f<&" or J RECENT SPEECHES AND ADDRESSES. * ,, BY CHARLES SUMNER. Such busy multitudes I fain would see Stand upon Free Soil with a people free. GOETHE S FAUST. NihU autem gloriosius libertate, praetor virtutem, si tamen libertaa recte a virtute sejungitur. JOHN op SALISBCBY. [U1UVEESIT7, BOSTON: HIGGINS AND BRADLEY, 20 WASHINGTON STBEET. 1856. Entered according to Act of Conferees, in the year 1856, by TlCKNOR AND FlELDS. In the Clerk s Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. CAMBRIDGE: STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BY THURSTON AND TORRY. CONTENTS ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF SENATOR OF THE -_ STATES^ LETTER TO THE LEGISLATURE OF MASSACHUSETTS, 14TH MAY, 1851 1-5 WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 10TH DEC., 1851 6-14 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES AND POLICY OF ROADS. SPEECHES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ON THE IOWA RAIL ROAD BILL, 27TH JAN., 17TH FEB., AND 16TH MARCH, 1852 15-43 CHEAB.OCEAN POSTAGE. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ON HIS RESOLUTION IN RELATION m CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE, 8TH MARCH, 1852 44-47 THE PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. ARGUMENT SUB- MITTED TO THE PRESIDENT 14TH MAY, 1852, UPON TJfk "APPLICATION FOR THE PARDON OF DRAYTON AND SAYBlj, DETAINED IN PRISON AT WASHINGTON FOR HELPING THE ESCAPE OF SLAVES 48-61 TRIBUTE TO MR RANTOUL. SPEECH IN THE SENATE .OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE DEATH OF HON. ROBERT RANTOUL, JR., 9ra AUGUST, 1852 62-68 .EEDOM NATIONAL , T^VTTPV *vr**Tn*nr cm^r.^ m Tnl? SENATE OF THE UTrpmm f}T*TBfll ^T H /VTTP^ ^;* ^ ^? ON HIS MOTION TO REPEAL THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL . 69 - 171 Vi CONTENTS. TRIBUTE TO MR. DOWNING. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, IN FAVOR OF AN ALLOWANCE TO THE WIDOW OF THE LATE ANDREW J. DOWNING, 26TH AUGUST, 1852 172-174 THE PARTY OF FREEDOM; ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABIL ITY. SPEECH AT TDE STATE CONVENTION OF THE FREE SOIL PARTY OF MASSACHUSETTS, HELD AT LOWELL, 16TH SEPT., 1852 .... 175-183 CIVIL, SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. SPEECH IN THE SEN ATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE PROPOSITION TO CHANGE THE SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. 23D FEB. 1853 184-187 AGAINST SECRECY IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SENATE. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE PROPOSITION TO LIMIT THE SECRET SESSIONS OF THE SENA TE, CTH APRIL, 1853 .,.,..... 188 - 190 THE POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. SPEECHES ON J^_ VTT dTTAi qEr AT - T -Y-^ND A COLORED MILITIA rirHrBg* j-iftrcYprTTnw Tr> PBVT^ ^rn .\MEND THE CONSTITUTION^OF MASSACHUSETTS, 21ST AND 22o JUNE, 1853 . 1T^- 202 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM AND ITS PROPER BASIS. SPEECH ON THE PROPOSITION TO AMEND THE BASIS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF MASSACHUSETTS, IN the CONVEN- *TION TO REYISE^AND AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THAT VATE, 7iH JULY, 1853 ....... 203-232 BILLS OF RIGHTS; THEIR HISTORY AND POLICY. rrijfi Tn^rvpy rn ^ M -f^ rOMMTTTEE ON THE BIL ,JN THE GONV-ENTION-JO -REVISE AND AMEND THE CONSTITU TION. OF. MASSACHUSETTS, 25TH JULY, 1853 . 233 - 241 FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. SPEECH AT THE PLYM OUTH FESTIVAL IN COMMEMORATION OF THE EMBARKATION OF TH:: PILGRIMS, IST AUGUST, 1853 . . . 242-248 CONTENTS. Vll THE^LANDMARK OP FREEDOM J FREEDOM NATIONAL. SPEECH V IN ^HE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, AGAINST THE RE-~ Jx PEAL OF THE MISSOURI PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY NORWDF^ 30" 3l) IN THE NEBRASKA AND KANSAS BILL, 21ST FEfiT 1854 ..... ........ 249-314 FINAL PROTEST FOR HIMSELF AND THE CLERGY OF NEW ENG LAND AGAINST SLA.VERY IN NEBRASKA AND KANSAS. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATED ON THE^IGHT^OF..^ THE FINAL PASSAGE OF THE NEBRASKA AND KANSAS BILL, A^ 1054 . ^ . . ""! . . . . . 315^- 326 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. TTE -SENATE OF THE JJNITED STATES, ON THE BOSTON *|M?T AT. TOTE OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL, AND IN REPLY TO JONES, OF TENNESSEE, BUTLER, OF SOUTH CAROLINA, AND MASON, OF VIRGINIA, 26TH AND 28lH JUNE . 327-371 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS. AT ! THE PRESENT CRISIS. SPEECH BEFORE THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION AT WORCES TER, 7TH SEPTEMBER, 1854 ...... 388-411 THE POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT ; ILLUSTRATED BY THE LIFE OF GRANVILLE SHARP. AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE MERCANTILE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION OF BOSTON, ON THE EVENING OF 15TH NOV., 1854 . . . . . 412-449 THE DEMANDS OF FREEDOM - REPEAL OF THE" FUGITIVE SLAVE TJTLbr ....... SPEECH IN TTTTC spjATT?. ny THT; TTTHTTiT P m " l " nn | AGAINST MR. TOUCEY S BILL, AND FOR WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK. SPEECH IN THE SEN ATE OF THE UNITED STATES, , ON INTRODUCING A BILL TO SECURE WAGES TO SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK, 28lH FEB., 1855" ,468-474 Vlll CONTENTS. y THE ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS NECESSITY, FRACTICABII/ JlTY AND DIGNITY. WITH GLIMPSES AT THE SPECIAL DUTIES OF THE NORTH. ADDRESS BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK, **AT THE METROPOLITAN THEATRE, 9th MAY, 1855 475 - 521 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS THE OUT RAGES IN KANSAS THE DIFFERENT POLITICAL PARTIES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. SPEECH AT FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON, "" ON THE EVENING OF 2o NOV., 1855 . . . 522-562 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ?TH FEBRUARY, 1856, ON THE USURPATIONS OF THE SENATE IN THE ORIGINA TION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS 563-572 THE ABROGATION OF~TREATIES. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF "THE UNITED STATES, 6TH MARCH, 1856 . . . 573-585 THE- fiRTME AfUTNST KANSAS THE APOLOGIES FOR THE *F_- ^^ TOT T>wnmv fiPTqyF IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED" STATES, 19TH AND 20TH^Mr, 1856, ON MR. DOUGLAS S REPORT ON AFFAIRS LN KANSAS . . 586-697 ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF SENATOR OF THE UNITED STATES. LETTER TO THE LEGISLATURE OF MASSACHUSETTS, 14TH MAY, 1851. Read in the Senate by Hon. Henry Wilson, President, and in the House of Representatives by Hon. N. P. Banks, Speaker. FELLOW-CITIZENS OP THE SENATE AND HOTJSE OF REPRESENTATIVES : I HATE received by the hands of the Secretary of the Commonwealth a certificate, that, by concurrent votes of the two branches of the Legislature, namely, by the Senate, on the 22d day of January, and by the House of Representatives, on the 24th day of April, I was duly elected, in conformity to the provisions of the Constitution and Laws of the United States, a Senator to represent the Commonwealth of Massa chusetts, in the Senate of the United States, for the term of six years, commencing on the 4th day of March, 1851. If I were to follow the customary course, I should receive this in silence. But the protracted and unpre cedented contest which ended in my election, the 1 2 ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF interest it awakened, the importance universally conceded to it, the ardor of opposition and the constancy of support which it aroused, also the principles, which more than ever among us, it brought into discussion, seem to justify, what my own feelings irresistibly prompt, a departure from this rule. If, beyond these considerations, any apology may be needed for thus directly addressing the Legislature, I may find it in the example of an illustrious prede cessor, whose clear and venerable name will be a sufficient authority.* The trust conferred on me is one of the most weighty which a citizen can receive. It concerns the grandest interests of our own Commonwealth, and also of the Union whereof we are an indissoluble part. Like every post of eminent duty, it is a post of eminent honor. A personal ambition, such as I cannot confess, might be satisfied to possess it. But when I think what it requires, I am obliged to say, that its honors are all eclipsed in my sight by its duties. Your appointment finds me in a private station, with which I am entirely content. But this is not all. For the first time in my life, I am now called to political office. With none of -the experience so amply possessed by others, to smooth the way of labor, I might well hesitate. But I am cheered by the generous confidence, which, throughout a length ened contest, persevered in sustaining me, and by the conviction that, amidst all seeming differences of party, the sentiments, of which I am the known advo- * John Quincy Adams. SENATOR OF THE UNITED STATES. 3 cate, and which led to my original selection as a candidate, are dear to the hearts of a large majority of the people of this Commonwealth. I derive, also, a most grateful consciousness of personal indepen dence from the circumstance, which I deem it frank and proper thus publicly to declare and place on record, that this office comes to me, unsought and undesired. Acknowledging the right of my country to the service of her sons wherever she chooses to place them, and with a heart full of gratitude that a sacred cause has been permitted to triumph through me, I now accept the post of Senator. I accept it as the servant of Massachusetts ; mindful of the sentiments solemnly uttered by her successive Legislatures ; of the genius which inspires her history ; and of the men, her perpetual pride and ornament, who breathed into her that breath of Liberty, which early made her an example to her sister States. In such a service, the way, though new to my footsteps, will be illumined by lights which cannot be missed. I accept it as the servant of the Union ; bound to study and maintain, with equal patriotic care, the interests of all parts of our country; to discounte nance every effort to loosen any of those ties by which our fellowship of States is held in fraternal company ; and to oppose all sectionalism, whether it appear in unconstitutional efforts by the North to carry so great a boon as Freedom into the slave States, or in unconstitutional efforts by the South, aided by Northern allies, to carry the sectional evil of Slavery into the free States ; or in whatsoever efforts it may make to extend the sectional domination V. 4 ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OP of Slavery over the National Government. With me the Union is twice-blessed ; first, as the powerful guardian of the repose and happiness of thirty-one sovereign States, clasped by the endearing name of country; and next, as the model and beginning of that all-embracing Federation of States, by which unity, peace and concord will finally be organized among the nations. Nor do I believe it possible, whatever may be the delusion of the hour, that any part thereof can be permanently lost from its well- compacted bulk. E Pluribus Unum is stamped upon the national coin, the national territory, and the national heart. Though composed of many parts united into one, the Union is separable only by a crash which shall destroy the whole. Entering now upon the public service, I venture to bespeak for what I may do or say that candid judg ment, which I trust always to extend to others, but which I am well aware the prejudices of party too rarely concede. I may fail in ability; but not in sincere efforts to promote the general weal. In the conflicts of opinion, natural to the atmosphere of liberal institutions, I may err ; but I trust never to forget the prudence which should temper firmness, or the modesty which becomes the consciousness of right. If I decline to recognize as my guides any of the men of to-day, I shall feel safe, while I follow the master principles which the Union was established to secure, and lean for support on the great triumvirate of American Freedom Washington, Franklin and Jef ferson. And since true politics are simply morals applied to public affairs, I shall find constant assist ance from those everlasting rules of right and wron& SENATOR OF THE UNITED STATES. 5 which are a law alike to individuals and communities : nay, which constrain the omnipotent God in self- imposed bonds. Let me borrow, in conclusion, the language of another : " I see my duty ; that of standing up for the liberties of my country ; and whatever difficulties and discouragements lie in my way, I dare not shrink from it ; and I rely on that Being, who has not left to us the choice of duties, that whilst I shall conscien tiously discharge mine, I shall not finally lose my reward." These are the words of Washington, uttered in the early darkness of the American Revolution. The rule of duty is the same for the lowly and the great ; and I hope it may not seem presumptuous in one so humble as myself to adopt his determination, and to avow his confidence. I have the honor to be, fellow-citizens, With sincere regard, Your faithful friend and servant, CHARLES SUMNER. BOSTON, May 14, 1851. WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 10TH DEC. 1851. MB. SEWARD, of New York, brought forward in the Senate the following joint resolution : > " Be it Resolved, <$~c., That Congress, in the name and behalf of the people of the United States, give to Louis Kossuth a cordial welcome to the capital and to the coun try, and that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to him by the President of the United States." December 9th, Mr. BERRIEN, of Georgia, addressed the Senate at length in opposition to any action by Congress, and, in closing his speech, moved the following amend ment : " And be it further Resolved, That the welcome thus afforded to Louis Kossuth be extended to his associates who have landed on our shores; but while welcoming these Hungarian patriots to an asylum in our country, and to the protection which our laws do and always will afford to them, it is due to candor to declare that it is not the pur pose of Congress to depart from the settted policy of this Government, which forbids all interference with the domes tic concerns of other nations." December 10th, on motion of Mr. SEWARD, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being his resolution of welcome to Kossuth. MR. SUMNER then addressed the Senate as fol lows : Mr. President : Words are sometimes things ; and I cannot disguise from myself that the resolution [6] WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. 7 in honor of Louis Kossuth, now pending before the Senate, when finally passed, will be an act of no small significance in the history of our country. The Sen ator from Georgia [Mr. Berrien] was right when he said that it was no unmeaning compliment. Beyond its immediate welcome to an illustrious stranger, it will help to combine and direct the sentiments of our own people everywhere ; it will inspire all in other lands who are engaged in the contest for freedom ; it will challenge the disturbed attention of despots ; and it will become a precedent whose importance will grow, in the thick-coming events of the future^with the growing might of the Republic. In this view, it becomes us to consider well what we do, and to un derstand the grounds of our conduct. For myself, I am prepared to vote for it without amendment or condition of any kind, and on reasons which seem to me at once obvious and conclusive. In assigning these I shall be brief; and let me say that, novice as I am in this hall, and, indeed, in all legisla tive halls, nothing but my strong interest in the ques tion as now presented, and a hope to say something directly upon it, could prompt me thus early to mingle in these debates. The case seems to require a statement, rather than an argument. As I understand, the last Congress requested the President to authorize the employment of one of our public vessels to receive and convey Louis Kossuth to the United States. That honorable service was performed, under the express direction of the President, and in pursuance of the vote of Con gress, by one of the best-appointed ships of our navy the steam-frigate Mississippi. Far away from our 8 WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. / country, in foreign waters, in the currents of the Bos- phorus, the Hungarian chief, passing from his Turkish exile, first pressed the deck of this gallant vessel ; first came under the protection of our national flag, and, for the first time in his life, rested beneath the ensign of an unquestioned Republic. From that moment he became our guest. The Republic which, thus far, he had seen only in delighted dream or vision was now his host ; and though this relation was inter rupted for a few weeks by his wise and brilliant visit to England, yet its duties and its pleasures, as I con fidently submit, are not yet ended. The liberated exile is now at our gates. Sir, we cannot do things by halves ; and the hospitality thus, under the auspices of Congress, begun, must, under the auspices of Con gress, be continued. The hearts of the people are already open to receive him ; Congress cannot turn its back upon him. But I would join in this welcome, not merely be cause it is essential to complete and crown the work of the last Congress, but because our guest deserves it at our hands. The distinction is great, I know; but it is not so great as his deserts. He deserves it as the early, constant, and incorruptible champion of the Liberal Cause in Hungary, who, while yet young, with unconscious power, girded himself for the contest, and by a series of masterly labors, with voice and pen, in parliamentary debates, and in the discussions of the press, breathed into his country the breath of life. He deserves it by the great principles of true democ racy which he caused to be recognized representa tion of the people without distinction of rank or birth, and equality before the Jaw. He deserves it by the WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. 9 trials he has undergone, in prison and in exile. He deserves it by the precious truth, which he now so eloquently proclaims, of the Fraternity of Nations. As I regard his course, I am filled with reverence and awe. I see in him, more than in any other living man, the power which may be exerted by a single, earnest, honest soul, in a noble cause. In himself he is more than a whole cabinet more than a whole army. I watch him in Hungary, while, like Carnot in France, he " organizes victory ; " I follow him in exile to distant. Asiatic Turkey, and there find him, with only a scanty band of attendants, in weakness and confinement, still the dread of despots ; I sympa thize with him in- his happy release; and now, as he comes more within the sphere of our immediate obser vation, amazement fills us all in the contemplation of his career, while he proceeds from land to land, from city to city, and, with words of matchless power, seems at times the fiery sword of freedom, and then the trumpet of resurrection to the nations Tula mirum spargens sonum. I know not how others have been impressed ; but I can call to mind no incident in history no event of peace or war certainly none of war more strongly calculated better adapted to touch and exalt the imagination and the heart than his recent visit to England. He landed on the southern coast, not far from where William of Normandy, nearly eight cen turies ago, had landed ; not far from where, nineteen centuries ago, Julius Caesar had landed also ; but Wil liam on the field of Hastings, and Csesar, in his adven turous expedition, made no conquest comparable in grandeur to that achieved by the unarmed and unat- 10 WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. tended Hungarian. A multitudinous people, outnum bering far the armies of those earlier times, was subdued by his wisdom and eloquence ; and this exile, proceed ing from place to place, traversing the country, at last, in the very heart of the Kingdom, threw down the gauntlet of the Republic. Without equivocation, amidst A.e supporters of monarchy, in the shadow of a lofty throne, he proclaimed himself a republican, and proclaimed the republic as his cherished aspiration for Hungary. And yet, amidst the excitements of this unparalleled scene, with that discretion which I pray may ever attend him, as a good angel the ancient poet aptly tells us that no Divinity is absent where Prudence is present he forbore all suggestion of interference with the existing institutions of the coun try whose guest he was, recognizing that vital principle of self-government, by virtue of which every State chooses for itself the institutions and rulers which it prefers. Such a character, thus grandly historic a living Wallace a living Tell I had almost said a liv ing Washington deserves our homage. Nor am I tempted to ask if there be any precedent for the reso lution now under consideration. There is a time for all things ; and the time has come for us to make a precedent in harmony with his unprecedented career. The occasion is fit ; the hero is near ; let us speak our welcome. It is true that, unlike Lafayette, he has never directly served our country ; but I cannot admit that on this account he is less worthy. Like Lafay ette, he perilled life and all ; like Lafayette, he has done penance in an Austrian dungeon ; like Lafayette, he has served the cause of freedom ; and whosoever WELCOME TO KOSSITTH. 11 serves this cause, wheresoever he may be, in whatever land, is entitled, according to his works, to the grati tude of every true American bosom of every true lover of mankind. The resolution before us commends itself by its simplicity and completeness. In this respect, it seems to me preferable to that of the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Shields] ; nor is it obnoxious to objections urged against that of the Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Foote] ; nor do I see that it can give any just umbrage, in our diplomatic relations, even to the sen sitive representative of the house of Austria. Though we have the high authority of the President, in his message, for styling our guest " Governor " a title which seems to imply the de facto independence of Hungary at the very time when our Government declined to acknowledge it the resolution avoids this difficulty, and speaks of him without title of any kind simply as a private citizen. As such, it offers him a welcome to the capital and to the country. The comity of nations I respect. To the behests of the law of nations I profoundly bow. As in our do mestic affairs, all acts are brought to the Constitution, as to a touchstone, so in our foreign affairs, all acts are brought to the touchstone of the law of nations that supreme law, the world s collected will, which overarches the Grand Commonwealth of Christian States. What that forbids, I forbear to do. But no text of this voluminous code, no commentary, no gloss, can be found which forbids us to welcome any exile of freedom. Looking at this -resolution in its various lights as a carrying out of the act of the last Congress ; as justly \ 12 WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. due to the exalted character of our guest ; and as proper in form and consistent with the law of nations it seems impossible to avoid the conclusion in its favor. On its merits it would naturally be adopted. And here I might stop. But an appeal has been made against the resolution, on grounds which seem to me extraneous and irrele vant. It has been attempted to involve it with the critical question of intervention by our country in European affairs ; and recent speeches in England and New York have been adduced to show that such in tervention is sought by our guest. It is sufficient to say in reply to this suggestion, introduced by the Senator from Georgia [Mr. Berrien] with a skill which all might envy and also by the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Miller] that no such interven tion is promised or implied ~by the resolution. It does not appear on the face of the resolution ; it is not in any way suggested by the resolution, directly or indi rectly. It can only be found in the imagination, the anxieties, or the fears of Senators ! It is a mere ghost, and not a reality. As such we may dismiss it. But I feel strongly on this point, and desire to go further. Here, again, I shall be brief; for the occa sion allows me to state conclusions only, and not arguments. While thus warmly with my heart in my hand joining in this tribute, I wish to be understood as in no respect encouraging any idea of belligerent interven tion in European affairs. Such a system would have in it no element of just self-defence, and it would open phials of perplexities and ills which I trust our country will never be called to affront. But I incul- WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. 13 cate no frigid isolation. God forbid that we should ever close our ears to the cry of distress, or cease to swell with indignation at the steps of tyranny ! In the wisdom of Washington we may find perpetual counsel. Like Washington, in his eloquent words to the Minister of the French Directory, I would offer sympathy and God-speed to all, in every land, who struggle for Human Rights ; but, sternly as Wash ington on another occasion, against every pressure, against all popular appeals, against all solicitations, against all blandishments, I would uphold with steady hand the peaceful neutrality of the country. Could I now approach our mighty guest, I would say to him, with the respectful frankness of a friend, " Be content with the outgushing sympathy which you now so marvellously inspire everywhere throughout this wide spread land, and may it strengthen your soul ! Trust in God, in the inspiration of your cause, and in the Great Future, pregnant with freedom for all mankind. But respect our ideas, as we respect yours. Do not seek to reverse our traditional, established policy of peace. Do not, under the too plausible sophism of upholding non-intervention-, provoke American inter vention on distant European soil. Leave us to tread where Washington points the way." And yet, with these convictions, Mr. President, which I now most sincerely express, I trust the Sena tor from Georgia [Mr. Berrien] will pardon me when I say I cannot join in his proposed amendment ; and for this specific reason. It attaches to an act of courtesy and welcome a condition which, however just as an independent proposition, is most ungracious in such connection. It is out of place, and everything 2 V 14 WELCOME TO KOSSUTH. out of place is, to a certain extent, offensive. If adopted, it would impair, if not destroy, the value of our act. A generous hospitality will not make terms or conditions with a guest; and such hospitality, I trust, Congress will tender to Louis Kossuth. & JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES AND POLICY OF ROADS. PEECHES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ON THE IOWA RAILROAD BILL, 27TH JAN., 17TH FEB., AND 16TH MARCH, 1852. IN THE SENATE, January 27, 1852. The Senate having under consideration the special order, being the bill grant ing the right of way, and making a grant of land to the State of Iowa, in aid of the construction of certain railroads in said State,"- ME. SUMNER said : This bill is important by itself, inasmuch as it prom ises to secure the building of a railroad at large cost, for a long distance, through, a country not thickly settled, in a remote corner of the land. It is more important still as a precedent for a series of similar ap propriations in other States. In this discussion, then, we have before us, at the same time, the special in terests of the State of Iowa, traversed by this projected road, and also the great question of the administration of the public lands. I have no inclination to go into these matters at length, even if I were able ; but entertaining no doubt as to the requirements of policy and of justice in the present case, and in all like cases, seeing my way clearly before me by lights that cannot deceive, I hope in a few words to exhibit these requirements and to [15] V 16 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES make this way manifest to others. And I am es pecially moved to do so by the tone of remarks often heard out of the Senate, and sometimes even here, begrudging these appropriations, and charging the particular States for which they are made with an undue absorption of the property of the Union. It is sometimes said not in this body, I know that " the West is stealing the public lands ; " and the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Hunter], who expresses himself with a frankness and a moderation of manner worthy of regard, in discussing this very measure, dis tinctly said that " we are squandering away the public lands ; " and he complained that such appropriations were partial, " because very large amounts of land are distributed to those States in which they lie, while nothing is given to the old States." And the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Underwood], taking up this strain, has dwelt at great length, and in every variety of expression, on the alleged partiality of the distribu tion. Now, I know full well that the States in which these lands lie need no defender like myself. But, as a Senator from one of the old States, I desire thus early to declare distinctly my dissent from these views, and the reasons for my dissent. Beyond a general con cern, that the public lands, of which the Union is now the almoner, the custodian and proprietor, should be ad ministered freely, generously, bountifully, in such wise as most to promote their settlement, and to build upon them towns, cities, and States, the nurseries of future empire beyond this concern which leads me to adopt gladly the proposition, in favor of actual set tlers, brought forward by the Senator from Wisconsin AND POLICY OF ROADS. 17 [Mr. Walker], I find a clear and special reason for supporting the measure now before the Senate, in an undeniable rule of justice to the States in which the lands lie. Let me speak, then, for justice to the land States. And in doing so I wish to present an important, and, as it seems to me, decisive consideration which has not been adduced thus far in this debate, nor do I know that it has been presented in any prior discus sion founded on the exemption from taxation enjoyed ~by the National lands in the several States, and the unquestionable value of this franchise. The subject naturally presents itself under two heads : First, the origin and nature of this franchise ; and, secondly, its extent and value, after deducting therefrom all reser vations and grants to the several States. I. And now, in the first place, as to the origin and nature of the immunity enjoyed by the national domain in the several States. The United States are the proprietors of large tracts of country within the municipal and legislative juris diction of States of the Union. These lands are not held directly by virtue of any original prerogative or eminent domain, by any right of conquest, occupancy, or discovery, but under acts of cession from the old States, in which the lands were situated, and from foreign countries, recognized and confirmed in the various statutes by which the different States have been constituted. The words determining this relation are found in the Ordinance of 1787. They are as follow: "The Legislatures of these districts or new States shall never interfere with the primary disposal of the soil by the United States in Congress assembled, s 18 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES nor with any regulations Congress may find necessary for securing the title in such soil to bona fide pur chasers." This provision has been incorporated, as an article of compact, in the subsequent statutes under which the new States have taken their place in the Union. It is the "primary disposal of the soil," without any incident of sovereignty, which is here secured. Regarding the United States, then, as simple pro prietors of these lands, under the jurisdiction of the States, would they not be liable, in the discretion of the States, to the burdens of other proprietors, unless especially exempted therefrom ? This exemption has been conceded. In the ordinance of 1787, it is ex pressly declared that " no tax shall be imposed on land the property of the United States ; " and this provision, like that already mentioned, is embodied in succeeding acts of Congress by which new States have been constituted. The fact that it was formally con ceded and has been thus imbodied, seems to denote that such concession was regarded as necessary to secure the desired immunity. Indeed, from the prin ciples recognized in our jurisprudence, and particularly by the Supreme Court, it is reasonable to infer that, without such express exemption, this whole amount of territory would be within the field of local taxation, liable, like the lands of other proprietors, to all cus tomary burdens and incidents. Thus, in an early case in Pennsylvania, it was de cided that the purchase of land by the United States would not alone be sufficient to vest them with the jurisdiction, or to oust the jurisdiction of the State, without being accompanied or followed by the consent / AND POLICY OF ROADS. 19 of the Legislature of the State. (See Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Young. 1 Kent s Comm. 431.) And it has been judicially declared by the late Mr. Justice Woodbury, in a well-considered case : " Where the United States own land situated within the limits of any particular States, and over which they have no cession of jurisdiction, for objects either special or gen eral, little doubt exists that the rights and remedies in relation to it are usually such as apply to other landholders within the Stale." After setting forth certain rights of the United States, the learned judge proceeds : " All these rights exist in the United States for constitu tional purposes, and without a special cession of jurisdiction ; though it is admitted that the powers over the property and persons on such lands will, of course, remain in the States till such cession is made. Nothing passes without such a cession, except what is an incident to the title and purposes of the General Government." United States v. Ames, 1 Woodbury & Minot, R. 76. The Supreme Court have given great eminence to the sovereign right of taxation in the States. They have said : " Taxation is a sacred right, essential to the existence of Government an incident of sovereignty. The right of legislation is co-extensive with the incident, to attach it upon all persons and property within the jurisdiction of a State." Dobbins v. Commissioners of Erie Co., 17 Peters, R. 447. And again, the Court say in another case : " However absolute the right of an individual may be, it is still in the nature of that right that it must bear a por- 20 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES tion of the public burdens, and that portion must be de termined by the Legislature." Providence Sank v. Pitt- man, 4 Peters, R. 514. And in the same case the Court, after declaring " that the taxing power is of vital importance ; that it is essential to the existence of Government ; that the relinquishment of such a power is never to be as sumed," add, cautiously, that they will not say " that a State may not relinquish it that a consideration sufficiently valuable to induce a partial release of it may not exist. " While thus upholding the right of taxation as one of the precious^ attributes of sovereignty in the States, the Court, under the Constitution of the United States, have properly exempted from taxation the instruments and means of the Government ; but they have limited the exemption to these instruments and means. Thus it has been expressly decided in a celebrated case, (McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 316,) that, while the Bank of the United States, being one of the neces sary instruments and means to execute the sovereign powers of the nation, was not liable to taxation, yet the real property of the Bank was thus liable in com mon with the other real property in a particular State. Now, the lands held by the United States do not belong to the instruments and means necessary and proper to execute the sovereign powers of the nation. In this respect they clearly differ from fortifications, arsenals, and navy yards. They are strictly in the nature of private property of the nation, situated within the jurisdiction of States. In excusing them from taxation, our fathers acted unquestionably ac cording to the suggestions of prudence, but also under AND POLICY OF ROADS. 21 the influence of precedent, derived at that time from the prerogatives of the British Crown. It was an early prerogative, transmitted from feudal days, when all taxes were in the nature of aids and subsidies to the monarch, that the property of the Crown, of every nature, should be exempt from taxation. But mark the change. This ancient feudal principle is not now the existing law of England. By the statute of 39 and 40 George III, cap. 38, passed twelve years after the Ordinance of 1787, the lands and tenements pur chased by the Crown out of the privy purse or other moneys not appropriated to any public service, or which came to the King from his ancestors or private persons in other words, lands and tenements in the nature of private property are subjected to taxation, even while they belong to the Crown. Thus the matter now stands. Lands belonging to the nation, which, it seems, even royal prerogative at this day, in England, cannot save from taxation, are in our country, under express provisions of compact, early established, exempted from this burden. Now, sir, I make no complaint of this ; I do not suggest any change ; nor do I hint any ground of legal title in the States. But I do confidently submit that in this peculiar, time-honored immunity, originally claimed by the nation, and conceded by the States within which the public lands lie, there is ample ground of equity, under which these States may now appeal to the nation for assistance out of these public lands. When I listen to comparisons discrediting these States by the side of the old States ; when I hear it charged that they have been constant recipients of the national bounty ; and when I catch those sharper V 22 . JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES terms of condemnation, by which they are character ized as "plunderers" and "robbers" and "pirates," I am forced to inquire whether the nation has not already received from these States something more than it has ever bestowed, even in its most liberal moods; whether, at this moment, the nation is not equitably the debtor to these States, and ^not these States the debtors to the nation. The answer is clear. In order to estimate the importance of this equity for I will call it by no stronger term we must endeavor to understand the extent and value of the franchise or immunity conceded by the States. II. And I am now brought to the second head of this inquiry ; that is, the extent and value of the im munity from taxation enjoyed by the national domain, after deducting therefrom all reservations and grants to the several States. Authentic documents and facts place these beyond question. From the official returns of the Land Office in Jan uary, 1849, [Exec. Doc. 2d session, 30th Cong., H. "R. No. 12, p. 225,] it appears that the areas of the twelve Land States Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Michigan, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Florida embrace 392,579,200 acres. California was not at that time a State of the Union. Of this territory, only 289,961,954 acres had been, in pursuance of the laws of the United States, surveyed, proclaimed, and put into the market. In some of the recent States, more than a moiety of the whole domain had never been brought into this con dition. It continued, at the date of these official returns, still unconscious of the surveyor s chain. Thus, in Wisconsin, out of a territory of more than J AND POLICY OF ROADS. 23 thirty-four millions of acres, only a little more than thirteen millions had been proclaimed for sale ; and in Iowa, the very State whose interests are now particu larly in question, out of a territory of more than thirty-two millions of acres, only a little more than twelve millions had been proclaimed for sale. It is evident, therefore, that, in point of fact, the true ex tent of territory, belonging to the United States at any time, much exceeds the extent actually in the market ; but since it may be said, that the lands not yet surveyed, proclaimed, and put into the market, though nominally under the jurisdiction of the State, must actually lie out of the sphere of their influence, so as not to derive any appreciable advantage from the local Governments, and, as I desire to hold this argument above every imputation of exaggeration knowing full well that it can afford to be under-stated I shall forbear to take the larger sum as the basis of my estimates, but shall found them upon the extent of territory actually proclaimed for sale, from the beginning down to January, 1849, amounting to 289,961,954 acres. All these lands thus proclaimed have been exempt from taxation. But since they were proclaimed at different periods, and also sold at different periods, so far as the same have been sold, it is necessary, in order to arrive at the value of this immunity, to as certain what is the average period during which the lands, after being put into the market, have been in the possession of the United States. This we are able to do from the official returns of the Land Office. Here is a table, now before me, from which it appears that of the lands offered for sale during a period of V 24 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES thirty years, large quantities in some cases more than half were, at the expiration of the period, still on hand. Of the fourteen millions offered in Ohio during this period, more than two millions remained ; while, of the nineteen millions offered in Missouri, more than twelve millions remained. Of all the lands offered during this period of thirty years, more than half were still unsold. And out of the above aggregate of all the lands proclaimed from the beginning down to January, 1849, notwithstanding the advancing tread of our thick-coming population, only 100,209,656 acres had been sold. Now, without further pursuing these details, I shall assume what cannot be ques tioned, as it is most clearly within the truth, that the lands proclaimed are not all sold till after a period of fifty years. This estimate will make the average period during which the lands, after being surveyed and proclaimed, are actually in the possession of the United States, and free from taxation, twenty-five years. According to this estimate, 289,961,954 acres pro claimed for sale, have been absolutely free from taxa tion, during the space of twenty-five years, and yet during this whole period have, without the ordinary consideration therefor, enjoyed the protection of the State, with the advantages and increased value from highways, bridges and school-houses, all of which are supported by the adjoining proprietors, under the laws of the State, without assistance of any kind from the United States. Such is the extent of this immunity. But, in order to determine its precise value, it is necessary to ad vance a step further and ascertain one other element ; / AND POLICY OF ROADS. 25 that is, the average annual tax on land in these States ; for instance, on the land of other non-residents. There are no official documents within my knowledge by which this can be determined. But after inquiry of gentlemen, themselves landholders in these States, I have thought it might he placed, without chance of contradiction, at one cent an acre. Probably it is rather two or even three cents ; but, desiring to keep within bounds, I call it merely one cent an acre. The annual tax on 289,761,954 acres, at the rate of one cent an acre, would be 82,809,619, and the sum total of this tax for twenty-five years would amount to $72,490,475, being the apparent value of this immu nity from taxation already enjoyed by the United States ; or, if we call the annual tax two cents an acre instead of one cent, we have the enormous sum of 8144,980,950, of which the United States may now be regarded as trustees in equity for the benefit of the Land States. But against this large sum I may be reminded of reservations and grants by the nation to the different States in question. These, however, when examined, do not materially interfere with the result. From the official returns of the Land Office in 1848, [Executive Doc., Thirtieth Congress, second session, H. R. No. 18,] we learn the precise extent of these reservations and grants down to that period. Here is the exhibit : Acres. Common schools 10,807,958 Universities 823,950 Seats of Government . ... . 50,860 Salines / i 2 ?l! 25 Amount carried forward, 12J1<J5|093 3 26 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES x Amount brought forward, 12,105,093 Deaf and dumb asylums . . . 45,440 Internal < By act Sept. 4, 1841, . 4,169,439 improvements ( Roads, rivers, and canals . 4,305,034 "20,625,006 This is all. In the whole aggregate, only a little more than twenty millions of acres have been granted to these States. The value of this sum total, if de ducted from the estimated value of the franchise enjoyed by the nation, will still leave a very large balance to the credit of the Land States. Estimating the land at $1.25 an acre, all the reservations and grants will amount to no more than $25,788,257. Deducting this sum from $72,490,475, and we have $46,702,218 to be entered to the credit of the Land States ; or, if we place the tax at two cents an acre, more than double this sum. This result leaves the nation so largely in debt to the Land States, that it becomes of small importance to scan closely the character of these grants and reser vations, in order to determine whether in large part they have not been already satisfied by specific con siderations on the part of the Abates. But the stress that, in the course of this debate, has been laid upon this bounty, leads me to go further. It appears, from an examination of the acts of Congress by which the Land States were admitted into the Union, that a large portion of these reservations and grants was made on the express condition that the lands sold by the United States, under the jurisdiction of the States, should remain exempt from any State tax for the space of Jive years after the sale. This condition is particu larly applicable tp th? appropriations for common y AND POLICY OF ROADS. 27 schools, universities, seats of Government, and salines, amounting to 12,105,093 acres. It is also particularly applicable to another item, not mentioned before, which is known as the five per cent, fund, from the proceeds of the public lands, for the benefit of roads and canals, amounting in the whole to $5,242,069. These appropriations being made on specific considera tions, faithfully performed by the States down to this day, may properly be excluded from our calculations. And this is a response to the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Underwood], who dwelt so energetically on these appropriations, without seeming to be aware of the conditions on which they were granted. That I may make this more intelligible, let me refer to the act for the admission of Indiana. After setting forth the five reservations and grants already men tioned, it proceeds : " And provided, always, That the five foregoing provis ions herein offered are on the condition that the convention of the said State shall provide by an ordinance, irrevocable without the consent of the United States, that every and each tract of land sold by the United States, from and after the 1st day of December next, shall be, and remain, exempt from any tax laid by order of any authority of the State, whether for State, county, or township, or any other pur pose whatever, for the term of five years from and after the day of sale." This clause does not stand by itself in the acts ad mitting the more recent States, but is mixed with other conditions. I will not believe, however, that any discrimination can be made between particular Land States, on the ground of a difference in their conditions which may properly be attributed to acci dental circumstances. The provision just quoted is 28 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES found substantially in the acts for the admission of Ohio, Missouri, Illinois and Arkansas. So far as these States are concerned, it is a complete considera tion, in the nature of satisfaction, for the reservations and grants enjoyed by them. It also helps to illus trate the value of the permanent immunity from taxa tion belonging to the United States, by exhibiting the concessions made by the United States to assure this franchise to certain moderate quantities of land during the brief space of five years only. After the constant charges of squandering the public lands and of partiality to the Land States, I think all will be astonished at the small amount to be entered on the debtor side, in the great account between the States and the National Government. This consists of grants for internal improvements, in the whole reaching to only 8,474,473 acres, which, at $1.25 an acre, will be $10,593,091. If this sum be deducted from the estimated value of the immunity from taxation already enjoyed by the United States, we shall still have upwards of $60, 000, 000 surrendered by the Land States to the nation ; or, if we call the annual tax two cents an acre, more than double this sum. In these estimates I have grouped together all the Land States. But, taking separate States, we shall find the same proportionate result. For instance, there is Ohio, with 16,770,984 acres proclaimed for sale down to January 1, 1849. Adopting the basis already employed, and assuming that these lands con tinued in the possession of the United States after being surveyed and proclaimed an average period of twenty-five years, and that the land tax was one cent an acre, we have $4,192,725 as the value of the im- AND POLICY OF ROADS. 29 munity from taxation already enjoyed by the United States in Ohio. From this may be deducted the value of 1,181,134 acres, being grants to this State for internal improvements, at $1.25 per acre, equal to $1,476,367, leaving upwards of two millions nearly three millions of dollars yielded by this State to the nation. Take another State Missouri. It appears that, down to January, 1849, 39,685,609 acres had been proclaimed for sale in this State. Assuming again the basis already employed, and we have $9,908,900 as the value of the immunity from taxation already enjoyed by the United States in Missouri. From this may be deducted the value of 500,000 acres, granted to this State for internal improvements, which, at $1.25 an acre, will amount to $625,000, leaving up wards of nine millions of dollars thus yielded, by this State to the nation. I might in this way proceed with all the Land States individually ; but enough has been done to repel the charges against them, and to elucidate their peculiar equity in the premises. On the one side, they have received little very little from the nation ; while, on the other side, the nation, by strong considerations of equity, is largely indebted to them. This obliga tion of itself constitutes an equitable fund to which the Land States may properly resort for assistance in their works of internal improvement, and Congress will show an indifference to the reasonable demands of these States, should it fail to deal with them munificently in some sort, according to the simple measure of advantage which the nation has already so largely .enj oyed at their hands. 3* 30 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES Against these clear and well-supported merits of the Land States, the old States can present small claims to consideration. They have waived no right of taxation over lands within their acknowledged jurisdiction; they have made no valuable concessions; they have yielded up no costly franchise. It remains, then, that, with candor and justice, they should recog nize the superior I will not say exclusive claims of the States within whose borders and under the protection of whose laws the national domain is found. Thus much for what I have to say in favor of this bill, on the ground of justice to the States in which the lands lie. . If this argument did not seem suffi ciently conclusive to render any further discussion superfluous, at least from me, I might go forward, and show that the true interests of the whole country of every State in the Union, as of Iowa itself are happily coincident with this claim of justice. It will readily occur to all, that the whole country will gain by the increased value of the lands still retained and benefited by the proposed road. But this advantage, though not unimportant, is trivial by the side of the grander gains commercially, politi cally, socially and morally which will necessarily accrue from the opening of a new communication, by which the territory beyond the Mississippi will be brought into connection with the Atlantic seaboard, and by which the distant post of Council Bluffs will become a suburb of Washington. It would be diffi cult to exaggerate the influence of roads as means of civilization. This, at least, may be said : Where roads AND POLICY OF 110ADS. 31 are not, civilization cannot be ; and civilization ad vances as roads are extended. By roads, religion and knowledge are diffused ; intercourse of all kinds is promoted; the producer, the manufacturer, and the consumer, are all brought nearer together ; commerce is quickened ; markets are opened ; property, wherever touched by these lines, is changed, as by a magic rod, into new values ; and the great current of travel, like that stream of classic fable, or one of the rivers of our own California, hurries in a channel of golden sand. The roads, together with the laws, of ancient Rome, are now better remembered than her victories. The Flaminian and Appian Ways once trod by returning proconsuls and tributary kings still remain as bene ficent representatives of her departed grandeur. Under God, the road and the schoolmaster are the two chief agents of human improvement. The education begun by the schoolmaster is expanded, liberalized, and com pleted, by intercourse with the world ; and this inter course finds new opportunities and inducements in every road that is built. Our country has already done much in this regard. Through a remarkable line of steam communications, chiefly by railroad, its whole population is now, or will be soon, brought close to the borders of Iowa. The cities of the Southern seaboard Charleston, Savannah, and Mobile are already stretching their lines in this direction, soon to be completed conduc tors ; while the traveller from all the principal points of the Northern seaboard from Portland, Boston, Providence, NCAV York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington now passes without impediment to this remote region, traversing a territory of unexampled 32 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES resources at once a magazine and a granary the largest coal-field, and at the same time the largest corn-field, of the known globe winding his way among churches and school-houses, among forests and gardens, by villages, towns, and cities, along the sea, along rivers arid lakes, with a speed which may recall the gallop of the ghostly horseman in the ballad : " Fled past on right and left how fast Each forest, grove, and bower ! On right and left fled past how fast Each city, town, and tower ! " Tramp ! tramp ! along the land they speed, Splash ! splash ! along the sea." On the banks of the Mississippi he is now arrested. The proposed road in Iowa will bear the adventurer yet further, to the banks of the Missouri; and this distant giant stream, mightiest of the earth, leaping from its sources in the Ilocky Mountains, will be clasped with the Atlantic in the same iron bracelet. In all this I see not only further opportunities for commerce, but a new extension to civilization and increased strength to our National Union. A heathen poet, while picturing the golden age, has perversely indicated the absence of long lines of road as creditable to that imaginary period in contrast with his own. " How well," exclaimed the youthful Tibullus,* " they lived while Saturn ruled before the earth was opened by long ways : " " Quam bene Saturno vivebant rege, priusquam Tellus in longas est patefacta i?ias." * Opera, Lib. i. Eleg. 3, v. 35. , AND POLICY OF 110ADS. 33 But the true Golden Age is before us, not behind us ; and one of its tokens will be the completion of those long ways, by which villages, towns, counties, States, provinces, nations, are all to be associated and knit together in a fellowship that can never be broken. The debate on the Iowa Railroad Bill was continued on successive days down to 17th February, when the speech of Mr. Sumner was particularly assailed by Mr. Hunter, of Virginia. To this he replied at once : ME. SUMNER. One word, if you please, Mr. Presi dent. The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Hunter], who has just taken his seat, has very kindly given me notice that I am to expect a broadside from the Sen ator from Kentucky [Mr. Underwood]. For this in formation I am properly grateful. When, a few days ago, I undertook to discuss an important question in this body, I expressed certain views, deemed by me of weight. Those views I submitted to the candor and to the judgment of the Senate. I felt confidence in their essential justice, and nothing which I have heard since has impaired that confidence. I have listened with respect and attention to the address to-day from the Senator from Virginia, as it becomes me to listen to everything any Senator undertakes to -put forth here. But I hope to be excused if I say, that in all that he has so eloquently uttered with reference to myself, he has not touched by a hair-breadth my argument. He has criticized I am unwilling to say that he has cavilled at my calculations ; but he has not, by the ninth part of a hair, touched the conclu- 31 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES sion which I drew. That still stands. And let me say, that it cannot be successfully assailed in the way attempted by him. I said that injustice had been done to the Land States, out of this body and in this body, out of this body, because I often heard them called " land steal- ers " and " land pirates ; " in this body, by the Sen ator from Virginia, when he complained of the partial distribution of the public lands, and particularly pointed out the bill now before the Senate as an instance of this partiality. I said that this charge was without foundation. And why did I say so ? and on- what ground ? Because there was an existing equity (I so called it nothing more) on the part of the Land States as against the General Government. And on what was this founded ? On a fact of record in the pub lic acts of this country. That is, the exemption of the public domain from taxation by the States in which it is situated. The Senator from Virginia has not ques tioned this fact ; of course he could not question it, for it is imbodied in the acts of Congress. The next inquiry, then, was, as to the value of this immunity from taxation, which I called an equity on the part of the Land States. In order to illustrate this value, I went into calculations and estimates, which I presented, after some study of the subject not, perhaps, such study as the Senator from Virginia has found time to give to it, or such as the Senator from Kentucky, in the plenitude of his researches, doubtless has given to it. On those calculations and estimates I attributed a certain value to the equity in question. My calculations and estimates may be over stated ; they may be exaggerated. The Senator from AND POLICY OF KOADS. 35 Virginia thinks them so. Other gentlemen with whom I have had the privilege of conversing, think them understated. But however this may be, it does not touch the argument. I may have done injustice to my argument by overstating them. I intended to understate them. I still think from all that I hear, that I have understated them. But, whether understated or overstated, the argument still stands, that these States have conceded to the General Gov ernment an immunity from taxation ; that this im munity has a certain value I think a very large value and that this value constitutes an equity to which the Land States have a right to appeal for boun tiful, ay, for munificent treatment from the General Government. Has the Senator from Virginia answered this argument ? Can he answer it ? But I forbear to go into the subject at this time. I arose simply to state, that as the Senator from Vir ginia had kindly given me notice that I am to expect a broadside from the Senator from Kentucky, I am to regard what he said to-day, so far as I am concerned, simply as a signal gun. The Senator will pardon me if I say it is nothing more, for it has not reached me, or my argument. Meanwhile I await, with resignation and without anxiety, the broadside from Kentucky. The debate was continued for many days, during which the speech of Mr. Sumner was attacked and defended. Finally, on the 16th March, immediately before the question was taken, he again returned to the subject : Mr. SUMNEE. Much time has been consumed by this question. At several periods the debate has 36 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES seemed about to stop, and then again it has taken a new spring, while the goal has constantly receded. I know not if it is now near the end. But I hope that I shall not seem to interfere with its natural course, or un duly occupy the time of the Senate, if I venture again for one moment to take part in it. The argument which I submitted on a former oc casion has not passed unregarded. And since it can owe little to my individual position, I accept the oppo sition it has encountered as a tribute to its intrinsic importance. It has been assailed by different Senators, on different days, and in different ways. It has been met by harmless pleasantry, and by equally harmless vituperation ; by figures of rhetoric and figures of arithmetic ; by minute criticism and extended discus sion ; also, by that sure resource of a weak cause, hard words and an imputation of personal motives. I do now propose to reply to all this array, least of all shall I retort the hard words or repel the personal imputa tions. On this head I content myself now with saying and confidently, too, that, had he known me better, the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Underwood], who is usually so moderate and careful, would have hesitated long before uttering expressions which fell from him in this debate. The position I took was regarded as natural, or ex^ cusable in a Senator from one of the Land States, act ing under the vulgar spur of local interest ; but it was pronounced unnatural and inexcusable in a Senator from Massachusetts. Now, sir, it is sufficient for me to say, in reply to this suggestion, that, while I know there are influences and biases incident to particular States or sections of the Union, I recognize no differ- AND POLICY OF ROADS. 37 ence in the duties of Senators on this floor. Coming from different States and opposite sections, we are all Senators of the Union ; and our constant duty is, with out fear or favor, to introduce into the national legis lation the principle of justice. In this spirit, while sustaining the bill now before the Senate, I spoke for ustice to the Land States. In sustaining this bill, I but followed the example of the Senators and Representatives of Massachusetts on kindred measures from their earliest introduction down to the present time. The first instance was in 1823, on the grant to the State of Ohio of land one hundred and twenty-five feet wide, with one mile on each side, for the construction of a road from the lower rapids of the Miami River to the western boundary of the Connecticut Reserve. On the final passage of this grant in the House, the Massachusetts delegation voted as follows : Yeas Samuel C. Allen, Henry W. Dwight, Timothy Fuller, Jeremiah Nelson, John Reed, Jonathan Russell. Nay Benjamin Gorham. In the Senate, the bill passed without a division. In 1828, a still greater unanimity occurred on the passage of the bill to aid the State of Ohio in extending the Miami canal from Dayton to Lake Erie ; and this bill is the first instance of the grant of alternate sections, as in that now before the Senate. On this the Massa chusetts delegation in the House voted as follows : Yeas Isaac C. Bates, Benjamin W. Crowninshield, John Davis, Edward Everett, John Locke, John Reed, Joseph Richardson, John Varnum. Nays none. In the Senate, Messrs. Silsbee and Webster both voted in the affirmative. I pass over the intermediate grants which, I am told, have been sustained by the Massa- 4 38 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES chusetts delegations with substantial unanimity. The extensive grants at the last session of Congress to Illi nois, Mississippi, and Alabama, in aid of a railroad from Chicago to Mobile, were sustained by all the Massachusetts votes in the House, except one. Still further, in sustaining the present bill on grounds of justice to the Land States, I but followed the re corded instructions of the Legislature of Massachusetts, addressed to its Senators and Representatives here on a former occasion. The subject was presented in a special message to the Legislature in 1841, by the distinguished Governor at that time, who strongly urged " a liberal policy towards the actual settler, and towards the new States, for this is justly due to both." And he added : " Such States are entitled to a more liberal share of the proceeds of the public lands than the old States, as we owe to their enterprise much of the value this property has acquired. It seems to me, therefore, that justice towards the States in which these lands lie, demands a liberal and generous policy fo~ wards them. 1 In accordance with this recommenda tion, it was resolved by the Legislature, " That, in the disposition of the public lands, this Commonwealth approves of making liberal provisions in favor of the new Stales ; and that she ever has been, and still is ready to co-operate with other portions of the Union in securing to those States such provisions." Thus a generous policy towards the Land States, with liberal provisions in their favor, was considered by Massachusetts the part of justice. It was my purpose, before this debate closed, to consider again the argument I formerly submitted, and. to vindicate its accuracy in all respects, both in prin- AND POLICY OF ROADS. 39 ciple and in detail. But this has already been so amply done by others so much abler than myself by the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Geyer], both the Sen ators from Michigan [Mr. Felch and Mr. Cass], the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Borland], the Senator from Iowa [Mr. Dodge], and the Senator from Loui siana [Mr. Downs], all of whom, with different degrees of fulness, have urged the same grounds in favor of this bill, that I feel unwilling at this hour, and while the Senate actually waits to vote on the ques tion, to occupy time by further dwelling upon it. Perhaps on some other occasion I may think proper to return to it. But, while avoiding what seems superfluous discus sion, I cannot forbear to ask your attention to the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Under wood]. This amendment, when addressed to the Senators of the favored States, is of a most plausible character. It proposes to give to the original thirteen States, to gether with Vermont, Maine, Tennessee, and Kentucky, for purposes of education and internal improvement, portions of the public domain, at the rate of one acre to each inhabitant according to the recent census. This is commended by the declared object education and internal improvement. Still further, in its dis crimination of the old States, it assumes a guise well calculated to tempt them into its support. It holds out the attraction of seeming, though unsubstantial, self- interest. It offers a lure, a bait to be unjust. I object to it on several grounds. 1. But I put it in the fore-front, as my first objec tion, its clear, indubitable, and radical injustice, written 40 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES on its very face. The amendment confines its dona tions to the old States, and, in so doing, makes an inequitable discrimination in their favor. It tacitly assumes that, by the bill in question, or in some other way, the Land States have received their proper dis tributive portion, so as to lose all title to share with the old States in the proposed distribution. But if there be any force in the argument, so much considered in this debate, that these railroad grants actually enhance the neighboring lands of the United States, and constitute a proper mode of bringing them into the market, or if there be any force in the other argu ment which I have presented, drawn from the equita ble claims of the Land States, in comparison with the other States, to the bounty of the great untaxed pro prietor,* then this assumption is unfounded. There is no basis for the discrimination made by the amend ment. If the Iowa land bill be proper to be passed without this amendment, as I submit it is, then this amendment, introducing a new discrimination, is im proper to be added to it. Nor do I well see how any one, prepared to sustain the original bill, can sustain this amendment. The Senator from Kentucky, who leads us to expect his vote for the bill, seems to con fess the injustice of his attempted addition. 2. I object to it as out of place. The amendment proposes to ingraft upon a special railroad grant to a * Mr. Webster in his greatest speech, the celebrated reply to Mr. Hayne, touched on this consideration. He said: "And, finally, have not these new States singularly strong claims, founded on the ground already stated, that the government is a great untaxed proprietor in the ownership of the soil?" WEBSTER S SPEECHES, Vol. III. p. 291. AND POLICY OF ROADS. 41 single State a novel system of distribution of the national domain. Now, there is a place and a time for all things ; and nothing seems to me more important in legislation than to keep all things in their proper place, and to treat them at their proper time. The distribu tion of the public lands, is worthy of attention ; and I am ready to meet this great question whenever it arises legitimately for our consideration; but I object to considering it merely as a rider to the Iowa land bill. The amendment would be less objectionable, if pro posed as a rider to a general system of railroad grants, as, for instance to a bill embracing grants to all the Land States; but it is specially objectionable as a graft upon a single bill. The Senator who introduced It doubtless assumed that other bills, already intro duced, would pass ; but, if his amendment be founded n this assumption, it should await the action of Con gress on all these bills. 3. If adopted, the amendment would endanger, if it did not occasion the defeat of, the Iowa land bill. This seems certain. . Having this measure at heart, believing it founded in essential justice, I am unwill ing to place it in this jeopardy. 4. It prepares the way for States of this Union to become landholders in other States, subject, of course, to the legislation of those States an expedient which, though not strictly objectionable on grounds of law, or under the Constitution, is not agreeable to our national policy. It should not be promoted without strong and special reasons therefor. In the bill introduced by the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Shields], bestowing lands for the benefit of the insane in different States, this 4* 42 JUSTICE TO THE LAND STATES objection has been partially obviated, by providing that the States in which there were no public lands should select their portion in the Territories of the United States, and not in other States. But, since in a short time these very Territories may become States, this objection is rather adjourned than entirely re moved. 5. But the lands held under this amendment, the ugh in the hands of States, will be liable to taxation, as the lands of other non-resident proprietors, and on this ac count will be comparatively valueless. For this reason, I said that the amendment held out the attraction of seem ing, though unsubstantial, self-interest. That the lands will be liable to taxation, cannot be doubted. The amendment does not propose in any way to relieve them from this burden ; nor am I aware that they can be relieved from it. The existing immunity is only so long as they belong to the United States. Now, there is reason to believe that, from lack of agencies and other means familiar to the United States, the lands dis tributed by this amendment would not find as prompt a market as those still in the hands of the Great Land holder. But howsoever this may be, it is entirely clear, from the recorded experience of the national domain, that these lands, if sold at the minimum price of the public lands, and only as rapidly as those of the United States, and if meanwhile they are subject to the same burdens as the lands of other non-residents, will, before the sales are closed, be eaten up by the taxes. The taxes will amount to more than the entire receipts from the sales of the lands ; and thus the grant, while unjust to the Land States, will be worth less to the old States, the pretended beneficiaries. In . 4m- AND POLICY OF ROADS. 43 the Roman law, an insolvent inheritance was known by an expressive phrase as damnosa hereditas. A grant under this amendment would be damnosa do- natio. For such good and sufficient reasons, I am opposed to this amendment. CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ON HIS RESO LUTION IN RELATION TO CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE, 8TH MARCH, 1852. [This proposition Mr. Sumner has renewed at each session .of Congress.] ME. SUMNER. I submit the following resolution. As it is one of inquiry, merely, I ask that it may be considered at this time : Resolved, That the Committee on Naval Affairs, while considering the nature and extent of aid proper to be granted to the Ocean Steamers, be directed to inquire whether the present charges for letters carried by these steamers are not unnecessarily large and burdensome to foreign correspondence, and whether something may not be done, and, if so, what, to secure the great boon of Cheap Ocean Postage. There being no objection, the question was stated to be on the adoption of the resolution. MR. SUMNER. The Committee on Naval Affairs have the responsibility of shaping some measure by which the relations of our Government with the ocean steam ers will be defined. And since one special inducement to these relations, involving the bounty now enjoyed [44] CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE. 45 and further solicited, is the carrying of the mails, I trust this Committee will be willing to inquire whether there cannot be a reduction on the postage of foreign correspondence. Under the postage act of 1851, the postmaster, by and with the advice of the President, has power to reduce, from time to time, the rates of postage on all mailable matter conveyed between the United States and any foreign country. But the ex istence of this power in the postmaster will not render it improper for the Committee, now drawn into con nection with this question, to take it into careful consideration, with a view to some practical action, or, at least, recommendation thereon. The subject is of peculiar interest ; nor do I know any measure so easily accomplished, which promises to be so benefi cent as cheap ocean postage. The argument in its favor seems to me at once brief and unanswerable. A letter can be sent three thousand miles in the United States for three cents, and the reasons for cheap postage on the land are equally applicable to the ocean. In point of fact, the conveyance of letters can be effected in sailing or steam packets at less cost than by railway. Besides, cheap ocean postage will tend to supersede the clandestine or illicit conveyance of letters, and to bring into the mails all mailable matter, which, under the present system, is carried in the pockets of passen gers, or in the bales and boxes of merchants. All new facilities for correspondence naturally give new expansion to human intercourse ; and there is reason to believe that, through an increased number of letters, cheap ocean postage will be self-supporting. 46 CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE. Cheap postal communication with foreign countries will be of incalculable importance to the commerce of the United States. By promoting the intercourse of families and friends, separated by the ocean, cheap postage will add to the sum of human happiness. The present high rates of ocean postage namely, twenty-four cents on half an ounce, forty-eight cents on an ounce, and ninety-six cents on a letter which weighs a fraction more than an ounce are a severe tax upon all, particularly upon the poor, amounting, in many cases, to a complete prohibition of foreign corres pondence. This should not be so. It particularly becomes our country, by the removal of all unnecessary burdens upon foreign correspon dence, to advance the comfort of European emigrants seeking a home among us, and to destroy as far as practicable, every barrier to free intercourse between the Old World and the New. And, lastly, cheap ocean postage will be a bond of peace among the nations of the earth, and will extend good-will among men. By such reasons this measure is commended. Much as I rejoice in the American steamers, which vindicate a peaceful supremacy of the seas, and help to weave a golden tissue between the two hemispheres, I cannot consider these, with all their unquestionable advan tages, an equivalent for cheap ocean postage. But I trust that they are not inconsistent with each other, and that both may happily flourish together. Objection was made to the resolution, as not being ad dressed to the proper Committee, and a brief debate ensued, CHEAP OCEAN POSTAGE. 47 in which Mr. Rusk, Mr. Gwin, Mr. Badger, Mr. Davis, Mr. Seward, Mr. Mason and Mr. Sumner, took part. It was urged by the latter, in reply to objections, that the Com mittee on Naval Affairs was the proper Committee, as at the present moment it is specially charged with a subject intimately connected with the inquiry into the importance and practicability of Cheap Ocean Postage. At the sugges tion of Mr. Badger, the matter was allowed to lie over till the next day. On Tuesday, 9th instant, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. Sumner on the 8th inst., relative to Ocean Steamers and Cheap Ocean Postage. On motion of Mr. Sumner, it was amended, and finally adopted, without opposition, as follows : Resolved, That the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads be directed to inquire whether the present charges on letters carried by the Ocean Steamers are not unnecessarily large and burdensome to foreign correspondence, and whether something may not be ctone, and, if so, what, to secure the great boon of Cheap Ocean Postage. THE PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. ARGUMENT SUBMITTED TO THE PRESIDENT 14TH MAY, 1852, ON THE APPLICATION FOR THE PARDON OF DRAYTON AND SAYRES, DETAINED IN PRISON AT WASHINGTON FOR HELP ING THE ESCAPE OF SLAVES. This case excited peculiar interest. Messrs. Drayton and Sayres had already been in prison more than four years, when Mr. Sumner applied to President Fillmore for their pardon. To this application, which was sustained by petitions from other quarters, the President interposed doubts of his right to exercLe the pardoning power in their case, but expressed a desire for light on this point. On his invitation, Mr. Sumner laid before him the following paper. Shortly afterwards the pardon was granted. BY the laws of Maryland, 1737, chapter 2, section 4, it is provided that any person " who shall steal any negro or other slave," " or who shall counsel, hire, aid, abet, or command any person or persons " to do so, shall suffer death as a felon. The punishment has since been changed to imprisonment, for a term not less than seven, nor more than twenty years. Fourteen years later, by the act of 1751, chapter 14, section 10, it was provided that "if any free person shall entice and persuade any slave within this province [48J PARDONING POWEB, OE THE PKESIDENT. 49 /:> run away, and who shall actually run away from the master, owner, or overseer, and be convicted thereof, by confession or verdict of a jury, upon an indictment or information, shall forfeit and pay the full value of such slave, to the master or owner of such slave, to be levied by execution on the goods, chattels, lands, or tenements of the offender, and, in case of inability to pay the same, shall suffer one year s imprisonment without bail or mainprise." Still later, by the act of 1796, chapter 67, section 19, " the transporting of any slave or person, held to service" from the State, was made a distinct offence, for which the offender was made liable in an action of damages, and also by indictment. By the act of Congress, organizing the District of Columbia, (Feb. 27, 1801,) it was declared that "the laws of the State of Maryland, as they now exist, shall be, and continue in force, in that part of the said District which was ceded by that State to the United States, and by them accepted as aforesaid." Under this provision, these ancient laws of Maryland are to this day of full force in the District of Columbia. The facts to be considered are few. Messrs. Dray- ton and Sayres, on indictment and trial, under the act of 1737, for stealing slaves, were acquitted; the jury rendering a verdict of " not guilty." Resort was then had to the statute of 1796, chapter 67, section 19, as follows : " And be it enacted, that any person or persons who shall hereafter be convicted of giving a pass to any slave, or per son held to service, or shall be found to assist, by advice, donation, or loan, or otherwise, the transporting of any 5 50 PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. slave, or any person held to service, from this State, or by any other unlawful means depriving the master or owner of the service of his slave, or person held to service, for every such offence the party aggrieved shall recover damages in an action on the case against such offender or offenders, and such offender or offenders also shall be liable, upon indictment and conviction upon verdict, confession or other wise, in this State, in any county court where such offence shall happen, be fined a sum not exceeding two hundred dollars, at the discretion of the court, one half to the use of the master or owner of such slave, the other half to the county school, in case there be any, if no such school, to the use of the county." Under this statute, proceedings were instituted by the attorney of the District of Columbia, against these parties, in seventy-four different indictments, each in dictment being founded on the alleged " transporting" of a single slave. On conviction, Drayton was sen tenced on each indictment to a fine of 8140, and costs, in each case $19.49, amounting in the sum total to 811,802.26. On conviction, Sayres was sentenced on each indictment to a fine of 8100 and costs, in each case 817.38, amounting in the sum total to 88,686.12. One half of the fine was, according to law, to the use of the masters or owners of the slaves transported ; the other half to the county school ; or, in case there be no such school, to the use of the county. After wards, on motion of the attorney for the District, they were "prayed in commitment," and committed until the fine and costs are payed. In pursuance of this sentence, and on this motion, they have been detained in prison, in the city of Washington, from April, 1848, and are still in prison, unable, from poverty, to pay these large fines. The question now occurs as to the PARDONING POWEB OP THE PRESIDENT. 51 power of the President to pardon them, so at least as to relieve them from their imprisonment. The peculiar embarrassment in this case arises from the nature of the sentence. If it were simply a sen tence of imprisonment, his power would be unquestion able. So, also, if it were a sentence of imprisonment, with fine superadded, payable to the United States, his power would be unquestionable ; and the same power would extend to the case of a fine payable to the United States, with imprisonment as the alternative on non-payment of the fine. But in the present case, the imprisonment is the alternative for non-payment of fines, which are not payable to the United States, but to other parties, viz. : the slave owners and the county. It is important, however, to bear in mind, that these fines are a mere donation to these parties, and not a compensation for services rendered. These parties were not informers, nor were the proceedings in the nature of a qui tam action. It should be distinctly understood, at the outset, that the proceedings against Drayton and Sayres were not at the suit of any informer or private individual, but at the prosecution of the United States by indict ment. They are, therefore, removed from the authority of the English cases, which protect the share of an informer after judgment from remission, by pardon from the crown. The power of the President in the present case may be regarded, first, in the light of the common law; 52 PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. secondly, under the statutes of Maryland, and thirdly, under the Constitution of the United States. First. As to the common law, it may be doubtful whether, according to early authorities, the pardoning power can be used so as to bar or divest any legal interest, benefit, or advantage, vested in a private in dividual. It is broadly stated by English writers, that it cannot be so used. (2 Hawkins, P. C. 392, cap. 37, sec. 34; 17Viner s Abridgment; 39 Prerogative of King JJ., art. 7.) But this principle does not seem to be sustained by practical cases in the United States, except in the instances of informers and qui tarn actions, while, on one occasion, in a leading case in Kentucky, it was rejected. (Routt v. Flemster, 7 J. J. Marshall, 132.) But it is clearly established that, where the fine is allotted to a public body or a public officer, for a pub lic purpose, it may be remitted by a pardon. This may be illustrated by several cases. 1 . As where in Pennsylvania, the fine was for the benefit of the county. In this case, the court said, " Until the money is collected and paid into the treasury, the constitutional right of the Governor to pardon the offender, and remit the fine or forfeiture, remains in full force. They can have no more vested interest in the money than the Commonwealth, under the same circumstances, would have had ; and it can not be doubted that, until the money reaches the trea sury, the Governor has the power to remit. In the case of costs, private persons are interested in them ; but as to fines and forfeitures, they are imposed upon principles of public policy. The latter, therefore, are under the exclusive control of the Governor." (Com- PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. 53 monwedlth v. Denniston, 9 Watts, 142.) The same point is also illustrated by a case in Indiana. (HolH- day v. Tie People, 5 Oilman, 214, 217.) 2. As where, in Georgia, the fine was to be paid to an inferior court, for county purposes. (Johns v. Georgia, 1 Kelly, 606, 610.) 3. As where, in South Carolina, the fine was to be paid to the Commissioners of Public Buildings, for public purposes. ( The State v. Simpson, I Bailey, 378.) Or the Commissioners of Public Roads. (The State v. Williams, 1 Nott & McCord, 26. See also Rowe v. State, 2 Bay, 565.) According to these authorities, the portion of the fine allotted to the county, or to the school, may be remitted. Of this there can be no doubt. Secondly. The Statutes of Maryland, anterior to the organization of the District of Columbia, may also be regarded as an independent source of light on this question, since these statutes have been made the law of the District. And here the conclusion seems to be easy. By the Constitution of Maryland, adopted 14th Au gust, 1776, it was declared "The Governor may grant reprieves or pardons for any crime, except in such cases where the law shall otherwise direct." Notwith standing these strong words of grant, which seem to be as broad as the common law, it was further declared, as if to remove all doubt, by the Legislature, in 1782, (chap. 42,) " That the Governor, with the advice of the Council, be authorized to remit the whole or any part of any fine, penalty, or forfeitures, heretofore imposed, or hereafter to be imposed, in any court of law." Here is no exception or limitation of any kind. By 5* 54 PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. express words, the Governor is authorized to remit the whole or any part of any fine. Of course, under this clause he cannot remit a private debt; but he may remit any fine. The question is not whether the fine be payable to the United States or other parties, but whether it is a fine. If it be a fine, it is in the powcj of the Governor. This view is strengthened by the circumstance that in Maryland, according to several statutes, fines were allotted to parties other than the government. The very statute of 1796, under which these proceedings were had, was passed subsequent to this provision respecting the remission of fines. It must be inter preted in harmony with the earlier statute ; and since all these statutes are now the law of the District of Columbia, the power of the President, under these laws, to remit these fines, seems established without special reference to the common law or to the Consti tution of the United States. If this were not the case, two different hardships w r ould ensue ; first, the statute of 1 782 would be de spoiled of its natural efficacy ; and, secondly, the minor offence of " transporting" a single slave would be pun ishable, on non-payment of the fine, with imprisonment for life, while the higher offence of " stealing " a slave is punishable with imprisonment for a specific term, and the other offence of " enticing " a slave is punishable with a fine larger than that for transporting a slave, and on non-payment thereof, imprisonment for one year only. Thirdly. Look at the case under the Constitution of the United States. By the Constitution, the President has power " to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against tho PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. 55 United States, except in case of impeachment." Ac cording to a familiar rule of interpretation, the single specified exception leaves the power of the President applicable to all other cases. Expressio unius exclusio est alterius. Mr. Berrien, in one of his opinions as Attorney-General, recognizes " the pardoning power as co-extensive with the power to punish ; " and he quotes with approbation the words of another writer, that " the power is general and unqualified, and that the remission of fines, penalties, and forfeitures, under the revenue laws, is included in it," (Opinions of Attorney-General, vol. ii. p. 756.) On this power, Mr. Justice Story thus remarks: " The power of remission of fines, penalties and for feitures, is also included in it ; and may, in the last resort, be exercised by the Executive, although it is in many cases, by our laws confined to the Treasury De partment. No law can abridge the constitutional powers of the Executive Department, or interrupt its right to interfere by pardon in such cases. Instances of the exercise of this power by the President, in re mitting fines and penalties, in cases not within the scope of the laws, giving authority to the Treasury Department, have repeatedly occurred ; and their obli gatory force has never been questioned." (Story, Com. on Constitution, vol. ii. 1504.) It has been decided by the Supreme Court, after elaborate argument, that the Secretary of the Treasury has authority, under the Remission Act of the 3d March, 1797, cap. 3G1, "to remit a forfeiture or pen alty accruing under the revenue laws, at any time, before or after a final sentence of condemnation or judgment for the penalty, until the money is actually 56 -PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. paid over to the Collector for distribution ; and such permission extends to the shares of the forfeiture or penalty to which the office of the customs is entitled, as well as to the interest of the United States." In giving his opinion in this case, Mr. Justice Johnson, of South Carolina, made use of language much in point. "Mercy and justice," he said, "could only have been administered by halves, if collectors could have hurried causes to judgment, and then clung to the one-half of the forfeiture, in contempt of the cries of distress, or the mandates of the Secretary." (United States v. Morris, 10 Wheaton, 303.) A case has occurred in Kentucky, to which reference has been already made, in which it is confidently and broadly assumed that the pardoning power (under the Constitution) extends even to the penalties due to in formers. The following passage occurs in the opinion of the Court: "The act of 1823 says that any prose cuting attorney, who shall prosecute any person to conviction under it, shall be entitled to twenty-five per cent, of the amount of such fine as shall be collected. The act gives the prosecuting attorney one-fourth of the money when collected, but vests him with no in terest in the fine or sentence, separate and distinct from that of the Commonwealth, that would screen his share from the effect of any legal operation which should, before collection, abrogate the whole or a part of it. It would require language of the strongest and most explicit character to authorize a presumption that the Legislature intended to confer any such right. We could never presume an intention to control the Gov ernor s constitutional power to remit fines and forfei tures. If he can, in this way, be restrained in the PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. 57 exercise of his power to remit, for the fourth of a fine, so can he be from the half or the whole. This part of his prerogative cannot be curtailed. With the excep tion of the case of treason, his power to remit fines and forfeitures, grant reprieves and pardons, is unlim- tied, iHimitable and uncontrollable. It has no bounds but his own discretion. It is no doubt politic and proper for the Legislature to incite prosecuting attor neys and informers, by giving them a portion of fines when collected ; but in so doing, the citizen cannot be debarred of his right of appeal to Executive clemency." (Routt v. Flemster, 7 J. J. Marshall, 132.) According to these authorities, it seems reasonable to infer that, under the Constitution of the United States, the pardoning power, which is clearly applica ble to the offence of "transporting" slaves of the District, might remit the penalties in question. These penalties, though allotted to the owners and the county, when finally collected, are neither more nor less than the punishment, under sentence of a criminal court for an offence of which the parties stand convicted upon indictment. They can be collected and acquitted only by the United States. No process for this pur pose is at the command of the slave owner. He had no control whatever over the prosecution at any stage, nor did it proceed at his suggestion or informa tion. The very statute under which these public proceedings were instituted, in the name of the United States, secured to the slave owner his private action on the case for damages thus separating the public from the private interests. These, it seems the duty of the President to keep separate, except on the final collection and distribution of the penalties. Pub- 58 PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. lie policy and the ends of justice require that the pun ishment for a criminal offence should, in every case, be exclusively subject to the supreme pardoning power, without dependence upon the will of any private per son. An obvious case will illustrate this. Suppose, in the case of Drayton and Sayres, it should be ascer tained beyond doubt that the conviction was procured by perjury. If, by virtue of the judgment, the slave owners have an interest in the imprisonment of these men, which cannot be touched, then the prisoners, unable to meet these heavy liabilities, must continue in perpetual imprisonment, or owe their release to the accident of private good- will. The President, notwith standing his beneficent power to pardon, under the Constitution, will be powerless to remedy this evil. But such a state of things would be monstrous ; and any interpretation of the Constitution is monstrous which thus ties his hands. Mercy and justice would be rendered not merely ly halves : but, owing to the inability of prisoners, from poverty, to pay the other half of the fine, they would be entirely arrested. The power of pardon, which is attached by the Con stitution to offences generally, should- not be curtailed. It is a generous prerogative, and should bq exercised generously. Boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem. This is an old maxim of the law. But if it be the duty of a good judge to extend his jurisdiction, how much more true is it the duty of a good President to extend the field of his clemency. At least, no small doubt should deter him from the exercise of his prerogative. The conclusion from this review is as follows : 1. By the English common law, the costs and one- half of the fines may be remitted. It is not certain PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. 59 that by this law, as adopted in the United States, the other half of the fines may not also be remitted. 2. Under the statutes of Maryland, now the law of the District, the Governor,- and, of course, the Presi dent, may remit " the whole or any part of any fine," without exception. 3. Under the Constitution of the United States, and according to its true spirit, the pardoning power of the President is co -extensive with the power to punish, ex cept in the solitary case of impeachment. Several courses are open to the President in the present case. I. By a general pardon he may discharge Drayton and Sayres from prison, and remit all the fines and costs for which they are detained. Such a pardon would effectually operate unquestionably upon the im prisonment and upon the costs, and also upon the half of the fines due to the county. It would be for the courts, on a proper application, and in the exercise of their just powers, to restrain it, if the pardon did not operate upon the other moiety. Among the opinions of the Attorney General, is a case which illustrates this point. In 1824, one Joshua Wingold prayed for a credit in the settlement of his accounts, for his proportion of a fine incurred by one P. Varney. It appeared that suit was instituted by the petitioner as Collector of the District of Bath, Maine, on which judgment was obtained in May, 1809 ; the defendant was arrested and committed to jail, under execution on that judgment, and the fine afterwards re mitted by the President. The petitioner contended that the President had no constitutional or legal power to remit his proportion of the fine, the right to which had 60 PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. been vested by the institution of the suit. On this Mr. Wirt remarks, that it is unnecessary to express an opinion upon the correctness of this position, " because, if it be correct, the act of remission by the President being wholly inoperative as to that portion of the fine claimed by the collector, his legal right to recover it remained in full force, notwithstanding the remission ; and it is his own fault if he has not -enforced his right at law." (Opinions of Attorney General, vol. i. p. 479.) A general pardon cannot conclude the question, so as to divest any existing rights. It can do no wrong. Why should the President hesitate to exercise it ? II. By a limited pardon the President may discharge Drayton and Sayres simply and exclusively from their imprisonment, without touching their pecuniary lia bility ; but leaving them still exposed to proceedings for all fines and costs, to be satisfied out of any prop erty they may hereafter acquire. If the imprisonment had been a specific part of the sentence, as if they had been sentenced to one year s imprisonment and a fine of one hundred dollars, beyond all question they might be discharged, by par don, from this imprisonment. But where the imprison ment, as in the present case, is not a specific part of the sentence, but simply an alternative in the nature of a remedy, to secure the payment of the fine, the power of the President cannot be less than in the former case. So far as all private parties are concerned, the im prisonment is a mere matter of remedy, which can be discharged without divesting the beneficiaries of any rights ; and, since imprisonment for debt has been PARDONING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT. 61 abolished, it is reasonable, under the circumstances, that this peculiar remedy should be discharged. III. By another form of limited pardon, the Presi dent may discharge Drayton and SayreSjfrow their im prisonment, also from all fines and costs in which the United States have an interest, without touching the rights of other parties. This would set them at liberty, but would leave them exposed to private proceedings at the investiga tion of the owners of the "transported slaves," if any should be so disposed. IV. By still another form of pardon, reference may be made to the Maryland statute of 1782, under which the Governor is authorized " to remit the whole or any part of any fine," without any exception therefrom; and this power, now vested in the President, may be made the express ground for the remission of all fines and costs due from Drayton and Sayres. By this form of pardon, the case may be limited, as a precedent here after, to a very narrow circle of cases. It would not in any way affect cases arising under the general laws of the Union. In either of these alternatives, the great object of this application would be gained the discharge of these men from prison. CHARLES SUMNER. 14 May, 1852. TRIBUTE TO MR. RANTOUL. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE DEATH OF HON. ROBERT RANTOUL, JR., 9TH AUGUST, 1852. A message was received from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Hayes, its Chief Clerk, communicating to the Senate infor mation of the death of the Hon. ROBERT RANTOUL, JR., a member of the House of Representatives from the State of Massachusetts, and the proceedings of the House thereon. The resolutions of the House of Representatives were read. MR. STJMNER said : Mr. President, by formal mes sage of the House of Representatives, we now learn that one of our associates in the public councils has died. Only a few brief days I had almost said hours have passed since he was in his accustomed seat. Now he is gone from us forever. He was my col league and friend ; and yet, so sudden has been this change, that no tidings of his illness even had reached me, before I learned that he was already beyond the reach of mortal aid or consolation, and that the shadows of the grave had already descended upon him. He died here in Washington, late on Saturd/iy evening, 7th August ; and his earthly remains, accompanied by the bereaved companion of his life, with a Committee of the other House, are now far on the way to Massa chusetts, there to mingle dust to dust with his native soil. [62] TRIBUTE TO MR. RANTOUL. * The occasion does not permit me to speak ac length of the character or services of Mr. Kantoul. A few words will suffice ; nor will the language of eulogy be required. He was born 13th August, 1805, at Beverly, in the county of Essex, the home of Nathan Dane, final au thor of the immortal Ordinance by which freedom was* made a perpetual heir-loom in the broad region of the Northwest. Here, under happy auspices of family and neighborhood, he commenced life. Here his excellent father, honored for his public services, venerable also with years and flowing silver locks, yet lives to mourn his last surviving son. The sad fortune of Burke is renewed. He who should have been as posterity, is now to this father in the place of ancestor. Mr. Rantoul was early a member of the Legislature of Massachusetts, and there won his first fame. For many years he occupied a place on the Board of Edu cation in that State. He was also, for a time, Collector of the Port of Boston, and afterwards Attorney of the United States for Massachusetts. During a brief pe riod he held a scat in this body. Finally, in 1851, by the choice of his native District, remarkable for its in telligence and public spirit, he became a Representative in the other branch of the National Legislature. In all these spheres he performed most acceptable service. And the future promised opportunities of a higher character, to which his abilities, industry, and fidel ity would have amply responded. Massachusetts has many arrows in her well-stocked quiver ; but few could she so ill spare at this moment as the servant we now mourn. By original fitness, study, knowledge and various 64 TRIBUTE TO Mil. RANTOUL. experience, he was formed for pirblic service. But he was no stranger to other pursuits. Early devoted to the profession of the law, he followed it with assiduity and success. In the antiquities of our jurisprudence, few were more learned. His arguments at the bar were thorough ; nor was his intellectual promptness in all emergencies of a trial- easily surpassed. Literature, neglected by many under the pressure of professional life, was always cultivated by him. His taste for books was enduring. He was a constant student. Amidst his manifold labors, professional and public, he cherished the honorable aspiration of adding to the historical productions of his country. A work on the history of France, wherein the annals and character of this great nation should be portrayed by an American pen, had occupied much of his thoughts. I know not if any part was ever matured for publication. The practice of the law, while it sharpens the intel lect, is too apt to cramp the faculties within the narrow limits of form, and to restrain the genial currents of the soul. It had no such influence on him. He was a Reformer. In the warfare with Evil, he was enlisted early and openly as a soldier for life. As such, he did not hesitate to encounter opposition, to bear obloquy, and to brave enmity. His conscience, pure as good ness, sustained him in every trial even that sharpest of all, the desertion of friends. And yet, while earn est in his cause, his zeal was tempered beyond that of the common reformer. He knew well the difference between the ideal and the actual, and sought, by prac tical means, in harmony with the existing public senti ment, to promote the interests which he had at heart. He saw clearly that reform could not prevail at once, TRIBUTE TO MR. RANTOUL. 65 in an hour, or in a day, but that it would be the slow and certain result of constant labor, testimony, and faith. Determined and tranquil in his own convic tions, he had the grace to respect the convictions of others. Recognizing in the social and political sys tem the essential elements of stability and progress, he discerned at once the office of the conservative and the reformer. But he saw also that a blind conservatism was not less destructive than a blind reform. By the mingled caution, moderation, and earnestness of his labors, he seemed often to blend two characters in one and to be at the same time a Reforming Conservative and a Conservative Reformer. I might speak of his devotion to public improve ments of all kinds, particularly to the system of rail roads. But here he was on the popular side. There were other causes, where his struggle was keener and more meritorious. At a moment when his services were much needed he was the faithful supporter of common schools, the peculiar glory of New England. By word and example he sustained the cause of tem perance. Some of his most devoted labors, commenc ing in the Legislature of Massachusetts, were for the abolition of capital punishment. Perhaps no person since that consummate jurist, Edward Livingston, has done so much by reports, articles, letters and speeches to commend this reform to the country. With its final triumph, in the progress of civilization, his name will be indissolubly connected. There is another cause that commanded his early sympathies and some of his latest best endeavors, to which, had life been spared, he would have given the splendid maturity of his powers. Posterity cannot forget this ; but I am 66 TRIBUTE TO MR. RANTOUL. forbidden by the occasion to name it here. Sir, in the long line of portraits on the walls of the ducal palace of Venice, commemorating its Doges, a single panel, where a portrait should have been, is shrouded by a dark curtain. But this darkened blank, in that place, attracts the beholder more than any picture. Let such a curtain fall to-day upon this theme. In becoming harmony with these noble causes was the purity of his private life. Here he was blameless. In manners he was modest, simple, and retiring. In conversation he was disposed to listen rather than to speak, though all were well pleased when he broke silence, and in apt language declared his glowing thoughts. But in the public assembly, before the people, or in the legislative hall, he was bold and tri umphant. As a debater he rarely met his peer. Flu ent, earnest, rapid, sharp, incisive, his words came forth like a flashing cimeter. Few could stand against him. He always understood his subject; and then, clear, logical, and determined, seeing his point before him, pressed forward with unrelenting power. His speeches on formal occasions were enriched by study, and contain passages of beauty. But he was most truly at home in dealing with practical questions aris ing from the actual exigencies of life. Few had studied public affairs more minutely or intelligently. As a constant and effective member of the Democratic party, ho had become conspicuous by championship of its doctrines on the currency and free trade. These he often discussed ; and from the am plitude of his knowledge, and his overflowing famil iarity with facts, statistics and the principles of politi cal economy, poured upon them a luminous flood. TRIBUTE TO ME. EANTOUL. 67 But there was no topic within the wide range of our national concerns which did not occupy his thoughts. The resources and needs of the West were all known to him ; and Western interests were near his heart. As the pioneer, resting from his daily labors, learns the death of KANTOTJL, he will feel a personal grief. The fishermen on the distant Eastern coast, many of whom are dwellers in his District, will sympathize with the pioneer. As these hardy children of the sea, re turning in their small craft from late adventures, hear the sad tidings, they, too, will feel that they have lost a friend. And well they may. During his last fitful hours of life, while reason still struggled against disease, he was anxious for their welfare. The speech which, in their behalf, he had hoped soon to make on the floor of Congress, was then chasing through his mind. Finally, in broken utterances, he gave to them some of his latest earthly thoughts. The death of such a man, so suddenly, in mid-career, is well calculated to arrest attention, and to furnish admonition. From the love of family, the attachment of friends and the regard of fellow-citizens, he has been removed. Leaving behind the cares of life, the concerns of State, and the wretched strifes of party, he has ascended to those mansions where there is no strife, or concern, or care. At last he stands face to face in His presence whose service is perfect freedom. He has gone before. You and I, sir, and all of us, must follow soon. God grant that we may go with equal consciousness of duty done. I beg leave to offer the following resolutions : Resolved, unanimously, That the Senate mourns the death of Hon. ROBERT RANTOUL, JR., late a member of the House of Rep- 68 TRIB-TITE TO MR. RANTOUL. resentatives, from Massachusetts, and tenders to his relativej t sincere sympathy in this afflicting bereavement. Resolved, As a mark of respect to the memory of the deceaa 4, that the Senate do now adjourn. The resolutions were adopted, and the Senate ad journed. FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 26TH AUGUST 1852, ON HIS MOTION TO REPEAL THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. IN THE SENATE, Wednesday, 26th May, 1852, on the pre sentation of a Memorial against the Fugitive Slave Bill, the fol lowing passage occurred, which is properly introductory to the principal speech at a later day. MB. SUMNER. I hold in my hand, and desire to present, a memorial from the representatives of the Society of Friends in New England, formally adopted at a public meeting, and authenticated by their clerk, in which they ask for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill. After setting forth their sentiments on the gen eral subject of slavery, the memorialists proceed as follows : "We, therefore, respectfully, but earnestly and sincerely, entreat you to repeal the law of the last Congress respecting fugitive slaves ; first and principally, because of its injustice towards a long sorely-oppressed and deeply-injured people ; and, secondly, in order that we, together with other conscientious sufferers, may be exempted from the penalties which it imposes on all who, in faithfulness to their Divine Master, and in dis charge of their obligations to their distressed fellow-men, feel bound to regulate their conduct, even under the heaviest penal ties which man can inflict for so doing, by the Divine injunction, * All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them ; and by the other commandment, * Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neigh bor as thyself. " [69J 70 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Mr. President, this memorial is commended by the character of the religious association from which it pro ceeds men who mingle rarely in public affairs, but with austere virtue seek to carry the Christian rule into life. The PRESIDENT. [Mr. King, of Alabama.] The Chair will have to interpose. The Senator is not privileged to enter into a discussion of the subject now. The contents of the memorial, simply, are to be stated, and then it becomes a question whether it is to be received, if any objection is made to its reception. Silence gives consent. After it is received, he can make a motion with regard to its reference, and then make any remarks he thinks proper. Mr. SUMNER. I have but few words to add, and then I propose to move the reference of the memorial to the Committee on the Judiciary. The PRESIDENT. The memorial has first to be received before any motion as to its reference can be entertained. The Senator presenting a memorial states distinctly its objects and contents ; then it is sent to the Chair, if a reference of it is desired. But it is not in order to enter into a discussion of the merits of the memorial until it has been received. Mr. SUMNER. I do not propose to enter into any such discussion. I have already read one part of the memorial, and it was my design merely to refer to the character of the memorialists a usage which I have observed on this floor constantly to state the course I should pursue, and then conclude with a motion for a reference. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hear the Senator, FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 71 if such is the pleasure of the Senate, if he does not go into an elaborate discussion. Mr. SUMNEE. I have no such purpose. Mr. DAWSON. Let him be heard. Several SENATORS. Certainly. Mr. SUMNEK. I observed that this memorial was commended by the character of the religious association from which it proceeds. It is commended, also, by its earnest and persuasive tone, and by the prayer which it presents. Offering it now, sir, I desire simply to say, that I shall deem it my duty, on some proper occasion hereafter, to express myself at length on the matter to which it relates. Thus far, during this session, I have foreborne. With the exception of an able speech from my colleague [Mr. Davis], the discussion of this all- absorbing question has been mainly left with Senators from another quarter of the country, by whose mutual differences it has been complicated, and between whom I have not cared to interfere. But there is a time for all things. Justice, also, requires that both sides should be heard ; and I trust not to expect too much, when, at some fit moment, I bespeak the clear and candid attention of the Senate, while I undertake to set forth, frankly and fully, and with entire respect for this body, convictions, deeply cherished in my own State, though disregarded here to which I am bound by every sentiment of the heart, by every fibre of my being, by all my devotion to country, by my love of God and man. But, upon these I do not now enter. Suffice it, for the present, to say, that when I shall undertake that service, I believe I shall utter nothing which, in any just sense, can be called sectional, unless the Con stitution is sectional, and unless the sentiments of the 72 FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. fathers were sectional. It is my happiness to believe, and my hope to be able to show, that, according to the true spirit of the Constitution, and according to the sentiments of the fathers, FREEDOM, and not slavery, is NATIONAL ; while SLAVERY, and not freedom, is SEC TIONAL. In duty to the petitioners, and with the hope of promoting their prayer, I move the referense of their petition to the Committee on the Judiciary. A brief debate ensued, in which Messrs. Mangum, of North Carolina, Badger, of North Carolina, Hale, of New Hampshire, Clemens, of Alabama, Dawson, of Georgia, Adams, of Mississippi, Butler, of South Carolina, and Chase, of Ohio, took part ; and, on motion of Mr. Badger, the memorial was laid on the table. ON THURSDAY, 11th July, the subject was again presented by Mr. Sumner to the Senate. Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, I have a Resolution which I desire to offer ; and, as it is not in order to debate it to-day, I give notice that I shall expect to call it up to-morrow, at an early moment in the morn ing hoitr, when I shall throw myself upon the indul gence of the Senate to be heard upon it. The Resolution was then read, as follows : Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be requested to consider the expediency of reporting a bill for immediate re peal of the Act of Congress, approved September 18, 1850, usually known as the Fugitive Slave Act. In pursuance of this notice, on the next day, 28th July, during the morning hour, an attempt was made by Mr. Sumner to call it up. FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 73 Mr. SUAINEE,. Mr. President, I now ask permis sion of the Senate to take up the Resolution which I offered yesterday. For that purpose, I move that the prior orders be postponed, and upon this motion I desire to say a word. In asking the Senate to take up this Resolution for consideration, I say nothing now of its merits, nor of the arguments by which it may be maintained ; nor do I at this stage anticipate any objec tions to it on these grounds. All this will properly belong to the discussion of the Resolution itself the main question when it is actually before the Senate. The single question now is, not the Resolution, but whether I shall be heard upon rt. As a Senator, under the responsibilities of my po sition, I have deemed it my duty to offer this Resolu tion. I may seem to have postponed this duty to an inconvenient period of the session, but had I attempted it at an earlier day, I might have exposed myself to a charge of a different character. It might then have been said that, a new-comer and inexperienced in this scene, without deliberation, hastily, rashly, recklessly, I pushed this question before the country. This is not the case now. I have taken time, and, in the exercise of my most careful discretion, at last ask the attention of the Senate. I shrink from any appeal founded on a trivial personal consideration ; but should I be blamed for delay latterly, I may add, that though in my seat daily, my bodily health for some time past, down to this very week, has not been equal to the service I have undertaken. I am not sure that it is now, but I desire to try. And now again I say, the question is simply whether I shall be heard. In allowing me this privilege this 7 \ 74 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. right, I might say you do not commit yourselves in any way to the principle of the Resolution ; but you merely follow the ordinary usage of the Senate, and yield to a brother Senator the opportunity which he craves, in the practical discharge of his duty, to express convictions dear to his heart, and dear to large numbers of his constituents. For the sake of these constituents, for my own sake, I now desire to be heard. Make such disposition of my Resolution afterward as to you shall seem best ; visit upon me any degree of criticism, censure, or displeasure, but do not deprive me of a hearing. " Strike, but hear." A debate ensued, in which Messrs. Mason, of Virginia, Brooke, of Mississippi, Charlton, of Georgia, Shields, of Illinois, Gwin, of California, Douglas, of Illinois, Butler, of South Carolina, and Borland, of Arkansas, took part. Objections to taking up the Resolution were pressed on the ground of " want of time," the " lateness of the session," and " danger to the Union." The question being then taken upon the motion by Mr. Sumner to take up his Resolution, it was rejected Yeas 10, Nays 32 as follows : YEAS. Messrs. Clarke, Davis, Dodge, of Wisconsin, Foote, Hamlin, Seward, Shields, Sumner, Upham, and "VVade 10. NAYS. Messrs. Borland, Brodhead, Brooke, Cass, Charlton, Clemens, Desaussure, Dodge, of Iowa, Douglas, Downs, Felch, Fish, Geyer, Gwin, Hunter, King, Mallory, Mangum, Mason, Meriwether, Miller, Morten, Norris, Pearce, Pratt, Rusk, Sebas tian, Smith, Soule, Spruance, Toucey, and Weller 32. Mr. Sumner was thus deprived of an opportunity to present his views on this important subject, and it was openly asserted that he should not present them on the floor of the Senate during the pending session. He was thus driven to watch for an oppor tunity, when, according to the rules of the Senate, he might be heard without impediment. On one of the last days of the session it came. FBEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 75 THURSDAY, 26th August, 1852. The Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation Bill being under consideration, the following amendment was moved by Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, on the recom mendation of the Committee on Finance. " That where the ministerial officers of the United States have or shall incur extraordinary expenses in executing the laws thereof, the payment of which is not specifically provided for, the President of the United States is authorized to allow the payment thereof, under the special taxation of the District or Circuit Court of the District in which the said services have been or shall be rendered, to be paid from the appropriation for de fraying the expenses of the Judiciary." Mr. SUMNER seized the opportunity for which he had been watching, and at once moved the following amendment to the amendment : " Provided, That no such allowance shall be authorized for any expenses incurred in executing the Act of September 18, 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from service or labor ; which said Act is hereby repealed." On this he took the floor, and spoke as follows : MB. PRESIDENT : Here is a provision for extra ordinary expenses incurred in executing the laws of the United States. Extraordinary expenses ! Sir, be neath these specious words lurks the very subject on which, by a solemn vote of this body, I was refused a hearing. Here it is ; no longer open to the charge of being an "abstraction," but actually presented for practical legislation; not introduced by me, but by the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Hunter], on the recom mendation of one of the important Committees of the Senate ; not brought forward weeks ago, when there was ample time for discussion, but only at this moment, 76 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. without any reference to the late period of the session. The amendment which I now offer, proposes to remove one chief occasion of these extraordinary expenses. Beyond all controversy or cavil, it is strictly in order. And now, at last, among these final crowded days of our duties here, but at this earliest opportunity, I am to be heard; not as a favor, but as a right. The graceful usages of this body may be abandoned, but the established privileges of debate cannot be abridged. Parliamentary courtesy may be forgotten, but parlia mentary law must prevail. The subject is broadly before the Senate. By the blessing of God, it shall be discussed. Sir, a severe lawgiver of early Greece vainly sought to secure permanence for his^ imperfect institutions, by providing that the citizen who, at any time, attempted their alteration or repeal, should appear in the public assembly with a halter about his neck, ready to be drawn if his proposition failed to be adopted. A tyran nical spirit among us, in unconscious imitation of this antique and discarded barbarism, seeks to surround an offensive institution with a similar safeguard. In the existing distemper of the public mind and at this present juncture, no man can enter upon the service which I now undertake, without a personal responsi bility, such as can be sustained only by that sense of duty which, under God, is always our best support. That personal responsibility I accept. Before the Sen ate and the country let me be held accountable for this act, and for every word which I utter. With me, sir, there is no alternative. Painfully convinced of the unutterable wrongs and woes of slavery; profoundly believing that, according to the FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 77 true spirit of the Constitution and the sentiments of the fathers, it can find no place under our National Government that it is in every respect sectional, and in no respect national that it is always and everywhere the creature and dependent of the States, and never anywhere the creature or dependent of the Nation, and that the Nation can never, by legislative or other act, impart to it any support, under the Con stitution of the United States ; with these convictions, I could not allow this session to reach its close, without making or seizing an opportunity to declare myself openly against the usurpation, injustice, and cruelty, of the late enactment by Congress for the recovery of fugitive slaves. Full well I know, sir, the difficulties of this discussion, arising from preju dices of opinion and from adverse conclusions, strong and sincere as my own. Full well I know that I am in a small minority, with few here .to whom I may look for sympathy or support. Full well I know that I must utter things unwelcome to many in this body, which I cannot do without pain. Full well I know that the institution of slavery in our country, which I now proceed to consider, is as sensitive as it is power ful possessing a power to shake the whole land with a sensitiveness that shrinks and trembles at the touch. But, while these things may properly prompt me to caution and reserve, they cannot change my duty, or my determination to perform it. For this I willingly forget myself, and all personal consequences. The favor and good-will of my fellow-citizens, of my brethren of the Senate, sir, grateful to me as it justly is I am ready, if required, to sacrifice. All that I am or may be, I freely offer to this cause. 7* 78 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. And here allow me, for one moment, to refer to myself and my position. Sir, I have never been a politician. The slave of principles, I call no party master. By sentiment, education, and conviction, a friend of Human Rights, in their utmost expansion, I have ever most sincerely embraced the Democratic Idea; not, indeed, as represented or professed by any party, but according to its real significance, as trans figured in the Declaration of Independence, and in the injunctions of Christianity. In this idea I saw no narrow advantages merely for individuals or classes, but the sovereignty of the people and the greatest happiness of all secured by equal laws. Amidst the vicissitudes of public affairs, I trust always to hold fast to this idea, and to any political party which truly embraces it. Party does not constrain me ; nor is my indepen dence lessened by any relations to the office which gives me a title to be heard on this floor. And here, sir, I may speak proudly. By no effort, by no desire of my own, I find myself a Senator of the United States. Never before have I held public office of any kind. With the ample opportunities of private life I was content. No tombstone for me could bear a fairer inscription than this : " Here lies one who, without the honors or emoluments of public station, did something for his fellow-man." From such simple aspirations I was taken away by the free choice of my native Commonwealth, and placed in this responsible post of duty, without personal obligation of any kind, beyond what was implied in my life and published words. The earnest friends, by whose confidence I was first designated, asked nothing from me, and, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 79 tlirougliout the long conflict which ended in my elec tion, rejoiced in the position which I most carefully guarded. To all my language was uniform, that I did not desire to be brought forward; that I would do nothing to promote the result ; that I had no pledges or promises to offer; tha^_the_,Qffi.c.e should ^ seek^me^ and not I the office ; and that it should find me in all respects an independent man, bound to no party and to no human being, but only, according to my best judgment, to act for the good of all. Again, sir, I speak with pride, both for myself and others, when I add that these avowals found a sympathizing response. In this spirit I have come here, and in this spirit I shall speak to-day. Hejoicing in my independence, and claiming nothing from party ties, I throw myself upon the candor and magnanimity of the Senate. I now ask your attention ; but I trust not to abuse it. I may speak strongly ; for I shall speak openly and from the strength of my convictions. I may speak warmly ; for I shall speak from the heart. But in no event can I forget the amenities which belong to debate, and which especially become this body. Slavery I must condemn with my whole soul ; but here I need only borrow the language of slaveholders themselves ; nor would it accord with my habits or my sense of justice to exhibit them as the impersonation of the institution Jefferson calls it the " enormity " which they cherish. Of them I do not speak ; but without fear and without favor, as without impeachment of any person, I assail this wrong. Again, sir, I may err; but it will be with the Fathers. I plant myself on the ancient ways of 80 FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. the Republic, with its grandest names, its surest land marks, and all its original altar-fires about me. And now, on the very threshold, I encounter the objection that there is a final settlement, in principle and substance* of the question of Slavery, and that all discussion of it is closed. Both the old political par ties of the country, by formal resolutions, in their recent conventions at Baltimore, have united in this declaration. On a subject which for years has agitated the public mind ; which yet palpitates in every heart and burns on every tongue ; which, in its immeasura ble importance, dwarfs all other subjects ; which, by its constant and gigantic presence, throws a shadow -across these Halls ; which at this very time calls for appropriations to meet extraordinary expenses it has caused, they have imposed the rule of silence. Ac cording to them, sir, we may speak of everything except that alone, which is most present in all our minds. To this combined effort I might fitly reply, that, with flagrant inconsistency, it challenges the very dis cussion which it pretends to forbid. Such a declara tion, on the eve of an election, is, of course, submitted to the consideration and ratification of the people, Debate, inquiry, discussion, are the necessary conse quence. Silence becomes impossible. Slavery, which you profess to banish from the public attention, openly by your invitation enters every political meeting and every political convention. Nay, at this moment it stalks into this Senate, crying, like the daughters of the horseleech, " Give, give ! " But no unanimity of politicians can uphold the FBEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 81 baseless assumption, that a law, or any conglomerate of laws, under the name of Compromise, or howsoever called, is final. Nothing can be plainer than this ; that, by no parliamentary device or knot, can any Legislature tie the hands of a succeeding Legislature, so as to prevent the full exercise of its constitutional powers. Each Legislature, under a just sense of its responsibility, must judge for itself; and, if it think proper, it may revise or amend, or absolutely undo the work of its predecessors. The laws of the Medes and Persians are proverbially said to have been un alterable ; but they stand forth in history as a single example of such irrational defiance of the true prin ciples of all law. To make a law final, so as not to be reached by Congress, is, by mere legislation, to fasten a new pro vision on the Constitution. Nay, more ; it gives to the law a character which the very Constitution does not possess. The wise fathers did not treat the coun try as a Chinese foot, never to grow after infancy ; but, anticipating Progress, they declared expressly that their great Act is not final. According to the Constitution itself, there is not one of its existing pro visions not even that with regard to fugitives from labor which may not at all times be reached by amendment, and thus be drawn into debate. This is rational and just. Sir, nothing from man s hands, nor law, nor constitution, can be final. Truth alone is final. Inconsistent and absurd, this effort is tyrannical also. The responsibility for the recent Slave Act and for Slavery everywhere within the jurisdiction of Con gress necessarily involves the right to discuss them. 82 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVE11Y SECTIONAL. To separate these is impossible. Like the twenty-fifth rule of the House of Representatives against petitions on Slavery now repealed and dishonored the Compromise, as explained and urged, is a curtailment of the actual powers of legislation, and a perpetual denial of the indisputable principle that the right to deliberate is co-extensive with the responsibility for an act. To sustain Slavery, it is now proposed to trample on free speech. In any country this would be grievous ; but here, where the Constitution ex pressly provides against abridging freedom of speech, it is a special outrage. In vain do we condemn the despotisms of Europe, while we borrow the rigors with which they repress Liberty, and guard their own uncertain power. For myself, in no factious spirit, but solemnly and in loyalty to the Constitution, as a Senator of the United States, representing a free Com monwealth, I protest against this wrong. On Slavery, as on every other subject, I claim the right to be heard. That right I cannot, I will not abandon. " Give me the liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely, above all liberties ; " these are the glowing words which flashed from the soul of John Milton, in his struggles with English tyranny. With equal fervor they should be echoed now by every American, not already a slave. But, sir, this effort is impotent as tyrannical. The convictions of the heart cannot be repressed. The utterances of conscience must be heard. They break forth with irrepressible might. As well attempt to check the tides of Ocean, the currents of the Missis sippi, or the rushing waters of Niagara. The discus sion of Slavery will proceed, wherever two or three are FKEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 83 gathered together by the fireside, on the highway, at the public meeting, in the church. The movement against Slavery is from the Everlasting Arm. Even now it is gathering its forces, soon to be confessed everywhere. It may not yet be felt in the high places of office and power ; bufc all who can put their ears humbly to the ground, will hear and comprehend its incessant -and advancing tread. The relations of the Government of the United States I speak of the National Government to Slavery, though plain and obvious, are constantly mis understood. A popular belief at this moment makes Slavery a national institution, and, of course, renders its support a national duty. The extravagance of this error can hardly be surpassed. An institution, which our fathers most carefully omitted to name in the Consti tution, which, according to the debates in the Conven tion, they refused to cover with any " sanction," and which, at the original organization of the Government, was merely sectional, existing nowhere on the national territory, is now, above all other things, blazoned as national. Its supporters plume themselves as national. The old political parties, while upholding it, claim to be national. A National Whig is simply a Slavery Whig, and a National Democrat is simply a Slavery Democrat, in contradistinction to all who regard Slavery as a sectional institution, within the exclusive control of the States, and with which the nation has nothing to do. As Slavery assumes to be national, so, by an equally strange perversion, Freedom is degraded to be sectional, and all who uphold it, under the national Constitution, 84 FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. share this same epithet. The honest efforts to secure its blessings, everywhere within the jurisdiction of Congress, are scouted as sectional ; and this cause, which the founders of our National Government had so much at heart, is called sectionalism. These terms, now belonging to the commonplaces of political speech, are adopted and misapplied by most persons without reflection. But herein is the power of Slavery. Ac cording to a curious tradition of the French language, Louis XIV., the grand monarch, by an accidental error of speech, among supple courtiers, changed the gender of a noun ; but Slavery has done more. It has changed word for word. It has taught men to say national instead of sectional, and sectional instead of national. Slavery national ! Sir, this is all a mistake and absurdity, fit to take a place in some new collection of Vulgar Errors, by some other Sir Thomas Browne, with the ancient but exploded stories, that the toad has a stone in its head, and that ostriches digest iron. According to the true spirit of the Constitution, and the sentiments of the Fathers, Slavery and not Free dom is sectional, while Freedom and not Slavery is national. On this unanswerable proposition I take my stand, and here commences my argument. The subject presents itself under two principal heads ; FIRST, the true relations of the National Government to Slavery, wherein it will appear that there is no national fountain out of which Slavery can be derived, and no national power, under the Constitution, by which it can be supported. Enlightened by this general survey, we shall be prepared to consider, SECONDLY, the true nature of the provision for the rendition of fugitives from service, and herein espec- FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEltY SECTIONAL. 85 ially the unconstitutional and offensive legislation of Congress in pursuance thereof. I. And now for the TRUE RELATIONS OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT TO SLAVERY. These will be readily apparent, if we do not neglect well-estab lished principles. If Slavery be national, if there be any power in the National Government to uphold this institution as in the recent Slave Act it must be by virtue of the Constitution. Nor can it be by mere inference, im plication, or conjecture. According to the uniform admission of courts and jurists in Europe, again and again promulgated in our country, Slavery can be de rived only from clear and special recognition. " The state of Slavery," said Lord Mansfield, pronouncing judgment in the great case of Somersett, "is of such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons moral or political, but only by positive law. It is so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it but POSITIVE LAW." * And a slavehold- ing tribunal, the Supreme Court of Mississippi, adopting the same principle, has said : " Slavery is condemned by reason, and the laws of nature. It exists and can exist only through municipal regulations. 1 (Harry v. Decker, Walker, B. 42.) And another slaveholding tribunal, the Supreme Court of Kentucky, has said : "We view this as a right existing by positive law of a muni cipal character, without foundation in the law of nature or the unwritten and common law." (Rankin v. Lydia, 2 Marshall, 470.) * HowelPs State Trials, vol. 20, p. 82. 8 86 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Of course every power to uphold Slavery must have an origin as distinct as that of Slavery itself. Every presumption must be as strong against such a power as against Slavery. A power so peculiar and offen sive so hostile to reason so repugnant to the law of nature and the inborn Rights of Man ; which despoils its victims of the fruits of their labor; which sub stitutes concubinage for marriage ; which abrogates the relation of parent and child ; which, by a denial of education, abases the intellect, prevents a true knowledge of God, and murders the very soul ; which, amidst a plausible physical comfort, degrades man, created in the Divine image, to the level of a beast ; such a power, so eminent, so transcendent, so tyran nical, so unjust, can find no place in any system of Government, unless by virtue of positive sanction. It can spring from no doubtful phrases. It must be declared by unambiguous words, incapable of a double sense. Slavery, I now repeat, is not mentioned in the Constitution. The name Slave does not pollute this Charter of our Liberties. No "positive" language gives to Congress any power to make a Slave or to hunt a Slave. To find even any seeming sanction for either, we must travel, with doubtful footsteps, beyond its express letter, into the region of interpretation. But here are rules which cannot be disobeyed. With electric might for Freedom, they send a pervasive influence through every provision, clause, and word of the Constitution. Each and all make Slavery impossi ble as a national institution. They efface from the Constitution every fountain out of which it can be derived. FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 87 First and foremost, is the Preamble. This discloses the .prevailing objects and principles of the Constitu tion. This is the vestibule through which all must pass, who would enter the sacred temple. Here are the inscriptions by which they are earliest impressed. Here they first catch the genius of the place. Here the proc lamation of Liberty is soonest heard. " We the People of the United States," says the Preamble, "in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Thus, according to undeniable words, the Constitution was ordained, not to establish, secure, or sanction Slavery not to promote the special in terests of slaveholders not to make Slavery national, in anyway, form, or manner; but to "establish jus tice," "promote the general welfare," and "secure the blessings of Liberty." Here, surely, Liberty is national. Secondly. Next in importance to the Preamble are the explicit contemporaneous declarations in the Con vention which framed the Constitution, and elsewhere, expressed in different forms of language, but all tend ing to the same conclusion. By the Preamble, the Constitution speaks for Freedom. By these declara tions, the Fathers speak as the Constitution speaks. Early in the Convention, Gouverneur Morris, of Penn sylvania, broke forth in the language of an Abolition ist : " He never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of Heaven on the State where it prevailed." 88 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Oliver Ellsworth, of Connecticut, said : " The morality or wisdom of Slavery are considerations belonging to the States themselves." According to him, Slavery was sectional. At a later day, a discussion ensued on the clause touching the African slave trade, which reveals the definitive purposes of the Convention. From the re port of Mr. Madison we learn what was said. Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts, " thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the States as to Slavery, but we ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it" According to these words, he regarded Slavery as sectional, and would not make it national. Roger Sherman, of Connecticut, " was opposed to any tax on slaves imported, as making the matter worse, be cause it implied they were property. He would not have Slavery national. After debate, the subject was committed to a Committee of eleven, who subsequently reported a substitute, authorizing " a tax on such migration or importation, at a rate not exceeding the average of duties laid on imports." This language, classifying persons with merchandise, seemed to imply a recognition that they were property. Mr. Sherman at once declared himself " against this part, as ac knowledging men to be property, by taxing them as such under the character of slaves." Mr. Gorham " thought Mr. Sherman should consider the duty not as implying that slaves are property, but as a dis couragement to the importation of them." Mr. Madi son in mild juridical phrase, " thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in man." After discussion it was finally agreed to make the clause read : FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 89 " But a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person." The difficulty seemed then to be removed, and the whole clause was adopted. This record demonstrates that the word "persons" was employed in order to show that slaves, everywhere under the Constitution, were always to be regarded as persons, and not as property, and thus to exclude from the Constitution all idea that there can be property in man. Remem ber well, that Mr. Sherman was opposed to the clause in its original form, " as acknowledging men to be property ;" that Mr. Madison was also opposed to it, because he " thought it wrong to admit in the Consti tution the idea that there could be property in man ; " and that, after these objections, the clause was so amended as to exclude the idea. But Slavery can not be national, unless this idea is distinctly and unequivocally admitted into the Constitution. But the evidence still accumulates. At a still later day in the proceedings of the Convention, as if to set the seal upon the solemn determination to have no sanction of Slavery in the Constitution, the word "servitude" which appeared in the clause on the apportionment of representation was struck out, and the word " service" inserted. This was done on the motion of Mr. Randolph, of Virginia, and the reason assigned for this substitution, according to Mr. Madison, in his authentic report of the debate, was that " the former was thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter the obligations of free persons." With such care was Slavery excluded from the Constitution. Nor is this all. In the Massachusetts Convention, 8* 90 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. to which the Constitution, when completed, was sub mitted for ratification, a veteran of the Revolution, General Heath, openly declared that, according to his view, Slavery was sectional, and not national. His language was pointed. " I apprehend," he says, " that it is not in our power to do anything for or against those who are in Slavery in the Southern States. No gentleman within these walls detests every idea of Slavery more than I do ; it is generally detested by people of this Commonwealth ; and I ardently hope the time will soon come, when our brethren in the Southern States will view it as we do, and put a stop to it ; but to this we have no right to compel them. Two questions naturally arise : If we ratify the Cow- stitution, shall we do anything ~by our act to hold the Hacks in slavery or shall we become partakers in other men s sins 1 I think neither of them." Afterwards, in the first Congress under the Consti tution, on a motion which was much debated, to introduce into the Impost Bill a duty on the importa tion of Slaves, the same Roger Sherman, who in the National Convention had opposed the idea of property in man, authoritatively exposed the true relations of the Constitution to Slavery. His language was, that " The Constitution does not consider these persons as property; it speaks of them as persons." Thus distinctly and constantly, from the very lips of the framers of the Constitution, we learn the false hood of the recent assumptions in favor of Slavery and in derogation of Freedom. Thirdly. According to a familiar rule of interpre tation, all laws concerning the same matter, in pari materia, are to be construed together. By the same FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 91 reason, the grand political acts of the Nation are to be construed together, giving and receiving light from each other. Earlier than the Constitution was the Declaration of Independence, embodying, in immortal words, those primal truths to which our country pledged itself with its baptismal vows as a Nation. "We hold these truths to be self-evident," says the Nation, " that all men are created equal ; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights ; that among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." But this does not stand alone. There is another national act of similar import. On the successful close of the Revolution, the Continental Congress, in an address to the people, repeated the same lofty truth. " Let it be remembered," said the Nation again, " that it has ever been the pride and the boast of America, that the rights for which she has contended were the rights of human nature. By the blessing of the Author of these rights, they have prevailed over all opposition, and FORM THE BASIS of thirteen independent States." Such were the acts of the Nation in its united capacity. Whatever may be the privileges of States in their individual capacities, within their several local juris dictions, no power can be attributed to the Nation, in the absence of positive, unequivocal grant, inconsistent with these two national declarations. Here, sir, is the national heart, the national soul, the national will, the national voice, which must inspire our interpretation of the Constitution, and enter into and diffuse itself 92 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. through all the national legislation. Thus again is Freedom national. Fourthly. Beyond these is a principle of the com mon law, clear, and indisputable, a supreme rule of interpretation from which in this case there can be no appeal. In any question under the Constitution every word is to ~be construed in favor of liberty. This rule,, which commends itself to the natural reason, is sus tained by time-honored maxims of our early jurispru dence. Blackstone aptly expresses it, when he says, that " The law is always ready to catch at anything in favor of liberty." * The rule is repeated in various forms. Favores ampliandi sunt ; odia restringenda. Favors are to be amplified ; hateful things to be re strained. Lex AnglicB est lex miser icor dice,. The law of England is a law of mercy. Anglia jura in omni casu liber tati dant favor em. The laws of England in every case show favor to liberty. And this sentiment breaks forth in natural, though intense, force, in the maxim : Impius et crudelis judicandus est qui libertati non favet. He is to be adjudged impious and cruel who does not favor liberty. Reading the Constitution in the admonition of these rules, again I say Freedom is national. Fifthly. From a learned judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, in an opinion of the court, we derive the same lesson. In considering the question, whether a State can prohibit the importation of slaves as merchandise, and whether Congress, in the exercise of its power to regulate commerce among the States, can interfere with the slave-trade between the States, a * 2 Black. Com. 94. FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 93 principle has been enunciated, which, while protecting the trade from any intervention of Congress declares openly that the Constitution acts upon no man as property. Mr. Justice McLean says : " If slaves are considered in some of the States as merchandise, that cannot divest them of the leading and controlling quality of persons by which they are designated in the Constitution. The character of property is given them by the local law. This law is respected, and all rights under it are protected by the Federal authorities ; hit the Constitution acts upon slaves as PERSONS and not as property. ..." The power over Slavery belongs to the States respectively. It is local in its character, and in its effects." * Here again Slavery is sectional, while Freedom is national. Sir, such, briefly, are the rules of interpretation which, as applied to the Constitution, fill it with the breath of Freedom, " Driving far off each thing of sin and guilt." To the history and prevailing sentiments of the times we may turn for further assurance. In the Spirit of Freedom the Constitution was formed. In this spirit our Fathers always spoke and acted. In this spirit the National Government was first organized under Wash ington. And here I recall a scene, in itself a touch stone of the period, and an example for us, upon which we may look with pure national pride, while we learn anew the relations of the National Government to Slavery. The Revolution had been accomplished. The feeble * Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Peters, R. 507. 94 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Government of the Confederation had passed away. The Constitution, slowly matured in a National Con vention, discussed before the people, defended by mas terly pens, had, been already adopted. The thirteen States stood forth a nation, wherein was unity without consolidation, and diversity without discord. The hopes of all were anxiously hanging upon the new order of things and the mighty procession of events. With signal unanimity Washington was chosen Pres ident. Leaving his home at Mount Vernoii, he re paired to New York, where the first Congress had already commenced its session, to assume his place as elected Chief of the Republic. On the thirtieth of April, 1789, the organization of the Government was completed by his inaguration. Entering the Senate Chamber, where the two Houses were assembled, he was informed that they awaited his readiness to re ceive the oath of office. Without delay, attended by the Senators and Representatives, with friends and men of mark gathered about him, he moved to the balcony in front of the edifice. A countless multitude, thronging the open street, and eagerly watching this great espousal, " "With reverence look on his majestic face, Proud to be less, but of his god-like race." * The oath was administered by the Chancellor of New \ork. At this time, and in this presence, beneath the uncovered heavens, Washington first took this vow upon his lips : " I do solemnly swear that I will faith fully execute the office of President of the United / * Dryden. FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 95 States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Over the President, on this high occasion, floated the national flag, with its stripes of red, and its stars on a field of blue. As his patriot eyes rested upon the glowing ensign, what currents must have rushed swiftly through his soul ! In the early days of the Revolution, in those darkest hours about Boston, after the battle of Bunker Hill, and before the Decla ration of Independence, the thirteen stripes had been first unfurled by him, as the emblem of Union among the Colonies for the sake of Freedom. By him, at that time, they had been named the Union Flag. Trial, struggle and war, were now ended, and the Union, which they first heralded, was unalterably es tablished. To every beholder, these memories must have been full of pride and consolation. But looking back upon the scene, there is one circumstance which, more than all its other associations, fills the soul ; more even than the suggestions of Union, which I prize so much. AT THIS MOMENT, WHEN WASH INGTON TOOK HIS FIRST OATH TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, THE NA TIONAL ENSIGN, NOWHERE WITHIN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY, COVERED A SINGLE SLAVE. Then, in deed, was Slavery sectional, and Freedom national. On the sea, an execrable piracy, the trade in slaves, was still, to the national scandal, tolerated under the national flag. In the States, as a sectional institution, beneath the shelter of local laws, Slavery unhappily found a home. But in the only territories at this time belonging to the nation, the broad region of the 96 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. North-west, it had already, by the Ordinance of Free dom, been made impossible, even before the adoption of the Constitution. The District of Columbia, with its fatal incumbrance, had not yet been acquired. The Government thus organized was Anti- Slavery in character. Washington was a slave-holder ; but it would be unjust to his memory not to say that he was an Abolitionist also. His opinions do not admit of question. Only a short time before the formation of the National Constitution, he had declared, by letter, " That it was among his first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which Slavery may be abolished by law ; " and again, in another letter, " That, in support of any legislative measure for the abolition of slavery, his suffrage should not be wanting ; " and still further, in conversation with a distinguished European Abolition ist, a travelling propagandist of Freedom, Brissot de Warville, recently welcomed to Mount Vernon, he had openly announced, that to promote this object in Virginia, " He desired the formation of a SOCIETY, and that he would second it." By this authentic tes timony, he takes his place with the early patrons of Abolition Societies. By the side of Washington, as standing beneath the national flag he swore to support the Constitution, were illustrious men, whose lives and recorded words now rise in judgment. There was John Adams, the Vice-President great vindicator and final negotiator of our national independence whose soul, flaming with freedom, broke forth in the early declaration, that " Consenting to Slavery is a sacrilegious breach of trust," and whose immitigable hostility to this wrong has been made immortal in his descendants. There FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 97 also was a companion in arms, and attached friend of incomparable genius, the yet youthful Hamilton, who, as a member of the Abolition Society of New York, had only recently united in a solemn petition for those who, " though free by the laws of God, are held in Slavery ly the laws of the State" There, too, was a noble spirit, the ornament of his country, the exemplar of truth and virtue, who, like the sun, ever held an unerring course, John Jay. Filling the important post of Minister of Foreign Affairs under the Confed eration, he found time to organize the Abolition Soci ety of New York, and to act as its President, until, by the nomination of Washington, he became Chief Justice of the United States. In his sight, Slavery was an " iniquity," " a sin of crimson dye," against which ministers of the gospel should testify, and which the Government should seek in every way to abolish. " Were I in the Legislature," he wrote, " I would present a bill for this purpose with great care, and I would never cease moving it till it became a law, or I ceased to be a member. Till America comes into this measure, her prayers to heaven will be im- pioas." But they were not alone. The convictions and earnest aspirations of the country were with them. At the North these were broad and general. At the South they found fervid utterance from slaveholders. By early and precocious efforts for " total emancipa tion," the author of the Declaration of Independence placed himself foremost among the Abolitionists of the land. In language now familiar to all, and which can never die, he perpetually denounced Slavery. He exposed its pernicious influences upon master as well 9 98 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. as slave ; declared that the love of justice and the love of country pleaded equally for the slave, and that the "abolition of domestic slavery was the greatest ob ject of desire." He believed that the " sacred side was gaining daily recruits," and confidently looked to the young for the accomplishment of this good work. In fitful sympathy with Jefferson, was another hon ored son of Virginia, the Orator of Liberty, Patrick Henry, who, while confessing that he was a master of slaves, said : " I will not, I cannot justify it. How ever culpable my conduct, I will so far pay my devoir to virtue, as to own the excellence and rectitude of her precepts, and lament my want of conformity to them." At this very period, in the Legislature of Maryland, on a bill for the relief of oppressed slaves, a young man, afterwards by his consummate learning and forensic powers, the acknowledged head of the American bar, William Pinkney, in a speech of earnest, truthful eloquence better far for his memory than his transcendent professional fame branded Slavery as " iniquitous and most dishonorable ; " " founded in a disgraceful traffic; " "as shameful in its continuance as in its origin; * and he openly declared, that, " By the eternal principles of natural justice, no master in the State has a right to hold his slave in bondage a single hour." Thus at this time spoke the NATION. The CHURCH also joined its voice. And here, amidst the diversities of religious faith, it is instructive to observe the general accord. The Quakers first bore their testi mony. At the adoption of the Constitution, their whole body, under the early teaching of George Fox, and by the crowning exertions of Benezet and Wool- FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 99 man, tad "become an Organized band of Abolitionists, penetrated by the conviction that it was unlawful to hold a fellow-man in bondage. The Methodists, nu merous, earnest and faithful, never ceased by their preachers to proclaim the same truth. Their rules in 1788 denounced, in formal language, " the buying or selling of bodies and souls of men, women, and chil dren, with an intention to enslave them." The words of their great apostle, John Wesley, were constantly repeated. On the eve of the National Convention the burning tract was circulated, in which he exposes American slavery as the "vilest" of the world " such Slavery as is not found among the Turks at Algiers ; " and, after declaring " Liberty the birthright of every human creature, of which no human law can deprive him," he pleads, " If, therefore, you have any regard to justice, (to say nothing of mercy or the revealed law of God,) render unto all their due. Give liberty to whom liberty is due, that is, to every child of man, to every partaker of human nature." At the same time, the Presbyterians, a powerful religious body, inspired by the principles of John Calvin, in more moderate language, but by a public act, recorded their judgment, recommending "to all the people under their care to use the most prudent measures consistent with the interest and the state of civil so ciety, to procure eventually the final abolition of Sla very in America" The Congregationalists of New- England, also of the faith of John Calvin, and with the hatred of Slavery belonging to the great non-conform ist, Richard Baxter, were sternly united against this wrong. As early as 1776, Samuel Hopkins, their eminent leader and divine, published his tract, show- 100 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. ing it to be the Duty and Interest of the American States to emancipate all their African slaves, and declaring that " Slavery is in every instance wrong, unrighteous and oppressive a very great and crying sin there being nothing of the kind equal to it on the face of the earth." And, in 1791, shortly after the adoption of the Constitution, the second Jonathan Edwards, a twice-honored name, in an elaborate dis course often published, called upon his country, " in the present blaze of light " on the injustice of slavery, to prepare the way for " its total abolition." This he gladly thought at hand. "If we judge of the future by the past," said the celebrated preacher, " within fifty years from this time, it will be as shameful for a man to hold a negro slave, as to be guilty of common robbery, or theft." Thus, at this time, the Church, in harmony with the Nation, by its leading denominations, Quakers, Meth odists, Presbyterians and Congregationalists, thundered against Slavery. The COLLEGES were in unison with the Church. Harvard University spoke by the voice of Massachusetts, which had already abolished Slavery. Dartmouth College, by one of its learned Professors, claimed for the slaves " equal privileges with the whites." Yale College, by its President, the eminent divine, Ezra Stiles, became the head of the Abolition Society of Connecticut. And the University of Wil liam and Mary, in Virginia, testified its sympathy with this cause at this very time, by conferring upon Gran- ville Sharpe, the acknowledged chief of British Aboli tionists, the honorary degree of Doctor of Laws. The LITERATURE of the land, such as then existed, agreed with the Nation, the Church and the College. FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 101 Franklin, in the last literary labor of his life ; Jeffer son, in his Notes on Virginia ; Barlow, in his measured verse ; Rush, in a work which inspired the praise of Clarkson ; the ingenious author of the Algerine Cap tive the earliest American novel, and though now but little known, one of the earliest American books republished in London were all moved by the con templation of Slavery. " If our fellow-citizens of the Southern States are deaf to the pleadings of nature," the latter exclaims in his work, " I will conjure them, for the sake of consistency, to cease to deprive their fellow-creatures of freedom, which their writers, their orators, representatives and senators, and even their Constitution of Government, have declared to be the inalienable birthright of man." A female writer and poet, earliest in our country among the graceful throng, Sarah Wentworth Morton, at the very period of the National Convention admired by the polite so ciety in which she lived, poured forth her sympathies also. The generous labors of John Jay in behalf of the crushed African inspired her muse ; and, in another poem, commemorating a slave, who fell while vindi cating his freedom, she rendered a truthful homage to his inalienable rights, in words which I now quote as part of the testimony of the times : " Does not the voica <*f rsason cry, Claim the first ri#lx*, that Nature gave ; From the red scourge cf bondage fly. Nor deign to live a Iwdened slave ? * " Such, sir, at the adoption of the Constitution and at the first organization of the N Atonal Go Vermont, was the out-spoken, unequivocal leart of the 102 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Slavery was abhorred. Like the slave trade, it was regarded as transitory ; and, by many, it was supposed that they would both disappear together. As the oracles grew mute at the coming of Christ, and a voice was heard, crying to mariners at sea, " Great Pan is dead," so at this time Slavery became dumb, and its death seemed to be near. Voices of Freedom filled the air. The patriot, the Christian, the scholar, the writer, the poet, vied in loyalty to this cause. All were Abolitionists. Glance now at the earliest Congress under the Con stitution. From various quarters came memorials to this body against Slavery. Among these was one from the Abolition Society of Virginia, wherein Slavery is pronounced " not only an odious degradation, but an outrageous violation of one of the most essential rights of human nature, and utterly repugnant to the pre cepts of the Gospel." Still another, of a more impor tant character, proceeded from the Abolition Society of Pennsylvania, and was signed by Benjamin Franklin, as President. This venerable man, whose active life had been devoted to the welfare of mankind at home and abroad who, both as philosopher and statesman, had arrested the admiration of the world who had ravished the lightning from the skies and the sceptre from the tyrant who, as a member of the Continental Congress, had set his name to the Declaration of Inde pendence, and, as a member of the National Conven tion, had again set his name to the Constitution in whom more, perhaps, than in any other person, was embodied the true spirit of American institutions, at once practical and humane than whom no one could be more familiar with the purposes and aspirations of FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 103 the founders this veteran, eighty-four years of age, within a few months of his death, now appeared by petition at the bar of that Congress, whose powers he had helped to define and establish. This was the last political act of his long life. Listen to the prayer of Franklin : " Your memoralists, particularly engaged in attending to the distresses arising from Slavery, believe it to be their indispensa ble duty to present this subject to your notice. They have ob served with real satisfaction that many important and salutary powers are vested in you for promoting the welfare and securing the blessings of liberty to the people of the United States ; and as they conceive that these blessings ought rightfully to be admin istered, without distinction of color to all descriptions of people, so they indulge themselves in the pleasing expectation, that noth ing which can be done for the relief of the unhappy objects of their care, will be either omitted or delayed. "Under these impressions, they earnestly entreat your serious attention to the subject of Slavery ; that you would be pleased to countenance the restoration of liberty to those unhappy men, who alone, in this land of Freedom, are degraded into perpetual bondage, and who, amidst the general joy of surrounding freemen, are groan ing in servile subjection ; that you will promote mercy and jus tice towards this distressed race, and that you will step to the very verge of the power vested in you for DISCOURAGING every species of traffic in the persons of our fellow-men." Important words ! in themselves a key-note of the times. From his grave Franklin seems still to call upon Congress to step to the very verge of the powers vested in it to DISCOURAGE SLAVERY ; and, in making this prayer, he proclaims the true national policy of the Fathers. Not encouragement but discouragement of Slavery was their rule. Sir, enough has been said to show the sentiment which, like a vital air, surrounded the National Gov- 104 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEBY SECTIONAL. eminent as it stepped -into being. In the face of this history, and in the absence of any positive sanction, it is absurd to suppose that Slavery, which under the Confederation was merely sectional, was now consti tuted a national institution. Our fathers did not say with the apostate angel, " Evil be thou my good ! " In a different spirit they cried out to Slavery, " Get thee behind me, Satan ! " But there is yet another link in the argument. In the discussions which took place in the local conven tions on the adoption of the Constitution, a sensitive desire was manifested to surround all persons under the Constitution with additional safeguards. Fears were expressed, from the supposed indefiniteness of some of the powers conceded to the National Govern ment, and also from the absence of a Bill of Rights. Massachusetts, on ratifying the Constitution, proposed a series of amendments, at the head of which was this, characterized by Samuel Adams, in the Convention, as " A summary of a Bill of Rights : " " That it be explicitly declared, that all powers not expressly delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are reserved to the sev eral States, to be by them exercised." Virginia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, with minorities in Pennsylvania and Maryland, united in this proposition. In pursuance of these recommenda tions, the first Congress presented for adoption the following article, which, being ratified by a propor number of States, became part of the Constitution, as the 10th amendment : " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Con stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 105 Stronger words could not be employed to limit the power under the Constitution, and to protect the people from all assumptions of the National Government, par ticularly in derogation of Freedom. Its guardian char acter commended it to the sagacious mind of Jefferson, who said : " I consider the foundation corner-stone of the Constitution of the United States to be laid upon the tenth article of the amendments." And Samuel Adams, ever watchful for Freedom, said : "It removes a doubt which many have entertained respecting the matter, gives assurance that, if any law made by the Federal Government shall be extended beyond the power granted by the Constitution, and inconsistent with the Constitution of this State, it will be an error, and adjudged by the courts of law to be void." Beyond all question, the National Government, ordained by the Constitution, is not general or uni versal ; but special and particular. It is a Govern; ment of limited powers. It has no powQr which is not delegated. Especially is this clear with regard to an institution like Slavery. The Constitution contains no power to make a King or to support kingly rule. With similar reason it may be said, that it contains no power to make a slave, or to support a system of Slavery. The absence of all such power is hardly more clear in one case than in the other. But if there be no such power, all national legislation upholding Slavery must be unconstitutional and void. The stream cannot be higher than the fountain-head. Nay more, nothing can come out of nothing ; the stream cannot exist, if there be no springs from which it is fed. .At the risk of repetition, but for the sake of clear- 106 FIIEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEIIY SECTIONAL. ness, review now this argument, and gather it together. Considering that Slavery is of such an offensive char acter that it can find sanction only in "positive law," and that it has no such "positive" sanction in the Constitution ; that the Constitution, accoitiing to its Preamble, was ordained " to establish justice " and " secure the blessings of liberty ; " that, in the Con vention which framed it, and also elsewhere at the time, it was declared not to sanction Slavery; that, according to the Declaration of Independence and the Address of the Continental Congress, the Nation was dedicated to " liberty " and the " rights of human na ture ; " that, according to the principles of the common law, the Constitution must be interpreted openly, actively, and perpetually, for Freedom ; that, accord ing to the decision of the Supreme Court, it acts upon slaves, not as property, but as PERSONS ; that, at the first organization of the National Government under Washington, Slavery had no national favor, existed nowhere on the national territory, beneath the national flag, but was openly condemned by the Nation, the Church, the Colleges and Literature of the time ; and, finally, that according to an Amendment of the Con stitution, the National Government can only exercise powers delegated to it, among which there is none to support Slavery ; considering these things, sir, it is impossible to avoid the single conclusion that Slavery is in no respect a national institution, and that the Constitution nowhere upholds property in man. But there is one other special provision of the Con stitution, which I have reserved to this stage, not so much from its superior importance, but because it may fitly stand by itself. This alone, if practically applied, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 107 would carry Freedom to all within its influence. It is an amendment proposed by the first Congress, as follows : " No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." Under this aegis the liberty of every person within the national jurisdiction is unequivocally placed. I say every person. Of this there can be no question. The word " person " in the Constitution embraces every human being within its sphere, whether Caucasian, Indian, or African, from the President to the slave. Show me a person, no matter what his condition, or race, or color, within the national jurisdiction, and I confidently claim for him this protection. The natural meaning of the clause is clear, but a single fact of its history places it in the broad light of noon. As origi nally recommended by North Carolina and Virginia, it was restrained to the freeman. Its language was, "No freeman ought to be deprived of his life, liberty or property, but by the law of the land." In rejecting this limitation, the authors of the amendment revealed their purpose, that no person, under the National Gov ernment, of whatever character, shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law ; that is, without due presentment, indictment or other judicial pro ceedings. Here by this Amendment is an express guaranty of Personal Liberty, and an express prohi bition against its invasion anywhere, at least within the national jurisdiction. Sir, apply these principles, and Slavery will again be as when Washington took his first oath as President. The Union Flag of the Republic will become once 108 FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. more the flag of Freedom, and at all points within the national jurisdiction will refuse to cover a slave. Be neath its beneficent folds, wherever it is carried, on land or sea, Slavery will disappear, like darkness under the arrows of the ascending sun like the Spirit of Evil before the Angel of the Lord. In all national territories Slavery will be impossible. On the high seas, under the national flag, Slavery will be impossible. In the District of Columbia Slavery will instantly cease. Inspired by these principles, Congress can give no sanction to Slavery by the admission of new Slave States. Nowhere under the Constitution, can the Nation, by legislation or otherwise, support Slavery, hunt slaves, or hold property in man. Such, sir, are my sincere convictions. According to the Constitution, as I understand it, in the light of the Past and of its true principles, there is no other conclusion which is rational or tenable ; which does not defy the authoritative rules of interpretation ; which does not falsify indisputable facts of history ; which does not affront the public opinion in which it had its birth ; and which does not dishonor the mem ory of the Fathers. And yet these convictions are now placed under formal ban by politicians of the hour. The generous sentiments which filled the early patriots, and which impressed upon the Government they founded, as upon the coin they circulated, the image and superscription of LIBERTY, have lost their power. The slave masters, few in number, amounting to not more than three hundred and fifty thousand, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 109 according to the recent census, have succeeded in dic tating the policy of the National Government, and have written SLAVERY on its front. And now an arrogant and unrelenting ostracism is applied, not only to all who express themselves against Slavery, but to every man who is unwilling to be the menial of Slavery. A novel test for office is introduced, which would have excluded ail the Fathers of the Republic even Wash ington, Jefferson and Franklin ! Yes, sir. Startling it may be, but indisputable. Could these revered demigods of history once again descend upon earth and mingle in our affairs, not one of them could re ceive a nomination from the National Convention of either of the two old political parties ! Out of the convictions of their hearts and the utterances of their lips against Slavery they would be condemned. This single fact reveals the extent to which the National Government has departed from its true course and its great examples. For myself, I know no better aim under the Constitution, than to bring the Govern ment back to the precise position on this question which it occupied on the auspicious morning of its - first organization by Washington ; nunc retrorsum Vela dare, atque iterare cursus Relictos ; * that the sentiments of the Fathers may again prevail with our rulers, and that the National Flag may no where shelter Slavery. To such as count this aspiration unreasonable, let * Horace, Carmina, Lib. I. 34. 10 110 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. me commend a renowned and life-giving precedent of English history. As early as the days of Queen Eliza beth, a courtier had boasted that the air of England was too pure for a slave to breathe, and the common law was said to forbid Slavery. And yet in the face of this vaunt, kindred to that of our Fathers, and so truly honorable, slaves were introduced from the West Indies. The custom of slavery gradually prevailed. Its positive legality was affirmed, in professional opinions, by two eminent lawyers, Talbot and Yorke, each afterwards Lord Chancellor. It was also affirmed on the bench by the latter as Lord Hardwicke. Eng land was already a Slave State. The following adver tisement, copied from a London newspaper, the Public Advertiser, of Nov. 22d, 1769, shows that the journals there were disfigured as some of ours, even in the District of Columbia : " To be sold, a black girl, the property of J. B., eleven years of age, who is extremely handy, works at her needle tolerably, and speaks English perfectly well ; is of an excellent temper and willing disposition. Enquire of her Owner at the Angel Inn, behind St. Clement s Church, in the Strand." At last, only three years after this advertisement, in 1772, the single question of the legality of Slavery was presented to Lord Mansfield, on a writ of Habeas Corpus. A poor negro, named Somersett, brought to England as a slave, became ill, and with an inhumanity disgraceful even to Slavery, was turned adrift upon the world. Through the charity of an estimable man, the eminent Abolitionist, Granville Sharpe, he was re stored to health, when his unfeeling and avaricious master again claimed him as a bondman. The claim FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Ill was repelled. After an elaborate and protracted dis cussion in Westminster Hall, marked by rare learning and ability, Lord Mansfield, with discreditable reluc tance, sullying his great judicial name, but in trembling obedience to the genius of the British Constitution, pronounced a decree which made the early boast a practical verity, and rendered Slavery forever impos sible in England. More than fifteen thousand persons,, at that time held as slaves in English air four times as many as are now found in this national metropolis stepped forth in the happiness and dignity of free men. With this guiding example I cannot despair. The time will yet come when the boast of our Fathers will be made a practical verity also, and Court or Con gress, in the spirit of this British judgment, will proudly declare that nowhere under the Constitution can man hold property in man. For the Republic such a decree will be the way of peace and safety. As Slavery is banished from the national jurisdiction, it will cease to vex our national politics. It may linger in the States as a local institution; but it will no longer engender national animosities, when it no longer de mands national support. II. From this general review of the relations of the National Government to Slavery, I pass to the con sideration Of the TRUE NATURE OF THE PROVISION FOR THE SURRENDER OF FUGITIVES FROM SERVICE, embracing an examination of this provision in the Constitution, and especially of the recent act of Con gress in pursuance thereof. And here, as I begin this discussion, let me bespeak anew your candor. Not in 112 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. prejudice, but in the light of history and of reason, let us consider this subject. The way will then be easy and the conclusion certain. Much error arises from the exaggerated importance now attached to this provision, and from the assump tions with regard to its origin and primitive character It is often asserted that it was suggested bv^ som special difficulty, which had become practically and extensively felt, anterior to the Constitution. But this is one of the myths or fables with which the sup porters of Slavery have surrounded their false god. In the Articles of Confederation, while provision is made for the surrender of fugitive criminals, nothing is said of fugitive slaves or servants ; and there is no evidence in any quarter, until after the National Convention, of any hardship or solicitude on this account. No pre vious voice was heard to express desire for any pro vision on the subject. The story to the contrary is a modern fiction. I put aside as equally fabulous the common saying that this provision was one of the original compromises of the Constitution, and an essential condition of Union. Though sanctioned by eminent judicial opinions, it will be found that this statement has been hastily made, without any support in the records of the Convention, the only authentic evidence of the compromises ; nor will it be easy to find any authority for it in any contemporary document, speech, published letter or pamphlet of any kind. It is true that there were compromises at the formation of the Constitution, which were the subject of anxious debate; but this was not of them. There was a compromise between the small and FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 113 large States, by which equality was secured to all the States in the Senate. There was another compromise finally carried, under threats from the South, on the motion of a New England member, by which the Slave States were allowed Representatives according to the whole number of free persons, and " three-fifths of all other persons," thus securing political power on account of their slaves, in consideration that direct taxes should be apportioned in the same way. Direct taxes have been imposed at only four brief intervals. The polit ical power has been constant, and, at this moment, sends twenty-one members to the other House. There was a third compromise, which cannot be mentioned without shame. It was that hateful bargain by which Congress was restrained until 1808 from the prohibition of the foreign slave trade, thus securing, down to that period, toleration for crime. This was pertinaciously pressed by the South, even to the extent of an absolute restraint on Congress. John Rutledge said : " If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an interest." Charles Pinckney said : " South Carolina can never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the slave trade." Charles Cotesworth Pinckney " thought himself bound to declare candidly that he did not think South Carolina would stop her importation of slaves in any short time." The effront ery of the slave-masters was matched by the sordidness of the Eastern members, who yielded again. Luther Martin, the eminent member of the Convention, in his 10* 114 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVEKT SECTIONAL. contemporary address to the Legislature of Maryland, has described the compromise. " I found," he says, " that the Eastern members, notwithstanding their aversion to slavery, were very willing to indulge the Southern States, at least with a temporary liberty to prosecute the slave trade, provided the Southern States would in their turn gratify them, hy laying no restric tion on navigation acts." The bargain was struck, and at this price the Southern States gained the detestable indulgence. At a subsequent day, Congress branded the slave trade as piracy, and thus, by solemn legisla tive act, adjudged this compromise to be felonious and wicked. Such are the three chief original compromises of the Constitution and essential conditions of Union. The case of fugitives from service is not of these. During the Convention, it was not in any way associated with these. Nor is there any evidence, from the records of this body, that the provision on this subject was re garded with any peculiar interest. As its absence from the Articles of Confederation had not been the occasion of solicitude or desire, anterior to the National Con vention, so it did not enter into any of the original plans of the Constitution. It was introduced tardily, at a late period of the Convention, and with very little and most casual discussion adopted. A few facts will show how utterly unfounded are the recent assump tions. The National Convention was convoked to meet at Philadelphia on the second Monday in May, 1787. Several members appeared at this time ; but a majority of the States not being represented, those present ad journed from day to day until the 25th, when the FREEDOM: NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 115 Convention was organized by the choice of George Washington, as President. On the 28th, a few brief rules and orders were adopted. On the next day they commenced their great work. On the same day, Edmund Randolph, of slavehold- ing Virginia, laid before the Convention a series of sixteen resolutions, containing his plan for the estab- tishment of a New National Government. Here was no allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Charles Pinckney, of slaveholding South Carolina, laid before the Convention what is called " A draft of a Federal Government, to be agreed upon between the free and independent States of America," an elaborate paper, marked by considerable minuteness of detail. Here are provisions, borrowed from the Articles of Confederation, securing to citizens of each State equal privileges in the several States ; giving faith to the public records of the States ; and ordaining the surrender of fugitives from justice. But this draft, though from the flaming guardian of the slave interest, contained no allusion to fugitive slaves. In the course of the Convention other plans were brought forward; on the 15th June a series of eleven propositions by Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, " so as to render the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of the Union;" on the 18th June, eleven propositions by Mr. Hamilton of New York, " containing his ideas of a suitable plan of Government for the United States ; " and on the 19th June, Mr. Randolph s reso lutions, originally offered on the 29th May, " as altered, amended, and agreed to in Committee of the Whole House." On the 26th, twenty- three resolutions, already 116 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. adopted on different days in the Convention, were re ferred to a "Committee of Detail," to be reduced to the form of a Constitution. On the 6th August this Committee reported the finished draft of a Constitution. And yet in all these resolutions, plans and drafts, seven in number, proceeding from eminent members and from able Committees, no allusion was made to fugitive slaves. For three months the Convention was in session, and not a word uttered on this subject. At last, on the 28th August, as the Convention was drawing to a close, on the consideration of the article providing for the privileges of citizens in different States, we meet the first reference to this matter, in words worthy of note : " Gen. [Charles Cotesworth] Pinckney was not satisfied with it. He SEEMED to wish some provision should be included in favor of property in slaves." But he made no proposition. Unwilling to shock the Convention, and uncertain in his own mind, he only seemed to wish such a provision. In this vague expression of a vague desire, this idea first appeared. In this modest, hesitating phrase is the germ of the audacious, unhesitating Slave Act. Here is the little vapor, which has since swollen, as in the Arabian tale, to the power and dimensions of a giant. The next article under discussion provided for the surrender of fugitives from justice. Mr. Butler and Mr. Charles Pinckney, both from South Carolina, now moved openly to require "fugitive slaves aod servants to be delivered up like criminals." Here was no disguise. With Hamlet it was now said in spirit : " Seems, madam, nay, it is ; I know not seems." But the very boldness of the effort drew attention and opposition. Mr. Wilson, of Pennsylvania, at once ob- FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 117 jected : " This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it at the public expense." Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, " saw no more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or servant, than a horse." Under the pressure of these objections, the offensive proposition was quietly withdrawn never more to be renewed. The article for the surrender of criminals was then adopted. On the next day, 29th August, profiting by the suggestions already made, Mr. Butler moved a proposition substantially like that now found in the Constitution not for the surrender of " fugitive slaves," as originally proposed, but simply of " persons held to service" which, without debate or opposition of any kind, was unanimously adopted. Here palpably was no labor of compromise no adjustment of conflicting interests; nor even any ex pression of solicitude. The clause finally adopted was vague and faint as the original suggestion. In its natural import it is not applicable to slaves. If sup posed by some to be so applicable, it is clear that it was supposed by others to be inapplicable to them. It is now insisted that the term " persons held to service " is an equivalent or synonym for " slaves." This in terpretation is rebuked by an incident, to which refer ence has been already made, but which will bear repetition. On the 6th September a little more than one brief week after the clause had been adopted, and when, if it was deemed to be of any significance, it could not have been forgotten the very word " service " came under debate, and received a fixed meaning. It was unanimously adopted as a substitute for " servi tude " in another part of the Constitution, for the reason that it " expressed the obligation of free per- 118 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. sons" while the other expressed " the condition of Slaves." * In the face of this authentic evidence of the sentiments of the Convention, reported by Mr. Madison, it is difficult to see how the term " persons held to service" can be deemed to express anything beyond " the obligations of free persons" Thus in the light of calm inquiry, does this exaggerated clause lose its importance. The provision, which showed itself thus tardily, and was so slightly regarded in the National Convention, was neglected in much of the contemporaneous discus sions before the people. In the Conventions of South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia, it was com mended as securing important rights, though on this point there was a difference of opinion. In the Vir ginia Convention, an eminent character, Mr. George Mason, with others, expressly declared that there was " no security of property coming within this section." In the other Conventions it was disregarded. Massa chusetts, while exhibiting peculiar sensitiveness at any responsibility for Slavery, seemed to view it with un concern. One of her leading statesmen, Gen. Heath, in the debates of the State Convention, strenuously asserted that, in ratifying the Constitution, the people of Massachusetts " would do nothing to hold the blacks in Slavery." The Federalist, (No. 42,) in its classifi cation of the powers of Congress, describes and groups a large number as those " which provide for the har mony and proper intercourse among the States," and therein speaks of the power over public records, stand ing next in the Constitution to the provision on fugi- * Madison s Papers, Vol. III. 1569. FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 119 lives from service ; but it fails to recognize the latter among the means of promoting that " harmony and proper intercourse ; " nor does it anywhere allude to the provision. The indifference which had thus far attended this subject, still continued. The earliest Act of Congress, passed in 1793, drew little attention. It was not origi nally suggested by any difficulty or anxiety, touching fugitives from service, nor is there any record of the times, in debate or otherwise, showing that any spe cial importance was attached to its provisions in this regard. The attention of Congress had been directed to fugitives from justice, and, with little deliberation, it undertook, in the same bill, to provide for both classes of cases. In this accidental manner was legis lation on this subject first attempted. There is no evidence that fugitives were often seized under this Act. From a competent inquirer we learn that twenty-six years elapsed before a single slave was surrendered under it in any Free State. It is certain that, in a case at Boston, towards the close of the last century, illustrated b^ Josiah Quincy as counsel, the crowd about the magistrate, at the examination, quietly and spontaneously opened a way for the fugitive, and thus the Act failed to be executed. It is also certain that, in Vermont, at the beginning of the century, a Judge of the Supreme Court of the State, on applica tion for the surrender of an alleged slave, accompanied by documentary evidence, gloriously refused compli ance unless the master could show a Bill of Sale from the Almighty. But even these cases passed without public comment. In 1801, the subject was introduced in the House 120 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. of Representatives, by an effort for another Act, which, on consideration, was rejected. At a later day, in 1817-18, though still disregarded by the country, it seemed to excite a short-lived interest in Congress. A bill to provide more effectually " for reclaiming ser vants and slaves, escaping from one State into another," was introduced into the House of Representatives by Mr. Pindall, of Virginia, was considered for several days in Committee of the Whole, amended and passed by this body. In the Senate, after much attention and warm debate, it was also passed with amendments. But on its return to the House for the adoption of the amendments, it was dropped. This effort, which, in the discussions of this subject, has thus far been un noticed, is chiefly remarkable as the earliest recorded evidence of the unwarrantable assertion, now so com mon, that this provision was originally of vital import ance to the peace and harmony of the country. At last, in 1850, we have another Act, passed by both Houses of Congress, and approved by the Presi dent, familiarly known as the Fugitive Slave Bill. As I read this statute, I am filled with painful emotions. The masterly subtlety with which it is drawn, might challenge admiration, if exerted for a benevolent pur pose ; but in an age of sensibility and refinement, a machine of torture, however skilful and apt, cannot be regarded without horror. Sir, in the name of the Constitution which it violates ; of my country which it dishonors ; of Humanity which it degrades ; of Chris tianity which it offends ; I arraign this enactment, and now hold it up to the judgment of the Senate and the world. Again, I shrink from no responsibility. I may seem to stand alone ; but all the patriots and mar- FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 121 tyrs of history, all the Fathers of the Republic, are with me. Sir, there is no attribute of God which does not unite against this Act. But I am to regard it now chiefly as an infringe ment of the Constitution. And here its outrages, fla grant as manifold, assume the deepest dye and broadest character only when we consider that by its language it is not restrained to any special race or class, to the African or to the person with African blood ; but that any inhabitant of the United States, of whatever com plexion or condition, may be its victim. Without discrimination of color even, and in violation of every presumption of freedom, the Act surrenders all, who maybe claimed as "owing service or labor" to the same tyrannical proceedings. If there be any, whose sympathies are not moved for the slave, who do not cherish the rights of the humble African, struggling for divine Freedom, as warmly as the rights of the white man, let him consider well that the rights of all are equally assailed. " Nephew," said Algernon Sid ney in prison, on the night before his execution, " I value not my own life a chip ; but what concerns me is, that the law which takes away my life may hang everyone of you, whenever it is thought convenient." Though thus comprehensive in its provisions and applicable to all, there is no safeguard of Human Free dom which the monster Act does not set at naught. It commits this great question than which none is more sacred in the law not to a solemn trial ; but to summary proceedings. It commits this question not to one of the high tribunals of the land but to the unaided judgment of a single petty magistrate. 11 122 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. It commits this question to a magistrate, appointed not by the President with the consent of the Senate but by the Court ; holding his office, not during good behavior, but merely during the will of the Court ; and receiving, not a regular salary, but fees according to each individual case. It authorizes judgment on ex parte evidence, by affi davits, without the sanction of cross-examination. It denies the writ of Habeas Corpus, ever known as the Palladium of the citizen. Contrary to the declared purposes of the framers of the Constitution, it sends the fugitive back " at the public expense." Adding meanness to the violation of the Constitu tion, it bribes the Commissioner by a double stipend to pronounce against Freedom. If he dooms a man to Slavery, the reward is ten dollars ; but, saving him to Freedom, his dole is five dollars. The Constitution expressly secures the " free exer cise of religion ; " but this Act visits with unrelenting penalties the faithful men and women, who may render to the fugitive that countenance, succor and shelter, which in their conscience " religion " seems to require. As it is for the public weal that there should be an end of suits, so by the consent of civilized nations, these must be instituted within fixed limitations of time ; but this Act, exalting Slavery above even this practical principle of universal justice, ordains proceed ings against Freedom without any reference to the lapse of time. Glancing only at these points, and not stopping for argument, vindication, or illustration, I come at once upon the two chief radical objections to this Act, iden- FREEDOM XATIOXA.Ii; SLAYEBY SECTIONAL. 123 tical in principle with those brought by our fathers against the British Stamp Act ; Jirst, that it is an usur pation by Congress of powers not granted by the Con stitution, and an infraction of rights secured to the States ; and, secondly , that it takes away Trial by Jury in a question of Personal Liberty and a suit at common law. Either of these objections, if sustained, strikes at the very root of the Act. That it is obnoxious to both, seems beyond doubt. But here, at this stage, I encounter the difficulty, that these objections have been already foreclosed by the legislation of Congress and by the decisions of the Supreme Court; that as early as 1793, Congress as sumed power over this subject by an Act, which failed to secure Trial by Jury, and that the validity of this Act, under the Constitution, has been affirmed by the Supreme Court. On examination this difficulty will disappear. The Act of 1793 proceeded from a Congress that had already recognized the United States Bank, char tered by a previous Congress, which, though sanctioned by the Supreme Court, has been since in high quarters pronounced unconstitutional. If it erred as to the Bank, it may have erred also as to fugitives from ser vice. But the very Act contains a capital error on this very subject, so declared by the Supreme Court, in pretending to vest a portion of the judicial power of the Nation in State officers. This error takes from the Act all authority as an interpretation of the Con stitution. I dismiss it. The decisions of the Supreme Court are entitled to great consideration, and will not be mentioned by me 124 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. except with respect. Among the memories of my youth are happy days in which I sat at the feet of this tribunal, while MARSHALL presided, with STORY by his side. The pressure now proceeds from the case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania, (16 Peters, 539,) wherein the power of Congress over this matter is asserted. With out going into any minute criticism of this judgment, or considering the extent to which it is extra-judicial, and therefore of no binding force, all which has been already done at the bar in one State, and by an able court in another ; but conceding to it a certain degree of weight as a rule to the judiciary on this particular point, still it does not touch the grave question arising from the denial of Trial by Jury. This judgment was pronounced by Mr. Justice Story. From the interest ing biography of this great jurist, recently published by his son, we learn that the question of Trial by Jury was not considered as before the Court; so that, in the estimation of the judge himself, it was still an open question. Here are the words : " One prevailing opinion, which has created great prejudice against this judgment, is, that it denies the right of a person claimed as a fugitive from service or labor to a trial by jury. This mistake arises from supposing the case to involve the general question as to the constitutionality of the Act of 1793. But in fact no such question was in the case ; and the argument that the Act of 1793 was unconstitutional, because it did not provide for a trial by jury according to the requisitions of the sixth article in the amendments to the Constitution, having been suggested to my father on his return from Washington, he replied that this question was not argued by counsel nor considered by the Court, and that he should still consider it an open one." But whatever may be the influence of this judgment as a rule to the judiciary, it cannot arrest our duty as FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 125 legislators. And here I adopt with entire assent the language of President Jackson, in his memorable Veto, in 1832, of the Bank of the United States. To his course was opposed the authority of the Supreme Court, and this is his reply : " If the opinion of the Supreme Court covers the whole ground of this Act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive and the Court, must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Consti tution. Each public qfficer^who takes an oath to support the Constitution, swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President, to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution, which may be presented to them for passage or approval, as it is of the Supreme Judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive, when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve." With these authoritative words of Andrew Jackson I dismiss this topic. The early legislation of Congress, and the decisions of the Supreme Court cannot stand in our way. I advance to the argument. (1.) Now, first, of the power of Congress over this subject. The Constitution contains powers granted to Con gress, compacts between the States, and prohibitions addressed to the Nation and to the States. A com pact or prohibition may be accompanied by a power ; but not necessarily, for it is essentially distinct in its nature. And here the single question arises, Whether the Constitution, by grant, general or special, confers 11* 126 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. upon Congress any power to legislate on the subject of fugitives from service. The whole legislative power of Congress is derived" from two sources; first, from the general grant of power, attached to the long catalogue of powers " to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for the carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Gov ernment of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof; " and secondly, from special grants in other parts of the Constitution. As the provision in question does not appear in the catalogue of pow ers, and does not purport to vest any power in the Government of the United States, or in any depart ment or officer thereof, no power to legislate on this subject can be derived from the general grant. Nor can any such power be derived from any special grant in any other part of the Constitution ; for none such exists. The conclusion must be, that no power is delegated to Congress over the surrender of fugitives from service. In all contemporary discussions and comments, the Constitution was constantly justified and recommended, on the ground that the powers not given to the Gov ernment were withheld from it. If under its original provisions any doubt could have existed on this head, it was removed, so far as language could remove it, by the Tenth Amendment, which, as we have already seen, expressly declares, that " The powers not dele gated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people." Here on the simple text of the Constitution I might leave this *~ FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 127 question. But its importance justifies a more extended examination in a tw,o-fold light ; first, in the history of. the Convention, revealing the unmistakeable inten tion of its members ; and secondly, in the true princi ples of our Political System, by which the powers of the Nation and of the States are respectively guarded. Look first at the history of the Convention. The articles of the old Confederation, adopted by the Continental Congress, 15th November, 1777, though containing no reference to fugitives from service, had provisions substantially like those in our present Con stitution, touching the privileges of citizens in the several States, the surrender of fugitives from justice, and the credit due to the public records of States. But, since the Confederation had no powers not " ex pressly delegated," and as^ no power was delegated to legislate on these matters, they were nothing more than articles of treaty or compact. Afterwards, at the National Convention, these three provisions found a place in the first reported draft of a Constitution, and they were arranged in the very order which they occupied in the Articles of Confederation. The clause relating to public records stood last. Mark this fact. When this clause, being in form merely a compact, came up for consideration in the Convention, various efforts were made to graft upon it a power. This was on the very day of the adoption of the clause relating to fugitives from service. Charles Pinckney moved to commit it with a proposition for a power to establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy and foreign bills of exchange. Mr. Madison was in favor of a power for the execution of judgments in other States. Gouverneur Morris on the same day moved to commit 128 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. a further proposition for a power " to determine the proof and effect of such acts, records and proceedings." Amidst all these efforts to associate a power with this compact, it is clear that nobody supposed that any such already existed. This narrative places the views of the Convention beyond question. The compact regarding public records, together with these various propositions, was referred to a Committee, on which were Mr. Randolph and Mr. Wilson, with John Rutledge, of South Carolina, as chairman. After several days, they reported the compact, with a power in Congress to prescribe by general laws the manner in which such records shall be proved. A discussion ensued, in which Mr. Randolph complained that the " definition of the powers of the Government was so loose as to give it opportunities of usurping all the State powers. He was for not going further than the report, which enables the Legislature to provide for the effect of judgments" The clause of compact with the power attached was, then adopted, and is now a part of the Constitution. In presence of this solicitude for the preservation of " State powers," even while con sidering a proposition for an express power, and also of the distinct statement of Mr. Randolph, that he "was not for going further than the report, it is evident that the idea could not then have occurred, that a power was coupled with the naked clause of compact on fugitives from service. At a later day, the various clauses and articles severally adopted from time to time in Convention, were referred to a committee of revision and arrange ment, that they might be reduced to form as a con nected whole. Here another change ivas made. The FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 129 clause relating to public records, with the power at tached, was taken from its original place at the bottom of the clauses of compact, and promoted to stand first in the article, as a distinct section, while the other clauses of compact concerning citizens, fugitives from justice, and fugitives from service, each and all with out any power attached, by a natural association com pose but a single section, thus : "ARTICLE IV. " SECTION 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof. " SECTION 2. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States. " A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another State, shall, on demand of the Executive authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime. " No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. " SECTION 3. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union ; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned, as well as of the Congress. " The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States ; and nothing in this 130 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular State. "SECTION 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion, and on application of the Legislature, or of the Executive, (when the Legislature cannot be convened,) against domestic violence." Here is the whole article. It will be observed that the third section immediately following the triad section of compacts, contains two specific powers, one with regard to new States, and the other with regard to the Public Treasury. These are naturally grouped to gether, while the fourth section of this same article, which is distinct in its character, is placed by itself. In the absence of all specific information, reason alone can determine why this arrangement was made. But the conclusion is obvious, that, in the view of the Committee and of the Convention, each of these sec tions differs from the others. The first contains a compact with a grant of power. The second contains provisions, all of which are simple compacts, and two of which were confessedly simple compacts in the old Articles of Confederation, from which, unchanged in letter or spirit, they were borrowed. The third is a two-fold grant of power to Congress, without any com pact. The fourth is neither power nor compact merely, nor both united, but a solemn injunction upon the National Government to perform an important duty. The framers of the Constitution were wise and care ful men, who had a reason for what they did, and who understood the language which they employed. They did not, after discussion, incorporate into their work any superfluous provision ; nor did they without design FREEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 131 adopt the peculiar arrangement in which it appears. In adding to the record compact the express grant of power, they testified not only their desire for such power in Congress ; but their conviction, that, without an express grant, it would not exist. But if an ex press grant was necessary in this case, it was equally necessary in all the other cases. Expressum facit cessare taciturn. Especially, in view of its odious character, was it necessary in the case of fugitives from service. In abstaining from any such grant, and then, in grouping the bare compact with other similar com pacts, separate from every grant of power, they have most significantly testified their purpose. They not only decline all addition of any such power to the compact, but, to render misapprehension impossible, to make assurance doubly sure, to exclude any contrary conclusion, they punctiliously arrange the clauses, on the principle of noscitur a sociis, so as to distinguish all the grants of power, but especially to make the new grant of power, in the case of public records, stand forth iri the front by itself, severed from the mere naked compacts with which it was originally associated. Thus the proceedings of the Convention show that the founders understood the necessity of powers in cer tain cases, and, on consideration, most jealously granted them. A closing example will strengthen the argu ment. Congress is expressly empowered " to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of Bankruptcies, throughout the United States." Without this provision these two subjects would have been within the control of the States, and the Nation would have had no power to establish an 132 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. uniform rule thereupon. Now, instead of the existing compact on fugitives from service, it would have been easy, had any such desire prevailed, to add this case to the clause on Naturalization and Bankruptcies, and to empower Congress TO ESTABLISH AN UNIFORM RULE FOR THE SURRENDER OF FUGITIVES FROM SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. Then, of COUrSB, whenever Congress undertook to exercise the power, all State control of the subject would have been super seded. The National Government would have been constituted, like Nimrod, the mighty Hunter, with power to gather the huntsmen, to halloo the pack, and to direct the chase of men, ranging at will, without regard to boundaries or jurisdictions, throughout all the States. But no person in the Convention, not one of the reckless partisans of slavery, was so audacious as to make this proposition. Had it been distinctly made, it would have been distinctly denied. The fact that the provision on this subject was adopted unanimously, while showing the little impor tance attached to it in the shape it finally assumed, testifies also that it could not have been regarded as a source of National power over Slavery. It will be remembered, that, among the members of the Conven tion, were Gouverneur Morris, who had said, that he "never would concur in upholding domestic slavery ; " Elbridge Gerry, who thought " we ought to be careful NOT to give any sanction to it;" Roger Sherman, who was OPPOSED to any clause " acknowledging men to be property ; " James Madison, who " thought it WRONG to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in man;" and Benjamin Franklin, who likened American slaveholders to Algerine corsairs. FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 133 In the face of these unequivocal statements, it is absurd to suppose that they consented unanimously to any provision by which the National Government, the work of their hands, dedicated to Freedom, could be made the most offensive instrument of Slavery. Thus much for the evidence from the history of the Convention. But the true principles of our Political System are in harmony with this conclusion of his tory ; and here let me say a word of State Rights. It was the purpose of our fathers to create a Na tional Government, and to endow it with adequate powers. They had known the perils of imbecility, discord and confusion, during the uncertain days of the Confederation, and desired a Government which should be a true bond of Union and an efficient organ of the national interests at home and abroad. But while fashioning this agency, they fully recognized the Governments of the States. To the nation were delegated high powers, essential to the national inter ests, but specific in character and limited in number. To the States and to the people were reserved the powers, general in character and unlimited in number, not delegated to the Nation or prohibited to the States. The integrity of our Political System depends upon harmony in the operations of the Nation and of the States. While the Nation within its wide orbit is su preme, the States move with equal supremacy in their own. But from the necessity of the case, the supremacy of each in its proper place excludes the other. The Nation cannot exercise rights reserved to the States ; nor can the States interfere with the powers of the Nation. Any such action on either side is a usurpa- 12 134 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. tion. These principles were distinctly declared by Mr. Jefferson, in 1798, in words often adopted since ; and which must find acceptance from all parties : " That the several States composing the United States of America are not united upon the principle of unlimited submission to the General Government ; but that by compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States and of the amend ments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, delegated to that Government certain definite powers, reserving each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government, and that wheresoever the General Govern ment assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthorized, void, and of no force. But I have already amply shown to-day that Slavery is in no respect national that it is not within the sphere of national activity that it has no " positive " support in the Constitution, and that any interpreta tion thereof consistent with this principle would be abhorrent to the sentiments of its founders. Slavery is a local institution, peculiar to the States and under the guardianship of State Rights. It is impossible, without violence, at once to the spirit and to the letter of the Constitution, to attribute to Congress any power to legislate, either for its abolition in the States or its support anywhere. Non-intervention is the rule prescribed to the Nation. Regarding the question only in its more general aspects, and putting aside, for the moment, the perfect evidence from the records of the Convention, it is palpable that there is no national fountain out of which the existing Slave Act can be derived. But this Act is not only an unwarrantable assump tion of power by the Nation ; it is also an infraction FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 135 of rights reserved to the States. Everywhere within their borders the States are the peculiar guardians of personal liberty. By Jury and Habeas Corpus to save the citizen harmless against all assault is among their duties and rights. To his State the citizen when oppressed may appeal, nor should he find that appeal denied. But this Act despoils him of his rights, and despoils his State of all power to protect him. It subjects him to the wretched chances of false oaths, forged papers and facile commissioners, and takes from him every safeguard. Now, if the slaveholder has a right to be secure at home in the enjoyment of Slavery, so also has the freeman of the North and every person there is presumed to be a freeman an equal right to be secure at home in the enjoyment of Freedom. The same principle of State Rights by which Slavery is protected in the Slave States throws an impenetrable shield over Freedom in the Free States. And here, let me say, is the only security for Slavery in the Slave States as for Freedom in the Free States. In the present fatal overthrow of State Rights you teach a lesson which may return to plague the teacher. Compelling the National Government to stretch its Briarean arms into the Free States, for the sake of Slavery, you show openly how it may stretch these same hundred giant arms into the Slave States for the sake of Freedom. This lesson was* not taught by our fathers. And here I end this branch of the question. The true principles of our Political System, the history of the National Convention, the natural interpretation of the Convention, all teach that this Act is a usurpa tion by Congress of powers that do not belong to it, 136 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. and an infraction of rights secured to the States. It is a sword, whose handle is at the National Capital, and whose point is everywhere in the States. A weapon so terrible to Personal Liberty the Nation has no power to grasp. (2.) And now of the denial of Trial by Jury. Ad mitting, for the moment, that Congress is entrusted with power over this subject, which truth disowns, still the Act is again radically unconstitutional from its denial of Trial by Jury in a question of Personal Liberty and a suit at common law. Since on the one side there is a claim of property, and on the other of liberty, both property and liberty are involved in the issue. To this claim on either side is attached Trial by Jury. To me, sir, regarding this matter in the light of the common law and in the blaze of free institutions, it has always seemed impossible to arrive at any other conclusion. If the language of the Constitution were open to doubt, which it is not, still all the presump tions of law, all the leanings for Freedom, all the suggestions of justice, plead angel-tongued for this right. Nobody doubts that Congress, if it legislates on this matter, may allow a Trial by Jury. But if it may, so overwhelming is the claim of justice, it MUST. Beyond this, however, the- question is determined by the precise letter of the Constitution. Several expressions in the provision for the surren der of fugitives from service, show the essential char acter of the proceedings. In the first place, the person must be, not merely charged, as in the case of fugitives from justice, but actually held to service FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 137 in the State from which he escaped. In the second place, he must be " delivered up on claim of the party to whom such labor is due" These two facts, that he was held to service, and that his service was due to his claimant, are directly placed in issue, and must be proved. Two necessary incidents of the delivery may also be observed. First, it must be made in the State where the fugitive is found ; and, secondly, it restores to the claimant his complete control over the person of the fugitive. From these circumstances it is evi dent that the proceedings cannot be regarded, in any just sense, as preliminary, or ancillary to some future formal trial, but as complete in themselves, final and conclusive. And these proceedings determine on the one side the question of property, and on the other the sacred question of Personal Liberty in its most transcendent form ; not merely Liberty for a day or a year, but for life, and the Liberty of generations that shall come after, so long as Slavery endures. To these questions, the Constitution, by two specific provisions, attaches the Trial by Jury. One of these is the familiar clause, already adduced : " No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law ;" that is, without due proceedings at law, with Trial by Jury. Not stopping to dwell on this, I press at once to the other provision, which is still more express : " In suits at common law, where the value in contro versy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved." This clause, which was not in the original Constitution, when first adopted, was suggested by the very spirit of Freedom. At the close of the National Convention, Elbridge Gerry re- 12* 138 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. fused to sign the Constitution, because, among other things, it established a " tribunal without juries, a Star Chamber as to civil cases." Many united in his op position, and on the recommendation of the First Congress this additional safeguard was adopted as an amendment. Now, regarding the question as one of property, or of Personal Liberty, in either alternative the Trial by Jury is secured. For this position authority is ample. In the debate on the Fugitive Slave Bill of 1817-18, a Senator from South Carolina, Mr. Smith, anxious for the asserted right of property, objected, on this very floor, to a reference of the question, under the writ of Habeas Corpus, to a judge without a jury. Speaking solely for property, these were his words : " This would give the Judge the sole power of deciding the right of property the master claims in his slaves, instead of try ing that right by a jury, as prescribed by the Constitution. He would be judge of matters of law and matters of fact ; clothed with all the powers of a court. Such a principle is unknown in your system of jurisprudence. Your Constitution has forbid it. It preserves the right of Trial by Jury in all cases where the value in controversy exceeds twenty dollars." (Debates in National Intelligencer, June 15, 1818.) But this provision has been repeatedly discussed by the Supreme Court, so that its meaning is not open to doubt. Three conditions are necessary. First, the proceedings must be " a suit ; " secondly, " at common law ; " and thirdly, " where the value in controversy exceeds twenty dollars." In every such case " the right of Trial by JU.TJ shall be preserved." The decisions of the Supreme Court expressly touch each of these points. First. In the case of Cohens v. Virginia, (6 Whea- FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 139 ton, 407,) the Court say : " What is a suit ? We understand it to be the prosecution of some claim, demand or request." Of course, then, the " claim " for a fugitive must be " a suit." Secondly. In the case of Parsons v. Bedford, (3 Peters, 456,) while considering this very clause, the Court say : " By common law is meant not merely suits which the common law recognized among its old and settled proceedings, but suits in which legal rights were to be ascertained and determined. In a just sense, the Amendment may well be construed to em brace all suits, which are not of Equity or Admiralty jurisdiction, whatever may be the peculiar form which they may assume to settle legal rights" Now, since the claim for a fugitive is not a suit in Equity or Ad miralty, but a suit to settle what are called legal rights, it must, of course, be " a suit at common law." Thirdly. In the case of Lee v. Lee, (8 Peters, 44,) on a question whether " the value in controversy " was " one thousand dollars and upwards," it was ob jected that the appellants, who were petitioners for Freedom, were not of the value of one thousand dollars. But the Court said: "The matter in dispute is the Freedom of the petitioners. This is not susceptible of pecuniary valuation. No doubt is entertained of the jurisdiction of the Court." Of course, then, since liberty is above price, the claim to any fugitive always and necessarily presumes that " the value in contro versy exceeds twenty dollars." By these successive steps, sustained by decisions of the highest tribunal, it appears, as in a diagram, that the right of Trial by Jury is secured to the fugitive from service. 140 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEItY SECTIONAL. This conclusion needs no further authority ; but it may receive curious illustration from the ancient records of the common law, so familiar and dear to the framers of the Constitution. It is said by Mr. Burke, in his magnificent speech on Conciliation with America, that " nearly as many of Blackstone s Commentaries were sold in America as in England," carrying thither the knowledge of those vital principles of Freedom, which were the boast of the British Constitution. Imbued by these, the earliest Continental Congress, in 1774, declared, " That the respective Colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law." Thus v amidst the troubles which heralded the Revolution, the common law was claimed by our fathers as a birthright. Now, although the common law may not be ap proached as a source of jurisdiction under the National Constitution and on this point I do not dwell it is clear that it may be employed to determine the mean ing of technical terms in the Constitution borrowed from this law. This, indeed, is expressly sanctioned by Mr. Madison, in his celebrated report of 1799, while re straining the extent to which the common law may be employed. Thus by this law we learn the nature of Trial by Jury, which, though secured, is not described by the Constitution ; also of Bills of Attainder, the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and Impeachment, all technical terms of the Constitution borrowed from the common law. By this law, and its associate Chancery, we learn what are cases in law and equity to which the judicial power of the United States is extended. These FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 141 instances I adduce merely by way of example. Of course also in the same way we learn what in reality are suits at common law. Now, on principle and authority, a claim for the delivery of a fugitive slave is a suit at common law, and is embraced naturally and necessarily in this class of judicial proceedings. This proposition can be placed beyond question. And here, especially, let me ask the attention of all learned in the law. On this point, as on every other other in this argument, I challenge inquiry and answer. History painfully records, that during the early clays of the common law, and down even to a late period, a system of slavery existed in England, known under the name of villanage. The slave was generally called a villain, though in the original Latin forms of judicial proceedings, he was termed nativus, implying slavery by birth. The incidents of this condition have been minutely described, and also the mutual remedies of master and slave, all of which were regulated by the common law. Slaves sometimes then, as now, escaped from their masters. The claim for them after such escape was prosecuted by a " suit at common law," to which, as to every suit at common law, the Trial by Jury was necessarily attached. Blackstone, in his Commentaries, (Vol. II. p. 93,) in words which must have been known to all the lawyers of the Convention, said of villains : " They could not leave their lord without his permission, but if they ran away, or were purloined from him, might be CLAIMED and recovered by ACTION, like beasts or other cattle." This very word " action " of itself implies " a suit at common law," with Trial by Jury. I 142 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. From other sources we learn precisely what the action was. That great expounder of the ancient law, Mr. Hargrave, says, " That Year Books and Books of Entries are full of the forms used in pleading a title to villains." Though no longer of practical value in England, they remain as monuments of jurisprudence, and as mementoes of a barbarous institution. He thus describes the remedy of the master at common law: " The lord s remedy for a fugitive villain was, either by seizure or by suing out a writ of Nativo Habendo, or Neifty, as it is sometimes called. If the lord seized, the villain s most effec tual mode of recovering liberty was by the writ of Homine Re- plegiando, which had great advantage over the writ of Habeas Corpus. In the Habeas Corpus the return cannot be contested by pleading against the truth of it, and consequently on a Habeas Corpus the question of liberty cannot go to a jury for trial, But in the Homine Replegiando it was otherwise. The plaintiff, on the defendant s pleading villanage, had the same opportunity of contesting it, as when impleaded by the lord in a Nativo Habendo. If the lord sued out a JVativo Habendo, and the vil lanage was denied, in which case the sheriff could not seize the villain, the lord was then to enter his plaint in the county court, and as the sheriff was not allowed to try the question of villa nage in his court, the lord could not have any benefit from the writ, without removing the cause by the writ of Pone into the King s Bench or Common Pleas." (20 Howell s State Trials, 38, note.) The authority of Mr. Hargrave is sufficient. But I desire to place this matter beyond all cavil. From the Digest of Lord Chief Baron Comyns, which, at the adoption of the Constitution, was one of the classics of our jurisprudence, I derive another description of the remedy of the master : " If the lord claims an inheritance in his villain, who flics from FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 143 his lord against his will, and lives in a place out of the manor, to which he is regardant, the lord shall have a Nativo Habendo. And upon such writ, directed to the sheriff, he may seize him who does not deny himself to be a villain. But if the defendant say that he is a Free Man, the sheriff cannot seize him, but the lord must remove the writ by Pone before the Justices in Eire, or in C. B., where he must count upon it." (Comyns Digest Villanage, C. l.) An early writer of peculiar authority, Fitzherbert, in his Natura Brevium, on the writs of the common law, thus describes these proceedings : " The writ de Nativo Habendo lieth for the lord who claimeth inheritance in any villain, when his villain is run from him, and is remaining within any place out of the manor unto which he is regardant, or when he departeth from his lord against the lord s will ; and the writ shall be directed to the sheriff. And the sheriff may seize the villain, and deliver him unto his lord, if the villain confess unto the sheriff that he is his villain ; but if the villain say to the sheriff that he is frank, then it seemeth that the sheriff ought not to seize him ; as it is in a replevin, if the defendant claim property, the sheriff cannot replevy the cattle, but the party ought to sue a writ de Proprietate Pro- banda ; and so if the villain say that he is a free man, &c., then the sheriff ought not to seize him, but then the lord ought to sue a Pone to remove the plea before the justices of the Common Pleas, or before the justices in eyre. But if the villain purchase a writ de Libertate Probanda before the lord hath sued the Pone to remove the plea before the justices, then that writ of Libertate Probanda is a Supersedeas unto the lord, that he proceed not upon the writ Nativo Habendo till the eyre of the justices, and that the lord ought not to seize the villain in the meantime." (Vol. I. p. 70.) These authorities are not merely applicable to the general question of freedom ; but they distinctly con template the case of fugitive slaves, and the " suits at common law" for their rendition. Blackstone speaks 144 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. of villains who " ran away ; " Hargrave of " fugitive villains ; " Comyns of a villain " who flies from his lord against his will ; " and Fitzherbert of the proceed ings of the lord "when his villain is run from him." The forms, writs, counts, pleadings, and judgments, in these suits, are all preserved among the precedents of the common law. The writs are known as original writs which the party on either side, at the proper stage, could sue out of right without showing cause. The writ of Libertate Probanda for a fugitive slave was in this form : "LlBERTATK PROBANDA. "The king to the sheriff, &c. A. and B. her sister, have showed unto us, that whereas they are free women, and ready to prove their liberty, F. claiming then to be his niefs unjustly, vexes them ; and therefore we command you, that if the afore said A. and B. shall make you secure touching the proving of their liberty, then put that plea before our justices at the first assizes, when they shall come into those parts, because proof of this kind belongeth not to you to take ; and in the meantime cause the said A. and B. to have peace thereupon, and tell the aforesaid F. that he may be there, if he will, to prosecute his plea thereof against the aforesaid A. and B. And have there this writ. Witness, &o." (Fitzherbert, Vol. I. p. 77.) By these various proceedings, all ending in Trial by Jury, Personal Liberty was guarded, even in the early, unrefined, and barbarous days of the common law. Any person claimed as a fugitive slave might invoke this Trial as a sacred right. Whether the master pro ceeded by seizure, as he might, or by legal process, the Trial by Jury in a suit at common law, before one of the high courts of the realm, was equally secured. In the case of seizure, the fugitive, reserving the pro- FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 145 ceedings, might institute process against his master and appeal to a court and jury. In the case of process by the master, the watchful law secured to the fugitive the same protection. By no urgency of force, by no device of process, could any person claimed as a slave be defrauded of this Trial. Such was the common law. If its early boast, that there could be no slaves in England, fails to be true, this at least may be its pride, that, according to its indisputable principles, the Lib erty of every man was placed under the guard of Trial by Jury. These things may seem new to us ; but they must have been known to the members of the Convention, particularly to those from South Carolina, through whose influence the provision on this subject was adopted. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney and Mr. Rut- ledge had studied law at the Temple, one of the English Inns of Court. It would be a discredit to them, and also to other learned lawyers, members of the Convention, to suppose that they were not con versant with the principles and precedents directly applicable to this subject, all of which are set down in works of acknowledged weight,, and at that time of constant professional study. Only a short time before, in the case of Somersett, they had been most elaborately examined in Westminster Hall. In a forensic effort of unsurpassed learning and elevation, which of itself vindicates for its author his great juridical name, Mr. Hargrave had fully made them known to such as were little acquainted with the more ancient sources. But even if we could suppose them unknown to the lawyers of the Convention, they are none the less applicable in determining the true meaning of the Constitution. 13 146 FKEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEKY SECTIONAL. The conclusion from this examination is explicit. Clearly and indisputably, in England, the country of the common law, a claim for a fugitive slave was " a suit at common law," recognized " among its old and settled proceedings." To question this, in the face of authentic principles and precedents, would be prepos terous. As well might it be questioned, that a writ of replevin for a horse, or a writ of right for land, was "a suit at common law." It follows, then, that this technical term of the Constitution, read in the illumi nation of the common law, naturally and necessarily embraces proceedings for the recovery of fugitive slaves, if any such le instituted or allowed under the Constitu tion. And thus, by the letter of the Constitution, in harmony with the requirements of the common law, all such persons, when claimed by their masters, are en titled to a Trial by Jury. Such, sir, is the argument, briefly uttered, against the constitutionality of the Slave Act. Much more I might say on this matter ; much more on the two chief grounds of objection which I have occupied. But I am admonished to hasten on. Opposing this Act as doubly unconstitutional from a want of power in Congress and from a denial of Trial by Jury, I find myself again encouraged by the example of our Revolutionary Fathers, in a case which is one of the landmarks of history. The parallel is important and complete In 1765, the British Parliament, by a notorious statute, attempted to draw money from the colonies through a stamp tax, while the determination of certain questions of forfeiture under the statute was delegated not to the courts of common law but to NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 147 Courts of Admiralty without a jury. The Stamp Act, now execrated by all lovers of liberty, had this extent and no more. Its passage was the signal for a general flame of opposition and indignation throughout the Colonies. It was denounced as contrary to the British Constitution on two principal grounds ; first, as a usurpation by Parliament of powers not belonging to it, and an infraction of rights secured to the Colonies ; and secondly, as a denial of Trial by Jury in certain cases of property. The public feeling was variously expressed. At Boston, on the arrival of the stamps, the shops were closed, the bells of the churches tolled, and the flags of the ships hung at half-mast. At Portsmouth, in New Hampshire, the bells were tolled, and notice given to the friends of Liberty to hold themselves in readiness to attend her funeral. At New York a letter was received from Franklin, then in London, written on the day after the passage of the Act, in which he said: "The sun of liberty is set." The obnoxious Act, headed " Folly of England and Ruin of America," was contemptuously hawked through the streets. The merchants of New York, inspired then by Liberty, resolved to import no more goods from England until the repeal of the Act ; and their example was followed shortly afterwards by the merchants of Philadelphia and Boston. Bodies of patriots were organized every where under the name of " Sons of Liberty." The orators also spoke. James Otis with fiery tongue ap pealed to Magna Charta. Of all the States, Virginia whose shield bears the image of Liberty trampling upon chains first declared herself by solemn resolutions, which the timid thought 148 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. " treasonable ; " but which soon found a response. New York followed. Massachusetts came next, speak ing by the pen of the inflexible Samuel Adams. In an Address from the Legislature to the Governor, the true grounds of opposition to the Stamp Act, coincident with the two radical objections to the Slave Act, are clearly set forth : " You are pleased to say that the Stamp Act is an act of Parliament, and as such ought to be observed. This House, sir, has too great reverence for the Supreme Legislature of the nation to question its just authority. It by no means appertains to us to presume to adjust the boundaries of the power of Parliament ; but boundaries there undoubtedly are. We hope "we may, with out offence, put your Excellency in mind of that most grievous sentence of excommunication solemnly denounced by the Church in the name of the sacred Trinity, in the presence of King Henry the Third and the estates of the realm, against all those who should make statutes OR OBSERVE THEM, BEING MADE, contrary to the liberties of Magna Charta. The Charter of this province invests the General Assembly with the power of making laws for its internal government and taxation ; and this Charter has never been forfeited. The Parliament has a right to make all laws within the limits of their own constitution." . . . "The people complain that the Act vests a single judge of Admiralty with the power to try and determine their property in contro versies arising from internal concerns, without a jury, contrary to the very expression of Magna Charta, that no freeman shall be amerced, but by the oath of good and lawful men of the vicinage." . . . " We deeply regret that the Parliament has seen fit to pass such an act as the Stamp Act ; we natter our selves that the hardships of it will shortly appear to them in such a light, as shall induce them in their wisdom to repeal it ; in the meantime, we must beg your Excellency will excuse us from doing anything to assist in the execution of it. " Thus in those days spoke Massachusetts ! The par allel still proceeds. The unconstitutional Stamp Act FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 149 was welcomed in the Colonies by the Tories of that day precisely as the unconstitutional Slave Act has been welcomed by large and imperious numbers among us. Hutchinson, at that time Lieutenant Governor and Judge in Massachusetts, wrote to Ministers in England : " The Stamp Act is received with as much decency as could be expected. It leaves no room for evasion, and will execute itself." Like the judges of our day, in charges to grand juries, he resolutely vindi cated the Act, and admonished " the jurors and the people " to obey. Like Governors of our day, Bern ard, in his speech to the Legislature of Massachusetts, demanded unreasoning submission. " I shall not," says this British Governor, " enter into any disquisition of the policy of this Act. I have only to say it is an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain; and I trust that the supremacy of that Parliament over all the members of their wide and diffused empire never was and never will be denied within these walls." Like marshals of our day, the officers of the Customs made " application for a military force to assist them in the execution of their duty." The military were against the people. A British major of artillery at New York exclaimed, in tones not unlike those now sometimes heard : "I will cram the stamps down their throats with the end of my sword." The elaborate answer of Massachusetts a paper of historic grandeur drawn by Samuel Adams, was pronounced " the ravings of a parcel of wild enthusiasts." Thus in those days spoke the partisans of the Stamp Act. But their weakness soon became manifest. In the face of an awakened community, where discussion has free scope, no men, though surrounded by office 13* 150 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. and wealth, can long sustain injustice. Earth, water, nature, they may subdue ; but Truth they cannot sub due. Subtle and mighty, against all efforts and de vices, it fills every region of light with its majestic presence. The Stamp Act was discussed and understood. Its violation of constitutional rights was exposed. By resolutions of Legislatures and of town meetings, by speeches and writings, by public assemblies and pro cessions, the country was rallied in peaceful phalanx against the execution of the Act. To this great object, within the bounds of law and the constitution, were bent all the patriot energies of the land. And here Boston took the lead. Her records at this time are full of proud memorials. In formal instruc tions to her representatives, adopted unanimously, "having been read several times," in Town Meeting at Faneuil Hall, the following rule of conduct was prescribed : ** We, therefore, think it our indispensable duty, in Justice to ourselves and Posterity,- as it is our undoubted Privilege, in the most open and unreserved, but decent and respectful Terms, to declare our greatest Dissatisfaction with this Law. And we think it incumbent upon you by no Means to join in any public Measures for countenancing and assisting in the execution of the same. But to use your best endeavors in the general Assem bly to have the inherent inalienable Rights of the People of this Province asserted, and vindicated, and left upon the public rec ord, that Posterity may never have reason to charge the present Times with the Guilt of tamely giving them away." Virginia responded to Boston. Many of her justices of the peace surrendered their commissions " rather than aid in the enforcement of the law, or be instru mental in,. the overthrow of their country s liberties." As the opposition deepened, its natural tendency was FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 151 to outbreak and violence. But this was carefully re strained. On one occasion in Boston it showed itself in the lawlessness of a mob. But the town, at a pub lic meeting in Faneuil Hall, called without delay on the motion of the opponents of the Stamp Act, with James Otis as chairman, condemned the outrage. Eager in hostility to the execution of the Act, Boston cher ished municipal order, and constantly discountenanced all tumult, violence and illegal proceedings. Her equal devotion to these two objects drew the praises and congratulations of other towns. In reply, March 27th, 1766, to an Address from the inhabitants of Plymouth, her own consciousness of duty done is thus expressed : ** If the inhabitants of Boston have taken the legal and war rantable measures to prevent that misfortune, of all others the most to be dreaded, the execution of the Stamp Act, and as a necessary means of preventing it, have made any spirited appli cations for opening the custom-houses and courts of justice ; if at the same time they have borne their testimony against out rageous tumults and illegal proceedings, and given any example of the Love of Peace and good order, next to the consciousness of having done their duty is the satisfaction of meeting with the approbation of any of their fellow-countrymen." Learn now from the Diary of John Adams the results of this system : " The year 1765 has been the mostr remarkable year of my life . That enormous engine, fabricated by the British Parliament, for battering down all the rights and liberties of America I mean the Stamp Act has raised and spread through the whole con tinent a spirit that will be recorded to our honor with all future generations. In every Colony, from Georgia to New Hampshire inclusively, the stamp distributors and inspectors have been compelled by the unconquerable rage of the people to renounce 152 FKEEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVEBY SECTIONAL. their offices. Such and so universal has been the resentment of the people, that every man who has dared to speak in favor of the stamps, or to soften the detestation in which they are held, how great soever his abilities and virtues had been esteemed be fore, or whatever his fortune, connections and influence had been, has been seen to sink into universal contempt and ig nominy. The Stamp Act became a dead letter. At the meeting of Parliament numerous petitions were pre sented, calling for its instant repeal. Franklin, at that time in England, while giving his famous testimony before the House of Commons, was asked whether he thought the people of America would submit to this Act if modified. His brief emphatic response was : " No, never, unless compelled by force of arms." Chat ham yet weak with disease, but mighty in eloquence, exclaimed in ever-memorable words : " We are told America is obstinate America is almost in open rebellion. Sir, 1 rejoice that America has resisted. Three millions of people, so dead to all the feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of all the rest. The Americans have been wronged ; they have been driven to madness. I will beg leave to tell the House in a few words that is really my opinion. It is that the Stamp Act ~be repealed, absolutely, totally and immediately" It was repealed. Within less than a year from its original passage, denounced and discred ited, it was driven from the Statute Book. In the charnel-house of history, with the unclean things of the Past, it now rots. Thither the Slave Act is des tined to follow. Sir, regarding the Stamp Act candidly and cautiously, free from the animosities of the time, it is impossible FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 153 not to see that, though gravely unconstitutional, it was at most an infringement of civil liberty only ; not of personal liberty. There was an unjust tax of a few pence, with the chances of amercements by a single judge without a jury ; but, by no provision of this Act was the personal liberty of any man assailed. Under it no freeman could be seized as a slave. Such an Act, though justly obnoxious to every lover of Con stitutional Liberty, cannot be viewed with the feelings of repugnance, enkindled by a statute which assails the personal liberty of every man, and under which any freeman may be seized as a slave. Sir, in placing the Stamp Act by the side of the Slave Act, I do in justice to that emanation of British tyranny. Both, indeed, infringe important rights ; one of property ; the other the vital right of all, which is to other rights as the soul to the body the right of a man to him self. Both are condemned ; but their relative con demnation must be measured by their relative characters. As Freedom is more than property ; as Man is above the dollar that he earns ; as Heaven, to which we all aspire, is higher than the earth, where every accumula tion of wealth must ever remain ; so are the rights assailed by an American Congress higher than those once assailed by the British Parliament. And just in this degree must history condemn the Slave Act more than the Stamp Act. Sir, I might here stop. It is enough in this place, and on this occasion, to show the unconstitutionality of this enactment. Your duty commences at once. All legislation hostile to the fundamental law of the land should be repealed without delay. But the argu- 154 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. ment is not yet exhausted. Even if this Act could claim any validity or apology under the Constitution, which it cannot, it lacks that essential support in the Public Conscience of the States, where it is to le enforced, which is the life of all law, and without which any law must become a dead letter. The Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler) was right, when, at the beginning of the~session, he point edly said that a law which could be enforced only by the bayonet, was no law. Sir, it is idle to suppose that an Act of Congress becomes effective, merely by compliance with the forms of legislation. Something more is necessary. The Act must be in harmony with the prevailing public sentiment of the community upon which it bears. Of course, I do not suggest that the cordial support of every man or of every small locality is necessary ; but I do mean that the public feelings, the public convictions, the public con science, must not be touched, wounded, lacerated, by every endeavor to enforce it. With all these, it must be so far in harmony, that, like other laws, by which property, liberty and life are guarded, it may be administered by the ordinary process of courts, without jeoparding the public peace or shocking good men. If this be true as a general rule if the public support and sympathy be essential to the life of all law, this is especially the case in an enactment which concerns the important and sensitive rights of Personal Liberty. In conformity with this principle, the Legis lature of Massachusetts, by formal resolution, in 1850, with singular unanimity, declared : " We hold it to be the duty of Congress to pass such laws only in regard thereto as will be maintained by the sentiments of the Free States, where such laws are to be enforced." FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 155 The duty of consulting these sentiments was recog nized by Washington. While President of the United States, at the close of his Administration, he sought to recover a slave who had fled to New Hampshire. His autograph letter to Mr. Whipple, the Collector at Portsmouth, dated at Philadelphia, 28th November, 1796, which I now hold in my hand, and which has never before seen the light, after describing the fugi tive, and particularly expressing the desire of " her mistress," Mrs. Washington, for her return, employs the following decisive language : " I do not mean, however, by this request, that such violent measures should be used AS WOULD EXCITE A MOB OR RIOT, WHICH MIGHT BE THE CASE IF SHE HAS ADHERENTS, OR EVEN UNEASY SEN SATIONS IN THE MINDS OF WELL-DISPOSED CITIZENS. Rather than either of these should happen, I would forego her services alto gether ; and the example, also, which is of infinite more impor tance. " GEORGE WASHINGTON." Mr. Whipple, in his reply, dated at Portsmouth, December 22, 1796, an autograph copy of which I have, recognizes the rule of Washington : * I will now, sir, agreeably to your desire, send her to Alex andria, if it be practicable, without the, consequences which you except that of exciting a riot or a mob,, or creating uneasy sensations in the minds of well-disposed persons. The first can not be calculated beforehand ; it will be governed by the popular opinion of the moment, or the circumstances that may arise in the transaction. The latter may be sought into and judged of by conversing with such persons without discovering the occa sion. So far as I have had opportunity, I perceive that different sentiments are entertained on this subject." The fugitive never was returned ; but lived in free dom to a good old age, down to a very recent period, 156 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. a monument of the just forbearance of him whom we aptly call the Father of his Country. It is true that he sought her return. This we must regret, and find its apology. He was at the time a slaveholder. Though often with various degrees of force expressing himself against slavery, and promising his suffrage for its aboli tion, he did not see this wrong as he saw it at the close of life, in the illumination of another sphere. From this act of Washington, still swayed by the policy of the world, I appeal to Washington writing his will. From Washington on earth I appeal to Washington in Heaven. Seek not by his name to justify any such effort. His death is above his life. His last testa ment cancels his authority as a slaveholder. However he may have appeared before man, he came into the presence of God only as the liberator of his slaves. Grateful for this example, I am grateful also that, while a slaveholder, and seeking the return of a fugi tive, he has left in permanent record a rule of conduct which, if adopted by his country, will make Slave- Hunting impossible. The chances of a riot, or mob, or " even uneasy sensations among well-disposed per sons," are to prevent any such pursuit. Sir, the existing Slave Act cannot be enforced with out violating the precept of Washington. Not merely " uneasy sensations of well-disposed persons," but rage, tumult, commotion, mob, riot, violence, death, gush from its fatal overflowing fountains ; Hoc fonte derivata clades In patriam populumque fluxit.* Not a case occurs without endangering the public * Horace, Carmina, Lib. III. 6. FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 157 peace. Workmen are brutally dragged from employ ments to which they are wedded by years of successful labor ; husbands are ravished from wives, and parents from children. Everywhere there is disturbance ; at Detroit, Buffalo, Harrisburg, Syracuse, Philadelphia, New York, Boston. At Buffalo the fugitive was cruelly knocked by a log of wood against a red-hot stove, and his mock trial commenced while the blood still oozed from his wounded head. At Syracuse he was rescued by a sudden mob ; so also at Boston. At Harrisburg the fugitive was shot ; at Christiana the Slave-Hunter was shot. At New York unprecedented excitement, always with uncertain consequences, has attended every case. Again at Boston a fugitive, ac cording to the received report, was first basely seized under pretext that he was a criminal ; arrested only after a deadly struggle ; guarded by officers who acted in violation of the laws of the State ; tried in a Court- House surrounded by chains contrary to the common law ; finally surrendered to Slavery by trampling on the- criminal process of the State, under an escort in violation again of the laws of the State, while the pulpits trembled and the whole people, not merely " uneasy," but swelling with ill-suppressed indignation, for the sake of order and tranquillity, without violence witnessed the shameful catastrophe. With every attempt to administer the Slave Act, it constantly becomes more revolting, particularly in its influence on the agents it enlists. Pitch cannot be touched without defilement, and all who lend them selves to this work seem at once and unconsciously to lose the better part of man. The spirit of the law passes into them, as the devils entered the swine. 14 158 FREEDOM MATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. Upstart commissioners, the mere mushrooms of courts, vie and revie with each other. Now by indecent speed, now by harshness of manner, now by a denial of evi dence, now by crippling the defence, and now by open glaring wrong, they make the odious Act yet more odious. Clemency, grace, and justice, die in its pres ence. All this is observed by the world. Not a case occurs which does not harrow the souls of good men, and bring tears of sympathy to the eyes, also those other noble tears which " patriots shed o er dying laws." Sir, I shall speak frankly. If there be an exception to this feeling, it will be found chiefly with a peculiar class. It is a sorry fact that the " mercantile interest," in its unpardonable selfishness, twice in English his tory, frowned upon the endeavors to suppress the atrocity of Algerine Slavery ; that it sought to baffle Wilberforce s great effort for the abolition of the African slave trade ; and that, by a sordid compro mise, at the formation of our Constitution, it exempted the same detested Heaven-defying traffic from Amer ican judgment. And now representatives of this " interest," forgetful that commerce is the child of Freedom, join in hunting the Slave. But the great heart of the people recoils from this enactment. It palpitates for the fugitive, and rejoices in his escape. Sir, I am telling you facts. The literature of the age is all on his side. The songs, more potent than laws, are for him. The poets, with voices of melody, are for Freedom. Who could sing for Slavery ? They who make the permanent opinion of the country, who mould our youth, whose words, dropped into the soul, are the germs of character, supplicate for the Slave. And FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 159 now, sir, behold a new and heavenly ally. A woman, inspired by Christian genius, enters the lists, like an other Joan of Arc, and with marvellous power, sweeps the chords of the popular heart. Now melting to tears, and now inspiring to rage, her work everywhere touches the conscience, and makes the Slave-Hunter more hateful. In a brief period, nearly 100,000 copies of Uncle Tom s Cabin have been already circulated.^ But this extraordinary and sudden success surpass ing all other instances in the records of literature cannot be regarded merely as the triumph of genius. Higher far than this, it is the testimony of the people, by an unprecedented act, against the Fugitive Slave Bill. These things I dwell upon as the incentives and tokens of an existing public sentiment, which renders this Act practically inoperative, except as a tremendous engine of terror. Sir, the sentiment is just. Even in tha lands of slavery, the slave-trader is loathed as an ignoble character, from whom the countenance is turned away ; and can the Slave-Hunter be more re garded while pursuing his prey in a land of Freedom ? In early Europe, in barbarous days, while Slavery prevailed, a Hunting Master, nach jagender Herr, as the Germans called him, was held in aversion. Nor was this all. The fugitive was welcomed in the cities, and protected against pursuit. Sometimes vengeance awaited the Hunter. Down to this day, at Revel, now a Russian city, a sword is proudly preserved with which a Hunting Baron was beheaded, who, in viola- * This was the number at the time of the delivery of this speech. But the circulation has gone on indefinitely. 160 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAYERY SECTIONAL. tion of the municipal rights of this place, seized a fugi tive slave. Hostile to this Act as our public sentiment may be, it exhibits no trophy like this. The State laws of Massachusetts have been violated in the seizure of a fugitive slave ; but no sword, like that of Revel, now hangs at Boston. I have said, sir, that this sentiment is just. And is it not ? Every escape from slavery necessarily and in stinctively awakens the regard of all who love Freedom. The endeavor, though unsuccessful, reveals courage, manhood, character. No story is read with more in terest than that of our own Lafayette, when, aided by a gallant South Carolinian, in defiance of the despotic ordinances of Austria, kindred to our Slave Act, he strove to escape from the bondage of Olmutz. Litera ture pauses with exultation over the struggles of Cer vantes, the great Spaniard, while a slave in Algiers, to regain the liberty for which he says, in his immortal work, " we ought to risk life itself, Slavery being the greatest evil that can fall to the lot of man." Science, in all her manifold triumphs, throbs with pride and delight, that Arago, the astronomer and philosopher devoted republican also was redeemed from bar barous Slavery to become one of her greatest sons. Religion rejoices serenely, with joy unspeakable, in the final escape of Vincent de Paul. Exposed in the public squares of Tunis to the inspection of the traffickers in human flesh, this illustrious Frenchman was sub jected to every vileness of treatment compelled, like a horse, to open his mouth, to show his teeth, to trot, to run, to exhibit his strength in lifting burthens, and then, like a horse, legally sold in market overt. Pass ing from master to master, after a protracted servitude, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAYEEY SECTIONAL. 161 he achieved his freedom, and regaining France, com menced that resplendent career of charity by which he is placed among the great names of Christendom. Princes and orators have lavished panegyrics upon this fugitive slave ; and the Catholic Church, in homage to his extraordinary virtues, has introduced him into the company of saints. Less by genius or eminent services, than by suffer ings, are the fugitive slaves of our country now com mended. For them every sentiment of humanity is aroused : " Who could refrain That had a heart to love, and in that heart Courage to make his love known ? " Rude and ignorant they may be ; but in their very efforts for Freedom, they claim kindred with all that is noble in the Past. They are among the heroes of our age. Romance has no stories of more thrilling interest than theirs. Classical antiquity has preserved no examples of adventurous trial more worthy of re nown. Among them are men whose names will be treasured in the annals of their race. By their eloquent voice they have already done much to make their wrongs known, and to secure the respect of the world. History will soon lend them her avenging pen. Pro scribed by you during life, they will proscribe you through all time. Sir, already judgment is beginning. A righteous public sentiment palsies your enactment. An4 now, sir, let us review the field over which we have passed. We have seen that any compromise, finally closing the discussion of Slavery under the Con- 14* 162 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. stitution, is tyrannical, absurd and impotent ; that as Slavery can exist only by virtue of positive law, and as it has no such positive support in the Constitution, it cannot exist within the National jurisdiction ; that the Constitution nowhere recognizes property in man, and that, according to its true interpretation, Freedom and not Slavery is national, while Slavery and not Freedom is sectional ; that, in this spirit, the National Government was first organized under Washington, himself an Abolitionist, surrounded by Abolitionists, while the whole country, by its Church, its Colleges, its Literature, and all its best voices, was united against Slavery, and the national flag at that time nowhere within the National Territory covered a single slave ; still further, that the National Government is a Government of delegated powers, and as among these there is no power to support Slavery, this institution cannot be national, nor can Congress in any way legis late in its behalf ; and, finally, that the establishment of this principle is the true way of peace and safety for the Republic. Considering next the provision for the surrender of fugitives from service, we have seen that it was not one of the original compromises of the Con stitution ; that it was introduced tardily and with hesi tation, and adopted with little discussion, and then and for a long period after was regarded with compar ative indifference ; that the recent Slave Act, though many times unconstitutional, is especially so on two grounds first, as a usurpation by Congress of powers not granted by the Constitution, and an infraction of rights secured to the States ; and secondly, as a denial of Trial by Jury, in a question of Personal Liberty and a suit at common law ; that its glaring unconstitu- FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 163 tionality finds a prototype in the British Stamp Act, which our fathers refused to obey as unconstitutional on two parallel grounds first, because it was a usur pation by Parliament of powers not belonging to it under the British Constitution, and an infraction of rights belonging to the Colonies ; and secondly, because it was a denial of Trial by Jury in certain cases of property ; that as Liberty is far above property, so is the outrage perpetrated by the American Congress far above that perpetrated by the British Parliament ; and, finally, that the Slave Act has not that support in the public sentiment of the States where it is to be exe cuted, which is the life of all law, and which prudence and the precept of Washington require. Sir, thus far 1^ have arrayed the objections to this Act, and the false interpretations out of which it has sprung. But I am asked what I offer as a substitute for the legislation which I denounce. Freely I will answer. It is to be found in a correct appreciation of the provision of the Constitution, under which 1his dis cussion occurs. Look at it in the double light of reason and of Freedom, and we cannot mistake the exact extent of its requirements. Here is the pro vision : " No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." From the very language employed, it is obvious that this is merely a compact between the States, with a prohibition on the States, conferring no power on the 164 FKEEDOM NATIONAL J SLAVERY SECTIONAL. nation. In its natural signification it is a compact. According to the examples of other countries, and the principles of jurisprudence, it is a compact. All arrangements for the extradition of fugitives have been customarily compacts. Except under the express obli gations of treaty, no nation is bound to surrender fugitives. Especially has this been the case with fugitives for Freedom. In mediaeval Europe, cities refused to recognize this obligation in favor of persons even under the same National Government. In 1531, while the Netherlands and Spain were united under Charles V., the Supreme Council of Mechlin rejected an application from Spain for the surrender of a fugitive slave. By express compact alone could this be secured. But the provision of the Constitution was borrowed from the Ordinance of the Northwestern Territory, which is expressly declared to be a compact ; and this Ordinance, finally drawn by Nathan Dane, was again borrowed in its distinctive features from the early institutions of Massachusetts, among which, as far back as 1643, was a compact of like nature with other New England States. Thus this provision is a com pact in language, in nature, in its whole history ; as we have already seen it is a compact, according to the intentions of our Fathers and the genius of our institutions. As a compact, its execution depends absolutely upon the States, without any intervention of the Nation. Each State, in the exercise of its own judgment, will determine for itself the precise extent of the obligations assumed. As a compact in derogation of Freedom, it must be construed strictly in every respoct leaning always in favor of Freedom, and shunning any mean- FEEEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVEEY SECTIONAL. 165 ing, not clearly necessary, which takes away important personal rights ; mindful that the parties to whom it is applicable are regarded as " persons," of course with all the rights of " persons " under the Constitution ; especially mindful of the vigorous maxim of the com mon law, that " he is cruel and impious who does not always favor Freedom ; " and also, completely adopting in letter and in spirit, as becomes a just people, the rule of the great Commentator, that " the law is always ready to catch at anything in favor of Lib erty." With this key the true interpretation is natural and easy. Briefly, the States are prohibited from any " law or regulation" by which any "person" escaped from "service or labor" may be discharged therefrom, and on establishment of the claim to such " service or labor," he is to be " delivered up." But the mode by which the claim is to be tried and determined is not specified. All this is obviously within the control of each State. It may be done by virtue of express legislation, in which event any Legislature, justly care ful of Personal Liberty, would surround the fugitive with every shield of the law and Constitution. But here a fact, pregnant with Freedom, must be studiously observed. The name Slave that litany of wrong and woe does not appear in the clause. Here is no unambiguous phrase, incapable of a double sense ; no " positive " language, applicable only to slaves, and excluding all other classes ; no word of that absolute certainty in every particular, which forbids any inter pretation except that of Slavery, and makes it impossi ble " to catch at anything in favor of Liberty." Nothing of this kind is here. But passing from this ; " cruelly 166 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. and impiously" renouncing for the moment all leanings for Freedom ; refusing " to catch at anything in favor of Liberty ; " abandoning the cherished idea of the Fathers, that " It was wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea of property in man ; " and, in the face of these com manding principles, assuming two things, first, that, in the evasive language of this clause, the Convention, whatever may have been the aim of individual mem bers, really intended fugitive slaves, which is sometimes questioned, and, secondly, that, if they so intended, the language employed can be judicially regarded as justly applicable to fugitive slaves, which is often and earnestly denied ; then the whole proceeding, without any express legislation, may be left to the ancient and authentic forms of the common law, familiar to the framers of the Constitution and ample for the occasion. If the fugitive be seized without process, he will be entitled at once to his writ de Homine Replegiando, while the master, resorting to process, may find his remedy in the writ de Nativo Habendo each writ requiring Trial by Jury. If, from ignorance or lack of employment, these processes have slumbered in our country, still they belong to the great arsenal of the common law, and continue, like other ancient writs, tanquam gladium in vagina, ready to be employed at the first necessity. They belong to the safeguards of the citizen. But in any event and in either alternative the proceedings would be by " suit at common law," with Trial by Jury ; and it would be the solemn duty of the court, according to all the forms and proper delays of the common law, to try the case on the evidence ; strictly to apply all the protecting rules of evidence, and especially to require stringent proof, by FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 167 competent witnesses under cross-examination, that the person claimed was held to service ; that his service was due to the claimant ; that he had escaped from the State where such service was due ; and also proof of the laws of the State under which he was held. Still further, to the Courts of each State must belong the determination of the question., to what classes of persons, according to just rules of interpretation, the phrase "persons held to service or labor" is strictly appli cable. Such is this much-debated provision. The Slave States, at the formation of the Constitution, did not propose, as in the cases of Naturalization and Bank ruptcy, to empower the National Government to estab lish an uniform rule for the rendition of fugitives from service, throughout the United States ; they did not ask the National Government to charge itself in any way with this service ; they did not venture to offend the country, and particularly the Northern States, by any such assertion of a hateful right. They were content, under the sanctions of compact, to leave it to the pub lic sentiment of the States. There, I insist, it shall remain. Mr. President, I have occupied much time ; but the great subject still stretches before us. One other point yet remains, which I should not leave untouched, and which justly belongs to the close. The Slave Act violates the Constitution and shocks the Public Con science. With modesty and yet with firmness let me add, sir, it offends against the Divine Law. No such enactment can be entitled to support. As the throne of God is above every earthly throne, so are his laws t 168 FREEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. and statutes above all the laws and statutes of man. To question these, is to question God himself. But to assume that human laws are beyond question, is to claim for their fallible authors infallibility. To assume that they are always in conformity with the laws of God, is presumptuously and impiously to exalt man to an equality with God. Clearly human laws are not always in such conformity; nor can they ever be beyond question from each individual. Where the conflict is open, as if Congress should command the perpetration of murder, the office of conscience as final arbiter is undisputed. But in every conflict the same Queenly office is hers. By no earthly power can she be de throned. Each person, after anxious examination, without haste, without passion, solemnly for himself must decide this great controversy. Any other rule attributes infallibility to human laws, places them beyond question,^ and degrades all men to an unthink ing passive obedience. According to St. Augustine, an unjust law does not appear to be a law ; lex esse non videtur quce justa non fuerit ; and the great fathers of the Church, while adopting these words, declare openly that unjust laws are not binding. Sometimes they are called "abuses," and not laws; sometimes "violences," and not laws. And here again the conscience of each person is the final arbiter. But this lofty principle is not confined 1 to the Church. A master of philosophy in early Europe, a name of intellectual renown, the eloquent Abelard, in Latin verses addressed to his son, has clearly expressed the universal injunction : * Jussa potestatis terrense discutienda Coelestis tibi mox perficienda scias. FRFEDOM NATIONAL ; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 169 Siquis divinis jubeat contraria jussis Te contra Domirmrn pactio nulla trahat." The mandates of an earthly power are to be discussed ; those of Heaven must at once be performed ; nor can any agreement constrain us against God. Such is the rule of morals. Such, also, by the lips of judges and sages, has been the proud declaration of the English law, whence our own is derived. In this conviction patriots have fearlessly braved unjust commands, and martyrs have died. And now, sir, the rule is commended to us. The good citizen, as he thinks of the shivering fugitive, guilty of no crime, pursued, hunted down like a beast, while praying for Christian help and deliverance, and as he reads the requirements of this Act, is filled with horror. Here is a despotic mandate, " to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient execution of this law." Again let me speak frankly. Not rashly would I set myself against any provision of law. This grave responsibility I would not lightly assume. But here the path of duty is clear. By the Supreme Law, which commands me to do no injustice ; by the comprehen sive Christian Law of Brotherhood ; ly the Constitution, which I have sworn to support ; I AM BOUND TO DIS OBEY THIS ACT. Never, in any capacity, can I render voluntary aid in its execution. Pains and penalties I will endure ; but this great wrong I will -not do. "I cannot obey; but I can suffer," was the exclamation of the author of Pilgrim s Progress, when imprisoned for disobedience to an earthly statute. Better suffer injustice than do it. Better be the victim than the instrument of wrong. Better be even the poor slave, 15 170 FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. returned to bondage, than the unhappy Commis sioner. There is, sir, an incident of history, which suggests a parallel, and affords a lesson of fidelity. Under the triumphant exertions of that Apostolic Jesuit, St. Francis Xavier, large numbers of the Japanese, amounting to as many as two hundred thousand among them princes, generals, and the flower of the nobility were converted to Christianity. Afterwards, amidst the frenzy of civil war, religious persecution arose, and the penalty of death was denounced against all who refused to trample upon the effigy of the Redeemer. This was the, Pagan law of a Pagan land. But the delighted historian records that scarcely one from the multitude of converts was guilty of this apostacy. The law of man was set at naught. Im prisonment, torture, death, were preferred. Thus did this people refuse to trample on the painted image. Sir, multitudes among us will not be less steadfast in refusing to trample on the living image of their Redeemer. Finally, sir, for the sake of peace and tranquillity, cease to shock the Public Conscience ; for the sake of the Constitution, cease to exercise a power which is nowhere granted, and which violates inviolable rights expressly secured. Leave this question where it was left b)* our fathers, at the formation of our National Government, in the absolute control of the States, the appointed guardians of Personal Liberty. Repeal this enactment. Let its terrors no longer rage through the land. Mindful of the lowly whom it pursues ; mindful of the good men perplexed by its require ments ; in the name of charity, in the name of the FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL. 171 Constitution, repeal this enactment, totally and without delay. Be inspired by the example of Washington. Be admonished by those words of Oriental piety " Beware of the groans of the wounded souls. Oppress not to the utmost a single heart ; for a solitary sigh has power to overset a whole world." TRIBUTE TO MR. DOWNING. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 26lH AUGUST, 1852, IN FAVOR OF AN ALLOWANCE TO THE WIDOW OF THE LATE ANDREW J. DOWNING. The Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation Bill being under con sideration, Mr. Pearce, of Maryland, under instructions from the Committee on Finance, moved the following amendment : " For the payment of the arrears of salary due to the late Eural Architect, A. J. Downing, from the first of May, 1852, to the date of his death, and a further allowance to his widow, equal to the salary for one year, $2,500 ; Provided, that the said sum shall be in full of all claim for the services of the said deceased, and for all models, specifications and drawings de signed for the benefit of the United States, which are not in its In the course of the debate which ensued, Mr. Sumner spoke as follows : MR. SUMNER. Mr. President : The laborer is worthy of his hire ; and I believe at this moment there is no question of charity to the widow of the late^Mr. Downing. The simple proposition is to make com pensation for services rendered to the United States by this eminent artist as superintendent of the public grounds in Washington. And, since the plans he has left behind and the impulses he has given to improve ments here by his incomparable genius will continue to (172) TRIBUTE TO MR. DOWNING. 173 benefit us, though he has been removed, it is thought reasonable to continue his salary to the close of the unexpired year from which it commenced. These plans alone have been valued at five thousand dollars, and we are to have the advantage of them. In pursuance of these, his successor will be able to proceed in ar ranging the public grounds, and in embellishing the national capital, without any further expenditure to procure others instead. Thus, as I said at the outset, it is not a question of charity, but of compensation; and on this ground I submit that the estate of the departed artist deserves the small pittance which it is proposed to supply. For myself, I should be much happier to vote for a larger appropriation, believing that, over and above the services actually rendered in the discharge of his duties, these plans are amply worth it, and that we shall all feel better by such a recognition of our debt. Few men in the public service have vindicated a title to regard above Mr. Downing. At the age of thirty-seven he has passed away, " dead ere his prime" like Lycidas, also, " stretched on a watery bier " leaving behind a reputation above that of any other citizen in the beautiful department of art to which he was devoted. His labors and his example cannot be forgotten. I know of no man among us, in any sphere of life, so young as he was at his death, who has been able to perform services of such true, simple and last ing beneficence. By his wide and active superintend ence of rural improvements, by his labors of the pen, and by the various exercise of his genius, he has contributed essentially to the sum of human happiness. And now, sir, by practical services here in Washington, 15* 174 TRIBUTE TO MR. DOWNING. rendered at the call of his country, he has earned, it seems to me, this small appropriation not as a charity to his desolate widow, but as a compensation for labor done. I hope the amendment will be agreed to. THE PARTY OF FREEDOM; ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABILITY. SPEECH AT THE STATE CONVENTION OP THE FREE SOIL PARTY OP MASSACHUSETTS, HELD AT LOWELL, 16T1I SEPTEMBER, 1852. The President [Hon. STEPHEN C. PHILLIPS] remarked that there was one gentleman present whom the Convention would all delight to hear ; he alluded to our distinguished Senator in Congress, Hon. Charles Stunner. The name of Mr. Sumner was received with " three times three " rousing cheers, and the waving of hats, canes, handker chiefs, &c., which demonstrations of regard were renewed as he made his appearance on the platform. The enthusiasm having in a degree subsided, he stepped forward and said : * MK. PRESIDENT AND FELLOW-CITIZENS OF MASS ACHUSETTS : I should be dull indeed dull as a weed were I insensible to this generous, overflow ing, heart- speaking welcome. After an absence of many months, I have now come home, to breathe anew this invigorating Northern air (applause), to tread again the free soil of our native Massachusetts (cheers), and to enjoy the sympathy of friends and fellow-citizens. (Renewed applause.) But, while glad in your greet ings, thus bounteously lavished, I cannot accept them for myself. I do not deserve them. They belong to * This report is copied from the newspapers of the time. (175) 176 THE PARTY OF FREEDOM ; the cause (applause) which we all have at heart, and which binds us together. (Cheers.) Fellow-citizens, I have not come here to-day to make a speech. The occasion requires no such effort. Weary with other labors, and desiring rest, I have little now to say, and that little must not be about myself. If, at Washington, during a long session of Congress my own first experience of public life I have been able to do anything which meets your acceptance, I am happy. (Cheers.) I have done nothing but my duty. (" Hear ! hear ! ") Passing from this, and taking advantage of the kind attention with which you honor me, let me add one word in vindication of our position as a third party. At this moment we are on the eve of two important elections ; one of national officers and the other of State officers. A President and Vice President of the United States, and members of Congress are to be chosen ; also, Governor and Lieutenant Governor of the Commonwealth, and members of the Legislature. And at these elections we are to. cast our votes so as most to promote the cause of Freedom under the National Constitution. (Cheers.) This is our peculiar object, though associated with it are other aims, kin dred in their humane and liberal character. Against Freedom both the old parties are now banded. Opposed to each other in the contest for power, they concur in opposing every effort for the establishment of Freedom under the National Consti tution. (Applause.) Divided as .parties, they are one as supporters of slavery. On this question we can have no sympathy with either ; but must necessarily be against both. (" Hear ! hear ! ") They sustain slavery ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABILITY. 