(pA^4z/?^c■ '£li "^ ^''-'Cf-^ K s. L-^hyrrt^ /^<€0/>fc Orations and Arguments BY English and American Statesmen EDITED, WITH NOTES, EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL, BY CORNELIUS BEACH BRADLEY Propbssob op Rhbtoric in ths Univbrsity OF CAUrORNIA , « • • • « • , , •• • • • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • • " • • • . • • Boston ALLYN AND BACON 1895 -i> Y EDUCATICN DEPI, Copt RIGHT, 1W4, Bt Cob»bhu8 B. Mr API ft. Ttpooeapitt bt C. J. Pctem ft Sow, BoeroN. PBE88WOSK BY BKBWI<;K * SMITII. PREFACE. The purpose of this book is to furnish a collection of oratorical and argumentative masterpieces, suitable for stu- dents in the schools and for general readers. In making the selection the following considerations have had deter- mining weight : 1. That every speech includetl should be in itself memorable — a great utterance upon a great sub- ject, attaining its distinction through the essential qualities of nobility and force of ideas, rather than through accidents of occasion, of feeling, or of rhetorical display; 2. That each should be in topic so related to the great thoughts, memories, or problems of our own time, as to have for us still an inherent and vital interest ; 3. That the collection as a whole should include material enough to permit of a varied selection for tlje use of successive classes in the schools. The speeches thus chosen have been printed from the best available texts, without change, save that the spelling has been made uniform throughout, and that three of the speeches — those of Webster, Calhoun, and Seward — have been shortened somewhat by the omission of matters of merely temporary or local interest. Yet even the omitted portions have been summarized for the reader, whenever they have seemed to bear upon the main argument. In the preparation of the notes, it has been the aim to furnish the reader with whatever help seems necessary to the proper understanding and appreciation of the speeches ; to avoid bewildering him with mere subtleties and display of erudition; and to encourage in him the habit of self- help and the familiarity with sources of information, whuh Ui ivil9ai47 iv Preface, mark the scholar. A special feature of this part of tli- work is a sketch of the English Constitution and Govern ment, intended as a general introduction to the English speeches. It has not l)een thought best to propound any set scheme for instruction. To enter into the high thought of such si)eeches as these, to appreciate the masterly forging of ar- gument, to realize the far-reaching force and application ol ideas, to feel the uplift of noble emotions — these are tlu ends to be reached; and competent teachers will reacli them l)e8t by their own methods. I desire to acknowledge in general my indebtedness to earlier works in this field, jiarticularly to Professor Good- rich's British Eloquence, and to K J. Payne's Jiurkr . Select Works. But wherever I have availed myself ol more than mere suggestion or clew, I have endeavored to make due acknowledgment in the Notes. First in the list of those to whom I am personally in- debted for assistance rendered, I would name Mr. George A. Bacon and Mr. John Allyn, my publishers. From them came the original suggestion of the work ; and to their wise counsel and untiring interest it owes far more than its excellence of outward form. To Prof. Charles Mills Ga \ ley, my colleague in the English Department, I am in debted for valuable suggestion in selecting the speeches, and for criticism of portions of my manuscript Notes. In this last acknowledgment must be included also Proi. Carl C. Plehn and Prof. William Carey Jones, who have generously given me the benefit of their criticism on a number of historical and political points encountered in my study. Nor must I forget the kind service rendered me by my nephew, Mr. Evander B. McGilvary, in reading through- out the proof of the Notes. C. B. BRADLEY. UNIVKRSITT of CAIilFORXlA, November 30, 1891. CONTENTS. SFEECKBS:— PAob BuRKR : On ConcUiatiun xoUh the Colouiea 1 Chatham : On American Affairs .... BuRKR : lie fore the Electors at Bristol HU Erskink : In the Stockdale Case Ill WKB.STKR : TTie Reply to Ilayne i ^.'' Macaulay : On the Reform Hill of 18.T2 r.j Calhoun : On the Slavery Quention . Ill Seward : On the Irrepressible Conflict -"« Lincoln: Tlie Gettysburg Address . . -11 NOTES:- The English Constitution and Oovemment . . ^15 Edmund Burke '•^27 Speech on Conciliation with America . ^9 Lord Chatham HI Speech on American Affairs . H3 Edmund Burke '^'^ Speech before the Electors at Bristol . ••• Lord Erskinb -'-^ Speech in the StockdcUe Case . . Daniel Webster '' The Reply to Ilayne '' Lord Macaulat '^' Speech on the Reform Bill of 1832 ' ~ John C. Calhoun '^- Speech on the Slavery Question . =74 William H. Seward ^^ Speech on the Irrepressible Conflict ^ Abraham Lincoln ... .. :»79 EDMUND BURKE. ON MOVING HIS RESOLUTIONS FOR CONCILIATION WITH THE COLONIES. HOUSE OP COMMONS, MARCH 22, 1775. I HOPE, Sir, that notwithstanding the austerity of the Chair, your good nature will incline you to some degree of indulgence towards human frailty. You will not think it unnatural that those who have an object depending, which strongly engages their hopes and fears, should be 6 somewhat inclined to superstition. As I came into the House full of anxiety about the event of my motion, I found, to my infinite surprise, that the grand penal bill, by wliich we had passed sentence on the trade and suste- nance of America, is to be returned to us from the other 10 House. I do confess I could not help looking on this event as a fortunate omen. I look upon it as a sort of providential favor, by which we are put once more in possession of our deliberative capacity upon a business so very questionable in its nature, so very uncertain in u its issue. Hy the return of this bill, which seemed to have taken its flight forever, we are at this very instant nearly as free to choose a plan for our American Gov- ernment as we were on the first day of the session. If, Sir, we incline to the side of conciliation, we are not so at all embarrassed (unless we please to make ourselves so) by any incongruous mixture of coercion and restraint. 1 2 Burke. We are therefore called upon, as it were by a superior warning voice, again to attend to America; to attend t(. the whole of it together; and to review the subject with an unusual degree of care and calmness. 5 Surely it is an awful subject, or there is none so on this side of the grave. When I first had the honor of a Beat in this House, the affairs of that continent pressoi i themselves upon us as the most imix)rtant and most delicate object of Parliamentary attention. My little 10 share in this great deliberation oppressed me. I fouml myself a partaker in a very high trust; and, having no sort of reason to rely on the strength of my natural abil- ities for the proper execution of that trust, I was oblige! to take more than common pains to instruct myself in 15 everything which relates to our Colonies. I was not less under the necessity of forming some fixed ideas concern- ing the general policy of the British Empire. Something of this sort seemed to be indispensable, in order, amidst so vast a fluctuation of passions and opinions, to con - 20 centre my thoughts, to ballast my conduct, to preserve me from being blown about by every wind of fashion- able doctrine. I really did not think it safe or manly to have fresh principles to seek upon every fresh mail which should arrive from America. 26 At that period I had the fortune to find myself in per- fect concurrence with a large majority in this House. Bowing under that high authority, and penetrated with the sharpness and strength of that early impression, I have continued ever since, without the least deviation, 30 in my original sentiments. Whether this be owing to an obstinate perseverance in error, or to a religious adher- ence to what appears to me truth and reason, it is in your equity tb judge. Sir, Parliament having an enlarged view of object 35 made, during this interval, more frequent changes in their Oanciliation with the Colonies. d sentiments and their conduct than could be justified in a particular person upon the contracted scale of private information. But though I do not hazard anything ap- proaching to a censure on the motives of former Parliar ments to all those alterations, one fact is undoubted — 5 that under them \he state of America has been kept in continual agitation. Ever3rthing administered as remedy to the public complaint, if it did not produce, was at least followed by, an heightening of the distemper ; until, by a variety of experiments, that important country has been lo brought into her present situation — a situation which I will not miscall, which I dare not name, which I scarcely know how to comprehend in the terms of any description. In this posture, Sir, things stood at the beginning of the session. About that time, a worthy member of great 15 Parliamentary experience, who, in the year 1766, filled tlie chair of the American committee with much ability, took me aside ; and, lamenting the present aspect of our politics, told me things were come to such a pass that our former methods of proceeding in the House would Ik* no 'JO longer tolerated : that the public tribunal (never too in- dulgent to a long and unsuccessful opposition) would now scnitinize our conduct with unusual severity : that the very vicissitudes and shiftings of Ministerial measures, instead of convicting their authors of inconstancy and » want of system, would be taken < as35 6 Burke, easily discovered at the first view as fraud is surely de- tected at last, is, let me say, of no mean force in the government of mankind. Genuine simplicity of heart is an healing and cementing principle. My plan, therefore, 6 being formed upon the most simple grounds imaginable, may disappoint some people when they hear it. It has notliing to recommend it to the pruriency of curious ears. There is nothing at all new and captivating in it. It has nothing of the splendor of the project which has been 10 lately laid upon your table by the noble lord in tlie blue ribbon. It does not propose to fill your lobby witli squabbling Colony agents, who will require the interpo- sition of your mace, at every instant, to keep the peace amongst them. It does not institute a magnificent auc- 15 tion of finance, where captivated provinces come to gener- al ransom by bidding against each other, until you knock down the hammer, and determine a proportion of pay- ments beyond all the powers of algebra to equalize and settle. 20 The plan which I shall presume to suggest derives, however, one great advantage from the proposition and registry of that noble lord's project. The idea of con- ciliation is admissible. First, the House, in accepting the resolution moved by the noble lord, has admitted, 25 notwithstanding the menacing front of our address, not- withstanding our heavy bills of pains and penalties — that we do not think ourselves precluded from all ideas of free grace and bounty. The House has gone farther ; it has declared concilia- 30 tion admissible, previous to any submission on the ])art of America. It has even shot a good deal beyond that mark, and has admitted that the complaints of our for- mer mode of exerting the right of taxation were not wholly unfounded. That right thus exerted is allowed 35 to have something reprehensible in it, something unwise, c..,,.;!;. ,::,,,> n-itl, the Colonies, 7 or s<">methiiig grn-voiis; since, m the midst of our heat and resentment, we, of ourselves, have proposed a capital alteration; and in order to get rid of what seemed so very exceptionable, have instituted a mode that is alto- gether new; one that is, indeed, wholly alien from all 6 the ancient methods and forms of Parliament. The principle of this proceeding is large enough for my purpose. The means proposed by the noble lord for carrying his ideas into execution, I think, indeed, are very indifferently suited to the end; and this I shall 10 •Muleavor to show you before I sit down. But, for the present, I take my ground on the admitted principle. I mean to give peace. Peace implies reconciliation; and where there has been a material dispute, reconciliation does in a manner always imply concession on the one 15 |)art or on the other. In this state of things I make no difficulty in affirming that the proposal ought to originate, irom us. Great and acknowledged force is not impaired, either in effect or in opinion, by an unwillingness to exert itself. The superior power may offer peace with 20 iionor and with safety. Such an offer from such a power will be attributed to magnanimity. But the concessions of the weak are the concessions of fear. When such a < )ne is disarmed, he is wholly at the mercy of his supe- rior ; and he loses forever that time and those chances, 25 which, as they happen to all men, are the strength and resources of all inferior power. The capital leading questions on which you must this day decide are these two: First, whether you ought to ' >ncede ; and secondly, what your concession ought to be. 30 »u the first of these questions we have gained, as I have just taken the liberty of observing to you, some ground. Hut I am sensible that a good deal more is still to be i«ieraLiuii ol the present and the grow- ing numbers in the front of our deliberation, because, Sir, this consideration will make it evident to a blunter discernment than yours, that no partial, narrow, con- t racted, pinched, occasional system will be at all suitable 5 to such an object. It will show you that it is not to be considered as one of those minima which are out of the eye and consideration of the law; not a paltry excres- cence of the stiite ; not a mean dependant, who may be neglected with little damage and provoked with little lo (lunger. It "will prove that some degree of care and caution is required in the handling such an object ; it will show that you ought not, in reason, to trifle with so large a mass, of the interests and feelings of the human race. You could at no time do so without guilt ; and be 16 assured you will not be able to do it long with impunity. But the population of this country, the great and :^^ rowing population, though a very important considera- tion, will lose much of its weight if not combined with ( >ther circumstances. The commerce of your Colonies 20 is out of all proportion beyond the numbers of the jieople. This ground of their commerce indeed has been t rod some days ago, and with great ability, by a distin- iiished person at your bar. This gentleman, after hirty-five years — it is so long since he first appeared 25. at the same place to plead for the commerce of Great 1 Britain — has come again before you to plead the same cause, without any other effect of time, than that to the tire of imagination and extent of erudition which even then marked him as one of the first literary characters 30 of his age, he has added a consummate knowledge in the ommercial interest of his country, formed by a long course of enlightened and discriminating experience. { Sir, I should be inexcusable in coming after such a l)er8on with any detail, if a great part of the members 36 10 Burke, who now fill the House had not the misfortune to be absent wlien he appeared at your bar. Besides, Sir, I propose to take the matter at i)eriods of time somewhat different from his. There is, if I mistake not, a point of 5 view from whence, if you will look at the subject, it is impossible that it should not make an impression upon you. I have in my hand two accounts ; one a comparative state of the export trade of England to its Colonies, as 10 it stood in the year 1704, and as it stood in the year 1772; the other a state of the export trade of this country to its Colonies alone, as it stood in 1772, com- pared with the whole trade of England to all i>arts of the world (the Colonies included) in the year 1704. 15 They are from good vouchers ; the latter pcriml from the accounts on your table, the earlier from an original manuscript of Davenant, who first established the In- spector-Greneral's office, which has been ever since his time so abundant a source of Parliamentary information. 20 The export trade to the Colonies consists of three great branches: the African — which, terminating almost wholly in the Colonies, must be put to the account of their commerce, — the West Indian, and the North Ameri- can. All these are so interwoven that the attempt to 25 separate them would tear to pieces the contexture of the whole; and, if not entirely destroy, would very much depreciate the value of all the parts. I therefore con- sider these three denominations to be, what in effect they are, one trade. 30 The trade to the Colonies, taken on the export side, at the beginning of this century, that is, in the year 1704, stood thus : — Exports to North America and the West Indies . £483,265 To Africa ....,., 86,665 35 £569,930 Conciliatmi with the Colonies. 1 1 In the year 1772, which I take as a middle year be- tween the highest and lowest of those lately laid on \ our table, the account was as follows : — To North America and the West Indies . . . £4,791,734 To Africa 866,398 6 To which, if you add the export trade from Scotland, which had in 1704 no existence . . 364,000 £6,022,132 From five hundred and odd thousand, it has grown to >ix millions. It has increased no less than twelve-fold, lo riiis is the state of the Colony tratle as compared with itself at these two periods within this century; — and this is matter for meditation. But this is not all. Ex- amine my second account. See how the export trade to tlie Colonies alone in 1772 stood in the other point of is view ; that is, as compared to the whole trade of England in 1701 : — The whole ex|>ort trade of England, including that to the Colonies, in 1704 £6,509,000 Export to the Colonies alone, in 1772 .... 6,024,000 20 Difference, £485,000 The trade with America alone is now within less than .4^5(K),0(X) of being ecpial to what this great commercial nation, England, carried on at the beginning of this cen- tury with the whole world ! If I had taken the largest 26 Nt'ar of those on your tiible, it would rather have ex- ceeded. But, it will be said, is not this American trade an unnatural protuberance, that has drawn the juices t rom the rest of the body ? The reverse. It is the very food that has nourished every other part into its 30 ])resent magnitude. Our genenil trade has been greatly ugmented, and augmented more or less in almost every part tf> wliirli it cvct extended; but with tliis material 12 Burke. difference, that of the six millions which in the begin- ning of the century constituted the whole mass of our export commerce, the Colony trade was but one-twelfth part ; it is now (as a part of sixteen millions) consider- 5 ably more than a third of the whole. This is the rela- tive proportion of the importance of the Colonies at these two periods; and all reasoning concerning our mode of treating them must have this proportion as its basis ; or it is a reasoning weak, rotten, and sophistical. 10 Mr. Speaker, I cannot prevail on myself to hurry over this great consideration. It is good for us to he here. We stand where we have an immense view of what is, and what is past. Clouds, indeed, and darkness, rest upon the future. Let us, however, before we descend 15 from this noble eminence, reflect that this growth of our national prosperity has happened within the short period of the life of man. It has happened within sixty-eiglit years. There are those alive whose memory might touch the two extremities. For instance, my Lord 20 Bathurst might remember all the stages of the progress. He was in 1704 of an age at least to be made to compre- hend such things. He was then old enough actaparentum jajn legere, et qu(B sit potuit cognoscere virtits. Suppose, Sir, that the angel of this auspicious youth, foreseeing 25 the many virtues which made him one of the most amiable, as he is one of the most fortunate, men of his age, had opened to him in vision that when in the fourth generation the third Prince of the House of Brunswick had sat twelve years on the throne of that nation which, 30 by the happy issue of moderate and healing counsels, was to be made Great Britain, he should see his. son, Lord Chancellor of England, turn back the current of hereditary dignity to its fountain, and raise him to a higher rank of peerage, whilst he enriched the family 35 with a new one — if, amidst these bright and happy Conciliation with the Colonies. 13 cenes of domestic honor and prosi)erity, that angel -hould have drawn up the curtain, and unfolded the rising glories of his country, and, whilst he was gazing with admiration on the then commercial grandeur of Kngland, the genius should point out to him a little 5 peck, scarcely visible in the mass of the national inter- est, a small seminal principle, rather than a formed body, and should tell him: "Young man, there is America — which at this day serves for little more than to amuse vou with stories of savage men, and uncouth manners ; lo I't shall, before you taste of death, show itself equal to the whole of that commerce which now attracts the rnvy of the world. Whatever England has been grow- ing to by a progressive increase of improvement, brought 111 by varieties of people, by succession of civilizing con 15 • [uests and civilizing settlements in a series of seventeen liundred years, you shall see as much added to her by America in the course of a single life! " If this state of his country had been foretold to him, would it not require 11 the sanguine credulity of youth, and all the fervid 20 low of enthusiasm, to make him believe it? Fortunate man, he hiis lived to see it ! Fortunate, indeed, if he lives to see nothing that shall vary the prospect, and cloud the setting of his day ! Excuse me. Sir, if turning from such thoughts I re- 25 lime this comparative view once more. You have seen it on a large scale; look at it on a small one. I will |)oint out to your attention a particular instance of it in tiu» single province of Pennsylvania. In the year 1704 tliat province called for .iJ 11,459 in value of your com- 30 modities, native and foreign. This was the whole. What •lid it demand in 1772? Why, nearly fifty times as much ; for in that year the export to Pennsylvania was £507,909, nearly equal to the export to all the Colonies >gether in the first period. 35 14 Burke. I choose, Sir, to enter into these minute and particular details, because generalities, which in all other cases are apt to heighten and raise the subject, have here a ten- dency to sink it. When we speak of the commerce 5 with our Colonies, fiction lags after truth, invention is unfruitful, and imagination cold and barren. So far, Sir, as to the im[)ortance of the object, in viuw of its commerce, as concerned in the exports from Eng- land. If 1 were to detail the imports, I could show how 10 many enjoyments they procure which deceive the bur- then of life ; how many materials which invigorate the springs of national industry, and extend and animate every part of our foreign and domestic commerce. This would be a curious subject indeed ; but I must prescribe 15 bounds to myself in a matter so vast and various. I pass, therefore, to the Colonies in another point of view, their agriculture. This they have prosecuted with such a spirit, that, besides feeding plentifully their own growing multitude, their annual export of grain, compre- 20 bending rice, has some years ago exceeded a million in value. Of their last harvest I am persuaded they will export much more. At the beginning of the century some of these Colonies imported corn from the Mother Country. For some time past the Old World has been 25 fed from the New. The scarcity which you have felt would have been a desolating famine, if this child of your old age, with a true filial piety, with a Roman charity, had not put the full breast of its youthful exuberance to the mouth of its exhausted parent. 30 As to the wealth which the Colonies have drawn from the sea by their fisheries, you had all that matter fully opened at your bar. You surely thought those acquisi- tions of value, for they seemed even to excite your envy ; and yet the spirit by which that enterprising employment 35 has been exercised ought rather, in my opinion, to have Conciliation u'ifit t/ic Colonies. 15 raised your esteem and atlmiratioii. And pray, Sir, wliat in tlie world is equal to it ? Pass by the other parts, and look at the manner in which the people of New England have of late carried on the whale fishery. Whilst we fol- low them among the tumbling mountains of ice, and 6 IxOiold them penetrating into the deepest frozen recesses of Hudson's Hay and Davis's Straits, whilst we are look- ing for them beneath the arctic circle, we hear that they liave pierced into the opposite region of polar cold, that t hey are at the antipodes, and engaged under the frozen lO Seri)ent of the south. Falkland Island, which seemed too remote and romantic an object for the grasp of national ambition, is but a stage and resting-place in the progress of their victorious industry. Nor is the equinoctial heat more discouraging to them than the ac- 16 cumulated winter of both the poles. We know that whilst some of them draw the line and strike the harpoon on the coast of Africa, others run the longitude and pur- sue their gigantic game along the coast of Brazil. No sea but what is vexed by their fisheries ; no climate that 20 is not witness to their toils. Neither the perseverance of Holland, nor the activity of France, nor the dexterous and firm sagacity of English enterprise ever carried this most perilous mode of hardy industry to the extent to which it has been pushed by this recent people ; a peo- 25 pie who are still, as it were, but in the gristle, and not yet hardened into the bone of manhood. When I con- t«'mplate these things; when I know that the Colonies ill general owe little or nothing to any care of ours, and liat they are not squeezed into this happy form by the 30 onstraints of watchful and suspicious government, but that, through a wise and salutary neglect, a generous nature has l)een suffered to take her own way to perfec- tion ; when I reflect upon these effects, when I see how profitable they have been to us, I feel all the pride of 36 16 Burke, power sink, and all presumption in the wisdom of human contrivances melt and die away within me. My rigor relents. I pardon something to the spirit of liberty. I am sensible, Sir, that all which I have asserted in my 6 detail is admitted in the gross ; but that quite a differ- ent conclusion is drawn from it. America, gentlemen say, is a noble object. It is an object well worth lighting for. Certainly it is, if fighting a people be the best way of gaining them. Gentlemen in this respect will be led 10 to their choice of means by their complexions and their habits. Those who understand the military art will of course have some predilection for it. Those who wield the thunder of the state may have more confidence in the efficacy of arms. But I confess, possibly for want of this 15 knowledge, my opinion is much more in favor of prudent management than of force ; considering force not as an odious, but a feeble instrument for preserving a people so numerous, so active, so growing, so spirited as this, in a profitable and subordinate connection with us. 20 First, Sir, permit me to observe that the use of force alone is but temporary. It may subdue for a moment, but it does not remove the necessity of subduing again ; and a nation is not governed which is perpetually to be conquered. 25 My next objection is its uncertainty. Terror is not always the effect of force, and an armament is not a vic- tory. If you do not succeed, you are without resource ; for, conciliation failing, force remains ; but, force failing, no further hope of reconciliation is left. Power and 30 authority are sometimes bought by kindness ; but they can never be begged as alms by an impoverished and defeated violence. A further objection to force is, that you impair the object by your very endeavors to preserve it. The thing 35 you fought for is not the thing which you recover ; but Co?ieiUation with the Colonies, 17 depreciated, sunk, was tod, and cousumed in the contest. Nothing less will content me than whole America. I do not choose to consume its strength along with our own, because in all parts it is the British strength that I con- sume. I do not choose to be caught by a foreign enemy 6 at the end of this exhausting conflict ; and still less in the midst of it. I may escape ; but I can make no in- sui-ance against such an event. Let me add, that I do not choose wholly to break the American spirit ; because it is the spirit that has made the country. lo Lastly, we have no sort of experience in favor of force as an instrument in the rule of our Colonies. Their growth and their utility has been owing to methods alto- gether different. Our ancient indulgence has been said to be pursued to a fault. It may be so. But we know, if is feeling is evidence, that our fault was more tolerable than our attempt to mend it; and our siu far more salutary than our penitence. >^ These, Sir, are my reasons for not entertaining that high opinion of untried force by which many gentlemen, 20 for whose sentiments in other particulars I have great* resi>ect, seem to be so greatly captivated. But there is still behind a third consideration concerning this object which serves to determine my opinion on tlie sort of policy which ought to be pursued in the management of 25 America, even more than its population and its commerce — I mean its temper and character. In this character of the Americans, a love of freedom is the predominating feature which marks and distin^ guishes the whole ; and as an ardent is always a jealous 30 affection, your Colonies become suspicious, restive, and untractable whenever they see tlie least attempt to wrest from them by force, or shuffle from them by chicane, what they think the only ailvantago worth living for. This fierce spirit of liberty is stronger in the English 35 18 • Burke . Colonies probably than in any other people of the earth, and this from a great variety of powerful causes ; which, to understand the true temper of their minds and the direction which this spirit takes, it will not be amiss to 5 lay open somewhat more largely. First, the i)eople of the Colonies are descendants of Englishmen. England, Sir, is a nation which still, I hope, respects, and formerly adored, her freedom. The Colonists emigrated from you when this part of your 10 character was most predominant; and they took this bias and direction the moment they parted from your hands. They are therefore not only devoted to liberty, but to liberty according to English ideas, and on English principles. Abstract liberty, like other mere abstrac- 15 tions, is not to be found. Liberty inheres in some sen- sible object ; and every nation has formed to itself some favorite point, which by way of eminence becomes the criterion of their happiness. It happened, you know, Sir, that the great contests for freedom in this country 20 were from the earliest times chiefly upon the question of taxing. Most of the contests in the ancient common- wealths turned primarily on the right of election of magistrates ; or on the balance among the several orders of the state. The question of money was not with them 25 so immediate. But in England it was otherwise. On this point of taxes the ablest pens, and most eloquent tongues, have been exercised ; the greatest spirits have acted and suffered. In order to give the fullest satisfac- •tion concerning the importance of this point, it was not 30 only necessary for those who in argument defended the excellence of the English Constitution to insist on this privilege of granting money as a dry point of fact, and to prove that the right had been acknowledged in ancient parchments and blind usages to reside in a certain body 35 called a House of Commons. They went much farther ; Coucilialion wit It I In- Colonies. 19 they attempted to prove, and they succeeded, that in tlieory it ought to be so, from the particular nature of a House of Commons as an immediate representative of the people, whether the old records had delivered this oracle or not. They took infinite pains to inculcate, as a 5 1 luulamental principle, that in all monarchies the people must in effect themselves, mediately or immediately, possess the power of granting their own money, or no sluulow of liberty can subsist. The Colonies draw from you, as with their life-blood, these ideas and principles. 10 Their love of liberty, as with you, fixed and attached on this specific point of taxing. Liberty might be safe, or might be endangered, in twenty other particulars, with- out their being much pleased or alarmed. Here they felt its pulse ; and as they found that beat, they thought 15 themselves sick or sound. I do not say whether they were right or wrong in applying your geneml arguments to their own case. It is- not easy, indeed, to make a monopoly of theorems and corollaries. Xhe fact is, that tliey did thus apply those general arguments ; and your 20 mode of governing them, whether through lenity or indolence, thnmgh wisdom or mistake, confirmed them in the imagination that they, as well as you, had an interest in these common principles. They were further confirmed in this pleasing error by 25 t lie form of their provincial legislative assemblies. Their 'governments are popular in an high degree; some are merely popular; in all, the popular representative is t he most weighty ; and this share of the people in their ordinary government never fails to inspire them with .*» lofty sentiments, and with a strong aversion from what- ever tends to deprive them of their chief imi)ortance. If anything wert» wanting to this necessary operation of the form of government, religion would have given it a complete effect Religion, always a principle of energy, 35 20 Burke, in this new people is no way worn out or impaired ; and their mode of professing it is also one main cause of this free spirit. The people are Protestants; and of that kind which is the most adverse to all implicit submission 5 of mind and opinion. This is a persuasion not only favorable to liberty, but built upon it. I do not think, Sir, that the reason of this averseness in the dissenting churches from all that looks like absolute government is so much to be sought in their religious tenets, as in their 10 liistory. Every one knows that the Roman Catholic religion is at least co-eval with most of the governments where it prevails; that it has generally gone hand in hand with them, and received great favor and every kind of support from authority. The Church of England too 16 was formed from her cradle under the nursing care of regular government. But the dissenting interests have sprung up in direct opposition to all the ordinary powers of the world, and could justify that opposition only on a strong claim to natural liberty. Their very existence 20 depended on the powerful and unremitted assertion of that claim. All Protestantism, even the most cold and passive, is a sort of dissent. But the religion most prevalent in our Northern Colonies is a refinement on the principle of resistance; it is the dissidence of dis- 25 sent, and the protestantism of the Protestant religion. This religion, under a variety of denominations agreeing in nothing but in the communion of the spirit of liberty, is predominant in most of the Northern Provinces, where the Church of England, notwithstanding its legal rights, 30 is in reality no more than a sort of private sect, not com- posing most probably the tenth of the people. The Colonists left England when this spirit was high, and in the emigrants was the highest of all ; and even that stream of foreigners which has been constantly flowing 35 into these Colonies has, for the greatest part, been com- Conciliafiiiii irith the Colonies. 21 posed of dissenters in»iii the establishments of their several countries, who have brought with them a temper and character far from alien to that of the people with whom they mixed. Sir, I can perceive by their manner that some gentle- 6 men object to the latitude of this description, because in the Southern Colonies the Church of England forms a large body, and has a regular establishment. It is cer- tainly true. There is, however, a circumstance attending these Colonies which, in my opinion, fully counterbal- lO ances this difference, and makes the spirit of liberty still more high and haughty than in those to the northward. It is that in Virginia and the Carolinas they have a vast multitude of slaves. Where this is the case in any part of the world, those who are free are by far the most 15 proud and jealous of their freedom. Freedom is to them not only an enjoyment, but a kind of rank and privilege. Not seeing there, that freedom, as in countries where it is a common blessing and as broad and general as tlie air, -may be united with much abject toil, with great 20 misery, with all the exterior of servitude ; liberty looks, amongst them, like something that is more noble and liberal. I do not mean, Sir, to commend the superior morality of this sentiment, which has at least as much pride as virtue in it ; but I cannot alter the nature of 25 man. The fact is so ; and these people of the Southern Colonies are much more strongly, and with an higher and more stubborn spirit, attached to liberty than those to the northward. Such were all the ancient common- wealths ; such were our Gothic ancestors ; such in our 30 days were the Poles; and such will be all masters of slaves, who are not slaves themselves. In such a people the haughtiness of domination combines with the spirit of freedom, fortifies it, and renders it invincible. Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our 36 22 Burke, Colonies which contributes no mean part towards tlie growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study. The profession itself is 6 numerous and powerful ; and in most provinces it takes the lead. The greater number of the deputies sent to the Congress were lawyers. But all who read, and most do read, endeavor to obtain some smattering in that science. I have been told by an eminent bookseller, 10 that in no branch of his business, after tracts of jx>pular devotion, were so many books as those on the law ex- ported to the Plantations. The Colonists have now fallen into the way of printing them for their own use. I hear that they have sold nearly as many of Black- is stone's Commentaries in America as in England. Gen- eral Gage marks out this disposition very particularly in a letter on your table. He states that all the people in his government are lawyers, or smatterers in law ; and that in Boston they have been enabled, by successful 20 chicane, wholly to evade many parts of one of your capi- tal penal constitutions. The smartness of debate will say that this knowledge ought to teach them more clearly the rights of legislature, their obligations to obedience, and the penalties of rebellion. All this is mighty well. 25 But my honorable and learned friend on the floor, who condescends to mark what I say for animadversion, will disdain that ground. He has heard, as well as I, that when great honors and great emoluments do not win over this knowledge to the service of the state, it is a 30 formidable adversary to government. If the spirit be not tamed and broken by these happy methods, it is stubborn and litigious. Aheunt studia in mores. This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other 35 countries, the people, more simple, and of a less mercu- Conciliation with the Colonictf. 23 iiiil ciust, judge ui an ill priuciple in govenimi'iit only by an actual grievance ; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the jii-essure of tlie grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment at a dis- tance, and snuff the approach of tyranny in every 5 tainted breeze. • The last cause of this disobedient spirit in the Colonies IS hardly less powerful than the rest, as it is not merely • mural, but laid deep in the natural constitution of things. Three thousand miles of ocean lie between you and them. 10 No contrivance can prevent the effect of this distance in weakening government. Seas roll, and months pass, between the order and the execution ; and the want of a siKjedy explanation of a single point is enough to defeat a whole system. You have, indeed, winged ministers of 15 vengeance, who carry your bolts in their pounces to the remotest verge of the sea. But there a power steps in that limits the arrogance of raging passions and furious elements, and snys, So far shalt thou go, and no farther. Who are you, that you should fret and rage, and bite the 20 chains of nature ? Nothing woi-se happens to you than does to all nations who have extensive empire; and it happens in all the forms into which empire can be thrown. In large Imdies the circulation of power must be less vigorous at the extremities. Nature has said it. 25 The Turk cannot govern Egypt and Arabia and Kurdis- tan as he governs Thrace ; nor has he the same domin- ion in Crimea and Algiers which he has at Bnisa and Smyrna. Despotism itself is obliged to truck and huck- ster. The Sultan gets such obedience as he can. He 30 governs with a loose rein, that he may govern at all ; and the whole of the force and vigor of his authority in his centre is derived from a prudent relaxation in all his borders. Spain, in her provinces, is, i)erhaps, not so well obeyed as you are in yours. She complies, too ; she 36 24 linrhr. submits; .she watclu's times. Tiiis is tin* immutable con- dition, the eternal law of extensive and < let ached emj)ire. Then, Sir, from these six capital sources — of descent, of form of government, of religion in the Northern Prov- 5 inces, of manners in the Soutlicm, of education, of the remoteness of situation from the lirst mover of govern- ment — from all these causes a tierce s])irit of liberty "has grown uji. It lias grown with tlic ,u'I■<>^^ tli ol' tlic j»eo- ple in your Colonies, and increased with tlic increas«' f»f 10 their wealth; a s])irit that unhapjnly nicctinLr with an exercise of jiowrr m I'ln-land which, however hiwt'ul, is not reconcilable to any it leas of lil)erty, much less with theirs, has kindled this flame that is ready to consume us. I dn \uA mean to (•(.niiiicnd either the si)iiit in tliis 15 excess, or the moral causes which produce it. Perhaps a more smooth and accommodating spirit of freedom in them would be more acceptable to us. IN i1ia])s iihas ol liberty might be desired more reconcihihh' with an arbi- trary and boundless authority. IVrliaps we miLclit wish 20 the Colonists to be i>ersuaded that their lilxity is more secure when held in trust for them by us, as their c^uard- ians during a perjictual minority, than witli any jiart of it in their own hands. The question is, not wlietlicr their spirit deserves pi-aise or blame, but — what, in the 25 name of God, shall we do with it ? You have l)efore you the object, such as it is, with all its glories, with all its imperfections on its head. You see the magnitude, the importance, the temper, the habits, the disorders. By all these considerations we are strongly urged to deter- 30 mine something concerning it. AVe are called ujwn to fix some rule and line for our future conduct which may give a little stability to our politics, and prevent the return of such unhappy deliberations as the present. Every such return will bring the matter before us in a 35 still more untractable form. For, what astonishing and Conciltuif"/( 'liih till' Colonies, 25 incredible things have we not seen already ! What monsters have not been generated from this unnatural (ontention ! AVhilst every principle of authority and resistance has been pushed, upon both sides, as far as it would go, there is nothing so solid and certain, either in 5 reasoning or in practice, that has not been shaken. Until very lately all authority in America seemed to be nothing l)ut an emanation from yours. Even the popular part of the Colony Constitution derived all its activity and its first vital movement from the pleasure of the Crown, lo We thought. Sir, that the utmost which the discontented ('olonists could do was to disturb authority; we never dreamt they could of themselves supply it — knowing in general what an operose business it is to establish a gov- ernment absolutely new. But having, for our purposes 16 in this contention, resolved that none but an obedient Assembly should sit, the humors of the people there, finding all passage through the legal channel stopped, with great violence broke out another way. Some prov- inces have tried their experiment, as we have tried ours ; 20 and theirs has succeeded. They have formed a govern- ment sufficient for its purposes, without the bustle of a revolution or the troublesome formality of an election. ICvident necessity and tacit consent have done the busi- ness in an instant. So well they have done it, that Lord 25 1 )unmore — the account is among the fragments on your table — tells you that the new institution is infinitely l)etter obeyed than the ancient government ever was in its most fortunate periods. Obedience is what makes 'overnment, and not the names by which it is called ; so ;n)t the name of Governor, as formerly, or Committee, as it present. This new government has originated directly from the people, and was not transmitted through any of the ordinary artificial media of a positive constitution. It was not a manufacture ready formed, and transmitted 35 26 Burke. to them in that condition from England. The evil aris- ing from hence is this ; that the Colonists having once found the ]X)ssibility of enjoying the advantages of order in the midst of a struggle for liberty, such struggles will 5 not henceforward seem so terrible to the settled and sober part of mankind as tliey had appeared before the trial. Pursuing the same plan of punishing by the denial of the exercise of government to still greater lengths, we 10 wholly abrogated the ancient government of Massachu- setts. We were confident that the first feeling, if not the very prospect, of anarchy would instantly enforce a complete submission. The experiment was tried. A new, strange, unexpected face of tilings ap{)eared. Anar- 16 chy is found tolerable. A vast province has now sub- sisted, and subsisted in a considerable degree of health and vigor for near a twelvemonth, without Governor, without public Council, without judges, without execu- tive magistrates. How long it will continue in this state, 20 or what may arise out of this unheard-of situation, how can the wisest of us conjecture ? Our late experience has taught us that many of those fundamental principles, formerly believed infallible, are either not of the impor- tance they were imagined to be, or that we have not at 25 all adverted to some other far more important and far more powerful principles, which entirely overrule those we had considered as omniix)tent. I am much against any further experiments which tend to put to the proof any more of these allowed opinions which contribute so 30 much to the public tranquillity. In effect, we suffer as much at home by this loosening of all ties, and this con- cussion of all establislied opinions, as we do abroad ; for in order to prove that the Americans have no riglit to their liberties, we are every day endeavoring to subvert 35 the maxims which preserve the whole spirit of our own. Conciliatian with the. Colonies. 27 To prove that tlie Americans ought nut to be free, we are obliged to depreciate the value of freedom itself ; and we never seem to gain a paltry advantage over them in debate without attacking some of those principles, or deriding some of those feelings, for which our ancestors 6 have shed their blood. But, Sir, in wishing to put an end to pernicious experi- ments, I do not mean to preclude the fullest inquiry. Far from it. Far from deciding on a sudden or partial view, I would patiently go round and round the subject, lo and survey it minutely in every possible aspect. Sir, if I were capable of engaging you to an equal attention, I would state that, as far as I am capable of discerning, there are but three ways of proceeding relative to this stubborn spirit which prevails in your Colonies, and dis- 16 turbs your government. These are — to change that spirit, as inconvenient, by removing the causes ; to prose- cute it as criminal ; or to comply with it as necessary. I would not be guilty of an imperfect enumeration ; I can think of but these three. Another has indeed been 20 started, — that of giving up the Colonies ; but it met so slight a reception that I do not think myself obliged to dwell a great while upon it. It is nothing but a little sally of anger, like the frowardness of peevish children, who, when they cannot get all they would have, are 25 resolved to take nothing. The first of these plans — to change the spirit, as in- convenient, by removing the causes — I think is the most like a systemjitic proceeding. It is radical in its princi- ])1p ; but it is attended with great difficulties, some of 3u them little short, as I conceive, of impossibilities. This ^vill appear by examining into the plans which have been proposed. As the growing population in the Colonies is evidently one cause of their resistance, it was last session men- 36 28 Burke, tioned in both Houses, by men of weight, and received not without applause, that in order to check this evil it would be proper for the Crown to make no further grants of land. But to this scheme there are two objections. 5 The first, that there is already so much unsettled land in private hands as to afford room for an immense future population, although the Crown not only withheld its grants, but annihilated its soil. If this be the case, then the only effect of this avarice of desolation, this hoard- 10 ing of a royal wilderness, would be to raise the value of the possessions in the hands of the great private monopo- lists, without any atlequate check to the growing and alarming mischief of population. But if you stopped your grants, what would be the 15 consequence ? The people would occupy without grants. They have already so occupied in many j)laces. You cannot station garrisons in every part of these deserts. If you drive the people from one place, they will carry on their annual tillage, and remove with their flocks and 20 herds to another. Many of the people in the back settle- ments are already little attached to particular situations. Already they have topped the Appalachian Mountains. From thence they behold before them an immense plain, one vast, rich, level meadow ; a square of five hundred 25 miles. Over this they would wander without a possibil- ity of restraint ; they would change their manners with the habits of their life ; would soon forget a government by which they were disowned ; would become hordes of English Tartars ; and^ pouring down upon your unforti- 30 fied frontiers a fierce and irresistible cavalry, become masters of your governors and your counsellors, your collectors and comptrollers, and of all the slaves that adhered to them. Such would, and in no long time must be, the effect of attempting to forbid as a crime 35 and to suppress as an evil the command and blessing of Concili'>ii II', th thr Colonies. 29 providence. Increase and multiply/. Such would be the happy result of the endeavor to keep as a lair of wild beasts that earth which God, by an express charter, has given to the children of men. Far different, and surely much wiser, has been our policy hitherto. Hitherto we 5 have invited our people, by every kind of bounty, to Hxed establishments. We have invited the husbandman to look to authority for his title. We have taught him piously to believe in the mysterious virtue of wax and parchment. We have thrown each tract of land, as it lO was peopled, into districts, that the ruling power should never l)e wholly out of sight We have settled all we could ; and we have carefully attended every settlement with government. Adhering, Sir, as I do, to this policy, as well as for 15 the reasons I have just given, 1 think this new project of hedging-in population to be neither prudent nor practicable. To impoverish the Colonies in general, and in particu- lar to arrest the noble course of tlieir marine enterprises, 20 would be a more easy task. I freely confess it. We have shown a disj)osition to a system of this kind, a dis- |K)sition even to continue the restraint after the offence, looking on ourselves as rivals to our Colonies, and per- suatled that of course we must gain all that they shall 25 lose. Much mischief we may certainly do. The power inadequate to all other things is often more than sufficient for this. I do not look on the direct and immediate IK)wer of the Colonies to resist our violence as very for- midable. In this, however, I may l)e mistaken. But 30 when I consider that we have Colonies for no purpose but to be serviceable to us, it seems to my poor under- standing a little preposterous to make them unserviceable in order to keep them obedient. It is, in truth, nothing more than the old and, as I thought, exploded problem 35 30 Burke, of tyranny, which proposes to beggar its subjects into submission. But remember, when you have completed your system of impoverishment, that nature still pro- ceeds in her ordinary course; that discontent will in- 5 crease with misery ; and that there are critical moments in the fortune of all states when they who are too weak to contribute to your prosperity may be strong enough to complete your ruin. Spoliatis anna supersunt. The temper and character which prevail in our Colonies 10 are, I am afraid, unalterable by any human art. We cannot, I fear, falsify the pedigree of this fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates. The language in which they would hear you tell them 15 this tale would detect the imposition ; your speech would betray you. An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth to argue another Englishman into slavery. I think it is nearly as little in our power to change their republican religion as their free descent ; or to sub- 20 stitute the Roman Catholic as a penalty, or the Church of England as an improvement. The mode of inquisi- tion and dragooning is going out of fashion in the Old "World, and 1 should not confide mudi to their efficacy in the New. The education of the Americans is also on 25 the same unalterable bottom with their religion. You cannot persuade them to bum their books of curious science ; to banish their laAV^'ers from their courts of laws ; or to quench the lights of their assemblies by re- fusing to choose those persons who are best read in their 30 privileges. It would be no less impracticable to think of wholly annihilating the popular assemblies in which these lawyers sit. The army, by which we must govern in their place, would be far more chargeable to us, not quite so effectual, and perhaps in the end full as difficult 35 to be kept in obedience. Conciliation with the Colonies, 81 With regard to the high aristocratic spirit of Virginia and the Southern Colonies, it has been proposed, I know, to reduce it by declaring a general enfranchisement of their slaves. Tliis object has had its advocates and panegyrists ; yet I never could argue myself into any 6 opinion of it Slaves are often much attached to their masters. A general wild offer of liberty would not always be accepted. History furnishes few instances of it. It is sometimes as hard to persuade slaves to be free, as it is to compel freemen to be slaves; and in this lo auspicious scheme we should have both these pleasing tasks on our hands at once. But when we talk of en- franchisement, do we not perceive that the American master may enfranchise too, and arm servile hands in defence of freedom ? — a measure to which other people 15 have had recourse more than once, and not without success, in a desiderate situation of their affairs. Slaves as these unfortunate black people are, and dull as all men are from slavery, must they not a little sus- pect the offer of freedom from that very nation which 20 has sold them to their present masters ? — from that nation, one of whose causes of quarrel with those mas- ters is their refusal to deal any more in that inhuman traffic ? An offer of freedom from England would come rather oddly, shipped to them in an African vessel which 25 is refused an entry into the ports of Virginia or Carolina with a cargo of three hundred Angola negroes. It would be curious to see the Guinea captain attempting at the same instant to publish his proclamation of liberty, and to advertise his sale of slaves. so But let us suppose all these moral difficulties got over. The ocean remains. You cannot pump this dry; and as long as it continues in its present bed, so long all the causes which weaken authority by distance will contimu*. ** Te gods, annihilate but space and time, And make two lovers happy!** 32 Burke, was a pious and passionate prayer ; but just as reason- able as many of the serious wishes of grave and solemn politicians. . If then, Sir, it seems almost desperate to think of any 5 alterative course for changing the moral causes, and not quite easy to remove the natural, which produce preju- dices irreconcilable to the late exercise of our authority — but that the spirit infallibly will continue, and, continu- ing, will produce such effects as now embarrass us — tlie 10 second mode under consideration is to prosecute that spirit in its overt acts as criminal. At this projwsition I must pause a moment. The thing seems a great deal too big for my ideas of juris- prudence. It should seem to my way of conceiving such 15 matters that there is a very wide difference, in reason and policy, between the mode of proceeding on the irregular conduct of scattered individuals, or even of bands of men who disturb order within the state, and the civil dissensions which may, from time to time, on 20 great questions, agitate the several communities which compose a great empire. It looks to me to be narrow and pedantic to apply the ordinary ideas of criminal justice to this great public contest. I do not know the method of drawing up an indictment against a whole 25 people. I cannot insult and ridicule the feelings of millions of my fellow-creatures as Sir Edward Coke in- sulted one excellent individual (Sir Walter Raleigh) at the bar. I hope I am not ri^)e to pass sentence on the gravest public bodies, intrusted with magistracies of 30 great authority and dignity, and charged with the safety of their fellow-citizens, uiK)n the very same title that I am. I really think that, for wise men, this is not judi- cious ; for sober men, not decent ; for minds tinctured with humanity, not mild and merciful. 35 Perhaps, Sir, I am mistaken in my idea of an empire. Conciliation with the Colonies, 83 as distinguished from a single state or kingdom. But my idea of it is this ^ that an empire is the aggregate of many states under one common head, whether this head be a monarch or a presiding republic. It does, in such constitutions, frequently happen — and nothing but the 5 dismal, cold, dead uniformity of servitude can prevent its happening — that the subordinate parts have many local privileges and immunities. Between these privi- leges and the supreme common authority the line may be extremely nice. Of course disputes, often, too, very 10 bitter disputes, and much ill blood, will arise. But though every privilege is an exemption, in the case, from the ordinary exercise of the supreme authority, it is no denial of it. The claim of a privilege seems rather, ex vi termini, to imply a superior power ; for to talk of the 15 privileges of a state* or of a person who has no superior is hardly any better than speaking nonsense. Now, in such unfortunate quarrels among the component parts of a great political union of communities, I can scarcely conceive anything more completely imprudent than for 20 the head of the empire to insist that, if any privilege is pleaded against his will or his acts, his whole authority is denied ; instantly to proclaim rebellion, to beat to arms, and to put the offending provinces under the ban. Will not this, Sir, very soon teach the provinces to make 25 no distinctions on their part ? Will it not teach them that the government, against which a claim of liberty is « tantamount to high treason, is a government to which sub- mission is equivalent to slavery ? It may not always be quite convenient to impress dependent communities with :» 8U(?h an idea. We are, indeed, in all disputes with the Colonies, by the necessity of tilings, the judge. It is true, Sir. But I confess that the character of judge in my own cause is a thing that frightens me. Instead of tilling me with 36 34 Burke. pride, I am exceedingly humbled by it. I cannot pro- ceed with a stern, assured, judicial confidence, until I find myself in something more like a judicial character. I must have these hesitations as long as I am compelled 6 to recollect that, in my little reading upon such contests as these, the sense of mankind has at least as often de- cided against the superior as the subordinate power. Sir, let me add, too, that the opinion of my having some abstract right in my favor would not put me much at 10 my ease in passing sentence, unless I could be sure that there were no rights which, in their exercise under cer- tain circumstances, were not the most odious of all wrongs and the most vexatious of all injustice. Sir, these considerations have great weight with me when I 15 find things so circumstanced, that I see the same party at once a civil litigant against me in point of right and a culprit before me, while I sit as a criminal judge on acts of his whose moral quality is to be decided upon the merits of that very litigation. Men are every now and 20 then put, by the complexity of human affairs, into strange Situations ; but justice is the same, let the judge be in what situation he will. There is. Sir, also a circumstance which convinces me that this mode of criminal proceeding is not, at least in 25 the present stage of our contest, altogether expedient ; which is nothing less than the conduct of those very per- ' sons who have seemed to adopt that mode by lately declaring a rebellion in Massachusetts Bay, as they had formerly addressed to have traitors brought hither, under 30 an Act of Henry the Eighth, for trial. For though rebellion is declared, it is not proceeded against as such, nor have any steps been taken towards the apprehension or conviction of any individual offender, either on our late or our former Address ; but modes of public coercion 35 have been adopted, and such as have much more resem- Conciliation with the Colonies, 85 blance to a sort of qualified hostility towards an indepen- dent power than the punishment of rebellious subjects. All this seems rather inconsistent; but it shows how difficult it is to apply these juridical ideas to our present case. 6 In this situation, let us seriously and coolly ponder. What is it we have got by all our menaces, which have l)een many and ferocious? What advantage have we derived from the penal law? we have passed, and which, for the time, have been severe and numerous ? What 10 advtinces have we made towards our object by the send- ing of a force which, by land and sea, is no contemptible strength ? Has the disorder abated ? Nothing less. When I see things in this situation after such confident hopes, bold promises, and active exertions, I cannot, for 15 my life, avoid a suspicion that the plan itself is not correctly right. - If, then, the removal of the causes of this spirit of American liberty be for the greater part, or rather en- tirely, impracticable ; if the ideas of criminal process be 20 inapplicable — or, if applicable, are in the highest degree inexpedient; what way yet remains? No way is open but the third and last, — to comply with the American spirit as necessary ; or, if you please, to submit to it as a necessary evil. 26 If we adopt this mode, — if we mean to conciliate and concede, — let us see of what nature the concession ought to be. To ascertain the nature of our concession, we must look at their complaint. The Colonies complain that they have not the characteristic mark and seal of 30 British freedom. They complain that they are taxed in ;i Parliament in which they are not represented. If you iiuaii to satisfy them at all, you must satisfy them with r«'«;urd to this complaint. If you mean to please any people you must give them the boon which they ask; 35 86 Burke. not what you may think better for them, but of a kind totally different. Such an act may be a wise regulation, but it is no concession ; whereas our present theme is the mode of giving satisfaction. 5 Sir, I think you must perceive that I am resolved this day to have nothing at all to do with the question of the right of taxation. Some gentlemen startle — but it is true ; I put it totally out of the question. It is less tlian notliing in my consideration. I do not indeed won- 10 der, nor will you, Sir, that gentlemen of profound leara- ing are fond of displaying it on this profound subject. But my consideration is narrow, confined, and wholly limited to the policy of the question. I do not examine whether the giving away a man's money be a power ex- 15 cepted and reserved out of the general trust of govern- ment, and how far all mankind, in all forms of polity, are entitled to an exercise of that right by the charter of nature ; or whether, on the contrary, a riglit of taxa- tion is necessarily involved in the general principle of 20 legislation, and inseparable from the ordinary supreme power. These are deep questions, where great names militate against each other, where reason is perplexed, and an appeal to authorities only thickens the con- fusion; for high and reverend authorities lift up their 25 heads on both sides, and there is no sure footing in the middle. This point is the great " Serbonian bog, Betwixt Damiata and Mount Casius old, Where armies whole have sunk." 30 I do not intend to be overwhelmed in that bog, though in such respectable company. The question with me is, not whether you have a right to render your people mis- erable, but whether it is not your interest to make them happy. It is not what a lawyer tells me I maj/ do, but 35 what humanity, reason, and justice tell me I our/ht to Conciliation with the Colonies, 37 •lo. Is a politic act the worse for being a generous one ? Is no concession proper but that which is made from your want of right to keep what you grant ? Or does it lessen the grace or dignity of relaxing in the exercise of an odious claim because you have your evidence-room r» full of titles, and your magazines stuffed with arms to enforce them ? What signify all those titles, and all those arms ? Of what avail are they, when the reason of the thing tells me that the assertion of my title is the loss of my suit, and that I could do nothing but wound 10 myself by the use of my own weapons ? Such is steadfastly my opinion of the absolute necessity of keeping up the concord of this Empire by an unity of spirit, though in a diversity of operations, that, if I were sure the Colonists had, at their leaving this country, 15 sealed a regular compact of servitude; that they had solemnly abjured all the rights of citizens ; that they had made a vow to renounce all ideas of liberty for them and their posterity to all generations ; yet I should hold myself obliged to conform to the temper I found uni- 20 versally prevalent in my own day, and to govern two million of men, impatient of servitude, on the principles of freedom. I am not detenuining a point of law, I am restoring tranquillity; and the general character and situation of a i)eople must determine what sort of gov- 25 ernment is fitted for them. That point nothing else can or ought to determine. My idea, therefore, without considering whether we \ ield as matter of right, or grant as matter of favor, is to atlmit the i)eople of our Colonies into an interest in 30 the Constitution ; and, by recording that jwlmission in the journals of Parliament, to give them as strong an assur- ance as the nature of the thing will admit, that we mean torever to af,'>.'i<. 57 and more bencticial and condurivt» to iiir public service, than the mode of giving and granting aids in Parliamenl, to be raised and paid in the said Colonies/' This makes the whole of the fundamental part of the plan. The conclusion is irresistible. You cannot say 6 that you were driven by any necessity to an exercise of the utmost rights of legislature. You cannot assert that you took on yourselves the task of imposing Colony taxes from the want of another le^al body that is competent to the purpose of supplying the exigencies of the state lO without wounding the prejudices of the people. Neither is it tiiie that the body so qualified, and having that competence, had rfeglected the duty. The question now, on all this accumulated matter, is : whether you will choose to abide by a profitable experi- 15 ence, or a mischievous theory ; whether you choose to build on imagination, or fact ; whether you prefer enjoy- ment, or liope ; satisfaction in your subjects, or discon- tent? If these propositions are accepted, everything which 20 , has been made to enforce a contrary system must, I take it for granted, fall along with it. On that ground, I have drawn the following Resolution, which, when it comes to be moved, will naturally be divided in a proper manner : " That it may be proper to repeal an Act made in the seventh 25 year of the reign of his present Majesty, entitled, An Act for granting certain duttes in the British Colonies and Plan- tations in America; for allowing a drawback of the duties of customs ui)on the exportation from this Kingdom of coflfee and cocoa-nuts of the produce of the said Colonies or 30 Plantations; for discontinuing the drawbacks payable on china earthenware exported to America; and for more effectually preventing the clandestine running of goods in the said Colonies and Plantations. And that it may be proper to repeal an Act made in the fourteenth year of the 35 reign of his present Majesty, entitled, An Act to discon- 58 Burke. tinue, in such manner and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and dischai^ing, lading or shipping of goods, wares, and merchandise at the town and within the harbor of Boston, in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 6 in North America. And that it may be proper to repeal an Act made in the fourteenth year of the reign of his present Majesty, intitled. An Act for the impartial administration of justice in the cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of 10 riots and tumults, in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, in New England. And that Jt may be proper to repeal an Act made in the fourteenth year of the reign of his present Maj- esty, intitled. An Act for the better regulating of the Gov- ernment of the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, in New 15 England. And also that it may be proper to explain and amend an Act made in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of King Henry the Eighth, intitled. An Act for the Trial of Treasons committed out of the King's Dominions.*' I wish, Sir, to repeal the Boston Port Bill, because — 20 independently of the dangerous precedent of suspending the rights of the subject during the King's pleasure — it was passed, as I apprehend, with less regularity and on more partial principles than it ought. The corporation of Boston was not heard before it was condemned. Other 25 towns, full as guilty as she was, have not had their ports blocked up. Even the Restraining Bill of the present session does not go to the length of the Boston Port Act. The same ideas of prudence which induced you not to extend equal punishment to equal guilt, even when you 30 were punishing, induced me, who mean not to chastise, but to reconcile, to be satisfied with the pimishment already partially inflicted. Ideas of prudence and accommodation to circumstances prevent you from taking away the charters of Connecti- 35 cut and Rhode Island, as you have taken away that of Massachusetts Bay, though the Crown has far less power in the two former provinces than it enjoyed in the latter, Conciliation with the (olonies. 59 and though the abuses liave been full as great, and as flagrant, in the exempted as in the punished. The same reasons of prudence and accommodation have weight with me in restoring the Charter of Massachusetts Bay. Be- sides, Sir, the Act which changes the charter of Massa- » chusetts is in many particulars so exceptionable that if I did not wish absolutely to repeal, I would by all means desire to alter it, as several of its provisions tend to the subversion of all public and private justice. Such, among others, is the power in the Governor to change lo the sheriff at his pleasure, and to make a new returning officer for every special cause. It is shameful to behold such a regulation standing among English laws. The Act for bringing i)ersons accused of committing murder, under the orders of Grovernment to England 15 for trial, is but temporary. That Act has calculated the probable dui-ation of our quarrel with the Colonies, and is accommodated to that supposed duration. I would hasten the happy moment of reconciliation, and there- fore must, on my principle, get rid of that most justly 20 obnoxious Act. The Act of Henry the Eighth, for the Trial of Trea- sons, I do not mean to take away, but to confine it to its proper bounds and original intention; to make it ex- pressly for trial of treasons — and the greatest treasons 25 may be committed — in places where the jurisdiction of the Crown does not extend. Having guartled the privileges of local legislature, I would next secure to the Colonies a fair and unbiassed judicature, for which purpose, Sir, I propose the follow- 30 ing Resolution : *' That, from the time when the General Assembly or (Jeneral Court of any Colony or Plantation in North America shall have appointed by Act of Assembly, duly confirmed, a settled salary to the offices of the Chief Justice and other 35 60 Burke. Judges of the Superior Court, it may be proper that the said Clilef Justice and other Judges of the Superior Courts of such Colony shall hold his and their office and offices during their good behavior, and shall not be removed therefrom r» but when the said removal shall be adjudged by his Majesty in Council, upon a hearing on complaint from the Greneral ABsembly, or on a complaint from the Governor, or Council, or the House of Representatives severally, or of the Colony in which the said Chief Justice and other Judges have 10 exercised the said offices." The next Resolution relates to the Courts of Admi- ralty. It is this : *'That it may be proper to regulate the Courts of Admiralty or Vice-Admiralty authorized by the fifteenth Chapter of 15 the Fourth of George the Third, in such a manner as to make the same more commodious to those who sue, or are sued, in the said Courts, and to provide for the more decent maintenance of the Judges in the same." These courts I do not wish to take away ; they are in 20 themselves proper establishments. This court is one of the capital securities of the Act of Navigation. The extent of its jurisdiction, indeed, has been increased, but this is altogether as proper, and is indeed on many accounts more eligible, where new powers were wanted, 25 than a court absolutely new. But courts incommodiously situated, in effect, deny justice ; and a court partaking in the fruits of its own condemnation is a robber. The Congress complain, and complain justly, of this griev- ance. 30 These are the three consequential propositions. I have thought of two or three more, but they come rather too near detail, and to the province of executive govern- ment, which I wish Parliament always to superintend, never to assume. If the first six are granted, congruity 35 will carry the latter three. If not, the things that Conciliation with the Colonies, 61 lomain unrepealed will be, I hope, rather unseemly incumbrances on the building, than very materially detrimental to its strength and stability. Here, Sir, I should close ; but I plainly perceive some objections remain which I ought, if possible, to remove. 6 The first will be that, in resorting to the doctrine of our ancestors, as contained in the preamble to the Chester Act, I prove too much ; that the grievance from a want of representation, stated in that preamble, goes to the whole of legislation as well as to taxation ; and that the 10 Colonies, grounding themselves upon that doctrine, will apply it to all parts of legislative authority. To this objection, Avith all possible deference and humility, and wishing as little as any man living to impair the smallest particle of our supreme authority, I 15 answer, that the words are the words of Parliament, and not mine, and that all false and inconclusive inferences drawn from them are not mine, for I heartily disclaim any such inference. I have chosen the words of an Act of Parliament which Mr. Grcnville, surely a tolerably 'M zealous and very judicious advocate for the sovereignty of Parliament, formerly moved to have read at your table in confirmation of his tenets. It is true that Lord Chatham considered these preambles as declaring t rongly in favor of his opinions. He was a no less 25 powerful advocate for the privileges of the Americans. Ought I not from hence to presume that these preambles are as favorable as possible to both, when properly under- stood ; favorable both to the rights of Parliament, and to the privilege of the dependencies of this Crown? But, 30 Sir, the object of grievance in my Resolution I have not taken from the Chester, but from the Durham Act, which onfines the hardship of want of representation to the . ase of subsidies, and which therefore falls in exactly with the case of the Colonies. But whether the unrep- 35 62 Burke, resented counties were dejiire or de facto bound, the pre- ambles do not accui-ately distinguish, nor indeed was it necessary ; for, whether de jure or de facto, the Legisla- ture thought the exercise of the power of taxing as of 5 right, or as of fact without right, equally a grievance, and equally oppressive. I do not know that the Colonies have, in any general way, or in any cool hour, gone much beyond the demand of humanity in relation to taxes. It is not fair to judge 10 of the temper or dispositions of any man, or any set of men, when they are composed and at rest, from their conduct or their expressions in a state of disturbance and irritation. It is besides a very great mistake to imagine that mankind follow up practically any speculative prin- ir> ciple, either of government or of freedom, as far as it will go in argument and logical illation. We English- men stop very short of the principles upon which we support any given part of our Constitution, or even the whole of it together. I could easily, if I had not already 20 tired you, give you very striking and convincing instances of it. This is nothing but what is natural and proi)er. All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoy- ment, evety virtue, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter. We balance inconveniences ; we 25 give and take ; we remit some rights, that we may enjoy others ; and we choose rather to be happy citizens than subtle disputants. As we must give away some natural liberty to enjoy civil advantages, so we must sacrifice some civil liberties for the advantages to be derived from 30 the communion and fellowship of a great empire. But, in all fair dealings, the thing bought must bear some pro- portion to the purchase paid. None will barter away the immediate jewel of his soul. Though a great house is apt to make slaves haughty, yet it is purchasing a part 35 of the artificial importance of a great empire too dear to Conciliation with the Colonies, 63 pay for it all essential rights and all the intrinsic dig- nity of human nature. None of us who would not risk his life rather than fall under a government purely arbi-. trary. But although there are some amongst us who think our Constitution wants many improvements to 6 make it a complete system of liberty, perhaps none who are of that opinion would think it right to aim at such improvement by disturbing his country, and risking everything that is dear to him. In every arduous enterj)rise we consider what we are to lose, as well as 10 what we are to gain ; and the more and better stake of liberty every people possess, the less they will hazard in a vain attempt to make it more. These are the cords of man. Man acts from adequate motives relative to his interest, and not on metaphysical speculations. Aris- 15 totle, the great master of reasoning, cautions us, and with great weight and propriety, against this species of delusive geometrical accuracy in moral arguments as the most fallacious of all sophistry. The Americans will have no interest contrary to the 20 grandeur and glory of England, when they are not op- pressed by the weight of it ; and they will rather be inclined to respect the acts of a superintending legisla- ture when they see them the acts of that power which is itself the security, not the rival, of their secondary 25 imiK)rtance. In this assurance my mind most perfectly acquiesces, and I confess I feel not the least alarm from the discontents which are to arise from jmtting i)eople at their ease, nor do I apprehend the destruction of this Empire from giving, by an act of free grace and indul- ao gence, to two millions of my fellow-citizens some shai-e of those rights ujKjn which 1 have always been taught to value myself. It is said, indetMl, tliat this ]K)wer of i;r.intiug, vesttnl in American Assemblies, would dissolve the unity of the as 64 Burke, Empire, which was preserved entire, although Wales, and Chester, and Durham were added to it. Truly, Mr. . Speaker, I do not know what this unity means, nor has it ever been heard of, that I know, in the constitutional 5 policy of this country. The very idea of subordination of parts excludes this notion of simple and undivided unity. England is the head; but she is not the head and the members too. Ireland has ever had from the beginning a separate, but not an independent, legisla- 10 ture, which, far from distracting, promoted the union of the whole. Everything was sweetly and harmoniously disposed through both islands for the conservation of English dominion, and the communication of English liberties. I do not see that the same principles might 16 not be carried into twenty islands and with the same good effect. This is my model with regard to America, as far as the internal cireiunstances of the two countries are the same. I know no other unity of this Empire than I can draw from its example during these periods, 20 when it seemed to my poor understanding more united than it is now, or than it is likely to be by the pres- ent methods. But since I speak of these methods, I recollect, Mr. Speaker, almost too late, that I promised, before I fin- 25 ished, to say something of the proposition of the nobie lord on the floor, which has been so lately received and stands on your Journals. I must be deeply concerned whenever it is my misfortune to continue a difference with the majority of this House ; but as the reasons for 30 that difference are my apology for thus troubling you, suffer me to state them in a very few words. I shall compress them into as small a body as I possibly can, having already debated that matter at large when the question was before the Committee. 