V ^ o • i ■> O' *> ^5°* V ^-••n"'* A ' V^.-o'*^ < \.^"-** A°° ^ .^:-*°o ^ y^.\ "V •.„•* .^ °^ *"■•• A ^ ***- 1 1 .*^ "^ .vS V ^ *• °. / s / i / V ^^>^Z^- 1 lil. GREAT SPEECHES AX I) ORATIONS i DANIEL WEBSTER WITH AN ESSAY ON DANIEL WEBSTER AS A MASTER OE ENGLISH STYLE BY EDWIN P. WH I P P L E BOS T O N LITTLE, BR OWN, & CO [879 • 8 ODU ^ Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1879, by Little, Brown, & Co., In the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. Cambridge : : [OHN Wll SON AM PREFACE. Tiie object of the present volume is not to supersede the standard edition of Daniel Webster's Works, in six octavo vol- umes, edited by Edward Everett, and originally issued in the year 1851, by the publishers of this volume of Selections. It is rather the purpose of the present publication to call atten- tion anew to the genius and character of Daniel Webster, as a lawyer, statesman, diplomatist, patriot, and citizen, and, by republishing some of his prominent orations and speeches of universally acknowledged excellence, to revive public interest in the great body of his works. In the task of selection, it has been impossible to do full justice to his powers ; for among the speeches omitted in this collection are to be found passages of superlative eloquence, maxims of political and moral wisdom which might be taken as mottoes for elaborate treatises on the philosophy of law and legislation, and impor- tant facts and principles which no student of history of the United States can overlook without betraying an ignorance of the great forces which influenced the legislation of the two Houses of Congress, from the time Mr. Webster first entered public life to the day of his death. It is to be supposed that, when Mr. Everett consented to edit the six volumes of his works. Mr. Webster indicated to him the orations, speeches, and diplomatic despatches which he really thought might be of service to the public, and that IV PREFACE. he intended them as a kind of legacy, — a bequest to his coun- trymen. The publishers of this volume believe that a study of Mr. Webster's mind, heart, and character, as exhibited in the selections contained in the present volume, will inevitably direct all sympathetic readers to the great body of Mr. Web- ster's works. Among the eminent men who have inlluenced legislative assemblies in Great Britain and the United States, during the past hundred and twenty years, it is curious that only two have established themselves as men of the first class in English and American literature. These two men are Edmund Burke and Daniel Webster ; and it is only by the complete study of every thing which they authorized to be published under their names, that we can adequately com- prehend either their position among the political forces of their time, or their rank among the great masters of English eloquence and style. CONTENTS. PAOE Daniel Webster as a Master of English Style . . xi Tin: Dartmouth College Case 1 Argument before the Supreme Court of the United States, at Wash- ington, on the 10th of March, 1818. First Settlement of New England 25 A Discourse delivered at Plymouth, on the 22d of December, 1820. Defence of Judge James Prescott 55 The closing Appeal to the Senate of Massachusetts, in Mr. "Webster's "Argument on the Impeachment of James Prescott," April 24th, 1821. The Revolution in Greece 57 A Speech delivered in the House of Representatives of the United States, on the 19th of January, 1824. The Tariff 77 A Speech delivered in the House of Representatives of the United States, on the 1st and 2d of April, 182 I. The Case of Glbbons and Ogden Ill An Argument made in the Case of Gibbons and Offden, in the Su- preme Court of the United States, February Term, 1824. The Bunker Hill Monument An Address delivered at the Laying of the Corner-Stone of the Bunker Hill Monument at Charlestown, Ma>sachusetts, on the 17th of June, 1825. The Completion of the Bunker Hill Monument . . 136 An Address delivered on Bunker Hill, on the 17th of dune. 1843, on Occasion of the Completion of the Monument. vi CONTENTS. Our Relations to the South American Republics . . 152 Extracts from the Speech on " The Panama Mission," delivered in the House of Representatives of the United States, on the 14th of April. 1826. Adams and Jefferson 156 A Discourse in Commemoration of the Lives and Services of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, delivered in Faneuil Hall, Boston, on the 2d of August, 1826. The Case of Ogden and Saunders 179 An Argument made in the Case of Ogden and Saunders, in the Su- preme Court of the United States, January Term, 1827. The Murder of Captain Joseph White 189 An Argument on the Trial of John Francis Knapp, for the Murder of Joseph White, of Salem, in Essex County, Massachusetts, on the Night of the 6th of April, 1830. The Reply to Hayne 227 Second Speech on " Foot's Resolution," delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 2Gth and 27th of January, 1830. The Constitution not a Compact between Sovereign States 273 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the IGth of February, 1833, in Reply to Mr. Calhoun's Speech on the Bill " Further to Provide for the Collection of Duties on Imports." Public Dinner at New York 807 A Speech delivered at a Public Dinner given by a large Number of Citizens of New York, in Honor of Mr. Webster, on March 10th, 1831. The Presidential Veto of the United States Bank Bill 320 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 11th of July, 1832, on the President's Veto of the Hank Bill. The Character of Washington 339 A Speech delivered at a Public Dinner in the City of Washington, <.n the 22d of February, 1832, the Centennial Anniversary of Washington's Birthdaj . Executive Patronage and Removals prom Office . . 347 From a Speech delivered al * 1 1 • - National Republican Convention, held ai Worcester | Ma--. >. on the I 2th of < October, 1832. CONTENTS. vii Kkecutive Usurpation 353 From the same Speech at Worcester. The Natural Hatred op the Poor to the Rich . . . 859 From a Speech in the Senate of the United States, January .'ilst, 1834, ou "The Removal of the Deposits." A Redeemable Paper Currency 862 From a Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 22d of February, 1834. The Presidential Protest . 367 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 7th of May, 1834, on the subject of the President's Protest against the Resolution of the Senate of the 28th of March. The Appointing and Removing Power 394 Delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 16th of February, 1835, on the Passage of the Bill entitled " An Act to Repeal the First and Second Sections of the Act to limit the Term of Service of certain Officers therein named." On the Loss of the Fortification Bill in 1835 . . . 407 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 14th of January, 183G, on Mr. Benton's Resolutions for Appropriating the Surplus Revenue to National Defence. Reception at New York 4 - 2 A Speech delivered at Niblo's Saloon, in New York, on the 15th of March, 1837. Slavery in the District of Columbia 445 Remarks made in the Senate of the Dnited States, on the 10th of January, 1838, upon a Resolution moved by Mr. Clay as a Sub- stitute for the Resolution offered by Mr. Calhoun on the Subject of Slavery in the District of Columbia. The Credit System and the Labor of the United States ^ ,! ' From the Second Speech on the Sub-Treasury, delivered in the v of the United States, ou the 12th of March, 1838. Viii CONTENTS. Remarks on the Political Couese of Mr. Calhoun, in 1838 453 From the same Speech. Reply to Mr. Calhoun 458 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 22d of March, 18?~ n Answer to Mr. Calhoun. A Uniform Jystem of Bankruptcy 471 From a Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 18th of May, 1810, on the proposed Amendment to the Bill estab- lishing a Uniform System of Bankruptcy. " The Log Cabin Candidate " 476 From a Speech delivered at the great Mass Meeting at Saratoga, New York, on the 12th of August, 1840. Address to the Ladies of Richmond 478 Remarks at a Public Reception by the Ladies of Richmond, Virginia, on the 5th of October, 1810. Reception at Boston 481 A Speech made in Faneuil Hall, on the 30th of September, 1812, at a Public Reception given to Mr. Webster, on his Return to Boston, after the Negotiation of the Treaty of Washington. The Landing at Plymouth 496 A Speech delivered on the 22d of December, 1813, at the Public Dinner of the New England Society of New York, in Commemo- ration of the Landing of the Pilgrims. The Christian Ministry and the Religious Instruc- tion of the Young 505 A Speech delivered in the Supreme Court at Washington, on the 20th of February, 1844, in the Girard Will Case. Mr. Justice Story 532 The Rhode Island Government 535 An Argument made in the Supreme Court of the United States, on the 27th of January, 1848, in the Dorr Rebellion Cases. Objects of the Mexican War 551 A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 23d of March, 1848, on the Bill from the Souse of Representatives for raising a Loan of Sixteen Millions of Dollars. CONTENTS. ix Exclusion of Slavery from the Tbbbitortes .... ."CO Remarks made in the Senate of the United States, on the 12th of August, 1848. Speech at Marshfteld 575 Delivered at a Meeting of the Citizens of Marshfield, "lass., on the 1st of September, 1848. Jeremiah Mason 589 Kossuth 598 From a Speech delivered in Boston, on the 7th of November, 1849, at a Festival of the Natives of New Hampshire established in Massachusetts. The Constitution and the Union GOO A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 7th of March, 1850. Reception at Buffalo - . . . . 626 A Speech delivered before a large Assembly of the Citizens of Buffalo and the County of Erie, at a Public Reception, on the 22d of May, 1851. The Addition to the Capitol 639 An Address delivered at the Laying of the Corner-Stone of the Addi- tion to the Capitol, on the 4th of July, 1851. APPENDIX. Impressment 655 The Right of Search 660 Letters to General Cass on the Treaty of Wash- ington ,;,;,; The Hulsemann Letter 678 DANIEL WEBSTER AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. THMIOM my own experience and observation I should say that ev *- boy, who is ready enough in spelling, grammar, geography, : arithmetic, is appalled when he is commanded to write what is tern "a composition." When he enters college the same fear follows hi and the Professor of Rhetoric is a more terrible personage to his im ination than the Professors of Greek, Latin, .Mathematics, and M< and Intellectual Philosophy. Both boys at school and young n in college show no lack of power in speaking their native Langu: with a vehemence and fluency which almost stuns the ears of th seniors. Why, then, should they find such difficulty in writing When you listen to the animated talk of a bright school-boy or coll student, full of a subject which really interests him, you say at 01 > that such command of racy and idiomatic English words must course be exhibited in his "compositions" or his "themes"; but when the latter are examined, they are commonly found to be fe< and lifeless, with hardly a thought or a word which bears any stam] freshness or originality, and which are so inferior to his ordinary c versation, that Ave can hardly believe they came from the same mil The first quality which strikes an examiner of these exercises English composition is their falseness. No boy or youth writes \\ 1 he personally thinks and feels, but writes what a good boy or youth ! expected to think or feel. This hypocrisy vitiates his writing fr< first to last, and is not absent in his "Class Oration," or in h "Speech at Commencement." I have a vivid memory of the fii ! time the boys of my class, in a public school, were called upon write "composition." The themes selected wnv the prominenl moi virtues or vices. How we poor innocent urchins were tormented the task imposed upon us ! How we put more ink on our hands faces than we shed upon the white paper on our desks ! < >ur cone sions generally agreed with those announced by the greatest moralis i DANIEL WEBSTER t he world. Socrates and Plato, Cicero and Seneca, Cud. worth, and itler, could not have been more austerely moral than were we little gues, as we relieved the immense exertion involved in completing a single short baby-like sentence, by shying at one companion a rule, • hurling at another a paper pellet intended to light plump on his rehead or nose. Our custom was to begin every composition with ie proposition that such or such a virtue "was one of the greatest ->ings we enjoy " ; and this triumph of accurate statement was not scovered by our teacher to be purely mechanical, until one juvenile thinker, having avarice to deal with, declared it to be "one of the ■eatest evils we enjoy." The whole thing was such a piece of monstrous hypocrisy, that I once timidly suggested to the school- taster that it would be well to allow me to select my own subject, '"he request was granted ; and, as narrative is the natural form of com- position which a boy adopts when he has his own way, I filled, in less han half the time heretofore consumed in writing a quarter of a page, Dur pages of letter-paper with an account of my being in a ship taken y a pirate ; of the heroic defiance I launched at the pirate captain ; and the sagacity I evinced in escaping the fate of my fellow-passen- ers, in not being ordered to "walk the plank." The story, though trashy enough, was so much better than any of the moral essays of the other pupils, that the teacher commanded me to read it before the whole school, as an evidence of the rapid strides I had made in the art if " composition." This falseness of thought and feeling is but too apt to characterize he writing of the student, after he has passed from the common school to the academy or the college. The term " Sophomorical " is used to describe speeches which are full of emotion which the speaker does not feel, full of words in four or five syllables that mean nothing, nid. in respect to imagery and illustrations, blazing with the cheap jewelry of rhetoric, — with those rubies and diamonds that can be pur- •hased for a few pennies an ounce. The danger is that this "Soph- omorical " Btyle may continue to afflict the student after he has be- jome a clergyman, a lawyer, or a legislator. Practical men who may not be "college educated" still have the great virtue of using the Eew words they employ as identical with facts. When thc\ meet a man who has half the dictionary at his disposal, and yel gives do evidence of appreheriding the real import and mean- ing of one woid among the many thousands he glibly pours forth, they naturally distrust him, as a person who docs not know the vital connection of all good words with the real things they represent. AS A MASTER <>F ENGLISH STYLE. \iii Indeed, the besi rule thai :i Professor of Rhetoric could adopt would be ti) insist that no student under his care should use an unusual word until he had earned the right to use it by making ii the verbal sign of some new advance in his thinking, in his acquirements, or in his feelings. Shakspeare, the greatest of English writers, and per- haps the greatest of nil writers, required fifteen thousand words to embody nil that his vast, exceptional intelligence acquired, thought, imagined, and discovered ; ami he had earned tin- right to use every one of them. Milton found that eight thousand words could fairly and fully represent all the power, grandeur, and creativenesa of his almost seraphic soul, when he attempted to express his whole nature in a literary form. All the words used by Shakspeare and Milton are alive; "cut them and they will bleed." lint it is ridiculous for a college student to claim that he has the mightv resources of the Kii"- lish language at his supreme disposal, when he has not verified, by his own thought, knowledge, and experience, one in a hundred of the words he presumptuously employs. Now Daniel Webster passed safely through all the stages of the " Sophomoric " disease of the mind, as he passed safely through the measles, the chicken-pox, and other eruptive maladies incident to childhood and youth. The process, however, by which he purified his style from this taint, and made his diction at last as robust and' as manly, as simple and as majestic, as the nature it expressed, -will reward a little study. The mature style of Webster is perfect of its kind, being in words the express image of his mind and character, — plain, terse, clear, forcible; and rising from the level of lucid statement and argument into passages of superlative eloquence only when his whole nature is stirred by some grand sentiment of freedom, patriotism, justice, humanity, or religion, which absolutely lifts him, by its own inherent force and inspiration, to a region above that in which his mind habit- ually lives and moves. At the same time it will be observed that these thrilling passages, which the boys of two generations have ever been delighted to declaim in their shrillest tones, are strictly illustra- tive of the main purpose of the speech in which they appeal-. They are not mere purple patches of rhetoric, loosely stitched on the home- spun gray of the reasoning, but they seem to be inwoven with it and to be a vital part of it. Indeed we can hardly decide, in reading these magnificent burstsof eloquence in connection with what precedes and follows them, whether the effect is due to the logic of the orator becoming suddenly morally impassioned, or to his moral passion XIV DANIEL WEBSTER becoming suddenly logical. What gave Webster his immense u ence over the opinions of the people of New England was, first, his power of so "putting things"' that everybody could understand his statements; secondly, his power of so framing his arguments that- all the steps, from one point to another, in a logical series, could be clearly apprehended by every intelligent farmer or mechanic who had a thoughtful interest in the affairs of the country ; and thirdly, his power of inflaming the sentiment of patriotism in all honest and well-intentioned men by overwhelming appeals to that sentiment, so that, after convincing their understandings, he clinched the matter by sweeping away their wills. Perhaps to these sources of influence may be added another which many eminent statesmen have lacked. With all his great superiority to average men in force and breadth of mind, he had a genuine respect for the intellect, as well as for the manhood, of average men. He disdained the ignoble office of misleading the voters he aimed to instruct ; and the farmers and mechanics who read his speeches felt ennobled when they found that the greatest statesman of the country frankly addressed them, as man to man, without pluming himself on his exceptional talents and accomplishments. Up to the crisis of 1850, he succeeded in domesticating himself at most of the pious, moral, and in- telligent firesides of New England. Through his speeches he seemed to be almost bodily present wherever the family, gathered in the evening around the blazing hearth, discussed the questions of the day. It was not the great Mr. Webster, " the godlike Daniel," who had a seat by the fire. It was a person who talked to them, and argued with them, as though he was "one of the folks," — a neighbor dropping in to make an evening call ; there was not the slightest trace of assumption in his manner; but suddenly, after the discussion had become a little tire- some, certain fiery words would leap from his lips and make the whole household spring to their feet, ready to sacrifice life and property for " the Constitution and the Union." That Webster was thus a kind of invisible presence in thousands of homes where his face was never seen, shows thai his rhetoric had caught an element of power from his early recollections of the independent, hard-headed farmers whom he met when a boy in his father's house. The bodies of these men had become tough and strong in their constant struggle to force scanty harvests from an unfruitful soil, which only persistent toil could com- pel to yield anything; and their brains, though forcible and clear, were still no! stored with the important facts and principles which it was his delight to state and expound. In truth, he ran a race with AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. xv tlic demagogues of his time in an attempt to capture Buch nun as these, thinking them the very backbone of the country. Whether he succeeded or failed, it would be vain to hunt through his works to find a single epithet in which he mentioned them with <■< -ni .•ni[>t. He was as incapable of insulting one member of this landed democracy, — sterile as most of their acres were, — as of insulting the memory <>t' his father, who belonged to this class. The late Mr. Peter Harvey used to tell with much zest a Btory illustrating the hold which these early associations retained on Web- ster's mind throughout his life. Some months after his removal from Portsmouth to Boston, a servant knocked at his chamber door lite in an April afternoon in the year 1817, with the announcement that three men were in the drawing-room who insisted on seeing him. Web- ster was overwhelmed with fatigue, the result of his Congressional labors and his attendance on courts of law; and he had determined, after a night's sleep, to steal a vacation in order to recruit his ener- gies by a fortnight's fishing and hunting. He suspected that the persons below were expectant clients ; and he resolved, in descending the stairs, not to accept their offer. He found in the parlor three plain, country-bred, honest-looking men, who were believers in the innocence of Levi and Laban Kenniston, accused of robbing a certain Major Goodridge on the highway, and whose trial would take place at Ipswich the next day. They could find, they said, no member of the Essex bar who would undertake the defence of the Kennistons, and they had come to Boston to engage the services of Mr. Webster. Would he go down to Ipswich and defend the accused ? Mr. Webster stated that he could not and would not go. He had made arrange- ments for an excursion to the sea-side ; the state of his health abso- lutely demanded a short withdrawal- from all business cares ; and that no fee could tempt him to abandon his purpose. "Well," was the reply of one of the delegation, "it isn't the fee that we think of at all, though we are willing to pay what you may charge ; but it's justice. Here are two New Hampshire men who are believed in Exeter, and Newbury, and Newburyport, and Salem to be rascals; but we in New- market believe, in spite of all evidence against them, that they are the victims of some conspiracy. We think you are the man to untax el it, though it seems a good deal tangled even to us. Still we suppose that men whom we know to have been honest all their lives can't have become such desperate rogues all of a sudden." " But I cannot take the case," persisted Mr. Webster; "I am worn to death with over-work; I have not had any real sleep for forty-eight hours. xvi DANIEL WEBSTER Besides, I know nothing of the case." "It's hard, I can see," con- tinued the leader of the delegation; "but you're a New Hampshire man, and the neighbors thought that you would not allow two innocent New Hampshire men, however humble they may be in their circum- stances, to suffer for lack of your skill in exposing the wiles of this scoundrel Goodridge. The neighbors all desire you to take the case.'' That phrase " the neighbors " settled the question. No resident of a city knows what the phrase means. But Webster knew it in all the intense significance of its meaning. His imagination flew back to the scattered homesteads of a New England village, where mutual sympa- thy and assistance are the necessities, as they are the commonplaces, of village life. The phrase remotely meant to him the combination of neighbors to resist an assault of Indian savages, or to send volun- teers to the war which wrought the independence of the nation. It specially meant to him the help of neighbor to neighbor, in times of sickness, distress, sorrow, and calamity. In his childhood and boy- hood the Christian question, "Who is my neighbor?" was instantly solved the moment a matron in good health heard that the wife of Farmer A, or Farmer B, was stricken down by fever, and needed a friendly nurse to sit by her bedside all night, though she had herself been toiling hard all day. Every thing philanthropists mean when they talk of brotherhood and sisterhood among men and women was con- densed in that homely phrase, " the neighbors." " Oh ! " said Web- ster, ruefully, " if the neighbors think I may be of service, of course I must go " ; — and, with his three companions, he was soon seated in the stage for Ipswich, where he arrived at about midnight. The court met the next morning ; and his management of the case is still con- sidered one of his masterpieces of legal acumen and eloquence. His cross-examination of Goodridge rivalled, in mental torture, every thing manyrologists tell us of the physical agony endured by the victim of the inquisitor, when roasted before slow fires or stretched upon the rack. Still it seemed impossible to assign any motive for the self-robbery and the self-maiming of Goodridge, which any judge or jury would accept as reasonable. The real motive has never been discovered. Webster argued that the motive might have originated in a desire to escape from the payment of his debts, or in a whimsical ambition t<. have his name sounded all over Maine and Massachusetts as the heroic tradesman who had parted with his money only when over- powered by Buperior force. It is impossible to say what motives may impel men who are half-crazed by vanity, or half-dcmonized by malice. I eridge describes [ago's hatred of Othello as the hatred which a AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. base nature instinctively feels for a noble one, and his as&ignmen motives for his acts as the mere " motive-hunting of B motivelei malignity." Whatever may have been Goodridge's motive in his attempt to ruin the innocent men he falsely accused, it is certain thai Webster saved these men from the unjust punishment of an imputed crime. Only the skeleton of his argument before the jury has been preserved ; but what we have of it evidently passed under his revision. He knew that the plot of Goodridge had been so cunningly contrive. 1, that every man of the twelve before him, whose verdict was to determine the fate of his clients, was inwardly persuaded of their guilt. Sonic small marked portions of the money which Goodridge swore he had on his person on the night of the pretended robbery were found in their house. Circumstantial evidence brought their guilt with a seemingly irre- sistible force literally "home " to them. It was the conviction of the leaders of the Essex bar that no respectable lawyer could appear in their defence without becoming, in some degree, their accomplice. But Webster, after damaging the character of the prosecutor by his stern cross-examination, addressed the jury, not as an advocate bear- ing down upon them with his arguments and appeals, but rather as a thirteenth juryman, who had cosily introduced himself into their com- pany, and was arguing the case with them after they had retired for consultation among themselves. The simplicity of the language em- ployed is not more notable than the power evinced in seizing the main points on which the question of guilt or innocence turned. At every quiet but deadly stab aimed at the theory of the prosecution, he is careful to remark, that u it is for the jury to say under their oaths" whether such inconsistencies or improbabilities should have any effect on their minds. Every strong argument closes with the ever-recurring phrase, " It is for the jury to say"; and, at the end, the jury, thor- oughly convinced, said, "Not guilty." The Kennistons were vindi- cated ; and the public, which had been almost unanimous in declaring them fit tenants for the State prison, soon blamed the infatuation which had made them the accomplices of a villain in hunting down two unoffending citizens, and of denouncing every lawyer who should undertake their defence as a legal rogue. The detected scoundrel fled from the place where his rascality had been exposed, to seek some other locality, where the mingled jeers and curses of his dupes would be unheard. Some twenty years after the trial, Mr. Webster, while travelling in Western New York, stopped at an obscure village tavern to get a glass of water. The hand of the b xviii DANIEL WEBSTER man behind the bar, who gave it to him, trembled violently; and Webster, wondering at the cause, looked the fellow steadily in the eye. He recognized Goodridge, and understood at once that Goodridge had just before recognized him. Not a word passed between the felon and the intrepid advocate who had stripped his villany of all its plausible disguises ; but what immense meaning must there have been in the swift interchange of feeling as their eyes met! Mr. Webster entered his carriage and proceeded on his journey ; but Goodridge, — who has since ever heard of him? This story is a slight digression, but it illustrates that hold on reality, that truth to fact, which was one of the sources of the force and simplicity of Mr. Webster's mature style. He, however, only obtained these good qualities of rhetoric by long struggles with con- stant temptations, in his early life, to use resounding expressions and flaring images which he had not earned the right to use. His Fourth of July oration at Hanover, when he was only eighteen, and his college addresses, must have been very bad in their diction if we can judge of them by the style of his private correspondence at the time. The verses he incorporates in his letters are deformed by all the faults of false thinking and borrowed expression which characterized contem- porary American imitators of English imitators of Pope and Gray. Think of the future orator, lawyer, and senator writing, even at the age of twenty, such balderdash as this ! " And Heaven grant me, whatever luck betide, Be fame or fortune given or denied, Some cordial friend to meet my warm desire, Honest as John and good as Nehemiah." In reading such couplets we are reminded of the noted local poet of New Hampshire (or was it Maine ?) who wrote " The Shepherd's Songs," and some of whose rustic lines still linger in the memory to be laughed at, such, for instance, as these : — Or these : — " This child who perished in the fire,— His father's name was Nehemiah." " Napoleon, that great ex//< . Who scoured all Europe like a file." And Webster's prose was then almost as bad as his verse, though it was modelled on what was considered fine writing at the opening of the preseni century. He writes to his dearest student friends in a style which is profoundly insincere, though the thoughts are often AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. good, and the fact of his love for his friends cannot bo doubted. He had committed to memory Fisher Ames's noble speech <>n the British Treaty, and had probably read some of Burke's greal pamphlets on the French Revolution. The stripling statesman aimed to talk in their high tone and in their richly ornamented language, before he bad earned the right even to mimic their style of expression. There is a certain swell in some of his long sentences, and a kind of good sense in some of his short ones, which suggest that the writer Is a youth endowed with elevation as well as strength of nature, and is only making a fool of himself because he thinks he must make a fool of himself in order that he may impress his correspondents with the idea that he is a master of the horrible jargon which all bright young fellows at that time innocently supposed to constitute eloquence. Thus, in February, 1800, he writes thus to his friend Bingham: "In my melancholy moments I presage the most dire calamities. I already see in my imagination the time when the banner of civil war shall be unfurled ; when Discord's hydra form shall set up her hideous yell, and from her hundred mouths shall howl destruction through our empire ; and when American blood shall be made to How in rivers by American swords! But propitious Heaven prevent such dreadful calamities ! Internally secure, we have nothing to fear. Let Europe pour her embattled millions around us. let her thronged cohorts cover our shores, from St. Lawrence to St. Marie's, yet United Columbia shall stand unmoved; the manes of her deceased Washington shall guard the liberties of his country, and direct the sword of freedom in the day of battle." And think of this, not in a Fourth of July ora- tion, but in a private letter to an intimate acquaintance ! The bones of Daniel Webster might be supposed to have moved in their coffin at the thought that this miserable trash — so regretted and so amply atoned for — should have ever seen the light; but it is from such youthful follies that we measure the vigor of the man who outgrows them. It was fortunate that Webster, after he was admitted to the bar, came into constant collision, in the courts of New Hampshire, with one of the greatest masters of the common law that the country has ever produced, Jeremiah Mason. It lias been said that Mr. Mason educated Webster into a lawyer by opposing him. He did more than this ; he cured Webster of all the florid foolery of his early rhetorical style. Of all men that ever appeared before a jury, Mason was the must pitiless realist, the most terrible enemy of what is — in a slang term as vile almost as itself — called " Hifalutin"; and woe to the opposing XX DANIEL WEBSTER lawyer who indulged in it! He relentlessly pricked all rhetorical bubbles, reducing them at once to the small amount of ignominious Buds, which the orator's breath had converted into colored globes, having sonic appearance of stability as well as splendor. Six feet and seven inches high, and corpulent in proportion, this inexorable repre- sentative of good sense and sound law stood, while he was arguing a case, " quite near to the jury," says Webster, — " so near that he might have laid his finger on the foreman's nose ; and then he talked to them in a plain conversational way, in short sentences, and using no word that was not level to the comprehension of the least educated man on the panel. This led me," he adds, k ' to examine my own style, and 1 set about reforming it altogether." Mr. Mason was what the lawyers call a k ' cause-getting man," like Sir James Scarlett, Brougham's great opponent at the English bar. It was said of Scarlett, that he gained his verdicts because there were twelve Scarletts in the jury-box ; and Mason so contrived to blend his stronger mind with the minds of the jurymen, that his thoughts appeared to be theirs, expressed in the same simple words and quaint illustrations which they would have used if asked to give their opin- ions on the case. It is to be added, that Mason's almost cynical dis- regard of ornament in his addresses to the jury gave to an opponent like Webster the advantage of availing himself of those real orna- ments of speech which spring directly from a great heart and imagination. Webster, without ever becoming so supremely plain and simple in style as Mason, still strove to emulate, in his legal statements and arguments, the homely, robust common-sense of his antagonist; but, wherever the case allowed of it, he brought into the discussion an element of wn-common sense, the gift of his own genius and individuality, which Mason could hardly comprehend sufficiently to controvert, but which was surely not without its effect in deciding the verdicts of juries. h is probable that Webster was one of the few lawyers and statesmen that Mason respected. Mason's curt, sharp, "vitriolic" sarcasms on many men who enjoyed a national reputation, and who were popularly considered the lights of their time, still remain in the memories of his surviving associates, as things which may be quoted in conversation, but which it would be cruel to put into print. Of Webster, however, lie aever seems to have spoken a contemptuous word. Indeed, Mason, though fourteen years older than Webster, and lighting him at the Portsmouth bar with all the formidable force of his logic and learning, was from the first his cordial friend. That friendship, early estab- AS A MASTER OF ENQLI8H 8TTLB. .\xi lished between strong natures so opposite in character, was nover dis- turbed by any collision in the courts. In a letter written. I think. ;i few weeks after he had made that "Reply to Hayne " which is con- ceded to be one of the great masterpieces of eloquence in the recorded oratory of the world, Webster wrote jocularly to Mason : " I have been written to, to go to New Hampshire, to try a cause against you next August. ... If it were an easy and plain case on our side, I might bo willing to go ; but I have some of your pounding in my bones yet) and I don't care about any more till that wears out." It may he said that Webster's argument in the celebrated " Dart- mouth College Case," before the Supreme Court of the United States, placed him. at the age of thirty-six, in the foremost rank of the con- stitutional lawyers of the country. For the main points of the reason- ing, and for the exhaustive citation of authorities by which the reasoning was sustained, he was probably indebted to Mason, who had previously argued the case before the Superior Court of New Hamp- shire; but his superiority to Mason was shown in the eloquence, the moral power, he infused into his reasoning, so as to make the dullest citation of legal authority tell on the minds he addressed. There is one incident connected with this speech which proves what immense force is given to simple words when a great man — great in. his emotional nature as well as great in logical power — is behind the words. " It is, sir, as I have said, a small college. And yet there are those who love it." At this point the orator's lips quivered, his- voice choked, his eyes filled with tears, — all the memories of sacrifices endured bv his father and mother, his brothers and sisters, in order that he might enjoy its rather scanty advantages of a liberal educa- tion, and by means of which he was there to plead its caase before the supreme tribunal of the nation, rushed suddenly upon his mind in an overwhelming flood. The justices of the Supreme Court — great lawyers, tried and toughened by experience into a certain obdurate sense of justice, and insensible to any common appeal to their heart- — melted into unwonted tenderness, as. in broken words, the advocate, proceeded to state his own indebtedness to the " small college," whose rights and privileges he was there to defend. Chief Justice Marshall's eyes were filled with tears; and the eyes of the other justices were suffused with a moisture similar to that which afflicted the eyes of the Chief. As the orator gradually recovered his accustomed stem composure of manner, he turned to the counsel on the other side, — one of whom, at least, was a graduate of Dartmouth, — and in his deepest and most thrilling tones, thus concluded his argument : " Sir. xxii DANIEL WEBSTER I know not how others may feel ; but for myself, when I see my Alma Mater surrounded, like Ca'sar in the senate-house, by those who are reiterating Btab after stab, I would not, for this right hand, have her turn to me and say, Et tu quoque, mi fill ! — And thou too, my son." The effect was overwhelming; yet by what simple means was it pro- duced, and with what small expenditure of words ! The eloquence was plainly "in the man, in the subject, and in the occasion,'' but most emphatically was it in the Man. Webster's extreme solicitude to make his style thoroughly Web- sterian — a style unimitated because it is in itself inimitable — is observable in the care he took in revising all his speeches and addresses which were published under his own authority. His great Plymouth oration of 1820 did not appear in a pamphlet form until a year after its delivery. The chief reason of this delay was probably due to his desire of stating the main political idea of the oration, that government is founded on property, so clearly that it could not be misconceived by any honest mind, and could only be perverted from its plain democratic meaning by the ingenious malignity of such minds as are deliberately dishonest, and consider lying as justifiable when lying will serve a party purpose. It is probable that Webster Avould have been President of the United States had it not been for one short sentence in this oration, — "Government is founded on prop- erty." It was of no use for his political friends to prove that he founded on this general proposition the most democratic views as to the distribution of property, and advised the enactment of laws calcu- lated to frustrate the accumulation of large fortunes in a few hands. There were the words, words horrible to the democratic imagination, and Webster was proclaimed an aristocrat, and an enemy to the common people. But the delay in the publication of the oration may also be supposed to have been due to his desire to prune all its grand passages of eloquence of every epithet and image which should not be rigor- ously exact as expressions of his genuine sentiments and principles. I I is probable that the Plymouth oration, as we possess it in print, is a better oration, in respect to composition, than that which was heard by the applauding crowd before which it was originally delivered. It is certain that the largeness, the grandeur, the weight of Webster's whole nature, were first made manifest to the intelligent portion of his countrymen by this noble commemorative address. Yei it is also certain that he was not himself altogether satisfied with this oration; and his dissatisfaction with some succeeding pop- ular speeches, memorable in the annals of American eloquence, was AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE xxiii expressed privately to his friends in the most emphatic terms. On tin- day he completed his magnificent Bunker Hill oration, delivered on the 17th of June, 1825, he wrote to Mr. George Ticknor: "1 did the deed this morning, i.e. 1 finished m\ speech; and I am pretty well persuaded that it will finish me as Ear as reputation is concerned. There is no more tone in it than in the weather in which it lias I n written; it is perpetual dissolution and thaw." Every critic will understand the force of that word "tone." He seemed to feel that it had not enough robust manliness, — that the ribs and backbone, the facts, thoughts, and real substance of the address, were not sufficiently prominent, owing to the frequency of those outbursts of magnetic elo- quence, which made the immense audience that listened to it half crazy with the vehemence of their applause. On the morning after he had delivered his eulogy on Adams and Jefferson, he entered his office with his manuscript in his hand, and threw it down on the desk of a young student at law whom he specially esteemed, with the request, "There, Tom, please to take that discourse, and weed out all the Latin words." Webster's liking for the Saxon element of our composite language was, however, subordinate to his main purpose of self-expression. Every word was good, whether of Saxon or Latin derivation, which aided him to embody the mood of mind dominant at the time he was speaking or writing. No man had less of what has been called " the ceremonial cleanliness of academical pharisees ; " and the purity of expression he aimed at was to put into a form, at once intelligible and tasteful, his exact thoughts and emotions. He tormented reporters, proof-readers, and the printers who had the misfortune to be engage, 1 in putting one of his performances into type, not because this or that word was or was not Saxon or Latin, but because it was inadequate to convey perfectly his meaning. Mr. Kemble, a great Anglo-Saxon scholar, once, in a company of educated gentlemen, defied anybody present to mention a single Latin phrase in our language for which he could not furnish a more forcible Saxon equivalent. "The impen- etrability of matter " was suggested; and Kemble, after half a minute's reflection, answered, "The un-thorough-fareableness of stuff." Still, no English writer Avould think of discarding such an abstract, but convenient and accurate, term as "impenetrability," for the coarsely concrete and terribly ponderous word which declares that there is no possible thoroughfare, no road, by which we can penetrate that substance which .we call " matter," and which our Saxon forefathers called "stuff." Wherever the Latin element in our language comes XXIV DANIEL WEBSTER in to express ideas and sentiments which were absent from the Anglo- Saxon mind, Webster uses it without stint; and some of the most resounding passages of his eloquence owe to it their strange power to BUggesI a certain vastness in his intellect and sensibility, which the quaint, idiomatic, homely prose of his friend, Mason, would have been utterly incompetent to convey. Still, he preferred a plain, plump, simple verb or noun to any learned phrase, whenever he could employ it without limiting his opulent nature to a meagre vocabulary, in- competent fully to express it. Yet he never departed from simplicity ; that is, he rigidly confined himself to the use of such words as he had earned the right to use. Whenever the report of one of his extemporaneous speeches came before him for revision, he had an instinctive sagacity in detecting every word that had slipped unguardedly from his tongue, which he felt, on reflection, did not belong to him. Among the reporters of his speeches, he had a particular esteem for Henry J. Raymond, after- wards so well known as the editor of the New York Times. Mr. Raymond told me that, after he had made a report of one of Webster's speeches, and had presented it to him for revision, his conversation with him was always a lesson in rhetoric. " Did I use that phrase? I hope not. At any rate, substitute for it this more accurate definition." And then again : " That word does not express my meaning. Wait a moment, and I will give you a better one. That sentence is slovenly, — that image is imperfect and confused. I believe, my young friend, that you have a remarkable power of reporting what I say; but, if I said that, and that, and that, it must have been owing to the fact that I caught, in the hurry of the moment, such expressions as I could command at the moment ; and you see they do not accurately represent the idea that was in my mind." And thus, Mr. Raymond said, the orator's criticism upon his own speech would go on, — correction fol- lowing correction, — until the reporter feared he would not have it feady for the morning edition of his journal. Webster had so much confidence in Raymond's power of reporting him accurately, that, when he intended to make an important speech in iIp- Senate, he would send a note to him, asking him to come to Washington as a personal favor; for he knew that, the accomplished editor had a ran- power of apprehending a long train of reasoning, ami of so reporting it that the separate thoughts would not only be exactly stated, hut the relations of the thoughts to each other — a much more difficult task — would be preserved throughout, and that the argument would he presented in the symmetrica] form in which AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. xxv it existed in the speaker's mind. Then would follow, as of old, the severe scrutiny of the phraseology of the speech ; and Webster would give, as of old, a new lesson in rhetoric to the accomplished reporter who was so capable of following the processes of bis mind. The great difficulty with speakers who may be sufficiently clear in Statement and COgent in argument is that turn in their discourse when their language labors to become figurative. Imagery makes palpable to the bodily eye the abstract thought seen only by the eye of the mind ; and all orators aim at giving vividness to their thinking by thus making their thoughts rtsililf. The investigation of the process of imagination by which this end is reached is an interesting study. Woe to the speaker who is ambitious to rise into the region of imagination without possessing the faculty ! Everybody remembers the remark of Sheridan, when Tierney, the prosaic Whig leader of the English House of Commons, ventured to bring in, as an illustration of his argument, the fabulous but favorite bird of untrained orators, the phoenix, which is supposed always to spring up alive out of its own ashes. "It was," said Sheridan, "a poulterer's description of a phoenix." That is, Tierney, from defect of imagination, could not lift his poetic bird above the rank of a common hen or chicken. The test that may be most easily applied to all efforts of the im- agination is sincerity ; for, like other qualities of the mind, it acts strictly within the limits of a man's character and experience. The meaning of the word, "experience," however, must not be confined to what he has personally seen and felt, but is also to be extended to every thing he has seen and felt through vital sympathy with facts, scenes, events, and characters, which he has learned by conversation with other men and through books. Webster laid great emphasis on conversation as one of the most important sources of imagery as well as of positive knowledge. " In my education," he once remarked to Charles Sumner, "I have found that conversation with the intelli- gent men I have had the good fortune to meet has done more for me than books ever did ; for I learn more from them in a talk of half an hour than I could possibly learn from their books. Their minds, in Conversation, come into intimate contact with my own mind; and I absorb certain secrets of their power, whatever may be its quality, -which I could not have detected in their works. Converse, con- verse, converse with living men, face to face, and mind to mind, — that is one of the best sources of knowledge." But my present object is simply to give what may be called the natural history of metaphor, comparison, image, trope, and the like. xx v i DANIEL WEBSTER whether imagery be employed by an uneducated husbandman, or by a great orator and writer. Many readers may recollect the anecdote of the New Hampshire farmer, who was once complimented on the extremely handsome appearance of a horse which he was somewhat sullenly urging on to perform its work. " Yaas," was the churlish reply ; k> the critter looks well enough, but then he is as slow as — as — as — well, as slow as cold molasses." This perfectly answers to Bacon's definition of imagination, as ""thought immersed in matter." The comparison is exactly on a level with the experience of the per- son who used it. He had seen his good wife, on so many bitter winter mornings, when he was eager for his breakfast, turn the molasses-jug upside down, and had noted so often the reluctance of the congealed sweetness to assume its liquid nature, that the thing had become to him the visible image of the abstract notion of slowness of movement. An imaginative dramatist or novelist, priding himself on the exactness with which he represented character, could not have invented a more appropriate comparison to be put into the mouth of an imagined New England farmer. The only objection to such rustic poets is, that a comparatively few images serve them for a lifetime ; and one tires of such " originals " after a few days' conversation has shown the extremely limited num- ber of apt illustrations they have added to the homely poetry of agricultural life. The only person, belonging to this class, that I ever met, who possessed an imagination which was continually creative in quaint images, was a farmer by the name of Knowlton, who had spent fifty years in forcing some few acres of the rocky soil of Cape Ann to produce grass, oats, potatoes, and, it may be added, those ugly stone^ walls which carefully distinguish, at the cape, one patch of miserable sterile land from another. He was equal, in quickness of imaginative illustration, to the whole crowd of clergymen, lawyers, poets, a|* artists, who filled the boarding-houses of " Pigeon Cove"; and he wi_ absolutely inexhaustible in fresh and original imagery. On one hof summer day, the continuation of fourteen hot summer days, w her? there was tear all over Cape Ann that the usual scanty crops would 1 withered up h\ the intense heat, and the prayer for rain was in almofl ever} farmer's heart, 1 met Mr. Knowlton, as he was looking philo- sophically over one of his own sun-smitten fields of grass. Thinking that I was in full sympathy with his own feeling at the dolorous pros- pect before his eyes, I said, in accosting him, that it was had weather for the farmer.,. He paused for half a minute; and then his mind Hashed hack on an incident of his weekly experience, — that of his AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. xxvii wife " ironing" the somewhat damp clothes of the Monday's •• wash- ing," — and he replied: "I see you've been talking with our farmers, who are too stupid to know what's for their good. Ye see the spring here was uncommonly rainy, and the ground became wet and cold ; but now, for the last, fortnight, God has been put \ting his flat-iron over it. and 'twill all come out right in the end." Thus Mr. Ivnowlton went on, year after year, speaking poetry without knowing it, as Moliere's Monsieur Jourdain found he had been speaking prose all his life without knowing it. But the concep- tion of the sun as God's flat-iron, smoothing out and wa lining the moist earth, as a housewife smooths and warms the yet damp shirts, stockings, and bed-linen brought into the house from the clothes-lines in the yard, is an astounding illustration of that "familiar grasp of things divine," which obtains in so many of our rustic households. Dante or Chaucer, two of the greatest poets of the world, would, had they happened to be " uneducated" men, have seized on just such an image to express their idea of the Divine beneficence. This natural, this instinctive operation of the imaginative faculty, is often observed in children. Numberless are the stories told by fond mothers of the wonderful things uttered by their babies, shortly after they have left their cradles. The most striking peculiarity running through them all is the astonishing audacity with which the child treats the most sacred things. He or she seems to have no sense of awe. All children are taught to believe that God resides above them in the sky ; and I shall never forget the shock of surprise I felt at the answer of a boy of five years — whom I found glorying over the treasures of his first paint-box — to my question: "Which color do voi. like best?" " Oh," he carelessly replied, "I like best sky-blue, .^LGod's color." And the little rogue went on, daubing the paper fAfore him with a mixture of all colors, utterly unconscious that he had «£d any thing remarkable; and yet what .Mrs. Browning specially listinguishes as the characteristic of the first and one of the greatest f English poets, Chaucer, namely, his "familiar grasp of things jkivine," could not have found a more appropriate illustration than in , 'lis chance remark of a mere child, expressing the fearlessness of his ith in the Almighty Father above him. Now in all these instinctive operations of the imagination, whether the mind of a child or in that of a grown man, it is easy to discern he mark of sincerity. If the child is petted, and urged by his mother to display his brightness before a company of other mothers and other babies, he is in danger of learning early that trick of falsehood, which xwili DANIEL WEBSTER clings to him when he goes to school, when he leaves the school for the college, and when he leaves the college for the pursuits of profes- sional life. The fanner or mechanic, not endowed with " college la ruin'," is sure to become a bad declaimer, perhaps a demagogue, when he abandons those natural illustrations and ornaments of his speech which spring from his individual experience, and strives to emulate the grandiloquence of those graduates of colleges who have the heathen mythology at the ends of their fingers and tongues, and can refer to Jove, Juno, Minerva, Diana, Venus, Vulcan, and Neptune, as though they were resident deities and deesses of the college halls. The trouble with most "uneducated" orators is, that they become enamored of these shining gods and goddesses, after they have lost, through repetition, all of their old power to give point or force to any good sentence of modern oratory. During the times when, to be a speaker at Abolitionist meetings, the speaker ran the risk of being pelted with rotten eggs, I happened to be present, as one of a small antislavery audience, gathered in an equally small hall. Among the speakers was an honest, strong-minded, w T arm-hearted young mechanic, who, as long as he was true to his theme, spoke earnestly, manfully, and well ; but alas ! he thought he could not close without calling in some god or goddess to give emphasis — after the method of college students — to his previous statements. He selected, of course, that un- fortunate phantom whom he called the Goddess of Liberty. " Here, in Boston," he thundered, "where she was cradled in Faneuil Hall, can it be that Liberty should be trampled under foot, when, after two genera- tions have passed, — yes, sir, have elapsed, — she has grown — yes, sir, I repeat it, has grown — grown up, sir, into a great man ? " The change in sex was, in this case, more violent than usual; but how ni.n\ instances occur to everybody's recollection, where that poor Goddcsj^ has been almosl equally outraged, through a puerile ambition on thjH part of the orator to endow her with an exceptional distinction b senseless rhodomontade, manufactured by the word-machine which he presumes to call his imagination ! All imitative imagery is the grave of common-sense. Now let us pass to an imagination which is, perhaps, the grandest in American oratory, but which was as perfectly natural as that of the,. " cold molasses," or "God's flat-iron," of the New England farmer, — aei natural, indeed, as the "sky-blue, God's color," of the New Englandfl boy. Daniel Webster, standing on the heights of Quebec at an early* hour of a summer morning, heard the ordinary morning drum-beat* which called the garrison to their duty. Knowing that the British AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYI.K. xxix possessions belted the globe, the thought occurred to him thai the morning drum would go on beating in some English post to the time when it would Bound again in Quebec. Afterwards, in a speech on President Jackson's Protest, he dwell on the facf that our Revolu- tionary fore fathers engaged in a war with Great Britain on a strict question of principle, w> while actual Buffering was still afar 011.*" How could he give most effeet to this statement? It would have been easy for him to have presented statistical tables, Bhowing the wealth, population, and resources of England, followed by an enumeration of her colonies and military stations, all going to prove the enormous strength of the nation against which the United American colonies raised their improvised Hag. But the thought whirh had heretofore occurred to him at Quebec happily recurred to his mind the moment, it was needed ; and he flashed on the imagination an image of British power which no statistics could have conveyed to the understanding, — " a Power," he said, "which has dotted over the surface of the whole globe with her possessions and military posts, whose morning drum- beat, following the sun, and keeping company with the hours, circles the earth with one continuous and unbroken strain of the martial airs of England." Perhaps a mere rhetorician might consider superfluous the word "whole," as applied to " globe," and " unbroken," as follow- ing " continuous"; yet they really add to the force and majesty of tin; expression. It is curious that, in Great Britain, this magnificent im- personation of the power of England is so little known. It is certain that it is unrivalled in British patriotic oratory. Not Chatham, not even Burke, ever approached it in the noblest passages in which they celebrated the greatness and glory of their country. Webster, it is to be noted, introduced it in his speech, not for the purpose of exalt- ing England, but of exalting our Revolutionary forefathers, whose victory, after a seven years' war of terrible severity, waged in vin- dication of a principle, was made all the more glorious from having been won over an adversary so formidable and so vast. It is reported that, at the conclusion of this speech on the Presi- dent's Protest, John Sergeant, of Philadelphia, came up to the orator, and, after cordially shaking hands with him. eagerly asked, " Where, Webster, did you get that idea of the morning drum-beat?' Like other public men, accustomed to address legislative assemblies, he was naturally desirous of knowing the place, if place there was, where Buch images and illustrations were to be found. The truth was that, if Webster had ever read Goethe's Faust, — which he of course n< had done, — he might have referred his old friend to that passage XXX DANIEL WEBSTER where Faust, gazing at the setting sun, aches to follow it in its course for ever. " See," he exclaims, " how the green-girt cottages shimmer in the Betting sun. He bends and sinks, — the day is outlived. Yonder he hurries off, and quickens other life. Oh, that I have no wing to lift me from the ground, to struggle after — forever after — him ! 1 should see, in everlasting evening beams, the stilly world at my feet, every height on fire, every vale in repose, the silver brook (lowing into golden streams. The rugged mountain, with all its dark defiles, would not then break my godlike course. Already the sea, with its heated bays, opens on my enraptured sight. Yet the god seems at last to sink away. But the new impulse wakes. I hurry on to drink his everlasting light, — the day before me and the night behind, — and under me the waves." In Faust, the wings of the mind follow the setting sun; in Webster, they follow the rising sun ; but the thought of each circumnavigates the globe, in joyous companionship with the same centre of life, light, and heat, — though the suggestion which prompts the sublime idea is widely different. The sentiment of Webster, calmly meditating on the heights of Quebec, contrasts strangely with the fiery feeling of Faust, raging against the limitations of his mortal existence. A humorist, Charles Dickens, who never read either Goethe or Webster, has oddly seized on the same general idea : " The British empire," — he says, in one of his novels, — "on which the sun never sets, and where the tax-gatherer never goes to bed." This celebrated image of the British "drum-beat" is here cited sim- ply to indicate the natural way in which all the faculties of Webster are brought into harmonious co-operation, whenever he seriously discusses any great question. His understanding and imagination, when both are roused into action, always cordially join hands. His statement of facts is so combined with the argument founded on them, that they are interchangeable ; his statement having the force of argument, and his argument having the "substantiality" which properly belongs to statement ; and to these he commonly adds an imaginative illustration, which gives increased reality to both statement and argument. In rapidly turning over the leaves of the six volumes of his Works, one can easily find numerous instances of this instinctive operation of his mind. In his first Bunker Hill oration, he announces that "the prin- ciple of free governments adheres to the American soil. It is bedded in it, immovable as its mountains." Again he says: "A call for the representative system, wherever it is not enjoyed, and where there is already intelligence enough to estimate its value, is perseveringly made. Where men may speak out, they demand it ; where the bayonet AS A Mas ill: OF ENGLISH STYLE. is :ii their throats, they pray for it." Ami yet again: "II the true Bpark of religious and civil liberty be kindled, it will burn. Human agency cannol extinguish it. Like the earth's central fire, ii maj be Bmothered for a time; the ocean may overwhelm it; i ntaina may press it down; l>ut its inherent and unconquerable Force will heave both the ocean and the land, and at Bome time or other, in some place or other, the volcano will break out, and flame up to heaven." It would be difficult to find in any European literature a Bimilai embodiment of an elemental sentiment of I in inanity, in an image which is as elemental as the sentimenl to which it gives vivid expression. And then with what majesty, with what energy, and with what simplicity, can he denounce a political transaction which, had it not attracted his ire, would hardly have survived in the memory of his countrymen! Thus, in his Protest against Mr. Benton's Expunging Resolution, speaking for himself and his Senatorial colleague, he says: "We rescue our own names, character, and honor from all participation in this matter; and, whatever the wayward character of tin* times, the headlong and plunging spirit of party devotion, or the fear or the love of power, may have been able to bring about elsewh we desire to thank God that they have not, as yet, overcome the love of liberty, fidelity to true republican principles, and a sacred regard for the Constitution in that State whose soil was drenched to a mire by the first and best blood of the Revolution."" Perhaps the peculiar power of Webster in condemning a measure by a felicitous epithet, such as that he employs in describing "the plunging spirit of party devotion," was never more happily exercised. In that word ••plun- ging," he Intended to condense all his horror and hatred of a transaction which he supposed calculated to throw the true principles of constitu- tional government into a bottomless abyss of personal government, where right constitutional principles would cease to have existence, as well as cease to have authority. There is one passage in his oration at the completion of the Bunker Hill Monument, which may be quoted as an illustration of his power of compact statement, and which, at the same time, may save readers from the trouble of reading many excellent histories of the origin and progress of the Spanish dominion in America, condensing, as it does, all which such histories can tell us in a few smiting Benten "Spain," he says, "stooped on South America, like a vulture on its prey. Every thing was force. Territories were acquired by fire and sword. Cities were destroyed by fire and sword. Hundreds of thou- sands of human beings fell by lire and sword. Even conversion to XX \ii DANIEL WEBSTER Christianity was attempted by fire and sword." One is reminded, in this passage, of Macaulay's method of giving vividness to his confident generalization of facts by emphatic repetitions of the same form of words. The repetition of "fire and sword," in this series of short, sharp sentences, ends in forcing the reality of what the words mean on tlic dullest imagination; and the climax is capped by affirming that "fire and sword" were the means by which the religion of peace was recommended to idolaters, whose heathenism was more benignant, and more intrinsically Christian, than the military Christianity which was forced upon them. Ami then, again, how easily Webster's imagination slips in, at the end of a comparatively bald enumeration of the benefits of a good government, to vitalize the statements of his understanding ! " Every- w here," he says, " there is order, everywhere there is security. Every- where the law reaches to the highest, and reaches to the lowest, to protect all in their rights, and to restrain all from wrong; and over all hovers liberty, — that liberty for which our fathers fought and fell on this very spot, with her eye ever watchful, and her eagle wing ever wide outspread." There is something astonishing in the dignity given in the last clause of this sentence to the American eagle, — a bird so degraded by the rhodomontade of fifth-rate declaimers, that it seemed impossible that the highest genius and patriotism could restore it to its primacy among the inhabitants of the air, and its just eminence as a symrlbl of American liberty. It is also to be noted, that Webster here alludes to "the bird of freedom" only as it appears on the American silver dollar that passes daily from hand to hand, where the watchful eye and the outspread wing are so inartistically repre- Bented that the critic is puzzled to account for the grandeur of the image which the orator contrived to evolve from the barbaric picture on the ugliesl ami clumsiest of civilized coins. The compactness of Webster's statements occasionally reminds us of the epigrammatic point which characterizes so many of the state- ments of Burke. Thus, in presenting a memorial to Congress, signed by many prominent men of business, against President Jackson's sys- tem of finance, lie saw at, once that the Democrats would denounce it a- ; ther manifesto of the "moneyed aristocracy." Accordingly Webster introduced the paper to the attention of the Senate, with the preliminary remark: "The memorialists are not unaware, that, if rights are attacked, attempts will be made to render odious those whose lights are violated. Power always seeks such subjects on which to t in its experiments." It is difficult to resist the impression AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH si TLB. -.iii that Webster must have been indebted to Burke for this maxim. Again, we are deluded into the belief that we must lie reading Burke, when WYbster refers to the minimum principle as the righi one to be followed in imposing duties on certain manufactures. "It lays the impost, 1 ' he says, "exactly where it will do good, and leaves the rest free. It is an intelligent, discerning, discriminating principle; not a blind, headlong, generalizing, nncalcnlating operation. Simplicity, undoubtedly, is a great beauty in acts of legislation, as well as in the works of art ; but in both it must be a simplicity resulting from con- gruity of parts and adaptation to the end designed; not a rude gener- alization, which either leaves the particular object unaccomplished, or, in accomplishing it, accomplishes a dozen others also, which were not desired. It is a simplicity wrought out by knowledge and skill ; not the rough product of an undistinguishing, sweeping general principle." An ingenuous reader, who has not learned from his historical studies that men generally act, not from arguments addressed to their under- standings, but from vehement appeals which rouse their passions to defend their seeming interests, cannot comprehend why Webster's arguments against Nullification and Secession, which were apparently unanswerable, and which were certainly unanswered either by Hayne or Calhoun, should not have settled the question in debate between the North and the South. Such a reader, after patiently following all the turns and twists of the logic, all the processes of the reasoning employed on both sides of the intellectual contest, would,, naturally conclude that the party defeated in the conflict would gracefully acknowledge the fact of its defeat; and, as human beings, gifted with the faculty of reason, would cheerfully admit the demonstrated results of its exercise. He w r ould find it difficult to comprehend why the men who were overcome in a fair gladiatorial strife in the open arena of debate, with brain pitted against brain, and manhood against man- hood, should resort to the rough logic of " blood and iron,'' when the nobler kind of logic, that which is developed in the struggle of mind with mind, had failed to accomplish the purposes which their hearts and wills, independent of their understandings, were bent on accom- plishing. It may be considered certain that so wise a statesman as Webster — a statesman whose foresight was so palpably the consequence of his insight, and whose piercing intellect was so admirably adapted to read events in their principles — never indulged in such illusions as tl which cheered so many of his own adherents, when they supposed his triumph in argumentation was to settle a matter which was really based xxxiv DANIEL WEBSTER on organic differences in the institutions of the two sections of the Union. He knew perfectly well that, while the Webster men were glorying in his victory over Calhoun, the Calhoun men were equally jubilant in celebrating Calhoun's victory over him. Which of them had the better in the argument was of little importance in comparison with the terrible fact that the people of the Southern States were widening, year by year, the distance which separated them from the people of the Northern States. We have no means of judging whether Webster clearly foresaw the frightful civil war between the two sections, which followed so soon after his own death. We only know that, to him, it was a conflict constantly impending, and which could be averted for the time only by compromises, concessions, and other temporary expedients. If he allowed his mind to pass from the pressing questions of the hour, and to consider the radical division bet ween the two sections of the country which were only formally united, it would seem that he must have felt, as long as the institution of negro slavery existed, that he was only laboring to postpone a con- flict which it was impossible for him to prevent. But my present purpose is simply to indicate the felicity of Web- ster's intrepid assault on the principles which the Southern disunionists put forward in justification of their acts. Mr. Calhoun's favorite idea was this, — that Nullification was a conservative principle, to be exercised within the Union, and in accordance with a just interpreta- tion of the Constitution. " To begin with nullification," Webster retorted, " with the avowed intent, nevertheless, not to proceed to secession, dismemberment, and general revolution, is as if one were to take the plunge of Niagara, and cry out that he would stop half- way down. In the one case, as in the other, the rash adventurer must go to the bottom of the dark abyss below, were it not that the abyss has no discovered bottom." How admirable also is his exposure of the distinction attempted to be 'law n between secession, as a State right to be exercised under the provisions of what was called "the Constitutional Compact," and revolution. " S< < jsion," he says, "as a revolutionary right, is intelli- gibli a right to be proclaimed in the. midst of civil commotions, and asserted at the head of armies, I can understand it. But as a practical right, existing under the Constitution, and in conformity with its provisions, it, seems to me nothing but a plain absurdity; for it BUpp08< istance to government, under the authority of ■ i n in- • ii t itself; it supposes dismemberment, without violating the principles of union; it supposes opposition to law, without AS A MASTKK OF ENGLISH sivi.i; *v crime; it supposes the total overthrow of government, without i. lution." After put ling some pertinent interrogatories —which are argument* in themselves — relating to the inevitable results of bi l, lie adds, that "every man must see that these are all questions which can ai only after a revolution. They presuppose the breaking up ol the gov- ernment While the Constitution lasts, they are repressed "; — and then, with that felicitous use of the imagination as a handmaid of tie' understanding, which is the peculiar characteristic of his eloquence, he closes the sentence by saving, that "they spring up to annoy and startle us only from its grave." A mere rcasoner would have Btopped at the word "repressed"; the instantaneous conversion of k ' ques- tions " into spectres, affrighting and annoying us as they spring up from the grave of the Constitution, — which is also by implication impersonated, — is the work of Webster's ready imagination; and it thoroughly vitalizes the statements which precede it, A great test of the sincerity of a statesman's style is his moderation. Now, if we take the whole body of Mr. Webster's speeches, whether delivered in the Senate or before popular assemblies, during the period of his opposition to President Jackson's administration, we may well be surprised at their moderation of tone and statement. Every- body old enough to recollect the singular virulence of political speech at that period must remember it as disgraceful equally to the national conscience and the national understanding. The spirit of party, alu ays sufficiently fierce and unreasonable, was then stimulated into a fury resembling madness. Almost every speaker, Democrat or Whig, was in that state of passion which is represented by the physical Bign of " foaming at the mouth." Few mouths then opened that did oof imme- diately begin to t; foam." So many fortunes were suddenly wrecked by President Jackson's financial policy, and the business of the country was so disastrously disturbed, that, whether the policy was right or wrong, those who assailed and those who defended it seemed to be equally devoid of common intellectual honesty. "I do well to he angry," appears to have been the maxim which inspired Democratic and Whig orators alike ; and what reason there was on either side was Bub- merged in the lies and libels, in the calumnies and caricatures, in the defamations and execrations, which accompanied the citation ol tacts and the affirmation of principles. Webster, during all this time, was selected as a shining mark, at which every puny writer or Bpeaket who opposed him hurled his small or large contribution of verbal rotten eggs; and yet Webster was almost the only Whig statesman XX \vi DANIEL WEBSTER who preserved sanity of understanding during the whole progress of that political riot, in which the passions of men became the masters of their understandings. Pious Whig fathers, who worshipped the "godlike Daniel," went almost to the. extent of teaching their chil- dren to curse Jackson in their prayers; equally pious Democratic fathers brought up their sons and daughters to anathematize the fiend- like Daniel as the enemy of human rights; and yet, in reading Web- ster's speeches, covering the whole space between 1832 and 1836, we can hardly find a statement which an historian of our day would not admit as a candid generalization of facts, or an argument which would D01 stand the test of logical examination. Such an historian might entirely disagree with the opinions of Webster; but he would cer- tain] v award to him the praise of being an honest reasoner and an honest rhetorician, in a time when reason was used merely as a tool of party passion, and when rhetoric rushed madly into the worst excesses of rhodomontade. It is also to be said that Webster rarely indulged in personalities. When we consider how great were his powers of sarcasm and invec- tive, how constant were the provocations to exercise them furnished by his political enemies, and how atrociously and meanly allusions to his private affairs were brought into discussions which should have been confined to refuting his reasoning, his moderation in this matter is to he ranked as a great virtue. He could not take a glass of wine without the trivial fact being announced all over the country as indis- putable proof that he was an habitual drunkard, though the most remarkable characteristic of his speeches is their temperance, — their " total abstinence " from all the intoxicating moral and mental "drinks" which confuse the understanding and mislead the con- science. He could not borrow money on his note of hand, like any other citizen, without the circumstance being trumpeted abroad as incontrovertible evidence that Nick Biddle had paid him that sum lo defend his diabolical Bank in the Senate of the United States. The plain fact that his speeches were confined strictly to the exposi- tion and defence of sound opinions on trade and finance, and that it was difficult to answer them, only confirmed his opponents in the conviction that >>\<\ Nick was at tin; bottom of it all. His great intel- lect was admitted ; hut on the high, broad brow, which was its mani- i at i<>n t<> tin- eye, hia enemies pasted the words, "To be let," or, " For sale." The more impersonal he became in his statements and arguments, the more truoulently was he assailed by the personalities of the political gossip and scandal-monger. Indeed, from the time he AS A MASTER OF BNQLISH STYLE. rvil first came to tlie front as a great lawyer, atatesman, and patriot, he was fixed upon by the whole crew of party libellers as a man wl arguments could be answered most efficiently by staining bis char- acter, lie passed through life with his head enveloped *' iii a cloud of poisonous flies " ; and the head was the grandest-looking head thai bad ever been seen on the American continent. It was so pre-eminently noble and impressive, and promised so much more than it could pa bly perform, that only one felicitous sarcasm of party malice, among many thousands of bad jokes, has escaped oblivion ; and that was stolen from Charles Fox's remark on Lord Chancellor Thurlow, as I ■• . once viewed him sitting on the wool-sack, frowning on the English House of Lords, which he dominated by the terror of his countenance, and by the fear that he might, at any moment, burst forth in one of his short bullying, thundering retorts, should any comparatively weak baron, earl, marquis, or duke dare to oppose him. "Thurlow," said Fox, "must be an impostor, for nobody can be as wise as he looks." The American version of this was, "Webster must be a charlatan, for no one can be as great as he looks." But during all the time that his antagonists attempted to elude .the force of his arguments by hunting up the evidences of his debts, and by trying to show that the most considerate, the most accurate, and t he most temperate of his lucid statements were the products of physical stimulants, Webster steadily kept in haughty reserve his power of retaliation. In his speech in reply to Hayne he hinted that, if he were imperatively called upon to meet blows with blows, he might be found fully equal to his antagonists in that ignoble province of intellectual pugilism; but that he preferred the more civilized struggle of brain with brain, in a contest which was to decide questions of principle. In the Senate, where he could meet his political opponents face to face, few dared to venture to degrade the subject in debate from the discussion of principles to the miserable subterfuge of imputing bad motives as a sufficient answer to good arguments: but still many of these dignified gentlemen smiled approval on the efforts of the low- minded, small-minded caucus-speakers of their party, when they declared that Webster's logic was unworthy of consideration, because he was bought by the Bank, or bought by the manufacturers <>t Massa- chusetts, or bought by some other combination of persons who wen- supposed to be the deadly enemies of the laboring men of the count On some rare occasions Webster's wrath broke out in such Bmiting words that his adversaries were cowed into silence, and cursed the infatuation which had led them to overlook the fact that the •• logic- KXXViii DANIEL WEBSTER machine" had in it invectives more terrible than its reasonings. But generally he refrained from using the giant's power "like a giant"; and it is almost, pathetic to remember that, when Mr. Everett un- dertook to edit, in 1851, the standard edition of his works, Webster gave directions to expunge all personalities from his speeches, even when those personalities were the just punishment of unprovoked attacks on his integrity as a man. Readers will look in vain, in this edition of his works, for some of the most pungent passages which originally attracted their attention in the first report of the Defence of the Treaty of Washington. At the time these directions were given, Webster was himself the object of innumerable personalities, which were the natural, the inevitable results of his speech of the 7th of March, 1850. It seems to be a law, that the fame of all public men shall be " half dislame." We are specially warned to beware of the man of whom all men speak well. Burke, complimenting his friend Fox for risking every thing, even his "darling popularity," on the success of the East India Bill, nobly says: "He is traduced and abused for his sup- posed motives. He will remember, that obloquy is a necessary ingre- dient in all true glory ; he will remember, that it was not only in the Roman customs, but it is in the nature of human things, that calumny and abuse are essential parts of triumph." It may be said, however, that Webster's virtue in this general abstinence from personalities is to be offset by the fact that he could throw into a glance of his eye, a contortion of his face, a tone of his voice, or a simple gesture of his hand, more scorn, contempt, and hatred than ordinary debaters could express by the profuse use of all the scurrilous terms in the English language. Probably many a sen- tence, which we now read with an even pulse, was, as originally deliv- ered, accompanied by such pointing of the finger, or such flashing of the eye, or such raising of the voice, that the seemingly innocent words were poisoned arrows that festered in the souls of those against whom they were directed, and made deadly enemies of a number of persons whom he seems, in his printed speeches, never to have men- tioned without the respect due from one Senator to another. In his speech in defence of tin; Treaty of Washington, he had to repel Mr. Ingersoll'a indecent attack on his integrity, and his dreadful retort is described by those win. heard it as coming within the rules which condemn cruelty to animals, lint the "noble rage" which prompted him to indulge in such unwonted invective subsided with the occasion that called it forth, and he was careful to have it expunged when the AS A MAsn.k 01 ENGLISH sivi.i: ,ix speech was reprinted. An eminent judge <>f the Supre Court "f Massachusetts, in commending the general dignitj and courte j which characterized Webster's conduct of a case in a court of law, noted one exception. "When," he said, " tin- opposite counsel had got bim into a corner, tin- wa\ he ' trampled out ' was somel hing frightful to behold. The court itself could hardly restrain him in his gigantic efforts to extricate himself from the consequences of a blunder or an oversight." Great writers and orators are commonly economists in the use of words. They compel common words to bear a burden of thought and emotion, which mere rhetoricians, with all the n^m, ,s of the lan- guage at their disposal, would never dream of imposing upon them. But it is also to be observed, that some writers have the power of giving a new and special significance to a common word, by impressing on it a wealth of meaning which it cannot claim for itself. Three obvious examples of this peculiar power maybe cited. Among poets, Chaucer infused into the simple word "green " a poetic ecstasy which no succeeding English poet, not even Wordsworth, lias ever rivalled, in describing an English landscape in the month of May. Jonathan Edwards fixed upon the term " sweetness " as best conveying his loft iest concej)tion of the bliss which the soul of the saint can attain to on earth, or expect to be blessed with in heaven ; but not one of his theological successors has ever caught the secret of using "sweetm in the sense attached to it by him. Dr. Barrow gave to the word "rest," as embodying his idea of the spiritual repose of the soul fit for heaven, a significance which it bears in the works of no other great English divine. To descend a little, Webster was fond of certain words, commonplace enough in themselves, to which he insisted on imparting a more than ordinary import. Two of these, which meet us contin- ually in reading his speeches, are "interesting'" and "respectable." The first of these appears to him competent to express that raptun attention called forth by a thing, an event, or a person, which other writers convey by such a term as "absorbing," or its numerous equivalents. If we should select one passage from his works which, more than any other, indicates his power of seeing and feeling, through a process of purely imaginative vision and sympathy, it is that portion of his Plymouth oration, where he places himself and his audience as spectators on the barren shore, when the Mayflower came into view. He speaks of "the interesting group upon the .leek" of the little vessel. The very word suggests that we are to have a very common- place account of the landing, and the circumstances which followed it. In an instant, however, we are made to ••feel the cold which xl DANIEL WEBSTER benumbed, and listen to the winds which pierced " this " interesting " group; and immediately after, the picture is flashed upon the imagi- nation of "chilled and shivering childhood, houseless, but for a mother's arms, couchless, but for a mother's breast," — an image which shows thai the orator had not only transported himself into a spectator of the Bcene, but had felt his own blood "almost freeze" in intense sympathy with the physical sufferings of the shelterless mothers and children. There is no word which the novelists, satirists, philanthropic reformers, and Bohemians of our day have done so much to discredit, and make dis-respectable to the heart and the imagination, as the word " respectable." Webster always uses it as a term of eulogy. A respectable man is, to his mind, a person who performs all his du- ties to his family, his country, and his Gocl ; a person who is not only virtuous, but who has a clear perception of the relation which con- nects one virtue with another by " the golden thread " of moderation, and who, whether he be a man of genius, or a business man of average talent, or an intelligent mechanic, or a farmer of sound moral and mental character, is to be considered " respectable " because he is one of those citizens whose intelligence and integrity constitute the foun- dation on which the Republic rests. As late as 1843, in his noble oration on the completion of the Bunker Hill Monument, he declared that if our American institutions had done nothing more than to pro- duce the character of Washington, that alone would entitle them to the respect of mankind. '.' Washington is all our own ! . . . I would cheerfully put the question to-day to the intelligence of Europe and the world, what character of the century, upon the whole, stands out in the relief of history, most pure, most respectable, most sublime; and I doubt not, that, by a suffrage approaching to unanimity, the answer would be Washington ! " It is needless to quote other instances of the peculiar meaning he. put into the word "respectable," when we thus find him challenging the Europe of the eighteenth century to name a match for Washington, and placing "most respectable" after tk most pure," and immediately preceding "most sublime," in his enumera- tion (if the three qualities in which Washington surpassed all men of his cent urv. It has been often remarked that Webster adapted his style, even his hahils of mind and modes of reasoning, to the particular auditors he desired to influence j bul that, whether he addressed an unorganized crowd of people, <>r a jury, or a bench of judges, or the Senate of the United States, lie ever proved himself an orator of the first class. AS A MASTER OF ENGLI8B 81 vi,i; k1] His admirers commonly confine themselves to the admirabli oity with which he discriminated between the kind of reasoning proper to he employed when he addressed courts and juries, and the kind of reasoning which is most effective in a Legislative assembly. The lawyer and the statesman were, in Webster, kepi distinct, excepl so far as he was a lawyer who had argued before the Supreme < kmrt questions of constitutional law. An amusing instance of this abne- gation of the lawyer, while incidentally bringing in a lawyer's knowledge of judicial decisions, occurs in a little episode in bis debate with Mr. Calhoun, in 184U, as to the relation of Congress to the Territories. Mr. Calhoun said that he had been told thai the Supreme Court of the United States had decided, in one case, that tie- Constitution did not extend to the Territories, but that he was "incredulous of the fact." "Oh!" replied Mr. Webster, "I can remove the gentleman's incredulity very easily, for I can assure, him that the same thing has been decided by the United States courts ■ and over again for the last thirty years." It will be observed, how- ever, that Mr. Webster, after communicating this important item of information, proceeded to discuss the question as if the Supreme Court had no existence, and bases his argument on the plain terms of the Constitution, and the plain facts recorded in the history of the government established by it. Macaulay, in his lively way, has shown the difficulty of manufactur- ing English statesmen out of English lawyers, though, as lawyers, their rank in the profession may be very high. " Their arguments," he Bays, "are intellectual prodigies, abounding with the happiest analogies and the most refined distinctions. The principles of their arbitrary science being once admitted, the statute-books and the reports being once assumed as the foundations of reasoning, these men must be allowed to be perfect masters of logic. But if a question arises as to the pos- tulates on which their whole system rests, if they arc called upon to vindicate the fundamental maxims of that system which they have passed their lives in studying, these very men often talk the language of savages or of children. Those who have listened to a man of this class in his own court, and who have witnessed the skill with which he analyzes and digests a vast mass of evidence, or reconciles a crowd of precedents which at first sight seem contradictory, scarcely know him again when, a few hours later, they hear him Bpeaking on the other side of Westminster Hall in his capacity of Legislator. They can scarcely believe that the paltry quirks which are faintly heard through a storm of coughing, and which do not impose on the phi.. x lii DANIEL WEBSTER country gentleman, can proceed from the same sharp and vigorous intellect which had excited their admiration under the same roof, and on the same day." And to this keen distinction between an English lawyer, and an English lawyer as a member of the House of Commons, may be added the peculiar kind of sturdy manliness which is demanded in any person who aims to take a leading part in Parliamentary debates. Erskine, probably the greatest advocate who ever appeared in the English courts of law, made hut a comparatively poor figure in the House of Commons, as a member of the Whig opposition. " The truth is, Erskine," Sheridan once said to him, u you are afraid of Pitt, and that is the flabby part of your character." But Macaulay, in another article, makes a point against the leaders of party themselves. His definition of Parliamentary government is " government by speaking " : and he declares that the most effective speakers are commonly ill-informed, shallow in thought, devoid of large ideas of legislation, hazarding the loosest speculations with the utmost intellectual impudence, and depending for success on volubility of speech, rather than on accuracy of knowledge or penetration of intelligence. " The tendency of institutions like those of England," he adds, " is to encourage readiness in public men, at the expense both of fulness and of exactness. The keenest and most vigorous minds of every generation, minds often admirably fitted for the investigation of truth, are habitually employed in producing arguments such as no man of sense would ever put into a treatise intended for publication, arguments which are just good enough to be used once, when aided by fluent delivery and pointed language." And he despairingly closes with the remark, that he " would sooner expect a great original work on political science, such a work, for example, as the Wealth of Nations, from an apothecary in a country town, or from a minister in the Hebrides, than from a statesman who, ever since he was one-and- twenty, had been a distinguished debater in the House of Commons." Now it is plain that neither of these contemptuous judgments applies to Webster. He was a great lawyer; but as a legislator the precedents of the lawyer did not control the action or supersede the principles of the statesman. He was one of the most formidable debaters thai ever appeared in a legislative assembly; and yet those who most resolutely grappled with him in the duel of debate would he the last to impute to him inaccuracy of knowledge or shallowness of thought, lb- carried into the Senate of the United States a trained mind, disciplined by the sternest culture of his faculties, disdaining any plaudits which were not the honest reward of robust reasoning on AS A MASTER OF ENGUSB BTYLB. xliii generalized facts, and "gravitating" in the direction of truth, whether he hit or missed it. In his case, at least, there u;is oothing in bis legal experience, or in his Legislative experience, whieli would I unfitted him for producing a work on the science of politics. The best speeches in the House of Commons of Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell appear very weak indeed, as compared with the Repl Ilavne, or the speech on "The Constitution not a Compact between Sovereign States," or the speech on the President's Prote In this connection it may be said, when we remember the hot contests between the two men, that there is something plaintive in Calhoun's dying testimony to Webster's austere intellectual conscien- tiousness. Mr. Venables, who attended the South Carolina st; man in his dying hours, wrote to Webster: "When your name was mentioned he remarked that * Mr. Webster has as high a standard of truth as any statesman I have met in debate. Convince him, and he cannot reply ; he is silenced; he cannot look truth in the face and oppose it by argument. I think that it can be readily perceived by his manner when he felt the unanswerable force of a reply.' He often spoke of you in my presence, and always kindly and most respectfully." Now it must be considered that, in debate, the minds of Webster and Calhoun had come into actual contact and collision. Each really felt the force of the other. An ordinary duel might be ranked among idle pastimes when compared with the stress and strain and pain of their encounters in the duel of debate. A sword-cut or pistol-bullet, maiming the body, was as nothing in comparison with the wounds they mutually inflicted on that substance which was immortal in both. It was a duel, or series of duels, in which mind was opposed to mind, and will to will, and where the object appealed to be to inflict moral and mental annihilation on one of the comba- tants. There never passed a word between them on which the most ingenious Southern jurists, in their interpretations of the "code" of honor, could have found matter for a personal quarrel : and yet these two proud and strong personalities knew that they were engaged in a mortal contest, in which neither gave quarter nor expected quarter. Mr. Calhoun's intellectual egotism was as great as his intellectual ability. He always supposed that he was the victor in every close logical wrestle with any mind to which his own was opposed. He never wrestled with a mind, until he met Webster's, which in tenacity, grasp, and power was a match for his own. He, of course, thought his antagonist was beaten by his superior strength and amplitude ol argumentation ; but it is still to be noted that he, the most redoubtable xliv DANIEL WEBSTER opponent that Webster ever encountered, testified, though in equivocal terms, to Webster's intellectual honesty. When he crept, half dead, into the Senate-Chamber to hear Webster's speech of the 7th of March, 1850, he objected emphatically at the end to Webster's decla- ration that the Union could not be dissolved. After declaring that ( alhoun's supposed case of justifiable resistance came within the definition of the ultimate right of revolution, which is lodged in all oppressed communities, Webster added that he did not at that time wish to go into a discussion of the nature of the United States government. " The honorable gentleman and myself," he said, " have broken lances sufficiently often before on that subject." "I have no desire to do it now," replied Calhoun ; and Webster blandly retorted, " I presume the gentleman has not, and I have quite as little." One is reminded here of Dr. Johnson's remark, when he was stretched on a sick-bed, with his gladiatorial powers of argument suspended by physi- cal exhaustion. " If that fellow Burke were now present," the Doctor humorously murmured, " he would certainly kill me." But to Webster's eminence as a lawyer and a statesman, it is proper to add, that he has never been excelled as a writer of state papers among the public men of the United States. Mr. Emerson has a phrase which is exactly applicable to these efforts of Webster's mind. That phrase is, " superb propriety." Throughout his despatches, he always seems to feel that he impersonates his country ; and the gravity and weight of his style are as admirable as its simplicity and majestic ease. " Daniel Webster, his mark," is indelibly stamped on them all. When the Treaty of Washington was criticised by the Whigs in the English Parliament, Macaulay specially noticed the difference in the style of the two negotiators. Lord Ashburton, he said, had compro- mised the honor of his country by "the humble, caressing, wheedling tone " of his letters, a tone which contrasted strangely with " the firm, resolute, vigilant, and unyielding manner" of the American Secretary of State. It is to be noticed that no other opponent of Sir Robert Peel's administration, not even Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell, struck at the essential weakness of Lord Ashburton's despatches with the force and sagacity which characterized Macaulay's assault on the treaty. Indeed, a rhetorician and critic less skilful than Macaulay can easily detect that ''America" is represented fully in Webster's despatches, while " Britannia" has a very amiable, but not very forci- ble, representative in Lord Ashburton. Had Palmerston been the British plenipotentiary, we can easily imagine how different would have been the task imposed on Webster. As the American Secretary. AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. xlv was generally in the right in every position be assumed, he would probably have triumphed even over Palmerston; but the Letters of the "pluckiest" of English statesmen would, we ma} be sun-, have never been criticised in the House of Commons as ,% bumble, wheedling, and caressing."' In addition, however, to his legal arguments, his senatorial speech and his state papers, Webster is to be considered as the greatest orator our country has produced in his addresses before miscellaneous assem- blages of the people. In saying this we do not confine the remark to such noble orations as those on the "First Settlement of New Eng- land," "The Bunker Hill Monument," and "Adams and Jefferson," but extend it so as to include speeches before great masses of people who could be hardly distinguished from a mob, and who were under no restraint but that imposed by their own self-respect and their res] for the orator. On these occasions he was uniformly successful. Ji is impossible to detect, in any reports of these popular addresses, that he ever stooped to employ a style of speech or mode of argument com- monly supposed appropriate to a speaker on the "stump"; and yet he was the greatest "stump " orator that our country has ever seen. 1 [e seemed to delight in addressing live, or ten, or even twenty thousand people, in the open air, trusting that the penetrating tones of his voice would reach even the ears of those who were on the ragged edges of the swaying crowd before him ; and he would thus speak to the sover- eign people, in their unorganized state as a collection of uneasy and somewhat belligerent individuals, with a dignity and majesty similar to the dignity and majesty which characterized his arguments before the Senate of the United States, or before a bench of judges. A large portion of his published works consist of such speeches, and they rank only second among the remarkable productions of his mind. The question arises, How could he hold the attention of such audiences without condescending to flatter their prejudices, or without occasionally acting the part of the sophist and the buffoon? Much may be said, in accounting for this phenomenon, about his widely extended reputation, his imposing presence, the vulgar curiosity to see a man whom even the smallest country newspaper thought of sufficient importance to defame, his power of giving vitality to simple words which the most ignorant of his auditors could easily understand, and the instinctive respect which the rudest kind of men feel for a grand specimen of robust manhood. But the real, the substantial source of his power over such audiences proceeded from his respect for them ; and their respect for him was more or less consciously founded on the perception of this fact. x l v i DANIEL WEBSTER Indeed, a close scrutiny of his speeches will show how conscien- tiously he regards the rights of other minds, however inferior they may be to his own ; and this virtue, for it is a virtue, is never more apparent than in his arguments and appeals addressed to popular assemblies. No working-man, whether farmer, mechanic, factory ik hand," or day-laborer, ever deemed himself insulted by a word from the lips of Daniel Webster ; he felt himself rather exalted in his own esteem, for the time, by coming in contact with that beneficent and comprehensive intelligence, which cherished among its favorite ideas a scheme for lifting up the American laborer to a height of comfort and respectability which the European laborer could hardly hope to attain. Prominent politicians, men of wealth and influence, statesmen of high social and political rank, may, at times, have considered Webster as arrogant and bad-tempered, and may, at times, have felt disposed to fasten a quarrel upon him; even in Massachusetts this disposition broke out in conventions of the party to which he belonged ; but it would be in vain to find a single laboring-man, whether he met Web- ster in private, or half pushed and half fought his way into a mass meeting, in order to get his ears into communication with the orator's voice, who ever heard a word from him which did not exalt the dignity of labor, or which was not full of sympathy for the laborer's occasional sorrows and privations. Webster seemed to have ever present to his mind the poverty of the humble home of his youth. His father, his brothers, he himself, had all been brought up to consider manual toil a dignified occupation, and as consistent with the exercise of all the virtues which nourish under the domestic roof. More than this, it may be said that, with the exception of a few intimate friends, his sympathies to the last were most warmly with common laborers. Indeed, if we closely study the private correspondence of this states- man, who was necessarily brought into relations, more or less friendly, with the conventionally great men of the world, European as well as American, we shall find that, after all, he took more real interest in Seth Peterson, and John Taylor, and Porter Wright, men connected with him in fishing and farming, than he did in the ambassadors of foreign states whom he met as Senator or as Secretary of State, or in all the members of the polite society of Washington, New York, and Boston. II- was very near to Nature himself ; and the nearer a man was to Nature, the more he esteemed him. Thus persons who super- intended his Earms and cattle, or who pulled an oar in his boat when he ventured out in search of cod and halibut, thought "Squire Web- ster " a man who realized their ideal and perfection of good-fellowship ; AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. xlvii while it may confidently be said that many of his closest friends among men of culture, including lawyers, men of letters, and states- men of the first rank, must have occasionally resented the "anfractu- osities " of his mood and temper. But Selli 1'etcrson, and Porter Wright, and John Taylor, never complained of these ••anl'rae- tuosities." Webster, in fact, is one of the few public men of the country in whose championship of the rights and sympathy with the wrongs of labor there is not the. slightest trace of the arts of the demagogue ; and in this fact we may find the reason why even the " roughs," who are present in every mass meeting, always treated him with respect. Perhaps it would not be out of place to remark here, that, in his Speech of the 7th of March, he missed a grand opportunity to vindicate Northern labor, in the reference he made, to a foolish tirade of a Senator from Louisiana, who "took pains to run a con- trast between the slaves of the South and the laboring people of the North, giving the preference, in all points of condition, of comfort, and happiness, to the slaves of the South." Webster made a complete reply to this aspersion on Northern labor ; but, as his purpose was to conciliate, he did not blast the libeller by quoting the most eminent example that could be named demonstrating the falsehood of the slave-holding Senator's assertion. Without deviating from the con- ciliatory attitude he had assumed, one could easily imagine him as lift- ing his large frame to its full height, flashing from his rebuking eyes a glance of scorn at the "amiable Senator," and simply saying, "/ belong to the class which the Senator from Louisiana stigmatizes as more degraded than the slaves of the South." There was not at the time any Senator from the South, except Mr. Calhoun, that the most prejudiced Southern man would have thought of comparing with Web- ster in respect to intellectual eminence; and, if Webster had then and there placed himself squarely on his position as the son of a Northern laborer, we should have been spared all the rhetoric about Northern " mud-sills," with which the Senate was afterwards afflicted. Web- ster was our man of men; and it would seem that he should have crushed such talk at the outset, by proudly assuming that Northern labor was embodied and impersonated in him, — that BE had sprung from its ranks, and was proud of his ancestry. An ingenious and powerful, but paradoxical thinker, once told me that I was mistaken in calling Jonathan Edwards and Daniel Webster great reasoners. " They were bad reasoners," he added, "but great poets." Without questioning the right of the author of " An Enquiry into the Modern Prevailing Notion of that Freedom of the Will, which x l v iii DANIEL WEBSTER is supposed to be Essential to Moral Agency," to be ranked among the most eminent of modem logicians, I could still understand why he was classed among poets ; for whether Edwards paints the torments of hell or the bliss of heaven, his imagination almost rivals that of Dante in intensity of realization. But it was at first puzzling to comprehend why Webster should be depressed as a reasoner in order to be exalted as a poet. The images and metaphors scattered over his speeches are so evidently brought in to illustrate and enforce his statements and arguments, that, grand as they often are, the imagination displayed in them is still a faculty strictly subsidiary to the reasoning power. It was only after reflecting patiently for some time on the seeming paradox that I caught a glimpse of my friend's meaning ; and it led me at once to consider an entirely novel question, not heretofore mooted by any of Webster's critics, whether friendly or unfriendly, in their endeavors to explain the reason of his influence over the best minds of the generation to which he belonged. In declaring that, as a poet, he far exceeded any capacity he evinced as a reasoner, my paradoxical friend must have meant that Webster had the poet's power of so organizing a speech, that it stood out to the eye of the mind as a palpable intellectual product and fact, possessing, not merely that vague reality which comes from erecting a plausible mental structure of deductive argumentation, based on strictly limited prem- ises, but a positive reality, akin to the products of Nature herself, when she tries her hand in constructing a ledge of rocks or rearing a chain of hills. In illustration, it may be well to cite the example of poets with whom Webster, of course, cannot be compared. Among the great mental facts, palpable to the eyes of all men interested in literature, are such creations as the Iliad, the Divine Comedy, the great Shakspearian dramas, the Paradise Lost, and Faust. The commen- taries and criticisms on these are numerous enough to occupy the shelves of a large library; some of them attempt to show that Homer, Dante, Shakspeare, Milton, and Goethe were all wrong in their methods of creation ; but they still cannot obscure, to ordinary vision, the lustre of these Luminaries as they placidly shine in the intellectual firmament, which is Literally over our heads. They are as palpable, to the eye of the mind, as Sirius, Arcturus, the Southern Cross, and the planets Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, are to the bodily sense. M. Taine has recently assailed the Paradise Lost with the happiest <>f French epigrams; he tries to prove that, in construc- tion, it is the most ridiculously inartistic monstrosity that the imagi- AS A MASTEB OF ENGLISB styi.i xlix nation of a great mind over framed out of chaos; but, after we have thoroughly enjoyed the play of his wit, there the Paradise I remains, an undisturbed objecl in the intellectual heavens, disdaining to justify its right to exist on any other grounds than the mere fad of its existence; and, certainly, not more ridiculous than Saturn himself, as we look at him through a great equatorial telescope, swinging through space encumbered with his clumsy ring, and Ids wrangling family of satellites, but still, in spile of peculiarities on which M. Taine might exercise his wit until doomsday, one of the numr beauti- ful and sublime objects which the astronomer can behold in the. whole phenomena of the heavens. Indeed, in reading criticisms on such durable poetic creation-, and organizations as we have named, one is reminded of Sydney Smith's delicious dialling of his friend Jeffrey, on account of Jeffrey's sensi- tiveness of literary taste, and his inward rage that events, men, and books, outside of him, do not correspond to the exacting rules w hich are the products of his own subjective and somewhat peevish intelligence. " I like," says Sydney, " to tell you these things, because you never do so well as when you are humbled and frightened, and, if you could be alarmed into the semblance of modesty, you would charm everybody; but remember my joke against you about the moon : ' D — n the solar system! bad light — planets too distant — pestered with comets — feeble contrivance ; could make a better with great ease.' ' Now when a man, in whatever department or direction of thought his activity is engaged, succeeds in organizing, or even welding together, the materials on which he works, so that the product, as a whole, is visible to the mental eye, as a new creation or construction, he has an immense advantage over all critics of his performance. Refined reasonings are impotent to overthrow it ; epigrams glance off from it, as rifle-bullets rebound when aimed at a granite wall ; and it, stands erect long after the reasonings and the epigrams are forgotten. Even when its symmetry is destroyed by a long and destructive siege, a pile of stones still remains, as at Fort Sumter, to attest what power of resistance it opposed to all the resources of modern artillery. If we look at Webster's greatest speeches, as, for instance, " The Reply to Hayne," " The Constitution not a Compact between Sover- eign States," "The President's Protest." and others that might be mentioned, we shall find that they partake of the character of organic formations, or at least of skilful engineering or architectural construc- tions. Even Mr. Calhoun never approached him in this art of giving objective reality to a speech, which, after all, is found, on analysis, to d 1 DANIEL WEBSTER consist only of a happy collocation and combination of words ; but in Webster the words are either all alive with the creative spirit of the poet, or. ;it the worst, resemble the blocks of granite or marble which the artisan piles, one on the other, and the result of which, though it may represent a poor style of architecture, is still a rude specimen of a Gothic edifice. The artist and artificer are both observable in Web- ster's work ; but the reality and solidity of the construction cannot be questioned. At the present time, an educated reader would be specially interested in the mental processes by which Webster thus succeeded in giving objective existence and validity to the operations of his mind ; and. whether sympathizing with his opinions or not, would as little think of refusing to read them because of their Whiggism, as he would think of refusing to read Homer because of his heathenism, or Dante because of his Catholicism, or Milton because of his compound of Arianism and Calvinism, or Goethe because of his Pantheism. The fact which would most interest such a reader would be, that Webster had, in some mysterious way, translated and transformed his abstract propositions into concrete substance and form. The form might offend his reason, his taste, or his conscience ; but he could not avoid admitting that it had a form, while most speeches, even those made by able men, are comparatively formless, however lucid they may be in the array of facts, and plausible in the order and connection of argu- ments. In trying to explain this power, the most obvious comparison which would arise in the mind of an intelligent reader would be, that Webster, as a rhetorician, resembled Vauban and Cohorn as military engineers. In the war of debate, he so fortified the propositions he maintained, that they could not be carried by direct assault, but must be patiently besieged. The words he employed were simple enough, and fell short of including the vocabulary of even fifth-rate declaimers ; but he had the art of so disposing them that, to an honest reason er, tlic position he took appeared to be impregnable. To assail it by the ordinary method of passionate protest and illogical reasoning, was as futile as a dash of light cavalry would have been against the defences of such cities aa Namur and Lille. Indeed, in his speech, " The Consti- tution not a Compact between Sovereign States," he erected a whole Torus Vedras line of fortifications, on which legislative Massenas dashed themselves in vain, and, however strong in numbers in respect to the power of voting him down, recoiled defeated in every attempt to reason him down. In further illustration of this peculiar power of Webster, the Speech AS A MASTER OF ENfil.ISII STYLE ]i of the 7th of March, 1850, m;i\ be cited) for its delivery is to be ranked with the most important historical events. For slum' years it was the object of the extremes of panegyric and the extremes of execration. But this effort is really the most loosely consi ructed of all t he greal pro- (luctions of Webster's mind. In force, compactness, and completen in closeness of thought to things, in closeness of imagers to the reason- ing it illustrates, and in general intellectual fibre, muscle, and bone, it cannot be compared to such an oration as that on the " First Settlement of New England," or such a speech as that which had for its theme; "The Constitution not a Compact between Sovereign States"; but, after all deductions have been made, it was still a speech which lY<>\\ tied upon its opponents as a kind of verbal fortress constructed both for the purpose of defence and aggression. Its fame is due, in a great degree, to its resistance to a storm of assaults, such as had rarely before been concentrated on any speech delivered in either branch of the Congress of the United States. Indeed, a very large portion of the intellect, the moral sentiment, and the moral passion of the free States was directed against it. There was not a weapon in the armory of the dialectician or the rhetorician which was not employed with the intent of demolish- ing it. Contempt of Webster was vehemently taught as the beginning of political wisdom. That a speech, thus assailed, should survive the attacks made upon it, appeared to be impossible. And yet it did survive, and is alive now, while better speeches, or what the present writer thought, at the time, to be more convincing speeches, have not retained individual existence, however deeply they may have influ- enced that public opinion which, in the end, determines political events. "I still live," was Webster's declaration on his death-bed. when the friends gathered around it imagined he had breathed his last; and the same words might be uttered by the Speech of the 7th of March, could it possess the vocal organ which announces persona] existence. Between the time it was originally delivered and the present year there runs a great and broad stream of blood, shed from the veins of Northern and Southern men alike; the whole political and moral constitution of the country has practically suffered an abrupt change; new problems engage the attention of thoughtful statesmen; much is forgotten which was once considered of the first importance; but the 7th of March Speech, battered as it is by innu- merable attacks, is still remembered at least as one which called forth more power than it embodied in itself. This persistence of lite is due to the fact that it was "organized." Is this power of organization common among orators? It seems to lii DANIEL WEBSTER me that, on the contrary, it is very rare. In some of Burke's speeches, in which his sensibility and imagination were thoroughly under the control of his judgment, as, for instance, his speech on Conciliation with America, that on Economical Reform, and that to the Elec- tor- of Bristol, we find the orator to be a consummate master of the art of so constructing a speech that it serves the immediate object which prompted its delivery, while at the same time it has in it a principle of vitality which makes it survive the occasion that called it forth. Hut the greatest of Burke's speeches, if we look merely at the richness and variety of mental power and the force and depth of moral passion displayed in it, is his speech on the Nabob of Arcot's Debts. No speech ever delivered before any assembly, legislative, judicial, or popular, can rank with this in respect to the abundance of its facts, reasonings, and imagery, and the ferocity of its moral wrath. It resembles the El Dorado that Voltaire's Candide visited, where the boys played with precious stones of inestimable value, as our boys play with ordinary marbles; for to the inhabitants of El Dorado diamonds and pearls were as common as pebbles are with us. But the defect of this speech, which must still be considered, on the whole, the most inspired product of Burke's great nature, was this, — that it did not strike its hearers or readers as having reality for its basis or the superstructure raised upon it. Englishmen could not believe then, and most of them probably do not believe now, that it had any solid foundation in incontrovertible facts. It did not "lit in" to their ordinary modes of thought; and it has never been ranked with Burke's " organized " orations ; it has never come home to what Bacon called the "business and bosoms" of his countrymen. They have generally dismissed it from their imaginations as " a phantasmagoria and a hideous dream" created by Burke under the impulse of the intense hatred he felt for the administration which succeeded the overthrow of the government, which was founded on the coalition of Fox and North. Now, in simple truth, the speech is the most masterly statement of tacts, relating to the oppression of millions of the people of India, whi.h was ever forced on the attention of the House of Commons, — a legislative assembly which, it may be incidentally remarked, was practically responsible tor the just government of the immense Indian empire of Greal Britain, [t is curious that the main facts on which the argumenl of Burke rests have, been confirmed by .lames Mill, the •ldesb-blooded historian that ever narrated the enormous crimes which attended the rise and progress of the British power in llindos- as A Masti'.K OF ENGLI8H B1 J LE liii ten, and a man who also had a strong intellectual antipathy t<> the mind of Burke. In making the* speech, I liiike had documentary evidence of a large portion of the transactions lie denounced, ami had ({'trincd the rest. Mill supports him both as regards the facts of which Burke had positive knowledge, and the facts which lie deduc- tively inferred from the facts he knew. Haying thus ;i strong founda- tion for his argument, he exerted every Eaculty of his mind, and every impulse of his moral sentiment and moral passion, to overwhelm the leading members of the administration of Pitt, by attempting to make them accomplices in crimes which would disgrace even slave-traders on the Guinea coast. The merely intellectual force of his reasoning is crushing; his analysis seems to be sharpened by his hatred ; and there is no device of contempt, scorn, derision, and direct personal attack, which he does not unsparingly use. In the midst of all this mental tumult, inestimable maxims of moral and political wisdom are shot forth in short sentences, which have so much of the sting and bril- liancy of epigram, that at first we do not appreciate their depth of thought; and through all there burns such a pitiless fierceness of moral reprobation of cruelty, injustice, and wrong, that all the accred- ited courtesies of debate are violated, once, at least, in every five minutes. In any American legislative assembly he would have been called to order'at least once in five minutes. The images which the orator brings in to give vividness to his argument are sometimes coarse; but, coarse as they are, they admirably reflect the moral tur- pitude of the men against whom he inveighs. Among these is the image with which he covers Dundas, the special friend of l'itt, with a ridicule which promises to be immortal. Dundas. on the occasion when Fox and Burke called for papers by the aid of which they pro- posed to demonstrate the iniquity of the scheme by which the minis- try proposed to settle the debts of the Nabob of Arcot, pretended that the production of such papers would be indelicate, — M that this inquiry is of a delicate nature, and that the state will suffer detriment by the exposure of this transaction." As Dundas had previously brought out six volumes of Reports, generally confirming Burke's own views of the corruption and oppression which marked the administration of affairs in India, he laid himself open to Burke's celebrated assault. Dundas and delicacy, he said, were "a rare and singular coalition.** And then follows an image of colossal coarseness, such as might be supp I capable of rousing thunder-peals of laughter from a company o\ tive giants, — an image which Lord Brougham declared offended hi* sensitive taste, — the sensitive taste of one of the most formidable liv DANIEL WEBSTER legal and legislative bullies that ever appeared before the juries or Parliament of Great Britain, and who never hesitated to use any illustration, however vulgar, which he thought would be effective to degrade hia opponents. But whatever may be thought of the indelicacy of Burke's image, it was one eminently adapted to penetrate through the thick hide of the minister of state at whom it was aimed, and it shamed him as far as a profligate politician like Dundas was capable of feeling the sen- sation of shame. But there are also flashes, or rather flames, of impas- sion, -d imagination, in the same speech, which rush up from the main body of its statements and arguments, and remind us of nothing so much as of those jets of incandescent gas which, we are told by astronomers, occasionally leap, from the extreme outer covering of the sun, to the height of a hundred or a hundred and sixty thousand miles, and testify to the terrible forces raging within it. After read- ing this speech for the fiftieth time, the critic cannot free himself from the rapture of admiration and amazement which he experienced in his first fresh acquaintance with it. Yet its delivery in the House of Commons (February 28, 1785) produced an effect so slight, that Pitt, after a few minutes' consultation with Grenville, concluded that it was not worth the trouble of being answered ; and the House of Commons, obedient to the Prime Minister's direction, negatived, by a large majority, the motion in advocating which Burke poured out the wonderful treasures of his intellect and imagination. To be sure, the House was tired to death with the discussion, was probably very sleepy, and the orator spoke five hours after the members had already shouted, " Question ! Question ! " Tin- truth is, that this speech, unmatched though it is in the litera- ture of eloquence, had not, as has been previously stated, the air of reality. It struck the House as a magnificent Oriental dream, as an Arabian Nights' Entertainment, as a tale told by an inspired madman, '•full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"; and the evident par- tisan intention of the orator to blast Pitt's administration by exhibit- ing its complicity in one of the most enormous frauds recorded in history, confirmed the dandies, the cockneys, the bankers, and the country gentlemen, who. as members of the House of Commons, stood by Pitt with all the combined force of their levity, their venality, and their Btupidity, in the propriety of voting Burke down. And though now. when the substantial truth of all the facts he alleged is established on evidence which convinces historians, the admiring reader can understand why it failed to convince Burke's con tempo- AS A MASTF.i: OF ENQU8B STYLE, lv varies, and why it still appears to lack the characteristics of a speech thoroughly organized, [ndeed, the mind of Burke, when it was de- livered, can only be compared to a volcanic mountain in eruption; — not merely a. volcano like that of Vesuvius, visited by scientists and amateurs in crowds, when it deigns to pour forth its flames and lava for the entertainment of the multitude; hut a Lonely volcano, like that of Etna, rising far above Vesuvius in height, tar removed from all the vulgar curiosity of a body of tourists, hut rending the earth on which it stands with the mighty earthquake throes of its fierj centre and heart. The moral passion, — perhaps it would he more jusl to say the moral fury, — displayed in the speech, is elemental, and can be compared to nothing less intense than the earth's interior fire and heat. Now in Webster's great legislative efforts, his mind is never exhib- ited in a state of eruption. In the most excited debates in which he bore a prominent part, nothing strikes us more than the admirable self-possession, than the majestic inward calm, which presides over all the operations of his mind and the impulses of his sensibility, so that, in building up the fabric of his speech, he has his reason, imagination, and passion under full control, — using each faculty and feeling as the occasion may demand, but never allowing himself to be used by it, — and always therefore conveying the impression of power in reserve, while he may, in fact, be exercising all the power he has to the utmost. In laboriously erecting his edifice of reasoning he also studi- ously regards the intellects and the passions of ordinary men; strives to bring his mind into cordial relations with theirs; employs every faculty he possesses to give reality, to give even visibility, to his thoughts; and though he never made a speech which rivals that of Burke on the Nabob of Arcot's Debts, in respect to grasp of under- standing, astounding wealth of imagination and depth of moral passion, he alwavs so contrived to organize his materials into a complete whole, that the result stood out clearly to the sight of the mind, as a structure resting on strong foundations, and reared to due height by the mingled skill of the artisan and the artist. When he does little more than weld his materials together, he is still an artificer of the old school of giant workmen, the school that dates its pedigree from Tubal Cain. After all this wearisome detail and dilution of the idea attempted to be expressed, it may be that I have, failed to convey an adequate impression of what constitutes Webster's distinction anion- orators, as far as orators have left speeches which are considered an invaluable addition to the literature of the language in which they were origi- Ivi DANIEL WEBSTER nallv delivered. Everybody understands why any one of the great sermons of Jeremj Taylor, or the sermon of Dr. South on "Man created in the Image of God," or the sermon of Dr. Barrow on "Heavenly Rest," differs from the millions on millions of doubtless edifying sermons thai have been preached and printed during the last two centuries and a half; but everybody does not understand the distinction between one brilliant oration and another, when both made a great sensation at the time, while only one survived in litera- ture. Probably Charles James Fox Mas a more effective speaker in the House of Commons than Edmund Burke ; probably Henry Clay was a more effective speaker in Congress than Daniel Webster ; but when the occasions on which their speeches were made are found gradually to fade from the memory of men, why is it that the speeches of Fox and Clay have no recognized position in literature, while those of Burke and Webster are ranked with literary produc- tions of the first class? The reason is as realty obvious as that which explains the exceptional value of some of the efforts of the great orators of the pulpit. Jeremy Taylor, Dr. South, and Dr. Barrow, different as they were in temper and disposition, succeeded in " organ- izing" some masterpieces in their special department of intellectual and moral activity ; and the same is true of Burke and Webster in the departments of legislation and political science. The " occasion " was merely an opportunity for the consolidation into a speech of the rare powers and attainments, the large personality and affluent thought, which were the spiritual possessions of the man who made it, — a speech which represented the whole intellectual manhood of the speaker, — a manhood in which knowledge, reason, imagination, and sensibility were all consolidated under the directing power of will. A pertinent example of the difference we have attempted to in- dicate may be easily found in contrasting Fox's closing speech on the East India Bill with Burke's on the same subject. For imme- diate effect on the House of Commons, it ranks with the most mas- t.il\ of Fox's Parliamentary efforts. The, hits on his opponents were all "telling." The argumentum ad hominem, embodied in short, sharp statements, or startling interrogatories, was never employed with more brillianl success. The reasoning was rapid, compact, en- cumbered by no long enumeration of facts, and, though somewhat unscrupulous here ami there, was driven home upon his adversaries with a skill that equalled its audacity. It maybe said that there is not a sentence in the whole speech which was not calculated to sting AS A MASTEB OF ENGLI8H si J LB. I \ u ,i sleepy amlieiiec into attention, or to give delight to a fatigued audience which still managed to keep its eyes and minds wide open. Even in respect to the principles of liberty and justice, which were the animating life of the hill, K<>\"s terse sentences contrast strangely with the somewhat more lumbering and elaborate paragraphs <>f P>urke. " A\' 1 m t ,*' he exclaims, putting his argument in his favorite interrogative form, — "what is the most odious species of tyranny? Precisely that which this bill is meant to annihilate. That a hand- ful of men, free themselves, should exercise the most base and abomi- nable despotism over millions of their fellow-creatures; that innocence should be the victim of oppression; that industry should toil for rapine ; that the harmless laborer should sweat, not for his own bene- fit, but for the luxury and rapacity of tyrannic depredation; — in a word, that thirty millions of men, gifted by Providence with the ordinary endowments of humanity, should groan under a Bystem of despotism unmatched in all the histories of the world'/ What is the end of all government? Certainly, the happiness of the governed. Others may hold different opinions; but this is mine, and I proclaim it. What, then, are we to think of a government whose good fortune is supposed to spring from the calamities of its subjects, whose aggran- dizement grows out of the miseries of mankind? This is the kind of government exercised under the East Indian Company upon the natives of Hindostan ; and the subversion of that infamous govern- ment is the main object of the bill in question." And afterwards he says, with admirable point and pungency of statement: "Every line in both the bills which I have had the honor to introduce, presumes the possibility of bad administration; for every word breathe- sus- picion. This bill supposes that men are but men. It confides in no integrity ; it trusts no character ; it inculcates the wisdom of a jealousy of power, and annexes responsibility, not only to every action, but even to the inaction of those who are to dispense it. The necessity of these provisions must be evident, when it is known that the different misfortunes of the company have resulted not more from what their servants did, than from what the masters did not." There is a directness in such sentences as these which we do not find in Burke's speech on the East India Pill : but Burke's remain- as a part of English literature, and in form and Bubstance, especially in substance, is so immensely superior to that of Fox, that, in quoting sentences from the latter, one may almosl be supposed to rescue them from that neglect which attends all speeches which do not reach beyond the occasion which calls them forth. In Bacon's phrase, the l v iii DANIEL WEBSTER speech of Fox shows "small matter, and infinite agitation of wit"; in Burke's, we discern large matter with an abundance of "wit" proper to the discussion of the matter, but nothing which suggests the idea of mere " agitation." Fox, in his speeches, subordinated every thing to the immediate impression he might make on the House of Commons. He deliberately gave it as his opinion, that a speech that read well must be a bad speech ; and, in a literary sense, the House of Commons, which he entered before he was twenty, may be called both the cradle and the grave of his fame. It has been said that he was a debater whose speeches should be studied by every man who wishes " to learn the science of logical defence " ; that he alone, among English orators, resembles Demosthenes, inasmuch as his reasoning is " penetrated and made red-hot by passion " ; and that nothing could excel the effect of his delivery when " he was in the full paroxysm of inspiration, foaming, screaming, choked by the rushing multitude of his words." But not one of his speeches, not even that on the East India Bill, or on the Westminster Scrutiny, or on the Russian Armament, or on Parliamentary Reform, or on Mr. Pitt's Rejection of Bonaparte's Overtures for Peace, has obtained an abiding place in the literature of Great Britain. It would be no disparage- ment to an educated man, if it were said that he had never read these speeches; but it would be a serious bar to his claim to be considered an English scholar, if he confessed to be ignorant of the great speeches of Burke; for such a confession would be like admitting that he had never read the first book of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, Bacon's Essays and Advancement of Learning, Milton's Areopagitica, Butler's Analogy, and Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. When we reflect on the enormous number of American speeches which, when they were first delivered, were confidently predicted, by appreciating friends, to insure to the orators a fame which would be immortal, one wonders a little at the quiet persistence of the speeches of Webster in refusing to die with the abrupt suddenness of other orations, which, at the time of their delivery, seemed to have an equal chance of renown. The lifeless remains of such unfortunate failures an- now entombed in that dreariest of all mausoleums, the dingy quarto volumes, hateful to all human eyes, which are lettered on the back with the title of "Congressional Debates," — a collection of printed matter which members of Congress are wont to send to a favored few among their constituents, and which are immediately consigned to the dust-barrel or sold to pedlers in waste' paper, according as the rage of the recipients takes a scornful or an economical direction. It would AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. lix seem that the speeches of Webster are saved from this fate, by the fact that, in them, the mental and moral life of a great man, and of a great master of the English language, are organized in a palpable intel- lectual form. The reader feels that thej have some of the substantial qualities which he recognizes in looking at the gigantic constructions of the master workmen among the crowd of the world's engineers and architects, in looking at the organic products of Nature herself, and in surveying, through the eye of his imagination, those novel repro- ductions of Nature which great poets have embodied in works which are indelibly stamped with the character of deathlessness. But Webster is even more obviously a poet — subordinating "the shows of things to the desires of the mind" — in his magnificent ideal- ization, or idolization, of the Constitution and the Union. By the magic of his imagination and sensibility he contrived to impress on the minds of a majority of the people of the free States a vague, grand idea that the Constitution was a sacred instrument of government, — a holy shrine of fundamental law, which no unhallowed hands could touch without profanation, — a digested system of rights and duties, resembling those institutes which were, in early times, devised by the immortal gods for the guidance of infirm mortal man; and the mysterious creatures, half divine and half human, who framed this remarkable document, were always reverently referred to as "the Fathers," — as persons who excelled all succeeding generations in sagacity and wis- dom ; as inspired prophets, who were specially selected by Divine Providence to frame the political scriptures on which our political faith was to be based, and by which our political reason was to 1"' limited. The splendor of the glamour thus cast over the imagi- nations and sentiments of the people was all the more effective lo- calise it was an effluence from the mind of a statesman who, of all other statesmen of the country, was deemed the most practical, and the least deluded by any misguiding lights of fancy and abstract speculation. There can be little doubt that Webster's impressive idealization of the Constitution gave a certain narrowness to American thinking on constitutional government and the science of politics and legislation. Foreigners, of the most liberal views, could not sometimes restrain an expression of wonder, when they found that our most intelligent men, even our jurists and publicists, hardly condescended to notice tin' eminent European thinkers on the philosophy of government, absorbed were they in the contemplation of the perfection of their own. When the great civil war broke out, hundreds of thousand- ol ] x DANIEL WEBSTER American citizens marched to the battle-field with the grand passages of Webster glowing in their hearts. They met death cheerfully in the cause of the " Constitution and Union," as by him expounded and idealized; and if they were so unfortunate as not to be killed, but to be taken captive, they still rotted to death in Southern prisons, sustained by sentences of Webster's speeches which they had de- claimed as boys in their country schools. Of all the triumphs of Webster as a leader of public opinion, the most remarkable was his infusing into the minds of the people of the free States the belief that the Constitution as it existed in his time was an organic fact, springing from the intelligence, hearts, and wills of the people of the United States, and not, as it really was, an ingenious mechanical con- trivance of wise men, to which the people, at the time, gave their assent. The constitutions of the separate States of the Union were doubt- less rooted in the habits, sentiments, and ideas of their inhabitants. But the Constitution of the United States could not possess this advantage, however felicitously it may have been framed for the pur- pose of keeping, for a considerable period, peace between the different sections of the country. As long, therefore, as the institution of negro slavery lasted, it could not be called a Constitution of States organi- cally " United " ; for it lacked the principle of growth, which charac- terizes all constitutions of government which are really adapted to the progressive needs of a people, if the people have in them any impulse which stimulates them to advance. The unwritten constitution of Great Britain has this advantage, that a decree of Parliament can alter the whole representative system, annihilating by a vote of the two houses all laws which the Parliament had enacted in former years. In (ircat Britain, therefore, a measure which any Imperial Parliament passes becomes at once the supreme law of the land, though it may nullify a great number of laws which previous Parliaments had passed under different conditions of the sentiment of the nation. Our Con- stitution, on the other hand, provides for the contingencies of growth in the public sentiment only by amendments to the Constitution. These amendments require more than a majority of all the political forces represented in Congress; and Mr. Calhoun, foreseeing that a collision must evcntuallv occur between the two sections, carried with him, not ..nly the South, hut a considerable minority of the North, in resisting any attempt to limit the extension of slavery. On this point the passions and principles of the people of the slave-holding and the majority of the people of the non-slave-holding States came into violent AS A MASTER OF ENGLI8H BTYLE. Ixi opposition; and there was no possibility that, any amendment to the Constitution could be ratified, which would represent either tin: growth of the Southern people in their ever-increasing belief that. negro slavery was not only a good in itself, hut a g 1 which ought to be extended, or the growth of the Northern people in their ever- inereasing hostility both to slavery and its extension. Thus two principles, each organic in its nature, and demanding indefinite devel- opment, came into deadly conflict under the mechanical forms of a Constitution which was not organic. A considerable portion of the speeches in this volume is devoted to denunciations of violations of the Constitution perpetrated by Web- ster's political opponents. These violations, again, would seem to prove that written constitutions follow practically the same law of development which marks the progress of the unwritten. By a strained system of Congressional interpretation, the Constitution has been repeatedly compelled to yield to the necessities of the party dominant, for the time, in the government; and has, if we may believe Webster, been repeatedly changed without being con- stitutionally " amended." The causes which led to the most terri- ble civil war recorded in history were silently working beneath the forms of the Constitution, — both parties, by the way, appeal- ing to its provisions, — while Webster was idealizing it as the utmost which humanity could come to in the way of civil government. In 1848, when nearly all Europe was in insurrection against its rulers, he proudly said that our Constitution promised to be the oldest, as well as the best, in civilized states. Meanwhile the institution of negro slavery was undermining the whole fabric of the Union. The moral division between the South and North was widening into a division between the religion of the two sections. The Southern statesmen, economists, jurists, publicists, and ethical writers had adapted their opinions to the demands which the defenders of the institution of slavery imposed on the action of the human intellect and conscience \ but it was rather startling to discover that the Christian religion, as taught in the Southern States, was a religion which had no vital con- nection with the Christianity taught in the Northern States. There is nothing more astounding, to a patient explorer of the causes which led to the final explosion, than this opposition of religions. The mere form of the dogmas common to the religion of both sections might be verbally identical ; but a volume of sermons by a Southern doctor of divinity, as far as he touched on the matter of slavery, was as different from one published by his Northern brother, in the essenr lxii DANIEL WEBSTER tial moral and humane elements of Christianity, as though they were divided from each other by a gulf as wide as that which yawns between a Druid priest and a Christian clergyman. The politicians of the South, whether they were the mouthpieces of the ideas and passions of their constituents, or were, as Webster probably thought, more or less responsible for their foolishness and bitterness, were ever eager to precipitate a conflict, which Webster was as eager to prevent, or at least to postpone. It was fortunate for the North, that the inevitable conflict did not come in 1850, when the free States were unprepared for it. Ten years of discussion and prep- aration were allowed ; when the war broke out, it found the North in a position to meet and eventually to overcome the enemies of the Union ; and the Constitution, not as it zcas, but as it is, now represents a form of government which promises to be permanent; for after passing through its baptism of fire and blood, the Constitution con- tains nothing which is not in harmony with any State government founded on the principle of equal rights which it guarantees, and is proof against all attacks but those which may proceed from the extremes of human folly and wickedness. But that, before the civil Avar, it was preserved so long under conditions which constantly threatened it with destruction, is due in a considerable degree to the circumstance that it found in Daniel Webster its poet as well as its " expounder." In conclusion it may be said that the style of Webster is pre-emi- nently distinguished by manliness. Nothing little, weak, whining, or sentimental can be detected in any page of the six volumes of his works. A certain strength and grandeur of personality is prominent in all his speeches. When he says " I," or " my," he never appears to indulge in the bravado of self-assertion, because the words are felt to express a posi- tive, stalwart, almost colossal manhood, which had already been implied in the close-knit sentences in which he embodied his statements and arguments. He is an eminent instance of the power which character communicates to style. Though evidently proud, self-respecting, and high-spirited, he is ever above mere vanity and egotism. Whenever he gives emphasis to the personal pronoun the reader feels that he had as much earned the right to make his opinion an authority, as he had earned the right to use the words he employs to express his ideas and sentiments. Thus, in the celebrated Smith Will trial, his antagonist, Mr. Choate, quoted a decision of Lord Chancellor Camden. In his reply. Webster argued against its validity as though it were merely a proposition laid down by Mr. Choate. "But it is not mine, it is Lord AS A MASTER OF ENGLISH STYLE. lxiii Camden's," was the instant retort. Webster paused fur half a minute, and then, with his eye fixed <>n the presiding judge, he replied : " Lord Camden was a great judge; he is respected by every American, for he was on our side in the Revolution ; but, may it please your honor, /differ from my Lord Camden." There was hardly a lawyer in the United States who could have made such a statement without exposing himself to ridicule; but it did not seem at all ridiculous, when the "I " stood for Daniel Webster. In his early career as a lawyer, Ins mode of reasoning was such as to make him practically a thirteenth juror in the panel; when his fame was fully established, he contrived, in some mysterious w r ay, to seat himself by the side of the judges on the bench, and appear to be consulting with them as a jurist, rather than addressing them as an advocate. The personality of the man was always suppressed until there seemed to be need of asserting it ; and then it was proudly pushed into prominence, though rarely passing beyond the limits which his acknowledged eminence as a statesman and lawyer did not justify him in asserting it. Among the selections in the present volume where his individuality becomes somewhat aggressive, and breaks loose from the restraints ordinarily self-imposed on it, may be mentioned his speech on his Reception at Boston (1842), his Marshfield Speech (1848), and his speech at his Reception at Buffalo (1851). Whatever may be thought of the course of argument pursued in these, they are at least thoroughly penetrated with a manly spirit, — a manliness somewhat haughty and defiant, but still consciously strong in its power to return blow for blow, from whatever quarter the assault may come. But the real intellectual and moral manliness of Webster underlies all his great orations and speeches, even those where the animating life wdiich gives them the power to persuade, convince, and uplift tin- reader's mind, seems to be altogether impersonal ; and this plain force of manhood, this sturdy grapple with every question that comes before his understanding for settlement, leads him contemptuously to rejecl all the meretricious aids and ornaments of mere rhetoric, and is prominent, among the many exceptional qualities of his large nature, which have given him a high position among the prose-writers of his country as a consummate master of English style. THE GREAT ORATIONS AND SPEECHES OP DANIEL WEBSTER. THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. ARGUMENT BEFORE THE SUPBEME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, AT WASHINGTON, ON THE 10th OF MARCH, 1818. [The action. The Trustees of Dartmouth College r. William II. Woodward, was com- menced in the Court of Common Fleas, Grafton County, State of New Hampshire, February terra, 1817. The declaration was trover for the books of record, original charter, common seal, and other corporate property of the College. The conversion was alleged to have been made on the 7th day of October, 1816. The proper pleas were filed, and by consent the cause was carried directly to the Superior Court of New Hampshire, by appeal, and entered at the May term, 1817. The general issue was pleaded by the defendant, and joined by the plaintiffs. The facts in the case were then agreed upon by the parties, and drawn up in the form of a special verdict, reciting the charter of the College and the acts of the legislature of the State, passed June and December, 1816, by which the saiil corporation of Dartmouth College was enlarged and improved, and the said charter amendi d. The question made in the case was, whether those acts of the legislature were valid and binding upon the corporation, without their acceptance or assent, and not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. If so, the verdict found for the defendants ; otherwise, it found for the plaintiffs. The cause was continued to the Sep- tember term of the court in Rockingham County, where it was argued; and at the November term of the same year, in Grafton County, the opinion of the court was deliv- ered by Chief Justice Richardson, in favor of the validity and constitutionality of the acts of the legislature; and judgment was accordingly entered for the defendant on the special verdict. Thereupon a writ of error was sued out by the original plaintiffs, to remove the cause to the Supreme Court of the United States; where it was entered at tin- term of the court holden at Washington on the first Monday of February, 1*1 s The cause came on for argument on the 10th day of March, 1818, before all the judges. It was argued by Mr. Webster and Mr. Ilopkinson for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Holmes and tile Attorney-Gen- eral (Wirt) for the defendant in error. At the term of the court bolden in Febru- ary, 1819, the opinion of the judges was de- livered by Chief Justice Marshal I. declaring the acts of the legislature unconstitutional and invalid, and reversing the judgment of the State Court. The court, with the ex- ception of Mr. Justice Duvall, were unani- mous. The following was the argument of Mr. Webster for the plaintiffs in error. J The general question i.s. whether the acts of the legislature of New Hamp- shire of the 27th of June, and of the lsih and 26th of December, L816, are valid and binding "ii the plaintiffs, with- out their accept/tun or assi nt. The charter of l"6'.i created and estab- lished a corporation, to consist of twelve persons, and m» more; to be called the "Trustees of Dartmouth College." preamble to- the charter recites, thai it is granted on the application and request of the Rev. EleaaerWheelock: Thai I>r. Wheelock, about the year 1754, estab- lished a charity school, at his own THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. pense, and on his own estate and plan- tat inn : That for several years, through the assistance of well-disposed persons in America, granted at his solicitation, he had clothed, maintained, and edu- cated a number of native Indians, and employed them afterwards as mission- aries and schoolmasters among the sav- age tribes : That, his design promising to be useful, he had constituted the Rev. Mr. Whitaker to be his attorney, with power to solicit contributions, in Eng- land, for the further extension and car- rying on of his undertaking ; and that he had requested the Earl of Dartmouth, Baron Smith, Mr. Thornton, and other gentlemen, to receive such sums as might be contributed, in England, towards supporting his school, and to be trustees thereof, for his charity ; which these persons had agreed to do : That there- upon Dr. Wheelock had executed to them a deed of trust, in pursuance of such agreement between him and them, and, for divers good reasons, had re- ferred it to these persons to determine the place in which the school should be finally established : And, to enable them to form a proper decision on this subject, had laid hefore them the several offers which had been made to him by the sev- eral governments in America, in order to induce him to settle and establish his school within the limits of such govern- ments for their own emolument, and the increase of learning in their respective places, as well as for the furtherance of his general original design : And inas- much as a number of the proprietors of lands in New Hampshire, animated by the example of the Governor himself and others, ami in consideration that, without any impediment to its original design, the school might be enlarged and improved, to promote learning among the English, and to supply ministers to tli«- people of that Province, had prom- ised large tracts of land, provided the school .should be established in that Province, the persons before mentioned, having weighed the reasons in favor of the several places proposed, had given the preference to this Pixh ince, and these offers : That l)v. Wheelock therefore represented the necessity of a legal in- corporation, and proposed that certain gentlemen in America, whom he had already named and appointed in his will to be trustees of his charity after his de- cease, should compose the corporation. Upon this recital, and in consideration of the laudable original design of Dr. Wheelock, and willing that the best means of education be established in New Hampshire, for the benefit of the Province, the king granted the charter, by the advice of his Provincial Council. The substance of the facts thus re- cited is, that Dr. Wheelock had founded a charity, on funds owned and procured by himself ; that he was at that time the sole dispenser and sole administra- tor, as well as the legal owner, of these funds ; that he had made his will, de- vising this property in trust, to continue the existence and uses of the school, and appointed trustees ; that, in this state of things, he had been invited to fix his school permanently in New Hampshire, and to extend the design of it to the education of the youth of that Province; that before he removed his school, or ac- cepted this invitation, which his friends in England had advised him to accept, he applied for a charter, to be granted, not to whomsoever the king or govern- ment of the Province should please, but to such persons as he named and ap- pointed, namely, the persons whom he had already appointed to be the future trustees of his charity by his will. The charter, or letters patent, then proceed to create such a corporation, and to appoint twelve persons to constitute it, by the name of the " Trustees of Dartmouth College"; to have perpetual existence as such corporation, and with power to hold and dispose of lands and goods, for the use of the college, with all the ordinary powers of corporations. They are in their discretion to apply the funds and property of the college to the support of the president, tutors, minis- ters, and other officers of the college, and such missionaries and schoolmasters as they may see fit to employ among the Indians. There are to be twelve trustees for ever, and no man ; and they are to have THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CA8B. the right of filling vacancies occurring in their own body. [The Rev. Mr. Wheeloch is declared to be the founder of the col- lege, and is, by the charter, appointed first president, with power to appoint a successor by his last will. All proper powers of government, superintendence, and visitation are vested in the trustees. They are to appoint and remove, all officers at their discretion; to lix their salaries, and assign their duties; and to make all ordinances, orders, and laws for the government of the students. To the end that the persons who had acted as depositaries of the contributions in England, and who had also been con- tributors themselves, might be satisfied of the good use of their contributions, the president was annually, or when re- quired, to transmit to them an account of the progress of the institution and the disbursements of its funds, so long as they should continue to act in that trust. These letters patent are to be good and effectual, in law, against (he king, his heirs and successors for ever, without further grant or confirmation; and the trustees are to hold all and singular these privileges, advantages, liberties, and immunities to .£hem and to their successors for ever. No funds are given to the college by this charter. A corporate existence and capacity are given to the trustees, with the privileges and immunities which have been mentioned, to enable the founder and his associates the better to manage the funds which they themselves had contributed, and such others as they might afterwards obtain. After the institution thus created and constituted had existed, uninterruptedly and usefully, nearly fifty years, the legis- lature of Xew Hampshire passed the acts in question. JT]ie first act makes the twelve trustees under the charter, and nine other indi- viduals, to be appointed by the Governor and Council, a corporation, by a new name ; and to this new corporation trans- fers all the property, rights, povm rs, libt r- ties, and privileges of the old corporation; with further power to establish new colleges and an institute, and to apply all or any part, of tie' fmeN to | purposes; subject to the power and ■ on- trol of a board of twenty-fi to be appointed by the Governor .net Council. [J he second act makes further pro- risions for executing tie- objects of the first, and the Last aci authorizes the de- fendant, the treasurer of the plaintifl retain and hold their property, against their will^J If these acts are valid, the old corpora- tion is abolished, and a new ■ it t. The first act does, in fact, if it can have any effect, create a new corporation, and transfer to it all the property and fran- chises of the old. The two corporal are not the same in anything which es- sentially belongs to the existence of a corporation. They have different names, and different powers, rights, and duties. Their organization is wholly different. The powers of the corporation are not vested in the same, or similar hands. In one, the trustees are twelve, and no more. In the other, they are twenty- one. In one, the power is in a Bl board. In the other, it is divided be- tween two boards. Although the act professes to include the old trustees in the new corporation, yet that was with- out their assent, and against their re- monstrance; and no person can he I pelled to be a member of such a t tion agains! his will. It was neither expected nor intended that they Bhould be members of the new corporation. The act itself treats the old corporation as at an end, and, going on the ground that all its functions have ceased, it pro- vides for the first meeting and organiza- tion of the new corporation. It express- ly provides, also, that the new c i] tion shall have and hold all the pro] of the old; a provision which would be quite unnecessary upon any other ground, than that the old corporation was dis- solved. But if it could DO contended that the effect of these acts was not en- tirely to abolish the old corporation, it ia manifest that they impair and in- vade the rights, property, and powei the trustees under the charter, as a poratiou, and the legal rights, privilt THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. and immunities which belong to them, as individual members of the corporation. The twelve trustees were the sole legal owner- of all the property acquired un- der the charter. By the acts, others are admitted, againsl //«-/> will, to be joint owners. The twelve individuals who are trustees were, possessed of all the fran- chises and immunities conferred by the charter. By the acts, nine other trustees and twenty-Jive overseers are admitted. against their will, to divide these fran- chise- and immunities with them. If. either as a corporation or as indi- viduals, they have any legal rights, this forcible intrusion of others violates those rights, as manifestly as an entire and complete ouster and dispossession. These acts alter the whole constitution of the corporation. They affect the rights of the whole body as a corporation, and the rights of the individuals who compose it. They revoke corporate powers and franchises. They alienate and transfer the property of the college to others. By the charter, the trustees had a right to fill vacancies in their own number. This i- now taken away. They were to con- sist of twelve, and. by express provision, of no more. This is altered. They and their successors, appointed by them- selves, were for ever to hold the prop- erty. The legislature has found suc- cessors for them, before their seats are vacant. The powers and privileges which the twelve were to exercise exclu- sively, are now to be exercised by others. By one of the acts, they are subjected to heavy penalties if they exercise their offices, or any of those powers and privi- leges -ranted them by charter, and which ercised for fifty years. They to be punished for not accepting the new grant an. I taking its Kenefits. This, it must he confessed, is rather a sum- mary mode of settling a question of con- stitutional right. Nbl only are new trustees forced into tin' corporation, but trusts and nm's are created. The college is turned into a university. Power i given t" create new colleges, and. to authorize any diversion of the fund- which may be agreeable t<> the ne\( board-, sufficient latitude is given by the undefined power of establishing an institute. To these new colleges, and this institute, the funds contributed by tlie founder, Dr. Wheelock, and by the original donors, the Earl of Dartmouth and others, tire to be applied, in plain and manifest disregard of the uses to w bich they were given. The president, one of the old trustees, had a right to his office, salary, and emoluments, subject to the twelve trus- tees alone. His title to these is now changed, and he is made accountable to new masters. So also all the professors and tutors. If the legislature can at pleasure make these alterations and changes in the rights and privileges of the plaintiffs, it may, with equal pro- priety, abolish these rights and privi- leges altogether. The same power which can do any part of this work can accom- plish the whole. And, indeed, the ar- gument on which these acts have been hitherto defended goes altogether on the ground, that this is such a corporation as the legislature may abolish at pleas- ure ; and that its members have no rights, lib* rtit s, franchises, property, or privilt yes, which the legislature may not revoke, annul, alienate, or transfer to others, whenever it sees fit. It will be contended by the plaintiffs, that these acts are not valid and binding on them without their assent. — 1. Beeau-e they are against common right, of New and the Constitution Hampshire. 2. Because they are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. 1 am aware of the limits which bound the jurisdiction of the court in this case, and that on this record nothing can he decided but the single question, whether these acts are repugnant to the Consti- tution of the United states. Yet it may assist in forming an opinion of their true nature and character to compare them with those fundamental principles introduced into the State governments for the purpose of limiting the exercise of the legislative power, and which the Constitution of New Hampshire ex- presses with great fulness and accu- racy. THE DARTMOUTH COLLECT. (ASK. 5 Tt is not too much to assert, that the legislature of New Hampshire would not have been competenl to pass the acts in question, and to make them binding 0D the plaintiffs withoul their assent, even if there had been, in the Constitution of New Hampshire, or of the United States, no special restriction on their power, lie- cause these acts are not the exercise of a power properly legislative 1 Their effeel and object are to take away. Erom one, rights, property, and franchises, and to grant them to another. This is not the exercise of a legislative power. To jus- tify the taking away of vested rights there must be a forfeiture, to adjudge upon and declare which is the proper province of the judiciary. Attainder and confiscation are acts of sovereign power, not acts of legislation. The British Par- liament, among other unlimited pow- ers, claims that of altering and vacating charters; not as an act of ordinary legis- lation, but of uncontrolled authority. It is theoretically omnipotent. Yet, in modern times, it has very rarely at- tempted the exercise of this power. In a celebrated instance, those who asserted this power in Parliament vindicated its exercise only in a case in which it could be shown, 1st. That the charter in ques- tion was a charter of political power; 2d. That there was a great and over- ruling state necessity, justifying the vio- lation of the charter ; 3d. That the char- ter had been abused and justly forfeited. 2 The bill affecting this charter did not pass. Its history is well known. The act which afterwards did pass, passed with the assent of the corporation. Even in the worst times, this power of Parlia- ment to repeal and rescind charters has not often been exercised. The illegal proceedings in the reign of Charles the Second were under color of law. Judg- ments of forfeit ur«' were obtained in the courts. Such was the case of the quo warranto against the city of London, and i Calder et ux. o. Bull, 3 Dallas 386. 2 Annual Register, 1784, p. 1G0; Pari. Reg. 1783:. Mr. Burke'a Speech on Mr. Fox's Easl India Bill. Burke's Works, Vol. II. pp. -111.417. 4>\ the State, or than the judges in the lines which they impose on the Culprits at their bar: that it is nothing to them whether their powers -hall be nded or lessened, any more than it i.-. to their honors whether their jurisdie- i Ellis >: Marshall, 2 Mass. Rep. 277; 1 Kyd • hi i lorporatioDS, 65, < i * » - tion shall be enlarged or diminished. It is necessary, therefore, to inquire into the true nature and character of the cor- poration which was created by the char- ter of 17tii). There are divers sorts of corporations; and it may be safely admitted that the Legislature has more power over some than others.' 2 Some corporations are for government and political arrangement; such, for example, as cities, counties, and towns in New England. These may be changed and modified as public convenience may require, due regard be- ing always had to the rights of property. Of such corporations, all who live with- in the limits are of course obliged to be members, and to submit to the duties which the law imposes on them as such. Other civil corporations are for the ad- vancement of trade and business, such as banks, insurance companies, and the like. These are created, not by general law, but usually by grant. Their con- stitution is special. It is such as the legislature sees fit to give, and the gran- tees to accept. The corporation in question is not a civil, although it is a lay corporation. It is an eleemosynary corporation. It is a private charity, originally founded and endowed by an individual, with a char- ter obtained for it at his request, for the better administration of his charity. " The eleemosynary sort of corporations are such as are constituted for the per- petual distributions of the free alms or bounty of the founder of them, to such persons as he has directed. Of this are all hospitals for the maintenance of the poor, sick, and impotent; and all col- leges both in our universities and out of them." 3 Eleemosynary corporations are for the management of private property, according to the will of the donors. They are private corporations. A col- lege is as much a private corporation as a hospital; especially a college Founded, as this was, by private bounty. A col- lege is a charity. " The establishment of learning," says Lord ELardwicke, "is a charity, and so considered in the stat- ■i I Wboddeson, 474; 1 Ulack. 467. a 1 Black. 471. THE DARTMOUTH COLLK<;K CASK. ute of Elizabeth. A devise to a college, for their benefit, is a laudable charity, and deserves encouragement." 1 The legal signification "i" a charity is derived chiefly from the statute 13 Eliz. ch. 4. " Those purposes, " says Sir Wil- liam Grant, "arc considered charitable which thai statute enumerates." 2 Col- leges are enumerated as charities in that statute. The government, in these cases, lends its aid to perpetuate the be- neficent intention of the donor, by grant- ing a charter under which his private charity shall continue to be dispensed after his death. This is done either by incorporating the objects of the charity, as, for instance, the scholars in a college or the poor in a hospital, or by incorpo- rating those who are to be governors or trustees of the charity. 8 In cases of the first sort, the founder is, by the common law, visitor. In early times it became a maxim, that he who gave the property might regulate it in future. " Cujus est dare, ejus est disponere." This right of visitation descended from the founder to his heir as a right of property, and pre- cisely as his other property went to his heir; and in default of heirs it went to the king, as all other property goes to the king for the want of heirs. The right of visitation arises from the prop- erty. It grows out of the endowment. The founder may, if he please, part with it at the time when he establishes the charity, and may vest it in others. Therefore, if he chooses that governors, trustees, or overseers should be appointed in the charter, he may cause it to be done, and his power of visitation may be transferred to them, instead of descend- ing to his heirs. The persons thus as- signed or appointed by the founder will be visitors, with all the powers of the founder, in exclusion of his heir. 4 The right of \ i.-itat ion, then, accrues to them, as a matter of property, by the gift, transfer, or appointment of the founder. This is a private right, which they can assert in all legal modes, and in which they have the same protection of the law i 1 Ves. 537. 2 9 Ves. Jun. 405. s 1 Wood. 474. 4 1 Black. 471. 5 2 Term Btp. 350, 351. as in all other rights. As visitors they may make rules, ordinances, and stat- utes, and alter and repeal them, as Ear as permitted bo to do by the chart Although the charter proceeds from the crown or the government, il is considered as the will of the donor. It is obtained at his request. He imposes il rule which is to prevail in the dispensa- tion of his bounty in all future times. The king or government which grants the charter is not thereby the founder, but he who furnishes the funds. I be gift of the revenues is the founda- tion. 8 ( The leading case on this subject is Phillips v. Bury. 7 This was an eject- ment brought to recover the rectory- house, &c. of Exeter College in Oxford. The question was whether the plaintiff or defendant was legal rector. Exeter College was founded by an individual, and incorporated by a charter granted by Queen Elizabeth. The controversy turned upon the power of the visitor, and, in the discussion of the cause, the nature of college charters and corpora- tions was very fully considered. Lord Holt's judgment, copied from his own manuscript, is found in 2 Term Reports, 346". The following is an extract: — "That we may the better apprehend the nature of a visitor, we are to consider that there arc in law two sorts of corpora- tions aggregate : Buch as are for public gov- ernment, and such as arc for pri van- charity. Those that are for the public government of a town, city, mystery, or the like, b< ins for public advantage, are to be governed according to the laws of the land. If they make any particular private laws and con- stitutions, the validity and justice of them is examinable in the kim;'.- courts. < >f tin se there arc no particular private founders, and consequently no particular visitor; there are no patrons of these; therefore, if oo i>ro\ ision be in the charter how th< (v—iuii shall continue, the law BUpplieth the defect of that constitution, and Baith it shall be bv election; as mayor, aldermen, com- mon council, and the like. Bu and particular corporations for charity, founded and endowed by private persons, are sub- ject t" the private government of those who erect them; and therefore, if there be 6 1 black. 4S0. 7 1 Lord Kavmond. 5; Pnml - Holt, 715; 1 Shower, 860; 4 Hod. B ■ ■•■ t*T« 8 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. no visitor appointed by the founder, the law appoints the founder and his heirs to be visitors, who are to act and proceed accord- ing t<> the particular laws and constitutions assigned them by the founder. It is now admitted on all bands that the founder is patron, and, as founder, is visitor, if no par- ticular visitor be assigned ; bo that patron- age ami visitation are necessary consequents out- upon another. For this visitatorial power was not introduced by any canons or constitutions ecclesiastical (as was said by a learned gentleman whom 1 have in my eye, in his argument of this case); it is an appointment of law. It ariseth from the property which the founder had in the lands assigned to support the charity; and as he is the author of the charity, the law gives him and his heirs a visitatorial power, that is. an authority to inspect the actions and regulate the behavior of the members that partake of the charity. For it is fit the members that are endowed, and that have the charity bestowed upon them, should not be left to themselves, but pursue the intent and design of him that bestowed it upon them. Now, indeed, where the /»"»', or those that r< ceive the charity, are not incorpo- rated, but there are certain trustees who dispose of tin charity, there is no visitor, because the in- t- n st of the et 'v inn is not n sted in the poor that leu-, tin benefit of the charity, but they are sub- j, ct tn tin mil, ,s and directions of the trustees. But where they who are to enjoy the ben- efit of the charity are incorporated, there to prevent all perverting of the charity, or to compose differences that may happen among them, there is by law a visitatorial power; audit being a creature of the founder's own, it is reason that he and his heii> should have that power, unless by the founder it is vested in some other. Now there is no manner of difference between a college and a hospital, except only in de- gr< e. A hospital is for those that are poor, and mean, and low, and sickly ; a college is for another sort of indigent persons; but it hath another intent, to study in and breed up persons in the world that have no other- wise to live; hut -till it is as much within the reasons as hospitals. And if in a hos- pital the master and poor are incorporated, it is a college having a common seal to act by, although it hath not the name of a col- lege (which always supposeth a corpora- . because it is of an inferior degree; and in the on,- case and in the other there must be a visitor, either the founder and his heirs or one appointed by him; and both are mosj nary. Lord IIoli c dud.-; bis whole argu- ment 1.-. again repeating, that that col- lege was a privatt corporation, and thai the founder had a right to appoint a \ is- 1 1 Lord Raj mond, 9. itor, and to give him such power as he .saw tit. 1 The learned Ilishop Stillingfleet's ar- gument in the same cause, as a member of the House of Lords, when it was there heard, exhibits very clearly the nature of colleges avid similar corpora- tions. It is to the following effect. "That this absolute and conclusive power of visitors is no more than the law hath appointed in other cases, upon commissions of charitable uses: that the common law. and not any ecclesiastical canons, do place the power of visitation in the founder and bis heirs, unless he settle it upon others: that although cor- porations for public government be sub- ject to the courts of Westminster Hall, which have no particular or special visitors, yet corporations for charity, founded and endowed by private per- sons, are subject to the rule and govern- ment of those that erect them; but where the persons to whom the charity is given are not incorporated, there is no such visitatorial power, because the in- terest of the revenue is not invested in them; but "where they are, the right of visitation ariseth from the foundation, and the founder may convey it to whom and in what manner he pleases; and the visitor acts as founder, and by the same authority which he had, and consequently is no more accountable than he had been: that the king by his charter can make a society to be incorporated so as to have the rights belonging to persons, as to legal capacities: that colleges, all bough founded by private persons, are yet in- corporated by the king's charter: but al- though the kings by their charter made the colleges to be such in law. that is, to be legal corporations, yet they left to the particular founders authority to appoint what statutes they thought tit for the regulation of them. And not only the statutes, but the appointment of visitors, was left to them, and the manner of gov- . -1111110111. and the several conditions on which any persons were to be made or continue partakers of their bounty." - These opinions received the .sanction - 1 Hum's F.icles. Law, 443, Appendix, No. ;). THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CA8E. !• of the Souse of Lords, and fchej Beem in be settled and undoubted law. Where there is a charter, Testing proper powers in trustees, or governors, they arc visit- ors; and there is no control in anybody else; except only that the courts of equity or of Ian will interfere so far as to preserve the revenues and prevent the perversion of the Eunds, and tn keep the visitors within their prescribed bounds. •• If there be a charter with proper powers, the charity must be regulated in the manner present >i'»l by tin- charter. There is no ground for the controlling interposition of the courts of chancery. The interposition of the courts, there- fore, iu those instances in which the charities were founded on charters or by act of Parliament, and a visitor or gov- ernor and trustees appointed, must be referred to the general jurisdiction of the courts in all cases in which a trust conferred appears to have been abused, and not to an original right to direct the management of the charity, or the con- duct of the governors or trustees." ■ " The original of all visitatorial power is the property of the donor, and the power every one lias to dispose, direct, and reg- ulate his own property; like the case of patronage; cujus est ilare, &c. There- fore, if either the crown or the subject creates an eleemosynary foundation, and vests the charity in the persons who are to receive the benefit of it, since a con- tent might arise about the government of it, the law allows the founder or his heirs, or the person specially appointed by him to be visitor, to determine con- cerning his own creature. If the charity is not vested in the persons who are to partake, but in trustees for their benefit, no visitor can arise by implication, but the trustees have that power." 8 " There is nothing better established," Bays Lord Commissioner Eyre, "than that this court does not entertain a general jurisdiction, or regulate and i 2 Fonb. 205, 206. 2 Green v. Kutlierforth, 1 Yes. 472, per Lord Hardwicke. 3 Attorney-General v. Foundling It '-pit.il, 2 Yes. .lun. 47. See also 2 Ky«l mi Corpora- tions, 195; Cooper's Equity Pleading, 2 ■-' control charities established >"/ /; 10 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. variations may have been in some in- stance-; adopted; as in the case of Har- vard College, where some power of inspection is given to the overseers, but not, strictly speaking, a visitatorial power, which still belongs, it is appre- hended, to the fellows or members of the corporation. In general, there are many donors. A charter is obtained, comprising them all, or some of them, ami such others as they choose to include, with the right of appointing successors. They are thus the visitors of their own charity, and appoint others, such as they may see fit, to exercise the same office in time to come. All such corporations are private. The case before the court is clearly that of an eleemosynary cor- poration. It is, in the strictest legal sense, a private charity. In King v. St. Catherine's Hall, 1 that college is called a private eleemosynary lay cor- poration. It was endowed by a private founder, and incorporated by letters patent. And in the same manner was Dartmouth College founded and incor- porated. Dr. Wheelock is declared by the charter to be its founder. It was established by him, on funds contributed and collected by himself. As such founder, he had a right of visitation, which he assigned to the trus- tees, and they received it by his consent and appointment, and held it under the charter.'- He appointed these trustees visitors, and in that respect to take place of his heir { as he might have appointed devisees, to take his estate instead of his heir. Little, probably, did he think, at that time, that t he legislature would ever take away this property and these privi- leges, and give them toothers. Little did lie suppose thai this charter secured 1.. him ami his successors no legal rights. Little 'li'l the other donors think so. If they had, the College would have been, •what the university is now, a thing upon paper, existing only in name. The numerous academies in New England have been establi ;he<] substan- tially in the .same manner. They hold their property by the. .same tenure, and i 1 Term Rep. 288. no other. Nor has Harvard College any surer title than Dartmouth College. It may to-day have more friends; but to- morrow it may have more enemies. Its legal lights are the same. So also of Yale College; and, indeed, of all the others. When the legislature gives to these institutions, it may and does ac- company its grants with such conditions as it pleases. The grant of lands by the legislature of New Hampshire to Dartmouth College, in 1789, was accom- panied with various conditions. When donations are made, by the legislature or others, to a charity already existing, -without any condition, or the specifica- tion of any new use, the donation fol- lows the nature of the charity. Hence the doctrine, that all eleemosynary cor- porations are private bodies. They are founded by private persons, and on pri- vate property. The public cannot be charitable in these institutions. It is not the money of the public, but of pri- vate persons, which is dispensed. It may be public, that is general, in its uses and advantages ; and the State may very laudably add contributions of its own to the funds; but it is still private in the tenure of the property, and in the riffht of administering the funds. If the doctrine laid down by Lord Holt, and the House of Lords, in Phillips v. Bury, and recognized and es- tablished in all the other cases, be cor- rect, the property of this college was private property; it was vested in the t rustees by the charter, and to be ad- ministered by them, according to the will of the founder and donors, as ex- pressed in the charter. They were also visitors of the charity, in the most ample sense. They had, therefore, as they contend, privileges, property, and im- munities, within the true meaning of the Bill of Lights. They had rights, and still have them, which they can assert against the legislature, as well as against other wrong-doers. It makes no difference, that the estate is holden for certain trusts. The Legal estate is still theirs. They have a right in the 2 Black, ub'i supra. T1IK DARTMOUTH college cask. 11 property, and they have a right of visit- ing ami superintending the trust; and this is an ohject of legal prelection, U much as any other right. Tin' charter declares that the powers conferred on the trustees are " privileges, advantages, liberties, and immunities"; and that they shall be for ever holden by them and their successors. The New Hamp- shire Bill of Rights declares that no one shall be deprived of Ins •• property, priv- ileges, or immunities," but by judg- ment of his peers, or the law of the lamb The argument on the other side is, that, although these terms may mean some- thing in the Bill of Rights, they mean nothing in this charter, But they are terms of legal signification, and very properly used in the charter. They are equivalent with franchises. Blackstone says that franchise and liberty are used as synonymous terms. And after enu- merating other liberties and franchises, he says: " It is likewise a franchise for a number of persons to be incorporated and subsist as a body politic, with a power to maintain perpetual succession and do other corporate acts; and each individual member of such a corporation is also said to have a franchise or free- dom." 1 Liberties is the term used in Magna Charta as including franchises, privi- leges, immunities, and all the rights which belong to that class. Professor Sullivan says, the term signifies the " privileges that some of the subjects, whether single persons or bodies cor- porate, have above others by the lawful grant of the king; as the chattels of felons or outlaws, and the lands and privileges of corporations." 2 The privilege, then, of being a mem- ber of a corporation, under a lawful grant, and of exercising the rights and powers of such member, is such a privi- lege, liberty, or franchise, as has been the object of legal protection, and the subject of a legal interest, from the time of Magna Charta to the present moment. The plaintiffs have such an interest in i 2 Black. Com. 37. 2 Sull 41st Lect. this corporation, individually, a- they COUld aS8erl and maintain in a rem! of law . net as agents of the public, but in their own right. Bach trustee ha a franchise, ami it' he In- disturbed in the enje\ menl of it . he would have redi en appealing to the law, as promptly a for any other injury. If the other trus- tees should conspire against any one of them to prevenl his equal righl and voice iii the appointment of a president or professor, or in the passing of any statute or ordinance of the college, lit; would be entitled to his action, for r be- cause they cannot be transmitted to their heirs, or would net be assets to pay their debts, is taking an extremely narrow view of the subject. According to this notion, the case would be differ- ent, if. in the charter, they had stipu- lated for a commission on the diflbu ment of the funds ; and the j havi 8 Phillip* r. Bury, and Green p. Ratherfbrth, ubi supra. See also 1 Black. -1- 12 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. to have any interest in the property, because they have undertaken to ad- minister it gratuitously. It cannol be necessary to say much in refutation of the idea, thai there cannot be a legal interest, or ownership, in any thin-' which does not yield a pecuniary profit; as if the law regarded no rights but the rights of money, and of visible, tangible property. Of what nature are all rights of suffrage? No elector has a particular personal interest; but each lias a legal right, to be exercised at his own discretion, and it cannot be taken away from him. The exercise of this right directly and very materially affects the public: much more so than the ex- ercise of the privileges of a trustee of this college. Consequences of the ut- most magnitude may sometimes depend on the exercise of the right of suffrage by one or a few electors. Nobody was ever yet heard to contend, however, that on that account the public might take away the right, or impair it. This notion appears to be borrowed from no better source than the repudiated doc- trine of the three judges in the Ayles- bury case. 1 Thai was an action against a returning officer for refusing the plain- tiff's vote, in the election of a member of Parliament. Three of the judges of the King's Bench held, that the action could not be maintained, because, among other objections, "it was not any mat- ter of profit, either in />r>s>,iti, or in fiit'tro." It would not enrich the plain- tiff /'// presenti, nor would it in futuro go to his heirs, or answer to pay his debts, lint I.oid Holt and the House of Lords were of another opinion. The judg- ment of the three judges was reversed, and the doctrine they held, having been exploded for a century, seems now for the firsl time to be re\ i\ ei|. Individuals have a righl to use their own property for purposes of benevo- lence, either towards the public, or towards ol her indn iduals. They have a righl to exercise this benevolence in BUCh lawful manner as they may choose; and when the governmenl has induced ] Ashby v. White, i Lord Raymond, 9 18. and excited it, by contracting to give perpetuity to the stipulated manner of exercising it, it is not law, but violence, to rescind this contract, and seize on the property. Whether the State will grant these franchises, and under what condi- tions it will grant them, it decides for itself, but when once granted, the con- stitution holds them to be sacred, till forfeited for just cause. That all property, of which the use may be beneficial to the public, belongs therefore to the public, is quite a new- doctrine. It has no precedent, and is supported by no known principle. Dr. Wheelock might have answered his pur- poses, in this case, by executing a pri- vate deed of trust. He might have conveyed his property to trustees, for precisely such uses as are described in this charter. Indeed, it appears that he had contemplated the establishing of his school in that manner, and had made his will, and devised the property to the same persons who were after- wards appointed trustees in the charter. Many literary and other charitable in- stitutions are founded in that manner, and the trust is renewed, and conferred on other persons, from time to time, as occasion may require. In such a case, no lawyer would or could say. that the legislature might divest the trustees, constituted by deed or will, seize upon the property, and give it to other per- sons, for other ] imposes. And does the granting of a charter, which is only done to perpetuate the trust in a more convenient manner, make any differ- ence? Does or can this change the nature of the charity, and turn it into a public political corporation V Happily. we are not without authority on this point. It has been considered and ad- judged. Lord Hardwicke says, in so many words, l< The charter of the crow n cannot make a charity more or less pub- lic, but only more permanent than it would otherwise be.*' - The granting of the corporation is but making the trust perpetual, and does not alter the nature of the charity. The 2 Attoroey-Genpral v. Pearce, 2 Atk. 87. THE DABTM01 i n COLLEGE C \-i:. L8 verj object sou-lit in obtaining such charter, and in giving property to such a corporation, is bo make and keep it private property, and to clothe ii with all the security and inviolability of pri- vate property. The intent is, thai there shall be a Legal private ownership, and thai the legal owners shall maintain and protect the property, for the benefit of those for whose use it was designed. Who ever endowed the public? Who ever appointed a Legislature to adminis- ter his charity'.-' Or who ever heard, before, thai a gift to a college, or a hos- pital, or an asylum, was, in reality, nothing but a gift to the state? The State of Vermont is a principal donor to Dartmouth College. The lands given lie in that State. This appears in the special verdict. \^, Vermont to be considered as having intended a gift to the state of New Hampshire in this case, a-, it has been said, is to be the reasonable construction of all donations to the college? The legislature of New Hampshire affects to represent the pub- lic, and therefore claims a right to con- trol all property destined to public use. What hinders Vermont from consider- ing herself equally the representative of the public, and from resuming her grants, at her own pleasure? Her right to do so is less doubtful than the power of New Hampshire to pass the laws in question. In University v. Foy, 1 the Supreme Court of Ninth Carolina pronounced un- constitutional and void a law repealing a grant to the University of North Caro- lina, although that university was origi- nally erected and endowed by a statute of the State. That case was a grant of lands, and the court decided that it could not be resumed. This is the grant of a power and capacity to hold lands. Where is the difference of the ca-es, upon principle? In Terreti v. Taylor, 3 this court de- cided that a legislative grant or confir- mation of lands, for the purposes "t moral and religious instruction, could no more be rescinded than other grants. 1 2 Haywood's Rep. 2 9 (.'ranch, 43. The nature of the use was nol bolden to make au\ difference. A granl I ish or church, for the purposes which have been mentioned, cannol !"• distin- guished, in r.-] ... I t,, the title it I from a -rant I- a College lor tie- pr.nno- tiiui of pietj and learning. To the • purpose maj !"■ cited the case of Pa v. ("lurk. The state of Vermont, l>y statute, in L794, granted to the respec- tive towns in thai State certain glebe Lands Lj ing \\ ithin those towns )•■!• the .-oie use and supporl of religiotu wor- ship. In 1799, an act was pa 1 to repeal the act of 1794; bul this court declared, that the act of L794, " 80 far as it granted the glebes to the towns, could not afterward- be repealed by the Legislature, so a- to divesl the rights of the towns under the grant." 8 It will l>e for the other side to show that the nature of the ose decides the question whether the Legislature has power to resume its "rants. It will be for those who maintain such a doc- trine to show the principles and cases upon which ii rests. It will be for them also to tix the limits and boundaries of their doctrine, and to show what are and what are not such UB6S a- t.. . the legislature this power of resumption and revocation. Ami to furnish an answer to the cases cited, it will for them further to show that a grant fur the use and support of religions worship stands on other ground than a grant for the [promotion of piety and learning. I hope enough has be.-n said to - : that the trustees possessed vested liber- ties, privileges, and immunities, under this charter; and that such liber privileges, and immunities, being ■ lawfully obtained and vested, are a- in- violable a- any vested rights of property whatever. Rights t" do certain act-. Buch, for instance, as the visitation and superintendence of a college and tin- ap- pointmenl of it- officers, may surely be vested rights, to all Legal intents, completely as the righl to possess | city. A late learned judge of tin.- court » 9 Craiuh. . 14 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. has said, " 'When I say that a right is vested in a citizen, I mean that he has the power to do certain actions, or to possess certain things, according to the Jaw (if tin' land." x If such be the true nature of the plain- t ills' interests under this charter, what are t lie articles in the New Hampshire Bill of Rights winch these acts infringe? They infringe the second article; which says, that the citizens of the State have a right to hold and possess prop- erty. The plaintiffs had a legal property in this charter; and they had acquired property under it. The acts deprive them of both. They impair and take away the charter ; and they appropriate the property to new uses, against their consent. The plaintiffs cannot now hold the property acquired by them- selves, and which this article says they have a right to hold. They infringe the twentieth article. By that article it is declared that, in questions of property, there is a right to trial. The plaintiffs are divested, with- out trial or judgment. They infringe the twenty-third article. It is therein declared that no retrospec- tive laws shall be passed. This article bears directly on the case. These acts must be deemed to be retrospective, within the settled construction of that term. What a retrospective law is, has been decided, on the construction of this very article, in the Circuit Court for the First Circuit. The learned judge of t hat circuil says: " Every statute which takes away or impairs vested rights, acquired iimler existing laws, must be deemed retrospective." 2 That all such laws are retrospective was decided also in the sof Dashv. Van Kh> / , :i where a most tied judge quotes this article from He- constitution of New Hampshire, with manifest approbation, as a plain and dear expression of those fundamen- tal and unalterable principles of justice, which must Lie at the foundation of i 8 Dallas, 894. '-' Society v. Wheeler, 2 Qal. 103. :i 7 Johnson's Rep. 177. ' lira, ten, Lib. i, foL 228. 2 [net 292. every free and just system of laws. Can any man deny that the plaintiffs had rights, under the charter, which were legally vested, and that by these acts tliose rights are impaired? " It is a principle in the English law," says Chief Justice Kent, in the case last cited, " as ancient as the law itself, that a statute, even of its omnipotent Parlia- ment, is not to have a retrospective ef- fect. ' Nova constitutio futuris formam imponere debet, et non prateritis.' 4 The maxim in Bracton was taken from the civil law, for we find in that system the same principle, expressed substan- tially in the same words, that the law- giver cannot alter his mind to the prejudice of a vested right. ' Nemo potest mutare concilium suum in alterius injuriam.' 5 This maxim of Papinian is general in its terms, but Dr. Taylor 6 applies it directly as a restriction upon the lawgiver, and a declaration in the Code leaves no doubt as to the sense of the civil law. ' Leges et constitutiones futuris certum est dare formam negotiis, non ad facta prasterita revocari, nisi no- minatim, et de praeterito tempore, et ad- huc pendentibus negotiis cautum sit.' 7 This passage, according to the best in- terpretation of the civilians, relates not merely to future suits, but to future, as contradistinguished from past, contracts and vested rights. 8 It is indeed ad- mitted that the prince may enact a ret- rospective law, provided it be done ex- pressly ; for the will of the prince under the despotism of the Roman emperors was paramount to every obligation. Great latitude w r as anciently allowed to legislative expositions of statutes; for the separation of the judicial from the Legislative power was not then distinctly known or prescribed. The prince was in the liahit of interpreting his own laws for particular occasions. This was called the ' Interlocutio Principis'; and this, according to Iluber's definition, was, 'quando principes inter partes loquun- 6 DiR. 50. 17. 75. a Elements of the Civil Law, p. 168. » Cod. 1. U. 7. 8 Perezii Protect h. t. THE DARTMOUTH CoLLVMV, CASE. L5 tur et jus dicunt.' 1 No correct civilian, and especially no proud admirer of the ancient republic (if any such then ex- isted), could have reflected on this inter- ference with private rights and pending suits without disgust and indignation; and we are rather surprised to find that, under the violent and arbitrary genius of the Roman government, the principle before us should have been acknowl- edged and obeyed to the extent in which we find it. The fact shows that it must he founded in the clearest justice. Our case is happily very different from that of the subjects of Justinian. With us the power of the lawgiver is limited and defined; the judicial is regarded as a dis- tinct, independent power; private rights are better understood and more exalted in public estimation, as well as secured by provisions dictated by the spirit of freedom, and unknown to the civil law. Our constitutions do not admit the power assumed by the Roman prince, and the principle we are considering is now to be regarded as sacred." These acts infringe also the thirty-sev- enth article of the constitution of New Hampshire; which says, that the powers of government shall be kept separate. By these acts, the legislature assumes to exercise a judicial power. It declares a forfeiture, and resumes franchises, once granted, without trial or hearing. If the constitution be not altogether waste-paper, it has restrained the power of the legislature in these particulars. If it has any meaning, it is that the leg- islature shall pass no act directly and manifestly impairing private property and private privileges. It shall not judge by act. It shall not decide by act. It shall not deprive by act. But it shall leave all these things to be tried and adjudged by the law of the land. The fifteenth article has been referred to before. It declares that no one shall be "deprived of his property, immuni- ties, or privileges, but by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land." Notwithstanding the light in which the learned judges in New Hampshire viewed 1 Pra?lect. Juris. Civ., Vol. II. p. 545. the rights of the plaintiffs under the charter, and which has l n before ad- verted to, it is found to be admitted in their opinion, thai those rights are priv- ileges within the meaning of this fif- teenth article of the Hill ,,l flights. Ilav- ing quoted that article, they jay; « That the right to manage the affait of this college is a privilege, within the mean- ing of this clause of the Bill of Sights, is not to be doubted." In my humble opinion, this surrenders the point. To resist the effect of this admission, how- ever, the learned judges add: " lint how a privilege can be protected from the operation of the law of the land by a clause in the constitution, declaring that it shall not be taken away but by the law of the land, is not very easily under- stood." This answer goes on the ground, that the acts in question are laws of the land, within the meaning of the consti- tution. If they be so, the argument drawn from this article is fully answered. If they be not so, it being admitted thai the plaintiffs' rights are "privileges," within the meaning of the article, the argument is not answered, and the arti- cle is infringed by the acts. Are, then, these acts of the legislature, which affect only particular persons and their particular privileges, laws of the land ? Let this question be answered by the text of Blackstone. " And first it (i.e. law) is arule: not a transient, Mid- den order from a superior to or concern- ing a particular person ; but something permanent, uniform, and universal. Therefore a particular act of the leg lature to confiscate the goods of Tit ins, or to attaint him of high treason, .! not enter into the idea of a municipal law; for the operation of this acl spent upon Titius only, and has no re- lation to the community in general; it i> rather a sentence than a law.*'- Lord Coke is equally decisive and emphatic. Citing and commenting on the celebrated twenty-ninth chapter of Mag ( ta, he says : •• No man shall be disseized, &c, unless it be by the lawful judg- ment, that is. verdict of equals, or by 2 1 Black. Com. 44. 16 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. the law of the land, thai is (to speak it once for all), by the due cnur.se and process of law." 1 Have the plaintiffs losl their franchises by "due course and process of law " '. / On the contrary, are not these arts "particular acts <>f the legislature, which have no relation to the community in general, and which are rather sentences than laws*' ? By the law of the Land is most clearly intended the general law; a law which hears before it condemns ; which pro- ceeds upon inquiry, and renders judg- nteiit only alter trial. The meaning is, that every citizen shall hold his life, lib- erty, property, and immunities under the protection of the general rules which govern society. Every thing which may pass under the form of an enactment is not therefore to be considered the law of the land. If this were so, acts of attainder, hills of pains and penalties, acts of confiscation, acts reversing judg- ments, and acts direct ly transferring one man's estate to another, legislative judg- ments, ile. rees. and forfeitures in all possible forms, would be the law of the land. Such a strange construction would render constitutional provisions of the highest Importance completely inopera- tive and void. It would tend directly to establish the union of all powers in the legislature. There would be no general, permanent law for courts to administer or men to live under. The administra- tion of justice would be an empty form, an idle ceremony. Judges would sit to execute legislative judgments and de- crees; not to declare the law or to ad- minister the justice of the country. "Is that the law of the land," said Mr. Burke, ••upon which, if a man go to Westminster Hall, and ask counsel by what title or tenure he holds his privi- lege or estate according to tin law <>/' the land, he should be told, that the law of the land is noi yel know a : that no de- cision or decree has been made in bis case; thai when a decree shall be passed, he will then know what tht law <>f ilt<> land ut W" ill this he said to he the law 1 Coke, 2 [list 4'i. of the land, by any lawyer who has a rag of a gown left upon his back, or a \\ ig w ith one tie upon his head ? " That the ] lower of electing and ap- pointing tl fficersof this college is not only a right of the trustees as a corpora- t i< >ii . generally, and in the aggregate, but that eaeli individual trustee has also his own individual franchise in such right of election and appointment, is accord- ing to the language of all the authorities. Lord Holt says: " It is agreeable to rea- son and the rules of law. that a franchise should be vested in the corporation ag- gregate, and yet the benefit of it to re- dound to the particular members, and to be enjoyed by them in their private capacity. Where the privilege of elec- tion is used by particular persons, it is a particular right, vested in every particular man." 2 It is also to be considered, that the president and professors of this college have rights to be affected by these acts. Their interest is similar to that of fel- lows in the English colleges; because they derive their living, wholly or in part, from the founders' bounty. The president is one of the trustees or cor- porators. The professors are not neces- sarily members of the corporation: hut they are appointed by the trustees, are removable only by them, and have fixed salaries payable out of the general funds of the college. Both president and pro- fessors have freeholds in their offices; subject only to be removed by the trus- tees, as their legal visitors, for good cause. All the authorities speak of fel- lowships in colleges as freeholds, not- withstanding the fellows may be liable to be suspended or removed, for misbe- havior, by their constituted visitors. Nothing could have been less expected, in this age. than that there should have been an attempt, by acts of the legis- lature, to take away these college liv- ings, the inadequate but the only support of literary men who have devoted their Lives to the instruction of youth. The president and professors were appointed by the twelve trustees. They were ac- 2 2 Lord Raymoiid, 952. THE DAUT.MOl III COl.I.KdK CASK. 17 countable to nobody else, and could be removed by nobody else. They accepted their otlices on this tenure. Yet tli<' legislature lias appointed other persons, with power to remove these officers and to deprive them of their livings ; and those other persons have exercised that power. No description of private prop- erty has been regarded as more sacred than college livings. They are the estates and freeholds of a most deserv- ing class of men; of scholars who have consented to forego the advantages of professional and public employments, and to devote themselves to science and literature and the instruction of youth in the quiet retreats of academic life. Whether to dispossess and oust them; to deprive them of their office, and to turn them out of their livings; to do this, not by the power of their legal visitors or governors, but by acts of the legislature, and to do it without forfeit- ure and without fault ; whether all this be not in the highest degree an inde- fensible and arbitrary proceeding, is a question of which there would seem to be but one side fit for a lawyer or a scholar to espouse. Of all the attempts of James the Sec- ond to overturn the law, and the rights of his subjects, none was esteemed more arbitrary or tyrannical than his attack on Magdalen College, Oxford; and yet that attempt was nothing but to put out one president and put in another. The president of that college, according to the charter and statutes, is to be chosen by the fellows, who are the corporators. There being a vacancy, the king chose to take the appointment out of the hands of the fellows, the legal electors of a president, into his own hands. He there- fore sent down his mandate, command- ing the fellows to admit for president a person of his nomination; and, inas- much as this was directly against the charter and constitution of the college, he was pleased to add a rum obstante clause of sufficiently comprehensive im- port. The fellows were commanded to admit the person mentioned in the man- date, "any statute, custom, or constitu- tion to the contrary notwithstanding. wherewith we are graciously plea ad to dispense, in this behalf." l be fel refused obedience to this mandate, and Dr. Bough, a man of independence and character, was chosen presidenl by the fellows, according to the charter and statutes. The king then assumed the power, iii virtue of hi> prerogative, to send down certain commissioners to turn him out; which was done accordingly; and Parker, a creature suite, 1 to the times, put in his place. Because the president, who was rightfully and legally elected, would not deliver thl /•//-. the doors were broken open. "The nation as well as the university," says Bishop Piurnet, 1 "looked on all these proceed- ings with just indignation. It was thought an open piece of robbery and burglary when men, authorized by no Legal commission, came ami forcibly turned men out of their possession and freehold." Mr. Hume, although a man of different temper, and of other senti- ments, in some respects, than Dr. Bur- net, speaks of this arbitrary attempt of prerogative in terms not less decisive. "The president, and all the fello says he, "except two, who complied, were expelled the college, and Parker was put in possession of the office. This act of violence, of all those which were committed during the reign of Jami perhaps the most illegal and arbitrary. When the dispensing power was the most strenuously insisted on by court lawyers, it had still been allowed that the statutes which regard private prop- erty could not legally be infringed by that prerogative. Vet, in this instance, it appeared that even these were not now- secure from invasion. The privileges of a college are attacked; men are illegally dispossessed of their property for adher- ing to their duty, to their oaths, and to their religion." This measure King James lived to repent, alter repentance was too late. When the charter of London was re- stored, and other measures of violence were retracted, to avert the impending revolution, the expelled president and 1 History of his own Times, Vol III. p. 119. IS THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. fellows of Magdalen College were per- mitted to resume their rights. It is evident that this was regarded as an arbitrary interference with private prop- erty. Yet private property was no oth- erwise attacked than as a person was appointed to administer and enjoy the revenues of a college in a manner and by persons not authorized by the consti- tution of the college. A majority of the members of the corporation would not • comply with the king's wishes. A minority woidd. The object was there- fore to make this minority a majority. To this end the king's commissioners were directed to interfere in the case, and they united with the two complying fellows, and expelled the rest; and thus effected a change in the government of the college. The language in which Mr. Hume and all other writers speak of this abortive attempt of oppression, shows that colleges were esteemed to be, as they truly are, private corporations, and the property and privileges which belong to them private property and private privileges. Court lawyers were found to justify the king in dispensing with the laws; that is, in assuming and exercising a legislative authority. But no lawyer, not even a court lawyer, in the reign of King James the Second, as far as appears, was found to say that, even by this high authority, he could infringe the franchises of the fellows of a college, and take away their liv- ings. Mr. II nine gives the reason; it is. that such franchises were regarded, in a most emphatic sense, as private prop- erty. 1 1 1 it could be made to appear that the trustees and the president and profes- sor- held their offices and franchises during the pleasure of the legislature, and that the property holden belonged to the Stati\ then in,| 1 the legislature have done no more than they had a right to do. lint this is not so. The charter is a charter s any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of con- tracts." The object of these most important provisions in the national constitution has often been discussed, both here and elsewhere. It is exhibited with great clearness and force by one of the dis- tinguished persons who framed that in- strument. " Bills of attainder, ex post j'lu-to laws, and laws impairing the obli- gation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legisla- tion. The two former are expressly prohibited by the declarations prefixed to some of the State constitutions, and all of them are prohibited by the spirit and scope of these fundamental charters. Our own experience has taught us, nevertheless, that additional fences against these dangers ought not to be omitted. Very properly, therefore, have the convention added this constitutional bulwark, in favor of personal security and private rights ; and I am much de- ceived, if they have not, in so doing, as faithfully consulted the genuine senti- ments as the undoubted interests of their constituents. The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret, and with indignation, that sudden changes, and legislative interferences in cases affecting personal rights, be- come jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more industrious and less in- formed part of the community. They have seen, too, that one legislative in- terference is but the link of a long chain of repetitions ; every subsequent inter- ference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding.'' x It has already been decided in this i The Federalist, No. 44, by Mr. Madison. court, that a ijrant is a contract, within the meaning of this provision ; and that a granl by a state is also a contrai t, as lunch a- the grant of an indii idual. In the case of Fletcher v. /'.-■/ - this court says: "A contract is a compact between two or re parties, an. I is either , iitory or executed. An executory con- tract 18 one in which a party hinds him- self to do, or not to (I,., a particular thing; such was tin- law under wliieh the conveyance was made by the eminent. A contract executed i- in which the object of contract is per- formed; and this, says Blaokstone, dif- fers in nothing from a grant. The i tract between Georgia and the pur- chasers was executed by the grant. A contract executed, as well as one which is executory, contains obligations bind- ing on the parties. A grant, in it- own nature, amounts to an extinguishment of the right of the grantor, and implies a contract not to reassert that ri If, under a fair construction of the Constitution, grants are comprehended under the term contracts, is a grant from the State excluded from the opera- tion of the provision? Is the clan-- to be considered as inhibiting the S from impairing tin' obligation of con- tracts between two individuals, b ' excluding from that inhibition font made with itself'/ The words them- selves contain no such distinction. They are general, and are applici to contracts of every description. If contracts made with the State are to be exempted from their operation, the ex- ception inu-t arise from the character of the contracting party, not from the words which are employed. Whatever respect might have been felt for the State sovereignties, it is not to ]>•■ dis- gui-ed that the trainers of tic ( OnstitU- tion viewed with some apprehension the violent act- which might grow out of the feelings of the moment; and that the people of the United v . in adopting that instrument, have mani- fested a determination to shield them- selves and their property from the 2 G Crunch, 87. 20 TIIK DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. effects of those sudden and strong pas- Biona to which men are exposed. The restrictions on the legislative power of th>- States are ohviously founded in this seiitinient ; and the Constitution of the United States contains what may be deemed a hill of rights for the people of each State." It has also been decided, that a grant by a State before the Revolution is as much to he protected as a grant since. 1 But the case of Terrett v. Taylor, before cited, is of all others most pertinent to the present argument. Indeed, the judgment of the court in that case seems to leave little to be argued or decided in this. "A private corpora- tion," say the court, "created by the Legislature, may lose its franchises by a misuser or a nonuser of them; and they may be resumed by the government under a judicial judgment upon a quo warranto to ascertain and enforce the forfeiture. This is the common law of the land, and is a tacit condition an- nexed to the creation of every such cor- poration. Upon a change of govern- ment, too, it may be admitted, that such exclusive privileges attached to a private corporation as are inconsistent with the new government may be abol- ished. In respect, also, to public cor- porations which exist only for public purposes, such as counties, towns, cities, and so forth, the legislature may, under proper limitations, have a right to change, modify, enlarge, or restrain them, securing, however, the property for the uses of those for whom and at whose expense it was originally pur- chased. But thai the legislature can repeal statutes creating private corpora- tions, or confirming to them property already acquired under the faith of pre- \i<>iis laws, and hy such repeal can vest the property of such corporations ex- clusively in the Mate, or dispose of the same to such purposes as they please, without the con-cut or default of the Corporators, We are not prepared tn ad- mit; and we think Ourselves standing 1 New Jersey i». Wilson, 7 Crunch, n;4. upon the principles of natural justice, upon the fundamental laws of every free government, upon the spirit and letter of the Constitution of the United States, and upon the decisions of most respect- able judicial tribunals, in resisting such a doctrine." This court, then, does not admit the doctrine, that a legislature can repeal statutes creating private corporations. If it cannot repeal them altogether, of course it cannot repeal any part of them, or impair them, or essentially alter them, without the consent of the corporators. If, therefore, it has been shown that this college is to be regarded as a private charity, this case is embraced within the very terms of that decision. A grant of corporate powers and privileges is as much a contract as a grant of land. ^Tuit proves all charters of this sort to be contracts is, that they must be ac- cepted to give them force and effect. If they are not accepted, they are void. And in the case of an existing corpora- tion, if a new charter is given it, it may even accept part and reject the rest. In Bex v. Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge, 2 Lord Mansfield says: " There is avast deal of difference between a new charter granted to a new corporation, (who must take it as it is given,) and a new charter given to a corporation already in being, and acting either under a former charter or under prescriptive usage. The latter, a corporation already exist- ing, are not obliged to accept the new charter in toto, and to receive either all or none of it; they may act partly under it, and partly under their old charter or prescription. The validity of these new charters musl turn upon the acceptance of them." In the same case Mr. Justice Wilinot says: "It is the concurrence and acceptance of the university that gives the force to the charter of the crown." In the King v. Pasmore,* Lord Kenyon observes: '-Some things are clear: when a corporation exists capable of discharging its functions, the crown cannot obtrude another charter upon 2 3 Burr. 1050. 8 3 Turin Uep. 240. THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASK. 21 them; they may either accept or re- t/jecl it,'" In all cases relative to charters, the acceptance of them is uniformly alleged in the pleadings. This shows the gen- eral understanding of the law , that they are grants or contracts; and that parties are necessary to give them force and va- lidity. In King v. Dr. Askew,* it is said: " The crown cannot oblige a man to be a corporator, without his consent ; he shall not be subject to the inconven- iences of it, without accepting it and assenting to it." These terms, •• accept- ance" and "assent," are the very lan- guage of contract. In Ellis v. Marshall,* it was expressly adjudged that the nam- ing of the defendant among others, in an act of incorporation, did not of itself make him a corporator; and that his as- sent was necessary to that end. The court speak of the act of incorporation as a grant, and observe: " That a man may refuse a grant, whether from the government or an individual, seems to be a principle too clear to require the support of authorities." But Justice Buller, in King v. Pasmore, furnishes, if possible, a still more direct and ex- plicit authority. Speaking of a corpo- ration for government, he says: "1 do not know how to reason on this point better than in the manner urged by one of the relator's counsel ; who considered the grant of incorporation to be a com- pact between the crown and a certain number of the subjects, the latter of whom undertake, in consideration of the privileges which are bestowed, to exert themselves for the good govern- ment of the place." This language ap- plies with peculiar propriety and force to the case before the court. It was in consequence of the ' ' privileges be- stowed," that Dr. AVheelock and his as- sociates undertook to exert the-mselves for the instruction and education of youth in this college; and it was on the same consideration that the founder en- dowed it with his property. 1 See also 1 Kvd on Corp. 65. 2 4 Burr. 220a 8 2 Mass. Rep. 269. \ii.l became ahartera of incorpor a tion are of tin- nature of contracts, they can- not !»• altered or raried but sent of the original parties. Ii a ch lie granted l,y t|„. king, it may be alt I by a new chartei granted bj the king, and accepted by the corporator-. lint if the first charter he granted hy Parlia- ment, the consent of Parliament musl be obtained to any alteration. In King v. Miller,* Lord Kenyon says: •• Wh< corporation takes its rise from the (ring's charter, the king by granting, and the cor] 'oration by accepting another charter, may alter it, because it is done with the consent of all the parties who are com- petent to consent to the alteration." 6 There are, in this case, all the essen- tial constituent parts of a contract. There is something to be contra about, there are parties, ami there are plain terms in which the agreement of the parties on the subject of the contract is expressed. There are mutual consid- erations and inducements. The charter recites, that the founder, on his part, has agreed to establish his seminary in New Hampshire, and to enlarge it be- yond its original design, among other things, for the benefit of that Province; and thereupon a charter is given to him and his associates, designated by him- self, promising and assuring to them, under the plighted faith of the State, the right of governing the college and administering its concerns in the manner provided in the charter. There is a complete and perfect grant to them of all the power of superintendence, visita- tion, ami government. I> not this a contract? If lands or money had been granted to him and his associates, for the same purposes, such grant could not lie rescinded. And is there any differ- ence, in legal contemplation, between a grant of corporate franchises ami a -rant of tangible property? No such difl ence is recognized in any decided • nor does it exist in the common appre- hension of mankind. * o Term Rep, 277. •■ Bee also Bz parte ISulton School, 2 Brown's Ch. Rep. 682. 22 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. It is therefore contended, that this case falls -within the true meaning of this provision of the Constitution, as ex- pounded in the decisions of this court; that the charter of 17t5L» is a contract, a stipulation or agreement, mutual in its considerations, express and formal in its terms, and of a most binding and sol- emn nature. That the acts in question impair this contract, has already been sufficiently shown. They repeal and ab- rogate its most essential parts. A single observation may not be im- proper on the opinion of the court of New Hampshire, which has been pub- lished. The learned judges who deliv- ered that opinion have viewed this question in a very different light from that in which the plaintiffs have endeav- ored to exhibit it. After some general remarks, they assume that this college is a public corporation ; and on this basis their judgment rests. Whether all col- leges are not regarded as private and eleemosynary corporations, by all law writers and all judicial decisions; wheth- er this college was not founded by Dr. Wheelock; whether the charter was not granted at his request, the better to ex- ecute a trust, which he had already cre- ated ; whether he and his associates did not become visitors, by the charter; and whether Dartmouth College be not, therefore, in the strictest sense, a pri- vate charity, are questions which the learned judges do not appear to have discussed. It is admitted in that opinion, that, if it be a private corporation, its rights stand on the same ground as those of an individual. The great question, there- fore, to he decided is, To which class of corporations do colleges thus founded belong? And the plaintiffs have en- deavored to satisfy the court, that, ac- cording to the well-settled principles and uniform decisions of law, they are pri- vate, eleemosynary corporations. .Much has heretofore been said on the necessity of admitting such a power in tic Legislature as has been assumed in this case. Many cases of possible evil have been imagined, which might other- be without remedy. Abuses, it is contended, might arise in the manage- ment of such institutions, which the or- dinary courts of law would be unable to correct. But this is only another in- stance of that habit of supposing ex- treme cases, and then of reasoning from them, which is the constant refuge of those who are obliged to defend a cause, which, upon its merits, is indefensible. It would be sufficient to say in answer, that it is not pretended that there was here any such case of necessity. But a still more satisfactory answer is, that the apprehension of danger is ground- less, and therefore the whole argument fails. Experience has not taught us that there is danger of great evils or of great inconvenience from this source. Hith- erto, neither in our own country nor elsewhere have such cases of necessity occurred. The judicial establishments of the State are presumed to be competent to prevent abuses and violations of trust, in cases of this kind, as well as in all others. If they be not, they are imper- fect, and their amendment would be a most proper subject for legislative wis- dom. Under the government and pro- tection of the general laws of the land, these institutions have always been found safe, as well as useful. They go on, with the progress of society, accom- modating themselves easily, without sud- den change or violence, to the alterations which take place in its condition, and in the knowledge, the habits, and pur- suits of men. The English colleges were founded in Catholic ages. Their re- ligion was reformed with the general reformation of the nation; and they are suited perfectly well to the purpose of educating the Protestant youth of mod- ern times. Dartmouth College was es- tablished under a charter granted by the Provincial government; but a better constitution for a college, or one more adapted to the condition of things under the present government, in all material respects, could not now be framed. .Nothing in it was found to need altera- tion at the Revolution. The wise men of that day saw in it one of the best bopes of future times, and commended it as it was, with parental care, to the THE DARTMOUTH COLI.KCK CASK. 23 protection and guardianship of the gov- ernment of the State. A charter of more libera] sentiments, of wiser pro- visions, drawn with more care, or in a better spirit, could not be expected at any time or from any source. The col- lege needed no change in its organiza- tion or government. That which it did need was the kindness, the patronage, the bounty of the legislature; not a mock eleval ion to the character of a uni- versity, without the solid benefit of a shilling's donation to sustain the charac- ter; not the swelling and empty author- ity of establishing institutes and other colleges. This unsubstantial pageantry would seem to have been in derision of the scanty endowment and limited means of an unobtrusive, but useful and growing seminary. Least of all was there a necessity, or pretence of ne- cessity, to infringe its legal rights, vio- late its franchises and privileges, and pour upon it these overwhelming streams of litigation. But this argument from necessity would equally apply in all other cases. If it be well founded, it would prove, that, whenever any inconvenience or evil is experienced from the restrictions im- posed on the legislatui'e by the Con- stitution, these restrictions ought to be disregarded. It is enough to say, that the people have thought otherwise. They have, most wisely, chosen to take the risk of occasional inconvenience from the want of power, in order that there might be a settled limit to its exercise, and a permanent security against its abuse. They have imposed prohibitions and restraints; and they have not rendered these altogether vain and nugatory by conferring the power of dispensation. If inconvenience should arise which the legislature cannot rem- edy under the power conferred upon it, it is not answerable for such inconvenience. That which it cannot do within the limits prescribed to it, it cannot do at all. No legislature in this country is able, and may the time never come when it shall be able, to apply to itself the memorable expression of a Roman pon- tiff: "Licet hoc de jure non possnmus, volniuus tamen de ]>letiitudine j la/is." The ease before the oouri is n..t rineiple. of existence, tier inviolability of their charters. It will be a dangerous, a most dangerous ex- periment, to hold these institutions sub- ject to the rise and fall of popular parties, and the fluctuations of political opinions. If the franchise may be at any time taken away, or impaired, the property also may be taken away, or its use perverted. Benefactors will have no certainty of effecting the object of their bounty; and learned men will be de- terred from devoting themselves to the service of such institutions, from the pre- carious title of their offices. Colleges and halls will be deserted by all better spirits, and become a theatre for the contentions of politics. Tarty and fac- tion will be cherished in the places con- secrated to piety and learning. These consequences are neither remote nor pos- sible only. They are certain and im- mediate. When the court in Xorth Carolina declared the law of the Stat.-, which re- pealed a granl to its university, uncon- stitutional and void, the legislature had the candor and the wisdom to repeal the law. 'This example, so honorable to the State which exhibited it. is most tit to be followed on this occasion. And there is good reason to hope that a State, which has hitherto been so much dis- tinguished for temperate counsels, cau- tious legislation, and regard to law, will not fail to adopt a course which will accord with her highest and best inter- ests, and in no small degree elevate her reputation. It was for many and obvious reai most anxiously desired that the question of the power of the legislature over this charter should have been finally decided in the State court. An earnest h<>i>o *> X 24 THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE. was entertained that the judges of the court might have viewed the case in a light favorable to the rights of the trus- tees. That hope has failed. It is here that those rights are now to be main- tained, or they are prostrated for ever. " Omnia alia perfugia bonorum, sub- sidia, consilia, auxilia, jura ceciderunt. Quern enim alium appellem? quem ob- tester? quem implorem? ^N'isi hoc loco, nisi apud vos, nisi per vos, judices, salu- tem nostram, quae spe exigua extremaque pendet, tenuerimus; nihil est praeterea quo confugere possimus." FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW EXCLAXD. A DISCOURSE DELIVERED AT PLYMOUTH, ON THE 22i> UF DECEMBER, 1820. [The first public anniversary celebration of the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth took place under the auspices of the "Old Colony Club," of whose formation an ac- count may be found in the interesting little work of William S. Russell, Esq., entitled "Guide to Plymouth and Recollections of the Pilgrims." This club was formed for general pur- poses of social intercourse, in 170U; but its members determined, by a vote passed on Monday, the ISth of December, of that year, " to keep" Friday, the 22d, in commemora- tion of the landing of the fathers. A par- ticular account of the simple festivities of this first public celebration of the landing of the Pilgrims will be found at page 220 of Mr. Russell's work. The following year, the anniversary was celebrated much in the same manner as in 1769, with the addition of a short address, pronounced " with modest and decent firm- ness, by a member of the club, Ed ward Winslow, Jr., Esq.," being the first address ever delivered on this occasion. In 1771, it was suggested by Rev. Chan- dler Robbins, pastor of the First Church at Plymouth, in a letter addressed to the club, " whether it would not be agreeable, for the entertainment and instruction of the rising generation on these anniversaries, to have a sermon in public, some part of the day, pe- culiarly adapted to the occasion." 'This recommendation prevailed, and an appro- priate discourse was delivered the following year by the Rev. Dr. Robbins. In 177o the Old Colony Club was dis- solved, in consequence of the conflicting opinions of its members on the great polit- ical questions then agitated. Notwithstand- ing this event, the anniversary celebrations of the 22d of December continued without interruption till 17b0, when they were sus- pended. After an interval of fourteen years, a public discourse was again delivered by the Rev. Dr. Robbins. Private celebrations took place the four following years, and from that time till the year 1819, with one or two exceptions, the day was annually commemorated, and public addresses were delivered by distinguished clergymen and laymen of Massachusetts, 'in 1820 the " Pilgrim Society " was formed by the citizen- of Plymouth and the descendants of the Pilgrims in other places, desirous of uniting "to commem- orate the landing, ami to honor the memory of the intrepid men who first sel foot on Plymouth rock." The foundation ot society gave a new impulse to the anniver- sary celebrations of this great event The lion. Daniel Webster was requested to de- liver the public address on the 22d of De- cember of that year, and the following discourse was pronounced by him on the ever-memorable occasion. Great public I \- pectation was awakened by the fame of the orator ; an immense concourse assembled at Plymouth to unite in the celebration ; and it maybe safely anticipated, that some por- tion of the powerful effect of the following address on the minds of those who were so fortunate as to hear it. will be perpetuated by the pros to the latest posterity. From 1820 to the present day, w 1th i sional interruptions, the 22d of December has been celebrated by the Pilgrim Society. A list of all those by whom anniversary discourses have been delivered since the first organization of tin- < >ld Colony Club, in 17o;», may he found in Mr. Russell's work. Nor has the notice of the day been con- fined to New England Public celebral of the landing of the Pilgrims have hi en frequent in other parts of the country, par- ticularly in New York. The New England Society of that city has rarely permitted the day to pass « ithout appropriate honors. Similar societies have been formed at Phil- adelphia, Charleston, s. < '., and Cincinnati, and the day has been publicly commem- orated in several other parts of the coun- try.] Li i ns rejoice thai we behold this day. Let OS !"• thankful that we I lived t<> see the bright and happy break- ing of the auspicious morn, which com- 26 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. mences the third century of the history of New England. Auspicious, indeed, — bringing a happiness beyond the com- mon allotment of Providence to men, — full of present joy, and gilding with bright I'-ams the prospect of futurity, is the dawn that awakens us to the com- memoration of the landing of the Pil- grim-. Living at an epoch which naturally marks the progress of the history of our native land, we have come hither to cel- ebrate the great event with which that history commenced. For ever honored be this, the place of our fathers' refuge! Forever remembered the day winch saw them, weary and distressed, broken in every thing but spirit, poor in all but faith and courage, at last secure from the dangers of wintry seas, and impress- ing this shore with the first footsteps of civilized man ! It is a noble faculty of our nature which enables us to connect our thoughts, our sympathies, and our happiness with what is distant in place or time; and, looking before and after, to hold com- munion at once with our ancestors and our posterity. Human and mortal al- though we are. we are nevertheless not mere insulated beings, without relation to the past or the future. Neither the point of time, nor the spot of earth, in which we physically live, bounds our ra- tional and intellectual enjoyments. We live in the past by a knowledge of its history; and in the future, by hope and anticipation. By ascending to an asso- ciation with our ancestors; by contem- plating their example and studying their character; by partaking their sentiments, and imbibing their spirit; by accompa- nying them in their toils, by sympathiz- ing in their sufferings, and rejoicing in their successes and their triumphs; we seem to belong to their age, and to min- gle our own existence with theirs. We become their contemporaries, live the Uvea which they lived, endure what they endured, and partake in the rewards which they enjoyed. And in like man- ner, by running along the line of future time, by contemplating the probable for- tunes of those wli" are .-,,111111- after us, by attempting something which may promote their happiness, and leave some not dishonorable memorial of ourselves for their regard, when we shall sleep with the fathers, we protract our own earthly being, and seem to crowd whatever is future, as well as all that is past, into the narrow compass of our earthly exist- ence. As it is not a vain and false, but an exalted and religious imagination, which leads us to raise our thoughts from the orb, which, amidst this uni- verse of worlds, the Creator has given us to inhabit, and to send them with something of the feeling which nature prompts, and teaches to be proper among children of the same Eternal Parent, to the contemplation of the myriads of fel- low-beings with which his goodness has peopled the infinite of space; so neither is it false or vain to consider ourselves as interested and connected with our whole race, through all time; allied to our ancestors; allied to our posterity; closely compacted on all sides with oth- ers; ourselves being but links in the great chain of being, which begins with the origin of our race, runs onward through its successive generations, bind- ing together the past, the present, and the future, and terminating at last, with the consummation of all things earthly, at the throne of God. There may be, and there often is, in- deed, a regard for ancestry, which nour- ishes only a weak pride; as there is also a care for posterity, which only disguises an habitual avarice, or hides the work- ings of a low and grovelling vanity. But there is also a moral and philosophical respect for our ancestors, which elevates the character and improves the heart. Next to the sense of religious duty and moral feeling, I hardly know what should bear with stronger obligation on a lib- eral and enlightened mind, than a con- sciousness of alliance with excellence which is departed; and a consciousness, too, that in its acts and conduct, and even in its sentiments and thoughts, it may be actively operating on the happi- ness of those who come after it. Poetry i- found to have few stronger concep- tions, by which it would affect or over- FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. 27 whelm the mind, than those in which it presents the moving and speaking image of the departed dead to the Benses of the living. This belongs to | try, only be- cause it is congenial to our nature. Poetry is, in this respect, bul the band- maid of true philosophy and morality; it deals with us as human beings, naturally reverencing those whose visible connec- tion with this state of existence is sev- ered, and who may yet exercise we know not what sympathy with ourselves; and when it carries us forward, also, and shows us the long continued result of all the good we do, in the prosperity of those who follow us, till it bears us from ourselves, and absorbs OS in an in- tense interest for what shall happen to the generations after us, it speaks only in the language of our nature, and af- fects us with sentiments which belong to us as human beings. Standing in this relation to our ances- tors and our posterity, we are assembled on this memorable spot, to perform the duties which that relation and the pres- ent occasion impose upon us. We have come to this Rock, to record here our homage for our Pilgrim Fathers; our sympathy in their sufferings; our grati- tude for their labors; our admiration of their virtues; our veneration for their piety; and our attachment to those prin- ciples of civil and religious liberty, which they encountered the dangers of the ocean, the storms of heaven, the violence of savages, disease, exile, and famine, to enjoy and to establish. And we would leave here, also, for the generations winch are rising up rapidly to fill out- places, some proof that we have endeav- ored to transmit the great inheritance unimpaired; that in our estimate of public principles and private virtue, in our veneration of religion and piety, in our devotion to civil and religious lil>- erty. in our regard for whatever ad- vances human knowledge or improves human happiness, we are not altogether unworthy of our origin. There is a local feeling connected with this occasion, too strong to he resisted; a sort of genius of the place, which in- spires and awes us. We feel that we are on the spot wheiv the fird MMM history was laid; where the hearths ami altars of New England were first placed; W here ( In i-t ianil \ , and ci\ ili/.al Imi, and letters made their firsi lodgement, in ■ vast extent of country, covered with a wilderness, and peopled by roving bar- barians. We are here, at th ason of the year at which the evenl t""k p] The imagination irresistibrj and rapidly draws around us the principal features and the leading character.-, in the origi- nal scene. We cast our eyes abroad on the ocean, and we see where the little hark, with the interesting group upon its deck, made its slow progress to the shore. We look around us, and behold the hills and promontories where the anxious eyes of our fathers first saw the places of habitation and of rest. We feel the cold which benumbed, and listen to the winds which pierced them. Be- neath us is the Rock, 1 on which New England received the feet of the Pil- grims. We seem even to behold them, as they struggle with the elements, and, with toilsome efforts, gain the shore. We listen to the chiefs in council; we see the unexampled exhibition of female fortitude and resignation; we hear the whisperings of youthful impatience, and we see, what a painter of our own has also represented by his pencil, 9 chilled and shivering childhood, houseless, hut for a mother's arms, couchless, hut for a mother's breast, till our own blood almost freezes. The mild dignity of Carver and of Bradford; tie- dee and soldier-like air and manner of Stan- dish; the devoul Brewster; the en prising Allerton;' the general firmness and thonghtfulneSS of the whole hand; their conscious joy for dangers escaped; i An interesting account of the Rock may be found in I'r. Thacher'a History of the ["own ,.i Plymouth, pp. ±'. L98, I - See N'ele A, III the 'MM 01 ill'' Dis< our I For notiees of Carver, Bradford, Standish, Brewster, ami Allerton, see Young's < hr ofPlyi ith and Massachusetts; Morton'i mortal, J.. 196; Belknap's American Biography, Vol. II.; Hutchinson's Hisiery. VoL II-. App», pp. 456 >t ■-"/. ; Cell. '-liens "f • ' ichu- Historical Society; Winthrop's Journal; and Thacher's History. 28 FIRST SETTLExMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. their deep Bolicitude about dangers to come; their trust in Heaven; their high religious faith, full of confidence and an- ticipation; all of these seem to belong to this place, and to be present upon this occasion, to fill us with reverence ami admiration. The settlement of New England by the colony which landed here 1 on the twenty-second 8 of December, sixteen hundred and twenty, although not the first European establishment in what now constitutes the United States, was yet so peculiar in its causes and charac- ter, and has been followed and must still be billowed by such consequences, as to give it a high claim to lasting com- memoration. On these causes and con- sequences, more than on its immediately attendant circumstances, its importance, as an historical event, depends. Great actions and striking occurrences, having excited a temporary admiration, often pass away and are forgotten, because they leave no lasting results, affecting the prosperity and happiness of commu- nities. Such is frequently the fortune of the most brilliant military achieve- ments. Of the ten thousand battles which have been fought, of all the fields fertilized with carnage, of t he banners which have been bathed in blood, of the warriors who have hoped thai they had risen from the field of con- quest to a glory as bright and as durable as the stars, how few that continue long to interesl mankind! The victory of yesterday is reversed by the defeat of to- day; tin- star of military glory, rising liked meteor, like a meteor has fallen; disgrace and disaster hang on the heels of conquest and renown; victor and van- quished presently pass away to oblivion, and the world goes on in its course, wit h the loss only of so many lives and so much treasure. lint if this be frequently, or generally, 1 For the original name <>f what is now Ply- month, see Lives oi American Governors, p ■(*, note, a work prepared «itli great run- by .1. B. Moore, Esq. 2 The twenty i i r - 1 ii now acknowledged to be the true anniversary. Bee the Report of the Pilgrim Society on the subject the fortune of military achievements, it is not always so. There are enterprises, military as well as civil, which some- times check the current of events, give a new. turn to human affairs, and trans- mit their consequences through ages. We see their importance in their results, and call them great, because great things follow. There have been battles which have fixed the fate of nations. These come down to us in history with a solid and permanent interest, not created by a display of glittering armor, the rush of adverse battalions, the sinking and rising of pennons, the flight, the pursuit, and the victory; but by their effect in advancing or retarding human knowl- edge, in overthrowing or establishing despotism, in extending or destroying human happiness. When the traveller pauses on the plain of Marathon, what are the emotions which most strongly agitate his breast? What is that glori- ous recollection, which thrills through his frame, and suffuses his eyes? Not, I imagine, that Grecian skill and Gre- cian valor were here most signally dis- played; but that Greece herself was saved. It is because to this spot, and to the event which has rendered it im- mortal, he refers all the succeeding glo- ries of the republic. It is because, ii that day had gone otherwise, Greece had perished. It is because he perceives that her philosophers and orators, her poets and painters, her sculptors and archi- tects, her governments and free institu- tions, point backward to Marathon, and that their future existence seems to have been suspended on the contingency, whether the Persian or the Grecian ban- ner should wave victorious in the beams of that day's setting sun. And, as his imagination kindles at the retrospect, he is transported back to the interesting moment; he counts the fearful odds of the contending hosts; his interest for the result overwhelms him ; he trembles, as if it were still uncertain, and seems to doubt whether he may consider Soc- rates and I'lato, Demosthenes, Sopho- cles, and Phidias, as secure, yet, to him- self and to the. world. "If we conquer," said the Athenian FIRST SETTLEMENT OF Ni;\V ENGLAND, commander on the approach of thai de- cisive day, •■ if we conquer, we shall make Athens the greatest city of Greece." 1 A prophecy Imu well ful- filled! '• If God prosper us." might have been the more appropriate lan- guage of our fathers, when they landed upon this Kock, " if Cod prosper us. we shall here begin a work which shall last for ages; we shall plant hen: a new soci- ety, in the principles of the fullest lib- erty and the purest religion; we shall subdue this wilderness which is before us; we shall till this region of the great continent, which stretches almost from pole to pole, with civilization and Chris- tianity; the temples of the true God shall rise, where now ascends the smoke of idolatrous sacritiee; fields and gar- dens, the flowers of summer, and the waving and golden harvest of autumn, shall spread over a thousand hills, and stretch along a thousand valleys, never yet, since the creation, reclaimed to the use of civilized man. We shall whiten this coast with the canvas of a prosper- ous commerce; we shall stud the long and winding shore with a hundred cit- ies. That which we sow in weakness shall be raised in strength. From our sincere, but houseless worship, there shall spring splendid temples to record God's goodness ; from the simplicity of our social union, there shall arise wise and politic constitutions of government, full of the liberty which we ourselves bring and breathe; from our zeal for learning, institutions shall spring which shall scatter the light of knowledge throughout the land, and, in time, pay- ing back where they have borrowed, shall contribute their part to the great aggregate of human knowledge ; and our descendants, through all generations, shall look back to this spot, and to this hour, with unabated affection and re- gard." A brief remembrance of the causes which led to the settlement of this place; some account of the peculiarities and characteristic qualities of that settle- i Herodot. YI. § 109. ment, as distinguished Erom other In- stances of colonization; a short ootii the progress of New England in the great Interests of Bociety, during the century which is now elapsed ; with a test ol vat ions "ii the principles upon which ciety and governmenl are established in this country; comprise all thai can be attempted, and much more than can be satisfactorily performed, on the present occasion. Of the motives which influenced the first settlers to a voluntary exile, in- duced them to relinquish their native country, and to seek an asylum in this then unexplored wilderness, the tir>t and principal, no doubt, wen; connected w ilh religion. They sought to enjoy a higher degree of religious IV loin, and what they esteemed a purer form of religions worship, than was allowed to their ch or presented to their imitation, in the Old World. The love of religious lit *— erty is a stronger sentiment, when fully excited, than an attachment to civil or political freedom. That freedom which the conscience demands, and which men feel bound by their hope of Balvation to contend for, can hardly fail to he at- tained. Conscience, in the cause of re- ligion and the worship of the Deity, prepares the mind to acl and to Buffer beyond almost all other causes. It some- times gives an impulse so irresistible, that no fetters of power or of opinion can withstand it. History instruct that this love of religious liberty, a com- pound sentiment in the breast of man, made up of the clearest sense of right and the highest conviction of dutj aide to look the sternest despotism in the face, and, with means apparently mosl Inadequate, to shake principalities and powers. Then' is a boldness, a spirit of daring, in religious reform not to be measured by the general i which control men's purposes and ac- tions. If the hand of power l>e laid upon it . this only seems to augmei I force and its elasticity . and to Cause its action to be more formidable and vio- lent. Human invention has di ■■■ nothing, human power has compa 30 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. nothing, that can forcibly restrain it, when it breaks forth. Nothing can stop it. but to give way to it; nothing can check it. but indulgence. It loses its power only when it has gained its ob- ject. The principle of toleration, to which the world has come so slowly, is at once the most just and the most wise of all principles. Even when religious feeling takes a character of extravagance and enthusiasm, and seems to threaten the order of society and .-hake the col- umns of the social edifice, its principal danger is in its restraint. If it be al- lowed indulgence and expansion, like the elemental lires, it only agitates, and perhaps purifies, the atmosphere; while its efforts to throw off restraint would burst the world asunder. It is certain, that, although many of them were republicans in principle, we have no evidence that our New England ancestors would have emigrated, as they did, from their own native country, wc mid have become wanderers in Europe, and finally would have undertaken the establishment of a colony here, merely from their dislike of the political sys- tems of Europe. They fled not so much from the civil government, as from the hierarchy, and the laws which enforced conformity to the church establishment. Mr. Robinson had left England as early as 1608, on account of the persecutions for non-conformity, and had retired to Holland. He left England from no dis- appointed ambition in affairs of state, from no regrets at the want of prefer- ment in the church, nor from any motive of distinction or of gain. Uniformity in matters of religion was pressed with such extreme rigor, that a voluntary exile Beemed the most eligible mode of escap- ingfrom the penalties of non-compliance. The accession of Elizabeth had, it is true, quenched the fires of Smithfield, and put an end to the easy acquisition of t he emu n of martyrdom. Her long reign had established the Reformation, but toleration was a virtue beyond her con- ception, and beyond the age. She left iic example of it to ber successor; and he was not of a character which rendered it probable that a sentiment either bo wise or so liberal would originate with him. At the present period it seems in- credible that the learned, accomplished, unassuming, and inoffensive Robinson should neither be tolerated in his peace- able mode of worship in his own coun- try, nor suffered quietly to depart from it. Yet such was the fact. He left his country by stealth, that he might else- where enjoy those rights which ought to belong to men in all countries. The departure of the Pilgrims for Holland is deeply interesting, from its circum- stances, and also as it marks the charac- ter of the times, independently of its connection with names now incorporated with the history of empire. The em- barkation was intended to be made in such a manner that it might escape the notice of the officers of government. Great pains had been taken to secure boats, which should come undiscovered to the shore, and receive the fugitives; and frequent disappointments had been experienced in this respect. At length the appointed time came, bringing with it unusual severity of cold and rain. An unfrequented and barren heath, on the shores of Lincolnshire, was the selected spot, where the feet of the Pilgrims were to tread, for the last time, the land of their fathers. The vessel which was to receive them did not come until the next day, and in the mean time the little band was collected, and men and women and children and bag- gage were crowded together, in melan- choly and distressed confusion. The sea was rough, and the women and children were already sick, from their passage down the river to the place of embarka- tion on the sea. At length the wished- forboat silently and fearfully approaches the. Bhore, and men and women and chil- dren, shaking with fear ami with cold, a- many as the small vessel could bear, venture off on a dangerous sea. Imme- diately the advance of horses is heard from behind, armed men appear, and those not yet embarked are seized and taken into custody. In the hurry of the moment, the first parties had been sent on board without any attempt to keep members of the same family together, FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW KXCLAXI). ::i and on account of the appearance of the horsemen, the boat never returned for the residue. Those who had gol away, and those who had not, were in equal distress. A storm, of great violence and long duration, arose at sea, which not only protracted the voyage, rendered dis- tressing by the want of all those accom- modations which the interruption of the embarkation had occasioned, but also forced the vessel out of her course, and menaced immediate shipwreck ; while t lu ise on shore, when they were dismissed from the custody of the officers of jus- tice, having no longer homes or houses to retire to, and their friends and pro- tectors being already gone, became ob- jects of necessary charity, as well as of deep commiseration. As this scene passes before us, we can hardly forbear asking whether this be a band of malefactors and felons flying from justice. What are their crimes, that they hide themselves in darkness ? To what punishment are they exposed, that, to avoid it, men, and women, and children, thus encounter the surf of the North Sea and the terrors of a night storm ? What induces this armed pur- suit, and this arrest of fugitives, of all ages and both sexes ? Truth does not allow us to answer these inquiries in a manner that does credit to the wisdom or the justice of the times. This was not the flight of guilt, but of virtue. It was an humble and peaceable religion, flying from causeless oppression. It was conscience, attempting to escape from the arbitrary rule of the Stuarts. It was Robinson and Brewster, leading off their little band from their native soil, at ficsl to find shelter on the shore of the neigh- boring continent, but ultimately to come hither; and having surmounted all dilli- culties and braved a thousand dangers, to find here a place of refuge and of rest. Thanks be to God, that this spot was honored as the asylum of religious lib- erty! May its standard, reared here, re- main for ever ! May it rise up as high as heaA'en, till its banner shall fan the air of both continents, and wave as a glori- ous ensign of peace and security to the nations ! The peculiar character, condition, and circumstances of the colonies which in- troduced eh ilizal Lou and an Eng li h into New England, afford a most inter- eating and extensive topic of discussion. On these, much of our subsequent char- acter and fortune baa depended. Their iniiuence has essentially affected our whole history, through the two centuries which have elapsed; and aa the] have become intimately connected with eminent, laws, and properly, as well as with our opinions on the Bubjecte of re- ligion and civil liberty, that influence is likely to continue to be bit through the centuries which shall succeed. Immigra- tion from one region to another, and the emission of colonies to people countries more or less distant from the residence of the parent stock, are common inci- dents in the history of mankind; but it has not often, perhaps never, happened, that the establishment of colonies should be attempted under circumstances, how- ever beset with present difficulties and dangers, yet so favorable to ultimate success, and so conducive to magnificent results, as those which attended the first settlements on this part of the American continent. In other instances, emigra- tion has proceeded from a less exalte, 1 purpose, in periods of less general intel- ligence, or more without plan and by accident; or under circumstances, physi- cal and moral, less favorable to tie pectation of laying a foundati< >n f< >r great public prosperity and future empire. A great resemblance ex Un. obviously, between all the English colonies estab- lished within the present limits of the United States; but the occasion atti our attention more immediately to those which took possession of New England, and the peculiarities of these furnish a strong contrast with most other inatai of colonization. Among the ancient nations, fhe (J reeks, no doubt. >ent forth from their territories the greatest number of colonit B nu- merous, indeed, were they, and so great the extent of space over which they » spread, that the parent country fondly and naturally persuaded herself, that by means of them she had laid a sure foun- 32 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. dation for the universal civilization of tin- world. These establishments, from obvious causes, were most numerous in places mosl contiguous; yet they were found on the coasts oJ France, on the shores of the Euxine Sea, in Africa, and even, as is alleged, on the borders of India. These emigrations appear to have been sometimes voluntary and sometimes compulsory; arising from the spontaneous enterprise of individuals, or the order and regulation of govern- ment. It was a common opinion with ancient writers, that they were under- taken in religious obedience to the com- mands of oracles, and it is probable that impressions of this sort might have had more or less influence ; but it is probable, also, that on these occasions the oracles did not speak a language dissonant from the views and purposes of the state. Political science among the Greeks seems never to have extended to the comprehension of a system, which should be adequate to the government of a great nation upon principles of liberty. They were accustomed only to the contempla- tion of small republics, and were led to consider an augmented population as in- compatible with free institutions. The desire of a remedy for this supposed evil, and the wish to establish marts for trade, led the governments often to undertake the establishment of colonies as an affair of state expediency. Colonization and commerce, indeed, would naturally be- come objects of interest to an ingenious and enterprising people, inhabiting a territory closely circumscribed in its limits, and in no small part mountain- ous and sterile; while the islands of the adjacent seas, and the promontories and coasts of the neighboring continents, by their mere proximity, strongly solicited the excited spirit of emigration. Such was this proximity, in many instances, that the new settlements appeared rather to 1"' the mere extension of population over contiguous territory, than the es- tablishmenl of distant colonies. In pro- portion as they were near in the parent state, they would be under its authority, and partake of its fortunes. The colony at Marseilles might perceive lightly, or not at all, the sway of Phocis; while the islands in the JEgean Sea could hardly attain to independence of their Athenian origin. Many of these establishments took place at an early age ; and if there were defects in the governments of the parent states, the colonists did not pos- sess philosophy or experience sufficient to correct such evils in their own insti- tutions, even if they had not been, by other causes, deprived of the power. An immediate necessity, connected with the support of life, was the main and direct inducement to these undertakings, and there could hardly exist more than the hope of a successful imitation of insti- tutions with which they were already acquainted, and of holding an equality with their neighbors in the course of improvement. The laws and customs, both political and municipal, as well as the religious worship of the parent city, were transferred to the colony ; and the parent city herself, with all such of her colonies as were not too far remote for frequent intercourse and common senti- ments, would appear like a family of cities, more or less dependent, and more or less connected. We know how imper- fect this system was, as a system of gen- eral politics, and what scope it gave to those mutual dissensions and conflicts which proved so fatal to Greece. But it is more pertinent to our present purpose to observe, that nothing existed in the character of Grecian emigrations, or in the spirit and intelligence of the emigrants, likely to give a new and im- portant direction to human affairs, or a new impulse to the human mind. Their motives were not high enough, their views were not sufficiently large and prospective. They went not forth, like our ancestors, to erect systems of more perfect civil liberty, or to enjoy a higher degree of religious freedom. Above all, there was nothing in the religion and learning of the age, that could either inspire high purposes, or give the ability to execute them. Whatever restraints on civil liberty, or whatever abuses in religious worship, existed at the time of our fathers' emigration, yet even then all was light in the moral and mental FIRST SKTTI.l'MKNT OF NEW ENGLAND. world, in comparison with its condition in most periods of the ancienl Btates. The Bettle ni of a new continent , in an ni**' of progressive knowledge and im- provement, could not hut do more than merely enlarge the aatural boundaries of the habitable world. It could not bul do much more even than extend com- merce and increase wealth among the human race. We Bee li"\\ thisevenl has acted, how it must have acted, and won- der only why it did not ad sooner, in the production of mora] effects, on the state of human knowledge, the general tone of human Bentiments, and the pros- pects of human happiness. It gave to civilized man not only a new continent to be inhabited and cultivated, and new- seas to be explored; but it gave him also a new range for his thoughts, new objects for curiosity, and new excite- ments to knowledge and improvement. Roman colonization resembled, far less than that of the Greeks, the original settlements of this country. Power and dominion were the objects of Rome, even in her colonial establishments. Her whole exterior aspect was for centuries hostile and terrific. She grasped at do- minion, from India to Britain, and her measures of colonization partook of the character of her general system. Her policy was military, because her objects were power, ascendency, and subjuga- tion. Detachments of emigrants from Rome incorporated themselves with, and governed, the original inhabitants of conquered countries. She sent citizens where she had first sent soldiers ; her law followed her sword. Her colonies were a sort of military establishment; so many advanced posts in the career of her dominion. A governor from Rome ruled the new colony with absolute sway, and often with unbounded rapacity. In Sicily, in Gaul, in Spain, and in Asia. the power of Rome prevailed, not nomi- nally only, but really and effectually. Those who immediately exercised it were Roman; the tone and tendency of its administration, Roman. Rome herself continued to be the heart and centre of the great system which she had estab- lished. Extortion and rapacity, find- ing a wide and of ten rich field of action in the pro\ i 1 1 < ■ < ■ - . looked lew. ill the banks of the Tiber, a> the scene in which their ill-gotten treasures Bhould be displayed : or, if a spiril of more honesl acquisition prevailed, the object, never- theless, was ultimate enjoyment in Rome itself. It' our own history and oar own times did not sufficiently expose the in- herent and incurable evils of pror facial government, we might see them por- trayed, to • amaze at, in the deso- lated and ruined provinces of the Roman empire. We might hear them, in B voice that terrifie8 us. in those strains of complaint and accusation, which the advocates of the provinces poured forth in the Roman Forum: — ■• Quae res luxuries in flagitiis, crudelitas in sup- pliciis, avaritia in rapinis, superbia in contumeliis, efficere potuisset, eas omnes sese pertulisse." As was to be ex] ted, the Roman Provinces partook of the fortunes, aa well as of the Bentiments and general character, of the seat of empire. They lived together with her, they flourished with her. and fell with her. The branches were lopped away even 1 1" fore the vast and venerable trunk itself fell prostrate to the earth. Nothing had proceeded from her which could support itself, and bear up the uai f its or when her own sustaining arm Bhould be enfeebled or withdrawn. It wasnol given to Rome to see, either at her zenith or in her decline, a child of her own. distant, iinl I. and independent of her control. yel Speaking her language and inherit- ing her Mood, springing forward to a competition with her own power, and a comparison with her own great renown. She saw not a vast region Of the earth peopled from her stock, full of s< and political communities, improving upon the i lels of her institutions, breathing in fuller measure the spirit which she had breathed in the best periods of her exist and extending her arts and her literature; rising rapidly from political child: to manly strength and independei her offspring, yet now her equal : uncon- nected with the ca hich n 34 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. affect the duration of her own power and greatness; of common origin, mil not linked to a common fate; giving ample pledge, thai her name should not be forgotten, that her language should 11.. t cease to be used among men; that whatsoever she had done for human knowledge and human happiness should be treasured up and preserved; that the record of her existence and her achieve- ments should not be obscured, although, in tin' inscrutable purposes of Frovi- dence, it might he her destiny to fall from opulence and splendor; although the time might come, when darkness should settle on all her hills; when for- eign or domestic violence should overturn her altars and her temples; when igno- rance and despotism should fill the places where Laws, and Arts, and Liberty had flourished; when the feet of barbarism should trample on the tombs of her con- suls, and the walls of her senate-house and forum echo only to the voice of savage triumph. She saw not this glori- ous vision, to inspire and fortify her against the possible decay or downfall of her power. Happy arc they who in our day may behold it, if they shall con- template it with the sentiments which it ought to inspire! Tin- Nev> England Colonies differ quite Ldely from the Asiatic establishments of the modern European nations, as from the models of the ancient states. The sole object of those establishments was originally trade ; although we have seen, in one of them, the anomaly of a mere trading company attaining a political character, disbursing revenues, and main- taining armies and fortresses, until it has aded its control over seventy mil- lion- of people. Differing from these, ami still more from the New England and North American Colonies, are the European settlements in the West India I Lands. It i- not strange, that, when men's minds were turned to the settlement of America, different objects should he proposed by those who emigrated to the different regions of so vast a country. Climate, soil, and condition were m equally Eavorable to all pursuits. In the W • i [ndie . the purpo e of those who went thither was to engage in that species of agriculture, suited to the soil and climate, which seems to bear more resemblance to commerce than to the hard and plain tillage of New England. The great staples of these countries, being partly an agricultural and partly a manufactured product, and not being of the necessaries of life, become the object of calculation, with respect to a profitable investment of capital, like any other enterprise of trade or manufacture. The more especially, as, requiring, by necessity or habit, slave labor for their production, the capital necessary to car- ry on the work of this production is very considerable. The West Indies are re- sorted to, therefore, rather for the in- vestment of capital than for the purpose of sustaining life by personal labor. Such as possess a considerable amount of capi- tal, or such as choose to adventure in commercial speculations without capital, can alone be fitted to be emigrants to the islands. The agriculture of these regions, as before observed, is a sort of commerce ; and it is a species of employ- ment in which labor seems to form an inconsiderable ingredient in the produc- tive causes, since the portion of white labor is exceedingly small, and slave labor is rather more like profit on stock or capital than labor properly so called. The individual who undertakes an es- tablishment of this kind takes into the account the cost of the necessary num- ber of slaves, in the same manner as ho calculates the cost of the land. The un- certainty, too, of this species of employ- ment, affords another ground of resem- blance to commerce. Although gainful on the whole, and in a series of years, it is often very disastrous for a single year, and, as the capital is not readily invested in other pursuits, had crops or bad mar- kets not only affect the profits, hut the capital it -elf. Hence the sudden depres- sions which take place in the value of such estates. Lnt the great and leading observation, relative to these establishments, remains to he mail". It is. that the owners of i be -oil ami of the capital seldom con- sider themselves "/ /"f the Boil itself is usually owned in the mother country; ;i still greater is mortgaged for capital ob- tained there; and, in general, those who are to derive an interest from the prod- ucts look to the parent, country as the place for enjoyment of their wealth. The population is therefore constantly fluc- tuating. Nobody conies but to return. A constant succession of o\\ ners, agents, and factors takes place. Whatsoever the soil, forced by the unmitigated toil of slavery, can yield, is sent home to defray rents, and interest, and agencies, or to give the means of living in a better so- ciety. In such a state, it is evident that no spirit of permanent improvement is likely to spring up. Profits will not he invested with a distant viev of benefit- ing posterity. Roads and canals will hardly be built ; schools will not be founded; colleges will not be endowed. There will be few fixtures in society; no principles of utility or of elegance, planted now. with the hope of being de- veloped and ex] uinded hereafter. Profit, immediate profit, must be the principal active spring in the social system. Then- may be many particular exceptions to these general remarks, but the outline of the whole is such as is here drawn. Another most important consequence of such a state of things is, that no idea of independence of the parent country is likely to arise; unless, indeed, it should spring up in a form that would threaten universal desolation. The inhabitants have no strong attachment to the place which they inhabit. The hope of a great portion of them is to leave it: and their great desire, to leave it soon. How- ever useful they may be to the parent state, how much soever they may add to the conveniences and luxuries of life, these colonies are not favored spots for the expansion of the human mind, for the progress of permanent improvement, or for sowing the seeds of future inde- pendent empire. Different, indeed, most widely differ- ent, from all these instances of emigra- tion and plantation, were the condition, the purposes, and the prospects of our fathers, when they established their in- fant colony upon this gpot. Th< j came hither to a land i n >m which li uever to return. Hither they had broi and here they were to ti\. their hopes, their attachments, and their object life. Some natural tears thej they left the pleasant abodes of their fathers, ami some emotions fchej sup- pressed, when the white cliffs of their native country . now seen for the time, -rew dim to their sight. 'I hej Were acting, however, upon a resolution not to be daunted. With whatever -ti- tled regrets, with whatever occasional hesitation, with whatever appalling ap- prehensions, which might sometimes arise with force to shake the firmest purpose, they had yet committed them- selves to Heaven and the elements; and a thousand leagues of water snon inter- posed to separate them lor ever from the region which gave them birth. A new existence awaited them here; ami when they saw these shores, rough, old. bar- barous, and barren, as then they v. they beheld their countarj . That m and strong feeling, which we call love of country, and which is. in general, never extinguished in the heart of man. grasped ami embraced it- proper object here. Whatever constitutes country ^ ex- cept tl ai'th and the sun. all the moral Causes of affection and attachment which operate upon the heart, they had brought with them to their new abode. 1 1 were now their families and friends, their homes, and their property. B they reached the shore, they had estab- lished the elements of a social system, 1 and at a much earlier period had settled their forms of religious worship. At the moment of their landing, therefore, they I institutions oi government, ami institutions of religion: and friends and families, and social and religious insti- tutions, framed by consent, founded on choice and preference, how nearly do 1 Tor the compact to which reference i« made in the text, signed on board the May- flower, see Hutchinson's History, Vol. IF. pendix, No. I. For an eloquent descripl tin' manner in which the firel < hnstian Sabbath was passed on board the Mayflower, at Ply- mouth, see Barnes's I ' B6 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. till up our whole idea of country! The morning that beamed on the first night of fcheii repose Baw the Pilgrims already at home in their country. There were political institutions, and civil lib- erty, and religious worship. Poetry has fancied nothing, in the wanderings of heroes, so distinct and characteristic. Here was man. indeed, unprotected, and unprovided for, on the shore of a rude and fearful wilderness; but it was poli- tic, intelligent, and educated man. Ev- ery thing was civilized hut the physical world. Institutions, containing in sub- stance all that ages had done for human government, were organized in a forest. Cultivated mind was to act on uncul- tivated nature; and, more than all, a government and a country were to cora- mence, with the very first foundations laid under the divine light of the Chris- tian religion. Happy auspices of a hap- py futurity! "Who would wish that his country's existence had otherwise begun? Who would desire the power of going back to the ages of fable ? Who would wish for an origin obscured in the dark- ness of antiquity? Who would wish for other emblazoning of his country's her- aldry, or other ornaments of her geneal- ogy, t han to be able to say. that her first existence was with intelligence, her first breath the inspiration of liberty, her first principle the truth of divine re- ligion ? Local attachments and sympathies id ore long spring up in the breasts oi our ancestors, endearing to them the place of their refuge. Whatever natural objects are associated with interesting mm! high efforts obtain a hold on human feeling, and demand from the heart a Bort of recognition and regard. This Etoci soon became hallowed in the hi of the Pilgrims, 1 and these hills t The names of the pnsscn^ers in the May- Sower, with Bome account of them, may !»' in the New England Genealogical Regis- ter, Vol. I. p. 17, and ;i narrati t some of 1 1 • « * incidents of the voyage, Vol. II. p. 186. I 7 o\ mi account "f Mrs. White, the mother of the hild born in New England, see Baylies's it tory of Plymouth, Vol. II. p. 18, and for ;i o ..f her ""ii Peregrine, see Moore's Lives American Governors, Vol. I. p. 31, note. grateful to their sight. Neither they nor their children were again to till the soil of England, nor again to traverse the seas which surround her.- But here was a new sea, now open to their enterprise, and a new soil, which had not failed to respond gratefully to their laborious in- dustry, and which was already assuming a robe of verdure. Hardly had they pro- vided shelter for the living, ere they were summoned to erect sepulchres for the dead. The ground had become sacred, by enclosing the remains of some of their companions and connections. A parent, a child, a husband, or a wife, had gone the way of all flesh, and mingled with the dust of New England. We natu- rally look with strong emotions to the spot, though it be a wilderness, where the ashes of those we have loved repose. Where the heart has laid down what it loved most, there it is desirous of laying itself down. No sculptured marble, no enduring monument, no honorable in- scription, no ever-burning taper that would drive away the darkness of the tomb, can soften our sense of the reality of death, and hallow to our feelings the ground which is to cover us, like the consciousness that we shall sleep, dust to dust, with the objects of our affec- tions. In a short time other causes sprung up to bind the Pilgrims with new cords to their chosen land. Children were born, and the hopes of future genera- tions arose, in the spot of their new habitation. The second generation found this the land of their nativity, and saw that they were bound to its fortunes. They beheld their fathers' graves around them, and while they read the memorials of their toils and labors, they rejoiced in the inheritance which they found bequeathed to them. Under the influence of these causes, it was to be expected that an interest and a feeling should arise here, entirely different 1 1 ..tn the interest and feeling of lucre Englishmen; and all the subse- 2 Sir the admirable letter written on board the Arbella, in Hutchinson's History, Vol. L, Appendix, No. 1. FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. : quenl history o£ the Colonies proves this to have actually and gradually taken place. With a general acknowledgment of the supremacy of the British crown, thru- was, from the first, a repugnance to an entire submission to the control of British legislation. Tin 1 Colonics stood upon their charters, which, as they con- tended, exempted them from the ordi- nary power of the British Parliament, and authorized them to conduct their own concerns by their own counsels. They utterly resisted the notion that they were to be ruled by the mere au- thority of the government al home, and Would not endure even that their own charter governments should he estab- lished on the other side of the Atlanl ic. It was not a controlling or protecting hoard in England, but a government of their own, and existing immediately within their limits, which could satisfy their wishes. It was easy to foresee, what we know also to have happened, that the first great cause of collision and jealousy would be, under the notion of political economy then and still preva- lent in Europe, an attempt on the part of the mother country to monopolize the trade of the Colonies. Whoever has looked deeply into the causes which pro- duced our Revolution has found, if I mistake not, the original principle far back in this claim, on the part of Eng- land, to monopolize our trade, and a continued effort on the part of the Colo- nies to resist or evade that monopoly: if, indeed, it be not still more just and philosophical to go farther back, and to consider it decided, that an independent government must arise here, the moment it was ascertained that . an English colony, such as landed in this place, could sustain itself against the dangers which surrounded it, and, with other similar establishments, overspread the land with an English population. Ac- cidental causes retarded at times, and at times accelerated, the progress of the controversy. The Colonies wanted strength, and time gave it to them. They required measures of strong and palpable injustice, on the part of the mother country, to justify resistance; tl arly part of the late 1 furnished them. They needed Bp of high order, of great dat foresight, and of commanding power, t sei/e the favoring occasion to strike a Mow, which should sever, For all time, the tie of colonial dependei ; and these spirits wen- found, in all tic- tent, which thai or any crisis could mand, in Otis, Adams, Hancock, and the other immediate authors of our independence. Still, it is true that, for a century, causes had Keen in operation tending to prepare things for this greal result, fa the year L660 the English Act of Navi- gation was passed; the firsl and grand object of which seems to ha\e 1 n. tfl secure to England the whole trade with her plantations. 1 It was provided by that act, that none but English ships should transport American produi the ocean, and that the principal art of that produce Bhould be allowed to be sold only in the markets of the mother country. Three years afterwards an- other law was passed, which enacted, that such commodities as the Colonies might wish to purchase should be bought only in the markets of the mother country. Severe rules were pre- scribed to enforce the provisions of these laws, and heavy penalties imposed on all who should violate them. In the subsequent years of the same reign, other statutes were enacted tore-enforce these statutes, and other rules pre- scribed to secure a compliance with these rules. In this manner was the trade to and from the Colonies stricted, almosl to the exclusive ad- vantage of the parent country. B I laws, which rendered the interest whole people subordinate to that of an- other people, were not likely to execute themselves; nor was it easy to find many on the spot, who could b 1 In reference to the Rriti-h polic] ■ olonial manufactures, itionj of the Board of Trade to the Hon I I 23d Jan., 1734; also, 8th June, L749. For an able vindication of the British Colonial | gee "Political Essays concerning the 1' - ■ bt the British Empire." London, L778. - FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. pended upon for carrying thorn into execution. In fact, these laws were more or less evaded or resisted, in all the Colonies. To enforce them was the constant endeavor of the government at home; to prevent or elude their opera- tion, the perpetual object here. ."The laws of navigation," says a living Brit- ish writer, "were nowhere so openly disobeyed and contemned as in New England." " The people of Massachu- setts Kay." lie adds, "were from the t'u-t disposed to act as if independent of the mother country, and having a srnor and magistrates of their own choice, it was difficult to enforce any regulation which came from the Eng- lish Parliament, adverse to their inter- ests." To provide more effectually for the execution of these laws, we know thai courts of admiralty were afterwards established by the crown, with power to trv revenue causes, as questions of ad- miralty, upon the construction given by the crown lawyers to an act of Parlia- ment ; a great departure from the ordi- nary principles of English jurispru- dence, but which has been maintained, nevertheless, by the force of habit and precedent, and is adopted in our own existing systems of government. "There lie," says another English writer, whose connection with the Board of Trade has enabled him to ascertain many facts connected with Colonial his- tory, "There lie among the documents in the hoard of trade and state-paper office, the most satisfactory proofs, from tin- epoch of the English Revolution in 1688, throughout every reign, and dur- ing '-very administration, of the settled purpose of the Colonies to acquire direct independent and positive sovereignty." Perhaps this may be stated somewhat too Btrongly; but it cannot be denied, that, from the rery nature of the estab- lishments here, and IV the general character of the measures respecting their concerns early adopted and stead- iP, pursued by the English government, a division of the empire was the natural and necessary result to which every thing tended. 1 i Many interesting papers, illustrating the I have dwelt on this topic, because it seems to me, that the peculiar original character of tie- New England Colonies, and certain causes coeval with their ex- istence, have had a strong and decided influence on all their subsequent history, and especially on the great event of the Revolution. Whoever would write our history, and would understand and ex- plain early transactions, should compre- hend the nature and force of the feeling which I have endeavored to describe. As a son, leaving the house of his father for his own, finds, by the order of nature, and the very law of his being, nearer and dearer objects around which his affections circle, while his attach- ment to the parental roof becomes moderated, by degrees, to a composed regard and an affectionate remem- brance; so our ancestors, leaving their native land, not without some violence to the feelings of nature and affection, yet, in time, found here a new circle of engagements, interests, and affections; a feeling, which more and more en- croached upon the old, till an undivided sentiment, that this ivas their country, occupied the heart; and patriotism, shutting out from its embraces the par- ent realm, became local to America. Some retrospect of the century which has now elapsed is among the duties of the occasion. It must, however, neces- sarily be imperfect, to be compressed within the limits of a single discourse. 1 shall content myself, therefore, with taking notice of a few of the leading and most important occurrences which have distinguished the period. When the first centurj closed, the prog- ress of the country appeared to have been considerable; notwithstanding that, in comparison \\ Lth its subsequent advance- ment, it no" seems otherwise. Abroad and lasting foundation had been laid; excellent institutions had been estab- lished; many of t he prejudices of former limes had been removed; a more liberal early history of the Colony, may be found in Hutchinson's "Collection of Original Papers relating to the History of the Colony of Massa- chusetts Hay." FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. and catholic spirit on subjects of relig- ious concern had begun to extend itself, and many things conspired to give prom- ise of increasing future prosperity. ' treat men had arisen in public life, and the liberal professions. The Mathers, Father and son, were then sinking low in the western horizon; Leveret), the learned, the accomplished, the excellent Leverett, was aboul to withdraw his brilliant and useful light. In Pemberton greal hopes had liecn suddenly extinguished, but J'rince and Column were in our sky; and along the east had begun to flash the crepuscular Light of a great luminary which was aboul to appear, and which was to stamp the age with his own name, as the age of Franklin. The bloody Indian wars, which har- assed the people for a part of the first century; the, restrictions on the trade of the Colonies, added to the discourage- ments inherently belonging to all forms of colonial government ; the distance from Europe, and the small hope of im- mediate profit to adventurers, are among the causes which had contributed to re- tard the progress of population. Per- haps it may be added, also, that during the period of the civil wars in England, and the reign of Cromwell, many per- sons, whose religious opinions and re- ligious temper might, under other cir- cumstances, have induced them to join the New England colonists, found rea- sons to remain in England; either on account of active occupation in the scenes which were passing, or of an anticipat ion of the enjoyment, in their own country, of a form of government, civil and re- ligious, accommodated to their views and principles. The violent measures, too, pursued against the Colonies in the reign of Charles the Second, the mock- ery of a trial, and the forfeiture of tic charters, were serious evils. And during the open violences of the short reign of James the Second, and the tyranny of An- dros, as the venerable historian of Con- necticut observes, "All the motives to great actions, to industry, economy, en- terprise, wealth, and population, were in a manner annihilated. A general inac- tivity and languishment pervaded the public body. Liberty, property, and every thing which oughl to be dear to men, ever] daj gre^i more and more in- secure." With the Revolution in England, better prospect had opened on this coun- try, as Well as on that. 'lie- joy had been as greal at thai event, and far m universal, in New than in Old England. A new charter hail been granted to v sachusetts, which, although it dpi not confirm to her inhabitants all their for- mer pi i\ ill'.,''-, yel relieved them from greal evils ami embarrassments, and promised future security. More than all. perhaps, the Revolution in England had dmie good to the general cause of liberty and justice. A blow had I li struck in favor of the rights and liber- ties, not of England alone, bul of de- scendants and kinsmen of England all over the world. Great political truths had been established. Tie-' champions of liberty had been successful in a fear- ful and perilous conflict. Somen, and Cavendish, and Jekyl, and Howard, had triumphed in one of the most noble causes ever undertaken by men. A revo- lution had been made upon principle. A monarch had been dethroned for violat- ing tic original compact between king and people. The rights of the people to partake in the government, and to limit the monarch by fundamental i of government, had been maintained; and however unjust the government of England might afterwards be towards other governments or towards hen nies, she had ceased to be governed her- self by the arbitrary maxims of the Stuarts. New England had submitted to the violence of dame.- the Second not longer than Old England. Not only was it re- served to Massachusetts, thai on hei should be acted the first Bcene of that great revolutionary drama, which was to take place near a century afterward-, but the English Revolution itself, as far as the Colonies were concerned, commei in Boston. The seizure and imprison- ment of Andros, in April. 168 . acts of direct and forcible resistant the authority 40 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. pulse of liberty beat as high in the ex- tremities as at the heart. The vigorous of the Colony burst out before it was known ln>w the parent country would finally conduct herself. The king's rep- resentative, sir Edmund Andros, was a prisoner in the castle at Boston, before it was or could be known that the king himself had ceased to exercise Ins full dominion on the English throne. Before it was known here whether the invasion of the Prince of Orange would or could prove successful, as soon as it was known that it bad been undertaken, the people of Massachusetts, at the im- minent hazard of their lives and fortunes, had accomplished the Revolution as far as respected themselves. It is probable that, reasoning on general principles and the known attachment of the English people to their constitution and liberties, and their deep and fixed dislike of the king's religion and politics, the people of New England expected a catastrophe fatal to the power of the reigning prince. Yet it was neither certain enough, nor near enough, to come to their aid against the authority of the crown, in that crisis which had arrived, and in which they trusted to put themselves, relying on Cod and their own courage. There were spir- its in Massachusetts congenial witli the spirits of the distinguished friends of the Revolution in England. There were those who were fit to associate with the boldest asserters of civil liberty; and Mather himself, then in England, was not unworthy to be ranked with those of the Church, whose firmness and spirit in resisting kingly encroachments in matters of religion, entitled them to the gratitude of their own and succeed- ing a The second century opened upon New I land under circumstances which evinced t hat much hail already been ac- complished, and that still better pros- pects ami brighter hopes were before she had laid, deep ami Btrong, the foundations of her Bociety. Her relig- ious principles \\>-\<- firm, ami her moral habits exemplary. Her public schools had begun to diffuse widely the elements of knowledge; ami the College, under the excellent and acceptable administra- tion of Leverett, had been raised to a high degree of credit and iisefulness. The commercial character of the coun- try, notwithstanding all discouragements, had begun to display itself, and^zre lnut- dred vessels, then belonging to Massa- chusetts, placed her, in relation to com- merce, thus early at the head of the Colonies. An author who wrote very near the close of the first century says : — " New England is almost deserving that noble name, so mightily hath it increased; and from a small settlement at first, is now become a very populous and flour- ishing government. The capital city, Boston, is a place of great wealth and trade; and by much the largest of any in the English empire of America; and not exceeded but by few cities, perhaps two orthree, in all the American world." But if our ancestors at the close of the first century could look back with joy and even admiration, at the progress of the country, what emotions must we not feel, when, from the point on which we stand, we also look back and run along the events of the century which has now closed ! The country which then, as we have seen, was thought deserv- ing of a "noble name," — which then had " mightily increased," and become "very populous," — what was it, in comparison with what our eyes behold it? At that period, a very great propor- tion of its inhabitants lived in the east- ern section of Massachusetts proper, and in Plymouth Colony. In Connecticut, there were towns along the coast, some of them respectable, but in the interior all was a wilderness beyond Hartford. On Connecticut River, settlements had proceeded as fir up as Deerfield, and Fort Dummerhad been built near where is now the south line of New Hamp- shire. In New Hampshire no settle- ment was then begun thirty miles from the mouth of Piscataqua River, and in what is now Maine the inhabitants were confined to the coast. The aggregate of the whole population of New England did not exceed one hundred and sixty thousand. Its {'resent amount (1820) is probably one million seven hundred FIRST SETTLEMENT OE NEW ENGLAND. 11 thousand. Instead of being confined in its former limits, her population has rolled backward, and filled up i be Bpaces included within her actual local boun- daries. Not this only, but it has over- flowed those boundaries, and the waves of emigration have pressed fait her and farther toward the West. The Alleghany has not checked it; the banks of the Ohio have been covered with it. New England fauns, houses, villages, and churches spread over and adorn the im- mense extent from tin* < >hio to Lake Erie, and stretch along from the Alleghany onwards, beyond the .Miainis, and toward the Kails of St. Anthony. Twothousand miles westward from the rock where their fathers landed, may now he found the sons of the Pilgrims, cultivating smiling fields, rearing towns and vil- lages, ami cherishing, we trust, the pat- rimonial blessings of wise institutions, of liberty, and religion. The world has seen nothing like this. Regions large enough to be empires, and which, half a century ago, were known only as remote and unexplored wildernesses, are now teeming with population, and prosperous in all the great concerns of life; in good governments, the means of subsistence, ami social happiness. It may be safely asserted, that there are now more than a million of people, descendants of New England ancestry, living, free ami hap- ly, in regions which scarce sixty years ago were tracts of impenetrated forest. Nor do rivers, or mountains, or seas re- sist the progress of industry and enter- prise. Erelong, the sons of the Pilgrims will be on the shores of the Pacific. 1 The imagination hardly keeps pace with the progress of population, improvement, ami civilization. It is now five-and-forty years since the growth and rising glory of America were portrayed in the English Parliament, with inimitable beauty, by the most con- summate orator of modern times. Go- ing back somewhat more than half a century, and describing our progre- 1 In reference to the fulfilment of this pre- diction, see Mr. Webster's Address .-it the Cele- bration oi the Blew England Society of New York, on the 23d of December, 1850. Foreseen from that point by hi- amiable friend Lord Bathurat, then living, he -poke of the wonderful pro inch America bad made during the period of a single human life. There is no Amer- ican heart, I imagine, that does not, -low, both with conscious, patriotic pride, ami admiration for one of the happiest efforts of eloquence, bo often as the vision of •• that little speck, Bcaroe visible in the mass of national interest, a small seminal principle, rather than a formed body." ami the progress of its astonishing development ami growth, are recalled to the recollection, but a stronger feeling might he produced, if we were able to take up this prophetic description where he left it. and, placing Ourselves at the poinl of time in which he was speaking, to gel forth with equal felicity the subsequent progress of the country. There b \,-t among the liv- ing a mo-t distinguished ami venerable name, a descendant of the Pilgrims ; who has been attended through life by a great and fortunate genius; a man illus- trious by his own great merits, and favored of Heaven in the long continua- tion of his years. 2 The time when the English orator was thus speaking of America preceded but by a few clays the actual opening of the revolutionary drama at Lexington, lie to whom I have alluded, then at the age of forty, was among the mo-t zealous and able defenders of the violated rights of his country. He seemed already to ! filled a full measure of public and attained an honorable fame. The moment was full of difficulty and dan- ger, and big with events of immeasura- ble importance. The country was on the very brink of a civil war. of which no man could foretell the duration or the result. Something more than a courageous hope, or characteristic ardor. would have been i essary to [m] the glorious pro-pert on his belief, ii that moment, before the Bound of the firsl shock of actual war had reached his . 90me attendant spirit had - John Adams, second President of the United States. 42 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. to him the vision of the future; — if it had said to him, " The blow is struck, and America is severed from England for ever!" — if it had informed him, that In- himself, during the next annual revolution of the sun, should put his own hand to the great instrument of in- dependence, and write his name where all nations should behold it and all time should not efface it; that erelong he himself should maintain the interests and represent the sovereignty of his new- horn country in the proudest courts of Europe; that he should one day exercise her supreme magistracy; that he should vet live to behold ten millions of fellow- citizens paying him the homage of their deepest gratitude and kindest affections; that he should see distinguished talent and high public trusl resting where his name rested; that he should even see with his .ami unclouded eyes the close of the second century of New England, who had begun life almost with its com- mencement, and lived through nearly half the whole history of his country: and that on the morning of this auspi- cious day he should be found in the political councils of his native State, re- vising', by the light of experience, that system of government which forty years before he had assisted to frame and es- tablish; and, great and happy as he should then behold his country, there should be nothing in prospect to cloud the scene, nothing to check the ardor of thai confident and patriotic hope which should gh.w in his bosom to the end of his long protracted and happy life. It would far exceed the limits of this discourse even to mention the principal events in the civil and political history of New England during the century; the more BO, a- for the Lasl half of the period thai history has, mosl happily, I,,-, -n closelj interwoven w ith the general history of the United Mate.-,. New Eng- land hore an honorable pari in the wars which took place between England and France. The capture of Louisburg gave her a character for military achieve- ment '. and in the war which terminated with the peace of 1 T « ; - 1 . her exertions on the frontiers were of mosl essential ser- vice, as well to the mother country as to all the Colonies. In New England the war of the Rev- olution commenced. I address those who remember the memorable 19th of A | nil, 177o; who shortly after saw the burning spires of Charlestown; who be- held the deeds of Prescott, and heard the voice of Putnam amidst the storm of war, and saw the generous Warren fall, the first distinguished victim in the cause of liberty. It would be superflu- ous to say, that no portion of the coun- try did more than the States of New England to bring the Revolutionary struggle to a successful issue. It is scarcely less to her credit, that she saw early the necessity of a closer union of the States, and gave an efficient and in- dispensable aid to the establishment and organization of the Federal government. Perhaps we might safely say, that a new spirit and a new excitement began to exist here about the middle of the last century. To whatever causes it may be imputed, there seems then to have commenced a more rapid improvement. The Colonies had attracted more of the attention of the mother country, and some renown in arms had been ac- quired. Lord Chatham was the first English minister who attached high im- portance to these possessions of the crown, and who foresaw any thing of their future growth and extension. His opinion was. that the great rival of Eng- land was chiefly to be feared as a mari- time and commercial power, and to drive her out of North America and de- prive her of her "West Indian possessions was ;i leading object in his policy. He dwelt often on tin' fisheries, as nurseries for British seamen, and the colonial trade, as furnishing them emplo] at. The war, conducted by him with so much vigor, terminated in a peace, by which Canada was ceded to England. The effect of this was immediately visi- ble in the New England Colonies; for, the fear of Indian hostilities on the fron- tiers hein- now happirj removed, settle- ments went on with an activity before thai time altogether unprecedented, and public affairs wore a new and encour- FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. i.; aging aspect. Shortly after this fortu- nate termination oi' the French war, the interesting topics con sted with the taxation of America by the British Par- liament began to be discussed, and the attention and all the faculties of tin' people drawn towards them. There is perhaps no port ion of our history more lull of interest than the period from 1700 to the actual commencement of the war. The progress of Opinion in this period, though less known, is not less important than the progress of arms afterwards. Nothing deserves more con- sideration than those events and discus- sions which affected the public sentiment and settled the Revolution in men's minds, before hostilities openly broke out. Internal improvement followed the es- tablishment and prosperous commence- ment of the present government. More has been done for roads, canals, and other public works, within the last thirty years, than in all our former history. In the first of these particulars, few countries excel the New England States. The astonishing increase of their navi- gation and trade is known to every one, and now belongs to the history of our national wealth. We may Hatter ourselves, too, that literature and taste have not been sta- tionary, and that some advancement has been made in the elegant, as well as in the useful arts. ^he The nature and constitution of society and government in this country are in- teresting topics, to which I would de- vote what remains of the time allowed to this occasion. Of our system of gov- ernment the first thing to be said is, that it is really and practically a tree system. It originates entirely with the ] pie, and rests on no other foundation than their assent. To judge of its actual op- eration, it is not enough to look merely at the form of its construction. The practical character of government de- pends often on a variety of consider- ations, besides the abstract frame of its constitutional organization. Among these are the condition and tenure of property; the [aws regulating it ^ aliena- tion and desceni ; the presence "i ab« of a military power; an armed or unarmed yeomanry; the spiril ot the age, and the degree of genera] intelligence. In tl respects it cannot be denied thai the cir- cumstances of this country are n favorable to the hope of maintaining the government of a great nation on princi- ples entirely popular. In the absence of military power, the nature of govern- ment must essentially depend on the manner in which property is bolden and distributed. There is a natural influ- ence belonging to property, whether it exists in many bands or few; and it is on tin' rights of property that both des- potism and unrestrained popular \ iolence ordinarily commence their attacks. ( >ur ancestors began their system of govern- ment here under a condition of compar- ative equality in regard to wealth, and their early laws were of a nature to favor and continue this equality. A republican form of government r< not more on political constitutions, than on those laws which regulate the descent and transmission of property. Govern- ments like ours could not have been maintained, where property was holden according to the principles of the feudal system; nor, on the other band, could the feudal constitution possibly exist witli us. Our New England ancestors brought hither no great capitals from Europe; and if they had, there was nothing productive in which they could have been invested. They left behind them the whole feudal policy of the other continent. They broke away at once from the system of military service established in the Dark Ages, and which continues, down even to the present time, more or less to affect the condi- tion ^>\ property all over Europe. They came to a new country. There yet, no lamb yielding rent, and no ten- ants rendering service. The whole soil was unreclaimed from barbarism. They were themselves, either from their origi- nal condition, ox from the necessitj of their common interest, nearly on a i era! level in respect to property. Their situation demanded a parcelling out and 44 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. division of the lands, and it may be fairly said, thai this necessary act fixed the futun frame and form of their gov- ernment. The character of their politi- cal institutions was determined by the fundamental laws respecting property. The laws rendered estates divisible among sons and daughters. The right of primogeniture, at first limited and curtailed, was afterwards abolished. The property was all freehold. The entailment of estates, long trusts, and the other processes for fettering and ty- ing up inheritances, were not applicable to the condition of society, and seldom made use of. On the contrary, aliena- tion of the land was every way facili- 1. even to the subjecting of it to every species of debt. The establish- ment of public registries, and the sim- plicity of our forms of conveyance, have greatly facilitated the change of real estate from one proprietor to another. The consequence of all these causes has been a great subdivision of the soil, and a great equality of condition; the true basis, most certainly, of a popular gov- ernment, "if the people," says Har- mon, " hold three parts in four of the territory, it is plain there can neither be any single person nor nobility able to dispute the government with them; in this case, therefore, except force be intt r- posed, they govern themselves." The history of other nations may teach us how favorable to public liberty are the division of the soil into small freeholds, and a system of laws, of which tendency is, without violence or in- justice, to produce and to preserve a ree of equality of property. It lias 1 n estimated, i!' I mistake not, thai about the time of Henry the Seventh four filths of the land in England was holden by the great barons and ecclesi- astics. The effects of a growing com- merce -"on afterwards began t<> break in on this state of things, and before the I: olution, in ln'ss. a vast change had been wrought. It maybe thought prob- able, that, for the last half-century, process of subdh ision in England has been retarded, if not reversed; that the great weight of taxation has com- pelled many of the lesser freeholders to dispose of their estates, and to seek em- ployment in the army and navy, in the professions of civil life, in commerce, or in the colonies. The effect of this on the British constitution cannot but be most unfavorable. A few large estates grow larger; but the number of those who have no estates also increases ; and there may be danger, lest the inequality of property become so great, that those who possess it may be dispossessed by force; in other words, that the govern- ment may be overturned. A most interesting exj:>eriment of the effect of a subdivision of property on government is now making in France. It is understood, that the law regulat- ing the transmission of property in that country, now divides it, real and per- sonal, among all the children equally, both sons and daughters ; and that there is, also, a very great restraint on the power of making dispositions of prop- erty by will. It has been supposed, that the effects of this might probably be. in time, to break up the soil into such small subdivisions, that the proprietors would be too poor to resist the encroachments of executive power. I think far other- wise. What is lost in individual wealth will be more than gained in numbers, in intelligence, and in a sympathy of senti- ment. If, indeed, only one or a few landholders were to resist the crown, like the barons of England, they must, of course, be great and powerful land- holders, with multitudes of retainers, to promise success. But if the proprietors of a given extent of territory are sum- moned to resistance, there is no reason to believe that such resistance would be less forcible, or less successful, because the number of such proprietors happened to be great. Bach would perceive his own importance, and his own interest, and would feel that natural elevation of character which the consciousness of property inspires. A common senti- ment would unite all, and numbers would not only add strength, but excite enthusiasm. It is true, that Fra possesses a vast military force, under tic direction of an hereditary executive FIRST SKTTLK.MKM <>F NF.W KNCI.AND. government; and military power, it is possible, may overthrow any govern- ment. It is in vain, however, in this period of the world, to look for Becurity against military power to tin- arm of the greal Landholders. That notion is de- rived from a state of things Long sine.' past; a state in which a feudal baron, with his retainers, might stand againsl the sovereign and his retainers, him- self but the greatest baron. Ibit at present, what could the richest land- holder do, against one regiment of dis- ciplined troops'? Other securities, there- fore, against the prevalence of military power must be provided. Happily for as, we are not so situated as that any purpose of national defence requires, ordinarily and constantly, such a mili- tary force as might seriously endanger our liberties. In respect, however, to the recent law of succession in France, to which I have alluded, 1 would, presumptuously per- haps, hazard a conjecture, that, if the government do not change the law, the law in half a century will change the gov- ernment; and that this change will be, not in favor of the power of the crown, as some European writers have supposed, but against it. Those writers only rea- son upon what they think correct general principles, in relation to this subject. They acknowledge a want of experience. Here we have had that experience; and we know that a multitude of small pro- prietors, acting with intelligence, and that enthusiasm which a common cause inspires, constitute not only a formida- ble, but an invincible power. 1 The true principle of a free and popu- lar government would seem to be, so to construct it as to give to all, or at Leasl to a very great majority, an interest in its preservation; to found it, as other things are founded, on men's interest. The stability of government demands' that those who desire its continuance should be more powerful than those who desire its dissolution. /This power, of course, is not always to be measured by mere numbers. Education, wealth, tal- 1 See note B, at the end of the Discourse. ents, are all parts and elements of the general aggregate of power; but (lum- bers, nevertheli --. con »1 itute ordinarily the most importanl consideration, un- indeed, there be u military fora in the hands of tip- few, by which 1 1 1 . • \ can control the many. In this counti have actually existing systems of eminent, in the maintenance of which, it should seem, a great majority, both in numbers and in other means of power and intluence, must see their interest. But this state of things is not bro about solely by written political consti- tutions, or the mere manner of organiz- ing the government ; but also by tin- laws which regulate the descenl and transmission of property. The f: government, if it could exist, would not be long acceptable, if the tondi of the laws were to create a rapid accu- mulation of property in few hands, and to render the great mass of the popula- tion dependent and penniless. In such a case, the popular power would be Likely to break in upon the rights of property, or else the influence of property to limit and control the exercise of popular power. Universal suffrage, for example, could not long exist in a community where there was great inequality of property. The holders of estate, would be oblige< 1. in such case, in BOmfi way to restrain the right of suffrage, or such right of suffrage would. \- long, divide the property. In the na- ture of things, those w ho have not prop- erty, and see their neighbors poe much more than they think them to need, cannot be favorable to laws made for the protection of property. When this claSS becomes HUIll'Tolls. it ■_ clamorous. It looks on property as prey and plunder, and is naturally ready, at all time... for violence and revolution. li would bi em, then, to be the part of political wisdom to found government on property; ami to establish such dis- tribution of property, by the laws which Late its transmission and alienation, as to interest the majority ety in the support of the government. This is, I imagine, the true theory and the actual practice of our republican 4G FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. institutions. With property divided as we have it. no other government than that of a republic could be maintained, even were we Eoolish enough to desire it. There is reason, therefore, to ex- pect a long continuance of our system. Party and passion, doubtless, may pre- vail at times, and much temporary mis- chief be done. Even modes and forms may be changed, and perhaps for the worse. But a great revolution in re- gard to property must take place, before our governments can be moved from their republican basis, unless they be violently struck off by military power. The people possess the property, more emphatically than it could ever be said of the people of any other country, and they can have no interest to overturn a g< ivernment which protects that property by equal laws. Let it not be supposed, that this state of things possesses too strong tendencies towards the production of a dead and uninteresting level in society. Such tendencies are sufficiently counteracted by the infinite diversities in the charac- ters and fortunes of individuals. Tal- ent, activity, industry, and enterprise tend at all times to produce inequality and distinction; and there is room still for the accumulation of wealth, with its i advantages, to all reasonable and useful extent. It has been often urged againsl the state of society in America, that it furnishes no class of men of for- tune and leisure. This may be partly true, but it is no! entirely so. and the evil, if it be one, would affect rather the progress of taste and literature, than tin- general prosperity of the people. lint the promotion of taste and litera- tim- canm it be primary objects of politi- cal institutions; and if they could, it mighl be doubted whether, in the long course of things, as much is not gained by a wide diffusion of general knowl- edge, as is lost by diminishing the num- 1 er of those w ho are enabled by fori une and Leisure to devote themselves exclu- sively to scientific and literary pursuits. ll<-\ er this may be, it is to be con- sidered that it is the spirit of our 33 tem tO I jual and general, and il there be particular disadvantages incident to this, they are far more than counterbalanced by the benefits which weigh against them. The important concerns of soci- ety are generally conducted, in all coun- tries, by the men of business and practi- cal ability; and even in matters of taste and literature, the advantages of mere leisure are liable to be overrated. If there exist adequate means of education and a love of letters be excited, that love will find its way to the object of its desire, through the crowd and pressure of the most busy society. Connected with this division of prop- erty, and the consequent participation of the great mass of people in its pos- session and enjoyments, is the system of representation, which is admirably ac- commodated to our condition, better understood among us, and more famil- iarly and extensively practised, in the higher and in the lower departments of government, than it has been by any other people. Great facility has been given to this in New England by the early division of the country into town- ships or small districts, in which all concerns of local police are regulated, and in which representatives to the leg- islature are elected. Nothing can ex- ceed the utility of these little bodies. They are so many councils or parlia- ments, in which common interests are discussed, and useful knowledge ac- quired and communicated. The division of governments into de- partments, and the division, again, of the legislative department into two chambers, are essential provisions in our system. This last, although not new in itself, yet seems to be new in its appli- cation to governments wholly popular. The Grecian republics, it is plain, knew nothing of it: and in Rome, the check and balance of legislative ]iower, such as it was, lay between the people and the senate. Indeed, few things are more difficult than to ascertain accu- rately the true nature and construction of the Roman commonwealth. The relative power of the senate and the peo- ple, of the consuls and the tribunes, appears not to have been at all times FIKsr SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. 17 the same, nor at any time accurately defined or Btrictly observed. Cicero, indeed, describes to us an admirable arrangement of political power, and a balance of the constitution, in that beautiful passage, in which lie compares the democracies of Greece with the Roman commonwealth. "O morera preclarum, disciplinamque, quam a majoribus accepimus, si quidem tenere- liius! sed nescio quo pacto jam de omni- bus elabitur. Nullam enim illi nostri sapientissimi et sanctissimi viri vim concionis esse voluerunt, qua? scisseret plebs, aut quae populus juberet; sum- mota concione, distributis partibus, tributim et centuriatim descriptis ordini- bus, classibus, setatibus, auditis auctori- bus, remultos dies promulgata et cognita, juberi vetarique voluerunt. Graecorum autem totse respublicae sedentis concio- nis temeritate administrantur." 1 Rut at what time this wise system existed in this perfection at Koine, no proofs remain to show. Her constitu- tion, originally framed for a monarchy, never seemed to be adjusted in its sev- eral parts after the expulsion of the kings. Liberty there was, but it was a disputatious, an uncertain, an ill-secured liberty. The patrician and plebeian orders, instead of being matched and joined, each in its just place and propor- tion, to sustain the fabric of the state, were rather like hostile powers, in per- petual conflict. With us, an attempt has been made, and so far not without success, to divide representation into chambers, and, by difference of age, character, qualification, or mode of elec- tion, to establish salutary checks, in governments altogether elective. Having detained you so long with these observations, I must yet advert to another most interesting topic, — the Free Schools. In this particular. New England may be allowed to claim, I think, a merit of a peculiar charac She early adopted, and has constantly maintained the principle, that it is the undoubted right and the bounden duty 1 Oratio pro Flacco, § 7. [overnmenl to provide for lie- In- struction of all youth. Thai which i- elsewhere left to cha r to chai ity, we aecure by law.- For the pui public Instruct] we hold every man Bubjecl to taxation in proportion to his property, and we look nol to tin- ., tion, whether he himself have, or have not, children to be benefited bj the edu- cation for which he pays. We regard it as a w ise ami liberal 33 stem of police, by which property, and life, and the peace of society are secured. We seek to prevent in some measure the exten- sion of the penal code, l>y inspiring a salutary and conservative principle of virtue and of knowledge in an early We strive t" excite a feeling of respect- ability, and a sense of character, by enlarging the capacity and increasing the sphere of intellectual enjoyment. Ry general instruction, we Beek, as far as possible, to purify the whole moral atmosphere; to keep g 1 sentiments uppermost, and to turn tin.' Btrong cur- rent of feeling and opinion, as well as the censures of the law and tie- denun- ciations of religion, against immorality and crime. We hope for a security beyond the law. and above the law. in the prevalence of an enlightened and well-principled moral sentiment. We nope to continue and prolong the time, when, in the vdllages and farm-ho of New England, there may he undis- turbed sleep within unbarred di And knowing that our government ; directly on t he public will, in order that we may preserve it we endeavor to .. ■■ and proper direction to that pub- lic will. We do not, indc.d. expect all men to he philosophers or state-men; 2 The first free Bchool established by law in the Plymouth Colony was in 1670-72. Oi the early teachers in Boston taught school more than • ■•" Math in ml Sermon upon Mr. Bzekii I . the ancient and honorable Master 1 I the 1 in Boston." For the impression made upon themin an intelligent foreigner by the general attention to popular educat ion, as ch American polity, see Mackay's Western World, Vol. III. v- 221 \ . Edinburgh !:• - view, N'.. 4.s FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. but we confidently trust, and our ex- pectation of the duration of our system overnment rests on thai trust, that, by the diffusion of general knowledge and good and virtuous sentiments, the political fabric may be secure, as well against open violence and overthrow, as against the slow, but sure, undermining of licentiousness. We know that, at the present time, an attempt is making in the English Parliament to provide by law for the education of the poor, and that a gen- tleman of distinguished character (Mr. Brougham) has taken the lead in pre- senting a plan to government for carry- ing that purpose into effect. And yet, although the representatives of the three kingdoms listened to him with astonish- ment as well as delight, we hear ho principles with which we ourselves have not been familiar from youth; we see nothing in the plan but an approach towards that system which has been es- tablished in New England for more than a century and a half. It is said that in England not more than one child in fifteen possesses the means of being taught to read and write; in Wales, one in twenty; in France, until lately, when some improvement was made, not more than one in thirty-Jive. Now, it is hardly too strong to say, that in New England < , ■ ry child possesses such means. It would be difficult to find an instance to the con- trary, unless where it should be owing to the negligence of the parent; and, in truth, the means are actually used and enjoyed by nearly every one. A youth of fifteen, of either sex, who cannot both tend and write, is very seldom to be found. Who can make this compari- or contemplate this spectacle, with- out delight and a feeling of just pride'/ Does any history shovi property more beneficently applied? Did any govern- ment e\ er subject t he property of those who have estates to a burden, for a pur- more favorable to the poor, or more ml to the whole community ? A com iction of the importance of pub- lic instruction was one of the earliest sentiments of our ancestors. No law- giver of ancient or modern times has ex- pressed moie just opinions, or adopted wiser measures, than the early records of the Colony of Plymouth show to have prevailed here. Assembled on this very spot, a hundred and fifty-three years ago, the legislature of this Colony declared, " Forasmuch as the maintenance of good literature dotli much tend to the advance- ment of the weal and flourishing state of societies and republics, this Court doth therefore order, that in whatever town- ship in this government, consisting of fifty families or upwards, any meet man shall be obtained to teach a grammar school, such township shall allow at least twelve pounds, to be raised by rate on all the inhabitants." Having provided that all youth should be instructed in the elements of learning by the institution of free schools, our ancestors had yet another duty to per- form. Men were to be educated for the professions and the public. For this purpose they founded the University, and with incredible zeal and persever- ance they cherished and supported it, through all trials and discouragements. 