177 in the District of Columbia ; we are against it. They sustain the coastwise slave trade under the National Flag ; we abhor it. (Cheers.) They sustain the policy of silence on Slavery in the territories ; we urge the voice of positive prohibition. They sustain that paragon of legislative monsters unconstitutional, unchristian and infamous, the Fugitive Slave Bill (sensation) ; we insist on its repeal. (Great applause.) They con cede to the Slave Power new life and protection ; we cannot be content except with its total destruction. (Enthusiasm.) Such, fellow-citizens, is the difference between us. And now, if here in Massachusetts, there be any persons, who, on grounds of policy or conscience, feel impelled to support slavery, let them go and sink in the embrace of the old parties. (Applause.) There they belong. But, on the other hand, all who are sincerely opposed to slavery who desire to act against it who seek to bear their testimony for Freedom, who long to carry into public affairs those principles of morality and Christian duty which are the rule of private life, let them come out from both the old parties, and join us. (Cheers.) In our third party, with the declared friends of Freedom, they will find a place in harmony with their aspirations. (Enthu siasm.) But there is one apology, which is common to the supporters of both the old parties, and which is often in their mouths when pressed for their inconsistent persistence in adhering to these parties. It is dog matically asserted that there can be but two parties ; that a third party is impossible, particularly in our country, and that, therefore, all persons, however op- 178 THE PARTY OF FREEDOM; posed to Slavery, must be content in one of the old parties. This assumption, which is without any foun dation in reason, has been so often put forth, that it has acquired a certain currency ; and many, who reason hastily, or who implicitly follow others, have adopted it as the all-sufficient excuse for their conduct. Con fessing their own opposition to slavery, they yet yield to the domination of party, and become dumb. All this is wrong morally, and, therefore, must be wrong practically. Party, in its true estate, is the natural expression and agency of different forms of opinion on important public questions ; and itself assumes different forms precisely according to the prevalence of different opinions. Thus in the early Italian republics there were for a while the factions of the Guelphs and Ghibellins, supporters of the Pope and the Emperor ; also of the Whites and the Blacks, taking their names from the color of their respective badges, and in Eng land, the two factions of the white and red roses, in which was involved the succession to the crown. But in all these cases the party came into being, died out, or changed with the prevailing sentiment. If there be in a community only two chief antagonist opinions, then there will be but two parties, embodying these opinions. But as other opinions practically prevail and seek vent, -so must parties change or multiply. This is so strongly the conclusion of reason and phil osophy, that it could not be doubted, even if there were no examples of such change and multiplication. But we need only turn to the recent history of France and England, the two countries where opinion has had the freest scope to find such examples. ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABILITY. 179 Thus, for instance, in France and I dwell on this point because I have observed myself, in conversa tion, that it is of practical importance under Louis Phillippe, anterior to the late Republic, there was the party of Legitimists, supporters of the old branch of Bourbons ; the party of Orleanists, supporters of the existing throne ; these two corresponding at the time in relative rank and power to our Whigs and Demo crats. But besides these, there was a third party, the small land of republicans, represented in the legislature by a few persons only, but strong in principles and purposes, which in February, 1848, prevailed over both the others. (Applause.) On the establishment of the Republic the multiplicity of parties continued until, with the freedom of opinion and the freedom of the press, all were equally overthrown by Louis Napo leon, and their place supplied by the enforced unity of despotism. In England, the most important measure of recent reform, the abolition of the laws imposing a protective duty on corn, was carried only by a third party. Neither of the two old parties could be brought to adopt this measure and press it to a consummation. A powerful public opinion, thus thwarted in the regular channel, found an outlet in another party, which was neither Whig nor Tory, but which was formed from both these parties, and wherein Sir Robert Peel, the great Conservative leader, took his place, side by side, in honorable coalition, with Mr. Cobden, the great Liberal leader. (" Hear ! hear ! ") In this way the Corn Laws were finally overthrown. The multiplicity of parties in England, engendered by this contest, still continues. At the general election for the new Parliament which 180 THE PARTY OF FltEEDOM ; has just taken place, the strict lines of ancient parties seemed to be effaced, and many were returned, not as Whigs and Tories, but as Protectionists and anti- Protectionists. Thus, by example in our own day we may confirm the principle of political philosophy, that parties must naturally adapt themselves in character and number to the prevailing public opinion. Now at the present time in our country, there exists a deep controlling conscientious feeling against Slavery. (Cheers.) You and I, sir, and all of us confess it. While recognizing the Constitution we desire to do everything in our power to relieve ourselves of respon sibility for this terrible wrong. (" Yes ! yes ! ") We would vindicate the Constitution and the National Government which it has established, from all partici pation in this outrage. (Cheers.) Both the old political parties, forgetful of the sentiments of the Fathers and of the spirit of the Constitution, not only refuse to be in any degree the agents or representa tives of our convictions, but expressly discourage and denounce them. Thus baffled in their efforts for utter ance, these convictions naturally seek expression in a new agency, the party of Freedom. (Cheers.) Such is the party, which, representing the great doctrines of Human Rights, as enunciated in our Declaration of Independence, and inspired truly by the Democratic sentiment, is now assembled here under the name of the Free Democracy. (Cheers.) The rising public opinion against Slavery cannot now flow in the old political channels. It is strangled, clogged, and dammed back. But if not through the old parties, then over the old parties, (tremendous ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABILITY. 181 cheering,) this irresistible current shall find its way. (Enthusiasm.) It cannot be permanently stopped. If the old parties will not become its organ, they must become its victim. (Cheers.) The party of Freedom will certainly prevail. (Sensation.) It may be by enter ing into, and possessing one of the old parties, filling it with our own strong life ; or it may be by drawing from both to itself the good and true who are unwill ing to continue members of any political combination when it ceases to represent their convictions. But, in one way or the other, its ultimate triumph is sure. (Great applause.) Of this let no man doubt. (Re peated cheers.) At this moment we are in a minority. At the last popular election in Massachusetts, there were twenty- eight thousand Free Soilers, forty-three thousand Democrats, and sixty-four thousand Whigs. But this is no reason for discouragement. According to recent estimates, the population of the whole world amounts to about eight hundred millions. Of these only two hundred and sixty millions are Christians, while the remaining five hundred and forty millions are mainly Mahometans, Brahmins and Idolaters. Because the Christians are in this minority, that is no reason for renouncing Christianity and for surrendering to the false religions (cheers) ; nor do we doubt that Christianity will yet prevail over the whole earth, as the waters cover the sea. ("Hear! hear!") The friends of Freedom in Massachusetts are likewise in a minority ; but they will not, therefore, renounce Freedom (cheers) ; nor surrender to the political Mahometans and idol aters of Baltimore (" never ! never ! ") ; nor can they 16 182 THE PARTY OF FREEDOM ; doubt that their cause, like Christianity, -will yet pre vail. (Enthusiastic cheers.) Our cause commends itself. But it is also com mended by our candidates. (Cheers.) In all that makes the eminent civilian or the accomplished states man fit for the responsibilities of government, they will proudly compare with any of their competitors (ap plause), while they are dear to our hearts as able, well- tried, loyal supporters of those vital principles of Freedom which we seek to establish under the Consti tution of the United States. (Applause.) In the Senate, Mr. Hale (cheers) is admitted to be foremost in aptitude and readiness of debate, whether in the general legislation of the country, or in the constant and valiant championship of our cause. (Applause.) His genial and sun-like nature irradiates the antagon ism of political controversy (cheers), while his active and practical mind, richly stored with various experi ence, never fails to render good service. (Great cheer ing.) Of Mr. Julian, our candidate for the Vice-Presidency (" Hear ! hear ! "), let me say simply that, in ability and devotion to our principles, he is a worthy compeer of Mr. Hale. To vote for such men will itself be a pleasure. But it will be doubly so when we reflect that in this way we bear our testimony to a noble cause, with which the happiness, welfare and fame of our country are indissolubly connected. (Repeated and enthusiastic cheers.) With such a cause and such candidates, let no man be disheartened. The tempest may blow, but ours is a life-boat, which cannot be harmed by wind or wave. ITS NECESSITY AND PRACTICABILITY. 183 The genius of Liberty sits at the helm. I hear her voice of cheer saying, " Whoso sails with me comes to shore." Mr. Sumner resumed his seat amid the heartiest and long protracted applause. CIVIL SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 23D FEE UARY, 1853, ON THE PROPOSITION TO CHANGE THE SUPER INTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. The Army Appropriation Bill being under discussion, Mr. Davis, of Massachusetts, moved the following amendment : " The Act of Congress, approved August 23, 1842, shall be so modified, that the President may, if in his opinion the public interest demands it, place over any of the armories a Superin tendent who does not belong to the Army." In the course of the debate Mr. Sumner spoke as follows : MR. SUMNEB. Mr. President, I do not desire to speak upon the general subject of the manufacture of arms under the authority of the United States, which has been opened in debate by honorable Senators. What I have to say will be on the precise question before the Senate, and nothing else. That question as I understand it, is on the amendment proposed by my colleague [Mr. Davis], according to which the act of 1842 is to be so far modified that the President, in his discretion, may place over the armories persons not of the army leaving it, therefore to his judgment to determine whether the superintendent shall be a mili tary man or a civilian. This is all. C1841 CIVIL SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. 185 The Senate has been exhorted not to act precip itately ; but the character of this proposition excludes all idea of precipitation. "We do not determine abso lutely that the system shall be changed, but simply that it may be changed in the discretion of the Presi dent. This discretion, which naturally will be exer cised only after ample inquiry, stands in the way of all precipitation ; and this is my answer to the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Shields]. Again : it is urged that under a military head, the armories are better administered than they would be under a civil head, and that the arms are better and cheaper made ; and here my friend from South Caro lina, who sits before me [Mr. Butler], dwelt with his accustomed glow upon the success with which this manufacture has been conducted at the national arm ories, and the extent to which it has been recognized in Europe. But, sir, on the precise question now before you, the merits of the armories are not involved. We do not undertake to judge the military superin tendents or their works. The determination of this question is referred to the President; and this is my answer to the Senator from South Carolina. The objections to this amendment of my colleague, then, seem to disappear. But there are two distinct arguments in its favor, which, at the present moment, dp not seem to me susceptible of any answer. In the first place, there are complaints against the existing system which ought to be heard. A memorial from five hundred legal voters of Springfield, now on your table, bears testimony to them. Letters addressed to myself and others, from persons whose opinions I am bound to regard, set them forth sometimes in very 16* 186 CIVIL SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. strong language. The administration of the arsenal at Springfield is commended by many, but there are others who judge it differently. As now conducted, it is represented by some to be the seat of oppressive conduct, and the occasion of heart-burnings and strife, often running into the local politics. In the eyes of some, this arsenal is now little better than a sore on that beautiful town. Now, on these complaints and allegations I express no opinion. I do not affirm their truth or their untruth. What I know of the Superin tendent, makes it difficult for me to believe that any thing unjust, oppressive, or hard, could proceed from him. But the whole case justifies inquiry at least, and such will be secured by the proposition now before the Senate. This is the smallest thing we can do. But this proposition is enforced by another consid eration which seems to me entitled to peculiar weight. I have nothing to say now on the general question of reducing the army or modifying the existing military system. But I do submit confidently that the genius of our institutions favors civil life rather than military life ; and that, in harmony with this, it is our duty, whenever the public interests will permit, to limit and restrain the sphere of military influences. This is not a military monarchy, where the soldier is supreme, but a republic, where the soldier yields to the civilian. But the law, as it now stands, gives to the soldier an absolute preference in a service which is not military, and which from its nature, seems to belong to civil life. Now the manufacture of arms is a mechanical pursuit, and for myself, I can see no reason why it should not be placed in charge of one bred to the CIYIL SUPERINTENDENTS OF ARMORIES. 187 business. Among the intelligent mechanics of Massa chusetts, there are many fully fit to be at the head of the arsenal at Springfield ; but all these, by the ex isting law, are austerely excluded from any such trust. The idea which has fallen from so many Senators, that the superintendent of an armory ought to be a military man that a military man only is competent or even that a military man is more competent than a civilian, seems to me as illogical as the jocular fallacy of Dr. Johnson, that " He who drives fat oxen must himself be fat." AGAINST SECRECY IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SENATE. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 6TH APRIL, 1853, ON THE PROPOSITION TO LIMIT THE SECRET SESSIONS OF THE SENATE. The following resolution was submitted by Mr. Chase, of Ohio : " Resolved, That the sessions and all proceedings of the Senate shall be public and open, except when matters commu nicated in confidence by the President, shall be received and considered, and in such other cases as the Senate by resolution from time to time shall specially order, and so much of the 38th, 39th and 40th rules as may be inconsistent with this resolution is hereby rescinded." In the debate which ensued, Mr. Sumner spoke as follows : MR. SUMNER. Party allusions and party consid erations have been brought to bear upon this question. I wish to regard it for a moment in the light of the Constitution and in the spirit of our institutions. In the Constitution there is no injunction of secrecy on any of the proceedings of the Senate ; nor is there any requirement of publicity. To the Senate is left abso lutely the determination of its rules of proceedings. In thus abstaining from all regulation of this matter the framers of the Constitution have obviously regarded [188] AGAINST SECRECY IN THE SENATE. 189 it as in all respects within the discretion of the Senate, to be exercised from time to time as it thinks best. The Senate exercises three important functions : Jirst, the legislative or parliamentary power, wherein it acts concurrently with the House of Representatives, as well as the President ; secondly, the power " to advise and consent" to treaties with foreign countries in concurrence with the President; and, thirdly, the power " to advise and consent" to nominations by the President to offices under the Constitution. I say nothing of another, rarely called into exercise, the sole power to try impeachments. At the first organization of the Government the proceedings of the "Senate, whether in legislation or on treaties or on nominations, were with closed doors. In this respect the legislative business ami executive business were conducted alike. This continued down to the second session of the Third Congress, in 1794, when, in pursuance of a formal resolution, the galleries were allowed to be opened so long as the Senate were engaged in their legislative capacity, unless in such cases as might, in the opinion of the Senate, require seciecy ; and this rule has continued ever since. Here was an exercise of the discretion of the Senate, in obvious harmony with public sentiment and the spirit of our institutions. The change now proposed goes still further. It opens the doors on all occasions, whether legislative or executive, except when specially ordered otherwise. The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Butler] says that the Senate is a confidential body, and should be ready to receive confidential communications from the President. But this will still be the case if we adopt *30 AGAINST SECRECY IN THE SENATE. the resolution now under consideration. The limita tion proposed seems adequate to all exigencies, while the general rule will be publicity. The Executive sessions with closed doors, shrouded from the public gaze and public criticism, constitute an exceptional part of our system, too much in harmony with the proceedings of other Governments less liberal in char acter. The genius of our institutions requires publicity. The ancient Roman, who bade his architect so to con struct his house that his guests and all that he did could be seen by the world, is a fit model for the American people. THE POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. SPEECHES ON THE MILITIA GENERALLY AND A COLORED MILITIA, IN THE CONVENTION TO REVISE AND AMEND THE CONSTI TUTION OF MASSACHUSETTS* 21ST AND 22D JUNE, 1853. The propositions of amendment on the general subject of the Militia being under consideration in Committee of the Whole, Mr. Sumner -spoke as follows : I SHOULD like to call the attention of the Committee to the precise question on which we are to vote. This does not, as it seems to me, properly open the discus sion to which we have been listening. I do not under stand that it involves the topics introduced by my friend opposite [Mr. Wilson], the present condi tion of Europe, the prospects of the liberal cause in that quarter of the globe, or the extent to which that cause may be affected by a contemporaneous movement for peace. Nor do I understand that the important considerations introduced by the gentleman on my right [Mr. Whitney, of Boylston], on the extent to which Government may be entrusted with the power * The members of this Convention were not required to have their domicil in the places which they represented. Mr. Sumner sat as the member for Marshfield, for which place he was chosen while absent from the State. [191] 192 POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. of the sword, can materially influence our decision. I put these things aside at this time. The question is on the final passage of the fifteen resolutions reported by the Committee on the Militia ; and here let me catch and adopt one word from my friend opposite [Mr. Wilson]. He regretted, if I understood him, that this whole subject was not com pressed into one or two resolutions. Am I right ? Mr. WILSON. The gentleman is correct. Mr. SUMNER. I agree with him. I regret that it was not compressed into one or two resolutions. I object to these resolutions for several reasons. In the first place, there are too many. In the second place, at least two of them seem to be an assumption of power belonging to Congress, and, therefore, at least, of doubtful constitutionality; and in the third place, because twelve of them undertake to control matters which it were better to leave to the Legislature. On the formation of the Constitution of Massachu setts, in 1780, it was natural that our fathers should introduce into it details with regard to the militia and its organization. The Constitution of the United States had not then been made. But since the establish ment of this Constitution, the whole condition of the militia is changed. Among the powers expressly given to Congress, is the power " to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia, according to the discipline pre scribed by Congress." And Congress have proceeded to exercise this power by the organization of a national POWERS OF A STATIC OVER THE MILITIA. 193 militia. I submit that whatever might have been the original inducements to introduce multiform provisions on this subject into the Constitution of Massachusetts, none such exist at this day; and it is impolitic, at least, to introduce them. But I fear that they are more than impolitic. I will not argue here the question of constitutional law ; but I submit to the better judgment of my professional brethren and I am happy to see some of them lingering at this late hour that any attempt on the part of the State to interfere, in any way, by addition or subtraction, with the organization of the national militia, is an experiment which we should not introduce into the permanent text of our organic law. If the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on the powers of Congress are to prevail, then, it seems to me, any such assumption, in a case where the original power of Congress is clear, will be unconstitu tional and void. In the famous case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania, after an elaborate discussion at the bar, all State legislation on the subject of fugitive slaves was declared to be unconstitutional and void, while Congress was recognized as the sole depository of power on this subject. According to my recollection, it was expressly held, that the legislation by Congress excluded all State legislation on the same subject, whether to control, qualify or superadd to the remedy enacted by Congress. I commend gentlemen, who are now so swift to introduce these provisions into our Constitution, to the study of this precedent. It is comparatively recent ; and the principle of interpreta tion which it establishes is applicable to State laws on the militia, even though entirely inapplicable to State 194 POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. laws on fugitive slaves ; for the simple reason that in the former case the original power of Congress is clear, while in the latter it is denied. But the States are not without power over the militia. In the very grant to Congress is a reser vation to them as follows : " reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia, according to the dis cipline prescribed by Congress." And here is precisely what the States can do. They may appoint the officers and train the militia. Now, sir, the first two resolutions before us transcend the powers of the State. They touch the enrolment and organization of the militia, and on this account are an assumption of power, forbidden by the principle to which I have referred. The other thirteen resolutions, with the exception of the seventh, are in the nature of a military code, concerning the choice of officers, all of which should be left to the action of the Legis lature. In conformity with these views, Mr. Chairman, and in the hope of presenting a proposition on which the Convention may unite, I propose to strike out all after the preamble and insert two resolutions, as follows : Art. 1. The Governor shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the State, and the Militia thereof, excepting when these forces shall be actually in the service of the United States ; and shall have power to call out the same to aid in the execution of the laws, to suppress insurrection, and to repel invasion. Art. 2. The appointment of officers and the training of the Militia shall be regulated in such manner as may hereafter be deemed expedient by the Legislature, and all persons, who from scruples of conscience, shall be averse to bearing arms shall be POWEKS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. 195 excused on such conditions as shall hereafter be prescribed by law. The first of these resolutions is identical with the seventh resolution of the Committee. The second pro vides for the exercise, by the Legislature, of the powers expressly reserved to the States, over the appointment of officers and the training of the militia; and taking advantage of the Act of Congress, which allows the States to determine who shall be exempted from mili tary duty, it plants in the text of the Constitution a clause by which this immunity is secured to all persons, who, from scruples of conscience, shall be averse to bearing arms. I believe we cannot go far beyond these without doing too much, while these seem to me to be enough. I send the resolutions to the Chair, and leave the Convention to dispose of them as they think proper. + On the next day, 22d June, the following resolution waa brought forward by Mr. Wilson : Resolved, That no distinction shall ever be made in the organ ization of the volunteer militia of the Commonwealth on account of color or race. On this proposition Mr. Sumner spoke as follows : I have a suggestion to make to my friend opposite [Mr. Wilson], in regard to the form of his proposition, which, if he will accept it, will, as it seems to me, ab solutely remove his proposition from the criticism of my most eloquent friend before me [Mr. Choate], and from the criticism of other gentlemen who have addressed the Convention. I suggest to him to strike out the word " militia," and substitute therefor the 196 POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. words, "military companies," so that his proposition will read " that in the organization of the volunteer military companies of the Commonwealth there shall be no distinction of color or race." Mr. WILSON. I accept the suggestion, and will amend my proposition accordingly. Mr. SUMMER. Now that proposition, as amended, I submit, is absolutely consistent with the Constitution of the United States, and, I believe, in conformity with the public sentiment of Massachusetts. A brief inquiry will show that it is consistent with the Constitution of the United States, and in no respect interferes with the organization of the National Militia. That Constitution provides for organizing, arming and disciplining a militia, and gives Congress full power over the subject in which particular, be it observed, it is clearly distinguishable from that of fugitive slaves, over whom no such power is given. To be more ex plicit, I will read the clause. It is found in the long list of enumerated powers of Congress, and is as fol lows : " Congress shall have power to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and of governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia, according to the dis cipline prescribed by Congress." And then at the close of the section it is further declared " that Congress shall make all laws which shall le necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers." In pursuance of this power, Congress have proceeded by various laws, " to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. 197 part of them as may be engaged in the service of the United States." The earliest of these laws, which is still in force, is entitled, " An act more effectually to provide for the national defence, hy establishing an uniform militia throughout the United States." [Act of May 8th, 1792, ch. 33.] This has been followed by several acts in addition thereto. Congress, then, have undertaken to exercise the power of " organizing " the militia under the Constitution. And here the question arises, to what extent, if any, this power, when already exercised by Congress, is ex clusive in its character. Among -the powers delegated to Congress, there may be some which are not for the time being exercised. For instance, there is the power "to fix the standard of weights and measures." Prac tically this has never been exercised by Congress ; but it has been left to each State within its own jurisdic tion. On the other hand, there is a power belonging to the same group, " to establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States," which, when exercised by Congress, has been held so far exclusive, as to avoid at once all the bankrupt and insolvent laws of the several States. Sir, I might go over all the powers of Congress, and find constant illustration of the subject. For instance, there is the power " to establish an uniform rule of naturalization," on which Chief Justice Marshall once remarked : " That the power of naturalization is exclusively in Congress, does not seem to be, and cer tainly ought not to be controverted." There is the power " to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States," which was early declared by the Supreme Court, to be exclusive, so as to prevent 17* 198 POWEBS OF A STATE OVEll THE MILITIA. the exercise of any part of it by the States. There is the power over patents and copyrights, which has also been regarded as exclusive. So, also, is the power " to define and punish piracies and felonies, committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations." So, also, is still another power, viz : " to establish post-offices and post-roads. All of these powers, as in the case of the power over the National Militia, have been exercised by Congress, and even if not absolutely exclusive in their original character, have become so by the exercise. Now, sir, upon what ground do gentleman make any discrimination in the case of the power over the National Militia ? I know of no ground which seems to be tenable. It is natural that the States should desire to exercise this power, since it was so important to them before the Union ; but I do not see how any discrimination can be maintained at the present time. Whatever may have been the original importance of the militia to each State, yet when the Constitution of the United States was formed, and Congress exercised the power delegated to it over this subject, the militia of the several States was absorbed into one uniform body, organized, armed and disciplined as the National Militia. To the States respectively was left, according to the express language of the Constitution, " the appointment of the officers and the authority of train ing the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by Congress." To this we may add the implied power of " governing " them when in the service of the State. This is all. The distinct specification of certain powers, as reserved to the States, seems to exclude them from the exercise of all others, which are not specified o* POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. 199 clearly implied. In other words, they are excluded from, all power over the " organizing, arming, and dis ciplining the militia," at least after Congress have undertaken to enact laws for this purpose. The history of the adoption of the several parts of this clause in the Federal Convention reflects light upon its true meaning. The first part, in regard to organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, was passed by a vote of nine States against two ; the next, referring the appointment of officers to the States, after an ineffectual attempt to amend it by confining the appointment to officers under the rank of general offi cers, was passed without a division ; and the last, re serving to the States the authority to train the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by Congress, was passed by a vote of seven States against four. It seems, then, that there was a strong opposition in the Convention, even to the express reservation to the States of " the authority of training the militia." But this power is not reserved unqualifiedly. The States are to train the militia " according to the discipline prescribed by Congress ; " not according to any dis cipline determined by the States, or by the States con currently with the General Government ; but abso lutely according to the discipline prescribed ~by Congress ; nor more, nor less ; thus distinctly recog nizing the exclusive character of the legislation of Congress on this subject. This interpretation derives confirmation from the manner in which the militia of England was constituted or organized at the time of the adoption of the Federal Constitution. To the crown was given the " sole right to govern and command them," though they ^^j&:iS- 200 POWEllS OJb A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. were " officered " by the Lord Lieutenant of the county , the Deputy Lieutenant, and other principal landholders of the county. The commentaries of Sir William Blackstone, from which this description is drawn, were familiar to the members of the Conven tion ; and it is reasonable to suppose that in the dis tribution of powers between the General Government and the States, on this subject, the peculiar arrange ment which prevailed in the mother country was not disregarded. If it should be said that the adoption of this con clusion would affect the character of many laws en acted by States, and thus far recognized as ancillary to the National Militia, it may be replied, that the possi bility of these consequences cannot justly influence our conclusions on a question which must be deter mined by acknowledged principles of constitutional law. In obedience to these same principles, the Supreme Court, in the case of -Prigg v. Pennsylvania? after asserting a power over fugitive slaves, which I cannot admit, has proceeded to annul a large num ber of statutes in different States. Mr. Justice Wayne in this case said : " That the legislation by Congress upon the provision, as the supreme law of the land, excludes all State legislation upon the same subject ; and that no State can pass any law or regulation, or interpose such as may have been a law or regulation when the Constitution of the United States has ratified to superadd to, control, qualify, or impede a remedy enacted by Congress for the delivery of fugitive slaves to the parties to whom their service or labor is due." Without the sanction of any express words in the Constitution, and chiefly, if not solely, im- POWERS OF A STATE OVER THE MILITIA. 201 pressed by the importance of consulting " unity of ptir- pose or uniformity of operation" in the legislation with regard to fugitive slaves, the Court has assumed a power over this subject, and then, as a natural incident to this assumption, it has excluded the States from all sovereignty in the premises. Now, if this rule be applicable to the pretended power over fugitive slaves, it is more applicable to the power over the militia which nobody questions. Besides, I know of no power which so absolutely re quires what has been regarded as an important crite rion, " unity of purpose or uniformity of operation," as that over the militia. No uniform military organi zation can spring from opposite or inharmonious sys tems, and all systems proceeding from different sources are liable to be opposite or inharmonious. Now, sir, let us apply this reasoning to the matter in hand, that we may arrive at a just conclusion. In Massachusetts, there exists, and has for a long time existed, an anomalous system, familiarly and loosely described as the Volunteer Militia, not com posed absolutely of those enrolled under the laws of the United States, but a smaller, more select and peculiar body. Now it cannot be doubted that the State, by virtue of its police powers within its own borders, has power to constitute or organize a body of volunteers, to aid in enforcing its laws. But it does not follow that it has power to constitute or organize a body of volunteers, who shall be regarded as a part of the National Militia. And, sir, I make bold to say that the volunteer militia I prefer to call it the volunteer military companies cannot be regarded as a part of the National Militia. It is no part of that 202 POWERS OF A STATE OVEIl THE MILITIA. uniform militia which it was the object of the early Act of Congress to organize. It may appear to be a part of this system it may affect to be, but I submit, it is a mistake to suppose that it is so in any just con stitutional sense. As a local system, disconnected from the national militia, and not in any way constrained by its organiza tion, it is within our jurisdiction. We are free to declare the principles which shall govern it. We may declare that, whatever may be the existing law of the United States with regard to its enrolled militia and with this I propose no interference, because it would be futile I say, Massachusetts may proudly declare that in her own volunteer military companies, mar shalled under her own local laws, there shall be no distinction of color or race. THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM AND ITS PROPER BASIS. SPEECH ON THE PROPOSITION TO AMEND THE BASIS OP THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OP MASSACHUSETTS, IN THE CONVENTION TO REVISE AND AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THAT STATE, 7TH JULY, 1853. Mr. President, if the question under consideration were less important in its bearings, or less embar rassed by conflicting opinions, I should hesitate to break the silence which I have been inclined to preserve in this Convention. In taking the seat to which, while absent from the Commonwealth, in another sphere of duty, I have been unexpectedly chosen, I felt that it would be becoming in me and that my associates here would recognize the propriety of my course considering the little op portunities I had of late enjoyed to make myself acquainted with the sentiments of the people on pro posed changes, especially in comparison with friends to whom this movement is mainly due on these accounts, and, also, on other accounts, I felt that it would be becoming in me to interfere as little as pos sible with these debates. To others, I have willingly left tho part which I might have taken. And now, when I think that since our labors began, weeks, even months, have passed, and that the term has been already reached, when, according to the just [203] 204 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM expectations and earnest desires of many, they should be closed, I feel that acts rather than words that votes rather than speeches at least such as I might hope to make are needed here, to the end that the Convention, seasonably, and effectively completing its beneficent work, may itself be hailed as a Great Act in the history of the Commonwealth. But the magnitude of this question justifies debate : and allow me to add that the State, our common mother, may feel proud of the ability, the eloquence, and the good temper with which it has thus far been conducted. Gentlemen have addressed the Convention in a manner which would grace any assembly, which it has been my fortune to know, at home or abroad. Sir, the character of these proceedings gives us new assurance for the future. The alarmist, who starts at every suggestion of change, and the croaker, who augurs constant evil from the irresistible tendency of events, must confess, that there are men here, to whose intelligence and patriotism, under God, the interests of our beloved Commonwealth may be entrusted. Yes, sir, Massachusetts is safe. Whatever may be the result even of the present important question which soever scheme of representation may be adopted Massachusetts will continue to prosper as in times past. In the course of human history, two States, small in territory, have won enviable renown by their genius and devotion to Freedom, so that their very names awaken echoes ; I refer to Athens and Scotland. But Athens even at Salamis, repelling the Persian host, or afterwards, in the golden days of Pericles and Scotland, throughout her long struggles with England, AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 205 down to the very act of Union at the beginning of the last century were inferior, each of them, in popula tion and in wealth, to Massachusetts at this moment. It belongs to us, according to our capacities, to see that this comparison does not end here. Others may believe that our duty will be best accomplished by standing still. I believe that it can be completely done only by a constant incessant advance in all things in knowledge, in science, in art, and lastly in gov ernment itself, destined to be the bright consumma tion, on earth, of all knowledge, all science, and all art. And now, sir, in framing anew our Constitution, we encounter a difficulty which at its original formation in 1780, perplexed our fathers which perplexed the Convention of 1820 which with its perplexities has haunted successive Legislatures and the whole people down to this day and which now perplexes us. This difficulty occurs in determining the Representative System, and it arises mainly from the corporate claims of towns. From an early period, the towns in the State, both great and small, with slight exceptions, have sent one or more representatives to the Legisla ture. In primitive days, when the towns were few and the whole population was scanty, this arrangement was convenient at least, if not equitable. But now, with the increased number of towns, and the unequal distribution of a large population, it has become in convenient, if not inequitable. The existing system does not work well, and we are summoned to reform it. And here, sir, let me congratulate the Convention that, on this most important question, transcending 18 206 THE REPJRESEJSTTATIVE SYSTEM every other, all of us, without distinction of party, are in favor of reform. We are all Reformers. The ex isting system finds no advocate on this floor. Nobody here will do it reverence. If the call of the Conven tion were not already amply vindicated if there were doubt anywhere of its expediency, the remarkable con currence of all sides in condemning the existing repre sentative system shows that we have not come together without cause. The orders of the day have been filled with the various plans offered to meet the exigency. Most of these aimed to preserve the corporate representation of towns ; some of them, at least one from the vener able gentleman from Taunton [Mr. Morton]], and another from the venerable gentleman from Boston [Mr. Hale], adopted an opposite system, hitherto un tried among us, and proposed to divide the State into districts. And the question has been between these hostile propositions ; and that is the question which I propose to consider, in the light of history and abstract principle, and, also, with reference to present exigen cies. I shall speak first of the origin and nature of the Representative System and its proper conditions under American institutions. And secondly, I shall endeavor to indicate the principles which may conduct us to a practical conclusion on the present occasion. In entering upon this service, at this late stage of the debate, I feel like a tardy gleaner in a well-traversed field ; but I shall proceed. I. And I begin with the origin and nature of the Representative System. This is an invention of modern times. In antiquity there were republics and democracies ; but there was no Representative System. AND ITS PROPEE. BASIS. 207 Rulers were chosen by the people, as in many Com monwealths ; senators were designated by the king or by the censors, as in Rome ; ambassadors or legates were sent to a Federal Council, as to the Assembly of the Amphictyons ; but, in no ancient State, was any body of men ever constituted by the people to repre sent them in the administration of their internal affairs. In Athens, the people met in public assembly, and directly acted for themselves in all questions, foreign or domestic. This was possible there, as the State was small, and the Assembly at no time exceeded five thousand citizens, a large town-meeting, or mass- meeting, we might call it, not inaptly termed the "fierce democracie " of Athens. But where the territory was extensive, and the pop ulation scattered and numerous, there could be no Assembly of the whole body of citizens. To meet this precise difficulty, the Representative System was devised. By a machinery, so obvious that we are astonished it was not employed in the ancient Com monwealths, the people, though scattered and numer ous, are gathered, by their chosen representatives, into a small and deliberative assembly, where, without tumult or rasltness, they may consider and determine all ques tions which concern them. In every representative body, properly constituted, the people are practically present. Nothing is invented and perfected at the same time ; and this system has been no exception to the rule. In England, where it reached its earliest vigor, it has been, and still is, anomalous in its character. The existing divisions of the country, composed of boroughs, cities, and counties, were summoned by the king s 208 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM writ to send representatives, with little regard to equality of any kind, whether of population, of taxa tion, or of territory. Their existence as corporate units was the prevailing title. The irregular opera tion of the system, increasing with the lapse of time, provoked a cry for Parliamentary Reform, which, after a struggle of more than fifty years, ending in a debate which occupied the House of Commons more than fifty days, was finally carried ; but, though many abuses and inequalities were removed, yet, the anomalous representation by counties, cities and boroughs, was still continued. And this, sir, is the English system. Pass now, sir, to the American system. I say American system, for to our country belongs the honor of first giving to the world the idea of a system, which, discarding corporate representation, founded itself absolutely on equality. Let us acknowledge with gratitude, that from England have come five great and ever memorable institutions, by which Liberty is se cured I mean the Trial by Jury, the writ of Habeas Corpus, the Representative System, the Rules and Orders of Debate ; and, lastly, that benign principle which pronounces that its air is too pure for a slave to breathe perhaps the five most important political establishments of modern times. This glory cannot be taken from the mother country. But America has added to the Representative System another prin ciple, without which it is incomplete, and which, in the course of events, is destined, I cannot doubt, to find acceptance wherever the Representative System is employed. I mean the principle of equality. Here in Massachusetts, home of the ideas out of which sprung the Revolution, this principle had its AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 209 earliest expression. And it is not a little curious that this very expression was suggested by the two evils of which we now complain namely, a practical ine quality of representation and a too numerous House. Let me furnish some details of its history. In the earliest days of the Colony, while the numbei of freemen was small and gathered in one neighbor hood, there was no occasion for any representative body. All could then meet as at ancient Athens, in public assembly ; and in fact, they did so meet, and in this way discharged the duties of legislation. But as the freemen became scattered and numerous, it was found grievous to compel the personal attendance of the whole body, and, as a substitute therefor, the towns were directed, in 1634, to assemble in General Court, by deputies. Here was the establishment of the Representative System in Massachusetts, which has continued, without interruption, down to our day. The size of the House and the relative representation of towns have varied at different times ; but the great principle of representation by which a substitute is provided for the whole body of the people has been constantly preserved. Still a feeling has long pre vailed, that the system had not yet received its final form, while, in more than vision, has been discerned that principle of equality which is essential to its com pleteness. Among the acts of the first General Court of the Revolution, was one passed in the summer of 1775, after the battle of Bunker Hill, " declaratory of the rights of the towns and districts to elect and depute a representative or representatives to serve for and repre sent them in the General Court." By this act, all pre- 18* 210 THE KEP11ESENTATIVE SYSTEM vious acts taking from towns and districts the right of sending a representative to the General Court were repealed, and every town containing thirty qualified voters, was authorized to send a representative. The immediate consequence was the two evils to which I have already referred namely, inequality of repre sentation, and a too numerous House ; but tne whole number of representatives which aroused the com plaints of that day, was two hundred and sixty. These grievances were the occasion of a Convention of delegates from the towns of Essex County, at Ipswich, April 25th, 1776, where a memorial to the Legislature was adopted, which was afterwards presented and enforced at the bar of the House by John Lowell. In this remarkable document occurs the first development, if not the first proclamation of the principle of equality in representation. Here, sir, is the fountain and origin of an idea, full of strength, beauty and glory. Listen to the words of these Revolutionary fathers : " If the representation is equal, it is perfect ; as far as it devi ates from this equality, so far it is imperfect, and approaches to the state of slavery ; and the want of a just weight in represen tation is an evil nearly akin to being totally destitute of it. An inequality of representation has been justly esteemed the cause, which has, in a great degree, sapped the foundation of the once admired, but now tottering fabric of the British empire ; and we fear that if a different mode of representation from the present is not adopted in this colony, our Constitution will not continue to the late period of time which the glowing heart of every true American now anticipates. . . . " We cannot realize that your honors, our wise political fathers, have adverted to the present inequality of representation in this colony, to the growth of the evil, or to the fatal consequences which will probably ensue from the continuance of it. " Each town and district in the colony is, by some late regu- AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 211 lations, permitted to send one representative to the General Court, if such town or district consists of thirty freeholders and other inhabitants qualified to elect ; if of one hundred and twenty, to send two. No town is permitted to send more than two except the town of Boston, which may send four. There are some towns and districts in the colony, in which there are between thirty and forty freeholders and other inhabitants qualified to elect only ; there are others beside Boston, in which there are more than five hundred. The first of these may send one repre sentative, the latter can send only two. If these towns as to property are to each other in the same respective proportion, is it not clear to a mathematical demonstration that the same number of inhabitants of equal property in the one town, have but an eighth part of the weight in representation with the other ; and with what colorable pretext we would decently inquire." Under the pressure of this powerful state paper the obnoxious law was repealed ; but the evil was not remedied. Then followed the unsuccessful effort to make a Constitution in 1777, which failed partly through dissatisfaction with its disposition of this very question. The county of Essex was again heard in another document, now known as the " Essex Result," and, among the most able and instructive in our his tory, from which I take the following important words : " The rights of representation should be so equally and impartially distributed, that the representatives should have the same views and interests with the people at large. They should think, feel, and act like them, and, in fine, should be an exact miniature of their constituents. They should be, if we may use " the expression, the whole body politic, with all its property, rights and privileges, reduced to a similar scale, every part being diminished in just proportion. To pursue the metaphor, if, in adjusting the represen tation of freemen, any ten are reduced into one, all the 212 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM other tens should be alike reduced ; or, if any hundred should be reduced to one, all the other hundreds should have just the same reduction" Mark well these words. Here is the Rule of Three, for the first time in history, applied to representation. This, Sir, is not the Eng lish system. I call it, with pride, the American system. In another place the document proceeds as follows : " The rights of representation should also be held sacred and inviolable, and for this purpose, representation should be fixed upon known and easy principles ; and the Constitution should make provision that recourse should constantly be had to those principles within a very small period of years, to rectify the errors that will creep in through lapse of time or alteration of situations." It then distinctly proposes a system of districts, in words which I quote : " In forming the first body of legislators, let regard be had only to the representation of persons, not of property This body we call the House of Representatives. Ascertain the num ber of representatives. It ought not to be so large as will induce an enormous expense to government, nor too unwieldy to delib erate with coolness and attention ; nor so small as to be unac quainted with the situation and circumstances of the State. One hundred will be large enough, and, perhaps, it may be too large. We are persuaded that any number of men exceeding that, cannot do business with such expedition and propriety as a smaller number could. However, let that at present be con sidered as the number. Let us have the number of freemen in the several counties in the State ; and let these representatives be apportioned among the respective counties, in proportion to their number of freemen. "As we have the number of freemen in the county, and the number of county representatives, by dividing the greater by the less we have the number of freemen entitled to send one represen- AND ITS PROPER BASIS 213 tative. Then add as many adjoining towns together as contain that number of freemen, or as near as may be, and let those towns form one district, and proceed in this manner through the country." Mr. HALLETT, for Wilbraham (interrupting). Will the gentleman state who was the author of that Essex paper. Mr. SUMMER. Theophilus Parsons is the reputed author of the document known as the " Essex Result." Mr. HALLETT. Yes, Sir, it was Theophilus Parsons who was the author of that, and John Lowell of the other, and good old Tory doctrines they are. Mr. SUMMER. If these be Tory doctrines, I must think well of Toryism. Mr. BIRD, of Walpole. The gentleman for Marsh- field speaks of the basis of representation in one House. I should like to know what was the basis proposed at that time for the other branch ? Mr. SUMNER. Property, I believe. But, Sir, I put these inquiries aside. I do not concern myself with the authorship of these doctrines, or with the character of other doctrines with which they were associated in the minds of their authors. All this is irrelevant and unimportant. I refer to them in the history of the question and hasten on. Sir, notwithstanding these appeals, sustained by unsurpassed ability, the American system failed to be adopted in the Constitution of 1 780. The anomalous English system was still continued ; but, as if to cover the departure from principle, it was twice declared that the representation of the people should be "founded on the principle of equality." This declaration still continues as our guide, while the irregular operation 214 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM of the existing system, with its inequalities and large numbers, is a beacon of warning. Following closely upon these efforts in Massachu setts, this principle found an illustrious advocate in Thomas Jefferson. In his Notes on Virginia, written in 1780, he sharply exposes the inequalities of repre sentation, and, a short time afterwards, when the vic tory at Yorktown had rescued Virginia from invasion and secured the independence of the United Colonies, he prepared a draught of a Constitution for his native State, which, disowning the English System and recog nizing the very principle that had failed in Massa chusetts, expressly provided that, " the number of delegates which each county may send shall be in pro portion to the number of its qualified electors ; and the whole number of delegates for the State shall be so proportioned to the whole number of qualified electors in it, that they shall never exceed three hundred, nor be fewer than one hundred ; and if any county be reduced in its qualified electors below the number authorized to send one delegate, let it be annexed to some adjoining county." This proposition, which is substantially the Rule of Three, was not adopted in Virginia. This State, like Massachusetts, was not yet prepared for such a charter of electoral equality ; but it still stands as a monument at once of its author and of the true system of representation. The American System, though first showing itself in Massachusetts and in Virginia, found its earliest practical exemplification only a few years later in the Constitution of the United States. By -the Articles of Confederation each State was entitled to send to Congress not less than two, nor more than seven repre- AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 216 sentatives, and in the determination of- questions, each State had one vote only. This plan was rejected by the framers of the new Constitution ; and another, until then untried in the history of the world, was adopted. It was declared that " representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included in this Union, according to their respective numbers ;" not according to property ; not according to territory ; not according to any cor porate rights ; but according to their respective numbers. And this system has continued down to our day, and will continue immortal as the Union itself. Here is the Rule of Three actually incorporated into the Repre sentative System of the United States. An attempt has been made to render this system odious, or at least questionable, by charging upon it something of the excesses of the great French Revolu tion. Even if this rule had prevailed at that time in France, it would be bold to attribute to it any such consequences. But it is a mistake to suppose that it was then adopted in that country. The republican Constitution of 1791 was not founded upon numbers only ; but upon numbers, territory and taxation com bined ; a mixed system, which excluded the true idea of personal equality. But at the peaceful almost bloodless revolution of 1848, under {he lead of Lamartine, a National Assembly was convened on the simple basis of population, and one representative was allowed for every forty thousand inhabitants. Here again is the Rule of Three ; but the idea originally came from our country. Mr. HALLETT. Will the gentleman from Marsh- field allow me to make one more inquiry ? 216 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM Mr. STTMNER. Certainly. Mr. HALLETT. Do I understand the gentleman to say that the Rule of Three was applied to representa tion in the United States ? Mr. SUMMER. I mean to say, that the representa tion in the lower House of Congress was apportioned according to numbers ; and this is the Rule of Three. The gentleman has in mind, perhaps, the anomalous exception with reference to Slavery. Mr. HALLETT. No, sir. I do not refer to that at all. The first apportionment of representation by Congress, was made by applying the divisor of thirty thousand, which was the ratio of representation, to the whole population of the United States. That bill was vetoed by General Washington, upon the ground that the Constitution required that representation should be apportioned among the States according to their respec tive numbers, and that it did not allow of a numerical representation of all the people of the United States. I ask the gentleman if that rule was the Rule of Three ? Mr. SUMMER. The learned gentleman is substan tially right in his statement ; but he will pardon me if I say, that it does not interfere with my proposition. The language of the Constitution is explicit : " repre sentatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers" This is the rule; I call it the Rule of Three. There arc minor details in its operation, arising from Slavery, and from the division into States, on which I do not dwell, as they do not interfere with its paramount principle, and I am admonished to proceed. A practical question here arises, whether this rule AND ITS PBOPER BASIS. 217 should be applied to the whole body of population, in cluding women, children, and unnaturalized foreigners, or whether it should be applied to those only who ex ercise the electoral franchise ; in other words, to voters. It is probable that the rule would generally produce nearly similar results, in both cases ; as the voters, except in a few places, would bear a uniform propor tion to the whole population. But it will be easy to determine what the principle of the Representative System requires. Since the object of the system is to provide a practical substitute for the meetings of the people, it should be founded in just proportion on the numbers of those who, according to our Constitu tion, can take part in those meetings ; that is, upon the qualified voters. The representative body should be a minature or abridgment of the electoral body ; in other words, of those allowed to participate in public affairs. If this conclusion needs authority, it may be found in the words of Mr. Madison, in the Debates on the Federal Constitution. " It has been very properly observed," he says, " that representation was an ex pedient by which the meeting of the people themselves was rendered unnecessary, and that representatives ought, therefore, to bear a proportion to the votes which their constituents, if convened, would respectively have." [Madison s Debates, vol. ii. p. 1103.] The Rule of Three, then, applied to voters, seems to me sound ; but whether applied to voters or pop ulation, it is the true rule of representation, and stands on adamantine principles. In my view, it commends itself so obviously, so instinctively, to the natural rea son, that I do not feel disposed to dwell upon it. But since it has been called in question, I shall be excused 19 218 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM for saying a few words in its behalf. Its advantages present themselves in several aspects. First. And I put in the front its constant and equal operation throughout the Commonwealth. Under it, every man will have a representative each year ; and every man will have the same representative power as every other man. In this respect, it carries out a darling idea of our institutions, which cannot be dis owned without weakening their foundations. It gives to the great principle of human equality a new expan sion and application. It makes all men, in the enjoy ment of the electoral franchise, whatever be their diversities of intelligence, of education, or of wealth, or wheresoever they may be within the borders of the Commonwealth, in small town or in populous city, absolutely equal at the ballot-box. I know that there are persons, sir, who do not hesi tate to assail the whole doctrine of the equality of men, as enunciated in our Declaration of Independence, and in our Bill of Rights. In this work two eminent statesmen, of our own country, and of England, have led the way. But it seems to me, that if they had chosen to comprehend the meaning of the principle, much, if not all of their objection would have been removed. It is a palpable truth, that men are not born equal in physical strength or in mental capacities ; in beauty of form or health of body. These mortal cloaks of flesh differ, as do these worldly garments. Diver sity or inequality in these respects, is the law of crea tion. But as God is no respecter of persons, and as all are equal in his sight, whether rich or poor, whether dwellers in cities or in fields, so are all equal in natural rights ; and it is a childish sophism of which no AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 219 gentleman in this Convention is guilty to adduce in argument against them the physical or mental inequal ities by which men are characterized. Now, I do not pretend to class the electoral franchise among those inherent, natural rights, which are common to the human family, without distinction of age, sex or resi dence ; but I do say, that from the equality of men, which we so proudly proclaim, we may derive a just rule for its exercise. For myself, I accept this prin ciple, and just so far and just so soon as possible, I would be guided by it in the system of Representation. But there are other reasons still. Secondly. The rule of Three, as applied to repre sentation, is commended by its simplicity. It super sedes all the painful calculations to which we have been driven, the long agony of mathematics as it was called by my friend over the way [Mr. Giles], and is as easy in its application as it seems to me to be just. Thirdly. This rule is founded in nature, and not in art ; on natural bodies, and not on artificial bodies ; on men, and not on corporations ; on souls, and not on petty geographical lines. On this account it may be called a natural rule, and when once established, will become fixed and permanent, beyond all change or desire of change. And, fourthly, this rule removes, to every possible extent, those opportunities of political partiality and calculation in the adjustment of the representation, which are naturally incident to any departure from precise rule. It was beautifully said of law by the greatest intellect of Antiquity, that it is mind without passion, and this very definition I would extend to a rule which, with little intervention from human will, 220 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM is graduated by numbers, passionless as law itself in the conception of Aristotle. The object of free institutions is, to withdraw all concerns of State, so far as practicable, from human discretion, and place them under the shield of human principles, to the end, according to the words of our Constitution, that there may be a government of laws, and not of men. But, just in proportion as we depart from precise rule, it becomes a government of men, and not of laws. Such considerations as these, thus briefly expressed, seem to vindicate this rule of representation. But let me not forget the arguments adduced against it. These have assumed two distinct forms ; one is founded on the character of our towns and the impor tance of preserving their influence ; the other is founded on the alleged necessity of counteracting the centralization of power in the cities. Now, of these in their order. And, first, of the importance of preserving our towns. Sir, I yield to no man in appreciation of the good done by these free municipalities. The able member for Erving [Mr. Griswold], who began this debate, the eloquent member for Berlin [Mr. Boutwell], and my excellent friend of many years, the accomplished member for Manchester [Mr. Dana], in the masterly speeches which they have addressed to the Convention, have attributed no good influence to the towns which I do not recognize also. "With them I agree, cordially, that the towns in Massachusetts, like the municipalities of Switzerland, have been schools and nurseries of freedom; and that in these small bodies, men were early disciplined in those primal duties of citizenship, which, on a grander scale, have been made the founda- AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 221 tion of our whole political fabric. But, I cannot go so far as to attribute this remarkable influence to the assumed fact, that each town by itself was entitled to a representative in the legislative body. At the time of the Revolution, this was the prerogative of most towns, though not of all ; but it cannot be regarded as the distinctive, essential, life-giving attribute. At most it was only an incident. Sir, the true glory of the towns then was, that they were organized on the principles of self-government, at a time when these principles were not generally re cognized ; that each town by itself was a little republic, where the whole body of freemen were voters, with powers of local legislation, taxation and administra tion, and, especially, with the power to choose their own head and all subordinate magistrates. Sir, the boroughs of England have possessed the power to send a member often two members to Parliament ; but this has not saved them from corruption ; nor has any person attributed to them, though in the enjoy ment of this franchise, the influence which has pro ceeded from our municipalities. And the reason is obvious. They were organized under charters from the crown, by which the local government was vested not in the whole body of freeman but in small councils, or select classes, originally nominated by the crown, and ever afterwards renewing themselves. No such abuse prevailed in our municipalities ; and this political health at home, sir, and not the incident of exclusive representation in a distant Legislature, has been the secret of their strength. This I would ever cherish. And this brings me, in the next place, to the objec- 19* 222 THE BEPRESENTATIYE SYSTEM tion founded on centralization of power in the cities. It is said that wealth, business, population and talent, in its multitudinous forms, all tend to the cities, and that the excessive influence of this concentrated mass, quickened by an active press, by facilities of concert, and by social appliances ought to be counterbalanced by an allotment to the towns of a representative weight beyond their proportion of numbers. Now, sir, while confessing and regretting the present predominance of the cities, I, must be permitted to question the propriety of the r proposed remedy. And here, as I differ in some respects from friends on both sides, I make an appeal for a candid judgment of what I shall candidly say. I would not be unjust to cities. But no student of history can fail to perceive that they have performed different parts at different stages of the world. In antiquity, they were the acknowledged centres of power, often of tyranny. But in the middle ages, they became the home of freedom, and the bridle to feudalism. For this service they should be gratefully remembered. And now there is another change. The armed feudalism is overthrown ; but it is impossible not to see that , it has yielded to a commercial feudal ism, whose seat is in the cities, and which, in its way, is hardly less selfish and exacting than the feudalism of the iron hand. My friend, the member for Man chester [Mr. Dana], was clearly right when he said, that the Boston of to-day is not the Boston of our fathers. But let me be understood. I make no im peachment of individuals ; but simply indicate those combined influences proceeding from the potent Spirit of Trade alas ! how unlike that Spirit of the Lord, where is liberty ! which are not inconsistent with A.ND ITS PROPER BASIS. 223 the most exalted individual worth. I think, while confessing the abounding charities of the rich men, whose eulogy we have heard more than once in this debate, it must be admitted that those pure princi ples which are the breath of the republic, now find their truest atmosphere in calm retreats, away from the strife of gain, and the hot pavements of crowded streets. Sir, it is not only when we look upon the fields, hills and valleys, clad in verdure, and shining with silver lake or rivulet, that we may be ready to exclaim : " God made the country, and man made the town." But, sir, while maintaining these opinions, I cannot admit the argument, that the centralized power of the cities may be counteracted by degrading them in the scale of representation. This cannot be purposely done without departing from fundamental principles, and without overthrowing the presiding doctrine of personal equality. Cities are but congregations of men ; and men exert influence in various ways ; by the accident of position ; by the accident of intelli gence ; by the accident of property ; by the accident of birth; and lastly, by the vote. It is the vote only which is not an accident ; and it should be the boast of Massachusetts, that all men, whatever may be their accidents, are equal in their votes. [Here the hammer of the President fell, as the hour expired ; but by ananimous consent, Mr. Sumner proceeded.] The idea of property as a check upon numbers, which, on a former occasion, found such favor in this hall, is now rejected in the adjustment of our Representative Sys tem. And, sir, I venture to predict that the propo- 224 THE HEPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM sition, newly broached in this Commonwealth, to re strain the cities by a curtailment of their just represen tative power, will hereafter be as little regarded. II. Mr. President, such is what I have to say on the history and principles of the Representative System, particularly in the light of American institutions, and this brings me to the practical question at this moment. I cannot doubt that the District System, as it is gener ally called, whereby the representative power will be distributed in just proportion, according to the Rule of Three, among the voters of the Commonwealth, is the true system, destined at no distant day to prevail. And, gladly, would I see this Convention hasten the day by presenting it to the people for adoption in the organic law. To this end I have striven by my votes. But, sir, I am not blind to what has passed. The votes already taken show that the Convention is not prepared for this change, and I am assured by gentle men more familiar with public sentiment than I can pretend to be, that the people are not yet prepared for it. And thus, sir, we are brought to the position occu pied successively by the Conventions of 1780 and 1820, each of which, though containing warm partisans of the District System, shrank from, its adoption ; as in Virginia, the early recommendation of Jefferson, and his vehement support at a later day, have been power less to produce this important amendment. John Lowell, who appeared at the bar of the Massachusetts Legislature in 1 776, to vindicate the principle of equality in representation, and Theophilus Parsons, the author of the powerful tract which proposed to found the AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 225 Representative System on the Rule of Three, were both members of the first Convention ; and, 1 know not if the District System has since had any abler defenders. To these I might add the great name of John Adams, who had early pleaded for equality of representation, and had declared in words adopted by the Essex Con vention, that the Representative Assembly should be an exact portrait in miniature of the people at large. (Works, Vol. iv., pp. 186, 195, 205.) In the Con vention of 1820, the District System was cherished and openly extolled by a distinguished jurist, at that time a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Joseph Story, whose present fame gives additional importance to his opinions. And yet, the desire of these men failed. The corporate representation of towns was preserved, and the District System pro nounced impracticable. In the address put forth by the Convention of 1780, and signed by its President, James Bowdoin, these words may be found : You will observe that we have resolved that representatives ought to be founded on the principle of equality ; but it cannot be understood thereby, that each town in the Commonwealth shall have weight and importance in a just proportion to its numbers and property. An exact representation would be un- practicable, even in a system of government arising from the state of nature, and much more so in a state already divided into nearly three hundred corporations." The Convention seem to have recognized the theoretic fitness of an " exact representation ; " but did not regard it as feasible in a State already divided into nearly three hundred corporations. In the Convention of 1820, Joseph Story, who has been already quoted by my eloquent friend [Mr. Choate], used language 226 THE liEPItESENTATlYE SYSTEM which, though not so strong as that of the early address, yet has the same result : " In the Select Committee, I was in favor of a plan of repre sentation in the House founded on population, as the most just and equal in its operation. I still retain that opinion. There were serious objections against this system, and it was believed by others that, the towns could not be brought to consent to yield up the corporate privileges of representation which had been en joyed so long, and were so intimately connected with their pride and their interests. I felt constrained, therefore, with great re luctance to yield up a favorite plan. I have lived long enough to know, that in any question of government, something is to be yielded up on all sides. Conciliation and compromise lie at the origin of every free government ; and the question never was, and never can be, what is absolutely best, but what is relatively wise, just and expedient. I have not hesitated, therefore, to support the plan of the Select Committee as one that, on the whole, was the best that, under existing circumstances, could be obtained." Sir, I am not insensible to these considerations, nor to the authority of these examples. A division of the State Jnto districts would be a change, in conformity with abstract principles, which would interfere with the existing opinions, habitudes and prejudices of the towns, all of which must be respected. A change so important in its character, cannot be advantageously made, unless supported by the permanent feelings and convictions of the people. Institutions are formed from within^ and uotfrom without. They spring from custom and popular faith, silently operating with inter nal power, and not from the imposed will of a law giver. And our present duty here, at least on this question, may be, in some measure, satisfied, if we aid this growth. Two great schools of jurisprudence, for a while, AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 227 divided the learned mind of Germany ; one known as the Historic, the other as the Didactic. The question between them was similar to that now before the Convention. The first regarded all laws and institu tions as the growth of custom under the constant in fluences of history ; the other insisted upon giving to them, by positive legislation, a form in conformity with abstract reason. It is clear that both were, in a mea sure, right. No law-giver or statesman can disregard either history or abstract reason. He must contem plate both. He will faithfully study the Past, and will recognize its treasures and traditions ; but, with equal fidelity, he will set his face towards the Future, where all institutions shall, at last, be in harmony with truth. I have been encouraged to believe in the practica bility of the District System, by its conformity with reason, and by seeing how naturally it went into oper ation under the Constitution of the United States. But there is a difference between that case and the present. A new Government was then founded, with new powers, applicable to a broad expanse of country ; but the Constitution of Massachusetts was little more than a continuation of pre-existing usages and institu tions, with all dependence upon royalty removed. This distinction may help us now. If the country were absolutely new, with no embarrassments from existing corporate rights claims I would rather call them it might easily be arranged, according to the most approved theory, as Philadelphia was originally laid out by its great founder, on the model of the German city which he had seen in his youth. But to bring our existing system into symmetry and to lay it out 228 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM anew, would seem to be a task at least I am reluct antly led to this conclusion by what I have heard here not unlike that of rebuilding Boston, and of shaping its compact mass of crooked streets into the regular rectangular forms of the city of Penn. And yet this is not impossible. With each day, by demolishing ancient houses and widening ancient ways, changes are made, which tend to this result. Sir, we must recognize the existing condition of things, remedy all practical grievances, so far as pos sible, and set our faces towards the true system. We must act in the Present; but be mindful also of the Future. There are proper occasions for compromise, as most certainly there are rights which are beyond compromise. But the Representative System is an expedient or device, for ascertaining the popular will, and though well satisfied that this can be best founded on numbers, I would not venture to say, in the present light of political science, that the right of each man to an equal representation, according to the Rule of Three and without regard to existing institutions or controlling usages, is of that inherent and lofty char acter like the God-given right to life or liberty which admits of no compromise. Several grievances exist, which will be removed by the proposed amendments. There is one which I had hoped would disappear, but which is the necessary incident of corporate representation ; I mean the un wieldy size of the House. It is generally said, that a small body is more open to bribery and corruption than a large body ; but, on the other hand, I have heard it asserted, that the larger is more exposed than the smaller. I put this consider- AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 229 ation aside. My objection to a large House is, that it is inconvenient for the dispatch of public business. There is a famous saying of Cardinal de Retz, that every assembly, of more than one hundred, is a mob ; and Lord Chesterfield applied this same term to the British House of Commons. This body, at present, nominally has six hundred and fifty-five members. It is called, by Lord Brougham, "preposterously large," but a quorum for business is forty only ; and it is only on rare occasions of political importance, that its benches are completely occupied. The House of Lords, nominally, has four hundred and forty-seven members ; but a quorum in this body consists of three only ; and much of its business is transacted in a very thin attendance. The experience of Congress, and also of other States, points to a reduction of our present number. Indeed, for many years, this was a general desire through the State. In the earliest colonial days, every town was allowed three deputies ; but in five years the number, on reaching thirty-three, was reduced to two for each. At a later day, in 1694, a great contest in the House" was decided by a vote of twenty-six against twenty- four. In the agitating period between 1762 and 1773, covering the controversies which heralded the Revolu tion, the House contained about one hundred and ten. Only on one occasion, the magnitude of the interest is said by Governor Hutchinson to have drawn together one hundred and thirty. At the last session of the Provincial Legislature, in May, 1774, when the revo lutionary conflict was at hand, the complete returns of the journals show one hundred and forty ; and in 1776, there was a House of two hundred and sixty. 20 230 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM But this "enormous and very unwieldy size," as it was then called, was assigned as a reason for a new Constitution. I regret that we cannot profit by this experience. A House of two hundred and fifty, or, since we are accustomed to large congregations, of three hundred at most, would be an improvement on the present system. But, there are two proposed improvements which I hail with satisfaction ; one relates to the small to wits, and the other to the cities. The small towns will have a more constant representation, and this of itself is an approach to the true principle of representation, which should be constant as well as equal. The cities will be divided into districts, and this I regard of two-fold importance first, as the beginning of a true system ; and secondly, as reducing the power, which the cities, by the large number of their representatives, chosen by the general ticket, now exercise. A respected gentleman, now in my eye, has re minded me that in boyhood, his attention was ar rested in this House by what was called the Boston seat, reserved exclusively for the Boston members, who sat together, on cushions, while other members were left to such accommodations as they could find on bare benches. This discrimination ceased long ago. But it seems to me that this reserved and cushioned seat is typical of another discrimination, which Boston, in common with the cities, still enjoys. Sir, in voting for forty-four representatives, the elector in Boston ex ercises a representative power transcending far that of electors in the country ; and the majority which rules Boston and determines the whole delegation, exercises a representative power transcending far that of any AND ITS PROPER BASIS. 231 similar number in the Commonwealth.. This is appa rent on the bare statement, as forty-four sticks are stronger in one compact bundle, than when apart or in small parcels. Thus, while other counties are divided, the delegation from Boston is united. In all political contests, it is like the well-knit Macedonian phalanx, or the iron front of the Roman legion, in comparison with the disconnected, individual warriors, against whom they were matched. But this abuse is to be removed ; and here is the beginning I had almost said the inauguration of a true electoral equality in our Commonwealth. And now, in conclusion, while thanking gentlemen for the kind attention with which they have honored me, let me express briefly the result to which I have come. I have openly declared my convictions with regard to the District System, and in accordance with these, have recorded my votes in this Convention. These votes, which reveal my inmost desires on this matter, I would not change. But the question is not now between the District System, which I covet so much for Massachusetts, and the proposed amend ments ; but between these amendments and the exist ing system. On this issue I decide without hesitation. I shall vote, sir, for the propositions of amendment now before the Convention, should they come to a question on their final passage ; not because they are all that I desire ; not because they seem to satisfy the requirements of principles which I cannot deny ; not because they constitute a permanent adjustment of this difficult question ; but because, they are the best which I can now obtain ; because they reform grievances of the existing system ; and, because, 232 THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM ETC. they begin a change, which can end only in the es tablishment of a Representative System, founded in reality, as in name, on equality. Their adoption will be a triumph of conciliation and harmony, and will furnish new testimony to the well-tempered spirit of our institutions, " Where jarring interests, reconciled, create \ The according music of a well mixed State." BILLS OF RIGHTS ; THEIR HISTORY AND POLICY. SPEECH ON THE REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE ON THE BILL OF RIGHTS, IN THE CONVENTION TO REVISE AND AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF MASSACHUSETTS, 25TH JULY, 1853. As Chairman of the Committee on the Bill of Eights, Mr. Sumner submitted a Report, on which, in Committee of the Whole, he spoke as follows : Mn. CHAIRMAN : As chairman of the Committee on the Preamble and Bill of Rights, it belongs to me to introduce and explain their Report. It will be per ceived that it is brief and proposes no important changes. But in justice to the distinguished gentle men with whom I had the honor of being associated on that Committee, I deem it my duty to suggest that the extent of their labors should not be judged by this result. It appears from the proceedings of the Con vention of 1820, that the Committee on the Bill of Rights at that time sat longer than any other Commit tee. I believe that the same Committee in the present Convention might claim the same pre-eminence. Their records show twenty different sessions. At these sessions, the Preamble and the Bill of Rights, in its thirty different propositions, were passed in review and considered, clause by clause ; the various [233] 234 BILLS OF EIGHTS ; orders of the Convention, amounting to twelve in num ber; the petitions addressed to the Convention and referred to the Committee ; and also informal proposi tions from members of the Convention and others, were considered ; some of them repeatedly and at length. On many questions there was a decided dif ference of opinion and on a few the Committee was nearly equally divided. But after the best consid eration we could bestow upon them in our protracted series of meetings, it was found that the few simple propositions, now on your table, were all upon which a majority of the Committee could be brought to unite. As such I was directed to present them to the Conven tion. And here, sir, admonished by the lapse of time and the desire to close these proceedings, I might be content with this simple statement. But, notwithstanding the urgency of our business, I cannot allow the opportunity to pass indeed I should not do my duty without attempting for a brief mo ment to show the origin and character of this part of our Constitution. In this way we may learn its weight and authority and appreciate the difficulty and delicacy of any change in its substance or even its form. I will try not to abuse your patience. The Preamble and Bill of Rights, like the rest of our Constitution, were from the pen of John Adams ; among whose published works the whole document, in its original draught, may be found. At the time when he rendered this important service to his native Com monwealth and to the principles of free institutions everywhere, he was forty-five years of age. But he was not unprepared. The natural maturity of his powers had been enriched by the well-ripened fruit of THEIR HISTOBY AND POLICY. 235 assiduous study and of an active life, both of which concurred in him. The examples of Greece and Rome and the writings of Sidney and Locke were especially familiar to his mind. The common law he had made his own, and mastered well its whole arsenal of Free dom. For a long time the vigorous and unfailing partisan of the liberal cause in Boston, throughout its many conflicts ; then in Congress, whither he was transferred, the irresistible champion of Independence ; and then the republican representative of the united but still struggling Colonies at the Court of France ; in the brief interval between his two foreign missions, only seven days after landing from his long ocean voyage, he was chosen a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, and at once brought all his varied ex perience, rare political culture and eminent powers to the task of adjusting the frame- work of government for Massachusetts. As his work, it all claims our regard ; and no part bears the imprint of his mind so much as the Preamble and Bill of Rights ; nor is any other part authenticated as coming so exclusively from him. At the time of its first adoption, the Massachusetts Bill of Rights was more ample in its provisions, and more complete in form, than any similar Declaration in English or Colonial history. Glancing at its predeces sors, we shall learn something of its sources. First came, long back in the thirteenth century, Magna Charta, with its generous safeguards of Freedom, wrung from King John by the Barons at Runnymede. From time to time these liberties were confirmed, and, after an interval of centuries, they were again ratified, at the beginning of the unhappy reign of Charles I. by a 236 BILLS OF RIGHTS ; Parliamentary Declaration, to which the monarch as sented, known as the Petition of Right, which, in its very title, reveals the humility with which the rights of the people were then maintained. And, finally, in a different tone and language, at the revolution of 1688, when James II. was driven from his dominions, a " Declaration of the true, ancient and indubitable rights and liberties of the people of the kingdom," familiarly known as the Bill of Rights, was delivered by the Convention Parliament to the new sovereigns, William and Mary, and embodied in the Act of Settle ment, by virtue of which they sat on the throne. These, sir, are the English examples. Their influence was not restrained to England. It crossed the ocean. From the beginning the colonists were tenacious of the rights and liberties of English men, and, at various times and in various forms, de clared them. Connecticut, as early as 1639 ; Virginia in 1624 and 1676 ; Pennsylvania in 1682 ; New York in 1691; and I might mention others still put forth Declarations, brief and meagre, but kindred to those of the mother country. In the colony of New Plymouth, the essential principles of Magna Charta were proclaimed in 1636, under the name of the General Fundamentals ; and in 1672, the inhabitants of Massa chusetts Bay announced in words, worthy of careful study, that " the free fruition of such Liberties, Immu nities, Privileges, as Humanity, Civility, and Chris tianity call for, as due to every man in his place and proportion, without impeachment and infringement, hath ever been and ever will be, the tranquillity and stability of churches and Commonwealth, and the THEIR HISTORY AND POLICY. 237 denial or deprival thereof, the disturbance, if not the ruin, of both." In the animated discussions, which immediately preceded the revolution, the rights and liberties of Englishmen were constantly asserted as the birth-right of the colonists. This was often done byjformal reso lutions or declarations, couched at first in moderate phrase. At the outrage of the Stamp Act, a Congress of delegates from nine States, held at New York in October, 1765, put forth a series of resolution entitled, " Declaration of our humble opinion respecting the most essential rights and liberties of the colonists." The humility of this language may recall the English Peti tion of Right under Charles I. This was followed in 1774 by the Declaration of the Continental Congress, which, in another tone and with admirable force, arrays in ten different propositions, the rights which " by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of English liberty and the several charters of compacts" belong to " the inhabitants of the English colonies in North America," " Time s noblest offspring is the last ; " and the whole colonial series was aptly closed by the Declaration of Independence, which declared not merely the rights of Englishmen, but the rights of men. But only a few brief weeks before the Declaration of Independence, Virginia, taking the lead of her sister colonies, had established a Constitution to which was prefixed an elaborate Bill of Rights. This remarkable document, which has been the grand precedent for the whole country, marks an epoch in political history. 238 BILLS OF EIGHTS ; In all English Declarations of Rights and even in those of the Colonies, unless we except the early declaration of the inhabitants of Massachusetts Bay, stress had been laid upon the liberties and privileges of English men. The rights claimed even by the Continental Congress of 1774, in their masculine Declaration, were the rights of "free and natural-born subjects within the realm of England." But the Virginia Bill of Righte, standing at the front of its first Constitution, discarded all narrow title from mere English precedent, planted itself on the eternal law of God, above every human ordinance, and openly proclaimed that " all men are equally free and independent ; " a declaration, which is repeated, though in other language, by the Massachusetts Bill of Rights. The policy of Bills of Rights has been sometimes called in question. It has been said that they were originally privileges or concessions extorted from the King, and, though expedient in a monarchy, are of little value in a Republic. As late as 1821, in the Convention for revising the Constitution of New York, doubts of their utility were openly expressed by Mr. Van Buren. But they are now above question. Each new State, ending with California, follows the example of Virginia and Massachusetts, and places its Bill of Rights in the front of its Constitution. Nor can I doubt that much good is done by this frank assertion of fundamental principles. The public mind is in structed ; people learn to know their rights ; liberal institutions are confirmed ; and the Constitution is made stable in the hearts of the community. The provisions in the Bill of Rights are lessons of political wisdom and anchors of liberty. They are also the THEIR HISTORY AND POLICY. 239 constant index and scourge of injustice and wrong. In Massachusetts, Slavery itself disappeared before the declaration that " all men are born free and equal," interpreted by a liberty-loving Court. In the Convention of 1780, the Bill of Rights formed a prominent subject of interest. The necessity of such a safeguard had been pressed upon the people, and its absence from the Constitution of 1777, was unquestion ably a reason for the rejection of that ill-fated effort. Indeed this Constitution was openly opposed because it had no Bill of Rights. In the array of objections to it, at the period, was the following, which I take from an important contemporaneous publication. " That a Bill of Rights, clearly ascertaining and denning the rights of conscience and that security of person and property, which every member of the State hath a right to expect from the supreme power thereof, ought to be settled and established previous to the ratification of any Constitution for the State." Accordingly, at the earliest moment after the organization of the Conven tion, a motion was made " that there be a Declaration of Rights prepared previous to the framing of the Constitution of Government;" and this motion, after " a general and extensive debate," prevailed by a nearly unanimous vote. The whole number present, as returned by the monitors, was two hundred and fifty-one, of whom two hundred and fifty were in the affirmative. By this triumphant vote did the early fathers of Massachusetts manifest their watchfulness for the rights of the people ; and there is good reason to believe also, that among the motives which stimu lated it, was a determination in this way to abolish Slavery. The Convention then resolved " to proceed 240 BILL OF EIGHTS ; to the framing a new Constitution of Government." A grand Committee of thirty was chosen to perform these two important duties ; and this Committee, after extended discussion, entrusted to John Adams alone the preparation of a Declaration of Rights, and to a Sub-Committee, consisting of James Bowdoin, Samuel Adams and John Adams, the duty of preparing the Form of a Constitution, which Sub-Committee again delegated the task to John Adams ; so that to the pen of this illustrious citizen, we are indebted primarily both for the Declaration of Rights and the Form of the Constitution. It is not difficult to trace most, if not all, of the ideas and provisions of our Preamble and Declaration of Rights, to their primitive sources. The Preamble, wherein the body politic is founded on the fiction of the social compact, was doubtless inspired by the writings of Sidney and Locke, and by the English discussions at the period of the Revolution of 1688, when this questionable theory did good service in response to the assumptions of Filmer, and as a shield against arbitrary power. Of the different pro visions in the Bill of Rights, some are in the very words of Magna Charta ; others are derived from the ancient common law, the Petition of Right and the Bill of Rights of 1688, while no less than sixteen may be found substantially in the Virginia Bill cf Rights ; but these again are in great part derived from the earlier fountains. And now, sir, you have before you for revision and amendment this early work of our Fathers. I THEIR HISTORY AND POLICY. 241 do not stop to consider its peculiar merits. With satisfaction I might point to special safeguards by which our rights have been protected against usur pations, whether executive, legislative or judicial. With pride I might dwell on those words which ban ished Slavery from our soil, and rendered the Decla ration of Independence here with us a living letter. But the hour does not require or admit any such service. You have a practical duty which I seek to promote ; and I now take leave of the whole sub ject, with the simple remark, that a document pro ceeding from such a pen drawn from such sources with such an origin in all respects speaking so early for Human Rights and now for more than threescore years and ten a household word to the people of Massachusetts should be touched by the Convention only with extreme care. 21 FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. SPEECH AT THE PLYMOUTH FESTIVAL IN COMMEMORATION O3 THE EMBARKATION OF THE PILGRIMS, 1ST AUGUST, 1853. The President, in giving the next toast, said they had already been delighted with the words of a distinguished member of the Senate of the United States. They were favored with the pres ence of another ; and he would give as a sentiment : "The Senate of the United States, The concentrated light of the stars of the Union." Mr. Sumner responded as follows : MB,. PRESIDENT. You bid me speak for the Senate of the United States. But I cannot forget that there is another voice here, of classical eloquence, which might more fitly render this service. As one of the humblest members of that body, and associated with the public councils for a brief period only, I should prefer that my distinguished colleague [Mr. Everett], whose fame is linked with a long political life, should speak for it. And there is yet another here [Mr. Hale], who, though not at this moment a member of the Senate, has, throughout an active and brilliant career, marked by a rare combination of ability, elo quence, and good humor, so identified himself with [242] A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. 243 it in the public mind, that he might well speak for it always, and when he speaks all are pleased to listen. But, sir, you have ordered it otherwise. From the tears and trials at Delft Haven, from the deck of the " Mayflower, from the landing at Plym outh Rock, to the Senate of the United States, is a mighty contrast, covering whole spaces of history, hardly less than from the wolf that suckled Romulus and Remus to that Roman Senate which, on curule chairs, swayed Italy and the world. From these ob scure beginnings of poverty and weakness, which you now piously commemorate, and on which all our minds naturally rest to-day, you bid us leap to that marble Capitol, where thirty-one powerful republics, bound in indissoluble union, a Plural Unit, are gathered together in legislative body, constituting a part of One Gov ernment, which, stretching from ocean to ocean, and counting millions of people beneath its majestic rule, surpasses far in wealth and might any Government of the Old World when the little band of Pilgrims left it, and now promises to be a clasp between Europe and Asia, bringing the most distant places near together, so that there shall be no more Orient or Occident. It were interesting to dwell on the stages of this grand procession ; but it is enough on this occasion merely to glance at them and pass on. Sir, it is the Pilgrims that we commemorate to-day ; not the Senate. For this moment, at least, let us tread under foot all pride of empire, all exultation in our manifold triumphs of industry, of science, of literature, with all the crowding anticipations of the vast untold Future, that we may reverently bow before the forefathers. The day is theirs. In the 244 A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. contemplation of their virtue we shall derive a lesson, which, like truth, may judge us sternly; but, if we can really follow it, like truth, it shall make us free. For myself, I accept the admonitions of the day. It may teach us all never, by word or act, although we may be few in numbers or alone, to swerve from those primal principles of duty, which, from the landing at Plymouth Rock, have been the life of Massachusetts. Let me briefly unfold the lesson ; though to the dis cerning soul it unfolds itself. Few persons in history have suffered more from contemporary misrepresentation, abuse, and persecu tion, than the English Puritans. At first a small body, they were regarded with indifference and con tempt. But by degrees they grew in numbers, and drew into their company men of education, intelli gence, and even of rank. Reformers in all ages have had little of blessing from the world which they sought to serve ; but the Puritans were not disheartened. Still they persevered. The obnoxious laws of con formity they vowed to withstand till, in the fervid language of the time, " they be sent back to the dark ness from whence they came." Through them the spirit of modern Freedom made itself potently felt in its great warface with Authority, in Church, in Litera ture and in the State ; in other words, for religious, intellectual and political emancipation. The Puritans primarily aimed at religious Freedom ; for this they contended in Parliament, under Elizabeth and James ; for this they suffered ; but so connected are all these great, and glorious interests, that the struggles for one have always helped the others. Such service did they do, that Hume, whose cold nature sympathized little A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. 245 with their burning souls, is obliged to confess that to the Puritans alone " the English owe the whole free dom of their constitution." As among all reformers, so among them there were differences of degree. Some continued within the pale of the National Church, and there pressed their ineffec tual attempts in behalf of the good cause. Some at length, driven by conscientious convictions, and unwil ling to be partakers longer in its enormities, stung also by the cruel excesses of magisterial power, openly disclaimed the National Establishment and became a separate sect, first under the name of Brownists, from the person who had led in this new organization, and then under the better name of Separatists. I like this word, sir. It has a meaning. After long struggles in Parliament and out of it, in Church and State, con tinued through successive reigns, the Puritans finally triumphed, and the despised sect of Separatists, swollen in numbers, and now under the denomination of Inde pendents, with Oliver Cromwell at their head and John Milton as his Secretary, ruled England. Thus is prefigured the final triumph of all, however few in numbers, who sincerely devote themselves to Truth. The Pilgrims of Plymouth were among the earliest of the Separatists. As such, they knew by bitter ex perience all the sharpness of persecution. Against them the men in power raged like the heathen. Against them the whole fury of the law was directed. Some were imprisoned ; all were impoverished, while their name became a by- word of reproach. For safety and freedom the little band first sought shelter in Holland, where they continued in indigence and obscu rity for more than ten years, when they were inspired 21* 246 A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. to seek a home in this unknown Western world. Such, in brief, is their history. I could not say more of it without intruding upon your time ; I could not say less without injustice to them. Rarely have austere principles been expressed with more gentleness than from their lips. By a covenant with the Lord, they had vowed to walk in all His ways, according to their best endeavors, whatsoever it should cost them, and also to receive whatsoever truth should be made known from the written word of God. Repentance and prayers, patience and tears, were their weapons. "It is not with us," said they, " as with other men, whom small things can discourage or small discontentments cause to wish themselves at home again." And then, again, on another occasion, their souls were lifted to utterance like this : " When we are in our graves it will be all one, whether we have lived in plenty or penury, whether we have died in a bed of down or on locks of straw." Self-sacrifice is never in vain, and they foresaw, with the clearness of prophecy, that out of their trials should come a transcendent Future. "As one small candle," said an early Pilgrim Governor, "may light a thousand, so the light kindled here m#y in some sort shine even to the whole nation." And yet these men, with such sublime endurance and such lofty faith, are among those who are some times called " Puritan knaves " and " knaves-Puritans," and who were branded by King James as the " very pests in the Church and Commonwealth." The small company of our forefathers became the jest and gibs of fashion and power. The phrase " men of one idea" had not been invented then ; but, in equivalent Ian- A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK. 247 guage, they were styled " the pinched fanatics of Ley- den." A contemporary poet and favorite of Charles the First, Thomas Carew, lent his genius to their defamation. A masque, from his elegant and careful pen, was performed by the monarch and his courtiers, wherein the whole plantation of New England was turned to royal sport. The jeer broke forth in the exclamation, that it had " purged more virulent humors from the politic bodies than guaiacum and all the West Indian drugs from the natural bodies of the king dom." * And these outcasts, despised in their own day by the proud and great, are the men whom we have met in this goodly number to celebrate ; not for any victory of war ; not for any triumph of discovery, science, learning, or eloquence ; not for worldly success of any kind. How poor are all these things by the side of that divine virtue which made them, amidst the re proach, the obloquy and the hardness of the world, hold fast to Freedom and Truth ! Sir, if the honors of this day are not a mockery ; if they do not expend themselves in mere selfish gratulation ; if they are a sincere homage to the character of the Pilgrims and I cannot suppose otherwise, then is it well for us to be here. Standing on Plymouth Rock, at their great anniversary, we cannot fail to be elevated by their example. We see clearly what it has done for the world, and what it has done for their fame. No pusillanimous soul here to-day will de clare their self-sacrifice, their deviation from received * This masque, entitled C&lum, Eritannicum, was performed at Whitehall, 18th February, 1673. 248 A FINGER-POINT FROM PLYMOUTH ROCK, opinions, their unquenchable thirst for liberty, an error or illusion. From gushing multitudinous hearts we now thank these lowly men that they dared to be true and brave. Conformity or compromise might, perhaps, have purchased for them a profitable peace, but not peace of mind ; it might have secured place and power, but not repose ; it might have opened a present shelter, but not a home in history and in men s hearts till time shall be no more. All will confess the true grandeur of their example, while, in vindication of a cherished principle, they stood alone, against the madness of men, against the law of the land, against their king. Better be the despised Pil grim, a fugitive for freedom, than the halting politician, forgetful of principle, " with a Senate at his heels." Such, sir, is the voice from Plymouth Rock, as it salutes my ears. Others may not hear it. But to me it comes in tones which I cannot mistake. I catch its words of noble cheer : " New occasions teach new duties ; Time makes ancient good uncouth ; They must upward still and onward who would keep abreast of Truth : Lo, before us gleam her camp-fires I we ourselves must Pil grims be, Launch our MayfiWer, and steer boldly through the desperate winter sea." THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; FREEDOM NATIONAL. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, AGAINST THE REPEAL OF THE MISSOURI PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY NORTH OF 36 30 IN THE NEBRASKA AND KANSAS BILL, 21ST FEBRU ARY, 1854. On the 14th December, 1853, Mr. Dodge of Iowa, asked and obtained leave to introduce a Bill to organize the Territory of Nebraska, which was read a first and second time, by unanimous consent, and referred to the Committee on Territories. This was a simple Territorial Bill, in the common form, containing no allusion to Slavery, and not in any way undertaking to touch the existing Prohibition of Slavery in this Territory. On the 4th January, 1854, Mr. Douglas, of Illinois, as Chair man of the Committee on Territories, reported this Bill back to the Senate, with various amendments, accompanied by a Special Report. By this Bill only a single Territory was consti tuted under the name of Nebraska ; the existing Prohibition of Slavery was not directly overthrown, but it was declared that the States formed out of this Territory, should be admitted into the Union " with or without Slavery," as they should desire. On the 16th January, Mr. Dixon, of Kentucky, in order to accomplish directly what the Bill did only indirectly, gave notice of an amendment, to the effect that the existing Prohibition of Slavery "shall not be so construed as to apply to the Territory contemplated by this Act, or to any other Territory of the United States ; but that the citizens of the several States or Territories shall be at liberty to take and hold their Slaves within any of [249] 250 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; the Territories of the United States, or of the States to be formed therefrom." On the next day, 17th January, Mr. Sumner, in order to keep alive the existing prohibition > gave notice of the following afiend- m ent : " Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to abrogate or in any way contravene the Act of March 6, 1820, entitled An Act to authorize the people of Missouri Territory to form a constitution and State government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and to prohibit Slavery in certain Territories ; wherein it is expressly enacted that * in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the State contemplated b$ this net, Slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited. " It is worthy of remark that at this stage the proposition of Mr. Dixon, and also that of Mr. Sumner, were equally condemned by the Washington Union, the official organ of the Adminis tration. It had not then been determined to sustain the repeal. On the 23d January, Mr. Douglas,, from the .Committee on Territories, submitted a new Bill as a substitute for that already reported. Here was a sudden change, by which the Territory was divided into two, Nebraska and Kansas, and the prohibi tion of Slavery was directly overthrown. According to his language at the time, there was " incorporated into it one or two other amendments, which make the provisions of the Bill upon other and more delicate questions, more clear and specific, so as to avoid all conflict of opinion." It was formally enun ciated in the Bill, that the prohibition of Slavery " was super seded by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, and is hereby declared inoper ative." This, of course, superseded the proposed amendment of Mr. Dixon, who subsequently declared his entire assent to the Bill in its new form. It also presented the issue directly raised in Mr. Sumner s proposed amendment. FEEEDOM NATIONAL. 251 On the next day, 24th January, when the amended Bill had just been laid upon the tables of Senators, and without allowing the necessary time even for its perusal, Mr. Douglas pressed its consideration upon the Senate. After some debate it was post poned until the 30th January, and made the special order from day to day until disposed of. Meanwhile an appeal to the country was put forth by certain Senators and Representatives in Congress, calling themselves Independent Democrats. It was entitled, " Shall Slavery be permitted in Nebraska ? " and proceeded in strong language to expose the violation of plighted faith and the wickedness about to be perpetrated. This document was extensively circulated, and did much to arouse the public. On the 30th January, the Senate proceeded to the consider ation of the Bill, when Mr. Douglas took the floor, and devoted himself to a denunciation of the appeal put forth by the Inde pendent Democrats, characterizing its authors as " Abolition confederates," and particularly arraigning Mr. Chase of Ohio, and Mr. Sumner, the two Senators who had signed it. When he sat down, Mr. Chase replied at once in admirable remarks to the personal matters introduced, and was followed in a few words by Mr. Sumnsr ; and this was the opening of the great debate which occupied for months the attention of the country. Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, before the Senate adjourns I crave a single moment. As one of the signers of the address referred to by the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas], I accept now openly, before the Senate and the country, my full responsibility for it, and deprecate no criticism from any quarter. That document was put forth in the discharge of a high public duty ; on the precipitate introduction into this body of a measure which, as it seems to me, is not only subversive of a^n ancient landmark, but hostile to the peace, the harmony, and the best interests of the coun try. But, sir, in doing this, I judged the act, and not 252 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; its author. I saw only the enormous proposition, and nothing of the Senator. The language used is strong, but it is not stronger than the exigency required. Here is a measure which reverses the time-honored policy of our fathers in the restriction of Slavery ; which sets aside the Missouri Compromise a solemn compact, by which all the territory coded by France under the name of Louisiana, .was "forever" consecrated to freedom and which violates, also, the alleged compromises of 1850 ; and all this is to open an immense territory to Slavery. Such a measure cannot be regarded without emotions too strong for speech ; nor can it be justly described in common language. It is a soulless, eyeless monster horrid, unshapely, vast; and this monster is now let loose upon the country. Allow me one other word of explanation. It is true I desired that the consideration of this measure should not be pressed at once with indecent haste, as was proposed, even before the Senate could read the Bill in which it was embodied. I had not forgotten that the Missouri Bill, as appears from the Journals of Congress, when first introduced in December, 1819, was allowed to rest upon the table nearly two months before the discussion commenced. The proposition to undo the only part of that work which is now in any degree within the reach of Congress should be ap proached with even greater caution and reserve. The people have a right to be heard on this monstrous scheme ; and ^here is no apology for that driving, gal loping speed, which shall anticipate their voice, and, in its consequences, must despoil them of this right. FREEDOM NATIONAL. 253 The debate was continued from day to day. On the 7th February, Mr. Douglas proposed still another change in his Bill. There seemed to be a perpetual difficulty in adjusting the lan guage by which the existing prohibition of Slavery should be overthrown. He now moved to strike out the words referring to this prohibition, and to insert the following : " Which being inconsistent with the principles of non-inter vention by Congress with Slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, is hereby declared inoperative and void, it being the true intent and meaning of this Act not to legislate Slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom ; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." On the 15th February this amendment was adopted by a vote of thirty-five yeas to ten nays. The debate was then continusd upon, the pending substitute reported by the Committee for the original Bill. On the 21st February, Mr. Sumner took the floor and spoke as follows : Mr. PRESIDENT : I approach this discussion with awe. The mighty question, with its untold issues, oppresses me. Like a portentous cloud, surchanged with irresisti ble storm and ruin, it seems to fill the whole heavens, making me painfully conscious how unequal I am to the occasion how unequal, also, is all that I can say, to all that I feel. In delivering my sentiments here to-day, I shall speak frankly according to my convictions, without concealment or reserve. But if anything fell from the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas], in opening this discussion, which might seem to challenge a personal contest, I desire to say that I shall not enter upon it. 22 254 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; Let not a word or a tone pass my lips, to direct atten tion, for a moment, from the transcendent theme, by the side of which Senators and Presidents are but dwarfs. I would not forget those amenities which belong to this place, and are so well calculated to temper the antagonism of debate ; nor can I cease to remember and to feel, that, amidst all diversities of opinion, we are the representatives of thirty-one sister republics, knit together by indissoluble tie, and consti tuting that Plural Unit, which we all embrace by the endearing name of country. The question presented for your consideration is not surpassed in grandeur by any which has occurred in our national history since the Declaration of Independ ence. In every aspect it assumes gigantic proportions, whether we simply consider the extent of territory it concerns, or the public faith and national policy which it assails, or that higher question that Question of Questions, as far above others as Liberty is above the common things of life which it opens anew for judg ment. It concerns an immense region, larger than the original thirteen States, vying in extent with all the existing free States stretching over prairie, field and forest interlaced by silver streams, skirted "by pro tecting mountains, and constituting the heart of the North American continent only a little smaller, let me add, than three great European countries combined Italy, Spain and France each of which, in succes sion, has dominated over the globe. This territory has already been likened, on this floor, to the Garden of God. The similitude is found, not merely in its present pure and virgin character, but in its actual FREEDOM NATIONAL. 255 geographical situation, occupying central spaces on this hemisphere, which, in their general relations, may well compare with that early Asiatic home. We are told that, Southward through Eden went a river large ; so here a stream flows southward which is larger than the Euphrates. And here, too, amidst all the smiling products of nature, lavished by the hand of God, is the lofty tree of Liberty, planted by our fathers, which, without exaggeration, or even imagination, may be likened to the tree of life, High eminent, blooming ambrosial fruit Of vegetable gold. It is with regard to this territory, that you are now called to exercise the grandest function of the lawgiver, by establishing those rules of polity which will deter mine its future character. As the twig is bent the tree inclines ; and the influences impressed upon the early days of an empire, like those upon a child, are of incon ceivable importance to its future weal or woe. The Bill now before us, proposes to organize and equip two new territorial establishments, with Governors, Secretaries, Legislative Councils, Legislators, Judges, Marshals, and the whole machinery of civil society. Such a measure, at any time, would deserve the most careful attention. But, at the present moment, it justly excites a peculiar interest, from the effort made on pretences unsus- tained by facts in violation of solemn covenant, and in disregard of the early principles of our fathers to open this immense region to Slavery. 256 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; According to existing law, this territory is now guarded against Slavery by a positive prohibition, embodied in the Act of Congress, approved 6th March, 1820, preparatory to the admission of Missouri into the Union, as a sister State, and in the following ex plicit words : " SEC. 8. Be it further enacted, That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louis iana, which lies north 36 30/ of north latitude, not included within the limits of the State contemplated by this Act, SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE, otherwise than as the punish ment of crimes, SHALL BE, AND is HEREBY, FOREVER PRO HIBITED." It is now proposed to set aside this prohibition ; but there seems to be a singular indecision as to the way in which the deed shall be done. From the time of its first introduction, in the report of the Committee on Territories, the proposition has assumed different shapes ; and it promises to assume as many as Pro teus ; now, one thing in form, and now, another ; now, like a river, and then, like flame ; but, in every form and shape, identical in substance ; with but one end and aim its be-all and end-all the overthrow of the Prohibition of Slavery. At first, it proposed simply to declare, that the States formed out of this territory should be admitted into the Union, " with or without Slavery," and did not directly assume to touch this prohibition. For some reason this was not satis factory, and then it was precipitately proposed to declare, that the prohibition in the Missouri Act " was superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, and is hereby declared inoperative." But this would not FREEDOM NATIONAL. 257 do ; and it is now proposed to enact, that the prohi bition, " being inconsistent with the principles of non intervention, by Congress, with Slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, is hereby declared inoperative and void." All this is to be done on pretences founded upon the Slavery enactments of 1850, thus seeking, with mingled audacity and cunning, " by indirection to find direction out." Now, sir, I am not here to speak in behalf of those measures, or to lean in any way upon their/ sup port. Relating to different subject-matters, contained in different acts, which prevailed successively, at dif ferent times, and by different votes some persons voting for one measure, and some voting for another, and very few voting for all they cannot be regarded as a unit, embodying conditions of compact, or com promise, if you please, adopted equally by all, and therefore obligatory on all. But since this broken series of measures has been adduced as an apology for the proposition now before us, I desire to say, that, such as they are, they cannot, by any effort of interpre tation, by any distorting wand of power, by any per verse alchemy, be transmuted into a repeal of that original Prohibition of Slavery. On this head there are several points to which I would merely call attention, and then pass on. First : The Slavery enactments of 1850 did not pretend, in terms, N to touch, much less to change, the condition of the Louisiana Territory, which was already. fixed by Congressional enactment. The two transactions related to different subject-matters. Secondly : The enact ments do not directly touch the subject of Slavery, 22* 258 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; during the Territorial existence of Utah and New Mexico ; but they provide prospectively, that, when admitted as States, they shall be received "with or without Slavery." Here certainly can be no overthrow of an Act of Congress which directly concerns a Ter ritory during its Territorial existence. Thirdly : During all the discussion of these measures in Congress, and afterwards before the people, and through the public press, at the North and the South alike, no person was heard to intimate that the Prohibition of Slavery in the Missouri Act was in any way disturbed. And, fourthly, The acts themselves contain a formal provision, that " nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair or qualify anything" in a certain article of the resolutions annexing Texas, wherein it is expressly declared, that in territory north of the Missouri Compromise line, " Slavery, or involuntary servitude, except for crime, shall be prohibited." But I do not dwell on these things. These pre tences have been already amply refuted by able Sena tors who have preceded me. It is clear, beyond contradiction, that the Prohibition of Slavery in this Territory has not been superseded or in any way contravened by the Slavery Acts of 1850. The propo sition before you is, therefore, original in its character, without sanction from any former legislation, and it must, accordingly, be judged by its merits, as an origi nal proposition. Here, sir, let it be remembered, that the friends of Freedom are not open to any charge of aggression. They are now standing on the defensive, guarding the early intrenchments thrown up by our fathers. No proposition to abolish Slavery anywhere is now before FREEDOM NATIONAL. 259 you ; but, on the contrary, a proposition to abolish Freedom. The term Abolitionist, which is so often applied in reproach, justly belongs, on this occasion, to him who would overthrow this well-established landmark. He is, indeed, no Abolitionist of Slavery f let him be called, sir, an Abolitionist of Freedom. For myself, whether with many or few, my place is taken. Even if alone, my feeble arm should not be wanting as a bar against this outrage. On two distinct grounds, " both strong against the deed," I arraign it : First, in the name of Public Faith, as an infraction of solemn obligations, assumed beyond recall by the South, on the admission of Mis souri into the Union as a Slave State. Secondly, I arraign it, in the name of Freedom, as an unjustifiable departure from the original Anti-slavery policy of our fathers. These two heads I propose to consider in their order, glancing under the latter at the objections to the Prohibition of Slavery in the Territories. And here, sir, before I approach the argument, indulge me with a few preliminary words on the character of this proposition. Slavery is the forcible subjection of one human being, in person, labor and property, to the will of another. In this simple state ment is involved its whole injustice. There is no offence against religion, against morals, against hu manity, which may not, in the license of this enormity, stalk " unwhipt of justice." For the husband and wife there is nc marriage ; for the mother there is no assurance that her infant child will not be ravished from her breast ; for all who bear the name of Slave, there is nothing that they can call their own. With- 260 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM J out a father, without a mother, almost without a God, the slave has nothing but a master. It would be con trary to that Rule of Right, which is ordained by God, if such a system, though mitigated often by a patri archal kindness, and by a plausible physical comfort, could be otherwise than pernicious in its influences. It is confessed that the master suffers not less than the slave. And this is not all. The whole social fabric is disorganized ; labor loses its dignity ; industry sickens ; education finds no schools, and all the land of Slavery is impoverished. And now, sir, when the conscience of mankind is at last aroused to these things ; when, throughout the civilized world, a slave- dealer is a by- word and a reproach, we, as a nation, are about to open a new market to the traffickers in flesh, that haunt the shambles of the South. Such an act, at this time, is removed from all reach of tha^ palliation often vouchsafed to Slavery. This wrong, we are speciously told, by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors ; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country. Now, without stopping to in quire into the value of this apology, which is never adduced in behalf of other abuses, and which availed nothing against that kingly power imposed by the mother country, which our fathers overthrew, it is sufficient for the present purpose to know, that it is now proposed to make Slavery our own original act. Here is a fresh case of actual transgression, which we cannot cast upon the shoulders of any progenitors, nor upon any mother country, distant in time or place. The Congress of the United States, the people of the FREEDOM NATIONAL. 261 United .States, at this day, in this vaunted period of light, will be responsible for it, so that it shall be said hereafter, so long as the dismal history of Slavery is read, that, in the year of Christ, 1854, a new and deliberate act was passed, by which a vast. Territory was opened to its inroads. Alone in the company of nations does our country assume this hateful championship. In despotic Russia, the serfdom which constitutes the " peculiar institu tion " of that great empire, is never allowed to travel with the imperial flag, according to the American pre tension, into provinces newly acquired by the ^ common blood and treasure, but is carefully restricted by posi tive prohibition, in harmony with the general con science, within its ancient confines ; and this prohibi tion the Wilmot proviso of Russia is rigorously enforced on every side, in all the provinces, as in Besarabia on the south, and Poland on the west, so that, in fact, no Russian nobleman has been able to move into these important territories with 1iis slaves. Thus Russia speaks for Freedom, and disowns the slave-holding dogma of our country. Far away in the East, at the " gateways of the day," in effeminate India, Slavery has been condemned. In Constantinople, the queenly seat of the most powerful Mohammedan empire, where barbarism still mingles with civilization, the Ottoman Sultan has fastened upon it the stigma of disapprobation. The Barbary States of Africa, occu pying the same parallels of latitude with the Slave States of our Union, and resembling them in the nature of their boundaries, their productions, their climate, and the " peculiar institution," which sought shelter in both, have been changed into Abolitionists. 262 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Algiers, seated on the line of 36 30 , has been dedi cated to Freedom. Morocco, by its untutored ruler, has expressed its desire, stamped in the formal terms of a treaty, that the very name of Slavery may perish from the minds of men ; and only recently, from the Bey of Tunis, has proceeded that noble act, by which, " in honor of God, and to distinguish man from the brute creation " I quote his own words he de creed its total abolition throughout his dominions. Let Christian America be willing to be taught by these examples. God forbid that our republic " heir of all the ages, foremost in the files of time " should adopt anew the barbarism which they have renounced. As the effort now making is extraordinary in char acter, so no assumption seems too extraordinary to be wielded in its support. The primal truth of the Equality of men, proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence, has been assailed, and this Great Char ter of our country discredited. Sir, you and I will soon pass away, but that charter will continue to stand above impeachment or question. The Declaration of Independence was a Declaration of Rights, and the language employed, though general in its character, must obviously be restrained within the design and sphere of a Declaration of Rights, involving no such absurdity as was attributed to it yesterday by the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Pettit]. Sir, it is a palpable fact that men are not born equal in physical strength or in mental capacities, in beauty of form or health of body. These mortal cloaks of flesh differ, as do these worldly garments. Diversity or inequality, in these respects, is the law of creation. But as God is no respecter of persons, and as all are equal in His FREEDOM NATIONAL. 263 sight, whether Dives or Lazarus, master or slave, so are all equal in natural inborn rights ; and pardon me if I say, it is a vain sophism to adduce in argument against this vital axiom of Liberty, the physical or mental inequalities by which men are characterized, or the unhappy degradation to which, in violation of a common brotherhood, they are doomed. To deny the Declaration of Independence is to rush on the bosses of the shield of the Almighty, which, in all respects, the supporters of this measure seem to do. To the delusive suggestion of the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Badger], that, by the overthrow of this prohibition, the number of slaves will not be increased ; that there will be simply a beneficent diffu sion of Slavery, and not its extension, I reply at once, that this argument, if of any value if not mere words and nothing else would equally justify and require the overthrow of the Prohibition of Slavery in the Free States, and indeed, everywhere throughout the world. All the dikes which, in different countries, from time to time, with the march of civilization, have been painfully set up against the inroads of this evil, must be removed, and every land opened aneAV to its de structive flood. It is clear, beyond dispute, that by the overthrow of this prohibition, Slavery will be quickened, and slaves themselves will be multiplied, while new room and verge will be secured for the gloomy operations of slave law, under which free labor will droop, and a vast territory be smitten with ster ility. Sir, a blade of grass would not grow where the horse of Attila had trod ; nor can any true prosperity spring up in the foot-prints of the slave. But it is argued, that slaves will not be carried into 264 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Nebraska in large numbers, and that, therefore, the question is of smalL practical moment. My distin guished colleague [Mr. Everett], in his eloquent speech, hearkened to this apology, and allowed him self, while upholding the prohibition, to disparage its importance in a manner, from which I feel obliged kindly, but most strenuously, to dissent. Sir, the very census attests its vital consequence. There is Missouri, at this moment, with Illinois on the east and Nebraska on the west, all covering nearly the same spaces of latitude, and resembling each other in soil, climate and natural productions. Mark now the con trast ! By the potent efficacy of the ordinance of the Northwestern Territory, Illinois is a free State, while Missouri has eighty-seven thousand four hundred and twenty-two slaves ; and the simple question which challenges an answer is, whether Nebraska shall be preserved in the condition of Illinois, or surrendered to that of Missouri ? Surely this cannot be treated lightly. But for myself, I am unwilling to measure the exigency of the prohibition by the number of per sons, whether many or few, whom it may protect. Human rights, whether in a vast multitude or a soli tary individual, are entitled to an equal and unhesitat ing support. In this spirit, the flag of our country only recently became the impenetrable panoply of a homeless wanderer, who claimed its protection in a distant sea ; and in this spirit I am constrained to declare that there is no place accessible to human avarice, or human lust, or human force whether in the- lowest valley, or on the loftiest mountain top, whether on the broad flower-spangled prairies, or the snowy caps of the Rocky Mountains where the pro- FREEDOM NATIONAL. 265 hibition of Slavery, like the commandments of the Decalogue, should not go. I. And now, sir, in the name of that Public Faith, which is the very ligament of civil society, and which the great Roman orator tells us it is detestable to break even with an enemy, I arraign this scheme, and hold it up to the judgment of the country. There is an early Italian story of an experienced citizen, who, when told by his nephew that he had been studying, at the University of Bologna, the science of right, said in reply, " You have spent your time to little purpose. It would have been better had you learned the science of might, for that is worth two of the other ; " and the bystanders of that day all agreed that the veteran spoke the truth. I begin, sir, by assuming that honor able Senators will not act in this spirit that they will not substitute might for right that they will not wantonly and flagitiously discard any obligation, pledge, or covenant, because they chance to possess the power ; but that, as honest men, desirous to do right, they will confront this question. Sir, the proposition before you involves not merely the repeal of an existing law, but the infraction of solemn obligations originally proposed and assumed by the South, after a protracted and embittered con test, as a covenant of peace with regard to certain specified territory therein described, namely : " All that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana ; " according to which, in consideration of the admission into the Union of Missouri as a slave State, Slavery was forever prohib ited in all the remaining part of this territory which 23 266 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; lies north of 36 30 . This arrangement, between different sections of the Union ( the slave States of the first part and the free States of the second part though usually known as the Missouri Com promise, was at the time styled a COMPACT. In its stipulations for Slavery, it was justly repugnant to the conscience of the North, and ought never to have been made ; but on that side it has been performed. And now the unperformed outstanding obligations to Freedom, originally proposed and assumed by the South, are resisted. Years have passed since these obligations were embodied in the legislation of Congress, and accepted by the country. Meanwhile, the statesmen by whom they were framed and vindicated have, one by one, dropped from this earthly sphere. Their living voices cannot now be heard, to plead for the conservation of that Public Faith to which they were pledged. But this extraordinary lapse of time, with the complete fruition by one party of all the benefits belonging to* it, under the compact, gives to the transaction an added and most sacred strength. Prescription steps in and with new bonds, confirms the original work, to the end that while men are mortal, controversies shall not be immortal. Death, with inexorable scythe, has mowed down the authors of this compact ; but, with conservative hour-glass, the dread destroyer has counted out a succession of years, which now defile before us, like so many sentinels, to guard the sacred landmark of Freedom. A simple statement of facts, derived from the jour nals of Congress and contemporary records, will show the origin and nature of this compact, the influence by FKEEDOM NATIONAL. 261 which it was established, and the obligations which il imposed. As early as 1818, at the first session of the fifteenth Congress, a Bill was reported to the House of Repre sentatives, authorizing the people of the Missouri Ter ritory to form a , Constitution and State Government, for the admission of such State into the Union ; but. at that session, no final action was had thereon. A1 the next session, in February, 1819, the Bill was again brought forward, when an eminent Representative of New York, whose life has been spared till this last summer, Mr. James Tallmadge, moved a clause pro hibiting any further introduction of slaves into the proposed State, and securing Freedom to the children born within the State after its admission into the Union, on attaining twenty-five years of age. This important proposition, which assumed a power not only to prohibit the ingress of Slavery into the State itself, but also to abolish it there, was passed in the affirmative, after a vehement debate of three days. On a division of the question, the first part, prohibit ing the further introduction of slaves, was adopted by eighty- seven yeas to seventy-six nays ; the second part, providing for the emancipation of children, was adopted by eighty-two yeas to seventy-eight nays. Other propositions to thwart the operation of these amendments were voted down, and on the 17th Feb ruary the Bill was read a third time, and passed with these important restrictions. In the Senate, after debate, the provision for the emancipation of children was struck out by thirty-one yeas to. seven nays; the other provision, against the further introduction of Slavery, was struck out by 268 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM J twenty-two yeas to sixteen nays. Thus emasculated, the Bill was returned to the House, which, on 2d March, by a vote of seventy-eight nays to seventy-six yeas, refused its concurrence. The Senate adhered to their amendments, and the House, by seventy-eight yeas to sixty-six nays, adhered to their disagreement ; and so at this session the Missouri Bill was lost ; and here was a temporary triumph for Freedom. Meanwhile, the same controversy was renewed on the Bill pending at the same time for the organization of the Territory of Arkansas, then known as the south ern part of the Territory of Missouri. The restrictions already adopted in the Missouri Bill were moved by Mr. Taylor, of New York, subsequently Speaker ; but after at least six close votes, on the yeas and nays, in one of which the House was equally divided, eighty-eight yeas to eighty-eight nays, they were lost. Another proposition by Mr. Taylor, simpler in form, that Slavery should not hereafter be introduced into this Territory, was lost by ninety nays to eighty-six yeas ; and the Arkansas Bill on 25th February was read the third time and passed. In the Senate, Mr. Burrill, of Rhode Island, moved, as an amendment, the prohibition of the further introduction of Slavery into this Territory, which was lost by nineteen nays to fourteen yeas. And thus, without any provision for Freedom, Arkansas was organized as a Territory ; and here was a triumph of Slavery. At this same session, Alabama was admitted as a slave State, without any restriction or objection. It was in the discussion on the Arkansas Bill, at this session, that we find the earliest suggestion of a Com promise. Defeated in his efforts to prohibit Slavery in FREEDOM NATIONAL. 