35 First, then, I cannot admit that proposition of a ran- Conciliation with the Colonies. - 65 som by auction ; because it is a mere project. It is a thing new, unheard of; supported by no experience; justified by no analogy; without example of our ances- tors, or root in the Constitution. It is neither regular Parliamentary taxation, nor Colony grant. Experimeri- 5 turn in corpore vili is a good rule, which will ever make me adverse to any trial of experiments on what is cer- tainly the most valuable of all subjects, the peace of this Empire. Secondly, it is an experiment which must be fatal in 10 the end to our Constitution. For what is it but a scheme for taxing the Colonies in the ante-chamber of the noble lord and his successors ? To settle the quotas and pro- portions in this House is clearly impossible. You, Sir, may flatter yourself you shall sit a state auctioneer, with 15 your hammer in your hand, and knock down to each Col- ony as it bids. But to settle, on the4)lan laid down by the noble lord, the true proportional payment for four or five and twenty governments according to the absolute and the relative wealth of each, and according to the British 20 proportion of wealth and burthen, is a wild and chimer- ical notion. This new taxation must therefore come in by the back door of the Constitution. Each quota must be brought to this House ready formed ; you can neither add nor alter. You must register it. You can do noth- 26 ing further; for on what grounds can you deliberate either before or after the proposition ? You cannot hear the counsel for all these provinces, quarrelling each on its own quantity of jjayment, and its proportion to others. If you should attempt it, the Committee of Provincial 30 Ways and Means, or by whatever other name it will de- light to be called, must swallow up all the time of Par- liament. Thirdly, it does not give satisfaction to the complaint of the Colonies. They complain that they are taxed 85 Q^ Burke, without their consent ; you answer, that you will fix the sum at which they shall be taxed. That is, you give them the very grievance for the remedy. You tell them, indeed, that you will leave the mode to themselves. I 5 really beg pardon — it gives me pain to mention it — but you must be sensible that you will not perform this part of the compact. For, suppose the Colonies were to lay the duties, which furnished their contingent, upon the imiK)rtation of your manufactures, you know you 10 would never suffer such a tax to be laid. You know, too, that you would not suffer many other modes of taxa- tion ; so that, when you come to explain yourself, it will be found that you will neither leave to themselves the quantum nor the mode, nor indeed anything. The whole 16 is delusion from one end to the other. Fourthly, this method of ransom by auction, unless it be universally accepted, will plunge you into great and inextricable difficulties. In what year of our Lord are the proiX)rtions of payments to be settled ? To say 20 nothing of the impossibility that Colony agents should have general powers of taxing the Colonies at their dis- cretion, consider, I implore you, that the communication by special messages and orders between these agents and their constituents, on each variation of the case, when 25 the parties come to contend together and to dispute on their relative proportions, will be a matter of delay, per- plexity, and confusion that never can have an end. If all the Colonies do not api>ear at the outcry, what is the condition of those assemblies who offer, by them- 30 selves or their agents, to tax themselves up to your ideas of their proportion ? The refractory Colonies who refuse all composition will remain taxed only to your old im- positions, which, however grievous in principle, are tri- fling as to production. The obedient Colonies in this 35 scheme are heavily taxed ; the refractory remain un- Couiiliation tvitJi the Colonies. 67 burdened. What will you do ? Will you lay new and heavier taxes by Parliament on the disobedient ? Pray consider in what way you can do it. You are perfectly convinced that, in the way of taxing, you can do nothing but at the ports. Now suppose it is Virginia that refuses 5 to appear at your auction, while Maryland and North Carolina bid handsomely for their ransom, and are taxed to your quota, how will you put these Colonies on a par ? Will you tax the tobacco of Virginia ? If you do, you give its death-wound to your English revenue at home, 10 and to one of the very greatest articles of your own foreign trade. If you tax the im|X)rt of that rebellious Colony, what do you tax but your own manufactures, or the goods of some other obedient and already well-taxed Colony ? Who has said one word on this labyrinth of 15 detail, which bewilders you more and more as you enter into it ? "Who has presented, who can present you with a clue to lead you out of it ? I think. Sir, it is impos- sible that you should not recollect that the Colony bounds are so implicated in one another — you know it 20 by your other experiments in the bill for prohibiting the New England fishery, — that you can lay no possible restraints on almost any of them which may not be presently eluded, if you do not confound the innocent with the guilty, and burthen those whom, upon every 25 principle, you ought to exonerate. He must be grossly ignorant of America who thinks that, without falling into this confusion of all rules of equity and policy, you 04111 restrain any single Colony, especially Virginia and Maryland, the central and most important of them all. ao Let it also ho considered that, either in the present confusion you settle a permanent contingent, which will and must be trifling, and then you have no effectual n»venue; or you change the quota at every exigency, md then on every new repartition you will have a new 85 quarrel. 68 Burke. Reflect, besides, that when you have fixed a quota for every Colony, you have not provided for prompt and punctual payment. Suppose one, two, five, ten years' arrears. You cannot issue a Treasury Extent against 5 the failing Colony. You must make new Boston Port Bills, new restraining laws, new acts for dragging men to England for trial. You must send out new fleets, new armies. All is to begin again. From this day forward the Empire is never to know an hour's tran- 10 quillity. An intestine fire will be kept alive in the bowels of the Colonies, which one time or other must consume this whole Empire. I allow indeed that the empire of Germany raises her revenue and her troops by quotas and contingents ; but the revenue of the empire, 15 and the army of the empire, is the worst revenue and the worst army in the world. Instead of a standing revenue, you will therefore have a perpetual quarrel. Indeed, the noble lord who pro- posed this project of a ransom by auction seems himself 20 to be of that opinion. His project was rather designed for breaking the union of the Colonies than for establish- ing a revenue. He confessed he apprehended that his proposal would not be to their taste. I say this scheme of disunion seems to be at the bottom of the project ; for 25 I will not suspect that the noble lord meant nothing but merely to delude the nation by an airy phantom which he never intended to realize. But whatever his views may be, as I propose the peace and union of the Colonies as the very foundation of my plan, it cannot accord with 30 one whose foundation is perpetual discord. Compare the two. This I offer to give you is plain and simple. The other full of perplexed and intricate mazes. This is mild ; that harsh. This is found by ex- perience effectual for its purposes ; the other is a new 35 project. This is universal -, the other calculated for cer- Conciliation with the Colonies. 69 tain Colonies only. Tln^ i^ im mediate in its conciliatory operation ; the other remote, contingent, full of hazard. Mine is what becomes the dignity of a ruling people — gratuitous, unconditional, and not held out as a matter of bargain and sale. I have done my duty in proposing it 6 to you. I have indeed tired you by a long discourse ; but this is the misfortune of those to whose influence nothing w^ill be conceded, and who must win every inch of their ground by argument. You have heard me with goodness. May you decide with wisdom ! For my part, 10 1 feel my mind greatly disburthened by what I have done to-day. I have been the less fearful of trying your jmtience, because on this subject I mean to spare it alto- gether in future. I have this comfort, that in every stage of the American affairs I have steadily opposed the meas- 15 ures that have produced the confusion, and may bring on the destruction, of this Empire. I now go so far as to risk a proposal of my own. If I cannot give peace to my country, I give it to my conscience. But what, says the financier, is peace to us without 20 money ? Your plan gives us no revenue. No ! But it does ; for it secures to the subject the power of refusal, tlic first of all revenues. Experience is a cheat, and fact a liar, if this power in the subject of proportioning his grant, or of not granting at all, has not been found the 26 richest mine of revenue ever discovered by the skill or by the fortune of man. It does not indeed vote you 152,750/. lis. 2jrf., nor any other paltry limited sum; but it gives the strong box itself, the fund, the bank — from whence only revenues can arise amongst a people 30 sensible of freedom. Fosita luditur area. Cannot you, in England — cannot you, at this time of day — cannot you, a House of Commons, trust to the principle which has raised so mighty a revenue, and accumulated a debt of near 140,000,000 in this country ? Is this principle to 35 70 Burke. be true in England, and false everywhere else ? Is it not true in Ireland ? Has it not hitherto been true in the Colonies ? Why should you presume that, in any country, a body duly constituted for any function will 5 neglect to perform its duty and abdicate its trust ? Such a presumption would go against all governments in all modes. But, in ti-uth, this dread of i)enury of supply from a free assembly has no foundation in nature ; for first, observe that, besides the desii-e which all men have 10 naturally of supporting the honor of their own govern- ment, that sense of dignity and that security to property which ever attends freedom has a tendency to increase the stock of the free community. Most may be taken where most is accumulated. And what is the soil or 15 climate where experience has not uniformly proved that the voluntary flow of heai)ed-up i)lenty, bursting from the weight of its own rich luxuriance, has ever run with a more copious stream of revenue than could be squeezed from the dry husks of oppressed indigence by the strain- 20 ing of all the politic machinery in the world ? A Next, we know that parties must ever exist in a f re5 country. We know, too, that the emulations of such parties — their contradictions, their reciprocal necessi- ties, their hopes, and their fears — must send them all 25 in their turns to him that holds the balance of the State. The jmrties are the gamesters ; but Government keeps the table, and is sure to be the winner in the end. When this game is played, I really think it is more to be feared that the j:>eople will be exhausted, than that government 30 will not be supplied ; whereas, whatever is got by acts of absolute power ill obeyed, because odious, or by con- tracts ill kept, because constrained, will be narrow, feeble, uncertain, and precarious. " Ease would retract 35 Vows made in pain, as violent and void." Coiir'lJdtlon /"ifh (he dthmirs. 71 1, 1(M" «MU', itr(Mr>i .ij^,uii>i ii ijw|»i Miiniilig (Mil tiriiialm.s. I declaie against c()miK)iiiuliiig, for a \yoov limited sura, the immense, ever-growing, eternal debt which is due to generous government from protected freedom. And so may I speed in the great object I propose to you, as I 5 tliink it would not only be an act of injustice, but would he the worst economy in the world, to compel the Colo- nies to a sum certain, either in the way of ransom or in the way of compulsory compact. But to clear up my ideas on this subject : a revenue 10 from America transmitted hither — do not delude your- selves — you never can receive it; no, not a shilling. We have experience that from remote countries it is not to l)e expected. If, when you attempted to extract reve- nue from l^engal, you were obliged to return in loan what 15 you had taken in imposition, what can you expect from . North America? For certainly, if ever there was a (Country qualified to produce wealth, it is India ; or an institution fit for the transmission, it is the East India Company. America has none of these aptitudes. If 20 America gives you taxable objects on which you lay your duties here, and gives you, at the same time, a surplus by a foreign sale of her commodities to pay the duties on these objects which you tax at home, she has per- formed her i)art to the British revenue. But with regai-d 26 to her own internal establishments, she may, I doubt not she will, contribute in moderation. I say in moderation, lor she ought not to be permitted to exhaust herself. She ought to be reserved to a war, the weight of which, with the enemies that we are most likely to have, must 30 be considerable in her quarter of the globe. There she may serve you, and serve you essentially. For that service — for all service, whether of revenue, ti-ade, or empire — my trust is in her interest in the British Constitution. My hold of the Colonies is in the 35 72 Burke, close affection which grows from common names, from kindred blood, from similar privileges, and equal pro- tection. These are ties which, though light as air, are as strong as links of iron. Let the Colonists always keep 5 the idea of their civil rights associated with your gov- ernment, — they will cling and grapple to you, and no force under heaven will be of power to tear them from their allegiance. But let it be once understood that your government may be one thing, and their privileges 10 another, that these two things may exist without any mutual relation, the cement is gone — the cohesion is loosened — and everything hastens to decay and disso- lution. As long as you have the wisdom to keep the sovereign authority of this country as the sanctuary of 15 liberty, the sacred temple consecrated to our common faith, wherever the chosen race and sons of England worship freedom, they will turn their faces towards you. The more they multiply, the more friends you will have ; the more ardently they love liberty, the more perfect 20 will be their obedience. Slavery they can have any- where — it is a weed that grows in every soil. They may have it from Spain ; they may have it from Prussia. But, until you become lost to all feeling of your true in- terest and your natural dignity, freedom they can have 25 from none but you. This is the commodity of price of which you have the monopoly. This is the true Act of Navigation which binds to you the commerce of the Col- onies, and through them secures to you the wealth of the world. Deny them this participation of freedom, 30 and you break that sole bond which originally made, and must still preserve, the unity of the Empire. Do not entertain so weak an imagination as that your registers and your bonds, your affidavits and your suffei-ances, your cockets and your clearances, are what form the 35 great securities of your commerce. Do not dream that Conciliation with the Colonies, 73 your letters of office, and your instructions, and your suspending clauses, are the things that hold together the preat contexture of the mysterious whole. These things do not make your government. Dead instruments, pas- sive tools as they are, it is the spirit of the English com- 5 munion that gives all their life and efficacy to them. It is the spirit of the English Constitution which, infused through the mighty mass, pervades, feeds, unites, invig- orates, vivifies evefy part of the Empire, even down to the minutest member. 10 Is it not the same virtue which does everything for us here in England ? Do you imagine, then, that it is the Land Tax Act which raises your revenue ? that it is the annual vote in the Committee of Supply which gives you your army ? or that it is the Mutiny Bill which inspires 15 it with bravery and discipline ? No ! surely no ! It is the love of the i^eople ; it is their attachment to their government, from the sense of the deep stake they have in such a glorious institution, which gives you your army and your navy, and infuses into both that liberal obedi- 20 ence without which your army would be a base rabble, and your navy nothing but rotten timber. All this, I know well enough, will sound wild and chimerical to the profane herd of those vulgar and me- chanical politicians who have no place among us ; a sort 25 of people who think that nothing exists but what is gross and material, and who, therefore, far from being qualified to be directors of the great movement of empire, are not tit to turn a wheel in the machine. But to men truly initiated and rightly taught, these ruling and master 30 principles which, in the opinion of such men as I have mentioned, have no substantial existence, are in truth everything, and all in all. Magnanimity in politics is not seldom the truest wisdom ; and a great empire and little minds po ill tnn;othor. If we are conscious of our 35 7 -I Burke, station, and glow with zeal to fill our places as becomes our situation and ourselves, we ought to auspicate all our public proceedings on America with the old warning of the church, Sursum corda / We ought to elevate our 5 minds to the greatness of that trust to which the order of providence has called us. By adverting to the dignity of this high calling our ancestors have turned a savage wilderness into a glorious empire, and have made the most extensive and the only honoiuble conquests — not 10 by destroying, but by promoting the wealth, the number, the happiness, of the human race. Let us get an Ameri- can revenue as we have got an American empire. Eng- lish privileges have made it all that it is; English privileges alone will make it all it can be. 15 In full confidence of this unalterable truth, I now, quod felix faustumque sit, lay the first stone of the Temple of Peace; and I move ytu — " Tliat the Colonies and Plantations of Great Britain in North America, consisting of fourteen separate governments, and 20 containing two millions and upwards of free inhabitants, have not had the liberty and privilege of electing and send- ing any Knights and Burgesses, or others, to represent them in the High Court of Parliament." LORD CHATHAM. ON AN ADDRESS TO THE THRONE CONCERNING AFFAIRS IN AMERICA. HOUSE OF LORDS, NOVEMBER 18, 1777. I RISE, my Lords, to declare my sentiments on this most solemn and serious subject. It has imposed a load upon my mind which I fear nothing can remove, but which impels me to endeavor its alleviation by a free and unreserved communication of my seiltiments. 6 In the first part of the Address I have the honor of lieartily concurring with the noble Earl who moved it. \o man feels sincerer joy than I do — none can offer more genuine congratulations — on every accession of strength to the Protestant succession. I therefore join lo in every congratulation on the birth of another Princess, ;ind the happy recovery of her Majesty. But I must stop here. My courtly complaisance will < arry me no farther. I will not join in congratulation n misfortune and disgrace. I cannot concur in a blind 15 md servile Address which approves, and endeavors to anctify, the monstrous measures which have heaped disgrace and misfortune ujwn us. This, my Lords, is a jterilous and tremendous moment! It is not a time for adulation. The smoothness of flattery cannot now avail 2C — cannot save us in this rugged and awful crisis. It is now necessary to instruct the Throne in the language of trutli. We must dispel the illusion and the darkness 75 76 Chatham. which envelop it, and display, in its full danger and true colors, the ruin that is brought to our doors. This, ray Lords, is our duty. . It is the proper function of this noble assembly, sitting, as we do, upon our honors 5 in this House, the hereditary council of the Crown. Who is the Minister — where is the Minister, that has dared to suggest to the Throne the contrary, unconstitutional language this day delivered from it ? The accustomed language from the Throne has been application to Parlia- 10 ment for advice, and a reliance on its constitutional advice and assistance. As it is the right of Parliament to give, so it is the duty of the Crown to ask it. But on this day, and in this extreme momentous exigency, no reliance is reposed on our constitutional counsels ! no 15 advice is asked from the sober and enlightened care of Parliament! but the Crown, from itself and by itself, declares an unalterable determination to pursue meas- ures — and what measures, my Lords? The measures that have produced the imminent perils that threaten us ; 20 the measures that have brought ruin to our doors. Can the Minister of the day now presume to expect a continuance of support in this ruinous infatuation ? Can Parliament be so dead to its dignity and its duty as to be thus deluded into the loss of the one and the viola- 25 tion of the other ? To give an unlimited credit and support for the steady perseverance in measures not proposed for our parliamentary advice, but dictated and forced upon us — in measures, I say, my Lords, which have reduced this late flourishing empire to ruin ;k) and contempt ? " But yesterday, and England might have stood against the world : now none so poor to do her reverence." I use the words of a poet ; but though it be poetry, it is no fiction. It is a shameful truth that not only the power and strength of this country 35 are wasting away and expiring, but her well-earned On Anierican Affairs. 77 glories, her true honor and substantial dignity, are sac- rificed. France, my Lords, has insulted you ; she has encour- aged and sustained America ; and, whether America be wrong or right, the dignity of this country ought to spurn 6 at the officious insult of French interference. The min- isters and embassadors of those who are called rebels and enemies are in Paris; in Paris they transact the re- il)rocal interests of America and France. Can there be .1 more mortifying insult ? Can even our Ministers sus- lo tain a more humiliating disgrace ? Do they dare to • sent it? Do they presume even to hint a vindication I their honor and the dignity of the state, by requiring the dismission of the plenipotentiaries of America? Such is the degradation to which they have reduced the 15 lories of England ! The people whom they affect to ill contemptible rebels, but whose growing power has at i.ist obtained the name of enemies; the people with whom they have engaged this country in war, and against whom they now command our implicit support 20 in every measure of desperate hostility — this people, despised as rebels, or acknowledged as enemies, are :il)etted against you, supplied with every military store, their interests consulted, and their embassadors enter- tained, by your inveterate enemy! and our Ministers dare 25 !i<»t interpose with dignity or effect. Is this the honor a great kingdom? Is this the indignant spirit of I jighind, who "but yesterday" gave law to the house of I»()iul)on ? My Lords, the dignity of nations demands a (l.M isive conduct in a situation like this. Even when the 30 neatest prince that perhaps this country ever saw filled ur throne, the requisition of a Spanish general, on a miilar suV)ject, was attended to, and complied with ; for, n the spirited remonstrance of the Duke of Alva, Eliza- lK3th found herself obliged to deny the Flemish exiles all 35 78 Chatham, countenance, support, or even entrance into her domin- ions, and the Count Le Marque, with his few desperate followers, were expelled the kingdom. Happening to arrive at the Brille, and finding it weak in defence, they 5 made themselves masters of the place ; and this was the foundation of the United Provinces. My Lords, this ruinous and ignominious situation, where we cannot act with success, nor suffer with honor, calls upon us to remonstrate in the strongest and loudest 10 language of truth, to rescue the ear of Majesty from the delusions which surround it. The desperate state of our arms abroad is in part known. No man thinks more highly of them than I do. I love and honor the English troops. I know their virtues and their valor. I know 15 they can achieve anything except impossibilities ; and I know that the conquest of English America is an impos- sibility. You cannot, I venture to say it, you cannot conquer America. Your armies last war effected every- thing that could be effected ; and what was it ? It cost 20 a numerous army, under the command of a most able general, now a noble lord in this House, a long and laborious campaign to expel five thousand Frenchmen from French America. My Lords, you cannot conquer America. 25 What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst ; but we know that in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much. Besides the sufferings, perhaps total loss, of the northern force, the best appointed army that ever took the field, commanded 30 by Sir William Howe, has retired from the American lines. He was obliged to relinquish his attempt, and with great delay and danger to adopt a new and distant plan of operations. We shall soon know, and in any event have reason to lament, what may have happened 35 since. As to conquest, therefore, my Lords, I repeat, it On American Affairs, 79 is impossible. Vou may swell every expense and every effort still more extravagantly ; pile and accumulate every assistance you can buy or borrow ; traffic and barter with every little pitiful German prince that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign prince ; your 6 efforts are forever vain and impotent — doubly so from this mercenary aid on which you rely; for it irritates to an incurable resentment the minds of your enemies to overrun them with the mercenary sons of rapine and plunder, devoting them and their possessions to the lo rapacity of hireling cruelty ! If I were an American, as 1 am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms — never — never — never. Your own army is infected with the contagion of these 15 illiberal allies. The spirit of plunder and of rapine is gone fortli among them. I know it ; and, notwithstand- ing what the noble Earl who moved the Address has given as his opinion of the American army, I know from authentic information and the most experienced 20 •fficers, that our discipline is deeply wounded. While this is notoriously our sinking situation, America grows and flourishes; while our strength and discipline are lowered, hers are rising and improving. But, my Lords, who is the man that, in addition to 25 these disgraces and mischiefs of our army, has dared to authorize and associate to our arms the tomahawk and scali)ing-knife of the savage ? to call into civilized alli- ance the wild and inhuman savage of the woods ; to dele- irate to the merciless Indian the defence of disputed 30 1 ights, and to wage the horrors of his barbarous war ii^ainst our brethren? My Lords, these enormities cry I loud for redress and punishment. Unless thoroughly lone away, it will be a stain on the national character. It is a violation of the Constitution. I believe it is 35 80 Chatham. against law. It is not the least of our national misfor- tunes that the strength and character of our army are thus impaired. Infected with the mercenary spirit of robl)ery and rapine, familiarized to the horrid scenes of 5 savage cruelty, it can no longer boast of the noble and generous principles which dignify a soldier; no longer sympathize with the dignity of the royal baimer, nor feel the pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war, " that make ambition virtue ! " What makes ambition virtue ? 10 — the sense of honor. But is the sense of honor con- sistent with a spirit of plunder or the practice of murder ? Can it flow from mercenary motives, or can it prompt to cruel deeds ? Besides these murderers and plunderers, let me ask our Ministers, what other allies have they 15 acquired ? What other powers have they associated to their cause ? Have they entered into alliance with the king of the gipsies ? Nothing, my Lords, is too low or too ludicrous to be consistent with their counsels. The independent views of America have been stated 20 and asserted as the foundation of this Address. My Lords, no man wishes for the due dependence of America on this country more than I do. To preserve it, and not confirm that state of independence into which your meas- ui*es hitherto have driven them, is the object which we 25 ought to unite in attaining. The Americans, contending for their rights against arbitrary exactions, I love and admire. It is the struggle of free and virtuous patriots. But, contending for independency and total disconnection from England, as an Englishman, I cannot wish them 30 success ; for in a due constitutional dependency, includ- ing the ancient supremacy of this country in regulating their commerce and navigation, consists the mutual hap piness and prosperity of both England and America. She derived assistance and protection from us, and we 35 reaped from her the most important advantages. She On American Affairs, 81 was, indeed, the fountain of our wealth, the nerve of our strength, the nursery and basis of our naval power. It is our duty, therefore, my Lords, if we wish to save our country, most seriously to endeavor the recovery of these most beneficial subjects ; and in this perilous crisis, per- 5 haps the present moment may be the only one in which we can hope for success ; for in their negotiations with France, they have, or think they have, reason to com- plain. Though it be notorious that they have received from that power important supplies and assistance of 10 various kinds, yet it is certain they expected it in a more decisive and immediate degree. America is in ill-humor with France ; on some points they have not entirely an- swered her expectations. Let us wisely take advantage of every possible moment of reconciliation. Besides, the 16 natural disjwsition of America herself still leans toward England ; to the old habits of connection and mutual interest that united both countries. This was the estab- lished sentiment of all the continent ; and still, my Lords, in the great and principal part, the sound part of Amer- 20 ica, this wise and affectionate disposition prevails. And there is a very considerable part of America yet sound — the middle and the southern Provinces. Some parts may be factious and blind to their time interests ; but if we express a wise and benevolent disposition to communicate 25 with them those immutable rights of nature and those constitutional liberties to which they are equally entitled with ourselves, by a conduct so just and humane we shall confirm the favorable and conciliate the adverse. I say, my Lords, the rights and liberties to which they are 30 ecjually entitled with ourselves, but no more. I would participate to them every enjoyment and freedom which the colonizing subjects of a free state can possess, or wish to possess ; and I do not see why they should not enjoy every fundam(»ntal right in th«Mr property, and every 35 82 Chatham, original substantial liberty, which Devonshire, or Surrey, or the county I live in, or any other county in England, can claim ; reserving always, as the sacred right of the Mother Countty, the due constitutional dependency of 5 the Colonies. The inherent supremacy of the state in regulating and protecting the navigation and commerce of all lier subjects, is necessary for the mutual lienetit and preservation of every part, to constitute and pre- serve the prosperous arrangement of the whole empire. 10 The sound parts of America, of which I have spoken, must be sensible of these great truths and of their real interests. America is not in that state of desperate and contemptible rebellion which this country has been de- luded to believe. It is not a wild and lawless banditti, 15 who, having nothing to lose, might hope to snatch some- thing from public convulsions. Many of their leaders and great men have a great stake in this great contest. The gentleman who conducts their armies, I am told, has an estate of four or five thousand pounds a year ; and 20 when I consider these things, I cannot but lament the inconsiderate violence of our penal acts, our declarations of treason and rebellion, with all the fatal effects of attainder and confiscation. As to the disposition of foreign powers which is as- 25 serted to be pacific and friendly, let us judge, my Lords, rather by their actions and the nature of things than by interested assertions. The uniform assistance supplied to America by France suggests a different conclusion. The most important interests of France in aggrandizing 30 and enriching herself with what she most wants, supplies of every naval store from America, must inspire her with different sentiments. The extraordinary preparations of the house of Bourbon, by land and by sea, from Dunkirk to the Straits, equally ready and willing to overwhelm 35 these defenceless islands, should rouse us to a sense of On American Affairs. 83 their real disposition and our own danger. Not five thou- sand troops in England ! hardly three thousand in Ire- land ! What can we oppose to the combined force of our enemies ? Scarcely twenty ships of the line so fully or sufficiently manned that any admiral's reputation would 6 permit him to take the command of. The river of Lis- bon in the possession of our enemies ! The seas swept by American privateers ! Our Channel trade torn to pieces by them ! In this complicated crisis of danger — weakness at home, and calamity abroad, terrified and in- lo suited by the neighboring powers, unable to act in Amer- ica, or acting only to be destroyed — where is the man with the forehead to promise or hope for success in such a situation, or from perseverance in the measures that have driven us to it ? Who has the forehead to do so ? 15 Where is that man ? I should be glad to see his face. You cannot conciliate America by your present mea- sures. You cannot subdue her by your present or by any measures. What, tlien, can you do? You cannot conquer; you cannot gain; but you can address — you 20 can lull the fears and anxieties of the moment into an ignorance of the danger that should produce them. But, my Lords, the time demands the language of truth. We must not now apply the flattering unction of servile com- pliance or blind complaisance. In a just and necessary 25 war tx) maintain the rights or honor of my country, I would strip the shirt from my bacik to support it. But in such a war as this, unjust in its principle, impracti- cable in its means, and ruinous in its consequences, I would not contribute a single effort nor a single shilling. 30 I do not call for vengeance on the heads of those wlio have been guilty ; I only recommend to them to make their retreat. I^et them walk off; and let them make liast*'. or they may be assured that speedy and condign punishment will overtake them. 35 84 Chatham, My Lords, I have submitted to you, with the freedom and truth which I think my duty, my sentiments on your present awful situation. I have laid before you the ruin of your power, the disgrace of your reputation, the pollu- 5 tion of your discipline, the contamination of your morals, the complication of calamities, foreign and domestic, that overwhelm your sinking country. Your dearest in- terests, your own liberties, the Constitution itself, tot- ters to the foundation. All this disgraceful danger, this 10 multitude of misery, is the monstrous offspring of this unnatural war. We have been deceived and deluded too long. Let us now stop short. This is the crisis — the only crisis of time and situation — to give us a possi- bility of escape from the fatal effects of our delusions. 15 But if, in an obstinate and infatuated perseverance in folly, we slavishly echo the peremptory words this day presented to us, nothing can save this devoted country from complete and final ruin. We madly rush into mul- tiplied miseries, and " confusion worse confounded." 20 Is it possible, can it be believed, that Ministers are yet blind to this impending destruction ? I did hope that instead of this false and empty vanity, this overween- ing pride, engendering high conceits and presumptuous imaginations. Ministers would have humbled themselves 25 in their errors, would have confessed and retracted them, and by an active though a late repentance, have endeav- ored to redeem them. But, my Lords, since they had neither sagacity to foresee, nor justice nor humanity to shun these oppressive calamities — since not even severe 30 experience can make them feel, nor the imminent ruin of their country awaken them from their stupefaction, the guardian care of Parliament must interpose. I shall therefore, my Lords, propose to you an amendment of the Address to his Majesty, to be inserted immediately 35 after the two first paragraphs of congratulation on the On American Affairs. S."> biilli oi" a princess, to recommend an inmiecliate cessation of hostilities, and the commencement of a treaty to re- store i)eace and liberty to America, strength and happi- ness to England, security and i^ermanent prosperity to both countries. This, my Lords, is yet in our power ; 6 and let not the wisdom and justice of your Lordships neglect the happy, and, jx>rhaps, the only opix)rtunity. By the establishment of irrevocable law founded on mu- tual rights, and ascertained by treaty, these glorious enjoyments may be firmly })eri)etuated. And let me re- 10 peat to your Lordships that the strong bias of America, at least of the wise and sounder parts of it, naturally inclines to this happy and constitutional reconnection with you. Notwithstanding the tempoi-ary intrigues with France, we may still be assured of their ancient 15 and confirmed partiality to us. America and France cannot be congenial. There is something decisive and confirmed in the honest American that will not assimi- late to the futility and levity of Frenchmen. My Lords, to encourage and confirm that innate incli- 20 nation to this country, founded on eveiy principle of affection as well as consideration of interest ; to restore that favoi-able disposition into a i)ermanent and ix)wer- ful reunion with this country ; to revive the mutual strength of the empire ; again to awe the house of Bour- 26 bon, instead of meanly truckling, as our present calami- ties compel us, to every insult of French caprice and Spanish punctilio ; to re-establish our commerce j to re- assert our rights and our honor; to confirm our interests, and renew our glories forever — a consummation most 30 devoutly to Iw endeavored ! and which, I trust, may yet arise from reconciliation with America — I have the honor of submitting to you the following amendment, which I move to be inserted after the two first para- graphs of the Address: 36 86 Chatham. " And that this House does most humbly advise and supplicate his Majesty to be pleased to cause the most speedy and ef- fectual measures to be taken for restoring peace in America ; and that no time may be lost in proposing an immediate 5 cessation of hostilities there, in order to the opening of a treaty for the final settlement of the tranquillity of these invaluable Provinces, by a removal of the imhappy causes of this ruinous civil war, and by a just and adequate security against the return of the like calamities in times to come. 10 And this House desire to ojffer the most dutiful assucances to his Majesty that they will, in due time, cheerfully co-operato with the magnanimity and tender goodness of his Majesty for the preservation of his people, by such explicit and most solemn declarations, and provisions of fundamental and 15 irrevocable laws, as may be judged necessary for the ascer- taining and fixing forever the respective rights of Great Britain and her Colonies. [In the course of this debate, Lord Suffolk, secretary for the Northern Department, undertook to defend the 20 employment of the Indians in the war. His Lordship contended that, besides its policy and necessity, the mea- sure was also allowable on principle ; for that '^ it was perfectly justifiable to use all the means that God and nature put into our hands ! "] 25 I am astonished [exclaimed Lord Chatham as he rose], shocked to hear such principles confessed — to hear them avowed in this House, or in this country; principles equally unconstitutional, inhuman, and unchristian ! My Lords, I did not intend to have encroached again 30 upon your attention, but I cannot repress my indigna- tion. I feel myself impelled by every duty. My Lords, we are called upon as members of this House, as men, as Christian men, to protest against such notions standing near the Throne, polluting the ear of Majesty. " That 35 God and nature put into our hands ! " I know not what ideas that lord may entertain of God and nature, but I know that such abominable principles are equally abhor- On American Affairs. 87 rent to religion and humanity. What ! to attribute the sacred sanction of God and nature to the massacres of the Indian scalping-knife — to the cannibal savage tor- turing, murdering, roasting, and eating — literally, my Lords, eating the mangled victims of his barbarous bat- 5 ties ! Such horrible notions shock every precept of reli- gion, divine or natural, and every generous feeling of humanity. And, my Lords, they shock every sentiment of honor ; they shock me as a lover of honorable war, and a detester of murderous barbarity. 10 These abominable principles, and this more abominable avowal of them, demand the most decisive indignation. I call upon that right reverend bench, those holy minis- ters of the Gospel, and pious pastors of our Church — I conjure them to join in the holy work, and vindicate the 15 religion of their God. I appeal to the wisdom and the law of this learned bench to defend and support the jus- tice of their country. I call upon the Bishops to in- terpose the unsullied sanctity of their lawn ; upon the learned Judges, to interpose the purity of their ermine, 20 to save us from this jwllution. I call upon the honor of your Lordships to revereqce the dignity of your ances- tors, and to maintain your own. I call upon the spirit and humanity of my country to vindicate the national character. I invoke the genius of the Constitution. 25 From the tai>estry that adorns these walls, the immortal ancestor of this noble lord frowns with indignation at the disgrace of his country. In vain he led your victorious fleets against the boasted Armada of Spain ; in vain he defended and established the honor, the liberties, the 30 religion — the Protestant religion — of this countrj', against the arbitrary cruelties of Popery and the Inquisi- tion, if these more than popish cruelties and inquisitorial practices are let loose among us — to turn forth into our settlements, among our ancient connections, friends, and 35 88 Chdtlinm, relations, the merciless caiiiiiuai, tliirsting for the blood of man, woman, and child ! to send forth the infidel sav- age — against whom ? against your Protestant brethren ; to lay waste their country, to desolate their dwellings, Tt and extirpate their race and name with these horrible hell-hounds of savage war — hell-hounds, I say, of savage war! Spain armed herself with blood-hounds to extir- pate the wretched natives of America, and we improve on the inhuman example even of Spanish cruelty ; we turn 10 loose these savage hell-hounds against our brethren and countrymen in America, of the same language, laws, lib- erties, and religion, endeared to us by every tie that should sanctify humanity. My Lords, this awful subject, so important to our 16 honor, our Constitution, and our religion, demands the most solemn and effectual inquiry ; and I again call upon your Lordships, and the united jwwers of the state, to examine it thoroughly and decisively, and to stamp upon it an indelible stigma of the public abhorrence. And I 20 again implore those holy prelates of our religion to do away these iniquities from among us. Let them perform a lustration ; let them puiify this House, and this coun- try, from this sin. My Lords, I am old and weak, and at present unable 25 to say more ; but my feelings and indignation were too strong to have said less. I could not have slept this night in my bed, nor reposed my head on my pillow, without giving this vent to my eternal abhorrence of such preposterous and enormous principles. EDMUND BURKE. SPEECH PREVIOUS TO THE BRISTOL ELECTION ; A DEFENCE OF HIS CONDUCT IN PARLIAMENT. AT THE GUILDHALL, BRISTOL, SEPTEMBER 6,1780. Mr. Mayor, and Gentlemen, I am extremely pleased at the appearance of this large and respectable meeting. The steps I may be obliged to take will want the sanction of a considerable authority; and in explaining anything which may appear doubtful 5 in my public conduct, I must naturally desire a very full audience. I have been backward to begin my canvass. The dis- solution of the Parliament was uncertain ; and it did not become me, by an unseasonable importunity, to appear lo diffident of the fact of my six years' endeavors to please you. I had served the city of Bristol honorably; and the city of Bristol had no reason to think that the means* of honorable service to the public were become indifferent to Hie. 15 1 found on my arrival here that three gentlemen hiul been long in eager pursuit of an object which but two of us can obtain. I found that they had all met with en- couragement. A contested election, in such a city as this, is no light thing. I paused on the brink of the 20 precipice. These three gentlemen, by various meriti 90 Burke, and on various titles, I made no doubt were worthy of your favor. I shall never attempt to raise myself by depreciating the merits of my competitors. In the com- plexity and confusion of these cross pursuits, I wished 5 to take the authentic public sense of my friends upon a business of so much delicacy. I wished to take your opinion along with me ; that if I should give up the con- test at the very beginning, my surrender of my post may not seem the effect of inconstancy, or timidity, or anger, 10 or disgust, or indolence, or any other temper unbecoming a man who has engaged in the public service. If, on the contrary, I should undertake the election, and fail of suc- cess, I was full as anxious that it should be manifest to the whole world that the peace of the city had not been 15 broken by my rashness, presumption, or fond conceit of my own merit. I am not come, by a false and counterfeit show of deference to your judgment, to seduce it in my favor. 1 ask it seriously and unaffectedly. If you wish that I 20 should retire, I shall not consider that advice as a cen- sure upon my conduct, or an alteration in your senti- ments ; but as a rational submission to the circumstances of affairs. If, on the contrary, you should think it proper for me to proceed on my canvass, if you will risk 25 the trouble on your part, I will risk it on mine. My pretensions are such as you cannot be ashamed of, •whether they succeed or fail. If you call upon me, I shall solicit the favor of the city upon manly ground. I come before you with the 30 plain confidence of an honest servant in the equity of a candid and discerning master. I come to claim your ap- probation, not to amuse you with vain apologies, or with professions still more vain and senseless. I have lived too long to be served by apologies, or to stand in need of 35 them. The part I have acted has been in open day ; and Speech at Bristol. 91 to hold out to a conduct which stands in tliat clear and steady light for all its good and all its evil, to hold out to that conduct the paltry winking tapers of excuses and ])romi8es — I never will do it. They may obscure it with their smoke ; but they never can illumine sunshine by 5 such a flame as theirs. — I am sensible that no endeavors have been left untried to injure me in your opinion. But the use of character is to be a sineld against calumny. I could wish, un- doubtedly, if idle wishes were not the most idle of all lo things, to make every part of my conduct agreeable to every part of my constituents. But in so great a city, and so greatly divided as this, it is weak to expect it. In such a discordancy of sentiments, it is better to look to the nature of things than to the humors of men. The 15 very attempt towards pleasing everybody discovers a tem- per always flashy, and often false and insincere. There- fore, as I have proceeded straight onward in my conduct, so I will proceed in my account of those parts of it which have been most excepted to. But I must first beg leave 20 just to hint to you that we may suffer very great detri- ment by being oi)en to every talker. It is not to be ima- gined how much of service is lost from spirits full of activity and full of energy, who are pressing, who are rushing, forward to great and capital objects, when you ai oblige them to be continually looking back. Whilst they are defending one service, they defraud you of an .- hundred. Applaud us when we run; console us when we fall ; cheer us when we recover ; but let us pass on — for God's sake, let us pass on. 30 Do you think, gentlemen, that every public act in the six years since I stood in this place before you — that all the arduous things which have been done in this event- ful period, which has crowded into a few years' space the revolutions of an age, can be opened to you on their fair 36 grounds in half an hour's conversation ? 92 Burke. But it is DO reason, because there is a bad mode of inquiry, that there should be no examination at all. Most certainly it is our duty to examine — it is our interest, too ; but it must be with discretion — with an 5 attention to all the circumstances, and to all the motives ; like sound judges, and not like cavilling pettifoggers and quibbling pleaders, prying into flaws and hunting for exceptions. Look, gentlemen, to the whole tenor of your member^s conduct. Try whether his ambition or 10 his avarice have justled him out of the straight line of duty ; or whether that grand foe of the offices of active life, that master-vice in men of business, a degenerate and inglorious sloth, has made him flag and languish in his course ? This is the object of our inquiry. If our 16 member's conduct can bear this touch, mark it for ster- ling. He may have fallen into errors ; he must have faidts; but our error is greater, and our faiilt is radi- cally ruinous to ourselves, if we do not bear, if we do not even applaud, the whole compound and mixed mass of 20 such a character. Not to act thus is folly ; I had almost said it is impiety. He censures God who quarrels with the imperfections of man. Crentlemen, we must not be peevish with those who serve the people. For none will serve us, whilst there is 25 a court to serve, but those who are of a nice and jealous honor. They who think everything, in comparison of that honor, to be dust and ashes, will not bear to have it soiled and impaired by those for whose sake they make a thousand sacrifices to preserve it immaculate and 30 whole. We shall either drive such men from the public stage, or we shall send them to the court for protection ; where, if they must sacrifice their reputa- tion, they will at least secure their interest. Depend upon it that the lovers of freedom will be free. Kone 35 will \4olate their conscience to please us, in order after- ,Sy.. , ,. e absurd to expect that they who are creeping and abject towards us will ever be bold and incorruptible 5 assertors of our freedom against the most seducing and the most formidable of all powers. No ! human nature is not so formed ; nor shall we improve the faculties or better the morals of public men by our possession of the most infallible receipt in the world for making cheats lo and hypocrites. Let me say with plainness, I who am no longer in a public character, that if by a fair, by an indulgent, by a gentlemanly behavior to our representatives, we do not give confidence to their minds, and a liberal scope to 15 their understandings ; if we do not permit our members to act upon a very enlarged view of things ; we shall at ,, length infallibly degrade our national representation into _► - a confused and scuffling bustle of local agency. Wlien "^^ '"*" the popular member is narrowed in his ideas, and ren- 20 dered timid in his proceedings, the service of the Crown will be the sole nursery of statesmen. Among the frolics of tlie court it may at length take that of attending to its business. Then the monopoly of mental power will be added to the power of all other kinds it possesses. 25 On the side of the people there will l^e nothing but impo- tence: for ignorance is impotence; narrowness of mind is impotence ; timidity is itself impotence, and makes all other qualities that go along with it impotent and useless. 30 At present it is the plan of the court to make its ser- vants insignificant. If the people should fall into the same humor, and should choose their servants on the same principles of mere obsequiousness, and flexibility, and total vacancy or indifference of opinion in all public 35 94 Burke, matters, then no part of tne state will be sound ; and it will be in vain to think of saving it. I thought it very expedient at this time to give you this candid counsel ; and with this counsel I would will- 5 ingly close, if the matters which at various times have been objected to me in this city concerned only myself, and my own election. These charges, I think, are four in number : my neglect of a due attention to my con- stituents, the not paying more frequent visits here ; 10 my conduct on the affairs of the first Irish Trade Acts ; my opinion and mode of proceeding on Lord Beauchamp's Debtors Bills ; and my votes on the late affairs of the Roman Catholics. All of these (except perhaps the first) relate to matters of very considerable public concern ; 15 and it is not lest you should censure me improperly, but lest you should form improper opinions on matters of some moment to you, that I trouble you at all upon the subject. My conduct is of small importance. With regard to the first charge, my friends have spoken 20 to me of it in the style of amicable expostulation ; not so much blaming the thing, as lamenting the effects. Others, less partial to me, were less kind in assigning the motives. I admit there is a decorum and propriety in a member of Parliament's paying a respectful court to 25 his constituents. If I were conscious to myself that pleasure or dissipation, or low, unworthy occupations, had detained me from personal attendance on you, I would readily admit my fault, and quietly submit to the penalty. But, gentlemen, I live at a hundred miles' 30 distance from Bristol ; and at the end of a session I come to my own house, fatigued in body and in mind, to a little repose, and to a very little attention to my family and my private concerns. A visit to Bristol is always a sort of canvass; else it will do more harm than good. To 35 pass from the toils of a session to the toils of a canvass Speech at Bristol. 95 is the furthest thing in the world from repose. I couhl hardly serve you as I have done, and court you too. Most of you have heard that I do not very remarkably spare myself in public business ; and in the private business of my constituents I have done very nearly as much as those 6 who have nothing else to do. My canvass of you was not on the 'Change, nor in the county meetings, nor in the clubs of this city. It was in the House of Commons ; it was at the custom-house ; it was at the council ; it was at the treasury ; it was at the admiralty. I canvassed you lo through your affairs, and not your persons. I was not only your representative as a body ; I was the agent, the solicitor of individuals ; I ran about wherever your affairs could call me ; and in acting for you, I often appeared rather as a ship-broker than as a member of Parliament. 15 There was nothing too laborious or too low for me to undertake. The meanness of the business was raised by the dignity of the object. If some lesser matters have slipped through my fingers, it was because I filled my hands too full, and, in my eagerness to serve you, took 20 in more than any hands could grasp. Several gentlemen stand round me who are my willing witnesses ; and there are others who, if they were here, would be still better, because they would be unwilling witnesses to the same truth. It was in the middle of a summer residence in 25 London, and in the middle of a negotiation at the admi- ralty for your trade, that I was called to Bristol; and this late visit, at this late day, has been possibly in prejudice to your affairs. Since I have touched upon this matter, let me say, 30 gentlemen, that if I had a disposition or a right to com- I)lain, I have some cause of complaint on my side. With a petition of the city in my hand, passed through the corporation without a dissenting voice, a petition in unison with almost the whole voice of the kingdom 35 96 Burke, (with whose formal thanks I was covered over) — while I labored on no less than five bills for a public reform, and fought, against the opposition of great abilities and of the greatest power, every clause and every word of r* the largest of those bills almost to the very last day of a very long session; — all this time a canvass in Bristol was as calmly carried on as if I were dead. I was con- sidered as a man wholly out of the question. A\Tiilst I watched, and fasted, and sweated in the House of Com- 10 mons, by the most easy and ordinary arts of election — by dinners and visits, by **How do you do's," and "My worthy friends," — I was to be quietly moved out of my seat ; and promises were made and engagements entered into, without any exception or reserve, as if my laborious 15 zeal in my duty had been a regular abdication of my trust. To open my whole heart to you on this subject, I do confess, however, that there were other times besides the two years in which I did visit you, when I was not 20 wholly without leisure for repeating that mark of my re- spect. But I could not bring my mind to see you. You remember, that in the beginning of this American war (that era of calamity, disgrace, and downfall, an era which no feeling mind will ever mention without a tear 25 for England) you were greatly divided ; and a vtry strong body, if not the strongest, opposed itself to the madness which every art and every power were employed to render popular, in order that the errors of the rulers might be lost in the general blindness of Jbhe nation. 30 This opposition continued until after our great, but most unfortunate, victory at Long Island. Then all the mounds and banks of our constancy were borne down at once ; and the frenzy of the American war broke in upon us like a deluge. This victory, which seemed to put an 35 immediate end to all difficulties, perfected us in that Speech at Bristol. 97 spirit of domination, which our unparalleled prosperity had but too long nurtured. We had been so very power- ful, and so very prosperous, that even the humblest of us were degraded into the vices and follies of kings. We lost all measure between means and ends ; and our head- 6 long desires became our politics and our morals. All men who wished for peace, or retained any sentiments of moderation, were overborne or silenced; and this city was led by every artifice (and probably with the more management, because I was one of your members) to dis- 10 tinguish itself by its zeal for that fatal cause. In this temper of your and of my mind, I should have sooner fled to the extremities of the earth, than have shown my- self here. I, who saw in every American victory (for you have had a long series of these misfortunes) the 16 germ and seed of the naval power of France and Spain, which all our heat and warmth against America was only hatching into life, — I should not have been a welcome visitant with the brow and the language of such feelings. When, afterwards, the other face of your calamity was ao turned upon you, and showed itself in defeat and dis- tress, I shunned you full as much. I felt sorely this variety in our wretchedness ; and I did not wish to have the least appearance of insulting you with that show of superiority, which, though it may not be assumed, is 26 generally suspected in a time of calamity from those whose previous warnings have been despised. I could not bear to show you a representative whose face did not reflect that of his constituents ; a face that could not joy in your joys, and sorrow in your sorrows. But time at 30 length has made us all of one opinion ; and we have all opened our eyes on the true nature of the American war, to the true nature of all its successes and all its failures. In that public storm, too, I had my private feelings. I Ijad seen blown down and prostrate on the ground sev- as 98 Burke. eral of those houses to whom I was chiefly indebted for the honor this city has done me. I confess that, whilst the wounds of those I loved were yet green, I could not bear to show myself in pride and triumph in that place 5 into which their partiality had brought me, and to appear at feasts and rejoicings, in the midst of the grief and calamity of my warm friends, my zealous supporters, my generous benefactors. This is a true, unvarnished, un- disguised state of the affair. You will judge of it. 10 This is the only one of the charges in which I am person- ally concerned. As to the other matters objected against me, which in their turn I shall mention to you, remem- ber once more I do not mean to extenuate or excuse. Why should I, when the things charged are among those IB upon which I found all my reputation? A\Tiat would be left to me, if I myself was the man who softened, and blended, and diluted, and weakened, all the distin- guishing colors of my life, so as to leave nothing distinct and determinate in my whole conduct ? 20 It has been said, and it is the second charge, that in the questions of the Irish trade, I did not consult the in- terest of my constituents ; or, to speak out strongly, that I rather acted as a native of Ireland, than as an English member of Parliament. 25 I certainly have very warm good wishes for the place of my birth. But the sphere of my duties is my true country. It was as a man attached to your interests, and zealous for the conservation of your power and dig- nity, that I acted on that occasion, and on all occasions. 30 You were involved in the American war. A new world of policy was opened, to which it was necessary we should conform, whether we would or not ; and my only thought was how to conform to our situation in such a manner as to unite to this kingdom, in prosperity and in 35 affection, whatever remained of the empire. I was true Speech at Bristol, 99 to my old, standing, invariable principle, that all things, which came from Great Britain, should issue as a gift of her bounty and beneficence, rather than as claims recov- ered against a struggling litigant ; or at least, that if your beneficence obtained no credit in your concessions, 6 yet that they should appear the salutary provisions of your wisdom and foresight, not as things wrung from you with your blood by the cruel gripe of a rigid neces- sity. The first concessions, by being (much against my will) mangled and stripped of the parts which were lO necessary to make out their just correspondence and con- nection in trade, were of no use. The next year a feeble attempt was made to bring the thing into better shape. This attempt (countenanced by the Minister) on the very first appearance of some popular uneasiness, was, after a 15 considerable progress through the House, thrown out by him. What was the consequence ? The whole kingdom of Ireland was instantly in a flame. Threatened by for- eigners, and, as they thought, insulted by England, they 20 resolved at once to resist the power of France, and to cast off yours. As for us, we were able neither to protect nor to restrain them. Forty thousand men were raised and disciplined without commission from the Crown. Two illegal armies were seen with banners displayed at the 25 same time and in the same country. No executive ma- gistrate, no judicature in Ireland, would acknowledge the legality of the army which bore the King's commission ; and no law, or appearance of law, authorized the army commissioned by itself. In this unexampled state of 30 things, which the least error, the least trespass on the right or left, would have hurried down the precipice into an abyss of blood and confusion, the people of Ireland demand a freedom of trade with arms in their hands. They interdict all commerce between the two nations. SB 100 Burke, They deny all new supply in the House of Commons, although in time of war. They stint the trust of the old revenue, given for two years to all the King's predeces- sors, to six months. The British Parliament, in a former 6 session, frightened into a limited concession by the men- aces of Ireland, frightened out of it by the menaces of England, were now frightened back again, and made a universal surrender of all that had been thought the peculiar, reserved, uncommunicable riglits of England; 10 — the exclusive commerce of America, of Africa, of the West Indies — all the enumerations of the Acts of Navi- gation — all the manufactures — iron, glass — even the last pledge of jealousy and pride, the interest hid in the secret of our hearts, the inveterate prejudice moulded 15 into the constitution of our frame, even the sacred fleece itself, all went together. No reserve ; no exception ; no debate; no discussion. A sudden light broke in upon us all. It broke in, not through well-contrived and well- disposed windows, but through flaws and breaches ; 20 through the yawning chasms of our ruin. We were taught wisdom by humiliation. No town in England presumed to have a prejudice, or dared to mutter a petition. What was worse, the whole Parliament of England, which retained authority for nothing but sur- 25 renders, was despoiled of every shadow of its superin- tendence. It was, without any qualification, denied in theory, as it had been trampled upon in practice. This scene of shame and disgrace has, in a manner whilst I am speaking, ended by the perpetual establishment of a 30 military power in the dominions of this Crown, without consent of the British legislature, contrary to the policy of the Constitution, contrary to the Declaration of Right ; and by this your liberties are swept away along with your supreme authority — and both, linked together from 35 the beginning, have, I am afraid, both together perished forever. Speech at Bristol, 10 1 What ! gentlemen, w;is I not to foresee, or foreseeing, was I not to endeavor to save you from all these multi- plied mischiefs and disgraces ? Would the little, silly, canvass prattle of obeying instructions, and having no opinions but yours, and such idle senseless tales, which 5 amuse the vacant ears of unthinking men, have saved you from " the pelting of that pitiless storm," to which the loose improvidence, the cowardly rashness, of those who dare not look danger in the face so as to provide against it in time, and therefore throw themselves head- 10 long into the midst of it, have exposed this degraded nation, beaten down and prostrate on the earth, unshel- tered, unarmed, unresisting ? Was I an Irishman on that day that I boldly withstood our pride ? or on the day that I hung down my head, and wept in shame and 15 silence over the humiliation of Great Britain ? I became unpopular in England for the one, and in Ireland for the other. What then ? What obligation lay on me to be popular? I was bound to serve both kingdoms. To be pleased with my service was their affair, not mine. 20 L was an Irishman in the Irish business, just as much as I was an American, when, on the same principles, I wished you to concede to America, at a time when she prayed concession at our feet. Just as much was I an American, when I wished Parliament to offer terms in 25 victory, and not to wait the well-chosen hour of defeat for making good by weakness, and by supplication, a claim of prerogative, pre-eminence, and authority. Instead of requiring it from me, as a point of duty, to kindle with your passions, had you all been as cool as I ao was, you would have been saved from disgraces and* dis- tresses that are unutterable. Do you remember our Com- mission ? We sent out a solemn embassy across the Atlantic Ocean, to lay the Crown, the Peerage, the Com- mons of Great Britain, at the feet of the American 3S 102 Burke, Congress. That our disgrace might want no sort of brightening and burnishing, observe who they were that composed this famous embassy ! My Lord Carlisle is among the first ranks of our nobility. He is the identi- 5 cal man who, but two years before, had been put forward, at the opening of the session in the House of Lords, as the mover of a haughty and rigorous Address against America. He was put in the front of the embassy of submission. Mr. Eden was taken from the office of Lord 10 Suffolk, to whom he was then Under-Secretary of State ; from the office of that Lord Suffolk, wlio but a few weeks before, in his place in Parliament, did not deign to in- quire where a congress of vagrants was to be found. This Lord Suffolk sent Mr. Eden to find these vagrants, 15 without knowing where this King's generals were to be found, who were joined in the « same commission of suj)- plicating those whom they were sent to subdue. 11 ny enter the capital of America only to abandon it; and these assertors and representatives of the dignity of Eng- 20 land, at the tail of a flying army, let fly their Parthian shafts of memorials and remonstrances at random behind them. Their promises and their offers, their flatteries and their menaces, were all despised ; and we were saved from the disgrace of their formal reception, only because 25 the Congress scorned to receive them ; whilst the state- house of independent Philadelphia opened her doors to the public entry of the ambassador of France. From war and blood we went to submission ; and from submission plunged back again to war and blood ; to desolate and 30 be desolated, without measure, hope, or end. I am a Royalist ; I blushed for this^-^^gradation of the Crown. I am a Whig ; I blushed for the dishonor of Parliament. I am a true Englishman ; I felt to the quick for the dis- grace of England. I am a man ; I felt for the melancholy 35 reverse of human affairs, in the fall of the first power in the worll. Speech a( linstoL 103 To read what was approaching in Ireland, in the black and bloody characters of the American war, was a pain- ful, but it was a necessary, part of my public duty. For, gentlemen, it is not your fond desires or mine that can alter the nature of things ; by contending against which, 6 what have we got, or shall ever get, but defeat and shame ? T did not obey your instructions : No. I conformed to t he instructions of truth and nature, and maintained your interest, against your opinions, with a constancy that became me. A representative worthy of you ought to be lO ;i person of stability. I am to look, indeed, to your opin- ions; but to such opinions as you and I must have five \ t'liis hence. I was not to look to the flash of the day. I knew that you chose me, in my place, along with others, to be a pillar of the state, and not a weathercock 15 on the top of the edifice, exalted for my levity and ver- satility, and of no use but to indicate the shiftings of every fashionable gale. Would to God the value of my sentiments on Ireland and on America had been at this day a subject of doubt and discussion ! No matter what 20 my sufferings had been, so that this kingdom had kept the authority I wished it to maintain, by a grave fore- sight, and by an equitable temperance in the use of its power. The next article of charge on my public conduct, and 26 that which I find rather the most prevalent of all, is Lord Beauchamp's bill. I mean his bill of last session for reforming the law-process concerning imprisonment. It is said, to aggravate the offence, that I treated the i)eti- tion of this city with contempt even in presenting it to 30 the House, and expressed myself in terms of marked dis- respect. Had this latter part of the charge been true, no merits on the side of the question which I took could possibly excuse me. But I am incapable of treating this city with disrespect Very fortunately, at this minute 35 104 Burke. (if my bad eyesight does not deceive me) the worthy gentleman deputed on this business stands directly be- fore me. To him I appeal, whether I did not, thougli it militated with my oldest and my most recent public 6 opinions, deliver the petition with a strong and more than usual recommendation to the consideration of the House, on account of the character and consequence of those who signed it. I believe the worthy gentleman will tell you, that the very day I received it, I applied to 10 the Solicitor, now the Attorney-General, to give it an immediate consideration; and he most obligingly and instantly consented to employ a great deal of his very valuable time to write an explanation of the bill. I attended the committee with all possible care and dili- 15 gence, in order that every objection of yours might meet with a solution, or produce an alteration. I entreated your learned Recorder (always ready in business in which you take a concern) to attend. But what will you say to those who blame me for supporting Lord Beauchamp^s 20 bill, as a disrespectful treatment of your petition, when you hear that out of respect to you, I myself was the cause of the loss of that very bill ? For the noble lord who brought it in, and who, I must say, has much merit for this and some other measures, at my request con- 25 sented to put it off for a week, which the Speaker's ill- ness lengthened to a fortnight ; and then the frantic tumult about Popery drove that and every rational business from the House. So that if I choose to make a defence of myself on the little principles of a 30 culprit pleading in his exculpation, I might not only secure my acquittal, but make merit with the opposers of the bill. But I sliall do no such thing. The truth is, that I did occasion the loss of the bill, and by a delay caused by my respect to you. But such an event was 35 never in my contemplation. And I am so far from taking Speech at Bristol, 105 credit for the defeat of that measure, that I cannot suffi- ciently lament my misfortune, if but one man who ought to be at large, has passed a year in prison by my means. I am a debtor to the debtors. I confess judgment. I owe what, if ever it be in my power, I shall most cer- 6 tainly pay, — ample atonement and usurious amends to liberty and humanity for my unhappy lapse. For, gen- tlemen, Lord Beauchamp's bill was a law of justice and policy, as far as it went ; I say as far as it went, for its fault was its being, in the remedial part, miserably 10 defective. There are two capital faults in our law with relation to civil debts. One is, that every man is presumed solvent — a presumption, in innumerable cases, directly against truth. Therefore the debtor is ordered, on a 15 supposition of ability and fraud, to be coerced his liberty until he makes payment. By this means, in all cases of civil insolvency, without a pardon from his creditor, he is to be imprisoned for life ; — and thus a miserable, mistaken invention of artificial science oper- 20 ites to change the civil into a criminal judgment, and to scourge misfortune or indiscretion with a punishment which the law does not inflict on the greatest crimes. The next fault is, that the inflicting of that punish- ment is not on the opinion of an equal and public judge ; 25 but is referred to the arbitrary discretion of a private, nay interested and irritated, individual. He who for- nmlly is, and substantially ought to be, the judge, is in reality no more than ministerial, a mere executive instru- ment of a private man, who is at once judge and party. 30 Kvery idea of judicial order is subverted by this pro- cedure. If the insolvency be no crime, why is it pun- ished with arbitrary imprisonment ? If it be a crime, why is it delivered into private hands to pardon with- out discretion, or to punish without mercy and without 35 measure ? 106 Burke. To these faults, gross and cruel faults in our law, the excellent principle of Lord Beauchamp's bill applied some sort of remedy. I know that credit must be pre- served ; but equity must be preserved too; and it is 6 impossible that anything should be necessary to com- merce which is inconsistent with justice. The princi- ple of credit was not weakened by that bill. God for- bid ! The enforcement of that credit was only put into the same public judicial hands on which we dejjend for 10 our lives, and all that makes life dear to us. But, indeed, this business was taken up too warmly both here and else- where. The bill was extremely mistaken. It was sup- posed to enact what it never enacted ; and complaints were made of clauses in it as novelties, which existed 15 before the noble lord that brought in the bill was born. There was a fallacy that ran through the whole of the objections. The gentlemen who opposed the bill always argued, as if the option lay between that bill and the ancient law. — But this is a grand mistake. For, practi- 20 cally, the option is between, not that bill and the old law, but between that bill and those occasional laws, called Acts of Grace. For the operation of the old law is so savage, and so inconvenient to society, that for a long time past, once in every Parliament, and lately twice, the 25 legislature has been obliged to make a general arbitrary jail-delivery, and at once to set open, by its sovereign authority, all the prisons in England. Gentlemen, I never relished Acts of Grace ; nor ever submitted to them but from despair of better. They are 30 a dishonorable invention, by which, not from humanity, not from policy, but merely because we have not room enough to hold these victims of the absurdity of our laws, we turn loose upon the public three or four thou- sand naked wretches, corrupted by the habits, debased by 35 the ignominy, of a prison. If the creditor had a right to Speech at Bristol. lect that here too, if we contrive to oppose this bill, we shall be found in a struggle against the nature of things. For, as we grow enlightened, the public will not lii'ar, for any length of time, to pay for the maintenance 15 f whole armies of prisoners, nor, at their own expense, .