1 On the subject of the University, it is not possible for a son of New England to think without pleasure, or to speak without emotion. Nothing confers more honor on the State where it is estab- lished, or more utility on the country at large. A respectable university is an establishment which must be the work of time. If pecuniary means were not wanting, no new institution could pos- sess character and respectability at once. We owe deep obligation to our ances- tors, who began, almost on the moment of their arrival, the work of building- up this institution. Although established in a different government, the Colony of Plymouth manifested warm friendship for Har- vard College. At an early period, its government took measures to promote a 1 By a law of tin 1 Colony of Massachusetts Bay, pa-Mil a- early as 1H1T, it was ordered, that, "when any town shall increase to the number of one hundred families or household- ers, they shall set up a grammar school, t lie master thereoi ile to instruct youth so far a- thej may be titled for the University." FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. 19 general subscription throughout all the towns in this Colony, in aid of its Bmall funds. ( M her colleges were subsequently founded and endowed, in other places, as tin' ability of the people allowed; and we in;i\ Batter ourselves, that the means of education at present enjoyed in New England are not only adequate to the diffusion of the elements of knowledge among all classes, but sufficient also Eor respectable attainments in literature and the sciences. Lastly, our ancestors established their system of government on morality and religious sentiment. Moral haliits, they believed, cannot safely be trusted on any other foundation than religious princi- ple, nor any government be secure which is not supported by moral habits. Liv- ing under the heavenly light of revela- tion, they hoped to find all the social dispositions, all the duties which nun owe to each other and to society, en- forced and performed. Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens. Our fathers came here to en- joy their religion free and unmolested; and, at the end of two centuries, there is nothing upon which we can pronounce more confidently, nothing of which we can express a more deep and earnest con- viction, than of the inestimable import- ance of that religion to man, both in re- gard to this life and that which is to come. If the blessings of our political and social condition have not been too highly estimated, we cannot well overrate the responsibility and duty which they im- pose upon us. We hold these institu- tions of government, religion, and learn- ing, to be transmitted, as well as enjoyed. We are in the line of conveyance, through which whatever has been obtained by the spirit and efforts of our ancestors is to be communicated to our children. We are bound to maintain public lib- erty, and. by the example of our own systems, to convince the world that or- der and law, religion and morality, the rights of conscience, the rights of per- sons, and the rights of property, may all be preserved and secured, in the most perfect manner, by a government en- tirely and purely elective. If we fail in this, our disaster will be signal, and will furnish an argument, stronger than hat yet been found, in support of tho ■ "pin- ion-, which maintain iliat government can rest safely on nothing but power ami coercion. As far as ezperie mav show errors in our establishments, we are bound to correct them; and if any practices exist contrary to the principles of justice and humanity within the reach of our laws or our influence, we are in- excusable if we do not exert ourseh ■ restrain and abolish them. I deem it my duty on this occasion to suggest, that the land is not yet wholly free from the contamination of a traffic, at which every feeling of humanity must for ever revolt, — I mean the African slave-trade. 1 Neither public sentiment, nor the law, has hitherto I n able en- tirely to put an end to this odious and abominable trade. At the moment when God in his mercy has blessed the Chris- tian world with a universal peace, there is reason to fear, that, to the disgrace of the Christian name and character, new- efforts are making for the extension of this trade by subjects and citizens of Christian states, in whose hearts there dwell no sentiments of humanity or of justice, and over whom neither the fear of God nor the fear of man exercifi control. In the sight of our law, the African slave-trader is a pirate ami a felon; and in the Bight of Heaven, an offender far beyond the ordinary depth of human guilt. There is no brighter page of our history, than that which records the measures which have 1 n adopted by the government at an early day, and at different times since, forth" suppression of this traffic; ami I would call on all the truesons of New England toCO-operate with the laws of man, and the ju8ticeof Heaven. If there be, with- in the extent of our knowledge or influ- ence, any participation in this traffii ii- pledge ourselves here, apon the rock of Plymouth, to extirpate and destroy it. 1 In reference to the opposition "f the Colo- ive-trade, see :i representation "f tli.' Board "t" Trade to the Houw i I 1 January, 1T-VJ-4. 50 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. It is not fit that the land of the Pilgrims should bear the shame longer. I hear the sound of the hammer, I see the smoke of the furnaces where manacles and fetters are still forged for human limbs. I see the visages of those who by stealth and at midnighi labor in this work of hell, foul and dark, as may be- come the artificers of such instruments of misery and torture. Let that spot be purified, or let it cease to be of New England. Let it be purified, or let it be Bet aside from the Christian world; let it be put out of the circle of human sym- pathies and human regards, and let civil- ized man henceforth have no communion with it. I would invoke those who fill the seats of justice, and all who minister at her altar, that they execute the wholesome and necessary severity of the law. I in- voke the ministers of our religion, that tl iev proclaim its denunciation of these crimes, and add its solemn sanctions to the authority of human laws. If the pulpit be silent whenever or wherever there may be a sinner bloody with this guilt within the hearing of its voice, the pulpit is false to its trust. I call on the fair merchant, who has reaped his harvest upon the seas, that he assist in Bcourging from those seas the worst pirates that ever infested them. That ocean, which seems to wave with a gen- tle magnificence to waft the burden of an honest commerce, and to roll along its treasures with a conscious pride, — that ocean, which hardy industry re- gards, even when the winds have ruffled it- surface, as a field of grateful toil, — what is it to the victim of this oppres- . when he is brought to its shores, and looks forth upon it, for the first time, loaded with chains, and bleeding with stripes? What is it to him but a wide-spread prof peel of suffering, an- guish, and death? N'or do the skies smile longer, nor is the air longer fra- grant to him. The sun is cast down from heaven. An inhuman and accursed traffic has cul him off in his manhood, or in his youth, from njoy nt belonging to his being, and every I ing which his Creator intended for him. The Christian communities send forth their emissaries of religion and letters, who stop, here and there, along the coast of the vast continent of Africa, and with painful and tedious efforts make some almost imperceptible progress in the communication of knowledge, and in the general improvement of the natives who are immediately about them. Not thus slow and imperceptible is the trans- mission of the vices and bad passions which the subjects of Christian states carry to the land. The slave-trade hav- ing touched the coast, its influence and its evils spread, like a pestilence, over the whole continent, making savage wars more savage and more frequent, and adding new and fierce passions to the contests of barbarians. I pursue this topic no further, except again to say, that all Christendom, being now blessed with peace, is bound by every thing which belongs to its char- acter, and to the character of the pres- ent age, to put a stop to this inhuman and disgraceful traffic. We are bound, not only to maintain the general principles of public liberty, but to support also those existing forms of government which have so well se- cured its enjoyment, and so highly pro- moted the public prosperity. It is now more than thirty years that these States have been united under the Federal Con- stitution, and whatever fortune may await them hereafter, it is impossible that this period of their history should not be regarded as distinguished by signal prosperity and success. They must be sanguine indeed, who can hope for benefit from change. Whatever division of the public judgment may have existed in relation to particular measures of the government, all must agree, one should think, in the opinion, that in its general course it has been eminently productive of public happi- IS. Its most ardent friends could not well have hoped from it more than it has accomplished; and those who dis- helieved or doubted ought to feel less concern about predictions which the event has uot verified, than pleasure in the good which has been obtained. FIRST SETTLEMENT OF M.W ENGLAND. 51 Whoever shall hereafter "write this pari of our history, although he may Bee oc- casional errors or defects, will be able to record no great failure in the ends and objects of government. Still less will lie be able to record any scries of lawless and despotic acts, or any success- ful usurpation. 1 1 is page will contain no exhibition of provinces depopulated, of civil authority habitually trampled down by military power, or of a com- munity crushed by the burden of taxa- tion, lie will speak, rather, of public liberty protected, and public happiness advanced; of increased revenue, and population augmented beyond all exam- ple; of the growth of commerce, manu- factures, and the arts; and of that happy condition, in which the restraint and co- ercion of government are almost invisible and imperceptible, and its influence felt only in the benefits which it confers. We can entertain no better wish for our country, than that this government may be preserved; nor have a clearer duty than to maintain and support it in the full exercise of all its just constitutional powers. The cause of science and literature also imposes upon us an important and delicate trust. The wealth and popu- lation of the country are now so far advanced, as to authorize the exepctation of a correct literature and a well formed taste, as well as respectable progress in the abstruse sciences. The country has risen from a state of colonial subjection; it has established an independent gov- ernment, and is now in the undisturbed enjoyment of peace and political security. The elements of knowledge are univer- sally diffused, and the reading portion of the community is large. Let us hope that the present maybe an auspicious era of literature. If, almost on the day of their landing, our ancestors founded schools and endowed colleges, what obli- gations do not rest upon us, living under circumstances so much more favorable both for providing and for using the means of education? Literature be- comes free institutions. It is the grace- ful ornament of civil liberty, and a happy restraint on the asperities which political conine ometimi sion. Jusl ' not only an embel- lishmenl of society, but it rises al- io the rank of the \ irtues, and din positive good throughout the wholi tent of its influence. There is a con- nection between right feeling and right principles, and truth in taste is allied with truth iii morality. With nothing in our past history to discourage us. and with something in our present condition and prospects to animate us, let us hope, that, as it is our fortune to live in an age when we may behold a wonderful advancement of the country in all its other great interests, we may see also equal progress and success attend the cause of letters. Finally, let us not forget the religious character of our origin. Our fathers were brought hither by their high vener- ation for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate its principles with the elements of their society, and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, po- litical, or literary. Let us cherish li sentiments, and extend this influence still more widely; in the full conviction, that that is the happiest society which partakes in the highesl degree of the mild and peaceful spirit of Christianity. The hours of this day are rapidly flying, and this occasion will Boon be passed. Neither we nor our children can expect to behold its return. They are in the distant regions of futurity, they exist only in the all-creating power of God, who shall stand here a hundred years hence, to trace, through us, their descent from the Pilgrims, and to sur- vey, as we have now surveyed, the pi ress of their country, during the lapse of a century. We would anticipate their concurrence w ith us in our sentiment deep regard for our common ancesi We would anticipate and partake the pleasure with which they will then re- count the steps of New England's ad- \ ancement. < >n the morning of that day, although it will not disturb us in our repose, the voice of acclamation and gratitude, commencing on tl 52 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. of Plymouth, shall l>e transmitted through millions of the suns of the Pilgrims, till it lose itself in the mur- murs of the Pacific seas. We \\ mi Id Leave for the consideration of those who shall then occupy our places, some proof that we hold the blessings transmitted from our fathers in just estimation; some proof of our attachment to the cause of good govern- ment, and of civil and religious liberty; some proof of a sincere and ardent de- sire to promote every thing which may enlarge the understandings and improve the hearts of men. And when, from the long distance of a hundred years, they shall look back upon us, they shall know, at least, that we possessed affec- tions, which, running backward and warming with gratitude for what our ancestors have done for our happiness, run forward also to our posterity, and meet them with cordial salutation, ere yet they have arrived on the shore of being. Advance, then, ye future generations! We would hail you, as you rise in your long succession, to fill the places which we now fill, and to taste the blessings of existence where we are passing, and soon shall have passed, our own human dura- tion. We bid you welcome to this pleasant land of the fathers. AVe bid you welcome to the healthful skies and the verdant fields of New England. We greet your accession to the great in- heritance which we have enjoyed. We welcome you to the blessings of good government and religious liberty. We welcome you to the treasures of science and the delights of learning. We wel- come you to the transcendent sweets of domestic life, to the happiness of kin- dred, and parents, and children. We welcome you to the immeasurable bless- ings of rational existence, the immortal hope of Christianity, and the light of everlasting truth! NOTES. Note A. — Page 27. The allusion in the Discourse is to the Large historical painting of the Landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth, executed by Henry Sargent, Esq., of Boston, and, with great liberality, presented by him to the Pilgrim Society, [t appeared in their hall (of which it forma the chief ornament) for the firsl time at the celebration of 1824. It represents the principal personages of the company at the moment of landing, with the Indian Samoset, who approaches them with a friendly welcome. A very competent judge, himself a distinguished artist, the late venerable < Jolonel Trumbull, has pro- nounced that this painting has great merit. An interesting account of it will be found in Dr. Thacher'e History of Plymouth, pp. 249 and 267. An historical painting, by Robert N. Weir, Esq., of the largest Bize, representing the embarkation of the Pilgrims from Delft- Haven, in Holland, and executed by order of i longress, till- one of the panels of the Rotunda ol the Capitol at Washington. The moment eh. .-en 1>\ the artist for the action of the picture is that in which the venerable pastor Robinson, with tears, and benedic- tions, and prayers to Heaven, dismisses the beloved members of his little flock to the perils and the hopes of their groat enter- prise. The characters of the personages introduced are indicated with discrimina- tion and power, and the accessories of the work marked with much taste and skill. It is a painting of distinguished historical in- terest and of great artistic merit. The " Landing of the Pilgrims " lias also been made the subject of a very interesting painting !>y Mr. Flagg, intended to repre- sent the deep religious feeling which so strikingly characterized the first settlers of New England. With this object in view, the central figure is that of Elder Brewster. It is a picture of cabinet size, and is in pos- session of a gentleman of New Haven, de- scended from Elder Brewster, and of that name. Note B. — Page 45. As the opinion of contemporaneous think- ers on this important Bubject cannot fail to interest the general leader, it is deemed proper to insert here the following extract FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. from a letter, written in 1849, to show how powerfully the truths uttered in 1820, in the Bpirit of prophecy.as it were, impressed themselves upon certain minds, and how closely the verification of the prediction lias been watched. "I do not remember any political prophecy, founded on the spirit of a wide and Far reaching statesmanship, that lias been so remarkably ful- filled as die one made by Mr. Webster, in bis Discourse delivered at Plymouth in L820, on the effect which the laws of succession to property in Frame, then in operation, would be likely to produce on the forms and working of the French government But t<> understand what he said, and what he foresaw, I must explain a little what had been the course of legislation in France on which his predictions were founded. "Before the Revolution of L789, there had been a great accumulation of the landed prop- erty of the country, and, indeed, of all its prop- erty, — by means of laws of entail, majorats, and other legal contrivances, —in the hands of the privileged classes; chieflyin those of the no- bility and the clergy. The injury and injustice done by long continued legislation in this direc- tion were obviously great ; and it was not, per- haps, unnatural, that the opposite course to that which had brought on the mischief should be deemed the best one to cure it. At any rate, such was the course taken. "In 17!U a law was passed, preventing any man from having any interest beyond the period of his own life in any of his property, real, per- sonal, or mixed, ami distributing all his posses- sions for him, immediately after his death, among his children, in equal shares, or if he left no chil- dren, then among his next of kin, on the same principle. This law, with a slight modifica- tion, made under the influence of Robespierre, was in force till 1800. But the period was en- tirely revolutionary, and probably quite as much property changed hands from violence and the consequences ot violence, during the nine years it continued, as was transmitted by the laws that directly controlled its succession. '• With the coming in of Bonaparte, however, there was established a new order of things, which has continued, with little modification, ever since, and has had its full share in working out the great changes in French society which we now witness. A few experiments were first made, and then the great Civil Code, often called the Code Napoleon, was adopted. This was in 1804. By this remarkable code, which is still in force, a man, if he has hut one child, can give away by his last will, as he pleases, half of his propertv, — the law insuring the other half to the child: if he has two children, then he can so give away only one third, — the law requir- ing the other two thirds to be given equally to the two children; if three, then only one fourth under similar conditions; but if he has a greater number, it restricts the rights of the parent more and more, and makes it more and more difficult for him to distribute his property ace. mini- to his own judgment ; the restrictions embarrassing him even in his lifetime. "The consequences of such laws arc. from their nature, verv slowly developed. When Mr. Webster spoke 'in 1820, the French code had been in operation sixteen years, and similar principles had prevailed for nearly a genera- tion, lint still it* wide reralti were no! i suspected 1 1 who had treated the subject at all supposed that the tendency was to break up the great estates in fiance, and make tin- larger number ot the holders of small estates more accessible to the influence of the govern- ment, then a limited monarchy, and BO render it stronger and more despotic. "Mr. Webster held a different opinion. lb- said, 'In respect, however, to tin- recent law of succession in France, to which I have alluded, / would, presumptuously per haps, hazard a con- jecture, that, if il" government do not ch tin law, iht law in half a a ntury will ch the government; mid that this ch III In, /mi in favor of il" power of thi crowi European writers Sow supposed, but against it. Those writers only reason upon what they think correct general principles, in relation to this subject. They acknowledge a want of experience. Here we have had that experi- ence; and we know that a multitude of -mall proprietors, acting with intelligence, and that enthusiasm which a common cause inspires, constitute not only a formidable, but an in- vincible power.' " In less than six years after Mr. Webster uttered this remarkable prediction, the king of France himself, at the opening of tin- Legislative Chambers, thus strangelv echoed it: — 'L lation ought to provide, by successive improve- ments, for all the wants of society. The pro- gressive partitioning of landed estates, e88( n- tially contrary to the spirit of a unman government, 'would enfeeble tic guaranties which the charter has given to my throne and to my subjects. Measures will be proposed to you, gentlemen, to establish the consistency which ought to exist between the political law and the civil law, and to preserve the patri- mony of families, without restricting the liberty of disposing of one's property. The preserva- tion of families is connected with, and afford- a guaranty to, political stability, which is the lir.-t want ot' states, and which is especially that of France, after so many vicissitudes.' "Still, the results "to which such subdivision and comminution of propertv tended were not foreseen even in France. The Revolution o| 1830 came, and revealed a part of them: for that revolution was made by the inline: i men possessing very moderate estates, who be- lieved that iln- guaranties oi a government like that of the elder branch of the BoUTDOnS were not sufficient for their safety. Hut when the revolution was made, and the younger branch of the Bourbons reigned instead of tin- elder. the laws for tin- descent of property continued to be the Same, and tie- subdivision went on as if it were an admitted benefit to Bociety. " In consequence of this, in 1844 il was found that there were iii France at least five millions and a half of families, or about twenty- millions id' soul-, who were proprietary families, and that of these about four millions of families had each less than nine English acres to the familv on the average. Of course, a vast ma- jorityof these twenty-seven millions of pen though thev might be interested in some small portion of tin- soil, were really ] r. and multi- tudes of them wen- dependent •• Now, therefore, the results began to a; in a practical form. One third of all the rental of France was discovered to be absolutely mort- gaged, and another third was swallowed up by 54 FIRST SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND. other encumbrances, leaving but one third free for the use and benefit of its owners. In other words, a great proportion ol the people of France i mbarrassed and poor, and a great propor- tion of tlie remainder were fast becoming bo. " Such a state of things produced, ot course, a wide-spread social uneasiness. Part of this uneasiness was directed against the existing government ; another and mere formidable por- tion was directed against aU government, and against the ven institution of property. The convulsion of isiS followed; France is still unsettled; and Mr. Webster's prophecy seems still to be in the course of a portentous fulfil- ment." In the London Quarterly Review for 1846 there is an interesting discussion on so much of the matter as relates to the subdivision of real estate for agricultural purposes in France, as far as it had then advanced, and from which many of the facts here alluded to are taken. DEFENCE OF JUDGE JAMES PRESCOTT. THE (LOSING APPEAL TO THE SENATE OF MASSACHUSETTS, IN MB. win STER'S "ARGUMENT ON THE IMPEACHMENT OF JAMES PEE8COTT," APBIL 24th, 1821. Mk. President, the case is closed! The fate of the respondent is in your hands. It is for you now to say, whether, from tlie law and the facts as they have appeared before yon, you will proceed to disgrace ami disfranchise him. It' your duty calls on you to convict him, let jus- tice be done, and convict him; hut, I adjure you, let it be a clear, undoubted rase. Let it be so for his sake, for you are robbing him of that for which, with all your high powers, you can yield him no compensation; let it be so for your own sakes, for the responsibility of this day's judgment is one which you must carry with you through life. For my- self, I am willing here to relinquish the character of an advocate, ami to expivs> opinions by which I am prepared to be bound as a citizen and a man. And I say upon my honor and conscience, that I see not how, with the law and consti- tution for your guides, you can pro- nounce the respondent guilty. I declare that I have seen no case of wilful and corrupt official misconduct, set forth ac- cording to the requisitions of the con- stitution, and proved according to the common rules of evidence. I see many tilings imprudent and ill-judged; many things that I could wish had been other- wise; but corruption and crime I do not see. Sir. the prejudices of the day will soon be forgotten; the passions, if any there be, which have excited or favored this prosecution will subside ; but the con- sequence of the judgment you are about to render will outlive both them and you. The respondent is now brought, a single, unprotected individual, to this formidable bar of judgment, to stand against the power and authority of the State. I know you can crush him, as he stands before you, and clothed as you are with the sovereignty of the 81 You have the power "to change Ids countenance and to send him away." Nor do I remind you, that your judg- ment is to be rejudged by the commu- nity; and, as you have summoned him for trial to this high tribunal, that you are soon to descend yourselves from th - • seats of justice, and stand before the higher tribunal of the world. I would not fail so much in respecl to this hon- orable court as to hint that it could pro- nounce a sentence which the community will reverse. No, Sir, it is not the world's revision which I would call on you to regard; but that of your own consciences, when years have gone by and you shall look back on the sent you are aboul to render. If you Bend away the respondent, condemned and sentenced, from your bar, you are \.t to meel him in the world on which you casl him out. You will he called to be- hold him a disgrace to his family, a sorrow and a shame to his children, a living fountain of grief and agony to himself. If von shall then be able to behold him only as an unjust judge, whom ven- geance has overtaken and justice lias blasted, you will be able to look u]*>n him, not without pity, hut yet without. remorse. Bui if. on th" other hand, you 56 DEFENCE OF JUDGE JAMES PRESCOTT. shall Bee, whenever and wherever you meet him, a victim of prejudice or of passion, a sacrifice to a transient excite- ment; if you shall see in him a man for whose condemnation any provision of the constitution has been violated or any principle of law broken down, then will lie !»• able, humble and low as may be his condition, then will he be able to turn the current of compassion back- ward, and to look with pity on those who have been his judges. If you are about to visit this respondent with a judgment which shall blast his house; if the bosoms of the innocent and the ami- able are to be made to bleed under your infliction, 1 beseech you to be able to state clear and strong grounds for your proceeding. Prejudice and excitement arc transitory, and will pass away. Po- litical expediency, in matters of judica- ture, is a false and hollow principle, and will never satisfy the conscience of him who is fearful that he may have given a hasty judgment. I earnestly entreat you, for your own sakes, to possess your- selves of solid reasons, founded in truth and justice, for the judgment you pro- nounce, which you can carry with you till you go down into your graves; rea- sons which it will require no argument to revive, no sophistry, no excitement, no regard to popular favor, to render sat- isfactory to your consciences; reasons which you can appeal to in every crisis of your lives, and which shall be able to assure you, in your own great extremity, that you have not judged a fellow-crea- ture without mercy. Sir, 1 have done with the case of this individual, and now leave it in your hands. But I would yet once more ap- peal to you as public men ; as statesmen ; as men of enlightened minds, capable of a large view of things, and of foreseeing the remote consequences of important transactions; and, as such, I would most earnestly implore you to consider fully of the judgment you may pronounce. You are about to give a construction to con- stitutional provisions which may adhere to that instrument for ages, either for good or evil. I may perhaps overrate the importance of this occasion to the public welfare; but I confess it does ap- pear to me that, if this body give its sanction to some of the principles which have been advanced on this occasion, then there is a power in the State above the constitution and the law ; a power essentially arbitrary and despotic, the exercise of which may be most danger- ous. If impeachment be not under the rule of the constitution and the laws, then may we tremble, not only for those who may be impeached, but for all others. If the full benefit of every con- stitutional provision be not extended to the respondent, his case becomes the case of all the people of the Common- wealth. The constitution is their con- stitution. They have made it for their own protection, and for his among the rest. They are not eager for his convic- tion. They desire not his ruin. If he be condemned, without having his of- fences set forth in the manner which they, by their constitution, have pre- scribed, and in the manner which they, by their laws, have ordained, then not only is he condemned unjustly, but the rights of the whole people are disre- garded. For the sake of the people themselves, therefore, I would resist all attempts to convict by straining the laws or getting over their prohibitions. I hold up before him the broad shield of the constitution ; if through that, he be pierced and fall, he will be but one suf- ferer in a common catastrophe. THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 1J)tii OF JANUARY, ls.il. [ The rise and progress of the revolution in Greece attracted great attention in the United States. Many obvious causes con- tributed to this effect, and their influence was seconded by the direct appeal made to the people of America, by tile first political body organized in Greece after the breaking out of the revolution, viz. "The Messenian Senate of Calaniata." A formal address was made by that body to the people of the United States, ami forwarded by their com- mittee (of which the celebrated Korav was chairman), to a friend and correspondent in this country. This address was translated and widely circulated; but it was not to be expected that any great degree of confi- dence should be at once generally felt in a movement undertaken against such formi- dable odds. The progress of events, however, in 1822 and 182o\ was such as to create an impres- sion that the revolution in Greece had a sub- stantial foundation in the state of affairs, in the awakened spirit of that country, and in the condition of public opinion through- out Christendom. The interest felt in the struggle rapidly increased in the United States. Local committees were formed, animated appeals were made, and funds collected, witli a view to the relief of the victims of the war. On the assembling of Congress, in Decem- ber, 1823, President Monroe made the revo- lution in Greece the subject of a paragraph in his annual message, and on the 8th of December Mr. Webster moved the follow- ing resolution in the House of Representa- tives : — " Resolved, That provision ought to be made, by law, for defraying the expense incident to the appointment of an Agent or Commissioner to ( J recce, whenever the Pres- ident shall deem it expedient to make such appointment." These, it is believed, are the first official expressions favorable to the independence of Greece uttered by any of the govern- ments of Christendom, and no doubt con- tributed powerfully towards the creation of that feeling throughout the civilized world which eventually led to the battle of N':i. ;i rino, and the liberation of a portion of Greece from the Turkish yoke. The House of Representatives having, on the 19th of .January, resolved Itself Into a committee nf the whole, and this resolution being taken into consideration, Mr. Webster spoke to the following effect.] I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, that, far as my part in this discussion is i- cerned, those expectations which tin- public excitement existing on the sub- ject, and certain associations easily sug- gested by it, have conspired to raise, may be disappointed. An occasion which calls the attention to a spot so distinguished, so connected with inter- esting recollections, as Greece, may natu- rally create something of warmth and enthusiasm. In a grave, political dis- cussion, however, it is necessary that those feelings should be chastised. I shall endeavor properly t<> repress them, although it is impossible that they should be altogether extinguished. We must, indeed, fly beyond the civilized world: wemusl pass the dominion of law and the boundaries of knowledge; we must, more especially, withdraw OUT- Belves from this place, and thi and objects which here surround u- if we would separate ourselves entirely t'loiii the influence of all those memorials of herself which* ancient Greece transmitted for the admiration and benefit of mankind. This free form of government, this popular assembly, the common council held lor the common good, — where have we contemplated its earliest models'/ This practice of debate and public discussion, th< 53 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. of mind with mind, and that popular eloquence, which, if it were now here, on a subject like this, would move the stones of the Capitol, — whose was the language in which all these were first exhibited? Even the edifice in which we .-,_, nii,|r, these proportioned col- umns, this ornamented architecture, all remind us that Greece has existed, and thai we, like the rest of mankind, are greatly her debtors. 1 But I have not introduced this motion in the vain hope of discharging any thing of this accumulated debt of centu- ries. I have not acted upon the expec- tation, that we who have inherited this obligation from our ancestors should now attempt to pay it to those who may seem to have inherited from their ances- tors a right to receive payment. My object is nearer and more immediate. I wish to take occasion of the struggle of an interesting and gallant people, in the cause i if liberty and Christianity, to draw the attention of the House to the circum- stances which have accompanied that struggle, and to the principles which appear to have governed the conduct of the great states of Europe in regard to it ; and to the effects and consequences of these principles upon the indepen- dence of nations, and especially upon the institutions of free governments. What 1 have to say of Greece, therefore, concerns the modern, not the ancient; the living, and not the dead. It regards her, not as she exists in history, trium- phant over time, and tyranny, and igno- rance; but as she now is, contending, againsi fearful odds, for being, and for the common privileges of human nature. A.S it is never dillicult to recite com- monplace remarks and trite aphorisms, so it may be easy, I am aware, on this occasion, to remind me of the wisdom which dictates to men a care of their own affairs, and admonishes them, instead of searching for adventures abroad, to leave other men's concerns in their own hands. It may be easy to call this reso- i The interior of the hall <>f the House of Representatives is surrounded by a magnificent colonnade of the composite order. [1824.] lution Quixotic, the emanation of a cru- sading or propagandist spirit. All this, and more, may be readily said; but all this, and more, will not be allowed to fix a character upon this proceeding, until that is proved which it takes for granted. Let it first be shown, that in this question there is nothing which can affect, the interest, the character, or the duty of this country. Let it be proved, that we are not called upon, by either of these considerations, to express an opinion on the subject to which the resolution relates. Let this be proved, and then it will indeed be made out, that neither ought this resolution to pass, nor ought the subject of it to have been mentioned in the communication of the President to us. But, in my opinion, this cannot be shown. In my judgment, the subject is interesting to the people and the government of this country, and we are called upon, by considerations of great weight and moment, to express our opinions upon it. These considera- tions, I think, spring from a sense of our own duty, our character, and our own interest. I wish to treat the subject on such grounds, exclusively, as are truly American; but then, in considering it as an American question, I cannot for- get the age in which we live, the pre- vailing spirit of the age, the interesting questions which agitate it, and our own peculiar relation in regard to these inter- esting questions. Let this be, then, and as far as I am concerned I hope it will be, purely an American discussion; but let it embrace, nevertheless, every thing that fairly concerns America. Let it comprehend, not merely her present ad- vantage, but her permanent interest, her elevated character as one of the free -^ states of the world, and her duty towards those great principles which have hith- erto maintained the relative indepen- dence of nations, and which have, more especially, made her what she is. At the commencement of the session, the President, in the discharge of the high duties of his office, called our at- tention to the Bubject to which this res- olution refers. " A strong hope," says that communication, " has been long THE REVOLUTION IN 0KE1 V.K entertained, founded <>n the heroic strug- gle of tin' Greeks, that they would suc- oeed in their contest, and resume their equal station among (lie nations of the earth. It is believed that the whole civilized world takes a deep interest in their welfare. Although no power lias declared in their favor, yet none, ac- cording to our information, lias taken part against them. Their cause and their name have protected them from dangers which might ere this have over- whelmed any other people. The ordi- nary calculations of interest, and of acquisition with a view to aggrandize- ment, which mingle so much in the transactions of nations, seem to have had no effect in regard to them. From the facts which have come to our knowl- edge, there is good cause to believe that their enemy has lost for ever all domin- ion over them; that Greece will become again an independent nation." It has appeared to me that the House should adopt some resolution reciprocat- ing these sentiments, so far as it shall approve them. More than twenty years have elapsed since Congress first ceased to receive such a communication from the President as could properly be made the subject of a general answer. I do not mean to find fault with this relin- quishment of a former and an ancient practice. It may have been attended with inconveniences which justified its abolition. But, certainly, there was one advantage belonging to it; and that is, that it furnished a fit opportunity for the expression of the opinion of the Houses of Congress upon those topics in the executive communication which were not expected to be made the im- mediate subjects of direct legislation. Since, therefore, the President's mes- sage does not now receive a general an- swer, it has seemed to me to be proper that, in some mode, agreeable to our own usual form of proceeding, we should express our sentiments upon the impor- tant and interesting topics on which it treats. If the sentiments of the message in respect to Greece be proper, it is equally proper that this House should recipro- cate those sentiments. The present olution is designed to have that extent, and no more. It it pass, it will l< any future proceeding where ii no in the discretion of the executive ernment. It is but an expression, under those forms in which the House i customed to act, of the satisfaction of the House with the general sentiments expressed in regard to this subject in the message, and of its readiness to defray the expense incident to any inquiry for the purpose of further information, or any other agency which the President, in his discretion, .shall see tit. in what- ever manner and at whatever time, to institute. The whole matter is still left in his judgment, and this resolution can in no way restrain its unlimited exer- cise. I might well, Mr. Chairman, avoid the responsibility of this measure, if it had, in my judgment, any tendency to change the policy of th untry. With the general course of that policy 1 am quite satisfied. The nation is prosper- ous, peaceful, and happy; and I should very reluctantly put its peace, prosper- ity, or happiness at risk. It appears to me, however, that this resolution is strictly conformable to our general pol- icy, and not only consistent with our interests, but even demanded by a 1 and liberal view of those Interests. It is certainly true that the jusl p>l- icy of this country is. in the first place, a peaceful policy. N. . nation ever had less to expect from forcible aggrandize- ment. The mighty agents which are working out our greatness are ti , in- dustry, and the arts. Our augmenta- tion is by growth, not by acquisition; l.\ internal &e\ elopmeul . m it by exter- nal accession. No Bchemes can be sug- d to us so magnificent as the prospects which a sober contemplation of our own condition, unaided by proj- ects, uninfluenced by ambition, fairly sp reads before US. A country of such vaai extent, with such varieties of soil and climate, with so much public Spirit and private enterprise, with a popula- tion increasing so much beyond former example, with capacities of impi 60 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. merit not only unapplied or unex- hausted, but even, in a great measure, as vet unexplored, — so free in its insti- tutions, so mild in its laws, so secure in the title it confers on every man to his own acquisitions, — needs nothing but time and peace to carry it forward to almost any point of advancement. In the next place, I take it for granted that the policy of this country, spring- ing from the nature of our government and the spirit of all our institutions, is, so far as it respects the interesting ques- tions which agitate the present age, on the side of liberal and enlightened sen- timents. The age is extraordinary; the spirit that actuates it is peculiar and marked; and our own relation to the times we live in, and to the questions w4+i©h interest them, is equally marked ^and peculiar. We are placed, by our good fortune and the wisdom and valor of our ancestors, in a condition in which we can act no obscure part. Be it for honor, or be it for dishonor, whatever we do is sure to attract the observation of the world. As one of the free states among the nations, as a great and rap- idly rising republic, it would be impos- sible for us, if we were so disposed, to prevent our principles, our sentiments, and our example from producing some [ effect upon the opinions and hopes of -■society throughout the civilized world. It rests probably with ourselves to deter- mine whether the influence of these shall be salutary or pernicious. It cannot be denied that the great political question of this age is that between alisolute and regulated govern- ments. The substance of the contro- versy is whether society shall have any part in its own government. Whether the form of government shall be that of limited monarchy, with more or less mixture Of hereditary power, or wholly elective or representative, may perhaps be considered as subordinate. The main controversy is between that abso- lute rule, which, while it, promises to govern well, means, nevertheless, to govern without control, and that consti- tutional Bystem which restrains sover- eign discretion, and asserts that uciety may claim as matter of right some effec- tive power in the establishment of the laws which are to regulate it. The spirit of the times sets with a most pow- erful current in favor of these last-men- tioned opinions. It is opposed, however, whenever and wherever it shows itself, by certain of the great potentates of Eu- rope; and it is opposed on grounds as applicable in one civilized nation as in another, and which would justify such opposition in relation to the United States, as well as in relation to any other state or nation, if time and circumstan- ces should render such opposition expe- dient. What part it becomes this country to take on a question of this sort, so far as it is called upon to take any part, can- not be doubtful. Our side of this ques- tion is settled for us, even without our own volition. Our history, our situa- tion, our character, necessarily decide our position and our course, before we have even time to ask whether we have an option. Our place is on the side of free institutions. From the earliest set- tlement of these States, their inhabi- tants were accustomed, in a greater or less degree, to the enjoyment of the powers of self-government; and for the last half-century they have sustained systems of government entirely repre- sentative, yielding to themselves the greatest possible prosperity, and not leaving them without distinction and respect among the nations of the earth. This system we are not likely to aban- don; and while we shall no farther rec- ommend its adoption to other nations, in whole or in part, than it may recom- mend itself by its visible influence on our own growth and prosperity, we are, nevertheless, interested to resist the es- tablishment of doctrines which deny the legality of its foundations. We stand as an equal among nations, claiming the full benefit of the established interna- tional law; and it is our duty to oppose, from the earliest to the latest moment, any innovations upon that code which shall bring into doubt or question our own equal and independent rights. I will now, Mr. Chairman, advert to THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. 61 those pretensions put Eorth by the allied sovereigns of Continental Europe, which seem to me calculated, it unresisted, to bring into disrepute the principles of our government, and, indeed, to I"' whclly incompatible with any degree of national independence. 1 do not intro- duce these considerations for the sake of topics. 1 am not about to declaim againsl crowned heads, nor to quarrel with any country for preferring a form of government different from our own. The right of choice that we exercise for ourselves, 1 am quite willing to leave also to others. But it appears to me that the pretensions to which I have alluded are wholly inconsistent with the independence of nations generally, w it n- out regard to the question whether their governments be absolute, monarchical and limited, or purely popular and rep- resentative. I have a most deep and thorough conviction, that a new era has arisen in the world, that new and dan- gerous combinations are taking place, promulgating doctrines and fraught with consequences wholly subversive in their tendency of the public law of na- tions and of the general liberties of man- kind. Whether this be so, or not, is the question which I now propose to ex- amine, upon such grounds of informa- tion as are afforded by the common and public means of knowledge. Everybody knows that, since the final restoration of the Bourbons to the throne of France, the Continental powers have entered into sundry alliances, which have been made public, and have held sev- eral meetings or congresses, at which the principles of their political conduct have been declared. These things must necessarily have an effect upon the in- ternational law of the states of the world. If that effect be good, and according to the principles of that law, they deserve to be applauded. If, on the contrary, their effect and tendency be most dan- gerous, their principles wholly inadmis- sible, their pretensions such as would abolish every degree of national inde- pendence, then they are to be resisted. I begin, Mr. Chairman, by drawing your attention to the treaty concluded at Paris in September, L815, between Russia, Prussia, and Austria, commonly called the Holy Alliance. This singular alliance appeal s to have oi iginated w ith the Emperor of Russia; lot we are in- formed thai a draft of it was exhibited by him, personally, to a plenipoteul of one of the great powei b of Europe, before it was presented to the other sovereigns who ultimately signed it. 1 This instrument pro nothing, cer- tainly, which is not extremely commend- able and praiseworthy. It promises only that the contracting parties, both in lation to other states, and in regard to their own subjects, will observe the rules of justice and Christianity. In confir- mation of these promises, it makes the most solemn and devout religious invo- cations. Now, although Buchanalliai is a novelty in European history, the world seems to ha\e received this treaty, uppn its first promulgation, with general charity. It was commonly undersl 1 as little or nothing more than an ex- pression of thanks for the BUCCessful termination of the momentous contest in which those sovereigns had 1 n en- gaged. It still seems somewhat unac- countable, however, that these good resolutions should require to be con- firmed by treaty. Who doubted that these august sovereigns would treat each other with justice, and rule their own subjects in mercy'/ And what necessity was there for a solemn stipulation by treaty, to insure the performance of that which is no more than the ordinary duty of every government? It would hardly lie admitted bj these sovereigns, that by this compact they consider themselves hound to introduce an entire change, or any change in the course of their own conduct. Nothing substantially new. certainly, can he Bupposed to have 1 p intended. What principle, or what prac- tice, therefor.', . -ailed for this solemn declaration of the intention of the par- tie- to observe the rules of religion ami justice? i See Lord CasUereagl ; use "f Commons, February ■'•■ L816. Debates in Parliament, Yo\. WW I i the treaty may be found at length. 62 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. It is not a little remarkable, that a writer of reputation upon the Public Law. described, many years ago, not inaccurately, the character of this alli- ance. I allude to Puffendorf. "It seems useless," says he, "to frame any pacts or leagues, barely for the defence and support of universal peace; for by .Midi a league nothing is superadded to the obligation of natural law, and no agreemeul is made for the performance of any thing which the parties were not previously bound to perform; nor is the Original obligation rendered firmer or stronger by such an addition. Men of any tolerable culture and civilization might well be ashamed of entering into any such compact, the conditions of which imply only that the parties con- cerned shall not offend in any clear point of duty. Besides, we should be guilty of great irreverence towards God, should we suppose that his injunctions had not already laid a sufficient obliga- tion upon us to act justly, unless we ourselves voluntarily consented to the same engagement; as if our obligation to obey his will depended upon our own pleasure. "If one engage to serve another, he does not set it down expressly and par- ticularly among the terms and condi- tions of the bargain, that he will not betray nor murder him. nor pillage nor burn his house. For the same reason, that would be a dishonorable engage- ment in which men should bind them- selves to act properly and decently, and not break the peace." 1 Such were the sentiments of that emi- nent writer. How nearly he had antici- pated the case of the Holy Alliance will appear from the preamble to that alli- ance. After .stating that the allied ereigns had become persuaded, by the events of the last three years, that •• their relations \\ ith each other ought to be regulated exclusively by the sub- lime truths taught by the eternal relig- ion of God the Saviour," they solemnly declare their fixed i esolut ion " to adopt as the sole rule of their conduct, both 1 Law of Nature and Nations, Book II. cap. 2, § 11. in the administration of their respective states, and in their political relations with every other government, the pre- cepts of that holy religion, namely, the precepts of justice, charity, and peace, which, far from being applicable to pri- vate life alone, ought, on the contrary, to have a direct influence upon the coun- sels of princes, and guide all their steps, as being the only means of consolidating human institutions, and remedying their imperfections." 2 This measure, however, appears prin- cipally important, as it was the first of a series, and was followed afterwards by others of a more marked and practical nature. These measures, taken to- gether, profess to establish two princi- ples, which the Allied Powers would introduce as a part of the law of the civilized world; and the establishment of which is to be enforced by a million and a half of bayonets. The first of these principles is, that all popular or constitutional rights are held no otherwise than as grants from the crown. Society, upon this princi- ple, has no rights of its own ; it takes good government, when it gets it, as a boon and a concession, but can demand nothing. It is to live by that favor which emanates from royal authority, and if it have the misfortune to lose that favor, there is nothing to protect it against any degree of injustice and oppression. It can rightfully make no endeavor for a change, by itself; its whole privilege is to receive the favors that may be dis- pensed by the sovereign power, and all its duty is described in the single word submission. This is the plain result of the principal Continental state papers; indeed, it is nearly the identical text of some of them. The circular despatch addressed h\ the sovereigns assembled at Laybach, in the spring of 1821, to their ministers at foreign courts, alleges, "that useful and necessary changes in legislation and in the administration of states ought only to emanate Erom the free will and intelligent and well-weighed conviction - Martens. Recueil des Trails, Tome XIII. p. (150. TIIK INVOLUTION IN (JKKK(,'K. of those whom God has rendered re- sponsible for power. All that deviates from this line necessarily leads to dis- order, commotions, and evils Ear more insufferable than those which they pre- tend to remedy." 1 Now, Sir, this prin- ciple woidd carry Europe hack attain, at once, into the middle of the Dark Ages. It is the old doctrine of the Divine right of kings, advanced now hy new advo- cates, and sustained by a formidable a nay of power. That the people hold their fundamental privileges as matter of concession or indulgence from the sovereign power, is a sentiment not easy to be diffused in this age, any farther than it is enforced by the direct opera- tion of military means. It is true, cer- tainly, that some six centuries ago the early founders of English liberty called the instrument which secured their rights a charter. It was, indeed, a concession; they had obtained it sword in hand from the king; and in many other cases, what- ever was obtained, favorable to human rights, from the tyranny and despotism of the feudal sovereigns, was called by the. names of privileges and liberties, as being matter of special favor. Though we retain this language at the present time, the principle itself belongs to ages that have long passed by us. The civil- ized world has done with " the enormous faith, of many made for one." Society asserts its own rights, and alleges them to be original, sacred, and unalienable. It is not satisfied with having kind mas- ters; it demands a participation in its own government; and in states much advanced in civilization, it urges this demand with a constancy and an energy that cannot well nor long be resisted. There are, happily, enough of regulated governments in the world, and those among the most distinguished, to op- erate as constant examples, and to keep alive an unceasing panting in the bosoms of men for the enjoyment of similar free institutions. When the English Revolution of 1688 took place, the English people did not content themselves with the example of 1 Annual Register for 1821, p. G01. Runnyi le; they did ooi build their hopes upon royal charters; they did not, like the authors of the Laj bach circular, Buppose that all useful changes in con- stitutions and laws musl proceed from those only whom < tod has rendered re- sponsible for power. They were ome what better Instructed in the principles of civil liberty, or at leasi they were better lovers of those principles than the sovereigns of Laybach. Instead of petitioning for charters, they declared their rights, and while they offered to the Prince of Orange the crown with one hand, they held in the other an enu- meration of those privileges which they did not profess to hold as favors, but which they demanded and insisted upon as their undoubted rights. 1 n 1 not stop to observe, Mr. Chair- man, how totally hostile are these doc- trines of Laybach to the fundamental principles of our government. They are in direct contradiction; the principles of good and evil are hardly more oppo- site, if these principles of the sov- ereigns be true, we are but in a Btate of rebellion or of anarchy, and are only tolerated among civilized states because it has not yet been convenient to reduce us to the true standard. But the second, and. if possible, the still more objectionable principle, avowed in these papers, is the right of forcible interference in the affairs of other states. A right to control nations in their desire to change their own government, wher- ever it maybe conjectured, or pretended, that such change might furnish an ex- ample to the subjects of other states, is plainly and distinctly asserted. Tic same Congress that mad.- the declara- tion at Laybach had declared, before its removal from Troppau, " that the pow- er- lia\ e an undoubted right to take ;t hostile attitude iii regard t<> those states in which the overthrow of the govern- ment may operate a- an example.'' There cannot, as I think, he concel a more flagrant violation of public or national independence, than is < on« tained in this Bhorl declaration. No matter what be the character of the government resist d; no matter with 64 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. what weight the foot of the oppressor bears on the neck of the oppressed; if he struggle, or if lie complain, he sets a dangerous example of resistance, — and from thai moment he becomes an object of hostility to the most powerful poten- tates of the earth. I want words to ex- press my abhorrence of this abominable principle. I trust every enlightened man throughout the world will oppose it, and that, especially 1 , those who, like our- selves, are fortunately out of the reach of the bayonets that enforce it, will pro- claim their detestation of it, in a tone both loud and decisive. The avowed object of such declarations is to preserve the peace of the world. But by what means is it proposed to preserve this peace ? Simply, by bringing the power of all governments to bear against all subjects. Here is to be established a sort of double, or treble, or quadruple, or, for aught I know, quintuple allegiance. An offence against one king is to be an offence against all kings, and the power of all is to be put forth for the punish- ment of the offender. A right to inter- fere in extreme cases, in the case of contiguous states, and where imminent danger is threatened to one by what is occurring in another, is not without pre- cedent in modern times, upon what has been called the law of vicinage; and when confined to extreme cases, and limited to a certain extent, it may perhaps be defended upon principles of necessity and self-defence. But to main- tain that sovereigns may go to war upon the subjects of another state to repress an example, is monstrous indeed. What is to be the limit to such a principle, or to the practice growing out of it? What, in any case, but sovereign pleasure, is to decide whether the example be good or bad ? And what, under the operation ol such a rule, may he thought of our mple ? Why are we not as fair ob- jects for the operation of the new prin- ciple, as any of th086 who may attempt a reform ^t government on the other side cf the Atlantic ? The ultimate effect of this alliance Of II-. for objects personal to themselves, or respecting only the per- manence of their own power, must be the destruction of all just feeling, and all natural sympathy, between those who exercise the power of govern- ment and those who are subject to it. The old channels of mutual regard and confidence are to be dried up, or cut off. Obedience can now be expected no longer than it is enforced. Instead of relying on the affections of the gov- erned, sovereigns are to rely on the affections and friendship of other sov- ereigns. There are, in short, no longer to be nations. Princes and people are no longer to unite for interests common to them both. There is to be an end of all patriotism, as a distinct national feeling. Society is to be divided hori- zontally; all sovereigns above, and all subjects below; the former coalescing for their own security, and for the more certain subjection of the undistinguished multitude beneath. This, Sir, is no picture drawn by imagination. I have hardly used language stronger than that in which the authors of this new system have commented on their own work. M. de Chateaubriand, in his speech in the French Chamber of Deputies, in February last, declared, that he had a conference with the Emperor of Russia at Verona, in which that august sover- eign uttered sentiments which appeared tohim so precious, that he immediately hastened home, and wrote them down while yet fresh in his recollection. " The Emperor declared," said he, " that there can no longer be such a thing as an English, French, Russian, Prussian, or Austrian policy; there is henceforth but one policy, which, for the safety of all, should be adopted both by people and kings. It was for me first to show myself convinced of the principles upon which I founded the alliance; an occa- sion offered itself, — the rising in Greece. Nothing certainly could occur more for my interests, for the interests of my people, nothing more acceptable to my country, than a religious war in Turkey. Bu1 I have thought I perceived in the troubles of the Morea the sign of revo- lution, and I have held back. Provi- dence has not put under my command THE REVOLUTION IN GREEl E eight hundred thousand soldiers to sat- isfy my ambition, Inn i" protect relig ion, morality, and justice, and to secure the prevalence of those principles of order on which human society rests. It may well be permitted, that kings may have public alliances to defend them- selves against secret enemies." These, Sir, are the words which the French minister thought so important that they deserved to be recorded ; and I, too, Sir, am of the same opinion. But if it be true that there is hereafter to be neither a Russian policy, nor a Prus- sian policy, nor an Austrian policy, nor a French policy, nor even, which yet I will not believe, an English policy, there will be, I trust in God, an American policy. If the authority of all these governments be hereafter to be mixed and blended, and to flow in one aug- mented cur rent of prerogative over the face of Europe, sweeping away all re- sistance in its course, it will yet remain for us to secure our own happiness by the preservation of our own principles ; which I hope we shall have the man- liness to express on all proper occasions, and the spirit to defend in every extrem- ity. The end and scope of this amal- gamated policy are neither more nor less than this: to interfere, by force, for any government against any people who may resist it. Be the state of the people what it may, they shall not rise; be the government what it will, it shall not be opposed. The practical commentary has corre- sponded with the plain language of the text. Look at Spain, and at Greece. If men may not resist the Spanish In- quisition, and the Turkish cimeter, what is there to which humanity must not submit ?• Stronger cases can never arise. Is it not proper for us. at all times, is it not our duty, at this time, to come forth, and deny, and condemn, these monstrous principles? Where, but here, and in one other place, are they likely to be resisted? They are advanced with equal coolness and boldness; and they are supported by immense power. The timid will shrink and give way, and many of the brave may be compelled to yield to force. Human liberty may yet, p irhap obliged to repose its principal hop the intelligence and the rigor of the Saxon race. A- Ear as depend at least . I trust those hop.-, \\ ill I,, , | |„. disappointed; and that, t" the extent which may consist with our own settled, pacific policy, our opinions and senti- ments may be brought to act on the right Bide, and to the right end, on an occasion which is, in truth, nothing than a momentous question between an intelligent age, full of knowledge, thirst- ing for improvement, and quickened by a thousand impulses, on one side, and the most arbitrary pretensions, sustained l>y unprecedented power, on the other. This asserted right <>f Forcible inter- vention in the affairs of other nation, \g in open violation of the public law of the world. Who has authorized these learned doctors of Troppan to establish new articles in this code? Whence their diplomas? Is the whole world ex- pected to acquiesce in principles which entirely subvert the independence of nations? On the basis of this indepen- dence has been reared the beautiful fabric of international law. On tic principle of this independence. Europe has seen a family of nations flourishing within its limits, the small among the B, protected not always by power, but by a principle above power, by a sense of propriety and justice. On this principle, the great commonwealth of civilized states has been hitherto upheld. There have been occasional depart or violations, and always disastrous in the case of Poland; but, in general, the harmony of the system lias | wonderfully preserved. In the produc- tion and preset vat ion of this sen-- justice, this predominating principle, the Christian religion bas acted a main part. Christianity and «-i\ ilization bave labored together; it seems, indeed, t a law of our human condition, that they can live and flourish only together. Prom their Mended influei has arisen that delightful .spectacle of the prevalen reason and principle over power ami in- terest . bo well described an honor to the age ; — GQ THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. "And sovereign Law. the state's collected will, t >'er thrones and globes elate, , — crowning g 1, repressing ill: Sum !>y her sacred Frown, The fiend, Discretion, like a vapor, sinks, And e'en the all-dazzling crown Hides his faint rays, and at her bidding shrinks." Bui this \ ision is past. While the teach- ers of Laybacfa give the rule, there will be ii" law but the law of the strongest. It may now be required of me to show what interest wt have in resisting this new system. What is it to us, it may be asked, upon what principles, or what pretences, tin-' European governments assert a right of interfering in the affairs of their neighbors? The thun- der, it may be said, rolls at a distance. The wide Atlantic is between us and danger; and, however others may suf- fer, we shall remain safe. I think it is a sufficient answer to this to say. that we are one of the nations of the earth; that we have an interest, therefore, in the preservation of that system of national law and national in- tercourse which has heretofore subsisted, so beneficially for all. Our system of government, it should also be remem- bered, is, throughout, founded on prin- ciples utterly hostile to the new code; and if we remain undisturbed by its operation, we shall owe our security either to our situation or our spirit. The enterprising character of the age, our own active, commercial spirit, the great increase which has taken place in the intercourse among civilized and commercial states, have necessarily con- nected ns with other nations, and given us a high concern in the preservation of chose Balutary principles upon which that intercourse is founded. We have clear an interesl in international law, as individuals have in the laws of Bociety. But apart from the soundness of the policy, "ii t he ground of direct interest , we have, Sir, a dutj connected with this subject, which 1 trust we are will- ing to perform. What do »■< not owe to the cause of civil and religious lib- ertj ? t<> the principle of lawful resist- ance? i" the principle that Bociety has a right to partake in its own government? As the leading republic of the world, living and breathing in these principles, ami advanced, by their operation, with unequalled rapidity in our career, shall we give our consent to bring them into disrepute and disgrace? It is neither ostentation nor boasting to say, that there lies before this country, in imme- diate prospect, a great extent and height of power. We are borne along towards this without effort, and not always even with a full knowledge of the rapidity of our own motion. Circumstances which never combined before have co-operated in our favor, and a mighty current is set- ting us forward which we could not resist even if we would, and which, while we would stop to make an observation, and take the sun, has set us, at the end of the operation, far in advance of the place where we commenced it. Does it not become us, then, is it not a duty imposed on us, to give our weight to the side of liberty and justice, to let mankind know that we are not tired of our own institutions, and to pro- test against the asserted power of alter- ing at pleasure the law of the civilized world? But whatever we do in this respect, it becomes us to do upon clear and con- sistent principles. There is an impor- tant topic in the message to which 1 have yet hardly alluded. 1 mean the rumored combination of the European Conti- nental sovereigns against the newly es- tablished free states of South America. Whatever position this government may take on that subject, 1 trust it will be one which can be defended on known and acknowledged grounds of right. The near approach or the remote dis- tance of danger may affect policy, but cannot change principle. The same reason that would authorize us to pro- test against, unwarrantable combina- tions to interfere bet ween Spain and her former colonies, would authorize us equally to protest if the same combina- tion were directed against the smallest state in Europe, although our duty to ourselves, our policy, and wisdom, might indicate very different courses as tit to THE REVOLUTION IN GREEl i: ■ 7 be pursued by us iu the two cases. We shall not, I trust, act upon the notion of dividing the world with the Holy Alli- ance, and complain of nothing done by them in their hemisphere if they will not interfere with oars. At Least this would not lie such a course of policj as I could recommend or support. Wo have not offended, and I hopewedonot intend to offend, in regard to South America, against any principle of na- tional independence or of JUlbUc law. We have done nothing, we shall do nothing, that we need to hush up or to compromise by forbearing to express OUT Sympathy tor the cause of the ( i leeks, or our opinion of the course which other governments have adopted in regard to them. It may, in the next place, be asked, perhaps, Supposing all this to be true, what can we do? Are we to go to war? Are we to interfere in the Greek cause, or any other European cause? Are we to endanger our pacific relations? No, certainly not. What, then, the ques- tion recurs, remains for us? If we will not endanger our own peace, if we will neither furnish armies nor navies to the cause which we think the just one, what is there within our power? Sir. this reasoning mistakes the age. The time has been, indeed, when fleets, and armies, and subsidies, were the principal reliances even in the besl cause. But, happily for mankind, a -Teat change lias taken place in tlii-- re- spect. Moral causes come into consid- eration, in proportion as the progress of knowledge is advanced; and the public opinion of tin 1 civilized world is rapidly gaining an ascendency over mere brutal force. It is already able to oppose the most formidable obstruction to the ; ress of injustice and oppression; and as it grows more intelligent and more in- tense, it will be more and more formi- dable. It may be silenced by military power, but it cannot be conquered. It is elastic, irrepressible, and invulnerable to the weapons of ordinary warfare. It is that impassible, inextinguishable enemy of mere violence and arbitrary rule, which, like Milton's angels, " Vital in every part i, bul by annihilating, •! Until this he propitiated i n i - vain for power to talk either of triumphs or of repose. No tnatb i what fields are desolated, what fortresses sur- rendered, what armies Bubdued.or what provinces overrun. In the history I the year that has passed bj us, and in the instance of unhappy Spain, we I seen the vanity of all triumphs in a cause w Inch \ iolates t he genei a of just ice of the on ilized woi Id. It is nothing that the troops of Prance have passed from the l'\ 1'eliers 1,, ( ,,,|i is nothing that an unhappy and prosl rate nation has fallen before them; nothing that arrests, and confiscation, and execution, sweep away the little remnant of national resistance. There is an enemy that still exi-t.s to check glory of thes,. triumphs. It follows the conqueror back to the very Bcene of his ovations; it calls upon him to taki tice that Europe, though silent, is indignant; it shows him that the sceptre of his victory is a barren sceptre; ti; shall confer neither joy nor honor, hut shall moulder to dry ashes in his grasp. In the midst of his exultation, it pi( his ear w ith the cry of injured just it denounces againsl him the indigna- tion of an enlightened and civilized it turns to bitterness the cup of hi joicing, and wounds him with the - which belongs to the consciousn js I having outraged the opinion of man- kind. In my opinion, Sir, the Spanish tioii is now nearer, not only in poil time, hut in point of circumst the acquisition of a regulated ment, than at the moment of the 1 I invasion. Nations mu-t. no doubt, un- dergo these trial- ill their pro the establishment of free institutions. The very trials benefit them, and render them more capable both of obtai and <>f enjoying the object which .seek. I -hall not detain the commit! by laying before it an] graphical, or commercial account G ece. I have no knowledge on tl 68 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. subjects which is not common to all. It is universally admitted, that, within the last thirty or forty years, the condi- tion of Greece lias been greatly im- proved. Her marine is at present re- spectable, containing the best sailors in the Mediterranean, better even, in that sea. than our own, as more accustomed to the long quarantines and other regu- lations which prevail in its ports. The number of her seamen has been esti- mated as high as 50,000, but I suppose that estimate must be much too large. She has, probably, 150,000 tons of ship- ping. It is not easy to ascertain the amount of the Greek population. The Turkish government does not trouble itself with any of the calculations of political economy, and there has never been such a thing as an accurate census, probably, in any part of the Turkish empire. In the absence of all official information, private opinions widely dif- fer. By the tallies which have been communicated, it would seem that there are 2,400,000 Greeks in Greece proper and the islands; an amount, as I am inclined to think, somewhat overrated. There are, probably, in the whole of European Turkey, 5,000,000 Greeks, and •_'. 1,000 more in the Asiatic do- minions of that power. The moral and intellectual progress of this numerous population, under the horrible oppression which crushes it, has been such as may well excite regard. Slaves, under barbarous masters, the Greeks have still aspired after the bless- ings of knowledge and civilization. Be- fore the breaking out of the present revolution, they had established schools, and colleges, and libraries, and the press. Wherever, as in Scio, owing to I eular circumstances, the weight of oppression was mitigated, the natural vivacity of the Greeks, and their apti- tude tor tic arts, were evinced. Though certainly nol on an equality with the civilized and Christian states of Europe, — anil how is it possible, under such oppression as fchey endured, that they should be? they yel Eurnished a strik- ing i trasl with their Tartar masters. It baa been well said, thai it is not easy to form a just conception of the nature of the despotism exercised over them. Conquest and subjugation, as known among European states, are inadequate modes of expression by which to denote the dominion of the Turks. A conquest in the civilized world is generally no more than an acquisition of a new do- minion to the conquering country. It does not imply a never-ending bondage imposed upon the conquered, a perpetual mark, — an opprobrious distinction be- tween them and their masters ; a bitter and unending persecution of their relig- ion ; an habitual violation of their rights of person and property, and the unre- strained indulgence towards them of every passion which belongs to the char- acter of a barbarous soldiery. Yet such is the state of Greece. The Otto- man power over them, obtained original- ly by the sword, is constantly preserved by the same means. "Wherever it exists, it is a mere military power. The relig- ious and civil code of the state being both fixed in the Koran, and equally the object of an ignorant and furious faith, have been found equally incapable of change. " The Turk," it has been said, " has been encamped in Europe for four centuries." He has hardly any more participation in European manners, knowledge, and arts, than when he crossed the Bosphorus. But this is not the worst. The power of the empire is fallen into anarchy, and as the principle which belongs to the head belongs also to the parts, there are as many despots as there are pachas, beys, and viziers. Wars are almost perpetual between the Sultan and some rebellious governor of a province; and in the conflict of these despotisms, the people are necessarily ground between the upper and the nether millstone. In short, the Christian sub- jects of the Sublime Porte feel daily all the miseries which flow from despotism, from anarchy, from slavery, and from religious persecution. If any thing yet remains to heighten such a picture, let it be added, that every office in the government is not only actually, but professedly, venal, — the pachalics, the vizierat ss, the cadiships, and whatsoever THE KKVOLUTION IN (JKKKl K. other denomination may denote the de- positary of power. In the whole world, sir, there is no such oppression Eel) as by the Christian Greeks. In various parts of India, to be sure, the govern- ment is bad enough; but then it is the government of barbarians over barbari- ans, and the feeling of oppression is, of course, not so keen. There t lie* oppressed are perhaps not better than their oppres- sors; but in the case of Greece, there are millions of Christian men, not without knowledge, not without refinement, not without a strong thirst for all the pleas- ures of civilized life, trampled into the very earth, century after century, by a pillaging, savage, relentless soldiery. Sir, the case is unique. There exists, and has existed, nothing like it. The world has no such misery to show; there is no case in which Christian communi- ties can be called upon with such em- phasis of appeal. But I have said enough, Mr. Chairman, indeed I need have said nothing to satisfy the House, that it must be some new combination of circumstances, or new views of policy in the cabinets of Europe, which have caused this interest- ing struggle not merely to be regarded with indifference, but to be marked with opprobrium. The very statement of the case, as a contest between the Turks and Greeks, sufficiently indicates what must be the feeling of every individual, and every government, that is not biassed by a particular interest, or a particular feel- ing, to disregard the dictates of justice and humanity. And now. Sir, what has been the con- duct pursued by the Allied Powers in regard to this contest? When the revo- lution broke out, the sovereigns were assembled in congress at Laybach; and the papers of that assembly sufficiently manifest their sentiments. They pro- claim their abhorrence of those " crimi- nal combinations which had been formed in the eastern parts of Europe"; and, although it is possible that this denun- ciation was aimed, more particularly, at the disturbances in the provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, yet no excep- tion is made, from its general terms, in favor of those events in G hioh were propel ly the commencement oi her revolution, and w bicb i M not but be well known at Laybach, before the date of these declarations. Now it mu remembered, thai Russia was a leading party '" this denunciation of the efforts of the Greeks to Achieve their libera- tion; and it cannot but be expected by Russia, that the world Bhould also re- member what part sip. herself ha- | tofore acted in the same concern. It is notorious, that within the last balf-cen- turyshe has again and again excited the Greeks to rebellion against the Porte, and that she has constantly kept alive in them the hope that she would, one day, by her own great power, break the of their oppressor. Indeed, the earnest attention with which Russia has regarded Greece goes much farther back than to the time I have mentioned. Ivan the Third, in 1482, having espoused a I cian princess, heiress of the last Greek' Emperor, discarded St. George from the Russian arms, and adopted the Greek two-headed black eagle, which has con- tinued in the Russian arms t<> the pres- ent day. In virtue of the same man i the Russian princes claim the Creek throne as their inheritance. Under Peter the (beat, the policy of Russia developed itself more fully. In 169G, he rendered himself master of Azof, and. in 1698, obtained the right to pass the Dardanelles, and to maintain, by that route, commercial intercourse with the Mediterranean. Behademi ries throughout Greece, and particularly applied himself to gain the clergy. He adopted the Labarum of Constantino, "In hoe signo vinces"; and medals were Struck, with the inscription. "1' trus I. Russo - Grseoornm Iraperator." In whatever new direction th" princi- ples of the Holy Alliance may HOW lead the politics of Russia, or whatever o she may suppose Christianity now pre- scribes to her, in regard to the Greek cause, the time has been when she pro- fessed to be contending for that cause, as identified with Christianity. The white banner under which the ni Peter the First usually fought, 1 70 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. as it- inscription, " In the name of the Prince, and for our country." Reiving on the aid of the Greeks, in his war with the Porte, he changed the white flag to red, and displayed on it the words, "In the name of God, and for Christi- anity." The unfortunate issue of this war is well known. Though Anne and Elizabeth, the successors of Peter, did not possess his active character, they kept up a constant communication with Greece, and held out hopes of restoring the Greek empire. Catharine the Sec- ond, as is well known, excited a general revolt in 17ii!). A Russian fleet ap- peared in the Mediterranean, and a Rus- sian army was landed in the Morea. The Greeks in the end were disgusted at being expected to take an oath of alle- giance to Russia, and the Empress was disgusted because they refused to take it. In 1774, peace was signed between Russia and the Porte, and the Greeks of the Morea were left to their fate. By this treaty the Porte acknowledged the independence of the Khan of the Crimea; a preliminary step to the acquisition of thai country by Russia. It is not un- worthy of remark, as a circumstance which distinguished this from most other diplomatic transactions, that it conceded to the cabinet of St. Peters- burg the right of intervention in the interior affairs of Turkey, in regard to whatever concerned the religion of tip- Greeks. The cruelties and massa- cres that happened to the Greeks after the peace between Russia and the Porte, notwithstanding the general pardon which had been stipulated lor them, need not now be recited. Instead of i acing the deplorable picture, it is enough to say, that, in this respect the past is justly reflected in the present, 'iie- Empress soon after invaded ami [uered I he ( Irimea, ami mi one of the gates "I Kerson, its capital, caused to be inscribed, " The road to Byzantium." 'I'm' present Emperor, on his accession to the throne, manifested an intention to adopt tie' policy of Catharine the md as his own, ami the world has not ho -n right in all its suspicions, it' a project for the partition of Turkey did not form a part of the negotiations of Napoleon and Alexander at Tilsit. All this course of policy seems sud- denly to be changed. Turkey is no longer regarded, it would appear, as an object of partition or acquisition, and Greek revolts have all at once become, according to the declaration of Laybach, "criminal combinations." The recent congress at Verona exceeded its prede- cessor at Laybach in its denunciations of the Greek struggle. In the circular of the 14th of December, 1822, it declared the Grecian resistance to the Turkish power to be rash and culpable, and la- mented that "the firebrand of rebel- lion had been thrown into the Otto- man empire." 'This rebuke and crimi- nation we know to have proceeded on those settled principles of conduct which the Continental powers had prescribed for themselves. The sovereigns saw, as well as others, the real condition of the Greeks; they knew as well as others that it was most natural and most justi- fiable, that they should endeavor, at whatever hazard, to change that condi- tion. They knew that they themselves, or at least one of them, had more than once urged the Greeks to similar efforts; that they themselves had thrown the same firebrand into the midst of the Ottoman empire. And yet, so much does it seem to be their fixed object to discountenance whatsoever threatens to disturb the actual government of any country, that, Christians as they were, and allied, as they professed to be, for purposes most important to human hap- piness and religion, they have not hesi- tated to declare to the world that they have wholly forborne to exercise any compassion to the Greeks, simply be- cause they thought that they saw, in the struggles of the Morea, the sign of revo- lution. This, then, is coming to a plain, practical result. The Grecian revolution has been discouraged, discountenanced, and denounced, solely because it is a revolution. Independent of all inquiry into the reasonableness of its causes or the enormity of the oppression which produced it : regardless of the peculiar claims which Greece possesses upon the THE REVOLUTION IX GRE] 1 civilized world; and regai*dleS8 of what lias been their own conduct towards uer for a century; regardless of the interest of the Christian religion, — the sover- eigns at Verona seized upon the case of the Greek revolution as one above all others calculated to illustrate the fixed principles of their policy. The abomi- nable rule of the Forte on one side, the value and the sufferings of the Christian Greeks on the other, furnished a case likely to convince even an incredulous world of the sincerity of the professions of the Allied Powers. They embraced the occasion with apparent ardor: and the world, 1 trust, is satisfied. We see here, Mr. Chairman, the direct and actual application of that system which I have attempted to de- scribe. We see it in the very case of Greece. We learn, authentically and indisputably, that the Allied Powers, holding that all changes in legislation and administration ought to proceed from kings alone, were wholly inexora- ble to the sufferings of the Greeks, and entirely hostile to their success. Now it is upon this practical result of the principle of the Continental powers that I wish this House to intimate its opin- ion. . The great question is a question of principle. Greece is only the signal instance of the application of that prin- ciple. If the principle be right, if we esteem it conformable to the law of na- tions, if we have nothing to say against it, or if we deem ourselves unlit to ex- press an opinion on the subject, then, of course, no resolution ought to pass. If, on the other hand, we see in the declara- tions of the Allied Powers principles, not only utterly hostile to our own free insti- tutions, but hostile also to the inde- pendence of all nations, and altogether opposed to the improvement of the con- dition of human nature; if. in the in- stance before us, we see a most striking exposition and application of those prin- ciples, and if we deem our opinions to be entitled to any weight in the estima- tion of mankind, — then I think it is our duty to adopt some such measure as the proposed resolution. It is worthy of observation, Sir. that iilv as Julj , 1821, Baroi Si the Russian minister at Constantinople, represented to the Tort.-, that, if the un- distinguished massacres of tie- Grei both of such a-, ui-iv in open i ■ and of those who remained patii i their submission were continued, and should become a settled habit, they would give jusl cause of war againsl the Porte to all Christian states. This was in 1821. * It was followed, early in the nexl year, by that indescribable enor- mity, that appalling monument of bar- barian cruelty, the destruction of Scio; a scene [ shall not attempt to describe ; a scene from which human nature shrinks shuddering away: a scene having hardly a parallel in the history of fallen man. This scene, too, was quickly followed by the massacres in Cyprus; and all t. tilings were perfectly known to the Christian powers assembled at. Verona. Yet these powers, instead of acting upon the case supposed by Baron Strogonoff, and which one would think had been then fully made out, — instead of I.. moved by any compassion for the suffer- ings of the Greeks, — these powers, i Christian powers, rebuke their gallantry and insult their sufferings by accusing them of " throw ing a firebrand into the Ottoman empire." Such, Sir, appear to me to be the principles on which the Continental powers of Europe h agreed hereafter to act; and this, an eminent instance of the application of those principles. I shall not detain the committee, Mr. Chairman, by any attempt to recite the events of the Greek struggle up to the present time. Its origin may be found. doubtless, in that improved state of knowledge which, for some years, has been gradually taking place in that country. The emancipation of the Greeks has been a Bubject frequently discussed in modern time-. They them- selves are represented as having a vivid remembrance of the distinction of their ancestors, not unmixed with an indig- nant feeling thai civilized and Christian Europe should not ere now have aided i Annua] Register for 1821, p. 851. 72 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. them in breaking their intolerable fetters. In 1S1G a society was founded in Vienna for the encouragement of Gre- cian literature. It was connected with a similar institution at Athens, and another in Thessaly, called the "Gym- nasium of Mount Pelion." The treas- ury and general office of the institution were established at Munich. No politi- cal object was avowed by these insti- tutions, probably none contemplated. Still, however, they had their effect, no doubt, in hastening that condition of things in which the Greeks felt compe- tent to the establishment of their inde- pendence. Many young men have been for years annually sent to the universi- ties in the western states of Europe for their education; and, after the general pacification of Europe, many military men, discharged from other employ- ment, were ready to enter even into so unpromising a service as that of the revolutionary Greeks. In 1820. war commenced between the Porte and Ali, the well-known Pacha of Albania. Differences existed also with Persia and with Russia. In this state of things, at the beginning of 1821, an insurrection broke out in Moldavia, under the direction of Alexander Ypsi- lanti, a well-educated soldier, who had been major-general in the Russian service. From his character, and the number of those who seemed inclined to join him, he was supposed to be coun- tenanced by the court of St. Petersburg. This, however, was a great mistake, which the Emperor, t hen at Laybach, took an early opportunity to rectify. The Turkish government was alarmed at these occurrences in the northern provinces of European Turkey, and caused March to be made of all vessels entering the Black Sea, lest arms or other military means should be sent, in thai manner to the insurgents. This proved inconvenienl to the commerce of Russia, and eaii-e.i Borne unsatisfactory correspondence between tie- two powers. It may be worthj of remark, as an exhibition of national character, that, agitated by these appearances of intes- tine commotion, the Sultan issued a proclamation, calling on all true Mus- sulmans to renounce the pleasures of social life, to prepare arms and horses, and to return to the manner of their ancestors, the life of the plains. The Turk seems to have thought that he had, at last, caught something of the danger- ous contagion of European civilization, and that it was necessary to reform his habits, by recurring to the original manners of military roving barbarians. It was about this time, that is to say, at the commencement of 1821, that the revolution burst out in various parts of Greece and the isles. Circumstances, certainly, were not unfavorable to the movement, as one portion of the Turk- ish army was employed in the war against Ali Pacha in Albania, and an- other part in the provinces north of the Danube. The Greeks soon possessed themselves of the open country of the Morea, and drove their enemy into the fortresses. Of these, that of Tripolitza, with the city, fell into their hands, in the course of the summer. Having after these first movements obtained time to breathe, it became, of course, an early object to establish a govern- ment. For this purpose delegates of the people assembled, under that name which describes the assembly in which we ourselves sit, that name which "freed the Atlantic," a Congress. A writer, who undertakes to render to the civilized world that service which was once performed by Edmund Burke, I mean the compiler of the English An- nual Register, asks, by what authority this assembly could call itself a Con- gress. Simply, Sir, by the same au- thority by which the people of the United States have given the same name to their own legislature. We, at least, should be naturally inclined to think, not only as far as names, but things also, are concerned, that the Greeks could hardly have begun their revolution under better auspices; since they have endeavored to render applica- ble to themselves the general principles of our form of government, as well as its name. This constitution went into Tin: itKVOLUTlox in <;i;i:i:i n Egj pt. happened to be in the neighboring seas, and, learning these events, landed a force on the isl- and of fifteen thousand men. There was nothing to resist BUCh an army. These troops immediately entered the city and began an indiscriminate mas- sacre. The city was tired: and in four days the file and sword of the Turk ren- dered the beautiful Scio a clotted mass Of blood and ashes. The details are too shocking to be recited. Forty tl -and women and children, unhappily B8 from the general destruction, were after- wards sold in the market of Smyrna, and sent off into distant and hop servitude. Even on the wharves of our own cities, it has been said, have been sold the utensils of those hearths which now exist no longer. Of the whole population which I have mentioned, not above nine hundred persons were left living -upon the island. I will only repeat, Sir, that these tragical scenes were as fully known at the Congress of Verona, as they are now known t" us; and it is not too much to call on the powers that constituted that c in the name of conscience and in the name of humanity, to tell us if there be nothing even in these unparalleled ex- cesses of Turkish barbarity to excite a sentiment of compassion : nothing v< hich they regard as so objectionable a- even the very idea of popular resistance to power. The events of the year which has just I by, a- far as they have be,-,. me known t<> us. have been even more favor- able to the Greeks than those of the year preceding. I omit all details being as well known to others as to my- self. Suffice it to say, that w ith no other enemy to contend with, and no diversion of hi.- force bo other object-. Porta 74 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. has not been able to carry the war into the Morea; and that, by the last ac- counts, it> armies were acting defensively in Thessaly. I pass over, also, the naval engagements of the Greeks, although that is a mode of warfare in which they are calculated to excel, and in which they have already performed actions of Mich distinguished skill and bravery, as would draw applause upon the best mariners in the world. The present state of tic war would seem to be, that the Creeks possess the whole of the Morea, with the exception of the three fortresses of Patras, Coron, and Modon ; all Candia, hut one fortress; and most of the other islands. They possess the citadel of Athens, Missolonghi, and sev- eral other places in Livadia. They have been able to act on the offensive, and to carry the war beyond the isthmus. There is no reason to believe their ma- rine is weakened; more probably, it is strengthened. But, what is most impor- tant of all, they have obtained time and experience. They have awakened a sym- pathy throughout Europe and through- out America; and they have formed a government which seems suited to the emergency of their condition. Sir. they have done much. It would be great injustice to compare their achievements with our own. We began our Revolution, already possessed of government, and, comparatively, of civil liberty. Our ancestors had from the first been accustomed in a great measure to govern themselves. They were famil- iar with popular elections and legislative assemblies, and well acquainted with the general principles and practice of free governments. They had little else to do than to throw off the paramount author- ity of the parent state. Enough was B til] left, both of law and of organiza- tion, toconducl society in its accustomed COur8e, and to unite men together lor a common object. The Greeks, of course, could act w ith little conceit at the be- ginning; they were unaccustomed to the exercise of power, without experience, with limited knowledge, without aid, and surrounded by nations which, what- ever claims the Greeks might seem to have upon them, have afforded them nothing but discouragement and re- proach. They have held out, however, for tin- -ainpaigns; and that, at least, is something. Constantinople and the northern provinces have sent forth thou- sands of troops; — they have been de- feated. Tripoli, and Algiers, and Egypt, have contributed their marine contin- gents; — they have not kept the ocean. Hordes of Tartars have crossed the Bos- phorus; — they have died where the Persians died. The powerful monar- chies in the neighborhood have de- nounced their cause, and admonished them to abandon it and submit to their fate. They have answered them, that, although two hundred thousand of their countrymen have offered up their lives, there yet remain lives to offer ; and that it is the determination of all, "yes, of all," to persevere until they shall have established their liberty, or until the power of their oppressors shall have re- lieved them from the burden of exist- ence. It may now be asked, perhaps, whether the expression of our own sympathy, and that of the country, may do them good? I hope it may. It may give them cour- age and spirit, it may assure them of public regard, teach them that they are not wholly forgotten by the civilized world, and inspire them with constancy in the pursuit of their great end. At any rate, Sir, it appears to me that the measure which I have proposed is due to our own character, and called for by our own duty. When we shall have discharged that duty, we may leave the rest to the disposition of Providence. I do not see how it can be doubted that this measure is entirely pacific. I profess my inability to perceive that it has any possible tendency to involve our neutral relations. If the resolution pass, if is not of necessity to be immediately acted on. It will not be acted on at all, unless, in the opinion of the President, a proper and safe occasion for acting upon if shall arise. If we adopt the resolution to-day, our relations with every foreign state will be to-morrow precisely what they now are. The reso- THE REVOLUTION IN GREEI E. 75 hit ion will be sufficient to express our sentiments on the Bubjecte to which I have adverted. Useful for thai purpose, it can be mischievous for no purpose. If the topic were properly introduced into the message, it cannot be impropei 1> introduced into discussion in this House. If it were proper, which no one doubts, for the President to express Ids opinions upon it, it cannot, I think, be improper for us to express ours. The Only certain effect of this resolution is to signify, in a form usual in bodies constituted like this, our approbation of the general sentiment of the message. Do we wish to withhold thai approbation? The res- olution confers on the President no new power, nor does it enjoin on him the exercise of any new duty; nor does it hasten him in the discharge of any exist- ing duty. I cannot imagine that this resolution can add any thing to those excitements which it has been supposed, I think very causelessly, might possibly jn-ovoke the Turkish government to acts of hostility. There is already the message, expressing the hope of success to the Greeks and disaster to the Turks, in a much stronger manner than is to be implied from the terms of this resolution. There is the correspondence between the Secretary of State and the Greek Agent in London, already made public, in which similar wishes are expressed, and a continuance of the correspondence apparently in- vited. I might add to this, the unex- ampled burst of feeling which this cause has called forth from all classes of so- ciety, and the notorious fact of pecuniary contributions made throughout the coun- try for its aid ami advancement. After all this, whoever can see cause of danger to our pacific relations from the adopt i> m of this resolution has a keener vision than I can pretend to. Sir, there is no augmented danger; there is no danger. The question comes at last to this, whether, on a subject of this sort, this House holds an opinion which is worthy to be expressed. Even suppose, Sir, an agent or com- missioner were to be immediately sent, — a measure which I myself believe to lie the proper one, — there is no bn of neutrality, nor any jn offence. Such an agent, "i would not be accredited; lie would not, he a public minister. The object would he inquiry and information; inquiry w hieii we have a i ighl !■> make, infor- mation which we arc interested scss. [f a dismemberment of the Turkish empire he taking place, or has already taken place ; if a new state be risin he already risen, in the Mediterranean, — who can doubt, that, without any breach of neutrality, we may inform oursi of these events for the government of our own concerns? The Greeks have declared the Turkish coasts in a state of blockade; may we not inform ourselves whether this blockade he nominal or real? and, of course, whether it shall he regarded or disregarded? The greater our trade may happen to he with Smyrna, a consideration which seem- to have alarmed some gentlemen, the greater i-. the reason, in my opinion, why we should seek to be accurately informed of those events which may affect its safety. It seems to me impossible, therefore, for any reasonable man to imagine that this resolution can expose us to the resentment of the Sublime Porte. As little reason is there for fearing its consequences upon the conduct of the Allied Powers. They may. very natu- rally, dislike our sentiments upon the subject of the Greek revolution; hut what those sentiments are they will much more explicitly learn in the 1 ident's -sage than in this resolution. They might, indeed, prefer that we should express no dissent from the doc- trines which they have avowed, and the application which they have made of those doctrines to the case of Gre But I trust we are not disposed to ! them in any doubt as to our sentin upon these important subjects. They have expressed their opinions, and do not call that expression of opinion an interference; in which respect the) are right, as the expression of opinion in such cases i- not such an interferon would justify the Greeks in considering 76 THE REVOLUTION IN GREECE. the powers at war with thorn. For the same reason, any expression which we may make of different principles and different sympathies is no interference. N\, one would call the President's mes- an interference; and vet it is much stronger in that respect than this reso- lution. Lf either of them could be con- strued to be an interference, no doubt it would he improper, at least it would be so according to my view of the subject; for the very thing which I have at- tempted to resist in the course of these observations is the right of foreign inter- ference. But neither the message nor the resolut ion has that character. There is not a power in Europe which can sup- pose, that, in expressing our opinions on this occasion, we are governed by any desire of aggrandizing ourselves or of injuring others. We do no more than to maintain those established principles in which we have an interest in common with other nations, and to resist the in- troduction of new principles and new rules, calculated to destroy the relative independence of states, and particularly hostile to the whole fabric of our gov- ernment. I close, then, Sir, with repeating, that the object of this resolution is to avail ourselves of the interesting occasion of the Greek revolution to make our pro- test aeainst the doctrines of the Allied Powers, both as they are laid down in principle and as they are applied in practice I think it right, too, Sir, not to be unseasonable in the expression of our regard, and, as far as that goes, in a manifestation of our sympathy with a long oppressed and now struggling peo- ple. I am not of those who would, in the hour of utmost peril, withhold such encouragement as might be properly and lawfully given, and, when the crisis should be past, overwhelm the rescued sufferer with kindness and caresses. The Greeks address the civilized world with a pathos not easy to be resisted. They invoke our favor by more moving considerations than can well belong to the condition of any other people. They stretch out their arms to the Christian communities of the earth, beseeching them, by a generous recollection of their ancestors, by the consideration of their desolated and ruined cities and villages, by their wives and children sold into an accursed slavery, by their blood, which they seem willing to pour out like Avater, by the common faith, and in the name, which unites all Christians, that they would extend to them at least some token of compassionate regard. TIIE TARIFF. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN TIIE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, ON. THE 1st AND 2d OF APRIL, 1*2 i. [At an early period of the session of Con- gress of L823-24 a bill was introduced into the House of Representatives to amend the several acts laying duties on imports. The object of the hill was a comprehensive re- vision of the existing laws, with a view to the extension of the protective system. The hill became the subject of a protracted de- bate, in which much of the talent of the House on both sides was engaged. Mr. Webster took an active part in the discus- sion, and spoke upon many of the details of the bill, while it remained in the committee of the whole House on the state of the Union. Several objectionable provisions were removed, ami various amendments were introduced upon his motion ; and it was a matter of regret to him, as seen in the following speech, that the friends of the bill were not able or willing to bring it into a form in which, as a whole, he could give it Ins support. On the 30th and :>lst of March, Mr. Clay, Speaker of the House, addressed the committee of the whole, at length and with great ability, on the gen- eral principles of the bill ; and he was suc- ceeded by Mr. Webster, on the 1st and 2d of April, in the following speech.] Mr. Chairman, — I will avail my- self of the present occasion to make some remarks on certain principles and opinions which have been recently ad- vanced, and on those considerations ■which, in my judgment, ought to gov- ern us in deciding upon the several and respective parts of this very important and complex measure. I can truly say that this is a painful duty. I deeply re- gret the necessity which is likely to be imposed upon me of giving a general affirmative or negative vote on the. whole of the bill. 1 cannot but think this mode of proceeding liable to great objec- tions. It exposes both those who sup- port and those who oppose the mea to very unjust and injurious misappre- hensions. There may be g 1 reasons tor favoring some of the provisions of the bill, and equally strong reasons for opposing others; ami these provisions do not stand to each other in the relation of principal and incident. If that were tie- case, those who are in favor of the prin- cipal might forego their opinions upon incidental and subordinate provisions. But the bill proposes enactments entirely distinct and different from one another in character and tendency. Some of its clauses are intended merely for revenue; and of those which regard the protection of home manufactures, one pari Btands upon very different grounds from tl of other parts. So that probably every gentleman who may ultimately support the bill will vote for much which his judgment does not approve; and those who oppose it will oppose some- thing which they would \<-\ x gladly sup- port. Being intrusted with the interests of a district highly commercial, and d( interested in manufactures also, I wish to -late my opinions on the present measure, no! a- on a whole, for it has do entire and homo is character, but as on a collection of different enact- ments, some of which meet my appi lion and some of which do not. And all-w me, Sir, in the first pi to state my regret, if ind 1 I ought n t to express a wanner sentiment, at 7s THE TATCIFF. the names or designations which Mr. Speaker 1 has seen lit to adopt for the purpose of describing the advocates and the opposers of the present bill. It is a question, he says, between the friends of an •• American policy" and those of a •• foreign policy." This, Sir, is an as- sumption which 1 take the liberty most directly to deny. Mr. Speaker certainly intended nothing invidious or deroga- tory to any part of the House by this mode of denominating friends and ene- mies. But there is power in nanus. and this manner of distinguishing those who favor and those who oppose partic- ular measures may lead to inferences to which no member of the House can submit. It may imply that there is a more exclusive and peculiar regard to American interests in one class of opin- ions than in another. Such an impli- cation is to be resisted and repelled. Every member has a right to the pre- sumption, that he pursues what he be- lieves to be the interest of his country with as sincere a zeal as any other mem- ber. I claim this in my own case; and while I shall not, for any purpose of de- scription or convenient arrangement use terms which may imply any disrespect to other men's opinions, much less any imputation upon other men's motives, it is my duty to take care that the use of such terms by others !"■ not, against the will of those who adopt them, made to produce a falsi,- impression. Indeed. Sir. it is a Utile astonishing, if it seemed convenient to Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of distinction, to make use of the terms " American policy" and •♦foreign policy," thai he should not Have appUed them in a manner precisely 1 1 10 reverse of that in which he has in fact used them. If names are thoughl necessary, it would he well enough, one would think, that the name should he in ■ measure descriptive of the thing; and since Mr. Speaker denominates the policy w Inch lie re amends •• a new policy in this country " ; since he speaks of the present measure a- a new era in our legislal ion ; 3ince he pro to in- i Mr. Clay. vite us to depart from our accustomed course, to instruct ourselves by the wis- dom of others, and to adopt the policy of the most distinguished foreign states, — one is a little curious to know with what propriety of speech this imitation of other nations is denominated an •■ American policy," while, on thecontra- ry, a preference for our own established system, as it now actually exists and always has existed, is called a "foreign policy." This favorite American policy is what America has never tried: and this odious foreign policy is what, as we are told, forei'j,'u states have never pur- sued. Sir, that is the truest American policy which shall most usefully employ American capital and American labor, and best sustain the whole population. With me it is a fundamental axiom, it is interwoven with all my opinions, that the great interests of the country are united and inseparable; that agricul- ture, commerce, and manufactures will prosper together or languish together; and that all legislation is dangerous which proposes to benefit one of these without looking to consequences which may fall on the others. Passing from this, Sir, I am bound to say that Mr. Speaker began his able and impressive speech at the proper point of inquiry, — I mean the present state and condition of the country, — although I am so unfortunate, or rather although I a in so happy, as to differ from him very widely in regard to that condition. I dissent entirely from the justice of that picture of distress which he has drawn. I have not seen the reality, and know- not where it exists. Within my obser- vation, there is no cause for so gloomy And terrifying a representation. In re- spect to the New Kngland States, with tin- condition of which I am of course best acquainted, the present appears to me ;i period of verj general prosperity. NTot, indeed, a time for sudden acquisi- tion and great profits, not a day of extraordinary activity and succes.-ful speculation*. There is no doubt' a con- siderable depression of prices, and. in some degree, a stagnation of business, r.ut the case presented bj Mr. Speak c THE TARH r 79 was not one of depression, but of distress ; of universal, pervading, intense distress, limited tn lid class ami to no place. We are represented as on the very verge and brink of national ruin. So far from aC- quiescing in these opinions, I believe there has I n no period in which the genera] prosperity was better secured, or rested on a more solid foundation. As applicable to the Eastern States, I put this remark to their representatives, and ask them it' it is not true. When has there been a time in which the means of living have been more accessi- ble and more abundant'.'' When has la- bor been rewarded, I do not say witli a Larger, but with a more certain success? Profits, indeed, are low: in some pur- suits of life, which it is not proposed to benefit, hut to burden, by this Kill, very low. But still I am unacquainted with any proofs of extraordinary distress. What, indeed, are the general indica- tions of the state of the country? There is no famine nor pestilence in the land, nor war, nor desolation. There is no writhing under the burden of taxation. The means of subsistence are abundant ; ami at the very moment when the mis- erable condition of the country is as- serted, it is admitted that the wages of labor are high in comparison with those of any other country. A country, then. enjoying a profound peace, perfecl civil liberty, with the means of subsistence cheap and abundant, with the reward of Labor sure, and its wages higher than anywhere else, cannot be represented as in gloom, melancholy, and distress, hut by the effort of extraordinary powers of tragedy. Even if, in judging of this question, we were to regard only those proofs to which we have been referred, we shall probably come to a conclusion somew hat different from that which litis been drawn. Our exports, for example, al- though certainly less than in some years. were not, last year, so much below an average formed upon the exports of a series of years, and putting those ex- ports at a fixed value, as mighl be -ap- posed. The value of the exports of agricultural products, of animals, of the products of the foresi and of the together with gunpowder, Bpiril -. and sundry unenumerated articles, amounted in the several years to the following sums, viz. : — In 1790 127,716,152 L804 83,842,816 L807, 88,465,854 Coming up now to our own time, and t akin-' I he exports of the years L821, L822, and L828, of the Bame articles and products, at the same prices, thej -land thus: — In 1821 $45,643,175 1822 18,782,295 1823, 55,863,491 Mr. Speaker has taken the very ex- traordinary year of 1803, and. adding to the exportation of that year what he thinks ought to have been a jusl aug- mentation, in proportion to the incr< of our population, he swells the result to a magnitude, which, when compared with our actual export-, would exhibit a great deficiency. Bui is there any justice in this mode of calculation? In the first place, as before observed, the year 1803 was a year of extraordinary exportation. By reference to the ac- counts, that of the article of flour, for example, there was an export that year of thirteen hundred thousand barrels; but the very next year it fell to eight hundred thousand, and the next year to Seven hundred thousand. In the next place, there never was any reason to expect that the increase of our exports of agricultural product-, would keep pace with the increase of our popula- tion. That would beagainsl all experi- ence. It is, ind 1. mosl desirable, that there should he an augmented demand for the products of agriculture; hut. nevertheless, the official returns of our export- do not show that absolute want of all foreign market which has 1 n bo Btrongly stated. Hut then' are other means by which to judge of the genera] condition of the people. The quantity of the meai - subsistence consumed, or, to make use of a phi suited to the 80 THE TARIFF. condition of our own people, the quan- tity of the comforts of life enjoyed, is one of those means. It so hap- pens, indeed, that it is not so easy in this country as elsewhere to ascertain facts of this sort with accuracy. Where most of the articles of subsistence and most of the comforts of life are taxed, there is, of course, great facility in ascertaining, from official statements, the amount of consumption. But in this country, most fortunately, the gov- ernment neither knows, nor is concer 1 to know, the annual consumption; and estimates can only be formed in another mode, and in reference only to a few articles. Of these articles, tea is one. It is not quite a luxury, and yet is some- thing above the absolute necessaries of life. Its consumption, therefore, will be diminished in times of adversity, and augmented in times of prosperity. By deducting the annual export from the annual import, and taking a number of years together, we may arrive at a prob- al ile esl imate of consumption. The aver- age of eleven years, from 1790 to 1800, inclusive, will be found to be two mil- lions and a half of pounds. From 1801 to 1812, inclusive, the average was three millions seven hundred thousand; and the average of the last three years, to wit, 1821, 1822, and 1823, was five millions and a half. Having made a ju-t allowance for the increase of our numbers, we shall still find, I think, from these statements, that there is no distress which has limited our means of subsistence and enjoyment. In forming an opinion of the degree of general prosperity, we may regard, likewise, the progress of internal im- provements, the investment of capital in roads, bridges, and canals. All these prove a balance of income over expendi- t are ; they afford ei idence that there is a surplus of profits, which the present generation i- usefully vesting for the benefit of the next. Il cannot be denied, that, in this particular, the progress of the country is steady ami rapid. We may look, too, to the sums ex- ided for education. Are our colleges d? Do fathers find themselv< - less able than usual to educate their children'.'' It will be found, I imagine, that the amount paid for the purpose of education is constantly increasing, and that the schools and colleges were never more full than at the present moment. I may add, that the endowment of public charities, the contributions to objects of general benevolence, whether foreign or domestic, the munificence of individuals towards whatever promises to benefit the community, are all so many proofs of national prosperity. And, finally, there is no defalcation of revenue', no pressure of taxation. The general result, therefore, of a fair examination of the present condition of things, seems to me to be, that there is a considerable depression of prices, and curtailment of profit; and in some parts of the country, it must be admitted, there is a great degree of pecuniary embarrassment, arising from the diffi- culty of paying debts which were con- tracted when prices were high. With these qualifications, the general state of the country may be said to be prosper- ous ; and these are not sufficient to give to the whole face of affairs any appear- ance of general distress. Supposing the evil, then, to be a de- pression of prices, and a partial pecuni- ary pressure, the next inquiry is into the causes of that evil; and it appears to me that there are several; and in this respect, I think, too much has been im- puted by Mr. Speaker to the single cause of the diminution of exports. Con- nected, as we are, with all the commer- cial nations of the world, and having observed great changes to take place elsewhere, we should consider whether the causes of those changes have not reached us, and whether we are not suffering by the operation of them, in common with others. Undoubtedly, there has been a great f all in the price of all commodities throughout the com- mercial world, in consequence of the restoration of a state of peace. When the Allies entered France in 1814, prices rose astonishingly fast, and very high. Colonial produce, for instance, in the porta of this country, as well as else- THE T \un r 81 where, sprung op suddenly from the lowest to the highest extreme. A new and vast demand was created Eor the commodities of trade. These were 1 1 ± * - natural consequences of tin' great | -< > 1 i t i - cal changes which then took place in Europe. We arc to consider, too, thai our own | war created \ demand, and thai a government expenditure of twenty-five or thirty million dollars a year had the usual effecl of enhancing prices. We are obliged to add, thai the paper issues of our banks carried the sail ffeel stall further. A depreciated currency existed in a great part of the country: depreciated to such an extent, that, at one time, exchange between the centre and the North was as high as twenty per cent. The Bank of the United States was instituted to correct this evil; but, for causes which it is not necessary now to enumerate, it did not for some years bring back the currency of the country to a sound state. This depreciation of the circulating currency was so much, of course, added to the nominal prices of commodities, and these prices, thus unnaturally high, seemed, to those who looked only at the appearance, to indicate great pros- perity. But such prosperity is more specious than real, it would have been better, probably, as the shock would have been less, if prices had fallen sooner. At length, however, they fell; and as there is little doubt that certain events in Europe had an influence in determining the time at which this tall took place, I will advert shortly to some of the principal of those events. In -May. 1819, the British House of Commons decided, by a unanimous vote, that the resumption of cash payments by the Bank of England should not be deferred beyond the ensuing Febru- ary. The restriction had been contin- ued from time to time, and from year to year, Parliament always professing to look to the restoration of a specie currency whenever it should be found practicable. Having been, in July, 1818, continued to July, 1819, it was under- stood that, in the interim, the impor- tant question of the time at which c payments should be resumed ihould be finally settled. In the latter pa year 1818, the circulation Of the bank hail been greatlj redu I. and a -canity of money was Celt in the Lon- don market. Such was the Btate of thing- in England. On the Continent, other important events took ■ French Indemnity l.oan had been ne- gotiated in the summer of 1818, and the proportion of it belonging to Austria, Russia, and Prussia had been sold. This created an unusual demand for gold and silver in those countries. It has been stated, that the amount of the precious metals transmitted to Austria and Rus- sia in that year was at least twenty mil- lions sterling. Other large sum- v sent to Prussia and to Denmark. effect of this sudden drain of Bp felt first at Paris, was communic to Amsterdam and Hamburg, and all other commercial places in the North of Europe. The paper system of England had cer- tainly communicated an artificial value to property. It had encouraged -pecu- lation, and excited over-trading. When the shock therefore came, and this vio- lent pressure for money acted at the same moment on the Continent and in England, inflated and unnatural p could be kept up no longer. A reduc- tion took place, which has 1 u esti- mated to have been at least equal I fall of thirty, if not forty per cent. I depression was universal ; and the cha was felt in the United States sev< though not equally bo in every I There are those, I am aware, who main- tain that the events to which 1 have al- luded did not cause the great fall of prices, but that that fall was natural and inevitable, from the previously i state of things, tie- abundance of com- modities, ami tin- want of demand. But that would only prove that tl. wa- produced in another way. rather t ban by another cause. If the I and sudden call- for monej did n ' duce price-, but pi i . a- of them- selves, t" tln-ir natural state, still the re- sult lame; for we .\'' that, s-j THE TARIFF. after these new calls for money, prices could not be kept longer at their un- natural height. About the time of these foreign events, our own bank system underwent a change ; and all these causes, in my view of the subject, concurred to pro- duce the great Bhock which took place in our commercial cities, and in many parts of the country. The year 1819 was a year of numerous failures, and very considerable distress, and would have furnished far better grounds than exist at present for that gloomy repre- sentation of our condition which has been presented. Mr. Speaker has al- luded to the strong inclination which exists, or has existed, in various parts of the country, to issue paper money, as a proof of great existing difficulties. I regard it rather as a very productive cause of those difficulties; and the com- mittee will not fail to observe, that there is. at this moment, much the loudest complaint of distress precisely where there lias been the greatest attempt to relieve it by systems of paper credit. And. mi the other hand, content, pros- perity, and happiness are most observa- ble in those parts of the country where there has been the least endeavor to ad- minister relief by law. In truth, noth- ing is so baneful, so utterly ruinous to all true industry, as interfering with the legal value of money, or attempting to raise artificial standards to supply its place. Such remedies suit well the spirit <>f extravagant, speculation, but they sap the very foundation of all honest, acqui- sition. By weakening the security of property, they take away all motive for exertion. Their effect is to transfer property. Whenever a debt is allowed to I''' paid h\ any thing less valuable than the legal currency in respect to which it was contracted, the difference between the value of the paper given in ]..!■, in. nt and the legal currency is pre- cise! . much property taken from one man and given to anol her, by legislative enactment. When we talk, theref >i ■■. of proteel - ing industry, let us remember that the first measure for that cud is to secure it in its earnings; to assure it that it shall receive its own. Before we invent new modes of raising prices, let us take care that existing prices are not rendered wholly unavailable, by making them capable of being paid in depreciated paper. I regard, sir, this issue of ir- redeemable paper as the most prominent and deplorable cause of whatever press- ure still exists in the country ; and, further, I would put the question to the members of this committee, whether it is not from that part of the people who have tried this paper system, and tried it to their cost, that this bill receives the most earnest support? And I can- not forbear to ask, further, whether this support does uot proceed rather from a general feeling of uneasiness under the present condition of things, than from the clear perception of any benefit which the measure itself can confer ? Is not all expectation of advantage centred in a sort of vague hope, that change may produce relief? Debt certainly presses hardest where prices have been longest kept up by artificial means. They find the shock lightest who take it soonest; and I fully believe that, if those parts of the country which now suffer most had not augmented the force of the blow by deferring it, they would have now been in a much better condition than they are. We may assure ourselves, once for all, Sir, that there can be no such thing as payment of debts by legislation. We may abolish debts indeed ; we may trans- fer property by visionary and violent laws. l!ut we deceive both ourselves ami our constituents, if we flatter either ourselves or them with the hope that there is any relief against whatever pressure exists, but in economy and in- dustry. The depression of prices and the stagnation of business have been in truth the necessary result of cir- cumstances. No government could pre- venl them, and no government can al- together relieve the people from their effect. We have enjoyed a day of ex- traordinary prosperity; we had been neutral while the world was at war, and had found a great demand lor our prod- ucts, our navigation, and our labor. We THE TARIFF. had no righi to expecl thai thai state of things would continue always. With the return of peace, Foreign nations would straggle for themselves, aud enter into competition with us in the great objects of pursuit. Now, Sir, what is the remedy for existing evils? What is the course of policy suited to our actual condition? Certainly it is nol our w isdom to adopl any system that may be offered to US, without examination, and in the blind hope that whatever changes our con- dition may improve it. It is better that we should ■• bear those ills we hare, Than fly to others thai we know not of." We are bound to see that there is a fit- ness and an aptitude in whatever meas- ures may be recommended to relieve the e\ ils that atfiiet us; and before we adopl a system that professes to make great alterations, it is our duty to look care- fully to each Leading interest of the com- munity, and see how it may probably be affected by our proposed legislation. And, in the first place, what is the condition of our commerce? Here we must clearly perceive, that it is not en- joying that rich harvest which fell to it- fortune during the continuance of the European wars. It has been greatly depressed, and limited to small profits. Still, it is elastic and active, and seems capable of recovering itself in some measure from its depression. The ship- ping interest, also, has suffered severely, still more severely, probably, than com- merce. If any thing should strike as with astonishment, it is thai the navi- gation of the United States should be able to sustain itself. Without anj eminent protection whatever, it goes abroad to challenge competition with tlie whole world: and, in spit" of all ob- stacles, it has yet been able to maintain eight hundred thousand tons in the em- ployment of foreign trade. How. Sir. do the ship-owners and navigators ac- complish this ? How is it that tie- able to meet, and in some measu come, universal competition ? It is not, Sir, by protection and bounties; but by unwearied exertion, by extreme • omy, by unshaken perseverance, i>. that manl\ and resolute Bpiril which r< on itself i,, proteel itself. Thesi alone enable American mips still to their element, and -how the nag of their country in distanl seas. I he insurance may teach us Hom thoroughly our ship- are built, and how skilfully and safely they are na\ ig ited. 1: are taken, as I learn, from the Unite I states to Liverpool, .-it one per cenl ; and from the United Mat. I ntOd and back, as low as three per cent, lint when we look to the low rate of freight, and when we consider, also, thai the articles entering into the composition of a ship, w ith tl sception of wood, are dearer here than in other countries, we cannot but be utterly surprised thai the shipping interest has been able to tain itself at all. I need nol say that the na\ igation of the count] intial to its honor and its defence. Yet, in- of proposing benefits for it in this hour of its depression, we threaten by this measure to Lay upon it new and h burdens. In the discussion, tie- other day, of that provision of the bill which proposes to tax tallow for the benel the oil-merchants and whalemen, we bad the pleasure of hearing eloquenl eulo- eiinus u] ion that portion of OUT shipping employed in the w hale-fishery, and Btrong statements of it- importance to the pub- lic interest. p,ut the same bill pro] ere tax upon that interesl . for benefil of tic iron-manufacturer and hemp-grower. So that the tallow-chand- lers and soapboilers are sacrificed to the oil-merchants, in order that these again may contribute to the manufacture: iron and the growers of hemp. It such lie the state of our comm and navigation, what i- the conditio! our home manufacture-^ 1 1 they amid-t the general depression? I 1 n 1 further protection? and if .1 how much? < »n all these p" : have had much general but little precise information. In the \ elaborate ^] h of Mr. Spe ik( r not supplied with - inds of judging with respect to these v.n 8-i THE TARIFF. particulars. Who can tell, from any thing yet before the committee, whether the proposed duty be too high or too low on any one article? Gentlemen tell u<. that they are in favor of domestic industry; so am I. They would give it protection; so would I. But then all domestic industry is not confined to manufactures. The employments of agriculture, commerce, ami navigation are all branches of the same domestic industry: they all furnish employment for American capital and American labor. And when the question is, whether new duties shall be laid, for tiie purpose of giving further encourage- ment to particular manufactures, every reasonable man must ask himself, both whether the proposed new encourage- ment be necessary, and whether it can be given without injustice to other branches of industry. It is desirable to know, also, some- what more distinctly, how the proposed means will produce the intended effect. One great object proposed, for example, is the increase of the home market for the consumption of agricultural prod- uct-. Tins certainly is much to be desired; bul what provisions of the bill are expected wholly or principally to produce this, is not stated. 1 would not deny that some increase of the home market may follow, from the adoption of this bill, but all its provisions have not an equal tendency to produce this effect. Those manufactures which em- ploy mosl labor, create, of course, most i nid lor articles of consumption; and those create least in the production Of which capital and skill enter as the chief ingredients of cost. I cannot. Sir, take this hill merely because a com- mittee has recommended it. 1 cannot ■ .ii—.- ;i side, and fight under a llag. I wholly repel the idea that we must take this law. or pass no law on the Subject. What should hinder us from cising our own judgments upon these provisions, singly and severally? Who ha- the power to place us, or why should we place ourselves, in a condition where we cannot give to every measure, that i> distinct ami separate in itself, a separate and distinct consideration? Sir, I presume no member of the com- mittee will withhold his assent from what he thinks right, until others will yield their assent to what they think wrong. There are many things in this hill acceptable, probably, to the general sense of the House. Why should not these provisions be passed into a law, and others left to be decided upon their own merits, as a majority of the House shall see tit? To some of these pro- visions I am myself decidedly favora- ble; to others I have great objections; and I should have been very glad of an opportunity of giving my own vote dis- tinctly on propositions which are, in their own nature, essentially and sub- stantially distinct from one another. But, Sir, before expressing my own opinion upon the several provisions of this bill, 1 will advert for a moment to some other general topics. We have heard much of the policy of England, and her example has been repeatedly urged upon us. as proving, not only the expediency of encouragement and pro- tection, but of exclusion and direct prohibition also. I took occasion the other day to remark, that more liberal notions were becoming prevalent on this subject; that the policy of restraints and prohibitions was getting out of repute, as the true nature of commerce became better understood; and that, among public men. those most distinguished were most decided in their reprobation of the broad principle of exclusion and prohibition. Upon the truth of this representation, as matter of fact., 1 sup- posed there could not be two opinions among those who had observed the progress of political sentiment in other countries, and were acquainted with its presenl state. In this respect, however, it would seem thai I was greatly mis- tale n. We have heard it again and again declared, that the English govern- ment still adheres, with immovable firm- ness, to its old doctrines of prohibition; that although journalists, theorists, and Scientific writers advance other doc- trines, yet the practical men, (he legis- lators, the government of the country, THF TARIFF. 35 arc too wise to follow them. If. lias even been most sagaciously hinted, that tin' promulgation of Libera] opinions on these Bubjecte is intended only to delude other governments, to cajole them into the E0II3 "i liberal Ideas, while England retains to herself all the benefits of tli<' admirable old system of prohibition. We have heard Erom Mr. Speaker a warm commendation of the complex mechanism of this system. The British empire, it is said. is. in the first place, tn be protected against the rest of the world; then the British Isles against the colonies; next, the isles respectively againsl each other. England herself, as the heart of the empire, being protected most of all. and against all. Truly. Sir. it appears to me that Mr. Speaker's imagination has seen system, and order, and beauty, in that, which is much more justly considered as the result of ignorance, partiality, or vio- lence. This part of English legislation has resulted, partly from considering Ireland as a conquered country, partly from the want of a complete anion, even with Scotland, and partly from the narrow views of colonial regulation, which in early and uninformed periods influenced the European states. Nothing. I imagine, would strike the public men of England more singularly, than to find gentlemen of real informa- tion and much weight in the councils of this country expressing sentiments like these, in regard to the existing state of these English laws. 1 have never said, indeed, that prohibitory laws do not exist in England; we all know they do; but the question is, Does she owe her prosperity and greatness to these laws? I venture to say, that such is not the opinion of public men now in England, and the continuance of the laws, even without any alteration, would not be evidence that their opinion is different from what I have represented it; be- cause the laws having existed long, and great interests having been built up on the faith of them, they cannot now be repealed without great and overwhelm- ing inconvenience. Because a thing has been wrongly done, it does not therefore Follow that it <-. l n n ,,w |„. undone; and this is the reason, 1 understand it. for which exclusion, hibition, and monopoly are suffered to remain in an\ degree in the En 1 system ; and for the ame res ion, it will be wise in us to take our measures, <>n all subjects of this kind, with caution. H'c mas not !»• able, bll the hazard of much injury to individuals, hereafter to retrai ur Bteps. And yet, whatever i- extravaganl or unreasonable is not likely to endure. There may come a moment of strong reaction 5 ami if no moderation be shown in laying on duties, there may be as little -criiplc in taking them off. It may be here observed, that thei a broad and marked distinction between entire prohibition and reasonable encour agement. It is one thin--, by dutii taxes on foreign articles, to awaken a home competition in tin- production of the same articles : it is another t ! 1 i 1 .. remove all competition by a total ex- clusion of the foreign article; and it is quite another thing still, by total pro- hibition, to raise op at home main tures not suited to the climate, the nature of the country, or the state of the population./ These ;in . substantial distinctions, and although it may ii"t be easy in every case to determine which of them applies to a given article, yet the distinctions themselves exist, and in mosl cases will be sufficiently clear to indicate the true course of policy; and. unless I have greatly mis- taken the prevailing sentiment in the councils of England, it -tow- every day more and more favorable to the diminution of restriction-, and to the wisdom of leaving much (1 do not Bay every thing, for that would not be true) to the enterprise ami the discretion of individuals. I should certainly not have taken up the time of the committee it.- at any length tin' opinions of other governments, or of the public men of other countries, upon a subject like this; but an occasional remark made by me the other day. having beei directly controverted, especially by Mr. deer, in hi.- observation day, A Mi THE TARIFF. 1 musl take occasion to refer to some proofs of what I have stated. What, then, is the state of English opinion? Everybody knows that, after the termination of the late European war, there came a time of great press- ure in England. Since her example has ) n uuoted, let it be asked in what mode her government sought relief. Did it aim to maintain artificial and unnatural prices? Did it maintain a swollen and extravagant paper circula- tion? Did it carry further the laws of prohibition and exclusion? Did it, draw closer the cords of colonial re- straint? No, Sir. but precisely the reverse. Instead of relying on legisla- tive contrivances and artificial devices, it trusted to the enterprise and industry of the people, which it sedulously sought to excite, not by imposing restraint, but by removing it, wherever its removal was practicable. In .May, 1820, the at- tention of the government having been much turned to the state of foreign trade, a distinguished member 1 of the House of Peers brought forward a Par- liamentary motion upon that subject, followed by an ample discussion and a full statement of his own opinions. In the course of his remarks, he observed, " that there ought to be no prohibitory duties as such; for that it was evident, that, where a manufacture could not be carried on, or a production raised, but under the protection of a prohibitory duty, that manufacture, or that prod- uce, coidd H"t be brought to market but at a loss. In his opinion, the name of strict prohibition might, therefore, in commerce, be got rid of altogether ; but. he did not see the same objection to protecting duties, which, while they admitted of the introduction of com- modities iidin abroad similar to those which \\e ourselves manufactured, placed them bo much on a level as to allow a competition between them." • No axiom," he added. " was more true than this: that it was by growing whal the territory of a country could giow most cheaply, and by receiving 1 Lord Lansdowoe. from other countries what it could not produce except at too great an expense, that the greatest degree of happiness was to be communicated to the greatest extent of population." In assenting to the motion, the first minister 2 of the crown expressed his own opinion of the great advantage re- sulting from unrestricted freedom of trade. " < >f the soundness of that gen- eral principle," he observed, " I can entertain no doubt. I can entertain no doubt of what would have been the great advantages to the civilized world, if the system of unrestricted trade had been acted upon by every nation from the earliest period of its commercial in- tercourse with its neighbors. If to those advantages there could have been any exceptions, I am persuaded that they would have been but few; and I am also persuaded that the cases to which they would have referred would not have been, in themselves, con- nected with the trade and commerce of England. But we are now in a situation in which, I will not say that a reference to the principle of un- restricted trade can be of no use, because such a reference may correct erroneous reasoning, but in which it is impossible for us, or for any country in the world but the United States of America, to act unreservedly On that principle. The commercial regulations of the European world have been long established, and cannot suddenly be departed from." Having supposed a proposition to be made to England by a foreign state lb r free commerce and in- tercourse, and an unrestricted exchange of agricultural products and of manu- factures, he proceeds to observe: "It would be impossible to accede to such a proposition. We have risen to our pres- ent greatness under a different system. Some Buppose that we have risen in consequence of that system: others, of whom I am "in , in i'n ve that we have risen in spitt of thai sysU m. But, whichever of these hypotheses be true, certain it is thai we have risen under a very dilTer- - Lord Liverpool. Tin: T.\i;ii i B7 iMit system (li;in thai >>i free ami an re- stricted trade. It is utterly impossible, with our ilflii ami taxation, even it they were bui half their existing amount, that we can suddenly adopt the system of free trade." Lord Ellenborough, in the Bame de- bate* said, " thai lie attributed the gen- eral distress then existing in Kurope to the regulations that had taken place since the destruction of the French power. Most of the states on the Con- tinent had surruinided themselves as with walls of brass, to inhibit inter- course with other states. Intercourse was prohibited, even in districts of the same state, as was the case in Austria and Sardinia. Thus, though the taxes on the people had been lightened, the severity of their condition had beeu in- creased, lie believed that the discon- tent which pervaded most parts of Europe, and especially Germany, was more owing to commercial restrictions than to any theoretical doctrines on gov- ernment; and that a free communica- tion anions;- them would do more to restore tranquillity, than any other step that could be adopted. He objected to all attempts to frustrate the benevolent intentions of Providence, which had given to various countries various wants. in order to bring them together. lie objected to it as anti-social; he objected to it as making commerce the means of barbarizing instead of enlightening na- tions. The state of the trade with France was must disgraceful to both countries* the two greatest civilized na- tions of the world, placed at a distance of scarcely twenty miles from each other, had contrived, by their artificial regulations, to reduce their commerce with each other to a mere nullity." Every member speaking on this occa- sion agreed in the general sentiments favorable to unrestricted intercourse, which had thus been advanced; one of them remarking, at the conclusion of the debate, that. •■ the principles of free trade, which he was happy to see so fully recognized, were of the utmost consequence; for, though, in the pres- ent circumstances of the country, a free hade was unattainable, yel their I hereafter was to approximate t" Considering the prejudices and in- terests \\ liieh were opposed to the 1 1 uition of that principle, it w mall indication of the firmness ami liberal- ity of government to ha ceded it." sir, we have Been, in the coursi this discussion, that several gentlemen have expressed their high admiration of the silk manufacture of England, lis commendation was begun, 1 think the honorable member from Vermont, who sits near me, who thinks that that alone gives conclusive evidence "I the benefits produced bj attention t<> manu- factures, inasmuch as ii i- a great of wealth to tin' nation, and has amply repaid all the cosl of its protection. .Mr. Speaker's approbation of this part of the English example was still warmer. Now, Sir, it does so happen, that both these gentlemen differ very widely on this point from the opinions entertained in England, by persons of the first rank, both as to knowledge and power. In the debate to which I have already referred, the proposer of the motion urged the expediency of providing for the admission of the silks of Prance into England. " He was aware. - ' be said. '• that there was a [ r and in- dustrious body of manufacturers, wl interests musl suffer by such an ar- rangement; and therefore he felt that it w mild lie the duty o\ Parliament provide for the present generation by ;v large Parliamentary grant. It was con- formable to every principle of Bound justice to do bo, \\ h -n the interests particular class \\<-v sacrificed to tic good of the whole." In answer to these observations, Lord Liverpool that, with reference to BeversJ branches of manufactures, time, ami the ch . of circumstances, had rendered tie t.-iu of protecting duties merely nom- inal; and that, in his opinion, if all ecting laws which regarded both the woollen and cotton manufactut to be repealed, no injurious would thereby !»• occasioned. " Hut," •• witli . to silk, that 88 THE TARIFF. manufacture in this kingdom is so com- pletely artificial, that any attempt to introduce the principles of free trade with reference to it might put an end to it altogether. I allow that the silk manufacture is not natural to this coun- try. / wish we //nil never had a silk manufactory. I allow that it is natural to France; I allow that it might have been better, had each country adhered exclusively to that manufacture in which each is superior; and had the silks of France been exchanged for British cottons. But I must look at things as they are; and when I consider the extent of capital, and the immense population, consisting, I believe, of about fifty thousand persons, engaged in our silk manufacture, I can only say, that one of the few points in which I totally disagree with the proposer of the motion is the expediency, under exist- ing circumstances, of holding out any idea that it would be possible to re- linquish the silk manufacture, and to provide for those who live by it, by Parliamentary enactment. Whatever objections there may be to the continu- ance of the protecting system, I repeat, that it is impossible altogether to relin- quish it. I may regret that the system was ever commenced; but as I cannot recall that act, 1 must submit to the in- convenience by which it is attended, rather than expose the country to evils of greater magnitude." Let it be re- membered, Sir, that these are not the sentiments of a theorist, nor the fancies of speculation; but the operative opin- ions of the first minister of England, acknowledged to be one of the ablest and most practical statesmen of his count ry. Gentlemen could have hardly been more unfortunate than in the selection of the silk manufacture in England as an example of the beneficial effects of that system which they would recom- mend. It is, in the language which I have quoted, completely artificial. It has been sustained by I know not how many laws, breaking in upon the plain- principles of general expediency. At the last session of Parliament, the manufacturers petitioned for the repeal of three or four of these statutes, com- plaining of the vexatious restrictions which they impose on the wages of labor; setting forth, that a great variety of orders has from time to time been issued by magistrates under the au- thority of these laws, interfering in an oppressive manner with the minutest details of the manufacture,- — such as limiting the number of threads to an inch, restricting the widths of many sorts of work, and determining the quantity of labor not to be exceeded without extra wages ; that by the oper- ation of these laws, the rate of wages, instead of being left to the recognized principles of regulation, has been arbi- trarily fixed by persons whose ignorance renders them incompetent to a just de- cision; that masters are compelled by law to pay an equal price for all work, whether well or ill performed ; and that they are wholly prevented from using improved machinery, it being ordered, that work, in the weaving of which machinery is employed, shall be paid precisely at the same rate as if done by hand; that these acts have frequently given rise to the most vexatious regula- tions, the unintentional breach of which has subjected manufacturers to ruinous penalties; and that the introduction of all machinery being prevented, by which labor might be cheapened, and the manu- facturers being compelled to pay at a fixed price, under all circumstances, they are unable to afford employment to their workmen, in times of stagnation of trade, and are compelled to stop their looms. And finally, they complain that, notwithstanding, these grievances under which they labor, while carrying on their manufacture in London, the law still prohibits them, while they continue to reside t here, from eniplov ing any portion of their capital in the same business in any other pari of the kingdom, where it might be more beneficially conducted. Now. Sir, absurd as these laws must appear to be to every man, the attempt to repeal them did not, as far as 1 recol- lect, altogether succeed. Tin; weavers were too numerous, their interests too Tin-: TAiiiiF. great, or their prejudices too strong; and this notable instance of protection and monopoly still exists, to be lamented in England with as much sincerity as it seems to be admired here. In order further to show the prevail- ing sentiment of the English govern- ment, I would refer to a report of a select committee of the House of Com- mons, at the head of which was the Vice-President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Wallace), in duly, 1820. "The time," say that committee, "when monopolies could he successfully sup- ported, or would he patiently endured, either in respect to subjects against sub- jects, or particular countries against the rest of the world, seems to have passed away. Commerce, to continue undis- turbed and secure, must he, as it was intended to he, a source of reciprocal amity between nations, and an inter- change of productions to promote the industry, the wealth, and the happiness of mankind." In moving for the re- appointment of the committee in Feb- ruary, 1823, the same gentleman said: '• We must also get rid of that feeling of appropriation which exhibited itself in a disposition to produce every thing necessary for our own consumption, and to render ourselves independent of the world. No notion could be more absurd or mischievous; it led, even in peace, to an animosity and rancor greater than existed in time of war. Undoubtedly there would be great prejudices to com- bat, both in this country and elsewhere, in the attempt to remove the difficulties which are most obnoxious. It would be impossible to forget the attention which was in some respects due to the present system of protections, although that attention ought certainly not to be carried beyond the absolute necessity of the case." And in a second report of the committee, drawn by the same gentleman, in that part of it which pro- poses a diminution of duties on timber from the North of Europe, and the policy of giving a legislative preference to the importation of such timber in the log, and a discouragement of the impor- tation of deals, it is stated that the com- mittee reject this policy, becau e, among other reasons, " it is founded on a prin- ciple of exclusion, \\ hich thej are n averse to see broughl into operation, in any new \n8tance, withoul the warrant of some evident ami greal polil ical pediency." And on mans Bubsequenl occasions the same gentleman has taken occasion to observe, thai he differed iViiin those who thoughl thai manufac- tures could not flourish withoul restric- tions on trade; thai old prejudices of that sort were dying a\\a\. and that more liberal and just sentiments were taking their place. These sentiments appear to have 1 n followed by important legal provisions, calculated to remove restrictions and prohibitions where they were tnosl verely felt; that is to say. in ,-everal branches of navigation and trade. They have relaxed their colonial system, they have opened the ports of their islands, and have done away the restriction which limited the trade of the colonj to the mother country. Colonial products can now be carried directly from the islands to any part of Europe; and it may not be improbable, considering our ow n high duties on spirits, that that article may be exchanged hereafter by the English West India colonies directly for the tim- ber and deals of the Baltic. It may be added, that Mr. Lowe, whom the gentle- man has cited, says, thai nobody sii|>- poses that the three great Btapl< English manufacture-, cotton, woollen, and hardware, are benefited by any existing protecting duties; and that one objeel of all these protecting laws is usually overlooked, and that is, that thc\ have been intended to reconcile the various interests to taxation; the corn law, for example, being designed as some equivalent to the agricultural in- terest for the burden of tithes and of poor-rates. In fine, Sir, I think it is clear, that. if we now embrace the system of prohi- bitions and restrictions, we -hall show an affection for what others have dis- carded, and 06 attempting to ornament ourselves with cast-off apparel. Sir, I -hould not have - :>t- settling the con- troversy between the oil-merchants and the tallow-chandlers, the balance of trade made its appearance in debate, and I must, confess, Sir, thai I spoke of it, or rather spoke to it. somewhat freely ami irreverently. I believe I asi 'I the lend names which have been imputed to me, and I did it simply for the purpose of laying the spectre, and driving it back to its tomb. Certainly, sir, when I called the old notion on this Bubject nonsense, 1 did not suppose that I should often, 1 any one, unless the dead should happen to hear me. All the Living gen- eration, I took it for granted, would think the term very properly applied. In this, however, I was mistaken. The dead and the living rise up together to call me to account, and I must defend myself as well as I am able. Let us inquire, then, Sir, what is meant by an unfavorable balance of trade, and what the argument is, drawn from that source. By an unfavorable balance of trade, I understand, is meant that state of things in which importation exceeds exportation. To apply it to our . own case, if the value of goods Imported exceed the value of those exported, then the balance, of trade is said to be against us, inasmuch as we have run in deW to the amount of this difference. There- fore it is said, that, if a nation continue long in a commerce like this, it must be rendered absolutely bankrupt. It is in the condition of a man that buys more than he sells; and how can such a traffic be maintained without ruin? Nov% . Sir, the whole fallacy of this argument con- sists in supposing, that, whenever the value of imports exceeds that of ports, a debt is necessarily created to the extent of the difference, when ordinarily, the import is no more than the result of the export, augmented in value by the labor of transportation. The excess of imports over exports, iit~j truth, usually shows the gains, not the losses, of trade; or, in a country that 92 THE TARIFF. not only buys and soils goods, but em- ploys ships in carrying goods also, it shows bhe profits of commerce, and the earnings of navigation. Nothing is more certain than that, in the usual course of things, and taking a series of years to- gether, the value of our imports is the aererreeate of our exports and our freights. If the value of commodities imported in a given instance did not ex- ceed the value of the outward cargo, with which they were purchased, then it would be clear to every man's common sense, that the voyage had not been profitable. If such commodities fell far short in value of the cost of the outward cargo, then the voyage would be a very los- ing one; and yet it would present exactly that state of things, which, according to the notion of a balance of trade, can alone indicate a prosperous commerce. On the other hand, if the return cargo were found to be worth much more than the outward cargo, while the merchant, having paid for the goods exported, and nil the expenses of the voyage, finds a handsome sum yet in his hands, which he calls profits, the balance of trade is still against him, and. whatever he may think of it, he is in a very bad way. Although one individual or all individ- uals gain, the nation loses; while all its citizens grow rich, the country grows poor. This is the doctrine of the bal- ance of trade. Allow me, Sir, to give an instance tending to show how unaccountably in- dividuals deceive themselves, and im- agine themselves to be. somewhat rap- idly mending their condition, while they ought t«. he persuaded that, by thai in- fallible standard, the balance of trade, they are on the high road to ruin. Some years ago s in better times than the pres- ent, a ship left one of the towns of New England with 70,000 specie dollars. She I seeded to Mocha, on the Bed Sea. and there laid oul these dollars in coffee, drugs, spices, and other articles procured in that market. With this new cargo she proceeded to Europe; two thirds of it were sold in Holland Eor 8130,000, which the ship broughl hack, and placed in the same hank from the vaults of which she had taken her original outfit. The other third was sent to the ports of the Mediterranean, and produced a re- turn of $25,000 in specie, and .$15,000 in Italian merchandise. These sums to- gether make $170,000 imported, which is $100,000 more than was exported, and is therefore proof of an unfavorable bal- ance of trade, to that amount, in this adventure. We should find no great difficulty. Sir, in paying off our bal- ances, if this were the nature of them all. The truth is, Mr. Chairman, that all these obsolete and exploded notions had their origin in very mistaken ideas of the true nature of commerce. Commerce is not a gambling among nations for a stake, to be won by some and lost by others. It has not the tendency neces- sarily to impoverish one of the parties to it, while it enriches the other; all parties gain, all parties make profits, all parties grow rich, by the operations of just and liberal commerce. If the world had but one clime and but one soil; if all men had the same wants and the same means, on the spot of their exist- ence, to gratify those wants, — then, in- deed, what one obtained from the other by exchange would injure one party in the same degree that it benefited the other: then, indeed, there would be some foundation for the balance of trade. But Providence has disposed our lot much more kindly. We inhabit a various earth. We have reciprocal wants, and reciprocal means for gratifying one another's wants. This is the true ori- gin of commerce, which is nothing more than an exchange of equivalents, and. from the rude barter of its primitive stale, to the refined and complex condi- tion in which we see it, its principle is uniformly the same, its only object being, in every stage, to produce that exchange of commodities between individuals and between nations which shall conduce to the advantage and to the happiness of both. Commerce between nations has the same essential character as com- merce between individuals, or between pails of the same nation. Cannot two individuals make an interchange of com- TI1K TARIFF. modifies which sliall prove beneficial to both, or in which tin- balance of trade shall be in favor of both? [f nol . the tailor and the si maker, the farmer and the smith, have hitherto very much misunderstood their own interests. And with regard to the internal trade of a country, in which the same rule would apply as between nations, do we ever speak of such an intercourse as prejudi- cial to our side because it is useful to the other? Do we ever hear that, be- cause the intercourse between New York and Albany is advantageous to one of those places, it must therefore be ruin- ous to the other'.-' May I be allowed. Sir, to read a pas- sage on this Bubjecl from the observa- tions of a gentleman, in my opinion one of the most clear and sensible writers and speakers of the age upon'subjects of this sort? 1 "There is no political question on which the prevalence of false principles is so general, as in what re- lates to the nature of commerce and to the pretended balance of trade; and there are few which have led to a greater number of practical mistakes, attended with consequences extensively prejudicial to the happiness of mankind. In this country, our Parliamentary pro- ceedings, our public documents, and the works of several aide and popular writers, have combined to propagate the impres- sion, that we are indebted for much of our riches to what is called the balance of trade." "Our true policy would surely be to profess, as the object and guide of our commercial system, thai which every man who has studied the subject must know to be the true prin- ciple of commerce, the interchange of reciprocal and equivalent benefit. We may rest assured that it is not in the nature of commerce to enrich one part} at the expense of the other. This is a purpose at which, if it were practicable, we ought not to aim; and which, if we aimed at, we could not accomplish*" These remarks, I believe, Sir. were writ- ten some ten or twelve years ago. They are in perfect accordance with the opin- 1 Mr. Hu-kisson, President of the English Board of Trade. ions advanced in more elaborate treal and now that the World hafl return. a state of peace, and oomra Burned its natural channels, and different nations are enjoying, or seeking to en their respective poi tiona of it, all sei justness of these ideas, —all see, that, ill this da\ of knowledge and of p. there can be no commerce between na- tions bin thai which shall benefit all who are pattiefl to it. If it were sessary, Mr. Chairman, I mighl ask the attention of the com- mittee to refer to a documenl befon on this subject of the balance ,,f trade. It will be seen by 1'eferelice to the ac- count j, that, in the course of the last vear. our total export to Holland ceeded two millions and a half; our total import from the SSJ ■oiintry was but Seven hundred thousand dollars. N can any man be wild enough to make any infer.' nee from this as to the gain Of Loss of our trade with Holland for that year.'' Our trade with Russia for the same year produced a balance the other way, our import being two millions, and our export but half a million. Bu1 this has no more tendency to show the I sian trade a Losing trade, than the other statemenl has to -how thai the Hutch trad" has 1 n a gainful one Neither of them, by itself, proves any thing. Springing out of this notion i balance of trade, there is another idea, which has been much dwelt upon in the course of this debate : that i-. thai OUghl not to buy of nations who do not buy of us; for example, thai the Russian trade Lea trad.- disadvantageous to the country, and OUghl to be discouraj I ause, in the ports of Russia, we buy more than we seU. N"W allow mo to observe, in the firsl place, Sir, that we have no account showing how much we do sell in the port- of Russia. < >ur official return- -how ii- only wh amount of our direct trade with her port-. Bui then we all kle-w thai proc 1- of another portion of out ports go to the same market, though in- directly. We -cud our own prod for example, to Cuba. OT to Bl tsi] : we there exchange them tor tl and 94 THE TARIFF. the coffee of those countries, and these articles we carry to St. Petersburg, and there sell them. Again; our exports to Holland and Hamburg are connected directly or indirectly with our imports from Russia. What difference does it make, in sense or reason, whether a cargo of iron be bought at St. Peters- burg, by the exchange of a cargo of tobacco, or \\ hether the tobacco has been sold on the way. in a better market, in a port of Holland, the money remitted to England, and the iron paid for by a bill on London? There might indeed have been an augmented freight, there might have been some saving of com- missions, if tobacco had been in brisk demand in the Russian market. But still there is nothing to show that the whole voyage may not have been highly ] trofitable. That depends upon the origi- nal cost of the article here, the amount be estimated. In regard to weights and measures, something drawn from exter- na] nature ig made a common standard, for the purposes of general convenience; and this is precisely tl Bice performed by the precious metals, in addition to those ases to which, as metals, they are capable of being applied. There may be of these too much or too little in a country at a particular time, as there may be of any other articles. When the market is overstocked with them, as it often is. their exportation becomes as proper and as useful as that of other commodities, under similar circumstan- ces. We need no more repine, when the dollars winch have been brought here from South America are despatched to other countries, than when coffee and sugar take the same direction. We often deceive ourselves, by attributing to a scarcity of money that which is the result of other causes. In the course of this debate, the honorable member from Pennsylvania 1 has represented the coun- try as full of every thing bul money. But this I take to be a mistake. The agricultural products, so abundanl in Pennsylvania, will not, he says, sell for money; but they will sell for money as quick as for any other article which hap- pens to be in demand. They will Bell for money, for example, as easily as for coffee or for tea. at the prices which properly belong to those articles. The mistake lies in imputing that to want of money which arises from want of demand. Men do not buy wheat lie- cause they have money, bul because they want wheat. To decide whether money be plenty or not, that is. whether there he a large portion of capital un- employed or not, when the currency of a country is metallic, we must look, not only to the prices of commodities, but also to the rate of interest. A low rate of interest, a facility of obtaining money on loans, a disposition to invest in per- manent stocks, all of which are proofs that money is plenty, may neverth i Mr. Tod. 9G THE TARIFF. often denote a state not of the highesl prosperity. They may, and often do, show a want of employment for capital; ami the accumulation of specie shows the Bame thing. We have no occasion for the precious metals as money, except for the purposes of circulation, or rather of sustaining a safe paper circulation. And whenever there is a prospect of a profitable investment abroad, all the gold and silver, except what these pur- poses require, will be exported. For the saint' reason, if a demand exist abroad for sugar and coffee, whatever amount of those articles mighl exist in the country, beyond th< j wants of its own consumption, would be sent abroad to meet that demand. Besides, Sir, how should it ever occur to anybody, that we should continue to export gold and silver, if we did not continue to import them also ? If a vessel take our own products to the Havana, or elsewhere, exchange them for dollars, proceed to China, exchange them for silks and teas, bring these last to the ports of the Mediterranean, sell them there for dollars, and return to the United States, — this would be a voyage resulting in the importation of the pre- cious metals. But if she had returned from Cuba, and the dollars obtained there had Keen shipped direct from the United States to China, the China goods sold in Holland, and the proceeds brought home in the hemp and iron of Russia, this would be a voyage in which they were exported. Yet everybody sees that both mighl be equally beneficial to the individual and to the public. I believe, Sir. that, in point of fact, we have en- joyed great benefit in our trade with India and China, from the liberty of going from place to place all over the world, without being obliged in the mean time to return home, a liberty not heretofore enjoyed bj the private traders of England, in regard to India and China. Suppose the American ship to be at Brazil, lor example: sin' could proceed with her dollars direct t" India, and. in return, could distribute her cargo in all the various ports of Europe or America; while an English ship, if a private trader, being at Brazil, must first return to England, and then could only proceed in the direct line from England to India. This advantage our countrymen have not. been backward to improve; and in the debate to which I have already so often referred, it was stated, not without some complaint of the inconvenience of exclusion, and the natural sluggishness of monopoly, that American ships were at that moment fitting out in the Thames, to supply France. Holland, and other countries on the Continent, with tea; while the East India Company would not do this of themselves, nor allow any of their fellow-countrymen to do it for them. There is yet another subject, Mr. Chairman, upon which I would wish to say something, if I might presume upon the continued patience of the commit- tee. We hear sometimes in the House, and continually out of it, of the rate of exchange, as being one proof that we areTbn the downward road to ruin. Mr. Speaker himself has adverted to that topic, and I am afraid that his author- ity may give credit to opinions clearly unfounded, and which lead to very false and erroneous conclusions. Sir, let us see what the facts are. Exchange on England has recently risen one or one and a half per cent, partly owing, per- haps, to the introduction of this bill into Congress. Before this recent rise, and for the last six months, I understand its average may have been about seven and a half per cent advance. Now, supposing this to be the real, and not merely, as it is, the nominal, par of ex- change between us and England, what would it, prove? Nothing, except that funds wore wanted by American citi- zens in England for commercial opera- tions, to be carried on either in England Or elsewhere. Itwould not, necessarily show that we were indebted to England; for, if we had occasion to pay debts in Russia or Holland, funds in England would naturally enough be required for such a purpose. Even if it did prove thai a balance was due England at the moment, it would have no tendency to THE TARIFF. '.'7 explain to us whether our commerce with England bad been profitable or unprof- itable. But it. is no! true, in poinl of Eacl . that the real price of exchange is Beven and a half per cent advance, nor, in- deed, that there is at the present mo- ment any advance at all. That is t<> say, it is nol true that merchants v\iU give such an advance, or any advance, for money in England, beyond what thej would give lor the same amount, in the same currency, here. It will Btrike everyone who reflects upon it, that, if there were a real difference of seven ami a half per cent, money would he imme- diately shipped in England; because the expense of transportation would he Ear less than that- difference. Or commodi- ties of trade would be .shipped to Eu- rope, and the proceeds remitted to Eng- land. If it could so happen, that American merchants should be willing to pay ten per cent premium for money in England, or, in other words, that a real difference to that amount in the exchange should exist, its effects would be immediately seen in new shipments of our own commodities to Europe, be- cause this state of things would create new motives. A cargo of tobacco, for example, might sell at Amsterdam for the same price as before; but if its pro- ceeds, when remitted to London, were advanced, as they would be in such case. ten per cent by the state of exchange, this would be so much added to the price, and would operate therefore as a motive for the exportation; and in this way na- tional balances are, and always will be, adjusted. To form any accurate idea of the true state of exchange between two countries, we must look at their currencies, and compare the quantities of gold and silver which they may respectively represent. This' usually explains the state of the exchanges; and this will satisfactorily account for the apparent advance now- existing on bills drawn on England. The English standard of value is gold; with us that office is performed by gold, and by silver also, at a fixed relation to each other. But our estimate of silver is rather higher, in proportion to gold, than most nations give it: it is higher, especially, than in England, al the pres- ent moment . The consequence i-, that siher, which remains a legal currency with us, stays here, while the gold has gone abroad; verifying the universal truth, that, if tWO Currencies be allowed to exist, of different values, that which is cheapesl will till up the whole cir- culation, for as much gold as will suffice to pay here a debl of a given amount, we can buy in England 03 .silver than would he necessary to pay the same debt here; and from this dif- ference in the value of Bilver a: wholly or in a great measure the pres- ent apparent difference in exchange. Spanish dollars sell now in England for four shillings and nine pence sterling per ounce, e.pial to one dollar and six cents. By our standard the same ounce is worth one dollar and sixteen cents, being a difference of about nine per cent. The true par of exchange, there- fore, is nine per cent. If a merchant here pay one hundred Spanish dollars for a, bill on England, at nominal par, in sterling money, that is for a hill of £22 His., the proceeds of this bill, when paid in England in the legal currency, will there purchase, at the present price of silver, one hundred and nine Spanish dollars. Therefore, if the nominal ad- vance on English bills do not exceed nine per cent, the real exchange is not against this country : in other words, it does not show that there is any pressing or particular occasion for the remittance of funds to England. A- little can he inferred from the occasional transfer of United States stock to England. Considering the in- terest paid on our stocks, tin; entire Stability of our credit, and the accumu- lation of capital in England, it i- not at all wonderful that investments should occasionally be made in our funds. Is a sort of countervailing fact, it may be Stated that English Btocks are now actu- ally held in this country, though proba- bly not to any considerable amount. 1 will now proceed, Sir, b OOOfl 98 THE TARIFF. objections of a more general nature to the course of Mr. Speaker's observations. He seems to me to argue the question as if all domestic Industry were con- fined to the production of manufactured articles; as if the employment of our own capital and our own labor, in the occupations of commerce and navigation, were not as emphatically domestic in- dustry as any other occupation. Some other gentlemen, in the course of the debate, have spoken of the price paid for every foreign manufactured article as so much given for the encouragement of foreign labor, to the prejudice of our own. But is not every such article the product of our own labor as truly as if we had manufactured it ourselves? Our labor has earned it, and paid the price for it. it is so much added to the stock of national wealth. If the commodity were dollars, nobody woidd doubt the truth of this remark; and it is precisely as correct in its application to any other commodity as to silver. One man makes a yard of cloth at home; another raises agricultural products and buys a yard of imported cloth. Both these are equally the earnings of domestic indus- try, and the only questions that arise in the case arc two: the first is, which is the best mode, under all the circum- stances, of obtaining the article; the second is, how far this first question is proper to be decided by government, and how tar it is proper to be left to individual discretion. There is no foundation lor the distinction which attributes to certain employments the peculiar appellation of American in- dustry; ami it is, in my judgment, extremely unwise to attempt such dis- criminai ions. We aii' asked, What nations have ever attained eminent prosperity with- out encouraging manufactures': 1 I may ask, Wliat nation ever nached the like prosperity without promoting foreign trade? I regard these interests as closely connected, and am of opinion that it should be our aim to can-'- them to flourish together. 1 know it would he very easj t" promote manufactures, at leasl i"i' a time, hut probably for a short time only, if we might act in dis- regard of other interests. We could cause a sudden transfer of capital, and a violent change in the pursuits of men. We could exceedingly benefit some classes by these means. But what, then, becomes of the interests of others? The power of collecting revenue by duties on imports, and the habit of the government of collecting almost its whole revenue in that mode, will enable us, without exceeding the bounds of moderation, to give great advantages to those classes of manufactures which we may think most useful to promote at home. What I object to is the im- moderate use of the power, — exclusions and prohibitions; all of which, as I think, not only interrupt the pursuits of individuals, with great injury to themselves and little or no benefit to the country, but also often divert our own labor, or, as it may very properly be called, our own domestic industry, from those occupations in which it is well employed and well_paid, to others in which it will be worse employed and worse paid. For my part, I see very little relief to those who are likely to be deprived of their employments, or who find the prices of the commodities which they need raised, in any of the alterna- tives which Mr. Speaker has presented. It is nothing to say that they may, if they choose, continue to buy the foreign article; the answer is, the price is aug- mented: nor that they may use the domestic article; the price of that also is increased. Nor can they supply them- selves by the substitution of their own fabric'. How can the agriculturist make his own iron? How can the ship-owner grow his own hemp ? But I have a vet stronger objection to the course of Mr. Speaker's reasoning; which is, that he leaves out of the case all that has been already done for the protection of manufactures, ami argues the question as if those interest* were now lor the firsl time to receive aid from duties on imports. I can hardly express the surprise I Iced that Mr. Speaker should fall into the common mode of expression used elsewhere, and TIIK TARIFF. 99 ask if wo will give our manufacturers no protection. Sir, look to the history of Our laws; look to the present state of our laws. Consider that our whole revenue, with a trilling exception, is collected at the custom-house, and always has been; and then say what propriety there is in calling on the gov- ernment for protection, as if no pro- tection had heretofore been afforded. The real question before us, in regard to all the important clauses of the bill, is not whether we will lay duties, but whether we will augment duties. The demand is for something more than exists, and yet it is pressed as if nothing existed. Jt is wholly forgotten that iron and hemp, for example, already pay a very heavy and burdensome duty; and, in short, from the general tenor of .Mr. Speaker's observations, one would infer that, hitherto, we had rather taxed our own manufactures than fostered them by taxes on those of other countries. We hear of the fatal policy of the tariff of 1816; and yet the law of 1816 was passed avowedly for the benefit of manu- facturers, and, with very few exceptions, imposed on imported articles very great additions of tax; in some important instances, indeed, amounting to a pro- hibition. Sir, on this subject, it becomes us at least to understand the real posture of the question. Let us not suppose that we are beginning the protection of manu- factures, by duties on imports. What we are asked to do is, to render those duties much higher, and therefore, in- stead of dealing in general commenda- tions of the benefits of protection, the friends of the bill, I think, are bound to make out a fair case for each of the manufactures which they propose to benefit. The government has already done much for their protection, and it ought to be presumed to have done enough, unless it be shown, by the facta and considerations applicable to each, that there is a necessity for doing more. On the general question, Sir, allow me to ask if the doctrine of prohibition, as a general doctrine, be not preposter- ous. Suppose all nations to act upon it; they would be prosperous, then, according to the argument, precisely in the proportion in which they abolished intercourse with one another. The of mutual commerce the better, upon this hypothesis. Protection and encour- agement may be, and doubtless are, sometimes, wise and beneficial, if kept within proper limits; but when carried to an extravagant height, or the point of prohibition, the absurd character of the system manifests itself. Mr. Speaker has referred to the Late Kinperor Napo- leon, as having attempted to naturalize the manufacture of cotton in France. lie did not cite a more extravagant part of the projects of that ruler, that is. his attempt to naturalize the growth of that plant itself, in France; whereas, we have understood that considerable dis- tricts in the South of France, and in Italy, of rich and productive lands, were at one time withdrawn from profitable uses, and devoted to raising, at great expense, a Little bad cotton. N'or have we been referred to the attempts, under the same system, to make sugar and coffee from common culinary vegetables ; attempts which served to fill the print- shops of Europe, and to show us how easy is the transition from what some think sublime to that which all admit to be ridiculous. The folly of some of these projects has not been surpassed, nor hardly equalled, unless it be by the philosopher in one of the satires of Swift, who so long labored to extract sunbeams from cucumbers. The poverty and unhappiness of Spain have been attributed to the want of protection to her own industry. If by this it be meant that the poverty of Spain is owing to bad government and bad laws, the remark is, in a great measure, just. Hut these very laws arc bad because they are restrictive, partial, and prohibitory. if prohibition were protection, Spain would seem to have bad enough of it. Nothing can exo I the barbarous rigidity of her colonial system, or tlie folly of her early com- mercial regulations. Unenlightened and bigoted legislation, the multitude of holidays, miserable roads, monopolies 100 THE TARIFF. on the part of government, restrictive laws, that oughl long since to have been abrogated, are generally, and 1 believe truly, reckoned the principal causes of the had state of the productive industry of Spain. Any partial improvement in her condition, or increase of her pros- perity, lias been, in all cases, the result of relaxation, and the abolition of whal was intended for favor and protection. In short. Sir, the general sense of this age sets, with a strong current, in favor of freedom of commercial intercourse, and unrestrained individual action. Miii yield up their notions of monopoly and restriction, as they yield up other prejudices, slowly and reluctantly; but they cannot withstand the general tide of opinion. Let me now ask, Sir, what relief this lull proposes to some of those great and essential interests of the country, the condition of which has been referred to as proof of national distress ; and which condition, although I do not think it makes out a case of distress, yet does indicate depression. And first, Sir, as to our foreign trade. Mr. Speaker has stated that there has been a considerable falling off in the tonnage employed in that trade. This is true, lamentably true. In my opinion, it, is one of those occurrences which ought to arrest our immediate, our deep, our most earnest attention. What does this bill propose for its relief? It proposes nothing hut new burdens. It proposes to diminish its employment, and it pro- poses, at the same time, to augment its expense, by subjecting it to heavier tax- ation, sir. then- is no interest, in regard to which a stronger case for protection c;in be made out, than the navigating interest. Whetherwe look at its present condition, which is admitted to be de- pressed, the number of persons connected with it. and dependent upon it for their daily bread, or its importance to the Country in a political point of view, it has claims upon our attention which cannot be surpassed. Bui what do we propose to do for it? I repeat, Sir, simpl\ to burden and to tax it. By batement which 1 have already sub- mitted to the committee, it appears that the shipping interest pays, annually, more than half a million of dollars in duties on articles used in the construc- tion of ships. We propose to add nearly, or quite, fifty per cent to this amount, at the very moment that we appeal to the languishing state of this interest as a proof of national distress. Let it be remembered that our shipping employed in foreign commerce has, at this mo- ment, not the shadow of government protection. It goes abroad upon the wide sea to make its own way, and earn its own bread, in a professed competition with the whole world. Its resources are its own frugality, its own skill, its own enterprise. It hopes to succeed, if it shall succeed at all, not by extraordinary aid of government, but by patience, vigi- lance, and toil. This right arm of the nation's safety strengthens its own mus- cle by its own efforts, and by unwearied exertion in its own defence becomes strong for the defence of the country. No one acquainted with this interest can deny that its situation, at this mo- ment, is extremely critical. We have left it hitherto to maintain itself or per- ish; to swim if it can, and to sink if it must. But at this moment of its ap- parent struggle, can we as men, can we as patriots, add another stone to the weight that threatens to carry it down? Sir, there is a limit to human power, and to human effort. I know the com- mercial marine of this country can do almost every thing, and bear almost ev- ery thing. Yet some things are impos- sible to be done, and some burdens may he impossible to be borne; and as it was the hist ounce that broke the back of the camel, so the last tax, although it were even a small one. may be decisive as to the power of our marine to sustain the conflid in which it is now engaged with all the commercial nations on the globe. Again, Mr. Chairman, the failures and the bankruptcies which have taken place in our large cities have been mentioned as proving the little success attending commerce, and its general decline. But this bill has no balm for those wounds. It is very remarkable, that when the TIIK TARIFF. 101 losses and disasters of certain manufac- turers, those of iron, for instance, are mentioned, it is done for the purpose of invoking aid Eor the distressed. Not so with the losses and disasters of com- merce; these last are narrated, and not [infrequently much exaggerated, to prove the ruinous nature of the employment, and to show that it ought to be aban- doned, and the capital engaged in it turned to other objects. It lias been often said, Sir, that our manufacturers have to contend, not only against the natural advantages of those who produce similar articles in foreign countries, but also against the action of foreign governments, who have great political interest in aiding their own manufactures to suppress ours. But have not these governments as great an interest to cripple our marine, by pre- venting the growth of our commerce and navigation ? What is it that makes us the object of the highest respect, or the most suspicious jealousy, to foreign states? What is it that most enables us to take high relative rank among the nations? I need not say that this re- sults, more than from any thing else, from that quantity of military power which we can cause to be water-borne, and from that extent of commerce which we are able to maintain throughout the world. Mr. Chairman, I am conscious of hav- ing detained the committee much too long with these observations. My apol- ogy for now proceeding to some remarks upon the particular clauses of the bill is, that, representing a district at once com- mercial and highly manufacturing, and being called upon to vote upon a bill containing provisions so numerous and so various, 1 am naturally desirous to state as well what I approve, as what I would reject. The first section proposes an aug- mented duty upon woollen manufactures. This, if it were unqualified, would no doubt be desirable to those who are en- gaged in that business. I have myself presented a petition from the woollen manufacturers of Massachusetts, pray- ing an augmented ad valorem duty upon imported woollen cloths; and I am pre- pared to accede to thai proposition, to a reasonable extent. But then this bill proposes, also, a very high duly upon imported wool ; and. as 1 1 1 as I can learn, a majority of the manufacturers are at least extremely doubt Eul \\ aether, taking these two provisions together, the state of the law is not better for them now than it would be if this bill should pass. It is said, this tax on raw wool will benefit the agriculturist : but 1 know it to be the opinion of some of the besl informed of that class, that it will do them more hurt than g I. Thej tear it will check the manufacturer, and con- sequently check his demand for their ar- ticle. The argument is, that a certain quantity of coarse wool, cheaper than we can possibly furnish, is necessary to en- able the manufacturer to carry on the general business, and that if this cannot be had, the consequence will be, not a greater, but a less, manufacture of our own wool. I am aware that \eiv in- telligent persons differ upon this point ; but if we may safely infer from that dif- ference of opinion, that the proposed benefit is at least doubtful, it would be prudent perhaps to abstain from the ex- periment. Certain it is, that the same reasoning has been employed, as I bave before stated, on the same subject, when a renewed application was made to the English Parliament to repeal thedutj on imported wool, I believe scarcely two months ago; those who supported the application pressing urgently the neces- sity of an unrestricted use of the cheap, imported raw material, with a view to supply with coarse cloths the markets of warm climates, such as those of Eg\ pt and Turkey, and especially a \a-t n.-wlv created demand in the South American states. As to the manufactures of cotton, it is agreed, I believe, thai they are gen- erally successful. It is understood that the preaenl existing duty operates pretty much as a prohibition over those descrip- tions of fabrics to which it applies. I le- proposed alteration w ould probably en- able the American manufacturer to com- 102 THE TARIFF. mence competition with higher-priced fabrics; and so. perhaps, would an aug- mentation less than is here proposed. I consider the cotton manufactures not oiiU to lia\ e reached, but to have passed, the point of competition. I regard their success as certain, and their growth as rapid as the most impatient could well expect. If. however, a provision of the nature of that recommended here were thought necessary, to commence new operations in the same line of manu- facture, I should cheerfully agree to it, if it were not at the cost of sacrificing other great interests of the country. I need hardly say. that whatever promotes the cotton and woollen manufactures promotes most important interests of my constituents. They have a great stake in the success of those establish- ments, and, as far as those manufac- tures are concerned, would be as much benefited by the provisions of this bill as any part of the community. It is ob- vious, too, I should think, that, for some considerable time, manufactures of this sort, to whatever magnitude they may rise, will be principally established in those parts of the country where popu- lation is most dense, capital most abun- dant, and where the most successful be- ginnings have already been made. But if these be thought to be advan- tages, they are greatly counterbalanced by other advantages enjoyed by other portions of the country. I cannot but t,rd the situation of the Wes1 as high- ly favorable to human happiness. It otter-, in the abundance of its new and fertile lands, such assurances of per- manent property and respectability to the industrious, it enables them to lay sieli sure foundations for a competent provision for their families, it makes such a nation of freeholders, that it need id envy the happiest and most pros- perous of the manufacturing communi- \Ye 1 1 1 , t \ talk a> we w ill of well-fed and well-clothed da\ -laborers or journey- men ; they are qoI . after all. to be com- pared, either for happiness or respecta- bility, with him who sleeps under his own roof and cultivates his own fee- simple inheritance. With respect to the proposed duty ozi glass, I would observe, thatj upon the best means of judging which I possess, 1 am of opinion thai the chairman of the committee is right in stating that there is in effect a bounty upon the exporta- tion of the British article. 1 think it entirely proper, therefore, to raise our own duty by such an amount as shall be equivalent to that bounty. And here. Mr. Chairman, before pro- ceeding to those parts of the bill to which I most strenuously object, I will be so presumptuous as to take up a chal- lenge which Mr. Speaker has thrown down. He has asked us, in a tone of interrogatory indicative of the feeling of anticipated triumph, to mention any country in which manufactures have llnurished without the aid of prohib- itory laws. He has demanded if it be not policy, protection, ay, and prohibi- tion, that have carried other states to the height of their prosperity, and whether any one has succeeded with such tame and inert legislation as ours. Sir, I am ready to answer this inquiry. There is a country, not undistin- guished among the nations, in which the progress of manufactures has been far more rapid than in any other, and yet unaided by prohibitions or unnatural restrictions. That country, the happi- est which the sun shines on, is our own. The woollen manufactures of England have existed from the early ages of the monarchy. Provisions designed to aid and foster them are in the black-letter statutes of the Edwards and the Henrys. Ours, on the contrary, are but of yester- day : and yet, with no more than the protection of existing laws, they are already at the point of close and promis- ing competition. Sir, nothing is more an philosophical than to refer us, on these subjects, to the policy adopted by other nations in a very different state of society, or to infer that what was judged expedient by them, in their early history, must also be expedient for us, in this early part of our own. This would be reckoning our age chron- ologically, and estimating our advance by our uumberof years; when, in truth, TIIK TARIFF. L03 we should regard only bhe Btate of bo- ciety, tlio knowledge, the skill, the capital, ami (lie enterprise which be- long to our times. We have been transferred from the stock of Europe, in a comparatively enlightened age, and our civilization and improvement date as far hack as her own. Her original history is also our original history; and if, since the moment of separation, she has gone ahead of us in some respects, it may be said, without violating truth, that we have kept up in others, and, in others again, are ahead ourselves. We are to legislate, then, with regard to the present actual state of society; and our own experience shows us, that, commencing manufactures at the pres- ent highly enlightened and emulous moment, we need not resort to the clumsy helps with which, in less auspi- cious times, governments have sought to enable the ingenuity and industry of their people to hobble along. The English cotton manufactures began about the commencement of the last reign. Ours can hardly be said to have commenced with any earnestness, until the application of the powerdoom, in 1814, not more than ten years ago. Now, Sir, I hardly need again speak of its progress, its present extent, or its assurance of future enlargement. In some sorts of fabrics we are already ex- porters, and the products of our facto- ries are, at this moment, in the South American markets. We see, then, what can be done without prohibition or extraordinary protection, because we see what has been done; and I venture to predict, that, in a few years, it will be thought wonderful that these branches of manufactures, at least, should have been thought to require additional aid from government. Mr. Chairman, the best apology for laws of prohibition and laws of mo- nopoly will be found in that state of society, not only unenlightened but sluggish, in which they are most gener- ally established. Private industry, in those days, required strong provocatives, ■which governments were seeking to ad- minister by these means. Something was wanted in actuate ami stimulate men, and the prOSpectfi of BUch profttfl as would, iii our times, excite un- bounded Competition, would hardly move the sloth of for r ages. In some instances, no doubt, these laws produced an effect, which, in th it, period, would not have taken place without them. But our age ia of a wholly different character, and its le lation takes another turn. Sociel full of excitement; competition comes in place of monopoly; and intelligence and industry ask only Eor fair play and an open field. Profits, indeed, in such a state of things, will be small, but they will be extensively diffused; price, will be low, and the great body of the people prosperous and happy. It. is worthy of remark, that, from the opera- tion of these causes, commercial wealth, while it is increased beyond calculation in its general aggregate, is, at the Bame time, broken and diminished in its sub- divisions. Commercial prosperity should be judged of, therefore, rather from the extent of trade, than from the magni- tude of its apparent profits. It has been remarked, that Spain, certainly one of the poorest nations, made very great profits on the amount of her trade; but with little other benefit than the enriching of a few individuals and companies. Profits to the English merchants engaged in the Levant and Turkey trade were formerly very great, and there were richer merchants in England some centuries ago, consider- ing the comparative value of money, than at the present highly commercial period. When the diminution of profits arises from the extent of competition, it indicates rather a salutary than an in- jurious change.' 1 " The present equahlo diffusion of moder- ate wealth cannot he better illustrated, than by remarking that in this age many palaces and Buperb mansions have I n pulled down, or .converted to other purposes, while none have been erected en a like scale, rhe numberless baronial castles ami mansions, in all parts of England, now in ruins, may all he adduced as examples of the decrease of inordinate wealth. On the other hand, the multiplication of com- 104 THE TARIFF. The true course then, Sir, for us to pursue, is, in ray opinion, to consider what our situation is; what our means are; and how they ran be best applied. What amount of population have we in comparison with our extent of soil, what amount of capital, and labor at what price? As to skill, knowledge, and enterprise, we may safely take it for granted that in these particulars we arc on an equality with others. Keep- ing these considerations in view, allow me to examine two or three of those provisions of the bill to which I feel the strongest objections. To begin with the article of iron. » Our whole annual consumption of this article is supposed by the chairman of the committee to be forty-eight or fifty thousand tons. Let us suppose the latter. The amount of our own manu- facture he estimates, I think, at seven- teen thousand tons. The present duty on the imported article is $15 per ton, and as this duty causes, of course, an \ equivalent augmentation of the price of the home manufacture, the whole in- crease of price is equal to $750,000 an- nually. This sum we pay on a raw material, and on an absolute necessary of life. The bill proposes to raise the duty from $15 to $22.50 per ton, which would be equal to $1,125,000 on the whole annual consumption. So that, suppose the point of prohibition which is aimed at by some gentlemen to be attained, the consumers of the article would pay this last-mentioned sum every year to the producers of it, over and above the price at which they could supply themselves with the same article from other sources. There would be no mitigation of this burden, excepl from the prospect, whatever thai might be, thai iron would fall in value, by domes- tic competition, after the importation should be prohibited. It will be easy, I think, to show thai it cannot fall; and supposing for the present thai it shall modions dwellings for the upper and middle claaset i'f society, and the increased comforts cjf all rank*, exhibit a picture >>t individual ha|>- piness, unknown in any other age." Sir G. Jilunt's I.' ii. r in Lord 8p< nci r, in 1800. not, the result will be, that we shall pay annually the sum of $1,125,000, constantly augmented, too, by increased consumption of the article, to support a business that cannot support itself. It is of no consequence to the argu- ment, that this sum is expended at home; so it would be if we taxed the people to support any other useless and expensive establishment, to build an- other Capitol, for example, or incur an unnecessary expense of any sort. The question still is, Are the money, time, and labor well laid out in these cases ? The present price of iron at Stockholm, I am assured by importers, is $53 per ton on board, $18 in the yard before loading, and probably not far from $10 at the mines. Freight, insurance, &c. may be fairly estimated at $15, to which add our present duty of $15 more, and these two last sums, together with the cost on board at Stockholm, give $83 as the cost of Swedes iron in our market. In fact, it is said to have been sold last year at $81.50 to $S2 per ton. We per- ceive, by this statement, that the cost of the iron is doubled in reaching us from the mine in which it is produced. In other words, our present duty, with the expense of transportation, gives an advantage to the American over the foreign manufacturer of one hundred per cent. Why, then, cannot the iron be manufactured at home? Our ore is said to be as good, and some of it better. It is under our feet, and the chairman of the committee tells us that it might be wrought by persons who otherwise will not be employed. Why, then, is it not wrought? Nothing could be more sure of constant sale. It is not an article of changeable fashion, but of absolute, permanent necessity, and such, therefore, as would always meet a steady demand. Sir, I think it would be well for the chairman of the committee to revise his premises, for I am persuaded that there is an ingre- dient properly belonging to the calcula- tion which he has misstated or omitted. Swedes iron in England pays a duty, I think, of about $27 per ton; yet it is imported in considerable quantities, THE TARIFF. 105 notwithstanding the vast capital, the excellent coal, and, more important than all perhaps, the highly improved state of inland navigation in England; although 1 am aware that the English -use of Swedes iron may he thought to be owing in Bome degree to its superior quality. Sir, the true explanation of this ap- pears to me to lie in the different prices of labor; and here 1 apprehend is the grand mistake in the argument of the chairman of the committee. He Bays it would oust the nation, as a nation. nothing, to make our ore into iron. Now, I think it would cost us precisely thai which we can worst afford; that IS, great labor. Although bar-iron is very properly considered a raw material in respect to its various future uses, yet, as bar-iron, the principal ingredient in its cost is labor. Of manual labor, no nation has more than a certain quantity, nor can it be increased at will. As to some operations, indeed, its place may be supplied by machinery: but there are other services which machinery cannot perform for it, and which it must per- form for itself. A most important ques- tion for every nation, as well as for every individual, to propose to itself, is. how it can best apply that quantity of labor which it is able to perform. La- bor is the great producer of wealth; it moves all other causes. If it call ma- chinery to its aid, it is still employed, not only in using the machinery, bul in making it. Now, with respect to the quantity of labor, as we all know, dif- ferent nations are differently circum- stanced. Some need, more than any thing, work for hands, others require hands for work; and if we ourselves are not absolutely in the latter class, we are still most fortunately very near it. I cannot find that we have those idle hands, of which the chairman of the committee speaks. The price of labor is a conclusive and unanswerable refu- tation of that idea; it is known to 1"' higher with us than in any other civil- ized state, and this is the. greatest of all proofs of general happiness. Labor in this country is independent and proud. It has not to ask the patronage of capi- tal, but capita] solicits the aid of labor. This is the general truth in regard to the condit ion of our % hole populal ion, although in the large cities there are doubtless many exceptions. The mere capacity to labor ii nmon agricultu- ral employments, gives t" our young men the assurance of independence. We have I n asked, s ir. by the chair- man of the committee, in a tone of Some pathos, whether we will allow to the serf- of Russia and Sweden the benefit of making iron for us. Let m>- inform the gentleman, sir. thai tin.-.' same serfs do not earn more than Beven cents a (lav. and that they work in :. mines for that compensation because they are serfs. And let me ask the tleman further, whether we have any labor in this country that cannol be better employed than in a hu-i which does not yield the laborer more than seven cents a day 't This, it ap- pears to me, is the true question for OUT consideration. There is no reason for saying that we will work iron because we have mountains that contain the ore. We might for the same reason dig an our rocks for the scattered grains of gold and silver which might be found there. The true inquiry is, Can we pro- duce the article in a useful state at the same cost, or nearly at the same cost, or at any reasonable approximation to- wards the same cost, at which we can import it ? Seine general estimates of the price and profits of labor, in those countries from which we import our iron, might be formed by comparing the reputed products of different mines, and their prices, with the number of hands em- ployed. The mines of Danemora are said to yield about 1,000 tons, and to employ in the mine- twelve hundred workmen. Suppose this to be worth 950 per ton; any one will find by com- putation, that the whole product would not pay, in this country, for piarter part of the necessary labor. The whole export of Sweden was estimated, a years ago, al 100,000 ship pound.-, or about 54,000 tons. Comparing this 106 THE TARIFF. product with the number of workmen usually supposed to be employed in the mines which produce iron for exporta- tion, the result will not greatly differ from the foregoing. These estimates arc general, and might not conduct us to a precise result; but we know, from intelligent travellers, and eye-witnesses, that the price of labor in the Swedish mines does not exceed seven cents a day. 1 The true reason, Sir, why it is not our policy to compel our citizens to manu- facture our own iron, is that they are far better employed. It is an unpro- ductive business, and they are not poor enough to be obliged to follow it. If we had more of poverty, more of mis- ery, and something of servitude, if we had an ignorant, idle, starving popula- tion, we might set up for iron makers against the world. The committee will take notice, Mr. Chairman, that, under our present duty, together with the expense of transpor- tation, our manufacturers are able to supply their own immediate neighbor- hood ; and this proves the magnitude of that substantial encouragement which these two causes concur to give. There is little or no foreign iron, I presume, used in the county of Lancaster. This is owing to the heavy expense of land 1 The price of labor in Russia may be pretty well collected from Tooke's " View of the Rus- sian Empire." "The workmen in the mines and the founderies are, indeed, all called mas- ter-people; bul they distinguish themselves into masters, under-masters, apprentices, delvers, servants, carriers, washers, and separators. In proportion to their ability their wages are regu- lated, which jiroc I from tificen to upwards of thirty roubles per annum. The provisions which thej receive from the magazines are deducted from this pay." The value of the rouble al thai dme (1799) was about twenty- four pence sterling, or forty-five cents of our money. "By the edict of 1799," it is added, "a laborer with a horse shall receive, daily, in summer, twenty, and in winter, twelve co- pecks; a laborer without a horse, in summer, ten, in \\ inter, eight copecks." A copeck is the hundredth part of a rouble, nr about half a cent of our money. The price of labor may have risen, in sci legree, since that period, bul probably not much. carriage ; and as we recede farther from the coast, the manufacturers are still more completely secured, as to their own immediate market, against the compe- tition of the imported article. But what they ask is to be allowed to supply the sea-coast, at such a price as shall be formed by adding to the cost at the mines the expense of land carriage to the sea; and this appears to me most unreasonable. The effect of it would be to compel the consumer to pay the cost of two land transportations ; for, in the first place, the price of iron at the inland furnaces w r ill always be found to be at, or not much below, the price of the imported article in the seaport, and the cost of transportation to the neigh- borhood of the furnace; and to enable the home product to hold a competition with the imported in the seaport, the cost of another transportation down- ward, from the furnace to the coast, must be added. Until our means of inland commerce be improved, and the charges of transportation by that means lessened, it appears to me wholly im- practicable, with such duties as any one would think of proposing, to meet the wishes of the manufacturers of this ar- ticle. Suppose we were to add the duty proposed by this bill, although it would benefit the capital invested in works near the sea and the navigable rivers, yet the benefit would not extend far in the interior. Where, then, are we to stop, or what limit is proposed to us? The freight of iron has been afforded from Sweden to the United States as low as eight dollars per ton. This is not more than the price of fifty miles of laud carriage. Stockholm, therefore, for the purpose of this argument, may be considered as within fifty miles of Philadelphia. Now, it is at once a just and a strong view of this case, to con- sider, that there are, within fifty miles of our market, vasl multitudes of per- sons who are willing to labor in the pro- duction of this article for us, at. the rate of seven cents per day, while we have do Labor which will not command, upon the average, at least live or six times that amount. The question is, then, TJIK TARIFF 107 shall we buy this ait i«li> of t.li<>s<> manu- facturers, and suffer our own labor to earn its greater reward, or shall we < ■ 1 1 1 — ploy our own labor in a similar manu- facture, and make up to it, by a tax on consumers, the loss which il must neces- sarily sustain. I proceed, Sir, to the article of hemp. Of this we imported last year, in round numbers, 6,000 tons, paying a duty of $80 a ton, or $180,000 on the whole amount; and this article, it is to he re- in inhered, is consumed almost entirely in the uses of navigation. The whole burden may be said to fall on one in- terest. It is said we can produce this article if we will raise the duties. But why is it not produced now? or why, at least, have we not seen some speci- mens ? for the present is a very high duty, when expenses of importation are added. Hemp was purchased at St. Petersburg, last year, at $101.67 per ton. Charges attending shipment, &c, $14.25. Freight may be stated at $30 per ton, and our existing duty $30 more. These three last sums, being the charges of transportation, amount to a protec- tion of near seventy-five per cent in favor of the home manufacturer, if there be any such. And we ought to consider, also, that the price of hemp at St. Petersburg is increased by all the expense of transportation from the place of growth to that port; so that probably the whole cost of transporta- tion, from- the place of growth to our market, including our duty, is equal to the first cost of the article ; or, in other words, is a protection in favor of our own product of one hundred per cent. And since it is stated that we have great quantities of fine land for the pro- duction of hemp, of which I have no doubt, the question recurs, Why is it not produced? I speak of the water- rotted hemp, for it is admitted that that which is dew-rotted is not sufficiently good for the requisite purposes. I can- not say whether the cause be in climate. in the process of rotting, or what else, but the fact is certain, that there is no American water-rotted hemp in the market. We are acting, therefore, upon an hypothesis. Is it not kble that those who say that thej can produce the article shall at least prove the truth of that allegation, before ne^ taxes are laid on those who use the foreign i modi) y ? Suppose this hill passes ; the pri E hemp Is immediately ra $1 1.80 per ton, and this burden falls immediately on the ship-builder; and no part of it, for the present, will go for the benefil of the American -rower, be- cause he has noic of the article that can lie used, nor is it expect.-, 1 that much of it will be produced for a considerable time. Still the tax takes effect upon the imported article: ami the ship-owners, to enable the Kentucky tanner to re- ceive an additional $1 1 on bis ton of hemp, whenever be may be able to ra ami manufacture it. pay, in the mean time, an equal sum per ton into the treasury on all the imported hemp which they are still obliged to U86; and this is called "protection"! Is this just or fair '; A particular interest is here, bur- dened, not onbj for the benefit of an- other particular interest, but burdened also beyond that, for the benefit of the treasury. It is said to be important for the country that this article should be raised in it; then let the country bear the expense, and pay the bounty. It it be for the good of the whole, let the sacrifice be made by the whole, and not by a part. If it be thought useful and necessary, from political considerations, to encourage the growth and manufac- ture of hemp, governmenl has abundant means of doing it. It might give a di- rect bounty, and such a measure would, at least, distribute the burden equally; or. as government itself is a great con- sumer of this article, it might stipulate to confine Lts own purchases to the home product, so soon as it should be shown to be of the proper quality. I see no objection to this proceeding, it it 1"' thought to be an object to encouj the production. It might easily, perhaps properly, be provided by law, that the navy should be supplied with American hemp, the quality being g 1. at any price not exceeding, by more than a given amount, the current p Ids THE TARIFF. of foreign hemp in (Mir market. Every thing conspires to render some such course preferable to the one now pro- posed. The encouragement in thai way would be ample, and, if the experiment should succeed, the whole object WOuld he gained : and. if it should fail, no con- siderable loss or evil would he felt by any one. I stated, some days ago, and I wish to renew the statement, whal was the amount of the proposed augmentation of the duties on iron and hemp, in the cost of a vessel. Take the case of a common ship of three hundred tons, not coppered, nor copper-fastened. It would stand thus, by the present duties: — ■ 14A tons of iron, for hull, rigging, and anchors, at $15 per ton, . . $217.50 10 tons of hemp, at 830 300.00 40 holts Russia duck, at $2, .... 80.00 20 bolts Ravens duck, at $1.25, . . . 25.00 On articles of ship-chandlery, cabin furniture, hard-ware, &c, . . . 40 00 B662.50 The bill proposes to add, — $7.40 per ton on iron, which will be . $107.30 $14.80 per ton on hemp, equal to . . Its. on And on duck, by the late amendment of the bill, say 25 per cent, . . 25.00 $280.30 But to the duties on iron and hemp should he added those paid on copper, whenever that article is used. By the statement which I furnished the other day, it appeared that the duties received by government on articles used in the construction of a vessel of three hundred and fifty-nine tons, with copper fasten- ings, amounted to $1,056. With the augmentations of this hill, they would he equal to $1,400. Now [cannot hut flatter myself. Mr. Chairman, that, before the committee will consent to this new burden upon the shipping interest, it will very delib- erately weigh the probable consequences. I would again urgently solicit its atten- tion to the condition of that interest. We are told that govt rnment has pro- tected it. by discriminating duties, ami by an exclusive right to the coasting trade. But it would retain the coasting trade by its own natural efforts, in like manner, and with more certainty, than it now retains any portion of foreign trade. The discriminating duties are now abolished, and while they existed, they were nothing more than counter- Nailing measures; not so much designed to give our navigation an advantage over that of other nations, as to put it upon an equality; and we have, accord- ingly, abolished ours, when they have been willing to abolish theirs. Look to the rate of freights. Were they ever lower, or even so low? I ask gentle- men who know, whether the harbor of Charleston, and the river of Savannah, be not crowded with ships seeking em- ployment, and finding none? I would ask the gentlemen from New Orleans, if their magnificent Mississippi does not exhibit, for furlongs, a forest of masts? The condition, Sir, of the ship- ping interest is not that of those who are insisting on high profits, or strug- gling for monopoly; but it is the condi- tion of men content with the smallest earnings, and anxious for their bread. The freight of cotton has formerly been three pence sterling, from Charleston to Liverpool, in time of peace. It is now I know not what, or how many fractions of a penny; I think, however, it is stated at five eighths. The producers, then, of this great staple, are able, by means of this navigation, to send it, for a cent a pound, from their own doors to the best market in the world. Mr. Chairman, I will now only re- mind the committee that, while we are proposing to add new burdens to the shipping interest, a very different line of policy is followed by our great com- mercial and maritime rival. It seems to be announced as the sentiment of the government "I ICngland, and undoubt- edly it is its real sentiment, that the firsl of all manufactures is the manufac- ture of ships. A constant and wakeful attention is paid to this interest, and \ei\ important regulations, favorable to it, have 1 n adopted within the last year, some of which 1 will beg leave to refer to, with the hope of exciting the notice, not only of the committee, but THE TARIFF. 109 of all others who may feel, as I do, a deep interest in this Bubject. In the firal place a general amendment has taken place in the register acts, introduc- ing many new provisions, and, among others, the following: — A direct mortgage of the interest of a ship is allowed, without subjecting the mortgagee to the responsibility of an owner. The proportion of interest held by each owner is exhibited in the register, thereby facilitating both sales and mort- gages, and giving a new value to ship- ping aiiinne- ti,,. moneyed classes. Shares, in the ships of copartnerships, may be registered as joint property, and Bubject to the same rules as oilier part- nership effects. Ships may be registered in the name of trustees, for the benefit of joint-stock companies. And many other regulations are adopt- ed, with the same general view of ren- dering the mode of holding the property as convenient and as favorable as pos- sible. By another act, British registered ves- sels, of every description, are allowed to enter into the general and the coast- ing trade in the India seas, and may now trade to and from India, with any part of the world except China. By a third, all limitations and restric- tions, as to latitude and longitude, are removed from ships engaged in the Southern whale-fishery. These regula- tions, I presume, have not been made without first obtaining the consent of the East India Company; so true is it found, that real encouragement of enter- prise oftener consists, in our days, in restraining or buying off monopolist and prohibitions, than in imposing or extending them. The trade w itli [reland is turned into a free coasting trade; light duties have 1 ii reduced, and various other beneficial arrangements made, and atil! others pro- posed. I mi-ht add, that, in favor of general commerce, and as showing their confidence in the principles of liberal intercourse, the British government lias perfected the warehouse system, and authorized a reciprocity of duties with foreign states, at the discretion of the Privy Council. This, Sir, is the attention which our great rival is paying to these important Subjects, and we may assure ourselves that, if we do not cherish a proper sense. of our own interests, she will not only beat us, but will deserve to beat us. Sir, I will detain you no longer. There are some parts of this bill which I highly approve; there are others in which I should acquiesce; but thosi which I have now stated my objections appear to me so destitute of all justice, bo burdensome and so dangerous to that interest which has steadily enriched, gallantly defended, and proudly distin- guished us, that nothing can prevail upon me to give it my support. 1 1 Since the delivery of this speech, nn ar- rival has hroujrht London ]i;ij"r^ containing the speech of the English Chancellor of the Ex- chequer (Mr. Robinson), on the 23d of Febru- ary la>t, in submitting to Parliament the annual financial statement. A l lanl confirmation will be found in that statement of the remarks made in the preceding speech, as to the prevail- ing sentiment, in the English government, on t ho general subject of prohibitory laws, and on the silk manufacture and the wool tax particularly. NOTE. This is commonly called Mr. Webster's "Free Trade " speech. It has been found difficult to select one among his many speeches in support of the policy of Pro- tection which would fully represent his views on the subject; but the reasons for his change of opinion, and for his advocacy of Protection, are fully stated in many of the speeches printed in this volume, deliv- ered after the year 1830. Perhaps as good a statement as can be selected from his many .speeches on the Tariff, in explana- tion of his change of position as to no- need, policy, and duty of protection to 110 THE TARIFF. American manufactures, may be found in In- speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 25th and 26th of July, 1 ■ — t * » . on tlic Iiill " To reduce the Duties on Imports, and for other Purposes." In this Bpeech, he made the following frank avow- al nf the reasons which induced him t<> reconsider and reverse his original opinions Oil the subject : — '■ But, Sir, before I proceed further with tliis part of the case, I will take notice of what ap- s, latterly, to be an attempt, by the repub- lication df opinions and expressions, arguments and speeches of mine, at an earlier and later period of life, to found against me a charge of inconsistency, on this subject of the protective policy of the country. Mr. President, if it be an inconsistency to hold an opinion upon a sub- ject at one time and in one state of circum- stances, and to hold a different opinion upon the same subject at another time and in a different state of circumstance-. I admit the charge. Nay, Sir, I will go further; and in regard to questions which, from their nature, do not de- pend upon circumstances for their true ami just solution. I mean constitutional questions, if it he an inconsistency to hold an opinion to-day, even upon such a question, and on that same ques- tion to hold a different opinion a quarter of a century afterwards, upon a more comprehensive view of the whole subject, with a more thorough tigation into the original purposes and ob- jects of that Constitution, and especially after a more thorough exposition of those objects and purposes by those who framed it, and have been trusted to administer it, I should not shrink even from that imputation. I hope I know more of the I institution of my country than I did when I was twenty years Old. I hop'' 1 have contemplated its great objects more broadly. I hope J have read with deeper interest the senti- ments of the great men who framed it. I hope I have studied with nioie care the condition of the country when the convention assembled to foiiu it. And yet I do not know that. I have h to retrai on i hese points. "Hut, Sir, I am of the opinion of a very eminent person, who had occasion, not long since, to speak of this topic in another place. Inconsistencies of opinion, arising from changes of circumstances, are often justifiable. liut there is one sort of inconsistency which is cul- pable. It i- tin- inconsistency between a man's conviction and his vote; between his conscience and his conduct. No man shall ever charge me with an inconsistency like that. And now, Sir, allow nu' to say, that I am quite indifferent, or rather thankful, to those conductors of the pub- lic press who think they cannot do better than now and then to spread my poor opinions before the public. 1 have said many times, and it is true, that, up to the year 1X24." the people of that part of the country to which I belong, being addicted to commerce, having been successful in com- merce, their capital being very much engaged iii commerce, were averse to entering upon a system of manufacturing operations. Every member in Congress from the State of Massa- chusetts, with the exception, I think, of one, voted against the act of 1S24. But what were we to do r Were we not bound, after 1817 and 1824, to consider that the policy of the country was settled, had become settled, as a policy, to protect the domestic industry of the country bv Solemn laws? The leading speech 1 which ushered in the act of 1824 was called a speech for tin' ' American System.' The bill was car- ried principally by the Middle States. Penn- sylvania and New York would have it so ; and what were we to doV Were we to stand aloof from the occupations which others were pursuing around us? Were we to pick clean teeth on a constitutional doubt which a majority in the councils of the nation had overruled . ; No, Sir; we had no option. All that was left us was to fall in with the settletl policy of the country; because, if any thing can ever settle the policy of the country, or if any thing can ever settle the practical construction of the Constitution of the country, it must be these repeated decisions of Congress, and enactments of successive laws conformable to these decisions. New England, then, did fall in. She went into manufactur- ing operations, not from original choice, but from the necessity of the circumstances in which the legislation of the country had placed her. And, for one, I resolved then, and have acted upon the resolution ever since, that, hav- ing compelled the Eastern States to go into these pursuits for a livelihood, the country was bound to fulfil the just expectations which it had inspired." 1 That of Mr. Clay. THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. AN ARGUMENT MADE IN THE ('ASK OF GIMSONS AND OGDEN, IN' THE SUPREME COUBT OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY TERM, 1834. [THIS was an appeal from the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correc- tion of Errors of the State of New York. Aaron Ogden filed his bill in the Court of Chancer; of thai state, against Thomas Gibbons, setting forth the several acts of the legislature thereof, enacted for the pur- pose of securing to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton the exclusive navigation of all the waters within the jurisdiction of that State, with boats moved by fire or steam, for a term of years which had not then expired; and authorizing the Chan- cellor to award an injunction, restraining any person whatever from navigating those waters with boats of that description. The bill stated an assignment from Livingston and Fulton to one John R. Livingston, and from him to the complainant, Ogden, of the right to navigate the waters between Elizabethtown, and other places in New Jersey, and the city of New York ; and that Gibbons, the defendant below, was in pos- session of two steamboats, called the Stou- dinger and the Bellona, which were actually employed in running between New York and Elizabethtown, in violation of the ex- clusive privilege conferred on the complain- ant, and praying an injunction to restrain the said Gibbons from using the said boats, or any other propelled by tire or steam, in navigating the waters within the territory of New York. The injunction having been awarded, the answer of Gibbons was filed, in which he stated, that the boats employed by him were duly enrolled and licensed to be em- ployed in carrying on the coasting trade. under the act of Congress, passed the 18th of February, 1793, eh. 8, entitled, " An Acl for enrolling and licensing ships and \ essels to be employed in the coasting trade and fisheries, and for regulating the same." And the defendant insisted on bis right, in virtue of such licenses, to navigate the waters between Elizabethtown and the city of New York, the said acts of the legisla- ture of the State of New York to the con- trary notwithstanding. At the hearing, the Chancellor perpetuated the injunction, be- ing of the opinion that the Baid acta were not repugnant to the Constitution and laws of the United States, ami were \alid. This decree was affirmed in the Court tor the Trial of Impeachments ami Correction of Errors, which is tl.e highest court of law and equity in the State of New York be- fore which the cause could I.e carried, ami it was thereupon carried up to the Supreme Court of the United States by appeal. The following argument was made by Mr. Webster, for the plaintiff in error.] It is admitted, that there is a very re- spectable weight of authority in favor of the decision which is sought to be reversed. The laws in question, L am aware, have been deliberately re-enacted by the legislature of New York: and they have also received the sanction, at different times, of all her judicial tribunals, than which there an- few. if any, in the country, more justly entitled to respect and deference. The disposi- tion of the court will be. undoubtedly, to support, if it can. law.- so passed and SO sanctioned. 1 admit, therefore, that it is justly expected of ua that we should make out a clear case; and unless we do so, we cannot hope for a reversal. It should be remembered, however, that the whole of this branch of power, as exercised by this court, is a power of revision. The question must be decided by tic State courts, and decided in a particular manner, before it can be brought here at all. Such di alone give tin- c t jurisdiction; and therefore, while they are to be r as the judgments of Learned judges, they are yet in the condition of all tl from which the law allows an appeal. 112 THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. It will not bo a waste of time to ad- vert to tin- existing state of the facts connected with the subject of this liti- gation. The use of steamboats on the coasts and in the bays and rivers of the country, lias become very general. The intercourse of its different parts essen- tially depends upon this mode of con- vex ance and transportation, liiversand bays, in many cases, form the divisions between States; and thence it is obvious, that, if tin' States should make regula- tions for the navigation of these waters, ami such regulations should be repug- nant and hostile, embarrassment would necessarily be caused to the general intercourse of the community. Such events have actually occurred, and have created the existing state of things. By the law of New York, no one can navigate the bay of New York, the North River, the Sound, the lakes, or any of the waters of that State, by steam-ves- sels, without a license from the grantees of New York, under penalty of forfeit- ure of the vessel. By the law of the neighboring State of Connecticut, no one can enter her waters with a steam- vessel having such license. By the law of New Jersey, if any citi- zen of that State shall be restrained, under the New York law, from using steamboats between the ancient shores of New Jersey and New York, he shall be entitled to an action for damages, in New Jersey, with treble costs against the party who thus restrains or impedes hi in under the law of New York ! This act of New Jersey is called an act of retortion against the illegal and op- pressive legislation of New York; and seems to In- defended on those grounds of public law which justify reprisals be- tween independent States. h will hardly he contended, that all th^-" acts are consistent with the laws and Constitution of the United States. If there is no power in the general gov- ernment to control this extreme bel- ligerent legislation of the states, the powers of the government are essentially detieient in a most, important and inter- ing particular. The present contro- versy respects the earliest of these State laws, those of New York. On these, this court is now to pronounce; and if they should be declared to be valid and operative, I hope somebody will point out where the State right stops, and on what grounds the acts of other States are to be held inoperative and void. It will be necessary to advert more particularly to the laws of New York, as they are stated in the record. The first was passed March 19th, 1787. By this act, a sole and exclusive right was granted to John Fitch, of making and using every kind of boat or vessel im- pelled by steam, in all creeks, rivers, bays, and waters within the territory and jurisdiction of New York for four- teen years. On the 27th of March, 1798, an act was passed, on the suggestion that Fitch was dead, or had withdrawn from the State without having made any attempt to use his privilege, repealing the grant to him, and conferring similar privileges on Robert R. Livingston, for the term of twenty years, on a suggestion, made by him, that he was possessor of a mode of applying the steam-engine to propel a boat, on new and advantageous prin- ciples. On the 5th of April, 1803, an- other act was passed, by which it was declared, that the rights and privileges granted to Robert R. Livingston by the last act should be extended to him and Robert Fulton, for twenty years from the passing of the act. Then there is the act of Apiil 11, 1808, purporting to extend the monopoly, in point of time, five years for every additional boat, the whole duration, however, not to exceed thirty years; and forbidding any and all persons to navigate the waters of the State with any steam boat or vessel, without the license of Livingston and Fulton, under penalty of forfeiture of the boat or vessel. And lastly comes the act of April i), 1811, for enforcing the provisionsof the last-mentioned act, and declaring, that the forfeiture of the boa! or vessel found navigating against the provisions of the previous acts shall lie deemed to accrue on the day on which such boat or vessel should navigate the THE CASE OF GIBBONS and OGDEN. 118 waters of the State; and thai Living- ston and Fulton might immediately have an action for such boal or vessel, in Like manner as if they themselves bad been dispossessed thereof bj force; and that, on bringing any such suit, the defendant therein should be prohibited, bj injunc- tion, From removing the boat or vessel out of the Stale, or using it within the Stale. There are one or two other acts mentioned in the pleadings, which prin- cipally respect the time allowed forcom- plying with the condition of the grant, and are not material to the discussion of the case. By these acts, then, an exclusive right is given to Livingston and Fulton to use steam navigation on all the waters of New York, for thirty years from 1S08. It is not necessary to recite the sev- eral conveyances and agreements, stated in the record, by which Ogden, the plain- tiff below, derives title under Living- ston and Fulton to the exclusive use of part of these waters for steam navi- gation. The appellant being owner of a steam- boat, and being found navigating the waters between New Jersey and the city of New York, over which waters Ogden, the plaintiff below, claims an exclusive right, under Livingston and Fulton, this bill was hied against him by Ogden, in October, 1818, and an injunction granted, restraining him from such use of his boat. This injunction was made perpetual, on the final hearing of the cause, in the Court of Chancery; and the decree of the Chancellor has been duly affirmed in the Court of Errors. The right, therefore, which the plaintiff below asserts, to have and maintain his injunction, depends obviously on the general validity of the New York laws, and especially on their force and opera- tion as against the right set up by the defendant. This right he states in his answer to be, that he is a citizen of New Jersey, and owner of the steamboal in question; that the boat is a vessel of more than twenty tons burden, duly en- rolled and licensed for carrying on the coasting trade, and intended to 1 m- ployed by him in that trade, between Elizabeth town, in N. w .1 and the oitj of New Yoik ; and that it tually employed in navigating beta those places at the time of, and until ii"i ice of, the injunction from the < iourt of ( lhancery was sen ed on him. On these pleadings tie- substantia] question i> raised, An' the e laws such a- the Legislature of N'-w fork h right lo pass? If bo, do they, secondly, in their operation, interfere with any right enjoyed under the ( ionstitution and Laws of the United Mat.-, and are they therefore void, a- tar as such int. a ence extends? It may be well to Btate again their general purport and effect, and the pur- port and effect of the other State laws which have 1 n enacted l.y way oi taliation. A steam-vessel, of any description, going to New York, is forfeited to the representatives of Livingston and Ful- ton, unless she have their License. < loing from New York or elsewhere to Con- necticut, she is prohibited from entering the waters of thai Mate if she ha\e such license. It the representatives of Living-ton and Fulton in New 5Tork carry into feet, by judicial process, the provision of the New York laws, against any citi- zen of New Jersey, the} expose them- selves to a statute action in Ne.. - 1 for all damages, and treble costs. The New York Laws extend to all steam-vessels; to steam frigates, steam ferry-boats, and all intermediate clae They extend to public a- well as private ships; and to vessels employed in for- eign commerce. ;^ Well as to those em- ployed in the coast ing trade. The remedy i-> as summary as the grant itself is ample; for immediate confiscation, without seizure, trial, or judgment, is the penalty of infrii in. -lit. In regard to these acts, I shall con- tend, in the ti i- 1 place, thai the j the power of the Legislature; and, ondly, that, if they could l ■■ valid for any purpose, th still, as against any right enjoyed under the laws of the United States with which Ill THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. they come in collision; and that in this case they are found interfering with such rights. I shall contend that the power of Con- gress to regulate commerce is complete and entire, and, to a certain extent, necessarily exclusive; that the acts in question are regulations of commerce, in a most important particular, af- fecting it in those respects in which it is under the exclusive authority of Congress. I state this first proposi- tion guardedly. I do not mean- to say, that all regulations which may, in their operation, affect commerce, are ex- clusively in the power of Congress; but that such power as has been exercised in this ease does not remain with the States. Nothing is more complex than commerce; and in such an age as this, no words embrace a wider held than commercial regulation. Almost all the business and intercourse of life may be connected incidentally, more or less, with commercial regulations. But it is only necessary to apply to this part of the Constitution the well-settled rules of construction. Some powers are held to be exclusive in Congress, from the use of exclusive words in the grant; others, from the prohibitions on the States to exercise similar powers; and others, again, from the nature of the powers themselves. It has been by this mode of reasoning that the court has adjudi- cated many important questions; and the same mode is proper here. And, as some powers have been held to be exclu- sive, and others not so, under the same form of expression, from the nature of the different powers respectively; so where the power, on any one subject, is given in general words, like the power to regulate commerce, the true method of construction will be to consider of whal i he -rant is composed, and which of those, from the nature of the thing, onghl to be considered exclusive. The right set up in this case, under the laws of New Ymk. is a monopoly. Now 1 think it very reasonable to Bay, thai l he ' "ii -t it ui ion never intended to leave with the States the power of granting monopolies either of trade or of naviga- tion; and therefore, that, as to this, the commercial power is exclusive in Con- gress. It is in vain to look for a precise and exact definition of the powers of Con- gress on several subjects. The Consti- tution does not undertake the task of making such exact definitions. In con- ferring powers, it proceeds by the way of enumeration, stating the powers con- ferred, one after another, in few words; and where the power is general or com- plex in its nature, the extent of the grant must necessarily be judged of, and limited, by its object, and by the nature of the power. Few things are better known than the immediate causes which led to the adop- tion of the present Constitution; and there is nothing, as I think, clearer, than that the prevailing motive was to regu- late emu an rce : to rescue it from the em- barrassing and destructive consequences resulting from the legislation of so many different States, and to place it under the protection of a uniform law. The great objects were commerce and reve- nue; and they were objects indissolubly connected. By the Confederation, divers restrictions had been imposed on the States; but these had not been found sufficient. No State, it is true, could send or receive an embassy; nor make any treaty; nor enter into any compact with another State, or with a foreign power; nor lay duties interfering with treaties which had been entered into by Congress. Bui all these were found to be far short of what the actual condition of the country required. The States could still, each for itself, regulate commerce, and the consequence was a perpetual jarring and hostility of com- mercial regulation. In the history of the times, it is ac- cordingly found, that the great topic, urged on all occasions, as showing the necessity of a new and different govern-r menf, was the state of trade and com- merce. To benefit and improve these was a great object in itself; and it be- came greater \\ hen it was regarded as the only means of enabling the country to pay the public debt, and to do justice to THE (ASK OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. [15 those who had mosl effectually labored for its independence. The Leading Btate papers of the time are full of this t < >] >i*-. The New Jersey resolutions 1 complain thai the regulation of trade was in the power of the several States, within their separate jurisdiction, to such a degree as to involve many difficulties and em- barrassments; and they express an ear- nest opinion, thai the sole and exclusive power of regulating trade with foreign states ought to be in Congress. Mr. "NVitherspoon's motion in Congress, in 1781, is of the same general character; and the report of a committee of that body, in 178.'). is still more emphatic. It declares that Congress oughl to pos- sess the sole and exclusive power of regulating trade, as well with foreign nations as between the States. 2 The resolutions of Virginia, in January, 1 TSfi, which were the immediate cause of the Convention, put forth this same great object. Indeed, it is the only ob- ject stated in those resolutions. There is not another idea in the whole docu- ment. The sole purpose for which the delegates assembled at Annapolis was to devise means for the uniform regulation of trade. They found no means but in a general government; and they recom- mended a convention to accomplish that purpose. Over whatever other interests of the country this governmeni may diffuse its benefits and its blessings, it will always be true, as matter of histor- ical fact, that it had its immediate origin in the necessities of commerce; and for its immediate object, the relief of those necessities, by removing their causes, and by establishing a uniform and steady system. It will be easy to show, by reference to the discussions in the sev- eral State conventions, the prevalence of the same general topic-: and if anyone would look to the proceedings of several of the States, especially to those of Massachusetts and New Xork, he would see very plainly, by the recorded lists of votes, that wherever this commer- cial necessity was most strongly felt. there the pn new Constitution had 1 1 Laws U. S., p. 28, Bioren and Dnane'a ed. a 1 Laws U. S., i>. 50. most Eriends. In the \.w fori con- vention, the argumenl arising from this consideration was b1 ron by (lie dial inguished person : v. | oame is connected w ith the presenl een worth accepting. I contend, therefore, that the people intended, in establishing the Constitu- tion, to transfer from the Beveral Si to a general governmeni those high ami important powers over commerce, which, in their exercise, were to maintain a uniform and general system. From the very nature of tin' case, these powers musl lie exclusive; that is. the higher branches of commercial regulation iiiu-t be exclusively committed to a single hand. \Vli;il is it that is to he regu- lated? Not the commerce of the gei states, respectively, hut the commerce of the United States, lien,-;, nth. the commerce of the Mate-, was to be a and the system by which it was to exisl and be governed musl necessarily be complete, entire, and uniform. It- char- acter was to be described in the Bag which waved over it. E PI ( 1:11:1 - < \i M. Now, bovi could individual Mate- ;i - a righl of concurrenl legislation, in a ea-e of this sort, without manifesl en- croachmenl and confusion? It Bhould be repeated, thai the words used in the Constitution, "to regulate commei are so very general and extensive, thai they may be construed to cover i field of legislation, pari of which has always been occupied by State laws; and therefore the word- musl ha aide construction, and the power Bhould onsidered as exclusively vested in Con-ress so far. and so far Only, a- tin' nature of tin- power requires. A insist, that the nature "i tl and » Chancellor Livingston. 116 THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. of the power, did imperiously require, that such important authority as that of granting monopolies of trade and navi- gation should not be considered as still retained by the States. It is apparent from the prohibitions on the power of the States, that the general concurrent power was not sup- posed to be left with them. And the exception out of these prohibitions of the inspection law r s proves this still more clearly. Which most concerns the commerce of this country, that New York and Virginia should have an un- controlled power to establish their in- spection of flour and tobacco, or that they should have an uncontrolled power of granting either a monopoly of trade in their own ports, or a monopoly of navigation over all the waters leading to those ports? Yet the argument on the other side must be, that, although the Constitution has sedulously guarded and limited the first of these powers, it has left the last wholly unlimited and un- controlled. But although much has been said, in the discussion on former occasions, about this supposed concurrent power in the States, I find great difficulty in under- standing what is meant by it. It is generally qualified by saying, that it is a power by which the States could pass laws on subjects of commercial regula- tion, which would be valid until Con- gress should pass other laws controlling them, or inconsistent with them, and that then the State laws must yield. What sort of concurrent powers are these, which cannot exist together? In- deed, the very reading of the clause in the Constitution must put to flight this notion of a general concurrent power. The Constitution was formed for all the Status; and Congress was to have power to regulate commerce. Now, what is the import of this, hut that Congress is to give the rule, to establish the system, to exercise the control over the subject? Ami ran more than one power, in cases of this sort, give the rule, establish the in. or exercise the control? As it is not contended that the power of Con- gresa is to be exercised by a supervision of State legislation, and as it is clear that Congress is to give the general rule, I contend that this power of giving the general rule is transferred, by the Con- stitution, from the States to Congress, to be exercised as that body may see fit ; and consequently, that all those high exercises of power. which might be considered as giving the rule, or estab- lishing the system, in regard to great commercial interests, are necessarily left with Congress alone. Of this character I consider monopolies of trade or navi- gation ; embargoes ; the system of navi- gation laws; the countervailing laws, as against foreign states; and other im- portant enactments respecting our con- nection with such states. It appears to me a most reasonable construction to say, that in these respects the power of Congress is exclusive, from the nature of the power. If it be not so, where is the limit, or who shall fix a boundary for the exercise of the power of the States? Can a State grant a monopoly of trade? Can New York shut her ports to all but her own citizens? Can she refuse admission to ships of particu- lar nations? The argument on the other side is, and must be, that she might do all these things, until Congress should revoke her enactments. And this is called concurrent legislation ! AVhat con- fusion such notions lead to is obvious enough. A power in the States to do any thing, and every thing, in regard to commerce, till Congress shall undo it, would suppose a state of things at least as bad as that which existed before the present Constitution. It is the true wis- dom of these governments to keep their action as distinct as possible. The general government should not seek to operate where the States can operate with more advantage to the community; nor should the States encroach on -round which the public good, as well as tin; Constitution, refers to the exclu- sive control of Congress. If the present state of things, these laws of New York, the laws of Con- necticut, and the laws of New Jersey, had been all presented, in the conven- tion of New York, to the eminent per- THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. 117 son whose name is on this record, and who acted on that occasion so important a part; if he had been told, that, after all lie had said in favor of the new gov- ernment, and of its salutary effects on commercial regulations, the time would yet come when the North River would be shut up by a monopoly from New York, the Sound interdicted by a penal law of Connecticut, reprisals authorized by New Jersey against citizens of New York, and when one could not cross a ferry without transshipment, does any one suppose he would have admitted all this as compatible with the government which he was recommending? This doctrine of a general concurrent power in the States is insidious and dangerous. If it be admitted, no one can say where it will stop. The State-; may legislate, it is said, wherever Con- gress has not made a plenary exercise of its power. But who is to judge whether Congress has made this plenary exercise of power? Congress has acted on this power; it has done all that it deemed wise; and are the States now to do whatever Congress has left undone? Congress makes such rules as, in its judgment, the case requires; and those rules, whatever they are, constitute the system. All useful regulation does not consist in restraint; and that wmich Congress sees fit to leave free is a part of its regu- lation, as much as the rest. The practice under the Constitution sufficiently evinces, that this portion of the commercial power is exclusive in Congress. When, before this instance, have the States granted monopolies? When, until now, have they interfered with the navigation of the country'.'' The pilot laws, the health laws, or quar- antine laws, and various regulations of that class, which have been recognized by Congress, are no arguments to prove, even if they are to be called commercial regulations (which they are not), that other regulations, more directly and strictly commercial, are not solely w i th- in the power of Congress. There is a singular fallacy, as I venture to think, in the argument of very learned and most respectable persona on this sub- ject. That argument alleges, that the states bave a concurrent power with Congress of regulating commerce; and the proof of this posil ion is, thai the States have, without anj question of their right, passed acts respecting turnpike- roads, toll-bridges, and Ferries. I are declared to he acts of commercial regulation, affecting not only the in- terior commerce of tli" state itself, hut also commerce between di tie rent Slates. Therefore, as all these are commercial regulations, and are yel acknowled to he right fully established by t be Mates, it follows, as is supposed, that the Si must have a concurrent power to regulate commerce. Now, what is the inevitable conse- quence of this mode of reasoning? Does it not admit the power of Con- gress, at once, upon all these minor ob- jects of legislation? If all these be regulations of commerce, within the meaning of the Constitution, then cer- tainly Congress, having a concurrent power to regulate commerce, may estab- lish ferries, turnpike-roads, and brid and provide for all this detail of interior legislation. To sustain the interference of the State in a bigb concern of mari- time commerce, the argument adopts a principle which acknowl the right of Congress over a vast scope of internal Legislation, which no one has heretofore Supposed to b<' within its power-. But this is not all; for it is admitted that, when Congress and the States i power to Legislate over the same subject, the power of Congress, when exercised, controls or extinguishes the State power ; and therefore the consequence would seem to follow, from the argument, that all State Legislation over Buch Bub as have been mentioned is, at all times, liable to the superior power of Cong a consequence which uo one would ad- mit for a moment. The truth is. in my judgment, that all these things are, in their general character, rather regula- tions of police than of commerce, in the constitutional understanding of that term. A road, Lnd 1. may be a matter of great conimercial concern. In many 118 THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. cases it is so: and when it is so, there is no doubt of the power of Congress to make it. But, generally speaking, roads, and bridges, and Eerries, though of course they affect commerce and intercourse, do nol possess such importance and eleva- tion as to be deemed commercial regula- tions. A reasonable construction must be given to the Constitution ; and such construction is as necessary to the just power of the States, as to the authority of Congress. Quarantine laws, lor ex- ample, may be considered as affecting commerce; yet they are, hi their nature, health law-. In England, we speak of the power of regulating commerce as in Parliament, or the king, as arbiter of commerce : yet the city of London enacts health laws. Would anyone infer from that circumstance, that the city of Lon- don had concurrent power with Parlia- ment or the crown to regulate commerce? or that it might grant a monopoly of the navigation of the Thames? "While. a health law is reasonable, it is a health law : hut if. under color of it, enact- ments should be made for other pur- poses, such enactments might be void. In the discussion in the New York courts, no small reliance was placed on tie- law of that State prohibiting the importation of slaves, as an example of a commercial regulation enacted by State authority. That law may or may ii"i be constitutional and valid. It has been referred to generally, but its particular provisions have not been stated. When they are more clearly seen, its character may be better deter- mined. It might further be argued, that the power of Congress over these high branches of commerce is exclusive, from the consideration that Congress possesses an exclusive admiralty juris- diction. That it, does possess 9uch exclusive jurisdiction will hardly he contested. No state pretends to exer- any jurisdiction of that kind. Tie' Mat'-.- abolished their e. purls of admi- ralty, when the Constitution went, into operation. Over these waters, there- fore, or at lea t ..me of them, w hieh are the Bubjecl of this monopoly, New York has no jurisdiction whatever. They are a part of the high seas, and not within the body of any county. The authorities of that State could not punish for a murder, committed on board one of these boats, in some places within the range of this exclusive grant. This restraining of the States from all jurisdiction out of the body of their own counties, shows plainly enough that navigation on the high seas was under- stood to be a matter to be regulated only by Congress. It is not unreason- able to s<\V, that what are called the waters of New York are, for purposes of navigation and commercial regula- tion, the waters of the United States. There is no cession, indeed, of the waters themselves, but their use for those purposes seems to be intrusted to the exclusive power of Congress. Sev- eral States have enacted laws which would appear to imply their conviction of the power of Congress over navigable waters to a greater extent. If there be a concurrent power of regulating commerce on the high seas, there must be a concurrent admiralty jurisdiction, and a concurrent control of the waters. It is a common principle, that arms of the sea, including naviga- ble rivers, belong to the sovereign, so far as navigation is concerned. Their use is navigation. The United States possess the general power over naviga- tion, and, of course, ought to control, in general, the use of navigable waters. If it be admitted that, for purposes of trade and navigation, the North River and its bay are the river and hay of New York, and the. Chesapeake the bay of Vir- ginia, very great inconveniences and much confusion might be the result. It may now he well to take a nearer view of these laws, to see more exactly what their provisions are, what conse- quences have followed from them, and what would and might follow from other similar laws. The first grant to John Fitch gave him the sole and exclusive right of making, employing, and navigating all boats impelled by tire or steam, " in all creeks, rivers, hays, and waters within THE CASE OF GIBBONS AN'l) OGDEN 119 the territory and jurisdiction of the State." Any other person navigating such boal was to Eorfeii it, and to pay a penalty of a hundred pounds. The subsequent arts repeal this, and grant similar privileges to Livingston and Fulton; and the act oi 1811 provides the extraordinary and Bummarj remedj which has been already Btated. Tlie river, the bay, and the uiarine league along the shore, are all within the scope of tins grant. Any vessel, therefore, of this description, coining - into any of those waters, without a license, whether from another State or from abroad, whether it. be a public or private vessel, is instantly forfeited to the grantees of the monopoly. Now it must be remembered that this grant is made as an exercise of sov- ereign political power. It is not an in- spection law, nor a health law, nor passed by any derivative authority; it is professedly an act of sovereign power. Of course, there is no limit to the power, to be derived from the purpose for which it is exercised. If exercised for one purpose, it may be also for an- other. No one can inquire into the motives which influence sovereign au- thority. It is enough that such power manifests its will. The motive alleged in this case is, to remunerate the gran- tees for a benefit conferred by them on the public. But there is no necessary connection between that benefit and this mode of rewarding it; and if the State could grant this monopoly for that purpose, it could also grant it for any other purpose. It could make the grant for money; and so make the mo- nopoly of navigation over those waters a direct source of revenue. When this monopoly shall expire, in 1838, the State may continue it, for any pecuni- ary consideration which the holders may see fit to offer, and the State to receive. If the State may grant this monopoly, it may also grant another, Eor other descriptions of vessels; for instance, for all sloops. If it can grant these exclusive privi- leges to a few, it may grant them t<> many; that is, il may granl them to .ill its own citizens, to the exclusion everybodj else. Bui tin 1 waters of New fork are no more the Bubject of exclusive grants by that State, than the waters <>i other States are subjects <>)' BUCh grants by those other Mai--. Virginia may well exercise, over the enl ranee of i he < I apeake, all the power thai New York can exercise over the bay of New York, and the waters on her shores. Chesapeake, therefore, upon the prin- ciple of these laws, may be the subject of State monopoly: and BO ma, the bay of Massachusetts. But this is not all. It recpiires no greater power to grant a monopoly of trade, than a monopol navigation. Of couim-, New York, if these acts can be maintained, may give an exclusive right of entry of vessels into her ports; ami the other States may do the same. These are not ex- treme cases. We have onlytosuppo • that other States should do what New York has already done, and that the power should be carried to its full extent. To all this, no answ T er is to be given but one, that the concurrent power of the States, concurrent though it be. is yet subordinate to the legislation of Congress; and that therefore Con§ may, whenever it pleases, annul the. State legislation; but until it doe, so annul it. the State Legislation is valid and effectual. What is there to recom- mend a construction which leads t.. :i result like this? Here would be a per- petual hostility; one Legislature enact- ing laws, till another Legislature should repeal them: one sovereign power mg the rule, till another sovereign power should abrogate it ; and all this under the idea of concurrent Legislation! But, further, under this concurrent power, the State does that which I gresscannol do: that is, it gives prefer- ences to the citizens of some States over those of others. I do not. mean here the advantages conferred by the -rant on the grantees; but the disadvanl to which it subjects all the other citi- zens of New York. To impose a: 120 THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND'OGDEN. traordinary tax on steam navigation visiting the ports of New York, and leaving it free everywhere else, is giv- ing a preference to the citizens of other States over those of New York. This Congress could not do; and yet the State does it; so that this power, at first subordinate, then concurrent, now becomes paramount. The people of New York have a right to be protected against this monopoly. It is one of the objects for which they agreed to this Constitution, that they should stand on an equality in commer- cial regulations; and if the government should not insure them that, the prom- ises made to them in its behalf would not be performed. I contend, therefore, in conclusion on this point, that the power of Congress over these high branches of commercial regulation is shown to be exclusive, by considering what was wished and in- tended to be done, when the convention for forming the Constitution was called ; by what was understood, in the State conventions, to have been accomplished by the instrument; by the prohibitions on the States, and the express excep- tion relative to inspection laws ; by the nature of the power itself; by the terms used, as connected with the nature of the power; by the subsequent under- standing and practice, both of Congress and the States; by the grant of ex- clusive admiralty jurisdiction to the federal government; by the manifest danger of the opposite doctrine, and the ruinous consequences to which it di- rectly leads. Little is now required to be said, to prove that this exclusive grant is a law regulating commerce ; although, in some of the discussion- elsewhere, it has been called a law of police. If it be not a regulation of commerce, then it follows, against the constanl admission on the r Bide, thai < longress, even by an express act, cannol annul or control it. For it' it be ool a regulation of com- merce, < longress has ao concern \\ ith it. Hut the granting of monopolies of this kind is always referred to the power over commerce. It was as arbiter of com- merce that the king formerly granted such monopolies. 1 This is a law regu- lating commerce, inasmuch as it imposes new conditions and terms on the coast- ing trade, on foreign trade generally, and on foreign trade as regulated by treaties; and inasmuch as it interferes with the free navigation of navigable waters. If, then, the power of commercial reg- ulation possessed by Congress be, in regard to the great branches of it, ex- clusive; and if this grant of New York be a commercial regulation, affecting commerce in respect to these great branches, then the grant is void, whether any case of actual collision has happened or not. But I contend, in the second place, that whether the grant were to be re- garded as wholly void or not, it must, at least, be inoperative, when the rights claimed under it come in collision with other rights, enjoyed and secured under the laws of the United States ; and such collision, I maintain, clearly exists in this case. It will not be denied that the law of Congress is paramount. The Constitution has expressly provided for that. So that the only question in this part of the case is, whether the two rights be inconsistent with each other. The appellant has a right to go from New Jersey to New York, in a vessel owned by himself, of the proper legal description, and enrolled and licensed according to law. This right belongs to him as a citizen of the United States. It is derived under the laws of the United States, and no act of the legis- lalure of New York can deprive him of if, any more than such act could deprive him of the right of holding lands in that State, or of suing in its courts. It ap- pears from the record, that the boat in question was regularly enrolled at Perth Amboy, and properly licensed for carry- ing on the coasting trade. Under this enrolment . and with this license, she was proceeding to New York, when she was stopped by the injunction of the Chan- i 1 Black. Com. 273; 4 Black. Com. 160. Till-; CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. 121 cellor, on the application of the New York grantees. There can be no doubt that here is a collision, in fact; that which the appellant claimed as a right, the respondent resisted; and there re- mains nothing now but to determine whether the appellant had, as he con- tends, aright to navigate these waters; because, if he had such right, it must prevail. Now. this right is expressly conferred by the laws of the United States. The first section of the act of February, 1793, cli. 8, regulating the coasting trade and fisheries, declares, that all ships and vessels, enrolled and licensed as that act provides, "and no others, shall be deemed ships or vessels of the United States, entitled to the privileges of ships or vessels employed in the coasting trade or fisheries." The fourth section of the same act declares, " that, in order to the licensing of any ship or vessel, for car- rying on the coasting trade or fisheries," bond shall be given, according to the provisions of the act. And the same section declares, that, the owner having complied with the requisites of the law, " it shall be the duty of the collector to grant a license for carrying on the coast- ing trade " ; and the act proceeds to give the form and words of the license, which is, therefore, of course, to be received as a jiart of the act; and the words of the license, after the necessary recitals, are, " License is hereby granted for the said vessel to be employed in carrying on the coasting trade. ' ' Words could not make this authority more express. The court below seems to me, with great deference, to have mistaken the object and nature of the license. It seems to have been of opinion, that the license has no other intent or effect than to ascertain the ownership and character of the vessel. But this is the peculiar office and object of the enrolment. That document ascertains that the regular proof of ownership and character has been given; and the license is given to confer the right to which the party has shown himself entitled. It is the au- thority which the master carries with him, to prove his right to navigate freely the waters of the Unite, i States, and t-> carry on die coasting trade. In BOl I' the discussions which h been had <>n thi» question, it, has been said, that ( Songress lias only pro\ ided for ascertaining tie- <>w nerahip and property of vessels, hut has not prescribed t" what use they may !"• applied. Hut this is an obvious error. The whole object of the act regulating the coasting trade is to declare what vessels shall enjoj tie- benefit of being employed in that trade. To secure this use to certain ve>seN, and to deny it to others, is precisely the pur- pose for which the act was passed. error, or what I humbly suppose to be the error, in the judgment of the court below, consists in that court's having thought, that, although Congress might act, it had not yet acted, in such a way as to confer a right on the appellant; whereas, if a right was not given by this law, it never could be given. No law- can be more express. It has been ad- mitted, that, supposing there is a pro- vision in the act of Congress, that all vessels duly licensed shall he at liberty to navigate, for the purpose of trade and commerce, all the navigable harbors, bays, rivers, and lakes within tic eral States, any law of the States creat- ing particular privileges as to any par- ticular class of vessels to the contrary notwithstanding, the only question that could arise, in such a case, would he. whether the law was constitutional; and that, if that was to be granted or de- cided, it would certainly, in all courts and places, overrule and set aside the State grant. Now, I do not see that such supposed case could he distinguished from the present. We -how a provision in an act of Congress, thai all \e>>.-ls. duly li- censed, may carry on the coasting trade ; nobody doubts the constitutional valid- ity of that law; and we show that this I was duly licensed according to its provisions. This is all that i- i — ntial in the case supposed. The presence or absence of a nan obstante clause cannot affect the extent or operation of the of Congress. Congress has no powi revoking State laws, a- a distinct pOWOr. 122 THE CASE OF GIBBONS AND OGDEN. It legislates oversubjects; and over those subjects which are within its power, its Legislation is supreme, and necessarily overrules all inconsistent or repugnant Stat.' legislation. If Congress were to pass an act expressly revoking or annul- ling, in whole or in part, this Xew York -rant, such an act would be wholly use- and inoperative. If the New York -rant be opposed to, or inconsistent with, any constitutional power which Congress has exercised, then, so far as the incom- patibility .'xists, the grant is nugatory and void, necessarily, and by reason of the supremacy of the law of Congress Bui if the grant be not inconsistent with any exercise of the powers of Congress, then, certainly, Congress has no author- ity to revoke or annul it. Such an act of Congress, therefore, would be either unconstitutional or supererogatory. The laws of Congress need no non obstante clause. The Constitution makes them supreme, when State laws come into opposition to them. So that in these cases there is no question except this; whether there be, or be not, a repug- nancy or hostility between the law of Congress and the law of the State. Nor is it at all material, in this view, whether the law of the State 1"' a law regulating commerce, or a law of police, nor by what other name or character it, may be designated. If its provisions be incon- sistent with an act of Congress, they are void, so far as that inconsistency ex- tend.-. The whole argument, therefore, is substantially and effectually given up, when it is admitted that I longress might, by express terms, abrogate the State ,i . or declare thai it should not stand in the way of its own legislation ; be- cause such express terms would add noth- ing to the effeel and operation of an act of ( longress. I contend, therefore, upon the whole of this point . that a case ol actual col- lision baa been made out between the rani and the acl of Congress; and as the acl of Congress is enl irely unexceptionable, and clearly in pursu- ance of it onal powers, the Stat'' -rant IDUSl yield. There are other provisions of the Con- stitution of the United States, which have more or less bearing on this ques- tion. •• No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage." Under color of grants like this, that prohibition might be wholly evaded. This grant authorizes Messrs. Livingston and Fulton to license naviga- tion in the waters of Xew York. They, of course, license it on their own terms. They may require a pecuniary consider- ation, ascertained by the tonnage of the vessel, or in any other manner. Prob- ably, in fact, they govern themselves, in this respect, by the size or tonnage of the vessels to which they grant licenses. Now, what is this but substantially a tonnage duty, under the law of the State? Or does it make any differ- ence, whether the receipts go directly into her own treasury, or into the hands of those to whom she has made the grant? There is, lastly, that provision of the Constitution which gives Congress power to promote the progress of science and the useful arts, by securing to authors and inventors, for a limited time, an ex- clusive right to their own writings and discoveries. Congress has exercised this power, and made all the provisions which it deemed useful or necessary. The States may, indeed, like munificent individuals, exercise their own bounty towards authors and inventors, at their own discretion. But to confer reward by exclusive grants, even if it were but a part of the use of the writing or inven- tion, is not supposed to be a power properly to be exercised by the States. Much less can they, under the notion of conferring rewards in such cases, grant monopolies, the enjoyment of which is essentially incompatible with the exer- cise of rights possessed under the laws of the United States. I shall insist, however, the less on these points, as they open to counsel who will come after in i the same side, and as I have said SO much upon what appears to me the more important and interesting part of the argument. THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. AN ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE LAYING OF THE CORNER-STONE OK II IK BUNKEB BILL MONUMENT AT CHARLESTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, ON Till, 17tu OF JUNE, 1825. [As early as 177i>. Bome steps were taken toward the commemoration <>f the battle of Bunker Hill and the tall of General War- ren, who was buried upon the hill the day after the action. The Massachusetts Lodge of .Masons, over which he presided, applied to the provisional government of Massachu- setts, for permission to take up his remains and to bury them with the usual solemni- ties. The Council granted this request, on condition that it should be carried into ef- fect in such a manner that the government of the Colony might have an opportunity to erect a monument to his memory- A funeral procession was had, and a Eulogy on Gen- eral Warren was delivered by Perez Morton, but no measures were taken toward build- ing a monument. A resolution was adopted by the Congress of the United States on the 8th of April, 1777, directing that monuments should be erected to the memory of General Warren, in Boston, and of General Mercer, at Fred- ericksburg; but this resolution has remained to the present time unexecuted. On the 11th of November, 1794, a com- mittee was appointed by King Solomon's Lodge, at Charlestown, 1 to take measures for the erection of a monument to the mem- ory of General Joseph Warren at the ex- pense of the Lodge. This resolution was promptly carried into effect. The land for this purpose was presented to the Lodge by the Hon. .lames Russell, of Charlestown, and it was dedicated with appropriate cer- emonies on the l'iI of December, 1794. It was a wooden pillar of the Tuscan order, eighteen feet in height, raised on a pedestal eight feet square, and of an elevation of ten feet from the ground. Tin- pillar was sur- mounted by a gilt urn. An appropriate in- scription was placed on the south side of the pedestal. In February, 1818, a committee of the 1 General Warren, at the time of his decease, ■was Grand Master of the Masonic Lodges in America. legislature of Massachusetts was appoint eil to consider the expediency of building a monument of American marble of the mem- ory of General Warren, but this proposal was not carried into effect As the half-century from the date of the battle drew toward a close, a stronger feel- ing of the duty of commemorating it began to be awakened in the community. Among those wdio from the first manifested the greatest interest in the subject, was the late William Tudor, Esq. He expressed the wish, in a letter still preserved, t" upon the battle-ground "the noblest monu- ment in the world," and he was so ardent and persevering in urging the project, that it has been stated that he first conceived the idea of it. The steps taken in execu- tion of the project, from the earliest prh ate conferences among the gentlemen drat en- gaged in it to its final completion, are accu- rately sketched by Mr. Richard Frothing- ham, Jr., in his valuable History of the Siege of I'oston. All the material facts contained in this note are derived from his chapter on the Bunker Hill Monument. After giving an account of the organiza- tion of the Bociety, the measures adopted for the collection of funds, and the delib- erations mi the form of the monument, Mr. Frothingham proceeds as follows: — ■|i was at this stage <>f the enterprise that the directors proposed t" lav the corner-stone >>f the monument, ami ground was broken (June "till fur this purpose. A- a mark of iv-|.. the liberality ami patriotism of King Solomon's Lodge, they invited the . and who are now here, from every quarter of New England, to visit once more, and under circum- stances so affecting, 1 had almost said so overwhelming, this renowned theatre of their courage and patriotism. Venerable men 1 you have come down to us from a former generation. Heaven has bounteously lengthened out your lives, that you might behold this joyous day. You are now where you stood fifty years ago, this very hour, with your brothers and your neighbors, shoulder to shoulder, in the strife for your country. Heboid, how altered! The same heavens are indeed over your beads; the same ocean rolls at your feet; but all else how changed ! You hear now no roar of hostile cannon, you see no mixed volumes of smoke and flame rising from burning Charles town. The ground strewed with the dead and the dying: the impetuous charge; the steady and successful repulse ; the loud call to repeated assault; the summoning of all that is manly to repeated resistance; a thousand bosoms freely and fearlessly bared in an instant to whatever of terror there may be in war and death; — all these you have witnessed, but you wit- ness them no more. All is peace. The heights of yonder metropolis, its towers and roofs, which you then saw filled with wives and children and country- men in distress and terror, and looking with unutterable emotions for the issue of the combat, have presented you to- day with the sigh! of its whole happy population, come out to welcome and greet you with a universal jubilee. Yonder proud ships, by a felicity of position appropriately lying at, the fool of this mount, and Beeming fondly to cling around it, are not means of annoy- ance to you, hut your country's own means of distinction and defence. 1 All is peace; and (iod has granted you this sight of your country's happiness, ere you slumber in the grave. He has al- lowed you to behold and to partake the reward of your patriotic toils: and he has allowed us, your sons and country- men, to meet you here, and in the name of the present generation, in the name of your country, in the name of liberty, to thank you ! Hut. alas! you are not all here! Time anil the sword have thinned your ranks. Prescott, Putnam, Stark, Brooks, Read, Pomeroy, Bridge! our eyes seek for you in vain amid this broken hand. You are gathered to your fathers, and live only to your country iu her grateful re- membrance and your own bright ex- ample. But let us not too much grieve, that you have met the common fate of men. You lived at least long enough to km.w tli.it your work had been nobly and successfully accomplished. Xbu lived to see your country's indepen- dence established, and to sheathe your swords from war. < >n the light of Lib- erty you saw arise the light of Peace, like " another morn, Risen on mid-noon " ; and the sky on which you closed your eyes was cloudleSS. Bui ah ! Him! the firsl great martyr in this great cause! Him! the premature victim of his own self-devoting heart! Him! the head of our civil councils, and the destined leader of our military bands, whom nothing brought hither but the unquenchable fire of his own spirit! Him! cut off by Providence in 1 It is necessary to inform those only who arc unacquainted with the localities, that the United States Navy Yard al ' barlestowo ia situated at the base of Bunker Hill. 123 THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. the hour of overwhelming anxiety and thick gloom; falling ere he saw the star of his country rise:; pouring out his generous blood like water, before he knew whether it would fertilize a land of freedom or of bondage! — how shall I struggle villi tin- emotions that stille the utterance of thy name! 1 Our poor work may perish; but thine shall en- dure ! This monument may moulder away; the solid ground it rests upon may sink down to a level with the sea; but thy memory shall not fail! Where- soever among men a heart shall be found that beats to the transports of patriotism and liberty, its aspirations shall be to claim kindred with thy spirit! But the scene amidst which we stand does not permit us to confine our thoughts or our sympathies to those fearless spirits who hazarded or lost their lives on this consecrated spot. We have the happiness to rejoice here in the presence of a most worthy repre- sentation of the survivors of the whole Revolutionary army. Veterans! you are the remnant of many a well-fought field. You bring with you marks of honor from Trenton and Monmouth, from Yorktown, Cam- den, Bennington, and Saratoga. Vet- erans of half a century! when in your youthful days you put every thing at hazard in your country's cause, good as that cause was, and sanguine as youth is, still your fondest hopes did not stretch onward to an hour like this! At a period to which you could not reasonably have expected to arrive, at a moment ^{ national prosperity such as you could never have foreseen, you are now ni'i here to enjoy the fellowship of old soldiers, and to receive the over- flowinga of a universal gratitude. But your agitated countenances and your heaving breasts inform me that even this is not an unmixed joy. I perceive thai a tumult of contending feelings rushes upon you. The images of the dead, as well as the persons of the living, present themselves before 1 Sec the North American Review, Vol. XI. I. p. 242. you. The scene overwhelms you, and I turn from it. May the Father of all mercies smile upon your declining years, and bless them! And when you shall here have exchanged your embraces, when you shall once more have pressed the hands which have been so often ex- tended to give succor in adversity, or grasped in the exultation of victory, then look abroad upon this lovely land which your young valor defended, and mark the happiness with which it is filled ; yea, look abroad upon the whole earth, and see what a name you have contributed to give to your country, and what a praise you have added to free- dom, and then rejoice in the sympathy and gratitude which beam upon your last days from the improved condition of mankind ! The occasion does not require of me any particular account of the battle of the 17th of June, 1775, nor any de- tailed narrative of the events which immediately preceded it. These are familiarly known to all. In the prog- ress of the great and interesting con- troversy, Massachusetts and the town of Boston had become early and marked objects of the displeasure of the British Parliament. This had been manifested in the act for altering the government of the Province, and in that for shut- ting up the port of Boston. Nothing shetls more honor on our early history, and nothing better shows how little the feelings and sentiments of the Colonies were known or regarded in England, than the impression which these meas- ures everywhere produced in America. It had been anticipated, that, while the Colonies in general would be terrified by the severity of the punishment in- flicted on Massachusetts, the other sea- ports would be governed by a mere spirit of gain; and that, as Boston was now cut off from all commerce, the un- expected advantage which this blow on her was calculated to confer on other towns would he greedily enjoyed. How miserably such reasoners deceived them- selves! How little they knew of the depth, and the strength, and the in- THE BUNKER BILL MONUMENT. 129 tenseness of (hat feeling of resistance to illegal acts of power, which possi the whole American people! Every- where the unworthy hoon was rejected with scorn. The fortunate occasion was seized, everywhere, to show to the whole world that the Colonies were .swayed by no local interest, no partial interest, no selfish interest. The temp- tation to profit by the punishment of Boston was strongest to our neighbors of Salem. Yet Salem was precisely the place where this miserable proffer was spurned, in a tone of the QlOSl lofty self-respect and the most indignant patriotism. " We are deeply affected," said its inhabitants, "with the sense of our public calamities; but the miseries thai are now rapidly hastening on out- brethren in the capital of the Province greatly excite our commiseration. By shutting up the port of Boston, some imagine that the course of trade might be turned hither and to our benefit; but we must be dead to every idea of justice, lost to all feelings of humanity, could we indulge a thought to seize on wealth and raise our fortunes on the ruin of our suffering neighbors." These noble sentiments were not confined to our im- mediate vicinity. In that day of gen- eral affection and brotherhood, the blow given to Boston smote on every patriotic heart from one end of the country to the other. Virginia and the Carolina-, as well as Connecticut and \ew Hamp- shire, felt and proclaimed the cause to be their own. The Continental Con- gress, then holding its first session in Philadelphia, expressed its sympathy for the suffering inhabitants of Boston, and addresses were received from all quarters, assuring them that the cause was a common one, and should be met by common efforts and common sacri- fices. The Congress of Massachusetts responded to these assurances; and in an address to the Congress at Philadel- phia, bearing the official signature, per- haps among the last, of the immortal Warren, notwithstanding the severity of its suffering and the magnitude of the dangers which threatened it, it was declared, that this Colony " is ready, at 'J ••'" times, to spend ;i ,,d to i„. .j,,.,,, Ul the Cause Of America." But the hour drew nigh which Wfl pul professions to the proof, and to de- termine Whether the authors ,,f theM mutual pledges were rea dj t,. seal them in blood. The tidings of Lexington and Concord had in. BOOner Spread, than ii was universally felt that the time at last come for action. A spirit per- vaded all ranks, id transient, not In.is- terous, but deep, .solemn, determined, " totamque infaM per artus Mens Bgital molem, el magno ie corpora mil War, on their own -oil and at their own doors, was, indeed. a strange work to the yeomanry of New England; but their consciences were convinced of it; necessity, their country called them to it. and they did not withhold themselves from the perilous trial. The ordinary occupations of life were abandoned; the plough wa> >taid in the unfinished furrow; wives gave up their husbands, and mothers gave up their sons, to the battles of a civil war. Death might come, in honor, on the field; it might come, in disgrace, on the Bcaffold. either an. I for both they were prepared. The sentiment of Quincy was full j n their hearts. •• Blandishments," said that distinguished son of genius and patriotism, "will not fascinate us-, nor will threats of a halter intimidate; under God, we are determined that, wheresoever, whensoever, or howsoever we shall be called to make our exit, will die free Il|e|l." The 17th of .lime saw the four New England Colonies standing here, Bide In- side, to triumph or to tall together; and there was with them from that moment to the end of the war. what I hope will remain with them for ever, one ca one country, one heart. The battle of Bunker Hill was at- tended w ith the most important beyond its immediate results as a mili- tary engagement. It created at oni state of open, pul. lie war. There could now be no longer a question of ; big against individuals, liltj of treason or rebellion. That fearful c 130 THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. was past. The appeal lay to (lie sword, and the only question was, whether the spirit and the resources of tin- people would hold out. till the object should be accomplished. Nor were its general consequences confined to our own coun- try. The previous proceedings of the Colonies, their appeals, resolutions, ami addresses, had made their cause known to Europe. Without boasting, we may say, that in no age or country has the public cause been maintained with more force of argument, more power of illustration, or more of that persuasion which ex- cited feeling and elevated principle can alone bestow, than the Revolutionary state papers exhibit. These papers will for ever deserve to be studied, not only tor the spirit which they breathe, but tor the ability with which they were written. To this able vindication of their cause, the Colonies had now added a practical and severe proof of their own true de- votion to it, and given evidence also of the power which they could bring to its support. All now saw, that, if America fell, she would not fall without a strug- gle. Men felt sympathy and regard, as well as surprise, when they beheld these infant states, remote, unknown, un- aided, encounter the power of England, ami. in the firs! considerable battle, leave more of their enemies dead on the field, in proportion to the number of combatants, than had been recently known to fall in the wars of Europe. Information of these events, circu- lating throughoul the world, at length reached the ears of one who now hears m<-.i He has not forgotten the emotion which the fame ,,f Bunker Hill, and the nam" of Warren, excited in his youth- ful breast. Sib, we are assembled to commemo rat" tic- establishmenl of great public principles of liberty, aid to do honor 1 Among the earliest of the arrangements for the celebration of tic- 17th <.f June, 1825, was the invitai 'o General Lafaj ette i<. be pres- ent : and he i ' ><> timed hi ther Stati .'-nun to Massachusetts i for tic- ^ i at ... asion, to the distinguished dead. The occa- sion is too severe for eulogy of the liv- ing. But, Sir. your interesting relation to this country, the peculiar circum- stances which surround you and sur- round us, call on me to express the happiness which we derive from your presence and aid in this solemn com- memoration. Fortunate, fortunate man! with what measure of devotion will you not thank God for the circumstances of your ex- traordinary life! You are connected with both hemispheres and with two generations. Heaven saw fit to ordain, that the electric spark of liberty should be conducted, through you, from the New World to the Old; and we, who are now here to perform this duty of patriotism, have all of us long ago re- ceived it in charge from our fathers to cherish your name and your virtues. You will account it an instance of your good fortune, Sir, that. you crossed the seas to visit us at a time which enables you to be present at this solemnity. You now behold the field, the renown of which reached you in the heart of France, and caused a thrill in your ar- dent bosom. You see the lines of the little redoubt thrown up by the incredi- ble diligence of Prescott; defended, to the last extremity, by his lion-hearted valor; and within which the corner- stone of our monument, has now taken its position. You see where Warren fell, and where Parker, Gardner, Mc- Cleary, Moore, and other early patriots, fell with him. Those who survived that day, and whose lives have been pro- Longed to the present hour, are now around you. Some of them you have known in the trying scenes of the war. Behold! thej now stretch forth their feeble arms to embrace you. Behold! they raise their tremliliiig voices to in- voke the blessing of God on you and yours for ever. sir. yon have assisted us in laving the foundation of this structure. You have heard US rehearse, with our feeble com- mendation, the names of departed pa- triots. Monuments and eulogy belong to the dead. We give them this day to THE BUNKER IIII-L MONUMENT. 131 Warren and his associates. <>n other occasion i I hej have been given to your more immediate companions in arms, to Washington, bo Greene, to Gates, to Sullivan, and to Lincoln.. We have become reluctant to granl these, our highest and last honors, further. We would gladly hold them yet back from the little remnanl of thai immortal band. Serus in caelum redeas. illustri- ous as an- your merits, ye1 Ear, < ) rerj Ear distant be the day, w hen anj inscrip- tion shall bear your name, or am tongue pronounce its eulogy ! Thi> leading reflection to which this occasion Beems to invite as, respects the greal changes which have happened in the fifty years since the battle of Bunker Hill was Eought. And it peculiarly marks the character of the presenl age, that, in looking at those changes, and in estimating their effect on our condition. we arc obliged to consider, not what has been done in our own country only, bui in others also. In these interesting times, while nat ions arc making separate and individual advances in improvement, they make. too. a common progress; like Is on a common I ide, propelled by the gales at different rates, according to their several structure and management, but all moved forward by one mighty current, strong enough to bear onward whatever does not sink beneath it. A chief distinction of the present day is a community of opinions and knowl- edge amongst men in different nations. existing in a degree heretofore unknown. Knowledge has. in our time, triumphed, and is triumphing, over distance, over difference of Languages, over diversity of habits, over prejudice, and over big- otry. The civilized and ( hnst ian world is fast Learning the greal Lesson, that dif- ference of nation does not imply neces- sary hostibty, and that all contact 1 not be war. The whole world is becom- ing a common field for intellect to act in. Energy of mind, genius, power. wheresoever it exists, may speak out in any tongue, and the world will hear it. A great chord of sentiment and feeling runs through two continents, and vi- brates over both. Every breeze - intelligence Erom country bo country; every w a vc rolls it ; all give it forth, and all in turn receive it. There b ,, commerce of ideas; there are marts and exchanges Eor intellectual dis and a wonderful fellowship of tl individual intelligences which make up the mind and opinion of bhe age. Mind is bhe greal level- of all things : human thought is the process by which human ends are tilt innately answered ; and bhe diffusion of knowledge, bo astonishing in bhe last half-century, has rend innumerable minds, variously gifted by nature, competent bo be competitoi fellow-workers on bhe theatre of intel- lect ual operat ion. Prom these causes important improve- ments have taken place in the personal condition of individual-. Generally speaking, mankind are not only better fed and better clothed, bul they are able also bo enjoy more leisure; they pos more refinement and more Belf-respeci . A superior tone of education, manners, and habits prevails. This remark, most true in its application to our own coun- try, is also partly true when applied elsewhere. It is proved by bhe vastly augmented consumpi ion of bhose art of manufacture and of commerce which contribute to the comforts and the de- cencies of life; an augmentation which has far outrun bhe progress of popula- tion. And while the unexampled and almosl incredible use of machinery would Beem to supply the place of Labor, labor still finds its tupation and its reward: bo wisely has Provi- dence adjusted men's want- and desires to their condition and their capacity. Any adequate survey, however, of the progress made during the Last half-cen- I ury in the polite and the mechanic 8 in machinery and manufactures, in com- merce and agriculture, in letters and in science, would require volumes. I must abstain wholly from these Bubj< turn for a i nent to the contemplal of what has been done , .it question of politic- am' government. This is the master topic oi bl during the whole tiitv yean il has m- 132 THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. tensely occupied the thoughts of men. The nature of civil government, its ends and OSes, have l>een canvassed and investigated; ancient opinions attacked and defended; new ideas recommended and resisted, by whatever power the mind of man could bring to the contro- versy. From the closet and the public halls the debate has 1 n transferred to the field; and the world has been shaken by wars of unexampled magnitude, and the greatest variety of fortune. A day of peace has at length succeeded; and now that the strife has subsided, and the smoke cleared away, we may begin to see what has actually been done, per- manently changing the state and condi- tion of human society. And, without dwelling on J 'articular circumstances, it is mosl apparent, that, from the before- mentioned causes of augmented knowl- edge and improved individual condition, areal. substantial, and important change has taken place, and is taking place, highly favorable, on the whole, to hu- man liberty and human happiness. The great wheel of political revolution bewail to move in America. Here its rotation was guarded, regular, and safe. Transferred to the other continent, from unfortunate but natural causes, it re- ceived an irregular and violent impulse; it whirled along with a fearful celerity; till at length, like tin; chariot-wheels in the races of antiquity, it took fire from tli'- rapidity of its own motion, and blazed onward, spreading conflagration and terror around. We learn from the result of this ex- periment, how fortunate was our own condition, and how admirably the char- acter of our people was calculated for setting the greal example of popular rnments. The possession of power did nol turn the heads of the American people, for they had long been in the habit of exercising a greal degree of self-control. Although the paramount authority of the parenl state existed over them, yel a large field of legisla- tion had always been open to our < !olo- nial assemblies. Theywere accustomed to representative bodies and the forms of free government ; they (mdet the doctrine of the division of power among different branches, and the neces- sity of checks on each. The character of our countrymen, moreover, was sober, moral, and religious; and there was little in the change to shock their feelings of justice and humanity, or even to disturb an honest prejudice. We had no do- mestic throne to overturn, no privileged orders to cast down, no violent changes of property to encounter. In the Ameri- can Revolution, no man sought or wished for more than to defend and enjoy his own. None hoped for plunder or for spoil. Rapacity was unknown to it; the axe was not among the instruments of its accomplishment; and we all know that it could not have lived a single day under any well-founded imputation of possessing a tendency adverse to, the Christian religion. It need not surprise us, that, under circumstances less auspicious, political revolutions elsewhere, even when well intended, have terminated differently. It is, indeed, a great achievement, it is the master-work of the world, to estab- lish governments entirely popular on lasting foundations; nor is it easy, in- deed, to introduce the popular principle at all into governments to which it has 1 n altogether a stranger. It cannot be doubted, however, that Europe has come out of the contest, in which she has been so long engaged, with greatly superior knowledge, and, in many re- spects, in a highly improved condition. Whatever benefit has been acquired is likely to be retained, for it consists mainly in the acquisition of more en- lightened ideas. And although king- doms and provinces may be wrested from the hands that hold them, in the same manner they were obtained; al- though ordinary and vulgar power may, in human affairs, lie losl as it has been won; yel it Is the glorious prerogative of the empire of knowledge, that, what ii gains it never loses. On the contrary, if increases by the multiple of its own power; all its ends 1 ome means; all its attainments, helps t « > new conquests. Its whole abundant harvest is but so much seed wheat, and nothing lias limited, and THE BUNKEB IIH.I. MONUMENT nothing can limit, the amount of ultimate product. Under the influence of this rapidly in- creasing knowledge, the people have be- gun in all forma of government, to think and to reason, on affairs of Btate. Regarding government as an institution for the public good, they demand a knowledge of its operations, and a par- ticipation in its exercise. A call for the representative system, wherever it is not enjoyed, and where there is already in- telligence enough to estimate Its value, is perse veringlj made. Where men may speak out, they demand it; where the bayonet is at their throats, thej pray for it. When Louis the Fourteenth said, "I am the state," he expressed the essence of the doctrine of unlimited power. By the rules of that system, the people are disconnected from the state; the\ are its subjects; it is their lord. These ideas. founded in the love of power, and long supported by the excess and the abuse tit' it, are yielding, in our age, to other opinions; and the civilized world seems at last to be proceeding to the conviction of that fundamental and manifest truth, that the powers of government are but a trust, and that they cannot be lawfully exercised but for the good of the com- munity. As knowledge is more and more extended, this conviction becomes more and more general. Knowledge, in truth, is the great sun in the firma- ment. Life and power are, scattered with all its beams. The prayer of the Grecian champion, when enveloped in unnatural clouds and darkness, is the appropriate political supplication for the people of every country not yet blessed with free institutions: — "Dispel tins cloud, the light of heaven restore, Give me to sel:, — and Ajax asks no mere." We may hope that the growing influ- ence of enlightened sentiment will pro- mote the permanent peace of the world. Wars to maintain family alliana uphold or to cast down dynasties, and to regulate successions to thrones, which have occupied so much room in the his- tory of modern times, if not less likely to happen at all, will be less likely to be- come genera] and involve m inj oaf as the great principle shall 1»- more ami more e itablished, that the interest oi the world is peace, ami it- fn it<-, thai everj nat ion po lie power of establishing a government for itself. Hut public opinion has attained also an influence over governments whicb do not admit the popular principle into their organization. A ne tor the judgment of tin- world operates, in some measure, as a control over the n unlimited forms of authority. [t owing, perhaps, to this truth, that the interesting struggle of the Greeks baa l n Buffered to g i bo long, without a direct interference, either to wrest that countrj from it- present masters, or to execute the Bystem of pacification by force, ami. with united strength, la\ the neek of Christian and civilized Greek at the fooi of the barbarian Turk. Let as thank God that we live in an age when Bomething ha- influence besides the ba net, and when tin' Bternest authority ■ not venture to encounter the scorching power of public reproach. Any attempt of the kind I have mentioned should be met by one universal burst of indig tion; the air of the civilized world o to be made too warm to be comfortably breathed by any one who would haz- ard it. It is. ind 1. a touching reflection, that, while, in the fulness of our counf happiness, we rear this monument to her honor, we look tor instruction in undertaking to a countrj which i- now in fearful .out, st. not for work- of ait or memorials of glory, hut for her own existence. Let her 1»- assured, that she i.- not forgotten in the world; that her efforts are applauded, and that constant iscend for her - . \ ua cherish a confidenl hope for her final triumph. If the true spark of i and ci\il liberty be kindled, it will burn. Human agency cannot extinguish it Like the earth's central t'ue. ii smothered for a time; tic may overwhelm it ; mountain- maj down: hut it- inherent and unconquer- able force will hi . md. and at some lime or other, in 134 THE BUXKElt HILL MONUMENT. some place or other, the volcano will break out and flame ap to heaven. Among the greal events of the half- century, we must reckon, certainly, the revolution of Smith America; and we are doI likely to overrate the importance of that revolution, either to the people of the country itself or to the rest of the world. The late Spanish colonics, new Lndependenl states, under circumstances less favorable, doubtless, than attended our own revolution, have yet successful- ly commenced their national existence. They have accomplished the great ob- ject of establishing- their independence; they are known and acknowledged in the world; and although in regard to their systems of government, their senti- ments on religious toleration, and their provisions for public instruction, they may have yet much to learn, it must be admitted that they have risen to the con- dition of settled and established states more rapidly than could have been rea- sonably anticipated. They already fur- nish an exhilarating example of the dif- ference between free governments and despotic misrule. Their commerce, at this moment, creates a new activity in all the great marts of the world. They show themselves able, by an exchange of commodities, to bear a useful part in the intercourse of nations. A new spirit of enterprise and indus- try begins to prevail; all the great in- terests of society receive a salutary im- pulse; and the progress of information not only testifies to an improved condi- tion, luil itself constitutes the highest and mosl essential improvement. When the battle of Bunker Hill was fought, the existence of South America was scarcely fell in the civilized world. The thirteen little Colonies of North America habitually called themselves the •• < out hunt."' Borne down by co- Ionia! subjugation, monopoly, and big- otry, these '.a-t regions of the South were hardlj risible above the horizon. Bui in our day there lias been, as it wen-, a uew creation. The southern hemisphere emerges from the 3ea. Its lofty mountains begin to lifl themselves into the lighl of heaven; its broad and fertile plains stretch out, in beauty, to the eye of civilized man, and at the mighty bidding of the voice of political liberty the waters of darkness retire. And, now, let us indulge an honest exultation in the conviction of the ben- efit which the example of our country has produced, and is likely to produce, on human freedom and human happi- ness. Let us endeavor to comprehend in all its magnitude, and to feel in all its importance, the part assigned to us in the great drama of human affairs. We are placed at the head of the system of representative and popular govern- ments. Thus far our example shows that such governments are compatible, not only with respectability and power, but with repose, with peace, with secu- rity of personal rights, with good laws, and a just administration. We are not propagandists. Wherever other systems are preferred, either as being thought better in themselves, or as 1 letter suited to existing condition, we leave the preference to be enjoyed. Our history hitherto proves, however, that the popular form is practicable, and that with wisdom and knowledge men may govern themselves; and the duty incumbent on us is, to preserve the con- sistency of this cheering example, and take care that nothing may weaken its authority with the world. If, in our case, the representative system ultimate- ly fail, popular governments must be pronounced impossible. No combina- tion of circumstances more favorable to the experiment can ever be expected to occur. The last hopes of mankind, therefore, rest with us; and if it should be proclaimed, that our example had become an argument against the experi- ment, the knell of popular liberty would he sounded throughout, the earth. These are excitements to duty; but the\ are not suggestions of doubt. Our history and our condition, all that is gone before us, and all that surrounds us, authorize the belief, that popular governments, though subject to occa- sional variations, in form perhaps not always for the better, may yet, in their THE BUNKER BILL MONUMENT L85 general character, be as durable and permanent as oilier systems. We kno^i . indeed, that in our country any oilier is impossible. The principle of free gov- ernments adheres to the American soil. It is bedded in it, immovable as its mountains. And let the sacred obligations which have devolved on this generation, and on us, sink deep into our hearts. Those who established our liberty and our gov- ernment are daily dropping from among us. The great trust now descends to new hands. Let us apply ourselves to that which is presented to us, as our appropriate object. We can win no lau- rels in a war tor independence. Earlier and worthier hands have gathered them all. Nor are there ] 'laces for us by the side of Solon, and Alfred, and other founders of states. Our fathers have filled them. But there remains to us a great duty of defence and preservation ; and there is opened to us, also, a noble pursuit, to which the spirit of the times strongly invites us. Our proper business is improvement. Let our age be the age of improvement. In a day of peace, let us advance the arte of peace and the works of peace. Lei as develop tfa sources of our land, call forth its pow- ers, build up its institutions, promote all its greal interests, and see whether we also, in our day and generation, m j not perform something worthy to be re- membered. Lei ns cull ivate a true spirit of union and harmony. In pursuing the greal objects which our condition points out to us, let iis acl under a setl Led con- viction, and an habitual feeling, that these twenty-tour Mat<> are one coun- try. Lei our conceptions be enlarged to the circle of our duties. Le1 us extend our ideas over the whole of the vasl field in which we are called to act. Let OUT object be, 01 b coi \u:y, odb whole < 01 N IKY, AMi Mil HIM; BUT 01 R coi \i by. And, by the blessing of God, may that country itself becon vast and splendid monument, not. of op- pression and terror, but of Wisdom, of Peace, and of Liberty, upon which the world may gaze with admiration for ever ! THE COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. AN ADDRESS DELIVERED ON BUNKER HILL, ON THE 17th OF JUNE, 1843, ON OCCASION OF THE COMPLETION OF THE MONUMENT. [In the introductory note to the preceding Address, a brief account is given of the origin and progress of the measures adopted for the erection of the Bunker Hill Monu- ment, down to the time of laying the cor- ner-stone, compiled from Mr. Frothingham's History of the Siege of Boston. The same valuable work (pp. 345-352) relates the ob- stacles which presented themselves to the rapid execution of the design, and the means by which they were overcome. In this nar- rative, Mr. Frothingham has done justice to the efforts and exertions of the successive boards of direction and officers of the Asso- ciation, to the skill and disinterestedness of the architect, to the liberality of distin- guished individuals, to the public spirit of the Massachusetts Charitable Mechanic As- sociation, in promoting a renewed subscrip- tion, and to the patriotic zeal of the ladies of Boston and the vicinity, in holding a most successful fair. As it would he diffi- cult farther to condense the information contained in this interesting summary, we must refer the reader to Mr. Frothingham's work for an adequate account of the causes which delayed the completion of the monu- ment for nearly seventeen years, and of the resources ami exertions by which the de- sired end was finally attained. The last stone was raised to its place on the morning of the 23d of July, 1842. It was determined by the directors of the Association, that the completion of the work should he celebrated in a manner not less imposing than that in which the laying of the corner-stone had heen celebrated, seven- t> in vi ;n- bi tore. The co-operation of Mr. Webster was again invited, and, notwith- standing the pressure of hi- engagements :i- Secretary of State .-it Washington, was again patriotically yielded. Many circum- stances conspired to increase the interest of the occasion. The completion of the monu- ment had heen lone delayed, hut in the in- .1 the BUbjeCl had heen kept much before the public mind. Mr Webster's ad- dress on the 17th of June. 1826, had obtained the v, eh b1 i irculation throughout the coun- try : passages from it had passed into household words throughout the Union. Wherever they were repeated, they made the Bunker Hill Monument a familiar thought with the people. Meantime, Bos- ton and Charlestown had doubled their population, and the multiplication of rail- roads in every direction enabled a person, in almost any part of New England, to reach the metropolis in a day. The President of the United States and' his Cabinet had ac- cepted invitations to be present ; delegations of the descendants of New England were present from the remotest parts of the Union; one hundred and eight surviving veterans of the Revolution, among whom were some who were in the battle of Bunker Hill, imparted a touching interest to the scene. Every thing conspired to promote the success of the ceremonial. The day was uncommonly fine ; cool for the season, and clear. A large volunteer force from vari- ous parts of the country had assembled for the occasion, and formed a brilliant escort to an immense procession, as it moved from Boston to the battle-ground on the hill. The hank which slopes down from the obe- lisk on the eastern side of Monument Square was covered with seats, rising in the form of an amphitheatre, under the open sky. These had been prepared for ladies, who had assembled in great numbers, awaiting the arrival of the procession. When it ar- rived, it was received into a large open area iii front of these seats. Mr. Webster was stationed upon an elevated platform, in front of the audience and of the monument towering in the background. According lo Mr. Frothingham's estimate, a hundred thousand persons were gathered about the Bpot, and nearly half that number are sup- posed to have been within the reach of the orator's voice. The ground rises slightly between the platform and the Monument Square, BO that the whole of this immense concourse, compactly crowded together, breatllle8S with attention, swayed by one sentiment of admiration and delight, was COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. 137 within the full view of the speaker. The position and the occasion were the height of the moral Bublime. "When, after Bay- ihg, ' It is not from my lips, it could not be from any human lips, that that strain of eloquence is this day to flow most compe- tent to move and excite the vast multitude around me, — the powerful speaker stands motionless he fore us,' — he paused, and point- ed in silent admiration to the sublime struc- ture, the audience hurst into long and loud applause. It was some moments before the speaker could go on with the address."] A duty has been performed. A work of gratitude and patriotism is completed. This structure, having its foundations in soil which drank deep of early Revo- lutionary blood-, has at length reached its destined height, and now lifts its summit to the skies. We have assembled to celebrate the accomplishment of this undertaking, and to indulge afresh in the recollection of the great event which it is designed to commemorate. Eighteen years, more than half the ordinary duration of a generation of mankind, have elapsed since the corner-stone of this monument was laid. The hopes of its projectors rested on voluntary contributions, pri- vate munificence, and the general favor of the public. These hopes have not been disappointed. Donations have been made by individuals, in some cases of large amount, and smaller sums have been contributed by thousands. All who regard the object itself as impor- tant, and its accomplishment, therefore, as a good attained, will entertain sincere respect and gratitude for the unwearied efforts of the successive presidents, boards of directors, and committees of the Association which has had the gen- eral control of the work. The architect, equally entitled to our thanks and com- mendation, will find other reward, also, for his labor and skill, in the beauty and elegance of the obelisk itself, and the distinction which, as a work of art, it confers upon him. At a period when the prospects of fur- ther progress in the undertaking were gloomy and discouraging, the Mechanic Association, by a most praiseworthy and vigorous effort, raised new funds for car- rying it forward, and saw them applied with fidelity, economy, and skill. It is a grateful duty to make public acknowl- edgments of such timely and efficient aid. The last effort and the hist COntribu- tion were from a different source. Gar- Lands of grace and elegance were destined to crown a work which had its com- mencement in manly patriotism. The winning power of the Bex addressed it- self to the public, and all that was needed to carry the monument to its proposed height, and to give to it its finish, was promptly Bupplied. The mothers and the daughters of the land contributed thus, most successfully, to whatever there is of beauty in the monu- ment itself, or whatever of utility and public benefit and gratification there is in its completion. Of those with whom the plan origi- nated of erecting on this spot a monument worthy of the event to be commemorated, many are now present; but others, alas! have themselves be- come subjects of monumental inscrip- tion. William Tudor, an accomplished scholar, a distinguished writer, a most amiable man, allied both by birth and sentiment to the patriots of the Revolu- tion, died while on public service abtf >ad, and now lies buried in a foreign land. 1 William Sullivan, a name fragrant of Revolutionary merit, and of public ser- vice and public virtue, who himself par- took in a high degree of the respect and confidence of the community, and yet was always most, loved w here best known, has also been gathered to his fathers. And last, George Blake, a lawyer of learning and eloquence, a man of wit and of talent, of social qualities the most agreeable and fascinating, and of gifts which enabled him to exercise I sway over public assemblies, lias cl< his human career.- I know that in the crowds before me there are those from whose eyes tears will flow at the men- 1 William Tudor died at Hi" de Janeiro, as Charge d' Affaires of the Uniti -. in - William Sullivan died in Boston in it George Blake in L841, both gentlemen of g political and legal eminence. 138 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER KILE MONUMENT. fcion of these names. Hut such mention is due u> their general character, their public ;in>f June, L775, ami father William II. Prescott, tli'- historian. Foster of Danvers, Enos Reynolds of Boxford, Phi neas Johnson, Robert An- drews, Elijah Dresser, Josiah Cleave- land, Jesse Smith, Philip Bagley, Need- ham Maynard, Roger Plaisted, -Joseph Stephens. Nehemiah Porter, and James Harvey, who bore arms for their country either at Concord and Lexington, on the 19th of April, or on Bunker Hill, all now far advanced in age, have come here to- day, to look once more on the field where their valor was proved, and to re- ceive a hearty outpouring of our respect. They have long outlived the troubles and dangers of the Revolution; they have outlived the evils arising from the want of a united and efficient govern- ment ; they have outlived the menace of imminent dangers to the public liberty; they have outlived nearly all their con- temporaries ; — but they have not out- lived, they cannot outlive, the affection- ate gratitude of their country. Heaven has not allotted to this generation an opportunity of rendering high services, and manifesting strong personal devo- tion, such as they rendered and mani- fested, and in such a cause as that which roused the patriotic fires of their youth- ful breasts, and nerved the strength of their arms. But we may praise what we cannot equal, and celebrate actions which we were not born to perform. Pulchrum est benefacere reipublicce, etiam bene dicere hand absurdum est. The Bunker Hill Monument is fin- ished. Here it stands. Fortunate hi the high natural eminence on which it is placed, higher, infinitely higher in its objects and purpose, it rises over the land and over (lie sea; and, visi- ble, at their homes, to three hun- dred thousand of the people of Mas- sachusetts, it Btands a memorial of the last, and a monitor to the present, and to all succeeding generations. I have spoken of the loftiness of its pur- pose. If it had I a without any other design than the creation of a work of an, the granite of which if is composed would have slept in its native bed. It ha. a purpose, and that purpose gives it its character. That purpose enrobes it witli dignitj and moral grandeur. That COMPLKTION OF THE BUXKKK HILL MONUMENT. L39 well-known purpose it is which causes us to look if']' to it with a feeling of awe. It is itself the orator of tliis occasion. It is imi from my lips, it. could not be from any human lips, that that strain of eloquence is this day to tl"\\ most cora- petenl to move and excite the vasl multitudes around me. The powerful speaker stands motionless before us. It i- a plain shaft. It hears no inscrip- tions, fronting to the rising sun, from which the future antiquary shall wipe the dust. Nor does the rising sun cause tones of music to issue from its summit. But at the rising of the sun, and at the setting of the sun; in the blaze of noon- day, and beneath the milder effulgence of lunar light; it looks, it speaks, it acts, to the full comprehension of every American mind, and the awakening of glowing enthusiasm in every American heart. Its silent, but awful utterance; its deep pathos, as it brings to our con- templation the 17th of June, 177o, and the consequences which have resulted to us, to our country, and to the world, from the events of that day, and which we know must continue to rain influence on the destinies of mankind to the end of time; the elevation with which it raises us high above the ordinary feel- ings of life, — surpass all that the study of the closet, or even the inspiration of genius, can produce. To-day it speaks to us. Its future auditories will be the successive generations of men, as they rise up before it and gather around it. Its speech will be of patriotism and courage; of civil and religious liberty; of free government; of the moral im- provement and elevation of mankind: ami of the immortal memory of those who, with heroic devotion, have sacri- ficed their lives for their country. 1 In the older world, numerous fabrics still exist, reared by human hands, but wlmse object has been lost in the dark- ness of ages. They are now monuments of nothing but the labor and skill which constructed them. The mighty pyramid itself, half buried in the sands of Africa, has nothing to 1 See the Note at the end of the Address. bring down and report to us, but the power of kings and the servitude of the people. If it had any purpose beyond that of a mausoleum, Buch purpose has perished Erom history and from tradi- t ion. If asked for its moral object, it 9 admonition, its sentiment, its instruc- tion to mankind, or any high end in its erection, it is silent ; silent as the mil- lions which lie in the dust at its base, and in the catacombs which surround it. Without a jus! moral object, there- fore, made known to man, though raised against the skies, it excites only convic- tion of power, mixed with strange won- der. But if the civilization of the pres- ent race of men. founded, as it is, in solid science, the true knowledge of na- ture, and vast discoveries in art, and which is elevated and purified by moral Sentiment and by the truths of Chris- tianity, be not destined to destruction before the final termination of human existence on earth, the objeel and pur- pose of this edifice will be known till that hour shall come. And even if civ- ilization should be subverted, and the truths of the Christian religion obscured by a new deluge of barbarism, the memory of Bunker Hill and the Ameri- can Revolution will still be elements and parts of the knowledge which shall be possessed by the last man to whom the light of civilization and Christianity shall be extended. This celebration is honored by the presence of the chief executive magis- trate of the Union. An occasion so na- tional in itsobjed and character, and so much connected with that Revolution from which the government sprang at the head of which he is pla 1, may well receive from him this mark of at- tention and respect. Well acquainted with Vorktown, the scene of the last great military struggle of the Revolu- tion, his eye now surveys the field of Bunker Hill, the theatre of the first of those important conflicts. He sees where Warren fell, where Putnam, and Pree- cott. and Mark, and Knowlton, and Brooks fought. He beholds the spot where a thousand trained soldiers of England were smitten to the earth, in 140 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. the first effort of revolutionary war, by the arm of a bold and determined yeo- manry, contending for liberty and their country. And while all assembled here entertain towards him sincere personal good wishes and the high respect due to his elevated office and station, it is not to be doubted thai he enters, with true American feeling, into the patriotic en- thusiasm kindled by the occasion which animates the multitudes that surround him. His Excellency, the Governor of the Commonwealth, the Governor of Rhode Island, and the other distinguished pub- lic men whom we have the honor to re- ceive as visitors and guests to-day, will cordially unite in a celebration connected with the great event of the Revolution- ary war. No name in the history of 1775 and 1776 is more distinguished than that borne by an ex-President of the United States, whom we expected to see here, but whose ill health prevents his attend- ance. "Whenever popular rights were to In asserted, an Adams was present; and when the time came for the formal Dec- laration of Independence, it was the voice of an Adams that shook the halls of Congress. We wish we could have welcomed to us this day the inheritor of Revolutionary blood, and the just and worthy representative of high Revolu- tionary names, merit, and services. Banners and hadges, processions and flags, announce to us, that amidst this uncounted throng are thousands of na- tives of New England now residents in other States. Welcome, ye kindred names, with kindred blood ! From the broad savannas of the South, from the newer regions of the West, from amidst the hundreds of thousands of men of Eastern origin who cultivate the rich valhv of the Genesee or live along the chain of the Lakes, from the mountains of Pennsylvania, and from the thronged cities of the coast, welcome, welcome! Wherever else you may be strangers, here you are all al home. You assem ble at this shrine of liberty, near the family altars at which your earliest de- votions were paid to Heaven, near to the temples of worship first entered by you, and near to the schools and colleges in which your education was received. You come hither with a glorious ances- try of liberty. You bring names which are on the rolls of Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill. You come, some of you, once more to be embraced by an aged Revolutionary father, or to receive another, perhaps a last, blessing, be- stowed in love and tears, by a mother, yet surviving to witness and to enjoy your prosperity and happiness. But if family associations and the recollections of the past bring you hither with greater alacrity, and mingle with your greeting much of local attachment and private affection, greeting also be given, free and hearty greeting, to every American citizen who treads this sacred soil with patriotic feeling, and respires with pleasure in an atmosphere per- fumed with the recollections of 1775! This occasion is respectable, nay, it is grand, it is sublime, by the nationality of its sentiment. Among the seventeen millions of happy people who form the American community, there is not one who has not an interest in this monu- ment, as there is not one that has not a deep and abiding interest in that which it commemorates. Woe betide the man who brings to this day's worship feeling less than wholly American! Woe betide the man who can stand here with the fires of local resentments burning, or the purpose of fomenting local jealousies and the strifes of local interests festering a n< I rankling in his heart! Union, established injus- tice, in patriotism, and the most plain and obvious common interest, — union, founded on the same love of liberty, ce- mented by blood Bhed in the same com- mon cause, - union has been the source of all our glory and greatness thus far, and is the ground of all our highest hopes. This column stands on Union. 