269 this Territory, Mr. Taylor stated that " he thought it important that some line should be designated beyond which Slavery should not be permitted," and he moved its prohibition hereafter in all territories of the United States north of 36 30 north latitude, without any exception of Missouri, which is north of this line. This proposition, though withdrawn after debate, was at once welcomed by Mr. Livermore, of New Hamp shire, " as made in the true spirit of compromise." It was opposed by Mr. Rhea, of Tennessee, on behalf of Slavery, who avowed himself against every restriction ; and also by Mr. Ogle, of Pennsylvania, on behalf of Freedom, who was " against any Compromise by which Slavery, in any of the Territories, should be recognized or sanctioned by Congress." ^In this spirit it was op posed and supported by others, among whom was General Harrison, afterwards President of the United States, who " assented to the expediency of establish ing some such line of discrimination ; " but proposed a line due west from the mouth of the Des Moines, thus constituting the northern, and not the southern boundary of Missouri, the partition line between Free- do-m^and Slavery. But this idea of Compromise, though suggested by Mr. Taylor, was thus early adopted and vindicated in this very debate, by an eminent character, Mr. Louis McLane, 6f Delaware, who has since held high office in the country, and enjoyed no common measure of public confidence. Of all the leading actors in these early scenes, he and Mr. Mercer alone are yet spared. On this occasion he said : "The fixing of a line on the west of the Mississippi, north of which Slavery shall not be tolerated, had always been with him a 23* 270 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; favorite policy, and he hoped the day was not distant when, upon principles affair compromise, it might constitutionally be effected. The present attempt he regarded as premature. " After opposing the restriction on Missouri, he con cluded by declaring : At the same time, I do not mean to abandon the policy to which I alluded in the commencement of my remarks. I think it but fair that both sections of the Union* should be accommo dated on this subject, with regard to which so much feeling has been manifested. The same great motives of policy which recon ciled and harmonized the jarring and discordant elements of our system originally, and which enabled the framers of our happy Constitution to compromise the different interests which then prevailed on this and other subjects, if properly cherished by us, will enable us to achieve similar objects. If we me:t upon prin ciples of reciprocity, we cannot fail to do justice to all. It has already been avowed, by genfomen on this floor from the South and the West, that they will agree upon a line which shall divide the slaveholding from the non-slaveholding States. It is this proposition I am anxious to effect ; but I wish to effect it by some COMPACT which shall be binding upon all parties, and all subsequent Legislatures ; which cannot be changed, and will not fluctuate with the diversity of feelhig and of sentiment to which this empire, in its march, must be destined. There is a vast and immense tract of country west of the Mississippi yet to be settled, and intimately connected with the Northern section of the Union, upon which this compromise can be effected." The suggestions of Compromise were at this time vain ; each party was determined. The North, by the prevailing voice of its representatives, claimed all for Freedom ; the South, by its potential command of the Senate, claimed all for Slavery. The report of this debate aroused the country. For the first time in our history, Freedom, after an ani mated struggle, hand to hand, had been kept in check by Slavery. The original policy of our fathers in the FREEDOM NATIONAL. 271 restriction of slavery was suspended, and this giant wrong threatened to stalk into all the broad national domain. Men at the North were humbled and amazed. The imperious demands of Slavery seemed incredible. Meanwhile, the whole subject was adjourned from Congress to the people. Through the press and at public meetings, an earnest voice was raised against the admission of Missouri into the Union without the restriction of Slavery. Judges left the bench and clergymen the pulpit, to swell the indignant protest which went up from good men, without distinction of party or of pursuit. The movement was not confined to a few persons, nor to a few States. A public meeting at Trenton, in New Jersey, was followed by others in New York and Philadelphia, and finally at Worcester, Salem and Boston, where Committees were organized to rally the country. The citizens of Baltimore, in public meeting at the court-house with the Mayor in the chair, re solved that the future admission of slaves into the States hereafter formed west of the Mississippi, ought to be prohibited by Congress. Villages, towns and cities, by memorial, petition and prayer, called upon Congress to maintain the great principle of the prohibition of Slavery. The same principle was also commended by the resolutions of State Legislatures ; and Pennsyl vania, inspired by the teachings of Franklin and the convictions of the respectable denomination of Friends, unanimously asserted at once the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit Slavery west of the Mississippi, and solemnly appealed to her sister States, " to refuse to covenant with crime." New Jersey and Delaware followed, both also unanimously. Ohio asserted the 272 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; same principle : so did also Indiana. The latter State, not content with providing for the future, severely censured one of its Senators, for his vote to organize Arkansas without the prohibition of Slavery. The reso lutions of New York were reinforced by the recom mendation of De Witt Clinton. Amidst these excitements, Congress came together in December, 1819, taking possession of these Halls of the Capitol for the first time since their desolation by the British. On the day after the receipt of the President s Message, two several Committees of the House were constituted, one to consider the application of Maine, and the other of Missouri, to enter the Union as separate and independent States. With only the delay of a single day, the bill for the admission of Missouri was reported to the House without the restric tion of Slavery ; but, as if shrinking from the immediate discussion of the great question it involved, afterwards, on the motion of Mr. Mercer, of Virginia, its consider ation was postponed for several weeks ; all which, be it observed, is in open contrast with the manner in which the present discussion has been precipitated upon Congress. Meanwhile, the Maine Bill, when reported to the House, was promptly acted upon^ and sent to the Senate. In the interval between the report of the Missouri Bill and its consideration by the House, a Committee was constituted on motion of Mr. Taylor, of New York, to inquire into the expediency of prohibiting the intro duction of Slavery into the Territories west of the Mississippi. This Committee, at the end of a fortnight, was discharged from further consideration of the sub ject, which, it was understood, would enter into the FREEDOM NATIONAL. 273 postponed debate on the Missouri Bill. This early effort to interdict Slavery in the Territories by a special law, is worthy of notice, on account of some of the expressions of opinion which it drew forth. In the course of his remarks, Mr. Taylor declared, that " he presumed there were no members he knew of none who doubted the constitutional power of Congress to impose such a restriction on the Territories." A generous voice from Virginia recognized at once the right and duty of Congress. This was from Charles Fenton Mercer, .who declared that "When the question proposed should come fairly before the House, he should support the proposition. He should record his vote against suffering the dark cloud of inhumanity, which now darkened his country, from rolling on beyond the peaceful shores of the Missis sippi." At length, on the 26th January, 1820, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the Missouri _ Bill, and proceeded with its discussion, day by day, till the 28th February, when it was reported back with amendments. But meanwhile the same question was presented to the Senate, \vhere a conclu sion was reached earlier than in the House. A clause for the admission of Missouri was moved by way of tack to the Maine Bill. To this an amendment was moved by Mr. Roberts, of Pennsylvania, prohibiting the further introduction of Slavery into the State, which, after a fortnight s debate, was defeated by twenty-seven nays to sixteen yeas. The debate in the Senate was of unusual interest and splendor. It was especially illustrated by an effort of transcendent power from that great lawyer and 274 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM J orator, William Pinkney. Recently returned from a succession of missions to foreign courts, and at this time the acknowledged chief of the American bar, particularly skilled in questions of constitutional law, his course as a Senator from Maryland \vas calculated to produce a profound impression. In a speech which for two days drew to this chamber an admiring throng, and at the time was fondly compared with the best examples of Greece and Rome, he first authoritatively proposed and developed the Missouri Compromise. His masterly effort was mainly directed against the restriction upon Missouri, but it began and ended with the idea of compromise. " Notwithstanding," he says, " occasional appearances of rather an unfavorable description, I have long since persuaded myself that fhe Missouri question, as it is called, might be laid to rest, with innocence and safety, by some conciliatory Compromise at least, by which, as is our duty, we might reconcile the extremes of conflicting views and feelings, without any sacrifice of constitutional princi ples." And he closed with the hope that the restric tion on Missouri would not be pressed, but that the whole question " migljt be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to all, ly a positive prohibition of Slavery in the Territory to the north and west of Missouri." This authoritative proposition of Compromise, from the most powerful advocate of the unconditional admis sion of Missouri, was made in the Senate on the 21st January. From various indications, it seems to have found prompt favor in that body. Finally, on the 17th February, the union of Maine and Missouri in one Bill prevailed there, by twenty-three yeas to twenty-one nays. On the next day, Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, who FREEDOM NATIONAL. 275 had always voted with the South against any restriction upon Missouri, introduced the famous clause prohibit ing -Slavery north of 36 30 , which now constitutes the eighth section of the Missouri Act. An effort was made to include the Arkansas Territory within this prohibition ; but the South united against this exten sion of the area of Freedom, and it was defeated by twenty-four nays, to twenty yeas. The prohibition, as moved by Mr. Thomas, then prevailed, by thirty-four yeas to only ten nays. Among those in the affirmative were both the Senators from each of the Slave States, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland and Alabama, and also one of the Senators from each of the Slave States, Mississippi and North Carolina, including in the honorable list the familiar names of William Pinkney, James Brown and William Rufus King. This Bill, thus amended, is the first legislative em bodiment of the Missouri Compact or Compromise, the essential conditions of which were, the admission of Missouri as a State without any restriction of Slavery ; and the prohibition of Slavery in all the remaining territory of Louisiana north of 36 30 . Janus-faced, with one front towards Freedom and another towards Slavery, this must not be confounded with the simpler proposition of Mr. Taylor, at the last session,, to pro hibit Slavery in all the territory north of 36 30 , including Missouri. The Compromise now brought forward following the early lead of Mr. McLane both recognized and prohibited Slavery north of 36 30 . Here, for the first time, these two opposite prin ciples commingled in one legislative channel ; and it is immediately subsequent to this junction that we dis- 276 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; cern the precise responsibility assumed by different parties. And now observe the indubitable and decisive iact. This Bill, thus composed, containing these two elements this double measure finally passed the Senate by a test vote of twenty-four yeas to twenty nays. The yeas embraced every Southern Senator, ex cept Nathaniel Macon, of North Carolina, and William Smith, of South Carolina. Mr. BUTLER, of S. C. (interrupting). Mr. Gaillard, of South Carolina, voted with Mr. Smith. Mr. STJMNER. No, sir. The journal, which I now hold in my hand, shows that he voted for the Compro mise. I repeat, that the yeas on this vital question embraced every Southern Senator, except Mr. Macon and Mr. Smith. The nays embraced every Northern Senator, except the two Senators from Illinois and one Senator from Rhode Island, and one from New Hamp shire. And this, sir, is the record of the first stage in the adoption of the Missouri Compromise. First openly announced and vindicated on the floor of the Senate, by a distinguished Southern statesman, it was forced on the North by an almost unanimous Southern vote. While things had thus culminated in the Senate, discussion was still proceeding in the other House on the original Missouri Bill. This was for a moment arrested by the reception from the Senate of the Maine Bill, embodying the Missouri Compromise. Upon this the debate was brief and the decision prompt. But here, even at this stage, as at every other, a Southern statesman intervenes. Mr. Smith, of Maryland, for many years an eminent Senator of that State, but at this time a representative, while opposing the restric- FREEDOM NATIONAL. 277 tion of Missouri, vindicated the prohibition of Slavery in the Territories, and thus practically accepted the Compromise : " Mr. S. Smith said that he rose principally with a view to state his understanding of the proposed amendment, viz. : That it retained the boundaries of Missouri as delineated in the Bill ; that it prohibited the admission of slaves west of the west line of Missouri, and north of the north line ; that it did not interfere with the Territory of Arkansas, or the uninhabited land west thereof. He thought the proposition not exceptionable, but doubted the propriety of its forming a part of the Bill. He considered the power of Congress over the Territory as supreme, unlimited, before its admission ; that Congress could impose on its Territories any restriction it thought proper ; that if citizens go into the Territories thus restricted, they cannot carry with them slaves. They will be without slaves, and will be educated with prejudices and habits such as will exclude all desire, on their part, to admit Slavery when they shall become sufficiently numerous to be admitted as a State. And this is the advantage proposed by the amendment." But the House was not disposed to abandon the substantial restriction of Slavery in Missouri, for what seemed its unsubstantial prohibition in an unsettled Territory. The Compromise was rejected, and the Bill left in its original condition. This was done by large votes. Even the prohibition of Slavery was thrown out by one hundred and fifty-nine yeas to eighteen nays, both the North and the South uniting against it ; though, in this small but persistent minority, we find two Southern statesmen, Samuel Smith and Charles Fenton Mercer. The Senate, on receiving the Bill back from the House, insisted on their amendments. The House in turn insisted on their disagreement. According to parliamentary usage, a Committee of 24 278 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Conference between the two Houses was appointed. Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, Mr. Pinkney, of, Marylandj and Mr. James Barbour, of Virginia, composed this important Committee on the part of the Senate ; and Mr. Holmes, of Maine, Mr. Taylor, of New York, Mr. Lowndes, of South Carolina, Mr. Parker, of Massa chusetts, and Mr. Kinsey, of New Jersey, on the part of the House. Meanwhile, " the House had voted on the original Missouri Bill. An amendment, peremptorily inter dicting all Slavery in the new State, was adopted by ninety-four yeas to eighty-six nays ; and thus the Bill passed the House, and was sent to the Senate on the 1st March. Thus, after an exasperated and protracted discussion, the two Houses were at a dead-lock. The double-headed Missouri Compromise was the ulti matum of the Senate. The restriction of Slavery in Missouri, involving, of course, its prohibition* in all the unorganized Territories, was the ultimatum of the House. At this stage, on the 2d March, the Committee of Conference made their report, which was urged at once upon the House by Mr. Lowndes, the distin guished representative from South Carolina, and one of her most precious sons. And here sir, at the men tion of this name, still so fragrant among us, let me for one moment stop this current of history, to express the tender admiration with which I am inspired. Mr. Lowndes died before my memory of political events ; but he is still endeared by the self-abnegation of a single utterance that the Presidency is an office not to be sought or declined a sentiment, which, by its beauty, in one part at least, shames the vileness of FKEEDOM NATIONAL. 279 aspiration in our day, and will ever live as an amaran thine flower. Such a man, on any occasion, would be a host ; but he now threw his great soul into the work. He even objected to a motion to print the report, on the ground " that it would imply a deter mination in the House to delay a decision of the subject to-day, which he had hoped the House was fully prepared for." The question then came on striking out the restriction in the Missouri Bill. The report in the National Intelligencer says : " Mr. Lowndes spoke briefly in support of the Compromise recommended by the Committee of Conference, and urged with great earnestness the propriety of a decision which would re store tranquillity to the country, which was demanded by every consideration of discretion, of moderation, of wisdom and of virtue. " Mr. Mercer, of Virginia, followed on the same side with great earnestness, and had spoken about half an h<5ur, when he was compelled, by indisposition, to resume his seat." Such efforts, pressed with Southern ardor, were not unavailing. In conformity with the report of the Committee, the whole question was forthwith put at rest. Maine and Missouri were each admitted into the Union as independent States. The restriction of Slavery in Missouri was abandoned by a vote in the House of ninety yeas to eighty-seven nays ; and the prohibition of Slavery in Territories north of 36 30 , exclusive of Missouri, was substituted by a vote of one hundred and thirty-four yeas to forty-two nays. Among the distinguished Southern names in the affirmative, are Louis McLane, of Delaware ; Samuel Smith, <|f Maryland ; William Lowndes, of South Carolina ; and Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia. 280 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; The title of the Missouri Bill was amended in con formity with this prohibition, by adding the words, "^and to prohibit Slavery in certain Territories." The Mils then passed both Houses without a division ; and, on the morning of the 3d March, 1820, the National Intelligencer contained an exulting article, entitled " The Question Settled." Another paper, published in Baltimore, immediately after the passage of the Compromise, vindicated it as a perpetual compact, which could not be disturbed. The language is so clear and strong that I will read it, although it has been already quoted by my able and most excellent friend from Ohio [Mr. Chase] : " It is true the Compromise is supported only by the letter of the law, repealable by the authority which enacted it ; but the circumstances of the case give this law a MORAL FORCE equal to that of a positive provision of the Constitution ; and we do not hazard anything by saying that the Constitution exists in its observance. Both parties have sacrificed much to conciliation. We wish to see the COMPACT kept in good faith, and we trust that a kind Providence will open the way to relieve us of an evil which every good citizen deprecates as the supreme curse of the country." Wiles s Register. Sir, the distinguished leaders in this settlement were all from the South. As early as February, 1819, Louis McLane, of Delaware, had urged it upon Congress, in the form of " compact binding upon all subsequent Legislatures." It was in 1820 brought forward and upheld in the Senate by William Pinkney, of Mary land, and passed in that body by the vote of every Southern Senator except two, against the vote of every Northern Senator except four. In the House, it was welcomed at once by Samuel Smith, of Maryland, and Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia. The Committee FREEDOM NATIONAL. 281 of Conference, through which it finally prevailed, was filled, on the part of the Senate, with inflexible parti sans of the South, such as might fitly represent the sentiments of its President, John Gaillard, a Senator from South Carolina ; on the part of the House, it was nominated by Henry Clay, the Speaker, and Represen tative from Kentucky. This Committee, thus consti tuted, drawing its double life from the South, was unanimous in favor of the Compromise. A private letter from Mr. Pinkney, written at the time, and pre served by his distinguished biographer, shows that the report made by the Committee came from him : " The bill for the admission of Missouri into the Union (with out restriction as to Slavery) may be considered as past. That bill was sent back again this morning from the House, with the restriction as to Slavery. The Senate voted to amend it by striking out the restriction (twenty-seven to fifteen), and pro posed, as another amendment, what I have all along been the advocate of, a restriction upon the vacant territory to the north and west, as to Slavery. To-night the House of Representatives have agreed to both of these amendments, in opposition to their former votes, and this affair is settled. To-morrow we shall (of course) recede from our amendments as to Maine (our object being effected), and both States will be admitted. This happy result has been accomplished by the Conference, of which I was a member on the part of the Senate, and of which I proposed the report which has been made." JVheaton s Life of Pinkney. Thus again the Compromise takes its life from the South. Proposed in the Committee by Mr. Pinkney, it was urged on the House of Representatives, with great earnestness, by Mr. Lowndes, of South Carolina, and Mr. Mercer, of Virginia ; and here again is the most persuasive voice of the South. "When passed by Congress, it next came before the President, James 24* 282 THE LANDMARK. OP FREEDOM ; Monroe, of Virginia, for his approval, who did not sign it till after the unanimous opinion, in writing, of his Cabinet, composed of John Quincy Adams, Wil liam H. Crawford, Smith Thompson, John C. Calhoun, and William Wirt a majority of whom were Southern men that the prohibition of Slavery in the Territories was constitutional. Thus yet again the Compromise takes its life from the South. As the Compromise took its life from the South, so the South, in the judgment of its own statesmen at the time, and according to unquestionable facts, was the conquering party. It gained forthwith its darling desire, the first and essential stage in the admission of Missouri as a Slave State, successfully consummated at the next session ; and subsequently the admission of Arkansas, also as a Slave State. From the crushed and humbled North, it received more than the full consideration stipulated in its favor. On the side of the North the contract has been more than executed. And now the South refuses to perform the part which it originally proposed and assumed in this transaction. With the consideration in its pocket, it repudiates the bargain which it forced upon the country. This, sir, is a simple statement of the present question. A, subtle German has declared, that he could find heresies in the Lord s Prayer and I believe it is only in this spirit that any flaw can be found in the existing obligations of this compact. As late as 1848, in the discussions of this body, the Senator from Virginia, who usually sits behind me [Mr. Mason], but who is not now in his seat, while condemning it in many aspects, says : * Yet as it was agreed to as a Compromise by the South for FREEDOM NATIONAL. 283 the sake of the Union, I would be the last to disturb t7." Cong. Globe, Appendix, 1st sess. 30th Cong., vol. xix. p. 887. Even this determined Senator recognized it as an obligation which he would not disturb. And, though disbelieving the original constitutionality of the ar rangement, he was clearly right. I know, sir, that it is in form simply a legislative Act ; but as the Act of Settlement in England, declaring the rights and liber ties of the subject, and settling the succession of the Crown, has become a permanent part of the British Constitution, irrepealable by any common legislation, so this Act under all the circumstances attending its passage, also by long acquiescence and the complete performance of its conditions by one party, has become a part of our fundamental law, irrepealable by any common legislation. As well might Congress at this moment undertake to overhaul the original purchase of Louisiana, as unconstitutional, and now, on this account, thrust away that magnificent heritage, with all its cities, States and territories, teeming with civiliza tion. The Missouri Compact, in its unperformed obli gations to Freedom, stands at this day as impregnable as the Louisiana purchase. I appeal to Senators about me, not to disturb it. I appeal to the Senators from Virginia, to keep inviolate the compact made in their behalf by James Barbour and Charles Fenton Mercer. I appeal to the Senators from South Carolina, to guard the work of John Gail- lard and William Lowndcs. I appeal to the Senators from Maryland, to uphold the Compromise which elicited the constant support of Samuel Smith, and was first triumphantly pressed by the unsurpassed eloquence of Pinkney. I appeal to the Senators from 284 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Delaware, to maintain the landmark of Freedom in the Territory of Louisiana, early espoused by Louis Mc- Lane. I appeal to the Senators from Kentucky, not to repudiate the pledges of Henry Clay. I appeal to the Senators from Alabama, not to break the agree ment sanctioned by the earliest votes in the Senate of their late most cherished fellow-citizen, William Rufiis King. Sir, I have heard of an honor that felt a stain like a wound. - If there be any such in this chamber as surely there is it will hesitate to take upon itself the stain of this transaction. Sir, Congress may now set aside this obligation, repudiate this plighted faith, annul this compact ; and some of you, forgetful of the majesty of honest dealing, in order to support Slavery, may consider it advanta geous to use this power. To all such let me commend a familiar story : An eminent leader in antiquity, Themistocles, once announced to the Athenian Assem- x bly, that he had a scheme to propose, highly beneficial to the State, but which could not be expounded to the many. Aristides, surnamed the Just, was appointed to receive the secret, and to report upon it. His brief and memorable judgment was, that, while nothing could be more advantageous to Athens, nothing could be more unjust ; and the Athenian multitude, respond ing at once, rejected the proposition. It appears that it was proposed to burn the combined Greek fleet, which then rested in the security of peace in a neigh boring sea, and thus confirm the naval supremacy of Athens. A similar proposition is now brought before the American Senate. You are asked to destroy a safeguard of Freedom, consecrated by solemn compact, under which the country is now reposing in the secu- FREEDOM NATIONAL. 285 rity of peace, and thus confirm the supremacy of Slavery. To this institution and its partisans the proposition may seem to be advantageous ; but nothing can be more unjust. Let the judgment of the Athenian multitude be yours. This is what I have to say upon this head. I now pass to the second branch of the argument. II. Mr. President, it is not only as an infraction of solemn compact, embodied in ancient law, that I arraign this bill. I arraign it also as a flagrant and extravagant departure from the original policy of our fathers, consecrated by their lives, opinions and acts. And here, sir, bear with me in a brief recital of unquestionable facts. At the period of the Declaration of Independence, there was upwards of half a million colored persons in slavery throughout the United Colo nies. These unhappy people were originally stolen from Africa, or were the children of those who had been stolen, and, though distributed throughout the whole country, were to be found in largest number in the Southern States. But the spirit of Freedom then prevailed in the land. The fathers of the Republic, leaders in the war of Independence, were struck with the inconsistency of an appeal for their own liberties, while holding in bondage their fellow-men, only " guilty of a skin not colored like their own." The same con- - viction animated the hearts of the people, whether at the North or South. In a town meeting, at Danbury, Connecticut, held on the 12th December, 1778, the following declaration was made : " It is with singular pleasure we note the second article of the Association, in which it is agreed to import no more negro 286 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM J slaves, as we cannot but think it a palpable absurdity so loudly to complain of attempts to enslave us while we are actually en slaving others. Am. Archives, 4th Series, vol. i. p. 1038. The South responded in similar strains. At a meeting in Darien, Georgia, in 1775, the following important resolution was put forth : " To show the world that we are not influenced by any con tracted or interested motives, but by a general philanthropy for all mankind, of whatever climate, language, or complexion, we hereby declare our disapprobation and abhorrence of the un natural practice of Slavery in (however the uncultivated state of the country or other specious arguments may plead for it) a practice founded in injustice and cruelty, and highly dangerous to our liberties as well as lives, debasing part of our fellow- creatures below men and corrupting the virtue and morals of the rest, and laying the basis of that liberty we contend for, and which we pray the Almighty to continue to the latest posterity, upon a very wrong foundation. We therefore resolve at all times to use our utmost endeavors for the manumission of our slaves in this Colony, upon the most safe and equitable footing for the masters and themselves." im. Archives, 4th Series, vol. i. p. 1135. The soul of Virginia, during this period, found fervid utterance through Jefferson, who, by precocious and immortal words, has enrolled himself among the earliest Abolitionists of the country. In his address to the Virginia Convention of 1774, he openly avowed, .while vindicating the rights of British America, that " the abolition of domestic Slavery is the greatest ob ject of desire in these Colonies, where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state" And then again, in the Declaration of Independence, he embodied senti ments, which, when practically applied, will give Free dom to every slave throughout the land. " We hold FREEDOM NATIONAL. 287 these truths to be self-evident," says our country, speaking by the voice of Jefferson, " that all men are created equal that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And again, in the Congress of the Confederation, he brought forward, as early as 1784, a resolution to exclude Slavery from all the territory " ceded or to be ceded" by the States of the Federal Government, including the whole territory now covered by Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama. Lost at first by a single vote only, this measure was renewed in a more restricted form, at a subsequent day, by a son of Massachusetts, and in 1787 was finally confirmed in the Ordinance of the Northwestern Terri tory, by a unanimous vote of the States. Thus early and distinctly do we discern the Anti- Slavery character of the founders of our Republic, and their determination to place the National Government, within the sphere of its jurisdiction, openly, actively and perpetually, on the side of Freedom. The National Constitution was adopted in 1788. And here we discern the same spirit. The emphatic words of the Declaration of Independence, which our country took upon its lips as baptismal vows, when it claimed its place among the nations of the earth, were not forgotten. The preamble to the Constitution renews them, when it declares its object to be, among other things, "to establish justice, to promote the gen eral welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and posterity." Thus, according to undeniable words, the Constitution was ordained, not to establish, secure, or sanction Slavery not to promote the special interest of slaveholders not to make Slavery national 288 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; in any way, form, or manner not to foster this great wrong, but to " establish justice," " promote the gen eral welfare," and "secure the blessings of Liberty." The discreditable words Slave and Slavery were not allowed to find a place in this instrument, while a clause was subsequently added by way of amendment, and, therefore, according to the rules of interpretation, particularly revealing the sentiments of the founders, which is calculated, like the Declaration of Independ ence, if practically applied, to carry Freedom every where within the sphere of its influence. It was specifically declared, that " no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; " that is, without due presentment, indictment, or other judicial proceeding. Here is an express guard of personal Liberty, and an express- interdict upon slavery anywhere within the national jurisdic tion. It is evident, from the debates on the National Constitution, that Slavery,- like the Slave trade, was regarded as temporary ; and it seems to have been supposed by many that they would both disappear together. Nor do any words employed in our day denounce it with an indignation more burning than those which glowed on the lips of the Fathers. Early in the Convention, Gouverneur Morris, of Pennsylvania, broke forth in the language of an Abolitionist : " He never would concur in upholding domestic Slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of Heaven." In another mood, and with mild, juridical phrase, Mr. Madison " thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea of property in man." And Washington, in letters written near this period FUEEDOM NATIONAL. 289 which completely describe the aims of an Abolitionist avowed " that it was among his first wishes to see some plan adopted by which Slavery may be abolished by law," and that to this end "his suffrage should not be wanting." In this spirit was the National Constitution adopted. In this spirit the National Government was first organ ized under Washington. And here there is a fact of peculiar significance, to which I have already, on a former occasion, called attention, but which is well worthy of perpetual memory. At the time that this great chief took his first oath to support the Constitu tion of the United States, the national ensign nowhere within the national territory covered a single slave. On the sea, an execrable piracy, the trade in slaves, was still, to the national scandal, tolerated under the national flag. In the States, as a sectional institution, beneath the shelter of local laws, Slavery unhappily found a home. But in the only Territories at this time belonging to the nation, the broad region of the North west, it had already, by the Ordinance of Freedom, been made impossible, even before the adoption of the Constitution. The District of Columbia, with its Fatal Dowry, had not yet been acquired. Entering upon his high duties, Washington, himself an Abolitionist, was surrounded by men, who, by their lives and declared opinions, were pledged to warfare with Slavery. There was John Adams, the Vice Pres ident great vindicator and final negotiator of our National Independence whose soul, flaming with Freedom, broke forth in the early declaration, that " consenting to Slavery is a sacrilegious breach of trust," and whose immitigable hostility to this wrong 25 290 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; has been made immortal in his descendants. By hia side, also, was a companion in arms and attached friend, the yet youthful and "incomparable" Hamil ton fit companion in early fame and genius with that darling of English history, Sir Philip Sidney, to whom the latter epithet has been reserved who, as a member of the Abolition Society of New York, had only recently united in a solemn petition for those who, " though free ~by the laws of God, are held in Slavery by the laws of the State." There, too, was a noble spirit, of spotless virtue, and commanding influ ence, the ornament of human nature, who, like the sun, ever held an unerring course, John Jay. Filling the important post of Minister of Foreign Affairs under the Confederation, he found time to organize the Abolition Society of New York, and to act as its Presi dent, until by the nomination of Washington he be came Chief Justice of the United States. In his sight, Slavery was an " iniquity " " a sin of crimson dye," against which ministers of the gospel should testify, and which the Government should seek in every way. to abolish. "Were I in the Legislature," he wrote, " I would present a bill for this purpose with great care, and I would never cease moving it till it became a law or I ceased to be a member. Till America comes into this measure, her prayers to Heaven will be impious." By such men was Washington sur rounded, while from his own Virginia came the voice of Patrick Henry, amidst confessions that he was a master of slaves, crying, " I will not, I cannot justify it. However culpable my conduct, I will so far pay my devoir to virtue as to own the excellence and rectitude of her precepts, and lament my want of con- FREEDOM NATIONAL. 291 formity to them." Such words as these, fitly coming from our leaders, belong to the true glories of the country : " While we such precedents can boast at home, Keep thy Fabricius and thy Cato, Rome ! " The earliest Congress under the Constitution adopted the Ordinance of Freedom for the Northwestern Ter ritory, and thus ratified the prohibition of Slavery in all the existing Territories of the Union. In the list of those who sanctioned this act were men fresh from the labors of the Convention, and therefore familiar with its policy. But there is another voice which bears testimony in the same direction. Among the petitions presented to the first Congress, was one from the Abo lition Society of Pennsylvania, signed by Benjamin Franklin, as President. This venerable votary of Free dom, who throughout a long life had splendidly served his country at home and abroad who, as statesman and philosopher, had won the admiration of man kind who had ravished the lightning from the skies and the sceptre from the tyrant whose name, signed to the Declaration of Independence, gave added im portance even to that great instrument, and then again signed to the Constitution of the United States, filled it with the charm of wisdom in whom, more than in any other man, the true spirit of American Institu tions, at once practical and humane, was embodied who knew intimately the purposes and aspirations of the founders this veteran statesman, then eighty- four years of age, appeared at the bar of that Congress, whose powers he had helped to define and establish, and, by the last political act of his long life, solemnly entreated " that it would be pleased to countenance 292 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; the restoration of liberty to those unhappy men, who alone, in this land of Freedom, are degraded into per petual bondage," and " that it would step to the very verge of the power vested in it for DISCOURAGING every species of traffic in the persons of our fellow- men." Only a short time after uttering this prayer, the patriot sage descended to the tomb ; but he seems still to call upon Congress, in memorable words, to step to the very verge of the powers vested in it to dis courage Slavery ; and this prayer, now sounding from the tomb of Franklin, proclaims the true national policy of the Fathers. Not encouragement, but discouragement of slavery, not its nationalization, but its denational ization, was their rule. The memorial of Franklin, with other memorials of a similar character, was referred to a Committee, and much debated in the House, which finally sanctioned the following resolution, and directed the same to be entered upon its journals, viz : " That Congress have no authority to interfere in the eman cipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them, -within any of the States ; it remaining with the several States to provide any regulations therein which humanity may require." This resolution, declaring the principle of non-inter vention by Congress with Slavery in the States, was adopted by the same Congress which had solemnly affirmed the prohibition of Slavery in all the existing territory of the Union ; and not only by the same Congress, but at the same session, so that one may be regarded as the complement of the other. And it is on these double acts, at the first organization of the Government, and the recorded sentiments of tho FREEDOM NATIONAL. 293 founders, that I take my stand, and challenge all question. At this time, there was strictly no dividing line in the country between Anti- Slavery and Pro- Slavery. The Anti-Slavery sentiment was thoroughly national, broad and general, pervading alike all parts of the Union, And uprising from the common heart of the entire people. The Pro-Slavery interest was strictly personal ind pecuniary, and had its source simply in the self- interest of individual slaveholders. It contemplated Slavery only as a domestic institution not as a political element and merely stipulated for its se curity where it actually existed within the States. Sir, the original policy of the country, begun under cue Confederation, and recognized at the initiation of the new Government, is clear and unmistakable. Com pendiously expressed, it was non-intervention by Con gress with Slavery in the States, and its prohibition in all the national domain. In this way, the discordant feelings on this subject were reconciled. Slave-masters were left at home in their respective States, under the protection of local laws, to hug Slavery without any interference from Congress, while all opposed to it were exempted from any responsibility therefor in the national domain. This, sir, is the common ground on which our political fabric was reared ; and I do not hesitate to say that it is the only ground on which it can stand in permanent peace. It is beyond question, sir, that our Constitution was framed by the lovers of Human Rights ; that it was animated by their divine spirit; that the institution of Slavery was regarded by them with aversion, so that, though covertly alluded to, it was not named 23? 294 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; in the instrument ; that, according to the debates in the Convention, they refused to give it any " sanction," and looked forward to the certain day when it would be obliterated from the land. But the original policy of the Government did not long prevail. The gener ous sentiments which filled the early patriots, giving to them historic grandeur, gradually lost their power. The blessings of Freedom being already secured to themselves, the freemen of the land grew indifferent to the freedom of others. They ceased to think of the slaves. The slave-masters availed themselves of this indifference, and, though few in numbers, compared with the non-slaveholders, even in the slave States (according to the late census they are fewer than three hundred and fifty thousand), they have, under the in fluence of an imagined self-interest, by the skilful tactics of party, and especially by an unhesitating, per severing union among themselves swaying, by turns, both the great political parties succeeded, through, a long succession of years, in obtaining the control of the National Government, bending it to their purposes, compelling it to do their will, and imposing upon it a policy friendly to Slavery offensive to Freedom only and directly opposed to the sentiments of its found ers. Our Republic has swollen in population and power ; but it has shrunk in character. It is not now what it was in the beginning, a Republic merely permitting, while it regretted Slavery ; tolerating it only where it could not be removed, and interdicting it where it did not exist but a mighty Propagandist, openly favor ing and vindicating it ; visiting, also, with displeasure all who oppose it. Sir, our country early reached heights which it could FREEDOM NATIONAL. 295 not keep. Its fall was gentle but complete. At the session of Congress immediately following the ratifica tion of the prohibition of Slavery in the national domain, a transfer of the territory now constituting Tennessee was accepted from North Carolina (2d April, 1790), loaded with the express condition " that no regulation made, or to be made, should tend to eman cipate slaves ; " a formal provision, w r hich, while ad mitting the power of Congress over Slavery in the Territories, waived the prevailing policy of executing it. This was followed, in 1798, by the transfer from Georgia of the region between her present western limit and the Mississippi, under a similar condition. In both these cases, an apology may be found in the very terms of the transfers, and in the fact that the region consti tuted a part of two States- where Slavery actually existed ; though it will be confessed that even here there was a descent from that summit of Freedom on which the Nation had so proudly rested : * From morn To noon he fell ; from noon to dewy eve A summer s day, and with the setting sun Drop d from the zenith, like a falling star." But, without tracing this downward course through its successive stages, let me refer to facts, which too palpably reveal the abyss that has been reached. Early in our history, no man was disqualified for public office by reasons of his opinions on this subject; and this condition continued for a long period. As late as 1821, John W. Taylor, Representative from New York, who had pressed with so much energy, not merely the prohibition of Slavery in the Territories, but its restriction in the State of Missouri, was elected 296 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; to the chair of Henry Clay, as Speaker of the other House. It is needless to add, that no determined supporter of the prohibition of Slavery in the Terri tories at this day could expect that eminent trust. An arrogant and unrelenting ostracism is now applied, not only to all who express themselves against Slavery, but to every man who will not be its menial. A novel test for office has been introduced, which would have excluded all the Fathers of the Republic even Wash ington, Jefferson and Franklin. Yes, sir ; startling it may be, but indisputable. Could these illustrious men descend from their realms above, and revisit the land which they once nobly dedicated to Freedom, they could not, with their well-known and recorded opinions against Slavery, receive a nomination for the Presi dency from either of the old political parties. Nor could John Jay, our first Chief Justice, and great ex emplar of Judicial virtue who hated Slavery as he loved Justice be admitted to resume those duties with which his name on earth is indissolubly associated ; nor could either of the patriots, whose names are now our greatest pride, be confirmed by the Senate for any political function whatever. To such lowest deep has our Government descended. These things prepare us to comprehend the true character of the change with regard to the Territories. Jn 1787, all the existing national domain was prompt ly and unanimously dedicated to Freedom, without opposition or criticism. The interdict of Slavery then covered every inch of soil belonging to the National Government. Louisiana, an immense region beyond the bounds of the original States, was subsequently acquired, and in 1 820, after a vehement struggle, which FREEDOM NATIONAL. 297 shook the whole land, discomfited Freedom was com pelled, by a dividing line, to a partition with Slavery. This arrangement, which, in its very terms, was exclu sively applicable to a particular territory purchased from France, has been accepted as final down to the present session of Congress ; but now sir, here in 1854, Freedom is suddenly summoned to surrender even her hard- won moiety. Here are the three stages : at the first, all is consecrated to Freedom ; at the second, only half; while at the third, all is grasped by Slavery. Thus is the original policy of the Gov ernment absolutely reversed. Slavery, which, at the beginning, was a sectional institution, with no foothold anywhere on the National Territory, is now exalted as a National Institution, and all our broad domain is threatened by its blighting shadow. Thus much for what I "have to say, at this time, of the original policy, consecrated by the lives, opinions and acts of our Fathers. Summoning to my side the majestic forms of those civil heroes, whose firmness in council was only equalled by the firmness of "Wash ington in war, I might leave the cause in their care. But certain reasons are adduced for the proposed de parture from their great example, and, -though these seem of little validity, yet I would not pass them in silence. The Prohibition of Slavery in the Territories is assailed, as beyond the power of Congress, and an infringement of the local sovereignty. On this account it is, at this late clay, pronounced unconstitutional. Now, without considering minutely the sources from 298 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; which the power of Congress over the national domain is derived whether from the express grant in the Constitution to make rules and regulations for the government of the Territory, or from the power, neces sarily implied, to govern Territory acquired by con quest or purchase it seems to me impossible to deny its existence, without invalidating a large portion of the legislation of the country, from the adoption of the Constitution down to the present day. This power was asserted before the Constitution. It was not denied or prohibited by the Constitution itself. It has been exercised from the first existence of the Government, and has been recognized by the three de partments the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial. Precedents of every kind are thick in its support. Indeed, the very Bill now before us, assumes a control of the Territory clearly inconsistent with those principles of sovereignty, which are said to be violated by a Congressional prohibition of Slavery. Here are provisions, determining the main features in the Government the distribution of powers in the Executive, the Legislative and Judicial departments, and the manner in which they shall be respectively constituted ; securing to the President, with the con sent of the Senate, the appointment of the Governor, the Secretary and the Judges, and to the people only the election of the Legislature ; and even ordaining the qualifications of voters, the salaries of the public officers, and the daily compensation of the members of the Legislature. Surely, if Congress may establish these provisions, without any interference with the rights of territorial sovereignty, it is absurd to say that it may not also prohibit Slavery. FKEEDOM NATIONAL. 299 But in the very Bill there is an express prohibition on the Territory, borrowed from the Ordinance of 1787, and repeated in every Act organizing a Territory, or even a new State, down to the present time, wherein it is expressly declared, that " no tax shall be imposed upon the property of the United States." Now, here is a clear and unquestionable restraint upon the sover eignty of Territories and States. The public lands of the United States, situated within an organized Terri tory or State, cannot be regarded as the instruments and means necessary and proper to execute the sover eign powers of the nation, like fortifications, arsenals and navy yards. They are strictly in the nature of private property of the nation, and as such, unless exempted by the foregoing prohibition, would clearly be within the field of local -taxation, liable, like the lands of other proprietors, to all customary burdens and incidents. Mr. Justice Woodbury has declared, in a well-considered judgment, that " where the United States own land situated within the limits of particular States, and over which they have no cession of juris diction, for objects either special or general, little doubt exists that the rights and remedies in relation to it are usually the same as apply to other landholders within the States." (United States v. Ames, 1 Wood- bury & Minot, p. 76). I assume, then, that without this prohibition these lands would be liable to taxation. Does any one question this ? Nobody. The conclu sion then follows, that by this prohibition you propose to deprive the present Territory, as you have deprived other Territories ay, and States of an essential portion of its sovereignty. And these, sir, are not vain words. The Supreme 300 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Court of the United States have given great promi nence to the sovereign right of taxation in the States. In the case of Providence Bank v. Pittman, 4 Peters, 514, they declare . " That the taxing power is % of vital importance ; that it is es sential to the existence of Government ; that the relinquishment of such power is never to be assumed." And again, in the case of Dobbins v. Commissioners of Erie County, 16 Peters, 447, they say " Taxation is a sacred right, essential to the existence of Gov ernment an incident of sovereignty. The right of legislation is co-extensive with the incident to attach it upon all persons and property within the jurisdiction of the State." Now, I call upon Senators to remark, that this sacred right, said to be essential to the very existence of Government, is abridged in the Bill before us. For myself, I do not doubt the power of Congress to fasten this restriction upon the Territory, and after wards upon the State, as has been always done ; but I am at a loss to see on what grounds this restric tion can be placed, which will not also support the Prohibition of Slavery. The former is an unquestion able infringement of sovereignty, as declared by our Supreme Court, far more than can be asserted of the latter. I am unwilling to admit, sir, that the Prohibition of Slavery in the Territories is in any just sense an infringement of the local sovereignty. Slavery is. an infraction of the immutable law of nature, and as such, cannot be considered a natural incident to any sover eignty, especially in a country which has solemnly declared, in its Declaration of Independence, the in- FREEDOM NATIONAL. 301 alienable right of all men to life, liberty and the pur suit of happiness. In an age of civilization and in a land of rights, Slavery may still he tolerated in fact ; hut its prohibition, within a municipal jurisdiction, by the Government thereof as by one of the States of the Union cannot be considered an infraction of natural rights ; nor can its prohibition by Congress in the Territories be regarded as an infringement of the local sovereignty, founded, as it must be, on natural rights. But another argument is pressed, most fallacious in its character. It is asserted that, inasmuch as the Territories were acquired by the common treasure, they are the common property of the whole Union ; and, therefore, no citizen can be prevented from moving into them with his slaves, without an infringement of the equal rights and privileges which belong to him as a citizen of the United States. But, it is admitted that the people of this very Territory, when organized as a State, may exclude slaves, and in this way abridge an asserted right founded on the common property in the Territory. Now, if this can be done by the few thou sand settlers who constitute the State Government, the whole argument founded on the acquisition of the Territories, by a common treasure, seems futile and evanescent. But this argument proceeds on an assumption which cannot stand. It assumes that Slavery is a National Institution, and that property in slaves is recognized by the Constitution of the United States. Nothing can be more false. By the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, and also by the principles of the common law, Slavery is a local municipal insti- 26 302 THE LAN DM AUK OF FItEEDOM ; tution, whicli derives its support exclusively from local municipal laws, and beyond the sphere of these laws it ceases to exist, except so far as it may be preserved by the clause for the rendition of fugitives from service. Madison thought it wrong to admit into the Constitu- ;ion the idea that there can be property in man ; and I rejoice to believe that no such idea can be found there. The Constitution regards slaves always as " persons," with the rights of " persons," never as property. When it is said, therefore, that every citizen may enter the national domain with his property, it does not fol low, by any rule of logic or of law, that he may carry his slaves. On the contrary, he can only carry that prop erty which is admitted to be such by the universal law of nature, written by God s own finger on the heart of man. Again: The relation of master and slave is some times classed with the domestic relations. Now, while it is unquestionably among the powers of any State, within its own jurisdiction, to change the existing relation of husband and wife, and to establish polyg amy, I presume no person would contend that a polyg amous husband, resident in one of the States, would be entitled to enter the National Territory with his harem his property, if you please and there claim immunity. Clearly, when he passes the bounds of that local jurisdiction,, which sanctions polygamy, the pecu liar domestic relation would cease ; and it is precisely the same with Slavery. Sir, I dismiss these considerations. The Prohibition of Slavery in the Territory of Kansas and Nebraska stands on foundations of adamant, upheld by the early policy of the Fathers, by constant precedent, and time- FREEDOM NATIONAL., 303 honored compact. It is now in your power to overturn it ; you may remove the sacred landmark, and open the whole vast domain to Slavery. To you is committed this high prerogative. Our fathers, on the eve of the Revolution, set forth in burning words, among their grievances, that George III. " in order to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, had prostituted his negative for suppressing every legis lative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce." Sir, like the English monarch, you may now prostitute your power to this same purpose. But you cannot escape the judgment of the world, nor the doom of history. It will be in vain, that, while doing this thing, you plead, in apology, the principle of self-government, which you profess to recognize in the Territories. Sir, this very principle, when truly administered, secures equal rights to all, without distinction of color or race, and makes Slavery impossible. By no rule of justice, and by no subtlety of political metaphysics, can the right to hold a fellow-man in bondage be regarded as essential to self-government. The inconsistency is too flagrant. It is apparent on the bare statement. It is like saying two and two make three. In the name of Liberty you open the door to Slavery. With profes sions of Equal Rights on the lips, you trample on the rights of Human Nature. With a kiss upon the brow of that fair Territory, you betray it to wretchedness and shame. Well did the patriot soul exclaim, in bitter words, wrung out by bitter experience : " Oh Liberty ! what crimes are done in thy name! " In vain, sir, you will plead, that this measure pro ceeds from the North, as has been suggested by the 304 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Dixon]. Even if this were true, it would be no apology. But, precipitated as this Bill has been upon the Senate, at a moment of general calm, and in the absence of any controlling exigency, and then hurried to a vote in advance of the public voice, as if fearful of arrest, it cannot justly be called the offspring of any popular sentiment. In this respect it differs widely from the Missouri Prohibi tion, which, after solemn debate, extending through two sessions of Congress, and ample discussion before the people, was adopted. Certainly there is, as yet, no evidence that this attempt, though espoused by Northern politicians, proceeds from that Northern sen timent which throbs and glows, strong and fresh, in the schools, the churches and homes of the people. Populi omnes AD AQUILONEM positi Libertatem quandam spirant. And could the abomination which you seek to perpetrate be now submitted to the awakened mil lions whose souls have been truly ripened under North ern skies, it would be flouted at once with indignant and undying scorn. But the race of men, "white slaves of the North," described and despised by a Southern statesman, is not yet extinct there, sir. It is one of the melancholy tokens of the power of Slavery, under our political system, and especially through the operations of the National Government, that it loosens and destroys the character of Northern men, exerting its subtle influence even at a distance like the black magnetic moun tain in the Arabian story, under whose irresistible attraction the iron bolts, which held together the strong timbers of a stately ship, securely floating on the distant wave, were drawn out, till the whole fell FREEDOM NATIONAL. 305 apart, and became a disjointed wreck. Alas ! too often those principles, which give consistency, indi viduality and form, to the Northern character, which render it staunch, strong and seaworthy, which hind it together as with iron, are sucked out, one by one, like the bolts of the ill-fated vessel, and from the miserable, loosened fragments is formed that human anomaly a Northern man with Southern principles. Sir No such man can speak for the North. [Here there was an interruption of prolonged ap plause in the galleries.] The PRESIDENT (Mr. Stuart in the chair). The Chair will be obliged to direct the galleries to be cleared, if order is not preserved. No applause will be allowed. SEVERAL VOICES. Let them be cleared now. Mr. SUMXER. Mr. President, I advance now to considerations of a more general character, to which I ask your best attention. Sir, this Bill is proposed as a measure of peace. In this way you vainly think to withdraw the subject of Slavery from National Politics. This is a mistake. Peace depends on mutual confi dence. It can never rest secure on broken faith and injustice. And, sir permit me to say, frankly, sin cerely and earnestly, that the subject of Slavery can never be withdrawn from the National Politics, until we return once more to the original policy of our fathers, at the first organization of the Government, under Washington, when the National ensign nowhere on the National Territory covered a single slave. Slavery, which our fathers branded as an " evil," a "curse," an " enormity," a " nefarious institution," is 26* 306 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; condemned at the North by the strongest convictions of the reason and the best sentiments of the heart. It is the only subject within the field of National Politics which excites any real interest. The old matters which have divided the minds of men have lost their import ance. One by one they have disappeared, leaving the ground to be occupied by a question grander far. The Bank, Sub-Treasury, the Distribution of the Public Lands, are each and all obselete issues. Even the Tariff is not a question on which opposite political parties are united in taking opposite sides. And now, instead of these superseded questions, which were filled for the most part with the odor of the dollar, the country is directly summoned to consider face to face a cause, which is connected with all that is divine in religion, with all that is pure and noble in morals, with all that is truly practical and constitutional in politics. Unlike the other questions, it is not temporary or local in its character. It belongs to all times and to all countries. Though long kept in check, it now, by your introduction, confronts the people, demanding to be heard. To every man in the land it says, with clear, penetrating voice, " Are you for Freedom, or are you for Slavery? " And every man in the land must answer this question when he votes. Pass this Bill, and it will be in vain that you say, the Slavery Question is settled. Sir, nothing can be settled which is not right. Nothing can be settled which is ^adverse to Freedom. God, nature and all the holy sentiments of the heart, repudiate any such false seeming settlement. Now, sir, mark the clear line of our duty. And here let me speak for those with whom, in minority and FREEDOM NATIONAL. 307 defeat, I am proud to be associated, the Independent Democrats, who espouse that Democracy which is transfigured in the Declaration of Independence and the injunctions of Christianity. The testimony which we bear against Slavery, as against all other wrong, is in different ways, according to our position. The Slavery, which exists under other Governments as in Russia or Turkey or in other States of the Union, as in Virginia and Carolina, we can oppose only through the influence of literature, morals and religion, without in any way invoking the Political Power. Nor is it proposed to act otherwise. But Slavery, where we are parties to it where we are responsible for it everywhere within our jurisdiction must be opposed, not only by all the influence of literature, morals and religion, but directly by every instrument of Political Power. In the States it is sustained by local laws, and although we may be compelled to share the shame, which its presence inflicts upon the fair fame of the country, yet it receives no direct sanction at our hands. We are not responsible for it. The wrong is not at our own particular doors. It is not within our jurisdiction. But Slavery everywhere under the Constitution of the United States every where within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Government everywhere under the National Flag, is at our own particular doors, within the sphere of our own personal responsibility, and exists there in defiance of the original policy of our Fathers, and of the true principles of the Constitution. It is a mistake to say, as is often charged, that we seek to interfere, through Congress, with Slavery in the States, or in any way to direct the legislation of 308 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; Congress upon subjects not within its jurisdiction. Our political aims, as well as our political duties, are co-extensive with our political responsibilities. And since we at the North are responsible for Slavery wherever it exists under the jurisdiction of Congress, it is unpardonable in us not to exert every power we possess to enlist Congress against it. Such is our cause. To men of all parties and opinions, who wish well to the Republic, and would preserve its good name, it appeals. Alike to the Con servative and the Reformer, it appeals ; for it stands on the truest Conservatism and the truest Reform. In seeking the reform of existing evils, w^e seek also the conservation of the principles of our fathers. The cause is not sectional. Oh, no ! sir, it is not sectional ; for it simply aims to establish under the National Gov ernment those great principles of Justice and Humanity, which are broad and universal as man. As well might it be said that Jefferson, Franklin and Washington, were sectional. It is not aggressive ; for it does not seek in any way to interfere, through Congress, with Slavery in the States. It is not contrary to the Con stitution ; for it recognizes this paramount law, and in the administration of the Government invokes the spirit of its founders. Sir, it is not hostile to the quiet of the country ; for it proposes the only course by which agitation can be allayed, and quiet be per manently established. It is not uncommon to hear persons declare that they are against Slavery, and are willing to unite in any practical efforts to make this opposition felt. At the same time, they pharisaically visit with con demnation, with reproach or contempt, the earnest FREEDOM NATIONAL. 309 souls who for years have striven in this struggle. To such I would say could I reach them now. with my voice if you are sincere in what you declare ; if your words are not merely lip-service ; if in your hearts you are entirely willing to join in any practical efforts against Slavery, then by your lives, by your conversa tion, by your influence, by your votes disregarding " the ancient forms of party strife " seek to carry the principles of Freedom into the National Govern ment, wherever its jurisdiction is acknowledged and its power can be felt. Thus, without any interference with the States, which are beyond this jurisdiction, may you help to erase the blot of Slavery from our National brow. Do this, and you will most truly promote the har mony which you so much desire. You will establish tranquillity throughout the country. Then at last, sir, the Slavery Question will be settled. Banished from its usurped foothold under the National Government, Slavery will no longer enter, with distracting force, into the National Politics making and unmaking laws, making and unmaking Presidents. Confined to the States, where it was left by the Constitution, it will take its place as a local institution if, alas ! continue it must ! for which we are in no sense responsible, and against which we cannot exert any political power. We shall be relieved from our pres ent painful and irritating connection with it. The existing antagonism between the North and the South will be softened; crimination and recrimination will cease ; the wishes of the Fathers will be fulfilled, and this Great Evil will be left to the kindly influences of 310 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM; morals and religion, and the prevailing laws of social economy. I am not blind to the adverse signs. But this I see clearly. - Amidst all seeming discouragements, the great omens are with us. Art, literature, poetry, religion everything which elevates man all are on our side. The plough, the steam-engine, the rail road, the telegraph, the book, every human improve ment, every generous word anywhere, every true pulsation of every heart which is not a mere muscle, and nothing else, gives new encouragement to the warfare with Slavery. The discussion will proceed. The devices of party can no longer stave it off. The subterfuges of the politician cannot escape it. The tricks of the office-seeker cannot dodge it. Wherever an election occurs, there this question will arise. Wherever men come together to speak of public affairs, there again will it be. No political Joshua now, with miraculous power, can stop the sun in his course through the heavens. It is even now rejoicing, like a strong man, to run its race, and will yet send its beams into the most distant plantations ay, sir, and melt the chains of every slave. But this movement or agitation, as it is reproach fully called is boldly pronounced injurious to the very object desired. Now, without entering into details which neither time nor the occasion justifies, let me say that this objection belongs to those com monplaces, which have been arrayed against every beneficent movement in the world s history against even knowledge itself against the abolition of the slave-trade. Perhaps it was not unnatural for the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Badger] to press it, FREEDOM NATIONAL. 311 even as vehemently as he did ; but it sounded less natural when it came, though in more moderate phrase, from my distinguished friend and colleague from Massachusetts [Mr. Everett]. The past furnishes a controlling example by which its true character may be determined. Do not forget, sir, that the efforts of William Wilberforce encountered this precise objec tion, and that the condition of the kidnapped slave was then vindicated, in language not unlike that of the Senator from North Carolina, by no less a person than the Duke of Clarence, of the royal family of Great Britain. In what was called his maiden speech, on 3d May, 1792, and preserved in the Parliamentary Debates, he said : " The negroes were not treated in the manner which had so much agitated the public mind. He had been an attentive observer of their state, and had no doubt that he could bring forward proofs to convince their lordships that their state was far from being miserable ; on the contrary, that when the various ranks of society were considered, they were comparatively in a state of humble happiness." And only the next year this same royal prince, in debate in the House of Lords, asserted that the promoters of the abolition of the slave-trade were " either fanatics or hypocrites," and in one of these classes he ranked Wilberforce. Mark now the end. After years of weary effort, the slave-trade was finally abolished ; and at last, in 1833, the early vindicator of this enor mity, the maligner of a name hallowed among men, was brought to give his royal assent, as William IV., King of Great Britain, to the immortal Act of Parlia ment, greater far than any victory of war, by which slavery was abolished throughout the British domin- 312 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM ; ions. Sir, time and the universal conscience have vindi cated the labors of Wilberforce. The movement against American Slavery, auspicated by the august names of Washington, Franklin and Jefferson, can calmly await a similar judgment. But it is suggested that, in this movement, there is danger to the Union. In this solicitude I cannot share. As a lover of concord and a jealous partisan of all things that make for peace, I am always glad to express my attachment to the Union ; but I believe that this bond will be most truly preserved and most beneficently extended (for I shrink from no expansion where Freedom leads the way) by firmly upholding those principles of Liberty and Justice which were made its early corner-stones. The true danger to this Union proceeds, not from any abandonment of the, " peculiar institution " of the South, but from the abandonment of the spirit in which the Union was formed ; not from any warfare, within the limits of the Constitution, upon Slavery ; but from warfare, like that waged by this very Bill, upon Freedom. The Union is most precious ; but more precious far are that " general welfare," " domestic tranquillity," and those " blessings of Liberty," which it was estab lished to secure ; all which are now wantonly endan gered. Not that I love the Union less, but Freedom more, do I now, in pleading this great cause, insist that Freedom, at all hazards, shall be preserved. One word more, and I have done. The great master, Shakespeare, who, with all-seeing mortal eye, observed mankind, and with immortal pen depicted the manners as they rise, has presented a scene which may be read with advantage by all who would plunge FREEDOM NATIONAL. 313 the South into tempestuous quarrel with the North. I refer to the well-known dialogue between Brutus and Cassius. Reading this remarkable passage, it is difficult not to see in Brutus our own North, and in Cassius the South : Cas. Urge me no more, I shall forget myself ; Have a mind upon your health, tempt me no further. Bru. Hear me, for I will speak. Must I give way and room to your rash choler ? Cas. ye gods ! ye gods ! Must I endure all this ? Bru. All this ? ay, more : Fret, till your proud heart break : G?o, show your slaves how choleric you are. And make your bondmen tremble. Must I budge ? Must I observe you ? Must I stand and crouch Under your testy humor ? Cas. Do not presume too much upon my love, I may do that I shall be sorry for. Bru. You have done that you should be sorry for. There is no terror, Cassius, in your threats ; For I am arm d so strong in honesty, That they pass by me, as the idle wind, Which I respect not. Cas. A friend should bear his friend s infirmities, But Brutus makes mine greater than they are. Bru. I do not, TILL YOU PRACTISE THEM ON ME. Cas. You love me not. Bru. I do not like your faults. Julius Ccesar, Act iv. Scene 3. And the colloquy proceeding, each finally comes to understand the other, appreciates his character and attitude, and the impetuous gallant Cassius exclaims, " Give me your hand ; " to which Brutus replies, " And my heart too." Afterwards, with hand and heart united, on the field of Philippi they together upheld the liberties of Rome. The North and the South, sir, as I fondly trust, 314 THE LANDMARK OF FKEEDOM, ETC. amidst all differences, will ever have a hand and heart for each other ; and, believing in the sure prevalence of Almighty Truth, I confidently look forward to the good time, when both will unite, according to the senti ments of the Fathers and the true spirit of the Constitu tion, in declaring Freedom and not Slavery NATIONAL, to the end that the Flag of the Republic, wherever it floats, on sea or land, within the National jurisdiction, may not cover a single slave. Then will be achieved that Union contemplated at the beginning, against which the storms of faction and the assaults of foreign power shall beat in vain, as upon the Rock of Ages ; and LIBERTY, seeking a firm foothold, WILL HATE AT LAST WHEREON TO STAND AND MOVE THE WORLD. FINAL PROTEST FOR HIMSELF AND THE CLERGY OF NEW ENGLAND AGAINST SLAVERY IN NEBRASKA AND KANSAS. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ON THE NIGHT OF THE FINAL PASSAGE OF THE NEBRASKA AND KANSAS BILL, 25TH MAY, 1854. The original debate in the Senate, on the Nebraska and Kansas Bill, in which Mr. Sumner took part, was closed by the passage of that Bill after a protracted session throughout the night on the morning of Saturday, 4th March, 1854, by a vote of .thirty- seven yeas to fourteen nays. The Bill was then sent to the House of Representatives for action there. It was there taken up and referred to the Committee of the Whole ; but, owing to the mass of prior business, it became impossible to reach it. Under these circumstances a fresh Bill, identical with that which had passed the Senate, was introduced and passed the House. This, of course, required the action of the Senate. On the 23d May, a message from the House announced its passage and asked the concurrence of the Senate. It was at once read a first time ; but, on the objection of Mr. Sumner, its second reading was stopped on that day. On the next day, on motion of Mr. Douglas, all prior orders were postponed for the purpose of considering it. The debate upon it continued during that day and the next. Late in the night of the last day, after the Bill had been reported to the Senate, and the question had been put by the Chair, "Shall the Bill be engrossed and read a third time?" Mr. SUMNER took the floor and said : Mr. President : It is now midnight. At this late hour of a session drawn out to an unaccustomed length, [315] 316 FINAL PROTEST AGAINST SLAVERY IN I shall not fatigue the Senate by argument. There is a time for all things, and the time for this has passed. The determination of the majority is fixed ; but it is not more fixed than mine. The Bill which they sustain, I oppose. On a former occasion I met it by argument, which, though often attacked in debate, still stands unanswered and unanswerable. At present, I am admonished that I must be content with a few words of earnest protest against the consummation of a great wrong. Duty to myself, and also to the honored Commonwealth, of which I find myself the sole repre sentative in this immediate exigency, will not allo w me to do less. But I have a special duty, which I would not omit. Here on my desk are remonstrances against the pas sage of this Bill, some of which have been placed in my hands since the commencement of the debate to-day, and I desire that these voices, direct from the people, should be heard. With the permission of the Senate, I will offer them now. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Stuart in the chair). The remonstrances can be received by unanimous consent. SEVERAL VOICES. Let them be received. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair hears no ob jection. Mr. STJMNER. Taking advantage of this permission, I now present the remonstrance of a large number of citizens of New York against the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. I also present the memorial of the religious Society of Friends in Michigan, against the passage of the NEBKASKA AND KANSAS. 31 7 Nebraska Bill, or any other Bill annulling the Missouri Compromise Act of 1820. I also present the remonstrance of the clergy and laity of the Baptist denomination in Michigan and Indiana, against the wrong and bad faith contemplated in the Nebraska Bill. But this is not all. I hold in my hand, and now present to the Senate, one hundred and twenty-five separate remonstrances, from clergymen of every Protestant denomination in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, constituting the six New England States. These remonstrances are identi cal in character with the larger one presented by my distinguished colleague [Mr. Everett] whose term of service here ends in a few days, by voluntary resig nation, and who is now detained at home by illness and were originally intended as a part of it, but did not arrive in season to be annexed to that interesting and weighty document. They are independent in form, though supplementary in their nature helping to swell the protest of the pulpits of New England. \Vith pleasure and pride I now do this service, and, at this last stage, interpose the sanctity of the pulpits of New England to arrest an alarming outrage ; be lieving that the remonstrants, from their eminent character and influence, as representatives of the intel ligence and conscience of the country, are peculiarly entitled to be heard ; and, further, believing that their remonstrances, while respectful in form, embody just conclusions, both of opinion and fact. Like them, sir, I do not hesitate to protest here against the Bill yet pending before the Senate, as a great moral wrong ; 27* 318 FINAL PROTEST AGAINST SLAVERY IN as a breach of public faith ; as a measure full of danger to the peace, and even existence of our Union. And, sir, believing in God as I profoundly do, I cannot doubt that the opening of an immense region to so great an enormity as Slavery is calculated to draw down upon our country His righteous judgments. " In the name of Almighty God, and in His pres ence," these remonstrants protest against the Ne braska Bill. In this solemn language, which has been strangely pronounced blasphemous on this floor, there is obviously no assumption of ecclesiastical power, as has been perversely charged, but simply a devout ob servance of the scriptural injunction : " Whatsoever ye do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord." Let me add, also, that these remonstrants, in this very language, have followed the example of the Senate, which, at our present session, has ratified at least one important treaty, beginning with these pre cise words : " In the name of Almighty God." Surely, if the Senate may thus assume to speak, the clergy may do likewise, without imputation of blasphemy or any just criticism, at least in this body. 4 But I am unwilling, particularly at this time, to be betrayed into anything that shall seem like a defence of the clergy. They need no such thing at my hands. There are men in this Senate, justly eminent for elo quence, learning and ability ; but there is no man here competent, except in his own conceit, to sit in judgment on the clergy of New England. Honorable Senators, who have been so swift with criticism and sarcasm, might profit by their example. Perhaps the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Butler], who is not insensible to scholarship, might learn from them some- NEBBASKA AXD KANSAS. 319 thing of its graces. Perhaps the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason], who finds no sanction under the Con stitution for any remonstrance from clergymen, might learn from them something of the privileges of an American citizen. And perhaps the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas], who precipitated this odious measure upon the country, might learn from them something of political wisdom. Sir, from the first settlement of these shores, from those early days of struggle and privation through the trials of the Revolution the clergy have been associated, not only with the piety and the learning, but with the liberties of the country. For a long time, New Eng land was governed by their prayers more than by any acts of the Legislature ; and at a later day, their voices aided even the Declaration of Independence. The clergy of our time may speak, then, not only from their own virtues, but from the echoes which yet live in the pulpits of their fathers. For myself, I desire to thank them for their gener ous interposition. They have already done much good in moving the country. They will not be idle. In the days of the Revolution, John Adams, yearning for Independence, said : " Let the pulpits thunder against oppression ! " And the pulpits thundered. The time has come for them to thunder again. There, are lessons taught by these remonstrances, which, at this moment, should not pass unheeded. The Senator from Ohio [Mr. Wade], on the other side of the Chamber, has openly declared that the Northern Whigs can never again combine with their Southern brethren in support of Slavery. This is a good augury. The clergy of New England, some of whom, forgetful 320 FINAL PROTEST AGAINST SLAVERY IN of the traditions of other clays, once made their pulpits vocal for the Fugitive Slave Bill, now, by the voices of learned divines, eminent bishops, accomplished professors and faithful pastors, uttered in solemn remonstrance, at last unite in putting a permanent brand upon this hateful wrong. Surely, from this time forward, they can never more render it any sup port. Thank God for this ! Here is a sign full of promise for Freedom. These remonstrances have especial significance, when it is urged, as has been often done in this debate, that the proposition still pending proceeds from the North. Yes, sir, proceeds from the North ; for that is its excuse and apology. The ostrich is reputed to hide its head in the sand, and then vainly imagine its coward body beyond the reach of pursuers. In similar spirit, honorable Senators seem to shelter themselves behind scanty Northern votes, and then vainly imagine that they are protected from the judgment of the country. The pulpits of New England, representing to an unprecedented extent the popular voice there, now proclaim that six States protest, with all the fervor of religious conviction, against your outrage. To this extent, at least, I confidently declare it does not come from the North. From these expressions, and other tokens which daily greet us, it is evident that at last the religious sentiment of the country is touched, and, under this sentiment, I rejoice to believe that the whole North will be quickened with the true life of Freedom. Sir Philip Sidney, speaking to Queen Elizabeth of the spirit which animated every man, woman and child n the Netherlands, against the Spanish power, ex- NEBRASKA AND KANSAS. 321 claimed, " It is the spirit of the Lord, and is irresisti ble." A kindred spirit now animates the free States against the Slave Power, breathing everywhere its precious inspiration, and forbidding repose under the attempted usurpation. I repeat, it is the spirit of the Lord, and is irresistible. The threat of disunion, too often sounded in our ears, will be disregarded by an aroused and indignant people. Ah, sir, Senators vainly expect peace. Not in this way can peace come. In passing this Bill, as is now threatened, you scatter, from this dark midnight hour, no seeds of harmony and good- will, but broadcast through the land, dragon s teeth, which haply may not, spring up in direful crops of armed men, but yet, I am assured, sir, will they fructify in civil strife and feud. From the depths of my soul, as a loyal citizen and as a Senator, I plead, remonstrate, protest, against the passage of this Bill. I struggle against it as against death ; but, as in death itself, corruption puts on incor- ruption, and this mortal body puts on immortality, so from the sting of this hour I find assurances of that triumph by which Freedom will be restored to her immortal birthright in the Republic. Sir, the Bill which you are now about to pass, is at - once the worst and the lest Bill on which Congress ever acted. Yes, sir, WORST and BEST at the same time. It is the worst Bill, inasmuch as it is a present 9 victory of Slavery. In a Christian land, and in an age of civilization, a time-honored statute of Freedom is struck down, opening the way to all the countless woes and wrongs of human bondage. Among the crimes of history, another is about to be recorded, which no tears can blot out, and which, in better days, 322 FINAL PROTEST AGAINST SLAVERY IN will be read with universal shame. Do not start. The Tea Tax and Stamp Act, which aroused the patriot rage of our fathers, were virtues by the side of your transgression ; nor would it be easy to imagine, at this day, any measure which more openly and per versely defied every sentiment of justice, humanity and Christianity. Am I not right, then, in calling it the worst Bill on which Congress ever acted ? But there is another side to which I gladly turn. Sir, it is the best Bill on which Congress ever acted ; for it annuls all past Compromises with Slavery, and makes all future Compromises impossible. Thus it puts Freedom and Slavery face to face, and bids them grapple. Who can doubt the result ? It opens wide the door of the Future, when, at last, there will really be a North, and the Slave Power will be broken ; when this wretched Despotism will cease to dominate over our Government, no longer impressing itself upon everything at home and abroad ; when the National Government shall be divorced in every way from Slavery, and, according to the true intention of our fathers, Freedom shall be established by Congress everywhere, at least beyond the local limits of the States. Slavery will then be driven from its usurped foot hold here in the District of Columbia, in the National Territories, and elsewhere beneath the National flag ; the Fugitive Slave Bill, as vile as it is unconstitutional, will become a dead letter ; and the domestic Slave- trade, so far as it can be reached, but especially on the high seas, will be blasted by Congressional Prohibition. Everywhere within the sphere of Congress, the great Northern Hammer will descend to smite the wrong ; NEBRASKA AND KANSAS. 323 and the irresistible cry will break forth, "No more Slave States ! " Thus, sir, now standing at the very grave of Free dom in Nebraska and Kansas, I lift myself to the vision of that happy resurrection, by which Freedom will be secured, not only in these Territories, but everywhere under the National Government. More clearly than ever before, I now penetrate that " All- Hail-Hereafter," when Slavery must disappear. Proud ly I discern the flag of my country, as it ripples in every breeze, at last become in reality, as in name, the Flag of Freedom undoubted, pure and irresistible. Am I not right, then, in calling this Bill the best on which Congress ever acted ? Sorrowfully I bend before the wrong you are about to commit. Joyfully I welcome all the promises of the future. When Mr. Sumner took his seat, he was followed by Mr. MASON, of Virginia, who spoke as follows : I understand that the petitions which the Senator [Mr. Sum ner] who has just taken his seat offers, were to be admitted as they were offered by the unanimous consent of the Senate. Two of them, when offered, were sent to the President s table. The last he has reserved, and made the vehicle for communicating the sentiments of the pulpits of New England to the Senate, on the subject of this Bill. I object to its reception, and I object to it, because I understand that Senator to say that it is verbatim the petition that was presented by his honorable colleague who is not now with us, in which the clergy presented themselves in this Senate and to the country, as a third estate, speaking not as American citizens, but as clergymen, and in that character only. I object to its reception. I object to it, that I may not in any manner minister to the unchristian purposes of the clergy of New England, as the Senator has just announced them. I object 324 FINAL PROTEST AGAINST SLAVERY IN to it, that I may be in no manner responsible for the prostitution of their office, (once called holy and sacred, with them no longer so,) in the face of the Senate and of the American people. I object to it, that the clergymen of my own honored State, and of the South, may, as holding a common office in the ministry of the gospel, be in no manner confounded with or contaminated by these clergymen of New England, if the Senator represents them correctly. Sir, if the Senator has represented these clergymen correctly, I rejoice that there is to be a separation between the church North and the church South ; for, I say, if these men dare to lay aside the character of American citizens, and come here pro faning their office, profaning the name of the Almighty, for the purpose of political alliances, they are unworthy of their associ ates in the church. Sir, it is the first time in the history of this country that a church of any denomination has asserted a right to be heard, as a church, upon the floors of legislation ; and if the Senator represents that body correctly, they have profaned their office, and I predict now a total separation between the church North and the church South, If I understand the senti ments of the church South. iThe church there, I know, is yet pure in its great and holy mission. When its ministers address themselves from the pulpit, they are heard with respect, under the sanctity of their office. You find none of them coming here to the doors of legislation to mingle in political strife. They truly hold themselves " unspotted from the world." If the Senator who has just taken his seat has correctly ex pounded the clergymen of New England, I object to that petition. If he has correctly stated that it is verbatim copied from the petition presented by his colleague, I say it is a prostitution of their office to the embrace of political party ; arid the Senate shall not, by my assent, be made the medium of so unholy an alliance. I do ntft mean to go further into this debate ; but I object to the reception of the petition. The PRESIDING OFFICER said : The petitions cannot be received without unanimous consent. Mr. SUMNER in reply. It may be, sir, at this moment, within the competency of the honorable Sen- NEBRASKA AND KANSAS. 325 ator from Virginia to object to the reception of these remonstrances ; but I am satisfied that, at another time^ his calmer judgment will not approve this course, much less the ground on which now, as well as on a former occasion, he has undertaken to impeach the right of clergymen to appear, by petition or remon strance, at the bar of Congress. Sir, in refusing to receive these remonstrances, or in neglecting them in any way, on reasons - assigned in this Chamber, you treat them with an indignity which becomes more marked, because it is the constant habit of the Senate to welcome remonstrances from members of the Society of Friends, in their religious character, and from all other persons, by any designation which they may adopt. Booksellers remonstrate against the interna tional copyright treaty ; last makers against a proposed change in the patent laws ; and only lately the tobac conists have remonstrated against certain regulations touching tobacco ; and all these remonstrances have been received with respect, and referred to appropriate Committees in the Senate. But. the clergy of New England, when protesting against a measure which they believe, with singular unanimity, full of peril and shame to our country, are told to stay at home. Almost the jeer has gone forth, " Go up, thou bald head ! " If not well, it is at least natural, that the act you are about to commit should be attended by this congenial outrage. 28 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. SPEECHES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 26TH AND 28TH JUNE, ON THE BOSTON MEMORIAL FOR THE REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL, AND IN REPLY TO MESSRS. JONES, OF TENNESSEE, BUTLER, OF SOUTH CAROLINA, AND MASON, OF VIRGINIA. On the 22d June, Mr. Rockwell, of Massachusetts, presented the following Memorial, stating that it was signed by twenty- nine hundred persons, chiefly of Boston, and moved its reference to the Committee on the Judiciary : " To the Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled : The undersigned, men of Massachusetts, ask for the repeal of the Act of Congress of 1850, known as the FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL." On 26th June, on the motion to refer the memorial, a debate ensued, in which Mr. Jones, of Tennessee, Mr. Rockwell, of Mas sachusetts, and then again Mr. Jones, took part. At this stage, Mr. SUMNER took the floor, and spoke as follows : MR. PRESIDENT : I begin by answering the inter rogatory propounded by the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Jones]. He asks, " Can any one suppose that, if the Fugitive Slave Act be repealed, this Union can exist ? " To which I reply at once, that if the Union be in any way dependent on an Act I cannot call it a law so revolting in every regard as that to which he [326] DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 327 refers, then it ought not to exist. To much else that has fallen from that Senator I do not desire to reply. He has discussed at length matters already handled again and again in the long drawn out debates of this session. Like the excited hero of Macedonia, he has renewed past conflicts, " And thrice he routed all his foes, And thrice he slew the slain." Of what the Senator has said on the relations of Sen ators, North and South, of a particular party, it is not my province to speak. And yet I cannot turn from it without expressing, at least, a single aspiration, that men from the North, whether Whigs or Democrats, will neither be cajoled or driven by any temptation, or lash, from the support of those principles of freedom which are inseparable from the true honor and welfare of the country. At last, I trust, there will be a back bone in the North. My colleague has already remarked, that this memo rial proceeds from persons of whom many were open supporters of the alleged Compromises of 1850, includ ing even the odious Fugitive Slave Bill. I have looked over the long list, and, so far as I can judge, find this to be true. And, in my opinion, the change shown by these men is typical of the change in. the community of which they constitute a prominent part. Once the positive upholders of the Fugitive Slave Bill, they now demand its unconditional repeal. There is another circumstance worthy of especial remark. This memorial proceeds mainly from persons connected with trade and commerce. Now, it is a fact too well known in the history of England, and of our 328 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. own country, that these persons, while often justly distinguished by their individual charities and munifi cence, have been lukewarm in their opposition to Slavery. Twice in English history the "mercantile interest" frowned upon the endeavors to suppress the atrocity of Algerine Slavery ; steadfastly in England it sought to baffle Wilberforce s great effort for the aboli tion of the African Slave-trade ; and, at the formation of our own Constitution, it stipulated a sordid com promise, by which this samp detested, Heaven-defying traffic, was saved for twenty years from American judgment. But now it is all changed at least in Boston. The representatives of the "mercantile in terest" place themselves in the front of the new movement against Slavery, and, by their explicit me morial, call for the abatement of a grievance which they have bitterly felt in Boston. Mr. President, this memorial .is interesting to me, first, as it asks a repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill, and secondly, as it comes from Massachusetts. That repeal I shall be glad at any time, now and hereafter, as in times past, to sustain by vote and argument ; and I trust never to fail in any just regard for the sentiments or interests of Massachusetts. With these few remarks, I would gladly close. But there has been an arraign ment here to-day, both of myself and of the Common wealth which I represent. To all that has been said of myself or the Commonwealth so far as it is an impeachment of either so far as it subjects either to any just censure, I plead openly, for myself and for Massachusetts, " not guilty." But pardon me, if I do not submit to be tried by tho Senate, fresh from the injustice of the Nebraska Bill. In the language of DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 329 the common law I put myself upon " God and the country," and claim the same trial for my honored Commonwealth. So far as the arraignment touches me personally, I hardly care to speak. It is true that I have not hes itated, here and elsewhere, to express my open, sincere, and unequivocal condemnation of the Fugitive Slave Bill. I have denounced it as at once a violation of tl: e law of God, and of the Constitution of the United States ; and I here repeat this denunciation. Its violation of the Constitution is manifold. It commits the great question of human freedom than which none is more sacred in the law not to a solemn trial, but to summary proceedings. It commits this question not to one of the high tribunals of the land but to the unaided judgment of a single petty magistrate. It commits this question to a magistrate, appointed, not by the President with the consent of the Senate, but by the court; holding his office, not during good behavior, but merely during the will of the court ; and receiving, not a regular salary, but fees according to each individual case. It authorizes judgment on ex parte evidence, by affi davits, without the sanction of cross-examination. It denies the writ of habeas corpus, ever known as the palladium of the citizen. Contrary to the declared purposes of the framers of the Constitution, it sends the fugitive back " at the public expense." Adding meanness to the violation of the Constitu tion, it bribes the Commissioner by a double fee to pronounce against Freedom. If he dooms a man to 28* 330 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. Slavery, the reward is ten dollars ; but, saving him to Freedom, his dole is five dollars. But this is not all. On two other capital grounds do I oppose this Act as unconstitutional ; first, as it is an assumption by Congress of powers not delegated by the Constitution, and in derogation of the rights of the States ; and, secondly, as it takes away that essential birthright of the citizen, trial by jury, in a question of personal liberty and a suit at common law. Thus ob noxious, I have regarded it as an enactment totally devoid of all constitutional obligation, as it is clearly devoid of all moral, while it is disgraceful to the country and the age. And, sir, I have hoped and labored for the creation of such a Public Opinion, firm, enlightened and generous, as should render the Act practically inoperative, and should press, without ceas ing, upon Congress for its repeal. For all that I have said on this head, I have no regrets or apologies ; but rather joy and satisfaction. Glad I am in having said it ; glad I am now in the opportunity of affirming it all anew. Thus much for myself. In response for Massachusetts, there are other things. Something surely must be pardoned to her history. In Massachusetts stands Boston. In Boston stands Faneuil Hall, where, throughout the perils which preceded the Revolution, our patriot fathers assembled to vow themselves to Freedom. Here, in those days, spoke James Otis, full of the thought that " the people s safety is the law of God." Here, also, spoke Joseph Warren, inspired by the sentiment that " death with all its tortures is preferable to Slavery." And here, also, thundered John Adams, fervid with the conviction that " consenting to Slavery is a sacrile- DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 331 gious breach of trust." Not far from this venerable hall between this temple of freedom and the very court-house, to which the Senator [Mr. Jones] has referred is the street, where, in 1770, the first blood was spilt in conflict between British troops and Ameri can citizens, and among the victims was one of that African race which you so much despise. Almost within sight is Bunker Hill ; further off, Lexington and Concord. Amidst these scenes, a Slave-Hunter from Virginia appears, and the disgusting rites begin by which a fellow-man is doomed to bondage. Sir, can you wonder that the people were moved ? " Who, can be wise, amazed, temperate and furious, Loyal and neutral, in a moment ? No It is true that the Slave Act was with difficulty executed, and that one of its servants perished in the effort. On these grounds the Senator from Tennessee charges Boston with fanaticism. I express no opinion on the conduct of individuals ; but I do say, that the fanaticism, which the Senator condemns, is not new in Boston. It is the same which opposed the execution of the Stamp Act, and finally secured its repeal. It is the same which opposed the Tea Tax. It is the fanat icism which finally triumphed on Bunker Hill. The Senator says that Boston is filled with traitors. That charge is not new. Boston, of old, was the home of Hancock and Adams. Her traitors now are those who are truly animated by the spirit of the American Revolution. In condemning them, in condemning Massachusetts, in condemning these remonstrants, you simply give a proper conclusion to the utterance on 332 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. this floor, that the Declaration of Independence is " a self-evident lie." Here I might leave the imputations on Massachu setts. But the case is stronger yet. I have referred to the Stamp Act. The parallel is of such aptness and importance, that, though on a former occasion I pre sented it to the Senate, I cannot forbear from pressing it again. As the precise character of this Act may not be familiar, allow me to remind the Senate, that it was an attempt to draw money from the Colonies through a stamp tax, while the determination of certain ques tions of forfeiture under the statute was delegated, not to the courts of common law, but to courts of admi ralty, without trial by jury. This Act was denounced in the Colonies at once on its passage, as contrary to the British Constitution, on two principal grounds, identical in character with the two chief grounds on which the Slave Act is now declared to be unconstitu tional ; first, as an assumption by Parliament of pow ers not belonging to it, and an infraction of rights secured to the Colonies ; and secondly, as a denial of trial by jury in certain cases of property. On these grounds the Stamp Act was held to be an outrage. The Colonies were aroused against it. Virginia first declared herself by solemn resolutions, which the timid thought " treasonable ;" yes, sir, " treasonable," even as that word is now applied to recent manifesta tions of opinion in Boston even to the memorial of her twenty-nins hundred merchants. But these " treason able " resolutions soon found a response. New York followed. Massachusetts came next. In an address from the Legislature to the Governor, the true ground of opposition to the Stamp Act, coincident with the DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 333 two radical objections to the Slave Act, are clearly set forth, with the following pregnant conclusion : "We deeply regret that the Parliament has seen fit to pass such an Act as the Stamp Act ; we flatter ourselves that the hardships of it will shortly appear to them in such a light as shall induce them, in their wisdom, to repeal it ; in the mean lime, we must beg your Excellency to excuse us from doing any thing to assist in the execution of it." The Stamp Act was welcomed in the Colonies by the Tories of that day, precisely as the unconstitutional Slave Act has been welcomed by imperious numbers among us. Hutchinson, at that time Lieutenant Gov ernor and Judge in Massachusetts, wrote to Ministers in England : " The Stamp Act is received with as much decency as could be expected. It leaves no room for evasion, and will execute itself." Like the Judges of our day, in charges to Grand Juries, he resolutely vindicated the Act, and admonished " the jurors and the people " to obey. Like Governors in our day, Bernard, in his speech to the Legislature of Massachusetts, demanded unreasoning submission. "I shall not," says this British Governor, " enter into any disquisition of the policy of the Act. I have only to say it is an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain." Like Marshals of our day, the Officers of the Customs are recorded as having made " application for a mili tary force to assist them in the execution of their duty." The elaborate answer of Massachusetts the work of Samuel Adams, and one of the corner-stones of our history was pronounced "the ravings of a parcel of wild enthusiasts," even as recent proceedings in Boston, resulting in the memorial before you, have 334 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. been characterized on this floor. Was I not right in adducing this parallel ? The country was aroused against the execution of this Act. And here Boston took the lead. In formal instructions to her Representatives, adopted unani mously in town meeting at Fanueil Hall, the following rule of conduct was prescribed : " We, therefore, think it our indispensable duty, in justice to ourselves and posterity, as it is our undoubted privilege, in the most open and unreserved, but decent and respectful terms, to declare our greatest dissatisfaction with this law. And we think it incumbent upon you by no means to join in any public mea sures for countenancing and assisting in the execution of the same, but to use your best endeavors in the General Assembly to have the inherent, inalienable rights of the people of this Province asserted, and vindicated, and left upon the public record, that posterity may never have reason to charge the present times with the guilt of tamely giving them away." The opposition spread and deepened, and one of its natural tendencies was to outbreak and violence. On one occasion in Boston, it showed itself in the lawless ness of a mob, of a most formidable character, even as is now charged. Liberty, in her struggles, is too often driven to force. But the town, at a public meeting in Fanueil Hall, called without delay, on the motion of the opponents of the Stamp Act, with James Otis as Chairman, condemned the outrage. Eager in hostility to the execution of the Act, Boston cherished municipal order, and constantly discountenanced all tumult, vio lence and illegal proceedings. On these two grounds she then stood ; and her position was widely recog nized. In reply, March 27, 1766, to an address from the inhabitants of Plymouth, her own consciousness of duty done is thus expressed : DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 335 " If the inhabitants of Boston have taken the legal and war rantable measures to prevent that misfortune, of all others the most to be dreaded, the execution of the Stamp Act, and as a necessary means of preventing it, have made any spirited appli cations for opening the custom houses and courts of justice ; if, at the same time, they have borne their testimony against out rageous tumults and illegal proceedings, and given any example of the love of peace and good order, next to the consciousness of having done their duty is the satisfaction of meeting with the approbation of any of their fellow-countrymen." Thus was the Stamp Act annulled, eyen before its actual repeal, which was pressed with assiduity by petition and remonstrance, on the next meeting of Parliament. Among the potent influences was the entire concurrence of the merchants, and especially a remonstrance against the Stamp Act by the merchants of -New York, like that now made against the Slave Act by the merchants of Boston. Some sought at first only for its modification. Even James Otis began with this moderate aim. The King himself showed a dis position to yield to this extent. But Franklin, who was then in England, when asked whether the Colonies would submit to the Act, if mitigated in certain par ticulars, replied : " No, never, unless compelled by force of arms." Then it was, that the great Commoner, William Pitt, in an ever-memorable speech, uttered words which fitly belong to this occasion. He said : ** Sir, I have been charged with giving birth to sedition in America. They have spoken their sentiments with freedom against this unhappy Act, and that freedom has become their crime. Sorry I am to hear the liberty of speech in this House imputed as a crime. But the imputation shall not discourage me. It is a liberty I mean to exercise. No gentleman ought to be afraid to exercise it. It is a liberty by which the gentleman who calumniates it might and ought to have profited. The gentle- 336 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. man tells us America is obstinate ; America is almost wi open rebellion. I rejoice that America has resisted. Three millions of slaves, so dead to all the feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of all the rest. I would not debate a particular point of law with the gentleman ; but I draw my ideas of Freedom from the vital powers of the British Constitution not from the crude and fallacious notions too much relied upon, as if we were but in the morning of liberty. I can acknowledge no veneration for any procedure, law, or ordinance, that is repugnant to reason and the first elements of our Constitution. The Americans have been wronged. -They have been driven to madness. Upon the whole, I will beg leave to tell the House what is really my opia ion. It is, that the Stamp Jlct be repealed, absolutely, totally and immediately, and that the reason for the repeal be assigned because it was founded on an erroneous principle." Thus spoke this great orator, at the time tutelary guardian of American liberty. He was not unheeded. Within less than a year from its original passage, the Stamp Act assailed as unconstitutional on the pre cise grounds which I now occupy in assailing the Slave Act was driven from the statute book. But, sir, the Stamp Act was, at most, an infringe ment of civil liberty only, not of personal liberty. It touched questions of property only, but not the personal liberty of any man. Under it, no freeman could be seized as a slave. There was an unjust tax of a few pence, with the chances of amercement by a single judge without jury ; but, by this statute, no person could be deprived of that vital right of all, which is to other rights as the soul to the body the right of a man to himself. As liberty is more than property, af man is above the beasts that perish, as heaven is highev than earth, so are the rights assailed by an America? Congress above those once assailed by the Britis) DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 337 Parliament ; and just in this proportion must be our condemnation of the Slave Act by the side of the Stamp Act. And this will yet be declared by history. I call upon you, then, to receive the memorial, and hearken to its prayer. All other memorials asking for changes in existing legislation are treated with respect, promptly referred, and acted upon. This should not be an exception. The memorial simply asks the repeal of an obnoxious statute, which is entirely within the competency of Congress. It proceeds from a large number of respectable citizens whose autograph signa tures are attached. It is brief and respectful in form ; and, in its very brevity, shows that spirit of freedom which should awaken a generous response. In refusing to receive it or refer it, according to the usage of the Senate, or in treating it with any indignity, you offer an affront, not only to these numerous petitioners, but also to the great right of petition, which is never more sacred than when exercised in behalf of Freedom against an obnoxious statute. Permit me to add, that by this course you provoke the very spirit which you would repress. There is a certain plant which is said to grow when trodden upon. It remains to be seen if the Boston petitioners have not something of this quality. But this I know, sir, that the Slave Act, like vice, is of so hideous a mien, that " to be hated it needs only to be seen ; " and the occurrences of this day will make it visible and palpable to the people in new forms of injustice. This speech was followed by an angry debate, of a highly per sonal character, in which Mr. Butler, of South Carolina, Mr. Mason, of Virginia, Mr. Pettit, of Indiana, Mr. Dixon, of Ken- 29 338 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. tucky, Mr. Mallory, of Florida, and Mr. Clay, of Alabama, took part all directed against Mr. Sumner. On the 28th June, an effort was made to close the debate, or at least to postpone it, when Mr. SUMNER remarked : I am unwilling to stand in the way of the general wish of the Senate to go on with its business. I de sire at all times to promote its business ; but this question has been presented and debated. Several Senators have already expressed themselves on it. Other Senators within my knowledge expect to be heard. I too, sir, claim the privilege of being heard again in reply to remarks which have fallen from hon orable Senators. I hope, therefore, the memorial will have no disposition that will preclude its complete dis cussion. SECOND SPEECH. The Senate refused to postpone the discussion, and the assault on Mr. Sumner went on. At last he obtained the floor and spoke as follows : MR. PRESIDENT : Since I had the honor of address ing the Senate two days ago, various Senators have spoken. Among these, several have alluded to me in terms clearly beyond the sanctions of parliamentary debate. Of this I make no complaint, though, for the honor of the Senate, at least, it were well that it were otherwise. If to them it seems fit, courteous, parlia mentary, " to unpack the heart with words, And fall a cursing, like a very drab, A scullion," DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 339 I will not interfere with the enjoyment which they find in such exposure of themselves. They have cer tainly given us a taste of their characters. Two of them, the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Butler], who sits immediately before me, and the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason], who sits immediately behind me, are not young. Their heads are amply crowned by time. They did not speak from any ebullition of youth, but from the confirmed temper of age. It is melancholy to believe that, in this debate, they showed themselves as they are. It were charitable to believe that they are in reality better than they showed them selves. I think, sir, that I am not the only person on this floor, who, in lately listening to these two self-confident champions of the peculiar fanaticism of the South, was reminded of the striking words by Jefferson, picturing the influence of Slavery, where he says, " The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the. most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submission on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it ; for man is an imitative animal. The parent storms. The child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives loose to his worst pas sions, and, thus nursed, educated and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such cir cumstances." Nobody who witnessed the Senator from South Carolina or the Senator from Virginia in this debate, will place either of them among the " prodigies " 340 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. described by Jefferson. As they spoke, the Senate Chamber must have seemed to them, in the character istic fantasy of the moment, a plantation well-stocked with slaves, over which the lash of the overseer had free swing. Sir, it gives me no pleasure to say these things. It is not according to my nature. Bear wit ness, that I do it only in just self-defence against the unprecedented assaults and provocations of this debate. , And, in doing it, I desire to warn certain Senators, that if they expect, by any ardor of menace or by- any tyrannical frown, to shake my fixed resolve, they ex pect a vain thing. There was, perhaps, little that fell from these two champions, as the fit was on, which deserves reply. Certainly not the hard words they used so readily and congenially. The veteran Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason] complained that I had characterized one of his " constituents" a person who went all the way from Virginia to Boston in pursuit of a slave as a Slave-hunter. Sir, I choose to call things by their right names. White I call white, and black T call black. And where a person degrades himself to the work of chasing a fellow-man, who, under the inspira tion of Freedom and the guidance of the north star, has sought a freeman s home far away from the come and the chain that person, whomsoever he may be, I call a Slave-hunter. If the Senator from Virginia, who professes nicety of speech, will give me any term which more precisely describes such an individual, 1 will use it. Until then, I must continue to use the language which seems to me so apt. But this very sensibility of the veteran Senator at a just term, which truly depicts an odious character, shows a shame in DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 341 which I exult. It was said by one of the philosophers of antiquity, that a blush is the sign of virtue, and permit me to add, that, in this violent sensibility, I recognize a blush mantling the cheek of the honorable Senator, which even his plantation manners cannot conceal. And the venerable Senator from South Carolina, too, [Mr. Butler] he has betrayed his sensibility. Here let me say that this Senator knows well that I always listen with peculiar pleasure to his racy and exuberant speech, as it gurgles forth sometimes tinctured by generous ideas except when, forgetful of history, and in defiance of reason, he undertakes to defend what is obviously indefensible. This Senator was disturbed, when to his inquiry, personally, pointedly and vehemently addressed to me, whether I would join in returning a fellow-man to Slavery, I exclaimed, " Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this thing ? " In fitful phrases, which seemed to come from the un conscious excitement so common with the Senator, he shot forth various cries about " dogs ; " and, among other things, asked if there was any "dog" in the Constitution ? The Senator did not seem to bear in mind, through the heady currents of that moment, that, by the false interpretation he has fastened upon the Constitution, he has helped to nurture there a whole kennel of Carolina bloodhounds, trained, with savage jaws and insatiable scent, for the hunt of flying bondmen. No, sir, I do not believe that there is any " kennel of bloodhounds," or even any " dog," in the Constitution of the United States. But, Mr. President, since the brief response which I made to the inquiry of the Senator, and which leaped unconsciously to my lips, has drawn upon me various 29* 342 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. attacks, all marked by grossness of language and man ner ; since I have been charged with openly declaring my purpose to violate the Constitution, and to break the oath which I have taken at that desk, I shall be pardoned for showing simply how a few plain words will put all this down. The authentic report in the Globe shows what was actually said. The report in the Sentinel is substantially the same ; and one of the New York papers, which has been put into my hands since I entered the Senate Chamber to-day, under its telegraphic head, states the incident with substantial accuracy, though it omits the personal individual ap peal addressed to me by the Senator, and which is preserved in the Globe. Here is the New York report : " Mr. BUTLER. I would like to ask the Senator, if Congress repealed the Fugitive Slave Law, would Massachusetts execute the constitutional requirements, and send back to the South the absconding slaves ? " Mr. SUMNER. Do you ask if I would send back a slave ? " Mr. BUTLER. Why, yes. " Mr. SUMNER. * Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this thing ? " To any candid mind, either of these reports renders anything further superfluous. The answer is explicit and above impeachment. It indignantly spurns a service from which the soul recoils ; but it denies no Constitutional obligation. But the Senators, who have been so swift in misrepresentation and in assault upon me as disloyal to the Constitution, deserve to be ex posed, and it shall be done. Now, sir, I begin by adopting as my guide the authoritative words of Andrew Jackson, in 1832, in his memorable veto of the Bank of the United States. DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 343 To his course, at that critical time, were opposed the authority of the Supreme Court and his oath to support the Constitution. Here is his triumphant reply : * lf the opinion of the Supreme Court covers the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the co-ordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive and the Court, must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitu tion. Each public officer, who takes an odih to support the Constitution, swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the Presi dent, to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolu tion, which may be presented to them for passage or approval, as it is of the Supreme Judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive, when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may de serve." Mark these words, and let them sink into your minds. " Each public officer, who takes an oath to support the Constitution, swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others." Yes, sir, AS HE UNDERSTANDS IT, and not as it is understood by others. Does any Senator here dissent from this rule ? Does the Senator from Vir ginia ? Does the Senator from South Carolina ? [Here Mr. Sumner paused, but there was no reply.] At all events, I accept the rule as just and reasonable ; in harmony, too, let me assert, with that liberty which scorns the dogma of passive obedience, and asserts the inestimable right of private judgment, whether in re ligion or politics. In swearing to support the Consti tution at your desk, Mr. President, I did not swear to support it as you understand it. Oh, no, sir. Or as 344 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. the Senator from Virginia understands it. Oh, no, sir. Or as the Senator ^from South Carolina understands it, with a kennel of bloodhounds ; or, at least, a " dog" in it, " pawing to get free its hinder parts," in pursuit of a slave. No such thing. Sir, I swore to support the Constitution as I understand it ; nor more, nor less. Now, I will not occupy your time, nor am I so dis posed at this moment, nor does the occasion require it, by entering upon any minute criticism of the clause in the Constitution touching the surrender of " fugi tives from service." A few words only are needful. Assuming, sir, in the face of commanding rules of interpretation, all leaning towards Freedom, that in the evasive language of this clause, paltering in a double sense, the words employed can be judicially regarded as justly applicable to fugitive slaves, which, as you ought to know, sir, is often most strenuously and con scientiously denied thus sponging the whole clause out of existence, except as a provision for the return of persons actually bound by lawful contract, but on which I now express no opinion ; assuming, I say, this interpretation, so hostile to Freedom, and derogatory to the members of the Federal Convention, who solemnly declared that they would not yield any sanction to Slavery, or admit into the Constitution the idea of property in man ; assuming, I repeat, an interpretation which every principle of the common law, claimed by our fathers as their birthright, must disown ; admitting, for the moment only, and with shame, that the Constitution of the United States has any words, which, in any legal intendment, can con strain fugitive slaves, then I desire to say, that, as I understand the Constitution, this clause does not im- DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 345 pose upon me, as a Senator or citizen, any obligation to take part, directly or indirectly, in the surrender of a fugitive slave. Sir, as a Senator, I have taken at your desk the oath to support the Constitution, as I understand it. And understanding it as I do, I am bound by that oath, Mr. President, to oppose all enactments by Congress on the subject of fugitive slaves, as a flagrant viola tion of the Constitution ; especially must I oppose the last act as a tyrannical usurpation, kindred in character to the Stamp Act, which our fathers indignantly re fused to obey. Here my duties, under the oath which I have taken as a Senator, end. There is nothing beyond. They are all absorbed in the constant, inflex ible, righteous obligation to oppose every exercise by Congress of any power over the subject. In no re spect, by that oath can I be constrained to duties in other capacities, or as a simple citizen, especially when revolting to my conscience. Now, in this interpreta tion of the Constitution I may be wrong ; others may differ from me ; the Senator from Virginia may differ from me, and the Senator from South Carolina also ; and they will, each and all, act according to their respective understandings. For myself, I shall act according to mine. On this explicit statement of my constitutional obligations, I stand, as upon a living rock, and, to the inquiry, in whatever form addressed to my personal responsibility, whether I would aid, directly or indirectly, in reducing or surrendering a fellow-man to bondage, I reply again, " Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this thing? " And, sir, looking round upon this Senate, I might ask fearlessly, how many there are, even in this 346 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. body if, indeed, there be a single Senator, who would stoop to any such service ? Until some one rises and openly confesses his willingness to become a Slave-hunter, I will not believe there can be one. [Here Mr. Sumner paused, but nobody rose.] And yet honorable and chivalrous Senators have rushed headlong to denounce me because I openly declared my repudiation of a service at which every manly bosom must revolt. " Sire, I have found in Bayonne brave soldiers and good citizens, lut not one execu tioner" was the noble utterance of the Governor of that place to Charles IX. of France, in response to the royal edict for the massacre of St. Bartholomew ; and such a spirit, I trust, will yet animate the people of this country, when pressed to the service of " dogs ! " To that other question, which has been proposed, whether Massachusetts, by State laws, will carry out the offensive clause in the Constitution, according to the understanding of the venerable Senator from South Carolina, I reply that Massachusetts, at all times, has been ready to do her duty under the Constitution, as she understands it ; and, I doubt not, will ever con tinue of this mind. More than this I cannot say. In quitting this topic, I cannot forbear to remark that the assault on me for my disclaimer of all consti tutional obligation, resting upon me as a Senator or citizen, to aid in making a man a slave, or in surren dering him to Slavery, comes with an ill grace from the veteran Senator from Virginia, a State which, by its far- famed resolutions of 1798, assumed to determine its constitutional obligations, even to the extent of openly declaring two different Acts of Congress null and void ; and it comes also* with an ill grace from the venerable DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 347 Senator from South Carolina, a State which, in latter days, has arrayed itself openly against the Federal au thorities, and which threatens nullification as often as babies cry. Surely the Senator from South Carolina, with his silver-white locks, would have hesitated to lead this assault upon me, had he not, for the moment, been entirely oblivious of the history of the State which he represents. Not many years have passed since an in cident occurred at Charleston, in South Carolina not at Boston, in Massachusetts which ought to be remembered. The postmaster of that place, acting under a controlling Public Opinion there, informed the head of his Department at Washington that he had determined to suppress all Anti-slavery publications, and requested instructions for the future. Thus, in violation of the laws of the land, the very mails were rifled, and South Carolina smiled approbation of the outrage. But this is not all. The Postmaster Gen eral, Mr. Kendall, after prudently alleging that, as he had not seen the papers in question, he could not give an opinion of their character, proceeded to say, that he had been informed that they were incendiary, inflam matory and insurrectionary, and then announced : " By no act or direction of mine, official or private, could I be induced to aid knowingly in giving circulation to papers of this description, directly or indirectly. We owe an obligation to the laws, but a higher one to the communities in which we live : and if the former be perverted to destroy the latter, it is patri otism to disregard them. Entertaining these views, I cannot sanction, and will not condemn, the step you have taken." Such was the approving response of the National Government to the Postmaster of Charleston, when, 348 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. for the sake of Slavery, and without any constitutional scruple, he set himself against an acknowledged law of the land ; and yet the venerable Senator from. South Carolina now presumes to denounce me, when, for the sake of Freedom, and in the honest interpretation of my constitutional obligations, I decline an offensive service. But there is another incident in the history of South Carolina, which as a loyal son of Massachusetts, I cannot forget, and which rises now in judgment against the venerable Senator. Massachusetts had commis sioned a distinguished gentleman, of blameless life and eminent professional qualities, who served with honor in the other House [Hon. Samuel Hoar], to reside at Charleston for a brief period, in order to guard the rights of her free colored citizens, assailed on arrival there by an inhospitable statute, so gross in its provis ions that an eminent character of South Carolina, a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, [Hon. William Johnson,] had > characterized it as " trampling on the Constitution," and " a direct attack upon the sovereignty of the United States." Massachusetts had read in the Constitution a clause closely associated with that touching "fugitives from service," to the following effect : " The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States," and .supposed that this would yet be recognized by South Carolina. But she was mis taken. Her venerable representative, an unarmed old man, with hair as silver-white almost as that of the Senator before me, was beset in Charleston by a " re spectable " mob, prevented from entering upon his duties, and driven from the State ; while the Legisla- DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 349 ture stepped in to sanction this shameless, lawless act, by placing on the statute book an order for his expul sion. And yet, sir, the excitable Senator from South Carolina is fired by the fancied delinquencies of Massa chusetts towards Slave -hunters, and also by my own refusal to render them any aid or comfort ; he shoots questions in volleys, assumes to measure our duties by his understanding, and ejaculates a lecture at Massa chusetts and myself. Sir, before that venerable Sena tor again ventures thus, let him return to his own State, seamed all over with the scars of nullification, and first lecture there. Ay, sir, let him look into his own heart, and lecture to himself. But enough for the present on the extent of my constitutional obligations to become a Slave-hunter. There are, however, yet other things in the assault of the venerable Senator, which, for the sake of truth, in just defence of Massachusetts, and in honor of Freedom, shall not be left unanswered. Alluding to those days when Massachusetts was illustrated by Otis, Hancock, and " the brace of Adamses ; " when Faneuil Hall sent forth echoes of liberty which resounded even to South Carolina, and the very stones in the streets of Boston rose in mutiny against tyranny, the Senator with the silver- white locks, iu the very ecstasy of Slavery, broke forth in the ejaculation that Massachusetts was then " slaveholding ; " and he presumed to hail these pa triots as representatives of " hardy, slaveholding Mas sachusetts." Sir, I repel the imputation. It is true that Massachusetts was " hardy ; " but she was not, in any just sense, " slaveholding." And had she been so, she could not have been " hardy." The two character- 30 350 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. istics are inconsistent as weakness and strength, as sickness and health I had almost said, as death and life. The Senator opens a page, which I would willingly present. Sir, Slavery never nourished in Massachu setts ; nor did it ever prevail there at any time, even in early Colonial days, to such a degree as to be a distinc tive feature in her powerful civilization. Her few slaves were merely for a term of years, or for life. If, in point of fact, their issue was sometimes, held in bondage, it was never by sanction of any statute or law of Colony or Commonwealth. Such has been the solemn judgment of her Supreme Court.* In all her annals, no person was ever born a slave on the soil of Massachusetts. This, of itself, is a response to the imputation of the Senator. A benign and brilliant Act of her Legislature, as far back as 1646, shows her sensibility on this subject. A Boston ship had brought home two negroes, seized on the coast of Guinea. Thus spoke Massachusetts : " The General Court, conceiving themselves bound by the first opportunity to bear witness against the heinous and crying sin of man-stealing, also to prescribe such timely redress for what is past, and such a law for the future as may sufficiently deter all those belonging to us, to have to do in such vile and most odious conduct, justly ahhorred of all good and just men, do order that the negro interpreter, with others unlawfully taken, be, by the fir^t opportunity, at the charge of the country, for the present, sent to his native country of Guinea, and a letter with him of the indignation of the Court thereabout and justice thereof." The Colony that could issue this noble decree was * Lanesboro v. Westfield, 16 Mass. 74. DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 351 inconsistent with itself, when it allowed its rocky face to be pressed by the footsteps of a single slave. But a righteous public opinion early and constantly set its face against Slavery. As early as 1701, a vote was entered upon the records of Boston to the following effect : " The Representatives are desired to promote the encouraging the bringing of white servants, and to put a period to negroes being slaves" Perhaps, in all history, this is the earliest testimony from any official body against Negro Slavery, and I thank God that it came from Boston, my native town. In 1705, a heavy duty was imposed upon every negro imported into the province; in 1712, the importation of Indians as ser vants or slaves was strictly forbidden ; but the general subject of Slavery attracted little attention till the begin ning of the controversy, which ended in the Revolu tion, when the rights of the blacks were blended by all true patriots with those of the whites. Sparing all unnecessary details, suffice it to say, that, as early as 1769, one of the courts of Massachusetts, anticipating, by several years, the renowned judgment in Somersett s case, established within its jurisdiction the principle of emancipation and, under its touch of magic power, changed a slave into a freeman. Similar decisions followed in other places. In 1776, the whole number of blacks, both free and slave, sprinkled thinly over "hardy" Massachusetts, was five thousand two hun dred and forty-nine, being to the whites as one is to sixty-five; while in " slaveholding " South Carolina the number of negro slaves, at that time, wa,3 not far from one hundred thousand, being nearly one slave for every freeman, thus rendering that Colony anything but "hardy." At last, in 1780, even before the 352 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. triumph of Yorktowii had led the way to that peace which set its seal upon our National Independence, Massachusetts, animated by the struggles of the Revo lution, and filled by the sentiments of Freedom, placed in front of her Bill of Rights the emphatic words, that " all men are born free and equal," and by this declar ation exterminated every vestige of Slavery within her borders. All hail, then, to Massachusetts, the just and generous Commonwealth in whose behalf I have the honor to speak. Thus, sir, does the venerable Senator err when he presumes to vouch Massachusetts for Slavery, and to associate this odious institution with the names of her great patriots. Mr. ROCKWELL. Will my honorable colleague allow me to send to the Chair, and have read in this connec tion with his present remarks, a passage from Graham s History of the United States ? Mr. SUMNER. I do not know the passage to which my colleague refers, but I welcome any interruption from him. The Secretary read as follows : " Among other subjects of dispute with the British Govern ment and its officers, was one more creditable to Massachusetts than even her magnanimous concern for the liberty of her citi zens and their fellow-colonists. Negro Slavery still subsisted in every one of the American Provinces, and the unhappy victims of this yoke were rapidly multiplied by the progressive extension of the slave-trade. Georgia, the youngest of all the States, con tained already fourteen thousand negroes ; and in the course of the present year alone, more than six thousand were imported into South Carolina. In New England, the number of Slaves was very insignificant, and their treatment so mild and humane as DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 353 in some measure to veil from the public eye the iniquity of their bondage. But the recent discussions with regard to liberty and the rights of human nature, were calculated to awaken in gener ous minds a juster impression of Negro Slavery ; and during the latter part of Governor Bernard s administration, a Bill pro hibitory of all traffic in negroes was passed by the Massachusetts Assembly. Bernard, however, in conformity with his instruc tions from the Crown, refused to affirm this law ; and thus op posed himself to the virtue as well as to the liberty of the people whom he governed. ** On three subsequent occasions, laws abolishing the slave- trade were passed by the same Assembly during Hutchinson s administration ; but all were, in like manner, negatived by the Governor. And yet it was at this very period, when Britain permitted her merchants annually to make slaves of more than fifty thousand men, and refused to permit her Colonies to decline a participation in this injustice, that her orators, poets and statesmen, loudly celebrate the generosity of English virtue, in suffering no slaves to exist on English ground, and the transcend ent equity of her judicial tribunals in liberating one negro who had been carried there. Though Massachusetts was thus pre vented from abolishing the slave-trade, the relative discussions that took place were by no means unproductive of good. A great amelioration became visible in the condition of all the negroes in the Province ; and most of the proprietors gave liberty to their slaves. This just action for such, and such only, it deserves to be termed has obtained hitherto scarcely any notice from mankind, while the subsequent and similar conduct of the Quakers in Pennsylvania has been celebrated with warmth and general encomium. So capricious is the distribution of fame, and so much advantage does the reputation of virtue derive from alliance with sectarian spirit and interest." Mr. SUMMER. I am obliged to my colleague. The extract is in substantial conformity with clear historic truth, which the Senator from South Carolina, in one of his oratorical effluxes, has impeached. But the venerable Senator errs yet more, if possible, when he attributes to " slaveholding " communities a leading 30* 354 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. part in those contributions of arms and treasure by which independence was secured. Here are his exact words, as I find them in the Glole, revised by himself: ** Sir, when blood was shed upon the plains of Lexington and Concord, in an issue made by Boston, to whom was an appeal made, and from whom was it answered ? The answer is found in the acts of slaveholding States animis opibusque parati. Yes, sir, the independence of America, to maintain republican liberty, was won by the arms and treasure, by the patriotism and g-wd faith of slaveholding communities." Mark the language, sir, as emphasized by himself. Surely, the Senator with his silver- white locks, all fresh from the outrage of the Nebraska Bill, cannot stand here and proclaim " the good faith of slaveholding communities," except in irony. Yes, sir, in irony. And let me add, that when this Senator presumes to say that American Independence " was won by the arms and treasure of slaveholding communities," he speaks either in irony or in ignorance. The question which the venerable Senator from South Carolina here opens, by his vaunt, I have no desire to discuss ; but, since it is presented, I confront it at once. This is not the first time, during my brief ser vice here, that this Senator has sought on this floor to provoke a comparison between slaveholding commu nities and the free States. Mr. BUTLER (from his seat). You cannot quote a single instance in which I have done it. I have always said I thought it was in bad taste, and I have never attempted it. Mr. SUMNER. I beg the Senator s pardon. I always listen to him, and I know wherof I affirm. He has profusely dealt in it. I allude now only to a single DEFENCE OP MASSACHUSETTS. 