-ubmit to keep jails as a sort, of garrisons, merely to for- tify the absurd principle of making men judges in their own cause. For credit has little or no concern in this ' ruelty. I speak in a commercial assembly. You know 20 iiat credit is given, because capital must be employed; iliat men calculate the chances of insolvency; and they • ither withhold the credit, or make the debtor pay the risk in the price. The counting-house has no alliance with the jail. Holland understands trade as well as we, 25 and she has done much more than this obnoxious bill in- ttMided to do. There was not, when Mr. Howard visited Holland, more than one prisoner for debt in the great ity of Rotterdam. Although Lord Beauchamp's Act which was previous to this bill, and intended to feel the 30 .ay for it) has already preserved liberty to thousands, I I id though it is not three years since the last Act of ' ; i-ace passed, yet by Mr. Howard's last account, there were near three thousand again in jaiL I cannot name this gentleman without remarking that his labors and 35 108 Burke. . writings have done much to open the eyes and hearts of mankind. He has visited all Europe, — not to survey the sumptuousness of palaces, or the stateliness of tem- ples ; not to make accurate measurements of the remains 5 of ancient grandeur, nor to form a scale of the curiosity of modem art; not to collect medals, or collate manu- scripts : — but to dive into the depths of dungeons ; to plunge into the infection of hospitals ; to survey the mansions of sorrow and pain ; to take the gauge and di- 10 mensions of misery, depression, and contempt ; to re- member the forgotten, to attend to the neglected, to visit the forsaken, and to compare and collate the distresses of all men in all countries. His plan is original ; and it is as full of genius as it is of humanity. It was a voyag;e 15 of discovery ; a circumnavigation of charity. Already the benefit of his labor is felt more or less in every coun- try ; — I hope he will anticipate his final reward by seeing all its effects fully realized in his own. He will receive, not by detail, but in gross, the reward of those who visit 20 the j)risoner ; and he has so forestalled and monopolized this branch of charity, that there will be, I trust, little room to merit by such acts of benevolence hereafter. Nothing now remains to trouble you with but the fourth charge against me — the business of the Koman 25 Catholics. It is a business closely connected with the rest. They are all on one and the same principle. My little scheme of conduct, such as it is, is all arranged. I could do nothing but what I have done on this subject, without confounding the whole train of my ideas, and 30 disturbing the whole order of my life. Gentlemen, I ought to apologize to you for seeming to think anything at all necessary to be said upon this matter. The calumny is fitter to be scrawled with the midnight chalk of incen- diaries, with " No Popery," on walls and doors of devoted 35 houses, than to be mentioned in any civilized company. I Speech at Bn'sfoL 109 had heard that the spirit ut di.M wnu hl on that subject was \ cry prevalent here. With pleasure I find that I have been grossly misinformed. If it exists at all in this city, the laws have crushed its exertions, and our morals have shamed its appearance in daylight. I have pursued this 5 spirit wherever I could trace it ; but it still fled from me. Tt was a ghost which all had heard of, but none had seen. None would acknowledge that he thought the public pro- ceeding with regard to our Catholic dissenters to be blamable ; but several were sorry it had made an ill im- lo pression uix)n others, and that my interest was hurt by my share in the business. I find with satisfaction and pride, that not above four or five in this city (and I dare say these misled by some gross misrepresentation) have signed that symbol of delusion and bond of sedition, that 15 libel on the national religion and English character, the Vrotestant Association. It is therefore, gentlemen, not by way of cure, but of prevention, and lest the arts of wicked men may prevail over the integrity of any one amongst us, that I think it necessary to open to you the 20 merits of this transaction pretty much at large; and I beg your patience ujwn it : for, although the reasonings that have been used to depreciate the Act are of little force, ;md though the authority of the men concerned in this ill design is not very imposing; yet the audaciousness 25 • f these conspirators against the national honor, and the extensive wickedness of their attempts, have raised per- sons of little im{K)rtance to a degree of evil eminence, 1 1 id imparted a sort of sinister dignity to proceedings that had their origin in only the meanest and blindest ao malice. In explaining to you the proceedings of Parliament is hich have been complained of, I will state to you, first, the thing that was done ; next, the persons who did it ; id lastly, the grounds and reasons upon which the 25 110 Burke, legislature proceeded in this deliberate act ui public jus- tice and public prudence. Gentlemen, the condition of our nature is such, that we buy our blessings at a price. The Reformation, one 5 of the greatest periods of human improvement, was a time of trouble and confusion. The vast structure of superstition and tyranny, which had been for ages in rearing, and which was combined with the interest of the great and of the many, which was moulded into the laws, 10 the manners, and civil institutions of nations, and blended •with the frame and policy of states, could not be brought to the ground without a fearful struggle ; nor could it fall without a violent concussion of itself and all about it. When this great revolution was attempted in a more 16 regular mode by government, it was opj)osed by plots and seditions of the people ; when by popular efforts, it was repressed as rebellion by the hand of power; and bloody executions (often bloodily returned) marked the whole of its progress through all its stages. The affairs 20 of religion, which are no longer heard of in the tumult of our present contentions, made a principal ingredient in the wars and politics of that time ; the enthusia.sm of religion threw a gloom over the politics; and political interests poisoned and perverted the spirit of religion 25 upon all sides. The Protestant religion in that violent struggle, infected, as the Popish had been before, by worldly interests and worldly passions, became a perse- cutor in its turn, — sometimes of the new sects, which carried their o\vti principles further than it was conveni- 30 ent to the original reformers, and always of the body from whom they parted; — and this persecuting spirit arose, not only from the bitterness of retaliation, but from the merciless policy of fear. It was long before the spirit of true piety and true wis- 35 dom, involved in the principles of the Reformation, could Speech at Bristol. Ill Ih' dopuiult'tl from the divgs aiul ieiuleuce of the conten- tion with which it was carried through. However, until this be done, the Reformation is not complete; and those who think themselves good Protestants, from their ani- mosity to others, are in that respect no Protestants at all. 6 It was at first thought necessary, perhaps, to oppose to Poi)ery another Popery, to get the l)etter of it. What- ever was the cause, laws were made in many countries, fuid in this kingdom in particular, against Papists, wliich ire as bloody as any of those which had been enacted by lo tlie Popisli princes and states; and where those laws were not bloody, in my opinion they were worse ; as they were slow, cruel outrages on our nature, and kept men alive only to insult in their persons every one of the rights and feelings of humanity. I pass those 15 statutes, l)ecause I would spare your pious ears the repetition of such shocking things ; and I come to that l)articular law, the repeal of which has produced so many unnatural and unexi)ected consequences. A stfitute was fabricated in the year 1699, by which the 20 saying mass (a church-service in the Latin tongue, not exactly the same as our liturg)% but very near it, and containing no offence whatsoever against the laws, or 1.,'ainst gmnl morals) was forged into a crime punishable with ])erpetual imprisonment. The teaching school, a 25 useful and virtuous occupation, even the teaching in a private family, was in every Catholic subjected to the same unprojjortioned punishment. Your industry, and t lie bread of your children, was taxed for a pecuniary re- ward to stimulate avarice to do what nature refused, to 30 inform and prosecute on this law. Every Roman Catho- lic wjis, under the same Act, to forfeit his estate to his nearest Protestant relation, until, through a profession of wliat he did not believe, he redeemed by his hyixx-ri.sy what the law had transfen-ed to the kinsmaii as the rec- 35 112 Burke, ompense of his i)rofligacy. AVhen thus turned out of doors from his paternal estate, he was disabled from ac- quiring any other by any industry, donation, or charity ; but was rendered a foreigner in liis native land, only be- 5 cause he retained the religion, along with the property, lianded down to him from those who had been the old inhabitants of that land before him. Does any one who hears me approve this scheme of things, or tliink there is common justice, common sense, 10 or common honesty in any part of it ? If any does, let him say it, and I am ready to discuss the point with temi)er and candor. But instead of approving, I perceive a virtuous indignation beginning to rise in your minds on the mere cold stating of the statute. 15 But what will you feel, when you know from history how this statute passed, and what were the motives, and what the mode of making it ? A party in this nation, enemies to the system of the Revolution, were in opposi- tion to the government of King William. They knew 20 that our glorious deliverer was an enemy to all persecu- tion. They knew that he came to free us from slavery and Popery, out of a country where a third of the people are contented Catholics under a Pi-otestant government. He came with a part of his army composed of those very 25 Catholics, to overset the ix)wer of a Popish prince. Such is the effect of a tolerating spirit ; and so much is liberty served in every way, and by all persons, by a manly ad- herence to its own principles. Whilst freedom is true to itself, everything becomes subject to it ; and its very 30 adversaries are an insti-ument in its hands. The party I speak of (like some amongst us who would disparage the best friends of their country) resolved to make the King either violate his principles of toleration, or incur the odium of protecting Papists. They there* 35 fore brought in this bill, and made it purposely wicked Speech at Bristol 113 and absurd that it might be rejected. The then court- party, discovering their game, turned the tables on them, and returned their bill to them stuffed with still greater absurdities, that its loss might lie upon its original au- thors. They, finding their own ball thrown back to them, 6 kicked it back again to their adversaries. And thus this Act, loaded with the double injustice of two parties, neither of whom intended to pass what they hoped the other would be j^ersuaded to reject, went through the legis- lature, contrary to the real wish of all parts of it, and lo of all the parties that composed it. In this manner these insolent and profligate factions, as if they were playing with balls and counters, made a sport of the fortunes and the liberties of their fellow-creatures. Other acts of j^er- secution have been acts of malice. This was a subversion 15 of justice from wantonness and petulance. Look into the History of Bishop Burnet. He is a witness without exception. The effects of the Act have been as mischievous as its origin was ludicrous and shameful. From that time 20 every |)erson of that communion, lay and ecclesiastic, has been obliged to fly from the face of day. The clergy, concealed in garrets of private houses, or obliged to take a shelter (liardly safe to themselves, but infinitely dan- gerous to their country) under the privileges of foreign 25 Ministers, officiated as their servants, and under their protection. The whole body of the Catholics, condemned to beggary and to ignorance in their native land, have been obliged to learn the principles of letters, at the hazard of all their other principles, from the charity of 30 your enemies. They have been taxed to their ruin at the pleasure of necessitous and profligate relations, and according to the measure of their necessity and profli- gacy. Examples of tliis are many and affecting. Sohie of them are known by a friend wIjo Rtands near me in 35 114 Burke. this hall. It is but six or seven years since a clergyman of the name of Malony, a man of morals, neither guilty nor accused of anything noxious to the state, was con- demned to perpetual imprisonment for exercising the 5 functions of his religion ; and after lying in jail two or three years, was relieved by the mercy of government from perpetual imprisonment on condition of perpetual banishment. A brother of the Earl of Shrewsbury, a Talbot, a name respectable in this country whilst its 10 glory is any part of its concern, was hauled to the bar of the Old Bailey among common felons, and only escaped the same doom, either by some error in the process, or that the wretch who brought him there could not cor- rectly describe his person — I now forget which. In 15 short, the persecution would never have relented for a moment, if the judges, superseding (though with an am- biguous example) the strict rule of their artificial duty by the higher obligation of their conscience, did not con- stantly throw every difficulty in the way of such inform- 20 ers. But so ineffectual is the power of legal evasion against legal iniquity, that it was but the other day that a lady of condition, beyond the middle of life, was on the point of being stripped of her whole fortune by a near relation, to whom she had been a friend and beue- 25 factor ; and she must have been totally ruined, without a power of redress or mitigation from the courts of law, had not the legislature itself rushed in, and by a special Act of Parliament rescued her from the injustice of its own statutes. One of the Acts authorizing such things 30 was that which we in part repealed, knowing what our duty was, and doing that duty as men of honor and vir- tue, as good Protestants, and as good citizens. Let him stand forth that disapproves what we have done ! ^n: Gentlemen, bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny. 35 In such a country as this they are of all bad things the Speei'Ji at Bristol . 115 worst — worse by fur tliiiii anywhere else ; and they derive a particular malignity even from the wisdom and sound- ness of the rest of our institutions. For very obvious reasons you cannot trust the Crown with a dispensing power over any of your laws. However, a government, 6 l)e it as bad as it may, will, in the exercise of a discre- tionary power, discriminate times and persons ; and will not ordinarily pursue any man when its own safety is not concerned. A mercenary informer knows no dis- tinction. Under such a system, the obnoxious people lO :ire slaves, not only to the government, but they live at tlie mercy of every individual; they are at once the slaves of the whole community, and of every part of it ; and the worst and most unmerciful men are those on whose goodness they most depend. 15 In this situation men not only shrink from the frowns of a stern magistrate, but they are obliged to fly from t heir very species. The seeds of destruction are sown in civil intercourse, in social habitudes. The blood of whole- some kindred is infected. Their tables and beds are 20 surrounded with snares. All thie means given by Provi- dence to make life safe and comfortable are perverted into instruments of terror and torment. This species of universal subserviency, that makes the very servant who waits behind your chair the arbiter of your life and for- 25 tune, has such a tendency to degrade and abase mankind, ;nul to deprive them of that assured and liberal state of mind which alone can make us what we ought to be, that I vow to God I would sooner bring myself to put a man to immediate death for opinions I disliked, and so .to to get rid of the man and his opinions at once, than to fret him with a feverish being, tainted with the jail-dis- temper of a contagious servitude, to keep him above ground an animated mass of putrt»faction, corrupted him- self, and corrupting all al)out him. 35 116 Burke. The Act repealed was of this direct tendency ; and it was made in the manner which I have related to you. I will now tell you by whom the bill of repeal was brought into Parliament. I find it has been industriously given 5 out in this city (from kindness to me, unquestionably) that I was the mover or the seconder. The fact is, I did not once open my lips on the subject during the whole progress of the bilL I do not say this as disclaiming my share in that measure. Very far from it. I inform you 10 of this fact, lest I should seem to arrogate to myself the merits which belong to others. To have been the man chosen out to redeem our fellow-citizens from slavery, to purify our laws from absurdity and injustice, and to cleanse our religion from the blot and stain of persecu- 15 tion, would be an honor and happiness to which my wishes would undoubtedly aspire ; but to whicli nothing but my wishes could possibly have entitled me. That great work was in hands in every respect far l)etter qual- ified than mine. The mover of the bill was Sir George 20 Savile. When an act of great and signal humanity was to be done, and done with all the weight and authority that belonged to it, the world could cast its eyes upon none but him. I hoi)e that few things which have a tendency 25 to bless or to adorn life have wholly escaped my obser- vation in my passage through it. I have sought the acquaintance of that gentleman, and have seen liim in all situations. He is a true genius ; with an understanding vigorous, and acute, and refined, and distinguisliing even 30 to excess, and illuminated with a most unbounded, pecu- liar, and original cast of imagination. With these he possesses many external and instrumental advantages, and he makes use of them all. His fortune is among the largest ; a fortune which, wholly unencumbered, as it is, 35 with one single charge from luxury, vanity, or excess, Spvceh (ft Bristol, 117 sinks under the benevolence of its dispenser. This pri- vate benevolence, expanding itself into patriotism, ren- ders his whole being the estate of the public, in which he has not reserved a peailium for himself of profit, diversion, or relaxation. During the session the first in 5 and the last out of the House of Commons, he passes from the senate to the camp ; and seldom seeing the seat of his ancestors, he is always in the senate to serve his country, or in the field to defend it. But in all well- wrought compositions some particulars stand out more 10 eminently than the rest, and the things which will carry his name to posterity are his two bills — I mean that for a limitation of the claims of the Crown upon landed estates, and this for the relief of the Roman Catholics. By the former he has emancipated property ; by the latter 15 he has quieted conscience; and by both he has taught that grand lesson to government and subject, — no longer to regard each other as adverse parties. Such was the mover of the Act that is complained of by men who are not quite so good as he is ; an Act most 20 assuredly not brought in by him from any partiality to tliat sect which is the object of it. For, among his faidts, I i*eally cannot help reckoning a greater degree of preju- dice against that people than becomes so wise a man. I know that he inclines to a sort of disgust, mixed with a 25 considerable degree of asperity, to the system ; and he has few, or rather no habits with any of its jirofessors. What he has done was on quite other motives. The mo- tives were these, which he declared in his excellent speech on his motion for the bill; namely, his extreme 30 zeal to the Protestant religion, which he thought utterly disgraced by the Act of 1699, and his rooted hatred to all kind of oppression, under any color, or upon any pre- tence whatsoever. The seconder was worthy of the mover, and of the 35 118 Burke, motion. I was not the seconder; it was Mr. Dunning, Recorder of this city. I sliall say the less of him, because his near relation to you makes you more par- ticularly acquainted with his merits. But I should 6 appear little acquainted with them, or little sensible of them, if I could utter his name on this occasion without expressing my esteem for his character. I am not afraid of offending a most learned body, and most jealous of its reputation for that learning, when I say he 10 is the first of his profession. It is a jx)int settled by those who settle everything else : and I must add (what I am enabled to say from my own long and close obser- vation) that there is not a man of any profession, or in any situation, of a more erect and independent spirit ; of 15 a moi-e proud honor ; a more manly mind ; a more firm and determined integrity. Assure yourselves, that the names of two such men will bear a great load of preju- dice in the other scale before they can be entirely out- weighed. 20 With this mover and this seconder agreed the whole House of Commons; the whole House of Lords; the whole bench of bishops; the King; the Ministry; the Opposition; all the distinguished clergy of the estab- lisliment; all the eminent lights (for they were con- 25 suited) of the dissenting churches. This according voice of national wisdom ought to be listened to with reverence. To say that all these descriptions of Englishmen unanimously concurred in a scheme for introducing the Catholic religion, or that none of them 30 understood the nature and effects of what they were doing so well as a few obscure clubs of people whose names you never heard of, is shamelessly absurd. Surely it is paying a misei*able compliment to the religion we profess, to suggest that everything emi- 35 nent in the kingdom is indifferent, or even adverse, to Speech at Briatol. 119 that religion, and that its security is wliolly abandoned to the zeal of those who have nothing but their zeal to distinguish them. In weighing this unanimous concur- rence of whatever the nation has to b(jast of, I lioj^ you will recollect that all these concurring parties do by no 5 means love one another enough to agree in any point which was not both evidently and importantly right. To prove this ; to prove that the measure was both clearly and materially proper, I will next lay before ,you, as I promised, the political grounds and reasons for the lo rei)eal of that penal statute, and the motives to its rej)eal at that particular time. Gentlemen, America — when the English nation seemed to be dangerously, if not irrecoverably, divided; when one, and that the most growing branch, was torn from i"> the parent stock, and ingrafted on the power of France, a great terror fell upon this kingdom. On a sudden we awakened from our dreams of conquest, and saw ourselves threatened with an immediate invasion, wlrich we were at that time very ill prepared to resist. You rememl>er 20 the cloud that gloomed over us all. In that hour of our dismay, from the bottom of the hiding-places into which the indiscriminate rigor of our statutes had driven them, came out the body of the Roman Catholics. They aj)- jieared before the steps of a tottering throne with one of 25 the most sober, measured, steady, and dutiful addresses that was ever presented to the Crown. It was no holiday ceremony ; no anniversary comj)liment of parade and show. It was signed by almost every gentleman of that l)ersuasion, of note or property, in England. At such a 30 crisis, nothing but a decided resolution to stand or fall with their country could have dictated such an address, the direct tendency of which was to cut off all retreat, and to render them peculiarly obnoxious to an invader of their own communion. The address showed what I long 35 120 Burke. languished to see, that all the subjects of England had cast off all foreign views and connections, and that every man looked for his relief from every grievance at the hands only of his own natural government. 5 It was necessary, on our part, that the natural govern- ment should show itself worthy of that name. It was necessary, at the crisis I si)eak of, that the supreme jx)wer ^f the state should meet the conciliatory disposi- tions of the subject. To delay protection would be to re- 10 ject allegiance. And why should it be rejected, or even coldly and suspiciously received ? If any independent Catholic state should choose to take part with this king- dom in a war with France and Spain, that bigot (if sucli a bigot could be found) would be heard with little res- 15 i^ect, who could dream of objecting his religion to an ally "^om the nation would not only receive with its freest thanks, but purchase with the last remains of its exl^austed treasure. To such an ally we should not dare to whisper a -eingle syllable of those base and invidious 20 topics upon which some unhappy men would persuade the state to reject the duty and allegiance of its own mem- bers. Is it then because foreigners are in a condition to set our malice at defiance, that with them we are willing to contract engagements of friendship, and to keep tliem 25 with fidelity and honor ; but that, because we conceive some descriptions of our countrymen are not powerful enough to punish our malignity, we will not permit them to support our common interest ? Is it on that ground that our anger is to he kindled by their offered kindness ? 30 Is it on that ground that they are to be subjected to penalties, because they are willing, by actual merit, to purge themselves from imputed crimes ? Lest by an ad- herence to the cause of their country they should acquire a title to fair and equitable treatment, are we resolved to 35 furnish them with causes of eternal enmity ; and rather Spfifch at Bristol, 121 supply thi'iii with jll^sl antl founded motives to disaffec- tion, tlian not to have tliat disaffection in existence to justify an oppression, which, not from policy, but disposi- tion, we have predetermined to exercise ? "What shadow of reason could be assigned, why, at a ft time when the most Protestant part of this Protestant empire found it for its advantage to unite with the two principal Popish states, to unite itself in the closest bonds with France and Sjmn, for our destruction, that we should refuse to unite with our own Catholic countrymen for our 10 own preservation ? Ought we, like madmen, to tear off the plasters that the lenient hand of prudence had spread over the wounds and gashes which in our de- lirium of ambition we had given to our own body ? No I)erson ever reprobated the American war more than I 15 did, and do, and ever shall. But I never will consent that we should lay additional voluntary penalties on our- selves for a fault which carries but too much of its own punishment in its own nature. For one, I was delighted with the pro{X)sal of internal peace. I accepted the bless- 20 ing with thankfulness and transport ; I was truly happy to find one good effect of our civil distractions, that they had put an end to all religious strife and heart-burning in our o^vn bowels. What must be the sentiments of a man who would wish to perpetuate domestic hostility 26 when the causes of dispute are at an end, and who, cry- ing out for pe;u!e with one part of the nation on the most humiliating terms, should deny it to those who offer friendship without any terms at all ? But if I was unable to reconcile such a denial to the 30 contracted principles of local duty, what answer could I give to the broad claims of general humanity ? I confess to you freely that the sufferings and distresses of the people of America, in this cruel war, have at times af- fected me more deeply than I can express. I felt every 35 122 Burke. -"^Gazette of triumph' as a blow upon my heart, which has an hundred times sunk and fainted within me at all the mischiefs brought upon those who bear the whole brunf ^ of war in the heart of their country. Yet the Americans 5 are utter strangers to me ; a nation among whom I am not sure that I have a single acquaintance. Was I to suffer my mind to be so unaccountably warj)ed ; was I to keep such iniquitous weights and measures of temper and of reason, as to sympathize with those who are in 10 open relx*llion against an authority which I resi>ect, at war with a country which by every title ought to be, and is, most dear to me ; and yet to have no feeling at all for the hardships and indignities suffered by men who, by their very vicinity, are bound up in a nearer relation to 15 us ; who contribute their share, and more than their share, to the common prosperity ; who perform the com- mon offices of social life, and who obey the laws, to the full as well as I do ? Gentlemen, the danger to the state being out of the question (of which, let me tell 20 you, statesmen themselves are apt to have but too ex- quisite a sense), I could assign no one reason of justice, jx)licy, or feeling, for not concurring most cordially, as most cordially I did concur, in softening some part of that shameful servitude under which several of my 25 worthy fellow-citizens were groaning. Important effects followed this act of wisdom. They appeared at home and abroad to the great benefit of this kingdom ; and, let me hope, to the advantage of man- kind at large. It betokened union among ourselves. It 30 showed soundness, even on the part of the persecuted, which generally is the weak side of every community. But its most essential operation was not in England. The Act was immediately, though very imperfectly, copied in Ireland ; and this imperfect transcript of an 35 imperfect Act, this first faint sketch of toleration, which Speech at Bristol, 123 (lid little more than disclose a principle, and mark out a disposition, completed in a most wonderful manner the re-union to the state of all the Catholics of that country. It made us what we ought always to have been, one family, one body, one heart and soul, against the family 6 combination, and all other combinations, of our enemies. We have indeed obligations to that people who received such small benefits with so much gratitude, and for which gratitude and attachment to us, I am afraid they have suffered not a little in other places. 10 I dare say you have all heard of the privileges indulged to the Irish Catholics residing in Spain. You have like- wise heard with what circumstances of severity they have been lately expelled from tlie seaports of that kingdom, driven into the inland cities, and there detained as a 15 sort of prisoners of state. I have good reason to believe that it was the zeal to our government and our cause (somewliat indiscreetly expressed in one of the addresses of the Catholics of Ireland) which has thus drawn down on their heads the indignation of the court of Madrid, to 20 the inexpressible loss of several individuals, and in fu- ture, perhaps, to the great detriment of the whole of their body. Now that our people should be persecuted in Spain for their attachment to this country, and perse- cuted in this country for their supposed enmity to us, is 26 such a jarring reconciliation of contradictory distresses — is a thing at once so dreadful and ridiculous — that no malice short of diabolical would wish to continue any human creatures in such a situation. But honest men will not forget either their merit or their sufferings. 30 There are men (and many, I trust, there are) who, out of love to their country and their kind, would torture their invention to find excuses for the mistakes of their breth- ren, and who, to stifle dissension, would construe even doubtful appearances with the utmost favor ; such men 35 124 Burke, will never persuade themselves to be ingenious and re- fined in discovering disaffection and treason in the mani- fest, palj)able signs of suffering loyalty. Persecution is so unnatural to them that they gladly snatch the very 6 first opportunity of laying aside all the tricks and devices of i)enal politics, and of returning home, after all their irksome and vexatious wanderings, to our natural family mansion, to the grand social principle that unites all men, in all descriptions, under the shadow of an equal 10 and impartial justice. Men of another sort, I mean the bigoted enemies to liberty, may perhaps, in their politics, make no account of the good or ill affection of the Catholics, of England, who are but a handful of people (enough to torment, but 15 not enough to fear), perhaps not so many, of both sexes and of all ages, as fifty thousand. But, gentlemen, it is possible you may not know that the people of that per- suasion in Ireland amount at least to sixteen or seventeen hundred thousand souls. I do not at all exaggerate the 20 number. A Nation to be persecuted ! "Whilst we were masters of the sea, embodied with America, and in alli- ance with half the powers of the continent, we might perhaps, in that remote comer of Europe, afford to tyrannize with impunity. But there is a revolution in 25 our affairs which makes it prudent to be just. In our late awkward contest with Ireland about trade, had reli- gion been thrown in to ferment and imbitter the mass of discontents, the consequences might have been truly dreadful ; but, very happily, that cause of quarrel was 30 previously quieted by the wisdom of the Acts I am com- mending. Even in England, where I admit the danger from the discontent of that persuasion to be less than in Ireland ; yet even here, had we listened to the counsels of fanati- 35 cism and folly, we might have wounded ourselves very Spci'>'h at lirisfol. 125 deei)ly, and wounded ourselves iu a very tender part. You are apprised that the Catholics of England consist mostly of our best manufacturers. Had the legislature chosen, instead of returning their declarations of duty with correspondent good-will, to drive them to despair, 5 there is a country at their very door to which they would be invited, a country in all respects as good as ours, and with the finest cities in the world ready built to receive them. And thus the bigotry of a free country, antl in an enlightened age, would have repeopled the 10 cities of Flanders, which, in the darkness of two hundred years ago, had been desolated by the superstition of a crutd tyrant. Our manufacturers were the growth of the i>ers(*cutions in the Low Countries. What a spec- tacle would it be to Europe to see us at this time of day 15 balancing the account of tyranny with those very coun- tries, and by our persecutions driving back trade and manufacture, as a sort of vagabonds, to their original settlement ! But I trust we shall be saved this last of disgi-aces. 20 So far as to the effect of the Act on the interest of this nation. With regard to the interests of mankind at large I am sure the benefit was very considerable. Long before this Act, indeed, the spirit of toleration began to gain ground in Europe. In Holland, the third part of the 25 I)eoi)le are Catliolics; they live at ease, and are a sound part of the State. In many parts of Germany, Protest- ants and Papists partake the same cities, the same coun- cils, and even the same churches. The unbounded liber- ality of the King of Pnissia's conduct on this occasion is 30 known to all the world ; and it is of a piece with the other grand maxims of his reign. The magnanimity of the imperial court, breaking through the narrow prin- ciples of its predecessors, has indulged its l^rotestant subjects — not only with proi)erty, with worship, with «5 126 Burke. liberal education — but with honors and trusts, both civil and military. A worthy Protestant gentleman of this country now fills, and fills with credit, a high office in the Austrian Netherlands. Even the Lutheran obstinacy 6 of Sweden has thawed at length, and opened a toleration to all religions. I know myself that in France the Pro- testants begin to be at rest. The army, which in that country is everything, is open to them ; and some of the military rewards and decorations which the laws deny, 10 are supplied by others to make the service acceptable and honorable. The first Minister of Finance in that country is a Protestant. Two years^ war without a tax is among the first-fruits of their liberality. Tarnished as the glory of this nation is, and as far as it has waded into is the shades of an eclipse, some beams of its former illumi- nation still play ujwn its surface ; and what is done in England is still looked to as argument and as example. It is certainly true that no law of this country ever met with such universal applause abroad, or was so likely to 20 produce the perfection of that tolerating spirit, which, as I observed, has been long gaining ground in Europe ; for abroad, it was universally thought that we had done what, I am sorry to say, we had not; they thought we had granted a full toleration. That opinion was, however, 25 so far from hurting the Protestant cause that I declare, with the most serious solemnity, my firm belief that no one thing done for these fifty years past was so likely to prove deeply beneficial to our religion at large as Sir George Savile's act. In its effects it was "an Act 30 for tolerating and protecting Protestantism throughout Europe ; " and I hope that those who were taking steps for the quiet and settlement of our Protestant brethren in other countries will, even yet, rather consider the steady equity of the greater and better part of the people of 35 Great Britain, than the vanity and violence of a few. Speech at Briatol. 127 I perceive, gentlemen, by the manner of all about me, that you look with horror on the wicked clamor which has been raised on this subject ; and that instead of an apology for what was done, you rather demand from me an account why the execution of the scheme of tolerar 6 tion was not made more answerable to the large and lilxjral grounds on which it was taken up ? The ques- tion is natural and proper ; and I remember tliat a great and learned magistrate, distinguished for his strong and systematic understanding, and who at that time was a lo meml)er of the House of Commons, made the same objec- tion to the proceeding. The statutes, as they now stand, are, without doubt, perfectly absurd. But I beg leave to explain the cause of this gross imperfection in the toler- ating plan, as well and as shortly as I am able. It w^as 15 universally thought that the session ought not to pass over without doing something in this business. To re- vise the whole body of the penal statutes was conceived to be an object too big for the time. The penal statute, therefore, which was chosen for repeal (chosen to show 20 our disi)osition to conciliate, not to perfect a toleration) was this Act of ludicrous cruelty, of which I have just given you the history. It is an Act which, though not by a great deal so fierce and bloody as some of the rest, was infinitely more ready in the execution. It was the 26 Act which gave the greatest encouragement to those pests of s(Xiiety, mercenary informers and interested disturbers of household peace ; and it was observed with truth that the prosecutions, either carried to conviction or com- pounded, for many years, had been all commenced upon 30 that Act. It was said that, whilst we were delil)erating on a more perfect scheme, the spirit of the age would never come up to the execution of the statutes which remained, esj)ecially as more steps, and a cooperation of more minds and powers were required towards a mischiev- as 128 Burke. oils use of them, than for the execution of the Act to be repealed ; that it was better to unravel this texture from below than from above, beginning with the latest, which, in general practice, is the severest evil. It was alleged 6 that this slow proceeding would be attended with the ad- vantage of a progressive experience ; and that the people would grow reconciled to toleration, when they should find by the effects that justice was not so irreconcilable an enemy to convenience as they had imagined. 10 These, gentlemen, were the reasons why we left this good work in the rude, unfinished state in which good works are commonly left through the tame circumspec- tion with which a timid prudence so frequently enervates beneficence. In doing good, we are generally cold, and 15 languid, and sluggish ; and of all things afraid of being too much in the right, l^ut the works of malice and injustice are quite in another style. They are finished with a bold, masterly hand, touched as they are with the spirit of those vehement passions that call forth all our 20 energies whenever we oppress and persecute. Thus this matter was left for the time, with a full determination in Parliament not to suffer other and worse statutes to remain for the purpose of counteracting the benefits proposed by the repeal of one penal law ; 25 for nobody then dreamed of defending what was done for a benefit, on the ground of its being no benefit at all. We were not then ripe for so mean a subterfuge. I do not wish to go over the horrid scene that was afterwards acted. Would to God it could be expunged 30 forever from the annals of this country ! But since it must subsist for our shame, let it subsist for our instruc- tion. In the year 1780, there were found in this nation men deluded enough (for I give the whole to their de- lusion), on pretences of zeal and piety, without any soii; 35 of provocation whatsoever, real or pretended, to make a Speech at BrUtol 129 dt\si)crate attempt, which would have consumed all the glory and power of this country in the flames of London, and buried all law, order, and religion under the ruins of the metropolis of the Protestant world. Whether all this mischief done, or in the direct train of doing, was in 6 their original scheme, I cannot say — I hope it was not ; but this would have been the unavoidable consequence of their j)roceedings had not the flames they had lighted up in their fury been extinguished in their blood. All the time that this horrid scene was acting or lo avenging, as well as for sometime before, and ever since, the wicked instigators of this unhappy multitude, guilty, with every aggravation, of all their crimes, and screened in a cowardly darkness from their punishment, continued without interruption, pity, or remorse, to blow up the 15 blind rage of the populace with a continued blast of pestilential libels, which infected and poisoned the very air we breathed in. The main drift of all the libels, and all the riots, was to force Parliament (to persuade us was hopeless) into 20 an act of national perfidy which has no example. For, gentlemen, it is proi)er you should all know what infamy we escaped by refusing that repeal, for a refusal of wliich, it seems, I, among others, stand somewhere or otlier accused. When, we took away, on the motives 25 which I had the honor of stating to you, a few of the innumerable penalties upon an oppressed and injured people, the relief was not absolute, but given on a stip ulation and compact between them and us ; for we bound down the Roman Catholics with the most solemn oaths 30 to bear true allegiance to this government, to abjure all sort of temporal jwwer in any other, and to renounce, under the same solemn obligations, the doctrines of sys- tematic perfidy with which they stood (I conceive very unjustly) charged. Now our modest petitioners came 35 130 Burke, up to us most humbly praying nothing more than that we should break our faith, without any one cause what- soever of forfeiture assigned ; and when the subjects of this kingdom had, on their part, fully performed their 6 engagement, we should refuse, on our part, the benefit we had stipulated on the performance of those very con- ditions that were prescribed by our own authority, and taken on the sanction of our public faith — that is to say, when we had inveigled them with fair ])romises within 10 our door, we were to shut it on them ; and, adding mock- ery to outrage, to tell them, " Now we have got you fast ; your consciences are bound to a power resolved on your destruction. We have made you swear that your reli- gion obliges you to keep your faith : fools as you are ! we 16 will now let you see that our religion enjoins us to keep no faith with you." They who would advisedly call upon us to do such things must certainly have thought us not only a convention of treacherous tyrants, but a gang of the lowest and dirtiest wretches that ever dis- 20 graced humanity. Had we done this, we sliould have indeed proved that there were some in the world whom no faith could bind ; and we should have convicted our- selves of that odious principle of which Papists stood accused by those very savages who wished us, on tliat 26 accusation, to deliver them over to their fury. In this audacious tumult, when our very name and character as gentlemen was to be cancelled forever along with the faith and honor of the nation, I, who had ex- erted myself very little on the quiet passing of the bill, 30 thought it necessary tlien to come forward. I was not alone ; but though some distinguished members on all sides, and particularly on ours, added much to their high reputation by the part they took on that day — a part which will be remembered as long as honor, spirit, and 35 eloquence have estimation in the world — I may and will Speech at Bristol. 181 value myself so far that, yielding in abilities to many, I yielded in zeal to none. With warmtli and with vigor, and animated with a just and natural indignation, I called forth every faculty that I possessed, and I directed it in every way in which I could possibly employ it. I 5 labored night and day. I labored in Parliament ; I la- bored out of Parliament. If therefore the resolution of the House of Commons, refusing to commit this act of unmatched turpitude, be a crime, I am guilty among the foremost. But, indeed, whatever the faults of that lO House may have been, no one member was found hardy enough to propose so infamous a thing ; and on full debate we passed the resolution against the petitions with as much unanimity as we had formerly passed the law of which these petitions demanded the repeal. 15 There was a circumstance (justice will not suffer me to pass it over) which, if anything could enforce the reasons I have given, would fully justify the Act of Relief, and render a repeal, or anything like a repeal, unnatural, impossible. It was the behavior of the per- 20 secuted Roman Catholics under the acts of violence and brutid insolence which they suffered. I suppose there are not in London less than four or five thousand of that 'persuasion, from my country, who do a great deal of the most laborious works in the metrojx)lis ; and they chiefly 25 inhabit those quarters which were the principal theatre of the fury of the bigoted multitude. They are known to be men of strong arms and quick feelings, and more remarkable for a determined resolution than clear ideas or much foresight. But though provoked by everything 30 that can stir the blood of men, their houses and chapels in flames, and with the most atrocious profanations of everything which they hold sacred before their eyes, not a liand was moved to retaliate, or even to defend. Had a conflict once begun, the rage of their persecutors would 35 132 Burke, have redoubled. Thus fury increasing by the reverberar tion of outrages, house Ijeing fired for house, and church for chapel, I am convinced that no power under heaven could have prevented a general conflagration ; and at tliis 6 day London would have been a tale. But I am well informed, and the thing speaks it, that their clergy ex- erted their whole influence to keep their people in such a state of forbearance and quiet as, when I look back, fills me with astonishment; but not with astonishment 10 only. Their merits on that occiusion ought not to l)e for- gotten; nor will they, when Englishmen come to recollect themselves. I am sure it were far more proper to have called them forth, and given them the tlianks of both Houses of Parliament, than to have suffered those worthy 15 clergymen and excellent citizens to be hunted into holes and corners, whilst we are making low-minded inquisi- tions into the number of their people; as if a tolerating principle was never to prevail, unless we were very sure that only a few could possibly take advantage of it. But 20 indeed we are not yet well recovered of our fright. Our reason, I trust, will return with our security; and this unfortunate temper will pass over like a cloud. Gentlemen, I have now laid before you a few of the reasons for taking away the penalties of the Act of 1699, 25 and for refusing to establish them on the riotous requisi- tion of 1780. Because I would not suffer anytliing which may be for your satisfaction to escape, permit me just to touch on the objections urged against our act and our resolves, and intended as a justification of the violence 30 offered to both Houses. "Parliament," they assert, "was too hasty, and they ought, in so essential and alarming a cliange, to have jn-oceeded with a far greater degree of deliberation." The direct contrary. Parliament was too slow. They took fourscore years to deliberate on the 35 repeal of an Act which ought not to have survived a Speech at Briatol, 138 second session. When at length, after a procrastination of near a century, the business was taken up, it proceeded in the most public manner, by the ordinary stages, and as slowly as a law so evidently right as to be resisted by none would naturally advance. Had it been read three 6 times in one day we should have shown only a becoming readiness to recognize, by protection, the undoubted duti- ful behavior of those whom we had but too long punished for offences of presumption or conjecture. But for what end was that bill to linger beyond the usual period of an 10 unoi)posed measure ? Was it to be delayed until a rab- ble in Edinburgh should dictate to the Church of Eng- land what measure of persecution was fitting for her safety? Was it to be adjourned until a fanatical force could be collected in London sufficient to frighten us out 15 of all our ideas of policy and justice? Were we to wait for the profound lectures on the reason of state, ecclesi- astical and ix)litical, which the Protestant Association have since condescended to read to us? Or were we, seven hundred Peers and Commoners, the only persons 20 ignorant of the ribald invectives which occupy the place of argument in those remonstrances, which every man of common observation had heard a thousand times over, and a thousand times over had despised ? All men had before heard what they have to say ; and all men at this 26 day know what they dare to do; and, I trust, all honest men are equally influenced by the one, and by the other. But they tell us that those our fellow-citizens whose chains we have a little relaxed, are enemies to liberty and our free Constitution. Not enemies, I presume, to 30 their own liberty. And as to the Constitution, until we give them some share in it, I do not know on what pre- tence we can examine into their opinions al)out a bus- iness in which they have no interest or concern, l^ut after all, arc we equally sure that they are adverse to as 134 Burke. our Constitution, as that our statutes are hostile and destructive to them? For my part, I have reason to believe their opinions and inclinations in that respect are various, exactly like those of other men ; and if they 5 lean more to the Crown than I and than many of you think we ought, we must remember that he who aims at another's life is not to be surprised if he flies into any sanctuary that will receive him. The tenderness of the executive i)ower is the natural asylum of those upon 10 whom the laws have declared war; and to complain that men are inclined to favor the means of their own safety is so absurd that one forgets the injustice in the ridi- cule. I must fairly tell you, that, so far as my principles are 16 concerned — principles that I hope will only depart with my last breath — I have no idea of a liberty unconnected with honesty and justice. Nor do I believe that any good constitutions of government, or of freedom, can find it necessary for their security to doom any part of 20 the people to a permanent slavery. Such a constitution of freedom, if such can be, is in effect no more than another name for the tyranny of the strongest faction ; and factions in republics have been, and are, full as capa- ble as monarchs of the most cruel oppression and injus- 25 tice. It is but too true that the love, and even the very idea, of genuine liberty is extremely rare. It is but too true that there are many whose whole scheme of free- dom is made up of pride, perverseness, and insolence. They feel themselves in a state of thraldom, they ima- 30 gine that their souls are cooped and cabined in, unless they have some man, or some body of men, dependent on their mercy. This desire of having some one below them descends to those who are the very lowest of all, — and a Protestant cobbler, debased by his poverty, but 35 exalted by his share of the ruling church, feels a pride Speech at Bristol, 135 ill knowing it is by his generosity alone that the peer, whose footman's instep he measures, is able to keep his chaplain from a jail. This disposition is the true source of the passion which many men, in very humble life, have taken to the American war. Our subjects in Amer- 6 ica ; our Colonies ; our dependents. This lust of party power is the liberty they hunger and thirst for ; and this siren song of ambition has charmed ears that one would have thought were never organized to that sort of music. 10 This way of proscribing the citizens by denominations and general descriptions, dignified by the name of rea- son of state and security for constitutions and common- wealths, is nothing better, at bottom, than the miserable invention of an ungenerous ambition, which would fain 15 hold the sacred trust of. power without any of the vir- tues or any of the energies that give a title to it: a receipt of policy made up of a detestable compound of malice, cowardice, and sloth. They would govern men against their will ; but in that government they would 20 Ik^ discharged from the exercise of vigilance, providence, and fortitude; and therefore, that they may sleep on their watch, they consent to take some one division of the society into partnership of the tyranny over the rest. But let government, in what form it may be, comprehend 25 the whole in its justice, and restrain the suspicious by its vigilance ; let it keep watch and ward ; let it discover by its sagacity, and punish by its firmness, all delin- quency against its power, whenever delinquency exists in the overt acts ; and then it will be as safe as ever God 30 and nature intended it should be. Crimes are the acts of individuals, and not of denominations ; and therefore arbitrarily to class men under general descriptions in order to proscribe and punish them in the lump for a presumed delinquency, of which perhaps but a part, S5 136 Burke, perhaps none at all, are guilty, is indeed a compendious method, and saves a world of trouble about proof; but such a method, instead of being law, is an act of unnatural rebellion against the legal dominion of reason 6 and justice ; and this vice, in any constitution that en- tertains it, at one time or other will certainly bring on its ruin. We are told that this is not a religious persecution; and its abettors are loud in disclaiming all severities on 10 account of conscience. Very fine indeed ! Then let it be so : they are not persecutors ; they are only tyrants. With all my heart. I am ^jerfectly indifferent concerning the pretexts ui)on which we torment one another ; or whether it be for the Constitution of the Church of England, or 15 for the Constitution of the State of England, that people choose to make their fellow-cyeatures wretched. When we were sent into a place of authority, you that sent us had yourselves but one commission to give. You could give us none to wrong or oppress, or even to suffer any 20 kind of oppression or wrong, on any grounds whatso- ever ; not on j)olitical, as in the affairs of America ; not on commercial, as in those of Ireland ; not in civil, as in the laws for debt ; not in religiofis, as in the statutes against Protestant or Catholic dissenters. The diversi- 25 fied but connected fabric of universal justice is well cramped and bolted together in all its parts ; and, de- pend upon it, I never have employed, and I never shall employ, any engine of power which may come into my hands to wrench it asunder. All shall stand, if I can 30 help it, and all shall stand connected. After all, to complete this work much remains to be done; much in the East, much in the West. But, great as the work is, if our will be ready, our powers are not defi- cient. 35 Since you have suffered me to trouble you so much on Speech at Bristol. 137 this subject, permit me, gentlemen, to detain you a little longer. I am indeed most solicitous to give you perfect satisfaction. I find there are some of a better and softer nature than the persons with whom I have supposed my- self in debate, who neither think ill of the Act of Relief, 5 nor by any means desire the repeal ; yet who, not accus- ing but lamenting what was done, on account of the con- sequences, have frequently expressed their wish that the late Act had never been made. Some of this des- cription, and pereons of worth, I liave met with in this lO city. They conceive that the prejudices, whatever they might be, of a large part of the people ought not to have been shocked ; that their opinions ought to have been previously taken, and much attended to; and that thereby the late horrid scenes might have been pre- 15 vented. I confess my notions are widely different, and I never was less sorry for any action of my life. I like the bill the better on account of the events of all kinds that fol- lowed it. It relieved the real sufferers ; it strengthened 20 the state ; and, by the disorders tliat ensued, we had clear evidence that there lurked a temper somewhere which ought not to be fostered by the laws. No ill consequences whatever could be attributed to the Act itself. We knew beforehand, or we were poorly instructed, that tol- 25 eration is odious to the intolerant ; freedom to oppressors ; property to robbers ; and all kinds and degrees of pros- perity to the envious. We knew that all these kinds of men woidd ghidly gratify their evil dispositions under the sanction of law and religion if they coukl ; if they ao could not, yet, to make way to their objects, they would do their utmost to subvert all religion and all law. Tliis we certainly knew but, knowing this, is there any rea- son, because thieves break in and steal, and thus bring detriment to you, aii'l 'l'-'^^- vii" <'?» t''"">-"i'"s, tliat I 35 138 Burke. am to be sorry that you are in the possession of shops, and of warehouses, and of wholesome laws to protect them ? Are you to build no houses because desperate men may pull them down upon their own heads ? Or, if 5 a malignant wretch will cut his own throat because he sees you give alms to the necessitous and deserving, shall his destmction be attributed to your charity, and not to his own deplorable madness ? If we repent of our good actions, what, I pray you, is left for our faults and fol- io lies ? It is not the beneficence of the laws ; it is the unnatural temj>er, which beneficence can fret and sour, that is to be lamented. It is this temper which, by all rational means, ought to be sweetened and corrected. If fro ward men should refuse this cure, can they vitiate 16 anything but themselves ? Does evil so react upon good as not only to retard its motion, but to change its nature ? If it can so operate, then good men will always be in the power of the bad ; and virtue, by a dreadful reverse of order, must lie under perpetual subjection and bondage 20 to vice. As to the opinion of the people, which some think, in such cases, is to be implicitly obeyed. — Nearly two years' tranquillity which followed the Act, and its instant imi- tation in Ireland, proved abundantly tliat the late liorri- 25 ble spirit was, in a great measure, the effect of insidious art, and perverse industry, and gross misrepresentation. But suppose that the dislike had been much more delib- erate and much more general than I am persuaded it was. When we know that the opinions of even the 30 greatest multitudes are the standard of rectitude, I shall think myself obliged to make those opinions the masters of my conscience ; but if it may be doubted whether Omnipotence itself is competent to alter the essential constitution of right and wrong, sure I am that such 35 thinr/s as they and I are possessed of no such power. Speech at Bristol 130 No man carries further thaa I do the policy of making government pleasing to the people ; but the widest range of this ixjlitic complaisance is confined within the limits of justice. I would not only consult the interest of the j)eople, but I would cheerfully gratify their humors. We 5 are all a soi-t of children that must be soothed and man- aged. I tliink I am not austere or formal in my nature. I would bear, I would even myself play my part in, any innocent buffooneries to divert them ; but I never will act the tyrant for their amusement. If they will mix 10 malice in their sports, I shall never consent to throw tliem any living sentient creature whatsoever, no, not so much as a kitling, to torment. " But, if I profess all this impolitic stubbornness, I may chance never to be elected into Parliament." It is cer- 15 tainly not pleasing to be put out of the public service ; but I wish to be a member of Parliament to have my share of doing good and resisting evil. It would there- fore be absurd to renounce my objects in order to obtain my seat. I deceive myself indeed most grossly if I had 20 not much rather pass the remainder of my life hidden in the recesses of the deepest obscurity, feeding my mind even with the visions and imaginations of such things, than to be jdaced on the most sjdendid throne of the universe, tantiilized with a denial of the practice of all 25 which can make the greatest situation any other than the greatest curse. Gentlemen, I have had my day. I can never sufficiently express my gratitude to you for having set me in a jilace wherein I could lend the slightest help to great and laudable designs. If I have had my share 30 in any measure giving quiet to private property and j)rivate conscience ; if by my vote I have aided in secur- ing to families the best possession, peace ; if I have joined in reconciling kings to their subjects, and subjects to thoir i>rinc(' ; if I liave assisted to loosen the foreign 35 140 Burke. holdings of the citizen, and taught him to look for his protection to the laws of his country, and for his comfort to the good-will of his countrymen ; if I have thus taken my part with the best of men in the best of their actions, 6 I can shut the book — I might wish to read a page or two more, but this is enough for my measure — I have not lived in vain. And now, gentlemen, on this serious day, when I come, as it were, to make up my account with you, let me take 10 to myself some degree of honest pride on the nature of the charges that are against me. I do not here stand before you accused of venality, or of neglect of duty. It is not said that, in the long i)eriod of my service, I have in a single instance sacrificed the slightest of your inter- 15 ests to my ambition, or to my fortune. It is not alleged that, to gratify any anger or revenge of my own or of my party, I have had a share in wronging or oppressing any description of men, or any one man in any descrip- tion. No ! the charges against me are all of one kind : 20 that I have pushed the principles of general justice and benevolence too far, further than a cautious policy would warrant, and further than the opinions of many would go along with me. In every accident which may happen througli life — in pain, in sorrow, in depression, and 25 distress — I will caU to mind this accusation, and be comforted. Grentlemen, I submit the whole to your judgment. Mr. Mayor, I thank you for the trouble you have taken on this occasion ; in your state of health, it is particularly 30 obliging. If this company should tliink it advisable for me to withdraw, I shall respectfully retire ; if you think otherwise, I shall go directly to the Council-house and to the 'Change, and, without a moment's delay, begin my canvass. LORD ERSKINE. IN BEHALF OF JOHN STOCKDALE WHEN TRIED FOR LIBEL ON THE HOUSE OF COMMONS; COURT OF THE KINO*8 BENCH, DECEMBER 9, 1789. Gentlemen of the Jury, — Mr. Stockdale, who is brought as a criminal before you for the publication of this book, has, by employing me as his advocate, reposed what must appear to many an extraordinary degree of confidence ; since, although he well knows that I am per- 5 sonally connected in friendship with most of those whose conduct and opinions are principally arraigned by its autlior, he nevertheless commits to my hands his defence and justification. From a trust apparently so delicate and singular, van- 10 ity is but too apt to whisi)er an api)lication to some fan- cied merit of one's own ; but it is proper, for the honor of the English bar, that the world should know that such things happen to all of us daily, and of course ; and that tlie defendant, without any knowledge of me, or any con- 15 lidence that was personal, was only not afraid to follow up an accidental retainer from the knowledge he has of the general character of the profession. Happy indeed is it for this countrj' that, whatever interested divisions may characterize other places of which I may have oc- 20 casion to six;ak to-day, however the counsels of the high- est departments of the state may be occasionally distracted 141 142 Ursktne. by personal considerations, they never enter these walls to disturb the administration of justice ; whatever may be our public principles or the private habits of our lives, they never cast even a shade across the path of 5 our professional duties. If this be the characteristic even of the bar of an English court of justice, what sacred impartiality may not every man expect from its jurors and its bench ? As, from the indulgence which the Court was yesterday 10 pleased to give to my indisposition, this information was not proceeded on when you were attending to try it, it is probable you were not altogether inattentive to what passed at the trial of the other indictment, prosecuted also by the House of Commons ; and therefore, without 15 a restatement of the same principles, and a similar quo- tation of authorities to 8up|X)rt them, I need only remind you of the law applicable to this subject, as it was then admitted by the Attorney-General, in concession to ray propositions, and confirmed by the higher authority of 20 the Court ; viz.. First, that every information or indictment must con- tain such a description of the crime that the defendant may know what crime it is which he is called upon to answer. 25 Secondly, that the jury may appear to be warranted in their conclusion of guilty or not guilty. And, lastly, that the court may see such a precise and definite transgression upon the record, as to be able to apply the punishment which judicial discretion may dic- 30 tate, or which positive law may inflict. It was admitted also to follow as a mere corollary from these propositions, that where an information charges a writing to be composed or published of and concerning the Commons of Great Britain, with an intent to bring 35 that body into scandal and disgrace with the public, the In the Stockdale Case, 143 author cannot be brought within the scope of such a charge unless the jury, on examination and comparison of the whole matter written or published, shall be satis- tied that the particular passages charged as criminal, when explained by the context, and considered as part 6 of one entire work, were meant and intended by the author to vilify the House of Commons as a bodrjy and were written of and concerning them in Parliament assembled. These principles being settled, we are now to see what 10 the present information is. It charges that the defendant — " unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously devising, contriving, and intending to asperse, scandalize, and vilify the Commons of Great Britain in Parliament assembled ; and most wickedly is and audaciously to represent their proceedings as corrupt and unjust ; and to make it believed and thought as if the Commons of Great Britain in Parliament assembled, were a most wicked, tyrannical, base, and comipt set of persons, and to bring them into disgrace with the pub- 20 lie " — the defendant published — what ? Not those latter ends of sentences which the Attorney-General has read from his brief, as if they had followed one another in order in this book ; not those scraps and tails of pas- sages which are patched together ujwn this record, and 25 pronounced in one breath, as if they existed without in- termediate matter in the same page, and without context anywhere. No ! This is not the accusation, even muti- lated as it is : for the information charges that, with in- tention to vilify the House of Commons, the defendant 30 published the whole book, describing it on the record by its title : " A Keview of the principal Charges against Warren Hastings, Esq., late Governor-General of Bengal ; " in which, among other things, the matter particularly selected is to be foiiiid. Your inquiry, therefore, is not 35 144 Er shine, confined to whether the defendant published those se- lected parts of it, and whetlier, looking at them as tliey are distorted by the information, they carry in fair con- struction the sense and meaning which the innuendoes 5 put ujwn them ; but whether the author of the entire work — I say the author, since, if he could defend him- self, the publisher unquestionably can — whether the author wrote the volume which I hold in my hand as a free, manly, bond fide disquisition of criminal charges 10 against his fellow-citizen ; or whether the long, eloquent discussion of them, which fills so many pages, was a mere cloak and cover for the introduction of the supposed scandal imputed to the selected passage?, the mind of the writer all along being intent on tnulucing the House 15 of Commons, and not on fairly answering their charges against Mr. Hastings. This, gentlemen, is the princi})al matter for your con- sideration ; and therefore, if, after you shall have taken the book itself into the chamber which will be provided 20 for you, and shall have read the whole of it with impar- tial attention — if, after the perf o;:mance of this duty, you can return here, and with clear consciences pronounce upon your oaths that the impression made upon you by these pages is, that the author wrote them with the 25 wicked, seditious, and corrupt intentions charged by the information — you have then my full permission to find the defendant guilty ; but if, on the other hand, the gen- eral tenor of the composition shall impress you with respect for the author, and point him out to you as a man 30 niistiiken, i>erhaps, himself, but not seeking to deceive others — if every line of the work shall present to you an intelligent, animated mind, glowing with a Christian compassion towards a fellowman whom he believed to be innocent, and with a patriot zeal for the liberty of his 35 country-, which he considered as wounded through the In the Stockdale Case, 146 sides of an oppressed fellow-citizen ; — if this shall be the impression on your consciences and understandings, when you are called upon to deliver your verdict ; then hear from me that you not only work private injustice, but break up the press of England, and surrender her 5 rights and liberties forever, if you convict the defendant. Gentlemen, to enable you to form a true judgment of the meaning of this book and of the intention of its author, and to exjMJse the miserable juggle that is played off in the information by the combination of sentences 10 which, in the work itself, have no bearing upon one another, I will first give you the publication as it is charged upon the record and presented by the Attorney- General in opening the case for the Crown ; and I will then, by reading the interjacent matter, which is studi- is ously kept out of view, convince you of its true inter- pretation. The information, beginning with the first page of the book, charges as a libel upon the House of Commons the following sentence : " The House of Commons has now 20 given its final decision with regard to the merits and demerits of Mr. Hastings. The grand inquest of England have delivered their charges, and preferred their impeach- ment ; their allegations are referred to proof ; and from the appeal to the collective wisdom and justice of the 25 nation, in the supreme tribunal of the kingdom, the ques- tion comes to be determined whether Mr. Hastings be guilty or not guilty ? " It is but fair, however, to admit that this first sentence, which the most ingenious malice cannot torture into a 30 criminal construction, is charged by the information rather a.s introductory to what is made to follow it than as libellous in itself; for the Attorney-General, from this introductory passage in the first page, goes on at a leap to page thirteenth, and reads, almost without a stop, as 35 146 Erakine, if it immediately followed the other, this sentence : " What credit can we give to multiplied and accumulated - charges when we find that they originate from misrep- resentation and falsehood ? " 6 From these two passages thus standing together, with- out the intervenient matter which occupies thirteen pages, one would imagine that, instead of investigating the probability or improbability of the guilt imputed to Mr. Hastings ; instead of carefully examining the Charges of 10 the Commons, and the defence of them wliich had been delivered before them, or which was preparing for the Lords; the author had immediately, and in a moment after stating the mere fact of the impeachment, decided that tlie act of the Commons originated from misrep- 16 resentation and falsehood. Gentlemen, in the same manner a veil is cast over all that is written in the next seven pages ; for, knowing that the context would help to the true construction, not only of the passages charged before, but of those in the 20 sequel of this information, the Attorney-General, aware that it would convince every man who read it that there was no intention in the author to calumniate the House of Commons, passes over, by another leap, to page twenty ; and in the same manner, without drawing his breath, 26 and as if it directly followed the two former sentences in the first and thirteenth pages, reads from page twen- tietli, — " An impeachment of error in judgment with regard to the quantum of a fine, and for an intention that never was executed, and never known to the offending 30 party, characterizes a tribunal of inquisition rather than a Court of Parliament." From this passage, by another vault, he leaps over one-and-thirty pages more, to page fifty-one, where he reads the following sentence, which he mainly relies on, 35 and upon which I shall by and by trouble you with some In the Stockdale Case. 147 observations : " Thirteen of them passed in the House of Commons, not only without investigation, but without being read; and the votes were given without inquiry, argument, or conviction. A majority had determined to impeach ; opix)site parties met each other, and * jostled 6 in the dark,* to perplex the political drama, and bring the liero to a tragic catastrophe." From thence, deriving new vigor from every exertion, he makes his last gi-and stride over forty-four i)agea more, almost to the end of the book, charging a sentence lo in the ninety-fifth page. So that, out of a volume of one hundred and ten pages, the defendant is only charged with a few scattered frag- ments of sentences, picked out of three or four. Out of a work consisting of about two thousand five hundred 15 and thirty lines of manly, spirited eloquence, only forty or fifty lines are culled from different parts of it, and artfully put together, so as to rear up a libel out of a false context, by a supposed connection of sentences with one another which are not only entirely independent, 20 but which, when compared with their antecedents, bear a totally different construction. In this manner the great- est works upon government, the most excellent l)ooks of science, the sacred Scriptures themselves, miglit be distorted into libel ; by forsaking the general context, 25 and hanging a meaning uI)on selected parts. Thus, as in the text put by Algernon Sidney, " The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God," the Attorney-General, on the principle of the present i)roceeding against this jKimphlet, might indict the publisher of the Bible for 30 blasi)hemously denying the existence of Heaven in print- ing, " There is no God ; " — these words alone, without the context, would be selected by the information, and the Bible, like this book, would be underscored to meet it ; nor could the defendant, in such a case, have any ss 148 Erskine, possible defence, unless the jury were permitted to see, by the book itself, that the verse, instead of denying the existence of the Divinity, only imputed that imagination to a fool. 6 Gentlemen, having now gone through the Attorney- GeneraPs reading, the book shall presently come forward and speak for itself ; but before I can venture to lay it before you, it is proper to call your attention to how matters stood at the time of its publication, without 10 which the author's meaning and intention cannot i)OS- sibly be understood. The Commons of Great Britain, in i'arliament assem- bled, had accused Mr. Hastings, as Governor-General of Bengal, of high crimes and misdemeanors; and their 15 jurisdiction, for that high purpose of national justice, was unquestionably competent; but it is proper you should know tlie nature of this inquisitorial capacity. The Commons, in voting an impeachment, may be com- pared to a grand jury finding a bill of indictment for the 20 Crown : neither the one nor the other can be supposed to proceed but upon the matter which is brought before them ; neither of them can find guilt without accusation, nor the truth of accusation, without evidence. When, therefore, we speak of the accuser or accusers of a person 25 indicted for any crime, although the grand jury are the prosecutors in form, by giving effect to tlie accusation, yet, in common parlance, we do not consider them as the responsible authors of the prosecution. If I were to write of a most wicked indictment, found against an 30 innocent man, which was preparing for trial, nobody who read it would conceive I meant to stigmatize the grand jury that found the bill ; but it would be inquired imme- diately, who was the prosecutor and who were the witness- es on the back of it ? In the same manner I mean to 35 contend that if this book is read with only common atten- In the Stockdcde Case, 149 tion, tlie wliole scoj^ of it will be discovered to be this : that, in the opinion of tlie author, Mr. Hastings had been accused of mal-administration in India from the heat and spleen of political divisions in Parliament, and not from any zeal for national honor or justice ; that the impeach- 6 ment did not originate from Government, but from a fac- tion banded against it, which, by misrepresentation and violence, had fastened it on an unwilling House of Com- mons ; that, prepossessed with this sentiment — which, however unfoiuided, makes no part of the present busi- lo ness, since the publisher is not called before you for de- faming individual members of the Commons, but for a con- tempt of the Commons as a body — the author pursues the charges, arti(ile by article ; enters into a warm and ani- mated vindication of Mr. Hastings, by regular answers to 16 each of them ; and that, as far as the mind and soul of a man can be visible — I might almost say embodied — in his writings, his intention throughout the whole volume apj^ars to have been to charge with injustice the private accusers of Mr. Hastings, and not the House of Commons 20 as a body, which undoubtedly rather reluctantly gave way to, than heartily adopted, the impeachment. This will be found to be the jwlpable scope of the book ; and no man who can read English, and who, at the same time, will have the candor and common sense to take up 26 his impressions from what is written in it, instead of bringing his own along with him to the reading of it, can jiossibly understand it otherwise. But it may be said, admitting this to be the scope and design of the autlior, wliat right hatl he to canvass 30 the merits of an accusation uiK)n the records of the Com- mons, more esi>ecially while it was in the course of legal procedure ? Tliis, I confess, might have been a serious question ; but the Commons, as prosecutora of this infor- mation, seem to have waived or forfeited their right to 96 150 Enklne. ask it. Before they sent the Attorney-Greneral into this place to punish the publication of answers to their charges, they should have recollected that their own want of circuinsi)ection in the maintenance of their priv- fi ileges, and in the protection of persons accused before them, had given to the public the charges themselves, which should have been confined to their own Journals. The course and practice of Parliament might warrant the printing of them for the use of their own members ; but 10 there the publication should have stopped, and all fur- ther progress been resisted by authority. If they were resolved to consider answers to their charges as a con- tempt of their privileges, and to punish the publication of them by such severe prosecutions, it would have well 15 become them to have begun first with those printers who, by publishing the charges themselves throughout the whole kingdom, or rather throughout the whole civilized world, were anticipating the passions and judgments of the public against a subject of England upon his trial, 20 so as to make the publication of answers to them not merely a privilege, but a debt and duty to humanity and justice. The Commons of Great Britain claimed and exercised the privilege of questioning the innocence of Mr. Hiistings by their impeachment ; but as, how- 25 ever questioned, it was still to be presumed and pro- tected until guilt was established by a judgment, he whom they had accused had an equal claim upon their justice to guard him from prejudice and misrepresenta- tion until the hour of trial. 