1 know not that it. might not keep its position, if the American Union, in the mad conflict of human passions, and in I hr strife of parties and factious, should In' broken up and destroyed. I know not that it would totter and fall to the COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. 141 earth, and mingle its fragments with the fragments of Liberty and the ( 'oust i- tution, when State should be separated from State, and faction and dismember- ment obliterate for ever all the hopes of the founders of our republic, and tin- great inheritance of their children. It might stand. But who, from beneath the weight of mortification and shame that would oppress him, could look up to behold it? Whose eyeballs would not be seared by such a spectacle '! For my part, should 1 live to such a time, I shall avert my eyes from it for ever. It is not as a mere military encoun- ter of hostile armies that the battle of Bunker Hill presents its principal claim to attention. Yet, even as a mere bat- tle, there were circumstances attending it extraordinary in character, and enti- tling it to peculiar distinction. It was fought on this eminence ; in the neigh- borhood of yonder city; in the presence of many more spectators than then; were combatants in the conflict. Men, wo- men, and children, from every com- manding position, were gazing at the battle, and looking for its results with all the eagerness natural to those who knew that the issue was fraught with the deepest consequences to themselves, personally, as well as to their country. Yet, on the 16th of .Tune, 1775, there was nothing around this hill but verdure and culture. There was, indeed, the note of awful preparation in Boston. There was the Provincial army at Cam- bridge, with its right flank resting on Dorchester, and its left on Chelsea. But here all was peace. Tranquillity reigned around. On the 17th, every thing was changed. On this eminence had arisen, in the night, a redoubt, built by Prescott, and in which he held com- mand. Perceived by the enemy at daw n, it was immediately cannonaded from the floating batteries in the river, and from the opposite shore. And then ensued the hurried movement in Boston, and soon the troops of Britain embarked in the attempt to dislodge the Colonists. In an hour every thing indicated an im- mediate and bloody conflict. Love of liberty on one side, proud defiance of rebellion on the other, hopes and fears, and courage and daring, Oil both sides, animated the hearts of the combatants as they hung on ih Ige of battle. 1 suppose it would be dillicult, in a military point of \ Lew, to ascribe to \ be leaders on either side any just motive for the engagement which followed. < m the one hand, it could not have been very important to the Americans to at- tempt to hem the British within the town, by advancing one single post a quarter of a mile; while, on the other hand, if the British found it. essential to dislodge the American troops, they had it in their power at no expense of life. By moving up their ships and batteries, they could have completely cut off all communication with the mainland over the Neck, and the forces in the redoubt would have been reduced to a state of famine in forty-eight hours. But that was not the day for any such consideration on either side! Both par- ties were anxious to try the strength of their arms. The pride of England would not permit the rebels, as she termed them, to defy her to the teeth; and, without for a moment calculating the cost, the British general determined to destroy the fort immediately. On the other side, Prescott and his gallant fol- lowers longed and thirsted for a decisive trial of strength and of courage. They wished a battle, and wished it at once. And this is the true secret of the move- ments on this bill. I will not attempt to describe that battle. The cannonading; the landing of the British; their advance; the cool- ness with which the charge was met; the repulse; the second attack; the sec- ond repulse; the burning of Charles- town; and, finally, the closing assault, and the slow retreat of the Americans, — the history of all these is familiar. Bui the consequences of the battle of Bunker Hill were greater than those of any ordinary conflict, although between armies of far greater force, and termi- nating with more Immediate advanl Oil the one side or the other. It was the first great battle of the Revolution; and not only the first blow, but the blow 142 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. which determined the contest. It did not, in. thai the American Revolution ed l'\ the instantaneous dis- cover} of principles of governmeni be- fore unheard of, or the pracl ical adopt i< m of political id< as such as had never be- entered into the minds of men. It bul the lull developmenl of princi- ples of government, tonus of society, and political sentiments, the origin of :tll which lay l>ack two centuries in Eng- and American history. The discovery of America, its colo- nization by the nations of Europe, the history and progress of the colonics, from their establishment to the time when the principal of them threw off their allegiance to the respective states by which they had been planted, and founded governments of their own, con- stitute one of the most interesting por- tions of the annals of man. These events occupied three hundred years; during which period civilization and knowledge made steady progress in the Old World; so that Europe, at the com- mencement of the nineteenth century, had become greatly changed from that Europe which began the colonization of America at the close of the fifteenth, or the commencement of the sixteenth. And what is most material to my pres- ent purpose is, that in the progress of the first of these centuries, that is to say, from the discovery of America to the settlements of Virginia and Massa- chusetts, political and religious events took place, which most materially af- fected the state of society and the senti- ments of mankind, especially in England and in parts of Continental Europe. After a few feeble and unsuccessful ef- forts by England, under Henry the Seventh, to plant colonies in America, no designs of that kind were prosecuted for a long period, either by the English government or any of its subjects. Without inquiring into the causes of this delay, its consequences are suffi- ciently clear and striking. England, in this lapse of a century, unknown to her- self, bul under the providence of God and the influence of events, was fitting herself for the work of colonizing North America, on such principles, and l>\ such li, as should spread the English name and English blood, in time, over a greal portion of the Western hemisphere. Th nmercial spirit was greatly fos- tered by several laws passed in the reign of Henry the Seventh; and in the same reign encouragement was given to arts ami manufactures in the eastern coun- ties, and some not unimportant modifi- cal ions of t he feudal system took placet by allowing the breaking of entails. COMPLKTTON OK TIIK ni'.NKKIf HILL MONUMENT. 1 I-', These and other measures, and other occurrences, were making way lor ;i new class of Bociety bo emerge, ami show it- self, in ;i military and feudal age; a middle class, between the barons or greal landholders and the retainers of the crown, t'll the one side, and the ten- ants of the ciown and barons, and agri- cultural and other Laborers, mi the other Bide. With the rise and growth of this new class of society, not only did com- merce and the mis increase, bul better education, a greater degree <>\' knowl- edge, juster notions of the true ends of government, and sentiments favorable to civil liberty, began to spread abroad, and liecc more and more common. Bul the plants springing from these seeds were of slow growth. The char- acter of English society had indeed be- gun to undergo a change; but changes of national character are ordinarily the work of time. Operative causes were, however, evidently in existence, and sure to produce, ultimately, their proper effect. From the accession of Henry the Seventh to the breaking out of the civil wars, England enjoyed much greater exemption from war, foreign and do- me-tic, than for a long period before, and during the controversy between the houses of York and Lancaster. These years of peace were favorable to com- merce and the arts. Commerce and the arts augmented general and individual knowledge; and knowledge is the only fountain, both of the love and the prin- ciples of human liberty. Other powerful causes soon came into active play. The Reformation of Luther broke out, kindling up the minds of men afresh, leading to new hahits of thought . and awakening in individuals energies before unknown even to themselves. The religious controversies of this period changed society, as well ;is religion; in- deed, it would he easy to ]>r«»\e, if this occasion were proper for it, that they changed society to a considerable ex- tent, where they did not change the re- ligion of the state. They changed man himself, in his modes of thought, his consciousness of his own powers, and hia desire of intellectual attainment. The spirit of commercial and foi adventure, therefore, on the one hand, which had gained so much strength and influence since the time of the discovery of America, and, on tl ther, the asser- tion and maintenani f religious lib- erty, having their source indeed in the Reformation, but continued, diversified, and constantly strengthened l>\ the sub- sequent divisions of sentimenl ami opin- ion among the Reformers themselves, and this love of religious liberty draw- in-' after it, or bringing along w ith it . as it always does, a n ardent devotion to the principle of civil liberty also, were the powerful influences under which charac- ter was formed, and men trained, for the greal work of introducing English civ- ilization, English law, and. what is more than all, Anglo-Saxon Mood, into the wilderness of North America. Raleigh and his companions may he considered as the creatures, principally, of the first of these causes. High-spirited, full of the love of personal adventure, excited, too, in some degree, by the hopes of sudden riches from the discovery of mines of the precious metals, and not unwilling to diversify the labors of set- tling a colony with occasional cruising against the Spaniards in the West In- dian seas, they crossed and recrossedthe ocean, with a frequency which surprises us, when we consider the state of navi- gation, and which evinces a most daring spirit. The other cause peopled New England. The Mayflower sought our shores under no high-'wroughl spirit of commercial adventure, no love of gold, no mixture of purpose warlike or hostile to any hu- man being. Like the dove from the ark, she had put forth only to find rest. Sol- emn supplications on the shore of the sea, in Holland, had invoked for her, at her departure, the blessings of Provi- dence. The stars which guided her were the unobscured constellations of civil and religious liberty. Her deck was the altar of the living God. Fervent prayers on bended knees mingled, morning and evening, with the voices of ocean, an. I the sighing of the wind in her shrouds. Every prosperous breeze, which, gently 144 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. swelling her sails, helped the Pilgrims onward in their course, awoke new an- thems of praise; and when the elements were wrought into Eury, neither the tem- pest, tossing their fragile bark like a feather, nor the darkness and howling of the midnight storm, ever disturbed, in man or woman, the firm and settled purpose of their souls, to undergo all, and to do all. that the meekest patience, the boldest resolution, and the highest trust in Cod, could enable human beings to suffer or to perform. Some differences may, doubtless, be traced at this day between the descend- ants of the early colonists of Virginia and those of New England, owing to the different influences and different circumstances under which the respec- fcive settlements were made; but only enough to create a pleasing variety in the midst of a general family resem- blance. " Facies, non omnibus una, Nee diversa tamen, qualem decetesse sorormn." But the habits, sentiments, and objects of both soon became modified by local causes, growing out of their condition in the New World; and as this condi- tion was essentially alike in both, and as both at once adopted the same gen- eral rules and principles of English juris- prudence, and became accustomed to the authority of representative bodies, these differences gradually diminished. They disappeared bythe progress of time, and the influence of intercourse. The neces- sity of some degree of union and co-op- eration to defend themselves against the savage tribes, tended to excite in them mutual respect and regard. Theyfought ther in the war.- against France. The greal and common cause of the Revolu- tion hound i hem to one another by new links of brotherhood; and at, length the presenl constitution of governmenl united them happily and gloriousbj , to form th ; republic of the world, ami bound up their interests and tor- tunes, till the whole earth sees that there i^ iimw for them, in present poss< .,- v., II a- in future hope, but " One i ontry, One Constitution, and One Destiny." The colonization of the tropical region, and the whole of the southern parts of the continent, by Spain and Portugal, was conducted on other principles, un- der the influence of other motives, and followed by far different consequences. From the time of its discovery, the Spanish government pushed forward its settlements in America, not only with vigor, but with eagerness; so that long before the first permanent English set- tlement had been accomplished in what is now the United States, Spain had conquered Mexico, Peru, and Chili, and stretched her power over nearly all the territory she ever acquired on this con- tinent. The rapidity of these conquests is to be ascribed in a great degree to the eagerness, not to say the rapacity, of those numerous bands of adventurers, who were stimulated by individual in- terests and private hopes to subdue im- mense regions, and take possession of them in the name of the crown of Spain. The mines of gold and silver were the incitements to these efforts, and accord- ingly settlements were generally made, and Spanish authority established im- mediately on the subjugation of terri- tory, that the native population might be set to work by their new Spanish masters in the mines. From these facts, the love of gold — gold, not produced l>y industry, nor accumulated by commerce, but gold dug from its native bed in the bowels of the earth, and that earth rav- ished from its rightful possessors by ev- ery possible degree of enormity, cruelty, and crime — was long the governing passion in Spanish wars and Spanish settlements in America. Even Columbus himself did not wholly escape the influ- ence of this base motive. In his early royages we find him passing from island to island, inquiring everywhere for gold; as if God had opened the New World to the knowledge of the old, only to gratify a passion equally senseless and sordid, and to offer up millions of an unoffend- ing race of men to the destruction of the sword, sharpened both by cruelty and rapacity. And yet Columbus was far above his age and country. Enthusi- astic, indeed, but sober, religious, and COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. 1 15 magnanimous; born to great things and capable of high Bentiments, as hia noble discourse before Ferdinand and Isabella, a-* well as the whole history of his life, shows. Probably he sacrificed much to the known Bentiments of others, and ad- dressed i" liis followers motives Likely to influence them. At the same time, it is evident that he himself looked upon the world which he discovered as a world of wealth, all ready to be seized and en- joyed. The conquerors and the European settlers of Spanish America were mainly military commanders and common sol- diers. The monarchy of Spain was not transferred to this hemisphere, bu1 it acted in it, as it acted at home, through its ordinary means, and its true repre- sentative, military force. The robbery and destruction of the native race was the achievement of standing armies, in the right of the king, and by his au- thority, fighting in his name, for the aggrandizement of his power and the ex- tension of his prerogatives, with military ideas under arbitrary maxims, — a por- tion of that dreadful instrumentality by which a perfect despotism governs a people. As there was no liberty in Spain, how could liberty be transmitted to Spanish colonies? The colonists of English America were of the people, and a people already free. They were of the middle, indus- trious, and already prosperous class, the inhabitants of commercial and manu- facturing cities, among whom liberty first revived and respired, after a sleep of a thousand years in the bosom of the Dark Ages. Spain descended on the New World in the armed and terrible image of her monarchy and her soldiery; England approached it in the winning and popular garb of personal rights, public protection, and civil freedom. England transplanted liberty to Amer- ica; Spain transplanted power. Eng- land, through the agency of private companies and the efforts of individuals, colonized this part of North America by industrious individuals, making their own way in the wilderness, defending themselves against the savages, recog- 10 nizing their right to the Boil, and with ;i general honest purpose of introducing knowledge as well as Christianity am them. Spain stooped on Smith Ame Like a vulture on its prey. Everj thing was force. Territories were acquired by fire and sword. Cities were destroyed '>\ fire ami sword. Hundreds of thou- sands ( ,f human beings fell by tire and sword. Even conversion to Christianity was attempted by lire ami sword. Behold, then, fellow-citizens, the dif- ference resulting from the operation of the two principles! Here, to-day, on the summit of Bunker Hill, and at the foot of this monument, behold the dif- ference! | would that the fifty thousand voices present could proclaim it with a shout which should 1„- heard over the globe. Our inheritance was of liberty, secured and regulated by law, and en- Lightened by religion and knowledge; that of South America was of power, stern, unrelenting, tyrannical, military power. And now look to the conse- quences of the two principle, on the general and aggregate happiness of the human race. Behold the results, in all the regions conquered by Cortez and Pizarro, and the contrasted results her.'. I suppose the territory of the Tinted States may amount to one eighth, or one tenth, of that colonized by Spain on this continent : and yet in all that vast region there are but between one and two millions of people of Euro- pean color and European blood, while in the United States there are four- teen millions who rejoice in their de- 3i Mit from the people of the more northern pari of Europe. But we may follow the difference in the original principle of colonization, and in its character and objects, still further. We musl look to moral and intellectual results; we nnM consider consequences, not only a, they show themselves in hastening or retarding the increase of population and the Bupply of physical wants, hut in their civilization, improvement, and happiness. We must inquire what pi has been made in the true science of liberty, in the knowledge of the great principles of self- 146 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. government, ami in the progress of man, as a social, moral, and religious being. I would DOl willingly say any thing on this occasion discourteous to the new governments founded on the demolition of the power of the Spanish monarchy. They arc yet on their trial, and I hope for a favorable result. But truth, sacred truth, and fidelity to the cause of civil liberty, compel me to say, that hitherto they have discovered quite too much of the spirit of that monarchy from which they separated themselves. Quite too frequent resort is made to military force; and quite too much of the substance of the people is consumed in maintaining armies, not for defence against foreign a^-Tosimi, but for enforcing obedience to domestic authority. Standing armies are the oppressive instruments for gov- erning the people, in the hands of heredi- tary and arbitrary monarchs. A military republic, a government founded on mock elections and supported only by the sword, is a movement indeed, but a retrograde and disastrous movement, from the reg- ular and old-fashioned monarchical sys- tems. If men would enjoy the blessings of republican government, they must gov- ern themselves by reason, by mutual coun- sel and consultation, by a sense and feeling of general interest, and by the acquies- cence of the minority in the will of the majority, properly expressed ; and, above all, the military must be kept, according to the language of our Bill of Rights, in strict subordination to the civil author- ity. Wherever this lesson is not both learned and practised, there can be no political freedom. Absurd, preposter- ous is it, a scoff and a satire on free of constitutional liberty, for frames of government to be prescribed h\ military leaders, and the right of Buffrage to be exercised at the point of the sword. Making all allowance for situation and climate, it cannot be doubted by intelligent minds, that the difference existing between North and South America is justly attributable, in a greal ee, to political institutions in the old World and in the New. And how broad that difference is ! Suppose an assembly, in one of the valleys or on the side of one of the mountains of the southern half of the hemisphere, to be held, this day, in the neighborhood of a large city; — what would be the scene presented? Yonder is a volcano, flam- ing and smoking, but shedding no light, moral or intellectual. At its foot is the mine, sometimes yielding, perhaps, large gains to capital, but in which labor is destined to eternal and unrequited toil, and followed only by penury and beg- gary. The city is filled with armed men ; not a free people, armed and com- ing forth voluntarily to rejoice in a public festivity, but hireling troops, supported by forced loans, excessive impositions on commerce, or taxes wrung from a half- fed and a half-clothed population. For the great there are palaces covered with gold; for the poor there are hovels of the meanest sort. There is an ecclesias- tical hierarchy, enjoying the wealth of princes; but there are no means of edu- cation for the people. Do public im- provements favor intercourse between place and place? So far from this, the traveller cannot pass from town to town, without danger, every mile, of robbery and assassination. I would not over- charge or exaggerate this picture; but its principal features are all too truly sketched. And how does it contrast with the scene now actually before us? Look round upon these fields; they are ver- dant and beautiful, well cultivated, and at this moment loaded with the riches of the early harvest. The hands which till them are those of the free owners of the soil, enjoying equal rights, and pro- tected by law from oppression and tyr- anny. Look to the thousand vessels in our sight, filling the harbor, or covering the neighboring sea. They are the vehicles of a profitable commerce, car- ried f the know ledge and attainments of that age. The distinctive characteristic of their settlement is the introduction of the civilization of Europe into a wil- derness, without bringing with it the political institutions of Europe. The arts, Bciences, and literature of England came over with the settlers. That great portion of the common law which regu- lates the social and personal relations and conducl of men. came also. The jury came: the habeas corpus came; the tes- tamentary power came; and the l;iw of inheritance and descent cane- also, 83 that pari of it which recognizes the rights . i* of primogeniture, which either did not come at all, or soon gave way to the rule of equal partition of estates among chil- dren. Hut the monarchy did not come, nor the aristocracy, nor the church, as an estate of the realm. Political insti- tutions were to be framed anew, Buch as should lie adapted to the state of thil But it could not be doubtful what should be the nature and character of these in- stitutions. A general social equality prevailed among the settler-;, and an equality of political rights seei 1 the natural, if not the necessary conse- quence. After forty years of revolution. violence, .and war, the people of 1 have placed at the head of the funda- mental instrument of their government, as the great boon obtained by all their Bufferings and sacrifices, the declaration that all Frenchmen are equal before the law. What France has reached only by the expenditure of bo much blood and treasure, and the perpetration of bo much crime, the English colonists obtai by simply changing their place, carrj with them the intellectual and moral culture of Europe, and the personal and social relations to which they were accus- 148 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. tomed, bui leaving behind their polit- ical institutions. It lias been said with much vivacity, that the felicity of the American colonists consisted in their es- cape from the past. This is true so far as respects political establishments, but no further. They brought with them a full portion of all the riches of the past, in science, in art, in morals, religion, ami literature. The Bible came with them. And it is not to be doubted, that to the free and universal reading of the Bible, in that age, men were much in- debted for right views of civil liberty. The Bible is a book of faith, and a book i)!' doctrine, and a book of morals, and a book of religion, of especial reve- lation from God; but it is also a book which teaches man his own individual responsibility, his own dignity, and his equality with his fellow-man. Bacon and Loeke, and Shakspeare and Milton, also came with the colonists. It was the object of the first settlers to form new political systems, but all that belonged to cultivated man, to fam- ily, to neighborhood, to social relations, accompanied them. In the Doric phrase of one of our own historians, " they came to settle on bare creation"; but their settlement in the wilderness, never- theless, \\ as not a lodgement of nomadic tribes, a mere resting-place of roaming savages. It was the beginning of a per- manent community, the, fixed residence of cultivated men. Not only was Eng- lish literature read, but English, good English, was spoken and written, before the axe had made way to let in the sun upon the habitations and fields of I'lv- m mth and Massachusetts. And what- ever may be said to the contrary, a correct use of the English language is, a1 this day, more general throughout the United Mates, than it is throughout I Ingland herself. Bui another grand characteristic is, that, in the English colonies, political affairs were left to be managed by the colonists themselves. This is another la. i wholly distinguishing them in char- acter, as it has distinguished them in fortune, from the colonists of Spain. Here lies the foundation of that expe- rience in self-government, which has preserved order, and security, and reg- ularity, amidst the play of popular insti- tutions. Home government was the secret of the prosperity of the North American settlements. The more dis- tinguished of the New England colonists, with a most remarkable sagacity and a long-sighted reach into futurity, refused to come to America unless they could bring with them charters providing for the administration of their affairs in this country. 1 They saw from the first the evils of being governed in the New World by a power fixed in the Old. Acknowledging the general superiority of the crown, they still insisted on the right of passing local laws, and of local administration. And history teaches us the justice and the value of this deter- mination in the example of Virginia. The early attempts to settle that Colony failed, sometimes with the most melan- choly and fatal consequences, from want of know ledge, care, and attention on the part of those who had the charge of their affairs in England; and it was only after the issuing of the third charter, that its prosperity fairly commenced. 'The cause was, that by that third charter the people of Virginia, for by this time they deserved to be so called, were allowed to constitute and estab- lish the first popular representative assembly which ever convened on this continent, the Virginia House of Bur- gesses. The great elements, then, of the American system of government, origi- nally introduced by the colonists, and which were early in operation, and ready t.> he developed, more and more, as the progress of events should justify or de- mand, were, Escape from the existing political sys- tems >>\ Europe, including its religious hierarchies, bui the continued possession and enjoymenl of its science and arts, its literature, and its manners; Home government, or the power of i See the "Records of the Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England," ;>s p- lislied in the third volume of the Transactions ot tin' American Antiquarian Society, pp. 47-50. completion of Tin: p.i'nkkk mill montmkxt. 149 making in the colony the municipal laws which were to govern it; Equality of rights; Representative assemblies, or forms' of government founded on popular elec- tions. Few topics are more inviting, or more fit for philosophical discussion, than the effect "ii the happiness of mankind of institutions founded upon these princi- ples; or, in other words, the influence of the New World upon the < >ld. Her obligations to Europe for Bcience and art, laws, literature, and manners, America acknowledges as b! nght, with respecl and gratitude. The people of the United States, descendants of the English stock, grateful for the treasures of knowledge derived from their English ancestors, admit also, with thanks and filial regard, that among those ancestors, under the culture of Ilampiln and Syd- ney and other assiduous friends, that Beed of popular liberty firsl germinated, which on our soil has shot up to its full height, until its branches overshadow all the land. But America has not failed to make returns. If she has not wholly cancelled the obligation, or equalled it by others of like weight, she has, at least, made respectable advances towards repaying the debt. And she admits, that, stand- ing in the midst of civilized nations, and in a civilized age, a nation among na- tions, there is a high part which she is expected to act, for the general advance- ment of human interests and human welfare. American mines have filled the mints of Europe with the precious metals. The productions of the American soil and climate have poured out their abun- dance of luxuries for the tables of the rich, and of necessaries for the suste- nanceof the poor. Birds and animals of beauty and value have been added to the European stocks: and transplantations from the unequalled riches of our fore-t> have mingled themselves profusely with the elms, and ashes, and Druidical oaks of England. America has made contributions to VWv-^<-*<~ Europe far more important. Who can estimate the amount, or the value, of the augmentation of the commerct the world thai has resulted from Amer- ica? Who can imagine to himself what would now be the shock to the East- ern Continent, if the Atlantic were 00 longer traversable, or if there were no longer American productions, or Amer- ican markets? But America exercises influences, or holds out examples, for the considera- tion of the old World, of a much higher, because they are of a moral and political character. America has furnished to Europe proof of the fact, that popular institutions, founded on equality and the principle of representation, are capable of maintain- ing governments, able to secure the rights of person, property, and reputa- tion. America has proved thai it is practi- cable to elevate the mass of mankind. — that portion which in Europe is called the laboring, or lower class, — to raise them to self-respect, to make them competent to act a part in the great right and great duty of self-government ; and she lias proved that this may be done by education and the diffusion of knowl- edge. She holds out an example, a thou- sand times more encouraging than was presented hi fore, to those nine tenths of the human race who are born without hereditary fortune or hereditary rank. America has furnished to the world the character of Washington! And if our American institutions had done nothing else, that alone would have entitled them to the respecl of man- kind. Washington! "First in war. first in peace, and tir-t in the hearts of hi* countrymen!" Washington is all out- own! The enthusiastic veneration and regard in which the people of the Ui - hold him. prove them t<> lie wor- thy of Such a countryman: while his reputation abroad reflects the highest honor on his country. I would cheer- fully put the question to-day to the intelligence of Europe and the world, what character of the century. QpoD Is— £X\^s/rK-J — 150 COMPLETION OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT. whole, stands oul in the relief of his- tory, most pure, most respectable, most sublime; and I doubt not, that, by a Buffrage approaching to unanimity, the answer would be Washington ! The structure now standing before us, liv its uprightness, its solidity, its dura- bility, is mi unlit emblem of bis char- acter. His public virtues and public principles were as firm as the earth on which it stands; his personal motives, as pure as the serene heaven in which its summit is lost. But, indeed, though a tit. it is an inadequate emblem. Tow- ering high above the column which our bands have builded, beheld, not by the inhabitants of a single city or a single Slate, but by all the families of man, ascends the colossal grandeur of the character and life of Washington. In all the constituents of the one, in all the acts of the other, in all its titles to im- mortal love, admiration, and renown, it is an American production. It is the embodiment and vindication of our Transatlantic liberty- Born upon our soil, of parents also born upon it; never for a moment having had sight of the Old World; instructed, according to the modes of his time, only in the spare, plain, but wholesome elementary knowl- edge which our institutions provide for the children of the people; growing up beneath and penetrated l,y the genuine influences of American society; living from infancy to manhood and age amid>1 our expanding, but not luxurious civilization; partaking in our great des- tiny of labor, our long contest with un- reclaimed nature and uncivilized man, our agonj of glory, the war of Indepen- dence, our great victory of peace, the formation of the Union, and the es- tablishment of the Constitution, — lie is all. all our own! Washington is ours. That crowded and glorious life, '■ Where multitudes of virtues passed along, Each pressing foremost, in the mighty throng Ambitious to I"- seen, then making room For greater multitudes thai were to come," — that life waa the life of an American citizen. 1 claim 1 1 i in lor America. 1 n all the perils, in every darkened moment of the state, in the midst of the reproaches of enemies and the misgiving of friends, I turn to that transcendent name for cour- age and for consolation. To him who denies or doubts whether our fervid lib- erty can be combined with law, with order, with the security of property, with the pursuits and advancement of happi- ness; to him who denies that our forms of government are capable of producing exaltation of soul, and the passion of true glory; to him who denies that we have contributed any thing to the stock of great lessons and great examples ; — to all these I reply by pointing to Wash- ington! And now, friends and fellow-citizens, it is time to bring this discourse to a close. We have indulged in gratifying recol- lections of the f>ast, in the prosperity and pleasures of the present, and in high hopes for the future. But let us remem- ber that we have duties and obligations to perform, corresponding to the bless- ings which we enjoy. Let us remember the trust, the sacred trust, attaching to the rich inheritance which we have re- ceived from our fathers. Let us feel our personal responsibility, to the full extent of our power and influence, for the pres- ervation of the principles of civil and religious liberty. And let us remember that it is only religion, and morals, and knowledge, that can make men respecta- ble and happy, under any form of govern- ment. Let us hold fast the great truth, that communities are responsible, as well as individuals; that no government is respectable, which is not just; that without, unspotted purity of public faith, without sacred public principle, fidelity, and honor, no mere forms of govern- ment, no machinery of laws, can give dignity to political society. In our day and generation let us seek to raise and improve the moral sentiment, so that we may look, not for a degraded, but for an elevated and improved future. And when both we and our children shall have been consigned to the house ap- pointed tor all living, may love of coun- «x V COMPLETION OF Till i;i\Ki:i{ HILL MoXUMKNT. 1 5 1 try and pride of country glow with equal fervor among those to whom our names ami our blood shall have descended! Ami then, when honored and decrepit age shall lean against the base of this monument, and troops of ingenuous youth shall be gathered round it, and when the one shall Bpeak to I be other of its objects, the purposes of it- construction, and the greal and glorious events with w bich it is connected, there shall from every youthful breast the ejacula- tion, " Thank God, I — I also — am an Ami rican! " NOTE. Page 139. The following description of the Bunker Hill Monument and Square is from Mr. Frothingham's History of the Siege of Bos- ton, pp. 35o, 356. " Monument Square is four hundred and seventeen feel from north to south, and four hundred feet from east to west, and contains i nearly six acres. It embraces the whole site of the redoubt, and a part of the site of the breast- work. According to the most accurate plan of the town and the battle (Page's), the monument stands where the southwest angle of the redoubt was, and the whole of the redoubt was between the monument and the street that bounds it on the west. The small mound in the northeast corner of the square is supposed to be the re- mains of the breastwork. Warren fell about two hundred feel weal of the monument An iron fence encloses the square, and another sur- rounds the monument The square has en- trances "ii each of it- sides, and at each of its corners, and is Burrounded by a walk ami rows of " The obelisk is thirty feet in diameter at the base, about fifteen feel at the top of the trun- cated part, and was designed to be two hundred and twenty feel high : but the mortar and the scams between the si - make the precise height two hundred and twenty-one feet With- in the shaft is a hollow COne, with a spiral -lair- way winding round it to its summit which enters a circular chamber at the top. There arc ninety courses of stone in the shaft. — six of them below tin' ground, and eighty-four above the ground. The cap-tone, or apex, is a single stone four feet square at the base, and three feet six inches in height, weighing two and a half tons." OUR RELATIONS TO TIIE SOUTII AMERICAN REPUBLICS. EXTRACTS FROM TIIE SPEECH ON "THE PANAMA MISSION," DELIVERED IN TIIE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, ON TIIE 14th OF APRIL, 1826. It has been affirmed, that this meas- ure, and the sentiments expressed by the Executive relative to its objects, are an iickiKiw lodged departure from the neu- tral policy of the United States. Sir, I deny that there is an acknowledged departure, or any departure at all, from the neutral policy of the country. What do we moan by our neutral policy? Not, I suppose, a blind and stupid indiffer- ence to whatever is passing around us; not a total disregard to approaching events, or approaching evils, till they meet us full in the face. Nor do we mean, by our neutral policy, that we in- tend never to assort our rights by force. No, Sir. \\'o mean by our policy of neu- trality, that the great objects of national pursuit with us are connected with peace. "We covet no provinces ; we desire no con- quests; we entertain no ambitious proj- ects of aggrandizement by war. This is our policy. But it does not follow from this, that we rely less than other nations on our own power to vindicate our own rights. We know that the last logic of kiugs is also our last logic; that our own interests musl be defended and main- tained by our own arm ; and that peace or war 1 1 1 .- 1 \ nol always be of our own choos- ing. < » 1 1 j- neutral policy, therefore, nol only justifies, bul requires, our anxious attention to the political events which take place in the world, a skilful percep- tion of their relation to our own concerns, and an early anticipation of their conse- quences, and firm and timely assertion of what we hold to be our ou a i ights and our own interests. Our neutrality is not a predetermined abstinence, either from remonstrances, or from force. Our neu- tral policy is a policy that protects neu- trality, that defends neutrality, that takes up arms, if need be, for neutral- ity. When it is said, therefore, that this measure departs from our neutral policy, either that policy, or the measure itself, is misunderstood. It implies either that the object or the tendency of the measure is to involve us in the war of other states, which I think cannot be shown, or that the assertion of our own sentiments, on points affecting deeply our own interests, may place us in a hos- tile attitude toward other states, and that therefore we depart from neutral- ity; whereas the truth is, that the deci- sive assertion and the firm support of these sentiments may be most essential to the maintenance of neutrality. An honorable member from Pennsyl- vania thinks this congress will bring a dark day over the United States. Doul it- Less, Sir, it is an interesting moment in our history; but I see no great proofs of thick-coming darkness. But the object of the remark seemed to be to show that the President himself saw difficulties on all sides, and. making a choice of evils, preferred rather to send ministers to this congress, than to run the risk of exciting the hostility of the states by refusing to send. In other words, the gentleman wished to prove that the President in- tended an alliance; although such inten- tion is expressly disclaimed. THE PANAMA MISSION. L58 Much commentary has been bestowed on the letters of invitation from the min- isters. I shall not go through with ver- bal criticisms on these letters. Their general import is plain enough. I shall not gather together small and minute quotations, taking a sentence here, a word there, and a syllable in a third place, dovetailing them into the course ct' remark, till the printed discourse l>iUtlrs in every line with inverted com- mas. I look to tin- genera] tenor of the invitations, and 1 find that we an' asked to take pari only in such things as con- cern ourselves. I look still more care- fully to tin- answers, and 1 see every proper caul ion and proper guard, J look to the message, and I Bee that nothing is then' contemplated likely to involve us in other men's quarrels, or that may justly give offence to any foreign state. With this I am satisfied. I must now ask the indulgence of the committee to an important point in the discussion, I mean the declaration of the President in 182-'). 1 Not only as a member of the House, but as a citizen of the country, I have an anxious de- sire that this part of our public history should stand in its proper light. The country has, in my judgment, a very high honor connected with that occur- rence, which we may maintain, or which we may sacrifice. I look upon it as a part of its treasures of reputation: and, for one, I intend to guard it. 1 In the message of President Monroe to Congress at the commencement of the session of 1823-24, tlic following passage occurs: — "In the wars of the European powers, in mat- ters relating to themselves, we have uever taken any part, nor does it comport with onr policy bo to ilo. It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced, that we re- Bent injuries or make preparations f"r defence. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by causes which must he obvious to all en- lightened and impartial observers. The politi- cal system of the Allied I'owers i- essentially din. rem. iu this respect, from thai of America. This difference proceeds from that which exi-t- in their respective governments. And to the defence of our own. which has been achieved by the loss of so much hlood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlight- Sir, lei us recur to the importanl po- lit ical e\ ents w hich led to thai declara- tion, <>r act ipanied it In the fall of I^l'l', the allied sovereigns held their congress at Verona. The greal Bubjecl of consideration was the condition of Spain, that country then being under the governmenl of the ( Sortes. The ques- tion was, whether Ferdinand Bhould be reinstated in all bis authority, by the intervention of foreign force. Russia, Prussia, France, and Austria were in- clined to that measure; England dis- sented and protested; but the COUTSe was agreed on, and France, with the consent of these other Continental powers, took the conduct of the operation into her own hands, [n the spring of 1823, a French army was sent into Spain, fta success was complete. The popular gov- ernmenl was overthrown, and Ferdinand re-established in till bis power. This invasion, sir. was determined on, and undertaken, precisely on the doctrines which the allied monarchs had pro- claimed the year before, at Lay bach; that is, that they had a righl to interfere in the concerns of another state, and re- form its government, in order to prevent the effects of its had example; this bad example, be it remembered, always be- ing the example of free government. Now, Sir, acting on this principle of supposed dangerous example, and hav- ing put down the example of the Cortes in Spain, it was natural to inquire with ened citizens, and under which we have en- joyed such unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted. We owe it. therefore, to candor, and to the amicable relations existing between the United State- and those ] ■• ■ \\ ■ re, to declare that we should consider any attempt 00 their part to extend their -y-tent to any portion of this hemisphere a- dangerous to our : ami safety. With the existing colonies or de- pendencies of any European power, ire have not interfered, and -hall not interfere. Hut with the governments who have declared their independence ami maintained it, ami whose in- dependence we have on great consideration and on just principle- acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpo f op- _- them, or controlling in .any other man- ner their destiny, in any other lighl than a- the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition to- ward the United 3 154 THE PANAMA MISSION. what eyes they would look on the colo- nies of Spain, thai were following still worse examples. Would King Ferdi- nand and his allies be content with what had been done in Spain itself, or would he solicit their aid, and was it likely they would grant it, to subdue his re- bellious American provinces'.-' Sir, it was in this posture of affairs, on an occasion which has already been alluded to, that I ventured to say, early in the session of December, 18:23, that these allied monarchs might possibly turn their attention to America; that America came within their avowed doc- trine, and that her examples might very possibly attract their notice. The doc- trines of Laybach were not limited to any continent. Spain had colonies in America, and having reformed Spain herself to the true standard, it was not impossible that they might see fit to complete the work by reconciling, in their way, the colonies to the mother country. Now, Sir, it did so happen, that, as soon as the Spanish king was completely re-established, he invited the co-operation of his allies in regard to South America. In the same month of December, of 1823, a formal invitation was addressed by Spain to the courts of St. Petersburg, Vienna, Berlin, and Paris, proposing to establish a confer- ence at Paris, in order that the plenipo- tentiaries there assembled might aid Spain in adjusting the affairs of her revolted provinces. These affairs were proposed to be adjusted in such manner as should retain the sovereignty of Spain over them; and though the co-operation of the allies by force of arms was not directlj solicited, such was evidently the object aimed at. The king of Spain, in making this request to the members of tie- Holy Alliance, argued as it has 1 n seen he mighl argue, lie quoted their own doctrines of Laybacb; he pointed out the pernicious example of America; and he reminded them that their success in Spain itself had paved the way for --ful operations against the spirit of liberty on this side of the Atlantic. The proposed meeting, however, did not take place. England had already taken a decided course ; for as early as October, Mr. Canning, in a conference with the French minister in London, informed him distinctly and expressly, that England would consider any foreign interference, by force or by menace, in the dispute between Spain and the colo- nies, as a motive for recognizing the lat- ter without delay. It is probable this determination of the English govern- ment was known here at the commence- ment of the session of Congress ; and it was under these circumstances, it was in this crisis, that Mr. Monroe's declara- tion was made. It was not then ascer- tained whether a meeting of the Allies would, or would not take place, to con- cert with Spain the means of re-estab- lishing her power; but it was plain enough they would be pressed by Spain to aid her operations; and it was plain enough, also, that they had no particular liking to what was taking place on this side of the Atlantic, nor any great disin- clination to interfere. This was the pos- ture of affairs; and, Sir, I concur entirely in the sentiment expressed in the resolu- tion of a gentleman from Pennsylvania, 1 that this declaration of Mr. Monroe was wise, seasonable, and patriotic. It has been said, in the course of this debate, to have been a loose and vague declaration. It was, I believe, suffi- ciently studied. I have understood, from good authority, that it was con- sidered, weighed, and distinctly and decidedly approved, by every one of the President's advisers at that time. Our government could not adopt on that oc- casion precisely the course which Eng- land had taken. England threatened the immediate recognition of the prov- inces, if the Allies should take part with Spain against them. We had al- ready recognized them. It remained, therefore, only for our government to sa\ how we should consider a combina- tion of the Allied Powers, to effect ob- jects in America, as affect ing ourselves; and the message was intended to say, what it does say. that we should regard Such combination as dangerous to us. Sir, I agree with those who maintain the i Mr. Markley. THE P A NAM A .MISSION. L55 proposition, and I contend against those who deny it. that the message did mean something; that it meant much; and 1 maintain, against both, thai the declara- tion effected much good, answered the end designed by it, did great honorto the foresight and the spirit of the gov- ernment, and thai it cannot now be taken hack, retracted, or annulled, with- out disgrace. It met, Sir, with the entire concurrence and the hearty approbation of the country. The tone which it uttered found a corresponding response in the breasts of the free people of the United States. That j pic saw, and they rejoiced to see. that, on a fit occa- sion, our weight, had been tin-own into the right, scale, and that, without de- parting from our duty, we had done something useful, and something effect- ual, for the cause of civil liherty. One general glow of exultation, one uni- versal feeling of the gratified love of liberty, one conscious and proud per- ception of the consideration which the country possessed, and of the respect and honor which belonged to it, per- vaded all bosoms. Possibly the public enthusiasm went too far; it certainly did go far. But, Sir, the sentiment which tli is declaration inspired was not confined to ourselves. Its force was felt everywhere, by all those who could understand its object and foresee its effect. In that very House of Com- mons of which the gentleman from South Carolina has spoken with such commendation, how was it received? Not only, Sir, with approbation, but, I may say, with no little enthusiasm. While the leading minister x expressed his entire concurrence in the sentiments and opinions of the American President , his distinguished competitor'-' in that popular body, less restrained by official decorum, and more at liberty 7 to give utterance to all the feeling of the occa- sion, declared that no event had ever created greater joy, exultation, and grat- it ade among all the free men in Europe; that he felt pride in being connected by blood and language with the people of the United States; that the policy 1 Mr. Canning. - Mr. Brougham. disclosed i.\ the message became a great, a free, and an independent nation ; and that, he hoped his own emintiy would he prevented by do mean pride, or paltrj jealousy, from following so noble and glorious an example. It is doubtless true, as I took occa- sion to observe the other day, thai this declaration musl l"' considered as found- ed on our rights, and to spring mainly from a regard to their preservation. It did not commit us, at all events, to take up arms on any indication of hostile feeling by the powers of Europe in- wards South America. If, for ex- ample, all the states of Europe had refused to trade with South America until her states should return to their former allegiance, that would have fur- nished no cause of interference (,, pa. Or if an armament had been furnished by the Allies to act against provinces the most remote from us, as Chili or Buenos Ay res, the distance of the scene of action diminishing our apprehension of danger, and diminishing also our means of effectual interposition, might still have left us to content ourselves with remonstrance. Put a very differ- ent case would have arisen, if an army, equipped and maintained by these pow- ers, had been landed on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, and commenced the war in our own immediate neighbor- hood. Such an event might justly 1"' regarded as dangerous to ourselves, and, on that ground, call for decided and immediate interference by us. The sentiments and the policy announced by the declaration, thus understood, were, therefore, in strict conformity to our duties and our interest. sir, I look on the message of De- cember, 1823, as fornuA^r a bright i in our history. I wn^nelp neither to eia>e it nor tear it out; nor shall it 1»', by any act of mine, blurred or blotted. It did honor to the Bagacity of the eminent, and I will not diminish that honor. It elevated the hopes, and gratified the patriotism, of the people. < >ver those hopes I will not bring a mil- dew; nor will I put that gratified patri- otism to shame. ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. A DISCOURSE IN COMMEMORATION OF THE LIVES AND SERVICES OF JOHN ADAMS AND THOMAS JEFFERSON, DELIVERED IN FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON, ON THE 2d OF AUGUST, 1826. [Since the decease of General 'Washing- ton, <>n the 14th of December, 1799, the public mind lias never been so powerfully affected in this part of the country by any similar event, as by the death of John Adams, on the 4th* of July, 1826. The news reached Boston in the evening of that day. The decease of this venerable fellow- citizen must at all times have appealed with much force to the patriotic sympathies of the people of Massachusetts. It ac- quired a singular interest from the year and the day on which it took place; — the 4th of July of the year completing the half- century from that ever memorable era in the history of tins country and the world, the Declaration of Independence; a meas- ure in which Mr Adams himself had taken so distinguished a part. The emotions of tin- public were greatly increased by the indications given by Mr. Adams in his last hours, that lie was fully aware that the day was the anniversary of Independence, ami by his dying allusion to the supposed fact that his colleague, Jefferson, survived him. When, in the course of a few days, tin- news arrived from Virginia, that he also had departed this life, on the same day and a feu hours before Mr. Adams, th^ sensibility of the community, as of tin' country at large, was touched beyond all example. The occurrence was justly deemed without a parallel in history. The variou- circumstances of association and Coincidence which marked the characters and careers of these great men, and espe- cially those Of their simultaneous decease on the lih of July, were dwelt upon with melancholy hut untiring interest. The cir- cli - of private life, the press, public bodies, and the pulpit, were for some time almost engrossed with the topic; and Bolemn rites oi commemoration wen' performed through- out the country An early daj was appointed for this purpose by the City Council of Boston. 'lie whole community manifested it- sym- pathy in the extraordinary event ; and on the 2d of August, 1826, at the request of the municipal authorities, and in the presence of an immense audience, the following Dis- course was delivered in Faneuil Hall.] This is an unaccustomed spectacle. For the first time, fellow-citizens, badges of mourning shroud the columns and overhang the arches of this hall. These walls, which were consecrated, so long ago, to the cause of American liberty, which witnessed her infant struggles, and rung with the shouts of her earliest victories, proclaim, now, that distin- guished friends and champions of that great cause have fallen. It is right that it should be thus. The tears which flow, and the honors that are paid, when the founders of the republic die, give hope that the republic itself may be immortal. It is fit that, by public as- sembly and solemn observance, by an- them and by eulogy, we commemorate the services of national benefactors, extol their virtues, and render thanks to God for eminent blessings, early given and long continued, through their agency, to our favored country. ADAMS and JEFFERSON are no more; ami we are assembled, fellow- citi/.ens, the aged, the middle-aged, and the young, by the spontaneous impulse of all. under the authority of the mu- nicipal government, with the presence of the chief magistrate of the Common- wealth, and others its official represent- atives, the University, and the learned societies, to bear our part in those niani- ADAMS AND JEITKRSON. 157 festationsof respect and gratitude which pervade the whole Land. Adams and Jefferson are no more. On fifti- eth anniversary, the greal day of national jubilee, in the very hour of public re- joicing, in the midst of echoing and re-echoing voices of thanksgiving, while their own names were on all tongues, they took their fiitrht together to tin* world of spirits. [f it be true that no one can safely be pronounced happy while he lives, if that event which terminates life can alone Crown its honors and its glory, what felicity is here! The greal epic of their lives, how happily concluded! Poetry itself has hardly terminated illustrious lives, and finished the career of earthly renown, by such a consummation. If we had the power, we could not wish to reverse this dispensation of the Divine Providence. The great objects of life were accomplished, the drama was ready to be closed. It has closed; our pal ri< >ts have fallen; but so fallen, at such age, with such coincidence, on such a day, that we cannot rationally lament that that end has come, which we knew could not be long deferred. Neither of these great men, fellow- citizens, could have died, at any time, without leaving an immense void in our American society. They have been so intimately, and for so long a time, blended with the history of the country, and especially so united, in our thoughts and recollections, with the events of the Revolution, that the death of either would have touched the chords of public sympathy. We should have felt that one great link, connecting us with former times, was broken; that we had lost something more, as it were, of the pres- ence of the Revolution itself, and of the act of independence, and were driven on, by another great remove from the days of our country's early distinction, to meet posterity, and to mix with the future. Like the mariner, whom the currents of the ocean and the winds carry along, till he sees the stars which have directed his course and lighted his pathless way descend, one by one, be- neath the rising horizon, we should have fell that the stream of time had home us onward till another great luminary, whose light had cheered US and who-,. guidance we had followed, h;id .sunk away from OUT Bight. But the i •nireiice of their death on the anniversary of Independence baa naturally awakened stronger emotions. Both had been Presidents, both had lived to greal age, both were early pa- triots, and both were distinguished and ever honored by their immediate agency in the act of independence. It cannot but seem striking and extraordinary, that these two should live to see the fif- tieth year from the date of that act ; that they should complete that year; and that then, on the day which had fasl linked for ever their own fame with their country's glory, the heavens should open to receive them both at once. As their lives themselves were the gifts of Providence, who is not willing to recog- nize in their happy termination, as well as in their long continuance, proofs that. our country and its benefactors are obj jects of His care? Adams and Jeffebbon, I have said, are no more. As human beings, indeed, they are no more. They are no more, as in 1 7 7 < > , bold and fearless advocates of independence; no more, as at subsequent periods, the head of the government ; no more, as we have recently seen them, aged and venerable objects of admira- tion and regard. They are no more. They are dead. But how little i-, there of the great and g 1 which can die! To their country they yet live, and live forever. They live in all thai perpetu- ates the remembrance of men on earth; in the recorded proofs of their ov actions, in the offspring of their intel- lect, in the deep-engraved lines of pub- lic gratitude, and in the respect and homage of mankind. They live in their example: and they live, emphatically, and will live, in the influence which their lives and efforts, their principles and opinions, now exercise, and will continue to exercise, on the affairs of men, not only in their own country, but throughout the civilized world. A su- perior and commanding human intellect, 153 ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. ;i truly great man, when Heaven vouch- safes bo rare a gift, is nol a temporary flame, burning brightly for a while, and then giving place to returning darkness. It is rather a spark of fervent heat, as well as radiant light, with power to enkindle the common mass of human mind; SO that when it glimmers in its own decay, and finally goes out in death, no night follows, but it leaves the world all light, all on fire, from the potent con- tact of its own spirit. Bacon died: but the human understanding, roused by the touch of his miraculous wand to a per- ception of the true philosophy and the just mode of inquiring after truth, lias kept on its course successfully and glori- ously. Newton died; yet the courses of the spheres are still known, and they vet move on by the laws which he dis- covered, and in the orbits which he saw, and described for them, in the infinity of space. No two men now live, fellow-citizens, perhaps it may be doubted whether any two men have ever lived in one age, who, more than those we now commem- orate, have impressed on mankind their own sentiments in regard to politics and government, infused their own opinions more deeply into the opinions of others, or given a more Lasting direction to the current of human thought. Their work doth not perish with them. The tree v\ inch they assisted to plant will flourish, although they water it and protect it no longer; for it lias struck its roots deep, it has sent them to the very centre; no storm, not of force to hurst the orb, can overturn it; its branches spread wide; they stretch their protecting arms broader and broader, and its top is destined to ii the heavens. We are nol deceived. There is no delusion here. No age will (■"me in which the American Revolution will appear less than it is, one of the greatest events in human history. No .•. ill come in which it shall cease to be seen and Ei li . on either continent, that a mighty Btep, a greal advance, not only in American affail'8, hut in human affairs, was made mi thr 1th of duly, 177 go in and inform the Speaker thai the secretary was at the door w iih a mi "ii, the Govei nor. The raes- ■ t rel urned, and informed the sec- retary that the orders of the House were that the doors should be kept fast; whereupon the secretary soon after read upon the stairs a proclamation dissolv- ing the General Court. Thus termi- nated, for ever, the actual exercise of the political power of England in or over .Massachusetts. The four last-named delegates accepted their appointments, and took their seats in Congress the first day of its meeting, the 5th of Sep- tember, 1774, in Philadelphia. The proceedings of the first Congress are well known, and have been univer- sally admired. It is in vain that we would look for superior proofs of wis- dom, talent, and patriotism. Lord Chat- ham said, that, for himself, he must declare that he had studied and admired the free states of antiquity, the master states of the world, but that for solidity of reasoning, force of sagacity, and wis- dom of conclusion, no body of men could stand in preference to this Congress. It is hardly inferior praise to say, that no production of that great man himself can be pronounced superior to several of the papers published as the proceedings of this most able, most firm, most patri- otic assembly. There is, indeed, noth- ing superior to them in the range of political disquisition. They not only embrace, illustrate, and enforce every thing which political philosophy, the love of liberty, and the spirit of free inquiry had antecedently produced, but they add new and striking views of their own, and apply the whole, with irresistible force, in support of the cause which had drawn them together. Mr. Adams was a constant attendant on the deliberations of this body, and bore an active part in its important measures, lie was of the committee to state the rights of the Colonies, and of that also which reported the Address to the King. As it was in the ("out mental Congress, fellow-citizens, thai those whose deaths have given rise to this occasion were first brought together, and called upon to unite their industry and their ability in the service of the country, let us now turn to the other of these distinguished ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 168 men, and take a brief notice of his life up to the period when he appeared within the walls of Congress. Thom \s Jefferson, descended from ancestors who had been settled in Vir- ginia for smile generations, was born near the spot, on which he died, in the county of Alheinarle, on the 2d of April (old style), 1743. His youthful studies were pursued in the neighborhood of Ids father's residence until he was removed to tiie College of William and Mary, the highest honors of which he in due time received. Having left the College with reputation, lie applied himself to the study of the law under the tuition of George Wythe, i of the highest judi- cial names of which that State can boast. At an early age he was elected a member of the legislature, in which he had do sooner appeared than he distinguished himself by knowledge, capacity, and promptitude. Mr. Jefferson appears to have been imbued with an early love of letters and science, and to have cherished a strong disposition to pursue these objects. To the physical sciences, especially, and to ancient classic literature, he is under- stood to have had a warm attachment, and never entirely to have lost sight of tliem in the midst of the busiest occu- pations. Hut the times were times for action, rather than for contemplation. The country was to be defended, and to be saved, before it could be enjoyed. Philosophic leisure and literary pursuits, and even the objects of professional at- tention, were all necessarily postponed to the urgent calls of the public sen ice. The exigency of the country made the same demand on Mr. Jefferson that it made on others who had the ability and the disposition to serve it ; and he obeyed the call; thinking and feeling in this respect with the great Roman orator: " Quis enim est tarn cupidus in perspi- cienda cognoscendaque rerum Datura, ut, si ei tractanti contemplantique res cognitione dignissimas subito sit alla- tum periculum discrimenque patriae, cui subvenire opitularique possit, non ilia omnia relinquat atque abjiciat, etiam si dinumerare Be Stellas, autmetiri mundi magnitudinem posse arbitretur? " 1 Entering with all his heart into the cause of liberty, his ability, patriotism, and power w ith the pen nal urallv drew upon him a large participation in the most important concerns. Wherever lie was, there was found a soul devoted to the cause, power to defend and maintain it. and willingness to incur all its haz- ards. In 177 I he published a " Summary View of the Rights of British America," a valuable production among those in- tended to show the dangers which threat- ened the liberties of the country, and to encourage the people in their defence. In June, 177"), he was elected a member of the Continental Congress, as succes- sor to Peyton Randolph, who had re- signed his place on account of ill health, and took his seat in that body on the '21st of the same month. And now, fellow-citizens, without pur- suing the biography of these illustrious men further, for the present, lei us turn our attention to the most prominent act of their lives, their participation in the Declaration of Independence. Preparatory to the introduction of that important measure, a committee, at the head of which was Mr. Adams, had reported a resolution, which Congress adopted on the 10th of May, recom- mending, in substance, to all the Colo- nies which had not already established governments suited to the exigencies of their affairs, to adopt such government as would, in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduce to the happi- ness and si if lij of their constituents in />ur- ticular, awl America in general. This significant vote was soon fol- lowed by the direct proposition which Richard Henry Lee had the honor to submit to Congress, by resolution, on the 7th day of June. The published journal does Dot expressly state it, but there is no doubt, I suppose, that this resolution was in the same words, when originally submitted by Mr. Lee, as when finally passed. Haviug been dis- cussed on Saturday, the 8th, and Mon- day, the 10th of June, this resolution 1 Cicero de Officiis, Lib. I. § 4 •!. 164 ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. was "ii the last-mentioned day postponed fur further consideration to the first day of July; ami at the same time it was voted, thai a committee be appointed to prepare a Declaration to the effect of the resolution. This committee was elected h\ ballot, on the following day, and con- sisted of Thomas Jefferson,. John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston. It is usual, when committees are elected by ballot, that their members should be arranged in order, according to the number of votes which each has received. Mr. Jefferson, therefore, had received the highest, and Mr. Adams the next highest number of votes. The difference is said to have been but of a single vote. Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Adams, standing thus at the head of the committee, were requested by the other ne rubers to act as a subcommittee to prepare the draft; and Mr. Jefferson drew up the paper. The original draft, a- brought by him from his study, and submitted to the other members of the committee, with interlineations in the handwriting of Dr. Franklin, and others in that of Mr. Adams, was in Mr. Jeffer- son's possession at the time of his death. 1 The merit of this paper is Mr. Jeffer- son's. Some changes were made in it at the suggestion of other members of the c mittee, and others by Congress while it was under discussion. But none of them altered the tone, the frame, the ar- rangement, or the general character of the instrument. As a composition, the Declaration is Mr. Jefferson's. J t is the production of his mind, and the high honor of it belongs to him, clearly and absolutely. It has sometimes been said, as if it were a derogation from the merits of this paper, that it contains nothing new; thai it only Btates grounds of proc 1- ing, and presses topics of argument, ■ A i.i' simile of tliis ever-memorable Btate r, a- drafted by Mr. Jefferson, with the in- i ueations alluded u> in the text, ia contained in M i Jefferson's Writings, Vol. I. p. 146. See, also, in reference to the history of the Declara- tion, the Life and Works "t John Adorns, \ II p 512 et teq. which had often- been stated and pressed before. But it was not the object of the Declaration to produce any thing new. It was not to invent reasons for inde- pendence, but to state those which gov- erned the Congress. For great and sufficient causes, it was proposed to declare independence; and the proper business of the paper to be drawn was to >et forth those causes, and justify the authors of the measure, in any event of fortune, to the country and to posterity. The cause of American independence, moreover, was now to be presented to the world in such manner, if it might so be, as to engage its sympathy, to com- mand its respect, to attract its admira- tion; and in an assembly of most able and distinguished men, Thomas Jef- ferson had the high honor of being the selected advocate of this cause. To say that he performed his great work well, would be doing him injustice. To say that he did excellently well, admirably well, would be inadequate and halting- praise. Let us rather say, that he so discharged the duty assigned him, that all Americans may well rejoice that the work of drawing the title-deed of their liberties devolved upon him. With all its merits, there are those who have thought that there was one thing in the Declaration to be regretted; and that is, the asperity and apparent anger with which it speaks of the person of the kin-'; the industrious ability with which it accumulates and charges upon him all the injuries which the Colonies had suffered from the mother country. Possibly some degree of injustice, now or hereafter, at home or abroad, may be done to the character of .Mr. Jefferson, if this part of the Declaration be not placed in its proper light. Anger or re- sentment, certainly much less personal reproach and invective, could not prop- erly find place in a composition of such high dignity, and of such lofty and per- manent character. A single reflection on the original ground of dispute between England and the Colonies is sufficient to remove any unfavorable impression in this respect. The inhabitants of all the Colonies, ADAMS AND JKKFKRSOH. !•;: while ('"Ionics, admitted themselves bound by their allegiance to the king; but they disclaimed altogether the au- thority of Parliament; holding them- selves, in this respect, to resemble the oondition of Scotland and [reland before the respective anions of those kingdoms with England, when they acknowledged allegiance to the same king, but had each its Bepavate Legislature. The tie, therefore, whioh cur Revolution was to break ffice at Washington. panied this great measure, has never been preserved, except in memory and by tradition. But it is, I believe, doing no injustice to others to say, that the general opinion was, and uniformly has been, that in debate, on the side of in- dependence, John Adams had no equal. The great author of the Declaration him- self has expressed that opinion uniform- ly and strongly. " John Adams," said he, in the hearing of him who has now the honor to address you, "John Adams was our colossus on the floor. Not grace- ful, not elegant, not always fluent, in his public addresses, he yet came out with a power, both of thought and of expression, which moved us from our seats." For the part which he was here to perform, Mr. Adams doubtless was emi- nently fitted. He possessed a bold spirit, which disregarded danger, and a san- guine reliance on the goodness of the cause, and the virtues of the people, which led him to overlook all obstacles. His character, too, had been formed in troubled times. He had been rocked in the early storms of the controversy, and had acquired a decision and a hardihood proportioned to the severity of the disci- pline which he had undergone. He not only loved the American cause devoutly, but had studied and under- stood it. It was all familiar to him. He had tried his powers on the ques- tions which it involved, often and in various ways; and had brought to their consideration whatever of argument or illustration the history of his own coun- try, the history of England, or the stm-es of ancient or of legal learning, could fur- nish. Every grievance enumerated in the long catalogue of the Declaration had been the subject of his discussion, and the object of his remonstrance and reprobation. From 1760, the Colonies, the lights of the Colonies, the liberties of the Colonies, and the wrongs inflicted on the Colonies, had engaged his con- stant attention; and it has surprised those w ho nave bad the opportunity of witnessing it, with what full remem- brance and with what prompt, recollec- lion he could refer, in his extreme old ADAMS AND JKKI-'KKSON 107 age, to every act nf l'arlianieni affecting the Colonies, distinguishing and Btating their respective titles, sections, and pro- visions; and to all the Colonial memo- rials, remonstrances, and petitions, with whatever else belonged to the intimate and exact history of the times from that \ear to I77"i. It was. in his own judg- ment, between these years thai the American people came to a full under- standing and thorough knowledge of their rights, ami to a fixed resolution of maintaining them; ami bearing himself an active pari in all important transac- tions, the controversy with England be- ing then in effect the business of his life, facts, dates, ami particulars mad.. an impression which was never effaced. He was prepared, therefore, by educa- tion and discipline, as well as by natural talent and natural temperament, for the part which he was now to act. The eloquence of Mr. Adams resem- bled his general character, and formed, indeed, apart of it. [t was bold, manly, and energetic; and such the crisis re- quired. When public bodies are to be addressed on momentous occasions, when great interests are at stake, and strong passions excited, nothing is valuable in speech farther than as it is connected with high intellectual and moral endowments. Clearness, force, and earnestness are the qualities which produce comic! ion. True eloquence, indeed, does not consist in speech. It cannot be brought from Ear. Labor and learning may toil for it, but they will tod in vain. Words and phrases may be marshalled in every way, but they cannot compass it. It must exisl in the man, in the subject, and in the occasion. Affected passion, intense ex- pression, the pomp of declamation, all may aspire to it; they cannot reach it. It comes, if it come at all, like the out- breaking of a fountain from the earth, or the bursting forth of volcanic fires, with spontaneous, original, native force. The graces taught in the schools, the costly oimaments and studied contriv- ances of speech, shock and disgust men, when their own lives, and the fate of their wives, their children, and their count i \ , hang on the decision of the hour. Then words have |o-l their power, rhetoric is vain, and all elaborate oratory contemptible. Even geniu self then feds rebuked ami subdued, as in the presence of higher qual Then patriotism is eloquent; then -elf- devotion is eloquent. The clear con- ception, outrunning the deductions of Logic, the high purpose, the firm resolve, the dauntless spirit, Speaking on the tongue, beaming from the eye, inform- ing every feature, and urging the w hole ma LWard, right onward to his ob- ject, — this, this is eloquence; or rather, it is something greater and higher than all eloquence, - it i> action, uoble, sub- lime, godlike action. In .Inly, 177<>, the controversy had passed the stage of argument. An appeal had been made to force, and opposing armies were in the field. Congress, then, was to deride whether the tie which had so Long bound us to the parent state was to be severed at once, and severed for ever. All the Colonies had signified their resolution to abide by this decision, and tin; people looked for it with the most intense anxiety. And surely, fellow-citizens, never, never were men called to a more important political deliberation. If we contemplate it from the point where they then Btood, no question could be more full of interest; if we look at it now, and judge of its importance by its effects, it appears of still greater mag- nit tide. l.ci us, then, bring before us the assembly, which was about to decide a question thus big with the fate of empire. Let US open their doors and look in upon their deliberations. Let US survey the anxious and careworn countenances, let us hear the firm-toned voices, of this band of patriots. Hancock presides over the solemn sitting; and one of those not \et pre- pared to pronounce for absolute inde- pendence is on the tloor, and is urging his reasons for dissenting from the I >ecl; nation. " Let us pause! This st. | taken, cannot be retraced. This reao- 16S ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. lution, once passed, will cut off all hope of reconciliation. If success attend the arms of England, we shall then be no longer Colonies, with charters and with privileges; these will all be forfeited by this act; and we shall be in the condi- tion of other conquered people, at the mercy of the conquerors. For ourselves, we maybe ready to run the hazard; but are we ready to carry the country to thai Length? Is success so probable as to justify it? Where is the military, where the naval power, by which we are to resist the whole strength of the arm of England, — for she will exert thai st length to the utmost? Can we rely on the constancy and perseverance of the people? or will they not act as the people of other countries have acted, and. wearied with a long war, submit, in the end, to a worse oppression? While we stand on our old ground, and insist on redress of grievances, we know we are right, and are not answerable for consequences. Nothing, then, can be imputed to us. But if we now change our object, carry our pretensions farther, and set up for absolute inde- pendence, we shall lose the sympathy of mankind. We shall no longer be defending what we possess, but strug- gling for something which we never did possess, and which we have solemnly and uniformly disclaimed all intention of pursuing, from the very outset of the troubles. Abandoning thus our old ground, of resistance only to arbitrary acts of oppression, the nations will be- lieve the whole to have been mere pre- tence, and they will look on us, not as injured, bul as ambitious subjects. 1 shudder before this responsibility. It will be on as, if, relinquishing the ground on which we have stood so long, and stood bo safely, we now proclaim independence, and carry on the war for that object . while these cities burn, these pleasant fields whiten and bleach with the bones of their owners, and these streams run blood. It will be upon ii-. it will be upon us. if, failing to maintain this unseasonable and ill- judged declaral ion, a Bterner despotism, maintained by military power, shall be established over our posterity, when we ourselves, given up by an exhausted, a harassed, a misled people, shall have oxpiated our rashness and atoned for our presumption on the scaffold." It was for Mr. Adams to reply to arguments like these. We know his opinions, and we know his character. lie would commence with his accus- tomed directness and earnestness. " Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I give my hand and my heart to this vote. It is true, indeed, that in the beginning we aimed not at indepen- dence. But there's a Divinity which shapes our ends. The injustice of Eng- land has driven us to arms ; and, blinded to her own interest for our good, she has obstinately persisted, till indepen- dence is now within our grasp. We have but to reach forth to it, and it is ours. Why, then, should we defer the Declaration? Is any man so weak as now to hope for a reconciliation with England, which shall leave either safety to the country and its liberties, or safety to his own life and his own honor? Are not you, Sir, who sit in that chair, — is not he, our venerable colleague near you, — are you not both already the pro- scribed and predestined objects of pun- ishment and of vengeance? Cut off from all hope of royal clemency, what are you, what can you be, while the power of Eng- land remains, but outlaws? If we post- pone independence, do we mean to carry on, or to give up, the war? Do we mean to submit to the measures of Parliament, Boston Port Bill and all? Do we mean to submit, and consent that we our- selves shall be ground to powder, and our country and its rights trodden dow n in the dust? I know we do not mean to submit. We never shall submit. Do we intend to violate that, EUOSl solemn obligation ever entered into bj men, that plighting, before (Jod, of OUT sac led honor to Washington, w hen, put- ting him forth to incur the dangers of war. as Well as the political hazards of the times, we promised to adhere to him, in every extremity, with our fortunes ami our lives? I know there is not a man here, who would not rather see ADAMS AND JEFFERSON L69 a general conflagration sweep over the land, or an earthquake sink it. than one jni or tittle of thai plighted Eaith Eall to the ground. For myself, having, twelve months ago, in this place, moved you, that George Washington be appointed commander of the forces raised, or to be raised, for defence of American liberty, 1 may my right band forget her cunning, and my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I hesitate or waver in the .support I give him. '•The war, then, must go on. We must fighl it through. And it' the war must go en. why put oft' longer the Dec- laration of Independence? That meas- ure will strengthen as. It will give us character abroad. The nations will then treat with us. which they never can do while we acknowledge ourselves subjects, in arms against our sovereign. Nay, I maintain that England herself will sooner treat for peace with us on the looting of independence, than con- sent, by repealing her acts, to acknowl- edge that her whole conduct towards us lias been a course of injustice and op- pression. Her pride will be less wound- ed by submitting to that course of things which now predestinates our in- dependence, than by yielding the points in controversy to her rebellious subjects. The former she would regard as the re- sult of fortune; the latter she would feel as her own deep disgrace. Why, then, why then, Sir, do we not as soon as possible change this from a civil to a national war? And since we must fight it through, why not put ourselves in a state to enjoy all the benefits of victory, if we gain the victory ? " If we fail, it can be no worse for us. But we shall not fail. The cause will raise up armies; the cause will create navies. The people, the people, if we are true to them, will carry us, and will carry themselves, gloriously, through this struggle. I care not how fickle other people have been found. I know the people of these Colonies, and I know that resistance to British aggres- sion is deep and settled in their hearts 1 See Life and Works of John Adams, Vol. II. p. 417 et seq. and cannot be eradicated. l'.\ ery Col- ony, indeed, has expressed ii w ill ness to follow , it we I, ut take the lead. sir, the Declaration will inspire the I pie w ith increased courage. Inst of a long and bloody war for the resto- ration of privileges, tor redress of griev- ances, for chartered immunities, held under a British king, set before them the glorious object of entire indepen- dence, and it will breathe into them anew the breath of life. Read this Declaration at the head of the army; every sword will be drawn from its scabbard, and the solemn vow uttered, to maintain it, or to perish on the bed of honor. Publish it from the pulpit; religion will approve it. and the love of religious liberty will cling round it, re- solved to stand with it, or fall with it. Send it to the public halls; proclaim it there; let them hear it who heard the first roar of the enemy's cannon; let them see it who saw their brothers and their sons fall on the field of Bunker Hill, and in the streets of Lexington and Concord, and the very walls will cry out in its support. " Sir, I know the uncertainty of human affairs, but I see, I see clearly, through this day's business. You and I, indeed, may rue it. We may not live to the time when this Declaration shall be made good. We may die; die colonists; die .slaves; die, it may be, ig- nominiously and on the BCaffold. Be it so. Be it so. If it be the pleasure of Eeaven that my country shall require the poor offering of my life, the victim shall be ready, at the appointed hour of Bacrifice, come when that hour may. Hut while I do live, let me have a country, or at least tin' hope of a coun- l i'y. and I hat a free country. "But whatever may lie our fate, be assured, be assured that this Declara- tion will stand. It may cost treasure, and it may cost blood; but it will stand, and it will richly compensate for both. Through the thick gloom of the present, 1 Bee the brightness of the futun the sim in heaven. We shall make this a glorious, an immortal day. When we are in our graves, our children w ill 170 ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. honor it. They will celebrate it with thanksgiving, with festivity, with bon- fires, and illuminations. On its annual return they will shed tears, copious, gushing tears, not of subjection and slavery, not of agony and distress, but of exultation, of gratitude, and of joy. sir, before God, I believe the hour is come. My judgment approves this measure, and m\ whole heart is in it. All that I have, and all that 1 am, and all that I hope, in this life, I am now ready here to stake upon it; and 1 leave off as I begun, that live or die, survive or perish, 1 am for the Declaration. It is my living sentiment, and by the bless- ing of God it shall be my dying senti- ment, Independence now, and Indepen- DEN< 1 FOE EVER." * And so that day shall be honored, illustrious prophet and patriot! so that day shall be honored, and as often as it returns, thy renown shall come along with it, and the glory of thy life, like the day of thy death, shall not fail from the remembrance of men. It would be unjust, fellow-citizens, on this occasion, while we express our veneration for him who is the imme- diate subject of these remarks, were we to omit a most respectful, affectionate, and grateful mention of those other great men, his colleagues, who stood with him, and with the same spirit, the same devotion, took part in the in- teresting transaction. Hancock, the proscribed Hancock, exiled from his home by a military governor, cut off by proclamation from the mercy of the crown, — Heaven reserved for him the distinguished honor of putting this great question to the vote, and of writ- ing his own mime first, and most COn- Bpicuously, on thai parchment which spoke defiance to the power of the clown of England. There, too, is the name of i bal other proscribed patriot . Sami ii- Adams, a man who hungered and thirsted for the independence of hi> country, who thoughl the Declaration halted and Lingered, being himself qoI 1 < >n the authorship of this peei h, see N oti at tlic end of il"- l •iacourse. only ready, but eager, for it, long before it was proposed; a man of the deepest sagacity, the clearest foresight, and the profoundest judgment in men. And there is Gerkt, himself among the ear- liest and the foremost of the patriots, found, when the battle of Lexington summoned them to common counsels, by the side of Waeren; a man who lived to serve his country at home and alnoad. and to die in the second place in the government. There, too, is the inflexible, the upright, the Spartan character, Robert Treat Paine. lie also lived to serve his country through the struggle, and then withdrew from her councils, only that he might give his labors and his life to his native State, in another relation. These names, fellow-citizens, are the treasures of the Commonwealth; and they are treasures which grow brighter by time. It is now necessary to resume the nar- rative, and to finish with great brevity the notice of the lives of those whose virtues and services we have met to commemorate. Mr. Adams remained in Congress from its first meeting till November, 1777, when he was appointed Minister to France. He proceeded on that ser- vice in the February following, em- barking in the frigate Boston, from the shore of his native town, at the foot of .Mount Wollaston. The year following, he was appointed commissioner to treat of peace with England. Returning to the United States, he was a dele- gate from Braintree in the Convention for framing the Constitution of this Commonwealth, in 1780. 2 At the latter end of the same year, he again went abroad in the diplomatic service of the country, and was employed at various courts, and occupied with various ne- gotiations, until 1788. The particu- lars of these interesting and important services this occasion does not allow time to relate. In 17M-' he concluded our first treaty with Holland. His ne- - In this Convention he Berved as chairman el the committee for preparing the" draft of a Constitution. ADAMS AM) JEFFERSON. 171 gotiations with thai republic, his efforts in persuade the States-General to recog- nize our independence, his incessanl ami indefatigable exertions to npresenl the American cause favorably tut the Continent, and to counteract the designs of its enemies, open and secret, and his successful undertaking to obtain Loans on the credit of a nation yet new and unknown, are among his mosl arduous, most useful, most honorable services. It was his fortune to hear a pari in the negotiation for peace with England, and in something more than six years from the Declaration which he had so Btrenuously supported, he had the satis- faction of seeing the minister plenipo- tentiary of the crown subscribe his name to the instrument which declared that his •• Britannic Majesty acknowl- edged the I'nited States to be free. sovereign, and independent." In these important transactions, Mr. Adams's conduct received the marked approba- tion of Congress and of the country. While abroad, in 1787, he published his " Defence of the American Constitu- tions"; a work of merit and ability. though composed with haste, on the spur of a particular occasion, in the midst of other occupations, and under circumstances not admitting of careful revision. The immediate object of the work was to counteract the weight of opinions advanced by several popular European writers of that day. M. Tur- got, the Abbe de Mably, and Dr. Price, at a time when the people of the United States were employed in forming and revising their systems of government. Returning to the United States in 1788, he found the new government about going into operation, and was himself elected the first Vice-President, a situation which he filled with reputa- tion for eight years, at the expiration of which he was raised to the Presidential chair, as immediate successor to the im- mortal Washington. In this high sta- tion he was succeeded by Mr. Jefferson, after a memorable controversy between their respective friends, in 1801; and from that period his manner of life has been known to all who hear me. He has lived, for ti ve-aml-t w enl j yean, w ith every enjoymen! thai could render old age happy. Not inattentive to the occurrences of the times, political cares have yet not. materially, or for any Ion- time, disturbed his repose, in 1820 he acted as Elector of President and Vice- President, and in the game year we saw him, then at the age of eighty-fiv< . a member of the Convention of this Commonwealth called to revise the Constitution. Forty years before, he had 1 n one of those; who formed that Constitution ; and he had now the pleas- ure of witnessing that there was little which the people desired to change. 1 Possessing all his faculties to the end of his long life, with an unabated love of reading and contemplation, iii the centre of interesting circles of friend- ship and affection, he was blessed in his retirement with whatever of repose and felicity the condition of man allows. He had, also, other enjoyments. Be saw around him that prosperity and general happiness which had been the object of his public cares and labors. No man ever beheld more clearly, and for a longer time, the great and benefi- cial effects of the services rendered by himself to his country. That liberty which he so early defended, that inde- pendence of which he was so able an advocate and supporter, he saw. we trust, firmly and securely established. The population of the country thick- ened around him faster, and extended wider, than his own sanguine predic- tions had anticipated; and the wealth, respectability, and power of the nation sprang up to a magnitude which it is quite impossible he could have expected to witness in his day. He lived also to behold those principles of civil freedom which had been developed, establish.- 1, 1 T"l>en the organization of tins body, 15th November, L820, John Adama was elected i t ■* President; an office which the infirmitii compelled hiin to decline. For the interesting proceedings of the < lonvention on tlii* occasion, theaddre8S "f Chief Justice Parker, and tl ply of Mr. Adams, see Journal <>f Debates and Proc lings in the Convention of Delegates chosen to revise the Constitution of Massachu- setts, p. 8 i t teq. 172 ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. and practically applied in America, at- tract attention, command respect, and awaken Imitation, in other regions of the nid well might, and well did, he exclaim, " Where will the consequences of the American Revolution end? " If any thing yet remain to fill this cup of happiness, let it be added, that he lived to Bee a great and intelligent peo- ple bestowthe highest honor in their gifl where he had bestowed his own kindest parental affections and lodged his Eondesl hopes. Thus honored in life, thus happy at death, he saw the .11 ]-, 1 1 i E, and lie died; and with the last prayers which trembled on his lips was the fervent supplication for his country, " Independence for ever! " 1 Mr. Jefferson, having been occupied in the years 1778 and 1779 in the impor- tant service of revising the laws of Vir- ginia, was elected Governor of that e, as successor to Patrick Henry, and held the situation when the State invaded by the British arms. In 1781 he published Ins Notes on Virginia, a work which attracted attention in Europe as well as America, dispelled many misconceptions respecting this continent, and gave its author a place among men distinguished for science. En November, 17S:i, he again took his seat in the Continental Congress, but in the May following was appointed Minis- ter Plenipotentiary, to act abroad, in the negotiation of commercial treaties, with Dr. Franklin and Mr. Adams. He pro- ceeded to France, in execution of this mission, embarking a1 Boston; and that was the only occasion on which he ever visited this place. In 1785 he was ap- pointed Minister to France, the duties of which situation he continued to per- form until < October, 1789, when he ob- ed leave to retire, just on the eve of that tremendous revolution which has bo much agitated the world in our times. Mr. Jefferson's discharge of his diplo- matic duties was marked bj great ability, diligence, and patriotism ; and while he 1 For an at t of Mr. w eb tor's last inter- view with Mi. Adams, Bee March's Reminis- cences of Congri -. p. 62. resided at Paris, in one of the most in- teresting periods, his character for intel- ligence, his love of knowledge and of the society of learned nun. distinguished him in the highest circles of the French capital. No court in Europe had at that time in Paris a representative com- manding or enjoying higher regard, for political knowledge or for general at- tainments, than the minister of this then infant republic. Immediately on his return to his native country, at the organization of the government under the present Constitution, his talents and experience recommended him to Presi- dent "Washington for the first office in his gift. He was placed at the head of the Department of State. In this situ- ation, also, he manifested conspicuous ability. His correspondence with the ministers of other powers residing here, and his instructions to our own diplo- matic agents abroad, are among our ablest state papers. A thorough knowl- edge of the laws and usages of nations, perfect acquaintance with the immediate subject before him, great felicity, and still greater facility, in writing, show themselves in whatever effort his official situation called on him to make. It is believed by competent judges, that the diplomatic intercourse of the govern- ment of the United States, from the first meeting of the Continental Congress in 1771 to the present time, taken together, would not suffer, in respect to the talent with which it lias been conducted, by comparison with any thing which other and older governments can produce; and to the attainment of this respectability and distinction Mr. Jefferson has con- tributed his full part. On the retirement of General Wash- ington from the Presidency, and the election of Mr. Adams to that office in 17!»7, he was chosen Vice-President. While presiding in this capacity over the deliberations of the Senate, he com- piled and published a Manual of Parlia- mentary Practice, a work of more labor and more merit than is indicated bj its size. It is nnw received as the general standard by which proceedings are reg- ulated, not only in both Houses of Con- ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. L78 grass, bul in most of the other legislative bodies in the country. In 1801 lie was elected President , in opposition to Mr. Adams, and re-elected in L805, b\ a vote approaching towards unanimity. From the time of his anal rel tremenl from pulilic lite, in ISO!), Mr. .Jefferson lived as became a wise man. Surrounded by affectionate friends, bis ardor in the pursuit of knowledge undiminished, with uncommon health and unbroken spirits, he was able to enjoy largely the rational pleasures of life, and to partake in that public prosperity which he had so much contributed to produce. His kindness and hospitality, the charm of his conversation, the ease of his man- ners, tin 1 extent of his acquirements, and, especially, the lull store of Revolu- tionary incidents which he had treas- ured in his memory, and which he knew when and how to dispense, rendered his abode in a high degree attractive to his admiring countrymen, while his high public and scientific character drew towards him every intelligent and edu- cated traveller from abroad. Both Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson had the pleas- ure of knowing that the respect which they so Largely received was not paid to their official stations. They were not men made great by office; but great men, on whom the country for it> own benefit had conferred office. There was that in them which office did not give, and which the relinquishment of office did not, and could not, take away. In their retirement, in the midst of their fellow-citizens, themselves private citi- zens, they enjoyed as high regard and esteem as when filling the most impor- tant places of public trust. There remained to Mr. Jefferson yet one other work of patriotism and benefi- cence, the establishment of a university in his native State. To this object he devoted years of incessant and anxious attention, and by the enlightened liber- ality of the Legislature of Virginia, and the co-operation of other able and zeal- ous friends, he lived to see it accom- plished. May all success attend this infant seminary; and may those who enjoy its advantages, as often as their eyes shall resl on the neighboring hei \ in , recollect what they owe to their disin- terested and indefatigable benefactor: and may letters honor him who fchus La- hore, 1 I,, the cause of Letters! ' Thus useful, and thus respected, pa d the old age of Thomas Jefferson. But time was <>n its ever-ceaseless \\ in •_: . ami was now bringing the lasl hour of this illustrious man. He saw its approach with undisturbed serenity. He counted the moments a- thej passed, ami beheld that his last sands were falling. That day, too, was at hand which he had belped to make immortal. One wish, hope, if it were not presumptuous, heat in his fainting breast. Could it he so, might it please God, he would desire once more to see the sun, once more to look abroad on the scene around him, on the great day of Liberty. Eeaven, in its mercy, fulfilled that prayer. He saw that sun. he enjoyed its Baored Light, hi! thanked (iod for this mercy, and bowed his aged head to the grave. "Felix, non vitae tantum claritate, sed etiam op- portunitate mortis." The last public labor of Mr. Jefferson naturally suggests the expression of the high praise which is due, both to him and to Mr. Adams, for their uniform ami zealous attachmeajaVto learning, and to the cau^e^of general knowledge, of the advantages of learning, indeed, and of literary accomplishments, their own characters were striking recommenda- tions and illustrations. They were schol- ars, ripe and good scholars; widely acquainted w ith ancient, a- well a- mod- ern literature, and not altogether unin- structed in the deeper sciences. Their acquirements, doubtless, W ere different, and so were the particular objects of 1 Mr. Jefferson himself considered his vices in establishing the University of Virginia as anions the most important rendered by him to the country. In Mr. Wirt's Eulogy, it is Btated tli.it a private memorandum was found among his papers, containing the following in- scription to be placed on his monument: — •• lhtv was buried Thomas Jefferson, Auth the Induration of Independence, of tl of Virginia for Religious Freedom, ami Fath.-r of the University of Virginia." Eulogies on Adams and Jefferson, p. 42'i. 174 ADAMS AND JI'.IT'KRSON. their literary pursuits; as their tastes ami characters, in these respects, dif- fered like those of other men. Being, also, men of busy lives, with great ob- jects requiring action constantly before them, their attainments in letters did not become showy or obtrusive. Yet I would hazard the opinion, that, if we could now ascertain all the causes which gave them eminence and distinction in the midst of the great men with whom they acted, we should rind not among the least their early acquisitions in liter- ature, the resources which it furnished, the promptitude and facility which it communicated, and the wide field it opened for analog}' and illustration; giving them thus, on every subject, a larger view and a broader range, as well for discussion as for the government of their own conduct. Literature sometimes disgusts, and pretension to it much oftener disgusts, by appearing to hang loosely on the character, like something foreign or ex- traneous, not a part, but an ill-adjusted appendage; or by seeming to overload and weigh it down by its unsightly bulk, like the productions of bad taste in architecture, where there is massy and cumbrous ornament without strength or solidity of column. This has exposed learning, and especially classical learn- ing, to reproach. Men have seen that it might exist without mental superi- ority, without vigor, without good taste, and without utility. But in such cases classical learning has only not inspired natural talent: or, at most, it has but made original feebleness of intellect, and natural bluntness of perception, some- thing more conspicuous. The question, after all, if it be a quesl ion, is, whether literature, ancienl as well as modern, not assist a good understanding, improve natural good taste, add polished armor to native Btrength, and render its r, not only re capable of de- riving private happiness from contera- plal ion and refleel ion, but more accom- plished Hi the affair- of life, and especially for public action. Those whose memories we now bonor • learned men; bul their learning was kept in its proper place, and made subservient to the uses and objects of life. They were scholars, not common nor superficial; but their scholarship was so in keeping with their character, so blended and inwrought, that careless observers, or bad judges, not seeing an ostentatious display of it, might infer that it did not exist; forgetting, or not knowing, that classical learning in men who act in conspicuous public stations, perform duties which exercise the faculty of writing, or address popular, deliber- ative, or judicial bodies, is often felt where it is little seen, and sometimes felt more effectually because it is not seen at all. But the cause of knowledge, in a more enlarged sense, the cause of general knowledge and of popular education, had no warmer friends, nor more pow- erful advocates, than Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson. On this foundation they knew the whole republican system rested; and this great and all-important truth they strove to impress, by all the means in their power. In the early publication already referred to, Mr. Adams ex- presses the strong and just sentiment, that the education of the poor is more important, even to the rich themselves, than all their own riches. On this great truth, indeed, is founded that un- rivalled, that invaluable political and moral institution, our own blessing and the glory of our fathers, the New Eng- land system of free schools. As the promotion of knowledge had been the object of their regard through life, so these great men made it the sub- ject of their testamentary bounty. Mr. Jefferson is understood to have be- queathed his library to the University of 'Virginia, and thai of Mr. Adams is be- stowed on the inhabitants of Quincy. Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson, fellow- citizens, were successively Presidents of the United states. The comparative merits of their respective administra- tions for a long time agitated and di- \ ided public opinion. They were rivals, each supported by numerous and power- ful portions of the people, for the high- est office. This contest, partly the cause ADAMS AND JKFIT.KM .\\ IT.". and partly the consequence of the long existence of two threat political parties in the country, is mnv pari of the bis- tory of our government. We may nat- urally regrel thai anj thing should have occurred to create difference and discord bet ween those who had acted harmoni- ously and efficiently in the great con- cerns of the Revolution. But this is not the time, nor this the occasion, for en- tering into the grounds of that differ- ence, or for attempting to discuss the merits of the questions which it involves. As practical questions, they were can- vassed when the measures which they regarded were acted on and adopted; and as belonging to history, the time has not come for their consideration. Ii is. perhaps, not wonderful, that, when the Constitution of the United Stairs first went into operation, differ- ent opinions should be entertained as to the extent of the powers conferred by it. Here was a natural source of diversity of sentiment. It is still less wonderful, that that event, nearly contemporary with our government under the present Constitution, which so entirely shocked all Europe, and disturbed our relations with her leading powers, should be thought, by different men, to have dif- ferent bearings on our own prosperity ; and that the early measures adopted 1 .y the government of the United States ( in consequence of this new state of things, should be seen in opposite lights. It is for the future historian, when what now remains of prejudice and misconception shall have passed away, to state these different opinions, and pronounce im- partial judgment. In the mean time, all good men rejoice, and well may re- joice, that the sharpest differences sprung out of measures which, whether right or wrong, have ceased with the exigen that gave them birth, and have left no permanent effect, either on the Consti- tution or on the general prosperity of the country. This remark, I am aware, may be supposed to have its exception in one measure, the alteration of the Constitu- tion as to the mode of choosing l'i evi- dent; but it is true in its general appli- cation. Thus the course of policy pursued towards France in 1798, on tie- one hand, and tie- measures of commer- cial restriction commenced in L807, on the other, both subjects of warm and severe op position, have paS86d away and left nothing behind them. Thej were temporary, and, w hether w ise Or unv, ise, their consequences were limited to their respective occasions. It is equally clear, at the same time, and it is equally ifying, that those asures of both ad- ministrations which were of durable importance, and w bich drew after them momentous and long remaining conse- quences, have received general appro- bat ion. Such was the organization, or rather the creation, of the navy, in the administration of Mr. Adam-: Buch the acquisition of Louisiana in that of Mr. Jefferson. The country, it may safely be added, is not likely to be willing either to approve, or to reprobate, indis- criminately, and in the aggregate, all the measures of either, or of any, ad- ministration. The dictate of reason and of justice is, that, holding each one his own sentiments on the points of difference, we imitate tie- great men themselves in the forbearance and mod- eration which they have cherished, and in the mutual respect and kindness which they have 1 n so much inclined to feel and to reciprocate. No men, fellow-citizens, ever Berved their country with more entire exemp- tion from every imputation of selfish and mercenary motives, than those to w | memory we are paying these proof. , f respect. A suspicion of any disposi- tion to enrich themselves or to profit by their public employments, never rested on either. No sordid motive approached them. The inheritance which they have left to their children is of their charac- ter and their fame. Fellow-citizens, I will detain you no' longer by this faint and feeble tribute to the mory of the illustrious dead. Even in other hands, adequate justice could not be done to them, within limits of this occasion. Their h their best praise, is your de< p conviction of their merits, your Date grati- tude for their lal i their Bervi 17G ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. It is aot ray voice, it is this cessation of ordinary pursuits, this arresting of all attention, these solemn ceremonies, and this crowded house, which speak their eulogy. Their fame, indeed, is safe. Thai is now treasured up beyond the reach of accident. Although no sculp- tured marble should rise to their mem- ory, nor engraved stone bear record of their deeds, yet will their remembrance be as lasting as the land they honored. Marble columns may, ind 1. moulder into dust, time may erase all impress from the crumbling stone, but their fame remains; for with AMERICAN lib- erty it rose, and with American lib- i imyo.m.y can it perish. It was the last swelling peal of yonder choir, " THEIK BODIES ARE BURIED IK PEACE, BUT THEIK NAME LIVETH EVERMORE." I catch that solemn song, I echo that lofty strain of funeral triumph, " Their -NAME LIVETH EVERMORE." Of the illustrious signers of the Dec- laration of Independence there now re- mains only Charles Carroll. He semis an aged oak, standing alone on the plain, which time has spared a little longer after all its contemporaries have been levelled with the dust. Venerable object ! we delight to gather round its trunk, while yet it stands, and to dwell beneath its shadow. Sole survivor of an assembly of as great men as the world has witnessed, in a transaction one of the most important that history records, what thoughts, what interesting reflections, must till his elevated and devout soul! If he dwell on the past, how touching its recollections; if he sur- vey the present, how happy, how joyous, how full of the fruition of that hope which his ardent patriotism indulged; if he glanceatthe future, how does the pros] t of his country's advance at almost he- wilder his weakened conception! Fortu- nate, distinguished patriot ! Interesting relic of the past ! Let him know that, m Idle we honor the dead, we do not for- fche living; and that there is not a heart here which does not Eervently pray 1 li.it I leaven may keep him yet hack from the society of lii- companions. And now, fellow-citizens, let us not re- 1 ire from this occasion without a deep and solemn conviction of the duties which have devolved upon us. This lovely land, this glorious liberty, these benign insti- tutions, the dear purchase of our fathers, are ours; ours to enjoy, ours to preserve, ours to transmit. Generations past and generations to come hold us responsible for this sacred trust. Our fathers, from behind, admonish us, with their anxious paternal voices; posterity calls out to us, from the bosom of the future ; the world turns hither its solicitous eyes; all, all conjure us to act wisely, and faithfully, in the relation which we sustain. We can never, indeed, pay the debt which is upon us; but by virtue, by morality, by religion, by the cultivation of every good principle and every good habit, we may hope to enjoy the blessing, through our day, and to leave it un- impaired to our children. Let us feel deeply how much of what we are and of what we possess we owe to this liberty, and to these institutions of government. Nature has, indeed, given us a soil which yields bounteously to the hand of in- dustry, the mighty and fruitful ocean is before us, and the skies over our heads shed health and vigor. But what are lands, and seas, and skies, to civilized man, without society, without knowl- edge, without morals, without religious culture; and how can these be enjoyed, in all their extent and all their excel- lence, but under the protection of wise institutions and a free government? Fel- low-citizens, there is not one of us, there is not one of us here present, who does not, at this moment, and at every mo- ment, experience, in his own condition, and in the condition of those most near and dear to him. the influence and the benefits of this liberty ami these insti- tutions. Let us then acknowledge the blessing, let us feel it deeply and power- fully, let us cherish a strong affection for it, and resolve to maintain and pei - - petuate it. The blood of our fathers, let it not have keen shed in vain; the great hope of posterity, let it not be blasted. The striking attitude, too, in which ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 177 we stand to the world around us, a topic to which, I fear, I advert too often, and dwell cm tun long, cannot be altogether omitted here. Neither individuals nor nations can perform their part well, until they understand and feel its importance, ami comprehend and justly appreciate all the duties belonging to it. Jt is not to inflate national vanity, nor t<> swell a lighl and empty feeling of self-impor- tance, but it is that we may judge justly nt our situation, and of our own duties, that I earnestly urge upon you this con- sideration of our position and our char- acter among the nations of the earth. It cannot lie denied, lnit by those who would dispute againsl tin- sun, that with America, and in America, a new era Commences in human affairs. This era is distinguished by free representative governments, by entire religious liberty, by improved Bystems of national inter- course, by a newly awakened and an unconquerable spirit of free inquiry, and by a diffusion of know ledge through the community, such as has been before alto- gether unknown and unheard of. Amer- ica, America, our country, fellow-citizens, our own dear ami native land, is insep- arably connected, fasl bound up, in forti and by fate, with these great interests. If they fall, we fall with them; if they stand, it will he because we have maintained them. Lei us con- template, then, this connection, which binds the prosperity of others to our own; and let us manfully discharge all the duties which if imposes. If we cherish the virtues ami the principles of our fathers, Eeaven will assist as t.i carry on the work of human liberty and human happiness. Auspicious omens cheer us. Greal examples are before us. Our own firmament now shines brightly upon our path. Wamii \o rON is in the clear, upper sky. These other Btars have now joined the American constel- lation; they circle round their centre, and the heaven-, beam with new light. Beneath this illumination let us walk the course of life, and at its close de- voutly commend our beloved < ntry, the common parent of us all, to the Divine Benignity. NOTE. Page 170. TnE question lias often been asked, whether the anonymous speech against the Declaration of Independence, and the speech in support of it ascribed to John Adams in the preceding Discourse, are a portion of the debates which actually took place in 177(iin the Continental Congress. Not only lias this inquiry been propounded in the public papers, but several letters on the subject have been addressed to Mr. Webster and his friends. For this reason, it may be proper to state, that those speeches were composed by Mr. Webster, after the manner of the ancient historians, as embodying in an impressive form the arguments relied upon by the friends and opponents of the measure, respectively. They of course represent the speeches that were actually made on both sides, but no report of the debates of this period has been preserved, and the orator on the pres- ent occasion had no aid in framing th< Be addresses, but what was furnished by general tradition and the known line of argument pursued by the speakers and writers of that day for and against the measure of Independence. The first sen- tence of the speech ascribed to Mr. Adams was of course suggested by the parting scene with Jonathan Sewall, as described by Mr. Adams himself, in the Preface to the I.ettei> of Novanglus and Ma.->achu- settensis. So much interest has been taken in this subject, thai it has been thought proper, by way of settling the question in the most authentic manner, to give publicity to the following answer, written by Mr. Webster to one of the letters of inquiry above al- luded to. " Washington, 23 January, 1846. " in m: Sir: — " I have the honor to acknowledge tlio receipt of your letter of the tstli instant Its contents hardly surprise me, as I have received v< ry many similar communications. " Your inquiry is easily answered. The Con- gress of the Revolution sal with clow ' speech, or any pari or (ragmen! of the speech, delivered by Mr. Adams on the ques- tion "f tlie Declaration of Independence. We only know, from the testimony of hi-* auditors, that he spoke with remarkable ability andchar- acterisl ic earnestness. •• rhe day after the Declaration was made, Mr. Adams, in writing toa friend, 1 declared the event to be one that 'ought to be commemorat- ed, as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be sol- emnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illumi- 1 See Letters of John Adams to his Wife, Vol. I. p. 128, note. nations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, for evermore.' '"Ami on the day of his death, hearing the noise of bells and cannon, he asked the occasion. < »n being reminded that it was 'Independent day,' he replied, 'Independence for ever!' These expressions were introduced into the Bpeecfa supposed to have been made by him. lor the rest I must be answerable. The speech was written by me, in my house in Boston, the day before the delivery of the Discourse in Fan- em] Hall ; a poor substitute, I am sure it would appear to lie. if we could now see the speech actually made by Mr. Adams on that transcen- dently important occasion. " I am, respectfully, "Your obedient servant, "DANLEL WiSBSTER." THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. AN ARGUMENT MADE IX THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS, I.N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY TERM, 1827. [This was an action oi assumpsit, brought originally in theCircuil Court of Louisiana, by Saunders, a citizen of Kentucky, against Ogden, a citizen of Louisiana. The plain- tiff below declared upon certain bills of exchange, drawn on the 80£h of September, 1806, by < > i n - .Ionian, at Lexington, in the State of Kentucky, upon the defendant below, Ogden, in the city of New York, [the defendant tlu-n being a citizen and resident of tile Slate of New York,) ac- cepted by him at the city of New York, and protested for non-payment. The defendant below pleaded several ideas, among which was a certificate of lischarge under the act of the legislature >f the State of New York, of April 3d, 1801, for the relief of insolvent debtors, tommonly called the Three-Fourths Act. The jury found the facts in the form of i special verdict, on which the court ren- lered a judgment for the plaintiff below, ind the cans*' was brought by writ of error jefore this court. The question which Iroae under this plea, as to the validity of he law of New York as being repugnant the Constitution of the United States, vas argued at February term, 1824, by Mr. 'lay. Mr. D. I?. Ogden, and .Mr. Haines, for he plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Webster md Mr. Wheaton, for the defendant in error, ind the cause was continued for advisemi nt mtil the present term. It was again ar- med at the present term, by Mr. Webster md Mr. Wheaton, against the validity, and »y the Attorney-General, Mr. E. Living- ton. Mr I). B Ogden, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Jampson, for the validity. Mr. Wheaton opened the argument for he defendant in error; he was followed by he counsel for the plaintiff in error; and dr. Webster replied as follows.] The question arising in this case is lot more important, nor so important vcn. in its bearing on individual cases if private right, as in its character of a public political question. The Consti- tution was intended to accomplish a great political object. Its design was not so much to prevent injustice or in- jury in one case, or in successive single cases, as it was to make general salutary provisions, which, in their operation, should give security to all contracts, stability to credit, uniformity among all the States in those things which mate- rially concern the Eoreign commer i' the country, and their own credit, trade, and intercourse with each other. The real question, is, therefore, a much broader one than has been argued. It is this: Whether the Constitution has not, for general political purposes, or- dained that bankrupt laws should be established only by national authority? We contend that such was the intention of the Constitution; an intention, as we think, plainly manifested in several of its provisions. The act of New York, under which this question arises, provides that a debtor may be discharged from all his debts, upon assigning his property to trustees I'm- the use of his Credit When applied to the discharge of debts contracted before the date of the law, this court has decided that the act is invalid. 1 The act itself makes no dis- tiiietion between past and future debts, but provides for the discharge of both in the same manner. In the case, then, of a debt already exist [ng, it is admitted 1 Sturges v. Crowninshicld. 4 Wheat Rep. 122. 180 THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. 1h.it tlif act does impair the obligation of contracts. We wish the full extent of this decision to be well considered. It is nol merely that the legislature of the State cannot interfere by law, in tin' particular case of A or B, to injure or impair rights which have become vested under contracts; but it is, that they have no power by general law to regu- late the manner in which all debtors may be discharged from subsisting con- tracts; in other words, they cannot pass general bankrupt laws to be applied in pr< send. Now, it is not contended that such laws are unjust, and ought not to be passed by any legislature. It is not said that they are unwise or impolitic. On the contrary, we know the general practice to be, that, when bankrupt laws are established, they make no dis- tinction between present and future debts. While all agree that special acts, made for individual cases, are un- just, all admit that a general law, made for all cases, may be both just and poli- tic. The question, then, which meets us on the threshold is this: If the Con- stitution meant to leave the States the power of establishing systems of bank- ruptcy to act upon future debts, what, great or important object of a political nature is answered by denying the power of making such systems applicable to existing debts? The argument used in Sturges v. Crouminshield was, at least, a plausible and consistent argument. It maintained that the prohibition of the Constitution was levelled only against interferences in individual cases, and did not apply to general laws, whether those laws were retrospective or prospect ive in their operation. But the court rejected that conclusion. It decided that the Consti- tution was intended to apply to general mis of bankruptcy : that an acl providing that all debtors might be discharged from all creditors, upon cer- tain conditions, was of no more validity than an act providing that a particular debtor, A. should be discharged on the Bame condii Lone from his particular cred- itor, I'.. It being thus decided that general laws are within the prohibition of the Constitution, it is for the plaintiff in error now to show on what ground, con- sistent with the general objects of the Constitution, he can establish a distinc- tion which can give effect to those gen- eral laws in their application to future debts, while it denies them effect in their application to subsisting debts. The words are, that "no State shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts." The general operation of all such laws is to impair that obliga- tion ; that is, to discharge the obligation without fulfilling it. This is admitted; and the only ground taken for the dis- tinction to stand on is, that, when the law was in existence at the time of the making of the contract, the parties must be supposed tohave reference to it, or, as it is usually expressed, the law is made a part of the contract. Before consid- ering what foundation there is for this argument, it may be well to inquire what is that obligation of contracts of which the Constitution speaks, and whence is it derived. The definition given by the court in Sturges v. Crouminshield is sufficient for our present purpose. "A contract," say the court, "is an agreement to do some particular thing; the law binds the party to perform this agreement, and this is the obligation of the con- tract." It is indeed probable that the Consti- tution used the words in a somewhat more popular sense. We speak, for ex- am] >le, familiarly of a usurious contract, and yet we say, speaking technically, that a usurious agreement is no con- tract. By the obligation of a contract, we should understand the Constitution to mean, the duty of performing a le-al agreement. If the contract be lawful, the party is bound to perform it. But bound by what? What is it that binds him? And this leads us to what we re- gard as a principal fallacy in the argu- ment (Hi the other side. That argument supposes, and insists, that the whole obligation of a contract has its origin in the municipal law. This position we TI1K CASK OK OCDKN AND SAUNDER8. L81 controvert. We do nol Bay thai it is that obligation which springs from con- science merely; but we deny that it is only such as springs from the particular law of the place where the contract is made. It must be a lawful contract, doubtless; that is, permitted and al- lowed; because society has a right to prohibit all Buch contracts, as well as all such actions, as it deems to be mischiev- ous or injurious. Hut if the contract lie such as the law of society tolerates, in other words, if it be lawful, then we say. the duty of performing it springs from universal law. And this is the concurrent sense of all the writers of authority. The duty of performing promises is thus shown to rest on universal law; ami if, departing from this well-estab- lished principle, we now follow the teachers who instruct us that the obli- gation of a contract has its origin in the law of a particular State, and is in all cases what that law makes it, and no more, and no less, we shall probably find ourselves involved in inextricable difficulties. A man promises, for a val- uable consideration, to pay money in New York. Is the obligation of that contract created by the laws of that State, or does it subsist independent of those laws? We contend that the obli- gation of a contract, that is, the duty of performing it, is not created by the law of the particular place where it is made, and dependent on that law for its exist- ence; but that it may subsist, and does subsist, without that law. and indepen- dent of it. The obligation is in the contract itself, in the assent of the par- ties, and in the sanction of universal law. Tins is the doctrine of Grot ins, Vattel, Burlamaqui, Pothier, and llu- therforth. The contract, doubtless, is necessarily to be enforced by the munici- pal law of the place where performance is demanded. The municipal law acts on the contract after it is made, to com- pel its execution, or give damages for its violation. Hut this is a very differ- ent thing from the same law being the origin or fountain of the contract. Let us illustrate this matter by an ex- ample. Two persons contract together in New York for the delivery, bj one to the other, of a domestic animal, a ut'-ii- sil of husbandry, or a weapon of war. This is a law fill contract , and. while the pai i ies remain in New 5Toi k, it is to be enforced by the laws of thai Si ate. But if they remove with the article to Penn- sylvania Or Maryland, there a new law comes to act upon the contract, and to apply other remedies if it be broken. Thus far the remedies are furnished by the laws of society. Hut suppose the sane- parties to go together to a sa wilderness, or a desert island, beyond the reach of the laws of any society. The obligation of the contract still sub- sists, and is as perfect as ever, and is now to be enforced by another law, that 18, the law of nature; and the party to whom the promise was made has a right to take by force the animal, the utensil, or the weapon that was promised him. The right is as perfect here as it wa i in Pennsylvania, or even in New York; but this could not be so if the obligation were created by the law of New York, or were dependent on that law for its existence, because the laws of that State can have no operation beyond its terri- tory. Let us reverse this example. Suppose a contract to be made between two persons cast ashore on an uninhab- ited territory, or in a place over which no law of society extends. There are such places, and contracts have been made by individuals casually there, and these contracts have been enforced in courts of law in civilized communities. Whence do such contracts derive their obligation, if not from universal law ? It these considerations Bhow US that the obligation of a lawful contract does not derive its force from the particular law of the place where made, but may exisl where that law does nol exist, and be enforced where that law has do va- lidity, then it follows, we contend, that any statute which diminishes or !■■-- its obligation does impair it, whether it precedes or succeeds the contract in date. The contract having an Indepen- dent origin, whenever the law comes exist together with it, and interferes 1 VJ THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. with it. it lessons, we say, and impairs, iH own original and independent obli- gation. In the case before the court, the contract did not owe its existence to the particular law of Nev Fork; it did not depend on that law, but could be enforced without the territory of that State, as well as within it. Nevertho- less, though Legal, though thus indepen- dently existing, though thus binding the party everywhere, and capable of being enforced everywhere, yet the stat- ute of New York says that it shall be discharged without payment. This, we say. impairs the obligation of that con- tract. It is admitted to have been legal in its inception, legal in its full extent, ami capable of being enforced by other tribunals according to its terms. An act, then, purporting to discharge it without payment, is, as we contend, an act impairing its obligation. Here, however, we meet the opposite argument, stated on different occasions in different terms, but usually summed up in this, that the law itself is a part of the contract, and therefore cannot im- pair it. What does this mean? Let us seek for clear ideas. Tt does not mean that the law gives any particular con- struction to the terms of the contract. or that it makes the promise, or the con- sideration, or the time of performance, other than is expressed in the instru- ment itself. Tt can only mean, that it is to be taken as a part of the contract, or understanding of the parties, that the contract itself shall be enforced by such laws and regulations, respecting remedy and tor the enforcement of contracts, as are iii being in the State where it is made at the time of entering into it. This is meant, or nothing very clearly intelligible i- meant, by saying the law is pari of the contract. There is no authority in adjudged cases for tin- plaintiff in error hut the deci ion \\ bich have, been c-i t < d, and. a- ha- alien, |\ 1 ,, stated, they all re-t on this reason, that the law is part of the contract. inal this we contend, — 1st. That, if the proposition were true, the consequence would no! follow. 2d. That the proposition itself cannot be maintained. 1. If it were true that the law is to be considered as part of the contract, tho consequence contended for would not follow; because, if this statute be part of the contract, so is every other legal or constitutional provision existing at the time which affects the contract, or which is capable of affecting it; and especially this very article of the Con- stitution of the United States is part of the contract. The plaintiff in error ar- gues in a complete circle. He supposes the parties to have had reference to it because it was a binding law, and yet he proves it to be a binding law only upon the ground that such reference was made to it. We come before the court alleg- ing the law to be void, as unconstitu- tional ; they stop the inquiry by opposing to us the law itself. Is this logical? Is it not precisely objectio ejus, cujus dissolutio petitur? If one bring a bill to set aside a judgment, is that judgment itself a good plea in bar to the bill? We propose to inquire if this law is of force to control our contract, or whether, by the Constitution of the United States, such force be not denied to it. The plain- tiff in error stops us by saying that it does control the contract, and so arrives shortly at the end of the debate. Is it not obvious, that, supposing the act of New York to be a part of the contract, the question still remains as undecided as ever. What is that act? Is it a law, or is it a nullity? a thing of force, or a thing of no force? Suppose the parties to have contemplated this act, what did they contemplate? its words only, or its legal effect? its words, or the force which the Constitution of the United States allows to it? If the parties contem- plated any law. they contemplated all the law that bore on their contract, the aggregate of all the statute and constitu- tional provisions. To suppose that they had in view one statute without regard- ing other-, or that t hey contemplated a statute without considering that para- mount constitutional provisions might control or quality that statute, or abro- gate it altogether, is unreasonable and THE CASK OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. 1-:: inadmissible. "This contract," says one of tin' authorities relied on, " is to In- const rued as it' the law were specially rcciti'd iii it." Lei it be bo for the Bake of argument. But it is also fco be con- stnicd as if the prohibitory clause of the Constitution were recited in it, and this brings us back again to the precise point from \\ hich we departed. The Constitution always accompanies the law, and the latter can have qo force which the former does not allow to it. If the reasoning were thrown into the form of special pleading, it would stand thus: the plaintiff declares mi his debt; the defendant pleads his discharge under the law ; the plaintiff alleges the law un- constitutional; but the defendant says, Yuu knew of its existence; to which the answer is obvious and irresistible, I knew its existence on the statute-1 k of Xew York, but I knew, at the same 1 ime, it was null and void under the ( (in- stitution of the United States. The language of another leading de- cision is, " A law in force at the time of making the contract does not violate that contract"; but the very question is, whether there be any such law "in force"; for if the States have no au- thority to pass such laws, then no such law can be in force. The Constitution is a part of the contract as much as the law, and was as much in the con- templation of the parties. So that the proposition, if it be admitted that the law is part of the contract, leaves us just where it found us; that is to say. under the necessity of comparing the law with the Constitution, and of deciding by such comparison whether it be valid or invalid. If the law be unconstitu- tional, it is void, and no party can be supposed to have had reference to a void law. If it be constitutional, no reference to it need be supposed. 2. But the proposition itself cannot be maintained. The law is no part of the contract. What part is it? the prom- ise? the consideration? the condition? Clearly, it is neither of these. It is no term of the contract. It acts opon the contract only when it is broken, or to discharge the party from its obligation after it is broken. The municipal law is the force of society employed to com- pel the performance of contracts. In every judgment in a suit, on conl rad , the damages are given, and the impris- onment of the person or Bale of goods awarded, cot in performance of the con- tract, or as part of the contract, but as an indemnity for the breach of the con- tract. Even interest , w hich case, where it is not expressed in the contract itself, can only be given as damages. It is all but absurd to say that a man's goods are sold on a facias, or that he himself goes to jail, in pursuance of his contract. These are the penalties which the lawinlliets for the breach of his contract. Doubtless, parties, when they enter into contracts, may well consider both what their rights and what their liabilities will be by the law, if such contracts be broken; but this contemplation of consequences which can ensue only when the contract is broken, is no part of the contract it- self. The law has nothing to do with the contract till it be broken; how, then, can it be said to form a part of the con- trad itself? But there are other cogent and more specific reasons against considering the law as part of the contract. (1.) If the law be part of the contract, it cannot be !■■ '!"•:!!■■' I or altered : because, in BUCh case, the repealing or modifying law it- self would impair the obligation of the contract. The insolvent law of New York, for example, authorizes the dis- charge of a debtor on the consent of thirds of his creditors. A subsequent act requires the consent of three fourths; lint if the existing law be part of the contract, this Latter law would be void. In short, nothing which i< part of the contract can be varied but by consent of the parties; therefore the argument runs in absurdum; for it proves that no laws for enforcing the contract, or giving remedies upon it, or any way affecting it. can be changed or modified between its creation and its end. If the law in question binds one party on the ground of assent to it. it binds both, and binds them until they agree to terminate iUj 184 THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. operation. (~2.) If the party be bound by an implied assent to the law, as there- by making the law a part of the contract, how would it be if the parties had ex- pressly dissented, and agreed that the law should make no part of the contract?' Suppose the promise to have been, that the promisor would pay at all events, and not take advantage of the statute; still, would not the statute operate on the whole, — on this particular agreement and all? and does not this show that the law is no part of the contract, but some- thing above it? (3.) If the law of the place be part of the contract, one of its terms and conditions, how could it be in forced, as we all know it might be, in another jurisdiction, which should have no regard to the law of the place? Sup- pose the parties, after the contract, to remove to another State, do they carry the law with them as part of their con- tract? We all know they do not. Or take a common case. Some States have laws abolishing imprisonment for debt ; these laws, according to the argument, are all parts of the contract; how, then, can the party, when sued in another State, be imprisoned contrary to the terms of his contract? (4.) The argu- ment proves too much, inasmuch as it applies as strongly to prior as to subse- quent contracts. It is founded on a supposed assent to the exercise of legis- lative authority, without considering whether that exercise be legal or illegal. But it is equally fair to found the argu- ment on an implied assent to the poten- tial exercise of that authority. The implied reference to the control of legis- lative power is as reasonable and as Btrong when that power is dormant, as while it is in exercise. In one case, the argument is, "The law existed, you knew it, and acquiesced." In the other it is, " The power to pass the law existed, you knew it, and took your chance." There is as clear an assent in one instance as in the other. Indeed, it Lb more reasonable and more sensible to imply a general assenl to all the laws of society, presenl and bo come, from the 1 art of Living in it, than it is to imply a particular assent to a particular existing enactment. The true view of the matter is, that every man is presumed to sub- mit to all power which may be lawfully exercised over him or his right, and no one should be presumed to submit to illegal acts of power, whether actual or contingent. (5.) But a main objection to this argument is, that it would render the whole constitutional provision idle and inoperative; and no explanatory words, if such words had been added in the Constitution, could have prevented this consequence. The law, it is said, is part of the contract ; it cannot, there- fore, impair the contract, because a con- tract cannot impair itself. Now, if this argument be sound, the case would have been the same, whatever words the Con- stitution had used. If, for example, it had declared that no State should pass any law impairing contracts prospec- tively or retrospectively; or any law im- pairing contracts, whether existing or future; or, whatever terms it had used to prohibit precisely such a law as is now before the court, — the prohibition would be totally nugatory if the law is to be taken as part of the contract; and the result would be, that, whatever may be the laws which the States by this clause of the Constitution are prohibited from passing, yet, if they in fact do pass such laws, those laws are valid, and bind par- ties by a supposed assent. But further, this idea, if well founded, would enable the States to defeat the whole constitutional provision by a gen- eral enactment. Suppose a State should declare, by law, that all contracts en- tered into therein should be subject to such laws as the legislature, at any time, or from time to time, might see fit to pass. This law, according to the argument, would enter into the contract, become a part of it, and authorize the interference of the legislative power with it, for any and all purposes, wholly uncontrolled by the Constitution of the United States. So much for the argument that the law is a part of the contract. We think it is shown to be not so; and if it were, the expected consequence would not fol- low. THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. 185 The inquiry, then, recurs, whether the law in question lie such ;i law as the legislature of New York had authority to pass. The question is general. We differ from our learned adversaries on general principles. We differ as I" the main scope and end of this constitutional provision. They think it entirely reme- dial; we regard it as preventive. They think it adopted to secure redress for violated private rights; to us, it seems intended to guard against, great public mischiefs. They argue it as if it wero designed as an indemnity or protection for injured private rights, in individual cases of meinn and tuuni ; we look upon it as a great political provision, favora- ble to the commerce and credit of the whole country. Certainly we do not deny its application to cases of violated private right. Such cases are clearly and unquestionably within its operation. Still, we think its main scope to be gen- eral and political. And this, we think, is proved by reference to the history of the country, and to the great objects which were sought to be attained by the- establishment of the present govern- ment. Commerce, credit, and confi- dence were the principal things which did not exist under the old Confedera- tion, and which it was a main object of the present Constitution to create and establish. A vicious system of legisla- tion, a system of paper money and ten- der laws, had completely paralyzed in- dustry, threatened to beggar every man of property, and ultimately to ruin the country. The relation between debtor and creditor, always delicate, and al- ways dangerous whenever it divides so- ciety, and draws out the respective par- ties into different ranks and classes, was in such a condition in the years 1787, 1788, and 1789, as to threaten the over- throw of all government; and a revolu- tion was menaced, much more critical and alarming than that through which the country had recently passed. The object of the new Constitution was to arrest these evils; to awaken industry by giving security to property; to estab- lish confidence, credit, and commerce, by salutary laws, to be enforced by the power of the whole community. The Revolutionary War was over, the coun- try had peace, but little domestic tran- quillity; it, had Liberty, but few of its enjoyments, and none of its security. The States had struggled together, bat their union was imperfect. They had freedom, but not an established course of justice. The Constitution was there- fore framed, as it professes, "to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to secure the blessings of liberty, and to insure domestic tranquillity." It is not pertinent to this occasion to advert to all the means by which these desirable ends were to be obtained. Some of them, closely connected with the subject now under consideration, are obvious and prominent. The ob- jects were commerce, credit, and mutual confidence in matters of property; and these required, among other things, a uniform standard of value or medium of payments. One of the first powers given to Congress, therefore, is that of coining money and fixing the value of foreign coins; and one of the first re- straints imposed on the States is the total prohibition to coin money. These two provisions are industriously followed up and completed by denying to the States all power to emit bills of credit, or to make any thing but gold and sil- ver a tender in the payment of debts. The whole control, therefore, over the standard of value and medium of pay- ments is vested in the general govern- ment. And here the question in- stantly suggests itself, Why should such pains be taken to confide to Congress alone this exclusive power of fixing on a standard of value, and of prescribing the medium in which debts shall be paid, if it is, after all, to be lefl to everj State to declare that debts may be discharged, and to prescribe how they may be discharged, without any payment at all? Why say that no man shall be obliged to take, in discharge of a debt, paper money issued by the au- thority of a State, and yet say thai the same authority the debt may be discharged without any payment what> ever'/ lsi> THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. We contend, that the Constitution has not lilt its work thus unfinished. We contend, that, taking its provisions to- gether, it is apparent it was intended to provide for two things, intimately con- nected with each other. These are, — 1. A medium for the payment of debts; ami, 2. A uniform manner of discharging debts, when they are to be discharged without payment. The arrangement of the grants and prohibitions contained in the Constitu- tion is tit to be regarded on this occa- sion. The grant to Congress and the prohibition on the States, though they are certainly to be construed together, are not contained in the same clauses. The powers granted to Congress are enumerated one after another in the eighth section; the principal limitations on those powers, in the ninth section; and the prohibitions to the States, in the tenth section. Now, in order to un- derstand whether any particular power be exclusively vested in Congress, it is necessary to read the terms of the grant, together with the terms of the prohibi- tion. Take an example from that power of which we have been speaking, the coinage power. Here the grant to Con- gress is, "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coins." Now. i he correlative prohibition on the States, though found in another section, is undoubtedly to be taken in immediate connection with the foregoing, as much as it it had been found in the same clause. The only just reading of these provis- ions, therefore, is this: "Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate the value tl>< re if, and of foreign coin; but no state shall coin money, emit Mils of credit, or make any thing bill -old ami er coin a tender in payment of debt These provisions respect the medium of payment, or standard of value, and, thus collated, their joint result is clear and decisive. We think the result clear, also, of those provisions which res] t t he discharge i d debt - wil houl paj mi nt. Collated in like mai r, they stand thus: ■■ i shall have power t tablish uniform laws on the subject of bank- ruptcies throughout the United States; but no State shall pass any law impair- ing the obligation of contracts." This collocation cannot be objected to, if they refer to the same subject-matter ; and that they do refer to the same sub- ject-matter we have the authority of this court for saying, because this court solemnly determined, in Sturges v. Crowninshield, that this prohibition on the States did apply to systems of bankruptcy. It must be now taken, therefore, that State bankrupt laws were in the mind of the Convention when the prohibition was adopted, and therefore the grant to Congress on the subject of bankrupt laws, and the prohibition to the States on the same subject, are properly to be taken and read together ; and being thus read together, is not the intention clear to take away from the States the power of passing bankrupt laws, since, while enacted by them, such laws would not be uniform, and to con- fer the power exclusively on Congress, by whom uniform laws could be estab- lished? Suppose the order of arrangement in the Constitution had been otherwise than it is, and that the prohibitions to the States had preceded the grants of power to Congress, the two powers, when col- lated, would then have read thus: " No State shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts; but Congress may establish uniform laws on the sub- ject of bankruptcies." Could any man have doubted, in that case, that the meaning was, that the States should not pass laws discharging del its without pay- ment, but that Congress might establish uniform bankrupt acts? And yet this inversion of the order of the clauses d< es not alter their sense. We contend, that Congress alone possesses the power of establishing bankrupt laws; and al- though we are aware that, in Sturgesv. Crowninshield, the court decided that such an exclusive power could not be inferred from the words of the grant in the seventh section, we yet would re- spectfully request the bench to recon- sider this point. We think it could not THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. 187 have been intended that both the States and general government should exercise this power; and therefore, that a grant to one implies a prohibition on the other. But 1 1 < • t to press a topic which the court has already had under its consideration, we contend, that, even without reading the clauses of the Constitution in the connection which we have suggested, ami which is believed to be the true one, the prohibition in the tenth section, talo-n by itself, docs forbid the enact- ment of siatc bankrupt laws, as applied to future as well as present debts. We argue this from the words of the prohi- bition, from the association they are found in, and from the objects intended. 1. The words are general. The States can pass no law impairing contracts; that is, any contract. In the nature of things a law may impair a future con- tract, and therefore such contract is within the protection of the Constitu- tion. The words being general, it is for the other side to show a limitation; and this, it is submitted, they have wholly failed to do, unless they shall have es- tablished the doctrine that the law itself is part of the contract. It may be added, that the particular expression of the Con- stitution is worth regarding. The thing prohibited is called a law, not an act. A law, in its general acceptation, is a rule prescribed for future conduct, not a legislative interference with existing rights. The framers of the Constitu- tion would hardly have given the appel- lation of lata to violent invasions of individual right, or individual property, by acts of legislative power. Although, doubtless, such acts fall within this pro- hibition, yet they are prohibited also by general principles, and by the constitu- tions of the states, and therefore further provision against such acts was not so necessary as againsl other mischiefs. 2. The most conclusive argument, per- haps, arises from the connection in which the clause stands. The words of the prohibition, so far as it applies to civil rights, or rights of property, are, that "no State shall coin money, emit bills of credit, make any thine- but gold and silver coin a tender in the payment of debts, or pass any law impairing the ob- ligation of contracts." The prohibition Of attainders, and ( t post facto law-, re- fers entirely to criminal proceedings, and therefore should be considered as stand- ing by itself; but the oilier parts of the prohibition are connected by the sub- ject-matter, and ought, therefore, to be construed together. Taking the words thus together, according to their natural connection, how is it possible to give a more limited construction to the term " contracts," in the last branch of the sentence, than to the word "debts," in that immediately preceding? Can a State make any thing but gold and sil- ver a lender in payment,,!' future debts? This nobody pretends. But what ground is there for a distinction? No State shall make any thing but gold and silver a tender in the paymenl of debts, nor | any law impairing the obligation of con- tracts. Now, by what reasoning is it made out that the debts here spoken of are any debts, either existing or future, but that the contracts spoken of are sub- sisting contracts only? Such a distinc- tion seems to us wholly arbitrary. We see no ground for it. Suppose the arti- cle, where it uses the word debts, had used the word contract*. The sense would have been the same then that it now is; but the identity of terms would have made the nature of the distinction now contended for somewhat more obvi- ous. Thus altered, the clause would read, that UO State should make any thing but gold and silver a tender in dis- charge of contracts, nor pass any law im- pairing the obligation of contracts; yet the first of these expressions would have been held to apply to all contracts, and the last to subsisting contracts only. This shows the consequence of what is now contended for in a strong light. Ii is certain that the substitution of the word contracts for debts would not alter the sense; and an argument that could not be sustained, if such substitution ji made, cannot be sustained now. We maintain, therefore, that, if tender may not be made for future debts, neither can bankrupt laws be made for future contracts. All the arguments used b 188 THE CASE OF OGDEN AND SAUNDERS. may be applied with equal force to ten- der laws for future debts. It may be said, foi instance, that, when it speaks of debts, the Constitution means existing debts, and not mere possibilities of fu- ture debt; that the object was to pre- serve vested rights; ami that it a man, after a tender law had passed, had con- t racted a debt, the manner in which that tender law authorized that debt to be discharged became part of the contract, and that the whole debt, or whole obli- gation, was thus qualified by the pre- existing law, and was no more than a contracl to deliver so much paper money, or whatever other article might be made a tender, as the original bargain ex- pressed. Arguments of this sort will not be found wanting in favor of tender laws, if the court yield to similar argu- ments in favor of bankrupt laws. These several prohibitions of the Con- stitution stand in the same paragraph; they have the same purpose, and were introduced for the same object; they are expressed in words of similar import, in grammar, and in sense; they are subject to the same construction, and we think no reason has yet been given for impos- ing an important restriction on one part of them, which does not equally show that the same restriction might be im- posed also on the other part. We have already endeavored to main- tain, that one great political object in- tended by the Constitution would be defeated, if this construction were al- lowed to prevail. As an object of polit- ical regulation, it was not important to | -nt the States from passing bank- rupt law.- applicable to present debts, while the power was left to them in re- card to luime del,ts; nor was it at all important, in a political point of view, to prohibit tender laws as to future debts, while it was yet left to the States to pass laws for the discharge of Buch debts, w bich, after all, are litl le differ- ent iii principle from tender laws. Look at the law before the court in this view. It provides, that, if the debtor will sur- render, offer, or tender to trustees, for the benefit of his creditors, all his estate and effects, he shall be discharged from all his debts. If it had authorized a ten- der of any thing but money to any one creditor, though it were of a value equal to the debt, and thereupon provided for a discharge, it would have been clearly in- valid. Yet it is maintained to be good, merely because it is made for all cred- itors, and seeks a discharge from all debts; although the thing tendered may not be equivalent to a shilling in the pound of those debts. This shows, again, very clearly, how the Constitu- tion has failed of its purpose, if, having in terms prohibited all tender laws, and taken so much pains to establish a uni- form medium of payment, it has yet left the States the power of discharging debts, as they may see fit, without any payment at all. To recapitulate what has been said, we maintain, first, that the Constitu- tion, by its grants to Congress and its prohibitions on the States, has sought to establish one uniform standard of value, or medium of payment. Second, that, by like means, it has endeavored to provide for one uniform mode of dis- charging debts, when they are to be dis- charged without payment. Third, that these objects are connected, and that the first loses much of its importance, if the last, also, be not accomplished. Fourth, that, reading the grant to Congress and the prohibition on the States together, the inference is strong that the Consti- tution intended to confer an exclusive power to pass bankrupt laws on Con- gress. Fifth, that the prohibition in the tenth section reaches to all contracts, existing or future, in the same way that the other prohibition in the same sec- tion extends to all debts existing or future. sixthly, that, upon any other construction, one great political object of the Constitution will fail of its accom- plishment. THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOS Kill WHITE. AN ARGUMENT ON THE TRIAL OE JOHN FRANCIS KNAIT, FOR THE MUR- DER OF JOSEPH WHITE, OF SALEM, IN ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS, ON THE NIGHT OF THE 6th OF APRIL, 1830. [Thb following argument was addri Bsed to the jury at a trial for a remarkable mur- der. A more extraordinary case never oc- curred iti this country, nor is it equalled in Btrange interest by any trial in the French Causes Ce'lebres or the English StaU Trials. Deep sensation and intense curiosity were excited through the whole country, at the time of the occurrence of the event, not only by tin- atrocity of tin.' crime, but by the position of the victim, and the romantic incidents in the detection and fate of the assassin and his accomplices. The following outline of the facts will assist the reader to understand the bearings of the argument. Joseph White, Esq. was found murdered in his bed, in his mansion-house, on the morning of the 7th of April, 1830. lie was a wealthy merchant of Salem, eighty-two years of age, and had for many years given up active business. His servant-man rose that morning at six o'clock, and on going down into the kitchen, and opening the shutters of the window, saw that the back window of the east parlor was open, and that a plank was raised to the window from the back yard : he then went into the par- lor, but saw no trace of any person having been there. He went to the apartment of the maid-servant, and told her, ami then into Mr. White's chandler by its back dour, and saw that the door of his chamber, lead- ing into the front entry, was open. < hi ap- proaching the bed, he found the Ud clothes turned down, and Mr. White dead, lib coun- tenance pallid, and his night-clothes and bed drenched in blood. He hastened to the neighboring houses to make known the event. He and the maid-servant were the only persons wdio slept in the house that night, except Mr. White himself, whose niece. Mrs. Beckford, his house-keeper, was then absent on a visit to her daughter, at Wen ham. The physicians and the Coroner's jury, who were called to examine the body, found on it thirteen deep stabs, made as if by a sharp dirk or poniard, and the appearance of a heavy blow on the left temple, which had fractured the skull, but not broken the skin. The body was cold, and appeared to have been lifeless many hours. On examining the apartments of the house, it ilid not appear that any valuable articles had been taken, or the house ran- sacked for them; there was a rouleau of doubloons in an iron chest in bis chamber, and costly plate in other apartments, none of which was missing. The perpetration of such an atrocious crime, in the most populous and central part of the town and in the most compactly built street, and under circumstances indi- cating the Utm08l coolness, deliberation, and audacity, deeply agitated and aroused the whole community; ingenuity was baffled in attempting even to conjecture a motiui for the deed; and all the citizens Were led I.) fear that the same fate might await them in the defenceless and helpless hbure of slumber. For several days, pi rsons passing through the streets might hear the continual sound of the hammer, while carpenters and smiths were fixing holts to doors and fasten- ings to window-. Many, for defence, fur- nished themselves with cutlasses, tire-arms, and watch-dogS. Large rewards for the detection of the author or authors of the murder were offered by the heirs of the de- ceased, by the selectmen of the town, and by the Governor of the State. The citi- zens held a public meeting, and appointed a Committee of Vigilance, of twenty-seven members, to make all possible exertion.- to ferret out the offenders. While the public mind was thus excited and anxious, it was announced that a bold attempt at highway robbery was made in Wenham, by three footpads, on Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. and John Francis Knapp, on the evening of the L'Tth of April, while they were returning in a chaise from Salem to their residence in Wenham. They ap- 190 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. peared before the investigating committee, and testified that, after nine o'clock, near the WYnliam Pond, they discovered three men approaching. One came near, seized tin bridle, and stopped the horse, while the other two ea i ne, une on each side, and seized 8 trunk in the bottom of the chaise. Frank Knapp drew a sword from his cane and made a thrust at one, and Joseph with the hutend of his whip gave the other a heavy blow across the face. This bold resistance made them fall hack. Joseph sprung from the chaise to assail the robbers. ( me of them then gave a shrill whistle, when they tied, and. Leaping over the wall, were soon lost in the darkness. One had a weapon like an ivory dirk-handle, was clad in a sailor's short jacket, cap, and had whiskers; an- other wore a long coat, with bright buttons ; all three were good-sized men. Frank, too, sprung from the chaise, and pursued with vigor, but all in vain. The account of this unusual and hold attempt at robbery, thus given by the Knapps, was immediately published in the Salem newspapers, with the editorial re- mark, that " these gentlemen are well known in this town, and their respectability and veracity are not questioned by any of our citizens." Noi the -lightest clew to the murder could In- found for several weeks, and the mystery seemed to be impenetrable. At length a junior reached the ear of the committee that a prisoner in the jail at New Bedford, seventy miles from Salem, confined there on a charge of shoplifting, had intimated that lie could make important disclosures. A confidential messenger was immediately sent, to ascertain what he knew on the sub- ject. The prisoner's name was Hatch; he had been committed before the murder. 11. stated that, some months before the murder, while lie was at large, he had asso- ciated in Salem witli Richard Crownin- Bhield, .Jr.. of Danvers, and had often heard Crowninshield express Ids intention to de- stroy the life of Mr. White. Crowninshield was a young man, of bad reputation ; though he had never heen convicted of any offence, he was Strongly suspected of several hei- ii'. u- robberies, lie was of dark and re- served deportment, temperate and wicked, daring and wary, subtle and obdurate, of great adroitness, boldness, and self-com I. lie had for >e\ eral years frequented the haunt- of \ ice in Salem ; and though he was often Bpoken of a- a dangerous man, hie person was known to few, tor he never walked the Btreets by daylight. Among )ii- fen associates he was a leader and a di Bjpol The disclosures of Hatch received credit. Win n the Supreme Courl met at Ipswich, tin Attorney General, Morton, moved for a writ of habeas corpus ad test if., &nd Hatch was carried in chains from N< w Bedford before tin- grand jury, and on his testimony an in dictmenl was found against Crowninshield. Other witnesses testified that, on the night of the murder, his brother, George Crown- inshield, Colonel Benjamin Selman, of Mar blehead, and Daniel Chase, of Lynn, were together iii Salem, at a gambling-house usually frequented by Richardj these were indicted as accomplices in the crime. They W( iv all arrested on the 2d of May, ar- raigned on the indictment, and committed to prison to await the sitting of a court that should have jurisdiction of the offence. The Committee of Vigilance, however, continued to hold frequent meetings in older to discover further proof, for it was doubted by many whether the evidence al- ready obtained would be sufficient to con- vict the accused. A fortnight afterwards, on the 15th of May, Captain Joseph .1. Knapp, a ship- master and merchant, a man of good character, received by mail the following letter: — Charles Grant, Jr., to Joseph J. Knapp. " Belfast, May 12, 1830. "Dear Sir, — I have taken the pen at this time to address an utter stranger, and, strange as it may seem to you, it is for the purpose of requesting the loan of three hundred and titty dollars, lor which I can give you no security but my word, and in this case consider this to be sufficient. My rail for money at this time is pressing, or 1 would not trouble you; but with that sum, 1 have the prospect of turning it to so much advantage, as to be able to refund it with interest in the course of six months. At all events, 1 think it will be for your interest to comply with my request, and that immediately, — that is, not to put off any longer than you receive this. Then set down and enclose me the money with as much despatch as possible, for your own interest. This, Sir. is my advice; and if you do not comply with it. the short period between now and November will convince you that you have denied a request, the granting of which will never injure you, the refusal of which will ruin you. Are you surprised at this asser- tion— rest assured that I make it, reserving to myself the reasons and a series of facts, which are founded mi such a bottom as will bid defiance to properly or quality. It is useless for me to enier into a discussion of facts which must in- evitably harrow upyoursoul. No, I will merely tell you thai I am acquainted with your brother franklin, ami also the business that he was transacting fur you on the 2d of April last; and that I think that you was very extravagant in giving one thousand dollars to the person that would execute the business for you. Bui you know besl about thai ; you Bee that such things will leak out. 'rn conclude, sir, I will inform you that there is a gentleman of my acquaints ance in Salem, that will observe that you do not leave town before the first of June, giving you sufficient time between now and then to comply with ni\ requesl ; and if 1 do not receive a line from you, together with the above sum, before the 22d of this month, I shall wait upon you with an assistant. I have said enough to con- vince you oi my knowledge, and merely inform THE MUKDFlt OF CA1TA1N JOSEPH WHITE, 101 you that you ran, when you answer, he as brief as possible. •• l lirect yours to "Chablbs Guam, Jr., of Prospect, Maim." This letter was an unintelligible enigma to Captain Knapp; he knew do man of the name of Charles Grant, Jr., and had do ac- quaintance al Belfast, a town in Maine, two hundred miles distant from Salem. After poring over it in vain, he handed it to his son, Nathaniel Phippen Knapp, a young lawyer; to him also the letter was an inex- plicable riddle. The receiving of such a threatening letter, at a time when bo many felt insecure, and were apprehensive of dan- ger, demanded their attention. Captain Knapp ami his son Phippen, therefore, eon eluded to ride to Wenhain, seven mill's dis- tant, and show the letter to Captain Knapp's other two sons, Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. and John Francis Knap]), who were then resid- ing at Wenham with Mrs. Beckford, the niece and late house-keeper of Mr. White, and the mother of the wife of J. J. Knapp, Jr. The latter perused the letter, told his father it " contained a devilish lot of trash," and requested him to hand it to the Com- mittee of Vigilance. Captain Knapp, on his return to Salem that evening, accord- ingly delivered the letter to the chairman of the Committee. The next day J. J. Knapp, Jr. went to Salem, and requested one of his friends to drop into thi' Salem post-office the two fol- lowing pseudonymous letters. 11 May 13, 1830. "Gentlemen of the Committee ok Vig- ilance, — Bearing chat you have taken up four young men on suspicion of being concerned in the murder of Mr. White, I think it time to in- form you that Steven White came to me one night and told me, if I would remove the old gentleman, he would give me live thousand dol- lars ; he said he was afraid he would alter In- will if lie lived any longer. I told him 1 would do it, but I was afeared to go into the house, so he said lie would go with me, that lie would in- to get into the house in the evening and open the window, would thru go home and go to bed and meet me again about eleven. I found him, and we both went into his chamber. I struck him on the head with a heavy piece of lead, and then stabbed him with a dirk; he made the finishing strokes with another. He promised to send me the m y next evening, and has not sent it yet, which is the reason that I mention this. "Yours, &c., "Grant.", This letter was directed on the outside to the "Hon. Gideon Barstow, Salem," and put into the post-office on Sunday evening, May 16, 1830. "Lynn, May 12, 1830. "Mr. White will send the So.onn. ,,r a part of it, before to-morrow night, or suffer the pain- ful consequences. "N. Claxton, fni." This letter was addressed to the " Hon. Stephen While, Salem, Mass," and WHS also put into tin- post office in Salem on Sundaj evening. When Knapp delivered these letters to his friend, he said hi- father had rec< I an anonymous letter, and "What I want you for is to put these in tin- post office in order to nip this sillj affair in the bud." The lion. Stephen White, mentioned in these letters, was a nephew of Joseph White, and the legatee of the principal part of his Large property. Winn the Committee of Vigilance read and considered the letter, purporting to be signed by < !harles < Irant, Jr.. which had been delivered to them by Captain Knapp, they weie impressed with the belief that it con- tained a clew which might lead to important disclosures. As they had spared no pains or expense in their investigations, they im- mediately despatched a discreet messenger to Prospect, in Maine ; he explained his busi- ness confidentially to the postmaster there, deposited a letter addressed to Charles (irant, Jr., and awaited the call of (irant to receive it. He soon called for it, when an officer, stationed in the house, stepped forward and arrested (Irant. ( hi examin- ing hiin.it appeared that his true name was Palmer, a young man of genteel appear- ance, resident in the adjoining town of I J< 1- fast. lie had been a convict in Maine, and had served a term in the State's prison in that State. Conscious that the circum- stances justified the belief that he had had a hand in the murder, he readily made known, while he protested his own inno- cence, that he could unfold the whole mys- tery. He then disclosed that he had been an associate of 11. Crowninshield, Jr. and George Crowninshield; had spent part of the winter at Danvers and Salem, under the name of Carr; part of the time he had been their inmate, concealed in their father's house in Danvers; that on the 2d of April he saw from the windows of the house Frank Knapp and a young man named Allen ride up to the house; that George walked away with Frank, and Richard with Allen; that on their return, George told Richard that Frank wished them to under- take to kill Mr. White, and that J.J. Knapp, Jr. would pay one thousand dollars for the job. They proposed various modes of exe- cuting it, and asked Palmer to he concerned, which he declined. George said the house- keeper would he awaj at the time: that the object of Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. was to de- stroy the will, because it gave most of the property to Stephen White; that Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. was first to destroy the will ; that he could get from the house-keeper the keys of the iron chest in which it was kept ; that Frank called again the same day, in a chaise, and rode away with Richard; and that on the night of the murder Palmer stayed at the Half-way House, in Lynn. 102 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. The messenger, on obtaining this dis- closure from Palmer, without delay com- municated it by mail to the < !ommittee, and (iti the 26th of May, a warrant was issued agaiost Joseph .1. Knapp, dr. and John Francis Knapp, and they were taken into custody at Wenham, where they wire re- Biding in the family hi- lather and brother, expressing in general terms the viciousness of his life, and his hopelessness of <- :ape from punishment. When his iates in guill heard his fate, they said ii was nut unexpected by them, for they Mad often heard him say he would never live ti> Mihmit to an ignominious punish- ment. A special term of the Supreme < lourl was held at Salem on the 20th of July, for the trial of the prisoners charged with the in in-. Kt; it continued in session till the '-'"th of August, with a few days' intermission. An indictment for the murder was found against John Francis Knapp, as principal, and Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. and George Crowninshield, as accessories. Selman and Chase were discharged by the Attorney- General. The principal, John Francis Knapp, was firs! put on trial. As the law then stood, an accessory in a murder could not be tried until a principal had been convicted. He was defended by Messrs. Franklin Dexter and William H. Gardiner, advocates of high reputation for ability and eloquence; the trial was long and arduous, and the wit- nesses numerous. , His brother Joseph, who had in id>' it full i niii i hi mi the govern- ment's promise of impunity if he would in good faith testify the truth, was brought into COUrt, called to the stand as a witni S3, but declined to testify. To convict the prisoner, it was necessary for the govern- ment to prove that he was present actually instructively, as an aider or abettor in the murder. The evidence was gtrong that there was a conspiracy to commit the mur- der, that the prisoner was one of the con- spirators, that at the time of the murder he was in Brown Streel at the rear of Mr White's garden, and the jury were satisfied that he was in that place to aid and abet in the murder, ready to afford assistance, if neci ssary. He was convicted. Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. was afterwards tried as an accessory before the fact, and con- victed. I leorge Crowninshield proved an alibi, and was discharged. The execution of J »hn Francis Knapp ami Joseph J. Knapp, Jr. closed the tragedy. It Joseph, alter turning State's evidence, 13 had not changed his mind, neither he nor his In-other, nor any of the conspirators, could h.-n e i.e. ii com icted ; if lie had testi- fied, and disclosed the « hole truth, it v. have appeared thai John Francis Knapp w as in Brown street, not to rend ance to the assassin ; but that < Irownin- shield, when he t,. commit the murder, requested Frank to go home and go to bed; thai Frank did ■_"> home, retire to bed, Boon after arose, iecn tly l< ft his father'-, house, ami hastened to Brown Street, tO await the Coming out of th ., in order to learn whether the deed was accomplished, and all the particu If Frank had nol been convicted as princi- pal, none of the acc< could by law have been convicted .1 ... ph would not have been even tried, for the government stipulated, that, if he would be a witness for the State, he should go clear. The whole hi8tory of this occurrence is of romantic interest. The murder itself, the corpus delicti, was strange : planned with deliberation and sagacity, and executed with firmness and rigor. While conjecture was baffled in ascertaining either the motive or the perpetrator, it was certain thai the assassin had acted upon design, and not at random. He mu-t have had knowledge of the house, for the window had been unfas- tened from within. He had entered stealth- ily, threaded his way in silence through the apartments, corridors, and staircases, and coolly given the mortal blow. To make assurance doubly sure, he inflicted many fatal stah-. ■• the h a-t a d.-ath to nature,"" and Btayed not his hand till he had deliber- ately felt the pulse of his victim, to make certain that life was extinct. It was Btrange thai Crowninshield, the real assassin, should have been indicted and arrested on the testimony of Hatch, who was himself in prison, in a distant part of the State, at the time of the murder, and had no actual knowledge mi the Bubji It was very strange that J. J. Knapp, Jr. should have been the instrument of bring- ing to light the mystery of the whole mur- derous conspiracy ; for when he received from the hand of his father the threatening letter of Palmer, consciousness of gui confounded his faculties, that, instead of destroying it. ho stupidly handed it back, and requested his father to deliver it to tho ( lommitti ■ • t \ igilance It wa- Btrange that the murder Bhould have been Committed on a mi-take in law. Joseph, some time previous to the murder, had made inquiry how Mr Whit. would lie distributed in case be died with- out a will, and had been erroneously that Mrs. Beckford, his mother-in-law, the sole issue and representative of a • .-i-tcr of Mr. While, would inherit half of the estate, and that the four children representatives of a d r of Mr. White, of whom tho Hon. Stephen 194 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. White was one, would inherit the other half. Joseph had privately read the will, and knew that Mr. White had bequeathed to Mrs. Beckford much less than half. It was strange that the murder should have been committed on a mistake in fact also. Joseph furtively abstracted a will, and expected Mr. White would die intes- tate; hut. after the decease, tin will, the last will, was found by his heirs in its proper place; and it could never have heen known, or conjectured, without the aid of Joseph's confession, that he had made either of those blunders. Finally, it was a strange fact that Knapp should. row knitted by revenge, the face black with settled hate, and the bloodshot eye emitting livid tires of malice. Let him draw, rather, a deco- rous, smooth-fated, bloodless demon; a picture in repose, rather than in action; not so much an example of human na- ture in its depravity, and in its parox- ysms of crime, as an infernal being, a fiend, in the ordinary display and de- velopment of his character. The deed was executed witli a decree of self-possession and steadiness equal to the wickedness with which it was planned. The circumstances now clearly in evidence spread out the whole scene before us. Deep sleep had fallen on the destined victim, and on all beneath his roof. A healthful old man. to whom sleep was sweet, the tirst sound slum- bers of the night held him in their soft but strong embrace. The assassin en- ters, through the window already pre- pared, into an unoccupied apartment. With noiseless foot he paces the lonely hall, half lighted by the moon ; he winds up the ascent of the stairs, and reaches the door of the chamber. Of this, he moves the lock, by soft and continued pressure, till it turns on its hinges with- out noise; and he enters, and beholds his victim before him. The room is uncommonly open to the admission of light. The face of the innocent sleeper is turned from the murderer, and the beams of the moon, resting on the gray locks of his aged temple, Bhow him where to strike. The fatal bio given ! and the vict Im passes, w ithout a struggle or a motion, from the repose of sleep to the repose of death ! It \n the assassin's purpose to make sure Work; and he plies the da.L, r evr, though it is obvious thai life has 1 a destroyed by the blow of the bludgeon. He even raises the aged arm, tliat lie may not fail in his aim at the heart . and replaces it again over the WOUnds of the poniard ! To finish the picture, he explores the \\ri-t for the pulse! He feels for it, and ascertains that it beats no longer! It is accomplished. The deed is done. He retreats, retraces his steps to the win- dow, passes out through it as he came in, and escapes. He has done the mur- der. No eye has seen him. no ear has heard him. The secret is his own. and it is safe! Ah! Gentlemen, that was a dreadful mistake. Such a secret can be safe no- where. The whole creation of (iod has neither nook nor corner where the guilty can bestow it, and say it is safe. Not to speak of that eye which pierces through all disguises, and beholds every thing as in the splendor of noon, such secrets of guilt are never safe from de- bection, even by men. True it is, gen- erally speaking, that " murder will out." True it is. that Providence hath so or- dained, and doth so gVvern things, that those who break the greal law of Heaven by shedding man's blood seldom suc- ceed in avoiding discovery. Especially, in a case exciting so much attention as this, discovery must come, and will come, sooner or later. A thousand eyes turn at once to explore every man. every thin--, every circumstance, connected with the time and place; a thousand ears eat el i every whisper; a thousand ex- cited minds intensely dwell on the BCene, shedding all their light, and ready to kindle the slightest circumstance into a blaze of discovery. Meantime the guilty soul cannot keep its own secret. It is false to itself; or rather it feels an irre- sistible impulse of conscience to be true to itself. It labors under its guilty pos- session, and knows uot what to do with 196 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. it. The human heart was not made for the residence <>i' such an inhabitant. It finds itself preyed on by a torment, which it dares not acknowledge to God or man. A vulture is devouring it. and it can ask no sympathy or assistance, either from heaven or earth. The secret which the murderer possesses soon co - to possess him; and, like the evil spirits of which we read, it overcomes him, and leads him whithersoever it will. He feel ii beating at Ins heart, rising to his throat, and demanding disclosure. He thinks the whole world sees it in his . reads it in his eves, and almost hears its workings in the very silence of his thoughts. It has become his mas- ter. It betrays his discretion, it breaks down his courage, it conquers his pru- dence. When suspicions from without be m to embarrass him, and the net of circumstance to entangle him, the fatal secret struggles with still greater vio- lence to burst forth. It must be con- fessed, it will be confessed; there is no refuge from confession but suicide, and suicide is confession"! Much has been said, on this occasion, of the excitement which has existed, and still exists, and of the extraordinary i sures taken to discover and punish the guilty. No doubt there has been, and is, lunch excitement, and strange indeed it would be had it been other- wise, should not nil the peaceable and well-disposed naturally fee] concerned, and naturally exert themselves to bring to punishment the authors of this secret -iiiation? Was it^ a thing to be slept upon or forgotten? Did you, Gen- tlem mi. sleep quite as quiel ly in your bed ter this murder as before? Was it 11. a .1 case for rewards, for meel ings, ommittees, for the united efforts of allthegood,tofindoutabandof murder- pirators, of midnight ruffians, and to bring them to the bar of justice and law '; If this be excitement, is it an unnal ural or an improper excitement ? It seems to me, Genl Lemen, thai there ppearances of another feeling, of a different nal ore and character; not extensive, I would hope, but still there is too much evidence of its exist- ence. Such is human nature, that some persons lose their abhorrence of crime in their admiration of its magnificent exhibitions. Ordinary vice is repro- bated by them, but extraordinary guilt, exquisite wickedness, the high flights and poetry of crime, seize on the imagi- nation, and lead them to forget the depths of the guilt, in admiration of the excellence of the performance, or the unequalled atrocity of the purpose. There are those in our day who have made great use of this infirmity of our nature, and by means of it done infinite injury to the cause of good morals. They have affected not only the taste, but I fear also the principles, of the young, the heedless, and the imagina- tive, by the exhibition of interesting and beautiful monsters. They render depravity attractive, sometimes by the polish of its manners, and sometimes by its very extravagance ; and study to show off crime under all the advantages of cleverness and dexterity. Gentle- men, this is an extraordinary murder, but it is still a murder. We are not to lose ourselves in wonder at its origin, or in gazing on its cool and skilful execu- tion. We are to detect and to punish it; and while we proceed with caution against the prisoner, and are to be sure that we do not visit on his head the offences of others, we are yet to con- sider that we are dealing with a case of most atrocious crime, which has not the slightest circumstance about it to soften its enormity. It is murder; deliberate, concerted, malicious murder. Although the interest of this case may have diminished by the repeated inves- tigation of the facts; still, the addi- tional labor which it imposes upon all concerned is not to be regretted, if it should result: in removing all doubts of the guilt of the prisoner. The learned counsel for the prisoner has said truly, that it is your individ- ual duty to judge the prisoner; that it is your individual duty to determine his guilt or innocence; and that you are to weigh the testimony with can- dor and fairness. But much at the same time has been said, which, al- Till-: MIMIDKK OK CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. 197 though it would seem to have no dis- tinct bearing on the trial, cannot be passed over without some notice. A tunc of complaint bo peculiar 1ms been indulged, as would almosl Lead us to doubl whether the prisoner at the bar, or the managers of this prosecu- tion, are now on trial. Great pains have been taken to complain of the manner of the prosecution. We hear getting up a case; of setting in mo- tion trains of machinery; of foul testi- mony; of combinations to overwhelm the prisoner; of private prosecutors; that the prisoner is hunted, persecuted, driven to hi- trial ; thai everybody is againsi him; and various other com- plaints, as if those who would bring to punishment the authors of this murder were almost as bad as they who com- mitted it. In the course of my whole life, I have never heard before so much said about the particular counsel who happen to be employed; as if it were extraordinary that other counsel than the usual offi- cers of the government should assist in the management of a case on the pari of the government. In one of the last criminal trials in this county, that of Jackman for the " Goodridge robbery " (so called), I remember thai the learned lead of the Suffolk Bar, .Mr. Prescott, came down in aid of the officers of the government. This was regarded as neither strange nor improper. The counsel for the prisoner, in that case. contented themselves with answering his arguments, as far as they were able, instead of carping at his presence. Complaint is made thai rewards were offered, in this case, and temptations held out to obtain testimony. Are not rewards always offered, when great and secret offences are committed? Rewards were offered in the case to which I have alluded; and every other means taken to discover the offenders, that ingenuity or the most persevering vigilance could suggest. The learned counsel have suf- fered their zeal to lead them into a st rain of complaint at the manner in which the perpetrators of this crime were de- tected, almost indicating that they re- gard ii a a positive injur; to them to have found out their guilt. Since no man witnessed it. since thej do nol now confess it, attempts to discover it are half esteei I as officious intermeddling and impertinent inquiry. Ii is said, that here even a ( lommittee oi \ igilance was appointed. This i subjectof reiterated remark. This com- mittee are pointed at, as though they had been officiously intermeddling with the administrate f justice. They are said to have 1 u •• laboring for months " against the prisoner. < Gentle- men, w hat musl we do in such a ■ Are people to be dumb and still, through fear of overdoing? Is it come to this, that an effort cannol be made, a hand cannot be Lifted, to discover the guilty, without its being said there is a combi- nation to overwhelm innocence? 1 1 is the community Losl all moral set Certainly, a community thai would not be roused to action upon an occasion such as this was, a community which should nol deny sleep to their eyes, and Blumber to their eyelids, till they had exhausted all the means of discovery and detection, must, indeed be lost to all moral sense, and would scarcely de- serve protection from the laws. The learned counsel have endeavored to per- suade you, that there exists a prejudice againsi the persons accused of this mur- der. They would have you under.-.: | that it is not confined to this vicinity alone; but that even the legislature have caughl this spirit. That through the procurement of the gentleman here styled private prosecutor, who is a mem- ber of the Senate, a special session of this conn was appointed for the trial of these offenders. That the ordinary move i its of the wheels of justice were low for the purposes de\ Lsed. Bui does not e\er\ body See Mild know . that it was matter of absolute necessity to have a special session of the court? When or how could the prisoners have been tried without a special b ission? In the ordinary arrangement of the courts, but one week in a s al- lotted for the whole court to sit in this county. In the trial of all capital of- 198 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. fences a majority of tin' court, at Least, is required to be present. In the trial of the present case alone, three weeks have already been taken up. Without Buch special session, then, three years would not have been sufficient for the purpose, li is answer sufficient to all complaints on this subject to say, that the law was drawn by the late Chief Justice himself, 1 to enable the court to accomplish its duties, and to afford the persons accused an opportunity for trial without delay. Again, it is said that it was not thought of making Francis Knapp, the prisoner at the bar, a principal till after the death of Richard Crowninshield, Jr.; thai the present indictment is an after- thought; that "testimony was got up" for the occasion. It is not so. There is no authority for this suggestion. The case of the Knapps had not then been before the grand jury. The officers of the government did not know what the testimony would be against them. They could not, therefore, have determined what course they should pursue. They intended to arraign all as principals who should appear to have been principals, and all as accessories who should appear to have been accessories. All this could be known only when the evidence should be produced. Hut the learned counsel for the de- fendant take a somewhat loftier flight still. They are more concerned, they assure us, for the law itself, than even for their client. Your decision in this case, thej say, will stand as a precedent. Gentle a, we hope it will. We hope it will be a precedenl both of candor and intelligence, of fairness and of firmness; a precedent of good sense and honest purpose pursuing their investigation dis- tly, rejecting loose generalities, ex- pi' ring all the circumstances, weighing each, in Bearch of truth, and embracing and declaring t he t ruth \\ hen found. It, i- -aid. thai •• laws arc made, nol for tic punishment of the guilty, bul for the pn iteel ion of the innocent ." This is no! quite accurate, perhaps, but if bo, we hope they will be so administered as to 1 Chief J ii tii e Pai ker. give that protection. But who are the innocent whom the law would protect? Gentlemen, Joseph White was innocent. They are innocent who, having lived in the fear of God through the day, wish to sleep in his peace through the night, in their own beds. The law is established that those who live quietly may sleep quietly; that they who do no harm may feel none. The gentleman can think of none that are innocent except the pris- oner at the bar, not yet convicted. Is a proved conspirator to murder inno- cent? Are the Crowninshields and the Knapps innocent? What is innocence? How deep stained with blood, how reck- less in crime, how deep in depravity may it be, and yet retain innocence? The law is made, if we would speak with en- tire accuracy, to protect the innocent by punishing the guilty. But there are those innocent out of a court, as well as in; innocent citizens not suspected of crime, as well as innocent prisoners at the bar. ^ The criminal law is not founded in a principle of vengeance. It does not pun- ish that it may inflict suffering. The humanity of the law feels and regrets every pain it causes, every hour of re- straint it imposes, and more deeply still every life it forfeits. But it uses evil as the means of preventing greater evil. It seeks to deter from crime by the ex- ample of punishment. This is its true, and only true main object. It restrains the liberty of the few offenders, that the many who do not offend may enjoy their liberty. It takes the life of the murderer, that other murders may not be committed. The law might open the jails, and at once set free all persons ac- cused of offences, and it ought to d^ so if it. could be made certain that no other offences would hereafter be committed; because il punishes, not to satisfy any desire to intlict pain, but simply to pre- vent the repetition of crimes. When the guilty, therefore, are not punished, the law has bo far failed of its purpose; the safety of the innocent is so Ear en- dangered. Every unpunished murder takes away something from the security of every man's life. Whenever a jury, through whimsical and ill-founded scru- THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH Will I I, 199 pies, suffer the guilty to escape, they make themselves answerable for the augmented dangeT of the innocent. We wish nothing to be strained againsl this defendant. Why, then, all this alarm? Why all this complaint against the manner in which the crime is dis- covered? The prisoner's counsel catch at supposed flaws of evidence, or had character of witnesses, without meeting the case. Do they mean to deny the conspiracy? Do they mean to deny that, the two Crowninshields and the two Knapps were conspirators? Why do they rail against Palmer, while they do not disprove, and hardly dispute, the truth of any one Eacl sworn to by him? In- stead of this, it is made matter of senti- mentality that Palmer has 1 n prevailed upon to betray his bosom companions and to violate the sanctity of friendship. Again 1 ask. Why do they not meet the case/ If the fact is out, why not meet it? Do they mean to deny that Captain White is dead? < >ne would have almost supposed even that, from some remarks that have been made. Do they mean to deny the conspiracy? Or, admitting a conspiracy, do they mean to deny only that Frank Knapp. the prisoner at the bar, was abetting in the murder, being present, and so deny that he was a prin- cipal? If a conspiracy is proved, it bears closely upon every subsequent subject of inquiry. Why do they not come to the fact? Here the defence is wholly in- distinct. The. counsel neither take the ground, nor abandon it. They neither fly, nor light. They hover. But they must come to a closer mode of con- test. They must meet the facts, and either deny or admit them. Had the prisoner at the bar, then, a knowledge of this conspiracy or not? This is the question. Instead of laying out their strength in complaining of the manner in which the deed is discovered, of the extraordinary pains taken to bring the prisoner's guilt to light, would it not be better to show there was qo guilt? Would it not be better to show his inno- cence? They say, and they complain, that the community feel a great desire that he should be punished for his crimes. Would it not he better to convince you. that he has committed no crime 1 Gentlemen, lei us now come to the case. Your first inquiry, on the e^ i- dence, will be, Was Captain White murdered in pursuance of a conspir- acj . and was i he defendant one of this conspiracy? If so, the second inquiry is, Was lie so connected with the mur- der itself as thai he is liable to be con- victed as a principal t The defendant is indicted as a principal. If not guilty as such . you cannol ci *n\ Let him. The in- dictment contains three distinct cla of counts. In the first , he is charged as having done the deed with his own hand; in the second, as an aider and abettor to Richard Crowninshield, Jr., who did the deed; in the third, as an aider and abettor to some person un- known. If you believe him guilty on either of these counts, or in either of these ways, you must convict him. It may be proper to say, as a prelimi- nary remark, that there are two extraor- dinary circumstances attending this trial. ( ) ne is, that Richard Crowninshield, Jr., the supposed immediate perpetrator of the murder, since his arrest, has com- mitted suicide. He has gone to answer, before a tribunal of perfect infallibility. The other is, that Joseph Knapp, the supposed originator and planner of the murder, having once made a full dis- closure of the facts, under a promise of indemnity, is, nevertheless, not now a witness. Notwithstanding his disclos- ure and his promise of indemnity, he now refuses to testify. He chooses to return to his original state, and now stands answerable himself, when the ti shall come for his trial. These cir- cumstances it is fit you should remem- ber, in your investigati >f the case. Your decision may affect more than the Life of this defendant. If he be not convict,', 1 as principal, no one can be. Nor can any one be convicted of a par- ticipation in the crime as accessory. The Knapps and (Jeorge Crow ninshield will be again on the coinmunitv. This shows the importance of the duty you have to perform, and serve- to remind you of the care and wisdom necessary to 200 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. be exercised in its performance. But certainly these considerations do nut render the prisoner's guill any clearer, nor enhance the weight of t In • evidence against him. No one desires you to re- gard consequences in thai Lighl . X le w ishes any thing to be strained, or too Ear pressed againsl the prisoner. Still, it is tit you should see the full importance of the duty which devolves upon you. And now, Gentlemen, in examining this evidence, let us begin at the begin- ning, and see first what we know in- dependent of the diluted testimony. This is a case of circumstantial evidence. And these circumstances, we think, are full and satisfactory. The case mainly depends upon them, and it is common that offences of this kind must be proved in this way. Midnight assassins take no witnesses. The evidence of the facts relied on has been somewhat sneeringly denominated, by the learned counsel, "circumstantial stuff," but it is not such stuff as dreams are made of. Why does he not rend this stuff? Why does he not scatter it to the winds? He dis- misses it a little too summarily. It shall be my business to examine this stuff, and try its cohesion. The letter from Palmer at Belfast, is that no more than flimsy stuff? The fabricated letters from Knapp to the committee, and to Mr. White, are they nothing bul stuff? The circumstance, that the house- keeper was away at the time the murder was committed, as it was agreed she would be, is that, too, a useless piece of the same stuff? The Eacts, that the key of the cham- ber door was taken out and secreted; that the window was unbarred and un- bolted; aiv these to be so slightly and so e;i-il-. di posed of? It is necessary, Gentlemen, to settle now. at the commencement . the great question of a conspiracy. If there was none, or the defendant was not a party. then there is •■ idence here to com ict him. If there was a conspiracy, and be is proved to have 1 n a party, then .'.., Eacta have a trong bearing on others, and all the ureal points of in- quiry. The defendant's counsel take no distinct ground, as I have already said, on this point, either to admit or to deny. They choose to confine themselves to a hypothetical mode of speech. They say, supposing there was a conspiracy, non sequitur that the prisoner is guilty. as principal. Be it so. But still, if there was a conspiracy, and if he was a con- spirator, and helped to plan the murder, this may shed much light on the evidence which goes to charge him with the exe- cution of that plan. We mean to make out the conspiracy ; and that the defendant was a party to it ; and then to draw all just inferences from these facts. Let me ask your attention, then, in the first place, to those appearances, on the morning after the murder, which have a tendency to show that it was done in pur- suance of a preconcerted plan of opera- tion. What are they'.-' A man was found murdered in his bed. No stranger had done the deed, no one unacquainted with the house had done it. It was apparent that somebody within had opened, and that somebody without had entered. There had ob\ iously and certainly been concert and co-operation. The inmates of the house were not alarmed when the murder was perpetrated. The assassin had entered without any riot or any vio- lence. He had found the \\a\ prepared before him. The house had been pre- viously opened. The window- was un- barred from within, and its fastening unscrewed. There wis a lock on the door of the chamber in which Mr. White slept, but the key was gone. It had been taken away and secreted. The footsteps of the murderer were visible, out-doors, tending toward the window. The plank h\ which he entered the window still re- mained. The i-oad he pursued had been thus prepared Eor him. The nctim was slain, and the murderer had escaped. Everj thine- indicated thai somebody within had co-operated with somebody without. Every thing proclai d that ome of the inmates, or somebody hav- ing access to the house, had had a hand in the murder. < m the Eace of the cir- cumstances, it was apparent, therefore, THE MI'KDKli OK CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. •Jill that this was a premeditated, concerted murder; that there had been a conspiracy t.i commit it , Who, t hen, were the con- spirators? 1 1 not qom found out, we are still groping in the dark, ami the whole tragedy is still a mystery. If thr Knapps and tin' Crowninshields were not tin- conspirators in this murder, then' there is a whole Bet of conspirators not yet discovered. Because, indepen- dent of th'' testimony of Palmer and Leighton, independent of all disputed r\ idence, we know . from [incontroverted facts, that this murder was. and tnusl have been, tin' result of concert and co- operation between two or more. We know it was nol done without plan and deliberation; we see, that whoever en- tered the house, to >trikc the blow, was favored and aided by some one who had been previously in the house, without suspicion, and who had prepared tin' ■way. This is concert, this is co-operation, this is conspiracy. If the Knapps and the Crowninshields, then, were not the Conspirators, win.) were? Joseph Knapp had a motive to desire the death of Mr. White, and that motive has been shown. He was connected by marriage with the family of Mr. White. His wife was the daughter of Mrs. Beckford, who was the only child of a sister of the deceased. The deceased wa- more than eighty years old. and had no children. His only heirs were nephews and nieces. He was supposed to be possessed of a very Large fortune, which would have descended, by law. to his several neph- ews and nieces in equal shares; or, if there was a will, then according to the will. But as he had but two branches of heirs, the children of his brother, Henry White, and of Mrs. Beckford. each of the>e branches, according to the common idea, would have shared one half of his property. Tins popular idea is not legally cor- rect. But it is common, and very prob- acy was entertained by the parties. According to this idea, Mrs. Beckford, on Mr. White's death without a will, would have been entitled to one half of his ample fortune; and Joseph Knapp had married one of her three children. There wasa will, and this will gave the hulk of the propei t> to ot hei - : and we Learn from Palmer t hat one part of the design was to destroy the will before the murder was commit ted. There had I n a previous will, ami thai previous will was known or believed to have been more favorable than the other to the Beckford family. So that, by destroy- ing the Last w ill. ami destroy ing the life of the testator at the game i ime, either tlie first ami more favorable will would he set Up. of tile deceased Would lia\e no will, which would he. as was sup- posed, rtill more favorable. But tic- conspirators not having succeeded in obtaining and destroying the last will. though they accomplished the murder, that will being found in existence and safe, and that will bequeathing tic mass of the property to others, it seemed at the time impossible for Joseph Knapp, as for any one else, ind I. hut tic prin- cipal devisee, to have any motive which should lead to the murder. The key which unlocks the whole mystery is the knowledge of tlie intention of the con- spirators to steal the will. This is de- rived from Palmer, and it explains all. It solves the whole marvel. It shows the motive which actuated those, against whom there is much evidence, hut who, without the knowledge of this intention, were not seen to have had a motive. This intention is proved, as I have said, by Palmer; ami it is so congruous with all tic rest of the case, it agrees so well with all facts and circumstances, that no man could well withhold his belief, though the facts were stated h\ a still less credible witness. If one desirous of opening a lock turns over and tries a bunch of keys till he finds one that will open it, he naturally supposes he has found tin key of that lock. So. in explaining circumstances of evidence which are apparently irreconcilable or unaccountable, if a fact he suggested which at once accounts for all. and rec- onciles all, by whomsoever it maj stated, it is still difficult n that such fact is the true fact belonging to the case. In this respei t, Pain testimony is singularly confirmed. Ii it 202 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. were false, his ingenuity could Dot fur- nish us such clear exposition of strange appearing circumstances. Some truth not before known can alone do that. When we look back, then, to the state of things immediately on the dis- covery of the murder, we see that sus- picion would naturally turn at once, not to the heirs at law, but to those princi- pally benefited by the will. They, and they alone, would he supposed or seem to have a direel objeel for wishing Mr. White's life to be terminated. And. strange as it may seem, we find counsel now insisting, that, if no apology, it is yet mitigation of the atrocity of the Knapps' conduct in attempting to charge this foul murder on Mr. White, the nephew and principal devisee, that pub- lic suspicion was already so directed! As if assassination of character were excusable in proportion as circumstances may render it easy. Their endeavors, when they knew they were suspected themselves, to fix the charge on others, by fold means and by falsehood, are fair and strong proof of their own guilt. But more of that hereafter. The counsel say that they might safely admit that Richard Crowninshield, Jr. w as the perpei rator of this murder. Bui how could they safely admit that? If that were admitted, every thing else would follow. For why should Richard Crowninshield, Jr. kill Mr. White? He was not his heir, nor his devisee; nor was lie his enemy. What could be his motive? It Richard Crowninshield, Jr. killed Mr. White, he did it at some one's procurement who himself had a motive. And who, having any motive, IS shown to have had any intercourse with Richard Crowninshield, Jr., but J oh Knapp, and this principally through the agency of the prisoner at the bar? It is the infirmity, the dis- difficulty of i he prisoner's case, that his counsel cannot and dan- not, admil what the\ yet cannot dispro\r, and what all must believe. Ilcwlmbe- -, on this evidence, that Rich- ard Crowninshield, Jr. was the im- mediate murderer, cannot doubt that i in the |\ nappS Were. c ,| ,s| ii la 1 1 >1 3 in that murder. The counsel, there- fore, are wrong, 1 think, in saying they might safely admit this. The ad- mission of so important and so connect- ed a fact would render it impossible to contend further against the proof of the entire con-piracy, as we state it. What, then, was this conspiracy? J. J. Knapp, dr., desirous of destroying the will, and of taking the life of the deceased, hired a ruffian, who, with the aid of other ruffians, was to enter the house, and murder him in his bed. As far back as January this conspiracy began. Endieott testifies to a conver- sation with J. .1. Knapp at that time, in which Knapp told him that Captain White had made a will, and given the principal part of his property to Stephen White. When asked how he knew, he said, "Black and white don't lie." When asked if the will was not locked up. he said, " There is such a thing as two keys to the same lock." And speaking of the then late illness of Cap- tain White, he said, that Stephen WTiite would not have been sent for if he had been there. Hence it appears, that as early as Jan- uary Knapp had a knowledge of the will, and that he had access to it by means of false keys. This knowledge of the will, and an intent to destroy it, appear also from Palmer's testimony, a fact disclosed to him by the other con- spirators, lie says that he was informed of this by the Crowninshields on the 2d of April. But then it is said, that Palmer is not to be credited; that by his own confession he is a felon; that he has been in the State prison in Maine; and, above all, that he was intimately associ- ated with these conspirators themselves. Let us admit these facts. Let us admit him to he as had as they would represent him to be; still, in law, he is a compe- tent witness. How else are the secret designs of the wicked to be proved, but by their wicked companions, to whom they have disclosed them? The govern- ment does not select its witlie-M'S. TllO conspirators themselves have chosen Palmer. He was the confidant of the prisoners. The fact, however, does not THE Ml'UDKIi OF CAPTAIN J08EPH WIIII'K. 208 depend on his testimony alone. It is corroborated by other proof; ami, taken in connection with the other circumstan- ces, it baa strong probability. In regard to tin' testimony of l'almer, generally, it may be said that it is less contradicted, in all parts of it. either by himself or others, than that of any other material witness, and that every thing he has told is corroborated by other evidence, so Ear as it is susceptible of confirmation. An attempt lias been made to impair his testimony, as to his being at the Half- way House on the night of the murder; you have seen with what success. -Mr. Babb is called to contradict him. You have seen how little he knows, ami even that not certainly; for he himself is proved to have been in an error by sup- posing Palmer to have boon at the Half- way House on the evening of the 9th of April. At that time he is proved to have been at Dustin's, in Danvers. If, then, l'almer, bad as he is, has disclosed the secrets of the conspiracy, ami has told the truth, there is no reason why it should not be believed. Truth is truth, come whence it may. The facts show that this murder had been long in agitation; that it was not a new proposition on the 2d of April; that it had been contemplated for five or six weeks. Richard Crowninshield was at Wenham in the latter part of March, as testified by Starrett. Frank Knapp was at Danvers in the latter part of February, as testified by Allen. Rich- ard Crowninshield inquired whether Captain Knapp was about home, when at Wenham. The probability is, that they would open the case to Palmer as a new project. There are other circumstances that show it to have been some weeks in agitation. Palm- er's testimony as to the transaction on the 2d of April is corroborated by Allen, and by Osborn's books. He says that Frank Knapp came there in the afternoon, and again in the even- ing. So the book shows. He says that Captain Whit • had gone out to his farm on that day. So others prove. How could this fact, or these facts, have been known to Palmer, unless Frank Knapp had brought the know le And was it not. the special object of this \Mt to give information of this fact, that they mighl meel him and execute their purpose on his return from his farm ? The letter of Palmer, \\ ritten at Belfast, bears intrinsic marks of genu- ineness. It was mailed at Belfast, May L3th. It states facts that hecould not have known, unless his testimony be true. This letter was not, an after- thought; it is a genuine narrative. In fa.t. it says, " I know the business your brother Frank was transacting on the I'd of April." How could he have pos- sibly known this, unless he hail been there V The " one thousand dollars that was to be paid," — where could he have obtained this knowledge? The testi- mony of Endicott, of l'almer, and these. facts, are to be taken together; ami they most clearly show that the death of Captain White was caused by some- body interested in putting an end to his life. As to the testimony of Leighton, as far as manner of test i lying goes, he is a bad witness; but it does not follow from this that he is not to be believed. There are some strange things about him. It is strange, that he should make up a story against Captain Knapp, the person with whom he lived; that he never volunta- rily told any thing: all that he has said was screwed out of him. But the story coidd not have been invented by him; his character for truth is unimpeaehed; and he intimated to another witness, soon after the murder happened, that he knew something he should not tell. There is not the leasl contradiction in his testimony, though he gives a poor account of withholding it. He says that he was extremely hnlhi ri il by those who questioned him. In tic main story that he relates, he is entirely consistent with himself. Some things are for him, and some against him. Examine the in- trinsic probability of what he says. See if some allowance is not to be made for him, on account of his ignorance of things of this kind. It is said to be ex- traordinary, that he should have heard just so much of the conversation, and 204 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. no more; thai he should have heard just •what was necessary to be proved, and nothing else. Admit that this is ex- traordinary: still, this does not prove it untrue. It is extraordinary that you twelve gentlemen should he railed upon. out of all the men in the county, to decide this ease; no one could have foretold this three weeks since. It is extraordinary that the first clew to this conspiracy should have been derived from information given by the father of the prisoner at the bar. And in every rase that conies to trial there are many things extraordinary. The murder itself is a most extraordinary one ; but still we do not doubt its reality. It is argued, that this conversation between Joseph mid Frank could not have been as Leighton has testified, be- cause they had been together for several hours lie fore; this subject must have been uppermost in their minds, whereas this appears to have been the commence- ment of their conversation upon it. Now this depends alto-ether upon the tone and manlier of the expression ; upon the particular word in the sentence which was emphatically spoken. If he had 6aid, " When did you set Dick. Frank?" this would not seem to be the beginning of the conversation. With what em- phasis it was littered, it is not possible to learn: and therefore nothing can be made of this argument. If this boy's testimony stood alone, it should be re- ceived with caution. And the same may be said of the testimony of Palmer. but they do not stand alone. They fur- nish a clew to numerous other circum- stances, which, when known, mutually firm what would have been received •with caution without such corrobora- tion. I low could Leighton have made up this conversation? " When did you see Dick? " •■ I saw him this morning." " W hen i • he to kill the old man'.' '• •■ I don'l know." " Tel] him, if he don't do it soon, I won't, pay him." Here is a \;i-l amount in few words. Had he wii enough to invent this? There is nothing bo powerful as truth; and often nothing BO sir. ic a even I that the story was made for him. There is noth- ing so extraordinary in the whole mat- ter, as it would have been for this ignorant country boy to invent this story. The acts of the parties themselves fur- nish strong presumption of their guilt. What was done on the receipt of the letter from Maine'.-' This letter was signed by Charles Grant, Jr., a person not known to either of the Knapps, nor was it known to them that any other person beside the Crowninshields knew of the conspiracy. This letter, by the accidental omission of the word Jr., fell into the hands of the father, when in- tended for the son. The father carried it to Wenham, where both the sons were. They both read it. Fix your eye stead- ily on this part of the circumstantial stuff which is in the case, and see what can lie made of it. This was shown to the two brothers on Saturday, the 15th of May. Neither of them knew Palmer. And if they had known him, they could not have known him to have been the writer of this letter. It was mysterious to them how any one at Belfast could have had knowledge of this affair. Their conscious guilt prevented due circum- spection. They did not see the bearing of its publication. They advised their father to carry it to the Committee of Vigilance, and it was so carried. On the Sunday following, Joseph began to think there might he something in it. Perhaps, in the mean time, he had seen one of the Crowninshields. He was apprehensive that they might be sus- pected; he was anxious to turn atten- tion from their family. What course did he adopt to effect this'/ He ad- dressed one letter, with a false name, to Mr. White, and another to the ( lom mittee; and to complete the climax of his folly, he signed the idler addressed to the Committee, " Grant," the same name as that which was signed to the letter received from Belfast. It was in the knowledge of the Committee, that no person bul the Knapps had seen this letter from Belfast; and that no other person knew its signature. It therefore inn i have been irresistibly plain to them THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. 205 that one of the Knapps was the writer of the Letter received by the Commit- tee, charging the murder on Mr. White. Add i" this the Eact of its having I n dated at Lynn, and mailed at Solera four Ways after it was dated, and \\ bo could doubl respecting it? Haw you ever read or known of folly equal to this? Can you conceive of crime more o. limis and abominable? Merely to ex- plain the apparenl mysteriesof the letter from Palmer, they excite the bases! sus- picions against a man, whom, if thej were inno :ent, they had no reason to believe guilty; and whom, if they were guilty, they mosl certainly knew to be innocent. Could they have adopted a more direcl method of exposing their own infamy? The Letter to the Com- mittee has intrinsic marks of a knowl- edge of this transaction. It tells the tinu and tin' iimiiiu r in which the murder was committed. Every line speaks the writer's condemnation. In attempting to divert attention from his family, and to charge the guilt upon another, he in- delibly fixes it upon himself. Joseph Knapp requested Allen to put these letters into the post-office, because, said he, " I wish to nip this silly affair in the bud." If this were not the order of an overruling Providence, I should say that it was the silliest piece of folly that was ever practised. Mark the des- tiny of crime. It is ever obliged to re- sort to such subterfuges; it trembles in the broad lighl ; it betrays itself in seek- ing concealment. He alone walks safely who walks uprightly. Who tor a mo- ment can read these letters and doubt of Joseph Knapp's guilt? The constitu- tion of nature is made to inform against him. There is no corner dark enough to conceal him. There is no turnpike- road broad enough or smooth enough for a man so guilty to walk in without stumbling. Every step proclaims his secivt to every passenger. His own acts come out to fix his guilt. In attempt in- to charge another with his own crime, he writes his own confession. To do away the effect of Palmer's letter, si Grant, he writes a letter himself and affixes to it the name of Grant. He writes in a disguised hand; but how could it. happen that the same Grant should be in Salem thai was at Beb This has brought the whole thing out. Evidently he did it, because he has adopted the same .-i ;■, le. Evidently he did it . because h of the price of bl iod, and of ol her circumstances con- nected w ith the murder, that no one luit a conspirator could have known. Palmer says he made a \ isit to the Crowninshields, on the 9th of April. George then asked him whether he had heard of the murder. Richard inquired whether he had heard the music at Salem. They -aid thai they were suspected, that a committee had been appointed to search house- ; and that they had melted up the dagger, the day after the murder, be- cause it would be a suspicious circum- stance to have it found in their possession. Now this committee was not appointed, in fact, until Friday evening. But this proves nothing against Palmer; it does not prove that George did not tell him so; it only proves that he gave a false reason for a fact. They had heard that they were suspected; how could they have heard this, unless it were from the whisperings of their own consciences? Surely this rumor was not then pub- lic. Aln.nt the 27th of April, another at- tempt was made by the Knapps to give a direction to public suspicion. They re- ported themselves to have been robbed, in passing from Salem to Wenham, W'eiiham Pond. They cam to Salem and stated the particular- of the adven- ture. They described persons, their dress, size, and appearance, who had been suspected of the murder. They would have it understood that the com- munity was infested by a band of ruf- fians, and that they themselves were the particular objects of their vengeance, this turns out to be all fictitious, all false, tan you conceive of any thing more enormous, any wickedness greater, than the circulation of such reports? than the allegation of crimes, it' com- mitted, capital? If no such crime had been committed, then it reacts with double force upon themselves, and goes 20G THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. very Ear to Bhow their guilt. How did they conduct themselves on this occa- sion? l>id they make hue and cry? Did they give information that they had been assaulted that night at Wen- hamV N" Buch thing. They rested quietly that night; they waited to be culled on for the particulars of their ad- venture; the\ made no attempt to arresl the offenders; this was not their object. They were content to fill the thousand mouths of rumor, to spread abroad false reports, to divert the attention of the public from themselves; for they thoughl every man suspected them, be- cause t hey knew they ought to be sus- pected. The manner in which the compensa- tion for this murder was paid is a cir- cumstance worthy of consideration. By examining the facts and dates, it will satisfactorily appear that Joseph Knapp paid a sum of money to Richard Crown- inshield. in five-franc pieces, on the 24th of April. On the 21st of April, Joseph Knapp received five hundred five-franc pieces, as the proceeds of an adventure at sea. The remainder of this species of currency that came home in the ves- sel was deposited in a hank at Salem. On Saturday, the 24th of April, Frank and Richard lode to Wenhain. They were there with Joseph an hour or more, and appeared to be negotiating private business. Richard continued in the chaise ; Joseph came to the chaise and conversed with him. These facts are proved by Hart and Leigh- ton, and by Osborn's hooks. On Sat- urday evening, aboul this time, Richard I iwninshield is proved, by Lummus, to have been at Wenham, with another person whose appearance corresponds with Frank's. Can any one doubl this being the same evening? What had l: bard < Irowninshield to do at Wen- ham, with Joseph, unless it were this iness? He was there before the mur- der; he was there after the murder; he there clandestinely, unwilling to be seen, [f it were nol upon this business, [el it be told whal it was for. Joseph Knapp could explain it; frank Knapp hi ■■■.plain it. Rut they do not ex- plain it; and the inference is against them. Immediately after this, Richard passes five-franc pieces; on the same evening, one to Lummus, five to Palmer; and near this time George passes three or four in Salem. Here are nine of these pieces passed by them in four days; this is extraordinary. It is an unusual cur- rency ; in ordinary business, few men would pass nine such pieces in the course of a year. If they were not re- ceived in this way, why not explain how they came by them? Money was not so flush in their pockets that they could not tell whence it came, if it honestly came there. It is extremely important to them to explain whence this money came, and they would do it if they could. If, then, the price of blood was paid at this time, in the presence and with the knowledge of this defendant, does not this prove him to have been connected with this conspiracy? Observe, also, the effect on the mind of Richard of Palmer's being arrested and committed to prison; the various efforts he makes to discover the fact; the lowering, through the crevices of the rock, the pencil and paper for him to write upon: the sending two lines of poetry, with the request that he would return the corresponding lines; the shrill and peculiar whistle ; the inimitable exclamations of "Palmer! Palmer! Palmer 1 " All these things prove how great was his alarm; they corroborate 1 'aimer's story, and tend to establish the conspiracy. Joseph Knapp had a part to act in this matter. lie must have opened the window, and secreted the key; he had free access to every part of the house; he was accustomed to visit there; he went in and out at his pleasure; he could do this without being suspected. He is proved to have been then' the Saturday preceding. If all these things, taken in connec- tion, do not prove that Captain White was murdered in pursuance of a con- spiracy, then the case is at an end. Savary's testimony is wholly unex- pecte 1. He was called lor a different THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. :M7 purpose. When asked who the person was thai be saw com i1 of Captain White's yard between three and four o'clock In the morning, be answered, Frank Knapp. Ii is nol clear thai this is licit true. There may !»■ many cir- cumstances of importance coi sted with this, though we believe the mur- der i" have bee mmitted between ten and eleven o'clock. The Letter to Dr. Barstow states it to have been done about eleven o'clock; it states it to have been done with a blow on the bead, from a weapon loaded with lead. Here is too great a correspondence with the reality not to bave some meaning in it. Dr. Peirsoii was always of the opinion, that the two classes of wounds were made with different instruments, and by dif- ferent hands. It is possible that one class was intlicted at one time, and the oilier at another. It is possible that on the last visit the pulse might not have entirely ceased to heat, and then the finishing stroke was ^iven. It is said, that, when the body was discovered, some of the wounds wept, while the others did not. They may have been inflicted from mere wantonness. It was known that Captain White was accus- tomed to keep specie by him in his cham- ber; this perhaps may explain the last visit. It is proved, that this defendant was in the habit of retiring to bed, and leaving it afterwards, without the know 1- edge of his family: perhaps he did so on this occasion. We see no reason to doubt the fact; and it does not shake our belief thai the murder was commit- ted earlv in the night. What are the probabilities as to the time of the murder'/ Mr. White was an aged man; he usually retired to bed at about half-past nine. He slept soundest in the early part of the nighl : usually awoke in the middle and latter part; and his habits were perfectly well known. When would persons, with a knowledge of these facts, be mosl likely to approach him? Most certainly, in the first hour of his sleep. This would be the safest time. If seen then going to or from the house, the appearance would be least suspicious. The earlier hour would then have been most probably selected. Gentlemen, I shall dwell no longer on the evidence which tends to pio\ e that, there was a ( .-piracy, and that the prisoner was a conspirator. All the circumstances concur to mak it this point . Not onl\ Palmer swears to it , in effect, and Leighton, bul Allen mainly supports Palmer, and Osborn's books lend confirmation, bo Ear as possible, from such a source. Palmer is contra- dicted Ln nothing, either by any other witness, or any proved circumstance or occurrence. Whatever could be ex- pected to support him does support him. All the evidence clearly mani- fests, I think, that there was a conspir- acy; thai it originated with Joseph Knapp; that defendant became a party to it, and was one of its conductors, from first to last. One of the most powerful circumstances is Palmer's let- ter from Belfast. The amount of this is a direct charge on the Knapps of the authorship of this murder. How did they treat this charge; like honesl men, or like guilty men? We have seen how- it was treated. Joseph Knapp fabricat- ed letters, charging another person, and caused them to be put into the post- office. I shall now proceed on the supposi- tion, that it is proved that there was a conspiracy to murder Mr. White, and that the prisoner was party to it. The second and the material inquiry is. Was the prisoner present at the mur- der, aiding and abetting therein? This leads to the Legal question in the case. What does the law mean, when it says, that, in order to charge him as a principal, "he must be present aiding and abetting in the murder "? In the Language of the Late Chief Jus- tice, " It is not required that the abet- tor shall be actually upon the spot when the murder is committed, or even in sighl of the more immediate perpetra- tor of the victim, to make him a princi- pal. If he be at a distance, co-operat- ing in the act. by watching to prevent relief, or to give an alarm, or to assist his confederate in escape, having knowl- ■J..S THE MURDEB OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. of the purpose and object of the .--in. this iu the eye of the law is being present, aiding and abetting, so as to make him a principal in the mur- der." ■ If he be at a distance co-operating." This is not a distance to be measured by feet or rods; if the intent to lend aid ibine with a knowledge that the mur- der is to lie committed, and the person so intending be so situate that he can by any possibility lend this aid in any man- ner, then he is pr< -ent in legal contem- plation, lie need not lend any actual aid; to be ready to assist is assisting. There are two sorts of murder; the distinction between them it is of essen- tial importance to l>ear in mind: 1. Mur- der in an affray, or upon sudden and unexpected provocation. 2. Murder se- cretly, with a deliberate, predetermined intention to commit the crime. Under the first class, the question usually is, whether the offence be murder or man- slaughter, in the person who commits the deed. Under the second class, it is often a question whether others than he who actually did the deed were present, aiding and assisting therein. Offences of this kind ordinarily happen when there is nobody pre.-eiit except those who go on the same design. If a riot should happen in the court-house, and one should kill another, this may be mur- der, or it may not, according to the in- tention with which it. was done; which is always matter of fact, to be collected from the circumstances at the time. but in secrel murders, premeditated and determined on, there can be no doubt of the murderous intention; there can be ho doubt, if a person be present, know- ing a murder is to be done, of his con- cur! ing in t he act. I lis being there is a proof of his inteiil to aid and abet; else, why is lie t lic- it has been contended, that proof lini-t be given thai the person ac did actually afford aid, did lend a hand in the murder itself; and without this proof, although he may be near by. he, may be presumed to be Here for an in- nocent purpose; he may have crept si- lently there to hear the new-, or from mere curiosity to see what was going on. 1 Preposterous, absurd! Such an idea shocks all common sense. A man i- found to be a conspirator to commit a murder; he has planned it; he has as- sisted in arranging the time, the place, and the means; and he is found in the place, and at the time, and yet it is sug- gested that lie might have been there, not for co-operation and concurrence, but from curiosity ! Such an argument deserves no answer. It w r ould be ditli- cult to give it one, in decorous terms. Is it not to be taken for granted, that a man seeks to accomplish his own pur- poses? When he has planned a mur- der, and is present at its execution, is he there to forward or to thwart his own design? is he there to assist, or there to prevent? But " Curiosity " ! lie may be there from mere •• curiosity " ! Curi- osity to witness the success of the execu- tion of his own plan of murder! The very walls of a court-house ought not to stand, the ploughshare should run through the ground it stands on, where such an argumenl could find toleration.' 2 It is not necessary that the abettor should actually lend a hand, that he should take a part in the act itself; if he be present ready to assist, that is assist- ing. Some of the doctrines advanced would acquit the defendant, though he had gone to the bedchamber of the de- ceased, though he had been standing by when the assassin gave the Mow. This is the argument we have heard to-day. The court here said, they did not so under- stand the argument of the counsel for de- fendant. Mr. Dexter said, " The intent and power alone must co operate." No doubt the law is. that being ready to assisl is assisting, if the party has the power to assisl . in case of need. It is so stated by foster, who is a high author- ity. " If A happeneth to be present at a murder, for instance, and taketh no part in it, nor endeavoreth to prevent it, nor apprehendeth the murderer, nor i Tlii* Beema to have been actually the case as regards J. F. Knapp. - And yet this argument, so absurd in Mr. Webster's opinion, was based on the exact fact. TIIK M I K 1 >i:ii OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WIIITIv 209 levyeth hue and cry after him, tliis strange behavior of his, though highly criminal, will not of itself render him either principal or accessory." " Hut, ii' a fad amounting to murder should he committed in prosecution of some un- lawful purpose, though it were but a bare trespass, to which A in the case lasi stated had consented, and he had gone in order to give assistance, if need were, for carrying it into execution, this would have amounted to murder in him, and in every person present and joining with him." " If the fad was com- mitted in prosecution of the original purpose which was unlaw fid. the whole party will be involved in the guilt of him who gave the blow. For in combi- nation- of this kind, the mortal stroke, though given by one of the party, is considered in the eye of the law, and of sound reason too, as given by every in- dividual present and abetting. The per- son actually giving the stroke is no more than the hand or instrument by which the others strike." The author, in speak- ing of being present, means actual pres- ence; not actual in opposition to con- structive, for the law knows no such distinction. There is but one presence, and this is the situation from which aid, or supposed aid, may be rendered. The law does not say where the person is to go, or how near he is to go, but that he must, be where he may give assistance, or where the perpetrator may believe that he may be assisted by him. Sup- pose that he is acquainted with the design of the murderer, and has a knowledge of the time when it is to be carried into effect, and goes out with a view to render assistance, if need be; why, then, even though the murderer does not know of this, the person so going out will be an abettor in the murder. It is contended that the prisoner at the bar could not be a principal, he heing in Brown Street, because he could not there render assistance; and you are called upon to determine this case, ac- cording as you may be of opinion whether Brown Street was, or was not, a suit- able, convenient, well-chosen place to aid in this murder. This is not the true question. The inquiry is not whether you would have selected this place in preference to all others, or whether you would have selected it at all. If the par- ties chose it, why should we doubl about it? How do we know the use they in- tended to make of it. or the kind of aid thai he was to afford by being there? The question for you to consider is. Did the defendant go into Brown St red in aid of this murder? I > i < 1 he go there by agreement, by appointment with the perpetrator? 1 If so, every thing else follows. The main thing, indeed the only thing, is to inquire whether he was in Brown Street by appointment with Richard Crowninshield. It might be to keep general watch; to observe the lights, and advise as to time of access; to meet the murderer on his return, to advise him as to his escape; to examine his clothes, to see if any marks of blood were upon them; to furnish exchange of clothes, or new disguise, if necessary; to tell him through what streets he could safely retreat, or whether he could de- posit the club in the place designed ; or it might be without any distinct object, but merely to afford that encourage- ment which would proceed from Rich- ard Crowninshield's consciousness that he was near. It is of no consequence whether, in your opinion, the place was well chosen or not, to afford aid; if it was so chosen, if it was by appointment that he was there, it is enough. Sup- pose Richard Crowninshield, when ap- plied to to commit tin' murder, had said, " I won't do it unless there can be some one near by to favor my escape; I won't go unless you will stay in Brown Street. " Upon the gentleman's argument, he would not be an aider and abettor in the murder, because the place was not well chosen; though it is apparent that the being in the place chosen was a con- dition, without which the murder would never have happened. You are to consider the defendant as one in the league, in the combination to commit the murder. If he was there by appointment with the perpetrator, he is 1 He did not. 14 210 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. an abettor. The concurrence of the per- petrator in his being there is proved by the i'iv\ ions r\ idence of the conspiracy. If Richard Crowninshield, for any pur- pose whatsoever, made it a condition of the agreemenl . thai Frank Knapp should stand as hacker, then Frank Knapp was an aider and abettor; no matter what the aid was. or what sort it was. or de- gree, be it ever so little; even if it were to judge of the hour when it was best to go, or to see when the lights were extinguished, or to give an alarm if any one approached. Who better cal- culated to judge of these things than the murderer himself? and if he so de- termined them, that is sufficient. Now as to the facts. Frank Knapp knew that the murder was that night to be committed: he was one of the con- spirators, he knew the object, he knew the time. lie had that day been to Wenham to see Joseph, and probably to Danvers to see Richard Crownin- shield, for he kept his motions secret. He had that day hired a horse and chaise of Osborn. and attempted to conceal the purpose for which it was used; he had intentionally lefi the place and the price blank on Osborn 's books. He went to "Wenham by the way of Danvers; he had Inch told the week before to hasten Dick: he had seen the Crowninshields several times within a few days; he had a saddle-horse the Saturday night lie- fore; he had seen Mrs. Beckford at Wenham, and knew she would not re- turn that night. She had not been away before for six weeks, and prob- ably would not soon be again. He had ju-t come from Wenham. Every day, for the week previous, he had visited one or another of these conspirators, Save Sunday, and then probably he saw them in town. When he saw Joseph on i be 61 li. Jo 'I'h had prepared the bouse, and would naturally tell him of it ; there were con-taut communications between them: daily and nightly visitation; too much knowledge of these panics and this transaction, to leave a particle of doubl on the mind of any one, that ik K napp knew the murder wa i" be committed this night. The hour was come, and he knew it; if so, and he was in Brown Street, without explaining why be was there, can the jury for a moment doubt whether he was there to counte- nance, aid, or support; or for curiosity alone; or to learn how the wages of sin and death were earned by the perpe- t rat or? Here Mr. Webster read the law from Hawkins. 1 Hawk. 204, Lib. 1, ch. 32, sec. 7. The perpetrator would derive courage, and strength, and confidence, from the knowledge that one of his associates was near by. If he was in Brown Street, he could have been there for no other purpose. If there for this pur- pose, then he was, in the language of the law, present, aiding and abetting in the murder. His interest lay in being somewhere else. If he had nothing to do with the murder, no part to act, why not stay at home? Why should he jeopard his own life, if it was not agreed that he should be there? He would not voluntarily go where the very place would cause him to swing if detected. He would not voluntarily assume the place of danger. His taking this place proves that he went to give aid. His staying away would have made an alibi. If he had nothing to do with the murder, he would be at home, where he could prove his alibi, lie knew he was in danger, because he was guilty of the conspiracy. and, if he had nothing to do, would not expose himself to suspicion or detection. Did tin' prisoner at the bar counte- nance this murder? Did he concur, or did he non-concur, in what the perpe- trator was about to do? Would lie have tried to shield him? Would he have furnished his cloak for protection? Would he have pointed out a safe way of retreat? As you would answer these questions, so you should answer the general question, whether he was there consent in,; to the murder, or whether he was there as a spectator only. One word more on this presence, called constructive presence. What aid THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSKPII WHITE. 211 is (d be rendered? When- is the line to be drawn, between acting, and omitting to act? Suppose be bad been in the bouse, Buppose be bad followed the per- petrator to tin 1 chamber, what could he bave done? This was to be a murder by stealth: it was to be* a secrel assas- sination. It was not their purpose to bave an open combat; they were to ap- proach their victim unawares, and si- lently give the fatal Mow. Bui if he had been in the chamUT, no one can doubt thai he would have been an abettor; because of his presence, and ability to render services, if needed. What service could he have rendered, if there? Could he have helped him to fly? Could he have aided the silence of his movements? Could he have fa- cilitated his retreat, on the first alarm? Surely, this was a case where there was more of safety in going alone than with another: where company would only embarrass. Richard Crowninshield would prefer to go alone. He knew his errand too well. His nerves needed no collateral support. He was not the man to take with him a trembling com- panion. He would prefer to have his aid at a distance, lie would not wish to be encumbered by his presence. He would prefer to have him out of the house. He would prefer that he should be in Brown Street. But whether in the chamber, in the house, in the garden, or in the street, whatsoever is aiding in actual pretence is aiding in constructive />r> *citc> ; any thing that is aid in one case is aid in the other. 1 If, then, the aid be anywhere, so as to embolden the perpetrator, to afford him hope or confidence in his enterprise, it is the same as though the person stood at his elbow with his sword drawn. Bis being there ready to act. with the power to act, is what makes him an abettor. Here Mr. Webster referred to the cases of Kelly, of Hyde, and others, cited by counsel for the defendant, and showed that they did not militate with the doctrine for which he contended. The difference, is, in those cases there was open violence; this > 4 Hawk. 201, Lib. 4, ch. 29, sec. 8. was a case <>f secret assassination. The aid must meet the occasion. Here do act- imj was necessary, luti watching, conceal- incut of escape, management. What are the facts in relation to this presence? Frank Knapp is proved to have been a conspirator, proved to have known thai the .1 1 was now to be done. Is it not probable that he was in Brown Street to concur in the murder? There were four conspirators. It was natural thai some one of them should go with the perpel rator. Richard Crown- inshield was to be the perpetrator; he was to give the blow. There is no evi- dence of any casting of the parts for the others. The defendant w.nild prob- ably be the man to take fche second part. Be was fond of exploits, he was accustomed to the use of sword-canes and dirks. If any aid was required, he was the man to give it. At least, there is no evidence to the contrary of this. Aid could not have been received from Joseph Knapp, or from George Crowninshield. Joseph Knapp was at Wenham. and took good care to prove that he was there. George Crownin- shield has proved satisfactorily where he was; that he was in other company, such as it was, until eleven o'clock. This narrows the inquiry. This de- mands of the prisoner to show, if he was not in this place, where he was. It calls on him loudly to show this, and to show it truly. If he could -how it, he would do it. If he does not tell, and that truly, it is against him. The de- fence of an alibi is a double-edged sword. He knew that he was in a sit- uation where he might be called upon to account for himself. If he had had no particular appointment or business to attend to. he would have taken care to be able so to account. He would have been out of town, or in Borne L, r ood company. Has be accounted for him- self on that night to your satisfaction? The prisoner has attempted to prove an alibi in two ways. In the first place, by four young men with whom he -ays he was in company, on the evening of the murder, from seven o'clock till 212 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. near ten o'clock. This depends upon the certainty of the night. In the second place, by his family, from ten o'clock afterwards. This depends upon the certainty of the time of the night. These two classes of proof have no con- nection with each other. One may he true, and the other Ealse; or they may both l»- true, or both be false. I shall examine this testimony with some at- tention, because, on a former trial, it made more impression on the minds of the court than on my own mind. I think, when carefully sifted and com- pared, it will he found to have in it more of plausibility than reality. Mr. Page testifies, that on the evening of the 6th of April he was in company with Burchmore, Balch, and Forrester, and that he met the defendant about seven o'clock, near the Salem Hotel; that he afterwards met, him at Re- mand's, about nine o'clock, and that he was in company with him a consid- erable part of the evening. This young gentleman is a member of college, and says that he came to town the Saturday evening previous; that he is now able to say that it was the night of the mur- der when he walked with Frank Khapp, from the recollection of the fact, thai he called himself to an account, on the morning after the murder, as it is nat- ural for men to do when an extraor- dinary occurrence happens. Gentlemen, this kind of evidence is not satisfactory; general impressions as to time are not to be relied on. If I were called on to state the particular day on which any witness testified in this cause, I could not do it. Every man will notice the Bame thing in his own mind. There is no one of these young men that, could give an account of himself for any other day in the month of April. They are made to remember the fact, and then they think they remember the time. The witness has no means of knowing it was 'In.' day rather than any other time. He did nol know it at firsl : he Could not know it afterwards. lie says he called himself to an account. This has no more to do with the murder than v. it h the man in the moon, Such testi- mony is not worthy to be relied on in any forty-shilling cause. What occasion had he to call himself to an account? Did he suppose that he should be sus- pected? Had he any intimation of tins conspiracy? Suppose, Gentlemen, you w r ere either of you asked where you were, or what you were doing, on the fifteenth day of dune; you could not answer this ques- tion without calling to mind some events to make it certain. Just as well may you remember on what you dined each day of the year past. Time is identical. Its subdivisions are all alike. No man knows one day from another, or one hour from another, but by some fact connected with it. Hays and hours are not visible to the senses, nor to be appre- hended and distinguished by the under- standing. The flow of time is known only by something which marks it; and he who speaks of the date of occurrences with nothing to guide his recollection speaks at random, and is not to be relied on. This young gentleman remembers the facts and occurrences; he knows nothing why they should not have hap- pened on the evening of the Oth; but he knows no more. All the rest is evi- dently conjecture or impression. Mr. White informs you, that he told him he could not tell what night it was. The first thoughts are all that are valu- able in such case. They miss the mark by taking second aim. Mr. Balch believes, but is not sure, that he was with Frank Knapp on the evening of the murder. He has given different accounts of the time. He has mi means of making it certain. All he knows is. thai it was some evening be- fore Fast-day. But whether Monday, Tuesday, or Saturday, he cannot tell. Mr. Burchmore says, to the best of his belief, it was the evening of the murder. Afterwards he attempts to Speak positively, from recollecting that he mentioned t ho circumstance to Wil- liam Peirce, as he went, to the Mineral Spring on Past-day. Fast, Monday morning be told Colonel Putnam he could not fix the time. This witness stand- in a much worse plight than THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. 21:5 cither of the others. It is difficult to reconcile all be has said with any belief in I he accuracy of his recollections. Mr. Forrester does not speak with any certainty as to the night; and it is very certain that he told Mr. Loring and oth- ers, that he did not know what night it was. Now, what does the testimony of these four young men amount to? The only circumstance by which they ap- proximate to an Identifying of the night is, that three of tlieui say it was cloudy; th''\ think their walk was cither on Monday or Tuesday evening, and it is admitted that Monday evening was clear, whence they draw the inference that it musi bave been Tuesday. But, fortunately, there is one fact disclosed in their testimony that settles the question. Balch says, that on the evening, whenever it was, he saw the prisoner; the prisoner told him he was going out of town on horseback, for a distance of about twenty minutes' drive, and that lie was going to get a horse at Osborn's. This was about seven o'clock. At about nine, Balch says he saw the prisoner again, and was then told by him that he had had his ride, and had returned. Now it appears by Osborn's hooks, that the prisoner had a saddle- horse from his stable, not on Tuesday evening, the night of the murder, but on the Saturday evening previous. This fixes the time about which these young men testify, and is a complete answer and refutation of the attempted alibi on Tuesday evening. I come now to speak of the testimony adduced by the defendant to explain where he was after ten o'clock on the night of the murder. This comes chiefly from members of the family; from his father and brothers. It is agreed that the affidavit of the prisoner should be received as evidence of what his brother, Samuel II. Knapp, would testify if present. Samuel H. Knapp says, that, about ten minutes past ten o'clock, his brother, Frank Knapp, on his way to bed, opened his chamber door, made some remarks, closed the door, and went to his cham- ber; and t hat he did not. hear him leave it afterwards. How is this witness able to lix the time at ten minute, past ten? There is DO circumstance mentioned by which he fixes it. He had been in bed, probably asleep, and was aroused bom his sleep by the opening of the door. Was he in a situation to speak of time with precision? Could he know, under such circumstances, whether it was leu minutes past ten, or ten minutes be- fore eleven, when his brother spoke to him? What would be the natural re- sult in such a case? But we are not Left to conjecture this result. We have positive testimony on this point. Mr. Webb tells you that Samuel told him, on the 8th of dune. " thai he did not know what time his brother Frank came home, and that be was not a1 home when he went to bed." You will consider this testimony of Mr. Webb as indorsed upon this affidavit; and with this in- dorsement upon it, you will give it its due weight. This statement was made to him after Frank was arrested. I come to the testimony of the father. I find myself incapable of speaking of him or his testimony with severity. On- fortunate old man! Another Lear, in the conduct of his children; another bear, I apprehend, in the effect of his distress upon his mind and understand- ing. He is brought here to testify, un- der circumstances that disarm severity, and call loudly for sympathy. Though it is impossible not to see that his story cannot be credited, yet I am unable to speak of him otherwise than in sorrow and grief. Unhappy father! he strives to remember, perhaps persuades himself that he does remember, that on the even- ing of the murder he was himself at home at ten o'clock. He thinks, or seems to think, that his son came in at about five minutes past ten. He fancies that he remembers his conversation; he thinks he spoke of bolting the door: be thinks he asked the time of night : he seems to remember his then going to his bed. Alas! these are but the swim- ming fancies of an agitated and distref I mind. Alas I they are but the dreams 214 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. of hope, its ascertain Lights, flickering on the thick darkness of parental dis- tress. Alas! the miserable father knows nothing, in reality, of all these things. Mr. Shepard says that the first con- versation he had with Mr. Knapp was soon after the murder, and before the arrest of his sons. Mr. Knap]) says it was after the arrest of his sons. His own fears led him to say to Mr. Shep- ard, thai his "son Frank was at, home that night; and so Phippen told him," or "as Phippen told him." Mr. Shep- ard says that he was struck with the remark at the time; that it made an unfavorable impression on his mind; he does not tell you what that impression was. but when yon connect it with the previous inquiry he had made, whether Frank had continued to associate with the Crowninshields, and recollect that the Crowninshields were then known to be suspected of this crime, can you doubt what this impression was? can you doubt as to the fears he then had? This poor old man tells you, that he was greatly perplexed at the time ; that he found himself in embarrassed cir- cumstances; that on this very night he was engaged in making an assignment of his property to his friend. Mr. Shep- ard. If ever charity should furnish a mantle for error, it should lie here. Im- agination cannot picture a more deplora- ble, distressed condition. The same general remarks may be applied to his conversation with Mr. Tread well, as have 1 n made' upon that with Mr. Shepard. He told him, that he believed Frank was at home about the usual time. In his conversations with either of these persons, lie did not ml to know, of his own knowledge, the time thai he came home. He now yon positively thai he recollects the time, and thai he so told Mr. Shepard. He is directly contradicted by both these witn !8, as respectable men as Salem affords. This idea of an alll>i is of recent ori- gin. Would Samuel Knapp have gone to ea if ii were then thoughl of? His uioiiy. if true, was too important to be lost. It there be anj truth in this part of the alibi, it is so near in point of time that it cannot be relied on. The mere variation of half an hour would avoid it. The mere variations of differ- ent timepieces would explain it. Has the defendant proved where he was on that night? If you doubt about it, there is an end of it. The burden is upon him to satisfy you beyond all reasonable doubt. Osborn's books, in connection with what the young men state, are conclusive, I think, on this point. He has not, then, accounted for himself; he has attempted it, and has failed. I pray you to remember, Gen- tlemen, that this is a case in which the prisoner would, more than any other, be rationally able to account for himself on the night of the murder, if he could do so. He was in the conspiracy, he knew the murder was then to be committed, and if he himself was to have no hand in its actual execution, he would of course, as a matter of safety and precau- tion, be somewhere else, and be able to prove afterwards that he had been some- where else. Having this motive to prove himself elsewhere, and the power to do it if he were elsewhere, his failing in such proof must necessarily leave a very strong inference against him. But, Gentlemen, let us now consider what is the evidence produced on the part of the government to prove that John Francis Knapp, the prisoner at the bar, was in Brown Street on the nighl of the murder. This is a point of vital importance in this cause. Unless this be made out, beyond reasonable doubt, the law of presence does not apply to the case. The government undertake to prove that he was present aiding in the murder, by proving that he was in Brown Street tor this purpose. Now, what are the undoubted facts? They are, that two persons were seen in that street, several times during that evening, under suspicious circumstances; under such circumstances as induced those who saw them to watch their movements. Of this there can be no doubt. Mirick saw a man standing at the post opposite his stoic from fifteen minutes before nine until twent) minutes alter, dressed TIIK MURDEB OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE 215 in a full frock-coat, glazed cap, and so forth, in size and general appearance answering to the prisoner at the bar. This person was waiting there; and whenever any one approached him, he moved to and from the corner, as though he would avoid being suspected or rec- Ognized. Afterwards, two persons were seen l>y Webster, walking in Howard Street, with a slow . deliberate movement that attracted hie attention. Tins was about hall-past nine. One of these he took to be the prisoner at the bar, the other he did not knew . About half-past ten a person is seen sitting on the rope-walk steps, wrapped in a cloak. He drops his head when passed, to avoid being known, shortly after, two persons are seen to meet in this street, without ceremony or salutation, and in a hurried manner to converse for a short time; then to separate, and run oft* with great speed. Now, on this same night a gentleman is slain, murdered in his bed, his house being entered by stealth from without; and his house sit- uated within three hundred feet of this street. The windows of his chamber were in plain Bight from this street; a weapon of death is afterwards found in a place where these persons were seen to pass, in a retired place, around which they had been seen lingering. It is now known that this murder was committed by four persons, conspiring together for this purpose. No account is given who these suspected persons thus seen in Brown Street and its neighborhood were. Now, I ask, Gentlemen, whether you or any man can doubt that this murder \\ as committed by the persons who were thus in and about Brown Street. Can any person doubt that they were there for purposes connected with this murder? It not for this purpose, what were they there for? When there is a cause so near at hand, why wander into conjec- ture for an explanation? Common-sense requires you to take the nearest ade- quate cause for a known effect. Who were these suspicious persons in Brown Street? There was something extraor- dinary about them; something notice- able, and noticed at the time: something in their appearance thai aroused suspi- cion. And a man is found the next morning murdered in the near vicinity. Now, so Long as no other accounl shall be given of those suspicious person! long the inference must remain irresisti- ble that they were the murderer-,. Let it be remembered, that it is already shown that this murder was the result, of conspiracy and of concert; let it be remembered, that the house, having been opened from within, was entered by stealth from without. Let it be remembered that Brown Street, when' these persons Were re] >ea I ei I ly mtii under such suspicious circumstances, was a place from which every occupied room in Mr. White's house is clearly seen: let it be remembered, that the place, though thus very near to Mr. White's home, is a re- tired and lonely place; and let it be re- membered that the instrument of death was afterwards found concealed very near the same spot. Must not every man come to the con- clusion, that these persons thus seen in Brown Street were the murderers? Every man's own judgment, I think, must satisfy him that this must be so. It is a plain deduction of common sense. It is a point on which each one of you may reason like a Hale or a Mansfield. The two occurrences explain each other. The murder shows why these persons were thus lurking, at that hour, in Brown Street; and their lurking in Brown Street shows who committed the murder. If, then, the persons in and about Brown Street were the plotters and exe- cuters of the murder of Captain White, we know who they were, and you know- that //are is one of them. This fearful concatenation of circum- stances puts hiii) to an account. II" was a conspirator. He had entered into this plan of murder. The murder is committed, and he is known to I Keen within three minutes' walk of the place. He must account, for himself. He has attempted this, and failed. Then, with all these general reasons to show he was actually in Brown Street, and his failures in his alibi, let us see what is the direct proof of his being 216 Till: MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. there. But first, !et me ask, is it not very remarkable thai there is no attempt to show where Richard Crowninshield, Jr. was on that aight? We hear noth- ing of him. II' 1 was seen in none of his usual haunts about tin' town. Vet, if he was thf actual perpetrator of the mur- der, which nobody doubts, In 1 was in the town Bomewhere. Can you, therefore, entertain a doubt that hi' was one of the persons seen in Brown Street? And as to the prisoner, you will recollect, that, since the testimony of the young men has failed to show where he was on that evening, the last we hear or know of him, on the day preceding the mur- der, is. that at four o'clock, p. m., he was at his brother's in Wenham. He had left home, after dinner, in a manner doubtless designed to avoid observation, and had gone to Wenham, probably by way of Danvers. As we hear nothing of him after four o'clock, p. m., for the remainder of the clay and evening; as he was one of the conspirators; as Richard ( rowninshield, Jr. was another; as Richard Crowninshield. Jr. was in town in the evening, and yet seen in no usual place of resort, — the inference is very fair, that Richard Crowninshield, Jr. and the prisoner were together, acting in execution of their conspiracy. Of the four conspirators, J. J. Knapp, Jr. was at Wenham. and George Crown in- shield has been accounted for; so that if the persons seen in llmwn Street were the murderers, one of them must have been Richard Crowninshield, Jr., and the other must have been the prisoner at the bar. Now. as to the proof of his identity with one o)' the persons seen in Brown Street. Mr. Mirick, a cautious witness, examined the person he saw, closely, in a lighl night, and saj - that he thinks the prisoner at the bar is the person ; and tiial he should not hesitate at all, if he were seen in the same dress. Bis opin- ion is formed partlj Erorn hisown obser- vation, and partly t'roiii the description of others. Rui this description turn- out to he oiiK in regard to the dress. It, aid, that he i-. now more confident than on the former trial. If he has varied in his testimony, make such al- lowance as you may think proper. I do not perceive any material variance. He thought him the same person, when he was first brought to court, and as he saw him get out of the chaise. This Ls one of the cases in which a witness is per- mitted to give an opinion. This wit- ness is as honest as yourselves, neither willing nor swift; but he says, he be- lieves it was the man. His words are, •■ This is my r opinion "; and this opinion it is proper for him to give. If partly founded on what he has heard, then this opinion is not to be taken; but if on what he saw, then you can have no better evidence. I lay no stress on similarity of dress. No man will ever lose his life by my voice on such evidence. But then it is proper to notice, that no infer- ences drawn from any dissimilarity of dress can be given in the prisoner's favor; because, in fact, the person seen by Mirick was dressed like the prisoner. The description of the person seen by Mirick answers to that of the prisoner at the bar. In regard to the supposed di-crepancy of statements, before and now, there would be no end to such minute inquiries. It would not be strange if witnesses should vary. I do not think much of slight shades of varia- tion. If I believe the witness is honest, that is enough. If he lias expressed himself more strongly now than then, this does not prove him false. Peter E. Webster saw the prisoner at the bar, as lie then thought, and still thinks, walking in Howard Street at half-past nine o'clock. He then thought it was Frank Knapp, and has not altered his opinion since, lie knew him well; he had lout;- known him. It he then thought it was he, this goes far to prove it. He observed him the more, as it was unusual to see gentlemen walk there at that hour. It was a ret ired, lonely street. Mow, is there reasonable doubt that Mr. Webster did see him there that night? I low can you have more proof than this? He judged by his walk, by his general appearance, by his deportment. We all judge in this inanner. if you believe he is right, it goea a great way in this THE MURDEB Or CAPTAIN JOSEPH Will I i: 217 case. But then thia person, Lt is said, hod a cloak on, and I hat he could aot, therefore, be the sunn' person that Miriek saw. If we were treating of men that hail no occasion to disguise themselves or their conduct, there might lie sonic- thing in this argument. Bui as it is, there is Little in it. It may be presumed thai they would change their dress. This would help their disguise. What Is easier than to throw off a cloak, and again put it on? Perhaps he was less fearful of being known when alone, than when with the perpetrator. Mr. Southwick swears all that a man can swear, lie has the best means of judging that could be had at the time. lie tells you that he left his father's house at half-past ten o'clock, and as he passed to his own house in Brown Street lie saw a. man sitting' on the steps of the rope-walk; that he passed him three times, and each time he held down his head, so t hat he did not see his face. That the, man had on a cloak, which was not wrapped around him, and a glazed cap. That he took the man to be Frank Kna | >] i at the time; that, when he went into his house, he told his wife that he thought it was Frank Knapp; that he knew him well, having known him from a boy. And his wife sw'ears that he did so tell her when he came home. What could mislead this witness at the time? He was not then suspecting Frank Knapp of any thing. He could not then be in- fluenced by any prejudice. If you believe that the witness saw Frank Knapp in this position at this time, it proves the case. Whether you believe it or not depends upon the credit of the witness. He swears it. If true, it is solid evidence. .Mrs. Southwick supports her husband. Are they true? Are they worthy of belief? If he deserves the epithets ap- plied to him, then he ought not to be believed. In this fact they cannot be mistaken; they are right, or they are perjured. As to his not speaking to Frank Knapp, that depends upon their intimacy. But .a very good reason is, Frank chose to disguise himself. This makes nothing against his credit. Bui it is said that he should not be believed. And why? Because, it is -aid, he him- self in iw (ells you, that, when he testi- fied before the grand JUTJ at Ipswich, he did not then say lh.it he thoughl the person Ik; saw in Brown Street was Fiank Knapp, but that •• the pel on was about the size of Selman." The means of attacking him. therefore, come from himself. If he is a false man, why should he tell truths against himself? they rely on his veracity to prove that he is a liar. Before you can come (,, 1 1 » i — conclusion, you will consider whether all the circumstances are now known, that should have a bearing on this point. Supp086 that , when lie was lief,, re fche grand jury, he was asked by the attor- ney this question, - Was the person you saw in Hrown Street about the size of Selman? " and he answered Yes. This was all true. Suppose, also, that he expected to be inquired of further, and no further questions were put to him. Would it not be extremely hard to im- pute to him perjury for this? It is not uncommon for witnesses to think that they have done all their duty, when they have answered the questions put to them. But suppose that we admit that he did not then tell all he knew, this does not affect the fact at all; because he did tell, at the time, in the hearing of others, that the person he saw was Frank Kna] p. There is not the slightest suggestion against the veracity or accuracy of Sirs. Southwick. Now she swears positively, that her husband came into the house and told her that he hail seen a person on the rope-walk steps, and believed it was Frank Knapp. It is said that Mr. Southwick is con- tradicted, also, by Mr. Shillaber. I do not so understand Mr. Shillaber's testi- mony. I think what tiny- both testify is reconcilable, and consistent. My learned brother said, on a similar occa- sion, that there is more probability, in such cases, that the persons hearing should misunderstand, than that the person speaking should contradict him- self. 1 think tic same remark appli- cable here. You have all witnessed the uncer- tainty of testimony, when witnesses are 218 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. called to testify whal other witnesses said. Several respectable counsellors have been summoned, on this occasion, to give testimony of that sort. They have, every one of them, given different versions. They all took minutes at the time, and without doubt intend to state the truth. But still they differ. Mr. ShiUaber's vision is different from every thiiur that Southwiek has stated elsewhere. Hut little reliance is to be placed on slight variations in testimony. unless they are manifestly intentional. I think that .Mr. Shillaber must be sat- isfied that he did not rightly understand .Air. Southwiek. I confess I misunder- stood Mr. Shillaber on the former trial, if I now rightly understand him. I, therefore, did not then recall Mr. South- wiek to the stand. Mr. Southwiek, as I read it, understood Mr. Shillaber as ask- ing him about a person coming out of Newbury Street, and whether, for aught he knew, it might not be Richard Crowninshield, Jr. He answered, that he could not tell. He did not under- stand Mr. Shillaber as questioning him as to the person whom he saw sitting on the steps of the rope-walk. Southwiek, on this trial, having heard Mr. Shillaber, has been recalled to the stand, and states that Mr. Shillaber entirely misunder- stood him. This is certainly most pr. .li- able, because the controlling fact in the case is not controverted; that is, that Southwiek did tell his wife, at the very moment he entered his house, that he had seen a person on the rope-walk steps, whom he believed to be Frank Knapp. Nothing can prove with more certainty than this, that Southwiek, at the time, thought the person whom he thus saw to I.,- tie- prisoner at the bar. Mr. Bray is an acknowledged accu- rate ami intelligent witness. lie was highly complimented by my brother on the former trial, although he now charges him with varying his testimony. What could he bis motive? You will be slow in imputing t<> him any design of tins kind. I deny altogether that there is any contradiction. There may be dif- ferences, but nol '-"lit radicl ion. These arise 1 1 "in the difference in the questions put; the difference between believing and knowing. On the first trial, he said he did not know the person, and now says the same. Then, we did not do all we had a right to do. We did not ask him who he thought it was. Now, when so asked, he says he believes it was the prisoner at the bar. If he had then been asked this question, he would have given the same answer. That he has expressed himself more strongly, I admit; but he has not contradicted him- self. He is more confident now; and that is all. A man may not assert a thing, and still may have no doubt upon it. Cannot every man see this distinc- tion to be consistent? I leave him in that attitude; that only is the difference. On questions of identity, opinion is evi- dence. We may ask the witness, either if he knew who the person seen was, or who he thinks he was. And he may well answer, as Captain Bray has an- swered, that he does not know r who it was, but that he thinks it was the pris- oner. We have offered to produce witnesses to prove, that, as soon as Bray saw the prisoner, he pronounced him the same person. We are not at liberty to call them to corroborate our own witness. How, then, could this fact of the pris- oner's being in Brown Street be better proved? If ten witnesses had testified to it, it would be no better. Two men, w ho knew him well, took it to be Frank Knapp, and one of them so said, when there was nothing to mislead them. Two others, who examined him closely, now swear to their opinion that he is the man. .Miss Jaqneth saw three persons pass by the rope-walk, several evenings before tin' murder, she saw one of them p< iint- ing towards Mr. White's house. She noticed that another had something which appeared to be like an instru- ment of music; that, he put it. behind him and attempted to conceal it. Who were these persons? This was but a few steps I'n mi the place where this ap- parent instrument, of music (of music suofc as Richard Crowninshield, Jr. Bpoke of to Palmer) was afterwards THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPE WHITE 219 found. These facts prove this a point of rendezvous for these parties. They show Brown Street to have been the place for consultation and observation; and to this purpose it was well suited. .Mi-. Burns's testimony is also impor- tant. What was the defendant's object in his private conversation with Burns? He knew that Burns was out that night; that he lived near Brown Street, and that he had prohahly seen him; and he wished hirn to say nothing. He Said to Burns, " If you saw any of your friends out that night, say nothing about it; my brother Joe and I are your friends." This is plain proof that he wished to say to him, if you saw me in Brown Street that night, say nothing about it. But it is said that Burns ought not to be believed, because he mistook the color Of the dagger, and because he has varied in his description of it. These are slight circumstances, if his general character be good. To my mind they are of no importance. It is for you to make what deduction you may think proper, on this account, from the weight of his evidence. His conversation with Burns, if Burns is believed, shows two things; first, that he desired Burns not to mention it, if he had seen him on the night of the mur- der; second, that he wished to fix the charge of murder on Mr. Stephen White. Both of these prove his own guilt. I think you will be of opinion, that Brown Street was a probable place for the conspirators to assemble, and for an aid to be stationed. If we knew their whole plan, and if we were skilled to judge in such a case, then we could per- haps determine on this point better. But it is a retired place, and still com- mands a full view of the house ; a lonely place, but still a place of observation. Not so lonely that a person would excite suspicion to be seen walking there in an ordinary manner; not so public as to be noticed by many. It is near enough to the scene of action in point of law. it was their point of centrality. The club was found near the spot, in a place pro- vided for it, in a place that had been previously hunted out, in a concerted place of concealment. Here was their point of ren I hie mighl the lights he seen. Here might an aid he BOCreted. Here \\as he within e.ill I [ere mighl he he aroused by the sound of the whistle. Here might he carry the weapon. Here mighl lie receive the murderer after the murder. Then, Gentlemen, the general qa tion occurs, Is it satisfactorily proved, by all these facts and circumstances, that the defendant was in and about Brown Street (Hi the night of the mur- der? Considering that the murder was effected by a conspiracy; < sideling that he was one of the four conspirai considering that two of the conspirators have accounted for themselves on the night of the murder, ami were not in Brown street; considering thai the pris- oner does not account for himself, nor show where he was; considering that Richard Crowninshield, the other con- spirator and the perpetrator, is not ac- counted for, nor shown to be elsewhere; considering that it is now past all doubt that two persons were seen lurking in and about Brown Street at different times, avoiding observation, and excit- ing so much suspicion that the neigh- bors actually watched them ; considering that, if these persons thus lurking in Brown Street at that hour were not the murderers, it remains to this day wholly unknown who they were or what their business was; considering the testimony of j\Iiss Jaqueth, and that the club was afterwards found near this place; consid- ering, finally, that Webster and South- wick saw these persons, and then took one of them for the defendant, and that Southwick then told his wife so, and that Bray and Mirick examined them closely, and now swear to their belief that the prisoner was one of them; — it is for you to say, putting these consider- ations together, whether you believe the prisoner was actually in Brown Street at the time of the murder. By tie- counsel for the prisoner, much stress has been laid upon the question, wlether Brown Street was a place in which aid could be given, a place in which actual assistance could be ren- dered in this transaction. This must be 220 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. mainly decided by their own opinion who selected the place; by what they thought at the time, according to their plan of operation. If it was agreed that the prisoner should be there to assist, it is enough. If they though! the place proper for their purpose, according to their plan, it is sufficient. Suppose we could prove ex- pressly that they agreed that Frank should 1"' there, and he was there, and you should think it not a well-chosen place for aiding and abetting, must he be acquitted? No! It is not what / think or you think of the appropriate- ness of the place; it is what they thought at the time. If the prisoner was in Brown Street by appointment and agree- ment with the perpetrator, for the pur- pose of giving assistance if assistance should be needed, it may safely be pre- sumed that the place was suited to such assistance as it was supposed by the par- ties might chance to become requisite. If in Brown Street, was he there by appointment? was he there to aid, if aid were necessary? was he there for, or against, the murderer? to concur, or to oppose ? to favor, or to thwart ? Did the perpetrator know he was there, there waiting? If so, then it. follows that he was there by appointment. He was at the post half an hour; he was waiting for somebody. This proves appoint- ment, arrangement, previous agreement ; then it follows that he was there to aid, to encourage, to embolden the perpetra- tor; and that is enough. If he were in such a situation as to afford aid, or that he was relied upon for aid, then he was aiding and abetting, [t is enough that the conspirator desired to have him there. Besides, it may be well said, that he could afford jusi as much aid there as if he had been in Essex Street, as if he b el bi en standing even at the gate, or at the window. It was not an act of power again I power that was to be done; it was a secrel act, to be done by Btealth. The aid was t<> be pi; d in a position Becure from observation. It was impor- tant to Hi'' security of both that he should he in a Lonely pli Now it is obvious that there are many purposes for which he might be in Brown Street. 1. Richard Crowninshield might have been secreted in the garden, and wait- ing for a signal: 2. Or he might be in Brown Street to advise him as to the time of making his entry into the house; 3. Or to favor his escape; 4. Or to see if the street was clear when lie came out; 5. Or to conceal the weapon or the clothes ; 0. To be ready for any unforeseen contingency. Richard Crowninshield lived in Dan- vers. He would retire by the most se- cret way. Brown Street is that way. If you find him there, can you doubt why he was there? If, Gentlemen, the prisoner went into Brown Street, by appointment with the perpetrator, to render aid or encourage- ment in any of these ways, he was pres- ent, in legal contemplation, aiding and abetting in this murder. It is not necessary that he should have done any thing; it is enough that he was ready to act, and in a place to act. If his being in Brown Street, by appointment, at the time of the murder, emboldened the purpose and encouraged the heart of the murderer, by the hope of instant aid, if aid should become necessary, then, with- out doubt, he was present, aiding and abetting, aud was a principal in the murder. I now proceed, Gentlemen, to the con- sideration of the testimony of Mr. Colman. Although this evidence bears on every material part of the cause, I have purposely avoided every comment on it till the present n nt. when I have done with the other evidence in the ease. As to the admission of this evi- dence, there has 1 n a great struggle, and its importance demanded it. The general rule of law is, that confessions are to he received as evidence. They are entitled to greal or to little consid- eration, according to the circumstances under which they are made. Voluntary, deliberate confessions arc the most ina- THE MURDKIl OK CAPTAIN JOSEPB WHITE. 221 portanl and satisfactory evidence, l>ut. confessions hastily made, or improperly obtained, are entitled to little or do con- sideration. It is always to be inquired, whether they were purely voluntary, or were made under any undue influence of hope or fear; for, in general, it' any intlnence were exerted on the mind of the person confessing, such confessions are not to be submitted to a jury. Who is Mr. Colman ? He is an intelli- gent, accurate, and cautious witness: a gentleman of high and well-known char- acter, and of unquestionable veracity; as a clergyman, highly respectable; as a man, of fair name and fame. Why was Mr. Colman with the pris- oner? Joseph , I. Knapp was his parish- ioner; lie was the head of a family, and had been married by Mr. Colman. The interests of that family were dear to him. He felt for their afflictions, and was anxious to alleviate their sufferings. He went from the purest and best of mo- tives to visit Joseph Knapp. He came to save, not to destroy; to rescue, not to take away life. In this family he thought there might be a chance to save one. It is a misconstruction of Mr. Colman's motives, at once the most strange and the most uncharitable, a perversion of all just views of his con- duct and intentions the most unaccount- able, to represent him as acting, on this occasion, in hostility to any one, or as desirous of injuring or endangering any one. He has stated his own motives, and his own conduct, in a manner to command universal belief and universal respect. For intelligence, for consist- ency, for accuracy, for caution, for can- dor, never did witness acquit himself better, or stand fairer. In all that ho did as a man, and all he has said as a witness, he has shown himself worthy of entire regard. Now, Gentlemen, very important con- fessions made by the prisoner are sworn to by Mr. Colman. They were made in the prisoner's cell, where Mr. Cohnan had gone with the prisoner's brother, N. Phippen Knapp. Whatever conver- sation took place was in the presence of N. P. Knapp. Now, on the part of the prisoner, two things ar< d ; first, i hat Buch inducements •■ edto the pi isoner, in this interview, thai no confessions mad.' by him ought i" be received : second, that, in point of fact , he made im Mich confessions as Mr. Colman testifies to, nor, indeed, any confessions at all. These two proposi- tions are attempted in be supported l>y the testimony of X. P. Knapp. I hese two witnesses, Mr. Colman and N. P. Knapp, differ entirely. There is no possibility of reconciling them. No charity can cover both. One or the other has sworn falsely. If X. 1'. Knapp l>e believed, Mr. Colman's b mony must be wholly disregarded. It is, then, a question of credit, a question of belief between the two witnet As you decide between these, so you will decide on all this part of the CS Mr. Cohnan has given you a plain narrative, a consistent account, and has uniformly stated the same things. He is not contradicted, except by the testi- mony of Phippen Knapp. He is influ- enced, as far as we can see, by no bias, or prejudice, any more than other men, except so far as his character is now at stake. He has feelings on this point, doubtless, and ought to have. If what he has stated be not true, I cannot see any ground for his escape. If he be a true man, he must have heard what he testifies. No treachery of memory brings to memory things that cover took place. There is no reconciling his evi- dence with good intention, if the facta in it are not as he stales them. He is on trial as to his veracity. The relation in which the other wit- ness stands deserves your careful consid- eration. He is a member of the family. He has the lives of two brothers de- pending, as he may think, on the effect of his evidence; depending on every word he speaks. I hope he has not an- other responsibility resting upon him. By the advice of a friend, and that friend Mr. Colman, J. Knapp made a full and free confession, and obtained a promise of pardon. He ha . as you know, probably by the advice of other friends, retracted that confession, ooo -. — _ THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. and rejected the offered pardon. Events will show wIki of these friends and ad- visers advised him best, and befriended him most. In the mean time, if this brother, the witness, be one of these advisers, and advised the retraction, he has. most emphatically, the lives of his brothers resting upon his evidence and upon his conduct. Compare the situa- tion of these two witnesses. Do you not see mighty motive enough on the one side, and want of all motive on the other? 1 would gladly find an apology for that witness, in his agonized feel- ings, in his distressed situation; in the agitation of that hour, or of this. I would gladly impute it to error, or to want of recollection, to confusion of mind, or disturbance of feeling. I would gladly impute to any pardonable source that which cannot be reconciled to facts and to truth ; but, even in a case calling for so much sympathy, justice must yet prevail, and we must come to the conclusion, however reluctantly, which that demands from us. It is said, Phippen Knapp was prob- al »ly correct, because he knew he should probably be called as a witness. Wit- ness to what? When he says there was no confession, what could he expect to bear witness of? But I do not put it on the ground that lie did not hear; I am compelled to put it on the other ground, that he d'nl hear, and does not now truly tell what he heard. If Mr. Colman were out of the case, there are other reasons why the story of Phippen Knapp should not be believed. It has in it inherent improbabilities. It bural, and inconsistent with the accompanying circumstances. lie tells you that they went " to the cell of Crank, I ■• if ho had any objection to taking a trial, and suffering his brother to accept the offer of pardon *' ; in other woid-. to obtain Frank's consent to Jo- seph's making a confession; and in case this consent was not obtained, that the pardon would I ffered to Frank. I >id ile \ handy about the chance of life, be- tween th two, in this way? Did Mr. Colman. after having given this pledge to Joseph, and after having received a disclosure from Joseph, go to the cell of Frank for such a purpose as this? It is impossible: it cannot be so. Again, we know that Mr. Colman found the club the next day; that he went directly to the place of deposit, and found it at the first attempt, exact ly where he says he had been informed it was. Now I'hippen Knapp says, that Frank had stated nothing respecting the club; that it was not mentioned in that conversation. He says, also, that he was present in the cell of Joseph all the time that Mr. Colman was there; that he believes he heard all that was said in Joseph's cell; and that he did not him- self know where the club was, and never had known where it was, until he heard it stated in court. Now it is certain that Mr. Colman says he did not learn the particular place of deposit of the club from Joseph ; that he only learned from him that it was deposited under the steps of the Howard Street meeting- house, without defining the particular steps. It is certain, also, that he had more knowledge of the position of the club than this; else how could he have placed his hand on it so readily? and where else could he have obtained this knowledge, except from Frank? Here Mr. Dexter said that Mr. Colman had had other interviews with Joseph, and might have derived the information from him at previous visits. .Mr. Webster re- plied, that Mr. Colman had testified that he learned nothing in relation to the club until this visit. Mr. Dexter denied there being any such testimony. Mr. Column's evi- dence was read, from the notes of the judges, and several other persons, and Mr. Webster then proceeded. My point is to show that Phippen Knapp'a story is not true, is not consist- ent with itself; that, taking it for grant- ed, as he says, that he heard all that was said to Mr. Colman in both cells, by Jo- seph and by Frank; and that Joseph did not state particularly where the club was deposited; and that he knew as much about the place of deposit of the club as Mr. Colman knew; why, then Mr. Col- man must either have been miraculously informed respecting the club, or Phippen THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH win j i: 228 Knapp has not told you the whole bruth. There is no reconciling this, without supposing thai Mr. Colraan lias misrep- resented what took | 'lace in Joseph's cell, as well as wlial hick place in Frank 's cell. Again, Phippen Knapp is directlj contradicted by Mr. Wheatland. Mr. Wheatland tells the same story, as com- ing from Phippen Knapp, that Colman now tells. Here there are two against one. Phippen Knapp says that Frank made no confessions, and thai he said lie had none to make. In this lie is con- tradicted by Wheatland. He, Phippen Knapp, told Wheatland, that Mr. Col- inan did ask Prank some questions, and that Frank answered them. He told him also what these answers were. Wheat- land does not recollect the questions or answers, but recollects his reply; which was, "Is not this premature f I think this answer is sufficient to make Frank a principal." Here Phippen Knapp opposes himself to Wheatland, as well as to Mr. Colman. Do you believe Phip- pen Knapp against these two respectable witnesses, or them against him? Is not Mr. Column's testimony credi- ble, natural, and proper? To judge of this, you must go back to that scene. The murder had been committed; the two Knapps were now arrested; four persons were already in jail supposed to be concerned in it, the Crowninshields, and Selman, and Chase. Another per- son at the Eastward was supposed to be in the plot; it was important to learn the facts. To do this, some one of those suspected must be admitted to turn state's witness. The contest was, Who should have this privilege? It was un- derstood that it was about to be offered to Palmer, then in Maine; there was no good reason why he should have the preference. Mr. Colman felt interested for the family of the Knapps, and par- ticularly for Joseph. He was a young man who had hitherto maintained a fair standing in society; he was a husband. Mr. Colman was particularly intimate with his family. With these views be went to the prison. He believed that he might safely converse with the pris- oner, because he thought confessions made to ;i clergyman were sacred, and that be could not be oalled upon bo dii ••love them. He went, the oral time, in the morning, and was requested bo come again. He wen! again ai three o'clock ; and was requested bo call again at ti\.- o'clock. In the mean ti he saw the lather ami Phippen, and they wished be would not go again, because it would be said the prisoners were making confes- sion. lie said be had engaged b again at five o'clock; but would not, if Phippen would excuse him to Joseph. Phippen engaged to do this, and bo i t liim at his office at live o'clock. Mr. Colman went to the office at the time, and waited; but, as Phippen was not there, be walked down street, and ~,m him coming from the jail. He met him, and while in conversation near the church, he saw Mrs. Beckford and Mrs. Knapp going in a chaise towards the jail. He hastened to meet them, as he thought it not proper for them to go in at that time. While conversing with them near the jail, he received two distinct messages from Joseph, that he wished to see him. He thought it proper to go; and accordingly went to Joseph's cell, and it was while there that the dis- closures were made. Before Joseph had finished his statement, Phippen came to the door; he was soon alter admitted. A short interval ensued, and they went together to the cell of Frank. Mr. ( !ol- m:iii went in by invitation of Phippen; he had come directlj from the cell of Joseph, where he had for the firsi time learned the incidents of bhe tragedy. He was incredulous as to some of the facts which he had learned, bhey were so different from his previous impres- sions. He was desirous of knowing whether he could place confidence in what Joseph had told him. He, there- fore, put bhe questions to Frank, as be has testified before you; in answer to which Frank Knapp informed him, — 1. "That the murder took place be- tween ten and eleven ..'clue! 2. •■That Richard Crowninshield 1 alone in the house." 3. "That he, Frank Knapp, went home afterwards." 224 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. 4. " That the club was deposited under tli>' steps of the Howard Street meeting-house, an.l under the part near- est the burying-ground, in a rat hole." 5. "That the dagger or daggers had been worked up at the factory." It is said that these five answers just tit the case; thai they are just what was want.'. I, and neither more nor less. True, they are; but the reason is, be- cause truth always fits. Truth is always congruous, and agrees with itself: every truth in the universe agrees with every other truth in the universe; whereas falsehoods not only disagree with truths, but usually quarrel among themselves. Surely Mr. Colman is influenced by no bias, no prejudice; he has no feelings to warp him, except, now that he is con- tradicted, he may feel an intei-est to be believed. If you believe Mr. Colman, then the evidence is fairly in the case. I shall now proceed on the ground that you do believe Mr. Colman. When told that Joseph had deter- mined to confess, the defendant said, ■' It is hard, or unfair, that Joseph should have the benefit of confessing, since the thing was done for his benefit." What thing was done for his benefit? Does not this carry an implication of the guilt of the defendant? Does it not show- that he had a knowledge of the object and history of the murder? The defendant said, "I told Joseph, when he proposed it, that it was a silly business, and would get us into trouble." lie knew, then, what this business was; he knew that Joseph proposed it, and that be agreed to it, else he could not ix5 into trouble; he understood its bearing and its consequences. Thus much was said, under circumstances that make it clearly evidence against him, before there js any pretence of an inducement held out. And does not this prove him to have had a knowledge of t he con piracy? He knew the daggers had been de- stroyed, and he knew who committed the murder. How could he have inno- cently known these facts? Why, if by Richard's story, this BboWS him guilty of a knowledge of the murder, and of the conspiracy. More than all, he knew when the deed was done, and that he went home afterwards. This shows his participation in that deed. ' ' Went home afterwards " ! Home, from what scene? home, from what fact? home, from what transaction? home, from what place? This confirms the supposition that the prisoner was in Brown Street for the purposes ascribed to him. These ques- tions were directly put, and directly answered. He does not intimate that he received the information from an- other. Now, if he knows the time, and went home afterwards, and does not ex- cuse himself, is not this an admission that he had a hand in this murder? Already proved to be a conspirator in the murder, he now confesses that he knew who did it, at what time it was done, that he was himself out of his own house at the time, and went home after- wards. Is not this conclusive, if not explained? Then comes the club. He told where it was. This is like posses- sion of stolen goods. He is charged with the guilty knowledge of this con- cealment. He must show, not say, how he came by this knowledge. If a man be found with stolen goods, he must prove how he came by them. The place of deposit of the club was premedi- tated and selected, and he knew where it was. Joseph Knapp was an accessory, and an accessory only; he knew only what was told him. Hut the prisoner knew the particular spot in which the club might be found. This shows his know 1- edge something more than that of an accessory. This presumption must be rebutted by evidence, or it, stands strong against him. He has too much knowl- edge of this transaction to have come innocently by it. It must stand against him until he explains it. This testimony of Mr. Colman is rep- resented as new matter, and therefore an attempt has been made to excite a prejudice against it. It is not so. How little is there in it, after all, that did ii ( it appear from other sources? It is mainly confirmatory. Compare what THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. 225 you learn from this confession with what you before knew. As to its hein.LT proposed by .Joseph, was not that known'.'' As to Richard's being alone in the house, was not that known? As to the daggers, was not that known? As to the time of the murder, was not that known? As to his being out that night, was not that known? As to his returning afterwards, was not that known? As to the club, was not that known? So this information confirms what was known before, and fully confirms it. One word as to the interview between Mr. Column and Phippen Enapp on the turnpike. It is said that Mr. Colman's conduct in this matter is inconsistent with his testimony. There does not appear to me to be any inconsistency. He tells you that his object was to save Joseph, and to hurt no one, and least of all the prisoner at the bar. He had probably told Mr. White the substance of what he heard at the prison. He had probably told him that Frank confirmed what Joseph had confessed. He was unwilling to be the instrument of harm to Frank. He therefore, at the request of Phippen Enapp, wrote a note to Mr. "White, requesting him to consider Jo- seph as authority for the information he had received. He tells you that this is the only thing he has to regret, as it may seem to be an evasion, as he doubts whether it was entirely correct. If it was an evasion, if it was a deviation, if it was an error, it was an error of mercy, an error of kindness, — an error that proves he had no hostility to the pris- oner at the bar. It does not in the least vary his testimony, or affect its correctness. Gentlemen, I look on the evidence of Mr. Colman as highly im- portant; not as bringing into the cause new facts, but as confirming, in a very satisfactory manner, other evidence. It is incredible that he can be false, and that he is seeking the prisoner's life If he is true, through false swearing it is Incredible that the prisoner can i»-. innocent . Gentlemen, I have pone through with the ei idence in this case, and have en- deavored to Btate it plainly and fairly before you. I think there are conclu- sions to be drawn from it, the accuracy of which you cannot doubt. I think you cannot doubt that there was a conspiracy formed for the purpose of committing this murder, and who the, conspirators were: That you cannot doubt thai the Crowninshields and the Enapps were the parties in this conspiracy: That you cannot doubt that the pris- oner at the bar knew that the murder was to be done on the night of the Gth of April: That you cannot doubt that the mur- derers of Captain White were the suspi- cious persons seen in and about Brown Street on that night : That you cannot doubt that Richard Crowninshield was the perpetrator of that crime: That you cannot doubt that the pris- oner at the bar was in Brown Street on that night. If there, then it must be by agree- ment, to countenance, to aid the perpe- trator. And if so, then he is guilty as Principal. Gentlemen, your whole concern should be to do your duty, and leave consequen- ces to take care of themselves. You will receive the law from the court. Your verdict, it is true, may endanger the prisoner's life, but then it is to save other lives. If the prisoner's guilt has been shown and proved beyond all reasonable doubt, you will convict him. If such reasonable doubts of guilt still remain, you will acquit him. You are the judges of the whole case. You owe a duty to the public, as well as to the pris- oner at the bar. You cannot presume to be wiser than the law. Your duty is a plain, straightforward one. Doubt- less we would all judge him in mercy. Towards him, as an individual, the law inculcates no hostility: lmt towards him, if [Moved to be a murderer, the law, and 15 226 THE MURDER OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH WHITE. the oaths you have taken, and public justice, demand thai you do your duty. With consciences satisfied with the discharge of duty, no consequences can harm you. There is no evil that we cannot either face or fly from, but the consciousness of duty disregarded. A sense of duty pursues us ever. It is om- nipresent, like the Deity. If we take to ourselves the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, duty performed, or duty violated, is still with us, for our happiness or our mis- ery. If we say the darkness shall coyer us, in the darkness as in the light our obligations are yet with us. We can- not escape their power, nor fly from their presence. They are with us in this life, will be with us at its close; and in that scene of inconceivable solemnity, which lies yet farther onward, we shall still lind ourselves surrounded by the con- sciousness of duty, to pain us wherever it has been violated, and to console us so far as God may have given us grace to perform it. THE REPLY TO HAYNE. SECOND SPEECH ON "FOOT'S RESOLUTION," DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 26th AND 27th OF JANUARY, 1830. [Mb. Webster having completed on Jan- uary 20th his first speech on Foot's resolu- tion, Mr. Benton spoke in reply, on the 20th anil 21st of January, 1830. Mr. Hayne of South Carolina followed on the same side, hut, after some time, gave way for a motion for adjournment. On Monday, the 25th, Mr. Hayne resumed, and concluded his argument. Mr. Webster immediately rose in reply, but yielded the floor for a motion for adjournment. The next day (26th January, 1830) Mr. Webster took the floor and delivered the following speech, which has given such great celebrity to the debate. The circum- stances connected with this remarkable ef- fort of parliamentary eloquence are vividly set forth in Mr. Everett's Memoir, prefixed to the first volume of Mr. Webster's Works.] Mr. President, — When the mari- ner has been tossed for many days in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his latitude, and as- certain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imi- tate this prudence, and, before we float farther on the waves of this debate, refer to the point from which we departed, that we may at least be able to conjecture where we new are. I ask for the reading of the resolution before the Senate. The Secretary read the resolution, as follows : — "Resolved, That the Committee on Public Lands be instructed to inquire and report the quantity of public lands remaining un- sold within each State and Territory, and whether it he expedient to limit for a c< r- tain period the sales of the public land- to such lands only as have heretofore been offered for Bale, and are now subject to entry at the minimum price. And, also, « nether the office of Surveyor-) ieneral, and BOme of the land offices, may not be abol- ished without detriment to the public inter- est; or whether it be expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sale- and extend more rapidly the surveys of the public lands." We have thus heard, Sir, what the resolution is which is actually before us for consideration; and it will readily occur to every one, that it is almost the only subject about which something has not been said in the speech, running through two days, by which the Senate has been entertained by the gentleman from South Carolina. Every topic in the wide range of our public affairs, whether past or present, — every thing, general or local, whether belonging to national politics or party politics, — seems to have attracted more or less of the honorable member's attention. - only the resolution before the Senate. He has spoken of every thing but the public lands; they have escaped his no- tice. To that subject, in all his excur- sions, he has not paid even the respect of a passing glance. When this debate, Sir, was to be re- sumed, on Thursday morning, il happened that it would have been con- venient for me to be elsewhere. The honorable member, however, did Dot incline to put off the discussion to an- other day. He had a shot, he said, to return, and he wished to discharge it. _, js THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. That shot. Sir, which he thus kindly in- formed us was coming, thai we might stand out of the way, or prepare our- ea to fall by it and die with decency, has now been received. Under all ad- vantages, and with expectation awa- kened by t lie tone which preceded it, it has been discharged, and has spent its force. It may become me to say no more of its effect, than that, if nobody is found, after all, either killed or wounded, it is imt the first time, in the history of human affairs, thai the vigor and success of the war have not quite a ime up to the lofty and sounding phrase of the manifesto. The gentleman, Sir, in declining to pone the debate, told the Senate, with the emphasis of his hand upon his heart, that there was something ran- kling here, which he wished to relieve. [Mr. Ilayne rose, and disclaimed having used the word rankling."] It would not, Mr. President, be safe for the honorable member to appeal to those around him, upon the question whether he did in fact make use of that word. But he may have been unconscious of it. At any rate, it is enough that he disclaims it. But still, with or without the use of that particular word, he had yet something here, 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 gen- tleman. There is nothing here, Sir, which gives me the slightest uneasiness; neither fear, nor anger, nor that which 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 origi- nating here, for I had ool the slightesl feeling of unkindness towards the hon- orable member. Some passages, it is . had occurred since our acquaint- ance 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 with respecl to 111 -t -| ch j and w hdi lie gal do\\ n. urprised, and I musl even say astonished, at some of his opinions, nothing was farther from my intention than to commence any personal warfare. Through the whole of the few remarks I made in answer, I avoided, studiously and carefully, every thing 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 rankles, or in any way gives me annoy- ance. I will not accuse the honorable member of violating the rules 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 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 quivering in the object at which they were aimed. The honorable member complained that I had slept on his speech. I must have slept on it, or not slept at all. The moment the honorable member sat down, his friend from Missouri rose, and, with much honeyed commendation of the speech, suggested that the impressions which it had produced were too charm- ing 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 good feeling? Must I not have been abso- lutely malicious, if I could have, thrust myself forward, to de-troy 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 if it be meant, by sleeping upon his speech, that I took time to prepare a reply to it, it is quite a mistake. Ow- ing to other engagements, I could not employ even the interval between the adjournment of the senate and it- meet- ing the next morning, in attention to the Bubject of this debate. Neverthe- THE REPLY TO HAVNi;. 229 less, Sir, the mere matter of fad is undoubtedly true, l did sleep <>n the gentleman's speech, and slept roundly. And I slept equally \\<'ll <>n his speech of yesterday, to which 1 am now reply- ing. It is quite possible that in this respect, also, I possess some advantage over tin- honorable member, attributa- ble, 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 object of such a reply. Why was he singled out? If an attack has been made on the East, he, he as- sures US, did not begin it; it was made by the gentleman from Missouri. Sir, I answered the gentleman's speech be- cause I happened to hear it ; and because, also, I chose to give an answer to that speech, which, it' unanswered. I thought most likely to produce injurious impres- sions. I did not stop to inquire who was the original drawer of the bill. 1 found a responsible indorser before me, and it was my purpose to hold him lia- ble, and to bring him to his just respon- sibility, without delay. But, Sir, this interrogatory of the honorable member was only introductory to another. 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 honorable member, modestke gratia, had chosen thus to defer to his friend, and to pay him a compliment, without intentional disparagement to others, it would have been quite according to the friendly courtesies of debate, and not at all ungrateful to my own feelings. I am not one of those, Sir, who esteem any tribute of regard, whether light and occasional, or more serious and delib- erate, 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. 1 am not at liberty to consider it as nothing more than a civility to his friend. It had an air of taunt and disparagement, something of the loftiness of asserted superiority, which does not allow m- to pa^s ii OTOT w it in >iii ii. ii i,-e. It was I'm as a ques- tion for me t" answer, ami .>.> put afl if ii were difficult for me to answer, whether 1 deemed tie- member from .Missouri an overmatch lor 1 1 1 s -«-lt" in debate here. It seems to me, sir. that this is extraordinary fanguage, and an extraordinary tone, for the discussions of this body. .Matches and overmatches ! Those terms are more applicable elsewhere than here, and litter lor other assem- blies than tins. 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 character, and of absolute independence. We know no masters, we acknowledge no dictators. This is a hall for mutual consultation and discussion; not an are- na for the exhibition of champions. I otter myself, Sir. as a match for no man ; I throw the challenge of debate at no man's feet. But theu, Sir, since the honorable member has put the question in a manner that calls for an answer, I will give him an answer; and I tell him, that, holding myself to be the humblest of the members here, I yet know noth- ing in the arm of his friend from Mis- souri, either alone or when aided by the arm of his friend from South Carolina, that need deter even me from espousing whatever opinions 1 may choose to es- pouse, 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 mat- ter of commendation or compliment, I should dissent from nothing which the honorable member 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. 1 throw it back, and say to the gentleman, that he could possibly say nothing less likely than such a comparison to wound my pride of personal character. The anger of its tone rescued the remark from intentional irony, which otherw ise, prob- ably, would have been in ureteral accep- tation. But, sir, if it be imagined that by this muiual quotation and coiiuneu- 280 THE RErLY TO HAYXE. dation; if it be supposed that, by cast- ing tlic characters of the drama, assign- ing to each lib part, to one the attack, to another the cry of onset; or if it If thought that, by aloud and empty vaunt of anticipated victory, any laurels are to be won hen", if it be imagined, espe- cially, that any or all these things will shake any purpose of mine, — I can tell the honorable member, once for all. thai he is greatly mistaken, and that he is dealing with one of whose temper and character he has yet much to learn. Sir, 1 shall not allow myself, on this occasion, I hope on uo occasion, to be betrayed into any loss of temper; but if provoked, as I trust I never shall be, into crimination and recrimination, the hon- orable 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 demand of him whatever powers of taunt and sarcasm he may possess. I commend him to a prudent husbandry of his resources. But, Sir, the Coalition! The Coali- tion! Ay, "the murdered Coalition!'" The gentleman asks, if I were led or frighted into this debate by the spectre of the Coalition. " Was it the ghost of the murdered Coalition," he exclaims, "which haunted the member from Mas- sachusetts; and which, like the ghost of Banquo, would never down?" "The murdered Coalition!" Sir, this charge of a coalition, in reference to the late administration, is not original with the honorable member. It did not spring up in the Senate. Whether as a fad. as an argument, or as an embellishment, it is all borrowed. He adopts it, in- deed, from a very low origin, and a Btill lower present condition. It is one of the thou dumnies with which the teemed, during an excited polii ical canvass. It. was a charge, of which there was ii"' only no proof or proba- bility, but which was in itself wholly impossible to be t rue \,> man of com- mon information ever believed a syllable of it. Yet it was of thai class of false- I-., which, b\ continued repetition, through all the organs of detraction and abuse, .are capable of misleading those who are already far misled, and of fur- ther fanning passion already kindling into flame. Doubtless it served in its day. and in greater or less degree, the end designed by it. Having done that, it has sunk into the general mass of stale and loathed calumnies. It is the very cast-off slough of a polluted and shameless press. Incapable of further mischief, it lies in the sewer, lifeless and despised. It is not now, Sir, in the power of the honorable member to give it dignity or decency, by attempting to elevate it, and to introduce it into the Senate. He cannot change it from what it is, an object of general disgust and scorn. On the contrary, the contact, if he choose to touch it, is more likely to drag him down, down, to the place where it lies itself. But, Sir, the honorable member was not, for other reasons, entirely happy in his allusion to the story of Banquo's murder and Banquo's ghost. It was not, I think, the friends, but the ene- mies of the murdered Banquo, at whose bidding his spirit would not down. The honorable gentleman is fresh in his read- ing of the English classics, and can put me right if I am wrong : but, according to my poor recollection, it was at those who had begun with caresses and ended with foul and treacherous murder that the gory locks were shaken. The ghost of Banquo, like that of Hamlet, was an honest ghost. It disturbed no innocent man. It knew where its appearance would strike terror, and who would cry out, A ghost! It made itself visible in the right quarter, and compelled the guilty and the conscience-smitten, and none others, to start, with, " Pr'ythee, see there ! behold! — look! lo, If I stlltlil here, 1 BaW llil"! " THEIR eyeballs were seared (was it not SO, Sir?) who had thought to shield themselves by concealing their own hand, and laying the imputation of the crime on a low and hireling agency in wickedness; who had vainly attempted to Btifle the workings of their own cow- Tin-: Ki.i'i.v TO iiavni: 231 ard consciences by ejaculating through white lips and ohattering teeth, " Thou canst not say I » I i * I it!" I have misread the great \ t if those who liaaine direct ion. Hut it is without adequate cause, and the suspi- cion which exists is wholly groundless. 1 bere i- not, and never has been, a dis- position in the North to interfere with these interests of the South. Such in- terference 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 policy, left with the States themselves, and with w Inch the Federal government had noth- ing to do. Certainly, Sir, I am, and ever have been, of that opinion. The gen- tleman, 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 point. I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest evils, both moral and political. 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 ml ints immedicabile of the social system, I leave it to those whose right and duty it is to inquire and to decide. And this I believe, Sir, is, and uniformly has been, the sentiment of the North. Let us look a little at the history of this matter. When the present Constitution was submitted for the ratification of the peo- ple, there were those who imagined that the powers of the government which it proposed to establish might, in some possible mode, be exerted in measures tending to the abolition of slavery. This suggestion would of course attract much attention in the Southern conventions. In that of Virginia, Governor Randolph said : — " I hope there is none here, who, con- sidering the subject in the calm light of philosophy, will make an objection dis- honorable to Virginia; that, at the mo- ment they are securing the rights of their citizens, an objection is started, that there is a spark of hope that those unfortunate men now held in bondage may, by the operation of the general government, he made free." At the very first. Congress, petitions on the subject were presented, if I mis- take not, from different States. The Pennsylvania society for promoting the abolition of slavery took a lead, and laid before Congress a memorial, praying THE REPLY To BAYNE. Congress to promote the abolition by such powers as ii possessed. This me- morial was referred, in the House of Representatives, to a select committee, consisting of Mr. Foster of New Hamp- shire, Mr. (Jerry of Massachusetts, Mr. Huntington of Connecticut, Mr. Law- rence of New York, Mr. Sinnickson of New Jersey. Mr. Hartley of Pennsylva- nia, and Mr. Parker of Virginia, — all of them, Sir, as you will observe, North- em men but the last. This committee made a report, which was referred to a committee of the whole House, and there considered and discussed tor sev- eral days; and heing amended, although without material alteration, it was made to express three distinct propositions. on the subject of slavery and the slave- trade. First, in the words of the Con- stitution, that Congress could not, prior to the year 1S08, prohibit the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States then existing should think proper to admit ; and, secondly, that Congress had authority to restrain the citizens of the United States from car- rying on the African slave-trade, for the purpose of supplying foreign countries. On this proposition, our early laws against those who engage in that traffic are founded. The third proposition, and that which bears on the present ques- tion, was expressed in the following terms: — " Resolved, That Congress have no authority to interfere in the emancipa- tion of slaves, or in the treatment of them in any of the States; it remaining with the several States alone to provide rules and regulations therein which hu- manity and true policy may require." This resolution received the sanction of the House of Representatives so early as March. 17&0. And now. Sir. the honorable member will allow me to re- mind hiin. that not only were the selecl committee who reported the resolution. with a single exception, all Northern men. luit also that, of the members then composing the House of Representa- tives, a large majority, I believe nearly two thirds, were Northern men also. The House agreed to insert these reso- lutions in its journal; and from licit day to this it hae never been maintained or contended at the North, that ( 'on had any authority to regulate or inter- fere with the condition of daws in the several states. No Northern gentle- man, to my knowledge, has moved any such question in either Hon-.- of Con- gress. The fears of the South, whatever lean they might have entertained, were al- layed and quieted by this early decis- ion; and so remained till they were excited afresh, without cause, bui for collateral and indirect purposes. When it became necessary, or was thoughl by some political persons, to find an unvarying ground for the exclusion ,,;' 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 influence of Northern men in the public counsels would endanger the re- lation of master and slave. For myBelf, I claim no other merit than that this gross and enormous injustice towards the whole North has not wrought upon me to change my opinions or my politi- cal conduct. I hope I am above violat- ing my principles, even under tic smart of injury and false imputations. In- just suspicions and undeserved reproach, whatever pain I may experience from them, will not induce me, I trust, to overstep the limits of constitutional duty, or to encroach on the rights of others. The domestic slavery of the Southern State. I leave where I find it. — in the hands of their own govern- ments. It is their affair, not mine. Nor do] complain of the peculiar • which the magnitude of that population has had in the distribution of power under this Federal government. We know. sir. that the representation of the Mates in the other house i< not equal. We know that greal advanl in that respect is enjoyed by the Blave- holding States; and we know, too, that the intended equivalent for that advan- tage, that is to say, the imposition of direct taxes iii the same ratio, ha- he- come merely nominal, the babil of the 234 THE REPLY TO HAYNE. government being almost invariably to collect its revenue from other sources and in other modes. Nevertheless, I do not complain; nor would I counte- nance any movement to alter this ar- rangement of representation. It is the 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 propositions for changing its original basis. I go for the Constitution as it is, and for the Dnionas it is. But I am resolved not to submit in silence to accusations, either lxls1 myself individually or against the North, wholly unfounded and un- just, — accusations which impute to us a disposition to evade the constitutional com] >act. 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 purposes, I know and feel to be groundless and injurious. And we must confide in Southern gentlemen them- selves; we must trust to those whose in- teg i it y of heart and magnanimity of feel- in- will lead them to a desire to maintain and disseminate truth, and who possess the means of its diffusion w T ith the Southern public; we must leave it to them to disabuse that public of its prej- udices. 