355 ccasion. In his speech, on the Nebraska Bill, running through two days, it was one of his commonplaces. In that he openly presented a contrast between the free States and " slaveholding communities," in certain essential features of civilization, and directed shafts at Massachusetts, which called to his feet my distin guished colleague at that time [Mr. Everett], and which more than once compelled me to take the floor. And now, sir, the venerable Senator not rising from his seat, and standing openly before the Senate, assumes to deny that he has dealt in such comparisons. Mr. BUTLER. Will the Senator allow me ? Mr. SUMMER. Certainly; I yield the floor to the Senator. Mr. BUTLER. Whenever that speech is read and I wish the Senator had read it before he commented on it with a good deal of rhetorical enthusiasm it will be found that I was particular not to wound the feelings of the Northern people who were sympathizing with us in the great movement to remove odious dis tinctions. I was careful to say nothing that would provoke invidious comparisons ; and when that speech is read, notwithstanding the vehement assertion of the honorable Senator, he will find that when I quoted the laws of Massachusetts, particularly one Act which I termed the toties quoties Act, by which every negro was whipped every time he came into Massachusetts, I quoted them with a view to show, not a contrast between South Carolina and Massachusetts, but to show that, in the whole of this country, from the be ginning to this time even in my own State, I made no exception public opinion had undergone a change, and that it had undergone the same change in Massa- 356 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. clmsetts, for at one time they did not regard this insti tution of Slavery with the same odium that they do at this time. That was the purpose ; and I challenge the Senator as an orator of fairness to look at it, and see if it is not so. Mr. SUMMER. Has the Senator done ? Mr. BUTLER. I may not be done presently ; but that is the purport of that speech. Mr. SUMNER. Will the Senator refer to his own speech ? He now admits that, under the guise of an argument, he did draw attention to what he evidently regarded an odious law of Massachusetts. And, sir, I did not forget that, in doing this, there was, at the time, an apology which ill-concealed the sting. But let that pass. The Senator is strangely oblivious of the statistical contrasts, which he borrowed from the speech of a member of the other House, and which, at his request, were read by a Senator before him on this floor. The Senator, too, is strangely oblivious of yet another imputation, which, at the very close of his speech, he shot as a Parthian arrow at Massachusetts. It is he, then, who is the offender ; and no hardihood of denial can extricate him. For myself, sir, I under stand the sensibilities of Senators from slaveholdiug communities, and would not wound them by a super fluous word. Of Slavery I speak strongly, as I must ; but thus far, even at the expense of my argument, I have avoided the contrasts, founded on details of figures and facts, which are so obvious between the free States and " slaveholding communities ; " especially have I shunned all allusion to South Carolina. But the venerable Senator, to whose discretion that State DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 357 has intrusted its interests here, will not allow me to be still. God forbid that I should do injustice to South Caro lina. I know well the gallantry of many of her sons. I know the response which she made to the appeal of Boston for union against the Stamp Act the Fugitive Slave Act of that day by, the pen of Christopher Gadsden. And I remember with sorrow that this patriot was obliged to confess, at the time, her " weak ness in having suck a number of slaves," though it is to his credit that he recognized Slavery as a " crime." * I have no pleasure in dwelling on the humiliations of South Carolina ; I do not desire to expose her sores ; I would not lay bare her nakedness. But the Senator, in his vaunt for " slaveholding communities," has made a claim for Slavery which is so inconsistent with his tory, and so derogatory to Freedom, that I cannot allow it to pass unanswered. This, sir, is not the first time, even during my little experience here, that the same claim has been made on this floor ; and this seems more astonishing, because the archives of the country furnish such ample and undoubted materials for its refutation. The question of the comparative contributions of men by different States and sections of the country in the war of the Revolution, was brought forward as early as 1790, in the first Congress under the Constitution, in the ani mated and protracted debate on the assumption of State debts by the Union. On this occasion Fisher Ames, a Representative from Massachusetts, memorable for his classic eloquence, moved a call , upon the War * Bancroft s History of United States, vol. v. p. 426. 358 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. Department for the number of men furnished by each State to the Revolutionary armies. This motion, though vehemently opposed, was carried by a small majority. Shortly afterwards, the answer to the call was received from the Department, at that time under the charge of General Knox. This answer, which is one of the documents of our history, places beyond cavil or criticism the exact contributions in arms of each State. Here it is copied from the first volume of the American Archives. Statement of the number of troops and militia furnished by the several States, for the support of the Revolutionary war, from 1775 to 1783, inclusive. NORTHERN STATES. New Hampshire Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut New York . Pennsylvania New Jersey Total SOUTHERN STATES. Delaware Maryland Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Total S3 . Ill i "5 fc8 12,496 67,937 5,908 32,039 17,781 25,608 10,727 if & 2,093 15,155 4,284 7,792 3,312 7,357 6,055 11 HI IP ** 14,598 83,092 10,192 39,831 21,093 32,965 16,782 "35 *o 111 7,300 9,500 1,500 3,000 8,750 2,000 2,500 172,496 46,048 218,553 30,9.50 2,387 376 2,763 1,000 13,912 5,464 19,376 4,000 26,672 4,163 30,835 21,880 7,263 2,716 9,969 12,000 5,508 5,508 28,000 2,679 2,679 9,930 58,421 12,719 71,130 76,810 It should be understood that, at this time, there was but little difference in numbers between the population DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 359 of the Southern States and that of the Northern States. By the census of 1790, the Southern had a popula tion of 1,956,354; the Northern had a population of 1,968,455. But, notwithstanding this comparative equality of population in the two sections, the North furnished vastly more men- than the South. Of continental troops, the Southern States furnished 58,421 ; the Northern furnished 172,496 ; making about three men furnished to the continental army by the Northern States to one from the Southern. Of militia, whose services are authenticated by the War Office, the Southern States furnished 12,719 ; the Northern furnished 46,048 ; making nearly four men furnished to the militia by the Northern States to one from the Southern. Of militia, whose services were not authenticated by the "War Office, but are set down in the return as conjectural only, we have 76,810 furnished by the Southern States and 30,950 furnished by the North ern ; making, under this head, more than two men furnished by the Southern to one from the Northern. The chief services of the Southern States for which the venerable Senator now claims so much it will be observed with a smile, were conjectural only ! Looking, however, at the sum total of continental troops, authenticated militia and conjectural militia, we have 147,940 furnished by the Southern States, while 249,503 were furnished by the Northern ; making 100,000 men furnished to the war by the Northern more than the Southern. But the disparity swells when we directly compare South Carolina and Massachusetts. Of continental troops, and authenticated militia, and conjectural mili- 360 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. tia, South Carolina furnished 33,508, while Massachu setts furnished 92,592 ; making in the latter sum nearly three men for one furnished by South Carolina. Look, however, at the continental troops and the authenticated militia furnished by the two States, and here you will find only 5,508 furnished by South Carolina, while 83,092 were furnished by Massachu setts being sixteen times more than ~by South Caro lina, and much more than by all the Southern States together. Here are facts and figures of which the Senator ought not to be ignorant. Did the occasion require, I might go further, and minutely portray the imbecility of the Southern States, and particularly of South Carolina, in the war of the Revolution, as compared with the Northern States. This is a sad chapter of history, upon which I unwill ingly dwell. Faithful annals record that, as early as 1778, the six South Carolina regiments, composing, with the Georgia regiment, the regular force of the Southern Department, did not, in the whole, muster above eight hundred men ; nor was it possible to fill up their ranks. During the succeeding year, the Governor of South Carolina, pressed by the British forces, offered to stipulate the neutrality of his State during the w r ar, leaving it to be decided at the peace to whom it should belong a premonitory symptom of the secession proposed in our own day ! At last, after the fatal field of Camden, no organized American force was left in this region. The three Southern States animis opibusque parati, according to the vaunt of the Senator had not a single battalion in the field ! During all this period the men of Massa chusetts were serving their country, not at home, but DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 361 away from their own borders ; for, from the time of the Declaration of Independence, Massachusetts never saw the smoke of an enemy s camp. At last, by the military genius and remarkable ex ertions of General Greene, a Northern man, who assumed the command of the Southern army, South Carolina was rescued from the .British power. But the trials of this- successful leader reveal, in a striking manner, the weakness of the " slaveholding " State which he saved. Some of these are graphically pre sented in his letters. Writing to Governor Reed, of Pennsylvania, under date of 3d May, 1781, he says : " Those whose true interest it was to have informed Congress and the people to the northward of the real state of things, have joined in the deception, and magnified the strength and re sources of this country infinitely above their ability. Many of those, who adhere to our party, are so fond of pleasure, that they cannot think of making the necessary sacrifices to support the Revolution. There are many good and virtuous people to the southward ; but they cannot animate the inhabitants in gen eral, as you can to the northward." Gordon s History of American Revolution, vol. iv. p. 87. Writing to Colonel Davies, under date of 23d May, 1781, he exposes the actual condition of the coun try: " The animosity between the Whigs and Tories of this State renders their situation truly deplorable. There is not a day passes but there are more or less who fall a sacrifice to this savage disposition. The Whigs seem determined to extirpate the Tories, and the Tories the Whigs. Some thousands have fallen in this way in this quarter, and the evil rages with more violence than ever. If a stop cannot be soon put to these massacres, the country will be depopulated in a few months more, as neither Whig nor Tory can live." 31 362 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. To Lafayette, General Greene, under date of 29th December, 1780, describes the weakness of his troops: "It is now within a few days of the time you mentioned of being with me. Were you to arrive, you would find a few ragged, half-starved troops in the wilderness, destitute of every thing necessary for either the comfort or convenience of soldiers." ... " The country is almost laid waste, and the inhabitants plunder one another with little less than savage fury. We live from hand to mouth, and have nothing to subsist on but what we collect with armed parties. In this situation, I believe you will agree with me, there is nothing inviting this way, especially when I assure you our whole force fit for duty, that are properly clothed and properly equipped, does not amount to eight hundred men." Johnson s Life of Greene, vol. i. p. 340. Writing to Mr. Varnum, a member of Congress, he says : ** There is a great spirit of enterprise prevailing among the militia of these Southern States, especially with the volunteers. But their mode of going to war is so destructive, that it is the greatest folly in the world to trust the liberties of a people to such a precarious defence." Johnson s Life of Greene, vol. i. p. 397. Nothing can be more authentic or complete than this testimony. Here, also, is what is said by David Ramsay, an estimable citizen of South Carolina, in his History of the Revolution in that State, published in 1785, only a short time after the scenes which he de scribes : " While the American soldiers lay encamped (in the low coun try near Charleston), their tattered rags were so completely worn out, that seven hundred of them were as naked as they were born, excepting a small strip of cloth about their waists, and they were nearly as destitute of meat as of clothing." vol. ii. p. 258. DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 363 The military weakness of this " slaveholding com munity" is too apparent. Learn now its occasion; and then join with me in amazement that a Senator from South Carolina should attribute our independence to anything " slaveholding." The records of the coun try, and various voices, all disown his brag for Slavery. The State of South Carolina, by authentic history, disowns it. Listen, if you please, to peculiar and decisive testimony, under date of 29th March, 1779, from the Secret Journal of the Continental Con gress : " The Committee appointed to take into consideration the cir cumstances of the Southern States, and the ways and means for their safety and defence, report, that the State of South Carolina (as represented by the Delegates of the said State, and by Mr. Huger, who has corne here at the request of the Governor of the said State, on purpose to explain the circumstances thereof) is UNABLE to make v any effectual efforts with militia, by reason of the great proportion of citizens necessary to remain at home, to prevent insurrection among the negroes, and to prevent the de sertion of them to the enemy. That the state of ihe country, and the great number of these people among them, expose the inhabi tants to great danger, from the endeavors of the enemy to excite them to revolt or desert." Vol. i. p. 105. Here is South Carolina secretly disclosing her mili tary weakness, and its ignoble occasion ; thus repudi ating, m advance, the vaunt of her Senator, who finds strength and gratulation in Slavery rather than in Freedom. It was during the war that she thus shrived herself, on bended knees, in the confessional of the Continental Congress. But the same ignominious confession was made, some time after the war, in open debate, on the floor of Congress, by Mr. Burke, a Representative from South Carolina : 364 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. "There is not a gentleman on the floor who is a stranger to the feeble situation of our State, when we entered into the war to oppose the British power. We were not only without money, without an army or military stores, but we were few in number, and likely to be entangled with our domestics, in case the enemy invaded us." Annals of Congress, 1789, 1791, vol. ii. p. 1484. Similar testimony to the weakness engendered by Slavery was also borne by Mr. Madison, in open de bate in Congress : " Every addition they (Georgia and South Carolina) receive to their number of slaves, tends to weaken them, and render them less capable of self-defence." Annals of Congress, vol. i. p. 340. The historian of South Carolina, Dr. Ramsay," a contemporary observer of the very scenes which he describes, also exposes this weakness : " The forces under the command of General Provost marched through the richest settlements of the State, where are the fewest white inhabitants in proportion to the number of slaves. The hapless Africans, allured with the hope of Freedom, forsook their owners, and repaired in great numbers to the royal army. They endeavored to recommend themselves to their new masters by discovering where their owners had concealed their property, and were assisting in carrying it off." History of South Caro lina, vol. i. p. 312. And the same candid historian, describing the inva sion of the next year, says : "The slaves a second time flocked to the British army." Vol. i. p. 336. And at a still later day, Mr. Justice Johnson, of the Supreme Court of the United States, and a citizen of DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 865 South Carolina, in his elaborate Life of General Greene, speaking of negro slaves, makes the same unhappy admission. He says : " But the number dispersed through these (Southern) States wa s very great ; so great, as to render it impossible for the citizens to muster freemen enough to withstand the pressure of the British arms." Vol. ii. p. 472. Surely, sir, this is enough, and more. Thus, from authentic documents including the very muster-rolls of the Revolution we learn the small contributions of men and the military weakness of the Southern States, particularly of South Carolina, as compared with the Northern States ; and from the very lips of South Carolina, on four different occasions, speaking by a Committee ; by one of her representatives in Con gress ; by her historian ; and by an eminent citizen, we have the confession not only of weakness, but that this weakness was caused by Slavery. And yet, in the face of this cumulative and unimpeachable testi mony, we are called to listen, in the American Senate, to a high-flying boast, from a venerable Senator, that American Independence was achieved by the arms and treasure of " slaveholding communities ; " an assump tion, baseless as the fabric of a vision, in any way it may be interpreted ; whether as meaning baldly that independence was achieved by those Southern States, which were the peculiar home of Slavery, or that it was achieved by any strength or influence which came from that noxious source. Sir, I speak here for a Commonwealth of just renown, but I speak also for a cause which is more than any Commonwealth, even that which I represent ; and I cannot allow the Sena- 31* 366 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. tor, with his silver-white locks, to discredit either. Not by Slavery, but in spite of it, was independence achieved. Not because, but notwithstanding,, there were " slaveholding communities," did triumph de scend upon our arms. It was the inspiration of Liberty Universal that conducted us through the Red Sea of the Revolution, as it had already given to the Declara tion of Independence its mighty tone, resounding through the ages. " Let it be remembered," said the nation, speaking by the voice of the Continental Con gress, at the close of the war, " that it has ever been the pride and boast of America, that the rights- for which she has contended WERE THE BIGHTS OF HUMAN NATUKE !" Yes, sir, in this behalf, and by this sign, we conquered. Such, sir, is my answer on this head to the Senator from South Carolina. If the work which I undertook has been done thoroughly, he must not blame me. Whatever I undertake, I am apt to do thoroughly. But while thus repelling the insinuations against Mas sachusetts-, and the assumptions for Slavery, I would not unnecessarily touch the sensibilities of that Sena tor, or of the State which he represents. I cannot forget that, amidst all diversities of opinion, we are bound together by the ties of a common country that Massachusetts and South Carolina are sister States, and that the concord of sisters ought to prevail between them ; but I am constrained to declare, that through out this debate I have sought in vain any token of that just spirit which, within the sphere of its influence, is calculated to promote the concord of States or of indi vidual* 3 DEFENCE OP MASSACHUSETTS. 367 And now, for the present, I part with the venerable Senator from South Carolina. In pursuing his incon sistencies, and exposing them to judgment, I had almost forgotten his associate leader in the wanton and personal assault to which I have been exposed I mean the veteran Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason], who is now directly in my eye. With im perious look, and in the style of Sir Forcible Feeble, that Senator has undertaken to call in question my statement that the Fugitive Slave Bill denied the writ of Habeas Corpus ; and, in doing this, he has assumed a superiority for himself which, permit me to tell him now in this presence, nothing in him can sanction. Sir, I claim little for myself; but I shrink in no respect from any comparison with that Senator, veteran, though he be. Sitting near him, as has been my for tune since I have been 011 this floor, I have come to know something of his conversation, something of his manners, something of his attainments, something of his abilities, something of his character ay, sir, and something of his associations ; and, while I would not undertake to disparage him in any of these respects, yet 1 feel that I do not exalt myself unduly that I do not claim too much for the position which I hold, or the name which I have established when I openly declare that, as a Senator of Massachusetts, and as a man, I place myself at every point in unhesi tating comparison with that honorable assailant. And to his peremptory assertion that the Fugitive Slave Bill does not deny the Habeas Corpus, I oppose my assertion, as peremptory as his own, that it does, and there I leave that question. Mr. President, I welcome the sensibility which the 368 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. Senator from Virginia displays at the exposure of the Fugitive Slave Bill in its true character. He is the author of that enormity. From his brain came forth the soulless monster. He is, therefore, its natural guardian. The Senator is, I believe, a lawyer. And now, since at last he has shown a parental solicitude to shield his offspring, he must do more than vainly parry the objection, that it denies the great writ of Habeas Corpus. It is true, sir, if anything but Slavery were in question, such an objection, if merely plausible, would be fatal ; but it is not to be supposed that the partisans of an institution founded on a denial of human rights, can appreciate the proper efficacy of that writ of Freedom. Sir, I challenge the Senator to defend his progeny ; not by assertion, but by reason. Let him rally all the ability, learning and subtlety, which he can command, and undertake the impossible work. Let him answer this objection. The Constitution, by an amendment which Samuel Adams hailed as a protection against the usurpations of the National Government, and which Jefferson asserted was our " foundation corner-stone," has solemnly declared that " the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Stronger words could not be employed to limit the powers under the Constitution, and to pro tect the people from all assumptions of the National Government, particularly in derogation of Freedom. By the Virginia resolutions of 1798, which the Senator is reputed to accept, this limitation of the powers of the National Government is recognized and enforced. The Senator himself is understood, on all questions DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 369 not affecting the claims of Slavery, to espouse this rule in its utmost strictness. Let him now indicate, if he can, any article, clause, phrase, or word, in the Constitution, which gives to Congress any power to establish a " uniform law throughout the United States " on the subject of fugitive slaves. Let him now show, if he can, from the records of the Federal Convention, one jot of evidence inclining to any such power. Whatever may be its interpretation in other respects, the clause on which this Bill purports to be founded gives no such power. Sir, nothing can come out of nothing, and the Fugitive Slave Bill is, therefore, without any source or origin in the Constitution. It is an open and unmitigated usurpation. And, sir, when the veteran Senator of Virginia has answered this objection : when he has been able to find in the Constitution a power which is not to be found, and to make us see what is not to be seen, then let him answer another objection. The Constitution has secured the inestimable right of Trial by Jury in " suits at common law," where the value in contro versy exceeds twenty dollars. Of course, Freedom is not susceptible of pecuniary valuation, therefore there can be no question that the claim for a fugitive slave is within this condition. In determining what is meant by "suits at common law," recourse must be had to the common law itself, precisely as we resort to that law in order to determine what is meant by " Trial by Jury." Let the Senator, if he be a lawyer, now under take to show that a claim for a fugitive slave is not, according to the early precedents and writs well known to the framers of the Constitution, especially to Charles Cotesworth Pinckney and John Rutledge, 370 DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. of South Carolina, both of whom had studied law at the Temple a suit at common law, to which, under the solemn guaranty of the Constitution, is attached the Trial by Jury, as an inseparable incident. Let the Senator undertake to show this, if he can. And, sir, when the veteran Senator has found a power in the Constitution where none exists, and has set aside the right of Trial by Jury in a suit at com mon law, then let him answer yet another objec tion. By the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, a claim for a fugitive slave is declared to be a case under the Constitution, within the judicial power ; and this judgment of the court is confirmed by common sense and common law. Let the Senator undertake to show, if he can, how such an exalted ex ercise of judicial power can be confided to a single petty magistrate, appointed, not by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, but by the Court ; holding his office, not during good behavior, but merely during the will of the Court ; and receiving, not a regular salary, but fegs according to each individual case. Let the Senator answer this objection, if, in any way, by any twist of learning, logic, or law, he can. Thus, sir, do I present the issue directly on this outrageous enactment. Let the author of the Fugitive Slave Bill meet it. He will find me ready to follow him in argument, though I trust never to be led, even by his example, into any departure from those couite- sies of debate which are essential to the harmony of every legislative body. Such, Mr. President, is my response to all that has been said in this debate so far as I deem it in DEFENCE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 371 any way worthy of attention. To the two associate chieftains in this personal assault, the veteran Senator from Virginia, and the Senator from South Carolina with the silver-white locks, I have replied completely. It is true that others have joined in the cry, which these associates first started ; but I shall not be tempted further. Some there are who are best answered by silence ; best answered by withholding the words which leap impulsively to the lips. And now, turning my back upon these things, let me, as I close, dwell on a single aspect of this discus sion which will render it memorable. On former occa sions like this, the right of petition has been vehemently assailed, or practically denied. Only two years ago, memorials for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill, presented by me, were laid on your table, Mr. Presi dent, without reference to any Committee. All is changed now. Senators have condemned the memo rial, and sounded the cry of " treason," " treason," in our ears ; but thus far, throughout this excited debate, no person has so completely outraged the spirit of our institutions, or forgotten himself, as to persevere in objecting to the reception of the memorial, and its proper reference. It is true, the remonstrants and their representatives here have been treated with in dignity ; but the great right of petition the sword and buckler of the citizen though thus discredited, has not been denied. Here, sir, is a triumph for Freedom. STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, SlST JULY, 1854. The. efforts of the friends of Freedom in Congress have encoun tered opposition at every stage. The presentation of petitions by John Quincy Adams was thwarted in every way that vin dictive rage could prompt. All propositions for the repeal of obnoxious laws sustaining Slavery have been stifled. To accom plish this result, parliamentary courtesy and parliamentary law have both been set at defiance. On a former occasion, (see ante, p. 74,) when Mr. Sumner brought forward his motion for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill, he was refused a hearing ; and he obtained it only by taking advantage of the Civil and Diplo matic Appropriation Bill, and moving an amendment to it, which no parliamentary subtlety or audacity could declare to be out of order. On the presentation of petitions against the Fugitive Slave Bill, from time to time, he was met by similar checks. Meanwhile, anything for Slavery was always in order. An ex perience of a single day will show something of this. On the 31st July, 1854, Mr. Seward, of New York, under instructions from the Committee on Pensions, reported a Bill, which had already passed the House of Representatives, for the relief of Betsey Nash, a poor and aged woman, whose husband had died of wounds received in the the war of 1812, and asked for its immediate consideration. This simple measure, demanded by obvious justice, was at once embarrassed by an incongruous proposition for the support of Slavery. Mr. Adams, of Missis sippi, moved, as an amendment, another Bill, for the relief of Mrs. Batchelderj the widow of a person who had been killed in Boston, while aiding as a volunteer in the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Bill. In the face of various objections this amend - [372] STRUGGLE FOE THE REPEAL, ETC. 373 ment was adopted. Mr. Sumner at once followed by a propo sition in the following words : " Provided, that the Act of Congress, approved 18th Sept. 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from service or labor, be, and the same hereby is repealed." But this was ruled out of order, as " not germane to the Bill under consideration ;" and the two Bills, hitched together one for a military pension, and the other for contribution to the widow of a Slave-Hunter were put on their passage. Mr. Sumner then sprang for the floor, when a struggle ensued, which is minutely reported in the Congressional Globe. The careful reader will observe that, in order to cut off an effort to repeal the Fugitive Slave Bill, at least two unquestionable rules of parliamentary law were overturned. Mr. SUMNER. In pursuance of notice, I now ask leave to introduce a Bill. Mr. STUART. I object to it, and move to take up the River and Harbor Bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The other Bill is not disposed of. The third reading of a Bill for the relief of Betsey Nash. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. Mr. SUMNER. In pursuance of notice, I ask leave to introduce a Bill, which I now send to the table. Mr. STUART. Is that in order ? Mr. SUMNER. Why not ? Mr. BENJAMIN. There is a pending motion of the Senator from Michigan to take up the River and Har bor Bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. That motion was not entertained, because the Senator from Massachusetts had and has the floor. Mr. STUART. I make the motion now. 32 374 STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair thinks it is in order to give the notice. Mr. SUMNER. Notice has been -given, and I now, in pursuance of notice, introduce the Bill. The ques tion is on its first reading. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The first reading of a Bill. Mr. NORRIS. I rise to a question of order. Mr. SUMNER. I believe I have the floor. Mr, NORRIS. But I rise to a question of order. I submit that that is not the question. The Senator from Massachusetts has given notice that he would ask leave to introduce a Bill. He now asks that leave. If there be objection, the question must be decided by the Senate whether he shall have leave or not. Objection is made, and the Bill cannot be read. Mr. SUMNER. Very well ; the first question, then, is on granting leave, and the title of the Bill will be read. The PRESIDING OFFICER (to the Secretary). Read the title. The Secretary read it as follows : " A Bill to repeal the Act of Congress approved 18th September, 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from service or labor." The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on granting leave to introduce the Bill. Mr. SUMNER. And I have the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mas sachusetts is entitled to the floor. Mr. SUMNER. I shall not occupy much time ; nor shall I debate the Bill. Some time ago, Mr. President, after the presentation of the Memorial from Boston, signed by twenty-nine hundred citizens without dis- OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 375 tinction of party, I gave notice that I should, at some day thereafter, ask leave to introduce a Bill for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act. Desirous, however, not to proceed in that matter prematurely, I awaited the action of the Committee on the Judiciary, to which the memorial, and others of a similar character, were referred. At length an adverse report was made, and accepted by the Senate. From the time of that report down to this moment, I have sought an opportunity to introduce this Bill. Now, at last, I have it. At a former session, sir, in introducing a similar proposition, I considered it at length, in an argument which I fear lessly assert Mr. GWIN. I rise to a point of order. Has the Senator a right to debate the question, or say anything on it until leave be granted ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. My impression is that the question is not debatable.* Mr. SUMNER. I propose simply to explain my Bill, to make a statement, riot an argument. Mr. GWIN. I make the point of order. The PRESIDING OFFICER. I am not aware pre cisely what the rule of order on the subject is; but I have the impression that the Senator cannot de bate Mr. STJMNER. The distinction is this Mr. GWIN. I insist upon the application of the decision of the Chair. Mr. MASON. Mr. President, there is one rule of order that is undoubted : that when the Chair is stat- * Nothing is clearer, under the rules of the Senate, than that Mr. Sumner was in order when, on introducing his Bill, he pro ceeded to state the causes for doing it. 376 STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL ing a question of order, he must not be interrupted by a Senator. There is no question about that rule of order. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator did not interrupt the Chair. Mr. SUMMER. The Chair does me justice in re sponse to the injustice of the Senator from Virginia. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Order, order ! Mr. MASON. The Senator is doing that very thing at this moment. I am endeavoring to sustain the authority of the Chair, which certainly has been vio lated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the opinion of the Chair that the debate is out of order. I am not pre cisely informed of what the rule is ; but such is my clear impression. Mr. WALKER. If the Senator from Massachusetts will allow me, I will say a word here. Mr. SUJMNER. Certainly. Mr. WALKER. It is usual, upon notice being given of intention, to ask leave to introduce a Bill. The Bill is sent to the Chair, and it is taken as a matter of course that the Senator asking it has leave. But in this instance, differing from the usual practice, objec tion has been made to leave being granted. The necessity is imposed, then, of taking the sense of the Senate on granting leave to the Senator to introduce his Bill. That, then, becomes the question. The question for the Chair to put is, Shall the Senator have leave ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. That was the question proposed. Mr. WALKER. Now, sir, it docs seem to me that OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 377 it is proper, and that it is in order, for the Senator to address himself to the Senate, with the view of show ing the propriety of granting the leave asked for. He has a right to show that there would be propriety on the part of the Senate in granting the leave. I think, therefore, as this may become a precedent in future in regard to other matters, that it should be settled with some degree of deliberation. Mr. GWIN. Let the Chair decide the question. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair has decided that debate was not in order, in his opinion. Mr. SUMNER. From that decision of the Chair, I most respectfully take an appeal. The PRESIDING OFFICER. From that ruling of the Chair an appeal is taken by the Senator from Massa chusetts. The question is on the. appeal. Mr. BENJAMIN. In order to put a stop to the whole debate, I move to lay the appeal on the table, That is a motion which is not debatable. Mr. SUMNER. Is that motion in order ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Certainly it is in order.^ Mr. WELLER. I desire to make one remark in regard to the rule. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is not in order now. The question must be taken without debate. Mr. SUMNER. Allow me to state the ease as it seems to me. I was on the floor, and yielded it to the Senator from Wisconsin strictly for the purpose of an explanation. When he finished I was in posses- *The motion was clearly out of order. In the Senate an appeal from the decision of the Chair on a question of order cannot be laid on the table. 32* 378 STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL sion of the floor ; and then it was that the Senator from Louisiana, on my right The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator from Massachusetts give leave to the Chair to explain ? Mr. SUMNER. Certainly. The PRESIDING OFFICER. A point of order was made by the Senator from California [Mr. Gwin], that debate was not in order upon the question of granting leave ; and the Chair so decided. The Sen ator from Massachusetts then lost the floor, as I appre hend, and he certainly did by following it up by an appeal. After that he could go no further. He lost the floor then again for a second time, and then it was that the Senator from Louisiana intervened with an other motion, which is certainly in order, to lay the appeal on the table. That is not debatable. This, it seems to me, is the state of the case. Mr. CHASE. Will the Chair allow me to make a single statement ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Certainly. Mr. CHASE. The Senator from Massachusetts rose and held the floor during the suggestion made to the Chair by the Senator from Wisconsin. The Chair then, after the Senator from Wisconsin had finished his suggestion, declared his opinion to be, notwith standing the suggestion, that debate was not in order. The Senator from Massachusetts then took an appeal, and retained the floor for the purpose of addressing the Senate on that appeal. While he occupied the floor, the Senator from Louisiana rose and moved to lay the appeal upon the table. That will be borne out by the the gentlemen present. The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is so ; but the OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 379 Chair does not understand that debate was in order on the appeal. The appeal was to be decided without debate, and therefore the Senator from Massachusetts necessarily lost the floor after he took the appeal. Mr. BELL. I would inquire whether there is not a Bill already pending for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. I have not inquired of the Secretary ; but it is my belief there is a similar Bill pending ; but it was not on that ground the Chair made this ruling. Mr. BELL. I would inquire whether there is not such a Bill pending ? Did not the honorable Senator from Ohio some time ago bring in such a Bill ? Mr. WELLER. I think he did. Mr. CHASE. No, sir. Mr. BELL. Then I am mistaken. Mr. CHASE. My Bill is not on that subject. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the Senator from Louisiana, to lay on the table the appeal taken by the Senator from Massachu setts from the decision of the Chair. Mr. CHASE. I ask if the motion of the Senator from Louisiana is in order when the Senator from Massachusetts retained the floor for the purpose of debating the appeal ? Mr. BENJAMIN. The Senator is not in order in renewing that question, which has already been decided by the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Chair acted under an erroneous impression in supposing that debate on the appeal was not in order, when it actually is, it was the fault of the Chair, and it would not have been 380 STRUGGLE FOE THE REPEAL in order for the Senator from Louisiana to make the motion which he did make, while the Senator from Massachusetts was on the floor. But the Chair recog nized the Senator from Louisiana, supposing that the Senator from Massachusetts h&d. yielded the floor. The Senator had taken an appeal ; he followed it up by no address to the Chair, indicating an intention that he intended to "debate the appeal, or the Chair certainly should so far have recognized him. But the Chair would reconsider his ruling in that respect, with the consent of the Senator from Louisiana. Mr. BRIGHT. The Chair will permit me to suggest that I think the motion proper to be entertained now is the one proposed by the Senator from New Hamp shire [Mr. Norris]. The Senator from Massachusetts presented his Bill, the Senator from New Hampshire raised the question as to whether the Senate would grant leave to introduce it ; and I think the proper question to be put now is, will the Senate grant leave to introduce a Bill repealing the Fugitive Slave Law ? The effect of the motion of the Senator from LQuisiana would be to lay the subject on the table, from which it might be taken at any time for action. For one, I desire to give a decisive vote now, declaring that I am unwilling to legislate upon the subject, that I am satis fied with the law as it reads, and that I will not aid the Senator from Massachusetts, or any Senator in The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indi ana is certainly not in order. Mr. BRIGHT. I certainly am in order in calling the attention of the Chair to the fact that the Senator from New Hampshire OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 881 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indi ana is not in order. Mr. BRIGHT. Then I will sit down and ask the Chair to state wherein I am out of order ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. In discussing a ques tion which is not before the Senate. Mr. BRIGHT. I claim that the motion is v before the Senate. The Senator from New Hampshire raised the question immediately that The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair decides otherwise. Mr. BRIGHT. Then I appeal from the decision of the Chair, and I state this as my point of order : that before the Bill was presented in legal parlance, the Senator from New Hampshire raised the question as to whether the Senate would grant leave, and that is the point now before the Senate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state the question which he supposes to be pending. The Senator from California made a point of order that debate on the Bill proposed to be introduced by the Senator from Massachusetts, was not in order. The Chair so ruled. From that ruling the Senator from Massachusetts took an appeal. The Chair supposed that the Senator from Massachusetts had yielded the floor, and he gave the floor to the Senator from Louis iana, who moved to lay that appeal on the table. That is the question which is now pending. The Chair be fore suggested that if the Senator from Massachusetts had not yielded the floor, he had made a mistake in giving the floor to the Senator from Louisiana, but he did not suppose that the Senator from Massachusetts, after taking the appeal, without some indication of his 382 STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL intention to debate it, could continue to hold the floor, and he therefore recognized the Senator from Louisiana. The Chair is sorry if he did the Senator from Massa chusetts injustice in that respect, but he did not hear him, and recognized the Senator from Louisiana. Mr. BRIGHT. I would respectfully ask the Chair what has become of the motion submitted by the Sen ator from New Hampshire ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair did not understand him to submit a motion, but the Senator from California took his point of order. Mr. BRIGHT. I wish to inquire of the Senator from New Hampshire whether he has withdrawn his motion ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. It was not entertained. It is not in his power to say whether it was withdrawn or not, for it was not entertained. Mr. NORRIS. I think I can inform my friend from Indiana how. the matter stands. The Senator from Massachusetts proposed to introduce a Bill on notice given. I raised the question that it could not be intro duced without leave of the Senate, if there was objec tion. Mr. SUMNER. Do I understand the Senator to say without notice given ? I asked leave to introduce the Bill in pursuance of notice. Mr. NORRIS. The Senator from Massachusetts, I have already stated, offered his Bill agreeably to pre vious notice. Mr. SUMNER. Precisely. Mr. NORRIS. The question was then raised, whether it could be received if there was objection. The ques- OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 383 tion arose whether leave should be granted to the Sen ator from Massachusetts to introduce the Bill ? Mr. SUMNER. That is the first question. Mr. NORRIS. The Senator from Massachusetts, upon the question of granting leave, undertook to address the Senate. He was then called to order by my friend from California, for discussing that question. The Chair sustained the objection of the Senator from California. From the decision of the Chair the Sen ator from Massachusetts took an appeal, and that is where the question now stands, unless the Senator from Louisiana had a right to make the motion which he did make, which was to lay the appeal on the table. - The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, unless the Senator from Louisiana will disembarrass the Chair by withdrawing it, on the motion of the Senator from Louisiana, to lay the appeal on the table. Mr. STJMNER. On that motion I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. FOOT. On what motion have the yeas and nays been ordered ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. On the motion of the Senator from Louisiana. Mr. WALKER. I wish to know, before voting, what will be the effect of a vote given in the affirmative on this motion ? "Will it carry the Bill and the whole subject on the table ? Mr. FOOT. An affirmative vote carries the whole measure on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, sir ; if the motion 384 STRUGGLE FOE THE REPEAL to lay on the table be agreed to, it carries the Bill with it. Several SENATORS. No, no. Mr. BENJAMIN. The question is whether, on the motion for leave to introduce the Bill, there shall be debate ? The Chair has decided that there shall be no debate. Those who vote " yea " on my motion to lay the appeal of the Senator from Massachusetts on the table, will vote that there is to be no debate upon the permission to offer the Bill, and then the question will be taken upon granting leave. Mr. WALKER. The Chair decides differently. The Chair decides, if I understand, that it will carry the Bill on the table. Then, how can we ever reach the question of leave when objection is made ? Mr. WELLER. I object to this discussion. The Chair will decide that question when it arises. It does not arise now. I insist that the Secretary shall go on and call the roll. Mr. WALKER. Suppose some of us object to it ? Mr. WELLER. Then I object to your discussing it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on reflection, thinks that the motion, if agreed to, would not have a further effect than to bring up the question of granting leave. Mr. BRIGHT. I desire to understand the Chair. I do not wish to insist on anything that is not right, or that is not within the rules. That I insist upon hav ing. The honorable Senator from Louisiana is right in his conclusions as to his motion, provided he had a right to make the motion ; but I doubt whether he had a right to make that motion while the motion of OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 385 the honorable Senator from New Hampshire was pend ing. I do not wish, however, to consume the time of the Senate. If the effect of the decision of the Chair is to bring us back to the question as to whether we shall receive the Bill or not, I will yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is it. Mr. BRIGHT. Very well. Mr. SUMNER. Before the vote is taken, allow me to read a few words from the Rules and Orders, and from Jefferson s Manual. " One day s notice, at least, shall be given of an intended motion for leave to bring in a Bill." That is the 25th rule of the Senate, and then to that rule, in the publication which I now hold in my hand, is appended, from Jefferson s Manual, the following decisive language : "o 1 " When a member desires to bring in a Bill on any subject, he states to the House, in general terms, the causes for doing it, and concludes for leave to bring in a Bill entitled, &c. Leave being given, on the question, a Committee is appointed to pre pare and bring in the Bill." Now, I would simply observe, that my purpose was merely to make a statement Mr. BENJAMIN. I call to order. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator had pre sented his Bill, and was debating it afterwards. The question is now on the motion of the Senator from Louisiana, to lay the appeal on the table ; and on that the yeas and nays have been ordered. The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted yeas 35, nays 10 ; as follows : YEAS Messrs. Adams, Atclunson, Bell, Benjamin, Brodhead, 33 386 STRUGGLE FOR THE REPEAL Brown, Butler, Cass, Clay, Cooper, Dawson, Dodge, of Iowa, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Gwin, Johnson, Jones, of Iowa, Jones, of Tennessee, Mallory, Mason, Morton, Norris, Pearce, Pettit, Pratt, Rusk, Sebastian, Slidell, Stuart, Thompson, of Kentucky, Thomson, of New Jersey, Toombs, Toucey and Weller 35. NAYS Messrs. Chase, Fessenden, Fish, Foot, Gillette, Rock well, Seward, Sunmer, Wade and Walker 10. So the appeal was ordered to lie on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now is on granting leave to introduce the Bill. Mr. SUMNER. On that question I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. STUART. I rise to a question of order ; and I think if the Chair will consider it for the moment, he will, or, at least, I hope he will, agree with me. The parliamentary law is the law under which the Senate act. Whenever there is a motion made to lay on the table a subject connected with the main subject, and it prevails, it carries the whole question with it. It is different entirely from the rule in the House of Repre sentatives. The rules in the House vary the parlia mentary law, and you may there move to lay a matter on the table, because that is the final vote, and is equivalent to rejecting it, and a motion to take it up from the table is not in order. But now the Presiding Officer will see that if this course be pursued, the Senate may grant leave to introduce this Bill, they may go on and pass it, and yet next week it will be in order for the Senator from Massachusetts to move to take up the appeal which the Senate has just laid on the table ; whereas the whole subject on which his appeal rested might have been passed and sent to the other House. That surely cannot be so. The ruling of the Chair in this respect, therefore, I suggest is OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 387 wrong, and the motion to lay on the table carries the whole subject with it. It is important to have the matter settled for the future practice of the Senate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. At the first mooting of the proposition, the Chair was of that opinion ; but he is perfectly satisfied now that it did not carry the whole question with it. The question was on the motion to lay the appeal on the table, and that motion was ex hausted when it did lay the appeal on the table. It did not reach back to affect the question of granting leave. That is now the question before the Senate. On that the yeas and nays have been asked for by the Senator from Massachusetts. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. STTJART. I will not take an appeal from the decision of the Chair, but I only wish to say that as I am satisfied I am right, I do not wish, by acquiescing in the decision of the Chair, to embarrass us when such occasions may arise again. The question being taken by yeas and nays upon granting leave to introduce the Bill, resulted yeas 10, nays 35 ; as follows : YEAS Messrs. Chase, Dodge, of Wisconsin, Fessenden, Foot, Gillette, Rockwell, Seward, Sumner,-Wade and Walker 10. NATS Messrs. Adams, Atchison, Bell, Benjamin, Bright, Brodhead, Brown, Butler, Cass, Clay, Cooper, Dawson, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Gwin, Johnson, Jones, of Iowa, Jones, of Tennessee, Mallory, Mason, Morton, Norris, Pearce, Pettit, Pratt, Rusk, Sebastian, Slidell, Stuart, Thompson, of Kentucky, Thom son, of New Jersey, Toombs, Toucey and Weller 35. So the Senate refused to grant leave to introduce the Bill. THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. SPEECH BEFORE THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION AT WOR CESTER, 7TH SEPTEMBER, 1854.* MR. PRESIDENT AND FELLOW-CITIZENS OF MASSA CHUSETTS : After months of anxious, constant service in another place, away from Massachusetts, I am per mitted again to stand among you, my fellow-citizens, and to draw satisfaction and strength from your gener ous presence. (Applause.) Life is full of changes and contrasts. From slave soil I have come to free soil. (Applause.) From the tainted breath of Slavery I have passed to this bracing air of Freedom. (Ap plause.) And the heated antagonism of debate, shooting forth its fiery cinders, is changed into this brimming, overflowing welcome, where I seem to lean on the great heart of our beloved Commonwealth, as it palpitates audibly in this crowded assembly. (Loud and long applause.) Let me say at once, frankly and sincerely, that I have not come here to receive applause or to give occasion for any tokens of public regard ; but simply * This speech is copied from the newspapers of the day. [388] THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS, ETC. 389 to unite with my fellow-citizens in new vows of duty. (Applause.) And yet I would not be thought insen sible to the good will now swelling from so many honest bosoms. It touches me more than I can tell. During the late session of Congress, an eminent supporter of the Nebraska Bill said to me, with great animation, in language which I give with some pre cision, that you may appreciate the style as well as the sentiment : " I would not go through all that you do on this nigger question, for all the offices and honors of the country." To which I naturally and promptly replied : " Nor would I for all the offices and honors of the country." (Laughter and long applause.) Not in such things can be found the true inducements to this warfare. For myself, if I have been able to do anything in any respect not unworthy of you, it is because I thought rather of those commanding duties which are above office and honor. (Cries of good, good, and loud applause.) And now, on the eve of an important election in this State, we have assembled to take counsel together, in order to determine how best to perform those duties which we owe to our common country. We are to choose eleven Representatives in Congress ; also, Governor, Lieutenant-Governor and members of the Legislature, "which last will choose a Senator of the United States, to uphold, for five years ensuing, the principles and honor of Massachusetts. If in these elections you were to be governed merely by partiali ties or prejudices, whether personal or political, or merely by the exactions of party, I should have nothing to say now, except to dismiss you to your 33* 390 THE PUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS ignoble work. (That is it, good, good.) But I as sume that you are ready to renounce these influences and press forward with a single regard to those duties which are now incumbent upon us in National affairs, and also in State affairs. And here two questions occur which absorb all others. First, what are our political duties here in Massachusetts at the present time ? and secondly, how, and by what agency shall they be performed ? What, and how ? These are the two questions of which I shall briefly speak, in their order, attempting no elaborate discussion, but simply aiming to state,, the case so that it may be intelligible to all who hear me. And first, what are our duties here in Massachusetts, at the present time ? In unfolding these, I need not dwell on the wrong and shame of Slavery, or on the character of the Slave Power that Oligarchy of slaveholders which now rules the Republic. These you understand. And yet there are two outrages fresh in your recollection, which I must not fail to expose, as natural manifestations of Slavery and the Slave Power. One is the repeal of the Prohibition of Slavery in the vast Missouri Territory, now known as Kansas and Nebraska, contrary to time-honored com pact and plighted faith. The other is the seizure of Anthony Burns, on the free soil of Massachusetts, and his surrender, without judge or jury, to a Slave- hunter from Virginia, to be thrust back into perpetual bondage. (Shame ! shame !) These outrages cry aloud to Heaven, and to the people of Massachusetts. (Sen- AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 391 sation.) Their intrinsic wickedness is enhanced by the way in which they were accomplished. Of the first, I know something from personal observation; of the latter, I am informed only by public report. It is characteristic of the Slave Power never to stick at any means supposed to be needful in carrying for ward its plans ; but never, on any occasion, were its assumptions so barefaced and tyrannical as in the passage of the Nebraska Bill. This Bill was precipitated upon Congress without one word of public recommendation from the Presi dent, without notice or discussion in any newspaper, and without a single petition from the people. It was urged by different advocates, on two principal arguments, so opposite and inconsistent, as to slap each other in the face. (Laughter.) One being that, by the repeal of the prohibition, the territory would be absolutely open to the entry of slaveholders with their slaves ; and the other being that the people there would be left to determine whether slaveholders should enter with their slaves. With some, the apology was the alleged rights of slaveholders ; with others, it was the alleged rights of the people. With some, it was openly the extension of Slavery ; and with others, openly the establishment of Freedom, under the guise of " popular sovereignty." Of course, the measure, thus upheld in defiance of reason, was carried through Congress, in defiance of all the securities of legis lation. It was carried, first, by whipping in to its support, through executive influence and patronage, men who acted against their own declared judgment, and the known will of their constituents; secondly, by foisting 392 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS out of place, both, in the Senate and House of Repre sentatives, important business, long pending, and usurping its room ; thirdly, by trampling under foot the rules, of the House of Representatives, always before the safeguard of the minority ; and fourthly , by driving it to a close during the present Congress, so that it might not be arrested by the indignant voice of- the people. Such are some of the means by which the Nebraska Bill was carried. If the clear will of the people had not been disregarded, it could not have passed. If the Government had not nefariously inter posed its influence, it could not have passed. If it had been left to its natural place in the order of business, it could not have passed. If the rules of the House and the rights of the minority had not been violated, it could not have passed. If it had been allowed to go over to another Congress, when the people might be heard, it would have been ended all ended. Contemporaneously with the final triumph of this outrage on the very night of the passage of the Nebraska Bill at Washington another scene, begin ning a dismal tragedy, was enacted at Boston. In those streets where he had walked as a freeman, Anthony Burns was seized as a slave under the base pretext that he was a criminal imprisoned in the court-house, which was turned for the time into a fortress and barracoon guarded by heartless hirelings, whose chief idea of liberty was the license-to do wrong (loud applause and cries of " that s it ! " " that s it ! " &c.) escorted by intrusive soldiers of the United States watched by a prostituted militia and finally given up to a Slave-hunter by the decree of a petty AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 393 magistrate, who did not hesitate to take upon his soul the awful responsibility of dooming a fellow-man, in whom he could find no fault, to a fate worse than death. How all this was accomplished, I need not minutely relate. Suffice it to say, that in doing this deed of woe and shame, the liberties of all our citizens, white as well as black, were put in jeopardy the Mayor of Boston was converted to a tool (applause) the Governor of the Commonwealth to a cipher (long continued applause) the laws, the precious sentiments, the religion, the pride and glory of Massa chusetts were trampled in the dust, and you and I and all of us fell down while the Slave Power nourished over us. (Shame, shame, and applause.) These things, in themselves are bad very bad; but they are worse when regarded as the natural off spring of the Oligarchy which now sways the country. And it is this Oligarchy which, at every political hazard, we must oppose. Already its schemes of new aggran dizement are displayed. With a watchfulness that never sleeps, and an activity that never tires with as many eyes as Argus, and as many arms as Briareus the Slave Power asserts its perpetual supremacy ; now threatening to wrest Cuba from Spain, by violent war, or hardly less violent purchase ; now hankering for another slice of Mexico, in order to give new scope to Slavery ; now proposing once more to open the hideous, heaven- defying slave-trade, and thus to re plenish its shambles with human flesh ; and now by the lips of an eminent Senator asserting an audacious claim to the whole group of the West Indies, whether held by Holland, Spain, France or England, as " our Southern Islands." while it assails the independence 394 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS. of Hayti, and stretches its treacherous ambition even to the distant Valley of the Amazon. In maintaining its power, it has applied a new test for office, very different from that of Jefferson " Is he honest ? is he capable ? is he faithful to the consti tution ? " None of these things are asked, but simply, " Is he faithful to Slavery ? " ( Cries of " That s a fact.") With arrogant ostracism it excludes from every office all who cannot respond to this test. So complete and irrational has this tyranny become, that, at this moment, while I now speak, could Washington, Jeffer son or Franklin, once more descend upon the earth and mingle in its affairs to bless us with their wisdom, not one of them, with his recorded opinions on Slavery, could receive a nomination for the Presidency, from a National Convention of either of the great political parties, nor, stranger still, could -he be confirmed by the Senate for any political function under the Govern ment. Had this test prevailed in earlier days, Wash ington could not have been made Commander-in-Chief of the American army ; Jefferson could not have taken his place on the Committee to draft the Declaration of Independence ; and Franklin could not have been sent to France with the commission of the infant republic, to secure the invaluable alliance of that powerful king dom. In view of these things, our duties are manifest. First and foremost, the Slave Power itself must be overthrown. Lord Chatham once exclaimed, in stirring language, that the time had been when he was content to bring France to her knees ; now he would not stop till he had laid her on her back. Nor can we be con tent with less in our warfare. We must not stop till AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 395 we have laid the Slave Power on its back. (Prolonged cheers.) And, fellow-citizens, permit me to say, not till then will the Free States be absolved from all political responsibility for Slavery, and relieved from that corrupt spirit of compromise which now debases, at once, their politics and their religion ; nor till then will there be any repose for the country. (Immense cheering.) Indemnity for the past, and security for the future, must be our watchwords. (Applause.) But these can be obtained only when Slavery is dis possessed of its present vantage-ground, by driving it back exclusively within the limits of the States, and putting the National Government everywhere within its constitutional sphere, openly, actively and perpetu ally, on the side of Freedom. The consequences of this change of policy would be of incalculable and far-reaching beneficence. Not only would Freedom become national and Slavery sectional, as was intended by our fathers ; but the National Government would become the mighty instrument and spokesman of Freedom, as it is now the mighty instrument and spokesman of Slavery. Its powers, its treasury, its patronage, would all be turned, in harmony with the Constitution, to promote Freedom. The Committees of Congress, where Slavery now rules, Congress itself, and the Cabinet also, would all be organized for Freedom. The hypocritical disguise or renunciation of Anti- Slavery sentiment would cease to be necessary for the sake of political preferment ; and the Slavehold- ing Oligarchy, banished from the National Government, and despoiled of its ill-gotten political consequence, without ability to punish or reward, would cease to be feared, either at the North or the South, until at last 396 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS the citizens of the Slave States, of whom a large portion hare no interest in Slavery, would demand Emancipation ; and the great work would commence. Such is the obvious course of things. To the over throw of the Slave Power we are thus summoned by a double call, one political and the other philan thropic ; first, to remove an oppressive tyranny from the National Government, and secondly, to open the gates of Emancipation in the Slave States. (Loud ap plause.) But while keeping this great purpose in view, we must not forget details. The existence of Slavery any where within the National jurisdiction in the Terri tories in the District of Columbia or on the high seas beneath the national flag, is an unconstitutional usurpation, which must be opposed. The Fugitive Slave Bill, monstrous in cruelty, as in unconstitution- ality, is a usurpation, which must be opposed. The admission of new Slave States, from whatsoever quar ter, from Texas or Cuba (applause), Utah or New Mexico, must be opposed. And to every scheme of Slavery, whether in Cuba, or Mexico, on the high seas in opening the slave-trade in the West Indies the Valley of the Amazon, whether accomplished or merely plotted, Avhether pending or in prospect, we must send forth an EVERLASTING NO ! (Long con- tined applause.) Such is the duty of Massachusetts, without hesitation or compromise. Thus far I have spoken of our- duties in national matters ; but there are other duties of pressing im portance, here at home, which must not be forgotten or postponed. It is often said that " charity should begin at home." Better say, that charity should begin A.T THE PRESENT CRISIS. 397 everywhere. But while contending with the Slave Power on the broad field of national politics, we must not forget the duty of protecting the liberty of all who tread the soil of Massachusetts. (Immense cheering.) Early in colonial history, Massachusetts set her face against Slavery. At the head of her Bill of Rights she solemnly asserted, that all men are born free and equal ; and in the same declaration, surrounded the liberties of all within her borders by the inestimable rights of trial by jury and Habeas Corpus. But recent events on her own soil have taught the necessity of new safeguards to these great principles, to the end that Massachusetts may not be a vassal of South Carolina and Virginia that the Slave-hunter may not range at will among us, and that the liberties of all may not be violated with impunity. But I am admonished that I must not dwell longer on these things. Suffice it to say, that our duties, in National and State affairs, are identical, and may be described by the same formula : In the one case to put the National Government, in all its departments, and in the other case the State Government, in all its departments, openly, actively and perpetually, on the side of Freedom. (Loud applause.) Having considered what our duties are, the question now presses upon us, how shall they be performed ? By what agency, by what instrumentality, or in what way? The most obvious way is by choosing men to repre sent us in the National Government, and also at home, who shall recognize these duties and be ever loyal to them (cheers) ; men who at Washington will not 398 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS shrink from the conflict with Slavery, and also other men, who, at home in Massachusetts will not shrink from the same conflict when the Slave-hunter appears. (Loud applause, and cries of "good," ".good.") But in the choice of men, we are driven to the organization of parties ; and here the question arises, by what form of organization, or by what party, can these men be best secured ? Surely not by the Democratic party, as at present constituted (laughter) ; though if this party were true to its name, pregnant with human rights, it would leave little to be desired. In this party there are doubtless individuals who are anxious to do all in their power against Slavery ; but, indulge me in say ing that, so long as they continue members of a party which upholds the Nebraska Bill, they can do very little. (Applause and laughter.) What may we ex pect from the Whig party ? (A voice Resolutions.) If more may be expected from the Whig party than the Democratic party, candor must attribute much of the difference to the fact that the Whigs are out of power, while the Democrats are in power. (Long con tinued cheers.) If the cases were reversed, and the Whigs were in power, as in 1850, I fear that, notwith standing the ardor of individuals, and the Resolutions of Conventions (great laughter) made, I fear, too often merely to be broken the party might be brought to sustain an outrage as great as the Fugitive Slave Bill ! (Laughter and applause.) But without dwell ing on these things, (to which I allude with diffidence, and, I trust, in no uncharitable temper, or partisan spirit,) I desire to say that no party, which calls itself national, according to the common acceptance of the word, - - which leans upon a slaveholding wing, AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 399 (cheers) or is in combination with slaveholders, (cheers) can at this time be true to Massachusetts. (Great applause.) And the reason is obviqus. It can be presented so as to cleave the most common understanding. The essential element of such a party, whether declared or concealed, is Compromise ; but our duties require all constitutional opposition to Slavery and the Slave Power, without Compromise. (" That s it," " good," " good.") It is difficult, then, to see how we can rely upon the Whig party. To the true-hearted, magnanimous men who are ready to place Freedom above Party, and their Country above Politicians, I appeal. (Immense cheering.) Let them leave the old parties, and blend in an organ ization, which, without compromise, will maintain the good cause surely to the end. Here in Massachusetts a large majority of the people concur in sentiment on Slavery ; a large majority desire the overthrow of the Slave Power. It becomes them not to scatter their votes, but to unite in one firm, consistent phalanx, (applause,) whose triumph shall constitute an epoch of Freedom, not only in this Commonwealth, but through out tb.e land. Such an organization is now presented by this Republican Convention, which, according to the resolutions by which it is convoked, is to co-operate with the friends of Freedom in other States. (Cheers.) As Republicans we go forth to encounter the Oligarchs of Slavery. (Great applause.) Through this organization we may most certainly secure the election of men, who, unseduced and un- terrified, will uphold at Washington the principles of Freedom and wh& also here at home, in our own com munity, by example, influence and vote, will help to 400 THE DUTIES OP MASSACHUSETTS invigorate Massachusetts. Indeed, I might go further and say, that, by no other organization can we reason ably hope to obtain such men, unless in rare and ex ceptional cases. Men are but instruments. It will not be enough merely to choose those who are loyal. Other things must be done here at home. In the first place, all the existing laws for the protection of human freedom must be rigorously enforced ; (applause, and cries of " good,") and, since these have been found inadequate, new laws for this purpose, within the limits of the constitution, must be enacted. Massachusetts certainly might do well in following Vermont, which, by a special law, has placed the fugitive slave under the safeguard of trial by jury, and the writ of habeas cor pus. But a legislature true to Freedom, will not fail in remedies. (Applause.) A simple prohibition, declaring that no person, holding the commission of Massachusetts, as a Justice of the Peace, or other magistrate, should assume to act as a Slave-hunting Commissoner, or as counsel of any Slave-hunter, under some proper penalty, would go far to render the exist ing Slave Bill inoperative. (Applause.) There are not many, so fond of this base trade as to continue in it when the Commonwealth has thus set upon it a legisla tive brand. But besides more rigorous legislation, Public Opinion must be invoked to step forward and throw over the fugitive its protecting panoply. A Slave-hunter will then be a by-word and reproach ; and all his instru ments, especially every one who volunteers in this vileness, without any positive obligation of law, will naturally be regarded as a part of his pack, and share AT THE PRESENT CBISIS. 401 the ignominy of the chief , hunter. (Laughter and cheers.) And now, from authentic example, drawn out of recent history, learn how the Slave-hunter may be palsied by contrition. I take the story from the late letters on Neapolitan affairs by the eminent Eng lish statesman, Mr. Gladstone; and he has copied it. from an Italian writer. A most successful member of the Italian police, Bolza, of the hateful tribe, known as sbirri, whose official duties involved his own per sonal degradation and the loathing of others, has left a record of the acute sense which even such a man retained of his shame. " I absolutely forbid my heirs," says this penitent official, " to allow any mark of what ever kind, to be placed over the spot of my burial ; much more any inscription or epitaph. I recommend my dearly beloved wife to impress upon my children the injunction, that, in soliciting any employment from the Government, they shall ask for it elsewhere than in the executive police, and not, unless under extraordi nary circumstances, to give her consent to the marriage of any of my daughters with a member of that service." Thus testifies the Italian instrument of legal wrong. Let public opinion here in Massachusetts once put forth its Christian might, and every instrument of the Fugitive Slave Act will feel a kindred shame. (Great applause.) But it is sometimes gravely urged, that since the Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed the constitutionality of the Fugitive Act, there only re mains to us in all places, whether in public station or in private life, the duty of absolute submission. Yes, sir, that is the assumption, which you will perceive is applicable to the humblest citizen, who holds 34* 402 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS ne office and has taken no oath to support the Consti tution, as well as to the public servant, who is under the special obligations of an official oath. Now, with out stopping to consider the soundness of their judg ment, affirming the constitutionality of this Act, let me say that the Constitution of the United States, as I understand it, exacts no such passive obedience. And, in taking the oath to support the Constitution, I have sworn to support it as I understand it, and not as other men understand it. (Loud applause. When it had subsided, it was followed by three rousing ^cheers for Sumner.) In adopting this rule, which was first authoritatively enunciated by Andrew Jackson, when, as President of the United States, in the face of the decisions of the Supreme Court, he asserted the unconstitutionality of the Bank, I desire to be understood as not acting hastily. Let me add, that if it needed other authority in its support, it has that also of the distinguished Cabinet by which he was then surrounded, among whom were that unsurpassed jurist, Edward Livings ton, Secretary of State, and that still living exemplar of careful learning and wisdom, Roger B. Taney, then Attorney General, now Chief Justice of the United States. But beyond these, it has the unquestionable authority of Thomas Jefferson, by whom, as President of the United States, it was asserted again and again as a rule of conduct. Thus if any person at this day be disposed to deal sharply with me on account of the support which I now most conscientiously give to this rule, let him remember that his thrusts will pierce not only myself, the humblest of its supporters, but also the great fame of Andrew Jackson and of Thomas AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 403 Jefferson patriots both of eminent life and authority, on whose Atlantean shoulders this principle of Consti tutional law will ever firmly rest. But reason here is in harmony with authority. From the necessity of the case I must swear to support the Constitution, either as I do understand it, or as I do NOT understand it. (Laughter,) But the absurdity of dangling on the latter horn of the dilemma, com pels me to take the former and there is a natural end of the argument. (Great laughter and cheers.) Is there a person in Congress or out of it, in the National Government or State Government, who, when this inevitable alternative is presented to him, will venture to say that he swears to support the Constitu tion as he does not understand it ? (Laughter and applause.) The supposition is too preposterous. But let me ask gentlemen who are disposed to abandon their own understanding of the Constitution, to submit their conscience to the standard of other men, by whose understanding do they swear ? Surely not by that of the President. This is not alleged. But by the understanding of the Supreme Court. In other words, to this Court, consisting at present of nine persons, is committed a power of fastening such interpretation as they see, fit upon any part of the Constitution adding to it or subtracting from it or positively varying its requirements actually making and unmaking the Constitution ; and all good citizens must bow to their work as of equal authority with the original instrument, ratified by solemn votes of the whole people ! (Great applause.) If this be so, then the oath to support the Constitution of the United States is hardly less offen sive than the famous " et cetera " oath devised by 404 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS Archbishop Laud, in which the subject swore to cer tain specified things, with an " &c " added. Such an oath I have not taken. (Good, good.) The power of our Supreme Court is great, and its sphere is vast ; but there are limits to its power and its sphere. According to the words of the Constitu tion, " the judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity, arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States, and Treaties ; " but it by "no means follows, that the interpretation of the Con stitution which may be incident to the trial of these " cases " is final. Of course, the judgment in the " case " actually pending is final, as the settlement of a controversy, for weal or woe to the litigating parties ; but as a precedent it is not final even on the Supreme Court itself. When cited afterwards it will be re garded with respect as an interpretation of the Consti tution, and, if nothing appears against it, of controlling authority ; but, at any day, in any litigation, at the trial of any " case," it will be within the unquestion able competency of the Court to review its own decision, so far as it establishes any interpretation of the Con stitution. But if the Court itself be not constrained by its own precedents, how can the co-ordinate branches of the Government, who are respectively under oath to support the Constitution, and who, like the Court itself, may be called within their respective spheres, incidentally to interpret the Constitution, be constrained by them ? In both instances, the power to interpret the Constitution is simply incident to other principal duties, as the trial of " cases," the making of laws, or the administration of Government, and it seems as plainly incident to a " case " of legislation or of ad- AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 405 ministration, as to one of the " cases " of litigation. And on this view I shall act with entire confidence under the oath which I have taken. For myself, let me say, that I hold judges, and especially the Supreme Court of the country, in much respect ; but I am too familiar with the history of judicial proceedings to regard them with any super stitious reverence. (Sensation.) Judges are but men, and in all ages have shown a full share of human, frailty. Alas ! alas ! the worst crimes of history have been perpetrated under their sanction. The blood of martyrs and of patriots, crying from the ground, sum mons them to judgment. It was a judicial tribunal which condemned Socrates to drink the fatal hemlock, and which pushed the Saviour barefoot over the pave ments of Jerusalem, bending beneath his cross. It was a judicial tribunal which, against the testimony and entreaties of her father, surrendered the fair Vir ginia as a slave ; which arrested the teachings of the great Apostle to the Gentiles, and sent him in bonds from Judea to Rome ; which, in the name of the Old Religion, adjudged the saints and fathers of the Chris tian Church to death, in all its most dreadful forms ; and which, afterwards, in the name of the New Religion, enforced the tortures of the Inquisition, amidst the shrieks and agonies of its victims, while it compelled Galileo to declare in solemn denial of the great truth he had disclosed that the earth did not move round the sun. It was a judicial tribunal which, in France, during the long reign of her monarchs, lent itself to be the instrument of every tyranny, as during the brief reign of terror it did not hesitate to stand forth the unpitying accessary of the unpitying guillo- 4(/6 THE DUTIES OP MASSACHUSETTS tine. Ay, sir, it was a judicial tribunal in England, surrounded by all the forms of law, whicb sanctioned every despotic caprice of Henry the Eighth, from the unjust divorce of his queen, to the beheading of Sir Thomas More ; which lighted the fires of persecution that glowed at Oxford and Smithfield, over the cinders of Latimer, Ridley and John Rogers ; which, after elaborate argument, upheld the fatal tyranny of ship money against the patriot resistance of Hampden ; which, in defiance of justice and humanity, sent Sidney and Russell to the block ; which persistently enforced the laws of Conformity that our Puritan Fathers per sistently refused to obey ; and which, afterwards, with Jeffries on the bench, crimsoned the pages of English history with massacre and murder even with the blood of innocent woman. Ay, sir, and it was a judicial tribunal in our own country, surrounded by all the forms of law, which hung witches at Salem which affirmed the constitutionality of the Stamp Act, while it admonished "jurors and the people " to obey and which now, in our day, has lent its sanction to the unutterable atrocity of the Fugitive Slave Bill. (Long continued applause, and three cheers for Sum- ner.) Of course the judgments of courts are of binding authority upon inferior tribunals and their own execu tive officers, whose virtue does not prompt them to resign rather than aid in the execution of an unjust mandate. Over all citizens, whether in public or private station, they will naturally exert, as precedents, a com manding influence. This I admit. But no man, who is not lost to self-respect, and ready to abandon that manhood which is shown in the Heaven-directed coun- AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 40* tenance, will voluntarily aid in enforcing a judgment which, in his conscience, he believes to be wrong Surely he will not hesitate to " obey God rather than man," and calmly abide the perils which he may pro voke. Not lightly, not rashly will he take the grave responsibility of open dissent ; but if the occasiou requires, he will not fail. Pains and penalties may be endured, but wrong must not be done. (Cheers.) " I cannot obey, but I can suffer," was the exclamation of the author of Pilgrim s Progress, when imprisoned for disobedience to an earthly statute. Better suffer injustice than do it. Better be even the poor slave, returned to bondage, than the unhappy Commissioner. (Applause and sensation.) The whole dogma of passive obedience must be re jected; in whatever guise it may assume, and under whatever alias it may skulk ; whether in the tyrannical usurpations of king, parliament, or judicial tribunal ; whether in the exploded theories of Sir Robert Filmer, or the rampant assumptions of the partisans of the Fugitive Slave Bill. The rights of the civil power are limited ; there are things beyond its province ; there are matters out of its control ; there are cases in which the faithful citizen may say ay, must say " I will not obey." No man now responds to the words of Shakespeare, " If a king bid a man be a villain, he is bound, by the indenture of his oath, to be one." Nor will any prudent reasoner, who duly considers the rights of conscience, claim for any earthly magistrate or tribunal, howsoever styled, a power which, in this age of civilization and liberty, the loftiest monarch of a Christian throne, wearing on 408 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS his brow " the round and top of sovereignty" dare not ass-ert. On this two-fold conclusion I rest, and do not doubt the final result. The citizen, who has sworn to support the Constitution, is constrained to support it simply as he understands it. The citizen, whose private life has kept him from assuming the obligations of the oath, may bravely set at naught the unjust mandate of a magistrate, and, in so doing, he will server justice, though he may expose himself to stern penalties. Fellow Citizens of Massachusetts : Our own local history is not without encouragement. In early colo nial days, the law against witchcraft, now so abhorrent to reason and conscience, was regarded as constitutional and binding, precisely as the Fugitive Slave Bill, not less abhorrent to reason and conscience, has been re garded as constitutional and binding. The Supreme Court of the Province, with able judges, whose names are entwined with our history, enforced this law at Salem, by the execution of fourteen persons as witches ; precisely as petty magistrates, acting under the sanction of the Supreme Court of the United States, and also of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, have enforced the Fugitive Act, by the reduction of two human beings to Slavery. The clergy of Massachusetts, par ticularly near Boston, and also Harvard College, were for the law. " Witchcraft," shouted Cotton Mather from the pulpit, "is the most nefandous high treason" " a capital crime" even as opposition to the Fugitive Act has been denounced as " treason." (Laughter.) But the law against witchcraft was not triumphant long. The General Court of the Province first became penitent, and asked pardon of God for " all the errors AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 409 of His servants and people in the late tragedy." Jury men -united in condemning and lamenting the delusion to which they had yielded under the decision of the judges, and acknowledged that they had brought the reproach of wrongful bloodshed on our native land. Sewall, one of the judges, whose name lives freshly in the liberty-loving character of his descendant, [Hon. S. E. Sewall,] (applause,) and who had presided at the trials, stood up in his place at church, before the congregation, and implored the prayers of the people "that the errors he had committed might not be visited by the judgments of an avenging God on his country, his family, or himself." And now, in a manuscript diary of this departed judge, may be read, on the margin against the contemporary record of these trials, in his own handwriting, words of Latin interjec tion and sorrow : Fee, vos, VCR. Woe ! woe ! woe ! (Sen sation.) The parallel between the law against witchcraft, and the Fugitive Act is not yet complete. It remains for our Legislature, the successor of that original General Court, to lead the penitential march. (Laughter.) In the slave cases there have been no jurymen to recant (laughter) ; and it is too much, perhaps, to expect any magistrate who has sanctioned the cruelty, to imitate the magnanimity of other days by public repentance. But it is not impossible that future generations may be permitted to read, in some newly exhumed diary or letter, by one of these unhappy functionaries, words of woe not unlike those which were wrung from the soul of Sewall. (Sensation.) And now, fellow-citizens, one word in conclusion : 35 410 THE DUTIES OF MASSACHUSETTS Be of good cheer. (" That s it.") I know well the difficulties and responsibilities of the contest ; but not on this account do I bate a jot of heart or hope. (Ap plause.) At this time, in our country, there is little else to tempt into public life an honest man, who wishes, by something that he has done, to leave the world better than he found it. There is little else which can afford any of those satisfactions which an honest man can covet. Nor is there any cause which so surely promises final success. . There is nothing good not a breathing of the common wind which is not on our side. Ours, too, are those great allies described by the poet " exultations, agonies, And love, and man s unconquerable mind." And there are favoring circumstances peculiar to the present moment. By the passage of the Nebraska Bill, and the Boston kidnapping case, the tyranny of the Slave Power has become unmistakably manifest, while, at the same time, all compromises with Slavery are happily dissolved, so that Freedom now stands face to face with its foe. The pulpit, too, released from ill-omened silence, now thunders for Freedom, as in the olden time. (Cheers.) It belongs to Massa chusetts nurse of the men and principles which made the earliest Revolution to vow herself anew to her ancient faith, as she lifts herself to the great struggle. Her place now, as of old, is in the van, at the head of the battle. (Sensation.) But to sustain this advanced position with proper inflexibility, three things are needed by our beloved Commonwealth, in all her departments of government the same three * AT THE PRESENT CRISIS. 411 things, which once in Faneuil Hall, I ventured to say were needed by every representative of the North at Washington. The first is backbone (applause) ; the second is BACKBONE (renewed applause) ; and the third is BACKBONE. (Long continued cheering, and three cheers for " backbone.") With these, Massachusetts will be respected, and felt as a positive force in the National Government (applause), while at home, on her own soil, free at last in reality as in name (applause), all her people, from the islands of Boston to Berkshire hills, and from the sands of Barn- stable to the northern line, will unite in the cry : " No slave hunt in our borders no pirate on our strand; No fetter on the Bay State; no slave upon her land." THE POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT, ILLUSTRATED BY THE LIFE OF GRANVILLE SHARP. AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE MERCANTILE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION OP BOSTON, ON THE EYENING OF 15TII NOVEMBER, 1854. MR. PRESIDENT, AND GENTLEMEN OF THE MERCANTILE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION : I HATE been honored by an invitation to deliver an address, introductory to one of the annual courses of lectures, which your Association bountifully contributes to the pastime, instruction and elevation of our com munity. You know, sir, something of the reluctance with which, embarrassed by other cares, I undertook this service, yielding to a kindly and persistent pres sure, which only a nature sterner than mine could resist. And now I am here to perform what I promised. I am to address the Mercantile Library Association of Boston, numbering, according to your last report, two thousand and seventy-eight members, and possess ing a library of more than fifteen thousand volumes. With so many members and so many books, yours is an institution of positive power. Two distinct features appear in its name. It is primarily an association of persons in mercantile pursuits ; and it is, next, ari association for the improvement of its members, par- [412] POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. 413 ticularly through books. In either particular, it is entitled to regard. But it possesses yet another fea ture, more interesting still, which does not appear in its name. It is an association of YOUNG MEN, with hearts yet hospitable to generous words, and with re solves not yet vanquished by the trials and temptations of life. Especially does this last consideration fill me with a deep sense at once of the privilege and respon sibility to which you have summoned me. I am aware that, according to usage, the whole circle of knowledge, thought and aspiration, is open to the speaker ; but as often as I have revolved the occasion in my mind even as the Greek poet, who hoped to sing of Atreus, was brought back to the strain of love I have been brought back to a consideration of the peculiar character of your association ; and I have found myself unwilling to touch any theme which was not addressed to them especially as merchants. I might fitly speak to you of books ; and here, while undertaking to consider the principles which should govern the student in his reading, it would be pleasant to dwell on the profitable delights, better than a " shower of cent, per cent. ; " on the society, better than fashion or dissipation ; and on that completeness of satisfaction, outvying the possessions of wealth and power, and making " my library dukedom large enough ; " all of which are found in books. But I leave this theme. I might also fitly speak to you of young men, their claims and duties. And here again, while enforcing the precious advantages of Occupation, it would be pleasant to unfold and vindicate that rever ence which antiquity wisely accorded to youth, as the season of promise and hope, pregnant with an unknown 35* 414 POSITION AND DUTIES future, and, therefore, to be watche d with tenderness and care ; to show how in every young man the uncer tain measure of yet undeveloped capacities gives scope to a magnificence of anticipation beyond any reality ; and to ask what must be done, that all this anticipa tion may not wholly die while the young man lives. But there are other things which beckon me away. Not on books, not on youth shall I speak ; but on yet another topic, suggested directly by the name of your Association. With your kind permission, I shall speak to-night on what this age requires from the mercantile profes sion, or rather, since nothing is justly required which is not due, what the mercantile profession owes to this age. I would show the principle by which we are to be guided in making the account current between the mercantile profession and Humanity, and, might I so aspire, hold up the Looking-glass of the Good Mer chant. And, since example is better than precept, and deeds are more than words, I shall exhibit the career of a remarkable man, whose simple life, beginning as the apprentice to a linen draper, and never getting beyond a clerkship, shows what may be accomplished by faithful, humble labors, and reveals precisely those qualities, which, in this age, are needed to crown the character of a Good Merchant. " Every man owes a debt to his profession," was a saying of Lord Bacon, repeated by his contemporary and rival Lord Coke. But this does not tell the whole truth. It restrains within the narrpw circle of a pro fession, obligations which are broad and universal as OP THE MERCHANT. 415 humanity. Rather should it be said that every man owes a debt^ojnankind. In determining the debt of the merchant, we must first appreciate his actual posi tion in the social system ; and here let us glance at history. At the dawn of modern times trade was unknown. There was nothing, then, like a policy of insurance, a bank, a bill of exchange or even a promissory note. The very term " chattels," so comprehensive in its pres ent application, yet when considered in its derivation from the mediseval Latin catalla, cattle, reveals the nar row inventory of personal property in those days, when " two hundred sheep " were paid by a pious Countess of Anjou for a coveted volume of homilies. The places of honor and power were then occupied by men who had distinguished themselves by the sword, and were known under the various names of knight, baron, count, or highest of all Duke, Dux, the leader in war. Under these influences the feudal system was organ ized, with its hierarchy of ranks, in mutual relations of dependence and protection ; and society for a while rested in its shadow. The steel-clad chiefs, who en joyed power, had a corresponding responsibility ; and the mingled gallantry and gentleness of chivalry often controlled the iron hand. It was the dukes who led the forces ; it was the counts or earls who placed themselves at the head of their respective counties ; it was the knights who went forth to do battle with danger, in whatever form, whether from robbers or wild beasts. It was the barons at Runnymede there was no merchant there who extorted from King John that Magna Charta which laid the corner-stone of English and American liberty. 416 POSITION AND DUTIES Meanwhile trade made its humble beginnings. But for a long time the merchant was of a despised caste, only next above the slave who was sol-d as a chattel. If a Jew, he was often compelled, under direful tor tures, to surrender his gains ; if a foreigner, he earned toleration by inordinate contributions to the public revenue ; if a native, he was treated as a caitiff too mean for society, and only good enough to be taxed. In the time of Chaucer he had so far come up, that he was admitted to the promiscuous company, ranging from the knight to the miller, who undertook the merry pilgrimage from the Tabard Inn to Canterbury; but the gentle poet satirically exposes his selfish talk " His resons spake he full solempnly, Souning alway the encrease of his winning ; He wold the see were kept for any thing Betwixen Middleburgh and Ore well." The man of trade had been so low that it took him long to rise. A London merchant, the famous Gresham, in the time of Elizabeth, founded the Koyal Exchange, and a college also ; but trade continued still a butt for jest and jibe. At a later day an English statute gave new security to the merchant s accounts ; but the con temporaneous dramatists exhibited him to the derision of the theatre, and even the almanacs exposed his ignorant superstitions by chronicling the days supposed to be favorable or unfavorable to trade. But in the grand mutations of society, the merchant throve. His wealth increased ; his influence extended, and he gradu ally drew into his company decayed or poverty-stricken members of feudal families, till at last in France, (I do not forget the exceptional condition of Italy,) at^ the close of the seventeenth century, an edict was put forth, OF THE MERCHANT. 417 which John Locke has preserved in the journal of his travels, " that those who merchandise, but do not use the yard, shall not lose their gentility;" (admirable discrimination !) and in England, at the close of the eighteenth century, his former degradation and growing importance were attested in th Q "nyirij7f T)r. Jnlnrnrm i that "the English merchant is a newly-discovered |L _sjp^cles_o. gentleman." But this high arbiter, bend- * ing under feudal traditions, would not even then concede to him any merit ; proclaiming that " there were no qualities in trade that should entitle a man to superiority ; " " that we cannot think a fellow, by sit ting all day at a desk, entitled to get above us," and, to the supposition by his faithful Boswell, that a mer chant might be a man of enlarged mind, the determined moralist replied, " Why, sir, we may suppose any fictitious character ; but there is nothing in trade con nected with an enlarged mind." In America feudalism never prevailed, and our Rev olution severed the only cord by which we were con nected with this ancient system. It was fit that the Congress, which performed this memorable act, should have for its President a merchant. It was fit that, in promulgating the Declaration of Independence, by which, in the face of kings, princes and nobles, the new era was inaugurated, the education of the count ing-house should flaunt conspicuously in the broad and clerkly signature of JOHN HANCOCK. Our fathers " builded wiser than they knew; " and these things are typical of the social change then taking place. And by yet another act, fresh in your recollection, and of peculiar interest to this assembly, has our country borne the same testimony. A distinguished merchant 418 x POSITION AND DUTIES of Boston, who has ascended through all the gradations of trade, honored always for his private virtues as well as public abilities I may mention the name of ABBOTT LAWRENCE has been sent to the Court of St. James as the ambassador of our Republic, and with that proud commission, higher than any patent of nobility, has taken precedence of the nobles of that ancient realm. In this circumstance I see the triumph of personal merit, but still more, the consummation of a new epoch. Yes, sir ! say what you will, this is the day of the merchant. As in the early ages, war was the great concern of society, and the very pivot of power, so is trade now ; and as the feudal chiefs were the " nota bles " placed at the very top of their time, so are the merchants now. All things attest the change. War, which was once the universal business, is now confined to a few : once a daily terror, it is now the accident of an age. Not for adventures of the sword, but for trade do men descend upon the sea in ships, and traverse broad continents on iron pathways. Not for protection against violence, but for trade, do men come together in cities and rear the marvellous superstruc ture of social order. If they go abroad, or if they stay at home, it is trade that controls them, without distinc tion of persons. Here, at least, in our country every man is a trader. The physician trades his benevolent care ; the lawyer trades his ingenious tongue ; the clergyman trades his prayers. And trade summons from the quarry the choicest marble and granite to build its capacious homes, and now, in our own city, displays warehouses which outdo the baronial castle, and sales-rooms which outdo the ducal palace. With these magnificent appliances the relations of depend- OF THE MERCHANT. 419 ence and protection, which marked the early feudalism, are reproduced in the more comprehensive feudalism of trade. Even now there are European bankers who vie in power with the dukes and princes of other days, and there are traffickers everywhere, whose title comes from the ledger and not the sword, fit successors to counts, barons and knights. As the feudal chief allocated to himself and his followers the soil, which was the prize of his strong arm, so now the merchant, with a grasp more subtle and reaching, allocates to himself and followers, ranging through multitudinous degrees of dependence, all the spoils of every land, triumphantly won by trade. I would not press this parallel too far, but, at this moment, especially in our country, the merchant, more than any other character, stands in the very boots of the feudal chief. Of all pursuits or relations, his is now the most extensive and formidable, making all others its tributaries, and bending at times even the lawyer and the clergyman to be its dependent stipendiaries. Such in our social system is the merchant ; and on this precise and incontrovertible statement I found his duties... "Wealth, power, and influence are not for self- indulgence merely, and just according to their extent are the obligations to others which they impose. If, by the rule of increase, to him that hath is given^.^sa-ia. the^jsame. degree new duties are superadded : nor can any man escape from their behests. If the merchant bo in reality our feudal lord, he must render feudal ser vice ; if he be our modern knight, he must do knightly deeds ; if he be the baron of our day, let him maintain baronial charity to the humble ay, sir, and baronial courage against tyrannical wrong, in whatsoever form 420 POSITION AND DUTIES it may assume. But even if I err in attributing to him this peculiar position, I do not err in attributing to him these duties ; for his influence is surely great, and he is at least a man, bound by his simple manhood to regard nothing human as foreign to his heart. The special perils which aroused the age of chivalry have passed away. Monsters, in the form of dragons, griffins, or unicorns, no longer ravage the land. Giants have disappeared from the scene. Robbers have been dislodged from castle and forest. Godeschal the Iron- hearted, and Robin Hood, are each without descend ants. In the new forms which society has assumed, touched by the potent wand of trade, there is no place for any of these. But wrong and outrage are not yet extinct. Cast out of one body, they enter straightway another, whence too they must be cast out. Alas ! in our day, amidst all this teeming civilization, with the horn of Abundance at our gates, with the purse of Fortunatus in our hands, with professions of Christianity on our lips, and with the merchant installed in the high places of chivalry, there are sorrows not less poig nant than those which once enkindled knightly sym pathy ; and there is wrong, which vies in loathsomeness with early monsters, in power with early giants, and in its existing immunity with the robbers once shel tered by castle and forest stalking through your streets in the abused garb of law itself, and dwarfing by its hateful presence all the atrocities of another age. A wicked man is a deplorable sight ; but a wicked law is worse than any wicked man, even than the wretch (J j who steals human beings from their home in Africa ; nor can its outrages be redressed by any incidental charities, perishing at night as the manna in the wilder- OF THE MERCHANT. 421 ness. Like a monster, it must be overpowered ; like a robber, it must be chained ; like a wild beast, it must be exterminated. To the merchant, then especially to the young merchant I appeal, by the position you have won and by the power which is yours ; go forth to redress these grievances, whatever they may be, whether in the sufferings of the solitary soul or audaciously organ ized in the likeness of law. And now, that I may not seem to hold up any impracticable standard, that the path of duty may not appear difficult, and that no young man need hesitate, even though he find himself alone, and opposed by numbers, let me present briefly, as becomes the hour, the example and special achieve ment of GRANVILLE SHARP, the humble Englishman, who, without wealth, fame, or power, did not hesitate to set himself against the merchants of the time, against the traditions of the English bar, against the authority of learned lawyers, and against the power of magis trates, until, by persevering effort, he compelled the highest tribunal of the land to declare the grand con stitutional truth, that the slave who sets his foot on British ground becomes that instant free. His character of pure and courageous principle may be little regarded yet ; but as time advances, it will become a guiding luminary. There are stars aloft, centres of other systems, in such depths of firmament that only after the lapse of ages does their light reach this small ball which we call earth. Mr. President, do not start, I shall not tread on forbidden ground. To the occasion and to your asso ciation I shall be loyal ; but let me be loyal also to myself. Thank God, the great volume of the past is 36 422 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. > always open, with, its lessons of warning and example. Nor will the assembly, which now does me the honor to listen to me, be willing to imitate the pious pirates of the Carribean Seas, who daily recited the ten com mandments, always omitting the injunction, " Thou shalt not steal." I know well the sensitiveness of certain cons9iences. This is; natural. It is according to the decrees of Providence that, whosoever has been engaged in meanness or wickedness, should be pur sued wherever he moves by reproving voices speak ing to him from the solitudes of nature, from the dark ness of night, from the hum of the street, and from every book that he reads, like fiery tongues at Pente cost, until at last the confession of Satan himself can alone express his wretchedness : Me miserable ! which way shall I fly ? - Which way I fly is hell, myself am hell ! GE.ANVILLE SHARP was born at Durham in 1735. His family was of great respectability and of ancient lineage. His grandfather was Archbishop of York, and the confidential chaplain and counsellor of the re nowned Chancellor, Heneage Finch, Lord Nottingham. His less conspicuous father was an arch-deacon and prebendary of the church, who, out of his ecclesiastical emoluments, knew how to dispense charity, while he reared his numerous children to different pursuits. Of these Granville was the youngest son, and, though his elder brothers were educated for professional life, he was destined to trade, a portion being set apart by his father to serve as his apprentice fee in London. With this view his back was turned upon the learned languages, and his instruction was confined chiefly to GRANVILLE SHARP. 423 writing and arithmetic ; but at this time he read and enjoyed all the plays of Shakespeare, in an apple-tree of his father s orchard. When fifteen years old, he was bound as apprentice to a Quaker linen-draper in London, and at this tender age left his father s house. Of his apprenticeship he has given an interesting glimpse : " After I had served about three years of my apprenticeship, my master, the Quaker, died, and I was turned over to a Pres byterian, or ratlier, as he was more properly called, an Inde pendent. I afterward lived some time with an Irish Papist, and also with another person, who, I believe, had no religion at all." Although always a devoted member of the Church of England, these extraordinary experiences in early life placed him above the prejudices of sect, and in spired a rule of conduct, worthy of perpetual memofy, which he presents as follows : " It taught me to make a proper distinction between .the OPINIONS of men and their PERSONS. The former I can freely condemn without presuming to judge the individuals themselves. Thus freedom of argument is preserved, as well as Christian charity, leaving personal judgment to Him to whom alone it belongs." Only two years before the enrolment of Granville Sharp a,mong London apprentices that class so famous in local history another person, kindred in benevolence and now in fame, Howard, the philan thropist, on whose career Burke has cast the illu mination of his genius, finished service in the same place as apprentice to a wholesale grocer. I do not know that these two congenial natures or yet another contemporary of lowly fortunes, John Raikes, the inventor of Sunday schools ever encountered in the world. But they are joined in example, and 424 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. the life of an apprentice, in all its humilities, seems radiant with their presence, as with heavenly light. Perhaps, among the apprentices of Boston, there may bo yet a Granville Sharp, or John Howard. And just in proportion as the moral nature asserts its rightful supremacy here, will such a character be hailed as of higher worth than the products of ail the mills of Lowell, backed by all the dividends and discounts of State street. In 1758, shortly after the completion of his appren ticeship and entrance upon business, Sharp lost both his parents, and very soon thereafter abandoning trade, obtained a subordinate appointment as a supernumerary clerk in the Ordnance Office, where, after six years service, he became simply a clerk in ordinary. Meanwhile, conscientiously fulfilling this life of rou tine and labor, not unlike the toils of Charles Lamb at the India House, he commenced, in moments saved from business and snatched from sleep, a series of studies, which, though undervalued by his modesty, the scholar may envy. That he might better enjoy and vindicate that Book, which he reverentially ac cepted as the rule of life, he first studied Greek and then Hebrew, obtaining such command of both lan guages, as to employ them skilfully in the field of theological controversy. Music and French he studied also, and our own English tongue too, on the pronun ciation of which he wrote an excellent essay. These quiet pursuits were interrupted by an incident which belongs to the romance of truth. An unhappy African, by the name of Jonathan Strong, had been brought from Barbadocs to London, as a slave, where, after brutal outrages, at which the soul shudders, GRANVILLE SHARP. 425 inflicted by the person who called himself master I regret to add lawyer also he was turned adrift on the unpitying stones of that great metropolis, lame, blind and faint, with ague and with fever, and with out a home. In this plight, while staggering along in quest of medical care, he was met by the good Samaritan, Granville Sharp, who, touched by his misfortunes, bound up his wounds, gave him chari table assistance, placed him in a hospital, and watched him through a protracted illness, until at last health and strength again returned, and he was able to com mence service as a freeman in a respectable home. In this condition, after the lapse of two years, he was at last recognized in the street by his old master, who at once determined to entrap him, and to hold him as a slave. By a deceitful message the victim was tempted to a public house, where he was shocked to encounter his cruel claimant, who, without delay, seized and committed him to prison. Here, again, was the good Samaritan, Granville Sharp, who lost no time in en joining upon the keeper of the prison, at his peril, not to deliver the negro to any person whatever, and then promptly invoked the intervention of the Mayor of London. At the hearing before this magistrate, it appeared that the claimant had already undertaken, by a formal bill of sale, to convey the alleged slave to another person, who, by an agent, was in attendance to take him on board a ship bound for Jamaica. As soon as the case had been stated, the Mayor g$ve judgment in words worthy of imitation : "The lad," said this righteous judge, "has not stolen anything, and is not guilty of any offence, and is, therefore, at liberty to go away." The agent of the claimant, not 36* 426 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. disheartened, seized him by the arm and still claimed him as " property." Yes ! even as property ! Sharp, in his ignorance of legal proceedings, was for a moment perplexed, when the friendly voice of the coroner, who chanced to be near, whispered, "Charge him;" on which hint our philanthropist, turning at once to the brazen-faced claimant, said, with justifiable anger of manner : " Sir, I charge you in the name of the King, with an assault upon the person of Jonathan Strong, and all these are my witnesses ! " when, to avoid immediate commitment, and the yawning cells of the jail, he let go his piratical slave-hunting grasp, " and all bowed to the Lord Mayor and came away, Jona than following Granville Sharp, and no one daring to touch him." But the end was not yet. By this accidental and disinterested act of humanity, Sharp was exposed at the same time to personal insult and to a suit at law. The discomfited claimant the same lawyer who had originally abandoned the slave in the streets of Lon don called on him " to demand gentlemanlike satis faction ; " to which the philanthropist replied, that, as " the lawyer had studied law so many years, he should want no satisfaction that the law could give him." And he nobly redeemed his word ; for he applied himself at once- to his defence against the legal process instituted by the claimant for an alleged ab straction of property. Here begins his greatness. It is in collision with difficulty that the sparks of genuine character appear. This simple-hearted man, now vindictively pursued, laid his case before an eminent solicitor, who, after ample consideration with learned counsel, among whom was the cele- GRANVILLE SHARP. 427 brated Sir James Eyre, did not hesitate to assure him that, under the British Constitution, he could not be defended against the action. An opinion given in 1729, jointly by the Attorney General and Solicitor General of the time, York and Talbot, two great names in the English law, and each afterwards Lord Chancellor, was adduced, declaring, under their respective signatures, that " a slave, by coming from the West Indies to Great Britain or Ireland, either with or without his master, doth not become free," and " that the master may legally compel him to return again to the plantations ; " and Lord Mansfield, the Chief Justice, was reported as strenuously concurring in this opinion, to the odious extent of delivering up fugitive slaves to their claimants. With these author ities against him, and forsaken by his professional defenders, Sharp was not disheartened ; but, though, according to his own striking language, " totally un acquainted either with the practice of the law, or the foundations of it, having never in his life opened a law book except the Bible," he was inspired to depend on himself. An unconquerable will, and those instincts which are often profounder in their teaching than any learning, were now his counsellors. For nearly two years, during which the suit was still pending, he gave himself to an intense study of the British Constitution in all its bearings upon human liberty. During these researches, he was confirmed in his original preposes- sions on the question, and aroused to an undying hostility against Slavery, which he plainly saw to be without any sanction in the Constitution. " Neither the ivord SLAVES," he exclaimed, " or anything that 428 POSITION AND DUTIES OP THE MEECHANT. can justify the enslaving of others, can be found there, God be praised / " * And I, too, say God be praised ! The result of these studies was embodied in a tract, " On the Injustice and Dangerous Tendency of toler ating Slavery, or even of admitting the least Claim to Private Property in the Persons of Men in England." This was submitted to his counsel, one of whom was the famous commentator, Sir William Blackstone, and, by means of numerous copies in manuscript, circulated among gentlemen of the bar, until the lawyers on the other side were actually intimidated, and the Slave- hunter, failing to bring forward his action, was mulcted in treble costs ; and thus ended that persecution of our philanthropist. This important tract was printed in 1769. Thus far it was an individual case only which had engaged his care. Another soon followed, where, through his chivalrous humanity, the intolerable wrongs of a woman kidnapped in London and transported as a slave to Barbadoes, were redressed, so far as an earthly decree could go. Learning the infinite woes of Slavery, he was now aroused to broader efforts. Shocked by an advertisement in a London newspaper, such as often appeared in those days of " a black girl to be sold, of excellent temper and willing dispo sition," he at once protested to the Chancellor, Lord Camden, against such things as " a notorious breach of the laws of nature, humanity and equity, and also the established law, custom and constitution of Eng land ;" and in the same year, 15th May, 1769, he solemnly appealed by letter to the Archbishop of Can terbury against the slave trade, and thus by many * Hoare s Life of Sharp, vol. i. p. 58, cap. I. GEANVILLE SHARP. 429 years heralded the labors of Clarkson and Wilberforce. " I am myself convinced," he said, " that nothing can thrive which is in any way concerned in that unjust trade. I have known several instances, which are strong proofs to me of the judgments of God, even in this world, against such a destructive and iniquitous traffic." In these things he showed not only his love of justice, but his personal independence. " Although I am a placeman," he wrote on another occasion, " and indeed of a very inferior rank, yet I look on myself to be per fectly independent, because I have never yet been afraid to do and avow whatever I thought just and right, without the consideration of consequences to myself ; for, indeed, I think it unworthy of a man to be afraid of the world ; and it is a point with me never to conceal my sentiments on any subject whatever, not even from my superiors in office, when there is a prob ability of answering any" good purpose ly it" Still again his protecting presence was enlisted to save a fellow-man from bondage ; and here it is neces sary to note the new form of outrage. A p^or African, Thomas Lewis, who had once been a slave, was residing quietly at Chelsea, in the neighborhood of London, when he was suddenly seized by his former master, who, with the aid of two ruffians hired for the fiend ish purpose, dragged him on his back into the water, and thence into a boat lying in the Thames, in which, with his legs tied, and his mouth gagged by a stick, he was rowed down to a ship bound for Jamaica, under a commander previously engaged in the conspiracy, to be sold for a slave on his arrival in that island. But this diabolical act, though warily contrived, did not escape notice. The cries of the victim, on his way to 430 POSITION AND DUTIES OP THE MERCHANT. the boat, reached the servants of a neighboring man sion, who witnessed the deadly struggle, but did not venture a rescue. Their mistress, a retired widow, mother of the eminent naturalist and traveller, Sir Joseph Bankfs, on learning what had passed, instantly put forth her womanly exertions. Without the hesita tion of her sex, she hurried to Granville Sharp, who was now known for his knightly zeal to succor the distressed, laid before him the terrible story, and in sisted upon vindicating the freedom of the stranger at her own expense. All honor to this woman ! A simple warrant, first obtained by Sharp, was scouted by the captain, whose victim, bathed in tears, was already chained to the mast. The great writ of habeas corpus was next invoked ; and the ship, which had contumaciously proceeded 011 its way, was boarded in the Downs, happily within British jurisdiction, by a faithful officer, who, in the name of the King of Eng land, unbound the chains of the African, and took him back to freedom. A complaint was now presented against the kid nappers, who were at once indicted by the grand jury. The cause was removed to the King s Bench, and on the 20th February, 1771, brought into court before Lord Mansfield. The defence was, that the victim was their slave, and, therefore, property to be rightfully seized. And here the question was distinctly pre sented, whether any such property was recognized by the British Constitution. The transcendent magistrate, who presided on the occasion, saw the magnitude of the issue, and sought to avoid its formal determina tion, by presenting the subordinate point, whether the claimant, supposing such property recognized, was able GRANVILLE SHARP. 431 to prove the man to be his. The kidnappers were found " guilty ; " but judgment against them was waived on the recommendation of Lord Mansfield, who, be it observed, shrank, at every stage, from any act by which Slavery in England should be annulled, and who avowed on this occasion " his hope that the question never would be finally discussed." Sharp was justly indignant at this craven conduct, which, with all gentleness of manner, but with perfect firm ness, he did not hesitate to arraign as an " open con tempt " of the tme principles of the Constitution. Alas ! it is the natural influence of Slavery to make men hard. Gorgon-like, it turns to stone all who look upon its face except to slay it. Among the juridical magistrates of the time, Lord Mansfield was not alone, His companion in contemporary fame, Blackstone, shared the petrifaction. An early edition of his incomparable Commentaries had openly declared that a slave on com ing to England became at once a freeman ; but, in a sub sequent edition, after the question had been practically presented by Granville Sharp, the text was pusillani- mously altered to an abandonment of this great constitu tional principle ; and our intrepid philanthropist hung his head with shame and anxiety while the counsel for the Slave-hunters triumphantly invoked this tergiver sation as a new authority against Freedom. But the day was at hand when the great philanthro pist was to be vindicated, even by the lips of the great magistrate. The Slavery Question could not be sup pressed. The Chief Justice of England could not do it. Drive out nature with a pitchfork, and still she will at once return. Only a few months elapsed, when a memorable case arose, which presented the question 432 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHAN1. distinctly for judgment. A negro, James Somerset, whose name, as the starting-point of an immortal prin ciple, will help to keep alive the appellation of the ducal house, to which it originally belonged, was detained in irons on board a ship lying in the Thames, and bound for Jamaica. On application to Lord Mans field, in his behalf, 3d December, 1771, supported by affidavits, a writ of habeas corpus was directed to the captain of the ship, commanding him to return the body of Somerset into court, with the cause of his detention. In course of time, though somewhat tardily, the body was produced, and, for cause of detention, it was assigned, that he was the property of Charles Stewart, Esq., of Virginia., who had held him in Vir ginia as a slave ; that, when brought as such to Lon don, he ran away from the service of his master, but was recovered, and finally delivered on board the ship to be carried to Jamaica, there to be sold as the slave and property of the Virginia gentleman. As no facts were in issue here, the whole cause hinged on the constitutionality of Slavery in England ; and the great question which the Chief Justice had sought to avoid, and on which the Commentator had changed sides, was once again to be heard. In order to give solemnity to the proceedings, in some degree corresponding to their importance, the cause was brought by Lord Mansfield before the King s Bench, where it was continued from time to time, ac cording to the convenience of counsel and of the court, running even through months, and occupying different days in January, February and May, down to the 22d June, 1772, when judgment was finally delivered. During all this period, Somerset, having recognized GKANVILLE SHARP. 433 with sureties for his appearance in court, was left at large. To Granville Sharp he had repaired at once, and by him was kindly welcomed, and effectually aided. Under his advice, counsel learned in the law were re tained, and by this humble clerk, they were instructed in the grounds of defence. At his expense, too, out of his small means, the proceedings were maintained. " Money," he nobly said, "has no value but when it is well spent ; and I am thoroughly convinced, that no part of my little pittance can ever be better bestowed than in an honest endeavor to crush a growing oppres sion, which is not only shocking to humanity, but in time must prove even dangerous to the community." On the other side, the costs were defrayed by a sub scription among the merchants ! Hear this, merchants of Boston, justly jealous of the good name of your calling, and hang your heads with shame ! To the glory of the English bar, the eminent counsel for the slave declined all fees for their valuable and protracted services ; and here let me pause for one moment to pay them an unaffected tribute. They were five in number : Mr. Sergeant Davy, who opened the cause with the proposition " that no man at this day is or can be & slave in England;" Mr. Sergeant Glynn ; Mr. Mansfield, afterward Chief Justice of the Common Pleas ; Mr. Hargrave and Mr. Alleyne, each of whom was patiently heard by the court at length. The argument of Mr. Hargrave, who early volunteered his great learning in the case, is one of the masterpieces of the bar. This was his first appearance in court ; but it is well that liberty on that day had such support. For all these gallant lawyers, champions of the right, there is honor ever increasing, which the soul spon- 37 434 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. taneously offers, while it turns in sorrow from the counsel, only two in number, who allowed themselves to be enlisted on the side of Slavery. I know well that in Westminster Hall there are professional usages, which happily do not prevail in our country where every such service depends purely on contract by which a barrister thinks himself contrained to assume any cause which is properly presented to him. If this service depended on contract there, as with us, the sarcasm of Ben Jonson would be strictly applicable ; " This fellow For six sols more would plead against his Maker." The Fox, Act 4th. But I undertake to affirm, that no usage, professional or social, can give any apology for joining the pack of the Slave-hunter. Mr. Dunning, one of the persons in this predicament, shewed that he acted against his better nature. The first words in his argument were : "It is incumbent on me to justify the detainer of the negro." Pray why incumbent on him? He was then careful to show that he did not maintain that there was an absolute property in him ; and he proceeded to say, among other things, that it was his misfortune to ad dress an audience, the greater part of which, he feared, was prejudiced the other way ; that for himself, he would not be understood to intimate a wish in favor of Slavery ; but that he was bound in duty to mention those arguments most useful to the claimant, so far as consistent with the truth, and he concluded with this conscience-stricken appeal : "I hope, therefore, I shall not suffer in the opinion of those whose honest passions are fired at the name of Slavery I hope I have not transgressed my duty to humanity." Clearly the lawyer GEANYILLE SHAKP. 435 had trangressed his duty to Humanity. No man can rightfully enforce any principle which violates human nature ; nor can any subtilty of dialectics, any extent of erudition, or any grandeur of intellect, sustain him. Notwithstanding the character for liberal principles which John Dunning acquired, and which breathes in his sensitive excuses notwithstanding his double fame at once in Westminster Hall and Saint Stephen s Chapel notwithstanding the peerage which he vainly won, "no son of his succeeding," this odious service rendered to a Slave-hunter, calling himself a Virginia gentleman, cries in judgment against him, and will continue to cry, as time advances. (Do nqt start, Mr. President, I am alluding to occurrences in another hemisphere, and another century !) As well undertake a Slave-hunt in the deserts of Africa as in the streets of London. As well pursue the fugitive with the hired whip of the overseer as with the hired argument of the lawyer. As well chase him with the bay of the blood-hound, as with the tongue of the advocate. It is the lawyer s clear duty to uphold human rights, whether in the loftiest or the lowliest, and when he undertakes to uphold a wrong so outrageous as Slavery, his proper function is so far reversed, that he can be aptly described only in the phrase of the Roman Church, L Avocato del Diavolo, The Devil s Advocate. Passing from the counsel to the court, we find at once occasion for gratitude and sorrow. The three judges, Ashton, Willes and Ashurst, who sat at the side of Lord Mansfield, were silent throughout the whole proceedings, overawed, perhaps, by his com manding authority, so that he alone seems to be present. Of large intellect and extensive studies, running into 436 POSITION AND DUTIES OP THE MERCHANT. all regions of learning ; with a silver-tongued voice and an amenity of manner which gave a constant charm to his presence ; with unsurpassed professional and political experience combined ; the early companion of Pope and the early competitor of Pitt ; having already once refused the post of Prime Minister and three times refused the post of Chancellor; he stood forth at the period when the poor slave was brought before him as an acknowledged light of jurisprudence, and, take him for all in all, the most finished magistrate England had then produced. But his character had one fatal defect, which is too common on the bench. He lacked moral firmness, which, happily, was not lacking in Granville Sharp. Still more, he was not naturally on the side of Liberty, as becomes a great judge, but always by blood and instinct on the side of prerogative and power an offence for which he was arraigned by his contemporary, Junius, and for which posterity will hold him to strict account. But his luminous mind, prompt to perceive the force of prin ciples, could not resist the array of arguments now marshalled for Freedom. He saw clearly that a system like Slavery could not find a home under the British Constitution, which nowhere mentions the name of slave. And yet he shrank from the conclusion. More than once he coquetted with the merchants, who had the case so much at heart, and twice he ignobly suggested that the claimant might avoid the decision of the great question, fraught with Freedom or Slavery to multi tudes, simply by ^manumitting the individual slave. And when at last the case could not be arrested by any device, or be longer postponed when judgment was inevitable he came to the work, not warmly or GEANVILLE SHARP. 437 generously, but in trembling obedience to the Truth which awaited to be declared. On other occasions of a purely commercial character, his judgments were more learned and elaborate, and they were reported with more completeness and care ; but no judgment of equal significance ever fell from the great Oracle. From various sources I have sought its precise import.* It is remarkable for several rules which it clearly enunciates, and which, though often assaulted, still stand as reason and as law. Of these the first was expressed in these simple words : "If the parties will have judgment, fiat justitia, mat ccelum ; let justice be done, whatever be the consequences." The Latin phrase, which here plays such a prominent part, though of classical stamp, cannot be traced to any classical origin, and it has even been asserted, that it was freshly coined by Lord Mansfield on this occasion, worthy of such commanding truth in such commanding phrase. But it is of older date and from another mint, though it is not too much to say, that it took its cur rency and authority from him. Coming from such a conservative magistrate, it is of peculiar importance. * It is strange that there should be no single satisfactory report of this memorable judgment. That usually quoted from Ho well s State Trials, vol. xx. pp. 81, 82, was copied from Lofft, a reporter generally avoided as an authority. There is another report in Hoar s Life of Sharp, pp. 89, 90 ; also another in Campbell s Lives of the Chief Justices, vol. ii. p. 419 ; and still another, and, in some respects, the best, in the Appendix to a tract published by Sharp in 1776, entitled " The Just Limitation of Slavery in the Laws of God, compared with the unbounded claims of the African Traders and British American Slaveholders." This judgment is also considered and quoted in several other contem porary tracts. 37* 438 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MEECHANT. With little expansion it says openly : To every man his natural rights ; justice to all, without distinction of persons, without abridgment and without compromise. Let justice be done though it drags down the pillars of the sky. Thus spoke the Chief Justice of England. And still another rule, hardly less important or less commanding, was clearly proclaimed in these penetrat ing words : " I care not for the supposed dicta of judges, however eminent, if they le contrary to all principle ;" or, in other language, it is in vain that you invoke great names in the law even the names of Hard- wicke and Talbot, and my own learned associate Black- stone in behalf of an institution which defies reason and outrages justice. Mortal precedents are powerless against immortal principles. Thus again spoke the Chief Justice of England. Braced by these rules, the next stages were logically easy. And here he uttered words which are like a buttress to Freedom. He declared that " tracing Slavery to natural principles, it can never be sup ported; " that is to say, Slavery is a violation of the great law of nature, established by God himself, and coextensive, in space and time, with the Universe. Again he proclaimed, " Slavery cannot stand on any reason, moral or political, but only by virtue of positive law," and he clinched his conclusion by the unquestion able statement, that " in a matter so odious the evi dence and authority of this law must be taken strictly ; " in other words, a wrong like Slavery, which finds no support in natural law or in reason, can be maintained if at all only by some dread mandate, from some sovereign authority, irresistibly clear and incapable of a double sense, which declares in precise and unequivo- GliANVILLE SHAEP. 439 cal terms, that men guilty of no crime may be held as slaves, and be submitted to the bargains of the market place, the hammer of the auctioneer, and the hunt of the blood-hound. Clearly no such mandate could be shown in England. And after asserting the obvious truth, that rights cannot depend on any discrimination of color, and thus discarding the profane assumptions of race, while he quoted apt Roman authority : ** Quamvis ille niger, quamvis tu candidus esses," the Chief Justice concluded, " and, therefore, let the negro be -discharged." Such was this immortal judg ment. I catch its last words, already resounding through the ages, with the voice of deliverance to an enslaved people. From Westminster Hall, where he had so long been held in painful suspense, the happy freedman, with the glad tidings of his deliverance, now hurried to his guardian protector, Granville Sharp, who, though organizing and sustaining these proceedings, had been restrained by unobtrusive modesty from all appearance of attendance in court, that he might in no wise irritate the judge, unfortunately prepossessed against his en deavor. And thus closed the most remarkable consti tutional battle in English history, fought by a simple clerk, once apprentice to a linen-draper, against the merchants of London, backed by the authority of great names in law, and by the most exalted magistrate of the age. Even like the stripling David, he had gone forth to the contest, with only a sling and a few smooth stones from the brook ; and Goliath fell pros trate at his feet. Not merely an individual slave was emancipated, but upwards of fifteen thousand human 440 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. beings five times as many as were held in Slavery throughout New England at the adoption of the Fed eral Constitution were discharged from bonds; a slave hunt was made impossible in the streets of London ; and a great principle was set up which will stand forever as a Landmark of Freedom. This triumph, which, at the time, was hailed by the friends of human happiness with exultation and de light, has been commemorated by poetry and eloquence. It prompted Cowper in his Task, to these touching verses : " Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs Receive our air, that moment they are free. They touch our country and their shackles fall. That s noble, and bespeaks a nation proud And jealous of the blessing. Spread it then, And let it circulate through every vein Of all your Empire, that where Britain s power Is felt, mankind may feel her mercy too ! " It inspired Curran to a burst of eloquence which can never be forgotten : " I speak in the spirit of British law, which makes liberty commensurate with and inseparable from British soil ; which proclaims even to the stranger and the sojourner, the moment he sets his foot upon British earth, that the ground on which he treads is holy and consecrated by the genius of Universal Eman cipation. No matter in what language his doom may have been pronounced ; no matter what complexion, incompatible with Freedom, an Indian or African sun may have burnt upon him ; no matter in what disastrous battle his liberty may have been cloven down ; nor with what solemnities he may have been de voted upon the altar of Slavery; the moment he touches the sacred soil of Britain, the altar and the god sink together in the dust; his soul walks abroad in her own majesty; and he stands GRANVILLE SHARP. 