30 Had the Commons, therefore, by the exercise of their high, necessary, and legal privileges, kept the public aloof from all canvass of their proceedings by an early punishment of printers who, without reserve or secrecy, had sent out the charges into the world from a thousand 35 presses in eveiy form of publication, they would have In the Stockdale Case. 161 then stood upon ground to-tlay from whence no argu- ment of iK)licy or justice could have removed them ; because nothing could be more incompatible with either than appeals to the many upon subjects of judicature which, by common consent, a few are appointed to deter- 6 mine, and which must be determined by facts and prin- ciples which the multitude have neither leisure nor knowledge to investigate. But then, let it be remem- bered that it is for those who have the authority to accuse and punish, to set the example of and to enforce 10 this reserve which is so necessary for the ends of justice. Courts of law therefore, in England, never endure the publication of their records ; and a prosecutor of an in- dictment would be attached for such a publication ; and uiK)n the same principle, a defendant would be punished 15 for anticipating the justice of his country by the publi- cation of his defence, the public being no party to it until the tribunal apiwinted for its determination be ojxjn for its decision. Gentlemen, you have a right to take judicial notice 20 of these matters without the proof of them by wit- nesses, for jurors may not only, without evidence, found their verdicts on facts that are notorious, but \\\}oi\ what they know privately themselves, after revealing it upon oath to one another, and therefore you are always to 25 remember that this book was written when the charges against Mr. Hastings, to which it is an answer, were, to the knowledge of the Commons (for we cannot presume our watchmen to have been asleep), publicly hawked about in every pamphlet, magazine, .and newspaper in so the kingdom. You well know with what a curious ai)]»e- tite those charges were devoured by the whole public, interesting as they were, not only from their impoi'tance, but from the merit of their comjwsition ; certainly not 80 intended by the honorable and excellent composer 35 162 Enkine, to oppress the accused, but because the commonest subjects swell into eloquence under the touch of his sub- lime genius. Thus, by the remissness of the Connnons, who are now the prosecutors of this infonuatinn. a sul)- 5 ject of Enicland, who was not even charged with contu- macious n sistanee to authority, much less a piuchiinied outlaw, a: id tlierefore fully entitled to every security which tlie customs and statutes of the kiiiL^dom hold out for tiie protection of British liberty, saw himselt' i)ierced 10 with the arrows of thousands and tm theusands of libels. Gentlemen, ere I venture to lay the ho. ^k heiure you, it niii>t. be yet lurthcr rciiieiidxTcd ( loi- the fact is equally notorious) that under these inauspicious cireum- 16 stances the trial of Mr. Hastings at the l)ar of the Lords had actually commenced long before its publica- tion. There the most august and striking spectacle was daily exhibited whi( h the world ever witnessed. A vast stage 20 of justice was erected, awful from its liiich authority, splendid from its illustrious dignity, veneralilc iiom the learning and wisdom of its judges, (a]itivating and affecting from the mighty concourse of all ranks and conditions which daily flocked into it, as into a tin atre 25 of pleasure; there, when the whole public mind was at once awed and softened to the iin])ression of every hu- man affection, there appeared, (Liy after day, one after another, men of the most powerful and exalted talents, colipsing by their accusing eloquence the most boasted 30 harangues of antiquity — rousing the pride of national resentment by the boldest invectives against broken faith and violated treaties, and shaking the bosom with alternate pity and horror by the most glowing pictures of insulted nature and humanity; ever animated and 35 energetic from the love of fame, which is the inherent In the Stockdale Case. 153 passion of genius ; firm and indefatigable from a strong prepossession of the justice of their cause. Gentlemen, when the author sat down to write the book now before you, all this terrible, unceasing, ex- haustless artillery of warm zeal, matchless vigor of 5 understanding, consuming and devouring eloquence, united with the highest dignity, was daily, and with- out prospect of conclusion, pouring forth upon one pri- vate, unprotected man, who wiis bound to hear it, in the face of the whole people of England, with reverential sub- 10 mission and silence. I do not complain of this, as I did of the publication of the charges, because it was what the law allowed and sanctioned in the course of a public trial ; but when it is remembered that we are not angels, but weak fallible men, and that even the noble judges of 15 that high tribunal are clothed beneath their ermines with the common infirmities of man's nature, it will bring us all to a proper temper for considering the book itself, which will in a few moments be laid before you. But first, let me once more remind you that it was under 20 all these circumstances, and amidst the blaze of passion and prejudice which the scene I have been endeavoring faintly to describe to you might be supposed likely to produce, that the author, whose name I will now give to you, sat down to compose the book which is prosecuted 25 to-day as a libel. Tlie history of it is very short and natural. The Rev. Mr. Logan, minister of the gospel at Leith, in Scotland, a clergyman of the purest morals, and, as you will see by and by, of very superior talents, well 30 acquainted with the human character, and knowing the difficulty of bringing back public opinion after it is settled on any subject, took a warm, unbought, unso- licited interest in the situation of Mr. Hastings, and deterinin«Ml, if ]M)8sible, to arrest and susi)end the ]>ublic 35 154 Erskine, judgment concerning him. He felt for the situation of a fellow-citizen exposed to a trial which, whether right or wrong, is undoubtedly a severe one ; a trial certainly not confined to a few criminal acts like those we are 6 accustomed to, but comprehending the transactions of a whole life, and the complicated policies of numerous and distant nations ; a trial which had neither visible limits to its duration, bounds to its expense, nor circumscribed compass for the grasp of memory or understanding; a 10 trial which had therefore broken loose from the common forms of decision, and had become the universal topic of discussion in the world, superseding not only every other grave pursuit, but every fashionable dissipation. Gentlemen, the question you have therefore to try 15 upon all this matter is extremely simple. It is neither more nor less than this. At a time when the charges against Mr. Hastings were, by the implied consent of the Commons, in every hand and on every table ; when, by their managers, the lightning of eloquence was inces- 20 santly consuming him, and flashing in the eyes of the pub- lic ; when every man was, with perfect impunity, saying, and writing, and publishing just what he pleased of the supposed plunderer and devastator of nations ; — would it have been criminal in Mr. Hastings himself to have re- 25 minded the public that he was a native of this free land, entitled to tlie common protection of her justice, and that he had a defence, in his turn, to offer to them, tlie outlines of which he implored them in the mean time to receive, as an antidote to the unlimited and unpunished 30 poison in circulation against him ? This is, without color or exaggeration, the true question you are to de- cide ; because I assert, without the hazard of contradic- tion, that if Mr. Hastings himself could have stood justified or excused in your eyes for publishing this 35 volume in his own defence, the author, if he wrote it In the Stockdale Case, 155 bond fide to defend him, must stand equally excused and justified; and if the author be justified, the publisher cannot be criminal, unless you have evidence that it was jmblished by him with a different spirit and intention from those in which it was written. The question, there- 6 fore, is correctly what I just now stated it to be : Could Mr. Hastings have been condemned to infamy for writ- ing this book ? Gentlemen, I tremble with indignation to be driven to put such a question in England. Shall it be endured 10 that a subject of this country (instead of being arraigned and tried for some single act in her ordinary courts, where the accusation, as soon at least as it is made public, is followed within a few hours by the decision) may be im- peached by the Commons for the transactions of twenty is years, that the accusation shall spread as wide as the region of letters, that the accused shall stand, day after day, and year after year, as a spectacle before the pub- lic, which shall be kept in a perpetual state of inflam- mation against him ; yet that he shall not, without the 20 severest penalties, be permitted to submit anything to the judgment of mankind in his defence? If this be law (which it is for you to-day to decide), such a man lias no trial. This great hall, built by our fathers for English justice, is no longer a court, but an altar ; and 25 an Englishman, instead of being judged in it by God ind his country, is a victim and a sacrifice. You will carefully remember that I am not presuming to question either the right or duty of the Commons of Great Britain to impeach ; neither am I arraigning the 30 ])ropriety of their selecting, as they have done, the most xtraordinary persons for ability which the age has pro- duced to manage their impeachment. Much less am I censuring the managers themselves, charged with the conduct of it before the Lords, who are undoubtedly 35 166 Erskine. bound, by their duty to the House and to the public, to expatiate upon the crimes of the persons whom they had accused. None of these points are questioned by me, nor are in this place questionable. 1 desire only to have it 6 decided whether — if the Commons, when national expedi- ency hap{)ens to call, in their judgment, for an impeach- ment, shall, instead of keeping it on their own records, and carrying it with due solemnity to the Peers for trial, permit it, without censure and punishment, to be 10 sold like a common newspaper in the shop of my client, so crowded with their own members, that no plain man, without privilege of Parliament, can hope even for the sight of the fire in a winter's day, every man buying it, reading it, and commenting upon it — tlie gentleman him- 16 self who is the object of it, or his friend in his absence, may not, without stepping beyond the bounds of English freedom, put a copy of what is thus published into his pocket, and send back to the very same shop for publica- tion a bond fidcj rational, able answer to it, in order that 20 the bane and antidote may circulate together, and the public be kept straight till the day of decision ? If you think, gentlemen, that this common duty of self-preserva- tion in the accused himself, which nature writes as a law upon the hearts of even savages and brutes, is neverthe- 25 less too high a privilege to be enjoyed by an impeached and suffering Englishman ; or if you think it beyond the offices of humanity and justice, when brought home to the hand of a brother or a friend, you will say so by your verdict of guilty ; the decision will then be yours, 30 and the consolation mine, that I have labored to avert it. A very small part of the misery which will follow from it is likely to light upon me ; the rest will be divided among yourselves and your children. Gentlemen, I observe plainly, and with infinite satisfac- 35 tion, that you are shocked and offended at my even sup- In the Stockdale Case. 167 posing it possible you should pronounce such a detestable judgment, and that you only require of me to make out to your satisfaction, as I promised, that the real scope and object of this book is a bond jide defence of Mr. Hastings, and not a cloak and cover for scandal on the 5 House of Commons. I engage to do this, and I engage for nothing more. I shall make an open, manly defence. I mean to torture no expressions from their natural con- structions ; to dispute no innuendoes on the record, should any of them have a fair application ; nor to conceal from 10 your notice any unguarded, intemperate expressions which may, perhaps, be found to chequer the vigorous and animated career of the work. Such a conduct might, by accident, shelter the defendant ; but it would be the surrender of the very principle on which alone the liberty 16 of the English press can stand, and I shall never defend any man from a temporary imprisonment by the perma- nent loss of my own liberty, and the ruin of my country. I mean, therefore, to submit to you that, though you should find a few lines in page thirteen or twenty-one, a 20 few more in page fifty-one, and some others in other places, containing expressions bearing on the House of Commons, even as a body, which if written as indepen- dent paragraphs by themselves, would be indefensible libels, yet that you have a right to pass them over in 25 judgment, provided the substance clearly appears to be a bond fide conclusion, arising from the honest investigation of a subject which it was lawful to investigate, and the questionable expressions the visible effusion of a zeal- ous temper engaged in an honorable and legal pursuit. 30 After this preparation, I am not afraid to lay the book in its genuine state before you. The pamphlet begins thus : " The House of Commons has now given its final decision with regard to the merits and demerits of Mr. Hastings. The grand inquest of 35 158 Er shine, England have delivered their charges, and preferred their impeachment; their allegations are referred to proof ; and, from the appeal to the collective wisdom and justice of the nation in the supreme tribunal of the king- 5 dom, the question comes to be determined whether Mr. Hastings be guilty or not guilty?" Now, if immediately after what I have just read to you (which is the first part charged by the information) the author had said, " Will accusations, built on such a 10 baseless fabric, prepossess the public in favor of the im- peachment ? What credit can we give to multiplied and accumulated charges, when we find that they originate from misrepresentation and falsehood ? " every man would have been justified in pronouncing that he was at- 15 tacking the House of Commons, because the groundless accusations mentioned in the second sentence could have no reference but to the House itself mentioned by name in the first and only sentence which preceded it. But, Gentlemen, to your astonishment, I will now read 20 what intervenes between these two passages. From this you will see, beyond a possibility of doubt, that the author never meant to calumniate the House of Com- mons, but to say that the accusations of Mr. Hastings before the whole House grew out of a Committee of Se- 25 crecy established some years before, and were afterwards brought forward by the spleen of private enemies and a faction in the government. This will appear, not only from the grammatical construction of the words, but from what is better than words, from the meaning which 30 a person writing as a friend of Mr. Hastings must be sup- posed to have intended to convey. Why should such a friend attack the House of Commons ? Will any man gravely tell me that the House of Commons, as a body, ever wished to impeach Mr. Hastings ? Do we not all 36 know that they constantly hung back from it, and hardly In the Stockdale Case, 169 knew where they were, or what to do, when they found themselves entangled with it ? My learned friend, the Attorney-General, is a member of this Assembly ; per- haps he may tell you by and by what he thought of it, and whether he ever marked any disposition in the mar 6 jority of the Commons hostile to Mr. Hastings. But why should I distress my friend by the question ? The fact is sufficiently notorious; and what I am going to read from the book itself (which is left out in the informa- tion) is too plain for controversy. lO " Whatever may be the event of the impeachment, the proper exercise of such power is a valuable privilege of the British Constitution, a formidable guardian of the public libei-ty and the dignity of the nation. The only danger is, that, from the influence of faction, and the 15 awe which is annexed to great names, they may be prompted to determine before they inquire, and to pro- nounce judgment without examination." Here is the clue to the whole pamphlet. The author trusts to and respects the House of Commons, but is 20 afraid their mature and just consideration may be dis- turbed by faction. Now, does he mean government by faction ? Does he mean the majority of the Commons by faction ? Will the House, which is the prosecutor here, sanction that application of the phrase — or will the 25 Attorney-General admit the majority to be the true in- nuendo of faction ? I wish he would ; I should then have gained something at least by this extraordinary de- bate. But I have no expectation of the sort ; such a con- cession would be too great a sacrifice to any prosecution 30 at a time when every thing is considered as faction that disturbs the repose of the Minister in Parliament. But, indeed, Gentlemen, some things are too plain for argu- ment. The author certainly means my friends, who, whatever qualifications may belong to them, must be 35 160 Erskine, contented with the appellation of faction while they op- pose the Minister in the House of Commons ; but the House having given this meaning to the phrase of faction for its own purposes, cannot in decency change the inter- 5 pretation in order to convict my client. I take that to be beyond the privilege of Parliament. The same bearing upon individual members of the Commons, and not on the Commons as a body, is obvious tliroughout. Thus, after saying, in page nine, that the 10 East India Company had thanked Mr. Hastings for his meritorious services (which is unquestionably true), he adds, "that mankind would abide by their deliberate decision, rather than by the intemperate assertion of a committee." 15 This he writes after the Imi)eachment was found by the Commons at large, but he takes no account of their proceedings, imputing the whole to the original com- mittee ; i.e.y the Committee of Secrecy, so called, I sup- pose, from their being the authors of twenty volumes in 20 folio, which will remain a secret to all posterity, as no- body will ever read them. The same construction is equally plain from what immediately follows : " The re- port of the Committee of Secrecy also states that the happiness of the native inhabitants of India has been 26 deeply affected, their confidence in English faith and lenity shaken and impaired, and the character of this nation wantonly and wickedly degraded." Here, again, you are grossly misled by the omission of near twenty-one pages; for the author, though he is 30 here speaking of this committee by name, which brought forward the charges to the notice of the House, and which he continues to do onward to the next select para- graph, yet, by arbitrarily sinking the whole context, he is taken to be speaking of the House as a body, when, in 35 the passage next charged by the information, he re- In the Stockdale Case. 161 proaches the accusers of Mr. Hastings ; although, so far is he from considering them as the House of Commons, that in the very same page he speaks of the Articles as the charges, not even of the Committee, but of Mr. Burke alone, the most active and intelligent member of that 5 Ixxly, having been circulated in India by a relation of tliat gentleman : " The charges of Mr. Burke have been carried to Calcutta, and carefully circulated in India." Now, if we were considering these passages of the work as calumniating a body of gentlemen, many of whom lO I must be supposed highly to respect, or as reflecting upon my worthy friend whose name I have mentioned, it would give rise to a totally different inquiry, which it is neither my duty nor yours to agitate ; but surely, the more that consideration obtrudes itself upon us, the more 15 clearly it demonstrates that the author's whole direction was against the individual accusers of Mr. Hastings, and not against the House of Commons, which merely trusted to the matter they had collected. Althougli, from a caution which my situation dictates 20 as representing another, I have thought it my duty thus to point out to you the real intention of the author, as it appears by the fair construction of the work, yet I pro- test that in my own apprehension it is very immaterial whether he speaks of the Committee or of the House, pro- 25 vided you shall think the whole volume a boiid fide de- fence of Mr. Ha.stings. This is the great point I am, by all my observations, endeavoring to establish, and which I think no man who reads the following short passages can doubt. Very intelligent i)ersons have indeed con- 30 sidered them, if founded in facts, to render every other amplification unnecessary. The first of them is as fol- lows : " It was known, at that time, that Mr. Hastings hail not only descended from a public to a private sta- tion, but that he was persecuted with accusations and 35 162 Urskine. impeachments. But none of these suffering millions have sent their complaints to this country ; not a sigh nor a groan has been waited from India to Britain. On the contrary, testimonies the most honorable to the character 5 and merit of Mr. Hastings have been transmitted by those very princes whom he has been supposed to have loaded with the deepest injuries." Here, gentlemen, we must be permitted to pause to- gether a little ; for, in examining whether these pages 10 were written as an honest answer to the charges of the Commons, or as a prostituted defence of a notorious criminal whom the writer believed to be guilty, truth becomes material at every step; for if in any instance he be detected of a wilful misrepresentation, he is no 15 longer an object of your attention. Will the Attomey-Greneral proceed then to detect the hypocrisy of our author, by giving us some details of the proofs by which these personal enormities have been established, and which the writer must be supposed to 20 have been acquainted with ? I ask this as the defender of Mr. Stockdale, not of Mr. Hastings, with whom I have no concern. I am sorry, indeed, to be so often obliged to repeat this protest; but I really feel myself embar- rassed with those repeated coincidences of defence which 25 thicken on me as I advance, and which were, no doubt, overlooked by the Commons when they directed this interlocutory inquiry into his conduct. I ask, then, as counsel for Mr. Stockdale, whether, when a great state criminal is brought for justice at an immense expense to 30 the public, accused of the most oppressive cruelties, and charged with the robbery of princes and the destruction of nations, it is not open to any one to ask, " ^Yh.o are his accusers ? What are the sources and the authorities of these shocking complaints ? Where are the am- 35 bassadors or memorials of those princes whose revenues In the Stockdale Case, 163 he has plundered ? Where are the witnesses for those unhappy men in whose persons the rights of humanity have been violated ? How deeply buried is the blood of the innocent, that it does not rise up in retributive judgment to confound the guilty ? " These, surely, are 6 questions which, when a fellow-citizen is upon a long, painful, and expensive trial, humanity has a right to propose ; which the plain sense of the most unlettered man may be expected to dictate ; and which all history must provoke from the more enlightened. When Cicero 10 impeached Verres before the great tribunal of Rome of -imilar cruelties and depredations in her Provinces, the Roman people were not left to such inquiries. All Sicily surrounded the Forum, demanding justice upon her plunderer and spoiler, with tears and imprecations. 15 It was not by the eloquence of the orator, but by the cries and tears of the miserable, that Cicero prevailed in that illustrious cause. Verres fled from the oaths of his accusers and their witnesses, and not from the voice of Tully. To preserve the fame of his eloquence, he com- 20 posed his five celebrated speeches, but they were never delivered against the criminal, because he had fled from the city, appalled with the sight of the persecuted and the oppressed. It may be said that the cases of Sicily and India are widely different ; perhaps they may be ; 25 whether they are or not is foreign to my purpose. I am not bound to deny the possibility of answers to such questions ; I am only vindicating the right to ask them. Gentlemen, the author, in" the other passage which I marked out to your attention, goes on thus : — " Lord .10 Cornwallis and Sir John Macpherson, his successors in office, have given the same voluntary tribute of approba- tion to his measures as Governor-Greneral of India, A letter from tlie former, dated the 10th of August, 1786, gives the following account of our dominions in Asia : 35 104 Erskine, *The native inliabitants oi' tliis kiii,L,nl<>iii arc the ]ia)i])iost and b«'>t protcclfd subjects ill India; our native allies and tributaries contide in our protection ; the country powers are aspiring to the friendship of the English; sand from tlie King of Tidore, toward New Guinea, to Tiniur Sliah, on the banks of the Indus, there is not a state tliat has not lately given us proofs of confidence and respect.'" Still pursuing the same test of sincerity, let us examine 10 this defensive allegation. \\ ill the Attorney-Greneral say that he does not Ik lit ve such a letter frotn Lord Comwallis ever existed ? ^'u ! for he knows thai it is as authentic as any document from India upon the table of the House of ComuM n>. W hat, m tlien, is the letter? "The native inhabitants ot this kini;(h)ni," says Lord Corn wallis (writing from the \ary spot), "are the happiest and best protected subjects in India," etc., etc., etc. The inhabitants of this kinccdom ! Of what kingdom? Of the very kingdom \\hi(h Mr. 20 Hastings has just returned from governing for thirtetn years, and for the misgovernment and desolation of which ht stands every day as a criminal, or rather as a spectacle, before us. This is matter for serious reflec- tion, and fully entitles the author to ])ut tlie (jucstion 25 which immediately follows: "Does tliis authentic ac- count of the administration of ^Ir. Hastings, and ot the state of India, correspond with the gloomy picture of despotism and desjiair drawn by the Committee of Secrecy ? " 30 Had that picture been even drawn by the House of Commons itself, he would have been fully justified in asking this question ; but you observe it has no bearing on it ; the last words not only entirely destroy that interpretation, but also tlie nieanincr <>f the very next 35 passage which is selected by the information as criminal ; In the Stockdale Case, 105 najnely, " What credit can we give to multiplied and ac- cumulated charges, when we find that they originate iiom misrepresentation and falsehood ? '* This passage, which is charged as a libel on the Com- mons, when thus compared with its immediate antece- 5 dftnt, can bear but one construction. It is imjwssible to )ntend that it charges misrepresentation on the House that found the impeachment, but ui)on the Committee of Secrecy just before adverted to, who were supi)osed to liave selected the matter, and brought it before the whole 10 House for judgment. I do not mean, as I have often told you, to vindicate any calumny on that honorable Committee, or upon any individual of it, any more than upon the Commons at large, but the defendant is not charged by this informa- 15 mation with any such offences. Let me here pause once more to ask you whether the book in its genuine state, as far as we have advanced in it, makes the same impression on your minds now as wlien it was first read to you in detached passages; and 20 whether, if I were to tear off the first part of it, which I hold in my hand, and give it to you as an entire work, the tirst and last passages, which have been selected as libels on the Commons, would now appear to be so when blended witli the interjacent parts ? I do not ask your 25 answer — I shall have it in your verdict. The question is only put to direct your attention in pursuing the remainder of the volume to this main point, — is it an honest, serious defence ? For this purpose, and as an example for all others, I will read the author's entire .30 iswer to the first article of charge concerning Cheit >ing, the Zemindar of Benares, and leave it to your impartial judgments to determine whether it be a mere cloak and cover for the slander imputed by the infornia- tinii to the concluding sentence of it, which is tli«' nnly 35 166 ErsMne, part attacked ; or whether, on the contrary, that con- clusion itself, when embodied with what goes before it, does not stand explained and justified ? "The first article of impeachment," continues our 6 author, " is concerning Cheit Sing, the Zemindar of Benares. Bui want Sing, the father of this Rajah, was merely an aumily or farmer and collector of the revenues for Sujah-ul-Dowlah, Nabob of Oude, and Vizier of the Mogul empire. When, on the decease of his father, 10 Cheit Sing was confirmed in the office of collector for the Vizier, he paid two hundred thousand pounds as a gift, or muzzeranah, and an additional rent of thirty thousand pounds per annum." " As the father was no more than an aumily the son 16 succeeded only to his rights and pretensions. But by a sunnud granted to him by the Nabob, Sujah Dowlah, in September, 1773, through the influence of Mr. Hastings, he acquired a legal title to property in the land, and was raised from the office of aumil to rank of Zemindar. 20 About four years after the death of Bulwant Sing, the Governor-General and Council of Bengal obtained the sovereignty paramount of the province of Benares. On the transfer of this sovereignty the Governor and Coun- cil proposed a new grant to Cheit Sing, confirming his 25 former privileges, and conferring upon him the addition of the sovereign rights of the mint, and the powers of criminal justice with regard to life and death. He was then recognized by the Company as one of their Zem- indars ; a tributary subject, or feudatory vassal, of the 30 British empire in Hindostan. The feudal system, which was formerly supposed to be peculiar to our Gothic an- cestors, has always prevailed in the East. In every description of that form of government, notwithstand- ing accidental variations, there are two associations ex- 35 pressed or understood ; one for internal security, the In the Stockdale Case, 167 other for external defence. The King or Nabob confers I >rotection on the feudatory baron as tributary prince, on )ndition of an annual revenue in the time of peace, and i military service, partly commutable for money, in the t ime of war. The feudal incidents in the Middle Ages in 5 luirope, the fine paid to the superior on marriage, ward- ship, relief, etc., correspond to the annual tribute in Asia. Military service in war, and extraordinary aids i II the event of extraordinary emergencies, were common to both." 10 " When the Governor-General of Bengal, in 1778, made an extraordinary demand on the Zemindar of Benares for five lacs of rupees, the British empire, in that part of *^he world, was surrounded with enemies which threat- led its destruction. In 1779, a general confederacy 16 was formed among the great powers of Hindostan for the expulsion of the English from their Asiatic domin- ions. At this crisis the expectation of a French arma- ment augmented the general calamities of the country. Mr. Hastings is charged by the committee with making 20 Ills first demand under the false pretence that hostilities luid commenced with France. Such an insidious attempt to pervert a meritorious action into a crime is new — even in the history of impeachments. On the 7th of July, 1778, Mr. Hastings received private intelligence 25 from an English merchant at Cairo, that war had been declared by Great Britain on the 23d of March, and by I'rance on the 30th of April. Upon this intelligence, considered as authentic, it was determined to attack all the French settlements in India. The information was 30 afterward found to be premature ; but in the latter end of August a secret despatch was received from England, authorizing and appointing Mr. Hastings to take the measures which he had already adopted in the preceding month. The Directors and the Board of Control have 8ft 168 Erskme. expressed their approbation of this transaction by liber- ally rewarding Mr. Baldwyn, the merchant, for sending the earliest intelligence he could procure to Bengal. It was two days after Mr. Hastings's information of the 5 French war that he formed the resolution of exacting the five lacs of rupees from Cheit Sing, and would have made similar exactions from all the dependencies of the Company in India had they been in the same circum- stances. The fact is that the great Zemindars of Bengal 10 pay as much to government as their lands can afford. Cheit Sing's collections were above fifty lacs, and his rent not twenty-four." " The right of calling for extraordinary aids and mili- tary service in times of danger being universally estab- 15 lished in India, as it was formerly in Europe during the feudal times, the subsequent conduct of Mr. Hastings is explained and vindicated. The Governor-General and Council of Bengal having made a demand upon a tribu- tary Zemindar for three successive years, and that 20 demand having been resisted by their vassal, they are justified in his punishment. The necessities of the Com- pany, in consequence of the critical situation of their affairs in 1781, calling for a high fine ; the ability of the. Zemindar, who possessed near two crores of rupees in 25 money and jewels, to pay the sum required ; his back- wardness to comply with the demands of his superiors ; his disaffection to the English interest, and desire of revolt, which even, then began to appear, and were after- wards conspicuous — fully justify Mr. Hastings in every 30 subsequent step of his conduct. In the whole of his pro- ceedings it is manifest that he had not early formed a design hostile to the Zemindar, but was regulated by events which he could neither foresee nor control. When the necessary measures which he had taken for 35 supporting the authority of the Company by punishing /// ///' Stockdale Case, 169 a refractory va.ssal were thwarted and defeated by the barbarous massacre of the British troops and by the rebellion of Cheit Sing, the appeal was made to arms ; an unavoidable revolution took place in Benares, and the /cniiridar became the author of his own destruction." 5 Here follows the concluding passage, which is arraigned 1 » y the information : — " The decision of the House of Commons on this charge against Mr. Hastings y^ one of the most singu- lar to be met with in the annals of Parliament. The 10 Minister, who was followed by the majority, vindicated liini in every thing that he had done, and found him lilamable only for what he intended to do; justified every step of his conduct, and only criminated his pro- l>osed intention of converting the crimes of the Zemin- 15 (lar to the benefit of the state by a fine of fifty lacs of rui)ees. An impeachment of error in judgment with K'l^ard to the quantum of a fine, and for an intention tliat never was executed, and never known to the offend- ing party, characterizes a tribunal of inquisition rather 20 than a court of Parliament." Gentlemen, I am ready to admit that this sentiment might have been expressed in language more reserved i 1 id guarded ; but you will look to the sentiment itself, ither than to its dress; to the mind of the writer, and 25 not to the bluntness with which he may hapjxin to express it. It is obviously the language of a warm man, engaged in the honest defence of his friend, and who is brought to what he thinks a just conclusion in argument, which jM'rhaps becomes offensive in proportion to its truth. 30 I'ruth is undoubtedly no warrant for writing what is reproachful of any private man. If a member of society lives within the law, then, if he offends, it is against God alone, and man has nothing to do with him ; and if he transgress tlje laws, the liU^ller should arrai-^n liim ]>efore :V5 170 KrsLlnr. them, instead of presuming to trj' him himself. But as to writings on general sulijfcts, whicli arc not charged as an infringement on the rights oi individuals, hnt as of a seditious tendency, it is far otherwise. Winn, in the 5 progress either of legislation or of high national jus- tice in Parliament, they who are amenable to no law are supposed to have adopted, thi(«uL,'li mistake or error, a principle which, if di-awn into luvcrch-nt, mi.L,dit be dan- gerous to the public, 1 shiUl not admit it to be a libel in 10 the course of a legal and bond fide publication to state that such a principle had in fiict been adopted. The peo- ple of England are not to ki kept in the dark touching the proceedings of their own representatives. Let us therefore coolly examine this supposed offence, and see 15 what it amounts to. First, was not the conduct of the right honorable gen- tleman, whose name is here mentioned, exactly what it is represented ? Will the Attorney-General, who was present in the House of Commons, say that it was not ? Did not 20 the Minister vindicate Mr. Hastings in ^\ hat lie had done, and was not his consent to that article of the impeach- ment founded on the intention only of levying a fine on the Zemindar for the service of the state, beyond the quantum which he, the Minister, thought reasonable? 25 What else is this but an impeachment of error in judg- ment in the quantum of a fine ? So much for the first part of the sentence, which, regarding Mr. Pitt only, is foreign to our purpose ; and as to the last part of it, which imputes the sentiments of 30 the Minister to the majority that followed him with their votes on the question, that appears to me to be giving handsome credit to the majority for having voted from conviction, and not from courtesy to the Minister. To have supposed otherwise I dare not say would have been 35 a more natural libel, but it would certainly have been a In the Stockdale Case, 171 crreater one. The sum and substance therefore of the aragraph is only this : that an impeachment for error in judgment is not consistent with the theory or the practice of the English Government. So say I. I say without reserve, si)eaking merely in the abstract, and not mean- 5 ing to decide nipon the merits of Mr. Hastings's cause, that an impeachment for an error in judgment is con- trary to the whole spirit of English criminal justice, wliich, though not binding on the House of Commons, ought to be a guide to its proceedings. I say that the 10 • xtraordinary jurisdiction of impeachment ought never to 1x3 assumed to exi)ose error, or to scourge misfortune, hut to hold up a terrible example to corruption and wil- t ul abuse of authority, by extra-legal pains. If public men are always punished with due severity when the 15 ource of their misconduct appears to have been selfishly I orrupt and criminal, the public can never suffer when their errors are treated with gentleness. From such pro- tection to the magistrate, no man can think lightly of the charge of magistracy itself, when he sees, by the Ian- 20 guage of tlie saving judgment, that the only title to it is an honest and zealous intention. If at this moment, gentlemen, or indeed in any other in the whole course of our history, the people of England were to call upon every man in this imj^eaching House of Commons who 25 liad given his voice on public questions, or acted in authority, civil or military, to answer for the issues of our councils and our wars, and if honest, single intentions for the public service were refused as answers to impeach- ments, we should have many relations to mourn for, and 30 many friends to deplore. For my own part, gentlemen, r feel, I hope, for my country as much as any man that inhabits it; but I would rather see it fall, and be buried in its ruins, than lend my voice to womid any Minister, or otlipr responsible person, however imfortunate, who 35 172 Er shine. had fairly followed the lights of his understanding and the dictates of his conscience for its preservation. Gentlemen, this is no theory of mine; it is tlie lan- guage of English law, and the protection which it affords 5 to every man in office, from the highest to the lowest trust of government. In no one instance that can be named, foreign or domestic, did the Court of King's Bench ever interpose its extraordinary jurisdiction by information against any magistrate for the widest depart- 10 ure from the rule of his duty, without the plainest and clearest proof of corruption. To every such application, not so supported, the constant answer has been, Go to a Grand Jury with your complaint. God forbid that a ma- gistrate should suffer from an error in judgment, if his 15 purpose was honestly to discharge his trust. We cannot stop the ordinary course of justice; but whesever the court has a discretion, such a magistrate is entitled to its protection. I appeal to the noble judge, and to every man who hears me, for the truth and universality of this 20 position ; and it would be a strange solecism indeed to assert that in a case where the supreme court of criminal justice in the nation would refuse to interpose an extraor- dinary though a legal jurisdiction, on the principle that the ordinary execution of the laws should never be 25 exceeded but for the punishment of malignant guilt, the Commons, in their higher capacity, growing out of the same Constitution, should reject that principle, and stretch them yet further by a jurisdiction still more eccentric. Many impeachments have taken place, be- 30 cause the law could not adequately punish the objects of them ; but who ever heard of one being set on foot because the law, upon principle, would not punish them ? Many impeachments hav^e been adopted for a higher example than a prosecution in the ordinary courts, but 35 surely never for a different example. The matter, there- In the Stockdale Case, 173 fore, in the offensive paragraph is not only an indisputa- ble truth, but a truth in the propagation of which we are all deeply concerned. Whether Mr. Hastings, in the particular instance, acted from corruption or from zeal for his employers, is what I 5 have nothing to do with ; it is to be decided in judgment; my duty stops with wishing him, as I do, an honorable deliverance. Whether the Minister or the Commons meant to found tliis article of the impeachment on mere error, without corruption, is likewise foreign to lo the purpose. The author could only judge from what was said and done on the occasion. He only sought to guard the principle, which is a common interest, and the rights of Mr. Hastings under it. He was, therefore, jus- tified in publishing that an impeachment, founded in 15 error in judgment, was to all intents and purposes ille- gal, unconstitutional, and unjust. Grentlemen, it is now time for us to return again to the work under examination. The author having discussed the whole of the first article through so many pages, 20 without even the imputation of an incorrect or intem- perate expression, except in the concluding passage (the meaning of which I trust I have explained), goes on with the same earnest disjwsition to the discussion of the second charge respecting the princesses of Oude, which 25 occupies eighteen pages, not one syllable of which the Attorney-General has read, and in which there is not even a glance at the House of Commons. The whole of this answer is, indeed, so far from being a mere cloak for the introduction of slander, that I aver it to be one of the 30 most masterly pieces of writing I ever read in my life. From thence he goes on to the charge of contracts and salaries, which occupies five pages more, in which there is not a glance at the House of Commons, nor a word read by the Attorney-General. He afterward defends 3» 174 Erskine, Mr. Hastings against the charges respecting the opium contract. Not a glance at the House of Commons ; not a word by the Attomey-Greneral ; and, in short, in this manner he goes on with the others, to the end of the 5 book. Now, is it possible for any Imman being to believe that a man, having no other intention than to vilify the House of Commons (as tliis information charges), should yet keep his mind thus fixed and settled as the needle to the 10 pole, upon the serious merits of Mr. Hastings's defence, without ever straying into matter even questionable, except in the two or three selected parts out of two or three hundred pages ? This is a forbearance which could not have existed, if calumny and detraction had been the 15 malignant objects which led him to the inquiry and pub- lication. The whole fallacy, therefore, arises from hold- ing up to view a few detached passages, and carefully concealing the general tenor of the book. Having now finished most, if not all, of these critical 20 observations which it has been my duty to make upon this unfair mode of prosecution, it is but a tribute of common justice to the Attorney-General (and which my personal regard for him makes it more pleasant to pay), that none of my commentaries reflect in the most dis- 2,5 tant manner upon liim ; nor upon the Solicitor for the Crown, who sits near me, who is a person of the most correct honor, — far from iL The Attorney-General having orders to prosecute in consequence of the Ad- dress of the House to his Majesty, had no choice in the 30 mode ; no means at all of keeping the prosecutors before you in countenance, but by the course which has been pursued. But so far has he been from enlisting into the cause those prejudices which it is not difficult to slide into a business originating from such exalted aui;hority, 35 he has honorably guarded you against them ; pressing. In the Stockdale Cafe, 175 indeed, severely upon my client with the weight of his ability, but not with the glare and trappings of his high office. Gentlemen, I wish that my strength would enable me to convince you of the author's singleness of intention, 6 and of the merit and ability of his work, by reading the whole that remains of it. But my voice is already nearly exhausted ; I am sorry my client should be a sufferer by my infirmity. One passage, however, is too striking and important to be passed over; the rest I must trust to lo your private examination. The author having discussed all the charges, article by article, sums them all up with this striking appeal to his readers : — "The autlientic statement of facts which has been given, and the arguments which have been employed, 15 ai-e, I think, sufficient to vindicate the character and conduct of Mr. Hastings, even on the maxims of Euro- pean policy. Wlien he was apix>inted Grovernor-General of Bengal he was invested with a discretionary power to promote the interests of the India Company and of the 20 1 British empire in that quarter of the globe. The general instructions sent to him from his constituents were, * That in all your deliberations and re^olutionSy you make the sofefy and prosperity of Bengal your principal ohjecty and Jix your attention on the security of the possessions 25 and revenues of the Company.^ His superior genius sometimes acted in the spirit, rather than complied with the letter of the law ; but he discharged the trust, and ])reserved the empire committed to his care in the same way, and with greater splendor and success than any of 30 his predecessors in office ; his departure from India was marked with the lamentations of the natives and the gratitude a],\ in tli.' >jkmc1i, runiiiiii; through two days, by \vlii( h the Senate has been entertained by the gentleman iioiu South Carolina. Every topic in the wide range of our public affairs, r> whether past or present — everything, general or local. whetlier belonging to national polities or party polities — seems to have attracted more or less of the honorable member's attention, save only the rcsolutii^n l)cfore the Senat(». He has spoken of everytliin -^ Imt tlic imLlif inlands; tlicv have escaped his no' in all his excursions, he has not paid even the cold respect of a passing glance. When this debate. Sir, was to be i< suni.d mi I hms- day morning, it so happened that it would have been 15 convenient for me to be elsewhere. The honorable mem- ber, however, did not ini line to ])ut oif the discussion to another day. He had a shot, he said, to return, and he wished to discharge it. That shot, Sir, which he thus kindly informed us was eoming, that we might stand out 20 of the way, or prepare ourselves to fall by it and die with decency, has now been received. Cnder all advan- tages, and with expectation awakened by the tone which preceded it, it has been discharged, and has spent its force. It may l)ecome me to say no more of its effect, 25 than that, if nobody is found, after all, either killed or wounded, it is not the first time in the history of human atTaiis that the vigor and success of the war have not quite come up to*the lofty and sounding phrase of the manifesto. 30 The gentleman. Sir, in declining to postpone the de- bate, told the Senate, with the emphasis of his hand upon his heart, that there was something rankling herej which he wished to relieve. [Mr. Hayne rose, and disclaimed having used the word rank- 35 ling.] Reply to Hayne. 187 It would not, Mr. President, be safe for the honorable member to appeal to those around him upon the ques- tion whether he did, in fact, make use of that word. But ho may have been unconscious of it. At any rate, it is enough that he disclaims it. But still, with or with- 5 out the use of that particular word, he had yet something herBy he said, of which he wished to rid himself by an immediate reply. In this respect. Sir, I have a great advantage over the honorable gentleman. There is noth- ing herBy Sir, which gives me the slightest uneasiness ; lo neither fear, nor anger, nor that which is sometimes more troublesome than either, the consciousness of having been in the wrong. There is nothing either originating here, or now received here by the gentleman's shot. Nothing originating here, for I had not the slightest feeling of 15 unkindness towards the honorable member. Some pas- sages, it is true, had occurred since our acquaintance in this body which I could have wished might have been otherwise ; but I had used philosophy, and forgotten them. I paid the honorable member the attention of listening 20 with respect to his first speech ; and when he sat down, though surprised, and I must even say astonished, at some of his opinions, nothing was farther from my in- tention than to commence any personal warfare. Through the whole of the few remarks I made in answer, I avoided, 25 studiously and carefully, everything which I thought possible to be construed into disrespect. And, Sir, while there is thus nothing originating here which I have wished at any time, or now wish, to discharge, I must repeat, also, that nothing has been received here which 30 rankles, or in any way gives me annoyance. I will not accuse the honorable meml)er of violating the niles of civilized war — I will not say that he poisoned his arrows. But whether his shafts were, or were not, dipped in that which would have caused rankling, if they had reached 35 188 Webster. their destination, there was not, as it happened, quite strength enough in the bow to bring them to their mark. If he wishes now to gather up those shafts, he must look for them elsewhere; they will not be found fixed and 5 quivering in the object at which they were aimed. The honorable member complained that I had slept on his speech. I must have slept on it, or not slept at all. The moment the honorable member sat down, his friend from Missouri rose, and, with much honeyed com- 10 mendation of the speech, suggested that the impressions which it had produced were too charming and delightful to be disturbed by other sentiments or other sounds, and proposed that the Senate should adjourn. Would it have been quite amiable in me, Sir, to interrupt this excellent 15 good feeling ? Must I not have been absolutely mali- cious, if I could have thrust myself forward to destroy sensations thus pleasing ? Was it not much better and kinder, both to sleep upon them myself, and to allow others also the pleasure of sleeping upon them? But 20 if it be meant, by sleeping upon his speech, that I took time to prepare a reply to it, it is quite a mistake. Owing to other engagements I could not employ even the inter- val between the adjournment of the Senate and its meet- ing the next morning in attention to the subject of this 25 debate. Nevertheless, Sir, the mere matter of fact is undoubtedly true. I did sleep on the gentleman's speech, and slept soundly. And I slept equally well on his speech of yesterday, to which I am now replying. It is quite possible that in this respect, also, I possess some advan- 30 tage over the honorable member, attributable, doubtless, to a cooler temperament on my part ; for, in truth, I slept upon his speeches remarkably well. But the gentleman inquires why he was made the ob- ject of such a reply ? Why was he singled out ? If an 35 attack has been made on the East, he, he assures us, did Reply to Hayne, 189 not begin it; it was matle by the gentleman from Mis- souri. Sir, I answered the gentleman's speech because I happened to hear it; and because, also, I chose to give an answer to that speech, which, if unanswered, I thought most likely to produce injurious impressions. I did not 5 stop to inquire who was the original drawer of the bill. I found a responsible indorser before me, and it was my purpose to hold him liable, and to bring him to his just res|X)nsibility without delay. But, Sir, this interrogatory of the honorable member was only introductory to another, lo He proceeded to ask me whether I had turned upon him, in this debate, from the consciousness that I should find an overmatch, if I ventured on a contest with his friend from Missouri. If, Sir, the honoi-able member, modestioi gratiuy had chosen thus to defer to his friend, and to pay 15 him a compliment, without intentional disparagement to others, it would have been quite according to tlie friendly courtesies of debate, and not at all ungi-ateful to my own feelings. I am not one of those, Sir, who esteem any tribute of regard, whether light and occasional, or more 20 serious and deliberate, which may be bestowed on others, as so much unjustly withholden from themselves. But the tone and manner of the gentleman's question forbid me thus to interpret it. I am not at liberty to consider it as nothing more than a civility to his friend. It had 'in an air of taunt and dispai-agement, something of the lofti- ness of asserted superiority, which does not allow me to pass it over without notice. It was put as a question for me to answer, and so put as if it were difficult for ine to answer, whether I deemed tlie member from Mis- m souri an overmatch for myself in debate here. It seems to me, Sir, that this is extraordinary language, and an extraordinary tone, for the discussions of tliis body. Matches and overmatches ! Those tenns are more ajv plicable elsewhere than here, and fitter for other assem- 36 190 Webster, blies than this. Sir, the gentleman seems to forget where and what we are. This is a Senate — a Senate of equals, of men of individual honor and personal char- acter, and of absolute independence. We know no mas- 5ter8, we acknowledge no dictators. This is a hall for mutual consultation and discussion ; not an arena for the exhibition of champions. I offer myself. Sir, as a match for no man ; I throw the challenge of debate at no man's feet. But then, Sir, since the honorable member has put 10 the question in a manner that calls for an answer, I will give him an answer ; and I tell him that, holding my- self to be the humblest of the members here, I yet know nothing in the arm of his friend from Missouri, eitlier alone, or when aided by the arm of his friend from South 15 Carolina, that need deter even me from esix>using what- ever opinions I may choose to esjx)use, from debating whenever I may choose to debate, or from speaking what- ever I may see fit to say, on the floor of the Senate. Sir, when uttered as matter of commendation or compliment, 20 I should dissent from nothing which the honorable mem- ber might say of his friend. Still less do I put forth any pretensions of my own. But when put to me as matter of taunt, I throw it back, and say to the gentle- man that he could possibly say nothing less likely than 25 such a comparison to wound my pride of personal char- acter. The anger of its tone rescued the remark from intentional irony, which otherwise, probably, would have been its general acceptation. But, Sir, if it be imagined that by this mutual quotation and commendation ; if it 30 be supposed that, by casting the characters of the drama, assigning to each his part, to one the attack, to another the cry of onset ; or if it be thought that, by a loud and empty vaunt of anticipated victory, any laurels are to be won here ; if it be imagined, especially, that any or all 35 these things will shake any purpose of mine, I can tell Reply to Ilayne. 191 the honorable member, once for all, that he is greatly mistaken, and that he is dealing with one of whose tem- l)er and character he has yet much to learn. Sir, I shall not allow myself on this occasion, I hope on no occasion, to bo betrayed into any loss of temper ; but if provoked, 5 as I trust I never shall be, into crimination and recrimi- nation, the honorable member may perhaps find that in that contest there will be blows to take as well as blows to give ; that others can state comparisons as significant, at least, as his own, and that his impunity may possibly lo demand of him whatever powers of taunt and sarcasm he may possess. I commend him to a prudent husbandry of his resources. . . . In the course of my observations the other day, Mr. President, I spoke of the Ordinance of 1787, which pro- 16 hibits slavery, in all future times, north-west of the Ohio, as a measure of great wisdom and foresight, and one which had been attended with highly beneficial and per- manent consequences. I supposed that, on this point, no two gentlemen in the Senate could entertain difi:erent 20 opinions. But the simple expression of this sentiment has led the gentleman, not only into a labored defence of slavery in the abstract, and on principle, but also into a warm accusation against me, as having attacked the system of domestic slavery now existing in the Southern 25 States. For all this there was not the slightest founda- tion in anything said or intimated by me. I did not utter a single word which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. I said only that it was highly wise and useful, in legislating for the ab North-western country, while it was yet a wilderness, to prohibit the introduction of slaves ; and I added that I presumed there was no reflecting and intelligent person in the neighboring state of Kentucky, who would doubt that, if th(' same prohibition had been extended at the sa 192 Webster, same early period over that Commonwealth, her strength and population would, at this day, have been far greater than they are. If these opinions be thought doubtful, they are, nevertheless, I trust, neither extraordinary nor 5 disresi)ectful. They attack nobody, and menace nobody. And yet. Sir, the gentleman's optics have discovered, even in the mere expression of this sentiment, what he calls the very spirit of the Missouri question ! He rep- resents me as making an onset on the whole South, and 10 manifesting a spirit which would interfere with, and dis- turb, their domestic condition ! Sir, this injustice no otherwise surprises me, than as it is committed here, and committed without the slight- est pretence of ground for it. I say it only surprises me 15 as being done here ; for I know full well that it is, and has been, the settled policy of some persons in the South for years to represent the people of the North as dis- ]X)sed to interfere with them in their own exclusive and peculiar concerns. This is a delicate and sensitive point 20 in Southern feeling ; and of late years it has always been touched, and generally with eifect, whenever the object has been to unite the whole South against Northern men or Northern measures. This feeling, always carefully kept alive, and maintained at too intense a heat to admit 25 discrimination or reflection, is a lever of great power in our political machine. It moves vast bodies, and gives to them one and the same direction. But it is without adequate cause, and the suspicion which exists is wholly groundless. There is not, and never has been, a dispo- se sition in the North to interfere with these interests of the South. Such interference has never been supposed to be within the power of government ; nor has it been in any way attempted. The slavery of the South has always been regarded as a matter of domestic iwlicy, 35 left with the States themselves, and with which the fed- Reply to Hayne. 193 eral government had nothing to do. Certainly, Sir, I am, and ever have been, of that opinion. The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery in the abstract is no evil. Most assuredly, I need not say, I differ with him alto- gether and most widely, on that ix)int. I regard domestic 6 slavery as one of the greatest evils, both moral and polit- ical. But whether it be a malady, and whether it be curable, and, if so, by what means ; or, on the other hand, whether it be the vulnus immedlcahile of the social sys- tem — I leave it to those whose right and duty it is to lo inquire and to decide. And this, I believe. Sir, is, and uniformly has been, the sentiment of the North. . . . [In support of this last statement Mr. Webster appeals to the history of attempts made to enlist tlie first Congress in the aboli- tion of slavery. These attempts resulted in the famous resolutions 15 reported by a committee composed almost exclusively of North- em men, and adopted by a House two-thirds of whose members were from the North, declaring that Congress has " no authority to interfere in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them in any of the States."] 20 The fears of the South, whatever fears they might have entertained, were allayed and quieted by this early decision ; and so remained till they were excited afresh, without cause, but for collateral and indirect purposes. When it became necessary, or was thought so by some 25 political persons, to find an unvarying ground for the exclusion of Northern men from confidence and from lead in the affairs of the republic, then, and not till then, the cry was raised, and the feeling industriously excited, that the mfluence of Northern men in the public coimcils 30 would endanger the relation of master and slave. For myself, I claim no other merit than that this gross and enormous injustice towards the whole North has not wrnnt'lit iin.Mj me to change my opinions or my political 194 Webster. conduct. I hope I am above violating my principles, even under the smart of injury and false imputations. Unjust suspicions and undeserved reproach, whatever pain I may experience from them, will not induce me, I 6 tmst, to overstep the limits of constitutional duty, or to encroach on the rights of others. The domestic slavery of the Southern States I leave where I find it, — in the hands of their own governments. It is their affair, not mine. Nor do I complain of the peculiar effect which 10 the magnitude of that population has had in the distri- bution of power under this federal government. We know, Sir, that the representation of the States in the other House is not equal. We know that great advan- tage in that respect is enjoyed by the slave-holding 16 States ; and we know, too, that the intended equivalent for that advantage, that is to say, the imposition of direct taxes in the same ratio, has become merely nominal, the habit of the government being almost invariably to col- lect its revenue from other sources and in other modes. ao Neveitheless, I do not complain ; nor would I counte- nance any movement to alter this arrangement of repre- sentation. It is tlie original bargain, the compact ; let it stand; let the advantage of it be fully enjoyed. The Union itself is too full of benefit to be hazarded in 25 propositions for changing its original basis. I go for the Constitution as it is, and for the Union as it is. But I am resolved not to submit in silence to accusa- tions either against myself individually or against the North, wholly unfounded and unjust ; accusations which 30 impute to us a disposition to evade the constitutional compact, and to extend the power of the government over the internal laws and domestic condition of the States. All such accusations, wherever and whenever made, all insinuations of the existence of any such pur- 35 poses, I know and feel to be groundless and injurious. Reply to Hayne. 195 And we must confide in Southern gentlemen themselves; we must tnist to those whose integrity of heart and mag- nanimity of feeling will lead them to a desire to maintain and disseminate truth, and who possess the means of its diffusion with the Southern public ; we must leave it to 5 them to disabuse that public of its prejudices. But in the mean time, for my own part, I shall continue to act justly, whether those towards whom justice is exercised receive it with candor or with contumely. . . . [Mr. Webster next refutes the charge of inconsistency between 10 his present position regarding the public lands and that taken by him In 1825.] We approach, at length. Sir, to a more important part of the honorable gentleman's observations. Since it does not accord with my views of justice and policy to 15 give away the public lands altogether, as mere matter of gratuity, I am asked by the honorable gentleman on what ground it is that I consent to vote them away in partic- ular instances. How, he inquires, do I reconcile with these professed sentiments, my support of measures 20 appropriating portions of the lands to particular roads, particular canals, particular rivers, and particular insti- tutions of education in the West ? This leads. Sir, to the real and wide difference, in political opinion, between the honorable gentleman and myself. On my part, I 26 look ui)on all these objects as connected with the com- mon good, fairly embraced in its object and its terms ; he, on the contrary, deems them all, if good at all, only local good. This is our difference. The interrogatory whicli he proceeded to put at once explains this differ- 30 ence. " What interest," asks he, " has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio ? " Sir, this very question is full of sig- nificance. It develops the gentleman's whole political system ; and its answer expounds mine. Here we differ. 196 Webster. I look upnii a road OTCr the Alleglianios, a canal round tilt' ialls (.f ihr ' a canal or railway iV. ^m the Atlantic to the \\ eslLrii waters, as being an object large and extensive enough to be fairly said to be for the com- r, mon Ix'iicfit. Tlie gentleman thinks otherwix-, and this is the key to his construction oT the ])()wers of the gov- ernment. He may well ask v liat interest has South Carolina in a canal in i >' liis svstcm. it is iiiie, she has no interest. On tn;;i >\ -k ni ( Jhio and Carolina 10 are diiTerent governments and ditTe!-eT,r countries; cou- ne(;tod here, it is true, by some slig' iletined bond of union, but in all main respects sejiaiaie and diverse. On that system Candina has no more interest in a. canal in Ohio than in Mexico. The gentleman, therefore, only 16 follows out his own principles ; he does no more than arrive at the natural conclusions of his own doctrines ; he only announces the true results of that erect 1 w hi( h he has adopted himself, and would persuade others to adopt, when he thus declares that South Carolina has no 20 interest in a public -work in Ohio. Sir, we narrow-minded people of New England do not reason thus. ( )ur notion of things is cntin ly different. We look upon the States, not as separated, but as united. We love to dwell on that union, and on the mutual hap- 25 piness which it has so much promoted, and the common renown whieh it has so greatly contributed to acquire. In our contemplation, Carolina and Ohio are parts of the same coimtry ; States, united under the same general government, ha^dng interests common, associated, inter- 30 mingled. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the constitutional power of this government, we look upon the States as one. We do not impose geographical limits to our patriotic feeling or regard ; we do not follow rivers and mountains and lines of latitude to find boun- 35 daries beyond which }»ublic improvements do not benefit • Reply to Hayne. 197 us. We who come here as agents and representatives of these narrow-minded and selfish men of New England, consider oui-selves as bound to regard with an equal eye the good of the whole, in whatever is within our powers of legislation. Sir, if a railroad or canal, beginning in 6 South Carolina and ending in South Carolina, appeared to me to be of national importance and national magni- tude, believing, as I do, that the power of goveniment extends to the encouragement of works of that descrip- tion, if I were to stand up here and ask, Wliat interest lo has Massachusetts in a railroad in South Carolina? I should not be willing to face my constituents. These same narrow-minded men would tell me that they had sent me to act for the whole country, and that one who possessed too little comprehension, either of intellect or is feeling, one who was not large enough, both in mind and in heart, to embrace the whole, was not fit to be intrusted with the interest of any part. Sir, I do not desire to enlarge the powers of the gov- ernment by unjustifiable construction, nor to exercise 20 any not within a fair interpretation. But when it is believed that a power does exist, then it is, in my judg- ment, to be exercised for the general benefit of the whole. So far as respects the exercise of such a power, the States are one. It was the very object of the Constitution to 26 create unity of interests to the extent of the jwwers of the general goveniment. In war and ])eace we are one ; in commerce, one ; because the authority of the general government reaches to war and peace, and to the regula- tion of commerce. I have never seen any more difficulty 30 in erecting liglithouses on the lakes, than on the ocean ; in improving the harbors of inland seas, than if they were within tlie ebb and flow of the tide ; or in removing ol)gtniction8 in the vast streams of the West, more than in any work to facilitate commerce on tlie Atlantic coast. 3S 198 Webster, If there be any power for one, there is power also for the other ; and they are all and equally for the common good of the country. There are other objects, apparently more local, or the 5 benefit of whicli is less general, towards which, neverthe- less, I have concurred with others to give aid by dona- tions of land. It is proj)osed to construct a road in or through one of the new States in which this govern- ment i)ossesses large quantities of land. Have the 10 United States no right, or, as a great and untaxed proprietor, are they under no obligation, to contribute to an object thus calculated to promote the common good of all the proprietors, themselves included ? And even with respect to education, which is the extreme 16 case, let the question be considered. In the first place, as we have seen, it was made matter of compact with these States that they should do their part to promote education. In the next place, our whole system of land laws proceeds on the idea that education is for the com- 20 mon good ; because in every division a certain portion is uniformly reserved and appropriated for the use of schools. And, finally, have not these new States singu- larly strong claims founded on the ground already stated, that the government is a great untaxed proprietor, in the 25 ownership of the soil ? It is a consideration of great importance, that probably there is in no part of the country, or of the world, so great call for the means of education, as in these new States ; owing to the vast number of persons within those ages in which education 30 and instruction are usually received, if received at all. This is the natural consequence of recency of settlement and rapid increase. The census of these States shows how gi-eat a proportion of the whole population occupies the classes between infancy and manhood. These are the 35 wide fields, and here is the deep and quick soil for the Reply to Ilaiine. 199 seeds of knowledge and viituf ; and this is the favored season, the very spring-time for sowing them. Let them be disseminated without stint. Let them be scattei*ed with a bountiful hand, broadcast. Whatever the gov- ernment can fairly do towards these objects, in my 6 opinion, ought to be done. These, Sir, are the grounds, succinctly stated, on which my votes for grants of lands for particular objects rest ; while I maintain at the same time, that it is all a com- mon fund, for the common benefit. And reasons like lo these, I presume, have influenced the votes of other gen- tlemen of New England. Those who have a different view of the powers of the government, of course, come to different conclusions on these, as on other questions. I observed, when speaking on this subject before, that if 15 we looked to any measure, whether for a road, a canal, or anything else, intended for the improvement of the West, it would be found that, if the New England ayes were struck out of the lists of votes, the Southern noes would always have rejected the measure. The truth of 20 this has not been denied, and cannot be denied. In stat- ing this, I thought it just to ascribe it to the constitu- tional scruples of the South, rather than to any other less favorable or less charitable cause. But no sooner liad I done this, than the honorable gentleman asks if 25 1 reproach him and his friends with their constitutional scruples. Sir, I reproach nobody. I stated a fact, and gave the most resi)ectful reason for it that occurred to me. The gentleman cannot deny the fact ; he may, if he choose, disclaim the reason. It is not long since I had 00 occasion, in presenting a petition from his own State, to account for its being intrusted to my hands, by saying that the constitutional opinions of the gentleman and his worthy colleague prevented them from supporting it Sir, did I state this as matter of reproach ? Far from it. 35 200 Webster. Did I attempt to find any other cause than an honest one for these scruples ? Sir, I did not. It did not become me to doubt or to insinuate that the gentleman had either changed his sentiments, or that he had made up a 5 set of constitutional opinions accommodated to anv j ar- ticular combination of political occurrences. Had i clone so, I should have felt that, while I was entitled to little credit in thus questioning other people's motives, I justi- fied the whole world in suspecting my own. But how 10 has the gentleman returned this respect for others' opin- ions ? His own candor and justice, how have they been exhibited towards the motives of others, while he has been at so much pains to maintain, what nobody has disputed, the purity of his own? Why, Sir, he has 15 asked when, and how, and w?ii/, New England votes were found going for measures favoi-able to the West? He has demanded to be informed whether all this did not begin in 1825, and while the election of President was still pending ? . . . 20 [Mr. Webster answers this insinuation by showing that the generous policy of New England toward the West found ex- pression years before ^he iK)litical exigency referred to ; and that it was embodied in the two well-known Acts of 1820 and 1821, " by far the most important general measures respecting 25 the public lauds which have been adopted in the last twenty years."] Having recurred to these two important measures, in answer to the gentleman's inquiries, I must now beg permission to go back to a period yet somewhat earlier, 30 for the purpose of still further showing how much, or rather how little, reason there is for the gentleman's insinuation tliat political hopes or fears, or party asso- ciations, were the grounds of these New England votes. And after what has been said, I hope it may be forgiven Reply to Hayne. 201 me if I allude to some jwlitical opinions and votes of my own, of very little public importance cei-tainly, but which, from the time at which they were given and expressed, may pass for good witnesses on this occasion. This government, Mr. President, from its origin to the 6 peace of 1815, had been too much engrossed with vari- ous other important concerns to be able to turn its thoughts inward, and look to the development of its vast internal resources. In the early part of President Washington's administration, it was fully occupied with lo completing its own organization, providing for the public debt, defending the frontiers, and maintaining domestic peace. Before the termination of that administration the fires of the French Revolution blazed forth, as from a new-opened volcano, and tlie Avhole breadth of the 15 ocean did not secure us from its effects. The smoke and the cinders reached us, though not the burning lava. Difficult and agitating questions, embarrassing to gov- ernment and dividing public opinion, sprung out of the new state of our foreign relations, and were succeeded by 20 others, and yet again by others, equally embarrassing and equally exciting division and discord, through the long series of twenty years, till they finally issued in the war with Ilngland. Down to the close of that war no distinct, marked, and deliberate attention had been given, 25 or could have been given, to the internal condition of the country, its capacities of improvement, or the constitu- tional i)ower of the government in regard to objects con- nected with such improvement. The peace, Mr. President, brought about an entirely 30 new and a most interesting state of tilings; it opened to us other prospects and suggested other duties. Wo ourselves were changed, and the whole wdrld was changed. The pacification of Europe, after June, 1815, assumed a firm and permanent aspect. The ua-85 202 Webster. tions evidently manifested that they were disposed for peace. Some agitation of the waves might be expected, even after the storm had subsided, but the tendency was, strongly and rapidly, towards settled repose. 