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. Saving had occasion to recur to the Ordinance of 1787, in order to defend myself against the inferences which the honorable member lias chosen to draw from my former observations on thai subject, 1 am nol willing now entirely to take Leave of it without another re- i.. It need hardly be said, that that paper expresses jusl Bentiments on the ,i subji cl "i 'i\ ii and religious liberty. Such Bentiments were com- mon, and abound in all our Btate papers of thai day. Bui this < Ordinance did thai which was nol so common, and which is not even now universal; that is, i forth and declared it to be a high and binding duty of government itself to support schools and advance the means of education, on the plain reason that religion, morality, and knowledge are necessary to good government, and to the happiness of mankind. One observa- tion further. The important provision incorporated into 1 he Constitution of the United States, and into several of those of the States, and recently, as we have seen, adopted into the reformed consti- tution of Virginia, restraining legisla- tive power in questions of private right, and from impairing the obligation of contracts, is first introduced and estab- lished, as far as I am informed, as matter of express written constitutional law, in this Ordinance of 1787. And I must add, also, in regard to the author of the Ordinance, who has not had the happi- ness to attract the gentleman's notice heretofore, nor to avoid his sarcasm now, that he was chairman of that select com- mittee of the old Congress, whose report first expressed the strong sense of that body, that the old Confederation was not adequate to the exigencies of the country, and recommended to the States to send delegates to the convention which formed the present Constitution. An attempt has been made to transfer from the North to the South the honor of this exclusion of slavery from the Northwestern Territory. The journal, without argument or comment, refutes such attempts. The cession by Virginia was mad.- in March. 1784. On the 19th of April following, a committee, consist- ing of Messrs. Jefferson, Chase, and Howell, reported a plan for a temporary government of the territory, in which was this article: "That, after the year 1S00, there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in punishmenl of crimen, w hereof the part \ shall have been com icted." Mr. Spaighl of North Caro- lina moved to strike out tins paragraph. The question was put, according to the form then practised, "Shall these words stand as a part of the plan? " New Hampshire, .Massachusetts, lihode Isl- and, Connecticut, New York. New Jer- sey, and Pennsylvania, seven States, TIIK REPLY TO EAYNE. voted in the affirmative; Maryland, Vir- ginia, and South Carolina, in the nega- tive, North Carolina was divided. As the consent of nine States was necessary, the words could not stand, and were struck out accordingly. Mr. Jefferson voted lor the clause, but was overruled by his colleagues. In March of the next year (1785), Mr. King of Massachusetts, seconded by Mr. Ellery of Rhode Island, proposed the formerly rejected article, with this addi- tion: ■• And that this regulation shall he an article of compact, and remain a fundamental principle of the constitu- tions between the thirteen original States, and each of the States described in the resolve." On this clause, which provided the adequate and thorough security, the eight Northern States at that time voted affirmatively, and the four Southern States negatively. The votes of nine States were not yet obtained, and thus the provision was again rejected by the Southern States. The persever- ance of the North held out, and two years afterwards the object was attained. It is no derogation from the credit (What- ever that may be, of drawing the Ordi- nance, that its principles had before been prepared and discussed, in the form of resolutions. If one should reason in that way. what would become of the dis- tinguished honor of the author of the Declaration of Independence? There is not a sentiment in that paper which had not been voted and resolved in the as- semblies, and other popular bodies in the country, over and over again. Hut the honorable member has now found out that this gentleman, Mr. Dane, was a member of the Hartford Conven- tion. However uninformed the honor- able member may be of characters and occurrences at the North, it would seem that he has at his elbow, on this i sion, some high-minded and lofty Bpirit, some magnanimous and true-hearted monitor, possessing the means of local knowledge, and ready to supply the honorable member with ever;, thing, down even to forgotten and moth-eaten two-penny pamphlets, which may be QSed to the disadvantage of his 0WI1 country. Bul as to the Hartford < !on- \eni ion, sir, allow me I I ual the proceedings of thai body seem now to be Less read and studied in New England than farther South. They appear U) be Looked to, no! in \.w England, but elsewhere, Eor the purpose of seeing how far they may serve as a precedent. Bul the\ will not answer the purpose, they are quite too tame. The latitude in which they originated was too cold. other conventions, of more recenl exist- ence, have gone a whole bar's length beyond it. The learned doctors of < lolle- ton and Abbeville have pushed their commentaries on the Hartford colled 90 far, that the original text-writers are thrown entirely into the shade. I have nothing to do, Sir. with the Hartford Convention. Its journal, which the gen- tleman has quoted, I never read. So far as the honorable member may discover in its proc lings a spirit in any deg resembling that which was avowed and justified in those other conventions to which I have alluded, or so far as those proceedings can be shown to be disloyal to the Constitution, or fending to dis- union, SO far I shall be as ready a- any one to bestow on them reprehension and censure. Having dwelt long on this convention, and other occurrences of that day. in the hope, probably, (which will not be grati- fied,) that I should leave the course of this debate to follow him at length in those excursions, the honorable member returned, and attempted another object. He referred to a speech of mine in the other house, the same which I had occa- sion to allude to myself, the other day; and has quoted a passage or two from it. with a bold, though uneasy and labor- ing, air of confidence, as if he had de- tected in me an inconsistency. Judging from the gentleman's manner, a stranger to the course of the debate and to the point iii discussion would have Lmag from so triumphant a tone, that the hon- orable member was aboul to overwhelm ' me with a manifest contradiction. Any- one who heard him. and who had heard what I had. in fact, pn riously .-aid, must have thought me routed THE REPLY TO HAYXE. unfited, as the gentleman bad prom- Sir, a breath blows all this triumph away. There is nol the slightest differ- ence in the purport of my remarks (iii tin- two occasions. What I said hereon Wednesday is in exact accordance with the opinion expressed by me in the other house in 1825. Though the, gentleman had the metaphysics of Hudibras, though he were able " to sever and divide A hair 'twixt north and northwest side," he yet conld not insert his metaphysical scissors between the fair reading of my remarks in 1825, and what I said here last week. There is not only no contra- diction, no difference, but, in truth, too exaet a similarity, both in thought and language, to be entirely in just taste. I had myself quoted the same speech ; had recurred to it, and spoke with it open before me ; and much of what I said was little more than a repetition from it. In order to make finishing work with this alleged contradiction, permit me to recur to the origin of this debate, and review 7 its course. This seems expedi- ent, and may be done as well now as at any time. Well, then, its history is this. The honorable member from Connecticut moved a resolution, which constitutes the firsl branch of that which is now be- fore us; that is to say, a resolution, in- structing the committee on public lands to inquire into the expediency of limit- ing, for a certain period, the sales of the public lands, to such as have heretofore been offered for sale; and whether sun- dry offices connected with the sales of the lands might not be abolished with- out detriment to the public service. In the progress of the discussion which arose on this resolution, an honorable member from New Hampshire moved to amend the resolution, so as entirely to reverse it- object ; thai is, to strike it all out, and insert a direction to the com- mittee to inquire into the expediency of ado], ling measures to hasten the sales, and extend more rapidly the surveys, of the hinds. The honorable member from Maine 1 1 .Mr. Sprague. suggested that both those propositions might well enough go for consideration to the committee; and in this state of the question, the member from South Carolina addressed the Senate in his first speech. He rose, he said, to give us bis own free thoughts on the public lands. I saw him rise with pleasure, and listened with expectation, though before he concluded I was filled with surprise. Certainly, I was never more surprised, than to find him following up. to the extent he did, the sentiments and opinions which the gentleman from Missouri had put forth, and which it is known he has long entertained. I need not repeat at large the general topics of the honorable gentleman's speech. When he said yesterday that he did not attack the Eastern States, he certainly must have forgotten, not only particular remarks, but the whole drift and tenor of his speech; unless he means by not attacking, that he did not com- mence hostilities, but that another had preceded him in the attack. He, in the first place, disapproved of the whole course of the government, for forty years, in regard to its disposition of the public lands; and then, turning north- ward and eastward, and fancying he had found a cause for alleged narrowness and niggardliness in the " accursed pol- icy " of the tariff, to which he repre- sented the people of New England as wedded, he went on for a full hour with remarks, the whole scope of which was to exhibit the results of this policy, in feelings and in measures unfavorable to the West. I thought his opinions un- founded and erroneous, as to the general course of the government, and ventured to reply to them. The gentleman had remarked on the analogy of other cases, and quoted the conduct of European governments to- wards their o\\ u subjects settling on this continent, as in point, to show that we had been harsh and rigid in selling, w In u We Should have given the public lands to settlers without price. I thought the honorable member had suffered bis judg- ment to be betrayed bj a false analogy ; that he was struck with an appearance THE Ki'.i'l.V TO ilWXi: of resemblance where there was no real similitude. I think so still. The first settlers of North America were enter- prising spirits, engaged in private ad- venture, or fleeing from tyranny at home. When arrived here, thej were forgotten by the mother country, or re- membered only to be oppressed. Car- ried away again by the appearance of analogy, or struck with the eloquence of the passage, the h irable member yes- terday observed, that the conduct of government towards the "Western emi- grants, or my representation of it. 1 nought to his mind a celebrated speech in the British Parliament. It was, Sir, the speech of Colonel Barre. On the question of the stamp act, or tea tax, 1 forget which, Colonel Barre had heard a member on the treasury bench argue, that the people of the United States, be- ing British colonists, planted by the ma- ternal care, nourished by the indulgence, and protected by the arms of England. would not grudge their mite to relieve the mother country from the heavy bur- den under which she groaned. The language of Colonel Barre, in reply to this, was: " They planted by your care? Tour oppression planted them in Amer- ica. They fled from your tyranny, and grew by your neglect of them. So soon as you began to care for them, you showed your care by sending persons to Bpy out their liberties, misrepresent their character, prey upon them, and eat out their substance." And how does the honorable gentle- man mean to maintain, that language like this is applicable to the conduct of the government of the United States towards the Western emigrants, or to any representation given by me of that conduct? "Were the settlers in the West driven thither by our oppression? Have they flourished only by our neglecl of them? Has the government done noth- ing but prey upon them, and eat out their substance? Sir, this fervid elo- quence of the British speaker, jus! when and where it was uttered, and tit tore- main an exercise for the schools, is net a little out of place, when it is broughl thence to be applied here to the conduct of out own ec urn try towards her on n cit- izens. From America p. England, it may be true; from Americans to their own government, it would !»• Btrai language. Lei us Leave it. to I"- recited and declaimed l,\ ,,iir boys a-ain-t .1 : eign nation; nol introduce it here, to recite and declaim OUTSelvefl againsl our OW II. But I come to the point of the al- leged contradiction. In my remarks < > 1 1 Wednesday . I contended thai we could not give away gratuitously all the public lands; that we held them in trusl : that the government had solemnly pledged itself to dispose of them as a common fund for the common benefit, and to sell and settle them as its discretion should dictate. Now, Sir, what contradiction does the gentleman And to this senti- ment in the speech of 1825? He quotes me as having then said, that we ought not to hug these lands as a very g] are. Very well, sir, supposing me to be accurately reported in that expres- sion, what is the contradiction? I have not now said, that we should hug tl lands as a favorite source of pecuniary income. No such thing. It is nol my view. What I have said, and what I do say. is, that they are a common fund, to be disposed of for the common benefit, to be sold at low juices for the accom- modation of settlers, keeping the o! of settling the lands as much in view as that of raising money from them. This I say now, and this I have always -aid. Is this hugging them as a favorite tn ure? Is there no difference between hugging and hoarding this fund, on the one hand, as a greal treasure, and. on the other, of disposing of it at low prii placing the proceeds in the general treas- ury of the Union? My opinion is, that as much is to be made of the land as fairly and reasonably may be, selling it all the while at such rate- as to give the fulle- ettlement. This is not giving it all away to the State-, as the gentleman would propose; nor is it hug- ging the fund closely and tenaciously, as a favorite treasure; bul it is, in my judgment, a just and wise policy, per- fectly according with all the various «lu- 23S THE RErLY TO HAYXE. t lea which rest on government. So much for my contradiction. And what is it? Where is the ground of the gentleman's triumph? What inconsistency in word or doctrine has he been able to detect? Sir, if this be a sample of that discom- tit vi it- with which t lie honorable gentle- man threatened me, commend me to the word discomfiture for the rest of my life. But. after all, this is not the point of the debate; and 1 must now bring the gentleman hack to what is the point. The real question het ween me and him is, Has the doctrine been advanced at the Smith or the East, that the popula- tion of the West should be retarded, or at least need not be hastened, on ac- count of its effect to drain off the people from the Atlantic States? Is this doc- trine, as has been alleged, of Eastern origin? That is the question. Has the gentleman found any thing by which he can make good his accusation? I sub- mit to the Senate, that he has entirely tailed; and, as far as this debate has shown, the only person who has ad- vanced such sentiments is a gentleman from South Carolina, and a friend of the honorable member himself. The hon- orable gentleman has given no answer to this; there is none which can be given. The simple fact, while it requires no comment to enforce it, defies all argu- ment to refute it. I could refer to the speeches of another Southern gentle- man, in years before, of the same gen- eral character, and to the same effect, as thai which has been quoted; but I will not consume the time of the Senate by the reading of them. So then, sir. New England is guiltless of the policy of retarding Western popu- m, and of all envy and jealousy of the growth of the new states. What- ever there be of that policy in the coun- try , no pari of it is hers. [f it has a local habitation, the honorable member has probably seen by this time where to look for it ; and if it now has received a name, he has himself christened it. We approach, al length, Sir, to a more important pari of the honorable gentle- man's observations. Since it does not accord with my views of justice and policy to give away the public lands altogether, as a mere matter of gratuity, I am asked by the honorable gentleman on what ground it is that I consent to vote them away in particular instances. How, he inquires, do I reconcile with these professed sentiments, my support of measures appropriating portions of the lands to particular roads, particular canals, particular rivers, and particular institutions of education in the AVest? This leads, Sir, to the real and wide dif- ference in political opinion between the honorable gentleman and myself. On my part, I look upon all these objects as connected with the common 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 which he proceeded to put at once explains this difference. "What interest," asks he, "has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? " Sir. this very question is full of significance. It develops the gentle- man's whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. Here we dif- fer. I look upon a road over the Al- leghanies, a canal round the falls of the Ohio, or a canal or railway from the Atlantic to the Western waters, as being an object large and extensive enough to be fairly said to be for the common benefit. The gentleman thinks other- wise, and this is the key to his construc- tion of the [lowers of the government. He may well ask what interest has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio. I hi his system, it is true, she has no interest. On that system, Ohio and Carolina are different governments, and different countries: connected here, it is true, by some slighl and ill-defined bond of union, but in all main respects separate and diverse. On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. The gentleman, there- fore, only follows out his own principles; he does no more than arrive at the natu- ral conclusions of his own doctrines; he only announces the true results of that, creed which he has adopted himself , and would persuade others to adopt, when he TIIK REPLY TO BAYNE 289 thus declares that .South Carolina lias no interest in ;i public work in I ttlio. Sir, we narrow-minded people of New England ir, I reproach nobody. I stated a fact, and gave the most respect- ful 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 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 wor- thy colleague prevented them from sup- porting it. Sir, did I state this as matter of reproach? Far from it. 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 set of constitutional opinions accommo- dated to any particular combination of political occurrences. Had I done so, I should have felt, that, while I was enti- tled to little credit in thus questioning other people's motives, I justified the whole world in suspecting my own. But how has the gentleman returned this respect for others' opinions? His own candor and justici . I ow 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 asked when, and how, and ivhy New England votes were found going for measures favorable to the West. He has demanded to be informed whether all this did not begin in 182."). and while the election of President was still pending. Sir, to these questions retort would be justified; and it is both cogent and at hand. Nevertheless, I will answei the inquiry, not by retort, but by facts. I will tell the gentleman when, and how, and why New England has supported measures favorable to the West. I have already referred to the early history of the government, to the first acquisition of the lands, to the original laws for dis] losing of them, and for governing the territories where they lie; and have shown the influence of New England men and New England principles in all these Leading measures. I should not be pardoned were I to go over thai ground again. Coming to more iv,, nt tines, and to measures of a less THE REPLI TO HAYNE •J 11 general character, I have endeavored to prove thai every thing of this kind, de- signed Eor Western improvement , has de- pended OD the votes of New England; all this is true beyond the power of con- tradiction. And now, Sir, there are two measures to which 1 will refer, nut bo ancient as to belong to the early history of the public lands, and not so recent as to be on this side of the period when the gentleman charitably imagines a new direction may have been given to New England feeling and New England votes. These measures, and the New- England votes in support of them, may be taken as samples and specimen- of all the rest. In 1820 (observe, Mr. President, in 1820) the people of the West besought Congress for a reduction in the price of lands. In favor of that reduction. New England, with a delegation of forty members in the other house, gave thirty- three votes, and one only against it. The four Southern States, with more than fifty members, gave thirty-two votes for it, and seven against it. Again, in 1821, (observe again, Sir, the time,) the law passed for the relief of the purchas- ers of the public lands. This was a measure of vital importance to the West, and more especially to the Southwest. It authorized the relinquishment of con- tracts for lands which had been entered into at high prices, and a reduction in other cases of not less than thirty-seven and a half per cent on the purchase- money. Many millions of dollars, six or seven, I believe, probably much more, were relinquished by this law. On this bill, New England, with her forty mem- bers, gave more affirmative votes than the four Southern States, with their fifty- two or fifty-three members. These two are far the most important general meas- ures respecting the public lands which have been adopted within the last twenty years. They took place in 1820 and 1821. That is the time when. As to the manner lu>u\ the gentleman already sees that it was by voting in solid column for the required relief; and, lastly, as to the cause why, I tell the gentleman it was because the mem- bers from New England thought the measures just and salutary ; because they entertained towards the \\ e-t neither envy, hatred, nor malice; because they deemed it becoming them, as just and enlightened public men, to meet the igency which hail arisen in the v. w iih th.> appropriate measure of relief; because they fell it due to their own characters, and the characters of their New England predecessors in this eminent, to act towards the aew States in the spirit of a liberal, patronizing, magnanimous policy. So much. Sir. for the cause why; and I hope that by this time, sir, the honorable gentleman is satisfied; if not, I do not know when, or how, or why he ever will be. Having recurred to these two impor- tant measures, in answer to the gentle- man's inquiries, I must now beg per- mission to go back toaperiod somewhat earlier, for the purpose of still further showing how much, or rather how little, reason there is for the gentleman's in- sinuation that political hopes or fears, or party associations, were the ground- of these New England votes. And after what has been said, I hope it may be forgiven me if I allude to some political opinions and votes of my own, of very little public importance certainly, 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 peace of 1815, had been too much engrossed with various other important concerns to be able to turn its thoughts inward, and look to the de- velopment of its vast internal resources. In the early part of President Wash- ington's administration, it was fully occupied with completing its own or- ganization, providing Eor the public debt, defending the frontiers, and main- taining domestic peace. Before the initiation of that administration, the tires of the French Revolution bl forth, as from a new-opened volcano, and the whole breadth of the ocean did not secure us from its effects. The -moke and the cinders reached us. though not the burning lava. Ditlicult and agitating 16 242 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. questions, embarrassing to government ami dividing public opinion, sprung out of tin' new state of our foreign relations, and were succeeded by others, and yet again by others, equally embarrassing and equally exciting division and dis- cord, through the long series of twenty years, till they finally issued in the war with Kugland. Down to the close of that war, no distinct, marked, and de- liberate attention had been given, or could have been given, to the internal condition of the country, its capacities of improvement, or the constitutional power of the government in regard to objects connected with such improvement. The peace, Mr. President, brought about an entirely new and a most Inter- esting state of things; it opened to us other prospects and suggested other du- ties. We ourselves were changed, and the whole world was changed. The pacification of Europe, after June, 1815, assumed a firm and permanent aspect. The nations evidently manifested that they were disposed for peace. Some agitation of the waves might be expected, even alter the storm had subsided; but the tendency was. strongly and rapidly, towards settled repose. It so happened, Sir, that I was at that time a member 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 experi- enced men, that the policy of the gov- ernment would naturally take a start in a new direction; because new 7 directions would necessarily be given to the pur- suits and occupations of the people. We had pushed our commerce far and fast, under the advantage of a neutral flag. Bui there were now no Longer tlags, either neutral or belligerent. The har- \'-t of neutrality had been great, but we had gathered it all. With the peace of Europe, it was obvious there would spring up iii her circle of nations a re- vived and invigorated spiril of trade, and a new activity in all the business and obji ivilized life. Hereafter, our commercial gains were to he earned only by success in a close and intense competition. Other nations would pro- duce for themselves, and carry for them- selves, and manufacture for themselves, to the full extent of their abilities. The crops of our plains would no longer sus- tain European armies, nor our ships longer supply those whom war had ren- dered unable, to supply themselves. It was obvious, that, under these circum- stances, the country would begin to survey itself, and to estimate its own capacity of improvement. And this improvement, — how was it to be accomplished, and who was to ac- complish it? We were ten or twelve millions of people, spread over almost half a world. We were more than twenty States, some stretching along the same seaboard, some along the same line of inland frontier, and others on opposite banks of the same vast rivers. Two considerations at once presented themselves 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 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 whole ex- pense, nor was the co-operation of sev- eral States to be expected. Take the instance of the Delaware breakwater. It will cost several millions of money. Would Pennsylvania, alone ever hav< constructed it? Certainly never, while this Union lasts, because it is not foi her sole benefit. Would Pennsylvania. New Jersey, and Delaware have united to accomplish it at their joint expense '.- Certainly not, for the same reason. It could not be done, therefore, hut by the general government. The same tnaj be said of the large inland undertakings, except that, in them, government, in- stead of hearing the whole expense. CO-Operates with others who hear a part The other consideration is, that tin United States have the means. The\ enjoy the revenues derived from conr merce, and the States have no abundant and easy sources of public income. Tin THE REPLY TO HAYNE. 243 sustom-hou8es fill the general treasury, while the States have scanty resources, except by resorl to heavy direcl taxes. Under this view of tiling I t ln-u - lit it accessary to settle, al least for myself, some definite notions \\ ith respect to the powers of the government in regard to internal affairs. It may not savor too much of self-commendation to remark, that, with this object, I considered the Constitution, its judicial construction, its contemporaneous exposition, and the whole history of the Legislation of Con- gress under it; and I arrived at the conclusion, that government had power tii accomplish sundry objects, or aid in their accomplishment, which are now commonly spoken of as [nternal Im- provements. That conclusion, Sir, may have been right, or it may have been wrong. 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 1 s 1 • ; . Yes, Mr. Presi- dent, I made up my opinion, and deter- mined on my intended course of political conduct, on these subjects, iii the Four- teenth Congress, in 181G. And now, Mr. President. I have further to say, that I made up these opinions, and en- d on this course of political conduct, Teucro fluce. 1 Yes, Sir, I pursued in all this a South Carolina track on the doc- trines of internal improvement. South Carolina, as she was then represented 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 cor- ner, unless I see new lights also, I keep straight on in the same path. I repeat, that leading gentlemen from Smith Caro- lina were first and foremost in behalf of the doctrines of internal improvements, when those doctrines came first to be considered and acted upon in ( The debate on the bank question, on the tariff of 1816, and on the direct will show who was who, and what was what, at that time. The tariff of 1816, (one of the plain 1 Mr. Calhoun, when this speech was made, was President of the Senate, and Vice-F dent of the United States. of oppression and usurpation, from which, If the government does not cede, individual States maj justly secede from the government,) is, Sir, in truth, a South Carolina tariff, supported by South Carolina rotes. But for those votes, it i Id not have passed in tie- form in w hich it did pass; « I it had depended on Massachusetts v< it would have been lost . I >< >es not the honorable gentleman well know all tbisV There are certainly those who do, full well, know it all. I do not say this to reproach South Carolina. I only -tat-- the fact : and I think it will appear to be true, that amon-- the earliest and boldest advocates of the tariff, as a measure of protection, and on the press ground of protection, were leading gentlemen of South Carolina in I gress. I did not then, and cannot i understand their language in any other sense. While this tariff of 1816 was under discussion in the Hous ' Repre- sentatives, an honorable gentleman I Georgia, now of this house.- moved to reduce the proposed duty on cotton. He failed, by four votes. South Carolina giv- ing three votes (enough to have turned the scale) against his motion. The act, Sir, then passed, and received on it- the support of a majority of the b sentatives of South Carolina pp and voting. This act is the first iii the order of those now denounced as plain usurpations. We Bee it daily in the list, by the side of those of 1824 and 1828, as of manifest oppression, justifying disunion. I put it hom the honorable member from South Caro- lina, that his own State was not only " art and part '* in this measure, but causa causans. Without her aid. this seminal principle of mischief, this root of Upas, could not have been planted. I have already said, and it is true, that this act proceeded on the ground of pro- ion. [t interfered directly with ea in,'- int srests of great value and am iunt. It cut up the Calcutta cotton trade by the roots; but it passed, nevertb and it pa--- 1 "ii the principle of tecting manufactures, on tie- principle - Mr. Tors-. 244 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. against free trade, on the principle op- posed to thai which lets us alone. Such, Mr. President, were the opin- ionsof important and leading gentlemen from South Carolina, on the subject of internal improvement, in 1816. I went out of Congress the next year, and, re- turning again in 1823, thought I found South Carolina vrhere I had left her. I really supposed that all things remained as they were, and that the South Caro- lina doctrine of internal improvements would be defended by the same eloquent voices, and the same strong arms, as formerly. In the lapse of these six years, it is true, political associations had assumed a new aspect and new di- visions. A strong party had arisen in the South hostile to the doctrine of in- ternal improvements. Anti-consolida- tion was the flag under which this party fought; and its supporters inveighed 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 consolidation. Whether this party arose in South Carolina itself, or in the neighborhood, is more than 1 know. I 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 bestowed on the anti-improvement gentlemen the ap- pellation of Radicals. 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, Somewhere between North Carolina and i, orgia. Well, Sir, these mischievous l; licals were to be put down, and the Strong arm of South Carolina was Stretched out to put th -m down. About this ti I retui 1 to < longress. The battle with the Radicals had been ht. and our South Carolina cham- pions of the doctrines of internal im- provement had noblj 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. A gentleman to whom 1 have already referred in this 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 which we had been acquainted, el noscitur a sociis. I hold in my hand, Sir, a printed speech of this distinguished gentleman, 1 " On Internal Improvements," delivered about the period to which I now refer, and printed with a few introductory re- marks upon consolidation ; in which, Sir, I think he quite consolidated the argu- ments of his opponents, the Radicals, if to crush be to consolidate. I give you a short but significant quotation from these remarks. He is speaking of a pamphlet, then recently published, en- titled "Consolidation ": and, having al- luded to the question of renewing the charter of the former Bank of the United States, he says: — " Moreover, in the early history of parties. and when Mr. Crawford advocated a re- newal of the old charter, it was considered a Federal measure ; which internal improve- ment in vi r was, as this author erroneously states. This latter measure originated in the administration of Mr. Jefferson, with the appropriation for the Cumberland Road ; and was first proposed, as a system, by .Mr. Calhoun, and carried through the House of Representatives by a large majority of the Republicans, including almost every one of the leading men who carried us through the late war." So, then, internal improvement is not one of the federal heresies. One para- graph more. Sir: — " The author in question, not content with denouncing as Federalists, ( ieneral Jackson, Mr. Adams, Mr. Calhoun, and the majority of the' South Carolina delegation in Con- gress, modotly extends the denunciat ion to Mr. Monroe and the whole Republican party. Here are his words: 'During the administration of Mr. Monroe much has passed winch the Republican party would l Mr. McUuflie. THE REPLY TO II.wm: 245 be glad to approve if they could! I Hut the principal feature, and that which has chiefly elicited these observations, is the renewal of the System of [ntbbnai [mprovb MBNTS.' Now this measure was adopted by a vote of II"' to 86 of a Republican Con- gress, and sanctioned by a Republican Pres- ident. Who, then, is this author, who as- sumes the high prerogative of denouncing, in the name of the Republican party, the Republican administration of the coun- try ' A denunciation including within its .sweep Calhoun, Lowndes, cinl Cheves, nun who will be regarded as the brightest orna- ments of Siiutli Carolina, and the strongest pillars of the Republican party, as long as the late war shall be remembered, and tal- ents and patriotism shall be regarded as the proper objects of the admiration and grati- tude of a free people! ! " Such are the opinions, Sir, which were maintained by South Carolina gentle- men, in the House of Representatives, on the subject of internal improvements, when I took my seat there as a member from Massachusetts in 1823. But this is not all. We had a bill before us, and passed it in that house, entitled, "An .Vet 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 In* made of the routes of such roads and canals as he might deem of national importance in a commercial or military point of view, or for the transportation of the mail, and appropriated thirty thousand dollars out of the treasury to defray the expense. This act, though preliminary in its nature, covered the whole -round. It took for granted the complete power of internal improvement. Be Ear as any of its advocates had ever contended for it. Having passed the other house, the bill came up to the Sen- ate, and was here considered and debated in April, 1824. The honorable mend >■ pended for roads or canals, except it shall lie among the several States, and in the same proportion as direct : are laid and assessed by the provisions of the Constitution." The honorable member voted against this proviso also, and it failed. The I. ill was then put on its passage, and the honorable member voted for it. and it passed, and became a law. Now, it strikes me, Sir, that there is no maintaining these votes, Imt upon the power of interna] improvement, in its broadest sense. In truth, these bills for surveys and estimates have always been considered as test questions; they show who is for and who against internal improvement. This law itself went the whole length, and assumed the full and complete power. The gentleman's votes sustained that power, in every form in which the various propositions to amend presented it. lie went for the entire and unrestrained authority, without con- sulting the .states, and without agreeing to any proportionate distribution. And now sutler me to remind you, Mr. Pres- ident, that it is this very same power, thus sanctioned, in every form, by the gentleman's own opinion, which i- plain and manifest a usurpation, that the State of South Carolina is supposed to be justified in refusing submission to any laws carrying the power into effect. Truly. Sir. i> nd this a little too hard ? May we not crave some mercy, under favor and protection of the gentleman's own authority ? Admitting that a road. or a canal, must !"• written down flat usurpation as was ever committed, 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 in establishing, in 1816, and this asserted power of internal im- 246 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. provement, advanced by her in the same year, and, as we have seen, approved and sanctioned by her Representative in L82 1, — these two measures are the greal grounds on which she is now thought to be justified in breaking up the Union, if she sees tit to break it up! I may now safely say. T think, that we have had the authority of Leading and distinguished gentlemen from South Carolina in supporl of the doctrine of internal improvement. I repeat, that, up to 1824, I for one followed South Carolina; 1 >i it when that star, in its as- een 'hin. veered off in an unexpected di- rection, I relied on its light no longer. Here the Vice-President said, "Does the chair understand the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts to say that the person now oc- cupying the chair of the Senate has changed his opinions on the suhject of internal im- provements ( " From nothing ever said to me, Sir, have I had reason to know of any change in the opinions of the person filling the chair of the Senate. If such change has taken place, I regret it. I speak gener- ally of the Slate of South Carolina. In- dividuals we know there are who hold opinions favorable to the power. An application for its exercise, in behalf of a public work in South Carolina itself, is now pending, 1 believe, in the other, house, presented by members from that State. I have thus, Sir, perhaps not without Borne tediousness of detail, shown, if 1 am in error on the subject of internal improvement, how, and in what com- pany, I fell into thai error. If I am wrong, it is apparent who misled me. I ■.. to ot her remarks of I he honor- able member; and I have to complain ot an entire misapprehension of what I said on the Bubjed of the national debt, though I can hardly perceive how any one could misunderstand me. What I said was, not thai I w ished to pul i iff I he p.r, menl of the debl , bul , on t he con- trary, thai I had always voted for everj measure Eoi its reduction, as uniformly he gentleman himself. I le seems to claim the exclusive mei it of a disposi- tion 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 thought I pereehed a morbid fervor on thai subject, an excessive anxiety to pay 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 continues, a tie of common interest. I did not impute such motives to the honorable member himself, but that there is such a feeling i n 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 it. The gentleman has not seen how to re- ply 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. 1 dis- tinctly and pointedly cautioned the hon- orable member not to understand me as expressing 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 gen- tleman had harangued against " consoli- dation." I told him, in reply, that there was one kind of consolidation to which 1 was attached, and that was the con- solidation of our Union; that this was precisely that consolidation to which I feared others were not attached, and that such consolidation was the very end of the Constitution, the leading object, as they had informed us them- selves, which its framers had kept in view. I turned to their communica- tion, 1 and read their very words, "the consolidation of the Union," and ex- pressed ins devotion to this sort of con- solidation. 1 said, in terms, that 1 wished not in the slightest degree to augment the powers of t his government; i The letter of the Federal Convention to the Congress of the Confederation transmitting the plan nl tin- ( 'i institution. THE RKl'LY TO IIAYNK 247 thai my object was to preserve, not to enlarge; and that by consolidating the Union I understood no more than the strengthening of the Union, and per- petuating it. Having been thus ex- plicit, having thus read from the printed boot 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 gov- ernment, or for consolidation in thai odious sense in which it means an ac- cumulation, 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 Consti- tution, I read their language audibly, and word for word; and I pointed out the distinction, 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 member misunderstood me. The gentleman had said 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? Why, Sir, because, as the gentleman told us, it tends to consolidation. 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 con- fess I like that tendency; if the gentle- man dislikes it, he is right in deprecat- ing a shilling of fixed revenue. So much, Sir, for consolidation. As well as I recollect the course of his remarks, the honorable gentleman next recurred to the subject of the tariff. He did not doubt the word must be of unpleasant sound to me, and proceeded, with an effort neither new nor attended with new success, to involve me and un- votes in inconsistency and contradiction. I am happy the honorable gentleman has furnished me an opportunity of a timely remark or two on that subject. I was glad he approached it, for it is a question I enter upon without fear from anybody. The strenuous toil of the gentleman has been to raise an incon- sistency between my dissent t" tic tariff in 1824, and my TOte in L828. It. is Labor lost, lie pays undeserved c m plimenl to my speech in 1824; but this is to raise me high, that my fall, a would have it, in 1828, may !"■ more Signal. Sir. there was do tall. I'. - tween the ground I b1 1 on in 1824 and that I took in 1828, there was not only no precipice, but no declivity. It was a change of posit ion to meel ne •• circumstances, but on the same Level. A plain tale explains the whole matter. In isiti I hail not acquiesced in the tariff, then supported by South Caro- lina. To some parts of it, especially, I felt and expressed great repugnance. I held the same opinions in 1820, at the meeting in Faneuil Hall, to which the gentleman has alluded. I said then, and say now, that, as an original ques- tion, the authority of Congress to ercise the revenue power, with direct reference to the protection of manufac- tures, is a questionable authority, Ear more questionable, in my judgment, than the power of internal improve- ments. I must confess, Sir, that in one respect some impression has been made on my opinions lately. Mr. Madison's publication has put the power in a very strong light. lie has placed it. I must acknowledge, upon grounds of construc- tion and argumenl which seem impreg- nable. Hut even if the power » doubtful, on the face of the Constitu- tion itself, it had been assumed and asserted in the first revenue law ever passed under that same Constitution; and on this ground, as a matter settled by contemporaneous practice, I had refrained from expressing the opinion that the tariff laws transcended consti- tutional limits, as the gentleman sup- poses. What 1 did say at Faneuil Hall, as far as I now remember, was, that this was originally matter of doubtful construction. Tin' gentleman him I suppose, thinks there is no doubt about it, and that the laws are plainly againsl the Constitution. Mr. Madi- son's letters, already referred to, con- tain, in my judgment, by far the most 248 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. able exposition extant of this part of the Constitution, lie has satisfied me, bo far as the practice of the government had Left it an open question. With a great majority of the Repre- sentatives of Massachusetts, I voted against the tariff of 1824. My reasons were then given, and I will not now re- peat them. But, notwithstanding our dissent, the great States of New York, Pennsylvania, < >hio, and Kentucky went for the bill, in almost unbroken column, and it passed. Congress and the Presi- dent sanctioned it, and it became the law of the land. What, then, were we to do? Our only option was, either to fall in with this settled course of public policy, and accommodate ourselves to it as well as we could, or to embrace the South Carolina doctrine, and talk of nullifying the statute by State interfer- ence. This last alternative did not suit our principles, and of course we adopted the former. In 1827, the subject came again before Congress, on a proposition to afford some relief to the branch of wool and woollens. We looked upon the sys- tem of protection as being fixed and settled. The law of 1821 remained. It had gone into full operation, and, in re- gard to some objects intended by it, per- haps most of them, had produced all its expected effects. No man proposed to repeal it; no man attempted to renew the general contest on its principle. But, owing to subsequent and unfore- seen occurrences, the benefit intended by it to wool and woollen fabrics had not been realized. Events not known here when the law passed had taken . which defeated its object in that particular respect. A measure was ac- cordingly brought forward to meet this precise deficiency, to remedy this par- ticular defect. It was limited to wool and woollens. Was ever any thing more reason. il,;e> [f the policy of the tariff had become established in princi- ple, as the pei manenl pi ilicy of t he gov- ernment, Bhould they not be revised and amended, and made equal, like other laws, as exigencies Should arise, 01 jus- tice require? Because we had doubted about adopting the system, were we to refuse to cure its manifest defects, after it had been adopted, and when no one attempted its repeal? And this, Sir, is the inconsistency so much bruited. I had voted against the tariff of 1824, but it passed; and in 1827 and 1828 I voted to amend it, in a point essential to the interest of my constituents. Where is the inconsistency? Could I do other- wise? Sir, does political consistency consist in always giving negative votes? Does it require of a public man to re- fuse to concur in amending laws, be- cause they passed against his consent? Having voted against the tariff origi- nally, does consistency demand that I should do all in my power to maintain an unequal tariff, burdensome to my own constituents in many respects, fa- vorable in none? To consistency of that sort, I lay no claim. And there is an- other sort to which I lay as little, and that is, a kind of consistency by which persons feel themselves as much bound to oppose a proposition after it has be- come a law of the land as before. The bill of 1827, limited, as I have said, to the single object in which the tariff of 1824 had manifestly failed in its effect, passed the House of Repre- sentatives, but was lost here. We had then the act of 1828. I need not recur to the history of a measure so re- cent. Its enemies spiced it with what- soever they thought would render it dis- tasteful; its friends took it, drugged as it was. Vast amounts of property, many millions, had been invested in manufactures, under the inducements of the act of 1824. Events called loudly, as I thought . for further regulation to secure the degree of protection intended by that act. I was disposed to vote for such regulation, and desired nothing more; but certainly was not to be bantered out of my purpose by a threatened augmen- tation of duty on molasses, put into the bill for the avowed purpose of making it obnoxious. The vote may have been right or wrong, wise or unwise; but it is little less than absurd to allege against it an inconsistency with opposition to the former law. TIIK REPLY TO HAYNE 249 Sir, as to the general subject of the tariff, I have little now to say. Another opportunity may be presented. I re- marked the other day, that this policy did not begin with us in New England; and yet, Sir. New Kngland is charged with vehemence as being favorable, 01 charged with equal vehemence as being unfavorable, to the tariff policy, just as besl suits the time, place, and occasion for making some charge against her. The credulity of the public has been put to iis extreme capacity of false impres- sion relative to her conduct in this par- ticular. Through all the South, during the late contest, it was New England policy and a New England administra- tion that were afflicting the country w it li a tariff beyond all endurance; while on the other side of the AUeghanies even the act of 1828 itself, the very subli- mated essence of oppression, according to Southern opinions, was pronounced to be one of those blessings for which the West was indebted to the " generous South." With large investments in manufac- turing establishments, and many and various interests connected with and de- pendent on them, it is not to be expected that New England, anymore than other portions of the country, will now con- sent to any measure destructive or highly dangerous. The duty of the govern- ment, at the present moment, would seem to be to preserve, not to destroy; to maintain the position which it has as- sumed; and, for one, I shall feel it an indispensable obligation to hold it steady, as Ear as in my power, to that decree ol protection which it has undertaken to bestow. No more of the tariff. Professing to be provoked by what he chose to consider a charge made by me against South Carolina, the honorable member, Mr. President, has taken up a new crusade against New England. Leaving altogether the subject of the public lands, in which his success, per- haps, had been neither distinguished nor satisfactory, and letting go, also, of the topic of the tariff, he sallied forth in a general assault on the opinions, politic-, and parties of New England, as they have been exhibited in the last thirty years. This is natural. The - nai policy " of (he public lands had proved a Legal Settlement in South Carolina, and was not to be removed. The " accursed policy " of the tariff, al to, had estab- lished the lad of its birth and parent in the same State. No wonder, there- fore, the gentleman wished to carry the war, as he expressed ii . into the enenrj '$ country. Prudently willing to qui! these subjects, he was. doubt! b of fastening on others, which could not be transferred south of Mason and Dixon's line. The politics of New England be- came bis theme; and it was in this pari of his speech, 1 think, that he menaced me with such sore discomfiture. I 1 comfit ure! Why, Sir, when he attacks any thing which I maintain, and over- throws it, when he turns the right or left of any position which I take up, when he drives me from any ground I choose to occupy, he may then talk of discomfiture, but not till thai distant day. What has he done ? Has be main- tained Ins own charges ? Has be proved what he alleged ? Has he sustained him- self in his attack on the government, and on the history of the North, in the matter of the public lands? Has he dis- proved a fact, refuted a proposition, weakened an argument, maintained by me? Has he come within beat of drum of any position of mine ? (). no; but he has "carried the war into the enemy's country " ! Carried the war into the ene- my's country! Yes, Sir, and what sort of a war has he made of it ? Why. Sir. he has stretched a drag-net over the whole surface of perished pamphlets, indiscreet sermons, frothy paragraphs, and fumiug popular addresses, - over whatever the pulpit in its moments of alarm, the press in its heats, and parties in their extravagance, have severally thrown ^\'( in times of general excitement and vio- lence, lie 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 l< in their state of dispersion. For a u r ""d Long hour or two, we had the unbroken pleasure of listening to the honorable member, while he recited with his usual 250 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. grace and spirit, and with evident high gusto, speeches, pamphlets, addresses, and all the et cceteras of the political . such as warm heads produce in warm times; ami Mich as it would be "discomfiture" indeed for any one. whose taste did not delight in that sort of reading, to be obliged to peruse. This i- his war. This ii is to carry war into the enemy's country. It is in an inva- sion of this sort, thai he flatters himself with the expectation of gaining laurels til to adorn a Senator's brow! Mr. President, 1 shall not, it will not, I trust, he expected that I should, either now or at any time, separate this farrago into parts, aiid answer and examine its components. I shall barely bestow upon it all a general remark or two. In the run of forty years, Sir. under this Con- stitution, we have experienced sundry successive violent party contests. Party arose, indeed, with the Constitution it- self, and, in some form or other, has at- tended it through the greater part of its history. Whether any other constitu- tion than the old Articles of Confedera- tion was desirable, was itself a ques- tion on which parties divided; if a new constitution were framed, what powers should be given to it was another ques- tion; and when it had been formed, what was. in fact, the just, extent of the pow- ers actually conferred was a third. Par- ties, as we know, existed under the first administration, as distinctly marked as those which have manifested themselves at any subsequent period. The, con- t<-t immediately preceding the political change in L801, and that, again, which existed al the commencement of the late war, are other instances of party excite- ment, of something more than usual strength and intensity. In all these conflicts there was, no doubt, much of violence on both and all -ides, it, would be impossible, if had a fancy for such employment, to adjust the relative quan- tum of \ iolence bel ween these contend 'I hei e w as e igh in each, as musl alw a\ - I"- . • pected in popular ernmenta. With I di al of pop- ular and decorous discussion, there was mingled a greal deal, also, of declama- tion, virulence, crimination, and abuse. In regard to any party, probably, at one of the fading epochs in the history of parties, enough may be found to make out another inflamed exhibition, not un- like that with which the honorable mem- ber has edified us. For myself, Sir, I shall not rake among the rubbish of by- gone times, to see what 1 can find, or w let her I cannot find something by which I can fix a blot on the escutcheon of any State, any party, or any part of the country. General Washington's ad- ministration 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 per- severing support, in all his great ami leading measures. W r e know where his private ami 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 might know, if we turned to the journals, who expressed respect, gratitude, and regret, when he retired from the chief magistracy, and who re- fused to express either respect, grati- tude, or regret. I shall not open those journals. Publications more abusive or scurrilous never saw the light, than were sent forth against Washington, 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, furnishing such means of retaliation; and if there were, with an ass's load of them, with a bulk as huge as that which the gentle- man himself has produced, I would not touch one of them. 1 seeenough of the violence of our own times, to be no way anxious to rescue from forget fulness the extravagances of times past. Besides, what is all this to the present purpose V It has nothing to do with the public lands, in regard to which the at- tack was begun; ami it has nothing to do with those Bentiments and opinions which, I have thought, lend to disunion, ami all of which the honorable member -.cms to have adopted himself, and un- THE REPLY TO HATNE. •J.M dertaken to defend. New England lias, at times, so argues the gentleman, held opinions as dangerous as those which he now holds. Suppose thiswereso; why should A< therefore abuse New England '. If he limls himself countenan 1 by acts .if hers, how is it that, while he relies on these acts, he covers, or seeks to cover, their authors with reproach? lint, sir, it', in the course of forty years, there have been undue effervescences ol' parly in New England, lias the same thing happened nowhere else? Tarty animos- ity and party outrage, not in New Eng- land, but elsewhere, denounced President Washington, not only as a Federalist, but as a Tory, a British agent, a man who, in his high office, sanctioned cor- ruption. But does the honorable mem- ber suppose, it' 1 had a tender here, who should put such an effusion of wicked- ness and folly into my hand, that 1 would stand up and read it against the South ? Parties ran into great heats again in 1709 and 1800. What was said, Sir, or rather what was not said, in those years, against John Adams, one of the com- mittee that drafted the Declaration of Independence, and its admitted ablest defender on the floor of Congress? If the gentleman wishes to increase his stores of party abuse and frothy vio- lence, if he lias a determined proclivity to such pursuits, there are treasures of that sort south of the Potomac, much to his taste, yet untouched. I shall not touch them. The parties which divided the country at the commencement of the late war were violent. But then there was vio- lence on both sides, and violence in every State. Minorities and majorities were equally violent. There was no more violence against the war in New England, than in other States; nor any more appearance of violence, except that, owing to a dense population, greater fa- cility of assembling, and more proses, there may have been more in quantity spoken and printed there than in some other places. In the article of sermons, too. New England i3 somewhat more abundant than South Carolina; and for that reason the chance of finding here and there an ezceptionabl ie maj greater. I hope, too, there are more good "nes. Opposition may have been more formidable in Nevi England, as it embraced a larger portion of the whole population; but it was no more unre- strained in principle, or riolenl in man- ner. The minorities dealt quite OS harshly with their own state govern- ments as the majorities dealt with the administral ion here. There were pp on both sides, popular meetings on both sides, ay, and pulpits on both Bides also. The gentleman's purveyors have only catered for him anion- the productions of one side. I certainly shall not supply the deficiency by furnishing sample- of the other. I leave to him, and to them, the whole concern. It is enough for me to saw that if, in any part of this their grateful occupa- tion, if, in all their researches, they find any thing in the history of -Massachu- setts, or New England, or in the pro- ceedings of any legislative or other public body, disloyal to the Union, speaking slightingly of its value, proposing to break it up, or recommending non-intercourse with neighboring States, on account of difference of political opinion, then, Sir, I give them all up to the honorable gen- tleman's unrestrained rebuke; expect- ing, however, that he will extend his bufferings in like manner to all similar proceedings, wherever elst found. The gentleman, Sir, has spoken at large of former parties, now no longer in being, by their received appellations, and has undertaken to instruct us, not only in the know Ledge of their principles, but of their respective pedigrees also. lie has ascended to their origin, and run out their genealogies. W i 1 1 1 most ex- emplary modesty, he speaks of the party to which he professes to have himself belonged, as the true Pure, the only honest, pai riot ie party, derived by n lar descent, from father to son, from the time of the virtuous Romans! Spread- ing before as the family tree of political parties, he take-, especial care to Bhow himself snugly perched on a popular bough! lie is wakeful to the expediency of adopting such rule-, of descenl as shall THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. bring him in. to the exclusion of others, as an heir to the inheritance of all pub- lic virtue, and all true political principle. His party and his opinions are sure to be orthodox; heterodoxy is contined to his opponents. He spoke. Sir, of the Fed- eralists, and I thought 1 saw some eyes begin to open and stare a little, when be ventured on that ground. 1 expected he would draw his sketches rather lightly, when lie looked on the circle round him. and especially it' he should cast his thoughts to the high places' out of the Senate. N'evert lieless, he went back to Koine, ml annum urbis conditce, and found the fathers of the Federalists in the primeval aristocrats of that re- nowned city! lie traced the flow of Federal Flood down through successive ages and centuries, till he brought it into the veins of the American Tories, of whom, by the way, there were twenty in the Carolinas for one in Massachu- setts. From the Tories he followed it to the Federalists; and, as the Federal party was broken up, and there was no possibility of transmitting it further'on this side the Atlantic, he seems to have discovered that it has gone off collater- ally, though against all the canons of descent, into the Ultras of France, and finally become extinguished, like ex- ploded gas, among the adherents of DonMiguel! This, Sir, is an abstract of the gentleman's history of Federal- ism. I am nol aboul to controvert it. It is not. at present, worth the pains of refutation; because. Sir, if at this day any one feels the sin of Federalism lying heavily on his conscience, he can easily remission. He may even obtain an indulgence, if he be desirous of re- peating the same transgression. It is an affair of no difficulty to get into this same righl line of patriot ic descent. A man riow-a-days is a1 libertj to choose his political parentage. I le maj eled his own Father. Federalist or not . he may, if he choose, claim to belong to the favored stock, and his claim will be allowed. He maj carry back his pre- tensions just as Ear a the honorable I Sm.ni himseli ; naj . he maj make himself oul the honorable gentleman's cousin, and prove, satisfactorily, that he is descended from the same political great-grandfather. All this is allow- able. We all know a process, Sir, by which the whole Essex Junto could, in one hour, be all washed white from their ancient Federalism, and come out, every- one of them, original Democrats, dyed in the wool ! Some of them have actually undergone the operation, and they say it is quite easy. The only inconvenience it occasions, as they tell us, is a slight tendency of the blood to the face, a soft suffusion, which, however, is very tran- sient, since nothing is said by those whom they join calculated to deepen the red on the cheek, but a prudent silence is ob- served in regard to all the past. Indeed, Sir, some smiles of approbation have been bestowed, and some crumbs of comfort have fallen, not a thousand miles from the door of the Hartford Convention itself. And if the author of the Ordinance of 1787 possessed the other requisite qualifications, there is no knowing, notwithstanding his Feder- alism, to what heights of favor he might not yet attain. 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 consider me as having as- sailed South Carolina, and insists 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 honorable member, in his first speech, expressed opinions, in regard to revenue and some other topics, which I heard both with pain and with surprise. I told the gentleman I was aware that such sentiments were entertained oat of the government, bui had not expected to find them advanced in it ; that 1 knew there were persons in the South who speak of our Union with indifference or doubt, taking pains to magnify its evils, and to say nothing of its benefits; that the honorable member himself, I was sure, could never I ne of these; and I regretted tl rpression of such opinions as he had avowed, because I thought THE REPLY TO IIAYNK. their obvious tendency was to encourage feelings of disrespect to (lie Union, and tn impair its Btrength. This, Sir, is Lhe sum and Bubstanoe of all I said mi the Bubject. And this constitutes the attach which called on the chivalry of the gen- tleman, in his own opinion, to barrj us with such a foray among the party pam- phlets and party proceedings of Massa- chusetts! [f he means that [spoke with dissatisfaction or disrespect of tin- ebul- litions of individuals in South Carolina, it is true. But if he means thai I as- sailed the character of the State, her honor, or patriotism, that 1 reflected on her history or her conduct, he has not the slightest ground for any such as- sumption. 1 did not even refer, I think, in my observations, to any collection of individuals. 1 said nothing of the re- cent conventions. I spoke in the most guarded and careful manner, and only expressed my regret for the publication of opinions, which I presumed the hon- orable member disapproved as much as myself. In this, it seems, I was mis- taken. T do not remember that the gen- tleman has disclaimed any sentiment, or any opinion, of a supposed anti-union tendency, which on all or any of the recent occasions has been expressed. The whole drift of his speech has been rather to prove, that, in divers times and manners, sentiments equally liable to my objection have been avowed in New England. And one would suppose that his object, in this reference to Mas- sachusetts, was to find a precedent to justify proceedings in the South, were it not for the reproach and contumely with which he labors, all along, to load these his own chosen precedents. By way of defending Smith Carolina from what he chooses to think an attack on her, he first quotes the example, of Massachu- setts, and then denounces that example in good set terms. This twofold pur- pose, not very consistent, one would think, with itself, was exhibited more than once in the course of his speech. He referred, for instance, to the Hart- ford Convention. Did he do this f<>r authority, or for a topic of reproach? Apparently for both, for he told us that lie should and no fault \\ ith the mere fad of holding Buch a ivention, and considering and discussing such ques- tions as he Bupposes were then ;in.l there discussed ; but w hat rendered it obnox- ious was n - being held at the time, and under the circumstances of the country then existing. We were in a war, he said, and the country needed all our aid ; the hand of government required to be strengthened, not weakened; and pa- triotism 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 Ibis point, than the honorable member. Supposing, as the gentleman Beem do, that the Hartford Convention assem- bled for any such purpose as breaking up the Union, because they thought un- constitutional laws had been passed, or to consult on that subject, or to calci the value of the Union; supposing this to be their purpose, or any part of it, then I say the meeting itself was dis- loyal, and was obnoxious to censure, whether held in time of peace or time of war, or under whatever circum- stances. The material question is the object. Is dissolution the object? If it be, external circumstances may make it a more or less aggravated case, but cannot affect the principle. I do not hold, therefore, Sir, that the Hartford Convention was pardonable, even to the extent of the gentleman's admission, if its object- were really such as have been imputed to it. Sir, there never was a time, under any degn f excite- ment, in which the Hartford Conven- tion, or any other convention, could have maintained itself one moment in New England, if assembled for any such purpose as the gentleman sayB would have 1 n an allowable purp To hold conventions to decide constitu- tional law! To try the binding validity of statutes by votes in a convention! sir, the Hartford Convention, I pre- sume, would not desire thai the honor- able gentleman should be their defender Or advocate, if he puts th. upon such untenable and ext rai agant grounds. 254 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. Then, Sir, the gentleman has no Fault to find with these recently promul- gated Smith Carolina opinions. And certainly he need have none: for his own sentiments, as ix>\\ advanced, and advanced on reflection, as tar as I have been able to comprehend them, go the full length of all these opinions. I pro- pose, Sir, to say something on these, and to consider how far they are just and constitutional. Before doing that. however, let me observe that the eulo- gium pronounced by the honorable gentleman on the character of the State of South Carolina, for her Revolu- tionary and other merits, meets my hearty concurrence. I shall not ac- knowledge that the honorable member goes before me in regard for whatever of distinguished talent, or distinguished character, South Carolina has produced. [ claim part of the honor, I partake in the pride, of her great names. I claim them for countrymen, one and all, the Laurenses, the Rutledges. the Pinckneys, the Similiters, the Marions. Americans all. whose fame is no more to be hemmed in by State lines, than their talents and patriotism were capable of being circumscribed within the same narrow limits. In their day and gen- eration, they served and honored the country, and the whole country: and their renown is of the treasures of the whole country. Him whose honored name the gentleman himself bears, — does he esteem me less capable of grati- tude for his patriotism, or sympathy for offerings, than if his eyes had first ed upon the light of Massachusetts, ad of South Carolina? Sir. does he Buppose it in his power to exhibit a ( Sarolina name so bi ight a- to produce envy in my bosom? No, sir. increased gratification ami delight, rather. I thank God, lint, if I am gifted with little of tin- spirit which is able to raise iiioi ; be skies, I |,;i\ e yet none, as I trust, of that other spirit, which won 1.1 drag angels down. When | shall he found. Sir. in my place lie re in the Senate, or elsewhere, to sneer at public meril . because it happi ip bej ond the little limit- of m\ own State or neighborhood; when I refuse, for any such cause or for any cause, the homage due to American talent, to elevated patri- otism, to sincere devotion to liberty and the country; or. if I see an uncommon endowment of Heaven, if I see extraor- dinary capacity and virtue, in any son of the South, and if, moved by local preju- dice or gangrened by State jealousy. I get up here to abate the tithe of a hair from his just character and just fame, may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth! Sir, let me recur to pleasing recollec- tions; let me indulge in refreshing re- membrance of the past; let me remind you that, in early times, no States cher- ished greater harmony, both of prin- ciple 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 shand they stood round the administration of Washington, and felt his own gnat arm lean on them for support. Un- kind feeling, if it exist, alienation, and distrust are the growth, unnatural to such soils, of false principles since sown. They are weeds, the seeds of which that same great arm never scattered. Mr. President, I shall enter on no en- comium upon Massachusetts; she needs none. There she is. Behold her, and judge for yourselves. There is her his- tory: the world knows it by heart. The past, at least, is secure. There is Bos- ton, and Concord, and Lexington, and Bunker Hill: and there they will re- main for ever. The bones of her sous. falling in the ureal struggle for Inde- pendence, now lie mingled with the soil of every State from New England to ( leorgia ; and then- they w ill lie for ever. And. Sir. w here American Liberty raise. I 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 ambition shall hawk at and tear it. if folly and madness, if uneasi- ness under salutary and necessary re- TIIK REPLY TO IIAVN'K. 255 straint, sliall succeed in separating 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 still retain over the friends who gather round it ; and it. will tall 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 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 Constitu- tion under which we are here assembled. I might well have desired thai so weighty a task should 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. But, Sir, I have met the occasion, not sought it; and 1 shall proceed to state my own sentiments, without challenging for them any particular regard, with studied plainness, and as much precision as possible. I understand the honorable gentleman from South Carolina to maintain, that it is a right of the State legislatures to interfere, whenever, in their judgment, this government transcends its constitu- tional limits, and to arrest the operation of its laws. I understand him to maintain this right, as a right existing under the Con- si it ution, not as a right to overthrow it on the ground of extreme necessity, such as would justify violent revolution. 1 understand him to maintain an au- thority, on the part of the States, thus to interfere, for the purpose of correct- ing the exercise of power by the general government, of checking it, and of com- pelling it to conform to their opinion of the extent of its powers. I understand him to maintain, thai the ultimate power of judging of the constitutional extent of its own author- ity is imt, lodged excliu ively in tic era! governmeni . or any branch of it : luit that, mi the contrary, the Stab may lawfully decide f<>r themselves, and each state Eor itself, whether, in a given case, the :icl of t i II al i 1 1 ii I'll t transcends its power. I understand him to insist, that, if tic exigency of the case, in tin- opinion of any State government, require it, such State government may, by its own sov- ereign authority, annul an act, of the general government which it, deems plainly and palpably unconstitutional. This is the sum of what I understand from him to he the South Carolina doc- trine, ami the doctrine which he main- tains. I propose t" consider it,, and compare it with the Constitution. Al- low me to say. as a preliminary remark, that I call this the South Carolina doc- trine only because the gentleman him- self has so denominated it. T do not feel at liberty to say that South Caro- lina, as a State, has ever advanced these sentiments. 1 hope she has not, and never may. That a greai majority of her people are opposed to tic tariff laws, is doubtless true. That a majority, somewhat less than that just mentioned, conscientiously believe these laws un- constitutional, may probably also be true. But that any majority holds to the right of direct state interference at State discretion, the right of nullifying acts of Congress by acts of Mate legisla- tion, is more than I know, and what I shall he slow to believe. That there are individuals besides the honorable gentleman who do maintain these opinions, is .[nil" certain. I P lectthe recent expression of a sentiment, which circumstances attending its utter- ance and publication justify us in sup- posingwasnbl unpremeditated. "The sovereignty of the State, — never to be controlled, construed. ..r decided on. hut by her own feelings of honorable jus- tice." Mr llayne here rose and said, that, for the purpose "f being clearlj oi ■ >. he would state that his proposition was in the words of the Virginia resolution, aa fol- low •, : — 25G THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. "That this assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the pow- ers of the federal government as resulting from the compact to which the States are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting that compact, as uo farther valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact : ami that, in case of a delib- erate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers not granted by the said com- pact, the States who are parties thereto have the right, and are in duty hound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their re- spective limits the authorities, rights, and liberties appertaining to them." Mr. Wchster resumed : — I am quite aware, Mr. President, of the existence of the resolution which the gentleman read, and has now repeated, and that he relies on it as his authority. I know the source, too, from which it is understood to have proceeded. I need not say that I have much respect for the constitutional opinions of Mr. Madison; they would weigh greatly with me al- ways. But before the authority of his opinion be vouched for the gentleman's proposition, it will be proper to consider what is the fair interpretation of that resolution, to which Mr. Madison is un- derstood to have given his sanction. As the gentleman construes it, it is an au- thority for him. Possibly he may not have adopted the right construction. That resolution declares, that, in the case of the dangerous exercise of powers not granted by the general government, the i may interpose to arrest the progress of the "-it. But how interpose, and what does this declaration purport? 1 1 ea it mean no more than that there be extreme cases, in which the peo- pl( . in any mode of assembling, may t usurpation, and relieve themselves from a tyrannical government? No one will deny tins. Such resistance is not onh acknowledged to be just in Amer- ica, 1'ut iii England also Blackstone admits as much, in the theory, ami practice, too, of tic English constitu- tion. We, Sir, who oppose the Carolina doctrine, do uol denj that the people may, if thej choose, throw off any gov- ernment when it becomes oppressive and intolerable, and erect a better in its stead. We all know that civil institu- tions are established for the public bene- fit, and that when they cease to answer the ends of their existence they may be changed. Hut I do not understand the doctrine now contended for to be that, which, for the sake of distinction, we may call the right of revolution. I un- derstand the gentleman to maintain, that, without revolution, without civil commotion, without rebellion, a remedy for supposed abuse and transgression of the powers of the general government lies in a direct appeal to the interference of the State, governments. Mr Hayne here rose and said : He did not contend for the mere right of revo- lution, but for the right of constitutional resistance. What he maintained was, that in case of a plain, palpable violation of the Constitution by the general government, a State may interpose ; and that this inter- position is constitutional. Mr. Wchster resumed: — So, Sir, 1 understood the gentleman, and am happy to find that i did not mis- understand him. What he contends for is, that it is constitutional to interrupt the administration of the Constitution itself, in the hands of those who are chosen and sworn to administer it, by the direct interference, in form of law, of the States, in virtue of their sovereign capacity. The inherent right in the peo- ple to reform their government 1 do not deny; and they have another right, and that is, to resist unconstitutional laws, without overturning the government. It is no doctrine of mine that unconstitu- tional laws bind the people. The great question is, Whose prerogative is it to decide on the constitutionality or uncon- stitutionality of the laws? On that, the main debate binges. The proposition, that, in ease of a supposed violation of the Constitution by Congress, the States have a constitutional right to interfere ami annul the law of Congress, is the proposition of the gentleman. I do not admit it. It' the gentleman had in- tended no more than to assert, the right of revolution for justifiable cause, lie THE REPLY TO HATNE. 257 would have said only what all agree to. lint I cannot conceive thai there can be a middle course, between submission to the laws, when regularly pr unced constitutional, on the one hand, and open resistance, which is revolution or rebellion, on the other. I say, the right of a State to annul a law of Congress cannot he maintained, but on the ground of the inalienable" righl <>t' man to resist oppression ; that, is to say. upon the ground of revolution. I admit thai there is an ultimate violent remedy, above the Constitution and in defiance of the Constitution, which may be re- sorted to when a revolution is to be jus- tified. But I do not admit, that, under the Constitution and in conformity with it, then- is any mode in which a State government, as a member of the Union, can interfere and stop the progress of the general government, by force of her own laws, under any circumstances what- ever. This leads us to inquire into the origin of tins government 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 govern- ment of the United States be the agent of the State governments, 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 for which the honorable gentle- man contends leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this gen- eral government is the creature of tie- States, but that it is the creature of each of the States severally, so that each may assert the power for itself of determin- ing whether it acts within the Limits of its authority. It is the servant of four- and-twenty masters, of different 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, t he peo ple's Constitution, tie' people's government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people. The j ■ 17 pie of the I'nited States have declared that this Constitution shall l»- thi pre law. \\ .'<• must either admil the proposition, or dispute their authority. The States are, unquestionably, sover- eign, so far as their sovereignty is not affected by this supreme law. Bui tie- state legislatures, as political bodies, however sovereign, are yel no1 sovereign over tin- people. So far a-> the i pie have given power to the general govern- ment, so far the grant is unquestionably good, and the gove rnment holds of tie- people, and not of the State government -. We are all agents of the sam-- supreme power, the people. The general gov- ernment and the State governments derive their authority fr the same source. Neither can, in relation to tie- other, be called primary, though one is definite and restricted, and the other general and residuary. The national government possesses those powers w Inch it can be shown the people have con- ferred on it, and no more. All the rest belongs to the State governments, or to the people themselves. So far as the people have restrained Stat'- sovereignty, by the expression of their will, in the Constitution of the United States, so far, it must be admitted. State sover- eignty is effectually controlled. I do not contend that it is. or ought to be, controlled farther. The sentiment to which I have referred propounds that state sovereignty is only to be con- trolled by its own "feeling of justice"; that is to say, it is not to be controlled at all, for one who is to follow his own feelings is under no legal control. Now. however men may think this ought to be, the fact is, that the people of the I'nited States have chosen to im control on State sovereignties. There are those, doubtless, who wish they had been left w ithoul restraint ; but the < in- stitution has ordered the matter differ- ently. To make war, for instance, is an exercise of sovereignty; but the Con- stitution declares that no State shall make war. To coin money is another exercise of sovereign power; but uo State is at liberty to coin money. Again, the Constitution says that no sov< 2.VS THE REPLY TO 1IAYNE. 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 static, which does not arise "from her own Eeelings of honor- able justice." The opinion referred to, therefore, is in defiance of the plainest provisions of the ( institution. 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 length and breadth of that doc- trine, denominated t he Carolina doc- trine, which the honorable member has new 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 expense of others, is contrary to the meaning and intention of the federal compact : and such a danger- ous, palpable, and deliberate usurpation of power, by a determined majority, wielding the general government beyond the limits of its delegated powers, as calls upon the 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 1828, and every other tariff designed to promote one branch of industry at the expense of another, to be such a dangerous, palpable, and de- liberate usurpation of power, as calls upon the States, in their sovereign ca- pacity, tu interfere by their own author- ity. This denunciation, Mr. President. you will please to observe, include-, our old tariff of 1816, as well as all others; because that was established to promote tip- mteresl "i the manufacturers of cot- ton, t,, i he manife I and admitted injury of the ( lalcutta cotton trade. < observe, n. that all tic qualifical ions are here rehearsed and charged upon the tariff, which are necessary to bring the case within the gentleman's proposition. The tariff is a usurpal ion ; it is a dan- gerous usurpation ; it is a palpable usur- pation; it is a deliberate usurpation. It is such a usurpation, therefore, as calls upon the States to exercise their right of interference. Here is a case, then, within the gentleman's principles, and all his qualifications of his principles. It is a case for action. The Constitution is plainly, dangerously, palpably, and deliberately violated; and the States must interpose their own authority to arrest the law. Let us suppose the State of South Carolina to express this same opinion, by the voice of her legis- lature. That would be very imposing; but what then? Is the voice of one State conclusive? It so happens that, at the very moment when South Caro- lina resolves that the tariff laws are un- constitutional, Pennsylvania and Ken- tucky resolve exactly the reverse. 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 does he relieve us from this difficulty, upon any principle of his? His con- struction gets us into it; how does he propose to get us out ? In Carolina, the tariff is a palpable, deliberate usurpation; Carolina, there- fore, may nullify it, and refuse to pay the duties. In Pennsylvania, it is both clearly constitutional and highly expe- dient; and there the duties are to be paid. And yet we live under a gov- ernment of uniform laws, and under a Constitution too, which contains 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, independent of either of the States, is not the whole Union a rope of sand? Art' we not thrown back again, precisely, upon the old Confederation? It is too plain to be argued. Four- and-twenty interpreters of constitutional law. each with a power to decide for itself, and none with authority to bind anybody 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 phraseology of the times, ihir- ing feeling! And that feeling, too, not THE REPLY TO HAYNK. 259 the feeling of the people, who estab- lished the Constitution, but the feeling of the State goA ernments. [n another of the South Carolina ad- dresses, having premised thai the crisis requires " all the concentrated energy of passion," an attitude "1" open resistance to the laws of the Union is advised. Open resistance to the laws, then, is the constitutional remedy, the conservative power of tlit- State, which the South Carolina doctrines teach for the redress of political evils, real or imaginary. And its authors further say. that, ap- pealing with confidence to the Consti- tution 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 atti- tude of open resistance in favor of lib- erty. But what sort of liberty? The liberty of establishing their own opin- ions, in defiance of the opinions of all others; the liberty of judging and of deciding exclusively themselves, in a matter in which others have as much right to judge and decide as they; the liberty of placing their own opinions above the judgment of all others, above the laws, and above the Constitution. This is their liberty, and this is the fair result of the proposition contended for by the honorable gentleman. Or, it may be more properly said, it is identi- cal with it, rather than a result from it. In the same publication we find the following: "Previously to our Revolu- tion, when the arm of oppression was stretched over New England, where did our Northern brethren meet with a braver sympathy than that which sprung from the bosoms of Carolinians ? We had no extortion, no oppression, no collision with the king's ministers, no naviga- tion interests springing up, in envious rivalry of England." This seems extraordinary language. South Carolina no collision with the king's ministers in 1775! No extor- tion! No oppression! But, Sir, it is also most significant language. Does any man doubt the purpose for which it was penned? Can any one fail to see that it was designed to raise in the read- er's mind the question, whether, al this fim< . tii.it is i. 'i l B28, - - South Carolina has any collision with the king's ministers, any oppression, or extortion, to tear from England? whether, in short, England is noi as naturally the friend of South ( Carolina a \ laud, with her navigation int. springing up in em ious rivalry of I land? Is it not strange, Sir, that an intelli- gent man in Smith Carolina, in 1828, should thus labor to prove that, in 177."), there was no Inutility, no cause of war, between South Carolina and England? That she had no occasion, in reference to her own interest, or from a regard to her own welfare, to take up ami- in the Revolutionary contest? Can any one account for the expression of such strange sentiments, and their circulation through the State, otherwise than by supposing the object to be what I have already in- timated, to raise the question, if they had no "collision'''' (mark the expres- sion) with the ministers of Kin- George the Third, in 1777), what collision have they, in 1828, with the ministers of King George the Fourth? What is there now, in the existing state of things, to sepa- rate Carolina from Old, more, or rather, than from New England? Resolutions, Sir, have been recently passed by the legislature of South Car- olina. 1 need not refer to them: they go no farther than the honorable gentle- man himself has gone, and I hope not so far. I content myself, therefore, with debating the matter with him. And now. Sir, what I have firsi to on this subject is. that at n<> time, and under no circumstances, has NeM Eng- land, or any State in New England, or any respectable body of persons in New England, or any public man of stand- ing in New England, put forth such a doctrine as this Carolina doctrine. The gentleman has found UO case, he can find none, to support his own (.pin- ions by New England authority. New nid has studied the Constitution in other schools, and under other teacl She looks upon it with other i and deems more highly and ntly 260 THE RETLY TO ITAYNE. both of itsjusl authority ami its utility and excellence. Thehistory of ber legis- lative proceedings maj be traced. The ephemera] effusions of temporary bodies, called together by the excitement of the occasion, may be hunted up; they have been hunted up. The opinions and votes of her public men, in and out of Congress, may be explored. It will all be in vain. The Carolina doctrine can derive from her neither countenance nor support. She rejects it now ; she always didrejecl it: and till she loses her senses, she always will reject it. The honor- able member has referred to expressions on the subject of the embargo law, made in this | 'lace by an honorable and ven- erable gentleman, 1 now favoring as with his presence. He quotes thai distin- guished Senator as saying, that, in his judgment . the embargo law was unconsti- tutional, and that therefore, in his opin- ion, the people were not bound to obey it. That, Sir. is perfectly constitutional Language. An unconstitutional law is not binding; but then it does not rest with <, i-i solution or a law of a State legislature to dt <■;,!< wht (her mi act of Congress be or be >mt constitutional. An unconstitu- tional act of Congress would not bind the people of this District, althougn they have no legislature to interfere in their behalf: and. on the other hand, a con- stitutional law of Congress does bind the citizens of every State, although all their legislatures should undertake to annul it by act or resolution. The ven- erable Connecticut Senator is a consti- tutional lawyer, of sound principles and enlarged knowledge; a statesman prac- tised and experienced, bred in the com- pany of Washington, ami holding just view- upon tie- nature of our govern- ments. He believed the embargo un- constitutional, and so did others; but what then'/ Who did he suppose was to decide thai question? The state leg- islatures? Certainly not. No such sen- timent ever escaped his lip . Lei ns follow up, Sir, this New Eng- land opposition to the embargo laws: le1 us trace it. till we discern the princi- ple which controlled and gover 1 New 1 Mr. HiIIIhmi-' , ol < lonm cticut England throughout the whole course of that opposition. We shall then see what similarity there is 1 "'tween the New England school of constitutional opinions, and this modern Carolina school. The gentleman, I think, read a petition from some single individual addressed to the Legislature of Massachu- setts, asserting the Carolina doctrine; that is, the right of State interference to arrest the laws of the Union. The fate of that petition shows the senti- ment of the legislature. It met no favor. The opinions of Massachusetts were very different. They had been ex- pressed in 1798, in answer to the reso- lutions of Virginia, and she did not depart from them, nor bend them to the times. Misgoverned, wronged, op- pressed, as she felt herself to be, she still held fast her integrity to the Union. The gentleman may find in her proceed- ings much evidence of dissatisfaction with the measures of government, and great and deep dislike to the embargo; all this makes the case so much the stronger for her; for, notwithstanding all this dissatisfaction and dislike, she still claimed no right to sever the bonds of the Union. There was heat, and there was anger in her political feeling. Be it so; but neither her heat nor her anger betrayed her into infidelity to the government. The gentleman labors to prove that she disliked the embargo as much as South Carolina dislikes the tariff, and expressed her dislike as strongly. Be it so; but did she propose the Carolina remedy? did she threaten to interfere, by State authority, to annul the laws of the Union? That is the question for the gentleman's consider- ation. No doubt, Sir. a great majority of the people of New England conscientiously believed the embargo law of 1807 uncon- stitutional ; as conscientiously, certainly, as the people of South Carolina hold that opinion of the tariff. They reasoned thus: Congress has power to regulate com rce; bul here is a law, they said, stopping all commerce, and stopping it indefinitely. The law is perpetual ; that is, it is not limited in point of time, and THE REPLY TO ll \Y\T.. 261 must of emirsc continue until it shall be repealed by some other law. It is as perpetual, therefore, as the law againsl treason <>r murder. Now. is this regu- lating commerce, it destroying it? Is it guiding, controlling, giving the rule t<> commerce, as a subsisting thing, or Is it putting an end to it altogether? Nothing is more certain, than that a majority in New England deemed this law a violation of the Constitution. The very case required by the gentle- man to justify State interference had then arisen. Massachusetts believed this law to be ■• a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of a power not granted by the Constitution." Delib- erate 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 threatened utter ruin to her most im- portant interests. Here, then, was a Carolina case. How did Massachusetts deal with it? It was, as she thought, a plain, manifest, palpable violation of the Constitution, and it brought ruin to her doors. Thousands of families, and hundreds of thousands of individuals. were beggared by it. While she saw and felt all this, she saw and felt also, that, as a measure of national policy, it was perfectly futile; that the country was no way benefited by that which caused so much individual distress ; that it was efficient only for the production of evil, and all that evil inflicted on ourselves. In such a case, under such circumstances, how did Massachusetts demean herself'.'' Sir, she remonstrated. she memorialized, she addressed herself to the general government, not exactly '•with the concentrated energy of pas- sion." 1 >iit with her own strong sense, and the energy of sober conviction. Bui she did not interpose the arm of her own power to arrest the law, and break the embargo. Far Erom it. Her principles hound her to two things; and she fol- lowed her principles, lead where they might. First, to submit to every con- stitutional law of Congress, and sec- ondly, if the constitutional validity of the law be doubted, to refeT thai quest ion to the decii ion of the proper tribunals. The firsl principle is \ain ami ineffect- ual without the second. A majoi it us in New England believed the em- bargo law unconstitutional; bul the great question was, and always will be in such cases, Who is to decide this? Who is to judge between the people and the government? And. Sir, it Is quite plain, that the ( lonsl it ill ii in of t he I unit- ed States confers on the government itself, to be exercised by its appropriate department, and under its own respon- sibility to the people, this power ol de- ciding nit iniii t eiy and conclusively upon the just extent of its own authority. If this had not been done, we Bhould not nave advanced a single Btep beyond the old ( ionfederation. Being fully of opinion thai the em- bargo law was unconstitutional, the people of Xew England were \,i equally clear in the opinion, (it was a matter they did doubt upon.) that the ques- tion, after all. must be decided by the judicial tribunals of the United States. Before those tribunals, therefore, they brought the question. Under the pro- visions of the law, they had given 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- Eashi d way of settling disputes, they went to law. The case came to hearing and solemn argument : and he who poused their cause, and .stood up for them against the validity of the em- bargo act, was none other than that greal man. of whom the gentleman has made honorable mention. Samuel I - ter. He was then. Sir. in the fn! of his knowledge, and the maturity of his s( length. 1 Ie had, retire. 1 from I and distinguished public Bervice 1 to the renewed pursuit of professional duties, carrying with him all that en- largement and expansion, all the new strength and force, which an acquaint- ance with the more general subj< discussed in the national councils is capable of adding to professional attain- ment, in a mind of true greatness and >y>-2 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. comprehension. He was a lawyer, and he was also a statesman. He had studied the Constitution, when he filled public station, thai he might defend it; he had examined its principles that he might maintain them. More than all men, or at Least as much as any man. he was attached to the general govern- ment and to the union of the States. Hi> feelings and opinions all ran in that direction. A question of constitutional law, too, was. of all subjects, that one which was best suited to his talents and learning. Aloof from technicality, and unfettered by artificial rule, such a question gave opportunity for that deep and clear analysis, that mighty grasp of principle, which so much distinguished his higher efforts. His very statement was argument; his inference seemed demonstration. The earnestness of his own conviction wrought conviction in others. One was convinced, and be- lieved, and assented, because it was gratifying, delightful, to think, and feel, and believe, in unison with an in- tellect of such evident superiority. Mr. Dexter, Sir, such as I have de- scribed him, argued the New England cause. 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 con- currence with his neighbors on the point in dispute. lie argued the cause; it was lost, and New England sub- mitted. The established tribunals pro- nounced the law constitutional, and \ew England acquiesced. Now, Sir, is not this the exact opposite of the doc- trine of the gentleman from South Caro- lina? According to him, instead of ring to the judicial tribunals, we should have broken up the embargo by laws of our own: we should have re- pealed it. quoad New England; for we had a strong, palpable, and oppressive Sir, we believed the embargo unconstitutional; bul still that was mat ter of opinion, and w ho was to de- cide it? We thought it a clear case; but, uevertheless, we did nol take the law into our own hand-, because we did not wish to bring about a revolution, nor to break up the Union; for I main- tain, that 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 re- hellion. And. Sir. how futile, how- very futile it is, to admit the right of State interference, and then attempt to save it from the character of unlawful resistance, by adding terms of qualifica- tion to the causes and occasions, leaving all these qualifications, like the case it- self, in the discretion of the State gov- ernments. It must be a clear case, it is said, a deliberate case, a palpable case, a dangerous case. But then the State is still left at liberty to decide for her- self what is clear, what is deliberate, what is palpable, what is dangerous. Do adjectives and epithets avail any thing? Sir, the human mind is so consti- tuted, that the merits of both sides of a controversy appear very clear, and very palpable, to those who respectively es- pouse them; and both sides usually grow clearer as the controversy ad- vances. South Carolina sees uncon- stitutionality in the tariff; she sees oppression there also, and she sees danger. 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 Bafe. The faith of South Carolina is strength- ened by opposition, and she now not only sees, but resolves, that the tariff is palpably unconstitutional, oppressive, and dangerous; but Pennsylvania, not to be behind her neighbors, and equally willing to strengthen her own faith by a confidenl asseveration, resolves, also, and gives to every warm affirmative of South Carolina, a plain, downright, Pennsylvania negative. South Caro- lina, to show the strength and unity of her opinion, brings her assembly to a unanimity, within se\en voices; lYnn- sylvania, not to 1 utdone in this re- spect any more than in others, reduces her dissentient fraction to a single vote. Now, Sir, again, I ask the gentleman, What is to be done? Are these States THE REPLY TO BAYNE. both right? Is he bound to consider them both right? If not, which La in the wrong? or rather, which has the best right to decide? And it' he, and if I, are not to know what the Constitu- tion means, and what it is, till those two state Legislatures, and the twenty- two others, shall agree in its construc- tion, what have we sworn to, when we have sworn to maintain it? I was for- cibly Btruck, Sir, with one reflection, as the gentleman went on in his speech, lie quoted Mr. Madison's resolutions, to prove that a State may Interfere, in a ease of deliberate, palpable, and dan- gerous 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, it' it see fit, interfere by its own law. Now it so happens, nevertheless, that .Mr. Madison deems this same tariff law quite constitutional. Instead of a clear and palpable violation, it is, in his judgment, oo violation at all. So that, while they use his authority for a hypo- thetical case, they reject it in the very case before them. All this, Sir, shows the inherent futility, I had almost used a stronger word, of conceding this power of interference to the State, and then attempting to secure it from abuse by imposing qualifications of which the States themselves are to judge. One of two things is true; either the law r s of the Union are beyond the discretion and beyond the control of the States; or else we have no constitution of general government, and are thrust back again to the days of the Confederation. Let me here say, Sir, that if the gen- tleman's doctrine had been received and acted upon in New England, in the times of the embargo and non-inter- course, -we should probably not now have been here. The government would very likely have gone to pieces, and crumbled into dust. No stronger case can ever arise than existed under those laws; no States can ever entertain a clearer conviction than the New Eng- land States then entertained ; and if they had been under the influence of that heresy of opinion, as I must call it, which the honorable membei pouses, this Union would, in all proba- bility, have been scattered to the tour w inds. I ask the gentleman, therefore, to apply his principles to thai case; I ask him to come forth and declare, whether, in his opinion, the N--'.\ Eng- land States would have been justified in interfering to break op the embargo system under the conscientious opinions which they held upon it ? Had they a right to annul that Law? Does he ad- mit or deny? If what is thought pal- pably unconstitutional in South Caro- lina justifies that State in arresting the progress of the law, tell me whether that which was thought palpably uncon- stitutional 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 Con- stitution to stand on. No public man of reputation ever advanced it in Mass i- chusetts in the warmest times, or could maintain himself upon it there at any time. 1 wish now, Sir, to make a remark upon the Virginia resolutions of 1798. 1 cannot undertake to say how these resolutions were understood by those who passed them. Their language ifl not a little indefinite. In the case of the exercise by Congress of a danger- ous power not granted to them, the resolutions assert the right, on the part of the state, to interfere and arresl the progress of the evil. This is suscepti- ble of more than one interpretation. It may mean no more than thai the St may interfere by complaint and remon- strance, or by proposing to the people an alteration of the Federal Constitu- tion. This would all be quite unob- jectionable. Or it may be that no more is meant than to assert the general right of revolution, as against all eminent-, in cases of intolerable op- pression. This no one doubts, and this, in my opinion, is all that he who framed the resolutions could have meanl by it; for 1 shall not readily believe that lie was ever of opinion that a State, under the Constitution and in conformity with •_v.l THE REPLY TO HAYNE. it, could, upon the ground of her own opinion of its unconstitutionality, how- ever clear and palpable Bhe might think ih«' case, annul a law of Congress, so far as it should operate on herself by her oy a Legislative power. 1 must now l>'"-, r to ask. Sir, Whence is this supposed right of the States derived? Where do they find the power to inter- fere with the laws of the Union? Sir, the opinion which the honorable gentle- man maintains is a notion founded in a total misapprehension, in my 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 admin- ister it. responsible to the people; and itself capable of being amended and modified, just as the people may choose it should be. It is as popular, just as truly emanating from the people, as the Mate 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 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 administra- tion. It isnol the creature of the State governments. It is of no moment to the argument, that certain acts of the state Legislatures are necessary to fill our Beats 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 Constitu- tion itself, have imposed on the State legislatures; and which they might have left to be performed elsewhere, if they had seen lit. So they have left the ce of President with electors; but all this does not affect tin' proposition thai this whole government, President, Senate, and I Louse of Etepresental ives, i .1 popular government. It leaves it still all it- popular character. The governor of a State (in some of the state-) is chosen, uol directly by the le, bul by thoBe who are chosen by the people, for the purpose of perform- ing, among other duties, that of electing a governor. 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 whole truth must he told, the people brought it into existence, established it, and have hitherto supported it, for the very purpose, amongst others, of imposing certain salutary restraints on State sov- ereignties. The States cannot now make war; they cannot contract alli- ances; 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 its creators. The people, then, Sir, erected this government. They gave it a Constitu- tion, and in that Constitution they have enumerated the powers which they be- stow on it. They have made it a lim- ited government. They have denned its authority. They have restrained it to the exercise of such powers as are granted; and all others, they declare, are reserved to the States or the people. But, Sir, they have not stopped here. If they had, they would have accom- plished bul half their work. No defini tion can be so clear, as to avoid possibil- ity 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 re- pose this ultimate right of deciding on the powers of the government? Sir, they have settled all this in the fullest manner. They have left it with the government itself, in its appropriate branches. Sir. the very chief end. the main design, tor which tin.' whole Con- stitution was framed and adopted, was to establish a government thai should not be obliged to act through State agency, or depend on State opinion and THE REPLY TO HAYNE 265 State discretion. The ] pie had had quite enough of thai kind of govern- menl under the Confederation. Under that system, the Legal action, the appli- cation of law to individuals, belonged exclusively to the States. Congress could only recommend; their ads wen' not of binding force, till the States had adopted and sanctioned them. Are we in that condition stilly Are we yet at the mercy of State discretion and stale construction? Sir, if we are. then vain will be our attempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. But, Sir, the people ha\e wisely pro- vided, in the Constitution itself, a proper, suitable mode and tribunal for settling questions of constitutional law. There are in the Constitution grants of ] lowers to Congress, and restrictions on these powers. There are, also, prohibi- tions on the States. Some authority must, therefore, necessarily exist, hav- ing the ultimate jurisdiction to fix and ascertain the interpretation of these giants, restrictions, 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 " the Constitution, and the laws of the United State* made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme Ian; of the lam/, any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." This, Sir, was the first great step. By this the supremacy of the Constitution and laws of the United States is de- clared. The people so will it. No Stale law is to be valid which comes in conflict with the Constitution, or any law of the United States passed in pur- suance of it. But who shall decide this question of interference? To whom lies the last appeal? This, Sir, the Consti- tution itself decides also, by declaring. " that the judicial power shall extend to all cases arising under the Constit ution and lairs of the United States." These two provi sions: cover the whole ground. They are, in truth, the keystone of the arch! With these it is a government; without them it is a confederation. In pursuance of these clear and express pro\ isions, ( !« ii tarnished, at it j \eiy iii -t Bession, in tic judicial acl . a mode for carrying them into full effect, and lor bringing all questions of consti- tutional power to tin- tinal decision of the Supreme Court. It then, Sir, be- came a government. It then had the means of self-protection ; and bul for this, it would, in all probability, have 1 n now among things which are past. Having constituted the government, and declared its powers, the | pie have fur- ther said, that, since BOmebody must decide on the extent of tie-'- powers, the gover nment shall itself decide; sub- ject, always, like other popular govern- ments, to its responsibility to tic people. And DOW, Sir, I repeat , how b it t Ii.it a State legislature acquires any power to interfere'.-' Who, or what, gives them the right to say to the j pie, '-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 anot her purpose, have t ranscend- ed the authority you gave them ! " The reply would l>e. I think. Doi impertinent, '•Who made you a judge over anoth- er's servants? To their own masters they stand or fall." Sir, I deny this power of Stat.- ! latures altogether. It cannot stand the test of examination. Gentlemen may say, that, in an extreme case, a Mate government might protect the people from intolerable oppression. Sir, in such a case, the people mighl protect themselves, without the aid of tie- State governments. Such a case warrants revolution. It must make, when it comes, a law for itself. A nullifying act of a State legislature cannot alter the case, nor make resistance any more lawful. Iii maintaining these senti- ments, Sir, I am but asserting the rights of the people. I state what they have declared, and insist on their right to de- clare it. They have chosen to rej this power in the general government, and I think it my duty to support it. like other constitutional powi For myself, Sir, I do not admit the competency of South Carolina, or any other State, to prescribe my constitu- •_v,,; THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. tionaJ duty; or to settle, between me and the people, the validity of laws of Congress for which 1 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 responsi- bility, except to the people, and those whom they have appointed to pass upon the question, whether laws, supported by my votes, conform to the Constitu- tion of the country. And, Sir, if we look to the general nature of the case, could any thing have been more prepos- terous, than to make a government for the whole Union, and yet leave its pow- ers subject, not to one interpretation, but to thirteen or twenty-four interpre- tations? Instead of one tribunal, estab- lished by all, responsible to all, with power to decide for all, shall constitu- tional questions be left to four-and- twenty popular bodies, each at liberty to decide for itself, and none bound to respect the decisions of others, — and each at liberty, too, to give a new con- struction on every new election of its own members? Would any thing, with such a principle in it, or rather with such a destitution of all principle, be fit to be called a government? 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 dis- putatious people. It would not be a government, ft would not be adequate to any practical good, or fit for any country to live under. To avoid all possibility of being mis- undersl 1. allow me to repeat again, in the fullest manner, that I claim no pow- ers for 1 1 : nment by forced or un- fair construction. 1 admit that it is a government of strictly limited powers; of enumerated, specified, and particular- ize. 1 powers; and that whatsoever is not, granted, is withheld. But notwithstand- ing all thi-. and however the grant of powers maj be express ed, it- limit and at maj yet, in -■•me cases, admit of doubt; and the general government would he g l 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. And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentleman's doctrine a lit- tle into its practical application. Let us look at his probable ?/e/(/«s operandi. If a thing can be done, an ingenious man can tell how it is to be done, and 1 wish to be informed lioiv this State interference is to be put in practice, without violence, bloodshed, 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 probably shall not,) she will then apply to the case the rem- edy of her doctrine. She will, we must suppose, pass a law of her legislature, declaring the several acts of Congress usually called the tariff laws null and void, so far as they respect South Caro- lina, or the citizens thereof. So far, all is a paper transaction, and easy enough* But the collector at Charleston is col- lecting the duties imposed 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 undertake their rescue, the marshal, with his poss", will come to the collector's aid, and here the con- test begins. The militia of the State will be called out to sustain the nullify- ing act. They will inarch, Sir, under a very gallant leader; for I believe the honorable member himself commands the militia of that part of the State. He will raise the NULLIFYING act on his standard, and spread it out as his banner! It will have a preamble, set- ting forth that the tariff laws are palpa- ble, deliberate, and dangerous violations of the Constitution! He will proceed, with this banner living, to the custom- house in Charleston, ■■ \ll the while Sonorous metal blowing martial Bounds " 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 w ill be somevt hat puzzled to say, \<\ the way, with a grave countenance, TIIK REPLY TO BAYNE. 267 eonsidering what band South Carolina herself had in that of 1816. But, Sir, tlic collector would not, probabrj . desist, at his bidding. Hi* would Bhow him the law of Congress, the treasury instruc- tion, and his own oath of office. He would say, he should perform his duty, come what come might. Here would ensue a pause; for tics- say that a certain stillness precedes tin? tempest. The trumpeter would hold his breath awhile, and before all this mili- tary 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 com- mander-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 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, something concern- ing their rights in this matter. They would impure, whether it was not some- what dangerous to resist a law of the United States. What would be the na- ture 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 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 nol afraid of bullets, but treason has a way of taking people off that w r e do not much relish. How do you propose to defend us? "Look at my floating ban- ner."' he would reply; "see there the nullifying law!" Is it your opinion. gallant commander, they would then 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 unconstitutional, palpably, delib- erately, dangerously." That may all be bo; but if the tribunal should nol hap- pen to be of thai opinion, dial I we swing for it ? We are ready to die for our coun- try, butii is rather an awkward busii this dying without touching the ground I After all, thai is a sorl of hemp tax worse than any pari of the tariff. Mr. President, the honorable gentle- man would be in adilei a. like that of another great general. He would have a knot before him which he could not untie. He must cut it with his BWOrd. He must say to his followers, •• Defend yourselves with your bayonets"; and this is war, — civil war. Direct collision, therefore, between and force, is the unavoidable re- sult of that remedy for the revision of unconstitutional laws which the gentle- man contends for. It must happen in the very first case to which it is applied. [s not this the plain result? To resist l'\ force the executi E a law, gener- ally, is treason. Can the courts of the United States take notice of the indul- gence of a State to commit treason? The common saying, 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 Pennsylvania, annulling the law .it' Congress, would it have helped his case? Talk about it as we will, these doctrines go tie- length of revolution. They are incompatible with any p. able 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 re- spectable men. and in a tangible form, I enter my public protest agaiuM them all. The honorable gentleman argues, that . if this government be the sole judge of the extent of its own power-, whether that right of judging be in Con tic Supreme < !ourt, it equally sub-. State sovereignty. This tl mtleman Bees, or thinks he sees, although he can- not perceive how the right "\ jud j in this matter, if left to the ex< rci state legislatures, ha- any tendency to 218 THE REPLY TO HAYNE. Bubvert the government of the Onion. The gentleman's opinion may be, that the right ought not to have been lodged with the general government; he may like better sncb a constitution as we should have under tin* ri-ht of State in- terference; but I ask him to meet me on the plain matter of Eact. I ask him to meet ine on the Constitution itself. I ask him if the power is not found there, clearly and visibly Eound there? But, Sir, what is this danger, and what are the grounds of itV Let it be remembered, that the Constitution of the United States is not unalterable. It is to continue in its present form no longer than the people who established it shall choose to continue it. If they shall become convinced that they have made an injudicious or inexpedient par- tition and distribution of power between the State governments and the general government, they can alter that distribu- tion at will. If any thing be found in the national Constitution, either by original provision or subsequent interpretation, which ought not to be in it, the people know how to get rid of it. If any construc- tion, unacceptable to them, be estab- lished, 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 it. who has given. or who can give, to the State legislatures a right to alter it, either by interference, ; ruction, or otherwise? Gentlemen do not seem to recollect that the people ■ any power to do any thing for themselves. They imagine there is no ty for them, any longer than they are under the close guardianship of the State legislatures. Sir, the people have no1 trusted their safety, in regard to the general Constitution, to these hands. They have required other security, and taken other 1 Is. They have chosen t.. t rust themseb es, first, to the plain words of the instru nt, and to such construction as the government them- ii doubt fnl cases, should put on their own pi under their oaths of office, and subject to their responsibility to them; just as the people of a State trust their own State governments with a similar power. Secondly, they have reposed their trust in the efficacy of fre- quent 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 order that it might be trust- worthy, they have made as 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, peaceably and quietly, whenever experience shall point out de- fects or imperfections. And, finally, the people of the United States have at no time, in no way, directly or in- directly, authorized any State legislature to construe or interpret their high instru- ment of government; much less, to in- terfere, by their own power, to arrest its course 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 pro- visions shall now be disregarded, and 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 dependent on State permission. It must borrow leave to be; and will be, no lon- ger than State pleasure, or State discre- tion, 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 Consti- tution, for forty years, and have seen their happiness, prosperity, and renown grow with its growth, and strengthen with its strength. They are now, gen- erally, Btrongly attached to it. Over- thrown by direct assault, it cannot be; evaded, undermined, NULLIFIED, it will not be. if we and those who shall suc- c 1 us here, as agents and represent** THE REPLY TO BAYNE 269 tives of tin- people, shall conscientiously and vigilantly discharge the two great branches of our public trust, faithfully to preserve, and wisely to administer it. .Mr. President, I have thus stated the reasons of my dissent to the doctrines which have been ailvanreil and main- tained. 1 am conscious of having de- tained you ami the Senate much too Ion I was drawn into tin- debate with no previous deliberation, such as is suited to the discussion of so grave and important a subject. Bui it Is a subject of which my heart is full, and I have not been willing to suppress the utter- ance of its spontaneous sentiments. 1 cannot, even now, persuade myself to relinquish it, without expressing once more my deep conviction, that, since it respects nothing less than the Union of the States, it is of most vital and essen- tial importance to the public happiness. I profess, Sir, in my career hitherto, to have kept steadily in view the pros] >erity and honor of the whole country, and the preservation of our Federal Union. It is to that Union we owe our safety at home, and our consideration and dignity abroad. It is to that Union that we are chiefly indebted for whatever makes us most proud of our country. That Union we reached only by the discipline of our virtues in the severe school of adversity. It had its origin in the necessities of dis- ordered finance, prostrate commerce, and ruined credit. Under its benign influ- ences, these great interests immediately aw i ike, as from the dead, and sprang forth with newness of life. Every year of its duration has teemed with fresh proofs of it- 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 pro- tection or its benefits. It has been to us all a copious fountain 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 preserving liberty when the bonds that unite us td-ether shall be broken asun- der. I have not accustomed myself to hang over the precipice of disunion, tu Bee whether, w ith my Bhort Bight , I can fathom the depth of the abyss b< - nor could I regard him as a safe coun- sellor in the affairs of this governim whose thoughts should be mainly bent on considering, not how the Union may be best preserved, but h<>w tolerable might be the condition of the people when it should be broken up and de- stroyed. While the Union lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prosp Bpread out before us, for as and our children. Beyond thai I Beeh not penetrate the 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! When my eyes shall be tinned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union; on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in frater- nal blood! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gor- geous ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and tro- phies 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 delusion ami folly, " Liberty first and Union afterwards"; but everywhere, spread all over in char- acters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the and Over the land, and in every wind under the whole heavens, that other sen- timent, dear to every true American heart, — Liberty and Union, now and for ever, one and inseparable! Mr. Hayne having rejoined to Mr. Webster, especially on the constitutional question, Mr. Webster rose, and, in conclu- sion, Baid : — A few words. Mr. President, on this constitutional argument, which the hon- orable gentleman has labored ; Btruct. 270 THE REPLY TO IIAYNE. His argument consists of two propo- sitions and an inference. His proposi- tions are, — 1. That tlir Constitution is a compact between the States. •_'. That a compact between two, with authority reserved to one to interpret its terms, would lie a surrender to that one of all power whatever. 3. Therefore, (such is his inference,) the general government does not pos- the authority to construe its own powers. Now, Sir. who does not see, without the aid of exposition or detection, the utter confusion of ideas involved in this so elaborate and systematic argument. The Constitution, it is said, is a compact between States; the Stairs. then, and the States only, are parties to the compact. How comes the gen- eral government itself a party? Upon the honoi'able gentleman's hypothesis, the general government is the result of the compact, the creature of the com- pact, not one of the parties to it. Yet the argument, as the gentleman has now stated it, makes the government itself one of its own creators, it makes it a party to that compact to which it owes its own existence. For the purpose of erecting the Con- Btitution on the basis of a compact, the gentleman considers the States as par- ties to that compact; but as soon as his compact is made, then he chooses to consider the general government, winch is the offspring of that compact, not its offspring, but one of its parties; and so, being a party, without the power of judging on the terms of compact. Pray, Sir. in what school is such reasoning as this taught '.- [f the whole of the gentleman's main proposit ion were conceded to him, — that i- to say, it I admit, for the sake of the argument, that the Constitution is a compact between States, — the inferences which he draws from that proposition are warranted by no just reasoning. If the Constitution be a compact between States, still that Constitution, or that compact . has established a government . with certain powers; and whether it be one of those powers, that it shall con- strue and interpret for itself the terms of the compact, in doubtful cases, is a question which can only be decided by looking to the compact, and inquiring what provisions it contains on this point. Without any inconsistency with natural reason, the government even thus cre- ated might be trusted with this power of construction. The extent of its pow- ers, therefore, must still be sought for in the instrument itself. if the old Confederation had con- tained a clause, declaring that resolu- tions of the Congress should be the supreme law of the land, any State law or constitution to the contrary notwith- standing, and that a committee of Con- gress, or any other body created by it, should possess judicial powers, extending to all cases arising under resolutions of Congress, then the power of ultimate de- cision would have been vested in Congress under the Confederation, although that Confederation was a compact between States; and for this plain reason, — that it would have been competent to the states, who alone were parties to the compact, to agree who should decide in cases of dispute arising on the construc- tion of the compact. For the same reason, Sir, if I were now to concede to the gentleman his principal proposition, namely, that the Constitution is a compact between States, the question would still be, What provision is made, in this com- pact, to settle points of disputed con- struction, or contested power, that shall come into controversy? And this ques- tion would still be answered, and con- clusively answered, by the Constitution itself. While the gentleman is contending against construction, he himself is set ting up the most loose and dangerous con- struction. The Constitution declares, that th laws of Congress passed in pur- suance of the Constitution shall be the su- prenu law of the laud. No construction is necessary here. It declares, also, with equal plainness and precision, thai tht judicial power of the United StateA shall i xlt ml to every case arising audi r the THE REPLY TO HAYNE. 271 laws of Ctmaress. This ueeda no con- struction. rHere is ;i law, then, which is declared to be Bupreme; and here is a power established, which is to interpret thai law. Now, Sir, uo\( has the gen- tleman nii'i this? Suppose the Consti- tution to be a compact, yel here are its terms; and how dues the gentleman gel rid of them? He cannot argue the seal o//' the bond, nor the words out of the instrument. Here they are; what an- swer dues lie give to them? None in the world, Sir, except, that the effect of this would be to place the States in a condition of inferiority; and that it re- sults from the very nature of things, there being no superior, that the parties must be their own judges ! Thus closely and cogently does the honorable gentle- man reason on the words of the Consti- tution. The gentleman says, if there be such a power of final decision in the general government, he asks for the grant of that power. Well, Sir, I show him the grant. I turn him to the very words. I show him that the laws of Congress are made supreme; and that the judicial power extends, by express words, to the interpretation of these laws. Instead of answering this, he retreats into the general reflection, that it must result from the nature of things, that the States, being parties, must judge for themselves. I have admitted, that, if the Consti- tution were to be considered as the crea- ture of the State governments, it might be modified, interpreted, or construed according to their pleasure. But, even in that case, it would he necessary that they should agree. One alone could not interpret it conclusively; one alone could not construe it; one alone could not modify it. Yet the gentleman's doctrine is, that Carolina alone may construe and interpret that compact which equally hinds all, and gives equal rights to all. So, then, Sir, even supposing the Constitution to be a compact between the States, the gentleman's doctrine, nevertheless, is not maintainable; be- cause, first, the general government is not a party to that compact, but a gov- ernment established by it, and vested by it with the powers of trying and decid- ing doubtful questions; and secondly, because, if the Constitution !»• regarded 8j8 a Compact, nut ill further to provide for tin' collection of duties. On the L'L'd day of the same month, Mr. Calhoun submitted the following resolutions: — "Resolved, That the people ef the several States composing these United States are united as parties to a constitutional compact, to which the people of each State acceded as a separate sovereign community, each binding itself by its own particular ratification; and that t lie union, of which the said compact is the bond, is a union between the States ratifying the same. "Resolved, That the people of the several States thus united by the constitutional coni- pact, in forming that instrument, and in creat- ing a general government to carry into effect the objects for which they were formed, dele- gated to that government, for that purpose, cer- tain definite powers, to be exercised jointly, reserving, at the same time, each State to itself, the residuary mass of powers, to he exercised by it< own separate government; and that when- ever the general government assumes the exer- eise of power- not delegated hy the compact, its act- are unauthorized, and are of no effect : and that the same government is not made the final judge of the powers delegated to it, since that would make us discretion, and not the Consti- tution, the measure of its power-; but that, as in all other eases of compact among sovereign parties, without any common judge, each has .•in equal right to judge for itself, as well of the infraction as of the mode and measure of redress. " Resolved, Thai the assertions, that the peo- ple of these United States, taken collectively ;is iiuliv iduals, are now. or ever have been, united on the principle of the social compact, ami. a- such, are now formed into one nation or people, or that they have ever been SO united in any stage of their political existence: that the peo- ple of the several State- composing the Union have not, as members thereof, retained thi ir sov- nty; thai the allegiance of their citizens has been transferred to the general govern- ment; that they have parted with the right of punishing treason through their respective State governments; and that they have ie. t tie- right of judging in the last resort as to the extent of the powers reserved, and of consequence of those delegated, — are not only without founda- tion in truth, hut are contrary to the most cer- tain and plain historical facts, and tie' ell deductions of reason; and that all exercise of P iwer on the part of the general government, or any of its departments, claiming authority from such erroneous assumptions, must of necessity be unconstitutional. — must tend, directly and inevitably, to subvert the sovereignty of the States, to destroy the federal character ol the Union, and to rear on its ruins a consolidated government, without constitutional check or lim- itation, and which must necessarily terminate in the loss of liberty itself." On Saturday, the Kith of February, Mr. Calhoun spoke in opposition to the hill, and in support of these resolutions. He was followed by Mr. Webster in tin- speech.] Mr. President, — The gentleman from South Carolina lias admonished us to lie mindful of the opinions of those who .-hall come after u-. We must take our chance. Sir, as to the lighl in which posterity will regard 08. 1 do not decline it- judgment, dot with- hold myself from its scrutiny. Feeling that I am performing my public duty with singleness of heart and to tie' best of my ability, I fearlessly trust myself to the country, now and hereafter, and leave both my motive- and my character to its decision. Tin 1 gentleman has terminated hia speech in a tone of threat and defiance towards this bill, even should it become a law of the land, altogether tiiitt-ual in the halls of Congress. But 1 -hall not -niter myself to be excited into warmth by his denunciation of the measure w hich I support. Among the feelings which 18 274 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT :il this moment fill my breast, not the least is that of regret a1 the position in which the gentleman h;is placed himself. Sir, he dues himself no justice. The can-.' which he has espoused finds no - in the Constitution, no succor from public sympathy, no cheering from a patriotic community. He has no foot- In >ld on which to stand while he mighl display the powers of his acknowledged talents. Every thing beneath his feet is hollow and treacherous. He is like a strong man struggling in a morass: 5 effort to extricate himself only sinks him deeper and deeper. And I fear the resemblance may be carried still farther; I fear that no friend can safely come to his relief, that no one can approach near enough to hold out a help- in.;' hand, without danger of going down himself, also, into the bottomless depths of this Serbonian bog. The honorable gentleman lias de- clared, that on the decision of the ques- tion now in debate may depend the cause of liberty itself. I am of the same opinion; but t hen. Sir, the liberty which I think is staked on the contest is not political liberty, in any general and un- defined character, but our own well- understood and long-enjoyed American liberty. Sir, I love Liberty no less ardently than the gentleman himself, in whatever form she may have appeared in the progress of human history. As exhib- ited in the master states of antiquity, as breaking out again from amidst the darkness of the Middle Ages, and beam- ing on the formation of new communi- ties in modern Europe, she has, always and everywhere, charms for me. Vet, Sir, it is our own liberty, guarded by titutions and secured by union, it is thai liberty which is our paternal inher- itance, it i^ our established, dear-bought . peculiar American liberty, to which 1 am chiefly devoted, and the cause of which I now mean, to the utmost of my power, to maintain and defend. Mr. President, if I considered the con- stitutional question now before us as doubtful as it is important . and if 1 sup- I I thai its decision, cither in the Senate or by the country, was likely to be in am degree influenced by the man- ner in which I might now discuss it, this would be to me a moment of deep solici- tude. Such a moment has once existed. There has been a time, when, rising in this place, on the same question, 1 felt, I must confess, that something for good or evil to the Constitution of the coun- try might depend on an effort of mine. But circumstances are changed. Since that day, Sir, the public opinion has be- come awakened to this great question; it has grasped it; it has reasoned upon it, as becomes an intelligent and patriotic community, and has settled it, or now seems in the progress of settling it, by an authority which none can disobey, the authority of the people themselves. I shall not, Mr. President, follow the gentleman, step by step, through the course of his speech. Much of what he has said he has deemed necessary to the just explanation and defence of his own political character and conduct. On this I shall offer no comment. Much, too, has consisted of philosophical remark upon the general nature of political lib- erty, and the history of free institutions; and upon other topics, so general in their nature as to possess, in my opinion, only a remote bearing on the immediate subject of this debate. But the gentleman's speech made some days ago, upon introducing his resolutions, those resolutions them- selves, and parts of the speech now just concluded, may, 1 presume, be justly re- garded as containing the whole South Carolina doctrine. That doctrine it is my purpose now to examine, and to compare it with the Constitution of the United States. I shall not consent. Sir, to make any new constitution, or to establish another form of government. 1 will not undertake to say what a con- stitution for these United States ought to be. That question the people have decided for themselves ; and 1 shall take the instrument as they have established il . and shall endeavor to maintain it, in its plain sense and meaning, against, opinions and notions which, in my judg- ment, threaten its subversion. BKTWKKN SOVKUKKiN STATE8. •11 : The resolutions introduced l>\ the gen- fcleman Were apparently drawn up with care, and broughl forward upon deliber- ation. I shall not be iii danger, there- fore, of misunderstanding him, i>r those who agree with him, if I proceed at once to these resolutions, and consider thrni as an authentic statement of those opinions upon the great constitutional question by which the recent proc I- ings in South Carolina are attempted to be justified. These resolutions are three in num- ber. The third seems intended to enumer- ate, and to deny, the several opinions expressed in the President's proclama- tion, respecting the nature and powers of this government. Of this third reso- lution. I purpose, at present, to take no particular notice. The first two resolutions of the honor- able member affirm these propositions, viz. : — 1. That the political system under which we live, and under which Con- gress is now assembled, is a compact, to which the people of the several States, as separate and sovereign communities, are the parties. 2. That these sovereign parties have a right to judge, each for itse'f, of any alleged violation of the Constitution by Congress; and, in case of such viola- tion, to choose, each for itself, its own mode and measure of redress. It is true, Sir, that the honorable member calls this a "constitutional" compact; but still he affirms it to be a compact between sovereign States. What precise meaning, then, does he attach to the term constitutional ? When applied to compacts between sovereign Slates, the term constitutional affixes to the word compact no definite idea. Were we to hear of a constitutional league or treaty between England and France, or a constitutional convention between Aus- tria and Russia, we should not under- stand what could be intended by Buch a league, such a treaty, or such a conven- tion. In these connections, the word is void of all meaning; and yet, Sir, it is easy, quite easy, to see why the honor- able gentleman has used it in ti. lutions. lie cannot open the book, and looi up.. u our w ritten frame of govei n- ment, without Beeing that it is called a constitution. This may well i„- appalling to him. li threat, mi. his whole doctrine oi e pa.-i . and its darling derival i nullification and secession, with instant confutation. Because, if he admits our instrument of government to be a con- stitution, then, for that \er\ reason, it is U'.t a compact between sovereigns; a constitution of government and a com- pact between sovereign powers being things essentially unlike in their very natures, ami incapable of ever being the same. Y,-t fche word constitution i- mi the very front of the instrument He cannot overlook it. He seeks, therefore, to compromise the matter, and to sink all the substantial sense of the word, while he retains a resemblani f its sound. lb' introduces a new word of his own. viz. compact, as importing the principal idea, and designed to play the principal part, and degrades constitution into an insignificant, idle epithet, at- tached to compact. The whole then stands as a '■constitutional compact"! And in this way he hopes to pass off a plausible e-loss, as satisfying the words of the instrument. But he will find himself disappointed, sir. I must Bay to the honorable gentleman, that, in our American political grammar, Constitu- tion is a noun substantive ; it imports a distinct and clear idea of itself; and it is not to lose its importance ami dignity, it is not to be turned into a p.. or. am- biguous, Senseless, unmeaning adjective. for the purpose of accommodating any new set of political notions. Sir. we reject his new rules of syntax altogeth ■!". We will not give up our forms of politi- cal sp -h t>> tie- grammarians of the school of nullification. By the Consti- tution, we mean, not a "constitutional compact," but, simply and directly, the Constitution, the fundamental law ; and if there be one WOld ill the langO which the people of the United SI understand, this is that word. We I no more of a constitutional compact be- tween sovereign | . than we know 276 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT of a constitutional indenture of copart- nership, a constitutional deed of convey- ance, or a constitutional bill of exchange. But we knew what the Constitution is; we know what the plainly written funda- mental law is: we know what the bond of our Union and the security of our liberties is; and we mean to maintain and to defend it, in its plain sense and unsophisticated meaning. The sense of the gentleman's proposi- tion, therefore, is not at all affected, one wav or the other, by the use of this word. That proposition still is, that our system of government is but a com- pact between the people of separate and sovereign States. Was it Mirabeau, Mr. President, or some other master of the human pas- sions, who has told us that words are things? They are indeed things, and things of mighty influence, not only in addresses to the passions and high- wrought feelings of mankind, but in the discussion of legal and political questions also; because a just conclu- sion is often avoided, or a false one reached, by the adroit substitution of one phrase, or one word, for another. Of this we have, I think, another ex- ample in the resolutions before us. The first resolution declares that the people of the several States " accedt d " to the Constitution, or to the constitu- tional compact, as it is called. This won! - : accede," not found either in the Constitution itself, or in the ratification of it by any one of the States, has been chosen for use here, doubtless, not with- out a well-considered purpose. The natural converse of accession is ision : and, therefore, when it is Btated thai the people of the Slates ac- ceded to the Union, it may be more plausibly argued that they may secede from it. 1 1 . in adopting the Constitu- tion, nothing was d bul acceding to a compact, nothing would seem neces- sary, in oiiler to break it up, but to ede from the same compact. But the t-'i m is wholly oul of place. I ,- ion, as a word applied to political ociations, implies coming into a league, treaty, or confederacy, by one hitherto a stranger to it; and secession implies departing from such league or confederacy. The people of the United States have used no such form of ex- pression in establishing the present gov- ernment. They do not say that they accede to a league, but they declare that they ordain and establish a Constitution. Such are the very words of the instru- ment itself; and in all the States, with- out an exception, the language used by their conventions was, that they "rati- fied the Constitution" ; some of them employing the additional words " as- sented to" and " adopted," but all of them " ratifying." There is more importance than may, at first sight, appear, in the introduc- tion of this new word, by the honorable mover of these resolutions. Its adop- tion and use are indispensable to main- tain those premises from which his main conclusion is to be afterwards drawn. But before showing that, allow me to remark, that this phraseology tends to keep out of sight the just view of a pre- vious political history, as well as to sug- gest wrong ideas as to what was actually done when the present Constitution was agreed to. In 1789, and before this Con- stitution was adopted, the United States had already been in a union, more or less close, for fifteen years. At least as far back as the meeting of the first Congress, in 1771, they had been in some measure, and for some national purposes, united together. Before the Confederation of 1781, they had de- clared independence jointly, and had carried on the war jointly, both by sea and land; and this not as separate States, but as one people. When, therefore, they formed thai Confederation, and adopted its articles as articles of per- petual union, they did not come together for the first time; and therefore they did not speak of the States as acceding to the Confederation, although it was a league, and nothing but a league, and rested on nothing but plighted faith for its performance. Yet, even then, the States were not strangers to each other; there was a bond of union already sub- sisting between them; they were associ- BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES. 277 at I'd, united Stat is; and the object of the Confederation was to make a Btronger ami better bond of union. Their repre- sentatives deliberated together on these proposed Articles of Confederation, and, being authorized by their respective States, finally " ratified and confirmed" them, [nasmuch as they were already in union, they did not speak of acceding to the new Articles of Confederation, but of ratifying and confirming them; and this language was not used inad- vertently, because, in the same instru- ment, accession is used in its proper sense, when applied to Canada, which was altogether a Btranger to the existing union. " Canada,*' says the eleventh article, "acceding to this Confedera- tion, and joining in the measures of the United States, shall be admitted into the Union." Having thus used the terms ratify and confirm, even in regard to the old Con- federation, it would have been strange indeed, if the people of the United States, after its formation, and when they came to establish the present Con- stitution, had spoken of the States, or the people of the States, as acceding to this Constitution. Such language would have been ill-suited to the oc- casion. It would have implied an ex- isting separation or disunion among the States, such as never has existed since 1774. No such language, there- fore, was used. The language actually employed is, adopt, ratify, ordain, es- tablish. Therefore, Sir, since any State, before she can prove her right to dissolve the Union, must show her authority to undo what has been done, no State is at lib- erty to secede, on the ground that Bhe and other States have don.- nothing but accede. She must show that she has a right to reverse what has been ordain, d, to unsettle and overthrow what has been established, to reject what the people have adopted, and to break up what they have ratified; because these are the terms which express the transactions which have actually taken place. In other words, she must show her right to make a revolution. If, Mr. President, in drawing th resolutions, tin' honorable member had confined himself t" the use of constitu- tional language, there would have a wide and awful hiatus between his premises and Ids conclusion. Leaving out tin' two words compact ami accession, which an' nut constitutional modes of expression, and stating tin- matter pre- cisely as tin' truth i>, his firsl resolution would have affirmed that the peoplt uf ih, st vi r 1 1 < ■ herself relinquished the power of protection, Bhe might allege, and allege t rulj . and gave ii up to Congress, on the faith that Cou- greSS would exercise it. If Con. now refuse to exercise it, Congress d as she maj insist . break the condition of the grant, and thus manifestly violal ■ the ( 'oust it ui ion : and for this \ iolal ion of the Constitute she may threaten to secede also. Virginia may secede, and hold the fortresses in the Chesa- peake. The Western States may secede, and take to their own use the public lands. Louisiana may secede, if she choose, form a foreign alliance, and hold the mouth of the Mississippi. If one State may secede, ten may do so, twenty may do so, twenty-three may do BO. Sir, as these secessions go on, one after another, what is to constitute the Unit- ed States? Whose will be the army? 'Whose the navy? Who will pay the debts'? Who fulfil the public treaties? Who perform the constitutional guaran- ties? Who govern this District and the Territories? Who retain the public property? Mr. President, every man must see that these are all questions which can arise only after a revolution. They pie- suppose the breaking up of the govern- ment. While the Constitution lasts, they are repressed; they spring up to an- noy and startle us only from its grave. The Constitution does not provide for events which must be preceded by its own destruction. Secession 1 , therefore, since it must bring these consequences with it, is REVOLUTION \t:v, and \i 111- 1 tc ation is equally revolutionary. What is revolution? Why, Sir, thai is revolution which overturns, or controls, or successfully resists, the existing pub- lic authority; that which arrests the ex- erciseof the supreme power: that which introduces a new paramount authority into the rule of the state. \ow. Sir, this is the precise object of nullification. •>,» THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT It attempts to supersede the supreme dative authority. It arrests the arm of the executive magistrate. It inter- rupts the exercise of the accustomed judicial power. Under the name of an ordinance, it declares null and void, within the State, all the revenue laws of the United States. Is not this revolu- tionary? Sir, so soon as this ordinance shall be carried into effect, a revolution will have commenced in South Carolina. She will have thrown off the authority to which her citizens have heretofore been subject. She will have declared her own opinions and her own will to be above the laws and above the power of those who are intrusted with their ad- ministration. If she makes good these declarations, she is revolutionized. As to her, it is as distinctly a change of the supreme power as the American Revo- lution of 1770. That revolution did not subvert government in all its forms. It did not subvert local laws and muni- cipal administrations. It only threw off the dominion of a power claiming to be superior, and to have a right, in many important respects, to exercise legisla- tive authority. Thinking this authority to have been usurped or abused, the American Colonies, now the United States, bade it defiance, and freed them- selves from it by means of a revolution. Hut that revolution left them with their own municipal laws still, and the forms of local government. If Carolina now shall effectually resist the laws of Con- gress; if she shall be her own judge, take Iht remedy into her own hands, obey the laws of the Union when she pleases and disobey them when she pleases, she will relieve herself from a paramouni power as distinctly as the American Colonies did the same thing in 177'i. In other words, she will achicv. ;,-. to herself, a revolution. But, Sir, while practical nullification in Smith Carolina would lie, as to her- self, actual ami distinct revolution, its necessary tendency must also be to spread revolution, and to break up the Constitution, a- to all the other states. It strikes a deadly blow at the vital principle of the whole Union. 'I'm allow State resistance to the laws of Congress to be rightful and proper, to admit nulli- fication in some States, and yet not ex- pect to see a dismemberment of the entire government, appears to me the wildest illusion, and the most extrava- gant folly. The gentleman seems not conscious of the direction or the rapid- ity of his own course. The current of his opinions sweeps him along, he knows not whither. To begin with nullification, with the avowed intent, nevertheless, not to proceed to secession, dismemberment, and general revolution, is as if one were to take the plunge of Niagara, and cry out that he would stop half-way down. In the one case, as in the other, the rash adventurer must go to the bottom of the dark abyss below, were it not that that abyss has no dis- covered bottom. Nullification, if successful, arrests the power of the law, absolves citizens from their duty, subverts the foundation both of protection and obedience, dispenses with oaths and obligations of allegiance, and elevates another authority to su- preme command. Is not this revolu- tion? And it raises to supreme com- mand four-and-twenty distinct powers, each professing to be under a general government, and yet each setting its laws at defiance at pleasure. Is not this anarchy, as well as revolution? Sir, the Constitution of the United States was received as a whole, and for the whole country. If it cannot stand alto- gether, it cannot stand in parts; and if the laws cannot be executed everywhere, they cannot long be executed anywhere. The gentleman very well knows that all duties and imposts must be uniform throughout the country. He knows that we cannot have one rule or one law for South Carolina, and another for other States. lie must see, therefore, and does see, and every man sees, that the only alternative is a repeal of the laws throughout the whole Union, or their execution in Carolina as well as else- where. And this repeal is demanded because a single State interposes her vet,,, and threatens resistance! The result of the gentleman's opinion, or BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES. 281 rat her the very text of his (lord inc. is, that no act of Congress can bind all the States, the constitutionality of which is not admitted by all; or, in other words, that do single Mate is bound, againsl its own dissent, by a law of imposts. This is precisely the evil experienced under the old Confederation, and for remedy of which this Constitution was adopted. The leading object in es- tablishing this government, an object forced On the country by the condition of the times and the absolute necessity of the law, was to give to Congress ] lower to lay and collect imposts with- out the ens, nt of particular Stales. The Revolutionary debt remained unpaid; the national treasury was bankrupt; the country was destitute of credit; Con- gress issued its requisitions on the States, and the States neglected them; there was no power of coercion but war, Congress could not lay imposts, or other taxes, by its own authority; the whole general government, therefore, was lit-, tie more than a name. The Articles of Confederation, as to purposes of revenue and finance, were nearly a dead letter. The country sought to escape from this condition, at once feeble and disgrace- ful, by constituting a government which should have power, of itself, to lay duties and taxes, and to pay the public debt, and provide for the general wel- fare; and to lay these duties and taxes in all the States, without asking the consent of the State governments. This was the very power on which the new- Constitution was to depend for all its ability to do good ; and without it, it can be no government, now or at any time. \<~\. Sir, it is precisely against this power, so absolutely indispensable to the very being of the government, that South Carolina directs her ordinance. She attacks the government in its au- thority to raise revenue, the very main- spring of the whole system; and if she succeed, every movement of that sys- tem must inevitably cease. It is of no avail that she declares that she does not resist the law as a revenue law, but as a law for protecting manufactures. It is a revenue law ; it is the very law by force of which the revenue is collected; if it be arrested in any State, the nue ceases in that State; it is, in a word, tie reliance of the govern- ment for the means of maintaining it- nelf and performing it 9 dul ■ Mr. President, the alleged right of a siaie to decide constitutional questions for herself necessarily lead- to force, be- cause other States musl have the same right, and because different Si will decide differently; and when these ques- tions arise between States, it' there be no superior power, they can be decided only by the law of force. On entering into the I fnion, the people of each Mad- gave up a part of their own power to make laws for themselves, in consideration, that, as to common objects, they Bhould have apart in making laws for other St In other words, the people of all the States agreed to create a common gov- ernment, to be conducted by common counsels. Pennsylvania, for example, yielded the right of laying imposts in her own ports, in consideration that the new government, in which She WS have a share,. should possess the power of laving imposts on all the States. If South Carolina now refuses to submit to this power, she breaks the condition on which other States entered into the Union. She partakes of the common counsels, and therein a»i>K to bind others, while she refuses to be bound herself. It makes no difference in the case, whether she does all this without reason or pretext, or whether she up as a reason, that, in her judgment, the acts complained of are unconstitu- tional. In the judgment of other State-, they are not so. It is nothing to them that she offers some reason or some apology for her conduct, if it be one which they do not admit, [t is not to be expected that any State will violate her duty without some plausible pret That would be too rash a defiance of the opinion of mankind. But if it be a pretext which lies in her own bri if it be no more than an opinion which she says she has formed, how can other States be satisfied with this? How can they allow her to be judge of Iter own 1>J THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT obligations? Or, if she may judge of her obligations, may they not judge of their rights also? May not the twenty- three 'Hi, nain an opinion as well as the twenty-fourth? And if it be their right, in their u\\ tl opinion, as expressed in the common council, to enforce the law against her. how is she to say that her right and her opinion are to be every thing, and their right and their opinion nothing? Mr. President, if we are to receive the Constitution as the text, and then to lay down in it< margin the contradictory commentaries which have been, and which may be, made by different States, the whole page would be a polyglot in- deed. It would speak with as many tongues as the builders of Babel, and in dialects as much confused, and mutu- ally as unintelligible. The very instance now before us presents a practical illus- tration. The law of the last session is declared unconstitutional in South Car- olina, and obedience to it is refused. In other States, it is admitted to be strictly constitutional. You walk over the limit of its authority, therefore, w hen you pass a State line. On one side ii is law, on the other side a nullity; and yet it is passed by a common gov- ernment, having the same authority in all the States. Such, Sir, are the inevitable results of this doctrine. Beginning with the origi- nal error, that the Constitution of the United States is nothing but a compact between sovereign States; asserting, in the next step, that eacli State has a right to be its own sole judge of the extent of its own obligations, and consequently of the constitutionality of laws of Con- Mid, in the next, that it may oppose whatever it sees lit to declare un- al, and that it decides [or it self on the mod.- and measure of re- dress, the argument arrives at once at the conclusion, thai what a State dis- sents from, it may nullify; what it- op- . it may oppose by force; what it decides for it self, it may execute bj its own power; and that, in short, it is ipreme over the Legislation of i tcss, and Bupreme over the to say. the power of war. Put a government executes its decisions by its own supreme authority. Its use of force in compelling obedience to its own enactments is noi war. [t contem- plates no opposing part} baving a right sistance. it rests mi its ow n power t i enforce its own w ill ; and when it ■ i . po ess this power, it is no longer a government. Mr. President, I concur so generally in the very able speech of the gentleman from Virginia near me, 1 that it is not without diffidence and regret that I ven- ture to differ with him on any point. His opinions, Sir, are redolent of the doctrines of a very distinguished school, for which I have the highest regard, of whose doctrines I can say, what I can also say of the gentleman's speech, that, while I concur in the results, I must be permitted to hesitate about some of the premises. I do not agree that the Con- stitution is a compact between States in their sovereign capacities. I do not agree, that, in strictness of language, it is a compact at all. But I do agree that it is founded on consent or agree- ment, or on compact, if the gentleman prefers that word, and means no more by it than voluntary consent or agree- ment. The Constitution, Sir, is not a contract, but the result of a contract; meaning by contract no more than as- sent. Founded on consent, it is a government proper. Adopted by the agreement of the people of the United States, when adopted, it has become a Constitution. The people have agreed to make a Constitution; but when made, that Constitution becomes what its name imports. It is no longer a mere agree- ment. Our laws, Sir, have their foun- dation in the agreement or consent of the two houses of Congress. We sav, habitually, that one house proposes a bill, and the other agrees to it; but the result of this agreement is not a com- pact, but a law. The law, the statute, is not the agreement, but something created by the agreement; and some- thing which, when created, has a new character, and acts by its own author- ity. So the Constitution of the United States, founded in or on the consent of the people, may be said to rest on com- pact or consent ; but it is not itself the compact, but its result. When the peo- ple agree to erect a government, and actually erect it, the thing is done, and the agreemenl is at an end. The com- pact is executed, and the end designed by it attained. Henceforth, the fruit 1 Mr. Ki\ ■ -. BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES. of the agreement exists, but tlio agree- ment itself is merged in its own accom- plishment; since there can be no longer a subsisting agreement or conipaol to form a constitution or government, after thai constitution or government lias been actually formed and established. It appears to me, Mr. President, that the plainest account of the establish- ment of this government presents the most just and philosophical view of its foundation. The people of the several States had their separate State govern- ments; and between the States there also existed a Confederation. With this condition of things the people were not satisfied, as the Confederation had been found not to fulfil its intended objects. It was proposed, therefore, to erect a new, common government, which should possess certain definite powers, such as regarded the prosperity of the people of all the States, and to be formed upon the general model of American consti- tutions. This proposal was assented to, and an instrument was presented to the people of the several States for their consideration. They approved it, and agreed to adopt it, as a Constitution. They executed that agreement; they adopted the Constitution as a Constitu- tion, and henceforth it must stand as a Constitution until it shall be altogether destroyed. Now, Sir, is not this the truth of the whole matter? And is not all that we have heard of compact be- tween sovereign States the mere effect of a theoretical and artificial mode of reasoning upon the subject? a mode of reasoning which disregards plain facts for the sake of hypothesis? Mr. President, the nature of sover- eignty or sovereign power has been ex- tensively discussed by gentlemen on this occasion, as it generally is when the ori- gin of our government is debated. But I confess myself not entirely satisfied with arguments and illustrations drawn from that topic. The sovereignty of government is an idea belonging to the other side of the Atlantic. No such thing is known in North America. Our governments are all limited. In Eu- rope, sovereignty is of feudal origin, and imp.. lis DO DOOM than the Btate of the sovereign, [t comprises his rights, duties, exemptions, prerogatives, and powers. But « itb us, all power is with the people. Theyaluiir me sovereign; and they erecl what governments they pleas.-, and confer on them such powers as they please. None of these govern- ments is sovereign, in the European sense of the word, all being restrained by written constitutions. It Been me, therefore, thai we only perplex our- selves when we attempl to explain the relations existing between the general government and the Beveral State gov- ernments, according to those ideas of sovereignty which prevail under systems essentially differenl from our own. But, sir, to return to the Constitu- tion itself; let me inquire what ii relies upon for its own continuance and sup- port. I hear it often BUggested, that the States, by refusing to appoinl Sena- tors and Electors, might bring this gov- ernment to an end. Perhaps that is true; but the same may be said of state governments themselves. Sup- pose the legislature of a State, having the power to appoint the governor and the judges, should omit that duty, would not the State government remain unor- ganized? No doubt, all elective govern- ments may be broken up by a general abandonment, on the pari of those in- trusted with political powers, of their appropriate duties. But one popular government has, in this respect, as much security as another. The main- tenance of this Constitution does not depend on the plighted faith of the States, as stat.-s. to support it; and this again shows that it is not a league. It relies on individual duty and obliga- tion. The Constitution of the United Stat.-s creates direct relations between this g. '\ .'111111. -nt and indi\ iduals. This ernment may punish individuals for treason, and all other crimes in De- code, when committed against the Unit- ed Stat.-s. It has power, a!- >, : individuals, in any mode, and to extent; and it possesses the further power of demanding from individuals 286 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT military service. Nothing, certainly, can mere clearly distinguish a govern- ment from a confederation of states than the possession of these powers. No closer relations can exist between individuals ami any government. On the other hand, the government owes high and solemn duties to every citizen of the country. It is bound to protect him in his most important rights and interests. It makes war for his ction, and no other government in the country can make war. It makes peace for his protection, and no other government can make peace. It main- tains armies and navies for his defence and security, and no other government is allowed to maintain them. He goes abroad beneath its Hag, and carries over all the earth a national character im- parted to him by this government, and which no other government can impart. In whatever relates to war, to peace, to commerce, he knows no other govern- in ut. All these, Sir, are connections as dear and as sacred as can bind indi- viduals to any government on earth. It is not. therefo ' compact between States, but a govern.,, 't proper, operat- ing directly upon individuals, yielding to them protection on the one hand, and demanding from them obedience on the other. The re is no language in the whole Constitution applicable to a confedera- tion of States. If the States be parties, as States, what are their rights, and what their respective covenants and stip- ulations'.' And where are their rights, covenants, and stipulations expressed? I States engage for nothing, they promise nothing. In the Articles of Confederation, they did make promises, and did enler into engagements, and did lit ii i i each state for their fulfilment ; bul in the Constitution there is nothing of thai kind. The reason is. that, in the Constitution, it is the pi opU who speak, and nol the States. The pi < lain the Constitution, and therein address themselves to the States, and to the legislatures of die states, in tic language of injunction and prohibi- tion. Tie' Constitution utters its be- hests in the name and by authority of the people, and it does not exact from States any plighted public faith to main- tain it. On the contrary, it makes its own preservation depend on individual duty and individual obligation. Sir, the States cannot omit to appoint Sena- tors and Electors. It is not a matter restingin St ate discretion or State pleas- ure. The Constitution has taken better care of its own preservation. It lays its hand on individual conscience and indi- vidual duty. It incapacitates any man to sit in the legislature of a State, who shall not first have taken his solemn oath to support the Constitution of the United States. From the obligation of this oath, no State power can discharge him. All the members of all the State legislatures are as religiously bound to O O W support the Constitution of the United States as they are to support their own State constitution. Nay, Sir, they are as solemnly sworn to support it as we ourselves are, who are members of Con- gress. No member of a State legislature can refuse to proceed, at the proper time, to elect. Senators to Congress, or to pro- vide for the choice of Electors of Presi- dent and Vice-President, anymore than the members of this Senate can refuse, when the appointed day arrives, to meet the members of the other house, to count the votes for those officers, and ascertain who are chosen. In both cases, the duty binds, and with equal strength, the conscience of the individ- ual member, and it is imposed on all by an oath in the same words. Let it then never be said. Sir, that it is a matter of discretion with the States whether they will continue the government, or break it up by refusing to appoint Senators and to elect Electors. They have no discretion in the matter. The members of their legislatures cannot avoid doing either, so often as the time arrives, w ith- out a direct violation of their duty and their oaths; such a. violation as would break up any other government. Looking Still further to the provisions of the Constitution itself, in order to learn its true character, we find its great BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES. 287 apparent purpose to be, to unite the | - pie of nil the States under one general government , For certain definite objects, ami, to the extent of this union, to re- strain the separate authority of the States. Congress only can declare war; there- fore, when one State is at war with a foreign nation, all must be at war. The President and the Senate onlj ran make peace; when peace is made for one State, therefore, it must he made for all. Can any thing be conceived more pre- posterous, than that any State should have power to nullify the proceedings of the general government respecting peace and war? When war is declared by a law of Congress, can a single State nullify that law. and remain at peace? And yet she may nullify that law as well as any other. If the President and Senate make peace, may one State, nevertheless, continue the war? And yet, if she can nullify a law, she may quite as well nullify a treaty. The truth is, Mr. President, and no ingenuity of argument, no suhtilty of distinction can evade it, that, as to cer- tain purposes, the people of the United States are one people. They are one in making war, and one in making peace; they are one in regulating com- merce, and one in laying duties of im- posts The very end and purpose of the Constitution was, to make them one people in these particulars: and it has effectually accomplished its object. All this is apparent on the face of the Con- stitution itself. I have already said, Sir. that to obtain a power of direct legislation over the people, especially in regard to imposts, was always promi- nent as a reason for getting rid of the Confederation, and forming a new Con- stitution. Among innumerable proofs of this, before the assembling of the Convention, allow me to refer only to the report of the committee of the old Congress, duly, 1785. But, Sir, let us go to the actual forma- tion of the Constitution; let us open the journal of the Convention itself, and we shall see that the very first resolu- tion which the Convention adopted was. " That a n n ion w. govj rnmj m 0UGH1 i i.i i - i \ i ; M - 1 1 1 i . . i i . \ - 1 - i l.Mi <>i \ si PR] \ii LEGISLATURE, n - on i vky, VM> KXEC1 i n i This itself completely negatives all idea of league, and compact, and con- federal ion. Terms could not be cb more tit to i'\|iiv,- an intention to estab- lish a national government, and to ban- ish tor ever all notion of a compact between sovereign states. This resolution was adopted OH the 30th of May, 1787. Afterwards, the style was altered, and, instead of being Called a national government, it was called the government of the United states; but the Bubstance of this res- olution was retained, and was at the head of that list of resolutions which was afterwards sent to tin- committee who were to frame the instrument. It is true, there were gentlemen in the Convention, who were for retaining the Confederation, and amending its Articles; but the majority was against this, and was for a national govern- ment. Mr. Patterson's propositions, which were for > .tuning the Arti- cles of Confederation with additional powers, were suhmitted to the Conven- tion on the 15th of June, and referred to the committee of the whole. The resolutions forming the basis of a na- tional government, which had once been agreed to in the committer of the whole, and reported, were recommitted to the same committee, on the same day. The Convention, then, in com- mittee of the whole, on the 19th of dune, had both these plans before them; that is to say. the plan of a confeder- acy, or compact, between States, and the plan of a national government. Both these plans were considered and debated, and the committee reported, •■ That they do not agree to the proposi- tions offered by the honorable Mr. Pat- terson, but that they again submit the resolutions formerly reported." If. sir, any historical fact in the world be plain and undeniable, it is that the Convention deliberated on the expediency of con- tinuing the Confederation, with some amendments, and n that scheme, o >s llli; CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT and adopted the plan of a national government, with a legislature, an ex- ecutive, and a judiciary of its own. They were asked to preserve the league; they rejected the proposition. They were asked to continue the existing compact between States; they rejected it. They rejected compact, league, and confederation, and set themselves about framing the constitution of a national government; and they accomplished what they undertook. If men will open their eyes fairly to the lights of history, it is impossible to be deceived on this point. The great object was to supersede the Confedera- tion by a regular government; because, under the Confederation, Congress had power only to make requisitions on States; and if States declined compli- ance, as they did, there was no remedy but war against such delinquent States. It would seem, from Mr. Jefferson's correspondence, in 1786 and 1787, that he was of opinion that even this remedy ought to be tried. "There will be no money in the treasury," said lie, "till the confederacy shows its teeth"; and he suggests that a single frigate would soon lew, on the commerce of a delin- quent State, the deficiency of its contri- bution. But this would be war; and it was evident that a confederacy could not long hold together, which should be at war with its members. The Consti- tution was adopted to avoid this neces- sity. It was adopted that there mighi a govemmenl which should act di- rectly on individuals, without borrow- aid from the State governments. This is clear as Light itself on the verj face of the provisions of the Constitu- tion, and its whole history tend- to the same conclusion. It> framers gave this very reason for their wori in the mo I distincl terms. Allow me to quote but one or two proofs, out of hundreds. That State. 80 small in territory, but bo distinguished for learning and talent. Connecticut, bad Ben1 to the general Convention, among other members, Samuel Johnston and Oliver Ellsworth. The < lonstil iition ha\ ing been framed, it was submitted to a convention of the people of Connecticut for ratification on the part of that State; and Mr. John- ston and Mr. Ellsworth were also mem- bers of this convention. On the first day of the debates, being called on to explain the reasons which led the Con- vention at Philadelphia to recommend such a Constitution, after showing the insufficiency of the existing confeder- acy, inasmuch as it applied to States, as States, Mr. Johnston proceeded to say: — " The Convention saw this imperfection in attempting to legislate for States in their political capacity, that the coercion of law can he exercised by nothing but a military force. They have, therefore, gone upon entirely new ground. They have formed one new nation out of the- individual States. The Constitution vests in the general legislature a power to make laws in matters of national concern ; to appoint judges to decide upon these laws; and to appoint officers to carry them into execu- tion. This excludes the idea of an armed force. The power which is to enforce these laws is to he a legal power, vested in proper magistrates. The force which is to be employed is the energy of law ; and this force is to operate only upon individ- uals who fail in their duty to their coun- try. This is the peculiar glory of the Constitution, that it depends upon the mild and equal energy of the magistracy for the execution of the laws." In the further course of the debate, Mr. Ellsworth said: — "In republics, it is a fundamental princi- ple, that the majority govern, and that the minority comply with the general voice. How contrary, then, to republican princi- ples, how humiliating, is our present situa- tion! A single State can rise up. and put a veto upon the most important public measures. We have seen this actually take place; a single State has controlled the g( neral \ oice of the Union ; a minority, ,-i very small minority, has governed us. So far is this from being consistent with republican principles, that it is, in effect, thi' worst Bpecies of monarchy. "Hence we >ee how necessary for the Union is a coercive principle. No man pre- tends the contrary. We all see and feel this necessity. The only question is, Shall it be a coercion of law, or a coercion of BETWEEN SOVEREIGN ST \Ti - arms ' There is no other ].-.-.-. s 1 .!<• alterna- tive. Where «ill those who oppose a co ercion of law come <>ut ! Where will they end ! A necessary consequence i>f their principles is n war of the States one against another. 1 am for coercion by law ; that coercion which acts only upon delinquent individuals. This Constitution does not attempt to run-re sovereign bodies, states, in their political capacity. No coercion is applicable to such bodies, but that of an armed force. If we should attempt to exe- cute the laws of the Union by Bending an armed force against a delinquent State, it would involve the good and bad, the inno- cent and guilty, in the same calamity. Hut this legal coercion singles out the guilty individual, and punishes him for breaking the laws of the Union." Indeed, Sir. if we look to all contem- porary history, to the numbers of the Federalist, to the debates in the con- ventions, to the publications of friends ami foes, they all agree, that a change had been made from a confederacy of States to a different system; they all agree, that the Convention had formed a Constitution for a national govern- ment. With this result some were satis- fied, and some were dissatisfied; but all admitted that the thing had been due. In none of these various productions and publications did any one intimate that the new Constitution was but another compact between States in their sover- eign capacities. I do not find such an opinion advanced in a single instance. Everywhere, the people were told that the old Confederation was to be aban- doned, and a new system to be tried; that a proper government was proposed, to be founded in the name of the people, and to have a regular organization of its own. Everywhere, the people were told that it was to be a government with direct powers to make laws over individ- uals, and to lay taxes and imposts with- out the consent of the States. Every- where, it was understood to be a popular Constitution. It came to the people for their adoption, and was to rest on the same deep foundation as the State constitutions themselves. Its most dis- tinguished advocates, who had been themselves members of the Convention, declared thai the very object of submit- ting the ( lonstitution to the people was, to pre, lude the possibility of its being regarded as a mere compact. " However gross a here - v .■" Baj the \\ titers .,f the Federalist, ■■ it may be to maintain thai a party to a compact has a righl to revoke thai compact, the doctrine itself has had respectable advocates. The pos- sibility of a question y any State. ,,r the ] pie of any state, but > > v the people of the United States. Virginia is more explicit, perhaps, in this particular, than any other State. Her convention, as- sembled to ratify the Constitution, " in the name and behalf of the people ,,f Virginia, declare and make known, that the powers granted under the Constitu- tion, being dt rivt d from the people of the United States, may be resumed by them whenever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." Is this language which describes the formation of a compact between Stal or language describing the grant of pow- er.- to a new government, by the whole people of the United States? Among all the other ratifications, there is not one which speaks of the Constitu- tion as a compact between States. Tl of .Massachusetts and New Hampshire express the transaction, in my opinion, with sufficient accuracy. They recognize the Divine goodness " in affording the peopl] "i rHE United States an op- portunity of entering into an explicit and solemn compact with each other, by asst nting t<> and ratifying n w to ( 'onr. if the common fate of things human must lie expected at some period to happen to it, yet that catastrophe is not anticipated. Tin- instrument contains ample pro- visiniis for its amendment, at all times; none for its abandonment, at any time. It declares that new States may come into the Union, hut it does not declare BKTWKKN s<>Vi:i;r.[(i\ STATES. 291 that old States mav go out. The Union is not a temporary partnership of States. It is the association of the people, under a constitution of government, uniting their power, joining together their bigh- esl interests, cementing their present enjoyments, and blending, in one indi- visible mass, all their hopes for the fu- ture. Whatsoever is steadfast in just political principles; whatsoever is per- manent in tlic structure of human so- ciety; whatsoever there is which can derive an enduring character from being founded on deep-laid principles of (■(in- stitutional liberty and on the broad foundations of the public will, — all these unite to entitle this instrument to he regarded as a permanent constitution of government. In the next p lace. Mr. President, I contend that there is a supreme law of the land, consisting of the Constitution, acts of Congress passed in pursuance of it, and the public treaties. This will not lie denied, because such are the very words of the Constitution. But I con- tend, further, that it rightfully belongs to Congress, and to the courts of the United States, to settle the construction of this supreme law, in doubtful cases. This is denied; and here arises the great practical question, Who is to construe finally the Constitution of the United States f We all agree that the ( !onst itu- tion is the supreme law; but who shall interpret that law? In our system of the division of powers between different governments, controversies will neces- sarily sometimes arise, respecting the extent of the powers of each. Who shall decide these controversies? Does it rest with the general government, in all or any of its departments, to exercise the office of final interpreter? Or may each of the States, as well as the gen- eral government, claim this right of ul- timate decision? The practical result of this whole debate turns on this point. The gentleman contends that each State may judge for itself of any alleged vio- lation of the Constitution, and may finally decide for itself, and may exe- cute its own decisions by its own power. All the recent proceedings in South Caro- lina are founded on this claim of relit Her ( mention has pronounced the eiiue laws of the I fnited States uncon- sl il ut ional : and this decision 9D6 does not allow any authority of the 1 1 1 i < < • < i Mate- to overrule or reverse. < >f course she rejects the authority of Congi because the very object of the ordinance is to reverse the decision ol < !ong and she rejects, too. the authority of the courts of the I'nitcd Slate-, because she expressly prohibits all appeal to those courts. It is in order to sustain tin serted right of being her own judge, that she pronounces the Constitution of the I 'nited Slates to be but a compact, to which she is a party, and a sovereign party. If this I stablished, then the inference is supposed to follow, that. being sovereign, there is no power to control her decision : and he r own judg- ment on her own compact Is, and must be, conclusive. I have already endeavored, Sir, to point out the practical consequences of this doctrine, and to show how utterly inconsistent it is with all ideas of reg- ular government . and how soon its adop- tion would involve the whole country in revolution and absolute anarchy. I hope it is easy now to show. Sir. that a doc- trine bringing such consequences with it is not well founded ; that it has nothing to stand on but theory and assumption; and that it is refuted by plain and ex- press const itut ional provisions. I think the government of the United States does possess, in its appropriate depart- ments, the authority of final decisioi questions of disputed power. I think it possesses this authority, both by necessary implication and by express grant. Ii w ill cot be denied, sir. that this authority naturally belongs to all gov- ernments. They all exercise it from necessity, and a-* a consequen* f the exerei\ei [iment, as it has a legislative power of its own. and a judicial power coextensive with the legis- lative, the inference i- irresistible thai this government, thus created by tin- whole and for the whole, must have an authority superior to that of the partic- ular government of any one part. Con- gress is the legislature of all the people of t lie United States; the judiciary of the general government is the judiciary of all the people of the United States. To hold, therefore, that this legislature and this judiciary are subordinate in au- thority to the legislature and judiciary of a single State, is doing violence to all common sense, and overturning all established principles. Congress must judge of the extent of its own powers so often as it is called on to exercise them, or it cannot act at all; and it must also act independent of State con- trol, or it cannot act at all. The right of State interposition strikes at the very foundation of the legislative power of Congress. It possesses no ef- fective legislative power, if such right of State interposition exists; because it can pass no law not subject to abrogation. It cannot make laws for the Union, if any part of the Union may pronounce its enactments void and of no effect. Its forms of legislation would be an idle ceremony, if. after all, any one of I'our- and-twenty States might bid defiance to its authority. Without express provis- ion in the Constitution, therefore, Sir, this whole question is necessarily decided by those provisions which create a legis- lative power and a judicial power. If these exist in a government intended for the whole, the inevitable consequence is, that the laws of this legislative power and the decisions of this judicial power must be landing on and over the whole. No man can form the conception of a government existing over t'our-and- fcwentj states, with a regular legislative and judicial power, and of the existence at the same time of an authority, resid- ing elsewhere, to resist, at pleasure or discretion, the enactments and the de- cisions of such a government. I main- tain, therefore, sir, that, from the na- ture of the case, and as an inference wholly unavoidable, the acts of Congress and tiie decisions of the national courts musl be Of higher authority than State Laws and State decisions. If this he not KKTWF.KN S()Vi:Ui:ii;\ S'I'A res 298 SO, there is, there ran he, no general -c\ eminent . Mut. .Mr. President, the Constitution has doI left this cardinal point without full and explicit provisions. First, as to the authority of Congress. Having enumerated the specific powers con- ferred on Congress, the Constitution adds, as a distinct and Buhstantive clause, the following, viz.: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this ('(institution in the gov- ernment of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." If this means any thing, it means that Con- gress may judge of the true extent and just interpretation of the specific powers granted to it. and may judge also of what is necessary and proper for exe- cuting those jiowers. If Congress is to judge of what is necessary for the execu- tion of its powers, it must, of necessity, judge of the extent and inter] net at ion of those powers. And in regard. Sir, to the judiciary, the Constitution is still more express and emphatic. It declares that the ju- dicial power shall extend to all rusts in law or equity arising under the Consti- tution, laws of the United States, and treaties; that there shall be one Supreme Court, and that this Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction of all these ea-es, subject to such exceptions as Con- gress may make. It is impossible to escape from the generality of these words. If a case arises under the Con- stitution, that is, if a case arises de- pending on the construction of the Con- stitution . t he j udicial power of the United States extends to it. It reaches the cast . the question; it attaches the power of the national judicature to the cast itself, in whatever court it may arise or exi-t : and in this cast the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over all courts whatever. No Language could provide with more effect and precision than is here done, for subjecting constitutional questions to the ultimate decision of the Supreme Court. And. Sir. this is exactly what the Convention found it necessary to pro\ ide for. and intended to provide for. It is, too, exactly what the people were universally told was done when fchej adopted the Constitution. < >ne of the firsl resolutions adopted bj the Convention was in these words, viz. : "That the jurisdiction of the national judiciary Bhall extend to cases which re- spect the collection of the national rt im nut . and questions which involve the national peace and harmony." Now, Sir, this either had no Bensible meaning at all, or else it meant that the jurisdiction of the national judiciary should extend to these questions, with n paramount authority. It is not to be BuppoBed that the < !on- vention intended thai the power of the national judiciary should extend to tl questions, and thai the power of th>- ju- dicatures of the states should also ex- tend to them, with equal power of final decision. This would be to defeal the whole object of the provision. There were thirteen judicatures already in ex- istence. The evil complai 1 of, or the danger to be guarded against, was con- tradiction and repugnance in the de- cisions of these judicatures. If the trainers of the Constitution meant to create a fourteenth, and yet not to _ it power to revise and control the df ions of the existing thirteen, then they only intended to augment the existing evil and the apprehended danger by in- creasing Mill further the chance- of dis- cordant judgments. Why. Sir, ha- it become a settled axiom in politic- that every government mu-t have a judicial power coextensive with its legislative power'.-' Certainly, there is only this reason, namely, that the laws may re- ceive a uniform interpretation and a uniform execution. This objecl cannot be otherVi Lse attained. A statute i- what it is judicially interpreted to be; and if it lie construed one way in New Hamp- shire, and another way in Georgia, there is no uniform law. < >ne supreme court, with appellate and final jurisdiction, is the natural and only adequate means, in an\ government, to secure this uniform- ity. The Convention saw all this dearly; and the resolution which I have q ed, never afterwards rescinded, passed 294 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT through vrarious modifications, till it finally received the Eorm which the ar- ticle niiw bears in the Constitution. It is undeniably true, then, thai the framers of the Constitution intended to rival.' a national judicial power, which should be paramount on national sub- jects. Ami after the Constitution was framed, and while tin- whole country was engaged in discussing its merits. one of its most distinguished advocates, Mr. Madison, told the people that it was trm . that, in cuiitrni-i rsies relating to tin /jiiiimliir// between the t/n> jurisi/irlions, the tribunal which is ultimately to decide is to be established under the general gov- ernment. Mr. Martin, who had been a member of the Convention, asserted the same thing to the legislature of Mary- land, and urged it as a reason for re- jecting the Constitution. Mr. Pinck- ney, himself also a leading member of the Convention, declared it to the people of South Carolina. Everywhere it was admitted, by friends and foes, that this power was in the Constitution. By some it was thought dangerous, by most it was thought necessary; but by all it was agreed to be a power actually contained in the instrument. The Con- vention saw the absolute necessity of some control in the national govern- ment over Slati' laws. Different modes of establishing this control were sug- gested and considered. At one time, it was proposed that the laws of the States should, from time to time, he laid before Congress, and that Congress should possess a negative over them. Hut this was thought inexpedient and inadmissible; and in its place, and ex- Is as a substit ate for it . the exist- ing provision was introduced: that is to a provision by which the federal courts should have authority to overrule such State laws as mighl he in man- ifest contravention of the Constitution. 'I he \\ riters of tin- Federalist, in ex- plaining tin- Constitution, while it was ret pending before tie' people, and still unadopted, give this account of the matter in terms, and assign this reason for the article as it now stands. By this provision ( long ■ aped the ne- cessity of any revision of State laws, left the whole sphere of State legisla- tion quite untouched, and yet obtained a security against any infringement of the constitutional power of the general government. Indeed, Sir, allow me to ask again, if the national judiciary was not to exercise a power of revision on constitutional questions over the judica- tures of the States, why was any na- tional judicature erected at all? Can any man give a sensible reason for bav- in- a judicial power in this government, unless it be for the sake of maintaining a uniformity of decision on questions arising under the Constitution and laws of Congress, and insuring its execution? And does not this very idea of uni- formity necessarily imply that the con- struction given by the national courts is to he the prevailing construction? I low else, Sir, is it possible that uni- formity can be preserved? Gentlemen appear to me, Sir, to look at but one side of the question. They regard only the supposed danger of trusting a government with the inter- pretation of its own powers. But will they view the question in its other as- pect? Will they show us how it is possible for a government to get along with four-and-twenty interpreters of its laws and powers? Gentlemen argue, too, as if, in these cases, the State would lie always right, and the general government always wrong. But sup- pose the reverse, — suppose the State wrong (and, since they differ, some of them must be wrong), - are the most important and essential operations of the government to be embarrassed and arrested, because one State holds the contrary opinion? Mr. President, every argument which refers the constitution- ality of acts of Congress to State de- cision appeals from the majority to the minority: it appeals from the common interest to a particular interest; from the counsels of all to the counsel of one; and endeavors to supersede the judg- ment of tin' whole by the judgment of a part . I think it is clear, Sir, that the Con- stitution, bj express provision, by defi- BETWEEN SOVEREIGN 8TATE8. 29 ■ > iiite and unequivocal words, as well aa I iv necessary implication, lias consti- tuted the Supreme ( lourt of the I faited States the appellate tribunal in all cases of a constitutional nature which assume the shape of a suit, in law or equitj , And I think I cannot do better than to leave this pari of the subject l>\ leading the remarks made upon it in the con- vention of Connecticut, by Mr. Ells- worth; a gentleman. Sir, who has left he hind him, on the records of the gov- ernment of his country, proofs of the clearest intelligence and of the deepest sagacity, as well as of the utmost purity and integrity of character. " This Con- stitution," says he, " defines the extent of the powers of the general govern- ment. If the general legislature should, at any time, overleap their limits, the judicial department is a constitutional check. If the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void; and the judiciary power, the national judges, who, to secure their impartiality, are to be made indepen- dent, will declare it to be void. On the other hand, if the States go beyond their limits, if they make a law which is a usurpation upon the general gov- ernment, the law is void; and upright, independent judges will declare it to be so." Nor did this remain merely matter of private opinion. In the very first session of the first Congress, with all these well-known objects, both of the Convention and the people, full and fresh in his mind. Mr. Ellsworth, as is generally understood, reported the bill for the organization of the judicial de- partment, and in that bill made pro- vision for the exercise of this appellate power of the Supreme Court, in all the proper cases, in whatsoever court aris- ing; and this appellate power has now been exercised for more than forty years, without interruption, and with- out doubt. As to the cases, Sir, which do not come before the courts, those political questions which terminate with the en- actments of Congress, it is of necessity that these should be ultimately decided l.\ ( longre - itself, bike other legisla- tures, it must be trusted with this power. The members of ' are chosen by the people, and they are an swerable to the ) pie; like other public agents, they are hound bj oatb to Bup- porl the Constitution. These are the securities that they will nol violate their duty, nor transcend theirpowers. They are the same securities that prevail in other popular governments; nor is it easy to see how -rant- of power can be more Bafely guarded, without rendering them nugatory. If the case cannot come before the courts, and if Congress he not, trusted with its decision, who -hall de- cide it ? The gentleman says, each State is to decide it for herself. If BO, then. as I have already urged, what is law in one Stale is not law in another. < »r, if the resistance of one State i pels an entire repeal of the law. then a minor- ity, and that a small one, governs tic whole country. Sir, those who espouse the doctrines of nullification reject, as it seems to me, the first great principle of all re- publican liberty; that is. that the ma- jority must govern. In matters of com- mon concern, the judgment of a majority must stand as the judgment of the whole. This is a law imposed on us by the ab- solute necessity of the case; and if we do not act upon it. there is no possibil- ity of maintaining any government but despotism. We hear loud and repeated denunciations against what is called majority government. It is declared, with much warmth, thai a majority government cannot be maintained in the United Mate.. What, then, do gen- tlemen wish? 1 >o they wish to establish a minority government? Do they wish to subject the will of the man] to the will of the few y The honorable gentle- man from South Carolina has spoken of absolute majorities and majorities con- current; language wholly unknown to our Constitution, and to which it is easy to affix definite ideas. A- Ear as I understand it. it would teach us that the absolute majority may be found in < gress, but the majority concurrent must be looked for in the - i\ that Lb to 296 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMTACT say, Sir. stripping the matter of this novelty of phrase, thai t he dissent of one or more States, as states, renders void the decision of a majority of Con- gress, so far as that .state is concerned. And so this doctrine, running but a short career, like other dogmas of the day, terminates in nullification. If this vehement invective against majorities meant no more than that, in the construction of government, it is \\ ise to provide checks and balances, so that there should be various limitations on the power of the mere majority, it would only mean what the Constitution of the Tinted States has already abun- dantly provided. It is full of such cheeks and balances. In its very or- ganization, it adopts a broad and most effective principle in restraint of the power of mere majorities. A majority of the people elects the House of Repre- sentatives, but it does not elect the Senate. The Senate is elected by the States, each State having, in this respect, an equal power. No law, therefore, can pass. \\ ithout the assent of the represent- atives of the people, and a majority of the representatives of the States also. A majority of the representatives of the people must concur, and a majority of the States must concur, in every act of Congress; and the President is elected on apian compounded of both these prin- ciples. But having composed one house of representatives chosen by the people in each State, according to their num- bers, and the other of an equal number of members from every State, whether larger or smaller, the Constitution gives to majorities in these houses thus con- stituted the full and entire power of passing laws, subject always to the con- stitutional restrictions and to the ap- proval of the President. To subject them to any other power is clear usurpa- tion. The majority of one house may be controlled bj the majority of the other; and both may be restrained by the President's negative. These are checks and balances provided by 'I"' Constitution, existing in the govern- ment itself, and widely intended to are deliberation and caution in legis- lative proceedings. But to resist the will of the majority in both houses, thus constitutionally exercised; to insist on the lawfulness of interposition by an extraneous power; to claim the right of defeating the will of Congress, by set- ting up against it the will of a single State, — is neither more nor less, as it strikes me, than a plain attempt to overthrow the government. The con- stituted authorities of the United States are no longer a government, if they be not masters of their own will; they are no longer a government, if an external power may arrest their proceedings; they are no longer a government, if acts passed by both houses, and approved by the President, may be nullified by State vetoes or State ordinances. Does any one suppose it could make any differ- ence, as to the binding authority of an act of Congress, and of the duty of a State to respect it, whether it passed by a mere majority of both houses, or by three fourths of each, or the unanimous vote of each? "Within the limits and restrictions of the Constitution, the gov- ernment of the United States, like all other popular governments, acts by majorities. It can act no otherwise. Whoever, therefore, denounces the gov- ernment of majorities, denounces the government of his own country, and denounces all free governments. And whoever would restrain these majorities, while acting within their constitutional limits, by an external power, whatever he may intend, asserts principles which, if adopted, can lead to nothing else than the destruction of the government itself. Does not the gentleman perceive, Sir, how his argument against majorities might here he retorted upon him? Does he not see how cogently he might be a^ked, whether it be the character of nul- lification to practise what it preaches? book to South Carolina, at the present moment. How far are the rights of minorities there respected? I confess, Sir, 1 have not known, in peaceable times, the power <>!' the majority carried with a higher hand, or upheld with more relentless disregard of the rights, BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES. L".<7 feelings, and principles of the minority; — & minority embracing, as the gentle- man himself will admit, a large portion of the worth ami respectability "I' the State; — a minority comprehending in its numbers men who have been associated with him, and with ns, in these halls of legislation; men who have served their country at home and honored it abroad; men who woftld cheerfully lay down their lives for their native State, in any cause which they could regard as the cause of honor and duty; men above fear, and above reproach, whose deepest grief and distress spring from the con- viction, that tin- present proceedings of the State must ultimately reflect discredit upon her. How is this minority, how are these men, regarded? They are en- thralled and disfranchised by ordinances and acts of legislation; subjected to tests and oaths, incompatible, as they con- scientiously think, with oaths already taken, and obligations already assumed; they are proscribed and denounced as recreants to duty and patriotism, and slaves to a foreign power. Both the spirit which pursues them, and the posi- tive measures which emanate from that spirit, are harsh and prescriptive beyond all precedent within my knowledge, ex- cept in periods of professed revolution. It is not, Sir, one would think, for those who approve these proceedings to complain of the power of majorities. Mr. President, all popular govern- ments rest on two principles, or two assumptions: — First, That there is so far a common interest among those over whom the government extends, as that it may pro- vide for the defence, protection, and good government of the whole, without injustice or oppression to parts; and Secondly, That the representatives of the people, and especially the people themselves, are secure against general corruption, and may be trusted, there- fore, with the exercise of power. Whoever argues against these princi- ples argues against the practicability of all free governments. And whoever admits these, must admit, or cannot deny, that power is as safe in the hands ! of Congress as in tho f other repre- sentative bodies. Congress is nol irre- sponsible. Its members are agent - of the I pie, elected by them, answerable to them, and liable to be displaced or super- seded, at their pleasure ; and i hej po as fair a claim to the confidence of the people, w hile they continue to deserve it, as any other public political agents. If. then. Sir, the manifest intention of the Convention, and the contempo- rary admission of both friends and foes, prove any thing; if the plain texl of the inst rument itself, as well as the m sary implication from other provisions, prove any thing; if the early legislation of Congress, the course of judicial decis- ions, acquiesced in by all the State.-, for forty years, prove any thing, — then it is proved that there is a supreme law, and a final interpreter. My fourth and last proposition, Mr."' President, was, that any attempt by a state to abrogate or nullify acts of Con- gress is a usurpation on the powers of the general government and on the equal rights of other States, a violation of the Constitution, and a proceeding essentially revolutionary. This is un- doubtedly true, if the preceding propo- sitions be regarded as proved. If the government of the United States be trusted with the duty, in any depart- ment, of declaring the extent of its own powers, then a State ordinance, or act of legislation, authorizing resistance to an act of ( 'ongress. on the alleged ground of its unconstitutionality, is manifestly a usurpation upon its powers. If the states have equal rights in matters con- cerning the whole, then for one State to set up her judgment against the judg- ment of the rest, and to insisl on execut- ing that judgment by force, is also a manifest usurpation on the rights of other States. If the Constitution of the United States 1"- a government proper, with authority to pass laws, ami to give them a uniform interpretation and exe- cution, then the interposition of a S: to enforce let- own construction, and to resist, as to herself, that law which hinds the other States, is a violation of the Constitution. o,,. THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT If that be revolutionary which arrests the legislative, executive, and judicial i- of government, dispenses with existing oaths and obligations of obedi- ence, and elevates another power to su- preme dominion, then nullification is lutionary. Or if that be revolution- ary the natural tendency and practical effect of which are to break the Union into fragments, to sever all connection among the people of the respective States, and to prostrate this general governmenl in the dust, then nullifica- tion is revolutionary. Nullification. Sir, is as distinctly rev- olutionary as secession; but I cannot say that the revolution which it seeks is one of so respectable a character. Se- cession would, it is true, abandon the Constitution altogether; but then it would profess to abandon it. What- ever other inconsistencies it might run into, one, at least, it would avoid. It would not belong to a government, while it rejected its authority. It would not repel the burden, and continue to enjoy the benefits. It would not aid in passing laws which others are to obey. and yet reject their authority as to itself. It would not undertake to rec- oncile obedience to public authority with an asserted right of command over that same authority. It would not be in the government, and above the govern- ment, at the same time. But though secession may be a more respectable mode of attaining the object than nullifi- cation, it is not more truly revolutionary. Each, and both, resist the constitutional authorities; each, and both, would sever the I nion and subvert the governmenl , Mr. President, having detained the Senate bo long already, I will not now examine ,ii length the ordinance and laws of South Carolina. These papers are well draw n for their purpose. Their authors understood their own objects. I nej are called a peaceable remedy, and we have been told thai Smith Carolina, alter all. intends nothing bul a lawsuit. A very few words, s 'n\ will show the nat ore oi this peaceable remedy . and of the lawsuil which South Carolina con- template Tn the first place, the ordinance de- clares the law of last July, and all other laws of the United States laying duties, to be absolutely null and void, and makes it unlawful for the constituted authorities of the United States to en- force the payment of such duties. It is therefore, Sir, an indictable offence, at this moment, in South Carolina, for any person to be 'concerned in collecting revenue under the laws of the United States. It being declared, by what is considered a fundamental law of the State, unlawful to collect these duties, an indictment lies, of course, against any one concerned in such collection; and he is, on general principles, liable to be punished by fine and imprison- ment. The terms, it is true, are, that it is unlawful " to enforce the payment of duties"; but every custom-house officer enforces payment while he detains the goods in order to obtain such payment. The ordinance, therefore, reaches every- body concerned in the collection of the duties. This is the first step in the prosecu- tion of the peaceable remedy. The second is more decisive. By the act commonly called the replevin law, any person whose goods are seized or de- tained by the collector for the payment of duties may sue out a writ of replevin, and, by virtue of that writ, the goods are to be restored to him. A writ of replevin is a writ which the sheriff is bound to execute, and for the execution of which he is bound to employ force, if necessary. He may call out the posse, and musl do so, if resistance be made. This posse maybe armed or unarmed. It may come forth with military array, and under the lead of military men. Whatever number of troops may be as- sembled in Charleston, they may be summoned, with the governor, or com- mander-in-chief, at their head, to come in aid of the sheriff. It is evident, then. Sir, that the whole military power of the state is to be employed, if neces- sary, iu dispossessing the custom-house officers, and iii seizing and holding the g Is, without paying theduties. This is the second step iii Hi. iblc remedy. BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STA I l !S 299 Sir, whatever pretences may he set up to the contrary, this is the 'line! ap- plication of force, and of military force. It is unlaw I'ul, in itself, to replevj g Is in tin' custody of tin' collectors. Bui tlii— unlawful act is to be done, ami it is to In 1 done by power. I [ere is a plain interposition, \>\ physical force, to resist the Laws nt tin' Union. The legal mode of collecting duties is to detain the goods till such duties are paid or se- cured. But force conies, and overpow- ers the collector and his assistants, and takes away the goods, Leaving the duties unpaid. There cannot be a clearer case of forcihle resistance to law. And it is provided that the goods thus seized shall be held against any attempt to retake them, by the same force which seized them. Having thus dispossessed the officers of the government of tin.' goods, with- out payment of duties, and seized and secured them by the strong arm of the State, only one thing more remains to be done, and that is, to cut off all possi- bility of legal redress; and that, too, is accomplished, or thought to be accom- plished. The ordinance declares, that all judicial proceedings, founded on the revenue laws (including, of course, pro- ceedings in the courts of the United States), shall lie null and void. This nullities the judicial power of the United States. Then comes the test-oath act. This requires all State judges and jurors in the State courts to swear that they will execute the ordinance, and all acts of the legislature passed in pursuance thereof. The ordinance declares, that no appeal shall he allowed from the de- cision of the State courts to the Supreme Court of the United States; and the re- plevin act makes it an indictable offence for any clerk to furnish a copy of the record, for the purpose of such appeal. The two principal provisions on which Smith Carolina relies, to resist the laws of the United States, and nullify the authority of this government, are, there- fore, these: — 1. A forcible seizure of goods, before duties are paid or secured, by the power of the State, civil and military. -J. Tin- taking away, by Hie a effectual means in ber power, of all s redress in tin- courts of the I , States; the confining of judicial pro- 1 lings io ber own State tribunals; and tin' compelling of ber judges and juroi - of these ber own courts to take an oath, beforehand, that they will decide all cases according to tin- ordinance, and ili" an- passed under it ; that i-. that, they will decide the can- te way. They do not -wear to try it, on its own merits; they only swear to decide it as nullitieat ion requires. The character, sir, of these provis- ions defies comment. Their objeel i- as plain as their mean- are extraordinary. They propose direel resistance, by the whole power of the State, (,, \ AV , Congress, and cut otf. by methods deemed adequate, any redress by Legal and judi- cial authority. They arre-t Legislation, defy the executive, and banish the judi- cial power of this government. They authorize and command acts to he done, and done by force, both of numbers and of arms, which, if done, and done by force, are clearly acts of rebellion and treason. Such. Sir, are the laws of Smith Caro- lina; such, Sir. is the peaceable remedy of nullification. Has not nullification reached, Sir, even thus early, that point of direct and forcible resistance to law to which I intimated, three years ago, it plainly tended? And now, Mr. President, what is the reason for passing law- like these? What are the oppressions experienced under the Union, calling for nt which thus threaten to sever and destroy it? What invasions of public Liberty, what, ruin to private liappiiie-s, what Ion- list of rights violated, or wro unredressed, is to justify to the coun- try, to posterity, and to the world, this assault upon the five Constitution of the United States, this -real ami glori- oii- work of our fathers? At thi- very moment, Sir. the whole land -miles in . ami rejoices in plenty. A gen- eral and a higb prosperity pervades the country; and, judging by the common standard, by increase oi population ami 300 THE CONSTITUTION NOT A COMPACT wealth, or judging by the opinions of thai portion of her people not embarked in these dangerous and desperate meas- ures, this prosperity overspreads South Carolina herself. Thus happy at hum.', our country, at the same time, holds high the character of her institutions, her power, her rapid growth, and her future destiny, in the of all foreign states. One danger only creates hesitation; one doul>t only exists, to darken the otherwise unclouded brightness of that aspect which she ex- hibits to the view and to the admiration of the world. Need I say. that that doubt respects the permanency of our Union? and need 1 say, that that doubt is now caused, more than any thing else, by these very proceedings of South Carolina? Sir, all Europe is, at this moment, beholding us, and looking for the issue of this controversy; those who hate free institutions, with malignant hope; those who love them, with deep anxiety and shivering fear. The cause, then, Sir, the cause! Let the world know the cause which has thus induced one State of the Union to bid defiance to the power of the whole, and openly to talk of secession. Sir, the world will scarcely believe that this whole controversy, and all the desperate measures which its support requires, have no other foundation than a differ- of opinion upon a provision of the Constitution, between a majority of the people of South Carolina, on one side. and a vast majority of the whole people of llie United Slates, on the other, it will nut credit the tact, it will not admit the possibility, that, in an enlightened age, in a free, popular republic, under a cou.-tii ut ion where the people govern, a- thej must always govern under such Bystems, by majorities, at a time of un- pn dented prosperity, without practi- cal oppression, without evils such as may uot only be pretended, but fell and expe- rienced, — evils n>>t slight or temporary, Inn deep, permanent, and intolerable, — a Bingle Male should rush into con- flict with all the rest, attempt to put, down the power of the Union by her own laws, and to support those laws by her military power, and thus break up and destroy the world's last hope. And well the world may be incredulous. We, who see and hear it, can ourselves hardly yet believe it. Even after all that had preceded ii. llii- ordinance -truck the country with amazement. It was in- credible and inconceivable that South Carolina should plunge headlong into resistance to the laws on a matter of opinion, and on a question in which the preponderance of opinion, both of the present day and of all past time, was so overwhelmingly against her. The ordi- nance declares that Congress has ex- ceeded its just power by laving duties on imports, intended for the protection of manufactures. This is the opinion of South Carolina; and on the strength of that opinion she nullifies the laws. Yet has the rest of the country no right to its opinion also? Is one State to sit sole arbitress? She maintains that those laws are plain, deliberate, and palpable violations of the Constitution ; that she has a sovereign right to decide this mat- ter; and that, having so decided, she is authorized to resist their execution by her own sovereign power; and she de- clares that she will resist it, though such resistance should shatter the Union into atoms. Mr. President, I do not intend to dis- cuss the propriety of these laws at large; but I will ask. How are they shown to be thus plainly and palpably unconstitu- tional? Have they no countenance at all in the Constitution itself? Are they unite' new in the history of the govern- ment? Are they a sudden and violent usurpation on the rights of the States'/ Sir, what will the civilized world say, what will posterity say. when they Learn that similar laws have existed from the very Foundation of the government, that for thirty years the power was never questii I, and that no State in the Union has more Ereely and unequivocally admitted it than South Carolina herself? To la\ and collectdut ies and imposts is an express powt r granted by the Constitu- i ion to Congress. Ii is, also, an exclusion pom /■ ; for the Constitution as expressly prohibits all the States from exercising it BETWKKN SOVEREIGN STATES 801 themselves. This express and exclu- sive power is unlimited in the terms of the grant, bu1 is attended with two spe- cific restrictions: first, thai all duties and imposts shall be equal in all the States; second, thai no duties shall be laid on exports. The power, then, being grant- ed, and being attended with these two rest ric! ions, and no more, who is to im- pose a third restriction on the general words of the grant? It' the power to lay duties, as known among all other nations, and as known in all our history, and as it was perfect ly understood when the Constitution was adopted, includes a right of discriminating while exer- cising tin- power, and of laying some duties heavier and some lighter, for the. sake of encouraging our own domestic products, what authority is there for giving to the words used in the Consti- tution a new, narrow, and unusual meaning? All the limitations which the Constitution intended, it has ex- pressed; and what it has left unrestrict- ed is as much a part of its will as the restraints which it has imposed. But these laws, it is said, are uncon- stitutional on account of the motive. How, Sir, can a law he examined on any such ground? How is the motive to be ascertained? One house, or one member, may have one motive; the other bouse, or another member, another. One motive may operate to-day, and another to-morrow. Upon any such mode of reasoning as this, one law might be unconstitutional now, and another law, in exactly the same words, perfectly constitutional next year. Be- sides, articles may not only be taxed for the purpose of protecting home prod- ucts, but other articles may lie left, free, for the same purpose and with the same motive. A law, therefore, would be- come unconstitutional from what it omitted, as well as from what it con- tained. Mr. President, it is a settled principle, acknowledged in all legisla- tive halls, recognized before all tribu- nals, sanctioned by the general sense and understanding of mankind, that there can be no inquiry into the mo- tives of those who pass laws, for the purpose of determining on their validity. If the law be w Lthin the fair meaning of the words in the granl of the power, its authority must be admitted until it is repeal,., 1. This rule, every* here ao knowledged, everywhere admitted', i universal and BO completely without exception, thai even an allegation of fraud, in the majority of a legislature, is not allowed as a ground to Bel aside a law. But, Sir. is it true that the motive for these laws is such as is stated? I think not. The great objectof all these laws is, unquestionably, revenue. If there were no occasion for revenue, the laws would n<>t have been passed; and it is notorious that almosi tie- entire revenue of the country is derived from them. And as yet we have collected none too much revenue. The treasury lias not, been more reduced for many years than it is at the presenl moment. All that South Carolina can say is. that, in pass- ing the laws which she now undertaki B to nullify, particular imported articles were taxed, from a regard to the />n>i< >•- tin, i qf certain drlicles of domestic manu- facture, higher than they >/-<>>dd have been had no such regard been entertained. And she insists, that, according to the Con- stitution, no such discrimination can be allowed; that duties should he laid for revenue, and revenue only ; and that it is unlawful to have reference, in any case, to protection. In oiler words, she denies the power of pi-i RIMIKATION. She does not, and cannot, complain of excessive taxation: on the contrary, she professes to l>e willing to pay any amount for revenue, merely a- revenue; and up to the presenl moraenl there is no surplus of revenue. Her grievance, then, that plain and palpable violation of the Constitution which she ii - has taken place, is simply tl xetvise of the power of discrimination. Now, Sir, i- the exercise of this power of dis- crimination plainly and palpably uncon- stitutional? I have already ion. acknowledging this power of proiectii.ii, voting for its exer- cise, and proposing its extension to their own products. Similar propositions came in, in Virginia ; and. indeed. Sir, in the whole debate, a1 whatever page you open the volume, you find the power admitted, and you find it applied to the protection of particular articles, or not applied, ac- cording to the discretion of Congress. No man denied the power, no man doubted it; the only questions were, in regard to the several articles proposed to he taxed, whether they were fit Sub- jects for protection, and what the amount of that protection ought to be. Will gentlemen, Sir, now answer the argu- ment drawn from these proceedings of the first Congress? Will they under- take to deny that that Congress did act on the avowed principle of protection ? Or, if they admit it, will they tell us how those who framed the Constitution fell, thus early, into this great mistake about its meaning ? Will they tell us how it should happen that they had so soon for- gotten their own sentiments and their own purposes ? I confess I have seen no answer to this argument, nor any respectable attempt to answer it. And, Sir, how did this debate terminate ? What law was passed ? There it stands, Sir, among the statutes, the second law in the book. It has a preamble, and that preamble expressly recites, that the du- ties which it imposes are laid ' ' for the support of government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and tin i neouragement and protection of manu- factures." Until, Sir, this early legisla- tion, thus coeval with the Constitution itself, thus full and explicit, can be ex- plained away, no man can doubt of the meaning of that instrument in this re- spect. Mr. President, this power of discrinii- nation, thus admitted, avowed, ami prac- tised upon in the first revenue act, has never been denied or doubted until with- in a few years past. It- was not at all doubted in 1 S 1 ( » , when it became neces- sary to adjust the revenue to a state of peace. < >n the contrary, the power was then exercised, not without opposition as to it- expediency, but, as far as I re- member or have understood, without the slightest opposition founded on any sup- posed want of constitutional authority- Certainly, South CAROLINA did not doubt it. The tariff of 181y those who defend it. 1 rely on no temporary expedients, on no political combination; but I rely on the true American feeling, the genuine patri- otism of the people, and the imperative decision of the public voice. Disorder and confusion, indeed, may arise; scenes of commotion and contest are threat- ened, and perhaps may come. With my whole heart, I pray for the continuance of the domestic peace and quiet of the country. 1 desire, most ardently, the restoration of affection and harmony to all its parts. I desire that every citizen of the whole country may look to this government with no other sentiments than those of grateful respect and at- tachment. But I cannot yield even to kind feelings the cause of the Constitu- tion, the true glory of the country, and the great trust which we hold in our hands for succeeding ages. If the Con- stitution cannot be maintained without meeting these scenes of commotion and contest, however unwelcome, they must come. We cannot, we must not, we dare not, omit to do that which, in our judg- ment, the safety of the Union requires. 'Not regardless of consequences, we must yet meet consequences; seeing the haz- ards which surround the discharge of public duty, it must yet be discharged. For myself, Sir, I shun no responsibility justly devolving on me, here or else- where, in attempting to maintain the cause. I am bound to it by indissoluble ties of affection and duty, and I shall cheerfully partake in its fortunes and its fate. I am ready to perform my own appropriate part, whenever and wherever the occasion may call on me, and to take my chance among those upon whom blows may fall first and fall thickest. I shall exert every faculty I possess in aiding to prevent the Constitution from being nullified, destroyed, or impaired; and even should I see it fall, I will still, with a voice feeble, perhaps, but earnest as ever issued from human lips, and with fidelity and zeal which nothing shall extinguish, call on the PEOPLE to come to its rescue. PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW YORK. A SPEECH DELIVERED AT A PUBLIC DINNER GIVEN BY A LARGE NUMBER OF CITIZENS OF NEW YORK, IN HONOR OF MR. WEBSTER, ON MARCH 10th, 1831. [In February, 1831, several distinguished gentlemen of the city of New York, in In- half of themselves and a large numher of other citizens, invited Mr. Webster to a pub- lic dinner, as a mark of their respect for the value and success of his efforts, in the preceding session of Congress, in defence of the Constitution of the United States, His speech in reply to Mr. llayne (con- tained in an earlier part of this volume), which, by that time, had been circulated and read through the country to a greater extent than any speech ever before delivered in Congress, was the particular effort which led to this invitation. The dinner took place at the City Hotel, on the 10th of March, and was attended by a very large assembly. Chancellor Kent presided, and, in propos- ing to the company the health of their guest, made the following remarks : — "New England has been long fruitful in great men, the necessary i sequence of the admirable discipline of her institutions; and we arc I his day honored with the presence of one of those cherished objects of her attachment and pride, who lias an undoubted ami peculiar title to our regard. It is a plain truth, that he who defends the ((institution of his country by his wisdom in council is entitled to share her gratitude with those who protect it by valor in the field. Peace has its victories as well as war. We all recollect a late memorable occasion, when tin' exalted talents and enlightened patriotism of the gentleman to whom I have alluded were exerted in the support of our national Union and the sound interpretation of its charter. " If there be any one political precept pre- eminent above all others and acknowledged by all, it is that which dictates the absolute neces- sity of a union of the States under one govern- ment, and that government clothed with those attributes and powers with which the existing Constitution has invested it. We are indebted, under Providence, to the operation and influence of the powers of that Constitution for our na- tional honor abroad and for unexampled pros- perity at home. Its future stability depends upon the linn support and due exercise of its legitimate powers in all their branches. A tendency to disunion, to anarchy among the members rather than to tyranny in the lead, has been heretofore the melancholy late of all the federal governments of ancient and modern Europe. Our Union and national Constitution were formed, as we have hitherto been led to believe, under better auspices and with improved wisdom. But there was a deadly princi| disease inherent in the system. The assump- tion by any member of the Union of the right to question and resist, or annul, as its own judg- ment .-In >iibl dictate, either the lawn of < longress, or the treaties, or the decisions of the federal courts, or the mandates of the executive power, duly made and promulgated as the Constitution prescribes, was a most dangerous assumption of power, leading to collision and the destruc- tion of the system. And if, contrary to all our expectations, we should hereafter fail in the grand experiment of a confederate government extending over some of the fairest portions of this continent, and destined to act. at the same time, with efficiency and harmony, we should most grievously disappoint the hopes of man- kind, and blast for ever the fruits of the Revo- lution. "But, happily for us. the refutation of such dangerous pretensions, on the occasi eferred to. was signal and complete. The false im and delusive theories which had perplexed the thoughts and disturbed the judgments of men, were then dissipated in like manner a- 9p disappear at the rising of the sun. The timable value of the Union, and the true princi- ples of the I !on8titUtion, were explained bv clear and accurate reasonings, and enforced by pa- thetic and eloquent illustration-. The result was the more auspicious, as the heretical doc- trines which were then fairly reasoned down had been advanced by a very respectable por- tion of the Union, and urged on the floor of the Senate by the polished mind, manly zeal, and h red name of a distinguished member from the South "fhe consequences of that discussion b been extremely beneficial. It turned the atten- tion of the public to the great doctrines ol oar tional rights and national union, ion-tin.' law ceased to remain wrapped up in the 111 and taught only by the n sponses, of the living oracles of the law. Socrates h.i- said to have -ox PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW YORK. drawn down philosophy from the skies, and scattered il among the Bchools. It may with equal truth be said, that constitutional law, by means of those senatorial discussions and the master genius that guided them, was rescued from the archives of our tribunals and the libraries of lawyer-, and placed under the eye, and submitted to the judgment, of the Ameri- can people. Their vt rdici is with us, and f rum it there lies no appeal." As soon as the immense cheering and acclamations with which this address and toast were received had subsided,Mr. Web- ster rose and addressed the company as follows.] I owe the honor of this occasion, Gentlemen, to your patriotic and affec- tionate attachment to the Constitution of our country. I'm- an effort, well in- tended, however otherwise of unpretend- ing character, made in the discharge of public duty, and designed to maintain the Constitution and vindicate its just powers, you have been pleased to tender me this token of your respect. It would be idle affectation to deny that it gives me singular gratification. Every public man must naturally desire the approba- tion of his fellow-citizens; and though it may be supposed that T should be anxious, in the firs! place, not to disap- point the expectations of those whose immediate representative I am, it is not possible but that I should feel, neverthe- less, the high value of such a mark of ■in as is here offered. But, Gentle- men, I am conscious that the main pur- pose of this occasion is higher than mere manifestation of personal regard. It is to evince your devotion to the Constitu- tion, your sense of its transcendent value, and your jusl alarm at whatever threat- ens to weaken its proper authority, or endanger its existence. t rentlemen, this could hardly be other- wise. It would he strange, indeed, if the members of this vast commercial , community should noi be first and fore- most to rail;. Eor the < lonstitution, \\ ben- opinions and doctrines are advanced i tile to its principles. Where sooner than here, vi here louder than here, maj we expect a patriotic voice to be raised, when the union oi the Mate- is threat- ened? In this -teat emporium, al this eem ra] point of I he united commerce of the United States, of all places, we may expect the warmest, the most determined and universal feeling of attachment to the national government. Gentlemen, no one can estimate more highly than I do the natural advantages of your city. No one entertains a higher opinion than myself, also, of that spirit of wise and liberal policy, which has actuated the government of your own great State in the accomplishment of high objects, im- portant to the growth and prosperity both of the State and the city. But all these local advantages, and all this en- lightened state policy, could never have made your city what it now is, without the aid and protection of a general gov- ernment, extending over all the States, and establishing for all a common and uniform system of commercial regula- tion. Without national character, with- out public credit, without systematic finance, without uniformity of commer- cial laws, all other advantages possessed by this city would have decayed and perished, like unripe fruit. A general government was, for years before it was instituted, the great object of desire to the inhabitants of this city. New York, at a very early day. was conscious of her local advantages for commerce; she saw her destiny, and was eager to embrace it; but nothing else than a general gov- ernment could make free her path before her. and set her forward on her brilliant career. She early saw all this, and to the accomplishment of this great and in- dispensable object she bent every faculty, and exerted every effort. She was not mistaken. She formed no false judg- ment. At the moment of the adoption of the Constitution. New York was the capital of one Mate, and contained thirty- two or three thousand people. It now contains more than two hundred thou- sand people, and is justly regarded as tl ommercial capital, not only of all the United States, hut of the whole con- tinent aUo. from the pole to the South Sea. Everj page of her history, for the last forty years, hears high and irresisti- ble testimony to the benefits and bless- ings of i : icral government. Her : uishing growth is referred to, and PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW FORK. 809 quoted, all the world over, as ■ of the most striking [> roofs of the; effects of OUT Federal Union. To suppose her now to be easy and indifferent, when notions are ad va need tending to its dissolution, would be to Buppose ber equally forget- ful im- possible to forget the prominent agency exercised by eminent citizens of your own, in regard to that great measure. Those greal men an- now recorded among the illustrious dead; hut they have left names never to be forgotten, and never to he remembered without respect ami veneration. Leasl of all can they he forgotten by you, when as- sembled here for the purpose of signify- ing your attachment to the < lonstitution, and your sense of its inestimable iinjKir- tanee to the happiness .if the people. I should do violence to my own feel- ings, Gentlemen, I think 1 should offend yours, if 1 omitted respectful mention of distinguished names yet fresh in your recollections. How can 1 stand here, to speak of the Constitution of the United States, of the wisdom of its provisions, of the difficulties attending its adoption, of the evils from which it rescued the country, ami of the prosperity ami power to which it has raised it. and y-l pas no tribute to those who were highly in- strumental in accomplishing the work? While we are here to rejoice that it yet stands firm and strong, while we con- gratulate one another that we live under its benign influence, and cherish hopes of its Long duration, we cannot forget who they were that, in the day of our national infancy, in the times of de- spondency and despair, mainly assisted to work out our deliverance. I should feel that I was unfaithful to the strong recollections which the occasion pr< upon u-. that I was no1 true b .lati- tude, not true tii patriotism, not true to the Living or the dead, not true to sour feelings or my own. if I should forbear to make mention of Alexander II sm- l I TOX. Coming from the military Bervi« I the country yet a youth, hut with knowl- edge and maturity, even in civil affairs, 310 PUBLIC DINNKU AT NEW YORK. far beyond his years, he made this city the place of his adoption; and he gave the whole powers of his mind to the contemplation of the weak and distracted condition of the country. Daily increas- ing in acquaintance and confidence with the people of New York, he saw, what they also saw, the absolute necessity of some closer bond of union for the States. This was the great object of desire. He never appears to have lost sight of it, but was found in the lead whenever any thing was to be attempted for its accomplishment. One experiment after another, as is well known, was tried, and all failed. The States were ur- gently called on to confer snch further powers on the old Congress as would enable it to redeem the public faith, or to adopt, themselves, some general and common principle of commercial regula- tion. But the States had not agreed, and were not likely to agree. In this posture of affairs, so full of public diffi- culty and public distress, commissioners from five or six of the States met, on the request of Virginia, at Annapolis, in Sept'-inber, 1786. The precise ob- ject of their appointment was to take into consideration the trade of the Unit- ed States: to examine the relative situ- ations and trade of the several States; and to consider how far a uniform sys- tem of commercial regulations was ne- cessary to their common interest and permanent harmony. Mr. Hamilton was one of these commissioners; and I have understood, though I cannot assert the fact, thai their report was drawn by him. His associate from this Slate the venerable Judge Benson, who lias lived long, and still lives, to see the happy results of the counsels which origi- nated in this meeting. Of its mem- bers, he and Mr. Madison are, I believe, now the only survivors. These commis- sion! mmended, what took place the next year, a general Convention of all the states, to take into serious de- liberation the condition of the country, and >\ >- tion of the Constitution, he was its firm friend and able advocate. He was a member of the State Convention, being one of that list of distinguished and gifted men who represented this city in that body; and he threw the whole weight of his talents and influence into the doubtful scale of the Constitution. Gentlemen, as connected with the Constitution, you have also local recol- lections which must bind it still closer to your attachment and affection. It commenced its being and its blessings here. It was in this city, in the midst of friends, anxious, hopeful, and de- voted, that the new government started in its course. To us, Gentlemen, who are younger, it has come down by tradi- tion; but some around me are old enough to have witnessed, and did witness, the interesting scene of the first inaugura- tion. They remember what voices of gratified patriotism, what shouts of en- thusiastic hope, what acclamations rent the air, how many eyes were suffused with tears of joy, how cordially each man pressed the hand of him who \\a.s next to him, when, standing in the open air, in the centre of the city, in the \ iew of assembled thousands, the first l'resi- 312 PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW YORK. dent of the United States was heard solemnly to pronounce the words of his official oath, repeating them from the lips of Chancellor Livingston. You then thought, Gentlemen, that the greal work of the Revolution was ac- complished. Youthen felt that you had a government; that the United States were then, indeed, united. Every be- nignant star seemed to shed its selectest influence on thai auspicious hour. Here were heroes of the Revolution: here were sages of the Convention ; here were minds, disciplined and schooled in all the various fortunes of the country, act- in"- now in several relations, but all co- operating to the same great end, the successful administration of the new and untried Constitution. And he, — how shall I speak of him? — he was at the head, who was already first in war, who was already first in the hearts of bis countrymen, and who was now shown also, by the unanimous suffrage of the country, to be first in peace. Gentlemen, how gloriously have the hopes then indulged been fulfilled! Whose expectation was then so san- guine, I may almost ask, whose imagi- nation then so extravagant, as to run forward, and contemplate as probable, the one half of what has been accom- plished in forty years? Who among you can go back to 1789, and see what this city, and this country, too, then were; and, beholding what they now are, can be ready to consent that the Constitution of the United States shall be weakened, — dishonored, — nullifi( d f Gentlemen, before 1 leave these pleas- ant recollections, I feel it an irresistible impulse of duty to pay a tribute of re-* sped to another distinguished person, not, indeed, a fellow-citizen of your (,w n, bul associated with those l have already mentioned in important labors, and an early and indefatigable friend and advocate in the great cause of the Constitution. 1 refer to Mr. M vdison. I am aware, < leni lemen, that a t ribute of regard from me to him is of little importance; bul if it shall receive your approbation and sanction, it will be- come of value. Mr. Madison, thanks to a kind Providence, is yet among the living, and there is certainly no other individual living, to whom the country is so much indebted for the blessings of the Constitution. He was one of the commissioners who met at Annapolis, in 1786, to which meeting 1 have al- ready referred, and which, to the great credil of Virginia, had its origin in a proceeding of that State. He was a member of the Convention of 1787, and of that of Virginia in the following year. He was thus intimately acquaint- ed with the whole progress of the for- mation of the Constitution, from its very first step to its final adoption. If ever man had the means of understand- ing a written instrument, Mr. Madison has the means of understanding the Con- stitution. If it be possible to know what was designed by it, he can tell us. It was in this city, that, in conjunction with Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Jay, he wrote the numbers of the Federalist; and it was in this city that he com- menced his brilliant career under the new Constitution, having been elected into the House of Representatives of the first Congress. The recorded votes and debates of those times show his ac- tive and efficient agency in every im- portant measure of that Congress. The necessary organization of the govern- ment, the arrangement of the depart- ments, and especially the paramount subject of revenue, engaged his atten- tion, and divided his labors. The legislative history of the first two or three years of the government is full of instruction. It presents, in striking- light, the evils intended to be remedied by the Constitution, and the provisions which were deemed essential to the remedy of those evils. It exhibits the country, in the n nt of its change from a weak and ill-delined confederacy of States, into a general, efficient, but still restrained and limited government. It shows the first working of our pe- culiar system, moved, as it then was, by master hands. Gentlemen, for one, I confess T like to dwell on this part of our history. It is good for us to be here. It is good for PUBLIC DINNER AT NI'.W VORK. 313 us to stiuh the situation of tin* country iii iliis period, to survey its difficulties, to look al the conduct of its public men, tn see how they struggled with obstacles, real and formidable, and bow gloriously they brought the Union out of its Btate <>l' depression and distress. Truly, Gen- tlemen, these founders and fathers of tin' ( 'oust it ui ton were great men, and thoroughly furnished for every good work. All that reading and Learning could do; all that talent and intelli- gence coidd do; and. what perhaps is si ill more, all that long experience in difficult and troubled times and a deep and intimate practical knowledge of the condition of the country could do, — conspired to fit them for the great busi- ness of forming a general, but limited government, embracing common objects, extending over all the States, and yet touching the power of the States no fur- ther than those common objects require. I confess 1 love to linger around these original fountains, and to drink deep of their waters. I love to imbibe, in as full measure as I may, the spirit of those who laid the foundations of the govern- ment, and so wisely and skilfully bal- anced and adjusted its bearings and pro- portions. Having been afterwards, for eight years, Secretary of State, and as long President, Mr. Madison has had an ex- perience in the affairs of the Constitu- tion, certainly second to no man. More than any other man living, and perhaps more than any other who has lived, his whole public life has been incorporated, as it were, into the Constitution; in the original conception and project of at- tempting to form it, in its actual fram- ing, in explaining and recommend inn it. by speaking and writing, in assisting at the first organization of the government under it, and in a long administration of its executive powers. — in these vari- ous ways he has lived near the Consti- tution, and with the power of imbibing its true spirit, and inhaling its very breath, from its first pulsation of life. Again, therefore, I ask, If he cannot tell us what the Constitution is, and what it means, who can? He had re- tired with the respect and regard of the community, and might naturally be sup- posed not willing to interfere again in matters of political concern. He b nevertheless, not withholden hi^ opin- ions on the v ital quest ion discussed on that occasion, which has caused this meeting. He Ins stated, with an ac- curacy almost peculiar to himself, and bo Btated as, in m\ opinion, to place al- most beyond further controversy, the true doctrines of the Constitution. He has Btated, not notions too loose and ir- regular to be called even a theory, aoi ideas struck out by the feeling of pres- ent inconvenience or supposed male- administration, not suggestions of ex- pediency, or evasions of fair and Straightforward construction, but ele- mentary principles, clear and BOUnd dis- tinctions, ami indisputable truths. I am sure, Gentlemen, that I Bpeak your sentiments, as well as my own, when I mi\. that, for making public bo clearly and distinctly as he has done his own opinions on these vital questions of constitutional law, Mr. Madi-on has founded a new and Btrong claim on the gratitude of a grateful country. You will think, with me, that, at bis ad- vanced age, and in the enjoyment of general respect and approbation for a long career of public services, it was an act of distinguished patriotism, when he saw notions promulgated and main- tained which he deemed unsound and dangerous, not to hesitate to come for- ward and to place the weight of his own opinion in what he deemed the right scale, come what come might. I am sure. Gentlemen, it cannot be doubted. — the manifestation is clear, — that the country feels deeply the force of this new obligation. 1 Gentlemen, what I have said of the benefits of the Constitution to your city might be said, with little cha in respect to every oiler part of the country. \\< benefits are not exclusive. What has it left undone, which any government could do, for the whole 1 The reference is to Mr. Mai ' "" subject n materials for an explosion, which maj take place at any moment, and bkra them into ;t thousand atoms. ( rentlemen, let any man who would degrade and enfeeble the national Con- stitution, lei any man who would nullify its laws, stand forth and tell us what he would wish. What does he propose? Whatever be may be, and whatever sub- stitute he may hold forth, I am sure the people of this country will decline his kind interference, and hold on by the Constitution which they possess. Au\ one who would willingly destroy it, I rejoice to know, would be looked upon with abhorrence. It is deeply intrenched in the regards of the people. Doubtless it may be undermined by artful and long-continued hostility; it may be im- perceptibly weakened by secret attack; it may be insidiously shorn of its powers by slow degrees; the public vigilance may be lulled, and when it awakes, it may find the Constitution frittered away. In these modes, or some of them, it is possible that the union of the States may be dissolved. But if the general attention of the people be kept alive, if they see the in- tended mischief before it is effected, they will prevent it by their own sover- eign power. They will interpose them- selves between the meditated blow and the object of their regard and attach- ment. Next to the controlling authority of the people themselves, the preserva- tion of the government is mainly com- mitted to those who administer it. If conducted in wisdom, it cannot but stand strong. Its genuine, original spirit is a patriotic, liberal, and gener- ous spirit; a spirit of conciliation, of moderation, of candor, and charity; a spirit of friendship, and not a spirit of hostility toward the States; a spirit careful not to exceed, and equally care- ful not to relinquish, its just powers. "While no interest can or ought to feel itself shut out from the benefits of the Constitution, none should consider those benefits as exclusively its own. The interests of all must be consulted, and reconciled, and provided for, as far as possible, that all may perceive tie- bene- fits of a united government. Among other things, we are t" re member thai, new Stal b • arisen, possessing already an immense popula- tion, spreading and thickening over regions which were a wilderness when the Constitution was adopted. Those states are not, like New fork, directly connected with maritime comro They are entirely agricultural, and i markets for consumption ; and they n 1, too, access to those markets. It is the duty of the government to bring die interests of these new States into the Union, and incorpoi al them closely in tie- family compact. Gentlemen, i not impracticable to reconcile these vari- ous interests, and so to administer the; government as to make it. useful to all. It was never easier to administer the government than it is now. We are beset with none, or with few, of its original difficulties; and it is a time of great general prosperity and happii Shall we admit ourselves incompetent to carry on the government, so as to be satisfactory to the whole country? Shall we admit that there has so little de- scended to us of the wisdom and pru- dence of our fathers? If the governm nt could be administered in Washington's time, when it was yet new, when the country was heavily in debt, when fori relations were in a threatening condition, and when Indian wars press 1 on the frontiers, can it not be adminisl 'red now? Let us not acknowledge our- selves so unequal to our dul Gentlemen, on the occasion referred to by the chair, it became neces consider the judicial power, and its proper functions under the Constitution. In every free and balanced government, this is a mo8( essential and important power. End 1. I think it is a remark of Mr. Hume, that tii i administration of justice Beems t i be the 1 lading obj& institutions of government; that le latures assemble, that armies are era- bodied, that both war and peace are made, with a sort of ultimate refer to the proper administration of laws, ::ii; PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW YORK. and the judicial protection of private rights. The judicial powercomes home to every man. [f the legislature passes incorrect or unjust general laws, its mem- bers bear theevilaswell as others. Bui judicature acts on individuals. It touches every private right, every private in- t. and almost every private feeling. What we possess is hardly fit to be called our own, unless we feel secure in its possession; and this security, this feeling of perfect safety, cannot exist under a wicked, or even under a weak and ignorant, administration of the laws. There is no happiness, there is no liberty, there is no enjoyment of life, unless a man can say when he rises in the morning, I shall be subject to the decision of no unjust judge to-day. But, Gentlemen, the judicial depart- ment, under the Constitution of the United States, possesses still higher duties. It is true, that it may be called on. and is occasionally called on. to decide questions which are, in one sense, of a political nature. The general and State governments, both established he i pie, are established for differ- ent purposes, and with different powers. Between those powers questions may arise; and who shall decide them? Some provision for this end is absolutely necessary. What shall it be ? This was the question before the Convention; and various schemes were suggested. It was foreseen that the states might inadver- tentlj pass laws inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or with act- i'l' Congress. At least, laws might be passed which would lie charged with Buch inconsistency. How should these questions be disposed of? Where shall the power of judging, in cases of alleged interference, be lodged? One SUgge !i"ii in the Convention was, to make il an executive power, and to • • it in the hands of the President , by requiring all State laws to he sub- mitted to him, that he might negative Buch as he thought appeared repugnant to tic general Constitution. This idea. perhaps, may Im\. been borrowed from the power exercised by tie- crown over the laws of the ( loloi i It would evi- dently have been, not only an inconven- ient and troublesome proceeding, but dangerous also to the powers of the States. It was not pressed. It was thought wiser and safer, on the whole, to require State legislatures and State judges to take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and then leave the States at liberty to pass whatever laws they pleased, and if in- terference, in point of fact, should arise, to refer the question to judicial decision. To this end, the judicial power, under the Constitution of the United States, was made coextensive with the legisla- tive power. It was extended to all cases arising under the Constitution and the laws of Congress. The judiciary became thus possessed of the authority of deciding, in the last resort, in all cases of alleged interference, between State laws and the Constitution and laws of Congress. Gentlemen, this is the actual Consti- tution, this is the law of the land. There may be those who think it un- necessary, or who would prefer a differ- ent mode of deciding such questions. lint this is the established mode, and, till it be altered, the courts can no more decline their duty on these occasions than on other occasions. But can any reasonable man doubt the expediency of this provision, or suggest a better? Is it not absolutely essential to the peace of the country that this power should exist: somewhere? Where can it exist, better than where it now does exist? The national judiciary is the common tribunal of the whole country. It is organized by the common authority, and its places tilled by the common agent This is a plain ami practical provision. It was framed by no bunglers, nor by any wild theorists. And who can say that il has failed? Who can hud siih- stantial fault with its operation or its results? The great question is. whether we shall provide for the peaceable decis- ion of Cases of collision. Shall they he d icided by law, or by force ? Shall the decisions lie decisions of peace, or decis- ions of war? On the occasion which lias given rise PUBLIC DINNER AT \i w FORK 317 to (his meeting, the proposition con- tended Eor in opposition to the doctrine just Btated was. that every State, under certain supposed exigencies, and in cer- tain supposed eases, might decide Eor itself, ami act Eor itself, and oppose its ow n force to Hie execution of the laws. By what argument, do you imagine, Gentlemen, was such a proposition maintained? I should call it, meta- physical and subtle; but these terms would imply at least ingenuity, and Bome degree of plausibility ; whereas the argument appears to me plain assump- tion, mere perverse construction of plain language in the body of the Constitution itself. As 1 understand it, when put forth in its revised and most authentic shape, it is this : that the Constitution provides that any amendments may be made to it which shall be agreed to by three fourths of the States; there is, therefore, to be nothing in the Constitu- tion to which three fourths of the States have not agreed. All this is true; but then comes this inference, namely, that, when one State denies the con- stitutionality of any law of Congress, she may arrest its execution as to herself, and keep it arrested, till the States can all be consulted by their conventions, and three fourths of them shall have decided that the law is con- stitutional. Indeed, the inference is still stranger than this; for State con- ventions have no authority to construe the Constitution, though they have authority to amend it; therefore the argument must prove, if it prove any thing, that, when any one State de- nies that any particular power is in- cluded in the Constitution, it is to be considered as not included, and cannot be found there till three fourths of the States agree to insert it. In short, the result of the whole is, that, though it requires three fourths of the States to insert any thing in the Constitution, yet any one State can strike any thing out of it. For the power to strike out, and the power of deciding, without appeal, upon the construction of what is already in, are substantially and practically the same. An. I, Gentlemen, what a spec! should we have exhibited under the actual operation of notions like tb At the \'i\ moment when our govern- ment was quoted, praised, and com- mended all over the world, when the friends of republican liberty <■•■ where were gazing at it with deli and w ere in pel feci admiral LOD at I h • harmony of its movements, one S Bteps forth, and, h\ the power of nulli- fication, breaks up the w hole jj stem, and scatters the bright chain of the Union into as many sundered links as there are separate Stal Seeing the true grounds of the Con- stitution thus attacked, I raised in v voice in its Eavor, I must confess with no preparation or pre^ ious intent ion. I can hardly say that I embarked in the contest from a sense of duty. It was an instantaneous impulse of inclination, not acting against duty, I trust, hut hardly waiting for its BUggestionS. I felt it, to be a contest for the integrity of the Constitution, and I was ready to enter into it, not thinking, or caring, personally, how I might come out. Gentlemen, I have true pleasure in saying that I trust the crisis has in some measure passed by. The doctrines of nullification have received a severe and stern rebuke from public opinion. The general reprobation of the country has been cast upon them. Recent ex- pressions of the most numerous branch of the national legislature are decisive and imposing. Everywhere, the gen- eral tone of public feeling is Eor the Constitution. While much will be yielded — every thing, almost, but the integrity of the Constitution, and the essentia] interests of the country — to the cause of mutual harmony and mut- ual conciliation, qo ground can be granted, not an inch, to menace and bluster. Indeed, menace and bluster, and the putting forth of daring, uncon- stitutional doctrines, are, at this very moment, the chief obstacles to mutual harmony and satisfactory accommoda- tion Men cannot well reason, and con- fer, and take counsel together, about the discreet exercise of a power, with tl 318 PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW YORK. who deny that any such power right- fully exists, and who threaten to blow up the whole ('(institution if they can- not otherwise gel rid of its operation. Ii is matter of sincere gratification, Gentlemen, that the voice of this great Stud' has been so clear and strong, and her vote all but unanimous, on the most interesting of these occasions, in the House of Representatives. Certainly, such respect to the Union becomes New York. It is consistent with her inter- ests and her character. That singularly prosperous State, which now is, and is likely to continue to be, the greatest link in the chain of the Union, will ever he, I am sure, the strongest link also. The great States which lie in her neighborhood agreed with her fully in this matter. Pennsylvania, I believe, was loyal to the Union, to a man; and Ohio raises her voice, like that of a lion, against whatsoever threatens dis- union and dismemberment. This har- mony of sentiment is truly gratifying. It i- not to he gainsaid, that the union of opinion in this great central mass of our population, on this momentous point of the Constitution, augurs well for our future prosperity and security. I have said. Gentlemen, what I verily eve io l»e true, that there is no dan- ger to the Union from open and avowed attacks on its essential principles. Noth- ing is to he feared from those who will march up boldly to their own proposi- tions, and tell us that they mean to an- nihilate powers exercised by Congress. But, certainly, there are dangers to the ' bitution, and we ought not to shut our eyes to them. We know the im- portance of a linn and intelligent judi- cial;,: but how shall we secure the continuance of a firm and intelligent judicial',.' Gentlemen, the judiciary is in the appointment of the executive power. It cannot continue or renew itself, lis vacancies are to be filled in the ordinary mod.- of executive ap- point lit. If tie- tillie shall ever collie (which [leaven avert), when men shall l,c placed in i he upreme t ribunal of the country, who entertain opinions hostile to tin- just powers of the Constitution, P- ;es 3 we shall then be visited by an evil defy- in,; all remedy. Our case will be past surgery. From that moment the Con- stitution is at an end. If they who are appointed to defend the castle shall be- tray it, woe betide those within! If I live to see that day come, I shall despair of the country. I shall be prepared to give it hack to all its former afflictions, in the days of the Confederation. I know no security against the possibility of this evil, but an awakened public vigilance. I know no safety, hut in that state of public opinion which shall lead it to rebuke and put down every attempt, either to gratify party by judi- cial appointments, or to dilute the Con- stitution by creating a court which shall construe away its provisions. If mem- bers of Congress betray their trust, the people will find it out before they are ruined. If the President should at any time violate his duty, his term of office is short, and popular elections may sup. ply a seasonable remedy. But the judges of the Supreme Court possess, for ve good reasons, an independent tenure office. No election reaches them. If, with this tenure, they betray their trusts, Heaven save us ! Let us hope for better results. The past, certainly, may en- courage us. Let us hope that we shall never see the time when there shall exist such an awkward posture of affairs, as that the government shall be found in opposition to the Constitution, and when the guardians of the Union shall become its betrayers. Gentlemen, our country stands, at the present time, on commanding ground. Older nations, with different systems of government, may be somewhat slow to acknowledge all that justly belongs to us. But we may feel without vanity, that America is doing her part in the great work of improving human affairs. There are two principles, Gentlemen, strictly and purely American, which are now likely to prevail throughout the civ- ilized world. Indeed, they seem the necessary result of the progress of civ- ilization and knowledge. These are, fust, popular governments, restrained PUBLIC DINNER AT NEW FORE. 819 by written constitutions; and, secondly, universal education. Popular govern- ments and general education, acting and leading, mutually producing and reproducing each other, an' the mighty agencies which in our days appear to he exciting, stimulating, and changing civilized societies. Man, everywhere, IS now found demanding a participation in government, — and he will not be refused; and he demands knowledge as necessary to self-government. On the hasis of these two principles, liberty and knowledge, our own American sys- tems rest. Thus far we have not been disappointed in their results. Our existing institutions, raised on these foundations, have conferred on us al- most unmixed happiness. Do we hope to better our condition by change? When we shall have nullified the pres- ent Constitution, what are we to receive in its place? As fathers, do we wish for our children better government, or better laws? As members of society, as lovers of our country, is there any thing we can desire for it better than that, as ages and centuries roll over it, it may possess the same invaluable in- stitutions which it now enjoys? For my part, Oentlemen, I can only say, that 1 desire to thank the beneficent Author of all good for being born where I was born, and when I was born; that the portion of human existence allotted to me has been meted out to me in this goodly land, and at this interesting period. I rejoice that I have lived to see so much development of truth, so much progress of liberty, so much dif- fusion of virtue and happiness. And, through good report and evil report, it will be my consolation to be a citizen of a republic unequalled in the annals of the world for the freedom of its institu- tions, its high prosperity, and the pros- pects of good which yet lie before it. Our course, Gentlemen, is onward, straight onward, and forward. Let us not turn to the right hand, nor to the left. Our path is marked out for us, (dear, plain, bright, distinctly defined, lik'' ill.' milk] waj across the heavens. If we are tine to our country, in our dav and generation, and those who come after US shall he true to it also, a — uiedly, assuredly, we shall elevate her to a pitch of prosperity and happiness, of honor and power, never yel reached by any nation beneath the sun. ( rent lemen, before I resume my a highly gratifying duty remains to be performed. In signifying your senti- ments of regard, you have kindly chosen to select as your organ for expressing them the eminent person 1 near whom 1 stand. I feel, I cannot well say how sensibly, the manner in which he has seen fit to speak on this occasion. Gentlemen, if I may be supposed to have made any attainment in the knowl- edge of constitutional law, he is among the masters in whose schools I have been taught. You see near him a distin- guished magistrate, 2 long associated with him in judicial labors, which have conferred lasting benefits and lasting character, not only on the State, but on the whole country. Gentlemen, I ac- knowledge myself much their debtor. While yet a youth, unknown, and with little expectation of becoming known beyond a very limited circle, I have passed days and nights, not of tedious, but of happy and gratified labor, in the study of the judicature of the State of New York. I am mosi happy to | this public opportunity of acknowledg- ing the obligation, and of repaying it. as far as it can he repaid, by the poor trib- ute of my profound regard, and the earnest expression of my sincere re- spect. Gentlemen, I will no longer detain you than to propose a toast: — The City of New York; herself the noblest eulogy on the Union of tic Mates. 1 Chancellor Kent, the presiding offl 2 Judge Spencer. THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO OF THE UNITED STATES BANK BILL. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 11th OF JULY, 1832, ON THE PRESIDENT'S VETO OF THE BANK BILL. Mr. President, — No one will deny the high importance of the subject now before us. Congress, after full deliber- ation and discussion, has passed a bill, by decisive majorities, in both houses, for extending the duration of the Bank of the United States. It has not adopted this measure until its attention had been called to the subject, in three suc- cessive annual messages of the Presi- dent. The bill having been thus passed by both houses, and having been duly presented to the President, instead of signing and approving it, he has re- turned it with objections. These objec- tions go against the whole substance of the law originally creating the bank. They deny, in effect, that the bank is i ii in ional : they deny that it is expe- dient ; they deny that it is necessary for the public service. It is not to be doubted, that the Con- Btitution gives the President the power which he has now exercised ; but while the power is admitted, the -rounds upon which it lias been exerted become lit Bubjects of examination. The Consti- tution makes it the duty of Congress, in cases Like this, to reconsider the measure which they have passed, to weigh the force of the President's ob- ject ions to i hat measure, and to take a new vote upon t he quest ion. B( [ore the Senate proceeds to this second rote, I propose to make some remarks upon those objections. And, in the tii -i place, it is to 1 bsen ed, that thej are such as to extinguish all hope that the present bank, or any bank at all resembling it, or resembling any known similar institution, can ever re- ceive his approbation. lie states no terms, no qualifications, no conditions, no modifications, which can reconcile him to the essential provisions of the existing charter. He is against the bank, and against any bank constituted in a manner km iwd either to this or any other country. One advantage, therefore, is certainly obtained by presenting him the bill. It has caused the President's sentiments to be made known. There is no longer ; 1 1 1 \ mystery, no longer a contest be- tween hope and fear, or between those prophets who predicted a veto and those who foretold an approval. The bill is negatived; the President has assumed the responsibility of putting an end to the bank; and the country must prepare itself to meet that change in its concerns which the expiration of the charter will produce. Mr. President, I will not conceal my opinion that the affairs of the country are approaching an impor- tant and dangerous crisis. At. the very momenl of almosl unparalleled general prosperity, there appears an unaccount- able disposition to destroy the mosl use- ful and most approved institutions of the government. Indeed, it .seems to lit; in the midst of all this national happiness that some are found openly to question the advantages of the Constitution itself; and many more ready to embarrass the exercise of its just power, weaken its authority, and undermine its Eounda- THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO. 321 (ions. I low far these notions may 1"' carried, It is impossible yel to say. \\ Te have before us the practical result of one of them. The bank has fallen,* or i la 11. It is now certain, that, withoul a change in our public counsels, this hank will not be continued, nor w ill any other be established, which, according to the general sense and language of mankind, can he entitled to the name. Within three years and nine months from the present moment, the charter of the bank expires; within that period, therefore, it must wind up its concerns. It must call in its debts, withdraw its hills from circulation, and cease from all its ordi- nary operations. All this is to be done in three years and nine mouths; be- cause, although there is a provision in the charter rendering it lawful to use the corporate name for two years after the expiration of the charter, yel this is allowed only for the purpose of suits and for the sale of the estate belonging to the bank, and for no other purpose whatever. The whole active business of the bank, its custody of public de- posits, its transfer of public moneys, its dealing in exchange, all its loans and discounts, and all its issues of bills for circulation, must cease and deter- mine on or before the third day of March, 18:50; and within the same period its debts must be collected, as no new contract can be made with it, as a corporation, for the renewal of loans, or discount of notes or bills, after that time. The President is of opinion, that this time is long enough to close the concerns of the institution without inconvenience. His language is, "The time allowed the bank to close its concerns is ample, and if it has been well managed, its press- ure will be light, and heavy only in case its management has been bad. If, there- fore, it shall produce distress, the fault will be its own." Sir, this is all no more than general statement, without fact or argument to support it. We know what the management of the bank has been, and we know the present state of its af- fairs. YVe can judge, therefore, whether it be probable that its capital can be all called "m, and the circulation of its bills withdrawn, in three yens ami nine months, bj any discretion or prudence iu management, withoul producing distress. The hank has discounted liberally, in compliance with the wants of the com- munity. The amount due to it on I and discounts, iii certain large divisions of the country, is great; SO ureal, that I do not perceive how any man can be- lieve that it can be paid, within the time now limited, without distress. Let us look at known facts. Thirty mil- lions of the capital of the bank are now out, on loans and discounts, in the States on the Mississippi and its waters; ten millions of which are loaned on the discount of bills of exchange, foreign and domestic, and twenty null ions on promissory notes. Now, Sir, how is it possible that this vast, amount can be collected in so short a period without suffering, by any management whatever? We are to remember, that, when the collection of this debt begins, at that same time the existing medium of pay- ment, that is, the circulation of the bills of the bank, will begin also to be re- strained and withdrawn; and thus the means of payment must be limited just when the necessity of making payment becomes pressing. The whole debt is to be paid, and within the same time the whole circulation withdrawn. The local banks, where there are such, will be able to afford little assistance; because they themselves will feel a full share of the pressure. They will not be in a condition to extend their discounts, but, in all probability, obliged to cur- tail them. Whence, then, are t lie mean3 to come for paying this debt? and in what medium is payment to be made? If all this may lie done with but Blight pressure on the community, what course. of conduct is to accomplish it? How is it to be done? What other thirty mil- lions are to supply the place of these thirty millions now to be called in? What other circulation or medium of payment is to be adopted in the place of the bills of the bank? The mes following a singular train of argument, which had been used in this house, had 21 822 THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO a loud lamentation upon the suffering of the Western States on account of their being obliged to pay even interest on this debt. This payment of interest is itself represented as exhausting their means and ruinous to their prosperity. lint if the interesl cannot be paid with- out pressure, can both interesl and prin- cipal be paid in four years without press 1 1 rey The truth is. the interest has been paid, is paid, and may continue to he paid, without any pressure at all; because the money borrowed is profit- ably employed by those who borrow it. and the rate of interest which they pay is at least two per cent lower than the actual value of money in that part of the country. But to pay the whole principal in less than tour years, losing, at the same time, the existing and ac- customed means and facilities of pay- ment created by the hank itself, and to do this without extreme embarrassment, without absolute distress, is, in my judgment, impossible. I hesitate not to say, that, as this veto travels to the "West, it will depreciate the value of every man's property from the Atlantic States to the capital of Missouri. Its effects will be felt in the price of lands, the great and leading article of Western property, in the price of crops, in the products of labor, in the repression of enterprise, and in embarrassment to every hind of business and occupation. I state this opinion strongly, because I have no doubt of its truth, and am willing its correctness should he judged by the event. Without personal ac- quaintance with the Western States, I know enough of their condition to be Satisfied thai what I have predicted must happen. The people of the West are rich, hut their riches consist in their immense quantities of excellent land, in the products of these lands, and in their spirit of enterprise. The actual value of money, or rate of interest, with them i- high, 1 anse their pecuniary capital hear- little proportion to their landed intere I \t an average rate. money is not worth less than eight per cent per annum throughout the whole We tern country, notwithstanding thai it has now a loan or an advance from the bank of thirty millions, at six per cent. To call in this loan, at the rate of eight millions a year, in addition to the interest on the whole, and to take away, at the same time, that circulation which constitutes so great a portion of the medium of payment throughout that whole region, is an operation, which, however wisely conducted, cannot but inflict a blow on the community of tre- mendous force and frightful consequen- ces. The thing cannot be done without distress, bankruptcy, and ruin, to many. If the President had seen any practical manner in which this change might be effected without producing these conse- quences, he would have rendered infinite service to the community by pointing it out. But he has pointed out nothing, he has suggested nothing; he contents himself with saying, without giving any reason, that, if the pressure be heavy, the fault will he the hank's. I hope this is not merely an attempt to fore- stall opinion, and to throw on the hank the responsibility of those evils which threaten the country, for the sake of removing it from himself. The responsibility justly lies with him, and there it ought to remain. A great majority of the people are satisfied with the bank as it is, and desirous that it should be continued. They wished no change. The strength of this public sentiment has carried the bill through Conerress, against all the influence of the administration, and all the power of or- ganized party. But the President has undertaken, on his own responsibility, to arrest the measure, by refusing his assent to the bill. He is answerable for the consequences, therefore, which necessarily follow the change which the expiration of the bank charier may pro- duce; and if these consequences shall prove disastrous, they can fairly be as- cribed to his policy only, and the policy of his administration. Although, Si)-. I have spoken of the effects of this veto in the Western coun- try, it has not been because 1 considered that part of the I'nited States exclu- sively affected by it. Some of the At- OF THE UNITED STATES BANK BILL. 328 lantic States may feel its consequences, perhaps, as sensibly as those of the West, though nol for the Bame reasons. The concern manifested by Pennsylva- nia for the renewal of the charter shows her sense of the importance of the bank to her own interest, and thai of the na- tion. Thai great and enterprising State has entered into an extensive system of internal improvements, which necessa- rily makes heavy demands <>n her credil and her resources; and by the sound and acceptable currency which the bank af- fords, by the stability which it gives to private credit, and by occasional ad- vances, made in anticipation of her rev- enues, and in aid of her great objects, she has found herself benefited, doubt- less, in no inconsiderable degree. Her legislature has instructed her Senators here to advocate the renewal of the charter, at this session. They have obeyed her voice, and yet they have the misfortune to find that, in the judgment of the President, the measure is unconsti- tutional, unnecessary, dangerous to liberty, and is, moreover, ill-limed. P>ut. Mr. President, it is not the local interest of the West, nor the particular interest of Pennsylvania, or any other State, which has influenced Congress in passing this bill. It has been gov- erned by a wise foresight, and by a desire to avoid embarrassment in the pecuniary concerns of the country, to secure the safe collection and conven- ient transmission of public moneys, to maintain the circulation of the country, sound and safe as it now happily is, against the possible effects of a wild spirit of speculation. Finding the bank highly useful, Congress has thought fit to provide for its continuance. As to the time of passing this bill, it would seem to be the last thing to be thought of, as a ground of objection, by the President; since, from the date of his first message to the present time, he has never failed to call our attention to fee subject wife all possible apparent earnestness. So early as December, 18:20, in his message to the two houses, he declares, that he "cannot, in justice to fee parties interested, too soon pre- sent fee subject to fee deliberate consid- eration of the legislature, in ordei to avoid the evils resulting from precipi tancy, in a measure invoh ing - m h important principle, and Mich deep pe- cuniary interests." Aware of tin- early invitation given to Congress to take up fee subject, l>\ the President himself, fee writer of fee ssage seems to vary the ground of objection, and, instead of complaining thai fee time of bringing forward this measure was premature, to insist, rather, that, after the reporl oi the committee of the other house, fee bank should have withdrawn its appli- cation for the present ' Hut that report offers no just ground, surely, lor such withdrawal. The subject was before Congress; it was for Congress to decide upon it, with all fee lighl shed by fee report: and fee question of postpone- ment, having been made in both houses, was lost, by clear majorities, in each. Under such circumstances, it would have been somewhat singular, to say the least, if the bank itself had withdrawn its application. It is indeed known to everybody, that neither the report of the committee, nor any thing contained in that report, was relied on by the op- posers of the renewal. If it has been discovered elsewhere, that that report contained matter important in itself, or which should have led to further inquiry, this may be proof of superior sagacity; for certainly no such thing was discerned by either house of Congr But, Sir, do we not now see that it w as time, and high time, t . . press this bill, and to send it to the President? Does not the event teach us, that the measure was nut broughl forward one moment too early? Tin 1 time hail come when the people wished to know the decision of the administration on the question of the bank V Why conceal it, 01 ' postpt its declaration? Why, as in regard to the tariff, give out one set of opinions for fee North, and another for fee South? An important election is at hand, and the renewal of fee bank charter is a pending object of great interest, and some excitement. Should not fee opin- ions of men high in office, and candi- 824 THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO dates for re-election, be known on this, as on other important public questions? I ; duly, it is to be hoped that tin' ile of the United States are not yet mere man-worshippers, that they do not choose their rulers without some regard to their political principles, or political opinions. Were the} to do this, ii would be to subjed themselves voluntarily to the evils which the hereditary transmis- sion of power, independent of all personal qualifications, inflicts on other nations. They will judge their public servants by their acts, and continue or withhold their confidence, as they shall think it merited, or as they shall think it for- feited. Tn every point of view, there- fore, the moment had arrived, when it became the duty of Congress to come to a result, in regard to this highly impor- tant measure. The interests of the gov- ernment, the interests of the people, the clear and indisputable voice of public opinion, all called upon Congress to act without further loss of time. It has acted, and its act has been negatived by the President; and this result of the proceedings here places the question, with all its connections and all its inci- dent-, fully before the people. Before proceeding to the constitutional question, there are some other topics, treated in tin' message, which oughi to be noticed. It commences by an in- named statement of what it calls the "favor" bestowed upon the original bank by the government, or, indeed, as it, is phrased, the " monopoly of its flavor and support"; and through the whole i.m ssage all possible changes are run;; on the "gratuity," the "exclusive privi- and " monopoly," of the hank charter. Now, Sir, the truth is, that the powers conferred on the bank are such, and no other-, as are usually con- ferred on similar institutions. They til ute i,,. monopoly, although some of them are of necessity, and with pro- priel ■ - exclusive prn ileges. " The origi- nal act .' ! lie message, " operated a- a gratuity of many millions to the ikholdera." What lair foundation i there for this remark . The Btock- holdera received their charier, nol gratu- itously, but for a valuable consideration in money, prescribed by Congress, and actually paid. At some times the stock has been above /»(/'. at other times below /mr, according to prudence in manage- ment, or according to commercial occur- rences. But if, by a judicious adminis- tration of its affairs, it had kept its stock always above par, what pretence would there be, nevertheless, for saying that such augmentation of its value was a "gratuity" from government? The message proceeds to declare, that the present act proposes another donation, another gratuity, to the same men, of at least seven millions more. If seems to me that this is an extraordinary state- ment, and an extraordinary style of argu- ment, for such a subject and on such an occasion. In the first place, the facts are all assumed; they are taken for true without evidence. There are no proofs that any benefit to that amount will accrue to the stockholders, nor any ex- perience to justify the expectation of it. It rests on random estimates, or mere conjecture. But suppose the continu- ance of the charter should prove bene- ficial to the stockholders; do they not pay for it? They give twice as much for a charter of fifteen years, as was eiven before for one of twenty. And if the proposed bonus, or premium, be not, in the President's judgment, large enough, would he, nevertheless, on such a mere matter of opinion as that, nega- tive the whole bill? May not Congress be trusted to decide even on such a sub- ject as the amount of the money premium to be received by government for a char- ter of this kind'/ But, Sir, there is a larger and a much more just \iew of this subject. The bill was not passed for the purpose of bene- fiting the present stockholders. Their benefit, if any. IS incidental and col- lateral. Nor was it passed on any idea that they had a right to a renewed char- ter, although the message argues against such right, as if it had been somewhere se1 up and asserted. No such right has been asserted by anybody. Con- gress passed the bill, not as a bounty or a favor to the pn sent stockholders, nor OF THE DNITED STATES BANK BILL, 325 to comply with any demand of right on their part; but to promote greal public interests, forgreal public objects. Everj bank must have some stockholders, mi- less it be such a bank as the President has recommended, and in regard to which he seems not likely to find much concurrence of other men's opinions; ami if the stockholders, whoever they may be, conduct the affairs of the bank prudently, the expectation is always, of course, that they will make it profitable to themselves, as well as useful to the public [f a hank charter is not to be granted, because, to some extent, it may l>e profitable to the stockholders, no charter can be granted. The objec- tion lies against all hanks. Sir, the object aimed at by such insti- tutions is to connect the public safety and convenience with private interests. It has been found by experience, that banks are safest under private manage- ment, and that government banks are anion-' the most dangerous of all inven- tions. Now, Sir, the whole drift of the message is to reverse the settled judg- ment of all the civilized world, and to set up government banks, independent of private interest or private control. For this purpose the message labors, even beyond the measure of all its other labors, to create jealousies and preju- dices, on the ground of the alleged bene- fit which individuals will derive from the renewal of this charter. Much less effort is made to show that government, or the public, will be injured by the bill, than that individuals will profit by it. Following up the impulses of the same spirit, the message goes on gravely to allege, that the act, as passed by Con- gress, proposes to make a present of some millions of dollars to foreigners, because a portion of the stock is held by foreigners, sir. how would this sort of argument apply to other cases? The President has shown himself not only willing, but anxious, to pay oil' the three per cent stock of the Onited States at />ank substantially as it now exists. " All the objectionable principles of the existing corpora; ion.'" says the message, ••and most of it- odious features, are retained without alleviation"; so that the message is aimed against the bank, as it has existed from the first, and again-t any and all ot hers resembling it in its general features. Allow me, now. Sir. to take notice of an argument founded on the practical operation of the bank. That argument is this. Little of the stock of tii.- hank is held in the West, the capita] being chiefly owned by citizens of the Southern and Eastern State-, and by foreigners. But the Western and Southwestern - owe the bank a heavy debt, so heavy that the interest amounts million six hundred thousand a year. This interest is carried to the Eastern States, or to Europe, annually, and its ::•_••; THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO payment is a burden on the people of the West, and a drain of their currency, which no country can hear without in- convenience and distress. The true character and the whole value of this argument are manifest l»y the mere state- ment of it. The people of the West are, tn>m their situation, necessarily large borrowers. They need money, capital, and they borrow it, because they can derive a benefit from its use, much be- yond the interest which they pay. They borrow at >ix per cent of the bank, al- though the value of money with them is at leas! as high as eight. Nevertheless, although they borrow at this low rate of interest, and although they use all they borrow thus profitably, yet they cannot pay the interest without ''inconvenience and distress"; and then, Sir, follows the logical conclusion, that, although they cannot pay even the interest with- out inconvenience and distress, yet less than four years is ample time for the bank to call in the whole, both princi- pal and interest, without causing more than a light pressure. This is the argu- ment. Then follows another, which may be thus stated. It is competent to the States to tax the property of their citi- zens vested in the stock of this bank; but the i M>wer is denied of taxing the stock of foreigners; therefore the stock will be worth ten or fifteen per cent more to foreigners than to residents, and will of course inevitably leave the country, and make the American people debtors to aliens in nearly the whole amount due the bank, and send across the At- lantic from two to five millions of specie . year, to pay the bank dividends. .Mr. President, arguments like these in i_ iii be more readily disposed of, were it col thai the high and official source from which they proceed imposes the neci t reating them with respeel . In the t'n i place, il may safely be denied thai thi of the hank is any more valuable to foi eigners than to our own citizens, or an objed of greater desire to them, excepl in so far as capital may be more abundanl in the foreign country, and therefore its om aers more in want of opportunity of investment. The for- eign stockholder enjoys no exemption from taxation. He is, of course, taxed by his own government for his incomes, derived from this as well as other prop- erty; and this is a full answer to the w h. ile statement. But it may be added, in the second place, that it is not the practice of civilized states to tax the property of foreigners under such cir- cumstances. Do we tax, or did we ever tax, the foreign holders of our public debt? Does Pennsylvania, New York, or Ohio tax the foreign holders of stock in the loans contracted by either of these States? Certainly not. Sir, I must confess I had little expected to see, on such an occasion as the present, a labored and repeated attempt to pro- duce an impression on the public opin- ion unfavorable to the bank, from the circumstance that foreigners are among its stockholders. I have no hesitation in saying, that I deem such a train of re- mark as the message contains on this point, coming from the President of the United States, to be injurious to the credit and character of the country abroad; because it manifests a jealousy, a lurking disposition not to respect the. property, of foreigners invited hither by our own laws. And, Sir, what is its tendency but to excite this jealousy, and create groundless prejudices? From the commencement of the gov- ernment, it has been thought desirable to invite, rather than to repel, the in- troduction of foreign capital. Our stocks have all been open to foreign subscriptions; and the State hanks, in like manner, are free to foreign owner- ship. Whatever State has created a debt has been willing that foreigners should become purchasers, and desirous of it. How lorn; is it. Sir. since Con- gress itself passed a law vesting new- powers in the President of the I'nited states over the cities in this District, for the very purpose of increasing their credit abroad, the better to enable them to hoiiow- money to pay their subscrip- tions to the Chesapeake and Ohio (anal? It is easy to say that there is danger to liberty, danger to indepen- OF THE UNITED STATES HANK BILL 327 dence, in ;t bank open to foreign stock- holders, because it is easy to Bay any thing. Bui neither reason nor experi- ence proves any Buch danger. The for- eign stockholder cannot be a director. Me has ihi voice even in the choice oi directors. His money is placed entirely in the management of the directors ap- pointed by the President and Senate and by the American stockholders. So Ear as there is dependence or influence either way, it is to the disadvantage of the foreign stockholder. He has parted with the control over his own property, instead of exercising control over the property or over the actions of others. And, Sir, let it now be added, in further answer to this class of objections, that experience has abundantly confuted them all. This government has existed forty-three years, and has maintained, in full being and operation, a bank. such as is now proposed to be renewed, for thirty-six years out of the forty- three. We have never for a moment had a bank not subject to every one of these objections. Always, foreigners might be stockholders; always, foreign stock has been exempt from State tax- ation, as much as at present; always, the same power and privileges; always, all that which is now called a " mo- nopoly, " a "gratuity," a "present," have been | >ossessed by the bank. And yet there has been found no danger to liberty, no introduction of foreign influ- ence, and no accumulation of irrespon- sible power in a few hands. I cannot but hope, therefore, that the people of the United Stales will not now yield up their judgment to those notions which would reverse all our best experience, and persuade us to discontinue a useful institution from the influence of vague and unfounded declamation against its danger to the public liberties. Our lib- erties, indeed, must stand upon very frail foundations, if the government Cannot, without endangering them, avail itself of those common facilities, in the collection of its revenues and the management of its finances, which all other governments, in commercial coun- tries, find useful and necessary. In order to justify its alarm tor the seem it \ of our independence, the i tupposes a case. I' supposes that the bank should pass principally into the bands of the Bubjects of a for country , ami thai we Bhould I"- involved in war « it h t hat Count rj , and then it exclaims, " What would be our condi- tion? " Why, Sir, it is plain thai all the advantages would be on our Bide. The bank would -till be our institution, Bubjecl to our own laws, and all it- directors elected bj ourselves; and our means would be enhanced, nol by the confiscation and plunder, bul by the proper use, of the foreign capital in our hands. And. sir. it is singular enough that this very state of war, from which this argument against a hank is drawn, is the very thing which, more than all others, convinced the country and the government of the necessity of a na- tional hank. So much was the want of such an institution Eell in the late war, that the sulked engaged the attention of Congress, constantly, from the decla- ration of that war down to the time when the existing hank was actually established; so that in this respect, as well as in others, the argumenl of the message is directly opposed to the whole experience of the government, and to the general and long-settled convictions of the country. I now proceed, Sir, to a few remarks upon the President's constitutional ob- jections to the bank; ami I cannot for- bear to say, in regard to them, that he appear- to me to have assumed very ex- traordinary grounds of reasoning. He denies thai the constitutionality of the bank is a settled question, [f it be not, will it ever become so, or what disputed question ever can be settled? I have already observed, that for thirty-six years oul of the forty-three during which the government lias been in being, a hank has existed, such as La now pro- posed to be continued. As early as L791, after great delibera- tion, the fiist hank charter was p.. by Congress, and approved by President Washington. It established an institu- tion, resembling, in all things now ob- .,l»s THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO jected to, the present bank. That bank, like this, COIlld take lands in payment of its debts; that charter, like the present, gave the States no power of taxation; it allowed foreigners to hold stock; it re- strained Cougress from creating other banks. It gave also exclusive privi- leges, and in all particulars it was, ac- cording to the doctrine of the message, as objectionable as that now existing. That hank continued twenty years. In 1816, the present institution was estab- lished, and has been ever since in full operation. Now, Sir, the question of the power of Congress to create such institutions has been contested in every manner known to our Constitution and laws. The forms of the government furnish no new mode in which to try this question. It has been discussed over and over again, in Cougress; it has been argued and solemnly adjudged in the Supreme Court,; every President, except the present, has considered it a settled question ; many of the State legis- latures have instructed their Senators to vote lor the bank: the tribunals of the States, in every instance, have sup- ported its constitutionality; and, beyond all doubt and dispute, the general pub- lic opinion of the country has at all times given, and does now give, its full sanction and approbation to the exercise of this power, as being a constitutional power. There has been no opinion questioning the power expressed or inti- mated, at any time, by either house of Congress, by any President, or by any respectable judicial tribunal. Now, Sir, if this practice of near forty years, if these repeated exercises of the power, if this solemn adjudication of the Su- preme Court, with the concurrence and approbation of public opinion, do not settle the question, how is any question ever to be settled, about which anyone ma . chi io e to raise a doubl ? The argument of the message upon the < on-! essional precedents is either a bold and gross fallacy, or else it is an 1 1 ion without proofs, and against known facts. The message admits. that . in 17!»1 . ( !ougre - decided in favor of a hank; but it adds, thai another Congress, in 1811, decided against it. Now, if it be meant that, in 1811, Con- gress decided against, the bank on con- stitutional ground, then the assertion is wholly incorrect, and against noto- rious fact. It is perfectly well known, that many members, in both houses, voted against the bank in 1811, who had no doubt at all of the constitutional power of Congress. 'They were entirely governed by other reasons given at the time. I appeal, Sir, to the honorable member from Maryland, who was then a member of the Senate, and voted against the bank, whether he, and others who were on the same side, did not give tin ise votes on other well-known grounds, and not at all on constitutional ground'.'' General Smith here rose, and said, that he voted against the bank in 1811, but not at all on constitutional grounds, and had no doubt such was the case with other members. We all know, Sir, the fact to be as the gentleman from Maryland has stat- ed it. Every man who recollects, or who has read, the political occurrences of that day, knows it. Therefore, if the message intends to say, that in 1811 Congress denied the existence of any such constitutional power, the declara- tion is unwarranted, and altogether at variance with the facts. If, on the other hand, it only intends to say, that Congress decided against the proposition then before it on some other grounds, then it alleges thai which is nothing at all to the purpose. The argument, then, either assumes for truth that which is not true, or else the whole statement is immaterial and futile. Bui whatever value others may attach to this argument, the message thinks so highly of it, that it proceeds to repeat it. "One Congress," it says, "in 1815, de- cided against a bank, another, in L816, decided in its favor. There is nothing in precedent, therefore, which, if its au- thority were admitted, ought to weigh in favor of the act before me." Now, Sir, since it is known to the whole country. one cannot but wonder how it, should remain unknown to the President, that OF THE I'MIKD STATES BANK HILL. Congress did not decide against a hank iu 1815. On tlie contrary, that very Congress passed a bill for erecting a hank, by very Large majorities. In our form, it is true, the bill failed in the House of Representatives; but the vote was reconsidered, the bill recommitted, and finally passed by a vote of one hun- dred and twenty to thirty-nine. There is, therefore, not only no .solid ground, but not even any plausible pretence, for the assertion, that Congress in 1815 de- cided against the bank. That very Con- gress passed a bill to create a bank, and its decision, therefore, is precisely the other way. and is a direct practical prece- dent in favor of the constitutional power. "What are we to think of a constitutional argument which deals in this way with historical facts'.-' When the message de- clares, as it does declare, that there is nothing in precedent which ought to weigh in favor of the power, it sets at naught repeated acts of Congress affirm- ing the power, and it also states other acts, which were in fact, and which are well known to have been, directly the reverse of what the message represents them. There is not, Sir, the slightest reason to think that any Senate or any House of Representatives, ever assem- bled under the Constitution, contained a majority that doubted the constitu- tional existence of the power of Con- gress to establish a bank. Whenever the question has arisen, and has been decided, it has always been decided one way. The legislative precedents all as- sert and maintain the power; and these legislative precedents have been the law of the land for almost forty years. They settle the construction of the Constitu- tion, and sanction the exercise of the power in question, so far as these effects can ever be produced by any legislative precedents whatever. But the President does not admit the authority of precedent. Sir, I have al- ways found, that those who habitually deny most vehemently the general force of precedent, and assert most strongly the supremacy of private opinion, are yet, of all men, most tenacious of that very authority of precedent, whenever it happens to be in their favor. I beg leave i o. i ik, sir, upon w hat ground, except thai of precedent, and precedent alone, the Presidenl 's friends have placed his power of removal from office. Nb BUCh P0W6I is given by the < 'onstitution, in tei ma, nor anyw here intimated, throughout the w hole of it ; no paragraph or clause of that instrument recognizes such a power. To say the least, it is a-~ questionable, and has been as often questioned, as tie- power of Congress to create a bank; ami. enlightened by what has pa under our own observation, we now see that it is of all powers the mosl capable of flagrant abuse. Now, Sir, 1 ask again, What becomes of this power, if the authority of precedent be talon awavV It has all along been denied to exist; it is nowhere found in the Con- stitution ; and its recent exercise, or, to call things by their right names, its re- cent abuse, has, more than any other single cause, rendered good men either cool in their affections toward the gov- ernment of their country, or doubtful of its long continuance. Yet there is prece- dent in favor of this power, and the Pres- ident exercises it. We know, Sir, that, without the aid of that precedent, his acts could never have received the sanc- tion of this body, even at a time when his voice was somewhat more potential here than it now is, or, as I trust, ever again will be. Does the President, then, reject the authority of all precedent ex- cept what it is suitable to his own pur- pose to use ? And does he use, w ithout stint or measure, all precedents which may augment his own power, or gratify his own wishes ? But if the Presidenl thinks lightly of the authority of Congress In construing the Constitution, he thinks still more Lightly of the authority of the Supreme Court, lie asserts a right of individual judgment on constitutional questions, which is totally inconsistent with any proper administration of the govern- ment, or any regular execution of the laws. Social disorder, entire uncertainty in regard to individual rights and indi- vidual duties, tin ssation of legal au- thority, confusion, the di Q of 330 THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO free government, — all these are the in- evitable consequences of the principles adopted by tin- message, whenever they shall be carried to their full extent. Hitherto it has been thought that the final decision of constitutional questions belonged to the supreme judicial tribu- nal. The very nature of free govern- ment, it has been supposed, enjoins this ; and our Constitution, moreover, has been understood so to proi Lde, clearly and ex- pressly. It is true, that each branch of the legislature lias an undoubted right, in the exercise of its functions, to con- sider the constitutionality of a law pro- posed to be passed. This is naturally a pari of its duty; and neither branch can be compelled to pass any law, or do any other act, which it deems to be bey 1 the reach of its constitutional power. The President has the same right, when a bill is presented for his approval; for he is, doubtless, bound to consider, in all cases, whether such bill be compat- ible with the Constitution, and whether he can approve it consistently with his oath of office. But when a law has been passed by Con-res-, and approved by the President, it is now no longer in the power, either of the same President, or his successors, to say whether the law is constitutional or not. lie is not at lib- erty to disregard it ; he is not at liberty to fee] or to affect "constitutional scru- ples,*' and to sit in judgment himself on the validity of a statute of the govern- ment . and to nullify it, if he so chooses. After a law has passed through all the requisite forms; after it has received the requisite legislative sanction and the executive approval, the question of its constitutionality then becomes a judicial question, and a judicial question alone. In the courts that question may be raised, argued, and adjudged; it can be adjudged nowhere else. The President is as much bound by 1 he lav. a .in;, |.i i\ ate <-it izen, and can no more contest its validity than any private citizen. He may refuse to obey the law, and bo may a private citizen; but both do it at their ow n peril, and neither of t hem can Bel t le the quesl ion of its validity. The Presidenl may say a law is unconstitutional, but he is not the judge. Who is to decide that ques- tion V The judiciary alone possesses this unquestionable and hitherto un- questioned right. The judiciary is the constitutional tribunal of appeal for the citizens, against both Congress and the executive, in regard to the constitution- ality of laws. It has this jurisdiction expressly conferred upon it, and when it has decided thequestion, its judgment must, from the very nature of all judg- ments that are final, and from which there is no appeal, be conclusive. Hitherto, this opinion, and a corre- spondent practice, have prevailed, in America, with all wise and considerate men. If it were otherwise, there would be no government of laws; but we should all live under the government, the rule, the caprices, of individuals. If we depai't from the observance of these salutary principles, the executive power becomes at once purely despotic; for the President, if the principle and the reasoning of the message be sound, may either execute or not execute the laws of the land, according to his sover- eign pleasure. He may refuse to put into execution one law, pronounced valid by all branches of the government, and yet execute another, which may have been by constitutional authority pronounced void. On the argument of the message, the President of the United States holds, under a new pretence and a new name, a dispensing power over the laws as abso- lute as was claimed by James the Second of Englaud, a month before he was com- pelled to fly the kingdom. That which is now claimed by the President is in truth nothing less, and nothing else, than the old dispensing power asserted by the kings of England in the worst of times; the very climax, indeed, of all the preposterous pretensions of the Tu- dor and the Stuart races. According to the doctrines put forth by the Presi- dent, although Congress may have passed a law, and although the Supreme Court ni;i\ have pronounced it constitu- tional, yet it is. nevertheless, no law at all, if he, in his good pleasure, sees lit OF THE UNITED 8TATE8 BANK BILL. 831 to deny it effect.; in other ui.nl,, to re- peal and annul it. Sir, no President and mi public man ever before advanced Buch doctrines in the Eace of the nation. There never before was a moment in which any President would have been I iterated in asserting such a claim to despotic power. After Congress has passed the law, and after the Supreme Court has pronounced its judgment on the very point in controversy, the Presi- dent has set up his own private judg- ment against its constitutional interpre- tation. It is to be remembered, Sir, that it is the present law, it is the act of 1816, it is tin- present charter of the bank, which the President pronounces to be unconstitutional. It is no bank to be (■/■■ at -/, it. is no law proposed to be passed, which he denounces; it is the law now exist in;/, passed by Congress, approved by President Madison, and sanctioned by a solemn judgment of the Supreme Court, which he now declares unconstitutional, and which, of course, so far as it may depend on him, cannot be executed. If these opinions of the President be maintained, there is an end of all law and all judicial authority. Statutes are but recommendations, judg- ments no more than opinions. Both are equally destitute of binding force. Such a universal power as is now claimed for him, a power of judging over the laws and over the decisions of the judi- ciary, is nothing else but pure despotism. If conceded to him, it makes him at once what Louis the Fourteenth pro- claimed himself to be when he said, " I am the State." The Supreme Court has unanimously declared and adjudged that the existing bank is created by a constitutional law of Congress. As has been before ob- served, this bank, so far as the present question is concerned, is like that which \sa> established in 1791 by Washington, and sanctioned by the great men of that day. In every form, therefore, in which the question can be raised, it has been raised and has been settled. Hvery pro- cess and every mode of trial known to the Constitution and laws have been ex- hausted, and always and without excep- tion the decision lias 1 n in favorofthe validity of the law. I'.ut all this practice, all this precedent, all this public approba- tion, all this solemn adjudication directly on the point, is to be disregarded and re» i ei id, and ill n-i li ni ional power flatly denied. And. sir. if we are startled at, this conclusion, our surprise will nol be lessened when we examine the argument by which it is maintained. By the Constitution, I is au- thorized to pass all laws •• necessary and proper" for carrying its own Legislative powers into effect. Congress has deemed a bank to be " nece8Sary and proper '" for these purposes, and it lias therefore ■ tablished a bank. Bui although the law has been passed, ami the bank es- tablished, ami the constitutional validity of its charter solemnly adjudged, jrel the President pronounces it unconstitutional, because some of the power-, botowed on the bank are. in his opinion, not ni sary or proper. It would appear that, powers which in 1791 and in 1816, in the time of Washington and in the time of Madison, were deemed " ii.n- and proper," are no longer to be so re- garded, and therefore the bank is un- constitutional. It has really com this, that the constitutionality of a bank is to depend upon the opinion which one particular man may form of the utility or necessity of some of the clauses in its charter! If that individual chooses to think that a particular power contained in the charter is not necessary to the proper constitution of the bank, then the act is unconstitutional ! Hitherto it has always been supposed that the question was of a very different nature. It has been thought that tic policy of granting a particular charter may be materially dependent on the structure and organization and powers of the proposed institution. l!ut its general constitutionality has never fore I n understood to turn on such points. This would be making its con- stitutionality depend OU subordinate questions; on questions ><\ ex] and questions of detail; upon that which one man may think necessary, and another mav not. If the COnstitU- 332 THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO tional question were made to hinge on matters of this kind, how could it ever In* il-ciili'il '! All would depend on con- jecture; on the complexioual feeling, on the prejudices, on the passions, of indi- viduals; on more or less practical skill or correct judgment in regard to bank- ing operations among those who should be the judges; on the impulse of mo- mentary interests, party objects, or per- sona] purposes. Put the question in this manner to a court of seven judges, to decide whether a particular bank was constitutional, and it might be doubtful whether they could come to any result, as they might well hold very various opinions on the practical utility of many clauses of the charter. The question in that case would be, not whether the bank, in its general frame; character, and objects, was a proper instrument to carry into effect the powers of the government, but whether the particular powers, director incidental, conferred on a particular bank, were better calculated than all others to give success to its operations. For if not. then the charter, according to this sort of reasoning, would be un- warranted by the Constitution. This mode of construing the Constitution is certainly a novel discovery. Its merits belong entirely to the President and his advisers. According to this rule of in- terpretation, if the President should he of opinion, that the capital of the bank was larger, by a thousand dollars, than it OUghl to he: or that the time for the continuance of the charter was a year too long: or that it was unnecessary to require it. under penalty, to pay specie; or m ide for punishing, as ry, the counterfeiting of its bills, — either of these reasons would be sulli- cienl to render the charter, in his opin- ion, unconstitutional, invalid, and nuga- tory. This is a legitimate conclusion from tie' argument. Such a view of the subject has certainly never before been taken. This t rain of reasoning has hith- erto not I n heard within the halls of Congress, nor has anyone ventured upon it before the tribunals of justice. 1 he tn t exhibit first appearance, as an argument, is in a message of the President of the United States. According to that mode of constru- ing the Constitution which was adopted by Congress in 1791, and approved by Washington, and which has been sanc- tioned by the judgment of the Supreme Court, and affirmed by the practice of nearly forty years, the question upon the constitutionality of the bank in- volves two inquiries. First, whether a bank, in its general character, and with regard to the general objects with which banks are usually connected, be, in it- self, a fit means, a suitable instrument, to carry into effect the powers granted to the government. If it be so, then the second, and the only other question is, whether the powers given in a par- ticular charter are appropriate for a bank. If they are powers which are appropriate for a bank, powers which Congress may fairly consider to be use- ful to the bank or the country, then Congress may confer these powers ; be- cause the discretion to be exercised in framing the constitution of the bank belongs to Congress. One man may think the granted powers not indispen- sable to the particular bank; another may suppose them injudicious, or inju- rious; a third may imagine that other powers, if granted in their stead, would be more beneficial ; but all these are matters of expediency, about which men may differ; and the power of de- ciding upon them belongs to Congress. I again repeat, Sir, that if, for reasons of this kind, the President sees fit to negative a bill, on the ground of its being inexpedient or impolitic, he has a right to do so. But remember. Sir. that we are now on the constitutional question; remember that the argument of the President is. that, because powers were given to the bank by the charter of 1810 which he thinks unnecessary, that charter is unconstitutional. Now, sir.it will hardly be denied, or rather it was not denied or doubled before this message came to us, that, if there was to be a bank, tic powers and duties of that bank must be prescribed in the law creating it. Nobody but Congress, it OF THE I'MTKI) STATES BANK BILL. has been thought, could grant these powers and privileges, or prescribe their limitations. It is true, indeed, that t ho message pretty plainly intimates, that the President should have been first consulted, and that he should have had the framing of the bill; but we arc not yet accustomed to that order of things in enacting laws, nor do I know a par- allel to this claim, thus now brought forward, except that, in some peculiar cases in England, highly affecting the royal prerogative, the assent of the mon- arch is necessary before either the House of Peers, or his Majesty's faithful Com- mons, are permitted to act upon the subject, or to entertain its consideration. But supposing, Sir. that our accustomed forms and our republican principles are still to be followed, and that a law cre- atine- a bank is, like all other laws, to originate with Congress, and that the President has nothing to do with it till it is presented for his approval, then it is clear that the powers and duties of a proposed bank, and all the terms and conditions annexed to it, must, in the first place, be settled by Congress. This power, if constitutional at all, is only constitutional in the hands of Congress. Anywhere else, its exercise would be plain usurpation. If, then, the authority to decide what powers ought to be granted to a bank belong to Congress, and Congress shall have exer- cised that power, it would seem little better than absurd to say, that its act, nevertheless, would be unconstitutional ami invalid, if, in the opinion of a third party, it had misjudged, on a question of expediency, in the arrange- ment of details. According to such a mode of reasoning, a mistake in the exercise of jurisdiction takes away the jurisdiction. If Congress decide right, its decision may stand; if it decide wrong, its decision is nugatory; and whether its decision be right or wrong, another is to judge, although the original power of making the decision must be allowed to be exclusively in Congress. This is the end to which the argument of the message will conduct its fol- lowers. Sir, in considering the authority of Congp is to inv< si the bani with the particular powers granted to it, the in- quiry is not, and cannot he, how appro- priate these powers are, but whether they be at all appropriate; whether they come within the range of a just and honest discrel ion ; whet her < longrcss ma) fairly esteem them to be n< The question is not, Are the V the fittest means, the besi means? or whether the bank might not be established without them; but the question is, Are they such as Congress, bona fide, may I regarded as appropriate to the end? If any other rule were to be adopted, noth- ing could ever be settled. A law would be constitutional to-day and unconstitu- tional to-morrow. Its constitutionality would altogether depend upon individual opinion on a matter of mere expediency. Indeed, such a case as that is now actu- ally before us. Mr. Madison deemed the powers given to the bank, in its present charter, proper and necessary. He held the bank, therefore, to be con- stitutional. But the present President, not acknowledging that the power of deciding on these points rests with Con- gress, nor with Congress and the then President, but setting up his own opin- ion as the standard, declares the law mnv in being unconstitutional, because the powers granted by it are, in his esti- mation, not necessary and proper. I pray to be informed, Sir, whether, upon similar grounds of reasoning, tic Pr< dent's own scheme for a bank, if Con- gress should do so unlikely a thing a- to adopt it, would not become unconstitu- tional also, if it should so happen that his successor should hold his bank in as light esteem as he holds those established under the auspices <>f Washington and Madison ? It the reasoning of the message be well founded, it is (dear that the charter of the existing bank is not a law. The bank has no legal existenc •: it is responsible to government; it has no authority to act; it is incapable of ing an agent; the President may t it as a nullity to-morrow, withdraw from it all the public deposits, and s i afloat :\:\\ THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO all the existing national arrangements of revenue and finance. It is enough to state these monstrous consequences, to show thai the doctrine, principles, and pretensions of the message are entirely inconsistent with a government of laws. If that which Congress has enacted, and the Supreme Court has sanctioned, be not the law of the land, then the reign of law has ceased, and the reign of individual opinion has already begun. The President, in his commentary on the details of the existing hank charter, undertakes to prove that one provision. and another provision, is not necessary and proper; because, as he thinks, the same objects proposed to be accom- plished by them might have been better attained in another mode; and there- fore such provisions are not necessary, and si i not warranted by the Consti- tution. Does not this show, that, ac- cording to his own mode of reasoning, his own scheme would not be constitu- tional, since another scheme, which probably most people would think a 1 " iter one, might be substituted for it? Perhaps, in any bank charter, there may be no provisions which may be justly regarded as absolutely indispensable; since it is probable that for any of them some others might be substituted. No hank, therefore, ever could be estab- lished; because there never has been, and never could be, any charter, of which every provision should appear to be indispensable, or necessary and proper, in the judgment of every indi- vidual. To admit, therefore, that there may be a constitutional bank, and yet intend for such a mode of judging of its provisions and details as the message adopts, involves an absurdity. Any charter which may be framed may be taken up, and each power conferred by it successively denied, on the ground, that, in regard to each, either no such power is "necessarj or proper" in a bank, or, which is the Bame thing in i . - ■ other | ov, er might be sub- ited for it. and supply its place. That can never be n issary, in the Bense in which the message understands thai term, which maj be dispensed with ; and it cannot be said that any power may not be dispensed with, if there be some other which might be substituted for it. and which would accomplish the same end. Therefore, no bank could ever be constitutional, because none could be established which should not contain some provisions which might ha\e been omitted, and their place sup- plied by others. Mr. President, I have understood the true and well-established doctrine to be, that, after it has been decided that it is competent for Congress to establish a bank, then it follows that it may create such a bank as it judges, in its discre- tion, to be best, and invest it with all such power as it may deem tit and suita- ble; with this limitation, always, that all is to be done in the bona fide execu- tion of the power to create a bank. If the granted powers are appropriate to the professed end, so that the granting of them cannot be regarded as usurpa- tion of authority by Congress, or an evasion of constitutional restrictions, under color of establishing a bank, then the charter is constitutional, whether these powers be thought indispensable by others or not, or whether even Con- gress itself deemed them absolutely in- dispensable, or only thought them fit and suitable, or whether they are more or less appropriate to their end. It is enough that they are appropriate; it is enough that they are suited to produce the effects designed: and no comparison is to be instituted, in order to try their constitutionality, between them and others which may be suggested. A case analogous to the present is found in the constitutional power of Congress over the mail. The Constitution says no more than that "Congress shall have power to establish post-offices and post- roads *' ; and. in the general clause, •• all powers necessary and proper" to give effect to this. In the execution of this power, ('.ingress has protected the mail. by providing that robbery of it shall be punished with death. Is this infliction of capital punishment constitutional? Certainly it is not, unless it be both "proper and necessary." The President OF THE UNITKI) BTATE8 BANK BILL 835 nny not think it necessary or proper; tli- law, then, according to the Bystem of reasoning enforced by the message, is of no binding force, and the President may disobey it. and refuse to see it exe- cuted. The truth is, Mr. President, thai if the general object, the Buhject-matter, properly belong to Congress, all its in- cidents belong to Congress also, [f Congress is to establish post-offices and post-roads, it may, for that end, adopl one set of regulations or another; and either would be constitutional. So the details of one bank are as constitu- tional as those of another, if they are confined fairly and honestly to the pur- pose of organizing the institution, and rendering it useful. One bank is as con- stitutional as another bunk. If Congress possesses the power to make a bank, it possesses the power to make it efficient, and competent to produce the good ex- pected from it. It may clothe it with all such power and privileges, not other- wise inconsistent with the Constitution, as may be necessary, in its own judg- ment, to make it what government deems it should be. It may confer on it such immunities as may induce indi- viduals to become stockholders, and to furnish the capital: and since the ex- tent of these immunities and privileges is matter of discretion, and matter of opinion, Congress only can decide it, because Congress alone can frame or grant the charter. A charter, thus granted to individuals, becomes a con- tract with them, upon their compliance with its terms. The bank becomes an agent, bound to perform certain duties, and entitled to certain stipulated rights and privileges, in compensation for the proper discharge of these duties; and all these stipulations, so long as they are appropriate to the object professed, and not repugnant to any other consti- tutional injunction, are entirely within the competency of Congress. And yet, Sir, the message of the President toils through all the commonplace topics of monopoly, the right of taxation, the Buffering of the poor, and the arrogance of the rich, with as much painful effort, as if one, or another, or all of th< m, had Bomething to do w iih the constil n- tiona] quest ion. What IS called the '• lie pi made the subjeci of repeated reheat sal, in terms of Bpecial complaint. By this " monopoly," I Buppose, i under I the restriction contained in the charter. thai Congress shall not, during the twenty years, create another hank. Now , Sir, let me ask, Who would think of creating a hank, inviting stockhold- ers into it, with large investments, im- posing upon it heavy duties, as con- nected with the government, receiving some millions of dollars as a bonus or premium, and yet retaining the power of granting, the nexl day, another char- ter, which would destroy the whole value of the first? If this be an unconstitu- tional restraint on Congress, the Consti- tution must be strangely at variance with the dictates both of g 1 sense and sound morals. Did not the first Bank of the I'nited States contain a similar restriction? And have not the States granted bank charters with a condition, that, if the charter should be accepted, they would not grant others? States have certainly done so; and, in some instances, where no bonus or premium was paid at all ; but from the mere de- sire to give effect to the charter, by in- ducing individuals to accepl it and or- ganize the institution. The President declares that this restriction is not n- sary to the efficiency of the bank; bul that is the very thing which Congress and his predecessor in office were called on to decide, and which they did decide, when the one passed and the other ap- proved the act. And he has now no more authority to pronounce his judg- ment on that act than any other indi- vidual in society. It is not his province to deride on the col is t i t II t KM I a 1 it V of stat- utes which Congress has passed, and his predecessors approved. There is another sentiment in this pari of the message, which we should hardly have expected to find iii a paper which is supposed, whoever may have drawn it up, to have passed under the review of professional charac re. The ;;:;.; THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO message declares, that this limitation to !.