441 redeemed, regenerated and disenthralled by the irresistible genius of Universal Emancipation." It was this triumph, which lifted Brougham, in our own day, to one of those vivid utterances by which truth is flashed upon the most unwilling souls : " Tell me not of rights talk not of the property of the plant er in his slaves. I deny the right I acknowledge not the property. The principles, the feelings of our common nature, rise in rebellion against it. Be the appeal made to the under standing or to the heart, the sentence is the same that rejects it. In vain you tell me of laws that sanction such a claim ! There is a law above all the enactments of human codes the same throughout the world, the same in all times ; it is the law written by the finger of God on the heart of man ; and by that law, un- > changeable and eternal, while men despise fraud, and loathe rapine and abhor blood, they will reject with indignation, the wild and guilty phantasy that man can hold property in man." Granville Sharp did not now rest from his labors. The Humanities are not solitary. Where one is found, there will others be also. The advocate of the slave in London was naturally the advocate of liberty for all everywhere. In this spirit he signalized himself against that scandal of the English law, the hateful system of impressment, while he encountered no less a person than Dr. Johnson, whom he did not hesitate to charge " with plausible sophistry and important self- sufficiency, as if he supposed that the mere sound of words was capable of altering the nature of things ; " also, against the claims of England in the controversy with her American colonies, zealously maintaining our cause in a publication, of which it is said seven thou sand copies were printed in Boston ; also in establishing a colony of liberated slaves at Sierra Leone, on the 442 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. coast of Africa, the predecessor of our more successful Liberia ; and finally, as a leader, not only against the Slave-trade, but also against Slavery in the colonies, so that he was reverentially hailed as " Father of the cause in England," and was placed at the head of the illustrious Committee by which it was conducted, though his rare modesty prevented him from actually taking the chair to which he was unanimously elected. But no modesty could check his valiant soul in conflict with wrong. At once, after the decree wrung from Lord Mansfield, he addressed Lord North, the Prime Minister, warning him in the most earnest manner to abolish immediately both the Slave-trade and Slavery itself in all the British dominions, as utterly irrecon cilable with the principles of the British Constitution and the established religion of the land, and solemnly declaring that it were better for the nation, that its American possessions had never existed, or even that that they were sunk in the sea, than that Great Britain should be loaded with the horrid guilt of such abominable wickedness. With similar boldness, in an elaborate work, he arraigned the doctrine of passive obedience advanced now in favor of judicial tribunals, as once in favor of kings, and he openly affirmed as unquestionable truth, that every public ordinance con trary to reason, justice, natural equity, or the written word of God, must be promptly rejected. Other things, too, I might mention ; but I am admonished that I must draw to a close. Pardon me if I touch yet one other shining point in his career worthy of perpetual example. The news of the battle of Bunker Hill, which reached London at the end of July, 1775, found him at his GEANYILLE SHARP. 443 desk, still a clerk in the Ordnance Office, and obliged by his position, to participate in the military prepara tions now required. But he was unwilling to be concerned, even thus distantly, in what he regarded as " that unnatural business ; " and though a close attendance on his office for eighteen years, to the neglect of all other means of subsistence, had made it important to him as a livelihood, yet he resolved to sacrifice it. Out of regard to his great worth and the respect he had won, he was at first indulged with a leave of absence, but when hostilities in the Colonies had advanced beyond any prospect of speedy accom modation, then he vacated his office. This man of charity, who had lived for others, was now left without support. But he was happy in the testimony he had borne to his principles ; nor was he alone. Lord Effingham, and also the eldest son of Lord Chatham, threw up their commissions in the army rather than serve on the side of injustice. And they were all clearly right. It is vain to suppose that any human ordinance, whether from King, Parliament, or Judicial Tribunal, can vary our moral responsibilities, or release us from obedience to God. And since no man can stand between us and God, it belongs to each con science for itself to determine its final obligations, and, where pressed to an unrighteous act, as if to slay, or what is equally bad, to enslave a fellow-man, charged with no crime, then at every peril to dis obey it. The lofty example of Granville Sharp on this occasion is not the least among the large legacies of wisdom and fidelity which he has left to man kind. All these are especially commended to us, as citizens 444 POSITION AND DUTIES OP THE MERCHANT. of the United States, by the early and constant interest which he manifested in our country. By pen and personal intercession he vindicated our political rights, and when independence was secured, his sympathies did not abate, as witness his correspondence with Adams, Jay, Franklin, and America s earliest Abo litionist, Anthony Benezet. His name became an authority here at the South as well as the North and the colleges, including Brown University, Harvard University, and William and Mary s, of slaveholding Virginia, vied with each other in conferring upon him their highest academic honors. But the growing numbers of the Episcopal Church had occasion for special gratitude, only to be repaid by a loyal regard for his character and life. On the separation from the mother country they were left without any Episcopal head. To repair this deprivation, Granville Sharp, in published writings extensively circulated, proposed the election of bishops by the churches, and their subsequent consecration in England, as congenial with the usages of early Christians, and, after much correspondence and many impediments, enjoyed the satisfaction of presenting two bishops elect from America, one of whom was the exemplary Bishop White, of Philadelphia, to the Archbishop of Can- t3rbury, by whom the Christian rite of laying on of hands was performed ; and thus was the English Epis copacy communicated to this continent. I know not that the powerful religious denomination, which, in its infancy, he befriended, has ever sympathized with the great effort by which his name is exalted ; but they should at least repel the weak imputation, so often levelled against all who are steadfast against Slavery, that their benefactor was " a man of one idea." GEANVILLE SHARP. 445 Mr. President I have striven to keep within the open field of history and philanthropy, on neutral ground ; but you would not forgive me if, on this occasion, I forbore to adduce the most interesting tes timony of Granville Sharp, touching the much debated clause in our Federal Constitution, which has been stretched to the surrender of fugitive slaves. Anterior to the Constitution, even during colonial days, he wrote that any law which orders the arrest or ren dition of fugitive slaves, or which, in any way, tends to deprive them of legal protection, is to be deemed " a corruption, null and void in itself; " and at a later period, in an elaborate communication to the Abolition Society of Maryland (mark, if you please, of slave- holding Maryland) which was printed and circu lated by this society, as " the production of a great and respectable name," calculated to relieve persons " embarrassed by a conflict between their principles and the obligations imposed by unwise and, perhaps, unconstitutional laws," he exposed the utter "ille gality" of Slavery and especially of " taking up slaves that had escaped from their masters." But, in a re markable letter to Franklin, dated 10th January, 1788, a short time after the Constitution had left the hands of the Convention, and some months before its final adoption by the people, and which has never before been mentioned even in the thorough discus sion of this question, the undaunted champion, who had not shrunk from conflict with the Chief Justice of England, openly arraigned the Federal Constitution. Here are his words : " Having been always zealous for the honor of free govern ments, I am the more sincerely grieved to see the new Federal 38 446 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. Constitution stained by the insertion of two most exceptionable clauses ; the one in direct opposition to a most humane article, ordained by the first American Congress to be perpetually ob served [referring to the sufferance of the slave trade till 1808] : and the other, in equal opposition to an express command of the Almighty, not to deliver up the servant that is escaped from his master, &c. Both clauses, however, (the 9th section of the 1st article and the latter part of the 2d section of the 3d article,) are so clearly null and void by their iniquity, that it would be even a CRIME to regard them as law." * It does not appear that Franklin ever answered this letter, in the short term of life which remained to him. But in justice to his great name, I desire to express my conviction here of course without argument that this patriot philosopher never attributed to the clause, which simply provides for the surrender of fugitives " from service or labor" without the mention of slaves, any such meaning as it has since been made to assume. And Granville Sharp himself, in putting upon it the interpretation he did, forgot the judgment which he had extorted from Lord Mansfield, affirming that any law out of which Slavery is derived must be construed strictly; and, stranger still, he forgot his own unanswerable argument, that the word SLATES is nowhere to le found in the British Constitution. The question under the fugitive clause of our Consti tution is identical with that happily settled in Eng land. In works and contemplations like these was the life of our philanthropist prolonged to a generous old age, cheered by the esteem of the good, informed by study, * Hoare s Life of Sharp, Part ii. cap. 9. GRANVILLE SHARP. 447 and elevated by an enthusiastic faith, which always saw the world as the footstool of God ; and when, at last, in 1813, bending under the burden of seventy- seven winters, he gently sank away, it was felt that a man had died in whom was the greatness of goodness. Among the mourners at his grave stood William Wil- berforce ; and over the earthly remains of this child of lowly beginnings were now dropped the tears of a royal duke. The portals of that great temple of honor, where are treasured England s glories, swung open at the name of England s earliest Abolitionist. A simple tablet, from the chisel of Chantry, represent ing an African slave on his knees in supplication, and also the lion and the lamb lying down together, with a suitable inscription, was placed in the Poet s corner of Westminster Abbey, in close companionship with those stones which bear the names of Chaucer, Spen ser, Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Goldsmith, Gray. As the Muses themselves did not disdain to watch over the grave of one who had done well on earth, so do the poets of England now keep watch over the monument of Granville Sharp. Nor is his place in that goodly company without even poetical title. The poet is simply a creator ; and he who was inspired to create freemen out of slaves was a poet of the loftiest style. But not in the sacred Abbey only, was our philanthropist commemorated. The city of London, the centre of those Slave-hunting merchants, ovei whom his great triumph was won, now gratefully claimed a part of his glory. The marble bust of Eng land s earliest Abolitionist was installed at Guildhall, the home of metropolitan justice, pomp and hospi tality, in the precise spot where once had stood th 448 POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE MERCHANT. bust of Nelson, England s greatest Admiral, and be neath it was carved a simple tribute of more perennial worth than all the trophies of Trafalgar : " Granville Sharp, to whom England owes the glorious verdict of her highest court of law, that the slave who sets his foot on British ground, becomes that instant free." Gentlemen of the Mercantile Library Association, such w r as Granville Sharp ; and such honors England to her hero paid. And now, if it be asked, why, in enforcing the duties of the Good Merchant, at this day, I have selected his name, the answer is prompt. It is in him that the merchant, successor to the chival rous knight, who aims to fulfil his. whole duties, may find a truer prototype than in any stunted though suc cessful votary of trade, while the humble circumstances of his life seem to make him an easy example. In imitating him, commerQe would thrive none the less ; but goodness more. Business would not be checked^ but it would cease to be pursued as the " one idea " of life. Wealth would still abound ; but there would, be also that solid virtue, never to be moved from truth, which you will admit, even without the admonition of Plato, is better than all the cunning of Daedalus, or all the treasures of Tantalus. The hardness of heart engendered by the accursed greed for gain, and by the madness of worldly ambition, would be overcome ; the perverted practice, that Policy is the lest Honesty, would be reversed ; and Merchants would be recalled, gently but irresistibly, to the great PRACTICAL DUTIES of this age, and thus win the palm of true which trade alone can never bestow. GRANVILLE SHARP. 449 Who is the HONEST MAN ? He who doth still and strongly good pursue, To GOD, his neighbor, and himself, most true." HERBERT. YOUNG MERCHANTS OF BOSTON ! I have spoken to you frankly and faithfully, trusting that you would frankly and faithfully hearken to me. And now, in the benison once bestowed upon the youthful Knight, I take my leave : "Go forth, be brave, loyal and suc cessful." 38* THE DEMANDS OF FREEDOM -REPEAL .OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 23D FEBRUARY, 1855, AGAINST MR. TOUCEY S SILL, AND FOR THE REPEAL CF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. On 23d February, 1855, on motion of Mr. Toucey, of Connec ticut, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of a " Bill to protect officers and other persons acting under the authority of the United States," by which it "was provided that " suits com menced or pending in any State Court against any officer of the United States or other person, for or on account of any act done under any law of the United States, or under color thereof, or for or on account of any right, authority, claim or title, set up by such officer or other person, under any law of the United States," should be removed for trial to the Circuit Court of the United States. It was seen at once that under these words an attempt was made to oust the State Courts of cases arising from trespasses and damages under the Fugitive Slave Bill ; and the Bill was pressed, as every thing for Slavery is always pressed, even on Friday, to the exclusion of the private claims to which that day is devoted under the rules of the Senate. A debate commenced, which was continued with much animation and feeling late into the night. Mr. SUMNER seized this opportunity to press again his propo sition to repeal the Fugitive Slave Bill. Just before the final question, he took the floor and spoke as follows : Mr. PRESIDENT : On a former occasion, as Slavery was about to clutch one of its triumphs, I rose to make [450] DEMANDS OF FEEEDOM, ETC. 451 my final opposition to it at midnight. It is now the same hour. Slavery is again pressing for its accus tomed victory, which I again undertake for the mo ment to arrest. It is hardly an accidental conjunction which thus constantly brings Slavery and midnight together. Since eleven o clock this forenoon we have been in our seats, detained by the dominant majority, which, in subservience to Slavery, has refused to postpone this question or to adjourn. All other things are neg lected. The various public interests which, at this late stage of the session, all press for attention, are put aside. According to the usages of the Senate, Friday is dedicated to the consideration of private claims. I have been accustomed to call it our day of justice, and I have been glad that, since these matters are referred to us, at least one day in the \veek has been thus set apart. But Slavery grasps this whole day, and changes it to a day of injustice. By the calendar, which I now hold in my hand, it appears that, at this moment, upwards of seventy-five private Bills, with which are associated the hopes and fears of widows and orphans, ahd of all who come to Congress for relief, are on your table neglected, ay, sir, sacri ficed to the Bill which is now urged with so much pertinacity. Like Juggernaut, the Bill is driven over prostrate victims. And here is another sacrifice to Slavery. But I do not adequately expose the character of this Bill when I say it is a sacrifice to Slavery. It is a sacrifice to Slavery in its most odious form. Bad as Slavery may be, it is not so bad as hunting slaves. There is a seeming apology for Slavery at home, in 452 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM the States where it prevails, founded on the difficulties in the position of the master and the relations of per sonal attachment which it sometimes excites ; but every apology fails when you seek again to enslave the fugi tive whom the master could not detain by duress or by kindness; and who, by courage and intelligence, under the guidance of the north star, has achieved a happy freedom. Sir, there is a wide difference be tween the Slaveholder and the Slave-hunter. But the Bill before you is to aid in the chase of slaves. This is its object. This is its " being s end and aim." And this Bill, with this object, is pressed upon the Senate by the honorable Senator from Con necticut [Mr. Toucey]. Not from slave 1 soil, but from free soil, comes this effort. A Senator from the North a Senator from New England lends himself to the work, and with unnatural zeal helps to bind still stronger the fetters of the slave. Mr. RUSK (interrupting). Will the honorable Sen ator allow me to interrupt him ? Mr. SUMNEH. Certainly. Mr. RUSK. I ask him to point out the words in this Bill where Slavery is mentioned. Mr. SUMNER. I am glad the Senator from Texas has asked the question, for it brings attention at once to the true character of this Bill. I know its language well, and also its plausible title. On its face it pur ports to be " a Bill to protect officers and other persons acting under the authority of the United States ; " and it proceeds to provide for the transfer of certain proceedings from the State courts to the Circuit Courts of the United States. And yet, sir, by the admission of this whole debate, stretching from BEPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 453 noon to midnight, it is a Bill to bolster up the Fugitive Slave Act. Mr. RUSK. I have not listened to the debate, but I ask the Senator to point out in the Bill the place where Slavery is mentioned. If the Constitution and the laws appoint officers, and require them to discharge duties, will he abandon them to the mob ? Mr. SUMNER. The Senator asks me to point out any place in this Bill where " Slavery " is mentioned. Why, sir, this is quite unnecessary. I might ask the Senator to point out any place in the Constitution of the United States where " Slavery " is mentioned, or where the word " slave " can be found, and he could not do it. Mr. RUSK. That is evading the question. I asked the Senator to point out in the Bill the clause where Slavery is mentioned. The Bill proposes to protect officers of the United States, whom you appoint, in discharging their duties. If they are to be left unpro tected, repeal your law. Mr. SUMMER. I respond to the Senator, with all my heart, "repeal your law." Yes, sir, repeal the Fugitive Act which now requires the support of sup plementary legislation. Remove this ground of offence. And before I sit down, I hope to make that very motion. Meanwhile, I evade no question propounded by the honorable Senator ; but I do not consider it necessary to show that " Slavery " is mentioned in the Bill. It may not be found there in name ; but Slavery is the very soul of the Bill. Mr. RUSK rose. Mr. SUMNER. The Senator has interrupted me 454 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM several times ; he may do it more ; but, perhaps, he had better let me go on. Mr. RUSK. I understand the Senator ; but I make no boast of that sort. Mr. SUMMER. Very well. At last I may be allowed to proceed. Of the Bill in question, I have little to say. Its technical character has been exposed by various Senators, and especially by my valued friend, the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Chase], who opened this debate. Suffice it to say, that it is an intrusive and offensive encroachment on State Rights, calculated to subvert the power of the States in the protection of their citizens. This consideration alone would be ample to secure its rejection, if the attachment to State Rights, so often avowed by Senators, were not utterly lost in a stronger attachment to Slavery. But on these things, although well worthy of attention, I do not dwell. Objectionable as the Bill maybe on this ground, it becomes much more so when I regard it as an effort to bolster up the Fugitive Slave Act. Of this Act it is difficult to speak with moderation. Conceived in defiance of the Constitution, and in utter disregard of every sentiment of justice and humanity, it should be regarded as an outlaw. It may have the form of legislation, but it lacks every essential element of law. I have so often exposed its character on this floor, that I shall be brief now. There is an argument against it which has especial importance at this moment, when the Fugitive Act is made the occasion of a new assault on State Rights. This very Act is an assumption by Congress of power not delegated to it under the Constitution, and an in fraction of rights secured to the States. You will BEPEAL OP THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 455 mark, if you please, the double aspect of this propo sition, in asserting not only an assumption of power by Congress, but an infraction of State Eights. And this proposition, I venture to say, defies answer or cavil. Show me, sir, if you can, the clause, sentence or word in the Constitution, which gives to Congress any power to legislate on this subject. I challenge honorable Senators to produce it. I fearlessly assert that it can not be done. The obligations imposed by the " fugi tive " clause, whatever they may be, rest upon the States, and not upon Congress. I do not now under take to say what these obligations are ; but simply that, whether much or little, they rest upon the States. And this interpretation is sustained by the practice of Congress on another kindred question. The associate clause touching the " privileges of citizens " has never been made a source of power. It will be in the recol lection of the Senate, that, during the last session, the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Benjamin], in answer to a question from me, openly admitted that there were laws of the Southern States, bearing hard upon colored citi zens of the North, which were unconstitutional ; but when I pressed the honorable Senator with the question whether he would introduce or sustain a Bill to carry out the clause of the Constitution securing to these citizens their rights, he declined to answer. Mr. BENJAMIN. I think, Mr. President, I have a right to set the record straight upon that point. I rose in the Senate on the occasion referred to, as will be perfectly well recollected by every Senator present, and put a respectful question to the Senator from Mas sachusetts. Instead of a reply to my question, he put a question to me, which I answered, and then I put 456 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM my question. Instead of replying to that, he again put a question to me. Considering that as an absolute evasion of the question which I put to him, I declined having anything further to say in the discussion. Mr. SUMNER. The Senator from Louisiana will pardon me if I suggest that there is an incontrovertible fact which shows that the evasion was on his part. The record testifies not only that he did not reply, but that I was cut off from replying by the efforts and votes of himself and friends. Let him consult the Congres sional Globe, ; and he will find it all there. I can con ceive that it might be embarrassing to him to reply, for had he declined to sustain a Bill to carry out the clause in question, it would have been awkward, at least, to vindicate the Fugitive Slave Bill, which is derived from an identical clause in the Constitution. And yet there are Senators on this floor who, careless of the flagrant inconsistency, vindicate the exercise of power by Con gress under the "fugitive" clause, while their own States at home deny to Congress any power under the associate clause, on the " privileges of citizens," assume to themselves a complete right to determine the extent of its obligations, and ruthlessly sell into Slavery colored citizens of the North, Mr. BUTLER (interrupting). Does the Senator allude to my State ? Mr. RUSK. No ; to mine. Mr. BUTLER. If he means South Carolina, I will reply to him. Mr. SUMNER. I do allude to South Carolina, and also to other Southern States ; but especially to South Carolina. But let me say, that if I allude to these States, it is not to bring up and array the hardships REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 457 of individual instances, but simply to show the position occupied by them on a constitutional question, iden tical with that involved in the Fugitive Act. And now, at the risk of repetition, if I can have your atten tion for a brief moment, without interruption, I will endeavor to state anew this argument. The rules of interpretation, applicable to the clause of the Constitution securing to " the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States," are equally applicable to its associate clause, forming a part of the same section, in the same article, and providing that " persons held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." Of this there can be no doubt. If one of these clauses is regarded as a compact between the .States, to be carried out by them respec tively, according to their interpretation of its obliga tions, without any intervention of Congress, then the other must be so regarded ; nor can any legislative power be asserted by Congress under one clause, which is denied under the other. This proposition cannot be questioned. Now mark the consequences. Congress, in abstaining from all exercise of power under the first clause, when required thereto, in order to protect the liberty of colored citizens, while it has assumed power under the second clause, in order to obtain the surrender of fugitive slaves, has shown an inconsistency, which becomes more monstrous when it is considered that, in the one case, the general and commanding interests of Liberty have been neglected, while in the other, the peculiar and subordinate inter- 39 458 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM ests of Slavery haye been carefully secured ; and such an exercise of power is an alarming evidence of that influence of Slavery in the National Government which has increased, is increasing, and ought to be over thrown. Looking more precisely at these two clauses, we shall arrive at the true conclusion. According to the express words of the Constitution, in the tenth amend ment, " the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the peo ple ; " and since no powers are delegated to the United States, in the clause relating to " the privileges and immunities of citizens," or in the associate clause of the same section, relating to the surrender of " persons held to service or labor," therefore, all legislation by Congress, under either clause, must be an assumption of undelegated powers, and an infraction of rights secured to the States respectively, or to the people ; and such, I have already said, is the Fugitive Slave Act. I might go further, and, by the example of South Carolina, vindicate to Massachusetts, and every other State, the right to put such interpretation upon the " fugitive " clause as it shall think proper. The Legislature of South Carolina, in a series of resolu tions, adopted in 1844, asserts the following propo sition : " Resolved, That free negroes and persons of color are not citizens of the United States within the meaning of the Constitu tion, which confers upon the citizens of one State the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the several States." Here is a distinct assumption of a right to determine the persons to whom certain words of the Constitution REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 459 - are applicable. Now, nothing can be clearer than this : If South Carolina may determine for itself whether the clause relating to " the privileges and immunities of citizens " be applicable to colored citi zens of the several States, and may solemnly deny its applicability, then may Massachusetts, and every other State, determine for itself whether the other clause relating to the surrender of " persons held to service or labor," be really applicable to fugitive slaves, and may solemnly deny its applicability. Mr. President, I have said enough to show the usurpation by Congress under the " fugitive " clause of the Constitution,- and to warn you against renewing this usurpation. But I have left untouched those other outrages, plentiful as words, which enter into the existing Fugitive Slave Act, among which are the denial of trial by jury ; the denial of the writ of habeas corpus ; the authorization of judgment on ex parte evidence, without the sanction of cross-examination ; and the surrender of the great question of Human Free dom to be determined by a mere Commissioner, who, according to the requirements of the Constitution, is grossly incompetent to any such service. I have also left untouched the hateful character of this enactment, as a barefaced subversion of every principle of human ity and justice. And now, sir, we are asked to lend ourselves anew to this enormity, worthy only of indig nant condemnation ; we are asked to impart new life to this pretended law, this false Act of Congress, this counterfeit enactment, this monstrosity of legislation, which draws no life from the Constitution, as it clearly draws no life from that Supreme Law which is the essential fountain of life to every human law. 460 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM Sir, the Bill before you may have the sanction of Congress ; and in yet other ways you may seek to sustain the Fugitive Slave Act. But it will be in vain. You undertake what no legislation can accomplish. Courts, too, may come forward, and lend it their sanc tion. All this, too, will be in vain. I respect the learning of judges ; I reverence the virtue, more than learning, by which their lives are often adorned. But nor learning, nor virtue, when, with mistaken force, bent to this purpose, can avail. I assert confidently, sir, and ask the Senate to note my assertion, that there is no court, howsoever endowed with judicial qualities, or surrounded by public confidence, which is strong enough to lift this Act into any permanent consideration or respect. It may seem, for a moment, to accomplish the feat. Its decision may be enforced amidst tears and agonies. A fellow-man may be reduced anew to Slavery. But all will be in vain. This Act cannot be upheld. Anything so entirely vile, so absolutely atro cious, would drag an angel down. Sir, it must drag down every court, which in an evil hour ventures to sustain it. And yet, sir, in zeal to support this enormity, Sena tors have not hesitated to avow a purpose to break down the recent legislation of States, calculated to shield the liberty of their citizens. "It is difficult," says Burke, " to frame an indictment against a whole people." But here in the Senate, where are convened the jealous representatives of the States, we have heard whole States arraigned, as if already guilty of crime. The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Benjamin], in plain tive tones has set forth the ground of proceeding, and more than one sovereign State has been summoned to REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLATE BILL. 461 judgment. It would be easy to show, by a critical inquiry, that this whole charge is without just founda tion, and that all the legislation, so much condemned, is as clearly defensible under the Constitution, as it is meritorious in purpose. Sir, the only crime of these States is, that Liberty has been placed before Slavery. Follow the charge, point by point, and this will be apparent. In securing to every person claimed as a slave the protection of trial by jury and the habeas corpus, they simply provide safeguards, strictly within the province of every State, and rendered necessary by the usurpation of the Fugi tive Act. In securing the aid of counsel to every per son claimed as a slave, they but pejrform a kindly duty, which no phrase or word in the Constitution can be tortured to condemn. In visiting with severe penalties every malicious effort to reduce a fellow-man to Slavery, they respond to the best feelings of the human heart. In prohibiting the use of the county jails and buildings as barracoons and slave-pens ; in prohibiting all public officers, holding the commission of the State, in any capacity whether as Chief Justice or Justice of the Peace whether as Governor or constable from any service as a slave-hunter ; in prohibiting the volunteer militia of the State, in its organized form, from any such service, the States simply exercise a power under the Constitution recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States, even while upholding Slavery in the fatal Prigg case by POSITIVE PROHIBITION, to withdraw its own officers from this offensive business. For myself, let me say that I look with no pleasure on any possibility of conflict between the State and National jurisdictions ; but I trust that, if the interests 39* 462 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM of Freedom so require, the States will not hesitate. From the beginning of this controversy, I have sought, as I still seek, to awaken another influence, which, without the possibility of conflict, will be mightier than any Act of Congress and the sword of the National Government. I mean an enlightened, generous, humane, Christian public opinion, which shall blast with con tempt, indignation, ajid abhorrence, all who, in what ever form, or under whatever name, undertake to be agents in enslaving a fellow-man. Sir, such an opinion you cannot bind or subdue. Against its subtle, perva sive influence, your legislation and the decrees of courts will be powerless. Already in Massachusetts, I am proud to believe, it begins to prevail ; and the Fugitive Act will soon be there a dead letter. Mr. President, since things are so, it were well to remove this Act from our statute book, that it may no longer exist as an occasion of ill-will and a point of conflict. Let the North be relieved from this usurpa tion, and the first step will be taken towards permanent harmony. The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Benja min] has proclaimed anew to-night what he has before declared on this floor " that Slavery is a subject with which the Federal Government has nothing to do." I thank him for teaching the Senate that word. True, most true, sir, ours is a Government of Freedom, which has nothing to do with Slavery. This is the doctrine which I have ever maintained, and which I am happy to find recognized in form, if not in reality, by the Senator from Louisiana. The Senator then proceeded to declare that " all that the South asks is to be let alone." This request is moderate. And I say, for the North, that all we ask is to be let alone. Yes, sir, let REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL, 463 us alone. Do not involve us in the support of Slavery. Hug the viper to your bosoms, if you perversely will, within your own States, until it stings you to a gener ous remorse, but do not compel us to hug it too ; for this I assure you we will not do. But the Senator from Louisiana, with these profes sions on his lips, proceeds to ask, doubtless with com plete sincerity, but in strange forgetfulness of the history of our country : " Did we ever bring this sub ject into Congress?" Yes, sir, that was his inquiry, as if there had been any moment, from the earliest days of the Republic, when the supporters of Slavery had ceased to bring this subject into Congress. Almost from the beginning it has been there, through the exercise of usurped power, nowhere given under the Constitution, for I am glad to believe that, the Consti tution of my country contains no words out of which Slavery, or the power to support Slavery, can be de rived ; and this conclusion, I doubt not, will yet be affirmed by the courts. And yet, the honorable Sena tor asks : " Did we ever bring this subject into Con gress ? " The answer shall be plain and explicit. Sir, you brought Slavery into Congress, when, shortly after the adoption of the Constitution, you sanctioned it in the District of Columbia, within the National jurisdic tion, and adopted that barbarous slave code, still extant on your statute-book, which the Senator from Connec ticut [Mr. Gillette] has so eloquently exposed to-night. You brought Slavery into Congress, when at the same period you accepted the cession of territories from North Carolina and Georgia, now constituting States of the Union, with conditions in favor of Slavery, and thus began to sanction Slavery in Territories within 464 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress. You brought Slavery into Congress, when, at different times, you usurped a power, not given by the Constitution, over fugitive slaves, and by most offensive legislation thrust your arms into distant Northern homes. You brought Slavery into Congress, when, by express legislation, you regulated the coastwise slave trade, and thus threw the national shield over a traffic on the coast of the United States, which on the coast of Congo you justly brand as " piracy." You brought Slavery into Congress, when, from time to time, you sought to introduce new States with slaveholding Constitutions into the National Union. And, permit me to say, sir, you brought Slavery into Congress when you called upon it, as you have done even at this very session, to pay for slaves and thus, in defiance of a cardinal principle of the Constitution, pressed the National Gov ernment to recognize property in men. And yet the Senator from Louisiana, with strange simplicity, says that the South only asks to be let alone. Sir, the honorable Senator borrows the language of the North, which, at each of these usurpations, exclaims, lt Let us alone." And let me say, frankly, that peace can never prevail until you do let us alone until this subject of Slavery is banished from Congress by the triumph of Freedom until Slavery is driven from its usurped foothold, and Freedom is made national instead of sec tional and until the National Government is brought back to the precise position it occupied on the day that Washington took his first oath as President of the United States, when there was no Fugitive Act, and the national flag, as it floated over the national territory, within the jurisdiction of Congress, nowhere covered a single slave. REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 465 And now, sir, as an effort in the true direction of the Constitution ; in the hope of beginning the divorce of the National Government from Slavery, and to re move all occasion for the proposed measure under con sideration, I shall close what I have to say with a motion to repeal the Fugitive Act. Twice already, since I have had the honor of a seat on this floor, I have pressed that question to a vote, and I mean to press it again to-night. After the protracted discussion, in volving the character of this enactment, such a motion seems logically to belong to this occasion, and may fitly close its proceedings. At a former session, on introducing this proposition, I discussed it at length, in an argument, which I fear lessly assert has never been answered, and now, in this debate, I have already touched upon various objections. There are yet other things which might bo urged. I might exhibit the abuses which have occurred under the Fugitive Act ; the number of free persons it has doomed to Slavery; the riots it has provoked; the brutal conduct of its officers ; the distress it has scat tered ; the derangement of business it has caused, interfering even with the administration of justice, changing court-houses into barracks and barracoons, and filling the streets with armed men, amidst which law is silent. All these things I might expose. But in these hurried moments, I forbear. Suffice it to say, that the proposition to repeal the existing Fugitive Act stands on adamantine grounds, which no debate or opposition can shake. There are considerations belonging to the present period which give new strength to this proposition. Public Opinion, which, under a popular Goverment, 466 DEMANDS OF FREEDOM makes and unmakes laws, and which for a time, was passive and acquiescent, now lifts itself everywhere in the States where the act is sought to be enforced, and demands a change. Already three States, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Michigan, by formal resolutions pre sented to the Senate, have concurred in this demand. The tribunals of law are joining at last with the people. The Superior Court of Cincinnati has denied the power of Congress over this subject. And now, almost while I speak, comes the solemn judgment of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin a sovereign State of this Union made after elaborate argument, on successive occasions, before a single judge, and then before the whole bench, declaring this act to be a violation of the Constitution. In response to public opinion, broad and general, if not universal at the North, swelling alike from village and city, from the seaboard and lakes judically attested, legislatively declared, and represented, also, by numer ous petitions from good men without distinction of party in response to this Public Opinion, as well as in obedience to my own fixed convictions, I deem it my duty not to lose this opportunity of pressing the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act once more upon the Senate. I move, sir, to strike out all after the enacting clause in the pending Bill, and insert instead thereof these words : " That the Act of Congress, approved September 18, 1850, usually known as the Fugitive Slave Act, be, and the same : hereby is repealed." And on this motion I ask the yeas and nays. When Mr. Sumner took his seat, he was followed by Mr. Butler of South Carolina, who put a question to him, which was the occasion of the following dialogue. REPEAL OF THE FUGITIVE SLATE BILL. 467 - Mr. SUMNER. The Senator asks me a question, and I answer, frankly, that no temptation, no inducement, would draw me in any way to sanction the return of any man to Slavery. But then I leave to others to speak for themselves. In this respect, I Speak for myself. Mr. BUTLER. I do not rise now at all to question the right of the gentleman from Massachusetts to hold his seat, under the obligation of the Constitution of the United States, with the opinions which he has ex pressed ; but, if I understand him, he means that, whether this law, or that law, or any other law pre vails, he disregards the obligations of the Constitution of the United States. Mr. SUMNER. Not at all. That I never said. I recognize the obligations of the Constitution. Mr. BUTLEK. But, sir, I will ask that gentleman one question : if it devolved upon him as a representa tive of Massachusetts, all Federal laws being put out of the way, would he recommend any law for the de livery of a Fugitive Slave under the Constitution of the United States ? Mr. SUMNER. Never. Mr. BUTLER. I knew that. Now, sir, I have got exactly what is the truth, and what I intend shall go forth to the Southern States. WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES, 28TH FEBRTJ ARY, 1855, ON INTRODUCING A BILL TO SECURE WAGES TO SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK. On the 28th February, 1855, Mr. Simmer, in pursuance of previous notice, asked and obtained leave to introduce a Bill to secure wages to seamen in case of wreck, which was read twice by its title. MR. SUMNEH. In introducing this Bill, I desire to make a brief explanation, which, shall, at least, be a record of my views with regard to it. The Bill proposes an amelioration of the existing maritime law in respect to the wages of merchant seamen, which, so far as England is concerned, has already been made by Act of Parliament, and which, in our country, can only be accomplished by Act of Con gress. By the existing maritime law, the seaman s wages depend upon a technical rule, which sometimes occa sions hardships. Freight is compendiously said to be the mother of w r ages. In conformity with this fanciful idea, the wages are made to depend upon the earning of freight, unless the freight has been waived by agrec- [468] WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WEECK. 469 rnent of the owner, or unless the voyage or freight be lost by the negligence, fraud, or misconduct of the owner or master, or be voluntarily abandoned. In case of wreck, the sailor has simply the chance of something, under the name of salvage, if the fragments of the ship saved happen to be of any value. But if the loss be total, then the sailor is without remedy. In the wrecks which occur with melancholy frequency on our churlish winter coast, this hardship adds even -to the sorrows of disaster. Thus, as in a case which has actually arisen, a crew may commence service at Calcutta, may navigate the Indian Ocean, double the Cape of Good Hope, and bring their ship safely to the sight of land, and then, by the total loss of the ship and cargo, from the acknowledged perils of the sea, they may lose everything even their right to wages and may find themselves in a strange port, the prey of poverty. Nor can any merit, either throughout the protracted voyage, or in the hour of peril and ship wreck, prevent the operation of this technical rule. There is also another circumstance which constrains the poor sailor. The owner may insure his ship, and also his freight, so that he may lose nothing but the premium he pays ; but the sailor is not allowed to pro tect himself by insurance from the loss of his wages. His loss is, therefore, literally total. Now, this technical rule, which fastens the wages of the sailor to the fortunes of the vessel, or, in other words, makes the right dependent on the successful issue of the enterprise for which he is hired, must be considered an off-shoot of the medieval maritime law. It is not to be found in the Roman law, nor in the maritime legislation of the Eastern Empire, nor in that 40 470 WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WBECK. early compilation which goes under the name of the Rhodian law. An eminent American judge, who has shed great light upon maritime jurisprudence I refer to the learned and able Judge Ware, of the District Court of Maine has said, in a judicial opinion, (see The Dawn, Daveis s Rep. 133,) that it owes its origin to the necessities and peculiar hazards which maritime commerce was compelled to encounter in the middle ages, when to the dangers of the winds and waves were added the more formidable perils of piracy and robbery. The rule having been thus established, ha? been preserved in the maritime jurisprudence of Europe, when the special exigencies in which it had its birth have ceased to exist. It has outlived the circumstances and excuses of its origin ; and now sur vives to vex, oppress and disappoint the most needy, if not the most meritorious, of all who are concerned in the business of the seas. This hard rule survives with us, but not everywhere. The greatest commercial nation of the world has led the way in its abolition, and set an example to the United States. The Act of Parliament of 7th and 8th Victoria, chap. Il2, sec. 17 (at the close) called " the Merchant Seamen s Act " provides that " In all cases of wreck or loss of the ship, every surviving sea man shall be entitled to his wages up to the period of the wreck or loss of the ship, whether such ship shall or shall not have ear ned freight ; provided the seaman shall produce a certificate from the master, or chief surviving officer of the ship, to the effect that he had exerted himself to the utmost to save the ship, cargo and stores." But the sailor was not completely protected by this provision. Experience in England showed that the WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK. 471 cunning of agents was able to introduce into the ship ping articles an agreement waiving the right to wages in case of loss, which the unthrifty sailor signed, igno rant or careless of its import. To remedy this abuse, a further Act of Parliament, of 13th and 14th Victoria, chap. 98, sec. 53 known as " the Mercantile Marine Act " provides that " No seaman shall, by reason of any agreement, forfeit his lien upon the ship, or be deprived of any remedy for the recovery of his wages, to which he would otherwise have been entitled ; and every stipulation which is inconsistent with any provision of this Act, or of any other Act relating to the merchant service, and every stipulation by which any seaman consents to abandon his right to wages in the case of the loss of the ship, or to abandon any rights which he may have or obtain in the nature of sal vage, shall be wholly inoperative." The Bill which I now introduce is grounded on the provisions quoted from the two Acts of the British Parliament, and contains two principles. First, that seamen shall be paid their ~ wages down to the time of the loss of the ship, in case they serve faithfully to the last ; and secondly, that they shall not be permitted to lose their wages through any agreement in the ship ping articles. In some details I have departed from the British Act. It has not seemed to me advisable to make the wages dependent on " the certificate from the master or chief surviving officer of the ship," but to leave the question of services open to proof in any way according to the received rules of evidence. I have, therefore, said that the wages shall be paid, " provided the seaman shall have exerted himself to the utmost to save the ship, cargo and stores." The reasons for this course are clear. Masters are often part owners of American 472 WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WRECK. ships, and thus have a personal interest adverse to the sailor. In a mood of selfishness or recklessness, they might refuse the certificate, even though well earned. Now, in constructing a protection to the sailor, it does not seem prudent to make his wages dependent upon any such quarter. Indeed, it is hardly just to take from him the right to establish his claim before the Admiralty Court, merely because an interested master refuses a certificate, when, perhaps, plenary proof might be furnished aliunde. Moreover, if the question were put in the control of the master, he might obtain thereby an improper influence over the minds of the crew, inducing them even to sacrifice truth in the event of any litigation between the owners and the underwriters. There can be no harm in leaving the question of fact to be proved by competent witnesses, like every other question of fact : and the seamen should be com petent witnesses for each other. A sagacious court will know how to weigh their testimony, should it come in conflict with that of the officer. It seems proper that the master, too, though a party to the suit, as in the case of a libel against him in personam, or in a suit at common law, should be competent to testify to the conduct of the libellant or plaintiff; in other words, whether he had " exerted himself to the utmost," and I have introduced into the Bill a provi sion accordingly. The British Act of 7th and 8th Victoria contains another defect. It limits the wages to " every sur viving seaman." I can see no good reason why the wife and children of the sailor who has perished in the forlorn hope, perhaps, in the cause of all, should be WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WEECK. 473 deprived of the humble wages so dearly earned by their natural protectors, and thus be compelled to feel a new deprivation added to their bereavement. In the proposed Bill there is no such limitation. Beyond this brief statement I need not, on this occa sion, add another word. Already Congress has shown a disposition to modify the rigorous maritime law in some of its provisions. In 1851, it made a change in the liability of ship owners as common carriers. But this very liability originated to a certain extent in the same principles from which is derived the liability of the seamen, if they fail to bring the ship and cargo to land. Ship owners and sailors were both treated as insurers. This was in the age of force, before the contract of insurance had spread its broad protection over commerce in every sea. The seaman should share this protection. He should be treated as not necessarily either a pirate or a coward. In the discussions of the Senate on the proposed change in the liability of ship-owners, it was effec tively urged by my immediate predecessor, a distin guished Senator from Massachusetts, the late Robert Rantoul, jr., that, if the United States failed to adopt that measure, the other maritime nations would have an advantage in the carrying trade. It is equally true that, unless we adopt the measure now proposed, Great Britain will have the advantage of us in the rate of seamen s wages ; for, under her existing laws, the sailor can afford to work cheaper on board a Brit ish ship than under the American flag. The measure now proposed is of direct importance to the two hundred thousand sailors constituting the mercantile marine of the United States. It also con- 40* 474 WAGES OF SEAMEN IN CASE OF WEECK. cerns the three millions of men constituting the mer cantile marine of the civilized world, any of whom, in the vicissitudes of the sea, may find themselves in American bottoms. I commend it as a measure of enlightened philanthropy, and also of simple justice. I ask that the Bill, having been read twice, be referred to the Committee on Commerce. The motion was agreed to. THE ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY, WITH GLIMPSES AT THE SPECIAL DUTIES OF THE NORTH. AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK, AT THE ME TROPOLITAN THEATRE, 9 MAY, 1855. THIS address was the concluding lecture in an Anti-Slavery course in the city of New York. On the night of its delivery the Chair was occupied by the HON. WILLIAM JAY, who introduced Mr. Sumner in the following words : " LADIES AND GENTLEMEN : I have been requested, on the part of the Society, to perform the pleasing but unnecessary office of introducing to you the honored and well-known advocate of Jus tice, Humanity and Freedom, Charles Sumner. It is not for his learning and eloquence that I commend him to your respectful attention ; for learning, eloquence, and even theology itself, have been prostituted in the service of an institution well described by John Wesley as the sum of all villanies. I introduce him to you as a Northern Senator on whom nature has conferred the unusual gift of a backbone a man who, standing erect on the floor of Congress, amid creeping things from the North, with Christian fidelity denounces the stupendous wickedness of the Fugitive law and Nebraska perfidy, and in the name of Liberty, Humanity and Religion, demands the repeal of those most atrocious enact ments. May the words he is about to utter be impressed on your consciences, and influence your conduct." As soon as the applause had subsided, Mr. SUMNER said : I am not insensible, sir, to this generous applause. Pardon [475] 476 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE; ITS me if I say, I cannot accept it for myself, but for the cause in whose behalf I am here to speak. Let me add that I -am proud to be introduced on this occasion by one whose name, il lustrious by a father s renown, is also illustrious - by his own noble devotion to the Eights of Man. MR. SUMNER then proceeded to give the following address : HISTORY abounds in vicissitudes. From weakness and humility, men ascend to power and place. From defeat and disparagement, enterprises are lifted to triumpli and acceptance. The martyr of to-day is gratefully enshrined on the morrow. The stone that the builders rejected is made the head of the corner. Thus it always has been, and ever will be. Only twenty years ago, in 1835, the friends of the slave in our country were weak and humble, while their great Enterprise, just then showing itself, was trampled down and despised. The small companies, gathered together in the name of Freedom, were inter rupted and often dispersed by riotous mobs. At Bos ton, a feeble association of women, called the Female Anti-Slavery Society, convened in a small room of an upper story in an obscure building, was insulted and then driven out of doors by a frantic crowd, politely termed at the time, an assemblage of " gentlcrren of property and standing," which, after various deeds of violence and vileness next directed itself upon William Lloyd Garrison, known as the determined editor of the Liberator, and the originator of the Anti- Slavery Enterprise in our day, then ruthlessly tearing him away, amidst savage threats and with a haltox about his neck, dragged him through the streets, until, at last, guilty only of loving liberty, if not wisely, too well, this unoffending citizen was thrust into the com- NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 477 mon jail for protection against an infuriated populace. Nor was Boston alone. Even villages, in remote rural solitude, belched forth in similar outrage ; while the large towns, like Providence, New Haven, Utica, Wor cester, Alton, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York, became so many fiery craters, overflowing with rage and madness. What lawless violence failed to accomplish was next urged through the forms of law. By solemn legislative acts, the Slave States called on the Free States " promptly and effectually to suppress all associations within their respective limits purporting to be Abolition Societies;" and PJiode Island, Massachusetts and New York, basely hearkened to the base proposition. The press, too, with untold power, exerted itself in this behalf, while the pulpit, the politician and the merchant, conspired to stifle discussion, until the voice of Freedom was hushed to a whisper, " alas ! almost afraid to know itself." Since then in the lapse of a few years only a change has taken place. Instead of those small com panies, counted by tens, we have now this mighty assembly, counted by thousands ; instead of an insig nificant apartment, like that in Boston, the mere appendage of a printing-office, where, as in the man ger itself, Truth was cradled, we have now this Metro politan Hall, ample in proportions and central in place ; instead of a profane and clamorous mob, beat ing at our gates, dispersing our assembly, and making one of our number the victim of its fury, we have now peace and harmony at unguarded doors, ruffled only by a generous competition to participate in this occa sion; while legislatures openly declare their sym- 478 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE J ITS pathies ; villages, towns and cities vie in the new manifestation ; and the press itself, with increased power, heralds, applauds and, extends the prevailing influence, which, overflowing from every fountain, and pouring through every channel, at last, by the awakened voice of pulpit, politician and merchant, swells into an irrepressible cry. Here is a great change, worthy of notice and memory, for it attests the first stage of victory. Slavery, in all its many-sided wrong, still continues ; but here in this metropolis, ay, sir, and throughout the whole North, freedom of discussion is at length secured. And this, I say, is the first stage of victory herald of the transcendent Future ; " Hark ! a glad voice the lonely desert cheers ; Prepare the way ! a God, a God appears ! A God ! a God ! the vocal hills reply, The rocks proclaim th approaching Deity." * Nor is there anything peculiar in the trials to which our cause has been exposed. Thus in all ages has Truth been encountered. At first persecuted, gagged, silenced, crucified, she has cried out from the prison, from the torture, from the stake, from the cross, until at last her voice has been heard. And when that voice is really heard, whether in martyr cries, or in the earthquake tones of civil convulsion, or in the calmness of ordinary speech, such as I now employ, or in that still small utterance inaudible to the common ear, then is the beginning of victory ! " Give me where to stand, and I will move the world," said Archimedes ; and Truth asks no more than did the master of geometry. * Pope s Messiah. NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 479 Viewed in this aspect, the present occasion rises above any ordinary course of lectures or series of po litical meetings. It is the inauguration of Freedom. From this time forward, her voice of warning and com mand cannot be silenced. The sensitive sympathies of property may, in this commercial mart, once again recognize property in man ; the watchful press itself may falter or fail, but the vantage-ground of free dis cussion now achieved cannot be lost. On this I take my stand, and, as from the Mount of Vision, behold the whole field of our great controversy spread before me. There is no point, topic, fact, matter, reason or argument, touching the question between Slavery and Freedom, which is not now open. Of all these I might, perhaps, aptly select some one and confine myself to its development. But I should not, in this way, best satisfy the seeming requirements of the occasion. Ac cording to the invitation of your Committee, I was to make an address, introductory to the present course of lectures, but was prevented by ill-health. And now, at the close of the course, I am to say what I failed to say at its beginning. Not as caucus or as Congress can I address you ; nor am I moved to under take a political harangue or constitutional argument. Out of the occasion let me speak, and, discarding any individual topic, aim to exhibit the entire field, in all its divisions and subdivisions, with all its metes and bounds. My subject will be THE NECESSITY, PRACTICA BILITY AND DIGNITY or THE ANTI-SLAVERY ENTER PRISE, WITH GLIMPSES AT THE SPECIAL DUTIES OF THE NORTH. By this enterprise I do not mean the 480 ANTI-SLAYEEY ENTEKPKISE ; ITS efforts of any restricted circle, sect or party, but the cause of the slave, in all its forms and degrees, and under all its names, whether inspired by the pulpit, the press, the economist or the politician, whether in the early, persistent and comprehensive demands of Garrison, the gentler utterances of Channing, or the strictly constitutional endeavors of others now actually sharing the public councils of the country. To carry through this review, under its different heads, I shall not hesitate to meet the objections which have been urged against it, so far at least as I am aware of them. And now, as I speak to you seriously, I venture to ask your serious attention even to the end. Not easily can a public address reach that highest completeness which is found in mingling the useful and the agreeable ; but I desire to say, that, in this arrangement and co-ordi nation of my remarks to-night, I seek to cultivate that highest courtesy of a speaker, which is found in clearness. I. I begin with the NECESSITY of the Anti-Slavery Enterprise. In the wrong of Slavery, as defined by existing law, this necessity is plainly apparent ; nor can any man within the sound of rny voice, who listens to the authentic words of the law, hesitate in my con clusion. -A wrong so grievous and unquestionable should not be allowed to continue. For the honor of human nature, and for the good of all concerned, it should at once cease to exist. On this simple statement, as a corner-stone, I found the necessity of the Anti- Slavery Enterprise. I do not dwell, sir, on the many tales which come from the house of bondage ; on the bitter sorrows there NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 481 undergone ; on the flesh, galled by . the manacle or spirting blood beneath the lash ; on the human form mutilated by the knife, or seared by red-hot iron ; on the ferocious scent of blood-hounds in chase of human prey ; on the sale of fathers and mothers, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, little children even infants at the auction-block ; on the practical prostra tion of all rights, all ties, and even all hope ; on the deadly injury to morals, substituting concubinage for marriage, and changing the whole land of Slavery into a by-word of shame, only fitly pictured by the language of Dante when he called his own degraded country a House of 111 Fame ; * and last of all, on the pernicious influence upon the master as well as the slave, showing itself too often, even by his own confession, in rude ness of manners and character, and especially in that blindness which renders him insensible to the wrongs he upholds, while he, " so perfect is his misery, Not once perceives his foul disfigurement, But boasts himself more comely than before." t On these things I do not dwell, although volumes are at hand of unquestionable facts and of illustrative story, so just and happy as to vie with fact, out of which I might draw, until, like Macbeth, you had supped full of horrors. But all these I put aside ; not because I do not regard them of moment in exhibiting the true character of Slavery, but because I desire to present this argu ment on grounds above all controversy, impeachment, * Purgat. Canto VI. Jlhi scrva Italia bordello ! f Milton s Comus. 41 482 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS or suspicion, even from slave -masters themselves. Not on triumphant story, not even on indisputable facts, do I now accuse Slavery, but on its character, as revealed in its own simple definition of itself. Out of its own mouth do I condemn it. By the law of Slavery, man, created in the image of God, is divested of his human character, and declared to be a mere chattel. That this statement may not seem to be put forward without precise authority, I quote the law of two different States. The civil code of Louisiana thus defines a slave : " A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs. The master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry, and his labor. He can do nothing, possess nothing, nor acquire anything but what must belong to his master." Civil Code, Art. 35. The law of another polished slave State gives this definition : " Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to be chattels personal, in the hands of their owners, and possessors, and their executors, administrators and assigns, to all intents, constructions and purposes whatsoever." 2 Brev. Dig. 229. (South Carolina.) And a careful writer, Judge Stroud, in a work of juridical as well as philanthropic merit, thus sums up the law : " The cardinal principle of Slavery that the slave is not to be ranked among sentient beings, but among things is an article of property a chattel personal obtains as undoubted law in all of these (the slave) States." Stroud s Laws of Slavery, 22. Sir, this is enough. As out of its small egg crawls forth the slimy, scaly, reptile crocodile, so out of this simple definition crawls forth the whole slimy, scaly, NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 483 reptile monstrosity, by which a man is changed into a chattel, a person is converted into a thing, a soul is transmuted into merchandise. According to this very definition, the slave is held simply for the good of his master, to whose behests, his life, liberty and happiness are devoted, and by whom he may be bar tered, leased, mortgaged, bequeathed, invoiced, shipped as cargo, stored as goods, sold on execution, knocked off at public auction, and even staked at the gaming table on the hazard of a card or die. The slave may seem to have a wife ; but he has not ; for his wife be longs to his master. He may seem to have a child ; but he has not ; for his child belongs to his master. He may be filled with the desire of knowledge, opening to him the gates of hope on earth and in heaven ; but the master may impiously close this sacred pursuit. Thus is he robbed not merely of privileges, but of himself ; not merely of money and labor, but of wife and children ; not merely of time and opportunity, but of every assur ance of happiness ; not merely of earthly hope, but of all those divine aspirations that spring from the Foun tain of Light. He is not mSrely restrained in liberty, but totally deprived of it ; not merely curtailed in rights, but absolutely stripped of them ; not merely loaded with burthens, but changed into a beast of burthen ; not merely bent in countenance to the earth, but sunk to the legal level of a quadruped ; not merely exposed to personal cruelty, but deprived of his charac ter as a person ; not merely compelled to involuntary labor, but degraded to be a rude thing; not merely shut out from knowledge, but wrested from his place in the human family. And all this, sir, is according to the simple law of Slavery. 484 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE J ITS Nor is even this all. The law, by cumulative pro visions, positively forbids that a slave shall be taught to read. Hear this, fellow-citizens, and confess, that no barbarism of despotism, no extravagance of tyranny, no excess of impiety can be more blasphemous or deadly. " Train up a child in the way he should go," is the lesson of sacred wisdom ; but the law of Slavery boldly prohibits any such training, and dooms the child to hopeless ignorance and degradation. " Let there be light," was the Divine utterance at the very dawn of creation, and this commandment, travelling with the ages and the hours, still speaks with the voice of God ; but the law of Slavery says, " Let there be darkness." But it is earnestly averred that slave-masters are humane, and that slaves are treated with kindness. These averments, however, I properly put aside, pre cisely as I have already put aside the multitudinous illustrations from the cruelty of Slavery. On the sim ple letter of the law I take my stand, and do not go beyond what is there nominated. The masses of men are not better than their laws, and, whatever may be the eminence of individual virtue, it is not reasonable to infer that the masses of slave-masters are better than the law of Slavery. And, since this law submits the slave to their irresponsible control, with power to bind and to scourge to shut the soul from knowledge to separate families to unclasp the infant from a mother s breast, and the wife from a husband s arms, it is natural to conclude that such enormities are sanctioned by them, while the brutal prohibition of instruction by supplementary law gives crowning evidence of their complete complicity. And this con clusion must exist unquestioned, just so long as the NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 485 law exists unrepealed. Cease, then, to blazon the humanity of slave-masters. Tell me not of the lenity with which this cruel law is tempered to its unhappy subjects. Tell me not of the sympathy which over flows from the mansion of the master to the cabin of the slave. In vain, you assert these instances. In vain you show that there are individuals who do not exert the wickedness of the law. The law still endures. Slavery, which it defines and upholds, continues to outrage Public Opinion, and, within the limits of our Republic, upwards of three millions of human beings, guilty only of a skin not colored like your own, are left the victims of its unrighteous, irresponsible power. Power divorced from right is devilish ; power with out the check of responsibility is tyrannical ; and I need not go back to the authority of Plato, when I assert, that the most complete injustice is that which is erected into the form of law. But all these things concur in Slavery. It is, then, on the testimony of slave-masters, solemnly, legislatively, judicially attested in the very law itself, that I now arraign this institu tion, as an outrage upon man and his Creator. And here is the necessity -of the Anti-Slavery Enterprise. A wrong so transcendent, so loathsome, so direful, must be encountered wherever it can le readied, and the battle must be continued without truce or com promise, until the field is entirely won. Freedom and Slavery can hold no divided empire ; nor can there be any true repose until Freedom is everywhere estab lished. To the necessity of the Anti- Slavery Enterprise, there are two and only two vital objections ; one founded on the alleged distinction of race, and the other on the 41* 486 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS alleged sanction of Christianity. All other objections are of an inferior character, or are directed logically at its practicability. Of these two leading objections, let me briefly speak. 1. And, first, of the alleged distinction of race. This objection itself assumes two different forms, one founded on a prophetic malediction in the Old Testa ment, and the other on the professed observations of recent science. Its importance is apparent in the obvi ous fact, that, unless such distinction be clearly and unmistakably established, every argument by which our own freedom is vindicated, every applause awarded to the successful rebellion of our fathers, every in dignant word ever hurled against the enslavement of our white fellow-citizens by Algerine corsairs, must plead trumpet-tongued against the deep damnation of Slavery, whether white or black. It is said that the Africans are the posterity of Ham, the son of Noah, through Canaan, who was cursed by Noah," to be the servant of his brethren, and that this malediction has fallen upon all his descendants, including the unhappy Africans, who are accordingly devoted by God, through unending generations, to unending bondage. Such is the favorite argument often put forth at the South, and more than once directly ad dressed to myself. Here, for instance, is a passage from a letter recently received ; " You need not per sist," says the writer, " in confounding Japheth s chil dren with Ham s, and making both races one, and arguing on their rights as those of man broadly." And I have been seriously assured that until this objection is answered, it \vill be in vain to press my views upon Congress or the country. Listen now to the texts NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 487 of the Old Testament which are so strangely em ployed : " And he (Noah) said, cursed be Canaan : a servant of ser vants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shein ; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant." Genesis, chap. ix. 25-27. That is all ; and I need only read these words in order to expose the whole transpicuous humbug. But I am tempted to add, that, to justify this objection, it will be necessary to maintain at least five different propositions, as essential links in the chain of the African slave ; first, that, by this malediction, Canaan himself was actually changed into a chattel, whereas, he is simply made the servant of his brethren ; secondly, that not merely Canaan, but all his posterity, to the remotest generation, was so changed, whereas the language has no such extent ; thirdly, that the African actually belongs to the posterity of Canaan, an ethnographical assumption absurdly difficult to estab lish ; fourthly, that each of the descendants of Shem and Japheth has a right to hold an African fellow-man as a chattel, a proposition which finds no semblance of support ; and, fifthly, that every slave-master is truly descended from Shem or Japheth, a pedigree which no anxiety or audacity can prove ! This plain analysis, which may fitly excite a smile, shows the five fold absurdity of an attempt to found this revolting wrong on " Any successive title, long and dark, Drawn from the mouldy rolls of Noah s ark." * The small -bigotry which could find comfort in these *Dryden s Absalom and Achitophel. 488 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS texts, has been lately exalted by the voice of science, which has undertaken to suggest that the different races of men are not derived from a single pair, but from several distinct stocks, according to their several distinct characteristics ; and it has been audaciously argued that the African is so far inferior, as to lose all title to that liberty which is the birthright of the lordly white. Now I have neither time nor disposition on this occasion, to discuss the question of the unity of the races ; nor is it necessary to my present purpose. It may be that the different races of men proceeded from different stocks ; but there is but one great Hu man Family, in which Caucasian and African, Ciiinese and Indian, are all brothers, children of one Father, and heirs to one happiness, alike on earth and in heaven. " Star-eyed science" cannot shake this ever lasting truth. It may vainly exhibit peculiarities in the African, by which he is distinguishable from the Caucasian. It may, in his physical form and intellect ual character, presume to find the stamp of permanent inferiority. But by 110 reach of learning, by no torture of fact, by no effrontery of dogma, can it show that he is not a man. And as a man he stands before you an unquestionable member of the Human Family, and entitled to all the rights of man. You can claim nothing for yourself, as man, which you must not accord to him. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which you proudly declare to be your own inalienable, God-given rights, and to the support of which your fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, are his by the same immortal title that they are yours. 2. From the objection founded on the alleged dis tinction of race, I pass to that other founded on the NECESSITY, PEACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 489 alleged sanction of Slavery ly Christianity. And, striving to be brief, I shall not undertake to reconcile texts often quoted from the Old Testament, which, whatever may be their import, are all absorbed in the New ; nor shall I stop to consider the precise inter pretation of the oft- quoted phrase, Servants, obey your masters ; nor seek to weigh any such imperfect injunc tion in the scales against those grand commandments, on which hang all the law and the prophets. Surely, in the example and teachings of the Saviour, who lifted up the down- trodden, who enjoined purity of life, and overflowed with tenderness even to little children, human ingenuity can find no apology for an institution which tramples on man, which defiles woman, and sweeps little children beneath the hammer of the auctioneer. If to any one these things seem to have the license of Christianity, it is only because they have first secured a license in his own soul. Men are prone to find in uncertain, disconnected texts, a confirmation of their own personal prejudices or preposessions. And I w ho am no divine, but only a simple layman make bold to say, that whoever finds in the Gospel any sanction of Slavery, finds there merely a reflection of himself. On a matter so irresistibly clear, authority is superfluous ; but an eminent character, who as poet makes us forget his high place as philosopher, and as philosopher, makes us forget his high place as theolo gian, has exposed the essential antagonism between Christianity and Slavery, in a few pregnant words which you will be glad to hear, particularly as, I believe, they have not been before introduced into this discussion. " By a principle essential to Christianity," says Coleridge, " & person is eternally differenced from a 490 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS thing ; so that the idea of a Human Being necessarily excludes the idea of property in that Being" * With regret, though not with astonishment, I learn that a Boston divine has sought to throw the seamless garment of Christ over this shocking wrong. But I am patient, and see clearly how vain will be his effort, when I call to mind, that, within this very century, other divines sought to throw the same seamless gar ment over the more shocking slave-trade ; and that, among many publications, a little book, was then put forth with the name of a reverend clergyman on the title-page, to prove that " the African trade for negro slaves is consistent with the principles of humanity and revealed religion;"! and, thinking of these things, I am ready to say with Shakespeare, " In religion, What damned error, but some sober brow Will bless it and approve it with a text ? " *In the support of Slavery, it is the habit to per vert texts and to invent authority. Even St. Paul is vouched for a wrong which his Christian life rebukes. Great stress is now laid on his example, as it appears in the epistle to Philemon, written at Home, and sent by Onesimus, a servant. From the single chapter constituting the entire epistle, I take the following passage, in ten verses, which is strangely invoked for Slavery : " I beseech thcefor my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds ; which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but * Coleridge s Dissertation introductory to the Ency. Mctrop. t This was by the llev. Thomas Thompson. Boswell s Lefcnco of the Slave-trade was kindred in character. Life of Johnson,, vol. iv. p. 55. NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 491 now profitable to thee and to mo ; whom I have sent again ; thou 5 therefore, receive him, that is, mine own bowels ; whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have minis tered unto me in the bonds of the gospel ; but without thy mind would I do nothing, that thy benefit should not be as it Were of necessity, but willingly. For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldst receive him for ever ; not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to lae, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord ? If thou count me, therefore, a partner, receive him as myself. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee aught, put that on mine ac count. I, Paul, have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it ; albeit, I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self besides." Epistle to Philemon, verses 10- 19. Out of this affectionate epistle, in which St. Paul calls the converted servant, Onesimus, his son, pre cisely as in another epistle he calls Timothy his son, Slavery has been elaborately vindicated, and the great Apostle to the Gentiles has been made the very tute lary saint of the Slave-hunter. Now, without relying on minute criticism, to infer his real judgment of Slavery from his condemnation on another occasion of " men-stealers," or, according to the original text, slave-traders, in company with " murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers," and without undertaking to show that the present epistle, when truly interpreted, is a protest against Slavery, and a voice for Freedom, all of which might be done, I content myself by calling attention to two things, apparent on its face, and in themselves an all-sufficient response. First, while it appears that Onesimus had been in some way the servant of Philemon, it does not appear that he had ever been held as a slave, much less as a chattel ; and how gross and monstrous is the effort to derive a 492 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE; ITS wrong, by which, man is changed to a chattel, out of words, whether in the Constitution of our country, or in the Bible, which do not explicitly, unequivocally and exclusively define this wrong ! Secondly, in charging Onesimus with this epistle to Philemon, the Apostle announces him as " not now a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, 1 * and he enjoins upon his correspondent the hospitality due only to a freeman, saying expressly, "If thou count me, therefore, a partner, receive him as myself; " ay, sir, not as slave, not even as servant, but as a brother beloved, even as the Apostle himself. Thus with apostolic pen wrote Paul to his disciple, Philemon. Beyond all doubt, in these words of gentleness, bene diction and emancipation, dropping with celestial, soul-awakening power, there can be no justification for a conspiracy, which, beginning with the treachery of Iscariot, and the temptation of pieces of silver, seeks, by fraud, brutality and violence, through officers of the law armed to the teeth, like pirates, and amidst soldiers who degrade their uniform, to hurl a fellow- man back into the lash-resounding den of American Slavery ; and if any one can thus pervert this benefi cent example, allow me to say, that he gives too much occasion to doubt his intelligence or his sin cerity. Certainly I am right in thus stripping from Slavery the apology of Christianity, which it has tenaciously hugged ; and here I leave the first part of my subject, assuming against every objection the Necessity of our Enterprise. II. I am now brought, in the second place, to con- NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 493 sider the PRACTICABILITY of the Enterprise. And here the way is easy. In showing its necessity, I have already demonstrated its practicability ; for the former includes the latter, as the greater includes the less. Whatever is necessary must be practicable. By a decree which has ever been a by-word of tyranny, the Israelites were compelled to make bricks without straw ; but it is not according to the ways of a benev olent Providence, that man should be constrained to do what cannot be done. Besides, the Anti-Slavery Enterprise is right ; and the right is always prac ticable. I know well the little faith which the world has in the triumph of principles, and I readily imagine the despair with which our object is regarded; but not on this account am I disheartened. That exuberant N wri ter, Sir Thomas Browne, breaks into an ecstatic wish for some new difficulty in Christian belief, that his faith might have a new victory, and an eminent enthu siast went so far as to say, that he believed because it was impossible credo quia impossible. But no such exalted faith is now required. Here is no im possibility, nor is there any difficulty which will not yield to a faithful, well-directed endeavor. If to any timid soul the Enterprise seems impossible because it is too beautiful, then I say at once that it is too beau tiful not to be possible. But descending from these summits, let me show plainly the object which it seeks to accomplish, and herein you shall see and confess its complete practica bility. While discountenancing all prejudice of color and every establishment of caste, the Anti- Slavery En terprise at least so far as I may speak for it does 42 494 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE J ITS not undertake to change human nature, or to force any individual into relations of life for which he is not morally, intellectually and socially adapted ; nor does it necessarily assume that a race, degraded for long generations under the iron heel of bondage, can be lifted at once into all the political privileges of an American citizen. But, sir, it does confidently assume, against all question, contradiction, or assault whatever, that every man is entitled to life, liberty, and the pur suit of happiness ; and, with equal confidence, it asserts that every individual, who wears the human form, whether black or white, should at once be recognized as man. I know not when this is done, what other trials may be in wait for the unhappy African ; but this I do know, that the An ti- Slavery Enterprise will then have tri umphed, and the institution of Slavery, as defined by existing law, will no longer shock mankind. In this work the first essential, practical requisite is, that the question shall be openly and frankly con fronted. Do not put it aside. Do not blink it out of sight. Do not dodge it. Approach it. Study it. Ponder it. Deal with it. Let it rest in the illumina tion of speech, conversation and the press. Let it fill the thoughts of the statesman and the prayers of the pulpit. When Slavery is thus regarded, its true char acter will be recognized as a hateful assemblage of un questionable wrongs under the sanction of existing law, and good men will be moved at once to apply the remedy. Already even its zealots admit that its " abuses " should be removed. This is their word and not mine. Alas ! alas ! sir, it is these very " abuses " which constitute its component parts, with out which it would not exist, even as the scourges in NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 495 a bundle with the axe constituted the dread fasces of the Roman lictor. Take away these, and the whole embodied outrage will disappear. Surely that central assumption more deadly than the axe itself by which man is changed into a chattel, may be abandoned ; and is not this practicable ? The associate scourges by which that transcendent " abuse " is surrounded, may, one by one, be subtracted. The " abuse " which sub stitutes concubinage for marriage the "abuse" which annuls the parental relation the " abuse " which closes the portals of knowledge the " abuse " which tyrannically usurps all the labor of another now upheld by positive law, may by positive law be abolished. To say that this is not practicable, in the nineteenth century, would be a scandal upon mankind, and just in proportion as these " abuses " cease to have the sanction of law, will the institution of Slavery cease to exist. The African, whatever may then be his con dition, will no longer be the slave over whose wrongs and sorrows the world throbs at times fiercely indignant, and at times painfully sad, while with outstretched arms, he sends forth the piteous cry, " Am I not a man and a brother ? " In pressing forward to this result, the inquiry is often presented, to what extent, if any, shall compen sation be allowed to the slave-masters ? Clearly, if the point be determined by absolute justice, not the masters but the slaves will be entitled to compensation ; for it is the slaves, who, throughout weary generations, have been deprived of their toil, and all its fruits which went to enrich their masters. Besides, it seems hardly reasonable to pay for the relinquishment of those dis gusting l abuses," which, in their aggregation, consti- 496 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS tute the bundle of Slavery. Pray, sir, by what tariff, price current, or principle of equation, shall their several values be estimated ? What sum shall be counted out as the proper price for the abandonment of that pretension more indecent than the jus primcc noctis of the feudal age which leaves woman, whether in the arms of master or slave, always a con cubine ? What bribe shall be proffered for the restora tion of God-given paternal rights ? What money shall be paid for taking off the padlock by which souls arc fastened down in darkness ? How much for a quit-claim to labor now meanly exacted by the strong from the weak ? And what compensation shall be awarded for the egregious assumption, condemned by reason and abhorred by piety, which changes a man into a thing ? I put these questions without undertaking to pass upon them. Shrinking instinctively from any recognition of rights founded on wrongs, I find myself shrinking also from any austere verdict, which shall deny the means necessary to the great consummation we seek. Our fathers, under Washington, did not hesitate by Act of Congress, to appropriate largely for the ransom of white fellow-citizens enslaved by Alge- rine corsairs ; and, following this example, I am dis posed to consider the (question of compensation as one of expediency, to be determined by the exigency of the hour and the constitutional powers of the Govern ment ; though such is my desire to see the foul fiend of Slavery in flight, that I could not hesitate to build even a Bridge of Gold, if necessary, to promote his escape. The Practicability of the Anti- Slavery Enterprise has been constantly questioned, often so superficially, NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 497 as to be answered at once. I shall not take time to consider the allegation, founded on considerations of economy, which audaciously assumes that Slave Labor is more advantageous than Free Labor that Slavery is more profitable than Freedom ; for this is all ex ploded by the official tables of the census : nor that other futile argument, that the slaves are not prepared for Freedom, and, therefore, should not be precipitated into this condition, for that is no better than the ancient Greek folly, where the anxious mother would not allow her son to go into the water until he had first learned to swim. But, as against the Necessity of the Anti- Slavery Enterprise, there were two chief objections, so, also, against its Practicability there are two ; the first, founded on its alleged danger to the master, and the second, on its alleged damage to the slave himself. 1. The first objection, founded on the alleged danger to the master, most generally takes the extravagant form, that the slave, if released from his present con dition, would cut his master s throat. Here is a blatant paradox, which can pass for reason only among those who have lost their reason. With an absurdity w r hich finds no parallel except in the defences of Slavery, it assumes that the African, when treated justly, will show a vindictiveness which he does not exhibit when treated unjustly; that when elevated by the blessings of Freedom, he will develop an appetite for blood which he never manifested when crushed by the curse of bondage. At present, the slave sees his wife rav ished from his arms sees his infant swept away to the auction block sees the heavenly gates of knowl edge shut upon him sees his industry and all its 42* 498 AKTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS fruits unjustly snatched by another sees himself and offspring doomed to a servitude from which there is no redemption ; and still his master sleeps secure. Will the master sleep less secure, when the slave no longer smarts under these revolting atrocities? I will not. trifle with your intelligence, or with the quick-passing hour, by arguing this question. But there is a lofty example, brightening the his toric page, by which the seal of experience is affixed to the conclusions of reason ; and you would hardly pardon me if I failed to adduce it. By virtue of a single Act of Parliament, the slaves of the British West Indies were changed at once to freedmen ; and this great transition was accomplished absolutely without personal danger of any kind to the master. And yet the chance of danger there was greater far than among us. In our broad country, the slaves are overshadowed by a more than six-fold white population. Only in two States South Carolina and Mississippi do the sjaves outnumber the whites, and there but slightly, while in the entire Slave States, the whites outnumber the slaves by many millions. But it was otherwise in the British West Indies, where the whites were over shadowed by a more than six-fold population. The slaves were 800,000, while the whites numbered only 131,000, distributed in different proportions on the different islands. And this disproportion has since in creased rather than diminished, always without danger to the whites. In Jamaica, the largest of these pos sessions, there are now upwards of 400,000 Africans, and only 37,000 whites ; in Barbadoes, the next larg est possession, there are 120,000 Africans, and only 15,000 whites ; in St. Lucia, 19,500 Africans, and only NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 499 600 whites ; in Tobago, 14,000 Africans, and only 600 whites ; in Montserrat, 6000 Africans, and only 150 whites ; and in the Grenadines, upwards of 6000 Afri cans, and less than 50 whites. And yet in all these places, the authorities attest the good behavior of the Africans. Sir Lionel Smith, the Governor of Jamaica, in his speech to the Assembly, declared that their con duct " proves how well they deserved the boon of Freedom." Another Governor of another island dwells on the " peculiarly rare instances of the commission of grave or sanguinary crimes among the emancipated portion of these islands ; " and the Queen of England, in a speech from the throne, has announced that the complete and final emancipation of the Africans had " taken place without any disturbance of public order and tranquillity." In this example I hail new con firmation of the rule that the highest safety is in doing right ; and thus do I dismiss the objection founded on the alleged danger to the master. 2. And I am now brought to the second objection, founded on the alleged damage to the slave. It is common among the partisans of Slavery, to assert that our Enterprise has actually retarded the very cause it seeks to promote ; and this paradoxical accusation, which might naturally show itself among the rank weeds of the South, is cherished here on our Northern soil, by those who anxiously look for any fig-leaf with which to cover their indifference or tergiversation. This peculiar form of complaint is an old device, which has been instinctively employed on other occa sions until it has ceased to be even plausible. Thus, throughout all times, has every good cause been en countered. The Saviour was nailed to the cross with 500 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS a drown of thorns on his head, as a disturber of that peace on earth which he came to declare. The disci ples, while preaching the Gospel of forgiveness and good will, were stoned as preachers of sedition and discord. The reformers, who sought to establish a higher piety and faith, were burnt at the stake as blasphemers and infidels. Patriots, in all ages, who have striven for their country s good, have been doom ed to the scaffold or to exile, even as their country s enemies. And those brave Englishmen, who, at home, under the lead of Edmund Burke, even against their own country, espoused the cause of our fathers, shared the same illogical impeachment, which was touched to the quick by that orator statesman, when, after exposing its essential vice, " in attributing the ill-effect of ill-judged conduct to the arguments used to dissuade us from it," he denounced it as " very absurd, but very common in modern practice, and very wicked." Ay, sir, it is common in modern practice. In England, it has vainly renewed itself with special frequency against the Bible Societies ; against the friends of education ; against the patrons of vaccina tion ; against the partisans of peace, all of whom have been openly arraigned as provoking and increasing the very evils, whether of infidelity, idleness, disease, or war, which they benignly sought to check. And to bring an instance which is precisely applicable to our own, Wilberforce, when conducting the Anti-Slavery Enterprise of England, first against the slave-trade and then against Slavery itself, was told that those efforts, by which his name is now consecrated forever- more, tended to ..increase the hardships of the slave, even to the extent of rivetting anew his chains. Such NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 501 are the precedents for the imputation to which our Enterprise is exposed ; and such, also, are the prece dents by which I exhibit the fallacy of the imputation. Sir, I do not doubt that the Enterprise has produced heat and irritatiorr, amounting often to inflammation, among slave-masters, which, to superficial minds, may seem inconsistent with success ; but which the careful observer will recognize at once as the natural and not unhealthy effort of a diseased body, to purge itself of existing impurities ; and just in proportion to the malignity of the concealed poison, will be the extent of inflammation. A distemper like Slavery cannot be ejected like a splinter. It is, perhaps, too much to ex pect that men thus tortured should reason calmly that patients thus suffering should comprehend the true nature of their case and kindly acknowledge the beneficent work ; but not on this account can it be suspended. In the face of this complaint, I assert that the Anti- Slavery Enterprise has already accomplished incalcula ble good. Even now it touches the national heart as it never before was touched, sweeping its strings with a might to draw forth emotions such as no political struggle has ever evoked. It moves the young, the middle-aged and the old. It enters the family circle, and mingles w r ith the flame of the household hearth. It reaches the souls of mothers, wives, sisters and daughters, filling all with a new aspiration for justice on earth, and awakening not merely a sentiment against Slavery, such as prevailed with our fathers, but a deep, undying conviction of its wrong, and a determination to leave no effort unattempted for its removal. With the sympathies of all Christendom as 502 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS allies, it has already encompassed the slave-masters by a moral blockade, invisible to the eye, but more potent than navies, from which there can be no escape except in final capitulation. Thus it has created the irresisti ble influence which itself constitutes the beginning of success. Already there are signs of change. In com mon speech, as well as in writing, among slave-masters the bondman is no longer called a slave, but a servant, thus, by a soft substitution, concealing and con demning the true relation. Even newspapers in the land of bondage blush with indignation at the hunt of men by blood-hounds, thus protesting against an un questionable incident of Slavery. Other signs are found in the added comfort of the slave ; in the en larged attention to his wants ; in the experiments now beginning, by which the slave is enabled to share in the profits of his labor, and thus finally secure his freedom ; and, above all, in the consciousness among slave-masters themselves, that they dwell now as never before under the keen observation of an ever- wakeful Public Opinion, quickened by an ever-wakeful Public Press. Nor is this all. Only lately propositions have been introduced into the Legislatures of different States, and countenanced by Governors, to mitigate the exist ing law of Slavery ; and, almost while speaking, I have received the drafts of two different memorials, one addressed to the Legislature of Virginia, and the other to that of North Carolina, asking for the slave three things, which it will be monstrous to refuse, but which, if conceded, will take from Slavery its existing charac ter ; I mean, first, the protection of the marriage relation ; secondly, the protection of the parental rela tion ; and, thirdly, the privilege of knowledge. Grant NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 503 these, and the girdled Upas tree soon must die. Sir, amidst these tokens of present success, and the augu ries of the future, I am not disturbed by any complaints of seeming damage. " Though it consume our own dwelling, who does not venerate fire, without which human life can hardly exist on earth," says the Hindoo proverb ; and the time is even now at hand when the Anti- Slavery Enterprise, which is the very fire of Freedom, with all its incidental excesses or excite ments, will be hailed with a similar regard. III. And now, in the third place, the Anti- Slavery Enterprise, which I have shown to be at once necessary and practicable, is commended by its inherent DIG NITY. Here the reasons are obvious and unanswer able. Its object is benevolent; nor is there, in the dreary annals of the Past, a single Enterprise which stands forth more clearly and indisputably entitled to this character. With unsurpassed and touching magnani mity, it seeks to benefit the lowly whom your eyes have not seen, and who are ignorant even of your labors, while it demands and receives a self-sacrifice calculated to ennoble an enterprise of even question able merit. Its true rank is among works properly called philanthropic the title of highest honor on earth. " I take goodness in this sense," says Lord Bacon in his Essays, " the affecting of the weal of men, which is what the Grecians call Philanthropeia of all virtues and dignities of the mind the greatest, being the character of the Deity ; and without it, man is a busy, mischievous, wretched thing, no better than a kind of vermin." Lord Bacon was right, and, per- 504 ANTl-SLAYERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS haps, unconsciously followed^ a higher authority ; for, when Moses asked the Lord to show unto him His glory, the Lord said, " I will make all my goodness to pass before thee." Ah! sir, Peace has trophies fairer and more perennial than any snatched from fields of blood, but among all these, the fairest and most peren nial are the trophies of beneficence. Scholarship, literature, jurisprudence, art, may wear their well- deserved honors ; but an Enterprise of goodness de serves, and will yet receive, a higher palm than these. In other aspects its dignity is apparent. It concerns the cause of Human Freedom, which, from the earliest days, has been the darling of history. By all the memories of the Past ; by the stories of childhood and the studies of youth; by every example of magnani mous virtue ; by every aspiration for the good and true ; by the fame of the martyrs swelling through all time ; by the renown of patriots whose lives are land marks of progress ; by the praise lavished upon our fathers, you are summoned to this work. Unless Free dom be an illusion, and Benevolence an error, you cannot resist the appeal. But our cause is nobler even than that of our fathers, inasmuch as it is more ex alted to struggle for the freedom of others than for our own. . Its practical importance at this moment gives to it an additional eminence. Whether measured by tho number of beings it seeks to benefit ; by the magnitude of the wrongs it hopes to relieve ; by the difficulties with which it is beset ; by the political relations which it affects ; or by the ability and character it has enlist ed, the cause of the slave now assumes proportions of grandeur which dwarf all other interests in our broad NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 505 country. In its" presence the machinations of politi cians, the aspirations of office-seekers and the subter fuges of party, all sink below even their ordinary insignificance. For myself, sir, I can see little else at this time among us which can tempt out on to the exposed steeps of public life an honest man, who wishes, by something that he does, to leave the world better than he found it. I can see little else which can afford any of those satisfactions which an honest man should covet. Nor is there any cause which so surely promises final success ; ** Oh ! a fair cause stands firm and will abide ; Legions of angels fight upon its side ! " * It is written that in the last days there shall be scoffers, and even this Enterprise, thus philanthropic, has not escaped their aspersions. And as the objec tions to its Necessity were two-fold, and the objections to its Practicability two-fold, so, also, are the asper sions two-fold ; first in the form of hard words, and secondly, by personal disparagement of those who are engaged in it. 1 . The hard words are manifold as the passions and prejudices of men ; but they generally end in the im putation of " fanaticism." In such a cause, I am wil ling to be called " fanatic," or what you will ; I care not for aspersions, nor shall I shrink before hard words, either here or elsewhere. I have learned from that great Englishman, Oliver Cromwell, that no man can be trusted " who is afraid of a paper pellet ; " and I am too familiar with history not to know, that every * Antonio and Mellida, a play by John Marston. 43 506 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS movement for reform, in Church or State, every en deavor for Human Liberty or Human Rights, has been thus assailed. I do not forget with what facility and frequency hard words have been employed how that grandest character of many generations, the precursor of our ow r n Washington, without whose example our Republic might have failed the great William, Prince of Orange, the founder of the Dutch Republic, the United States of Holland I do not forget how he was publicly branded as " a perjurer and a pest of society ; " and, not to dwell on general instances, how the enterprise for the abolition of the slave-trade was characterized on the floor of Parliament by one emi nent speaker as "mischievous," and by another as " visionary and delusive ; " and how the exalted char acters which it had enlisted were arraigned by still another eminent speaker none other than that Tarle- ton, so conspicuous as the commander of the British horse in the southern campaigns of our Revolution, but more conspicuous in politics at home, "as a junto of sectaries, sophists, enthusiasts and fanat ics ;" and also were again arraigned by no less a person than a prince of the blood, the Duke of Clar ence, afterwards William IV. of England, as " either fanatics or hypocrites," in one of which classes he openly placed William Wilberforce. But impartial history, with immortal pen, has redressed these im passioned judgments ; and the same impartial history will yet rejudge the impassioned judgments of this hour. 2. Hard w r ords have been followed by personal dis paragement, and the sneer is often launched that our Enterprise lacks the authority of names eminent in NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 507 Church, and State. If this be so, the more is the pity on their account ; for our cause is needed to them more than they are needed to our cause. But alas ! it is only according to the example of history that it should be so. It is not the eminent in Church and State, the rich and powerful, the favorites of fortune and of place, who most promptly welcome Truth, when she heralds change in the existing order of things. It is others in poorer condition who throw open their hospitable hearts to the unattended stran ger. Nay, more ; it is not the dwellers amidst the glare of the world, but the humble and lowly, who most clearly discern new duties, as the watchers, placed in the depths of a well, may observe the stars which are obscured to those who live in the effulgence of noon. Placed below the egotism and prejudice of self-interest, or of a class below the cares and temp tations of wealth or power in the obscurity of com mon life, they discern the new signal, and surrender themselves unreservedly to its guidance. The Sa viour knew this. He did not call upon the Priest, or Levite, or Pharisee, to follow him; but upon the humble fisherman by the sea of Galilee. And now, sir, I present to you the Anti- Slavery Enterprise vindicated in Necessity, Practicability and Dignity, against all objections. If there be any objec tion which I have not answered, it is because I am not aware of its existence. It remains that I should give a practical conclusion to this whole matter, by showing, though in glimpses only, your SPECIAL DUTIES AS FREEMEN or THE NORTH. And, thank God ! at last there is a North. 508 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS Mr. President, it is not uncommon to hear persons among us at the North, confess the wrong of Slavery, and then, folding their hands in absolute listlessness, ejaculate, "What can we do about it?" Such men we encounter daily. You all know them. Among them are men in every department of human activity who perpetually buy, build and plan who shrink from no labor who are daunted by no peril of com mercial adventure, by no hardihood of industrial enter prise who, reaching in their undertakings across oceans and continents, would undertake " to put a girdle about the earth in forty seconds ; " and yet, disheartened, they can join in no effort against Slavery. Others there are, especially among the youthful and enthusiastic, who vainly sigh because they were not born in the age of chivalry, or at least in the days of the revolution, not thinking that in this Enterprise, there is an opportunity of lofty endeavor such as no Paladin of chivalry, or chief of the revolu tion enjoyed. Others there are, who freely bestow their means and time upon the distant inaccessible heathen of another hemisphere, in the islands of the sea; and yet they can do nothing to mitigate our grander heathenism here at home. While confessing that it ought to disappear from the earth, they forego, renounce and abandon all exertion against it. Others there are still, (such is human inconsistency !) who plant the tree in whose full-grown shade they can never expect to sit who hopefully drop the acorn in the earth, trusting that the oak which it sends upward to the skies will shelter their children beneath its shade ; but they will do nothing to plant or nur ture the great tree of Liberty, that it may cover with its arms unborn generations of men. NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 509 Others still there are, particularly in the large cities, who content themselves by occasional contributions to the redemption of a slave. To this object they give out of ample riches, and thus seek to silence the mo nitions of conscience. Now, I would not discounte nance any form of activity by which Human Freedom, even in a single case, may be secured. But I desire to say, that such an act too often accompanied by a pharisaical pretension, in strange contrast with the petty performance cannot be considered an essential aid to the Anti- Slavery Enterprise. Not in this way can any impression be made on an evil so vast as Slavery as you will clearly see by an illustration which I shall give. The -god Thor, of Scandinavian mythology whose strength surpassed that of Her cules was once challenged to drain a simple cup dry. He applied it to his lips, and with superhuman capacity drank, but the water did not recede even from the rim, and at last the god abandoned the effort. The failure of even his extraordinary strength was explained, when he learned that the simple cup had communicated, by an invisible connection, with the whole vast ocean behind, out of which it was per petually supplied, and which remained absolutely unaffected by the effort. And just so will these occasions of charity, though encountered by the larg est private means, be constantly renewed, for they communicate with the whole Black Sea of Slavery behind, out of which they are perpetually supplied, and which remains absolutely unaffected by the effort. Sir, private means may cope with individual necessi ties, but they are powerless to redress the evils of a wicked institution. Charity is limited and local ; the 43* 510 AttTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE J ITS evils of Slavery are infinite and everywhere. Besides, a wrong organized and upheld by law, can be removed only through a change of the law. Not, then, by an occasional contribution to ransom a slave can your duty be done in this great cause ; but only by earn est, constant, valiant efforts against the institution against the* law which makes slaves. I am not insensible to the difficulties of this work. Full well I know the power of Slavery. Full well I know all its various intrenchments in the church, the politics and the prejudices of the country. Full well I know the sensitive interests of property, amounting to many hundred millions of dollars, which are said to be at stake. But these things can furnish no motive or apology for indifference, or for any folding of the hands. Surely the wrong is not less wrong because it is gigantic ; the evil is not less evil because it is immeasurable ; nor can the duty of perpetual warfare, with wrong, or evil, be in this instance suspended. Nay, because Slavery is powerful because the En terprise is difficult therefore is the duty of all more exigent. The well-tempered soul does not yield to difficulties, but presses onward forever with increased resolution. And here the question occurs, which is so often pressed in argument, or in taunt, What have we at the North to do with Slavery ? In answer, I might con tent myself by saying that as members of the human family, bound together by the cords of a common manhood, there is no human wrong to which we can justly be insensible, nor is there any human sorrow which we should not seek to relieve ; but I prefer to say, on this occasion, that, as citizens of the United NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 51 1 States, anxious for the good name, the repose and the prosperity of the Republic that it may be a blessing and not a curse to mankind there is nothing among all its diversified interests, under the National Consti tution, with which, at this moment, we have so much to do ; nor is there anything with regard to which our duties are so irresistibly clear. I do not dwell on the scandal of Slavery in the national capital of Slavery in the national territories of the coast- wise slave- trade on the high seas beneath the national flag, all of which are outside of State limits, and within the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress, where you and I, sir, and every freeman of the North, are compelled to share the responsibility and help to bind the chain. To dislodge Slavery from these usurped footholds under the Constitution, and thus at once to relieve ourselves from a grievous responsibility, and to begin the great work of emancipation, were an object worthy of an exalted ambition. But before even this can be commenced, there is a great work, more than any other important and urgent, which must be consum mated in the domain of national politics, and also here at home in the Free States. The National Gov ernment itself must be emancipated, so that it shall no longer wear the yoke of servitude ; and Slavery in all its pretensions must be dislodged from its usurped foothold, in the Free States themselves, thus relieving ourselves from a grievous responsibility at our own door, and emancipating the North. Emancipation, even within the national jurisdiction, can be achieved only through the emancipation of the Free States, accompanied by the complete emancipation of the National Government. Ay, sir, emancipation at the 512 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS South can be reached only through the emancipation of the North. And this is my answer to the in terrogatory, What have we at the North to do with Slavery ? But the answer may be made yet more irresistible, while, with mingled sorrow and shame, I portray the tyrannical power which holds us in thraldom. Notwithstanding all its excess of numbers, wealth and intelligence, the North is now the vassal of an OLIGARCHY, whose single inspiration comes from Slavery; According to the official tables of our recent census, the slave-masters men, women, and children all told are only THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY SEVEN THOUSAND ; and yet this small company now dominates over the Republic, deter mines its national policy, disposes of its offices, and sways all to its absolute will. With a watchfulness that never sleeps, and an activity that never tires with as many eyes as Argus, and as many arms as Briareus the SLAVE OLIGARCHY asserts its perpetual and insatiate masterdom ; now seizing a broad territory once covered by a time-honored ordi nance of Freedom ; now threatening to wrest Cuba from Spain by violent war, or hardly less violent pur chase ; now hankering for another slice of Mexico, merely to find new scope for Slavery ; now proposing once more to open the hideous, heaven-defying Slave- trade, and thus to replenish its shambles with human flesh ; and now, by the lips of an eminent Senator, asserting an audacious claim to the whole group of the West Indies, whether held by Holland, Spain, France, or England, as " our Southern Islands," while it assails the independence of Hayti, and stretches its NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 513 treacherous ambition even to the distant valley of the Amazon. In maintaining its power, the Slave Oligarchy has applied a new test for office, very different from that of Jefferson ; " Is he honest ? is he capable ? is he faithful to the Constitution ? " These things are all forgotten now in the controlling question, " Is he faithful to Slavery ? " With arrogant ostracism it excludes from every national office all who cannot respond to this test. So complete and irrational has this tyranny become, that, at this moment, while I now speak, could Washington, Jefferson, or Franklin, once more descend from their spheres above, to mingle in our affairs and bless us with their wisdom, not one of them, with his recorded, unretracted opinions on Slavery, could receive a nomination for the Presidency from a National Convention of either of the late great political parties ; nor, stranger still, could either of these sainted patriots, whose names alone open a per petual fountain of gratitude in all your hearts, be confirmed by the Senate of the United States for any political function whatever under the National Govern ment not even for the office of Postmaster. What I now say, amidst your natural astonishment, I have more than once uttered from my seat in the Senate, and no man there has made answer, for no man, who has sat in its secret sessions and there learned the test which is practically applied, could make answer ; and I ask you to accept this statement as my testimony derived from the experience which has been my lot. Yes, fellow-citizens, had this test prevailed in the earlier days, Washington first in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen could not 514 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE; ITS have been created Generalissimo of the American forces ; Jefferson could not have taken his place on the Committee to draft the Declaration of Independ ence ; and Franklin could not have gone forth to France, with the commission of the infant Republic, to secure the invaluable alliance of that ancient king dom. And this giant strength is used with a giant heart- lessness. By a cruel enactment, which has no source in the Constitution which defies justice which tramples on humanity and which rebels against God, the Free States are made the hunting-ground for slaves, and you, and I, and all good citizens, are sum moned to join in the loathsome and abhorred work. Your hearts and judgments, swift to feel and to con demn, will not require me to expose here the abomi nation of the Fugitive Slave Bill or its utter unconsti- tutionaJity. Elsewhere I have done this, and never been answered. Nor will you expect that an enact ment, so entirely devoid of all just sanction, should be called by the sacred name of law. History still repeats the language in which our fathers persevered, when they denounced the last emanation of British tyranny which heralded the Revolution, as the Boston Port JBi /Z, and I am content with this precedent. I have said that if any man finds in the Gospel any support of Slavery, it is because Slavery is already in himself ; so do I now say, if any man finds in the Constitution of our country any support of the Fugitive Slave Bill, it is because that Bill is already in himself. One of our ancient masters Aristotle, I think tells us that every man has a beast in his bosom ; but the Northern citizen, who has the Fugitive Slave Bill NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 515 there, has worse than a beast a devil ! And yet in this Bill more even than in the ostracism at which yo-u rebel does the Slave Oligarchy stand confessed ; heartless, grasping, tyrannical ; careless of humanity, right, or the Constitution ; wanting that foundation of justice which is the essential base of every civilized community; stuck together only by confederacy in spoliation ; and constituting in itself a magnum latro- cinium ; while it degrades the Free States to the con dition of a slave plantation, under the lash of a vulgar, despised and revolting overseer. Surely, fellow-citizens, without hesitation or post ponement you will insist that this Oligarchy shall be overthrown ; and here is the foremost among the special duties of the North, now required for the honor of the republic, for our own defence, and in obedience to God. Urging this comprehensive duty, I ought to have hours rather than minutes before me ; but, in a few words, you shall see its comprehensive importance. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and the wickedness of the Fugitive Slave Bill will be expelled from the statute book. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and Slavery will cease at once in the national capital. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and liberty will be come the universal law of all the national territories. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and the Slave-trade will no longer skulk along our coasts, beneath the national flag. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and the national government will be at length divorced from Slavery. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and the national policy will be exchanged from Slavery to Freedom. Prostrate the Slav*e Oligarchy and the North will no longer be the vassal of the South, 516 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and the North will be admitted to its just share in the trusts and honors of the Republic. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy and you will possess the master-key to unlock the whole house of bondage. Prostrate the Slave Oligar chy and the gates of emancipation will be open at the South. But, without waiting for this consummation, there is another special duty to be done here at home, on our own soil, which must be made free in reality, as in name. And here I shall speak frankly, though not without a proper sense of the responsibility of my words. I know that I cannot address you entirely as a private citizen ; but I shall say nothing here, which I have not said elsewhere, and which I shall not be proud to vindicate everywhere. " A lie," it has been declared, " should be trampled out and extinguished forever," and surely you will do nothing less with a tyrannical and wicked enactment. The Fugitive Slave Bill, while it continues unrepealed, must be made a dead letter ; not by violence ; not by any unconstitu tional activity or intervention ; not even by hasty con flict between jurisdictions ; but by an aroused Public Opinion, which, in its irresistible might, shall blast with contempt, indignation and abhorrence, all who consent to be its agents. Thus did our fathers blast all who became the agents of the Stamp Act ; and surely their motive was small compared with ours. The Slave-hunter who drags his victim from Africa is loathed as a monster ; but I defy any acuteness of reason to indicate the moral difference between his act, and that of the Slave-hunter who drags his victim from our Northern free soil. A few puny persons, NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 517 calling themselves the Congress of the United States, with the titles of Representatives and Senators, cannot turn wrong into right cannot change a man into a thing cannot reverse the irreversible law of God cannot make him wicked who hunts a slave on the burning sands of Congo or Guinea, and make him virtuous who hunts a slave in the colder streets of Boston or New York. Nor can any acuteness of reason distinguish between the bill of sale from the kidnap per, by which the unhappy African was originally transferred in Congo or Guinea, and the certificate of the Commissioner, by which, when once again in Freedom, he was reduced anew to bondage. The acts are kindred, and should share a kindred condem nation. One man s virtue becomes a standard of excellence for all ; and there is now in Boston, a simple citizen, whose example may be a lesson to Commissioners, Marshals, Magistrates ; while it fills all with the beauty of a generous act. I refer to Mr. Hayes, who resigned his place in the city police rather than take any part in the pack of the Slave-hunter. He is now the door keeper of the public edifice which has been honored this winter by the triumphant lectures on Slavery Better be a door-keeper in the house of the Lord than a dweller in the tents of the ungodly. For myself, let me say, that I can imagine no office, no salary, no consideration, which I would not gladly forego, rather than become in any way an agent for the enslavement of my brother-man. Where, for me, would be comfort or solace after such a work ! In dreams and waking hours, in solitude and in the street, in the study of the open book and in conversation with the world, 44 518 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTERPRISE ; ITS wherever I turned, there my victim would stare me in the face ; while from the distant rice-fields and sugar plantations of the South, his cries beneath the vindic tive lash, his moans at the thought of liberty once his, now, alas ! ravished away, would pursue me, repeating the tale of his fearful doom, and sounding forever sounding in my ears, " Thou art the man." Mr. President, may no such terrible voice fall on your soul or mine ! Yes, sir, here our duty is plain and paramount. While the Slave Oligarchy, through its unrepealed Slave Bill, undertakes to enslave our free soil, we can only turn for protection to a Public Opinion, worthy of a humane, just and religious people, which shall keep perpetual guard over the liberties of all within our borders ; nay more, which, like the flaming sword of the cherubim at the gates of Paradise, turning on every side, shall prevent any Slave-hunter from ever setting foot on our sacred soil. Elsewhere he may pursue his human prey ; he may employ his congenial blood-hounds, and exult in his successful game. But into these domains of Freedom he must not come. And this Public Opinon, with Freedom as its watch word, must proclaim not only the overthrow of the Slave Bill, but also the overthrow of the Slave Oli garchy behind, the two pressing duties of the North, essential to our own emancipation ; and believe me, sir, while they remain undone, nothing is done. Mr. President, far already have I trespassed upon your generous patience ; but there are other things which still press for utterance. Something would I say of the arguments by which our. .Enterprise is com- NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 519 mended; something also of the appeal it makes to men of every condition; and something also of union, as a vital necessity among all who love Freedom. I know not if our work can be soon accomplished. I know not, sir, if you or I can live to see in our Re public the vows of the Fathers at length fulfilled, as the last fetter falls from the limbs of the last slave. But one thing I do know, beyond all doubt or ques tion, that this Enterprise must go on that in its irre sistible current, it will sweep schools, colleges, churches, the intelligence, the conscience, and the religious aspirations of the land, while all, who stand in its way or speak evil of it, are laying up for their children, if not for themselves, days of sorrow and shame. Better to strive in this cause, even unsuccessfully, than never to strive at all. There is no weapon in the celestial armory of truth ; there is no sweet influence from the skies ; there is no generous word that ever dropped from human lips, which may not be employed. Ours, too, is the argu ment alike of the Conservative and the Reformer, for our cause stands on the truest conservatism and the truest reform. It seeks the conservation of Freedom itself and of its kindred historic principles; it seeks also the reform of Slavery and of the kindred tyranny by which it is upheld. Religion, morals, justice, economy, the Constitution, may each and all be in voked ; and one person is touched by one argument while another person is touched by another. You do not forget how Christopher Columbus won Isabella of Spain to his enterprise of discovery. He first presented to her the temptation of extending her dominions ; but she heark ened not. He next promised to her the dazzling 520 ANTI-SLAVERY ENTEKPKISE ; ITS wealth of the Indies ; and still she hearkened not. But when at last was pictured to her pious imagination the poor heathen with souls to be saved, then the youthful Queen poured her royal jewels into the lap of the Genoese adventurer, and, at her expense, that small fleet was sent forth, which gave to Spain and to mankind a New World. As in this Enterprise, there is a place for every argument, so also is there a place for every man. Even as on the broad shield of Achilles, sculptured by divine art, was wrought every form of human activity ; so in this cause, which is the very shield of Freedom, whatever man can do by deed or speech, may find its place. One may act in one way, and another in another way; but all must act. Providence is felt through individuals ; the dropping of water wears away the rock ; and no man can be so humble or poor as to be excused from this work, while to all the happy in genius, fortune or fame, it makes a special appeal. Here is room for the strengh of Luther, and the sweetness of Melancthon ; for the wisdom of age, and the ardor of youth; for the judgment of the statesman, and the eloquence of the orator ; for the grace of the scholar, and the aspiration of the poet ; for the learning of the professor, and the skill of the lawyer ; for the exhortation of the preacher, and the persuasion of the press ; for the various energy of the citizen, and the abounding sympathy of woman. And still one thing more is needed, without which Liberty-loving men, and even their arguments, will fail in power even as without chanty all graces of knowledge, speech and faith are said to profit nothing. I mean that Unity of Spirit in itself a fountain of NECESSITY, PRACTICABILITY AND DIGNITY. 521 strength which, filling the people of the North, shall make them tread under foot past antipathies* decayed dissensions, and those irritating names which now exist only as the tattered ensigns of ancient strife, It is right to be taught by the enemy ; and with their example before us and their power brandished in our very faces, we cannot hesitate. With them Slavery is made the main-spring of political life, and the ab sorbing centre of political activity ; with them all differences are swallowed up by this one idea, as all other rods were swallowed up by the rod of Aaron ; with them all unite to keep the national government under the control of slave-masters ; and surely we should not do less for Freedom than they do for Slavery. We too mmt le united. Among us at last mutual criticism, crimination, and feud, must give place to- mutual sympathy, trust and alliance. Face to face against the SLAVE OLIGARCHY must be rallied the UNITED MASSES of the North, in compact political association planted on the everlasting base of justice knit together by the instincts of a common danger, and by the holy sympathies of humanity enkindled by a love of Freedom, not only for themselves, bin for others determined to enfranchise the national gov ernment from degrading thraldom and constituting the BACKBONE PARTY, powerful in numbers, wealth, and intelligence, but more powerful still in an inspiring cause. Let this be done, and victory will be ours. 44* THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS THE OUTRAGES IN KANSAS THE DIFFER ENT POLITICAL PARTIES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. SPEECH OX THE EVENING OF 2D NOVEMBER, 1855, AT FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON. FELLOW-CITIZENS OP BOSTON : Are you for Free dom or arc you for Slavery ? This is the question which you are to answer at the coming election. Above all other questions, whether national or local, it now lifts itself directly in the path of every voter, and calls for a plain and honest reply. There it is. It cannot be avoided. It cannot be banished away. It cannot be silenced. Forever sounding in our ears, it has a mood for every hour stirring us at times as with the blast of a trumpet then visiting us in solemn tones, like the bell which calls to prayer and then again awaking us to unmistakable duty, like the same bell, when at midnight it summons all to stay the raging conflagration. And yet, there are persons among us who seek to put this great question aside. Some clamor for finan cial reform, and hold up a tax-bill ; others clamor for a modification of the elective franchise, and they hold up the Pope ; some speak in the name of old parties, calling themselves Democrats or Whigs ; others in the name of a new party, which shall be nameless at pres- [522] THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS. 523 ent. Surely the people of Massachusetts will not be diverted from the true issue involving Freedom for broad territories and Freedom for themselves by holding up a tax-bill or by holding up the Pope. The people of Massachusetts are intelligent and humane. They are not bulls to be turned aside by shaking in their eyes a bit of red cloth ; nor are they whales to be stopped by a tub. The pertinacious and exclusive advocacy with which, at this crisis of Freedom, humbler matters and even personal aspirations have been pressed, in disregard of a sacred cause, finds a prototype in an effort of selfishness, which, occurring at the very crisis of our Revolution, was chastised by the humor and eloquence of Patrick Henry. The story is familiar. Our small army, contending for Freedom, was reduced to the depths of distress : exposed, almost naked, to the rigors of a winter sky, and marking the frozen ground with the blood of shoeless feet. " Where is the man," said Patrick Henry, " who would not have thrown open his fields, his barns, his cellars, the doors of his house, the portals of his breast, to receive the mean est soldier in that little famished band ? Where is the man ? There he stands ; but whether the heart of an American beats in his bosom, you are to judge ? " It was to John Hook, that he pointed, who was then pressing a vexatious claim for supplies taken for the use of these starving troops. " What notes of discord do I hear ? " exclaimed the orator, " They are the notes of John Hook, hoarsely brawling through the patriot camp, Beef! Beef! Beef!" And now, among us, the selfishness of John Hook is renewed, and politicians disturb the hour, as they hoarsely brawl their petty claims through our patriot camp. But above all theso 524 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; is heard the great question, which will not be post poned, Are you for Freedom, or are you for Slavery ? " Under which king, Bezonian, speak or die ! " Are you for Freedom, with its priceless blessings, or are you for Slavery, with its countless wrongs and woes ? Are you for God, or are you for the Devil ? Fellow-citizens, I speak plainly ; nor can words ex hibiting the enormity of Slavery be too plain, whether it be regarded simply in the legislative and judicial decisions by which it is upheld, or in the unquestion able facts by which its character is revealed. It has been my fortune latterly to see Slavery face to face in its own home, in the Slave States ; and I take this early opportunity to offer my testimony to the open barbarism which it sanctions. I have seen a human being knocked off at auction on the steps of a court house, and as the sale went on, compelled to open his mouth and show his teeth, like a horse ; I have been detained in a stage-coach, that our driver might, in the phrase of the country, "help lick a nigger ;" and I have been constrained, at a public table, to wit ness the revolting spectacle of a poor slave, yet a child, almost felled to the floor by a blow on the head from a clenched fist. Such incidents were not calculated to shake my original convictions. The distant slave holder, who, in generous solicitude for that truth which makes for Freedom, feared that, like a certain Doctor of Divinity, I might, under the influence of personal kindness, be hastily swayed from these conviction?, may be assured that I saw nothing to change them in one tittle, but to confirm them ; while I was entirely satisfied that here in Massachusetts, where all read, the true character of Slavery is better known than in THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 525 the Slave States themselves, where ignorance and pre judice close the avenues of knowledge. And now, grateful for the attention with which you honor me, I venture to hope that you are assem bled honestly to hear the truth ; not to gratify preju dice, to appease personal antipathies, or to indulge a morbid appetite for excitement ; but with candor and your best discrimination, to weigh facts and arguments in order to determine the course of duty. I address myself particularly to the friends of Freedom the Republicans on whose invitation I appear to-night, but I make bold to ask you of other parties, who now listen, to divest yourselves for the time, of partisan constraint to forget for the moment that you are "Whigs or Democrats, or how you are called, and to remember only that you are men, with hearts to feel, with heads to understand, and with consciences to guide. Then only will you be in a condition to receive the truth. " If men are not aware of the probable bias of party over them, then they are so much the more likely to be blindly governed by it." Such is the wise remark of Wilberforce ; and I fear that among us there are too many who are unconsciously governed by such bias. There are men, who, while professing candor, yet show that the bitterness of party has entered into their whole character and lives, as the bitterness of the soil in Sardinia is said to appear even in its honey. * At this election we do not choose a President of the United States, or member of Congress ; but a Gov ernor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and other State officers. To a superficial observer, the occasion seems to be rather local than national ; it 526 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; seems to belong to State affairs rather than Federal to Massachusetts rather than to the Union. And yet, such are our relations to the Union such is the sol idarity of these confederate States so are we all knit together as a Plural Unit, that the great question which now disturbs and overshadows the whole country, be comes at once national and local, addressing itself alike to the whole Republic and to each constituent part. Freedom in Kansas, and our own Freedom here at home, are both assailed. They must be defended. There are honorable responsibilities belonging to Mas sachusetts, as an early and constant vindicator of Free dom, which she cannot renounce. " If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself for the battle?" The distant emigrant the whole country awaits the voice of our beloved Common wealth in answer to the question, Are you for Freedom or are you for Slavery ? So transcendent, so exclusive, so all-absorbing at the present juncture is this question, that it is vain to speak of the position of candidates on other things. To be doubtful on this is to be wrong ; and to be wrong on this is to be wholly wrong. Pass ing strange it is that here in Massachusetts, in this nineteenth century, we should be constrained to put this question. Passing strange, that when it is put, there should be any hesitation to answer it, by voice and vote, in such way as to speak the loudest for Free dom. A plain recital will show the urgency of this ques tion. At the period of the Declaration of Independence, upwards of half a million colored persons were held as chattels in the United States. These unhappy people were originally stolen from Africa, or were the THE HEPUBLICAN PARTY. 527 children of those who had been stolen, and, though distributed throughout the whole country, were to be found chiefly in the Southern States. The Slavery to which they were reduced was simply a continuation of the violence by which they had been originally robbed of their rights, and was of course as indefen sible. The fathers of the Republic, leaders of the war of Independence, were struck with the inconsis tency of an appeal for their own liberties while hold ing in bondage fellow-men, only " guilty of a skin not colored like their own." The same conviction animated the hearts of the people, whether at the North or South. Out of ample illustrations, I select one which specially reveals this conviction, and possesses a local interest in this community. It is a deed of man umission, made after our struggles had begun, and preserved in the Probate records of the County of Suffolk. Here it is : " Know all men by these presents, that I, JONATHAN JACKSON, of Newburyport, in the county of Essex, gentleman, in consider ation of the impropriety I feel, and have long felt in beholding any person in constant bondage more especially at a time when my country is so warmly contending for the liberty every man ought to enjoy and having sometime since promised my negro man, POMP, that I would give him his freedom, and in further consideration of five shillings, paid me by said POMP, I do hereby liberate, manumit, and set him free ; and I do hereby remise and release unto said POMP, all demands of whatever nature I have against said POMP. ** In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this nineteenth June, 1776. " JONATHAN JACKSON. [Seal.] " Witness, Mary Coburn, William Noyes." Such was the general spirit. Public opinion found 528 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; free vent in every channel. By the literature of the time by the voice of the Church, and by the solemn judgment of the College, Slavery was condemned, while all the grandest names of our history were ar rayed openly against it. Of these I might dwell on many ; but I am always pleased to mention an illus trious triumvirate from whose concurring testimony there can be no appeal. There was Washington, who at one time declared that " it was among his first wishes to see some plan adopted by which Slavery might be abolished by law," and then at another, that to this end, "his suffrage should not be wanting." There also was Jefferson, who by early and precocious efforts for "total emancipation," placed himself fore most among the Abolitionists of the land perpetually denouncing Slavery exposing the pernicious influ ences upon the master, as well as the Slave declar ing that the love of justice and the love of country pleaded equally for the Slave, and that " the abolition of domestic Slavery was the greatest object of desire." There also was the venerable patriot, Benjamin Frank lin, who did not hesitate to liken the American master of black Slaves to the Algerine corsair with his white Slaves, and who, as President of the earliest Abolition Society the same of which Passmore Williamson is now the honored Secretary by solemn petition, called upon Congress " to step to the very verge of the power vested in it to discourage every species of traffic in the persons of our fellow-men." Thus completely, by this triumvirate of Freedom, was Slavery con demned, and the power of the Government invoked against it. By such men, and in such spirit, was the National THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, 529 Constitution framed. The emphatic words of the Declaration of Independence, which our country took upon its lips as baptismal vows, when it claimed a place among the nations of the earth, were not forgot ten. The preamble to the Constitution renews them, when it declares the object of the people of the United States to be, among other things, " to establish justice, to promote the general welfare, and to secure the bless ings of liberty to ourselves and posterity." Thus, ac cording to undeniable words, . the Constitution was ordained, not to establish, secure or sanction Slavery not to promote the special interest of slave-masters, bound together in oligarchical combination not to make Slavery national in any way, form or manner ; but to " establish justice," which condemns Slavery " to promote the general welfare," which repudiates every Oligarchy and "to secure the blessings of Liberty," in whose presence human bondage must cease. Early in the Convention, Gouverneur Morris broke forth in the language of an Abolitionist : " He never would concur in upholding domestic Slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of Heaven." In another mood, and with mild juridical phrase, Mr. Madison, himself a slaveholder, " thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea of property in man." The discreditable words, Slave and Slavery, were not allowed to find a place in the instrument, while a clause was subsequently added by wa.y of amendment, and, therefore, according to the rules of interpretation, particularly revealing the sentiments of the founders, which is calculated, like the Declara tion of Independence, if practically applied, to carry Freedom everywhere within the sphere of its influence. 