5 It so happened. Sir, that I was at that time a mem- ber of Congress, and, like others, naturally turned my thoughts to the contemplation of the recently altered condition of the country and of the world. It appeared plainly enough to me, as well as to wiser and more 10 experienced men, that the policy of the government would naturally take a start in a new direction; be- cause new directions would necessarily be given to the pursuits and occupations of the people. We had pushed our commerce far and fast, under the advantage of a 15 neutral flag. But there were now no longer flags, oitlior neutral or belligerent. The harvest of neutrality li;i«l been great, but we had gathered it all. With the peace of Europe it was obvious there would spring up in her circle of nations a revived and invigorated spirit of trade, 20 and a new activity in all the business and objects of civilized life. Hereafter, our commercial gains were to be earned only by success in a close and intense competi- tion. Other nations would produce for themselves, and carry for themselves, and manufacture for themselves, to 25 the full extent of their abilities. The crops of our plains would no longer sustain European armies, nor our ships longer supply those whom war had rendered unable to supply themselves. It was obvious that, under these circumstances, the country would begin to survey itself, 30 and to estimate its own capacity of improvement. And this improvement — how was it to be accom- plished, and who was to accomplish it ? We were ten or twelve millions of people, spread over almost half a world. We were more than twenty States, some stretch- 35 ing along the same seaboard, some along the same line of Reply to Haym, 203 inland frontier, and others on opposite banks of the same vast rivers. Two considerations at once presented them- selves with great force in looking at this state of things. One was, that that great branch of improvement which consisted in furnishing new facilities of intercourse, 5 necessarily ran into different States in every leading instance, and would benefit the citizens of all such States. No one State, therefore, in such cases, would assume the wliole expense, nor was the co-operation of several States to be expected. Take the instance of ic the Delaware breakwater. It will cost several millions of money. Would Pennsylvania alone ever have con- structed it? Certainly never while this Union lasts, because it is not for her sole benefit. Would Pennsyl- vania, New Jersey, and Delaware have united to accom- 15 plish it at their joint expense ? Certainly not, for the same reason.- It could not be done, therefore, but by the general government. The same may be said of the large inland undertakings, except that, in them, govern- ment, instead of bearing the whole expense, co-operates 20 with others who bear a part. The other consideration is, that the United States have the means. They enjoy the revenues derived froin commerce, and the States have no abundant and easy sources of public income. Tlie cus- tom-houses fill the general treasury, while the States 25 have scanty resources, except by resort to heavy direct taxes. Under this view of things, I thought it necessary to settle, at least for myself, some definite notions with respect to the powers of the government in regard to 30 internal afifaii-s. It may not savor too much of self-com- mendation to remark that, with this object, I considered the Constitution, its judicial construction, its contemjx)- raneous exposition, and the whole history of the legisla- tion of Cnv'v--- '•"■!"•• =♦ t ;nid I arrived at the conclusion 35 204 Webster. that government had power to accomplish sundry objects, — or aid in their accomplishment, — which are now com- monly spoken of as internal improvements. That conclu- sion, Sir, may have been right, or it may have been wrong. 5 I am not about to argue the grounds of it at large. I say only, that it was adopted and acted on even so early as in 1816. Yes, Mr. President, I made up my opinion, and determined on my intended course of ix)litical conduct on these subjects, in the Fourteenth Congress, in 1816. 10 And now, Mr. President, I have further to say, that I made up these opinions, and entered on this course of political conduct Teucro diice. Yes, Sir, I pursued in all this a South Carolina track on the doctrines of internal improvement. South Carolina, as she was then repre- 15 sented in the other House, set forth in 1816, under a fresh and leading breeze, and I was among the followers. But if my leader sees new lights, and turns a sharp corner, unless I see new lights also, I keep straight on in the same path. I repeat that leading gentlemen from 20 South Carolina were first and foremost in behalf of the doctrines of internal improvements, when those doctrines came first to be considered and acted upon in Congress. The debate on the bank question, on the tariff of 1816, and on the direct tax, vnW show who was who, and what 25 was what, at that time. The tariff of 1816 (one of the plain cases of oppression and usurpation, from which, if the government does not recede, individual States may justly secede from the government) is, Sir, in truth, a South Carolina tariff, supported by South Carolina votes. 30 But for those votes, it could not have passed in the form in which it did pass; whereas, if it had depended on Massachusetts votes, it would have been lost. Does not the honorable gentleman well know all this ? There are certainly those wlio do full well know it all. I do not 35 say this to reproach South Carolina. I only state the Reply to Hayne, 205 fact ; iuul I think it will appear to be true, that among the earliest and boldest advocates of the tariff as a meas- ure of protection, and on the express ground of protec- tion, were leading gentlemen of South Carolina in Congress. I did not then, and cannot now, under- 5 stand their language in any other sense. While this tariff of 1816 was under discussion in the House of Representatives, an honorable gentleman from Georgia, now of this House [Mr. Forsyth], moved to reduce the proposed duty on cotton. He failed by four votes. South 10 Carolina giving three votes (enough to have turned the sciile) against his motion. The act, Sir, then passed, and received on its passage the support of a majority of the Representatives of South Carolina present and voting. This act is the first in the order of those now denounced 15 as plain usurpations. We see it daily in the list, by the side of those of 1824 and 1828, as a case of manifest oppression, justifying disunion. I put it home to the honorable member from South Carolina, that his own State was not only " art and part " in this measure, but 20 the causa causans. Without her aid this seminal prin- ciple of mischief, this root of Upas, could not have been planted. I have already said, and it is true, that this act proceeded on the ground of protection. It interfered directly with existing interests of great viilue and amount. 25 It cut up the Calcutta cotton trade by the roots ; but it passed, nevertheless, and it passed on the principle of protecting manufactures, on the principle against free trade, on the principle opposed to that which lets us alone. SO Such, Mr. President, were the opinions of important and leading gentlemen from South Carolina on the sub- ject of internal improvement, in 1816. I went out of Congress tlie next year, and returning again in 1823, thought I found South CaroUna where I had left her. 36 206 Webster, I really supposed that all things remained as they were, and that the South Carolina doctrine of internal improve- ments would be defended by the same eloquent voices and the same strong arms as formerly. In the lapse of 6 these six years, it is true, political associations had as- sumed a new aspect and new divisions. A strong \nivty had arisen in the South hostile to the doctrine of inter- nal improvements. Anti-consolidation was the flag under which this party fought; and its supporters inveighed 10 against internal improvements, much after the manner in which the honorable gentleman has now inveighed against them, as part and parcel of the system of consol- idation. Whether this jmrty arose in South Carolina itself, or in the neighborhood, is more than I know. I 15 think the latter. However that may have been, there were those found in South Carolina ready to make war upon it, and who did make intrepid war upon it. Names being regarded as things in such controversies, they be- stowed on the anti-improvement gentlemen the apjjella- 20 tion of Ratlicals. Yes, Sir, the appellation of Radicals, as a term of distinction applicable and applied to those who denied the liberal doctrines of internal improvement, originated, according to the best of my recollection, some- where between North Carolina and Georgia. Well, Sir, 25 these mischievous Radicals were to be put down, and the strong arm of South Carolina was stretched out to put them down. About this time. Sir, I returned to Con- gress. The battle with the Radicals had been fought, and our South Carolina champions of the doctrines of 30 internal improvement had nobly maintained their ground, and were understood to have achieved a victory. We looked upon them as conquerors. They had driven back the enemy with discomfiture, — a thing, by the way, Sir, which is not always performed when it is promised. 35 A gentleman to whom I have already referred in this Reply to Ilayne, 207 debate had come into Congress, during my absence from it, from South Carolina, and had brought with him a high reputation for ability. He came from a school with wliich we had been acquainted, et noscitur a sociis. I hold in my hand, Sir, a printed sj)eech of this distin-S guished gentleman [Mr. McDuffie] "On Internal Improve- ments," delivered about the period to which I now refer, and printed with a few introductory remarks upon con- solidation; in which, Sir, I think he quite consolidated tlie arguments of his opponents, the lladicals, if to crush lo be to consolidate. [Mr. Webster quotes passages from the speech claiming for the •'Republican" party of that time, — the dominant party in the South, — and for the South Carolinian delegation in Congress, led by Mr. Calhoun, the honor of originating the system and 15 policy of internal improvements.] Such are the opinions. Sir, which were maintained by South Carolina gentlemen in the House of Kepresenta- tives, on the subject of internal improvements, when I took my seat there as a member from Massachusetts in 20 1823. But this is not all. We had a bill before us, and passed it in that House, entitled, " An Act to procure the necessary surveys, plans, and estimates upon the subject of roads and canals." It authorized the President to cause surveys and estimates to be made of the routes of 25 such roads and canals as he might deem of national im- portance in a commercial or military \)ou\t of view, or for the transi)ortation of the mail, and appropriated thirty thousand dollars out of the treasury to defniy the exjiense. This act, thAugh preliminary in its nature, 30 covered the whole grounu. It took for granted the com- plete power of internal improvement, as far as any of its advocates had ever contended for it. Having jnissed the other House, the bill came up to the Senate, and was 208 Webster. here considered and debated in April, 1824. The honor- able menil^er from South Carolina was a member of the Senate at that time. While the bill was under consid- eration here, a motion was matlo to add the following 6 proviso : — ^^ Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be constmed to affirm or admit a power in Congress, on their own authority, to make roads or canals within any of the States of the Union," The yeas and nays were 10 tiiken on this proviso, and the honorable member voted in the negative! The proviso failed. A motion was then made to add this proviso ; viz., — " Provided, That the faith of the United States is hereby pledged, that no money shall ever be expended 15 for roads or canals, except it shall be among the several States, and in the same proportion as direct taxes are laid and assessed by the provisions of the Constitution." The honorable member voted against this proviso also, and it failed. The bill was then put on its passage, and 20 the honorable member voted for it, and it i)assed, and became a law. Now, it strikes me, Sir, that there is no maintaining these votes but upon tne power of internal improvement, in its broadest sense. In truth, these bills for surveys 26 and estimates have always been considered as test ques- tions; they show who is for and who against internal improvement. This law itself went the Avhole length, and assumed the full and complete power. The gentle- man's votes sustained that power, in every form in which 30 the various propositions to amend presented it. He went for the entire and unrestrained authority, without con- sulting the States, and without agreeing to any propor- tionate distribution. And now suffer me to remind you, Mr. President, that it is this very same power, thus sanc- 35 tioned in every form by the gentleman's own opinion. Reply to Hayne. 209 that is so plain and manifest a usurpation that the State of South Carolina is supix)se(i to be justified in refusing submission to any laws canying the power into effect. Tmly, Sir, is not this a little too hard? May we not. crave some mercy, under favor and protection of the gen- 6 tleman's own authority? Admitting that a road, or a canal, must be written down flat usurpation as was ever committed, may we find no mitigation in our respect for his place and his vote, as one that knows the law ? The tariff, which South Carolina had an efficient hand 10 in estiiblishing in 1816, and this asserted power of inter- nal improvement, advanced by her in the same year, and, as we have seen, approved and sanctioned by her repre- sentatives in 1824 — these two measures are the great grounds on whicli she is now thought to be justified in 15 breaking up the Union, if she sees fit to break it up ! I may now safely say, I think, that we have had the authority of leading and distinguished gentlemen from South Carolina in support of the doctrine of internal improvement. I repeat that, up to 1824, Ij for one, fol- 20 lowed South Carolina ; but when that star, in its ascen- sion, veered off in an unexpected direction, I relied on its light no longer. [Here the Vice-Preaident said, '* Does the chair understand the gentleman from Massachusetts to say tliat the person now 25 occupying the chair of the Senate has changed his opinions on the subject of Internal improvements ? ''] From nothing ever s4id to me. Sir, have I had reason to know of any change in the opinions of the person fill- ing the chair of the Senate. If such change has taken so place, I regret it. I speak generally of the State of South Carolina. Individuals we know there are who hold opinions favorable to the j)ower. An application for its exercise, in behalf of a public work in South Carolina 210 Webster, itself, is now pending, I believe, in the other House, presented by members from tliat State. I have thus. Sir, perhaps not without some tediousness .of detail, shown, if I am in error on the subject of inter- 5 nal improvement, how, and in what company, I fell into that error. If I am wrong, it is apparent who misled me. I go to other remarks of the honorable member ; and I have to complain of an entire misapprehension of what 10 I said on the subject of the national debt, though I can hardly perceive how any one could misunderstand me. What I said was, not that I wished to put off the pay- ment of the debt, but, on the contrary, that I had always voted for every measure for its reduction as uniformly 15 as the gentleman himself. He seems to claim the ex- clusive merit of a disposition to reduce the public charge. I do not allow it to him. As a debt, I was, I am, for paying it, because it is a charge on our finances and on the industry of the country. But I observed that I 20 thought I perceived a morbid fervor on that subject — an excessive anxiety to i>ay off the debt, not so much because it is a debt simply, as because, while it lasts, it furnishes one objection to disunion. It is, while it con- tinues, a tie of common interest. I did not impute such 25 motives to the honorable member himself, but that there is such a feeling in existence I have not a particle of doubt. The most I said was, that if one effect of the debt was to strengthen our Union, that effect itself was not regretted by me, however much others might regret 30 it. The gentleman has not seen how to reply to this otherwise than by supposing me to have advanced the doctrine that a national debt is a national blessing. Others, I must hope, will find much less difficulty in understanding me. I distinctly and pointedly cautioned 35 the honorable member not to understand me as express- Reply to Ilayne, 211 ing an opinion favorable to the continuance of the debt. I repeated this caution, and repeated it more than once ; but it was thrown away. On yet another point I was still more unaccountably misunderstood. The gentleman had harangued against 6 " consolidation." I told him in reply that there was one kind of consolidation to which I was attached, and that was the consolidation of our Union ; and that this was precisely that consolidation to which I feared othei-s were not attached, and that such consolidation was the lo very end of the Constitution, the leading object, as they had informed us themselves, which its framers had kept in view. I turned to their communication, and read their very words, " the consolidation of the Union," and ex- pressed my devotion to this sort of consolidation. I said 15 in terms that I wished not, in the slightest degree, to augment the powers of this government; that my object was to preserve, not to enlarge ; and that by consolidat- ing the Union I understood no more than the strength- ening of the Union, and perpetuating it. Having been 20 thus explicit, having thus read from the printed book the precise words which I adopted as expressing my own sentiments, it passes comprehension how any man could understand me as contending for an extension of the powers of the government, or for consolidation in that 25 odious sense, in which it means an accumulation in the federal government of the powers properly belonging to the States. I repeat, Sir, that, in adopting the sentiment of the framers of the Constitution, I read their language audi- 30 bly, and word for word ; and I pointed out the distinc- tion, just as fully as I have now done, between the consolidation of the Union and that other obnoxious con- solidation which I disclaimed. And yet the honorable mpmbcr misunderstood nio. The gentleman had said A 212 Weh%ter. that he wished for no fixed revenue, — not a shilling. If by a word he could convert the Capitol into gold, he would not do it. Why all this fear of revenue ? AVhy, Sir, because, as the gentleman told us, it tends to consol- 5 idation. Now, this can mean neither more nor less than that a common revenue is a common interest, and that all common interests tend to preserve the union of the States. I confess I like that tendency ; if the gentleman dislikes it, he is right in deprecating a shilling of fixed 10 revenue. So much, Sir, for consolidation. . . . Professing to be provoked by what he chose to con- sider a charge made by me against South Carolina, the honorable member, Mr. President, has taken up a new cnisade against New England. Leaving altogether the 15 subject of the public lands, in which his success, perhaps, had been neither distinguished nor satisfactory, and let- ting go, also, of the topic of the tariff, he sallied forth in a general assault on the opinions, politics, and parties of New England, as they have been exhibited in the last 20 thirty yeai-s. This is natural. The " narrow jKjlicy " of the public lands had proved a legal settlement in South Carolina, and was not to be removed. The " ac- cursed policy " of the tariff, also, had established the fact of its birth and parentage in the same State. No 25 wonder, therefore, the gentleman wished to carry the war, as he expressed it, into the enemy's country. Pru- dently willing to quit these subjects, he was, doubtless, desirous of fastening on others, which could not be trans- ferred south of Mason and Dixon's line. The politics of 30 New England became his theme ; and it was in this part of his speech, I think, that he menaced me with such sore discomfiture. Discomfiture ! Why, Sir, when he attacks anything which I maintain, and overthrows it, when he turns the right or left of any position which I 35 take up, when he drives me from any ground I choose to Reply to Hayne, 213 occupy, he may then talk of discomfiture, but not till that distant day. What has he done? Has he main- tained his own charges ? Has he proved what he alleged ? Has he sustained himself in his attack on the govern- ment, and on the history of the North, in the matter of 6 the public lauds ? Has he disproved a fact, refuted a proposition, weakened an argument, maintained by me ? Has he come within beat of drum of any position of mine ? Oh, no ; but he has " carried the war into the enemy's country ! " Carried the war into the enemy's 10 country ! Yes, Sir, and what sort of a war has he made of it ? AVhy, Sir, he has stretched a drag-net over the whole surface of perished pamphlets, indiscreet sermons, frothy paragraphs, and fuming popular addresses ; over wliatever the pulpit in its moments of alarm, the press 15 in its heats, and parties in their extravagance, have sev- erally thrown off in times of general excitement and vio- lence. He has thus swept together a mass of such things as, but that they are now old and cold, the public health would have required him rather to leave in their state 20 of dispersion. For a good long hour or two we had the unbroken pleasure of listening to the honorable member, while he recited with his usual grace and spirit, and with evident high gusto, speeches, pamphlets, addresses, and all the et ceteras of the political press, such as warm 25 heads produce in warm times ; and such as it would be " discomfiture " indeed for any one, whose taste did not delight in that sort of reading, to be obliged to ixiruse. This is his war. This it is to carry war into the enemy's country. It is in an invasion of this sort that he flatters 30 himself ^vith the expectation of gaining laurels fit to adorn a Senator's brow ! Mr. President, I shall not, it will not, I trust, bo expected that I should, either now or at any time, sepa- rate this farrago into parts, and answer and examine its 3S 214 Webster. components. I shall barely bestow upon it all a general remark or two. In the run of forty years, Sir, under this Constitution, we have exjxirieneed sundry successive vio- lent party contests. Party arose, indeed, with the Con- 5 stitution itself, and, in some form or other, has attended it through the greater part of its history. Whether any other constitution than the old Articles of Confederation was desirable, was itself a question on which parties divided; if a new Constitution were framed, what 10 powers should be given to it was another question ; and, when it had been formed, what was, in fact, the just extent of the powers actually conferred was a tliird. Parties, as we know, existed under the first administra- tion, as distinctly marked as those which have mani- 15 fested themselves at any subsequent i)eriod. The contest immediately preceding the political change in 1801, and that, again, which existed at the commence- ment of the late war, are other instances of party ex- citement, of something more than usual strength and 20 intensity. In all these conflicts there was, no doubt, much of violence on both and all sides. It would be impossible, if one had a fancy for such employment, to adjust the relative quantum of violence between these contending parties. There was enough in each, as must 25 always be expected in popular governments. With a great deal of proper and decorous discussion there was mingled a great deal, also, of declamation, virulence, crimination, and abuse. In regard to any party, proba- bly, at one of the leading epochs in the history of parties, 30 enough may be found to make out another inflamed exhi- bition, not unlike tliat with which the honorable member has edified us. For myself, Sir, I shall not rake among the rubbish of by-gone times to see what I can find, or whether I cannot find something by which I can fix a 35 blot on the escutcheon of any State, any party, or any Reply to Hayne. 215 part of the country. General Washington's administra- tion was steadily and zealously maintained, as we all know, by New England. It was violently opposed else- where. We know in what quarter he had the most earnest, constant, and persevering support, in all his 6 great and leading measures. We know where his pri- vate and personal character was held in the highest degree of attachment and veneration ; and we know, too, where his measures were opposed, his services slighted, and his character vilified. We know, or we ic might know, if we turned to the journals, who expressed respect, gratitude, and regret when he retired from the chief magistracy, and who refused to express either respect, gratitude, or regret. I shall not open those journals. Publications more abusive or scurrilous never 15 saw the light than were sent forth against Wjushington and all his leading measures from presses south of New England. But I shall not look them up. I employ no scavengers ; no one is in attendance on me, tendering such means of retaliation ; and, if there were, with an ass's 20 load of them, with a bulk as huge as that which the gentleman himself has produced, I would not touch one of them. I see enough of the violence of our own times to be no way anxious to rescue from forgetfulness the extravagances of times past. 25 ;• Besides, what is all this to the present purpose ? It has nothing to do with the public lands, in regard to which the attack was begim ; and it has notliing to do with those sentiments and opinions whicli I have thought tend to disunion, and all of which the lionorable mem- 30 ber seems to have adopted himself, and undertaken to defend. New England has, at times, so argues the gentleman, held opinions as dangerous as those which he now holds. Suppose this were so; why sliould he therefore abuse New England ? I f ho finds himself 36 \ 216 Webster. countenanced by acts of hers, how is it tliat, while he relies on these acts, he covers, or seeks to cover, their authors with reproach ? But, Sir, if, in the course of forty years, there have been luidue enervescences of 5 party in New England, has the same thing happened nowhere else ? ... If the gentleman wishes to increase his stores of party abuse and frothy violence, if he has a determined proclivity to such pursuits, there are treasures of that sort south of the Potomac, much to 10 his taste, yet untouched. . . . The gentleman's purvey- ors have only catered for him among the productions of one side. I certainly shall not supply the deficiency by furnishing samples of the other. I leave to him, and to them, the whole concern. It is enough for me 15 to say, that if, in any part of this their grateful occu- pation, if, in all their researches, they find anything in the history of Massachusetts or New England, or in the proceedings of any legislative or other public body, disloyal to the Union, speaking slightly of its 20 value, proposing to break it up, or recommending non- intercourse with neighboring States, on account of differ- ence of political opinion, then. Sir, I give them all up to the honorable gentleman's unrestrained rebuke; expecting, however, that he will extend his buffetings in 25 like manner to all similar proceedings, wherever else found. . . . Mr. President, in carrying his warfare, such as it is, into New England, the honorable gentleman all along professes to be acting on the defensive. He chooses to 30 consider me as having assailed South Carolina, and in- sists that he comes forth only as her champion, and in her defence. Sir, I do not admit that I made any attack whatever on South Carolina. Nothing like it. The hon- orable member, in his first speech, expressed opinions, in 35 regard to revenue and some other topics, which I heard Eeply to Hayne. 217 both with pain and with surprise. I told the gentleman I was aware that such sentiments were entertained out of the government, but had not expected to find them advanced in it ; that I knew there were persons in the South who speak of our Union with indifference or doubt, 5 taking pains to magnify its evils, and to say nothing of its benefits ; that the honorable member himself, I was sure, could never be one of these ; and I regretted the expression of such opinions as he had avowed, because I thought their obvious tendency was to encourage feelings 10 of disrespect to the Union, and to impair its strength. This, Sir, is the sum and substance of all I said on the subject. And this constitutes the attack, which called on the chivalry of the gentleman, in his own opinion, to harry us. with such a foray among the party pamphlets 15 and party proceedings of Massachusetts ! If he means that I spoke with dissatisfaction or disrespect of the ebullitions of individuals in South Carolina, it is true. But if he means that I had assailed the character of the State, her honor, or patriotism, that I reflected on her 20 history or her conduct, he has not the slightest ground for any such assumption. I did not even refer, 1 think, in my observations, to any collection of individuals. I said nothing of the recent conventions. I spoke in the most guarded and eareful manner, and only expressed 25 my regret for the publication of opinions which I pre- sumed the honorable member disapproved as much as myself. In this, it seems, I was mistaken. I do not remember that the gentleman has disclaimed any senti- ment, or any opinion, of a supposed anti-union tendency, 30 which on all or any of the recent occasions has been ex- pressed. The whole drift of his speech has been rather to prove tliat, in divers times and manners, sentiments Cfjually liable to my objection have been avowed in New England. And one would sumdosc! that liis object, in 36 218 Webster. tliis reference to Massachusetts, was to find a jnecedent to justify proceedings in the South, \ven» it not lor tlie reproach and continm.lv with which he hibors, all along, to load these lii ur])()se, not very consistent, one would think, with itself, was exhibited more than once 10 in the coui-^e of Ids siiecch. He referred, for instance, to the Hartford Convention. Did he do this for author- ity, or for a to])ic of reproacli ? Ap])arently for both ; for he told us that he shouhl lind no fault with the mere fact of holding such a convention, and considerini,^ and 16 discussing such questions as he supposes were then and there discussed; but what rendered it obnoxious was its being held at the tim(\ and under the circumstances of the country then existing,'. We were in a war, he said, and the country neeiLd all our aid ; the hand of govern- 20 nient re(iuired to be strengtiiened, not weakened; and patriotism should have postponed such proceedings to another day. The thing itself, then, is a precedent; the time and manner of it only, a subject of censure. Now, Sir, I go much further on this point than the honorable 25 member. Supposing, as the gentleman seems to do, that the Hai-tford Convention assembled for any such purpose as breaking up the Union, because they thought uncon- stitutional laws had been passed, or to consult on that subject, or to calculate the value of the Union ; supposing 30 this to be their purpose, or any part of it, then, I say, the meeting itself was disloyal, and was obnoxious to censure, whether held in time of peace or time of war, or under whatever circumstances. The material question is the ohjcrf. Is dissolution the object ? If it be, ex- 35 ternal circimistances may make it a more or less aggra- Reply to Hayne. 'Jl!' \ ated case, but cannot affect the principle. I do not hold, t herefore. Sir, that the Hartford Convention was pardon- able, even to the extent of the gentleman's admission, if its objects were really such as have been imputed to it. Sir, there never was a time, under any degree of excite- 5 ment, in which the Hartford Convention, or any other ' )nvention, could have maintained itself one moment in N t»w England, if assembled for any such purpose as the • ntleman says would have been an allowable purpose. To hold conventions to decide constitutional- law ! to try 10 the binding validity of statutes, by votes in a convention I Sir, the Hartford Convention, I presume, would not desire that the honorable gentleman should be their defender or advocate, if he puts their case upon such untenable and extravagant grounds. 15 Then, Sir, the gentleman has no fault to find with these recently promulgated South Carolina opinions. And certainly he need have none; for his own senti- ments as now advanced, and advanced on reflection, as far as I have been able to comprehend them, go the 20 full length of all these opinions. I propose. Sir, to say something on these, and to consider how far they are just and constitutional. Before doing that, however, U't me observe that the eulogium pronounced by the lionorable gentleman on the character of the State of 35 South Carolina, for Revolutionary and other merits, meets my hearty concurrence. I shall not acknowledge tliat the honorable member goes before me in regard for whatever of distinguished talent, or distinguished char- acter, South Carolina has produced. I claim part of the 30 honor, I partake in the pride, of her great names. I ( laim them for countrymen, one and all. The Laurenses, the Kutledges, the Pinckneys, the Sumpters, the Marions, Americans all, whose fame is no more to be hemmed in by State lines than their talents and patriotism were 35 220 Webster. capable of being circuiubciibt'd witliiii tlip samp narrow limits. In their day and general Imi tlnv >t'iv('(l and honored the country, and the whole count rv ; and tluir renown is of the treasures of the whole tuuniiv. Iliin 6 whose honored name the gentleman himself lx\irs, — does he esteem me less cai>:d>l<' (»f gratitude for his i)atiiutism, or sym])atliy for his sulfeiings, than if his eves had first op^^iit'il upon ilic liL,dit of Massac]iii>t itli Carolina"/ JSir, does he suppose it m liis power i . . x- 10 hibit a Carolina name so bright as to produce enw in my bosom ? No, Sir : int. of iliat dtlicr spirit, which If) would dra.i; angels down. When i shall be found. Sir, in my })hu'e here in the Senate, or elsewhere, to sn* < r at ]»uhli(' merit, because it happens to sj»iin;4 up hi'voud the little limits of my own State or neighborhood ; when 1 refuse, for any such cause, or for any cause, the homage 20 due to American talent, to elevated patriotism, to sincere devotion to liberty and the country ; or, if I see an uncommon endowment of Heaven, if I see extraordinary capacity and virtue, in any son of the South, and if, moved by local prejudice, or gangrened by State jealousy, 25 I get up here to abate the tithe of a hair from his just character and just fame, may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth ! Sir, let me recur to pleasing recollections; let me indulge in refreshing remembrance of the past ; — let me 30 remind you that in early times no States cherished greater harmony, both of principle and feeling, than Massachusetts and South Carolina. Would to God that harmony might again return ! Shoulder to shoulder they went through the Revolution, hand in hand they 35 stood round the administration of Washington, and felt Reply to Hayne. 221 his own great arm lean on them for support. Unkind teeling, if it exist, alienation and distrust are the growth, unnatural to such soils, of false principles since sown. They are weeds, the seeds of which that same great arm never scattered. 5 Mr. President, I shall enter on no encomium upon Massachusetts; she needs none. There she is, behold lier, and judge for yourselves. There is her history; the world knows it by heart. The past, at least, is secure. There is Boston, and Concord, and Lexington, lo and Bunker Hill ; and there they will remain forever. The bones of her sons, falling in the great struggle for I ndei)endence, now lie mingled with the soil of every State from New England to Georgia ; and there they will lie forever. And, Sir, where American Liberty 15 raised its first voice, and where its youth was nurtured and sustained, there it still lives in the strength of its manhood and full of its original spirit. If discord and disunion shall wound it ; if party strife and blind ambi- tion shall hawk at and tear it ; if folly and madness, if 20 uneasiness under salutary and necessary restraint, shall succeed to separate it from that Union by which alone its existence is made sure ; it will stand, in the end, by the side of that cradle in which its infancy was rocked ; it will stretch forth its arm with whatever of vigor it may 25 still retain, over the friends who gather round it ; and it will fall at last, if fall it must, amidst the proudest monuments of its own glory, and on the very spot of its origin. There yet remains to be performed, Mr. President, by 30 far the most grave and important duty which I feel to be devolved on me by this occasion. It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. I might well have desired that so weighty a task should 85 222 Webster, have fallen into other and abler hands. I could have wished that it should have been executed by those whose character and experience give weight and influence to their opinions such as cannot possibly belong to mine. 5 But, Sir, I have met the occasion, not sought it ; and I shall proceed to state my own sentiments, without chal- lenging for them any particular regard, with studied plainness, and as much precision as possible. I understand the honorable gentleman from South 10 Carolina to maintain that it is a right of the State legislatures to interfere, whenever in their judgment this government transcends its constitutional limits, and to arrest the operation of its laws. I understand him to maintain this right, as a right 15 existing under the ConstUutiony not as a right to over- throw it on the ground of extreme necessity, such as would justify violent revolution. I understand him to maintain an authority, on the part of the States, thus to interfere for the purpose of 20 correcting the exercise of power by the general govern- ment, of checking it, and of compelling it to conform to their opinion of the extent of its powers. I understand him to maintain that the ultimate power of judging of the constitutional extent of its own author- 25 ity is not lodged exclusively in the general government, or any branch of it ; but that, on the contrary, the States may lawfully decide for themselves, and each State for itself, whether, in a given case, the act of the general government transcends its power. 30 I understand him to insist that, if the exigency of the case, in the opinion of any State government, require it, such State government may, by its own sovereign authority, annul an act of the general gov- ernment which it deems plainly and palpably unconsti- 35 tutional. Reply to Hayne, 223 This is the sum of what I understand from him to be the South Carolina doctrine and the doctrine which he maintains. I propose to consider it, and compare it with the Constitution. Allow me to say, as a preliminary remark, that I call this the South Carolina doctrine only 5 because the gentleman himself has so denominated it. I do not feel at liberty to say that South Carolina, as a State, has ever advanced these sentiments. I hope she has not, and never may. That a great majority of her people are opposed to the tariff laws, is doubtless true. lO That a majority, somewhat less than that just men- tioned, conscientiously believe these laws unconstitu- tional, may probably also be true. But, that any majority holds to the right of direct State interfer- ence at State discretion, — the right of nullifying acts of 15 Congress by acts of State legislation, — is more than I know, and what I shall be slow to believe. That there are individuals besides the honorable gen- tleman who do maintain these opinions, is quite certain. I recollect the recent expression of a sentiment which 20 circumstances attending its utterance and publication justify us in supposing was not unpremeditated, "The sovereignty of the State — never to be controlled, con- strued, or decided on, but by her own feelings of honor- able justice." 26 [Mr. Hayne here rose and said that, for the purpose of being clearly understood, he would state that his proposition was in the words of tlie Virginia resolution as follows: — ** That this assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting dO from the compact to which the States are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting that com- pact, as no farther valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact ; and that, in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by 35 the said compact, the States who are parties thereto haye the 224 Webster. right, ami arr in iliiiy IkmukI, to ini.TjiM-,.. f. .r an-rst iiiLT tlu' [tvo'j;- r<;8s of llu- fvil, Hiul lur inaiiiLaiuing within their respective limits the authorities, rights, and libert.ie8 appertaining to them."] Mr. Webster resumed : — 5 I am quite aware, Mr. President, of the existence of the resolution \vlii( li the gentleman read, and has now repeated, and that he rcli* s on it, as his aiitliority. I know the source, too, from which it is uiidcistood to liave proceeded. I need not say tliat I have mucli respect for 10 the constitutional opinions of Mr. Madison ; they would weigh greatly with me always. But, before the authority of his opinion be vouched for the gentleman's proposi- tion, it will be proper to consider wliat is the fair inter- pretation of that resolution to which Mr. Madison is 15 understood to have given his sanction. As the gentle- man construes it, it is an authority for him. Possibly he may not have adopted the right construction. That reso- lution declares, that, in the case of the dangerous exercise of potvers not granted by the general gorrrvrnrvf, thn 20 States may interpose to arrest the progress of the criL But how interpose, and what does this declaration pur- port ? Does it mean no more than that there may be extreme cases, in which the people, in any mode of assembling, may resist usurpation and relieve tliem- 25 selves from a tyrannical government ? No one will deny this. Such resistance is not only acknowledged to be just in America, but in England also. Blackstone admits as much, in the theory, and practice, too, of the English constitution. We, Sir, who oppose the Carolina 30 doctrine, do not deny that the people may, if they choose, throw off any government, when it becomes oppressive and intolerable, and erect a better in its stead. We all know that civil institutions are estab- lished for the public benefit, and that when they cease Reply to Hayne, 226 to answer the ends of their existence they may be changed. But I do not understand the doctrine now contended for to be that which, for the sake of dis- tinction, we may call the right of revolution, I under- stand the gentleman to maintain that, without revolution, 6 without civil commotion, without rebellion, a remedy for 8upi)osed abuse and transgression of the powers of the general government lies in a direct appeal to the inter- ference of the State governments. [Mr. Hayne here rose and said : He did not contend for the 10 men' right of revohition, but for the right of constitutional reslst- ;inco. What he maintained was, that, in case of a plain, pal- pable violation of the Constitution by the general government, a State may interpose; and that this interposition is constitu- tional.] 15 Mr. Webster resumed : — So, Sir, I understood the gentleman, and am happy to find that I did not misunderstand him. What he con- tends for is, that it is constitutional to interrupt the administration of the Constitution itself, in the hands 20 of those who are chosen and sworn to administer it, by tlie direct interference, in form of law, of the States, in virtue of their sovereign capacity. The inherent right in the people to reform their government I do not deny; and they have anotlier right, and tliat is, to resist uncon- 25 stitutional laws, without overturning the government, it is no doctrine of mine that unconstitutional laws bind the people. The great question is, whose preroga- tive is it to decide on the constitutionality or' unconsti- tutionality of the laws ? On that the main debate 30 liinges. The proposition tliat, in case of a supposed violation of the Constitution by Congress, the 'States liave a constitutional right to interfere and annul the law of Congress, is the proposition of tlie gentleman. 226 Webster. I do not admit it. If the gentleman had intended no more than to assert the right of revolution for justifiable cause, he would have said only what all agree to. But I cannot conceive that there can be a middle course, be- 5 tween submission to the laws, when regularly pro- nounced constitutional, on the one hand, and open resistance, which is revolution or rebellion, on tlie other. I say, the riglit of a State to annul a law of Congress cannot be maintained but on the ground of the inalien- 10 able right of man to resist oppression ; that is to say, upon the gfound of revolution. I admit that there is an ultimate violent remedy^ al)ove the Constitution and in defiance of the Constitution, which may be\resorted to when a revolution is to be justified. But I do not admit 15 that, under the Constitution and in conformity with it, there is any mode in which a State government, as a member of the Union, can interfere and stop tlie prog- ress of the general government, by force of her own laws, under any circumstances whatever. 20 This leads us to inquire into the origin of this gov- ernment and the source of its power. Whose agent is it ? Is it the creature of the State legislatures, or the creature of the people ? If the government of the United States be the agent of the State governments, 25 then they may control it, provided they can agree in the manner of controlling it; if it be the agent of the people, then the people alone can control it, restrain it, modify, or reform it. It is observable enough, that the doctrine Jor which the honorable gentleman contends 30 leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this general government is the creature of the States, but that it is the creature of each of the States severally, so that each may assert the power for itself of determining whether it acts within the limits of its authority. It 35 is the servant of four-and-tweuty masters, of different Reply to JSayne. 227 wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. This absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this government and its true character. It is, Sir, the people's Consti- tution, the people's government, made for the people, s made by the people, and answerable to the people. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the supreme law. We must either ailmit the proposition, or dispute their authority. Tlie States are, unquestionably, sovereign, so far as lO tlieir sovereignty is not affected by this supreme law. IJut the State legislatures, as political bodies, how- ever sovereign, are yet not sovereign over the peo- ple. So far as the people have given power to the general government, so far the grant is unquestiona- 16 bly good, and the government holds of the people, and not of the State governments. We are all agents of the same supreme power, the people. The general govern- ment and the State governments derive their authority t rom the same source. Neither can, in relation to the 20 other, be called primary, though one is definite and restricted, and the other general and residuary. The national government possesses those powers which it can be shown the people liave conferred on it, and no more. All the rest belongs to the State governments, or 25 to the people themselves. So far as the people have restrained State sovereignty, by the expression of their will, in the Constitution of the United States, so far, it must be admitted, State sovereignty is effectually con- trolled. I do not contend that it is, or ought to be, 30 controlled farther. The sentiment to which I have referred proi)Ounds that State sovereignty is only to be controlled by its own " feeling of justice ; " that is to say, it is not to be controlled at all ; for one wlio is to fol- hnv his o\v!i fccliiii^s is uiul(»r no h\i^al control. Now, 35 228 Webster. however men may think this ought to be, the fact is, that the people of the United States have chosen to impose control on State sovereignties. There are those, doubt- less, who wish they had been left without restraint ; but 6 the Constitution has ordered the matter differently. To make war, for instance, is an exercise of sovereignty ; but the Constitution declares that no State shall make war. To coin money is another exercise of sovereign power ; but no State is at liberty to coin money. Again, 10 the Constitution says that no sovereign State shall be so sovereign as to make a treaty. These prohibitions, it must be confessed, are a control on the State sovereignty of South Carolina, as well as of the other States, which does not arise " from her own feelings of honorable jus- 15 tice." Such an opinion, therefore, is in defiance of the plainest provisions of the Constitution. There are other proceedings of public bodies which have already been alluded to, and to which I refer again, for the purpose of ascertaining more fully what is the 20 length and breadth of that doctrine denominated the Carolina doctrine, which the honorable member has now stood up on this floor to maintain. In one of them I find it resolved, that " the tariff of 1828, and every other tariff designed to promote one branch of industry at the 25 expense of others, is contrary to the meaning and inten- tion of the federal compact ; and such a dangerous, palpable, and deliberate usurpation of power, by a. determined majority, wielding the general government beyond the limits of its delegated powers, as calls upon 30 States which compose the suffering minority, in their sovereign capacity, to exercise the powers which, as sovereigns, necessarily devolve upon them when their compact is violated." Observe, Sir, that this resolution holds the tariff of 35 1828, and every other tariff designed to promote one Reply to Hayne, 229 branch of industry at the expense of another, to be such a dangerous, palpable, and deliberate usurpation of power, as calls upon the States, in their sovereign capacity, to interfere by their own authority. This denunciation, Mr. President, you will please to observe, 5 includes our old tariff of 1816, as well as all others; because that was established to promote the interest of the manufacturers of cotton, to the manifest and admitted injury of the Calcutta cotton trade. Observe, again, that all the qualifications are here rehearsed and 10 charged upon the tariff, which are necessary to bring the case within the gentleman's proposition. The tariif is a usurpation : it is a dangerous usurpation ; it is a palpa- ble usurpation ; it is a deliberate usurpation. It is such a usurpation, therefore, as calls upon the States to exer- 15 else their right of interference. Here is a case, then, within the gentleman's principles, and all his qualifica- tions of his principles. It is a case for action. The Constitution is plainly, dangerously, palpably, and delib- erately violated; and the States must interpose their 20 own authority to arrest the law. Let us suppose the State of South Carolina to express this same opinion by the voice of her legislature. That would be very impos- ing ; but what then ? Is the voice of one State conclu- sive ? It so happens that, at the very moment when 26 South Carolina resolves that the tariff laws are unconsti- tutional, Pennsylvania and Kentucky resolve exactly the IV verse. They hold those laws to be both highly proper and strictly constitutional. And now, Sir, how does the honorable member propose to deal with this case ? How 30 does he relieve us from this difficulty, upon any principle of his ? His construction gets us into it ; how does he 1 (lopose to get us out ? In Carolina, the tariff is a palpable, deliberate usurpar lion ; Carolina, therefore, may nullify it, and refuse to 36 230 Webster, pay the duties. In Pennsylvania, it is both clearly con- stitutional and highly expedient; and there the duties are to be paid. And yet we live under a government of uniform laws, and under a Constitution, too, wliich con- 5 tains an express provision, as it happens, that all duties shall be equal in all the States. Does not this approach absurdity ? If there be no power to settle such questions, inde- pendent of either of the States, is not the whole Union 10 a rope of sand ? Are we not thrown back again, pre- cisely, upon the old Confederation ? It is too plain to be argued. Four and twenty inter- preters of constitutional law, each with a power to decide for itself, and none with authority to bind any- 15 body else, and this constitutional law the only bond of their union ! What is such a state of things but a mere connection during pleasure, or, to use the phrase- ology of the times, during feeling ? And that feeling, too, not the feeling of the people, who established the 20 Constitution, but the feeling of the State govern- ments. In another of the South Carolina addresses, having premised that the crisis requires "all the concentrated energy of passion," an attitude of open resistance to the 25 laws of the Union is advised. Open resistance to the laws, then, is the constitutional remedy, the conservative power of the State, which the South Carolina doctrines teach f oi;. the redress of political evils, real or imaginary. And its authors further say that, appealing with con- 30 fidence to the Constitution itself, to justify their opinions, they cannot consent to try their accuracy by the courts of justice. In one sense, indeed, Sir, this is assuming an attitude of open resistance in favor of liberty. But what sort of liberty ? The liberty of establishing their own 35 opinions, in defiance of the opinions of all others ; the Reply to Hayne, 231 liberty of jiul^'iii^' and ot deciding exclusively them- selves, in a matter in which othere have as much right to judge and decide as they ; the liberty of placing their own opinions above the judgment of all others, aljove the laws, and above the Constitution. This is their liberty, 5 and this is the fair result of the proposition contended for by the honorable gentleman. Or it may be more properly said, it is identical with it, rather than a result from it. . . . And now, Sir, what I have first to say on this subject 10 is, that at no time, and under no circumstances, has New England, or any State in New England, or any respect- able body of persons in New England, or any public man of standing in New England, put forth such a doctrine as this Carolina doctrine. 15 The gentleman has found no case, he can find none, to supjwrt his own opinions by New England authority. New England has studied the Constitution in other schools, and under other teachers. She looks upon it with other regards, and deems more highly and rever- 20 ently both of its just authority and its utility and excel- lence. The history of her legislative proceedings may be traced. The ephemeral effusions of temix)rary bodies, called together by^e excitement of the occasion, may be hunted up ; they have been hunted up. The opinions 25 and votes of her public men, in and out of Congress, may be explored. It will all be in vain. The Carolina doc- trine can derive from her neither countenance nor support. She rejects it now; she always did reject it; and, till she loses her senses, she always will reject it. The hon- 30 orable member has referred to expressions on the subject of the embargo law, made in this place by an honorable and venerable gentleman [Mr. Hillhouse], now favoring us with his presence. He quotes that distinguished Sen- ator as saying that, in his judgment, the embargo law 35 232 Webster. was unconstitutional, and that, therefore, in his opinion, the people were not bound to obey it. That, Sir, is per- fectly constitutional language. An unconstitutional law is not binding ; but then it does not rest with a resolu- 5 tion or a law of a State legislature to decide whether an act of Congress be, or be not, constitutional. An uncon- stitutional act of Congress would not bind the people of this District, although they have no legislature to inter- fere in their behalf ; and, on the other hand, a constitu- 10 tional law of Congress does bind the citizens of every State, although all their legislatures should undertake to annul it by act or resolution. The venerable Connecticut Senator is a constitutional lawyer of sound principles and enlarged knowledge ; a statesman practised and ex- 15 perienced, bred in the company of Washington, and hold- ing just views upon the nature of our governments. He believed the embargo unconstitutional, and so did others ; but what then ? Who did he suppose was to decide that question ? The State legislatures ? Certainly not. No 20 such sentiment ever escaped his lips. Let us follow up, Sir, this New England opposition to the embargo laws ; let us trace it till we discern the principle which controlled and governed New England throughout the whole course of that opposition. We 25 shall then see what similarity there is between the New England school of constitutional opinions, and this mod- ern Carolina school. . . . No doubt. Sir, a great ma- jority of the people of New England conscientiously believed the embargo law of 1807 imconstitutional ; as 30 conscientiously, certainly, as the people of South Carolina hold that opinion of the tariff. They reasoned thus : Congress has power to regulate commerce; but here is a law, they said, stopping all commerce, and stopping it indefinitely. The law is perpetual; that is, it is not 35 limited in point of time, and must, of course, continue Reply to Hayne, 233 until it shall be repealed by some other law. It is as I»erpetual, therefore, as the law against treason or mur- der. Now, is this regulating commerce, or destroying it ? Is it guiding, controlling, giving the' rule to commerce, I s a subsisting thing ; or is it putting an end to it alto- 5 u,^'ther ? Nothing is more certain than that a majority in New England deemed this law a violation of the Con- stitution. The very case required by the gentleman to justify State interference had then arisen. Massachu- • tts believed this law to be " a deliberate, palpable, and lO dangerous exercise of a power not gmnted by the Con- stitution." Deliberate it was, for it was long continued ; palpable, she thought it, as no words in the Constitution gave the power, and only a construction, in her opinion most violent, raised it ; dangerous it was, since it threat- 15 tiled utter loiin to her most important interests. Here, then, was a Carolina case. How did Massachusetts deal with it ? It was, as she thought, a plain, manifest, pal- j)able violation of the Constitution, and it brought ruin to her doors. Thousands of families, and hundreds of 20 housands of individuals, were beggared by it. While :>he saw and felt all this, she saw and felt, also, that, as ;i measure of national policy, it was perfectly futile; that he country was no way benefited by that which caused o much individual distress; that it was efficient only 25 lor the production of evil, and all that evil inflicted on •mrselves. In such a case, under such circumstances, how did Massachusetts demean herself ? Sir, she remon- '— • strated, she memorialized, she addressed herself to the general government, not exactly " with the concentrated 30 iiergy of passion,'' but with her own strong sense, and tlie energy of sober conviction. But she did not inter- pose the arm of her own power to arrest the law, and break the embargo. Far from it. Her principles bound her to two things ; and she followed her principles, lead 39 234 Webster. where they might. First, to submit to every consti- tutional law of Congress; and, secondly, if the constitu- tional validity of the law be doubted, to refer that question to the decision of the proper tribunals. The 5 first principle is vain and ineffectual without the second. A majority of us in New England believed the embargo law unconstitutional; but the great question was, and always will be, in such cases, Wlio is to decide this? Who is to judge between the people and the government ? 10 And, Sir, it is quite plain that the Constitution of the United States confers on the government itself, to be exercised by its appropriate department, and under its own responsibility to the people, this power of deciding ultimately and conclusively upon the just extent of its 15 own authority. If this had not been done, we should not have advanced a single step beyond the old Confed- eration. Being fully of opinion that the embargo law was un- constitutional, the people of New England were yet 20 equally clear in the opinion — it was a matter they did [not] doubt upon — that the question, after all, must be decided by the judicial tribunals of the United States. Before those tribunals, therefore, they brought the ques- tion. Under the provisions of the law they had given 25 bonds to millions in amount, and which were alleged to be forfeited. They suffered the bonds to be sued, and thus raised the question. In the old-fashioned way of settling disputes they went to law. The case came to hearing and solemn argument ; and he who espoused 30 their cause, and stood up for them against the validity of the embargo act, was none other than that great man of whom the gentleman has made honorable mention, Samuel Dexter. He was then, Sir, in the fullness of his knowledge and the maturity of his strength. He had 35 retired from long and distinguished public service here, Reply to Rayne. 235 ' the renewed pursuit of professional duties ; carrying with him all that enlargement and expansion, all the new strength and force, which an acquaintance with the more general subjects discussed in the national councils is capable of adding to professional attainment in a mind 5 of true greatness and comprehension. He was a lawyer, and he was also a statesman. . . . He put into his effort his whole heart, as well as all the powers of his understanding; for he had avowed in the most public manner his entire concurrence with his neighbors on lo the point in dispute. He argued the cause ; it was lost, and New England submitted. The established tribunals pronounced the law constitutional, and New England acquiesced. Now, Sir, is not this the exact opposite of the doctrine of the gentleman from South Carolina ? 15 According to him, instead of referring to the judicial tribunals, we should have broken up the embargo by laws of our own ; we should have repealed it, quoad - New England; for we had a strong, palpable, and op- pressive case. Sir, we believed the embargo unconstitu- 20 tional; but still that was matter of opinion, and who was to decide it ? We thought it a clear case ; but, nevertheless, we did not take the law into our own hands, because we did not wish to bring about a revolu- tion, nor to break up the Union ; for I maintain that, 25 between submission to the decision of the constituted tribunals and revolution, or disunion, there is no middle ground ; there is no ambiguous condition, half allegiance and half rebellion. And, Sir, how futile, how very futile, it is to admit the right of State interference, and then 30 attempt to save it from the character of unlawful resist- ance, by adding terms of qualification to the causes and occasions, leaving all these qualifications, like the case itself, in the discretion of the State governments. It must be a clear case, it is said, a deliberate case, a pal- 35 236 Webster. pable case, a dangerous case. But then the State is still left at liberty to decide for herself what is clear, what is deliberate, what is palpable, what is dangerous. Do ^jwijectives and epithets avail anything ? 6 Sir, the human mind is so constituted that the merits of both sides of a controversy appear very clear and very palpable to those who respectively espouse them; and both sides usually grow clearer as the controversy ad- vances. South Carolina sees unconstitutionality in the 10 tariff ; she sees oppression there also, and she sees dan- ger. Pennsylvania, with a vision not less sharp, looks at the same tariff, and sees no such thing in it ; she sees it all constitutional, all useful, all safe. The faith of South Carolina is strengthened by opposition, and she 15 now not only sees, but resolves, that the tariff is palpably unconstitutional, oppressive, and dangerous ; but Penn- sylvania, not to be behind her neighbors, and equally willing to strengthen her own faith by a confident asseveration, resolves also, and gives to every warm 20 affirmative of South Carolina, a plain, downright, Penn- sylvania negative. South Carolina, to show the strength and unity of her opinion, brings her assembly to a unan^^^ imity within seven voices ; Pennsylvania, not to be out- done in this respect more than in others, reduces her 25 dissentient fraction to a single vote. Now, Sir, again I ask the gentleman, AVhat is to be done ? Are these States both right ? Is he bound to consider them both right ? If not, which is in the wrong ? or, rather, which has the best right to decide ? And if he, and if I, are not to 30 know what the Constitution means, and what it is, till those two State legislatures, and the twenty-two others, shall agree in its construction, what have we sworn to when we have sworn to maintain it? I was forcibly struck, Sir, with one reflection, as the gentleman went 35 on in his speech. He quoted Mr. Madison's resolutions Reply to Hayne. 237 to prove that a State may interfere, in a case of deliber- ate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of a power not granted. The honorable member supposes the tariff law to be such an exercise of power ; and that, consequently, a case has arisen in which the State may, if it see fit, 5 interfere by its own law. Now it so happens, neverthe- less, that Mr. Madison deems this same tariff law quite constitutional. Instead of a clear and palpable violation, it is, in his judgment, no violation at all. So that, while t liey use his authority for a hypothetical case, they re- lo ject it in the very case before them. All this, Sir, shows the inherent futility, I had almost used a stronger word, of conceding this power of interference to the States, and then attempting to secure it from abuse by imposing qualifications of which the States themselves are to judge. 16 ( )ne of two things is tnie ; either the laws of the Union are l>eyond the discretion and beyond the control of the States, or else we have no Constitution of general gov- ernment, and are thrust back again to the days of the Confederation. 20 Let me here say. Sir, that if the gentleman's doctrine liad been received and acted upon in New England, in t lie times of the embargo and non-intercourse, we should probjibly not now have been here. The government would very likely have gone to pieces, and crumbled into 26 (lust. No stronger case can ever arise than existed under those laws ; no States can ever entertain a clearer conviction than the New England States then entertained ; and if they had been under the influence of that heresy of opinion, as I must call it, which the honorable mem- 30 ber espouses, this Union would, in all probability, have been scattered to the four winds. I ask the gentleman, therefore, to apply his principles to that case ; I ask him to come forth and declare whether, in his opinion, the New England States would have been justified in inter- 36 238 Webster, fering to break up the embargo system under the con- scientious opinions which they held upon it ? Had they a right to annul that law ? Does he admit or deny ? If that which is thought palpably unconstitutional in 5 South Carolina justifies that State in arresting the prog- ress of the law, tell me whether that which was thought palpably unconstitutional also in Massachusetts would have justified her in doing the same thing. Sir, I deny the whole doctrine. It has not a foot of ground in the 10 Constitution to stand on. No public man of reputation ever advanced it in Massachusetts, in tlie warmest times, or could maintain himself upon it there at any time. I wish now, Sir, to make a remark upon the Virginia resolutions of 1798. I cannot undertake to say how 16 these resolutions were understood by those who passed them. Their language is not a little indefinite. In the case of the exercise by Congress of a dangerous power not granted to them, the resolutions assert the right, on the part of the State, to interfere and arrest the progress 20 of the evil. This is susceptible of more than one inter- pretation. It may mean no more than that the States may interfere by complaint and remonstrance ; or by pro- posing to the people an alteration of the federal Consti- tution. This would all be quite unobjectionable. Or it 25 may be that no more is meant than to assert the general right of revolution, as against all governments, in cases of intolerable oppression. This no one doubts, and this, in my opinion, is all that he who framed the resolutions could have meant by it ; for I shall not readily believe 30 that he was ever of opinion that a State, under the Con- stitution and in conformity with it, could, upon the ground of her own opinion of its unconstitutionality, however clear and palpable she might think the case, annul a law of Congress so far as it should operate on 35 herself, by her o^ti legislative power. Reply to Hayne, 289 I must now beg to ask, Sir, whence is this supposed right of the States derived? Where do they find the power to interfere with the laws of the Union? Sir, the opinion which the honorable gentleman maintains is a notion founded in a total misapprehension, in my 5 judgment, of the origin of this government, and of the foundation on which it stands. I hold it to be a popular government, erected by the people ; those who adminis- ter it, responsible to the people; and itself capable of being amended and modified, just as the people may lo choose it should l)e. It is as popular, just as truly emanating from the people, as the State governments. It is created for one purpose ; the State governments for another. It has its own powers ; they have theirs. There is no more authority with them to arrest the 15 operation of a law of Congress, than with Congress to arrest the operation of their laws. We are here to administer a Constitution emanating immediately from the people, and trusted by them to our administration. It is not the creature of the State governments. It is of 20 no moment to the argument, that certain acts of the State legislatures are necessary to fill our seats in this body. That is not one of their original State powers, a part of the sovereignty of the State. It is a duty which the people, by the Constitution itself, have imposed on 25 the State legislatures, and which they might have left to be performed elsewhere, if they had seen fit. So they have left the choice of President with electors ; but all this does not affect the proposition that this whole gov- ernment, President, Senate, and House of Representa- 30 tives, is a i)opular government. It leaves it still all its popular character. The governor of a State (in some of the States) is chosen, not directly by the i)eople, but by those who are chosen by the people for the purpose of performing, among other duties, that of electing a gov- 35 240 Webster, emor. Is the government of the State, on that account, not a popular government? This government, Sir, is the independent offspring of the popular will. It is not the creature of State legislatures ; nay more, if the 5 whole truth must be told, the people brought it into existence, established it, and have hitherto supported it, for the very purpose, amongst others, of imposing cer- tain salutary restraints on State sovereignties. The States cannot now make war; they cannot contract 10 alliances ; they cannot make, each for itself, separate regulations of commerce ; they cannot lay imposts ; they cannot coin money. If this Constitution, Sir, be the creature of State legislatures, it must be admitted that it has obtained a strange control over the volitions of 15 its creators. The people, then, Sir, erected this government. They gave it a Constitution, and in that Constitution they have enumerated the powers which they bestow on it. They have made it a limited government. They liave defined 20 its authority. They have restrained it to the exercise of such powei-s as are granted ; and all othei-s, they declare, are reserved to the States or the people. But, Sir, they have not stopped here. If they had, they would have accomplished but half their work. No definition can be 25 so clear as to avoid possibility of doubt ; no limitation so precise as to exclude all uncertainty. Who, then, shall construe this grant of the people ? Who shall interpret their will, where it may be supposed they have left it doubtful ? With whom do they repose this ultimate 30 right of deciding on the powers of the government ? Sir, they have settled aU this in the fuUest manner. They have left it with the government itself in its appropriate branches. Sir, the very chief end, the main design for which the whole Constitution was framed and 35 adopted, was to establish a government that should not Reply to Hayne. 241 be obliged to act through State agency, or depend on State opinion and State discretion. The people had had quite enough of that kind of government under the Con- federation. Under that system the legal action, the application of law to individuals, belonged exclusively 5 to the States. Congress could only recommend; their acts were not of binding force, till the States had adopted and sanctioned them. Are we in that condition still? Are we yet at the mercy of State discretion and State construction ? Sir, if we are, then vain will be our at- lo tempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. But, Sir, the people have wisely provided in the Con- stitution itself a proper, suitable mode and tribunal for settling questions of constitutional law. There are in 15 the Constitution grants of powers to Congress, and restrictions on these powers. There are, also, prohibi- tions on the States. Some authority must, therefore, necessarily exist, having the ultimate jurisdiction to fix and ascertain the interpretation of these grants, restric- 20 tions, and prohibitions. The Constitution has itself pointed out, ordained, and established that authority. How has it accomplished this great and essential end ? By declaring, Sir, that " tJie Constitution and the laws of the United States made in pursuance thereof shall be the 25 mtpreme law of the landj anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary fiotwitlistanding.^* — This, Sir, was the firet great step. By this the su- premacy of the Constitution and laws of the United States is declared. The people so will it. No State law 30 is to be valid which comes in conflict with the Constitu- tion or any law of the United States passed in pursuance of it. But who shall decide this question of interfer- ence? To whom lies the last appeal? This, Sir, the Constitution itself decides also, by declaring, " that the 35 242 Webster. judicial power shall extend to all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States.''^ These two provisions cover the whole ground. They are, in truth, the keystone pi the arch ! With these, it is a govem- 6 ment ; without them it is a confederation. In pursuance of these clear and express provisions, Congress estab- lished at its very first session, in the judicial act, a mode for carrying them into full effect, and for bringing all questions of constitutional power to the final decision of 10 the Supreme Court It then. Sir, became a government. It then had the means of self-protection; and, but for this, it would, in all probability, have been now among things which are past. Having constituted the govern- ment and declared its powers, the people have further 15 said that, since somebody must decide on the extent of these powers, the government shall itself decide ; subject always, like other popular governments, to its responsi- bility to the people. And now. Sir, I repeat, how is it that a State legislature acquires any power to interfere ? 20 Who, or what, gives them the right to say to the peo- ple, " We, who are your agents and servants for one pur- pose, will undertake to decide that your other agents and servants, appointed by you for another purpose, have transcended the authority you gave them ! " The reply 25 would be, I think, not impertinent, — " Who made you a judge over another's servants ? To their own masters they stand or fall." Sir, I deny this power of State legislatures altogether. It cannot stand the test of examination. Gentlemen 30 may say that, in an extreme case, a State government might protect the people from intolerable oppression. Sir, in such a case, the people might protect themselves without the aid of the State governments. Such a case Avarrants revolution. It must make, when it comes, a 35 law for itself. A nullifying act of a State legislature Reply to Hayne, 243 cannot alter the case, nor make resistance any more law- ful. In maintaining these sentiments, Sir, I am but as- serting the rights of the people. I state what they have declared, and insist on their right to declare it. They have chosen to repose this power in the general govern- 6 ment, and I think it my duty to support it, like other iion&titutional powers. For myself, Sir, I do not admit the jurisdiction of South Carolina, or any other State, to prescribe my con- stitutional duty ; or to settle, between me and the people, lo the validity of laws of Congress, for which I have voted. I decline her umpirage. I have not sworn to support the Constitution according to her construction of its clauses. I have not stipulated, by my oath of office or otherwise, to come under any responsibility, except to 15 the people and those whom they have appointed to pass upon the question, whether laws supported by my votes conform to the Constitution of the country. And, Sir, if we look to the general nature of the case, could any- thing have been more preposterous than to make a gov- 20 ernment for the whole Union, and yet leave its }X)wers subject, not to one interpretation, but to thirteen, or twenty-four interpretations ? Instead of one tribunal, established by all, responsible to all, with power to decide for all, shall constitutional questions be left to four and 25 twenty popular bodies, each at liberty to decide for it- self, and none bound to respect the decisions of others ; and each at liberty, too, to give a new construction on every new election of its own members ? Would any- thing, with such a principle in it, or rather with such a 30 destitution of all principle, be fit to be called a govern- ment ? No, Sir ; it should not be denominated a Consti- tution. It should be called, rather, a collection of topics for everlasting controversy ; heads of debate for a dispu- tatious jMjople. It would not be a government. It would 36 244 Webster, not be adequate to any practical good, nor fit for any- country to live under. To avoid all possibility of being misunderstood, allow me to repeat again, in the fullest manner, that I claim no powers for the government by 5 forced or unfair construction. I admit that it is a gov- ernment of strictly limited powers, of enumerated, spe- cified, and particularized powers ; and that whatsoever is not granted is withheld. But, notwithstanding all this, and however the grant of powers may be expressed, its 10 limit and extent may yet, in some cases, admit of doubt ; and the general government would be good for nothing, it would be incapable of long existing, if some mode had not been provided in which those doubts, as they should arise, might be peaceably, but authoritatively solved. 