• no other bank is unconstitutional, because, although Congress may use the discretion rested in them, " they may not limit the discretion of their suc- cessors." This reason is almost too superficial to require an answer. Every one at all accustomed to the considera- tion of such subjects knows that every Congress can hind its successors to the same extent that it ran bind itself. The power of Congress is always the same; the authority of law always the same. It is true, we speak of the Twentieth Congress and the Twenty-first Congress; but this is only to denote the period of time, or to mark the successive organ- izations of the House of Representa- tives under the successive periodical lion of its members. As a politic body, as the legislative power of the government, Congress is always con- tinuous, always identical. A particular Congress, as we speak of it, for in- stance, the present Congress, can no farther restrain itself from doing what it may choose to do at the next session, than it can restrain any succeeding Con- gress from doing what it may choose. Any Congress may repeal the act or law of its predecessor, if in its nature it be repealable, just as it may repeal its ov« n and if a law or an act be irrepeal- able in its nature, it can no more be re- pealed by a subsequent Congress than by that winch passed it. All this is familiar to everybody. And Congress, like every other legislature, often passes acts which, being in the nature of grants or contracts, are irrepealable ever after- wards. The message, in a strain of ar- gument which it is difficult to treat with ordinary respect, declares that this re- strict ion on the power of Congress, as to the establishment of other banks, is a palpable attempt to amend the Con- stitution by an act of legislation. The on on which this observation pur- ports to he founded is, that Congress, by the Constitution, is to have exclusive legislation over the District of Colum- bia; and when the hank charter de- clares that Congress will create no new bank within the District, it annuls this power of exclusive legislation ! I must say, that this reasoning hardly rises high enough to entitle it to a passing notice. It would he doing it too much credit to call it plausible. No one needs to be informed that exclusive power of legis- lation is not unlimited power of legisla- tion; and if it were, how can that legis- lative power be unlimited that cannot restrain itself, that cannot bind itself by contract? Whether as a government or as an individual, that being is fettered and restrained which is not capable of binding itself by ordinary obligation. Every legislature binds itself, whenever it makes a grant, enters into a contract, bestows an office, or does any other act or thing which is in its nature irrepeal- able. And this, instead of detracting from its legislative power, is one of the modes of exercising that power. The legislative power of Congress over the District of Columbia would not be full and complete, if it might not make just such a stipulation as the bank charter contains. As to the taxing power of the States, about which the message says so much, the proper answer to all it says is, that the States possess no power to tax any instrument of the government of the United States. It was no part of then- power before the Constitution, and they derive no such power from any of its pro\ isions. It is nowhere given to them. Could a State tax the coin of the United States at themint? Could a State lay a stamp tax on the process of the courts of the United States, and on custom-house papers? Could it tax the transporter tion of the mail, or the ships of war, or the ordnance, or the muniments of war, of the I'nited State? The rea.-mi that these cannot be taxed by a State is, that they are means and instruments of the government of the United states. The establishment of a bank exempt from State taxation takes away no existing l'i'dit in a State. It leaves it all it ever possessed. But the complaint IS, that the hank charter does not confer the power of taxation. This, certainly, though not a new, (for the same argu- ment was urged here,) appears to me OF THE UNITED 8TATE8 HANK BILL to be a strange, mode of asserting and maintaining State rights. The power of taxation is a sovereign power; and the Presidenl and those who think with him arc of opinion, in a given case, thai this sovereign power should be conferred <>n the States by an act of Congress. There is, if I mistake not, Sir, as little complimenl to state sov- ereignty in this idea, as there is of Bound constitutional doctrine. Sover- eign rights held under the grant of an act of Congress present a proposition quite new in constitutional law. 'The President himself even admits that an instrument of the government of the United States ought not, as such, to be taxed by the States; yet be contends for such a power of taxing property con- nected with this instrument, and essen- tial to its very being, as places its whole existence in the pleasure of the States. It is not enough that the States may tax all the property of all their own citizens, wherever invested or however employed. The complaint is, that the power of State taxation does not reach so far as to take cognizance over persons out of the State, and to tax them for a franchise lawfully exercised under the authority of the United States. Sir, when did the power of the States, or indeed of any government, go to such an extent as that? Clearly never. The taxing power of all communities is necessarily and justly limited to the property of its own citizens, and to the property of others, having a distinct local existence as property, within its jurisdiction ; it does not extend to rights and franchises, rightly exercised, under the authority of other governments, nor to persons beyond its jurisdiction. As the Constitution has left the taxing power of the States, so the bank char- ter leaves it. Congress has not under- taken either to take away, or to confer, a taxing power; nor to enlarge, or to restrain it; if it were to do either. 1 hardly know which of the two would be the least excusable. 1 beg leave to repeat, Mr. President, that what I have now been considering are the President's objections, not to 22 the policy or expediency, bul to tin- istitutionalitj . of the bank ; and not to ll OllStitutiouality of any new or proposed bank, bul of the bank as il no* is, and as it has long existed. If the Presidenl had declined to approve this bill because be though! the original charter unwisely granted, and the bank, in point of policy and expediency, ob- jectionabl ■ mischievous, and in that view only had suggested the reasons now urged by him, his argument, bow- ever inconclusive, would have been in- telligible, and imt. in its whole frame and scope, inconsistent with all well- established first principles. His rejec- tion of the bill, in that case, would i. been, no doubt, an extraordinary exer- cise of power; but it would bave been, nevertheless, the exercise of a power belonging to his office, and trusted by the Constitution to his discretion. Imt when he puts forth an array of argu- ments such as the message employs, nol against the expediency of the bank, but against its constitutional existence, he confounds all distinctions, mixes ques- tions of policy and questions of right together, and turns all constitutional restraints into mere matters of opinion. As far as its power extends, either in its direct effects or as a precedent, the message not only unsettles every thing which has been settled under the Con- stitution, but would show, also, that the Constitution itself is utterly incapable of any fixed construction or definite in- terpretation, and that there is no possi- bility of establishing, by its authority, any practical limitations on the powers of the respect ive branches of the govern- ment. When the message denies, as it does, the authority of the Supreme Court to decide on constitutional questions, it effects, so far as the opinion of the Presidenl and his authority can efl it, a complete change in our govern- ment. It does two things: first, it con- verts constitutional limitation, of power into mere matters of opinion, and then it strikes the judicial department, as an efficient department, out of our system. Hut the message by no means i ven 338 THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO. at this point. Having denied to Con- gress the authority of judging what powers may be constitutionally con- ferred on a hank, and having erected the judgment of the President himself into a standard by which to try the con- stitut ii >nal character of such powers, and having denounced the authority of the Supreme Court to decide finally on con- stitutional questions, the message pro- ceeds to claim for the President, not the power of approval, but the primary power, the power of originating laws. The President informs Congress, that he would have sent them such a charter, if it had been properly asked for, as they ought to confer. He very plainly intimates, that, in his opinion, the es- tablishment of all laws, of this nature at least, belongs to the functions of the executive government; and that Con- gress ought to have waited for the mani- festation of the executive will, before it presumed to touch the subject. Such, Mr. President, stripped of their dis- guises, are the real pretences set up in behalf of the executive power in this most extraordinary paper. Mr. President, we have arrived at a new epoch. "We are entering on ex- periments, with the government and the Constitution of the country, hitherto untried, and of fearful and appalling aspect. This message calls us to the contemplation of a future which little resembles the past. Its principles are, at war with all that public opinion has sustained, and all which the experience of the government has sanctioned. It denies first principles : it contradicts truth>. heretofore received as indisputa- ble. It denies to the judiciary the in- terpretation pf law, and claims to divide with Congress the power of originating statutes. It extends the grasp of execu- tive pretension over every ] lower of the government. Bui this is not all. It presents the chief magistrate of the Union iu the attitude of arguing away the powers of that government over which he has been chosen to preside; and adopting for this purpose modes of reasoning which, even under the influ- ence of all proper feeling towards high official station, it is difficult to regard as respectable. It appeals to every preju- dice which may betray men into a mis- taken view of their own interests, and to every passion which may lead them to disobey the impulses of their under- standing. It urges all the specious topics of State rights and national en- croachment against that which a great majority of the States have affirmed to be rightful, and in which all of them have acquiesced. It sows, in an un- sparing manner, the seeds of jealousy and ill-will against that government of which its author is the official head. It raises a cry, that liberty is in danger, at the very moment when it puts forth claims to powers heretofore unknown and unheard of. It affects alarm for the public freedom, when nothing en- dangers that freedom so much as its own unparalleled pretences. Tins, even, is not all. It manifestly seeks to in- flame the poor against the rich; it wan- tonly attacks whole classes of the peo- ple, for the purpose of turning against them the prejudices and the resent- ments of other classes. It is a state paper which finds no topic too exciting for its use, no passion too inflammable for its address and its solicitation. Such is this message. It remains now for the people of the United States to choose between the principles here avowed and their government. These cannot, subsist together. The one or the other must be rejected. If the sen- timents of the message shall receive general approbation, the Constitution will have perished even earlier than the moment which its enemies originally allowed for the termination of its exist- ence. It will not have survived to its fiftieth year. THE CHARACTER OF WASriINGTON. A SPEECH DELIVERED ATA PUBLIC DINNER IN THE CITY <>! WASIIINdToN, ON THE 2-2.) OF FEBRUARY, 1882, THE CENTENNIAL ANNIVERSABI 0* WASHINGTON'S BIRTHDAY. [On the 22(1 of February, 1832, being the centennial birthday of George Washing- ton, a number of gentlemen, members of Congress and others, from different pans of the Union, united in commemorating the occasion by a public dinner in the city of Washington. At the request of the Committee of Ar- rangements, Mr. Webster, then a Senator from Massachusetts, occupied the chair. After the cloth was removed, he addressed the company in the following manner.] I rise, Gentlemen, to propose to you the name of that great man, in com- memoration of whose birth, and in honor of whose character and services, we are here assembled. I am sure that I express a sentiment common to every one present, when I say that there is something more than ordinarily solemn and affecting in this occasion. We are met to testify our regard for him whose name is intimately blended with whatever belongs most essentially to the prosperity, the liberty, the free institutions, and the renown of our country. That name was of power to rally a nation, in the hour of thick- thronging public disasters and calam- ities; that name shone, amid the storm of war, a beacon light, to cheer and guide the country's friends; it flamed, too, like a meteor, to repel her foes. That name, in the days of peace, was a loadstone, attracting to itself a whole people's confidence, a whole people's love, and the whole world's respect. That name, descending with all time, spreading over the whole earth, and uttered in all the languages beloi to the tribes and races of men, will for ever be pronounced with affectionate gratitude by every one in whose breast there shall arise an aspiration for hu- man rights and human liberty. We perform this grateful duly, Gen- tlemen, at the expiration of a hundred years from his birth, near the place, so cherished and beloved by him, where his dust now reposes, and in the capital which bears his own immortal name. All experience evinces that human sentiments are strongly influenced by associations. The recurrence of anni- versaries, or of longer periods of time, naturally freshens the recollection, and deepens the impression, of events with which they are historically connected. Renowned places, also, have a power to awaken feeling, which all acknowledge. No American can pass by the fields of Bunker Hill. Monmouth, and Camden, as if they were ordinary spots on the earth's surface. Whoever visits them feels the sentiment of love of country kindling anew, as if the spirit that be- longed to the transactions which have rendered these places distinguii hed .-till hovered round, with power to move and excite all who in future time may ap- proach them. Bui neither of these sources of emo- tion equals the power with which great moral examples affect the mind. When sublime virtues cease to be abstractions, when they become embodied in human 340 THE CHARACTER OF WASHINGTON. character, and exemplified in human conduct, we should be false to our own nature if we did not indulge in the spontaneous effusions of our gratitude and our admiration. A true lover of the virtue of patriotism delights to con- template its purest models; and that love of country may be well suspected which affects to soar so high into the regions of sentiment as to be lost ami absorbed in the abstract feeling, ami becomes too elevated or too refined to glow with fervor in the commendation or the love of individual benefaetoi <. All this is unnatural. It is as if one should be so enthusiastic a lover of poetry, as to care nothing tor Homer or Milton: so passionately attached to elo- quence as to be indifferent to Tully and Chatham; or such a devotee to the arts. in such an ecstasy with the elements of beauty, proportion, and expression, as to regard the masterpieces of Raphael and Michael Angelo with coldness or contempt. We maybe assured, Gentle- men, that he who really loves the thing itself, loves its finest exhibitions. A true friend of his country loves her friends and benefactors, and thinks it no degradation to commend ami com- memorate them. The voluntary out- pouring of the public feeling, made to-day, from the North to the South, and from the East to the West, proves this sentiment to be both just and natural. In the cities and in the vil- lages, in the public temples and in the family circles, among all ages and Maddened voices to-day bespeak grateful hearts and a freshened recollec- tion of the virtues of the Father of his Country. And it will be so, in all time t<, come, so long as public virtue is itself an objed of regard. The ingen- uous youth of America will hold up to themselves the brighl model of Wash- ington's example, and study to be what t hey behold ; they w ill contemplate his character till all it-, virtues spread out and display themselves to their de- lighted rision ; as the earliest astrono- mers, the shepherds on the plains of Babylon, gazed at the -tar- till they -aw them form into clusters ami constella- tions, overpowering at length the eyes of the beholders with the united blaze of a thousand lights. Gentlemen, we are at a point of a century from the birth of Washington ; and what a century it has been! Dur- ing its course, the human mind has seemed to proceed with a sort of ge- ometric velocity, accomplishing for hu- man intelligence and human freedom more than had been done in fives or tens of centuries preceding. Wash- ington stands at the commencement of a new era, as well as at the head of the New World. A century from the birth of Washington has changed the world. The country of Washington has been the theatre on which a great part of that change has been wrought, and Washington himself a principal agent by which it has been accomplished. His age and his country are equally full of wonders; and of both he is the chief. If the poetical prediction, uttered a few years before his birth, be true; if indeed it be designed by Providence that the grandest exhibition of human character and human affairs shall be made on this theatre of the Western world; if it be true that, "The four first acts already past, A fifth shall close the drama with the day; Time's noblest offspring is the last" ; — how could this imposing, swelling, final scene be appropriately opened, how could its intense interest be adequately sus- tained, but. by the introduction of just. such a character as our Washington? Washington had attained his man- hood when that spark of liberty was struck out in his own country, which has since kindled into a flame, and shot its beams over the earth. In the flow of a century from his birth, the world has changed in science, in arts, in the extent of commerce, in the improve- ment of navigation, and in all that re- lates to the civilization of man. But it is the spirit of human freedom, the new elevation of individual man, in his moral, social, and political character, Leading the whole long train of other improvements, which has most remark- THE CHARAC1 i:w OF WASHINGTON 841 ably distinguished the era. Society, in this century, baa nol made its pro like Chinese skill, by a greater acute- cess of ingenuity in trifles; it bas nol merely lashed itself to an increased .-I (1 round tin' olil circles of thoughl and action; bul it has assumed a new character; it lias raised itself from be- neath governments to a participation in governments; it has mixed moral and political objects with the dailj pursuits of individual men; and. with a freedom and strength he fore altogether unknown, it has applied to these objects the whole power of the human understanding. It has been the era. in short, when tin- social principle has triumphed over the feudal principle; when society has maintained its rights against military power, and established, on foundations never hereafter to be shaken, its com- petency to govern itself. It was the extraordinary fortune of Washington, that, having been in- trusted, in revolutionary times, with the supreme military command, and having fulfilled that trust with equal renown for wisdom and for valor, he should be placed at the head of the firs! government in which an attempt was to be made on a large scale to rear the fabric of. social order on the basis of a written constitution and of a pure rep- resentative principle. A government was to be established, without a throne, without an aristocracy, without castes. orders, or privileges; and this govern- ment, instead of being a democracy, existing and acting within the walls of a single city, was to be extended over a vast country, of different climates, in- terests, and habits, and of various com- munions of our common Christian faith. The experiment certainly was entirely new. A popular government of this extent, it was evident, could be framed only by carrying into full effect the principle of representation or of dele- gated power; and the world was to see whether society could, by the strength of this principle, maintain its own peace and good government, carry for- ward its own great interests, ami con- duct itself to political renown and glory. By the benignity of Providence, this experiment, bo full of intere I to us and t ir posterity for ever, ■" full of interest . indeed, t.. the world in it- | cut generation and in all it^ generations to cuie. was Buffered t" commence under the guidance of Washington. I '■ i ined for this high career, he was lilted for it h\ wisdom, by rirtue, b\ patriotism, l>\ discretion, by whatever can inspire confidence iii man toward man. In entering on the untried scenes, early disappointment and the premature extinction of all bope oi Buccess would have 1 a certain, had it not been that there did exist throughout the country, in a most extraordinary degree, an unwavering trust in him who stood at the helm. I remarked. Gentlemen, that the whole world was and is interested in the result of this experiment. And is it ma Do we deceive ourselves, or is it true that at this moment the career which this government is running is among the most attractive objects t" the civilized world? Do we deceive ourselves, or is it true that at this moment that love of liberty and that understanding of it.s true principles which are flying over the whole earth, as on the wings of all the winds, are really and truly of American origin ? At the period of the birth of Wash- ington, there existed in Europe no polit- ical liberty in large communities, except in the provinces of Holland, and except thai England herself had set a ureal ex- ample, SO far as it went, bj hei glorious Revolution of L688. Everywhere else, despotic power was predominant, and the feudal or military principle held the mass of mankind in hopeless bond ( me half of Europe was crushed beneath the Bourbon sceptre, and no conception of political liberty, no hope even of re- ligious toleration, existed among that nation which was America's firsl ally. The king was the state, the fcj the country, the kin- was all. There was one king, with power not derived from his people, and too high to be questioned; and the real were all sub- jects, with no political right but obedi- 342 THE CHARACTER OF WASHINGTON. ence. All above was intangible power, all below quiet subjection. A recent oc- currence in the French Chambers shows us how public opinion on these subjects is changed. A minister had spoken of the "king's subjects." " There arc no subjects," exclaimed hundreds of voices at once, "in a country where the people make the king! " Gentlemen, the spirit of human lib- erty and of free government, nurtured and grown into strength and beauty in America, has stretched its course into the midst of the nations. Like an ema- nation from Heaven, it has gone forth, and it will not return void. It must change, it is fast changing, the face of the earth. Our great, our high duty is to show, in our own example, that this spirit is a spirit of health as well as a spirit of power; that its benignity is as great as its strength; that its efficiency to secure individual rights, social rela- tions, and moral order, is equal to the irresistible force with which it- prostrates principalities and powers. The world, at this moment, is regarding us with a willing, but something of a fearful ad- miration. Its deep and awful anxiety is to learn whether free states may be stable, as well as free; whether popnlar power may be trusted, as well as feared; in short, whether wise, regular, and vir- tuous self-government is a vision for the contemplation of theorists, or a truth established, illustrated, and brought into practice in the country of Washington. Gentlemen, for the earth which we inhabit, and the whole circle of the sun, for all the unborn races of mankind, we seem to hold in our hands, for their weal or woe, the fate of this experi- ment. It we tail, who shall venture the rendition ? If our example shall prove to be "iic. not of encouragement, but of terror, not tit to be imitated, but tit only to be shunned, where else shall the world I"" 1 for Eree models? If this great II Sun be struck out of the firmament, at what oilier fountain shall the lamp oi libei ';■ hen after !»• lighted V What, other oil. >hall emit- a ray to glim- mer, even, on the darkness of the world V There is no danger of our overrating or overstating the important part which we are now acting in human affairs. It should not flatter our personal self-re- spect, but it should reanimate onr patri- otic virtues, and inspire us with a deeper ami more solemn sense, both of our priv- ileges and of our duties. We cannot wish better for our country, nor for the world, than that the same spirit which influenced Washington may influence all who succeed him; and that the same blessing from above, which attended his efforts, may also attend theirs. The principles of Washington's ad- ministration are not left doubtful. They are to be found in the Constitution it- self, in the great measures recommended and approved by him, in his speeches to Congress, and in that most interesting paper, his Farewell Address to the Peo- ple of the United States. The success of the government under his administra- tion is the highest proof of the sound- ness of these principles. And, after an experience of thirty-five years, what is there which an enemy could condemn ? What is there which either his friends, or the friends of the country, could wish to have been otherwise ? I speak, of course, of great measures and leading principles. In the first place, all his measures were right in their intent. He stated the whole basis of his own great charac- ter, when he told the country, in the homely phrase of the proverb, that hon- est v is the best policy. One of the most striking things ever said of him is, that 11 he changed mankind's ideas of political greatness." 1 To commanding talents, and to success, the common elements of such greatness, he added a disregard of self, a spotlessness of motive, a steady submission to every public and private duty, which threw far into the shade the whole crowd of vulgar great. The object of his regard was the whole coun- try. No part of it was enough to fill his enlarged patriotism. His love of elory, so far as that may be supposed to have influenced him at all, spurned every thing short of general approbation. It would have been nothing to him, that his par- i See Works of Fisher Ames, pp. 122, 123. THE CHARACTER <>f Washington. 343 (isans or his favorites outnumbered, or outvoted, or oiitmanaged, or outclam- ored, those of other leaders. 1 le had no favorites; lie rejected all partisanship; and. acting honestly f,.r the universal good, he deserved, what he has so richly enjoyed, the universal love. His principle it was to act right, and to trust the people for support ; his prin- ciple it was not to follow the lead of sinister and selfish ends, nor to rely on the little arts of part\ delusion to obtain public sanction for such a course. Bom for his country and for the world, he did not give up to party what was meant for mankind. The consequence is, that his fame is as durable as his principles, as lasting as truth and virtue them- selves. While the hundreds whom par- ty excitement, and temporary circum- stances, and casual combinations, have raised into transient notoriety, sink again, like thin hubbies, bursting and dissolving into the great ocean, Wash- ington's fame is like the rock which bounds that ocean, and at whose feet its billows are destined to break harmlessly for ever. The maxims upon which Washington conducted our foreign relations were few and simple. The first was an entire and indisputable impartiality towards for- eign states. He adhered to this rule of public conduct, against very strong in- ducements to depart from it, and when the popularity of the moment seemed to favor such a departure. In the next place, he maintained true dignity ami unsullied honor in all communications with foreign states. It was among the high duties devolved upon him, to intro- duce our new government into the circle of civilized states and powerful nations. Not arrogant or assuming, with no un- becoming or supercilious bearing, he yet exacted for it from all others entire and punctilious respect. He demanded, and he obtained at once, a standing of per- fect equality for his country in the soci- ety of nations; nor was there a prince or potentate of his day, whose personal character carried with it, into the inter- course of other states, a greater degree of respect and veneration. I [e regarded other nation- onlj a- they stood in political relations t" us. With their internal affairs, their polil ical par- ind di en ion . le- scrupulously ab- stained from all interference; ami. on tie- other hand, he repelled with spirit all such interference by others with us or our concerns. His sternesl rebuke, themosi indignanl measure of his whole administration, was aimed againsl Buch an attempted interference. He fell it as an attempt to wound the national honor, and resented it accordingly. The reiterated admonitions in his Farewell Address show his deep I that foreign influence would insinuate itself into our counsels through the chan- nels of domestic dissension, and obtain a sympathy with our own temporary par- ties. Against all such dangers, he most earnestly entreats the country to guard itself. He appeals to its patriot ism, to its self-respect, to its own honor, to every consideration connected with its welfare and happiness, to resist, at tin- very !»■- ginning, all tendencies towards such con- nection of foreign interests with our own affairs. With a tone of earnestness nowhere else found, even in his last af- fectionate farewell advice to his country- men, he says, "Againsl the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens.) the jeal- ousy of a free people ought to be stantly awake; since history ami experi- ence prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican -i>\ eminent." Lastly, on the subject of foreign rela- tions, Washington never forgo! that we had interests peculiar to ourselves. The primary political concerns of Europe, he saw , did not affect us. We had nothing to do with her balance of power, her family compacts, or her sin 3SioU9 to thrones. We were placed in a condition favorable to neutrality during European wars, and to the enjoyment of all the great advantages of that relation. " Why, then," he asks us, " why fo] the advantages of so peculiar a situa- tion? Why quit our own to stand iq>on foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of 344 THE CHARACTER OF WASHINGTON. Europe, entangle our peace and pros- perity in the toils of European ambition, rivalsbip, interest, humor, or caprice?" [ndeed, Gentlemen, Washington's Farewell Address is full of truths im- portanl at all times, and particularly deserving consideration at the present. With a sagacity which brought the fu- ture before him, and made it like the present, he saw and pointed out the dangers that even at this momenl mosl imminently threaten us. I hardly know how a greater service of that kind could now be done to the community, than by a renewed and wide diffusion of that admirable paper, and an ear- nest invitation to every man in the country to reperuse and consider it. rts political maxims are invaluable ; its exhortations to love of country and to brotherly affection among citizens, touching; and the solemnity with which it 'urges the observance of moral duties, and impresses the power of religious ol 'ligation, gives to it the highest char- acter of truly disinterested, sincere, pa- rental advice. The domestic policy of Washington found its pole-star in the avowed objects of the Constitution itself. lie sought so to administer that Constitution, as to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, pro- vide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the bless- ings of liberty. These were objects in- teresting, in the highest degree, to the •whole country, and his policy embraced the whole country. Among his earliest and most impor- tant duties was tic organization of the government itself, the choice of his con- fidential advisers, and the various ap- pointments to otfice. This duty, so importanl ami delicate, when a whole government was <■, he organized, and all it- offices for the I'n-t time tilled, was not difficult to him ; for he had no sinister ends to accomplish, no clamorous partisans to gratify, no pledges to re- deem, no objecl toll- regarded but simply the public good, [1 .. ■< plain, straight- forward matter, a mere honest choice of good men tor the public Bervice. His own singleness of purpose, his disinterested patriotism, were evinced by the selection of his first Cabinet, and by the manner in which he filled the seats of justice, and other places of high trust, lie sought for men fit for offices; not for offices which might suit men. Above personal considerations, above local considerations, above party consid- erations, he felt that he could only dis- charge the sacred trust which the country had placed in his hands, by a diligent inquiry after real merit, and a consci- entious preference of virtue and talent. The whole country was the field of his selection. lie explored that whole field, looking only for whatever it contained most worthy and distinguished, lie was. indeed, most successful, and he deserved success for the purity of his motives, the liberality of his sentiments, and his en- larged and manly policy. Washington's administration estab- lished the national credit, made pro- vision for the public debt, and for that patriotic army whose interests and wel- fare were always so dear to him; and, by laws wisely framed, and of admira- ble effect, raised the commerce and nav- igation of the country, almost at once, from depression and ruin to a state of prosperity. Nor were his eyes open to these interests alone. lie viewed with equal concern its agriculture and manu- factures, and, so far as they came within the regular exercise of the powers of this government, they experienced re- gard and favor. It should not be omitted, even in this slight reference to the general measures and general principles of the first Presi- dent, that he saw and felt the full value and importance of the judicial depart- ment of the government. An upright and able administration of the laws he held to lie alike indis] 'disable to private happiness and public liberty. The tem- ple of justice, in his opinion, was a sacred place, and lie would profane and pollute it who should call any to minister in it, not spotless in character, not in- corruptible in integrity, not competent, by talent and learning, not a fit object of unhesitating trust. THE CHARACTER OF WASHING fON 845 Among oilier admonitions, Washing- ton lias left us, in his Last communi- cation to his country, an exhortation against the excesses of party spirit. A lire not to be quenched, he yet conjures us nol to fan and feed i he Maine. 1 n- doubtedly, Gentlemen, it is the greatest danger of our system and of our time. Undoubtedly, if thai system should be overthrown, it will he the work of ex- cessive party spirit, acting on the gov- ernment, which is dangerous enough, or acting in the government, which is a thousand times more dangerous; for government then heeoines nothing but organized party, and, in the strange vicissitudes of human affairs, it may come at Last, perhaps, to exhibit the singular paradox of government itself being in opposition to its own powers, at war with the very elements of its own existence. Such cases are hopeless. As men may be protected against murder, but cannot be guarded against suicide, so government may be shielded from the assaults of external foes, but nothing can save it when it chooses to lay violent hands on itself. Finally, Gentlemen, thei'e was in the breast of Washington one sentiment so deeply felt, so constantly uppermost, that no proper occasion escaped without its utterance. From the letter which he signed in behalf of the Convention when the Constitution was sent out to the people, to the moment when he put his hand to that last paper in which he addressed his countrymen, the Union, — the Union was the great object of his thoughts. In that first letter he tells them that, to him and his brethren of the Convention, union appears to be the greatest interest of every true American; and in that last paper he conjures them to regard that unity of government which constitutes them one people as the very palladium of their prosperity and safety, and the security of liberty itself. He regarded the union of these States less as one of our blessings, than as the great treasure-house which con- tained them all. Here, in his judgment, was the great magazine of all our means of prosperity: here, as he thought, and as everj true American -till thin) -. are deposited all our animating prospi all our solid hopes for future great n lie has taught us to maintain thi- union, not bj Beeking to enlarge the powei - ol the government, on the one hand, nor by surrendering them, on the other: but 1>\ an administration of them at once firm and moderate, pursuing obji tin I \ national, ami carried on in a spirit of justice and equity. The extreme solieitude for the pre-ef- vation of the Union, at all times mani- fested by him. shows not only tic- opin- ion he entertained of its importance, hut his clear perception of those causes which were likely to spring up to endanger it. and which, if one they should over- throw the present system, would Leave little hope of any future beneficial re- union. Of all the presumptions indulged by presumptuous man, that is one of the rashest which looks for repeated and favorable opportunities tor the deliberate establishment of a unite i government over distinct and widely extended com- munities. Such a thing has happened once in human affairs, and but one: the event stands out as a prominent ception to all ordinary history: and un- less we suppose ourselves running into an age of miracles, we may not expect its repetition. Washington, therefore, could regard, and did regard, nothing as of paramount political interest, hut the integrity oi the Union itself. With a united govern- ment, well administered, he saw that we had nothing to fear: and without it. nothing to hope. The sentiment is just, and its momentous truth should sol- emnly impress the whole country. If we might regard our country as personated in thespiritof Washington, if we might consider him as representing her, in her past renown, her present prosperity, and her future career, and as in that charac- ter demanding of us all to account for our conduct, as political men or as pri- vate citizens, how should lie answer him who has ventured to talk of disunion and dismemberment'.'' Or how should he answer him who dwells perpetually on local interests, and fans every kind- ,1 346 THE CHARACTER OF WASHINGTON. ling flame of local prejudice? How should he answer him who would array State against State, interest against in- terest, and party against party, care- less of the continuance of that unity of government which constitutes us one Je f The political prosperity which this country has attained, and which it now enjoys, has been acquired mainly through the instrumentality of the present gov- ernment. While this agent contin- ues, the capacity of attaining to still higher degrees of prosperity exists also. We have, while this lasts, a political life capable of beneficial exertion, with power to resist or overcome misfortunes, to sustain us against the ordinary acci- dents of human affairs, and to promote, by active efforts, every public interest. Bui dismemberment strikes at the very being which preserves these faculties. It would lay its rude and ruthless hand on this great agent itself. It would sweep away, not only what we possess, but all power of regaining lost, or ac- quiring new possessions. It would leave the country, not only bereft of its pros- perity and happiness, but without limbs, or organs, or faculties, by which to exert itself hereafter in the pursuit of that prosperity and happiness. other misfortunes may be borne, or their effects overcome. If disastrous war should sweep our commerce from the ocean, another generation may re- new it; if it exhaust our treasury, future industry may replenish it; if it desolate and Lay waste our fields, still, iinder a new cultivation, they will grow green :.n. and ripen t<> future harvests. It were hut a trifle even if the walls of yonder Capitol were to crumble, if its lofty pillars should fall, and its gor- decorations be all covered by the du-t of the valley. All these might lie rebuilt. But who shall reconstruct the fabric of demolished government? Who shall reai- again the well-proportioned columns of constitutional liberty? Who shall frame together the skilful archi- tecture which unites national sovereignty with State rights, individual security, and public prosperity? No, if these columns fall, they will be raised not again. Like the Coliseum and the Par- thenon, they will be destined to a mourn- ful, a melancholy immortality. Bitterer tears, however, will flow over them, than were ever shed over the monuments of Roman or Grecian art; for they will be the remnants of a more glorious edifice than Greece or Rome ever saw, the edi- fice of constitutional American liberty. But let us hope for better things. Let us trust in that gracious Being who has hitherto held our country as in the hollow of his hand. Let us trust to the virtue and the intelligence of the people, and to the efficacy of religious obliga- tion. Let us trust to the influence of Washington's example. Let us hope that that fear of Heaven which expels all other fear, and that regard to duty which transcends all other regard, may influence public men and private citizens, and lead our country still onward in her happy career. Full of these gratifying anticipations and hopes, let us look for- ward to the end of that century which is now commenced. A hundred years hence, other disciples of Washington will celebrate his birth, with no less of sincere admiration than we now com- memorate it. When they shall meet, as we now meet, to do themselves and him that honor, so surely as they shall see the blue summits of his native moun- tains rise in the horizon, so surely as they shall behold the river on whose hanks he lived, and on whose banks he rests, still flowing on toward the sea, so surely may they sec. as we now see, the flag of the Union floating on the top of the Capitol; and then, as now, may the sun in his course visit no land more. free, more happy, more lovely, than this our own country I Gentlemen, I propose — "Tun MEM- ORY or Geokgk Washington." EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE AND KROM OF KICK. REMOVALS FROM A SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, HELD AT WORCESTER (MASS.), ON THE 12 m OF oiToliLR, 1S.J2. I begin, Sir, with the subject of re- movals from office for opinion's sake, one of the most signal instances, as I think, of the attempt to extend execu- tive power. This has been a leading measure, a cardinal point, in tire course of the administration. It has proceeded, from the first, on a settled proscription for political opinions; and this system it has carried into operation to the full extent of its ability. The President has not only filled all vacancies with his own friends, generally those most distin- guished as personal partisans, but he has turned out political opponents, and thus created vacancies, in order that he might fill them with his own friends. I think the number of removals and ap- pointments is said to be two thousand. While the administration and its friends have been attempting to circumscribe and to decry the powers belonging to other branches, it has thus seized into its own hands a patronage most, per- nicious and coiTupting, an authority over men's means of living most tyran- nical and odious, and a power to punish free men for political opinions alto- gether intolerable. You will remember, Sir, that the Constitution says not one word about the President's power of removal from office. It is a power raised entirely by construction. It is a constructive power, introduced at first to meet cases of ex- treme public necessity. It has now be- come coextensive with the executive will, calling for no necessity, requiring no exigency for its exercise; to be em- ployed at all times, without, control, without question, without responsibility. When the question of the President's power of removal was debated in the first Congress, those who argued for it limited it to extreme cases. Cases, they said, might arise, in which it would be absolutely necessary to remove an officer before the Senate could be assembled. An officer might become insane; he might abscond; and from these and other SUpposable cases, it. was said, the public service mighl materially suiter if the President could not remove the in- cumbent. And it was further said, that there was little or no danger of the abuse of the power for party or personal objects. No President, it was thought, would ever commit such an outrage on public opinion. Mr. Madison, who thought the power ought to exist, and to be exercised in cases of high necessity, declared, nevertheless, that if a Presi- dent should resort to the power when not required by any public exigency, and merely for personal objects, he w deserve to I"' impeached. By a very small majority, — I think, in the Senate, by the casting vote of the Vice-President, — Congress decided in favor of th istence of the power of removal, upon the grounds which I have mentioned; granting the power in a case of i and absolute necessity, and denying its existence everywhere els 348 EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE AND REMOVALS FROM OFFICE. Mr. President, we should recollect thai this question was discussed, and 1 1 1 ii-; decided, when Washington was in the executive chair. Men knew that in his hands the power would nol be abused; nor did they conceive it pos- sible that any of his successors could so far depart from his great and bright example, as. by abuse of the power, and by carrying thai abuse to its utmost ex- tent . to change the essential character of the executive from that of an impar- tial guardian and executor of the laws into that of the chief dispenser of party rewards. Three or four instances of removal occurred in the first twelve years of the government. At the commence- ment of Mr. Jefferson's administration. he made several others, not without pro- ducing much dissatisfaction; so much so, that he thought it expedient to give reasons to the people, in a public paper, for even the limited extent to which he had exercised the power. lie rested his justification on particular circumstances and peculiar grounds; which, whether substantial or not, showed, at least, that he did not regard the power of re- moval as an ordinary power, still less as a mere arbitrary one, to he used as he pleased, for whatever ends he pleased, ami without responsibility. As far as I remember, Sir, after the early part of Mr. Jefferson's administration, hardly an instance occurred for near thirty m;us. If there were any instances, they were few. But at the commence- ment of the present administration, the precedent of these previous cases was seized on, and a system, a regular plan of government, a well-considered scheme for the maintenance of party power by the patronage of office, and this pat- ronage to he created by general remo\ al, was adopted, and has been carried into full operation. Indeed, before General Jackson's inauguration, the party put tin- (system into practice. In the last "ii of Mr. Adams's administration, the friends of General Jackson consti- tuted a majority in the Senate; and nominations, made by Mr. Adams t" fdl vacancies which ha I occurred iii the ordinary way, were postponed, by this majority, beyond the 3d of March, for the purpose, openly avowed, of (living the nominations to General Jackson. A nomination for a judge of the Supreme Court, and many others of less magni- tude, were thus disposed of. And what did we witness. Sir, when the administration actually c menced, in the full exercise of its authority ''. One universal sweep, one undistin- guishiug blow, levelled against all who were not of the successful party. No worth, public or private, no service, civil or military, was of power to resist the relentless greediness of proscription. Soldiers of the late war, soldiers of the Revolutionary war, the very contem- poraries of the independence of the country, all lost their situations. No office was too high, and none too low; for office was the spoil, and "all the spoils," it is said, ''belong to the vic- tors " ! If a man holding an office neces- sary for his daily support had present- ed himself covered with the scars of wounds received in every battle, from Bunker Hill to Yorktown. these would not have protected him against this reck- less rapacity. Nay, Sir, if Warren him- self had been among the living, and had possessed any office under govern- ment, high or low, he would not have been suffered to hold it a single hour, unless he ci mid show that he had strictly complied with the party statutes, and had put a well-marked party collar round his own neck. Look. Sir. to the case of the late venerable Major Melville. He was a personification id' the spirit of 177G, one of the earliest to venture in the cause of liberty. lie was of the Tea Party: one of the very first to ex- pose himself to British power. And his whole life was consonant with this, its beginning. Always ardent in the cause of liberty, always a zealous friend to his country, always acting with the party which he supposed cherished the genuine republican spirit most fervently, always estimable and respectable in private life. he seemed armed against this miserable petty tyranny of party as far as man could he. But he felt its blow, and he fell. He held an office in the custom- EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE .\M> REMOVALS FROM OFFICE. 849 In iii-c. and had held it fur a long course of years; and he was deprived of it, as if unworthy to Berve the countrj which he loved, and for whose liberties, in the rigor of his early manhood, he had thrust himself into the very jaws of its (Minnies. There was no mistake in the matter. His character, his Btanding, his Revolutionary services, wen' all well known; bul they were known to no purpose; they weighed not one Feather against party pretensions. It cost no pains to remove him; it cost no com- punction to wring liis aged heart with this retribution from his country tor his services, his zeal, and his fidelity. Sir, you will bear witness, 1 that, when his successor was nominated to the Senate, and the Senate wen; informed who had been removed to make way for that nom- ination, its members were struck with horror. They had not conceived the ad- ministration to be capable of such a thing; and yet they said, What can we do? The man is removed; ice cannot recall him; we can only act upon the nomina- tion before us. Sir, you and I thought otherwise; and I rejoice that we did think otherwise. We thought it our duty to resist the nomination to fill a vacancy thus created. We thought it our duty to oppose this proscription, when, ami where, and as, we constitutionally could. We besought the Senate to go with us, and to take a stand before the country on this great question. We invoked them to try the deliberate sense of the people; to trust themselves before the tribunal of public opinion ; to resist at first, to resist at last, to resist always, the introduction of this unsocial, this mischievous, this dangerous, this belligerent principle into the practice of the government. Mr. President, as far as I know, there is no civilized country on earth, in which, on a change of rulers, there is such an inquisition for spoil as we have witnessed in this free; republic. The Inaugural Address of 1829 spoke of a searching operation of government. The most searching operation, Sir, of the 1 Hon. Nathaniel Silsbee, President of the Convention, was Mr. Webster's colleague in the Semite at the time referred to. ut administration, lias been its search for office and plaoe, When, sir, did an-. En li h minister, Whig or Tory, ever make guch an inqu< When did he ever go down to low- water mark, to make m ousting of tide-waiters? When did I ver I away the daily bread of weighers, and gaugers, and measurers'/ When did he ever go into the \ ill i i disturb the little post-offices, tin' mail contracts, and everything else in the remotest '!• connected w ii h government ''. Sir, a British minister who Bhould do this, ami should afterwards Bhow his head in a British House of Commons, would he received 1>\ a universal biss. 1 have little to say of the select ions made to fill vacancies thus created. It is true, however, and it is a natural consequence of the system which has been acted on, that, within the last three years, more nominations have been rejected (Mi the ground of unfitness, than in all the preceding forty years of the government. And these nomina- tions, you know. Sir, could not have been rejected hut by votes of the President's own friends. The cas were too strong to be resisted. Even party attachment could not stand them. In some not a third of the Senate, in others not ten votes, and in others not a single vote, could be obtained; and this for no particular reason known only to the Senate, but on general grounds >>i the want of character and qualifications; on grounds known to everybody else, as well as to the Senate. All this. Sir, is perfectly natural and consistent. The same party selfishness which drives good men out of office will push bad men in. Political proscription leads necessarily to the filling of offices with incompetent persons, and to a consequent malexecu- tion of official duties. And in my opin- ion, Sir, this principle of claiming a monopoly of office by the right of eon- quest, unless the public shall effectually rebuke and restrain it, will entirely change the character of our government. It elevates party above country; it for- gets the common wed in the pursuit of mal emolument ; it tends to form, 350 EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE AND REMOVALS FROM OFFICE. it does form, we see that it has formed, a political combination, united by no common principles or opinions among its members, either upon the powers of the government, or the true policy of the country; but held together simply as an association, under the charm of a popular head, seeking to maintain pos- session of the government by a vigorous exercise of its patronage; and for this purpose agitating, and alarming, and distressing social life by the exercise of a tyrannical party proscription. Sir, if this course of things cannot be checked, good men will grow tired of the exercise of political privileges. They will have nothing to do with popular elections. They will see that such elections are but a mere selfish contest for office; and they will abandon the government to the scramble of the bold, the daring, and the desperate. It seems, Mr. President, to be a pe- culiar and singular characteristic of the present administration, that it came into power on a cry against abuses, which ili'l wit exist, and then, as soon as it was in, as if in mockery of the per- ception and intelligence of the people, it created those very abuses, and carried them to a great length. Thus the chief magistrate himself, before he came into the chair, in a formal public paper, denounced the practice of appointing members of Congress to office. lie said, that, if that practice continued, corrup- tion would become the order of the day; and, as if to fasten and nail down his own consistency to that point, lie de- clared tlmt it was due to himself to prac- tist what he recommended to others. Yet, Sir. as soon as he was in power, these fastenings gave way, the nails all flew, and the promised consistency remains a Btriking proof of the manner in which political assurances are sometimes ful- filled. Ih- has already .appointed more members of Congress to office than any of his predecessors, in the longest period of administration. Before his time, there was no reason to complain of these appointments. They had not been nu- nc ions under any administration. Un- this, they have been numerous, and some of them such as may well justify complaint. Another striking instance of the ex- hibition of the same characteristics may be found in the sentiments of the Inau- gural Address, and in the subsequent practice, on the subject of interfering with the freedom of elections. The Inau- gural Address declares, that it is neces- sary to reform abuses which have brought the patronage of the government into con- flict with the freedom of elections. And what has been the subsequent practice? Look to the newspapers; look to the published letters of officers of the gov- ernment, advising, exhorting, soliciting, friends and partisans to greater exer- tions in the cause of the party; see all done, everywhere, which patronage and power can do, to affect, not only elec- tions in the general government, but also in every State government, and then say how well this promise of re- forming abuses has been kept. At what former period, under what former ad- ministration, did public officers of the United States thus interfere in elections? Certainly, Sir, never. In this respect, then, as well as in others, that which was not true as a charge against previous administrations would have been true, if it had assumed the form of a proph- ecy respecting the acts of the present. But there is another attempt to grasp and to wield a power over public opin- ion, of a still more daring character, and far more dangerous effects. In all popular governments, a Free Press is the most important of all agents and instruments. It not only expresses public opinion, but, to a very great degree, it contributes to form that opinion. It is an engine for good or for evil, as it may be directed; but an engine of which nothing can resist the force. The conductors of the press, in popular governments, occupy a place, in the social and political system, of the very highest consequence. They wear the character of public instructors. Their daily labors bear directly on the intelligence, the morals, the taste, and the public spirit of the country. Not EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE AND REMOVALS FROM OFFICE. 851 only arc they journalists, recording political occurrences, but they discuss principles, they comment on measures, they canvass characters; they hold a j tower over the reputation, tin- feelings, the happiness of individuals. The pub- lic ear is always open to their addresses, the public sympathy easily made respon- sive to their sentiments. It is indeed, Sir, a distinction of high honor, that theirs is the only profession expressly protected and guarded l>y constitutional enactments. Their employment soars so high, in its general consequences it is so intimately connected with the public happiness, that its security is provided for by the fundamental law. While it acts in a manner worthy of this distinc- tion, the press is a fountain of light, and a source of gladdening warmth. It instructs the public mind, and animates the spirit of patriotism. Its loud voice Suppresses every thing which would raise itself against the public liberty; and its blasting- rebuke causes incipient despot- ism to perish in the bud. But remember, Sir, that these are the attributes of a free press only. And is a [uess that is purchased or pensioned more free than a press that is fettered? Can the people look for truths to par- tial sources, whether rendered partial through fear or through favor? Why shall not a manacled press be trusted with the maintenance and defence of popular rights? Because it is supposed to be under the influence of a power which may prove greater than the love of truth. Such a press may screen abuses in government, or be silent. It may fear to speak. And may it not fear to speak, too, when its conductors, if they speak in any but one way, may l<>se their means of livelihood? Is de- pendence on government for bread no temptation to screen its abuses? Will the press always speak the truth, when the truth, if spoken, may be the means of silencing it for the future? Is the truth in no danger, is the watchman under no temptation, when he can nei- ther proclaim the approach of national evils, nor seem to descry them, without the loss of his place? Mr. President, an open attempt to secure the aid and 1 1 i ■ 1 1 ■ 1 - 1 1 i ] . "I the public press, by bestowing the emolu- ments "i "Hie.- <>n it - acl ive conduct seems to me, of every thing we have witnessed, t" be the mosl reprehensible. It degrades both the government and the press. As far as its natural effect extends, it turns tie- palladium of liberty into an engine of party. It brings the agency, activity, energy, and patrol of government all to hear, with united force, on the means of general intelli- gence, and on the adoption or rejection of political opinions. It so completely perverts the true object of government, it so entirely revolutionizes our whole system, that the chief business of those in power is directed rather to the propa- gation of opinions favorable to them- selves, than to the execution of the laws. This propagation of opinions, through the press, becomes the main administra- tive duty. Some fifty or sixty editors of leading journals have been appointed to office by the present executive. A stand has been made against this pro- ceeding, in the Senate, with partial suc- cess; but, by means of appointments which do not come before the Senate, or other means, the number has been car- ried to the extent I have mentioned. Certainly, Sir, the editors of the public journals are not to be disfranchised. Certainly they are fair candidates, either for popular elections, or a just participa- tion in office. Certainly they reckon in their number some of the first geniu the best scholars, and the most honest and well-principled men in the country. But the complaint is against the sysU m, against the practice, against the undis- guised attempt to secure the favor of the press by means addressed to its pecuniary interest, and these means, too, drawn from the public treasury, being no other than the appointed com- pensations for the performance of official duties. Sir, the press itself should re- sent this. Its own character for purity and independence is at stake. It should resist a connection rendering it obi ious to so many imputations, [t should point to its honorable denomination in 352 EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE AND REMOVALS FROM OFFICE. our constitutions of government, and it slmuM maintain the character, there as- cribed to it. of a Free Pri ss. There can, Sir, l>e no objection to the appointment of an editor to office, if he is the fittest man. There can be no ob- jection tn considering the services which, in that or in any other capacity, he may have rendered his country. He may have done much to maintain her rights against foreign aggression, and her char- acter against; insult. He may have hon- ored, as well as defended her; and may, therefore, be justly regarded and se- lected, in the choice of faithful public agents. But the ground of complaint is. that the aiding, by the press, of the eleet ion of an individual, is rewarded, by that same individual, with the gift of moneyed offices. Men are turned out of office, and others put in, and receive salaries limn the public treasury, on the ground, either openly avowed or falsely denied, that they have rendered service in the election of the very individual who makes this removal and makes this appointment. Every man, Sir, must sec thai this is a vital stab at the purity of the press. It not only assails its inde- pendence, by addressing sinister motives to it, but it furnishes from the public treasury the means of exciting these mo- tives. It extends the executive power over the press in a most daring manner. It operates to give a direction to opinion, not favorable to the government, in the aggregate; nut favorable to the Consti- tution and laws; not favorable to the legislature; but favorable to the execu- tive alone. The consequence often is, just what might he looked for, that the portion of the press thus made fast to the executive interest denounces Con- gress, denounces the judiciary, com- plains of the laws, and quarrels with the Constitution. This exercise of the right of appointment to this end is an augmentation, and a vast one, of the executive power, singly and alone. It uses that power strongly against all other branches of the government, and it uses it strongly, too, for any struggle which it may be called on to make with the public opinion of the country. Mr. 1 'resident. I will quit this topic. There is much in it, in my judgment, affect- ing, not only the purity and independ- ence of the press, but also the character and honor, the peace and security, of the government. I leave it, in all its bearings, to the consideration of the people. EXECUTIVE USURPATION. FROM THE SAME SPEECH AT U'OUi [:STEI£. Mn. President, the executive has not only used these unaccustomed means to prevent the passage of laws, hut it lias also refused to enforce the execution of laws actually passed. An eminent instance of tins is found in the course adopted relative to the Indian intercourse law of 1 B< i"_'. I'jKm heing applied to, in behalf of the Missionaries, to execute that law, for their relief and protection, the Presi- dent replied, that the Slate of Georgia having extended he?' laws over the Indian territory, the laics of Congress had thereby }•• • n superseded. This is the substance of Ins answer, as communicated through the Secretary of War. He holds, then, that the law of the State is paramount to the law of Congress. The Supreme Court has adjudged this act of Georgia to be void, as being repugnant to a con- si it utional law of the United States. But the President pays no more regard to this decision than to the act of Con- gress itself. The missionaries remain in prison, held there by a condemnation under a law of a State which the su- preme judicial tribunal has pronounced to be null and void. The Supreme Court have decided that the act of Congress is constitutional; that it is a binding stat- ute; that it has the same force as other laws, and is as much entitled to be obeyed and executed as other laws. The President, on the contrary, declares that the law of Congress has been super- seded by the law of the State, and there- fore he will not carry its provisions into effect. Now we know, Sic, that the Constitution of the United States de- clares, that that Constitution, and all acts of Congress passed in pursuance of it, shall be the supreme law of the land, any thing in any State law to the contrary notwithstanding. This would seem to be a plain case, then, in which the law should be executed. It has been solemnly decided to be in ad force, by the highest judicial authority; its execution is demanded for the relief of free citizens, now suffering the pains of unjust and unlawful imprisonment; yet the President refuses to execute it. In the case of the Chicago Road, some sessions ago, the President ap- proved the bill, but accompanied his approval by a message, saying how Ear he deemed it a proper law, and how far, therefore, it ought to be carried into execution. In the case of the harbor bill of the late session, being applied to by a mem- ber of Congress for directions for carry- ing parts of the law into effect, he declined giving them, and made a dis- tinction between such parts of the law as he should cause to be executed, and such as he should not; and hi> rig] make this distinction has been openly maintained, by those who habitually defend bis measures. Indeed, sir. ti and other instances of liberties taken with plain statute laws, flow naturally from the principles expressly avowed by the President, under bis own hand. In that important document. Sir, upon which it seems to be his fate to stand or to fall before the American people, the veto mes- 23 sage, he holds the following lang 354 EXECUTIVE USURPATION. •• Bach public officer who takes an oath to Bupport the Constitution, swears that be will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood hy others." Mr. President, the general adoption of the sentiments expressed in tins sentence would dissolve our government. It would raise every man's private opinions into a standard for his own conduct; and there certainly is, there can be, no gov- ernment, where every man is to judge for himself of his own rights and his own obligations. Where every one is his own arbiter, force, and not law, is the governing power. He who may judge for himself, and decide for him- self, musi execute his own decisions; and this is the law of force. I confess, Sir, it strikes me with astonishment, that so wild, so disorganizing, a sentiment should be uttered by a President of the United states. I should think it must have escaped from its author through want of reflection, or from the habit of little reflection on such subjects, if I could suppose it possible, that, on a question exciting so much public atten- tion, and of so much national impor- tance, any such extraordinary doctrine could find its way, through inadvertence, into a formal and solemn public act. Standing as it does, it affirms a proposi- tion winch would effectually repeal all constitutional and all legal obligations. The Constitution declares, that every public officer, in the State governments as well as in the general government, shall take an oath to support the Con- stitution of the United States. This is all. Would it not have cast an air of ridicule on the whole provision, if the Constitution had gone on to add the words, '• as he understands it"? What could come nearer to a solemn farce, than to bind a man by oath, and still leave him to be his own interpreter of his own obligation? Sir, those who are to execute the laws have no more a license to construe them for themselves, than those whose only duty is to obey them. Public officers are hound to sup- port the Constitution; private citizens bound to obey it ; and there is no more indulgence granted to the public officer to support the Constitution only as he understands it, than to a private citizen to obey it only ax he understands it; and what is true of the Constitu- tion, in this respect, is equally true of any law. Laws are to be executed, and to be obeyed, not as individuals may in- terpret them, but according to public, authoritative interpretation and adjudi- cation. The sentiment of the message would abrogate the obligation of the whole criminal code. If every man is to judge of the Constitution and the laws for himself, if he is to obey and support them only as he may say he understands them, a revolution, I think, would take place in the administration of justice; and discussions about the law of treason, murder, and arson should be addressed, not to the judicial bench, but to those who might stand charged with such offences. The object of discussion should be, if we run out this notion to its natural extent, to enlighten the cul- prit himself how he ought to understand the law. Mr. President, how is it possible that a sentiment so wild, and so dangerous, so encouraging to all who feel a desire to oppose the laws, and to impair the Constitution, should have been uttered by the President of the United States at this eventful and critical moment? Are we not threatened with dissolution of the Union? Are we not told that the laws of the government shall be openly and directly resisted? Is not the whole country looking, with the utmost anxiety, to what may be the result of these threatened courses? And at this very moment, so full of peril to the state, the chief magistrate puts forth opinions and sentiments as truly sub- versive of all government, as absolutely in conflict with the authority of the Constitution, as the wildest theories of nullification. Mr. President, I have very little regard for the law, or the logic, of nullification. Put there is not an individual in its ranks, capable of putting two ideas together, who, if you will grant him the principles of the veto message, cannot defend all that nullifi- • ■ ; 1 1 ion has ever threatened. EXECUTIVE USURPATION. 855 To make this assertion good, Sir, let us Bee ii"\v the case stands. The Legis- lature of South Carolina, it is said, will nullify the late revenue or tariff law, because, they say, it is not warranted by t lie ('dust it ut ii hi of t lie United States, as they understand the Constitution. They, as well as the President of the United States, have sworn to support the Con- stitution. Both he and they have taken the same oath, in the same words. Now, Sir, since lie claims the right to interpret the Constitution as he pleases, how can hi' deny the same right to them? Is his oath less stringent than theirs? Has he a prerogative of dis- pensation which they do not possess? How can he answer them, when they tell him, that the revenue laws are unconstitutional, as they understand the Constitution, and that therefore they will nullify them? Will he reply to them, according to the doctrines of his annual message in 1830, that precedent has settled the question, if it was ever doubtful? They will answer him in his own words in the veto message, that, in such a case, precedent is not binding. Will he say to them, that the revenue law is a law of Congress, which must be executed until it shall be declared void? They will answer him, that, in other cases, he has himself refused to execute laws of Congress which had not been declared void, but which had been, on the contrary, declared valid. Will he urge the force of judicial decisions? They will answer, that he himself does not admit the binding obligation of such decisions. Sir, the President of the United States is of opinion, that an individual, called on to execute a law, may himself judge of its constitutional validity. Does nullification teach any thing more revolutionary than that? The President is of opinion, that judi- cial interpretations of the Constitution and the laws do not bind the con- sciences, and ought not to bind the conduct, of men. is nullification at all more disorganizing than that? The President is of opinion, that every of- ficer is bound to support the Constitu- tion only according to what ought to be, in his private opinion, it- construction. Has nullification, in its w ildesl flij ht, ever reached to an extravagance like that ? \,,, Sir, never. The docl i ine of nullification, in my judgment a most false, dangerous, and revolutionary doc- trine, IS this: that tht Statt . or -/ Statt . may declare the extent of tie- obliga- tions which its citizens arc under to the United States; in other words, that a state. h\ State laws ami State judica- tures, may conclusively construe the Constitution tor its own citizens. But that every individual may construe it for himself is a refinement on the theory of resistance to constitutional power, a sublimation of the right of being dis- loyal t<> the Union, a free charter for the elevation of private opinion above the authority of the fundamental law of the state, such as was never presented to the public view, and the public aston- ishment, even by nullification itself. Its first appearance is in the veto message. Melancholy, lamentable, indeed, sir, is our condition, when, at a moment of serious danger and wide-spread alarm, such sentiments are found to proceed from the chief magistrate of the govern- ment. Sir, I cannot feel that the Con- stitution is safe in such hands. I can- not feel that the present administration is its fit and proper guardian. But let me ask, Sir, what evidence there is, that the President is himself opposed to the doctrines of nullification: I do not say to the political party which now pushes these doctrines, but to the doctrines themselves. Has he anywhere rebuked them? Has he anywhere dis- couraged them? Has his influence been exerted to inspire respect for the Con- stitution, and to produce obedience to the laws? Has he followed the bright example of his predecessors? Has he held fast by the institutions of the coun- try? Has he summoned the good and the w ise around him? Has he admon- ished the country that the Union is in danger, and called on all the patriotic to come out in its support? Alas! Sir, we have seen nothing, nothing, of all this. Mr. President. I shall not discuss the 356 EXECUTIVE USURPATION. doctrine of nullification. I am sure it can have no friends here. Gloss it and disguise it as we may, it is a pretence incompatible with the authority of the Constitution. If direct separation be not its only mode of operation, separa- tion is, nevertheless, its direct conse- quence. That a State may nullify a law of the Union, and still remain in the Union; that she may have Senators and Representatives in the government, and yel be at liberty to disobey and resist that government; that she may partake in the common councils, and yet not lie hound by their results; that she may control a law of Congress, so that it shall be one thing with her, while it is another thing with the rest of the States; — all these propositions seem to me so absolutely at war with common sense and reason, that I do not understand how any intelligent person can yield the slightest assent to them. Nullification, it is in vain to attempt to conceal it, is dissolution: it is dismemberment; it is the breaking up of the Union. If it shall practically succeed in any one State, from that moment there are twenty-four States in the Union no longer. Now, Sir, I think it exceed- ing probable that the President may come to an open rupture with that por- tion of his original party which now constitutes what is called the Nullifica- tion party. I think it likely he will oppose the proceedings of that party, if they shall adopt measures coming di- rectly in conflict with the laws of the United States. Put how will he op- pose? What will he his course of remedy? Sir, I wish to call the atten- tion of the Convention, and of the peo- ple, earnestly to this question, — How will tie- President attempt to put down nullification, if he shall attempt it at all? - . tor one. I protest in ad\ ance asaintil Buch remedies as 1 have heard hinted. The administration itself keeps a profound Bilence, bul its friends have spoken for it. We are told, sir, that the President will immediately employ military force, and at once block- ade Charleston! A military remedy, a remedy by direct helligerent operation, has been thus BUggested, and nothing else has been suggested, as the intended means of preserving the Union. Sir, there is no little reason to think, that this suggestion is true. We cannot be altogether unmindful of the past, and therefore we cannot he altogether unap- prehensive for the future. For one, Sir. I raise my voice he forehand against the unauthorized employment of military power, and against superseding the au- thority of the laws, by an armed force, under pretence of putting down nullifi- cation. The President lias no authority to blockade Charleston; the President has no authority to employ military force, till he shall be duly required so to do, by law, and by the civil authorities. His duty is to cause the laws to be exe- cuted. Ilis.duty is to support the civil authority. His duty is, if the laws be resisted, to employ the military force of the country, if necessary, for their sup- port and execution ; but to do all this in compliance only with law, and with de- cisions of the tribunals. If, by any in- genious devices, those who resist the laws escape from the reach of judicial authority, as it is now provided to be exercised, it is entirely competent to Congress to make such new provisions as the exigency of the case may de- mand. These provisions undoubtedly would be made. With a constitutional and eflicient head of the government, with an administration really and truly in favor of the Constitution, the coun- try can grapple with nullification. By the force of reason, by the progress of enlightened opinion, by the natural, genuine patriotism of the country, and by the steady and well-sustained opera- tions of law, the progress of disorgan- ization may be successfully checked, and the Union maintained. Let it be re- membered, that, where nullification is most powerful, it is not unopposed. Let it l>e remembered, thai they who would break up the Union by force have to march toward that, object through thick ranks of as brave and good men as the country can show, — men strong in character, strong in intelli- KXKCI riVE USURPATION 57 gence, strong in the purity of their own motives, and ready, always ready, to sacrifice their fortunes and their lives to the preservation of the constitutional union of the States. [f we can relieve the country from an administration which denies to the Constitul ion those powers which are the breath of its life; if we can place the government in the hands of its friends; it' we can Becure it against the dangers of irregular and unlawful military force; if it can be under the lead of an administration whose moderation, firmness, and wis- dom shall inspire confidence and com- mand respect, — we may vet surmount the dangers, numerous and formidable as they are, which surround 118. Sir, I see little prospect of overcom- ing these dangers without a change of men. After all that has passed, the re-election of the present executive w ill give the national sanction to sentiments and to measures which will effectually change the government; which, in short, must destroy the government. If the President be re-elected, with concur- rent and co-operating majorities in both .houses of Congress, I do not see, that, in four years more, all the power which is suffered to remain in the government will not be held by the executive hand. Nullification will proceed, or will be put down by a power as unconstitutional as itself. The revenues will be managed by a treasury bank. The use of the veto will be considered as sanctioned by the public voice. The Senate, if not "cut down," will be bound down, and, the President commanding the army and the navy, and holding all places of trust to be party property, what will then be left, Sir, for constitutional reliance? Sir, we have been accustomed to ven- erate the judiciary, and to repose hopes of safety on that branch of the govern- ment. But let us not deceive ourselves. The judicial power cannot stand for a long time against the executive power. The judges, it is true, hold their places by an independent tenure; but they are mortal. That which is the common lot of humanity must make it Q( cessary to renew the benches of justice. And how will they he tilled/ Don). tie,,. Sir, they will he tin,., i by judge og with the I'm. i, i, .lit in liis constitutional opin- ions* If the court i- fell a. an obstacle, the first opportunity and every opportu- nity will certaiuh be embraced to give it- le-s and less the character oi obstacle, sir, without pursuing I suggestions, I only saj thai the country must prepare itself for any change ill the judicial department such a, il shall deliberately sanction in other depart- ments. But, Sir, what is the prospect of change? Is there any hope that the national sentiment will recover it, ac- customed tone, and restore to the gov- ernment a just and efficient adminis- tration? Sir, if there be something of doubt on this point, there is also something, per- haps much, of hope. The popularity of the present chief magistrate, springing from causes not connected with his ad- ministration of the government, has been great. Public gratitude for mili- tary service has remained fast to him, in defiance of many things in his civil administration calculated to weaken its hold. At length there are indications, not to be mistaken, of new sentiment* and new impressions. At length, a conviction of danger to important in- terests, and to the security of the gov- ernment, has made its Lodgement in the public mind. At length, public senti- ment begins to have its free course and to produce its just effects. I fully be- lieve. Sir. that a great majority of the nation desire a change in the adminis- tration; and that it will be difficult for party organizat ion or party denunciation to suppress the effective utterance that genera] wish. There an- unhappy differences, it is true, about the tit per- son to be successor to the present incum- bent in the chief magistracy; and il i> possible that this disunion may. in the end. defeat the will of the majority. But so far as we agree together, let us act together. Wherever our sentim< concur, let our hand- co-operate. If we cannot at present agree who should ;i;,s EXECUTIVE USURPATION. be President, we are at least agreed who ought nol to be. I fully believe, Sir, that gratifying intelligence is already on the wing. While we are yet deliberat- ing in .Massachusetts. Pennsylvania is ig. Phis week, she elects her mein- to the next Congress. I doubt not the result of that election will show an important change in public sentiment in thai State; nor can I doubt that the greal States adjoining her, holding similar constitutional principles and having similar interests, will feel the impulse of the same causes which affect her. The people of the United States, by a countless majority, are attached to the ('(institution. If they shall be con- vinced that it is in danger, they will come to its rescue, and will save it. Jt cannot be destroyed, even now, if they will undertake its guardianship and protection. Bui suppose, Sir, there was less hope than there is, would that consideration weaken the force of our obligations? Are we at a post which we are at liberty to desert when it becomes difficult to hold it? May we fly at the approach of clanger? Does our fidelity to the Con- stitution require no more of us than to enjoy its blessings, to bask in the pros- perity which it has shed around us and our fathers? and are we at liberty to abandon it in the hour of its peril, or to make for it but a faint and heartless struggle, for the want of encourage- ment and the want of hope? Sir, if no State come to our succor, if everywhere i Ise the contest should be given up, here let it be protracted to I he Last moment. Here, where the first blood of the Revo- lution was Shed, let the last effort be made for that which is the greatesl jing obtained by the Revolution, a i united government. Sir, in our endeavors to maintain our existing forms of government, we are acting not for ourselves alone, but for the great cause of constitutional Liberty all over the globe. We are trustees holding a sacred treasure, in which all the lovers of freedom have, a stake. Not only in revolutionized France, where there are no longer subjects, where the monarch can no longer say, I am the state; not only iu reformed England, where our principles, our institutions, our practice of free government, are now daily quoted and commended; but in the depths of Germany, also, and among the desolated fields and the still smoking ashes of Poland, prayers are uttered for the preservation of our union and happiness. We are surrounded, Sir, by a cloud of witnesses. The gaze of the sons of lib- erty, everywhere, is upon us, anxiously, intently, upon us. They may see us fall in the struggle for our Constitution and government, but Heaven forbid that they should see us recreant. At least, Sir, let the star of Massa- chusetts be the last which shall be seen to fall from heaven, and to plunge into the utter darkness of disunion. Let her shrink back, let her hold others back if she can, at any rate, let her keep her- self back, from this gulf, full at once of fire and of blackness; yes, Sir, as far as human foresight can scan, or human imagination fathom, full of the fire and the blood of civil war, and of the thick darkness of general political disgrace, ignominy, and ruin. Though the worst, may happen that can happen, and though she may not be able to prevent the catastrophe, yet let her maintain her own integrity, her own high honor, her own unwavering fidelity, so that with respecl and decency, though with a broken and a bleeding heart, she may pay the last tribute to a glorious, de- parted, free Constitution. THE NATURAL HATRED OF THE RICH. THE POOR TO FROM A SPEECH IN TIIF SENATE OF THE UNITED SI LTES, JANUARY 31ht, 1834, ON "THE REMOVAL OF THE DEPOSITS." Sir, there is one other subject on which I wish to raise my voice. There is a topic which I perceive is to be- come the general war-cry of party, on which L take the liberty to warn the country against delusion. Sir, the cry is to be raised that tins is a question between the poor and the rich. I know, Sir, it has been proclaimed, that one thing was certain, that there was always a hatred on the part of the poor toward the rich; and that this hatred would support the late measures, and the put- ting down of the bank. Sir, I will not be silent at the threat of such a detesta- ble fraud on public opinion. If but ten men, or one man, in the nation will hear my voice, I will still warn them against this attempted imposition. Mr. President, this is an eventful mo- ment. On the great questions which occupy us, we all look for some decisive movement of public opinion. As I w Lsh that movement to be free, intelligent, and unbiassed, the true manifestation of the public will, I desire to prepare the country for another appeal, which I perceive is about to be made to popular prejudice, another attempt to obscure all distinct views of the public good, to overwhelm all patriotism and all enlight- ened self-interest, by loud cries against false danger, and by exciting the pas- sions of one class against another. I am not mistaken in the omen; I see the magazine whence the weapons of this warfare are to be drawn. I hear already the diu of the hammering of arms pre- paratory to the combat. They may be such arms, perhaps, as reason, and jus- tice, and honest patriotism cannot resist. Every effort at resistance, it is possible, may be feeble and powerless; bat, for one, I shall make an effort, — an effort to be begun now, and to be carried on and continued, with untiring zeal, till the end of the contest . Sir, I see, in those vehicles wbicb carry to the people sentiments from high places, plain declarations thai the pres- ent controversy is but a strife beta one part of the community and another. I hear it boasted as the unfailing secu- rity, the solid ground, never to be shaken, on which recent measures rest, that the poor naturally hate the rich. I know that, under the cover of the roofs of the Capitol, within the last twenty-four hours, among men sent here to devise means for the public Bafety and the public good, it has been vaunted forth, as matter of boast and triumph, thai one cause existed powerful enough t<> support every thing and to defend every thing; and that was, the natural hatr>d of the poor to th>' rich. Sir, I pronounce the author of such sentiments to be guilty of attempting a detestable fraud on the community; a double fraud; a fraud which is to cheat men out of their property, and out of the earnings of their labor, by first cheating them out of their understandings. •' The natural hatred of the poor to the rich!" Sir, it shall not he till the last moment of my existence, — it shall 3G0 THE NATURAL HATRED OF THE POOR TO THE RICH. be only when I am drawn to the verge of oblivion, when I shall cease to have respect or affection for any thing on earth, — that I will believe the people of the United States capable of being effectually deluded, cajoled, and driven almiii in In rds, by such abominable frauds as this. If they shall sink to that point, if they so far cease to be men, thinking men, intelligent men, as tu yield to such pretences and such clamor, they will be slaves already ; slaves to their own passions, slaves to the fraud and knavery of pretended friends. They will deserve to be blotted out of all the records of freedom ; they ought not to dishonor the cause of self- government, by attempting any longer to exercise it; they ought to keep their unworthy hands entirely off from the cause of republican liberty, if they are capable of being the victims of artifices so shallow, of tricks so stale, so thread- bare, so often practised, so much worn out, on serfs and slaves. "The natural hatred of the poor against the rich!' 1 "The danger of a moneyed aristocracy!" "A power as great and dangerous as that resisted by the Revolution!'' "A call to a new declaration of independence!" Sir, I admonish the people against the object of outcries like these. I admonish every industrious laborer in the country to be on his guard against such delusion. I tell him the attempt is to play off his passions against his interests, and to prevail on him, in the name of liberty, to destroy all the fruits of liberty; in the name of patriotism, to injure and afflict his country; and in the name of his own independence, to destroy that very Independence, and make him a beggar and a slave. Has he a dollar'/ He is advised to do that which will de- stroy half its value. Has he hands to labor? Lei him rather fold them, and sit still, than be pushed on, by fraud and artifice, to Bupporl measures which will render bis labor useless and hope- Sir, the very man. of all others, who has the deepesl interesl in a sound cur- rency, and who Buffers mosl by mis- chievous legislation in money matters, is the man who earns his daily bread by his daily toil. A depreciated cur- rency, sudden changes of prices, paper money, falling between morning and noon, and falling still lower between noon and night, — these things consti- tute the very harvest-time of specula- tors, and of the whole race of those who are at once idle and crafty ; and of that other race, too, the Catilines of all times, marked, so as to be known for ever by one stroke of the historian's pen, those greedy of other men's property and prodigal of their own. Capitalists, too, may outlive such times. They may either prey on the earnings of labor, by their cent, per cent., or they may hoard. But the laboring man, what can he hoard? Preying on nobody, he becomes the prey of all. His property is in his hands. His reliance, his fund, his pro- ductive freehold, his all, is his labor. Whether he work on his own small cap- ital, or another's, his living is still earned by his industry; and when the money of the country becomes depreciated and debased, whether it be adulterated coin or paper without credit, that industry is robbed of its reward. He then labors for a country whose laws cheat him out of his bread. I would say to every owner of every quarter-section of land in the West, I would say to every man in the East who follows his own plough, and to every mechanic, artisan, and la- borer in every city in the country, — I would say to every man, everywhere, who wishes by honest means to gain an honest living, "Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. Whoever attempts, under whatever popular cry, to shake the stability of the public currency, bring on distress in money matters, and drive the country into the use of paper money, stabs your interest and your happiness to the heart." The herd of hungry wolves who live on other men's earnings will rejoice in such a state of things. A system which absorbs into their pockets the fruits of other men's industry is the very system for them. A government that produces or countenances uncertainty, Huctua- THE NATURAL HATRED OF Tin: poou to TI1K RICH. 361 tions, violent risings and fallings in prices, and, finally, paper money, is a government exactly after their own heart. Hence these men are always for change. They will never lei well enough alone. A condition of public affairs in which property is safe, industry certain of its reward, and every man secure in liis own hard-earned gains, is no para- dise for them. Give them just the re- verse of this state of things; bring on change, and change after change; let it not be known to-day what will be the value of property to-morrow; let no man be able to say whether the money in his pockets at night will be money or worth- less rags in the morning; and depress labor till double work shall earn but half a living, — give them this state of things, and you give them the consum- mation of their earthly bliss. Sir, the great interest of this great country, the producing cause of all its prosperity, is labor! labor! labor! We are a laboring community. A vast ma- jority of us all live by industry and ac- tual employment in some of their forms. The Constitution was made to protect this industry, to give it both encourage- ment and security; but, above all, se- curity. To that very end, with that precise object in view, power was given to Congress over the currency, and over the money system of the country. In forty years' experience, we have Found nothing at all adequate to the beneficial execution of this tragi bul a well-con- ducted national bank. Thai has been tried, returned to, tried again, and al- ways found BUCCesaful. If it !"■ not lie- proper thing for as, lei it be Boberly argued against; lei something better be proposed; lei the country examine the matter coolly, and decide Eor itself. But whoever shall attempt to carry a question of this kind by clamor, and violence, and prejudice; whoever would rouse the people ley appeal-;, fal-e and fraudulent appeals, to their love of inde- pendence, to resist the establishment of a useful institution, because it IS a bank, and deals in money, and who artfully urges these appeals wherever he thinks there is more of honest feeling than of enlightened judgment, — means nothing but deception. And whoever has tie- wickedness to conceive, and the hardi- hood to avow, a purpose to break down what has been found, in forty years' experience, essential to the protecl of all interests, by arraying one class against another, and by acting on such a principle as that the poor always hate the rich, shows himself the reckless ene- my of all. An enemy to his whole country, to all classes, and to every man in it, he deserves to be marked espe- cially as the poor man's curse! A REDEEMABLE PAPER CURRENCY. FROM A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON TI1E22D OF FEBRUARY, 1834. Mr. President. — The honorable member from Georgia stated yesterday, more distinctly than I have before learned it. what that experiment is which the government is now trying on the revenues and the currency, and, I may add, on the commerce, manufactures, and agri- culture of this country. If I rightly apprehend him, this experiment is an attempt to return to an exclusive specie currency, first, by employing the State banks as a substitute for the Bank of the United States; and then by dispens- ing with the use of the State banks themselves. This. Sir. is the experiment. I thank the gentleman for thus stating its char- acter. He has done his duty, and dealt fairly with the people, by this exhibi- tion of what the views of the executive government are, at this interesting mo- ment, it is certainly most proper that tie- people should see distinctly to what end or tor what object it is that so much suffering is already upon them, and so much more already in visible and near prospect. And now. sir, is it possible, — is it I — Lble that twelve millions of intelli- gent ] pie can be expected voluntarily to subjed themselves to severe distress, of unknown duration, for the purpose of making trial of an experiment like this? Will a nation thai is intelligent, well informed of its own interest, en- lightened, ami capable of Belf-govern- ment, submit to Buffer embarrass a\ in all its pursuits, loss of capital, loss of employment, and a sudden and dead stop in its onward movement in the path of prosperity and wealth, until it shall be ascertained whether this new-hatched theory shall answer the hopes of those who have devised it? Is the country to be persuaded to bear every thing, and bear patiently, until the operation of such an experiment, adopted for such an avowed object, and adopted, too, without the co-operation or consent of Congress, and by the executive power alone, shall exhibit its results? In the name of the hundreds of thou- sands of our suffering fellow-citizens, I ask, for what reasonable end is this ex- periment to be tried? What great and good object, worth so much cost, is it to accomplish ? What enormous evil is to be remedied by all this inconvenience and all this suffering? What great ca- lamity is to be averted? Have the peo- ple thronged our doors, and loaded our tables with petitions for relief against the pressure of some political mischief, some notorious misrule, which this ex- periment is to redress? Has it been re- sorted to in an hour of misfortune, ca- lamity, or peril, to save the state? h it a measure of remedy, yielded to the im- portunate cries of an agitated and dis- tressed nation? bar. Sir, very far from all this. There was no calamity, there was no suffering, there was no peril, when these measures began. At the moment when this experiment was en- tered upon, these twelve millions of peo- ple were prosperous and happy, not only A REDEEMABLE l'APKR CURKFACY. 863 beyond the example of all others, but even beyond their own example in times past. There was no pressure of public or private distress throughout tin- whole land. AH business was prosperous, all industry was rewarded, and cheerful- ness and content universally prevailed, ret, iii the midst of all this enjoyment, with BO much to heighten and so little to mar it, this experiment comes upon OS, to harass and oppress us at present, and to affright us for the future. Sir, it is incredible; the world abroad will not believe it ; it is difficult even for us to credit, who see it with our own eves, that the country, at such a moment, should put itself upon an experiment fraught with such immediate and over- whelming evils, and threatening the. property and the employments of the people, and all their social and political blessings, with severe and long-endur- ing future inflictions. And this experiment, with all its cost, is to be tried, for what? Why, simply, Sir, to enable us to try another "ex- periment"; and that other experiment is, to see whether an exclusive specie currency may not be better than a cur- rency partly specie and partly bank paper! The object which it is hoped we may effect, by patiently treading this path of endurance, is to banish all bank paper, of all kinds, and to have coined money, and coined money only, as the actual currency of the country! Now, Sir, I altogether deny that such an object is at all desirable, even if it could be attained. I know, indeed, that all paper ought to circulate on a specie basis; that all bank-notes, to be safe, must be convertible into gold and silver at the will of the holder; and I admit, too, that the issuing of very small notes by many of the State banks has too much reduced the amount of specie actually circulating. It may be remem- bered that I called the attention of Con- gress to this subject in 1832, and that the bill which then passed both houses for renewing the bank charter contained a provision designed to produce some restraint on the circulation of very small notes. I admit there ar Dvenienoes in making Bmall payments in BjKvfai and I have always, nol oTlTyadmitted, but contended, that, if all issues of bank- notes under five dollars were discontin- ued, much men- specie would be retained in the country, and in the circulation; and thai great security would resuK from this. Bui we are now debating about an exclusive specie currency; and I deny that an exclusive specie currency is the besl currency for any highly commercial country; and I deny, especially, that such a currency would be best suited to the condition and circumstances of the. United States. With the enlightened writers and practical statesmen of all commercial communities in modern times, I have supposed it to be admit- ted that a well regulated, properly re- strained, safely limited paper currency, circulating on an adequate specie basis, was a thing to be desired, a political public advantage to be obtained, if it might be obtained : and, more espe- cially, I have supposed that in a new country, with resources not yet half developed, with a rapidly increasing population and a constant demand for more and more capital. — that is to say. in just such a country as the United States are, I have supposed that it was admitted that there are particular and extraordinary advantages in a safe and well regulated paper currency; because in such a country well regulated bank paper not only supplies a convenient medium of payments and of exchange, but also, by the expansion of that me- dium in a reasonable and Bafe degree, the amount of circulation is kept more nearly commensurate with the constant- ly increasing amount of property; and an extended capital, in the shape of credit, comes to the aid of the enter- prising and the industrious. It is pre- cisely on this credit, created by reason- able expansion of the currency in a new country, that men of small capital carry on their business. It is exactly by mean- of this, that industry and enter- prise are stimulated. If we were driven back to an exclusively metallic curren- cy, the necessary and inevitaM 364 A REDEEMABLE TAPER CURRENCY. quence would be, that all trade would fall into the hands of large capitalists. This is SO plain, that no man of reflec- tion can doubt it. I know not, there- Eore, in what words to express my as- tonishment, when I hear it said that the present measures of government are in- tended for the good of the many instead of tin' tew. tor the benefit of the poor, and against the rich; and when 1 hear it proposed, at the same moment, to do away with the whole system of credit, and place all trade and commerce, there- fore, in the hands of those who have ade- quate capital to carry them on without the use of any credit at all. This. Sir, would be dividing society, by a precise, distinct, and well-defined line, into two classes: first, the small class, who have competent capital for trade, when credit is out of the question; and, secondly, the vastly numerous class of those whose living must become, in such a state of things, a mere manual occupation, with- out the use of capital or of any substi- tute for it. Now, Sir, it is the effect of a well- regulated system of paper credit to break in upon this line thus dividing the many from the few, and to enable more or less of the more numerous class to pass over it, and to participate in the profits of capital by means of a safe and conven- ient substitute for capital; and thus to diffuse far more widely the general earn- ings, and therefore the general prosper- ity and happiness, of society. Every man of observation must have witnessed, in this country, that men of heavy capi- tal have constantly complained of bank circulation, and a consequent credit sys- tem, a- injurious to the rightsof capital. Ties undoubtedly feel its effects. All thai is gained by the use of credit is jii-t so much subtracted from the amount of their own accumulations, and so much the mole ha- gone to the benefitof those who bestow their own labor and indus- try on capital in small amounts. To the great majority, this has been of incal- culable benefil in the United States; and therefore, Sir, whoever attempts the en- tile overthrow of the Bystem of hank credit aims a deadly blow at the interest of that great and industrious class, who, having some capital, cannot, neverthe- less, transact business without some credit, lb- can mean nothing else, if he have any intelligible meaning at all, than to turn all such persons over to the long list of mere manual laborers. What else can they do, with not enough of absolute capital, and with no credit? This, Sir, this is the true tendency and the unavoidable result of these measures, which have been undertaken with the patriotic object of assisting the poor against the rich! I am well aware that bank credit may be abused. I know that there is another extreme, exactly the opposite of that of which I have now been speaking, and no less sedulously to be avoided. I know that the issue of bank paper may be- come excessive; that depreciation will then follow ; and that the evils, the losses, and the frauds consequent on a disordered currency fall on the rich and the poor together, but with especial weight of ruin on the poor. 1 know that, the system of bank credit must al- ways rest on a specie basis, and that it constantly needs to be strictly guarded and properly restrained; and it may be so guarded and restrained. We need not give up the good which belongs to it, through fear of the evils which may follow from its abuse. "We have the power to take security against these evils. It is our business, as statesmen, to adopt that security ; it is our business not to prostrate, or attempt to prostrate, the system, but to use those means of pre- caution, restraint, and correction which experience has sanctioned, and which are ready at our hands. It would be to our everlasting re- proach, it would be placing us below the general level of the intelligence of civil- ized states, to admit that we cannot contrive means to enjoy the benefits of bank circulation, and of avoiding, at the same time, its dangers. Indeed, Sir, no contrivance is necessary. It is eon- trivaurr, and the love of contrivance, that spoil all. We are destroying our- Belvea by a remedy which no evil called for. We are ruining perfect health by A REDEEM IBLE PAPER CURRENl V nostrums and quackery. We have lived hitherto under a well constructed, prac- tical, and beneficial system; a Bystem not surpassed by any in the world; and it seems to me to be presuming largely, largely indeed, on the credulity and self- denial of the people, to rush with such sudden and impetuous haste into new Bchemes and new theories, to overturn and annihilate all that we have BO long found useful. Our system has hitherto been one in which paper has been circulating on the strength of a specie basis : that is to say, when every bank-note was convertible into specie at the will of the holder. This has 1 n OUT guard against excess. While hanks are bound to redeem their bills by paying gold and silver on de- mand, and are at all times able to do this, the currency is safe and conven- ient. Such a currency is not paper money, in its odious sense. It is not like the Continental paper of Revolu- tionary times; it is not like the worth- less bills of hanks which have suspended specie payments. On the contrary, it is the representative of gold and silver, and convertible into gold and silver on demand, and therefore answers the purposes of gold and silver; and so long as its credit is in this way sustained, it is the cheapest, the best, and the most convenient circulating medium. I have already endeavored to warn the country against irredeemable paper; against the paper of banks which do not pay specie for their own notes; against that miser- able, abominable, and fraudulent policy, which attempts to give value to any paper, of any bank, one single moment longer than such paper is redeemable on demand in gold and silver. I wish most solemnly and earnestly to repeat thai warning. I see danger of that state of things ahead. 1 see imminent danger that a portion of the State banks will Btop specie payments. The late measure of the Secretary, and the infatuation with which it seems to be supported, tend di- rectly and strongly to that result. IV der pretence, then, of a design to return to a currency which shall be all specie, we are likely to have a currency in which there shall be do specie at all. We are in danger of being overwhelmed with irredeemable paper, mere paper, r< | Benting not gold nor silver; no, Sir, rep- resenting nothing but broken promi bad faith, bankrupt corporations, cheat- ed creditors, and a ruined people. This, I fear. Nil-, may be the consequence, al- ready alarmingly near, of fchifl alt nipt, unwise if it be real, and grossly fraudu- lent if it be only pretended, of establish- ing an exclusively hard-monej currency. But, sir, if this Bhock could !»• avoid- ed, and if we could reach the objecl of an exclusive metallic circulation, we should find in that very success serious and insurmountable inconveniences. U e require neither irredeemable paper, nor yet exclusively hard money. We require a mixed system. We require Bpecie, and we require, too, good bank paper, found- ed on specie, representing specie, and convertible into specie on demand. We require, in short, just such a currency as we have long enjoyed, and the advan- tages of which we seem now, with un- accountable rashness, about to throw- away. I avow myself, therefore, decidedly against the object of a return to an ex- clusive specie currency. I find great difficulty, I confess, in believing any man serious in avowing such an object. It seems to me rather a subject for ridi- cule, at this age of the world, than for sober argument. Hut if it be true that any are serious for the return of the gold and silver age, I am seriously against it. Let us, Sir. anticipate, in imagina- tion, the accomplishment of this grand experiment. Let us Buppose that, at this moment, all bank paper were out of exist e and the COUntl'J full of specie. Where, Sir, should we put it. ami what should we do with it? Should we ship it, by cargoes, every day, from New York to New Orleans, and from New Orleans back to New York? Shouldwe encumber the turnpikes, the railroads, and the steamboats with it, whenever purchases and sales were to be made in one place of articles to be transported to another? The carriage of the money would, in some at half as much :;.;.; A REDEEMABLE PAPER CURRENCY. as the carriage of the goods. Sir, the very first day, under sueli a state of tilings, we should set ourselves about the creatioo of banks. This would im- mediately become necessary and una- voidable. We may assure ourselves, therefore, without danger of mistake, that the idea of an exclusively metallic currency is totally incompatible, in the existing state of the world, with an ac- tive and extensive commerce. It is in- consistent, too, with the greatest good of the greatest number; and therefore I oppose it. But, Sir, how are we to get through the first experiment, so as to be able to try that which is to be final and ulti- mate, that is to say, how are we to get rid of the State banks ? How is this to be accomplished ? Of the Bank of the United Slates, indeed, we may free our- selves readily; but how are we to anni- hilate the State banks ? We did not speak them into being; we cannot speak them out of being. They did not origi- nate in any exercise of our power; nor do they owe their continuance to our in- dulgence. They are responsible to the Si ates ; to us they are irresponsible. We cannot act upon them; we can only act with them; and the expectation, as it would appear, is, that, by zealously co- operating with the government in carry- ing into operation its new theory, they may disprove the necessity of their own existence, and fairly work themselves out of the world ! Sir, I ask once more, [s a great and intelligent community to endure patiently all sorts of suffering for fantasies like these? How charmingly practicable, how delightfully probable, all this looks! I find it impossible, Mr. President, to believe that the removal of the deposits arose in any such purpose as is now avowed. I believe all this to be an after-thought. The removal was re- solved on as a strong measure against the bank; and now that it has been attended with consequences not at all apprehended from it, instead of being promptly retracted, as it should have 1 n, it is to be justified on the ground of a grand experiment, above the reach of common sagacity, and dropped down, as it were, from the clouds, " to witch the world with noble policy." It is not credible, not possible, Sir, that, six months ago, the administration sud- denly started off to astonish mankind with its new inventions in politics, and that it then began its magnificent project by removing the deposits as its first op- eration. No, Sir, no such thing. The removal of the deposits was a blow at the bank, and nothing more; and if it had succeeded, we should have heard nothing of any project for the final put- ting down of all State banks. No. Sir, not one word. "\\V should have heard, on the contrary, only of their usefulness, their excellence, and their exact adapta- tion to the uses and necessities of this government. But the experiment of making successful use of State banks having failed, completely failed, in this tin 1 very first endeavor; the State banks having already proved themselves not a hie to fill the place and perform the duties of a national bank, although highly useful in their appropriate sphere; and the disastrous consequences of the measures of government coming thick and fast upon us, the professed object of the whole movement is at once changed, and the cry now is, Down with all the State banks ! Down with all the State banks! and let us return to our embraces of solid gold and solid silver! THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED BTATES, ON THE 7th OF MAY, 1834, ON TIIK sli:.u;K THE PRESIDENT'S PBOTES1 AGAINST THE RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE OF THE 28th 01 MABCH. Mr. President, — I feel the magni- tude of this question. We are coming to a vote which cannot fail to produce impor- tant effects on the character of the Senate, and the character of the government. Unhappily, Sir, the Senate finds itself involved in a controversy with the Pres- ident of the United States; a man who has rendered most distinguished services to his country, who has hitherto pos- sessed a degree of popular favor per- haps never exceeded, and whose honesty of motive and integrity of purpose are still admitted by those who maintain that his administration has fallen into lamentable errors. On some of the interesting questions in regard to which the President and Senate hold opposite opinions, the more popular branch of the legislature concurs with the executive. It is not to be concealed that the Senate is engaged against im- posing odds. It can sustain itself only by its own prudence and the justice of its cause. It has no patronage by which to secure friends ; it can raise up no ad- vocates through the dispensation of fa- vors, for it has no favors to dispense. Its very constitution, as a body whose members are elected for a long term, is capable of being rendered obnoxious, and is daily made the subject of oppro- brious remark. It is already denounced as independent of the people, and aris- tocratic. Nor is it, like the other house, powerful in its numbers; not being, like that, so large as that its members come constantly in direct and extensive con- tact with the whole people. Under these disadvantages, sir, which, we maj be assured, will be pressed and urged to the utmost length, there is bul one course for us. The Senate musl stand on it- rendered reasons. It must put forth the grounds of its proceedings, and it must then rely on the intelligence and patri- otism of the people to carry it through the contest. As an individual member of the Sen- ate, it gives me great pain to be engaged in such a conflict with the executive government. The occurrences of tin- last session are fresh in the recollection of all of us; and having felt it fco Li- my duty, at that time, to give my cor- dial support to highly important meas- ures of the administration, I ardently hoped that nothing might occur t<> place me afterwards in an attitude of opposi- tion. In all respects, and in everj way, it would have been far more agreeable to me to find nothing in the measun the executive government which I could not cheerfully support. The present occasion of difference has not been sought or made by me. It is thrusl upon me, in opposition to strong opin- ions and wishes, on my part not con- cealed. The interference with the public deposits dispelled all hope of continued concurrence with the administration, and was a measure so uncalled for, so unnecessary, and, in my judgment, so illegal and indefensible, that, with what- ever reluctance it might be opposed by me, opposition was unavoidable. 3C8 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. Tin- paper before us has grown out of this interference. It is a paper which cannot be treated with indifference. The doctrines which it advances, the circumstances which have attended its transmission to the Senate, and the manner in which the Senate may now dispose of it, will form a memorable era in the history of the government. We are either to enter it on our journals, concur in its sentiments, and submit to its rebuke, or we must answer it, with the respect due to the chief magistrate, lmt with such animadversion on its doc- trines as they deserve, and with the firmness imposed upon us by our public duties. 1 shall proceed, then, Sir, to consider the circumstances which gave rise to this Protest; to examine the principles which it attempts to establish; and to compare those principles with the Con- stitution and the laws. On the 28th day of March, the Senate adopted a resolution declaring that, " in the late executive proceedings in relation to the public revenue, the President had assumed a power not conferred by the Constitution and laws, but in deroga- tion of both." In that resolution I con- curred. It is not a direct question, now again before us. whether the President really had assumed such illegal power; that point is decided, so far as the Senate ever can decide it. But the Protest de- nies that, supposing the President to have assumed such illegal power, the S'liate could properly pass the resolu- tion; or, what is the same thing, it de- nies that the Senate could, in this way, express any opinion about it. It denies that the Senate has any right, by reso- lution, in this or any other case, to ex- • disapprobation of the President 's conduct, let thatconduct be what it may; and this, one of the leading doctrines of the Protest, I propose to consider. Bui a • I concurred in the resold ion of the 28th of .March, and did ool I rouble the Senate, at t hat I ime, w it h any statement of my own reasons, I will avail myself of this opportunity to explain, .shortly, what those reasons were. In the first place, then, I have to say, that I did not vote for the resolution on the mere ground of the removal of Mr. Duane from the office of Secretary of the Treasury. Although I disapprove of the removal altogether, yet the power of removal does exist in the President. according to the established construction of the Constitution; and therefore, al- though in a particular case it may be abused, and, in my opinion, was abused in this case, yet its exercise cannot be justly said to be an assumption or usur- pation. We must all agree that Mr. Duane is out of office. He has, there- fore, been removed by a power con- stitutionally competent to remove him, whatever may be thought of the exercise of that power under the circumstances of the case. If, then, the act of removing the Sec- retary be not the assumption of power which the resolution declares, in what is that assumption found? Before giving a precise answer to this inquiry, allow me to recur to some of the principal previous events. At the end of the last session of Con- gress, the public moneys of the United States were still in their proper place. That place was fixed by the law of the land, and no power of change was con- ferred on any other human being than the Secretary of the Treasury. On him the power of change was conferred, to be exercised by himself, if emergency should arise, and to be exercised for reasons which he was bound to lay be- fore Congress. No other officer of the government had the slightest pretence of authority to lay his hand on these moneys for the purpose of changing the place of their custody. All the other heads of departments together could not touch them. The President could not touch them. The power of change was a trust confided to the discretion of the Secretary, and to his discretion alone. The President had no more authority to take upon himself this duty, thus as- signed expressly by law to the Secretary, than he had to make the annual report to Congress, or the annual commercial statements, or to perform any other ser- THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTES I 869 vice which the law Bpeciallj requires of the Secretary. He mighl jus! as well sign the warrants for moneys, in the or- dinary daily disbursements of govern- ment, instead of the Secretary. The statute had assigned the especial dut\ of removing the deposits, if removed at all, to tho Secretary of the Treasury, and to him alone. The consideration of the propriety or necessity of removal must be the consideration of the Secre- tary; the decision to remove, his decis- ion; and the act of removal, his act. Now, Sir, on the isth day of Septem- ber last, a resolution was taken to remove these deposits from their legislative, that is to say, their Legal custody. Whose resolution was this? On the 1st of Octo- ber, they were removed. By whose power was this dune? The papers necessary ti' accomplish the removal (that is, the orders and drafts) are, it is true, signed by the Secretary. The President's name is not subscribed to them; nor does the Secretary, in any of them, recite or de- clare that he does the act by direction of the President, or on the President's responsibility. In form, the whole pro- ceeding is the proceeding of the Secre- tary, and, as snch, had the legal effect. The deposits were removed. But whose act was it, in truth and reality? Whose will accomplished it? On whose re- sponsibility was it adopted? These questions are all explicitly an- swered by the President himself, in the paper, under his own hand, read to the Cahinet on the ISth of September, and published by his authority. In this pa- per the President declares, in 80 many v. ords, that he begs his Cabinet to con- sider the proposed measure as his own; that its responsibility has been assumed by him; and that he names the first day of October as a period proper for its execution. Now, Sir, it is precisely this which I deem an assumption of power not con- ferred by the Constitution and laws. 1 think the law did not give this author- ity to the President, nor impose on him the responsibility of its exercise. It is evident that, in this removal, the Sec- retary was in reality nothing but the 24 scribe; b< «;i the pen in the lv band, and no more. Nothing dep nded mi his discretion, bis judgment, or his responsibility. The removal, indeed, has been admitted ami defended in the Senate, as the direct acl of the Presi- ded himself. This, Sir, is what I call assumption of power. If the President had issued an order fol the removal of the deposits in his o\\ □ name, and un- der his own hand, it would have been an illegal order, and the bank would not have been at liberty to obey it. I th ■ same reason, if the Secretary's order had recited thai it was issued by the President's direction, and on the Presi- dent's authority, it would have Bhown On its face that it was illegal and in- valid. No one can doubl that. The act of removal, to be lawful, must be the bond fide act of the Secretary; his judgment, the result of his deliberations, the volition of his mind. All are able to see the difference between the power to remove the Secretary from office, and the power to control him, in all or any of his duties, while in office. The law- charges the officer, whoever he may be, with the performance of certain duties. The President, with the consent of the Senate, appoints an individual to be such officer; and this individual he may remove, if he so please; but, until re- moved, he is the officer, and remains charged with the duties of his station, duties which nobody else can perform, and for the neglect or violation of which he is liable to be imp ached. The distinction is visible and broad between the power of removal and the power to control an officer not removed. The President, it is true, may termi- nate his political life; but he cannot control his powers and functions, ami act upon him as a merp machine, while he is allowed tn live. The power of control and direction, nowhere given, certainly, by any express provision of the Consti- tution Or laws, is derived, by those who maintain it, from the right of removal; that is to say, it is a constructive power; it has no express warrant in the Consti- tution. A very important power, then, is raised by construction in the first 1 370 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. place; and being (lnis raised, it becomes a fountain out of which other important powers, raised also by construction, are to be supplied. There is no little dan- ger that such a mode of reasoning may be carried too far. It cannot be main- tained that the power of direct control necessarily Hows from the power of re- moval. Suppose it had been decided in 1789, when the question was debated, that the President does not possess the power of removal; will it be contended, that, in that case, his right of interfer- ence with the acts and duties of execu- tive officers would be less than it now is? The reason of the thing would seem to be the other way. If the Presi- dent may remove an incumbent when he becomes satisfied of his unfaithful- ness and incapacity, there would appear to be less necessity to give him also a right of control, than there would be if he could not remove him. We may try this question by suppos- ing it to arise in a judicial proceeding. If the Secretary of the Treasury were impeached for removing the deposits, could he justify himself by saying that he did it by the President's direction? If he could, then no executive officer could ever be impeached who obeys the President; and the whole notion of mak- ing such officers impeachable at all would be farcical. If he could not so justify himself, (and all will allow he could not.) the reason can only be that the act of removal is his own act; the power, a power confided to him, for the just exercise of which the law looks to his discretion, his honesty, and his di- rect responsibility. Now. Sir, the President wishes the world to understand that he himself decided on tin- question <>f the removal of the deposits; that he took the whole responsibility of the measure upon him- self; that, he wished it to be considered his own act; that he not only himself decided that tie- thing should be done, but regulated iis details also, and named the 'lay for carrying it into effect. I have alwaye entertained a very erro- neous view of the partition of powers, and of tie- tine nature of official respon- sibility under our Constitution, if this be not a plain case of the assumption of power. The legislature had fixed a place, by law, for the keeping of the public money. They had, at the same time and by the same law, created and con- ferred a power of removal, to be exer- cised contingently. This power they had vested in the Secretary, by express words. The law did not say that the deposits should be made in the bank, unless the President should order other- wise; but it did say that they should be made there, unless the Secretary of the Treasury should order otherwise. I put it to the plain sense and common candor of all men, whether the dis- cretion thus to be exercised over the subject was not the Secretary's own personal discretion; and whether, there- fore, the interposition of the authority of another, acting directly and conclu- sively on the subject, deciding the whole question, even in its particulars and de- tails, be not an assumption of power? The Senate regarded this interposition as an encroachment by the executive on other branches of the government ; as an interference with the legislative disposition of the public treasure. It was strongly and forcibly urged, yester- day, by the honorable member from South Carolina, that the true and only mode of preserving any balance of power, in mixed governments, is to keep an exact balance. This is very true, and to this end encroachment must be resisted at the first step. The ques- tion is, therefore, whether, upon the true principles of the Constitution, this exercise of power by the President can be justified. Whether the consequen- ces be prejudicial or not, if there be an illegal exercise of power, it is to be resisted in the proper manner. Even if no harm or inconvenience result from transgressing the boundary, the intru- sion is not to be suffered to pass un- noticed. Every encroachment, great or small, is important enough to awaken the attention of those who are intrusted with (he preservation of a constitutional government. We are not to wait till THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST 371 great public mischiefs come, till the gov- ernment is overthrown, or liberty itself put into extreme jeopardy. We should not be worthy sons of our fathers were we so to regard great questions affecting the general freedom. Those fathers accomplished the Revolution on a strict question of principle. The Parliaraenl of Great Britain asserted a right to tax the Colonies in all cases whatsoever; and it was precisely on this question that they made, the Revolution turn. The amount of taxation was trifling, but the claim itself was inconsistent with liberty; and that was, in their eyes, enough. It was against the recital of an act of Parliament, rather than against any suffering under its enact- ments, that the} 7 took up arms. They went to war against a preamble. They fought seven years against a declaration. They poured out their treasures and their blood like water, in a contest against an assertion which those less sagacious and not so well schooled in the principles of civil liberty would have regarded as barren phraseology, or mere parade of words. They saw in the claim of the British Parliament a seminal principle of mischief, the germ of unjust power; they detected it, dragged it forth from underneath its plausible disguises, struck at it; nor did it elude either their steady eye or their well-directed blow till they had extirpated and destroyed it, to the smallest fibre. On this question of principle, while actual suffering was yet afar off, they raised their flag against a power, to which, for purposes of for- eign conquest and subjugation, Rome, in the height of her glory, is not to be compared; |T power which has dotted over the surface of the whole globe with her possessions and military posts, whose morning drum-beat, following the sun, and keeping company with the hours, circles the earth with one contin- uous and unbroken strain of the martial airs of Engla ud.\) The necessity of holding strictly to the principle upon which free govern- ments are constructed, and to those pre- cise lines which fix the partitions of power between different branches, is as plain, if not as cogent, as that <>f resist- ing, as our fathers did, the strides of I he parent country against the lights of (he Colonies; lieeanse, whether the power which exceeds its just limits be foreign or domestic, whether it be the encroachment of all branches '>u the lights of the people, or that of one branch on the rights of others, in either ease the balanced and well-adjusted machinery of tree government is dis- turbed, and, if the derangement go on, the whole system must fall. Hut the ease before us is nol a ease of merely theoretic infringement ; nor is it one of trifling importance. Far other- wise, rt respects one of the highest and ni' ivt important of all the powers of gov- ernment; that is t<> say. the custody and control of the public money. The act of removing the deposits, which I now consider as the President's act, and which his friends on this floor defend as his act. took the national purse from beneath the security and guardianship of the law, and disposed of its contents, in parcels, in such places of deposit as he chose to select. At this very mo- ment, every dollar of the public treasure is subject, so far as respects its custody and safe-keeping, to his unlimited con- trol. We know not where it is to-day; still less do we know where it may be to-morrow. But, Mr. President, this is not all. There is another part of the case, which has not been so much discussed, but which appears to me to be still more in- defensible in its character. It is some- thing which may well teach us the tendency of power to move forward with accelerated pace, if it be allowed to take tin' first step. The Bank of the United States, in addition to the ser- vices rendered to the treasury, gave for its charter, and for the use of the public deposits, a litmus or outright sum of one million and a half of dollars. This sum was paid by the bank into the treasury soon after the commencement of its charter, hi the act which passed both houses for renewing the charter, in 1S.'5l } , it was provided that the hank, for the same consideration, should pay 372 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. two hundred thousand dollars a year during the period for which it was pro- posed tn renew it. A similar provision is in the bill which 1 asked leave to in- troducesome weeks ago. Now. Sir, this shows thai the custody of the deposits is a benefit for which a bank may well afford to pay a Large annual sum. The banks which now hold the deposits pay nothing to the public; they give no bonus, they pay no annuity. Hut this loss of so much money is Dot tin- worst part of the case, nor that which ought most to alarm us. Although they pay mulling to the public, they do pay, nevertheless, such sums, and for such uses, as may be agreed upon between themselves and the executive govern- ment. We arc officially informed that an officer is appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury to inspect or superin- tend these selected banks; and this officer is compensated by a salary fixed by the executive, agreed to by the banks, and paid by them. 1 ask, Sir, it there can be a more irregular or a more illegal transaction than this? Whose money is it out of which this salary is paid? Is it not money justly due to the United States, and paid, be- cause it is so due, for the advantage of holding the deposits? If a dollar is re- ceived on that account, is not its only true destination into the general treas- ury of the government? And who has authority, without law, to create an office, to fix a salary, and to pay that salary out of this money? Here is an inspector or supervisor of the deposit banks. But what law has provided for such an officer? What commission has he received? Who concurred in his appointment? What oath docs lie take? How is he to be punished or impeached if he colludes with any of these hanks to embezzle the public money or defraud the government? The value of the use of this public monej to the deposit banks is probably two hundred thousand dollars a year; or, if less than that, it is yet, certainly, a very great Bum. May the President appoint whatever officers he pleases, with whatever duties he pleases, and pay them as much as he pleases, out of the moneys thus paid by the banks, for the sake of having the deposits? Mr. President, the executive claim of power is exactly this, that the President may keep t lie money of the public in whatever hanks he chooses, on whatever terms he chooses, and apply the sums which these banks are willing to pay for its use to whatever purposes he chooses. These sums are not to come into the general treasury. They are to be appropriated before they get there; they are never to be brought under the control of Congress; they are to be paid to officers and agents not known to the law, not nominated to the Senate, and responsible to nobody but the executive Itself. I ask gentlemen if all this be lawful. Are they prepared to defend it? Will they stand up and justify it? In my opinion, Sir, it is a clear and most dangerous assumption of power. It is the creation of office without law ; the appointment to office without con- sulting the Senate; the establishment of a salary without law; and the payment of that salary out of a fund which it- self is derived from the use of the public treasures. This, Sir, is my other reason for concurring in the vote of the 28th of March; and on these grounds I leave the propriety of that vote, so far as I am concerned with it. to be judged of by the country. But, Sir, the President denies the power of the Senate to pass any such resolution, on any ground whatever. Suppose the declaration contained in the resolution to be true; suppose the President had, in fact , assumed powers not granted to him; does the Senate possess the right to declare its opinion, affirming this fact, or does it not? I maintain that the Senate does possess such a power; the President denies it. Mr. President, we Deed not look far, nor search deep, for the foundation of this right in the Senate. It is close at hand, and clearly visible. In the first place, it is the right of self-defence. In the second place, it is a right founded on the duty of representative bodies, in a free government, to defend the public THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. 373 liberty against encroachment. We must presume thai the Senate honestly enter- tained tlu' opinion expressed in tin' res- olution of the 28th of March; and, entertaining that opinion, its right t<> express it is but the necessary conse- quence of its right tn defend its own constitutional authority, as one branch of the government. This is its clear right, and this, too, is its imperative duty. 11' one or both the other branches of the government happen to do that which appears to us inconsistent with the constitutional rights of the Senate, will any one say that the Senate is yet bound to be passive, and to be silent? to do nothing, and to say nothing? Or, if one branch appears to encroach on the rights of the other two, have these two no power of remonstrance, com- plaint, or resistance? Sir, the question may be put in a still more striking form. Has the Senate a right to have an opinion in a case of this kind? If it may have an opinion, how is that opinion to be ascertained but by resolution and vote? The objection must go the whole length ; it must maintain that the Senate has not only no right to express opinions, but no right to form opinions, on the conduct of the executive government, though in matters intimately affecting the powers and duties of the Senate itself. It is not possible, Sir, that such a doctrine can be maintained for a single moment. All political bodies resist what they deem encroachments by resolutions ex- pressive of their sentiments, and their purpose to resist such encroachments. When such a resolution is presented for its consideration, the question is, whether it be true; not whether the body has au- thority to pass it, admitting it to be true. The Senate, like other public bodies, is perfectly justifiable in defending, in this mode, either its legislative or executive authority. The usages of Parliament, the practice in our State legislatures and assemblies, both before and since the Revolution, and precedents in the Senate itself, fully maintain this right. The case of the Panama mission is in point. In that case, Mr. Branch, from North Carolina, introduced a resolution, which, after reciting that the Pre« ident, in his annual m and in hi- communica- tion to the Senate, had asserted that he possessed an authority to make certain appointments, although tin- appointment* /tail mil In i n iiiiuli . went on to declare that •• a s/li ni acquiescent mi the part <>/' this body mmi. iii sm, i, future tinu , be drawn into dangerous precedent"; ami to re- solve, therefore, that the President d<.es not possess the right or power Baid to he claimed by him. This resolution was discussed, and finally laid on the table. Hut the question discussed was, whether the resolution was correct, in fact and principle; not whether the Senate had any right to pass such resolution. So far as I remember, no one pretended thai, if the President had exceeded his authority, the Senate might not so de- clare by resolution. Xo one ventured to contend that, whether the rights of the Senate were invaded or not, the Sen- ate must hold its peace. The Protest labors strenuously to show that the Senate adopted the resolution of the 28th of March, under its judicial au- thority. The reason of this attempt is obvious enough. If the Senate, in its judicial character, has been trying the President, then he has not had a regular and formal trial; and, on that ground, it is hoped the public sympathy may be moved. Hut the Senate has acted not in its judicial, but in its legislative capacity. As a legislative body, it has defended its own just authority, and the authority of the other branch of the legislature. Whatever attacks our own rights and privileges, or whatever en- croaches on the power of both houses, we may oppose and resist, by declara- tion, resolution, or other similar pro- ceedings. If we look to the books of precedents, if we examine the journals of legislative bodies, we find everywhere instances of such proceeding-. It is to be observed, Sir, that the Protest imposes silence on the House of Representatives as well as on the Senate. It declares that no power is conferred on either branch of the legislature, to con- sider or decide upon official acts of tin- executive, for the purpose of censure. 374 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. and without a view to legislation or im- peachment. This, I think, Sir, is pretty high-toned pretension. According to this doctrine, neither house could assert its own rights, however the executive might assail them; neither house could point out the danger to the people, however East executive encroachment might be extending itself, or whatever danger it might threaten to the public liberties. If the two houses of Congress may not express an opinion of executive con- duct by resolution, there is the same reason why they should not express it in any other form, or by any other mode of proceeding. Indeed, the Pro- test limits botli houses, expressly, to the case of impeachment. If the House of Representatives are not about to im- peach the President, they have nothing to say of his measures or of his conduct; and unless the Senate are engaged in trying an impeachment, their mouths, too, are stopped. It is the practice of the President to send us an annual mes- sage, in which he rehearses the general proceedings of the executive for the past year. This message we refer to our committees for consideration. But, according to the doctrine of the Protest, they can express no opinion upon any executive proceeding upon which it gives information. Suppose the President had told us, in his last annual message, what he had previously told us in his cabinet paper, that the removal of the deposits was his act, done on his responsibility; and that the Secretary of the Treasury had exercised no discretion, formed no judgment, presumed to have no opinion whatever, on the subject. This part of the message would have been referred to^ the committee on finance; but what could they say? They think it shows a plain violation of the Constitution and the laws; but the President is not im- peached; therefore they can express no censure. They think it a direct inva- sion of legislative power, but they musi not -.iv BO. They may, indeed, com- mend, if they can. The grateful busi- ness of praise is lawful to them ; bul if, instead oi commendation and applause, they find cause Eoi di {approbation, cen- sure, or alarm, the Protest enjoins upon them absolute silence. Formerly, Sir, it was a practice for the President to meet both houses, at the opening of the session, and deliver a speech, as is still the usage of some of the State legislatures. To this speech there was an answer from each house, and those answers expressed, freely, the sentiments of the house upon all the merits and faults of the administra- tion. The discussion of the topics con- tained in the speech, and the debate on the answers, usually drew out the whole force of parties, and lasted some- times a week. President Washington's conduct, in every year of his admin- istration, was thus freely and publicly canvassed. He did not complain of it; he did not doubt that both houses had a perfect right to comment, with the ut- most latitude, consistent with decorum, upon all his measures. Answers, or amendments to answers, were not un- frequently proposed, very hostile to his own course of public policy, if not some- times bordering on disrespect. And when they did express respect and re- gard, there were votes ready to be re- corded against the expression of those sentiments. To all this President Wash- ington took no exception; for he well knew that these, and similar proceed- ings, belonged to the power of popular bodies. But if the President were now to meet us with a speech, and should in- form us of measures, adopted by him- self in the recess, which should appear to us the most plain, palpable, and dan- gerous violations of the Const it ut ion, we must, nevertheless, either keep respect- ful silence, or rill our answer merely with courtly phrases of approbation. Mr. President, 1 know not who wrote this Protest, but I confess I am aston- ished, truly astonished, as well at the want, of knowledge which it displays of constitutional law, as at the high and dangerous pretensions which it puts forth. Neither branch of the legisla- ture can express censure upon the Presi- dent's conduct! Suppose, Sir, that we should see him enlisting troops and rais- ing an army, can we say nothing, and THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. :;;r, do nothing? Suppose he were bo declare war against a foreign power, and put the army and the tleet in action; are we still to be silent'.-' Suppose we should See him borrowing money on tin- credil of the United Slates; are we yet to wait for impeachment':' Indeed, Sir, in re- gard to this borrowing money on the credit of the United States, I wish to call the attention of the Senate, not only to what might happen, but to what has actually happened. We are in- formed that the Post-Office Department, a department over which tin' Presidenl claims the same control as over the rest, has actually borrowed near half a million of money on the credit of the United States. Mr. President, the first power granted to Congress by the Constitution is the power to lay taxes; the second, the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. Now, Sir, where does the executive find its authority, in or through any department, to borrow money without authority of Congress ? This proceeding appears to me wholly illegal, and reprehensible in a very high degree. It may be said that it is not true that this money is borrowed on the credit of the United States, but that it is borrowed on the credit of the Post- Office Department. But that would be mere evasion. The department is but a name. It is an office, and nothing more. The banks have not lent this money to any officer. If Congress should abolish the whole department to-morrow, would the. banks not expect the United States to replace this borrowed money? The money, then, is borrowed on the credit of the United States, an act which Con- gress alone is competent to authorize. If the Post-Office Department may bor- row money, so may the War Department and the Navy Department. If half a million may be borrowed, ten millions maybe borrowed. What, then, if this t ransaction shall be justified, is to hinder the executive from borrowing money to maintain fleets and armies, or for any other purpose, at his pleasure, without any authority of law? Yet even this. according to the doctrine of the Protest, we have no right to complain of. ^Ye have no right to declare that an execu- tive departmenl baa violated the Consti- tution and broken the law, bj borrow ing money on tie- credil of the I Fnited Sta Nor could we make a .similar declara- tion, if we were to Bee (In- executive, by means of this borrowed money, enlist- ing armies and equipping fleets. And yet, Sir, the Presidenl has found no diffi- culty, heretofore, in expn his opin- ions, in a paper not called for by the exer- cise of any official duty, upon the conduct and proceedings of the two houses of Congress. At the commencement of this session, he sent us a message, com- menting on the land bill which the two houses passed at the end of the last sion. That bill he had not approved, nor had he returned it with objections. ( 'ongress w as dissoh ed : and i he bill, therefore, was completely dead, and could not be revived. Xo communica- tion from him could have the least pos- sible effect as an official act. Yet he saw fit to send a message on the subject, and in that message he very freely de- clares his opinion that the bill which had passed both houses began with an entire subversion of every one of the com- pacts by which the United States became possessed of their Western domain; that one of its provisions u-as in direct and undisguised violation of the pledge given by ( 'ongn ss to the States : that the Con- stitution provides that these compacts shall be untouched by the legislative power, which can only make needful rules and regulations; and that all be- yond that is an assumption "/undelegated power. These are the terms in which the Pres- idenl speaks of an act of the two houses ; not in an official paper, not in a com- munication which it was necessary for him to make to them; but in a message, adopted only as a mode through which to make public these opinions. After this, it would seem too late to enjoin on the houses of Congress a total forbear- ance from all comment on the measures of the executive. Not only is it the right of both houses, or of either, to resist, by vote, declara- tion, or resolution, whatever it may 37G THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. deem an encroachment of executive power, but it is also undoubtedly the right of either house to oppose, in like manner, any encroachment L>y the other. The two houses have each its own appro- priate powers and authorities, which it is bound to preserve. They have, too, differenl constituents. The members of the Senate are representatives of States: and it is in the Senate alone that the four-and-twentj Mates, as political bod- ies, have a direct influence in the legis- lative and executive powers of this gov- ernment. He is a strange advocate of Male rights, who maintains that this body, thus representing the States, and thus being the strictly federal branch of the Legislature, may not assert and main- tain all and singular its own powers and privileges, against either or both of the other branches. If any thing be done or threatened derogatory to the rights of the States, as secured by the organization of the Sen- ate, may we not lift up our voices against it? Suppose the House of Representa- tives should vote that the Senate ought not to propose amendments to revenue hills; would it be the duty of the Senate to take no notice of such proceeding? Or, if we were to see the President issu- ing commissions to office to persons who had never been nominated to the Senate, are we not to remonstrate? Sir, 1 here is no end of cases, no end of illustrations. The doctrines of the Pro- test, in this respect, cannot stand the slighte t scrutiny; they are blown away by the first breath of discussion. And yet, Sir, it is easy to perceive why this right of declaring its sentiments respecting the conduct of the executive i denied to either house, in its Legisla- tive capacity. It is merely that the Senate mighl be presented in the odious light of trying the President, judicially, without regular accusation or hearing. The Protesl declares thai the Presidenl is chargi d with a crirtu . and, mill, nut In ar- ing or trial, found guilty and condemned. This is e\ ideni ly an attempt to appeal to popular feeling, and to represent the ideni as unjustly treated and un- fairly tried sir. it is a false appeal. The President has not been tried at all; he has not been accused; he has not been charged with crime; he has uol 1 a condemned. Accusation, trial, and sentence are terms belonging to judicial proceedings. But the Senate has been engaged in no such pro- ceeding. The resolution of the 28th of March was not an exercise of judicial power, either in form, in substance, or in intent. Everybody knows that the Senate can exercise no judicial power un- til articles of impeachment are brought before it. It is then to proceed, by ac- cusation and answer, hearing, trial, and judgment. But there has been no im- peachment, no answer, no hearing, no judgment. All that the Senate did was to pass a resolution, in legislative form, declaring its opinion of certain acts of the executive. This resolution imputed no crime; it charged no corrupt motive; it proposed no punishment. It was di- rected, not against the President person- ally, but against the act; and that act it declared to be, in its judgment, an as- sumption of authority not warranted by the Constitution. It is in vain that the Protest attempts to shift the resolution to the judicial character of the Senate. The case is too plain for such an argument to be plausi- ble. But, in order to lay some founda- tion for it, the Protest, as 1 have already said, contends that neither the Senate nor the House of Representatives can ex- press its opinions on the conduct of the President, except in some form con- nected with impeachment; so that, if the power of impeachment did not exist, these two houses, though they be repre- sentative bodies, though one of them bi» filled by the immediate representatives of the pei iple, though they he constituted like other popular and representative bodies, could not utter a syllable, al- though they saw the executive either trampling on their own rights and priv- ileges, or grasping at absolute authority and dominion over the liberties of the country! Sir. I hardly know how to '-peak of such claims of impunity for executive ci lcroach i lien t. I am amazed that any American citizen should draw THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. 877 up a paper containing such lofty pre- tensions; pretensions which would have 1 n 1 1 !• ■ t with scorn In England, at any time since the Revolution of L688. A man who should stand up, in either house of tin' British Parliament, to main- tain thai I lit' house could not , l>\ vote Or resolution, maintain its own rights and privileges, would make even the Tory 1m 'in 'lies bang their heads tor very Bhame. There was, indeed, a lime when such proceedings were not allowed. Some of the kings of the Stuart race would 1 1. •! tolerate them. A signal instance of royal displeasure with the proceedings of Parliament occurred in the latter part of the reign of .James the First. The House of Commons had spoken, on some occasion, "of its own undoubted rights and privileges." The king there- upon sent them a letter, declaring that he would not allow that they had any un- doubted rights; but that what (hey enjoyed they might still hold by his own royal grace and permission. Sir Edward Coke and Mr. Granville were not satisfied with this title to their privileges; and, under their lead, the house entered on its jour- nals a resolution asserting its privileges, us i/s own undoubted right, and manifest- ing a determination to maintain them as such. This, says the historian, so en- raged his Majesty, that he sent for the journal, had it brought into the Council, and there, in the presence of his lords and great officers of state, tore out the offensive resolution with his own royal hand. He then dissolved Parliament, and sent its most refractory members to the Tower. 1 have no fear, certainly, ■ s ir. that this English example will be followed, on this occasion, to its full ex- tent; nor would I insinuate that any thing outrageous has been thought of, or intended, except outrageous pretensions ; but such pretensions I must impute to the author of this Protest, whoever that author may be. When this and the other house shall lose the freedom of speech and debate ; when they shall surrender the rights of publicly and freely caavassing all im- portant measures of the executive; when they shall not be allowed to maintain their own authority arid their own j >i i % i- Leges by vote, declaration, or resolution, they w ill then be no longer f repre- sentatives of a free people, bul themselves, and tit insti uments to make slaves of others. The Protest , Mr. President, cue what it. doubtless regards as a liberal right of di ni jion to the people them- selves. But its language, even in ac- knowledging this right of the peopli to discuss the conduct of their Ben ant qualified and peculiar. The free people of the United States, it declares, have an undoubted right to discuss the offi- cial conduct of the President in such Language and form as they may think proper, " subject only to the restraints of truth and justice." But, then, who is to be judge of this truth and justice? Are the people to judge for themsel or are others to judge for them? The Protest is here speaking of politicalrightB, and not moral rights; and if restraints are imposed on political rights, it must follow, of course, that others are to de- cide whenever the case arises whether these restraints have been violated. It is strange that the writer of the Protest did not perceive that, by using this lan- guage, he was pushing the President into a direct avowal of the doctrine-, of 1798. The text, of the 1'. l1 I Hid the text of the obnoxious act 1 of that . are nearly identical. But, Sir, if tin' ] pie have a right to discuss the official conduct of the execu- tive, so have their representatives. W have, been taught toregarda representa- tive of the people as a Bentine] on the watch-tower of liberty. Is he to be blind, though visible danger approaches? Is he to be deaf, though sounds of peril fill the air? Is he to be dumb, while a thousand duties impel him to raise the cry of alarm'.'' Is he not. rather, to catch the Lowest whisper which breathes intention or purpose of encroachment on the public liberties, and I his voice breath and utterance at the first appearance of danger? I- not his to trave.se the whole horizon with the i Commonly called the Sedition Act, ap- proved 14ih July, 17U8. 378 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. keen and eager vision of an unhooded hawk, detecting, through all disguises, every enemy advancing, in any form, towards the citadel which he guards? Sir. this watchfulness for public liberty; this duty of foreseeing danger and pro- claiming it; this promptitude and bold- ness in resisting attacks on the Consti- tution from any quarter; this defence of established landmarks; this Eearless re- sistance of whatever would transcend or remov% them. — all belong to the repre- sentative character, are interwoven with its very nature. If deprived of them, an active, intelligent, faithful agent of the people will he converted into an unresisting and passive instrument of power. A representative body, which gives up these rights and duties, gives itself up. It is a representative body no longer. It has broken the tie be- tween itself and its constituents, and henceforth is fit only to be regarded as an inert, self-sacrificed mass, from which all appropriate principle of vitality has departed for ever. I have thus endeavored to vindicate the right of the Senate to pass the reso- lution of the 28th of March, notwith- standing the denial of that right in the Protest. Rut there are other sentiments and opinions expressed in the Protest, of the very highest importance, and which de- mand nothing less than our utmost at- tention. The first object of a free people is the preservation of their liberty; and liberty is only to be preserved by maintaining constitutional restraints and just di- visions of political power. Nothing is more deceptive or more dangerous than the pretence of a desire to simplify gov- ernment. Tic simplest governments are despotisms; the nexi simplest, limited monarchies; but all republics, all gov- ernments "t law, musl impose numerous limitations and qualifications of author- ity, and give many positive and many qualified rights. In other words, thej musl be Bubjecl to rule and regulation. This is the very essence of free political institutions. The spirit of liberty is. indeed, a bold and fearless spirit; but it is also a sharp-sighted spirit; it is a cautious, sagacious, discriminating, far- seeing intelligence; it is jealous of en- croachment, jealous of power, jealous of man. It demands checks; it seeks for guards; it insists on securities; it in- trenches itself behind strong defences, and fortifies itself with all possible care against the assaults of ambition and passion. It does not trust the amiable weaknesses of human nature, and there- fore it will not permit power to overstep its prescribed limits, though benevo- lence, good intent, and patriotic pur- pose come along with it. Neither does it satisfy itself with flashy and tempo- rary resistance to illegal authority. Far otherwise. It seeks for duration and permanence. It looks before and after; and, building on the experience of ages which are past, it labors diligently for the benefit of ages to come. This is the nature of constitutional liberty; ami this is our liberty, if we will rightly under- stand and preserve it. Every free gov- ernment is necessarily complicated, be- cause all such governments establish restraints, as well on the power of gov- ernment itself as on that of individuals. If we will abolish the distinction of branches, and have but one branch; if we will abolish jury trials, and leave all to the judge; if we will then ordain that the legislator shall himself be that judge; and if we will place the execu- tive power in the same hands, we may readily simplify government. We may easily bring it to the simplest of all possible forms, a pure despotism. Rut a separation of departments, so far as practicable, and the preservation of clear lines of division between them, is the fundamental idea in the creation of all our constitutions; and. doubtless, the continuance of regulated liberty depends on maintaining these boundaries. In the progress, Sir, of the govern- ments of the United States, we seem exposed to two classes of dangers or disturbances; one external, the other internal. It may happen that collisions arise between this government and the governments of the Mates. That case belongs to the first class. A memorable THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. :I7'J instance of this kind occurred last year. It was my conscientious opinion, on that occasion, that the authority claimed l>v an individual Slate 1 was subversive of the just powers of this government, and, indeed, incompatible with its existence. I gave a hearty co-operation, therefore, to measures which the crisis seemed to require. We have now before us what appeal's, to my judgment, to be an in- stance of the latter kind. A contest has arisen between different branches of the same government, interrupting their harmony, and threatening to dis- turb their balance. It is of the highest importance, therefore, to examine the question carefully, and to decide it Justly. The separation of the powers of gov- ernment into three departments, though all our constitutions profess to be founded on it, has, nevertheless, never been per- fectly established in any government of the world, and perhaps never can be. The general principle is of inestimable value, and the leading lines of distinc- tion sufficiently plain; yet there are powers of so undecided a character, that they do not seem necessarily to range themselves under either head. And most of our constitutions, too, having laid down the general principle, imme- diately create exceptions. There do not exist, in the general science of govern- ment, or the received maxims of po- litical law, such precise definitions as enable us always to say of a given power whether it be legislative, executive, or judicial. And this is one reason, doubtless, why the Constitution, in con- ferring power on all the departments, proceeds not by general definition, but by specific enumeration. And, again, it grants a power in general terms, but yet, in the same or some other article or section, imposes a limitation or qualifi- cation on the grant; and the grant and the limitation must, of course, be con- strued together. Thus the Const i tut inn says that all legislative power, therein granted, shall be vested in Congress, which Congress shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives; and yet, 1 South Carolina. in another article, it gives to the Pre i dent a qualified negative over all ai Congress. So the Constitution declares that the judicial power shall be vt in one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts as Congress may establish. It gives, nevertheless, in another provision, judicial power to the Senate; and, in like manner, though it declares that the executive power shall be vested in the President, using, in the immediate con- text, ti" words of limitation, yet it else- where Bubjecta the treaty-making power, and the appointing power, to the con- currenceof the Senate. The irresistible inference from these considerations is, that the mere nomination of a depart- ment, as one of the three great and commonly acknowledged departments of government, does not confer on that de- partment any power at all. Notwith- standing the departments are called the legislative, the executive, and the judi- cial, we must yet look into the provisions of the Constitution itself, in order to learn, first, what powers the Constitu- tion regards as legislative, executive, and judicial; and, in the next place, what portions or quantities of these powers are conferred on the respective departments; because no one will con- tend that all legislative power belongs to Congress, all executive power to the President, or all judicial power to the courts of the United States. The first three articles of the Consti- tution, as all know, are taken up in prescribing the organization, and enu- merating the powers, of the three de- partments. The first article treats of the legislature, and its first section is, 11 All legislative power, herein granted, shall be vested in a Congress of the United states, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." The second article treats of the execu- tive power, and its first section declares that " the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America." The third article treats of the judicial power, and its first section declare- that ■■ the judicial power of the United v -hall be d in one Supreme Court, and in 380 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. such inferior courts as the Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish." It is too plain to be doubted, I think, Sir, that these descriptions of the per- sons or officers in whom the executive and the judicial powers are to be vested no more define the extent of the grant (rf those powers, than the words quoted from the fust article describe the extenl of the legislative grant to Congress. All these several titles, heads of articles, or introductory clauses, with the general declarations which they contain, serve to designate the departments, and to mark the general distribution of powers; but in all the departments, in the execu- tive and judicial as well as in the legis- lative, it would be unsafe to contend for any specific power under such clauses. If we look into the State constitu- tions, we shall find the line of distinc- tion between the departments still less perfectly drawn, although the general principle of the distinction is laid down in mosl of them, and in some of them in very positive and emphatic terms. In some of these States, notwithstanding the principle of distribution is adopted and sanctioned, the legislature appoints the judges; and in others it appoints both the governor and the judges; and in others, again, it appoints not only the judges, but all other officers. The inferences which, I think, follow from these views of the subject, are two: first, that the denomination of a depart- ment does not fix the limits of the pow- ers con feiied on it, nor even their exact nat are ; and, second (which, indeed, fol- lows from the first), that in our Amer- ican governments, the chief executive magistrate does not necessarily, and by force of his general character of supreme executive, possess the appointing power. He ma\ have it, or he may not, accord- ing to tin- particular provisions applica- ble to each case in the respective consti- tut ions. The President appears to have taken a differenl view of this subject. He I the appoinl Lng power as originally and inherently in the execu- tive, and as remaining absolute in his hands, except so far as the Constitution resl rains it. This I do not agree to, and 1 shall have occasion hereafter to exam- ine the question further. I have in- tended thus far only to insist on the high and indispensable duty of maintaining the division of power as the Constitution Ims marked out that division, and to op- pose claims of authority not founded on express grants or necessary implication, but sustained merely by argument or in- ference from names or denominations given to departments. Mr. President, the resolutions now be- fore us declare, that the Protest asserts powers as belonging to the President in- consistent with the authority of the two houses of Congress, and inconsistent with the Constitution; and that the Protest itself is a breach of privilege. I believe all this to be true. The doctrines of the Protest are in- consistent with the authority of the two houses, because, in my judgment, they deny the just extent of the law-making power. I take the Protest as it was sent to us, without inquiring how far the subsequent message has modified or ex- plained it. It is singular, indeed, that a paper, so long in preparation, so elab- orate in composition, and which is put forth for so high a purpose as the Pro- test avows, should not be able to stand an hour's discussion before it became evident that it was indispensably neces- sary to alter or explain its contents. Explained or unexplained, however, the paper contains sentiments which justify us, as I think, in adopting these resolu- tions. In the first place, I think the Protest a clear breach of privilege. It is a re- proof or rebuke of the Senate, in lan- guage hardly respectful, for the exercise of a power clearly belonging to it as a Legislative body. It entirely misrepre- sents the proceedings of the Senate. I find this paragraph in it, among others of a similar tone and character: "A majority <>f the Senate, whose interfer- ence with the preliminary question has. for the best of all reasons, been studi- ously excluded, anticipate the action of the House of Representatives, assume THE PRESIDENTIAL PB0TE8T. 381 not only the function which belongs ex- clusively to that body, but convert them- selves into accusers, witnesses, coun- sel, and judges, and prejudge the whole case; thus presenting the appalling spec- tacle, in a free state, of judges going through a labored preparation lor an im- partial hearing and decision, by a previ- ous ex />iif>, investigation and sentence against, the supposed offender." Now. Sir, this paragraph, I am bound to say, is a total misrepresentation of the proceedings of the Senate. A ma- jority of the Senate have not anticipated the House of Representatives; they have not assumed the functions of that body; they have not converted themselves into accusers, witnesses, counsel, or judges: they have made no ex parte investiga- tion ; they have given no sentence. This paragraph is an elaborate perversion of the whole design and the whole proceed- ings of the Senate. A Protest, sent to us by the President, against votes which the Senate has an unquestionable right to pass, and containing, too, such a mis- representation of these votes as this par- agraph manifests, is a breach of privilege. But there is another breach of priv- ilege. The President interferes between the members of the Senate and their constituents, and charges them with act- ing contrary to the will of those constit- uents. He says it is his right and duty to look to the journals of the Senate to ascertain who voted for the resolution of the 28th of March, and then to show that individual Senators have, by their votes on that resolution, disobeyed the instructions or violated the known will of the legislatures who appointed them. All this he claims as his right and his duty. And where does he find any such right or any such duty? What, right lias he to send a message to either house of Congress telling its members that they disobey the will of their constit- uents ? I las any English sovereign since Cromwell's time dared to send such a message to Parliament ? Sir, if he can tell us that some of us disobey our con- st it uents, he can tell us that all do so; and if we consent to receive this lan- guage from him, there is but one re- maining step, and that is, that since we thus disobey the will of our const itu he should disperse us and send us home. In my opinion, the firsl step in this proce - i- as distincl a breach of privi- lege as the last. If Cromwell's example shall be followed out, it will not be more Clear then than it is now that the pii\ i- legeS of the Senate have 1 |, viola! d. There is \et something, Sir. which sur- passes all this; and that is, that, after this direct interference, after pointing out those Senators whom he would rep- resent as having disobeyed the known will of their constituents, he disdain design of interfering at all! Sir. who could be the writer of a message, which, in the tirsi place, makes the President assert such monstrous pretensions, and, in the next line, affront the understand- ing of the Senate by disavowing all right to do that very thin;,; which he is doing? If there be any thing, Sir, in this message, more likely than the rest of it to move one from his equanimity, it is this disclaimer of all design to in- terfere with the responsibility of mem- bers of the Senate to their const it u- after such interference had already been made, in the same paper, in the most objectionable and offensive form. If it were not for the purpose of tell; Senators that they disobeyed the will of the legislatures of the States they n sent, for what purpose was it that the Protest has pointed out the four Sen- ators, and paraded against them the .sen- timents of their legislatures ? There can benootherpurpose. The Protest - indeed, that •• these fact . belong to the history of these proceedings"! To the history of what pro, dings'/ To any proceeding to which the President was party? To any pro. ling to which the Senate was party? Have they any thing to do with the resolution of the 28th of March? But it adds, that these I (//•- important to the just derelopim ntofthe principles and interests involv d ■ ceedings. All this might be -aid of any other facts, [t is mere words. To what principles, to what interests, are th.se facts important? They can be impor- tant but in one point of view; and that :>:! THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. is as proof, or evidence, that the Sen- ators have disobeyed instructions, or acted againsl the known will of their constituents in disapproving the Presi- dent's conduct. They have not the slightest bearing in any other way. They do not make the resolution of the Senate more or less true, nor its right to pass it more or less clear. Sir, these proceedings of the legislatures were in- troduced into this Protest for the very purpose, and no other, of showing that members of the Senate have acted con- trary to the will of their constituents. Every man sees and knows this to have been the sole design; and any other pre- ti'iice is a mockery to our understandings. And this purpose is, in my opinion, an unlawful purpose; it is an unjustifiable intervention between us and our constit- uents; and is, therefore, a manifest and flagrant breach of privilege. In the next place, the assertions of the Protest are inconsistent with the just authority of Congress, because they claim for the President a power, independent of Congress, to possess the custody and control of the public treasures. Let this point be accurately examined; and, in order to avoid mistake, I will read the precise words of the Protest. " The custody (if the public property, un- der such regulations .-is may be prescribed by legislative authority, lias always been sidered an appropriate function of the partment in this and all other governments. In accordance with this prin- ciple, every species of property belonging to the United States, (excepting that which is in the use of the several co-ordinate depart ments of the government, as means to aid the in in performing their appropriate func- tions,) is in charge of officers appointed by the President, whether it be land-, or buildings, or merchandise, or provisions, or clothing, or arms and munitions of war. The superintendents and keepers of the whole are appointed by the President, and removable at his will. " Public monej is but a species of public property. It cannot be raised by taxation or customs, nor brought into the treasury in any other way except by law ; but when- ever or howsoever obtained, its custody al- ways lias been, and always must be, unless the Constitution be changed, intrusted to the executive department. No officer can be created by Congress, for the purpose of taking charge of it, whose appointment would not, by the Constitution, at once de- volve on the President, and who would not be responsible to him for the faithful per- formance of his duties." And, in another place, it declares that " Congress cannot, therefore, take out of the hands of the executive department the custody of the public property or money, without an assumption of execu- tive power, and a subversion of the first principles of the Constitution." These, Sir, are propositions which cannot re- ceive too much attention. They affirm, that the custody of the public money constitutionally and necessarily belongs to the executive; and that, until the Constitution is changed, Congress can- not take it out of his hands, nor make any provision for its custody, except by such superintendents and keepers as are appointed by the President and remova- ble at his will. If these assertions be correct, we have, indeed, a singular constitution for a republican govern- ment; for we give the executive the control, the custody, and the posses- sion of the public treasury, by origi- nal constitutional provision ; and when Congress appropriates, it appropriates only what is already in the President's hands. Sir, I hold these propositions to be sound in neither branch. I maintain that the custody of the public money does not necessarily belong to the ex- ecutive, under this government; and I hold that Congress may so dispose of it. that it shall be under the superintend- ence of keepers not. appointed by the President, nor removable at his will. I think it competent for Congress to de- clare, as Congress did declare in the hank charter, that the public deposits should be made in the bank. When in the bank, they were not kept by persons appointed by the President, or remova- ble at his will. Ilfc could not change that custody; nor could it be changed at all, but according to provisions made in the law itself. There was, indeed, a TIIK PRESIDENTIAL l'HOTKST. provision in the law authorizing the Sec- retary to change the custody. But BUp- 1 «>se there had been no Buch provision; suppose the contingent power had doI been given to the Secretary ; would it not have been a lawful enactment? Might not the law have provided that the public moneys should remain in the bank, until Congress itself should other- wise order, Leaving no power of removal anywhere else? And it' such provision had been made, what power, or custody, or control, would the President have possessed over them? Clearly, none at all. The act of May, 1800, directed custom-house bonds, in places where the hank which was then in existence was situated, or in which it had brandies, to be deposited in the bank or its branches for collection, without the reservation to the Secretary, or anybody else, of any power of removal. Now, Sir, this was an unconstitutional law, if the Pro- t ssl . in the part now under consideration, be correct; because it placed the public money in a custody beyond the control of the President, and in the hands of keepers not appointed by him, nor re- movable at his pleasure. One may readily discern. Sir, the process of rea- soning by which the author of the Pro- test brought himself to the conclusion that Congress could not place the public moneys beyond the President's control. It is all founded on the power of ap- pointment and the power of removal. These powers, it is supposed, must give the President complete control and au- thority over those who actually hold the money, and therefore must necessarily suliject its custody, at all times, to his own individual will. This is the argu- ment. It is true, that the appointment of all public officers, with some exceptions, is. by the Constitution, given to the Presi- dent, with the consent of the Senate; and as, in most cases, public property must be held by some officer, its keepers will generally be persons so appointed. But this is only the common, not a ne sary consequence, of giving the appoint- ing power to the President ami Senate. Congress may still, if it shall so see fit, place the public treasure in the hand oi do officer appointed by the Presidei removable by him, but in bands quite beyond his control. Subject t . • one contingency only, it did this very tiling l>\ the chat tor of tic presenl bank ; and it did the same thing absolutely, and subject to no contingency, by tie- law ot 1800. The Protest, in the ti,~t place, seizes on the fact that all officers mu-t he appointed by the President, or "ii his nomination ; it then assumes the ne\t Btep, that all officers are. and muft 1 - . removable at hi- pleasure; and then, insisting that public i ley, like other public property, musl he kepi by some public officer, it thus arrives at the eon- elusion that it must always be in tie- hands of tlh>se who are appointed by the President, and who are removable at his pleasure. And it is very clear that the Protesi means to maintain that the tenure of ojjii-c cannot Iir so regulated by /"' that public officers shall not he /•< movab the // < of the Pn sid The President considers the right "f removal as a fixed, vested, constitutional right, which Congress cannot limit, con- trol, or qualify, until the Constitution shall be altered. This. Sir. is doctrine which 4 am not prepared t" admit. J shall not now discuss the question, whether the law may i i < » t place the tenure of office beyond the reach of ex- ecutive pleasure; but I wish merely t" draw the attention of the Senate t" the fact, that any such power in Congress is denied by the principles and by the words of the Protest. According to that paper, we live under a constitution by the provisions of which the public tre w- ures are. necessarily and unavoidably, always under executive control; ami as the executive may remove all officers, and appoint others, at leasl temporarily. without the concurrence of the Senate. he may hold those treasures, in the hands of persons appointed by himself alone, in defiance of any law which Congress has passed or can pass. It i> to be seen. Sir. how far Buch claim- of power will receive the approbation of the country. It is to be seen whether a con- struction will be readily a lopte 1 which 38J THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. thus places the public purse out of the guardianship of the immediate repre- sentatives of the people. But, Sir, there is, in this paper, some- thing even yel more strange than these extraordinary claims of power. There ia a strong disposition, running through the w hole Protest, to represent the execu- tive department of this government as the peculiar protector of the public lib- erty, the chief security on which the people are to rely against the encroach- ment of other branches of the govern- ment. Nothing can be more manifest than this purpose. To this end, the 1'r -I -pleads out the President's offi- cial oath, reciting all its words in a forma] quotation; and yet the oath of members of Congress is exactly equiva- lent. The President is to swear that lie will " preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution"; and members of Con- gress are to swear that they will "sup- port the Constitution." There are more words in one oath than the other, but the sense is precisely the same. "Why, then, this reference to his official oath, and this ostentatious quotation of it? Would the writer of the Protest argue that the oath itself is any grant of ] lower: or that, because the President is to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution," he is therefore to use what means he pleases for such preser- vation, protection, and defence, or any means except those which the Constitu- tion and laws have specifically given him? Such an argument would he ab- surd; but if the oath be not cited for preposterous purpose, with what de- sign is it thus displayed on the face of the Protest, unless it be to support the ! idea 1 hat the maintenance of the Constitution and the preservation of the public liberties are especially con- fided to the safe discretion, the sure moderation, the paternal guardianship, ot execut Lve power? The oath of the President contains three words, all of ecpial import ; t hat i , i hat he will pre- serve, protect, and defend the Constitu- tion. The oath of members of Con- 3 is expressed in shorter phrase; it that they will support the Constitu- tion. If there be any difference in the meaning of the two oaths, I cannot dis- cern it; and yet the Protest solemnly and formally argues thus: "The duty of defending, so far as in him lies, the integrity of the Constitution, would, in- deed, have resulted from the very nature of his office; but by thus expressing it in the official oath or affirmation, which, in this respect, differs from that of every other functionary, the founders of our republic have attested their sense of its importance, and have given to it a pe- culiar solemnity and force." Sir, I deny the proposition, and I dis- pute the proof. I deny that the duty of defending the integrity of the Constitu- tion is, in any peculiar sense, confided to the President; and I deny that the words of his oath furnish any argument to make good that proposition. Be pleased, Sir, to remember against whom it is that the President holds it his pe- culiar duty to defend the integrity of the Constitution. It is not against external force; it is not against a foreign foe; no such thing; but it is against the represent- atives of the people and the representatives of the States ! It is against these that the founders of our republic have imposed on him the duty ef defending the integ- rity of the Constitution; a duty, he says, of the importance of which they have attested their sense, and to which they have given peculiar solemnity and force, by expressing it in his official oath ! Let us pause, Sir, and consider this most strange proposition. The Presi- dent is the chief executive magistrate. He is commander-in-chief of the army and navy; nominates all persons to office; claims a right to remove all at will, and to control all, while yet in office; dispenses all favors; and wields the whole patronage of the government. And the proposition is, that the duty of defending the integrity of the Consti- tution against the representatives of the States and against the representativi of the | pie, results to him from the very >ia- ture of his office; and that the founders of our republic have given to this duty, thus confided to him, peculiar solemnity and force! T1IK PRESIDENTIAL PRO! EST. Mr. President, the contest, for ages, lias been to rescue Liberty from the grasp of executive power. Whoever lias engaged in her sacred cause, from the days of the downfall of those great aristocracies which had stood between the king and the people to the time of our own independence, has struggled for the accomplishment of that Bingle object. On the long list of the cham- pions of human freedom, there is not one name dimmed by the reproach of advocating the extension of executive authority; on the contrary, the uniform and steady purpose of all such chain- pious has been to limit and restrain it. To this end the spirit of liberty, grow- ing more and more enlightened and more and more vigorous from age to age, has been battering, for centuries, against the solid hutments of the feudal system. To this end, all that could be gained from the imprudence, snatched from the weakness, or wrung from the necessities of crowned heads, has been carefully gathered up, secured, and hoarded, as the rich treasures, the very jewels of liberty. To this end, popular and representative right has kept up its warfare against prerogative, with va- rious success; sometimes writing the history of a whole age in blood, some- times witnessing the martyrdom of Sid- neys and Russells, often baffled and repulsed, but still gaining, on the whole, and holding what it gained with a grasp which nothing but the complete extinc- tion of its own being could compel it to relinquish. At length, the great con- quest over executive power, in the lead- ing western states of Europe, has been accomplished. The feudal system, like other stupendous fabrics of past ages, is known only by the rubbish which it has left behind it. Crowned heads have been compelled to submit to the re- straints of law, and the peoi'LE, with that intelligence and that spirit which make their voice resistless, have been able to say to prerogative, "Thus far shalt thou come, and no farther." I need hardly say, Sir, that into the full enjoyment of all which Europe has reached only through such slow and painful steps we sprang at once, by the Declaration of Independence, and by the establishment of free representative governments; governments borrowing more or leas from the models of other free Btates, bul strengthened, secured, improved in their symmetry, and deep- ened in their foundation, by those great men of our own country whose names will be as familiar to future li if they were written on the arch of the sky. Through all this history of the 'on- test for liberty, executive power has been regarded as a lion which must be caged. So far from being the object of enlightened popular trust, so far from being considered the natural protector of popular right, it has been dreaded, Uniformly, always dreaded, as the great source of its danger. And now, Sir, who is he, so ignorant of the history of liberty, at home and abroad; who is he, yet dwelling in his contemplations among the principles and dogmas of the Middle Ages; who is he, from whose bosom all original infu- sion of American spirit has become so entirely evaporated and exhaled, that he shall put into the mouth of the President of the United States the doc- trine that the defence of liberty nu/n- rally results to executive power, and is its peculiar duty'/ Who is he, that, generous and confiding towards power where it is most dangerous, and jealous only of those who can restrain it, — who is he, that, reversing the order of the state, and upheaving the base, would poise the pyramid of the political sys- tem upon its apex? Who is he, that, overlooking with contempt the guar- dianship of the representatives of Un- people, and with equal contempt the higher guardianship of the people them- selves, — who is be that declares to u-, through the President's lips, that tie- security for freedom rests in executive authority'.'' Who is he that belies the blood and libels the fa of his own ancestors, by declaring that they, with solemnity of form, and force oi manner, have invoked the executive power to come to the protection of liberty? Who 25 :;m; THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. is he thai thus charges them with the insanity, or the recklessness, of putting the lamb beneath the lion's paw? No, Sir. No, Sir. Our security is in our watchfulness of executive power. It was the constitution of this department which was infinitely the most difficult part in tin- great work of creating our presenl government. To give to the executive department such power as should make it useful, and yet not such as should render it dangerous; to make it efficient, independent, and strong, and yet to prevent it from sweeping away every thing by its union of mili- tary and civil authority, by the influ- ence of patronage, and office, and favor, — this, indeed, was difficult. They who had the work to do saw the diffi- culty, and we see it; and if we would maintain our system, we shall act wisely to that end, by preserving every restraint and every guard which the Constitution has provided. And when we, and those who come after us, have done all that we can do, and all that they can do, it will be well for us and for them, if some popular executive, by the power of patronage and party, and the power, too, of that very popular- ity, shall not hereafter prove an over- match for all other branches of the gov- ernment. 1 do not wish, Sir, to impair the power of the President, as it stands written down in the Constitution, and as great and good men have hitherto exercised it. In this, as in other re- spects, I am for the Constitution as it is. liut I will not acquiesce in the reversal of all just ideas of government; I will not degrade the character of popular representation; I will not blindly con- fide, where all experience admonishes me to 1"- jealous; I will not trust execu- tive power, vested in the hands of a single magistrate, to be the guardian of liberty. Having claimed for the executive the especial guardianship of the Constitu- tion, the Protest proceeds to present a summary view of the powers which are supposed to be conferred on t lie execu- ti\e by that instrument. And it is to this part of the message, Sir, that I would, more than to all others, call the ] 'articular attention of the Senate. I confess that it was only upon careful re- ] tenisal of the paper that I perceived the extent to which its assertions of power reach. I do not speak now of the Pres- ident's claims of power as opposed to legislative authority, but of his opinions as to his own authority, duty, and re- sponsibility, as connected with all other officers under the government. He is of opinion that the whole executive power is vested in him, and that he is responsible for its entire exercise; that among the duties imposed on him is that of "taking care that the laws be faithfully executed "; and that, " being thus made responsible for the entire ac- tion of the executive department, it is but reasonable that the power of ap- pointing, overseeing, and controlling those who execute the laws, a power in its nature executive, should remain in his hands. It is, therefore, not only his right, but the Constitution makes it his duty, to ' nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Sen- ate, appoint,' all 'officers of the United States whose appointments are not in the Constitution otherwise provided for,' with a proviso that the appointment of inferior officers may be vested in the President alone, in the courts of justice, or in the heads of departments." The first proposition, then, which the Protest asserts, in regard to the Presi- dent's powers as executive magistrate, is, that, the general duty being imposed on him by the Constitution of taking care that the laws be faithfully exe- cuted, he tin nhji becomes himself respon- sible for the conduct of every person em- ployed in the government ; " for the entire action," as the paper expresses it, "of the executive department." This, Sir, is very dangerous logic. I reject the in- ference altogether. No such responsibil- ity, nor any thing like it, follows from the general provision of the Constitution, making it his duty to see the laws exe- cuted. If it did, we should have, in fact, but one officer in the whole govern- ment. The President would be every- THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. 37 body. And the Protest assumes to the President this whole responsibility for every other oflicer, for the un purpose of making the President everybody, of annihilating every thing like indepen- dence, responsibility, or characU r, in all other public agents. The whole re- sponsibility is assumed, in order thai ii may be more plausibly argued that all officers of government are not agents of (he law, but the President's agents, and therefore responsible to him alone. If he he responsible for the conduct of all i iili.-ers, and they be responsible to him only, then it may be maintained that such officers are but his own agents, his substitutes, his deputies. The first thing to be done, therefore, is to as- sume the responsibility for all; and this you will perceive, Sir, is done, in the fullest manner, in the passages which I have read. Having thus assumed for the President the entire responsibility of the whole government, the Protest advances boldly to its conclusion, and claims, at once, absolute power over all individuals in office, as being merely the President's agents. This is the language: " The whole executive power being vested in the President, who is responsible for its exercise, it is a neces- sary consequence that he should have a right to employ agents of his own choice to aid him in the performance of his duties, and to discharge them when he is no longer willing to be responsible for their acts." This, Sir, completes the work. This handsomely rounds off the whole exec- utive system of executive authority. First, the President has the whole responsibility; and then, being thus responsible for all, he has, and ought to have, the whole power. We have heard of political units, and our Amer- ican executive, as here represented, is indeed a unit. We have a charmingly simple government! Instead of many officers, in different departments, each having appropriate duties, and each re- sponsible for his own duties, we are so fortunate as to have to deal with but one officer. The President carries on the government; all the rest are but sub-contractors, sir, whatever nanu we l; i \ < • him, we have but oni execu- tive c.i i ic i a, A Briareufl site in the centre of our bj stem, and w iih his hun- dred hands fcou hee every thing, m< every thing, controls every thing. I ask. sn. Is this republicanism? Is this a government of laws? Is this legal responsibility? According to the Protest, the very duties which every officer under the government performs are the dutie the President himself. It Bays thai tie- President has a right to employ any Longer to talk about any such thing as a government of laws. We have no government of laws, not even the .semi, lance or shadow of it; we have no legal responsibility. We have an executive, consisting of one person, wielding all official power, and which is, to every effectual puij completely irresponsibh . The Presid snt declares that he is •• responsible for the entire action of the executive depart- ment." Responsible? What does he, mean by being "responsible''? Does he mean legal responsibility? Certainly not. No such thing. Legal responsi- bility signifies liability to punishment for misconduct or maladministration. But the Protest does not mean that tin- President is liable to be impeached and punished if a secretary of state should commit treason, if a collector of the cus- toms should be guilty of bribery, or if a treasurer should embezzle the public money. It does not mean, and cannot mean, that he should be answerable for any such crime or such delinquency. What then, is its notion of that re- sponsibility which it says the President is under for all officers, and which au- thorizes him to consider all officer his own personal agents? Sir, merely responsibility to public opin- ion. It is a liability to !"■ Man:-. I; it is the chance of becoming unpopu- lar, the danger of losing a re-election. Nothing else is meant in the world It is the hazard of failing in any at- 388 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. temj>t or enterprise of ambition. This is all the responsibility to which the doctrines of tin- Protest hold the Presi- dent subject. It is precisely the responsibility under which Cromwell acted when he dis- persed Parliament, telling its members, not in so many words, indeed, that they disobeyed the will of their constituents, but telling them that the people were sick of them, and that he drove them out " for the glory of God and the good of the nation." It is precisely the responsibility upon which Bonaparte broke up the popular assembly of France. I do not mean, Sir, certainly, by these illustrations, to insinuate de- signs of violent usurpation against the President; far from it; but I do mean to maintain, that such responsibility as that with which the Protest clothes him is no legal responsibility, no consti- tutional responsibility, no republican responsibility, but a mere liability to loss of office, loss of character, and loss of fame, if he shall choose to violate the laws and overturn the liberties of the country. It is such a responsibility as leaves every thing in his discretion and his pleasure. Sir, it exceeds human belief that any man should put sentiments such as this paper contains into a public communi- cation from the President to the Senate. They are sentiments which give us all one master. The Protest asserts an absolute right to remove all persons from office at pleasure; and for what reason? Because they are incompetent ? Because they are incapable? Because they are remiss, negligent, or inatten- tive? No, Sir; these are not the rea- sons. But he may discharge them, one and all, simply because "he is no longer willing to be responsible for their acts"! It insists on an absolute right in the President to direct and con- trol every act of every officer of the government, except the judges. It as- serts this right of direct control over and over again. The President may go into the treasury, among the auditors and comptrollers, and direct them how ettle every man'.- account; what abatements to make from one, what additions to another. He may go into the custom-house, among collectors and appraisers, and may control, estimates, reductions, and appraisements. It is true that these officers are sworn to dis- charge the duties of their respective offices honestly and fairly, according to their own best abilities; it is true, that many of them are liable to indictment for official misconduct, and others re- sponsible, in suits of individuals, for damages and penalties, if such official misconduct be proved; but notwith- standing all this, the Protest avers that all these officers are but the President's agents; that they are but aiding him in the discharge of his duties; that he is responsible for their conduct, and that they are removable at his will and pleasure. And it is under this view of his own authority that the President calls the Secretaries his Secretaries, not once only, but repeatedly. After half a century's administration of this gov- ernment, Sir; — after we have endeav- ored, by statute upon statute, and by provision following provision, to define and limit official authority; to assign particular duties to particular public servants; to define those duties; to create penalties for their violation; to adjust accurately the responsibility of each agent with his own powers and his own duties; to establish the prevalence of equal rule; to make the law, as far as possible, every thing, and individual will, as far as possible, nothing; — after all this, the astounding assertion rings in our ears, that, throughout the whole range of official agency, in its smallest ramifications as well as in its larger masses, there is but one responsi- bility, ONE DISCRETION, ONE Will! True indeed is it, Sir, if these senti- ments be maintained, — true indeed is it that a President of the United Stales may well repeat from Napoleon what he repeated from Louis the Fourteenth, " I am the state"! The argument by which tin' writer of the Protect endeavors to establish the President's claim to this vast mass of accumulated authority, is founded on THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST s !( the provision of the Constitution that the executive power shall be rested in the President. No doubt the executive power is vested in the President ; but what and how much executive power, ami how limited? T<> this question I should answer, "Look to the Constitu- tion, and Bee ; examine the particulars of the grant, and learn what thai exec- utive power is which is given to the President, either by express words or by necessary implication." But so the writer of this Protest does not reason. He takes these words of the Constitu- tion as being, of themselves, a general original grant of all executive power to the President, subject only to such ex- press limitations as the Constitution prescribes. This is clearly the writer's view of the subject, unless, indeed, he goes behind the Constitution altogether, as some expressions would intimate, to search elsewhere for sources of execu- tive power. Thus, the Protest says that it is not only the right of the Presi- dent, but that the Constitution makes it his duty, to appoint persons to office; as if the right existed before the Consti- tution had created the duty. It speaks, too, of the power of removal, not as a power granted by the Constitution, but expressly as "an original executive power, left unchecked by the Constitu- tion." How original? Coming from what source higher than the Constitu- tion? I should be glad to know how the President gets possession of any power by a title earlier, or more origi- nal, than the grant of the Constitution ; or what is meant by an original power, which the President possesses, and which the Constitution has left un- checked in his hands. The truth is, Sir, most assuredly, that the writer of the Protest, in these passages, was reasoning upon the British constitution, and not upon the Constitution of the I nited States. Indeed, he professes to found himself on authority drawn from the constitution of England. I will read, Sir, the whole passage. It is this : — "In strict accordance with this principle, the power of removal, which, like that of appointment, is an original executive power, i- left unchecked by the Constitution in re- lation to all executive officers, tor whose conduct iIh- President i- responsible; while it i- taken from him in relation to judicial officers, for whose acta lie i* not respond ble. In tin government from which many of tin fundamental principle* if nm tyttem an derived, thi head of th executiw department originally had pouter to appoint and remoct at will all officers, executm and judicial. It was to take the judges ma of this general power of removal, ami thus nuke them independent of the executive, that the ten- ure of their offices was changed to | behavior. Nor is it conceivable why they arc placed, in our Constitution, upon a tenure different from that of all other officers appointed by the executive, unless it he for the same purpose." .Mr. President, I do most solemnly protest (if I, to,,, may be permitted to make a protest) against this mode of reasoning. The analogy between the British constitution and ours, in this respect, is not close enough to guide us safely; it can only mislead us. It has entirely misled the writer of the Pro- test. The President is made to argue, upon this subject, as if he had some right anterior to the Constitution, which right is by that instrument checked, in some respects, ami in other respects is left unchecked, but which, nevertheless, still derives its being from another source; just as the British king had, in the early ages of the monarchy, an uncontrolled right of appointing and removing all officers at pleasure, but which right, so far a- it respects the judges, has since been checked and con- trolled by act of Parliament; the right being original and inherent, the check only imposed by law. Sir. I distrust altogether British precedent-, author- ities, and analogies, on such questions as this. We are not inquiring how- far our Constitution has imposed cheeks on a pre-existing authority. We are inquiring what extent of power that Constitution has granted. The -rant of power, the whole source of power, xs well as the restrictions and limitations which ate imposed on it. is made in and by the Constitution. It has no other 390 THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. origin. And it is this, Sir, which dis- tinguishes our system so very widely and materially from the systems of Europe. Our governments are limited governments; limited in their origin, in their very creation; limited, because none hut specific powers were ever granted, either to any department of government, or to the whole: theirs are limited, whenever limited at all, by rea- son of restraints imposed at different times on governments originally un- limited and despotic. Our American questions, therefore, must be discussed, reasoned on, decided, and settled, on the appropriate principles of our own Constitutions, and not by inapplicable precedents and loose analogies drawn from foreign states. Mr. President, in one of the French comedies, as you know, in which the dulness and prolixity of legal argument is intended to be severely satirized, while the advocate is tediously groping among ancient lore having nothing to do with his case, the judge grows impa- tient, and at last cries out to him to comedown to the flood! I really wish, Sir, thai the writer of this Protest, since he was discussing matters of the highest importance to us as Americans, and which arise out of our own peculiar Constitution, had kept himself, not only on this side I In? general deluge, but also on this side the Atlantic. I desire that tin' broad waves of that wide sea should continue to roll between us and the in- tluence of those foreign principles and foreign precedents which he so eagerly adop In asserting power for an American Pre.sidcnt, I prefer that he should at- tempt to maintain his assertions on American reasons. 1 know not, . s ir, who the writer was (I wish I did); but whoever he was, it is manifest that he argues this pari of his ease, throughout, on the principles of the constitution of 1 . land, li is true, that, in England, the king is regarded as tl riginal fountain of all honor and all office; and thai anciently, indeed, he possessed all political power of every kind. It is true thai this mass of authority, in the progress of that government, has been diminished, restrained, and controlled, by charters, by immunities, by grants, and by various modifications, which the friends of liberty have, at different pe- riods, been able to obtain or to impose. All liberty, as we know, all popular privileges, as indeed the word itself im- ports, were formerly considered as favors and concessions from the monarch. But whenever and wherever civil freedom could get a foothold, and could maintain itself, these favors were turned into rights. Before and during the reigns of the princes of the Stuart family, they were acknowledged only as favors or privileges graciously allowed, although, even then, whenever opportunity of- fered, as in the instance to which I alluded just now, they were contended for as rights ; and by the Revolution of 1G88 they were acknowledged as the rights of Englishmen, by the prince who then ascended the throne, and as the condition on which he was allowed to sit upon it. But with us there never was a time when we acknowledged original, unrestrained, sovereign power over us. Our constitutions are not made to limit and restrain pre-existing authority. They are the instruments by which the people confer power on their own servants. If I may use a legal phrase, the people are grantors, not grantees. They give to the government, and to each branch of it, all the power it possesses, or can possess; and what is not given they retain. In England, be- fore her revolution, and in the rest of Europe since, if we would know the ex- tent of liberty or popular right, we must go to grants, to charters, to allowances, and indulgences. But with us, we go to grants and to constitutions to learn the extent of the powers of government. No political power is more original than the Constitution; none is possessed which is not there granted; and the grant, and the limitations in the grant, are in the same insl rument. The powers, therefore, belonging to any branch of our government, are to be construed and settled, not by remote analogies drawn from other govern- Till; PKESIDKNTIAL l'KOTKST. :;<.n ments, but from the words of the grant itself, in their plain sense and necessary import, and according to an interpreta- tion consistent with our ow a history and the spirit of our own institutions. I will never agree that a I 'resident of the United States holds (lie whole undivided power of office in his own hands, upon the theory that he is responsible for the entire action of the whole body of those engaged in carrying on the government and executing the laws. Such a respon- sibility is purely ideal, delusive, and vain. There is, there can be, no sub- stantial responsibility, any further than every individual is answerable, not merely in his reputation, not merely in the opinion of mankind, but to the law, for the faithful discharge of his own ap- propriate duties. Again and again we hear it said that the President is respon- sible to the American people ! that he is responsible to the bar of public opinion ! For whatever he does, he assumes ac- countability to the American people! For whatever he omits, he expects to be brought to the high bar of public opin- ion ! And this is thought enough for a limited, restrained, republican govern- ment! an undefined, undehnable, ideal responsibility to the public judgment! Sir, if all this mean any thing, if it be not empty sound, it means no less than that the President may do any thing and every thing which he may expect to be tolerated in doing. He may go just so far as he thinks it safe to go; and Crom- well and Bonaparte went no farther. 1 ask again, Sir, is this legal responsi- bility? Is this the true nature of a gov- ernment with written law r s and limited powers? And allow me, Sir, to ask, too, if an executive magistrate, while professing to act under the Constitution, is restrained only by this responsibility to public opinion, what prevents him, on the same responsibility, from propos- ing a change in that Constitution? Why may he not say, " I am about to intro- duce new forms, new principles, and a new spirit; I am about to try a political experiment on a great scale; and when I get through with it, I shall be respon- sible to the American j pie, 1 shall be BJMWerable to the bar of public opin- ion "? ( lonnected, Sir, with the idea oi this airy and unreal responsibility to the public is another sentiment, which of Late we hear frequently expressed; and that is, //ni/ / In President u tin direct rep- resentative of ill' American peoplt , I his is declared in the Protest in so many words. "The President," it says, "u the direct representative of the American people." Now, Sir, this is not the lan- guage of the Constitution. The Con- stitution nowhere calls him the repre- sentative of the American people; still less, their direct representative. It could not do so with the least propriety. He is not chosen directly by the | pie, but by a body of electors, some of whom are chosen by the people, and some of whom are appointed by the State legislatures. Where, then, is the authority for Baying that the President is the direct represent- ative of the peoplt t The Constitution calls the members of the other house Representatives, and declares that they shall be chosen by the people; and there are no other direct or immediate repre- sentatives of the people in this govern- ment. The Constitution denominates the President simply the President of the United States; it points out the complex mode of electing him, defines his powers and duties, and imposes lim- its and restraints on his authority. With these powers and duties, and under these restraints, he becomes, when chosen, President of the United State-. That is his character, and the denomination of his otlice. How is it. then, that, on this official character, thus cautiously created, limited, and defined, he is to engraft another and a very imposing character, namely, the character ofthedi- rect represent a! ii-' of the . 1 mt rican pt ■ I hold this, Sir, to he mere assumption, and dangerous assumption. It' he is the representative of all the American people, he is the only representative which they all have. Nbbodj else pre- -n - to represent all the people. And if he may be allowed to consider him- self as the BOLE REPRE8ENTATIV1 O* ALL l in: Ami ki. \\ PI OPU . and is to oyO THE PRESIDENTIAL PROTEST. act under no other responsibility than Midi as I have already described, then I .say. Sir, that the government (I will not say the people) has already a master. J deny the sentiment, therefore, and I protest against the language; neither the sentiment nor the language is to be found in 'the Constitution of the coun- try: and whoever is not satisfied to de- scribe the powers of the President in the language of the Constitution may be justly suspected of being as little satisfied with the powers themselves. The President is President. His office and his name of office are known, and both are fixed and described by law. Being commander of the army and navy, holding the power of nominating to office and removing from office, and being by these powers the fountain of all patronage and all favor, what does he not become if he be allowed to super- add to all this the character of single representative of the American people? Sir, he becomes what America has not been accustomed to see, what this Con- stitution has never created, and what I cannot contemplate but with profound alarm. He who may call himself the single representative of a nation may speak in the name of the nation, may undertake to wield the power of the nation; and who shall gainsay him in whatsoever he chooses to pronounce to be the nation's will? 1 will now. Sir, ask leave to recapitu- late the general doctrines of this Protest, and to present them together. They are, — That neither branch of the legislature can take up, or consider, for the purpose of censure, any official act of the Presi- dent, without some view to legislation or impeachment ; That n"i only the passage, but the discussion, of the resolution of the Sen- ate of the 28th of .March, was unauthor- ized l>y the Constitution, and repugnant to its provisions ; Thai the custody of the public treas- ury always must he intrusted to the :utive; thai Congress cannot take it out of his hands, nor place it anywhere pi under such superintendents and keepers as are appointed by him, re- sponsible to him, and removable at his will; That the whole executive power is in the President, and that therefore the duty of defending the integrity of the Constitution results to him from the very nature of his office : and that the found- ers of our republic have attested their sense of the importance of this duty, and, by expressing it in his official oath, have given to it peculiar solemnity and force ; That, as he is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, he is there- by made responsible for the entire action of the executive department, with the power of appointing, overseeing, and controlling those who execute the laws; That the power of removal from office, , like that of appointment, is an original executive power, and is lift in his hands unchecked by the Constitution, except in the case of judges; that, being respon- sible for the exercise of the whole exec- utive power, he has a right to employ agents of his own choice to assist him in the performance of his duties, and to discharge them when he is no longer willing to be responsible for their acts; That the Secretaries are his Secre- taries, and all persons appointed to of- fices created by law, except the judges, his agents, responsible to him, and re- movable at his pleasure; Aud, finally, that he is the direct rep- resentative b greal public measures, men will act conscientiously, under the influ- ence of public principle and patriotic duty; and that, in supporting or oppos- ing men or measures, there will be a general prevalence of honest, intelligent judgment and manly independence. These presumptions lie at the founda- tion of all hope of maintaining gov- ernments entirely popular. Whenever personal, individual, or selfish motives influence the conduct of individuals on public questions, they affect the safety of the whole system. When these mo- tives run deep and wide, and come in serious conflict with higher, purer, and more patriotic purposes, they greatly endanger that system; and all will ad- mit that, if they become general and overwhelming, so that all public prin- ciple is lost sight of, and every election becomes a mere scramble for office, the system inevitably must fall. Every wise man, in and out of government, will endeavor, therefore, to promote the ascendency of public virtue and public principle, and to restrain as far as prac- ticable, in the actual operation of our institutions, the influence of selfish and private interest-. I concur with those who think, that, looking to the present, and looking also to the future, and regarding all the probabilities that await us in reference to the character and qualities of those who may till the executive chair, it is important to the stabilityof government and the welfare of the people that there should be a check to the progress of official influence and patronage. The THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING I'OWKR. 95 unlimited power to grant office, and to take; it away, gives a commaiiil over tin- hopes and fears of a vast multitude of men. It is generally true, that he who controls another man's means of living controls his will. Where there are Ea- vors to be granted, there are usually enough to solicit for them; and when favors once granted may he w it lidrawu at pleasure, there is ordinarily little security for personal independence of character. The power of giving office thus affects the fears of all who are in, and the hopes of all who are out. Those who are out endeavor to distin- guish themselves by active political friendship, by warm personal devotion, by clamorous support of men in whose hands is the power of reward; while those who are in ordinarily take care bhat others shall not surpass them in such qualities or such conduct as are most likely to secure favor. They re- solve not to be outdone in any of the works of partisanship. The conse- quence of all this is obvious. A com- petition ensues, not of patriotic labors; not of rough and severe toils for the public good; not of manliness, inde- pendence, and public spirit; but of complaisance, of indiscriminate support of executive measures, of pliant sub- serviency and gross adulation. All throng and rush together to the altar of man-worship; and there they offer sacrifices, and pour out libations, till the thick fumes of their incense turn their own heads, and turn, also, the head of him who is the object of their idolatry. The existence of parties in popular governments is not to be avoided; and if they are formed on constitutional questions, or in regard to great meas- ures of public policy, and do not run to excessive length, it may be admitted that, on the whole, they do no great harm. But the patronage of office, the power of bestowing place and emolu- ments, creates parties, not upon any principle or any measure, but upon the single ground of personal interest. Un- der the direct influence of this motive, they form round a leader, and they go lot " the spoils of victory." And if tie- party chieftain becomes the national chieftain, he is still bul too apt to con- sider all who have opposed him as ene- mies to be punished, and all w bo b supported him as friends to be rewai ded. Hliml devotion to party, and to the head of a party, thus takes place of the Benti- uieiii of generous patriotism and a high and exalted sense of public duty. Let it not he said, sir, that the dan- ger from executive patronage cannoi be great, since the persons who hold office, or can bold office, constitute BO small a portion of the whole people. In the first place, it, is to be remem- bered that patronage acts, not only on those who actually possess office, hut on those also who expect it, or hope for it ; and in the next place, office-holders, by their very situation, their public slat ion, their connection with the business of individuals, their activity, their ability to help or to hurt according to their pleasure, their acquaintance with public affairs, and their zeal and devotion, ercise a degree of influence out of all proportion to their numbers. Sir, we cannot disregard our own ex- perience. We cannot shut our eyes to what is around us and upon as. No candid man can deny that a great, a very great change has taken place, within a few years, in the practii E the executive government, which has produced a corresponding change in our political condition. No one can deny that office, of every kind, is now sought with extraordinary avidity, and that the condition, well understood to be attached to every officer, high or low, is indis- criminate support of executive measures and implicit obedience to executive will. For these reasons, Sir, I am for arrest- ing the further progress of this execu- tive patronage, if we can arrest it; I am for staying the further contagion of this plague. The bill proposes two measures. One is to alter the duration of certain offices, now limited absolutely to four years that the limitation shall be qualified or conditional If the officer is in default, if his accounts are not settle. 1, if be re- :■.<•«; THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER. tains or misapplies the public money, information is to be given thereof, and thereupon his commission is to cease. But if his accounts are all regularly set- tled, if he collects and disburses the public money faithfully, then he is to remain in office, unless, for some other cause, the President sees fit to remove him. This is the provision of the bill. It applies only to certain enumerated officers, who may be called accounting officers; that is to say, officers who re- ceive and disburse the public money. Formerly, all these officers held their places at the pleasure of the President. If he saw no just cause for removing them, they continued in their situations, no fixed period being assigned for the ex- piration of their commissions. But the act of 1820 limited the commissions of these officers to four years. At the end of four years, they were to go out, with- out any removal, however well they might have conducted themselves, or however useful to the public their fur- ther continuance in office might be. They might be nominated again, or might not; but their commissions ex- pired. Now, Sir, I freely admit that consid- erable benefit has arisen from this law. I agree that it has, in some instances, secured promptitude, diligence, and a sense of responsibility. These were the benefits which those who passed the law expected from it; and these benefits have, in some measure, been realized. But I think that this change in the ten- ure of office, together with some good, has brought along a far more than equivalent amount of evil. By the operation of this law, the President can deprive a man of office without taking the responsibility of removing him. The law itself vacates the office, and gives the means of rewarding a friend without the exercise of the power of re- tnoval at all. Here is increased power, with diminished responsibility. Here i-- a still greater dependence, for the means of living, on executive favor, and. of course, a new dominion acquired over opinion and over conduct. The power of removal is, or at least formerly was, a suspected and odious power. Public opinion would not always toler- ate it; and still less frequently did it approve it. Something of character, something of the respect of the intelli- gent and patriotic part of the commu- nity, was lost by every instance of its unnecessary exercise. This was some restraint. But the law of 1820 took it all away. It vacated offices periodically, by its own operation, and thus added to the power of removal, which it left still existing in full force, a new and ex-' traordinary facility for the extension of patronage, influence, and favoritism. I would ask every member of the Sen- ate if he does not perceive, daily, effects which may be fairly traced to this cause. Does he not see a union of purpose, a devotion to power, a co-operation in action, among all who hold office, quite unknown in the earlier periods of the government? Does he not behold, every hour, a stronger development of the principle of personal attachment, and a corresponding diminution of genuine and generous public feeling? Was in- discriminate support of party measures, was unwavering fealty, was regular suit and service, ever before esteemed such important and essential parts of official duty? Sir, the theory of our institutions is plain ; it is, that government is an agency created for the good of the people, and that every person in office is the agent and servant of the people. Offices are created, not for the benefit of those who are to fill them, but for the public con- venience; and they ought to be no more in number, nor should higher salaries be attached to them, than the public service requires. This is the theory. But the difficulty in practice is, to pre- vent a direct reversal of all this; to pre- vent public oiliees from being considered as intended for the use and emolument of those who can obtain them. There is a headlong tendency to this, and it is ne- cessary to restrain it, by wise and effect- ive legislation. There is still another, and perhaps a greatly more mischievous result, of extensive patronage in the hands of a single magistrate, to which I THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER :{'.«7 have already incidentally alluded; and thai is, that men in office bave begun to think themselves mere agents and ser- vants of the appointing power, and not agents of the government or the country • Ii is, in an especial manner, important, it' it be practicable, to apply some cor- rective to this kind of feeling and opin- ion. It is necessary to bring back public officers to the conviction, that they belong to the country, and not to any administrat ion, nor to any one man. The army is the army of the country; the navy is the navy of the country; nei- ther of them is either the mere instru- ment of the administration for the time being, nor of him who is at the head of it. The post-office, the land-office, the custom-house, are, in like manner, institutions of the country, established for the good of the people; and it may well alarm the lovers of free institutions, when all the offices in these several de- part incuts are spoken of, in high places, as being but '• spoils of victory," to be enjoyed by those who are successful in a contest, in which they profess this grasp- ing of the spoils to have been the object of their efforts. This part of the bill, therefore, Sir, is a subject for fair comparison. We have gained something, doubtless, by limiting the commissions of these offi- cers to four years. But have we gained as much as we have lost? And may not the good be preserved, and the evil still avoided? Is it not enough to say, that if, at the end of four years, moneys are retained, accounts unsettled, or other duties unperformed, the office shall be held to be vacated, without any positive act of removal? For one, I think the balance of ad- vantage is decidedly in favor of the present bill. I think it will make men more dependent on their own good con- duct, and less dependent on the will of others. I believe it will cause them to regard their country more, their own duty more, and the favor of individuals less. I think it will contribute to offi- cial respectability, to freedom of opin- ion, to independence of character; and 1 think it will tend, in no small degree, to prevenl the mixture of selfish and per- sonal motives with the exercise of high political duties. It will promote true and genuine republicanism, by causing the opinion of the people respecting the measures of government, and the men in government, to be formed and ex- pressed w itl t fear or favor, and with a more entire regard to their true and real merits or demerits. It w ill kx far as its effects reach, an auxiliary to patriotism and public virtue, in their warfare against selfishness and Cupidity. The see, in, 1 cheek < >ll e\eellti\e ],a! roll- age contained in this bill ia of still greater importance than the first. This provision is, that, whenever the Presi- dent removes any of these officers from oiiice, he shall state to the Senate the reasons for Buch removal. This pari of the bill has been opposed, both on con- stitutional grounds and on grounds of expediency. The bill, it is to be observed, ex- pressly recognizes and admits the actual existence of the power of removal. 1 do not mean to deny, and the bill does not deny, that, at the present moment, the President may remove these offi- cers at will, because the early decision adopted that construction, and the laws have since uniformly sanctioned it. The law of 1820, intended to be re- pealed by this bill, expressly affirms the power. I consider it, therefore, a settled point; settled by construction, settled by precedent, settled by the practice of the government, and settled by statute. At the same time, after considering the question again and again within the last >ix years, I am very willing to say, that, in my delib- erate judgment, the original decision was wrong. I cannot but think that those who denied the power in 1789 had the best of the argument; and yel 1 will not say that 1 know my8eli thoroughly as to affirm, that this opin- ion may not have been produced, in some measure, by that abuse of the power which has been passing before our eyes for several years, It is possi- ble that this experience of lii ■ evil may have affected my view of the constitu- :;:»s THE APPOINTING AND REMOVIXG POWER. tiona] argument. It appears to me, however, after thorough and repeated ami conscientious examination, that an erroneous interpretation was given to the Constitution, in this respect, by the decision of the first Congress; and I will ask leave to state, shortly, the rea- sons for that opinion, although there is nothing in this bill which proposes to disturb that decision. The Constitution nowhere says one word of the power of removal from office, except in the case of conviction on impeachment. Wherever the power exists, therefore, except in cases of im- peachment, it must exist as a construc- tive or incidental power. If it exists in the President alone, it must exist in him because it is attached to something else, or included in something else, or results from something else, which is granted to the President. There is cer- tainly no specific grant; it is a power, therefore, the existence of which, if proved at all, is to be proved by infer- ence and argument. In the only in- stance in which the Constitution speaks of removal from office, as I have already said, it speaks of it as the exercise of judicial power; that is to say, it speaks of it as one part of the judgment of the Senate, in cases of conviction on im- peachment. No other mention is made, in tlie whole instrument, of any power of removal. Whence, then, is the power derived to the President? It is usually said, by those who main- tain its existence in the single hands of the President, that the power is derived from that clause of the Constitution which says. '"The executive power shall be vested in a President." The power of removal, they argue, is, in its nature, an executive power; and, as the executive power is thus vested in the P -ident. the powerof removal is neces- sarily included. It is true, that the Constitution de- clares thai the executive power shall be vested in the President; but the first question which then arises is, What is executive power? What is the degree, and what an On limitations? Ex- ecutive power is not a thing so well known, and so accurately defined, as that the written constitution of a limited government can be supposed to have conferred it in the lump. What is executive power? What are its boundaries ? What model or exam- ple had the framers of the Constitution in their minds, when they spoke of ••executive power"? Did they mean executive power as known in England, or as known in France, or as known in Russia? Did they take it as defined by Montesquieu, by Burlamaqui, or by De Lolme? All these differ from one an- other as to the extent of the executive power of government. What, then, was intended by "the executive power"? Now, Sir, I think it perfectly plain and manifest, that, although the framers of the Constitution meant to confer execu- tive power on the President, yet they meant to define and limit that power, and to confer no more than they did thus define and limit. When they say it shall be vested in a President, they mean that one magistrate, to be called a President, shall hold the executive authority; but they mean, further, that he shall hold this authority according to the grants and limitations of the Con- stitution itself. They did not intend, certainly, a sweeping gift of prerogative. They did not intend to grant to the President whatever might be construed, or sup- posed, or imagined to be executive power; and the proof that they meant no such thing is, that, immediately after using these general words, they proceed specifically to enumerate his several distinct and particular authori- ties; to fix and define them; to give the Senate an essential control over the exercise of some of them, and to Leave others uncontrolled. By the executive power conferred on the President, the Constitution means no more than that portion which itself creates, and which it qualifies, limits, and circumscribes. A general survey of the frame of the ( 'oust it ut ion will satisfy us of this. That instrument goes all along upon the idea of dividing the powers of gov- ernment, so far as practicable, into THE APPOINTING and REMOVING POWER. 899 throe profit departments. Tt describes tin- powers and duties of these depart- ments In an article allotted to each. As first in importance and dignity, it begins with the legislative department. The first article of the Constitution, therefore, commences with the declara- tion, that "all legislative power herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of tin- United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representa- tives." The article goes on to proscribe the manner in which Congress is to be constituted and organized, and thai pro- ceeds to enumerate, sp< cl/ica/ly, the powers int< nded to he granted ; and adds the gen- eral clause, conferring such authority as may be necessary to carry granted powers into effect. Now, Sir, no man doubts that this is a limited legislature; that it possesses no powers but such as are granted by express words or neces- sary implication; and that it would be quite preposterous to insist that Con- gress possesses any particular legislative power, merely because it is, in its nature, a legislative body, if no grant can be found for it in the Constitution itsolf. Then comes, Sir, the second article, creating an executive power; and it declares, that " the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States." After providing for the mode of choosing him, it immedi- ately proceeds to enumerate, specifically, the powers which he shall possess and exercise, and the duties which he shall perform. I consider the language of this article, therefore, precisely analo- gous to that in which the legislature is created; that is to say, I understand the Constitution as saying that " the execu- tive power herein granted shall be vested in a President of the United States." In like manner, the third article, or that which is intended to arrange the judicial system, begins by declaring that " the judicial power of the United States shall he vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish." But these gen- eral words do not show what extent of judicial power is \e>ted in the com I the United Mates. All that is left to be di , and i^ done, in the follow ing sections, ly express ami well-guarded pitn isions. I think, therefore, sir, that rary great caution is t" be used, and the ground well considered, before w- ad- mil that the President derives any dis- tinct and specific power from those genera] words which vest the executive authority in him. The Constitution itself dues not rest satisfied with these general words. It immediately •_:"•■- into particulars, and carefully enumer- ates the several authorities which the President shall possess. The very first of the enumerate, 1 powers is the com- mand of the army and navy. This, most certainly, is an executive power. And why is it particularly Bet down and expressed, if any power was intended I i be granted under the general words? This would pass, if any thing would pass, under those words. Hut enumer- ation, specification, particularization, was evidently the design of the framers of the Constitution, in this as in other parts of it. I do not, therefore, regard the declaration that the executive power shall be vested in a President as being any grant at all; any more than the declaration that the legislative power shall be vested in Congre^ constitutes, by itself, a grant of such power. In the one case, as in the other, I think the object was to describe and denomi- nate the department, which should hold, respectively, the legislative and the ex- ecutive authority; very much as we Bee, in some of the State constitutions, that the several articles are headed with the titles " legislative power," " executive power," "judicial power"; ami this entitling of the articles with the name of the power has never been supposed, of itself, to confer any authority what- ever. It amounts to no more than naming the departments. If, then, the power of removal be admitted to be an executive power, still it must besought for and found among the enumerated executive powers, or fairly implied from some one or more 400 THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER. of them. It cannot be implied from the general words. The power of ap- pointment was not left to lie so implied; why, then, should the power of removal have been SO Left? They are both closely connected; one is indispensable to the other; why, then, was one care- fully expressed, defined, and limited, and not one word said about the other? Sir, I think the whole matter is suffi- ciently plain. Nothing is said in the Constitution about the power of re- moval, because it is not a separate and distinct power. It is part of the power of appointment, naturally going with it or necessarily resulting from it. The Constitution or the laws may separate these powers, it is true, in a particular c ise, as is done in respect to the judges, who. though appointed by the President and Senate, cannot be removed at the pleasure of either or of both. So a statute, in prescribing the tenure of any other office, may place the officer beyond the reach of the appointing power. But where no other tenure is prescribed, and officers hold their places at will, that will is necessarily the will of the ap- pointing power; because the exercise of the power of appointment at once dis- places such officers. The power of plac- ing one man in office necessarily implies the power of turning another out. If one man be Secretary of State, and an- other be appointed, the first goes out by the mere force of the appointment of the other, without any previous act of removal whatever. And this is the practice of the government, and has been, from the first. In all the re- movals which have been made, they have generally been effected simply by making other appointments. I cannot find a c;im- to the contrary. There is DO such thing as any distinct official act of removal. I have looked into the practice, and caused inquiries to be made in the depart ments, and [do nol learn that an\ Buch proceeding is known an entry or record of the removal of an officer from office; and the Presidenl could only act. in Mich cases, by causing some proper record or entry to !»• made, proof of the tact of removal. I am aware that there have been some cases in which notice has been sent to persons in office that their services are, or will be, after a given day, dispensed with. These are usually cases in which the object is, not to inform the incumbent that he is removed, but to tell him that a successor either is, or by a day named will be, appointed. If there be any instances in which such notice is given without express reference to the ap- pointment of a successor, they are few; and even in these, such reference must be implied; because in no case is there any distinct official act of removal, that, I can find, unconnected with the act of appointment. At any rate, it is the usual practice, and has been from the first, to consider the appointment as producing the removal of the previous incumbent. When the President de- sires to remove a person from office, he sends a message to the Senate nominat- ing some other person. The message usually runs in this form: " I nominate A. B. to be collector of the customs, &c, in the place of C. IX, removed." If the Senate advise and consent to this nomination, C. D. is effectually out of office, and A. B. is in, in his place. The same effect would be produced, if the message should say nothing of any removal. Suppose A. B. to be Secre- tary of State, and the President to send us a message, saying merely, " I nomi- nate C. 1). to be Secretary of State." If we confirm this nomination, C. D. becomes Secretary of State, and A. B. is necessarily removed. I have gone into these details and par- ticulars, Sir, for the purpose of showing, that, not only in the nature of things, but also according to the practice of the government, the power of removal is in- cident to the power of appointment. It belongs to it, is attached to it, forms a part of it, or results from it. If this be true, the inference is mani- fest. If the power of removal, when not otherwise regulated by Constitution or law. hi' part and parcel of the power of appointment, or a necessary incident to it, then whoever holds the power of appointment holds also the power of re- THE APPOINTING AM) REMOVING POWER, 101 moval. \ But it is the President and the Senate, and not tin- 1 'resident alone, who hold the power of appointment ; and therefore, according to the true con- struction of the Constitution, it should be the President and Senate, and not the President alone, who hold the power of removal. / The decision of 1789 has been followed by ;i very strange and indefensible anom- aly, showing that it does not rest on any just principle. The natural connection between the appointing power and the removing power has, as I have already stated, always led the President "to bring about a removal by the process of a new appointment. This is quite efficient for his purpose, when the Senate confirms the new nomination. One man is then turned out, and another put in. But the Senate sometimes rejects the new nomination; and what then becomes of the old incumbent? Is he out of office, or is he still in? He has not been turned out by any exercise of the power of aj>- pointment, for no appointment has been made. That power has not been exer- cised, lie has not been removed by any distinct and separate act of removal, for no such act has been performed, or at- tempted. Is he still in, then, or is he out? Where is he? In this dilemma, Sir, those who maintain the power of removal as existing in the President alone are driven to what seems to me very near absurdity. The incumbent has not been removed by the appointing power, since the appointing power has not been exercised. He has not been re- moved by any distinct and independent act of removal, since no such act has been performed. They are forced to the necessity, there- fore, of contending that the removal has been accomplished by the mere nomina- tion of a successor; so that the removing power is made incident, not to the ap- pointing power, but to one part of it; that is, to the nominating power. The nomination, not having been assented to by the Senate, it is clear, has failed, as the first step in the process of appoint- ment. But though thus rendered null and void in its main object, as the first 20 process in making an appointment, it is held tn lie good and valid, neverthi to bring about that which r< tultsjrom an appointment; that is, the removal "i the person actually in office, [n other words, the nomination proline.', the consequen- ces of an appointment, or some of them, though ii I"- itself no appointmenl . ami effeci no appointment. This, Sir, ap- pears to me to he any thing bul sound reasoning ami just construct ion. lint, this is nut all. The President has sometimes sent as a nomination to an Office already tilled, and. before we have arled upon it. has seen lit to withdraw it. What is the effect of such a nomina- tion? If a nomination, merely as Buch, turns out the present incumbent, then he is out, let what will become after- wards of the nomination. Hilt I believe the President has acted upon the idea that, a nomination made, and at. any time afterwards withdrawn, does not re- move the actual incumbent. Sir, even this is not the end of the in- consistencies into which the prevailing doctrine has led. There have been eases in which nominations to offices already filled have come to the Senate, remained here for weeks, or months, the incum- bents all the while continuing to dis- charge their official duties, ami relin- quishing their offices only when the nominations of their successors have been confirmed, and commissions issued to them; so that, it' a nomination be confirmed, the nomination itself makes m> removal; the removal then waits to be brought about by the appointment. But if the nomination 1" ■ /, then the nomination itself, it is contended, has effected the removal. Who can defend opinions which lead to such results? These reasons, Sir, incline mestron to the opinion, that, upon a just con- struction of the Constitution, the power of removal is part of, or a necessary re- sult fi'imi, the power of appointment, and. therefore, that it ought to havi exercised by the Senate concurrently with the President. The argument may be strengthened by various illustrations. The Constitu- tion declares that Congress may vest the 402 THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING PCHYER. appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments; and Con- gress has passed various acts providing for appointments, according to this reg- ulation of the Constitution. Thus the Supreme Court, and other courts of the United States, have authority to appoint their clerks; heads of departments also appoint their own clerks, according to statute provisions; and it lias never been doubted thai these courts, and these heads of departments, may remove their clerks at pleasure, although nothing is said in the Laws respecting such-power of removal. Now. it is evident that, neither the courts nor the heads of departments acquire the right of removal under a general grant of executive power, for none such is made to them; nor upon the ground of any general injunction to see the laws executed, for no such general injunction is addressed to them. They neverthe- less hold the power of removal, as all admit, and they must hold it, therefore, simply as incident to, or belonging to, the power of appointment. There is no other clause under which they can possi- bly claim it. Again, let us suppose that the Con- stitution had given to the President the power of appointment, without consult- in- the Senate. Suppose it had said, " The President shall appoint ambassa- dors, other public ministers, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States." If the Constitu- tion had stood thus, the President would unquestionably have possessed the power of removal, where the tenure of office was not fixed; and no man, I imagine, would in that case have looked for the removing power either in that clause which says the executive authority shall be vested in the President, or in that other clause which makes it his duty to the laws faithfully executed. Every- 1 ody would have -aid. " The President po i ies an uncont rolled power of ap- pointment, and that necessarily carries with it an uncontrolled power of re- moval, unless some permanenl tenure be given to the office by the Constitution, or by law." And now. Sir, let me state, and ex- amine, the main argument, on which the decision of 1789 appears to rest it. The most plausible reasoning brought forward on that occasion may be fairly stated thus: "The executive power is vested in the President; this is the gen- eral rule of the Constitution. The asso- ciation of the Senate with the President, in exercising a particular function be- longing to the executive power, is an exception to this general rule, and ex- ceptions to general rules are to be taken strictly; therefore, though the Senate partakes of the appointing power, by ex- press provision, yet, as nothing is said of its participation in the removing power, such participation is to be excluded." The error of this argument, if I may venture to call it so, considering who used it, 1 lies in this. It supposes the power of removal to be held by the President under the general grant of executive power. Now, it is certain that the power of appointment is not held under that general grant, because it is particularly provided for, and is conferred, in express terms, on the President and Senate. If, therefore, the power of removal be a natural ap- pendage to the power of appointment, then it is not conferred by the general vrords granting executive power to the President, but is conferred by the spe- cial clause which gives the appointing power to the President and Senate. So that the spirit of the very rule on which the argument of 1789, as 1 have stated it, relies, appears to me to produce a directly opposite result; for, if excep- tions to a general rule are to be taken strictly, when expressed, it is still more clear, when they are not expressed at all, that they are not to be implied ex- cept on evident and clear grounds; and as the general power of appointment is confessedly given to the President and Senate, no exception is to be implied in favor of one part of that general power, namely, the removing part, unless for some obvious and irresistible reason. i Mr. Madison. Sec the discussion in Galea and Seaton's Debates in Congress, Vol. I. p. 473 et seq. THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER 108 In other words, this argument which I am answering is not sound in its prem- ises, and therefore not .sound in its con- elusion, if the grant of the power of appointmenl does naturally include also the power of removal, when this last power is not otherwise expressly pro- vided for; because, it' the power of removal belongs to the power of appoint- ment, or necessarily follows it, then it has gone with it into the hands of the President and Senate; and the President does not hold it alone, as an implication or inference from the grant to him of general executive powers. The true application of that rule of construction, thus relied on, would pre- sent the argument, I think, in this form: " The appointing power is vested in tlie President and Senate; this is the general rule of the Constitution. The removing power is part of the appoint- ing power; it cannot be separated from the rest, but by supposing that an ex- ception was intended; but all exceptions to general rules are to be taken strictly, even when expressed; and, for a much stronger reason, they are not to be im- plied, when not expressed, unless inevita- ble necessity of construction requires it." On the whole, Sir, with the diffidence which becomes one who is reviewing the opinions of some of the ablest and wisest men of the age, I must still express my own conviction, that the decision of Congress in 1789, which separated the power of removal from the power of appointment, was founded on an erro- neous construction of the Constitution, and that it has led to great inconsisten- cies, as well as to great abuses, in the subsequent, and especially in the more recent, history of the government. Much has been said now, and much was said formerly, about the inconven- ience of denying this power to the Presi- dent alone. 1 agree that an argument drawn from this source may have weight, in a doubtful case; but it is not to be permitted that we shall presume the ex- istence of a power merely because we think it would be convenient. Xor is there, I think, any such glaring, strik- ing, or certain inconvenience as has been suggested. Sudden removals from office are seldom sessary; we see how seldom, bj reference to the pracl ice of the government under all administra- tions which preceded the present. And if we look hack over the removals which have l u made in the last six yi there is do man who can maintain that there is one case in a bundled in which the country would have Buffered the least inconvenience if no removal had been made without the consent of the Senate. Party might have Celt the in- convenience, but the country m Many removals have been made (by new appointments) during the Bession of the Senate; and if then' has occurred one single case, in the whole mx years, in which the public convenience required the removal of an officer in the recess, such case has escaped my recollection. Besides, it is worthy of being remene bered, when we are seeking for the true; intent of the Constitution on this sub- ject, that there is reason to suppose that its framers expected the Senate would be in session a much larger part of the year than the House of Representatives, so that its concurrence could generally be had, at once, on any question of appoint- ment or removal. But this argument, drawn from the supposed inconvenience of denying an absolute power of removal to the Presi- dent, suggests still another view of the question. The argument asserts, that it must have been the intention of the framers of the Constitution to confer the power on the President, for the sake of convenience, and as an absolutely necessary power in his hands. Why, then, did they leave their intent doubt- ful? Why did (hey not confer tht power in express terms? Why were they thus totally silent on a point of bo much im- portance? Seeing that the removing power nat- urally belongs to the appointing power; seeing that, in other cases, in the - Constitution, its framers hive left the one with the consequence of drawing the other after it, — if, in this insta they meant to do what was uncommon and extraordinary, that is to Bay, if they 40-1 THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER. meant to separate and divorce the two powers, why did they not say so? Why did they not express their meaning in plain words? Why should they take up the appointing power, and carefully define it, limit it, and restrain it, and yet leave to vague inference and loose construction an equally important pow- er, which ad must admit to be closely connected with it, if not a part of it? [f others can account for all this silence respecting the removing power, upon any other ground than that the framers of the Constitution regarded both powers as one, and supposed they had provided for them together, I confess I cannot. I have the clearest conviction, that they looked to no other mode of displacing an officer than by impeachment, or by the regular appointment of another per- son to the same place. But, Sir, whether the decision of 1789 were right or wrong, the bill before us applies to the actually existing state of things. It recognizes the President's power of removal, in express terms, as it has been practically exercised, inde- pendently of the Senate. The present bill does not disturb the power; but I wish it not to be understood that the power is, even now, beyond the reach of legislation. I believe it to be within the just power of Congress to reverse the decision of 1789, and I mean to hold myself at liberty to act, hereafter, upon that question, as I shall think the safety of the government and of the Constitu- tion may require. The present bill, however, proceeds upon the admission that the power does at present exist. Its words are : — "Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That, in all Dominations made by the President to the Senate, to till vacancies occasioned by the exercise of the President's power to remove the .said officers mentioned in the second Beet ion of this act, the fact of the removal shall )»■ staled to the Senate, at the same time thai the nomination is made, with a statement of the reasons for which such officer maj bai e been removed." In my opinion, this provision is en- tirely constitutional, and highly expe- dient. The regulation of the tenure of office is a common exercise of legislative au- thority, and the power of Congress in this particular is not at all restrained or limited by any thing contained in the Constitution, except in regard to judi- cial officers. All the rest is left to the ordinary discretion of the legislature. Congress may give to offices which it creates (except those of judges) what duration it pleases. When the office is created, and is to be filled, the President is to nominate the candidate to fill it; but when he comes into the office, lit; comes into it upon the conditions and restrictions which the law may have at- tached to it. If Congress were to de- clare by law that the Attorney-General, or the Secretary of State, should hold his office during good behavior, I am not aware of any ground on which such a law could be held unconstitutional. A provision of that kind in regard to such officers might be unwise, but I do not perceive that it would transcend the power of Congress. If the Constitution had not prescribed the tenure of judicial office, Congress might have thought it expedient to give the judges just such a tenure as the Constitution has itself provided; that is to say, a right to hold during good be- havior; and I am of opinion that such a law would have been perfectly constitu- tional. It is by law, in England, that the judges are made independent of the removing power of the crown. I do not think that the Constitution, by giving the power of appointment, or the power both of appointment and removal, to the President and Senate, intended to impose any restraint on the legislature, in regard to its authority of regulating the duties, powers, duration, or respon- sibility of office. I agree, that Congress ought not to do anything which shall essentially impair that right of nina- tion and appointment of certain officers, such as ministers, judges, &C, which the Constitution has rested in the Presi- dent and Senate. But while the power of nomination and appointment is left fairly where the Constitution has placed it, I think the whole field of regulation THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER. Ki.O is open to legislative discretion. If a law were t<> pass, declaring that district attorneys, or collectors of customs, should hold their offices four years, unites re- moved on conviction for misbehavior, no one could doubt its constitutional validity; because the legislature is nat- urally competent to prescribe the tenure of office. And is a reasonable check on the power of removal any thing more than ;i qualification of the tenure of of- fice? Lei it be always remembered, that the President's removing power, as now exercised, is claimed and held under the general clause vesting in him the executive authority. It is implied, or inferred, from that clause alone. Now, if it is properly derived from that source, since the Constitution does not say how it shall be limited, how de- fined, or how carried into effect, it seems especially proper for Congress, under the general provision of the Constitu- tion which gives it authority to pass all laws necessary to carry into effect the powers conferred on any department, to regulate the subject of removal. And the regulation here required is of the gentlest kind. It only provides that the President shall make known to the Sen- ate his reasons for removal of officers of this description, when he does see fit to remove them. It might, I think, very justly go farther. It might, and perhaps it ought, to prescribe the form of removal, and the proof of the fact. It might, I also think, declare that the President should only suspend officers, at pleasure, till the next meeting of the Senate, according to the amendment sug- gested by the honorable member from Kentucky; and, if the present practice cannot be otherwise checked, this pro- vision, in my opinion, ought hereafter to be adopted. But I am content with the slightest degree of restraint which may be sufficient to arrest the totally un- necessary, unreasonable, and dangerous exercise of the power of removal. I desire only, for the present at least, that, when the President turns a man out of office, he should give his reasons for it to the Senate, when he nominates another person to fill the place. Let him give tin and Btand on them, li the} are Eair and hones! , he need have no fear in Btating them. It is not to invite any trial; it is not to give the removed officer an opportunity of defence; it is not to excite i I ro versy and debate; it is simply that the Senate, and ultimately the public, may know the -rounds of removal. I deem this degree of regulation, at Least, neces- sary; unless we are willing to submit all these officers to an absolute and a per- fectly irresponsible removing power; a power which, as recent l\ exercised, tends to turn the whole l>od> of public officers into partisans, dependants, favorites, sycophants, and man-worshippers. Mr. President, without pursuing the discussion further, I will detain the Sen- ate only while I recapitulate the opinions which I have expressed; because I am far less desirous of influencing the judg- ment of others, than of making clear this grounds of my own judgment. I think, then, Sir, that the power of appointment naturally and necessarily includes the power of removal where no limitation is expressed, nor any tenure but that at will declared. The power of appointment being conferred on the President and Senate, I think the power of removal went along with it, and should have been regarded as a part of it, and exercised by the same hands. I think, consequently, that the decision of 1789, which implied a power of removal separate from the appointing power, was erroneous. Hut I think the decision of 1789 has been established by practice, and recog- nized by subsequent laws, as the settled construction of the Constitution, and that it is our duty to act upon the case accordingly, for the present ; without admitting that Congress may not. here- after, if necessity shall require it, re- verse the decision of 1789. I think the legislature possesses the power of !• kiting the condition, duration, qualifica- tion, and tenure of office, in all cases where the Constitution has made no ex- press provision on the subject. I am, therefore, of opinion, that it is competent for Congress to declare by 40G THE APPOINTING AND REMOVING POWER. law, as one qualification of the tenure of office, that the incumbent shall re- main in place till the President shall remove him, for reasons to he stated to the Senate. And I am of opinion that this qualification, mild and gentle as it is, will have some effect in arresting the evils which beset the progress of the government, and seriously threaten its future prosperity. These are the reasons for which I give my support to this bill. NOTE. Tins speech is singular among the speeches of Mr. Webster, as it exhibits him as a " Strict-Constructionist," and as a master of that peculiar kind of deductive reasoning which is commonly considered the special distinction of his great antago- nist, Mr. Calhoun. In subtilty and refine- ment of argument it is fully the match of most of Mr. Calhoun's elaborate disquisi- tions. At the time of its delivery it ex- cited the almost savage ire of John Quincy Adams, as will be seen by reference to the hitter's "Diary." It was in connection witli tins speech that Mr. Adams speaks of "the rotten heart of Daniel Webster. " How such a purely intellectual feat as this, one so entirely passionless and impersonal, should be referred to rottenness of heart, is one of the unexplained mysteries of the operations of Mr. Adams's understanding, when that understanding was misled by personal antipathy. ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, OH I UK 14th OE JANUARY, 1830, ON MR BENTON'S RESOLUTIONS FOB flJPPROPBI- ATING THE SURPLUS REVENUE TO NATIONAL DEI KM K. It is not my purpose, Mr. President, to make any remark OH the state of our affairs with France. The time for that discussion has not come, and I wait. AW' are in daily expectation of a com- munication from the President, which will give us light; and we are author- ized to expect a recommendation by him of such measures as lie thinks it may be necessary and proper for Congress to adopt. I do not anticipate him. In this most important and delicate busi- ness, it is the proper duty of the exec- utive to go forward, and I, for one, do not intend either to be drawn or driven into the lead. When official informa- tion shall be before us, and when meas- ures shall be recommended upon the proper responsibility, I shall endeavor to form the best judgment I can, and shall act according to its dictates. I rise, now, for another purpose. This resolution has drawn on a debate upon the general conduct of the Senate during the last session of Congress, and espe- cially in regard to the proposed grant of the three millions to the President on the last night of the session. My main object is to tell the story of this transac- tion, and to exhibit the conduct of tic Senate fairly to the public view. I owe this duty to the Senate. I owe it to the committee with which I am connected; and although whatever is personal to an individual is generally of too little im- portance to be made the subject of much remark, I hope I may be permitted to say a few words in defence of my own reputation, in reference to a matter which has Keen greatly misrepresented. This vote for the three millio proj posed by the House, of Representa- tives as an amendment to the Fortifica- tion bill; and the loss of that bill, three millions and all, is the charge which has been made upon the Senate, sounded over all the land, and now again re- newed. 1 propose to give the true his- tory of this bill, its origin, its progress, and its loss. Before attempting that, however, Let me remark, for it is worthy to be re- marked and remembered, that the busi- ness brought before the tSenate last session, important and various as it was, and both public and private, was all gone through with mosl uueounnon de- spatch and promptitude. No session has witnessed a more complete clearing off and finishing of the subjects before us. The communications from the other house, whether bills or whatever else, were e-peeially attended to in a proper season, and « Lth thai ready respeel which is due from one bouse to the other. I recollect nothing of any importance which came to as from the Bouse of Representatives, which was neglected, overlooked, or disregarded by the Sen- ate. On the other hand, it was the misfor- tune of the Senate, and, as 1 think, the IDS ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. misfortune of the country, that, owing to tin' state of business in the House of Representatives towards the close of the session, several measures which had been matured in the Senate, ami passed into bills, ut which the public in- terest requires to be passed. But the House of Representatives sent us no re- quest to Buspend the rules in favor of a bill for the support of the Military Academy, nor made any other proposi- tion to save the institution from imme- diate dissolution. Notwithstanding all the talk about a war, and the necessity of a vote for the three millions, the Mil- itary Academy, an institution cherished so long, and at so much expense, was on the very point of being entirely broken up. Now it so happened, Sir, that at this time there was another appropriation bill which had come from the House of Representatives, and was before the Committee on Finance here. This bill was entitled " An Act making appropri- ations for the civil and diplomatic ex- penses of the government for the year 1835." In this state of things, several mem- bers of the House of Representatives ap- plied to the committee, and besought us to save the Military Academy by annex- ing the necessary appropriations for its support to the bill for civil and diplo- matic service. AVe spoke to them, in reply, of the unfitness, the irregularity, the incongruity, of this forced union of such dissimilar subjects; but they told us it was a case of absolute necessity, and that, without resorting to this mode, the appropriation could not get through. We acquiesced, Sir, in these suggestions. W e went out of our way. We agreed to do an extraordinary and an irregular thing, in order to save the public busi- ness from miscarriage. By direction of the committee, I moved the Senate to add an appropriation for the Military Academy to the bill for defraying civil and diplomatic expenses. The bill was so amended; and in this form the ap- propriation was finally made. But this was not all. This bill for the oivi] and diplomatic service, being thus amended bj backing the Military Academy to it . was Bent back bj u to the Souse of Representatives, where it i Length of tail was to be -till much fur- ther increased, That house had before it Beveral Bubjects tor provision, and for appropriation, upon which it had not passed ;ui\ I. ill before the time u^i- \ ing bills to be Bent to the Senate had elapsed. I was anxious that these things should, in some way, be provided for; and when the diplomatic lull came hark, drawing the Military Academy after it, it was thought prudent to at- tach to it several of these other provis- ions. There were propositions to pave the streets in the city of Washington, to repair the Capitol, and various other things, which it was necessary to pro- vide for; and they, therefore, were put into the same bill, by way of amend- ment to an amendment; that is to Bay, Mr. President, we had been prevailed on to amend their bill for defraying the salary of our ministers abroad, by add- ing an appropriation for the Military Academy, and they proposed to amend this our amendment by adding matter as germane to it as it was itself to the original bill. There was also the Presi- dent's gardener. His salary was unpro- vided for; and there was no way of remedying this important omission, but by giving him place in the diplomatic service bill, among charge's d'affaires, envoys extraordinary, and mini- plenipotentiary. In and anion- th ranks, therefore, he was formally intro- duced by the amendment of the House, and there he now stands, as you will readily see by turning to the law. Sir, I have not the pleasure to know this useful person; but should 1 see him, some morning, overlooking the work- men in the lawns, walks, copses, and parterres which adorn the grounds around the President's residence, con- sidering the company into which we have introduced him, I should 6X] to see, at least, a small diplomatic but- ton on his working jacket. When these amendments came from the House, and were read at our table, 410 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. though they caused a smile, they were \,t adopted, and the law passed, almost with the rapidity of a comet, and with something like the Bame Length of tail. Now, Sir. not one of theso irregulari- ties or incongruities, no part of this jumbling together of distinct and differ- ent subjects, was in the slightest degree occasioned by any thing done, or omit- ted to be done, on the part of the Sen- ate. Their proceedings were all regu- lar; their decision was prompt, their despatch of the public business correct and reasonable. There was nothing of disorganization, nothing of procrastina- tion, nothing evincive of a temper to embarrass or obstruct the public busi- 3. If the history which I have now truly given shows that one thing was amended by another, which had no sort of connection with it; that unusual ex- pedients were resorted to; and that the laws, instead of arrangement and sym- metry, exhibit anomaly, confusion, and the most grotesque associations, it is nevertheless true, that no part of all this was made necessary by us. We deviated from the accustomed modes of legislation only when we were suppli- cated to do so, in order to supply bald and glaring deficiencies in measures which were before us. lint now, Mr. President, let me come to the fortification bill, the lost bill, which not only now, but on a graver occasion, has been lamented like the ]< st Pleiad. 'Ibis bill, Sir, came from the House of le'i'iesentatives to the Senate in the usual way, and was referred to the Com- mittee on Finance. Its appropriations were not large. Indeed, they appeared to the committee to be quite too small. It .-truck a majority of the committee at once, that there were several fortifica- tions on the coasl . either not proA Lded at all. or not adequately provided lor, by this hill. The whole amount of it- appropriations was four hundred or four hundred and thirty thousand dol- lars. It contained no granl of three million-, and if the Senate had passed it the very day it came from the 1 1 m.t only would there have been no ap- propriation of the three millions, but, Sir, none of these other sums which the Senate did insert in the bill. Others besides ourselves saw the deficiencies of this bill. We had communications \\ it h and fr the departments, and we in- serted in the bill every thing which any department recommended to us. We took care to be sure that nothing else was coming. And we then reported the bill to the Senate with our proposed amendments. Among these amend- ments, there was a sum of $75, 000 for Castle Island in Boston harbor, §100,000 for defences in Maryland, and so forth. These amendments were agreed to by the Senate, and one or two others added, on the motion of members; and the bill, as thus amended, was returned to the House. And now, Sir, it becomes important to ask. When was this bill, thus amended, returned to the House of Representa- tives? Was it unduly detained here, so that the House was obliged afterwards to act upon it suddenly? This question is material to be asked, and material to be answered, too, and the journal does satisfactorily answer it; for it appears by the journal that the bill was returned to the House of Representatives on Tuesday, the 24th of February, one whnl< week before the close of the session. And from Tuesday, the 24th of Febru- ary, to Tuesday, the 3d day of March, we heard not one word from this bill. Tuesday, the 3d day of March, was, of course, the last day of the session. We assembled here at ten or eleven o'clock in the morning of that, day, and sat until three in the afternoon, and still we were not informed whether the House had finally passed tin' bill. As it was an important matter, and belonged to that part of the public business which usually receives particular attention from the Committee on Finance, I bore the sub- ject in my mind, and felt some solici- tude aboul it, seeing that the session was drawing so near to a close. I took it for granted, however, as I had not heard any thing to the contrary, that the amendments of the Senate would not be objected to, and that, when a ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN I II convenient time should arrive for taking up the bill in the House, it would be passed at once into a law, and we should hear no more about it. Not the Blight- est intimation was given, either that the executive wished for any larger appro- priation, or that it was intended in tie' Bouse to insert such larger appropria- tion. Not a syllable escaped from any- body, and came to our knowledge, that an\ further alteration whatever was in- tended in the bill. At three o'clock in the afternoon of the 3d of March, the Senate took its recess, as is usual in that period of the session, until five o'clock. At five o'clock we again assembled, and pro- ceeded with the business of the Senate until eight o'clock in the evening; and at eight o'clock in the evening, and not before, the clerk of the House appeared at our door, and announced that the House of Representatives had disagreed to one of the Senate's amendments, agreed to others; and to two of those amendments, namely, the fourth and fifth, it had agreed, with an amendment of its own. Now, Sir, these fourth and fifth amendments of ours were, one, a vote of $75,000 for Castle Island in Boston harbor, and the other, a vote of $100,000 for certain defences in Maryland. And what, Sir, was the addition which the House of Representatives proposed to make, by way of " amendment" to a vote of §75,000 for repairing the works in Boston harbor? Here, Sir, it is: — " And be it further enacted, That the sum of three millions of dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated, out of any money in the treasury not otherwise ap- propriated, to be expended, in whole or in part, under the direction of the President of the United States, for the military and naval service, including fortifications and ordnance, and the increase of the navy : Provided, such expenditures shall be ren- dered necessary for the defence of the country prior to the next meeting of Con- gress." This proposition, Sir, was thus unex- pectedly and suddenly put to us, at eight o'clock in the evening of the lasl day of tie- session. Unusual, unprece- dented, extraordinary, u it obviously i-. on th'- face of it , the manner of pre- senting it was Mill more extraordinary. The President had asked for no such grant of m -\ ; no depai tment had recommended it ; no estimate had gested it ; no reason whatever was given lor it. No emergency had happened, and nothing new had occurred; every thing known to the administration, at that hour, respecting our foreign rela- tions, had certainly been known to it for days and weeks. With what propriety, then, could the Senate be called on to sanction a pro- ceeding 80 entirely irregular and anom- alous? Sir, I recollect th.' occurrem es of the moment very well, and I remem- ber the impression which this vote of the House seemed to make all round the Senate. We had just come out of e ■ utive session; the doors were hut just opened; and I hardly remember that there was a single spectator in tie- hall or the galleries. I had been at tin- clerk's table, and had not reached my when the message was read. All tie- Senators were in the chamber. I heard the message, certainly with great Bur- prise and astonishment; and I immedi- ately moved the Senate to disagrt this vote of the House. My relation to the subject, in consequence of my con- nection with the Committee on Finance, made it my duty to propose some con and I had not a moment's doubt or hesitation what that course ought to be. I took upon myself, then, sir. the responsibility of moving that the Sen- ate should disagree to this vote, and r now acknowledge that responsibility. It might be presumptuous to say that I took a leading part, but I certainly took an early part, a decided part, and an earnesl part, in rejecting this broad giant of three millions of dollar-, without limitation of purpose or -| tication of object, called for by DO I oininendation. founded on ii" esl it: made necessary by no state of th which was known t.> us. ( ertainly, Sir, I took a part in its rejection; ami [ stand here, in my place in the - 412 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. to-day, ready to defend the part so taken by me; or, rather, Sir, I disclaim all defence, and all occasion of defence, and I assert it as meritorious to have been among those who arrested, at the earliest moment, this extraordinary de- parture from all settled usage, and. as I think, from plain constitutional injunc- tion, — this indefinite voting of a vast sum of money to mere executive discre- tion, without limit assigned, without object specified, without reason given, and without the least control. Sir, 1 am told, that, in opposing this grant, I spoke with warmth, and I sup- pose I may have done so. If I did, it was a warmth springing from as honest a conviction of duty as ever influenced a public man. It was spontaneous, un- affected, sincere. There had been among us, Sir, no consultation, no concert. There could have been none. Between the reading of the message and my mo- tion to disagree, there was not time enough for any two members of the Senate to exchange five words on the subject. The proposition was sudden and perfectly unexpected. I resisted it, as irregular, as dangerous in itself, and dangerous in its precedent; as wholly unnecessary, and as violating the plain intention, if not the express words, of the Constitution. Before the Senate, then, 1 avowed, and before the country I now avow, my part in this opposition. Whatsoever is to fall on those who sanc- tioned it, of that let me have my full share. The Senate, Sir, rejected this grant by a veteof i wknty-nine against nineteen. Those twenty-nine names are on the journal: and whensoever the kxi'UNGING process may commence, or how far so- ever it may be carried, 1 pray it, in mercy, no1 to erase mine from that rec- ord. I beseech it. in its sparing good- to leave me that proof of attach- ment to duty and to principle. It may draM around it. over it, or through it, black lines, or red lines, or any lines; it may mark it in any way which either the mosl prostrate and fantastical spirit of man-worship, or the mosl ingenious and elaborate -del;, of Belf-degradation, may devise, if only it will leave it so that those who inherit my blood, or who may hereafter care for my reputation, shall be able to behold it where it now stands. The House, Sir, insisted on this amendment. The Senate adhered to its disagreement; the House asked a con- ference, to which request the Senate im- mediately acceded. The committee of conference met, and in a very short time came to an agreement. They agreed to recommend to their respective houses, as a substitute for the vote pro- posed by the House, the following: — "As an additional appropriation for arming the fortifications of the United States, three hundred thousand dollars." "As an additional appropriation for the repairs and equipment of ships of war of the United States, five hundred thousand dollars." I immediately reported this agreement of the committee of conference to the Senate; but, inasmuch as the bill w 7 as in the House of Representatives, the Senate could not act further on the mat- ter until the House should first have con- sidered the report of the committee, decided thereon, and sent us the bill. I did not myself take any note of the par- ticular hour of this part of the transac- tion. The honorable member from Vir- ginia 1 says he looked at his watch at the time, and he knows that 1 had come from the conference, and was in my seat, at a quarter past eleven. I have no reason to think that he is under any mistake on this particular. He savs it so happened that he had occasion to take notice of the hour, and well remembers it. It could not well have been later than this, as any one will be satisfied who will look at our journals, public and executive, and see what a mass of business was despatched after I came from the commit tee, and before the ad- journment of the Senate. Having made; tin' report, Sir, 1 had no doubt that both houses would concur in the result of the conference, and looked every moment for the officer of the House bringing the bill. He did not come, however, and I 1 Mr. Leigh. ON THK LOSS OF TliK FORTIFICATION BILL IN I 11:; pretty soon learned tliat there was doubt whether the committee on the part of the House would report to the House the agreement of the conferees. At first, I did not at all credit this; but was con- firmed by one communication after an- other, until 1 was obliged to think it, true. Seeing that the bill was thus in danger of being lost, and intending at any rate that no blame should justly attach to the Senate, I immediately moved the following resolution: — " Hi sn/n tl. That a message be sent to the honorable the House of Representa- tives, respectfully to remind the House of the report of the committee of con- ference appointed on the disagreeing votes of the two houses on the amend- ment of the House to the amendment of the Senate to the bill respecting the for- tifications of the United States." You recollect this resolution, Sir, hav- ing, as I well remember, taken some part on the occasion. 1 This resolution was promptly passed ; the secretary carried it to the House, and delivered it. What was done in the House on the receipt of this message now appears from the printed journal. I have no wish to comment on the pro- ceedings there recorded; all may read them, and each be able to form his own opinion. Suffice it to say, that the House of Representatives, having then possession of the bill, chose to retain that possession, and never acted on the report of the committee of con- ference. The bill, therefore, was lost. It was lost in the House of Representa- tives. It died there, and there its re- mains are to be found. No opportunity was given to the members of the House to decide whether thev would airree to the report of the committee or not. From a quarter past eleven, when the report was agreed to, until two or three o'clock in the morning, the House re- mained in session. If at any time there was not a quorum of members present, the attendance of a quorum, we are to presume, might have been commanded, as there was undoubtedly a great major- ity of members still in the city. 1 Mr. King, of Alabama, was in the chair. But, Sir, there is one other transaction of the evening which 1 now feel bound i" state, because I think it unite impor- tant on several accounts, that it should be know n. \ nomination was pending before the Senate for a judge of the Supreme Court. In the course of the sitting, thai nomination was called up, and, on mo- tion, was indefinitely postponed. In other words, it was rejected; Eor an in- definite postponement i- a rejection. The office, of coins'-, remained recant, and the nomination of another person to fill it became necessary. The President of the United States was then in the Capitol, as is usual on the evening of the last day of the Bession, in the chamber assigned to him, and with the heads of departments around him. When nomi- nations are rejected under these circum- stances, it has been usual for the Presi- dent immediately to transmit a new- nomination to the Senate; otherwise the office must remain vacant till the next session, as the vacancy in such case has not happened in the recess of Cone) The vote of the Senate, indefinitely post- poning this nomination, was carried to the President's room by the secretary of the Senate. The President told the sec- retary that it was more than an hour past twelve o'clock, and that he could receive no further communications from the Senate, and immediately after, as 1 have understood, left the Capitol. The secretary brought back the paper con- taining the certified copy of the vote of the Senate, and indorsed thereon the substance of the President's answer, and also added, that, according to his own watch, it was quarter pasl one o'clock. There are two views, Sir, in which this occurrence may well deserve to be noticed. <>ne is as to the connection which it may perhaps have had with the loss of the fortification bill; the other is as to its general importance, as intro- ducing a new rule, or a new practice, respecting the intercourse between the President and the two houses of < Jong on the last day of the -.- — ion. On the first point, I Bhall only obe that the fact of the President's having 414 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. declined to receive this communication from the Senate, and of liis having left the Capitol, was immediately known in 1 1 1 « - House of Representatives. It was quite obvious, that, if he could not re- ceive a communication from the Senate, neither could he receive a bill from the Bouse of Representatives f or his signa- ture. It was equally obvious, that, if, under these circumstances, the House of Representatives should agree to the re- port of the committee of conference, so thai the bill should pass, it must, never- theless, fail to become a law for want of the President's signature; and that, in that case, the blame of losing the bill, on whomsoever else it might fall, could not be laid upon the Senate. ( >n t he more general point, I must say, Sir, that this decision of the President, not to hold communication with the houses of Congress after twelve o'clock at night, on the 3d of March, is quite new. No such objection has ever been made before by any President. No one of them has ever declined communicat- ing with either house at any time during the continuance of its session on that day. All Presidents heretofore have left with the houses themselves to fix their hour of adjournment, and to bring their session for the day to a close, whenever they saw fit. It is notorious, in point of fact, that not liin.; is more common than for both houses to sit Later than twelve o'clock, for the purpose of completing measures which are in the last stages of their ress. Amendments are proposed and agreed to, bills passed, enrolled bills sig 1 by the presiding officers, and other Important legislative; acts per- formed, often at two or three o'clock in the morning. All this is very well utlemen who have been for an;, considerable time members of Con- gress. And all Presidents have signed bills, and have also made nominations to the Senate, without objection as to time, whenever bills have been presented for signature, or whenever it became ne- iiv to make nominations to the Sen- it any time dm Lng lli" -'- — ion of the re pective houses on thai day. And all this, Sir, I suppose to be per- fectly right, correct, and legal. There is no clause of the Constitution, nor is there any law. which declares that the term of office of members of the House of Representatives shall expire at twelve o'clock at night on the 3d of March. They are to hold for two years, but the precise hour for the commencement of that term of two years is nowhere fixed by constitutional or legal provision. It has been established by usage and by inference, and very properly established, that, since the first Congress commenced its existence on the first Wednesday in March, 1789, which happened to be the fourth day of the month, therefore the 4th of .March is the day of the commence- ment of each successive term; but no hour is fixed by law or practice. The true rule is, as I think, most undoubt- edly, that the session held on the last day constitutes the last day for all legis- lative and legal purposes. While the session begun. on that day continues, the day itself continues, according to the established practice both of legislative and judicial bodies. This could not well be otherwise. If the precise mo- ment of actual time were to settle such a matter, it would be material to ask, "Who shall settle the time? Shall it be done by public authority, or shall every man observe the tick of his own watch? If absolute time is to furnish a precise rule, the excess of a minute, it is obvious, would be as fatal as the excess of an hour. Sir, no bodies, judicial or Legis- lative, have ever been so hypercritical, so astute to no purpose, so much more nice than wise, as to govern themselves by any such ideas. The session for the day. at whatever hour it. commences, or at whatever hour it breaks up, is the Legislative day. Every thing has refer- ence to the commencement of thai diur- nal session. for instance, this is the 11th day of January; we assembled here to-day at twelve o'clock; our journal is dated January 1 1th, and if we should remain here until live o'clock to-moiicw morning (and the Senate has sometimes sat so late), our proceedings would still bear date of the 11th of January; they ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION Mil. I. IN 1835 •II. would be so stated upon the journal, and the journal is a record, and Lfi a conclusive record, BO far as rejects the proceedings bf the body. It is so in judicial proceedings. Ii a man were on trial tor bis life, at a Late hour on the lasl day allowed by law for the holding' of the court, and the jury should acquit him, but happened tn re- main so long In deliberation that they did not bring in their verdict till after twelve o'clock, is it all to be held for naught, and the man to hi' tried over again? Are all verdicts, judgments, and orders of courts null and void, if made after midnight on the day which the law prescribes as the last day? It would be easy to .show by authority, if authority could be wanted lor a thing the reason of which is so clear, that the day lasts while the daily session lasts. When the court or the legislative body adjourns for that day, the day is over, and not before. I am told, indeed. Sir, that it is true that, on this same 3d day of March last, not only were other things transacted, but that the bill for the repair of the Cumberland Road, an important and much litigated measure, actually re- ceived the signature of our presiding ottieer after twelve o'clock, was then sent to the President, and signed by him. I do not affirm this, because I took no notice of the time, or do not remember it if I did ; but I have heard the matter so stated. I see no reason, Sir, for the introduc- tion of this new practice ; no principle on which it can be justified, no necessity for it, no propriety in it. As yet, it 1 as been applied only to the President's intercourse with the Senate. Certainly it is equally applicable to his inter- course with both houses in legislative matters; and if it is to prevail here- after, it is of much importance that it should be known. The President of the United States, Sir, has alluded to this loss of the forti- fication bill in his message at the open- ing of the session, and he has alluded, also, in the same message, to the rejec- tion of the vote of the three millions. On tin 1 first point, that i-. the the w hull- Mil, and tin- causes of that . this is his Itn ■ Much ami i avenience have been experi- enced in consequent i the failu i the Kill containing the ordinan appro- priations for fortifications, which pa one branch of the national Legislature at tin' lasl session, but was |,,.i i M ih,. other." If the President intended 'hat. the bill, having originated in tin- 1 1. .ii-.' of Representatives, passed tic Senate, and was yet afterwards Inst in the House of Representatives, he was entirely cor- rect. But be has been wholly misin- formed, if he intended to state that tie' bill, having passed the House, was In- 1 in the Senate. As I have already stated, the bill was lost in the House of Repre- sentatives. It drew its last breath there. That House never let go its hold on it after the report of the committee of con- ference. But it held it, it retained it, and of course it died in its ] ssion when the House adjourned. It is to be regretted that the President should 1 been misinformed in a matter of this kind, when the slightest reference to the journals of the two houses would have exhibited the correct history of the trans- action. I recur again, Mr. President, to the proposed grant of the three millions, for the purpose of stating somewhat more distinctly the true grounds of objection to that grant. These grounds of objection wen- two; the first was, that no such appropriation had been recommended by the President, or any of the departments. And what made this ground the stronger was, that the proposed grant was defended, BO far as it was defended at all, upon an alleged necessity, growing out of our Eon relations. The foreign relations cJ the country are intrusted by the Constitu- tion to the lead and management <■( the executive government. The President not only is supposed to be, but usually is, much better informed on these inter- esting Bubjects than the hoUB< - ol Con- gress. If then' be danger of a rupture with a foreign state, he sees it 416 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. All OUT ministers and agents abroad arc bu1 SO man\ eyes, and cars, and organs to communicate t<> him whatsoever oc- curs in foreign places, and to keep him well advised of all which may concern the interests of the United States. There is an especial propriety, there- fore, that, in this branch of the public service, Congress should always be able to avail itself of the distinct opinions and recommendations of the President. The two houses, and especially the House of Representatives, are the nat- ural guardians of the people's money. They are to keep it sacred, and to use it discreetly. They are not at liberty to spend it where it is not needed, nor to offer it for any purpose till a reasonable occasion for the expenditure be shown. Now, in this case, I repeat again, the President had sent us no recommenda- tion for any such appropriation ; no de- partment had recommended it ; no esti- mate had contained it; in the whole history of the session, from the morning of the first day, down to eight o'clock in the evening of the last day, not one syllable had been said to us, not one hint suggested, showing that the Presi- dent deemed any such measure either necessary or proper. I state this strong- ly, Sir, but I state it truly. I state the matter as it is; and I wish to draw the attention of the Senate and of the coun- try strongly to this part of the case. I say again, therefore, that, when this vote fur the three millions was proposed to the Senate, there was nothing before us showing that the President recom- mended any such appropriation. You very well know, Sir, that this objection was stated as soon as the message from tin- House was read. We all well re- member that this was the very point put forth by the honorable member from renin--.,. 1 as being, it I may say so, tlic 1. ut-i Mid of bis argument in opposi- tion to the vote. He said, very signiii- cantly, and very forcibly, "It is not asked for by those who best know what the public Bervice requires; how, then, are we to presume that it is needed?" This question, Sir, was not answered 1 Mr. White. then ; it never has been answered since ; it never can be answered satisfacto- rily. But let me here again, Sir, recur to the message of the President. Speak- ing of the loss of the bill, he uses these words: " This failure was the more re- gretted, not only because it necessarily interrupted and delayed the progress of a system of national defence projected immediately after the last war, and since steadily pursued, but also because it contained a contingent appropriation, inserted in accordance with the views of the executive, in aid of this important object, and other branches of the na- tional defence, some portions of which might have been most usefully applied during the past season." Taking these words of the message, Sir, and connecting them with the fact that the President had made no recom- mendation to Congress of any such ap- propriation, it strikes me that they fur- nish matter for very grave reflection. The President says that this proposed appropriation was " in accordance with the views of the executive "; that it was " in aid of an important object"; and that "some portions of it might have been most usefully applied during the past season." And now, Sir, I ask, if this be so, why was not this appropriation recom- mended to Congress by the President? I ask this question in the name of the Constitution of the United States; I stand on its own clear authority in ask- ing it; and I invite all those who re- member its injunctions, and who mean to respect them, to consider well how the question is to be answered. Sir, the Constitution is not yet an en- tire dead letter. There is yet some form of observance of its requirements; and even while any degree of formal respect is paid to it, I must be permitted to con- tinue the question, Why was not this appropriation recommended? It was in accordance with the President's views; it was for an important objeci ; it might have been usefully expended. The President being of opinion, therefore, that the appropriation was necessary ON THE LOSS OF THK FOIMIi h \ i i,,\ iui,|, IN 1836. II and proper, how is it thai it was aot rec- ommended bo Congress'/ For, Sir, we all know the plain and direct words in which tlic \cry first duty of the Presi- dent is imposed by the Constitution. Here they are : — "He shall, from time to time, give to (he Congress information of the state dt' the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Alter enumerating the powers of the President, this is the first, the very first duly which the Constitution gravely en- joins upon him. And now, Sir, in do language of taunt or reproach, in no language of party attack, in terms of no asperity or exaggeration, bul called upon by the necessity of defending my own vote upon the subject, as a public man, as a member of Congress here in my place, and as a citizen who feels as warm an attachment to the Constitution of the country as any other can, I de- mand of any who may choose to give it an answer to this question: Why was NOT THIS MEASURE, WHICH THE PuESI- DENT DECLARES THAT HE THOUGHT NECESSARY AND EXPEDIENT, RECOM- MENDED to Congkess? And why am I, and why are other members of Con- gress, whose path of duty the Constitu- tion says shall be enlightened by the President's opinions and communica- tions, to be charged with want of pa- triotism and want of fidelity to the country, because we refused an appro- priation which the President, though it was in accordance with his views, and though he believed it important, would not, and diil not, recommend to IIS? When these questions are answered to the satisfaction of intelligent and im- partial men, then, and not till then, let reproach, let censure, let suspicion of any kind, rest on the twenty-nine names which stand opposed to this appropria- tion. How, Sir, were we to know that this appropriation " was in accordance with the views of the executive*".'' He had not so told us, formally or informally. He had not only not recommended it to Congress, or either house of Congress, 27 hut oobody on this floor hail undertaken to speak in his behalf. No man got up ay, •• Tin' Presidenl desires it ; he thinks it aect expedient, ami proper." But, sir, if any gentleman had risen to Say this, it would not have answered the requisition of tin- < ,. tution. Not at all. It is not by a hint, an intimation, the uggestion of a friend, that the executive duty in this reaped is to be fulfilled. By no means. The Presidenl is to make a recommen- dation, — a public recommendation official recommendation, a responsible recommendation, nol to one house, but to both houses; it is to be a recommen- dation to Congress. If. on receiving such recommendation, Congress fail to pay it proper respi cl . the fault i- their-. If, deeming the measure necessary and expedient, the Presidenl fail- to recom- mend it, the fault is his, clearly, dis- tinctly, and exclusively his. This, Sir, LS the Constitution of the I fnited Mates, or else I do not understand the Consti- tution of the United state-. Does not every man see how entirely unconstitutional it is that the President should communicate his opinions or wishes to Congress, on such grave and important subjects, otherwise than by a direct and responsible recommendation, a public and open recommendation, equally addressed and equally known to all whose duty calls upon them to act on the subject? What would he the state of things, if he might communi- cate his wishes or opinions privately to members of one house, and make no such communication to the other? Would not the two houses be in sarily put in immediate collision? Would they stand on equal footing? Would they have equal information? What could ensue from such a manner of conducting the public business, hut quarrel, confusion, and conflict i a member rises in the House of Repre- sentatives, and moves a very large ap- propriation of money for military pur- poses. If he says he doe- it upon ecutive recommendation, where is his voucher? The President i- not like the British king, whose ministers and boo- 418 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILE IN 1835. retarie8 are in the House of Commons, ami who are authorized, in certain cases, to express the opinions and wishes of their sovereign. We have no king's Bervants; at Least, we have none known to the Constitution. Congress can know the opinions of the President only as he officially communicates them. It would be a curious inquiry in either house, when a large appropriation is moved, if it were necessary to ask whether the mover represented the President, spoke his sentiments, or, in other words, whether what he proposed were " in accordance with the views of the execu- tive." How could that be judged of? By the party he belongs to? Party is not quite strongly enough marked for that. By the airs he gives himself? .Mai might assume airs, if thereby they ould give themselves such impor- tance as to be esteemed authentic exposi- tors of the executive will. Or is this will to be circulated in whispers; made known to the meetings of party men; intimated through the press; or com- municated in any other form, which still leaves the executive completely irresponsible; so that, while executive purposes or wishes pervade the ranks of party friends, influence their conduct, an " unite their efforts, the open, di- rect, and constitutional responsibility is wholly avoided? Sir, this is not the Constitution of the United States, nor can it be consistent with any constitu- tion which professes to maintain sepa- rate departments in the government. Here, then, Sir, is abundant ground, in my judgment, for the vote of the Senate, and here I might rest it. Bui there is also another ground. The Con- stitution declares that DO money shall be drawn from the treasury but in conse- quence of appropriations made by law. What is meant by " appropriations" f Doe- not this language mean thai par- ticular -um- shall be assigned by law to particular objects? How far this point- ing ou1 and axing the particular objects shall be carried, is a question thai can- nol !"• Bettled by any precise rule. But pecific appropriation," that is to say, the designation ol every object Eor which money is voted, as far as such designa- tion is practicable, has been thought to be a most important republican princi- ple. In times past, popular parties have claimed great merit from professing to carry this doctrine much farther, and to adhere to it much more strictly, than their adversaries. Mr. .Jefferson, espe- cially, was a great advocate for it, and held it to be indispensable to a safe and economical administration and disburse- ment of the public revenues. But what have the friends and admir- ers of Mr. Jefferson to say to this appro- priation ? Where do they find, in this proposed grant of three millions, a con- stitutional designation of object, and a particular and specific application of money? Have they forgotten, all for- gotten, and wholly abandoned even all pretence for specific appropriation? If not, how could they sanction such a vote as this? Let me recall its terms. They are, that " the sum of three millions of dollars be, and the same is hereby, ap- propriated, out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, to be expended, in whole or in part, under the direction of the President of the United States, for the military and naval service, including fortifications and ord- nance, and the increase of the navy; provided such expenditures shall be ren- dered necessary for the defence of the country prior to the next meeting of Congress." In the first place it is to be observed, that whether the money shall be used at all, or not, is made to depend on the discretion of the President. This is sufficiently liberal. It carries confi- dence far enough. Hut if there had been no other objections, if the objects of the appropriation had been suffi- ciently described, so that the President, if he expended the money at all, must expend it for purposes authorized by the legislature, and nothing had been left to his discretion hut, the question whether an emergency had arisen in which the authority ought to be exer- cised. I might not have fell hound to rejeel the rote. There are some prece- dents which might favor such a contin- ON THF LOSS OF TIIK FOUTIFK WTH »N I '.ILL IN 1835 ■l\\) gent provision, though the practice is dangerous, and ought not to be fol- lowed except in cases of clear necessity. But the insurmountable objection to the proposed grant was, thai it specified no objects. It was as general as lan- guage could make it. It embraced every expenditure that could be called either military or naval. It was to in- clude " fortifications, ordnance, and the increase of the navy,'' but it was not confined to these. It embraced the whole general subject of military ser- vice. Under the authority of such a law, the President might repair ships, build ships, buy ships, enlist seamen, and do any thing and every thing else touching the naval service, without re- straint or control. He might repair such fortifications as he saw fit, and neglect the rest; arm such as he saw fit, and neglect the arm- ing of others; or build new fortifica- tions wherever he chose. But these unlimited powers over the fortifications and the navy constitute by no means the most dangerous part of the proposed authority; because, under that author- ity, his power to raise and employ land forces would be equally abso- lute and uncontrolled. He might levy troops, embody a new army, call out the militia in numbers to suit his own discretion, and emplov them as he saw fit. Now, Sir, does our legislation, under the Constitution, furnish any precedent for all this? We make appropriations for the army, and we understand what we are doing, because it is "the army," that is to say, the army established by law. We make appropriations for the navy; they, too, are for "the navy," as provided for and established by law. We make appropriations for fortifications, but we say what fortifi- cations, and we assign to each its in- tended amount of the whole sum. This is the usual course of Congress mi such subjects; and why should it be de- parted from? Are we ready to say that the power of fixing the places for new fortifications, and the sum allotted to each; the power <>f ordering aew ships to be built, and fixing the number oi such new ships; the power of laving out money to rai te men for the army ; in short, everj power, greal ox small, respecting the military and naval \ ice, shall !»• vested in the President . without specification "f object or pur- pose, to the entire exclusion of thi ercise oi all judgment on the pari of ( longresa ? For one, I am Dot pre- pared. The honorable member from Ohio, near me, has Baid, that it' the enemy had been on our shores he would not have agreed to this vote. Ami I say. if the proposition were now before us, and the guns of the enemy were pointed against the walls of the < lapitol, 1 would not agree to it. The people of this country 1 >ie an interest, a property, an inherit.' ie, in this INSTRUMENT, against the .due of which forty capitols do not weigh the twentieth part of one poor scruple. There can never be any necessity for such proceedings, but a feigned and false necessity ; a mere idle and hollow pretence of necessity; least of all can it be said that any such necessity actually existed on the 3d of March. There was no enemy on our shores; there were no guns pointed against the Capito] we were in no war, nor was there a rea- sonable probability that we should have war, unless we made it ourselves. But whatever was the state of our foreign relations, is it not preposterous to say, that it was necessary for Con- gress to adopt this measure, and yet not necessary for the President to recom- mend it? Why should we thus run in advance of all our own duties, and 1 the President completely shielded from his just responsibility.'' Why should there be nothing but trust and confi- dence on our side, and nothing but dis- crel ion and power on his'.' Sir, if there be any philosophy in his- tory, if human blood still runs inhu- man veins, if man still conforms to the identity of his nature, the institutions which secure constitutional liberty can never stand long against thi> excessive personal confidence, against this di 420 ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. tion to men, in utter disregard both of principle and experience, which seem to me to be strongly characteristic of our times. This vote came to us. Sir. from the popular branch of the Legislature; and that such a vote should come from such a branch of the legislature was amongst the circumstances which ex- cited in me the greatest surprise and the deepest concern. Certainly, Sir, cer- tainly I was not, on that account, the more inclined to concur. It was no argumenl with me, that others seemed to be rushing, with such heedless, head- long trust, such impetuosity of confi- dence, into the arms of executive power. 1 held back the more strongly, and would hold back the longer. I see, or I think I see, — it is either a true vision of the future, revealed by the his- tory of the past, or, if it be an illusion, it is an illusion which appears to me in all the brightness and sunlight of broad noon, — that it is in this career of per- sonal confidence, along this beaten track of man-worship, marked at every stage by the fragments of other free governments, that our own system is making progress to its close. A per- sonal popularity, honorably earned at firsl by military achievements, and sus- tained now by party, by patronage, and by enthusiasm which looks for no ill, because it means no ill itself, seems to render men willing to gratify power, even before its demands are made, and to surfeit executive discretion, even in anticipation of its own appetite. Ii. Sir, on the 3d of .March last, it had been the purpose of both houses of Congress to create a military dictator, what formula had been better suited to their purpose than this vote of the House? It is true, we might have given more money, if we had had it to We might have; emptied the treas- ury; bul as to the form of the gift, we could not have be! tered it. Rome had no better models. When we give our money for any military purpose whatever f what remains to be d me? It' we lea^ e ith one man to decide, nol only whether the military means of the try shall lie used at all, but how they shall be used, and to what extent they shall be employed, what remains either for Congress or the people but to sit still and see how this dictatorial power will be exercised? On the :$d of .March, Sir, I had not forgotten, it was impossible that I should have forgotten, the recommendation in the message at the opening of that session, that power should be vested in the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal against France, at his discretion, in the recess of Congress. Happily, this power was not granted; but suppose it had been, what would then have been the true condition of this government? Why, Sir, this condition is very shortly described. The whole war power would have been in the hands of the Presi- dent; for no man can doubt a moment that reprisals would bring on immediate war; and the treasury, to the amount of this vote, in addition to all ordinary appropriations, would have been at his absolute disposal also. And all this in a time of peace. I beseech all true lovers of constitutional liberty to con- template this state of things, and tell me whether such be a truly republi- can administration of this government. Whether particular consequences had ensued or not, is such an accumulation of power in the hands of the executive according to the spirit of our system? Is it either wise or safe? Has it any warrant in the practice of former times? Or are gentlemen ready to establish the practice, as an example for the benefit of those who are to come after us? But, Sir, if the power to make re- prisals, and this money from the treas- ury, had both been granted, is there not great reason to believe that we should have been now actually at war? I think there is great reason to believe this. It. will be said, I know, that if we had armed the President with this power of war. and supplied him with this grant of money, France would have taken it for such a proof of spirit on our part, that she would have paid tin; in- demnity without further delay. This is the old story, and the old pica. It is the excuse of every one who desires more ON THE LOSS OF THE FORTIFICATION BILL IN 1835. 421 power than the Constitution or the laws give him, thai it' he had more power he could do more good. Power is always olaimed for the good of the people ; and dictators an' always made, when made at, all, for the good of the people. For my part, Sir, I was content, ami am content, to show France thai we are prepared to maintain our just, rights against her by the exertion of our power, when need be, according to the forms of our own Constitution; that, if we make war, we will make it constitu- tionally; and that we will trust all our in- terests, both in peace and war, to what the intelligence and the strength of the country may do for them, without break- ing down or endangering the fabric of our free institutions. Mr. President, it is the misfortune of the Senate to have differed with the ex- ecutive on many great questions during the last four or five years. I have re- gretted this state of things deeply, both on personal and on public accounts; but it has been unavoidable. It is no pleasant employment, it is no holiday business, to maintain opposition against power and against majorities, and to contend for stern and sturdy principle, against personal popularity, against a rushing and overwhelming confidence, that, by wave upon wave and cataract after cataract , t ems i" )"• beai ing away and destroying whatsoever would withstand it. How much longer we ma) he able to Buppoii this opposition in any d< r whether We '-an i' blj hold nut i ill the pill. lie intelligence and the public patriotism shall be awakened to a due sen f the public danger, if is Dot tor me to foretell. I shall not despair to tie- last, if, in the mean time, we are true to Our own principles. If there be Ifasl ad- herence to these principles, both here ami elsewhere, if, one and all, they continue thy rule of our conduct in the Senate, and the rallying-point of those who think with us and support US <>ut of the Senate, | am content t,, hope on and to struggle on. While it remains a contest for the preservation of the Constitution, for the security of public liberty, for the ascendency of principll - over men, I am willing to bear m\ pari of it. If we can maintain the ( lonstitu- tion, if we can preserve this security for liberty, if we can thus give to true principle its just superiority over party, over persons, over names, our labors will be richly rewarded. If we fail in all this, they are already among the living who will write the history of this government, from its commencement to its close. RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. A SPEECH DELIVERED AT NIBLO'S SALOON, IN NEW YORK, ON THE 15th OF MARCH, 1837. Mk. Chairman and Fellow-Citi- zens: — It would be idle in me to af- fect to be indifferent to the circumstances under which I have now the honor of addressing you. I find myself in the commercial me- tropolis of the continent, in the midst of a vast assembly of intelligent men, drawn from all the classes, professions, and pursuits of life. And you have been pleased, Gentle- men, to meet me, in this imposing man- ner, and to offer me a warm and cordial welcome to your city. I thank you. I feel the full force and importance of this manifestation of your regard. In the highly-flattering resolutions which in- vited me here, in the respectability of this vast multitude of my fellow-citi- zens, and in the approbation and hearty good-will which you have here mani- fested, I feel cause for profound and grateful acknowledgment. To every individual of this meeting, therefore, I would now most respectfully make that acknowledgment; and with every on.-, as with hands joined in mu- tual greeting, 1 reciprocate friendly salu- tation, respect, and good wishes. But, Gentlemen, although I am well ired "i \ "in- personal regard, 1 can- not fail to know, that the times, the political and commercial condition of things which exists among us, and an intelligent spirit, awakened to new ac- tivity and a new degree of anxiety, have mainly contributed to till these avenues and crowd these halls. At a moment of difficulty, and of much alarm, you coi in- here as Whigs of New York, to meet one whom you believe to be bound to you by common principles and common sentiments, and pursuing, with you, a common object. Gentlemen, I am proud to admit this community of our princi- ples, and this identity of our objects. You are for the Constitution of the country; so am I. You are for the In ion of the States; so am I. You are for equal laws, for the equal rights of all men, for constitutional and just re- straints on power, for the substance and not the shadowy image only of popular institutions, for a government which has liberty for its spirit and soul, as well as in its forms; and so am I. You feel that if, in warm party times, the execu- tive power is in hands distinguished for boldness, for great success, for persever- ance, and other qualities which strike men's minds strongly, there is danger of derangement of the powers of gov- ernment, danger of a new division of those powers, in which the executive is likely to obtain the lion's part; and danger of a state of things in which the more popular branches of the govern- ment, instead of being guards and sen- tinels against any encroachments from the executive, seek, rather, support from its patronage, safety against the com- plaints of the people in its ample and all-protecting favor, and refuge in its power; and so I feel, and so I have felt for eight long and anxious years. You believe that a very efficient and powerful cause in the production of the evils which now fall on the industrious KECKITION AT NEW YORK 428 and commercial classes of the <-< >n > n ■ n- nity, is the derangement oi the cur- rency, the destruction of the exchanges, and the unnatural and unnecessary r»w- placement oi the Bpecie of the country, by unauthorized and illegaJ treasury or- ders. So do I believe. I predicted all this from the beginniug, and Erom be- fore th<' beginning. I predicted it. all, last Bpring, when that was attempted to be done by law which was afterwards done by executive authority; and from the moment of the exercise of that ex- ecutive authority to the present time, I have both foreseen and seen the regular pin- ress of things under it, from incon- venience and embarrassment, to pres- sure, loss of confidence, disorder, and bankruptcies. Gentlemen, I mean, on this occasion, to speak my sentiments freely on the great topics of the day. I have nothing to conceal, and shall therefore conceal nothing. In regard to political senti- ments, purposes, or objects, there is nothing in my heart which I am ashamed of; 1 shall throw it all open, therefore, to you, and to all men. [That is right, said some one in the crowd; let us have it, with no non-committal.] Yes, my friend, without non-committal or evasion, without barren generalities or empty phrase, without if or but, with- out a single touch, in all I say, bearing the oracular character of an Inaugural, I shall, on this occasion, speak my mind plainly, freely, and independently, to men who are just as free to concur or not to concur in my sentiments, as 1 am to utter them. I think you are entitled to hear my opinions freely and frankly Bp >ken ; but I freely acknowledge that you are still more clearly entitled to retain, and maintain, your own opinions, how- ever they may differ or agree witli mine. It is true, Gentlemen, that I have contemplated the relinquishment of my seat in the Senate for the residue of the term, now two years, for which I was chosen. This resolution was not taken from disgust or discouragement, al- though some things have certainly hap- pened which might excite both those feelings. But in popular governments, men must not Buffer themselves to be permanently disgusted bj occasional ex- hibitions of political barlequinisra, ox deeply discouraged, although their ef- forts t<> awaken the people t" what they deem the dangerous tendency of public measures be nol crowned with immedi- ate Buccess. It was altogether from other causes, and other considerations, that, alter an uninterrupted service of fourteen or fifteen years, I naturally desired a respite. lint those wh<.se opinions 1 am bound to reaped saw objections to a present withdrawal from Congress; ami I have yielded my own Btrong desire to their convictions "i wiiat the public good requires. Gentlemen, in Bpeaking here on the subjects which now su much interesi the community, I wish in the outset to dis- claim all personal disrespect towards individuals. He' whose character and fortune have exercised such a decisive influence on our politics for eight years, has now retired from public station. I pursue him with no personal reflections, no reproaches. Between him and my- self there has always existed ;i respect- ful personal intercourse. Moments have existed, indeed, critical and decisive upon the general success of his adminis- tration, in which he lias been pleased to regard my aid as not altogether unim- portant. I now speak of him respect- fully, as a distinguished soldier. as one who, in that character, has don.' the state much service; as a man, too, of strong and decided character, of unsub- dued resolution and perseverance in whatever he undertakes. In Bpeaking of his civil administration, I speak without censoriousness, or harsh impu- tation of motives; 1 wish him health and happiness in his retirement; but 1 must still sp,-ak as I think of his public measures, and of their general bearing and tendency, not only on the present interests of the country, hut also on the well-being and security of the govern- Ilient itself. There are, however, some topics of a less urgent present application and im- portance, upon which 1 wish to say a few 1 President Jackson. 