45 530 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; It was specifically declared that " no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law" that is, without due presentment, indictment or other formal judical proceedings. Here is an ex press guard of personal Liberty, and a prohibition of Slavery everywhere within the national jurisdiction. In this spirit was the National Constitution adopt ed. In this spirit the National Government was first organized under . Washington. And here there is a fact of peculiar significance, well worthy of perpetual memory. At the time this great chief took his first oath to support the Constitution of the United States, the National Ensign nowhere within the National Ter ritory covered a single slave. On the sea, an execrable piracy, the trade in slaves, was still, to the national scandal, tolerated beneath the national flag. In the States, as a sectional institution, beneath the shelter of local laws, Slavery, unhappily, found a home. But in the only territories at this time belonging to the Nation the broad region of the North West it had already, by the Ordinance of Freedom, been made impossible, even before the adoption of the Constitu tion. The District of Columbia, with its Fated Dowry, had not yet been acquired. The original policy of the Republic, begun under the Confederation, and recognized at the initiation of the new Government, is clear and unmistakable. Compendiously expressed, it was non-intervention by Congress with Slavery in the States, and its prohibition in all the national domain ; and also, as a corollary from this policy, the complete ascendency of the prin ciple of Freedom in the National Government. Thus were reconciled all discordant feelings on this subject. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 531 Slave-masters were left at home in their respective States, without any intervention from Congress to hug Slavery until it stung them to contrition, while the great mass opposed to this wrong were properly ex empted from any responsibility for it in the national domain, and the National Government was placed indubitably on the side of Freedom. Most true it is beyond all question that our Constitution was framed by the lovers of Human Rights ; that it was animated by their divine spirit ; that the institution of Slavery was regarded by them with aversion, so that, though covertly alluded to, it was not named in the instrument ; that, according to the debates in the Convention, they refused to give it any " sanction " or "to admit into the Constitution the idea of property in man," while they looked for ward to the certain day when it would be obliterated from the land. Surely, fellow-citizens, they did not contemplate any Oligarchical combination, constituting a mighty Propaganda, such as we now witness, to up hold and extend it ; nor can any person put his finger on any clause, phrase or word, which sanctions any such Propaganda; and, in making this assertion, I challenge criticism and reply. But the original policy of the Government did not long prevail. The generous sentiments, which filled the early patriots, giving to them historic grandeur, and which stamped upon the Republic, as upon the coin which it circulated, the very image and super scription of LIBERTY, gradually lost their power. The blessings of Freedom being already secured to them selves, the freemen of the land became indifferent to the Freedom of others. They ceased to think of the 532 THE SLATE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; Slaves. The slave-masters availed themselves of this indifference, and, though few in number, compared with the non-slave-masters, even in the Slave States, they have, under the influence of an imagined self-in terest, by the skilful tactics of party, and especially by an unhesitating, persevering union among themselves swaying by turns both the great political parties succeeded, through a long succession of years, in ob taining the mastery of the National Government, bending it to their purposes compelling it to do their will, and imposing upon it a policy offensive to Freedom, and directly opposed to the sentiments of its founders ; while on the forehead of the Republic, once beaming with Liberty, they have stamped the image and superscription of SLAYERY. The actual number of slaveholders in the country was for a long time unknown, and, on this account, was naturally exaggerated. It was often represented to be very great. On one occasion, a distinguished Rep resentative from Massachusetts, whose name will be ever cherished for his devotion to Human Rights, the Hon. Horace Mann, was rudely interrupted on the floor of Congress by a member from Alabama, who averred that the number of slaveholders was as many as three millions. At that time, there was no official document by which this assumption could be corrected. But at last we have it. The late census, taken in 1850, shows that the whole number of this peculiar class embracing men, women and children, all told, who are so unfortunate as to hold slaves was only three hundred and forty- seven thousand ; and, of this num ber, the larger part are small slaveholders, leaving only ninety-two thousand persons as the owners of the great THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 533 mass of slaves, and as the substantial representatives of this class. And yet, this small company some times called the Slave Power, or Black Power, better called the Slave Oligarchy now dominates over the Republic, determines its national policy, disposes of its offices, and sways all to its absolute will. Yes, fellow-citizens, it is an Oligarchy odious beyond precedent ; heartless, grasping, tyrannical ; careless of humanity, right or the Constitution ; wanting that foundation of justice which is the essential base of every civilized community ; stuck together only by confederacy in spoliation ; and constituting in itself a magnum latrocinium ; while it degrades the Free States to the condition of a slave plantation, under the lash of a vulgar, despised and revolting overseer. There is nothing in the National Government which the Slave Oligarchy does not appropriate. It entered into and possessed both the old political parties, Whig and Democrat as witness their servile resolutions at Baltimore making them one in subserviency, though double in form ; and renewing in them the mystery of the Siamese twins, which, though separate in body and different in name, were constrained, by an un natural ligament, to a community of exertion. It now holds the keys of every office, from that of President down to the humblest Postmaster, compelling all to do its bidding. It organizes the Cabinet. It directs the Army and Navy. It manages every department of public business. It presides over the census. It con trols the Smithsonian Institution, founded by the gen erous charity of a foreigner, to promote the interests of knowledge. It subsidizes the national press, alike in the national capital and in the remotest village of 45* 534 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; the North. It sits in the chair of the President of the Senate, and also in the chair of the Speaker of the House. It arranges the Committees of both bodies, placing at their head only the servitors of Slavery, and excluding therefrom the friends of Freedom, though entitled to such places by their character and the States they represent ; and thus it controls the legislation of the country. In maintaining its power, the Slave Oligarchy has applied a test for office, very different from that of Jefferson, " Is he honest ? Is he capable ? Is he faithful to the Constitution ? " These things are all forgotten now in the single question, "Is he faith ful to Slavery ? " With arrogant ostracism it excludes from every national office all who cannot respond to this test. So complete and irrational has this tyranny become, that at this moment, while I now speak, could Washington, or Jefferson, or Franklin, once more descend from their spheres above, to mingle in our affairs and bless us with their wisdom, not one of them, with his recorded, unretracted opinions on Slavery could receive a nomination for the Presidency from either of the political parties calling themselves national ; nor, stranger still, could either of these sainted patriots, whose names alone . open a perpetual fountain of gratitude in all your hearts, be confirmed by the Senate of the United States for any political function whatever, not even for : the office of Postmas ter. What I now say, amidst your natural astonish ment, I have often said before in addressing the people, and more than once uttered from my seat in the Senate, and no man there has made answer, for no man who has sat in its secret sessions, and there learned the test THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 535 which is practically applied, could make answer ; and I ask you to accept this statement as my testimony, derived from the experience of four years which has been my lot under the commission which I have re ceived from our honored Commonwealth. Yes, fellow- citizens, had this test prevailed in the earlier days, Washington first in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen could not have been cre ated generalissimo of the American forces ; Jefferson could not have taken his place on the Committee to draft the Declaration of Independence ; and Franklin could not have gone forth to France, with the com mission of the infant Republic, to secure the invaluable alliance of that ancient kingdom. All tyranny, like murder, is foul at the best ; but this is most foul, strange and unnatural, when it is considered that the States, which are the home of the Slave Oligarchy, are far inferior to the Free States in population, wealth, education, schools, churches, libra ries, manufactures and resources of all kinds. By the last census, there was in the Free States a solid popu lation of freemen, amounting to upwards of thirteen millions, while in the Slave States, there was a like population of only six millions. In other respects, important to civilization, the disparity was as great. And yet, from the beginning, they have taken to them selves the lion s share among the honors and trusts of the Republic. But, without exposing the game of political " sweepstakes," which the Slave Oligarchy has perpetually played interesting as it would be I prefer to hold up for one moment the assumptions, aggressions and usurpations by which, in defiance of 536 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; the Constitution, it has made Slavery national, when it is, in reality, sectional. Here is a brief catalogue : Early in this century, when the District of Columbia was finally occupied as the National Capitol, the Slave Oligarchy succeeded, in defiance of the spirit of the Constitution, and even of the express letter of one ef its amendments, in securing for Slavery, within the District, the countenance of the National Government. Until then, Slavery had existed nowhere on the land within the reach and exclusive jurisdiction of this Gov ernment. The Slave Oligarchy next secured for Slavery an other recognition under the National Government, in the broad territory of Louisiana, purchased from France. The Slave Oligarchy next placed Slavery again under the sanction of the National Government, in the territory of Florida, purchased from Spain. The Slave Oligarchy, waxing powerful, was able, after a severe struggle, to dictate terms to the National Government, in the Missouri Compromise, compelling it to receive that State into the Union with a slave- holding Constitution. The Slave Oligarchy instigated and carried on a most expensive war in Florida, mainly to recover fugi tive slaves, thus degrading the army of the United States to be Slave-hunters. The Slave Oligarchy wrested from Mexico the Prov ince of Texas, and, triumphing over all opposition, finally secured its admission into the Union, with a Constitution making Slavery perpetual. The Slave Oligarchy plunged the country in war with Mexico, in order to gain new lands for Slavery. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 537 The Slave Oligarchy, with the meanness, as well as the insolence of tyranny, has compelled the National Government to abstain from acknowledging the neigh bor republic of Hayti, where slaves have become free men, and established an independent nation. The Slave Oligarchy has compelled the National Government to stoop ignobly before the British Queen, to secure compensation for slaves, who, in the exercise of the natural rights of man, had asserted and achieved their freedom on the Atlantic Ocean, and afterwards sought shelter in Bermuda. The Slave Oligarchy has compelled the National Government to seek to negotiate treaties for the sur render of fugitive slaves, thus making our Republic assert abroad, in foreign lands, property in human flesh. The Slave Oligarchy has joined in declaring the foreign slave-trade piracy, but insists on the coastwise slave-trade, under the auspices of the National Gov ernment. The Slave Oligarchy for several years rejected the petitions to Congress adverse to Slavery, thus, in order to shield this wrong, practically denying the right of petition. The Slave Oligarchy, in defiance of the privileges secured under the Constitution of the United States, imprisons the free colored citizens of Massachusetts, and sometimes sells them into bondage. The Slave Oligarchy insulted and exiled from Charles ton and New Orleans, the honored representatives of Massachusetts, who were sent to those places with the commission of the Commonwealth, in order to throw the shield of the Constitution over her colored citizens. 538 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; The Slave Oligarchy has, by the pen of Mr. Calhoun, as Secretary of State, in formal despatches, made the Republic stand before the nations of the earth as the vindicator of Slavery. The Slave Oligarchy has put forth the hideous effrontery that Slavery can go to all newly acquired territories, and enjoy the protection of the National Flag. The Slave Oligarchy has imposed upon the country an Act of Congress, for the recovery of fugitive slaves, revolting in its mandates, and many times uncon stitutional ; especially on two grounds, jirst, as a usurpation by Congress of powers not granted by the Constitution, and an infraction of rights secured to the States ; and secondly, as a denial of Trial by Jury, in a question of Personal Liberty, and a suit at common law. The Slave Oligarchy, in defiance of the declared desires of the Fathers to limit and discourage Slavery, has, successively introduced into the Union, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas and Texas, as slave-holding States, thus, at each stage, fortifying its political power, and making the National Government give new sanction to Slavery. Such, fellow-citizens, are some of the assumptions, aggressions and usurpations of the Slave Oligarchy ! By such steps, the National Government has been perverted from its original purposes, its character changed, and its powers all surrendered to Slavery. Surely, no patriot soul can listen to this recital, without confessing that our first political duty is, at all hazards and without com promise, to oppose this Oligarchy, to dislodge it from THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 539 the National Government, and to bring the administra-. tion back to that character which it enjoyed when first organized under Washington, himself an Abolitionist, and surrounded by Abolitionists, while the whole country, by its Church, its Colleges, its Literature, and all its best voices, was united against Slavery, and the National Flag nowhere within the national territory covered a single slave. Fellow-citizens, I have said enough to stir you ; but this humiliating tale is not yet finished. An Oli garchy seeking to maintain an outrage like Slavery, and drawing its inspirations from this fountain of wickedness, is naturally base, false and heedless of justice. It is vain to expect that men, who have screwed themselves to become the propagandists of this enormity, will be constrained by any compromise, compact, bargain or plighted faith. As the less is contained in the greater, so there is no vileness of dis honesty, no denial of human riglits, that is not plainly involved in the support of an enormity, which begins by changing man, created in the image of God, into a chattel, and sweeps little children away to the auction- block. A power which Heaven never gave, can be maintained only by means which Heaven can never sanction. And this conclusion of reason is confirmed by late experience ; and here I approach the special question under which the country now shakes from side to side. The protracted struggle of 1820, known as the Missouri Question, ended with the admission of Missouri as a slaveholding State, and the prohibition of Slavery in all the remaining territory, West of the Mississippi and North of 36 30 . Here was a solemn 540 THE SLAVE OLIGAKCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS; act of legislation, called at the time a compromise, a covenant, a compact, first brought forward by the Slave Oligarchy vindicated by it in debate finally sanc tioned by its votes, also upheld at the time by a slave- holding President, James Monroe, and his cabinet of whom a majority were slaveholders, including Mr. Calhoun himself and made the condition of the ad mission of Missouri without which that State could -not have been received into the Union. Suddenly, during the last year without any notice in the pub lic press or the prayer of a single petition after an acquiescence of thirty-three years, and the irreclaim able possession by the Slave Oligarchy of its special share in the provisions of this Compromise in viola tion of every obligation of honor, compact and good neighborhood and in contemptuous disregard of the out-gushing sentiments of an aroused North, this time- honored Prohibition, in itself a Landmark of Freedom, was overturned, and the vast region, now known as Kansas and Nebraska, was opened to Slavery ; and this was done under the disgraceful lead of Northern poli ticians, and with the undisguised complicity of a North ern President, forgetful of Freedom, forgetful also of his reiterated pledges, that during his administration the repose of the country should receive no shock. And all this was perpetrated under pretences of popular rights. Freedom was betrayed by a kiss. In defiance of an uninterrupted prescription down to our day early sustained at the South as well as the North leaning at once on Jefferson and Washington sanctioned by all the authoritative names of our his tory, and beginning with the great Ordinance by which Slavery was prohibited in the North West it was TJIE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 541 pretended that the people of the United States, who are the proprietors of the national domain, and who, according to the Constitution, may " make all needful rules and regulations " for its government, neverthe less were not its sovereigns that they had no power to interdict Slavery there ; but that this eminent do minion resided in the few settlers, called squatters, whom chance or a desire to better their fortunes, first hurried into these places. To this precarious handful, sprinkled over immense spaces, it was left, without any constraint from Congress, to decide, whether into these vast, unsettled lands, as into the veins of an infant, should be poured the festering poison of Slavery des tined, as time advances, to show itself in cancers and leprous disease, or whether they should be filled with all the glowing life of Freedom. And this great power, transferred from Congress to these few settlers, was hailed by the new-fangled name of Squatter Sov ereignty. It was fit that the original outrage perpretrated under such pretences, should be followed by other outrages perpetrated in defiance of these pretences. In the race of emigration, the freedom-loving freemen of the North promised to obtain the ascendency, and in the exercise of the conceded sovereignty of the set tlers, to prohibit Slavery. The Slave Oligarchy was aroused to other efforts. Of course it stuck at noth ing. On the day of election when this vaunted popular sovereignty was first invoked, hirelings from Missouri, having no home in the territory, entered it in bands of fifties and hundreds, and assuming an electoral franchise to which they had no claim-, trampled under foot the Constitution and laws. Violently, ruthlessly 46 542 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; the polls were possessed by these invaders. The same Northern President, who did not shrink from unblush ing complicity in the original outrage, now assumed another complicity. Though prompt to lavish the Treasury, the Army and the Navy of the Republic in hunting a single slave through the streets of Boston, he could see the Constitution and laws, which he was sworn to protect, and those popular rights which he had affected to promote, all struck down in Kansas, and then give new scope to these invaders by the re moval of the faithful Governor, who had become obnoxious to the Slave Oligarchy because he would not become its tool, and the substitution of another, who vindicated the dishonest choice by making haste, on his first arrival there, to embrace the partisans of Slavery. The legislature, which was constituted by the overthrow of the electoral franchise, proceeded to overthrow every safeguard of Freedom. At one swoop it adopted all the legislation of Missouri, including its Slave Code ; by another act it imposed unprecedented conditions upon the exercise of the electoral franchise, and by still another act it denounced the punishment of death no less than five times against as many differ ent forms of interference with the alleged property in human flesh, while all who only write or speak against Slavery are adjudged to be felons. Yes, fellow-citizens, should any person there presume to print or circulate the speech in which I now express my abhorrence of Slavery, and deny its constitutional existence anywhere within the national jurisdiction, he would become liable under this act as a felon. And this overthrow of all popular rights is done in the name of Popular Sovereignty. Surely its authors follow well the ex- THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 543 ample of the earliest Squatter Sovereign none other than Satan who, stealing into Eden, was there dis covered, by the celestial angels, just beginning his work ; as Milton tells us, " him there they found Squat like a toad, close at the ear of Eve." Would you know the secret of this unprecedented endeavor, beginning with the repeal of the Prohibition of Slavery down to the latest atrocity ? The answer is at hand. It is not merely to provide new markets for Slaves, or even to guard Slavery in Missouri, but to build another Slave State, and thus, by the presence of two additional slaveholding Senators, to give in creased preponderance to the Slave Oligarchy in the National Government. As men are murdered for the sake of their money, so is this territory blasted in peace and prosperity, in order to wrest its political in fluence to the side of Slavery. But a single usurpation is not enough to employ the rapacious energies of our Oligarchy. At this moment, while the country is pained by the heartless conspiracy against Freedom in Kansas, we are startled by another effort, which contemplates, not merely the political subjugation of the National Government, but the ac tual introduction of Slavery into the Free States. The vaunt has been made, that slaves will yet be counted in the sacred shadow of the monument on Bunker Hill, and more than one step has been taken towards this effrontery. A person of Virginia has asserted his right to hold slaves in New York on the way to Texas ; and this claim is still pending before the highest judicial 544 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; tribunal of the land. A similar claim has been assert ed in Pennsylvania, and thus far been sustained by the court. A blameless citizen, who in obedience to his generous impulses and in harmony with the re ceived law merely gave notice to a person held as a slave in a Free State, that she was in reality free, has been thrust into jail, and now, after the lapse ol months, still languishes there, the victim of this pre tension ; while, that no excess might be wanting in the madness of this tyranny the great writ of Habeas Corpus, proudly known as the writ of deliverance, has been made the instrument of his imprisonment. Out rage treads upon outrage, and great rights pass away to perish. Alas ! the needful tool for such work is too easily found in places low and high in the alleys and cellars of Boston on the bench of the judge in the chair of the President. But it is the power behind which I arraign. The Slave Oligarchy does it ; the Slave Oligarchy does it all. To the prostration of this Oligarchy you are bound by a three-fold cord of duty ; first, as you would secure Freedom for yourselves ; secondly, as you would up hold Freedom in distant Kansas ; and thirdly, as you would preserve the Union in its early strength and integrity. The people of Kansas are, many of them, from Massachusetts bone of our bone, flesh of our flesh; but as fellow-citizens under the Constitution, they are bound to us by ties which we cannot disown. Nay, more ; by the subtle cord which connects this embryo settlement with the Republic, they are made a part of us. The outrage which touches them touches us. What galls them galls us. The fetter which THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 545 binds the slave in Kansas binds every citizen in Massachusetts. Thus are we prompted to their rescue, not only to save them, but also to save ourselves. The tyranny which now treads them down, has already trampled on us, and only awaits an opportunity to do it again. In its complete overthrow is the only way of safety. Indeed, this must be done before anything else can be done. In vain you seek economy in the Government improvement of rivers and harbors or dignity and peace in our foreign relations, while this power holds the national purse and the national sword. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and the door will be wide open for all generous reforms. Oh ! the imagination loses itself in the vain endeavor to picture the good that will be then accomplished. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and Liberty will become the uni versal law of all the national territories ; Slavery will cease at once in the national capital ; the slave-trade will no longer skulk along our coasts beneath the national flag ; and the wickedness of the Fugitive Slave Bill will be driven from the statute book. Pros trate the Slave Oligarchy, and the national Govern ment will be at length divorced from Slaver j, and the national policy will be changed from Slavery to Free dom. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and the North will no longer be the vassal of the South. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and the North will be admitted to its just share in the trusts and honors of the Re public. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and you will possess the master-key with which to unlock the. whole house of bondage. Prostrate the Slave Oligarchy, and the gates of emancipation will be open at the South. 46* 546 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; To this work, fellow-citizens, you are now summon ed. By your votes you are to declare, not merely your predilection for men, but your devotion to princi ples. Men are erring and mortal. Principles arc steadfast and immortal. Forgetting all other things especially forgetting men you are to cast your votes so as best to promote Freedom. But in the choice of men we are driven to the or ganization of parties ; and here c ccu-rs the practical question on which hinges our immediate duty, by what political party can our desire be accomplished ? There are individuals in all the parties, even the Democratic, who hate Slavery, and say so ; but a political party cannot be judged by the private opinions of some of its members. Something else, more solid and tangible, must appear. The party that we select to bear the burden and honor of our great controversy, must be adapted to the work. It must be a perfect machine. Wedded to Freedom, for better or for worse, and cleaving to it with a grasp never to be unloosed, it must be clear, open and unequivocal in its declarations, and must admit no other question to divert its energies. It must be all in Freedom, and, like Caesar s wife, it must be above suspicion. But besides this character which it must sustain in Massa chusetts, it must be prepared to take its place in close phalanx with the united masses of the North, now or ganizing through all the Free States, junctceque umbone phalanges, for the protection of Freedom, and the over throw of the Slave Oligarchy. Bearing these conditions in mind, there are three parties which we may dismiss, one by one, as they pass in review. Men do not gather grapes from thorns, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 547 nor figs from thistles ; nor do they expect patriotism from Benedict Arnold. A party which sustains the tyrannies and perfidies of the Slave Oligarchy, and is represented by the President, through whom has come so much of all our woe, need not occupy our time ; and such is the Democratic party. If there be within the sound of my voice a single person, who, professing sympathy with Freedom, still votes with this party, to him I would say : The name of Democrat is a tower of strength ; let it not be a bulwark of Slavery ; for the sake of a name do not sacrifice a thing ; for the sake of party do not surrender Freedom. According to a familar rule, handed down from dis tant antiquity, we are to say nothing but good of the dead. How, then, shall I speak of the late powerful Whig party by whose giant contests the whole country was once upheaved but which has now ceased to exist, except as the shadow of a name ? Here, in Massachusetts, a few who do not yet know that it is dead, have met together and proffered their old allegiance. They are the Rip Van Winkles of our politics. This respectable character, falling asleep in the mountains, drowsed undisturbed throughout the whole war of the Revolution, and, then returnimg to his native village, ignorant of all that had passed, proposed to drink the health of King George. But our Whigs are less tolerant and urbane than this awakened Dutchman. In petulant and irrational assumptions they arc like the unfortunate judge, who, being aroused from his slumbers on the bench, by a sudden crash of thunder, exclaimed, " Mr. Crier, stop the noise in Court." The thunder would not be hushed ; nor will the voice of Freedom, now reverberating throughout the land. 548 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS J Some there are among these who openly espouse the part of Slavery, while others, by their indifference, place themselves in the same unhappy company. If their position at this moment were of sufficient impor tance to justify grave remark, they should be exhibited as kindred in spirit and isolation to the Tories of our Revolution, or, at least, as the Bourbons of Massachu setts always claiming everything, learning nothing, forgetting nothing, and at last condemned by an aroused people for their disloyalty to Freedom. Let no person who truly loves Freedom join this company, tempted by its name, its music, and its banners. There is still another party, which claims your votes, but permit me to say, at this crisis, with small pre tence. I am at a loss to determine the name by which it may be properly called. It is sometimes known as the Know Nothing party ; sometimes as the American party ; but it cannot be entitled to these designations if they be of any value for it does not claim to belong to the organization, which first assumed and still retains them. It is an isolated combination, peculiar to Massachusetts, which, while professing certain political sentiments, is bound together by the support of one of the candidates for Governor. At this moment, this is its controlling idea. It is, there fore, a personal party, and I trust that I shall not be considered as departing from that courtesy which is with me a law, if I say that, in the absence of any ap propriate name, expressive of principles, it may properly take its designation from the candidate it supports. Of course, such a party wants the first essential con dition of the organization which we seek. It is a personal party, whose controlling idea is a predilection THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 549 for a man and not a principle. Whatever may be the private sentiments of some of its members, clearly it is not a party wedded to Freedom, for better and for worse, and cleaving to it with a grasp never to be un loosed. "While professing opposition to Slavery, it also arraigns Catholics and foreigners, and allows the question of their privileges to disturb its energies. It is not all in Freedom ; nor is it, like Caesar s wife, above suspicion. Besides, even as a party of Freedom, it is powerless from its isolation; for it stands by itself, and is in no way associated with that great phalanx now rallying throughout the North. In this condition should it continue to exist, it will, in the coming Presidential contest, from natural affinity lapse back into the American party of the country which is ranged on the side of Slavery. Of course, as a separate party, it is necessarily short-lived. Cut off from the main body, it may still show a brief vitality, as the head of a turtle still bites for some days after it is severed from the neck : but it can have no permanent exist ence. Surely this is not the party of Freedom which we seek. But the incompetency of this party, as the organ of our cause, is enhanced by the uncongenial secrecy in which it had its origin and yet shrouds itself. For myself, let me say that, on the floor of the Senate I have striven, by vote and speech, in conjunction with my distinguished friend Mr. CHA*SE, for the limitation of the secret sessions of that body, under shelter of which so much of the business of the nation is trans acted, and I have there presented the example of that ancient Roman, who bade his architect so to con- 550 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; struct his house that his guests and all that they did might be seen by the world, as a fit model for American institutions. What I have urged there, I now urge here. But the special aims which this party proposes, seem to be in harmony with the darkness in which it begins. Even if justifiable, on any grounds of public policy, they sho uld not be associated with our cause ; but I am unwilling to allude to them with out expressing my frank dissent. It is proposed to attaint men for their religion and also for their birth. If this object can prevail, vain are the triumphs of Civil Freedom in its many hard- fought fields ; vain is that religious toleration which we all profess. The fires of Smithfield, the tortures of the Inquisition, the proscriptions of non-conformists, may all be revived. It was mainly to escape these outrages, dictated by a dominant religious sect, that our country was early settled, in one place by Quakers, who set at naught all forms; in another, by Puritans, who disowned bishops ; in another, by Episcopalians, who take their name from bishops ; and in yet another, by Catholics, who look to the Pope as their Spiritual Father. Slowly among the struggling sects was evolved the great idea of the Equality of all men before the law without regard to religious belief; nor can any party now organize a proscription merely for religious belief, without calling in question this unquestionable principle. But Catholics are" mostly foreigners, and, on this account, are condemned. Let us see if there be any reason in this ; and here indulge me with one word on foreigners. With the ancient Greeks, a foreigner was a barbarian, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 551 and with the ancient Romans, he was an enemy. In early modern times, the austerity of this judgment was relaxed ; but, under the influence of feudalism, the different sovereignties, whether provinces or nations, were kept in a condition of isolation, from which they have been gradually passing until now, when pro vinces are merged into nations, and nations are giving signs that the y too will yet commingle into one. In our country another example is already displayed. From all nations people commingle here. As in ancient Corinth, by the accidental fusion of all metals, accumulated in the sacred temples, a peculiar metal was produced, better than any individual metal, even silver or gold ; so^ perhaps, in the arrangements of Providence, by the fusion of all races here, there may be a better race than any individual race, even Saxon or Celt. Originally settled from England, the Repub lic has been strengthened and enriched by generous contributions of population from Scotland, Ireland, Switzerland, Sweden, France and Germany ; and the cry is still they come. At no time since the discovery of the New World, has the army of emigrants pressed so strongly in this direction. Nearly half a million are annually landed on our shores. The manner in which they shall be received is one of the problems of our national policy. All will admit that any influence which they may bring, hostile to our institutions calculated to sub stitute priestcraft for religion and bigotry for Christian ity must be deprecated and opposed. All will admit, too, that there must be some assurance of their purpose to become not merely consumers of the fruits of our soil, but useful, loyal and permanent members 552 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS; of our community, upholders of the general welfare. With this simple explanation, I am not disposed to place any check upon the welcome to foreigners. There are our broad lands, stretching towards the setting sun ; let them come and take them. Ourselves the children of the Pilgrims of a former generation, let us not turn from the Pilgrims of the present. Let the home, founded by our emigrant fathers, continue open in its many mansions to the emigrants of to-day. The history of our country, in its humblest as well as most exalted spheres, testifies to the merits of foreigners. Their strong arms have helped furrow our broad territory with canals, and stretch in every direc tion the iron rail. They have filled our workshops, navigated our ships, and even tilled our fields. Go where you will, among the hardy sons of toil on land or sea, and there you will find industrious and faithful foreigners bending their muscles to the work. At the bar and in the high places of commerce, you will find them. Enter the retreats of learning, and there you will find them too, shedding upon our country the glory of science. Nor can any reflection be cast upon foreigners, claiming hospitality now, which will not glance at once upon the distinguished living and the illustrious dead upon the Irish Montgomery, who perished for us at the gates of Quebec upon Pulaski the Pole, who perished for us at Savannah upon De Kalb and Steuben, the generous Germans, who aided our weakness by their military experience upon Paul Jones, the Scotchman, who lent his unsurpassed courage to the infant thunders of our navy also upon those great European liberators, Kosciusko of Poland, and Lafayette of France, each of whom paid his earliest THE REPUBLICAN PAHTY. 553 vows to Liberty in our cause. Nor should this list be confined to military characters, so long as we gratefully cherish the name of Alexander Hamilton, who was born in the "West Indies, and the name of Albert Gal- latin, who was born in Switzerland, and never, to the close of his octogenarian career, lost the French accent of his boyhood both of whom rendered civic services which may be commemorated among the victories of peace. Nor is the experience of our Republic peculiar. Where is the country or power which must not in scribe the names of foreigners on its historic scroll ? It was Christopher Columbus, of Genoa, who disclosed to Spain the New World ; it was Magellan, of Portu gal, sailing in the service of Spain, who first pressed with adventurous keel through those distant Southern straits which now bear his name, and opened the way to the vast Pacific sea ; and it was Cabot, the Venetian, who first conducted English enterprise to this North American continent. As in the triumphs of discovery, so, also, in other fields have foreigners excelled, while serving States to which they were bound by no tie of birth. The Dutch Grotius author of the sublime work, " The Laws of Peace and War " an exile from his own country became the Ambassador of Sweden, and, in our own day, the Italian Pozzo di Borgo, turning his back upon his own country, has reached the most exalted diplomatic trusts in the jealous service of Russia. In the list of monarchs on the throne of England, not one has been more truly English than the Dutch William. In Holland, no ruler has equalled in renown the German William, Prince of Orange. In Russia, the German Cathar- 47 554 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; ine II. takes a place among the most commanding sovereigns. And wlio of the Swedish monarchs was a better Swede than Bernadotte, the Frenchman ; and what Frenchman was ever filled with aspirations for France more than the Italian Napoleon Bonaparte ? But I pass from these things, which have occupied me too long. A party, which, beginning in secrecy, interferes with religious belief, and founds a dis crimination on the accident of birth, is not the party for us. It was the sentiment of that great Apostle of Free dom, Benjamin Franklin, uttered during the trials of the Revolution, that, " Where Liberty is, there is my country." In similar strain, I would say, " Where Liberty is, there is my party." Such an organization is now happily constituted here in Massachusetts, and in all the Free States, under the name of the REPUB LICAN PARTY. In assuming our place as a distinct party, we simply give form and direction, in harmony with the usage and genius of popular governments, to a movement which stirs the whole country, and does not find an adequate and constant organ in either of the other ex isting parties. The early opposition to Slavery was simply a sentiment, out-gushing from the hearts of the sensitive and humane. In the lapse of time, it became a determined principle, inspiring larger numbers, and showing itself first in an organized endeavor to resist the annexation of slaveholding Texas ; next, to prohibit Slavery in newly acquired territories : and now, alarm ed by the overthrow of all rights in Kansas, and the domination of the Slave Oligarchy throughout the THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 555 Republic, it breaks forth, in a stronger effort, a wider union, and a deeper channel inspiring yet larger num bers and firmer resolves, while opposite quarters con tribute to its power even as the fountain, first out- gushing from the weeping sides of its pure mountain home, trickles in the rill, leaps in the torrent, and flows in the river, till at last, swollen with accumulated waters, it presses onward, forever onward, in irresistible beneficent current, fertilizing and uniting the spaces which it traverses, washing the feet of cities, and woo ing states to repose upon its banks. Parties are the natural expression of a strong public sentiment, which seeks vent. As old controversies subside, the parties by which they have been conducted must yield to others which represent the actual life of the times. In obedience to this law, political parties in France and England the only countries where these are known have undergone mutations with time. In France, under the royalty of Louis Phillippe, the small band of republicans, feeble at first in num bers, and represented in the Legislature by a few per sons only, but strong in principles and purpose, rallied together and at length prevailed over the old parties, until all were equally subverted by Louis Napoleon, and their place supplied by. the enforced unity of des potism. In England, the most brilliant popular triumph of her history the repeal of the monopoly of the corn laws was finally carried, by means of a newly- formed, but wide-spread political organization, which combined men of all the old parties, Whigs, Tories, and Radicals, and put forward the single idea of oppo sition to the corn laws, as its end and aim. In the spirit of these examples the friends of Freedom, in 556 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; well compacted ranks, now unite to uphold their cherished principles, and by combined efforts, accord ing to the course of parties, to urge them upon the Government and the country. Our party has its origin in the exigencies of the hour. Vowing ourselves against Slavery wherever it exists, whether enforced by the Russian knout, the Turkish bastinado, or the lash of the Carolina planter, we do not seek to interfere with it at Petersburg, Constantinople, or Charleston ; nor does any such grave duty rest upon us. Our political duties are properly limited by our political responsibilities ; and we are in no just sense responsible for the local law or usage by which human bondage in these places is upheld. But wherever we are responsible for the wrong, there our duty begins. The object to which, as a party, we are pledged, is all contained in the acceptance of the issue which the Slave Oligarchy tenders. To its repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and its imperious demand that Kansas shall be surrendered to Slavery, we reply, that Freedom shall be made the universal law of all the national domain, without compromise, and that hereafter no Slave State shall be admitted into the Union. To its tyrannical assumption of su premacy in the National Government, we reply that the Slave Oligarchy shall be overthrown. Such is the practical purpose of the Republican Party. It is to uphold and advance this cause, that we have come together, leaving the parties to which we have been respectively attached. Now, in the course of human events, it becomes our duty to dissolve the political bands which bound us to the old organiza tions, and to assume a separate existence. Our Decla- THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 557 ration of Independence has been made. Let us, in the spirit of our Fathers, pledge ourselves to sustain it with our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor. In thus associating and harmonizing from opposite quarters, in order to promote a common cause, we have learned to forget former differences, and to appre ciate the motives of each other. We have learned how trivial are the matters on which we may disagree, compared with the Great Issue on which we all agree. Old prejudices have vanished. Even the rancors of political antagonism have been changed and dissolved, as in a potent alembic, by the natural irresistible affinities of Freedom. In our union we have ceased to wear the badges of either of the old organizations. We have become a new party, distinct, independent, permanent, under a new name, with Liberty as our watchword, and our flag inscribed, " By this sign con quer." Our object is reasonable, consistent with the Con stitution, and required by just self-defence. And yet it is assailed from opposite quarters, and by various objections. It is even objected, that the Republican Party is actually injurious to the very cause we seek to promote, and this paradoxical accusation, which might naturally show itself among the rank weeds of the South, is cherished here on our Free Soil by those who anxiously look for any fig-leaf with which to cover their indiffer ence or tergiversation. This peculiar form of complaint is an old device which has been instinctively employed on other occasions, until it has ceased to be even plau sible. Thus, throughout all time, has every good cause 47* 558 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS ; been encountered. Even Wilberforce, when pressing the abolition of the slave trade, was told that those efforts by which his name is now consecrated for ever more, tended to retard the cause he sought to promote, even to the extent of riveting ane w the chains of the slave ; and, mentioning this great example, I may dis miss the objection to the contempt it deserves. With more pertinacity it is objected, that ours is a sectional party, and the significant words of Washing ton are quoted to warn the country against " geo graphical " questions. This is a mere bugbear, with which to disturb timid nerves. It is a part of the intolerable usurpation of the Slave Oligarchy, that the sectional institution of Slavery is exalted to be national in. its character, so that a National Whig is simply a Slavery Whig, and a National Democrat is simply a Slavery Democrat. According to the true interpreta tion of the Constitution, Freedom and not Slavery is national, while Slavery and not Freedom is sectional. Now, if the Republican party proposed any measures calculated to operate exclusively upon any " geograph ical " section, or if it sought to direct the powers of Congress upon Slavery in the States, then, perhaps, it might be obnoxious to this charge ; but as it simply acts against Slavery under the National jurisdiction, and seeks to dislodge the Slave Oligarchy from their usurped control of the National Government, it is absurd to say that it is sectional. Our aim is in no respect sectional, but in every respect national. It is in no respect against the South, but against the Evil Spirit at the South, which has perverted our national politics. As well might it be said that Washington, and Jefferson and Franklin were sectional and against % THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 559 the South. To all who are really against sectionalism* I would say, what sectionalism so direful as that of Slavery ? To all who profess to be against isms, I would say, what ism so wretched as the ism of Slavery ? If you are in earnest, join the National party of Free dom. Again, it is objected that the Republican party is against the Union, and we are reminded of the priceless blessings which come from this fountain. Here is another bugbear. With us the Union is not the object of mere lip service, but it is cherished in simple sin cerity, as the aged Lear was loved by his only faithful daughter, "according to her bond, nor more nor less." Our party does nothing against the Union, but every thing for it. It strives to guard those great principles which the Union <was established to secure, and thus to keep it ever worthy of our love. It seeks to over throw that baleful Oligarchy, under which the Union has been changed from a vessel of honor to a vessel of dishonor. In this patriot work it will persevere, re gardless of menace from any quarter. Not that I love the Union less but Freedom more, do I now, in plead ing this great cause,- insist that Freedom, at all hazards, shall be preserved. God forbid, that for the sake of the Union, we should sacrifice the very things for which the Union was made. And yet again, it is objected that ours is a party of a single idea. This is a phrase, and nothing more. The party may not recognize certain measures of pub lic policy, deemed by some of special importance ; but it does what is better, and what other parties fail to do. It acknowledges that beneficent principle, which, like the great central light, vivifies all, and without 560 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS J which all is dark and sterile. The moving cause and the animating soul of our party, is the idea of Freedom. But this idea is manifold in character and influence. It is the idea of the Declaration of Independence. It is the great idea of the founders of the Republic. It is the idea which combined our Fathers on the heights of Bunker Hill ; which carried Washington through a seven years war ; which inspired Lafayette ; which touched with coals of fire the lips of Adams, Otis, and Patrick Henry. Ours is an idea, which is at least noble and elevating ; it is an idea which draws in its train virtue, goodness and all the charities of life, all that makes earth a home of improvement and happi ness " Her track, where er the goddess roves, Glory pursues, and generous shame, The unconquerable mind and Freedom s holy flame." Thus do all objections disappear, even as the mists of morning before the sun, rejoicing like a strong man to run his race. The Republican party stands vindi cated , in every particular. It only remains that I should press the question with which I begun "Are you for Freedom, or are you for Slavery ? " As it is right to be taught by the enemy, let us derive instruction from the Oligarchy we oppose. The three hundred and forty-seven thousand slave masters are always united. Hence their strength. Like arrows in a quiver, they cannot be broken. The friends of Freedom have thus far been divided. They, too, must be united. In the crisis before us, it becomes you all to forget ancient feuds, and those names which- have been the signal of strife. There is no occasion to remember anything but our duties. When the fire-bell rings at midnight, we do THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 561 not ask if it bo Whigs or Democrats, Protestants or Catholics, .natives or foreigners, who join our efforts- to extinguish the flames ; nor do we ask any such ques tion in selecting our leader then. Men of all parties, Whigs and Democrats, or however named, let me call upon you to come forward and join in a common cause. Do not hesitate. When Freedom is in danger, all who are not for her are against her. The penalty of indifference, in such a cause, is akin to the penalty of opposition ; as is well pictured by the great Italian poet, when, among the saddest on the banks of Acheron rending the air with outcries of torment, shrieks of anger and smiting of hands he finds the troop of dreary souls who had been ciphers only in the great conflicts of life : " Mingled with whom, of their disgrace the proof, Are the vile angels, "who did not rebel, Nor kept their faith to God, but stood aloof." Come forth, then, from the old organizations ; let us range together. Come forth, all who have stood aloof from parties ; here is an opportunity for action. You who place principles above men ! come forward. All who feel in any way the wrong of Slavery, take your stand ! Join us, ye lovers of Truth, of Justice, of Humanity ! And let me call especially upon the young. You are the natural guardians of Liberty. In your firm resolves and generous souls she will find her surest protection. The young man who is not willing to serve in her cause to suffer, if need be, for her gives little promise of those qualities which secure an honorable age. "O" FELLOW-CITIZENS : We found now a new party, 562 THE SLAVE OLIGARCHY AND ITS USURPATIONS. Its corner-stone is Freedom. Its broad, all-sustaining arches are Truth, Justice, and Humanity. Like the ancient Roman Capitol, at once a Temple and a Citadel, it shall be the fit shrine for the genius of American Institutions. OBIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 7TH FEB RUARY, 1856, ON THE USURPATIONS OF THE SENATE IN THE ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. On motion by Mr. HUNTER, the Senate proceeded to consider the following resolution, reported by him on the 4th instant, from the Committee on Finance. Resolved, That the Committee on Finance be instructed to pre pare and report such of the general appropriation bills as they may deem expedient. In the course of the debate that ensued, Mr. SUMNEB, spoke as follows : MR. PRESIDENT : Whatever the Senator from New York [Mr. Seward"] touches, he handles with a com pleteness which is apt to render any thing superfluous from one who follows on the same side ; but the oppo sition which his views have encountered from the Sen ator from Virginia, [Mr. Hunter,] and also from the Senator from Georgia, [Mr. Toombs,] and also the in trinsic importance of the question, may justify an effort to state anew the argument. We are carried first to the words of the Constitution, which are as follows : [563] 564 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION HILLS. " All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives ; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments, as in other bills." Under this provision, the annual appropriation bills for the Army, Navy, Post Office, and civil and diplomatic service, from the beginning of the Government, have originated in the House of Representatives ; and this has always been done, I believe, without question. It is now proposed to reverse this standing policy, and to originate these bills in the Senate ; and this proposi tion has the sanction of the Committee on Finance of this body. The proposition is a clear departure from usage, and on this account must be regarded with suspicion. A slight examination will demonstrate that it tends to a subversion of well-established landmarks. By looking at the debates in the Convention which framed the Federal Constitution, it will be found that this clause was not hastily or carelessly adopted ; that it was the subject of much discussion, and that it was viewed as essentially important in establishing the sys tem of checks and balances peculiar to our Republic. It was, indeed, a part of the compromise between the small States and the large States. After much consideration, the equality of the States was recognized in the constitution of the Senate, and small States, like Delaware and Rhode Island, were allowed, in this body, equal power with large States, like Virginia and Massachusetts. But this great con cession to the small States was coupled at the time with a condition that "money bills" should originate in the House of Representatives, where the people were represented according to numbers. The language final- ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. 565 ly employed was, "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives." And this was adopted, as a compensation to the large and pop ulous States for their comparative weakness in the Senate. That I do not go too far when I call it a part of the compromise between the great States and small States, let me show, from the authentic report, by Mr. Madison, of the debates in the Federal Convention, how it was regarded there. It owes its authoritative introduction to Dr. Franklin, who moved it in the committee which subsequently reported it. (Eliot s Debates, vol. v. p. 274.) Afterwards, in Convention, when the clause relating to equality of votes was under consideration, we have this report of Avhat he said : "Dr. FRANKLIN observed that this question could not be prop erly put by itself, the committee having reported several proposi tions as mutual conditions of each other. He could not vote for it if separately taken ; but should vote for the whole together." Ibid. p. 282. Colonel Mason, of Virginia, was of the same opin ion, and desired " that the whole might be brought into one view." Mr. Gerry, of Massachusetts, followed up the idea of the mutual dependence of the two propositions, re marking " He would not say that the concession was a sufficient one 011 the part of the small States ; but he could not but regard it in the light of a concession. It would make it a constitutional prin ciple, that the second branch were not possessed of the confidence of the people in money matters, [Please, sir, to mark the breadth of this expression,] which would lessen their weight and influ ence." Ibid. 283. 48 566 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. Mr. Pinckney, of South Carolina, followed, say ing " He thought it evident that the concession was wholly on one side, that of the large States ; the privilege of originating money bills being of no account." Ibid. At a later stage of the debates, the subject was re sumed, and the two propositions still appear together : " Mr. RXJTLEDGE, of South Carolina, proceeded to reconsider the two propositions, touching the originating of money bills in the first, and the equality of votes in the second branch." " Mr. SHERMAN, of Connecticut, was for the question on the whole at once. It was, he said, a conciliatory plan. It had been considered in all its parts." " Mr. LUTHER MARTIN, of Maryland, urged the question on the whole. He did not like many parts of the plan." * * * " He was willing, however, to make trial of the plan, rather than do nothing." Ibid. 310. " Mr. GERRY, of Massachusetts, did not approve of a recon sideration of the clause relating to money bills. It was of great consequence. It was the corner stone of the accommodation." Ibid. 311. At a still later stage, Mr. Pinckney moved to strike out the section on money bills, " as giving no peculiar advantage to the House of Representatives, and as clogging the Government." Mr. Gorham was " against allowing the Senate to originate, but was willing to allow it only to amend." Mr. Gouverneur Morris urged that it was " particularly proper that the Senate should have the right of originating money Mils. They will sit constantly, will consist of a smaller number, and will be able to prepare such bills with due correct ness, and so to prevent delay of business in the other House." To all this Colonel Mason replied, in the strong language which seems to have been natural to ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATIO.N BILLS. 567 him, that " he was unwilling to travel over the ground again. To strike out the section was to unhinge the compromise of which it made a part" (Hid. 394.) I might adduce other authorities ; but here surely is enough to show that the provision in question was in reality one of the important compromises of the Con stitution. And this brings me, sir, to the precise meaning of the provision. The seeming indefiniteness of the term, " bills for raising revenue," may, perhaps, furnish apology for the present effort. It may be argued that, while the Senate is placed under certain restrictions, it may, nevertheless, originate " appropriation bills." This, of course, is a question of interpretation. Does this interdict upon the Senate extend to the bills by which money is appropriated to the support of Govern ment, as well as to those bills by which it is directly obtained ? Are appropriation bills included under the term, " bills for raising revenue " ? Now, I cannot join with the opinions so confidently expressed by the Senator from Virginia, [Mr. Hunter,] and the Senator from Georgia, [Mr. Toombs,] that it was clearly the intention of the Constitution to concede to the Senate the power of originating all appropriation bills ; nor, on the other hand, do I assert that such exercise of power is in the strict sense constitutional. I approach the question as an inquirer, anxious to find the real purpose of the fathers. There are several considerations which seem to shed light on the path to our conclusion. First. The compromise between the small States and large States can be made completely effective, accord ing to the obvious intent of the authors of the Consti- 568 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. tution, only by interdicting the Senate from originating the great appropriation bills. If this interdict is re strained simply to the tariff bills, which occur only at rare intervals, it becomes a very inadequate compensa tion for the surrender made by the large States to the small States in the constitution of the Senate. Ac cording to the reason of the rule, the great appropri ation bills must be equally within its intendment. The reason is as strong in one case as in the other. In the debates of the Convention, Dr. Franklin said that, " as it had been asked what would be the use of restraining the second branch from meddling with money bills, he could not but remark, that it was al ways of importance that the people should know who had disposed of their money, and how it had been dis posed of. [Please, sir, to mark these words.] It was a maxim, that those who feel can best judge. This end would be best attained if money affairs were to be confined to the immediate representatives of the peo ple." (Eliot s Debates, vol. v. p. 284.) Mr. Gerry, in urging the restraint upon the Senate, said, " the other branch was more immediately the representatives of the people, and it was a maxim that the people ought to hold the purse strings." (Ibid. 188.) How. sir, can they hold the purse strings, unless they hold the bills by which the purse is appropriated ? And Colonel Mason broke forth in language which clearly reveals his sense of the danger against which we should guard. " If the Senate," said he, " can originate, they will, in the recess of the legislative sessions, hatch their mis chievous projects for their own purposes, and have their money bills cut and dried (to use a common phrase) for the meeting of the House of Representatives." (Ibid. ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. 569 415.) I repeat, then, according to the reason of the rule, the great appropriation bills must be embraced by the prohibition. Secondly. There is a second consideration, founded on the familiar use of the term money bills throughout the debates in the Convention, as applicable to the bills which the Senate cannot originate. I need not occupy time by reference to instances ; but whoever takes the trouble to investigate the matter in Mr. Madison s Re ports of the Debates, and also in the report of the Vir ginia Convention, will find that this term is universally employed, unless, indeed, where Mr. Gouverneur Morris uses the broader term "money plans," (Ibid. p. 282,) and Mr. Gerry "money matters." (Ibid. p. 283.) Now, all of these phrases are clearly applicable to " appropriation bills," by which the Government is carried on; and the inference seems irresistible, that the parties who used them must have had such bills in mind. In the Virginia Convention objection was made by Mr. Grayson " to the power of the Senate to propose or concur with amendments to money bills." He pro nounced this " a departure from that great principle which required that the immediate representatives of the people only should interfere with money bills. The Lords in England had never been allowed to meddle with money bills. He knew not why the Senate should." Eliot s Debates, vol. i. p. 375. Thirdly. And this brings me to a third considera tion, founded on the example of England, which was obviously in the minds of the framers of the Constitu tion. The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Hunter,] is clearly mistaken on this point. It was often adduced 570 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. in debate in the Federal Convention, and, as we have just seen, in the Virginia Convention also. In Eng land, the rule is explicit and of ancient date. As early as the 3d of July, 1678, the Commons resolved: " That all aids and supplies, and aids to his Majesty in Parlia ment, are the sole gift of the Commons ; and all bills for the granting of any such aids .and supplies ought to begin with the Commons ; and that it is the undoubted and sole right of the Com mons to direct, limit, and appoint, in such bills, the ends, purposes, considerations, limitations, and qualifications of such grants, which ought not to be changed or altered by the House of Lords." May s Law of Parliament, p. 407. In pursuance of this rule, the estimates for the an nual expenditure are submitted by the Ministry to the House of Commons, sitting as a committee of supply. This process is explained as follows : " The member of the Administration presenting the depart ment for which the supplies are required, first explains to the Committee such matters as may satisfy them of the correctness and propriety of the estimates, and then proceeds to propose each grant in succession, which is put from the Chair in these words : < That a sum not exceeding be granted to her Majesty, for the object specified in the estimate. * * * The Committee of Supply votes every sum which is granted annually for the public service the army, the navy, the ordnance, and the sev eral civil departments." Ibid. pp. 415 and 418. And at the close of the session all the grants are embodied in a bill, which is known as the " appropria tion bill ; " and which, as it is kindred in character to that under our system, doubtless has given its name to ours. This bill is thus described : " It enumerates every grant that has been made during the whole session, and authorizes the several sums, as voted by the Committee of supply, to be issued and applied to each service." Ibid. p. 425. ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. 571 Thus, on three accounts first, by the reason of the thing ; secondly, by the familiar use of the descriptive term, " money bills," in all the debates; and thirdly, by the example of England the conclusion seems irresistible, that " appropriation bills," by which the Government is carried on, are within the spirit of the interdict upon the Senate, and that this body cannot originate such bills without a violation of a well-estab lished principle, inherited from English jurisprudence, and also without unhinging, according to the language of Colonel Mason, in the Federal Convention, that com promise, by virtue of which the small States are ad mitted to an equality of representation on this floor. I am not unmindful of the fact, on which the Sena tor from Virginia has dwelt so emphatically, that the Senate has been in the habit of originating pension bills, bills for the payment of private claims, and kindred measures. I was glad, to-day, in voting for the bill originating in this body for the relief of our late distin guished Minister at Constantinople. But, against this usage; which is exceptional in character, and which has probably attracted little attention, from its considerable convenience and little importance, may be opposed the uniform usage, that the great bills providing for the necessities of the Government have always originated in the House of Representatives. And you will bear in mind, sir, that the question is now on these bills. Mr. President, it is a received maxim, that it is the part of a good judge to amplify his jurisdiction ; but it will hardly be accepted, that it is the part of the American Senate to amplify its powers, particularly in derogation of the popular branch. And it surely can not escape observation, that the present effort is 572 ORIGINATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS. launched at a moment when the popular branch prom ises to differ from the Senate on important questions of national policy. I am not insensible to the public convenience which has been pressed in this debate ; but permit me to say, that should this convenience require the proposed departure from our standing pol icy* y ou - will be wise, sir, if you hearken to the coun sels of the Senator from New York, and refrain from any innovation, unless assured of the consent and co operation of the other House. THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 6TH MARCH, 1856. MR. SUMNER. A week ago, I laid on the table of the Senate a resolution relating to the Danish Sound dues. I have watched every day since for an opportu nity to call for its consideration ; and, if agreeable to the Senate, I now ask that it may be taken up. The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution, which is in these words : Resolved, That the Committee on Foreign Relations be directed to consider the expediency of some act of legislation, having the concurrence of both Houses of Congress, by which the treaty with Denmark, regulating the payment of Sound dues, may be effectively abrogated, in conformity with the requirements of the Constitution, under which every treaty is a part of " the supreme law of the land," and in conformity with the practice of the Gov ernment in such cases ; and especially to consider if such legisla tion be not necessary forthwith, in order to supply a defect in the notice of the purpose of the United States to abrogate the said treaty, which the President has undertaken to give to Denmark, without the authority of an act of Congress, and in disregard of the function of the House of Representatives, in the abrogation of -all existing laws. [573] 574 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. MR. SUMNER. Mr. President, if I can have the attention of the Senate for a brief time, I will explain the object of this inquiry. The question may be dry, but it is important, and, at this moment, of direct prac tical interest. The President, in his annual message, called atten tion to three different questions, arising out of our re lations with foreign nations. Two of these, concern ing England, have been discussed in the Senate ; the other, which concerns the payment of the Sound dues to Denmark, has not yet been mentioned here. In in troducing it now, I have no purpose to say any thing as to the character of these dues, or to arrest the efforts of the Government for the relief of our commerce from foreign exactions. That is a broad field of history and of public law, which, for the present, there is no occa sion to enter. My desire is simply to open to you a question of domestic interest under our own Constitu tion, with which, of course, Denmark has nothing to do, but which is necessarily involved in the determina tion of our course on this matter. The President, in his annual message, announces that " In pursuance of the authority conferred by a resolution of the Senate of the United States, passed on the 3d of March last, notice was given to Denmark, on the 14th day of April, of the intention of this Government to avail itself of the stipulations of the subsisting convention of friendship, commerce, and naviga tion, between that kingdom and the United States, whereby either party might, after ten years, terminate the same at the expiration of one year from the date of notice for that purpose." The treaty, it will be noted, reserves to either party that is, to either of the governments between whom THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 575 it is made the privilege of terminating it by notice ; and the President, without the sanction of an act of Congress, but simply in pursuance of a resolution of the Senate, passed in Executive session, lias constituted himself the Government, so far as to give such notice, and by such notice to abrogate the treaty. Acting un der his instructions, our Minister at Copenhagen, on the 14th April, 1855, notified to the Danish Govern ment that "After the expiration of one year from the date of this com munication, the United States will regard the general convention of friendship, commerce, and navigation, agreed upon by Den mark and themselves on the 26th of April, 1826, as finally abro gated, .and that after that period its provisions will not be binding upon our Government." In thus undertaking, merely with the consent of the Senate, and without the cooperation of the House of Representatives, to abrogate a treaty, the President has assumed a power inconsistent with the Constitution, and disowned by the practice of the government, adopted after debate on leading occasions. Of course, such a usurpation cannot be justified by the good that is sought ; for that good might have been sought, and may still be sought, by another course, in entire har mony with the Constitution and the practice of the Government. Nor is it safe for any temporary purpose to remove constitutional landmarks. The Constitution has declared, that " the President shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senate concur ; " but it has not declared that the President, by and with the consent of the Senate, shall have power to abrogate treaties. The absence of all 576 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. language conferring this extraordinary power is itself an unanswerable argument against the existence of the power. But we are not left to found our conclusion even on irresistible inference. There are explicit words of the Constitution, which determine it beyond doubt. It is declared that " This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, AND ALL TREATIES MADE, or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, SHALL BE THE SUPREME LAW OP THE LAND." Art. VI. In thus declaring treaties to be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution not only gives to them the highest authority, but places them under the highest safeguards known to our institutions. When once made, they are obligatory on our side as laws, and can be abrogated by no power less than that which may abrogate existing laws. Not the President alone not the President and Senate can set them aside ; but for this purpose the whole power of the government must be invoked, in its most solemn form, by act of Congress. In conformity with this requirement, the power to declare war, involving, of course, the abroga tion of treaties, is expressly lodged with Congress. The President, with the consent of the Senate, cannot declare war ; and it is difficult to see what greater pow er he possesses in the abrogation of an existing treaty, involving possibly the rupture of friendly relations with a foreign State, and involving certainly the overthrow of what the Constitution has declared to be the supreme law. In thus placing treaties under all the sanctions of laws, I follow the best authorities. The eminent com mentator, Mr. Justice Story, in speaking of them, gives THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 577 to them this character. In his exposition of this very clause, he says : * It is therefore indispensable that they should have the obli gation and force of a law, that they may be executed by the ju dicial power, and be obeyed like other laws. This will not prevent them from being cancelled or abrogated by the nation, upon grave and suitable occasions ; for it will not be disputed that they are subject to the legislative power, and may be repealed, like other laws, at its pleasure*" Story s Comm. on Const. t sec. 1838. And the Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed the same principle : " A treaty is in its nature a contract between two nations, not a legislative act." * * * "In the United States a different prin ciple is established. Our Constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is consequently to be regarded by courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the Legislature, wherever it oper ates of itself, without the aid of any legislative provision." Foster vs. Netlson, 2 Peters, Supreme Court Reports, 314. This is a decision comparatively recent. But early in our history the authority of treaties was much con sidered by the Supreme Court, in the famous case of Ware vs. Hylton, 3 Dallas, 260, and we find judges from opposite sections of the country arriving at the same conclusion. Mr. Justice Gushing, of Massachu setts, said: " The treaty is of equal force with the Constitution itself, and certainly with any law whatever." And Mr. Justice Iredell, of North Carolina, passed directly upon the power of Congress, asserting that to this body alone was given the power to abrogate a treaty under our Constitution. These are his words : " It is a part of the law of nations, that if a treaty be violated 49 578 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. by one party, it is at the option of the other party, if innocent, to declare, in consequence of the breach, that the treaty is void. If Congress, therefore, who, I conceive, alone have such authority under our Government, shall make such a declaration in any case like the present, I shall deem it my duty to regard the treaty as void." Ware vs. Hylton, 3 Dallas, 260. In practical illustration of this position of treaties, it will be observed that they are published with the Laws of the United States, and constitute a part of this collection, being bound between the same covers ; and I submit that the President and Senate might under take to tear out a leaf from the Statutes at Large with as much propriety as tear out an existing treaty. Such is the rule of the Constitution, in conformity with which has been the practice of the country. Never before has the President assumed to act without the House of Representatives in the performance of this high duty. This question arose early after the adoption of the Constitution, in our relations with France ; and you will find, sir, on our statute book the evidence of the way in which it was regarded. In 1798, the existing treaties with France were abrogated by act of Con gress, which, after a preamble, proceeded as follows : " Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the United States are of right freed and exonerated from the stipula tions of the treaties, and of the consular convention heretofore concluded between the United States and France, and that the same shall not be henceforth regarded as legally obligatory on the Government or citizens of the United States." 1 United States Statutes at Large, 678. And this very act of Congress originated in the Sen ate, which in that day undertook to exercise no such THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 579 power as is now claimed. It was not passed hastily, or without debate. The subject of our relations with France was referred to a committee of that body on the 29th November, 1797. After the lapse of months, on the 21st Juue, 1798, Mr. Goodhue, from that commit tee, reported a bill to abrogate existing treaties with that nation, which passed the Senate on the 23d June, by a vote of thirteen yeas to five nays. On the next day it was carried to the House of Representatives, where it was referred to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, there fully debated, and finally passed on the 6th of July. In the course of the debate, treaties were recognized as laws, to be abrogated only by act of Congress. A Representative from Mas sachusetts, afterwards an eminent judicial character, Mr. Sewell, put this point in these words : " It is certainly a novel doctrine to pass a law declaring a treaty void ; but the necessity arose from the peculiar situation of the country. In most countries, it is in the power of the Chief Magistrate to suspend a treaty whenever he thinks proper. Here Congress only has that power." Annals of Congress, l797- 99, p. 2120. This view was in no respect controverted or ques tioned. On the contrary, it was recognized by the whole debate. Mr. Dana, of Connecticut, said : " France has violated the faith pledged by Jier treaties with America. This, by the law of nations, puts it within the option of the Legislature to decide, as a question of expediency, whether the United States shall any longer continue to observe their stip ulations." Ibid. p. 2123. Mr. Gallatin, whose position in our public affairs was afterwards so justly distinguished, employed the very language applicable to laws, when he spoke of the proposed abrogation of the treaty as a repeal : 580 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. " He knew of no precedent of a Legislature repealing a treaty. It is, therefore, an act of a peculiar kind, and it appeared to him necessary that Congress should justify it by a declaration of their reasons." * * * " It is not sufficient to say that, because a treaty has been violated, we will repeal it." Ibid. p. 2126. Such is the first and leading precedent in our histo ry. The next is more recent, and of hardly less im portance. It was the notice to Great Britain of the termination of the convention of 1827, relating to the joint occupancy of certain parts of Oregon. This was not done by the President, with the advice of the Sen ate in secret session ; but by act of Congress. Pres ident Polk, in his annual message of 2d of December, 1845, called upon Congress to act. These are his words : " Under that convention, a year s notice is required to be given by either party to the other, before the joint occupancy shall ter minate, and before either can rightfully assert or exercise exclusive jurisdiction over any portion of the territory. This notice it would, in my judgment, be proper to give : and I recommend that provision be made by law for giving it accordingly, and terminat ing in this manner the convention of 6th August, 1827." In pursuance of this recommendation, provision was made by law for this notice. You will remember, sir, the debate which for months occupied both Houses of Congress, and which was closed by the passage of a joint resolution, approved 27th April, 1846 ; which, after a preamble, proceeds as follows : <{ Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Presi dent of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized, at his discretion, to give to the Government of Great Britain the notice required by the second article of the said convention of the 6th of August, 1827, for the abrogation of the same." 9 United States Statutes at Large, p. 108. THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 581 This instance is particularly in point ; for the treaty was terminated, in accordance with its stipulations, by notice from the United States precisely as it is now proposed to terminate the treaty with Denmark. And the notice given to Great Britain, with regard to the treaty, is declared to be "for the abrogation of the same." Such, sir, is the rule of the Constitution, sustained by authoritative precedents, in the abrogation of suc cessive treaties with two powerful nations, France and Great Britain. Surely there cannot be one rule for large States and another for small States ; nor will any one argue that a treaty with France or Great Britain can be abrogated only by act of Congress, but a treaty with Denmark may be abrogated by the President with out an act of Congress. And yet, in apparent harmony with this fallacious distinction, the Executive, merely with the consent of the Senate, obtained in secret ses sion, has assumed to abrogate a treaty with the weaker State of Denmark ; and has given notice that this ab rogation will take effect on the ensuing 14th of April. Not content with- the treaty -making power which it possesses under the Constitution, it has now assumed the treaty-abrogating power, which it does not possess. And this assumption becomes more objectionable when it is considered how completely it excludes the House of Representatives from an important function in the Government. Louis XIV., in the pride of conscious power, exclaimed, " I am the State ; " and permit me to say, that our own Executive, undertaking to act in this matter without the sanction of Congress, effective ly makes the same declaration. To the Senate is justly given large powers ; but it now assumes more. Only 49* 582 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. lately it authorized the organization of the great ap propriation bills, constituting the mainspring of the Government, in defiance of the uninterrupted usage of Congress, and, as I submit, of the spirit of the Con stitution. What next, sir ? " Cawdor thou art, and Glainis ! " And where, sir, in this career of aggran dizement, will you stop ? Whatever may be the merits of the existing contro versy with Denmark, I trust that the President will not clutch at the promised fruits so eagerly as to dis regard the requirements of the Constitution, and the voice of the popular branch, in the repeal of an exist ing law. In vain you will urge the good accomplished. To do even a great right, it is not safe to do even a little wrong. At all events, I call attention to this ex traordinary assumption, that it may not be recorded for a precedent. I call attention to it, also, that the needful steps may be taken forthwith, in order to make effective the notice which has been given, without due authority under the Constitution. The treaty with Denmark is at this moment a part of the supreme law of the land, and can be abrogated only by act of Con gress. A debate ensued, in which the conclusions of Mr. SUMXER were maintained by Mr. Seward of New York, Mr. Fesscnden of Maine, Mr. Collamer of Vermont, Mr. Crittenden of Ken tucky, and Mr. Stuart of Michigan ; and controverted by Mr. Mason of Virginia, Mr. Toucey of Connecticut, and Mr. Cass of Michigan. Mr. Mason proposed to amend the pending reso lution by striking out the second clause, which amendment Mr. SUMNER at once accepted, and closed the debate, as follows: Mr. SUMNEE. My desire is simply to bring this matter before the committee, and, in order to accom- THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 583 plish this, I shall not stand on the form of the resolu tion. I am aware that it is argumentative, and in volves, perhaps, a reflection upon the course of the Executive ; but I adopted this form from a desire that the resolution should tell its whole story on its face, and speak for itself. The ample debate that has oc curred has superseded all such desire. The subject is fully before the Senate, and I doubt not will receive the attention of the committee. In introducing this question, I remarked that it was of domestic concern imder our own Constitution, with which, of course, Denmark has nothing to do. All references, therefore, to that Power have been super fluous, if not illogical. Her consent is not sought in the proposed termination of the treaty. On the con trary, it will be terminated against her known desires. We are to look for our rule of conduct to our own Constitution. This I assume as an undeniable pos tulate. The discussion, though protracted, has not been un profitable ; but at each stage we have been brought back to the clear and unmistakable distinction between the power to make treaties, and the power to abrogate them, under our Constitution. The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, may make treaties ; but there is nothing in the Constitution con ferring upon them the power to abrogate treaties. To attribute to them any such power is to go beyond the Constitution. Nor has any Senator here distinctly, and in terms, claimed for them this power. On the contrary, I think that the Senators on the other side both the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Connecticut admit that a treaty cannot be abrogated, 584 THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. except by virtue of an act of Congress. I understood the Senator from Connecticut to make this admission, and I believe the Senator from Virginia did also. Mr. MASON here nodded assent. Mr. TOTTCEY. I mean, except by act of Congress, or a new treaty. Mr. SUMNER. But I put aside the whole idea of a new treaty, constituting in itself a new transaction, and involving the concurrence of the foreign Power. The President and Senate, with the concurrence of a foreign Power, may, of course, make a new treaty ; but we are now dealing with the case where the whole proceeding is without any such concurrence. The question does not turn on the treaty-making power, but on the trea ty-abrogating power. And I come back again to the admission of both Senators, that a treaty can be abro gated only by act of Congress. This admission is im portant, and, as it seems to me, conclusive. But here a distinction is made by these Senators be tween treaties which contain no provision for their ter mination, and treaties which contain such provision. And I understand the Senator from Virginia to main tain that a treaty terminated in pursuance of such a provision is not abrogated. This is strange ; for, in both cases, the treaty is brought to an end by our spe cial intervention ; and this is done without the concur rence of the other contracting party. If this is not the abrogation of a treaty, I do not see what can be. You may, if you choose, call it by a softer term, but still it is the same thing. The treaty is invalidated, or made to cease. But I will not argue this question. I submit to Senators opposite, who have maintained their views with so much constancy, that their position is not THE ABROGATION OF TREATIES. 585 tenable ; I say this frankly, but with entire respect for their learning and ability. The same power must be involved under our Constitution to terminate a treaty which contains a provision for its termination, on no tice from either party, as to terminate a treaty which contains no such provision ; and in both cases the treaty may properly be said to be abrogated. The sin gle distinction between the two cases is, that the treaty in one case is abrogated in defiance of the other party, and, perhaps, on hostile ground ; while in the other case it is abrogated in pursuance of a power specially reserved, and therefore without any just cause of of fence ; but in both cases the life of the treaty is de stroyed by our act. Permit me to add, that the dis tinction made between these two classes of treaties is a distinction without a difference, and the admission that a treaty can be abrogated only by act of Con gress is as applicable to one class as to another. It settles the question. I rest, then, confidently on the conclusion, that a treaty is a part of the supreme law of the land, and cannot be set aside, terminated, (superseded, dis claimed,) repealed, or abrogated, except by the exercise of the highest power known to the Constitution, em bodying the collected will of the whole people in a legislative act, under the sanction of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Con gress assembled. The resolution, as modified, was adopted. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS. THE APOLOGIES FOR THE CRIME. THE TRUE REMEDY. SPEECH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 19TH AND 20TH MAY, 1856, ON ME. DOUGLAS S REPORT ON AFFAIRS IN KANSAS. In the Senate, 13th March, 1856, Mr. Douglas, from the Com mittee on Territories, presented and read a very long Report on affairs in Kansas. Mr. Collamer also presented and read a Mi nority Report. As soon as the reading was completed, Mr. Sum- ner took the floor, and made the following remarks : MR. SUMNER. In those two reports the whole sub ject is presented characteristically on both sides. In the report of the majority the true issue is smothered; in that of the minority the true issue stands forth as a pillar of fire to guide the country. The first report proceeds from four Senators ; but against it I put, fearlessly, the report signed by a single Senator, [Mr. Collamer,] to whom I offer my thanks for this service. Let the two go abroad together. Error is harmless while reason is left free to combat it. I have no desire to precipitate the debate on this important question, under which the country already shakes from side to side, and which threatens to scat ter from its folds civil war. Nor, indeed, am I dis- [586] THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 587 posed to enter upon it until I have had the opportu nity of seeing in print the elaborate documents which have been read to us to-day. But I cannot allow the subject to pass away, even for this hour, without repel ling at once, distinctly and unequivocally, the assault which has been made upon the Emigrant Aid Com pany of Massachusetts. That Company has done nothing for which it can be condemned under the laws and constitution of the land. These it has not offend ed in letter or spirit ; not in the slightest letter or in the remotest spirit. It is true it has sent men to Kansas ; and had it not a right to send them ? It is true, I trust, that its agents love Freedom and hate Slavery ; and have they not a right to do so ? Their offence has this extent, and nothing more. Sir, to the whole arraignment of that Company, in the report of the Committee on Territories, I now for them plead " Not guilty ! " and confidently appeal to the country for that honorable acquittal which is due to their patriot services. The outrages in Kansas are vindicated or extenuated by the alleged misconduct of the Emigrant Aid Com pany. Very well, sir ; a bad cause is naturally staked on untenable ground. You cannot show the miscon duct. Any such allegation will fail. And you now begin your game with loaded dice. Afterwards, 19th March, Mr. Douglas introduced "A Bill to authorize the people of the Territory of Kansas to form a Consti tution and State Government, and to provide for their admission into the Union when they have the requisite population." Sub sequently, Mr. Seward moved, by way of substitute, another Bill, providing for immediate action, and entitled, " A Bill for the admission of the State of Kansas into the Union." Debate 588 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. ensued, and was continued, by adjournment, from time to time. In the course of this debate, on the 19th and 20th May, Mr. Sumner made the following speech : MR. PRESIDENT : You are now called to redress a great transgression. Seldom in the history of nations has such a question been presented. Tariffs, army bills, navy bills, land bills, are important, and justly occupy your care ; but these all belong to the course of ordinary legislation. As means and instruments only, they are necessarily subordinate to the conserva tion of Government itself. Grant them or deny them, in greater or less degree, and you will inflict no shock. The machinery of Government will continue to move. The State will not cease to exist. Far otherwise is it with the eminent question now before you, involving, as it does, Liberty in a broad Territory, and also involving the peace of the whole country with our good name in history forevermore. Take down your map, sir, and you will find that the Territory of Kansas, more than any other region, occu pies the middle spot of North America, equally distant from the Atlantic on the east and the Pacific on the west ; from the frozen waters of Hudson s Bay on the north and the tepid Gulf Stream on the south con stituting the precise territorial centre of the whole vast Continent. To such advantages of situation, on the very highway between two oceans, are added a soil of unsurpassed richness, and a fascinating, undulating beauty of surface, with a health-giving climate, cal culated to nurture a powerful and generous people, worthy to be a central pivot of American Institutions. A few short months only have passed since this spa cious mediterranean country was open only to the THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 589 savage, who ran wild in its woods and prairies ; and now it has already drawn to its bosom a population of freemen larger than Athens crowded within her historic gates when her sons, under Miltiades, won lib erty for mankind on the field of Marathon ; more than Sparta contained when she ruled Greece, and sent forth her devoted children, quickened by a mother s benedic tion, to return with their shields or on them; more than Rome gathered on her seven hills, when, under her kings, she commenced that sovereign sway which afterwards embraced the whole earth ; more than Lon don held, when, on the fields of Crecy and Agincourt, the English banner was carried victoriously over the chivalrous hosts of France. Against this Territory, thus fortunate in position and population, a Crime has been committed, which is without example in the records of the Past. Not in plundered provinces or in the cruelties of selfish gov ernors will you find its parallel ; and yet there is an ancient instance which may show at least the path of justice. In the terrible impeachment by which the great Roman Orator has blasted through all time the name of Verres, amidst charges of robbery and sacri lege, the enormity which most aroused the indignant, voice of his accuser, and which still stands forth with strongest distinctness, arresting the sympathetic indig nation of all who read the story, is, that away in Sicily he had scourged a citizen of Rome ; that the cry, " I am a Roman citizen ! " had been interposed in vain against the lash of the tyrant governoj . Other charges were, that he had carried away productions of art, and that he had violated the sacred shrines. It was in the presence of the Roman Senate that this arraign- 50 590 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. ment proceeded ; in a temple of the Forum ; amidst crowds such as no orator had ever before drawn to gether, thronging the porticos and colonnades, even clinging to the house tops and neighboring slopes, and under the anxious gaze of witnesses summoned from the scene of crime. But an audience grander far, of higher dignity, of more various people, and of wider intelligence the countless multitude of succeeding generations, in every land where eloquence has been studied, or where the Roman name has been recog nised has listened to the accusation, and throbbed with condemnation of the criminal. Sir, speaking in an age of light, and in a land of constitutional lib erty, where the safeguards of elections are justly placed among the highest triumphs of civilization, I fearlessly assert that the wrongs of much-abused Sicily, thus memorable in history, were small by the side of the wrongs of Kansas, where the very shrines of pop ular institutions, more sacred than any heathen altar, have been desecrated; where the ballot box, more precious than any work, in ivory or marble, from the cunning hand of art, has been plundered ; and where the cry, " I am an American citizen ! " has been inter posed in vain against outrage of every kind, even upon life itself. Are you against sacrilege ? I present it for your execration. Are you against robbery? I hold it up to your scorn. Are you for the protection of American citizens ? I show you how their dearest rights have been cloven down, while a Tyrannical Usurpation has sought to instal itself on their very ne.cks ! t the wickedness which I now begin to expose is immeasurably aggravated by the motive which THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 591 prompted it. Not in any common lust for power did this uncommon tragedy have its origin. It is the rape of a virgin Territory, compelling it to the hateful em brace "of Slavery ; and it may be clearly traced to a depraved longing for a new slave S$ate, the hideous offspring of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the power of Slavery in the National Government. Yes, sir, when the whole world, alike Christian and Turk, is rising up to condemn this wrong, and to make it a hiesing to the nations, here in our Republic, force ay, sir, FORCE has been openly employed in com pelling Kansas to this pollution, and all for the sake of political power. There is the simple fact, which you will vainly attempt to deny, but which in itself presents an essential wickedness that makes other public crimes seem like public virtues. But this enormity, vast beyond comparison, swells to dimensions of wickedness which the imagination toils in vain to grasp, when it is understood that for this purpose are hazarded the horrors of intestine feud, not only in this distant Territory, but every where throughout the country. Already the muster has begun. The strife is no longer local, but national. Even now, while I speak, portents hang on all the arches of the horizon, threatening to darken the broaci land, which already yawns with the mutterings of civil war. The fury of the propagandists of Slavery, and the calm determination of their opponents, are now diffused from the distant Territory over wide-spread communities and the whole country, in all its extent ; marshalling hostile divisions, and foreshadowing a strife which, unless happily averted by the triumph of Freedom, will becorna war fratricidal, parricidal 592 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. W ar with an accumulated wickedness beyond the wickedness of any war in human annals, justly pro voking the avenging judgment of Providence and the avenging pen of history, and constituting a strife, in the language of the ancient writer, more than foreign, more than social, more than civil, but something com pounded of all these strifes, and in itself more than war ; sed potius commune quoddam ex omnibus, et plus quam lellum. Such is the Crime which you are to judge. But the criminal also must be dragged into day, that you may see and measure the power by which all this wrong is sustained. From no common source could it proceed. In its perpetration was needed a spirit of vaulting ambition which would hesitate at nothing ; a hardihood of purpose which was insensible to the judgment of mankind ; a madness for Slavery which should disregard the Constitution, the laws, and all the great examples of our history ; also a conscious ness of power such as comes from the habit of power ; a combination of energies found only in a hundred arms directed by a hundred eyes ; a control of Public Opinion through venal pens and a prostituted press ; an ability to subsidize crowds in every vocation of life the politician with his local importance, the lawyer with his subtle tongue, and even the authority of the judge on the bench ; and a familiar use of men in places high and low, so that none, from the Presi dent to the lowest border postmaster, should decline to be its tool ; all these things and more were needed, and they were found in the Slave Power of our Repub lic. There, sir, stands the criminal all unmasked before you, heartless, grasping, and tyrannical, with an THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 593 audacity beyond that of Verres, a subtlety beyond that of Machiavel, a meanness beyond that of Bacon, and an ability beyond that of Hastings. Justice to Kansas can be secured only by the prostration of this influ ence ; for this is the Power behind greater than any President which succors and sustains the Crime. Nay, the proceedings I now arraign derive their fear ful consequence only from this connection. In now opening this great matter, I am not insensi ble to the austere demands of the occasion; but the dependence of the Crime against Kansas upon the Slave Power is so peculiar and important that I trust to be pardoned while I impress it by an illustration which to some may seem trivial. It is related in northern mythology that the god of Force, visiting an enchanted region, was challenged by his royal enter tainer to what seemed a humble feat of strength merely, sir, to lift a cat from the ground. The* god smiled at the challenge, and calmly placing his hand under the belly of the animal, with superhuman strength strove, while the back of the feline monster arched far upwards, even beyond reach, and one paw actually for sook the earth, until at last the discomfited divinity desisted ; but he was little surprised at his defeat when he learned that this creature, which seemed to be a cat, and nothing more, was not merely a cat, but that it belonged to and was a part of the great Terrestrial Serpent which, in its innumerable folds, encircled the whole globe. Even so the creature whose paws are now fastened upon Kansas, whatever it may seem to be, constitutes in reality a part of the Slave Power, which, with loathsome folds, is now coiled about the whole land. Thus do I expose the extent of the pres- 594 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. ent contest, where we encounter not merely local resistance, but also the unconquered sustaining arm behind. But out of the vastness of the Crime attempt ed, with all its woe and shame, I derive a well-founded assurance of a commensurate vastness of effort against it by the aroused masses of the country, determined not only to vindicate Right against Wrong, but to redeem the Republic from the thraldom of that Oli garchy which prompts, directs, and concentrates the distant wrong. ( Such is the Crime, and such the criminal, which it is my duty in this debate to expose ; and, by the bless ing of God, this duty shall be done completely to the end. But this will not be enough. The Apologies which, with strange hardihood, have been offered for the Crime must be torn away, so that it shall stand forth without a single rag or fig leaf to cover its vile- ness. And, finally, the True Remedy must be shown. The subject is complex in its relations, as it is tran scendent in importance ; and yet, if I am honored by your attention, I hope to exhibit it clearly in all its parts, while I conduct you to the inevitable conclusion that Kansas must be admitted at once, with her pres ent Constitution, as a State of this Union, and give a new star to the blue field of our National Flag. And here I derive satisfaction from the thought that the cause is so strong in itself as to bear even the infirmi ties of its advocates ; nor can it require any thing beyond that simplicity of treatment and moderation of manner which I desire to cultivate. Its true char acter is such, that, like Hercules, it will conquer just so soon as it is recognized. My task will be divided under three different heads : THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 595 first, THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS, in its origin and extent ; secondly, THE APOLOGIES FOE THE CEIME ; and thirdly, THE TETJE REMEDY. But, before entering upon the argument, I must say something of a general character, particularly in re sponse to what has fallen from Senators who have raised themselves to eminence on this floor in championship of human wrongs : I mean the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. Butler,] and the Senator from Illi nois, [Mr. Douglas,] who, though unlike as Don Quix ote and Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally forth / together in the same adventure. I regret much to miss the elder Senator from his seat ; but the cause, against which he has run a tilt, with such activity of animosity, demands that the opportunity of exposing him should not be lost ; and it is for the cause that I speak. The Senator from South jCarqlina^h.as read many books of chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight, Avith sentiments of honor and courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to whomlic has made his vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the worTcT is chaste in his sight i mean the harlot, Slavery. J? or ner Ms tongue is always profuse in words. Let her 436 im peached in character, or any proposition made to shut her out from the extension of her wantonness , and no eltravagancie" of manner or hardihood of assertion is thetf^toogreat for this Senator. The frenzy of Don Quixote, in behalf of his wench Dulcinea del Toboso, is all surpassed. The asserted rights of Slavery, which shock equality of all kinds, are cloked by a fantastic claim of equality. If the slave States cannot enjoy what, in mockery of the great fathers of the Republic, 596 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. he misnames equality under the Constitution in other words, the full power in the National Territories to compel fellow-men to unpaid toil, to separate husband and wife, and to sell little children at the auction block then, sir, the chivalric Senator will conduct the State of South Carolina out of the Union ! Heroic knight ! Exalted Senator ! A second Moses come for a second exodus ! * But not content with this poor menace, which we have been twice told was " measured," the Senator, in the unrestrained chivalry of his nature, has undertaken to apply opprobrious words to those who differ from him on this floor, He calls them " sectional and fanati cal; " and opposition to the usurpation of Kansas he denounces as " an uncalculating fanaticism." To be sure, these charges lack all grace of originality, and all sentiment of truth ; but the adventurous Senator does not hesitate. He is the uncompromising, unblushing representative on this floor of a flagrant sectionalism, which now domineers over the Republic, and yet with a ludicrous ignorance of his own position unable to see himself as others see him or with an effrontery which even his white head ought not to protect from rebuke, he applies to those here who resist his section alism the very epithet which designates himself. The men who strive to bring back the Government to its original policy, when Freedom and not Slavery was national, while Slavery and not Freedom was sectional, he arraigns as sectional. This will not do. It involves too great a perversion of terms. I tell that Senator, that it is to himself, and to the " organization " of which he is the " committed advocate," that this epithet belongs. I now fasten it upon them. For myself, I THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 597 care little for names ; but since the question has been raised here, I affirm that the Republican party of the Union is in no just sense sectional, but, more than any other party, national; and that it now goes forth to dislodge from the high places of the Government the tyrannical sectionalism of which the Senator from South Carolina is one of the maddest zealots. To the charge of fanaticism I also reply. Sir, fanat icism is found in an enthusiasm or exaggeration of opinions, particularly on religious subjects ; but there may be a fanaticism for evil as well as for good. Now, I will not deny that there are persons among us loving Liberty too well for their personal good, in a selfish generation. Such there may be ; and, for the sake of their example, would that there were more ! In calling them " fanatics," you cast contumely upon the noble army of martyrs, from the earliest day down to this hour ; upon the great tribunes of human rights, by whom life, liberty, and happiness, on earth, have been secured; upon the long line of devoted patriots, who, throughout history, have truly loved their country ; and upon all who, in noble aspirations for the general good and in forgetfulness of self, have stood out before their age, and gathered into their generous bosoms the shafts of tyranny and wrong, in order to make a path way for Truth. You discredit Luther, when alone he nailed his articles to the door of the church at Witten berg, and then, to the imperial demand that he should retract, firmly replied, "Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God ! " You discredit Hampden, when alone he refused to pay the few shillings of ship money, and shook the throne of Charles I. ; you dis credit Milton, when, amidst the corruptions of a heart- 598 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. less Court, he lived on, the lofty friend of .Liberty, above question or suspicion ; you discredit Russell and Sidney, when, for the sake of their country, they calmly turned from family and friends, to tread the narrow steps of the scaffold ; you discredit those early found ers of American institutions, who preferred the hard ships of a wilderness, surrounded by a savage foe, to injustice on beds of ease; you discredit our later fathers, who, few in numbers and weak in resources, yet strong in their cause, did not hesitate to brave the mighty power of England, already encircling the globe with her morning drum-beats. Yes, sir, of such are the fanatics of history, according to the Senator. But I tell that Senator, that there are characters badly em inent, of whose fanaticism there can be no question. Such were the ancient Egyptians, who worshipped di vinities in brutish forms ; the Druids, who darkened the forests of oak, in which they lived, by sacrifices .of blood ; the Mexicans, who surrendered countless vic tims to the propitiation of their obscene idols ; the Spaniards, who, under Alva, sought to force the Inqui sition upon Holland, by a tyranny kindred to that now employed to force Slavery upon Kansas ; and such were the Algerines, when in solemn conclave, after listening to a speech not unlike that of the Senator from South Carolina, they resolved to continue the slavery of white Christians, and to extend it to the countrymen of Washington ! Ay, sir, extend it ! And in this same dreary catalogue faithful history must record all who now, in an enlightened age and in a land of boasted Freedom, stand up, in perversion of the Constitution and in denial of immortal truth, to fasten a new shackle upon their fellow-man. IfJ^ie ^Senator wishes tojsee THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. fanatics T let him look round among his own associates : let Jinn But I have not done with the Senator. There is another matter regarded by him of such consequence that he interpolated it into the speech of the Senator from New Hampshire, [Mr. Hale,] and also an nounced that he had prepared himself with it, to take in his pocket all the way to Boston, when he expected to address the people of that community. On this ac count, and for the sake of truth, I stop for one mome and tread it to the earth. The North, according to the Senator, was engaged in the slave trade, and helped to introduce slaves into the Southern States ; and this un deniable fact he proposed to establish by statistics, in stating which his errors surpassed his sentences in number. But I let these pass for the present, that may deal with his argument. Pray, sir, is the ac knowledged turpitude of a departed generation to be come an example for us ? And yet the suggestion of the Senator, if entitled to any consideration in this discussion, must have this extent. I join my friend from New Hampshire in thanking the Senator from South Carolina for adducing this instance ; for it gives me an opportunity to say that the Northern merchants, with homes in Boston, Bristol, Newport, New York, and Philadelphia, who catered for Slavery during the years of the slave trade, are the lineal progenitors of the Northern men, with homes in these places, who lend themselves to Slavery in our day ; and especially that all, whether North or South, who take part, di rectly or indirectly, in the conspiracy against Kansas, do but continue the work of the slave traders, which you condemn. It is true, too true, alas ! that our fa- 600 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. thers were engaged in this traffic ; but that is no apol ogy for it. And in repelling th authority of this ex ample, I repel also the trite argument founded on the earlier example of England. It is true that our mother country, at the peace of Utrecht, extorted from Spain the Assiento Contract, securing the monopoly of the slave trade with the Spanish Colonies, as the whole price of all the blood of great victories ; that she hig gled at Aix-la-Chapelle for another lease of this exclu sive traffic ; and again, at the treaty of Madrid, clung to the wretched piracy. It is true, that in this spirit the power of the mother country was prostituted to the same base ends in her American Colonies, against in dignant protests from our fathers. All these things now rise up in judgment against her. Let us not fol low the Senator from South Carolina to do the very evil to-day which in another generation we condemn. As the Senator from South Carolina is the Don Quixote, the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] is the squire of Slavery, its very Sancho Panza, ready to do all its humiliating offices. This Senator, in his la bored address, vindicating his labored report piling one mass of elaborate error upon another mass con strained himself, as you will remember, to unfamiliar decencies of speech. Of that address I have nothing to say at this moment, though before I sit down I shall show something of its fallacies. But I go back now to an earlier occasion, when, true to his native impulses, he threw into this discussion, " for a charm of power ful trouble," personalities most discreditable to this body. I will not stop to repel the imputations which he cast upon myself; but I mention them to remind you of the " sweltered venom sleeping got," which, THE CHIME AGAINST KAXSAS, ETC. 601 with other poisoned ingredients, he cast into the cal dron of this debate. Of other things I speak. Stand ing on this floor, the Senator issued his rescript, requir ing submission to the Usurped Power of Kansas ; and this was accompanied by a manner all his own such as befits the tyrannical threat. Very well. Let the Senator try. I tell him now that he cannot enforce any such submission. The Senator, with the Slave Power at his back, is strong ; but he is not strong enough for this purpose. He is bold. He shrinks from nothing. Like Danton, he may cry, " L^audace ! Vaudace ! toujours Paudace I " but even his audacity cannot compass this work. The Senator copies the British officer, who, with boastful swagger, said that with the hilt of his sword he would cram the " stamps " down the throats of the American people ; and he will meet a similar failure. He may convulse this country with civil feud. Like the ancient madman, he may set fire to this Temple of Constitutional Liberty, grander than Ephesian dome ; but he cannot enforce obedience to that tyrannical Usurpation. The Senator dreams that he can subdue the North. He disclaims the open threat, but his conduct still im plies it. How little that Senator knows himself, or the strength of the cause which he persecutes ! He is but a mortal man ; against him is an immortal principle. With finite power he wrestles with the infinite, and he must fall. Against him are stronger battalions than any marshalled by mortal arm the inborn, ineradica ble, invincible sentiments of the human heart ; against him is Nature in all her subtle forces ; against him is God. Let him try to subdue these. But I pass from these things, which, though be- 51 602 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. longing to the very heart of the discussion, are yet preliminary in character, and press at once to the main question. I. It belongs to me now, in the first place, to ex pose the CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, in its origin and extent. Logically this is the beginning of the argu ment. I say Crime, and deliberately adopt this strong est term, as better than any other denoting the con summate transgression. I would go further if lan guage could further go. It is the Crime of Crimes surpassing far the old crimen majestatis, pursued with vengeance by the laws of Rome, and containing all other crimes, as the greater contains the less. I do not go too far when I call it the Crime against Nature, from which the soul recoils, and which language re fuses to describe. To lay bare this enormity I now proceed. The whole subject has already become a twice-told tale, and its renewed recital will be a renewal of its sorrow and shame ; but I shall not hesitate to enter upon it. The occasion requires it from the beginning. It has been well remarked by a distinguished histo rian of our country, that, at the Ithuriel touch of the Missouri discussion, the slave interest, hitherto hardly recognized as a distinct element in our system, started up portentous and dilated, with threats and assump tions, which are the origin of our existing national politics. This was in 1820. The discussion ended with the admission of Missouri as a slaveholding State, and the prohibition of Slavery in all the remaining territory west of the Mississippi and north of 36 30 , leaving the condition of other territory south of this line, or subsequently acquired, untouched by the THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 603 arrangement. Here was a solemn act of legislation, called at the time a compromise, a covenant, a com pact, first brought forward in this body by a slaveholder, vindicated by slaveholders in debate, finally sanctioned by slaveholding votes ; also upheld at the time by the essential approbation of a slaveholding President, James Monroe, and his Cabinet, of whom a majority were slaveholders, including Mr. Calhoun himself; and this compromise was made the condition of the admission of Missouri, without which that State could not have been received into the Union. The bargain was sim ple, and was applicable, of course, only to the territory named. Leaving all other territory to await the judg ment of another generation, the South said to the North, Conquer your prejudices so far as to admit Missouri as a slave State, and, in consideration of this much-coveted boon, Slavery shall be prohibited forever in all the remaining Louisiana Territory above 36 30 ; and the North yielded. In total disregard of history, the President, in his annual message, has told us that this compromise "was reluctantly acquiesced in by the Southern States." Just the" contrary is true. It was the work of slave holders, and was crowded by their concurring votes upon a reluctant North. At the time it was hailed by slaveholders as a victory. Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, in an oft- quoted letter, written at three o clock on the night of its passage, says, "It is consid ered hereby the slaveholding States as a great triumph." At the North it was accepted as a defeat, and the friends of Freedom every where throughout the coun try bowed their heads with mortification. But little did they know the completeness of their disaster. Lit- 604 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. tie did they dream that the prohibition of Slavery in the Territory, which was stipulated as the price of their fatal capitulation, would also at the very moment of its maturity be wrested from them. Time passed, and it became necessary to provide for this Territory an organized Government. Suddenly, without notice in the public press, or the prayer of a single petition, or one word of open recommendation from the President, after an acquiescence of thirty-three years, and the irreclaimable possession by the South of its special share under this compromise, in violation of every obligation of honor, compact, and good neigh borhood, and in contemptuous disregard of the out- gushing sentiments of an aroused North, this time- honored prohibition in itself a Landmark of Freedom was overturned, and the vast region now known as Kansas and Nebraska was opened to Slavery. It was natural that a measure thus repugnant in character should be pressed by arguments mutually repugnant. It was urged on two principal reasons, so opposite and inconsistent as to slap each other in the face ; one being that, by the repeal of the prohibition, the Terri tory would be left open to the entry of slaveholders with their slaves, without hinderance ; and the other being, that the people would be left absolutely free to determine the question for themselves, and to pro hibit the entry of slaveholders with their slaves if they should think best. With some the apology was the alleged rights of slaveholders ; with others it was the alleged rights of the people. With some it was openly the extension of Slavery; and with others it was openly the establishment of Freedom, under the guise of Popu lar Sovereignty. Of course the measure, thus upheld THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 605 in defiance of reason, was carried through Congress in defiance of all the securities of legislation ; and I men tion these things that you may see in what foulness the present Crime was engendered. , It was carried, first, by whipping in to its support, through Executive influence and patronage, men who acted against their own declared judgment and the known will of their constituents. Secondly, ^j foisting out of place., both in the Senate and House of Repre sentatives, important business, long pending, and usurp ing its room. Thirdly, by trampling under foot the rules of the House of Representatives, always before the safeguard of the minority. And fourthly, by driving it to a close during the very session in which it originated, so that it might not be arrested by the indignant voice of the People. Such are some of the means by which this snap judgment was obtained. If the clear will of the people had not been disregarded, it could not have passed. If the Government had not nefariously interposed its influence, it could not have passed. If it had been left to its natural place in the order of business, it could not have passed. If the rules -of the House and the rights of the minority had not been violated, it could not have passed. If it had been allowed to go over to another Congress, when the People might be heard, it would have been ended ; and then the Crime we now deplore would have been without its first seminal life. Mr. President, I mean to keep absolutely within the limits of parliamentary propriety. I make no personal imputations ; but only with frankness, such as belongs to the occasion and my own character, describe a great historical act, which is now enrolled in the Capitol. 51* 606 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. Sir, the Nebraska Bill was in every respect a swindle. It was a swindle by the South of the North. It was, on the part of those who had already completely en joyed their share of the Missouri Compromise, a swin dle of those whose share was yet absolutely untouched ; and the plea of unconstitutional! ty set up like the plea of usury after the borrowed money has been en joyed did not make it less a swindle. Urged as a Bill of peace, it was a swindle of the whole country. Urged as opening the doors to slave masters with their slaves, it was a swindle of the asserted doctrine of Popular Sovereignty. Urged as sanctioning Popular Sovereignty, it was a swindle of the asserted rights of slave masters. It was a swindle of a broad territory, thus cheated of protection against Slavery. It was a swindle of a great cause, early espoused by Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson, surrounded by the best fathers of the Republic. Sir, it was a swindle of God-given, in alienable rights. Turn it over, look at it on all sides, and it is every where a swindle ; and if the word I now employ has not the authority of classical usage, it has, on this occasion, the indubitable authority of fitness. No other word will adequately express the mingled meanness and wickedness of the cheat. Its character was still fur-ther apparent in the gen eral structure of the Bill. Amidst overflowing profes sions of regard for the sovereignty of the people in the Territory, they were despoiled of every essential privi lege of sovereignty. They were not allowed to choose their Governor, Secretary, Chief Justice, Associate Jus tices, Attorney, or Marshal all of whom are sent from Washington ; nor were they allowed to regulate the salaries of any of these functionaries, or the daily THE CJilME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 607 allowance of the legislative body, or even the pay of the clerks and doorkeepers ; but they were left free to adopt Slavery. And this was called Popular Sovereign ty ! Time does not allow, nor does the occasion re quire, that I should stop to dwell on this transparent device to cover a transcendent wrong. Suffice it to say, that Slavery is in itself an arrogant denial of hu man rights, and by no human reason can the power to establish such a wrong be placed among the attributes of any just sovereignty. In refusing it such a place, I do not deny popular rights, but uphold them ; I do not restrain popular rights, but extend them. And, sir, to this conclusion you must yet come, unless deaf, not only to the admonitions of political justice, but also to the genius of our own Constitution, under which, when properly interpreted, no valid claim for Slavery can be set up any where in the National territory. The Sena tor from Michigan [Mr. Cass] may say, in response to the Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. Brown,] that Slavery cannot go into the Territory under the Consti tution, without legislative introduction ; and permit me to add, in response to both, that Slavery cannot go there at all. Nothing can come out of nothing ; and there is absolutely nothing in the constitution out of which Slavery can be derived, while there are provisions which, when properly interpreted, make its existence any where within the exclusive National jurisdiction impossible. The offensive provision in the bill was in its form a legislative anomaly, utterly wanting the natural direct ness and simplicity of an honest transaction. It did not undertake openly to repeal the old Prohibition of Slavery, but seemed to mince the matter, as if 608 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. conscious of the swindle. It is said that this Pro hibition, " being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by Congress with Slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legisla tion of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Meas ures, is hereby declared inoperative and void." Thus, with insidious ostentation, was it pretended that an act, violating the greatest compromise of our legislative history, and setting loose the foundations of all com promise, was derived out of a compromise. Then fol lowed in the Bill the further declaration, which is en tirely without precedent, and which has been aptly called " a stump speech in its belly," namely ; " it being the true intent and meaning of this act not to legislate Slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." Here were smooth words, such as belong to a cunning tongue enlisted in a bad cause. But what ever may have been their various hidden meanings, this at least was evident, that, by their effect, the congressional prohibition of Slavery, which had always been regarded as a sevenfold shield, covering the whole Louisiana Territory north of 36 SO , was now removed, while a principle was declared, which would render the supplementary prohibition of Slavery in Min nesota, Oregon, and Washington, " inoperative and void," and thus open to Slavery all these vast re gions, now the rude cradles of mighty States. Here you see the magnitude of the mischief contemplated. But my purpose now is with the Crime against Kansas, and I shall not stop to expose the conspiracy beyond. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 609 Mr. President, men are wisely presumed to intend the natural consequences of their conduct, and to seek what their acts seem to promote. Now, the Nebraska Bill, on its very face, openly cleared the way for Slavery, and it is not wrong to presume that its originators in tended the natural consequences of such an act, and sought in this way to extend Slavery.- Of course they did. And this is the first stage in the Crime against Kansas. But this was speedily followed by other develop ments. The barefaced scheme was soon whispered, that Kansas must be a slave State. In conformity with this idea was the Government of this unhappy Terri tory organized in all its departments ; and thus did the President, by whose complicity the Prohibition of Slavery had been overthrown, lend himself to a new complicity giving to the conspirators a lease of con nivance, amounting even to copartnership. The Gov ernor, Secretary, Chief Justice, Associate Justices, At torney, and Marshal, with a whole caucus of other stipendiaries, nominated by the President and con firmed by the Senate, were all commended as friendly to Slavery. No man, with the sentiments of Wash ington, or Jefferson, or Franklin, found any favor ; nor is it too much to say, that, had these great patriots once more come among us, not one of them, with his recorded unretracted opinions on Slavery, could have been nominated by the President or confirmed by the Senate for any post in that Territory. With such aus pices the conspiracy proceeded. Even in advance of the Nebraska Bill, secret societies were organized in Missouri, ostensibly to protect her institutions, and af terwards, under the name of " Self-Defensive Associa- 610 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. tions," and of " Blue Lodges," these were multiplied throughout the western counties of that State, before any counter -movement from the North. It was confi dently anticipated, that, by the activity of these soci eties, and the interest of slaveholders every where, with the advantage derived from the neighborhood of Mis souri, and the influence of the Territorial Government, Slavery might be introduced into Kansas, quietly but surely, without arousing a conflict that the crocodile egg might be stealthily dropped in the sun-burnt soil, there to be hatched unobserved until it sent forth its reptile monster. But the conspiracy was unexpectedly balked. The debate, which convulsed Congress, had stirred the whole country. Attention from all sides was directed upon Kansas, which at once became the favorite goal of em igration. The Bill had loudly declared, that its object was " to leave the people perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way ; " and its supporters every where challenged the determi nation of the question between Freedom and Slavery by a competition of emigration. Thus, while opening the Territory to Slavery, the Bill also opened it to em igrants from every quarter, who might by their votes redress the wrong. The populous North, stung by a sharp sense of outrage, and inspired by a noble cause, poured into the debatable land, and promised soon to establish a supremacy of numbers there, involving, of course, a just supremacy of Freedom. Then was conceived the consummation of the Crime against Kansas. What could not be accomplished peaceably was to be accomplished forcibly. The rep tile monster, that could not be quietly and securely THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 611 hatched there, was to be pushed full-grown into the Territory. All efforts were now given to the dismal work of forcing Slavery on Free Soil. In flagrant derogation of the very Popular Sovereignty, whose name helped to impose this Bill upon the country, the atrocious object was now distinctly avowed. And the avowal has been followed by the act. Slavery has been forcibly introduced into Kansas, and placed under the formal safeguards of pretended law*. How this was done, belongs to th e argument. In depicting this consummation, the simplest out line, Avithout one word of color, will be best. Whether regarded in its mass or its details, in its origin or its result, it is all blackness, illumined by nothing from itself, but only by the heroism of the undaunted men and women whom it environed. A plain statement of facts will be a picture of fearful truth, which faith ful history will preserve in its darkest gallery. In the foreground all will recognize a familiar character, in himself a connecting link between the President and the border ruffian less conspicuous for ability than for the exalted place he has occupied who once sat in the seat where you now sit, sir ; where once sat John Adams and Thomas Jefferson ; also, where once sat Aaron Burr. I need not add the name of David R. Atchison. You have not forgotten that, at the ses sion of Congress immediately succeeding the Nebraska Bill, he came tardily to his duty here, and then, after a short time, disappeared. The secret has been long since disclosed. Like Catiline, he stalked into this Chamber, reeking with conspiracy immo in Senatum venit and then like Catiline he skulked away dbiity excessit, evasit, erupit to join and provoke the 612 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. conspirators, who at a distance awaited their congenial chief. Under the influence of his malign presence the Crime ripened to its fatal fruits, while the similitude with Catiline was again renewed in the sympathy, not even concealed, which he found in the very Senate it self, where, beyond even the Roman example, a Sen ator has not hesitated to appear as his open compur- gator. And now, as I proceed to show the way in which this Territory was overrun and finally subjugated to Slavery, I desire to remove in advance all question with regard to the authority on which I rely. The evidence is secondary ; but it is the best which, in the nature of the case, can be had, and it is not less clear, direct, and peremptory, than any by which we are assured of the campaigns in the Crimea or the fall of Sebasto- pol. In its manifold mass, I confidently assert, that it is such a body of evidence as the human mind is not able to resist. It is found in the concurring reports of the public press ; in the letters of correspondents ; in the testimony of travellers ; and in the unaffected story to which I have listened from leading citizens, who, during this winter, have " come nocking " here from that distant Territory. It breaks forth in the irrepres sible outcry, reaching us from Kansas, in truthful tones, which leave no ground of mistake. It addresses us in formal complaints, instinct with the indigna tion of a people determined to be free, and unimpeach able as the declarations of a murdered man on his dying bed against his murderer. And let me add, that all this testimony finds an echo in the very statute book of the conspirators, and also in language dropped from the President of the United States. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 613 I begin with an admission from the President him self, in whose sight the people of Kansas have little favor. And yet, after arraigning the innocent em igrants from the North, he was constrained to declare that their conduct was "far from justifying the illegal and reprehensible counter-movement which ensued." Then, by the reluctant admission of the Chief Magis trate, there was a counter-movement, at once illegal and reprehensible. I thank thee, President, for teaching me these words ; and I now put them in the front of this exposition, as in themselves a confession. Sir, this "illegal and reprehensible counter-movement" is none other than the dreadful Crime under an apol ogetic alias by which, through successive invasions, Slavery has been forcibly planted in this Territory. Next to this Presidential admission must be placed the details of the invasions, which I now present as not only " illegal and reprehensible," but also unquestion able evidence of the resulting Crime. The violence, for some time threatened, broke forth on the 29th November, 1854, at the first election of a Delegate to Congress, when companies from Missouri, amounting- to upwards of one thousand, crossed into Kansas, and with force and arms, proceeded to vote for Mr. Whitfield, the candidate of Slavery. An eye-wit ness, General Pomeroy, of superior intelligence and perfect integrity, thus describes this scene : " The first ballot box that was opened upon our virgin soil was closed to us by overpowering numbers and impending force. So bold and reckless were our invaders, that they cared not to conceal their attack. They came upon us not in the guise of voters, to steal away our franchise, but boldly and openly, to snatch it with a strong hand. They came directly from their 52 614 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. own homes, and in compact and organized bands, with arms in hand and provisions for the expedition, marched to our polls, and, when their work was done, returned whence they came." Here was an outrage at which the coolest blood of patriotism boils. Though, for various reasons unneces sary to develop, the busy settlers allowed the election to pass uncontested, still the means employed were none the less " illegal and reprehensible." This infliction was a significant prelude to the grand invasion of the 30th March, 1855, at the election of the first Territorial Legislature under the organic law, when an armed multitude from Missouri entered the Territory, in larger numbers than General Taylor com manded at Buena Vista, or than General Jackson had within his lines at New Orleans larger far than our fathers rallied on Bunker Hill. On they came as an "army with banners," organized in companies, with officers, munitions, tents, and provisions, as though marching upon a foreign foe, and breathing loud mouthed threats that they would carry their purpose, if need be, by the bowie knife and revolver. Among them, according to his own confession, was David R. Atchison, belted with, the vulgar arms of his vulgar comrades. Arrived at their several destinations on the night before the election, the invaders pitched their tents, placed their sentries, and waited for the coming day. The same trustworthy eye-witness, whom I have already quoted, says, of one locality : " Baggage wagons were there, with arms and ammunition enough for a protracted fight, and among them two brass field- pieces, ready charged. They came with drums beating and flags flying, and their leaders were of the most prominent and conspic uous men of their State." THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 615 Of another locality he says : " The invaders came together in one armed and organized body, with trains of fifty wagons, besides horsemen, and, the night be fore election, pitched their camp in the vicinity of the polls ; and, having appointed their own judges in place of those who, from intimidation or otherwise, failed to attend, they voted without any proof of residence." With this force they were able, on the succeeding day, in some places, to intimidate the judges of elec tions ; in others, to substitute judges of their own ap pointment ; in others, to wrest the ballot boxes from their rightful possessors, and every where to exercise a complete control of the election, and thus, by a preter natural audacity of usurpation, impose a Legislature upon the free people of Kansas. Thus was conquered the Sebastopol of that Territory ! But it was not enough to secure the Legislature. The election of a member of Congress recurred on the 2d October, 1855, and the same foreigners, who had learned their strength, again manifested it. Another invasion, in controlling numbers, came from Missouri, and once more forcibly exercised the electoral franchise in Kansas. At last, in the latter days of November, 1855, a storm, long brewing, burst upon the heads of the de voted people. The ballot boxes had been violated, and a Legislature installed, which had proceeded to carry out the conspiracy of the invaders ; but the good people of the Territory, born to Freedom, and educated as American citizens, showed no signs of submission. Slavery, though recognized by pretended law, was in many places practically an outlaw. To the lawless borderers, this was hard to bear ; and, like the hea- 616 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. then of old, they raged, particularly against the town of Lawrence, already known, by the firmness of its prin ciples and the character of its citizens, as the citadel of the good cause. On this account they threatened, in their peculiar language, to " wipe it out." Soon the hostile power was gathered for this purpose. The wickedness of this invasion was enhanced by the way in which it began. A citizen of Kansas, by the name of Dow, was murdered by one of the partisans of Slavery, under the name of " law and order." Such an outrage naturally aroused indignation and provoked threats. The professors of "law and order" allowed the murderer to escape ; and, still further to illustrate the irony of the name they assumed, seized the friend of the murdered man, whose few neighbors soon rallied for his rescue. This transaction, though totally disre garded in its chief front of wickedness, became the excuse for unprecedented excitement. The weak Gov ernor, with no faculty higher than servility to Slavery whom the President, in his official delinquency, had appointed to a trust worthy only of a well-balanced character was frightened from his propriety. By proclamation he invoked the Territory. By telegraph he invoked the President. The Territory would not respond to his senseless appeal. The President was dumb ; but the proclamation was circulated throughout the border counties of Missouri ; and Platte, Clay, Car lisle, Sabine, Howard, and Jefferson, each of them, contributed a volunteer company, recruited from the road sides, and armed with weapons which chance af forded known as the "shot-gun militia" with a Missouri officer as commissary general, dispensing ra tions, and another Missouri officer as gcneral-in-chief ; THE CRIME AGATNST KANSAS, ETC. 617 with two wagon loads of rifles, belonging to Missouri, drawn by six mules, from its arsenal at Jefferson City ; with seven pieces of cannon, belonging to the United States, from its arsenal at Liberty ; and this formi dable force, amounting to at least 1800 men, terrible with threats, with oaths, and with whiskey, crossed the borders, and encamped in larger part at Wacherusa, over against the doomed town of Lawrence, which was now threatened with destruction. With these invaders was the Governor, who by this act levied war upon the people he was sent to protect. In camp with him was the original Catiline of the conspiracy, while by his side was the docile Chief Justice and the docile Judges. But this is not the first instance in which an unjust Governor has found tools where he ought to have found justice. In the great impeachment of Warren Has tings, the British orator, by whom it was conducted, ex claims, in words strictly applicable to the misdeed I now arraign, " Had he not the Chief Justice, the tamed and domesticated Chief Justice, who waited on .him like a familiar spirit? " Thus was this invasion coun tenanced by those who should have stood in the breach against it. For more than a week it continued, while deadly conflict seemed imminent. I do not dwell on the heroism by which it was encountered, or the mean retreat to which it was compelled ; for that is not necessary to exhibit the Crime which you are to judge. But I cannot forbear to add other additional features, furnished in the letter of a clergyman, written at the time, who saw and was a part of what he de scribes : " Our citizens have been shot at, and in two instances mur dered, our houses invaded, hay-ricks burnt, corn and other pro- 52* 618 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. visions plundered, cattle driven off, all communication cut off between us and the States, wagons on the way to us with pro visions stopped and plundered, and the drivers taken prisoners, and we in hourly expectation of an attack. Nearly, every man has been in arms in the village. Fortifications have been thrown up, by incessant labor night and day. The sound of the drum and the tramp of armed men resounded through our streets, fam ilies fleeing with their household goods for safety. Day before yes terday the report of cannon was heard at our house, from the direction of Lecompton. Last Thursday one of our neighbors one of the most peaceable and excellent of men, from Ohio on his way home, was set upon by a gang of twelve men on horseback, and shot down. Over eight hundred men are gath ered under arms at Lawrence. As yet, no act of violence has been perpetrated by those on our side. No blood of retaliation stains our hands. We stand and are ready to act purely in the defence of our homes and lives" But the catalogue is not yet complete. On the 15th of -December, when the people assembled to vote on the Constitution then submitted for adoption only a few days after the Treaty of Peace between the Gov ernor on the one side and the town of Lawrence on the other another and fifth irruption was made. But I leave all this untold. Enough of these details has been given. Five several times and more have these invaders entered Kansas in armed array, and thus five several times and more have they trampled upon the organic law of the Territory. But these extraordinary expe ditions are simply the extraordinary witnesses to suc cessive uninterrupted violence. They stand out con spicuous, but not alone. The spirit of evil, in which they had their origin, was wakeful and incessant. From the beginning 1 it hung upon the skirts of this interesting Territory, harrowing its peace, disturbing THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 619 its prosperity, and keeping its inhabitants under the painful alarms of war. Thus was all security of person, of property, and of labor overthrown ; and when I urge this incontrovertible fact, I set forth a wrong which is small only by the side of the giant wrong for the consummation of which all this was done. Sir, what is man, what is government, without security ? in the absence of which, nor man nor gov ernment can proceed in development, or enjoy the fruits of existence. Without security, civilization is cramped and dwarfed. Without security there can be no true Freedom. Nor shall I say too much when I declare that security, guarded of course by its offspring, Freedom, is the true end and aim of government. Of this indispensable boon the people of Kansas have thus far been despoiled absolutely, totally. All this is aggravated by the nature of their pursuits, render ing them peculiarly sensitive to interruption, and at the same time attesting their innocence. They are for the most part engaged in the cultivation of the soil, which from time immemorial has been the sweet em ployment of undisturbed industry. Contented in the returns of bounteous Nature, and the shade of his own trees, the husbandman is not aggressive ; accustomed to produce, and not to destroy, he is essentially peace ful, unless his home is invaded, when his arm derives vigor from the soil he treads, and his soul inspiration from the heavens beneath whose canopy he daily toils. And^uch are the people of Kansas, whose security has been overthrown. Scenes from which Civilization averts her countenance have been a part of their daily life. The border incursions which, in barbarous ages or bar barous lands, have fretted and " harried " an exposed 620 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. people, have been here renewed, with this peculiarity, that our border robbers do not simply levy black mail, and drive off a few cattle, like those who acted under the inspiration of the Douglas of other days ; that they do not seize a few persons, and sweep them away into captivity, like the African slave traders, whom we brand as pirates ; but that they commit a succession of acts in which all border sorrows and all African wrongs are revived together on American soil, and which, for the time being, annuls all protection of all kinds, and enslaves the whole Territory. Private griefs mingle their poignancy with public wrongs. I do not dwell on the anxieties which fami lies have undergone, exposed to sudden assault, and obliged to lie down to rest with the alarms of war ringing in their ears, not knowing that another day might be spared to them. Throughout this bitter winter, with the thermometer at thirty degrees below zero, the citizens of Lawrence have been constrained to sleep under arms, with sentinels treading their con stant watch against surprise. But our souls are wrung by individual instances. In vain do we condemn the cruelties of another age, the refinements of torture to which men have been doomed, the rack and thumb screw of the Inquisition, the last agonies of the regi cide Ravaillac, " Luke s iron crown, and Damien s bed of steel;" for kindred outrages have disgraced these borders. Murder has stalked, assassination has skulked in the tall grass of the prairie, and the vindictiveness of man has assumed unwonted forms. A preacher of the gospel of the Saviour has been ridden on a rail, and then thrown into the Missouri, fastened to a log, and left to drift down its muddy, tortuous current. THE CHIME, AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 621 And lately we have had the tidings of that enormity without precedent a deed without a name where a candidate for the Legislature was most brutally gashed with knives and hatchets, and then, after wel tering in blood on the snow-clad earth, was trundled along, with gaping wounds, to fall dead in the face of his wife. It is common to drop a tear of sympathy over the trembling solicitudes of our early fathers, ex posed to the stealthy assault of the savage foe ; and an eminent American artist has pictured this scene in a marble group of rare beauty, on the front of the National Capitol, where the uplifted tomahawk is arrested by the strong arm and generous countenance of the pioneer, while his wife and children find shelter at his feet ; but now the tear must be dropped over the trembling solicitudes of fellow-citizens, seeking to build a new State in Kansas, and exposed to the per petual assault of murderous robbers from Missouri. Hirelings, picked from the drunken spew and vomit of an uneasy civilization, in the form of men, " Ay, in the catalogue ye go for men ; As hounds and grayhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs, Shoughs, water-rugs, and demi- wolves, are called All by the name of dogs," leashed together by secret signs and lodges, have renewed the incredible atrocities of the Assassins and of the Thugs ; showing the blind submission of the Assassins to the Old Man of the Mountain, in robbing Christians on the road to Jerusalem, and showing the heartlessness of the Thugs, who, avowing that murder was their religion, waylaid travellers on the great road from Agra to Delhi ; with the more deadly bowie knife 622 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. for the dagger of the Assassin, and the more deadly revolver for the noose of the Thug. In these invasions, attended by the entire subver sion of all security in this Territory, with the plunder of the ballot box, and the pollution of the electoral franchise, I show simply the process in unprecedented Crime. If that be the best Government where an injury to a single citizen is resented as an injury to the whole State, then must our Government forfeit all claim to any such eminence while it leaves its citizens thus exposed. In the outrage upon the ballot box, even without the illicit fruits which I shall soon ex hibit, there is a peculiar crime of the deepest dye, though subordinate to the final Crime, which should be promptly avenged. In countries where royalty is upheld, it is a special offence to rob the crown jewels, which are the emblems of that sovereignty before which the loyal subject bows, and it is treason to be found in adultery with the Queen, for in this way may a false heir be imposed upon the State ; but in our Republic the ballot box is the single priceless jewel of that sovereignty which we respect, and the electoral franchise, out of which are born the rulers of a free people, is the Queen whom we are to guard against pollution. In this plain presentment, whether as regards security or as regards elections, there is enough, surely, without proceeding further, to justify the intervention of Congress, most promptly and com pletely, to throw over this oppressed people the impen etrable shield of the Constitution and laws. But the half is not yet told. As every point in a wide-spread horizon radiates from a common centre, so every thing said or done in THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 623 this vast circle of Crime radiates from the One Idea that Kansas, at all hazards, must j^ made a slave State. In all the manifold wickednesses that have occurred, and in every successive invasion, this One Idea has been ever present, as the Satanic tempter, the motive power, the causing cause. To accomplish this result, three things were attempt ed : first, by outrages of all kinds, to drive the friends of Freedom already there out of the Territory; sec ondly, to deter others from coming ; and, thirdly, to obtain the complete control of the Government. The process of driving out and also of deterring has failed. On the contrary, the friends of Freedom there became more fixed in their resolves to stay and fight the battle which they had never sought, but from which they disdained to retreat; while the friends of Freedom elsewhere were more aroused to the duty of timely succors by men and munitions of just self-defence. But, while defeated in the first two processes pro posed, the conspirators succeeded in the last. By the violence already portrayed at the election of the 30th March, when the polls were occupied by the armed hordes from Missouri, they imposed a Legislature upon the Territory, and thus, under the iron mask of law, established a Usurpation not less complete than any in history. That this was done, I proceed to prove. Here is tjie evidence. 1. Only in this way can this extraordinary expedi tion be adequately explained. In the words of Moliere, once employed by John Quincy Adams in the other House, Que diable allaient-ils faire dans cette galere I What did they go into the Territory for? If their purposes were peaceful, as has been suggested, why 624 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. cannons, arms, flags, numbers, and all this violence? As simple citizens, ^proceeding to the honest exercise of the electoral franchise, they might have gone with nothing more than a pilgrim s staff. Philosophy always seeks a sufficient cause, and only in the One Idea, already presented, can a cause be found in any degree commen surate with this Crime ; and this becomes so only when we consider the mad fanaticism of Slavery. 2. Public notoriety steps forward to confirm the suggestion of reason. In every place where Truth can freely travel it has been asserted and understood that the Legislature was imposed upon Kansas by foreign ers from Missouri ; and this universal voice is now received as undeniable verity. 3. It is also attested by the harangues of the con spirators. Here is what Stringfellow said before the invasion : " To those who have qualms of conscience as to violating laws, State or National, the time has come when such impositions must be disregarded, as your rights and property are in danger : and I advise you, one and all, to enter every election district in Kansas, in defiance of Reeder and his vile myrmidons, and vote at the point of the bowie knife and revolver. Neither give nor take quarter, as our case demands it. It is enough that the slaveholding in terest wills it, from which there is no appeal. What right has Governor Reeder to rule Missourians in Kansas? His procla mation and prescribed oath must be repudiated. It is your inter est to do so. Mind that Slavery is established where it is not prohibited." Here is what Atchison said after the invasion : " Well, what next ? Why, an election for members of the Legislature to organize the Territory must be held. What did I advise you to do then ? Why, meet them on their own ground, and beat them at their own game again ; and cold and inclem- THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 625 ent as the weather was, I went over with a company of men. My object in going was not to vote. I had no right to vote, un less I had disfranchised myself in Missouri. I was not within two miles of a voting place. My object in going was not to vote, but to settle a difficulty between two of our candidates ; and the Abolitionists of the North said, and published it abroad, that Atchison was there with boivie knife and revolver, and by God twas true. I never did go into that Territory / never intend to go into that Territory without being prepared for all such kind of cattle. Well, we beat them, and Governor Reeder gave cer tificates to a majority of all the members of both Houses, and then, after they were organized, as every body will admit, they were the only competent persons to say who were, and who were not, members of the same." 4. It is confirmed by the contemporaneous admis sion of the Squatter Sovereign, a paper published at Atchison, and at once the organ of the President and of tliese Borderers, which, under date of 1 st April, thus recounts the victory : "INDEPENDENCE, [MISSOURI,] March 31, 1855. " Several hundred emigrants from Kansas have just entered our city. They were preceded by the Westport and Independ ence brass bands. They came in at the west side of the public square, and proceeded entirely around it, the bands cheering us with fine music, and the emigrants with good news. Immedi ately following the bands were about two hundred horsemen in regular order ; following these were one hundred and fifty wag ons, carriages, &c. They gave repeated cheers for Kansas and Missouri. They report that not an An ti- Slavery man will be in the Legislature of Kansas. We have made a clean sweep!" 5. It is also confirmed by the contemporaneous tes timony of another paper, always faithful to Slavery, the New York Herald, in the letter of a correspond ent from Brunswick, in Missouri, under date of 20th April, 1855 : 626 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. " From five to seven thousand men started from Missouri to attend the election, some to remove, but the most to return to their families, with an intention, if they liked the Territory, to make it their permanent abode at the earliest moment practica ble. But they intended to vote. The Missourians were, many of them, Douglas men. There were one hundred and fifty voters from this county, one hundred and seventy-five from Howard, one hundred from Cooper. Indeed, every county furnished its quota ; and when they set out it looked like an army. * * * They were armed. * * * And, as there were no houses in the Territory, they carried tents. Their mission was a peace able one to vote, and to drive down stakes for their future homes. After the election, some one thousand five hundred of the voters sent a committee to Mr. Reeder, to ascertain if it was his purpose to ratify the election. He answered that it was, and said the majority at an election must carry the day. But it is not to be denied that the one thousand five hundred, apprehend ing that the Governor might attempt to play the tyrant, since his conduct had already been insidious and unjust, wore on their hats bunches of hemp. They were resolved, if a tyrant attempted to trample upon the rights of the sovereign people, to hang him." 6. It is again confirmed by the testimony of a lady who for five years has lived in Western Missouri, and thus writes in a letter published in the New Haven Register : " MIAMI, SALINE Co., November 26, 1855. " You ask me to tell you something aboxit the Kansas and Missoiiri troubles. Of course you know in what they have origi nated. There is no denying that the Missourians have determined to control the elections, if possible ; and I do not know that their measures would be justifiable, except upon the principle of self- preservation ; and that, you know, is the first law of nature." 7. And it is confirmed still further by the Circular of the Emigration Society of Lafayette, in Missouri, dated as late as 25th March, 1856, in which the efforts of Missourians are openly confessed : THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 627 " The Western counties of Missouri have for the last two years been heavily taxed, both in money and time, in fighting the battles of the South., Lafayette county alone has expended more than $100,000 in money, and as much or more in time. Up to this time the border counties of Missouri have upheld and main tained tJie rights and interests of the South in this struggle, unas sisted, and not unsuccessfully. But the Abolitionists, staking their all upon the Kansas issue, and hesitating at no means, fair or foul, are moving heaven and earth to render that beautiful Territory a Free State." 8. Here, also, is complete admission of the Usurpa tion, by the Intelligencer, a leading paper of St. Louis, Missouri, made ii| the ensuing summer : " Atchison and Stringfellow, -with their Missouri followers, overwhelmed the settlers in Kansas, browbeat and bullied them, and took the Government from their hands. Missouri votes elect ed the present body of men, who insult public intelligence and popular rights by styling themselves the Legislature of Kansas. This body of men are helping themselves to fat speculations by locating the seat of Government and getting town lots for their votes. They are passing laws disfranchising all the citizens of Kansas who do not believe Negro Slavery to be $ Christian insti tution and a- national blessing. They are proposing to punish with imprisonment the utterance of views inconsistent with their own. And they are trying to perpetuate their preposterous and infernal tyranny by appointing for a term of years creatures of their own, as commissioners in every county, to lay and collect taxes, and see that the laws they are passing are faithfully exe cuted. Has this age any thing to compare with these acts in audacity ? " 9. In harmony with all these is the authoritative declaration of Governor Reeder, in a speech addressed to his neighbors at Easton, Pennsylvania, at the end of April, 1855, and immediately afterwards published in the Washington Union. Here it is : " It was indeed too true that Kansas had been invaded, con- 628 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. quered, subjugated, by an armed force from beyond her borders, led on by a fanatical spirit, trampling under foot the principles of the Kansas Bill and the right of suffrage." 10. And in similar harmony is the complaint of the people of Kansas, in a public meeting at Big Springs, on the 5th September, 1855, embodied in these words : " Resolved, That the body of men who for the last two months have been passing laws for the people of our Territory, moved, counselled, and dictated to by the demagogues of Missouri, are to us a foreign body, representing only the lawless invaders who elected them, and not the people of the Territory that we re pudiate their action, as the monstrous consummation of an act of violence, usurpation, and fraud unparalleled in the history of the Union, and worthy only of men unfitted for the duties and regardless of the responsibilities of Republicans." 11. And finally, by the official minutes which have been laid on our table by the President, the invasion, which ended in the Usurpation, is clearly established ; but the effect of this testimony has been so amply ex posed by the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. Collamer,] in his able and indefatigable argument, that I content myself with simply referring to it. On this cumulative, irresistible evidence, in concur rence with the antecedent history, I rest. And yet Senators here have argued that this cannot be so precisely as the conspiracy of Catiline was doubted in the Roman Senate. Nonnulli sunt in hoc ordine, qui aut ea, qua imminent, non videant ; aut ea, qua vident, dissimulent ; qui spem Catilince mollibus sententiis dluerunt, conjurationemque nascentem non credendo corroloraverunt. As I listened to the Senator from Illinois, while he painfully strove to show that there was no Usurpation, I was reminded of the effort by a THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 629 distinguished logician, in a much- admired argument, to prove that Napoleon Bonaparte never existed. And permit me to say, that the fact of his existence is not placed more completely above doubt than the fact of this Usurpation. This I assert on the proofs already presented. But confirmation comes almost while I speak. The columns of the public press are now daily filled with testimony solemnly taken before the Com mittee of Congress in Kansas, which shows, in awful light, the violence ending in the Usurpation. Of this I may speak on some other occasion. Meanwhile, I proceed with the development of the Crime. The usurping Legislature assembled at the appointed place in the interior, and then at once, in opposition to the veto of the Governor, by a majority of two thirds, removed to the Shawnee Mission, a place in most con venient proximity to the Missouri borderers, by whom it had been constituted, and whose tyrannical agent it was. The statutes of Missouri, in all their text, with their divisions and subdivisions, were adopted bodily, and with such little local adaptation that the word " State " in the original is not even changed to " Ter ritory," but is left to be corrected by an explanatory act. But all this general legislation was entirely sub ordinate to the special act entitled " An Act to punish Offences against Slave Property," in which the One Idea that provoked this whole conspiracy is at last embodied in legislative form, and Human Slavery openly recognized on Free Soil, under the sanction of pretended law. This act of thirteen sections is in itself a Dance of Death. But its complex complete ness of wickedness without a parallel may be partially conceived when it is understood that in three sections 53* 630 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. only of it is the penalty of death, denounced no less than forty-eight different times, by as many changes of language, against the heinous offence, described in forty-eight different ways, of interfering with what does not exist in that Territory and under the Con stitution cannot exist there I mean property in human flesh. Thus is Liberty sacrificed to Slavery, and Death summoned to sit at the gates as guardian of the Wrong. But the work of Usurpation was not perfected even yet. It had already cost too much to be left at any hazard. " To be thus was nothing ; But to be safely thus ! " Such was the object. And this could not be except by the entire prostration of all the safeguards of Human Rights. The liberty of speech, which is the very breath of a Republic ; the press, which is the terror of wrong doers ; the bar, through which the oppressed beards the arrogance of law ; the jury, by which right is vin dicated ; all these must be struck down, while officers are provided in all places, ready to be the tools of this tyranny ; and then, to obtain final assurance that their crime was secure, the whole Usurpation, stretching over the Territory, must be fastened and riveted by legislative bolts, spikes, and screws, so as to defy all effort at change through the ordinary forms of law. To this work, in its various parts, were bent the subtlest energies ; and never, from Tubal Cain to this hour, was any fabric forged with more desperate skill and completeness. Mark, sir, three different legislative enactments, which constitute part of this work. First, according THE ClilME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 631 to one act, all who deny, by spoken or written word, "the right of persons to hold slaves in this Territory," are denounced as felons, to be punished by imprison ment at hard labor for a term not less than two years* it may be for life. And to show the extravagance of this injustice, it has been well put by the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. Collamer,] that should the Senator from Michigan, [Mr. Cass,] who believes that Slavery cannot exist in a Territory unless introduced by express legislative acts, venture there with his moderate opin ions, his doom must be that of a felon ! To this ex tent are the great liberties of speech and of the press subverted ! Secondly, by another act, entitled " An Act concerning Attorneys-at-Law," no person can practise as an attorney unless he shall obtain a license from the Territorial courts, which, of course, a tyran nical discretion will be free to deny ; and after obtain ing such license, he is constrained to take an oath, not only " to support " the Constitution of the United States, but also " to support and sustain " mark here the reduplication the Territorial act and the Fugitive Slave Bill, thus erecting a test for the function of the bar, calculated to exclude citizens who honestly regard that latter legislative enormity as unfit to be obeyed. And, thirdly, by another act, entitled "An Act con cerning Jurors," all persons " conscientiously opposed to holding slaves," or " not admitting the right to hold slaves in the Territory," are excluded from the jury on every question, civil or criminal, arising out of asserted slave property ; while, in all cases, the summoning of the jury is left without one word of restraint to " the marshal, sheriff, or other officer," who are thus free to pack it according to their tyrannical discretion. 632 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. For the ready enforcement of all statutes against Hu man Freedom, the President had already furnished a powerful quota of officers, in the Governor, Chief Jus tice, Judges, Secretary, Attorney, and Marshal. The Legislature completed this part of the work, by consti tuting, in each county, a Board of Commissioners, composed of two persons, associated with the Probate Judge, whose duty it is " to appoint a county treasurer, coroner, justices of the peace, constables, and all other officers provided for bylaw," and then proceeded to the choice of this very Board ; thus delegating^and diffusing their usurped power, and tyrannically imposing upon the Territory a crowd of officers, in whose appointment the people have had no voice, directly or indirectly. And still the final inexorable work remained. A Legislature, renovated in both branches, could not as semble until 1858; so that, during this long intermedi ate period, this whole system must continue in the likeness of law, unless overturned by the Federal Gov ernment, or, in default of such interposition, by a gen erous uprising of an oppressed people. But it was necessary to guard against the possibility of change, even tardily, at a future election ; and this was done by two different acts ; under the first of which, all who will not take the oath to support the Fugitive Slave Bill are excluded from the elective franchise ; and un der the second of which, all others are entitled to vote who shall tender a tax of one doMar to the Sheriff on the day of election ; thus, by provision of Territorial law, disfranchising all opposed to Slavery, and at the same time opening the door to the votes of the in vaders ; by an unconstitutional shibboleth exclud ing from the polls the mass of actual settlers, and by THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 633 making the franchise depend upon a petty tax only, ad mitting to the polls the mass of borderers from Mis souri. Thus, by tyrannical forethought, the Usurpation not only fortified all that it did, but assumed a self- perpetuating energy. Thus the Crime consummated. Slavery now stands erect, clanking its chains on the Territory of Kansas, surrounded by a code of death, and trampling upon all cherished liberties, whether of speech, the press, the bar, the trial by jury, or the electoral franchise. And, sir, all this has been done, not merely to introduce a wrong which in itself is a denial of all rights, and in dread of which a mother has lately taken the life of hgr offspring ; not merely, as has been sometimes said, to protect Slavery in Missouri, since it is futile for this State to complain of Freedom on the side of Kansas, when Freedom exists without complaint on the side of Iowa and also on the side of Illinois ; but it has been done for the sake of political power, in order to bring two new slaveholding Senators upon this floor, and thus to fortify in the National Government the des perate chances of a waning Oligarchy. As the ship, voyaging on pleasant summer seas, is assailed by a pi rate crew, and robbed for the sake of its doubloons and dollars, so is this beautiful Territory now assailed in its peace and prosperity, and robbed, in order to wrest its political power to the side of Slavery. Even now the black flag of the land pirates from Missouri waves at the mast head ; in their laws ycrti hear the pirate yell, and see the flash of the pirate knife ; while, in credible to relate ! the President, gathering the Slave Power at his back, testifies a pirate sympathy. Sir, all this was done in the name of Popular Sover- 634 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. eignty. And this is the close of the tragedy. Pop ular Sovereignty, which, when truly understood, is a fountain of just power, has ended in Popular Slavery ; not merely in the subjection of the unhappy African race, but of this proud Caucasian blood, which you boast. The profession with which you began, of AH by the People, has been lost in the wretched reality of Nothing for the People. Popular Sovereignty, in whose deceitful name plighted faith was broken, and an ancient Landmark of Freedom was overturned, now lifts itself before us, like Sin, in the terrible picture of Miiton, " That seemed a woman to the waist, and fair, But ended foul in many a scaly fold Voluminous and vast, a serpent armed With mortal sting ; about her middle round A cry of hell-hounds never ceasing barked With wide Cerberean mouths full loud, and rung A hideous peal ; yet, when they list, would creep, If aught disturbed their noise, into her womb, And kennel there, yet there still barked and howled Within, unseen." The image is complete at all points ; and, with this exposure, I take my leave of the Crime against Kansas. II. Emerging from all the blackness of this Crime, in which we seem to have been lost, as in a savage wood, and turning our backs upon it, as upon desola tion and death, from which, while others have suffered, we have escaped, I come now to THE APOLOGIP^S which the Crime has found. Sir, well may you start at the suggestion that such a series of wrongs, so clearly proved by various testimony, so openly confessed by the wrong doers, and so widely recognized throughout the country, should find Apologies. But the partisan spirit, THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 635 now, as in other days, hesitates at nothing. The great Crimes of history have never been without Apologies. The massacre of St. Bartholomew, which you now in stinctively condemn, was, at the time, applauded in high quarters, and even commemorated by a Papal medal, which may still be procured at Rome ; as the Crime against Kansas, which is hardly less conspicuous in dreadful eminence, has been shielded on this floor by extenuating words, and even by a Presidential message, which, like the Papal medal, can never be forgotten in considering the madness and perversity of men. Sir, the Crime cannot be denied. The President himself has admitted "illegal and reprehensible" con duct. To such conclusion he was compelled by irre sistible evidence ; but what he mildly describes I openly arraign. Senators may affect to put it aside by a sneer; or to reason it away by figures ; or to explain it by a theory, such as desperate invention has produced on this floor, that the Assassins and Thugs of Missouri were in reality citizens of Kansas ; but all these efforts, so far as made, are only tokens of the weakness of the cause, while to the original Crime they add another offence of false testimony against innocent and suffer ing men. But the Apologies for the Crime are worse than the efforts at denial. In cruelty and heartlessness they identify their authors with the great transgression. They are four in number, and fourfold in character. The first is the Apology tyrannical ; the second, the Apology imbecile ; the third, the Apology absurd ; and the fourth, the Apology infamous. This is all. Tyranny, imbecility, absurdity, and infamy, all unite to dance, like the weird sisters, about this Crime. The Apology tyrannical is founded on the mistaken 636 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. act of Governor Reeder, in authenticating the Usurping Legislature, by which it is asserted that, whatever may have been the actual force or fraud in its election, the people of Kansas are effectually concluded, and the whole proceeding is placed under the formal sanction of law. According to this assumption, complaint is now in vain, and it only remains that Congress should sit and hearken to it, without correcting the wrong, as the ancient tyrant listened and granted no redress to the human moans that issued from the heated brazen bull, which siibtle cruelty had devised. This I call the Apology of technicality inspired by tyranny. The facts on this head are few and plain. Governor Reeder, after allowing only five days for objections to the returns, a space of time unreasonably brief in that extensive Territory, declared a majority of the members of the Council and of the House of Repre sentatives " duly elected," withheld certificates from certain others, because of satisfactory proof that they were not duly elected, and appointed a day for new elections to supply these vacancies. Afterwards, by formal message, he recognized the Legislature as a legal body, and when he vetoed their act of adjournment to the neighborhood of Missouri, he did it simply on the ground of the illegality of such an adjournment under the organic law. Now, to every assumption founded on these facts, there are two satisfactory re plies : first, that no certificate of the Governor can do more than authenticate a subsisting legal act, without of itself infusing legality where the essence of legality is not already ; and secondly, that violence or fraud, wherever disclosed, vitiates completely every proceeding. In denying these principles, you place the certificate THE CB.IME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 637 above the thing certified, and give a perpetual lease to violence and fraud, merely because at an ephemeral moment they were unquestioned. This will not do. Sir, I am no apologist for Governor Reeder. There is sad reason to believe that he went to Kansas origi nally as the tool of the President ; but his simple na ture, nurtured in the atmosphere of Pennsylvania, re volted at the service required, and he turned from his patron to duty. Grievously did he err in yielding to the Legislature any act of authentication ; but he has in some measure answered for this error by determined efforts since to expose the utter illegality of that body, which he now repudiates entirely. It was said of cer tain Roman Emperors, who did infinite mischief in their beginnings, and infinite good towards their ends, that they should never have been born, or never died ; and I would apply the same to the official life of this Kansas Governor. At all events, I dismiss the Apol ogy founded on his acts, as the utterance of tyranny by the voice of law, transcending the declaration of the pedantic judge, in the British Parliament, on the eve of our Revolution, that our fathers, notwithstand ing their complaints, were in reality represented in Parliament, inasmuch as their lands, under the original charters, were held " in common socage, as of the manor of Greenwich in Kent," which, being duly rep resented, carried with it all the Colonies. Thus in other ages has tyranny assumed the voice of law. Next comes the Apology imbecile, which is founded on the alleged want of power in the President to arrest this Crime. It is openly asserted, that, under the ex isting laws of the United States, the Chief Magistrate had no authority to interfere in Kansas for this pur- 54 638 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. pose. Such is the broad statement, which, even if correct, furnishes, no Apology for any proposed ratifica tion of the Crime, but which is in reality untrue ; and this I call the Apology of imbecility. In other matters, no such ostentatious imbecility ap pears. Only lately, a vessel of war in the Pacific has chastised the cannibals of the Fejee Islands, for alleged outrages on American citizens. But no person of or dinary intelligence will pretend that American citizens in the Pacific have received wrongs from these canni bals comparable in atrocity to those received by Amer ican citizens in Kansas. Ah, sir, the interests of Slavery are not touched by any chastisement of the Fejees ! Constantly we are informed of efforts at New York, through the agency of the Government, and sometimes only on the breath of suspicion, to arrest vessels about to sail on foreign voyages in violation of our neutrality laws or treaty stipulations. Now, no man familiar with the cases will presume to suggest that the urgency for these arrests was equal to the urgency for interposition against these successive invasions from Missouri. But the Slave Power is not disturbed by such arrests at New York ! At this moment the President exults in the vigi lance with which he has prevented the enlistment of a few soldiers, to be carried off to Halifax, in violation of our territorial sovereignty, and England is bravely threatened, even to the extent of a rupture of diplo matic relations, for her endeavor, though unsuccessful, and at once abandoned. Surely, no man in his senses will urge that this act was any thing but trivial by the side of the Crime against Kansas. But the Slave Power is not concerned in this controversy. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 639 Thus, where the Slave Power is indifferent, the President will see that the laws are faithfully executed ; but in other cases, where the interests of Slavery are at stake, he is controlled absolutely by this tyranny, ready at all times to do, or not to do, precisely as it dictates. Therefore it is that Kansas is left a prey to the Propagandists of Slavery, while the whole Treas ury, the Army and Navy of the United States, are lav ished to hunt a single slave through the streets of Bo- ton. You have not forgotten the latter instance ; but I choose to refresh it in your minds. As long ago as 1851, the War Department and Navy Department concurred in placing the forces of the United States near Boston at the command of the Mar shal, if needed, for the enforcement of an Act of Con gress, which had no support in the public conscience, as I believe it has no support in the Constitution ; and thus these forces were degraded to the loathsome work of slave hunters. More than three years afterwards an occasion arose for their intervention. A fugitive from Virginia, who for some days had trod the streets of Boston as a freeman, was seized as a slave. The whole community was aroused, while Bunker Hill and Faneuil Hall quaked with responsive indignation. Then, sir, the President, anxious that no tittle of Slavery should suffer, was curiously eager in the en forcement of the statute. The despatches between him and his agents in Boston attest his zeal. Here are some of them : " BOSTON, May 27, 1854. " To the President of the United States : " In consequence of an attack upon the Court House, last night, for the purpose of rescuing a fugitive slave, under arrest, and in 640 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. which one of my own guards was killed, / have availed myself of the resources of the United States, placed iinder my control by letter from the War and Navy Departments in 1851, and now have two companies of troops from Fort Independence stationed in the Court House. Every thing is now quiet. The attack was repulsed by my own guard. WATSON FREEMAN, United States Marshal, Boston, Mass." " WASHINGTON, May 27, 1854. " To Watson Freeman, United States Marshal, Boston, Mass. : " Your conduct is approved. The law must be executed. FRANKLIN PIERCE." " WASHINGTON, May 30, 1854. " To lion B. F. Hallett, Boston, Mass. : " What is the state of the case of Burns ? SIDNEY WEBSTER." [Private Secretary of the President.} " WASHINGTON, May 31, 1854. " To B. F. Hallett, United States Attorney, Boston, Mass. : " Incur any expense deemed necessary by the Marshal and your self, for City Military, or otherwise, to insure the execution of the law. FRANKLIN PIERCE." But the President was not content with such forces as were then on hand in the neighborhood. Other posts also were put under requisition. Two companies of National troops, stationed at New York, were kept under arms, ready at any moment to proceed to Boston ; and the Adjutant General of the Army was directed to repair to the scene, there to superintend the execution of the statute. All this was done for the sake of Slavery ; but during long months of menace suspended over the Free Soil of Kansas, breaking forth in suc cessive invasions, the President has folded his hands in complete listlessness, or, if he has moved at all, it has been only to encourage the robber propagandists. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 641 And now the intelligence of the country is insulted by the Apology, that the President had no power to interfere. Why, sir, to make this confession is to con fess our Government to be a practical failure, which I will never do, except, indeed, as it is administered now. No, sir, the imbecility of the Chief Magistrate shall not be charged upon our American Institutions. Where there is a will, there is a way ; and in his case, had the will existed, there would have been a way, easy and triumphant, to guard against the Crime we now deplore. His powers were in every respect ample ; and this I will prove by the statute book. By the Act of Congress of 28th February, 1795, it is enacted, " that whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed, or the execution thereof obstructed, in any State, by combinations too powerful to be sup pressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals," the Presi dent " may call forth the militia." By the supple mentary Act of 3d March, 1807, in all cases where he is authorized to call forth the militia " for the purpose of causing the laws to be duly executed," the President is further empowered, in any State or Territory, " to employ for the same purposes such part of the land or naval force of the United States as shall be judged necessary." There is the letter of the law ; and you will please to mark the power conferred. In no case where the laws of the United States are opposed, or their execution obstructed, is the President constrained to wait for the requisition of a Governor, or even the petition of a citizen. Just so soon as he learns the fact, no matter by what channel, he is invested by law with full power to counteract it. True it is, that when 54* 642 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. the laws of a State are obstructed, he can interfere Only on the application of the Legislature of such State, or of the Executive, when the Legislature cannot be convened ; but when the Federal laws are obstructed, no such preliminary application is necessary. It is his high duty, under his oath of office, to see that they are executed, and if need be, by the Federal forces. And, sir, this is the precise exigency that has arisen in Kansas precisely this ; nor more, nor less. The Act of Congress, constituting the very organic law of the Territory, which, in peculiar phrase, as if to avoid ambiguity, declares, as " its true intent and meaning," that the people thereof " shall be left perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way," has been from the beginning opposed and ob structed in its execution. If the President had power to employ the Federal forces in Boston, when he sup posed the Fugitive Slave Bill was obstructed, and mere ly in anticipation of such obstruction, it is absurd to say that he had not power in Kansas, when, in the face of the whole country, the very organic law of the Ter ritory was trampled under foot by successive invasions, and the freedom of the people there overthrown. To assert ignorance of this obstruction premeditated, long-continued, and stretching through months at tributes to him, not merely imbecility, but idiocy. And thus do I dispose of this Apology. Next comes the Apology absurd, which is, indeed, in the nature of a pretext. It is alleged that a small printed pamphlet, containing the " Constitution and Ritual of the Grand Encampment and Regiments of the Kansas Legion," was taken from the person of one George F. Warren, who attempted to avoid detection THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 643 by chewing it. The oaths and grandiose titles of the pretended Legion have all been set forth, and this poor mummery of a secret society, which existed only on paper, has been gravely introduced on this floor, in order to extenuate the Crime against Kansas. It has been paraded in more than one speech, and even stuffed into the report of the committee. A part of the obligations assumed by the members of this Legion shows why it has been, thus pursued, and also attests its innocence. It is as follows : " I will never knowingly propose a person for membership in this order who is not in favor of making Kansas a free State, and whom I feel satisfied will exert his entire influence to bring about this result. I will support, maintain, and abide by any honora ble movement made by the organization to secure this great end, tchich will not conflict with the laws of the country and the Consti tution of the United States." Kansas is to be made a free State by an honorable movement, which will not conflict with the laws and the Constitution. That is the object of the organization, declared in the very words of the initiatory obligation. Where is the wrong in this ? What is there here which can cast reproach, or even suspicion, upon the people of Kansas ? Grant that the Legion was consti tuted, can you extract from it any Apology for the original Crime, or for its present ratification ? Secret societies, with their extravagant oaths, are justly of fensive ; but who can find, in this mistaken machinery, any excuse for the denial of all rights to the people of Kansas ? All this I say on the supposition that the society was a reality, which it was not. Existing in the fantastic brains of a few persons only, it never had any practical life. It was never organized. The whole 644 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. tale, with the mode of obtaining the copy of the Consti tution, is at once a cock-and-bull story and a mare s nest ; trivial as the former, absurd as the latter ; and to be dismissed with the Apology founded upon it, to the derision which triviality and absurdity justly receive. It only remains, under this head, that I should speak of the Apology infamous ; founded on false testimony against the Emigrant Aid Company, and assumptions of duty more false than the testimony. Defying Truth and mocking Decency, this Apology excels all others in futility and audacity, while, from its utter hollow- ness, it proves the utter impotence of the conspirators to defend their Crime. Falsehood, always infamous, in this case arouses peculiar scorn. An association of sincere benevolence, faithful to the Constitution and laws, whose only fortifications are hotels, school houses, and churches ; whose only weapons are saw-mills, tools, and books ; whose mission is peace and good will, has been falsely assailed on this floor, and an errand of blameless virtue has been made the pretext for an unpardonable Crime. Nay, more the inno cent are sacrificed, and the guilty set at liberty. They who seek to do the mission of the Saviour are scourged and crucified, while the murderer, Barabbas, with the sympathy of the chief priests, goes at large. Were I to take counsel of my own feelings, I should dismiss this whole Apology to the ineffable contempt which it deserves ; but it has been made to play such a part in this conspiracy, that I feel it a duty to expose it completely. Sir, from the earliest times, men have recognized the advantages of organization, as an effective agency in promoting works of peace or war. Especially at THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 645 this moment, there is no interest, public or private, high or low, of charity or trade, of luxury or con venience, which does not seek its aid. Men organize to rear churches and to sell thread ; to build schools and to sail ships ; to construct roads and to manufac ture toys ; to spin cotton and to print books ; to weave cloths and to quicken harvests ; to provide food and to distribute light ; to influence Public Opinion and to secure votes ; to guard infancy in its weakness, old age in its decrepitude, and womanhood in its wretchedness ; and now, in all large towns, when death has come, they are buried by organized societies, and, emigrants to another world, they lie down in pleasant places, adorned by organized skill. To complain that this prevailing principle has been applied to living emigrd- tion is to complain of Providence and the irresistible tendencies implantefl in man. But this application of the principle is no recent in vention, brought forth for an existing emergency. It has the best stamp of Antiquity. It showed itself in the brightest days of Greece, where colonists moved in organized bands. It became a part of the mature policy of Rome, where bodies of men were constituted expressly for this purpose triumviri ad colonos dedu- cendos. (Livy, xxxvii. 46.) Naturally it has been accepted in modern times by every civilized State. With the sanction of Spain, an association of Genoese merchants first introduced slaves to this continent. With the sanction of France, the Society of Jesuits stretched their labors over Canada and the Great Lakes to the Mississippi. It was under the auspices of Emi grant Aid Companies that our country was originally settled by the Pilgrim Fathers of Plymouth, by the 646 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. Adventurers of Virginia, and by the philanthropic Oglethorpe, whose "benevolence of soul," commemo rated by Pope, sought to plant a Free State in Geor gia. At this day, such associations, of a humbler character, are found in Europe, with offices in the great capitals, through whose activity emigrants are directed here. For a long time, emigration to the West, from the Northern and Middle States, but particularly from New England, has been of marked significance. In quest of better homes, annually it has pressed to the unsettled lands, in numbers to be counted by tens of thousands ; but this has been done heretofore with little knowledge, and without guide or counsel. Fi nally, when, by the establishment of a Government in Kansas, the tempting fields of that central region were opened to the competition of peaceful colonization, and especially when it was declared that the question of Freedom or Slavery there was to be determined by the votes of actual settlers, then at once was organiza tion enlisted as an effective agency in quickening and conducting the emigration impelled thither, and, more than all, in providing homes for it on arrival there. The Company was first constituted under an act of the Legislature of Massachusetts, 4th of May, 1854, some weeks prior to the passage of the Nebraska Bill. The original act of incorporation was subsequently abandoned, and a new charter received in February, 1855, in which the objects of the Society are thus de clared : " For the purposes of directing emigration Westward, and aid ing in providing accommodations for the emigrants after arriving at their places of destination" THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 647 At any other moment, an association for these pur poses would have taken its place, by general consent, among the philanthropic experiments of the age ; but Crime is always suspicious, and shakes, like a sick man, merely at the pointing of a finger. The conspirators against Freedom in Kansas now shook with tremor, real or affected. Their wicked plot was about to fail. To help themselves, they denounced the Emigrant Aid Company; and their denunciations, after finding an echo in the President, have been repeated, with much particularity, on this floor, in the formal report of your committee. The falsehood of the whole accusation will appear in illustrative specimens. A charter is set out, section by section, which, though originally granted, was subsequently abandoned, and is not in reality the charter of the Company, but is ma terially unlike it. The Company is represented as " a powerful corpo ration, with a capital of five millions ; " when, by its actual charter, it is not allowed to hold property above one million, and, in point of fact, its capital has not exceeded $100,000. Then, again, it is suggested, if not alleged, that this enormous capital, which I have already said does not exist, is invested in " cannon and rifles, in powder and lead, and implements of war" all of which, whether alleged or suggested, is absolutely false. The officers of the Company authorize me to give to this whole pre tension a point-blank denial. All these allegations are of small importance, and I mention them only because they show the character of the report, and also something of the quicksand on 648 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. which the Senator from Illinois has chosen to plant himself. But these are all capped by the unblushing assertion that the proceedings of the Company were " in perversion of the plain provisions of an Act of Congress ; " and also, another unblushing assertion, as " certain and undeniable," that the Company was formed to promote certain objects, "regardless of the rights and wishes of the people, as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and secured by their organic law ; " when it is certain and undeniable that the Company has done nothing in perversion of any Act of Congress, while to the extent of its power it has sought to protect the rights and wishes of the ac tual people in the Territory. Sir, this Company has violated in no respect the Constitution or laws of the land ; not in the severest letter or the slightest spirit. But every other imputa tion is equally baseless. It is not true, as the Senator from Illinois has alleged, in order in some way to com promise the Company, that it was informed before the public of the date fixed for the election of the Legis lature. This statement is pronounced by the Secretary, in a letter now before me, " an unqualified falsehood, not having even the shadow of a shade of truth for its basis." It is not true that men have been hired by the Company to go to Kansas ; for every emigrant, who has gone under its direction, has himself provided the means for his journey. Of course, sir, it is not true, as has been complained by the Senator from South Carolina, with that proclivity to error which marks all his utterances, that men have been sent by the Company "with one uniform gun, Sharpe s rifle ; " for it has supplied no arms of any kind to any body. It is not true that the THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 649 Company has encouraged any fanatical aggression upon the people of Missouri ; for it has counselled order, v peace, forbearance. It is not true that the Company has chosen its emigrants on account of their political opinions ; for it has asked no questions with regard to the opinions of any whom it aids, and at this moment stands ready to forward those from the South as well as the North, while, in the Territory, all, from what ever quarter, are admitted to an equal enjoyment of its tempting advantages. It is not true that the Company has sent persons merely to control elections, and not to remain in the Territory ; for its whole action, and all its anticipation of pecuniary profits, are founded on the hope to stock the country with permanent settlers, by whose labor the capital of the Company shall be made to yield its increase, and by whose fixed interest in the soil the welfare of all shall be promoted. Sir, it has not the honor of being an Abolition So ciety, or of numbering among its officers Abolitionists. Its President is a retired citizen, of ample means and charitable life, who has taken no part in the conflicts on Slavery, and has never allowed his sympathies to be felt by Abolitionists. One of its Vice Presidents is a gentleman from Virginia, with family and friends there, who has always opposed the Abolitionists. Its generous Treasurer, who is now justly absorbed by the objects of the Company, has always been understood as ranging with his extensive connections, by blood and marriage, on the side of that quietism which submits to all the tyranny of the Slave Power. Its Directors are more conspicuous for wealth and science than for any activity against Slavery. Among these is an em inent lawyer of Massachusetts, Mr. Chapman per- 55 650 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. sonally known, doubtless, to some who hear me who has distinguished himself by an austere conservatism, too natural to the atmosphere of courts, which does not flinch even from the support of the Fugitive Slave Bill. In a recent address at a public meeting in Springfield, this gentleman thus speaks for himself and his associates : "I have been a Director of the Society from the first, and have kept myself well informed in regard to its proceedings. I am not aware that any one in this community ever suspected me of being an Abolitionist ; but I have been accused of being Pro- Slavery ; and I believe many good people think I am quite too conservative on that subject. I take this occasion to say that all the plans and proceedings of the Society have met my approba tion ; and I assert that it has never done a single act with which any political party or the people of any section of the country can justly find fault. The name of its President, Mr. Brown, of Providence, and of its Treasurer, Mr. Lawrence, of Boston, are a sufficient guarantee, in the estimation of intelligent men, against its being engaged in any fanatical enterprise. Its stockholders are composed of men of all political parties except Abolitionists. I am not aware that it has received the patronage of that class of our fellow- citizens, and I am informed that some of them dis approve of its proceedings." The acts of the Company have been such as might be expected from auspices thus severely careful at all points. The secret, through which, with small means, it has been able to accomplish so much, is, that, as an inducement to emigration, it has gone forward and planted capital in advance of population. According to the old immethodical system, this rule is reversed, and population has been left to grope blindly, without the advantage of fixed centres, with mills, schools, and churches all calculated to soften the hardships of pioneer life such as have been established beforehand THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 651 in Kansas. Here, sir, is the secret of the Emigrant Aid Company. By this single principle, which is now practically applied for the first time in history, and which has the simplicity of genius, a business asso ciation at a distance, without a large capital, has be come a beneficent instrument of civilization, exercising the functions of various Societies, and in itself being a Missionary Society, a Bible Society, a Tract Society, an Education Society, and a Society for the Diffusion of the Mechanic Arts. I would not claim too much for this Company ; but I doubt if, at this moment, there is any Society which is so completely philan thropic ; and since its leading idea, like the light of a candle from which other candles are lighted without number, may be applied indefinitely, it promises to be an important aid to Human Progress. The lesson it teaches cannot be forgotten ; and hereafter, wherever unsettled lands exist, intelligent capital will lead the way, anticipating the wants of the pioneer nay, do ing the very work of the original pioneer while, amidst well-arranged harmonies, a new community will arise, to become, by its example, a more eloquent preacher than any solitary missionary. In subordina tion to this essential idea, is its humbler machinery for the aid of emigrants on their way, by combining par ties, so that friends and neighbors might journey to gether ; by purchasing tickets at wholesale, and fur nishing them to individuals at the actual cost; by providing for each party a conductor familiar with the road, and, through these simple means, promoting the economy, safety, and comfort of the expedition. The number of emigrants it has directly aided, even thus slightly, in their journey, has been infinitely exagger- 4 652 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. ated. From the beginning of its operations down to the close of the last autumn, all its detachments from Massachusetts contained only thirteen hundred and twelve persons. Such is the simple tale of the Emigrant Aid Com pany. Sir, not even suspicion can justly touch it. But it must be made a scapegoat. This is the decree which has gone forth. I was hardly surprised at this outrage, when it proceeded from the President, for, like Mac beth, he is stepped so far in, that returning were as tedious as go on ; but I did not expect it from the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. Geyer,] whom I had learned to respect for the general moderation of his views, and the name he has won in an honorable pro fession. Listening to him, I was saddened by the spectacle of the extent to which Slavery will sway a candid mind to do injustice. Had any other interest been in question, that Senator would have scorned to join in impeachment of such an association. His in stincts as a lawyer, as a man of honor, and as a Sen ator, would have forbidden ; but the Slave Power, in enforcing its behests, allows no hesitation, and the Senator surrendered. In this vindication I content myself with a state ment of facts, rather than an argument. It might be urged that Missouri had organized a propagandist em igration long before any from Massachusetts, and you might be reminded of the wolf in the fable, which complained of the lamb for disturbing the waters, when in fact the alleged offender was lower down on the stream. It might be urged, also, that South Carolina has lately entered upon a similar system while one of her chieftains, in rallying recruits, has unconscious- THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 653 ly attested to the cause in which he was engaged, by exclaiming, in the words of Satan, addressed to his wicked forces, " Awake ! arise ! or be forever fallen ! " * But the occasion needs no such defences. I put them aside. Not on the example of Missouri or the exam ple of South Carolina, but on inherent rights, which no man, whether Senator or President, can justly assail, do I plant this impregnable justification. It will not do, in specious phrases, to allege the right of every State to be free in its domestic policy from foreign in terference, and then to assume such wrongful interfer ence by this Company. By the law and Constitution, we stand or fall ; and that law and Constitution we have in no respect offended. To cloak the overthrow of all law in Kansas, an as sumption is now set up, which utterly denies one of the plainest rights of the people every where. Sir, I beg Senators to understand that this is a Government of laws ; and that, under these laws, the people have an incontestable right to settle any portion of our broad territory, and, if they choose, to propagate any opin ions there not openly forbidden by the laws. If this were not so, pray, sir, by what title is the Senator from Illinois, who is an emigrant from Vermont, propagating his disastrous opinions in another State ? Surely he has no monopoly of this right. Others may do what he is doing ; nor can the right be in any way restrained. It is as broad as the people ; and it matters not whether they go in numbers small or great, with assistance or without assistance, under the auspices of societies or * Mr. EVANS, of South Carolina, here interrupted Mr. Sum- ner to say that he did not know of any such address. Mr. Sum- ner replied, that it was taken from Southern papers. 55* 654 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. not under such auspices. If this were not so, then, by what title are so many foreigners annually natural ized, under Democratic auspices, in order to secure their votes for misnamed Democratic principles ? And if capital as well as combination cannot be employed, by what title do venerable associations exist, of ampler means and longer duration than any Emigrant Aid Com pany, around which cluster the regard and confidence of the country the Tract Society, a powerful corporation, which scatters its publications freely in every corner of the land the Bible Society, an incorporated body, with large resources, which seeks to carry the Book of Life alike into Territories and States the Mission ary Society, also an incorporated body, with large re sources, which sends its agents every where, at home and in foreign lands ? By what title do all these ex ist? Nay, sir, by what title does an Insurance Com pany in New York send its agent to open an office in New Orleans, and by what title does Massachusetts cap ital contribute to the Hannibal and St. Joseph Rail road in Missouri, and also to the copper mines of Mich igan ? The Senator inveighs against the Native Amer ican party ; but his own principle is narrower than any attributed to them. They object to the influence of emigrants from abroad ; he objects to the influence of American citizens at home, when exerted in States or Territories where they were not born ! The whole as sumption is too audacious for respectful argument. But since a great right has been denied, the children of the Free States, over whose cradles has shone the North Star, owe it to themselves, to their ancestors, and to Freedom itself, that this right should now be asserted to the fullest extent. By the blessing of God, THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 655 and under the continued protection of the laws, they will go to Kansas, there to plant their homes, in the hope of elevating this Territory soon into the sister hood of Free States ; and to such end they will not hesitate, in the employment of all legitimate means, whether by companies of men or contributions of mon ey, to swell a virtuous emigration, and they will justly scout any attempt to question this unquestionable right. Sir, if they failed to do this, they would be fit only for slaves themselves. God be praised ! Massachusetts, honored Common wealth that gives me the privilege to plead for Kansas on this floor, knows her rights, and will maintain them firmly to the end. This is not the first time in history that her public acts have been arraigned, and that her public men have been exposed to contumely. Thus was it when, in the olden time, she began the great battle whose fruits you all enjoy. But never yet has she occupied a position so lofty as at this hour. By the intelligence of her population by the resources of her industry by her commerce, cleaving every wave by her manufactures, various as human skill by her institutions of education, various as human knowledge by her institutions of benevolence, vari ous as human suffering by the pages of her scholars and historians by the voices of her poets and orators -* she is now exerting an influence more subtle and commanding than ever before shooting her far-dart- irig rays wherever ignorance, wretchedness, or wrong prevail, and flashing light even upon those who travel far to persecute her. Such is Massachusetts ; and I am proud to believe that you may as well attempt, with puny arm, to topple down the earth-rooted, 656 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. heaven-kissing granite which crowns the historic sod of Bunker Hill, as to change her fixed resolves for Freedom every where, and especially now for Freedom in Kansas. I exult, too, that in this battle, which sur passes far in moral grandeur the whole war of the Revolution, she is able to preserve her just eminence-. To the first she contributed a larger number of troops than any other State in the Union, and larger than all the Slave States together ; and now to the second, which is not of contending armies, but of contending opinions, on whose issue hangs trembling the advan cing civilization of the country, she contributes, through the manifold and endless intellectual activity of her children, more of that divine spark by which opinions are quickened into life than. is contributed by any other State, or by all the Slave States together ; while her annual productive industry excels in value three times the whole vaunted cotton crop of the whole South. Sir, to men on earth it belongs only to deserve suc cess, not to secure it ; and I know not how soon the efforts of Massachusetts will wear the crown of tri umph. But it cannot be that she acts wrong for her self or children, when in this cause she thus encoun ters reproach. No ; by the generous souls who were exposed at Lexington ; by those who stood arrayed at Bunker Hill ; by the many from her bosom who, on all the fields of the first great struggle, lent their vig orous arms to the cause of all ; by the children she has borne, whose names alone are national trophies, is Massachusetts now vowed irrevocably to this work. What belongs to the faithful servant she will do in all things, and Providence shall determine the result. And here ends what I have to say of the four Apol ogies for the Crime against Kansas. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 657 III. From this ample survey, where one obstruction after another has been removed, I now pass, in the third place, to the consideration of the various remedies proposed, ending with the TRUE REMEDY. The Remedy should be coextensive with the original Wrong; and since, by the passage of the Nebraska Bill, not only Kansas, but also Nebraska, Minnesota, Washington, and even Oregon, have been opened to Slavery, the original Prohibition should be restored to its complete activity throughout these various Territo ries. By such a happy restoration, made in good faith, the whole country would be replaced in the condition which it enjoyed before the introduction of that dis honest measure. Here is the Alpha and the Omega of our aim in this immediate controversy. But no such extensive measure is now in question. The Crime against Kansas has been special, and all else is absorbed in the special remedies for it. Of these I shall now As the Apologies were fourfold, so are the Remedies- proposed fourfold ; and they range themselves in natu ral order, under designations which so truly disclose their character as even to supersede argument. First, we have the Remedy of Tyranny ; next, the Remedy of Folly j next, the Remedy of Injustice and Civil War ; and fourthly, the Remedy of Justice and Peace. There are the four caskets ; and you are to determine which shall be opened by Senatorial votes. There is the Remedy of Tyranny, which, like its com plement, the Apology of Tyranny though espoused on this floor, especially by the Senator from Illinois proceeds from the President, and is embodied in a special message. It proposes to enforce obedience to 658 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. the existing laws of Kansas, " whether Federal or local," when, in fact, Kansas has no " local " laws, except those imposed by the Usurpation from Missouri, and it calls for additional appropriations to complete this work of tyranny. I shall not follow the President in his elaborate en deavor to prejudge the contested election now pending in the House of Representatives ; for this whole mat ter belongs to the privileges of that body, and neither the President nor the Senate has a right to intermeddle therewith. I do not touch it. But now, while dis missing it, I should not pardon myself if I failed to add that any person who founds his claim to a^seat in Congress on the pretended votes of hirelings from another State, with no home on the soil of Kansas, plays the part of Anacharsis Clootz, who, at the bar of the French Convention, undertook to represent nations that knew him not, or, if they knew him, scorned him ; with this difference, that in our American case the ex cessive farce of the transaction cannot cover its tragedy. But all this I put aside, to deal only with what is legit imately before the Senate. I expose simply the tyranny which upholds the exist ing Usurpation, and asks for additional appropriations. Let it be judged by an example from which in this country there can be no appeal. Here is the speech of George III., made from the Throne to Parliament, in response to the complaints of the Province of Massa chusetts Bay, which, though smarting under laws passed by usurped power, had yet avoided all armed opposi tion, while Lexington and Bunker Hill still slumbered in rural solitude, unconscious of the historic kindred which they were soon to claim. Instead of Massachu- THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 659 setts Bay, in the Royal speech, substitute Kansas, and the message of the President will be found fresh on the lips of the British King. Listen now to the words, which, in opening Parliament, 30th November, 1774, his Majesty, according to the official report, was pleased to speak : " My Lords and Gentlemen : " It gives me much concern that I am obliged, at the opening of this Parliament, to inform you that a most daring spirit of resistance and disobedience to the law still unhappily prevails in the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, and has in divers parts of it broke forth in fresh violences of a very criminal nature. These proceedings have been countenanced in other of my Colonies, and unwarrantable attempts have been made to obstruct the Commerce of this Kingdom, by unlawful combinations. I have taken such measures and given such orders as I have judged most proper and effectual for carrying into execution the laws which were passed in the last session of the late Parliament, for the protection and se curity of the Commerce of my subjects, and for the restoring and preserving peace, order, and good government in the Province of the Massachusetts Bay." American Archives, 4th series, vol. i. page 1465. The King complained of a " daring spirit of resist ance and disobedience to the law ; " so also does the President. The King adds that it has " broke forth in fresh violences of a very criminal nature ; " so also does the President. The King declares that these proceed ings have been " countenanced and encouraged in other of my Colonies ; " even so the President declares that Kansas has found sympathy in " remote States." The King inveighs against " unwarrantable measures " and " unlawful combinations ; " even so inveighs the Presi dent. The King proclaims that he has taken the neces sary steps for " carrying into execution the laws," passed in defiance of the constitutional rights of the 660 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. Colonies ; even so the President proclaims that he shall " exert the whole power of the Federal Execu tive " to support the Usurpation in Kansas. The par allel is complete. The Message, if not copied from the Speech of the King, has been fashioned on the same original block, and must be dismissed to the same limbo. I dismiss its tyrannical assumptions in favor of the Usurpation. I dismiss also its petition for additional appropriations, in the affected desire to main tain order in Kansas. It is not money or troops that you need there, but simply the good will of the President. That is all, absolutely. Let his complicity with the Crime cease, and peace will be restored. For myself, I will not consent to wad the National artillery with fresh appropriation bills, when its murderous hail is to be directed against the constitutional rights of my fellow-citizens. Next comes the Remedy of Folly, which, indeed, is also a Remedy of Tyranny ; but its Folly is so sur passing as to eclipse even its Tyranny. It does not proceed from the President. With this proposition he is not in any way chargeable. It comes from the Sen ator from South Carolina, who, at the close of a long speech, offered it as his single contribution to the adjustment of this question, and who thus far stands alone in its support. It might, therefore, fitly bear his name ; but that which I now give to it is a more suggestive synonyme. This proposition, nakedly expressed, is, that the people of Kansas should be deprived of their arms. That I may not do the least injustice to the Senator, I quote his precise words : " The President of the United States is under the highest and THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 661 most solemn obligations to interpose ; and if I were to indicate the manner in which he should interpose in Kansas, I would point out the old common law process. I would serve si warrant on Sharpe s rifles, and if Sharpc s rifles did not answer the sum mons, and come into court on a day certain, or if they resisted the sheriff, I would summon the posse comitatus, and would have Colonel Sumner s regiment to be a part of that posse comitatus." Really, sir, has it come to this ? The rifle has ever been the companion of the pioneer, and, under God, his tutelary protector against the red man and the beast of the forest. Never was this efficient weapon more needed in just self-defence than now in Kansas ; and at least one article in our National Constitution must be blotted out before the complete right to it can in any way be impeached. And yet such is the mad ness of the hour, that, in defiance of the solemn guar antee embodied in the Amendments to the Constitution, that " the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," the people of Kansas have been arraigned for keeping and bearing them, and the Senator from South Carolina has had the face to say openly on this floor that they should be disarmed of course that the fanatics of Slavery, his allies and con stituents, may meet no impediment. Sir, the Senator is venerable with years ; he is reputed also to have worn at home, in the State which lie represents, judi cial honors ; and he is placed here at the head of an important Committee occupied particularly with ques tions of law ; but neither his years, nor his position, past or present, can give respectability to the demand he has made, or save him from indignant condemna tion, when, to compass the wretched purposes of a wretched cause, he thus proposes to trample on one of the plainest provisions of constitutional liberty. - 56 662 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. Next comes the Remedy of Injustice and Civil War organized by Act of Congress. This proposition, which is also an offshoot of the original Remedy of Tyranny, proceeds from the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] with the sanction of the Committee on Ter ritories, and is embodied in the Bill which is now pressed to a vote. By this Bill it is proposed as follows : That whenever it shall appear, by a census to be taken under the direction of the Governor, by the authority of the Legisla ture, that there shall be 93,420 inhabitants (that being the num ber required by the present ratio of representation for a member of Congress) within the limits hereafter described as the Territo ry of Kansas, the Legislature of said Territory shall be, and is hereby, authorized to provide by law for the election of delegates, by the people of said Territory, to assemble in Convention and form a Constitution and State Government, preparatory to their admission into the Union on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatsoever, by the name of the State of Kansas." Now, sir, consider these words carefully, and you will see that, however plausible and velvet-pawed they may seem, yet in reality they are most unjust and cruel. While affecting to initiate honest proceedings for the formation of a State, they furnish to this Terri tory no redress for the Crime under which it suffers ; nay, they recognize the very Usurpation in which the Crime ended, and proceed to endow it with new pre rogatives. It is ~by the authority of the Legislature that the census is to be taken, which is the first step in the work. It is also by the authority of the Legislature that a Convention is to be called for the formation of a Constitution, which is the second step. But the Legislature is not obliged to take either of these steps. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 663 To its absolute wilfulness is it left to act or not to act in the premises. And since, in the ordinary course of business, there can be no action of the Legislature till January of the next -year, all these steps, which are preliminary in their character, are postponed till after that distant day thus keeping this great question open, to distract and irritate the country. Clearly this is not what is required. The country desires peace at once, and is determined to have it. But this objection is slight by the side of the glaring Tyranny that, in recognizing the Legislature, and conferring upon it these new powers, the Bill recognizes the existing Usurpation, not only as the authentic government of the Territory for the time being, but also as possessing a creative power to reproduce itself in the new State. Pass this Bill, and you enlist Congress in the conspir acy, not only to keep the people of Kansas in their present subjugation, throughout their Territorial exist ence, but also to protract this subjugation into their existence as a State, while you legalize and perpetuate the very force by which Slavery has been already planted there. I know that there is another deceptive clause, which seems to throw certain safeguards around the election of delegates to the Convention, when that Convention shall be ordered by the Legislature ; but out of this very clause do I draw a condemnation of the Usurpa tion which the Bill recognizes. It provides that the tests, coupled with the electoral franchise, shall not prevail in the election of delegates, and thus impliedly condemns them. By if they are not to prevail on this occasion, why are they permitted at the election of the Legislature? If they are unjust in the one case, they 664 THE CpIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. are unjust in the other. If annulled at the election of delegates, they should be annulled at the election of the Legislature ; whereas the Bill of the Senator leaves all these offensive tests in full activity at the election of the very Legislature out of which this whole proceeding is to come, and it leaves the polls at both elections in the control of the officers appointed by the Usurpation. Consider well the facts. By an existing statute, establishing the Fugitive Slave Bill as a shib boleth, a large portion of the honest citizens are ex cluded from voting for the Legislature, while, by another statute, all who present themselves with a fee of one dollar, whether from Missouri or not, and who can utter this shibboleth, are entitled to vote. And it is a Legislature thus chosen, under the auspices of officers appointed by the Usurpation, that you now propose to invest with parental powers to rear the Territory into a State. You recognize and confirm the Usurpation which you ought to annul without delay. You put the infant State, now preparing to take a place in our sisterhood, to suckle with the wolf which you ought at once to kill. The improbable story of Baron Munchausen is verified. The bear, which thrust itself into the harness of the horse it had devoured, and then whirled the sledge according to mere brutal bent, is recognized by this Bill, and kept in its usurped place, when the safety of all requires that it should be shot. In characterizing this Bill as the Remedy of Injus tice and Civil War, I give it a plain, self-evident title. It is a continuation of the Crime against Kansas, and as such deserves the same condemnation. It can only be defended by those who defend the Crime. Sir, you THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 665 cannot expect that the people of Kansas will submit to the Usurpation which this Bill sets up, and bids them bow before, as the Austrian tyrant set up his cap in the Swiss market place. If you madly persevere, Kansas will not be without her William Tell, who will refuse at all hazards to recognize the tyrannical edict ; and this will be the beginning of civil war. Next, and lastly, comes the Remedy of Justice and Peace, proposed by the Senator from New York, [Mr. Seward,] and embodied in his Bill for the immediate admission of Kansas as a State of this Union, now pending as a substitute for the Bill of the Senator from Illinois. This is sustained by the prayer of the people of the Territory, setting forth a Constitution formed by a spontaneous movement, in which all there had opportunity to participate, without distinction of party. Rarely has any proposition so simple in character, so entirely practicable, so absolutely within your power, been presented, which promised at once such benefi cent results. In its adoption, the Crime against Kan sas will be all happily absolved, the Usurpation which it established will be peacefully suppressed, and order will be permanently secured. By a joyful metamor phosis this fair Territory may be saved from outrage. " O, help," she cries, "in this extremest need, If you who hear are Deities indeed ; Gape, earth, and make for this dread foe a tomb, Or change my form, whence all my sorrows come." In offering this proposition, the Senator from New York has entitled himself to the gratitude of the coun try. He has, throughout a life of unsurpassed indus try and of eminent ability, done much for Freedom, which the world will not let die ; but he has done 56* G66 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. nothing more opportune than this, and he has uttered no words more effective than the speech, so masterly and ingenious, by which he has vindicated it. Kansas now presents herself for admission with a Constitution republican in form. And, independent of the great necessity of the case, three considerations of fact concur in commending her. First, she thus testifies her willingness to relieve the Federal Govern ment of the considerable pecuniary responsibility to which it is now exposed on account of the pretended Territorial Government. Secondly, she has, by her recent conduct, particularly in repelling the invasion at Wakarusa, evinced an ability to defend her Govern ment. And, thirdly, by the pecuniary credit which she now enjoys, she shows an undoubted ability to support it. What now can stand in her way ? The power of Congress to admit Kansas at once is explicit. It is found in a single clause of the Consti tution, which, standing by itself, without any qualifi cation applicable to the present case, and without doubtful words, requires no commentary. Here it is : " New States may be admitted by Congress into this Union ; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdic tion of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned, as well as of the Con- New States MAY be admitted. Out of that little word, may, comes the power, broadly and fully, with out any limitation founded on population or prelimi nary forms, provided the State is not within the juris diction of another State, nor formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the THE CKIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. G67 consent of the Legislatures of the States. Kansas is not within the legal jurisdiction of another State, although the laws of Missouri have been tyrannically extended over her : nor is Kansas formed by the junc tion of two or more States ; and, therefore, Kansas may be admitted by Congress into the Union, without regard to population or preliminary forms. You can not deny the power without obliterating this clause of the Constitution. The Senator from New York was right in rejecting all appeal to precedents, as entirely irrelevant ; for the power invoked is clear and express in the Constitution, which is above all precedent. But, since precedent has been enlisted, let us look at prece dent. It is objected that the population of Kansas is not sufficient for a State ; and this objection is sustained by under-reckoning the numbers there, and exagger ating the numbers required by precedent. In the ab sence of any recent census, it is impossible to do more than approximate to the actual population ; but, from careful inquiry of the best sources, I am led to place it now at 50,000, though I observe that a prudent author ity, the Boston Daily Advertiser, puts it as high as 60,000 ; and while I speak, this remarkable popula tion, fed by fresh emigration, is outstripping even these calculations. Nor can there be a doubt that, before the assent of Congress can be perfected in the ordinary course of legislation, this population will swell to the large number of 93,420, required in the Bill of the Senator from Illinois. But in making this number the condition of the admission of Kansas, you set up an extraordinary standard. There is nothing out of which it can be derived, from the beginning to 668 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. the end of the precedents. Going back to the days of the Continental Congress, you will find that, in 1784, it was declared that 20,000 freemen in a Terri tory might " establish a permanent Constitution and Government for themselves," (Journals of Congress, vol. iv. p. 379 ;) and though this number was after wards, in the Ordinance of 1787 for the North-western Territory, raised to 60,000, yet the power was left in Congress, and subsequently exercised in more than one instance, to constitute a State with a smaller num ber. Out of all the new States, only Maine, Wiscon sin, and Texas contained, at the time of their admis sion into the Union, so large a population as it is pro posed to require in Kansas ; while no less than fourteen new States have been admitted with a smaller popula tion, as will appear in the following list, which is the result of research, showing the number of " free inhab itants" in these States at the time of the proceedings which ended in their admission : Vermont, . . . 85,416 Kentucky, . . . 61,103 Tennessee, . . . 66,649 Ohio, .... 50,000 Louisiana, . . . 41,890 Indiana,. . . . 60,000 Mississippi, . . . 35,000 Alabama, . . . 50,000 Illinois, .... 45,000 Missouri, . . . 56,586 Arkansas, . . . 41,000 Michigan, . . . 92,673 Florida, .... 27,091 Iowa, .... 81,921 California, . . . 92,597 But this is not all. At the adoption of the Federal Constitution there were three of the old Thirteen States whose respective populations did not reach the ainount now required for Kansas. These were Delaware, with THE CRIME AGA IXST KANSAS, ETC. 669 a population of 59,096 ; Rhode Island, with a popula tion of 64,689 ; and Georgia, with a population of 82,548. And even now, while I speak, there are at least two States, with Senators on this floor, which, according to the last census, do not contain the popu lation now required of Kansas. I refer to Delaware, with a population of 91,635, and Florida, with a pop ulation of freemen amounting only to 47,203. So much for precedents of population. But in sustaining this objection, it is not uncommon to depart from the strict rule of numerical precedent, by suggesting that the population required in a new State has always been, in point of fact, above the existing ratio of representation for a member of the House of Representatives. But this is not true ; for at least one State, Florida, was admitted with a popu lation below this ratio, which at the time was 70,680. So much, again, for precedents. But even if this co incidence were complete, it would be impossible to press it into a binding precedent. The rule seems reasonable, and, in ordinary cases, would not be ques tioned ; but it cannot be drawn or implied from the Constitution. Besides, this ratio is, in itself, a sliding scale. At first it was 33,000, and thus continued till 1811, when it was put at 35,000. In 1822 it was 40,000; in 1832 it was 47,700; in 1842 it was 70,680 ; and now it is 93,420. If any ratio is to be made the foundation of a binding rule, it should be that which prevailed at the adoption of the Constitu tion, and which still continued when Kansas, as a part of Louisiana, was acquired from France, under solemn stipulation that it should " be incorporated into the Union of the United States as soon as may. be consist- 670 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. ent with the principles of the Federal Constitution." But this whole objection is met by the memorial of the people of Florida, which, if good for that State, is also good for Kansas. Here is a passage : " But the people of Florida respectfully insist that their right to be admitted into the Federal Union as a State is not depend ent upon the fact of their having a population equal to such ratio. Their right to admission, it is conceived, is guaranteed by the express pledge in the sixth article of the treaty before quoted ; and if any rule as to the number of the population is to govern, it should be that in existence at the time of the cession, which was thirty-five thousand. They submit, however, that any ratio of representation, dependent upon legislative action, based solely on convenience and expediency, shifting and vacillating as the opin ion of a majority of Congress may make it, now greater than at a previous apportionment, but which a future Congress may pre scribe to be less, cannot be one of the constitutional PRINCIPLES referred to in the treaty, consistency with which, by its terms, is required. It is, in truth, but a mere regulation, not founded on principle. No specified number of population is required by any recognized principle as necessary in the establishment of a free Government. " It is in no wise inconsistent with the principles of the Federal. Constitution, that the population of a State should be less than the ratio of Congressional representation. The very case is pro vided for in the Constitution. With such deficient population, she would be entitled to one- Representative. If any event should cause a decrease of the population of one of the States even to a number below the minimum ratio of representation prescribed by the Constitution, she would still remain a member of the Con federacy, and be entitled to such Representative. It is respect fully urged, that a rule or principle which would not justify the expulsion of a State with a deficient population, on the ground of inconsistency with the Constitution, should not exclude or prohibit admission." Exec. Doc. 27th Cong., 2d sess., vol. iv. No. 206. Thus, sir, do the people of Florida plead for the people of Kansas. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 671 Distrusting the objection from inadequacy of popu lation, it is said that the proceedings for the forma tion of a new State are fatally defective in form. It is not asserted that a previous enabling Act of Con gress is indispensable ; for there are notorious prece dents the other way, among which are Kentucky, in 1791; Tennessee, in 1796; Maine, in 1820; and Arkansas and Michigan, in 1836. But it is urged that in no instance has a State been admitted whose Constitution was formed without such enabling Act, or without the authority of the Territorial Legislature. This is not true ; for California came into the Union with a Constitution formed not only without any pre vious enabling Act, but also without any sanction from a Territorial Legislature. The proceedings which ended in this Constitution were initiated by the mili tary Governor there, acting under the exigency of the hour. This instance may not be identical in all respects with that of Kansas ; but it displaces completely one of the assumptions which Kansas now encounters, and it also stows completely the disposition to relax all rule, under the exigency of the hour, in order to do substantial justice. But there is a memorable- instance, which contains in itself every element of irregularity which you denounce in the proceedings of Kansas. Michigan, now cher ished with such pride as a sister State, achieved admis sion into the Union in persistent defiance of all rule. Do you ask for precedents ? Here is a precedent for the largest latitude, which you who profess a deference to precedent cannot disown. Mark now the stages of this case. The first proceedings of Michigan were without any previous enabling Act of Congress ; and 672 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. she presented herself at your door with a Constitution thus formed, and with Senators chosen under that Con stitution precisely as Kansas now. This was in December, 1835, while Andrew Jackson was Presi dent. By the leaders of the Democracy at that time all objection for alleged defects of form was scouted, and language was employed which is strictly applica ble to Kansas. There is nothing new under the sun ; and the very objection of the President, that the appli cation of Kansas proceeds from " persons acting against authorities duly constituted by Act of Congress," was hurled against the application of Michigan, in debate on this floor, by Mr. Hendricks, of Indiana. This was his language : < " But the people of Michigan, in presenting their Senate and House of Representatives as the legislative power existing there, showed that they had trampled upon and violated the laws of the United States establishing a Territorial Government in Michigan. These laws were, or ought to be, in full force there ; but, by the character and position assumed, they had set up a Government antagonist to that of the United States." Congress Deb., vol. xii. p. 288, Ikth Cong., 1st session. To this impeachment Mr. Benton replied in these effective words : " Conventions were original acts of the people. They depend ed upon inherent and inalienable rights. The people of any State may at any time meet in Convention, without a law of their Legislature, and without any provision, or against any provision, in their Constitution, and may alter or abolish the whole frame of Government as they please. The sovereign power to govern themselves was in the majority, and they could not be divested of it." Ibid. p. 1036. Mr. Buchanan vied with Mr. Benton in vindicating the new State : THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 673 " The precedent in the case of Tennessee has completely silenced all opposition in regard to the necessity of a previous act of Congress to enable the people of Michigan to form a State Con stitution. It now seems to be conceded that our subsequent ap probation is equivalent to our previous action. This can no longer be doubted. We have the unquestionable power of waiving any irregularities in the mode of framing the Constitution, had any such existed." Ibid. p. 1041. " He did hope that by this bill all objections would be re moved; and that this State, so ready to rush into our arms, would not be repulsed, because of the absence of some formalities which perhaps were very proper, but certainly not indispensable." Ibid. p. 1015. After an animated contest in the Senate, the Bill for the admission of Michigan, on her assent to certain conditions, was passed, by 23 yeas to 8 nays. But you find weight, as well as numbers, on the side of the new State. Among the yeas were Thomas H. Benton, of Missouri, James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, Silas Wright, of New York, W. R. King, of Alabama. (Cong. Globe, vol. Hi. p. 276, 1st session 24th Cong.) Subsequently, on motion of Mr. Buchanan, the two gentlemen, sent as Senators by the new State received the regular compensation for attendance throughout the very session in which their seats had been so acri moniously assailed. Ibid. p. 448. In the House of Representatives the application was equally successful. The Committee on the Judiciary, in an elaborate report, reviewed the objections, and, among other things, said : " That the people of Michigan have, without due authority, formed a State Government, but, nevertheless, that Congress has power to waive any objection which might, on that account, be enter tained, to the ratification of the Constitution which they have adopted, and to admit their Senators and Representatives to take 57 674 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. their seats in the Congress of the United States." Exec. Doc., 1st sess. 2th Cong., vol. ii. No. 380. The House sustained this view by a vote of 153 yeas to 45 nays. In this large majority, by which the title of Michigan was then recognized, will be found the name of Franklin Pierce, at that time a Represent ative from New Hampshire. But the case was not ended. The fiercest trial and the greatest irregularity remained. The Act providing for the admission of the new State contained a modifi cation of its boundaries, and proceeded to require, as a fundamental condition, that these should "receive the assent of a Convention of delegates, elected by the people of the said State, for the sole purpose of giving the assent herein required." (Statutes at Large, vol. v. p. 50, Act of June 5th, 1836.)- Such a Convention, duly elected under a call from the Legislature, met in pursuance of law, and, after consideration, declined to come into the Union on the condition proposed. But the action of this Convention was not universally sat isfactory ; and in order to effect an admission into the Union, another Convention was called professedly by the people, in their sovereign capacity, without any authority from State or Territorial Legislature ; nay, sir, according to the language of the present President, "against authorities duly constituted by Act of Con gress," at least as much as the recent Convention in Kansas. The irregularity of this Convention was in creased by the circumstance that two of the oldest counties of the State, comprising a population of some 25,000 souls, refused to take any part in it, even to the extent, of not opening the polls for the election of delegates, claiming that it was held without warrant THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 675 of law, and in defiance of the legal Convention. This popular Convention, though wanting a popular sup port coextensive with the State, yet proceeded, by formal act, to give the assent of the people of Michi gan to the fundamental condition proposed by Congress. The proceedings of the two Conventions were trans mitted to President Jackson, who, by message, dated 27th December, 1836, laid them both before Congress, indicating very clearly his desire to ascertain the will of the people, without regard to form. The origin of the popular Convention he thus describes : " This Convention was not held or elected by virtue of any act of the Territorial or State Legislature. It originated from the People themselves, and was chosen by them in pursuance of res olutions adopted in primary assemblies held in the respective counties." Sen. Doc., 2d sess. 24:th Cong., vol. i. No. 36. And he then declares that, had these proceedings come to him during the recess of Congress, he should have felt it his duty, on being satisfied that they emanated from a Convention of delegates elected in point of fact by the People of the State, to issue his proclama tion for the admission of the State. The Committee on the Judiciary in the Senate, of which Felix Grundy was Chairman, after inquiry, recog nized the competency of the popular Convention, as " elected by the People of the State of Michigan," and reported a Bill, responsive to their assent of the proposed condition, for the admission of the State without further condition. (Statutes at Large, vol. v. p. 144, Act of 26th Jan., 1837.) Then, sir, ap peared the very objections which are now directed against Kansas. It was complained that the move ment for immediate admission was the work of "a 676 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. minority," and that "a great majority of the State feel otherwise." (Sen. Doc., 2d sess. 24th Cong., vol. i. No. 37.) And a leading Senator, of great ability and integrity, Mr. Ewing, of Ohio, broke forth in a catechism which would do for the present hour. He exclaimed : " What evidence had the Senate of the organization of the Convention ? Of the organization of the popular assemblies who appointed their delegates to that Convention ? None on earth. Who they were that met and voted we had no information. Who gave the notice ? And for what did the People receive the notice ? To meet and elect ? What evidence was there that the Convention acted according to law ? Were the delegates sworn ? And if so, they were extrajuclicial oaths, and not binding upon them. Were the votes counted ? In fact, it was not a proceed ing under the forms of law, for they were totally disregarded." Cong. Globe, vol. iv. p. 60, 2d sess. 21th Cong. And the same able Senator, on another occasion, after exposing the imperfect evidence with regard to the action of the Convention, existing only in letters, and in an article from a Detroit newspaper, again exclaimed : "This, sir, is the evidence to support an organic law of a new State about to enter into the IJnion ! Yes, of an organic law, the very highest act a community of men can perform. Letters referring to other letters and a scrap of a newspaper." Cong. Debates, vol. xiii. Part I. p. 233. It was Mr. Calhoun, however, who pressed the op position with the most persevering intensity. In his sight, the admission of Michigan, under the circum stances, " would be the most monstrous proceeding under our Constitution that can be conceived, the most repugnant to its principles and dangerous in its conse quences." (Cong. Delates, vol. xiii. p. 210.) " There is not," he exclaimed, " one particle of official evidence THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 677 before us. We have nothing but the private letters of individuals, who do not know even the numbers that voted on either occasion. They know nothing of the qualifications of voters, nor how their votes were re ceived, nor by whom counted." (Ibid.) And he proceeded to characterize the popular Convention as "not only a party caucus, for party purpose, but a criminal meeting a meeting to subvert the authority of the State and to assume its sovereignty " adding, " that the actors in that meeting might be indicted, tried, and punished" and he expressed astonishment that " a self-created meeting, convened for a criminal object, had dared to present to this Government an act of theirs, and to expect that we are to receive this ir regular and criminal act as a fulfilment of the condition which we had presented for the admission of the State ! " (Ibid. p. 299.) No stronger words have been employed against Kansas. But the single question on which all the proceedings then hinged, and which is as pertinent in the case of Kansas as in the case of Michigan, was thus put by Mr. Morris, of Ohio, (Ibid. p. 215): " Will Con gress recognize as valid, constitutional, and obligatory, without the color of a law of Michigan to sustain it, an act done by the People of that State in their primary assemblies, and acknowledge that act as obligatory on the constituted authorities and Legislature of the State ? " This question, thus distinctly presented, was answered in debate by able Senators, among whom were Mr. Benton and Mr. King. But there was one person, who has since enjoyed much public confidence, and has left many memorials of an industrious career in the Senate and in diplomatic life, James Buchanan, 57* 678 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. * who rendered himself conspicuous by the ability and ardor with which, against all assaults, he upheld the cause of the popular Convention, which was so strongly denounced, and the entire conformity of its proceedings with the genius of American Institutions. His speeches on that occasion contain an unanswerable argument, at all points, mutato nomine, for the imme diate admission of Kansas under her present Constitu tion ; nor is there any thing by which he is now dis tinguished that will redound so truly to his fame, if he only continues true to them. But the question was emphatically answered in the Senate by the final vote on the passage of the Bill, where we find 25 yeas to only 10 nays. In the House of Representatives, after debate, the question was answered in the same way, by a vote of 148 yeas to 58 nays ; and among the yeas is again the name of FRANKLIN PIERCE, a Representa tive from New Hampshire. Thus, in that day, by such triumphant votes, did the cause of Kansas prevail in the name of Michigan. A popular Convention called absolutely without au thority, and containing delegates from a portion only of the population called, too, in opposition to con stituted authorities, and in derogation of another Con vention assembled under the forms of law stigma tized as a caucus and a criminal meeting, whose authors were liable to indictment, trial, and punish ment was, after ample debate, recognized by Con gress as valid, and Michigan now holds her place in the Union, and her Senators sit on this floor, by virtue of that act. Sir, if Michigan is legitimate, Kansas cannot be illegitimate. You bastardize Michigan when you refuse to recognize Kansas. THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 679 Again I say, do you require a precedent ? I give it to you. But I will not stake this cause on any prece dent. I plant it firmly on the fundamental principle of American Institutions, as embodied in the Declara tion of Independence, by which Government is recog nized as deriving its just powers only from the consent of the governed, who may alter or abolish it when it becomes destructive of their rights. In the debate on the Nebraska Bill, at the overthrow of the Prohibition of Slavery, the Declaration of Independence was de nounced as a " self-evident lie." It is only by a simi lar audacity that the fundamental principle, which sus tains the proceedings in Kansas, can be assailed. Nay, more : you must disown the Declaration of Independ ence, and adopt the Circular of the Holy Alliance, which declares that " useful and necessary changes in legislation and in the administration of States ought only to emanate from the free will and the intelligent and well-weighed conviction of those whom God has rendered responsible for power." Face to face, I put the principle of the Declaration of Independence and the principle of the Holy Alliance, and bid them grap ple ! " The one places the remedy in the hands which feel the disorder ; the other places the remedy in the hands which cause the disorder;" and when I thus truthfully characterize them, I but adopt a sententious phrase from the Debates in the Virginia Convention on the adoption of the Federal Constitution. (3 Elliofs Delates. 107 Mr. Corbin.) And now these two principles, embodied in the rival propositions of the Senator from New York and the Senator from Illinois, must grapple on this floor. Statesmen and judges, publicists and authors, with 680 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. names of authority in American history, espouse and vindicate the American principle. Hand in hand, they now stand around Kansas, and feel this new State lean on them for support. Of these I content myself with adducing two only, both from slaveholding Virginia, in days when Human Rights were not without support in that State. Listen to the language of St. George Tucker, the distinguished commentator upon Black- stone, uttered from the bench in a judicial opinion : " The power of convening the legal Assemblies, or the ordi nary constitutional Legislature, resided solely in the Executive. They could neither be chosen without writs issued by its author ity, nor assemble, when chosen, but under the same authority. The Conventions, on the contrary, were chosen and assembled, either in pursuance of recommendations from Congress, or from their own bodies, or by the discretion and common consent of the people. They were held even whilst a legal Assembly existed. Witness the Convention held at Richmond, in March v 1775 ; after which period, the legal constitutional Assembly was con vened in Williamsburg, by the Governor, Lord Dunmore. * * * Yet a constitutional dependence on the British Government was never denied until the succeeding May. * * * The Conven tion, then, was not the ordinary Legislature of Virginia. It was the body of the people, impelled to assemble from a sense of com mon danger, consulting for the common good, and acting in all things for the common safety." 1 Virginia Cases, 70, 71, Kam- pcr vs. Hawkins. ) Listen also to the language of James Madison : " That in all great changes of established government, forms ought to give way to substance ; that a rigid adherence in such cases to the forms would render nominal and nugatory the tran scendent and precious right of the people to abolish or alter their Government, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. * * * Nor can it have been forgot ten that no little ill-timed scruples, no zeal for adhering to ordi nary forms, were any ichere seen, except in those icho wish to indulge THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 681 tinder these masks their secret enmity to the substance contended for." The Federalist, No. 40. Proceedings thus sustained I am unwilling to call revolutionary, although this term has the sanction of the Senator from New York. They are founded on an unquestionable American right, declared with Inde pendence, confirmed by the blood of the fathers, and expounded by patriots, which cannot be impeached without impairing the liberties of all. On this head the language of Mr. Buchanan, in reply to Mr. Cal- houn, is explicit : "Does the Senator [Mr. Calhoun] contend, then, that if, in one of the States of this Union, the Government be so organized as to utterly destroy the right of equal representation, there is no mode of obtaining redress, but by an act of the Legislature au thorizing a Convention, or by open rebellion ? Must the people step at once from oppression to open war ? Must it be either absolute submission or absolute revolution ? Is there no middle course? I cannot agree with the "Senator. I say that the whole history of our Government establishes the principle that the peo ple are sovereign, and that a majority of them can alter or change their fundamental laws at pleasure. I deny that this is either rebellion or revolution. It is an essential and a recognized princi ple in all our forms of government." Congress Deb., vol. xiii. p. 313, 24:th Cong., 2d session. Surely, sir, if ever there was occasion for the exer cise of this right, the time nad come in Kansas. The people there had been subjugated by a horde of foreign invaders, and brought under a tyrannical code of re volting barbarity, while property and life among them were left exposed to audacious assaults which flaunted at noonday, and to reptile abuses which crawled in the darkness of night. Self-defence is the first law of nature ; and unless this law is temporarily silenced 682 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. as all other law has been silenced there you cannot condemn the proceedings in Kansas. Here, sir, is an unquestionable authority in itself an overwhelming law which belongs to all countries and times which is the same in Kansas as at Athens and Rome which is now, and will be hereafter, as it was in other days in presence of which Acts of Congress and Con stitutions are powerless, as the voice of man against the thunder which rolls through the sky which whis pers itself coeval with life whose very breath is life itself ; and now, in the last resort, do I place all these proceedings under this supreme safeguard, which you will assail in vain. Any opposition must be founded on a fundamental perversion of facts, or a perversion of fundamental principles, which no speeches can up hold, though surpassing in numbers the nine hundred thousand piles driven into the mud in order to sustain the Dutch Stadthouse at Amsterdam ! Thus, on every ground of precedent, whether as re gards population or forms of proceeding ; also, on the vital principle of American Institutions ; and, lastly, on the absolute law of self-defence, do I now invoke the power of Congress to admit Kansas at once and without hesitation into the Union. " New States may be admitted by the Congress into the Union: " such are the words of the Constitution. If you hesitate for want of precedent, then do I appeal to the great prin ciple of American Institutions. If, forgetting the ori gin of the Republic, you turn away from this principle, then, in the name of human nature, trampled down and oppressed, but aroused to a just self-defence, do I plead for the exercise of this power. Do not hearken, I pray you, to the propositions of Tyranny and Folly ; do not THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 683 be insnared by that other proposition of the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] in which is the horrid root of Injustice and Civil War. But apply gladly, and at once, the True Remedy, wherein are Justice and Peace. Mr. President, an immense space has been traversed, and I now stand at the goal. The argument in its various parts is here closed. The Crime against Kan sas has been displayed in its origin and extent, begin ning with the overthrow of the Prohibition of Slavery ; next cropping out in conspiracy on the borders of Mis souri ; then hardening into a continuity of outrage, through organized invasions and miscellaneous as saults, in which all security was destroyed, and ending at last in the perfect subjugation of a generous people to an unprecedented Usurpation. Turning aghast from the Crime, which, like murder, seemed to confess itself " with most miraculous organ," we have looked with mingled shame and indignation upon the four Apol ogies, whether of Tyranny, Imbecility, Absurdity, or Infamy, in which it has been wrapped, marking espe cially the false testimony, congenial with the original Crime, against the Emigrant Aid Company. Then were noted, in succession, the four Remedies, whether of Tyranny, Folly, Injustice, and Civil War, or Jus tice and Peace, which last bids Kansas, in conformity with past precedents and under the exigencies of the hour, in order to redeem her from Usurpation, to take a place as a sovereign State of the Union ; and this is the True Remedy. If in this argument I have not un worthily vindicated Truth, then have I spoken accord ing to my desires ; if imperfectly, then only according 684 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. to my powers. But there are other things, not belong ing to the argument, which still press for utterance. Sir, the people of Kansas, bone of your bone and flesh of your flesh, with the education of freemen and the rights of American citizens, now stand at your door. Will you send them away, or bid them enter ? Will you push them back to renew their struggles with a deadly foe, or will you preserve them in security and peace ? Will you cast them again into the den of Tyranny, or will you help their despairing efforts to escape ? These questions I put with no common solici tude ; for I feel that on their just determination de pend all the most precious interests of the Republic ; and I perceive too clearly the prejudices in the way, and the accumulating bitterness against this distant people, now claiming their simple birthright, while I am bowed with mortification, as I recognize the Pres ident of the United States, who should have been a staff to the weak and a shield to the innocent, at the head of this strange oppression. At every stage, the similitude between the wrongs of Kansas, and those other wrongs against which our fathers rose, becomes more apparent. Read the Declaration of Independence, and there is hardly an accusation which is there directed against the British Monarch, which may not now be directed with increased force against the American President. The parallel has a fearful particularity. Our fathers complained that the King had " sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance ; " that he " had combined, with others, to subject us to a juris diction foreign to our Constitution, giving his assent THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 685 to their acts of pretended legislation ; " that " he had abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection, and waging war against us ; " that " he had excited domestic insurrection among us, and en deavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontier the merciless savages ; " that " our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury." And this arraignment was aptly followed by the damning words, that " a Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." And surely a President who has done all these things cannot be less unfit than a Prince. At every stage the responsibility is brought directly to him. His offence has been both of com mission and omission. He has done that which he ought not to have done, and he has left undone that which he ought to have done. By his activity the Prohibition of Slavery was overturned. By his failure to act, the honest emigrants in Kansas have been left a prey to wrong of all kinds. Nullum flagitium extitit, nisi per te ; nullum flagitium sine te. And now he stands forth the most conspicuous enemy of that un happy Territory. As the tyranny of the British King is all renewed in the President, so on this floor have the old indigni ties been renewed, which imbittered and fomented the troubles of our Fathers. The early petition of the American Congress to Parliament, long before any suggestion of Independence, was opposed like the petitions of Kansas because that body " was assem bled without any requisition on the part of the Su preme Power." Another petition from New York, presented by Edmund Burke, was flatly rejected, as 58 686 THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. claiming rights derogatory to Parliament. And still another petition from Massachusetts Bay was dismissed as "vexatious and scandalous," while the patriotic phi losopher who bore it was exposed to peculiar contume ly. Throughout the debates our Fathers were made the butt of sorry jests and supercilious assumptions. And now these scenes, with these precise objections, have been renewed in the American Senate. With regret I come again upon the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. Butler,] who, omnipresent in this debate, overflowed with rage at the simple sugges- j tion that Kansas had applied for admission as a State ; and, with incoherent phrases, discharged the loose ex pectoration of his speech, now upon her representative, ; and then upon her people. There was no extrava gance of the ancient Parliamentary debate which he ; did not repeat ; nor was there any possible deviation from truth which he did not make, with so much of passion, I am glad to add, as to save him from the sus picion of intentional aberration. But the Senator touches nothing which he does not disfigure with error, sometimes of principle, sometimes of fact. He shows an incapacity of accuracy, whether in stating the Constitution or in stating the law, whether in the de tails of statistics or the diversions of scholarship. He cannot ope his mouth, but out there flies a blunder. Surely he ought to be familiar with the life of Frank lin ; and yet he referred to this household character, while acting as agent of our Fathers in England, as above suspicion ; and this was done that he might give point to a false contrast with the agent of Kansas not knowing that, however they may differ in genius and fame, in this experience they are alike : that Franklin, THE CKIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 687 when intrusted with the petition of Massachusetts Bay, was assaulted by a foul-mouthed speaker, where he could not be heard in defence, and denounced as a " thief," even as the agent of Kansas has been assaulted on this floor, and denounced as a " forger." And let not the vanity of the Senator be inspired by the parallel with the British statesmen of that day ; for it is only in hos tility to Freedom that any parallel can be recognized. But it is against the people of Kansas that the sen sibilities of the Senator are particularly aroused. Coming, as he announces, " from a State " ay, sir, from South Carolina he turns with lordly disgust from this newly-formed community, which he will not recognize even as " a body politic." Pray, sir, by what title does he indulge in this egotism ? Has he read the history of " the State " which he represents ? He cannot surely have forgotten its shameful imbecili ty from Slavery, confessed throughout the Revolution, followed by its more shameful assumptions for Slavery since. He cannot have forgotten its wretched per sistence in the slave trade as the very apple of its eye, and the condition of its participation in the Union. He cannot have forgotten its Constitution, which is republican only in name, confirming power in the hands of the few, and founding the qualifications of its legislators on " a settled freehold estate or ten negroes." And yet the Senator to whom that " State " has in part committed the guardianship of its good name, in stead of moving, with backward-treading steps, to cover its nakedness, rushes forward, in the very ecstasy of madness, to expose it, by provoking a comparison with Kansas. f South Carolina is old ; Kansas is young. South Carolina counts by centuries, where Kansas 688 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. counts by years* But a beneficent example may be born in a day ; and I venture to say, that against the two centuries of the older " State," may be already set the two years of trial, evolving corresponding virtue, in the younger community. In the one is the long wail of Slavery ; in the other, the hymns of Freedom. And if we glance at special achievements, it will be difficult to find any thing in the history of South Caro lina which presents so much of heroic spirit in an heroic cause as appears in that repulse of the Missouri invaders by the beleaguered town of Lawrence, where even the women gave their effective efforts to Free dom./ The matrons of Rome who poured their jewels into the treasury for the public defence ; the wives of Prussia, who, with delicate fingers, clothed their de fenders against French invasion ; the mothers of our own Revolution, who sent forth their sons, covered over with prayers and blessings, to combat for Human Rights, did nothing of self-sacrifice truer than did these women on this occasion. Were the whole history of South Carolina blotted out of existence, from its very beginning down to the day of the last election of the Senator to his present seat on this floor, civilization might lose I do not say how little ; but surely less than it has already gained by the example of Kansas, in its valiant struggle against oppression, and in the development of a new science of emigration. Already in Lawrence alone there are newspapers and schools, including a High School, and throughout this infant Territory there is more of mature scholarship, in pro portion to its inhabitants, than in all South Carolina. Ah, sir, I tell the Senator that Kansas, welcomed as a Free State, will be a " ministering angel " to the Re- THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 689 public, when South Carolina, in the cloak of darkness which she hugs, "lies howling." / The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] naturally joins the Senator from South Carolina in this warfare, and gives to it the superior intensity of his nature. He thinks that the National Government has not complete ly proved its power, as it has never hanged a traitor ; but if the occasion requires, he hopes there will be no hesitation ; and this threat is directed at Kansas, and even at the friends of Kansas throughout the country. Again occurs the parallel with the struggles of our Fathers ; and I borrow the language of Patrick Henry, when to the cry from the Senator of " Treason, trea son ! " I reply, " If this be treason, make the most of it." Sir, it is easy to call names ; but I beg to tell the Senator that if the word " traitor " is in any way applicable to those who refuse submission to a tyrannical Usurpation, whether in Kansas or elsewhere, then must some new word, of deeper color, be invented to designate those mad spirits who would endanger and degrade the Re public, while they betray all the cherished sentiments of the Fathers and the spirit of the Constitution in order to give new spread to Slavery. Let the Senator proceed. It will not be the first time in history that a scaffold erected for punishment has become a pedestal of honor. Out of death comes life, and the " traitor " whom he blindly executes will live immortal in the cause. " For Humanity sweeps onward ; where to-day the martyr stands, On the morrow crouches Judas, with the silver in his hands ; While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return, To glean up the scattered ashes into History s golden urn." Among these hostile Senators there is yet another, with all the prejudices of the Senator from South Caro- 690 THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. lina, but without his generous impulses, who, on ac count of his character before the country, and the ran cor of his opposition, deserves to be named. I mean the Senator from Virginia, [Mr. Mason,] who, as the | author of the Fugitive Slave Bill, has associated him self with a special act of inhumanity and tyranny. Of him I shall say little, for he has said little in this debate, though within that little was compressed the bitterness of a life absorbed in the support of Slavery. He holds the commission of Virginia ; but he does not represent that early Virginia, so dear to our hearts, which gave to us the pen of Jefferson, by which the equality of men was declared, and the sword of Wash ington, by which Independence was secured ; but he represents that other Virginia, from which Washing ton and Jefferson now avert their faces, where human beings are bred as cattle for the shambles, and where a dungeon rewards the pious matron who teaches little children to relieve their bondage by reading the Book of Life. It is proper that such a Senator, represent ing such a State, should rail against Free Kansas. But this is not all. The precedent is still more clinching. Thus far I have followed exclusively the public documents laid before Congress, and illustrated by the debates of that body ; but well-authenticated facts, not of record here, make the case stronger still. It is sometimes said that the proceedings in Kansas are defective, because they originated in a party. This is not true ; but even if it were true, then would they still find support in the example of Michigan, where all the proceedings, stretching through successive years, began and ended in party. The proposed State Gov ernment was pressed by the Democrats as a party test ; THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 691 and all who did not embark in it were denounced. Of the Legislative Council, which called the first Con stitutional Convention in 1835, all were Democrats ; and in the Convention itself, composed of eighty-seven members, only seven were Whigs. The Convention of 1836, which gave the final assent, originated in a Dem ocratic Convention on the 29th October, in the county of Wayne, composed of one hundred and twenty-four delegates, all Democrats, who proceeded to resolve : " That the delegates of the Democratic party of Wayne, sol emnly impressed with the spreading evils and dangers which a refusal to go into the Union has brought upon the people of Mich igan, earnestly recommend meetings to be immediately convened by their fellow-citizens in every county of the State, with a view to the expression of their sentiments in favor of the election and call of another Convention, in time to secure our admission into the Union before the first of January next." Shortly afterwards, a committee of five, appointed by this Convention, all leading Democrats, issued a circular, " under the authority of the delegates of the county of Wayne," recommending that the voters throughout Michigan should meet and elect delegates to a Convention to give the necessary assent to the Act of Congress. In pursuance of this call, the Conven tion met ; and, as it originated in an exclusively party recommendation, so it was of an exclusively party character. And it was the action of this Convention that was submitted to Congress, and, after discussion in both bodies, on solemn votes, approved. But the precedent of Michigan has another feature, which is entitled to the gravest attention, especially at this moment, when citizens engaged in the effort to establish a State Government in Kansas are openly 692 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. arrested on the charge of treason, and we are startled by tidings of the maddest efforts to press this procedure of preposterous Tyranny. No such madness prevailed under Andrew Jackson ; although, during the long pendency of the Michigan proceedings, for more than fourteen months, the Territorial Government was entire ly ousted, and the State Government organized in all its departments. One hundred and thirty different legis lative acts were passed, providing for elections, impos ing taxes, erecting corporations, and establishing courts of justice, including a Supreme Court and a Court of Chancery. All process was issued in the name of the people of the State of Michigan. And yet no attempt was made to question the legal validity of these pro ceedings, whether legislative or judicial. Least of all did any menial Governor, dressed in a little brief au thority, play the fantastic tricks which we now witness in Kansas ; nor did any person, wearing the robes of justice, shock high Heaven with the mockery of injus tice now enacted by emissaries of the President in that Territory. No, sir ; nothing of this kind then oc curred. Andrew Jackson was President. Senators such as these are the natural enemies of Kansas, and I introduce them with reluctance, simply that the country may understand the character of the hostility which must be overcome. Arrayed with them, of course, are all who unite, under any pretext or apology, in the propagandism of Human Slavery. To such, indeed, the time-honored safeguards of pop ular rights can be a name only, and nothing more. What are trial by jury, habeas corpus, the ballot box, the right of petition, the liberty of Kansas, your lib erty, sir, or mine, to one who lends himself, not mere- THE CHIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 693 ly to the support at home, but to the propagandism abroad, of that preposterous wrong, which denies even the right of a man to himself! Such a cause can be maintained only by a practical subversion of all rights. It is, therefore, merely according to reason that its par tisans should uphold the Usurpation in Kansas. To overthrow this Usurpation is now the special, importunate duty of Congress, admitting of no hes itation or postponement. To this end it must lift itself from the cabals of candidates, the machinations of party, and the low level of vulgar strife. It must turn from that Slave Oligarchy which now controls the Republic, and refuse to be its tool. Let its power be stretched forth towards this distant Territory, not to bind, but to unbind ; not for the oppression of the weak, but for the subversion of the tyrannical ; not for the prop and maintenance of a revolting Usurpa tion, but for the confirmation of Liberty. " These are imperial arts, and worthy thee ! " Let it now take its stand between the living and dead, and cause this plague to be stayed. All this it can do ; and if the interests of Slavery did not oppose, all this it would do at once, in reverent regard for justice; law, and order, driving far away all the alarms of war ; nor would it dare to brave the shame and punishment of this Great Refusal. But the Slave Power dares any thing ; and it can be conquered only by the united masses of the People. From Congress to the People I appeal. Already Public Opinion gathers unwonted forces to scourge the aggressors. In the press, in daily conver sation, wherever two or three are gathered together, 694 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. there the indignant utterance finds vent. And trade, by unerring indications, attests the growing energy. Public credit in Missouri droops. The six per cents of that State, which at par should be 102, have sunk to 84^- thus at once completing the evidence of Crime, and attesting its punishment. Business is now turning from the Assassins and Thugs, that infest the Missouri River on the way to Kansas, to seek some safer avenue. And this, though not unimportant in itself, is typical of greater changes. The political credit of the men who uphold the Usurpation droops even more than the stocks ; and the People are turn ing from all those through whom the Assassins and Thugs have derived their disgraceful immunity. It was said of old, " Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor s Landmark. And all the people shall say. Amen" (Deut. xxvii. 17.) Cursed, it is said, in the city, and in the field ; cursed in basket and store ; cursed when thou comest in, and cursed when thou goest out. These are terrible imprecations ; but if ever any Landmark were sacred, it Avas that by which an immense territory was guarded forever against Slavery ; and if ever such imprecations could justly descend upon any one, they must descend now upon all who, not content with the removal of this sacred Landmark, have since, with criminal complicity, fos tered the incursions of the great Wrong against which it was intended to guard. But I utter no impreca tions. These are not my words ; nor is it my part to add to or subtract from them. But thanks be to God ! they find a response in the hearts of an aroused Peo ple, making them turn from every man, whether Pres ident, or Senator, or Representative, who has been THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 695 engaged in this Crime especially from those who, cradled in free institutions, are without the apology of education or social prejudice until of all such those other words of the prophet shall be fulfilled "I will set my face against that man, and make him a sign and a proverb, and I will cut him off from the midst of my people." (Ezekiel xiv. 8.) Turning thus from the authors of this Crime, the People will unite once more with the Fathers of the Republic, in a just condemna tion of Slavery determined especially that it shall find no home in the National Territories while the Slave Power, in which the Crime had its beginning, and by which it is now sustained, will be swept into the charnel house of defunct Tyrannies. In this contest Kansas bravely stands forth the stripling leader, clad in the panoply of American insti tutions. In calmly meeting and adopting a frame of Government, her people have with intuitive prompti tude performed the duties of freemen ; and when I consider the difficulties by which she was beset, I find dignity in her attitude. In offering herself for admis sion into the Union as a FREE STATE, she presents a single issue for the people to decide. And since the Slave Power now stakes on this issue all its ill-gotten supremacy, the People, while vindicating Kansas, will at the same time overthrow this Tyranny. Thus does the contest which she now begins involve not only Liberty for herself, but for the whole country. God be praised that she did not bend ignobly beneath the yoke ! Far away on the prairies, she is now battling for the Liberty of all, against the President, who mis represents all. Every where among those who are not insensible to Right, the generous struggle meets a gen- 696 THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. erous response. From innumerable throbbing hearts go forth the very words of encouragement which, in the sorrowful days of our Fathers, were sent by Vir ginia, speaking by the pen of Richard Henry Lee, to Massachusetts, in the person of her popular tribune, Samuel Adams : " CHANTILLY, VA., June 23, 1774. " I hope the good people of Boston will not lose their spirits, under their present heavy oppression, for they will certainly be supported by the other Colonies ; and the cause for which they suffer is so glorious, and so deeply interesting to the present and "future generations, that all America will owe, in a great meas ure, their political salvation to the present virtue of Massachu setts Bay." American Archives, 4th series, vol. i. p. 446. In all this sympathy there is strength. But in the cause itself there is angelic power. Unseen of men, the great spirits of History combat by the side of the people of Kansas, breathing a divine courage. Above all towers the majestic form of Washington, once more, as on the bloody field, bidding them to remember those rights of Human Nature for which, the War of Inde pendence was waged. Such a cause, thus sustained, is invincible. The contest, which, beginning in Kansas, has reached us, will soon be transferred from Congress to a broader stage, where every citizen will be not only spectator, but actor; and to their judgment I confi dently appeal. To the People, now on the eve of ex ercising the electoral franchise, in choosing a Chief Magistrate of the Republic, I appeal, to vindicate the electoral franchise in Kansas. Let the ballot box of the Union, with multitudinous might, protect the bal lot box in that Territory. Let the voters every where, THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS, ETC. 697 while rejoicing in their own rights, help to guard the equal rights of distant fellow-citizens ; that the shrines of popular institutions, now desecrated, may be sanc tified anew ; that the ballot box, now plundered, may be restored ; and that the cry, " I am an American citizen," may not be sent forth in vain against .outrage of every kind. In just regard for free labor in that Territory, which it is sought to blast by unwelcome association with slave labor ; in Christian sympathy with the slave, whom it is proposed to task and to sell there ; in stern condemnation of the Crime which has been consummated on that beautiful soil ; in rescue of fellow-citizens, now subjugated to a Tyrannical Usur pation ; in dutiful respect for the early Fathers, whose aspirations are now ignobly thwarted ; in the name of the Constitution, which has been outraged of the Laws trampled down of Justice banished of Hu manity degraded of Peace destroyed of Freedom crushed to earth ; and in the name of the Heavenly Father, whose service is perfect Freedom, I make this last appeal. 59 AlISHSAI RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT TO ^ 202 Main Library LOAN PERIOD 1 HOME USE 2 3 4 5 6 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date. Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405. DUE AS STAMPED BELOW U9 JUNO? 1990 DEC ? 20! 4 FORM NO. DD6 7 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY BERKELEY, CA 94720 s VJA JA U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES COOt,ObOM37