16 And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gen- tleman's doctrine a little into its practical application. Let us look at his probable modus operandi. If a thing can be done, an ingenious man can tell how it is to be done. And I wish to be informed how this State inter- 20 ference is to be put in practice without violence, blood- shed, and rebellion. We will take the existing case of the tariff law. South Carolina is said to have made up her opinion upon it. If we do not repeal it (as we prob- ably shall not), she will then apply to the case the rem- 25 edy of her doctrine. She will, we must suppose, pass a law of her legislature declaring the several acts of Con- gress, usually called the tariff laws, null and void so far as they respect South Carolina or the citizens thereof. So far, all is a paper transaction, and easy enough. But 30 the collector at Charleston is collecting the duties im- posed by these tariff laws. He, therefore, must be stopped. The collector will seize the goods if the tariff duties are not paid. The State authorities will under- take their rescue ; the marshal with his posse will come 35 to the collector's aid ; and here the contesF begins. The Reply to Hayne. 246 militia of the State will be called out to sustain the nul- lifying act. They will march, Sir, under a very gallant leader ; for I believe the honorable member himself com- mands the militia of that part of the State. He will raise the nullifying act on his standard, and spread it 5 out as his banner. It will have a preamble, setting forth that the tariff laws are palpable, deliberate, and dangerous violations of the Constitution. He will pro- ceed, with this banner flying, to the custom-house in Charleston. 10 " All the while, Sonorous metal blowing martial sounds.^' Arrived at the custom-house, he will tell the collector that he must collect no more duties under any of the tariff laws. This he will be somewhat puzzled to say, by 15 the way, with a grave countenance, considering what hand South Carolina herself had in that of 181G. But, Sir, the collector would probably not desist at his bid- ding. He would show him the law of Congress, the treasury insti-uction, and his own oath of office. He 20 would say he should perform his duty, come what come might. Here would ensue a pause, for they say that a certain stillness precedes the tempest. The trumpeter would hold his breath a while, and before all this military 25 array should fall on the custom-house, collector, clerks, and all, it is very probable some of those composing it would request of their gallant commander-in-chief to be informed a little upon the point of law ; for they have, doubtless, a just respect for his opinions as a lawyer, as 30 well as for his bravery as a soldier. They know he has read Blackstone and the Constitution, as well as Turenne and Vauban. They would ask him, therefore, some- thing concerning their rights in this matter. They would inquire whether it was not somewhat dangerous 35 246 Webster, to resist a law of the United States, What would be the nature of their offence, they would wish to learn, if they by military force and array resisted the execution in Carolina of a law of the United States, and it should 6 turn out, after all, that the law was constitutional. He would answer, of course. Treason. No lawyer could give any other answer. John Fries, he would tell them, had learned that some years ago. " How then," they would ask, " do you propose to defend us ? We are 10 not afraid of bullets, but treason has a way of taking people off that we do not much relish. How do you propose to defend us ? " " Look at my floating banner," he would reply ; " see there the Nullifying Law ! " " Is it your opinion, gallant commander," they would then 15 say, " that, if we should be indicted for treason, that same floating banner of yours would make a good plea in bar ? " " South Carolina is a sovereign State," he would reply. "That is true; but would the judge admit our plea?" "These tariff laws," he would repeat, "are 20 unconstitutional, palpably, deliberately, dangerously." " That all may be so ; but if the tribunal should not happen to be of that opinion, shall we swing for it? We are ready to die for our country, but it is rather an awkward business, this dying without touching the 25 ground ! After all, that is a sort of hemp tax, worse than any part of the tariff." Mr. President, the honorable gentleman Avould be in a dilemma like that of another great general. He would have a knot before him which he could not untie. He 30 must cut it with his sword. He must say to his fol- lowers, " Defend yourselves with your bayonets ! " And this is war, — civil war. Direct collision, therefore, between force and force is the unavoidable result of that remedy for the revision of 35 unconstitutional laws which the gentleman contends for. Reply to Hayne. 247 It must happen in the very first case to which it is applied. Is not this the plain result? To resist by force the execution of a law, generally is treason. Can the courts of the United States take notice of the indul- gence of a State to commit treason ? The common say- 5 ing, that a State cannot commit treason herself, is nothing to the purpose. Can she authorize others to do it ? If John Fries had produced an act of Pennsyl- vania annulling the law of Congress, would it have helped his case ? Talk about it as we will, these doc- lo trines go the length of revolution. They are incompati- ble with any peaceable administration of the government. They lead directly to disunion and civil commotion ; and therefore it is, that at their commencement, when they are first found to be maintained by respectable men, and 15 in a tangible form, I enter my public protest against them all. The honorable gentleman argues that, if this govern- ment be the sole judge of the extent of its own powers, whether that right of judging be in Congress or the 20 Supreme Court, it equally subverts State sovereignty. This the gentleman sees, or thinks he sees, although he cannot perceive how the right of judging in this matter, if left to the exercise of State legislatures, has any ten- dency to subvert the government of the Union. The 25 gentleman*s opinion may be that the right ought not to have been lodged with the general government ; he may like better such a Constitution as we should have under the right of State interference ; but I ask him to meet me on the plain matter of fact. I ask him to meet me 30 on the Constitution itself. I ask him if the power is not found there — clearly and visibly found there? But, Sir, what is this danger, and what the grounds of it? Let it be remembered that the Constitution of the United States is not unaltdrable. It is to continue 35 248 Webster, in its present form no longer than the people who estab- lished it shall choose to continue it. If they shall become convinced that they have made an injudicious or inexpe- dient partition and distribution of power between the n State governments and the general government, they can alter that distribution at will. If anything be found in the national Constitution, either by original provision or subsequent interpretation, which ought not to be in it, the people know how to get 10 rid of it. If any construction unacceptable to them be established, so as to become practically a part of the Constitution, they will amend it at their own sovereign pleasure. But while the people choose to maintain it as it is, while they are satisfied with it, and refuse to change 15 it, who has given, or who can give, to the State legisla- tures a right to alter it either by interference, construc- tion, or otherwise ? Gentlemen do not seem to recollect that the people have any power to do anything for them- selves. They imagine there is no safety for them, any 20 longer than they are under the close guardianship of the State legislatures. Sir, the people have not trusted their safety, in regard to the general Constitution, to these hands. They have required other security, and taken other bonds. They have chosen to trust them- 25 selves, first, to the plain words of the instrument, and to such construction as the government itself, in doubt- ful cases, should put on its own powers, under its oaths of office, and subject to its responsibility to them ; just as the people of a State trust their own State govern- 30 ments with a similar power. Secondly, they have re- posed their trust in the efficacy of frequent elections, and in their own power to remove their own servants and agents whenever they see cause. Thirdly, they have reposed trust in the judicial power, which, in 35 order that it might be trustworthy, they have made as Reply to Ilayne, 249 respectable, as disinterested, and as independent as was practicable. Fourthly, they have seen fit to rely, in case of necessity or high expediency, on their known and admitted power to alter or amend the Constitution peace- ably and quietly, whenever experience shall point out 6 defects or imperfections. And, finally, the people of the United States have at no time, in no way, directly or indirectly, authorized any State legislature to construe or interpret their high instrument of government ; much less to interfere by their own power to arrest its course lo and operation. If, Sir, the people in these respects had done otherwise than they have done, their Constitution could neither have been preserved, nor would it have been worth preserving. And if its plain provisions shall now be disregarded, and 15 these new doctrines interpolated in it, it will become as feeble and helpless a being as its enemies, whether early or more recent, could possibly desire. It will exist in every State but as a poor dependant on State permission. It must borrow leave to be ; and will be no longer than 20 State pleasure, or State discretion, sees fit to grant the indulgence and to prolong its poor existence. But, Sir, although there are fears, there are hopes also. The people have preserved this, their own chosen Con- stitution, for forty years, and have seen their happi- 25 ness, prosi)erity, and renown grow with its growth, and strengthen with its strength. They are now, generally, strongly attached to it. Overthrown by direct assault, it cannot be ; evaded, undermined, nullified, it will not be, if we, and those who shall succeed us here as agents ao and representatives of the people, shall conscientiously and vigilantly discharge the two great brandies of our public trust, faitlifuUy to preserve, and wisely to administer it. Mr. President, I have thus stated the reasons of my 35 250 Webster. dissent to the doctrines which have been advanced and maintained. I am conscious of having detained you and the Senate much too long. I was drawn into the debate with no previous deliberation such as is suited to the 6 discussion of so grave and important a subject. But it is a subject of which my heart is full, and I have not been willing to suppress the utterance of its spontaneous sentiments. I cannot, even now, persuade myself to relinquish it without expressing once more my deep 10 conviction that, since it respects nothing less than the Union of the States, it is of most vital and essential importance to the public happiness. I profess. Sir, in my career hitherto to have kept steadily in view the prosperity and honor of the whole country, and the pres- 15 ervation of our Federal Union. It is to that Union we owe our safety at home, and our consideration and dig- nity abroad. It is to that Union that we are chiefly indebted for whatever makes us most proud of our coun- try. That Union we reached only by the discipline of 20 our virtues in the severe school of adversity. It had its origin in the necessities of disordered finance, prostrate commerce, and ruined credit. Under its benign influ- ences, these great interests immediately awoke as from the dead, and sprang forth with newness of life. Every 25 year of its duration has teemed with fresh proofs of its utility and its blessings ; and although our territory has stretched out wider and wider, and our population spread farther and farther, they have not outrun its protection or its benefits. It has been to us all a copious fountain 30 of national, social, and personal happiness. I have not allowed myself, Sir, to look beyond the Union to see what might lie hidden in the dark recess behind. I have not coolly weighed the chances of pre- serving liberty, when the bonds that unite us together 35 shall be broken asunder. I have not accustomed mjself Reply to Hayne, 261 to hang over the precipice of disunion, to see whether, with my short sight, I can fathom the depth of the abyss below; nor could I regard him as a safe counsellor in the affairs of this government, whose thoughts should be mainly bent on considering, not how the Union should 5 be best preserved, but how tolerable might be the condi- tion of the people when it should be broken up and destroyed. While the Union lasts, we have high, excit- ing, gratifying prospects spread out before us, — for us and our children. Beyond that, I seek not to penetrate the lO veil. God grant that, in my day, at least, that curtain may not rise ! God grant that on my vision never may be opened what lies behind! Wlien my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored 15 fragments of a once glorious Union; on States dissev- ered, discordant, l)elligerent ; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood ! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the Republic, now known and lion- 20 ored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original lustre, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured ; bearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as " What is all this worth ? " nor those other words of 25 delusion and folly, " Liberty first, and Union after- wards ; " but everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land and in every wind under the whole heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every 30 true American heart, — Liberty and Union, now and for- ever, one and inseparable ! LORD MACAULAY. ON THE REFORM BILL; HOUSE OF OOMMONS. MARCH 2, 1831. It is a circumstance, Sir, of happy augiiry for the motion before the House, that almost all those who have opposed it have declared themselves hostile on principle to Parliamentary Reform. Two members, I think, have 5 confessed that, though they disapprove of the plan now— submitted to us, they are forced to admit the necessity of a change in the representative system. Yet even those gentlemen have used, as far as I have observed, no arguments which would not apply as strongly to the most 10 moderate change as to that which has l^een proposed by His Majesty's Government. I say. Sir, that I consider this as a circumstance of happy augury. For what I feared was, not the opposition of those who are averse to all reform, but the disunion of reformers. I knew 15 that, during three months, every reformer liad been employed in conjecturing what the plan of the Govern- ment would be. I knew that every reformer had im- agined in his own mind a scheme differing, doubtless, in some points from that which my noble friend, the Pay- 20 master of the Forces, has developed. I felt, therefore, great apprehension that one person would be dissatisfied with one part of the bill, that another person would be 252 On the Reform Bill, 25o dissatisfied with another part, and that thus our whole strengtli would be wasted in internal dissensions. That apprehension is now at an end. I have seen with delight the i)erfect concord wliich prevails among all wlio deserve the name of reformers in this House ; and I trust that I 5 may consider it as an omen of the concord which will pre- vail among reformers throughout the country. I will not, Sir, at present express any opinion as to the details of the bill ; but, having during the last twenty -four hours given the most diligent consideration to its general prin- 10 ciples, I have no hesitation in pronouncing it a wise, noble, and comprehensive measure, skilfully framed for the healing of great distempers, for the securing at once of the public liberties and of the public repose, and for the reconciling and knitting together of all the orders of 15 the State. The honorable Baronet who has just sat down, has told us that the Ministers have attempted to unite two inconsistent principles in one abortive measure. Those were his very words. He thinks, if I understand him 20 rightly, that we ought either to leave the representiitive system such as it is, or to make it perfectly symmetrical. I think. Sir, that the Ministers would have acted un- wisely if they had taken either course. Their principle is plain, rational, and consistent. It is this, to a*lmit the 25 middle class to a large and direct share in the represen- tation, without any violent shock to the institutions of our country. I understand those cheers ; but surely the gentlemen who utter them will allow that the change which will be made in our institutions by this bill is far 30 less violent than that which, according to the honorable Haronet, ought to be made if we make any reform at all. I praise the Ministers for not attempting, at the present time, to make the representation uniform. I ]>rais(' tlicm for not cffaciii^' tlic old distinction In'twccn :» 264 Lord Macaulay. the towns and the counties, and for not assigning mem-* bers to districts, according to the American practice, by the Rule of Three. The Government has, in my opinion, done all that was necessary for the removal of a great 6 practical evil, and no more than was necessary. I consider this. Sir, as a practical question. I rest my opinion on no general theory of government. I distrust all general theories of government. I will not positively say, that there is any form of polity which may not, in 10 some conceivable circumstances, be the best possible. I believe that there are societies in which every man may safely be admitted to vote. Gentlemen may cheer, but such is my opinion. I say, Sir, that there are countries in which the condition of the lalwring classes is such 15 that they may safely be entrusted with the right of electing members of the Legislature. If the laborers of England were in that state in which I, from my soul, wish to see them ; if employment were always plentiful, wages always high, food always cheap ; if a large family were 20 considered not as an encumbi*ance but as a blessing; the principal objections to universal suffrage would, I think, be removed. Universal suffrage exists in the United States without producing any very frightful consequences ; and I do not believe that the people of those States, or of 25 any part of the world, are in any good quality naturally superior to our own countrymen. But, unhappily, the laboring classes in England, and in all old countries, are occasionally in a state of great distress. Some of the causes of this distress are, I fear, beyond the control of 30 the Government. We know what effect distress pro- duces, even on people more intelligent than the great body of the laboring classes can possibly be. We know that it makes even wise men irritable, unreasonable, credulous, eager for immediate relief, heedless of remote 35 consequences. There is no quackery in medicine, reli- On the Reform Bill 255 ijion, or politics, which may not impose even on a power- ful mind, when that mind has been disordered by pain or fear. It is therefore no reflection on the poorer class of Englishmen, who are not, and who cannot in the nature of things be, highly educated, to say that distress pro- 6 duces on them its natural effects, those effects which it would produce on the Americans, or on any other peo- ple ; that it blinds their judgment, that it inflames their passions, that it makes them prone to believe those who flatter them, and to distrust those who would serve them, lo For the sake, therefore, of the whole society, for the sake of the laboring classes themselves, I hold it to be clearly expedient that, in a country like this, the right of suffrage should depend on a pecuniary qualiflcation. But, Sir, every argument which would induce me to 15 oppose universal suffrage induces me to support the plan which is now before us. I am opposed to universal suffrage, because I think that it would produce a de- structive revolution. I support this plan, because I am sure that it is our best security against a revolution. 20 The noble Paymaster of the Forces hinted, delicately indeed and remotely, at this subject. He spoke of the danger of disappointing the expectations of the nation ; and for this he was charged with threatening the House. Sir, in the year 1817, the late Lord Londonderry pro- 25 posed a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act On that occasion he told the House that, unless the measures which he recommended were adopted, the public peace could not be preserved. Was he accused of threatening the House ? Again, in the year 1819, he proposed the 30 laws known by the name of the Six Acts. He then told the House that, unless the executive power were rein- forced, all the institutions of the country would be over- turned by jx)pular violence. Was he then accused of threatening the House ? Will any gentleman say that 35 256 Lord Macanlay. it is parliamentary and decorous to urge the danger arising from popular discontent as an argument for severity ; but that it is unparliamentary and indecorous to urge that same danger as an argument for conciliar 5 tion ? I, Sir, do entertain great apprehension for the fate of my country. I do in my conscience believe that, unless the plan proposed, or some similar plan, be speedily adopted, great and terrible calamities will befall us. Entertaining this opinion, I think myself bound to 10 state it, not as a threat, but as a reason. I support this bill because it will improve our institutions ; but I sup- port it also because it tends to preserve them. That we may exclude those whom it is necessary to exclude, we must admit those whom it may be safe to admit At 15 present we oppose the schemes of revolutionists with only one half, with only one quarter, of our proper force. We say, and we say justly, that it is not by mere num- bers, but by property and intelligence, that the nation ought to be governed. Yet, saying this, we exclude from 20 all share in the government great masses of property and intelligence, great numbers of those who are most interested in preserving tranquillity, and who know best how to preserve it. We do more. We drive over to the side of revolution those whom we shut out from power. 25 Is this a time when the cause of law and order can spare one of its natural allies ? My noble friend, the Paymaster of the Forces, happily described the effect which some parts of our representa- tive system would produce on the mind of a foreigner, 30 who had heard much of our freedom and greatness. If, Sir, I wished to make such a foreigner clearly understand what I consider as the great defects of our system, I would conduct liim through that immense city which lies to the north of Great Russell Street and Oxford Street, a city 35 superior in size and in population to the capitals of many On the Reform Bill 257 mighty kingdoms ; and probably superior in opulence, intoUigence, and general respectability, to any city in the world. I would conduct him through that interminable succession of streets and squares, all consisting of well built and well furnished houses. I would make him 5 observe the brilliancy of the shops and the crowd of well-appointed equipages. I would show him that mag- nificent circle of palaces which surrounds the Regent's Park. I would tell him that the rental of this district was far greater than that of the whole kingdom of Scot- 10 land at the time of the Union. And then I would tell him, that this was an unrepresented district. It is need- less to give any more instances. It is needless to speak of Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield, with no representation, or of ^Edinburgh and Glasgow with a 16 mock representation. If a property tax were now im- posed on the principle that no person who had less than a hundred and fifty pounds a year should contribute, I should not be surprised to find that one half in number and value of the contributors had no votes at all ; and it 20 would, beyond all doubt, be found that one fiftieth part in number and value of the contributors had a larger share of the representation than the other forty-nine fiftieths. This is not government by property. It is government by certain detached portions and fragments 26 of property, selected from the rest, and preferred to the rest, on no rational principle whatever. say that such a system is ancient is no defence. My honorable friend, the member for tlie University of Oxford, challenges us to show that the Constitution was 30 ever better than it is. Sir, we are legislators, not anti- quaries. The question for us is, not whether the Consti- tution was better formerly, but whether we can make it better now. In fact, however, the system was not in ancient times by any means so absurd as it is in our age. 36 258 Lord Macaulay, One noble lord has to-night told us that the town of Aldborough, which he represents, was not larger in the time of Edward the First than it is at present. The line of its walls, he assures us, may still be traced. It is 5 now built up to that line. He argues, therefore, that as the founders of our representative institutions gave mem- bers to Aldborough when it was as small as it now is, those who would disfranchise it on account of its small- ness have no right to say that they are recurring to the 10 original principle of our representative institutions. But does tlie noble lord remember the change which has taken place in the country during the last five centuries ? Does he remember how much England has grown in population, while Aldborough has been standing still ? 15 Does he consider, that in the time of Edward the First the kingdom did not contain two millions of inhabit- ants? It now contains nearly fourteen millions. A hamlet of the present day would have been a town of some importance in the time of our early Parliaments. 20 Aldborough may be absolutely as considerable a place as ever. But, compared with the kingdom, it is much less considerable, by the noble lord's own showing, tlian when it first elected burgesses. My honorable friend, the member for the University of Oxford, has collected 25 numerous instances of the tyranny which the kings and nobles anciently exercised both over this House and over the electors. It is not strange that, in times when nothing was held sacred, the rights of the people, and of the representatives of the people, should not have been 30 held sacred. The proceedings which my honorable friend has mentioned no more prove that, by the ancient consti- tution of the realm, this House ought to be a tool of the king and of the aristocracy, than the Benevolences and tlie Shipmoney prove their own legality, or than those 35 unjustifiable arrests, which took place long after the On the Reform Bill 259 ratification of the Great Charter, and even after the Petition of Right, prove that the subject was not anciently entitled to his personal liberty. We talk of the wisdom of our ancestors ; and in one respect at least they were wiser than we. They legislated for their own 5 times. They looked at the England which was before them. They did not think it necessary to give twice as many members to York as they gave to London, because York had been the capital of Britain in the time of Constantius Chlorus ; and they would have been amazed lo indeed if they had foreseen that a city of more than a hundred thousand inhabitants would be left without representatives in the nineteenth century, merely because it stood on ground which, in the thirteenth century, had been occupied by a few huts. They framed a represen- 16 tative system, which, though not without defects and irregidarities, was well adapted to the state of England in their time. But a great revolution took place. The character of the old corporations changed. New forms of proi)erty came into existence. New portions of so- 20 ciety rose into importance. There were in our rural dis- tricts rich cultivators, who were not freeholders. There were in our capital rich traders, who were not livery- men. Towns shrank into villages. Villages swelled into cities larger than the London of the Plantagenets. 25 Unhappily, while the natural growth of society went on, the artificial polity continued unchanged. The an- cient form of the representation remained ; and pre- cisely because the form remained, the spirit departed. Then came that pressure almost to bursting, the new 30 wine in the old lK)ttles, the new society under the old institutions. It is now time for us to pay a decent, a rational, a manly reverence to our ancestors, not by superstitiously adhering to what they, in other circum- stances, did, but by doing what they, in our circumstances, 35 260 Lord Macaulay, would have done. All history is full of revolutions, pro- duced by causes similar to those wliich are now oi)erating in England. A portion of the community which had been of no account, expands and becomes strong. It 5 demands a place in the system, suited, not to its former weakness, but to its present power. If this is granted, all is well. If this is refused, then comes the struggle between the youn^ energy of one class and the ancient l)rivileges of another. Such was the struggle between 10 the Plebeians and the Patridans of Rome. Such was the sti-uggle of the It^an allies for admission to the full rights of Romaii citizens. Such was the struggle of our North American colonies against the mother country. Such was the struggle which the Third Estate of France 15 maintained against the aristocracy of birth. Such was the struggle which the Roman Catholics of Ireland maintained against the aristocracy of creed. Such is tlie struggle which the free people of color in Jamaica are now maintaining against the aristocracy of skin. 20 Such, finally, is the struggle which the middle classes in England are maintaining against an aristocracy of mere locality, against an aristocracy, the principle of which is to invest a hundred drunken potwallopers in one place, or the owner of a ruined hovel in another, 25 with powers which are withheld from cities renowned to the furthest ends of the earth for the marvels of their wealth and of their industry. But these great cities, says my honorable friend, the member for the University of Oxford, are virtually, 30 though not directly, represented. Are not the wishes of Manchester, he asks, as much consulted as those of any town wliich sends members to Parliament ? Now, Sir, I do not understand how a power which is salutary when exercised virtually, can be noxious when exercised 35 directly. If the wishes of Manchester have as much On tJte Reform Bill. 261 weiglit with us as they would have under a system which should give representatives to Manchester, how can there be any danger in giving representatives to Manchester ? A virtual representative is, I presume, a man who acts as a direct representative would act ; for surely it would 5 be absurd to say that a man virtually represents the peo- ple of Manchester, who is in the habit of saying No, when a man directly representing the people of Man- chester would say Aye. The utmost that can be ex- pected from virtual representation is, that it may be as lo good as direct representation. If so, why not gi-ant direct representation to places which, as everybody allows, ought, by some process or other, to be represented ? ^ If it be said that there is an evil in change aa change, I answer that there is also an evil in discontent as dis- 15 content. This, indeed, is the strongest part of our case. It is said that the system works well. I deny it. I deny that a system works well, which the people regard with aversion. We may say here that it is a good system and a perfect system. But if any man were to say so to any 20 six hundred and fifty-eight respectable farmers or shop- keei)ers, chosen by lot in any part of England, he would be hooted down, and laughed to scorn. Are these the feelings with which any part of the government ought to be regarded ? Above all, are these the feelings with 25 which the popular branch of the legislature ought to be regarded ? It is almost as essential to the utility of a House of Commons that it should possess the confidence of the people, as that it should deserve that confidence. Unfortunately, that wliich is in theory the popiUar part 30 of our government, is in practice the unpopular part. Who wishes to dethrone the king ? Who wishes to turn the Lords out of their House ? Here and there a crazy radical, whom the boys in the street point at as he walks along. Who wishes to alter the constitution of tliis 35 2G2 Lord Macaulaij, House ? The whole people. It is natural that it should be so. The House of Commons is, in the language of Mr. Burke, a check, not on the people, but for the peo- ple. While that check is efficient, there is no reason to 5 fear that the king or the nobles will oppress the people. But if that check requires checking, how is it to be checked? If the salt shall lose its savor, wherewith shall we season it ? The distrust with which the nation regards this House may be unjust. But wliat then ? 10 Can you remove that distrust ? That it exists cannot be denied. That it is an evil cannot be denied. That it is an increasing evil cannot be denied. One gentleman tells us that it has been produced by the late events in France and B elgium ; another, that it is the effect of seditious 15 works which have lately been published. If tliis feeling be of origin so recent, I have read history to little pur- pose. Sir, this alarming discontent is not the growth of a day, or of a year. If there be any symptoms by which it is possible to distinguish the chronic diseases of the 20 body politic from its passing inflammations, all those symptoms exist in the present case. The taint has been gradually becoming more extensive and more malignant, through the whole lifetime of two generations. We have tried anodynes. We have tried cruel operations. What 25 are we to try now ? Who flatters himself that he can turn this feeling back? Does there remain any argu- ment wliich escaped the comprehensive intellect of Mr. Burke, or the subtlety of M r. Wi ndhani ? Does there remain any species of coercion which was not tried by 30 M r^ Pit t and by Lord Londonderry ? We have had laws. We have had blood. New treasons have been created. The press has been shackled. The Habeas Corpus Act has been suspended. Public meetings have been pro- liibited. The event has proved that these expedients 35 were mere palliatives. You are at the end of your On the Reform Bill 268 palliatives. The evil remains. It is more formidable than ever. What is to be done? Under such circumstances, a great plan of reconcilia- tion, prepared by the Ministers of the Crown, has been brought before us in a manner which gives additional 5 lustre to a noble name inseparably associated during two centuries with the dearest liberties of the English peo- ple. I will not say that this plan is in all its details precisely such as I might wish it to be ; but it is founded on a great and a sound principle. It takes away a vast lo power from a few. It distributes that power through the great mass of the middle order. Every man, there- fore, who thinks as I think, is bound to stand firmly by Ministers who are resolved to stand or fall with this measure. Were I one of them, I would sooner, infinitely 15 sooner, fall with such a measure than stand by any other means that ever supported a Cabinet. My honorable friend, the member for the University of Oxford, tells us, that if we pass this law, England will soon be a republic. The reformed House of Commons 20 will, according to him, before it has sat ten years, depose the King and exi>el the Lords from their House. Sir, if my honorable friend could prove this, he would have succeeded in bringing an argument for democracy infin- itely stronger than any that is to be found in the works 25 of Paine. My honorable friend's proposition is in fact this : that our monarchical and aristocratical institutions have no hold on the ])ublic mind of England ; that these institutions are regarded with aversion by a decided majority of the middle class. This, Sir, I say, is plainly 30 deducible from his proposition ; for he tells us that the representatives of the middle class will inevitably abolish royalty and nobility within ten years ; and there is surely no reason to think that the representatives of the middle class will be more inclined to a democratic revolution 3S 264 Lord Macaulay, than their constituents. Now, Sir, if I were convinced that the great body of the middle class in England look with aversion on monarchy and aristocracy, I should be forced, much against my will, to come to this conclusion, 5 that monarchical and aristocratical institutions are un- suited to my country. Monarchy and aristocracy, valuable and useful as I think them, are still valuable and useful as means, and not as ends. The end of government is the happiness of the people ; and I do not conceive that, 10 in a country like this, the happiness of the people can be promoted by a form of government in which the middle classes place no confidence, and which exists only because the middle classes have no organ by which to make tlieir sentiments known. But, Sir, I am fully convinced that 15 the middle classes sincerely wish to uphold the royal prerogatives and the constitutional rights of the peers. AVhat facts does my honorable friend produce in support of his opinion ? One fact only, and that a fact which has absolutely nothing to do with the question. The 20 effect of this Reform, he tells us, would be to make the House of Commons all powerful. It was all powerful once before, in the begimiing of 1649. Then it cut off the head of the King, and abolished the House of^ Peers. Therefore, if it again has the supreme power, it will act 25 in the same manner. Now, Sir, it was not the House of Commons that cut off the head of Charles the First ; nor was the House of Commons then all jwwerful. It had been greatly reduced in numbers by successive expul- sions. It was under the absolute dominion of the army. 30 A majority of the House was willing to take the terms offered by the King. The soldiers turned out the majority ; and the minority, not a sixth part of the whole House, passed those votes of which my honorable friend speaks, votes of which the middle classes disapproved then, and 36 of which tliey disapprove still. On the Reform Bill 266 My honorable friend, and almost all the gentlemen who have taken the same side with liim in this debate, have dwelt much on the utility of close and rotten boroughs. It is by means of Such boroughs, they tell us, that the ablest men have been introduced into l*arlia- 5 ment. It is true that many distinguished persons have represented places of this description. But, Sir, we must judge of a form of government by its general tendency, not by happy accidents. Every form of government has its happy accidents. Despotism has its happy accidents, lo Yet we are not disposed to abolish all constitutional checks, to place an absolute master over us, and to take our chance whether he may be a Caligula or a Marcus Aurelius. In whatever way the House of Commons may be chosen, some able men will be chosen in that way who 15 would not be chosen in any other way. If there were a law that the hundred tallest men in England should be members of Parliament, there would probably be some able men among those who would come into the House by virtue of this law. If the hundred persons whose 20 names stand first in the alpliabetical list of the Court Guide were made members of Parliament, there would probably be able men among them. We read in ancient history that a very able king was elected by the neighing of his horse ; but we shall scarcely, I think, adopt this 25 mode of election. In one of the most celebrated repub- lics of antiquity, Athens, Senators and Magistrates were chosen by lot; and sometimes the lot fell fortunately. Once, for example, Socrates was in office. A cruel and unjust proposition was made by a demagogue. Socrates 30 resisted it at the hazard of his own life. There is no event in Grecian history more interesting than that memorable resistance. Yet who would have officers apiK)inted by lot, because the accident of the lot may have giv»'" ♦" •' "V"-\*- m-hI good man a 1)owoliticians, who resorted to it as the means of retrieving their fortunes. 20 On the contrary, all the great political influences of the section were arrayed against excitement, and exerted to the utmost to keep the people quiet. The great mass of the people of the South were divided, as in the other section, into Whigs and Democrats. The leaders and 25 the presses of both parties in the South were very solici- tous to prevent excitement and to preserve quiet ; because it was seen that the effects of the former would neces- sarily tend to weaken, if not destroy, the political ties which united them with their respective parties in the 30 other section. Those who know the strength of party ties will readily appreciate the immense force which this cause exerted against agitation, and in favor of preserv- ing quiet. But, great as it was, it was not sufficient to prevent the wide-spread discontent which now pervades 35 the section. No ; some cause far deeper and more On the Slavery Question. 273 powerful than the one supposed, must exist, to account for discontent so wide and deep. The question then recurs — What is the cause of this discontent ? It will be found in the belief of the people of the Southern States, as prevalent as the discontent itself, that they 6 cannot remain, as things now are, consistently with honor and safety, in the Union. The next question to be con- sidered is — TVTiat has caused this belief? One of the causes is, undoubtedly, to be traced to the long-continued agitation of the slave question on the 10 part of the Noi-th, and the many aggressions which they have made on the rights of the South during the time. I will not enumerate them at present, as it will be done hereafter in its proper place. There is another lying back of it — with which this is 15 intimately connected — that may be regarded as the great and primary cause. This is to be found in the fact that the equilibriimi between the two sections in the govern- ment as it stood when the Constitution was ratified and the government put in action, has been destroyed. At 20 that time there was nearly a perfect equilibrium between the two, which afforded ample means to each to protect itself against the aggression of the other ; but, as it now stands, one section has the exclusive power of controlling the government, which leaves the other without any 25 adequate means of protecting itself against its encroach- ment and oppression. To place this subject distinctly before you, I have. Senators, prepared a brief statistical statement, showing the relative weight of the two sec- tions in the government under the first census of 1790, 30 and the last census of 1840. According to the former, the population of the United States — including Vermont, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which then were in their incipient condition of becoming States, but were not actually admitted — amounted to 35 274 Calhoun, 3,929,827. Of this number the Northern States had 1,997,899, and the Southern 1,952,072, making a differ- ence of only 45,827 in favor of the former States. The number of States, including Vermont, Kentucky, and 5 Tennessee, was sixteen ; of which eight, including Ver- mont, belonged to the Northern section, and eight, in- cluding Kentucky and Tennessee, to the Southern, — making an equal division of the States between the two sections under the first census. There was a small pre- 10 ponderance in the House of Representatives and in the Electoral College, in favor of the Northern, owing to the fact that, according to the provisions of the Constitution, in estimating federal numbers five slaves count but three ; but it was too small to affect sensibly the perfect equilib- 15 rium which, with that exception, existed at the time. Such was the equality of the two sections when the States composing them agreed to enter into a Federal Union. Since then the equilibrium between them has been greatly disturbed. 20 According to the last census the aggregate population of the United States amounted to 17,063,357, of wliicli the Northern section contained 9,728,920, and the Southern 7,334,437, making a difference in round numbers, of 2,400,000. The number of States had increased from 25 sixteen to twenty-six, making an addition of ten States. In the mean time the position of Delaware had become doubtful as to the section to which she properly belonged. Considering her as neutral, the Northern States will have thirteen and the Southern States twelve, making a 30 difference in the Senate of two senators in favor of the former. According to the apportionment under the census of 1840, there were two hundred and twenty-three mem- bers of the House of Representatives, of which the Northern States had one hundred and thirty-five, and 35 the Southern States (considering Delaware as neutral) On the Slavery Question, 275 eighty-seven, making a difference in favor of the former in the House of Representatives of forty-eight. The difference in the Senate of two members, added to this, gives to the North in the Electoral College, a majority of fifty. Since the census of 1840, four States have 5 been added to the Union, — Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida, and Texas. They leave the difference in the Senate as it was when the census was taken ; but add two to the side of the North in the House, making the present majority in the House in its favor fifty, and in the lO Electoral College fifty-two. The result of the whole is to give the Northern section a j)redominance in every department of the gov- ernment, and thereby concentrate in it the two elements which constitute the Federal Government : a majority of 15 States, and a majority of their population, estimated in federal numbers. Whatever section concentrates the two in itself i)OSsesses the control of the entire government. But we are just at the close of the sixth decade, and the commencement of the seventh. The census is to be 20 taken this year, which must add greatly to the decided preponderance of the North in the House of Represen- tatives and in the Electoral College. The prospect is, also, that a great increase will be added to its present prei)onderance in the Senate, during the period of the 25 decade, by the addition of new States. Two territories, Oregon and Minnesota, are already in progress, and strenuous efforts are making to bring in three additional States from the territory recently conquered from Mexico ; which, if successful, will add three other States in a 30 short time to the Northern section, making five States ; and increasing the present number of its States from fifteen to twenty, and of its senators from thirty to forty. On the contrary, there is not a single territory in progress in the Southern section, and no certainty that any addi- 35 276 Calhoun. tional State will be added to it during the decade. The prospect then is, that the two sections in the Senate, should the efforts now nijide to exclude the South from the newly acquired territories succeed, will stand, before 6 the end of the decade, twenty Northern States to four- teen Southern (considering Delaware as neutral), and forty Northern senators to twenty-eight Southern. This great increase of senators, added to the great increase of members of the House of Representatives and the Elec- 10 toral College on the part of the North, which must take place under the next decade, will effectually and irre- trievably destroy the equilibrium which existed when the government commenced. Had this destruction been the operation of time, with- 16 out the interference of government, the South would have had no reason to complain ; but such was not the fact. It was caused by the legislation of this govern- ment, which was apjx>inted as the common agent of all, and charged with the protection of the interests and 20 security of all. The legislation by which it has been effected may be classed under three heads. The first is that series of acts by which the South has been excluded from the common territory belonging to all the States as members of the Federal Union — which have had the 25 effect of extending vastly the portion allotted to the Northern section, and restricting within narrow limits the portion left the South. The next consists in adopt- ing a system of revenue and disbursements by which an undue proportion of the burden of taxation has been 30 imposed upon the South, and an undue proportion of its proceeds appropriated to the North ; and the last is a system of political measures by which the original char- acter of the government has been radically changed. I propose to bestow upon each of these, in the order they 35 stand, a few remarks, with the view of showing that On the Slavery Question, 277 it is owing to the action of this government, that the equilibrium between the two sections has been destroyed, and the whole powers of the system centred in a sec- tional majority. The tirst of the series of acts by which the South was 5 deprived of its due share of the territories, originated with the confederacy which preceded the existence of this government. It is to be found in the provision of the ordinance of 1787. Its effect was to exclude the South entirely from that vast and fertile region which lo lies between the Ohio and the Mississippi Rivers, now embracing five States and one Territory. The next of the series is the Missouri Compromise, which excluded the South from that large portion of Louisiana which lies north of 36° 30', excepting what is included in the 15 State of Missouri. The last of the series excluded the South from the whole of the Oregon Territory. All these, in the slang of the day, were what are called slave territories, and not free soil ; that is, territories belonging to slaveholding powers and open to the emi- 20 gration of masters with their slaves. By these several acts, the South was excluded from 1,238,025 square miles — an extent of country considerably exceeding the entire valley of the Mississippi. To the South was left the portion of the Territory of Louisiana lying south of 25 36° 30^, and the portion north of it included in the State of Missouri, with the portion lying south of 30° 30', including the States of Louisiana and Arkansas, and the territory lying west of the latter and south of 36° 30', called the Indian country. These, with the Territory 30 of Florida, now the State, make, in the whole, 283,603 square miles. To this must be added the territory acquired with Texas. If the whole should be added to the Southern section, it would make an increase of 325,520, which would mako th.' wl-.-l.' l-fh to the South 609,023. 35 278 Calhoun, But a large part of Texas is still in contest between the two sections, which leaves it uncertain wliat will be the real eitent of the ])ortion of territory tliat may be left to the South. 5 I have not included the territory recently acquired by the treaty with Mexico. The North is making the most strenuous efforts to appropriate the whole to herself, by excluding the South from every foot of it. If she should succeed, it will add to that from which the South has 10 already been excluded, 526,078 square miles, and would increase the whole which the North has appropriated to herself, to 1,764,023, not including the poi-tion that she may succeed in excluding us from in Texas. To sum up the whole, the United States, since they declared their 15 independence, have acquired 2,373,046 square miles of territory, from which the North will have excluded the South, if she should succeed in monopolizing the newly acquired territories, about three-fourths of the whole, leaving to the South but about one-fourth. 20 Such is the first and great cause that has destroyed the equilibrium between the two sections in the govern- ment. The next is the system of revenue and disbursements which has been adopted by the government. It is well 25 known that the government has derived its revenue mainly from duties on imports. I shall not undertake to show that such duties must necessarily fall mainly on the exporting States, and that the South, as the great exporting portion of the Union, has in reality paid vastly 30 more than her due proportion of the revenue ; because I deem it unnecessary, as the subject has on so many occa- sions been fully discussed. Nor shaU I, for the same reason, undertake to show that a far greater portion of the revenue has been disbursed at the North, than its 35 due share ; and that the joint effect of these causes has On the Slavery Question, 279 been to transfer a vast amount from South to North, which, under an equal system of revenue and disburse- ments, would not have l)een lost to her. If to this be added, that many of the duties were imposed, not for revenue, but for protection, — that is, intended to put 6 money, not in the treasury, but directly into the jx)cket of the manufacturers, — some conception may be formed of tlie immense amount which, in the long course of sixty years, has been transferred from South to Korth. There are no data by which it can be estimated with any lo certainty ; but it is safe to say that it amounts to hun- dreds of millions of dollars. Under the most moderate estimate, it would be sufficient to add greatly to the wealth of the Nortli, and thus greatly increase her I)opulation by attracting emigration from all quarters 15 to that section. This, combined with the great primary cause, amply explains why the North has acquired a preponderance in every department of the government by its dispropor- tionate increase of population and States. The former, *^ as has been shown, has increased, in fifty years, 2,400,000 over that of the South. This increase of population during so long a period, is satisfactorily accounted for by the number of emigrants, and the increase of their descendants, which have been attracted to the Northern 26 section from Europe and the South, in consequence of the advantages derived from the causes assigned. If they had not existed — if the South had retained all the capital which has been extracted from her by the fiscal action of the government ; and if it had not been ex- 30 eluded by the ordinance of 1787 and the Missouri Com- promise, from the region lying between the Ohio and the Mississippi Rivera, and between the Mississippi and tlie Rocky Mountains north of 36° 30' — it scarcely admits of a doubt, that it would have divided the emigration with 85 280 Calhoun, the North, and by retaining her own people, would have at least equalled the North in population under the census of 1840, and probably under that about to be taken. She would also, if she had retained her equal 5 riglits in those territories, have maintained an equality in the number of States with the North, and have pre- served the equilibrium between the two sections that existed at the commencement of the government. The loss, then, of the equilibrium is to be attributed to the 10 action of this government. lUit while these measures were destroying the equi- librium between the two sections, the action of the gov- ernment was leading to a radical change in its chai-acter, by concentrating all the power of the system in itself. 15 The occasion will not permit me to trace the measures by which this great change has been consummated. If it did, it would not be difficult to show that the process commenced at an early period of the government; and that it proceeded almost without interruption, step by 20 step, until it absorbed virtually its entire |K)wers ; but without going through the whole process to establish the fact, it may be done satisfactorily by a very short statement. That the government claims, and practically main- 25 tains, the right to decide in the last resort, as to the extent of its powers, will scarcely be denied by any one conversant with the political history of the country. That it also claims the right to resort to force to main- tain whatever power it claims, against all opposition, is 30 equally certain. Indeed it is apparent, from what we daily hear, that this has become the prevailing and fixed opinion of a great majority of the community. Now, I ask, what limitation can possibly be placed upon the powers of a government claiming and exercising such 35 riglits ? And, if none can be, how can the se}xirate On the Slavery Question. 281 governments of the States maintain and protect the l)ower8 reserved to them by the Constitution — or the people of the several States maintain those which are reserved to them, and among others, the sovereign powers by which they ordained and established, not only their 6 separate State Constitutions and governments, but also tlie Constitution and government of the United States ? lUit, if they have no constitutional means of maintaining them against the right claimed by this government, it necessarily follows, that they hold them at its pleasure 10 and discretion, and that all tlie powers of the system are in reality concentrated in it. It also follows, that the character of the government has been changed in con- sequence, from a federal republic, as it originally came from the hands of its f ramers, into a great national con- 15 solidated democracy. It has indeed, at present, all the characteristics of the latter, and not one of the former, although it still retains its outward form. The result of the whole of those causes combined is, that the North has acquired a decided ascendency over 20 every department of this government, and through it a control over all the powers of the system. A single section governed by the will of the numerical majority, has now, in fact, the control of the government and the • entire powers of the system. What was once a consti- 25 tutional federal republic, is now converted, in reality, into one as absolute as that of the Autocrat of Russia, and as despotic in its tendency as any absolute govern- ment that ever existed. As, then, the North has the absolute control over the 30 government, it is manifest, that on all questions between it and the South, where there is a diversity of interests, the interest of the latter will be sacrificed to the former, however oppressive the effects may be; as the South no i!"'P'^ ^y wliicli it cjui resist, through the 35 282 Calhoun. action of the government. But if there was no question of vital importance to the South, in reference to which there was a diversity of views between the two sections, this state of things might be endured without the hazard 5 of destruction to the South. But such is not the fact. There is a question of Vital importance to the Southern section, in reference to which the views and feelings of the two sections are as opposite and hostile as they can possibly be. 10 I refer to the relation between the two races in the Southern section, which constitutes a vital portion of her social organization. Every portion of the North entertains views and feelings more or less hostile to it. Those most opiX)sed and hostile regard it as a sin, and 15 consider themselves under the most sacred obligation to use every effort to destroy it. Indeed, to the extent that they conceive that they have power, they regard them- selves as implicated in the sin, and responsible for not suppressing it by the use of all and every means. Those 20 less opposed and hostile, regard it as a crime — an of- fence against humanity, as they call it ; and, although not so fanatical, feel themselves bound to use all efforts to effect the same object; while those who are least opposed and hostile, regard it as a blot and a stain on 25 the character of what they call the Nation, and feel themselves accordingly bound to give it no countenance or support. On the contrary, the Southern section regards the relation as one which cannot be destroyed without subjecting the two races to the greatest calamity, and 30 the section to poverty, desolation, and wretchedness ; and accordingly they feel bound by every consideration of interest and safety to defend it. This hostile feeling on the part of the North towards the social organization of the South long lay dormajit, 35 but it only required some cause to act on those who felt On the Slavery Question. 283 most intensely that they were responsible for its continu- ance, to call it into action. The increasing power of this government, and of the control of the Northern section over all its departments, furnished the cause. It was this which made an impression on the minds of many 6 that there was little or no restraint to prevent the gov- ernment from doing whatever it might choose to do. This was sufficient of itself to put the most fanatical portion of the North in action, for the purpose of de- stroying the existing relation between the two races in lo the South. The first organized movement towards it commenced in 1835. Then, for the first time, societies were organ- ized, presses established, lecturers sent forth to excite the people of the North, and incendiary publications 15 scattered over the whole South, through the mail. The South was thoroughly aroused. Meetings were held everywhere, and resolutions adopted, calling upon the North to apply a remedy to arrest the threatened evil, and pledging themselves to adopt measures for their own 20 protection, if it was not arrested. At the meeting of Congress, petitions poured in from the North, calling upon Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and to prohibit what they called the inter- nal slave trade between the States — announcing at the 26 same time that their ultimate object was to abolish slavery, not only in the District, but in the States and throughout the Union. At this period, the number en- gaged in the agitation was small, and possessed little or no personal influence. 30 Neither party in Congress had, at that time, any sym- pathy with them or their cause. The members of each l)arty presented their petitions with great reluctance. Nevertheless, small and contemptible as the party then was, both of the great parties of the North dreaded 36 284 Calhoun. them. They felt that, though small, they were organized in reference to a subject which had a great and a com- manding influence over the Noi-thern mind. Eai;h party, on that account, feared to opi)Ose their petitions, lest the r* opposite party should take advantage of the one that might do so, by favoring them. The effect was that both united in insisting that the petitions should be received, and that Congress should take jurisdiction over the subject. To justify their course, they took the ex- 10 traordinary ground that Congress was bound to receive l)etitions on every subject, however objectionable they might be, and whether they liad, or h;ul not, jurisdiction over the subject. These views prevailed in the House of Representatives, and partially in the Senate ; and thus 15 the party succeeded in their first movements, in gaining what they proposed — a jwsition in Congress in 'in wliich agitation could be extended over the whole Union. This was the commencement of the agitation which has ever since continued, and which, as is now acknowledged, has 20 endangered the Union itself. As for myself, I believed at that early period, if the party that got up the petitions should succeed in getting Congress to take jurisdiction, that agitation would follow, and that it would in the end, if not arrested, destroy the 25 Union. I then so expressed myself in debate, and called upon both parties to take grounds against assuming juris- diction; but in vain. Had my voice been heeded, and had Congress refused to take jurisdiction, by the united votes of all parties, the agitation which followed would 30 have been prevented, and the fanatical zeal that gives impulse to the agitation, and which has brought us to our present perilous condition, woidd have become extin- guished from the want of fuel to feed the flame. That was the time for the North to have shown her devotion 35 to the Union ; but, unfortunately, both of the great parties On the Slavery Question. 285 of that section were so intent on obtaining or retaining party ascendency, that all other considerations were over- looked or forgotten. What has since followed are but natural consequences. With the success of their first movement, this small 5 fanatical party began to acquire strength ; and with that, to become an object of courtship to both the great parties. The necessary consequence was a further increase of power, and a gradual tainting of the opinions of both of the other parties with their doctrines, until the infeo- lO tion has extended over both ; and the great mass of the pojuilation of the North, who, whatever may be their opinion of the original abolition party, which still pre- serves its distinctive organization, hardly ever fail, when it comes to acting, to co-operate in carrying out their 15 measures. With the increase of their influence, they extended the sphere of their action. In a short time after the commencement of their first movement, they had acquired sufficient influence to induce the legislatures of most of the Northern States to pass acts, which in 20 effect abrogated the clause of the Constitution that pro- vides for the delivery up of fugitive slaves. Not long after, petitions followed to abolish slavery in forts, maga- zines, and dockyards, and all other places where Congress had exclusive power of legislation. This was followed by 25 petitions and resolutions of legislatures of the Northern States, and jwpular meetings, to exclude the Southern States from all territories acquired, or to be acquired, and to prevent the admission of any State hereafter into the Union, which, by its constitution, does not prohibit 30 slavery. And Congress is invoked to do all this, ex- l)ressly with the view to the final abolition of slavery in the States. That has been avowed to be the ultimate object from the beginning of the agitation until the present time ; and yet the great body of both parties 35 286 Calhoun. of the North, with the full knowledge of the fact, although disavowing the cbolitionists, have co-operated with them in almost all their measures. Such is a brief history of the agitation, as far as it 5 has yet advanced. Now I ask, Senators, what is there to prevent its further progress, until it fulfils the ulti- mate end proposed, unless some decisive measure should be adopted to prevent it ? Has any one of the causes, which has added to its increase from its original small 10 and contemptible beginning until it has attained its present magnitude, diminished in force ? Is the original cause of the movement — that slavery is a sin, and ought to be suppressed — weaker now than at the com- mencement ? Or is the abolition party less numerous or 15 influential, or have they less influence with, or control over, the two great parties of the North in elections? Or has the South greater means of influencing or con- trolling the movements of this government now, than it had when the agitation commenced ? To all these ques- 20 tions but one answer can be given : No — no — no. The very reverse is true. Instead of being weaker, all the elements in favor of agitation are stronger now than they were in 1835, when it first commenced, while all the elements of influence on the part of the South are 25 weaker. Unless something decisive is done, I again ask, what is to stop this agitation before the great and final object at which it aims — the abolition of slavery in the States — is consummated ? Is it, then, not certain that if something is not done to arrest it, the South will be 30 forced to choose between abolition and secession ? In- deed, as events are now moving, it will not require the South to secede, in order to dissolve the Union. Agita- tion will of itself effect it, of which its past history furnishes abundant proof — as I shall next proceed to 35 show. On the Slavery Question, 287 It is a great mistake to suppose that disunion can be effected by a single blow. The cords which bind these States together in one common Union, are far too numer- ous and powerful for that. Disunion must be the work of time. It is only through a long process, and succes- 5 sively, that the cords can be snapped, until the whole fabric falls asunder. Already the agitation of the slavery question has snapped some of the most important, and has greatly weakened all the others, as I shall proceed to show. 10 The cords that bind the States together are not only many, but various in character. Some are spiritual or ecclesiastical ; some political ; others social. Some ap- pertain to the benefit conferred by the Union, and others to the feeling of duty and obligation. 16 The strongest of those of a spiritual and ecclesiastical nature, consisted in the unity of the great religious denominations, all of which originally embraced the whole Union. All these denominations, with the excep- tion, perhaps, of the Catholics, were organized very 20 much upon the principle of our political institutions. Beginning with smaller meetings corresix)nding with the political divisions of the country, their organization ter- minated in one great central assemblage corresponding very much with the character of Congress. At these 25 meetings the principal clergymen and lay members of the respective denominations from all parts of the Union, met to transact business relating to their common con- cerns. It was not confined to what api)ertained to the doctrines and discipline of the respective denominations, ao but extended to plans for disseminating the Bible, establishing missions, distributing tracts — and of estab- lishing presses for the publication of tracts, newspapers, and periodicals, with a view of diffusing religious infor- mation — and for the support of their respective doc- as 288 Calhoun. trines and creeds. All this combined contributed greatly to strengthen the bonds of the Union. The ties which held each denomination together formed a strong cord to hold the whole Union together, but, powerful as they 5 were, they have not been able to resist the explosive effect of slavery agitation. The first of these cords which snapped under its ex- plosive force, was that of the powerful Methodist Episco- pal Church. The numerous and strong ties which lield 10 it together, are all broken, and its unity is gone. They now form separate churches ; and, instead of that feeling of attachment and devotion to the interests of the wliole church which was formerly felt, they are now arrayed into two hostile bodies, engaged in litigation about what 15 was formerly their common property. The next cord that snapped was that of the Baptists — one of the largest and most respectable of the de- nominations. That of the Presbyterian is not entirely snapped, but some of its strands have given way. That 20 of the Episcopal Church is the only one of the four great Protestant denominations which remains unbroken and entire. The strongest cord of a political character, consists of the many and powerful ties that have held together the 25 two great parties which have, with some modifications, existed from the beginning of the government. They both extended to every portion of the Union, and strongly contributed to hold all its parts together. But this powerful cord has fared no better than the spiritual. 30 It resisted for a long time the explosive tendency of the agitation, but has finally snapped under its force — if not entirely, in a great measure. Nor is there one of the remaining cords which has not been greatly weakened. To this extent the Union has already been destroyed by 35 agitation, in the only way it can be, by sundering and weakening the cords which bind it together. On the Slavery Question* 289 li tia agitation goes on, the same force, acting with increased intensity, as has been shown, will finally snap every cord, when nothing will be left to hold the States together except force. But, surely, that can with no })ropriety of language be called a Union, when the only 5 means by which the weaker is held connected with the stronger portion is force. It may, indeed, keep them connected ; but the connection will partake much more of the character of subjugation, on the part of the weaker to the stronger, than the union of free, indepen- lO ileut, and sovereign States, in one confederation, as they stood in the early stages of the government, and which only is worthy of the sacred name of Union. Having now, Senators, explained what it is that cndangt^rs the Union, and traced it to its cause, and ir» explained its nature and character, the question again recurs — How can the Union be saved ? To this I answer, there is but one way by which it can be, and that is by adopting such measures as will satisfy the States l>elonging to the Southern section, that they can remain 20 in the Union consistently with their honor and their safety. There is, again, only one way by which this can be effected, and that is by removing the causes by which this belief hius been ])roduced. Do this, and discontent will cease, harmony and kind feelings l)etween the sec- 25 tions be restored, and every apprehension of danger to the Union removed. The question, then, is — How can tliis l)e done ? But, before I undertake to answer this question, I proi)08e to show by what the Union cannot be saved. 30 It cannot, tlien, be saved by eulogies on the Union, however 8[)lendid or numerous. The cry of " Union, Union, the glorious Union ! " can no more prevent dis- union than the cry of "Health, health, glorious health I" on the part of the physician, can save a jiatient lying 35 290 Calhoun. dangerously ill. So long as the Union, instead of being re- garded as a protector, is regarded in the opposite char- acter, by not much less than a majority of the States, it will be in vain to attempt to conciliate them by pronoun- 5 cing eulogies on it. Besides, this cry of Union comes commonly from those whom we cannot believe to be sincere. It usually comes from our assailants. But we cannot believe them to be sincere ; for, if they loved the Union, they would neces- 10 sarily be devoted to the Constitution. It made the Union, — and to destroy the Constitution would be to destroy the Union. But the only reliable and certain evidence of devotion to the Constitution is to abstain, on the one hand, from violating it, and to repel, on the 15 other, all attempts to violate it. It is only by faithfully performing these high duties that the Constitution can be preserved, and with it the Union. But how stands the profession of devotion to the Union by our assailants, when brought to this test? 20 Have they abstained from violating the Constitution ? Let the many acts passed by the i^orthern States to set aside and annul the clause of the Constitution providing for the delivery up of fugitive slaves answer. I cite this, not that it is the only instance (for there are many 25 others), but because the violation in this particular is too notorious and palpable to be denied. Again : Have they stood forth faithfully to repel violations of the Constitu- tion? Let their course in reference to the agitation of the slavery question, which was commenced and has 30 been carried on for fifteen years, avowedly for the pur- pose of abolishing slavery in the States — an object all acknowledged to be unconstitutional — answer. Let them show a single instance, during this long period, in which they have denounced the agitators or their 35 attempts to effect wliat is admitted to be unconstitu- On the Slavery Question, 291 tional, or a single measure which they have brought for- ward for that purpose. How can we, with all these facts before us, believe that they are sincere in their profession of devotion to the Union, or avoid believing their profession is but intended to increase the vigor of 5 their assaults and to weaken the force of our resistance ? Nor can we regard the profession of devotion to the Union, on the part of those who are not our assailants, as sincere, when they pronounce eulogies ujx)n the Tuion, evidently with the intent of charging us with 10 disunion, without uttering one word of denunciation against our assailants. If friends of the Union, their course should be to unite with us in repelling these assaults, and denouncing the authors as enemies of the Tnion. Why they avoid this, and pursue the course 15 they do, it is for them to explain. Nor can the Union be saved by invoking the name of the illustrious Southerner whose mortal remains repose on the western bank of the Potomac. He was one of us — a slave-holder and a planter. We have studied his 20 history, and find nothing in it to justify submission to wrong. On the contrary, his great fame rests on the solid foundation that, while he was careful to avoid doing wrong to others, he was prompt and decided in reijelling wrong. I trust that, in this res])ect, we profited 25 hy his example. Nor can we find anything in his history to deter us from seceding from the Union, should it fail to fulfil the objects for which it was instituted, by being permanently and hopelessly converted into the means of oppressing so instead of protecting us. On the contrary, we find much in his example to encourage us, should we be forced to the extremity of decidini? between submission and dis- union. riitrr i\i>U'd tlien, as well as now, a union — that S5 292 Calhoun, between the parent country and her then Colonies. It was a union that had much to endear it to the people of the Colonies. Under its protecting and superintending care, the Colonies were planted and grew up and pros- 5 pered through a long course of years, until they became populous and wealthy. Its benefits were not limited to them. Their extensive agricultural and other produc- tions gave birth to a flourishing commerce, wliich richly rewarded the parent country for the trouble and expense 10 of establishing and protecting them. Washington was born and grew up to manhood under that union. He acquired his early distinction in its service, and there is every reason to believe that he was devotedly attached to it. But his devotion was a rational one. He was 15 attached to it, not as an end, but as a means to an end. When it failed to fulfil its end, and, instead of affording protection, was converted into tlie means of oppressing the Colonies, he did not hesitate to draw his sword, and head the great movement by which that union was for- 20 ever severed, and the independence of these States estab- lished. This was the great and crowning glory of his life, which has spread his fame over the whole globe, and will transmit it to the latest posterity. Nor can the plan proposed by the distinguished sen- 25 ator from Kentucky, nor that of the administration, save the Union. I shall pass by, without remark, the plan proposed by the senator, and proceed directly to the con- sideration of that of the administration. I, however, assure the distinguished and -able senator, that, in taking 30 this course, no disrespect whatever is intended to him or his plan. I have adopted it because so many senators of distinguished abilities, who were present when he de- livered his speech and explained his plan, and who were fully capable to do justice to the side they support, have 35 replied to him. On the Slavery Question. 293 The plan of the administration cannot save the Union, l)eeause it can have no effect whatever towards satisfying the States composing the Southern section of the Union, that they can, consistently with safety and honor, remain in the Union. It is, in fact, but a modification of the 6 W'ilniot Proviso. It proposes to effect the same object, — to exclude the South from all the territory acquired by the Mexican treaty. It is well known that the South is united against the Wilmot Proviso, and has committed itself by solemn resolutions to resist, should it be adopted. 10 1 ts opposition is not to the name, but that which it pro- lK)ses to effect. That, the Southern States hold to be unconstitutional, unjust, inconsistent with their equality as members of the common Union, and calculated to destroy irretrievably the equilibrium between the two 15 'ctious. These objections equally apply to what, for levity, I will call the Executive Proviso. There is no difference between it and the Wilmot, except in the mode of effecting the object ; and in that resi)ect, I must say that the latter is much the least objectionable. It 20 goes to its object openly, boldly, and distinctly-. It claims for Congress unlimited power over the territories, and proposes to assert it over the territories acquired from Mexico, by a positive prohibition of slavery. Not so t lie Executive Proviso. It takes an indirect course, and 25 in order to elude the Wilmot Proviso, and thereby avoid encountering the united and determined resistance of the South, it denies, by implication, the authority of Congress to legislate for the territories, and claims the right as belonging exclusively to the inhabitants of the territories. 