424 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. words, before I advert to those which arc more immediately connected with the present distressed state of things. My learned and highly-valued friend (Mr. Ogdeu) who has addressed me in your behalf, has been kindly pleased peah of my political career as being marked by a freedom from local inter- ests and prejudices, and a devotion to liberal and comprehensive views of pub- lic policy. I will not say that this compliment is deserved. I will only say, that I have earnestly endeavored to deserve it. Gen- tlemen, the general government, to the extent of its power, is national. It is not consolidated, it does not embrace all powers of government. On the con- trary, it is delegated, restrained, strictly limited. But what powers it does possess, it possesses for the general, not for any partial or local good. It extends over a vast territory, embracing now six-and- twenty Stat s, with interests various, but not irreconcilable, infinitely diver- sified, but capable of being all blended into political harmony. He, however, who would produce this harmony must survey the whole field, as if all parts were as interesting to himself as they are to others, and with that generous, patriotic feeling, prompter and better than the mere dictates of cool reason, which leads him to embrace the whole with affectionate regard, as con- stituting, altogether, that object which he is so much bound to respect, to de- fend, and to love, — his country. We have around us, and more or less within the influence and protection of the gen- eral government, all the great interests of agriculture, navigation, comm >,ree, manufactures, the fisheries, and the me- chanic arts. The duties of the govern- ment . then, certainly extend over all this territory, and embrace all these vast interests. We have a maritime frontier, a sea-coast oi many thousand miles; and while no one doubl that it is the duty of government to defend this coast by suitable military preparations, there are e w ho yet Buppose thai the powers of government stop at this point; and tit at as to works of peace and works of improvement, they are beyond our con- stitutional limits. I have ever thought otherwise. Congress has a right, no doubt, to declare war, and to provide armies and navies; and it has necessa- rily the right to build fortifications and batteries, to protect the coast from the effects of war. But Congress has au- thority also, and it is its duty, to regu- late commerce, and it has the whole power of collecting duties on imports and tonnage. It must have ports and harbors, and dock-yards also, for its navies. Very early in the history of the government, it was decided by Congress, on the report of a highly respectable committee, that the transfer by the States to Congress of the power of col- lecting tonnage and other duties, and the grant of the authority to regulate commerce, charged Congress, necessa- rily, with the duty of maintaining such piers and wharves and lighthouses, and of making such improvements, as might have been expected to be done by the States, if they had retained the usual means, by retaining the power of col- lecting duties on imports. The States, it was admitted, had parted with this power; and the duty of protecting and facilitating commerce by these means had passed, along with this power, into other hands. I have never hesitated, therefore, when the state of the treasury would admit, to vote for reasonable appropriations, for breakwaters, light- houses, piers, harbors, and similar pub- lic works, on any part of the whole Atlantic coast or the Gulf of Mexico, from Maine to Louisiana. But how stands the inland frontier? I low is it along the vast lakes and the mighty rivers of the North and West ? Do our constitutional rights and duties terminate where the water ceases to be salt? or do they exist, in full vigor, on the shores of these inland seas ? 1 never eoidd doubl about this; and yet, Gen- tlemen, 1 remember even to have parti- cipated in a warm debate, in the Senate, some years ago, upon the constitutional righl of Congress to make an appropria- tion for a pier in the harbor of Buffalo. RECKPTION AT NKW YokK. 125 What! make a harbor at Buffalo, where Nature never made any, and where there- fore it was never intended an\ ever should be made! Take monej from the people i" pun out piers from the Bandy shores of Lake Erie, or deepen the chan- nels of her shallow rivers! Where was the constitutional authority for this? Where would such strides of power stop? How long would the states have any power at all left, if their territory mighl he ruthlessly invaded for BUch unhal- lowed purposes, or how lone- would the people have any money in their pockets, if the government of the United Slates might tax them, at pleasure, for such extravagant projects as these? Piers, wharves, harbors, and breakwaters in the Lakes! These arguments, Gentle- men, however earnestly put forth here- tofore, do not strike us with great power, at the present day, if we stand on the shores of Lake Erie, and see hundreds of vessels, with valuable cargoes and thousands of valuable lives, moving on its waters, with few shelters from the storm, except what is furnished by the havens created, or made useful, by the aid of government. These great lakes, stretching away many thousands of miles, not in a straight line, but with turns and deflections, as if designed to reach, by water communication, the greatest possible number of important points through a region of vast extent, cannot but arrest the attention of any one who looks upon the map. They lie connected, but variously placed ; and in- terspersed, as if with studied variety of form and direction, over that part of the country. They were made for man, and admirably adapted for his use and con- venience. Looking, Gentlemen, over our whole country, comprehending in our survey the Atlantic coast, with its thick population, its advanced agricul- ture, its extended commerce, its manu- factures and mechanic arts, its varie- ties of communication, its wealth, and its general improvements; and looking, then, to the interior, to the immense tracts of fresh, fertile, and cheap lands. bounded by so many lakes, and watered by so many magnificent rivers, let me ask if such a d if was ever before pre- sented to the eye of any statesman, as the theatre for the exercise of his wis- dom aid patriotism ? And lei me ask, !"•>. if any man I- til to act a part, on BUCh a theatre, w bo does not, comprehend the whole of it w it hin the -cop. • of his policy, and embrace it all as his country ? \ g ain, < rentlemen, we are one in re- sped to the glorious Constitution under which we live. We are all united in the -rcat brotherhood of Amei ican lib- erty . 1 descending from the Bame an tors, bred in the Bame school, taughl in infancy to imbibe the same general po- litical sentiment-. Americans all, by birth, education, and principle, what, but a narrow mind, or woful ignorance, or besotted selfishness, or prejudice ten times blinded, can lead any of OS to re- gard the citizens of any pari of the coun- try as strangers and aliens ? The solemn truth, moreover, is before US, that a common political fate attends us all. Under the present Constitution, wisely and conscientiously administered, all are safe, happy, and renowned. The meas- ure of our country's fame may till all our breasts. It is fame enough for us all to partake in her glory, if we will carry her character onward to its true destiny. But if the system is broken, its fragments must fall alike on all. Not only the cause of American liberty, but the grand cause of liberty through- out the whole earth, depends, in a great measure, on upholding the Con- stitution and Union of these States. If shattered and destroyed, no matter by what cause, the peculiar and cherished ideaof United American Liberty will be no more for ever. There may be free states, it is possible, when there shall be separate states. There may be many loose, and feeble, and hostile confedera- cies, where there is now one greal and united confederacy. Hut the noble idea of United American Liberty, of our lib- erty, such as our fathers established it, will be extinguished for ever. I ments and shattered columns ..;' tl * 1 i — lice may be found remaining; and mel- ancholy and mournful ruins w ill ihe\ 426 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. The august temple itself will be pros- trate in the dust. Gentlemen, the citi- zens of tliis republic cannot sever their fortunes. A common fate awaits us. In the honor of upholding, or in the dis- grace of undermining the Constitution, we shall all necessarily partake. Lei us then stand by the Constitution as it is, and by our country as it is, one united, and entire; let it be a truth engraven on our hearts, let it be borne on the flag under which we rally, in every exigency, thai we have one Country, one CON- STITUTION, ONE DESTINY. Gentlemen, of our interior adminis- tration, the public lands constitute a highly important part. This is a sub- ject of great interest, and it ought to at- tract much more attention than it has hitherto received, especially from the people of the Atlantic States. The pub- lic lands are public property. They be- long to the people of all the States. A vast portion of them is composed of ter- ritories which were ceded by individual States to the United States, after the close of the Revolutionary war, and be- fore the adoption of the present Consti- tution. The history of these cessions, and the reasons for making them, are familiar to you. Some of the Old Thir- teen possessed large tracts of unsettled lands within their chartered limits. The Revolution had established their title to these lands, and as the Revolution had 1 n brought about by the common treasure and the common blood of all the Colonies, it was thought not unrea- Bi tnable thai these unsettled lands should be transferred to the United States, to pay the debt created by the war, and afterwards to remain as a fund for the use of all the States. This is tie- well- known origin of the title possessed by the United States to lands northwest of the River < >hio. I',, treaties with France and Spain, Louisiana and Florida, containing many millions of acres of public land, have been since acquired. The cost of these acquisitions was paid, of course, by the general government, and was thus a Bje upon the w hole people. The public lands, therefore, all and singu- lar, are national property; granted to the United States, purchased by the United States, paid for by all the peo- ple of the United States. The idea, that, when a new State is created, the public lands lying within her territory become the property of such new State in consequence of her sover- eignty, is too preposterous for serious refutation. Such notions have hereto- fore been advanced in Congress, but no- body has sustained them. They were rejected and abandoned, although one cannot say whether they may not be re- vived, in consequence of recent prop- ositions which have been made in the Senate. The new States are admitted on express conditions, recognizing, to the fullest extent, the right of the United States to the public lands within their borders; and it is no more reasonable to contend that some indefinite idea of State sovereignty overrides all these stip- ulations, and makes the lands the prop- erty of the States, against the provisions and conditions of their own constitu- tion, and the Constitution of the United States, than it would be, that a similar doctrine entitled the State of New York to the money collected at the custom- house in this city; since it is no more inconsistent with sovereignty that one government should hold lands, for the purpose of sale, within the territory of another, than it is that it should lay and collect taxes and duties within such ter- ritory. Whatever extravagant preten- sions may have been set up heretofore, there was not, I suppose, an enlightened man in the whole West, who insisted on any such right in the States, when the proposition to cede the lands to the Si ales was made, in the late session of Congress. The public lands being, there- fore, the common property of all the people of all the states, 1 shall never consent to give them away to particular Mil.-, or to dispose of them otherwise than for the general good, and the gen- eral use of the whole country. I felt bound, therefore, on the occa- sion just alluded to, to resist at the threshold a proposition to cede the pub- KKi'KI'TlnN AT NEW YORK 427 lie lands to the States in which they li'\ on certain conditions. I vei v much re- gretted the introduction of such a meas- ure, as its effect must be, I fear, only to agitate w liat w as well settled, and to dis- turb that course of proceeding, in regard to the public lauds, which forty years of experience have shown to be so wise, and so satisfactory in its operation, both to the people of the old States and to those of the new. But, Gentlemen, although the public lands are not to be given away, nor ceded to particular States, a very liberal policy in regard to them ought certainly to prevail. Such a policy has prevailed, and I have steadily supported it, and shall continue to support it so long as I may remain in public life. The main object, in regard to these lands, is un- doubtedly to settle them, so fast as the growth of our population, and its aug- mentation by emigration, may enable us to settle them. The lands, therefore, ^should be sold, at a low price; and, for one, I have never doubted the right or expediency of granting portions of the lands them- selves, or of making grants of money for objects of internal improvement con- nected with them. I have always supported liberal ap- propriations for the purpose of opening communications to and through these lands, by common roads, canals, and railroads; and where lauds of little value have been long in market, and, on ac- count of their indifferent quality, are not likely to command a common price, I know no objection to a reduction of price, as to such lands, so that they may pass into private ownership. Nor do I feel any objections to removing those restraints which prevent the States from taxing the lands for five years after they are sold, Hut while, in these and all other respects, I am not only reconciled to a liberal policy, but espouse it and support it, and have constantly done so, 1 still hold the national domain to be the general property of the country, confined to the care of Congress, and which Congress is solemnly bound to pro- tect and preserve for the common good. The benefit derived from the public lands, after all, is, and must be, in the greatesl degree, enjoyed by those who buj them and set! le upon them. The original price paid to government con- stitutes but a small pari of their actual value. Their immediate rise in value, iu the hands of the settler, gives him competence. He exercises a power of selection over a vast region of fertile ter- ritory, all on sale, at the same price, and that price an exceedingly low one. lection is no sooner made, cultivation i-> no sooner begun, and the first furrow turned, than lie already finds himself a man of property. Thee are the advan- i of Western emigrants and \\ ern settlers; and they are such, certainly, as DO country on earth ever before af- forded to her citi/ens. This opportu- nity of purchase and settlement, this certainty of enhanced value, these sure means of immediate competence ami ul- timate wealth, — all these are the rights and the blessings of the people of the West, and they have my hearty wishes for their full and perfect enjoyment. I desire to see the public lands culti- vated and occupied. I desire the growth and prosperity of the West, and the full- est development of its vast and extraor- dinary resources. I wish to bring it near to us, by every species of useful commu- nication. I see, not without admiration and amazement, but yet without envy Ot jealousy, States of recent origin already containing more people than Massachu- setts. These people I know to be part of ourselves; they have proceeded from the midst of US, and we may trust that they are not likely to separate themselves, in interest or in feeling, from their kind] ed, whom they have left on the farms and around the hearths of their common fathers. A liberal policy, a sympathy with its interests, an enlightened and generous feeling of participation in its prosperity, are due to the West, and will be met, I doubt not, by a return of Bentiments equally cordial and equally patriotic. Gentlemen, the general question of revenue is very much connected with this subject of the public land-, and I 428 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. will therefore, in a very few words, ex- press my views on that point. The revenue involves, not only the supply of the treasury with money, but the question of protection to manufac- tures. On these connected subjects, therefore. Gentlemen, as I have prom- ised to keep nothing back, i will state my opinions plainly, but very shortly. 1 am in favor of such a revenue as shall be equal to all the just and reason- able wants of the government; and I am decidedly opposed to all collection or accumulation of revenue beyond this point. An extravagant government ex- penditure, and unnecessary accumula- tion in the treasury, are both, of all things, to be most studiously avoided. I am in favor of protecting American industry and labor, not only as employed in large manufactories, but also, and more especially, as employed in the va- rious mechanic arts, carried on by per- sons of small capitals, and living by the earnings of their own personal industry. Every city in the Union, and none more than this, would feel severely the conse- quences of departing from the ancient and continued policy of the government respecting this last branch of protec- tion. If duties were to be abolished on hat-;, boots, shoes, and other articles of leather, and on the articles fabricated of brass, tin, and iron, and on ready- made clothes, carriages, furniture, and many similar articles, thousands of per- sons would be immediately thrown out of employment in this city, and in other parts of the Union. Protection, in this ect, of our own labor against the cheaper, ill-paid, half-fed. and pauper labor of Europe, i>. in my opinion, a duty which the country owes to its own citizens. I am, therefore, decidedly for protecting our own industry and our own Labor. In the next place, I rentlemen, I am of opinion, that, with no more than usual skill in the application of the well-tried principles of discriminating and specific dm ies, all the branches of national industry may be protected, without imposing such duties on im- porte a shall overcharge the treasury. And as to the revenues arising from the sales of the public lands, I am of opinion that they ought to be set apart for the use of the States. The States need the money. The government of the United States does not need it. .Many of the States have contracted large debts for objects of internal im- provement, and others of them have important objects which they would wish to accomplish. The lands were originally granted for the use of the several States; and now that their pro- c Is are not necessary for the purposes of the general government, lam of opin- ion that they should go to the States, and to the people of the States, upon an equal principle. Set apart, then, the proceeds of the public lands for the use of the States ; supply the treasury from duties on imports; apply to these duties a just and careful discrimination, in favor of articles produced at home by our own labor, and thus support, to a fair extent, our own manufactures. These, Gentlemen, appear to me to be the general outlines of that policy which the present condition of the country re- quires us to adopt. Gentlemen, proposing to express opin- ions on the principal subjects of interest at the present moment, it is impossible to overlook the delicate question which has arisen from events which have hap- pened in the late Mexican province of Texas. The independence of that prov- ince has now been recognized by the government of the United States. Con- gress cave the President the means, to be used when he saw fit, of opening a diplomatic intercourse with its govern- ment, and the late President imme- diately made use of those means. I saw no objection, under the circum- stances, to voting an appropriation to be used when the I 'resident should think the proper time had come; and he deemed, very promptly, if is true, that, the time had already arrived. Certainly, Gentle- men, the history of Texas is not, a little wonderful. A very few people, in a very short time, have established a gov- ernment for themselves, against, the an- RECEPTION AT NEW FORK. 429 fchority of the parent state: and this government, it is generally supposed, there is little probability, al the present moment, of the parent state being able to overturn. This government is, in form, a copj of our own. It is an American consti- tution, substantially after the great American model. We all, therefore, must wish it success; and there is no one who will more heartily rejoice than 1 shall, to see an independent com- munity, intelligent, industrious, and friendly towards as, springing up, and rising into happiness, distinction, and power, upon our own principles of lib- erty and government. But it cannot be disguised, Gentle- men, that a desire, or an intention, is already manifested to annex Texas to the United States. On a subject of such mighty magnitude as this, and at a moment when the public attention is drawn to it, I should feel myself want- ing in candor, if I did not express my opinion; since all must suppose that, on such a question, it is impossible that 1 should be without some opinion. I say then, Gentlemen, in all frank- ness, that 1 see objections, I think insurmountable objections, to the an- nexation of Texas to the United States. When the Constitution was formed, it is not probable that either its framers or the people ever looked to the admis- sion of any States into the Union, ex- cept such as then already existed, and such as should be formed out of terri- tories then already belonging to the United States. Fifteen years after the adoption of the Constitution, however, the case of Louisiana arose. Louisiana was obtained by treaty with France, who had recently obtained it from Spain; but the object of this acquisition, cer- tainly, was not mere extension of terri- tory. Other great political interests were connected with it. Spain, while she possessed Louisiana, had held the mouths of the great rivers which rise in the Western States, and flow into the Gulf of Mexico. She had disputed our use of these rivers already, ami with a powerful nation in possession of the-e outlets to the -e,t. it i, obvious that the oommer f all the West was in danger of perpetual vexation. The command of these rivers to the sea was, there- fore, the -re.it object aimed at in the acquisition of Louisiana. But that (position necessarily brought territory along with it, and three Male, now ex- ist, formed cut of that ancient province. A similar policy, and a similar net sit\, though perhaps not entirely bo ur* gent, led to the acquisition of Florida Now, no such necessity, no such pol- icy, requires the ai .cation of Texas. The accession of Texas to our territory is nut necessary to the full and complete enjoyment of all which we already sess. Her case, therefore, stands upon a footing entirely different from that of Louisiana and Florida. There being no necessity for extending the limit- of the Union in that direction, we ought, I think, for numerous and powerful reasons, to be content with our present boundaries. Gentlemen, we all see that, by whom- soever possessed, Texas is likely to be a slave-holding country; and 1 frankly avow my entire unwillingness t<> do any thing that shall extend the slavery of the African race on this continent, or add other slave-holding States to the Union. When I say that I regard slav- ery in itself as a great moral, social, and political evil, 1 only use lane, which has been adopted by distinguished men, themselves citizens of slave-holding States. I shall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage its further exten- sion. We have slavery already amoi us. The Constitution found it in the Union; it recognized it. and gave it sol- emn guaranties. To the full extent of these guaranties we are all bound, in honor, in justice, and b\ the Constitu- tion. All the stipulations contained in the Constitution in favor of the slave- holding States which are already in the Union ought to be fulfilled, and. bo far as depends oil me, shall be fulfilled, ill the fulness of their spirit and t<> tl x- actness of their letter. Slavery, as it exists in the States. i> beyond the reach of Congress. It is a concern of the ■1311 RECKITION AT NEW YORK. States themselves; they have never sub- mittal it to Congress, and Congress has no rightful power over it. I shall con- cur, therefore, in no act, no measure, no menace, no indication of purpose, which shall interfere or threaten to in- terfere with the exclusive authority of the several States over the subject of slavery as it exists within their respec- tive limits. All this appears to me to be matter of plain ami imperative duty. Bui when we mine to speak of admit- ting new States, the subject assumes an entirely different aspect. Our rights and our duties are then both different. The free States, and all the States, are then at liberty to accept or to reject. When it is proposed to bring new mem- bers into this political partnership, the old members have a right to say on what terms such new partners are to come in, and what they are to bring along with them. In my opinion, the people of the United States will not consent to bring into the Union a new, vastly extensive, and slave-holding coun- try, large enough for half a dozen or a dozen States. In my opinion, they ought not to consent to it. Indeed, I am altogether at a loss to conceive whal possible benefit any part of this country can expect to derive from such annexa- tion. Any benefit to any part is at least doubtful and uncertain; the objec- tions are obvious, plain, and strong. On the general question of slavery, a great portion of the community is al- ready strongly excited. The subject has not only attracted attrition as a question of politics, but it has struck a deeper-toned chord. It has arrested the religious feeling of the country; it has taken strong hold on the consciences of men. He is a rash man indeed, and little conversant with human nature, and es] ially has he a very erroneous estimate of the character of the ] pie of this country, who supposes that a feeling of this kind is to be trifled with or despised. It will assuredly cause it- Belf to be respected. It may be rea- soned with, it may be made willing, I believe it is entirely willing, to fulfil all - nieiits and all existing duties, to uphold and defend the Con- stitution as it is established, with what- ever regrets about some provisions which it does actually contain. But to coerce it into silence, to endeavor to restrain its free expression, to seek to compress and confine it, warm as it is, and more heated as such endeavors would inevi- tably render it, — should this be at- tempted, I know nothing, even in the Constitution or in the Union itself, which would not be endangered by the explosion which might follow. I see, therefore, no political necessity for the annexation of Texas to the Union; no advantages to be derived from it; and objections to it of a strong, and, in my judgment, decisive character. I believe it to be for the interest and happiness of the whole Union to remain as it is, without diminution and with- out addition. Gentlemen, I pass to other subjects. The rapid advancement of the execu- tive authority is a topic which has al- ready been alluded to. I believe there is serious cause of alarm from this source. I believe the power of the executive has increased, is increasing, and ought now to be brought back within its ancient constitutional limits. I have nothing to do witli the motives which have led to those acts, which I believe to have transcended the boundaries of the Constitution. Good motives may always be assumed, as bad motives may always be impute. 1. Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of power; but they cannot justify it, even if we were sure that, they existed. It is hardly too strong to say, that the Constitution was made to guard the people against l he dangers of good intention, real or pretended. When bad intentions are boldly avowed, the people will promptly take care of themselves. On the other hand, they will always be asked why they should resist or question that exer- cise of power which is so fair in its object, so plausible and patriotic in ap- pearance, and which has the public good RECEPTION AT NEW FORK. |.:i alone confessedly in view? Human be- ings, we may be assured, will generally exercise power when they oan gel ii ; ami t In- v will exorcise it most undoubt- edly, in popular governments, under pretences of public safety or hieji public interest. It maybe very possible thai g 1 intentions do really sometimes ex- ist when constitutional restraints are disregarded. There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power use- fully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but t h<-\ mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be mas- ters. They think there need be but little restraint upon themselves. Their notion of the public interest is apt to be quite closely connected with their own exercise of authority. They may not, indeed, always understand their own motives. The love of power may sink too deep in their own hearts even for their own scrutiny, and may pass with themselves for mere patriotism and be- nevolence. A character has been drawn of a very eminent citizen of Massachusetts, of the last age, which, though I think it does not entirely belong to him, yet very well describes a certain class of public men. It was said of this distinguished son of Massachusetts, that in matters of politics and government he cherished the most kind and benevolent feelings towards the whole earth. He earnestly desired to see all nations well governed ; and to bring about this happy result, he wished that the United Stales might govern the rest of the world; that Mas- sachusetts might govern the United States; that Boston might govern Mas- sachusetts; and as for himself, his own humble ambition would be satisfied by governing the little town of Boston. I do not intend, Gentlemen, to com- mit so unreasonable a trespass on your patience as to discuss all those cases in which I think executive power has been unreasonably extended. 1 shall only allude to some of them, and, as being earliest in the order of time, and hardly second to any other in importance, I mention the practice ol removal From all offices, high ami low . for opinion's sake, and on I he avowed gTOUnd "! ing patronage t" the President; that is to say, of giving him the power of in- fluencing men's political opinions and political conduct, by hopes and by fears addressed directly to their pecuniary in- terests. Tie- greal battle on this point was fought, ami was lost, in the Senate of ill.' United States, in the last session of Congress under Mr. Adams's admin- istration. After General .lack-on known to be elected, and he tore his term of oilier bewail, many important offices became vacant by the usual <-:ni-.- of death and resignation. Mr. Adams, of eonr e. Dominated persons to till these vacant otheos. But a majority of tie- Senate was composed of the friends of General .lack-on; ami. instead of acting on these nominations, and filling tic vacant offices with ordinary prompti- tude, the nominations were post] 1 to a day beyond the 4th of March, for the purpose, openly avowed, of giving the patronage of the appointments to the President who was then coming into office. When the new Presidenl entered on his office, he withdrew these nomina- tions, and sent in nominations of his own friends in their places. 1 was of opinion then, and am of opinion now, that that decision of the Senate went far to unfix the proper balance of the gov- ernment. It conferred on the President the power of reward- for party pur- poses, or personal purposes, without limit or control. It sanctioned, mani- festly ami plainly, that exercise of power which Mr. Madison had -aid would de- serve impeachment ; and it completely defeated one great object, which we are told the trainers of the Constitution contemplated, in the manner of forming the Senate; that is, that the Senate mi Jit be a body not changing with the election of a President, ami therefore likely to be able to hold over him Bome check or restraint in regard to bringing bis own friends ami partisans into power with him. and thus rewarding their vices to him at the public expense. The debate- in the Senate, oil tl 432 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. questions, wore long continued and ear- n. -I. They wore of course in secret session. Imt the opinions of those mem- bers who opposed this course have all 1 n proved true by the result. The contesl was severe and ardent, as much BO as any that I have ever partaken in; and I have seen some service in that Mirt lit' warfare. Gentlemen, when I look back to that eventful moment, when I remember who those were who upheld this claim for executive power, with so much zeal and devotion, as well as with such great and splendid abilities, and when I look round now, and inquire what has be- come of these gentlemen, where they have found themselves at last, under the power which they thus helped to estab- lish, what has become now of all their respect, trust, confidence, and attach- ment . how many of them, indeed, have not escaped from being broken and crushed under the weight of the wheels of that engine which they themselves set in motion, — I feel that an edifying lesson may be read by those who, in the freshness and fulness of party zeal, are ready to confer the most dangerous pow- er, in the hope that they and their friends may bask in its sunshine, while enemies only shall be withered by its frown. I will not go into the mention of Dames. I will give no enumeration of persons; but I ask you to turn your minds back, and recollect who the dis- tinguished men were who supported, in the Senate, General Jackson's adminis- tration for the first two years; and I will ask you what you suppose they think now of that power and that dis- cretion which they so freely confided to executive hands. What do they think of the whole career of that administra- tion, the commencement of which, and indeed the existence of which, owed bo much to their own greal exertions? In addition to the establishment of thifl power of unlimited and causeless removal, another doctrine has been pul forth, more vague, it is true, bu1 alto- i •!• unconsl ii ut ional, and tending to : erous result -. In some Loose, indefinite, and unknown sense, the President has been called the representa- tive of tin whoh American people. He has called himself so repeatedly, and been so denominated by his friends a thousand times. Acts, for which no specific authority has been found either in the Constitution or the laws, have been justified on the ground that the President is the representative of the whole American people. Certainly, this is not constitutional language. Cer- tainly, the Constitution nowhere calls the President the universal representa- tive of the people. The constitutional representatives of the people are in the House of Representatives, exercising powers of legislation. The President is an executive officer, appointed in a par- ticular manner, and clothed with pre- scribed and limited powers. It may be thought to be of no great consequence, that the President should call himself, or that others should call him, the sole representative of all the people, although he has no such appellation or character in the Constitution. But, in these mat- ters, words are things. If he is the people's representative, and as such may exercise power, without any other grant, what is the limit to that power? And what may not an unlimited representa- tive of the people do? When the Consti- tution expressly creates representatives, as members of Congress, it regulates, defines, and limits their authority. But if the executive chief magistrate, merely because he is the executive chief magis- trate, may assume to himself another character, and call himself the repre- sentative of the whole people, what is to limit or restrain this representative pow- er in his hands? I fear, Gentlemen, that if these pre- tensions should be continued and justi- fied, we might have many instances of summary political Logic, such as I once heard in the House of Re] resentatives. A gentleman, not now living, wished very much to vote for the establishment Of a l'.ank of the United Mates, hut he had always Btoutly denied the constitu- tional power of Congress to create such a hank. The country, however, was in RKCKI'TION AT NEW FORK. 133 a state of great financial distress, from which such ;in institution, it was hoped, might help to extricate it ; and this con- sideration Led the worthy member to re- view his opinions with care and delib- eration. Happily, on Buch careful and deliberate review, he altered his former judgment. II*- came, satisfactorily, to the conclusion that Congress might in- corporate a bank. The argument which brought his mind to this result was Bhort, and so plain and obvious, that he wondered how he should so long have overlooked it. The power, he said, to cnate a bank, was either given to Con- gress, or it was not given. Very well. If it was given, Congress of course could exercise it; if it was not given, the peo- ple still retained it, and in that case, Congress, as the representatives of the people, might, upon an emergency, make free to use it. Arguments and conclusions in sub- stance like these, Gentlemen, will not be wanting, if men of great popularity, commanding characters, sustained by powerful parties, and full of good inten- tions towards the public, may be permitted to call themselves the universal repre- sentatives of the people. But, Gentlemen, it is the currency, the currency of the country, — it is this great subject, so interesting, so vital, to all classes of the community, which has been destined to feel the most violent assaults of executive power. The con- sequences are around us and upon us. Not unforeseen, not unforetold, here they come, bringing distress for the present, and fear and alarm for the future. If it be denied that the pres- ent condition of things has arisen from the President's interference with the revenue, the first answer is, that, when he did interfere, just such consequences were predicted. It was then said, and repeated, and pressed upon the public attention, that that interference must necessarily produce derangement, em- barrassment, loss of confidence, and commercial distress. I pray you, Gen- tlemen, to recur to the debates of 1832, 18:53, and 1S34, and then to decide whose opinions have proved to be cor- rect. When the treasury experiment was fixsl announced, who supported, and who opposed it? Who warned the country against it? Who were they who endeavored t" -ta\ the violence of parly, In ariol the hand of executive author- ity, and to own ince th.' people thai this experiment was delusive ; thai its object was merely to increase executive power, and thai it- effect, Boonei or later, must be injurious and ruinous? Gentlemen, it is fair to bring the opinions of politi- cal men to the tesl of experience. It is just to judge of them by their mease and their opposition to measures; and for myself, and those political friends with whom I have acted, on this Bubject of the currency, I am ready to abide the test. I'>ut before the subject of the curren- cy, and its presenl most embarrassing state, is discussed, I invite your at tion, Gentlemen, to the history of execu- tive proceedings connected with it. I propose to state to you a series of fat I B ; not to argue upon them, not to mystify them, nor to draw any unjust inference from them ; but merely to state the case, in the plainest manner, as I understand it. And I wish. Gentlemen, that, in order to be able to do this in the best and most convincing manner. I had the ability of my learned friend. (Mr. Og- den,) whom you have all so often heard, and who usually states his case in such a manner that, when .stated, it is already very well argued. Let us see, Gentlemen, what the train of occurrences lias been in regard to our revenue and finances; and when these occurrences are .stated. I leave to every man the right to decide for himself whether our present difficulties hav • have not arisen from attempts to extend the executive authority. In giving this detail, I .shall be compelled to Bpeak of the late Bank of the United States; bul I shall Bpeak of it historically only. My opinion of its utility, and oi the extraor- dinary ability and success with which its affairs were conducted for many \ before the termination of its charter, is well known. I have often expressed it, and I have not altered it. Hut at | ■js 434 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. ent I speak of the bank only as it makes a necessary pari in the history of events which I wish now to recapitulate. Mr. Adams commenced his adminis- tration in March, 1825. He bad been elected bythe House of Representatives, ami began his career as President under a powerful opposition. From the very first day. he was warmly, even violently, opposed in all his measures; and this opposition, as we all know, continued with. ml abatement, either in force or asperity, through his whole term of four .. Gentlemen, 1 am not about to say whether this opposition was well or ill founded, just or unjust. I only state the tad as connected with other facts. The Bank of the United States, during these four years of Mr. Adams's admin- istration, was in full operation. It was performing the fiscal duties enjoined on it by its charter ; it had established numerous offices, was maintaining a large circulation, and transacting a vast business in exchange. Its character, conduct, and manner of administra- tis, n were all well known to the whole country. Now there are two or three things worthy of especial notice. One is, that during the whole of this heated politi- cal controversy, from 1825 to 1829, the party which was endeavoring to produce a change of administration in the gen- eral government brought no charge of political interference against the Bank of the United States. If any thing, il was rather a favorite with that party generally. Certainly, the party, as a party, did not ascribe to it undue at- tachment to other parties, or to the then existing administration. Another im- portant fact is, that, during the whole of the same period, those who had es- poused the cause of General Jackson, and who sought to bring about a revo- lution under his name, did not propose the destruction of the hank, or its dis- continuance, as one of the objects which weri' t.i be accomplished by the intended revolution. They did lot t<-ll the coun- i hat i in- bank w as unconstitui ional ; they did n,,t declare it unnecessary; they did not propose i" get along with- out it, when they should come into power themselves. If individuals en- tertained any such purposes, they kept them much to themselves. The party, as a party, avowed none such. A third fact, worthy of all notice, is, that dur- ing this period there was no complaint about the state of the currency, either by the country generally or by the party then in opposition. In March, ls-_»<), GeneralJackson was inaugurated as President. He came into power on professions of reform. He announced reform of all abuses to be the great and leading object of his future administration; and in his in- augural address he pointed out the main subjects of this reform. But the bank was not one of them. It was not said by him that the bank was unconstitu- tional. It was not said that it was un- necessary or useless. It was not said that it had failed to do all that had been hoped or expected from it in regard to the currency. In March, 1829, then, the bank stood well, very well, with the new adminis- tration. It was regarded, so far as ap- pears, as entirely constitutional, free from political or party taint, and highly useful. It had as yet found no place in the catalogue of abuses to be reformed. But, Gentlemen, nine months wrought a wonderful change. New lights broke forth before these months had rolled away; and the President, in his mes- sage to Congress in December, 1829, held a very unaccustomed language and manifested very unexpected purposes. Although the bank had then five or six years of its charter unexpired, he yet called the attention of Congress very pointedly to the subject, and de- clared, — 1. That the constitutionality of the bank was well doubted by many; 2. That its utility or expediency was also well doubted ; :S. That all must admit, that it had failed to establish or maintain a sound and uniform currency; and 4. That, the true bank for the use of the government of the United States would be a bank which should bo RECEPTION AT NEW FORK. 135 Founded on the revenues and credil of the governmenl itself. These propositions appeared t <•. .-■I the time, as very extraordinary, and the last oue as very Btartling. A bank founded on the revenue and credit of the government, and managed and ad- ministered by the executive, was a con- ception which I had supposed no man holding the chief executive power in his own hands would venture to put forth. But the question now is, what had wrought this great change of feeling and of purpose in regard to tin' hank. What events had occurred between March and December that should have caused the hank, so constitutional, so useful, so peaceful, and so safe an institution, in the first of these months, to start up into the character of a monster, and become so horrid and dangerous, in the last? Gentlemen, lei us see what the events were which had intervened. General Jackson was elected in December. L828. His term was to begin in March. 1829. A session of Congress took place, there- fore, between his election and the com- mencement of his administration. Now, Gentlemen, the truth is, that during this session, and a little before the commencement of the new adminis- tration, a disposition was manifested by political men to interfere with the management of the hank. Members of Congress undertook to nominate or rec- ommend individuals as directors in the branches or offices of the bank. They Were kind enough, sometimes, to make out whole lists, or tickets, and to send them to Philadelphia, containing the names of those whose appointments woidd be satisfactory to General Jack- son's friends. Portions of the corre- spondence on these subjects have been published in some of the voluminous reports and other documents connected with the hank, but perhaps have not been generally heeded or noticed. At first, the bank merely declined, as gently as possible, complying with these and similar requests. Put like applications began to show themselves from many quarters, and a very mai ked case a I-, as June, 1829. Certain mem- bers of the Legislature of New Hamp- shire applied for a change in the presidency <>f the branch which was established In thai Mate, a member of the Senate of the United States wrote both to the president of the l>.mk and t«i the Secretary of the Treasury, Btrong- ly recommending a change, and in his letter to the Secretary hinting very dis- tinctly at political considerations as the ground of the movement. Other officers in the Bervice of the governmenl tool an intere8l in the matter, and urged a change; and the Secretary himself wrote to the hank, suggesting and recommend- ing it. The time had come, then, for the hank to take its position. It did take it ; and. in my judgment, if It had not acted as it did act, nol only would those who had the care of it have been most highly censurable, bul a claim would have been yielded to, entirely in- consistent with a government of laws, and subversive of the very foundations of republicanism. A long correspondence between the Secretary of the Treasury and the presi- dent of the bank ensued. The directors determined that they would not surren- der either their rights or their duties to the control or supervision of the ■ \- ecutive government. They said they had never appointed directors of their branches on political grounds, and they would not remove them on such grounds. They had avoided politics. Tiny had sought for men of business, capacity, fidelity, and experience in the manage- ment of pecuniary concerns. They owed duties, they said, to the government, which they meant to perform, faithfully and impartially, under all administra- tions; and they owed duties to the si holders of the hank, which required them to disregard political considera- tions in their appointments. This cor- respondence ran along into the fall of the year, and finally terminated in a stern and unanimous declaration, made by the directors, and transmitted t" the Secretary of the Treasury, that the bank would continue to be independently 436 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. administered, and that the directors once for all refused to Bubmil to the su- pervision of the executive authority, in any of its branches, in the appointment of local directors ami agents. This res- olution decided the character of the future. Hostility towards the bank, thenceforward, became the settled policy of tin' government; and the message of December. ls-_»!i, was the clear announce- ment of that policy. If the bank had appointed those directors, thus recom- mended by members of Congress; if it had submitted all its appointments to the supervision of the treasury; if it had removed the president of the New Hampshire branch; if it had, in all things, showed itself a complying, po- litical, party machine, instead of an independent institution; — if it had done this. I leave all men to judge whether such an entire change of opin- ion, as to its constitutionality, its utility, and its good effects on the currency, would have happened between March and December. From the moment in which the bank asserted its independence of treasury control, and its elevation above mere party purposes, down to the end of its charter, and down even to the present day, it has been the subject to which the selectest phrases of party denunciation have been plentifully applied. lint Congress manifested no disposi- tion to establish a treasury bank. On the contrary, it was satisfied, and so was the country, most unquestionably, with the bank then existing. In the sum- mer of 18:52, Congress passed an act for Continuing the charter of the bank, by strong majorities in both houses. In the House of Representatives, I think, two thirds of the members voted for the bill. The President gave it his nega- tive; and as there were not two thirds of the .senate, though a large majority were for it . the hill Tailed tn become a law. Ibii it was not enough that a contin- uance i.l' the charter of the hank was thus refused. It had the deposil of the public money, and this it was entitled to, by law. for the |',-\\ Mar- which yet remained of its chartered term. Hut this it was determined it should not continue to enjoy. At the commence- ment of the session of lS:5'2-3:5, a grave and sober doubt was expressed by the Secretary of the Treasury, in his offi- cial communication, whether the public moneys were safe in the custody of the bank! I confess, Gentlemen, when I look back to this suggestion, thus offi- cially made, so serious in its import, so unjust, if not well founded, and so greatly injurious to the credit of the bank, and injurious, indeed, to the credit of the whole country, I cannot but won- der that any man of intelligence and char- acter should have been willing to make it. I read in it, however, the first lines of another chapter. I saw an attempt was now to be made to remove the de- posits of the public money from the bank, and such an attempt was made that very session. But Congress was not to be prevailed upon to accomplish the end by its own authority. It was well ascertained that neither house would consent to it. The House of Represent- atives, indeed, at the heel of the ses- sion, decided against the proposition by a very large majority. The legislative authority having been thus invoked, and invoked in vain, it was resolved to stretch farther the long arm of executive power, and by that arm to reach and strike the victim. It so happened that T was in this city in May, 1 o:5:5, and here learned, from a very authentic source, that the deposits would be removed by the President's order; and in June, as afterwards ap- peared, that order was given. Now it is obvious. Gentlemen, that thus far the changes in our financial and fiscal system were effected, not by Con- gress, but by the executive; not by law, but by the will and the power of the I 'resident. Congress would have con- tinued the charter of the bank; but the President negatived the hill. Congress was of opinion that the deposits ought not to he removed; hut the President removed them. Nor was this all. The public moneys being withdrawn from the custody which the law had provided, by executive power alone, that same RECEPTION AT NEW FORK 187 power selected the places for their fu- ture keeping. Particular banks, exist- ing under State charters, were chosen. Willi these especial and particular ar- rangements were made, and the public moneys were deposited in their vaults. Henceforward these selected banks were to operate on the revenue and credil of tli<' government; and thus the original scheme, promulgated in the annual mes- sage of December, 1829, was substan- tially carried into effect. Here were banks chosen by the treasury; all the arrangements with them made by the treasury; a set of duties to be performed by them to the treasury prescribed; and these banks were to hold the whole pro- ceeds of the public revenue. In all this. Congress had neither part nor lot. Xo law had caused the removal of the de- posits ; no law had authorized the selec- tion of deposit State banks; no law had prescribed the terms on which the rev- enues should be placed in such banks. From the beginning of the chapter to the end, it was all executive edict. And now, Gentlemen, I ask if it be not most remarkable, that, in a country professing to be under a government of laws, such great and important changes in one of its most essential and vital interests should be brought about without any change of law, without any enactment of the legislature whatever ? Is such a power trusted to the executive of any government in which the executive is separated, by clear and well-defined lines, from the legislative department ? The currency of the country stands on the same general ground as the com- merce of the country. Both are inti- mately connected, and both are subjects of legal, not of executive, regulation. It is worthy of notice, that the writers of the Federalist, in discussing the pow- ers which the Constitution conferred on the President, made it matter of com- mendation, that it withdraws this sub- ject altogether from his grasp. " He can prescribe no rules," say they, " con- cerning the commerce or currency of the country." And so we have been all taught to think, under all former ad- ministrations. But we have now seen that the President, and the Pre* ident alone, does prescribe the rule concern- ing ill.' currency, lie makes it, and he alters it. He makes one rule for one branch of the revenue, and another rule for another, lb- makes one rule for the citizen ..I one Mai.', and another for the citizen ,,i another State. This, it i- .-.-i- taiu, is .me part of the treasury order of July last. But at last Congress interfered, and undertook in regulate the deposit j ..i the public moneys. It passed the law of July, 1836, placing the subject under legal control, restraining the power of the .vein ive, subjecting the hanks t.. liabilities and duties, on the one hand, and securing them againsl executive fa- voritism, on the olli.-r. lint this law contained another Important provision; which was. that all the money in the treasury, beyond what was necessary lor the current expenditures of the govern- merit, should be deposited with the States. This measure pa.-.-ed both houses by very unusual majorities, yet it hardly escaped a veto. It obtained only a cold nt, a slow, reluctant, and hesitating approval; and an early moment was seized to array against it a long list of objections. But the law passed. The money in the treasury beyond the sum of live millions was to go to tic Slates. It has so gone, and the treasury for the present is relieved from the burden of a surplus. But now observe other coinci- dences. In the annual message of De- cember, 1S;35, the President quoted the fact of the rapidly increasing sale of the public lands as proof of high national prosperity. He alluded to that subject, certainly with much satisfaction, and apparently in something of the tone of exultation. There was nothing said about monopoly, not a word about spec- ulation, not a word about over-issu paper, to pay for the lauds. All prosperous, all was full of evidence of a wise administration of government, ail was joy and triumph. But the idea of a deposil or distribu- tion of ihe surplus money with the p ... pie suddenly damped this effervescing happiness. The color of the rose W08 4:',s RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. gone, and every thing QOW looked gloomy and black. N"\v no more felicitation or congratulation, on account of the rapid Bales of the public lands; no more of this mosl decisive proof of national pros- perity and happiness. The executive Muse takes up a melancholy strain, she sings of monopolies, of speculation, of worthless paper, of loss both of land and money, of the multiplication of banks, and the danger of paper issues; and the end of the canto, the catastrophe, is, that lands shall no longer be sold but for gold and silver alone. The object of all this is clear enough. It was to diminish the income from the public lands. No desire for such a diminution had been manifested, so long as the money was supposed to be likely to re- main in the treasury. But a growing conviction that some other disposition must be made of the surplus, awakened attention to the means of preventing that surplus. Toward the close of the last session, Gentlemen, a proposition was brought forward in Congress for such an altera- tion of the law as should admit payment for public lands to be made in nothing but gold and silver. The mover voted for his own proposition; but I do not recollect that any other member con- curred in the vote. The proposition was rejected at once; but, as in other cases, that which Congress refused to do, the executive power did. Ten days after Congress adjourned, having had this mat- ter before it, and having refused to act upon it by making any alteration in the existing laws, a treasury order was is- Bued, commanding that very thing to be done which Congress had been requested and had refused to do. .Just as in the case of the removal of the deposits, the executive power acted in this ease also againsl the known, well understood, and recently expressed will of the representa- tives of the people. There never has been a momenl when the legislative will would h;i\ e Banc! Li med I he objeel of that order; probably never a moment in which any twenty individual members of Congress would have concurred in it. The acl was done withoul the assent of Congress, and against the well-known opinion of Congress. That act altered the law of the land, or purported to alter it, against the well-known will of the law-making power. For one, I confess I see no authority whatever in the Constitution, or in any law, for this treasury order. Those who have undertaken to maintain it have placed it on grounds, not only different, but inconsistent and contradictory. The reason which one gives, another rejects; one confutes what another argues. With one it is the joint resolution of 181ti which gave the authority; with another, it is tht! law of 1820; with a third, it is the general superintending power of the President; and this last argument, since it resolves itself into mere power, with- out stopping to point out the sources of that power, is not only the shortest, but in truth the most just. He is the most, sensible, as well as the most candid rea- soner, in my opinion, who places this treasury order on the ground of the pleas- ure of the executive, and stops there. I regard the joint resolution of 1810 as mandatory; as prescribing a legal rule; as putting this subject, in which all have so deep an interest, beyond the caprice, or the arbitrary pleasure, or the discre- tion, of the Secretary of the Treasury. I believe there is not the slightest legal authority, either in that officer or in the President, to make a distinction, and to say that paper may be received for debts at the custom-house, but that gold and silver only shall be received at the land oilices. And now for the sequel. At the commencement of the last ses- sion, as you know. Gentlemen, a resolu- tion was brought, forward in the Senate for annulling and abrogating this order, by Mr. Ewing, of Ohio, a gentleman of much intelligence, of sound principles, of vigorous and energetic character, whose loss from the service of the coun- try I regard as a public misfortune. The Whig members all supported this resolu- tion, and all the members, I believe, with the exception of Bomefive or six, were very anxious in some way to get rid of the treasury order. But Mr. Sw- ing's resolution was too direct. It was RECKlTloN AT NEW Y"ORK. 139 deemed a pointed and ungracious attack nn executive policy. It musl therefore be Boftened, modified, qualified, mad'' to sound less harsh to the ears of men in power, and to assume a plausible, pol- ished, inoffensive character. It was ac- cordingly put into tin- plastic hands of friends of the executive to be moulded and fashioned, so thai it might have the effect of ridding the country of the ob- noxious order, and yel not appear to question executive infallibility. All this did not answer. The late President is not a man to l>e satisfied with soli words; and he saw in the measure, even as it passed the two houses, a sub- stantial repeal of the order. He is a man of boldness and decision; and he respects boldness and decision in others. If you are his friend, he expects no flinching; and if you are his adversary, he respects you none the less for carry- ing your opposition to the full limits of honorable warfare. Gentlemen, I most sincerely regret the course of the Presi- dent in regard to this bill, and certainly most highly disapprove it. But I do not suffer the mortification of having attempted to disguise and garnish it, in order to make it acceptable, and of still finding it thrown back in my face. All that was obtained by this ingenious, diplomatic, and over-courteous mode of enacting a law, was a response from the President and the Attorney-General, that the bill in question was obscure, ill penned, and not easy to be understood. The bill, therefore, was neither ap- proved nor negatived. If it had been approved, the treasury order would have been annulled, though in a clumsy and objectionable manner. If it had been negatived, and returned to Congress, no doubt it would have been passed by two thirds of both houses, and in that way have become a law, and abrogated the order. But it was not approved, it was not returned; it was retained. It had passed the Senate in season ; it had been sent to the House in season: but there it was suffered to lie so long withoul being called up, that it was completely in the power of the President when it finally passed that body ; since he is not obliged to return bills which he does not ap- prove, if oi 'i pre ented to him ten d before the end of thi on. The bill was lost, therefore, and the trea order remains in force. Here again the representatives "i the people, in both houses of Congress, bj majorities almost unprecedented, endeavored t" aboli h this obnoxious order. <>n hardly any subject, indeed, has opinion I n unanimous, either in or out of Congn Yet the order remains. And dow, Gentlemen, I ask you, and I ask all men who have ii"t voluntarily surrendered all power and all right of thinking Eor themselves, whether, from 1832 to the present moment, the execu- tive authority has not effectually super- seded the power of Congress, thwarted the v\ill of the representatives of the people, and even of the people them- selves, and taken the whole subject of the currency into it- own grasp? In 1832, Congress desired to continue the bank of the United States, and a major- ity of the people desired it also; but the President opposed it. and his will pre- vailed. In Is:;:;. Congress refused to remove the deposits; the President re- solved upon it, however, and his will prevailed. Congress has never been willing to make a bank founded on the money and credit of the government, and administered, of course, by execu- tive hands: but this was the President's object, and he attained it, in a great measure, by the treasury selection of de- posit banks. In this particular, there- fore, to a great extent . his will prevailed. In 1836, Congress refused to confine the receipts for public lands to gold and silver; but the President willed it, and his will prevailed. In ls:!7. both houses of Congress, by more than two thirds, pa--ed a bill for restoring the former state of things by annulling the treasury order; but the President willed, notwith- standing, that the order should remain in force, and his will again prevailed. I repeat the question, therefore, and I would put it earnestly to every intelli- gent man, to everj lover of our constitu- il liberty . are we under the dominion of the law? or has the effectual govern- 440 KECEITION AT NEW YOIIK. ii i« - 1 1 1 dl' tin- country, at least in all that regards the great interest of the cur- rency . beeD in a single hand'/ Gentlemen, I have done with the nar- rative of event-, and measures. I have done with the history of these successive Bteps, in the progress of executive power. towards a complete control over the rev- enue and the currency. The result is now all before us. These pretended re- forms, these extraordinary exercises of power from an extraordinary zeal for the good of the people, what have they brought us to? In L829, the currency was declared to he neither sound um- uniform; a proposi- tion, in my judgment, altogether at vari- ance with the fact, because I do not be- lieve there ever was a country of equal extent, in which paper formed any part of the circulation, that possessed a cur- rency so sound, so uniform, so conven- ient, and so perfect in all respects, as the currency of this country, at the moment of tin- delivery of that message, in 1829. But how is it now? Where lias the improvement brought it? What has re- form done'? What has the great cry Eor hard money accomplished? Is the cur- rency uniform now? Is money in New Orleans now as good, or nearly so, as money in New York? Are exchanges at pai-. or only at the same low rates as in 1829 and other years? Everyone here knows that all the benefits of this ex- periment are but injury and oppression; all this reform, but aggravated distress. And as to the soundness of the cur- rency, how does that stand? Are the causes of alarm Less now than in 1829? I- there Less bank paper in circulation? 1- there less fear of a general catastro- phe? Is property more secure, or indus- try more certain of its reward? We all know . < tentlemen, that, during all this pretended warfare against all banks, banks have vastly increased. .Millions upon million-, of bank paper have been added to the circulation. Everywhere, and nowhere BO much as where the •nt administration and its measures been most zealously supported, hank have multiplied under State au- thority, since the decree was made that the Bank of the United states should be suffered to expire. Look at Mississippi, Missouri, Louisiana. Virginia, and other States. Do we not see that banking capital and bank paper are enormously increasing? The opposition to banks, therefore, so much professed, whether it be real or whether it be but pretended, has not restrained either their number or their issues of paper. Both have vastly increased. And now a word or two, Gentlemen, upon this hard-money scheme, and the fancies and the delusions to which it has given birth. Gentlemen, this is a sub- ject of delicacy, and one which it is diffi- cult to treat with sufficient caution, in a popular and occasional address like this. I profess to be a bullionist, in the usual and accepted sense of that word. I am Eor a solid specie basis for our circula- tion, and for specie as a part of the cir- culation, so far as it may be practicable and convenient. I am for giving no value to paper, merely as paper. I abhor paper; that is to say, irredeema- ble paper, paper that may not be con- verted into gold or silver at the will of the holder. But while I hold to all this, I believe, also, that an exclusive gold and silver circulation is an utter impos- sibility in the present state of this coun- try and of the world. "We shall none of us ever see it; and it is credulity and folly, in my opinion, to act under any such hope or expectation. The States will make banks, and these will issue paper; and the longer the government of the United States neglects its duty in regard to measures for regulating the cur- rency, the greater will be the amount of bank paper overspreading the country. Of this I entertain not a particle of doubt. While I thus hold to the absolute and indispensable necessity of gold ami sil- ver, as the foundation of our circulation, I yet think nothing more absurd and pre- posterous, than unnatural and strained efforts to import specie. There is but so much specie in the world, and its amount cannot be greatly or suddenly increased. Indeed, there are reasons for supposing that its amount has re- RECEITION AT NEW YORK. in cently diminished, by the quantity used in manufactures, aud bj the diminished products of the mines. The existing amount of Bpecie, however, musl sup- port the paper circulations, and the sys- tems of currency, not of the United States only, 1'iit of other nations al80. One of its great uses is to pass from country to country, for the purpose of si i t ling occasional balances in commer- cial transactions. It always finds its way, naturally and easily, to places where it IS needed for these uses, lint to lake extraordinary pains to bring it where the course of trade does nol bring it, where the state of debt and credit does not require it to be, and then to endeavor, by unnecessary and injurious regulations, treasury orders, accumula- tions at the mint, and other contriv- ances, there to retain it, is a course of policy bordering, as it appears to me, on political insanity. It is boasted that we have seventy-five or eighty millions of specie now in the country, liut what more senseless, what more absurd, than this boast, if there is a balance against us abroad, of which payment is desired sooner than remittances of our own products are likely to make that pay- ment? What more miserable than to boast of having that which is not ours, which belongs to others, and which the convenience of others, and our own con- venience also, require that they should possess? if Boston were in debt to New York, would it be wise in Boston, instead of paying its debt, to contrive all possible means of obtaining specie from the New York banks, and hoarding it at home? And yet this, as 1 think, would be precisely as sensible as the course which the government of the United States at present pursues. We have, beyond all doubt, a great amount of specie in the country, but it does not answer its accustomed end. it docs not perform its proper duty. , It neither goes abroad to settle balances against us, and thereby quiet those who have demands upon us; nor is it so disposed of at home as to sustain the circulation to the extent which the circumstances of the times require. A great part of it is in the U • iii ii bank-, in the land offices, OB the roads through the wilderness, on the passages over the Lakes, from the land offices i" the deposil banks, and from the deposit banks back to the land of- fices. Another p u bion is in the hands of buyers and sellers of specie; of men in the West, who sell land-office money to the new settlers for a high premium. Another portion, again, is kepi in pri- vate hands, to be used when circum- stances shall tempt to the purchase of lands. And, Gentlemen, I am inclined to think, so loud has been the cry about hard money, and BO BWeeping the de- nunciation of all paper, that private holding, or hoarding, prevails to some extenl in different parts of the country, These eighty millions of Bpecie, there- fore, really do us little good. We are weaker in our circulation, I have no doubt, our credit is feebler, money is scarcer with us, at this moment, than if twenty millions of this Bpecie were shipped to Europe, and general confi- dence thereby restored. Gentlemen, I will not say that some degree of pressure might not have come upon us, if the treasury order had not issued. I will not say that there has not been over-trading, and over-produc- tion, and a too great expansion of bank circulation. This may all be BO, and the last-mentioned evil, it was easy to foresee, was likely to happen when the United States discontinued their own bank. But what 1 do Bay is, that, act- ing upon the state of things as it actu- ally existed, and is now actually existing, the treasury order has been, and now is, productive of great distress. It acta upon a state of things which gives ex- traordinary force to its stroke, and ex- traordinary point to its sting. It an specie, when the free use and circulation of specie are most important; it cripples the banks, at a moment when the banks more than ever need all their mean-. It makes the merchant unable to remit, w ben remittance is necessary fur his own credit, and for the general adjustment of commercial balances. I am uot now discussing the general question, whether prices must not come down, and adjust 442 RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. themselves anew to the amount of bul- lion existing in Europe and America. 1 am dealing only with the measures of our own government on the subject of the currency, and 1 insist that these measures have been mosl unfortunate, and most ruinous in their effects on the ordinary means of our circulation at home, and on our ability of remittance abroad. Their effects, too, on domestic ex- changes, by deranging and misplacing the specie which is in the country, are most disastrous. Let him who lias lent an ear to all these promises of a more uniform currency sec how he can now sell his draft on New Orleans, or Mobile. Let the Northern manufacturers and mechanics, those who have sold the products of their labor to the South, and heretofore realized the prices with little loss of exchange, — let them try present facilities. Let them see what reform of the currency has done for them. Let them inquire whether, in this respect, their condition is better or worse than it was five or six years ago. Gentlemen, 1 hold this disturbance of the measure of value, and the means of payment and exchange, this derange- ment, and, if I may so say, this violation of the currency, to be one of the most un- pardonable of political faults. He who tampers with the currency robs labor of its bread. He panders, indeed, to greedy capital, which is keen-sighted, and may shift for itself; but he beggars labor, which is honest, unsuspecting, and too busy with the present to calcu- late for tie' future. The prosperity of tie' working classes lives, moves, ami lias its being in established credit, and a stead) medium of payment . All sud- den changes destroy it. Honest indus- try never comes in for any part of the spoils in tint scramble which takes place when tic currency of a country i- disordered. Did wild schemes and projects cut benefil the industrious? Did irredeemable hank paper ever enrich tie- laborious? Did violent fluctuations .|r, good t" him w ho depends on his daily Labor for his daily bread? Cer- tainly never. All these things may gratify greediness for sudden gain, or the rashness of daring speculation; but they can bring nothing but injury and distress to the homes of patient industry and li st labor. Who are they that profit by the present state of things? They are not the many, but the few. They are speculators, brokers, dealers in money, and lenders of money at ex- orbitant interest. Small capitalists are crushed, and, their means being dis- persed, as usual, in various parts of the country, and this miserable policy hav- ing destroyed exchanges, they have no longer either money or credit. And all classes of labor partake, and must par- take, in the same calamity- And what consolation for all this is it, that the public lands are paid for in specie? that, whatever embarrassment and distress pervade the country, the Western wil- derness is thickly sprinkled over with eagles and dollars? that gold goes weekly from Milwaukieand Chicago to Detroit, and back again from Detroit to Mil- waukie and Chicago, and performs simi- lar feats of egress and regress, in many other instances, in the Western States? It is remarkable enough, that, with all this sacrifice of general convenience, with all this sky-rending clamor for gov- ernment payments in specie, government, after all, never gets a dollar. So far as 1 know, the United States have not now a single specie dollar in the world. If they have, where is it? The gold and silver collected at the land offices is sent to tin' deposit, banks; it is there placed to the credit of the government, and thereby becomes the property of the bank. The whole revenue of the gov- ernment, therefore, after all, consists in mere hank credits; that- very sort of se- curity which the friends of the adminis- tration have so much denounced. Remember, Gentlemen, in the midst of this deafening din against all banks, I hat. if it shall create such a panic as Bhall shut up the hanks, it will shut up the treasury of the United States also. Gentlemen, I would not willingly he a prophet of ill. I most devoutly wish to see a better state of things; and 1 RECF.I'TIoN AT NEW YORK. ■\\:\ believe the repeal of tin- treasury order would tend very much to bring about that better state of things. And I am of opinion, that, sooner or later, the order will be repealed. I think il must be repealed. 1 think the Bast, West, North, and South will demand its re- peal. But, Gentlemen, I feel it my duty to say, that, if I should be disap- pointed in this expectation, I see no immediate relief to the distresses of the community. I gTeatly fear, even, that the worst is not yet. 1 I look for Beverer distresses; for extreme dillieulties in exchange, for far greater inconveniences in remittance, and for a sudden fall in prices. Our condition is one 'which is not to be tampered with, and the repeal of the treasury order, being something which government can do, and which will do good, the public voice is right in demanding that repeal. It is true, if repealed now, the relief will come late. Nevertheless its repeal or abrogation is a thing to be insisted on, and pursued, till it shall be accomplished. This ex- ecutive control over the currency, this power of discriminating, by treasury order, between one man's debt and an- other man's debt, is a thing not to be endured in a free country; and it should be the constant, persisting demand of all true Whigs, " Rescind the illegal treasury order, restore the rule of the law, place all branches of the revenue on the same grounds, make men's rights equal, and leave the government of the country where the Constitution leaves it, in the hands of the representatives of the people in Congress." This point should never be surrendered or compro- mised. Whatever is established, let it 1 On the 10th of June following the delivery of this speech, all the banks in the city of New York, by common consent, suspended tin' pay- ment of their notes in specie. On the next day, tli' -ante step was taken by the banks of Bos- ton and the vicinity, ami the example was fol- lowed by all the banks south of New York, as they received intelligence of the suspension of specie payments in that city. On the 15th of .lune, (just three months from tin- day this ppeech was delivered,) President Van liuren issued his proclamation calling an extra sion of Congress for the first Monday of Sep- tember. be equal, and let it ho legal. Le1 men know, to-day, what money may be re quired of them to-morrow. Let tie- rule he ..pen and pill. lie, ..|| tie- • | the statute book, n..i a Becrel . in the execu- tive breasl , ' lentlemen, in the session which baa now jusl closed, I have done my utmost to effect ;i direct ami immediate repeal of the i reasury order. I have voted for a hill anticipating the payment of the French ami Neapol- itan indemnities by an advance from the treasury. I have voted with great satisfaction for the restoration of duties on roods destroyed in the great conflagration in this city. I have voted for a deposit with tie- States of the surplus which may be in the treasury at the end of the year. All these measures have failed; and it is for you, and for our fellow-citizens through- out the country, to decide whethei public interest would, or would not, have been promoted by their success. But I find, Gentlemen, that I am committing an unpardonable trespass on your indulgent patience. I will pursue these remarks no further. And yet I cannot persuade myself to take lea. you without reminding you, with the utmost deference and respect, of the' im- portant part assigned to you in the political concerns of ymr country, and of the great influence of your opinions, your example, and your efforts upon the general prosperity ami happiness. Whigs of New York! Patriotic citi- zens of this great metropolis! hovers of constitutional liberty, bound by in- terest ami by affection to the institu- tions of your country, American- in heart and in principle! — you an' ready, I am sure, to fulfil all the duties im- posed u] you by your situation, and demanded ..! you by your country. You have a centra! position J VOUT i- the point from which intelligent m- anates, and spreads in all directions over the whole laud. Every hour carries re- ports of your sentiments and opinions to the verge of the Union. You cannot escape tic reap rosibility which circum- lit RECEPTION AT NEW YORK. Btances have thrown upon you. You must live and act, on a broad and con- spicuous theatre, either for good or for evil to your country. You cannot shrink from your public duties; you cannot ob- BCUre yourselves, nor bury your talent. In the common welfare, in the common prosperity, in the common glory of Americans, you have a stake of value; n.it to be calculated. You have an in- terest in the preservation of the Union, of the Constitution, and of the true principles of the government, which no man can estimate. You act for your- selves, and for the generations that are to come alter you; and those who ages hence shall bear your names, and par- take your blood, will feel, in their po- litical and social condition, the conse- quences of the manner in which you discharge your political duties. 1 hiving fulfilled, then, on your part and on mine, though feebly and imper- fectly on mine, the offices of kindness and mutual regard required by this occasion, shall we not use it to a higher and nobler purpose? Shall we not, by this friendly meeting, refresh our pa- triotism, rekindle our love of consti- tutional liberty, and strengthen our resolutions of public duty? Shall we not, in all honesty and sincerity, with pure and disinterested love of country, as Americans, looking back to the re- nown of our ancestors, and looking tor- ward to the interests of our posterity, here, to-night, pledge our mutual faith to hold on to the last to our professed principles, to the doctrines of true lib- erty, and to the Constitution of the country, let who will prove true, or who will prove recreant? Whigs of New York! I meet you in advance, and give you my pledge for my own performance of these duties, without qualification and without reserve. Whether in pub- lic life or in private life, in the Capi- tol or at home, I mean never to desert them. I mean never to forget that I have a country, to which I am bound by a thousand ties ; and the stone which is to lie on the ground that shall cover me, shall not bear the name of a son ungrate- ful to his native land. SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. REMARKS MADE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED BTATES, ON THE lOra OF JANUARY, 1838, UPON A RESOLUTION MOVED BY Ml:. CLAT IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE RESOLUTION OFFEEED BT MR. CALHOUN ON Mil. SUBJECT OF SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Oh tlie 27th of December, 1837, a series of resolutions was moved in the Senate by Mr. Calhoun, on the subject of slavery. The fifth of the scries was expressed in the following terms : — " Resolved, That the intermeddling of any State, or States, or their citizens, to abolish slavery in this District, or any of the Territories, on the ground, or under the pretext, that it is immoral or sinful, or the passage <>f any act or measure of Congress with that view, would be a direct and dan- gerous attack on the institutions of all the slave-holding States." These resolutions were taken up for dis- cussion on several successive days. On the 10th of January, 1838, Mr. Clay' moved the following resolution, as a substitute for the fifth of Mr. Calhoun's series: — "Resolved, That the interference, by the citizens of any of the States, with the view to the abolition of slavery in this Dis- trict, is endangering the rights and security of the people of the District ; and that any act or measure of Congress, designed to abolish slavery in this District, would be a violation of the faith implied in the ces- sions by the States of Virginia and Mary- land, a just cause of alarm to the people of the slave-holding States, and have a direct and inevitable tendency to disturb and en- danger the Union." on the subject of this amendment, Mr. Webster addressed the Senate as fol- lows.] Mit. President, — I cannot concur in this resolution. I do not know any matter of fact, or any ground of ar- gument, on which this affirmation of plighted faitli can be sustained. I see nothing by which Congress has tied up its hands, either directly or indirectly, so as to put its clear constitutional power beyond the exercise of its own discretion. I have carefully examined the acts of cession by lie the act of Congress, the pr edings and history of tic times, ami I find noth- ing to lead me to doubt that it was tin; intention of all parties to leave this, like other subjects belonging to legisla- tion for the ceded territory, entirely to the discretion and wisdom of ( The words of the Constitution are clear ami plain. None could be clearer or plainer. Congress, by that instrument, has power to exercise exclusive jurisdic- tion over the ceded territory, in all c whatsoever. The acts of cession con- tain no limitation, condition, or qualifi- cation whatever, except that, out of abundant caution, there is inserted a proviso that nothing in the acts con- tained shall be construed to vest in the United States any right of property in the soil, so as to affect the rights of individuals therein, otherwise than as such individuals mighl themselves trans- fer their righl of soil t<> the United States. The acts of cession declare, that the tract of country •• is for ceded and relinquished t I press and to the government of the United Sta in full and absolute right and exclusive jurisdiction, as well of soil as of persons residing or to reside therein, pursuant to the tenor and effect of the eighth tion of the first article of the Constitu- tion Of the United Stal 446 SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. N'mv. thai Bection, to which reference is thus expressly made in these deeds of cession, declares, that Congress shall have power " to exercise exclusive legis- lation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district, not exceeding ten miles square, as may, by cession of particular States and the acceptance of Congress, become the scat of government of the United States." Nothing, therefore, as it seems to me, can be clearer, than that the States mak- ing the cession expected Congress to exercise over the District precisely that power, and neither more nor less, which the Constitution had conferred upon it. I do not know how the provision, or the intention, either of the Constitution in granting the power, or of the States in making the cession, could be expressed in a manner more absolutely free from all doubt or ambiguity. I see, therefore, nothing in the act of cession, and nothing in the Constitu- tion, and nothing in the history of this transaction, and nothing in any other transaction, implying any limitation upon the authority of Congress. If the assertion contained in this resolution be true, a very strange re- sult, as it seems to me, must follow. The resolution affirms that the faith of Congress is pledged, indefinitely. It makes no limitation of time or circum- stance. If this be so, then it is an obli- gation that binds us for ever, as much as if it were one of the prohibitions of the Constitution itself. And at all times hereafter, even if, in the course of their history, availing themselves of events, or changing their views of policy, the Mat'-- themselves should make provis- ion for tin- emancipation of their slaves, the existing state of tilings could not be changed, nevertheless, in this District. It does really seem to me, that, if this resolution, in its terms, be true, though Blavery in every other part of the world may be abolished, yet in the metrop- olis of this great republic it is estab- lished in perpetuity. This appears to mi- to be tin- result of the doctrine of plighted faith, as Btated in the reso- lution. In reply to Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Webster said : — The words of the resolution speak for themselves. They require no comment. They express an unlimited plighted faith. The honorable member will so see if he will look at those words. The gentleman asks whether those who made the cession could have expected that Congress would ever exercise such a power. To this I answer, that 1 see no reason to doubt that the parties to the cession were as willing to leave this as to leave other powers to the discre- tion of Congress. 1 see not the slight- est evidence of any especial fear, or any especial care or concern, on the part of the ceding States, in regard to this par- ticular part of the jurisdiction ceded to Congress. And 1 think I can ask, on the other side, a yery important question for the consideration of the gentleman himself, and for that of the Senate and the country; and that is, Would Con- gress have accepted the cession with any such restraint upon its constitutional power, cither express or understood to be implied? 1 think not. Looking back to the state of things then existing, and especially to what Congress had so re- cently done, when it accepted the ces- sion of the Northwestern Territory, I entertain no doubt whatever that Con- gress would have refused the cession al- together, if offered with any condition or understanding that its constitutional authority to exercise exclusive legisla- tion over the District in all cases what- soever should be abridged. The Senate will observe that I am speaking solely to the point of plighted faith. I'pon other parts of the resolu- tion, and upon many other things con- nected with it, 1 have said nothing. I only resist the imposition of new obli- gations, or a new prohibition, not to be found, as I think, either in the Consti- tution or any act of Congress. I have said nothing on the expediency of aboli- tion, immediate or gradual, or the rea- sons which ought to weigh witli Con- gress should that question be proposed. I can, however, well conceive what would, as I think, be a natural and SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 117 fair mode <>f reasoning on bucVj an oc- casion. When it is s;iid. for instance. In waj (if argument, thai Congress, although it have the power, ought nol to bake a lead in the business of abolition, consider- ing that the Lnteresi which the United States have in the whole subject is vastly less than thai which States have in it, I can understand the propriety and per- tinency of tin' observation. It is, as far as it goes, a pertinent and appro- priate argument, and I shall always be ready to give it the full weight belong- ing to it. When it is argued that, in a case so vital to the States, the States themselves should be allowed to main- tain their own policy, and that the gov- ernment of the United States ought not to do any thing which shall, directly or indirectly, shake or disturb that policy, this is a line of argument which I can understand, whatever weight I may be disposed to give to it; for I have always not only admitted, but insisted, that slavery within the States is a subject belonging absolutely and exclusively to the States themselves. But the present is not an attempt to establish any such course of reasoning as this. The attempt is to set up a pledge of the public faith, to do the same office that a constitutional prohibition in terms would do; that is, to set up a di- rect bar, precluding all exercise of the discretion of Congress over the subject. It has been often said, in this debate, and I believe it is true, that a decided majority of the Senate do believe that Congress has a clear constitutional power over slavery in this District. But while this constitutional right is admitted, it is at the same moment at- tempted effectually to counteract, over- throw, and do away with it, by the affir- mation of plighted faith, as asserted in the resolution before us. Now, I have already said I know of nothing to support this affirmation. Neither in the acts of cession, nor in the act of Congress accepting it, nor in any other document, history, publication, or transaction, do I know of a single fact or suggestion supporting this proposi- tion, or tending to support it. Nor has anj gentleman, so Ear as I know, pointed out, or attempted t" point out, anj Buch fact, documeut, transaction, or other evidence. All i> lefl i" tie- general and repeated statement, thai Buch a condi- tion must have been iutendi d bj the States. Of all this I see no proof what- ever. I see ii" e\ idence of any desire on the part Of tie- Slate, thus to limit the power of Congress, or thus to require a pledge againsl its exercise. And. in- deed, if this were made out, the inten- tion of Congress, a- well as that of the States, musl be inquired into. Nothing short of a dear and manifest intention of both parties, proved by proper evi- dence, can amount to plighted faith. The expectation or intent of one party, founded on something not. provided for nor hinted at in the transaction itself, cannot plight the faith of the other party. In short, T am altogether unable to see any ground for supposing that either party to the cession had any mental reservation, any unexpressed expecta- tion, or relied on any implied, but un- mentioned and unsuggested pledge, whatever. By the Constitution, if a district should be ceded to it for the seat of government, Congress was to have a right, in express terms, to exer- cise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever. The cession was made and accepted in pursuance of this power. Both parties knew well what they were doing. Both parties knew that by the cession the States surrendered all juris- diction, and Congress acquired all juris- diction; and this is the whole transac- tion. As to any provision in the acts of ces- sion stipulating for the security of prop- erty, there is none, excepting only what I have already stated; the condition, namely, that no right of individuals to the soil should be construed to be trans- ferred, but only the jurisdiction. But, no doubt, all rights of property ought to be duly respected by Congress, and all other legislatures. And since the subject of compensa- tion to the ow ners of emancipated 3] •lis SLAVERY IX THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. has been referred to, 1 take occasion to Bay, that if Congress should think that a wise, just, and politic Legislation for this District required it to make com- pensation for slaves emancipated here, it has tin' same constitutional author- ity to make such compensation as to make grants for roads and bridges, almshouses, penitentiaries, and other similar objects, in the District. A general and absolute power of legis- lation carries with it all the necessary and just incidents belonging to such legislation. Mr. Clay having made some remarks in reply, Mr. Webster rejoined: — The honorable member from Ken- tucky asks the Senate to suppose the opposite case; to suppose that the seat of government had been fixed in a free State, Pennsylvania, for exam- ple; and that Congress had attempted to establish slavery in a district over which, as here, it had thus exclusive Legislation. He asks whether, in that case, Congress could establish slavery in such a place. This mode of changing the question does not, I think, vary the argument; and I answer, at once, that, however improbable or improper such an act might be, yet, if the power were universal, absolute, and without restriction, it might unquestionably be so exercised. No limitation being ex- pressed or intimated in the grant itself, or any other proceeding of the parties, none could be implied. And in the other cases, of forts, arsenals, and dock-yards, if Congress has exclusive and absolute legislative power, it must, of course, have the power, if it could be supposed to be guilty of such folly, whether proposed to be exercised in a district within a free State, to establish slavery, or in a dis- trict in a slave State, to abolish or regu- late it. If it be a district over which Congress has, as it has in this District, unlimited power of legislation, it seems to me that whatever would stay the exer- cise of this power, in either case, must be drawn from discretion, from reasons of justice and true policy, from those high considerations which ought to in- fluence Congress in questions of such extreme delicacy and importance; and to all these considerations I am willing, and always shall be willing, I trust, to give full weight. But I cannot, in con- science, say that the power so clearly conferred on Congress by the Constitu- tion, as a power to be exercised, like others, at its own discretion, is imme- diately taken away again by an implied faith that it shall not be exercised at all. THE CREDIT SYSTEM AND THE LABOR OF THE UNITED STATES. FROM THE SECOND SPEECH <>N THE SUB-TREASURY, DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STAFFS, ON THE ISlH 01 MARCH, 18J8. Now, Mr. President, what I under- stand by the credit system is, that which thus connects labor and capital, by giv- ing to labor the use of capital. In other words, intelligence, good charac- ter, and good morals bestow on those who have not capital a power, a trust, a confidence, which enables them to ob- tain it, and to employ it usefully for themselves and others. These active men of business build their hopes of suc- cess on their atteutiveness, their econ- omy, and their integrity. A wider theatre for useful activity is under their feet, and around them, than was ever open to the young and enterprising gen- erations of men, on any other spot en- lightened by the sun. Before them is the ocean. Every thing in that direc- tion invites them to efforts of enterprise and industry in the pursuits of commerce and the fisheries. Around them, on all hands, are thriving and prosperous man- ufactures, an improving agriculture, and the daily presentation of new objects of internal improvement; while behind them is almost half a continent of the richest land, at the cheapest prices, un- der healthful climates, and washed by the most magnificent rivers that on any part of the globe pay their homage to the sea. In the midst of all these glow- ing and glorious prospects, they are neither restrained by ignorance, nor smitten down by the penury of personal circumstances. They are not compelled to contemplate, in hopelessness and de spair, all the advantages thus bestowed on their condition by Providence. Cap- ital they may have little 01 none, but CREDIT supplies its place; not as the refuge of the prodigal and the reckless; not as gratifying present wants with the certainty of future absolute ruin; but as the genius of honorable trust and confi- dence; as the blessing voluntarily offered to good character and to good conduct; as the beneficent agent, which assists honesty and enterprise in obtaining com- fort and independence. Mr. President, take away this credit, and what remains? I do not ask what remains to the few, bul to the many? Take away this system of credit, and then tell me what is left for labor and industry, but mere manual toil and daily drudgery? If we adopt a system that withdraws capital from active em- ployment, do we not diminish the rate of wages? If we curtail the general business of society, does not even labor- ing man find his condition grow daily worse? In the politics of the day, Sir. we hear much said about divorcing the government from the hanks; but when we abolish credit, we shall di- vorce labor fmui capital; and depend upon it, Sir, when we divorce labor from capital, capital is hoarded, and labor starves. The declaration so often quoted, that "all who trade on borrowed capital ought to break," is the most aristocratic sentiment ever uttered in this country. 29 450 THE CREDIT SYSTEM AND THE LABOR It is a sentiment which, if carried out by political arrangement, would con- demn the great majority of mankind to the perpetual condition of mere day- laborers. It tends to take away from them all thai solace and hope which arise from possessing something which they can call their own. A man loves his own: it is tit and natural that he should do so; and he will love his coun- try and its institutions, if he have some stake in that country, although it be but a very small part of the general mass of property. If it be but a cottage, an acre, a garden, its possession raises him, gives him self-respect, and strengthens his attachment to his native land. It is our happy condition, by the blessing of Providence, that almost every man of sound health, industrious habits, and good morals, can ordinarily attain, at least, to this degree of comfort and re- spectability; and it is a result devoutly to be wished, both for its individual and its general consequences. But even to this degree of acquisition that credit of which I have already said so much is highly important, since its general effect is to raise the price of wages, and render industry productive. There is no condition so low, if it be attended with industry and economy, that it is not benefited by credit, as any one will find, if he will examine and follow out its operations. Sir, if there be any aristocrats in Massachusetts, the people are all aristo- crats ; because I do not believe there is on earth, in a highly civilized society, a greater equality in the condition of men than exists there. If there be a man in the State wIki maintains what is called an equipage, has servants in livery, or drives four horses in his coach, I am not acquainted with him. On the other hand, there are few who are not able to carry their wives and daughters to church in some decent < veyance. It is no matter of regrel or sorrow to us that few an- very rich; but, it is onr pride ami glory that few are very poor. It is oar still higher pride, ami our ju-t boast . as I think, that all her eiti/ens possess means of intelligence and education ; and that, of all her productions, she reckons among the very chiefest those which spring from the culture of the mind and the heart. Mr. President, one of the most strik- ing characteristics of this age is the extraordinary progress which it has wit- nessed in popular knowledge. A new and powerful impulse has been acting in the social system of late, producing this effect in a most remarkable degree. In morals, in politics, in art, in litera- ture, there is a vast accession to the number of readers and to the number of proficients. The present state of popular knowledge is not the result of a slow and uniform progress, proceeding through a lapse of years, with the same regular degree of motion. It is evi- dently the result of some new causes, brought into powerful action, and pro- ducing their consequences rapidly and strikingly. What, Sir, are these causes? This is not an occasion, Sir, for dis- cussing such a question at length; allow me to say, however, that the improved state of popular knowledge is but the necessary result of the improved con- dition of the great mass of the people. Knowledge is not one of our merely physical wants. Life may be sustained without it. But, in order to live, men must be fed and clothed and sheltered; and in a state of things in which one's whole labor can do no more than pro- cure clothes, food, and shelter, he can have no time nor means for mental improvement. Knowledge, therefore, is not attained, and cannot be attained, till there is some degree of respite from daily manual toil and never-ending drudgery. "Whenever a less degree of labor will produce the absolute necessa- ries of life, then there come leisure and means both to teach and to learn. If this great and wonderful extension of popular knowledge be the result of an improved condition, it may, in the next place, well he ask. (1, What are the causes which have thus suddenly produced that great improvement? How is it that the means of food, clothing, and shelter arc now so much more cheaply and abun- OK THE UNITED BTATE8. 451 d.uiily procured than formerly? Sir, the main cause I take to be the progress of scientific art, or a nem extension of the application of science to art. This it is which lias so lunch distinguished the last, half-century in Europe and in America; ami its effects arc everywhere risible, and especially among us. .Man lias found new allies and auxiliaries in the powers ur attenl ion, our regard, and our at tachment are every moment solicited to what touches u< closest, and we feel less and less the attraction of a distant orb. Such tendencies we are bound by true pal i lOl ism and by our love of union to re it. This is our dutj ; and the mo- ment, in my judgment, has arrived, when that duty should be performed. We hear, every day, sentiments and ar- guments which would become a meeting of envoys, employed by separate govern- ments, more than they become the com- mon legislature of a united country. Constant appeals are made to local in- terests, to geographical distinctions, and to the policy and the pride of particular States. It would sometimes appear as if it were a settled purpose to convince the people that our Union is nothing but a jumble of different and discordant interests, which must, erelong, be all resolved into their original state of sep- arate existence; as if, therefore, it was of no great value while it should last, and was not likely to last long. The process of disintegration begins by urging as a fact the existence of different interests. Sir, is not the end to which all this leads us obvious? Who does not see that, if convictions of this kind take possession of the public mind, our Un- ion can hereafter be nothing, while it remains, but a connection without har- mony; a bond without affection ; a thea- tre for the angry contests of local feelings, local objects, and local jealousies? Even while it continues to exist in name, it may by these means become nothing but the mere form of a united government. My children, and the children of those who sit around me, may meet, perhaps, in this chamber, in the next generation; but if tendencies now but too obvious be not checked, they will meet as strangers and aliens. They will feel no sense of common interest or common country; they will cherish no common object of patriotic love. If the same Saxon lan- guage shall fall from their lips, it may be the chief proof that they belong to the same nation. Its vital principle ex- hausted and yone, its power of doing good terminated, the Union itself, lie- come productive only of strife and con- tention, must ultimately fall, dishonored and unlamented. The honorable member from Carolina himself habitually indulges in charges of usurpation and oppression against the government of his country. He daily denounces its important, measures, in the COURSE OF MR. CALHOUN 157 language in which our Revolutionary fathers Bpoke of the oppressions of the mother country. Not merely against executive usurpation, cither real or sup- posed, does he utter these sentiments, but against laws of Congress, laws passed by large majorities, laws sanctioned for a course of years by the people. These laws lie proclaims, every hour, to be but a scries of acts of oppression. He speaks of them as if it were an admitted fact, thai such is their true character. This is the language he utters, these are the sentiments he expresses, to the rising generation around him. Are they sen- timents and language which are likely to inspire our children with the love of union, to enlarge their patriotism, or to teach them, and to make them feel, that their destiny has made them common citizens of one great and glorious repub- lic? A principal object in his late polit- ical movements, the gentleman himself tells us, was to unite the entire SoutJi ; and against whom, or against what, does he wish to unite the entire South? Is not this the very essence of local feel- ing and local regard? Is it not the ac- knowledgment of a wish and object to create political strength by uniting polit- ical opinions geographically? While the gentleman thus wishes to unite the en- tire South, I pray to know, Sir, if he ex- pects me to turn toward the polar star, and, acting on the same principle, to utter a cry of bally! to the whole North? Heaven forbid! To the day of my death, neither he nor others shall hear such a cry from me. Finally, the honorable member de- clares that he shall now march off, un- der the banner of State rights! March off from whom? March off from what? We have been contending for great prin- ciples. We have been struggling to maintain the liberty and to restore the prosperity of the country; we have made these struggles here, in the national councils, with the old flag, the true American flag, the Eagle, and the Stars and Stripes, waving over the chamber in which we sit. He now tells us, how- ever, that he marches off under the Si ite- lights banner! bet him go. I remain. I am w here I ever have hen, and ever mean !•> be. Here, standing on the platform of tin; general Constitution, a platform b enough and firm enough t" uphold every interest of the who!.' country, I shall still he found, [ntrusted with -"me part in the administration of thai Constitu- tion, I intend t" act in its spirit, and in the spirit of those w ho framed it , Sir, I would act as if our fathers, who formed it for us ami who bequeathed it to us, were looking on me; as if I could see their venerable forms bending down to behold us from tin- abodes above. I would act, too, as if the eye of | w as gazing on me. Standing thus, as in the full [ our ancestors and our posterity, hav- ing received this inheritance from the former, to be transmitted to the latter, and feeling that, if I am born for any good, in my day and g n, it is for the good of the whole country, no local policy or local feeling, no tempo- rary impulse, shall induce me to yield my foothold on the Constitution of the Union. I move off under no banner not known to the whole American people, and to their Constitution and laws. No, Sir; these walls, these columns, ">hall By From their firm base aa soon as I." I came into public life. Sir, in the service of the United States. On that broad altar, my earliest, ami all my pub- lic vows, have been made. 1 pro] to serve no other master. So far as de- pends on any agency of mine, they shall continue united States; united in inter- est ami in affection; united in every thing in regard to which the Constitu- tion has decreed their union ; unite, 1 in war, tor the common defence, the com- mon renown, and the common glory; aiul united, compacted, knit firml) to- gether iii peace, for the comi i \ perity ami happiness of ourselves ami our children. REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 22d OF MARCH, 1838, IN ANSWER TO MR. CALHOUN. [On Thursday, the 22d of March, Mr. Calhoun spoke at length in answer to Mr. Webster's speech of the 12th of March. When he had concluded, Mr. Webster immediately rose, and addressed the Sen- ate as follows.] M it. President, — I came rather Late to the Senate this morning, and, hap- pening to meet a friend on the Avenue, I was admonished to hasten my steps, as " the war was to be carried into Africa," and I was expected to be anni- hilated. I lost no time in following the advice, Sir, since it would be awkward for one to be annihilated without know- ing any thing about it. Well, Sir, the war has been carried into Africa. The honorable member has mad" an expedition into regions as remote from the subject of this debate as the orb of .Jupiter from that of our earth. He has spoken of the tariff, of slavery, and of the late war. Of all this 1 do not complain. On the contrary, if it I"- his pleasure to allude to all or any of these topics, for any purpose what- evi i . I am ready at all times to hear him. Sir, this carrying the war into Africa, which has become so common a phrase among us, is, indeed, imitating a great example; but it is an example which is not, always followed with success. In the first place, every man, though he be a man of talent and g-nius, is not a Scipio; and in the next place, as I rec- oiled this pari "t Roman and Cartha- ginian history. — the gentleman may he more accurate, but, as I recollect it, when Scipio resolved upon carrying the war into Africa, Hannibal was not at home. Now, Sir, I am very little like Hannibal, but I am at home; and when Scipio Africanus South-C'aroliniensis brings the war into my territories, I shall not leave their defence to Asdru- bal, nor Syphax, nor anybody else. I meet him on the shore, at his landing, and propose but one contest. " Concurritur ; hone Momento cita mors venit, aut victoria la?ta." Mr. President, I had made up my mind that, if the honorable gentleman should confine himself to a reply in the ordinary way, I would not say another syllable. But he has not done so. He has gone off into topics quite remote from all connection with revenue, com- merce, finance, or sub-treasuries, and invites to a discussion which, however uninteresting to the public at the pres- ent moment, is too personal to be de- clined by me. He says, Sir, that I undertook to com- pare my political character and conduct with his. Far from it. I alt"mpted no such thing. I compared the gentle- man's political opinions at different times with one another, and expressed decided opposition to those which he now holds. And 1 did, certainly, ad- vert to the general tone ami drift of the gentleman's sentiments and expressions for some years past, in their hearing on REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN, 459 the Union, with such remarks as I thought they deserved; but I instituted no comparison between hira and myself. lie may institute one if lie pleases, ami when he pleases. Seeking nothing of this kind, 1 avoid nothing. Let it, be remembered, that the gentleman began the deliate. by attempting tO exliiliit a contrast between the present opinions and conduct of my friends and myself, and our recent opinions and conduit. Here is the first charge of inconsist- ency; let the public judge whether he has made it good. lie says, Sir, thai OU several questions I have taken different sides, at different times; let him show it. If he shows any change of opinion, I shall be called on to give a reason, and to account for it. I leave it to the country to say whether, as yet, he has shown any such thing. But, Sir, before attempting that, he has something else to say. He had prepared, it seems, to draw comparisons himself. lie had intended to say some- thing, if time had allowed, upon our respective opinions and conduct in re- gard to the war. If time had allowed! Sir, time does allow, time must al- low. A general remark of that kind ought not to be, cannot be, left to pro- duce its effect, when that effect is ob- viously intended to be unfavorable. Why did the gentleman allude to my votes or my opinions respecting the war at all, unless he had something to say? Does he wish to leave an undefined im- pression that something was done, or something said, by me, not now capable of defence or justification? something not reconcilable with true patriotism? lie means that, or nothing. And now, Sir, let him bring the matter forth; let him take the responsibility of the ac- cusation; let him state his facts. I am here to answer: I am here, this day, to answer. Now is the time, and now the hour. T think we read, Sir, that one of the good spirits would not bring against the Arch-enemy of mankind a railing accusation; and what is railing but gen- eral reproach, an imputation without fact, time, or circumstance? Sir, I call for particulars. The gentleman knows my whole conduct w> 11 ; indeed, the journals Bhow it all, from the moment 1 came into < longress till the peace. If I have done, then. Sir, any thing unpad i- otic, any thing which, as far as love to count in goes, will no! bear comparison with his or any man's conduct, let it now be stated. Give me the fact, the time, the manner. He speaks of the war; that which we call the late war, though it is now twenty-five years since it terminated. He would leave an im- pression that I opposed it. How? I was not in Congress when war was de- clared, nor in public life anywhere. I was pursuing my profession, keeping company with judges and jurors, and plaintiffs and defendants. If I had been in Congress, and had enjoyed the benefit of hearing the honorable gentle- man's speeches, for aught I can Bay, I might have concurred with him. Bui I was not in public life. I never had been, for a single hour; and was in no situation, therefore, to oppose or to sup- port the declaration of war. I am speaking to the fact, Sir; and if the gentleman has any fact, lei us know it. Well, Sir, I came into Congress (lur- ing the war. I found it waged, and raging. And what did I do here to op- pose it? Look to the journals. I.ct the honorable gentleman tax his memory. Bring up any thing, if there be any- thing to bring up, not showing error of opinion, but showing want of loyalty or fidelity to the country. I did not agree to all that was proposed, nor did the honorable member. I did Dot app of every measure, nor did he. The war had been preceded by the restrictive tern and the embargo. As a private in- dividual, I certainly did not think well of these measures. It appeared to me that the embargo annoyed ourselves as much as our enemies, while it destroyed the business and cramped the spirits of the people. In this opinion I may have been right or wrong, but the gen- tleman was himself of the same opinion. He told us the other day. as a proof of his independence of party on g eat ques- tions, that he differed with his fri< on the subject of the em He was 460 REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. decidedly and unalterably opposed to it. Ii furnishes in his judgment, therefore, no imputation either on my patriotism, or on the soundness of my political opinions, that I was opposed to it also. 1 mean opposed in opinion; for I was m>t in Congress, and had nothing to do with the act creating the embargo. And as tn opposition to measures for carry- ing on the war, after I came into Con- gress. 1 again say, let the gentleman specify; let him lay his finger on any tiling calling for an answer, and he shall have an answer. Mr. President, you were yourself in the House during a considerable part of this time. The honorable gentleman may make a witness of you. He may make a witness of anybody else. He may be his own witness. Give us but some fact, some charge, something ca- pable in itself either of being proved or disproved. Prove any thing, state any tiling, not consistent with honorable and patriotic conduct, and I am ready to an- Bwer it. Sir, I am glad this subject has been alluded to in a manner which jus- tifies me in taking public notice of it; because I am well aware that, for ten years past, infinite pains has been taken to find something, in the range of these topics, which might create prejudice against me in the country. The jour- nals have all been pored over, and the reports ransacked, and scraps of para- graphs and half-sentences have been col- lected, fraudulently put together, and then made to flare out as if there had been -nine discovery. But all this failed. The next resort was to supposed corre- spondence. My letters were sought for, to learn if, in the confidence of private friendship, I had ever said any thing which an enemy could make use of. With tliis view, the vicinity of my for- mer residence has been searched, as with a lighted candle. New Hampshire has been explored, from the mouth of the Merrimack to the White Hills. In one instance a gentleman had left the State, gone five hundred miles nil, ami died. His papers wen- examined; a letter was found, and I have understood it was brought to Washington; a conclave was held to consider it, and the result was, that, if there was nothing else against Mr. Webster, the matter had better be let alone. Sir, I hope to make every- body of that opinion who brings against me a charge of want of patriotism. Er- rors of opinion can be found, doubtless, on many subjects; but as conduct flows from the feelings which animate the heart, 1 know that no act of my life has had its origin in the want of ardent love of country. Sir, when I came to Congress, I found the honorable gentleman a leading mem- ber of the House of Representatives. Well, Sir, in what did we differ? One of the first measures of magnitude, after I came here, was Mr. Dallas's 1 proposi- tion for a bank. It was a war measure. It was urged as being absolutely neces- sary to enable government to carry on the war. Government wanted revenue; such a bank, it was hoped, would furnish it; and on that account it was most warmly pressed and urged on Congress. You remember all this, Mr. President. You remember how much some persons supposed the success of the war and the salvation of the country depended on carrying that measure. Yet the honor- able member from South Carolina op- posed this bill. He now takes to himself a good deal of merit, none too much, but still a good deal of merit, for having de- feated it. Well, Sir, I agreed with him. It was a mere paper bank; a machine for fabricating irredeemable paper. It was a new form for paper money; and instead of benefiting the country, I thought it would plunge it deeper and deeper in difficulty. I made a speech on the subject; it has often been quoted. There it is; let whoever pleases read and examine it. I am not proud of it EOT any ability it exhibits; on the other hand, I am not ashamed of it for the spirit which it manifests. But, Sir, I say again that the gentleman himself took the lead against this measure, this darling measure of the administration. I followed him; if I was seduced into error, or into unjustifiable opposition, there sits my seducer. 1 The Secretary of the Treasury. REPLY TO MR. CALHOl N 461 What, Sir, were other leading senti- menta or Leading measures of thai day? On what other subjects did men differ? The gentleman has adverted to one, and that a most importanl one; I mean the navy. He says, and Bays truly, that at the commencement of the war the navy was unpopular. It was unpopular with his friends, who then controlled the politics of the country. But he says he differed with his friends; in this respect lie resisted party influence and party connection, and was the friend and ad- vocate of the navy. Sir, I commend him for it. He showed his wisdom. Thai gallant little navy soon fought itself into favor, and showed that no man who had placed reliance on it had been disappointed. Well, Sir, in all this I was exactly of the opinion of the honorable gentleman. Sir, I do not know when my opinion of the importance of a naval force to the United States had its origin. I can give no date to my present sentiments on this subject, because I never entertained dif- ferent sentiments. I remember, Sir, that immediately after coming into my pro- fession, at a period when the navy was most unpopular, when it was called by all sorts of hard names and designated by many coarse epithets, on one of those occasions on which young men address their neighbors, I ventured to put forth a boy's hand in defence of the navy. I insisted on its importance, its adaptation to our circumstances and to our national character, and its indispensable neces- sity, if we intended to maintain and ex- tend our commerce. These opinions and sentiments I brought into Congress; and the first time in which I presumed to speak on the topics of the day, I at- tempted to urge on the House a greater attention to the naval service. There were divers modes of prosecuting the war. On these modes, or on the degree of attention and expense which should be bestowed on each, different men held different opinions. I confess I looked with most hope to the results of naval warfare, and therefore I invoked gov- ernment to invigorate and strengthen that arm of the national defence. I invoked it to seek its enemy upon I he seas, to go where every auspicious indi- cation pointed, and where the whole lie. ii t and soul of the country would w ith it. sir, we were at war with the greatest maritime power on earth. England had gained an ascendency on the w all the combined powers of Europe. She had been at war twenty years. She hud tried her fori O.XU - OH the ( !on- tinent, but generally with do bucc At one time the whole Continent had Keen elosed against her. A Long line of armed exterior, an unbroken hostile ar- ray, frowned upon her from the (iulf of Archangel, round the promontory of Spain ami Portugal, to the extreme point of Italy. There was doI a port which an English ship could enter. Everywhere on the laud the genius of her great enemy had triumphed. He had de- feated armies, crushed coalitions, and overturned thrones; but, like the fabled giant, he was unconquerable only while he touched the land. On the ocean he was powerless. That field of lame was his adversary's, and her meteor flag was streaming in triumph over its whole ex- tent. To her maritime ascendency England owed every thing, and we were now at war with her. One of the most charm- ing of her poets had said of her, — " Her march is o'er the mountain wave?, Her home is on the deep." Xow, Sir, since we were at war with her, 1 was for intercepting this march; I was for calling upon her, and paying our respects to her, at home; I was for giving her to know that we, too, had a right of way over the Beas, and that our marine officers and our sailors were not entire Btrangers on the bosom of the deep. I was tor doing something more with our navy than keeping it on our own Bhores, for the protection of our coasts and harbors; I was for giving play to its gallant and burning spirit; for allowing it to go forth upon the Beas, and to encounter, on an open and an equal field, whatever the proudest or the bravest of the enenrj could bring against 462 REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. it. I knew the character of its officers and the spirit of its seamen ; and I knew that, in their hands, though the flag of the country might go down to the bot- tom, yet, while defended by them, that it could never be dishonored or dis- graced. since she was our enemy, and a most powerful enemy, I was for touching her, if we could, in the very apple of her eye; for reaching the highest feather in her cap; for clutching at the very brightest jewel in her crown. There seemed to me to be a peculiar propriety in all this, as the war was undertaken for the re- dress of maritime injuries alone. It was a war declared for free trade and sailors' rights. The ocean, therefore, v\;is the proper theatre for deciding this controversy with our enemy, and on that theatre it was my ardent wish that our own power should be concentrated to the utmost. So much, Sir, for the war, and for my conduct and opinions as connected with it. And, as I do not mean to recur to this subject often, nor ever, unless in- dispensably necessary, I repeat the de- mand for any charge, any accusation, any allegation whatever, that throws me behind the honorable gentleman, or lie- hind any other man, in honor, in fidel- ity, in devoted love to that country in which 1 was horn, -which has honored me, and which I serve. I, who seldom deal in defiance, now, here, in my place, boldly defy the honorable member to put his insinuation in the form of a charge, and to support that charge by any proof whatever. Tli'- gentleman has adverted to the subject >>f slavery. On this subject, he Bays, I have not proved myself a friend to tin- South. Why, Sir, the only proof is, that I did not vote for his resolu- t i0H8. Sir. this is a very grave matter; it is a Bubjecl very exciting and inflammable. I take, of course, all the responsibility belonging to my opinions; hut. I desire these opinions to be understood, and fairly stated. If I am to be regarded as an enemy i" the Soul h, because I could i, mi uppori die gentleman's resolutions, be it so. I cannot purchase favor from any quarter, by the sacrifice of clear and conscientious convictions. The princi- pal resolution declared that Congress had plighted its faith not to interfere either with slavery or the slave trade in the District of Columbia. Now, Sir, this is quite a new idea. I never heard it advanced until this ses- sion. I have heard gentlemen contend that no such power was in the Constitu- tion ; but the notion, that, though the Constitution contained the power, yet Congress had plighted its faith not to exercise such a power, is an entire nov- elty, so far as I know. I must say, Sir, it appeared to me little else than an at- tempt to put a prohibition into the Con- stitution, because there was none there already. For this supposed plighting of the public faith, or the faith of Con- gress, 1 saw no ground, either in the his- tory of the government, or in any one fact, or in any argument. I therefore could not vote for the proposition. Sir, it is now several years since T took care to make my opinion known, that this government has, constitutionally. nothing to do with slavery, as it exists in the States. That opinion is entirely unchanged. I stand steadily by the resolution of the House of Representa- tives, adopted, after much consideration, at the commencement of the govern- ment, which was, that Congress has no authority to interfere in the emancipa- tion of slaves, or in the treatment of them, within any of the States; it, re- maining with the several States alone to provide any regulations therein, which humanity and true policy may require. This, in my opinion, is the Constitution ami the law. 1 feel bound by it. 1 have quoted the resolution often. It ex- presses the judgment of men of all parts of the country, deliberately and coolly Eonned; ami it expresses my judgment, and I shall adhere to it. But this has nothing to do with the other constitu- tional question; that is to say, the mere (■.institutional question whether Con- - has the power to regulate slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia. REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN 168 On such a question, Sir, when I am asked what the Constitution is, or whether any power granted by it lias been compromised away, or, bi- ll I, could !><■ compromised away, I must express my honest opinion, and always shall express it, if I say any thing, notwithstanding it may nol meet concurrence either in the South, or the North, or the East, or the West. I can- not express by my vote what I do not believe. The gentleman has chosen to bring that subject into this debate, with which it has no concern; but be may make the most of it, it' he thinks lit; can produce unfavorable impressions against me at the South from inv negative to his fifth resolution. As to the rest of them, they were commonplaces, generally, or abstractions; in regard to which, one may well feel himself not called on to vote at all. And now, Sir, in regard to the tariff. That is a long chapter, but I am quite ready to go over it with the honorable member. He charges me with inconsistency. That may depend on deciding what in- consistency is, in respect to such sub- jects, and how it is to be proved. I will state the facts, for I have them in my mind somewhat more fully than the hon- orable member has himself presented them. Let us begin at the beginning. In 1S16 I voted against the tariff law which then passed. In 1824 I again voted against the tariff law which was then proposed, and which passed. A majority' of Xew England votes, in 182-4, were against the tariff system. The bill received but one vote from Massachu- setts; but it passed. The policy was established. Xew England acquiesced in it; conformed her business and pur- suits to it; embarked her capital, and employed her labor, in manufactures; and I certainly admit that, from that time, I have felt bound to support inter- ests thus called into being, and into im- portance, by the settled policy of the government. I have stated this often here, and often elsewhere. The ground is defensible, and I maintain it. As to the resolutions adopted in Bos- ton in L820, ami which resolutions be has can led I" I"' read, and which In- he presumes I prepared, I have no n c ollection of having drawn the resolu- tions, and do not believe I did. Bui I was at the meeting, and addressed the meeting, and what I -aid OH thai l sion was produced here, and read in the Senate, years aj The resolutions, sir, were opposed to the commencing of a high tariff policy. I was opposed to it, and sp<>ke against it ; the city of Boston was opposed to it ; the duii mi in wealth .if Massachusetts was opposed to it. Remember, s ir. that this was in 1820. This opposition contin- ued till 1824. The rotes all show this. But in 1824 the question was decided; the government entered upon the policj ; it invited men to embark their property and their means of living in it. Indi- viduals thus encouraged have done this to a great extent; and therefore 1 say, so long as the manufactures shall Deed reasonable and just protection from eminent, I shall be disposed to give it to them. What is there, Sir, in all this, for the gentleman to complain of? Would he have us always oppose the policy adopted by the country on a great question? Would he have minorities never submit to the will of majorities? I remember to have said. Sir, at the meeting in Faneuil Hall, that protection appeared to be regarded as incidental to revenue, and that the incident could not be carried fairly above the principal; in other words, that duties ought not to be laid for the mere object of protection. I believe that proposition to be sub- stantially correct. I believe that, if the power of protection be inferred only from the revenue power, the protection could only be incidental. But I have said in this place before, and 1 repeat it now, that .Mr. Madison's publication after that period, and his declaration that, the Convention did in- tend to grant the power of protection under the commen ial clause, placed the subject in a new and a clear li J:; . I will add, Sir, that a paper drawn up apparently with the sanction of Dr. Franklin, and read to a circle of friends 464 REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. at his house, on the eve of the assem- bling of the Convention, respecting the powers which tin- proposed new govern- ment ought i" possess, shows plainly that, in regulating commerce, it was ex- pected thai Congress would adopt a course which should protect the manu- factures of the North. lie. certainly went into the Convention himself under that conviction. Well, Sir, and now what does the gen- tleman make out against me in relation to the tariff? What laurels does he gather in this part of Africa? I op- posed the policy of the tariff, until it had 1 iccome the settled and established policy of the country. 1 have never questioned the constitutional power of Congress to grant protection, except so far as the remark made in Faneuil Hall goes, which remark respects only the Length to which protection might prop- erly be carried, so far as the power is derived from the authority to lay duties on imports. But the policy being estab- lished, and a great part of the country having placed vast interests at stake in it, I have not disturbed it; on the con- trary, 1 have insisted that it ought not to be disturbed. If there be inconsist- ency in all this, the gentleman is at lib- erty to blazon it forth; let him see what he can make of it. Here, Sir, 1 cease to speak of myself; and respectfully ask pardon of the Sen- ate for having so long detained it upon any thing so unimportant as what re- lates merely to my own public conduct and opinions. Sir, the honorable member is pleased to suppose that our spleen is excited, because he has interfered to snatch from OB a victory over the administration, if he means by this any personal disap- pointment, I shall not think it worth while to make a remark upon it. If he means a disappointment at his quitting ns while we were endeavoring to arrest the present policy of the administration, w liy then 1 admit , Sir. that I, for one, fell thai disappointment deeply. It is the policy of the administration, its principles, and it- measures, which 1 oppose. It is not persons, bul things; not men, but measures. I do wish most fervently to {Hit an end to this anti- commercial policy; and if the overthrow of the policy shall be followed by the political defeat of its authors, why, Sir, it is a result which I shall endeavor to meet with equanimity. Sir, as to the honorable member's wresting the victory from us, or as to his ability to sustain the administration in this policy, there may be some doubt about that. I trust the citadel will yet be stormed, and carried, by the force of public opinion, and that no Hector will be able to defend its' walls. But now, Sir, I must advert to a declaration of the honorable member, which, I confess, did surprise me. The honorable member says, that, personally, he and myself have been on friendly terms, but that we always differed on great constitutional questions. Sir, this is astounding. And yet I was partly prepared for it; for I sat here the other day, and held my breath, while the hon- orable gentleman declared, and repeat- ed, that he had always belonged to the State-rights party. And he means, by what he has declared to-day, that he has always given to the Constitution a con- struction more limited, better guarded, less favorable to the extension of the powers of this government, than that which I have given to it. He has always interpreted it according to the strict doc- trines of the school of State rights ! Sir, if the honorable member ever belonged, until very lately, to the State-rights party, the connection was very much like a secret marriage. And never was secret better kept. Not only were the espousals not acknowledged, but all suspicion was avoided. There was no known familiarity, or even kindness, between them. On the contrary, they acted like parties who were not at all fond of each other's company. Sir, is there a man in my hearing, among all the gentlemen now surround- ing as, many of whom, of both houses, have been here many years, and know the gentleman and myself perfectly, — is there one who ever heard, supposed, or dreamed that the honorable member BEPLI TO Mil. CALHOUN 465 belonged to the State-rights party before fcbe year 1825? Can any Buch connec- tion be proved upon him, can lie prove it upon himself, before that time? Sir, I will show you, before I resume ray seat, that it was not until after the gentleman took his seat in the chair which you now occupy, that any public manifestation, or intimation, was ever given by him of his having embraced the peculiar doctrines of the State-rights party. The truth is, Sir, the honorable gentleman had acted a very important and useful part during the war. But the war terminated. Toward the end of the session of 1814-15, we received the news of peace. This closed the Thirteenth Congress. In the fall of 1815, the Fourteenth Congress assem- bled. It was full of ability, and the honorable gentleman stood high among its distinguished members. He re- mained in the House, Sir, through the whole of that Congress; and now, Sir, it is easy to show that, during those two years, the honorable gentleman took a decided lead in all those great measures which he has since so often denounced as unconstitutional and oppressive, the bank, the tariff, and internal improve- ments. The war being terminated, the gentleman's mind turned itself toward internal administration and improve- ment. He surveyed the whole country, contemplated its resources, saw what it was capable of becoming, and held a political faith not so narrow and con- tracted as to restrain him from useful and efficient action. He was, therefore, at once a full length ahead of all others in measures which were national, and which required a broad and liberal con- struction of the Constitution. This is historic truth. Of Ids agency in the bank, and other measures connected with the currency, I have already spoken, and I do not understand him to deny any thing I have said, in that particular. Indeed, I have said nothing capable of denial. Now allow me a few words upon the tariff. The tariff of 1816 was distinctly a South Carolina measure. Look at the votes, and you will see it. It was a tariff for the benefit of South Carolina inter- ests, ami carried through Congress by South Carolina rotes and South Carolina influence. Even the minimum, Sir, thi much-reproached, the abominable mini- mum, that Bubjecl of angry indignation and wrathful rhetoric, is of Southern origin, and has a South I Carolina parent- age. Sir, the contest on that occasion W88 chiefly between the cotton-growers at home, and the importers of cotton tal>- rics from India. These India fabrics were made from the cotton of thai coun- try. The people of this country using cotton fabrics not made of Ameri- can cotton, and. so far, they were di- minishing the demand for Buch cotton. The importation of India cottons was then very large, and this bill was de- signed to put an end to it. and, with the help of the minimum, it did put an end to it. The cotton manufactures of the North were then in their infancy. Tiny had some friends in Congress, but, if I recollect, tne majority of Massachusetts members and of New England members were against this cotton tariff of L816. I remember well, that the main debate was between the importers of India cot- tons, in the North, and the cotton-grow- ers of the South. The gentleman can- not deny the truth of this, or any part of it. Boston opposed this tariff, and Salem opposed it, warmly and vigor- ously. But the honorable member sup- ported it, and the law passed. And now be it always remembered, Sir, that that act passed on the professed ground of protection; that it had in it the min- imum principle, and thai the honorable member, and other leading gentlemen from his own Mate, supported it. voted for it, and carried it through Congress. And now, sir, we come to the doc- trine of internal improvement, that other usurpation, that other oppression, which has come so near to justifying violent disruption of the governm and scattering the fragments of the Un- ion to the four winds. Have the gen- tleman's State-rights opinions abi kept him aloof from such unhallowed infringements of the Constitution'.' !!•• 30 46G REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. says he always differed with me on con- stitutional questions. How was it in this most importanl particular? lias In- here stood on the ramparts, brandishing his glittering sword against assailants. and holding out a banner of defiance? Sir. it is an indisputable truth, that lie is himself the man, the ipse that first brought forward in Congress a scheme of general internal improvement, at the expense and under the authority of this government. He, Sir, is the very man, the ipsissimus ipse, who considerately, and on a settled system, began these un- constitutional measures, if they be un- constitutional. And now for the proof. The acl ineorporating the Bank of the United States was passed in April, 181G. For the privileges of the charter, the proprietors of the bank were to pay to government a bonus, as it was called, of one million five hundred thousand dol- lars, in certain instalments. Govern- ment also took seven millions in the stock of the bank. Early in the next session of Congress, that is, in Decem- ber, 1816, the honorable member moved. in the House of Representatives, that a committee be appointed to consider the propriety of setting apart this bonus, and also the dividends on the stock belong- ing to the United States, as a permanent fund for internal improvement. The committee was appointed, and the hon- orable member was made its chairman, lie thus originated the plan, and took the lead in its execution. Shortly after- wards, he reported a bill carrying out the objects for which the committee had been appointed. This hill provided that the dividends on the seven millions of bank stock belonging to government, and also the whole of the bonus, should 1m- permanently pledged as a fund for constructing roads and eanals; and that this fund Bhould be subject to such spe- cific appropriations as Congress might subsequently make. 'I his v. a. the bill; and this was the first project ever brought forward in Congress for a bj item of internal im- provements. The hill g - tli.- whole doctrine at a Bingle .jump. The < !um berland Road, it is true, was already in progress; and for that the gentleman had also voted. But there were, and are now, peculiarities about that partic- ular expenditure which sometimes sat- isfy scrupulous consciences ; but this bill of the gentleman's, without equivoca- tion or saving clause, without if, or and, or but, occupied the whole ground at once, and announced internal improve- ment as one of the objects of this gov- ernment, on a grand and systematic plan. The bill, Sir, seemed indeed too strong. It was thought by persons not esteemed extremely jealous of State rights to evince too little regard to the will of the States. Several gentlemen opposed the measure in that shape, on that account; and among them Colonel Pickering, then one of the Representa- tives from Massachusetts. Even Timo- thy Pickering could not quite sanction, or concur in, the honorable gentleman's doctrines to their full extent, although he favored the measure in its general character. He therefore prepared an amendment, as a substitute; and his substitute provided for two very impor- tant things not embraced in the original bill: — First, that the proportion of the fund to be expended in each State, respec- tively, should be in proportion to the number of its inhabitants. Second, that the money should be ap- plied in constructing such roads, canals, and so forth, in the several States, as Congress might direct, with the assent of the State. This, Sir, was Timothy Pickering's amendment to the gentleman's bill. And now, Sir, how did the honorable gentleman, who has always belonged to the State-rights party, — how did he treat this amendment . or this .substitute? Which way do you think his State-rights doctrine led him? Why, Sir, 1 will tell you. He immediately rose, and moved to strike out the words "with the assent of the Stall-" 1 .' Here is the journal un- der my hand. Sir; and here is the gen- tleman's motion. And certainly, Sir, it will be admitted that this motion was not of a nature to intimate that lie was wedded to State rights. But the words i;i;i'LV TO mk. cm. imi \ 167 were not struck out. The motion 'li'l not prevail. Air. Pickering's substitute was adopted, and the l>ill passed the House in thai form. In committee of the whole on this bill, sir, the honorable member made a very able speech both on the policy of internal improvements and the power of Congress over the subjeet. These points were fully argued by him. He spoke of the importance of the Bystem, the vast good it would produce, and its favorable effect on the union of the Mates. " Let us, then," said he, " bind the republic together with a perfect sys- tem of roads and canals. Let us con- quer space. It is thus the most distant parts of the republic will be broughl within a few days' travel of the centre; it is thus that a citizen of the West will read the news of Boston still moist from the press." But on the power of Congress to make interna] improvements, ay, Sir, on the power of Congress, hear him! What were then his rules of construction and interpretation? How did he at that time read and understand the Constitu- tion? Why, Sir, he said that "he was no advocate for refined arguments on the Constitution. The instrument was not intended as a thesis for the logician to exercise his ingenuity on. It ought to be construed with plain good-sense." This is all very just, I think. Sir; and he said much more in the same strain. He quoted many instances of laws passed, as he contended, on similar principles, and then added, that " he introduced these instances to prove the uniform sense of Congress and of the country (for they had not been objected to) as to our powers; and surely," said he, " they furnish better evidence of the true inter- pretation of the Constitution than the most refined and subtile arguments." Here you see, Mr. President, how little original I am. You have heard me again and again contending in my place here for the stability of that which has been long settled; you have heard me, till I dare say you have been tired, insisting thai the sense of Congress, so often expressed, and the sense of the country, so fully shown and -<> firmly established, oughl to be regard* d ai having decided finallj certain con titu- tional questions. ^ on see now . Sir, what authority I have for this mud.- of argu- ment. Bui while the scholar is learning, the teacher renounces. W ill he apply his old doctrine now — I sincerelj he would i" the question of the bank, to the question of the receiving of bank- notes by government, to the power of Congress over the paper currency? Will In' admit that these questions oughl I" be regarded as decided by the settled seuse of Congress and of the country? O, no ! Car othervt ise. Prom I rules of judgment, and from the influ- ence of all considerations of this practi- cal nature, the honorable member now takes these questions with him into the upper heights of metaphysics, into the regions of those refinements and subtile arguments which he rejected with so much decision in 1817, as appears by this speech. Be quits his old ground of common-sense, experience, and the gen- eral understanding of the country, fors flight among theories and ethereal ab- stractions. And now, Sir, let me ask. when did the honorable member relinquish these early opinions and principles of his? When did he. make known his adhe- sion to the doctrines of the State-rij party'/ We have been speaking of transactions in 1816 and 1817. What the gentleman's opinions then were, we have seen. When did he announce him- self a State-rights man'.-' I have already said. Sir, that aobody knew of his claim- ing that character until after the com- mencement of 1825; and I have said so. because 1 have before me an address of his to his neighbors at Abbeville, in May of that year, in which he recounts, \ery properly, the principal incidents in his career as a member <>f < head of a departmenl ; and in w hich he says that, as a member of Congress, he had given bis zealous efforts in favor of a restoration of specie currency, of a due lion of those manufactures which had taken root during the war, and, finally, of a Bystem for connecting the -ir.s REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. various parts of the country by a judi- cious s\ st i-in of internal improvement. He adds, that it afterwards became his duty, as a member of the administra- tion, to aid in sustaining against t lie boldest assaults those very measures which, as a member of Congress, he had contributed to establish. And now. Sir, since the honorable gentleman says he has differed with me on constitutional questions, will he be pleased to say what constitutional opin- ion I have ever avowed for which I have not his express authority? Is it on the bank power? the tariff power? the power of internal improvement? I have shown his votes, his speeches, and his conduct, on all these subjects, up to the time when General Jackson became a candidate for the Presidency. From that time, Sir, I know we have differed ; but if there was any difference before that time, I call upon him to point it out, to declare what was the occasion, what the question, and what the difference. And if before that period, Sir, by any speech, any vote, any public proceeding, or by any mode of announcement whatever, he gave the world to know that he belonged to the State-rights party, I hope he will now be kind enough to produce it, or to refer to it, or to tell us where we may look for it. Sir, I will pursue this topic no farther. I would not have pursued it so far, I would not have entered upon it at all, had it not been for the astonishment I felt, mingled, I confess, with something of warmer feeling, when the honorable gentleman declared that lie had always differed with me on constitutional ques- tions. Sir. the honorable member read a quotation or two from a speech of mine in 1816, on the currency or bank quesl ion. With what intent, or to what end? What inconsistency does he show? Speak in.; of the /' (jal currency of the country, that is, the coin, I then said it was in a good state. Was not that true? I was Bpeaking of the legal currency; of thai which the law made a tender. And how is that inconsistent with any thing said by me now. or ever -aid by me? I declared then, he says, thai the Irani ers of this government were hard-money men. Certainly they were. But are not the friends of a convertible paper hard-money men, in every practical and sensible meaning of the term? Did I, in that speech, or any other, insist on excluding all convertible paper from the uses of society? Most assuredly I did not. I never quite so far lost my wits, I think. There is but a single sentence in that speech which I should qualify if I were to deliver it again, and that the honorable member has not noticed. It is a paragraph respecting the power of Congress over the circulation of State banks, which might perhaps need ex- planation or correction. Understanding it as applicable to the case then before Congress, all the rest is perfectly ac- cordant with my present opinions. It is well known that I never doubted the power of Congress to create a bank ; that I was always in favor of a bank, con- stituted on proper principles; that I voted for the bank bill of 1815; and that I opposed that of 1S16 only on ac- count of one or two of its provisions, which I and others hoped to be able to strike out. I am a hard-money man, and always have been, and always shall be. But I know the great use of such bank paper as is convertible into hard money on demand ; which may be called specie paper, and which is equivalent to specie in value, and much more con- venient and useful for common pur- poses. On the other hand, I abhor all irredeemable paper; all old-fashioned papier money; all deceptive promises; every thing, indeed, in the shape of paper issued for circulation, whether by government or individuals, which cannot be turned into gold and silver at the will of the holder. But, Sir, I have insisted that govern- ment is bound to protect and regulate the means of commerce, to see that there is a sound currency for the use of the people. The honorable gentleman asks, What then is the limit? Must Congress also furnish all means of commerce? Must it furnish weights and scales and steelyards? Most undoubtedly, Sir, it must regulate weights and measures, REPLY TO MK. CALHOUN. 469 anil ii does bo. Bui the answer to the genera] que tiou is very obvious. Gov- ernment must furnish all that which none luii government can furnish. Gov- ernment must do that Eor individuals which individuals cannot do for them- selves. That is the very end of govern- ment. Why else have we a government ? Can individuals make a currency? Can individuals regulate money? The dis- tinction is as broad ami plain as the Pennsylvania Avenue. No man can mistake it, or well blunder out of it. The gentleman asks if government must furnish for the people ships, and boats, and wagons. Certainly not. The gen- tleman here only recites the President's message of September. These things, and all such things, the people can fur- nish for themselves; but they cannot make a currency; they cannot, indi- vidually, decide what shall be the money of the country. That, everybody know s, is one of the prerogatives, and one of the duties, of government; and a duty which I think we are most unwisely and im- properly neglecting. We may as well leave the people to make war and to make peace, each man for himself, as to leave to individuals the regulation of commerce and currency. Mr. President, there are other remarks of the gentleman of which I might take notice. But should I do so, I could only repeat what I have already said, either now or heretofore. 1 shall, therefore, not now allude to them. My principal purpose in what I have said has been to defend myself; that was my first object; and next, as the honorable member has attempted to take to himself the char- acter of a strict constructionist, and a State-rights man, and on that basis to show a difference, not favorable to me, between his constitutional opinions and my own, heretofore, it has been my in- tention to show that the power to create a bank, the power to regulate the cur- rency by other and direct means, the power to enact a protective tariff, and the power of internal improvement, in its broadest sense, are all powers which the honorable gentleman himself has sup- ported, has acted on, and in the exercise of which, in. I i, be has taken a di I in- guished lead in thee iseU of Congress. It this has been done, my puipOBfl IS answered. I do aol wish to prolong the discussion, nor to spin it nut into aool- loquy. If the honorable member baa an\ thing new to bring forward ; if be has any charge i" make, anj proof, or any specification; if be baa any thing to advance against my opinions or my con- duct, my honor or patriotism, I am still at home. I am here, [f not, then Ear as I am concerned, this discussion will here terminate. I will say a few words, before I resume my seat, on the motion now- pending. That motion is to strike out the Bpecie- paying part of the bill. I have :t suspi- cion, Sir, that the motion will prevail. If it should, it will leave a great vacuum; and how shall that vacuum be filled ? The part proposed to be struck out is that which requires all debts to govern- ment to be paid in specie. It niak good provision for government, and for public men, through all classes. The Secretary of the Treasury, in his letter .it the last session, was still more watchful of the interests of the holders of office. He assured us, that, bad as the times were, and notwithstanding the floods of bad paper which deluged the country, members of Congress should get gold and silver. In my opinion, Sir. this is beginning the use of good money in payments at the wrong end of the list. If there be bad money in the count i. . 1 think that Secretaries and other execu- tive officers, and especially members of Congress, should be the last to receive any good money; because they have the power, if they will do their duty, and exercise it, of making the monej of the country good for all. I think. Sir, it was a leading feature in Mr. Burl famous bill for economical reform, that he provided, first of all. for those who are least able to secure themseh Everybody else was to be well paid all they were entitled to, before the minis- ters of the crown, and other political characters, should have any thing. This Beems to me very right. But we have a precedent, Sir, in our own country, more 470 REPLY TO MR. CALHOUN. directly to the purpose; and as that which we now hope to strike out is the part of the bill furnished or proposed originally by the honorable member from South Carolina, it will naturally devolve on him to supply its place. I wish, therefore, to draw his particular attention to this precedent, which I am now about to produce. Most members of the Senate will re- member, that before the establishment of this government, and before or about the time that the territory which now constitutes the State of Tennessee was ceded to Congress, the inhabitants of the eastern part of that territory estab- lished a government for themselves, and called it the State of Franklin. They adopted a very good constitution, pro- viding for the usual branches of legis- lative, executive, and judicial power. They laid and collected taxes, and per- formed other usual acts of legislation. They had, for the present, it is true, no maritime possessions, yet they followed the common forms in constituting high officers; and their governor was not only captain-general and commander-in-chief, but admiral also, so that the navy might have a commander when there should be a navy. Well, Sir, the currency in this State of Franklin became very much de- ranged. Specie was scarce, and equally scarce were the notes of specie-paying banks. But the legislature did not pro- any divorce of government and people; they did not seek to establish two currencies, one for men in office, and one for the rest of the community. They were content with neighbor's fare. It became necessary to pass what we should call now-a-days the civil-list ap- propriation bill. They passed such a bill; and when we shall have made a void in the 1 > i 1 1 now before us by strik- ing out 3pecie paymentsfor government, I recommend to its friends to fill tip- gap, by inserting, if no! the same pro- visions as were in the law of the State of Franklin, at least something in the Bame spirit. The preamble of that law, sir, lo- gins by reciting, that the collection of taxes in specie had become very oppres- sive to the good people of the common- wealth, for the want of a circulating medium. A parallel case to ours, Sir, exactly. It recites further, that it is the duty of the legislature to hear, at all times, the prayer of their constit- uents, and apply as speedy a remedy as lies in their power. These senti- ments are very just, and I sincerely wish there was a thorough disposition here to adopt the like. Acting under the influence of these sound opinions, Sir, the legislature of Franklin passed a law for the support of the civil list, which, as it is short, I will beg permission to read. It is as fol- lows : — " Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Franklin, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That, from the first day of January, a. d. 1789, the sala- ries of the civil officers of this common- wealth be as follows, to wit : " His excellency, the governor, per annum, one thousand deer-skins ; his honor, the chief justice, five hundred do. do. ; the at- torney-general, five hundred do. do.; secre- tary to his excellency the governor, five hundred raccoon do. ; the treasurer of the State, four hundred and fifty otter do.; each county clerk, three hundred beaver do. ; clerk of the house of commons, two hundred raccoon do. ; members of assem- bly, per diem, three do. do. ; justice's fee for signing a warrant, one nmskrat do. ; to the constable, for serving a warrant, one mink do. " Enacted into a law this 18th day of Oc- tober, 1788, under the great seal of the State. " Witness his excellency, &c. "Governor, captain-gi nt ral, commander-in-chief, anil admiral in and over said State." This, Sir, is the law, the spirit of which I commend to gentlemen. I will not speak of the appropriateness of these several allowances for the civil list. But the example is good, and I am of opin- ion that, until Congress shall perform its duty, by seeing that the country en- joys a good currency, the same medium which the people, are obliged to use, whether it be skins or rags, is good enough for its own members. A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKKriTCV. FROM A SPBEOH DELIVERED IX THE SENATE OF THE UNITED BTATES, OH THE 18th OF MAY, 1840, ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE BILL ESTABLISHING A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTCY. Let me remind you, then, in the first place, Sir, that, commercial as the coun- try is, and having experienced as it has done, and experiencing as it now does, great vicissitudes of trade and business, it is almost forty years since any law has been in force by which any honest man, failing in business, could be effectually discharged from debt by surrendering his property. The former bankrupt law was repealed on the 19th of December, 1803. From that day to this, the condition of an insolvent, how- ever honest and worthy, has been ut- terly hopeless, so far as he depended on any legal mode of relief. This state of things has arisen from the peculiar provisions of the Constitution of the United States, and from the omission by Congress to exercise this branch of its constitutional power. By the Constitution, the States are prohib- ited from passing laws impairing the obligation of contracts. Bankrupt laws impair the obligation of contracts, if they discharge the bankrupt from his debts without payment. The States, therefore, cannot pass such Laws. The power, then, is taken from the States, and placed in our hands. It is true thai it has been decided, that, in regard to contracts entered into alter the pas of any State bankrupt law, between the citizens of the State having such law, and sued in the State courts, a State discharge may prevail. So far, effecl has been given to State laws. I have great respect, habitually, for judicial decisions ; but it lias nevertheless, I must Bay, always appeared to me that the distinctions on which these deci-ions are founded are slender, and that they evade, without answering, the objec- tions founded on the greal political and commercial objects intended to be cured by this part of the Constitution. But these decisions, whether righl or wrong, afford no effectual relief. The qualifications and limitations which I have stated render them useless, as to the purpose of a general discharge. So much of the concerns of every man of business is with citizens of other States than his own. and with foreigners, that the partial extent to which the validity of Mate discharges reaches is of little benefit. The States, then, cannot pass effect- ual bankrupt laws; thai Is, effectual for the discharge of the debtor. There is no doubt thai most, if not all, the States would now pass BUCh laws, if they had the power ; although their legislation would be various, interfering, and full of all the evils which the Constitution of the United States intended to pro- vide against. Bui they have nol the power: ( is, which has the power, does not exercise it. This is the pe- culiarity of our condition. The S would pass bankrupt laws, hut they can- not; we can. but we will QOt. And be- 472 A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTCY. tween this want of power in the States and want of will in Congress, unfortu- nate insolvents are left to hopeless bond- age. There arc probably one or two hun- dred thousand debtors, honest, sober, and industrious, who drag out lives use- less to themselves, useless to their fam- ilies, and useless to their country, for no reason but that they cannot be legally discharged from debts in which misfor- tunes have involved them, and which there is no possibility of their ever pay- ing. I repeat, again, that these cases have now been accumulating for a whole generation. It is true they are not imprisoned; I nit there may be, and there are, re- straint and bondage outside the walls of the jail, as well as in. Their power of earning is, in truth, taken away, their faculty of useful employment is par- alyzed, and hope itself become extin- guished. Creditors, generally, are not inhuman or unkind; but there will be found some who hold on, and the more a debtor struggles to free himself, the more they feel encouraged to hold on. The mode of reasoning is, that, the more honest the debtor may be, the more industrious, the more disposed to struggle and bear up against his misfor- tunes, the greater the chance is, that, in the end, especially if the humanity of others shall have led them to release him, their own debts may be finally re- covered. Now, in this state of our constitu- tional powers and duties, in this state of our laws, and with this actually ex- isting condition of so many insolvents before us, it is not too serious to ask • very member of the Senate to put it to his own conscience to say, whether we are not bound to exercise our constitu- tional duty. Can we abstain from ex- ercising it'.- The states give to their own laws all the effect they can. This Shows that they desire the power to be exercised. Several states have, in the mosl solemn manner, made known their earnest wishes to Congress. II' we still refuse, what is to be d >? Many of these insolvent persona are young men with young families. Like other men, tiny have capacities both for action and enjoyment. Are we to stifle all these for ever? Are we to suffer all these persons, many of them meritorious and respectable, to be pressed to the earth for ever, by a load of hopeless debt? The existing diversities and contradic- tions of State laws on the subject ad- mirably illustrate the objects of this part of the Constitution, as stated by Mr. Madison; and they form that pre- cise case for which the clause was in- serted. The very evil intended to be pro- vided against is before us, and around us, and pressing us on all sides. How can we, how dare we, make a perfect dead letter of this part of the Constitution, which we have sworn to support? The insolvent persons have not the power of locomotion. They cannot travel from State to State. They are prisoners. To my certain knowledge, there are many who cannot even come here to the seat of government, to presont their peti- tions to Congress, so great is their fear that some creditor will dog their heels, and arrest them in some intervening State, or in this District, in the hope that friends will appear to save them, by payment of the debt, from imprison- ment. These are truths; not creditable to the country, but they are truths. I am sorry for their existence. Sir, there is one crime, quite too common, which the laws of man do not punish, but which cannot escape the justice of God; and that is, the arrest and confinement of a debtor by his creditor, with no mo- tive on earth but the hope that some friend, or some relative, perhaps almost as poor as himself, his mother it may be, or his sisters, or his daughters, will give up all their own little pittance, and make beggars of themselves, to save him from the horrors of a loathsome jail. Human retribution cannot reach this guilt; human feeling may not penetrate the flinty heart thai perpetrates it; but an hour is surely coming, with more than human retribution on its wings, when that Hint shall be melted, either by the power of penitence and grace, or in tin- tins of remorse. A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTS IT:'. Sir, I verily believe thai the power of perpetuating debts against debtors, for no substantial good to the creditor him- self , and tlif power of imprisonment for debt, at least as it existed in this coun- try tea years ago, have imposed more restraint on personal liberty than the law of debtor and creditor imposes in any other Christian and commercial country, [f any public good were at tained, any high political object an- swered, by such law.<, there might be Borne reason for counselling submission and sufferance to individuals. But the result is bad, every way. It is bad to tin- public and to the country, which loses the efforts and the industry of so many useful and capable citizens. It is bad to creditors, because there is no secu- rity against preferences, no principle of equality, and no encouragement for hon- est, fair, and seasonable assignments of effects. As to the debtor, however good his intentions or earnest his endeavors, it subdues his spirit and degrades him in his own esteem; and if he attempts any thing for the purpose of obtaining food and clothing for his family, he is driven to unworthy shifts and disguises, to the use of other persons' names, to the adoption of the character of agent, and various other contrivances, to keep the little earnings of the day from the reach of his creditors. Fathers act in the name of their sons, sons act in the name of their fathers; all constantly exposed to the greatest temptation to misrepresent facts and to evade the law, if creditors should strike. All this is evil, unmixed evil. And what is it all for? Of what benefit to any- body? Who likes it? Who wishes it? What class of creditors desire it? What consideration of public good de- mands it? Sir, we talk much, and talk warmly, of political liberty; and well we may, for it is among the chief of public bless- ings. But who can enjoy political liberty it he is deprived, permanently, of per- sonal liberty, and the exercise of his own industry and his own faculties? To those unfortunate individuals, doomed to the everlasting bondage of debt, ^ hat is it thai we have free institution government? What is it that we hai e public and popular assemblies? What is even this Constitution itself to them, in its actual operation, and as we now administer it? What is its aspect to them, but an aspect of stern, implacable severity? an aspect of refusal, denial, and frowning rebuke'.'' oay, in.. re than that, an aspect QOt only of austerity and rebuke, but, as they must think it, of plain injustice; also, since it will not re- lieve them, nor suffer others to give them relief? What love can they feel towards the Constitution of their country, which has taken the power of striking off their bonds from their own paternal State governments, and yet, inexorable to all the cries of justice and of mercy, holds it unexercised in its own fast and unre- lenting grasp? They find themselves bondsmen, because we will not exe- cute the commands of the ( constitution ; bondsmen to debts they cannot pay, and which all know they cannot pay, and which take away the power of sup- porting themselves. Other slaves have masters, charged with the duty of sup- port and protection; but their masters neither clothe, nor feed, nor shelter; they only bind. But, Sir, the fault is not in the Con- stitution. The Constitution is benefi- cent as well as wise in all its provisions on this subject. The fault, J must be allowed to say, is in us, who have suf- fered ourselves quite too long to neglect the duty incumbent upon us. The time will come, Sir, when we shall look back and wonder at the long delay of this just and salutary measure. We shall then feel as we now feel when we reflect on that progress of opinion which has al- ready done so much on another con- nected subject; I mean the abolition of imprisonment for debt. What should we say at this day, if it were proposed to re-establish arrest and imprisonment for debt, as it existed in most of the States even so late as twenty years a I mean for debt alone, for in. -re, pure debt, without charge or suspicion of fraud or falsehood. Sir, it is about that length of time, I 474 A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTCY. think, since yon, 1 who now preside over our deliberations, began here your efforts for the abolition of imprisonment for debt; and a better work was never lie- pun in the Capitol. Ever remembered and ever honored be that noble effort! You drew the attention of the public to the question, whether, in a civilized and Christian country, debt incurred with- out fraud, and remaining unpaid with- out fault, is a crime, and a crime fit to be punished by denying to the offender the enjoyment of the light of heaven, and shutting him up within four walls. Your own good sense, and that instinct of right feeling which often outruns sa- gacity, carried you at once to a result to which others were more slowly brought, but to which nearly all have at length been brought, by reason, reflection, and argument. Your movement led the w ay ; it became an example, and has had a powerful effect on both sides of the At- lantic. Imprisonment for debt, or even arrest and holding to bail for mere debt, no longer exists in England: and former laws on the subject have been greatly modified and mitigated, as we all know, in our States. " Abolition of imprisonment for debt," your own words in the title of your own bill, has become the title of an act of Par- liament. Sir, I am glad of an occasion to pay you the tribute of my sincere respect for these your labors in the cause of human- ity and enlightened policy. For these labors thousands of grateful hearts have thanked you ; and other thousands of hearts, not yet full of joy for the accom- plishmenl of their hoj.es. full, rather, at the present moment, of deep and dis- tressing anxiety, have yet the pleasure to know that your advice, your counsel, and your influence will all be given in favor of what is intended for (heir relief in the bill before us. Mi. President, Lei us atone for the omissions of the past by a prompt and efficient discharge of presenl duty. The demand for this measure is not partial or local. Ii comes to us, earnest and i Hon, Richard M.Johnson, Vice-President <>f the Unit* 'I States. loud, from all classes and all quarters. The time is come when we must answer it to our own consciences, if we suffer longer delay or postponement. High hopes, high duties, and high responsibili- ties concentrate themselves on this meas- ure and this moment. With a power to pass a bankrupt Law, which no other legislature in the country possesses, with a power of giving relief to many, doing injustice to none, I again ask every man who hears me, if he can content himself without an honest attempt to exercise that power. We may think it would be better to leave the power with the States ; but it was not left with the States; they have it not, and we cannot give it to them. It is in our hands, to be exer- cised by us, or to be for ever useless and lifeless. Under these circumstances, does not every man's heart tell him that he has a duty to discharge? If the final vote shall be given this day, and if that vote shall leave thousands of our fellow- citizens and their families, in hopeless and helpless distress, to everlasting sub- jection to irredeemable debt, can we go to our beds with satisfied consciences? Can we lay our heads upon our pillows, and, without self-reproach, supplicate the Almighty Mercy to forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors? Sir, let us meet the unanimous wishes of the country, and proclaim relief to the un- fortunate throughout the land. What should hinder? What should stay our hands from this good work? Creditors do not oppose it, — they apply for it; debtors solicit it, with an importunity, earnestness, and anxiety not to be de- scribed; the Constitution enjoins it; and all the considerations of justice, policy, and propriety, which are wrapped up in the phrase Public Duty, demand it, as I think, and demand it Loudly and impera- tively, at our hands. Sir, let us gratify the whole country, for once, with the joyous clang of chains, joyous because heard falling from the limbs of men. The wises! among those whom I address can desire nothing more beneficial than this measure, or more universally de- sired; and he who is youngest may not expect to live long enough to see a bet- A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTCY. it:, ter opportunity of causing new pleasures ami a happiness long un tasted to spring up in tin- hearts of the poor and the humble. How many husbands and fa- thers are looking with hopes which they cannot suppress, and yet hardly dare to cherish, for the result of this debute! How many wives and mothers will pass sleeplos and feverish nights, until they know whether they and their families shall be raised from poverty, despond- ency, and despair, and restored again to the circles of industrious, indepen- dent, and happy life! Sir, let it be to the honor of Cong that, in these days oi political strife and controversy, we have laid aside for once the sin thai mosl easily besets as, and, with unanimity of counsel, and with BingleneSS Of heart and of pin p' accomplished for our country one u. ure of unquestionable- good. "THE LOG CABIN CANDIDATE." FROM A SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE GREAT MASS MEETING AT SARATOGA, NEW YORK, ON THE 12th OF AUGUST, 1840. But it is the cry and effort of the times to stimulate those who are called poor against those who are called rich ; and yet, among those who urge this cry, and seek to profit by it, there is be- trayed sometimes an occasional sneer at whatever savors of humble life. Wit- ness the reproach against a candi- date now before the people for their highest honors, that a log cabin, with plenty of hard cider, is good enough for him! It appears to some persons, that a great deal too much use is made of the symbol of the log cabin. No man of sense supposes, certainly, that the hav- ing lived in a log cabin is any further proof of qualification for the Presidency, than as it creates a presumption that any one who, rising from humble con- dition, or under unfavorable circum- stances, has been able to attract a con- siderable, degree of public attention, is 3sed of reputable qualities, moral and intellectual. Bui it is to be remembered, that this matter of the log cabin originated, not with tin- friends of the Whig candidate, but with his enemies. Soon after his Domination at Harrisburg, a writer for one of the leading administration papers spoke of his " log cabin," and his use of " hard cider," by way of sneer and re- proach. As mighl have I n expected, (for pretenders are apt to be thrown off their guard,) this taunt at humble life proceeded from the party which claims a monopoly of the purest democracy. The whole party appeared to enjoy it, or, at least, they countenanced it by si- lent acquiescence; for I do not know that, to this day, any eminent indi- vidual or any leading newspaper at- tached to the administration has rebuked this scornful jeering at the supposed humble condition or circumstances in life, past or present, of a worthy man and a war-worn soldier. But it touched a tender point in the public feeling. It naturally roused indignation. What was intended as reproach was immediately seized on as merit. "Be it so ! Be it so! " was the instant burst of the public voice. " Let him be the log cabin can- didate. What you say in scorn, we will shout with all our lungs. From this day forward, we have our cry of rally; and we shall see whether he who has dwelt in one of the rude abodes of the West may not become the best house in the country! " All this is natural, and springs from sources of just feeling. Other things, Gentlemen, have had a similar origin. We all know that the term "Whig" was bestowed in derision, two hundred years ago, on those who were thought too fond of liberty; and our national air of " Yankee Doodle " was composed by British officers, in ridicule of the Amer- ican troops. Yet, erelong, the last of the British armies laid down its arms at "THE Lot; CABIN CANDIDATE." 477 Yorktown, while this Bame air was play- ing in the ears of officers and men. Gentlemen, it. is only Bhallow-minded pretenders who either make distin- guished origin matter of personal merit, or obscure origin matter of personal re- proach. Taunl and scoffing at the hum- ble condition of early life affect nobody, in this country, but those who are fool- ish enough to indulge in them, and they are generally sufficiently punished by public rebuke. A man who is not ashamed of himself need not be ashamed of his early condition. Gentlemen, it did not happen to me to be born in a log cabin; but my elder brothers and sisters were born in a log cabin, raised amid the snow-drifts of New Hampshire, at a period so early that, when the smoke first rose from its rude chimney, and curled over the frozen hills, there was no similar evidence of a white man's habitation between it and the settlements on the rivers of Canada. [ts remains still exist. I make to il an annual visit. I carry my children t" it, to teach them the hardships en, lined by the generations which have gone 1» them. I love t.i dwell on the tender recollections, the kindred ties, the early affect ions, an>l the touching narral and incidents, which mingle with all I know of this primitive family ab I weep to think that none of those who inhabited it are now among tie' living; and if ever I am ashamed of it. or if I ever fail in affectionate veneration for lain who reared it, and defended it against savage violence and destruction, cherished all the domestic virtues be- neath its roof, and, through the lire and blood of a seven years' revolutionary war, shrunk from no danger, no toi] sacrifice, to serve his country, and to raise his children to a condition 1" than his own, may my name ami the name of my posterity be blotted forever from the memory of mankind! ADDRESS TO THE LADIES OF RICHMOND. REMARKS AT A PUBLIC RECEPTION BY THE LADIES OK RICHMOND, VIR- GINIA, ON THK 5th OF OCTOBER 1840. [Tmc visit of Mr. Webster to Richmond was short, and his public engagements so numerous, as to put it out of His power to return the calls of his friends, or to pay his respects to their families. It was accord- ingly proposed that the ladies who might desire to do so should assemble in the " Log Cabin," and that he should there Jun- ius respects to them collectively. The meeting was large, and the building quite full. On being introduced to them in a t\u appropriate remarks, by Mr. Lyons, Mr. Webster addressed them in the follow- ing speech.] Ladies, — I am very sure I owe the pleasure I now enjoy to your kind dis- position, which has given me the oppor- tunity to present my thanks and my respects to you thus collectively, since the shortness of my stay in the city does not allow me the happiness of calling upon those, severally and individually, from members of whose families I have received kindness and notice. And, in the first place. I wish to express to you my deep and hearty thanks, as 1 have endeavored to do to your fathers, your husbands and your brothers, for the unbounded hospitality 1 have received ever since I came among you. This is tered, I assure you, in a grateful heart, in characters of an enduring na- ture. The rough contests of the politi- cal world arc not suited to the dignity and the delicacy of your Bex; bul you possess the intelligence Lo know how much of thai happiness which yOU are entitled to hope for, Loth for yourselves and for your children, depends on the right administration of government, and a proper tone of public morals. That is a subject on which the moral percep- tions of woman are both quicker and juster than those of the other sex. I do not speak of that administration of government whose object is merely the protection of industry, the preservation of civil liberty, and the securing to en- terprise of its due reward. I speak of government in a somewhat higher point of view; I speak of it in regard to its influence on the morals and sentiments of the community. We live in an age distinguished for great benevolent ex- ertion, in which the affluent are conse- crating the means they possess to the endowment of colleges and academies, to the building of churches, to the sup- port of religion and religious worship, to the encouragement of schools, lyceuins, and athemeums, and other means of general popular instruction. This is all well; it is admirable; it augurs well for the prospects of ensuing generations. But I have sometimes thought, that, amidst all this activity and zeal of the good and the benevolent, the influence of government on the morals and on the religious feelings of the commu- nity is apt to be overlooked or under- rated. 1 speak, of course, of its in- direct influence, of the power of its example, and the general tone which it inspires. A popular government, in all these respects, is a most powerful institution; more powerful, as it has sometimes ap- peared to me, than the influence of most ADDRESS TO THE LADIES OF RICHMOND. IT'.' other human institutions put together, either for good or Eoi evil, according to its character. Its example, its tone, whether of regard or disregard for mora] obligation, is most important to human happiness; it is among those things which most affect the political morals of mankind, and their general morals also. 1 advert to this, because there has 1 n put forth, in modern times, the false maxim, that there is one morality for politics, and another morality for other things; that, in their political conduct to their opponents, men may say and do that which they would never think of saying or doing in the personal relations of private life. There has been openly announced a sentiment, which I con- sider as the very essence of false moral- ity, which declares that "all is fair in politics." If a man speaks falsely or calumniously of his neighbor, and is reproached for the offence, the ready excuse is this: •• It was in relation to public and political matters; I cherished no personal ill-will whatever against that individual, but quite the contrary; I spoke of my adversary merely as a political man." In my opinion, the day is coming when falsehood will stand for falsehood, and calumny will be treated as a breach of the commandment, whether it he committed politically or in the con- cerns of private life. It is by the promulgation of sound morals in the community, and more es- pecially by the training and instruction of the young, that woman performs her part towards the preservation of a free government. It is generally admitted that public liberty, and the perpetuity ot a free constitution, rest on the virtue and intelligence of the community which enjoys it. How is that virtue to be in- spired, and how is that intelligence to be communicated? Bonaparte once asked .Madame de Stael in what manner he could best promote the happiness of France. Her reply is full of political wisdom. She said, " Instruct the moth- ers of the French people." Mothers are, indeed, the affectionate and effective teachers of the human race. The moth- er begins her process of training with the infant in her arms. It is she who din speak, ii • iii -t mental ami spiritual pulsations. She conducts it along the impressible years of childhood and youth, and hopes to deliver it t.. the stern con- flicts and i umultuous • i life, aimed by tfa d principles which her child has received from maternal care and love. If we draw within the circle of Our contemplation the mol bei of a civilized nation, what do we see? We behold bo many artificers working, QOl "ii frail and perishable matter, bul on the im- mortal mind, moulding and fashioning beings who are to exist for ever. We applaud the artist whose skill and nius present the mimic man upon the canvas; we admire ami celebrate the sculptor who works out that same image in enduring marble; but how insignifi- cant are these achievements, though the highest and the fairest in all tie- de- partments of art, in comparison with the great vocation of human mothers! They work, not upon the canvas that shall perish, or the marble that shall crumble into dust, but upon mind, upon spirit, which is to lastforever, and which is to bear, for good or evil, throughout its duration, the impress of a moth plastic hand. I have already expressed the opinion, which all allow to be correct, that our security for the duration of the free institutions which bless our country depends upon habits of virtue ami tie' prevalence of knowledge and of educa- tion. The attainment of knowledge does not comprise all which is contained in the larger term of education. The feelings are to be disciplined; the pas- sions are to be restrained; true and worthy motives are to be inspired; a profound religious feeling is to be in- stilled, and pure morality inculcated, under all circumstances. All this comprised in education. Mothers who are faithful to this great duty will t 11 their children, that neither in political nor in any other concerns of life can man ever withdraw himself from the perpetual obligations of conscience and of duty; that in every act, whether pub- 480 ADDRESS TO THE LADIES OF RICHMOND. lie or private, he incurs a just responsi- bility; and that in no condition is he warranted in trifling with important rights and obligations. They will im- 58 upon their children the truth, that the exercise of the elective franchise is a social duty, of as solemn a nature as man can be called to perform; that a man may not innocently trifle with his vote ; that every free elector is a trustee, as well for others as himself; and that every man and every measure he sup- ports has an important bea-ing on the interests of others, as well as on his own. It is in the inculcation of high and pure morals such as these, that, in a free republic, woman performs her sacred duty, and fulfils her destiny. The French, as you know, are remark- able for their fondness for sententious phrases, in which much meaning is con- densed into a small space. I noticed lately, on the title-page of one of the books of popular instruction in France, this motto: "Pour instruction on the heads of the people! you owe them that baptism." And, certainly, if there be any duty which may be described by a reference to that great institute of re- ligion, — a duty approaching it in im- portance, perhaps next to it in obliga- tion, — it is this. I know you hardly expect me to ad- dress you on the popular political topics of the day. You read enough, you hear quite enough, on those subjects. You expect me only to meet you, and to tender my profound thanks for this marked proof of your regard, and will kindly receive the assurances with which I tender to you, on parting, my affec- tionate respects and best wishes. RECEPTION AT BOSTON. A SPEECH MADE IN FAN KIM L HALL, ON THE 30th OF SEPTEMBER, 1849, AT A PUBLIC RECEPTION GIVEN TO MB. WEBSTER, ON Ills RETURN I" BOSTON, AFTER THE NEGOTIATION OF THE TREATY OF UASIIIV.i [On the accession of Genera] Harrison to the Presidency of the Tinted States, on the Jth of March,' 1841, Mr. Wehster was called to the office of Secretary of State, in which, after the President's untimely death, he con- tinued under Mr. Tyler for about two years. The illations of the country with Great Britain were at that time in a very critical position. The most important and difficult Buhject which engaged the attention of the government, while he filled the Department of State, was the negotiation of the treaty with Great Britain, which was signed at Washington on the 9th of August, 1842. The other members of General Harrison's Cabinet having resigned their places in the autumn of 1841, discontent was fell by some of their friends, that Mr. Webster should have consented to retain his. But as Mr. Tyler continued to place entire confidence in Mr. Webster's administration of the De- partment of State, the great importance of pursuing a steady line of policy in reference to foreign affairs, and especially the hope of averting a rupture with England by an honorable settlement of OUT difficulties with that country, induced Mr. Webster to re- main at his post. On occasion of a visit made by him to Boston, after the adjournment of Congress, in August, 1842, a Dumber of his friends were desirous of manifesting their sense of the services which lie had rendered to the country by pursuing this course. A pub- lic meeting of citizens was accordingly held in Faneuil Hall, on the :!Oth of September, 1842. At this meeting the following speech was made.] I know not how it is, Mr. Mayor, lmt there is something in the echoes of these walls, or in this sea of upturned faces which I behold before me, or in the genius thai always hovers over this place, Canning ardenl and patriotic feel- ing by every motion of its wings, — I know not how it is, bul there is some- thing that excite me strangely, deeply. before I even begin to speak. It cannot be doubted that this salutation and greeting from my fellow-citizens of Bos- ton is a tribute dear to my heart. Bos- ton is indeed my home, my cherished home. It is now more than twenty- five years since I came to it with my family, to pursue, here in this enlight- ened metropolis, those objects of pro- fessional life for which my studies and education were designed to tit me. It is twenty years since I was invited by the citizens of Boston to take upon mvself an office of public trusl in their service. 1 It gives me infinite pleasure to see here to-day, anion- those who hold the Beats yielded to such as are more advanced in life, not a few of the gentlemen who were earnestly instrumental in inducing me to enter II] a course of life wholly unexpected, and to devote im self to the Ben ice of the public. Whenever the duties of public life have withdrawn from this home, I ha\e fell it. nevertheless, to be the at- tractive spot to which all local affection tended. Ami now that the progress of i Tin- office of Representative hi Congn 31 m RECEPTION AT BOSTON. time' inii-t shortly bring about the pe- ri,. .1. if it should qoI be hastened bj the progress of events, when the duties of public life shall yield fco the influences of advancing years, I cherish no hope more precious, than to pass here in these asso- ciations and among these friends what may remain to me of life; and to Leave in the tnidsl of you, fellow-citizens, par- taking of your fortunes, whether for good or for evil, those who bear my name, and inherit my Mood. The Mayor has alluded, very kindly, to the exertions which I have made since I have held a position in the Cain- net, and especially to the results of the negotiation in which I have been recently engaged. I hope, fellow-citizens, that something has been done which may prove permanently useful to the public. 1 have endeavored to do something, and 1 hope my endeavors have not been in vain. I have had a hard summer's work, it is true, but I am not wholly unused to hard work. I have had some anxious days, I have spent some sleep- less nights; but if the results of my efforts shall be approved by the commu- nity, I am richly compensated. My other days will be the happier, and my other nights will be given to a sweeter repose. It was an object of the highest na- tional importance, no doubt, to disperse the clouds which threatened a storm be- tween England and America. For sev- eral years past there has been a class of questions open between the two coun- tries, which have not always threatened war. but which have prevented the peo- ple from being assured of permanent ice. His lienor the Mayor has paid a just tribute to that lamented personage, by whom, in bs 11, I was called to the place I now occupy; and although, Gentle- men. I know it is in very bad taste to peak much of one's self, yet here, anion-- my friends and neighbors, I wish to -a\ a word "i' two on subjects in which I am concerned. With the late President Harrison I had contracted an acquaintance while we were both mem- bers of < longress, and 1 bad an opportu- nity of renewing it afterwards in his own house, and elsewhere. 1 have made no exhibition or boast of the confidence which it was his pleasure to repose in me; but circumstances, hardly worthy of serious notice, have rendered it not improper for me to say on this occasion, that as soon as President Harrison was elected, without, of course, one word from me, he wrote to me inviting me to take a place in his Cabinet, leaving to me the choice of that place, and asking my advice as to the persons that should fill every other place in it. lie ex- pressed rather a wish that I should take the administration of the treasury, be- cause, as he was pleased to say, I had devoted myself with success to the ex- amination of the questions of currency and finance, and he felt that the wants of the country, — the necessities of the country, on the great subjects of cur- rency and finance, — were moving causes that produced the revolution which had placed him in the presidential chair. It so happened, Gentlemen, that my preference was for another place, — for that which 1 have now the honor to fill. I felt all its responsibilities; but I must say, that, with whatever attention I had considered the general questions of finance, I felt more competent and will- ing to undertake the duties of an office which did not involve the daily drudgery of the treasury. 1 was not disappointed, Gentlemen, in the exigency which then existed in our foreign relations. I was not unaware of all the difficulties which hung over us; for although the whole of the danger was not at that moment developed, the cause. of it was known, and it seemed as if an outbreak was inevitable. 1 allude now to that occurrence on the frontier of which the chairman has already spoken, which took place in the winter of 1811, the case of Alexander McLeod. A year or two before, the Canadian government had seen fit to authorize a military incursion, for a particular pur- pose, within the territory of the United States. That, purpose was to destroy a steamboal , charged with being employed fur hostile purposes against its forces RECEPTION AT BOSTON. and the peaceable subjects of the crown. The act was avowed bj the British gov- ernment at home as a public act. Alex- ander Mel I, a person who individ- ually could claim no regard or sympathy, happened to be one of the agents w ho, in a military character, performed the act of their sovereign. Coining into the United states some years alter, he was arrested under a charge of homicide com- mitted in this act, and was held to trial as for a private felony. According to my apprehensions, a pro- ceeding of this kind w as directly adverse to the well-settled doctrines of the pub- lic law. It could not but be received with lively indignation, not only by the British government, but among the peo- ple of England. It would be so re- ceived among us. If a citizen of the United States should as a military man receive an order of his government and obey it, (and he must either obey it or be hanged,) and should afterwards, in the territory of another power, which by that act he had offended, be tried for a violation of its law, as for a crime, and threatened w ith individual punishment, there is not a man in the United States who would not cry out for redress and for vengeance. Any elevated govern- ment, in a case like this, where one of its citizens, in the performance of his duty, incurs such menaces and danger, assumes the responsibility; any elevated government says, " The act was mine, — 1 am the man"; — "Adsum qui feci, in me convertite ferrum." Now, Gentlemen, information of the action of the British government on this subject was transmitted to us at Wash- ington within a few days after the instal- lation of General Harrison. I did not think that it was proper to make public then, nor is it important to say now , all that we knew on the subject; but I will tell you, in general terms, that if all that was known at Washington then had been divulged throughout the country, the value of the shipping interest of this city, and of every other interest con- nected with the commerce of the country, would have been depressed one half in six hours. I thought that the concus- sion might I"- averted, by holding up to vievi the principle, of public law by which this question ought to be settled, and l.\ demanding an apologj for what- ever had been done against those princi- ples of public law by the British govern- ment or IK officers. I tl ye ought to put ourselves right in the tii and then we could insist that they m do right in the n.\t place. When in England, in the year l ■-•;.'. I had i sion to address a large and respectable assemblage; and allusion having been made to tl,,. relations of things bet the two countries, 1 stated then, what I thought and imw think, that in au\ con- troversy which should terminate in war between the I'niied States and England, the only eminent advantage that either would possess would be found in the rec- titude of its cause. With the right on our side, we are a match for England; and with tin; right on her Bide, Bhe is a match for us, or for anybody. We live in an age, fell., w -citizens, I when there has been established among the nations a more elevated tribunal than ever before existed on earth ; 1 mean the tribunal of the enlightened public opin- ion of the world. Governments cannot go to war now, either with or against the consent of their own Bubjectsor peo- ple, without the reprobation of other states, unless for grounds and reasons justifying them in the general judgment of mankind. The judgment of civiliza- tion, of commerce, and of that heavenly light that beams over Christendom, restrains men. congresses, parliaments, princes, and people from gratifying the inordinate love of ambition through the LI. ...i]\ scenes of war. It basbeen wisely said, and it is true, that every settle- ment <>f national differences between Christian states by fair negotiation, without resort to arms, is a new illus- tration and a new proof of the benign influence of the Christian faith. With regard to the terms "i this treaty, and in relation to the other sub- jects connected with it. it i< somewhat awkward for me t.. speak, I. cause the documents connected with them have not been made public by authority. But 484 RECEPTION AT BOSTON. 1 persuade myself, that, when the whole shall be calmly considered, it will be seen that there was throughout a fervent disposition to maintain the interest ami honor of the country, united with a proper regard for the preservation of peace between us and the greatest com- mercial nation of the world. Gentlemen, while I receive these com- mendations which you have bestowed, I have an agreeable duty to perform to others. In the first place, I have great pleasure in bearing testimony to the in- telligent interest manifested by the Pres- ident of the United States, under whose authority, of course, I constantly acted throughout the negotiation, and his sin- cere and anxious desire that it might re- sult successfully. I take great pleasure in acknowledging here, as I will ac- knowledge everywhere, my obligations to him for the unbroken and steady con- fidence reposed in me through the whole progress of an affair not unimportant to the country, and infinitely important to my own reputation. A negotiator disparaged, distrusted, treated with jealousy by his own gov- ernment, would be indeed a very unequal match for a cool and sagacious represent- ative of one of the proudest and most powerful monarchies of Europe, possess- ing in the fullest extent the confidence of his government, and authorized to bind it in concerns of the greatest im- portance. I shall never forget the frank- ness ami generosity with which, after a full and free interchange of suggestions upon the subject. I was told by the Pres- ident that on my shoulders rested the responsibility of the negotiation, and on my discretion and judgment should rest the lead of every measure. 1 desire also to speak here of the hearty co-operation rendered every day by the other gentle- men connected with tin' administration, from everj one of whom I received im- portant assistance. I speak with satis- fact ion, also, of t he useful labors i i .ill the Commissioners, although I need hardly Bay here, what has been already said officially, that tie- highest respect is due t,, the Commissioners from Maine and Massachusetts for their faithful ad- herence to the rights of their own States, mingled with a cordial co-operation in what was required by the general inter- ests of the United States. And I hope I shall not be considered as trespassing on this occasion, if I speak of the happy selection made by England of a person to represent her government on this oc- casion, 1 — a thorough Englishman, un- derstanding and appreciating the great objects and interests of his own govern- ment, of large and liberal views, and of such standing and weight of character at home, as to impress a feeling of ap- probation of his course upon both gov- ernment and people. He was fully ac- quainted with the subject, and always, on all occasions, as far as his allegiance and duty permitted, felt and manifested good-will towards this country. Aside from the question of the boun- dary, there were other important subjects to be considered, to which I know not whether this is a proper occasion to al- lude. When the results of the negotia- tion shall be fully before the public, it will be seen that these other questions have not been neglected, questions of great moment and importance to the country; and then I shall look with con- cern, but with faith and trust, for the judgment of that country upon them. It is but just to take notice of a very im- portant act, intended to provide for such cases as McLeod's,for which the country is indebted to the AVhig majorities in the two houses of Congress, acting upon the President's recommendation. Events showed the absolute necessity of remov- ing into the national tribunals quest ions involving the peace and honor of the I 'nited Slate-. There yet remain, Gentlemen, several other subjects still unsettled with Eng- land. First, there is that concerning the trade between the United States and the possessions of England, on this con- tinent and in the West indies. It has been my duty to look into that, subject, and to Keep the run of it, as we say, from the arrangement of L829 ami 1830, until the present time. That arrange- ment was one unfavorable to the ship- 1 Lord Asliburtou. REl EPTK IN A.T BOSTON. 185 ping interests of the United States, and especially so to the New England States. Tn adjust these relations is an impor- tant subject, either fur diplomatic uego- tiation, or the consideration of ( longress. One or both bouses of Congress, indeed, have already called upon the proper de- partment for a report upon the opera- tions of that arrangement, and a com- mittee of tlic House of Representatives has made a report, showing that some adjustment of these relations is of vital importance to the future prosperity of our navigating interests. There is another question, somewhat more remote; that of the Northwest Boundary, where the possessions nf (lie two countries touch each other upon the Pacific. There are evident public rea- sons why that question should be settled before the country becomes peopled. There are also. Gentlemen, many open questions respecting our relations with other governments. Upon most of the other States of tins continent, citizens of the United States have claims, with regard to which the delays already in- curred have caused great injustice; and it becomes the government of the United States, by a calm and dignified course, and a deliberate and vigorous tone of administration of public affairs, to se- cure prompt justice to our citizens in these quarters. I am here to-day as a guest. I was invited by a number of highly valued personal and political friends to partake with them of a public dinner, for the purpose of giving them an opportunity to pass the usual greeting of friends upon my return; of testifying their re- spect for my public services heretofore; and of exchanging congratulations upon the results of the late negotiation. It was at my instance that the proposed dinner took the form of this meeting, and, instead of meeting them at the festive board, 1 agreed to meet them, and those who chose to meet me with them, here. Still, the general character of the meeting seems not to be changed. I am here as a guest; here to receive greetings and salutations for particular services, and not under any intimation or expectation that I should address the gentlemen who invited me or others here, upon subjects not si i by themselves, it would not become me to use the occasion for any more genera] purpose. Because, although I have a design, at Borne time not far distant, to make known mj sentiments upon po- litical maiter. generally . and upon the political Btate of the country and that of iis several parties, yet I knov, very well that I should be trespassing beyond the bounds of politeness and propriety, Should I enter upon this whole wide field now. 1 will not enter upon it. be- cause the gentlemen who invited me en- tertain on many of these topics \ iews different from m\ own, and they would \er\ properly say. that they canoe here to meet .Mi-. Webster, bo congratulate him upon the late negotiation, and to exchange sentiments upon matters about which they agreed with him; and that it was not in very correct taste for him to use the occasion to express opinions upon other subjects mi which thej differ. It is on that account that I shall forbear discussing political subjects at large, and shall endeavor to confine my remarks to what may lie considered a- affect ing my- self, directly or indirectly. The Mayor was kind enough t" say. that having, in his judgment, performed the duties of my own department to the satisfaction of my country, it might be left to me to take care of my own honor and reputation, [suppose thai he meant to say. that in the present distracted state of the Whig party, and anion.; the contrariety of opinions that prevail (if there l,e a contrariety of opinion) a- to the course proper for m to pursue, the decision of thai question might he left to myself. I am exactly of his opinion. I am quite of opinion that on a question touching my own honor and character, as I am to hear the consequences of the decision. I had a great deal better be trusted to make it. No man feels more highly the advantage of the advice of friend- than I do; hut on a question BO delicate and important as that. I like to choose myself the friends who are to give me advice; and upon this subject. 48G KF.CKPTION AT BOSTON. Gentlemen, I shall leave you as enlight- en. -.1 as 1 found you. I give no pledges, I make no intima- tions, one -way or the other; and I will be as free, when this day closes, to act as duty calls, as I was when the dawn of this day — (Here Mr. Webster was inter- rupted by tremendous applause. When Bilence was restored he continued:) There is a delicacy in the case, be- cause there is always delicacy and regret when one feels obliged to differ fromhis friends; hut there is no embarrassment. There is no embarrassment, because, if I see the path of duty before me, I have that within me which will enable me to pursue it. and throw all embarrassment to the winds. A public man has no oc- casion to be embarrassed, if he is honest. Himself and his feelings should be to him as nobody and as nothing; the in- terest of his country must be to him as every thing; he must sink what is per- sonal to himself, making exertions for his country; and it is his ability and readiness to do this which are to mark him as a great or as a little man in time to COllie. There were many persons in Septem- ber, 1841, who found great fault with my remaining in the President's Cabinet. You know. Gentlemen, that twenty years of honest, and not altogether un- distinguished service in the Whig cause, did not save mi' from an outpouring of wrath, which seldom proceeds from Whig pens and Whig tongues against, anybody, I am, Gentlemen, a little hard to coax-, but as to being driven. thai is out of the question. 1 chose to tl i m\ own judgment, and thinking I was at a post where I was in the service of tli'' country, and could do it good, I ed there. And I leave it to yon to- '!:>, i" say, I leave it to my country to Bay, whether the country would have been better "if if I had left also. 1 have no attachment to office. I have r ted of its Bweel -. bul 1 have tasted of it bitterness. I am content \\ itli w liat I have achieved j I am more ready to r< ied v» ith what is gained, than to i mi i In- risk of doubl Eul efforts for lew acquisition. I suppose I ought to pause here. (Cries of "Go on!") I ought, perhaps, to allude to nothing more, and I will not allude to any thing further than it may he supposed to concern myself, directly or by implication. Gentlemen, and Mr. Mayor, a most respectable convention of Whig delegates met in this place a few days since, and passed very impor- tant resolutions. There is no set of gen- tlemen in the Commonwealth, so far as I know them, who have more of my re- spect and regard. They are Whigs, but they are no better Whigs than I am. They have served the country in the Whig ranks; so have I, quite as long as most of them, though perhaps with less ability and success. Their resolutions on political subjects, as representing the Whigs of the State, are entitled to respect, so far as they were author- ized to express opinion on those sub- jects, and no further. They were sent hither, as I supposed, to agree upon can- didates for the othees of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor for the support of the Whigs of .Massachusetts; and if they had any authority to speak in the name of the Whigs of Massachusetts to any other purport or intent, I have not been informed of it. I feel very little dis- turbed by any of those proceedings, of whatever nature ; but some of them ap- pear to me to have been inconsiderate and hasty, and their point and bearing can hardly be mistaken. I notice, among others, a declaration made, in behalf of all the Whigs of this Commonwealth, of "a full and final separation from the President of the United States." If those gentlemen saw tit to express their own sentiments to that extent, there was no objection. Whigs speak their senti- ments everywhere; but, whether they may assume a privilege to speak for others on a point on which those others have not given them authority, is an- other question. I am a Whig. 1 always have been a Whig, and 1 always will be line; and if there are any who would turn me out of the pale of that com- munion, let them see who will get out first. I am a Massachusetts Whig, a Faneuil Hall Whig, having breathed RECEPTION AT B08TON. 1-7 this air for five-and-twenty years, and meaning to breathe it as long as my life is spared. I am ready to Bubmil to all decisions of Whig conventions on sub- jects mi which they arc authorized to make decisions; I know thai greal party good and great public -cod can only he so obtained. But it is quite another question whether a set of gentlemen, however respectable they may In; as in- dividuals, shall have tin- power to hind me on matters which I have not agreed to submit to their decision at all. "A full and final separation " is de- clared between (lie Whig party of Mas- sachusetts and the President. Thai is the text: it requires a commentary. What does it mean? The President of the United Slates lias three years of his term of office yet unexpired. Does this declaration mean, then, that during those three years all the measures of his administration are to lie opposed by the great body of the Whig party of Mas- sachusetts, whether they are right or wrong? There are great public inter- ests which require his attention. If the President of the United States should attempt, by negotiation, or by earnest and serious application to Congress, to make some change in the present ar- rangements, such as should be of sen ice to those interests of navigation which are concerned in the colonial trade, are the Whigs of Massachusetts to give him neither aid nor succor? If the Presi- dent of the I'nited States shall direct the proper department to review the whole commercial policy of the United States, in respect of reciprocity in the indirect trade, to which so much of our tonnage is now sacrificed, if the amend- ment of this policy shall be undertaken by him, is there such a separation be- tween him and the Whigs of Massachu- setts as shall lead them and their repre- sentatives to oppose it. Do you know (there are gentlemen now here who do know) that a large proportion, I rather think more than one half, of the carry- ing trade between the empire of Brazil and the United States is enjoyed by ton- nage from the North of Europe, in con- sequence of this ill-considered principle with regard to reciprocity. JTou m jusl as well admit them into the i • ing trade. By thi> arrangement, we take the bread oul of our children's mouths and give it to strangers. I ap- peal to you, Sir, (turning to Captain Benjamin Rich, who -at bj him.) i this true? (Mr. Rich al once replied, True!) Is everj measure of ti. for the relief of Mich abll.-e-, to 1 jected? Are we to Buffer ourselves to remain inactive under every grievance of this kind until these three years Bhall expire, and through as many more as shall pass until Providence shall bless us with more power of doing good than we have now? Again, there are now in this SI persons employed under government, allowed to be pretty ;_: ..... I Whigs, -till holding their offices; collectors, district attorneys, postmasters, marshals. What ia ti. become of them in this separation? Which side are they to fall? Are they to resign? or is this resolution to be held up to government as an invitation or a provocation to turn them out.' Our distinguished fellow-citizen, who, with so much credit to himself and to his country, represents our government in England, 1 — is he expected to conic home, on this separation, and yield his place to his predecessor, 3 or t<> Bome- body else? And in regard to the indi- vidual who addresses you, — what do tiis brother Whigs mean to do with him? Where do they mean to | me? Generally, when a divorce takes place, the parties divide their children. I am anxious to know where, in the case of this divorce. I shall fall. This declaration announces a full and final separation between the Whigs of Mas- sachusetts and the President. If I choose to remain in the President's councils, do these gentlemen mean to say that I cease to be a Massachu Whig? I am quite ready to put thai question to the | pie of Massachu- setts. I would not treat this matter too light- ly, nor yet too seriously. I know very 1 Mr. Edward I"\ erett - Mr. Andrei) Sti •■• oson. 488 RECEPTION AT BOSTON. well that, when public bodies get to- gether, resolutions can never be con- sidered with any degn f deliberation. Thej are passed as they are presented. Who the honorable gentlemen were who drew this resolution 1 do nut know. I Buspect that they had n<»t lnneh mean- ing in it. and that they have not very clearly defined what little meaning they had. They were angry; they were re-, sentful; they had drawn up a string of charges against the President, — a bill of indictment, as it were, — and, to close the whole, they introduced this declaration about " a full and final sep- aration." I could not read this, of course, without perceiving that it had an intentional or unintentional bearing on my position ; and therefore it was proper for me to allude to it here. Gentlemen, there are some topics on which it has been my fortune to differ from my old friends. They may be right on these topics ; very probably they are ; but I am sure / am right in maintaining my opinions, such as they are, when I have formed them honestly and on deliberation. There seems to me to be a disposition to postpone all attempts to do good to the country to some future and uncertain day. Yet there is a Whig majority in each house of Congress, and I am of opinion that now is the time to accomplish what yet remains to be accomplished. Some, gen- tlemen are for suffering the present Congress to expire; another Congress to be chosen, and to expire also; a third Congress to be chosen, and then, if there shall be a Whig majority in both branches, and a Whig President, they propose to take up highly impor- tant and pressing subjects. These are (bisons, Gentlemen, of more sanguine temperament, than myself. " Confi- dence," saj - Lord < ihatham, " is a plant of slow growth in an old hosom." lie referred to confidence in men, bul the remark is as true of confidence in predictions of future occurrences. Many Wh bef H a pros] t of more power, and a better chance to serve the country, than we now possess. Far along in the horizon, they discern mild Bides and halcyon seas, while fogs and darknos and mists blind other sons of humanity from beholding all this bright vision. It was not so that we accom- plished our last great victory, by simply brooding over a glorious Whig future. We succeeded in 1840, but ttOl without an effort; and I know that nothing but union, cordial, sympathetic, fraternal union, can prevent the party that achieved that success from renewed prostration. It is not, — I would say it in the presence of the world, — it is not by premature and partial, by pre- scriptive and denunciatory proceedings, that this great Whig family can ever be kept together, or that Whig counsels can maintain their ascendency. This is perfectly plain and obvious. It was a party, from the first, made up of dif- ferent ojiinions and principles, of gen- tlemen of every political complexion, uniting to make a change in the admin- istration. They were men of strong State-rights principles, men of strong federal principles, men of extreme tar- iff, and men of extreme anti-tariff notions. What could be expected of such a party, unless animated by a spirit of conciliation and harmony, of union and sympathy? Its true policy was, from the first, and must be, un- less it meditates its own destruction, to heal, and not to widen, the breaches that existed in its ranks. It consented to be- come united in order to save the country from a continuation of a ruinous course of measures. And the lesson taught by the whole history of the revolution of 1840 is the momentous value of concilia- tion, friendship, sympathy, and union. Gentlemen, if I understand the mat- ter, there were four or five great objects in that revolution. And, in the tii-t place, one great object was that of at- tempting to secure permanent peace be- tween this country and England. For although, as 1 have said, we were not actually at war. we were subjected to perpetual agitations, which disturb the interests of the country almost as much as war. They break in upon men's pur- suits, and render them incapable of cal- culating or judging of their chances oi RECEPTION A I BOSTON ■is'.i success in any proposed line or oonrse hi' business. A Bettled peace was one of tlir objects nf thai revolul ion. I am glad if vmi think this is accomplished. Tlif iu'\t objeci of tliat revolution was an increase of revenue. It was no- torious that, tnr tin' several la-t years, tin' expenditures lor tin' administration of government hail exceeded tin' re- ceipts; in other words, governmenl had been running in debt, and in tin' mean t i i in- the operation of the compromise act was still further ami faster dimin- ishing the revenue itself. A sound reve- niii' was one of those objects; and that it has been accomplished, our thanks and praise are due to the Congress that ha- ju-t adjourned. A third object was protection, protec- tion incidental to revenue, or consequent upon revenue. Now as to that, Centle- nien, much has been done, and I hope it will be found that enough has been done. And for this, too, all the Whigs who supported that measure in Congress are entitled to high praise: they receive mine, and I hope they do yours; it is right that they should. Rut let us be just. The French rhetoricians have a maxim, that there is nothing beautiful that is not true; I am afraid that some of our jubilant oratory would hardly stand the test of this canon of criticism. It i- imt true that a majority, composed of Whigs, could be found, in either house, in favor of the tariff bill. More than thirty Whigs, many of them gen- tlemen of lead and influence, voted against the law, from beginning to end. on all questions, direct and indirect; and it is not pleasant to consider what would have been the state of the coun- try, the treasury, and the government itself, at this moment, if the law act- ually passed, for revenue and for pro- tection, had depended on Whig votes alone. After all, it passed the House of Representatives by a >ingle vote; and there is a good deal of eclat aboul that Bingle vote. But did not every gentle- man who voted for it take the responsi- bility and deserve the honor of that single vote? Several gentlemen in the opposition thus befriended the bill; thus ■ lid our neighbor from the Middle 1 1 i ii«t of this State, 1 voting for the tai iff out ami out, as steadilj as did my hon- ored friend, the member from this city. a \\ e hear not hing of his •• coming to the ■." and M-t he had that OTH "■'■ , and held the tariff in hi- hand BS absolutely as if he had had a presidential \> to! Ami lii.w was it in the Senate? It passed by vote again there, and could not have passed at all without the assistance of the two Senators from Pennsylvania, of Mr. Williams of Maine, and of Mr. Wright of New York. Let us then admit the truth (and a lawyer may do that when it helps his case), thai it was necec that a large portion of the other party should come to the assistance of the Whigs to enable them to carry the tariff, and that, if this assistance had nol I a rendered, the tariff musl hai e failed. And this is a \erv important truth for New Knglaml. Her children, looking to their manufactures and industry for their livelihood, must rejoice to find tin- tariff, so necessary to these, no party question. Can they desire, can they wish, that such a great object as the protection of Industry should become a party object, rising with party, and with the failure of the party that supported it going to the grave? This is a public. a national question. The tariff ought to be inwrought in the sentiments of all parties; and although I hope that the pre-eminence of Whig principles may be eternal, I wish to take bond ami se- curity, that we mag make the protec- tion of domestic industry more durable even than Whig supremacy. Let us be true in another I This tariff has accomplished much, and is an honor to the men who passed it. But in regard to protection it has only restored the country to the state in which it was before the compromise act, and fnun which it fell under the operation of that act. It has repaired the conse- quences of thai measure, and it has done no more. I may Bpeak of the compro- mise ad. My turn ha- come now. \ i 1 Mr. Parmenter. - Mr. R C. Winthrop. ■i'.'O RECEPTION AT BOSTON. measure ever passed Congress during my connection with thai body that caused me so much grief and mortification. It was passed by a few friends joining the whole host of the enemy. I have heard much of the motives of that act. The persona] motives of those that passed the act were, I doubt Dot, pure; and all public men are supposed to act from pure motives. Bui if by motives are meant the objects proposed by the act itself, and expressed in it, then I say, if those be the motives alluded to, they arc worse than the act itself. The principle was bad, the measure was bad, the conse- quences were had. Every circumstance, as well as every line of the act itself, shows that the design was to impose upon legis- lation a restraint that the Constitution had not imposed; to insert in the Con- stitution a new prohibitory clause, pro- viding that, after the year 1842, no rev- enue should be collected except according to an absurd horizontal system, and none exceeding twenty per cent. It was then pressed through under the great emergency of the public necessities. But 1 may now recur to what I then said, namely, that its principle was false and dangerous, and that, when its time came, it would rack and convulse our system. 1 said we should not get rid of it with- out throes and spasms. Has not this I..-, mi as predicted? We have felt the spasms and throes of this convulsion; hut we have at last gone through them, and begin to breathe again. It is some- thing that that act is at last got rid of; and the present tariff is deserving in this, that it is specific and discriminat- ing, that it holds to common sense, and rejects ami discards the principles of the compromise act. I hope for ever. Another great and principal object of tic- revolution of 1840 was a restoration of the currency. Our troubles did not begin with want of money in the treas- ury, or under the sapping and mining operation of the compromise act. They an- of earlier date. The trouble ami distress of the country began with the curt-' nr,/ in 1833, and broke out with new severity in 1837. Other causes of difficulty have since arisen, hut the first great shock was a shock on the cur- rency; and from the effect of this the country is not yet relieved. I hope the late act may yield competent revenue, and am sure it will do much for protec- tion. But until you provide a better currency, so that you may have a uni- versal one, of equal and general value throughout the land, I am hard to be persuaded that w r e shall see the day of our former prosperity. Currency, ac- credited currency, and easy and cheap internal exchanges, — until these, things be obtained, depend upon it, the coun- try will find no adequate relief. And now, fellow-citizens, I will say a word or two on the history of the trans- actions on tins subject. At the special session of Congress, the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Ewing, arranged a plan for a national hank. That plan was founded upon the idea of a large capital, furnished mainly by private subscrip- tions, and it included branches for local discounts. I need not advert, Gentle- men, to the circumstances under which this scheme was drawn up, and received, as it did, the approbation of the Presi- dent and Cabinet, as the best thing that could be done. I need not remind you, that he whom we had all agreed should hold the second place in the government had been called to the head of it. I need not say that he held opinions wholly different from mine on the sub- jects which now came before us. But those opinions were fixed, and therefore it was thought the part of wisdom and prudence not to see how strong a case might be made against the President, but to get along as well as we might. With such views, Mr. Ewing presented his plan to Congress. As most persons will remember, the clause allowing the hank to establish branches provided that those branches might be placed in any Mate which should give its consent. I have no idea that there is any necessity for such a restriction. 1 believe Con- gress has the power to establish the l. ranches without, as well as with, the consent of the Mate-. But that clause, at m08t, was theoretical. I never could find anybody who could show any praor RECEPTION AT BOS ["ON 491 fcical mischief resulting Erom it. Its Opponents wenl upon the theory, wliicli ] do Dot exactly accord with, thai hi omission to exercise a power, in any case, amounts to a surrender of that power. At any rate, it was the best thing that could be done ; and its rejec- tion was the commencement of the dis- astrous dissensions between the Presi- dent and Congress. Gentlemen, it was exceedingly doubt- ful at the time when that plan was prepared whether the capital would he subscribed. But we did what we could about it. We asked the opinion of the leading merchants of the principal com- mercial cities. They were invited to Washington to confer with us. They expressed doubts whether the bank could be put into operation, but they expressed hopes also, and they pledged themselves to do the best they could to advance it. And as the commercial interests were in its favor, as the administration was new and fresh and popular, and the people were desirous to have something done, a great earnestness was felt that thai bill should be tried. It was sent to the Senate at the Sen- ate's request, and by the Senate it was rejected. Another bill was reported in the Senate, without the provision requir- ing the consent of the States to branches, was discussed for six weeks or two months, and then could not pass even a "Whig Senate. Here was the origin of distrust, disunion, and resentment. I will not pursue the unhappy narra- tive of the latter part of the session of 1811. Men had begun to grow excited and angry and resentful. I expressed the opinion, at an early period, to all those to whom [was entitled to speak, that it would be a great deal better to forbear further action at present. That opinion, as expressed to the two Whig Senators from Massachusetts, is before the public. I wished Congress to ui\e time for consultation to take place, for harmony to he restored; because I looked for no good, except from the united and harmonious action of all the branches of the Whig government. I suppose that counsel was not good, certainly it v.i not followed. I need id add the eminent . This brings as, a* far as concerns the questions ol currency, to the la I ■ of Congress. Barh in thai session the Secretary of the Tree arj senl in a plan of an exchequer. Ii met with little favor in either House, and therefore it is necessarj for me, Gentlemen, let tin- whole burden fall on other-, to say that it had my hearty, sincere, and entire approbation. Gentlemen, I hopethat I have not manifested through my public life a very overweening confidence in my own judgment, or a very unreasonable unwillingness to accepl the views of others. But there are -,,ine BubjectS "li which I feel entitled to pay some reaped to my own opinion. The subjeel of cur- rency. Gentlemen, has been the -tudy of my life. Thirty years ago, a little be- fore my entrance into the House of Rep- resentatives, the questions connected with a mixed currency, involving the proper relation of paper to specie, and the proper means of restricting an cessive issue of paper, came to be dis- cussed by the most acute and well-disci- plined understandings in England in Parliament. At thai time, during the suspension of specie payments by the bank, when paper was fifteen per cenl below par, Mr. Vansittarl had presented his celebrated resolution, declaring that a bank-note was still worth the value expressed on its face; that the bank- note had not depreciated, bul thai the price of bullion had risen. Lord Liver- pool and Lord Castlereagh espoused this view, as we know, and it was opposed by the close reasoning of Huskisson, the powerful logic of Horner, and the prac- tical sagacity and common sense of Al- exander Baring, now Lord Ashburton. The study of those debates made me a bullionist. They convinced me thai paper could noi circulate safely in any country, any longer than it was imme- diately redeemable at the pit E its Coming into Congress the nexl year, or the nexl bul one after, and finding the finances of the country in a mosl deplorable condition, I then and ever after devoted myself, in preference 4!'-J RECEPTION AT BOSTON. to all other public topics, to the consid- eration of the questions relating to them. I believe I have read every thing of value that has heen published since on those questions, on either side of the Atlantic. I have studied by close obser- vation the laws of papei currency, as they have exhibited themselves in this ami in other countries, from 1811 down td the present time. I have expressed in\ opinions a1 various times in Con- gress, and some of the predici ions' which I have made have not been altogether falsified by subsequent events. I must therefore be permitted, ( ientlenien, with- out yielding to any flippant newspaper paragraph, or to the hasty ebullitions of debate in a public assembly, to say, that I believe the plan for an exchequer, as presented to Congress at its last session, is the best measure, the only measure tor the ado] it ion of Congress and the trial of the people. I am ready to stake my reputation upon it, and that is all that I have to stake. I am ready to stake my reputation, that, if this Whig Congress will take that measure and give it a fair trial, within three years it will be admitted by the whole American people to be tin' most beneficial measure of any sort ever adopted in this country, the Constitution only excepted. I mean that they should take it as it was when it came from the Cabinet, not as it looked when the committees of Congress had laid their hands upon it. For when the committees of Congress hail struck out the proviso respecting exchange, it was not worth a rush; it was not worth the parchment it would 1 ngrossed upon. The great desire of this country is a general currency, a facility of exchange; a currency which shall In- tie- same for you and for fche people of Alabama and Louisiana, and a Bystera of exchange which shall equal- ize credit between them and you. with tie' rapidity ami facility with which steam conveys men ami merchandise. That is what tin- country wants, what you want: ami you have not got it. Vou have not gol it, you cannot get it, l.iit by some adequate provision of gov- ernment. Exchange, ready exchange, that will enable a man to turn his New Orleans means into money to-day, (as we have had in better times millions a year exchanged, at only three quarters of one per cent,) is what is wanted. How are we to obtain this? A Bank of the United States founded on a pri- vate subscription is out of the question. That is an obsolete idea. The country ami the condition of things have changed. Suppose that a hank were chartered with a capital of fifty millions, to he raised by private subscription. Would it not be out of all possibility to find the moneyV AYho would subscribe? What would you get for shares? And as for the local discount, do you wish it? Do you, in State Street, wish that the na- tion should send millions of untaxed hanking capital hither to increase your discounts? What, then, shall we do? People who are waiting for power to make a Bank of the United States may as well post] tone all attempts to benefit the country to the incoming of the Jews. What, then, shall we do? Let us turn to this plan of the exchequer, brought forward last year. It was as- sailed from all quarters. One gentle- man did say, I believe, that by some possibility some good might come out of it, but in general it nut with a different opposition from every different class. Some said it would be a perfectly life- less machine. — that it was no system at all, — that it would do nothing, for good or evil; others thought that it had a great deal too much vitality, admit- ting that it would answer the purpose perfectly well for which it was designed, hut fearing that it would increase the executive power: thus making it at once King Log and King Serpent. One party called it a ridiculous imbecility; the other, a dangerous giant, that might subvert the Constitution. These varied arguments, contradicting, if not refut- ing, one another, convinced me of one thing at least, — that the hill would not 1»' adopted, nor even temperately and candidlj considered. Ami it was not. In a manner quite unusual, it was dis- cussed, assailed, denounced, before it i:r.< i.i- ii< «\ at BOSTON. 493 was allowed to take bhe course of refer- ence and examination. Tin' difficulties we meet in carrying out oar system of constitutional govern- ment are indeed extraordinary. The Constitution was intended as an instru- ment of great i>< >lit ii-:tl good; but we sometimes bo dispute its meaning, that we cat t use it at all. < me man will not have a bank, without the power of local discount, against the consent of khe Slates; Eor that, he insists, would break the Constitution. Another will not have a bank with Buch a power, be- cause he thinks that would break the Constitution. A third will not have an exchequer, with authority to deal in exchangee, because that would increase executive influence, and so might break the Constitution. And between them all, we are like the boatman who, in the midst of rocks and currents and whirl- pools, will not pull one stroke for safety, lest he break his oar. Are we now look- ing for the time when we can charter a United States Hank with a large private subscription? When will that be? When confidence is restored. Are we, then, to do nothing to save the vessel from sinking, till the chances of the winds and waves have landed us on the shore? He is more sanguine than I am, who thinks that the time will soon come when the Whigs have more power to work effectually for the good of the country than they now have. The voice of patriotism calls upon them not to postpone, but to act at this moment, at the very next session; to make the best of their means, and to try. You say that the administration is responsible; why not, then, try the plan it has rec- ommended. If it fails, let the President bear the responsibility. If you will not try this plan, why not propose some- thing else? Gentlemen, in speaking of events that have happened, I ought to say, and will, since I am making a full and free < 1- munication, that there is no one of my age, ami 1 am no longer very young, who has written or spoken more against the abuse and indiscreet use of the veto power than I have. And there is no one whose opinions upon thi> subject are less changed. I presume it is uni- versally known, that I have ad. against the us,, of the veto power on ever) occasion when it has been used since 1 have been in the ( labinet. Hut 1 am, nevertheless, not willing to join those who seem moo- desirous to make out a case against tie- President, than of Berving their country to the extent of their ability, vetoes notwithstanding. 1 ndeed, at the close of tin- ,\t i a session, tlie received doctrine of many seemed to be, that they would undertake nothing until they could amend the Constitution so as to do away with this power. Tins was mere mockery. If we were dow reforming the Constitution, we might wish for some, 1 do not say what, guards and restraints upon this power more than the Constitution at presi nt con- tains; but no convention would recom- mend striking it out altogether. II not the people of New York lately amended their constitution, so as to re- quire, in certain Legislative action, \ of two thirds? and is not this same re- striction in daily use in the national House of Representatives it-elf. in the case of suspension of the rules? This constitutional power, therefore, is no greater a restraint than this body im- poses on itself. Hut it is utterly hope- less to look for such an amendment ; who expects to live to see its day'.' And to give up all practical efforts, and to go on with a general idea that the Consti- tution must lie amended before any thin-- can be done, was. I will not say trifling, but treating the greal necessities of the [ pie as of quite too little impor- tance. This Congress accomplished, in this regard, nothing for the people. The exchequer plan which was submitted to it will ai mpliab some of the objects "t the people, and es] tally the Whig | pie. I am confident of it; I know it. When a mechanic makes a tool, an axe, a saw. or a plane, and knows that the temper i- good and the parts are well proportioned, he knows that it will an- swer its purpose. And I know that this plan will answer its purpose. There are other objects which ought 494 RECEPTION AT BOSTON. not to be neglected, among which is one | of Buch importance thai 1 will not now pass it by; 1 mean, the mortifying state of the public credit of this country at this time. 1 caunot help thinking, that if the statesmen of a former age were among us, if Washington wen' here, if John Adams, ami Hamilton, and Madi- son were here, they would be deeply concerned and soberly thoughtful aboul the pnsent state of the public credit of the country. In the position I fill, it becomes my duty to read, generally with pleasure, but sometimes with pain, com- munications from our public agents abroad. It is distressing to hear them speak of their distress at what they see and hear of the scorn and contumely with which the American character and American credit are treated abroad. Why, at this very time, we have a loan in the market, which, at the present rate of money and credit, ought to com- mand in Europe one hundred and twen- ty-five per cent. Can we sell a dollar of it? And how is it with the credit of our own Commonwealth? Docs it not find itself affected in its credit by the general state of the credit of the coun- try ? Is there nobody ready to make a movement in this matter ? Is there not a man in our councils large enough, comprehensive enough in his views, to undertake at least to present this case before the American people, and thus do something to restore the public char- acter for morals and honesty? There are in the country some men who are indiscreet enough to talk of repudiation, — to advise their fellow- citizens to repudiak public debt. Does repudiation pay a debt? Does it dis- chavge the debtor? Can it so modify a debt that it shall not, be always binding, in law as well as in morals? No, Gen- tlemen; repudiation does nothing but add a soil of disrepute to acknowledged inability, it is our duty, so far as is in our power, to rouse the public feeling on the subject; to maintain and aS8erl the universal principles of law and jus- tice, and the importance of preserving public faith and credit. People say that the intelligent capitalists of Europe ought to distinguish between the United States government and the State gov- ernments. So they ought ; but, Gen- tlemen, what does all this amount to? Does not the general government com- prise the same people wdio make up the State governments? May not these Europeans ask us how long it may be before the national councils will repudi- ate public obligations? The doctrine of repudiation lias in- flicted upon us a stain which we ought to feel worse than a wound; and the time has come when every man ought to address himself soberly and seriously to the correction of this great existing evil. I do not undertake to say what the Con- stitution allows Congress to do in the premises. I will only say, that if that great fund of the public domain prop- erly and in equity belongs, as is main- tained, to the States themselves, there are some means, by regular and consti- tutional laws, to enable and induce the States to save their own credit and the credit of the country. Gentlemen, I have detained you much too long. I have wished to say, that, in my judgment, there remain certain important objects to engage our public and private attention, in the national affairs of the country. These are, the settlement of the remaining questions between ourselves and England; the great questions relating to the reciproci- ty principle; those relating to colonial trade; the most absorbing questions of the currency, and those relating to the great subject of the restoration of the national character and the public faith; these are all objects to which I am will- ing to devote myself, both in public and in private life. I do not expect that much of public service remains to be done by me; but 1 am ready, for the promotion of these objects, to act with sober men of any party, and of all parties. 1 am ready to act with men who are free from that great danger that surrounds all men of all parties, — the danger that patriot- ism itself, warmed ami heated in party contests, will run into partisanship. I believe that, anion-' the sober men of this country, there is a growing desire RECEPTION AT BOSTON 495 for more moderation of party feeling more predominance of purely public considerations, more honest and genera] union of well-meaning men of all Bides to uphold the institutions of the country and carry them forward. '" the purauii of these objed i, in P UD )w llt " or in a private station, I am willing to perform the part I to "" '■ : "" 1 '" give them, with beartj good- will and zealous effort, all that ma; main to me of strength ;m OF DECEMBER, 1843, AT THE PUBLIC DINNER OF THE NEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF NEW YOKE, IN COMMEMO- RATION OF THE LANDING OF THE PILGRIMS. [The groat Pilgrim festival was cele- brated on the 22d of December, 1843, by the New England Society of New York, with uncommon spirit and success. A commem- orative oration was delivered in the morn- ing by Hon. Rufus Choate, in a style of eloquence rarely equalled. The public dinner of the Society, at the Astor House, at which M. II. (Irinnell, Esq. presided, was attended by a very large company, composed of the members of the Society and their invited guests. Several appro- priate toasts having been given and re- sponded to by tlie distinguished individuals present, George Griswohl, Esq. rose to offer one in honor of Mr. Webster. After a few remarks complimentary to that gen- tleman, in reference to his services in refut- ing the doctrine of nullification and in averting the danger of war by the treaty of Washington, Mr. Griswold gave the following toasl : — " Daniel Webster, — the gift of New England to hi> country, his whole country, and nothing but his country." This was received with great applause, and on rising to respond to it Mr. Webster was greeted with nine enthusiastic cheers, and the most hearty and prolonged appro- bation. When silence was restored, he spoke as follow-. | Mi:. President:- — I have a grate- ful duty to perforin in acknowledging the kindness of the sentiment thus ex- pressed towards me. And yet I must ( ieut lemen, that I rise upon this occasion under a consciousness thai I may probably disappoint highly raised. too highly raised expectations. In the tes of t his evening, and in the scene of this day, my pari is an humble one. I can enter into no competition with the fresher geniuses of those more eloquent gentle- men, learned and reverend, who have addressed this Society. I may perform, however, the humbler, but sometimes useful, duty of contrast, by adding the dark ground of the picture, which shall serve to bring out the more brilliant colors. 1 must receive, Gentlemen, the senti- ment proposed by the worthy and dis- tinguished citizen of New York before me, as intended to convey the idea that, as a citizen of New England, as a son, a child, a creation of New England, I may be yet supposed to entertain, in some degree, that enlarged view of my duty as a citizen of the United States and as a public man, which may. in some sniall measure, commend me to the regard of the wliole country. While I am free to confess. Gentlemen, that there is no compliment of which 1 am more desirous to be thought worthy, I will add, thai a compliment of that kind could have proceeded from no source more agreeable to my own feelings than from the gentleman who has proposed it, — an eminent merchant, the member of a body of eminenl merchants, known throughout the world Eor their intelli- gence and enterprise. I the more espe- cially feel this, Gentlemen, because, whether I view the present state of things or recur to the history of the past, TIIK LANDING AT PLY.NMl I II 197 I can in neither case be ignorant how much thai profession, and its distin- guished members, from an early day of our history, have contributed to make the country what it is, and the govern- ment what it is. Gentlemen, the free nature of oui institutions, and the popular form of those governments which have come down to us from the Rock of Plymouth, give scope to intelligence, to talent, en- terprise, and public spirit, from all classes making up the great body of the community. And the country has re- ceived benefit in all its history and in all its exigencies, of the most eminent and striking character, from persons of the class to which my friend before me be- longs. Who will ever forget that the first name signed to our ever-memorable and ever-glorious Declaration of Inde- pendence is the name of John Hancock, a merchant of Boston? Who will ever forget that, in the most disastrous days of the Revolution, when the treasury of the country was bankrupt, with unpaid navies and starving armies, it was a mer- chant, — Robert Morris of Philadelphia, — who, by a noble sacrifice of his own fortune, as well as by the exercise of his great financial abilities, sustained and supported the wise men of the country in council, and the brave men of the coun- try in the field of battle? Nor are there wanting more recent instances. I have the pleasure to see near me, and near my friend who proposed this sentiment, the son of an eminent merchant of New England (Mr. Goodhue), an early mem- ber of the Senate of the United States, always consulted, always respected, in whatever belonged to the duty and the means of putting in operation the finan- cial and commercial system of the coun- try; and this mention of the father of my friend brings to my mind the mem- pry of his great colleague, the early associate of Hamilton and of Ames, trusted and beloved by Washington, consulted on all occasions connected with the administration of the finances, the establishment of the treasury depart- ment, the imposition of the first rates of duty, and with every thing that belonged t" the commercial system of the l fnited States, I • I abol . of IVfassachusetts. 1 will take this occasion b I len- tlemen, thai there u no truth better developed and established in the hi of the I rnited States, from the forma- tion of the < !onstitution t" the pre ent ti , than this, -that the mercantile classes, the greal commercial masses of the country, whose affairs conned them strongly with every State in the Union and with all the nations of the eai th, whose business and profession give a sort of nationality to their character, — thai no class of men among us, from the beginning, have Bhown a stronger and firmer devotion to whatsoever has been designed, or to whatever ha- tended, to preserve the onion of these States and the stability of the free government un- der which we live. The Constitution of the United States, in regard to the vari- ous municipal regulations and local in- terests, has left the States individual, disconnected, isolated. It has 1,-ft them their own codes of criminal law; it has left them their own system of municipal regulations. But there was one great, interest, one great concern, which, from the very nature of the case, was no longer to be left under the regulations of the then thirteen, afterwards twenty, and now twenty-six states, but was com- mitted, necessarily committed, to the care, the protection, and the regulation of one government: and this was that great unit, as it has been called, the commerce of the United States. There is no commerce of New York, no com- merce of Massachusetts, noi f Geoi none of Alabama or Louisiana. All and singular, in the aggregate and in all its parts, is the commerce of the United States, regulated at home by a uniform system of laws under the authority of the general government, and protected abroad under the flag of our govern- ment, the glorious /.' Pluribus Unum, and guarded, if need be, by the power of the genera] governmenl all over the world. There is. therefore, Gentlemen, nothing more cementing, nothing that makes us more cohesive, nothing thai 32 •!!•> THE LANDING AT PLYMOUTH. more repels all tendencies to separation and dismemberment, than this great, this common. I may say this overwhelm- in- int. rot of one commerce, one gen- eral system of trade and navigation, one everj \\ here and with every nation of the globe. There is no flag of any partic- ular American State seen in the Pacific seas, or in the Baltic, or in the Indian Ocean. Who knows, or who hears, there of your proud State, or of my proud State? Who knows, or who hears. of any thing, at the extremest north or south, or at the antipodes, — in the re- motest regions of the Eastern or West- ern Sea. —who ever hears, or knows, of any thing hut an American ship, or of any American enterprise of a commercial character that does not bear the impres- sion of the American Union with it? It would be a presumption of which I cannot he guilty, Gentlemen, for me tn imagine for a moment, that, among the gifts which New England has made to our common country, I am any thing more than one of the most inconsidera- ble. I readily bring to mind the great nun. not only with whom 1 have met, lmt those of the generation before me, who now sleep with their fathers, distin- guished in the Revolution, distinguished in the formation of the Constitution and in the early administration of the gov- ernment, always and everywhere dis- tinguished ; and I shrink in just and conscious humiliation before their es- tablished character and established re- nown; and all that 1 venture to say, ami all that I venture to hope may he thought true, in the sentiment pro- posed, is, that, so far as mind and purpose, so far as intention and will, an- concerned, I may be found among those who are capable of embracing the whole country of which they are mem- bers in a proper, comprehensive, and patriotic regard. We all know thai the objects which are nearest are the objects which are dearesl ; family affections, neighborhood affections, social rela- tions, these in truth are nearest and dearesl to us all ; but whosoever shall be able rightly to adjust the gradu- ation of his affections, and to love his friends and his neighbors, and his coun- try, as he ought to love them, merits the commendation pronounced by the philo- sophic poet upon him "Qui didicit patriae quid debeat, et quid ainicis." Gentlemen, it has been my fortune, in the little part which I have acted in public life, for good or for evil to the community, to be connected entirely with that government which, within the limits of constitutional power, exercises jurisdiction over all the States and all the people. My friend at the end of the table on my left has spoken pleasantly to us to-night of the reputed miracles of tutelar saints. In a sober sense, in a sense of deep conviction, I say that the emergence of this country from British domination, and its union under its present form of government beneath the general Constitution of the coun- try, if not a miracle, is, 1 do not say the most, but one of the most fortu- nate, the most admirable, the most aus- picious occurrences, which have ever fallen to the lot of man. Circumstances have wrought out for us a state of things which, in other times and other regions, philosophy has dreamed of, and theory has proposed, and speculation has sug- gested, but which man has never been able to accomplish. I mean the govern- ment of a great nation over a vastly extended portion of the surface of the earth, by 7neans of local institutions for local purposes, and general institutions for general purposes. I know of nothing in the history of the world, notwithstand- ing t lie great league of Grecian states, notwithstanding the success of the lio- niaii system, (and certainly there is no exception to the remark in modern his- tory,) — I know of nothing so suitable on the whole for the great interests of a great people spread over a large portion of the globe, as the provision of local Legislation for Local and municipal pur- poses, with, not a confederacy, nor a loose binding together of separate parts, but a limited, positive general government for positive general purposes, over the whole. We may derive eminent proofs of this truth from the past and the pres- TIIK LANDING AT l'l.VNKaiH. 499 ent. What Bee we to-day in the agita- tions on the other side of tin- Atlantic? I speak of them, of course without BX« pressing any opinion on questions of politics in a foreign country ; but 1 speak of them as an occurrence which shows the great expediency, the utility, I may say the necessity, of local Legis- lation. If, in a country on the other side of the water (Ireland), there be some who desire a severance of one part of the empire from another, under a proposition of repeal, there are others who propose a continuance of the ex- isting relation under a federative sys- tem: and what is this? Xo more, and no less, than an approximation to that system under which we live, which for local, municipal purposes shall have a local legislature, and for general pur- poses a general legislature. This becomes the more important when we consider that the Tinted States stretch over so many degrees of latitude, — that they embrace such a variety of climate, — that various conditions and relations of society naturally call for dif- ferent laws and regulations. Let me ask whether the legislature of Xew York could wisely pass laws for the govern- ment of Louisiana, or whether the legis- lature of Louisiana could wisely pass laws for Pennsylvania or Xew York? Everybody will say, "Xo." And yet the interests of Xew York and Pennsyl- vania and Louisiana, in whatever con- cerns their relations between themselves and their general relations with all the states of the world, are found to he per- fectly well provided for, and adjusted with perfect congruity, by committing these general interests to one common government, the result of popular gen- eral elections among them all. I confess, Gentlemen, that having been, as I have said, in my humble career in public life, employed in that portion of the public service which is connected with the general government, I have contemplated, as the greal ob- ject of every proceeding, not only the particular henefit of the moment, or the exigency of the occasion, but the preser- vation of this system ; for I do consider it bo much the result of circumstances, and that so much of it is due to for- tunate concurrence, as well a^ to the :■ -its of the great men acting upon thos sessions, — that it i- an experi- ment of such remarkable and renowned success, — that be is s fool or a mad- man who would wish to trj that experi- ment a second time. I see to day, and we all sec. that the descendants of the Puri- tans who Landed upon the Rocs of Ply- mouth; the followers of Raleigh, who settled Virginia and North Carolina; be who Lives where the truncheon of em- pire, bo to speak, was home by Smith; the inhabitants of Georgia; he who tied under the auspices of France at the mouth of the Mississippi; the Swede on the Delaware, the Quaker of Pennsyl- vania, — all find, at this day, their com- mon interest, their common protection, their common glory, under the united government, which leaves them all, nevertheless, in the administration of their own municipal and local affairs, to he Frenchmen, or Swedes, or (Quak- ers, or whatever they choose. And when one considers that this system of \ ernment, I will not say has produced, because God and nature and circum- stances have had an agency in it. — but when it is considered that this system has not prevented, but has rather en- couraged, the growth of the people of this country from three millions, on the glorious 4th of July, 177'i. to seventeen millions now, who is there that will upon this hemisphere, — nay. who La there that will stand up in any hemi- sphere, who is there in any part of the world, that will say that the great ex- periment of a united republic has failed in America y And yet 1 know, Gentle- men, I feel, that this united system is held together by Btrong tendencies to union, at the same time that it i- kept from too much leaning tow aid consoli- dation by a Strong tendency in the eral States to support each its own power and consideration, in the physi- cal world it is said, that •■ \ll nature's difference keep* all nature's peace," and there is in the political world this 500 THE LANDING AT PLYMOUTH. same harmonious difference, this regu- lar play of the positive and negative powers, (if I may so say,) which, at least for one glorious half-century, has kepi us as we have been kept, and made ns what we are. Hut, Gentlemen, I must not allow my- self to pursue this topic. It is a senti- ment so commonly repeated by me upon all public occasions, and upon all pri- vate occasions, and everywhere, that I forbear to dwell upon it now. It is the union of these States, it is the system of government under which we live, be- neath the Constitution of the United States, happily framed, wisely adopted, successfully administered for fifty years, — it is mainly this. I say, that gives us ] lower at home and credit abroad. And, for one, I never stop to consider the power or wealth or greatness of a State. I tell you, Mr. Chairman, I care nothing for your Empire State as such. Dela- ware and Rhode Island are as high in my regard as New York. In popula- tion, in power, in the government over us, you have a greater share. You would have the same share if you were divided into forty States. It is not, therefore, as a State sovereignty, it is only because New York is a vast por- tion of the whole American people, that I regard this State, as I always shall regard her, as respectable and honora- ble But among State sovereignties there is no preference; there is nothing- high and nothing low; every State is independent and every State is equal. If we depart from this great principle, then are we no longer one people; but we are tin-own bact again upon the Con- federation, and upon that state of things in which the inequality of the States produced all the evils which befell us in times past, and a thousand ill-adjusted and jarring interests. Mr. President, I wish, then, without pursuing these thoughts, without espe- cially attempting to proline.' any fervid impression by dwelling upon them, to take thie occasion to answer my friend who lias proposed the sentiment, and to )•■ pond to it l.\ Baying, that \\1 vex would serve his country in this our day, with whatever degree of talent, great or small, it may have pleased the Almighty Power to give him, he cannot serve it, he will not serve it, unless he be able, at least, to extend his political designs, purposes, and objects, till they shall comprehend the whole country of which he is a servant. Sir, 1 must say a word in connection with that event which we have assem- bled to commemorate. It has seemed fit to the dwellers in New York, New- Englanders by birth or descent, to form this society. They have formed it for the relief of the poor and distressed, and for the purpose of commemorating annually the great event of the settle- ment of the country from which they spring. It would be great presumption in me to go back to the scene of that settlement, or to attempt to exhibit it in any colors, after the exhibition made to-day; yet it is an event that in all time since, and in all time to come, and more in times to come than in times past, must stand out in great and striking characteristics to the ad- miration of the world. The sun's re- turn to his winter solstice, in 10:20, is the epoch from which he dates his first acquaintance with the small people, now one of the happiest, and destined to be one of the greatest, that his rays fall upon; and his annual visitation, from that day to this, to our frozen region, has enabled him to see that progress, process, was the characteristic of that small people. He has seen them from a handful, that one of his beams coming through a key-hole might illuminate, spread over a hemisphere which he can- not enlighten under the slightest eclipse. Nor, though this globe should revolve round him for tens of hundreds of thou- sands of years, will he see such another incipient colonization upon any part of this attendant upon his mighty orb. What else he may see in those other planets which revolve around him we cannot tell. ;it least until we have tried the fifty-fool telescope which Lord Rosse is preparing for that purpose. There is not, Gentlemen, and we may as well admit it, in any history of the THE LANDING AT via M<»i til 501 past, another epocb from which bo many great events have taken a turn; events which, while important to us, are equally important to the country from whence we came. The settlement of Plymouth — concurring, 1 always wish to be un- derstood, \\ it U that of Virginia was the settlement of New England by colonies of Old England. Now, Gentlemen, take these twoideasand run out the thoughts suggested by both. What has been, and what is to be, Old England ? What has been, what is, and what maybe, in the providence of God, New England, with her neighbors and associates 1 1 would not dwell, Gentlemen, with any particu- lar emphasis upon the sentiment, which I nevertheless entertain, with respect to the great diversity in the races of men. I do not know how far in that respect I might not encroach on those mysteries of Providence which, while I adore, I may not comprehend; but it does seem to me to be very remarkable, that we may go back to the time when New England, or those who founded it, were subtracted from Old England ; and both Old England and New England went on, nevertheless, in their mighty career of progress and power. Let me begin with Xew England for a moment. What has resulted, embrac- ing, as I say, the nearly contempora- neous settlement of Virginia, — what has resulted from the planting upon this continent of two or three slender colo- nies from the mother country? Gentle- men, the great epitaph commemorative of the character and the worth, the discoveries and glory, of Columbus, was, that he had given a new world to the crowns of Castile and Aragon. Gentlemen, this is a great mistake. It does not come up at all to the great merits of Columbus. He gave the territory of the southern hemisphere to the crowns of Castile and Aragon ; but as a place for the plantat i< >u of colonies, as a place for the habitation of men, as a place to which laws and relig- ion, and manners and science, were to be transferred, as a place in which the crea- tures of Cod should multiply and rill the earth, under friendly skies and with relig- ious hearts, he gave it to the whole world, he gave it to universal man! From this seminal principle, and from a handful, a hundred Baints, blessed "f < rod and honored of men, landed on the short Plymouth and elsewhere along the coast, united, as I have said already more than once, in the process of time, with the tlement al Jamestovi n, has Bprung this great people of which we are a portion. I do nol reckon myself ai ig quite the oldest of the land, and ye( it bo happens that very recent l\ I recurred to an exulting speech or oration of my own, iu which I Bpoke of my country as con- sisting of nine millions of people. I could hardly persuade myself thai within the short time which had elapsed that epoch our population had doubled; and that at the present moment there does exist most unquestionably as great a probability of its continued progress, in the same ratio, as has ever ex. in any previous time. I do not know whose imagination is fertile enough, I do not know whose conjectures, I may almost say, are wild enough to tell what may be the progress of wealth and popu- lation in the United States in half a century to come. All we know is, here is a people of from seventeen to twenty millions, intelligent, educated, freehold- ers, freemen, republicans, possessed of all the means of modem improvement, modern science, arts, literature, with the world before them! There is nothing to check them till they touch the Bhores of the Pacific, and then, they are so much accustomed to water, that that's a facil- ity, and no obstruction ! So much, Gentlemen, for this branch of the English race; but what has hap- pened, meanwhile, to England herself since the period of the departure of the Puritans from the coast of Lincolnshire, from the English Boston? (ientleinen, in .-.peaking of the progress of English power, of English dominion and author- ity, from that period to the present, I shall be understood, of course ther entering into any defence or an, accusa- tion of the policy which has conducted her to her present Btate. A.S to the jus- tice of her wars, the necessity of her conquests, the propriety of those acts by 502 THE LANDING AT PLYMOUTH. which she has taken possession of so greal a portion of the globe, it is not the business of the present occasion to in- quire. Neque teneo, neque refello. But I speak of them, or intend to speak of them, as facts of the most extraordinary character, unequalled in the history of any nation on the globe, and the conse- quences of which may and must reach through a thousand generations. The Puritans left England in the reign of James the First. England herself had then become somewhat settled and es- tablished in the Protestant faith, and in tlif quiet enjoyment of property, by the previous energetic, long, and prosperous reign of Elizabeth. Her successor was dames the Sixth of Scotland, now become James the First of England; and here was a union of the crowns, but not of the kingdoms, — a very important distinction. Ireland was held by a military power, and one cannot but see that at that day, whatever may be true or untrue in more recent periods of her history, Ireland was held by England by the two great potencies, the power of the sword and the power of confiscation. In other respects, England was nothing like the England which we now behold. Her foreign possessions were quite inconsid- erable. She had some hold on the West India Islands; she had Acadia, or Nova Scotia, which King James granted, by wholesale, for the endowment of the knights whom he created by hundreds. And what has been her progress ? Did Bhe then possess Gibraltar, the key to the Mediterranean ? Did she possess a port in the Mediterranean? Was Malta hers? WCie the Ionian Islands hers? Was the southern extremity of Africa, was the (ape of Good Hope, hers? Were the whole of her vast possessions in India hers ? Washer greal Australian empire hers ? While that branch of her population which followed the western Btar, and under its guidance committed itself to the duty of settling, fertilizing, and peopling an unknown wilderness in the West, 'Acre pursuing their destinies, other causes, providential doubtless, were Leading English power eastward and southward, in consequence and by means of her naval prowess, and the extent of her commerce, until in our day we have seen that within the Mediterra- nean, on the western coast and at the southern extremity of Africa, in Arabia, in hither India and farther India, she has a population ten times as great as that of the British Isles two centuries ago. And recently, as we have wit- nessed, — I will not say with how much truth and justice, policy or impolicy, I do not speak at all to the morality of the action, I only speak to the fact, — she has found admission into China, and has carried the Christian religion and the Protestant faith to the doors of three hundred millions of people. It has been said that whosoever would see the Eastern world before it turns into a Western world must make his visit soon, because steamboats and om- nibuses, commerce, and all the arts of Europe, are extending themselves from Egypt to Suez, from Suez to the Indian seas, and from the Indian seas all over the explored regions of the still farther East. Now, Gentlemen, I do not know what practical views or what practical results mav take place from this great expan- sion of the pow r er of the two branches of Old England. It is not for me to sav- I only can see, that on this continent all is to be Anglo-American from Plymouth Rock to the Pacific seas, from the north pole to California. That is certain ; and in the Eastern world, I only see that you can hardly place a finger on a map of the world and be an inch from an Eng- lish settlement. Gentlemen, if there be any thing in the supremacy of races, the experiment now in progress will develop it. If there be any truth in the idea, that those who issued from the great Caucasian fountain, and spread over Europe, are to react on India and on Asia, and to act on the whole Western world, it may not be for US, nor our children, nor our grandchildren, to see it, but it will be for our descendants of some generation to see the extent of that progress and dominion of the favored races. For myself, I believe there is no limit fit to be assigned to it by the human THE LANDING AT PLYMOUTH. 503 mind, because I Bridal work everywhere, on both sides of the Atlantic, under various tenuis and degrees of restriction on the one hand, and under various degrees of motive and stimulus on 1 1 1 * * other hand, in these branches of a com- mon race, the great principle of (he free- dom of human thought, and the respecta- bility of individual character. I find everywhere an elevation of the character of man as man, an elevation of the in- dividual as a component part of society. I find everywhere a rebuke of the idea, that the many are made for the few, or that government is any thing but an agency for mankind. And I care not beneath what zone, frozen, temperate. or torrid; I care not of what complexion, ■white or brown; I care not under what circumstances of climate or cultivation, — if I can find a race of men on an inhabi- table spot of earth whose general senti- ment it is, and whose general feeling it is, that government is made for man, — man, as a religious, moral, and social being, — and not man for government, there I know that I shall find prosperity and happiness. Gentlemen, I forbear from these re- marks. I recur with pleasure to the sentiment which I expressed at the com- mencement of my observations. I re- peat the gratification which I feel at having been referred to on this occasion by a distinguished member of the mer- cantile profession; and without detain- ing you further, I beg to offer as a senti- ment, — " The mercantile interest of the United States, always and everywhere friendly to a united and free government." Mr. Webster sat down amid loud and re- peated applause ; and immediately after, at the request of the President, rose and said : — Gentlemen, I have the permission of the President to call your attention to the circumstance that a distinguished foreigner is at the table to-night, Mr. Aldham; a gentleman, I am happy to say, of my own hard-working profes- sion, and a member of the English Par- liament from the great city of Leeds. A traveller in the United States, in the most unostentatious manner, he has d us the honor, ;tt the request of the Society, to i„- present to-night. I i ise, Gentlemen, to propose his health He is of that ( Hd England of which I have 1 n Bpeaking; of that Old England with whom we had Borne fifty years ago rather a serious family quarrel, ter- minated in a manner, I believe, not particularly disadvantage i to either of us. He will find in this, his first visit to our country, many thing! remind him of his o\\ rj home, and the pursuits in which he is engaged in thai home. If he will go into out courts of law, he will find those who practise there referring to the same hooks of authority, acknowledging the same principles, discussing the same nub] which he left under discussion in W minster Hall. If he go into our public assemblies, he will find the >a rules of procedure — possibly not always quite as regularly observed — as he left he- hind him in that house of Parliament of which he is a member. At any rate, he will find us a branch of that great family to which he himself belongs, and I doubt not that, in his sojourn among us, in the acquaintances he may form, the notions he may naturally imbibe, he will go home to his own country BO what better satisfied with what he has seen and learned on this side of t In- Atlantic, and somewhat more convinced of the great importance to both coun- tries of preserving the peace that at present subsists between them. I pro- pose to you, Gentlemen, the health of Mr. Aldham. Mr. Aldham rose and said:—" Mr. Presi- dent and Gentlemen of the New England Society, I little expected to be called on to take a part in the proceedings of this eren- ing ; but 1 am very bappy in being afforded an opportunity of expressing my grateful acknou ledgmentS for the verv cordial I tality which yon have extended to me, and the very agreeable intellectual treat with which I have been favored this evening. It was with no little astonishment that I listened to the terms in which 1 »as intro- duced to you by a gentleman whom I so much honor (Mr. Webster). The kind and friendly terms in which he referred to DM f>0-4 THE LANDING AT PLYMOUTH. were, indeed, quite unmerited by their hum- ble object, ami nothing, indeed, could have been more inappropriate. It is impossible for any stranger to witness such a scene as this without the greatest interest. It is the celebration of an event which already Mauds recorded as one of the most inter- esting and momentous occurrences which ever took place in the annals of our race. And an Englishman especially cannot but experience the deepest emotion as he re- gards such a scene. Every thing which he sees, every emblem employed in this cele- bration, man j' of the topics introduced, re- mind him most impressively of that com- munity of ancestry which exists between his own countrymen and that great race which peoples this continent, and which, in enterprise, ingenuity, and commercial ac- tivity, — in all the elements indeed of a great and prosperous nation, — is certainly not exceeded, perhaps not equalled, by any other nation on the face of the globe. Gen- tlemen, I again thank you for the honor you have done me, and conclude by ex- pressing the hope that the event may con- tinue to be celebrated in the manner which its importance and interest merit." Mr. Aldham sat down amid great ap- plause. THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY AND THE REUGI01 - INSTRUCTION OF THE Y<>( \<;. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT AT WASHINGTON, ON THB 20th OE FEBRUARY, 1844, IN THE GIRARD WILL CASE. [The heirs at law of the late Stephen Girard, of Philadelphia, instituted a suit in October, LS-'lti, in the Cireuit Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting as a court of equity, to try the question of the validity of his will. In April, 1841, the cause came on for hearing in the Circuit Court, and was decided in favor of the will. The case was carried by appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, at Washington, where it was argued by General Jones and Mr. Webster for the com- plainants and appellants, and by Messrs. Binney and Sergeant for the validity of the will. The following speech was made by Mr. Webster in the course of the trial at Wash- ington. A deep impression was produced upon the public mind by those portions of it which enforced the intimate connection of the Christian ministry with the business of instruction, and the necessity of found- ing education on a religious basis. This impression resulted in the follow- ing correspondence : — " IVashinr/ton, February 13, 1844. "Sir, — Enclosed is a copy of certain pro- ceedings of a meeting held in reference to your argument in the Supreme Court of the "case arising out of the late Mr. Girard's will. In communicating to you the request contained in tin' Becond resolution, we take leave to express our earnest hope that you may find it conven- ient to comply with that request " We are, Sir, with high consideration, yours, very respectfully, P. R. Fbndall, Horace Stfingfellow, Joshua X Dakfokth, r. r. gurlet, William Ruggles, Joel S. Bacon, Thomas Sewall, Wiixiaji B. Howards, "Hon. Daniel Weustek." Committee. "At a meeting of a number of citizens, be- longing to different religious denominatio Washington and its vicinity, convened to con- sider the expediency of procuring the publica- tion of so much of Mr. Webster's argument before the Supreme Court of the United Si in the case of Francois 1\ Vi'lal ei "/.. A hints, r. The Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of Philadelphia, and Stephen Girard's Execn tors, as relates to that part of Mr. Girard's will which excludes ministers of religion from anv station or duty in the college directed by the testator to be founded, and denies to them the right of visiting said college; tl bjecl of tin- meeting having been stated by Professor Sewall in a few appropriate remarks, the Hon. Henry L. Ellsworth was elected chairman, and the Lev. Isaac S. Tinaley secretary. " Whereupon it was, on motion, unanimously resolved, " 1st. That, in the opini f this meeting, the powerful and eloquent argument of Mr. Webster, on the before-mentioned clause of Mr. Girard's will, demonstrates tin- vital importance of ( Ihristiaiiity to tin- Buccess of our free institu- tions, and its necessityas the basis of all useful moral education: and that tin- general diffusion of that argument among tie- | | le of the United States is a matter of deep public interest. "2d. That a committee of eight persons the several Christian denominations represented in this meeting, I"- appointed to wait on Mr. Webster, and, in the name and on behalf of this meeting, to request him to prepare for the press the portion referred to of his argument in the Girard case; and. should he consent to do so. to cause it to he speedily published and ex- tensively disseminated. "The following gentlemen were appointed the committee under tin- Becond resolution: Philip R Fendall, Esq., Rev. II - mg- fellow, Rev. Joshua N. Danforth, Rev. R Ran- dolph Gurley, Professor William Ruggles, Rev. President J. S. Bacon, Doctor Tl 8 wall, Rev. William B. Edwards. •• The meeting then adjourned. "II I l . jw< 'in it. Chairman. "iBAAl 8. Ii\-m, S then- iasuch a diversity of opinion amongst them, I de- sire to keep the tender minds of the or- phans who are to derive advantage from this bequest free from the excitement which clashing doctrines and sectarian con- troversy are bo apt to produce; my desire is, that all the instructors and teachers in the college shall take pains to instil into the minds of the scholars tht purest princi- ples of' morality, so that on their entrance into active life they may, from inclination and habit, evince benevolence towards their fellow-creatures, and a love of truth, sobri>ty, and industry, adopting at the same time such religious tenets as their matured reason may enable them to prefer." The testator having, after the date of his will, bought a house in Penn Town- ship, with forty-five acres of land, h>- made a codicil, by which he directed the college to be buill on this estate, in- stead of the square mentioned in the will, and the whole establishment to be made thereon, just as if he had in his will devoted the estate to that purj The city government has accordingly l n advised thai the whole forty-five acres musl be enclosed with the same high wall as was provided in the will for the Bquare in the city. 1 have now Btated, I believe, all the provisions of the will which are mate- rial to the discussion of thai pari of the case which respects the character of the institution. ;-,.m THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY The first question is, whether this de- vise ran be sustained, otherwise than as a charity, and by thai special aid and assistance by which courts of equity Bupporl gifts tn charitable uses. [f the devise be a good limitation at law, if it require no exercise of the Favor which is bestowed on privileged testaments, then there is already an end to the question. But I take it that this point is conceded. The devise is void, according to the general rules of law, en account of the uncertainty in the description of those who are intended to receive it > benefits. "Poor white male orphan children" is so loose a description, that no one can bring himself within the terms of the bequest, so as to say that it was made in his favor. No individual can ac- quire any right or interest; nobody, therefore, can come forward as a party, in a court of law, to claim participation in the gift. The bequest must stand, if it stand at all, on the peculiar rules which equitable jurisprudence applies to charities. This is clear. I proceed, there tore, to submit, and most conscientiously to argue, a ques- tion, certainly one of the highest which this court has ever been called upon to consider, and one of the highest, and most important, in my opinion, ever likely to come before it. That question is, whether, in the eye of equitable juris- prudence, this devise be a charity at all. I deny that it is so. I maintain, that neither by judicial decisions nor by cor- rect reasoning on general principles can this devise or bequest be regarded as a charity. This part of the argument is ioi affected by the particular judicial m ni Pennsylvania, or the question of the power of her courts to uphold and administer charitable gifts. The question which 1 now propose respects the inherent, essential, and manifest character of the devise itself. In this respect, I wish to express myself clearly, and to he correct!) and distinctly under- stood. What I bave said I shall stand by, and endeavor to maintain; namely, that in the view of a court of equity this devise is no charity at all. It is no charity, because the plan of education proposed by Mr. Girard is derogatory to the Christian religion; tends to weaken men's reverence for that religion, and their conviction of its authority and im- portance; and therefore, in its general character, tends to mischievous, and not to useful ends. The proposed school is to be founded on plain and clear principles, and for plain and clear objects, of infidelity. This cannot well be doubted; and a gift, or devise, for such objects, is not a charity, and as such entitled to the well-known favor with which charities are received and upheld by the courts of Christian countries. In the next pdace, the object of this bequest is against the public policy of the State of Pennsylvania, in which State Christianity is declared to be the law of the land. For that reason, therefore, as well as the other, the de- vise ought not to be allowed to take effect. These are the two propositions which it is my purpose to maintain, on this part of the case. This scheme of instruction begins by attempting to attach reproach and odium to the whole clergy of the coun- try. It places a brand, a stigma, on every individual member of the profes- sion, without an exception. No min- ister of the Gospel, of any denomina- tion, is to be allowed to come within the grounds belonging to this school, on any occasion, or for any purpose what- ever. They are all rigorously excluded, as if their mere presence might cause pestilence. We have beard it said that Mr. Girard, by this will, distributed his charity without distinction of sect or party. However that may be. Sir, he certainly has dealt out opprobrium to the whole profession of the clergy, with- out regard to sect or party. By this will, no minister of the Gos- pel of any sect or denomination what- ever can be authorized or allowed to hold ;m\ office within the college; and not only that, but no minister or clergy- man of any sect can, for any purpose whatever, enter within the walls that AND THE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION' OK THE YOUNG -,,:■ o arc to surround this college. If a clergyman has a rick nephew, or a sick grandson, In 1 cannot, upon anj pretext, be allowed to visit him within the walls of die college. 'I'll' 1 provision of the will is express and decisive. Still |. - may a clergyman enter to offer consola- tion to the sick, or to unite in prayer with the dying. Now, I will not arraign Mr. Girard or his motives for this. I will not in- quire into Mr. Girard's opinions u] religion. Butlfeel bound to say, the occasion demands that I should say, that this is the most opprobrious, the most insulting and unmerited stigma, that ever was cast, or attempted to be cast, upon the preachers of Christianity, from north to south, from east to west. through the length and breadth of the land, in the history of the country. When have they deserved it? Where have they deserved it? IIow have they deserved it? They are not to be allowed even the ordinary rights of hospitality; not even to be permitted to put their foot over the threshold of this college! Sir, I take it upon myself to say, that in no country in the world, upon either continent, can there be found a body of ministers of the Gospel who perform so much service to man, in such a full spirit of self-denial, under so little en- couragement from government of any kind, and under circumstances almost, always much straitened and often dis- tressed, as the ministers of the Gospel in the United States, of all denomina- tions. They form no part of any estab- lished order of religion; they constitute no hierarchy; they enjoy no peculiar privileges. In some of the States they are even shut out from all participation in the political rights and privileges en- joyed by their fellow-citizens. They enjoy no tithes, no public provision of any kind. Except here and there, in large cities, where a wealthy individual occasionally makes a donation for the support of public worship, what have tiny to depend upon? They have to depend entirely on the voluntary con- tributions of those who hear them. And this body of clergymen has shown, to the honor of their own coun- try and to the astonishment of the hie* rarchies of the < )id World, thai ii is practicable in fie,- governments i" i and su-tain by voluntary contributions alone a body of clergymen, which, for devotedness to their sacred calling, purit} of life and character, for learn- ing, intelligence, piety, and that wis- dom which cometh from above, is in- ferior to none, and superior to mo ' others. I hope that our learned men have done something for the honor of OUT lit- erature abroad. I hope that the courts of justice ami members of the bar of this country have done BOmething to elevate the character of the profession of the law. 1 hope that the discussions above (in Congress) have ome- thing to meliorate the condition of the human race, to secure and extend the great charter of human right8, and to strengthen and advance the great principles of human liberty. Hut I contend that no literary efforts, no ad- judications, no constitutional di- sions, nothing that has been done or said in favor of the great interests of universal man. has done this country more credit, at home and abroad, than the establishment of our body of cli men, their support by voluntary contri- butions, ami the general excellence of their character for pietj and learning. The great truth has thus been pro- claimed and proved, a truth which I be- lieve will in time to come shake all the hierarchies of Europe, that the volun- tary support of such a mini-try. under free institutions, is a practicable idea. And yet every one of these, the Chris- tian ministers of the United States, is by this devise denied tin: privili w hich are at the same time open to the vilesl of our race : every i- shut out from this, I had almost -aid tanctum, but I will not profane that word bj BUch a QSe of it. Did a man ever live that had a for the Christian religion, and yet had no regard for any one of its minis! l>id that system of instruction • exist, which denounced the whole body 510 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY of Christian teachers, and yet called itself a Bystem of Christianity? The learned counsel on the other side see the weak points of this case. They are not blind. They have, with the aid of their great Learning, industry, and research, gone back to the time of Con- stantine, they have searched the history of the Roman emperors, the Dark Ages, and the intervening period, down to the settlement of these colonies; they have explored every nook and corner of relig- ious and Christian history, to find out the various meanings and uses of Chris- tian charity; and yet, with all their skill and all their research, they have not been able to discover any thing which has ever been regarded as a Christian charity, that sets such an opprobrium upon the forehead of all its ministers. If, with all their endeavors, they can find any one thing which has been so regarded, they may have their college, and make the most of it. But the thing does not exist; it never had a being; his- tory does not record it, common sense revolts at it. It certainly is not neces- sary for me to make an ecclesiastical argument in favor of this proposition. The thing is so plain, that it must in- stantly commend itself to your honors. It has been said that Mr. Girard was charitable. I am not now going to con- trovert this. I hope he was. I hope he has found his reward. It has also been asked, " Cannot Mr. Girard be allowed to have his own will, to devise his prop- erty according to his own desire? " Cer- tainly he can, in any legal devise, and the law will sustain him therein. But it is not for him to overturn the law of the land. The law cannot be altered to please Mr. Girard. He found that out, 1 believe, in two <>r three instances in his lifetime. Nor can the law be altered on account of the magnitude and mu- nificence of the bounty. What is the value of that bounty, however great or munificent, which touches the very foun- dations of human society, which touches the very foundations of Christian char- ity, which touches the very foundations of public Law, and the Constitution, and the whole welfare of the BtateV And now, let me ask, What is, in con- templation of law, "a charity"? The word has various significations. In the larger and broader sense, it means the kindly exercise of the social affections, all the good feelings which man enter- tains towards man. Charity is love. This is that charity of which St. Raul speaks, that charity which covereth the sins of men, "that suffereth all things, hopeth all things." In a more popular sense, charity is alms-giving or active benevolence. But the question for your honors to decide here is, What is a charity, or a charitable use, in contemplation of law? To answer this inquiry, we are generally referred to the objects enumerated in the 43d of Elizabeth. The objects enumer- ated in that statute, and others analo- gous to them, are charities in the sense of equitable jurisprudence. There is no doubt that a school of learning is a charity. It is one of those mentioned in the statutes. Such a school of learning as was contemplated by the statutes of Elizabeth is a charity; and all such have borne that name and char- acter to this day. I mean to confine myself to that description of charity, the statute charity, and to apply it to this case alone. The devise before us proposes to es- tablish, as its main object, a school of learning, a college. There are provis- ions, of course, for lodging, clothing, and feeding the pupils, but all this is subsidiary. The great object is the in- struction of the young; although it pro- poses to give the children better food and clothes and lodging, and proposes that the system of education shall be somewhat better than that which is usu- ally provided for the poor and destitute in our public institutions generally. The main object, then, is to establish a school of learning for children, begin- ning with them at a very tender age, and retaining them (namely, from six years to eighteen) till they are on the verge of manhood, when they will have expended more than one third part of the average duration of human life. For if the college takes them at six, and AND THE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE 70UNG. 511 keeps them till they are eighteen, a period of twelve vcars will be passed within its walls; more than a third part of the average of human life. These children, then, are to be taken almosl before they learn their alphabet, and be discharged about the time that men enter on the active business of life. Ai six, many do not know their alphabet. John Wesley did not know a letter till after he was six years old, and his mother then took him on her lap, and taught him his alphabet at a single lesson. There are many parents who think that any attempt to instil the ru- diments of education into the mind of a child at an earlier age, is little better than labor thrown away. The great object, then, which Mr. Girard seemed to have in view, was to take these orphans at this very tender age, and to keep them within his walls until they were entering manhood. And this object I pray your honors steadily to bear in mind. 1 never, in the whole course of my life, listened to any thing with more sincere delight, than to the remarks of my learned friend who opened this cause, on the nature and character of true charity. I agree with every word he said on that subject. I almost envy him his power of expressing so happily what his mind conceives so clearly and correctly. He is right when he speaks of it as an emanation from the Chris- tian religion. He is right when he says that it has its origin in the word of God. He is right when he says that it was unknown throughout all the world till the first dawn of Christianity. He •is right, pre-eminently right, in all this, as he was pre-eminently happy in his power of clothing his thoughts and feel- ings in appropriate forms of speech. And I maintain, that, in any institu- tion for the instruction of youth, where the authority of God is disowned, and the duties of Christianity derided and despised, and its ministers shut out from all participation in its proceed- ings, there can no more be charity, true charity, found to exist, than evil can spring out of the Bible, error out of truth, or hatred and animosity come fot t h from the bosom of perfect No, Sirl No, sir' If charity denies its birth and parentage, if it turns in- fidel to the great doctrines of the < Shris- tian religion, if it turns unbeliever, it is do longer charity ! There is no longer charity , either in a Christian sense or in the sense of jurisprudence; for it separates itself from the fountain od its own creation. There is nothing in the history of the Christian religion; there is nothing in the history of English law, either before or after the Conquest; there can be found no BUch thing B8 a Bchool of in- struction in a Christian land, ir.uu which the Christian religion has been, of intent and purpose, rigorously and opprobriously excluded, and yet such school regarded as a charitable trust or foundation. This is the first instance on record. 1 do not say that there may not be charity schools in which religions instruction is not provided. 1 oeed not go that length, although I take that to be the rule of the English law. Hut what I do say, and repeat, is. that a school for the instruction of the young, which sedulously and reproachfully ex- cludes Christian knowledge, is no char- ity, either on principle or authority, and is not, therefore, entitled to the character of a charity in a court of equity. I have considered this proposi- tion, and am ready to stand by it. 1 will not say that there may not 1m- a charity for instruction, in which there is no positive provision for the Chris- tian religion. But I do say, and do in- sist, that there is no such thing in the history of religion, no such thine in tin- history of human law, as a charit school of instruction for children, from which the Christian religion and Chris- tian teachers are excluded, a- Q] and unworthy intruders. Such a scheme is deprived of that which enters into the \.rv essence of human benevolence, when that benevolence contemplates in- struction, that is to say. religions knowl- edge, connected with human knowl- edge. Il is this w hich causes it t. regarded as a charity: and ly reason uf 512 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY this it is entitled to the special favor of the courts of law. This is the vital question which must be decided by this court. It is vital to the understanding of what the law is. it is vital to the va- lidity of this devise. If this be true, if there can be no charity in that plan of education which opposes Christianity, then that goes far to decide this case. I take it that this court, in looking at this subject, will see the important bearing of this point upon it. The learned counsel said that the State of Pennsylvania was not an infidel State. It is true that she is not an infidel State. She has a Christian origin, a Christian code of laws, a system of legislation founded on noth- ing else, in many of its important bear- ings upon human society, than the belief of the people of Pennsylvania, their firm and sincere belief, in the di- vine authority and great importance of the truths of the Christian religion. And she should the more carefully seek to preserve them pure. Now, let us look at the condition and prospects of these tender children, who are to be submitted to this experiment of instruction without Christianity. In the first place, they are orphans, have no parents to guide or instruct them in the way in which they should go, no father, no religious mother, to lead them to the pure fount of Christianity; they are orphans. If they were only poor, there might be somebody bound by ties of human affection to look after their spirit mil welfare; to see that they im- bibed no erroneous opinions on the sub- ject of religion; that they run into no excessive improprieties of belief as well as conduct. The child would have its father or mother to teach it to lisp the name of its Creator in prayer, or hymn His praise. But in this experimental school of instruction, if the orphans have any friends or connect ions able to looi after their welfare, it shuts them out. It is made the duty of the gov- . mors of i be instil ution, on taking the child, -o to make ..lit the indentures of apprenticeship as to keep him from any after interference in his welfare on the part of guardians or relatives; to keep them from withdrawing him from the school, or interfering with his instruc- tion whilst he is in the school, in any manner whatever. The school or college is to be sur- rounded by high walls; there are to be two gates in these walls, and no more; they are to be of iron within, and iron bound or covered without; thus answer- ing more to the description of a castle than a school-house. The children are to be thus guarded for twelve years in this, I do not mean to say a prison, nor do I mean to say that this is exactly close confinement; but it is much closer confinement than ordinarily is met with, under the rules of any institution at present, and has a resemblance to the monastic institutions of past ages, rath- er than to any school for instruction at this period, at least in this country. All this is to be wit Inn one great en- closure; all that is done for the bodily or mental welfare of the child is to be done within this great wall. It has been said that the children could attend public worship elsewhere. Where is the proof of this'.-' There is no such provision in the devise; there is nothing said about it in any part of Mr. Gi- rard's will; and I shall show presently that any such thing would be just as ad- verse to Mr. Girard's whole scheme, as it would be that the doctrines of Chris- tianity should be preached within the walls of the college. These children, then, are taken before they know the alphabet. They are kept til! the period of early manhood, and then sent out into the world to enter upon its business and affairs. By this time the character will have been stamped. For if there is any truth in the Bible, if there is any truth in those oracles which soar above all human au- thority, or if anything be established as a genera] fact, by the experience of mankind, in this first third of human life the character is formed. And what sort of a character is likely to be made b\ this process, this experimental sys- tem of instruction? I have lead the two provisions of Mr. AND THE Ki:i,li;iols INSTRUCTION OF THE Vhim; H8 Girard's will in relation to Qua feature of his school. The firs! excludes the Christian religion and all its ministers from its walls. The second explains the whole principles upon which he pur- poses to conducl his BChool. It was to try an experiment in education, never before known to the Christian world. It had been recommended often enough among those who did not belong to the Christian world. But it was never known to exist, never adopted by any- body even professing a connection with Christianity. And I cannot do better, in order to show the tendency and ob- ject of this institution, than to read from a paper by Bishop White, which lias been referred to by the other side In order to a right understanding of what was Mr. Girard's real intention and original design, we have only to read carefully the words of the clause I have referred to. He enjoins that no ministers of religion, of any sects, shall be allowed to enter his college, on any pretence whatever. Now, it is obvious, that by sects he means Christian sects. Any of the followers of Voltaire or D'Alembert may have admission into this school whenever they please, be- cause they are not usually spoken of as " sects." The doors are to be opened to the opposers and revilers of Chris- tianity, in every form and shape, and shut to its supporters. While the voice of the upholders of Christianity is never to be heard within the walls, the voices of those who impugn Christianity may be raised high and loud, till they shake the marble roof of the building. It is no less derogatory thus to exclude the one, and admit the other, than it would be to make a positive provision and all the necessary arrangements for lectures and lessons and teachers, for all the de- tails of the doctrines of infidelity. It is equally derogatory, it is the same in principle, thus to shut the door to one party, and open the door to the other. We must reason as to the probable results of such a system according to natural consequences. They say, on the other side, that infidel teachers will not be admitted in this school. How :;;; do they knew that ? What La the in- evitable tendency of inch an education as is here prescribed? What is likely to occur '{ The. court cannot sup] that the trustees will act in opposition to the directions of the w ill. It' they accepl the trust, thej must fulfil it. and carry out the details of Mr. Girard's plan. Now, what is likely to be the eflVct of thi> Bystem on the minds of these children, thus bt'l BOlely to its perni- cious influence, w ith do one to care tor their spiritual welfare in this world or the next? They are to Deleft entirely to the tender mercies of those who will try upon them thi> experiment of moral philosophy or philosophical morality. .Morality without sentiment; benevo- lence towards man, without a sense of responsibility towards Cud; the duties of this life performed, without any reference to the life which is to come; this is Mr. Girard's theory of useful education. Half of these poor children may die before the term of their education ex- pires. Still, those who survive must be brought up imbued fully with the inevitable tendencies of the system. It has been said that there may be lay preachers among them. Lay preachers! This is ridiculous enough in a country of Christianity and relig- ion. [Here some one handed Mr. Webster a note.] A friend informs iii>' that four of the principal religious * in this country, the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Bap- tists, allow no lay preachers; and these four constitute a large majority of the religions and Christian portion of the people of the United Mates. And, besides, lay preaching would be jusl as adverse to Mr. Girard's original object anil whole pi. ui as professional preach- ing, provided it should be Christianity which should be preached. It is plain, as plain as language can be made, that he did not intend allow the minds of these children to be troubled about religion of any kind, whilst they were within the cull. And why? lie himself assigns the 514 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY reason. Because of the difficulty and trouble, he says, that might arise from the multitude of sects, and creeds, and teachers, and the various clashing doc- trines and tenets advanced by the differ- ent preachers of Christianity. There- fore his desire as to these orphans is, that their minds should be kept free from all bias of any kind in favor of any description of Christian creed, till they arrived at manhood, and should have left the walls of his school. Now, are not laymen equally sectarian in their views with clergymen? And would it not be just as easy to prevent sectarian doctrines from being preached by a clergyman, as from being taught by a layman? It is idle, therefore, to speak of lay preaching. Mr. Sergeant here rose, and said that they on their side had not uttered one word about lay preaching. It was lay teaching they spoke of. Well, I would just as soon take it that way as the other, teaching as preaching. Is not the teaching of lay- men as sectarian as the preaching of clergymen? What is the difference between unlettered laymen and lettered clergymen in this respect ? Every one knows that laymen are as violent con- In iversialists as clergymen, and the less informed the more violent. So this, while it is a little more ridiculous, is equally obnoxious. According to my experience, a layman is just as likely to launch out into sectarian views, and to advance clashing doctrines and violent, bigoted prejudices, as a professional preacher, and even more so. Every objection to professional religious in- struction applies with still greater force to lay teaching. As in other cases, so in this, the greatest degree of candor is usually found accompanying the greatest degree of knowledge. Nothing is more apt to be positive and dogmatical than ignorance. But there is no provision in any part of Mr. Girard's will for the introduction of any lay teaching on religious matters whatever. The children are to get their religion when they Leave his school, and they are to have nothing to do with re- ligion before they do leave it. They are then to choose their religious opin- ions, and not before. Mis. Binney. "Choose their tenets" is the expression. Tenets are opinions, I believe. The mass of one's religious tenets makes up one's religion. Now, it is evident that Mr Girard meant to found a school of morals, without any reference to, or connection with, religion. But, after all, there is nothing original in this plan of his. It has its origin in a deistical source, but not from the highest school of infidelity. Not from Bolingbroke, or Shaftesbury, or Gibbon; not even from Voltaire or D'Alembert. It is from two persons who were probably known to Mr. (ii- rard in the early part of his life; it is from Mr. Thomas Paine and Mr. Vol- ney. Mr. Thomas Paine, in his " Age of Reason," says: " Let us devise means to establish schools of instruction, that we may banish the ignorance that the ancient regime of kings and priests has spread among the people. Let us prop- agate morality, unfettered by super- stition." Mr. Binney. What do you get that from ■? The same place that Mr. Girard got this provision of his will from, Paine's " Age of Reason." The same phraseol- ogy in effect is here. Paine disguised his real meaning, it is true. He said: "Let us devise means to establish, schools to propagate morality, unfet- tered by superstition." Mr. Girard, who had no disguise about him, uses plain language to express the same meaning. In Mr. Girard's view, relig* ion is just that thing which Mr. Paine calls superstition. " Let us establish schools of morality," said he, " un- fettered by religious tenets. Let us give these children a system of pure morals before they adopt any religion." The ancient regime of which l'aine spoke as obnoxious was that of kings and priests. That was the popular way he had of making any thing oh- AND THE KKI.KJIOl'S INS 1 IM < I I < » N OF THE Y"l 515 noxious that he wished to destroy. Now, if be liad merely wished to rid of the dogmas which he says were established by kings and priests, if he had no desire to abolish the Christian religion itself, he could have thus ex- pressed himself: " Let as rid ourselves of the errors of kings and priests, and plan! morality on the plain text of the Christian religion, with the simplesl forms of religious worship." I do not intend to leave this part of the cause, however, without a still more distinct statement of the objections to this scheme of instruction. This is due, 1 think, to the subject and to the occasion; and I trust 1 shall not be considered presumptuous, or as trench- ing upon the duties which properly be- long to another profession. But I deem it due to the cause of Christianity to take up the notions of this scheme of Mr. Girard, and show how mistaken is the idea of calling it a charity. In the first place, then, I say, this scheme is derogatory to Christianity, because it rejects Christianity from the education of youth, by rejecting its teachers, by re- jecting the ordinary agencies of instilling the Christian religion into the minds of the young. I do not say that, in or- der to make this a charity, there should be a positive provision for the teaching of Christianity, although, as I have already observed, I take that to be the rule in an English court of equity. But I need not, in this case, claim the whole bene- fit of that rule. I say it is derogatory, because there is a positive rejection of Christianity; because it rejects the ordi- nary means and agencies of Christianity. He who rejects the ordinary means of accomplishing an end, means to defeat that end itself, or else he has no mean- ing. And this is true, although the means originally be means of human appointment, and not attaching to or resting on any higher authority. For example, if the New Testament had contained a set of principles of morality and religion, without refer- ence to the means by which those prin- ciples were to be established, and if in the course of time a system of in> bad sprung up, become identified with the history of the world, become general, sanctioned bj continued use and custom, then he who Bhould reject those means would design to reject, and would reject, that morality and religion themaeh This would be true in a case where the end rested on divine authority, and human agency devised and used the means. But if the means them* be of divine authority also, then the rejection of them is a direct rejection of that authority. NOW, I suppose there j, I i . . t i I 1 1 1 _T ill the New Testament more clearly estab- lished by the Author of Christianity, than the appointment of a Christ ministry. The world was to be evan- gelized, was to be brought out of dark- ness into light, by the influences of the Christian religion, spread and propa- gated by the instrumentality of man. A Christian ministry was therefore ap- pointed by the Author of the Christian religion himself, and it Btands on the same authority as any other part of his religion. When the lost sheep .of the house of Israel were to be brought to the knowledge of Christianity, the dis- ciples were commanded to go forth into all the cities, and to preach "that the kingdom of heaven is at hand." It was added, that whosoever would not receive them, uor hear their words, it should be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha than for them. And ai't>-r his resurrection, in the appointment of the great mission to the whole human race, the Author of Christianity com- manded his disciples that they Bhould "go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature." This v. one of his last command- : and one his last promises was the assurance, •• Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world!" 1 Bay, there- fore, there i- nothing sel forth more au- thentically in the New Testament than the* appointment of a Christian minis- try; and he who dors not believe this does not ami cannot believe the rest It is true that Christian ministers, in this age of the world, are selected in ditt' rent ways ami different modes by 516 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY different sects and denominations. But there are, - 1 ill, ministers of all sects and denominations. Why should we shut our eyes to thewljole history of Chris- tianity? Is it not the preaching of ministers of the Gospel that has evan- gelized the more civilized part of the world? Why do we at this day enjoy the lights and benefits of Christianity ourselves? Do we not owe it to the instrumentality of the Christian min- istry? The ministers of Christianity, departing from Asia Minor, traversing Asia. Africa, and Europe, to Iceland, Greenland, and the poles of the earth, Buffering all things, enduring all things, hoping all things, raising men every- where from the ignorance of idol wor- ship to the knowledge of the true God, and everywhere bringing life and im- mortality to light through the Gospel, have only been acting in obedience to the Divine instruction; they were com- manded to go forth, and they have gone forth, and they still go forth. They have sought, and they still seek, to be able to preach the Gospel to every crea- ture under the whole heaven. And where was Christianity ever received, where were its truths ever poured into the human heart, where did its waters, springing up into everlasting life, ever burst forth, except in the track of a Christian ministry'.'' Did we ever hear of an instance, does history record an instance, of any part of the globe Chris- tianized by lav preachers, or " lay teach- ers "? And, descending from kingdoms and empires to cities and countries, to parishes and villages, do we not all know, that wherever Christianity has been carried, ami wherever it has been taught, by human agency, that agency was the agency of ministers of the Gos- pel? It is all idle, and a mockery, to pretend that any man has respect for the Christian religion who yet derides, reproaches, and stigmatizes all its min- isters and teachers. It is all idle, it is a mockery, ami an insult to common Bense, t" maintain that a Bchool for the instruction of youth, from which Chris- tian instruction by Christian teachers is sedulously and rigorously shut out, is not deistical and infidel both in its purpose and in its tendency. I insist, therefore, that this plan of education is, in this respect, derogatory to Christian- ity, in opposition to it, and calculated either to subvert or to supersede it. In the next place, this scheme of edu- cation is derogatory to Christianity, be- cause it proceeds upon the presumption that the Christian religion is not the only true foundation, or any necessary foundation, of morals. The ground taken is, that religion is not necessary to morality, that benevolence may he insured by habit, and that all the vir- tues may flourish, and be safely left to the chance of flourishing, without touch- ing the waters of the living spring of religious responsibility. With him who thinks thus, what can be the value of the Christian revelation? So the Chris- tian world has not thought; for by that Christian world, throughout its broadest extent, it has been, and is, held as a fundamental truth, that religion is the only solid basis of morals, and that moral instruction not resting on this basis is only a building upon sand. And at what age of the Christian era have those who professed to teach the Christian religion, or to believe in its authority and importance, not insisted on the absolute necessity of inculcating its principles and its precepts upon the minds of the young? In what age, by what sect, where, when, by whom, has religious truth been excluded from the education of youth? Nowhere; never. Everywhere, and at all times, it has been, and is, regarded as essential. It is of the essence, the vitality, of useful instruction. From all this Mr. Girard disstMits. Ilis plan denies the necessity and the propriety of religious instruc- tion as a part of the education of youth. lie dissents, not only from all the senti* ments of Christian mankind, from all common conviction, and from the re- sults of all experience, hut he dissents also from still higher authority, the word of God itself. My learned friend has referred, with propriety, to one of the pommands of the Decalogue; but there i> another, a first commandment, AND THE RELIGIOUS DESTRUCTION OF THE IO\ 517 and thai is a precept i » f religion, and it is in subordination to this that the mora] precepts of the Decalogue are proclaimed. This first great command- ment teaches man thai there is one, and only one, great First Cause, one, and only one, proper object ol human wor- ship. This is the great, the ever fresh, the overflowing fountain of all revealed truth. Without it. human life is a des- ert, of no known termination on any side, but shut in on all sides by a dark and impenetrable horizon. Without the light of this truth, man knows nothing of his origin, and nothing of his end. And when the Decalogue was delivered to the Jews, with this great announce- ment and command at its head, what said the inspired lawgiver'/ that it should be kept from children ? that it should be reserved as a communication fit only for mature age ? Far, far otherwise. " And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thy heart. And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shall talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." There is an authority still more im- posing and awful. When little children were brought into the presence of the Son of God, his disciples proposed to send them away; but he said, " Suffer little children to come unto me." Unto me; he did not send them first for les- sons in morals to the schools of the Pharisees, or to the unbelieving Saddu- cees, nor to read the precepts and les- sons phylacteried on the garments of the Jewish priesthood; he said nothing of different creeds or clashing doctrines; but he opened at once to the youthful mind the everlasting fountain of living waters, the only source of eternal truths: " Suffer little children to come unto me." And that injunction is of perpet- ual obligation. It addresses itself to- day with the same earnestness and the same authority which attended its first utterance to the Christian world. It is of force everywhere, and at all times. It extends to the ends of the earth, it will reach t«> the end <>f time, al- and everywhere sounding in bh< men, with an emphasis which no repeti- tion can weaken, and with an authority which nothing can supersede: " S little children to come unto me." And not only my heart and my pidg- in. nt, my belief and my conscience, in- struct me that this great precept should be obeyd. hut the idea i- bo aacred, the Bolemn thoughts connected with it so crowd upon me. ii i- .,, utt.-i l\ at va- riance with this system of philosophical morality which we have beard advocated, that I Btand ami speak here in fear of being influenced by my feelings to ex- ceed the proper line of my professional duty. Go thy way at tins time, is the language of philosophical morality, and I will send for thee at a more convenient season. This is the language of Mr. Girard in his win. i n this there is neither religion nor reason. The earliest and the most urgent in- tellectual want of human nature is the knowledge of its origin, its duty, ami its destiny. '•'Whence am I. what am I. and what is before me?" Thi- is the cry of the human soul, BO Boon as it raises its contemplation above visible, material tilings. When an intellectual being finds him- self on this earth, as BOOH as the facul- ties of reason operate, one of the first inquiries of his mind is. •• shall I be here always?" ••Shall I live here for ever?" And reasoning from what he sees daily occurring bo others, he learns to a certainty that his Btate of being must one day be changed. I do not mean to deny, that it may he true that he is created with this consciousn but whether it be consciousness, or the result of his reasoning faculties, man soon learns that he must die. And of all sentient beings, he alone. BO tar as we can jud.ev. attains to this know led,'.'. lli> .Maker has made him Capabl learning this. Before he knows his ori- gin and dotiny. he knows that he is to die. Then comes that most urgent and solemn demand for light that ever pro- C led, or can proceed, from the pro- found and anxious broodiugs of the f.lN THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY human soul. It is stated, with wonder- ful force and beauty, in that incom- parable composition, the book of Job: •■ For there is hope of a tree, if it be cm down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease; that, through the scent of water, it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant. But if a man die, skull he live again?" And that question nothing hut God, and the religion of God, can solve. Religion does solve it, and teaches every man that he is to live again, and that the duties of this life have reference to the life which is to come. And hence, since the introduc- tion of Christianity, it has been the duty, as it has been the effort, of the great and the good, to sanctify human knowledge, to bring it to the fount, and to baptize learning into Christianity; to gather up all its productions, its earliest and its latest, its blossoms and its fruits, and lay them all upon the altar of relig- ion and virtue. Another important point involved in this question is, What becomes of the Christian Sabbath, in a school thus es- tablished? I do not mean to say that this stands exactly on the same authori- ty as the Christian religion, but I mean to say that the observance of the Sab- bath is a part of Christianity in all its forms. All Christians admit the observ- ance of the Sabbath. All admit that there is a Lord's day, although there may be a difference in the belief as to which is the right day to be observed. Now, I say that in this institution, under .Mr. Girard's scheme, the ordinary ob- servance of the Sabbath could not take place, because the ordinary means of observing it are excluded. I know that I .-hall be told here, also, that lay teach- would come in again; and I say again, in reply, that, where the ordinary means of attaining an end are excluded, the intention is to exclude the end itself. There can 1"' no Sabbath in this college, there can be no religious observance of the Lord's day; for there are do means ioi attaining thai end. It will be said, thai the children would be permitted to "lit. There is nothing seen of this permission in Mr. Girard's will. And I say again, that it would be just as much opposed to Mr. Girard's whole scheme to allow these children to go out and attend places of public worship on the Sabbath day, as it would be to have ministers of religion to preach to them within the walls; because, if they go out to hear preaching, they will hear just as much about religious controversies, and clashing doctrines, and more, than if appointed preachers officiated in the college. His object, as he states, was to keep their minds free from all religious doctrines and sects, and he would just as much defeat his ends by sending them out as by having religious instruction within. Where, then, are these little children to go? Where can they go to learn the truth, to reverence the Sab- bath? They are far from their friends, they have no one to accompany them to any place of worship, no one to show them the right from the wrong course; their minds must be kept clear from all bias on the subject, and they are just as far from the ordinary observance of the Sabbath as if there were no Sabbath day at all. And where there is no observ- ance of the Christian Sabbath there will of course be no public worship of God. In connection with this subject I will observe, that there has been recently held a large convention of clergymen and laymen in Columbus, Ohio, to lead the minds of the Christian public to the importance of a more particular observ- ance of the Christian Sabbath; and I will read, as part of my argument, an extract from their address, which bears with peculiar force upon this case. "It is alike obvious that the Sabbath exerts its salutary power by making the population acquainted with the being, per- fections, and laws of God ; with our rela- tions to him as his creatures, and our obli- gations to him as rational, accountable subjects, and with our character as sinners, for whom his mercy has provided a Saviour; under whose governmenl we live to be re- strained from sin and reconciled to (!oincc the com- mencement of the Christian era, and has done more good than could be accom- plished by a thousand marble palace-. because it was charity mingled with true benevolence, given in the tear, tie- love, the Bervice, ami honor of God; because it was charity, that had its origin in re- ligious feeling; because it was a gift to the honor of ( iod | Cases have come before the court.-, ol bequests, in lasl wills, made or given to God, without any 1 v Bpecific direc- tion; and these bequests have been re- garded as creating charitable uses. But can that be truly called a charity which flies in the face of all the laws of I | i .-I'll THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY and all the usages of Christian man? I arraign no man for mixing up a love of distinction and notoriety with his chari- ties. 1 Maine not Mr. Girard because be desired to raise a Bplendid marble palace in the neighborhood of a beauti- ful city, that should endure for ages, and transmit his name and fame to posterity. lint his school of learning is not to be valued, because it has not the chasten- ing influences of true religion; because it lias m> fragrance of the spirit of Christianity. It is not a charity, for it has not that which gives to a charity for education its chief value. It will, there- fore, soothe the heart of no Christian parent, dying in poverty and distress, that those who owe to him their being may be led, and fed, and clothed by Mr. Girard's bounty, at the expense of being excluded from all the means of religious instruction afforded to other children, and shut up through the most interesting period of their lives in a sem- inary without religion, and with moral sentiments as cold as its own marble walls. I now come to the consideration of the second part of this clause in the will, that is to say, the reasons assigned by Mr. Girard for making these restrictions with regard to the ministers of religion; and I say that these are much more de- rogatory to Christianity than the main provision itself, excluding them. He says that there are such a multitude of sects and such diversity of opinion, that he will exclude all religion and all its ministers, in order to keep tin- minds of the children free from clashing contro- versies. Now, does not this tend to sub- vert all belief in the utility of teaching the Christian religion to youth at all? Certainly, it is a broad and bold denial of Buch utility. To Bay that the evil re- sulting to youth from the differences of sects and creeds overbalances all the benefits which the besl education can give them, what is this but to say that the branches of the tree of religious knowledge are so twisted, and twined, and commingled, and all run BO much into and over each other, that there is therefore no remedy but to lay the axe at the root of the tree itself? It means that, ami nothing less ! Now, if there be any thing more derogatory to the Christian religion than this, I should like to know what it is. In all this we see the attack upon religion itself, made on its ministers, its institutions, and its diversities. And that is the objection urged by all the lower and more vul- gar schools of infidelity throughout the world. In all these schools, called schools of Rationalism in Germany, Socialism in England, and by various other names in various countries which they infest, this is the universal cant. The first step of all these philosophical moralists and regenerators of the human race is to attack the agency through which religion and Christianity are ad- ministered to man. But in this there is nothing new or original. We find the same mode of attack and remark in Paine's "Age of Reason." At page 33G he says: " The Bramin, the follower of Zoroaster, the Jew, the Mahometan, the Church of Rome, the Greek Church, the Protestant Church, split into sev- eral hundred contradictory sectaries, preaching, in some instances, damna- tion against each other, all cry out, ' Our holy religion! ' " We find the same view in Yolney's "Ruins of Empires." Mr. Volney ar- rays in a sort of semicircle the different and conflicting religions of the world. "And first," says he, "surrounded by a group in various fantastic dresses, that confused mixture of violet, red, white, black, and speckled garments, with beads shaved, with tonsures, or with short hairs, with red hats, square bon- nets, pointed mitres, or long beards, is the standard of the Roman Pontiff. On his righi you see the Greek Pontiff, and on the left are the standards of two re- cent chiefs (Luther and Calvin), who, shaking off a yoke that had become ty- rannical, had raised altar against altar in their reform, and w rested half of Europe from the Pope. Behind these are the subaltern sects, subdivided Erom the principal divisions. The Nestorians, Eutychians, Jacobites, Iconoclasts, Ana- AND THE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE fOUNG. 521 baptists, l'ivsi>\ terians, Wickliffites, ' )si- andrians, Manicheans, Pietists, Adam- ites, the Contemplatives, the Quakers, the Weepers, and a hundred others, all of distinct parties, persecuting when strong, tolerant when weak, bating each other in the name of the God of peer. forming BUCfa an exclusive heaven in a religion of universal charity, damning each other to pains without end in a future state, and realizing in this world the imaginary hell of the other." Can it be doubted for an instant thai sentiments like these are derogatory to the Christian religion? And yet on grounds and reasons exactly these, not like these, but exactly these. Mr. Gi- rard founds his excuse for excluding Christianity and its ministers from his school. lie is a tame copyist, and has only raised marble walls to perpetuate and disseminate the principles of Paine and of Volney. It has been said that Mr. Girard was in a difficulty; that he was the judge and disposer of his own property. We have nothing to do with his difficulties. It has been said that he must have done as he did do, because there could be no agreement otherwise. Agreement? among whom? about what? He was at liberty to do what he pleased with his own. He had to consult no one as to what he should do in the mat- ter. And if he had wished to establish such a charity as might obtain the es- pecial favor of the courts of law, he had only to frame it on principles not hos- tile to the religion of the country. But the learned gentleman went even further than this, and to an extent that I regretted; he said that there was as much dispute about the Bible as about any thing else in the world. No, thank God, that is not the case! Mr. Binney. The disputes about the meaning of words and passages; you will admit that? Well, there is a dispute about the translation of certain words; but if tins be true, there is just as much dispute about it out of Mr. Girard's institution as there would be in it. And if this plan is to be advocated and sustained, wh\ does not ever! man keep bis chil- dren from attending all places ol public worship until thej are over eighteen yeai - of age? He says tint a prudent parent keeps his child from the influ oi sectarian doctrines, by which I sup- l«'-.- him io mean those tenets that are opposed to his own. Well, I do not know but what that plan b as Like] make bigots as it i, i,, make any thing else. 1 -rant that tin- mind of youth Should !»• kepi pliant, and free from all undue and erroneous influences ; that it should have as much plaj as u consist- ent with prudence; but put it where it can obtain the elementary principle* religious truth ; at anj rat.-, those broad and general precepts and principles which are admitted by all Christians. But here in this scheme of Mr. Girard, all sects and all creeds are denounced. And would not a prudent father rather send his child where he could gel in- struction under any form of the Chris- tian religion, than where he could none at all? Then' are many instances of institutions, professing one leading creed, educating youths of different sects. The Baptist college in Rhode Island re- ceives and educates youths of all relig- ious sects and all beliefs. The cob all over New England differ in certain minor points of belief, and yet that is held to be no ground for excluding youth with other forms of belief, and other re- ligious views and sentiments. But this objection to the multitude and differences "\ Beets is but the old story, the old infidel argument. It is notorious that there are certain greal religious truths which are admitted and believed by all Christians. All believe in the exist. -nee of a God. All believe in the immortality of the soul. All be- lieve in the responsibility, in another world, for our conduct in this. All be- lieve in the divine authority of tin- New Testament. Dr. Paley says thai a su word from the New Testamenl shuts up the mouth of human questioning, and excludes all human reasoning. And cannot all these greal truths be taught to children without their minds being plexed with clashing doctrines and 522 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY tarian controversies? Most certainly they can. And, to compare secular with relig- ious matters, what would become of the organization of society, what would be- come of man as a social being, in con- nection with the social system, if we applied this mode of reasoning- to him in his social relations? We have a con- stitutional government, about the pow- ers, and limitations, and uses of which there is a vasl amount of differences of belief. Your honors have a body of laws, now before you, in relation to which differences of opinion, almost in- numerable, are daily spread before the courts ; in all these we see clashing doc- t lines and opinions advanced daily, to as great an extent as in the religious world. Apply the reasoning advanced by Mr. Girard to human institutions, and you will tear them all up by the root; as you would inevitably tear all divine institu- tions up by the root, if such reasoning is to prevail. At the meeting of the first Congress there w^as a doubt in the minds of many of the propriety of opening the session with prayer; and the reason as- signed was, as here, the great diversity of opinion and religious belief. At length Mr. Samuel Adams, with his gray hairs hanging about his shoulders, and with an impressive venerableness now seldom to be met with, (I suppose owing to the difference of habits,) rose in that assembly, and, with the air of a perfect Puritan, said that it did not be- come men, professing to be Christian men, who had come together for solemn deliberation in the hour of their extrem- ity, to say that there was so wide a difference in their religious belief, thai they could not, as one man, bow the knee in prayer to the Almighty, whose advice and assistance they Imped to ob- tain. Independent as he was, and an enemy to all prelacy as he was known to I.e. in- moved that the Rev. Mr. Duche, of ili'' Episcopal Church, should address the Throne of ( trace in prayer. And John Adams, in a Letter to his wile, that he never >aw a more iiio\ ing Bpectacle. Mr. Duche" read the Episco- pal service of the Church of England, and then, as if moved by the occasion, he broke out into extemporaneous prayer. And those men, who were then about to resort to force to obtain their rights, were moved to tears ; and floods of tears, Mr. Adams says, ran down the cheeks of the pacific Quakers who formed part of that most interesting assembly. De- pend upon it, where there is a spirit of Christianity, there is a spirit which rises above forms, above ceremonies, in- dependent of sect or creed, and the con- troversies of clashing doctrines. The consolations of religion can never be administered to any of these sick and dying children in this college. It is said, indeed, that a poor, dying child can be carried out beyond the walls of the school. He can be carried out to a hos- telry, or hovel, and there receive those rites of the Christian religion which can- not be performed within those walls, even in his dying hour! Is not all this shocking? What a stricture is it upon this whole scheme ! What an utter con- demnation! A dying youth cannot re- ceive religious solace within this semi- nary of learning! But, it is asked, what could Mr. Gi- rard have done? He could have done, as has been done in Lombardy by the Em- peror of Austria, as my learned friend has informed us, where, on a large scale, the principle is established of teaching the elementary principles of the Chris- tian religion, of enforcing human duties by divine obligations, and carefully ab- staining in all cases from interfering with sects or the inculcation of sectarian doctrines. How have they done in the schools of New England? There, as far as I am acquainted with them, the great elements of Christian truth are taught in every school. The Scriptures are read, their authority taught and en- forced, their evidences explained, and prayers usually offered. The truth is, that those who really value Christianity, and believe in its im- portance, not only to the spiritual wel- fare of man, but to the safety and pros- peritj of human society, rejoice that in its revelations and its teachings there is AM) THE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNG. 523 so much which mounts above contro- versy, and stands on universal acknowl- edgment. While many things about it are disputed or are dark, thej .-till plainly see its foundation, and its main pillars; and they behold in it a sac-red structure, rising up to the heavens. They wish its general principles, and all its great truths, to be spread over the whole eanh. lkit those \vli hare a tendency contrary to it, ami every thing be taught in a mannei ognudng the relation with it, a- far u shall consist with a natural, unforced oi keeping the relation in view. Thus it i* sought to be secured, that, a- the pupil's mind grows stronger, and multiplies il Bources, and he therefore ha- necessarily more power and mean- for what is wrong, then- may hi' lumii sly presented to him, as if celestial eves % i~ii.lv beamed upon him, the most solemn idea- that can en: what is rij^lit. " Such is the discipline meditated fur preparing the subordinate classes to pursue their individual welfare, and act their part a> members of tin- community. • • • " All this is to be taught, in many in- stances directly.in others by reference for confirmation, from the Boly Scriptures, from which authority will also he impress* d, all the while, the principles of religion. And religion, while its grand concern is with the state of the soul towards < rod and < ternal interests, yet takes every principle and rule of morals under its peremptory sanction; making the primary obligation and responsi- bility be towards God, of every thing that is a duty with respect to men. So that, with the subjects of this education, the sen.se of propriety shall he . . the consideration of how tiny ought to he regu- lated in their conduct as a part of the com- munity shall he the recollection that their .Master in heaven dictates the laws of that conduct, and will judicially hold them ame- nable for every part of it. "And is not a discipline thus addressed to the purpose of fixing religious principles in ascendency, as tar as that difficult object is within the power of discipline, and of in- fusing a salutary tincture of them into whatever else is taught, the right wa; bring up citizens faithful to all that de- serves fidelity in the social compact ' . . . "Lay bold on the myriads of juvenile spirits before they have time to grow up, through ignorance, into a reckless hostility to BOcial order: train them to sense and good morals ; inculcate the principl. - , ligion, simply and solemnly, <;,- religion, as a thing directly of divine dictation, and not as it its authority were chiefly in virt . human institutions; let the higher OH ally, make it evident to tin multitude that they are desirous to raise them in value, and promote their happiness; and then, irli.it. r, r the demand- of ill. | 524 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY a body, thus improving in understanding and Bense iif justice, shall come to be, and whatever modification their preponderance may ultimately enforce on the great social arrangements, it will be infallibly certain that there never can be a love of disorder, an insolent anarchy, a prevailing spirit of revenge and devastation. Such a conduct of tlu- ascendent ranks would, in this na- tion at least, secure that, as long as the world lasts, there never would he any formidable commotion, or violent sudden changes. All those modifications of the national economy to which an improving people would aspire, and would deserve to obtain, would be gradually accomplished, in a manner by which no party would be wronged, and all would be the happier." 1 I not only read this for the excellence of its sentiments and their application to the subject, but because they are the results of the profound meditations of a man who is dealing with popular igno- rance. Desirous of, and expecting, a gn-at change in the social system of the Old World, he is anxious to discover that conservative principle by which so- ciety can be kept together when crowns and mitres shall have no more influence. And he says that the only conservative principle must be, and is, religion! the authority of God! his revealed will ! and the influence of the teaching of the ministers of Christianity ! Air. Webster here stated that he would, on Monday, bring forward certain refer- ences and legal points bearing on this view of the case. The court then adjourned. SECOND DAY. The seven judges all took their seats at eleven o'clock, and the court was opened. Mr. Binney observed to the court, that he had omitted to notice, in his argument, that, in regard to the statutes of Uniformity and Toleration in England, whilst the Jew- ish Talmuda tor the propagation of Juda- ism alone were not sustained by those stat- wti -, yet the Jewish Talmuda for the main- tenance "i tin- poor were sustained thereby. And the decisions Bhow that, where a gift had for its object the maintenance and edu- cation of poor Jewish children, the statutes 1 Poster's Essay mi the Evils of Popular i irance, Section IV. sustained the devise. In proof of this he quoted 1 Ambler, by Blunt, p. 228, case of I*.- Costa, \<\ Also, the case of Jacobs v. Gomperte, in the notes. Also, in the notes, 2 Swanston, p. 487, same case of De Costa, &c. Also, 7 Vesey, p. 423, case of .Mo Catto v. Lucardo. Also, Sheppard, p. 107, and Boyle, p. 43. Another case was that of a bequest given to an object abroad, and in the decision the Master of the Rolls considered that relig- ious instruction was not a necessary part of education. See, also, the case of The Attor- ney-General v. The Dean and Canons of Christ Church, Jacobs, p. 485. Mr. Binney then quoted from Noah Web- ster the definition of the word " tenets," to show that Mr. Webster did not give the right definition when he said that " tenets " meant " religion." Mr. Webster then rose and said : — The arguments of my learned friend, may it please your honors, in relation to the Jewish laws as tolerated by the statutes, go to maintain my very propo- sition ; that is, that no school for the in- struction of youth in any system which is in any way derogatory to the Chris- tian religion, or for the teaching of doc- trines that are in any way contrary to the Christian religion, is, or ever was, regarded as a charity by the courts. It is true that the statutes of Toleration re-' garded a devise for the maintenance of poor Jewish children, to give them food and raiment and lodging, as a charity. But a devise for the teaching of the Jew- ish religion to poor children, that should come into the Court of Chancery, would not be regarded as a charity, or entitled to any peculiar privileges from the court. When 1 stated to your honors, in the course of my argument on Saturday, that all denominations of Christians had some mode or provision for the appointment of teachers of Christianity amongst them, I meant to have said something about the Quakers. Although we know that the teachers among them '->>n\f into their office in a somewhat peculiar manner, yet there are preachers ami teachers of Christianity provided iu that peculiar body, not withstanding its objection to the mode of appointing teachers and preachers by other Christian sects. The AND TIIK Kl'.I.KilOUS IXSTKKCTIOH OJ THE FOUNG. 525 place or character of ;i Quaker preacher is an office and ;t] >] >« >i nl m«*tit as will knows as that of a preacher among anj other denomination of Christians. I have heretofore argued to Bhow thai the Christian religion, its genera] prin- ciples, must ever be regarded among as as tin- foundation of civil society ; and I have thus Ear confined my remarks to the tendency and effect of the scheme of Mr. (iirard (if carried out) upon the Christian religion. But I will go far- ther, and say that this school, this scheme or system, in its tendencies and effects, is opposed to all religions, of every kind. 1 will not now enter into a controversy with my Learned friend about the word "tenets." whether it signify opinions or dogmas, or whatever you please. Re- ligions tenets, I take it, and I suppose it will be generally conceded, mean re- ligious opinions; and if a youth has ar- rived at the age of eighteen, and has no religious tenets, it is very plain that he has no religion. I do not care whether you call them dogmas, tenets, or opinions. If the youth does not en- tertain dogmas, tenets, or opinions, or opinions, tenets, or dogmas, on relig- ious subjects, then he has no religion at all. And this strikes at a broader prin- ciple than when you merely look at this school in its effect upon Christianity alone. We will suppose the case of a youth of eighteen, who has just left this school, and has gone through an educa- tion of philosophical morality, precisely in accordance with the views and ex- pressed wishes of the donor. He comes then into the world to choose his relig- ious tenets. The very next day, per- haps, after leaving school, he comes into a court of law to give testimony as a witness. Sir, I protest that by such a system he would be disfranchised, He is asked, " What is your religion'.-' " His reply is. " (), I have not yet chosen any; I am going to look round, and see which suits me best." He is asked, "Are you a Christian?" He replies, " That involves religious tenets, and as yet I have not been allowed to entertain any." Again, "Do you believe in a future state of rewards and punish- ments?" And he answers, ••That in- volves sectarian controversies, which have carefully been kepi from me." •• Do you believe in the existence i ( tod? *' He answers, thai then- are clashing doctrines involved in these things, which he has l d taughl to have nothing to do «i ith ; thai the belief in the existence oi a God, being one of the firsl questions in religion, be is shortly aboul to think of that proposition. Why, Sir, it is \ain to talk aboul the destruc- tive tendency of such a system; to argue upon it is to insult the understanding of every man; it is mere, sheer, low, ril vulgar deism and infidelity!* It opposes all that is in heaven, and all on earth that is worth being OH earth. It de- stroys the connecting link between the creature and the Creator; it opposes that greal system of universal benevolence and goodness that binds man to his Maker. Vb religion till he is remark was almost • trie, ami some one in the court-room in applatu 5:26 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY it\ and government, of society? No, Sir! no, Sir! And here let me turn to the consider- ation of the question, What is an oath ? I I i not mean in the variety of defini- tions that may be given to it as it ex- isted and was practised iii the time of the Romans, but an oath as it exists at present in our courts of law; as it is founded on a degree of consciousness that there is a Power above us that will reward ourvirtues and punish our vices. We all know that the doctrine of the English law is, that in the case of every person who enters court as a witness, be he Christian or Hindoo, there must be a firm conviction on his mind that false- hood or perjury will be punished, either in this world or the next, or he cannot be admitted as a witness. If he has not this belief, he is disfranchised. In proof of this, I refer your honors to the great case of Ormichund against Barker, in Lord Chief Justice Willes's report. There this doctrine is clearly laid down. But in no case is a man allowed to be a wit- ness that has no belief in future rewards and punishments for virtues or vices, nor ought he to be. We hold life, liberty, and property in this country upon a sys- tem of oaths; oaths founded on a relig- ious belief of some sort. And that sys- tem which would strike away the great substratum, destroy the safe possession of life, liberty, and property, destroy all the institutions of civil society, cannot and will not be considered as entitled to the protection of a court of equity. It has been said, on the other side, that there was no teaching against religion or Christianity in this system. I deny it. The whole testament is one bold procla- mation againsl Christianity and religion of every creed. The children are to be brought up in fche principles declared in that testament. Tiny are to learn to be suspicious of Christianity and religion; to keep clear of it, thai their youthful hi ait may not become susceptible of the influences of Christianity or religion in the Blightesi degree. They are to be told and taught that religion is not a matter for the heart or conscience, but for the decision of the cool judgment of mature years; that at that period when the whole Christian world deem it most, desirable to instil the chastening influ- ences of Christianity into the tender and comparatively pure mind and heart of the child, ere the cares and corruptions of the world have reached and seared it, — at that period the child in this col- lege is to be carefully excluded there- from, and to be told that its influence is pernicious and dangerous in the ex- treme. Why, the whole system is a con- stant preaching against Christianity and against religion, and I insist that there is no charity, and can be no charity, in that system of instruction from which Christianity is excluded. I perfectly agree with what my learned friend says in regard to the monasteries of the Old World, as seats of learning to which we are all indebted at the present day. Much of our learning, almost all of our early histories, and a vast amount of literary treasure, were preserved therein and emanated therefrom. But we all know, that although these were emphat- ically receptacles for literature of the highest order, yet they were always con- nected with Christianity, and were al- ways regarded and conducted as relig- ious establishments. Going back as far as the statutes of Henry the Fourth, as early as 140:2, a in the act respecting charities, we find that one hundred years before the Reforma- tion, in Catholic times, in the establish- ment of every charitable institution, there was to be proper provision for re- ligious instruction. Again, after the time of the Reformation, when those monastic institutions were abolished, in the 1st Edw. VI. ch. 14, we find certain chantries abolished, and their funds ap- propriated to the instruction of youth in the grammar schools founded in that reign, which Lord Eldon says extended all over the kingdom. In all these we find provision for religious instruction, the dispensation of the same being by a teacher or preacher. In 2 Swanston, p. 529, the case of the Bedford Charity. Lord Eldon gives a long opinion, in the course of which he says, that in these 1 'J Pickering, p. 4.Xi. AND THE IlKLICIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE fOUNQ. 527 schools care is taken to educate youth in the Christian religion, and in all of them the New Testament is taught, both in Latin and ( Ireek. Here, then, we find that the great and leading provision, both before and after the Reformation, was to conned the knowledge of Chris- tianity with human letters. And it will be always found that a school for in- struction of youth, to possess the privi- leges of B charity, inu-t 1"' pros iih •< 1 with religious instruction. For the decision, that the essent ials of Christianity are part of the common law of the land. I refer your honors to 1 Ver- non, p. '293, where Lord Hale, who can- not be suspected of any bigotry on this subject, says, that to decry religion, and call it a cheat, tends to destroy all re- ligion; and he also declares Christianity to be part of the common law of the land. Mr. X. Dane, in his Abridgment, ch. 219, recognizes the same principle. In 2 Strange, p. 834, case of The King v. Wilson, the judges would not suffer it to be debated that writing against religion generally is an offence at common law. They laid stress upon the word " gener- ally," because there might arise differ- ences of opinion between religious writ- ers on points of doctrine, and so forth. So in Taylor's case, 3 Merivale, p. 405, by the High Court of Chancery, these doctrines were recognized and main- tained. The same doctrine is laid down in 2 Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, p. 95, Evans v. The Chamberlain of London; and in 2 Russell, p. 501, The Attorney- General v. The Earl of Mansfield. There is a case of recent date, which, if the English law is to prevail, would seem conclusive as to the character of this devise. It is the case of The Attor- ney-General v. Cullum, 1 Younge and Collyer's Reports, p. 411. The case was heard and decided in 1812, by Sir Knight I in ice, Vice-Chancellor. The reporter's abstract, or summary, of the decision is this: "Courts of equity, in this COUNTRY, WILL NOT SANCTION ANY SYSTEM OF EDUCATION IX WHICH 1:1 LIGION IS NOT INCLUDED." The charity in question in that case was established in the reign of Edward the Fourth, for the benefit of Hip com- munity and | ■ inhabitants of the tow n of Burj SI . Edmunds. The object the charitj were various: for relief of prisoners, educating and instructing poor people, for f I and raiment tor the aged and impotent, and othei the same kind. There were uses, also, now deemed superstitious, Bucb a- pray- ing for the souls of the dead. In this, and in other respects, tie- charity re- quired re\ ision, to Buil it to the hahits and requirements of modern times; and a scheme was accordingly Bel forth for Buch revision by the master, under tie- direct ion of the cunt . By this Bcheme there were to be schools, and these schools were to 1 losed "ii Sundays, although the Scriptures were to be read daily on other days. This was objected to, and it was insisted, on the other hand, that the masters ami mistr< of the schools should lie inelnhers of the Church of England; that they Bhould, on every Lord's day, give instruction in the doctrines of the Church to (J children whose parents mighl so desire; but that all the scholars Bhould he re- quired to attend public worship every Lord's day in the parish church, or other place of worship, according to t/i> ir respt c- tive creeds. The Vice-Chancellor said, that Hi' term •' education " was properly under- stood, by all the parties, t<> comprehend religious instruction ; that the objection to the scheme proposed by the ma was not that it did nol provide for re- ligious instruction according to the doc- trines of the Church of England, but that it did not provide for religious in- struction at all. In the course of tin- hearing, the Vice-Chancellor -aid. I any scheme of education, without relig- ion, would be worse than a mockery. The parties afterwards agr 1. that the masters and mistresses should l»- mem- bers of the Church of England; that every school day the master Bhould give religious instruction, during one hour, to all the scholars, such instruc- tion i" be confined to the reading and ex- planation of the Scriptures; thai on <■•■ Lord'.- day he should give instruction in 528 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY the liturgy, catechism, and articles of the Church of England, and that the scholars should attend church every Lord's day. unless they were children of persons not in communion with the Church of Eiujhind. In giving the sanction of the court to this arrangement, the Vice- Chancellor said, that he wished to have it distinctly understood that the ground on which he had proceeded was not a preference of one form of religion to another, but the necessity, if the matter was left to him judicially, to adopt the course of requiring the teachers to be members of the Church of England. This case clearly shows, that, at the present day, a school, founded by a char- ity, for the instruction of children, can- not be sanctioned by the courts as a charity, unless the scheme of education includes religious instruction. It-shows, too, that this general requisition of the law is independent of a church estab- lishment, and that it is not religion in any particular form, but religion, relig- ious and Christian instruction in some form, which is held to be indispensable. It cannot be doubted how a charity for the instruction of children would fare in an English court, the scheme of which should carefully and sedulously exclude all religious or Christian instruction, and profess to establish morals on prin- ciples no higher than those of enlight- ened Paganism. Enough, then, your honors, has been said on this point; and I am willing that inquiry should be prosecuted to any ex- tent of research to controvert this posi- tion, that a school of education for the ng, which rejects the Christian relig- ion, cannot he sustained as a charity, so as tn entitle it to come before the courts of equity for the privileges which they have power to confer on charitable be- quests. Mr. Webster then replied to the remarks lit Mr. Binney, in relation to the Liverpool Blue i 'eat School, and read from the report of Mr. Bache on education in Europe, Mr. Bache having been Benl abroad by the city of Philadelphia to investigate this whole matter of education. If Mr. Girard had established such a school as that, it would have been free from all those objections that have been raised against it. This Liverpool Blue Coat School, though too much of a relig- ious party character, is strictly a church establishment. It is a school established on a peculiar foundation, that of the Madras system of Dr. Bell. It is a monitorial school; those who are ad- vanced in learning are to teach the others in religion, as well as secular knowledge. It is strictly a religious school, and the only objection is, that in its instruction it is too much confined to a particular sect. Mr. Binney observed that there was no provision made for clergymen. That is true, because the scheme of the school is monitorial, in which the more advanced scholars instruct the others. But religious instruction is am- ply and particularly provided for. Mr. Webster then referred to Shelford, p. 105, and onward, under the head " Jews," in the fourth paragraph, where, he stated, the whole matter, and all the cases, as re- garded the condition and position of the Jews respecting various charities, were given in full. He then referred to the Smithsonian leg- acy, which had been mentioned, and which he said was no charity at all, nor any thing like a charity. It was a gift to Congress, to be disposed of as Congress saw fit, for scientific purposes. He then replied, in a few words, to the arguments of Mr. Binney in relation to the University of Virginia; and said that, al- though there was no provision for religious instruction in that University, yet hi' sup- posed it would not he contended for a mo- ment that the University of Virginia was a charity, or that it came before the courts claiming of the law of that State protection as such. It stood on its charter. I repeat again, before closing this part of my argument, the proposition, impor- tant as I believe it to be, for your hon- ors' consideration, that the proposed school, in its true character, objects, and tendencies, is derogatory to Chris- tianity and religion. If it he so, then I maintain that it cannot be considered a charity, and as such entitled to the just AND THE RELIGIOUS IN8TBUCTI0H OF THE Y"i 529 protectioa and support of ;i court of equity. I consider this the great ques- tion for the consideration of this court. 1 may be excused for pressing ii on the attention of your honors. Ii is one which, in its decision, is to influence the happiness, the temporal and the eternal welfare, of one linnili'etl millions of hu- man beings, alive and to l>e born, in this land. Its decision will give a hue to the apparent character of our institutions; it will be a comment on their spirit to the whole Christian world. 1 again press the question to your honors : Is a clear, plain, posit ivi system for the instruc- timi of children, founded on clear and plain objects of infidelity, a charity in the eye of the laic, and as such entitled to the privileges awarded to charities in a court of equity? And with this, I leave this part of the case. THIRD DAY. I shall now, may it please your hon- ors, proceed to inquire whether there is, in the State of Pennsylvania, any set- tled public policy to which this school, as planned by Mr. Girard in his will, is in opposition; for it follows, that, if there be any settled public policy in the laws of Pennsylvania on this subject, then any school, or scheme, or system, which tends to subvert this public policy, can- not be entitled to the protection of a court of equity. It will not be denied that there is a general public policy in that, as in all States, drawn from its history and its laws. And it will not be denied that any scheme or school of education which directly opposes this is not to be favored by the courts. Penn- sylvania is a free and independent State. She has a popular government, a sys- tem of trial by jury, of free suffrage, of vote by ballot, of alienability of prop- erty. All these form part of the general public policy of Pennsylvania. Any man who shall go into that State can s|»-ik and write as much as he pleases against a popular form of government, freedom of suffrage, trial by jury, and against any or all of the institutions just named; he may decry civil liberty, " 34 and assert the divine i ightof kings, and v|| H be does nothing criminal; but if, i" give Bucceea to racb efforts, special power from a o mrl of justice is required, it will not be granted to him. There is 111,1 ' t these feat area of tie- general public policj i i Pennsylvania against which a school might nol be established and preachers and teachers employed to teach. Thai might in a certain sense be considered a Bohool of education, but it would not be a charily. And i|" Mr. Girard, in his lifetime, had founded sdmois and employed teachers to preach and teach iufavorof infidelity, or against popular government, free suffrage, trial by jury, or the alienability of property, there was nothing to Btop him or prevent him from bo doing. Bui where any one or all of these come to be provided for a school or system as a charity, and come before the courts for favor, then in nei- ther one, nor all, nor any. can they he favored, because they are opposed to the general public policy and public lav, of the State. These great principles have always been recognized; and they arc- no more part and parcel of the public law of Pennsylvania than is the Christian re- ligion. We have in the charter of Pennsylvania, as prepared by it- great founder, William Penn, — we have in his "great law," as it was .ailed, the dec- laration, that the preservation of Chris- tianity is one of the greal and leading ends of government. This is declared in the charter of the State. Then the laws of Pennsylvania, the Btatutes against blasphemy, the violation of the Lord's day. and others to the same effect, proi 1 on this great, bl principle, that the preservation ^i Chris- tianity is one of the main ends of gov- ernment. This is the general public policy of Pennsylvania. <>n this head we have the case of I fpdegraph p. I I (' monwealth, 1 in which a decision in accordance with this whole doctrine was given by the Supreme Court of Penn- sylvania. The solemn opinion | nounced by that tribunal begins by a general declaration that Christianity i 11 - \ Rawli . p. ;,:]<> THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY and has always been, part of the cora- mon law of Pennsylvania. I have said, your honors, that our system of oaths in all our courts, by which we hold liberty and property, and all our rights, is founded on or rests on Christianity and a religious belief. In like manner the affirmation of Quakers rests on religious scruples drawn from the same source, the same feeling of religious responsibility. The courts of Pennsylvania have themselves decided that a charitable bequest, which counteracts the public policy of the State, cannot be sustained. This was so ruled in the often cited case of the Methodist Church v. Remington. There, the devise was to the Methodist Church generally, extending through the States and into Canada, and the trust was declared void on this account alone; namely, that it was inconsistent with the public policy of the State, inconsistent with the general spirit of the laws of Pennsylvania. But is there any comparison to be made between that ground on which a devise to a church is declared void, namely, as in- consistent with the public policy of the State, and the case of a devise which undermines and opposes the whole Christian religion, and derides all its ministers; the one tending to destroy all religion, and the other being merely against the spirit of the legislation and laws of the State, and the general public- policy of government, in a very subordi- nate matter? Can it be shown that this devise of a piece of ground to the Meth- odist Church can be properly set aside, and declared void on general grounds, and not lie shown that such a devise as that of Mr. Girard, which tends to over- turn as well as oppose the public policy and laws of Pennsylvania, can also be Bel aside? sir. there are many other American cases which I could cite to the court in Bupporl of this point of the case. I will now only refer to 8 Johnson, page 291. It is the Mine- iii Pennsylvania as elsewhere, the general principles and public policy are sometimes established by constitutional provisions, sometimes by legislative enactments, sometimes by judicial decisions, and sometimes by general consent. But however they may be established, there is nothing that we look for with more certainty than this general principle, that Chris- tianity is part of the law of the land. This was the case among the Puritans of New England, the Episcopalians of the Southern States, the Pennsylvania Quakers, the Baptists, the mass of the followers of Whiteheld and Wesley, and the Presbyterians; all brought and all adopted this great truth, and all have sustained it. And where there is any religious sentiment amongst men at all, this sentiment incorporates itself with the law. Ecery thing declares it. The massive cathedral of the Catholic; the Episcopalian church, with its lofty spire pointing heavenward; the plain temple of the Quaker; the log church of the hardy pioneer of the wilderness; the mementos and memorials around and about us; the consecrated graveyards, their tombstones and epitaphs, their silent vaults, their mouldering contents; all attest it. The dead prove it as well as the living. The generations that are gone before speak to it, and pronounce it from the tomb. We feel it. All, all, proclaim that Christianity, general, tol- erant Christianity, Christianity inde- pendent of sects and parties, that Chris- tianity to which the sword and the fagot are unknown, general, tolerant Chris- tianity, is the law of the land. Mr. Webster, having gone ever the other points in the case, which were of a more technical character, in conclusion, said : — I now take leave of this cause. 1 look for no good whatever from the es- tablishment of this school, this college, this scheme, this experiment of an education in " practical morality," un- blessed by the influences of religion. It sometimes happens to man to attain by accident that which he could not achieve by long-continued exercise of industry and ability. And it is said even of the man of genius, that by chance lie will sometimes " snatch a grace beyond the reach of art." And AND TI1K HKLKJIol'S INSTIU'CTION "I I III. *01 >81 I believe that men Bometimea 'I" mis- chief, not onlj beyond their intent, but beyond the ordinary scope of their talents and ability. In my opinion, if Mr. Girard had gives years to the study of a mode by which he could dispose of his vast fortune so that uo good could arise to the general cause of charity, no good to the general cause of learning, no good to human Bociety, and which should be most productive of protracted struggles, troubles, and difficulties in the popular counsels of a great city, be could not so effectually have attained that result as he has by this devise now before the court. It is not the result of good fortunes, but of bad fortunes, which have overriden and cast down whatever of good might have been ac- complished by a different disposition. 1 believe that this plan, this scheme, was unblessed in all its purposes, and in all its original plan--. Unwise in all its frame and th v, while il li\'- it will Lead an annoyed and troubled life, and leave an unblessed memory when it dies. It I could persuade myself thai this court would come to such a decision as, in my opinion, the public good and the law require, and ii I could be] that any humble efforts of my own had contributed in the least to lead to Buch a result, 1 should deem it the crowning mercy of my professional life. MR. JUSTICE STORY. 1 [At a meeting of the Suffolk Bar, held in the Circuit Court Room, Boston, on the morning of the 12th of September, the day of the funeral of Mr. Justice Story, Chief Justice Shaw having taken the chair and announced the object of the meeting, Mr. Webster rose and spoke substantially as follows.] Vim i; solemn announcement, Mr. Chief Justice, has confirmed the sad intelligence which had already reached us, through the public channels of in- formation, and deeply afflicted us all. Joski'H Stoky, one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of Ihe United States, and for many years the presiding judge of this Circuit, died on Wednesday evening last, at his house in Cambridge, wanting only a few days for the completion of the sixty-sixth year of his age. This most mournful and lamentable event has called together the whole Bar of Suffolk, and all connected with the courts of law or the profession. It has brought you. Mr. Chief Justice, and your associates of the Bench of the Su- preme Court of Massachusetts, into the midst of us; and you have done us the honor, out of respect to the occasion, to consent to preside over us, while we deliberate on what is due, as well to our own afflicted and smitten feelings, as to the exalted character and eminent distinction of the deceased judge. The oera-inn has drawn from his retirement, i The following letter <>f dedication to the mother of Judge Story accompanied these re- marks in the original edition : — ■• Boston, September 15, 1845. "Venerable Madam, — I pray you to I me | n |ip"-etit to you the brief remarks which I made before the Suffolk bar, on the 12th instant, at a meeting occasioned by the sudden and afflicting death of your distinguished also, that venerable man, whom we all so much respect and honor, (Judge Davis,) who was, for thirty years, the associate of the deceased upon the same Bench. It has called hither another judicial personage, now in retirement, (Judge Putnam,) but long an ornament of that Bench of which you are now the head, and whose marked good fortune it is to have been the professional teach- er of Mr. Justice Story, and the director of his early studies. He also is present to whom this blow comes near; I mean, the learned judge (Judge Sprague) from whose side it has struck away a friend and a highly venerated official associate. The members of the Law School at Cambridge, to which the deceased was so much attached, and who returned that attachment with all the ingenuous- ness and enthusiasm of educated and anient youthful minds, are here also, to manifest their sense of their own severe deprivation, as well as their admiration of the bright and shining professional example which they have so loved to contemplate, — an example, let me say to them, and let me say to all, as a solace in the midst of their sorrows, which death hath not touched and which time cannot obscure. Mr. Chief Justice, one sentiment per- vades us all. It is that of the most profound and penetrating grief, mixed, nevertheless, with an assured convic- son. I trust, dear Madam, that as you enjoyed through his whole life constant proofs of his profound respect and ardent filial affection, so yon may yet live long to enjoy the remembrance of his virtues and his exalted reputation. " 1 am, with very great regard, " Your obedient servant, " Daniel Wkbstbb. " To Madam Stoky." Mi: JUSTICE s rORT. fcion, thai the great man whom we de- plore is yet with as and in the midst of us. Hi' hath not wholly died, He lives in the affections of Friends and kindred, and in the high regard of the commuuity. He lives in our remembrance of his so- cial virtues, his warm and steady friend- ships, and the vivacity and richness of his conversat ion. He lives, and will live still more permanently, by Ids words of written wisdom, by the results of Ids vast researches and attainments, by his imperishable Legal judgments, and l>y those juridical disquisitions which have stamped Ids name, all over the civilized world, witli die character of a com- manding authority. " Vivit, enim, vivetque semper; atque etiam latins in memoria hominum et sermone versabi- tur, postquam ab oculis recessit." Mr. Chief Justice, there are consola- tions which arise to mitigate our loss, and shed the influence of resignation over unfeigned and heart-felt sorrow. We are all penetrated with gratitude to God that the deceased lived so long; that he did so much for himself, his friends, the country, and the world; that his lamp went out, at last, without unsteadiness or flickering. He contin- ued to exercise every power of his mind without dimness or obscuration, and every affection of his heart with no abatement of energy or warmth, till deatli drew an impenetrable veil be- tween us and him. Indeed, he seems to us now, as in truth he is, not extin- guished or ceasing to be, but only with- drawn; as the clear sun goes down at its setting, not darkened, but only no longer seen. This calamity, Mr. Chief Justice, is not confined to the bar or the courts of this Commonwealth. It will be felt by every bar throughout the land, by every court, and indeed by every intelligent and well-informed man in or out of the profession. It will be felt still more widely, for his reputation had a still wider range. In the High Court of Parliament, in every tribunal in West minster Hall, in the judicatories of Paris and Berlin, of Stockholm and St. Petersburg, in the learned universities of Germany, Italy, and Spain, by i eminent jurist in the civilized world, it will be acknowledged thai a great lumi- nals ha- fallen from the armament <»f public jurisprudence. Sir, then- i- no purer pride of count i v than that in which we may indulge "leu we -,-,• America paying back the great debt of civilization, learning, and Bcience to Europe. In this high return of light for light and mind for mind, in this august reckoning and accounting between the intellects of nations, Joseph Story was destined by Providence to act, and ilid act, an important part. Acknowledging, as we all acknowledge, our obligations to the original sources of English law, as well as of civil lib- erty, we have seen in our generation copious and salutary streams turning and running backward, replenishing their original Fountains, and giving a fresher and a brighter green to the fields of English jurisprudence. By a sort of reversed hereditary transmission, the mother, without envy or humiliation, acknowledges that -he bas received a valuable and cherished inheritance from the daughter. The profession in Eng- land admits with frankness and candor, and with no feeling but that of respect ami admiration, that he whose voice we have so recently heard within these walls, but shall now hear no more, \ of all men who have yel appeared, n fitted by the comprehensiveness of his mind, and the vast extent and accuracy of his attainments, t> mpare the c of nations, to trace their differeno difference of origin, climate, or religious or political institutions, and to exhibit, nevertheless, their concurrence in those great principles upon which tie- system of human civilization rests. Justice, Sir. is the great int man on earth. It is the ligament which holds civilized beings ami civilized na- tion- together. Wherever her temple stand-, and bo long as it is duly honored, there is a foundation for social security, general happiness, and the improvement and progress of our race. And whoever labors on this edifice with usefult and distinction, whoever clean it- foun- 534 MR. JUSTICE STORY. elation-., strengthens its pillars, adorns its entablatures, or contributes to raise its august dome still higher in the skies, connects himself, in name, and fame, and character, with that which is and must be as durable as the frame of hu- man society. All know. Mr. Chief Justice, the pure love of country which animated the deceased, and the zeal, as well as the talent, with which he explained and de- fended her institutions. His work on the Constitution of the United States is one of his most eminently successful labors. But all his writings, and all his judgments, all his opinions, and the whole influence of his character, public and private, leaned strongly and always to the support of sound principles, to the restraint of illegal power, and to the discouragement and rebuke of licentious and disorganizing sentiments. "Ad rempublicam firmandam, et ad stabi- liendas vires, et sanandum populum, omnis ejus pergebat institutio." But this is not the occasion, Sir, nor is it for me to consider and discuss at length the character and merits of Mr. Justice Story, as a writer or a judge. The per- formance of that duty, with which this Bar will no doubt charge itself, must be deferred to another opportunity, and will be committed to abler hands. But in the homage paid to his memory, one part may come witli peculiar propriety and emphasis from ourselves. We have known him in private life. We have seen him descend from the bench, and mingle in our friendly circles. We have known liis manner of life, fromhisyouth up. We can bear witness to the strict uprightness and purity of his character, his simplicity and unostentatious habits, the ease and affability of his intercourse, his remarkable vivacity amidst severe labors, the cheerful and animating 1 8 of hi> conversation, and his fast fidelity to friends. Some of us, also, can tes- tify t'i his large and liberal charities, not 08tentatious or casual, hut sys- tematic ami Bilent, -dispensed almost without showing the hand, and falling and distilling comforl and happiness, lik,' lli.' d.-u - of bea> en. But we can testify, also, that in all his pursuits and employments, in all his recreations, in all his commerce with the world, and in his intercourse with the circle of his friends, the predominance of his judicial character was manifest. He never for- got the ermine which he wore. The judge, the judge, the useful and dis- tinguished judge, was the great picture which he kept constantly before his eyes, and to a resemblance of which all his efforts, all his thoughts, all his life, were devoted. We may go the world over, without finding a man who shall present a more striking realization of the beautiful conception of D'Agues- seau: "C'est en vain que Ton cherche a distinguer en lui la personne privee et la personne publique; un meme esprit les anime, un meme objet les reunit; l'homme, le pere de famille, le citoyen, tout est en lui consacre a la gloire du magistrat." Mr. Chief Justice, one may live as a conqueror, a king, or a magistrate; but he must die as a man. The bed of death brings every human being to his pure in- dividuality ; to the intense contempla- tion of that deepest and most solemn of all relations, the relation between the creature and his Creator. Here it is that fame and renown cannot assist us; that all external things must fail to aid us ; that even friends, affec- tion, and human love and devotedness, cannot succor us. This relation, the true foundation of all duty, a relation perceived and felt by conscience and confirmed by revelation, our illustrious friend, now deceased, always acknowl- edged. He reverenced the Scriptures of truth, honored the pure morality which they teach, and clung to the hopes of future life which they impart. He be- held enough in nature, in himself, and in all that can he known of things seen, to feel assured that there is a Supreme Power, without whose providence not a sparrow falleth to the ground. To this gracious being ho trusted himself for time and for eternity; and the last words of his lips ever heard by mor- tal ears were a fervent supplication to his Maker to take him to himself. THE RHODE ISLAND (JOVKHNMKNT. AN ARGUMENT MADE IN THE SUPREME COIMiT <»!■ THE IMIIh Bl LTES, ON THE 27th OF JANUABY, 1848, IN THE DOER REBELLION CASES. [The facts necessary to the understand- ing of these cast's are sufficiently set forth in the commencement of Mr. Webster's argument The event out of which the eases arose is known in popular language as the Dorr Rebellion. The first case (that of Martin Luther against Luther M. Borden and others) came up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of Rhode Island, in which the jury, under the rulings of the court (Mr. Justice Story), found a verdict for the defendants ; the second case (that of Rachel Luther against the same defendants) came up hy a certificate of a division of opinion. The allegations, evidence, and arguments were the same in both cases. The first case was argued by Mr. Ilallet and Mr. Clifford (Attorney-General) for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Whipple and Mr. Webster for the defendants in error. Mr. Justice Catron, Mr. Justice Daniel, and Mr. Justice Mckinley were absent from the court, in consequence of ill health. Chief Justice Taney delivered the opinion of the court, affirming the judgment of the court below in the first case, and dismissing the second for want of jurisdiction. Mr. .Jus- tice Woodbury dissented, and delivered a very elaborate opinion in support of his view of the subject.] There is something novel and ex- traordinary in the case now before the court. All will admit that it is not such a one as is usually presented f in- judicial consideration. It is well known, that in the years 1841 and 1842 political agitation existed in Rhode Island. Some of the citizens of that State undertook to form a new constitution of government, beginning their proceedings towards that end by meetings of tin- people, held without authority of law. ami conducting those proi lin-s through such forms a- Led them, in 1842, to say thai thej had es- tablished a new constitution and form of government, and placed Mr. Thomas W. Dorr at its head. The previously existing, and then existing, government of Rhode Island treated these procee I- ings as nugatory. BO far as they went to establish a new constitution ; ami crim- inal, so Ear as they proposed to confer authority upon any persons to interfere with the acts of the existing govern- ment, or to exercise powers of legisla- tion, or administration of the laws. All will remember thai the state of things approached, if not actual conflict be- tween men in arms, at leasi the •• peril- ous edge of battle." Arms were re- sorted to, force was used, and greater force threatened. In June, 1842, this agitation subsided. The new govern- ment, as it called itself, disappeared from the scene of action. The former gov- ernment, the charter government, as it was sometimes Btyled, resumed undis- puted control, went on in its ordinary course, and the peace of the Mate w.is restored. l'.nt the past had been too * i ious to be forgotten. The legislature of the Mate had. at an early stage <^ the troubles, found it necessary to pass ,-,:;<; THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. Bpecia] laws for the punishment of the persons concerned in these proceedings. It defined the crime of treason, as well as -mailer offences, and authorized the declaration of martial law. Governor King, under this authority, proclaimed the existence of treason and rebellion in the State, and declared the State under martial law. This having been done, ami the ephemeral government of Mr. Dorr having disappeared, the grand juries of the State found indictments againsl several persons for having dis- turbed the peace of the State, and one against Dorr himself for treason. This indictment came on in the Supreme Court of Rhode Island in 1844, before a tribunal admitted on all hands to be the legal judicature of the State. He was tried by a jury of Rhode Island, above all objection, and after all chal- lenge. By that jury, under the instruc- tions of the court, he was convicted of treason, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Now an action is brought in the courts of the United States, and be- fore your honors, by appeal, in which it is attempted to prove that the char- acters of this drama have been oddly and wrongly cast; that there has beeu a great mistake in the courts of Rhode [sland. It is alleged, that Mr. Dorr, instead of being a traitor or an insur- rectionist, was the real governor of the State at the time; that the force used by him was exercised in defence of the constitution and laws, and not against them; that he who opposed the consti- tute,! authorities was not Mr. Dorr, but Governor King: and that it was he who Bhould have been indicted, and tried, and sentenced. This is rather an im- portant mistake, to be sure, if it be a mistake. " Change places," cries | r Rear, '• changi places, and handy-dandy, which is the justice and which the thii So our learned opponent- >;n . "I hange places, and, handy-dandy, which is the governor and which the rebel? " The aspecl of the case is, as 1 have Baid, novel. It may perhaps give vivacity and variety to judicial in- vestigations. It may relieve the drudg- ery of perusing briefs, demurrers, and pleas in bar, bills in equity and an- swers, and introduce topics which give sprightliness, freshness, and something of an uncommon public interest to pro- ceedings in courts of law. However difficult it may be, and I suppose it to be wholly impossible, that this court should take judicial cogni zance of the questions which the plain- tiff has presented to the court below, yet I do not think it a matter of regret that the cause has come hither. It is said, and truly said, that the case involves the consideration and discussion of what are the true principles of government in our American system of public liberty. This is very right. The case does in- volve these questions, and harm can never come from their discussion, espe- cially when such discussion is addressed to reason and not to passion ; when it is had before magistrates and lawyers, and not before excited masses out of doors. I agree entirely that the case does raise considerations, somewhat extensive, of the true character of our American sys- tem of popular liberty ; and although I am constrained to differ from the learned counsel who opened the cause for the plaintiff in error, on the principles and character of that American liberty, and upon the true characteristics of that American system on which changes of the government and constitution, if they become necessary, are to be made, j'et I agree with him that this case does pre- sent them for consideration. Now, there are certain principles of public liberty, which, though they do not exist in all forms of government, exist, nevertheless, to some extent, in different forms of government. The protection of life and property, the ha- beas corpus, trial by jury, the right of open trial, these are principles of public liberty existing in their best form in the republican institutions of this country, but, to the extent mentioned, existing also in the constitution of England. Our American liberty, allow me to say, therefore, has an ancestry, a pedigree, a history. Our ancestors brought to this continent all that was valuable, in their Tin: i; ; island <;<>vkkxmkn i. 537 judgment, in the political institutions of England, and lefl behind them all thai was without \ ;t 1 in', or 1 1 i : 1 1 was objec- tionable. Daring the colonial period they were closely connected of course with the colonial system ; hut thej were Englishmen, as well as colonists, and took an interest in whatever concerned the mother country, especially in all great questions of public liberty in that country. They accordingly took a deep concern in the Revolution of L688. The American colonists had Buffered from the tyranny of James the Second. Their charters had been wrested from them l>\ mockeries of law, and by the corruption of judges in the city of London; and in no part of England was there more grat- ification, or a more resolute feeling, when James abdicated and William came over, than in the American colonies. All know that Massachusetts immedi- ately overthrew what had been done under the reign of James, and took pos- session of the colonial fort in the harbor of Boston in the name of the new king. When the United States separated from England, by the Declaration of 1776, they departed from the political maxims and examples of the mother country, and entered upon a course more exclusively American. From that day down, our institutions and our history relate to ourselves. Through the period of the Declaration of Independence, of the Confederation, of the Convention, and the adoption of the Constitution, all our public acts are records out of which a knowledge of our system of American liberty is to be drawn. From the Declaration of Indepen- dence, the governments of what had been colonies before were adapted to their new condition. They no longer owed allegiance to crowned heads. Xo tie bound them to England. The whole system became entirely popular, and all legislative and constitutional provisions had regard to this new, peculiar. Amer- ican character, which they had assumed. Where the form of government was al- ready well enough, they let it alone. Where reform was necessary, they re- formed it. What was valuable, they re- tained ; what wa i i ntial, the; added ; ami do more. Through the whole pro- ceeding, Erom 1776 to the Latest pet iod, the whole coarse of American put. lie acts, the whole j of this Amer- ican Bystem, was marked by a peculiar conservatism. 'II bjecl was to do what was necessary, and no more; and to 'l" thai w itli the utmost temperance and prudence. Now. without going into historical details at length, Lei me state what 1 understand the American principles to be, on which this system real 3. First ami chief, no man makes a qi (don, thai the people are the source of all political power. Government is insti- tuted for their good, and its mem are their agents and servants. Be who would argue against this musl argue without an adversary. And who thinks there is any peculiar merit in asserting a doctrine like this, in the midsl of twenty millions of people, when nine- teen millions nine hundred and ninety- nine thousand nine hundred and nine- ty-nine of them hold it, as well as himself? There is no other doctrine of government here; and DO man im- putes to another, and no man should claim for himself, any peculiar merit for asserting what everybody know- to be true, and nobody denies. Why, where else can we look but to the people for political power, in a popular govern- ment '■ We have no hereditary execu- tive, no hereditary branch of the l lature. no inherited masses of property, no system of entails, no long trusts, no long family .settlements, no primogeni- ture. Everj estate in the country, from the richest to the 1 rest, is divided anion;,; -mis and daughters alike. Alien- ation is made a< easy as possible; every- where the tranamissibility of property is perfectly free. The whole system is ar- ranged so as to produce, as far as un- equal industry and enterprise render it possible, a universal equality among men; an equality of rights absolutely, and an equality of condition, bo fai the different character- of individuals will allow Buch equality to be produced. He who considers that there maj bt ,,:;s THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. or ever has been, since the Declaration of Independence, any person who looks to any other source of power in this country than the people, so as to give peculiar merit to those who clamor loud- est in its assertion, must he out of his mind, even more than Don Quixote. His imagination was only perverted. He saw things not as they were, though what he saw were things. He saw windmills, and took them to be giants, knights on horseback. This was bad enough; but whoever says, or speaks as if he thought, that anybody looks to any other source of political power in this country than the people, must have a stronger and wilder imagination, for he sees nothing but the creations of his own fancy. He stares at phantoms. Well, then, let all admit, what none deny, that the only source of political power in this country is the people. Let us admit that they are sovereign, for they are so ; that is to say, the aggregate community, the collected will of the people, is sovereign. I confess that 1 think Chief Justice Jay spoke rather paradoxically than philosophically, when he said that this country exhibited the extraordinary spectacle of many sover- eigns and no subjects. The people, he said, are all sovereigns; and the pecu- liarity of the case is that they have no subjects, except a few colored persons. This must be rather fanciful. The ag- gregate community is sovereign, but that is not the sovereignty which acts in the daily exercise of sovereign power. The people cannot act daily as the peo- ple. They must establish a government, and invesl it with so much of the sover- eign power as the case requires; and this sovereign power being delegated and placed in the hands of the govern- ment, thai government becomes what is popularly called ihk state. I like tin-' old-fashioned way of stating things as they are; and this is the true idea of a state. It is an organized government, representing the collected will of the peo- ple, as Ear as they see lit to invest thai immenrt with power. And in that re peel it is true, that, though this gov- ernmenl po • sovereign power, it does not possess all sovereign power; and so the State governments, though sovereign in some respects, are not so in all. Nor could it be shown that the powers of both, as delegated, embrace the whole range of what might be called sovereign power. We usually speak of the States as sovereign States. 1 do not object to this. But the Constitution never so styles them, nor does the Con- stitution speak of the government here as t he general or the federal government. It calls this government the United States; and it calls the State govern- ments State governments. Still the fact is undeniably so ; legislation is a sover- eign power, and is exercised by the Unit- ed States government to a certain extent, and also by the States, according to the forms which they themselves have estab- lished, and subject to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. Well, then, having agreed that all power is originally from the people, and that they can confer as much of it as they please, the next principle is, that, as the exercise of legislative power and the other powers of government immedi- ately by the people themselves is im- practicable, they must be exercised by representatives of the people; and what distinguishes American govern- ments as much as any thing else from any governments of ancient or o+' mod- ern times, is the marvellous felicity of their representative system. It has with us, allow me to say, a somewhat differ- ent origin from the representation of the commons in England, though that has been worked up to some resemblance of our own. The representative system in England had its origin, not in any sup- posed rights of the people themselves, but in the necessities and commands of the crown. At first, knights and bur- gesses were summoned, often against their will, to a Parliament called by the king. Many remonstrances were pre- sented against sending up these repre- sentatives; the charge of paying them wa>. not (infrequently, felt to be bur- densome by the people. But the king wished their counsel and advice, and ! erhapa the presence of a popular body, THE RHODE ISLAND GOV] RNMENT. to enable him to make greater headway against the Feudal barons in the aristo- cratic and hereditary branch of the legislature. In process of time these knights ami burgesses assumed more and more a popular character, and be- came, by degrees, the guardians of pop- ular rights. 'The people through them obtained protection against the encroach- ments of the crown and the aristocracy, till in our day they are understood to be the representatives of the people, charged with the protection of their rights. With us it was always just so. Representa- tion has always been of this character. The power is with the people; but they cannot exercise it in masses or /» ;• capita : they can only exercise it by their repre- ! sentatives. The whole system with us has been popular from the beginning. Now, the basis of this representation is suffrage. The right to choose repre- sentatives is every man's pari in the ex- ercise of sovereign power; to have a voice in it, if he has the proper qualifica- tions, is the portion of political power belonging to every elector. That is the beginning. That is the mode in which power emanates from its source, and gets into the hands of conventions, legis- latures, courts of law, and the chair of the executive. It begins in suffrage. Suffrage is the delegation of the power of an individual to some agent. This being so, then follow two other great principles of the American system. 1. The first is, that the right of suf- frage shall lie guarded, protected, and secured against force and against fraud; and, 2. The second is, that its exercise shall be prescribed by previous law: its qualifications shall be prescribed by pre- vious law ; the time and place of its ex- ercise shall be prescril tei 1 by pre^ ions law; the manner of its exercise, under whose supervision (always sworn officers of the law), is to be prescribed. And then. again, the results are to be certified to the central power by some certain rule. by some known public officers, in some clear and definite form, to the end that two things may be done: first, that every man entitled to vote may vote; second, thai hi-- rote maj 1"' sent for- ward and counted, ami mi In- mas exer- cise his part of sovereignty, in common w ith his fellow-citizens. In the exercise of political p through representatives we know noth- ing, we never have known any thing, but such an exercise as should take place through the prescribed forms "i law. When we depart from that, we -hall wander as widely from the American track as the pole i- from the track of the sun. I have said that it i< one principle <>f the American Bystem, that tin- people limit their governments, National ami Stat.-. They do bo; hut it is another principle, equally true and certain, and. according to my judgment of things, equally important, that the people often limit themselves. They gel bounds to their own power. They have chosen to secure the institutions which they estab- lish againsl the sudden impulses of mere majorities. All our institution- I with instances of this. It was their great conservative principle, in consti- tuting forms of government, that they should secure what they had established againsl hasty changes by simple majori- ties. By the tilth article of the Con- stitution of the I 'nit ed State-. ( fongress, two thirds of both houses concurring, may propose amendments of the Con- stitution: or. on the application of the -latures of two thirds of th S may call a convention : and amendments proposed in either of these forms must be ratified by the legislatures or i- ventioiis of three fourths of tie - The tilth article of the Constitution, if it was made a topic for those who framed the "people's constitution" of Rhode Island, could only have 1 n a matter of reproach. It gives no countenance to any of their proc lings, "i" to any thing like them. ( >n the contrary, it is remarkable instance of th.- enactment and application of that great American principle, thai the constitution of eminent should be cautiously and pru- dently interfered with, ami that chai should not ordinarily be begun ami car- ried through by bare majoril 540 THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. But the people limit themselves also in other ways. They limit themselves in the first exercise of their political rights. They Limit themselves, by all their constitutions, in two important respects; that is to say, in regard to the qualifications of electors, and in regard to the qualifications of the elected. In every State, and in all the States, the people have precluded themselves from voting for everybody they might wish to vote for; they have limited their own right of choosing. They have said. We will elect no man who has not such and such qualifications. We will not vote oursehes. unless we have such and such qualifications. They have also limited themselves to certain prescribed forms for the conduct of elections. They must vote at a particular place, at a particu- lar time, and under particular condi- tions, or not at all. It is in these modes that we are to ascertain the will of the American people; and our Constitution and laws know no other mode. We are not to take the will of the people from public meetings, nor from tumultuous assemblies, by which the timid are ter- rified, the prudent are alarmed, and by which society is disturbed. These are not American modes of signifying the will of the people, and they never were. If any thing in the country, not ascer- tained by a regular vote, by regular re- turns, and by regular representation, has lieen established, it is an exception, and not the rule ; it is an anomaly which, I believe, can scarcely be found. It is true that at the Revolution, when all government was immediately dis- solved, the people got together, and what did they do V Did they exercise reign power? They began an in- cepth utilization, the object of which was to bring together representatives of ili.- people, who should form a govern- ment. This was the mode of proceeding in those States where their legislatures were dissolved. It was much like that had in England upon tic abdication of .lane-- the Second. He ran away, lie abdicated. He threw the great seal into the Thames. I am not aware that, on tic 1lh of May, L842, an, -oat seal was thrown into Providence River! But James abdicated, and King William took the government; and how did he pro- ceed? Why, he at once requested all who had been members of the old Par- liament, of any regular Parliament in the time of Charles the Second, to as- semble. The Peers, being a standing Lilly, could of course assemble; and all they did was to recommend the calling of a convention, to be chosen by the same electors, and composed of the same numbers, as composed a Parliament. The Convention assembled, and, as all know, was turned into a Parliament. This w r as a case of necessity, a revolu- tion. Don't we call it so? And why? Not merely because a new sovereign then ascended the throne of the Stuarts, but because there was a change in the organization of the government. The lesal and established succession was broken. The convention did not assem- ble under any preceding law. There was a hiatus, a syncope, in the action of the body politic. This was revolution, and the Parliaments that assembled afterwards referred their legal origin to that revolution. Is it not obvious enough, that men cannot get together and count them- selves, and say they are so many hun- dreds and so many thousands, and judge of their own qualifications, and call themselves the people, and set up a gov- ernment? Why, another set of men, forty miles off, on the same day, with the same propriety, with as good quali- fications, and in as large numbers, may meet and set up another government; one may meet at Newport and another at Chepachet, and both may call them- selves the people. What is this but anarchy? What liberty is there here, but a tumultuary, tempestuous, violent, stormy liberty, a sort of South Ameri- can liberty, without power except in its 3pasms, a liberty supported by arms to- ,la\, crushed by arms to-morrow? Is that '""■ liberty? The regular action of popular power, on the other hand, places upon public liberty the most beautiful face that ever adorned that angel form. All is regular tin-: kiiom: island government. 541 ;unl harmonious in its features, and gentle in its operation. The Btream of public authority, under American 1 i 1 »— erty, running in this channel, has the strength of tlic Missouri, while its waters are as transparent as those of a crystal lake. It is powerful for good. Ii pro- duces no tumult, no violence, and no wrong; — "Though deep, yet clear; though gentle, yel not dull; Strong, without rage; without o'erflowing, full." Another American principle growing out of this, and just as important and well settled as is the truth that the people are the source of power, is, that. when in the course of events it becomes necessary to ascertain the will of the people on a new exigency, or a new state of things or of opinion, the legis- lative power provides for that ascertain- ing 'lit by an ordinary act of legislation. Has not that been our whole history? It would take me from now till the sun shall go down to advert to all the in- stances of it, and I shall only refer to the most prominent, and especially to the establishment of the Constitution under which you sit. The old Con- gress, upon the suggestion of the dele- gates who assembled at Annapolis in May, 1786, recommended to the States that they should send delegates to a convention to be holden at Philadelphia to form a Constitution. No article of the old Confederation gave them power to do this; but they did it, and the States did appoint delegates, who as- sembled at Philadelphia, and formed the Constitution. It was communicated to the old Congress, and that body rec- ommended to the States to make pro- vision for calling the people together to act upon its adoption. Was not that exactly the case of passing a law to as- certain the will of the people in a new exigency? And this method was adapt- ed without opposition, nobody suggest- ing that there could be any other mode of ascertaining the will of the people. My learned friend went through the constitutions of several of the States. It is enough to say, that, of the old thirteen States, tie- constitutions, with but one exception, contained do pro- vision for their own amendment. In New Hampshire then- was a provision tor taking the sense of the people onee in seven years, "i 1 1 there i> hardly one that baa n"t altered it> constitution, and it has been done bj conventions called by tin- legislature, a- an ordinary exer- cise of legislative power. NLw wh.it State ever alten-d iK constitution in auv other mode? What alteration bas been brought in. put in. forced in. or L;<>t in anyhow, by resolutions of a meetings, and then by applying force? In what State has an assembly, calling itself tin' people, convened without law, without authority, without qualifica- tions, without certain officers, with no oaths, securities, or sanctions of any kind, met ami made a constitution, and called it the constitution of the STATE? There must he some authentic mode of ascertaining the will of the people, else all is anarchy. It resolves it-elf into the law of the strong' -i. or, what is the same thing, of the most numerous for the moment, and all constitutions and all legislative rights are prostrated and disregarded. But my learned adversary Bays, that, if we maintain that the people (for he speaks in the name and on behalf of the people, to which I do not objed ) cannot commence changes in their government but by some previous act of legislation, and if the legislature will not grant such an act. we do in fact follow the ex- ample of the Holy Alliance, ••the doc- tors of Laybach," where the assembled sovereigns said that all chai gov- ernment' must proceed from sovereigns; and it i-> -aid that we mark out the same rule for the people of Rhode Island. Now will any man. will my adversary here, on a moment's reflection, under- take to show the leasl resemblan( n earth between what I have called the American doctrine, and the doctrii the sovereigns at Laybach? What do I contend for? I say that the will of the people must prevail, when it is as- certained; but there must be some 542 THE KIIODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. ami authentic mode of ascertaining that will; and thru the people may make what government they please. 'Was that ili''. doctrine of Laybach? Was not the doctrine there held this, — that the .<<,)■< ni. to call foi 1 1 ■ such number of the militia of anj other State or Stab maj be applied t"i-. ;i> he maj ju sufficient to suppress inch insurrection." Insurrection against the exulin^r govern- ment is, then, the thing i" !>•• suppre — l But tli" law and the * Constitution, the whole system of American institutions, do H"t contemplate a case in which a re- sort %\ill be neoessarj t" proceedings aliunde, or outside "I' 1 1 * . - law and the Constitution, for the purpose of amend- ing the frame of government. They go on the idea that the stair- are all repub- lican, that they are all representative in their forms, and that these popular ernments in each state, the annually created creatures of the people, will give all proper facilities and necessary aids to bring about changes which the people may judge necessary in their constitu- tions. They take that ground and act on no other supposition. 11 icy assume that the popular will in all particulars will be accomplished. And history has proved that the presumption is well founded. This, may it please your honors, is the view I take of what I have called the American system. These are the methods of bringing about changes in government. Now, it is proper to look into this record, and see what the questions are that are presented by it. and consider, — 1. Whether the case is one for judicial investigation at all ; that is, whether this court can try the matters which the plaintiff has offered to prove in tl ourt below; and, 2. In the second place, whether many things which he did offer to prove, it they could have been and had been proved, were not acts of criminality. and therefore no justification ; and, 3. Whether all that was offered to be proved would show that, in point of fact, there had been established and put in operation any new constitution, dis- placing the old charter government of Rhode Island. The declaration is in I"he writ was issued on the 8th of October, 544 THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. 1842, in which Martin Luther complains that Luther M. Borden and others broke into his house in Warren, Rhode Island] on tlie 29th of June, 1812. and disturbed his family and committed other illegal acts. The defendant answers, that large numbers of men were in arms, in Rhode Island, for the purpose of overthrowing the government of the State, and making war upon it; and that, for the preserva- tion of the government and people, mar- tial law had been proclaimed by the Governor, under an act of the legisla- ture, on the 25th of June, 1S42. The plea goes on to aver, that the plaintiff was aiding and abetting this attempt to overthrow the government, and that the defendant was under the military au- thority of John T. Child, and was or- dered by him to arrest the plaintiff; for which purpose he applied at the door of his house, and being refused entrance he forced the door. The action is thus for an alleged tres- pass, and the plea is justification under the law of Rhode Island. The plea and replications are as usual in such cases in point of form. The plea was filed at the November term of 1842, and the case was tried at the November term of 18l:i, in the Circuit Court in Rhode Island. In order to make out a defence, the defendant offered the charter of Rhode Island, the participation of the State in the Declaration of Indepen- dence, its uniting with the Confederation in 177s. its admission into the Union in 1790, its continuance in the Union and it- recognition as a State down to May, 1843, when the ('(institution now in force was adopted. Here let it he particularly remarked, that Congress admitted Rhode Island into the Constitution under this identical old charter government, there- by giving Banction to it as a republican form of government. The defendant then refers to all the laws and proceed- ings cf the Assembly, fill the adoption of the present constitution of Rhode l-land. 'I'd repel the case of the de- fendant, the plaintiff read the proceed- of the old legislature, and docu- ments t" show that the idea of changing the government had been entertained as long ago as 1790. He read also certain resolutions of the Assembly in 1841, memorials praying changes in the con- stitution, and other documents to the same effect. He next offered to prove that suffrage associations were formed throughout the State in 1840 and 1841, and that steps were taken by them for holding public meetings; and to show the proceedings had at those meetings. In the next place, he offered to prove that a mass convention was held at New- port, attended by over four thousand persons, and another at Providence, at which over six thousand attended, at which resolutions were passed in favor of the change. Then he offered to prove the election of delegates; the meeting of the convention in October, 1841, and the draughting of the Dorr constitution ; the reassembling in 1841, the comple- tion of the draught, its submission to the people, their voting upon it, its adoption, and the proclamation on the 13th of January, 1842, that the consti- tution so adopted was the law of the land. That is the substance of what was averred as to the formation of the Dorr constitution. The plaintiff next offered to prove that the constitution was adopted by a large majority of the qualified voters of the State; that offi- cers were elected under it in April, 1812; that this new government assembled on the 3d of May; and he offered a copy of its proceedings. He sets forth that the court refused to admit testimony upon these subjects, and to these points; and ruled that the old government and laws nl' I lie Slate were in full force ami power, and then existing, when the alleged trespass was made, and that they justi- fied the acts of the defendants, according to their plea. 1 will give a few references to other proceedings of this new government. The new constitution was proclaimed on the 13th of January, L842, by some of the officers of the convention. On the 13th of April, officers were appointed under it, and Mr. Dorr was chosen gOV- ! ernor. On Tuesday, the 3d of May, the TI1K KIloDK ISLAND GOVERNMENT. 545 iirw legislature met, was organized, and then, it is insisted, the new constitution became the law of the land. The legis- lature Bat through thai whole day, morning and evening; adjourned; mel the next day, and sal through all that day, morning and evening, and 'lir i mum-. The accused ha- only to prove that he has been systematic in committing crime, and that he thought that he had a right to com- mit it ; and. according to this doctrine, yon in u- 1 acquit The main ground upon which the prisoner Bought for a justification was, that a constitution had been adopted bj ;l majority of the male adult population "f this State, voting in their primary nr nat- ural capacity or Condition, and that h< subsequently elected, and did the charged, as governor under it lie ofl the votes themselves to prove it- adoption, which were also to be followed by i>r- his election. This evidence we have ruled 35 546 THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. out. Courts and juries, Gentlemen, do not count votes to determine whether a consti- tution has been adopted or a governor elected, or not Courts take notice, with- out proof offered from the bar, what the constitution is or was, ami who is or was the governor of their own State. It belongs to the legislature to exercise this high duty. It is tlie legislature which, in the exercise of its delegated sovereignty, counts the votes and declares whether a constitution be adopted or a governor elected, or not; and we cannot revise and reverse their acts in this particular, without usurping their power. Were the votes on the adoption of our present constitution now offered here to prove that it was or was not adopted; or those given for the governor under it, to prove that he was or was not elected; we could not receive the evidence ourselves, we could not permit it to pass to the jury. And why not? Because, if we did so, we should cease to be a mere judicial, and become a political tribunal, with the whole sovereignty in our hands. Neither the peo- ple nor the legislature would be sovereign. We should be sovereign, or you would be sovereign; and we should deal out to par- ties litigant, here at our bar, sovereignty to this or that, according to rules or laws of our own making, and heretofore unknown in courts. " In what condition would this country be, if appeals could he thus taken to courts and juries? This jury might decide one way, and that another, and the sovereignty might he found here to-day, and there to- morrow. Sovereignty is above courts or juries, and the creature cannot sit in judg- ment upon its creator. Were this instru- ment offered as the constitution of a foreign state, we might, perhaps, under some cir- cumstances, require proof of its existence; but, even in that case, the fact would not he ascertained by counting the votes given at its adoption, hut by the certificate of the secretary of state, under the broad seal of the state. This instrument is not offered a- a foreign constitution, and this court is bound to know what the constitution of the government is under which it acts, without an} proof even of that high character. We know nothing of the existence of the so- called ' people's constitution ' as law, and there is no proof before von of its adoption, and of tin' election of the prisoner as gov- ernor under it ; and you can return a verdict only on the evidence that has passed to you." Having thus, may it please your hon^ ors, attempted to state the questions as they arise, and having referred to what lias taken place in Rhode Island, I shall present what further I have to say in three propositions: — 1st. I say, first that the matters offered to be proved by the plaintiff in the court below are not of judicial cog- nizance; and proof of them, therefore, was properly rejected by the court. 2d. If all these matters could be, and had been, legally proved, they would have constituted no defence, because they show nothing but an illegal attempt to overthrow the government of Rhode Island. 3d. No proof was offered by the plain- tiff to show that, in fact, another gov- ernment had gone into operation, by which the Charter government had become displaced. And first, these matters are not of judicial cognizance. Does this need areuine? Are the various matters of fact alleged, the meetings, the appoint- ment of committees, the qualifications of voters, — is there any one of all these matters of which a court of law can take cognizance in a case in which it is to decide on sovereignty? Are fundamen- tal changes in the frame of a govern- ment to be thus proved? The thing to be proved is a change of the sovereign power. Two legislatures existed at the same time, both claiming power to pass laws. Both could not have a legal ex- istence. What, then, is the attempt of our adversaries? To put down one sovereign government, and to put an- other up, by facts and proceedings in regard to elections out of doors, unau- thorized by any law whatever. Regular proceedings for a change of government may in some cases, perhaps, be taken notice of by a court; but this court must look elsewhere than out of doors, and to public meetings, irregular ami unau- thorized, for the decision of such a question as this. It naturally looks to that authority under which it sits here, to the provisions of the Constitution which have created this tribunal, and to the laws by which its proceedings are THE RHODE island i;< >vu;\\ii;\ i 547 regulated. It must, look to die acta of the government of the United States, in its various branches. This Rhode Island disturbance, as everybody knows, was broughl to the know ledge of tin' Presidenl of the United States 1 by the public authorities of Rhode Island; and DOW did lie treat it? The United States have guaranteed to each State a republican form of government, And a law of Congress has directed the President, in a constitutional case re- quiring the adoption of such a proceed- ing, to call out the militia to put down domestic violence, and suppress insur- rection. Well, then, application was made to the President of the United States, to the executive power of the United States. For, according to our system, it devolves upon the executive to determine, in the first instance, what are and what are not governments. The President recognizes governments, for- eign governments, as they appear from time to time in the occurrences of this changeful world. And the Constitution and the laws, if an insurrection exists against the government of any State, rendering it necessary to appear with an armed force, make it his duty to call out the militia and suppress it. Two things may here be properly con- sidered. The first is, that the Constitu- tion declares that the United States shall protect every State against domestic vio- lence; and the law of 1795, making pro- vision for carrying this constitutional duty into effect in all proper cases, de- clares, that, " in case of an insurrection in any State against the government thereof, it shall be lawful for the Presi- dent of the United States to call out the militia of other States to suppress such insurrection. " These constitutional and legal provisions make it the indispensa- ble duty of the President to decide, in cases of commotion, what is the rightful government of the State. He cannot avoid such decision. And in this case he decided, of course, that the existing government, the charter government, was the rightful government. He could not possibly have decided otherwise. 1 Mr. Tyler. In the next plane, if events bad made it accessary to Call out tip' militia, and il fflcei - .nnl soldiers of Bach militia, in protecting the existing government, had do,,,, precisely what the defendants in this case did, could an action have 1 n maintained against them? \" "in' would asserl so absurd a pro] tiun. In reply to the requisition of the Gov- ernor, the Presidenl stated thai he did nut think it was yel time for tin- appli- cation of force; but he wrote a left the Secretary of War, in whirl! he di- rected him to confer with the Governor "I Rhode Island; and, whenever it should appear to them to be n sssary, to call out from Massachusetts and Connecticut a militia force sufficient to terminate 'it once this insurrection, by the authority of the government of the United St i We are at no loss, therefore, to know how the executive government of the United States treated this insurrection. It was regarded as fit to be suppressed. That is manifest from the President's letters to the Secretary of War and to Governor King. Now, the eye of this court must be directed to the proceedings of the gen- eral government, which had it- attention called to the subject, and which did insti- tute proceedings respecting it. And the court will learn from the proceedings of the executive branch of the government, and of the two chambers above us, how the disturbances in Rhode [sland • regarded; whether they were looked upon as the establishment of any government, or as a mere pure, unauthorized, un- qualified insurrection against the author- ity of the existing government of the State. I say, therefore, that, upon that ground, these facts are not fact- which this court can inquire into, or which the court below could try ; because thej facts going to prove (if they prove any thing) the establishment of a new sov- ereignty; ami that is a question to ho settled elsewhere and otherwise. Prom the very nature of the case, it i- D question to be decided by judicial in- quiry. Take, for example, one of the :>\< THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. points ■which it involves. My adversary offered to prove that the constitution was adopted by a majority of the people of Rhode [sland; by a large majority, as he alleges. What does this offer call on your honors to do? Why. to ascertain, by proof, what is the nnmber of citizens of Rhode Island, and how many attended the meetings at which the delegates to the convention were elected; and then you have to add them all up, and prove by testimony the qualifications of every one of them to be an elector. It is enough to state such a proposition to show its absurdity. As none such ever was sustained in a court of law, so none can be or ought to be sustained. Ob- serve that minutes of proceedings can be no proof, for they were made by no authentic persons; registers were kept by no warranted officers; chairmen and moderators were chosen without author- ity. In short, there are no official rec- ords; there is no testimony in the case but parol. Chief Justice Durfee has stated this so plainly, that I need not dwell upon it. But, again, I say you cannot look into the facts attempted to be proved, be- cause of the certainty of the continuance of the old government till the new and legal constitution went into effect on the :;.l of May. 1843. To prove that there was another constitution of two days' duration would be ridiculous. And I say that the decision of Rhode Island herself, by her legislature, by her execu- tive, by the adjudication of her highest court of law, on the trial of Dorr, has shut up the whole case. Do you propose. — I will not put it in that form, — but would it be proper for this court to reverse that adjudication? That de- clarer that the judges of Rhode Island know nothing of the 1 " People's Consti- tution.'* Is it possible, then, for this court, or for the court below, to know any thing of it ? It appears to me that, if there were nothing else in the case, the proceedings ,,! Rhode [sland herself must close every- body's mouth, in tie- COUrl ami out of it. Rhode [sland is competenl to decide the question herself, aid everybody else ought to be bound by her decision. And she has decided it. And it is but a branch of this to say, according to my second proposition, — 2. That if every thing offered had been proved, if in the nature of the case these facts an«l proceedings could have been received as proof, the court could not have listened to them, because everyone of them is regarded by the State in which they took place as a criminal act. Who can derive any authority from acts declared to be criminal? The very pro- ceedings which are now set up here show that this pretended constitution was founded upon acts which the legis- lature of the State had provided punish- ment for, and which the courts of the State have punished. All, therefore, which the plaintiff has attempted to prove, are acts which he was not allowed to prove, because they were criminal in themselves, and have been so treated and punished, so far as the State gov- ernment, in its discretion, has thought proper to punish them. 3. Thirdly, and lastly, I say that there is no evidence offered, nor has any dis- tinct allegation been made, that there w r as an actual government established and put in operation to displace the Charter government, even for a single day. That is evident enough. You find the whole embraced in those two days, the 3d and 4th of May. The French revolution was thought to be somewhat rapid. That took three days. But this work was accomplished in two. It is all there, and what is it? Its birth, its whole life, and its death were accom- plished in forty-eight hours. What does it appear that the members of this gov- ernment did? Why, they voted that A should be treasurer, and C, secretary, and Mr. Dorr, governor; and chose offi- cers of the Supreme Court. But did ever any man under that authority at- tempt to exercise a particle of official power? Did any man ever bring a suit'/ Did ever an officer make an arrest? Did any act proceed from any member of this government, or from any agent of it, to touch a citizen of Rhode Island in his person, his safety, or his property, TI1K KIIODK ISLAND (iOVKKN.MEN I >49 so as to make tin- party answerable upon an indictment or in a civil Bail '.' Never. It never performed One single act of government. It never did a thing in the world! All was patriotism, and all was paper; and with patriotism and with paper it went out on the lili of May, admitting itself to be, as all must regard it, a contemptible sham .' I have now done with the principles involved in tins ease, and the questions presented on this record. In regard to the other ease, I have but few winds to say. And, first, I think it is to he regretted that the court below sent up such a list of points on which it was divided. I shall not go through them, and shall leave it to the court to say whether, after they shall have dis- posed of the first cause, there is any thine left. I shall only draw attention to the subject of martial law; and in respect to that, instead of going hack to martial law as it existed in England at the time the charter of Rhode Island w as granted, I shall merely observe that martial law confers power of arrest, of summary trial, and prompt execution; and that when it has been proclaimed, the land becomes a camp, and the law of the camp is the law of the land. Mr. Justice Story defines martial law to be the law of war, a resort to military au- thority in cases where the civil law is not sufficient; and it confers summary power, not to be used arbitrarily or for the gratification of personal feelings of hatred or revenge, but for the preserva- tion of order and of the public peace. The officer clothed with it is to judge of the degree of force that the necessity of the case may demand; and there is no limit to this, except such as is to be found in the nature and character of the exigency. I now take leave of this whole case. That it is an interesting incident in the history of our institutions, I freely ad- mit. That it has come hither is a sub- ject of no regret to me. I might have said, that I see nothing to complain of in the proceedings of what is called the Charter government of Rhode Island, except that it might perhaps have dis- creetly taken measures at an » -,t 1 1 i«- r period for revining th nstitution. Ii in that delaj it ei red, it was the ei tor into which j >i in l.-iit ami cautious men would fall. A- to the enormity of ft bold suffrage, how long is it sinoe Vir- ginia, the parent of States, gave up her freehold suffrage? Hovi long i- it since nobody voted for governor in Hem York without a freehold qualification? There are ii"W States in which no man can rote for members of the upper branch of tin' legislature who dues cot own fifty acres of land. Every State requires more or less of a property qualification in its officers and electors; ami it U discreel legislation, or constitutional pro- visions, to determine what its amount shall he. Even tl.e Dorr constitution had a property qualification. Accord- ing to its provisions, for officers of the State, to be sure, anybody could i but its authors remembered that taxa- tion and representation go together, and therefore they declared that no man, in any town, should vote to lay a tax for town purposes who had not the means to pay his portion. It .-aid to him, You cannot vote in the town of Providence to levy a tax for repairing the streets of Providence; hut you may vote for governor, and for thirteen rep- resentatives from the town of Provi- dence, and send them to the legislature, and there they may tax the } pl< Rhode Island at their sovereign will and pleasure. I believe that no harm can Come of the Rhode Island agitation in 1841, but rather good. It will purify the political atmosphere from -one- of its noxious mists, and I hope it will clear m minds from unfounded notion.- and dan- gerous delusions. 1 hope it will bring them to look at the regularity, the or- der, with which we carry on what, if the word were not so much abused, 1 Would call our glorious representative -y-t.-m of popular government. It- principles will stand the test of thiseri-i-. a- they I stood the tesl and torture of others. They are exposed always, and they always will be exposed, to d Then ;,:,(. THE RHODE ISLAND GOVERNMENT. dangers from the extremes of too much and of too little popular liberty; from monarchy, or military despotism, on one side, and from licentiousness and anarchy on the other. This always will !'.■ the case. The classical navi- gator had been told that he must pass a narrow and dangerous strait: •• Dextrum Seylla latus, hevum implacata Cha- rvbdis, Ob-i.lCt." Forewarned he was alive to his danger, and knew, by signs not doubtful, where he was, when he approached its scene: " I'.t i_'cmiUim ingentom pi'lagi, pulsataque saxa, Andimus lenge, fractasque ad litora voces ; Exsultantque vada, atque aestu miscentur arena;. .... Nimirum lure, ilia Charybdis!" The long-seeing sagacity of our fathers enables us to know equally well where we are, when we hear the voices of tumultuary assemblies, and see the turbulence created by numbers meeting and acting without the restraints of law; and has most wisely provided con- Bi it utional means of escape and security. "When the established authority of gov- ernment is openly contemned ; when no deference is paid to the regular and au- thentic declarations of the public will; when assembled masses put themselves above the law, and, calling themselves the people, attempt by force to seize on the government; when the social and political order of the state is thus threat- ened with overthrow, and the spray of the waves of violent popular commotion lashes the stars, — our political pilots may well cry out: "Nimirum luec ilia Charybdis! " The prudence of the country, the sober wisdom of the people, has thus far enabled us to carry this Constitu- tion, and all our constitutions, through the perils which have surrounded them, without running upon the rocks on one side, or being swallowed up in the eddy- ing whirlpools of the other. And I fer- vently hope that this signal happiness and good fortune will continue, and that our children after us will ex- ercise a similar prudence, and wis- dom, and justice; and that, under the Divine blessing, our system of free government may continue to go on, with equal prosperity, to the end of time. OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR A SPEECH DELIVERKD IN Till: M.NATK OK TIIF. IMII.h BTATE8, OH MIL 23d OF MARCH, 1848, ON THE HILL FROM MIL HOUSE OF REPRESENTA- TIVES FOR RAISING A LOAN OF SIXTEEN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, [On the 2d of February, 1848, the treaty called a " treaty of peace, friendship, limits. and settlement, between the United States of America and the Mexican Republic," was signed at Guadalupe Hidalgo. Tliis treaty, with the advice and consent of the Senate, was ratified by the President of the United States on the 16th of March. In the mean time, a bill, introduced into the House of Representatives on the 18th of February, to authorize a loan of sixteen millions of dollars for the purpose of carry- ing on the war, passed through that house, and was considered in the Senate. Other war measures were considered and adopted by the two houses, after the signature and ratification of the treaty. On the 28d of March, the Sixteen Million Loan Bill being under consideration, Mr. Webster spoke as follows.] Mr. President, — On Friday a bill passed the Senate for raising ten regi- me t its of new troops for the further prosecution of the war against Mexico; and we have been informed that that measure is shortly to be followed, in this branch of the legislature, by a bill to raise twenty regiments of volunteers for the same service. I was desirous of expressing my opinions against the ob- ject of these bills, against the supposed necessity which leads to their enact- ment, and against the general policy which they are apparently designed to promote. Circumstances personal to myself, but beyond my control, com- pelled me to forego, on that day, the execution of that design. The bill now before the Senate is a measure for rais- ing money to meet the exigencies of the government, and to provide the means, as well as for other things, for the pay and support of these thirty regime! sir, the scenes through which we have passed, and are passing, here, are various. For a fortnight the world supposes we have been occupied with the ratification of a treaty of peace, ami that within these walls, "the world shut out,'' notes of peace, ami hopes •■!' peace, nay, strong assurance- of pi and indications of peace, have I uttered to console and to cheer us. Sir, it has been over and over stated, and is public, that we have ratified a treaty, of course a treaty of peace, and, as the country has been led to Buppose, OOl of an uncertain, empty, and delusive peace, but of real and substantial, a gratifying and an enduring peace, a peace which would Btanch the wounds id" war, prevent the further flow of human blood, cut off these enormous expenses, ami return our friend-. our brothers, and our children, if they be yet living, from the laud of sla ter, and the land of still more dismal destruction by climate, to our fin - and our arms. Hardly have these halcyon r ceased upon our ears, when, in resumed OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. public session, we are summoned to fresh warlike operations; to create a m -w arinv of thirty thousand men for the t'mi her prosecution of the war; to carry the war, in the language of the President, still more dreadfully into the vital parts of the enemy, and to press home, by fire and sword, the claims we make, and the grounds which we insist. upon, against our fallen, prostrate, I ha.- no more fighting. In the presenl state of things, my opinion is thai the i pie of this country will not sustain the war. They will not go for its heavy expense-; they will not find any gratification in putting the bayonel to the throat- of the Mexican people. For my part. 1 hope the ten regiment bill will never be- come a law. Three weeks ago ] Bhould have entertained thai hope with the ut- mosl confidence; events instrucl me to abate my confidence. I still hope it will not pass. And here, T dare say, I shall be called by some a •• Mexican Whig." The man who can stand up here and say that he hopes that what the administration pro- jects, and the further prosecution of the war with Mexico requires, may nol be carried into effect, must be an enemy !■• his country, or what gentlemen have considered the same thing, an enemy to the President of the United State-, and to his administration and his party. He is a Mexican. Sir, I think very badly of the Mexican character, high and low, out and out; but names do nol terrify me. Besides, if 1 have • I in this respect, if 1 have rendered myself sub- ject to the reproachi - oi these stipendiary presses, these hired abusers of the mol 554 OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. of public men, T have the honor, on this occasion, to he in very respectable com- pany. In the reproachful sense of that term, I don't know a greater Mexican in tliis body than the honorable Senator from Michigan, the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs. Mb. Cass. Will the gentleman be good enough to explain what sort of a Mexican I am ! On the resumption of the bill in the Senate the other day. the gentleman told us thai its principal object was to frighten Mexico; it would touch his humanity too much to hurt her ! He would fright- en her — Mr. Cass. Does the gentleman affirm that 1 said that? Yes; twice. Mr. Cass. No, Sir, I beg your pardon, I did not say it. I did not say it would touch my humanity to hurt her. Be it so. M it. Cass. Will the honorable Senator allow me to repeat 1113" statement of the ob- ject of the bill'? I said it was twofold: first, that it would enable us to prosecute the war, if necessary ; and, second, that it would show Mexico we were prepared to do so ; and thus, by its moral effect, would induce her to ratify the treaty. The gentleman said, that the princi- pal object of the bill was to frighten Mexico, and that this would be more humane than to harm her. Mr. Cass. That's true. Well, Sir, the remarkable character- istic of that speech, that which makes it .so much a Mexican speech, is, that the gentleman spoke it in the hearing of Mexico, as well as iii the hearing of this Senate. We are accused here, because what we say is heard by Mexico, and Mexico derives encouragement from w hat is said here. And yet the honorable member comes forth and tells Mexico thai the principal object of the bill is to frighten her! The words have passed along the wires; they are on the Gulf, and ao- floating awa\ to Vera ( 'ruz ; and when they gel there, thej will Bignify to Mexico, " After all. ye good Mexicans, my principal object is to frighten you; and to the end that you may not be frightened too much, I have given you this indication of my purpose." But, Sir, in any view of this case, in any view of the proper policy of this government, to be pursued according to any man's apprehension and judgment, where is the necessity for this augmenta- tion, by regiments, of the military force of the country? I hold in my hand here a note, which I suppose to be substan- tially correct, of the present military force of the United States. I cannot answer for its entire accuracy, but I be- lieve it to be substantially according to fact. We have twenty-five regiments of regular troops, of various arms; if full, they would amount to 28,960 rank and file, and including officers to 30,296 men. These, with the exception of six or seven hundred men, are now all out of the United States and in field service in Mexico, or en route to Mexico. These regiments are not full; casualties and the climate have sadly reduced their numbers. If the recruiting service were now to yield ten thousand men, it would not more than fill up these regiments, so that every brigadier and colonel and cap- tain should have his appropriate and his full command. Here is a call, then, on the country now for the enlistment of ten thousand men, to fill up the regi- ments in the foreign service of the United States. I understand, Sir, that there is a re- port from General Scott; from General Scott, a man who has performed the most brilliant campaign on recent mili- tary record, a man who has warred against the enemy, warred against the climate, warred against a thousand un- propitious circumstances, and has car- ried the flag of his country to the capital of the enemy, honorably, proudly, hu- manely, to his own permanent honor, and the great military credit of his coun- try, — General Scott; and where is he ? At Pueblal at Puebla, undergoing an inquiry before his inferiors in rank, and other persons without military rank; while the high powers lie has exercised, and exercised with so much distinction, OIUKCTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. 555 are transferred to another, I do DOl sav to one unworthy of them, but t" one in- feriorin rank, station, and experience to himself. Hut General Scott reports, as I un- derstand, that, in February, there were twenty thousand regular troops under his command and ui routr, and we have thirty regiments of volunteers for the war. If full, this would make thirty- four thousand men, or, including officers, thirty-five thousand. So that, if the regi- ments were full, there is at this mo nt a number of troops, regular and volun- teer, of not less than fifty-five or sixty thousand men, including recruits on the way. And with these twenty thousand men in the field, of regular troops, there were also ten thousand volunteers; mak- ing, of regulars and volunteers under General Scott, thirty thousand men. The Senator from Michigan knows these things better than I do, but 1 believe this is very nearly the fact. Now all these troops are regularly officered; there is no deficiency, in the line or in the staff, of officers. They are all full. Where there is any deficiency it consists of men. Now, Sir, there may be a plausible reason for saying that there is difficulty in recruiting at home for the supply of deficiency in the volunteer regiments. It may be said that volunteers choose to enlist under officers of their own knowl- edge and selection; they do not incline to enlist as individual volunteers, to join regiments abroad, under officers of whom they know nothing. There may be some- thing in that; but pray what conclusion does it lead to, if not to this, that all these regiments must moulder away, by casualties or disease, until the privates are less in number than the officers themselves. But however that may be with respect to volunteers, in regard to recruiting for the regular service, in filling up the regi- ments by pay and bounties according to existing laws, or new laws, if new ones are necessary, there is no reason on earth why we should now create five hundred new officers, for the purpose of getting ten thousand more men. The oil are already then-; in thai rasped there is no deficiency. All that is wanted is men. ami then i- place for the men; and I suppose no gentleman, ben elsewhere, thinks thai recruiting will go on fastei than would In- necessary to ob- tain men to till up the deficiencies in the regiments abroad. But now. Sir, what do we want of a greater force than we have in Mei I am not , ; ,s ing, What do we want force greater than we can supply? but, What is the ol.j.ct of bringing these new regiments into the field? What do we propose? There is no army to fight. I suppose there are not five hundred men under aims in an\ pari of Mexico; probably not hall' that number, except. in one place. Mexico is prostrate. It is not the government that resists us. Why, it is notorious that the government of Mexico is on our Bide, that it is an in- strument by which we hope to establish such a peace, and accomplish such a treaty, as we like. As far as I under- stand the matter, the government of Mexico owes its life and breath and being to the support of our aims, and to the hope, I do not say how inspired, that somehow or other, and at no dis- tant period, she will have the pecuniary means of carrying it on, from our ti millions, or our twelve millions, or from some of our other millions. What do we propose to do, then, with these thirty regini'-nts which it is de- signed to throw into Mexico? Are we going to cut the throats of her people? Are we to thrust the sword deeper and deeper into the •• vital part-" of Mexico? What is it proposed to do? Sir, I can see no object in it; and yet, while we are pressed and urged to adopt this proposition to raise ten and twenty regiments, we are told, and the public is told, and the public believes, that we are on the verge of a safe and an hon- orable peace. Ilverv one look- every morning for tidings of a confirmed peace, or of contin l hopes of peace. We gather il from the administration, and from every organ of the administration From Dan to Beersbeba. And \.-t war- like preparations, the incurring 55G OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. penses, the imposition of new charges upon the treasury, arc pressed here, as if peace were not in all our thoughts, at leasl not in any of our expectations. Now, Sir, 1 propose to hold a plain talk to-day; and I say that, according to my best judgment, the object of the bill is patronage, office, the gratification of friends. This very measure for raising ten regiments creates four or five hun- dred officers; colonels, subalterns, and not them only, for for all these I feel some respect, but there are also pay- masters, contractors, persons engaged in the transportation service, commissaries, even down to sutlers, et id genus omne, people who handle the public money without facing the foe, one and all of whom are true descendants, or if not, true representatives, of Ancient Pistol, who said, " I shall sutler be Unto the camp, and profits will accrue." Sir, I hope, with no disrespect for the applicants, and the aspirants, and the ] .at riots (and among them are some sin- cere patriots) who would fight for their country, and those others who are not ready to right, but who are willing to be paid, — with due respect for all of them according to their several degrees and their merits, I hope they will all be dis- appointed. I hope that, as the pleasant season advances, the whole may find it for their interest to place themselves, of mild mornings, in the cars, and take their destination to their respective places of honorable private occupation ami of civil employment. They have inv guod wishes that they may find the way to their homes from the Avenue and the Capitol, and from the purlieu,-, of the President's house, in good health them- selves, and that they may find their fam- ilies all very happy to receive them. But, Sir, i" -peak more seriously, this war was waged lor the object of creating new States, "ii the southern frontier of the United States, out of Mexican terri- tory, and with such population as could be found resident thereupon. 1 have opposed this object, [amagainst all ac- cessions of territory to form new States. And this is DO mailer of sentimentality, which I am to parade before mass meet- ings or before my constituents at home. It is not a matter with me of declama- tion, or of regret, or of expressed repug- nance. It is a matter of firm, unchange- able purpose. 1 yield nothing to the force of circumstances that have oc- curred, or that I can consider as likely to occur. And therefore I say, Sir, that, if I were asked to-day whether, for the sake of peace, I would take a treaty for adding two new States to the Union on our southern border, I would say. Xn ! distinctly, No! And I wish every man in the United States to un- derstand that to be my judgment and my purpose. I said upon our southern border, be- cause the present proposition takes that locality. I would say the same of the western, the northeastern, or of any other border. I resist to-day, and for ever, and to the end, any proposition to add any foreign territory, south or west, north or east, to the States of this Union, as they are constituted and held together under the Constitution. I do not want the colonists of England on the north; and as little do I want the population of Mexico on the south. I resist and reject all, and all with equal resolution. Therefore I say, that, if the question were put to me to-day, whether I would take peace under the present state of the country, distressed as it is, during the existence of a war odious as this is, under circumstances so afflictive as now exist to humanity, and so dis- turbing to the business of those whom I represent, — I say still, if it were put to me whether I would have peace, with new States, I would say. No ! no ! And that because, Sir. in my judgment, there is no necessity of brine- driven into that. dilemma, other gentlemen think dif- ferently. 1 hold no man's conscience; but I mean to make a clean breast of it myself; and 1 protest that I see no rea- son, 1 believe there is none, why we cannot obtain as safe a peace, as honor- able and as prompt a peace, without ter- ritory as with it. The two things are separable. There is no necessary con- nection between them. Mexico does not oiukcts (»]' Tin: \ir\n \\ w\i; 557 wish us to take her territory, while Bhe receives our money • Far from it. She yields Iht assent, it Bhe yields it a1 all, reluctantly, and we all Limw it. It is the result of force, and there is no man here who does not know that. And let me say, Sir, that, it' this Trisi paper shall finally be rejected in Mexico, it is most likely to be because those who un- der our protection hold the power there cannot persuade the Mexican Congress or people to agree to this cession of ter- ritory. The thing most likely to break up what we now expect to take place is the repugnance of the Mexican people to part With their territory. They would prefer to keep their territory, and that we should keep our money; as I prefer we should keep our money, and they their territory. We shall see. I pretend to no powers of prediction. I do not know what may happen. The times are full of strange events. But I think it certain that, if the treaty which has gone to Mexico shall fail to be ratified, it will be because of the aversion of the Mexican Congress, or the Mexican peo- ple, to cede the territory, or any part of it. belonging to their republic. I have said that I would rather have no peace for the present, than have a peace which brings territory for new States; and the reason is, that we shall get peace as soon without territory as with it, more safe, more durable, and vastly more honorable to us, the great republic of the world. But we hear gentlemen say, We must have some territory, the people demand it. I deny it; at least, I see no proof of it whatever. I do not doubt that there are individuals of an enterprising char- acter, disposed to emigrate, who know nothing about New Mexico but that it is far off , and nothing about California but that it is still farther off, who are tired of the dull pursuits of agriculture and of civil life; that there are hundreds and thousands of such persons to whom whatsoever is new and distant is attrac- tive. They feel the Bpirit of borderers; and the spirit of a borderer. I take it. is to be tolerably contented with his condi- tion where he is. until S body go.- to regions beyond him; and then be is all eagerness to take up his traps and go still farther than he who QM thus got in advance of him. With such men the de-ire i., emigrate b an irresistible pas- Bion. At least bo thought th cious observer "i human nature, m. de Talleyrand, when he travelled in tins country in 17!' I. lint I Bay I d t find anywhere any considerable and respectable body of persons who want more territory, and such territory. Twenty-four of us last year in this hone roted against the prosecution of the war lor territory, be- cause we diil not want it. both Southern and Northern men. [ believe the South- ern gentlemen who concurred in that vote found themselves, even when they had gone against what might he sup- posed to he local feelings and partiali- ties, sustained on the genera] policy of not seeking territory, and 1>\ the acqui- sition of territory bringing into our pol- itics certain embarrassing and embroil- ing questions and considerations. I do not learn that they suffered from the advocacy of such a sentiment. | believe they were supported in it; ami I believe that through the greater part of the South, and even of the Southwest, there is no prevalent opinion in favor of ac- quiring territory, ami such territory, and of the augmentation of our population by such an accession. And such. I need not say. is. if not the undivided, the prep lending sentiment of all the North. But it is said we must take territory for the sake of peace. We must take territory. It is the will of the Presi- dent. If we do not now take what he otters, we may fare worse. Mr. Polk will take no less, that he is fixed upon. ITe is immovable. He -has — put — down— his— foot I Well, Sir, lie put it down upon '• fifty-four forty," but it didn't stay. I speak of the President, as of all Presidents, without disrespect. I know of no reason why his opinion and his will, his purpose, declared t.. be final, should control US, any more than our purpose, from equally conscientious motives, and under as high responsibili- -,:,s OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. ties, should control him. We think he ifi tii in. and will not he moved. I should be sorry, Sir. very sorry indeed, that we should entertain more respect for the firmness of the individual at the head of the government than we entertain for our own firmness, lie stands out against u^. Do we fear to stand out against him? For one, I do not. It appears to me to be a slavish doctrine. For one, I am willing to meet the issue, and go to the people all over this broad land. Shall we take peace without new States, or refuse peace without new States? I will stand upon that, and trust the peo- ple. And I do that because I think it right, and because I have no distrust of the people. I am not unwilling to put it to their sovereign decision and arbi- tration. I hold this to be a question vital, permanent, elementary, in the fu- ture prosperity of the country and the maintenance of the Constitution; and I am willing to trust that question to the people. I prefer that it should go to them, because, if what I take to be a great constitutional principle, or what is essential to its maintenance, is to be broken down, let it be the act of the people themselves; it shall never be my act. I, therefore, do not distrust the ] pie. 1 am willing to take their sen- timent, from the Gulf to the British Provinces, and from the ocean to the Missouri: Will you continue the war for territory, to be purchased, after all, at an enormous price, a price a thousand times the value of all its purchases, or take peace, contenting yourselves with the honor we have reaped by the mili- tary achievements of the army? Will you take peace without territory, and pivserve the integrity of the Constitu- tion of the country? I am entirely will- ing to stand upon that question. I will therefore take the issue: Peace, with u<> in a- States, keeping c, it' they will have territory and add new States to the Union, let them do so; and let them be the artificers of their own fortune, for good or for evil. But, Sir, we tremble before executive power. The truth cannot be concealed. We tremble before executive power! Mr. Folk will take no less than this. If we do not take this, the king's anger may kindle, and he will give us what is worse. But now, Sir, who and what is Mr. Polk? I speak of him with no manner of disrespect. I mean, thereby, only to ask who and what is the President of the United States for the current mo- ment. He is in the last year of his ad- ministration. Formally, officially, it can only be drawn out till the fourth of March, while really and substantially we know that two short months will, or may, produce events that will render the dura- tion of that official term of very little im- portance. AYe are on the eve of a Presi- dential election. That machinery which is employed to collect public opinion or party opinion will be put in operation two months hence. We shall see its result. It may be that the present incumbent of the Presidential office will be again pre- sented to his party friends and admirers for their suffrages for the next Presiden- tial term. I do not say how probable or improbable this is. Perhaps it is not entirely probable. Suppose this not to be the result, what then? Why, then Mr. Polk becomes as absolutely insig- nificant as any respectable man among the public men of the United States. Honored in private life, valued for his private character, respectable, never em- inent, in public life, he will, from the moment a new star arises, have just as little influence as you or I; and, so far as I am concerned, that certainly is little enough. Sir, political partisans, and aspirants, and office-seekers, are not sunflowers* They do not " turn to their god when he sets The same look which they turned when he rose." No, Sir, if the respectable gentleman now at the head of the government be 0BJECT8 OE THE MEXICAN W AR Dominated, there will Ik; tli<>>.- wlm will oommend his consistency, who will be bound to maintain it, for the interest of his party friends will require it. It will !»■ done. I E others ise, who is there in the whole length and breadth of the land that will care for the consistency of the presenl incumbent <>t" the office? There will then be new objects. •• .Man- ifest destiny" will have pointed out some other man. Sir, the eulogies are now written, the commendations are already elaborated. 1 do not say every thing fulsome, but every thing pane- gyrical, lias already been written out, with blanks for names, to be filled ■when the convention shall adjourn. When "manifest destiny" shall be un- rolled, all these strong panegyrics, wher- ever they may light, made beforehand, laid up in pigeon-holes, studied, framed, emblazoned, and embossed, will all come out: and then there will be found to be somebody in the United States whose merits have been strangely overlooked, marked out by Providence, a kind of miracle, while all will wonder that no- body ever thought of him before, as a fit, and the only tit, man to be at the bead of this great republic! I shrink not, therefore, from any thing that I feel to be my duty, from any ap- prehension of the importance and impos- ing dignity, and the power of will, as- cribed to the present incumbent of office. But I wish we possessed that power of will. I wisli we had that firmness. Yes, Sir, I wish we had adherence. I wish we could gather something from the spirit of our brave forces, who have met the enemy under circumstances most adverse and have stood the shock. I wish we could imitate Zachary Taylor in his biv- ouac on the field of Buena Vista. He said he -'would remain for the night; he would feel the enemy in the morning. and try his position." I wish, before we surrender, we could make up our minds to " feel the enemy, and try his position," and I think we should find him, as Taylor did, under the early sun, on his way to San Luis Potosi. That is my judgment. But, Sir, I come to the all-absorbing question, more particularly, of the • tion of New States. Some years before I entered public life, Louisiana had i n obtained tinder the treat] with Prance. Shortly after, Florida was obtained under the t with Spain. These two countries were Bituated on our frontier, and command- ed tl atlets of the greal rivers which flow into the < rulf. As I have bad oc- casion to -a\ . in the first of these in- stances, the Presidenl of the United States' Bupposed thai an amendment of the Constitution was required. He acted upon thai supposition. Mr. Madi- Bon was Secretary of Mate, and, upon the suggestion of the President, pro- posed that the propel- amendment to the Constitution should l>e submitted, to bring Louisiana into the Union. Mr. Madia hew it, and submitted it to Mr. Adams, as I have understood. Mr. Madison did no! go upon any general idea that new States mighl be admitted; he did not proc 1 to a general amend- ment of the Constitution in thai respect. The amendment which he proposed and submitted to Mr. Adam- was a Bimple declaration, by a new article, thai " tin- Province of Louisiana is hereby declared to be part and panel of the United States." But public opinion, seeing the great importance of the acquisition, t<.ok a turn favorable to the affirmation of the power. The acl was acquiesced in. and Louisiana became a part of the Union, without any amendment of the Consti- tution. On the example of Louisiana. Florida was admitted. Now, Sir, I consider those transactions as passed, settled, Legalized. There they stand as matter, of political history. They are facts a-ain-t which it would be idle at this daj to contend. My flrsl agencj in matter- <>f this kind was upon the proposition for admitting Texas into this Union. That I thought it my duty to oppose, upon the genera] ground of opposing all formation of new State, oul of foreign territory, and. I may add, and I OUghl to add in just of Mate, in which .-lav.-, were t" be rep- 1 Mr. .1. ii. -.n. ;V,0 OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. resented in the Congress of the United States. I was opposed to this mi the ground of its inequality- It happened to me, sir. to 1"' called upon to address a political meeting in New York, in ls;',7. sunn after the recognition of Texan Independence. I state now, Sir, what 1 have often stated before, that no man, from the first, has been a more sincere well-wisher to the government and the people of Texas than myself. 1 looked upon the achievement of their indepen- dence in the battle of San Jacinto as an extraordinary, almost a marvellous, in- cident in the affairs of mankind. I was among the first disposed to ac- knowledge her independence. But from the first, down to this moment, I have o] 'posed, as far 'as I was able, the an- nexation of new States to this Union. 1 stated my reasons on the occasion now referred to, in language which I have now before me, and which I beg to pre- sent to the Senate. Air. Webster here read the passage from his speech at Niblo's Saloon, New York, which will be found in a previous part of this work, pages 429, 430, beginning, "But it cannot be disguised, Gentlemen, that a desire, or an intention, is already manifested to annex Texas to the United States." Well, Sir, for a few years I held a position in the executive administration of the government. I left the Depart- ment of State in 1843, in the month of May. Within a month after, another (an intelligent gentleman, for whom I cherished a high respect, and who came to a sad and untimely end) had taken m\ place, I had occasion to know, not officially, but from circumstances, that the annexation of Texas was taken up by Mr. Tyler's administration as an ad- ministration measure. It was pushed, pressed, insisted on ; and I believe the honorable gentleman to whom 1 have referred ' had something like a passion for the accomplishment of this purpose. A nd I am afraid that the President of the I nii'-d States - at that time suffered his ardent feelings qo! a little to control Mr. Upshur. - Mr. Tyler. his more prudent judgment. At any rate, I saw, in 1843, that annexation had become a purpose of the adminis- tration. 1 was not in Congress nor in public life. But, seeing this state of things, I thought it my duty to admon- ish the country, so far as I could, of the existence of that purpose. There are gentlemen at the North, many of them, there are gentlemen now in the Capitol, who know that, in the summer of 1843, being fully persuaded that this purpose was embraced with zeal and determina- tion by the executive department of the government of the United States, I thought it my duty, and asked them to concur with me in the attempt, to make that purpose known to the coun- try. I conferred with gentlemen of distinction and influence. I proposed means for exciting public attention to the question of annexation, before it should have become a party question; for I had learned that, when any topic becomes a party question, it is in vain to argue upon it. But the optimists and the quiet ists, and those who said, All things are well, and let all things alone, discouraged, discountenanced, and repressed any such effort. The North, they said. could take care of itself; the country could take care of itself, and would not sustain Mr. Tyler in his project of an- nexation. When the time should come, they said, the power of the North would be felt, and would be found sufficient to resist and prevent the consummation of the measure. And I could now refer to paragraphs and articles in the most re- spectable and leading journals of the North, in which it was attempted to produce the impression that there was no danger; there could be DO addition of new States, and men need not alarm themselves about that. I was not in Congress. Sir, when the preliminary resolutions, providing for the annexation of Texas, passed. 1 only know that, up to a very short period before (lie passage of those reso- lutions, the impression in that part of the country of which I have spoken was, that no such measure could be ni;.li;. TS of Till: MEXIC \N WAi: adopted. But I have found, in t h<- course of thirty years 1 experience, thai whatever measures the executive eminent may embrace and push are quite likely to Bucceed in the end. There is always a giving way Bome- where. The executive government ads with uniformity, with steadiness, with entire unity of purpose. And sooner or later, often enough, and, ac- cording to my construction of our his- tory, quite too often, it effects its purposes. In this way it heroines the predominating power of the govern- ment. Well, Sir, just hefore the commence- ment of the present administration, the resolutions for the annexation of Texas were passed in Congress. Texas com- plied with the provisions of those reso- lutions, and was here, or the case was here, on the L'lM day of December, 1845, for her final admission into the Union, as one of the States. I took occasion then to say, that I hoped I had shown all proper regard for Texas; that I had been certainly opposed to annexation; that, if I should go over the whole mat- ter again, I should have nothing new to add; that I had acted, all along, under the unanimous declaration of all par- ties, and of the legislature of Massa- chusetts; that I thought there must be some limit to the extent of our terri- tories, and that I wished this country should exhibit to the world the ex- ample of a powerful republic, without greediness and hunger of empire. And I added, that while I held, with as much faithfulness as any citizen of the coun- try, to all the original arrangements and compromises of the Constitution under which we live, I never could, and I never should, bring myself to be in favor of the admission of any States into the Union as slave-holding States; and I might have added, any States at all. to be formed out of territories not now belonging to us. Now, as I have said, in all this I acted under the resolutions of the State of Massachusetts, certainly concurrenl with my own judgment, so often re- peated, and reaffirmed by the unani- mous consenl of all men of all parties, that I could nut w.ll go through the series, pointing out, doI only the im- policy, luit the unconstitutionality, of Mich annexation. It a State pro] to come into the I In ion, and t" come in as a slave state, then there ii an aug- mentation of the inequality in the rep- resentati E the people; an inequality already existing, with which I do DOl quarrel, and which I never will attempt to alter, i>ui shall preserve as long as I have a vote to give, or any voice in this go> eminent . because it is a pari of the original < ipact- Lei it stand. But then there is another consideration of vastly more general importance even than that; more general, because it affects all the States, free and slave- holding ; and it is, that, if Si formed out of territories thus thinly populated come into the Union, they necessarily and inevitably break up the relation existing between the two branches of the government, and de- stroy its balance. They break up the intended relation between the Senate and the House of Representatives. If you bring in new State-, any Mate that comes in must have two Senators. She may come in with fifty or sixty thou- sand people, or more. You may have, from a particular State, more Senators than you have Representatives. Can anything occur to disfigure and dera the form of government under which we live more signally than that? Here would be a Senate bearing do propor- tion to the people, out of all relation to them, by the addition of new States; from some of them only one Repre- sentative, perhaps, and two Sena' whereas the larger States may have ten, fifteen, or even thirty Representati and but two Senators. The Senate, augmented by these new Senators com- ing from Mate- where there an- few peo- ple, become- an odious oligarchy. It holds power without any adequate con- stituency. Sir, it is but •• borough- mongering" upon a large Bcale. N 1 do nol depend upon theory; I a-k the Senate and the country to look at Ea to see where we were when we made our :w 5G2 OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. departure three years ago, and where we now are; and I Leave it to the imagina- tion to conjecture where we shall be. We admitted Texas, — one State for the present; but, Sir, if you refer to the resolutions providing for the annexation of Texas, you find a provision that it shall be in the power of Congress here- after to make four new States out of Texan territory. Present and prospec- tively, five new States, with ten Senators, may come into the Union out of Texas. Three years ago we did this; we now propose to make two States. Undoubt- edly, if we take, as the President recom- mends, New Mexico and California, there must then be four new Senators. We shall then have provided, in these territories out of the United States along our southern borders, for the creation of States enough to send fourteen Sen- ators into this chamber. Now, what will be the relation between these Sena- tors and the people they represent, or the States from which they come? I do not understand that there is any very accu- rate census of Texas. It is generally supposed to contain one hundred and fifty thousand persons. I doubt whether it contains above one hundred thousand. Mi;. Mangum. It contains one hundred and forty-nine thousand. My honorable friend on my left says, a hundred and forty-nine thousand. I put it down, then, one hundred and fifty thousand. Well, Sir, Texas is not des- tined, probably, to be a country of dense population. We will suppose it to have at the present time a population of near one hundred and fifty thousand. New Mexico may have sixty or seventy thou- ■ l inhabitants; say seventy thousand. In California, there are not supposed to he above t w ell I V-ti \C> thousand Iliell ; hilt undoubtedly, if this territory should be- come ours, persons from Oregon, and from our Western state-,, will find their way to San Franriseo. where there is some good land, and we may Suppose they will shortly amount to sixty or sev- enty thousand. We will put them down e\ ent v i housand. Then the \\ hole territory in this estimate, which is as high as any man puts it, will contain two hundred and ninety thousand per- sons, and they will send us, whenever we ask for them, fourteen Senators; a population less than that of the State of Vermont, and not the eighth part of that of New York. Fourteen Senators, and not as many people as Vermont! and no more people than New Hamp- shire! and not so many people as the good State of New Jersey ! But then, Sir, Texas claims to the line of the Rio Grande, and if it be her true line, why then of course she absorbs a considerable part, nay, the greater part, of the population of what is now called New Mexico. I do not argue the ques- tion of the true southern or western line of Texas; I only say, that it is apparent to everybody who will look at the map, and learn any thing of the matter, that New Mexico cannot be divided by this river, the Rio Grande, which is a shal- low, fordable, insignificant stream, creep- ing along through a narrow valley, at the base of enormous mountains. New Mexico must remain together; it must be a State, with its seventy thousand people, and so it will be; and so will California. But then, Sir, suppose Texas to re- main a unit, and but one State for the present; still we shall have three States, Texas, New Mexico, and California. We shall have six Senators, then, for less than three hundred thousand peo- ple. We shall have as many Senators for three hundred thousand people in that region as we have for New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, with four or five millions of people; and that is what we call an equal representation! Is nut this enormous? Have gentlemen con- sidered this? Have they looked at it? Are they willing to look it in the face, and then say they embrace it? 1 trust, Sir, the people will look at it and con- sider it. And now let me add, that this disproportion can never be diminished; it must remain for ever. How are you going to diminish it? Why, here is Texas, with a hundred and forty-nine thousand people, witbrone State. Sup- pose that population should flow into OHJKCTS OF 'NIK MEXIC \ \ W \K Texas, wlicrc will it go? NTol to any dense point, but to lie spread over all i hat region, in places remote from the Gulf, in places remote from what is novi the capital of Texas; and therefore, as soon as there are in other portions of Texas people enough within our com* i in m construction of the Constitution our practice in respect to the admission of states, my honorable friend from Texas 1 will have a new Stat.', and 1 have no doubt he has chalked it out already. As to New Mexico, its population is not likely to increase. It is a settled country; the people living along in the bottom of the valley on the sides of a little stream, a garter of land only on one side and the other, filled by coarse landholders and miserable peons. It can sustain, not only under this cultivation, but under any cultivation that our Amer- ican race would ever submit to, no more people than are there now. There will, then, he two Senators for sixty thousand inhabitants in New Mexico to the end of our lives and to the end of the lives of our children. And how is it with California? We propose to take California, from the fortj - second degree of north latitude down to the thirty-second. We propose to take t' n degrees along the coast of the Pacific. Scattered along the coast for that great distance are settlements and villages and ports; and in the rear all is wilderness and barrenness, and Indian country. But if, just about San Francisco, and perhaps Monterey, emigrants enough should settle to make up one State, then the people five hundred miles off would have another State. And so this dis- proportion of the Senate to the people will go on, and must go on, and we can- not prevent it. I say, Sir, that, according to my con- scientious conviction, we are now fixing on the Constitution of the United States, and its frame of government, a mon- strosity, a disfiguration, an enormity! Sir, T hardly dare trust myself. I don'l know but I may be under some delusion. It may be the weakness of my eyes that i Mr. Rusk. Forms this monstrous apparition. Bat, if I ina\ trust myself, if I can persuade If that 1 am in my right mind, then ii does appear t" me thai we in 1 1 ■ I -- Sen- ate have been and air acting, and are likerj to be acting hereafter, and imme- diately . a pail which will form the I remarkable epoch in tin- history of our country. I bold it (<> be enormous, fla- grant, an outrage upon all tin' principles of popular republican government, and on the elementary provisions of tie 1 Con- stitution under which we live, and which we have sworn to suppoi I . But then, sir, what relieves the case from this enormity? What is our reli- ance? Why, it is that we stipulate that these new States Bhall only be brought in at a suitable time. And pray, what is to constitute the suitableness of time? Who is to judge of it? I tell you, Sir, that suitable time will oome when the pre] lerance of party power here makes it necessary to bring in new States. Be assured it will be a suitable time when votes are wanted in this Senate. \\ e have had some little experience of I 'I'.xas came in at a "suitable time," a very suitable time! Texas wa- Anally admitted in December, L845. My friend near me here, for whom I have a great regard, and whose acquaintance I have cultivated with pleasure, 1 took his seat in March, 1846, with his colleague. In July, L846, these two Texan votes tur I the balance in the Sena!.-, and over- threw the tariff of L842, in my judg- ment the best System of revenue | established in this country. Gentlemen on the opposite Bide think others They think ii fortunate. They think that was a suitable time, and they mean to lake eare that other times .-hall be equally suitable. I understand it per- feetly well. That is the difference of opinion between me and these honora- ble gentlemen. To their iH.liey. their objects, and their purposes the time suitable, and the aid was efficient and decisive. sir. in 1850 perhaps a similar •; (ion ma\ lie agitated here. It is not likely to he before that time, hut i Mr. Rusk. ;,.;i OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. tated it will be then, unless a change in the administration of tin- government shall take place. According to my ap- prehension, looking at general results as flowing from our established system of commerce and revenue, in two years from this time we shall probably be en- gaged in a new revision of our system: in the work of establishing, if we can, a tariff of specific duties; of protecting, if we can. our domestic industry and the manufactures of the country; in the work of preventing, if we can, the over- whelming Hood of foreign importations. Suppose that to be part of the future: that would be exactly the "suitable time," if necessary, for two Senators from New Mexico to make their appearance here! But. again, we hear another halcyon, soothing tone, which quiets none of my alarms, assuages none of my apprehen- sions, commends me to my nightly rest with no more resignation. And that is, the plea that we may trust the popular branch of the legislature, we may look to the House of Representatives, to the Northern and Middle States and even the sound men of the South, and trust them to take care that States be not ad- mitted sooner than they should be, or for party purposes. I am compelled, by experience, to distrust all such reli- ances. If we cannot rely on ourselves, when we have the clear constitutional authority competent to carry us through, and the motives intensely powerful, I beg to know how we can rely on others. Have we more reliance on the patriot- ism, the firmness, of others, than on our own? Besides, experience shows us that things of this sort may be sprung upon Congress and the people. It was so in the ease of Texas. It was so in the Twenty-eighth Congress. The mem- bers of that Congress were not chosen to decide the question of annexation or do annexation. They came in on other grounds, political and party, and were supported for reasons not connected with thai question. What then? The administration Bprung upon them the question of annexation. It obtained a map judgment upon it, and carried the measure of annexation. That is in- dubitable, as I could show by many in- stances, of which I shall state only one. Four gentlemen from the State of Con- necticut were elected before the ques- tion arose, belonging to the dominant party. They had not been here long before they were committed to annexa- tion ; and when it was known in Con- necticut that annexation was in contem- plation, remonstrances, private, public, and legislative, were uttered, in tones that any one could hear who could hear thunder. Did they move them'? Not at all. Every one of them voted for an- nexation! The election came on, and they were turned out, to a man. But what did those care who had had the benefit of their votes? Such agencies, if it be not more proper to call them such instrumentalities, retain respect no longer than they continue to be useful. Sir, we take New Mexico and Cali- fornia; who is weak enough to suppose that there is an end? Don't we hear it avowed every day, that it would be proper also to take Sonora, Tamaulipas, and other provinces of Northern Mex- ico? Who thinks that the hunger for dominion will stop here of itself? It is said, to be sure, that our present acqui- sitions will prove so lean and unsatis- factory, that we shall seek no further. In my judgment, we may as well say of a rapacious animal, that, if he has made one unproductive hunt, he will not try for a better foray. But further. There are some things one can argue against with temper, and submit to, if overruled, without morti- fication. There are other things that seem to affect one's consciousness of being a sensible man, and to imply a disposition to impose upon his common sense. And of this class of topics, or pretences, I have never heard of any thing, and I cannot conceive of any thing, more ridiculous in itself, more absurd, and more affrontivc to all sober judgment, than the cry that we are gec- ting indemnity by the acquisition of New Mexico and California. I hold they are not worth a dollar; and we pay for them vast sums of money! We OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN W \i;. have expended, as everybody knows, large treasures in the prosecution of the war; and now what is to constitute this indemnity V Whal do gentlemen mean by it ? Lei as see a little Imu this stands. We get a country; we get, in the first instance, a cession, or an ac- knowledgment of boundary, (I care nut which way you state it.) of the coun- try between the Nueces and the Rio Grande. What this countrj is appears from a publication made by a gentle- man in the other house. 1 He speak- of the country in the following manner: — " The country from the Nueces to the valley of the Rio Grande is poor, sterile, sandy, and barren, with not a single tree "f any size or value on our whole route. The only tree which we saw was the musquit- tree, and very few of these. The inus(|iiit is a small tree, resembling an old and de- cayed peach-tree. The whole country may be truly called a perfect waste, uninhabited and uninhabitable. There is not a drop of running water between the two rivers, except in the two small streams of San Salvador and Santa Gertrudis, and these only con- tain water in the rainy season. Neither of them had running water when we passed them. The chaparral commences within forty or fifty miles of the Rio Grande. This is poor, rocky, and sandy ; covered with prickly-pear, thistles, ami almost every sticking thing, constituting a thick and perfectly impenetrable undergrowth, bor any useful or agricultural purpose, the country is not worth a sous. " So far as we were able to form any opinion of this desert upon the other routes which had been travelled, its character, everywhere between the two rivers, is pretty much the same. We learned that the route pursued by General Taylor, south of ours, was through a country similar to that through which we passed; as also was that travelled by General Wool from San Antonio to Presidio on the Rio Grande. From what we both saw and heard, the whole command came to the conclusion which 1 have already expressed, that it was worth nothing. I have no hesitation in say- ing, that I would not hazard the life of one valuable and useful man for every foot of land between San Patricio and the valley of the Rio Grande. The country is not now, and can never be, of the slightest value." 1 Major Gaines. M ijor < raines has been there lately. lie is a competent observer. He i- con- tradicted by nobody. Ami bo far .■■.- that countrj i- concerned, I take ii granted that it is not worth a dollar. Now of New Mexico, what of that? Forty-nine fiftieths, at least, of the whole of New Mexico, an- a barren waste, a deceit plain of mountain, witli no wood, no timber. Little fagots for lighting a tire are carried thirtv or forty miles on mules. There i^ no fall of rain there, as in temperate climates. It is Asiatic in scenery altogether: enor- mously high mountains, running up some of them ten thousand feet, with narrow valleys at their bases, through which streams sometimes trickle along. A strip, a garter, winds along, through which runs the Rio Grande, from far away up in the Rocky Mountain latitude 83°, a distance of three or four hundred miles. Then- these sixty thousand persons reside. In tlie moun- tains on the right and left are Btreams which, obeying tin' natural tendem tributaries, should flow into the Rio Grande, and which, in certain seasons, when rains are abundant, do, BOme of them, actually leach the Rio Grande; while the greater pari always, and all for the greater pari of the year, never reach an outlet to the sea. but are ab- sorbed in the sands and deseii plaii the country. There is no cultivation there. There is cultivation where there is artificial watering or irrigation, and nowhere else. Men can live only in the narrow valley, and in the gorges of the mountains which rise round it. and not along the course of the streams w bich lose themselves in the .-and-. Now there is no public domain in New Mexico. Dot a foot of land, to the soil of which we shall obtain title. N,,t an acre becomes ours w hen the country becomes ours. More than that, the country 18 as full of i pie, such a- they are, as it is likely to be. There b not the least tiling in it to invite settlement from the fertile valley of the Mississippi. And 1 undertake to say. there would not be two hundred families of pet who would emigrate from the Ul :,.;.; OBJECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. States to New Mexico, for agricultural purposes, in fifty years. They could not live there. Suppose they were to cultivate the lands; (hey could only make them productive in a slight degree by irrigation or artificial watering. The people there produce little, and live on little. That is not the characteristic, I take it. el' the people of the Eastern or of thf Middle States, or of the Valley of the Mississippi. They produce a good deal, and they consume a good deal. Again, Sir, New IMexico is not like Texas. I have hoped, and I still hope, that Texas will be filled up from among ourselves, not with Spaniards, not with peons ; that its inhabitants will not be Mexican landlords, with troops of slaves, predial or otherwise. Mr. Rusk here rose, and said that lie dis- liked to interrupt the Senator, and there- fore lie had said nothing while he was de- scribing the country between the Nueces and the Rio Grande; hut he wished now to say, that, when that country conies to he known, it will be found to be as valuable as any part of Texas. The valley of the Rio Grande is valuable from its source to its mouth. But he did not look upon that as indemnity ; he claimed that as therightof \> cas. So far as the Mexican population is concerned, there is a good deal of it in Texas; and it comprises many respectable persons, wealthy, intelligent, and distin- guished. A good many are now moving in from New Mexico, and settling in Texas. I take what I say from .Major Gaines. But I am glad to hear that any part of New Mexico is fit for the foot of civil- ized man. And I am glad, moreover, that there are some persons in New Mi xico who are not so blindly attached to their miserable condition as not to make an effort to come out of their country, and get into a better. Sir, I would, if 1 had time, call the attention "I' the Senate to an instructive s] 'h made in the other house by Mr. Smith of Connecticut. He semis to have examined a!) the authorities, to have conversed will, all the travellers, to have corresponded with all our agents. Hi- Bpeecfa contains communications from all of them : and I commend il t" every man in the United States who wishes to know what we are about to ac- quire by the annexation of New Mexico. New Mexico is secluded, isolated, a place by itself, in the midst and at the foot of vast mountains, five hundred miles from the settled part of Texas, ' ' and as far from anywhere else! It does not belong anywhere ! It has no belong- ings about it! At this moment it is absolutely more retired and shut out from communication with the civilized world than Hawaii or any of the other islands of the Pacific sea. Iu seclusion v and remoteness, New Mexico may press hard on the character and condition of Typee. And its people are infinitely less elevated, in morals and condition, than the people of the Sandwich Islands. We had much better have Senators from Oahu. They are far less intelli- gent than the better class of our Indian neighbors. Commend me to the Chero- kees, to the Choctaws; if you please, speak of the Pawnees, of the Snakes, the Flatfeet, of any thing but the Dig- ging Indians, and I will be satisfied not to take the people of New Mexico. Have they any notion of our institu- tions, or of any free institutions? Have they any notion of popular government? Not the slightest ! Not the slightest on earth! When the question is asked, What will be their constitution? it is farcical to talk of such people making a constitution for themselves. They do not know the meaning of the term, they do not know its import. They know nothing at all about it; and I can tell you, Sir, that when they are made a Territory, and are to be made a State, such a constitution as the executive power of this government may think fit to send them will be sent, and will be adopted. The constitution of onx fellow- citizens of New Mexico will be framed in the city of Washington. Now what says in regard to all Mexico Colonel Hardin, thai most lamented and distinguished officer, honorably known as a member of the other house, and who has fallen gallantly lighting in the service of his country? Here is his description: — oii.M'.i is of Tin: MEXICAN WAR. 567 "Tin- whole country is miserable w a- tered. Large districts lia \ <• do water at all. The streams are Bmall, and at great dis- tances apart. <'nt' day we marched on the road from Monclova to Parras thirty Ave miles without water, a pretty Bevere day's marching for infantry. "Grass is very scarce, and Indeed there is uone at all in many regions for miles square. Its place is supplied with prickly- pear and thorny bushes. There is not one acre in two hundred, more probably not one in five hundred, of all the land w e have Been in Mexico, which can ever lie culti- vated : the greater portion of it is the most desolate region I could ever have imagined. The pure granite hills of New England are a paradise to it, for they are without the thorny briers and venomous reptiles which infest the barbed barrenness of Mexico. The good land and cultivated spots in Mexico are but dots on the map. Were it not that it takes so very little to support a Mexican, and that the land which is culti- vated yields its produce with little labor, it would he surprising how its sparse popula- tion is sustained. All the towns we have visited, with perhaps the exception of Par- ras, are depopulating, as is also the whole country. " The people are on a par with their land. One in two hundred or five hundred is rich, and lives like a nabob ; the rest are peons, or servants sold for debt, who work for their masters, and are as subservient as the slaves of the South, and look like In- dians, and, indeed, are not more capable of self-government. One man. Jacobus San- chez, owns three fourths of all the land our column has passed over in Mexico. We are told we have seen the best part of Northern Mexico; if so, the whole of it is not worth much. "I came to Mexico in favor of getting or taking enough of it to pay the expenses of the war. I now doubt whether all Northern Mexico is worth the expenses of our column of three thousand men. The expenses of the war must be enormous; we have paid enormous prices for every thing, much beyond the usual prices of the coun- try." There it is. That's all North Mexico; and New Mexico is not the better part of it. Sir, there is a recent traveller, not unfriendly to the United States, if we may judge from his work, for he speaks well nf as everywhere; an Englishman, Darned Etuxton. II'- gives an account "f the morals and the manners of the population "i New Mexico. And, Mr. President and Senators, I shall take leave to inl roduce you to th< ti to \«- your respected /■ ■'<'<••■ ■ i Men Mexico: — "It is remarkable that, although existing from the earliest times of tin- colonization of New Mexico, a period of two centui in a state of continual hostility with the numerous Bavage tribes "i Indians who surround their territory, and in constant insecurity of life and property from their attacks, being also tar removed from the enervating influences of large cities, and, in their isolated situation, entirely depend- ent upon their own resources, the inhabi- tants are totally destitute of those qualities which, for the above reasons, we might naturally have expected to distinguish them, and are as deficient in energj of character and physical courage as they are in all the moral and intellectual qualities In their social state but one degree removi d from the veriest Bavages, they might take a lesson even from these in morality and the conventional decencies of life. [mpo8ing no restraint on their passions, a shann I. -- and universal concubinage exist8, and a total disregard of morality, to which it would be impossible to find a parallel in any country calling itself ei\ ilized. A want of honorable principle, and consummate duplicity and treachery, characterize all their dealings. Liars by nature, tiny are treacherous and faithless to their friend-, cowardly and cringing to their enemh - : cruel, as all cowards are, they unit'' Bfl ferocity with their want of animal com as an example of which, their recent mas- sacre of Governor Bent, and other Ameri- cans, may he given, one of a hundred instances." These, Sir. are soon to be our beloved countrymen I Mr. President, Eor many years I have struggled in opposition to every thing \\ Inch I thoughl tended to strength- en the arm of executive power. I think it La growing more and more formid ever) day. And I think that by yielding to it in this, as in other instances, we give it a Btrength which it will be diffi- cult hereafter to resist. I think that it 568 nlMECTS OF THE MEXICAN WAR. is nothing less than the fear of executive power which induces us to acquiesce in the acquisition of territory; fear, /ear, and nothing else. In the little part which I have acted in public life, it has been my purpose to maintain the people of the United States, what the Constitution designed to make them, one people, one in interest, one in character, and one in political feeling. 11 we depart from that, we break it all up. What sympathy can there be be- tween the people of .Mexico and Califor- nia and the inhabitants of the Valley of the Mississippi and the Eastern States in the choice of a President? Do they know the same man ? Do they concur in any general constitutional principles? Not at all. Arbitrary governments may have ter- ritories and distant possessions, because arbitrary governments may rule them by different laws and different systems. Russia may rule in the Ukraine and the provinces of the Caucasus and Kamt- schatka by different codes, ordinances, or ukases. We can do no such thing. They must be of us, part of us, or else Btrangers. I tli ink I see that in progress which will disfigure and deform the Constitu- tion. While these territories remain territories, they will be a trouble and an annoyance; they will draw after them vast expenses; they will probably re- quire as many troops as we have main- tained during the last twenty years to p "end them against the Indian tribes. We must maintain an army at that im- mense distance. When they shall be- come States, they will be still more likely to give us trouble. I think I see a course adopted which is likely to turn the Constitution of the land into a deformed monster, into a curse rather than a blessing; in fact, a frame of an unequal government, not founded on popular representation, not founded on equality, but on the grossest inequality; and I think that this process will go on, or that there is danger that it will go on, until this Union shall fall to pieces. I resist it, to-day and always! Whoever falters or whoever flies, I con- tinue the contest! I know, Sir, that all the portents are discouraging. Would to God I could auspicate good influences! "Would to God that those who think with me, and myself, could hope for stronger support! Would that we could stand where we desire to stand! I see the signs are sinister. But with few, or alone, my position is fixed. If there were time, I would gladly awaken the country. I believe the country might be awakened, although it may be too late. For my- self, supported or unsupported, by the blessing of God, I shall do my duty. I see well enough all the adverse indica- tions. But I am sustained by a deep and a conscientious sense of duty; and while supported by that feeling, and while such great interests are at stake, I defy auguries, and ask no omen but my country's cause! EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY FROM THE TERRITORIES. REMABKS MADE IN THE SENATE OF THE DOTTED STATES, ON THE 12th OF AUGUST, 1848. [In the course of the first session of the Thirtieth Congress, a bill passed the House of Representatives to organize a govern- ment for the Territory of Oregon. This bill received several amendments on its passage through the Senate, and among them one moved by Mr. Douglass of Illi- nois, on the 10th of August, by which the eighth section of the law of the 6th of March, 1820, for the admission of Missouri, was revived and adopted, as a part of the bill, and declared to be " in full force, and binding, for the future organization of the territories of the United States, in the same sense and with the same understanding with which it was originally adopted." This, with some of the 'other amend- ments of the Senate, was disagreed to by the House. On the return of the hill to the Senate, a discussion arose, and continued for several days, on the question of agree- ment or disagreement with the amendments of the House to the Senate's amendments. The principal subject of tins discussion was whether the Senate would recede from the above-mentioned amendment moved by Mr. Douglass, which was finally decided in tin- affirmative. In these discussions, a con- siderahle portion of which was of a conver- sational character, Mr. Webster took a leading part ; hut of most of what was said hv him, as hy other Senators, no report has heen preserved. The session of the Senate at which the last and most animated dis- cussion of this suhject took place, nomi- nally on Saturday of the 12th of August, was prolonged till ten o'clock, a. m., of Sundaj . the 13th. In the course of the debate on this day Mr. Webster spoke as follow*. | I am very little inclined to prolong this debate, and I hope I am utterly dis- inclined to bring into it any new warmth or excitement. I wish to say a few words, however, first, upon the question as it is presented to us, as a parliamentary ques- tion; ami secondly, upon the genera] political questions involved in the de- bate. As a question of parliamentary pro- ceeding. I understand the case to be this. The House of Representatives sen! as a bill for the establishment of a territorial government in Oregon; and no motion has been made in the Senate fco -hike out any part of that bill. The bill pur- porting to respect Oregon, simply and alone, has not been the subject of any objection in this branch of the legisla- ture. The Senate has proposed do im- portant amendment to this bill, affect- ing Oregon itself; and the honorable member from Missouri 1 was right, en- tirely right, when lie said that the amendment now under consideration had no relation to Oregon. That is per- fectly true; and therefore the amend- ment which the Senate has adopted, and the House has disagr 1 to. has no connection with the immediate subject before it. The truth is, that it is an amendment by which the Senate w bins to have now a public, legal declaration, not respecting Oregon, but respecting the newly acquired territories of Cali- fornia and New Mexico. It wishes now to make a lit f slavery, which shall include those new territorj 1 Mr. Iicnton. 570 ]\( I.ISIOX OF SLAVERY FROM THE TERRITORIES. The amendment says that the line of the "Missouri Compromise" shall be the line to the Pacific, and then goes on to Bay, in the language of the bill as it 11. <\\ Mauds, that the Ordinance of 17>7 shall be applicable to Oregon; and therefore 1 say that the amendment proposed is. foreign to the immediate object of the bill. It does nothing to modify, restrain, or affect, in any way, the government which we propose to establish over Oregon, or the condition or character of that government, or of the people under it. In a parliamen- tary view, this is the state of the case. Now, Sir. this amendment has been attached to this bill by a strong major- ity of the Senate. That majority had the right, as it had the power, to pass it. The House disagreed to that amend- ment. If the majority of the Senate, who attached it to the bill, are of opin- ion that a conference with the House will lead to some adjustment of the question, by which this amendment, or something equivalent to it, may be adopted by the House, it is very proper for them to urge a conference. It is very fair, quite parliamentary, and there is not a word to be said against it. But my position is that of one ■who voted against the amendment, who thinks that it ought not to be attached to this bill; and therefore I naturally vote for the motion to get rid of it, that is, " to recede." So much for the parliamentary ques- tion. Now there are two or three polit- ical questions arising in this case, which I wish to state dispassionately; not to argue, but to state. The honorable member from Georgia,' for whom I have great respect, and with whom it is my delight to cultivate personal friendship, has .-fated, with great pro- priety, the importance of this question. lie has saiil, that it is a question in- teresting to the South and to the North, and one which may very well also attract i he attention of mankind. He has not ted any part of this too stione.lv. It is Buch a question. Without doubt . it i- a question which may well attract the 1 Mr. Berrien. attention of mankind. On the subjects involved in this debate, the whole world is not now asleep. It is wide awake; and I agree with the honorable mem- ber, that, if what is now proposed to be done by us who resist this amendment is, as he supposes, unjust and injurious to any portion of this community, or against its constitutional rights, that injustice should be presented to the civilized world, and we, who concur in the proceeding, ought to submit our- selves to its rebuke. I am glad that the honorable gentleman proposes to refer this question to the great tribunal of Modern Civilization, as well as the great tribunal of the American People. It is proper. It is a question of magni- tude enough, of interest enough, to all the civilized nations of the earth, to call from those who support the one side or the other a statement of the grounds upon which they act. Now I propose to state as briefly as I can the grounds upon which I pro- ceed, historical and constitutional; and will endeavor to use as few words as possible, so that I may relieve the Sen- ate from hearing me at the earliest possible moment. In the first place, to view the matter historically. This Constitution, founded in 1787, and the government under it, organized in 1789, do recognize the existence of slavery in certain States then belonging to the Union, and a particular description of slavery. I hope that what I am about to say may be received without any sup- position that I intend the slightest dis- respect. But this particular description of slavery does not, I believe, now exist in Europe, nor in any other civilized portion of the habitable globe. It is not a predial slavery. It is not analo- gous to the case of the jirnlinl slaves, or slaves glebes adscripti of Russia, or Hungary, or other states. It is a pecu- liar system of persona] slavery, by which the person who is called a slave is trans- ferable as a chattel, from hand to hand. 1 speak of this as a fact ; and that is the fact. And I will say further, perhaps other gentlemen may remember the in- stances, that although slavery, as a sys- EXCLUSION OF BLAVERY FROM THE TERRITORIES ... I triii cif servitude attached to the earth, exists in various countries of Europe, I am not at the present momenl aware of any place on the globe in which this property of man in a human I » « i 1 1 l^: as a Blave, transferable as a chattel, exists, except Ann-lira. Now, thai ii existed, in th«' form in which it still exists, in certain States, a1 the formation of this Constitution, and that the Cramers of that instrument, and those who adopted it, agreed that, as far as it existed, it should not be disturbed or interfered with by the new general government, there is no doubt. The Constitution of the United States recognizes it as an existing fact, an ex- isting relation between the inhabitants of the Southern States. I do not call it an "institution," because that term is not applicable to it; for that seems to imply a voluntary establishment. "When I first came here, it was a matter of frequent reproach to England, the mother country, that slavery had been entailed upon the colonies by her, against their consent, and that which is now considered a cherished " institu- tion " was then regarded as, I will not say an evil, hut an entailment on the Col- onies by the policy of the mother country against their wishes. At any rate, it stands upon the Constitution. The Con- stitution was adopted in 1788, and went into operation in 1780. When it was adopted, the state of the country was this: slavery existed in the Southern States; there was a very large extent of unoccupied territory, the whole Northwestern Territory, which, it was understood, was destined to be formed into States; and it was then determined that no slavery should exist in this terri- tory. I gather now. as a matter of in- ference from the history of the time and the history of the dehates, that tie' prevailing motives with the North for agreeing to this recognition of the ex- istence of slavery in the Southern States, and giving a representation to those States founded in pari upon their slaves, rested on the supposition that no acquisition of territory would be made to form new States on the south- ern frontier of this country, either by ii 'ii or conquest. No one looked to any acquisition of new territory on the southern or southwestern frontier. The exclusion "i ilaverj from tie- North- western Territory and tie- prospective abolition of the foreign slave trade were generally, the former unani- mously, agreed t" : and on tin- bat these considerations, the South insisted that when- slavery existed it Bhould U0t he interfered with, and that it should have a certain ratio of representation in Congress. And now, sir, I am one, who, believing Buch to !"• the under- standing on which the Constitution was frame. 1, mean t" abide by it. There is another principle, equally clear, by which I mean to abide; and that is, that in the Convention, and in the 6rs1 Congress, when appealed to on the Bubjecl by petitions, and all along in the history of this government, it was and has been a conceded point, that slavery in the Mates in which it exists is a matter of Mate regulation exclu- sively, and thai Congress has not the least power over it. orrighl to interfere with it. Therefore I say. that all agita- tions and attempts t,> disturb the rela- tions between master and Blave, by per- sons not living in the slav.- Mat's, are unconstitutional in their spirit, and are, in my opinion, productive of nothing hut evil and mischief. I countenance none of them. The manner in whieh the governments of those States where slavery exists are to regulate it. is for their own consideration, under their re- sponsibility to their constituents, to the genera] laws of propriety, humanity, and justice, and to God. Associations formed elsewhere, springing from a feel- ing of humanity, or any other cause, have nothing whatever to do with it. nor righl to interfere with it. I have never received any encouragement from me, ami they never will. In my opinion, the] have done nothing hut delav and defeat their own profl 1 objects. I have now stated, as I understand it. the condition of things upon the adop- tion of the Constitution of the L'l 572 EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY FROM THE TERRITORIES. States. "What has hapjiened since? Sir, it has happened that, above and be- yond all contemplation or expectation of tin' original trainers of the Constitu- tion, or the people who adopted it, for- eign territory lias been acquired by cession, first from France, and then from Spain, on our southern frontier. And what has heen the result? Five slave-holding States have been created and added to the Union, bringing ten Senators into this body, (I include Texas, which I consider in the light of a foreign acquisition also,) and up to this hour in which I address you, not one free State has been admitted to the Union from all this acquired territory! Mr. Berrien (in his seat). Yes, Iowa. Iowa is not yet in the Union. Her Senators are not here. When she comes in, there will be one to five, one free State to the slave States, formed out of new territories. Now, it seems strange to me that there shoidd be any com- plaint of injustice exercised by the North toward the South. Northern votes have been necessary, they have been ready, and they have been given, to aid in the admission of these five new slave-holding Si ates. These are facts ; and as the gen- tleman from Georgia has very properly put it as a case in which we are to pre- sent ourselves before the world for its judgment, let us now see how we stand. I do not represent the North. I state my own case; and I present the matter in that light in which I am willing, as an individual member of Congress, to be judged by civilized humanity. I say then, that, according to true history, the slave-holding interest in this country has not hem a disfavored interest; it has nol 1 n disfavored by the North. The North has concurred to bring in these five slave-holding States out of newly acquired territory, which acquisi- tions were nol at all in the contempla- tion of the < 'invention which formed the Constitution, or of the people when they agreed thai then- Bhould be a represen- tation of three fifths of the slaves in the then existing States. Mr. President, what is the result of this? We stand here now, at least I do, for one, to say, that, considering there have been already five new slave-holding States formed out of newly acquired ter- ritory, and only one non-slave-holding State, at most, I do not feel that I am called on to go further; I do not feel the obligation to yield more. Hut our friends of the South say, You deprive us of all our rights. We have fought for this territory, and you deny us participation in it. Let us consider this question as it really is; and since the honorable gen- tleman from Georgia proposes to leave the case to the enlightened and impartial judgment of mankind, and as I agree with him that it is a case proper to be considered by the enlightened part of mankind, let us see how the matter in truth stands. Gentlemen who advocate the case which my honorable friend from Georgia, with so much ability, sustains, declare that we invade their rights, that we deprive them of a participation in the enjoyment of territories acquired by the common services and common exertions of all. Is this true? How deprive? Of what do we deprive them? Why, they say that we deprive them of the privi- lege of carrying their slaves, as slaves, into the new territories. Well, Sir, what is the amount of that? They say that in this way we deprive them of the opportunity of going into this acquired territory with their property. Their "property"? What do they mean by "property"? We certainly do not de- prive them of the privilege of going into these newly acquired territories with all that, in the general estimate of human society, in the general, and common, and universal understanding of mankind, is esteemed property. Not at all. The truth is just this. They have, in their own States, peculiar laws, w hich create property in persons. They have a sys- tem of local legislation on which slavery rests; while everybody agrees that it is against natural law, or at least against the common understanding which pre- vails among men as to what is natural law . 1 am not going into metaphysics, for therein I should encounter the honora- EXCLUSION OF SLAVER? FROM THE TERRITORIES 573 ble member from South Carolina, 1 and we should find end, in wandering mazes lust." until after the time for the adjournment of Congress. The Southern States have peouliar laws, and liy those laws there is property in slaves. This is purely local. The real meaning, then, of Southern gentlemen, in making this complaint, is, that they cannot go into the territories of the United States car- rying with them their ow a peculiar local law, a law which creates property in per- sons. This, according to their own statement, is all the ground of complain! they have. Now here, 1 think, gentle- men are unjust towards us. How un- just they are, others will judge; genera- tions that will come after us will judge. It will not be contended that this sort of personal slavery exists by general law. It exists only by local law. I do not mean to deny the validity of that local law where it is established; but I say it is, after all, local law. It is nothing more. And wherever that local law does not extend, property in persons does not exist. Well, Sir, what is now the de- mand on the part of our Southern friends? They say, " We will carry our local laws with us wherever we go. We in- sist that Congress does us injustice un- less it establishes in the territory in which we wish to go our own local law." This demand I for one resist, and shall resist. It goes upon the idea that there is an inequality, unless persons under this local law, and holding property by authority of that law, can go into new territory and there establish that local law, to the exclusion of the general law. Mr. President, it was a maxim of the civil law, that, between slavery and freedom, freedom should always be pre- sumed, and slavery must always be proved. If any question arose as to the Statu* of an individual in Rome, he was presumed to be free until he was proved to be a slave, because slavery is an ex- ception to the general rule. Such, I suppose, is the general law of mankind. An individual is to be presumed to be free, until a law can be produced which creates ownership in his person. I do i Mr. Calhoun. not dispute He- force and validity of the local law . a- I have already said ; hut I -a\ , it i- a matter t" be proved : and therefore, if individuals go intoanj part of the eai th, it i- t" !"• pio\ ed that they are not freemen, or else the presumption is that thej are. Now our friends seem to think that an inequality arises from restraining them from going into the territories, m there he a law provided which shall pro- tect their ow nership in person-. I he assertion is, that we create an inequality. Is there nothing to be -aid on the other side in relation to inequality? sir. from the date of this Constitution, and in the counsels that formed ami established this Constitution, and I Buppose in all men's judgmenl since, it is received as a settled truth, that slave labor and labor do no! exist well together, [have before me a declaration of Mr. Blason, in the Convention that formed th>- Con- stitution, to that effect. .Mr. Mason, as is well known, was a distinguished mem- ber from Virginia. lie says that tie- objection to slave labor i-, that it puts free white labor in disrepute; that it causes labor to be regarded as del tory to the character of the free white man. and that the free white man de- spises to work, to use hi- expi — ion, where slaves are employed. This i- a matter of greal interest to the f re S if it be true, a- t.. a greal extent it cer- tainly is. that wherever sla\e [abOT pie- vails flee white labor is excluded or dis- couraged. I agree that slave labor not necessarily exclude free labor totally. There is free white labor in Virginia, Tennessee, and other state., where n of the labor i- done by slaves. Hut it necessarily loses something of its re- spectability, by the side of, and when associated with, slave labor. Wherever labor is mainly performed by Blaves, it is regarded a- degrading t" freemen. The freemen of the North, then f< have a deep interest in keeping labor free, exclusively free, in the new terri- tories. But, Sir. let n- look further into this alleged i piality. There i-> no pre- tence that Southern people may not go 574 EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY FROM THE TERRITORIES. into territory which shall be subject to the Ordinance of 1787. The only re- straint is. that they shall not carry slaves thither, and continue that relation. They Bay this shuts them altogether out. Why, Sir, there can be nothing more inaccurate in point of fact than this Btatement. 1 understand that one half the people who settled Illinois are peo- ple, or descendants of people, who came from the Southern States. And I sup- pose that one third of the people of ( >hio are those, or descendants of those, who emigrated from the South; and I ven- ture to say, that, in respect to those two States, they are at this day settled by people of Southern origin in as great a proportion as they are by people of Northern origin, according to the gen- eral numbers and proportion of people, South and North. There are as many people from the South, in proportion to the whole people of the South, in those States, as there are from the North, in proportion to the whole people of the North. There is, then, no exclusion of Southern people; there is only the ex- clusion of a peculiar local law. Neither in principle nor in fact is there any in- equality. The question now is, whether it is not competent to Congress, in the exercise of a fair and just discretion, considering that there have been five slave-holding states added to this Union out of foreign acquisitions, and as yet only one free State, to prevent their further increase. That is the question. 1 see no injustice in it. As to the power of Congress, I have nothing to add to what I said the other day. Congress has full power over the subject. It may establish any such government, and any such laws, in the territories, as in its discretion it may see fit. It is subject, of course, to the rules of justice and propriety; hut it is under no constitul ional restraints. I have said thai I shall consent to no extension of the area of slavery upon this continent, nor to any increase of slave representation in the other house . I have now -fated my rea- sons for my conduct and my vote. We of the North have already gone, in this respect, far beyond all that any South- ern man could have expected, or did ex- pect, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. I repeat the statement of the fact of the creation of five new slave- holding States out of newly acquired territory. We have done that which, if those who framed the Constitution had foreseen, they never would have agreed to slave representation. We have yielded thus far: and we have now in the House of Representatives twenty persons vot- ing upon this very question, and upon all other questions, who are there only in virtue of the representation of slaves. Let me conclude, therefore, by re- marking, that, while I am willing to present this as showing my own judg- ment and position, in regard to this case, and I beg it to be understood that I am speaking for no other than myself, and while I am willing to offer it to the whole world as my own justification, I rest on these propositions: First, That when this Constitution was adopted, nobody looked for any new acquisition of territory to be formed into slave-hold- ing States. Secondly, That the princi- ples of the Constitution prohibited, and were intended to prohibit, and should be construed to prohibit, all interference of the general government with slavery as it existed and as it still exists in the States. And then, looking to the oper- ation of these new acquisitions, which have in this great degree had the effect of strengthening that interest in the South by the addition of these five States, I feel that there is nothing un- just, nothing of which any honest man can complain, if he is intelligent, and I feel that there is nothing with which the civilized world, if they take notice of so humbles person as myself , will reproach me, when I say, as 1 said the other day, thai I have made up my mind, for one, that under no circumstances will I con- sent to the further extension of the area of slavery in the I'nited States, or to the further increase of slave repre- sentation in the House of Representa- tives. SPEECH AT MABSHFIELD. DELIVERED AT A MEETING OF THE CITIZENS OF MABSHFIELD, MASS., OX THE 1st OF SEPTEMBER, 1848. [The following oorrespondoncp explains the occasion of the meeting at Marshfield, at which the following speech was deliv- ered. " Marshfield, Mass., Aug. 2, 1848. "Hon. Daniel Webster: — "Dear Sir, — The undersigned, Whigs and fellow-citizens of yours, are desirous of seeing and conferring with you on the subject of our national policy, and of hearing your opinions freely expressed thereon. We look anxiously on the present aspect of public affairs, and on the position in which the Whig party, and espe- cially Northern Whigs, are now placed. We should be grieved indeed to see General ('ass — so decided an opponent of all those measures which we think essential to the honor and inter- ests of the country and the prosperity id' all classes — elected to the chief magistracy. On tin- other hand, it is not to he concealed, that there is much discontenl with the nomination made by the late Philadelphia Convention, of a Southern man. a military man. fresh from bloody ti' Ms, and known only by his sword, as a Whig candidate for the Presidency. "So far as is in our humble ability, we desire to preserve the Union and the Whig party, and to perpetuate Whig principles ; hut we wish to see also that these principles may he preserved, and this Union perpetuated, in a manner consist- ent with the rights of the Free State-, and the prevention of the farther extension of tin- slave power; and we dread the effects of the prece- dent, which we think eminently dangerous, and as not exhibiting us in a favorable light to the nations of the earth, of elevating a mere military man to the Presidency. " We think a crisis is upon us : and, we would gladly know how we may best discharge our duties as true Americans, honest men, and good Whigs. To you, who have been so long in pub- lic life, and are aide from your great expel and unrivalled ability to give us information and advice, ami upon whom, as neighbors and friends, we think we have some claims, we nat- urally look, and we should be exceedingly grat- ified if, in any way, public or private, you would express your opinion upon interesting public questions now pending, with that boldness ami distinctness with which you are accustomed to declare vour sentiments, li you can concur with our wishes, please signify to us in what manner it would be mosl agreeable to you that they should be carried into effect. "With very great regard, your obedient ser- vants, " I > A N I I I. I'llll III'-. Gkokgi Leonard, Geo ll \\ i i in i . i i . and many oil,. To this invitation Mr. Webster returned the following reply : — " Marshfield, Avg. -\. ' - "Gentlemen, — I have recciv< d nmr letter. The critical stateof things at Washington ol me to think it my duty to repair thither imme- diately and take my seal in the £ . notwith- standing the state id my health and the le the weather render it disagreeable for me to lea\ e home. " I cannot, therefore, comply with your w Mo- at present: hut on my return, if such should continue to be your desire, 1 will meet you and the other Whigs of Marshfield. in an unceremo- nious manner, that we may confer upon the top- ics to which your letter relates "I am. Gentlemen, with esteem and friend- ship. •• Your obliged fellow-citizen, •• I > wii i. U I c-ii i:. •■ To Me--r-. Daniel Phillips, Gi orgi 1 i • ■ s- ard, Geo, H. w i i hi i.ii i . and others. Soon after Mr. Webster's return from Washington, it was arranged that the meet- ing should take place at the " \Vin-l..\s House," the ancient seat of the Wilislow family, now forming a pari of Mr. Web- ster's farm at Marshfield, on Friday, the first day of September.] Ai THOUGH it is no! my purpose, "lur- ing the presenl recess of t frequently to address public assemblies on political subjects, I bave felt it my duty to comply with your requesl neighbors ami townsmen, and to naeel yon to-day; ami 1 am not unwilling 576 SPEECH AT MARSIIFIELD. avail myself of this occasion to signify to tin' people of the United States my opinions upon the present state of our public affairs. I shall perform that duty, certainly with great frankness, 1 hope with candor. It is not my inten- tion to-day to endeavor to carry any point, to act as any man's advocate, to put up or put down anybody. I wish, and I propose, to address you in the lan- guage and in the spirit of conference and consultation. In the present extraordi- nary crisis of our public concerns, I de- sire to hold no man's conscience but ray own. My own opinions 1 shall commu- nicate, freely and fearlessly, with equal disregard to consequences, whether they respect myself or respect others. We are on the eve of a highly impor- tant Presidential election. In two or three months the people of this country will be called upon to elect an executive chief magistrate of the United States; and all see, and all feel, that great in- terests of the country are to be affected, for good or evil, by the results of that election. Of the interesting subjects ever which the person who shall be elected must necessarily exercise more or less control, there are especially three, vitally connected, in my judgment, with the honor and happiness- of the country. In the first place, the honor and happi- ness of the country imperatively require that there shall be a chief magistrate elected who shall not plunge us into further wars of ambition and conquest. In the second place, in my judgment, the interests of the country and the feel- ing of a vast majority of the people require that a President of these I'nited States should be elected, who will nei- ther \\>n official influence to promote, nor feel any desire in his heart to pro- liiute, the further extension of slavery in this community, or its further influ- ence in the public councils. In the third place, if I have any just estimate, if an experience not no^i a Bhorl one in public affairs has enabled to know any thing of what the public interest demands, the state of the country requires an essential reform in the system of revenue and finance, such as shall nstore the pros- perity, by prompting the industry and fostering the labor of the country, in its various branches. There are other things important, but I will not allude to them. These three I hold to be essential. There are three candidates presented to the choice of the American people. General Taylor is the Whig candidate, standing upon the nomination of the Whig Convention ; General Cass is the candidate of the opposing and now dominant party in the country; and a third candidate is presented in the per- son of Mr. Van Buren, by a convention of citizens assembled at Buffalo, whose object, or whose main object, as it ap- pears to me, is contained in one of those considerations which I have mentioned; and that is, the prevention of the fur- ther increase of slavery ; — an object in which you and I, Gentlemen, so far as that goes, entirely concur with them, I am sure. Most of us who are here to-day are Whigs, National Whigs, Massachusetts Whigs, Old Colony Whigs, and Marsh- field Whigs, and if the Whig nomina- tion made at Philadelphia were entirely satisfactory to the people of Massa- chusetts and to us, our path of duty would be plain. But the nomination of a candidate for the Presidency made by the Whig Convention at Philadelphia is not satisfactory to the Whigs of Massa- chusetts. That is certain, and it would be idle to attempt to conceal the fact. It is more just and more patriotic, it, is more manly and practical, to take facts as they are, and things as they are, and to deduce our own convic- tion of duty from what exists before us. However respectable and distin- guished in the line of his own profes- sion, or however estimable as a private citizen, General Taylor is a military man. and a military man merely, lie has had no training in civil affairs. He has performed no functions of a civil nature under the Constitution of his country. lie has been known and is known, only by his brilliant achieve- ments at the head of an army. Nosv tin; Whigs of Massachusetts, and I SPEECH AT MAKSlirn.i.i) .-.77 among them, are of opinion thai it was not wise, nor discreet, to go to the army for the selection of ;i candidate for the Presidency of the United 8tates. It is the first instance in their bistorj in which any man of mere military char- acter has been proposed for thai high office. Genera] Washington wasagreal military character ; but by far a greater civil character. Me had been employed in the councils of his country, from the earliest dawn of the Revolution. Be had been in the Continental Congress, and he had established a great character for civil wisdom and judgment. After the war, as you know, lie was elected a member of that convention which formed the Constitution of the United States; and it is one of the most honorable tributes ever paid to him, that by that assembly of good and wise men he was selected to preside over their delibera- tions. And he put his name first and foremost to the Constitution under which we live. President Harrison was bred a soldier, and at different periods of his life rendered important military services. lint President Harrison, nevertheless, was for a much greater period of his life employed in civil than in military service. For twenty years he was either governor of a Territory, member of one or the other house of Congress, or minis- ter abroad; and discharged all these duties to the satisfaction of his country. This case, therefore, stands by itself; without a precedent or justification from any thing in our previous history. It is for this reason, as I imagine, that the Whigs of Massachusetts feel dissatis- fied with this nomination. There may be other reasons, there are- others; they are, perhaps, of less importance, and more easily to be answered. But this is a well-founded objection; and in my opinion it ought to have prevailed, and to have prevented this nomination. I know enough of history to see the dan- gerous tendency of such resorts to mili- tary popularity. Hut, if 1 may borrow a mercantile ex- pression, I may now venture to say. that there is another side to this account. to discharge my dutj to-day n quires thai it should be stated. And, in the firs) place, it ts to be considered, thai Genera] Taylor baa been nominated by a Whig convention, held in conformity with the usages of the Whig party, and, bo far as I kno^i , fairly nominated. It is to be i lidered, also, thai be is the only Whig before the | pie, a> a candi- date for the Presidency; and do citizen of the country, with any effect, can eote for any other Whig, lei his preferences be wli.it thej mighl or may. In the nexl place, it is proper to con- sider the personal character of < lei Taylor, and his political opinions, rela- tions, and connections, bo far as they are known. In advancing to a few observa- tions on this pari of the case, 1 wish everybody to understand that I have no persona] acquaintance whatever with General Taylor. I never saw him but once, and thai bu1 for a few moments in the Senate. The sources of informa- tion are open to yon. as well as to me, from which I derive what I know of his character and opinions. Put I have endeavored to obtain access to those sources. I have endeavored to inform and instruct myself by communication with those who have known him in his profession as a soldier, in his associa- tions as a man. in his conversations and opinions on political subjects; and I will tell you frankly what I think of him. according to the best Lights which I i been able to obtain. I nerd not say. that be is a skilful, brave, and gallant soldier. That is ad- mitted by all. Willi me, all that t but very little way to make out the proper qualifications for President of the United States. Bu1 what is more important. I believe thai he is an entirely honest and upright man. I believe that be is modest, clear-beaded, of indepen- dent and manly character, possessh mind trained by proper discipline and Belf-control. I believe that he is esti- mable and amiable in all the relatioi private life. 1 believe that be i a reputation for equity and fair judg- ment, which gives him an influence over The impartiality with which I propose those under his command beyond what 87 578 SPEECH AT MARSHFIELD. is conferred by the authority of station. I believe thai he is a man possessing the confidence ami attachmenl of all who have been near him and know him. Ami I believe, that, if elected President, he will do his besl tu relieve the count rj from present evils, and guard it against tut urc dangers. So much for what 1 think of the personal character of Gen- eral Taylor. 1 will say. too, that, so far as I have ol 'served, his conduct since he has been a candidate for the office of President has been irreproachable. I hear no in- trigue imputed to him, no contumelious treatment of rivals. I do not find him making promises or holding out hopes to any men or any party. 1 do not find him putting forth any pretensions of his own, and therefore I think of him very much as he seems to think of himself, that he is an honest man, of an inde- pendent mind and of upright intentions. And as for the subject of his qualifica- tions for the Presidency, he has himself nothing to say about it. And now, friends and fellow-towns- men, with respect to his political opin- ions and relations, I can say at once, that I believe him to be a Whig; I be- lieve him to hold to the main doctrines of the Whig party. To think otherwise would be to impute to him a degree of tergiversation and fraudulent deception of which I suppose him to be entirely incapable. Gentlemen, it is worth our while to consider in what manner General Taylor has become a candidate for the Presi- dency of the United States. It would be a great mistake to suppose that he was made such merely by the nomination of the Philadelphia Convention. He had been nominated for the Presidency in a greal many States, by various conven- tions and n tings of the people, a year before the convention at Philadelphia mbled. The whole history of the world shows, whether in the most civil- ized or i he mosl barbarous ages, thai the affections and admiration of mankind an- at all time- easily carried awaj to- wards successful military achievements. '1 he story of all republics and of all I governments shows this. We know in the case now before us, that so soon as brilliant success had attended General Taylor's operations on the Rio Grande, at Palo Alto, and Monterey, spontane- . ous nominations of him sprang up. And here let me say, that, generally, these were Whig nominations. Xot uni- versally, but generally, these nomina- tions, made at various times before the meeting of the Philadelphia Convention, were Whig nominations. General Tay- lor was esteemed, from the moment that his military achievements brought him into public notice, as a Whig general. You all remember, that when we were discussing his merits in Congress, upon the question of giving thanks to the army under his command, and to him- self, among other objections, the friends and supporters of Mr. Polk's adminis- tration denounced him as being, and be- cause he was, a Whig general. My friends near me, whom I am happy to see here, belonging to the House of Rep- resentatives, will remember that a lead- ing man of the party of the administra- tion declared in his place in Congress, that the policy of the administration, connected with the Mexican war, would never prosper, till the President recalled those Whig generals, Scott and Taylor. The policy was a Democratic policy. The argument was, that the men to carry out this policy should be Demo- cratic men; the officers to tight the battles should be Democratic officers; and on that ground, the ordinary vote of thanks was refused to General Taylor, on the part of the friends of the admin- istration. Let me remark, in the next place, that there was no particular purpose con- nected with the advancement of slavery entertained, generally, by those who nominated him. As I have said, they were Whig nominations, more in the Middle and Northern than in the South- ern States, and by persons who never entertained the slightest desire, by his nomination, or by any other means, to extend the area of slavery of the human race, or the influence of the slave-holding Males in the councils of the nation. SPEECH AT MAHSHFIELD. The Quaker city of Philadelphia domi- nated General Taylor, the Whigs all over tin' 1'iiiun nominated him, with no such view. A great convent ion \sa semblcil in Xi'w York, of highly influ- ential and respectable gentlemen, very many of them well know n bo me, and the) nominated General Taylor with no such view. General Taylor's nomina- tion was hailed, not very extensively, luit by some enthusiastic and nol verj far-seeing people in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. There were, even among- us, in our own State, Whigs quite early enough, certainly, in mani- festing their confidence in this nomina- tion; a little too early, it may be, in uttering notes of exultation for the an- ticipated triumph, [t would have been better if they had waited. Now the truth is, Gentlemen, — and no man can avoid seeing it, unless, as sometimes happens, the object is too near our eyes to be distinctly discerned, — the truth is, that in these nomina- tions, and also in the nomination al Philadelphia, in these conventions, and also in the convention at Philadelphia, General Taylor was nominated exactly fortius reason; — that, believing him to be a Whig, they thought he could be chosen more easily than any other Whig. This is the whole of it. That saga- cious, wise, far-seeing doctrine of avail- ability lies at the bottom of the whole matter. So far. then, from imputing any motive to these conventions over the country, or to the convention in Philadelphia, as operating on a major- ity of the members, to promote slavery by the nomination of General Taylor, I do not believe a word of it, — not one word. I see that one part of what is called the Platform of the Buffalo Con- vention says that the candidates before the public were nominated under the dictation of the slave power. I do not believe a word of it. In the first place, a very great majority of the convention at Philadelphia was composed of members from the Free States. By a very great majority they might have nominated anybody they chose. But the Free States did not choose to nominate a I S man, or i Noi thorn m in. Even our neighboi . the Statei oi \' \\ England, with the ezception of Ne\i Hampshire and a pari of Blaine, neither proposed nor concurred in the nomination of any Northern man. Vermont would hear of nothing but the nomination of a South- ern and slave-holding candidate. Con- necticut was "i the same mind, and ■•• wa^ Rhode [gland. The North mad< demand, nor presented an) requesl I Northern candidate, nor attempted any onion anion-' themselves for the pui p of promoting the nomination of Buch a candidate. They wer itenl to take their choice among the candidates of the South. It is preposterous, therefor pretend thai a candidate from the Slave States has been forced upon the North by Southern dicta! ion. In the next place, it is true that there were persons from New England who were extreme!) zealous and active in pro- curing the nomination of General Tay- lor, bul they wen- men who would cul off their right hands before they would do any thing to pr te slavery in the United States. I do not admire their policy: indeed I have very little res] I for it. understand thai : bul I acquit them of bad mo1 ives. I know the I ing men in thai convention. 1 think I understand the motives thai governed them. Their reasoning was this : "Gen- eral Taylor is a Whig; nol eminent in civil life, not known in civil lit'.-, but still a man of sound Whig princi] Circumstances have given him a reputa- tion and eclat in the country. If he -hall be the Whig candidate, he will l>c chosen; and with him th.-re will come into the two houses of I - an augmentation of Whig Btrength. The Whig majority in the Hon-- of Repre- sentatives will be increased. 1 he Demo- cratic majority in the Senate will be diminished. That was the view, and such was the motive, however wi-e or however unwise, thai governed a very large majority of those who com] the convention at Philadelphia. In my opinion, this was a wholly ut, policy; it was short-sighted and tempor- ,-s„ SPEECH AT MARSIIFIELD. izing on questions of great principles. But I acquit those who adopted it of any such motives as have heen ascrihed to them, and especially of what has been ascribed to them in a part of this Buffalo Platform. Such, Gentlemen, are the circum- stances connected with the nomination of General Taylor. I only repeat, thai those who had the greatest agency origi- nally in bringing him before the people were Whig ('(inventions and "Whig meet- ings in the several States, Free States. and that a great majority of that con- vention which nominated him in Phila- delphia was from the Free States, and might have rejected him if they had chosen, and selected anybody else on whom they could have united. This is the case, Gentlemen, as far as I can discern it, and exercising upon it as impartial a judgment as I can form, — this is the case presented to the Whigs, so far as respects the personal fitness and personal character of General Tay- lor, and the circumstances which have caused his nomination. If we were weighing the propriety of nominating such a person to the Presidency, it would be one thing; if we are considering the expediency, or I may say the necessity (which to some minds may seem to be the case), of well-meaning and patriotic Whigs supporting him after he is nom- inal.-, I. that is quite another thing. This leads us to the consideration of what the Whigs of Massachusetts are to do, or such of them as do not see fit to support General Taylor. Of course they mu.-t vote for General Cass, or they must vote for Mr. Van Buren, or they must omit to vote at all. I agree that then' are cases in which, if we do not know in what direction to move, we oughl to stand still till we do. I admit thai there are cases in which, if one does not know what to do, he had heller nut do he knows nol what. But on a question so importanl to ourselves and the coun- try, on a question of a popular election under constitutional forms, in which it is impossible thai every man's private judgmenl can prevail, or every man's private choice Bucceed, it becomes a question of conscientious duty and pa- triotism, what it is best to do upon the whole. Under the practical administration of the Constitution of the United States, there cannot be a great range of personal choice in regard to the candidate for the Presidency. In order that their votes may be effective, men must give them for some one of those who are promi- nently before the public. This is the necessary result of our forms of govern- ment and of the provisions of the Con- stitution. The people are therefore brought sometimes to the necessity of choosing between candidates neither of whom would be their original, personal choice. Now, what is the contingency? What is the alternative presented to the Whigs of Massachusetts? In my judgment, fellow-citizens, it is simply this; the question is between General Taylor and General Cass. And that is the only question. I am no more skilled to foresee political occurrences than others. I judge only for myself. But, in my opinion, there is not the least proba- bility of any other result than the choice of General Taylor or General Cass. I know that the enthusiasm of a new- formed party, that the popularity of a new-formed name, without communicat- ing any new-formed idea, may lead men to think that the sky is to fall, and that larks are suddenly to be taken. I enter- tain no such expectations. 1 speak with- out disrespect of the Free Soil party. I have read their platform, and though I think there are some unsound places in it, 1 can stand on it pretty well. But I see nothing in it both new and valuable. • What is valuable is not new, and what is new is not valuable." If the term Free Soil party, or Free Soil men, desig- nate those who are fixed, and unalter- ably fixed, in favor of the restriction of slavery, are so to-day and were SO yes- terday, and have been so for some ti , then I hold myself to be as good a Free Soil man as any of the Buffalo Conven- tion. I pray to know who is to put be- neath my feet a freer soil than that upon which I have stood ever since I have been SPEECH AT MARSHFIELD. 581 in public life? I pray to know who is to make my lips freer than they always have been, or to inspire into mj breast a more resolute and fixed determination to resist the advances and encroachments of the slave power, than has inhabited ii since J for the first tim«' opened inv mouth in the councils of tin- e.-niitn ? The gentlemen at Buffalo have placed at the head of their party Mr. Van Buren, a gentleman for whom I have all the respect that 1 ought to entertain for one with whom I have been associated, in some degree, in public life for many years, and who has held the highesl offi- ces in the country. But really, speaking for myself, if I were to express confi- dence in Mr. Van Buren and his politics on any question, and most especially this very question of slavery, I think the scene would border upon the ludicrous, if not upon the contemptible. I never pro- posed any thing in my life of a general and public nature, that Mr. Van Buren did not oppose. Nor has it happened to me to support any important measure proposed by him. If he and I now were to find ourselves together under the Free Soil flag, I am sure that, with his accus- tomed good nature, he would laugh. If nobody were present, we should both laugh at the strange occurrences and stranger jumbles of political life that should have brought us to sit down cosily and snugly, side by side, on the same platform. That the leader of the Free Spoil party should so suddenly have become the leader of the Free Soil party would be a joke to shake his sides and mine. Gentlemen, my first acquaintance in public life with Mr. Van Buren was when he was pressing with great power the election of Mr. Crawford to the Presidency, against Mr. Adams. Mr. Crawford was not elected, and Mr. Adams was. Mr. Van Buren was in the Senate nearly the whole of that ad- ministration; and during the remainder of it he was Governor of the State of New York. It is notorious thai he was the soul and centre, throughout the w hole of Mr. Adams's term, of the opposition made to him. He did more to prevent Mr. Adams's re-election in 1828, and to obtain Genera] Jackson's election, than anj other man. yes, than any ten other lliell in the eolint I \ . General Jackson \\ a> chosen, and Mr. Van Buren was appointed bis Secretary of State. It bo happened thai in July, 1829, Mi \|. i. me went to England to arrange the controverted, difficult, and disputed poinl on the subject of the colonial trade. Mr. Adams had held a high tone on that Bubject, He bad de- manded, on the ground of reciprocity and right, the introducti if our prod- acts into all parts of the British terri- tory, freely, ill our own 7688618, Since Greal Britain was allowed to bring her produce into the United States upon the same terms. Mr. Adam- placed this de- mand upon the ground of reciprocity and justice. Greal Britain would not yield. Mr. Van Buren, in his instruction Mr. McLane, told him to yield that question of right, and to solicit the free admission of American produce into the British colonies, on the ground of privi- lege and favor; intimating thai there had been a change of parties, and that this favor ought not to be refused to General Jackson's administration be- cause it had been demanded on the ground of right by Mr. Adams's. This is the sum and Bubstauce of the instruc- tion. Well. Gentlemen, it was one of the most painful duties of my life, on ac- count of this, to refuse my aasenl to Mr. Van Buren 's nomination. It was novel in our history, when an administration changes, for the new administration to seek to obtain privileges from a foreign power on the assertion that they have abandoned the ground of their prede BOrs. I suppose that such a coin-" is held to be altogether undignified by all public men. When I went into the De- partment of State under General Harri- son, I found in the conduct of my prede- cessor many things that I could have wished had been otherwise. Did I re- tract a jot or tittle of what Mr. Forsyth had said'/ 1 took the case a- he had left it, and conducted it upon the principles which he left. I should have COnsidi :.sj SPEECH AT MAUSHFIELD. that I disgraced myself if I had said, " Pray, my Lord Ashburton, we are more rational persons than our prede- cessors, we are more considerate than they, and intend to adept an entirely opposite policy. Consider, my dear Lord, how much more friendly, reason- able, and amiable we are than our pre- decessors." But now, on this very Bubject of the extension of the slave power, 1 would by -no means do the least injustice to Mr. Van Buren. If he lias come up to some of the opinions expressed in the platform of the Buffalo Convention, I am very glad of it. I do not mean to say that there may not be very good rea- sons for those of his own party who can- not conscientiously vote for General Cass to vote for him, because I think him much the least dangerous of the two. But, in truth, looking at Mr. Van Bu- ren's conduct as President of the United States, I am amazed to find that he should be placed at the head of a party professing to be, beyond all other par- ties, friends of liberty and enemies of African slavery in the Southern States. Why, the very first thing that Mr. Van Buren did after lie was President was to declare, that, if Congress interfered with slavery in the District of Columbia, he woidd apply the veto to their bills. Mr. Van Buren, in his inaugural address, quotes the following expression from his letter accepting his nomination: "I must go into the Presidential chair the inflexible and uncompromising opponent of every attempt, on the part of Con- gress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia against the wishes of the. slave-holding States; and also with a determination equally decided to resist tie- slightest interference with it in the states where it exists. 7 ' He then pro- ceeds: •• I submitted also to my fellow- citizenS, With fulness and frankness, the reasons \\ hich led me to this determina- tion. The result authorizes me to be- lieve that they have been approved ami are confided in by a majority of the peo- ple of the United States, including those whom they mosf immediately affect. It now only remains i" add, that no lull conflicting with these views can ever receive my constitutional sanction." In the next place, we know that Mr. Van Buren's casting vote was given for a law of very doubtful propriety, — a law to allow postmasters to open the mails and see if there was any incen- diary matter in them, and, if so, to de- stroy it. I do not say that there was no constitutional power to pass such a law . Perhaps the people of the South thought it was necessary to protect themselves from incitements to insurrection. So far as any thing endangers the lives and property of the South, so far I agree that there may be such legislation in Congress as shall prevent such results. But, Gentlemen, no man has exercised a more controlling influence on the con- duct of his friends in this country than Mr. Van Buren. I take it that the most important event in our time tend- ing to the extension of slavery and its everlasting establishment on this conti- nent, was the annexation of Texas, in 1844. Where was Mr. Van Buren then? Let me ask, Three or four years ago, where was he then? Every friend of Mr. Van Buren, so far as I know, sup- ported the measure. The two Senators from New York supported it, and the members of the House of Representa- tives from New York supported it, and nobody resisted it but Whigs. And I say in the face of the world, I say in the face of those connected with, or likely to be benefited by, the Buffalo Convention, — I say to all of them, that there has been no party of men in this country winch has firmly and sternly re- sisted the progress of the slave power but the Whigs. Why, look to this very question of the annexation of Texas. We talk of the dictation of the slave power! At least they do, I do not. 1 do not allow thai anybody dictates to me. They talk of the triumph of the South over the North! There is not a word of truth or reason in the whole of it. I am bound to say on u\\ conscience, that, of all the evils inflicted upon us by these acquisi- tions of slave territory, the North has borne its full part in the infliction. SPEECH AT MARSIIFIELD. Northern votes, in full proportion, have been given in both houses Eoi the ac- quisition of new territory) in which slavery existed. We talk of the North. There baa for a long time been no North. 1 think the North star is iii lasl discov- ered; I think there will be a North; 1'iit up to the recenl session of Congress there has been oo North, no geographi- cal section of the country, in which there has been found a Btrong, conscien- tious, and united opposition to slavery. No such North has existed. Pope says, you know , "Ask where 's the North? At York, 'tis on the Tweed ; In Scotland, at the Orcades; and there, At Greenland, Zembla, or the Lord knows where." Now, if there has heretofore been Buch a North as I have described, a North strong in opinion and united in action against shivery, — if such a North has existed anywhere, it has existed "the Lord knows where," I do not. "Why, on this very question of the ad- mission of Texas, it may be said with truth, that the North let in Texas. The Whigs, North and South, resisted Texas. Ten Senators from slave-hold- ing States, of the Whig party, resisted Texas. Two, only, as I remember, voted for it. But the Southern Whig votes against Texas were overpowered by the Democratic votes from the Free States, and from New England among the rest. Yes, if there had not been votes from New England in favor of Texas, Texas would have been out of the Union to this day. Yes, if men from New England had been true, Texas \\ ( mid have been nothing but Texas still. There were four votes in the Senate from New England in favor of the ad- mission of Texas, Mr. Van Buren's friends, Demoeratie members: from Maine; two from New Hampshire; one Eroin Connecticut. Two of these gen- tlemen were confidential friend-, of Mr. Van Buren, and had both been mem- bers of his cabinet. They voted for Texas; and they let in Tex; is, against Southern Whigs and Northern Whigs. That is the truth of it, my friends. .Mr. Van Buren, by the wave of bis hand, could have kepi ou1 Texas. A word, a letter, though ii had been even shoi ter than < reoeral < ass's letter to the < hi< Convention, would have been enough, and would have done the work. Bui he was Bilent. When Northern members of Conj voted, in 1 B20, Eor1 he M U ouri < Compro- mise, against the known win ,,f their constituents, they were called " Dough I 68." I am afraid, fellow-citia thai the generation of " dough fa will be as perpetual as the generation of men. In 1844, :i- we all know. Mr. Van Buren was a candidate for the Presi- dency, on the pari of th<- Democratic party, bul losl the nomination at Balti- more. We now Learn, from a letter from Genera] Jackson to Mr. Butler, thai Mr. Van Buren's claims were superseded, because, after all, the South thoughl that the acconi|>]i-hment of the annexa- tion of Texas mighl be more Bafely in- trusted to Southern hands. We all know that the Northern portion of the Demoeratie parly were friendly to Mr. Van Buren. Our neighbors from Hampshire, and Maine, and elsewhere, were Van Buren men. Hut the moment it was ascertained that Mr. Polk was tin' favorite of the South, and the favorite of the South upon the ground I have mentioned, as a man more certain to bring ;i 1 >• >i 1 1 th<' annexation of T< than Mr. Van Buren, these friends Mr. Yan Buren in the North all •• caved in,"' - not a man of them Bl 1. Mr. Van Buren himaftlf wrote a letter very complimentary to Mr. Polk and Mr. Dallas, and found no fault with the nomination. Now, Gentlemen, if they were •• d< faces " who voted for the Missouri Com- promise, what epithel should describe these men, here in our New England, who were mi ready, not only to ch or abandon him whom they mosl • dially wished to rapport, bul did bo in order to make more Mire the annexation of Texas. They nominated Mr. Polk ;it the requi gentlemen from the South, and voted for him. through 584 SrEECII AT MAKSMFIELD. thick ami thin, till t lie work was ac- complished, and Mr. Polk elected. For my part, 1 think that "dough faces" is an epithet not sufficiently reproach- ful. Such persons are dough faces, with dough heads, and dough hearts, and dough souls; they are all dough; the coarsesl potter may mould them to vessels of honor or dishonor, — most readily to vessels of dishonor. Bui what (In we now see? Repent- ance has gone far. There are among these very people, these very gentlemen, persons who espouse, with great zeal, the interests of the Free Soil party. I hope their repentance is as sincere as it appears to be. I hope it is honest con- viction, and not merely a new chance for power, under a new name and a new party, lint, with all their pretensions, and with all their patriotism, I see dough still- sticking on the cheeks of some of them. And therefore I have no confidence in them, not a particle. I do not mean to say, that the great mass of the people, especially those who went to the Buffalo Convention from this State, have not the highest and purest motives. I think they act un- wisely, but I acquit them of dishonest intentions. But with respect to others, and those who have been part and par- cel in the measures which have brought new slave territory into this Union, I distrust them all. If they repent, let them, before we trust them, do works worthy of repentance. 1 have said. Gentlemen, that in my opinion, if it were desirable to place .Mr. Van Buren at the head of govern- ment, there is no chance for him. Others arc as good judges as I am. Bui 1 am not able to say that 1 see any Mate in the I'nion in winch there is a reasonable probability that he will get the vote. There may he. Others are more versed in such statistics than 1 am. but 1 see none, and therefore 1 think that we are reduced to a choice hetween General Cass and General Taylor. You may remember, that in the discussions of L844, when Mr. I J i 1 1 1 < • \ was drawing olt votes from the Whig candidate, I said that every vote for Mr. Birney was half a vote for Mr. Polk. Is it not true that the vote of the Liber- ty party taken from Mr. Clay's vote in the State of New York made Mr. Polk President? That is as clear as any historical fact. And in my judgment, it will be so now. I consider every Whig vote given to Mr. Van Buren, as directly aiding the election of Mr. Cass. Mark, I say. Whig vote. There may be States in which Mr. Van Buren may draw from the other side largely. But I speak of Whig votes, in this State and in any State. And I am of opinion, that any such vote given to Mr. Van Buren inures to the benefit of General Cass. Now as to General Cass, Gentlemen. We need not go to the Baltimore plat- form to instruct ourselves as to what his politics are, or how he will conduct the government. General Cass will go into the government, if at all, chosen by the same party that elected Mr. Polk ; and he will "follow in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessor." I hold him, I confess, in the present state of the coun- try, to be the most dangerous man on whom the powers of the execidive chief magistracy could well be conferred. He would consider himself, not as conser- vative, not as protective to present insti- tutions, but as belonging to the party of Progress. He believes in the doc- trine of American destiny ; and that that destiny is, to go through wars and invasions, and maintain vast armies, to establish a great, powerful, domineering government over all this continent. We know that, if Mr. Cass could have pre- vented it, the treaty with England in 184-J would not have been made. We know that, if Mr. Cass could have pre- vented it, the settlement of the Oregon question would not have been accom- plished in 1846. We know that General Cass could have prevented the Mexican war; and we know that he was first and foremost in pressing that war. We know that he is a man of talent, of ability, of some celebrity as a states- man, in every way superior to his pre- decessor, if he shoidd be the successor of Mr. Polk. But I think him a man of rash politics, pushed on by a rash party, SPEECH AT MARSHFIELD. 5*5 and committed to a course of polic] I believe, not in consistency with the happiness and security of the country. Therefore it i> for you, and for me, and for all of ns, Whigs, to consider wheth- er, in this state of tin' case, we can or cannot, we will or will Dot, give our votes for the Whig nomination. I Leave that to every man's conscience. 1 have endeavored to state the case as it pre- sents itself to me. Gentlemen, before General Taylor's nomination, 1 Btated always, when the subject was mentioned by my friends, that 1 did not and could not recommend the nomination of a military man to the people of the United States for the office of President. It was against my conviction of what was due to the best interests of the country, and to the char- acter of the republic. I stated always, at the .same time, that if General Taylor should be nominated by the Whig Con- vention, fairly, I should not oppose his election. I stand now upon the same declaration. General Taylor has been nominated fairly, as far as 1 know, and I cannot, therefore, and shall not, op- pose his election. At the same time. there is no man who is more firmly of opinion that such a nomination was not fit to be made. But the declaration that I would not oppose General Taylor, if nominated by the Whig party, was of course subject, in the nature of things, to some exceptions. If 1 believed him to be a man who would plunge the country into further wars for any pur- pose of ambition or conquest, I would oppose him, let him be nominated by whom he might. If I believed that he was a man who would exert his official influence for the further extension of the slave power, I would oppose him. let him be nominated by whom he might. But I do not believe either. I believe that he has been, from the first, opposed to the policy of the Mexican war. as im- proper, impolitic, and inexpedient. I believe, from the best information I can obtain, — and you will take this as my own opinion, Gentlemen, — I believe, from the best information I can obtain, that he has no disposition to go to war, or t" form new States in order to in- cres e the limits ot slavery. Gentlemen, so much for what maj be considered as belonging to the Presi- dency as a national question. Bui the case by do means stops here. VI e are cil izens of Massachusetf - H • Whigsof Massachusetts. We have sup- ported the present government of the State for years, with success ; and I have thought thai most Whigs were satis- fied with the administration of the State government in the hands of those who have had it. But now it is proposed, I presume, on the basis of the Buffalo Platform, to carry this into the SI elections, as u.-il as into the national elections. There is to be a Domination of a candidate for Governor, against Mr. Briggs, or whoever may 1"' nomi- nated by the Whigs; and there is to be a nomination of a candidate for Lieu- tenant-Governor, against Mr. Reed, or whoever may !»• nominated bj the Wi and there are to be Dominations against the present members of ( longress. Now, what is the utility or the aecessity of this? We have ten members in the Congress of the I'nited States. I know- not ten men of any party who are more zealous, and firm, and inflexible in their Opposition against slavery in any form. And what will he the result of oppos- ing their re-election ? Suppose that a considerable Dumber of Whigs Becede from the Whig party, and support a candidate of this new party, what will be the result'.'' Do we not know what has been the case in this State? Do we not know that this district has been un- represented from month to month, ami from vear to year, I ause there has 1 n an opposition to a- g 1 an antislav.-ry man :is hreathes the air of this district'.' On this occasion, and even in his own presence, I may allude to our Represent- ative, Mr. Hale. I)., we want a man to give a better vote in Congress than Mr. Hale gives? Why. 1 undertal say that there is do< one of the Liberty party, nor will there 1 tie of this mw party, who will have the least objection I.. Mr. Hale, except that he was not Dominated by themselves. I 586 SPEECH AT MARSIIFIELD. if the Whigs had not nominated him, they would have nominated him them- selves'; doubtless they would, if he had come into their organization, and called himself ;i third party man. Now, Gentlemen, 1 remember it to have occurred, that, on very important questions in Congress, the vote was losl ti.r want of two ur three members which Massachusetts mighl have sent, but which, in consequence of the division of parties, she did not send. And now I foresee that, if in this district any con- siderable number of Whigs think it. their duty to join in the support of Mr. Van Bur en, and in the support of gentlemen whom that party may nominate for Con- gress, the same thing will take place, and we shall be without a representa- tive, in all probability, in the first ses- sion of the next Congress, when the hat tie is to be fought on this very sla- very question. The same is likely to happen in other districts. I am sure that honest, intelligent, and patriotic Whigs will lay this consideration to their consciences, and judge of it as they think they ought to do. Gentlemen, I will detain you but a moment longer. You know that 1 gave my vote' in Congress against the treaty of peace with Mexico, because it con- tained these cessions of territory, and brought under the authority of the United States, with a pledge of future admission into the Union, the great, vast, and almost unknown countries of New Mexico and California. In the session before the last, oneof the Southern Win-- Senators, Mr. Berrien of Georgia, had moved a resolution, to the effed thai the war ought not to be con- tinued for the purposes of conquest and acquisition, The resolution declared thai the war with Mexico ought not to be prosecuted ly this government with any view to the dismemberment of thai re public, or to the acquisition, by con- quest, of any portion of her territory. Thai proposition he introduced into the Senate, in the form of a resolution; and 1 believe thai everj Whig Senator bu1 one voted for it. Bui the Senators be- longing to the Locofoco or Democratic party voted against it. The Senators from New York voted against it. Gen- eral Cass, from the free State of Mich- igan, Mr. Fairfield, from Maine, Mr. Niles, from Connecticut, and others, voted against it, and the vote was lost. That is, these gentlemen, — some of them very prominent friends of Mr. Van Buren, and ready to take the field for him, — these very gentlemen voted not to exclude territory that might he ob- tained by conquest. They were willing to bring in the territory, and then have a squabble and controversy whether it should be slave or free territory. I was of opinion that the true and safe policy was, to shut out the whole question by getting no territory, and thereby keep off all controversy. The territory will do us no good, if free; it will be an en- cumbrance, if free. To a great extent, it will produce a preponderance in favor of the South in the Senate, even if it be free. Let us keep it out, therefore. But no. We will make the acquisition, bring in the territory, and manage it after- wards. That was the policy. Gentlemen, in an important crisis in English history, in the reign of Charles the Second, when the country was threat- ened by the accession to the throne of a prinde, then called the Duke of York, who was a bigot to the Roman Catholic religion, a proposition was made to ex- clude him from the crown. Some said that was a very rash measure, brought forward by very rash men; that they had better admit him, and then put lim- itations upon him, chain him down, re- strict him. When the debate was going on, a member is reported to have risen and expressed his sentiments by rather a grotesque comparison, but one of con- siderable force: — " I hear a lion, in the lobby, roar! Say, Mr. Speaker, shall we shut the door, And keep him out; or shall we let him in, Ami see if we can get him out again?" I was lor shutting the door and keep- ing the lion out. other more confident spirits, who are of the character oi \ an A.mburgh, were Eor letting him in, and disturbing all the interests of the coun- try. When this Mexican treaty came SPEECH AT MAloiini.U) before the Senate, it bad certain da ceding New Mexico and California to the United States. A Southern •_;< ■! it 1<-- man, Mr. Badger, of North Carolina. moved to Btrike oul thdse clauses. Now yon understand, thai if a motion to Btrike out a clause of a treat] be sup- ported by one third, it will be .-truck out; that is, two thirds of the Senate must \ < >te for each clause, in cider to have it retained. Thevot i this ques- tion of striking out stood 38 to 11. nol quite one third being against the ces- sion, and so the elau.se was retained. And why were there not one third? Just because there were four New England Senators voting for these new territo- ries. That is the reason. 1 hope 1 am as anient an advocate for peace as any man living; hut I would not be carried away by the desire for peace to commit an act which I believed highly injurious, likely to have conse- quences of a permanent character, and indeed to endanger the existence of the government. Besides, I believed that we could have struck out the cessions of territory, and had peace just as soon. And I would be willing to go before the people and leave it to them to say, whether they would carry on the war any longer for acquisition of territory. If they would, then they were the artifi- cers of their own fortunes. I was not afraid of the people on that subject. But if this course had continued the war somewhat longer, I would ha\e preferred that result, rather than that those ter- ritories lying on our southern border should come in hereafter as new Stales. I should speak, perhaps, with more con- lidence, if some Whigs of the North had not voted for the treaty. My own opin- ion was then clear and decisive. For myself I thought the case a perfectly plain one, and no man has yet stated a reason to convince me to the contrary. I voted to strike out the articles of cession. They would have been struck out if four of the New England Senators had not voted againsi the motion. I then voted against the ratification of the treaty, and that treaty would have failed if three New England Senators had nol voted for it . and Wl. too. I should do the same thing again, and with much nioie resolution. I would have run a -till greater ri-k, I would have endured a still greater -ho. i. I would bave risked any thing, rather than have been a participator in any mea which should have a tendency to annex Southern territory to th - of the Union. I hope it will be remembered, in all future time, thai on this question of the a sssion of these new territo of almost boundless extent, I voted against them, and againsi the tn which contained them, notwithstanding all inducements to the contrary, and all the cries, which I thought hasty and injudicious, of "Peace! Peace on any term-! " I w ill add, that those who voted againsi the treaty were gentlemen from so many part- of the country, that its rejection would have been an act rather of national than of local resist- ance. There were votes againsi it from both parties, and from all parties, the Smith and tin- West, the North and the Mast. What we wanted was a few more New England vote-. < rentlemen, after I had the honor of receiving the invitation to meet my fel- low-citizens. I found it necessary, in tic discharge of my duty, though with great inconvenience to my health, to be present at the closing scenes of tl n. You know what there transpired. You know the important decision that was made in both houses of Congress, in regard to Oregon. The immediate question re- spected Ore-oii. or rather the hill re- Bpected Oregon, but the question more particularly concerned these new terri- tories. The effect of the hill ;\s pa--'d in the Senate was to establish these new territories a- Blave-holding State-. House disagreed. The Senate receded from their ground, and the bill passed, establishing Oregon a- a free Terril and making no provision forth.' newly acquired territories on the South. My . and the reasons 1 gave f ir it. are known to the good people of Massachu- setts, ami I have not heard that they have expressed any particular disappro- bation of them. f.ss SPEECH AT MARSIIFIELD. But this question is to be resumed at the first Bession of the next Congress. There is no probability that it will be settled at the next session of this Con- gress. Hut at least at the first session of the next Congress this question -will In- resumed. It will enter at this very period into all the elections of the South. And now I venture to say. Gentle- men, two things; the first well known to you, that General Cuss is in favor of what is called the Compromise Line, and is of opinion that the Wilmot Pro- viso, or the Ordinance of 1787, which excludes slavery from territories, ought not to be applied to territories lying south of 36° 30'. He announced this before he was nominated, and if he had not announced it, he would have been 36° 30' farther off from being nominated. In the next place, he will do all he can to establish that compromise line; and lastly, which is a matter of opinion, in my conscientious belief he will establish it. Give him the power and the patronage of the government, let him exercise it over certain portions of the country whose representatives voted on this occa- sion to put off that question for future consideration; let him have the power of this government with his attachments, with his inducements, and we shall see tin' result. I verily believe, that unless there is a renewed strength, an aug- mented strength, of Whig votes in Con- gress, he will accomplish his purpose. He will surely have the Senate, and with the patronage of the government, with every interest which he can bring to hear, co-operating with every interest which the South can bring to bear, he will establish the compromise line. We cry safety before we are out of the woods, if we feel that the danger respecting the territories is over. Gentlemen, I came here to confer with you as friends and countrymen, to speak my own mind and hear yours; but if we all should speak, and occupy as much time as I have, we should make a late meeting. I shall detain you no longer. I have been long in public life, longer, far longer than I shall remain there. 1 have had some participation for more than thirty years in the councils of the nation. I profess to feel a strong attach- ment to the liberty of the United States, to the Constitution and free institutions of this country, to the honor, and I may say the glory, of my native land. I feel every injury inflicted upon it, almost as a personal injury. I blush for every fault which I think I see committed in its public councils, as if they were faults or mistakes of my own. I know that, at this moment, there is no object upon earth so much attracting the gaze of the intelligent and civilized nations of the earth as this great republic. All men look at us, all men examine our course, all good men are anxious for a favorable result to this great experiment of repub- lican liberty. We are on a hill and can- not be hid. We cannot withdraw our- selves either from the commendation or the reproaches of the civilized world. They see us as that star of empire which half a century ago was represented as making its way westward. I wish they may see it as a mild, placid, though brilliant orb, moving athwart the whole heavens to the enlightening and cheer- ing of mankind; and not as a meteor of fire and blood, terrifying the nations. JEREMIAH MASON. [The death of the Hon. Jeremiah Mason, one of the most eminent membera of the Legal profession in the United states, took plaee at Boston, on the 14th of October, 1848. At a meeting of the liar of the County of Suffolk, Mass., held on the 17th instant, appropriate resolutions in honor of the deceased, accompanied with a few elo- quent observations, were introduced by Mr. Choate, and unanimously adopted. It was voted by the meeting, that Mr. Webster should Ik' requested to present these reso- lutions to the Supreme Judieial Court at its next term in Boston. In compliance with this request, at the Opening of the next term of the court, on the 14th of November, 1848, prayer having been offered, Mr. Webster rose and spoke as follows.] May it please your Honors, — Jere- miah Masox, one of the counsellors of this court, departed this life on the 1 Itli of October, at his residence in this city. The death of one of its members, so highly respected, so much admired and venerated, could not fail to produce a striking impression upon the members of this bar; and a meeting was imme- diately called, at which a member of this court, just on the eve of leaving the practice of his profession for a seat on the bench, 1 presided; and resolutions expressive of the sense entertained by the bar of the high character of the de- ceased, and of sincere condolence with those whom his loss touched more nearly, were moved by one of his distinguished brethren, and adopted with entire una- nimity. My brethren have appointed me to the honorable duty of presenting these resolutions to this court; and it is in discharge of that duty that, I rise to address you, and pray that the resolu- tions which I hold in my hand may be read by the clerk. 1 Mr. Justice Richard Fletcher. The clerk of the court tin n read the resolutions, a-- follovi i : — "Resolved, That the membera of this bar have heard with profound emotion of the decease of the Honorable Jeremiah Ma- son, one of the most eminent and distin- guished of the great men who ha\e ever adorned this profession; and, a- well in discharge of a public duty, B4 in obedi. 1 1. . ■ to the dictates of our private feelings, we think it proper to mark this occasion i>\ gome attempt to record our estimate of his pre-eminent abilities and high char- acter. " Resolved, That the public character and services of Mr. Mason demand prominent commemoration; that, throughout his long life, whether as a private person or in pub- lic place, he maintained a wide and various intercourse with public men, and cherished a constant and deep interest in public affairs, ami by his \a»t practical wisdom and sagacity, the fruit of extraordinary in- tellectual endowments, matured thought, and profound observation, and by tin sound- ness of his opinions and the comprehensive- ness and elevated tone of his politics, he exerted at all times a greal and most salu- tary influence upon the sentiments and pol- icy of the community and the country ; and that, as a Senator in the Congress of the United States during a p> riod of many years, and in a crisis of affairs which de- manded the wisdom of the widest and the civil virtues of the best, he was distin- guished among the most eminent men of his country for ability in debate, tor atten- tion to all tin- duties of his great trust, t""r moderation, tor prudence, for fidelity to the obligations of that party connection to which he was attached, fur fidelity still more conspicuous and still more admirable to the higher obligations of a thoughtful ami enlarged patriotism. "Resolved, That it was the prlvilegi Mr. Mas, hi to come t" the bar w In n the jurisprudence of (few England was yet in 500 JEREMIAH MASON. its infancy; thai he brought to its cultiva- tion great general ability, and a practical Bagacity, logical power, and patient re- search, — constituting altogether a legal genius, rarely if ever surpassed ; that it was greatly through his influence that the grow- ing wants of a prosperous State were met and satisfied by a system of common law at once flexible and certain, deduced by the highest human wisdom from the actual wants of the community, logically correct, and practically useful ; that in the fact that the State of New Hampshire now possesses such a \\ stem of law, whose gladsome light lias shone on other States, are seen both the product and the monument of his labors, less conspicuous, but not less real, than if embodied in codes and institutes bearing his name ; yet that, bred as he was to the common law, his great powers, opened and liberalized by its study and practice, en- abled him to grasp readily, and wield with entire ease, those systems of equity, appli- cable to the transactions of the land or the sea. which, in recent times, have so much meliorated and improved the administra- tion of justice in our country. "Resolved, That as respects his practice as a counsellor and advocate at this bar, we would record our sense of his integrity, prudence, fidelity, depth of learning, knowl- edge of men and affairs, and great powers of persuading kindred minds; and we know well, that, when he died, there was extin- guished one of the few great lights of the old common law. " Resc d, That Mr. Webster be request- ed to present these resolutions to the Su- preme Judicial Court, at its next term, in Boston; and the District Attorney of the United States be requested to present them to the Circuit Court of the United States now in session. " Resolved, That the Secretary communi- cate to the family of Mr. Mason a copy of these resolutions, together with the respect- fid sympathy of the bar." The proprieties of this occasion (con- tinued Mr. Webster) compel me, with whatever reluctance, to refrain from the indulgence <>\' tie- personal feelings which • in in V heart, upon the death id' one with whom 1 have cultivated a sin- cere, affectionate, and unbroken friend- ship, from tie- daj \\ lien I commenced iii n own professional career, to the clos- hour of hi- life. I will not say, of the advantages which I have derived from his intercourse and conversation, all that Mr. Fox said of Edmund Burke; but I am bound to say, that of my own professional discipline and attainments, whatever they may be, I owe much to that close attention to the discharge of my duties which 1 was compelled to pay, for nine successive years, from day to day, by Mr. Mason's efforts and ar- guments at the same bar. Fa* est ah koste doct ri : and I must have been un- intelligent, indeed, not to have learned something from the constant displays of that power which I had so much occa- sion to see and to feel. It is the more appropriate duty of the present moment to give some short no- tice of his life, character, and the quali- ties of his mind and heart, so that he maybe presented as an example to those who are entering upon or pursuing the same career. Four or five years ago, Mr. Mason drew up a biography of himself, from the earliest period of his recollection to the time of his removal to Portsmouth, in 1797; which is inter- esting, not only for the information it gives of the mode in which the habits of his life were formed, but also for the manner of its composition. He was born on the 27th day of April, 1768, at Lebanon in Connecticut. His remotest ancestor in this country was Captain John Mason (an officer who had served with distinction in the Neth- erlands, under Sir Thomas Fairfax), who came from England in 1630, and settled at Dorchester in the Colony of Massachusetts. His great-grandfather lived at lladdam. His grandfather, born in 1705, lived at Norwich, and died in the year 1770. Mr. Mason remembered him, and recollected his character, as that of a respectable and deeply religious man. His ancestor on the maternal side was .lames Fitch, a learned divine, who came from England and settled in Saybrook, but removed to Lebanon, where he died. A Latin epitaph, iii the ancient burying-ground of that town, records his merits. One of hi 3 descendants held a large tract of laud iii the parish of Goshen, in the JEREM1 Ml MASON .-.'.'1 town of Lebanon, by grant from the [ndians; one half of which, near :i cen- tury afterwards, was bequeathed to his daughter, Elizabeth Pitch, the mother of Mr, Mason. To this property Mr. Mason's father removed Boon after bis marriage, and there be died, in 1818. The title of ili is land was obtained from Uncas, an Indian sachem in that neigh- borhood, by tin- great-grandfather of Mr. Mason's mother, and has never been alienated from the family. It is now owned by -Mr. Mason's nephew, Jeremiah .Mason, the son of his eldest brother dames. The family has been distinguished for longevity; the average ages of Mr. Mason's six immediate ancestors having exceeded eighty-three years each. Mr. Mason was the sixth of nine children, all of whom are now dead. Mr. Mason's father was a man of in- telligence and activity, of considerable opulence, and highly esteemed by the community. At the commencement of the Revolutionary war. being a zealous Whig, lie raised and commanded a com- pany of minute-men, as they were called, and marched to the siege of Boston. Here he rendered important service, being stationed at Dorchester Heights, and engaged in fortifying that position. In the autumn of that year, he was pro- moted to a colonelcy, and joined the army with his regiment, in the neigh- borhood of New York. At the end of the campaign, he returned home out of health, but retained the command of his regiment, which he rallied and brought out with celerity and spirit when Gen- eral Arnold assaulted and burned New London. He became attached to mili- tary life, and regretted that he had not at an early day entered the Continental service. Colonel Mason was a good man. affectionate to his family, kind and obliging to his neighbors, and faith- ful in the observance of all moral and religious duties. Mr. Mason's mother was distinguished for a good understanding, much discre- tion, the purity of her heart and affec- tions, and the exemplary kindness and benevolence of her life. It was her • anxiety to jive all her children tin- best education, within tie- mean- of lie- family, which ti. ■ I the COUn- trj would allow; and she was particu- larly desirous thai Jeremiah should l"- sent i., college. •• In m\ recollection of my mother. \i Mason, " she was the personification of love, kind- aud benevolence." Destined for an education and for professional life, Mr. Mason was sent to Jf ale ( lollege, at Bixteen j his preparatory studies having I a pur- sued under •• Master Tisdale," who had then been forty years at tie- head of ;i school in Lebanon, which had become distinguished, and ai g the gcb of which were the Wbeelocks, after- w ards Presidents of Dartmouth Colli lie was graduated in 1784, and per- formed a pari in the Commencement exercises, which greatly raised tl \- pectation of hi- friends, and gratified and animated his love for distinction. " In the course of a long and active life," says he, •• I recollect n casion when I have experienced slleh elevation of feeling." This was tl ffed of that spirit of emulation which incited the whole course of Ids life ,,f usefulness. There is now- prevalent among us a morbid and sickly notion, that emu- lation, even as honorable rivalry, i- a debasing passion, and nol to l> encour- aged. It BUppOSea that the mind should be left without such excitement, in a dreamy and undisturbed state, flowing or not flowing, according to it> own im- pulse, Vi ithout such aid- a- are furnished by the rivalry of one with another. I one, I do not believe in this. I bold t" the doctrine of the old Bchool, a- to this p.nt of education. Quinctilian Bays: '•Sunt quidam, nisi institeris, remissi; quidam imperio indignantur; quosdani continet metus, quosdam debilitat : alios continuatio extundit, in alii- plus im- petus tacit. Mihi ill.- detur | r. quern laus excitet, quern gloria juvet, qui victus float; hie eril alendus ambitu, hunc mordebit objurgatio, hunc honor excitabit; in boo desidiam nnnquam verebor." I think this i- BOUnd sense and just feeling. 592 JEREMIAH MASON. Mr. Mason was destined for the law, and commenced the study of that pro- fession with Mr. Baldwin, a gentleman who has lived to perform important public and private duties, has served his country in Congress, and on the bench of the Supreme Court of Connect- icut, and still lives to hear the account of tin- peaceful death of his distinguished pupil. After a year, he went to Ver- mont, in whose recently established tri- bunals he expected to find a new sphere for the gratification of ambition, and the employment of talents. He studied in the office of Stephen Howe Bradley, afterwards a Senator in Congress; and was admitted to the bar, in Ver- mont and Xew Hampshire, in the year 1791. He began his career in Westmoreland, a few miles below Walpole, at the age of twenty-three; but in 1791, three years afterwards, removed to Walpole, as be- ing a larger village, where there was more societ y and more business. There was at that time on the Connecticut River a rather unusual number of gen- tlemen, distinguished for polite accom- plishments and correct tastes in litera- ture, and among them some well known to the public as respectable writers and authors. Among these were Mr. Ben- jamin "West, Mr. Dennie, Mr. Royall Tyler, Mr. Jacobs, Mr. Samuel Hunt, Mr. J. W. Blake, Mr. Colman (who es- tablished, and for a long time edited, the "New York Evening Post"), and Mr. Olcott. In the association with these gentlemen, and those like them, Mr. Mason found an agreeable position, and cultivated tastes and habits of the highest character. About this period, he made a journey to Virginia, on mme business connected with land titles, where he had much intercourse with Major-General Henry Lee; and, on his return, he saw Presi- denl Washington, at Philadelphia, and was greatly struck by the urbanity and dignity of his manner. He heard Fisher Aim- make his celebrated speech upon the British treaty. All that the world has said with regard to the extraordi- nary effect produced by that Speech, and its wonderful excellence, is fully confirmed by the opinion of Mr. Mason. He speaks of it as one of the highest exhibitions of popular oratory that he had ever witnessed ; popular, not in any low sense, but popular as being addressed to a popular body, and high in all the qualities of sound reasoning and enlight- ened eloquence. Mr. Mason was inclined to exercise his abilities in a larger sphere. He had at this time made the acquaintance of Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. The former advised Mr. Mason to re- move himself to New York. His own preference was for Boston; but he thought, that, filled as it then was by distinguished professional ability, it was too crowded to allow him a place. That was a mistake. On the contrary, the bar of this city, with the utmost liberality and generosity of feeling and sentiment, have alw r ays been ready to receive, with open arms, every honor- able acquisition to the dignity and use- fulness of the profession, from other States. Mr. Mason, however, removed to Portsmouth in the autumn of 1797 ; and, as w r as to be expected, his prac- tice soon became extensive. He was appointed Attorney-General in 1802. About that time, the late learned and lamented Chief Justice Smith retired from his professional duties, to take his place as a judge; and Mr. Mason be- came the acknowledged head of his pro- fession. He resigned the office of Attorney-General, three or four years afterwards, to the great regret of the court, the bar, and the country. As a prosecuting officer, he was courteous, inflexible, and just; careful that the guilty should not escape, and that the honest should be protected. He was impartial, almost judicial, in t ho ad- ministration of his great office. lie had no morbid eagerness for conviction; and never permitted, as sometimes occurs, an unworthy wrangling between the of- ficial power prosecuting, and the zeal of the other party defending. His official course produced exactly the ends it was designed to do. The honesl felt safe; but there was a trembling and fear in JEW Ml Ml MASON. the evil disposed, thai the bran law would be vindicated. Very much confi I to his profession, he never sought office or political eleva- tion. Yet he held derided opinions upon all political questions, and culti- vated acquaintance with all the Leading subjects of the day: and do man was more keenly alive than he to whatever occurred, at borne or abroad, involv- ing the great interests of the civilized world. His political principles, opinions, judgments, wen* framed upon those of the men of the times of Washington. From these, to the last, he never swerved. The copy was well executed. His conversation on subjects of state was as instructive and interesting as upon professional topics. He had the same reach of thought, and exhibited the same comprehensive mind, and sa- gacity quick and far seeing, with regard to political things and men, as he did in professional affairs. His influence was, therefore, hardly the less from the fact that he was not actively engaged in political life. There was an additional weight given to his j.idgmcnt, arising from his being a disinterested beholder only. The looker-on can sometimes form a more independent and impartial opinion of the course and results of the contest, than those who are actually engaged in it. Hut at length, in June, 1813, he was persuaded to accept the post of a Sena- tor of the United States, and took his seat that month. He was in Congress during the sessions of 1813 and 1811. Those were very exciting times; party spirit ran very high, and each party put forward its most prominent and gifted men. Both houses were filled by the greatest intellects of the country. Mr. Mason found himself by the side of Rufus King, Giles, Goldsborough, Gore, Barbour, Daggett, Hunter, and other distinguished public men. Among men of whatever party, and however much Borne of them differed from him in opin- ion or political principle, there was not one of them all but felt pleasure if he spoke, and respected his uncommon ability and probity, and bis fail- and up- right demeanor in Id- place and station. He took at once hi- appropriate posi- tion, of In and admirers in tin- other house, there an- some emi- nent pei-oii- now living who wen occa- sional listeners to hi- speeches and much struck with hi- ability: together with Pickering, Benson, Pitkin, Stock- ton. i.ow iid>- i . • ton, and Hopkinson, dow all deceased, who Dsed to flock to hear him, and alwa\- derived deep gratification and instruction from his talent-, character, and power. He resigned hi- Beat in the Senate in 1817. His published -| he- are not numerous. The report- of that day were far less Complete than DOW, and comparatively few debates were pre- served and revised. It was a remark- able truth, that he always thought far too lightly of himself and all his pro- ductions. 1 know that he wa- with difficulty persuaded to prepare his speeches in Congre88 for publication; and in this memorial of himself which I have before me he says, with every appearance and feeling of sincerity, that he ■■ has never acted any important part in life, but has felt a deep interest in the conduct of others." His two main speeches were, first, one of great vigor, in the Senate, in Febru- ary, 1814, on the Embargo, ju-t before that policy was abandoned. The other was later, in December, 1815, shortly before the peace, on Mr. Giles's Con- scription Bill, in which he discussed the subject of the enlistment of minor.-; and tin- clause authorizing Buch enlistment wa- Bl ruck out apOD his motion. He wa- afterwards for several yea member of the New Hampshire Legisla- ture, and assisted in revising the code of that Mate. II -paid much attention to the subject of the judicature, and per- formed his Ben ice- fully to the -at tion of the Mate; and the result of his labors was warmly commended. In l^L'l he wa- again a candidate for the Senate of the I 1 1 i t ed State-. The .-lec- tion was to be made by the concurrent vote of tie- two branches of the i tare. In tin' popular branch he was 38 594 JEREMIAH MASON. chosen by a strong vote. The Senate, however, non-concurred ; bywhich means the election was lost, — a loss to the coun- try, not tn him, — by force of circum- stances and agencies not now or ever fit to 1"' recalled or remembered. He continued to reside for many years in Portsmouth. His residence in that ancient town was a happy one. lie was happy in his family and in the society of the town, surrounded by agreeable neigh- bors, respected by the bar and the court, and standing at the head of his profes- si on. He had a great love of conver- sation, lie took pleasure in hearing others talk, and gave an additional charm by the freshness, agreeableness, and originality of his own observations. His warm hospitality left him never alone, and his usefulness was felt as much within the walls of the homes, as of the tribunals, of Portsmouth. There are yet many in that town who love him and his: many who witnessed, as chil- dren, and recollect, the enthusiasm with which he was greeted by their fathers and mothers; and all in New Hampshire old enough to remember him will feel what we feel here on this occasion. Led at last partly by the desire of ex- erting his abilities in a larger sphere of usefulness, and partly by the fact of the residence here of beloved domestic con- nections, be came to this city, and en- tered upon the performance of his pro- fessional duties in 1832. Of the manner in which he discharged those duties, this court is the most competent judge. You. Mr. Chief Justice, and the venerable; as- sociate who usually occupies a place at your right. 1 have been witnesses of the whole. You know the fidelity with which he observed his duty to the court, as well as his duty to his clients. In learning, assiduity, respect for the bench, uprightness, and integrity, he stood as an example to the bar. You know the gen- eral probity and talent with which he n med, for so many years, the duty of a counsellor of tins court. I mould hardly trust myself to make any analysis of Mr. Mason's mind. I may he a partial judge. Bui I may ■ Mr. Justice Wilde. speak of what I myself admire and venerate. The characteristics of Mr. Mason's mind, as I think, were real greatness, strength, and sagacity. Ho was great through strong sense and sound judgment, great by comprehensive views of things, great by high and elevated purposes. Perhaps sometimes he was too cautious and refined, and his dis- tinctions became too minute; but his discrimination arose from a force of intellect, and quick-seeing, far-reaching sagacity, everywhere discerning his ob ; ject and pursuing it steadily. Whether it was popular or professional, he grasped a point and held it with a strong hand. He was sarcastic sometimes, but not fre- quently; not frothy or petulant, but cool and vitriolic. Unfortunate for him on whom his sarcasm fell ! II is conversation was as remarkable as his efforts at the bar. It was original, fresh, and suggestive; never dull or in- different. He never talked when he had nothing to say. He was particularly agreeable, edifying, and instructive to all about him: and this was the charm of the social intercourse in which he w as connected. As a professional man, Mr. Mason's great ability lay in the department of the common law. In this part of juris- prudence he was profoundly learned. He had drunk copiously from its deepest springs; and he had studied with dili- gence and success the departures from the English common law which had taken place in this country, either neces- sarily, from difference of condition, or positively, by force of our own statutes. In his addresses, both to courts and juries, he affected to despise all elo- quence, and certainly disdained all or- nament : but his efforts, whether ad- dressed to one tribunal or the other, were marked by a degree of clearness, directness, ami force not easy to be equalled. There wen' no courts of equity, as a separate and distinct juris- diction, in New Hampshire, during his residence in that State. Yet, the equity treatises and equity reports were all in his library, not " wisely ranged for show," but for constant and daily con- JEREM1 Ml M \- IN Bultation; because he saw that the com- mon law itself was growing even day more ami more liberal; that equitj prin- ciples were constantly forcing themselves into its administration and within its rules; that the subjects of litigation iii the courts were constantly becoming, more ami more, Buch a- escaped from the technicalities ami the trammels <>t the common law, ami offered themselves Eor discussion and decision on the broader principles of general jurisprudence. .Mr. Mason, like other accomplished lawyers, and more than most , admired the search- ing scrutiny and the high morality of a court of equity; ami felt the Instruction and edification resulting from the peru- sal of the judgments of Lord I lard w icke, Lord Eldon, ami Sir William Grant, as well as of those of great names in our own country, not now among the living. Among his early associates in New Hampshire, there were many distin- guished men. Of those now dead were Mr. West, Mr. Gordon, Edward St. Loe Livermore, Peleg Sprague, William K. Atkinson, George Sullivan, Thomas W. Thompson, and Amos Kent; the last of these having been always a particular persona] friend. All of these gentlemen in their day held high and respectable stations, and were eminent as lawyers of probity and character. Another contemporary and friend of Mr. Mason was Mr. Timothy Bigelow, a lawyer of reputation, a man of probity and honor, attractive by his conversa- tion, and highly agreeable in his social intercourse. Mr. Bigelow, we all know, was of this State, in which he filled high offices with great credit; but, as a coun- sellor and advocate, he was constant in his attendance on the New Hampshire courts. Having known Mr. Bigelow from my early youth, I have pleasure in recall- ing the mutual regard and friendship which I know to have subsisted between him and the subject of these remarks. ] ought not to omit Mr. Wilson and Mr. lietton, in mentioning Mr. Mason's con- temporaries at the bar. They were near his own age, and both well known as lawyers and public men. Mr. Mason, while yet in New Hamp- shire, found himself engaged in causes in which that illustrious man, Samuel Dexter, also appeared. The late Mr. Justice Storj was -till more frequently at the I'.u'oi thai State ; and, at a pei iod Bomewhal earlier, your greal and distin- guished predecessor, < biei Justice Par- Bons, occasionally presented himself be- fore the courts at Portsmouth or Exeter, and he is known to have entertained a very high regard, personal and pn sional. as well for Mr. Mason as for the late Chief Jug| ice Smith. Anion- those still living, With whom Mr. Mason was on terms of intimacy, and w ill. whom he associated at the bar, were MeS8r8. Plumer, Arthur Liven, lore, Samuel Bell, and Charles II. Atherton. It' these re-perted men could be lcav to- day, every one of them would unite with us in our tribute of love ami veneration to his memory. but . Sir, political eminence ami pro- fessional fame fade away and die with all things earthlj . Nothing of character is really permanent but virtue ami per- sonal worth. These remain. Whatever of excellence i- WTOUghl into til.- soul itself belongs to both world-. Heal goodness does not attach it-elf merely to this life; it point- to another world. Political or professional reputation can- not last for ever; I'm a conscience void of offence before God ami man i- an in- heritance for eternity. /.'. 'igion, tb fore, is a necessary and indispensable element in any greal human character. There is no living withoul it. Religion is the tie that connects man with his Creator, and hold- ldni to his throne, if that tie be all Bundered, all brok he floats away, a worthless atom in the universe; it- proper attractions all gone, its destiny thwarted, ami it- whole fu- ture nothing but darkness, desolation, and death. A man with U0 Sense of religious dutj is he whom the Script describe, in Buch terse hut ten ific lan- guage, a- living ••without (iod in the world." Such a man i- out of hi- proper being, out of tie- circle of all his dul out of the circle of all his happiness, and away, far, far away, from the purp of hi- creation. 596 JEREMIAH MASON. A mind like Mr. Mason's, active, thoughtful, penetrating, sedate, could not but meditate deeply on the condi- tion of man below, and feel its respon- sibilities. He could not look on this mighty system, "This universal frame, thus wondrous fair," without feeling that it was created and upheld by an Intelligence, to which all other intelligences must be responsible. I am bound to say. that in the course of my life I never met with an individual, in any profession or condition of life, who always spoke, and always thought, with such awful reverence of the power and presence of God. No irreverence, no lightness, even no too familiar allu- sion to God and his attributes, ever escaped his lips. The very notion of a Supreme Being was, with him, made up of awe and solemnity. It filled the whole of his great mind with the strongest emotions. A man like him, with all his proper sentiments and sensibilities alive in him, must, in this state of existence, have something to believe and some- thing to hope for; or else, as life is ad- vaneing to its close and parting, all is heart-sinking and oppression. Depend upon it, whatever may be the mind of an old man, old age is only really happy, when, on feeling the enjoyments of this world pass away, it begins to lay a stronger hold on those of another. Mr. Mason's religious sentiments and feelings were the crowning glories of his character. One, with the strongest mo- tives to love and venerate him, and the best means of knowledge, says: — '• Sii far as my memory extends, he always shown! a deep conviction of the divine au- thority of the Holy Scriptures, of the in- stitutions of Christianity, and of the im- portance of persona] religion. Soon after his residence ill l'.u-toii, lie entered tile I'uiii- munion of the Church, and has continued since regularly to receive the Lord's Supper. From that time, he also habitually main- tained domestic worship, morning and even- ing. The death of two of his sons produced a deep impression upon his mind, and di- rected it in an increased degree to religious Bubjects. "Though he was always reserved in the expression of religious feeling, still it has been very apparent, for several years, that his thoughts dwelt much upon his practical religious duties, and especially upon prep- aration for another world. Within three or four years, he frequently led the conversa- tion to such subjects; and during the year past, immediate preparation for his depart- ure has been obviously the constant sub- ject of his attention. His expressions in regard to it were deeply humble ; and, in- deed, the very humble manner in which he always spoke of himself was most marked. " I have observed, of late years, an in- creasing tenderness in his feelings and man- ner, and a desire to impress his family with the conviction that he would not remain long with them. His allusions of this kind have been repeated, even when apparently in his usual health ; and they indicated the current of his thoughts. "He retained his consciousness till within a few hours of his death, and made distinct replies to every question put to him. He was fully aware that his end was near ; and in answer to the question, ' Can you now rest with firm faith upon the merits of your Divine Redeemer ? ' he said, ' I trust I do : upon what else can I rest ! ' " At another time, in reply to a similar question, he said, ' Of course, I have no other ground of hope.' We did not often speak to him during those last three days, but had no doubt that he was entirely con- scious of his state, knew that his family were all near, and that Ins mind was free from anxiety. He could not speak with ease, and we were unwilling to cause him the pain of exertion. His whole life, marked by uniform greatness, wisdom, and integ- rity, his deep humility, his profound rev- erence for the Divine Majesty, his habitual preparation for death, his humble trust in his Saviour, left nothing to be desired for the consolation of his family under this great loss. He was gradually prepared for his departure. His last years were passed in calm retirement; and he died as he wished to die, with his faculties unimpaired, without great pain, with his family around his lied, the precious promises of the Gospel before his mind, without lingering disease, and yet not suddenly called away." Such, Mr. Chief Justice, was the life, and such the death, of Ji Ri mi mi M ison. For one, I could pour out my heart like water, at the recollection of bis \ trtues and his friendship, and in the JEREMIAH M L80H 597 feeling of his loss. I would embalm bis memory in my best affections, Hi- per- BonaJ regard, so long continued to me, 1 esteem one of the greatest blessings of my life; and I hope that ii may be known hereafter, that, with. ait inter- mission or coolness through many years, and until he descended to his grave, Mr. Mason and myself were friends. Mr. Mas, mi died in old age; ool by a violent stroke from the hand of death, not by a sudden rupture of the ties of nature, but by a gradual wearing out of his constitution. lie enjoyed through life, indeed, remarkable health. He took competent exercise, loved the open air, and, avoiding all extreme theories or practice, controlled his conduct and habits of life by the rules of prudence and moderation. Hi- death was there- fore not unlike that described by the angel, admonishing Adam: — " l yield it just, -aid Adam, tod submit I'.nt i- then- yit DO Other way. I..--I.!.--. rhese painful passages, how «■• tnaj coma l o death, an, l mix with oui connatural dust ? 'I'll' i Michael, if thou well obeerra The rule uf • n,.i i,„, much, 1 by tempei taught, In what thou eat'st unil ilrink'-t: seeking fruin thence Due nourishment, nut gluttonous delight; Till many years over thy head return, Su mays! thou live; till, like ripe fruit, thon dr..|i Into thy mother's lap; or In- with i i Gathered, not harshly plucked; for diuth mature. This is old age." KOSSUTH. FROM A SPEECH DELIVERED IN BOSTON, ON THE 7th OF NOVEMBER, 1849, AT A FESTIVAL OF THE NATIVES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ESTABLISHED IN MASSACHUSETTS. We have all had our sympathies much enlisted in the Hungarian effort for lib- erty. We have all wept at its fail- ure. "We thought we saw a more ra- tional hope of establishing free gov- ernment in Hungary than iu any other pari of Europe, where the question has been in agitation within the last twelve months. But despotic power from abroad intervened to suppress that hope. And, Gentlemen, what will come of it I do not know. For my part, at this moment, I feel more indignant at recent events connected with Hungary than at all those which passed in her struggle for liberty. I see that the Emperor of Rus- sia demands of Turkey that the noble Kossuth and his companions shall be given up, to be dealt with at his pleas- ure. And I see that this demand is made in derision of the established law of nations. Gentlemen, there is some- thing on earth greater than arbitrary or despotic power. The lightning has its power, and the whirlwind has its power, and the earthquake has its power; but there is something among men more capable of shaking despotic thrones than Lightning, whirlwind, or earth- quake, and that is, the excited and aroused indignation of the whole civil- ized world. Gentlemen, the Kinperor oi Russia holds himself to be bound by the law of nations, from the fact that he negotiates with civilized nations, and 1 } j :i t he forms alliances and treaties with them. He professes, in fact, to live in a civilized age, and to govern an en- lightened nation. I say, that if, under these circumstances, he shall perpetrate so great a violation of national law as to seize these Hungarians and to exe- cute them, he will stand as a criminal and malefactor in the view of the pub- lic law of the world. The whole world will be the tribunal to try him, and he must appear before it, and hold up his hand, and plead, and abide its judg- ment. The Emperor of Russia is the su- preme lawgiver in his own country, and, for aught I know, the executor of that law also. But, thanks be to God, he is not the supreme lawgiver or exec- utor of national law, and every offence against that is an offence against the rights of the civilized world. If he breaks that law in the case of Turkey, or any other case, the whole world has a right to call him out, and to demand his punishment. Our rights as a nation, like those of other nations, are held under the sanc- tion of national law; a law which be- comes more important from day to day; a law which none, who profess to agree to it, are at liberty to violate. Nor let him imagine, nor let any one imagine, that mere force can subdue the general sentiment, of mankind. It is much more likely to diffuse that, sentiment, and to destroy the power which he most desires to establish and secure. KOSSUTH. 599 Gentlemen, the bones of poor .John Wickliffe were dag out of his grave, seventy years after bis death, and burnt for his heresy; and his ashes were thrown upon a river in Warwickshire. Some prophet of that day said: "The Avon to the Severn runs, The Severn to the Bea, Ami Wickliffe'a duel shall Bpread al id, Wide as the waters be." Gentlemen, if the blood of Kossuth is taken by an absolute, unqualified, unjustifiable violation of national law, what will it appease, what will it pacify? It will mingle \\ ith the earth, it will mix with the waters of the ocean, the whole civilized world will snuff it in the air, and it will return with awful retribution on the heads of those violators of na- tional law and universal justice. I can- QOl Bay when, or in what form; but depend upon il . thai , if such an acl I place, then thrones, and pi incipalil and powers, must look out for the oon« sequences. And now , Gentlemen, lei us d ur part ; Lei us understand the posil ion in which we Btand, a- the great republic of the world, at the most interesting era of its history . Let us consider the mis- sion and the destiny which Providi seems to have designed torus, and let ns so lake care of OUT OWH conduct, that, with irreproachable hearts, and with hands void of offence, we may stand up whenever and wherever called upon, and, w ith a voice not to be disregai Ard, say, This shall not, be done, at least not without our plot THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION. A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850. [On the 25th of January, 1850, Mr. Clay submitted a series of resolutions to the Sen- ate, on the subject of slavery, in connec- tion with the various questions which had arisen in consequence of the acquisition of Mexican territory. These resolutions fur- nished the occasion of a protracted debate. < to Wednesday, the 0th of March, Mr. Walker of Wisconsin engaged in the dis- cussion, but, owing to the length of time taken up by repeated interruptions, he was unable to finish his argument. In the mean time it had been generally understood that Mr. Webster would, at an early day, take an opportunity of addressing the Senate on the present aspect of the slavery question, on the dangers to the Union of the existing agitation, and on the terms of honorable adjustment. In the expectation of hearing a speech from him on these all-important topics, an immense audience assembled in the Senate-Chamber at an early hour of Thursday, the 7th of March. The floor, the galleries, and the antechambers of the Sen- ate were crowded, and it was with difficulty that the members themselves were able to force their way to their seats. At twelve o'clock the special order of the da\ was announced, and the Vice-President staled that Mr. Walker of Wisconsin was entitled t my pleasure, to give tin- floor to the Senator from Diassachu- bi tts. 1 understand it is immaterial to him upon which of these questions he Bpeaks, and there- fore I will not move to postpone Che Bpecial order." Mi Webster then rose, and, after making hi- acknowledgments to the Senators from Wisconsin (Mr. Walker) and New York (Mr. Seward) for their courtesy in yielding tin' door to him, delivered the following ch, whirl], in consideration of it ^ char- acter and of the manner in which it was re- ceived throughout the country, has been entitled a speech for " the Constitution and the Union." In the pamphlet edition it was dedicated in the following terms to the peo- ple of Massachusetts : — WITH THE HIGHEST RESPECT, AND THE DEEPEST SENSE OF OBLIGATION, I DEDICATE THIS SPEECH TO THE PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS. "His ego gratiora dictu alia esse scio; sed me VERA PRO GRATIS LOQCi, etsi mecm inge- NICM KON MONEKET, NECESS1TAS COGIT. VELLEM, EQUIDEM, VOBIS PLACEKE; SED MULTO MALO VOS SALVOS ESSE, QUALICl MQUE ERGA ME ANIMO FCTl'RI EST1S." DANIEL WEBSTER.] Mr. President, — I wish to speak to-day, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, but as an American, and a member of the Senate of the United States. It is fortunate that there is a Senate of the United States ; a body not yet moved from its propriety, not lost to a just sense of its own dignity and its own high responsibilities, and a body to which the country looks, with confidence, for wise, moderate, patri- otic, and healing counsels. It is not to be denied that we live in the midst of strong agitations, and arc surrounded by very considerable dangers to our in- stitutions and government. The impris- oned winds are let loose. The East, the North, and the stormy South combine to throw the whole sea into commotion, to toss its billows to the skies, and dis- close its profoundesi depths. 1 do not affect to regard myself, Mr. President, SPEECH OF mi: Ttb OF \i \i:< n t',(i| as holding, <>r as lit to hold, (lit* helm in this combal w itfa t be polil icaJ ele ate ; Init I have a duty to perform, ami I mean to perform it with fidelit] . not without a Bense of existing dangers, but not without hope. I have a pai i to art, not for my own security or Bafety, for I am looking out for do fragment upon which to tloat awa\ from the wreck, if wreck there musl I"-. but for the good of tin- whole and the preservation of all; and there is that which will keep me to my duty during this Btruggle, whether the sun and the stars shall ap- pear, or shall not appear, for many days. I speak to-day for the preservation of the Union. "Hear me for my cause." I speak to-day, out of a solicitous and anxious heart, for the restoration to the country of that quiet and that harmony which make the blessings of this Union so rich, and so dear to us all. These are the topics that I propose to myself to discuss; these are the motives, and the sole motives, that influence me in the wish to communicate my opinions to the Senate and the country; and if I can do any tiling, however little, for the promotion of these ends, I shall have accomplished all that I expect. Mr. President, it may not be amiss to recur very briefly to the events which, equally sudden and extraordinary, have brought the country into its present political condition. In May. 1846, the United States declared war against Mex- ico. Our armies, then on the frontiers, entered the provinces of that republic, met and defeated all her troops, pene- trated her mountain passes, and occu- pied her capital. The marine force of the United States took possession of ber forts and her towns, on the Atlantic and on the Pacific. In less than two years a treaty was negotiated, by which Mex- ico ceded to the United Stales a vast territory, extending seven or eight hun- dred miles along the shores of the Pa- cific, and reaching back over the moun- tains, and across the desert, until it joins the frontier of the State of Texas. It so happened, in the distracted and feeble condition of the Mexican govern- ment, that, before the declaration of war by the United States against Mexico had become know a in < California, the people of ( California, under the lead of Aim i ioan officers, overthrew the existing Mex- ican provincial government, and ra I an independent Sag. When the ni arrived at San Francisco that war had been declared by the United - againsl Mexico, this Independent Bag was pulled down, and the stars and Btripesof this Union hoisted in it- Btead. So, sir. before the war was over, the forces of the United state,, militarj naval, had p San Frandaoo ami I 'pper California, and a great nidi of emigrants from various pai t- of the world took place into California in L846 and 1847. Bui now behold another wonder. In January of I -Is. a party of Mor- mon- made a discovery of ,, n extraordi- narily rich mine of gold, or rather great quantity of gold, hardly proper to be called a mine, for it was spread near the surface, mi the lower part of the south, or American, branch of the S ramento. They attempted to conceal their disc,, very for some time; hut soon another discovery of -old. perhaps of greater importance, was made, on an- other part of the American branch of the Sacramento, and near Sutter's Fort, as it is called. The fame of these dis- coveries spread far and wide. They in- flamed more ami more the spirit of emi- gration toward^ California, which had already been excited : and adventi. crowded into the country by hundreds, and flocked towards the Bay of Sin Francisco. This, a- 1 have -aid. took place in t|„. winter and spring of 1 s | s. The digging «• menced in the Bpring of that year, and from that time to this the work of searchin Id has I n prosecuted with a mi,-,-,--,- not heretofore known in the history of this globe. You recollet t . sir. how incredulous at the American publicwas at the acco which reached u- of tie — - disCOVei but we all know, now . that t: counts received, and cotit in:. rve, daily continuation, and down to the present moment 1 Buppose the assurance is as strong, after the experience of t: r,ir_> SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, Beveral mouths, of the existence of de- posits of gold apparently inexhaustible in the regions near San Francisco, in California, as it was at anv period of the earlier dates of the accounts. It so happened, Sir, that although, after the return of peace, it became a very important subject for legislative consideration and Legislative decision to provide a proper territorial government for California, yet differences of opin- ion between the two houses of Congress prevented the establishment of any such territorial government at the last session. Under this state of things, the inhabitants of California, already amounting to a considerable number, thought it to be their duty, in the summer of last year, to establish a local government. Under the proclamation of General Riley, the people chose dele- gates to a convention, and that conven- tion met at Monterey. It formed a constitution for the State of California, which, being referred to the people, was adopted by them in their primary assemblages. Desirous of immediate connection with the United States, its Senators were appointed and Represent- atives chosen, who have come hither, bringing with them the authentic con- stitution of the State of California; and they now present themselves, asking, in behalf of their constituents, that it may be admitted into this Union as one of the United States. This constitu- tion, Sir, contains an express prohibi- tion of slavery, or involuntary servitude, in the State of California. It is said, and I suppose truly, that, of the mem- bers who composed that convention, some sixteen were natives of, and had been residents in, the slave-holding States, about twenty-two were from the non-slaveholding States, and the remain- ing ten members wen- either native Cal- iloniiaiis or old settlers in that country. This prohibition of slavery, it is said, was inserted with entire unanimity. It is this circumstance, Sir, the pro- hibition of slavery, which has con- ited to raise, I do nol say it lias illj i aised, the dispute as to the pro- priety of the admission of California into the Union under this constitution. It is not to be denied, Mr. President, nobody thinks of denying, that, what- ever reasons were assigned at the com- mencement of the late war with Mexico, it was prosecuted for the purpose of the acquisition of territory, and under the alleged argument that the cession of territory was the only form in which proper compensation could be obtained by the United States, from Mexico, for the various claims and demands which the people of this country had against that government. At any rate, it will be found that President Polk's message, at the commencement of the session of December, 18-17, avowed that the war was to be prosecuted until some acqui- sition of territory should be made. As the acquisition was to be south of the line of the United States, in warm cli- mates and countries, it was naturally, I suppose, expected by the South, that whatever acquisitions were made in that region would be added to the slave- holding portion of the United States. Very little of accurate information was possessed of the real physical character, either of California or New Mexico, and events have not turned out as was ex- pected. Both California and New .Mexico are likely to come in as free States; and therefore some degree of disappointment and surprise has re- sulted. In other words, it is obvious that the question which has so long harassed the country, and at some times very seriously alarmed the minds of wise and good men, has come upon us for a fresh discussion, — the question of slavery in these United States. Now, Sir, I propose, perhaps at the expense of some detail and consequent detention of the Senate, to review his- torically this question, which, partly in consequence of its own importance, and partly, perhaps mostly, in consequence of tin; manner in which it has been dis- cussed in different portions of the coun- try, lias been a source of so much aliena- tion and unkind feeling between them. We all know, Sir, that slavery has existed in the world from time immemo- rial. There was slavery, in the earliest FOR TIIK CONST1 I T I |<»N ANT) Till ONION. 603 periods of history, among the Oriental nations. There was slavery among tin- flows; the theocratic "[oveiumenl of thai people issued mi injunction againsl it. There was Blaverj among the Greeks; and the ingenious philosophy of the (Jreeks found, or sought to Bud, a justi- fication for it exactly upon the grounds which have been assumed for such a justification in this country; that is, a natural and original difference among the races of mankind, and the inferiority of the black or colored race to the white. The Greeks justified their system of slavery upon that idea, precisely. They held the African and some of the Asiatic tribes to be inferior to the white race; but they did not show, I think, by any close process of logic, that, if this wire true, the more intelligent and the stronger had therefore a right to subjugate the weaker. The more manly philosophy and juris- prudence of the Romans placed the jus- tification of slavery on entirely different grounds. The Roman jurists, from the first and down to the fall of the empire, admitted that slavery was against the natural law, by which, as they main- tained, all men, of whatsoever clime, color, or capacity, were equal ; but they justified slavery, first, upon the ground and authority of the law of nations, arguing, and arguing truly, that at that day the conventional law of nations ad- mitted that captives in war, whose lives, according to the notions of the times, were at the absolute disposal of the captors, might, in exchange for exemp- tion from death, be made slaves for life, and that such servitude mi -lit descend to their posterity. The jurists of Rome also maintained, that, l»y the civil law, there might be servitude or slavery. personal and hereditary; first, by the voluntary act of an individual, who might sell himself into slavery; secondly, by his being reduced into a stat' 1 of slavery by his creditors, in satisfaction of his debts; and, thirdly, by being placed in a state of servitude or Blavery for crime. At the introduction of Chris- tianity, the Roman world was full of slaves, and I suppose there is to *be found do injunction againsl that relation be- tween man ami man in the I the < lospel ol Je iuji < !hi i-t or of any of hi-* Apostles. I he object of the instruc- tion imparted to mankind by the Founder of Christianity was to touch the heart, purify the BOul, and improve tie- livs of individual men. Thai object went directly to the oral fountain of all the political and BOCial relations of the hu- man race, as well as of all trie- religious Feeling, the individual heart and mind Of man. Now , sir. upon the general nature and influent f slavery there exists a wide difference of opinion between the north- ern portion of this country and the southern. It is said on the one side, that, although not the snbjecl of anv injunction or direel prohibition in the New- Testament, slavery is a wrong; that it is founded merely in the right of the strongest ; and that it is an op] sion, like unjust wars, like all those con- flicts by which a powerful nation BubjectS a weaker to its will; and that, in its nature, whatever may be said of it in the modifications which have taken place, it is not according to the meek spirit of the Gospel. It is not "kindly affectioned " ; it does not "seek an- other's, and not its own": it dors imt " let the oppressed go free." These are sentiments that are cherished, and > an ei il. They ascribed its existence here, ool without truth, and ool without some acerbity of temper and force of language, to the injurious policy of the mother counfa v, who, to favor the navigator, had entailed these evils upon the Colonies. I n 1 hardly refer. Sir, particularly to the pub- lications of the day. They are matters of history on the record. The eminent men, the mosl eminenl men, and nearly all the conspic s politicians of the South, held the same sentiments, — that slavery was an evil, a blight, a BOOH and a curse. There are QO terms of reprobation of slavery so vehement in the North at that day as in the South. The North was not so much excited against it as the South ; and the reason is, I suppose, that there was much less of it at the North, and the people did not see, or think they saw, the evils so prominently as they were seen, or thought to be seen, at the South. Then, Sir, when this Constitution was framed, this was the light in which the Federal Convention viewed it. Thai body reflected the judgment and senti- ments of the great men of the South. A member of the other house, whom 1 have not the honor to know, has, in a recenl sj ch, collected extracts from these public document.,. They prove the truth of what I am saying, and the question then was, how to deal with it, and how to deal with it as an evil. They came to this general result. They thoughl that Blaverj could not be i tinned in the country if the imputation of slaves were made i ( . cease, and there- they provided that, after a certain period, the importation might he • vented by the act of the new govern- ment. The period of twenty years was proposed by Borne gentleman from the N'oi th, I think, and many members of GOG SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, the Convention from the South opposed it as being too long. Mr. Madison especially was somewhat warm against it. He said it would bring too much of this mischief into the country to allow the importation of slaves for such a period. Because we must take along with us, in the whole of this discussion, when we are considering the sentiments and opinions in which the constitutional provision originated, that the conviction of all men was. that, if the importation of slaves ceased, the white race would multiply faster than the black race, and thai slavery would therefore gradually wear out and expire. It may not be improper here to allude to that, 1 had almost said, celebrated opinion of Mr. Madison. You observe, Sir, that the term slave, or slavery, is not used in the Constitution. The Constitution does not require that " fugitive slaves " shall be delivered up. It requires that per- sons held to service in one State, and escaping into another, shall be delivered up. Mr. Madison opposed the intro- duction of the term slave, or slavery, into the Constitution ; for he said that he did not wish to see it recognized by the Con- stitution of the United States of America that there could be property in men. Now. Sir, all this took place in the Convention in 1787; but connected with this, concurrent and contemporaneous, is another important transaction, not sufficiently attended to. The Conven- tion for framing this Constitution as- sembled in Philadelphia in May, and sat until September, 1787. During all that time the Congress of the United States was in session at New York. It was a matter of design, as we know, thai the Convention should not assemble in the same city where Congress was holding its sessions. Almost all the public men of the country, therefore, of distinction and eminence, were in one or tl ther of these two assemblies ; and I think it happened, in some instances, thai the Bame gentle n were mem- bei of both bodies. If I mistake not, Buch was the case with Mr. Rufus King, then a member of Congress Erom Massa- chusetts. Now, at the very time when the Convention in Philadelphia was framing this Constitution, the Congress in New York was framing the Ordinance of 1787, for the organization and govern- ment of the territory northwest of the Ohio. They passed that Ordinance on the 13th of July, 1787, at New York, the very month, perhaps the very day, on which these questions about the im- portation of slaves and the character of slavery were debated in the Convention at Philadelphia. So far as we can now learn, there was a perfect concurrence of opinion between these two bodies; and it resulted in this Ordinance of 1787, excluding slavery from all the ter- ritory over which the Congress of the United States had jurisdiction, and that was all the territory northwest of the Ohio. Three years before, Virginia and other States had made a cession of that creat territory to the United States; and o *■' a most munificent act it was. I never reflect upon it without a disposition to do honor and justice, and justice would be the highest honor, to Virginia, for the cession of her northwestern territory. I will say, Sir, it is one of her fairest claims to the respect and gratitude of the country, and that, perhaps, it is only second to that other claim which belongs to her, — that from her counsels, and from the intelligence and patriotism of her leading statesmen, proceeded the first idea put into practice of the formation of a general constitution of the United States. The Ordinance of 1787 applied to the whole territory over which the Congress of the United States had juris- diction. It was adopted two years be- fore the Constitution of the United States went into operation: because the Ordinance took effect immediately on its passage, while the Constitution of the United States, having been framed, was to be sent to the States to be adopted by their conventions; and then a government was to be organized under it. This ( Ordinance, then, was in opera- tion and force when the Constitution was ad"], ted, and the government put in motion, in April, 1789. Mr. President, three things are quite clear as historical truths. One is, that FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND THE I NION there was an expectation that, on 1 1 1 « - ceasing of the importation of b] from Africa, slavery would begin to run out here. Thai was hoped and expected. Another is, that, as Ear as there was any power in Congress to prevent the spread of slavery in the United States, thai power was executed in the most absolute manner, and to the fullest extent . An honorable member, 1 whose health does not allow him to be here to-day — A Sbnatqb. He is here. I am very happy to hear thai In' is; may he long be here, and in the enjoy- ment of health to serve liis country! The honorable member said, the other day, that he considered this Ordinance' as the first in the series of measures cal- culated to enfeeble the South, and de- prive them of their just participation in the benefits and privileges of this go\- ernment. He says, very properly, thai it was enacted under the old Confedera- tion, and before this Constitution went into effect; but my present purpose is only to say, Mr. President, that it was established with the entire and unani- mous concurrence of the whole South. Why, there it stands ! The vote of every State in the Union was unanimous in favor of the Ordinance, with the excep- tion of a single individual vote, and that individual vote was given by a Northern man. This Ordinance prohibiting sla- very for ever northwest of the Ohio has the hand and seal of every Southern member in Congress. It was therefore no aggression of the North on the South. The other and third clear historical truth is, that the Convention meant to Leave slavery in the States as they found it, entirely under the authority and control of the States themselves. This was the state of things. Sir. and this tin- state of opinion, under v> bich those very important matters were ar- ranged, and those three important things done; that is, the establishment of the Constitution of the United States with a recognition of slavery as it existed in the States; the establishment of the ordinance for the government of the 1 Mr. Calhoun. Northwestern Territory, prohibiting, to the full extent of all territory owned by the United States, the introduction of Blavery into that ten itorj , while lea to the States all power over slavery in their own limits : ami creating a power, in the icw government, to pu1 an end to the importation of Blaves, after a lim- ited period. There '■•■ aa ent ire i oinci- dence and concurrence ntiment between the North and the South, upon all these questions, at the period of the adoption of the < lonstitution. But opin- ions, Sir, have changed, greatly chai changed North and changed South. Slavery is not regarded in the South now as it was then. I see an honorable member of this body paying me the honor of listening to my remarks; 1 be brings to my mind. sir. freshly and vividly, what I have learned of bis great ancestor, so mucb distinguished in his daj and generation, so worthy to be succeeded by so worthy a grandson, and of the sentiments he expressed in the Convention in Philadelphia. 1 Here we may pause. There was, if not an entire unanimity, a general con- currence of sentiment running through the whole community, and especially en- tertained l>y the eminent men of all parts of the country. Bui Boon a change began, at the North and the South, and a difference of opinion showed itself; the North growing much more warm ami strong againsl Blavery, and the South growing much more warm and strong in its support. Sir, there is no generation of mankind whose opinions are not siil.- ject to he influenced by what appear to them to he their present emergent and exigent interests. I impute to the South no particularly selfish view in the change which has come Over her. I impute {>, her certainly no dishonest view. \ that has happened has been natural. It has followed those causes which al. influence the human mind and operate upon it. What. then, have been the causes which have created so new a feel- ing in favor of slavery in the Smith. 1 Mr. Mason of Virginia. Madison P«jm ra, V. 1. III. pp. I 1428, ti seq. COS SPEECH OF THE 7th OE MARCH, 1850, which have changed the whole nomen- clature of tlic South on thai subject, so that, from being though! and described in th«' t.-riiis I have mentioned and will ii. .t repeat, it lias now become an insti- tution, a cherished institution, in that quarter; no evil, no scourge, but a great religious, social, and moral blessing, as I think I have heard it latterly spoken of ? 1 suppose this, sir. is owing to tin- rapid growth and sudden extension of the cot- ton plantations of the South. So far as any motive consistent with honor, jus- tice, and general judgment could act, it was the cotton interest that gave a new desire to promote slavery, to spread it, and to use its labor. I again say that this change was produced by causes which must always produce like effects. The whole interest of the South became connected, more or less, with the exten- sion of slavery. If we look back to the history of the commerce of this country in the early years of this government, what were our exports? Cotton was hardly, or but to a very limited extent, known. In 17!) 1 the first parcel of cot- ton of the growth of the United States was exported, and amounted only to 19,200 pounds. 1 It has gone on in- creasing rapidly, until the whole crop may now, perhaps, in a season of great product and high prices, amount to a hundred millions of dollars. In the years I have mentioned, there was more • it wax, more of indigo, more of rice, more of almost every article of export from the South, than of cotton. When Mr. Ja\ negotiated the treaty of 170 1 with England, it is evident, from the twelfth article of the treaty, which was sus- pended by the Senate, that he did not know thai cotton was exported at all from tin- | Pnited States. Well, Sir, we know what followed. The age of cotton became the golden age "I our Southern brethren. It grati- fied their desire for improvement and accumulation, at the same time that it ' Seybert's Statistics, p. 92. A. small parcel of cull. hi found it- way l> Liver| I from the I'nit..| States in L784, and was refused admis- sion, mi ii"- ground thai ii could not In- the grow ill i'f the United States. excited it. The desire grew by what it fed upon, and there soon came to be an eagerness for other territory, a new area or new areas for the cultivation of the cot- ton crop; and measures leading to this result were brought about rapidly, one after another, under the lead of Southern men at the head of the government, they having a majority in both branches of Congress to accomplish their ends. The honorable member from South Caro- lina 1 observed that there has been a majority all along in favor of the North. If that be true, Sir, the North has acted either very liberally ami kindly, or very weakly; for they never exercised that majority efficiently five times in the history of the government, when a di- \ -isii m or trial of strength arose. Never. Whether they were outgeneralled, or whether it was owing to other causes, I shall not stop to consider; but no man acquainted with the history of the Union can deny that the general lead in the politics of the country, for three fourths of the period that has elapsed since the adoption of the Constitution, has been a Southern lead. In 1802, in pursuit of the idea of open- ing a new cotton region, the United States obtained a cession from Georgia of the whole of her western territory, now embracing the rich and growing States of Alabama and Mississippi. In 1803 Louisiana was purchased from France, out of which the States of Lou- isiana. Arkansas, and Missouri have been framed, as slave-holding States. In 1819 the cession of Florida was made, bring- ing in another region adapted to culti- \ at imi by slaves. Sir, the honorable member from South Carolina thought In saw in certain operations of the gov- ernment, such as the manner of collect- ing the revenue, and the tendency of measures calculated to promote emigra- tion into the country, what accounts for the more rapid growth of the North than the South. He ascribes that more rapid growth, not to the operation of time, bul tn the system of government and administration established under this Const it ill ion. That is matter of opin- 1 Mr. Culliouu. FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND Tin; i HON ion. To :i certain extent it maj be true; but it doea Beem to me thai , if any operation of the government can be shown in any degree to have pr oted the population, and growth, and wealth of the North, it is much more Bure that there arc sundry ini|><>rtaxxt and < 1 i -^ t i n » ■ t operations of the government, about which do man can doubt, tending to promote, and which absolutely have pro- moted, the increase of the slave interest and the slave territory of the South. It was not time that brought in Louisiana; it was the act of men. It was not time that brought in Florida; it was the act of men. And lastly, Sir, to complete those acts of legislation which, have con- tributed so much to enlarge the area of the institution of slavery, Texas, great and vast and illimitable Texas, was added to the Union as a slave State in 1845; and that, Sir, pretty much closed the whole chapter, and settled the whole account. That closed the whole chapter and settled the whole account, because the annexation of Texas, upon the condi- tions and under the guaranties upon which she was admitted, did not leave within the control of this government an acre of land, capable of being culti- vated by slave labor, between this Capi- tol and the Rio Grande or the Nueces, or whatever is the proper boundary of Texas; not an acre. From that moment, the whole country, from this place to the western boundary of Texas, was fixed, pledged, fastened, decided, to be slave territory for ever, by the solemn guar- anties of law. And I now say, Sir. as the proposition upon which I stand this day, and upon the truth and firmness of which I intend to act until it is over- thrown, that there is not at this moment within the United States, or any terri- tory of the United States, a single foot of laud, the character of which, in re- gard to its being free territory or slave territory, is not tixed by some law. and some irrepealable law, beyond the power of the action of the government. I - it not so with respect to Texas/ It i- most manifestly so. The honorable mem- ber from South Carolina, at the time of the admission "f Texas, held an iinp.r- tant poet in the executive department of the government ; he wa state. Another eminent |" i rest activity and adroitness in affairs, I mean the late s - cretary of the I sa try, 1 was a conspicuous membei of tin- l»"l\ . and took t be lead in t be business of am ■ tion, in co-operation with th - of State; and I most aay thai they did their business faithfully and thoroughly; there was do botch left in it. They rounded it off, and made aa close joiner- work as ever was exhibited. Resolu- tions of annexation were brought into Congress, fitly joined together, com] efficient, conclusive upon the ijeot which they bad In View, and th lutions passed. Allow me to read a pari of these reso- lutions. It is the third elan-- of the second section of the resolution of the 1st of March, 1845, for the admission of Texas, which applies to this part of the case. That clause is as follows: — " New State>. of convenient rise, net • \ ceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient popu- lation, may Inn after, by the consent of said State, he formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admis- sion under die provisions of the Federal Constitution. And such States as maybe formed out of that portion of said territory lying smith of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Mi^nuri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union with or without slavery, as the people of each State a-kinp admission may desire ; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of - territory north of Baid Missouri Compro- mise line, slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime] shall he prohibited." Now what is here stipulated, enacted, and secured? It i-. that all T( I - - nth of 36° oil', which is nearly the wholi it. -hall he admitted into the I fnioi . e State. It wa- a - 51 it--, and therefore came in a- a -l,i\ a State ; the guaranty is, that new v 'nail be made out of it, to the number of four, in addition to the State then in 1 Mr. Walker. 39 610 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, existence and admitted at that time by these resolutions, and that such States as are formed out of that portion of Texas lying south of 3(1° 30' may come in as slave States. I know no form of legislation which can strengthen this. I know no mode of recognition that can add a tittle of weight to it. I listened respectfully to the resolutions of my honorable friend from Tennessee. 1 lie proposed to recognize that stipulation with Texas. But any additional recog- nition would weaken the force of it; because it stands here on the ground of a contract, a thing done for a considera- tion. It is a law founded on a contract with Texas, and designed to carry that contract into effect. A recognition now, founded not on any consideration, or any contract, would not be so strong as it now stands on the face of the resolu- tion. I know no w T ay, I candidly con- fess, in which this government, acting in good faith, as I trust it always will, can relieve itself from that stipulation and pledge, by any honest course of legislation whatever. And therefore I say again, that, so far as Texas is con- cerned, in the whole of that State south of 36° 30', which, I suppose, embraces all the territory capable of slave cultiva- tion, there is no land, not an acre, the character of which is not established by law; a law which cannot be repealed without the violation of a contract, and plain disregard of the public faith. I hope, Sir, it is now apparent that my proposition, so far as it respects Texas, has been maintained, and that the provision in this article is clear and absolute; and it has been well suggested by my friend from Rhode Island,- that thai part of Texas which lies north of 36° 30' of north latitude, and which may be formed into free States, is de- pendent, in like manner, upon the con- sent of Texas, herself a slave State. Now, Sir, how came this? How came it to pass thai within these walls, where it is said by the honorable member from South Carolina that the free States have always had a majority, this resolution of annexation, such as I have described 1 Mr. I !.■ II. 2 Mr. Greene. it, obtained a majority in both houses of Congress? Sir, it obtained that majority by the great number of North- ern votes added to the entire Southern vote, or at least nearly the whole of the Southern vote. The aggregate was made up of Northern and Southern votes. In the House of Representatives there were about eighty Southern votes and about fifty Northern votes for the admission of Texas. In the Senate the vote for the admission of Texas was twenty-seven, and twenty-five against it; and of those twenty-seven votes, constituting the majority, no less than thirteen came from the free States, and four of them were from New England. The whole of these thirteen Senators, constituting within a fraction, you see, one half of all the votes in this body for the admission of this immeasurable ex- tent of slave territory, were sent here by free States. Sir, there is not so remarkable a chapter in our history of political events, political parties, and political men as is afforded by this admission of a new slave-holding territory, so vast that a bird cannot fly over it in a week. New England, as I have said, with some of her own votes, supported this measure. Three fourths of the votes of liberty- loving Connecticut were given for it in the other house, and one half here. There was one vote for it from Maine, but, I am happy to say, not the vote of the honorable member who addressed the Senate the day before yesterday, 1 and who was then a Representative from Maine in the House of Representatives; but there was one vote from Maine, ay, and there was one vote for it from Mas- sachusetts, given by a gentleman then representing, and now living in, the district in which the prevalence of Free Soil .sentiment for a couple of years or so has defeated the choice of any mem- ber to represent it in Congress. Sir, that body of Northern and Eastern men who gave those votes at that time are ih'w seen taking uj>on themselves, in the nomenclature of politics, the ap- pellation of the Northern Democracy. 1 Mr. Hamlin. FOIl TIIK <<».\mim riON AND I 111: UNION 611 They undertook bo wield the destinies of this empire, if 1 may L, r i\«' thai name to a republic, and their policj was, and they persisted in it, to bring into this country and under this government all tlie territory they could. They * 1 i * 1 it. in the case of Texas, under pledges, ab- suhit'' pledges, tn the slave interest, ami they afterwards lent their aid in bring- ing in these new conquests, to take their chance for slavery or Er lorn. My honorable friend from Georgia, 1 in March, 1847, moved the Senate to de- clare that the war ought nut to he pros- ecuted for the conquest of Territory, or for the dismemberment of Mexico. The whole of the Northern Democracy voted against it. He did not get a vote from them. It suited the patriotic and ele- vated sentiments of the Northern De- mocracy to bring in a world from among the mountains and valleys of California and New Mexico, or any other part of Mexico, and then quarrel about it ; to bring it in, and then endeavor to put upon it the saving grace of the Wihnot Proviso. There were two eminent and highly respectable gentlemen from the North and East, then leading gentlemen in the Senate, (I refer, and I do so with entire respect, for I entertain for both of those gentlemen, in general, high re- gard, to Mr. Dix of New York and Mr. Niles of Connecticut,) who both voted for the admission of Texas. They would not have that vote any other way than as it stood; and they would have it as it did stand. I speak of the vote upon the annexation of Texas. Those two gentlemen would have the resolu- tion of annexation just as it is, without amendment; and they voted for it just as it is, and their eyes were all open to its true character. The honorable member from South Carolina who ad- dressed us the other day was then S retary of State. His correspondence with Mr. Murphy, the Charge* d' Affaires of the United States in Texas, had been published. That correspond' nee was all before those gentlemen, and the Secre- tary had the boldness and candor to avow in that correspondence, that the 1 Mr. Berrien. greal object sought by the annexation of I i ben the slave inter- iih. \\ by , Sir, he in -.1 many words — Mi:. Cai hoi v. Will tin- honorable B< n- ator permit me to Interrupt him for a moment ' Certainly. Mh. ('almoin i am rery reluctant to interrupt the honorable gentleman; hot, Upon a point "t - mh iiiijMirlan deem it righl to pat myself rectus i* curia. 1 did not put it upon the ground assumed by the Senator. 1 put it upon this ground: that Great Britain had announced to this country, in >o many words, that her object was to abolish slavery in Texas, and, through Texas, to ac< plisfa 1 1 »« - abolition of slavery in the United States and the world. The ground I put it mi was, that it would make an exposed frontier, and, if Great Britain succeeded in her object, it would be impossible that that frontier could be Becured against the aggri ssions "f the Abolitionists; and that this government was bound, under the guaranties of the Constitution, to protect u,- against such a state of things. That comes, I suppose, Sir, to exactly the same thing. It was, that I must be obtained for the security of the slave interest of the South. Mu. Calhoun. Another view is rery distinctly given. That was the object set forth in the correspondence of a worthy gentleman not now living. 1 who preceded the hon- orable member from Si. nth Carolina in the Department .of State. There te- on the files of the Department . as I have occasion to know, strong Letters from Mr. Upshur to the United St Minister in England, and I believe tl are Borne to the Bame Minister from the honorable Senator himself, asserting to this effect the Bentiments of this g »veni- inent ; namely, that Great Britain expected not to interfere to tak. I out of the hands of its then ■ government and make it a free country. But my argument, my suggestion, is this: that those gentlemen who oon> 1 Mr. Upshur. 612 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, posed th" Northern Democracy when Texas was brought into the Union saw clearly that it was brought in as a slave country, and brought in for the purpose oi being maintained as slave territory, to the Crerk Kalends. I rather think the honorable gentleman who was then Secretary of State might, in some of his correspondence with Mr. Murphy, have suggested that it was not expedient to say too much about this object, lest it shmdd create some alarm. At any rate. Mr. Murphy wrote to him that England was anxious to get rid of the constitution of Texas, because it was a constitution establishing slavery; and that what the United States had to do was to aid the people of Texas in upholding their constitution ; but that nothing should be said which should of- fend the fanatical men of the North. But, Sir, the honorable member did avow this object himself, openly, boldly, and manfully; he did not disguise his conduct or his motives. Mr. Calhoun. Never, never. What he means he is very apt to say. Mr. Calhoun. Always, always. And I honor him for it. This admission of Texas was in 1845. Then in 1847, flagrante hello between the United States and Mexico, the prop- osition I have mentioned ' was brought forward by my friend from Georgia, and the Northern Democracy voted steadily against it. Their remedy was to apply to the acquisitions, after they should come in, the YVilmot 1'roviso. What follows? These two gentlemen, 1 worthy and hon- orable and influential men, (and if they had not been they could not have car- ried the measure,) these two gentlemen, members of this body, Wrought in Texas, and by their votes they also prevented the passage of the resolution of the hon- orable member from Georgia, and then they went home and took the lead in the Free Soil party. And there they .land. Sir! They leave us here, bound in honor and conscience by the resolu- 1 Messrs. Nile*, of Connecticut and Diz of New York. tions of annexation ; they leave us here, to take the odium of fulfilling the obli- gations in favor of slavery which they voted us into, or else the greater odium of violating those obligations, while they are at home making capital and rousing speeches for free soil and no slavery. And therefore I say, Sir, that there is not a chapter in our history, respecting public measures and public men, more full of what would create surprise, more full of what does create, in my mind, extreme mortification, than that of the conduct of the North- ern Democracy on this subject. Mr. President, sometimes, when a man is found in a new relation to things around him and to other men, he says the world has changed, and that he has not changed. I believe, Sir, that our self-respect leads us often to make this declaration in regard to ourselves when it is not exactly true. An indi- vidual is more apt to change, perhaps, than all the world around him. But under the present circumstances, and under the responsibility which I know I incur by what I am now stating here, I feel at liberty to recur to the various ex- pressions and statements, made at vari- ous times, of my own opinions and resolutions respecting the admission of Texas, and all that has followed. Sir, as early as 1S:3(3, or in the early part of 1837, there was conversation and corre- spondence between myself and some private friends on this project of annex- ing Texas to the United States ; and an honorable gentleman with whom I have had a long acquaintance, a friend of mine, now perhaps in this chamber, I mean General Hamilton, of South Caro- lina, was privy to that correspondence. 