30 lUit to effect the object of excluding the South, it takes care, in the meantime, to let in emigrants freely from the Northern States and all other quarters except fruth, whi(!h it t'lkes sjH'cial care to exclude by hoUling i*p to them the danger of liaving tl^'i'- ^ lilnM-ated 35 294 Calhoun, under the Mexican laws. The necessary consequence is to exclude the South from the territory just as effectu- ally as would the Wilmot Proviso. The only difference in this respect is, that what one proposes to effect directly 6 and openly, the other proposes to effect indirectly and covertly. But the Executive Proviso is more objectionable than the Wilmot in another and more important partic- ular. ... In claiming the right for the inliabitants, 10 instead of Congress, to legislate for the territories, the Executive Proviso assumes that the sovereignty over the territories is vested in the former ; or, to express it in the language used in a resolution offered by one of the Senators from Texas (General Houston, now absent), 16 they have " the same inherent right of self-government as the people in the States." The assumption is utterly unfounded, unconstitutional, without example, and con- trary to the entire practice of the government, from its commencement to the present time. . . . 20 [As a striking example of what such doctrine as this will lead to, Mr. Calhomi takes up the case of California, then seeking ad- mission as a State. The organization of a State government there, and the appointment of senators and representatives by the inhabitants of that region, without having first been clothed by 25 Congress with authority for these acts, he characterizes as " revo- lutionary and rebellious in its character, anarchical in its tendency, and calculated to lead to the most dangerous consequences." And for it he blames most of all the Executive branch of the government, which openly advocates the doctrine in question, 30 and has openly abetted these proceedings.] Having now shown what cannot save the Union, I return to the question with which I commenced, — How can the Union be saved ? There is but one way by which it can with any certainty ; and that is, by a full and 35 final settlement, on tlie principle of justice, of all the On the Slavery Question. 295 questions at issue between the two sections. The South ks for justice, simple justice, and less she ought not to uike. She has no compromise to offer but the Constitu- tion ; and no concession or surrender to make. She has already surrendered so much that she has little left to 5 surrender. Such a settlement would go to the root of the evil, and remove all cause of discontent, by satisfying the South that she could remain honorably and safely in the Union, and thereby restore the harmony and frater- nal feelings between the sections, which existed anterior lo to the Missouri agitation. Nothing else can, with any ct'itainty, finally and forever settle the question at issue, rininate agitation, and save the Union. But can this be done ? Yes, easily ; not by the weaker party, for it can of itself do nothing — not even protect 15 itself — but by the stronger. The North has only to will it to accomplish it — to do justice by conceding to the South an equal right in the acquired territory, and to do her duty by causing the stipulations relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfilled — to cease the 20 agitation of the slave question, and to provide for the in- sertion of a provision in the Constitution, by an amend- ment, which will restore to the South, in substance, the power she possessed of protecting herself, before the equilibrium between the sections was destroyed by the 25 action of this government. There will l)e no difficulty in devising such a provision — one that will protect the South, and which, at the same time, will improve and strengthen the government, instead of impairing and weakening it 30 But will the North agree to this ? It is for her to iswer the question. But, I will say, she cannot refuse, she has half the love of the Union which she pro- fesses to have, or without justly exposing herself to the r*harge that her love of power and aggrandizement is far 35 296 Calhoun. greater than her love of the Union. At all events, the responsibility of saving the Union rests on the North, and not on the South. The South cannot save it by any act of hers, and the North may save it without any sac- 5 lifice whatever, unless to do justice, and to perform her duties under the Constitution, should be regarded by her as a sacrifice. It is time. Senators, that there should be an open and manly avowal on all sides, as to what is intended to be 10 done. If the question is not now settled, it is uncertain whether it ever can hereafter be ; and we, as the repre- sentatives of the States of this Union regarded as gov- ernments, should come to a distinct understanding as to our resi)ective views, in order to ascertain whether the 15 great questions at issue can be settled or not. If you, who represent the stronger iK)rtion, cannot agree to settle them on the broad principle of justice and duty, say so ; and let the States we both represent agree to separate and part in peace. If you are unwilling we should part 20 in peace, tell us so ; and we shall know what to do when you reduce the question to submission or resistance. If you remain silent, you will compel us to infer by your acts what you intend. In that case, California will be- come the test question. If you admit her under all the 25 difficulties that oppose her admission, you compel us to infer that you intend to exclude us from the whole of the acquired territories, with the intention of destroying irretrievably the equilibrium between the two sections. We should be blind not to perceive in that case, that 30 your real objects are power and aggrandizement, and in- fatuated, not to act accordingly. I have now, Senators, done my duty in expressing my opinions fully, freely, and candidly, on this solemn occa- sion. In doing so, I have been governed by the motives ?5 which have governed me in all the stages of the agita- On the Slavery Question. 297 tion of the slavery question since its commencement. 1 have exerted myself during the whole period to arrest it, with the intention of saving the Union, if it could be tlone; and if it could not, to save the section where it lias pleaseil Providence to cast my lot, and which I sin- 5 iMM-ely believe has justice and the Constitution on its ule. Having faithfully done my duty to the best of i.iy ability, both to the Union and my section, through- out this agitation, I shall have the consolation, let what will come, that I am free from all responsibility. WILLIAM H. SEWARD ON THE IKRErRESSIBLE CONFLICT; ROCHESTER, OCTOBER, 25, 1868. The unmistakable outbreaks of zeal which occur all around me, show that you are earnest men — and such a man am I. Let us therefore, at least for a time, pass all secondary and collateral questions, whether of a personal 6 or of a general nature, and consider the main subject of the present canvass. The Democratic party — or, to speak more accurately, the party which wears that attractive name — is in possession of the Federal Grov- emment. The Republicans propose to dislodge that 10 party, and dismiss it from its high trust. The main subject, then, is, whether the Democratic party deserves to retain the confidence of the American people. In attempting to prove it unworthy, I think that I am not actuated by prejudices against that party, 15 or by prepossessions in favor of its adversary ; for I have learned by some experience that virtue and patriotism, vice and selfishness, are found in all parties, and that they differ less in their motives than in the policies they pursue. 20 Our country is a theatre which exhibits, in full opera- tion, two radically different political systems ; the one resting on the basis of servile or slave labor, the other on the basis of voluntary labor of freemen. 298 On the lrrepre%fible Conflict, 299 The laborers who are enslaved are all negroes, or per- sons more or less purely of African derivation. But this is only accidental. The principle of the system is, that labor in every society, by whomsoever performed, is necessarily unintellectual, grovelling, and base ; and that 5 the laborer, equally for his own good and for the welfare of the State, ought to be enslaved. The white laboring man, whether native or foreigner, is not enslaved, only because he cannot, as yet, be reduced to bondage. You need not be told now that the slave system is the lo older of the two, and that once it was universal. The emancipation of our own ancestors, Caucasians and Euro- peans as they were, hardly dates beyond a period of five hundred years. The great melioration of human society which modern times exhibit, is mainly due to the incom- 16 plete substitution of the system of voluntary laVx)r for the old one of servile labor, which has already taken place. I'iiis African slave system is one which, in its origin and in its growth, has been altogether foreign from the habits of the races which colonized these States, and established 20 civilization here. It was introduced on this new con- tinent as an engine of conquest, and for the establish- ment of monarchical power, by the Portuguese and the Spaniards, and was rapidly extended by them all ovef South America, Central America, Louisiana, and Mexico. 26 I ts legitimate fruits are seen in the poverty, imbecility, and anarchy which now pervade all Portuguese and Spanish America. The free-labor system is of German extraction, and it was established in our country by emi- grants from Sweden, Holland, Germany, Great Britain, 30 and Ireland. We justly ascribe to its influences the strength, wealth, greatness, intelligence, and freedom, which the whole American people now enjoy. One of t he chief elements of the value of human life is freedom in the pursuit of happiness. The slave system is not 35 300 Seward, only intolerable, unjust, and inhuman towards the laborer, whom, only because he is a laborer, it loads down with chains and converts into merchandise ; but is scarcely less severe upon the freeman, to whom, only because he is a 5 laborer from necessity, it denies facilities for employ- ment, and whom it expels from the community because it cannot enslave and convert him into merchandise also. It is necessarily improvident and ruinous, because, as a general truth, communities prosi)er and flourish, or droop 10 and decline, in just the degree that they practise or neglect to practise the primary duties of justice and humanity. The free-labor system conforms to the divine law of equality which is written in the hearts and con- sciences of men, and therefore is always and everywhere 15 beneficent. The slave system is one of constant danger, distrust, suspicion, and watchfulness. It debases those whose toil alone can produce wealth and resources for defence, to the lowest degree of which human nature is capable, 20 to guard against mutiny and insurrection, and thus wastes energies which otherwise might be employed in national development and aggrandizement. The free-labor system educates all alike, and by open- ing all the fields of industrial employment, and all the 25 departments of authority, to the unchecked and equal rivalry of all classes of men, at once secures universal contentment, and brings into the highest possible activity all the physical, moral, and social energies of the whole state. In states where the slave system prevails, the 30 masters, directly or indirectly, secure aU political power, and constitute a ruling aristocracy. In states where the free-labor system prevails, universal suffrage necessarily obtains, and the state inevitably becomes, sooner or later, a republic or democracy. 35 Russia yet maintains slavery, and is a despotism. (hi the Irrepressible Conflict. 301 Most of the other European states have abolished slavery, and adopted the system of free labor. It was the antagonistic political tendencies of the two systems which the first Nai)oleon was contemplating when he predicted that Europe would ultimately be either all 5 Cossack or all republican. Never did human sagacity utter a more pregnant tnith. The two systems are at once perceived to be incongruous. But they are more than incongruous — they are incompatible. They never have permanently existed together in one country, and lo they never can. It would be easy to demonstrate this impossibility from the irreconcilable contrast between their great principles and characteristics. But the ex- perience of mankind has conclusively established it. Slavery, as I have already intimated, existed in every 15 state in Europe. Free labor has supplanted it every- where except in Russia and Turkey. State necessities developed in modern times are now obliging even those two nations to encourage and employ free labor; and already, despotic as they are, we find them engaged in 20 abolishing slavery. In the United States, slavery came into collision with free labor at the close of the last century, and fell before it in New England, New York, Xew Jersey, and Pennsylvania, but triumphed over it t'tTectually, and excluded it for a i)eriod yet undetermined, 25 from Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Indeed, so i incompatible are the two systems, that every new State which is organized within our ever-extending domain makes its first political act a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at the cost of civil war if no necessary. The slave States, without law, at the last national election successfully forbade, within their own limits, even the casting of votes for a candidate for Presi- dent of the United States supposed to be favorable to the establishment of the free-labor system in new States. 35 302 Seward. Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different States, but side by side within the American Union. This has happened because the Union is a confederation of States. But in another aspect the United States con- 6 stitute only one nation. Increase of population, which is filling the States out to their very borders, together with a new and extended net-work of railroads and other avenues, and an internal commerce which daily becomes more intimate, is rapidly bringing the States into a 10 higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation. Thus, these antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact, and collision results. Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think that it is accidental, unnecessary, the work 15 of interested or fanatical agitators, and therefore ephem- eral, mistake the case altogether. It is an irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces, and it means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become either entirely a slave-holding nation, or 30 entirely a free-labor nation. Either the cotton and rice- fields of South Carolina and the sugar plantations of Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free labor, and Charleston and New Orleans become marts for legitimate merchandise alone, or else the rye-fields and wheat-fields of 25 Massachusetts and New York must again be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and to the production of slaves, and Boston and New York become once more markets for trade in the bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend this great truth that induces so 30 many unsuccessful attempts at final compromise between the slave and free States, and it is the existence of this great fact that renders all such pretended compromises, when made, vain and ephemeral. Startling as this say- ing may appear to you, fellow citizens, it is by no means 35 an original or even a modem one. Our forefathers knew Chi the Irrepressible Conflict. 803 it to be true, and unanimously acted upon it when they fmmed the Constitution of the United States. They regarded the existence of the servile system in so many of the States with sorrow and shame which they oj^enly confessed, and they looked upon the collision between 6 them, which was then just revealing itself, and which we are now accustomed to deplore, with favor and hope. They knew that either the one or the other system must exclusively prevail. Unlike too many of those who in modern time invoke 10 their authority, they had a choice between the two. They preferred the system of free labor, and they deter- mined to organize the government, and so to direct its activity, that that system should surely and certainly prevail. For this purpose, and no other, they based the 15 whole structure of government broadly on the principle that all men are created equal, and therefore free — little dreaming that within the short period of one hun- dred years their descendants would bear to be told by any orator, however popular, that the utterance of that 20 principle was merely a rhetorical rhapsody ; or by any judge, however venerated, that it was attended by mental reservations, which rendered it hyix)critical and false. Hy the ordinance of 1787, they dedicated all of the national domain not yet polluted by slavery to free 25 labor immediately, thenceforth, and forever; while by the new Constitution and laws they invited foreign free labor from all lands under the sun, and interdicted the importation of African slave labor, at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances whatsoever. It is 30 true that they necessarily and wisely modified this policy of freedom by leaving it to the several States, affected as they were by differing circumstances, to abolisli slavery in their own way and at their own pleasure, instead of confiding that duty to Congress ^ and that they secured 35 304 Seward. to the slave States, while yet retainiiiK the system of slavery, a three-fifths representation of slaves in the Federal Government, nntil they should find themselves able to relinquish it with safety. But the very nature 6 of these modifications fortifies my position, tliat the fathers knew that the two systems could not t ndure within th(^ Union, and expected that within ;i short period slavery would disappear forever. Moreovci. in order that these modifications might not altoi^ethci lU Icat 10 their grand design of a republic maintaining,^ univtisal equality, they provided that two-thirds of the States might amend the Constitution. It remains to say on this jxiint only one word, to guard against misapprehension. If these States are to again 15 l)ecome universally slave-holding, I do not ])retend to say wilh wliat violations of the Const itntion that end shall be accomplished. On the other liand, wliih- I do confi- dently believe and hope that my connti y will yet become a land of universal freedom, I do not expect that it will 20 be made so otherwise than through the action of the several States co-operating with the Federal Government, and all acting in strict conformity with their respective constitutions. The strife and contentions concerning slavery, which 25 gently-disposed persons so habitually deprecate, are noth- ing more than the ripening of the conflict which the fathers themselves not only thus regarded with favor, but which they may be said to have instituted. It is not to be denied, however, that thus far the 30 course of that contest has not been according to their humane anticipations and wishes. In the field of federal politics, slavery — deriving unlooked-for advantages from commercial changes, and energies unforeseen from the facilities of combination between members of the slave- 35 holding class and between that class and other property On the Irrepressible Conflict. 305 classes — early rallied, and has at length made a stand, not merely to retain its original defensive position, but to extend its sway throughout the whole Union. It is certain that the slave-holding class of American citizens indulge this high ambition, and that they derive encour- 5 agement for it from the rapid and effective political suc- cesses which they have already obtained. The plan of operation is this : By continued appliances of patronage and threats of disunion, they will keep a majority favor- able to these designs in the Senate, where each State has lo equal representation. Through that majority they will defeat, as they best can, the admission of free States and secure the admission of slave States. Under the protec- tion of the judiciary, they will, on the principle of the Dred Scott case, carry slavery into all the territories of 15 the United States now existing and hereafter to be organ- ized. By the action of the President and the Senate, using the treaty-making power, they will annex foreign slave- holding States. In a favorable conjuncture they will in- duce Congress to repeal the act of 1808, which prohibits 20 the foreign slave-trade, and so they will import from Africa, at the cost of only twenty dollars a head, slaves enough to fill up the interior of the continent. Thus relatively increasing the number of slave States, they will allow no amendment to the Constitution prejudicial 25 to their interest ; and so, having permanently established their power, they expect the federal judiciary to nullify all State laws which shall interfere with internal or foreign commerce in slaves. When the free States shall be sufficiently demoralized to tolerate these designs, th^y 30 reasonably conclude that slavery will be accepted by those States themselves. I shall not stop to show how speedy or how complete would be the ruin which the accomplishment of these slave-holding schemes would bring upon the country. For one, I should not remain 36 806 Seward. in the country to test the sad experiment. . . . When that evil day shall come, and all further effort at resist- ance shall be impossible, then, if there be no better hope of redemption than I can now foresee, I shall say with 5 Franklin, while looking abroad over the whole earth for a new and more congenial home, " Where liberty dwells, there is my country." You will tell me that these fears are extravagant and chimerical. I answer, they are so ; but they are so only 10 because the designs of the slave-holders must and can be defeated. But it is only the possibility of defeat that renders them so. They cannot be defeated by inactivity. There is no escape from them compatible with non- resistance. How, then, and in what way, shall the 16 necessary resistance be made ? There is only one way. The Democratic party must be permanently dislodged from the government The reason is, that the Demo- cratic party is inextricably committed to the designs of the slave-holders, which I have described. Let me be 20 well understood. I do not charge that the Democratic candidates for public office now before the people are pledged to — much less that tlie Democratic masses who support them really adopt — those atrocious and danger- ous designs. Candidates may, and generally do, mean 25 to act justly, wisely, and patriotically when they shall be elected ; but they become the ministers and servants, not the dictators, of the power which elects them. . . . It is not more true that "hell is paved with good inten- tions," than it is that earth is covered with wrecks 30 resulting from innocent and amiable motives. "^he very constitution of the Democratic party commits it to execute all the designs of the slave-holders, whatever they may be. It is not a party of the whole Union — of all the free States and of all the slave States ; nor yet is 35 it a party of the free States in the North and in the On the Irrepressible Conflict, 807 North- West ; but it is a sectional and local party, having practically its seat within the slave States, and count- ing its constituency chiefly and almost exclusively there. Of all its representatives in Congress and in the electoral colleges, two-thirds uniformly come from these States. 5 Its great element of strength lies in the vote of the slave-holders, augmented by the representation of three- fifths of the slaves. Deprive the Democratic party of this strength, and it would be a helpless and hopeless minority, incapable of continued organization. The Dem- lo ocratic party, being thus local and sectional, acquires new strength from the admission of every new slave State, and loses relatively by the admission of every new free State into the Union. A party is in one sense a joint stock association, in 15 which those who contribute most direct the action and management of the concern. The slave-holders contrib- uting in an overwhelming proportion to the capital strength of the Democratic party, they necessarily dictate and pre- scribe its policy. The inevitable caucus system enables 20 them to do so with a show of fairness and justice. If it were possible to conceive for a moment that the Demo- cratic party should disobey the behests of the slave-holders, we should then see a withdrawal of the slave-holders, which would leave the party to perish. The portion of the 25 ])arty which is found in the free States is a mere appen- dage, convenient to modify its sectional character with- out imimiring its sectional constitution, and is less effective in regulating its uiovement than the nebulous tail of the comet is in determining the appointed, though apparently 30 eccentric, course of tlie fiery sphere from which it em- anates. To expect the Democratic party to resist slavery and favor freedom, is as unreasonable as to look for Protest- ant missionaries to the Catholic Propaganda of Kome. 35 308 Setvard, The history of the Democratic party commits it to tlie policy of slavery. It has been the Democratic party and no other agency, which has carried that policy up to its present alarming culmination. Without stopping to 6 ascertain critically the origin of the present Democratic party, we may concede its claim to date from the era of good feeling which occurred under the administration of President Monroe. At that time, in this State, and about that time in many others of the free States, the 10 Democratic party deliberately disfranchised the free col- ored or African citizen, and it has pertinaciously continued this disfranchisement ever since. This was an effective aid to slavery ; for, while the slave-holder votes for his slaves against freedom, the freed slave in the free States 15 is prohibited from voting against slavery. . . . [Here follows a review of measures carried or attempted by the Democratic party, from 1824 up to the date of this speech, to show the singleness of the devotion of that party to the support of slavery. The passage closes as follows: — ] 20 The Democratic party, finally, has procured from a supreme judiciary, fixed in its interest, a decree that slavery exists by force of the Constitution in every terri- tory of the United States, paramount to all legislative authority either within th^ territory or residing in 25 Congress. Such is the Democratic party. It has no policy, state or federal, for finance, or trade, or manufacture, or com- merce, or education, or internal improvjBments, or for the protection or even the security of civil or religious lib- 30 erty. It is positive and uncompromising in the interest of slavery, — negative, compromising, and vacillating, in regard to everything else. It boasts its love of equality ; and wastes its strength, and even its life, in fortifying the only aristocracy known in the land. It professes On the Irrepressible Conflict. 309 fiiiU'iuity ; iuid, so ultcu as slavery requires, allies itself with proscription. It magnifies itself for conquests in foreign lands ; but it sends the national eagle forth always with chains, and not the olive branch, in his fangs. This dark record shows you, fellow citizens, what I 6 was unwilling to announce at an earlier stage of this argument, that of the whole nefarious schedule of slave- holding designs which I have submitted to you, the Dem- ocratic party has left only one yet to be consummated — the abrogation of the law which forbids the African slave- lo ti-ade. . . . I think, fellow citizens, that I have shown you that it is high time for the friends of freedom to rush to the rescue of the Constitution, and that their very first duty is to dismiss the Democratic party from the administra- 16 tion of government. Why shall it not be done ? ... I know — few, I think, know better than I — the resources and energies of the Democratic party, which is identical with the slave power. I do ample justice to its traditional ix)pularity. I know, further — 20 few, I think, know better than I — the difficulties and disadvantages of organizing a new political force, like the Republican party, and the obstacles it must en- counter in laboring without prestige and without pat- ronage. But, understanding all this, I know that the 25 Democratic party must go down, and that the Republican party must rise into its place. The Democratic party derived its strength, originally, from its adoption of the principles of equal and exact justice to all men. So long as it practised this principle faithfully, it was in- 30 vulnerable. It became vulnerable when it renounced the principle, and since that time it has maintained it- self, not by virtue of its own strength, or even of its traditional merits, but because there as yet had ap- peared in the political field no other party that had 86 810 Seward. the conscience and the courage to take up, and avow, and practise the life-inspiring principle which the Democratic party had surrendered. At last, the Republican party has appeared. It avows, now, as the Republican party 6 of 1800 did, in one word, its faith and its works, " Equal and exact justice to all men." Even when it first en- tered the field, only half organized, it struck a blow which only just failed to secure complete and triumpliant victory. In this, its second campaign, it has already 10 won advantages which render that triumph now both easy and certain. The secret of its assured success lies in that very char- acteristic which, in the mouth of scoifers, constitutes its great and lasting imbecility and reproach. It lies in the 15 fact that it is a party of one idea ; but that idea is a noble one — an idea that fills and expands all generous souls ; the idea of equality — the equality of all men be- fore human tribunals and human laws, as they all are equal before the divine tribunal and divine laws. 20 I know, and you know, that a revolution has begun. I know, and all the world knows, that revolutions never go backward. Twenty Senators and a hundred Repre- sentatives proclaim boldly in Congress to-day sentiments and opinions and principles of freedom which hardly so 25 many men, even in this free State, dared to utter in their own homes twenty years ago. "While the Government of the United States, under the conduct of tlie Democratic party, has been all that time surrendering one plain and castle after another to slavery, the people of the United 30 States have been no less steadily and perseveringly gath- ering together the forces with which to recover back again all the fields and all the castles which have been lost, and to confound and overthrow, by one decisive blow, the betrayers of the constitution and freedom 35 forever. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS ; NOVEMBER 19, 1883. Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth upon this continent a new nation, conceived in lib- erty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived 5 and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedi- cate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should 10 do this. But in a larger sense we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we 15 say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us, that 20 from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion ; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain ; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government 26 of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth. 811 NOTES ORATIONS AND ARGUMENTS, NOTES. THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION AND GOVERNMENT. TiiK English speeches contained in this volume make frequent reference to a structure of government and to forms and usages unlike those with which we are familiar in the United States. Information uiH)n these subjects is absolutely necessary to an intelligent reading of these sixjeches, and yet it is not always rejMlily accessible. It lias therefore been thought best to embody in succinct statement the j>eculiar features of the English Consti- tution, government, and procedure touched upon in the speeches, and incidentally to point out the pitfalls which lurk under the guise of terms and expressions similar in form to our own, but different in content and meaning. It should be noted that the point of view in the following sketch is that of the present status in England. Historical differences within the period covered will be noticed as they occur in the speeches themselves. TIIK BRITISH CONSTITUTION. When a new organization of government was adopted and put ujKjn trial in the United States in 1789, the sjiecial features of that organization were set forth in a well-known document, which, by a natural transfer of meaning, took the name of the order and organization which it described ; that is, the Constitution of the United States of America. Ever since that time the extraordi- nary interest centring in this document has, in the usage of American si^akers and writers, tended steadily to shift the mean- ing of the word Constitution to this narrower base ; that is, from the iictual order and organization of government to the docunient in which that order is officially descril)ed and promulgated. This limitation of meaning is by no means prevalent outsidt; the realm of American iJolitics ; and the young American student should be 815 316 Notes, sixjcially cautioned against intei-preting in any such narrow sense the frequent reference made by Englishmen to the Britisli Consti- tution. England has no written Constitution ; nor, under the cir- cumstances, could she well liave one. Her government is the outcome of ages of experiment and struggle ; of incessant re-ad- justment of conflicting powers and interests ; sometimes of 8haii> and decisive action ; more frequently of insensible but irresistible drifting uikju the current of national tendency. Questions of constitutionality, therefore, are settled in England, not by appeal to a state-paiMjr like ours, since none exists, but by tipi>eal to unchallenged usage, to precedents not reversed, or to legislation not rejHjaled, wherever these are to be found in the centuries between Magna Charta and the present time. Even in cases where we find citation of what is claimed to be the very language of the Constitution, we are not to understand anything more than that the language is that of some document of acknowledged au- thority in determining usage; as, for example, an Act of Parlia- ment. And the English Constitution is altered, not through the formality of an amendment voted upon by the people, but by em- bodying the innovation directly in legislative act, — subject, of course, to prompt ratification or rejection by the jieople in their next return of members to Parliament. To Englishmen, then, the Constitution means primarily the established order of rjocern- menty whether this be (1) with reference to its organization, its actual structure, and the relation of its parts ; or (2) with refer- ence to usage, precedent, and law ; or (3) with reference to its genius and spirit. In the firet sense the word is often loosely synonymous with our use of the word government; but for this last word English usage has developed a special meaiiing (see below), which excludes it in certain connections. Examples of these several uses of the word may be found on p. 257, 1. 32 ; p. 50, 1. 15 ; p. 79, 1. 35 ; and p. 42, 1. 25. THE CABINET. In England the executive power, as of old, is vested nominally in the Crown, but really in the Cabinet, or Ministry, with which body the sovereign is associated, both as its honorary head and as TlieEiiglUh Cabinet. 317 a ix»rinaneut councillor; influential indeed, but without vol.. n- 8i)onsiV>ility, or i>l{ico in itij sessions. AVhenever a decisive change of party or of i>olicy becomes apparent in the votes of the House of Commons, the old Cabinet resigns, and a new one is formed to put the new policy into operation. Theoretically the Queen is free to choose whom she will to become Prime Minister and form the new Cabinet ; but practically the choice is limited to a single person, the acknowledged leader of the party which has be- come uppermost in the Commons. The Prime Minister selects liis colleagues from among the ablest men of his party and its allies in both Houses, a significant feature of the scheme being the fact that the Ministers are actually members of Parliament, are present at its sessions, and play a most important part in its delilierations. The Cabinet so constituted is, therefore, a com- mittee of the majority. But it is more than this. It is a commit- tee ♦* with power," charged with the duty of acting in momentous alTaii"s, and often without previous consultation with Parliament. Ui>on it devolves, furthermore, nearly the whole initiative iii legis- lation, — the duty of planning, introducing, and bringing to decis- ion almost all measures discussed in Parliament. The promptness and completeness with which this body of men is vested with im- l^erial power, in every realm save that of the Judiciary, is startling indeed to American ideas. The Ministry becomes at once both heart and brain of the government, and during its tenure of office wields a ix)wer far transcending that of our Presidential Adminis- tration. A sufficient safeguard against abuse of this power is found in the immediate resiwnsibility of the Ministry to the Couj- mons; that is, in the swiftness and certainty of it^ downfall if it fails to carry the majority with it. Out of the feeling that the Ministry is the vital centre of government. Englishmen have come to call it " Her Majesty's Government," " the Government," or simply " Government." In these expressions there is often an implied reference to that other equally important and equally recognized part of the system, " the Opjwsition ; " that is, the organized minority, in its character of critic and advocate for the other side, charged with the duty of allowing nothing to pass tviiliiiiii i-]iiii<-ii.>.- III. I ..(I'l. •;..••« <<■••■•«;•. T- ■>]-< Notes, • PARLIAMENT. The Parliament of England consists of two bodies, or « Houses,** the I^rds and the Commons. The House of Ix)rds stands for the conservatism of ancient privilege ; the Commons, for the final sovereignty of the ^xjople. The one is for the most part heredi- tary, and often continues without radical change during long jx»riods of time ; the other is the direct representative of the i^eo- ple, and is kept such by frequent general elections. Parliament assembles at the summons of the Crown ; that Ls, of the Ministry in the name of the Queen. It is o^^ened by a Speech from the Throne read in the House of Ix)rds. Its annual session is usually from February to August, at the close of which it is "prorogued" by the Crown ; and in the end it is dissolved by the same author- ity. The term of a Parliament is really the term of the Lower House, since that alone is affected by elections. Its utmost possi- ble term is fixed by statute at seven years ; but no Parliament of modern times has survived so long. Dissolution of Parliament comes about at no stated time, but rather as an exigency of gov- ernment. When the Ministers find themselves confronted by an adverse majority in the Commons, if issue is clearly joined and the majority decisive, they are exjiected to resign their power at once into the hands of the majority. But if there is doubt as to "whether this majority really represents the will of the people, the ^linistry may dissolve Parliament and " go to the country " — that is, api^eal to the people uix)n the issue raised. TlIK HOUSE OF LORDS. The House of Lords has a membership of over five hundred, consisting of the following groups: (1) The Lords Temi)oral ; i.e., the hereditary peerage of England with a small representa- tion chosen from the peerage of Scotland and of Ireland. (2) The Lords Spiritual ; i.e., the higher clergy of the Established Church, in the persons of the archbishops and bishops. (3) The higher judiciaiT, in the persons of the I^rd Chancellor and three distin- guished lawyers or judges designated by the Crown, and called Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, or, more popularly, " Law Lords." Tlie JTnme of Lords. 310 i ii.->,- ill!.-.- ^MMij.^ .11.' .^. i-aicilt'ly iidilii'sstMl ill (.'liutlianrs sj^oech, p. 87. The \jovA Cliuiicellor presides, and is a meuiber of the rejjiiant ministry ; tlie Law Ixjrds are advisers of the Ix)rd8 uiK>n legal nuittei-s. These i^ersons, however, are not by virtue of their offices " lords of Parliament *' — members entitled to speak and to vote in the ordinary business of the Upper House. Even the Chancellor's seat, the famous " woolsack," is theoretically outside the precincts of the Lords, although it is, in fact, almost in the centre of their chamber. But in recent practice the Chancellor is regularly maers, it is said, constitute a quorum ; and, until recently, meml)ers might vote by proxy without being present or hearing discussion. In legislation, the House of Lords is theoretically of equal weight with the House of Commons, since the consent of both is requisite to the passage of any Act. But, iu reality, the power of the former has greatly dwindled, partly because of what is felt to be the narrowness of its sympathy and interest outside of its own class ; still more because of its exclusion from the great field of finance and taxation ; and, most of all, because in the end it can always be forced to assent to the will of the Commons by the simple expedient of having new peers created by the ^Hnistry in the name of the Crown, and thus overwhelming the adverse majority. The fear that such action would be taken was sufficient to secure the a.ssent of the Lords to the Reform Bill of 1832; — a sufficient number of the majority, though bitterly opposed to the bill, deliberately absented themselves to avoid precipitating the crisis. The influence of the peerage upon legislation is still great in many wavs; but the actual power of their House in a contested case is limit4>d to a power of cautious revision and a veto to stay proceedings until the people shall have spoken again, and with decisive empliasis, u|x>n the ix)int in question. It should 1)6 noted in passing, that the House of Lords has judicial functions in which its action is quite independent of the Commons. It sits as a Court of Imp(>achment in cases like that of Warren Hastings, and as a court for the trial of members of 320 Notes, its own order charged witli troason or felony. Furthermore, it 8it8, — or, as we sliould say, a committee consisting only of its legal members sits, — as a Supreme Con it of A i.i «.;.!< for the kingdom. THK HOUSE OF COMMONS. As the result of successive changes in the representation of the realm, the House of Commons now numbers sir hundred and sevetity meml>ers. The constituencies which " return " these meml>ers are either rural — counties and subdivisions of counties; ur1)an — l)oroughs and wards; or universities. On receipt of the writ, or order for an election, the " returning officer " of each con- stituency arranges the preliminaries and fixes a date before which all candidates nmst announce themselves. When that date is reached, if no more candidates api^ear than there are seats to be filled, the candidates are " returned " by the officer — are reported as duly elected — without further formality of l)alloting. If, however, a seat is " contested ** by two or more candidates, the officer apix)ints a day for "taking the |k>11." In general elections, therefore, it comes about that the polls are not taken in all the constituencies on the same day, but are scattered over a consider- able interval of time. Thus, in a hotly contested campaign it not infrequently hapixjns that some distinguished party champion attempts in the first instance to carry some stronghold of the enemy, is defeated there, and yet saves his place in Parliament by offering himself at the eleventh hour as a candidate in one of these later elections. Any fully qualified citizen not a meml>er of the House of Lords, an officer of government, nor a clergyman either of the Established or Roman Church, may « stand ; " i.e., is eligible to Parliament. Residence outside of the district is no bar, as we have seen al>ove. The candidate not only pays all the expenses of his canvass, but must render a sworn statement of every item of it. If successful, he is free thereafter to serve the public in Parliament at his own expense, for the government allows him no compensation whatever. Only in very rare cases does a constituency volunteer to maintain in Parliament a mem- ber too poor to maintain himself. If the member becomes distin- guished enough to be sought for high political office, such as a The House of Commons. 321 place in the Cabinet, he must, by submitting to a second election, obtain from his constituency permission to serve them in tiie doublo capacity of memlxir and minister. The old Houses of Parliament, in which Burke, Chatham, and Aliicaulay spoke, were destroyed by fire in 1834. Their essential features, arrangements, and usages, liowever, have all been re- peated in the new Houses; and these will require some brief notice in view of the frequent reference made to them in the sjieeches. The "House" in which the Commons sit, and in which is transacted the business of the British Empire, is an oblong chaml>er surrounded by lobbies. At one end, on an ele- vatt^d platform, is the Sjieaker's Chair. At a table below and in front of him sit the Clerks ; beyond them lies the Mace, emblem of the Speaker's authority. Parallel with the sides and with the further end of the room are arranged the members' seats, tier above tier, filling the whole space with the exception of a narrow, oblong iK)rtion of o[>en floor in the centre. From this o^hmi space the main aisle runs down the centre of the chamber; while an aisle at right angles to this, and known as the " gangway," inter- sects the side benches. There are three well-known groups of sittings: The front row of seats on the Speaker's right is called the Treasury Bench, and is occupied by the Ministers, liehind these are ranged the supporters of the Government — the members of the dominant party. The seats on the Speaker's left, and directly facing these last, are the Opposition Benches, occu- pied by the leaders and body of "Her Majesty's Opposition." The " cross-benches " at the end of the room, directly facing the Speaker, are the place for members who do not afliliate with either of the great parties. One's location in the House is thus an indication of his ix)litical relationships. No member, how- ever, can claim exclusive right to any particular seat, since the sittings are far fewer than the membership. There are regularly five sessions a week ; four of these run from 4 o'clock p.m. till late at night — sometimes till after day-break — and one, on Wednesday, from midday till o'clock p.m. Members sit with their hats on, but remove them when they rise to s{ieak. The " House " of the Ix)rds is in the same builduig with that 322 Notes, of the Commons, but at the furtlier end of the corridor. Its gen- eral arrangements are not unlike those of the other chanil>er, save that the S|>eaker's seat — the woolsack — is moved forward toward the centre to make place for a raised platform and the royal throne at the end of the room. FOKM8 OF PROCEDURE. At the opening of Parliament the Commons, headed by their Speaker, attend at the bar ^ of the Ix)rds to listen to the Speech from the Throne, a pai>er prepared, of course, l>y the Ministry, and resembling somewhat, in its general scoi^e, our President's Message. At the close of the Speech they retire to their chamber, and, first of all, go through the form of reading some unimpor- tant bill, in order to assert once more their right to deliberate freely about whatever they will, even though matters urged upon them by the Crown liave to wait. Some meml)er previously desig- nated for this duty then moves the " Address " — the formal reply to the royal Speech, couched in subservient language, and strictly echoing the tone and the suggestions of that paper. In the debate which follows, there is a general airing of views of all sorts, and not infrequently amendments are proi>osed sharply criticising the acts or the ix)licy of Government.^ These matters disix)sed of, the regular business of the session begins. Of this there is inevitably an enormous amount, since many matters which in our country never come before Congress, but belong either to State, or to county, or to municipal government, are in England directly under the control of Parliament. But there is no such deluge of proposed legislation as that which greets us Americans at the opening of Congress. The House of Lords, as we have seen, does very little in initiating measures ; w hile individual members of the Commons may introduce bills but sparingly, not as of right, but only by con- sent of the House. Furthermore, only the Wednesday afternoon 1 A movable barrier or rail in the main aisle of each House, beyond which none but officers and members are allowed to pass. * A debate «iK)n a similar Address in the House of Lords was the occasion of Chatham's speech printed in this volume, and of an amendment proposed by Forms of Procedure, 323 session of each week is available for the consideration of business so introduced. The Ministry is held responsible for the introduc- tion of all necessary legislation ; while the duty of the House is pri- marily to scrutinize, discuss, amend, accept, or reject the measures the Ministry projwses. (iovernment measures have, therefore, large right of way ; tlu-ee full sessions each week are devoted to them exclusively. Questions propounded to the Ministry form a noteworthy feature of the Parliamentary scheme, aifording, as they do, to the House an admirable means of informing itself on matters it needs to know, and to the Ministers an opportunity of directly stating their case and explaining their action. But neither measures nor questions may be sprung upon the House unawares. Full notice and precise statement of each must in all cases be previously given. The regular course through which a Bill nmst pass to become a a law is as follows : The Bill, having been drafted, printed, and projxjrly endorsed, comes to its " first reading," after due notice given and motion passed " for leave to bring in the Bill." Its title then is read aloud by the Clerk, and a motion is made that the Bill be read a second time on a future day named. When the day arrives, the projwser moves its second reading, and enters into a full exi>lanation and defence of its provisions. Debate fol- lows; and if the House consents to the second reading, it is under- stood as accepting the general principle of the measure, though not committing itself to the details. If the House refuses, the Bill is of course defeated. This second reading is therefore the most critical stage of a Bill in its course in the Connnons, and calls for the most strenuous efforts of its defenders. After its second reading, the Hou.se votes to consider it in detail in a Com- mittee on some future day named. In this Committee changes and amendments are agreed upon, and the Committee rises and reports to the House the Bill, usually in its final shai)e. The House orders its third reading, again in the future ; and when this is reached, the motion is put " that the Bill l)e pa.ssed." Votes in the House are taken first viva vttce ; but if the result is doubted, a «♦ division ** is taken in this way : Those voting " Ay " pass oiii (if ilir (hamber into the lobby ou the S|)eakcr*s right, 324 Note». while those voting " No " pass into the lobby on the left, luitil tlio SiHiaker remains alone. The members are counted as they file back into the chamber, and the result is announced. A Bill that suc- cessfully passes this stau^e is sent up to the Lords. If the Lords accept it, it receives, as a matter of course, the royal assent,^ and l)econies a law. If the Lords amend it, it nmst return to the Commons for their concurrence in tlie amendments. If the I^rds " throw it out," or if the Commons refuse to accept the amend- ments of the Lords, the Bill, of course, is lost. FINANCE AND TAXATION. The principle that a free people must be free to tax itself and to sp(»nd its money as it will, is a principle which our fathers brought with them from the old country. The difference between a tax " given and granted " to the Crown by the people themselves, and a tax imj^sed by the Crown upon the people, was in the last century, to Englishmen on both sides of the Atlantic, a very vital diffei-ence — the difference l>etween freedom and subjugation. Burke sj^eaks of this point on p. 49, 1. 13-21 ; and the whole subject is eloquently set forth by him in a speech uiwn American Taxation, not included in this volume. Out of this very matter grew our Revolutionary War. Since that war, however, there has been for us neither Crown nor subject, nor any participant in our government other than the people itself ; and the old distinc- tion is lost. Our governments of all degrees regularly levy, or imix)se, taxes ; and the form of expression no longer awakes our wrath. But in England the old distinction and the old usage still hold. There the vast framework of government — outside of the Commons — has absolutely no vital or sustaining power within itself ; it can levy no tax, can raise no revenue for its own support, has no income at all save what the people from year to year through their representatives, the Commons, actually " give and grant." The Queen, in her Speech from the Throne, must each year ask anew that " her faithful Commons " vote her the » There was once a veto power resi«ient in the Sovereign, but it is now practi- cally lost. Tlie Queen must assent to whatever passes the two Houses. The last veto in English liistory was by Queen Anne. Finance and Taxation, o-* supplios without which every wheel in the system must come to a stantistill. The Commons hold the purse. One of the chiel matters, therefore, in the annual business of the House, is the consideration of the " Budget." The minister in charge of the finances of the realm is termed the Chancellor of the Exchequer. 1 1 is most arduous duty is the preparation of estimates of exi>en- diture for the coming year, and plans for taxation whereby the necessary amount may be raised. When this Budget is reatly, the House receives and considers it in a "Committee of Supply." This is a Committee of the whole House, formed for the purjwse of securing the utmost freedom of question and discussion, which would otherwise be hampered by strict parliamentary rules. The Sju^aker leaves his seat, the Mace is carried away, some member is made Chairman, and discussion runs on with little heed to the formality of rules. In this Committee is settled the amount Commons will grant the Crown, and the ends to which it is to be applied. This done, the same body resolves itself into a Com- mittee of Ways and Means, to determine in like manner how the money shall be raised. When this Committee has closed its de- liberations, it rises, the Speaker resumes his place, and the Chair- man of the Committees reix)rts to the House the conclusions reiiched, which are then embodied in a motion and passed by the House in its formal capacity. When a " Money Bill " has duly passed all its stages in the Commons, it is sent to the Ix>rds, who have no power to alter or amend it, though they may reject it — if they dare. Furthermore, such a bill does not go up to the Queen along with others through the hands of the Ivords, but is returned to the Commons, and at the end of the session is pre- sented to her by the Speaker in person, as the gift of the people alone. And on such an occasion the Queen never fails to thank the Commons for their generosity. In the preparation of the foregoing sketch the author has consulted among others the following works, and would recom- mend them to the student for further study or reference : A Primer of f he Englith Cnnttitntum and Goremment, by Shelilon Aiu<)ii(I^)nK- maiM, Oreen & C^., N.V.) — a compact topical statciiieiit, with gtxMl Index and Apiwudices. 326 Notes, The Enyllah Constitutinn, by Walter Ragehnt (Chapman, Hall & Co., London) — a brilliant and iM>pular discusKion of it« exctillenceg and defects. Tilt' State, by WcKMlrow Wilson (I), C. Heath & Co., Ikmton) — specially valu- able as a topical digest and manual of the structure and organization of all the great constitutional governments of the modent M'orld. The Iaiw of the CoHstitution, a series of lectures by A. V. Dicey (Macmillan & Co.) — giving with utmost logical clearness the lawyer's view of the English Constitution, and explaining some of its principal maxims. EDMUND BUKKE. Edmund Burke was born in Dublin, Ireland, in January, 1729. His father was an attorney with a fair practice, and looked for- ward to the same profession for his son. The boy received his education first in a private school; then in Trinity College, DuIh lin, where he took the bachelor's degree in his nineteenth year ; and last of all, in the Middle Temple, London. Ilis studies gained him at the time no si>ecial academic honors, and never brought him to the iictual practice of the law; yet in them, and especially in the wide and i»rofound reading whicii accompanied them, was laid the foundation of his future greatness. Burke's first public venture was in literature. In 1756 appeared his y indication of Natural Society — a clever bit of irony ^ and liis Iwiuirij into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, an essay which at once attracted attention both in England and \i\yon the Continent. Meantime, however, he had discovered the true bent of his genius, and was diligently study- ing the governmental problems of England. The first fruit of this study appeared in 1757, in his Account of Knf/lish Settle- ments in America. From about this time also dates his long friendship with Dr. Johnson and the members of his famous Literary Club. His political career began in 1765, when he became private sec- retary to I^rd Rockingham, the head of the new Whig Ministry. A little later he was returned to Parliament as nieml>er for Wen- dover, taking his seat in time to distinguish himself in the debates which preceded the rej^eal of the Stamp Act in 1766. His career in Parliament lasted without break from this time until 1701, when, broken in health and spirits, he withdrew from public life. Ilis death occurred not long after, in 17U7. 327 328 Notes. A passion for order and a passion for justice, some one has said, were the master-motives of Burke's thought and life. Both these passions led him directly into that field of human activity where they find their noblest play, the field of practical govern- ment. During his lifetime three mighty questions successively confronted the government of England: (1) How shall a great nation deal with colonies of its own proud blood and free tradi- tions? (2) IIow shall such a nation treat subject provinces of alien race and temper? (3) IIow shall it meet the fierce spirit of change and revolution at its very doors ? They were the ques- tions of America, of India, and of France. Into their discussion Burke threw himself with all the ardor and force of his great nature. In his utterance \x\My\\ the first of these questions Burke was undoubtedly at his best. It is not merely that this topic is one which naturally attracts American readers. It is not merely that his arguments have still a living interest in their application to great questions which confront England in our own day. Burke brought to it a fresher, truer insight, a judgment more sane, a temper more serene and genial, than he was able to com- mand later, after years spent in unavailing struggle and bitter conflict. Furthermore, this question raised no schism within him- self. His passion for the established order and his passion for justice both led him to the same conclusion. When the American Colonies were forever lost, Burke turned his attention to the government of England's East Indian i>osses- sions. A series of brilliant speeches in Parliament led up to his crowning effort upon this subject, the speech at the trial of War- ren Hastings, in 1787. Burke's grasp of facts is now more mas- terful, and his oratory more splendid than ever; but the noble effect is somewhat marred by a shrillness of tone, an excitement of personal feeling, and a fierceness of invective from which his earlier utterances were free. In 1789 came the crash of the French Revolution. Burke's horror at the overthrow of long-established order was so great as to leave no room for calm consideration of justice as between oppressor and oppressed. With fiercer and fiercer outcry from this time onward he urged England to esix)use the cause of the old tyranny, and to put down the Revolution. Burke : On ConciliatlQn with the Colonies, 829 SPEECH ON CONCILIATION AMIII THE COLONIES. At the Oldening of the year 1775 the harsh treatment which the Colonies were receiving from England had forced them to com- bine for mutual support against further aggression. The Conti- nental Congress had already assembled. Lexington and Bunker Hill were not far off. It was becoming a matter of grave imjior- tance to the English government to break up this formidable union, and to bring the Colonies once more to deal separately and singly with England. At this juncture Lord North, the Prime Minister, unexpectedly announced what he was pleased to term a mejisure for '* conciliating the differences with America." He l)rop<)sed to exempt from further taxation any Colony which, after providing for the maintenance of its own government, should guarantee to the mother-country an amount satisfactory to her as btung, " according to the condition, circumstances, and situation of such Colony," its proportionate contribution toward the com- mon defence. This transparent scheme deceived no one, — it was really a plan to divide and conquer. To the friends of the Colonies, however, it was no small thing that the Ministry, after a long policy of coercion, should not merely accept, but of its own accord announce, the principle of conciliation. Burke seized tlie opportunity to propose conciliation which might really be effective. TEXTUAL NOTES. Pace 1, 1. the austerity of the Chair means, of course, *the dignity and seriousness of this a-ssenibly.' The parliamentary fiction which regards not merely the dignity, but the i>erson- ality, of the House as embodied in its Si)eaker, is an old-time device to banish from public deliberations the fierceness and the confusion of personal encounters. To it we owe our common rule of debate that all remarks must lie addres.sed to the Chair, anositiou are not merely sure to receive no fair consideration from the triumphant majority, but are apt thereby to be discredited in advance, and ruined for future usefulness. The scruple is thoroughly characteristic of Burke, as are also the considerations which induced him to set it aside. Page 6, 9-14. the project has been outlined above in the Introductory Note to this sjHjech. The impossibility of assigning any definite values to the factors which were to determine the proiHirtionate share of each Colony, as well as the cool irony of talking about proiK)rtion at all, when the real object was in each case to extort the largest sum possible, strongly roused Burke. His imagination at once pictures the scenes Parliament is likely to witness in attempting to carry out such a scheme, and he sar- castically figures these as the splendors and sensations of a new entertainment provided by the Ministry. The noble lord was Frederick North, Prime Minister from 1770 till 1782, and largely responsible for the separation of the Colonies from England. He was at this time * lord * only by couilesy of speech. He did not come into his earldom until his father's death in 1790. Sons and younger brothers of peers, though commonly styled lords, are only commoners in fact, and as such are eligible to the lower house, where they often seek a career. A notable example in our own day is Lord Randolph Churchill. The blue ribbon is the badge of the famous Order of the Garter, a decoration rarely conferred upon commoners, and therefore often mentioned l>y Burke in his parliamentary designation of this Prime Minister to whom he was so long opposed. Colony agents. In default of any regular channel through wliich a colony could make its condition and its needs known to Parliament, the practice was to secure the services of some mem- ber of Parliament to act as agent for the colony, and to look after its interests in the general legislation. Burke himself was such an agent for New York. A fuller recognition is now accorded the colonics of K!;/'"-!. i'l tlif ridditioi: \n tho Ministry of a 332 Notes, special Secretary of State for tlie Colonies. But the Agents-Gen- eral are still maintained. the interposition of your mace. When the ordinary call for order is ineffective to quell disturbance in the House, the Sergeant-at-Arms, at the Speaker's direction, takes up the mace from the table where it lies, and with it con- fronts the disorderly members. Before this symbol of the majesty of the House, they are expected to quail and sink into their seats. There is in the Speaker's power but one last resource more dreaded than this, and that is to " name " the disorderly member. 25, 26. For the Address see Note on the English Consti- tution, page 322. Its menacing front in this case was the declaration of a state of rebellion in Massachusetts, and a call for immediate action to suppress it. One of the heavy bills of pains and penalities was that referred to in the opening sen- tences of this speech as " the grand penal bill." See note, p. 1, L 8. Pack 9, 5-12. An occasional system here means a policy which lacks the guidance of far-reaching principles, and so con- tents itself with makeshifts to meet new occasions or emergencies as they arise — a policy of shifts. The object referred to in 1. G and 12, and rejxiatedly throughout this discussion, is the Colonies themselves. 22. That is, ' the subject of their commerce has been treated,' etc. The gentleman was a Mr. Glover, who presented a petition from the West India planters praying that peace might be made with the American Colonies. His literary reputation, compli- mented here, is now quite forgotten. The bar is a movable bar- rier or rail in the main aisle, beyond which none but officers and members are allowed to pass. All other persons, if permitted to address the House, must do so standing outside this barrier. Page 10, 9. state, where we should say statement. See also p. 56, 1. 4. 21-23. The exports from England to Africa consisted almost wholly of articles used in bai-ter for slaves, who were shipped thence to the Colonies. The exchange on the coast of Africa was but an incident in a larger transaction beginning in England and ending in America. The amount of these exports is, therefore. Burke: On Conciliation with the Colonies. 383 rightly added by Burke to the total of direct exports to the Colonies. Page 12, 10 ff. To secure a more vivid sense of the uuexam- l»led vigor and growth of the Colonies than mere statistics could i^'ive, Burke pauses here to turn upon the subject the gorgeous illumination of this paragraph. The attempt is a daring one, and is carried out with characteristic opulence and splendor. The u^ood taste of portions of it has been questioned ; particularly the :icademic and conventional fulsomeness of lines 24-35 ; but that wt)uld hanlly have counted as a fault in a century which admired such displays. 22, 23. Already old enough to read the deeds of his fathers, an«l abl«^ to know what virtue is;' — adapted from Viri^il, Eel. iv. 2(J. 27-'i."). the fourth generation, since (icorge III., was, not the son, but the grandson of (leorge II. made Oreat Britain by the union with Scotland in 1707. The higher rank of peerage was that of Earl, to which Lord Bathurst had been advanced from that of Baron, the lowest hereditary degree. The new title added to the honors of the family was that of Baron Apsley, conferred upon I^rd Bathurst's son when the latter became Lord Chancellor. Page 14, 10. deceive, i.e., beguile, lighten, — an echo of Latin usage in the case of the parallel word, fallere. 27-29. Alluding to the famous story of a Roman father con- demned to die of starvation, but secretly nourished by his daugh- ter from her own breasts, until the discovery of her devotion and the admiration it aroused brought about his release. Page 15^ 11. The Serpent, — a constellation within the Antartic circle. 17. run the longitude. This expression seems not to be current with nautical men ; although they naturally interpret it its spoken of a course sailed due east or west, so that the ship's progress is reckoned in longitude alone. On the other hand, the context seems to call for a course due south, or nearly so — fol- lowing a great circle of longitude, or meridian. It may l>e that Burke has used the phrase here stricMy, as the sailors understand it; meaning that some of the American whalers, after their 834 Notes. African cruise, sailed westward to Brazil, as perhaps they might do oil their homeward cruise. Or it may be that without strict question of nautical interpretation he used the sonorous phrase in the other sense, which seemed obvious enough to him. Page 16, 10. complexion, in its original signification of temperament, the way in which a person is ' put together ; ' and so generally in Burke. Passages like that which follows here (pp. IG, 17) justify Matthew Arnold's high praise of Burke, "be- cause almost alone in England he brings thought to bear upon politics ; he saturates politics with thought.'* Pack 18, 9, 10. During the great struggle against the tyranny of the Stuarts. 21-24. Notably in Rome, an example always present to Burke's mind. Paynk. Pack 19, 27-29. popular, — democratic, *of the jieople and by the jxiople.' merely jx)pular, — wholly so. the popular representative — the portion which represents the people. Cf. Burke's more explicit statement, p. 52, 1. 34 ff. 31. aversion is now followed by /o, after the manner of its synonyms, dislike, repugnance, etc. But in Burke's time the force of a Latin etymology or of Latin usage was still strongly felt, and often determined both idiom and meaning of English words. Hence the from in this case. The young student, whose sense for idiom and usage needs to grow more sure and more intelligent, should not fail to notice these cases as they arise. Even though unacquainted with Latin, he should lose no time in acquiring the habit of consulting directly the Latin lexicon. With a little resolution and a little help at first, the difficulties will speedily vanish ; while the gain in conscious power and in grasp of lan- guage is invaluable. For examples at hand try piety, p. 14, 1. 27, communion, p. 20, 1. 27, and constitution, p. 22, 1. 21. Page 21, 29-31. This high and jealous spirit of the free-born in Rome in the midst of a servile class may be illustrated from almost any page of Shakespeare's Julius Ccusar. Our Teutonic and Scandinavian ancestry was habitually, though incorrectly, called Gothic by writers of the last century. such were the Poles, for at this time they had ceased to be an independent nation. Burlcc : On C>ifhu'li>itioji irifli the Colonics, 33") Page 22, 6, 7. The loiui seems still to ho, held by the lawyers. The law is still considered to be the most natural avenue to a political career. 12. Plantations — colonies, the plantings of a new society or race. The term is regularly so used in acts and charters, and has no reference whatever to cultivation of the soil. 18-21. In the hope of paralyzing all concerted action on the part of the colonists, an order was issued forbidding the calling of town-meetings after Aug. 1, 1774. But a way was soon found, and within the limit of the law, to hold such meetings without calling them. The last called meeting before that date was simply adjourned to whatever time was thought desirable, and its legal existence was thus prolonged indefinitely. 25, 26. This was Thurlow, a famous lawyer, and afterwards Lord Chancellor. At this time he was Attorney-General, and a conspicuous figure among the Ministers on the Tresasury Bench. Directly in front of him was the narrow space of open floor; hence, the designation of his position as "on the floor." To guard its freedom of speech, the House of Commons in earlier times used its utmost powers to prevent any attempt at reporting its debates. It thus became, and still is, a grave breach of deco- rum for a member to use pencil and paper in the House at all, unless it were to make a brief note of a point to which he would reply. Burke thus understands Thurlow's note-book and pencil, and avails himself of the unusual action to identify, without naming him, the person he means. 32. "Studies pass over into character,** or "What we pursue takes shape again in our life ; " a famous aphorism from Ovid, Heroid. Ep. xv. 83, quoted also by Bacon in his essay 0/ Studies. Page 23, 15-17. A splendid figure developed out of Horace's fine phrase in the opening of one of his Odes (Bk. iv. 4), com- paring Drusus in his victorious career to Jove's eagle, "tlx* tluiii- der's winged minister," ministrum fulminis alitem. Paqr 24, 20, 27. with all its imperfections on its head. Adapted from the words of the ghost iu Uandet^ Act I., bceuo V. 79. 336 Notes. Page 30, 8. "To the despoiled are still left arms." — Juve- nal, Sat. viii. 124. 26. Cf. Acts xix. 19. 33. more chargeable, involving heavier charge, more ex- pensive. Page 31, 35, 36. Quoted from that treasury of bathos, The Art of Sinking in Poetry^ ch. xi. The remote source of the lines in « one of Dryden's plays,*' though affirmed by various editors, seems to lack verification. Pack 32, 20, 27. Sir Edward Coke, a famous lawyer under Elizabeth and James; Attorney-General in 1603, when Raleigh was tried for treason. " While the prisoner defended himself with the calmest dignity and self-possession, Coke burst into the bitterest invective, brutally addressing the great courtier, as if he were a* servant, in the phrase long remembered for its insolence and injustice, *Thou hast an English face, but a Spanish heart!'*' — Encyc. Brit. Page 33, 14, 15. ex vi test have incurred many delays, and in this case, with the Ministry to oppose it at every step, it could hardly have been brought to the consideration of the House at all. (See Note on Forms of Procedure, p. 323.) Still, could these resolu- tions have passed, the Ministers would, in effect, have been instructed to introduce and forward the legislation indicated, or else to vacate their places. This speech shared the fate which attended most of Burke's efforts. Its force and eloquence commanded utiiversal admiration, but were powerless to bring about what he desired. The resolu- tions were lost by an overwhelming majority. What actually took place is stated in Ilansard^s Parliamentary History as follows : ^ * The statement appended to the flrat edition of this ii|)4>cch, and copied by alinoat every editor nince, that " upon this [flmt] Reflolntion the previoiu que** tiou was put and carrird," In maiiifestly in error oud absurd. 340 Note%, " Mr. Jenkiiison iiiDvcd tip- iucstioii iipc:, oliition. Upon this the liou.-j diMd' •!. . . . ^'ta- . . . 7^, .Nut-.s, . . . 27 (jU'-tioii jmt (ni thtiii, 'Die otlwrs were negativod." In Anu'rican j>nictice the lUdtiMn •• that th.- jii^n i^us (jip >tions who hope to ••any tli-i it. and th<'n tlif main <[ti»'>t ii.ii inimrdiafely afterwards, if it laiLs, tilings ai'e oidy as ili( y wfic Im-iuh'. In England, on the contrary, tho motion " that the previous question be put," is a device 1 main qnostion altogftlior, without cominj^ to any dii- , . ^.,,. ,,|m.ii it; i>, in fact, a baokdiandfd way of " tablini; " it. Tlif motion is nia,.,., >i-,]ii,fT to Kni^dislj theory, the a.«sfMnbly is not at lilM>rty to ( I'lirtlitT any (>n which it lia> d.-ciilrd thai a Vol.' ^hall not ]m' tak.'ii. Thus, in th.- j'l-.-xMit instance, the Minis- tink.'*s trouMtsoiiif array of facts without cither admittini,^ or denying; them, and tlien voted down the i)olicy he babied upon tlio.^e hicLs. LORD CHATHAM. William Pitt, the "Great Commoner," afterwards Earl of Chatham, was born in 1708, was educated at Eton and Oxford, and entered Parliament in 1735. His remarkable ix)wers of oratory and his fiery spirit soon made him one of the foremost men of the Commons, and the most formidable antagonist of Walpole's administration. His uncompromising and successful hostility during these years earned for him the King's lasting resentment. "NN'hen Walpole was overthrown, and the Opposition came into power, Pitt's mastery in the House should have been recognized, and a seat should have been given him in the Ministry. But it was long before the King could be brought to offer him even a subordinate jx)sition. It was not until 174G that he became Paymaster of the Forces ; ten more years passed, and every other exixjriment was tried, before he was asked to become Prime Minister. At this time he was confessedly the only man capable of saving England from the desperate straits into which the weakness and wickedness of his predecessors had brought her. He soon won for her far more than all that had been lost. He made the name of England to be known and respected in every quarter of the globe. The five years of his administration are accounted the most glorious in all her history. For five years after that Pitt was out of office. After his return in 1760 with the title of Earl of Chatham, ill-health prevented him from taking an active part in the administration of which he was nominally the head ; and he retired finally from office two years later. But his interest in public affairs, and especially in whatever concenied the greatness of England, remained undiminished to the end. His most memorable speeches were those in which he denounced that pride and folly which was driving the American Colonies 342 Notes, into war ; yet he could not endure to think that England should ever lose these jewels from her crown. In 1778, on learning that a motion was to be made to grant to the Colonies their indepen- dence, he struggled up from his sick-bed to make a passionate and successful protest against a policy that would dismember England, and let her " fall prostrate before the House of Bourbon." He was already a dying man. At the close of the speech he fell in convulsions, was carried out, and, aftt»r lingering a few days, breathed his last, May 11, 1778. SPEECH ON AMERICAN AFFAIRS. Reporters of the last century rarely attempted to do more than to ^ive the general drift of thought and argument; at their hands a fiery eloquence like that of Chatham was sure to lose most of its vital quality. Barely five of his sjieeches seem to have been written out by competent listeners from notes taken on the spot ; and in these alone have we any clear approximation to what was actually said. The one we have chosen for this vol- ume claims to have had Chatham's revision ; but of this there is no certainty. By many critics it is accounted his master effort. The occasion was this : The assembling of Parliament in Novem- ber, 1777, had called forth the usual Address to the Throne, con- gratulating the King on the birth of a princess, indorsing the measures adopted by the Ministry, and promising to support the Crown to the uttermost in its struggle with the Colonies. Chatham seized the occasion to move an Amendment to the Address, and to protest once more against the injustice and folly of the war. TEXTUAL NOTES. Page 76, 5-7. The Minister was Lord North. See note to page 6. 30, 31. Adapted from Shakespeare, Julius Ccesar, III. ii. 123- 125. Page 78, 21. Lord Amherst, in the campaign of 1758-1759, ending in the capture of Quebec. Chatluim : On American Affairs. 343 28. The force under General Burgoyne, which surrendered at Saratoga, Oct 13, 1777. "The news of this terrible calamity gave force' to the words with which Chatham, at the very time of the surrender, was pressing for peace." — Green's History. 33, 34. in any event, because British success would only serve to make reconciliation impossible. See p. 79, 1. 7-14. Page 79, 18. Lord Percy. , Page 80, 8, 9. Shakespeare, Othello, III. iii. 349 ff. Page 82, 18. Note how carefully the speaker avoids recogniz- ing the validity of Washington's military title. Page 83, 20. but you can address. A special use of the verb address growing out of the special use of the noun explained in the Note on Forms of Procedure, p. 322. The thought is ex- panded below, 1. 24, 25. Page 87, 13-23. For the classes separately appealed to here, see Note on the House of I^rds, p. 318. 27. The walls of the old House of Lords were hung with tapestry representing striking scenes in English history. Among these was the fight with the Spanish Armada, in August, 1588. Lord Howard, Admiral of the English fleet on that occasion, and presumably conspicuous on the tapestry, was the ancestor of Ix)rd Suffolk referred to. Page 88, 20. enormous, in the sense of atrocious^ a sense which survives in the kindred noun enormity. Chatham's eloquence, like that of Burke, was all in vain upon this question. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 97 to 24. EDMUND BURKE. SPEECH AT BRISTOL. During his first and second Parliaments, Burke sat as member for Wendover. At the dissolution of 1774 he lost his seat be- cause the friend who owned the borough, and who had given him the election, was now in need of money, and must sell the seat to some one who could pay for it. Burke was proposed for a little borough in Yorkshire, and his election was actually secured, when there appeared on the scene a deputation from Bristol, the second city in the kingdom, urging him to " stand " for them. The honor and the opportunity were too great to be neglected. Burke waived his election at Malton, hurried to Bristol, and after an exciting canvass was elected as one of the two representatives of that city. In thanking his constituents after the election, Burke's colleague promised strictly to obey their wishes in all his parlia- mentary action. With characteristic independence, Burke took a different view of the relation between a representative and his constituents. "Their wishes," said he, "ought to have great weight with him; their opinions, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasure, his satisfactions to theirs ; and, above all, ever and in all cases to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacri- fices it to your opinion. . . . Government and legislation are matters of reason and judgment, and not of inclination ; and what sort of reason is that in which the determination precedes the dis- 344 Burke : Speech at Bristol, 1 1 "» cushion, in which one set of men deliberate and another decide, and where those who form the conclusion are perhaps three hun- dred miles distant from those who hear the arguments?" For six years the proud merchants of Bristol were content to be served by a man of this sort. But \i\)o\\ the sudden dissolu- tion of Parliament in 1780, Burke came down to Bristol to find an active canvass against him already in progress. Calling a meeting of the Mayor and prominent citizens, he rendered an account of his stewardship in the speech we are now considering. Its simplicity, its directness, and the calm dignity of its tone, are finely suited to the audience and the occasion, and are in marked contrast with the splendid rhetoric and the magnificent movement of the speech on Conciliation with America. But in devotion to principle, in lofty patriotism, in manly courage, in all that makes the difference between the statesman and the adroit politician, Burke is the same in both. As a noble defence of his own con- duct on the part of a public servant, this speech is unsurpassed. Burke's arguments presuppose a somewhat broad .acquaintance with the history of that eventful time, and especially with p]ng- land's part in it, whether at home or in America, Ireland, France, and the East Indies. The materials for such a synoptic view may be found in Green's Short History of the English People, chapter X., sections ii., iii,, iv., supplemented by topical readings from other standard works, especially Lecky's England in the Eigh- teenth Century. TEXTUAL NOTES. Page 89, 13, 14. the means of honorable service — his election to a seat in Parliament. 19. For the general conduct of elections, see note on the House of Commons, p. 320. In the United States all elections are " contested ; " i.e., are brought to the test of actual voting. In England such is not always the case. Where there is no ho}^ of carrying the election, or of gain from agitation, the weaker party often saves itself trouble and expense either by putting forward no candidates at all, or by withdrawing them after the canva.ss \\'M progressed far enough to demonstrate its futility. lu such 346 NoUs. cases, if there are no more candidates than there are seats to fill, the projjer officer " returns " those candidates — certifies that they are duly elected — without actually calling for the votes. Such would seem to have been the case in this election — see note upon the conclusion of this speech. For vivid portrayals of the excite- ments and strain of a contested election in England, the student should consult George Eliot's Middlemarch and Charles Reade's Put Yourself in His Place. Pagk 91, 20-^50. The student can hardly fail to note the striking application which Burke's utterances often have to pres- ent conditions in our own politics and public life. Cf. pp. 92-03, 103, el jxussim. This is due to his habit of fixing his attention upon the principles involved, rather than upon the passing forms of life and thought. Pack 92, 24 if. The most shameless intrigues and hrilwry were resorted to under George III., to enable him to control the legislation and policy of the realm, that he might rule as well as reign. See Green's Short HiMory, X. ii., the House of Commons and the Crown. Burke himself has left a startling picture of this state of affairs in his Thourfhts on the Present Discontents. A court party in English politics seems happily now no longer pos- sible. The initial step towards reform Burke had already been urging with characteristic energy in the session just ended (see p. 96, 1. 2 ff). It was — not unlike our own Civil Service Re- form — an attempt to cut short the means for bribery by greatly curtailing the lucrative offices within the gift of the Crown. (Cf. Burke's speech on Economical Reform, delivered Feb. 11, 1780.) The final steps in this same reform were the redistricting of the realm and the extension of the franchise in such a way as to make the House of Commons a body really representing the people. See Macaulay's speech on the Reform Bill, p. 252 ff. of this volume. 35. violate their consciences; e.g., by pledging absolute subserviency to the dictates of their constituents. This is the " infallible receipt " spoken of below. Page 96, 31. This was in August, 1776, when Washington was obliged to abandon New York. The victory seemed so deci- Burke: Speech at Bristol oAl .«»ive tltal lurtlior icftisliiuco «)ii lli<- paii m1 i1i,' ( uloiiirr, «iio tliought to l>e iii)ix>ssible. I*AiJK 98, .J. wounds . . . yet greeu; i.e., Iresh — a Shake- siiearian touch. li. state = statement; a frequent use in Burke's time. 20 ff. For a full account of Irish affairs as touched uix>n in this section, consult Lecky's England in the Eighteenth Centurt/. chapter xvii. The following sketch, adapted from Profe-ssor Goodrich, will serve to supplement and explain what is said in the sjieech : — Ireland at this time had a parliament of her own, but not Home Rule, since all legislation was really dictated by the British Ministry. Under the Navigation Laws almost no foreign trade was allowed her, save with England, and that was greatly re- stricted in order to protect English industries. At last the coun- try was reduced to such distress that in 1778, and again in 1771), it was proposed to remove the restrictions, and allow her a consid- erable participation in the commerce of the world. Though this was vehemently opi>osed by Bristol, in common with other great commercial towns, Burke felt himself bound to supi)ort the meas- ure. The ministry, however, l)ecame alarmed at the general out- cry, and no effectual relief was secured in either session. The Irish, indignant at this treatment, copied the example of the Americans, and formed associations pledged to abstain from the u.se of all English manufactures. In August, 1770, the French and Spanish fleets swept the Channel without resistance, and threatened a descent upon Ireland. England, with her own coasts in danger, and her armies engaged in America and India, could spare no more troops. The Irish people flew to arms. With no commission or authority whatever, save that of tln» necessity of national defence, the celebrated corps of Irish Volun- teers, consisting of over forty thousand men, was organized, armed, an«l oflicered within a few weeks. The Irish Parliament, meeting shortly after, approved the conduct of the Volunteers by a unani- njous vote of thank.s. With these troops at their command, they sent a significant Address to the King, declaring that '• it was not by temporary expedients, but by a free trade that the nation was 348 NoUs. to be saved from impending ruin." To enforce this Address, they limited the "supply" they granted the Crown to the jK^riod of six months instead of the customary two years. It was now clear that Ireland would follow the American Colonies in rebel- lion, unless the Ministry yielded at once. Hence the instanta- neous concessions so graphically described on page 100. P>en the woollen trade, — the "sacred fleece," — which the English had guarded with such jealous care, was thrown open to the Irish. Pagk 100, 1. It was the Irish House of Commons which re- fused to make any new grant to the English Crown. 27, ff. After their experiences during the seventeenth century. Englishmen came to regard a standing army in the hands of the King as a standing menace to their liberties. By the Bill of Bights (1G79) it was declared illegal to raise and maintain such an army except by consent of Psifliament. Ever since that time the maintenance and discipline of the English army has been authorized each year anew — and for a single year — by a sixicial Act of Parliament called, somewhat oddly, the Mutiny Act. In the flush of success and of national enthusiasm at this time, the Irish denied the validity in Ireland of all Acts of the English Parliament, though they did not abate in the least their loyalty to the King of England, who was also their King. English Acts being thus inoperative, and the civil law alone being in force, it became impossible to maintain military discipline — not among the Volunteers, for their conduct was a matter of national pride — but among the royal troops in Ireland. The Irish Parliament with great spirit seized the opportunity to prepare a Mutiny Act for Ireland, backed it by an overwhelming vote, and, in accord- ance with the regular procedure, sent it to the English Ministry for approval — a challenge to acknowledge their independence. The Bill came back with no other change save the loss of those words which limited its action to a single year. At this counter- challenge a panic seized Parliament. It could not be rallied to restore the expunged words, and the Act passed in that form. The maintenance of royal troops in Ireland was thus to be made perpetual, and independent of control by either Parliament ; a state of affairs fraught with danger to the liberties of both countries. linrkr: Sp /' "^ lir'tstnl. 349 VMiV. 101, 14-lU. Iturki! nviuisukmi Kiij^lisli jtritU; l>y urjjiiig iiH'a«ures for the relief of IreluiMl in spite of the seUi.sh op|)OKitiuii of his constituents. The humiliatiou of Great Britain, — in ln'ing terrified into making concfssions. uud in the j Kussair** of the Perjietual Mutiny Act. 21, ff. The si)ecial jwint of iliis rcU-riMuf i«) Anuiiiuii uiiaii.'s conies out on page 103. The news of the loss of Burgoyne's army reached England at the end of the session, lX*ceniV>er, 1777. After the holiday recess Ix)rd North amazed all parties alike by taking this " well-chosen hour of defeat " to offer to the Ameri- cans in effect the very measures of conciliation which Burke had urgeecanie intolerable to fair-* minded men ; and a Relief Bill, annulling the worst of the penal acts, was passed without even a call for a division in either House, so unanimous was the conviction concerning it (p. 118). But the old-time fanaticism of the masses had only l>een slumber- ing. At the passage of the Belief Bill it suddenly flashed again into flame. The l^rotestant Association " was fonned, an organ- ization i)ledged to bring al>out the re-enactment of the annulled law and to prevent any further measures of relief. Under such stimulus madness spread far and fast. Rioting soon l)egan in Edinburgh and (Jlasgow, where furious mobs destroyed the houses and property of Catholics and of those suspected of sym- jtathi/ing with them. After months of fitful disorder in various parts of the realm, matters culminated in June, 1780, in an at- tempt which recalls a very recent chapter in our own history — but with results more immediately tragic than in our case. A monster j^tition, calling for immediate repeal of the Relief Bill, was prepared; and Lord George Gordon, a leader in the agita- tion, undertook to lay it before Parliament in person, and at the head of an army of his followers. On the afternoon of June 2, three great bodies of men, wearing blue cockades and marching by different roads, met in front of the Parliament building just as the Houses were assembling. The petition was presented as planned. The roaring mob surged in, filled all the courts, stair- ways, and lobbies, insulted and outraged members, and for many hours held the Houses in a state of siege. At nightfall it dis- persed to l)egin its work of pillage and destruction elsewhere. The five days and nights that followed were a veritable reign of terror. All authority was paralyzed. The city was completely at Burh' : Speech at Bristol, 351 tlio mercy of tho inoh. For an admirable picture of the scenes in I^ndoi), the student is referred to Dickens's Barnahy Iludge. TIk! liistory of the whole matter may be read in Lecky's England in the Kighteenth Century^ chapter xiii. P.\(JK 109. Bristol had sympathized with the "No Popery" Miovemont, and had had its share of disorder as well. There is Ljrave irony, therefore, in Burke's remarks here and on page 116. Pa(JK 111, Ifi. pious, in the old Roman sense of reverent attitude ttiward (dl natural claims, whether from above, or around, or Iniueath us; — here used with special reference to the claims of humanity and justice. Students of Latin should look up in this connection the various connotations of Virgil's pius JEneas. 20, 21. the saying mass. The student will notice the change in this idiom since Burke's time. Wherover the gerund has Income so nearly like a common noun as to take an adjective modifier, the noun-construction is now commonly extended to its object as well — "saying ma.ss," or else "Mc saying o/mass." Page 112, 18. Revolution. See note to p. 42, 1. 33-:35. Pack 113, 27-30. The children of Catholic families were com- monly educated in France, under circumstances not at all calcu- lated to inspire in them patriotism and a love for free government. Pack 114, 9. For the Talbots, consult an Encyclopaedia or Biographical Dictionary. Page 116, 21 ff. Writers and speakers of the last century had a notable fashion of diversifying their compositions with what they called "characters," — elalM)rate and rhetorical descriptions of jwrsons, — an example of which we have alreatly encountered in this speech. An academic flavor and fulsomeness almost always characterize these passages, and in this instance these qualities are the more conspicuous because of the general sim- plicity and directness of the context. Page 117, 4. peculium — "a special fund for private and i^r- sonal uses." The student will be interested to trace the origin of this woni from the Latin pecus, and the development of meaning in its English cognates and derivatives, peculiar^ jtecun'mryy pecu- Ifttf, and fee. Consult the Latin Lexicon and the Etymological Dictionary. 352 Notes, 13, 14. The " Nullum Tempus Act.** See Lecky, Index, 8.v. Pack 121, 0. The most Protestant part of this Protest- ant Empire was, of course, th« American Colonies. Compare what liurke says of them in his Speech on Conciliation, p. 20 of this volume. Pagk 125, 10-14. The persecutions under Philip of Spain, carried out by the bloody Alva. See Motley's Rute of the Dutch Republic. Many craftsmen of the I^w Countries found refu!L,'o in Kngland, and planted their trades there. 33. Austria, as the successor of the ♦• Holy Roman Emi»ire," was the imix»rial court of Eurojie. Russia was not yet accorded that rank ; the French and German Empires were yet to be. Pack 126, \\. The minbter was Necker, the famous banker and financier ot France. Pagk 127, 8-12. This was Thurlow. See note to \>. 22, 1. 25, 26. Paok 132, 29. our resolves — the resolution refusing tore- peal the Relief Bill. See p. l:U, 1. 7 fF. Pagk 133, 5, 6. read three times, passed the three formal readings which mark the regular stages in the progress of an Act through the House. See Note on Forms of Procedure, p. 323. f). offences of presumption — presumed offences. Pagk 134, 5. lean more to the Crown, 8upiK)rt the kingly power and prerogative. See note to p. 113, 1. 27-30. 25. " No man ever touched with such force that proud and cruel spirit which actuates a people who hold others in subjection. It was just the spirit of the Athenian mob toward their colonies, and of every Roman toward the provinces of the empire, and it was, no doubt, one principal cause of the American war." — Pito- FKSSOR Goodrich. Pagk 135, 31 £f. An expansion of his own famous utterance in the Speech on Conciliation (p. 32) : " I do not know the method of drawing up an indictment against a whole people." Pagk 136, 30. help it, not in the sense now common, of pre- vent it. It is wortli while to notice how the scathing flash of irony, with which the paragraph opens, furnishes the heat and convincing force with which the orator resumes and welds together Burke: Sptu Hrlatol. 863 :is one the various topics with which he has separately dealt. IIo haegan his canvass. Two days later one of his three competitors fell dead, overcome with the excitement and strain of the contest. Next morning — the very morning of the election — Mr. Burke, satis- fied that his election was hopeless, publicly withdrew — " declined the poll " — in a little speech which is a fit pendant to the one just reaefore his time. Ilis most memorable speeches were delivered before the Court of the King's 354 Erskine: In the Stockdale Case, 355 Il«'nch, and from this series the one in behalf of Stockdale has Itcen chosen as an example of argument and eloquence specially ad- dressed to a jury. The circumstances were these : During the slow progress of the trial of Warren Hastings, a Scotch clergyman had written, and a Mr. John Stockdale of London had published, a pamphlet defending Mr. Ila-stings, and criticizing severely the con- el " was the other agency employed ; and it was at that time rendered far more effective for mischief than it could l>e now, by the following means : Instead of submitting to the jury the whole question of the guilt or innocence of the defendant in view of ail the facts and motives shown, as was done in the case of every other crime and misdemeanor, the practice in lilx;l suits was to allow the jury to consider nothing l)eyond the question whether the defendant had or had not published the matter as alleged. The vital question of the guilt or innocence of the publication was reserved for the decision of the judge alone; and in tl»'s«> ]X)litical suits he was often an interested party. «« Writers, pros- ecuti'd by an officer of the crown, without the investigation of a grand jury, and denied even a trial by their peers, were placed l>e- yond the pale of the law." This vicious principle hail been clearly revealed by tlic jxTSPoiitions which Wilkes cnduriMl, and in the 866 Notes, Letters of Junius. Mr. Erskine had attacked it with splendid force and skill in his defence of the Dean of St. Asaph's, claiming for the jx^rson accused of libel the same right which wa.s accorded to one accused of any other crime or misdemeanor known to the law of England — the right to be tried by the jury on the whole issue raised. Mr. Erskine's argument on that occasion was before judges alone, and, naturally enough, he was^ unceremoniously over- ruled. But the matter was not to be thus summarily disposed of. The public was aroused. The trial of Stockdale soon afforded an opportunity of bringing the question before the jury itself. Their answer was the verdict " Not Guilty," rendered in defiance of all precedent, and in spite of the fact that the publication was ad- mitted. It wa.s the last case of libel tried under the old rifjime. In 1702 Parliament was constrained to register this triumph of freedom by establishing in the Libel Act the very principle for which Mr. Erskine had contended. Among the champions of liberty Erskine stands thus linked with Milton, whose eloquent appeal "for the liberty of unli- censed printing," — his Areojmgitica — was the trumpet-call which opened the attack on this stronghold of tyranny. The history of this interesting subject may be found in May's Constitutional History of England^ chapter ix. TEXTUAL NOTES. Page 141, 5-7. The reference is to Erskine's political friends, Fox and the Whigs, and especially Burke, whom he greatly ad- mired. See relocated references to them farther on in this speech. Page 142, 10. information. The precise meaning of techni- cal terms should be ascertained u^wn the student's first encounter with them. See also, innuendoes, fine, farm, rent, and others farther on. Page 152, 18 ff. Compare with this Macaulay's description of the famous trial in his Essay on Warren IIa.stings. Page 153, 8. ■without prospect of conclusion, Tlie trial dragged on for seven years. One hundred and forty-eight days were actually spent in its sessions. Frxhine: In the Stockdale Case, 357 Pa«;k 155, Jl. This great hall was Westminster Hall, built I>y William Uufus. It .still stands, and forms part of the new Houses of Parliament. The Court of the King's Bench, before which Erskine was si^aking, sat under the same roof, and in a chamlHjr directly adjoining it. See also p. 178. Pa<;k 156, 27. brought home to — intrusted to, undertaken ''>■• 1*a(;k 159, 22. government, in the parliamentary sense ex- plained in the next sentence. 27. I ■wish he -would. To atlmit that the Tory party then in )x)W('r wa.s a faction would be to give up the poetical battle. ;i. my friends — Burke, Fox, and the Whigs now in oppo- sition. Page 160, 18. A committee which was appointed in 1781 to inquire into East Indian affairs, and which reported in 1782. The charges made by it are not to be confounded with the Arti- cles of Im|)eachment presented by the House. See below, p. IGl, 1. :^ I'm.! 162, 20-27. A striking proof of the dangers at that time attending free sj^ech is found in the extreme pains Erskine thinks it necessary to take in order to guard what he says from the charge of interfering with, or anticipating, tlie regular process of judicial investigation — the very same charge under which his client was suffering. Pagk 163, 11. Verres. Consult the Clas.sical Dictionary, s.v. Pa(;k 166, 'M. Gothic, a term formerly used with utmost looseness of signification, to designate confusedly anything Teu- tonic, mediaeval, or barbaric. Such was its meaning as at first applied to a style of arch\|«cture. In no other sense were our ancestors Gothic. Page 170, 6. amenable to no law, with reference to the privileges of members of Parliament, and particularly to their exemption from action or indictment for iiiiv fncdoni of sin^ech they may use. Page 170, 28 ff. The keen e«lg«- wnnu imks miiU-r ilu->.' in- nocent-looking remarks will l)e appreciated when we recall the notorious fact that Pitt carried the very same majority with him 358 Notes, i< : - mI ili<- iiii]M-:uliiii.iit (|U-'-i • a-aiii-t. and llifii I'-r 1 - betwi'L'U liic two votes suliiced lor li I ; but till' rank and tile wovo so v.iil Aiilioiit \\i>- '. in- t<'ii(l.-.t. Ml'-, ' s. . iii.-il tlifir niaiiMii\ !.• m |hth-i-l iwim. m iJic woi.l nt" (•(.iiiiiiaiiil -i\cn on tlic vny fvi-ning the vote was taktii. Ta*.! 171. 11*. assumed — t-x-i-i-.l. l.iou'^lit into r.Mjui- sit ion. 21. the saving judgment — th.' ju lo j>nni>li as iTinif«> wwrv <*rroi> of tl Pa(.i 172. > extraordinary <>\ upon " mloiiiiat ion ■* only, ami not njM.n ic^nhir indift nicnt l>y a -rand jury, as rxj.lainrd l.rl..\\. o(i. the law. i.r.. tlic roiniuon law. W(»rkini; tlirough its ordi- naiy in>t runn-nt^. I' vol 174 L' I. commentaries, when' we shoiil«l .say '"//////' ///>. Th. : lit tl<' adroit iH'ss in th . >\\ which f(.llows, tliat III.' .\i:..rn.-y-( , " ■~. after all. oio} .li-rhar_;iiij, ].cii'unc- tori!\ };is otiicial th.: 180, 1. 'ihc ] ■'/ in a sent, i.e.' is a ;..,ii.. I x\hich usctl to i..- .1.1.1 iniii.-o ,oiii.-i ns holly ]»y cohMilcr- ations of cupliony and rliytlnn. The claiin-^ of clearness and of jirecision are now more generally reco-ni/.etl. and we arc aj>t to insi>t iii.it til.' word l>e ]>laced next to that wlii<-h it ([ualiti<'s. The ; is >harj>ly I'l-.'iuht (.ut in thi- j>articii]ar cas.'. Odd a- 111.' >.'ntence now sounds, it Would he dillicult. unless we rec.ot I lie wliole. to tind an(»ther place lor »//«/// witliout destroying either >en.M' or rhvthni. or l»(»th. DANIEL WEBSTEU. Daniel Webster, statesman and orator, was bom in Salis- bury, N. II., Jan. 12, 1782. Ills father, a sturdy frontiei-snian, soldier, farmer, ineiiil)er of the legislature, and county judge, was, after the nuiniier of his kind, always struggling with i^verty, and handicapiK'd with a sense of the deficiencies of his early educa- tion. He purposed that Daniel, his youngest son, a delicate latl and little fitted for the heavy tasks of a farmer's life, should not l)e so handicai>iHMl. Through struggles and self-denial by no means rare in such cases, a way w;us made to send him to college. After an exceedingly brief and fragmentary preparation, he en- tered Dartmouth College in 1797, and was graduated in 1801, at the age of nineteen. He turned at once to the study of law, sup|K)rting himself meanwhile, and assisting his elder brother in college, by copying, teaching, and other miscellaneous labors. Admitted to the bar in 1805, his remarkable abilities soon gained him recognition, and the field of political life oi^ned before him. In 181'i he took his seat in Congress. From this time on his life is writ so large on the pages of his country's history as to need little further notice here. The greatest service he rendere*! his country wjis doubtless as champion of the national idea, and the siXH'ch Iwfore us is probably his most meniorable utterance uihmi that subject. Honors and fame came thick uiK>n him — all save the honor he had come to covet most, the Presidency. Aftt-r thirty-nine years of public life he died ()i(. Jl. 1^."*J. SPEECH IN REPLY TO HAYNE. The cncuinstances which called forth this sjHiech may 1h« thus 8ummari/x'd : For a long time l)efore l.s:U) there had been a grave divergence of conviction among American statesmen as t 350 aOU JNutca. real nature of the union l>etween the various States, and as to thr limitations thereby iniiK)sed upon the powers of the 8eparat<' States, as well as the limitations exercised by them uj^n the IK>wers of the general government. One side held that the United States was one nation; that the general government wius clKirt,nMl with the conduct of all matters which concern tli« hiikmi as ;, whole; that laws matle by the representatives of all in tiic gtMunil government are binding upon all alike ; and that such laws may be jwacefully set aside in one of two ways only, either by having them declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, or by hav- ing them rei»ealed by the power which made them. The other side held the several States to be sovereign i>owers, very much as if they were separate nations, united, it is true, for certain com- mon purposes, and delegating certain limited* powers to a common organization ; but reserving each to itiielf alone the decision as to whether measures enacted by the general government should l)e ojierative within its territory. This was the doctrine of State- Rights; and its application in nullifying laws passed by Congress was at this time nuich talked about, and was soon to be tried by South Carolina with this very Robert Y. Ilayne as Governor. These views were not confined to separate sections of country ; but the National idea found its strongest support in New Eng- land, while the State-Rights idea — with its corollary, nullification — was warmly espoused in the South. At the end of December, 1829, Mr. Foote of Connecticut intro- duced into the Senate the innocent resolution, printed on page 185 of this volume, calling for an inquiry into the sales and sur- veys of the }Tublic lands. JN^othing 8i>ecial was elicited by the fitful discussion which ensued until, on January*19, Mr. Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina made a speech, " accusing the New England States of a selfish design to retard the growth of the Western States — a design originating the tariff; " and appealing to a natural sympathy, which, as he affirmed, existed lietween the Western and the Southern States, and which should unite thein against the policy and the assumption of New England. Engaged as Mr. Webster was at this time in the Supreme Court, he had not followed the discussion, and had no thought of taking part Webster: In Reply to Ilayne. J501 ill it at iill until by chance he heard this kimmmIi ot Mi. ll.iyn.-. Its tone and spirit were so unusual that he felt it nmst be an- 8Nvereolicy, as opi)os(nl to the divisive tendencies and sectional jealousies to which api)eal hail been made. The discussion took on at once a range and an iin- {K)rtance far transcending the scoik; of the simple resolution which started it. The champions of State-Rights and Nullificar tion, together with those who insisted that slavery should be provided for in the settlement of new territories, rallied to the charge. " There seemed to be," said an observer, "a preconcerted action on the part of Southern meml>er8 to break down the Northern men, aiul to destroy their influence by a prt;meditated assault." John C. Calhoun, the foremost of them all, wjus presid- ing officer of the Senate, and could take no part in the debate; but his place in the lists was made good by Thomas II. Benton and Robert Y. Ilayne. The speech of the latter, in particular, by its eloquence and acuteness, as well as by the relentlessness of its personal attack, produced a profound impression. By many per- sons it was felt to be unauswerable. At its close the Senate adjourned. This second speech of Mr. Hayne wjts the one i«* wliiih Mi. Webster was next morning to reply. The previous strokes in this battle-royal haeech with a question (p. 209) which may be taken either as an indignant denial of any change in his views, or as a " bluff." Nothing could have better served Mr. Webster's purjwse. Having "drawn" Mr. Calhoun, he graciously accepts his remark in the former sense, and then recalls that there are other gentlemen, too, from South Carolina who are not imphicably opposed to internal improvements at the general cost — if only they are to be carried out in South Carolina. Pagk 205, 21. causa cauaans — the caiudnr/ cause, — the school- men's phrase to distinguish the essential or efficient cause from various co-oiwrating or conditioning caiLses. Pagk 207, 4. et noscilur a sociis — " and he is [was] recognized by his companions." But Mr. Webster seems to give it a pun- ning turn not borne out by the T.nfin — -anti ho w.-vs known by the company he kept." Page 207, 13. For the puny (icsignanons ot tho^r .l;i\^. >. .> note to page 298. Pagk 212, 21. had proved a legal settlement in South Carolina — was found to Ik; regularly domiciled there. Page 218» 11. The Hartford Couvention of 1814, a conven- tion of New England delegates opi>osed to the policy of the government, and especially to the war with England. It sat with closed doors, and was at the time strongly susix'cted of treasonable designs. No proof, however, of this charge has ever Injcn produced, and it is now generally discredited. Cf ' "^ 1 1 istory. Pack 220, 12 -If). The peculiar turn of expression here is » reminiscence of the closing lines of Dryden's Alexander** Feast. 364 Notes. The student who has his English classics in mind cannot fail to notice the freer, 1798, to express its opposition to the Alien and Sedition Laws recently enacted by Congress. The language was understood to be Mr. Madison's. Page 227, 5, 6. One finds here, and farther on (p. 239), the first drafts of Lincoln's immortal phrase — " government of the people, by the people, and for the people." See p. 312. Page 234, 21. The not does not appear in any edition con- sulted, but seems imperatively demanded by the sense. Its omission was doubtless due to a slip of the printer and the proof- reader. Page 246, 7. John Fries was a turbulent fellow who, in 1799, headed some Pennsylvanians in riotous resistance to the laws of the United States and in the rescue of prisoners. He was twice tried for treason, twice convicted and sentenced to be hanged, but was finally pardoned by the President " At the conclusion of Mr. Webster's argument, (reneral Hayne rose to reply. Although one of his friends proposed an adjourn- ment, he declined to avail himself of it, and addressed the Senate for a short time on the constitutional question. Mr. Webster then rose again, rest^t^d both sides of the controversy with great force, giving General Ilayne the benefit of that clear setting forth Webster: In Reply to Hayne. 865 of the position of an adversary, which none could do better tliun Mr. Webster, and which none could doubt was the strongest method of stating it ; and then following it, step by step, with the appropriate answer. This was the reduction of the whole con- troversy to the severest forms of logic." — Life of Daniel WelmUr, by Gkokge T. Cuutis, vol. i. p. 359. Two years passed, and again Mr. Webster faced this same ques- tion in the Senate, but this time with an antagonist more formid- able than Mr. Ilayne. Mr. Calhoun's speech on that occa.sion hius l>een considered as perhaps the al)lest effort of his life. It became the scripture from which almost a whole generation of the young men of the South learned those lessons which afterward carried them into the War of Secession. Mr. Webster's rei)ly was this time more closely masoned, more compact and powerful as an intellectual effort than the earlier speech, though less inter- esting, it may l>e, to the general reader. But the great debate of 1830 seems to liave exhausted the arguments upon this subject. \Miatever was said later upon either side seemed to be but re- statement or re-arrangement of what was there laid down. One thing only remained, and that was to bring the opposing views to the arbitrament of actual conflict. That crisis seemed actually to have come, even while tliis second debate was going on. South Carolina, with Mr. Ilayne as Governor, undertook to put her views in practice, and armed herself to stop the collection of United States duties in her jwrts. President Jackson sternly prepared to enforce the laws with all the powers the goverment could wield. But the storm that threatened did not break then after all. The matter was compromised, and South Carolina took back her Act of Nullification. The final issue came a generation later, and on those battle-fields where brave men freely gave their lives " that government of the people, by the people, and for the people should not perish from the earth." LORD MACAULAY. Thomas Babington Macaulay was bom Oct. 25, 1800, the eldest 8UI1 of Zachary Macaulay, a prominent reformer and aboli- tionist, a follower and friend of Willierforce. His boyhood was passed at his father's home in I^ndon, and afterwards at a private school, until at eighteen years of age he entered Cambridge. Here he took his degree in 182*^, and was elected Fellow two years later. While yet a mere child he luul become interested in the great public questions discussed at his father's table. At the university he won academic honors for comi>osition, oratory, and political debate. Thus were already outlined the two fields of his future achievement His literary career opened first with the publica- tion in 1825 of his famous essay on Milton, the first of a long and brilliant series of papers which ended only with his death. In 1842 appeared his Lolitical career l)egan with his entrance into Parliament in 18*50. It continued unbroken for seventeen years, and was even resumed for a time at a later period. His voice was heard with no uncertain sound on all the great questions of that stirring time, but he is specially rememl>ered for the ardor with which he threw hiuLself into the great Reform Movement of 1832. Twice he held cabinet offices in Whig Ministries, and once he was sent to India as legal adviser to the Supreme Council and president of an important Commission. In 1857 he was made Baron Macaulay of Rothley — " the first literary man to receive such a distinction." Into each of these careers lie put energy and talent enough to have made Mm famous without aid from the other. Between 3GG M'i'-.inh,,/ • On tin /:. r.,r,n Ji:ji. .wr, tlu'rn l)nth his iiic was crowiKMi witiiciKtri ana cxciK'uxmii i>«'V(mu1 the lot of most famous men, ami beyond the jxjwers of his own abounding vitality to sustain. A weakness of the heart ended in his death on December 28, 1859. SPEECH ON THE REFORM BILL. The House of Commons was formally established in England when Edward I. in 1295 summoned to his Great Council two bur- gesses to be elected " from every city, borough, and leading town " of his realm, and two knights from every shire. A body so con- stituted must have been fairly representative of the nation. There was, however, no definite settlement of the details of representation ; it still remained with the Crown to determine what boroughs should Ihj invited to participate. In the sixteenth century the Tudor sovereigns had learned the art of managing their Commons by managing the election of members. Elections, of course, could most easily be controlled in small and unimpor- tant places ; hence such from time to time were added to the list Thus began one form of the " rotten borough." In the seventeenth century representation in Parliament crystallized per- manently almost in the form in which the Tudors left it. As time went on, places once imi^rtant and ix)pulou8 often dwindled or stood still, while the mighty towns of modern England were growing up about them, and wholly without representation. These Imroughs thus accidentally decayed were quite as reatly means for corrupt uses — were quite as " rotten " — as were those of the other sort. By this time Parliament had ceased to l>e in any true sense the representative of the nation. The pressure of the " new wine in old bottles " was alrt^ady alarming in the eigh- teenth century, when it attracted the attention of such men as Cliatham and Burke. But consideration of it was imix)ssible amid the tumults of the French Revolution and of the XajHileonic wars. It had to wait till 1820, when I^>ril John Russell proposed his bill for Parliamentary Reform. The demand was nothing less tlian that a corrupt Parliament, intrenched within these " rot- j»n'ssiir n\\vr> 1' 1(1 111 . . udiiitl not do without ext4.Tnal Tlif liill \'. 1.- Lidiiiitilv r«'U'cted, as were lit I'lw.irl ;o the popular A >n luriiii-laM'' tiial \\ Ilm^i^toii and ili.' Tory Miiiis- 1 out >titlly auMiii>t it, Nwn* fdivcd to n'-ign, Nvhilc t he I Earl Grey (am. i;ito power, pledged to the reform. On ill.- 1-t ..1' March. l-Sol, llu-ir > - ■- ^vas laid before Parlia- iiKiit l.y Loid Johii lliissell, who, loi a ( 'al>inet Minister, was clio-.-ii tor this iiiiiM.rt:, • ot" Ids ability and of Ili- l.'ii' :im1 iH,ii(.r;il.! ... :..;: ^ -. It wfvs |m>]")osed to 1 Iwroughs, and to di>tri lilt r their one huiiiinil and lurty-thruc seats among tli" '^rrat cities and the towns hitherto not reprcsrntod. Thobattl*' tin:- j.iiiod continued wiili l>ut littlf iiitilily on ' .. w: -;m'-. w nut- l H' .■. n^ '■• nai ion \N;iited for tlh' i-xiif with «'V('r-L:ro\N iiiL,^ excitement. Tii'' l»ill came to its second n-adini^ with a majority of one vote. In the discussions whirh followed, the ^Miui.stry was defeated on a j-oint of detail, and I'Vomi'tly dissolved Parliament and appeaU-d to th.- |m<,|,1,- in a nc w rlt'ction. Intrenched as corruption was in the existing order of thin<;s, tlie reformers were nevertheless returned in over- wht'lmiiiL,' majority. At the assembling of tli<* nt-w Parlia!i,.iit in June. Lord John Russell introduced his I'ill a-ain, in iln' loiui known as tlie Second Reform Bill. All that it> oi^poiM-nt.- in the IIou.se could now do was to delay its jro-it ss. It finally passed the romnioiis by a majority of over a hundred votes, but was rcj. ( I. (I hy the Lords. Parliament -was then prorogued. After the recess tlu' hill wa.s introduced for the tliird time, and at the end of .March had passed the House by a niajcjrity more decisive than ever. Popular excitement was now at fever heat, and r< i'( at- rdly broke out into rioting. The Lords seemed as obstinately }>ent on defeating- the measure as ever before; but the gravity of tlu' crisis, and the knowledge that the king's consent liad been oiven to the creation of enonixh new peers to overcome theii- iiia- joritv. at last sobered the-ni. W.'llin-ton and his followers decidetl to withdraw frc»ni the linal deliberations and vutin-. and to allow Macaulay: On the Reform Bill, 869 the bill to pass in their absence, rather than face an issue so haz- ardous to their order. The bill became law on June 7, 1832. During this long debate Macaulay spoke many times. Of the live speeches on the Reform Bill, which he himself corrected for the press, we have chosen the first as the most comprehensive and the best suited for our purpose. In it his characteristic brilliancy of expression and of argument are abundantly exemplified. Those who are interested in looking further into the ix)ints of his style will find the matter fully treated iu Miuto's Manual of English Prose Literature^ pp. 76-130. TEXTUAL NOTES. Page 252, 20. Paymaster of the Forcea — Lord John Rus- sell, mentioned in the Introductory Note above. lie was after- wards Earl Russell, and a conspicuous figure in Euro^^ean politics as late as the close of the Crimean War. For the "courtesy-title" borne by liim at this time, see note to page 6, 1. 9-14. It is not thought necessary to burden the student with the names of all the persons referred to in this speech. Many of them are unknown to general fame. The exceptions will be noted as they occur. Pack 253, 28. those cheers — the cries of "Hear, hear," with which the Commons punctuate, or rather annotate, the utterances -of their si^eakers. An astonishing variety of meaning can he put into them. Macaulay understands the contemptuous irony of these cheers from the Opposition. So, too, on the next page, I. 12. Page 258, 33, 34. Benevolences and Shipmoney were ex- actions of money maer8 of the great guilds of London, entitled to wear their livery, and to vote as burgesses. Page 265, 5-7. The list brought forward in this debate con- taineeen added — member for Calue, "cue of the most degraded of the o7U JSotCH. rotten borough^/* as one of the speakers took pains to remind him. Page 267, 5. The famous agitator and " uncrowned king of Ireland," Daniel O'Connell. Note the striking reference to him again, p. 209, 1. 24-26. The circumstances here concerned are these : The franchise in Ireland had been limited to persons who owned freehold pro]M»rty of forty shillings* yearly value or rental. On the l)a.sis of this representation, in 1828 O'Connell was elected to Parliament as member for Clare, in spite of the fact that he was a Catholic, and that Catholics were ineligible to sit in Parlia- ment. Ireland was aflame with enthusiasm over this victory. The English Minlstr}' under Wellington, fearing lest civil war should break out, consented in 1829 to measures of relief which allowed Catholics to sit in Parliament, but at the same time raised the proi>erty qualification of voters. O'Connell now came forward to claim his seat ; but the Commons insisted that, having been elected on the old basis of representation, he must take the oaths formerly required, and renounce Catholicism, which he refused to do. The seat was then declared vacant, and a new election was ordered. O'Connell was triumphantly returned, and took his seat in 1830. The supix>sed "crime" of the electors of Clare was their defiance of the established order in electing a representative who could not legally sit in Parliament. The sup- posed "punishment" was the disfranchising of the poorer electors, Protestant as well as Catholic. Pack 268, 2. Sir Rolwrt Peel, member of the last Tory cab- inet, and a distinguished statesman, in spite of the humiliating position in which he here appears. The Test and Corporation Acts mentioned below were parts of the machinery for disqualifying Catholics for positions of public trust. Page 269, 24. The Rent was O'Connell's campaign fund, raised by the Catholic Association through voluntary contribu- tions from all classes in Ireland. It amounted at times to 82,500 per month. 28. that . . . cruel test of military fidelity — in the case of Macaulay: On the Reform Bill, JlTl soldiers ordered to charge upon mobs of their couiitrvinni. wiili whose cause they could not but sympathize. V\r,v. 270, 5-9. The reference is to the mtMiiorable ivevolution of .Inly, aiul the downfall and exile from France of the last of hor liourbon kings. 22. property divided against itself. The newer wealth of England — her iiianufactures and trade — oKstinately opposed in its claims for representation by the older wealth of landed estates in the hands of the old aristocracy. JOHN C. CALHOUN. John C. Calhoun was of Irwh Presbyterian descent, bom in the Abbeville District, South Carolina, March 18, 1782. His father died while he was yet young. His iHjyhooti and youth were spent with his mother on the plantation, and without any regular school- ing until he was eighteen years old. It is a striking proof of the intensity and power of his mind, that after only two years of study under private instruction he was able to enter the Junior class in Yale College. Two years later he was graduated with honors. Three years more he devoted to the study of law. Not long after this he was elected to the legislature of his State, and in 1811 he •was sent to Congress, taking at once a prominent j>lace as a sup- porter of the measures which brought on the war with England. He was of the same age as Daniel Webster, and but little younger than Henry Clay — men with whom he was so incessantly brought in contact in public life, that, in spite of the fact of their almost constant antagonism, the three are often spoken of as " the great triumvirate " of American statesmen. Mr. Calhoun had the qual- ities of a born leader of men — high intellectual force, albeit somewhat narrow, unflinching determination, fiery earnestness, and splendid oratorical powers. During the early part of his career he was broadly and generously national in the policies he supported, as is seen in Mr. Webster's sketch (pp. 204-207 of this volume). He filled successively many high positions, becoming Vice-President under John Quincy Adams, and again under Jack- son in 1829. About this time his attitude seemed to change. His view was more and more concentrated upon the institutions and interests of the South. Henceforward he stood as the champion of State-Rights, and of whatever that doctrine finally involved — nullification and the extension of the slave-holding power. As 372 Calhoun: On the Slavery Question, 87»5 sucli he was frcciuontly opposed to Mr. Wt;l»sUr ;nui Mr. Clay (see concluding note to Mr. Webster's speech, p. 365). As time went on, and troul)les gathered about the nation, Mr. Calhoun set himself with unflinching determination against all conjpromise, and iBcd his utmost endeavor to make the whole South a unit for what he believed to be its right and its duty. lie did not live to see the direful harvest which sprang up from the dragon's teeth lie had sown. He died March 31, 1850. SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY QUESTIOX. At the conclusion of the Mexican War the country >\.i.> innMsn into a ferment over the question whether slavery should be aelow, note to page 293) ; and though the proviso failed at that time, there was every indication that it would l>e revive*! later, and that it might eventually succeed. At this juncture the inliabitants of California, without waiting for an «< enabling act," met in convention, drafted for themselves a State Constitution prohibiting slaverj', ratified it by an overwhelming popular vote, and applied to Congress to be received into tlie Union. It seemed that the territorial acquisition which the slave-holding interest had counted on so confidently as* \i» own was alreatly slipping out of its grasp. The South was greatly roused. Its more fiery spirits denounced in unmeasured terms this violation of what 374 NotcB, they thought their righta, and threatened more fiercely than ever to bn'ak up the Union. More thoughtful men regarded the crisia with profound distress and alann. Among these, Henry Clay, then seventy-three years old, and retired from public life, felt cuIUmI u|X)n to come forward once more to avert, if possible, the inqM^nding ruin. His scheme for restoring harmony was pre- sented to the Senate, Jan. 20, 1850, in a series of resolutions, and was supjwrted by him in a great siteech on Feb. 5 and 6. The debate which followed brought out, we are told, every man of note in the Senate, not merely its great leaders of the pa.st, — Webster, Calhoun, and Clay, — whose race was almost run, l)ut those who were to shape the future of the country — Seward, Chase, and Jefferson Davis. The speech we have chosen from this great debate is specially memorable as Ix'ing the last great utterance of Mr. Calhoun on the subject to which he had given the strength and force of his life. Of the purity of his purpose and of his profound sincerity there could Iw no queMion. I lis int4»lh'ct was as bright and keen as ever, though the hand of death was visibly upon him. The * speech, which he ha^l carefully prei>ared, he was unable to deliver; it was reaint such utter- ances as the jHiroration of Mr. Webster's si»eech of twenty years bt'f.)re. Page 292, 25. The distinguished senator was Henry Clay. His plan, the Compromise of 1850, was this: «*The admission of California was to be made acceptable to the South by giving slavery a chance iff Utah and New Mexico, and by the enactment of a more efficient fugitive slave law. The Northern jHJople were to be reconciled to the abandonment of the Wilmot Proviso [for which see just Iwlow], as to Utah and New Mexico, and to a more efficient fugitive slave law by the admission of California :ks a free State and by the al>olition of the slave-trade in the District of Columbia." — Caui. Sciiruz, in his Henry Clay, ii., p. 332. Page 293, 9. Tlu; "Wilmot Proviso was a rider attached to a bill providing for the settlement of gislature8, and was taken as the foundation of the Free Soil I»arty. Page 297, 7 ff. " These were the last words of the last s|)cech of the great and honest nullifier. He could no more supitort himself. 376 Notes. Two friendB had to lead him out of the- Senate chanil)er. Slowly and heavily the curtain rolled down to shut from the public gaze the last scene of the grand tragedy of this brilliant life. For nearly twenty years the suspicion, and even the direct accusation, had weighed on his shoulders that he was systematically working at the destruction of the Union. By doing more than any other single man towards raising the slavocracy to the pinnacle of ix)wer, he had actually done more than any other man to hasten the catastrophe and to determine its character ; and yet he labored to the last with the intense anxiety of a true patriot to avert the fearful calamity. Hut the last efforts of his {wwerful mind were a most overwhelming refutation of all the doctrines whose foremost champion he had been ever since the days of nullification. It would have been impossible to pdss a more annihilating judgment on them than he himself did in his speech of March 4, 1850." — Von llouiT in liis John C. Calhoun^ page 348. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. William II. Seward was born in Orange County, New York, in 1801. At nineteen years of age he was graduated from Union College. At twenty-three he began the practice of law. After filling the {wsitions of Senator and Governor of his own State, in 1849 he entered the United States Senate. There he found Webster, Calhoun, and Clay, those giants of the elder time, whose sands of life were nearly run. The dawn of the newer time was indeed already discerned, though its troubled light was destined to faest l)efore the day could be fully ushered in. For twelve years, while the forces were mustering for the deatlly conflict, he kept his jx)st, alert and watchful, in the Senate. For four years, while the conflict lasted, he stood by Lincoln's side as his faithful Secretary of State. Stricken almost unto death at the same time with Lincoln, he nevertheless re- covered, and stood by Lincoln's successor to the end of his term. Three years of rest from the burdens of public service — of en- joyment of well-earned honors — were left to round out his life. He died Oct 10, 1872. The speech on the Irrepressible Conflict was a political address delivered at Rochester, New York, in Mr. Seward's canvass of that State in behalf of the newly formed Republican party. It made a profound impression. Though separated by a consider- able interval from Calhoun's stern arraignment of the spirit of the North as the spirit of disunion, this is, perhaps, the most direct answer to that speech in its counter-arraignment of the spirit of the South. In simplicity, in directness, and in determined con- centration upon the one point at issue, the two speeches are strik- ingly alike. As compared with the genial largeness and range of Webster's view, tlujse qualities mark a much later stag* of tlie struggle between flu* (»i>i»<)sing ideas — a stage in which all 877 • 378 NoteB, sories and complications are impatiently brushed aside, and the naked issue is confronted. One feels, as he hears such challenge and defiance, that the sword-strokes are not long to wait. PAtiK 298, 7. The young student, of course, will not make the mistake of supposing that what is said in this speech is to be understood of political parties now calling themselves Democratic and liepublican. Names often outlast the ideas they once stood for. As a matter of fact. Democrat and liepublican in early American politics were synonymous terms, applied alike to the party opi>osed to the Federal Union, — the party originally made up, as Mr. Ilayne put it, of 'Hhose who wanted no union of the suites, and [those] who disliked the proix)sed form of union." Their opponents were the Federalists. After 1808 the name Republican was gradually dropped, and was not heard of again until, in 1856, it was taken up by the new {>arty formed to oppose the Democrats. See pages 207 and 310, I. 4 fP. Pagk 303, 21. For the ordinance of 1787, see Webster's Speech, p. 191, and consult U. S. History s. v. Pack 305, 15. Dred Scott was a negro who brought suit for his freedom on the ground that his mjvster haound to respect," but furthermore that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the Territories, and that the Mis- souri Compromise Act was null and void. Page 310, 6 ft. The party was organized for the first time in February, 1856. Its first convention met in June of the same year, and nominated Colonel Fremont for the presidency. In the election which followed, Colonel Frdmont secured one hundred and fourteen electoral votes, as against Mr. Buchanan's one hun- dred and seventy-four. In thirteen of the sixteen free States the Republicans elected their State tickets, and gave Fremont a majority over Buchanan, all told, of two hundred thousand votes. See Seward's Works, iv., p. 43. AIJUAUAM Ll.NCULN. AiiUAiiAM Lincoln — Rom February 12, 1800; died April I'l, iSii't. The story of his early life, tlie discipline in which his |M»vers were trained, tluj part ho, played in the tremendous drama <»r our Civil War, — his stead I'ajstness, his gentleness, the great- rit>s8 of his heart, and the pathos of his death in the very hour of victory, — are known unto all men. Aft^T the battle of Gettysburg, in July, 18(3'J, it was proposed to set apart a jwrtion of the battle-ground as a i>eri)etual memo- rial of those who hiwl thei-e laid down their lives at their coun- t ry*s neeil. The suggestion was carrieer 1!) of tiiat year the National Cemetery was solemnly consecrated. The words s|K>ken by President Lincoln on that day have lieen liostMi as a fitting conclusion to this collection of sj»eeches. A tac-simile of the original manuscript may be seeu in The Centuri/ yf, ,.„,-;„.■ for I'Vbniary, IbUi. THE END. ^ ENGLISH. Introduction to Theme'Writing By J. U. Fletcher, Harvard University, and Professor G. R. Car- penter, Columbia College. 1 6mo, cloth, 136 pages. Price, Co cents. THE lectures that form the basis of tliis book were delivered by Mr. Fletcher before the Freshman class at Harvard Col- lege in the spring of 1893. These have been rearranged, with ad- ditional matter by Professor Carpenter. The result is a text-book for students who have completed the introductory course in rhet- oric usually prescribed at the beginning of the Freshman year. The fundamental idea of the book is that in practising any of the various kinds of composition the student must decide : — 1. Just what treatment will be most appropriate to the sub- ject-matter in general. 2. What treatment will most clearly bring out his own indi- vidual ideas or impressions of this matter. 3. What treatment will make this subject most clear to the particular class of readers or hearers which he has in mind. Letter-writing, Translation, Description, Criticism, Exposi- tion, and Argument are each treated in a clear and concise manner, and exercises on each subject are freely introduced. Professor John F. Genung, in The School Rciiciv for September, 1S94: In- stead of Ix'ing directed to grind out these things (compositions), the stu- dent is here set at real literary tasks, forms of composition such as the best writers cultivate, methods that obtain in the highest enterprises of litera- ture, ways of working such as, once mastered, will never cftase to be prac- tical. In this tiiere is great advantage. If the student must "go through with the motions "of composition, as of course he must, there is great stimulus in his undertaking, from the outset, work that he may recog- nize as real, and th.it he may compare at every step with the literature of books and magazines. Professor James W. Bright, /oAnj Hopkins University: The subject of the little treatise is handkid with such admirable clearness and directness as to give it a genuine attractiveness which no teacher, and, it is to be hoped, few pupils, would fail to perceive. Professor Fred N. Scott, Unix'ersHy of Michigan : Theme-Writing is an admirable little work. It has a breadth of view and a charm of style that are often painfully abwnt from text-books in English. The book is well adapted to tlie needs of our students. ENGLISH. Orations and Arguments Edited by Professor C. B. Bradley, University ui ^^.uiuinn.i. 121110, cloth, 3.S5 pages. Price, f i.oo. The following speeches are contained in the book : — Burke: Webster: On Conciliation with the Col- The Reply to Hayne. onies, and Speech before the Elec- Macau lay • tors at Bristol. ^^ ^^ j^^^^^ g.„ ^^ Chatham: Calhoun: On American Attairs. r^ ^x. c\ r\ »• On the Slavery Question. "'^"^r' ...^ Sewarh: m tl« Mockdale Case. , „, ^,, . ,^51,^ Conflict. Lincoln: The Gettysburg Address. IN making this selection, the test applied to each si)eech was that it should be in itself memorable, attaining its distinc- tion through the essential qualities of nobility and force of ideas, and that it should be, in topic, so related to the great thoughts, memories, or problems of our own time as to have for us still an inherent and vital interest. The speeches thus chosen have been printed from the best available texts, without change, save that the spelling has been made uniform throughout, and that three of the speeches — those of Webster, Calhoun, and Seward — have been shortened somewhat by the omission of matters of merely temiK>ral or local interest. The omitted portions have been summarized for the reader, whenever they bear upon the main argument. The Notes aim to furnish the reader with whatever help is necessary to the proper appreciation of the speeches ; to avoid bewildering him with mere subtleties and display of erudition : and to encourage in him habits of self-help and familiarity with sources of information. A special feature of this part of the work is a sketch of the English Constitution and Government, intended as a general introduction to the English speeches. The collection includes material enough to permit of a varied selection for the use of successive classes in the schools. ENGLISH. 3 Professor J. M. Hart, Cornell University: Bradley's Orations and Argu- ments is a good b(M>k. I am glad to have it, and shall take pk;asure in recommending its use. The thought of bringing togetlicr a few of tlie best speeches by the best Englishmen and Americans, in a volume of moderate size, is an excellent one. The selection is judicious, and as representative as the limits permit. The annotation seems to me to be sound. 1 am especially pleased with the general notes on the English Constitution and Governn>ent. They ought to clear up a good many puzzles and obscurities for tlie students. Professor T. W. Hunt, College of New Jersey ^ Princeton : It is a book that will be of practical service in the sphere of argumentation and forensic address. The notes add much to its value. Professor J. H. Penniman, University of Pennsylvania : It seems to l» an excellent book, and will prove a great aid to teachers of rhetoric and com- position. The literary side of oratory is prominently set forth by the selections chosen. Byron Groce, Boston Latin School: It is a remarkably fine book; fine in selection, in editing, in print, paper, and form. I wish I might have copies for one of my classes. I long ago publicly urged that a larger selection of orations be given in our literature courses, which, though perhaps not too literary, certainly needed the variety such selections as tliese you publish will give. Wilson Farrand, Newark Academy, N. J. : The book is admirable in every way — selection of speeches, annotation, and mechanical execution. The special excellence of the notes seems to me to be in their historical sagges- tiveness, and the special value of the book in its connecting litornn,- and historical study. E. H. Lewis, University of Chicago: The principles on which tl»ese selec- tions have been made are thoroughly sound. The notes are adequate, but not too full. The book is a most available and useful one. Professor Edward E. Hale, Jr., Iowa State University, Icnva City : I have read the Urgcr p.irt of it with great pleasure. I think it will serve Its purpose very well, for the selections are excellent, and st» are the notes. The book supplies gotxl material which cannot easily be found else- where in so compact a form, and which ought to bo a great help to many teachers. Professor H. W. Snyder, h ,//,>*./ « ,'//,\v. .>/•>"■ ci«>«s sekHTtions, and Iwlpful and interesting i\- useful book. ENGLISH. Studies in English Composition By Harriet C. Keeler, High School, Cleveland, Ohio, anci I^mma C. Davis, Cleveland, Ohio. lamo, cloth, 210 pages. Price, 80 cents. THIS book is the outgrowth of experience in teaching compo- sition, and the lessons which it contains have all borne the actual test of the class-room. Intended to meet the wants of those schools which have composition as a weekly exercise in their course of study, it contains an orderly succession of topics adapted to the age and development of high school pupils, to- gethei*with such le,s.sons in languairt- ami rlittoric as are of con- stant application in class exercises. The authors believe that too muen iiuniioii cannot l)c givtn to supplying young writers with good models, which not only indicate what is expected, and serve as an ideal toward which to work, but stimulate and encourage the learner in his first efforts. For this reason numerous examples of good writing have been given, and many more have been suggested. The primal idea of the book is that the pupil learns to write by writing; and therefore that it is of more importance to get him to write than to prevent his making mistakes in writing. Consequently, the pupil is set to writing at the very outset ; the idea^af producing something is kept constantly uppermost, and the function of criticism is reserved until after something has been done which may be criticised. J. W. Steams, Professor of Pedagosiy, Unhrrsiiy of Wisconsin: It strikes me that the author of your "Studies in English Composition" touches the gravest defect in school composition work when she writes in her pref- ace : " One may as well grasp a sea-anemone, and expect it to show its beauty, as ask a child to write from his own experience when he expects every sentence to be dislocated in order to be improved." In order to improve the beauty of the body, we drive out the soul m our extreme for- mal criticisms of school compositions. She has made a book which teaches children to write by getting them to write often and freely ; and if used with the spirit which has presided over the making of it, it will prove a most effective instrument for the reform of school composition work. Albert G. Owen, SupcritUendent, Afton, Iowa: It is an excellent text. I am highly pleased with it. The best of the kind I have yet seen. ENGLISH. H. C. Miasimer, Suferinttndeni, Erit, Pa. : There is nothing but praise from our teachers for the book. It is a great success. Edward L. Harris, Principal of Central High School, Cleveland, Ohio: After giving the boolc a very careful review, I unhesitatingly pronounce it to be tite very best worlc of the Icind 1 have ever seen. C. F. Boyden, Superintendent, Taunton, Mass, : I consider this a gem of the first water. I have examined it f rom tieginning to end, and find it all good. Albert Leonard, Principal of High School, Dinghamton, N. Y.: In my opinion Keeler's " Studies in English Composition " is by far the best lxK>k of the kind that has ever been published. C. H. Douglas, Principal of High School, Hartford, Conn.: ".Studies in Knglish Coni{X)sition" is the most useful book of its class tha{ I have seen. In variety of matter and practical suggestions it leaves little more to Ix; desired. S. W. Landon, Principal of High School, Burlington, Vt. : I consider it one of the strongest Ijooks on tlie subject that I have ever seen, presenting some, to me, new and especially admirable features. Harry H. Bumham, High School, Biddeford, Me. : I have been trying the book rvith one of my cbsses, and the experience has only served to strengthen ny good opinion of it ; it is the best book to place in tlie hands uf the pupil that I have yet seen. Professor H. S. Kritz, Wttbash College, CrcnvfordsvilU, Ind.: I am using the book with great success in a class of about forty. I have never before been able to secure so much originality in tIte compositions of my students as with this method. Composition is usually regarded as a very unpleas- ant task, but with this book it is a delightful recreation. Professor J. V. Denney, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio: Remark- ably suggestive and admirably planned. It is just the kind of English work that will m.ake good writers of pupils of high school grade. J. B. Fitzpatrick, Parochial School, Cambridgeport, Mass. : I know of no otiter work like it — simple, plain, and practical. Ity following its in- structions, much of the time spent in kerning how to do will be spent in doing, and the knowledge gained by doing is the knowledge that sticks. L. B. L«e, Principal of High School, Decatur, III. : I consider your " Studies in English Composition " a very superior work. The material is good and excellently arranged. W. H. Small, Superintendent of Schools, Palmer, Mass. : "Studies in Eng- lish Composition " is one of tl»e most pr.-ictical outlines of study ever offered to teachm or pupils. It couU have been conceived only by practical and practised teachers. ENGLISH. DcQuincey's Essays on Style, Rhetoric, and Language Edited by Professor Fred N. Scott, University of Michigan. lamo, 276 pages. Price, 60 cents. THE essays selected are those which deal directly with the theory of literature. The ap])endix contains such passages from DeQuincey's other writings as will be of most assistance to the student. The introduction and notes are intended to re-enforce, not to forestall, research. Principles of Success in Literature By George Henry Lewes. Edited with Introduction and Notes by Professor Fred N. Scott, lamo, 159 pages. Price, 50 cents. THE object of reprinting this admirable little treatise on lit- erature is to make it available for classes in rhetoric and literary criticism. Scarcely any other wprk will be found so thoroughly sound in principles, and so suggestive and inspiring. The value of the present edition is greatly increased by the excellent introduction by Professor Scott, and by a full index, which adds much to its convenience. Professor 0. B. Clarke, Indiana University, Bloomingion : Vour reprint of I^wes*s articles on " The Principles of Success in Literature " puts an- other sharp and serviceable tool into the hands of the teacher and student of the art of com{X)sition. Professor Scott, as well as yourselves, deserves the thanks of all who care for truth and force in working. Spencer's Philosophy of Style fS^Wright's Essay on Style Edited by Professor Fred N. Scott. i2mo, 92 pages. Price, 45 cents. THE plan has been followed of providing a biographical and critical introduction, an index, and a few notes, — the latter designed to provoke discussion or to furnish clews for further investigation. ENGLISH. Paragraph- Writin g By Professor F. N. Scott, University of Michigan, and Professor J. V. DENNEY,Ohio State University. i2mo, 304 pages. Price, ?i.oo. THE principles embodied in this work were developed and put in practice by its authors at the University of Michigan sev- eral years ago. Its aim is to make the paragraph the basis of a method of composition, and to present all the important facts of rhetoric in their application to it. In Part I. the nature and laws of the paragraph are presented ; the structure and function of the isolated paragraph are dis- cussed, and considerable space is devoted to related paragraphs ; that is, those which are combined into es.says. Part II. is a chapter on the theory of the paragraph intended for teachers and advanced students. Part III. contains copious material for cla.ss work, selected paragraphs, suggestions to teachers, lists of subjects for composi- tions (about two thousand), and helpful references of many kinds. The Revised Edition contains a chapter on the Rhetoric of the Paragraph, in which will be found applications of the paragraph- idea to the sentence, and to the constituent parts of the .sentence, so far as these demand especial notice. The new material thus provided supplies, in the form of principles and illustrations, as much additional theory as the student of Elementary Rhetoric needs to master and apply, in order to improve the details of his paragraphs in unity, clearness, and force. Professor J. M. Hart, Cornell University : The style of the writers is ad- mirable for clearness and correctness. . . . They have produced sji uncom- numly sensible textbook. . . . For college work it will be hard to beat. I know of no otiicr book at all comparable to it for frvshman drill. Professor Charles Mills Gayley, UnttrrsUy of California: Paragraph- Writing is tl»e best thing of its kind, — the only systematic and exhauMive effort to picMi\t .1 ( atditi.il feature of rhetorical training to the educational world. The Dial, . iph-Writing Is one of tin? really practical books on Enghsh composition. ... A book that successfully illustrates the three articles of the rhetorician's creed, — theor>', exampk.% and practice. ENGLISH. From Milton to Tennyson Masterpieces of English Poetry. Edited by L. Du PoNT Syle, Uni- versity of California. i2mo, cloth, 4S0 pages. Price, $1.00. IN this work the editor has endeavored to bring together witliin the compass of a moderate-sized volume as much narrative, descriptive, and lyric verse as a student may reasonably be re- quired to read critically for entrance to college. From the nineteen poets represented, only such masterpieces have been selected as are within the range of the understanding and the sympathy of the high .school student. Each masterpiece is given complete, except for pedagogical reasons in the cases of Tliomson, Cowi)er, IJyron, and Browning. Exigencies of space have compelled the editor reluctantly to omit Scott from this volume. The copyright laws, of course, exclude American |X)ets from the scope of this work. The low price of the book, together with its strong and attrac- tive binding, make it especially desirable for those teachers who read with their classes even a small part of the poems it contains. President D. S. Jordan, Letand Slanford^Jr.^ University^ Cal.: I have re- ceived the copy of Mr. Syle's book," From Milton to Tennyson," and have looked it over with a great deal of interest, it seems to be an excellent work for the pur^xise. The selections seem well adapted to high school use, and the notes are wisely chosen and well stated. Professor Henry A. Beers, Yale University: The notes are helpful and suggestive. What is more, — and what is unusual in text-book annota- tions, — they are interesting and make very good reading ; not at all school- masterish, but really literary in their taste and discernment of nice points. Professor Elmer E. Wentworth, Vassar College: It is a most attractive book in appearance outward and inward, the selections satisfactory and just, the notes excellent. In schools where less time is given than in ours, no other book known to me, me judice^ will be so good. I wish to com- mend the notes again. Wm. E. Griffis, Ithaca, N.Y.: The whole work shows independent research as well as refined taste and a repose of judgment that is admirable. The selected pieces are not overburdened with critical notes, while the sugges- tions for comparison and criticism, to be made by the student himself, are very valuable. ENGLISH. Isabel Graves, H't/UsUy College, WelUsUy, A fuss.: I am pleased with the ap|X'ar.ince of the book, and find that the selection of mxsterpieces gives the desired variety. 'I"he notes are fortunately directed against some prejudices, and must prove suggestive. W. E. Sargent, Hebron Acatiitny, Hebron, Me. : The book is a gem — just enough selections, and the very best ones of each author. P. A. Tupper, Principal of Hlt^h School, Quincy, Mass.: Mr'. Syle's " From Milton to Tennyson " is a most admirable book in conception and execu- tion. The selections, both of authors and of poems, evince true poetic feeling and rare taste. The sketches, notes, and bibliography everywhere bear marks of sound and scientific teaching power. The book is .idapted not only to schools and colleges, but also to the library and tlie hon>e. I feel indebted to the etlitor of this book, and in expressing my approval, I am making only a slight return for the profit derived from the volume. Professor Edward S. Parsons, Colorado ColUj^e: I find the book extremely v;ilua!)le for the wisdom of its selections ; for its comprehensive, yet care- fully chosen bibliography ; and for its pointed and entertaining style. The following poets are represented : — MILTON, by the DRYDEN . . . POPE . . . THOMSON . JOHNSON . GRAY . . GOLDSMITH COWPER BURNS . . COLERIDGE . BYRON . . . KEATS . SHELLEY . WORDSWORTH MACAULAY . CLOUGH ARNOLD . BROWNING . TENNYSON L'AlIesro, II Penseroso, Lyddas, and a Selection from the Sonnets. Kpistic to Congrevc, Alexander's Feast, Character of a Good Parson. Kpistles to Mr. ]cr\vts, to Ix)rd Burlington, and to Augustus. Winter. V.inity of Human Wishes. Klejfy Written in a Country Churchyard, .nnd Tlif r..ird. Deserted VilLige. Winter Morning's Walk. Colter's Saturday Night, Tarn O'Shantcr, and a Selection from the Songs. Ancient Mariner. Isles of Greece and .Selections from Childe Harold, Manfred, and the Hebrew Melodies. Kvc of .St. Agnes, Ode to a Nightingale, Sonnet on Chapman's Homer. Kupncan Hills, The Cloud, The Skylark, and the Two Sonnets nn the Nile. I..indaniia. The Hishland r.irl,Tlntem Abbey, The Cuckoo, 'n»e Ode to a Skylark, The Milton Sonnet. The Ode to Duty, and the Ode on ilic Intimations of Immortality. Horatius. 'I'wo .ShiiM, the Prologue to the Mari Matrno, and The law- yer's First Tale. Scholar>Gypsy and the Forsaken Menn.in Traniicript from Kuri|iidcs (Italauslion's Advcnturr >. hia : I am delighted to find that you are continuing the work so well tegun in the Macaulay. 1 read the Introduction with much interest, and with a fresh sense of the importance and value of the method of teaching you arc working to advance. William C. Collar, Principal of Latin School, Roxbury, Afass. : I suppose thelx»it thing I can say is that your lxK>k will go into our list of books to be re.id, and that it will have a permanent place in my school. I believe with all my heart in your principks of annotation, and think you are doing a great work for the schools. Macaulay^s Essays on Milton and Addi- son 1 2ino, boards. Price, 30 cents. THESE are reprinted from Mr. Thurbc: Macaulay and Select Essays of AiUison^ vviihoul any change in the numbering of the pages. Strongly and attrac- tively bound, and printed on good paper, this book forms the cheapest and be.st editiiin i)f these twti essavs for school use. 12 ENGLISH. Irving's Sketch'Book With notes by Professor Elmer E. Wkntwortii, Vassar College. i2nio, cloth, 426 pages. Price, 60 cents. THIS is the best and cheapest edition of the coini)lcte Sketcli- Book now before the pubHc. The paper and press-work are excellent, and the binding is strong and handsome. In his notes the editor has endeavored to stimulate, not supersede, thought on the part of the pupil, and so to prepare him to read with profit and enjoyment other literary masteq)ieces. What success's has been attained in this direction may be estimated from the following extracts from letters recently received from those who have examined the book. Professor Wm. Lyon Phelps,. New Hav.-n, Conn.: Please accept my tlianks for your handsome edition of the Sketch-Book, which seems to me surprisingly cheap in price for such a book. Professor Chas. F. Richardson, Dartmoitth Collef>e^ I/anoi'cr, N.H. . 1 thank you for sending me Mr. Wentworth's well-annotated edition of Irving's Sketch-Uook, a pleasure to the eye and the hand, and sure to aid in the enjoyment of an American classic. Professor Wm. H. Brown, Johns Hopkins Universiiy : I have to thank you for a copy of your very neat edition of Irving's classic Sketch -Book. I shall call the attention of my classes to it and its exceeding cheapness. Irving H. Upton, Principal of High School, Portsmouth, N.H.: I examined it with a great deal of pleasure arising from two points in particular. First, from the remarkable execution of the book mechanically and typo- graphically; and, secondly, because of the judicious absence of useless notes. Professor T. W. Hunt, Princeton College, N.J. : Thanks for Wentworth's neat and convenient edition of the Sketch-Book. Had I seen it earlier, I should have inserted it in our catalogue for 1 893-1 S94. Professor Wm. E. Smyser, De Pattw University, Greencastlc, I ml. I am very much pleased with the book in ever)' particular. Professor Edward A. Allen, University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo.: Please accept my thanks for a copy of Wentworth's Irving's Sketch- Book, which strikes me as the best school edition I have seen. Professor 0. B. Clark, Ripon College, Ripon, Wis. : Permit me to congratu- late you on the beauty of the volume, on its cheapness, and, above all, on the scholarly taste, modest reserve, and encouraging suggest iveness of the notes. Reading and study are made to beget reading and study, and the appetite will surely grow with what it feeds on. re 3f.m4 Ilept, THE UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA UBRARY