1 had voted for the recognition of Texan independence, because I believed it to be an existing fact, surprising and as- tonishing as it was, and 1 wished well to the new republic; but 1 manifested from the iirst utter opposition to bringing her, with her slave territory, into the Union. I happened, in 1837, to make a public address to political friends in New York, and 1 then stated m\ sentiments upon the subject, [t was the first time that FOR THE CONST] 1 I I [ON AND I III UNION. 618 I had occasion to adverl to it; and I w ill ask a friend near niu to have the kind- ness to read an eztracl from the Bpeech made by me on thai occasion. It was delivered in Niblo's Saloon, in 1837. Mr. Greene then read the following tract from the Bpeech of Mr. Webster to which he referred : — " Gentlemen, we all sec that, by whomso- ever [mism ssi (1, Texas is likely to be a slave- holding country; and I frankl\ avow m\ entire an willingness to d<> any thing thai Shall extend the slavery of the African race on this continent, or add other Blave- holding States to the Union. When I say that I regard slavery in itself as i _- moral, social, and political evil, I only use language which has been adopted by dis- tinguished men, themselves citizens of slave- holding States. I shall do nothing, there- fore, to favor or encourage its further ex- tension. We have slavery already amongst us. The Constitution found it in the Union : it recognized it, and gave it solemn guaran- ties. To the full extent of these guaran- ties we are all bound, in honor, in justice, and by the Constitution. All the stipula- tions contained in the Constitution in favor of the slave-holding States which are al- ready in the Union ought to be fulfilled, and, so far as depends on me, shall be ful- filled, in the fulness of their spirit, and to the exactness of their letter. Slavery, as it exists in the States, is beyond the reach of Congress. It is a concern of the States themselves; they have never submitted it to Congress, and Congress has no rightful power over it. I shall concur, therefore, in no act, no measure, no menace, no indi- cation of purpose, which shall interfere or threaten to interfere with the exclusive authority of the several States over the Subject of slavery as it exists within their respective limits. All this appears to me to be matter of plain and imperative duty. "But when we come to speak of admit- ting new States, the subject assumes an en- tirely different aspect. Our rights and our duties are then both different. . . . " I see, therefore, no political necessity for the annexation of Texas to the Union ; no advantages to be derived from it ; and objections to it of a strong, and, in my judgment, decisive character." I have nothing, Sir, to add to, or to take from, those sentiments. That speech, the Senate will perceive, was made in L887. 'I he pin i of imme- diately annexing TeXftfl at that tune abandoned or postponed; and it not re\ ived \\ ith an\ \ igor for some yean. In the mean time it happened that I bad become a member of the executive administration, ami was for a short period in the Department of Mate. The annexation >■( I • a Bubjed of conversation, not confiden- tial, with the President and head departments, as well as with other pub- lic men. No serious attempt was then made, however, to bring it about. I left the Department of State in M L848, ami shortly after I learned, though by means which were no way connected with official information, that a de- sign had been taken up of bringing Texas, with her slave territory and population, into thi.s Union. I was in Washington at the time, ami per are now here who will remember that we had an arranged n ting for conver- sation upon it. I went home t" M chusetts and proclaimed the existence of that purpose, but Leonid get no au- dience and but little attention. Some did not believe it. ami Borne were too much engaged in their own pursuits to give it any heed. They had gone to their farms or to their merchandise, ami it was impossible to arouse any feeling in New England, or in Massachusetts, that should combine the two great po- litical parties againsl this annexation; and, indeed, there was no hope of bi ing- ing the Northern Democracy into that view, for their leaning was all tic other way. But, Sir, even with Whigs, and leading Whigs, I am ashamed to • there was a great indifference towards the admission oi I . with slave ter- ritory, into this Union. The project went on. I was then out of t ongress. The annexation resolu- tions passed on the l-t of Match, 1845; the legislature of 1 - complied w ith the conditions and accepted the guaran- ties; for the language of the resolution is. that Texas i> to coin.' in '« upon the conditions and under the guaranties herein prescribed." I was returned to the Senate in Man h, 1846, and was 014 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, here in December following, when the acceptance by Texas of the conditions proposed by Congress was communi- cated to us by the President, and an act for the consummation of the union was laid before the two houses. The connection was then not completed. A final law, doing the deed of annexation ultimately, had not been passed; and wl H'n it was put upon its final passage here, I expressed my opposition to it, and recorded my vote in the negative ; and there that vote stands, with the ob- servations that I made upon that occa- sion. 1 Nor is this the only occasion on which T have expressed myself to the same effect. It has happened that, be- tween 1837 and this time, on various occasions, I have expressed my entire opposition to the admission of slave States, or the acquisition of new slave territories, to be added to the United States. I know, Sir, no change in my own sentiments, or my own purposes, in that respect. I will now ask my friend from Rhode Island to read an- other extract from a speech of mine made at a Whig Convention in Spring- field, Massachusetts, in the month of September, 1817. Mr. Greene here read the following extract : — " We hear much just now of a panacea for the dangers and evils of slavery and slave annexation, which they call the ' Wilinot Proviso.' That certainly is a just sentiment, but it is not a sentiment to found any new party upon. It is not a sentiment on which Massachusetts Whigs differ. There is not a man in this hall who holds to it more firmly than I do, nor one who adheres to it more than another. " I feel some little interest ill this matter, Sir. Did not I commit myself in 1837 to the whole doctrine, fully, entirely? And 1 must be permitted to say that I cannot quite consent that more recent discoverers should claim the merit and take out a patent. " I deny the priority of their invention. Allow me to say, Sir, it is not their thunder. . . . " We are to use the flrsl and the last and 1 Bee the remarks on the Admission of Texas, in w , b •• t Works, Vol. V. p. 55. every occasion which offers to oppose the extension of slave power. " But I speak of it here, as in Congress, as a political question, a question for statesmen to act upon. We must so re- gard it. I certainly do not mean to say that it is less important in a moral point of view, that it is not more important in many other points of view ; but as a legislator, or in any official capacity, I must look at it, consider it, and decide it as a matter of political action." On other occasions, in debates here, I have expressed my determination to vote for no acquisition, cession, or an- nexation, north or south, east or west. My opinion has been, that we have ter- ritory enough, and that we should follow the Spartan maxim, "Improve, adorn what you have," seek no fur- ther. I think that it was in some observations that I made on the three- million loan bill that I avowed this sen- timent. In short, Sir, it has been avowed quite as often, in as many places, and before as many assemblies, as any humble opinions of mine ought to be avowed. But now that, under certain condi- tions, Texas is in the Union, with all her territory, as a slave State, with a solemn pledge, also, that, if she shall be di- vided into many States, those States may come in as slave States south of 36° 30', how are we to deal with this subject? I know no way of honest legislation, when the proper time comes for the enactment, but to carry into effect all that we have stipulated to do. I do not entirely agree with my honor- able friend from Tennessee, 1 that, as soon as the time comes when she is en- titled to another representative, we should create a new State. On former occasions, in creating new States out of territories, we have generally gone upon the idea that, when the population of the territory amounts to about sixty thousand, we would consent to its ad- mission as a State. But it is quite a different thing when a State is divided, and two or more States made out of it. It does not follow in such a case that 1 Mr. Bell. Foil Till'. ( (INSTITUTION AND THE I NION 615 the same rule of apportionment Bhould be applied. That, however, i matter Eor the consideration of Con- gress, when the proper time arrives. I may not then !»• here; 1 v have do vote to give on the occasion ; bul I wish it to be distinctly understood, that, according to my view of the matter, this government is solemnly pledged, bj law and contract, to create new States out of Texas, with her consent, when her population shall justify and call for BUch u proceeding, and, so far as Buch states are formed out of Texan territory lying south of 36° 30', to let them come in as slave States. That is the meaning of the contract which our friends, the Northern Democracy, have left as to fulfil; and I, for one, mean to fulfil it, because 1 will not violate the faith of the government. What I mean to say is, that the time for the admission of new States formed out of Texas, the number of such States, their bounda- ries, the requisite amount of popula- tion, and all other things connected with the admission, are in the free dis- cretion of Congress, except this; to wit, that, when new States formed out of Texas are to be admitted, they have a right, by legal stipulation and contract, to come in as slave States. Now, as to California and New Mex- ico, I hold slavery to be excluded from those territories by a law even superior to that which admits and sanctions it in Texas. I mean the law of nature, of physical geography, the law of the for- mation of the earth. That law settles for ever, with a strength beyond all terms of human enactment, that slavery cannot exist in California or New Mex- ico. Understand me, Sir; I mean sla- very as we regard it; the slavery of the colored race as it exists in the Southern States. I shall not discuss the point, but leave it to the learned gentlemen who have undertaken to discuss it; but I suppose there is no slavery of that description in California now. I under- stand that peonism, a sort of penal ser- vitude, exists there, or rather a Bort oi voluntary sale of a man and his off- spring for debt, an arrangement of a peculiar uature known to the law of Mexico. Bui w hat I mean to that ii i- as impossible that African Blavery, as we see it among us, Bhould find its was, or l>e Introduced, into California and New Mexii any other natural impossibility. California and New Mexico are Asiatic in their formation and Bcenery. Ih im- posed of \ ast ridges of mountains, of greal height, with broken ridges ami deep valleys. The Bides oi these moun- tains are entirely barren; their I capped by perennial snovi . There be in California, now made 1" i . ■ . • bj its constitution, and uo doubt there are, some tracts of valuable land, lint it is not BO in New Mexico, l'ray, what is the evidence which every gentleman must have obtained on this subject, from information sou-lit by himself or communicated by others? I have inquired and read all I could find, in order to acquire information on this important Bubject. What is there in New Mexico that could, by any possi- bility, induce anybody to go there with slaves? There are some narrow strips of tillable land on the borders of the rivers; but the rivers themselves dry op before midsummer is -one. All that the people can do in that region raise some little articles, some little wheat for their tortillas, and that by irrigation. And who expects I hundred blach men cultivating tobacco, corn, cotton, rice, or any thing else, on lands in New Mexico, made fertile Only by irrigation? I look upon it. there: fact, to use the current expression of the day. that both California ami New Mexico are destined to be free, so far as they are settled at all. which I belj in regard to New Mexico, will be but partially for a greal length of time; free by the arrangement of things or- dained by the Power above us. 1 have therefore to say, in this reaped also, that this country is ti\'-.l for freedom, to as many persons as shall ever live in it. by a less repealable law than that which attaches to the right of holding slaves in Texas; and I will Bay further, 016 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, that, if a resolution or a bill were now before us. to provide a territorial gov- ernmenl for Nom Mexico, I \\ <> u 1 1 1 not vote to put any prohibition into it what- ever. Such a prohibition would be idle, as it respects any effect it would have upon the territory; and I would nol take pains uselessly to reaffirm an ordi- nance of nature, nor to re-enact the will of God. I would put in no Wihnot Proviso for the mere purpose of a taunt or a reproach, f would put into it no evidence of the votes of superior power. exercised for no purpose but to wound the pride, whether a just and a rational pride, or an irrational pride, of the citi- zens of the Southern States. I have no such object, no such purpose. They would think it a taunt, an indignity; they would think it to be an act taking away from them what they regard as a proper equality of privilege. Whether they expect to realize anj benefit from it or not, they would think it at least a plain theoretic wrong; that something more or less derogatory to their charac- ter and their rights had taken place. I propose to inflict no such wound upon anybody, unless something essentially important to the country, and efficient to the preservation of liberty and free- dom, is to be effected. I repeat, there- fore, Sir, and, as I do not propose to address the Senate often on this subject, I repeat it because T wish it to be dis- tinctly understood, that, for the reasons Btated, if a proposition were nowhere to establish a government for New Mexico, and it was moved to insert a provision for a prohibition of slavery, I would not vote for it. Sir, if we were now making a gov- ernment for New Mexico, and anybody should propose a Wihnot Proviso, I should treat it exactly as Mr. I'olk treated that provision for excluding sla- very from Oregon. Mr. I'olk was known to be in opinion decidedly averse to the W'ilmot Proviso; bul he fell the aeces- ii\ of establishing a government Eor the Territory of Oregon. The proviso wa- in the bill, bul be knew it would be en- tirely nugatory; and, Bince it must be entirely nugatory, since it took away no right, no describable, no tangible, no appreciable right of the South, he said he would sign the bill for the sake of enacting a law to form a government in that Territory, and let that entirely use- less, and, in that connection, entirely senseless, proviso remain. Sir, we hear occasionally of the annexation of Can- ada; and if there be any man, any of the Northern Democracy, or any one of the Free Soil party, who supposes it neces- sary to insert a Wihnot Proviso in a territorial government for New Mexico, that man would of course be of opinion that it is necessary to protect the ever- lasting snows of Canada from the foot of slavery by the same overspreading wing of an act of Congress. Sir, wher- ever there is a substantive good to be done, wherever there is a foot of land to be prevented from becoming slave terri- tory, I am ready to assert the princi- ple of the exclusion of slavery. I am pledged to it from the year 1837; I have been pledged to it again and again; and I will perform those pledges; but 1 will not do a thing unnecessarily that wounds the feelings of others, or that does dis- credit to my own understanding. Now, Mr. President, I have estab- lished, so far as I proposed to do so, the proposition with which I set out, and upon which I intend to stand or fall; and that is, that the whole territory within the former United States, or in the newly acquired Mexican provinces, has a fixed and settled character, now fixed and settled by law which cannot be repealed, — in the case of Texas with- out a violation of public faith, and by no human power in regard to California or New Mexico; that, therefore, under one or other of these laws, every foot of land in the States or in the Territories has already received a fixed and decided character. Mr. President, in the excited times in which we live, there is found to exist a State of crimination and recrimination between the North and South. There are lists of grievances produced by each; and those grievances, real or supposed, alienate the minds of one portion of the FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND I in: UNION 617 country frmn the other, exasperate the feelings, ami Bubdue the Bense of fra- ternal affection, patriotic Love, and mu- tual regard. I shall bestow a little at- tention, Sir, upon these various grievan- ces existing on the one side and on the other. I begin with complaints of the South. I will not answer, further than I have, the genera] statements of the honorable Senator from South Carolina, that the North lias prospered at the ex- pense of the South in consequence of the manner of administering this govern- ment, in the collecting of its revenues, and so forth. These an' disputed topics, ami I have no Inclination to enter into them. But I will allude to other com- plaints of the South, and especially to one which has in my opinion just foun- dation ; and that is, that there has been found at the North, among- individuals and among legislators, a disinclination to perform fully their constitution;! I duties in regard to tho return of persons bound to service who have escaped into the free States. In that respect, the South, in my judgment, is right, and the North is wrong. Every member of every Northern legislature is bound by oath, like every other officer in the coun- try, to support the Constitution of the United States; and the article of the Constitution 1 which says to these States that they shall deliver up fugitives from service is as binding in honor and con- science as any other article. No man fulfils his duty in any legislature who sits himself to find excuses, evasions, escapes from this constitutional obliga- tion. I have always thought that the Constitution addressed itself to the legis- latures of the States or to the States themselves. It says that those persons escaping to other States "shall be de- livered up," and I confess I have always been of the opinion that it was an in- junction upon the States themselves. AN hen it is said that a person escaping into another State, and coming there- fore within the jurisdiction of that Stat.'. shall be delivered up, it seems to me the import of the clause is, that the Mat.' itself, in obedience to the Constitution, i Art. IV. Sect. 2, § 2. shall .au-.- him to i„. delivered up. Thai is mj judgment. I bave al entertained that opinion, and I entertain n now. lint when the subject, lomeyean ago, was h.-tnr.- tin- Supreme Court of the United Mat.-, the majority of the judges held that the power to cause fugi- tives from service to be delivered up •' power t.. be exercised under the au- thority of this government. I do not know, on the Whole, that it may not nave been a fortunate decision. M. habit i- t.. rasped the result of judicial deliberations and the solemnity of judi- cial decisions. A- it now stands, the business oi seeing that th fugitives are delivered up resides in the power of Congress and the national judicature, and my friend at th.- head of th.- Judi- ciary Committee ' has a hill on th.' sub- ject now before th.- Senate, which, with some amendments t.. it. I pro] — t., support, with all it- provisions, t.. tie- fullest extent. And I desire to rail the attention of all sober-minded men at the North, of all conscientious men, of all men who are not carried away by some fanatical idea or some fab.- im- pression, to their constitutional obliga- tions. I put it to all the sober and sound minds at th.' North a- a question of morals and a question of conscience. What right have they, in their legisla- tive capacity or any other capacity, to endeavor to get round this Constitution, or to embarrass th.' free exercise of the rights secured by the Constitution to the persons whoa escape from them? None at all; none at all. Neither in the forum of conscience, nor before the far.' of the Constitution, are they, in my opinion, justified in such an attempt. Of course it i> a matter for their consid- eration. They probably, in th.- excite- ment of the time-, have not Btopped t.> consider of this. They have followed what seei 1 1.. he the current of tin.:. and of motives, a- tic occasion ai and they have neglected t.> mvi fully the real question, and t.. consider their constitutional oblig which, I am Mire, if they did consider, they would fulfil with alacrity. I repe.it, 1 Mr V »us SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, therefore, Sir. thai here is a well-founded ground of complaint againsl the North, which on-lit to be removed, which it is now in the power of the different depart- ments of this government to remove; which calls for the enactment of proper laws authorizing the judicature of this government, in the several States, to do all that is necessary Eor the recapture of fugitive slaves and for their restoration to those who claim them. Wherever I go, and whenever I speak on the subject, and when I speak here I desire to speak to the whole North, I say that the South has been injured in this respect, and has a right to complain; and the North has been too careless of what I think the Constitution peremptorily and emphati- cally enjoins upon her as a duty. Complaint has been made against certain resolutions that emanate from legislatures at the North, and are sent here to us, not only on the subject of slavery in this District, but sometimes recommending Congress to consider the means of abolishing slavery in the States. I should be sorry to be called upon to present any resolutions here which could not be referable to any committee or any power in Congress; and therefore I should be unwilling to receive from the legislature of Massa- chusetts any instructions to present reso- lutions expressive of any opinion what- ever on the subject of slavery, as it exists at the present moment in t In- states, for two reasons: first, because I do not consider that the legislature of Massachusetts has any thing to do with it; and next, because I do not consider that I, as her representative here, have any thing to do with it. It bas become, in my opinion, quite too common; and if the legislatures of the States do not like that opinion, they have a great deal more power to pul it down than I have to ii|. hold it ; it lias beco in my opin- ion, quite t •oinnion a pracl ice Eor the State- legislatures to presenl resolutions here on all subjects and to instruct us on all subjects. There is no public man thai requires instruction more than I do, or who requires information more than I do, or desires it more heartily; but I do not like to have it in too im- perative a shape. I took notice, with pleasure, of some remarks made upon this Bubject, the other day, in the Sen- ate of Massachusetts, by a young man of talent and character, of whom the best hopes may be entertained. I mean Mr. Ilillard. lie told the Senate of Mas- sachusetts that he would vote for no in- structions whatever to be forwarded to members of Congress, nor for any reso- lutions to be offered expressive of the sense of Massachusetts as to what her members of Congress ought to do. He said that he saw no propriety in one set of public servants giving instructions and reading lectures to another set of public servants. To his own master each of them must stand or fall, and that master is his constituents. I wish these sentiments could become more common. I have never entered into the question, and never shall, as to the binding force of instructions. I will, however, simply say this: if there be any matter pending in this body, while I am a member of it, in which Massa- chusetts has an interest of her own not adverse to the general interests of the country, I shall pursue her instructions with gladness of heart and with all the efficiency which I can bring to the occa- sion. But if the question be one which affects her interest, and at the same time equally affects the interests of all the other States, 1 shall no more regard her particular wishes or instructions than I should regard the wishes of a man who might appoint me an arbitrator or ref- eree to decide some question of impor- tant private right between him and his neighbor, and then instruct me to decide in his Eavor. [f ever there was a gov- ernment upon earth it is this govern- ment, if ever there was a body upon earth it is this body, which should con- sider itself as composed )i\ agreement of all, each member appointed by some, but organized l>y the general consent of all, sitting here, under the solemn obliga- tions of oath ami conscience, to do that which they think to be best for the good of tin- \\ hole. Then, Sir, there are the Abolition FOB THE CONSTITUTION and THE ONION 619 societies, of which I an unwilling to speak, l'ut in regard bo which I have very clear notions and opinions. I do not think them useful. F think their operations for tin- last twenty years have produced nothing good or valua- ble. At the same time, I believe thou- sands of their members to be bones! and good men, perfectly well-meaning men. They have excited feelings; they think they must do something for t li.- cause of liberty; and, in their sphere of action, they do not see what else they can do than to contribute to an Aboli- tion press, or an Abolition society, or to pay an Abolition lecturer. 1 do not mean to impute gross motives even to the leaders of these societies; luit I am not blind to the consequences of their proceedings. I cannot l>ut see what mischiefs their interference with the South has produced. And is it not plain to every man? Let any gentle- man who entertains doubts on this point recur to the debates in the Vir- ginia House of Delegates in 1S:J2, and he will see with what freedom B proposition made by Air. Jefferson Randolph for the gradual abolition of slavery was discussed in that body. Every one spoke of slavery as he thought; very ignominious and dispar- aging names and epithets were applied to it. The debates in the House of Delegates on that occasion, I believe, were all published. They were read by every colored man who could read ; and to those who could not read, those de- bates were read by others. At that time Virginia was not unwilling or afraid to discuss this question, and to let that part of her population know as much of the discussion as they could learn. That was in 18:32. As has been said by the honorable member from South Carolina, these Abolition societies com- menced their course of action in 1835. It is said, I do not know how true it may be, that they sent incendiary pub- lications into the slave States; at any rate, they attempted to arouse, and did arouse, a very strong feeling; in other words, they created great agitation in the North against Southern slavery. Well, what wad the result ? The bond the slaves were bound m nrmlj than before, their rivets were hum.' strongly fastened. Public opinion, which in Vir- ginia had begun t" I ihibited against slavery, and was opening oul for the cussion of the question, drew hack and shut itself up in its castle. I wish t.> know whether anybody in Virginia can new talk openly as Mr. Randolph, G ernor McDowell, and others talked in 1882, and Benl their remarks t-i the press? We all knew the fact, and we all know the cause; and every thing that these agitating | pie have done has been, nol to enlarge, but to restrain, not to set free, but to hind faster, the slave population of the South. 1 Again, Sir, the violent f the North- ern press is complained ( >f. The | violent! Why, s ir. the press is violent everywhere. There are on; re- proaches in the North againsl the South, and there are reproaches as vehement in the South againsl the North. Sir. the extremists of both parts of this country are violent; they mistake loud and no- lent talk for eloquence and for reason. They think that he who talks loudest reasons best. And this we mu-t ex- pect, when the press is free, as it is here, and I trust always will be; for, with all its licentiousness and all it> evil, the entire and absolute freedom of the press is essential to the preservation of government on the basis of a free constitution. Wherever it exists ti will be foolish and violent paragraphs in the newspapers, as there are, I am sorry to say. foolish and violent speeches in both houses of Congress. In truth, sir, I must say that, in my opinion, the vernacular tongue of the country has become greatly vitiated, depraved, and corrupted l>> the >t\ le of onr I sional debates. And if it were possible for those debates to vitiate the principles of the people as much a^ they have de- praved their tastes, I Bhould cry i • God Bave the Republic! " Well, in all thi> I see no solid griev- ance, qo grievance presented by the South, w it 1 1 i ii the redress of the g \ ■■!. .u the end of the Sp ech. 620 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, eminent, but the single one to which I have referred; and that is, the want of a proper regard to the injunction of the Constitution for the delivery of fugitive Blaves. There are also complaints of the North against the South. I need not go over them particularly. The first and gravest is, that the North adopted the Constitu- tion, recognizing the existence of slavery in the states, and recognizing the right, to a certain extent, of the representation of slaves in Congress, under a state of sentiment and expectation which does not now exist; and that, by events, by circumstances, by the eagerness of the South to acquire territory and extend her slave population, the North finds itself, in regard to the relative influence of the South and the North, of the free States and the slave States, where it never did expect to find itself when tiny agreed to the compact of the Con- stitution. They complain, therefore, that, instead of slavery being regarded as an evil, as it was then, an evil which all hoped would be extinguished grad- ually, it is now regarded by the South as an institution to be cherished, and preserved, and extended; an institution which the South has already extended to the utmost of her power by the acqui- sition of new territory. Well, then, passing from that, every- body in the North reads ; and every- body reads whatsoever the newspapers contain; and the newspapers, some of them, especially those presses to which I have alluded, are careful to spread about among the people every reproach- ful sentiment uttered by any Southern man hearing at all against the North; every thing that is calculated to exas- perate and to alienate ; and there are many such things, as everybody will admit, from the South, or some portion of it, which are disseminated among the reading people; and they do exas- perate, and alienate, and produce a most mischievous effeel upon the public mind at the North. Sir, I would not notice things of this sort appearing in obscure quarters; bul one thing has occurred in this debate which struck me very forci- bly. An honorable member from Lou- isiana addressed us the other day on this subject. I suppose there is not a more amiable and worthy gentleman in this chamber, nor a gentleman who would be more slow to give offence to anybody, and he did not mean in his remarks to give offence. But what did he say? Why, Sir, he took pains to run a con- trast between the slaves of the South and the laboring people of the North, giving the preference, in all points of condition, and comfort, and happiness, to the slaves of the South. The honor- able member, doubtless, did not suppose that he gave any offence, or did any in- justice, lie was merely expressing his opinion. Rut does he know how re- marks of that sort will be received by the laboring people of the North ? Why, who are the laboring people of the North? They are the whole North. They are the people who till their own farms with their own hands; freehold- ers, educated men, independent men. Let me say, Sir, that five sixths of the whole property of the North is in the hands of the laborers of the North; they cultivate their farms, they educate their children, they provide the means of independence. If they are not free- holders, they earn wages; these wages accumulate, are turned into capital, into new freeholds, and small capitalists are created. Such is the case, and such the course of things, among the indus- trious and frugal. And what can these people think when so respectable and worthy a gentleman as the member from Louisiana undertakes to prove that the absolute ignorance and the abject sla- very of the South are more in conformity with the high purposes and destiny of immortal, rational human beings, than the educated, the independent tree labor of the North? There is a more tangible and irritat- ing cause of grievance at the North. Free blacks are constantly employed in the vessels of the North, generally as cooks or stewards. When the vessel arrives at a Southern port, these free colored men are taken on shore, by the police or municipal authority, impris- run THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 021 oned, and kepi in prison till the ressel is again ready to Bail. This is not only irri- tating, bul exceedingly unjustifiable and oppressive. Mr. Hoar's mission, some time ago, to South Carolina, was a well- intended effort (o remove this can complaint. The North thinks such im- prisonments illegal and unconstitutional ; ami as the cases occur constant k and frequently, they regard it as a gnat grievance. Now, Sir, so far as any of these griev- ances have their foundation in matters of law, they ran be redressed, and ought to be redressed; and so far as they have their foundation in matters of opinion, in sentiment, in mutual crimination and recrimination, all that we can do is to endeavor to allay the agitation, and cul- tivate a better feeling and more fralernal sentiments between the South and the North. Mr. President, I should much prefer to have heard from every member on this floor declarations of opinion that this Union could never be dissolved, than the declaration of opinion -by anybody, that, in any case, under the pressure of any circumstances, such a dissolution was possible. I hear with distress and anguish the word " secession," espe- cially when it falls from the lips of those who are patriotic, and known to the country, and known all over the world, for their political services. Se- cession! Peaceable secession ! Sir, your eyes and mine are never destined to see that miracle. The dismemberment of this vast country without convulsion! The breaking up of the fountains of the great deep without ruffling the surface! AVho is so foolish, I beg everybody's pardon, as to expect to see any such thing? Sir, he who sees these States, now revolving in harmony around a common centre, and expects to see them quit their places and fly off without con- vulsion, may look the next hour to see the heavenly bodies rush from their spheres, and jostle against each other in the realms of space, without causing the wreck of the universe. There can be no such thing as a peaceable seces- sion. Peaceable secession is an utter impossibility. Is the great Constitution under which we live, covering this whole country, i- it to be thawed and melted away by ~.-.-.--~i. >ii . a- tie- BnOWfl OH the mountain melt under the influence vernal sun, disappear almost unobservi d, and run oil.' No, 8il 'I No, sir! I will not state w hat might produce the dis- ruption of the I niou ; hut . Sir. I plainly as 1 see the sun in heaven what that disruption itself must product I see that it must produce war. and such a war as I will not describe, in its twofold character. Peaceable secession ! Peaceable sa sionl The concurrent agreement of all the members of this great republi separafel A voluntary separation, with alimony on one side and on the other. Why, what would he the result? Where is the line to lie drawn? What St are to secede? What is to remain Amer- ican? What am I to be? An American no longer? Am I to become a sectional man, a local man. a separatist, with no country in common with the gentlemen who sit around me here, or who till the other house of Congress? Heaven for- bid! Where is the flag of the republic to remain? Where is the eagle -till to tower? or is he to cower, and shrink. and fall to the ground? Why, Sir. our ancestors, our fathers and our grand- fathers, those of them that are yet living amongst us with prolonged lives, would rebuke and reproach us; and our chil- dren and our grandchildren would cry out shame upon us, if we of this genera- tion should dishonor these ensigns of the power of the government and the har- mony of thai Union which is everyday fell anion.; us with so much joy and gratitude. What is to 1 one- of the army? What i- to become of the navy? What is to become of the public lands? How is each of tie' thirty State- to defend itself? I know, although the idea bas not 1m -en stated distinctly, there is t, or it is supposed possible that there will 1>.-, a Southern Confederacy. I do not mean, when I allude to this statement. that any one Beriously contemplates Buch a state of things. I do not mean to say that it is true, hut 1 ha\e heard it 622 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, rested elsewhere, thai the idea has been entertained, that, after the dissolu- tion of this Union, a Southern Confeder- acy might be formed. I am sorry, Sir, thai it has ever been thought of, talked of, or dreamed of. in the wildest nights of human imagination. But the idea, so far as it exists, must be of a separa- tion, assigning the slave States to one side and the free States to the other. Sir, I may express myself too strongly, perhaps, but there are impossibilities in the natural as well as in the physical world, and I hold the idea of a separa- tion of these States, those that are free to form one government, and those that are slave-holding to form another, as such an impossibility. We could not separate the States by any such line, if we were to draw it. We could not sit down here to-day and draw a line of sep- aration that would satisfy any five men in the country- There are natural causes that would keep and tie us together, and there are social and domestic relations which we could not break if we would, and which we should not if we could. Sir, nobody can look over the face of this country at the present moment, no- body can see where its population is the most dense and growing, without being ready to admit, and compelled to admit, that erelong the strength of America will be in the Valley of the Mississippi. Well, now, Sir, I beg to inquire what the wildest enthusiast has to say on the possibility of cutting that river in two, and leaving free States at its source and on its branches, and slave States down near its mouth, each forming a separate government? Pray, Sir, let me say to the people of this country, that these things are worthy of their pondering and of their consideration. lb-re. Sir, are live in ill ions of freemen in the free States north of the river Ohio. Can anybody Buppose thai this population can be sev- ered, by a line thai divides them from the territory of a foreign and an alien eminent, down somewhere, the Lord knows where, upon the lower hanks of the Mississippi? What would become of Missouri'.-' Will Bhe join the arron- dissement of the Blave states? Shall the man from the Yellowstone and the Platte be connected, in the new republic, with the man who lives on the southern extremity of the Cape of Florida ? Sir, I am ashamed to pursue this line of re- mark. I dislike it, I have an utter dis- gust for it. I would rather hear of natural blasts and mildews, war, pesti- lence, and famine, than to hear gentle- men talk of secession. To break up this great government! to dismember this glorious country! to astonish Europe with an act of folly such as Europe for two centuries has never beheld in any government or any people! No, Sir! no, Sir! There will be no secession! Gentlemen are not serious when they talk of secession. Sir, I hear there is to be a convention held at Nashville. I am bound to be- lieve that, if worthy gentlemen meet at Nashville in convention, their object will be to adopt conciliatory counsels; to advise the South to forbearance and moderation, and to advise the North to forbearance and moderation ; and to in- culcate principles of brotherly love and affection, and attachment to the Consti- tution of the country as it now is. I believe, if the convention meet at all, it will be for this purpose; for certainly, if they meet for any purpose hostile to the Union, they have been singularly inappropriate in their selection of a place. 1 remember, Sir, that, when the treaty of Amiens was concluded between France and England, a sturdy Englishman and a distinguished orator, who regarded the conditions of the peace as ignominious to England, said in the House of Com- mons, that, if King William could know the terms of that treaty, he would turn in his coffin! Let me commend this saying of Mr. Windham, in all its em- phasis and in all its force, to any per- sons who shall meet at Nashville for the purpose of concerting measures for the overthrow of this Union over the bones of Andrew Jackson ! Sir. I wish now to make two remarks, and hasten to a conclusion. 1 wish to say, in regard to Texas, that if it should be hereafter, at any time, the pleasure of the government of Texas to cede to FOR THE CONST] IT HON AND THE UNION. the United States a portion, larger or smaller, of her territory which lies adja- cent to New Mexico, and north oi ;i(>' of north latitude, t<> be formed Into free States, for a fair equivalent in money or in the payment of her debt, 1 think it an object well worthy the con- sideration of Congress, ami I shall he happy to concur in it myself, if I Bhould have a connection with the government at that time. I have one other remark to make. In my observations upon slavery as it lias existed in this country, and as it now exists, 1 have expressed no opinion of the mode of its extinguishment or melio- ration. I will say. however, though I have nothing to propose, because 1 do not deem myself so competent a- other gentlemen to take any lead on this sub- ject, that if any gentleman from the South shall propose a scheme, to be car- ried on by this government upon a large scale, for the transportation of free col- ored people to any colony or any place in the world, I should be quite disposed to incur almost any degree of expense to accomplish that object. Nay, Sir, fol- lowing an example set more than twenty years ago by a great man, 1 then a Sen- ator from New York. 1 would return to Virginia, and through her to the whole South, the money received from the lands and territories ceded by her to this gov- ernment, for any such purpose as to re- move, in whole or in part, or in any way to diminish or deal beneficially with, the free colored population of the South- ern States. I have said that I honor Virginia for her cession of this territory. There have been received into the treas- ury of the United States eighty millions of dollars, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands ceded by her. If the residue should be sold at the same rate, the whole aggregate will exceed two hun- dred millions of dollars. If Virginia and the South see fit to adopt any prop- osition to relieve themselves from the free people of color among them, or sneh as may be made free, they have my full consent that the government shall pay them any sum of money out of the pro- 1 Mr. Kufus King. i Is "i that cession which may be ade quate to the purpose. Lnd ii'iw . Mi . President, I 'li im« t - \ ations to a close. I have spoken Creel] . and I meant to do to. I have Boughl to make no display. I have Bought to enliven the occasion bj no an- imated discussion, nor have I attempted any train of elaborate argument. I have wished only to srJeak my sentiments, fully and at length, being desirous, once and for all, to let the Senate know, and to let the country know , the opinions and sentiments which I entertain on all these subjects. These opinions are not likely to be Buddenly changed. If there I"- any future service that I can render to tlii- country, consistently with these sentiment- and opinion-, 1 shall cheer- fully render it. If there be not. I -hall still be glad to have hail an opportu- nity to disburden myself from the bot- tom of my heart, and to make known every political sentiment that therein exists. And now. Mr. President, instead of speaking of the possibility or utility of secession, instead of dwelling in t: caverns of darkness, Instead of -roping with those ideas BO full of all that i- horrid and horrible, let n- come out into the light of day: let us enjoy the fresh air of Liberty and Union; let us cherish those hopes which belong to as; let us devote ourselves t" those great object- that are fit for our consideration and our action ; let us raise our conceptions to the magnitude ami the importance of the duties that devolve upon us; let our comprehension be a- broad a- the coun- try for which we act. our a-piratioi high as it- certain destiny; let us not be pygmies in a case that calls for men. Never did there devolve on any -ei,. -ra- tion of men higher trusts than now devolve upon us, for the preservation of this Constitution and the harmony and peace of all who are destined to live under it. Let us make our _• neration one of the strongest and brightest links in that golden chain which i- destined, I fondly believe, to grapple the j>eopl all tin- state- to this Constitution for to come. We have a great, popu- 624 SPEECH OF THE 7th OF MARCH, 1850, lar. constitutional government, guarded by law and by judicature, and defended by the affections of the whole people. No monarchical throne presses these States together, no iron chain of mili- tary power encircles them ; they live and stand under a government popular in its form, representative in its character, founded upon principles of equality, and so constructed, we hope, as to last for ever. In all its history it has been beneficent; it has trodden down no man's liberty; it has crushed no State. Its daily respiration is liberty and pa- triotism; its yet youthful veins are full of enterprise, courage, and honorable love of glory and renown. Large be- fore, the country has now, by recent events, become vastly larger. This re- public now extends, with a vast breadth, across the whole continent. The two great seas of the world wash the one and the other shore. We realize, on a mighty scale, the beautiful description of the ornamental border of the buckler of Achilles : — "Now, the broad shield complete, the artist crowned With his last hand, and poured the ocean round ; In living silver seemed the waves to roll, And beat the buckler's verge, and bound the whole." NOTE. Page 619. Letter from Mr. Webster to the Editors of the National Intelligencer, enclosing Extracts from a Letter of the late Dr. Channing. Washington, February 15, 1851. Mi ~v natiooa] courts, fur the purpose of settling quietly among citizens of different States questions which might otherwise be settled by arms, 1 shall be satisfied. My fear in regard to our efforts against slaver; is, thai we Bhall make the case worse by rousing sectional pride and pas sion for its support, and that we shall only break the country into two great parties, which may shake the foundations of gov- ernment I have written to you because your situa tion gives you advantages which perhaps do other man enjoys for ascertaining the method, if any can be devised, by which ««• may operate I" nefieiallj and safelj In i< gard to slavery. Appeals »iii probablj i"- made soon to the people here, and I wish that wise men would save us from the rash- ness of enthusiasts, and from the peri] u bich our rerj t unit - expose us With great respect, j our fi lend, WM I. I II \NMSo Il<>\ 1 Iimi i vVkBSTBB, 40 RECEPTION AT BUFFALO. A SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE A LARGE ASSEMBLY OF THE CITIZENS OF BUFFALO AND THE COUNTY OF ERIE, AT A PUBLIC RECEPTION ON THE 22d OF MAY, 1851. Fellow-Citizens of the City of Buffalo, — I am very glad to see you; I meet you with pleasure. It is not the first time that I have been in Buffalo, and I have always come to it with grati- fication. It is at a great distance from my own home. I am thankful that cir- cumstances have enabled me to be here again, and I regret that untoward events deprived me of the pleasure of being with you when your distinguished fel- low -citizen, the President of the United States, visited you, and received from you, as he deserved, not only a respect- ful, but a cordial and enthusiastic wel- come. The President of the United States has been a resident among you for more than half his life. He has represented you in the State and na- tional councils. You know him and all his relations, both public and pri- vate, and it would be bad taste in me to say any thing of him, except that I wish to say, with emphasis, that, since my connection with him in the adminis- tration of the government of the United States, 1 have fully concurred with him in all his great and leading measures. This might be inferred from the Eacl that I have been one of his ordinary ad- visers. Hut I 'I t wish to let it rest on thai presumption ; I wish to declare that the principles of the President, as set forth in hi8 annual message, his let- ter^, and all documents and opinions which have proceeded from him, or 1 n issued by his authority, in regard to the great question of the times, — all these principles are my principles; and if he is wrong in them, I am, and al- ways shall be. Gentlemen, it has been suggested to me that it would be agreeable to the citizens of Buffalo, and their neighbors in the county of Erie, that I should state to you my opinions, whatever may be their value, on the present condition of the country, its prospects, its hopes, and its dangers; and, fellow-citizens. I intend to do that, this day. and this hour, as far as my strength will permit. Gentlemen, believe me. I know where I am. I know to whom I am speaking. I know for whom I am speaking. I know that I am here in this singularly prosperous and powerful section of the United States, Western Xew York, and I know the character of the men who inhabit Western New York. I know they are sons of liberty, one and all; that they sucked in liberty with their mothers' milk; inherited it with their blood ; that it is the subject of their daily contemplation and watchful thought. They are men of unusual equality of condition, for a million and a half of people. There are thousands of men around us. and here before us. who till their own soil with their own hands; and others who earn their own liveli- hood by their own labor in the work- shops and other places of industry; and thej are independent, in principle and in condition, having neither slaves nor masters, and not intending to have either. These are the men who con- stitute, to a great extent, the people of Western New York. Put the school- RECEP1 ION A I BUI FALO. 627 house, I know, is ainon^ them. Kduca- t ion is among them. Thej dead, and write, and think. Here, too, are women, educated, refined, and intelligent; and here arc Mien who know the histon of their country, and the laws of their country, and t he institutions of their country; and men, Lovers of Liberty al- ways, and yel lovers i county, or a city, or a hamlet in the State of New York, that is ready to go out of the Union, hut only some -mall bodies of fanatics. There is no ms insane in the State. m,t tit for a lunatic asylum, as to wish it. Hut that is not the point. We all know that every man and every neighborhood, and all cor- porations, in the State of New York, except those I have mentioned, are at- tached to the Union, and have no idea of withdrawing from it. Bui that is not, I repeat, the point. The question, fellow-citizens, (and I put it to you now as the real question,) the question is. Whether you ami the rest of the people of the greal Mate of New York, and of all the Mate,, will go adhere to the Con- stitution, will so enact ami maintain laws to preserve that instrument, that you will ii. .1 only remain in the Union yourselves, hut permit your brethren to remain in it, and help to perpetuate it? That is the question. Will you concur in measure-, necessary to maintain the Union, or w ill you oppose Buch m< ures? Thai i- the whole point of the case. There are thirty or f.-rty membei Congress from New fork; you have 628 RECEPTION AT BUFFALO. your proportion in the United States Senate. We have many members of ( iongress from New England. Will they maintain the laws that are passed for the administration of the Constitution, and respept the rights of the Smith, so that the Union maybe held together; and not only so that we may not go out of it ourselves, which we are not in- clined to do, but si) that, by maintaining the rights of others, they may also re- main in the Union? Now, Gentlemen, permit me to say, that I speak of no concessions. If the South wish any con- cession from me, they will not get it; not a hair's breadth of it. If they come to my house for it, they will not find it, and the door will be shut; I concede nothing. But I say that I will maintain for them, as I will maintain for you, to the utmost of my power, and in the face of all danger, their rights under the Constitution, and your rights under the Constitution. And I shall never be found to falter in one or the other. It is obvious to every one, and we all know it, that the origin of the great disturb- ance which agitates the country is the existence of slavery in some of the States ; but we must meet the subject ; we must consider it; we must deal with it ear- nestly, honestly, and justly. From the mouth of the St. John's to the confines of Florida, there existed, in 1775, thir- teen colonies of English origin, planted at different times, and coming from dif- ferent parts of England, bringing with them various habits, and establishing, each for itself, institutions entirely dif- ferent from the institutions which they left, and in many cases from each other. But they were all of English origin. The English language was theirs, Shak- Bpeare and Milton were theirs, the com- mon law of England was theirs, and the Christian religion was theirs; and these things held them together by the force of a common character. The aggres- sions of the parent state compelled them tu assert their independence. They de- dared independence, and that immortal act, | in iin hi need mi the 1th of July, 177G, made them independent. That was an act of union by the United States in Congress assembled. Hut this act of itself did nothing to es- tablish over them a general government. They had a Congress. They had Arti- cles of Confederation to prosecute the war. But thus far they were still, es- sentially, separate and independent each of the other. They had entered into a simple confederacy, and nothing more. No State was bound by what it did not itself agree to, or what was done accord- ing to the provisions of the confedera- tion. That was the state of things, Gentlemen, at that time. The war went on; victory crowned the American arms; our independence was acknowledged. The States were then united together under a confederacy of very limited pow- ers. It could levy no taxes. It could not enforce its own decrees. It was a confederacy, instead of a united govern- ment. Experience showed that this was insufficient and inefficient. Accord- ingly, beginning as far back almost as the close of the war, measures were taken for the formation of a united gov- ernment, a government in the strict sense of the term, a government that could pass laws binding on the individual citi- zens of all the States, and which could enforce those laws by its executive pow- ers, having them interpreted by a judicial power belonging to the government it- self, and yet a government strictly lim- ited in its nature. Well, Gentlemen, this led to the formation of the Consti- tution of the United States, and that instrument was framed on the idea of a limited government. It proposed to leave, and did leave, the different domes- tic institutions of the several States to themselves. It did not propose consoli- dation. It did not propose that the laws of Virginia should be the laws of New- York, or that the laws of New York should be the laws of Massachusetts. It proposed only that, for certain purposes and to a certain extent, there should be a united government, and that that gov- ernment should have the power of exe- cuting its own laws. All the rest was left tu the several States. We now come, Gentlemen, to the very poinl of the case. At that time slavery RECEPTION AT BUI PALO G29 existed in the Southern States, entailed upon then in the time of the supremacy of British laws over us. There it was. It was obnoxious to the Middle and Eastern States, and honestly and Beri- ously disliked, as the records of tin* country will show, by the Soul hern States themselves. Now, how was it to be dealt with? Were the Northern and Middle Slates to exclude from the government those States of the South which had pro- duced a Washington, a Laurens, and other distinguished patriots, who had so truly served, and BO greatly honored, the whole country? Were they to be ex- cluded from the new government be- cause they tolerated the institution of Slavery V Your fathers and my fathers did not think so. They did not see that it would be of the least advantage to the slaves of the Southern States, to cut off the South from all connection with the North. Their views of humanity led to no such result; and of course, when the Constitution was framed and estab- lished, and adopted by you, here in New York, and by New England, it con- tained an express provision of security to the persons who lived in the Southern States, in regard to fugitives who owed them service; that is to say, it was stipu- lated that the fugitive from service or labor should be restored to his master or owner if he escaped into a free State. Well, that had been the history of the country from its first settlement. It was a matter of common practice to return fugitives before the Constitution was formed. Fugitive slaves from Virginia to Massachusetts were restored by the people of .Massachusetts. At that day there was a great system of apprentice- ship at the North, and many apprentices at the North, taking advantage of cir- cumstances, and of vessels sailing to the South, thereby escaped; and they we re restored on proper claim and proof. That led to a clear, express, and well- defined provision in the Constitution of the country On the subject. Now 1 am aware that all these things are well known; that they have been stated a thousand times; but in these days of perpetual discontent and misrepresenta- tion, I" -tale things a thousand tin. not enough; for there are persons whose conscience s, it would seem, lead them to consider it their duty t" deny, mis- represent, falsify, and cover up truths. N"\\ t bese are words of th< < titu- tion, fellow-citizens, which 1 have taken the pains to transcribe therefrom, so that he w ho runs may i Bad : — u No PERSON in i i. ro -i i:\ i. i ..i: LABOR IN ONI St ATE, UNDER TBI LAWS THEREOF, ESCAPING is TO ANOTHER, SHALL, IN CON8EQOENC1 01 IXTt I \ w OB REGULATION i in 1:1 in, in DI8- CHAROl l> PROM -I'll 9ERVIC1 OR LA- BOR, BUT -II \ i i Bl DELIVERED DP ON CLAIM OP THE PAH I Y low llc.M ~l ( || SERVICE OH LABOR M \Y III M l ." ra there any mistake aboul that ? Is there any forty-shilling attorney here to make a questi f it ? No. I will not disgrace my profession l>y supposing such a thing. There i- not. i • out of an attorney's office in the county of Brie, or elsewhere, one who could raise a doiiht. or a particle of a doubt, about the meaning of this provision of the Constitution. He may act a- witnesses do, sometimes, on the stand He may wriggle, and twist, and say he cannot tell, or cannot remember. I have Been many Blich efforts in my time, on tin- part of witnesses, to falsify and deny the truth. lint there is no man who can read these words of tie- ('. >n-t itu- tion of the United States, and say they are not clear and imperative. •• No per- son," tic ( institution Baj -. •• held t.> service or labor in one Slate, under the law- thereof , escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, he discharged from such set - or labor, hut shall hi- delivered up on claim of the party to whom BOcfa -• or labor maj he due. - ' Why, you may- lie told by forty conventions in Ms chusetts, in Ohio, in N<\s York, or < where, that, if a colored man COl here, he comes a- a freeman ; that mm sequitur. It i- not so. It be comes a- a fugitive from labor, tic Constitu- tion -ays he ia nol a freeman, and that he .-hall he delivered up to those who are entitled to hi- Ben ice. 630 l;r.< T.l'TION AT BUFFALO. Gentlemen, thai is the Constitution of the United states. Do we, or do we not, mean to conform to it, and to exe- cute that part of the Constitution as well as the rest of it? I believe there are before me here members of Congress. I suppose there may be here members of the State legislature, or executive officers under the State government. I suppose there may be judicial magistrates of New York, executive officers, assessors, supervisors, justices of the peace, and constables before me. Allow me to say, Gentlemen, that there is not, that there cannot be, any one of these officers in this assemblage, or elsewhere, who lias not, according to the form of the usual obligation, bound himself by a solemn oath to support the Constitution. They have taken their oaths on the Holy Evangelists of Almighty God, or by up- lift. 'd hand, as the case may be, or by a solemn affirmation, as is the practice in some cases; but among all of them there is not a man who holds, nor is there any man who can hold, any office in the gift of the United States, or of this State, or of any other State, who does not bind himself, by the solemn obligation of an oath, to support the Constitution of the Tinted States. Well, is he to tamper with that? Is he to palter? Gentle- men, our political duties are as much matters of conscience as any other duties ; our sacred domestic ties, our most en- dearing social relations, are no more the Bubjects for conscientious consideration and conscientious discharge, than the duties we enter upon under the Consti- tution of the United States. The bun. Is of political brotherhood, which hold US together from Maine to Georgia, rest upon the same principles of obligation as tho f domestic and social life. Now, Gentlemen, that is the plain story of the Constitution of the United States, mi the question of slavery. 1 Contend, and have always .-.intended, that . after the adoption of the Constitu- tion, any measure of the government calculated to bring more slave territory into the I Ihited States was beyond the power of the Constitution, and against its provisions. Thai ismyopini* rad it always has been my opinion. It was inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or thought to be so, in Mr. Jefferson's time, to attach Louisiana to the United States. A treaty with Frame was made for that purpose. Mr. Jefferson's opinion at that moment was, that an alteration of the Constitu- tion was necessary to enable it to 1"' done. In consequence of considerations to which I need not now refer, that opinion was abandoned, and Louisiana was admitted by law, without any pro- vision in, or alteration of, the Constitu- tion. At that time I was too young to hold any office, or take any share in the political affairs of the country. Louisi- ana was admitted as a slave State, and became entitled to her representation in Congress on the principle of a mixed basis. Florida was afterwards admit- ted. Then, too, I was out of Congress. I had formerly been a member, but had ceased to be so. I had nothing to do with the Florida treaty, or the admis- sion of Florida. My opinion remains unchanged, that it was not within the original scope or design of the Constitu- tion to admit new States out of foreign territory; and, for one, whatever may be said at the Syracuse Convention, or at any other assemblage of insane per- sons, I never would consent, and never have consented, that there should be one foot of slave territory beyond what the old thirteen States had at the time of the formation of the Union. Never, never! The man cannot show his face to me, and say he can prove that I ever departed from that doctrine. He would sneak away, and slink away, or hire a mercenary press to cry out. What an apostate from liberty Daniel Webster has become! But he knows himself to be a hypocrite and a falsifier. But, Gentlemen, I was in public life when the proposition to annex Texas to the United States was brought forward. V..u know thai the revolution in Texas, which separated thai country from Mex- ico, occurred in the year L835 or 1836. 1 BaW then, and 1 do not know that it required any [.articular foresight, that it would be the very next thing to bring RECEPTION \ I 1:1 I FALO. 6 1 Texas, which was designed to be a Blave- holding State, into this 1 fnion. I did nol wait. I Bought an occasion to pro- claim 1 1 1 \ atter aversion bo any such measure, and I determined to resist it with all my Btrength u< the last. On this subject, Gentlemen, you will beat with mi', if I now repeat, in the pres- ence of this assembly, what I have be- fore spoken elsewhere. 1 was in this city in the year li>>7, and, some time before 1 left New York on that excur- sion from which 1 returned to this place, my friends in Xew York were kind enough to offer me a public dinner as a testimony of their regard. I went out of my way, in a speech delivered in Niblo's Saloon, on that occasion, for the purpose of showing that I antici- pated the attempt to annex Texas as a slave territory, and said it should be opposed by me to the last extremity. Well, there was the press all around me, — the Whig press and the Demo- cratic press. Some spoke in terms com- mendatory enough of my speech, but all agreed that I took pains to step out of my way to denounce in advance the annexation of Texas as slave territory to the United States. I said on that occasion : — "Gentlemen, we all see that, by whomso- ever possessed, Texas is likely to lie a slave- holding country; and I frankly avow my entire unwillingness to do any thing that shall extend the slavery' of the African race on this continent, or add other slave- holding States to the Union. When I say that I regard slavery in itself as a great moral, social, and political evil, I only use language which has been adopted by dis- tinguished men, themselves citizens of slave-holding States. I shall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage its fur- ther extension. We have slavery already amongst us. The Constitution found it in the Union; it recognized it, ami gave it sol- emn guaranties. To the full extent of these guaranties we are all bound, in honor, in justice, ami by the Constitution. All the stipulations contained in the Constitution in favor of the slave-holding States which are already in the Union ought t<> be ful- filled, and, so far as depends on me, shall be fulfilled, in the fulness of their spirit and to the exactness of their letter. Sla- ' ft i \ . a- it exists in iln- v i ond tin- re.n h of Coi i Deem of tin- Btatei them* Ives j thej have > submitted it to Congress, and • has mi rightful power ovei It [shall concur, therefore, In do act, no measure, ■ no indication of purpose, which shall inter- fere or threaten to Inti rf< r\ with the exclu- sive authority of the several States over the Bubjed "t slavery ;i- It i \i-t- within their respective limit-. All this appeal- to me tu be matter of plain and imp July. Km when we <■ e tu speak "t admitting new States, the subject assumes an entirely different aspi ct < tur rights and mir duties are then both different. The fn i 3 and all the State-, are then at libert accept or to reject. When it i- propo» bring new members into this political part- nership, the old members have a right to Bay mi what term- such new partners ;ire tu come in, and w hat they are to bring along with them. In my opinion, the peop the United States will nut consent tu bring into the Union a new. vastly extensive, and slave-holding country, large enough for half a dozen or a dozen state-. In my opinion, they ought nut tn consent tu it." Gent let nen. [ was mistaken ; < "n_ did consent tn the bringing in of Texas. They did consent, and I was a ! prophet. Your own Stal indented, and the majority of tin- representatives of Xew Yolk consented. I went into Congress before the final consummation of tin- deed and tlnre 1 fought, holding up both my hands, and urging, with a voice stronger than it now is. my remon- strances against the whole of it. But yOU WOuld have it BO, .and yon did have it so. Nay. Gentlemen, I will tell the truth, whether it shatne- the Devil <>r not. Persons who have aspired high as lovers of liberty, a- eminent loven the Wilmol Proviso, a- eminent I Soil men, and who have mounted over our heads, and trodden US down a- if we were mere Blaves, insisting that tin-;. the only true lovers of liberty, I the men, the very men, that brought Texas into this Union. This is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and I declare it before you, this day. Look to the journals. With- out tie- consent of New ^ >rk, I would nol have come into tin- Union, .;:;_' RECEPTION AT BUFFALO. either under the original resolutions or afterwards. l>nt New JTork voted for the measure. The two Senators from New JTork voted for it, and decided the question; and you may thank them for the glory, the renown, and the happi- ness of having five or six slave States added to the Union. Do not blame me for it. Let them answer who did the deed, and who are now proclaiming themselves the champions of liberty, crying up their Free Soil creed, and using it for selfish and deceptive pur- poses. They were the persons who aided in bringing in Texas. It was all fairly told to you, both beforehand and after- wards. You heard Moses and the proph- ets, but if one had risen from the dead, such was your devotion to that policy, at that time, you would not have listened to him for a moment. I do not, of course. speak of the persons now here before me, but of the general political tone in New York, and especially of those who are now Free Soil apostles. Well, all that I do not complain of; but T will not now, or hereafter, before the country, or the world, consent to be numbered among those who introduced new slave power into the Union. I did all in my power to prevent it. Then, again, Gentlemen, the Mexican war broke out. Yast territory was ac- quired, and the peace was made; and, much as I disliked the war, I disliked the peace more, because it brought in these territories.. I wished for peace indeed, but I desired to strike out the grant of territory on the one side, and the payment of the $12,000,000 on the other. That territory was unknown to me; I could not tell what its character might be. The plan came from the South. I knew that certain Southern gentlemen wished the acquisition of California, New Mexico, and Utah, as a means of extending slave power and slave population. Foreseeing a sectional controversy, and. as I conceived, seeing how much it won].] ilist racl the 1 Inion, I poted against the treaty with .Mexico. 1 voted against the acquisition. I wanted noi f her territory, n< ither California, New Mexico, nor Utah. They were rather ultra-American, as I thought. They were far from us. and I saw that they might lead to a political conflict, and I voted against them all, against the treaty and against the peace, rather than have the territories. Seeing that it would be an occasion of dispute, that by the controversy the whole Union would be agitated, Messrs. Berrien, Badger, and other respectable and dis- tinguished men of the South, voted against the acquisition, and the treaty which secured it ; and if the men of the North had voted the same way, we should have been spared all the difficul- ties that have grown out of it. We should have had peace without the ter- ritories. Now there is no sort of doubt, Gen- tlemen, that there were some persons in the South who supposed that California, if it came into the Union at all, would come in as a slave State. You know the extraordinary events which imme- diately occurred, and the impulse given to emigration by the discovery of gold. You know that crowds of Northern peo- ple immediately rushed to California, and that an African slave could no more live there among them, than he could live on the top of Mount Hecla. Of necessity it became a free State, and that, no doubt, was a source of much disappointment to the South. And then there were New Mexico and Utah ; what was to be done with them? Why, Gen- tlemen, from the best investigation I had given to the subject, and the reflection I had devoted to it, I was of the opinion that the mountains of New Mexico and Utah could no more sustain American slavery than the snows of Canada. I saw it was impossible. I thought so then; it is quite evident now. There- fore, when it was proposed in Congress to apply the Wilmot Proviso to New .Mexico and Utah, it appeared to me just as absurd as to apply it here in Western New York. I saw that the snow-capped hills, the eternal moun- tains, and the climate of those countries would never support slavery. No man could carry a slave there with any ex- pectation of profit. It could not be RECEPTION AT mil ai.<» done; and as the South regarded the Proviso as merely a source of irritation, and as designed by some to irritate, I thought it unwise to apply it to New Mexico or Utah. I voted accordingly, and who doubts now the coiTectne that vote? The law admitting those territories passed without any proviso. Is there a slave, or will there ever be one, in either of those territories? Why, there is not a man in the United States so stupid as not to see, at this moment, that such a thing was wholly unnecessary, and that it was only calcu- lated to irritate and to offend. 1 am not one who is disposed to create irrita- tion, or give offence among brethren, or to break np fraternal friendship, with- out cause. The question was accord- ingly left legally open, whether slavery should or should not go to New Mexico or Utah. There is no slavery there, it is utterly impracticable that it should be introduced into such a region, and utterly ridiculous to suppose that it could exist there. No one, who does not mean to deceive, will now pretend it can exist there. Well, Gentlemen, we have a race of agitators all over the country; some connected with the press, some, I am sorry to say, belonging to the learned professions. They agitate; their liveli- hood consists in agitating; their free- bold, their copyhold, their capital, their all in all, depend on tbe excitement of the public mind. The events now briefly alluded to were going on at the commencement of the year 18.30. There were two great questions before the public. There was the question of the Texan boundary, and of a government for Utah and New Mexico, which I consider as one question ; and there was the question of making a provision for the restoration of fugitive slaves. On these subjects, I have something to say. Texas, as you know, established her independence of Mexico by her revolution and the battle of San -Jacinto, which made her a sovereign power. I have already stated to you what 1 then anticipated from the movement, namely. that she would ask to come into the Union as a slave State. We admitted her in 18 1"', and we admitted hei Blave State, w e admitted her also with an undefined boundary ; remember that. She claii 1 by conquest the whole of thai territory ononis called New Mexico, east of the Rio Grande. She claimed also those limit- which her . stitution had deolared and marked out aa the proper limits of Texas. This was her claim, and when >he was ad- mitted into the United Mate-, the Unit- ed State- did nol define her territory. They admitted her as she wat W e took her as ahe defined her own limits, and with the power of making four ad- ditional slave States. I -ay " we," bat I do not mean thai I was one; I mean the United state- admitted her. What, then, was the state of thi in 1850? There was Texas claiming all, or a great part, of thai which the United State.- had acquired from Mex- ico as X'-w Mexico. She claimed that it belonged to her by conqnesl and by her admission into the I baited States, and shew a- ready to maintain her claim by force of arms. Nor was this all. A man must be ignoranl of the history of the country who does nol know, that, at the commencement of 1850, there was great agitation throughout the whole South. Who does not know that or seven of the largest State- of tbe South had already taken measures look- ing toward secession; were preparing for disunion in some way'/ They COn- curred apparently, at least soini them, with Texas, while Texas was prepared or preparing to enforce her rights by force of arm-. Troops ■•■ enlisted by her, and many thousand persons in the South disaffected towards the Union, or desirous of breaking it up, were ready to make common cause with Texas; to join her ranks, and Bee what tlev oould make in a war to establish the right of Texas t" New Mex The public mind was disturbed. A considerable part of tie- South was die- ted towards tie- Union, and in a c lition to adopt any course that should 1m- \ Iolenl anil destructive. What then wa- to be don. . as tar as GU KKCEFTION AT BUFFALO. Texas was concerned? Allow me to say, Gentlemen, there are two sorts of foresight. There is a military foresight, which Bees what will be the result of an appeal to arms; and there is also a statesmanlike foresight, which looks not to the result of battles ami carnage, but to the results of political disturbances, the violence of faction carried into mili- tary operations, and the horrors attend- ant on civil war. I never had a doubt, that, if the administration of General Taylor had gone to war, and had sent troops into New Mexico, the Texan forces would have been subdued in a week. The power on one side was far superior to all the power on the other. But what then? What if Texan troops, assisted by thousands of volun- teers from the disaffected States, had gone to New Mexico, and had been de- feated and turned back? Would that have settled the boundary question ? Now, Gentlemen, I wish I had ten thousand voices. I wish I could draw around me the whole people of the United States, and I wish I could make them all hear what I now declare on my conscience as my solemn belief, before the Bower who sits on high, and who will judge you and me hereafter, that, if this Texan controversy had not been settled by Congress in the manner it was, by the so-called adjustment meas- ures, civil war would have ensued; blood, American blood, would have been shed; and who can tell what would have been the consequences? Gentlemen, in an honorable war, if a foreign foe in- vade us, if our rights are threatened, if it be necessary to defend them by arms, I am not afraid of blood. And if I am too old myself, 1 hope there are those connected with me by ties of relation- ship who are young, and willing to de- fend their country to the last drop of their blood. But I cannot express the horror I feel at the shedding of blood in a controversy between one of these States and the government of the United States, because I Bee in it a total and cntin- disruption of all those ties that make us a ureal ami happy people. Gentlemen, this was the great question, the leading question, at the commence- ment of the year 1850. Then there was the other matter, and that was the Fugitive Slave Law. Let me say a word about that. Under the provisions of the Constitution, during Washington's administration, in the year 1793, there was passed, by general consent, a law for the restoration of fugitive slaves. Hardly any one op- posed it at that period ; it was thought to be necessary, in order to carry the Constitution into effect; the great men of New England and New York all con- curred in it. It passed, and answered all the purposes expected from it, till about the year 1811 or «1842, when the States interfered to make enactments in opposition to it. The act of Congress said that State magistrates might exe- cute the duties of the law. Some of the States passed enactments imposing a penalty on any State officers who exer- cised authority under the law, or assisted in its execution; others denied the use of their jails to carry the law into. effect; and, in general, at the commencement of the year 1850, it had become absolutely indispensable that Congress should pass some law for the execution of this pro- vision of the Constitution, or else give up that provision entirely. That was the question. I was in Congress when it was brought forward. I was for a proper law. I had, indeed, proposed a different law; I was of opinion that a summary trial by a jury might be had, which would satisfy the people of the North, and produce no harm to those who claimed the service of fugitives; but I left the Senate, and went to an- other station, before any law was passed. The law of 1850 passed. Now I under- take, as a lawyer, and on my profes- sional character, to say to you, and to all, that the law of 1850 is decidedly more favorable to the fugitive than General Washington's law of 1 7 : >-i ; ami 1 will tell you why, in the first place, the present law places the power in much higher hands: in the hands of independent judges of the Supreme and Circuit Courts, and District Courts, and of commissioners who Are appointed to RECEPTION AT BUFFALO. office for their legal learning. Every fugitive is brought before a tribunal <>f high character, of eminent ability, of re- spectable station. In the sec ml place, when a claimant conies from Virginia to New York, to say that one A or one B has run away, or is a fugitive from service or labor, lie brings with him a record of the court of the county from which he comes, and that record must be sworn to before a magistrate, and certified by the county clerk, and bear an official seal. The affidavit must state that A or li had departed under such and such circumstances, and had gone to another State; and that record under seal is, by the Constitution of the United States, entitled to full credit in ever] State. AVell, the claimant or his agent comes here, and he presents to you the seal of the court in Virginia, affixed to a record of his declaration, that A or B had escaped from service. He must then prove that the fugitive is here. He brings a witness: he is asked if this is the man, and he proves it; or, in nine cases out of ten, the fact would be admitted by the fugitive him- self. Such is the present law; and, much opposed and maligned as it is, it is more favorable to the fugitive slave than the law enacted during Washington's ad- ministration, in 1793, which was sanc- tioned by the North as well as by the South. The present violent opposition has sprung up in modern times. From whom does this clamor come? Why, look at the proceedings of the antisla- very conventions; look at their resolu- tions. Do you find among those persons who oppose this Fugitive Slave Law any admission whatever, that any law ought to lie passed to carry into effect the sol- emn stipulations of the Constitution? Tell me any such case; tell me if any resolution was adopted by the conven- tion at Syracuse favorable to the carry- ing out of the Constitution. Not ! The fact is. Gentlemen . they oppose the constitutional provision : they oppose the whole! Not a man of them admits that there ought to be any law on the sub- ject. They deny, altogether, that the pros isions of tic ' 'onstitution ought to be carried into effei t. Look at the pro- ceedings of the antialaverj conventions in < Miio. \1 . b husett -. and at v cuse, in the State of New York. What do they -as ? •• Thai . so help them God, no colored man shall 1m- sent from the State "i Nt "> ork back to bis mas- ter in Virginia 1 " Do not they saj that? And. to the fulfilment of that they "pledge their Lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.*' Their sacred h..n- orl They pledge their Bacred bonorto violate the Constitution; they pledge their Bacred honor to commit treason against tic- laws of their country! I have already state,). ( ient 1. -men, what your observation of th things must have taught you. I will only re- cur to the Bubject for a moment, for the purpose of persuading you. as public men and private men. as good men ami patriotic men, that you ought, t" the extent of your ability ami influence, to see to it that such law- are established and maintained a- -hall keep you, and the South, and the West, and all the country, together, on the terms oi the Constitution. I -ay. that what i- de- manded of us is to fulfil our constitu- tional duties, and to do for the South what the South ha- a tighl to demand. Gentlemen, 1 have 1 u Borne time before the public. My character is known, my life is before the country. 1 profess to love liberty a- much as any man living; but 1 profess to I-'..- Amer- ican liberty, that liberty which i- se- cured to th. untry by the government under which we live; and I have no great opinion of that other and bighet libertv which disregards tin- restraints of law and of the Constitution. I hold the Constitution of the United Stab be the bulwark, tl nly bulwark, of our Liberties and of our national character. I do not mean that you should become slaves under the Constitution. That is not American liberty. That i< not the liberty of the Union for which our fathers fought, that liberty which has given right to be known and i the world. 1 mean onlj to -;iv. that 1 am for constitutional liberty, [t IS enough 636 RECEPTION AT BUFFALO. for me to be as free as the Constitution of the country makes me. Now, Gentlemen, let me say, that, as uiu. h as I respect the character of the people of Western New York, as much as 1 wish to retain their good opinion, if I should ever hereafter be placed in any situation in public life, let me tell you now thai you must not expect from me the slightest variation, even of a hair's breadth, from the Constitution of the United States. I am a Northern man. 1 was born at the North, educated at the North, have lived all my days at the North. 1 know five hundred Northern men to one Southern man. My sympa- thies, all my sympathies, my love of lib- erty for all mankind, of every color, are the same as yours. My affections and hopes in that respect are exactly like yours. I wish to see all men free, all men happy. I have few personal associations out of the Northern States. My people are your people. And yet I am told sometimes that I am not a friend of liberty, because I am not a Free Soil man. What am I ? What ■was I ever ? What shall I be hereafter, if I could sacrifice, for any considera- tion, that love of American liberty which lias glowed in my breast since my in- fancy, and which, I hope, will never leave me till I expire ? Gentlemen, I regret that slavery exists in the Southern States; but it is clear ami certain that Congress has no power over it. It may be, however, that, in the dispensations of Providence, some remedy for this evil may occur, or may be hoped for hereafter. But, in the mean time, I hold to the Constitution of the I'nited States, and you need never expect from me, under any circum- Btances, that I shall falter from it; that I shall he otherwise than frank and de- cisive. I would not part with my char- acter a- a man of firmness and decision, and honor and principle, for all that the world possesses. You will find me true in tic- North, because all my sympathies are with the North. My affections, my children! my hopes, my everything, are with the North. Hut when I stand lip before my country, as appointed to administer the Constitution of the coun- try, by the blessing of God I will be just. Gentlemen, I expect to be libelled and abused. Yes. libelled and abused. But it does not disturb me. I have not lost a night's rest for a great many years from any such cause. I have some talent for sleeping. And why should I not expect to be libelled ? Is not the Constitution of the United States libelled and abused? Do not some peo- ple call it a covenant with hell ? Is not Washington libelled and abused ? Is hi not called a bloodhound on the track of the African negro ? Are not our fathers libelled and abused by their own chil- dren ? And ungrateful children they are. How, then, shall I escape? I do not expect to escape; but, knowing these things, I impute no bad motive to any men of character and fair standing. The great settlement measures of the last Congress are laws. Many respect- able men, representatives from your own State and from other States, did not concur in them. I do not impute any bad motive to them. I am ready to be- lieve they are Americans all. They may not have thought these laws necessary ; or they may have thought that they would be enacted without their concur- rence. Let all that pass away. If they are now men who will stand by what is done, and stand up for their country, and say that, as these laws were passed by a majority of the whole country, we must stand by them and live by them, I will respect them all as friends. Now. Gentlemen, allow me to ask of you, What do you think would have been the condition of the country, at this time, if these laws had not been passed by the last Congress ? if the ques- tion of tiic Texas boundary had not 1 n settled? if New Mexico ami Utah had been left as desert-places, and no gov- ernment had been provided for them? And if the other great object to which State Laws had opposed so many obsta- cles, the restoration of fugitives, had not been provided for, I ask, what would have 1 n the stale of this country now? You men of Erie County, you men of RECEPTION AT BUFJ \l.<» New York, I conjure you to go borne to-night and meditate on this Bubjeot. What would bave been the state of thia country, now, at this moment, it' these laws had not been passed? I bave given my opinion thai we should have had a civil war. I refer it to you, there- fore, for your consideration; meditate on it; do not be carried away by any abstract notions or metaphysical ideas; think practically on the great question, What would have been the condition of the United States at this moment, it' we had not settled these agitating ques- tions? I repeat, in my opinion, then' would have been a civil war. Gentlemen, will you allow me, for a moment, to advert to myself ? I have been a long time in public life ; of course, not many years remain to me. At the commencement of 1850, I looked anx- iously at the condition of the country, and I thought the inevitable consequence of leaving the existing controversies un- adjusted would be civil war. I saw dan- ger in leaving Utah and New Mexico without any government, a prey to the power of Texas. I saw the condition of things arising from the interference of some of the States in defeating the oper- ation of the Constitution in respect to the restoration of fugitive slaves. I saw these things, and I made up my mind to encounter whatever might betide me in the attempt to avert the impending catastrophe. And allow me to add some- thing which is not entirely unworthy of notice. A member of the House of Rep- resentatives told me that he had pre- pared a list of one hundred and forty speeches which had been made in Con- gress on the slavery question. " That is a very large number, my friend," I said; " but how is that? " " Why,*' said he, "a Northern man gets up and speaks with considerable power and fluency until the Speaker's hammer knocks him down. Then gets up a Southern man. and he speaks with more warmth. He is nearer the sun. and he comes out with the greater fervor against the North. He speaks his hour, and is in turn knocked down. And so it has gone on, until I have got one hundred and forty B] ihea on mj bat." ■■ \\ ell, •• where are the) , and what are th< "If tli" speaker," said be, u wi Northern man. be held forth against Blavery; and if be was from the South, lie abused the North; and all these Bpeeches were sent bj the membei their own localities, where thej served only to aggravate the local irritation al- ready existing. No man reads both Bides. The other Bide of the argument is nut heard: and the speeches senl from Washington in suoh prodigious num- bers, instead of tending to conciliation, do but increase, iii both sections oJ the Union, an excitemenl already of the moBl dangerous character.' 1 Gentlemen, in this state of things, I saw that something must !>«• done. It was impossible to Look with indifference on a danger of bo formidable a char- acter. I am a Massachusetts man. and I bore in mind what Massachusetts has ever been to the Constitution and the Union. I fell the importance of the duty which devolved upon one to whom she had bo Long confided the trust of representing her in either house of Congress. As I honored her, and re- spected her, I felt that I was serving her in my endeavors to promote the wel- fare of the w bole country. And now suppose, Gentlemen, that, on the occasion in question, 1 bad taken a different course, [f I may allud particularly to an individual BO insig- nificant as myself, suppose that, on the 7th of -March. 1850, instead of making a speech that would. BO far as my power went . reconcile the Country, 1 had joined in the general clamor of tie' Anti-la\.-ry party. Suppose I had said, •• 1 will I aothing t>> do with any accommodation; we will admit no compromise; we will let Texas invade X>w Mexico; we will Leave New Mexico and Utah to take care of themselves; we will plant mil- selves Oil the \\ ilmot Pr0Vi8O, let the consequences he what they may." Now, Gentlemen, I do not mean to say that great consequences would have followed iii u 1 1 such a course on my part ; but Bup- pose I bad taken Mich a course. How could I 1-e blamed for it? Was 1 i 638 RE( EPTION AT BUFFALO. Northern man? Did I not know Massa- chusetts feelings and prejudices? 1 > n t what of that? I am an American. I was made a whole man, and I did not mean to make myself half a one. I felt thai I had a duty to perform to my country, to my own reputation; for I flattered myself that a service of forty years had given me some character, on which I had a right to repose for my justification in the performance of a duty attended with some degree of local unpopularity. I thought it my duty to pursue this course, and I did not care what was to be the consequence. I felt it was my duty, in a very alarming crisis, to come out; to go for my coun- try, and my whole country ; and to ex- ert any power I had to keep that coun- try together. I cared for nothing, I was afraid of nothing, but I meant to do my duty. Duty performed makes a man happy ; duty neglected makes a man unhappy. I therefore, in the face of all discouragements and all dangers, was ready to go forth and do what I thought my country, your country, de- manded of me. And, Gentlemen, al- low me to say here to-day, that if the fate of John Rogers had stared me in the face, if I had seen the stake, if I had heard the fagots already crack- ling, by the blessing of Almighty God I would have gone on and discharged the duty which I thought my country called upon me to perform. I would have become a martyr to save that country. And now, Gentlemen, farewell. Live and be happy. Live like patriots, live like Americans. Live in the enjoyment of the inestimable blessings which your fathers prepared for you; and if any thing that I may do hereafter should be inconsistent, in the slightest degree, with the opinions and principles which I have this day submitted to you, then discard me for ever from your recollection. THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. AN ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE LAYING OF THE I ORNER-STONE OF THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL, ON THE 4th OE JULY, 1801. I Fellow-Citizens, — I greet you well ; I give you joy, on the return ot this an- niversary; and I felicitate you, also, on the more particular purpose of which this ever- memorable day has been chosen to witness the fulfilment. Hail! all hail! I see before and around me a mass of faces, glowing with cheerful- ness and patriotic pride. I see thou- sands of eyes turned towards other eyes, all sparkling with gratification and de- light. This is the New World! This is America! This is Washington! and this the Capitol of the United States! And where else, among the nations, can the seat of government be surrounded, on any day of any year, by those who have more reason to rejoice in the bless- ings which they possess? Nowhere, fel- low-citizens! assuredly, nowhere! Let us, then, meet this rising sun with joy and thanksgiving! This is that day of the year which an- nounced to mankind the great fact of American Independence. This fresh and brilliant morning blesses our vision with another beholding of the birthday of our nation; and we see that nation, of recent origin, now among the most considerable and powerful, and spread- ing over the continent from sea to sea. Among the first colonists from Eu- rope to this part of America, there were 1 The following motto stands upon the title- page of the original pamphlet edition : — "Stet Capitolium Fulgens ; lute r h unii in ultimas Extendat oraa." some, doubtless, who contemplated the distant consequences of their under- taking, and who saw a great Futurity. But, in general, their hopes were limited to the enjoyment of a safe asylum from tyranny, religious and civil, and to re- speetalile subsistence, by industry and toil. A thick veil hid our times from their view. But the progress of Amer- ica, however slow, could not but at length awaken genius, and attract the attention of mankind. In the early part of the second cen- tury of our history, Bishop Berkeley, who, it will be remembered, had resided for some time in Newport, in lihode Island, wrote his well-known •• Verses on the Prospect of Planting Arts and Learning in America." The last stanza of this little poem seems to have been produced by a high poetical inspiration : — "Westward the course of empire takes its way; The four first ;i<-t> already past, A fifth shall close the drama with the day: Time's noblest offspring i> the last." This extraordinary prophecy may be considered only as the result of long foresight and uncommon sagacity ; of a foresight and sagacity stimulated, nev- ertheless, by excited feeling and high enthusiasm. So clear a vision of what America would become was nol founded on Bquare miles, or on existing num- bers, or on any common laws of statis- tics. It was an intuitive glance into futurity; it was a grand conception, strong, ardent, glowing, embracing all 640 THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. time since the creation of the world, and all regions of which thai world ia composed, and judging of the future by just analogy with the past. And the inimitable imagery and beauty with which the thought is expressed, joined to the conception itself, render it one of the most striking passages in our lan- guage. On the day of the Declaration of In- dependence our illustrious fathers per- formed the first scene in the last great act of this drama; one in real impor- tance infinitely exceeding that for which the great English poet invokes " A muse of fire, . . . A kingdom for a stage, princes to act, And monarchs to behold the swelling scene ! " The Muse inspiring our fathers was the Genius of Liberty, all on fire with a sense of oppression, and a resolution to throw it off; the whole world was the stage, and higher characters than princes trod it; and, instead of mon- archs, countries and nations and the age beheld the swelling scene. How well the characters were cast, and how well each acted his part, and what emo- tions the whole performance excited, let history, now and hereafter, tell. At a subsequent period, but before the Declaration of Independence, the Bishop of St. Asaph published a discourse, in which the following remarkable passages are found : — "It is difficult for man to look into the destiny of future ages ; the designs of Provi- dence are vast and complicated, and our own powers are too narrow to admit of much satisfaction to our curiosity. But when we see many great and powerful causes con- stantly at work, we cannot doubt of their producing proportionable effects. "The colonies in North America have not only taken root and acquired strength, hut sum hastening with mi accelerated progress tu such " /»"'•' * /'a! s/iiti ( rhaps they may make as considera- ble advances in tin mis of civil govt rnmt ni and the conduct of life. We have reason to be proud, and even jealous, of our excellent constitution; but those equitable principles on which it was formed, an equal repre- sentation (the best discovery of political wisdom), and a just and commodious distri- bution of power, which with us were the price of civil wars, and the rewards of the virtues and sufferings of our ancestors, de- scend to them as a natural inheritance, without toil or pain. "Bui nuts/ they nsi here, as in tin utmost effort of human i/i nius ! < 'an chance and time, the wisdom and the experience of public nun, suggest no »< v> n uudij against the i viU which TIIK ADDl HON TO Till: CAPITOL. 641 vices and ambition are perpetually apl to cause ' Maj they nut hope, without pre- inmptioti, i.i preserve a greater seal for piety ami public devotion than we have done ' For sure it can hardly happen to them, as it has to us, that, when religion is best understood and rendered mosl pure and reasonable, then should be the precise time when many cease to believe and practise it. and all in general become moat indifferent to it. " .May they not p088ibly tie more SUCCCSS fill than their mother country has Keen in preserving that reverence and authority which are due to the laws? to those who make, and to those who execute them ' May not «• s in in the history of the Slate of California. On a former occasion I ventured to remark, that "it i- very difficult to es- tablish a free conservative government for the equal advancement of all the in- terests of society. What has Germany done, learned Germany, more full of ancient lore than all the world beside? What has Italy done? What have they done who dwell on the spot where Cicero lived ? They have not the power of self- government which a common town-meet- ing, with us, possesses Yes, I say that those persons who have gone from our town-meetings to dig gold in California are more fit to make a repub- lican government than any body of men in Germany or Italy; because they have learned this one great lesson, that there is no security without law, and that, under the circumstances in which they are placed, where there is no military authority to cut their throats, there is no sovereign will but the will of the major- ity; that, therefore, if they remain, they must submit to that will." And this I believe to be strictly true. Now, fellow-citizens, if your patience will hold out, I will venture, before proceeding to the more appropriate and particular duties of the day, to state, in a few w T ords, what I take these Ameri- can political principles in substance to be. They consist, as I think, in the first place, in the establishment of popu- lar governments, on the basis of repre- sentation; for it is plain that a pure democracy, like that which existed in some of the states of Greece, in which every individual had a direct vote in the enactment of all laws, cannot possibly exist in a country of wide extent. This representation is to be made as equal as circumstances will allow. Now, this principle of popular representation, pre- vailing either in all the branches of gov- ernment, or in some of them, has ex- isted in these States almost from the days of the settlements at Jamestown and Plymouth ; borrowed, no doubt, from the example of the popular branch of the British legislature. The repre- sentation of the people in the. British House of Commons was, however, origi- nally very unequal, and is yet not equal. Indeed, it may be doubted whether the appearance of knights and burgesses, as- TIIH ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. 648 sembling on the summons of tin- crown, was not intended at first as an a--i.-tance and support t<> the royal prerogative, ill matters of revenue and taxation, rather than as a mode of ascertaining popular opinion. Nevertheless, representation had a popular origin, and savored more and more of tin- character of thai origin, as ii accjuired, hy slow degrees, greater and greater strength, in the actual gov- ernment of the country. The constitu- tion ct' the House of Commons was cer- tainly a form of representation, how- ever unequal; numbers were counted, and majorities prevailed; and when our ancestors, acting upon this example, in- troduced more equality of representa- tion, the idea assumed a more rational and distinct shape. At any rate, this manner of exercising popular power was familiar to our fathers when they settled on this continent. They adopted it, and generation has risen up after generation, all acknowledging it, and all learning its practice and its forms. The next fundamental principle in our system is, that the will of the ma- jority, fairly expressed through the means of representation, shall have the force of law; and it is quite evi- dent that, in a country without thrones or aristocracies or privileged castes or classes, there can be no other founda- tion for law to stand upon. And, as the necessary result of this, the third element is, that the law is the supreme rule for the government of all. The great sentiment of Alcseus, so beau- tifully presented to us by Sir William Jones, is absolutely indispensable to the construction and maintenance of our political systems : — " What constitutes a state"? Not high-raised battlement or labored mound, Thick wall or moated gate; Not cities proud, with spires and turrets crowned; Not bays and broad-armed ports, Where, laughing at the storm, rich navies ride ; Not starred and spangled courts, Where low-browed baseness wafts perfume to pride. No: Men, hitjh-minded Men, Witli powers as far above dull brutes endued, Iu forest, brake, or den, \ b eel cold rocks and brambles rude : Men who their dutiei know, lint know their rights, and, knowing, dare maintain : Prevent tin- long aimed Mow, Ami crush tin- tyrant while tiny rend the chain : These constitute a -t.it.- : And Sovereign Law, that state's collected will, i I'er throm - and globes elate sit- empress, crowning good, repressing ill.'' And. finally, another must important part of the greal fabric of American liberty is, that then- -hall he written constitutions, founded on the imme- diate authority of the people tliem- selves, ami regulating and restraining all the powers conferred upon govern- ment, whether Legislative, executive, or judicial. Tins, fellow-citizens, 1 suppose to be a just summary of our American prin- ciples, and I have on this occasion sought to express them in the plain- est and in the fewest words. The sum- mary may not be entirely exact, but I hope it may be sufficiently so to make manifest to the rising generation among ourselves, and to those elsewhere who may choose to inquire into the nature of our political institutions, the general theory upon which they are founded. And I now proceed to add, that the strong and deep-settled conviction of all intelligent persons amongsi as is, that, in order to support a useful and wise government upon these popular princi- ples, the general education of the peo- ple, and the wide diffusion of pure morality and true religion, are indis- pensable. Individual virtue is a part of public virtue. It is difficult to con- ceive how there can remain morality in the government when it shall cease to exist among the people; or how the aggregate of tin- political institution-, all the organs of which consist only of men. should he wise, and beneficent, and competent to inspire confidence, if the opposite qualities belong to the in- dividuals who constitute those organ-, and make up that aggregate. And now. fellow-cit i/.etis, I take leave of this part of the duty which I pro- 644 IMF. ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. posed to perform; and, once more fe- licitating you ami myself thai our eyes have seen the 1 i ;u. 1 1 1 of this blessed morn- ing, and that our ears have heard the shouts with which joyous thousands wel- come its return, and joiningwith you in the bope that every revolving year may renew these rejoicings to the end oi time, T proceed to address you, shortly. upon the particular occasion of our as- sembling here to-day. Fellow-citizens, by the act of Congress of the 30th of September, 1850, provis- ion was made for the extension of the Capitol, according to such plan as might be approved by the President of the United States, and for the necessary sums to be expended, under his direc- tion, by such architect as he might ap- point. " This measure was imperatively demanded, for the use of the legislative and judiciary departments, the public libraries, the occasional accommodation of the chief executive magistrate, and for other object-. No act of Congress incurring a large expenditure has re- ceived more general approbation from the people. The President has pro- ceeded to execute this law. He has approved a plan; he has appointed an architect; and all things are now ready for the commencement of the work. The anniversary of national indepen- dence appeared to afford an auspicious occasion for laying the foundation-stone of the additional building. That cere- mony has now been performed by the President himself, in the presence and view of this multitude. He has thought thai the day and the occasion made a united and imperative call for some short address to the people here as- sembled ; and it is at his requesl thai I have appeared before you to perform that part of the duty uliirh was deemed incumbenl on us. Beneath the stone is deposited, among other things, a lisl of which will be pub- lished, the Eollowing brief accounl of the proceedings of this day, in my band- it riting: — ■■ I in tin- morning of the Brat day of the seventy-sixth year of the Independence of the United States of America, in the city of Washington, being the 4th day of July, 1851, this stone, designed as the comer- stone of the extension of the Capitol, ac- cording to a plan approved by the Presi- dent, in pursuance of an act of Congress, was laid by MILLARD FILLMORE, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, assisted by the Grand Master of the Ma- sonic Lodges, in the presence of many members of Congress, of officers of the Executive and Judiciary Departments, Na- tional, State, and District, of officers of the army and navy, the corporate authorities of this and neighboring cities, many asso- ciations, civil and military and masonic, members of the Smithsonian Institution and National Institute, professors of col- leges and teachers of schools of the Dis- trict, with their students and pupils, and a vast concourse of people from places near and remote, including a few surviving gen- tlemen who witnessed the laying of the corner-stone of the Capitol by President Washington, on the 18th day of September, a. d. 1793. " If, therefore, it shall be hereafter the will of God that this structure shall fall from its base, that its foundation be up- turned, and this deposit brought to the eyes of men, be it then known, that on this day the Union of the United States of America stands firm, that their Constitution still exists unimpaired, and with all its original usefulness and glory ; growing every day stronger and stronger in the affections of the great body of the American people, and attracting more and more the admira- tion of the world. And all here assembled, whether belonging to public life or to pri- vate life, with hearts devoutly thankful to Almighty God for the preservation of the liberty ami happiness of the country, unite in sincere and fervent prayers that thi- de- posit, and the walls and arches, the domes :ind lowers, the columns and entablatures, now to be erected over it, may endure for ever ! "GOD SAVE THE UNIT1 l> STATES OF Amebic \ I •• Daniel Webster, Secretary of Statt of il>< I 'nil. d States." Fellow-citizens, fifty-eight years ago Washington stood on this spot to exe- cute a duty like thai which has now been performed. He then laid the corner-stone THE ADDITION To THE CAP1T<>L 645 of the original Capitol. Be was al the bead of the government, at thai time weak in resources, burdened with debt, just struggling into political existence and respectability, and agitated by the heaving waves which were overturning European thrones. But even then, in many important respects, the govern- ment was si roil-'. It was strong in Washington's own great character; it was strong in the wisdom and patriotism of other eminent public men, his political associates and fellow -laborers ; and it was strong in the affections of the people. Since that time astonishing changes have been \\ rough! in the condil ion and prospects of the American people; and a degree of progress witnessed with which the world can Furnish no parallel. As we review the course of that progress^ wonder and amazement arresl our atten- t ion at <-\ erj step. The present occasion, although allowing of no lengthened re- marks, ma\ yet, perhaps, admit ol a short comparative statement of impor- tant subject - "i national interest as they existed at that day. and as they mm ex- ist. 1 have adopted Eorthis purpose the tabular form of statement, as being the in. .-I brief and significant. COMPARATIVE TABLE. Number of States Representatives and Senators in Congress Population of the United States Population of Boston Population of Baltimore Population of Philadelphia Population of New York (city) Population of Washington Population of Richmond Population of Charleston Amount of receipts into the Treasury Amount of expenditures Amount of imports Amount of exports Amount of tonnage (tons) Area of the United States in square miles Bank and file of the army Militia (enrolled) Navy of the United States (vessels) Navy armament (ordnance) Treaties and conventions with foreign powers .... Light-houses and light-boats Expenditures for ditto Area of the Capitol Number of miles of railroad in operation Cost of ditto Number of miles in course of construction Lines of electric telegraph, in miles Number of post-offices Number of miles of post-route Amount of revenue from post-offices Amount of expenditures of Post-Office Department . . Number of miles of mail transportation Number of colleges Public libraries Volumes in ditto School libraries Volumes in ditto Emigrants from Europe to the United States Coinage at the Mint Tear \TU Year 1861. 15 81 135 296 8,029,828 28,267,498 18,088 136,871 18,503 169,054 42,520 409,046 33,121 616,607 . 40,076 4,000 27,582 n;,: :.-,-• 42,988 $5,720,624 $52,312,980 17,529,575 $ 1* 005,879 8215,725,995 $26,109,000 $217,517,130 520,764 3,772,440 805.4(51 3,314,365 5,120 10,000 . 2,006,458 (None.) 76 . 2,012 9 go 12 372 $12,061 $529,266 i acre. 4J acres. . 10,287 . $306,607,964 • 10,092 . 16,000 209 21,661 6,642 196,290 $104,747 $6,727,867 -?72.040 $6,024,667 • 62,465,724 19 121 85 694 To. • 2,201,638 > 10,000 2,1 ,000 10,000 299,610 664 2,019,466 646 THE ADDITION TO THE CAITTOL. In respect to the growth of Western trade and commerce, I extract a few sentences from a very valuable address before the Historical Society of Ohio, by William 1). Gallagher, Esq., 1850: — "A few facts will exhibit as well as a volume the wonderful growth of Western trade and commerce. Previous to the J ear 1 SOI), some eight orten keel-boats, of twenty or twenty-five tons each, performed all the earning trade between Cincinnati and Pittsburg. In 1802 the first government \. >S8i 1 appeared on Lake Erie. In 1811 the tir>t steamboat (the Orleans) was launched at Pittsburg. In 1826 the waters of Michi- gan were first ploughed by the keel of a steamboat, a pleasure trip to Green Bay being planned and executed in the summer of this year. In L832 a steamboat first ap- peared at Chicago. At the present time the entire number of steamboats running on the Mississippi and Ohio and their tributaries is more probably over than under six hundred, the aggregate tonnage of which is not short of one hundred and forty thousand ; a larger number of steamboats than England can claim, and a greater steam commercial marine than that employed by Great Brit- ain and her dependencies." And now, fellow-citizens, having stal- ed to you this infallible proof of the growtli and prosperity of the nation, I ask yen. and I would ask every man, whether the government which has been over us has proved itself an infliction or a curse to the country, or any part of it? Ye men of the South, of all the origi- nal Southern States, wdiat say you to all this? Are you, or any of you, ashamed of this great work of your fathers? Your fathers were not- they who st< I the prophets and killed them. They Were :ii ig the prophets; they were of the prophets; they were themselves the prophets. \< men of Virginia, what do you say to all this? Ye men of the Potomac, dwelling along i be mores of thai river on which Washington lived and died, and where his remains now rest, ye, so many of whom may see the domes "I the ( lapitol from your ow ii homes, what ye? V'' men of .lames River ami the Baj , places consecrated by the early settle- ment of your Commonwealth, what do you say? Do you desire, from the soil of your State, or as you travel to the North, to see these halls vacated, their beauty and ornaments destroyed, and their national usefulness gone for ever? Ye men beyond the Blue Ridge, many thousands of whom are nearer to this Capitol than to the seat of government of your own State, what do you think of breaking this great association into fragments of States and of people? I know that some of you, and I believe that you all, would be almost as much shocked at the announcement of such a catastrophe, as if you were to be in- formed that the Blue Ridge itself would soon totter from its base. And ye men of Western Virginia, who occupy the great slope from the top of the Alle- ghanies to Ohio and Kentucky, wdiat benefit do you propose to yourselves by disunion? If you "secede," what do you " secede " from, and what do you " accede " to? Do you look for the cur- rent of the Ohio to change, and to bring you and your commerce to the tide- waters of Eastern rivers? What man in his senses can suppose that you would remain part and parcel of Vir- ginia a month after Virginia should have ceased to be part and parcel of the United States? The secession of Virginia ! The se- cession of Virginia, whether alone or in company, is most improbable, the greatest of all improbabilities. Vir- ginia, to her everlasting honor, acted a great part in framing and establishing the present Constitution. She has had her reward and her (list met ion. Seven of her noble sons have each filled the Presi- dency, and enjoyed the highest honors of the country. Dolorous complaints come up to us from the South, that Vir- ginia will not head the march of seces- sion, and lead the other Southern States out of the Union. This, if it should happen, would be something of a mar- vel, certainly, considering how much pains Virginia took to lead these same States into the Union, and considering, too, that she has partaken as largely of T1IK ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL 647 its benefits and its government as any other Siatc. Ami ye men of the other Southern States, members of the < >1 hinut And now, ye men of the new- States of the South ! You are ool of the oriei- mil thirteen. The battle had 1 n fought ami won, the Revolution achieved, and the Constitution established, before your States had any existence as States. "> ou came t<> a prepared banquet, and had scats assigned you at table jusl as honor- able as those which were filled by older guests. You have been and are singu- larly prosperous; and if any one Bhould deny thi8, you would at once contradict, his assertion. You have bought vast quantities of choice and excellent land at the lowesl price; and it' the public domain has not been lavished upon you. you yourself will admit that it lias been appropriated to your own uses by a very liberal hand. And yet in BOme of these States, not in all, persons are found in favor of a dissolution of the 1'nion. or of secession from it. Such opinions are expressed even where the general pros- perity of the community has been the mosl rapidly advanced. In the flourish- ing and interesting State of Mississippi, for example, there is a huge party which insists that her grievances are intoler- able, that the whole body politic is in a state of Buffering; and all along, and through her whole extent on the Missis- sippi, a loud cry rings that her only remedy is " Secession," " Secession." Now, Gentlemen, what infliction does the State of Mississippi suffer under? What oppression prostrates her strength or destroys her happiness? Before we can judge of the proper remedy, we must know something of tie- disi and. for my part, I confess that the real evil existing in the case appears to me to be a certain inquietude or uneasiness growing out of a high degree of pr. •>- perity ami consciousness of wealth and power, which sometimes lead men to he ready for changes, and to push on un- reasonably to still higher elevation, tf this be the truth of the matter, her p>- litical doctors are about right If the 648 THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. complaint spring from over-wrought prosperity, for thai disease I have no doubt that secession would prove a sovereign remedy. I!ut I return to the leading topic on which I was engaged. In the depart- ment of invention there have been wonderful applications of science to arts within the last sixty years. The spacious hall of the l'atent Office is at once the repository and proof of Ameri- can inventive art and genius. Their results are seen in the numerous im- provements by which human labor is abridged. Without going into details, it may be sufficient to say, that many of the ap- plications of steam to locomotion and manufactures, of electricity and magnet- ism to the production of mechanical mo- tion, the electrical telegraph, the regis- tration of astronomical phenomena, the art of multiplying engravings, the in- troduction and improvement among us of all the important inventions of the Old World, are striking indications of the progress of this country in the use- ful arts. The net-work of railroads and telegraphic lines by which this vast country is reticulated have not only developed its resources, but united em- phatically, in metallic bauds, all parts of the Union. The hydraulic works of New York, Philadelphia, and Boston surpass in extent and importance those of ancient Home. But we have not confined our atten- tion to the immediate application of science to the useful arts. We have entered the field of original research, and ha\e enlarged the bounds of scien- tific know ledge. Sixty years ago, besides the brilliant discoveries of Franklin in electricity, scarcely any thing had been done among US in the way of original discovery. < >ur men of science were content with re- peating the experiments and diffusing a knowledge of the discoveries of the learned of the old World, without at- tempting to add a single new fact or principle to the existing stock. Within the last tueiitydh • thirty years a re- markable improvement has taken place in this respect. ( )ur natural history has been explored in all its branches; our geology has been investigated with re- sults of the highest interest to practical and theoretical science. Discoveries have been made in pure chemistry and elec- tricity, which have received the approba- tion of the world. The advance which has been made in meteorology in this country, within the last twenty years, is equal to that made during the same period in all the world besides. In 1793 there was not in the United States an instrument with which a good observation of the heavenly bodies could be made. There are now instruments at Washington, Cambridge, and Cin- cinnati equal to those at the best Euro- pean observatories, and the original dis- coveries in astronomy within the last five years, in this country, are among the most brilliant of the age. I can hardly refrain from saying, in this con- nection, that the " Celestial .Mechanics " of La Place has been translated and com- mented upon by Bowditch. Our knowledge of the geography and topography of the American continent has been rapidly extended by the labor and science of the officers of the United States army, and discoveries of much interest in distant seas have resulted from the enterprise of the navy. In 1807, a survey of the coast of the United States was commenced, which at that time it was supposed no American was competent to direct. The work has, however, grown within the last few years, under a native superintendent, in importance and extent, beyond any enterprise of the kind ever before at- tempted. These facts conclusively prove that a great advance has been mad.' among us, not only in the application of science to the wants of ordinary life, bid. in sci- ence itself, in its highest branches, in ii> adaptation to satisfy the cravings of the immortal mind. In respect to literature, with the ex- ception of some books of elementary edu- cation, and Borne theological treatises, of which scarcely any but those of dona- THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. 649 than Edwards have any permanent \ alue, and some works on local history and pol- itics, like Hutchinson's Massachusetts, Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, the Feder- alist, Belknap's New Hampshire, and Morse's Geography, and a Eew others, America had ool produced a single work of any repute in literature. We were almost wildly dependent on imported books. Even our Bibles and Testa- ments were, for the most part, printed abroad. The book trade is dow one of the greatest branches of business, and many works of standard value, and of high reputation in Europe as well as at home, have been produced by American authors in every department of Literary composition. While the country has been expanding in dimensions, in numbers, and in wealth, the government has applied a wise fore- cast in the adoption of measures neces- sary, when the world shall no longer be at peace, to maintain the national honor, whether by appropriate displays of vigor abroad, or by well-adapted means of defence at home. A navy, which has so often illustrated our history by heroic achievements, though in peaceful times restrained in its operations to narrow limits, possesses, in its admirable ele- ments, the means of great and sudden expansion, and is justly looked upon by the nation as the right arm of its power. An army, still smaller, but not less per- fect in its detail, has on many a field exhibited the military aptitudes and prowess of the race, and demonstrated the wisdom which has presided over its organization and government. While the gradual and slow enlarge- ment of these respective military arms has been regulated by a jealous watch- fulness over the public treasure, there has, neverthless, been freely given all that was needed to perfect their quality; and each affords the nucleus of any en- largement that the public exigencies may demand, from the millions of brave hearts and strong arms upon the land and water. The navy is the active and aggressive element of national defence; and. Let loose from our own sea-coast, must dis- play its power in the teas and channels of the enemy. To do this, it need not be large; ami it can never I"- I enough t<> defend bj its presence a i home all our puts ami harbors. But , in the absence of the navy, what .•an the regular arm;, or the volunteer militia do against the enemy's line-of-battle ships and steamers, falling without notice upon "ur coast ? What w ill guard out cities from tribute, our merchant-vessels and our navy-yards Erom conflagration? Here, again, we see a wise forecast in the system of c|, • | ', >] | - \ \ , • iii'-aMMo which, especially since the close of the war with Great Britain, has been steadily followed by our government. While the perils from which our great establishments had just escaped were vet fresh in remembrance, a system of forti- fications was begun, which now. though not quite complete, fences in our im- portant points with impassable strength. More than four thousand cannon may at any moment, within strong and perma- nent works, arranged with all the ad- vantages and appliances thai the art affords, be turned to the protection of the sea-coast, and be served by the men whose hearths they shelter. Happy fpr us that it is so, since these are means of security that time alone can supply; and since the improvements of mari- time warfare, by making distant expe- ditions easy and speedy, have made them more probable, and at the Bame time more difficult to anticipate and provide against. The cost of fortifying all the important points of our coast, as well upon the whole Atlantic as the Gulf of Mexico, will not exceed the amount expended on the fortifications of Paris. In this connection one most important facility in the defence of the country is not to he overlooked ; it i- the extreme rapidity with which the soldiers of the army, and any number of the militia corps, may he brought to any point where a hostile attack shall at any time be mad • threat. -lied. Ami this extension of territory em- braced within the United Mates, in- crease of its population, commerce, and 650 THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. manufactures, development of its re- sources bj canals and railroads, and ra- pidity of intercommunication by means of steam and electricity, have all been accomplished without overthrow of, or danger to, the public liberties, by any assumption of military power; and, in- deed, without any permanent increase of the army, except for the purpose of frontier defence, and of affording a slight guard to the public property ; or of the navy, any further than to assure the navigator that, in whatsoever sea he shall sail his ship, he is protected by the stars and stripes of his country. This, too, has been done without the shedding of a drop of blood for treason or rebel- lion ; while systems of popular represen- tation have regularly been supported in the State governments and in the general government; while laws, national and State, of such a character have been passed, and have been so wisely admin- istered, that I may stand up here to- day, and declare, as I now do declare, in the face of all the intelligent of the age, that, for the period which has elapsed from the day that Washing- ton laid the foundation of this Capitol to the present time, there has been no country upon earth in which life, liberty, and property have been more amply and steadily secured, or more freely enjoyed, than in these United States of America. Who is there thai will deny this? Who is there prepared with a greater or a better example? Who is there that can stand upon the foundation of facts, acknowl- edged or proved, and assert that these our republican institutions have not an- swered the true ends of government be- yond all precedent in human history? There i- yet another view. There are still higher considerations. Man is an intellectual being, destined to immor- tality. There is a spirit in him, and the breath of the Almighty hath given him understanding. Then only is he tending toward his own destiny, while he seeks for knowledge and virtue, for tic will of his Maker, and tor just con- ceptions of his own duty, of all impor- tant questions, therefore, let this, the most important of all, be first asked and first answered: In what country of the habitable globe, of great extent and large population, are the means of knowledge the most generally diffused and enjoyed among the people? This question admits of one, and only one, answer. It is here; it is here in these United States; it is among the descend- ants of those who settled at Jamestown; of those who were pilgrims on the shore of Plymouth; and of those other races of men, who, in subsequent times, have become joined in this great American family. Let one fact, incapable of doubt or dispute, satisfy every mind on this point. The population of the United States is twenty- three millions. Now, take the map of the continent of Europe and spread it out before you. Take your scale and your dividers, and lay off in one area, in any shape you please, a triangle, square, circle, parallelogram, or trapezoid, and of an extent that shall contain one hundred and fifty millions of people, and there will be found within the United States more persons who do habitually read and write than can be embraced within the lines of your demar- cation. But there is something even more than this. Man is not only an intellectual, but he is also a religious being, and his religious feelings and habits require cul- tivation. Let the religious element in man's nature be neglected, let him be influenced by no higher motives than low self-interest, and subjected to no stronger restraint than the limits of civil authority, and he becomes the creature of selfish passion or blind fanaticism. The spectacle of a nation powerful and enlightened, but without Christian faith, has been presented, almost within our own day, as a warning beacon for the nations. On the other hand, the cultivation of the religious sentiment, represses licen- tiousness, incites to general benevolence and the practical acknowledgment of the brotherh 1 of man, inspires respect for law and order, and gives strength to the whole social fabric, at the same time that it conducts the human soul upward to the Author of its being. THE ADDITION TO THE (ATI I'M. 651 Now, T think it may be staled with truth, thai in do country, in proportion to its population, are there bo main be- nevolent establishments connected with religious instruction, Bible, Missionary, and Tract Societies, supported by public and private contributions, as in our OM n. There are also institutions for the educa- tion of the blind, of idiots, of the deaf and dumb; for the reception of orphan and destitute children, ami the insane; for moral reform, designed for children and females respectively; and institu- tions for the reformation of criminals; not to speak of those numerous estab- lishments, in almost every county and town in the United States, Eor the recep- tion of the aged, infirm, and destitute poor, many of whom have fled to our shores to escape the poverty and wretch- edness of their condition at home. In the United Si ates there is no church establishment or ecclesiastical authority founded by government. Public worship is maintained either by voluntary asso- ciations and contributions, or by trusts and donations of a charitable origin. Now, I think it safe to say, that a greater portion of the people of the United States attend public worship, decently clad, well behaved, and well seated, than of any other country of the civilized world. Edifices of religion are seen everywhere. Their aggregate cost would amount to an immense sum of money. They are, in general, kept in good repair, and consecrated to the pur- poses of public worship. In these edi- fices the people regularly assemble on the Sabbath day, which, by all classes, is sacredly set apart for rest from secular employment and for religious medita- tion and worship, to listen to the read- ing of the Holy Scriptures, and dis- courses from pious ministers of the sev- eral denominations. This attention to the wants of the in- tellect and of the soul, as manifested by the voluntary support of schools and colleges, of churches and benevolent in- stitutions, is one of the most remarkable characteristics of the American people, not less strikingly exhibited in the new than in the older settlements of the country. On the spol where the in -i of i he Eoresl were Felled, near the Log cabins of the pioneers, are t" be een rising together the church and the school- house. So has it been from the begin- ning, and God grant that it may thus continue! "On other shores, above their mouldering towns, In sullen pomp, the tall cathedral frowns; Simple Mud frail, our lowly temples throw Their slei der shadows on tin- paths below; Scarce steal the winds, thai Bweep the wood- land tracks, The larch's perfume from the settler's axe, lire, like a vision of the morning His slight-framed Bteeple marks 1 1 1 . ■ house uf prayer. Vit Faith's pure hymn, beneath its shelter rude, Breathes out as sweetly to the tangled wood, As where tin' rays through blazing oriels pour On marble Bhaft and tessellated Boor." Who does not admit that this unpar- alleled growth in prosperity and renown is the result, under Providence, of the union of these States under a general Constitution, which guarantees to each State a republican form of government, and to every man the enjoyment of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happim free from civil tyranny or ecclesiastical domination? And, to bring home this idea to tin- present occasion, who does not feel that. when President Washington laid his hand on the foundation of the first Cap- itol, he performed a great work of per- petuation of the Union and the Consti- tution? Who does not feel that this seat of the general government, health- ful in its situation, central in its posi- tion, near the mountains whence gush springs of wonderful virtue, teeming with Nature's richest products, and yel not far from the bays and the greal estuaries of the sea, easily accessible and generally agreeable in climate and association, does give strength to the union of these States'? that this city, bearing an immortal name, with its broad streets and avenues, its public squares and magnificent edifices of the general government, erected Eor the pur- pose of carrying on within tlein the im- portant business of the several depart- G52 THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. mcnts, for the reception of wonderful and curious inventions, for the preser- vation of the records of American learn- in.; and genius, of extensive collections of the products of nature and art, brought hither for study and comparison from all parts of the world, — adorned with numerous churches, and sprinkled over, 1 am happy to say, with many public schools, where all the children of the city, without distinction, have the means of obtaining a good education, and with academies and colleges, professional schools and public libraries, — should continue to receive, as it has heretofore received, the fostering care of Congress, and should be regarded as the permanent seat of the national gevernment? Here, too, a citizen of the great republic of letters. 1 a republic which knows not the metes and bounds of political geogra- phy, has prophetically indicated his conviction that America is to exercise a wide and powerful influence in the intellectual world, by founding in this city, as a commanding position in the field of science and literature, and placing under the guardianship of the government, an institution ''for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men." With each succeeding year new inter- est is added to the spot; it becomes connected with all the historical associa- tions of our country, with her states- men and her orators, and. alas! its cem- etery is annually enriched by the ashes of her chosen sons. Before us is the broad and beautiful river, separating two of the original thirteen States, which a late President, a man of determined purpose and inflex- ible will, but patriotic heart, desired to span with arches of ever-enduring gran- it'-, symbolical of the firmly cemented union of the North and the South. That Presidenl was < reneral .Jackson. On its banks repose the ashes of the Father of his Country, and at our side, by a singular felicity of position, over- looking the city which he designed, and i Hugh Smithson, whose munificent bequest has been applied to the foundation of "The Snii Institution." which bears his name, rises to his mem- ory the marble column, sublime in its simple grandeur, and fitly intended to reach a loftier height than any similar structure on the surface of the whole earth. Let the votive offerings of his grate- ful countrymen be freely contributed to carry this monument higher and still higher. May I say, as on another occa- sion, " Let it rise; let it rise till it meet the sun in his coming; let the earliest light of the morning gild it, and parting day linger and play on its summit! " Fellow-citizens, wdiat contemplations are awakened in our minds as we assem- ble here to re-enact a scene like that performed by "Washington ! Methinks I see his venerable form -now before me, as presented in the glorious statue by Houdon, now in the Capitol of Virginia. He is dignified and grave; but concern and anxiety seem to soften the linea- ments of his countenance. The govern- ment over which he presides is yet in the crisis of experiment. Not free from troubles at home, he sees the world in commotion and in arms all around him. He sees that imposing foreign powers are half disposed to try the strength of the recently established American gov- ernment. We perceive that mighty thoughts, mingled with fears as well as with hopes, are struggling within him. He heads a short procession over these then naked fields; he crosses yonder stream on a fallen tree; he ascends to the top of this eminence, whose original oaks of the forest stand as thick around him as if the spot had been devoted to Druidical worship, and here he performs the appointed duty of the day. And now, fellow-citizens, if this vis- ion were a reality; if Washington actu- ally were now amongst 11-. and if he could draw around him the shades of the great public men of his own day, patriots and warriors, orators and states- men, and weir to address us in their presence, would he not say to us: "Ye men of this generation, 1 rejoice and thank God for being able to see that our labors and toils and sacrifices were not in vain. You are prosperous, you are THE ADDITION TO THE C M'l l"l. 658 happy, you are grateful; the fire of lib- erty burns brightly and steadily in your hearts, \\ bile di i v and the i \w re strain it from bursting forth in wild and destructive conflagration. Cherish liberty, as you love it; cherish its secu- rities, as you wish to preserve it. Main- tain the Constitution which we labored so painfully to establish, and which has been to yon such a source of inestima- ble blessings. Preserve the union of the States, cemented as it was by our prayers, our tears, and our blood. lie true to God, to your country, and to your duty. So shall the whole Eastern world follow the morning sun to con- template you as a nation; so shall all generations honor you, as they honor us; and so shall that Almighty Power ■which so graciously protected us, and which now protects you, shower its everlasting blessings upon you and your posterity." Great Father of your Country! we heed your words; we feel their force as if you now uttered them with lips of flesh and blood. Your example teaches us, your affectionate addresses teach us, your public life teaches us, your sense of the value of the blessings of the Union. Those blessings our fathers have tasted, and we have tasted, and still taste. Nor do we intend that those who come after us shall be denied the same high fruition. Our honor as well as our happiness is concerned. We can- not, we dare not, we will not, betray our sacred trust. We will not filch from posterity the treasure placed in our hands to be transmitted to other generations. The bow that gilds the clouds in the heavens, the pillars that uphold the firmament, may disappear and fall away in the hour appointed by the will of God; but until thai day comes, or so long as our lives may last, no ruthless hand shall undermine that bright arch of Union and Liberty which spans the continent from Washington to California. Fellow-citizens, we must sometimes be tolerant to folly, and patient at the sight of the extreme waywardness of men; but I confess that, when I reflect "ii the ien,,\\ n of our pasl history, on our presenl prosperity and great i and on w hat i he Eul are hath yet to un- fold, and w ben I Bee that there are men who ran find iii all this nothing g I, nothing valuable, nothing trulj glorious, I feel thai all their reason has fled away from them, and lefl tl ut ire conl rol over their judgment and their actions to insanity and fanaticism; and i *e than all, felloe -cil izens, it' the purp of fanatics and disunionists Bhould be accomplished, the patriotic and intelli- gent of our generation would seek to hide themselves from the scorn of the world, and go about to find dishonorable graves. Fellow-citizens, take courage; be of good cheer. We shall come to no Buch ignoble end. We shall live, and not die. During the period allotted to oar several lives, we shall continue to re- joice in the return of this anniversary. The ill-omened sounds of fanaticism will be hushed; the ghastly spectres of Secession and Disunion will disappear; and the enemies of united i stitutional liberty, if their hatred cannot be ap- peased, may prepare to have their eye- balls seared as they behold the steady flight of the American eagle, on his burnished wings, for years and years to come. President Fillmore, it is your singu- larly good fortune to perform an act such as that which the earliest of your predecessors performed fifty-eighl years ago. Von stand where lie stood; you lay your hand on the corner-stone of a building designed greatly to extend that whose corner-stone he laid. Changed, changed is every thing around. The same sun, indeed, shone upon his bead which now shines upon yours. The same broad river rolled at his feet, and bathes his la>t re-ting-place, that now mils at yours. I'.nt the site of this city was then mainly an open held. Streets and avenues have since been laid out and completed, squares and public grounds enclosed and ornamented, until the city which bears his name, although com- paratively inconsiderable in numbers and wealth, has become quite tit to be G54 THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITOL. the seat of government of a great and united people. Sir, may the consequences of the duty which you perform so auspiciously to- day, equal those which flowed from his act. Nor this only ; may the principles of your administration, and the wisdom of your political conduct, be such, as that the world of the present day, and all history hereafter, maybe at no Loss to ] ereeive what example you have made your study. Fellow-citizens, I now bring this ad- dress to a close, by expressing to you, in the words of the great Roman orator, llic deepest wish of my heart, and which I know dwells deeply in the hearts of all who hear me: " Duo modo ha;c opto; unum, UT MORIEXS POPULUM Romanum libekum relinquam; hoc mill i ma jus a diis immortalibus dari nihil potest: alteram, ut ita cuique eveniat, ut de republics quisque mereatur." And now, fellow-citizens, with hearts void of hatred, envy, and malice towards our own countrymen, or any of them, or lowards the subjects or citizens of other governments, or towards any member of the great family of man ; but exult- ing, nevertheless, in our own peace, se- curity, and happiness, in the grateful remembrance of the past, and the glo- rious hopes of the future, let us return to our homes, and with all humility and devotion offer our thanks to the Father of all our mercies, political, social, and religious. Arrux i) ix. IMPRESSMENT. Mr. Webster to Lord Ashburton. Department of State. Washington, August 8, 1842. My Lord, — We have had several con- versations on the subject of impressment, but I do not understand that your Lordship lias instructions from your government to negotiate upon it, nor dor- the government of the United States see any utility in opening such negotiation, unless the Brit- ish government is prepared to renounce the practice in all future wars. No cause lias produced to so great an extent, and for so long a period, disturbing and irritating influences on the political re- lations of the United States and England, as the impressment of seamen by British cruisers from American merchant-vessels. From the commencement of the French Revolution to the breaking out of the war between the two countries in 1812, hardly a year elapsed without loud complaint and earnest remonstrance. A deep feeling of opposition to the right claimed, and to the practice exercised under it, and not unfre- quently exercised without the least regard to what justice and humanity would have dictated, even if the right itself had been admitted, took possession of the public mind of America, and this feeling, it is well known, co-operated most powerfully with other causes to produce the state of hostilities which ensued. At different periods, both before and since the war, negotiations have taken place between the two governments, with the hope of finding some means of quiet- ing these complaints. At some times, the effectual abolition of the practice has been requested and treated of ; at other times, its temporary suspension ; and at other times, again, the limitation of its exercise, and gome security against its enormous abuses A common destiny has attended these efforts; tin/ have all failed. The ques- tion stand- at this moment where it stood fifty years ago. The oearesl approach to a settlement was a convention proposed in 1803, and which had come to the point of signature, win n it was broken off in eon- sequence of the British governmeii t insist- ing that the narrowsecu should be expressly excepted out of the sphere over which the contemplated stipulation against impress- ment should extend. The American -Min- ister, Mr. King, regarded this exception as quite inadmissible, and chose rather to abandon the negotiation than to acqui in the doctrine which it proposed to es- tablish. England asserts the right of impressing British subjects, in time of war, out of neutral merchant-vessels, and of deciding by her visiting officers who, among the crews of such merchant-vessels, are British subjects. She asserts this as a legal exer- cise of the prerogative of the crown ; which prerogative is alleged to be founded on the English law of the perpetual and indis- soluble allegiance of the subject, and his obligation under all circumstances, and for hi- whole life, to render military service to the crown whenever required. This statement, made in the words of eminent British jurists, shows at once that the English claim is far broader than the basis or platform on which it is raised. The law relied on is English law ; the obli- gations insisted on tire obligations existing between the crown of England and its sub- jects. This law and these obligations, it is admitted, may be such as England may choose they shall be. But then they must be confined to the parties. Impressment of seamen out of and beyond English ter- ritory, and from on board the ships of other nations, is an Interference with the rights of other nation-: i- further, there- fore, than English prerogative can legally 656 APPENDIX. extend; and is nothing but an attempt to enforce the peculiai law of England be- yond the dominions and jurisdiction of the crown. The claim asserts an extra-terri- torial authority for the law of British pre- rogative, and assumes to exerciBe this extra- territorial authority, to the manifest injury and annoyance of the citizens and subjects of other states, on board their own vessels, on the high seas. Every merchant-vessel on the seas is rightfully considered as part of the terri- tory of the country to which it belongs. The entry, therefore, into such vessel, be- ing neutral, by a belligerent, is an act of force, and is, prima facie, a wrong, a tres- pass, which can be justified only when done for some purpose allowed to form a suffi- cient justification by the law of nations. Put a Pritish cruiser enters an American merchant-vessel in order to take therefrom supposed Pritish subjects ; offering no jus- tification, therefore, under the law of na- tions, but claiming the right under the law of England respecting the king's preroga- tive. This cannot be defended. English soil, English territory, English jurisdiction, is the appropriate sphere for the operation of English law. The ocean is the sphere of the law of nations; and any merchant- vessel on the seas is by that law under the protection of the laws of her own nation, and may claim immunity, unless in cases in which that law allows her to be entered or visited. If this notion of perpetual allegiance, and the consequent power of the preroga- tive, was the law of the world ; if it formed part of the conventional code of nations, and was usually practised, like the ritrlit ays an authority not unknown or unregarded on either side of the Atlantic, " we speak of the right of a state to bind its own native subjects everywhere, we speak only of its own claim and exercise of sovereignty over them when they return within its own ter- ritorial jurisdiction, and not of its right to compel or require obedience to such laws, on the part of other nations, within their own territorial sovereignty. On the con- trary, every nation has an exclusive right to regulate persons and things within its own territory, according to its sovereign will and public polity." The good sense of these principles, their remarkable pertinency to the subject now under consideration, and the extraordinary consequences resulting from the Pritish doc- trine, are signally manifested by that which we see taking place every day. England acknowledges herself overburdened with population of the poorer classes. Every instance of the emigration of persons of those classes is regarded by her as a bene- fit. England, therefore, encourages emi- gration ; means are notoriously supplied to emigrants, to assist their conveyance, from public funds; and the New World, and most especially these United States, receive the many thousands of her subjects thus ejected from the bosom of their native land by the necessities of their condition. They come away from poverty and distress in over-crowded cities, to seek employment, comfort, and new homes in a country of free institutions, possessed by a kindred race, speaking their own language, and having laws and usages in many respects like those to which they have been accus- tomed ; and a country which, upon the whole, is found to possess more attractions for persons of their character and condi- tion than any other on the face of the globe. It is stated that, in the quarter of the year ending with dune last, more than twenty-six thousand emigrants left the sin- pie port of Liverpool tor the United states, being four or Ave t inns, as many as left the same port within the same period for the [MPRESSMENT. 657 British colonies and all other parts of t ho world. Of these crowds <>t' emigrants, ma n \ arrive in mi!- cities in circumstances of great destitution, and the charities of the country, both public and private, are severely taxed to relieve' their Immediate wants. In time they mingle with the new community in which they find themselves, ami seek means ot' living. Some find em ploy men t in the cities, others go to the frontiers, to cultivate lands reclaimed from tin 1 forest ; and a greater or less number of the residue, becoming iii time naturalized Citizens, enter into the merchant service under the flag of their adopted country. Now, my Lord, if war should break out between England and a European power, can any thing he more unjust, any thing more irreconcilable to the genera] senti- ments of mankind, than that England should seek out these persons, thus en- COUraged by her and compelled by their own condition to leave their native homes, tear them away from their new employ- ments, their new political relations, and their domestic connections, and force them to undergo the dangers and hardships of military service for a country which lias thus ceased to he their own country ! Cer- tainly, certainly, my Lord, there can be but one answer to this question. Is it not far more reasonable that England should either prevent such emigration of her subjects, or that, if she encourage and promote it, she should leave them, not to the embroilment of a double and contradictory allegiance, but to their own voluntary choice, to form such relations, political or social, as they see fit, in the country where they are to find their bread, and to the laws and insti- tutions of which they are to look for de- fence and protection 1 A question of such serious importance ought now to be put at rest. If the United States give shelter and protection to those whom the policy of England annually casts upon their shores, — if, by the benign in- fluences of their government and institu- tions, and by the happy condition of the country, those emigrants become raised from poverty to comfort, finding it easy even to become landholders, and being allowed to partake in the enjoyment of all civil rights, — if all this may be done, land all this is done, under the countenance and encouragement of England herself,) is it not high time that, yielding that which had its origin in feudal ideas as inconsistent cially with the Intercourse and relations subsisting between the Old vVorld and the \i w , England should at length formally disclaim all righl to the of such persons, and renounce all control over their conduct ' Bui Impressment ii Bubjecl to objections of a much wider range. It it could be justified in its application to those who are declari d to be it- onlj objects, it still re- mains true that, in its exercise, it touches the political rights of other governments, and endangers the security of their own native subjects and citizens. The sover- eignty of the Btate is concerned in maintain- ing its exclusive jurisdiction and possession over its merchant ships on the seas, except so far as the law of nations justifies in- trusion upon that |i ■-inn tor special pur- poses; and all experience has shown, that no member of a crew, wherever horn, is safe against impressment when a ship is visited. The evils and injuries resulting from the actual practice can hardly he overstated, and have ever proved themselves to I.,- such as should had to it- relinquishment, even if it were founded in any defensible principle. The difficulty of discriminating between English subjects and American citizens has always been found to he great, even when an honest purpose of discrimination has existed. But the lieutenant of a man-of- war, having necessity for men, is apt to he a summary judge, and his decisions will he quite as significant of his own wants and his own power as of the truth and justice of the case. An extract from a letter of Mr. King, of the loth of April, 17'.»7. to the American Secretary of State, shows some- thing of the enormous extent of these wrong- ful seizures. " Instead of a few, and these in many in- stances equivocal cases, 1 have," says he, "since the month of duly past, made appli- cation for the discharge from British men- of-war of two hundred and Beventy-one seamen, who, Btating themselves to be American-, havi claimed my interference. Of this number, eighty-six have been or- dered by the Admiralty to in- discharged, thirty-seven more have been detained as British suhjeets or as American volunt or for want of proof that they are Amer- icans, and to my applications for the dis- charge of the remaining one hundred and forty-eight 1 have received no answer; the ship.- on board of which thi Be -■amen were with the present state of societv, and espe- detained having, in many instances, sailed 42 <;:,x APPEND] X. In fur.' an examination was made in conse- quence of my application. "It is certain that some of those who have applied to me are not American cit- izens, hut the exceptions are, in my opinion, few, and the evidence', exclusive of certifi- cates, has been such as, in most cases, to satisfy ine that the applicants were real Americans, who have been forced into the British service, and who, with singular con- stancy, have generally persevered in refus- ing pay or bounty, though in some instances they have been in service more than two 3 ear-." But the injuries of impressment are by no means confined to its immediate sub- jects, or the individuals on whom it is prac- tised. Vessels suffer from the weakening of their crews, ami voyages are often de- layed, and not imfrequently broken up, by subtraction from the number of necessary hands by impressment. .And what is of still greater and mure general moment, the fear of impressment lias been found to cre- ate great difficulty in obtaining sailors for the American merchant service in times of European war. Seafaring men, otherwise inclined to enter into that service, are, as experience has shown, deterred by the fear of finding themselves erelong in compulsory military service in British ships of war. Many instances have occurred, fully estab- lished by proof, in which raw seamen, na- tives of the United States, fresh from the fields of agriculture, entering for the first time on shipboard, have been impressed be- fore they made the land, placed on the decks of British men-of-war, and compelled to serve for years before they could ob- tain their release, or revisit their country and their homes. Such instances become known, and their effect in discouraging young men from engaging in the merchant service of their country can neither be doubted nor wondered at. More than all, my Lord, the practice of impressment, when- ever it has existed, has produced, not con- ciliation and good feeling, but resentment, exasperation, and animosity between the two great commercial countries of the world. In the calm and quiet which have suc- led the late war, a condition so favor- able for dispassionate consideration, Eng- land herself has evidently seen the harsli He-- of impressment, even when exercised on seamen in her own merchant Bervice, and she has adopted measures calculated, if not to renounce the power or to abolish the practice, yet at least to supersede its necessity by other means of maiming the royal navy more compatible with justice and the rights of individuals, and far more conformable to the spirit and sentiments of the age. Under these circumstances, the govern- ment of the 1'nited States has used the oc- casion of your Lordship's pacific mission to review this whole subject, and to bring it to your notice and that of your govern- ment. It has reflected on the past, pon- dered the condition of the present, and endeavored to anticipate, so far as might be in its power, the probable future; and I am now to communicate to your Lordship the result of these deliberations. The American government, then, is pre- pared to say that the practice of impressing seamen from American vessels cannot here- after he allowed to take place. That prac- tice is founded on principles which it does not recognize, and is invariably attended by consequences so unjust, so injurious, and of such formidable magnitude, as cannot be submitted to. In the early disputes between the two governments on this so long contested topic, the distinguished person to whose hands were first intrusted the seals of this depart- ment l declared, that " the simplest rule will be, that the vessel being American shall be evidence that the seamen on board are such." Fifty years' experience, the utter failure of many negotiations, and a careful reconsid- eration, now had. of the whole subject, at a moment when the passions are laid, and no present interest or emergency exists to bias the judgment, have fully convinced this government that this is not only the simplest and best, but the only rule, which can be adopted and observed, consistently with the rights and honor of the United States and the security of their citizens. That rule announces, therefore, what will hereafter be the principle maintained by their government. In every regularly doc- umented American merchant-vessel the crew who navigate it will find their protection in the flag w Inch is over them. This announcement is not made, my Lord, to revive useless recollections of the past, nor to stir the embers from tires which have been, in a great degree, smothered by many years of peace. Far otherwise. lis purpose is to extinguish those fires effectu- ally, before new incidents arise to fan them into flame. The communication is in the 1 Mr. Jefferson. IMPRESSMEN I 659 spirit (if peace, and for the sake of peace, and springs from ;i deep and conscientious conviction thai high Interests of both aa tions require this so long contested and con- troverted Bubjecl now to be Anally put to rest. 1 persuade myself that you will do justice to this frank and sincere avowal of motives, and that you will communicate your sentiments in this respect t" your gOV- ernment. This letter closes, my Lord, on inv part, our official correspondence; and I gladly use tin' occasion to offer yon the assurance of my high and sincere regard. 1 ) vNiicr. Wi.nsi i i;. Lord Ashburtox, &c, &c, &c. Lord Ashburton to J// - . Webster. Washington, August 9, 1842. Sir, — The note yon did me the honor of addressing me the 8th instant, on the sub- ject of impressment, shall be transmitted without delay to my government, and will, you may be assured, receive' from them the deliberate attention which its importance d< serves. The object of my mission was mainly the settlement of existing subjects of differ- ence; and no differences have or could have arisen of late years with respect to impressment, because the practice has, since the peace, wholly ceased, and cannot, con- sistently wi.h existing laws and regulations for manning her Majesty's navy, be, under the present circumstances, renewed. Desirous, however, of looking far for- ward into futurity to anticipate even possi- ble causes of disagreement, and sensible of the anxiety of the American people on this grave subject of past irritation, I should be sorry in any way to discourage the attempt at some settlement of it; and, although without authority to enter upon it here dur- ing the limited continuance of my mission, I entertain a confident hope that this task may be accomplished, when undertaken with the spirit of candor and conciliation which has marked all our late negotiations. It not being our intention to endeavor now to come to any agreement on this sub- ject, I may be permitted to abstain from noticing at length your very ingenious ar- guments relating to it, and from discussing the graver matters of constitutional and international law growing out of them. These sufficiently show that the question is one requiring calm consideration ; though I must, at the Mme time, admit that thev prove a strong necessity of some settlement for the preservation of that good under- standing which, l trust, we maj flatter our- selves that our joint labors have now me ceeded in establishing. I am well aware that the law - of our two Countries maintain opposite principles re- apecting allegiance to the sovereign. Amer- ica, receiving ever\ year by thousands the emigrants of Europe, maintain- the doc- trine suitable to her condition, of the right of transferring allegiance at will, law -oft treat Britain have maintained from all time ill.- opposite doctrine. The duties of allegiance are held to be indefeasible ; and it is believed that this doctrine, under various modifications, prevails iii most, if not in all, the civilized states of Europe. Emigration, the modern i le by which the populati f the world peaceably finds its level, is for the benefit of all, and emi- nently for the benefil of humanity. The fertile deserts of America are gradually ad- vancing to the highest state of cultivation and production, while tin emigrant acquires comfort which his ow n confined home could not alTord him. If there were any thing in our laws or our practice on either side tending to im- pede this march of providential humanity, we could not be too eager to provide a remedy; but as this does not appear to be the case, we may safely leave this part of the subject without indulging in abstract speculations having no material practical application to matters in discussion be- tween us. But it must be admitted that a s, rious practical question does arise.or, rather existed, from practices formerly attending the mode of manning the British navy in times of war. The principle is, that all subjects of the crown are. in case of qi sity, bound to serve their country, and the seafaring man is naturally taken for the naval service. This is not. as is » times supposed, any arbitrary principle of mon- archical government, but one founded on the natural duty of every man to defend the life of his country : and all the analogy of your laws would had to the conclusion. that the same principle would hold good in the United States if their geographical posi- tion did not make its application unn< sary. The very anomalous condition of the two countries with relation to each other here creates a serious difficulty. Our pec- 660 APPENDIX. pie are not distinguishable; and, owing to the peculiar habits of sailors, our vessels arc very generally manned from a common Btock. It is difficult, under these circum- stances, to execute laws which at times have been thought to be essential t'<>r the existence of the country, without risk of in- jury toothers. The extent and importance of those injuries, however, are so formida- ble, that it is admitted that some remedy should, if possible, be applied ; at all event-, it must be fairly and honestly attempted. It is true, that during the continuance of peace no practical grievance can arise; but it is also true, that it is for that reason the proper Beason for the calm and deliberate consideration of an important subject. I have much reason to hope that a satisfac- tory arrangement respecting it may be made, so as to set at rest all apprehension and anxiety; and 1 will only further repeat the assurance of the sincere disposition of my government favorably to consider all matters having for their object the promot- ing and maintaining undisturbed kind and friendly feelings with the United States. 1 beg, Sir, on this occasion of closing the correspondence with you connected with my mission, to express the satisfaction I feel at it- successful termination, and to assure you of my high consideration and personal esteem ami regard. ashhukton. Hon. Daniel Wkhsteh, &c, &c, &c. THE RIGHT OF SEARCH. Mr. Webster to Mr. Everett. Department of State. Washington, .March 2S, 1^43 Sin, — I transmit to you with this de- spatch a message from the President of the United States to Congress, communicated on the 27th of February, and accompanied by a report made from this department to the President, of the substance of a de- spatch from Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Fox, which was by him read to me on the 21th ultimo. Lord Aberdeen's despatch, as you will perceive, was occasioned by a passage in tin- President's message to Congress at the opening of its late session. The particular passage is not stated by his Lordship; but no mistake will be committed, it is pre- sumed, in considering it to be thai which was quoted by sir Robert Peel and other gentlemen in the debate in the House of Common-, on the answer to the Queen's -pe, eh, on the 3d of IYhrua ry . The President regrets that it should have become n< cessary to hold a diplomatic cor- respondence upon the Subject of a commu- nication from tin 1 head of the executive government to the legislature, drawing after it, a- in this case, the further necessity of referring to observations made by persons in high and responsible station-, in debates ot public hodies. Such a necessity, how- in- to he unav oidably inclined in consequence of Lord Aberdeen's despatch; for, although the President's recant message may he regarded as a (dear exposition of hi- opinions on the subject, yet a just re- spect for her .Majesty's government, and a disposition to meet all questions with promptness, as well as with frankness and candor, require that a formal answer should be made to that despatch. The words in the messa-xp at the opening of the session which are complained of, it is supposed, are the following : "Although Lord Aberdeen, in his correspondence with tin- American envoys at London, expressly disclaimed all right to detain an American ship on the high Mas, even if found with a cargo of slaves on board, and restricted the British pretension to a mere claim to visit and inquire, yet it could not well be dis- cerned by the Executive of the United States how such visit and inquiry could be made without detention on the voyage, and consequent interruption to the trade. It was regarded as the righl of search, pre- sented only in a new form and expressed in differi n1 words ; and 1 therefore fell it to he my duty distinctly to declare, in my an- nual message to Congress, that no Buch con- on could he made, and that the United States hail both the will and the ability to enforce their own law-, ami to protect their flag from being used for purposes wholly forbidden by those laws, am! obnoxious to the moral censure of the world." THE KIGHT OF SEARCH. 661 This statement would tend, as Lord Aber- deen tliinks, to convey the supposition, not only that the question of the right of search had been disavowed by the British pleni- potentiary al Washington, but that Great Britain had made concessions on that point Lord Aberdeen is entirely correct in say- ing that the claim of a right of search was not discussed during the late negotiation, ami that neither was any concession re- quired by this government, nor made by that of her Britannic Majesty. The eighth and ninth articles of the treaty of Washington constitute a mutual stipulation for concerted efforts to abolish the African slave trade. The stipulation, it may be admitted, lias no other effects on tlie pretensions of either party than this: Great Britain had claimed as a right that which this government could not admit to be a right, and, in the exercise of a just and proper spirit of amity, a mode was resorted to winch might render unnecessary both the assertion and the denial of such claim. There probably are those who think that what Lord Aberdeen calls a right of visit, and which he attempts to distinguish from the right of search, ought to have been ex- pressly acknowledged by the government of the United States. At the same time, there are those on the other side who think that the formal surrender of such right of visit should have been demanded by the United States as a precedent condition to the negotiation for treaty stipulations on the subject of the African slave-trade. Rut the treaty neither asserts the claim in terms, nor denies the claim in terms; it neither formally insists upon it, nor formally re- nounces it. Still, the whole proceeding shows that the object of the stipulation was to avoid such differences and disputes as had already arisen, and the serious prac- tical evils and inconveniences which, it can- not be denied, are always liable to result from the practice which Great Britain had asserted to be lawful. These evils and in- conveniences had been acknowledged by both governments. They had been such as to cause much irritation, and to threaten to disturb the amicable sentiments which pre- vailed between them. Both governments were sincerely desirous of abolishing the slave-trade; both governments were equally desirous of avoiding occasion of complaint by their respective citizens and Bubji and both governments regarded the eighth and ninth articles as effectual tor their avowed purpose, and likely, at the same , time, to preset i e all fri< ndlj relations, and to lake away causes ol ruture individual complaints Thetreatj of Washington was intended to fulfil the obligations enti into by the ir. atj ><\ < Ihent It standi by itself; is clear and intelligible. It speaks it- own language, and manifests it- own purpose. It ni eds no interpretation, and requires no c mi m. A- a fact, as an im- portant occurrence in national intercourse, it may have important bearing existing questions respecting the public law ; ami individuals, or perhaps governments, may not agree as to w hat thc.-e In nil; are. (iieat Britain has discussions, if not controversies, with other great European Statt - upon the subject of visit or >i anh. I'll' -i- state- will naturally make their OWH commentary on the treaty of Washington, and draw their own inferences from the fact that such a treaty has been entered into. Its stipulations, in the mean time, are plain, explicit, and >a I i-l aetory to both parties, and will be fulfilled on the part of the United States, and, it is not doubted, on the part of Great Britain also, with the ut most good faith. Holding this to be the true character of the treaty, 1 might, perhaps, excuse myself from entering into the consideration of the grounds of that claim of a right to visit merchant-ships for certain purposes, in time of peace, which Lord Aberdeen asserts lor the British government, and declares that it can never surrender. lint 1 deem it right, nevertheless, and no more than justly re- spectful toward the British government, not to leave the point without remark. In his recent message to Congress, the President, referring to the language of Lord Aberdeen in his note to Mr. Everett of the 20th of December, 1841, and in his late despatch to Mr. FoX, Bays: "These declarations may well lead us to doubt whether the apparent difference between the two gover etits is not rather one of definition than of principle." Lord Aberdeen, in his note to \ on of the 20th of l tecember, >a_\ - . " The undersigned again renounces, as he has already done in the most explicit ti rni-. any right OH the part of the British government to search American vessels in time of peace. The right of Bearch, except when specially eon- ceded by treaty, is a pure belligerent right, and can have no existence on the high sea- during peace. The undersigned apprehends, however, that the right of search i> not confined to the verification 6G2 APPENDIX. of tlie nationality of the vessel, but also extends to the objeet of the voyage ami the nature of the cargo. The sole pur- pose of the British cruisers is to ascertain whether the vessels they meet with are really American or not. The right asserted has, in truth, no resemblance to the right of search, cither in principle or practice. It is simply a right to satisfy the party who has a legitimate interest in knowing the truth, that the vessel actually is what her colors announce. This right we concede as freely as we exercise. The British cruisers are not instructed to detain American vessels under any circumstances whatever; on the con- trary, they are ordered to abstain from all interference with them, be they slavers or otherwise. But where reasonable suspicion exists that the American flag has been abused for the purpose of covering the vessel of another nation, it would appear scarcely credible, had it not been made manifest by the repeated protestations of their representative, that the government of the United States, which has stigma- tized and abolished the trade itself, should object to the adoption of such means as are indispensably necessary for ascertaining the truth." And in his recent despatch to Mr. Fox his Lordship further says: "That the Presi- dent might be assured that Great Britain would always respect the just claims of tin' United States. That the British gov- ernment made no pretension to interfere in any manner whatever, either by detention, visit, or search, with vessels of the United States, known or believed to be such, but thai it still maintained, and would exercise when necessary, its own right to ascertain the genuineness of any flag which a sus- pected vessel might bear; that if, in the ex- ercise of this right, cither from involuntary error, or in spite of every precaution, loss or injury should be sustained, a prompt reparation would be afforded; but that it should entertain, for a single instant, the notion of abandoning the right itself, would be quite impossible." This, then, is the British claim, as asserted by her Majesty's government. In hi- remarks in the speech already re- ferred to, in the House of Commons, the first minister of the crown >aid : " There i- nothing more distinct than the righl of visit i- from the right of search. Search is a belligerent right, and not to be exercised in time of peace, except when it has been conceded by treaty. The right of Bearch extends not only to the vessel, but to the cargo also. The right of visit is quite dis- tinct from this, though the two are often confounded. The right of search, with re- spect to American vessels, we entirely and utterly disclaim ; nay, more, if we knew that an American vessel were furnished with all the materials requisite for the slave-trade, if we knew that the decks were prepared to receive hundreds of hu- man beings within a Bpace in which life is almost impossible, still we should be bound to let that American vessel pass on. But the right we claim is to know whether a vessel pretending to lie American, and hoisting the American Hag, be bona fide American." The President's message is regarded as holding opinions in opposition to these. The British government, then, supposes that the right of visit and the right of search are essentially distinct in their nature, and that this difference is well known and gen- erally acknowledged ; that the difference be- tween them consists in their different ob- jects and purposes : one, the visit, having for its object nothing but to ascertain the nationality of the vessel ; the other, the search, by an inquisition, not only into the nationality of the vessel, but the nature and object of her voyage, and the true ownership of her cargo. The government of the United States, on the other hand, maintains that there is no such well-known and acknowledged, nor, indeed, any- broad and generic difference between what has been usually called visit, and what has been usually- called search; that the right of visit, to be effectual, must come, in the end, to include Bearch ; and thus to exercise, in peace, an authority which the law of nations only allows in times of war. If such well-known distinc- tion exists, where are the proofs of it? What writers of authority on public law, what adjudications in courts of admiralty, what public treaties, recognize it? No such recognition has presented itself to the gov- ernment of the United States; but, on the contrary.it understands that public writers, courts of law, and solemn treaties have, for two centuries, used the words " visit " and "search" in the same sense. What Great Britain and the United States mean by the "right of search," in its broadest sense, 18 called by Continental writers and jurists by no other name than the " right of visit." Visit, therefore, as it has been understood, implies not only a right to inquire into the national character, but to detain the vessel, THE KicilT OF BE \i;ni G63 to stop the progress of the voyage, to ex- amine papers, to decide on th< Lr regularity and authenticity, and i<> make inquisition on board for i nnin 's property, and into 1 1 1 * ■ business which the vessel is engaged in. In other words, it describes the entire right of belligerent visitation and Bearch. Such a rightis justlj disclaimed bj the British gov- ernment in time of peace. They, neverthe- less, insist mi a right which they denominate a right ut' visit, and by that word describe the claim which they assert It is proper, ami due tu the importance and delicacy of the questions involved, to take care that, in discussing them, both governments under stand the terms which may be used in the Bame sense. If, indeed, it should be mani- fest that the difference between the parties is only verbal, it might be hoped that no harm would be done; but the government of the United States thinks itself not justly chargeable with excessive jealousy, or with too great scrupulosity in the use of words, in insisting on its opinion that there is no Buch distinction as the British government maintains between visit and search ; and that there is no right to visit in time of peace, except in the execution of revenue laws or other municipal regulations, in which cases the right is usually exercised near the coast, or within the marine league, or where the vessel is justly suspected of violating the law of nations by piratical aggression ; but, wherever exercised, it is a right of search. Nor can the United States government agree that the term " right " is justly ap- plied to such exercise of power as the Brit- ish government thinks it indispensable to maintain in certain cases. The right as- serted is a right to ascertain whether a merchant-vessel is justly entitled to the protection of the flag which she may hap- pen to have hoisted, such vessel being in circumstances which render her liable to the suspicion, first, that she is not entitled to the protection of the Hag; and secondly, that, if not entitled to it, she is, either by the law of England, as an English vessel, or under the provisions of treaties with certain European powers, subject to tin- supervision and search of British cruisers. And yet Lord Aberdeen says, " that if, in the exercise of this right, either from invol- untary error, or in spite of every precau- tion, loss or injury should be sustained, a prompt reparation would be afforded." It is not easy to perceive how these con- sequences can be admitted justly to flow from tlu' fair ex( rclse of a clear right. U injury be produci d by the exerciai ol ■ right, it would seem strange that it should paired, as it it had been the effi cl « > t a wrongful act. The general rule of law certainly is, that, in the proper and prudent exercisi ol his own nuht. n te is answer- able for undesigni d injurii - it may be said that the right is a qualified right; that ii is a right to do certain acts of force at the risk of turning out to be wrong di and of being made answerable for all dam- But such an argument would prove c \ 1 1\ trespass to be matter of right, jeet only to just responsibility. If force wi re allowed to Buch reasoning in other cases, it would follow that an individual's right in his own property was hardly more than a w ell founded claim for compensa- tion if he should he deprived of it. Hut compensation is that which is rendered for injury, and is not commutation, or forced equivalent, for acknowledged rights. It implies, at least in it.- general interpretation, the ( imission id' some wrongful act. But, without pressing further these in- quiries into the accuracy and propriety of definitions and the use of words, I proci i d to draw your attention to the thing itself, and to consider what these acts arc which the British government insists its cruisers have a right to perform, and to what con- sequences they naturally and necessarily tend. An eminent member of the House of ( lommons ' thus states the British claim, and his statement is acquiesced in and adopt- ed by the first minister of the crown: — "The claim of this country is for the right of our cruisers to ascertain whether a merchant-vessel is justly entitled to the protection of the flag which .-he may hap- pen to have hoisted, 8 uch vessel being in circumstances which rendered her liable to the suspicion, firat, that -lie was not enti- tled to the protection of the (lag ; ami. - ondly, if not entitled to it. -he w a-, either under the law of nation- or the provisions of treaties, subject to the supervision and control of our cruisers." Now the question i-. By what meant i- thi- ascertainment to he effected '. A- we understand the general and Bet- tied rules of public law. in r. apect to -hips of war Bailing under the authority of their government, "to arrest pirates and other public offenders," there i- no reason why tiny may not approach anj vessc 1- descried i Mr. Wood, now >ir i ii.ul.- W I. Chan- cellor ut' lli' i :'li r. 664 APPENDIX. at sea for the purpose of ascertaining their real characters. Such a right of approach smii- Indispensable for the fair and dis- creet exercise of their authority ; and the u>e of it cannot be justly deemed indicative of any design to insult «ir injure those they approach, or to impede them in their law- ful commerce. On the oilier hand, it is as char that no ship is, under such circum- stances, hound to lie by or wait the ap- proach of any other ship. She is at full liberty to pursue her voyage in her own way, and to use all necessary precautions to avoid any suspected sinister enterprise or hostile attack. Her right to the free use of the ocean is as perfect as that of any other ship. An entire equality is pre- sumed to exist. She has a right to consult her own safety, hut at the same time she must take care not to violate the rights of others. She may use any precautions dic- tated by the prudence or fears of her offi- cers, either as to delay, or the progress or course of her voyage; hut she is not at liberty to inflict injuries upon other inno- cent parties simply because of conjectural dangers. But if the vessel thus approached at- tempts to avoid the vessel approaching, or does not comply with her commander's or- der to send him her papers for his inspec- tion, nor consent to he visited or detained, what is next to he done ? Is force to be used? And if force he used, may that force be lawfully repelled ! These ques- tions had at once to the elemental prin- ciple, the essence of the British claim. Suppose the merchant-vessel be in truth an American vessel engaged in lawful com- merce, ami that she does not choose to be detained. Suppose she resists the visit. What is the consequence ? In all cases in which the belligerent right of visit exists, r< sistance to the exercise of that rii^lit is regarded as just cause of condem- nation, both of vessel and cargo. Is that penalty, or what other penalty, to be in- curred by resistance to visit in time of peace ! Or Buppose that force he met by force, gun returned for gun, and the com- mander of the cruiser, or some of Ids sea- men, he killed; what description of offence will have been committed ! It would he said, in behalf of the commander of the cruiser, that he mistook the vessel for a ol I Ingland, Brazil, or Portugal ; hut doe- this mi-take of his take muiiv i tin' American \ . 8Sel the right ol' silt' del. nee ' The writer- of authority declare it to be a principle of natural law, that the privilege of self-defence exists against an assailant who mistakes the object of his attack for another whom he had a right to assail. Lord Aberdeen cannot fail to see, there- fore, what serious consequences might en- sue, if it were to he admitted that this claim to visit, in time of peace, however limited or defined, should he permitted to exist as a strict matter of right ; for if it exist as a right, it 'must he followed by cor- responding duties and obligations, and the failure to fulfil those duties would natu- rally draw penal consequences after it, till erelong it would become, in truth, little less, or little other, than the belligerent right of search. If visit or visitation he not accompanied by search, it will he in most case- merely idle. A sight of papers may lie demanded, and papers may he produced. But it is known that slave-traders carry false papers, and different sets of papers. A search for Other papers, then, must he made where suspicion justifies it, or else the whole pro- ceeding would he nugatory. In suspicious cases, the language and general appearance of the crew are among the means of ascer- taining the national character of the vessel. The cargo on hoard, also, often indicates the country from which she comes. Her log-hooks, showing the previous course and events of her voyage, her internal fitting up ami equipment, are all evidences for her, or against her, on her allegation of charac- ter. These matters, it is obvious, can only be ascertained by rigorous search. It may he asked. If a vessel may not he called on to show her papers, why does she carry papers '. No doubt she may he called on to show her papers ; hut the question is, Where, when, and by whom ! Not in time of peace, on the high seas, where her rights are equal to the rights of any other vessel, and where none has a right to molest her. The use of her papers is, in time of war, to prove her neutrality when visited by bel- ligerent cruisers; and in both peace and war, to show her national character, and the lawfulness of her voyage, in those ports of other countries to which she may pro- ceed for purposes of trade. It appears to the government of the United States, that the view of this whole subject which is the most naturally taken is al-o the mo-t legal, and most in analogy with other cases. British cruisers have a right to detain British merchantmen for THE RIGHT OF SEARCH. 665 certain purposes; and they have a right, acquired by treaty, to detain merchant vessels <>f Beveral other nations for the same purposes. Bu1 they have no right at all to detain an American merchant v> This Lord Aberdeen admits in the fullest manner. Any detention of an American vessel by a British cruiser is therefore a wrong, a trespass; although it maj be done under the belief that she was a Brit- ish vessel, or that she belonged to a nation which had conceded the right of such de- tention to the British cruisers, ami the tres- pass therefore an involuntary trespass. It' a ship of war, in thick weather, or in the darkness of the night, tire upon and sink a neutral vessel, under the belief that she is an enemy's vessel, this is a trespass, a men' wrong; and cannot be said to he an act done under any right, accompanied by re- sponsibility for damages. So if a civil officer on land have process against one individual, and through mistake arrest another, this arrest is wholly tortious; no one would think of Baying that it was done under any lawful exercise of authority, subject only to responsibility, or that it was any thing but a mere trespass, though an unintentional trespass. The municipal law does not undertake to lay down before- hand any rule for the government of such cases ; and as little, in the opinion of the government of the United States, does the public law of the world lay down before- hand any rule for the government of cases of involuntary trespasses, detentions, and injuries at sea; except that in both classes of eases law and reason make a distinction between injuries committed through mis- take and injuries committed by design, the former being entitled to fair and just com- pensation, the latter demanding exemplary damages, and sometimes personal punish- ment. The government of the United States has frequently made known its opin- ion, which it now repeats, that the practice of detaining American vessels, though sub- ject to just compensation if such detention afterward turn out to have been without good cause, however guarded by instruc- tions, or however cautiously exercised, necessarily leads to serious inconvenience and injury. The amount of loss cannot be always well ascertained. Compensation, if it be adequate in the amount, may still necessarily be long delayed; and the pen- dency of such claims always proves trou- blesome to the governments of both coun- tries. These detentions, too, frequently Irritate Individuals, causi warm blood, and produce nothing but ill effects on the ami- cable relations existing between the coun- tries. \\ ,- wish, therefore, to put an end to them, ami to avoid all occasions tor their re c urrence. I In the whole, the govern null t of the United Stales, uhiloit has not conceded a mutual right of \i-it or search, as has been dour by the parties to the quintuple treaty of Decemlier, 1841, does not admit that, by the law and practice of nations, there is any such thing as a righl of visit, distinguished by »'II known rides and definitions from the right of Bearch. li does not admit that visil of Ameri- can merchant vessels b\ British cruisers is founded on any right, notwithstanding the cruiser may suppose such \rss,.| t u be Brit- ish, Brazilian, or Portuguese. We cannot but Bee that the detention and examination of American vessels by British cruisers has already led to consequences, ami fear that, if continued, it would still lead to further Consequences, highly injurious to the law- ful commerce of the United States. At the same time, the government of the United States fully admits that its Sag can give no immunity to pirates, nor to any other than to regularly documented Ameri- can vessels. It was upon this view of the whole case, and with a firm conviction of the truth of these sentiments, that it cheer- fully assumed the duties contained in the treaty of Washington: in the hope that thereby causes id' difficulty and difference might be altogether removed, and that the two powers might be enabled to act con- currently, cordially, and effectually for the suppression of a traffic which both regard as a reproach upon the civilizati f the age, and at war with every principle of humanity and every Christian sentiment. The government of the United St has no interest, nor is it under the influi nee of any opinions, which should had it to de- sire any derogation of the just authority and rights of maritime power. But in the convictions which it entertains, and in the measures which it has adopted, it has been governed solely by a sincere desire to sup- port those principles and those pra which it believes to lie conformable to pub- lic law, and favorable to the peace and harmony of nations Both houses of ( longress, with a remarka- ble degree of unanimity, have mad provisions for carrj ing into effect the eighth article of the treats. An American squad- em APPENDIX. roii will immediately proceed to the coast of Africa. Instructions for its commander are in the course of preparation, ami copies will be furnished to the British govern- ment ; and the President confidently be- lieves, that the cordial concurrence of the two governments in the mode agreed on will be more effectual than any efforts yet made for the suppression of the slave-trade. You will read this despatch to Lord Ab- erdeen, and, if he desire it, give him a copy. 1 am, Sir, &c., &c. Dam i.i, \V MUSTEK. 1 JiWAHD EVERETT, Esq., &C, &C., &C. LETTERS TO GENERAL CASS ON THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. Mr. Webster to General Cass. Department of State, Washington, Augusts, 1842. Sir, — You will see by the enclosed the result of the negotiations lately had in this city between this department and Lord Ash- burton. The treaty has been ratified by tlie President and Senate. In communicating to you this treaty, I am directed by the President to draw your particular attention to those articles which relate to the suppression of the African slave-trade. After full and anxious consideration of this very delicate subject, the government of the United States has come to the con- clusion which you will see expressed in the President's message to the Senate accom- panying the treaty. Without intending or desiring to influ- ence the policy of other governments on this important subject, this government has reflected on what was due to its own char- acter and position, as the leading maritime power on the American continent, left free to make choice of such means for the fulfil- ment of its duties as it should deem best suited to its dignity. The result of its re- flections has been, that it does not concur in measures which, for whatever benevolent purpose they may he adopted, or u itli what- ever care ami moderation they may be ex- ercised, have yet a tendency to place the police of the seas in the hands of a single power. It chooses rather to follow its own laws with its own sanction, and to carry them into execution by its own authority. Disposed to act in the spirit of the most cordial concurrence with other nations for tie- suppression of the African slave trade, that great reproach of our times, it deems it to be right, nevertheless, that this action, though concurrent, should be independent; and it believes that from this independence it will derive a greater degree of efficiency. You will perceive, however, that, in the opinion of this government, cruising against slave-dealers on the coast of Africa is not all which is necessary to be done in order to put an end to the traffic. There are markets for slaves, or the unhappy natives of Africa would not be seized, chained, and carried over the ocean into slavery. These markets ought to be shut. And, in the treaty now communicated to you, the high contracting parties have stip- ulated "that they will unite, in all becom- ing representations and remonstrances, with any and all powers within whose dominions such markets are allowed to exist ; and that they will urge upon all such powers the propriety and duty of closing such markets effectually, at once and for ever." You are furnished, then, with the Ameri- can policy in regard to this interesting subject First, independent but cordially concurrent efforts of maritime states to sup- press, us far as possible, the trade on the coast, by means of competent and well- appointed squadrons, to watch the shores and scour the neighboring seas. Secondly, concurrent, becoming remonstrance with all governments who tolerate within their ter- ritories markets for the purchase of African negroes. There is much reason to believe that, if other states, professing equal hos- tility to this nefarious traffic, would give their own powerful concurrence and co- operation to these remonstrances, the gen- eral effect would he satisfactory, and that the Cupidity and crimes of individuals would at length cease to find both their temp- tation and their reward in the bosom of LETTERS ON THE TREATT OF WASHINGTON. 667 Christian states, and in the permission of Christian governments. It will still remain for each government to n \ rise, execute, and make more effectual its own municipal laws against its subjects , or citizens alio shall be concerned in, or in any way give aid or countenance to others concerned in this traffic. You are at liberty to make the contents of this despatch known to the French gov- ernment. I have, &c. Dam i.r, WbBBTEB. Lewis Cass, Esq., &c, &c., &c. Mr. F. Webster to General Cuss. Department of State, Washington, October 11, 1842. Sir. — I have to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the 17th of September last, requesting permission to return home. I have submitted the despatch to the Pres- ident, and am by him directed to say, that although he much regrets that your own wishes should, at this time, terminate your mission to the court of France, where for a long period you have rendered your coun- try distinguished service, in all instances to its honor and to the satisfaction of the gov- ernment, and where you occupy so favor- able a position, from the more than ordi- nary good intelligence which is understood to subsist between you, personally, and the members of the French government, and from the esteem entertained for you by its illustrious head; yet he cannot refuse your request to return once more to your home and your country, so that you can pay that attention to your personal and private af- fairs which your long absence and constant employment in the service of your govern- ment may now render most necessary. I have. Sir, to tender you, on behalf of the President, his most cordial good wishes, and am, &c. Fletcher Webster, Acting Secretary of State. Lewis Cass, Esq., &c, &c, &c. Mr. Webster to General Cass. Department of State, Washington, November 14, 1842. Sir, — I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the 3d of October, brought by the "Great Western," which arrived at New York on the 6th in- stant. It Is probable you will have embarked for the I nited States I" fore my communication can now reach yon; but ai it is thought proper that your letter should be answered, and as circumstances maj i ibly have occurred to delaj your departure, this will be transmitted to Paris in the ordinarj way. Tour letter has caused the President con- siderable concern. Entertaining a lively Bense of the respectable and useful manner in which you have discharged, for several years, the duties of an important foreign mission, it occasions him real regret and pain, that your last official communication should be of Buch a character as that he cannot give to it his entire and cordial ap- probation. It appears to be intended as a sort of pro- test, a remonstrance, in the form of an offi- cial despatch, against a transaction of the government to which you were not a party, in which you had no agency whatever, and for the results of which you were no way answerable. This would Beem an unusual and extraordinary proceeding. In Ibmmon with everj other citizen of the republic, you have an unquestionable right to form opinions upon public transaction-, and the conduct of public men ; but it will hardly be thought to be among either the duties or the priv- ileges of a minister abroad to make formal remonstrances and protests against proceed- ings of the various branches of the govern- ment at home, upon subjects in relation to which he himself has not been charged with any duty or partaken any responsibility. The negotiation and conclusion of the treaty of Washington were in the hands of the President and Senate. They had acted upon this important subject according to their convictions of duty and of the public interest, and had ratified the treaty. It was a thing done; and although your opinion might be at variance with that of the Pres- ident and Senate, it is not perceived that you had anj cause of c plaint, remon- strance, or protest, more than anj other cit- izen who might entertain the same opinion. In your letter of the 17th of September, requesting your recall, you obsen e : " The mail by the steam-packet which left Boston the 1st instant has just arrived, and has brought intelligence of the ratification of the treaties recently concluded with Great Britain. All apprehensions, therefore, of any immediate difficulties with that country are at an end. ami 1 do not see that any piiUio in ten Bt demands my further n -i- dence in Europe. I can no lot 608 APPENDIX. fill lure, and the statu of my private affairs requires mj presence a1 home. Under these circumstances, 1 beg you to submit to the President mj wish for permission to retire from this mission, and to return to the United States without delay." A.8 you appeared at that time not to be acquainted with the provisions <>f the treaty, it was inferred that your desire to return home proceeded from the conviction that, in- asmuch us all appn In nsions ofimnn diatt diffi r- ( aft s with Great Britain were at an end, you would no longer be useful at Paris. Placing this interpretation on your letter, and be- lieving, as you yourself allege, that your long absence abroad rendered it desirable for you to give some attention to your pri- vate affairs in this country, the President lost no time in yielding to your request, and, in doing so, signified to you the senti- ments of approbation which he entertained for your conduct abroad. You may, then, well imagine the great astonishment which the declaration contained in your despatch of the 3d of October, that you could no longer remain in France honorably to your- self or advantageously to the country, and that the proceedings of this government had placed you in a false position, from which you could escape only by returning home, created in his mind. The President perceives not the slightest foundation for these opinions. He cannot see how your usefulness as minister to France should be terminated by the settle- ment of difficulties and disputes between the United States and Great Britain. You ha\ e been charged w ith no duties connected with the settlement of these questions, or in any way relating to them, beyond the com- munication to the French government of the President's approbation of your letter of the 13th of February, written without pre- vious instructions from this department. This government is not informed of any other net or proceeding of yours connected with any part of the subject, nor does it know thai your official conduct and charac- ter have become in any other way connected with the question of the right of search; and that letter having been approved, and the French government having been bo in- formed, the President is altogether at a loss to understand how you can regard yourself as placed in a false position. If the char- acter or conduct of any one was to be af- fected, it could only be tin- character and conducl of the Presidenl himself. The gov- i iniiH hi bag dune nothing, most assuredly, to place you in a false position. Represent- ing your country at a foreign court, you saw a transaction about to take place be- tween the government to which you were accredited and another power, which you thought might have a prejudicial effect on the interest of your own country. Think- ing, as it is to he presumed, that the case was too pressing to wait for instructions, you presented a protest against that trans* action, and our government approved your proceeding. This is your only official con- nection with thi' whole subject, if after this the President had sanctioned the nego- tiation of a treaty, and the Senate had rat- ified it, containing provisions in the highest degree objectionable, however the govern- ment might be discredited, your exemption from all blame and censure would have been complete. Having delivered your let- ter of the 13th of February to the French government, and having received the Pres- ident's approbation of that proceeding, it is most manifest that you could be in no de- gree responsible for what should lie done afterward, and done by others. The Pres- ident, therefore, cannot conceive what par- ticular or personal interest of yours was affected by the subsequent negotiation lure, or how the treaty, the result of that nego- tiation, should put an end to your useful- ness as a public minister at the court of France, or in any way affect your official character or conduct. It is impossible not to see that such a pro- ceeding as you have seen tit to adopt might produce much inconvenience, and even se- rious prejudice, to the public interests. Your opinion is against the treaty, a treaty concluded and formally ratified ; and, to support that opinion, while yet in the ser- vice of the government, you put a construc- tion on its provisions such as your own gov- ernment does not put upon them, such as you must he aware the enlightened public of Europe does not put Upon them, and such as England herself has not put upon them as yet, so far as we know. It may become necessary hereafter to publish your letter, in connection w ith other correspondence of the mission; and al- though it is not to be presumed that you looked to such publication, because such a presumption would impute to you a claim to put forth your private opinions upon the conduct of the President and Senate, in a transaction finished ami concluded, through the imposing form of a public despatch, yetj it' published, it cannot be foreseen how far LETTERS <)N THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON 669 England might hereafter ni\ on your au- thority for a construction favorable to Imt own pretensions, and inconsistent with the interest and honor of the United States. [I i- certain that you would most sedulously desire to avoid any such attitude. You would be slow to express opinions, in a sol emn and official form, favorable to another government, and on the authority of which opinions that other government might here- after found new claims or set u[> new pre- tensions. It is for tins reason, as well as others, that the President feels bo much re- gret at your desire of placing \ our construc- tion of the provisions of the treaty, and your objections to those provisions, accord ing to your construction, upon the records of the government. Before examining the Beveral objections suggested by you, it may be proper to take notice of what you say upon the course of the negotiation. In regard to this, having observed that the national dignity of the United States had not been compromised down to the time of the President's message to the last session of Congress, you proceed to say: "But England then urged the United States to enter into a conventional arrangement, by which we might be pledged to concur with her in measures for the sup- pression of the slave-trade. Till then we had executed our own laws in our own way. But, yielding to this application, and de- parting from our former principle of avoid- ing European combinations upon subjects hot American, we stipulated in a solemn treaty, that we would carry into effect our own laws, and fixed the minimum force we would employ for that purpose." The President cannot conceive how you should have been led to adventure upon such a statement as this. It is but a tissue of mistakes. England did not urge the United States to enter into this conven- tional arrangement. The United States yielded to no application from England. The proposition for abolishing the slave- trade, as it stands in the treaty, was an American proposition ; it originated with the executive government of the United States, which cheerfully assumes all its responsibility. It stands upon it as it- own mode of fulfilling its duties, and ac- complishing its objects. Nor have the United States departed, in this treaty, in the slightest degree, from their former principles of avoiding European combina- tions upon subjects not American, because the abolition of the African slave trade i- an American subject as emphaticallj as it Is .1 European subject ; and indeed moi inasmuch a- the government of the United States took the Brsl great steps in declar- ing that trade unlawful, and in attempting it- extinction. The abolition of this traffic i- an object of the highest interest to the American people and the American govern- ment ; and you - > \n -liair_'el\ to have- over- looked alto-ether the important fact, that nearly thirty years ago, bj the treaty of Ghent, the United state- hound themsi l.\ solemn compact with England, to con- tinue "their efforts to promote its entire abolition," both parties pli dging them* by that treaty to use their besl endeavors to accomplish bo desirable an object Again, you -peak of an important con- cession made t0 the renewed application of England. But the treaty, let it be repeated, make- no concession to England whatever. It complies with no demand, grants no ap- plication, conforms to no request. All these statements, thus by you made, and which are so exceedingly erroneous, seem calculated to hold up the idea, that in this treaty your government has been acting a subordinate, or even a oomph iii_ r part. The President is not a little -tartlcd that you should make such totally groundless assumptions of fact, and then have a dis- creditable inference to be draw n from them. He directs me not only to repel this infer- ence as it ought to be repelled, but also to bring to your serious consideration and re- flection the propriety of Buch an assumed narration of facts as your despatch, in this respect, puts forth. Having informed the department that a copy of the letter of the 24th of August, addressed by me to you, had been deliv- ered to .M. < iuizot, you proceed to say : " In executing this duty. I felt too well what was ilue to my government and country to intimate my regret to a foreign power that sonic declaration had not preceded the treaty, or some stipulation accompanied it, by which the extraordinary pretension of Great Britain to search our ships at all time- and in all places, first put forth to the world by Lord Paluierston on the L'Tth of August, 1841, and on the Pith of Octo- ber following again peremptorily claimed as a ri-ht by Lord Aberdeen, would have been abrogated, a- equally incompatible with the law- of nation- and with the inde- pendence of the United States. I confined myself, therefore, to a simple communica- tion of your letter.'' It may be true that 670 APPENDIX. the British pretension leads necessarily to consequences as broad and general as your statement Bui ii is no more than fair to slate that pretension in the words of the British government itself, and tlien it be- comes matter of consideration and argu- ment how broad and extensive it really is. The last statement of this pretension, or claim, by the British government, is con- tained in Lord Aberdeen's note to Mr. Stevenson of the 13th of October, 1841. It is in these words : — "The undersigned readily admit-;, that to visit and search American vessels in time of peace, when that right of starch is not granted by tnaty. would he an infraction of public law, and a violation of national dignity and inde- pendence. But no such right is asserted. We sincerely desire to respect the vessels of the United States, but we may reasonably expect to know what it really is that we respect. Doubtless the flag is prima facii .evidence of the nationality of the vessel; and, if this evi- dence were in its nature conclusive and irrefra- gable, it ought to preclude all further inquiry. But it is sufficiently notorious that the (lags of all nations are liable to be assumed by those who have no right or title to bear them. Mr. Stevenson himself fully admits the extent to which the American flag has been employed for the purpose of covering this infamous traffic. The undersigned joins with .Mr. Stevenson in deeply lamenting the evil; and he agrees with him in thinking that the United States outfit not to be considered responsible for this abuse of their flag. But if all inquiry be resisted, even when carried no further than to ascertain the nationality of the vessel, and impunity be claimed for the most lawless and desperate of mankind, in the commission of this fraud, the undersigned greatly fears that it may be re- d as something like an assumption of that responsibility which has been deprecated by Mr. Stevenson "The undersigned renounces all pretension on the part of the British government to visit and search American vessels in time of peace. Nor is it as American that such vessels are ever visited: but it has I n the invariable practice of the British navy, and. as the undersigned I navies in the world, to ascertain by visit the real nationality of merchant-vessels met with on the high seas, if there be good rea- Bon to apprehend their illegal character ••The undersigned admits, that, if the Brit- ish cruiser should possess a knowledge of the American character of any vessel, his \ isitation of such vessel would be entirely unjustifiable. He furthi r admit-, that so much respect and honor He to the American flag, that no vessel bearing it ought to be visited by a British r, except under the most grave suspicions and well-founded doubts of the genuineness of its character. "The undersigned, although with pain, must add, that if such visit should lead to the proof of the American origin of the vessel, and that she was avowedly engaged in the slave-trade, exhibiting to view the manacles, fetters, and other usual implements of torture, or had even a number of these unfortunate beings on board, no British officer could interfere further. He might give information to the cruisers of the United States, but it could not be in his own power to arrest or impede the prosecution of the voyage and the success of the undertaking. " It is obvious, therefore, that the utmost caution is necessary in the exercise of this right claimed by Great Britain. While we have re- course to the necessary, and. indeed, the only means for detecting imposture, the practice will be carefully guarded and limited to cases of strong suspicion. The undersigned begs to as- sure Mr. Stevenson that the most precise and positive instructions have been issued to her Majesty's officers on this subject." Such are the words of the British claim or pretension ; and it stood in this form at the delivery of the President's message to Congress in December last ; a message in which you are pleased to say that the Brit- ish pretension was promptly met and firmly resisted. I may now proceed to a more particular examination of the objections which you make to the treaty. You observe that you think a just self- respect required of the government of the United States to demand of Lord Ashbur- ton a distinct renunciation of the British claim to search our vessels previous to en- tering into any negotiation. The govern- ment has thought otherwise; and this ap- pears to be your main objection to the treaty, if, indeed, it be not the only one which is clearly and distinctly stated. The government of the United States supposed that, in this nsp r ct. it stood in a position in which it had no occasion to demand any thing, or ask for any tiling, id' England. The British pretension, whatever it was, or however extensive, was well known to the President at the date of his message to ( longress at the opening of the last session. And 1 must be allowed to remind you how the President treated this subject in that communication. "However desirous the United States may be," said he. " for the suppression of the slave- trade, they cannot consent to interpolations into the maritime code at the mere will and pleasure of other governments. We deny the right of LETTERS <>.\ THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 671 any such interpolation to any one, or .'ill the na- tions of the earth, without mir consent w e claim to have a voice in all amendments or alterations of that code; and when we are given to understand, as in this instance, by a I government, thai its treaties with other nations cannot be executed without tl Btablishment and enforcement of new principles of mari- time police, to be applied without our concent, we 1 1 1 1 1 -— t employ a language neither of equiv- ocal import nor susceptible of misconstruction. American citizens prosecuting a lawful commerce in the African Mas, under the Bag of their coun- try, arc not responsible for the abuse or unlaw- ful use of that Bag by others; nor can they rightfully, on account of any such alleged abuses, be interrupted, molested, or detained While on the ocean; and if thus molested and detained while pursuing honest voyages in the usual way, and violating no law themselves, they are unquestionably entitled to indemnity." This declaration of the President stands : not :t syllable of it lias been, or will lie, re- tracted. The principles which it announces rest on their inherent justice and proprie- ty, on their conformity to public law, and, bo far as we are concerned, on the deter- mination and ability of the country to main- tain them. To these principles the govern- ment is pledged, and that pledge it will be at all times ready to redeem. 15 11 1 what is your own Language on this point 1 You say, " This claim (the British claim), thus asserted and supported, was promptly met and firmly repelled by the President in his message at the commence- ment of the last session of Congress; and in your letter to me approving the course I had adopted in relation to the question of the ratification by France of the quintuple treaty, you consider the principles of that message as the established policy of the government." And you add, " So far, our national dignity was uncompromitted." If this be so, what is there which has since occurred to compromit this dignity ? You shall yourself be judge of this; because you say, in a subsequent part of your let- ter, that " the mutual rights of the par- ties are in this respect wholly untouched." If, then, the British pretension had bet n promptly met and firmly repelled by the President's message ; if, so far, our national dignity had not been compromised ; and if, as you further say, our rights remain wholly untouched by any subsequent ad or proceeding, what ground is there on which to found complaint against the treaty ! But your sentiments on this point do not concur with the opinions of your govern- ment. That government la of opinion that tin- sentiments of the message, which yon bo highly approve, are reaffirmed and cor- roborated by the treaty, ami the corre- spondence accompanying It The \.r\ ob- i' cl sought to he obtained, in proposing the mode adopted for abolishing the slave-trade, was to take away all pretence whatever for interrupting lawful < imerce by tin- \i-i- tation of American vessels Allow me to nfer you, on this point, to the following passage in the mi ; the President to the Senate, accompany inu r tin- treaty : — " In my message at the commencement of the present session of Congress, I endeavored to siate the principles which this government supports respecting the right oi search and the immunity of flags. Desirous of maintaining those principles fully, at the name time that ex- isting obligations should he fulfilled, I have thought it most consistent with the dignity and honor of tin- country that it should . \«- cute its own laws and perform it- own obli- gations by it- own means and it- own power. The examination or visitation of the mer- chant-vessels of one nation i>v the cruisers of another, for any purposes except those known and acknowledged by the law of na- tions, under whatever restraints or regulations it may take place, may lead to dangerous re- sults. It is far better by other means to super- sede any supposed neces-ity, or any motive, tor such examination or visit. Interference with a merchant-vessel by an armed cruiser i- always a delicate proceeding, apt to touch tin- point of national honor, a- well a- to affect the int. of individuals. It has been thought, therefore, expedient, not only in accordance with the stipulation- of the treaty of Ghent, hut at the same time as removing all pretext on the part of others for violating the immunities of the American flag upon the seas, a- they exist and are defined by the law of nation-, to enter into the article- now submitted !" the Se ate. ■■ The treaty which I now- submit to you pro- no alteration, mitigation, or modification of the rules of the law of nations. It provides simply, that each ol tin- two governments shall maintain mi the coast of Africa a sufficient Bquadron to enforce, separately and respec- tively, the laws, rights, and obligations of the two countries lor the suppression of the - trade." In the actual posture of things, the President thought that the government of the United States. Standing on it- own tights and its own solemn declaration-. would only weaken its po-itioii by mak- ing such a demand a- appears to you to have I", n expedient We maintain the public law id' tin world a- we receive it 672 APPENDIX. and understand it to be established. We defend our own rights and our own honor, meeting all aggression at the boundary. Here \\v may well stop. You are pleased ti> observe, that "under the circumstances of the assertion of the British claim, in the correspondence of the British secretaries, ami of its denial by the President of the United States, the eyes of Europe were upon these two great naval powers ; one of which had advanced a pretension, and avowed her determina- tion to enforce it, which might at any mo- ment bring them into collision." It is certainly true that the attention of Europe has been very much awakened, of late years, to the general suhject, and quite alive, also, to whatever might take place in regard to it between the United States and Great Britain. And it is highly satisfactory to find, that, so far as we can learn, the opinion is universal that the government of the United States has fully sustained its rights and its dignity by the treaty which has been concluded. Europe, we believe, is happy to see that a collision, which might have disturbed the peace of the whole civ- ilized world, has been avoided in a manner which reconciles the performance of a high national duty, and the fulfilment of posi- tive stipulations, with the perfect immunity of flags and the equality of nations upon the ocean. I must be permitted to add, that, from every agent of the government abroad who has been heard from on the subject, with the single exception of your own letter, fan exception most deeply re- gretted,) as well as from every part of Europe where maritime rights have advo- cates and defenders, we have received nothing but congratulation. And at this moment, if the general sources of informa- tion may he trusted, our example has rec- ommended itself already to the regard of >l;ite> the most jealous of British ascen- dencj at sea ; ami the treaty against which you remonstrate may soon come to be es- teemed by them as a fit model for imitation. Toward the (dose of your despatch, you an- pleased to say: " By the recent treaty we are to keep a squadron upon the coast of Africa. We have kept one there for years ; during the whole term, indeed, of these ts to put a stop to this most iniqui- tous commerce. The effect of the treaty is, therefore, to render it obligatory upon us, by a convention, to do what we have long done voluntarily; to place our municipal laws, in Bome measure, beyond the reach of Congress." Should the effect of the treaty be to place our municipal laws, in some measure, beyond the reach of Congress, it is sufficient to say that all treaties contain- ing obligations necessarily do this. All treaties of commerce do it; and, indeed, there is hardly a treaty existing, to which the United States are party, which does not, to some extent, or in some way, re- strain the legislative power. Treaties could not be made without producing this effect. But your remark would seem to imply, that, in your judgment, there is something derogatory to the character and dignity of the country in thus stipulating with a foreign power for a concurrent effort to execute the laws of each. It would be a sufficient refutation of this objection to say, that, if in this arrangement there be any thing derogatory to the character and dignity of one party, it must be equally de- rogatory, since the stipulation is perfectly mutual, to the character and dignity of both. But it is derogatory to the char- acter and dignity of neither. The objec- tion seems to proceed still upon the implied ground that the abolition of the slave-trade is more a duty of Great Britain, or a more leading object with her, than it is or should be with us; as if, in this great effort of civ- ilized nations to do away the most cruel traffic that ever scourged or disgraced the world, we had not as high and honorable, as just and merciful, a part to act, as any other nation upon the face of the earth. Lit it be for ever remembered, that in this great work of humanity and justice the United States took the lead themselves. This government declared the slave-trade unlawful; and in this declaration it has been followed by the great powers of Europe. This government declared the slave-trade to he piracy ; anil in this, too, its example has been followed by other States. This government, this young gov- ernment, springing up in this new world within half a century, founded on the broadest principles of civil liberty, and sustained by the moral sense and intelli- gence of the people, has gone in advance of all other nations in summoning the civ- ilized world to a common effort to put • down and destroy a nefarious traffic re- proachful to human nature. It has not deemed, and it dor- not deem, that it suffers any derogation from its character or its dig- nity, if, in Beeking to fulfil this sacred duty, it act, a- far as necessary, on fair and equal terms of conci it with other powers having LETTERS ON Till; TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 678 in view the Bame praiseworthy object Bach were its xniiiiK iits wlnn it entered into the solemn stipulations of the treaty of Ghent ; such were its sentiments when it requested England to concur with us in declaring the Blare-trade to be piracy ; and such are the sentiments which it has manifested on all other proper occasions. In conclusion, I have to repeat the ex- pression of the President's deep regret at the general tone and character of your letter, and to assure you of the great happiness it would have afforded him if, concurring with the judgment of the President ami Senate, concurring with what appears to he the general sense of the country, concurring in all the manifestations of enlightened public opinion in Europe, you had Been nothing in the treaty of the 9th of August to which you could not give your cordial approbation. I have, &c. Daniel Wehsteij. Lewis Cass, Esq., &c , &c, &c. Mr. Webster to General Cass. Department of State, Washington, December 20, 1811.'. Sir, — Your letter of the 11th instant has been submitted to the President. He directs me to say, in reply, that he continues to regard your correspondence, of which this letter is part, as being quite irregular from the beginning. You had asked leave to retire from your mission ; the leave was granted by the President, with kind and friendly remarks upon the manner in which you had discharged its duties. Having asked for this honorable recall, which was promptly given, you afterward addressed to this department your letter of the 3d of October, which, however it may appear to you, the President cannot but consider as a remonstrance, a protest, against the treaty of the 9th of August ; in other words, an at- tack upon his administration for the nego- tiation and conclusion of that treaty. He certainly was not prepared for this. It came upon him with no small surprise, and he still feels that you must have been, at the moment, under the influence of tempo- rary impressions, which he cannot but hope have ere now worn away. A few remarks upon some of the points of your last letter must now close the cor- respondence. In the first place, you object to my hav- ing called your letter of October 3d a " pro- 43 teat or remonstrance '" against a transaction of the government, and observe that you must have been unhappy in the iiH.dc of expressing yourself, if yon wire liable to this charge. What other construction your letter will bear, 1 cannot perceive, i he transaction m&% finished. No letter or remarks of your* self, or any one else, could undo it, if desir- able. Yuur opinions were unsolicited If given :i- a citizen, then it ».i- altogether unusual to address them to this department in an official despatch ; if as a public func- tionary, the whole subject-matter was quite aside from the duties of your particular station. In your letter you did not pro- pose any thing U> l»> done, but objected to what had been done. You did DOt -u any method of remedying what you were pleased to consider a defect, but stated what you thought to be reasons for fearing its consequences. Ion declared that there had been, in your opinion, an omission to assert American rights ; to which omission you gave the department to understand that you would never have consented. In all this there is nothing but protest and remonstrance; and. though your letter be not formally entitled such, I cannot see that it can be construed, in effect, as any thing else; and I must continue to think, therefore, that the terms used are entirely applicable and proper. In the next place, you say: "You give me to understand that the communications which have passed between us on this sub- ject are to be published, and submitted to the great tribunal of public opinion." It would have been better if you had quoted my remark with entire correctness. What I said was, not that the communica- tions which have passed between Us be published, or must lie published, but that '• it may become necessary hereafter to pub- lish your letter, in connection with other correspondence of the mission; and, al- though it is not to be presumed that you looked to such publication, because such a presumption would impute to you a claim to put forth your private opinions upon the conduct of the President and Senate, in a transaction finished and concluded, through the imposing form of a public despatch ; yet, if published, it cannot lie foreseen how far England might hereafter rely on your authority for a construction favorable to her own pretensions, and inconsistent with the interest and honor of the United S In another part of your letter you oh- 674 APPENDIX. serve: "The publication of my letter, which is to produce this result, is to be the act of the government, and not my act. Put if the President should think that the Blightest injury to the public interest would ensue from the disclosure of my views, the letter may be buried in the archives of the department, and thus forgotten and ren- dered harmless." To this I have to remark, in the first place, that instances have occurred in other times, not unknown to you, in which highly important letters from ministers of the United States, in Europe, to their own gov- ernment, have found their way into the newspapers of Europe, when that govern- ment itself held it to be inconsistent with the interest of the United States to make 6uch letters public. Put it is hardly worth while to pursue a topic like this. You are pleased to ask: "Is it the duty of a diplomatic agent to receive all the communications of his government, and to carry into effect their instructions su8 silt »- tio, whatever may be his own sentiments in relation to them; or is he not bound, as a faithful representative, to communicate freely, hut respectfully, his own views, that these maybe considered, and receive their due weight, in that particular case, or in other circumstances involving similar con- siderations ? It seems to me that the bare enunciation of the principle is all that is necessary for my justification. I am speak- ing now of the propriety of my action, not of the manner in which it was performed. I may have executed the task well or ill. 1 may have introduced topics unadvisedly, and urged them indiscreetly. All this I leave without remark. I am only endeavor- ing here to free myself from the serious charge which you bring against me. If I have misapprehended the duties of an American diplomatic agenl upon this sub- ject , I am well satistied to have withdrawn, by a timely resignation, from a position in which my own self respect would not per mil me to remain. And I may express the Conviction, that there is no government, certainly none this Bide of Constantinople, which would not encourage rather than re- buke the free e\prc-,-ion of tile view- of their representatives in foreign countries." I answer, certainly not. In the letter to which you were replj ing it was fully stated, that, "in common with every other citizen of the republic, you have an unquestionable righl to form opinions upon public transac tions and the conduct of public men. Put it will hardly bethought to be among either the duties or the privileges of a minister abroad to make formal remonstrances and protests against proceedings of the various branches of the government at home, upon subjects in relation to which he himself has not been charged with any duty, or par- taken any responsibility." Ybu have not been requested to bestow your approbation upon the treaty, however gratifying it would have been to the Presi- dent to set' that, in that respect, you united with other distinguished public agents abroad. Like all citizens of the republic, you are quite at liberty to exercise your own judgment upon that as upon other transactions. Put neither your observa- tions nor this concession cover the case. They do not show, that, as a public minis- ter abroad, it is a part of your official func- tions, in a public despatch, to remonstrate against the conduct of the government at home in relation to a transaction in which you bore no part, and for which you were in no way answerable. The President and Senate must be permitted to judge for them- selves in a matter solely within their con- trol. Nor do I know that, in complaining of your protest against their proceedings in a case of this kind, any thing has been done to warrant, on your part, an invidious and unjust reference to Constantinople. If you could show, by the general practice of diplo- matic functionaries in the civilized part of the world, and more especially, if you could show by any precedent drawn from the con- duct of the many distinguished men who have represented the government of the United States abroad, that your letter of the 3d of < October was, in its general object, tone, and character, within the usual limits of diplomatic correspondence, you may be quite assured that the President would not have recourse to the code of Turkey in order to find precedents the other way. You complain that, in the letter from this department of the 14th of November, a statement contained in yours of the 3d of October is called a tissue of mistakes, and you attempt to show the impropriety of this appellation. Pet the point be distinctly stated, and what you say in reply be then considered. In your letter of October 3d you remark, that " England then urged the United States to enter into a conventional arrangement, by which we might be pledged to concur with her in measures for the suppression of LETTERS ON THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 675 the slave-trade. Until then, we had exe rated our own laws in our own way; but, yielding to this application, and departing from our former principle of avoiding European combinations upon subjects not American, we stipulated in a Bolemn treaty that we would carry into effect our own laws, and fixed the minimum force we would employ for that purp The letter of this department of the 1 lih of November, having quoted this passage, proceeds to observe, that "the President cannot conceive how vim should have been led to adventure upon such a statement as this. It is but a tissue of mistakes. Eng- land did not urge the United States to enter into this conventional arrangement. The United States yielded to no application from England. The proposition for abolish- ing the slave-trade, as it stands in the treaty, was an American proposition; it originated with the executive government of the Tint- ed States, which cheerfully assumes all its responsibility. It stands upon it as its own mode of fulfilling its duties and accom- plishing its objects. Nor have the United States departed in the slightest degree from their former principles of avoiding Eu- ropean combinations upon subjects not American; because the abolition of the African slave-trade is an American subject as emphatically as it is a European subject, and, indeed, more so, inasmuch as the gov- ernment of the United States took the first great step in declaring that trade unlawful, and in attempting its extinction. The abo- lition of this traffic is an object of the high- est interest to the American people and the American government; and you seem strangely to have overlooked altogether the important fact, that nearly thirty years ago, by the treaty of Ghent, the United States bound themselves, by solemn com- pact with England, to continue their efforts to promote its entire abolition ; both parties pledging themselves by that treaty to use their best endeavors to accomplish so de- sirable an object." Now, in answer to this, you observe in your last letter: "That the particular mode in which the governments should act in con- cert, as finally arranged in the treaty, \\ :i s suggested by yourself, I never doubted. And if this is the construction I am to give to your denial of 1113' correctness, there is no difficulty upon the subject. The ques- tion between us is untouched. All I said was, that England continued to prosecute the matter; that she presented it for a tiation, and that we thereupon consented to it- Introduction, And it' Lord Ashburton did not ((Hue nut with Instructions from his government to endeavor to effeel some ar- rangement u| this subject, the world has Btrangelj misundi rstood one of the great objects of hi- mission, and l have misun- derstood that paragraph in your first note, where you -a\ that l.nnl A-hburt..n nunn with full powers to negotiate and settle all matter- in discussion between England and the United Stat..-. Hut the \, r\ fact of hi- coming hen-, and of his acceding to any stipulations respecting the sis re-trade, is conclusive proof that hi- government were desirous to obtain the co-operation of the United States. I had BUpposed that OUT government would scarcely take the initia- tive in thi- matter, and urge it upon that of Great Britain, either in Washington or in London, if it did so. 1 can only expn ss my regret, and confi -- that I have I" en U d inadvertently into an error." It would appear from all thi-. that that which, in your first letter, appeared as a direct statement of facts, of which you would naturally be presumed to have had knowledge, sinks at last into infer* rices and conjectures. But, in attempting to escape from some of the mistakes of thi- tissue, you have fallen into others. "All I -aid wa-." you observe, " that England con- tinued to prosecute the matter: that -he presented it for negotiation, and that we thereupon consented to its introduction." Now the English minister no more pre- sented thi- subject for negotiation than the government of the United States presented it. Nor can it be said that the United States consented to its introduction in any other sense than it may be -aid that the British minister consented tn it. Will you h< good enough to review the series of your own assertions on this Bubject, and see whether they can possibly be regarded merely a- a statement of your own inference- ' Your only authentic fact i- a _. m ral one. that the British minister came clothed with full power to negotiate and Bettle all matter- in discussion. This, you -ay, i- conclusive proof that hi- government was desirous to obtain the co operation of the United Si respecting the Blave-trade; and then yon infer that England continued to prosecute this matter, and presented it for negotia- tion, and that the United States const tu its introduction; and give to this infer- ence the shape of a direct statement fact. 676 APPENDIX. You might liavo made the same remarks, and with the same propriety, in relation to the subject of the "Creole," that of im- pressment, the extradition of fugitive crim- inals, or any thing else embraced in the treaty or in the correspondence, and then have converted these inferences of your own into so many facts. And it is upon conjectures like these, it is upon such in- ferences of your own, that you make the direct and formal statement in your letter of the 3d of October, that " England then urged the United States to enter into a conventional arrangement, by which we might he pledged to concur with her in measures for the suppression of the slave- trade. Until then, we had executed our own laws in our own way ; but, yielding to this application, and departing from our former principle of avoiding European combinations upon subjects not American, we stipulated in a solemn treaty that we would carry into effect our own laws, and fixed the minimum force we would employ for that purpose." The President was well warranted, there- fore, in requesting your serious reconsider- ation and review of that statement. Suppose your letter to go before the public unanswered and uncontradicted; BUppose it to mingle itself with the general political history of the country, as an of- ficial letter among the archives of the De- partment of State, would not the general mass of readers understand you as reciting facts, rather than as drawing your own conclusions? as stating history, rather than as presenting an argument? It is of an incorrect narrative that the President com- plains. It is that, in your hotel at Paris, you should undertake to write a history of a very delicate part of a negotiation car- ried on at Washington, with which you had nothing to do, and of the history of which you had no authentic information ; and which history, as you narrate it, re- fleets not a little on the independence, wisdom, and public spirit of the adminis- tration. As of the history of this part of the ne- gotiation you were not well informed, the President cannot but think it would have been more just in you to have refrained froiTi any attempt to give an account of it. You observe, further: "I never men- tioned in my despatch to you, nor in any manner whatever, that our government had conceded to that of England the right to search our ships. That idea, however, per- vades your letter, and is very apparent in that part of it which brings to my observa- tion the possible effect of my views upon tlie English government. Hut in this you do me, though I am sure unintentionally, great injustice. I repeatedly state that the recent treaty leaves the rights of the parties as it found them. My difficulty is not that we have made a positive conces- sion, but that we have acted unadvisedly in not making the abandonment of this pretension a previous condition to any con- ventional arrangement upon the general subject." On this part of your letter I must be al- lowed to make two remarks. The first is, inasmuch as the treaty gives no color or pretext whatever to any right of searching our ships, a declaration against such a right would have been no more suitable to this treaty than a declaration against the right of sacking our towns in time of peace, or any other outrage. The rights of merchant-vessels of the United States on the high seas, as under- stood by this government, have been clearly and fully asserted. As asserted, they will be maintained ; nor would a declaration such as you propose have increased either its resolution or its ability in this respect. The government of the United States relies on its own power, and on the effective sup- port of the people, to assert successfully all the rights of all its citizens, on the Bea as well as on the land ; and it asks respect for these rights not as a boon or favor from any nation. The President's message, most certainly, is a clear declaration of what the country understands to be its rights, and his determination to maintain them ; not a mere promise to negotiate for these rights, or to endeavor to bring other powers into an acknowledgment of them, either express or implied. Whereas, if I understand the meaning of this part of your letter, you would have advised that something should have been offered to England which she might have regarded as a benefit, but coupled with BUCh a declaration or condi- tion as that, if she received the boon, it would have been a recognition by her of a claim which we make as matter of right. The President's view of the proper duty of the government has certainly been quite different. Being convinced that the doc- trine asserted by this government is the true doctrine of the law of nations, and feeling the competency of the government LETTERS ON THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. «;tt to uphold and enforce it for Itself, be baa tin! Bought, but, mi the contrary . hat sedu- lously avoided, to change tin- ground, and to place the just rights >>t the country upon the assent, express or implied, of any power whatever. The government thought do skilfully ex- torted promises necessary in any such cases. It asks ni> such pledges of any nation. If its character for ability and readiness to protect and defend its own rights and dig- nity is Dot sufficient to preserve them from violation, do interpolation of promise to re spect them, ingeniously woven into treaties, would be likely to afford such protection. And as our rights and liberties depend for existence upon our power to maintain them, genera] and vague protests are not likely to be more effectual than the Chinese method of defending their towns, by paint- ing grotesque and hideous figures mi the walls to fright away assailing foes. My other remark on this portion of your letter is this : — Suppose a declaration" to the effect that this treaty should not be considered as sacrificing any American rights had been appended, and the treaty, thus fortified, had been sent to Great Britain, as you pro- pose ; and suppose that that government, with equal ingenuity, had appended an equivalent written declaration that it should not be considered as sacrificing any British right, how much more denned would have been the rights of either party, or how much clearer the meaning and interpreta- tion of the treaty, by these reservations on both sides? Or, in other words, what is the value of a protest on one Bide, balanced by an exactly equivalent protest on the other ? No nation is presumed to sacrifice its rights, or give up what justly belongs to it, unless it expressly stipulates that, for some good reason or adequate consideration, it does make such relinquishment ; and an unnecessary asseveration that it does uot intend to sacrifice just rights would seem only calculated to invite aggression. Such proclamations would seem better devised for concealing weakness and apprehension, than for manifesting conscious Btrength and self-reliance, or for inspiring respect in others. Toward the end of your letter you are pleased t" observe: "The rejection of a, treaty, duly negotiated, is a serious q tiuii, to be avoided whenever it can be without too great a sacrifice. 1 bough the national faith is nol actually committed, still it is more or less engaged. And there were peculiar circumstances, growing out of long standing difficulties, which rem an amicable arrangement of the various matters in dispute with England a subject of gnat national interest. But the nego- tiation of a treaty is a far different sub- ject. Topics are omitted or introduced at the discretion of the negotiators, and they are responsible, to use the language of an eminent and able Senator, for 'what it contains and what it omits.' This treaty, in my opinion, omits a most important and necessary stipulation ; and then fore, as it seems to me, its negotiation, in this partic- ular, was imfortunate for the country." The President directs me to say, in reply to this, that in the treaty of Washington no topics were omitted, and do topics intro- duced, at the mere discretion of the i. tiator; that the negotiation proceeded from step to step, and from day tpp day, under his own immediate supervision and ilirec- tion ; that he himself takes the responsi- bility for what the treaty contains and what it omits, and cheerfully leaves the merits of the whole to the judgment of the country. I now conclude tin- letter, ami close this correspondence, by repeating se more the expression of the President's regret that you should have commenced it by your letter of the 3d of < Ictober. It is painful to him to have with you any cause of difference, lie has a just appreciation of your character ami your public services at home ami abroad. He cannot but persuade himself that yon must be aware yourself, by this time, that your letter of October was written under erro- neous impressions, ami that there is no foundation for tin- opinions respecting the treaty which it expresses] ami that it would have bnii far better on all accounts if no such letter bad been written. 1 have, 8m. 1>a mm. Wii.-iii:. I.i wis Cass, I Minister >t<((i.i nt Paris. G7> APPENDIX. THE HULSKMANN LETTER. [As the authorship of this remarkable paper has sometimes been imputed to another person, it may be proper to give the facts respecting its preparation, al- though they involve nothing more impor- tant than a question of literary interest. Mr. Webster, as has been stated, arrived at Marshfield on the 9th of October, 1850, where he remained for the space of two weeks. He brought with him the papers relating to this controversy with Austria. P. tore he left Washington, he gave to Mr. Hunter, a gentleman then and still lilling an important post in the Department of State, verbal instructions concerning some of the points which would require to be touched iii an answer to Mr. Hiilsemann's letti r of September 30th, and requested Mr. Hunter to prepare a draft of such an an- swer. This was done, and Mr. Hunter's draft of an answer was forwarded to Mr. Webster at Marshfield. On the 20th of i »ctober, l s ">u, Mr. Webster, being far from well, addressed a note to Mr. Everett, 1 re- questing him also to prepare a draft of a reply to Mr. Hiilsemann, at the same time sending to Mr. Everett a copy of Mr. Hiil- semann's letter and of President Taylor's message to the Senate relating to Mr, Mann- mission to Hungary. 2 On the 21st Mr. Webster went to his farm in Franklin, New Hampshire, when- he remained until the 4th of November. While there he re- ceived from Mr. Everett a draft of an an- swer to Mr. Hiilsemann, which was written by Mr Everett between the 21st and the 24th of October. Soon after Mr. Webster's death, it was rumored that the real author of "the Hiil- semann letter" was Mr. Hunter, — a rumor for which .Mr. Hunter himself was in no way responsible. At a later period, in the summer of 1853, the statement obtained currency in the newspapers that Mr. Ever- ett wrote this celebrated despatch, and 1 1 1 ; 1 1 1 \ comments were made upon the sup- posed fact that Mr. Everett had claimed in authorship. The facts are, that, while at Franklin, Mr. Webster, with Mr. Hunter's and Mr. Everett's drafts both before him, went over the whole subject, making con- rable changes in Mr- Everett's draft, striking out entire paragraphs with his pen, altering some phi and writing new paragraphs of his own, but adopting Mr. Everett's draft as the i>a.-i.> of the official 1 Mr. Everett had then resigned the Presi- ■, -I I l.ii'-. ard < olli - \\ hether Mr. Hunter's draft was al o i nl 1.. Mr. Everett, I do nol Knew. The internal would Beem to indicate that it was ; hui the fact is ii"! material. paper; a purpose which lie expressed to Mr. Kveieit on Ins return to Boston toward Washington. Subsequently, when he had arrived in Washington, Mr. Webster caused a third draft to he made, in the State De- partment, from Mr. Everett's paper and his own additions and alterations. On this third draft he made still other changes and additions, and, when the whole was com- pleted to his own satisfaction, the official letter was drawn out by a clerk, was sub- mitted to the President, and, being signed by Mr. Webster, was sent to Mr. Hiilse- mann. 1 There are, no doubt, passages and ex- pressions in this letter which are in a tone not usual with Mr. Webster in his diplo- matic papers. How he himself regarded the criticisms that might he made upon it may be seen from the following note: — [to mi:, ticknor.] " Washington, January 10, 1851. "My dead Sir, — If you say that my Hiilsemann letter is boastful and rough, I shall own the soft impeachment. My ex- cuse is twofold: 1. 1 thought it well enough to speak out, and tell the people of Europe who and what we are, and awaken them lo a just sense of the unparalleled growth of this country. 2. I wished to write a paper which should touch the national pride, and make a man feel sheepish and look silly who should speak of disunion. It is curious 1 1 have seen, I believe, all the documents in relation to this matter; viz Mr. Hunter's draft, Mr. Everett's (in his handwriting, with Mr. Webster's erasures), the third draft, made at the department under Mr. Webster's direc- tions, ami the original added paragraphs, writ- ten by Mr. Webster with his own hand. To these who are curious about the question of authorship, it is needful only to say that Mr. Webster adopted Mr. Everett s draft as the hasis of the official letter, hut that the official letter is a much mere vigorous, expanded, and com- plete production than Mr. Everett's draft. It is described in a note written by Mr. Everett to one "I the literary executors, in 1853, as fellows : •■ Ii can he Mated truly that what Mr. Webster did himself to the letter was very considerable; and thai he added one hall in hulk in the origi- nal draft; and that his additions were of the most significant character. It was verycare- I'ully elaborated in the department by him, till In- was authorized to speak of it as he did at the KoSSUth dinner. . . ." This refers to what Mr. Webster said in his speech at the Kossuth banquet, in Washington, January 7. 1852 : — •'May I hi' mi egotistical as to say that I have nothing new to say on the subject of Hun- gary ? Gentlemen, in the autumn of the year THE HULSEMANN LETTER. 679 enough, but it is certain, that Mr Mann's private instructions were seen, somehow, by Schw arzenberg. " Yours always truly, "DAKIEL vYHBSTJ .u.-I] Department of State, Washington, I tocembei 21, IS ". Tin: undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, had the honor to re- ceive, some time ago, the note of Mr. Hiilsemann, Charge" d' Affaires of his Ma- jesty, the Emperor of Austria, of the 80th of September. Causes, not arising from any want (if personal regard For Mr. Hiilse maim, or of proper respect for his govcrn- ment, have delayed an answer until the present moment. Havin g submitted Mr. Biilsemann's letter to the President, the undersigned is now directed by him '" re turn the following reply. The objeci8~of Mr. Hiilsemann's note are, first, to protest, by order of his govern- ment, against the steps taken by the late President of. the United States to ascer- tain the progress and probable result of the revolutionary movements in Hungary; and, secondly, to complain of sonic expres- sions in tlie instructions of the late Secre- tary of State to Mr. A. Dudley Mann, a confidential agent of the United States, as communicated by President Taylor to the Senate on the 28th of March last. The principal ground of protest is founded on the idea, or in the allegation, that the government of the United States, by the mission of Mr. Mann and his in- structions, has interfered in the domestic affairs of Austria in a manner unjust or disrespectful toward that power. The President's message was a communication made by him to the Senate, transmitting a correspondence between the executive gov- ernment and a confidential agent of its own. This would seem to be itself a do- mestic transaction, a mere instance of in- before last, out of health, and retired to my paternal home among the mountains of New Hampshire, I was, by reason of my physical condition, confined to my house; but i was among tin- mountains, whose native air I «a- bound tn inspire. Nothing saluted my Benses, nothing saluted my mind, or my Bentiments, hut freedom, full and entire; and there, gentlemen, near the graves of my ancestors, I wrote a let- ter, which must of you have situ, addressed to the Austrian chargd d'affaires. 1 can say noth- ing of the ability displayed in that letter, but, as i" its principles, while the sun and moon en- dure, [ stand by them." 1 From I [on. < leorge T. < 'urtis's Life of Daniel Webster, Vol. II. pp". 535-537. tercourse between the President and the Senate, in the manner whieh i- usual and indispensable in communications between tin' different branches of the governmt nt It was not addressed either to Austria or Hungary; imr was it a public manii tn which anj foreign state was called on to reply. It was an account of it* transac- tions communicated by the executive gov- ernment to the Senate, at the request of that body; made public, indeed, but made public only because such is the common and usual course of proceeding. It may be regarded a> somewhat strange, there- fore, that the Austrian Cabinet did not perceive that, by the instructions given to Mr. Hiilsemann, it was itself interfering with the domestic concerns of a foreign state, the very thing which is the ground of its complaint againsl the United Sta This department ha-, on former inci- sions, informed the ministers of foreign powers, that a communication from the President to either house of Congress is regarded as a domestic communication, of which, ordinarily, no foreign state has cog- nizance : and in more recent instances, the great inconvenience of making Buch com- munications the subject of diplomatic cor- respondence and discussion has been fully shown. If it had been the pleasure of his Majesty, the Emperor of Austria, during the struggles in Hungary, to have admon- ished the provisional government or the people of that country against involving themselves in disaster, by following the evil and dangerous example of the United States of America in making efforts for the establishment of independent governments, such an admonition from that BOVereign to his Hungarian subjects would not b originated lure a diplomatic correspond- ence. The President might, perhaps, on this ground, have declined to direct any particular reply to Mr. Hiilsemann's D but out of proper respect for the Austrian government, it has been thought better to answer that note at length; and the more especially, as the occasion is not unfavor- able for the expn Bsion of the general sen- timents of the government of the United States upon the topics which that note ili-ell- A leading subject in Mr. Biilsemann's note is that of the correspondence be- tween Mr. Hiilsemann and the predecessor of the undersigned, in which Mr. Clayton, by direction of the President, informed Mr. Hiilsemann " that Mr. Mann's mission had IN,, APPENDIX. no other object in view than to ohtain re- liable information as to the true state of affairs in Hungary, by personal observa- tion." Mr. Hiilsemann remarks, that "this explanation tan hardly be admitted, for it sa\ a very little as to the cause of the anxiety which was felt tii ascertain the chances of the revolutionists." As this, however, is tin- only purpose which can, with any appearance of truth, be attrib- uted to the agency; as nothing whatever is alleged by Mi - . Hiilsemann to have been either done or said by the agent inconsist- ent with such an object, the undersigned conceives that Mr. Clayton's explanation ought to be deemed, not only admissible, but quite satisfactory. Mr. Hiilsemann states, in the course of his note, that his instructions to address his present communication to Mr. Clayton reached Washington about the time of the lamented death of the late President, and that he delayed from a sense of propriety the execution of his task until the new ad- ministration should be fully organized; "a delay which he now rejoices at, as it has given him the opportunity of ascertaining from the new President himself, on the oc- casion of the reception of the diplomatic corps, that the fundamental policy of the United States, so frequently proclaimed, would guide the relations of the American government with other powers." Mr. Hiilse- mann also observes, that it is in his power to assure the undersigned "that the Im- perial government is disposed to cultivate relations of friendship and good under- standing with the United States." The President receives this assurance of the disposition of the Imperial government with great satisfaction; and, in considera- tion of the friendly relations of the two governments thus mutually recognized, and of thi' peculiar nature of the incidents by which their good understanding is supposed by Mr. Hiilsemann to have been for a mo- ment disturbed or endangered, the Presi- dent regrets that Mr. Hiilsemann did not feel himself at liberty wholly to forbear from the execution of instructions, which were of course transmitted from Vienna without any foresight of the state of things under which they would reach Washing- ton. If Mr. Hiilsemann saw, in the ad- dress of the President to the diplomatic corps, satisfactory pledgee of the Benti ments ami the policy of this government in regard to neutral rights and neutral duties, it might, perhaps, have hem bet- ter not to bring on a discussion of past transactions. But the undersigned readily admits that this was a question fit only for the consideration and decision of Mr. Hiilsemann himself ; and although the President does not see that any good pur- pose can be answered by reopening the in- quiry into the propriety of the steps taken by President Taylor to ascertain the prob- able issue of the late civil war in Hungary, justice to his memory requires the under- signed briefly to restate the history of those steps, and to show their consistency with the neutral policy which has invariably guided the government of the United States in its foreign relations, as well as with the established and well-settled principles of national intercourse, and the doctrines of public law. The undersigned will first observe, that the President is persuaded his Majesty, the Emperor of Austria, does not think that the government of the United States ought to view with unconcern the extraordinary events which have occurred, not only in his dominions, but in many other parts of Europe, since Eebruary, 1848. The gov- ernment and people of the United States, like other intelligent governments and com- munities, take a lively interest in the move- ments and the events of this remarkable age, in whatever part of the world they may be exhibited. But the interest taken by the United States in those events has not proceeded from any disposition to de- part from that neutrality toward foreign powers, which is among the deepest prin- ciples and the most cherished traditions of the political history of the Union. It has been the necessary effect of the unexam- pled character of the events themselves, which could not fail to arrest the attention of the contemporary world, as they will doubtless (ill a memorable page in history. But the undersigned goes further, and freely admits that, in proportion as these extraordinary events appeared to have their origin in those great ideas of responsible and popular government, on which the American constitutions themselves are wholly founded, they could not but com- mand the warm sympathy of the people of this country. Well-known circum- stances in their hi.-tory, indeed their whole history, have made them the representa- tives of purely popular principles of gov- ernment. In this light they now stand be- fore the world. They could not, if they would, Conceal their character, their condi- THE III I.SKMANN LETTER 681 tion, or their destiny. They could Dot, if they so desired, shut out from (he \ie\v of mankind the causes which hare placed tliem. in so short a national career, in the station which they now hold among the Civilized states of the world. They could not, if they desired it, suppress either the thoughts or the hopes which arise in nun's minds, in other countries, from contem- plating their successful example of free government. That very intelligent and dis- tinguished personage, the Emperor Joseph the Second, was among the tir>t to discern this necessary consequence of the Ameri- can Revolution on the sentiments and opinions of the people of Europe. In a letter to his minister in the Netherlands in 17S7, he observes, that "it is remarkable that France, by the assistance which she afforded to the Americans, gave birth to reflections on freedom." This fact, which the sagacity of that monarch perceived at 60 early a day, is now known and admitted by intelligent powers all over the world. True, indeed, it is, that the prevalence on the other continent of sentiments favorable to republican liberty is the result of the reaction of America upon Europe ; and the source and centre of this reaction has doubtless been, and now is, in these United States. The position thus belonging to the United States is a fact as inseparable from their history, their constitutional organization, and their character, as the opposite position of the powers composing the European al- liance is from the history and constitutional organization of the government of those powers. The sovereigns who form that alliance have not unfrequently felt it their right to interfere with the political move- ments of foreign states; and have, in their manifestoes and declarations, denounced the popular ideas of the age in terms so com- prehensive as of necessity to include the United States, and their forms of govern- ment. It is well known that one of the leading principles announced by the allied sovereigns, after the restoration of the Bourbons, is, that all popular or constitu- tional rights are holden no otherwise than as grants and indulgences from crowned heads. " Useful and necessary changes in legislation and administration." says the Laybach Circular of .May, 1821, 'ought only to emanate from the free will and in- telligent conviction of those whom (iod has rendered responsible for power; all that deviates from this line necessarily leads to disorder, commotions, and evils far more insufferable than those which they pretend to remedy." And hi- late Austrian Ma- jesty, Francis the Pint, is reported to bave declared, in an address to the Hungarian Diet, in 1820, that " the whole world had become foolish, ami. leaving their ancient law-, were in search of Imaginary constitu- tions " These declarations amount to noth- ing le-s than a denial of the lawfulness of the origin of the government of the United States, since it is certain that that govern- ment wa> established in consequence of a change which did not proceed from thrones, or the permission of crowned heads. Hut the government of the United State- heard these denunciation- of it- fundamental prin- ciples w ithout remonstrance, or the disturb- ance of its equanimity. This was thirty years ago. The power of this republic, at the pres- ent moment, is spread over a region one of the richest and most fertile on the globe, and of an extent in comparison with which the possessions of the house of Hapsburgare but as a patch on the earth'.- Burface. Its population, already twenty-live millions, will exceed that of the Austrian empire within the period during which it may be hoped that Mr. Ilulsemann may yet remain in the honorable discharge of his duti< his government. Its navigation ami com- merce are hardly exceeded hy the oldest ami most commercial nation-: it- maritime means and its maritime power may he seen by Austria herself, in all seas where she has ports, as well a- they may he seen, also, in all other quarters of the globe. Life, liberty, property, .and all personal rights, are amply secured to all citizens, and protected by just and stable law-; ami credit, public and private, i- a- well estab- lished as in any government of Continental Europe ; ami the country, in all its interests and concerns, partake- most largely in all the improvements and progress which dis- tinguish the age. Certainly, the United States may he pardoned, even by those who profess adherence to the principles of absolute government, if they entertain an ardent affection for those popular form- of political organisation which have so rapidly advanced their own prosperity and happi- n< BS, and enabled them, in so -hort a period, to bring their country, and the hemisphere to which it belongs, to thi' notice ami re- spectful regard, not to -ay the admiration, of the civilized world. Nevertheless, the United States have abstained, at all times, 682 APPENDIX. from acts of interference with the political changes of Europe, They cannot, how- ever, fail to cherish always a lively interest in the fortunes of nations struggling for institutions like their own. But this sym- pathy, so far from being necessarily a hos- tile feeling toward any of the parties to these great national struggles, is quite con- sistent with amicable relations with them all. The Hungarian people are three or four times as numerous as the inhabitants of these United States were when the Amer- ican Revolution broke out. They possess, in a distinct language, and in other respects, important elements of a separate nation- ality, which the Anglo-Saxon race in this country did not possess; and if the United States wish success to countries contending for popular constitutions and national in- dependence, it is only because they regard such constitutions and such national inde- pendence, not as imaginary, hut as real blessings. They claim no right, however, to take part in the struggles of foreign powers in order to promote these ends. It is only in defence of his own government, and its principles and character, that the undersigned has now expressed himself on this subject. But when the people of the United States behold the people of foreign countries, without any such interference, spontaneously moving toward the adoption of institutions like their own, it surely can- not be expected of them to remain wholly indifferenl spectators. In regard to the recent very important occurrences in the Austrian empire, the un- dersigned freely admits the difficulty which exists in this country, and is alluded to by Mr. Hiilsemann, of obtaining accurate in- formation. But this difficulty is by no means to be ascribed to what .Mr. llulse- ni ami calls, with little justice, as it seems to the undersigned, " the mendacious rumors propagated by the American press." For information on this subject, and others of the same kind, the American press is, of ssity, almost wholly dependent upon that of Europe; and if "mendacious ru- mors" respecting Austrian and Hungarian affairs have been anywhere propagated, that propagation of falsehoods has been most prolific on the European continent, and in countries immediately bordering on the Austrian empire. Hut, wherever these errors may have originated, they certainly justified the late President in seeking true information through authentic channels. His attention was firsl particularly drawn to the state of things in Hungary by the correspondence of Mr. Stiles, Charge d'Af- faires of the United States at Vienna. In the autumn of 1848, an application was made to this gentleman, on behalf of Mr. Kossuth, formerly Minister of Finance for the Kingdom of Hungary by Imperial ap- pointment, but, at the time the application was made, chief of the revolutionary gov- ernment. The object of this application was to obtain the good offices of Mr. Stiles with the Imperial government, with a view to the suspension of hostilities. This appli- cation became the subject of a conferer.ee between Prince Schwarzenberg, tin- Impe- rial Minister for Foreign Affairs, and Mr. Stiles. The Prince commended the consid- erateness and propriety with which Mr. Stiles had acted; and, so far from disap- proving his interference, advised him, in case ho received a further communication from the revolutionary government in Hun- gary, to have an interview with Prince Windischgratz, who was charged by the Emperor with the proceedings determined on in relation to that kingdom. A week after these occurrences, Mr. Stiles received, through a secret channel, a communication signed by L. Kossuth, President of the Com- mittee of Defence, and countersigned by Francis Pulszky, Secretary of State. On the receipt of this communication, Mr. Stiles had an interview with Prince Windisch- gratz, " who received him with the utmost kindness, and thanked him for his efforts toward reconciling the existing difficulties." Such were the incidents which first drew the attention of the government of the United States particularly to the affairs of Hungary, and the conduct of Mr. Stiles, though acting without instructions in a mat- ter of much delicacy, having been viewed with satisfaction by the Imperial govern- ment, was approved by that of the United States. In the course of the year ISIS, and in the early part of 1849, a considerable num- ber of Hungarians came to the United States. Among them were individuals rep- resenting themselves to lie in the confidence of the revolutionary government, and by these persons the President was strongly urged to recognize the existence of that government. In these applications, and in the manner in which they were viewed by the President, there was nothing unusual; still less was there any thine unauthorized by the law of nations. It is the right of every independent state to enter into friend- THE HULSEMANN 1. 1. 1 I i :i: ly relations with every cither Independent state. Of course, questions oi prudence naturally arise in reference to new states, brought by successful revolutions into the family of nations ; but it is not to be re quired of neutral powers that they should await the recognition of the new govern 11 it'ii r by the parent state. No principle of public law has been inure frequently acted upon, within the la -t thirty years, by the great powers of the world, than this. Within that period, eight or ten new Btates have established independent governments, « ith in the limits of the colonial dominions of Spain, on this continent; and in Europe the same thing has been done by Belgium and Greece. The existence of all these governments was recognized by Borne of the leading powers of Europe, as well as by the United States, before it was acknowl- edged by the states from which they had Separated themselves. If, therefore, the United States had gone so far as formally to acknowledge the independence of Hun- gary, although, as the result has proved, it would have been a precipitate step, and one from which no benefit would have resulted to either party ; it would not, nevertheless, have been an act against the law of nations, provided they took no part in her contest with Austria. But the United States did no sueb tiling. Not only did they not yield to Hungary any actual countenance or suc- cor, not only did they not show their ships of war in the Adriatic with any menacing or hostile aspect, but they studiously ab- stained from every thing which had not been done in other cases in times past, and Contented themselves with instituting an Inquiry into the truth and reality of alleged political occurrences. Mr. Hiilsetnann incor- rectly states, unintentionally certainly, the nature of the mission of this agent, when he says that "a United States agent hail been despatched to Vienna with orders to watch for a favorable moment to recognize the Hungarian republic, and to conclude a treaty of commerce with the same." This, indeed, would have been a lawful object, but Mr. Mann's errand was, in the first in- stance, purely one of inquiry, lie had no power to act, unless he had first come to the conviction that a firm and stable Hun- garian government existed. "The princi- pal object the President has in view," ac- cording to his instructions, " is to obtain minute and reliable information in regard to Hungary, in connection with the affairs of adjoining countries, the probable issue of the present revolutionary movements, and the chancei we ma) have of forming commercial arrangements with that power favorable to the United Again, in the sauie papei.it is said "The object of the President is to obtain information in regard to Hungary, and her resources and prospects, with a \\<\\ to an earl} recogni- tion id' her Independent e and the formation of commercial relations with her." It was only in the event that the new governmi nt .should appear, in tin' opinion of the agent, to be firm and stable, that the President proposed to recommend its recognition. Mr. 1 1 1 i 1 ~ i - 1 1 1 .- 1 1 1 1 1 . in qualifying thi of President Taylor with the epithet of "hostile," -''ins tn take for granted that the inquiry could, in the expectation of the President, have but one result, and that favorable to Hungary. If this were s.,. it would not change the case. But the Ameri- can government sought for nothing but truth; it desired to ham the facts through a reliable channel. It so happened, in the chances and vicissitudes of human alt that the result was adverse to the Hunga- rian revolution. The American agent, as was stated in his instructions to be not un- likely, found the condition of Hungarian affairs less prosperous than it had been, or had been believed to be. He did not enter Hungary, nor hold any direct communica- tion with her revolutionary leaders. He reported against the recognition of her in- dependence, because he found she had been unable to get up a firm and stable govern- ment, He carefully fori ore, as his instruc- tions required, to give publicity to his mis. sion, and the undersigned supposes that the Austrian government first learned its ex- istence from the communications of the President to the Senate. .Mr. Hiilsemann will observe from this Statement, that Mr. Mann's mission «;,« wholly unobjectionable, and strictly within the rule of the law of nations and the duty of the United Siatis a- a neutral power. He will accordingly feel how little founda- tion there is for his remark, that " ; w ho did not hesitate to assume tin' responsi- bility of Bending Mr. Dudley Mann on such an errand should, independent of considera- tions of propriety, have borne in mind that they were e\posin'_ r their emissary to be in an d as a Bpy." A Bpj is a pi rson sent by one belligerent to gain bi crel informa- tion of the forces and defences of the other, to lie used for hostile purposi 9. According to practice, he may use deception, under .;s4 APPENDIX. the penalty of being lawfully hanged if de- tected. To give this odious name and char- acter to a confidential agent of a neutral power, bearing the commission of his coun- try, and Bent for a purpose fully warranted by the law of nations, is not only to abuse language, hut also to confound all just ideas, ami to announce the wildest and most extravagant notions, such as certainly were not to have been expected in a grave diplomatic paper; and the President directs the undersigned to say to Mr. Hiilsemann, that tin- American government would re- gard such an imputation upon it by the Cabinet of Austria as that it employs spies, and that in a quarrel none of its own, as distinctly offensive, if it did not presume, as it is willing to presume, that the word used in the original German was not of equivalent meaning with " spy " in the Eng- lish language, or that in some other way the employment of such an opprobrious term may he explained. Had the Imperial government of Austria subjected Mr. Mann to the treatment of a spy, it would have placed itself without the pale of civilized nations; and the Cabinet of Vienna may- be assured, that if it had carried, or at- tempted to tarry, any such lawless purpose into effect, in the case of an authorized agent of this government, the spirit of the people of this country would have demand- ed immediate hostilities to be waged by the utmost exertion of the power of the repub- lic, military and naval. Mr. Hiilsemann proceeds to remark, that "this extremely painful incident, therefore, might have been passed over, without any written evidence being left on our part in the archives of the United States, had not General Taylor thought proper to revive the whole subject by communicating to the Senate, in his message of the 18th [28th] of last March, the instructions with which Mr. Mann had been furnished on the occa- sion of his mis-ion to Vienna. The pub- licity which has been given to that docu- ment has placed the Imperial government under the necessity of entering a formal protest, through it> official representative, against the proceedings of the American government, lest that government Bhould con-true our silence into approbation, or toleration even, of the principles which ap- pear to have guided its action and the means it has adopted." The undersigned reasserts to Mr. Hiilsemann, and to the Cabinet of Vienna and in the presence of the world, that the steps taken bj Presi dent Taylor, now protested against by the Austrian government, were warranted by the law of nations and agreeable to the usages of civilized states. With respect to the communication of Mr. Mann's instruc- tions to the Senate, and the language in which they are couched, it has already been said, and Mr. Hiilsemann must feel the justice of the remark, that these are domestic affairs, in reference to which the government of the United states cannot admit the slightest responsibility to the government of his Imperial Majesty. Xo state, deserving the appellation of inde- pendent, can permit the language in which it may instruct its own officers in the dis- charge of their duties to itself to be called in question under any pretext by a foreign power. But even if this were not so, Mr. Hiil- semann is in an error in stating that the Austrian government is called an "iron rule " in Mr. Mann's instructions. That phrase is not found in the paper; and in respect to the honorary epithet bestowed in Mr. Mann's instructions on the late chief of the revolutionary government of Hun- gary, Mr. Hiilsemann will bear in mind that the government of the United States cannot justly be expected, in a confidential communication to its own agent, to with- hold front an individual an epithet of dis- tinction of which a great part of the world thinks him worthy, merely on the ground that his own government regards him as a rebel. At an early stage of the American Revolution, while Washington was consid- ered by the English government as a rebel chief, he was regarded on the Continent of Europe as an illustrious hero. Put the undersigned will take the liberty of bring- ing the Cabinet of Vienna into the presence of it- own predecessors, ami of citing for its consideration the conduct of the Impe- rial government itself. In the year 1777 the warof the American Revolution was raging all over these United States. England was prosecuting that war with a most iv.-o- lute determination, ami by the exertion of all her military means to the fullest extent. Germany was at that time at peace with England; and yet an agent of that Con- gress, which was looked upon by England in no other light than that of a body in open rebellion, was not only received with great respect by the ambassador of the Empress Queen at Paris, and by the minis- ter id' the Grand Duke of Tuscany (who afterwards mounted the Imperial throne), THE BULSEM \\\ 1. 1.1 1 l i: 685 but resided in Vienna for ■ considerable time; not, Indeed, officially acknowledged, but treated with courtesy and reaped ; and the Emperor Buffered himself to be per- suaded by that agent to exert himself to prevent the German powers from furnish- ing troops to England to enable her to sup- press the rebellion in America. Neither Mr. Hiilsemann nor the Cabinet of Vienna, it is presumed, will undertake to say that any thing said or done by this government in regard to the recent war between Aus tii.i and Hungary is not borne out, and much more than borne out, by this exam- ple of tlic Imperial Court It is believed that the Emperor Joseph the Second habit- ually spoke in terms of respect and admira- tion of the character of Washington, as he is known to have done of that of Franklin; and he deemed it no infraction of neutrality to inform himself of the progress of the revolutionary Btruggle in America, or to express his deep sense of the merits and the talents of those illustrious men who wire then leading their country to inde- pendence and renown. The undersigned may add, that in 1781 the courts of Russia and Austria proposed a diplomatic congress of the belligerent powers, to which the commissioners of the United States should be admitted. Mr. Hiilsemann thinks that in Mr. Mann's instructions improper expressions are intro- duced in regard to Russia; but the under- signed has no reason to suppose that Russia herself is of that opinion. The only obser- vation made in those instructions about Russia is, that site " has chosen to assume an attitude of interference, and her im- mense preparations for invading and redu- cing the Hungarians to the rule of Austria, from which they desire to be released, gave so serious a character to the contest as to awaken the most painful solicitude in the minds of Americans." The undersigned cannot but consider the Austrian Cabinet as unnecessarily susceptible in looking upon language like this as a " hostile dem- onstration." If we remember that it was addressed by the government to its own agent, and has received publicity only through a communication from one depart- ment of the American government to an- other, the language quoted must be deemed moderate and inoffensive. The comity of nations would hardly forbid its being ad- dressed to the two imperial powers them- selves. It is scarcely necessary for the undersigned to say, that the relations of the United Btatea with Russia have always been of the moat friendly kind, and have never been deemed by either party to re. quire any compromise of their peculiar riewa upon subjects of domestic or foreign polity, or the true origin of governments. At any rati', the fact that Au-tria, in her contest with Hungary, had an intimate and faithful ally in Russia, cannot alter the real nature of the question between Au- tria and Hungary, nor in any way affect the neutral rights and duties of the govern- ment of the United State-, or the justifiable sympathies of the American people. It i-. indeed, easy to conceive, thai favor toward struggling Hungary would be not dimin- ished, but increased, when it was seen that the arm of Austria was strengthened and upheld by a power whose assistance threat- ened to be, and which in the end proved to be, overwhelmingly destructive of all her hopes. Toward the conclusion of bis note Mr. Hiilaemann remarks, that "if the govern- ment of the United States were to think it proper to take an indirect part in the polit- ical movement- of Europe, American pol- icy would be exposed to acts of retaliation, and to certain inconveniences which would not fail to affect the commerce and indus- try of the two hemispheres." As to this possible fortune, this hypothetical retalia- tion, the government and people of the United States are quite willing to take their chances and abide their destiny. Taking neither a direct nor an indirect part in the domestic or intestine movements of Europe, they have no fear of events of the nature alluded to by Mr. Hiilsemann. It would be idle now to diacuaa with Mr. Hiilsemann those act- of retaliation which he imagines may possibly take place at some indefinite time hereafter. Those questions will he discussed when they arise; and Mr. Hiilsemann and the Cabinet at Vienna may rest assured, that, in the mean time, while performing with strict and exact fidelity all their neutral duties, nothing will deter either the government or the people of the United States from exercising, at their own discretion, the rights belonging to them as an independent nation, and of forming and exprcr->inL, r their own opinions, freely and at all times, upon the great political events which may transpire among the civilized nations of the earth. Their own institu- tions Btand upon the broadest principli - of civil Liberty ; and believing those princi- ples and the fundamental law- in which i;s t ; appendix. they art embodied to be eminently favor- able to the prosperity of Mutes, to be, in fact, the f, 1T"> ; political abuse of, 261 ; letter cm opening first < Ion- gress with praj er, 622. A. lams, J. Q., at Bunker Hill, 189; his nominations to office postponed by tin- Senate, .".IS; remark on Webster, I 1 ".; opposition to his administration, 484. Adams, Samuel, delegate to ( .'ongress, 162 ; signs the declaration, 170; movement to open Congress with prayer, 622. Addition to the Capitol, speech at laying of the corner-stone of the, 639. Address, delivered at laying of corner stone of Bunker Hill Monument, 123; on com- pletion of Bunker Hill Monument, 136. African Slave Trade, remarks of Mr. Web- ster on, 4 ( .) ; Congress has power to re- strain, '_'•'.:'>. African Squadron, maintained, t'>72. " Aiding and Abetting " defined, 207. Airs, the martial, of England, 871. Aldham, Mr., at dinner of New England Society in New York, 503. Allegiance, doctrine of perpetual, 856 Allied Sovereigns, claims of, over national independence, til ; effect of their meet- ing at Laybach on the people, 64; their conduct in regard to contest in (Jreece, 69; meeting at Verona, 1822, 163; over- throw Cortez government of Spain, 158. America, first railroad in, 126; her contri- butions to Europe, 1 19 ; bu< cess of united government in, 499; extract from Bishop of St. Asaph on colonies in, 640; political principles of, 642. " American " and "foreign policy," applied to system of tariff, 7^ American Government, elements of, 148; principles of, in respect to suffra the people limit themst li es, 540. American Liberty, principles of, 586; our inheritance of, 642. GOO INDEX. American People, what they owe to repub- lican principles, 66 ; establish popular government, 132; prepared for popular l;h\ ernraent, 182. American Political Principles, summary of, 642. American Revolution, commemorated by Bunker Hill .Monument, 125; survivors of, at Bunker Hill, 127 ; character of state papers of, 130; peculiar principle of, 142. Amiens, Treaty of, remarks of Mr. Wind- ham on, 622. Ancestors, how we may commune with, 26. Ancestry, our respect for, 26. Annapolis, meeting at, concerning com- merce, 1 1">. Antislavery Conventions, proceedings at, 1 185. Appointing and removing power, speech on, 394. Appropriations by Congress, shall be spe- cific, 418. Artisans, law prohibiting emigration of, from England, in • Arts and Science, progress of, in the United States, 648. Ashburton, Lord, character of, 484 ; cited 4'.U ; letter to Mr. Webster on impress- ment, 659. Astronomy, progress in, 648. Attainder, bill of, provision on prohibition of, 19. Attorney-General v. Cullum, in regard to charity for town of Bury St. Edmunds, 527. Austria, agent of United States respect- fully received by, 684. Austria and Russia, friendly to United States in 1781, 085. B. Babylon, astronomers of, 340. Baciie, A. 1) , quoted, 528. Bacon, Lord, 1~>^ Badger, G. E., of N. Carolina, 587 ; voted againsl ceding New Mexico and Cali- fornia, 682. Balance of Trade, doctrine of, 91. Bank Charter, benefit of, to stockholders, :;■_'( ; first passed bj Congress, 327. Bank Credit, benefit of, in United States, 86 1 : evils arising from abuse of, 864. Bank, National. Mr. Swing's plan for a, 490. Bank Notes, must in' convertible into specie, Bank of England, resumes cash paymi nts, 81. Bank of United States, object of, 81 ; charter vetoed. 321 ; effect of the veto in Western country, 322 ; time for renewal of charter, 323 ; benefit of a charter to stockholders, 824; foreigners as stockholders in, 325- :;27 ; advantage of, in case of war, 327; established, 328 ; its conduct under Mr. Adams's administration, 434 ; message of President Jackson in regard to, 434 ; how affected by events of 1829, 435; bill for re-charter passed by Congress, 436; branch of, in New Hampshire, 436; order for removal of deposits, 430; act incorporating the, 400. Bankruptcy, a uniform system of, remarks on, 471; State laws concerning, ineffect- ual, 471. Bankrupt Law, of New York, considered, 180; repeal of the, 471. Bankrupt Laws, to be established by na- tional authority, 179 ; absolute power of Congress to establish, 186; prohibition on State law in regard to, 186. Banks, effect of paper issues by, 81 ; safest under private management, 325 ; power of Congress to establish, 328, 334, 335; increase of, 440; suspension of specie payment, 443. Barre, Col., extract from speech on Ameri- can Colonists, 237. Barrow, Dr., his idea of " rest," xxxix. Bell, Senator from Tennessee, G14. Benevolent establishments of United States, 651. Benson, Judge, Commissioner at Annapolis, 310. Benton, Thomas II., speaks on Eoot's reso- lution, 227; resolutions of, 407; allusion to, 569. Berkeley, Bishop, extract from. 639. Berrien, J. M., 570; resolution concerning Mexico, .">stj ; proposition in respect to Texas, (ill; vote against ceding New Mexico and California, 632. Bill, to limit time of service of certain officers, 394, 395. Bill of Rights, meaning of, concerning chartered charities, 10. Bill of Plights of N. II., articles infringed in regard to Dartmouth College, 14 ; pro- hibit retrospective laws. 1 1. Blacks from Northern States, how treated at the South, 620. P.lake, George, 137. Boston, imprisonment of Sir E, Andros in, :;'.•; its port closed, 12S; resolutions of, in lS-Jf), 4ii.". ; reception given to Mr. Webster in 1842, 481. Bowdoin, James, delegate to Congress, 102. INDEX. 691 Branch, Mr., resolution of, 378. Brewster, Elder, 27, 81, 62. British Parliament, power claimed by, over i barters, 5. Brooks, Gov. John, 127. Brougham, Mr., his approval of the Monroe declaration, 165. Buena Vista, General Taylor at, 559. Buffalo, building of a pier at, 121 ; recep- tion of Mr. Webster at, anil Bpeech, May ■J - .', ls.'ii, 626; citizens of, exhorted to preserve the Union, 027. Holler, Justice, extract on government of corporations, 21. Bunker Mill Battle, address to survivors of, 127 ; important effects of, 129 ; changes of the fifty years following the, 181 ; survivors of, present at completion of monument, 188; described, 141; estab- lished Independence, 112. Bunker Hill Monument, address at laving of corner-stone, 12".; William Tudor 's idea of erecting tin*. 1 23 ; laying of corner- stone described, 123; completion of, 136; veterans present at completion of, 138; " stands on Union," 140 ; description of, 161. Burke, Edmund, compliment to Charles Fox, xxxviii ; speeches of, criticised, lii ; bill for economical reform, 469. Cabot, George, notice of, 497. Calhoun, J. ('., President of Senate and Vice-President of United States, 243; resolutions on State sovereignty, 273; speaks on Wilkins tariff hill, 273 ; course in regard to tariff of 1816,305; resolutions of, relating to slavery, 445; supports administration of Van Buren, 451 ; remarks of Mr. Webster on the political course of, 453 ; letter on Sub- Treasury bill, 453 ; change in views upon Nub-Treasury bill, 454; advocates the State-rights party, 455, 464, 467 ; his ob- ject to unite the entire South, 457 ; attack on Mr. Webster, 158; Mr. Webster's reply to, 458; opposes Mr. Dallas's bill for a bank, 400; bill of, for internal im- provements, 466; extract from, on the power of Congress, 167 ; took lead in an- nexing Texas, 609; remarks npon admis- sion of Texas, 611 ; dying testimony to Mr. Webster's conscientiousness, xliii. California, proposed annexation of, 563; article of cession to United States, 587 ; discovery of gold in, 001 ; Mexican pro- vincial government overthrown by, 601 ; establishment of local government in, 602; slavery excluded from, by law of Datura, 616 < '.meii. cei lion to England, effect on the colonies, 12 Canals, aet of 1*21 concerning, 245. Canning, Mr., opinion concerning Spain and her colonii - I I approval of the \l onroe declaration, 155. Capitol, speech at laying of corner-stone of the addition to the, 889 ; copj of paper under comer 644; foun- dation laid by Washington, 644 ; plan for extension of the, 644. Carroll, Charles, signer of the Declaration, 176. ('ass, Lewis, Mexican Bpeech of, 554 ; as a Whig candidate, o7"> ; ai a candidate for President, 684; personal character of, 684; in favor of the Compromise Line, 5ss ; requests his recall from France, 667 ; his construction of the treaty of Wash- ington referred to, 669, «<7 1 ; answer of Mr. Webster to, concerning the African squadron, 672. Catharine the Second of Russia, policy in respect to I Ireeee, 70. Cession, articles of, concerning New Mexico and California, 5*7. Channing, W. E., letter of, on slavery, 624. Charities, charters granted to founders of, 7; college's included under, 7,610; founder of incorporated, considered vis- itor, 7; government may incorporate, 7; legal signification of, 7: opinion of Lord Holt respecting the power of visitors over, 7; right of visitation in, incorpo- rated. 7; case of town of Bury St. Ed- munds, 627; schools founded by, must include religious instruction, 628. Charity, legal definition of, 510. Charles the Second, 39. Charters, of Dartmouth College (1760), 1; legislative power over, defined, 5; power claimed by British Parliament over, 5; Lord Mansfield on rights of, 6 ; legisla- tive power over, limited, 6; granted to founders of charities, 7 : opinion of Lord Commissioner Lyre on charities estab- lished by, '.i ; how they affect property of corporations, 12; of the nature of con- tracts, 20, 21 ; how may be altered or varied, L'l ; may be accepted at will, _' 1 ; no difference between grant- of corporate franchise and tangible property, 21 ; of Dartmouth College (1769) is a contract, 22; obtained by founders of English liberty. 63; New England colonists re- quired them, 148. G92 INDEX. Chateaubriand, M. do, quoted respecting the I loly Alliance, 6 1 Chatham, Lord, his colonial policy, 42; opinion of the first Congress, 162. Chaucer, his use of word " green," xxxix. Chicago Road, President's opinion in re- spect to, 353. China, trade of United States with, 05. Choate, Rufus, 496. Christian charity defined, 510; spirit of, 619. Christianity, blended influence of civiliza- tion and. 65; observance of the Sabbath a part of, 518; essentials of, part of the common law, 527, 530. Christian Ministry, and the Religious In- struction of the Young, speech in Su- preme Court, 505. Christian Ministry, opprobrium cast on the, by the Girard will, 508; establishment of, by Christ, 515 ; work of the, in United States, 509, 516. Christians, religious belief of, 521. Christ's command, " Sutler little children," &c, referred to, 517. Church, grants to, cannot be rescinded, 13. Civil Law, maxim of, in regard to slavery, 573. Clay, Henry, speech on tariff of 1824 criti- cised by Mr. Webster, 78; author of American system of tariff, 78 ; resolution of, relating to slavery in District of Co- lumbia, 445; resolutions in respect to slavery, GOO. Clayton, J. M., his explanation of Mr. Mann's mission, C80. Clergy, eulogium on, 500. Coast Survey of United States, 648. College Livings, rights and character of, 10; attack of .lames the Second on Magdalen College, 17. Colleges, are eleemosynary corporations, 0, 8, 22 ; charters granted to, 7 ; founda- tion of, considered by Lord Mansfield, 0; charters should be kept inviolate, 23 ; party or political influence dangerous to, 23 Colonies, establishment of Greek, 31; of New England, 34, 35; of Roman, 33; of West India, '.'A, 35; Spanish in South America, 184, 111; New England ami Virginia, 144 ; English and Spanish com- pared, 146; original ground of dispute l. et w ecu England and the, 164; American, declared free and independent, fill. Colonists, English, in America, secret of their Micce-s, 117; brought their charters, 148; in Virginia, failed for want of charter, 148; allegiance to the king, 105. Columbus, Christopher, portrayed, 121,144. Columbus, O., convention at, in regard to the observance of the Sabbath, 518. Commerce, condition of, in 1824, 83; its national character, 92, 498; bow affected by laws of Confederation, 114; power of Congress to regulate, 114, 120; resolutions of New Jersey in regard to, 115; Mr. YVitherspoon's motion in Con- gress concerning, 115; of Virginia in re- gard to, 115; necessity of vesting Con- gress with power to control, 115; law of Congress paramount. 120; guarded by the general government, 407. Compact and government as distinguished from each other, 28 I. Compromise Act, principle of, 480. Compromise Line, in respect to slavery, 588. Concurrent Legislation, defined and argued, 110; effect on monopolies, 119. Confederation, its effect on commerce, 114; of 1781 a league, 276 ; state of the country under the, 281. Confessions, how to be regarded, 220. Congress of Delegates, at Philadelphia, 1774, 102 ; resolutions on the Declaration, 105; sat with closed doors, 106. Congress of Greece, of 1821, 72. Congress of United States, power to regu- late commerce, 114, 120; should have power to regulate commerce, 115; and the States, argument on concurrent power of, 115; exclusive right over monopolies, 116 ; possesses exclusive admiralty juris- diction, 118; law of, paramount, 120; laws of, in opposition to State law, 122 ; power concerning rights of authors and inventors, 122; its coinage powers, 185; to establish uniform bankrupt laws, 186 ; power over slave trade, 233; no power over slavery, 2:53, 420, 036 ; power to make laws, 293, 331 ; exclusive power to lay duties, 300 ; duty of, in case of a Presi- dential veto, 320; passes first bank charter, 1791, 327 ; to establish banks, 328, 331, 335; power of, continuous, 336; duties of both houses, 375; power to bor- row money, 375; in regard to public moneys, 3s2 ; no precise time for ex- piration of session, 414; power over ceded territory, 445; no control over slavery, 571. Congress of Verona, in regard to Greek revolution, 70, 153. Connecticut, law of, concerning steam nav- igation, 1 12. Constitution of United States, provision con- cerning' c post facto laws, 10; its origin to INDKX. 093 regulate commerce, 1 1 1. 1 15; it- authority to establish bankrupt laws, L79 ; law of, in regard to contracts. [80 . object of the, ls:>; provides a medium for payment of debts, and a uniform mink' of discharging them, 186 j prohibitions of, i cerning contracts ami payment of debts, 1*7 ; provisions for settling questions of ((in- stitutional law, 265; to be interpreted bj the judicial power, 265, 282; as a com- pact, 270; not a compact between Sover- eign Statts, argued, 273; object of, 281 ; not a league, 282 ; what it says of itself, 283; its relations to individuals, 286 ; Madison's opinion of, ,'313 ; provision of, in case of a Presidential veto, 320; President Jackson's view of, 354 ; our duty to the, 858; protects lalior, 361 ; division of powers conferred by, 379; on power of removal from office, 398 ; divides powers of government, 398 ; recognized slavery, 429, 570 ; does not speak of Sovereign States, or Federal Govern- ment, 538; protects existing government of a State, 542; and the Union, speech on, March 7, 1850, 600; formation of the, 628; provision of, concerning fugitives, 629 ; officers of the law bound to support the, 680; how it affected the institution of slavery, l.v. Constructive presence defined, 210. Contracts, cases cited concerning obliga- tion of, 19; defined, include grants, 19; provision concerning obligation of, 19; law of the Constitution in regard to, 180; obligation of, defined, 180, 181 ; obliga- tion of, rests on universal law, 181; the law not a part of, argued, 182-184; the constitutional provision in regard to, 185 ; prohibition on state law concerning, 187. Convention of 1787, remarks on. 287. Copper, duties received from, 108. Corporate Franchises, power of Legislature over, limited, 6. Corporations, acts of Legislature, on Dart- mouth College (1709), 2, 3; royal preroga- tive to create, 5; power of King over, limited by Legislature, 5 ; power of Legis- lature to create, 5 ; opinion of Lord Mans field on rights of, 5; divers sorts of, 6 : eleemosynary, nature of, defined. 6, '.• ; power of, over property possessed by them, >'< ; charter rights of visitors of, 7; power of visitation over transferable, 7 ; argument of Stillingtleet, 8 ; rights of trustees object of legal protection, 11; fr nchises granted to, 11; concerning pecuniary benefit fr.om, 11; concerning private property, 12; concerning grants of land to, 18 ; right of trustees to elect officers, 16 ; legislature, c mnot repeal statutes creating private, 20; extract from Justice Bulleron government of, 21 ; bow Charters of, may he altered or varied, 21 ; possible dangers of independent inent, 22. Cotton, attempt t<> naturalize growth of, in Prance, 90; how affected by tariff of 1824, 102; proposed reduction of duty on, 248 ; culture of, protect* d, :; >i ; how its cultivation affects slavery and the South, 608. Cotton Manufactures, importance Of, 101 ; of England and United States, 103. Crawford, Mr., opposing candidate to Mr. Adams, .".-1 . Credit System, and the Labor of the United States, remarks on, 449. Credit System, benefit of, in United Slates, 304; evils arising from abuse of, 864. Criminal Law, its object, 198 Cumberland Road Bill, approved, 415. Currency, effect of paper issues to depre- ciate, 81 ; paper, of England, effect on prices, 81; the laboring man's interest in, 360; experiment of exclusive Bpi 362; President's interference with, 433 ; soundness of, 440 ; derangement of , effect of, 442 ; its restoration an object of revolu- tion of is K), 4'.)0. Gushing, Thomas, delegate to Congress, 162. Custom-house Bonds, act of 1S0U in regard to, 383. D. Dallas, Geo. M., proposition of, for a bank. 460. Dane, Nathan, drafted Ordinance of 17-7. 231. Danemora, iron mines of, 105. Dartmouth College, argument in case of, 1 ; acts of Legislature affecting, 1. ■';, 11, 15, 16, IS; corporation of, (1769,] 2; charter of. (1769,) is a contract. 22; ob servation of Mr. Webster on opinion of court of N. H. concerning, 22; incident connected with Mr. Webster- argument in case of. \\i. I tavis, Judge, 582. Debt, abolition of imprisonment for, 47 1. 1 H'hti.r and Creditor, law of, 472, 17-1. Debts, the Constitution provides for the payment and d - ration of Independence, 168 . mittee appointed to draft the. 161; its 694 INDEX. object and foundation, 166 ; speeches of Webster for, and dissenting, ascribed to Adams and another, 107, 168; anniver- sary of, 641. Democracy, Northern, policy of, 611. Deposits, removal of, by the President, 869. Public Moneys. Dexter, Samuel, character of, 2G1. Disbursing I officers, tenure of office, 390. Discourse delivered at Plymouth, on " First Settlement of New England," 25. Dissolution of the Union, evils of, 340. District of Columbia, remarks of Mr. Web- ster on Slavery in, 44.">; resolutions on Slavery in, 445; power of Congress in, 446. Divine liiglit, a doctrine of the Holy Alli- ance, 63. Dix. J. A., his vote for admission of Texas, 611. Domestic Industry, not confined to manu- factures, 98. Dorr, Thomas W., at the head of revolu- tionary government of Hhode Island, E35; tried for treason, 536. Dough Faces, voted for Missouri Compro- mise. 583. Douglass, Stephen II., amendment concern- ing Missouri, 569. Drum-Heat of England, 371. Duane, W. J., removal of, from office, 368. Duelie', Rev. Mr., opened first Congress with prayer, 522. Durfee, Chief Justice, charge of, in Dorr case of Rhode Island, 545. Duties on Imports, extract from speech on, (1846,) 110. E. Education, provision for general diffusion of, in New England, 47,48; sentiment of John Adams on, 174. Edwards, Jonathan, liis use of the word " Bweetness," xxxix. Election, of officers of colleges, 16. Elections, rights of, 12; American system of, 640. Electricity, progress in, 648. Eleei ynary corporations, nature of, de- fined, 6, 9; Colleges are included under, 22. EUenborough, Lord, on commercial re- Btrictions, 87. I worth, ' Miver, extract from, on the Con- Btitution, 288, 295. Eloquence, defined by Webster, 167. Embargo Mr. Hillhouse's opinion of, 200; opposed by Massachusetts, 260. Emigration, different motives for, 81, 557 ; Grecian, 82 ; Roman, 83 ; purposes and prospects Of Pilgrim Fathers, 35; toward the West, 41 ; to California, began, 601 ; how encouraged by England, 656. England, effect of taxation on land-holders in, 44 ; how land was holden, in time of Henry the Seventh, 44; paper system of, effect on prices, 81; protective system of, 84 ; policy of, in respect to paper currency, 86; manufacture of silk in, 87; removed certain restrictions on trade, 89; pro- visions concerning her shipping interest, 109; course of, in regard to Spanish colonies, 151; the original ground of dis- pute between the Colonies and, 164 ; rela- tion of South Carolina to, in 1775,259; maritime power of, in war of 1812, 461; imprisonment for debt abolished in, 474 ; progress of its power, 501 ; law of, in regard to charitable institutions, 527; representative system of, 538, 642; right claimed by, in respect to impressment, 655; encourages emigration, 656. English Colonists, in America, secret of their success, 147. English Composition, school-boy's attempt at, xi ; falseness of style, xii. English Language, correct use in the United States, 148. English Revolution of 1088, 63; participa- tion of Massachusetts in, 39. Europe, effect in United States of pacifi- cation of, 242; condition of, at the birth of Washington, 341. Everett, Edward, Minister to England, 487; draft for the Hiilsemann letter, 678. Ewing, Thomas, resolution in regard to payments for public lands, 438 ; plan for a national bank. 490. Exchange, the rate of, 96; English stand- ard of, 97. Exchequer, plan of, Mr. Webster's appro- bation of, 191,492; sent to Congress in 1842, 191. Exclusion of Slavery from the Territories, speech on, Aug. 12, 1848, 669. Executive of United States, power over the press, 861, 852; refuses to execute law of Congress, 858 ; patronage, dangers of, 394, 395 ; power of, defined, 898 ; exten- sion of its power, 480, 481 ; change in the fiscal system effected by, 136. Executive Patronage, and removals from office, speech on, 3t7. Executive Usurpation, speech on, 353. Exeter College, judgmenl of Lord Holt, in case of, 7 ; argument of Stillingfleet, 8. Exports from the United States, 79, 98. INDEX Ex post facto laws, prohibited l»y Consti- tution of r. s.. 19, Eyre, L«>nl Commissioner, opinion of, on chartered charities, 9. 1'. Faneuil Hall, draped in mourning tor the first time, 156; reception of Mr. Webster at, Sept. 80, 1842, 181. Federalism, history of, 252, Federalist, extract from, on the Constitution, 289. Festival of Sons of New Eampshire, 698, Fillmore, Millard, laid corner-stone of ex tension to the Capitol, 644 ; addressed, 853. Fitch, John, grant to, concerning Bteam navigation, 112. l'itzsiininons, Mr., suggests protective du- ties, 808. Flagg, George, his painting of the Landing of the Pilgrims, 52. Fletcher r. Peck, case of contract, 19. Florida, acquisition of, 42'J ; admitted into the Union, 559; cession of, 008. Foot's Resolution, in Congress, concerning Public Lands, 227 ; Mr. Webster's second speecli on, 227 ; Mr. Webster's last re- marks on, 269. Foreigners, as stockholders in U. S. Bank, :;2o-:;27. Foreign Interference, President Monroe on, 153. Foreign Trade, to be encouraged, 94, 98. Forsyth, John, moves to reduce duty on cotton, 243. Fortification Bill, speech on loss of the, 407; history of, 410-413; extract from President's Message on, 416. Foster, John, extract from his " Essay on Evils of Popular Ignorance," 623. Fox, Charles, remark on Lord Chancellor Thurlow, xx.wii ; and Burke, speeches of, compared, lvi. France, subdivision of landed property in, 44; prophecy concerning government of, 44,53; allies enter into, effect on trade. 80; invasion of Spain, 153; alliance of U. S. with, declared void. 278 ; letters of marque, asked by President Jackson, 42H. Franchise, and liberty, synonymous terms, 11; individual, protected by law, 15. Franchises, corporate, power of Legislature over, limited, 6 ; granted to trustc corporations, 11. Francis the First, quoted, GS1. Franklin, Benjamin, 89 ; appointed i" draft tin- I declaration, 164 Franklin, State of, constitution of, and pro- ■ii t<> supply a currency, 170 Free Blacks, from North, bow treated at tin- South, 620. Free Prees, attributes of, 850 ; tin- bestow- ing of offlCfl "li i luetor- of the. Schools, of N ind, i .". In i- Soil men, character of. 681 • Soil Party , platform of, 680; n inate Martin Nan Buren, 681. Free Trade, speech of Mr. Webster on, 109, noic Freights, rat. I, 108 j of iron from Sweden, 106. French Indemnity Loan, of L818, Bl. Frothingham, Richard, extract from, on lay- ing corner-stone of Bunker Mill Monu- ment, 123; account of completion of Hunker Hill Monument, 135, Fugitive Slave Law, of 1798, and i860 opposition to, 635. Fugitive Slaves, complaint of the South and duty of the North concerning, 617 ; pro- vision of the Constitution in respect to, 62! >. Fulton, Robert, his exclusive right to navi- gation, 1 12. Fulton and Livingston, grant of steam nai i- gation to, by New York, 112. G. Gage, Governor, convenes General Court at Salem, 162 J rejects John Adam- Councillor, 162. Gaines, Major, description of New Mexico, 566. Gallagher, Win. I>, extract from, on growth of Western trade. 646. General Court, convened at Salem. 163; at Salem dissolved, and power of Lnglan 1 terminated, 162. Georgia, cession of her Western territory, 608. German Literature, play ridiculing the, CI Gerry, Samuel. 17o. Gibbons v. Ogden, case of, 111; argument of Mr. Webster in, 111. Girard College, provisions of Qirard's will in regard to, 608 ; i >n concerning religious instruction in, 607; no obi ance of the Sabbath there. 618 Girard, Stephen, will of, contested, his BCh( me derogatory to Christianity, 616, 616. Glass, duty on, advisable. 1<»2. GOG INDEX. Gold, and silver as legal tender, 95; dis- covered in California, 001. Goodhue, Mr, 497. Goodridge Robbery Case, Mr. Webster's management of, xv. Government, nature and constitution of, 43; republican form of, laws which regu- late, 43 ; of France, how effected by sub- division of land, 44, 53; subdivision of lands necessary to free form of, 44 ; the true principle of a free, 45 ; to be founded on property, 45 ; absolute or regulated, the question of the age, 60 ; influence of knowledge over, 131-133; difficulty of establishing popular, 132; influence of public opinion on, 133; popular, practi- cable, 134 ; popular, overthrown in Spain, 153; powers of, concerning local im- provement, 238 ; power of, over internal improvements, 243 ; doctrine of South Carolina on State rights, 255; popular, rests on two principles, 2U7 ; the success of a united, 4 ( J9. Government, American, character of, estab- lished by tbe Pilgrims, 35; origin and character of, 43; system of representa- tion in, 46 ; founded on morality and religious sentiment, 49; origin and source of power, 257; its establishment, 285; majority must govern, 295; danger of political proscription to the, 3l'J ; two principles upon which it stands, 319. Grants, legislature no power to rescind, when given for educational or religious purposes, 13; protection of, 19; included under contracts, 19. Great Britain, negotiation of treaty with. 481. Greece, saved by battle of Marathon, 28 ; emigration from, 32 ; speech on revolu- tion in, 57 ; appeal to United States con- cerning revolution in, 57; extract from President Monroe, on revolution in, 58; we are her debtors, 58 ; improved condi- tion of, 68; conduct (if Allied Sovereigns in regard to contesl in, 69; Congress at Verona, 1*22, concerning independence of, 70; Congress of 1821,72; revolution of 1821 in, 72; society of Vienna to en- courage literature in, 72 : propriety of ap- pointing an agent to, 75; liberty, of, (ill ; want of union among her states, lU^. (■reeks, Baron Strogonoff on the massacre of the, 71; excited to rebellion by Rus- sia, 69; our sympathy for cause of, 67j the oppression of, by Turkey, 68; what they have accomplished, 7 (. Griswold, George, toast to Daniel Web- ster, 496. IT. Hale, Representative to Congress, 585. Hamilton, Alexander, his services, 309. Hancock, John, presides in Congress, 107; Bigned the Declaration, 170; first signer of the Declaration, 497. Harbor Bill, course of President Jackson concerning, 353. Hardin, Col., description of New Mexico, "itiT. Harrison, Wm. Henry, President, 481 ; the "Log Cabin " candidate, 470; civil char- acter of, 577. Hartford Convention, 235; design of, 253. Harvard College, 40, 48. Harvey, Peter, story told of Mr. Webster by, xv. Hayne, Robert Y., speaks on Foot's resolu- tion, 227; reply of Webster to, on Foot's resolution, 227; votes on internal im- provement, 245. Hemp, growth of, to he encouraged, 107 ; importation of, 107; effect of increased duty on, 108. Henry, Patrick, 172. Henry tbe Seventh, division of land in Eng- land in time of, 44 ; colonies planted in the reign of, 142. Hermitage, supposed visit of occupant of, to the Senate Chamber, 446. Ilillard, Mr., remarks in Massachusetts Senate, 018. Hillhouse, Mr., opinion on the embargo law, 260. Hoar, Mr., mission of, to South Carolina, * 621. Holland, trade of, with the United States, 93; our treaty with, of 1782, 170. Holt, Lord, opinion of, respecting power of visitors over corporations, 7. Holy Alliance, origin of, til ; effect on social rights, 62, 64 ; extract from Puffendorf, bearing on principles of, 02; principles of the, 62, 63; forcible interference a principle of, 63. Home Market, effect of manufactures on, 84. House of Commons, representation in the, 012. 1 1 iilsemann Letter, written by Mr. Webster, 679. Hume, Mr., remark on administration of justice, 315. Hungarians, arrival of, in the United States, 882 Hungary, President Taylor's interest in the revolution in, 679; correspondence relat- ing to revolution in, 682. tNDEX. 697 Hunter, Mr., 678. Iluskisson, Mr., 491 ; policy of, in respect to commerce, 93. Hutchinson, Gov., 165. I. Immortality, inquiries concerning, 517. Impeachment, closing appeal in defence of Judge .lames Pre8cott, 55. Imports, excess of, over exports, explained, 93. Impressment, convention of 1803, in respect to, 666 ; English law in respect to, 666 ; letter of Mr. Webster to Lord Ashburton respecting, 665; injuries of, 658 ; letter of Lord Ashburton on, 050; rule of the United States in respect to, 058. Imprisonment for Debt, abolition of, 474. Inauguration of Washington, 312. India and China, trade of United States with, 96. Individual Rights, concerning charities, 12. Insolvent Debtors, act of New York con- cerning, 179. Insolvents, hopeless condition of, 472. Intellectual being, inquiries of an, 517. Interference, forcible, a principle of the Holy Alliance, 63; a violation of public law, 65. Internal Improvements, in New England. 13 ; progress of, 80; general benefit from, 238 ; course of South Carolina towards, 238; at the West, opposition of the South to, . 240: attention of United States directed to, 242 ; course pursued by Mr. Webster in Congress towards, 243 ; votes of Hayne on, 245 ; Mr. Calhoun's bill for, 466. International Law, duty of United States in regard to, 60, 61, 66. Ireland, coasting trade of England with, 100 ; legislation desired in, 499. Iron, concerning home manufacture of, 104- 106; how affected by tariff of 1824, 104; effect of increased duty on, 108. Jackson, Andrew, veto on United States Bank Bill, 320 ; opinion of Mr. Webster on the veto of the Bank bill, 337, 838; message in regard to the Bank of United States, 343; uses his power to remove from office, 347 ; sentiments of Webster on reelection of, 357; protest of, :*.*". 7 ; removal of deposits by, ::ii'.> ; recommends letters of marque and reprisal against France, 420 ; remarks of Mr. Webster on, 428 ; nil course concerning the currencj . il; inauguration ai President, I i act ol making sales of public huid^ payable in gold and silver, 488 ; character ol • elected President vice Mr. Adami in I ■"> s l . Idea of bridging the Potomac, 1 .lames the 1- Irst, bis tyninin , 377. Jamefl the Second, attack on college livings at Magdalen < lollege, 17. Jay, John, his services, 811; appointed Chief .lu-tic, 811 j quoted, 688; treaty of 1794 with England, 808. Jefferson, Thomas, news of the death of, 166; birth and education of, L68; elected to first Congress, 168, 172; his paper on " Rights of America," L68 ; appointed to draft the Declaration, 164; remark on Adams in Congress, 166 : Governor of Virginia, 172 ; his "Notes on Virginia," 172 ; Minister abroad, 172; Secretary of State, 17l'; Vice-I'resident and President, 172, 173; his " Manual of Parliamentary Practice," 172; founded University of Virginia, 173; his scholarship, 173; last days of, 173; inscription for his monument, 17:'.; Louisiana acquired in administration of, 175; correspondence concerning the Confederation, 287 ; use of his power to remove from office. 348 ; opposed to ex- pending money without appropriation, 418; admitted Louisiana into the Union, 559; opinion of admitting Louisiana into the Union, 630 J rule in respect to im- pressment, 658. Jewish Talmuds, 524. Johnson, Hon. Richard M., effort for aboli- tion of imprisonment for debt, 17 1. Johnston, Samuel, extract on the Constitu- tion, 288. Jones, Sir William, extract from, 848. Joseph the Second, quoted, 681. Judiciary of United State-, to interpret questions of constitutional law, 266, 282 ; extent of its power, 265, 293 : Mr. Madi- son's opinion on, "-".'l ; Mr. l'inkney on the, 294; its duties and extent. 816; how vacancies are tilled, 318; decides the constitutional laws, 330. K. Kemlile, Mr., anecdote of, xxiii. Kennistons, I defence of the, xv. Kent, Chancellor, remarks at Webster din- ner in N.w York, -07. King, Gov., action of, in revolution in Rhode Island, 636 King, Mr., of Alabama. 413. 698 INDEX. King, Rufus, resolution of, in 1786, in re- gard to slavery, 235 ; member of Con- gress, and of the Convention of 1787, 600 ; on impressment, *i57. King Solomon's Lodge, erect a monument t<> Genera] Warren, 128. Knapp, J. K. and .1. J.. Jr., convicted of murder of Captain Joseph White, 1!»3. Knowledge, i t> influence over governments, 181-188; diffusion of, in United States, 660. Knowlton, anecdote of, xxvi. Kossuth, Louis, demanded of Turkey by Emperor of Russia, 698; extract from speech of Mr. Webster on, 508; his com- munication to American Charge' d'Af- faires, 082. Labor, how to be protected, 82; different prices of, 105; protected by the Consti- tution, 3G1. Laborers, their interest in the currency, 360; character of Northern, 620 ; of the North, compared with Southern slaves, 020. Labor-Saving Machines, 451. Lafayette, Gen., addressed by Webster at Bunker Hill, 130. Land, a subdivision of, necessary to free form of government, 44 ; effect of taxa- tion on division of, in England, 44; how liolden in England in time of Henry the Seventh, 44; prophecy concerning sub- division of, on government of France, 44, 53. Landing of Pilgrims at Plymouth, picture representing. 52. Lands, Public, Mr. Foot's resolution in re- gard to, 227 ; views of Mr. Webster con- cerning the disposition of, 237, 238; powers of government to donate for local improvement, 238; donations of, n. ■ -.i lv tor local improvement, 239 ; liberal reduction in price of, favored by New Eng- land, 241; whence obtained, 126; States have no sovereignty over, 126; question of revenue connected with, 427; liberal policy in respect to Bales of, 127; revenue arising from Bales of, 128; act making sales of, payable in gold and silver, Lansdowne, Lord, quoted on prohibitory duties, 86, '.'1. Law, of the land, relating to individual fran- chise, lii; interest and duty of United States in international, 66 ; criminal, its object, 108 ; Mr. Webster's respect for, 819; representation the foundation of, 043 ; the supreme rule, 043. Laws, validity of, not to depend upon the motive, 301. Laybach, circular of sovereigns at, 02. Lay preaching and lay teaching, 513. League, defined, 278. Lee, Richard Henry, resolution of June, 1770, 103. Legislation, society to be regarded in, 103; concurrent power of States with Congress, 110-118; will of the people ascertained by, 541. Legislative Power, over charters, defined, 5; restriction imposed upon, 2:). Legislature, Acts of. t' Webster on, 869. Navigation, English act of 1660, restricting the trade of the N. E. Colonies) ">7 ; con- dition of that of United States ( 1824), 83 ; of Hudson River and Long Island Sound, exclusive claim of Fulton to, 112. Navy, creation of, 175; Mr. Webster's early support to the, 461 ; of the United States, its strength in 1850, 640. Neutrality of United States, defined, 152. New England, discourse on First Settlement of , 25 ; first settlement of, 28; English Act of Navigation, 1660, restricting trade of, 37 ; progress of the first century of, 38 ; opening of second century of, 40; popu- lation of, in 1820, 40; her part in wars be- tween England and France, 42 ; war of the Revolution begun in, 42 ; internal im- provement in, 43 ; the subdivision of lands in, necessary, 43, 44 ; right of primogeni- ture abolished in, 44 ; free schools of, 47 ; prosperity of, in 1824, 78 ; forced into manufactures, 110; causes which led to settlement of, 141-144; its free schools, 174; attack of Hayne on, 236, 240 ; policy of, concerning Western population, 238 ; interest of, in public improvements, 239 ; when, how, and why her measures favor the West, 240; favors reduction of price of public lands, 241; supported adminis- tration of Washington, 250; her course concerning the embargo, 261 ; New Eng- land Society of New York, object of its formation, 500; settlement of, 501. New Hampshire, acts of Legislature, relat- ing to Dartmouth College, 1, 14, 15, 16, 18; legislative and judicial power, sepa- rate, 15; extract from speech, at festival of natives of, 598. New Jersey, law of, concerning steam navi- gation, 112 ; resolutions concerning com- merce, 115. New Mexico, proposed annexation of, 562; population of, 668; country described by Major Gaines, 565; nature of country in- habitants, 666; prognostications of Mr. Webster in regard to admission of, 568; article of cession to United States, 587 ; existence oi peonism in, 615; slavery ex- cluded from, by law of nature, 615. Newton. I - . ( : l . ■ , i - New York, grant of steam navigation to John Fitch, 1I*J : grant of steam naviga- tion to Livingston and Fulton, 112; laws of, concerning steam navigation, 112, 113; act of, concerning insolvent debtors, 179; insolvent law of, 183; public dinner given to Webster in, 307 ; growth of, contempo- rary with the Constitution, 809 ; her loy- alty to the Union, 31tS ; toast of Webster to City of, 319 ; Reception of Webster at, in 1837, 422; law of 1845 in respect to elections, 642; her vote for annexing Texas, 631. Niks, J. M., his vote for admission of Texas, 611. North, duty of, in respect to fugitive slaves, 617 ; complaints of, against the South, 620. North and South, grievances of, 617, 620. Northern Democracy, policy of, 611. Northwestern Territory, concerning slavery in, 234 ; slavery excluded from, 571. Nullification, right of, denied, 257 ; right of, never advanced in New England, 263 ; practical operations of, in South Carolina, 266 ; practical operation of, 270, 282, 298 ; threatened in South Carolina, 355; dan- gerous tendency of, 355. 0. Oath, legal definition of, 526. Office. See Removal from Office. Ogden, A., his right to navigation, 113. Ogden v. Saunders, argument in case of, 179. Ohio, settled mostly by Southern emigra- tion, 574. < >ld Colony Club, formation of, 25. Old Thirteen, their public lands, 426. Ordinance of 1787, drafted by Nathan Dane, 231, 234 ; prohibits slavery, 231 ; re- strained legislative power, 234. Oregon, bill to organize a government for, 560; established a free Territory, 587; government of, established, 616. Ormichund '■. Barker, case of, 526. Orphans, provision of Stephen Girard for education of, 506. I Mis, James, li is speech on Writs of Assist ance noticed, 161. Paine, Robert Treat, 170; delegate to Con- gress, 162. Paine, Thomas, extract from his " Age of Reason," 614. Panama Mission, speech on, 1">'-'. Paper < lurrency, of England, effect on prices, 81 ; the evils of, 82 ; experiment of a re- INDIA'. 70| deeraahle, 863 ; advantages of a, In the United States, :'>(;;! ; prediction concern nig irredeemable, 8661 Parable of tin' prodigal son, 647; the wid- ow's mite, referred to, 619. Parker, Chief Justice, 207 ; death of, 194. Parliament, power of, over the Colonies, 166. Parmenter, Mr., voted for tariff of 1842, 48?. Parthenon, referred to, 346. Parties, origin of, 250; violence of, 251. Party Spirit, Washington's exhortation against, 345. Patent-Office, established, 648. Patterson, Mr., propositions of, in regard to Confederation, 287. Peace, the policy of tlie United States, 59. Peaceable Secession, the impossibility of, 621. Penn, William, 529. Pennsylvania, memorial to abolish slavery, 232; opinion on tariff bill. 258, 262; how affected by veto of U. S. Bank Bill, 323 : of Christian origin, 512 ; the public policy of, 52'J ; laws of, in regard to charitable bequests, 530. Peonism, existence of, in New Mexico, 615. People, source of power, 257 ; will of, to be ascertained by legislation, 541. Perkins, Thomas II., eulogized, 138. Peter the Great, policy of Russia developed under, 69. Philadelphia, convention of Whigs at, 575. Phillips v. Bury, case of Exeter College, 7. Pickering, Timothy, amendment to Mr. Calhoun's bill for internal improvements, 466. Pilgrim Fathers, first celebration of anni- versary of landing of, 25; our homage for, 27 ; prophecy for the future of their work. 29; motives which led them into exile, 29; departure of, for Holland, 30; establish their government, 35 ; their pur- poses and prospects in emigration, 35. Pilgrim Festival at New York, speech of Mr. Webster, 496. Pilgrim Society, formation of, 25. l'inknev, Thomas, opinion on the Judiciary, 294. Plymouth, Landing of Pilgrims at, speech in commemoration of, Dec. 22, 1820, 26 ; speech of Dec. 22, 1843, 496. Plymouth Hock, landing on, described, 27. Policy, of United States, peaceful, 59; neu- tral, defined, 152. Political Parties, existence of, 250. Political Power, the people the source of, 537. Political Revolution, 182 Polk, James K , will of, to take territory from M'-\ 1 567 ; remarks of Mr. Web iter on, 668 ; elected President in 1844, 688; avowal in respect i" Mexican war, 602. Poor, the, and the Rich, 859. Pope, quotation from, Popular Knowledge, progress of, and the causes, 460. Posterity, OUr relation to. •_''). Potomac Itiver, idea of President Jackson to bridge the, 652. Prescott, Judge James, closing appeal in defence of, 65. Prescott, William, at Bunker Hill, 188. President of the United States, power of removal from office, 829; no power to decide constitutionality of laws, 330; power to remove and to control an officer, 869; former practice of, to address Con- gress in person, 374 ; power of appointing public otlieers, 883; oath of, 884; is re- Bponsible to the people, 391 ; not the sole representative of the people, 391 ; power of, over removal from office, 397 , 399 ; custom of, on last day of a session of Congress, 413 ; duty of, 417; how com- municate his wishes to Congress, 417; called the representative of the Ameri- can people, 432. Presidential Protest, speech on, 367; gen- eral doctrines of, 392. Presidential Veto of United States Bank Bill, speech on, •",-jn. Press, freedom of, essential to free govern- ment, 619; violence of, in respect to slav- ery, 619. Primogeniture, the right of, abolished in New England, 4 1. Property, general division of, necessary to tree government, 15. Proscription, exercised by President Jack- son, 348; political, danger of, to the government, 34'.*. Protection, incidental, policy of England, 84; should be limited, entire prohibition destructive. 90; Mr. Webster's views on, 428 ; an object of the revolution of 1840, 489. Public Credit, in 1842, 494. Public Lands. See Paid-. Public. Public Law, extract from Puffendorf on, 62; forcible interference a violation of, 65. Public Moneys, to whom belongs the cus- tody of, 368 ; place of deposit of, fixed by Congress, 370; power of Congress over, 382; extract from Protest in regard to, 702 INDEX. 382 ; law of 1836 to regulate deposits of, 487. Public Opinion, power of, 67, 483 ; its influ- ence over governments, 133. Public Worship, in United States, 651. Puffendorf, extract from, bearing on prin- ciples of Holy Alliance, 02. Putnam, Judge, 532. Q. Quakers, their preachers, 524. Quincy, Josiah, Jr., quoted, 129. Quincy, Hon. Josiah, 159. R. Radicals, of South Carolina, 244. Railroads, first in America, 126. Raleigh, Sir W., referred to, 143. Randolph, Jefferson, proposition of, to abolish slavery, 619. Randolph, Gov., on domestic slavery, 232. Raymond, Henry J., reporter of Mr. Web- ster's speeches, xxiv. Reception of Mr. Webster at Boston, Sept. 30, 1842, 481 ; at Buffalo, May 22, 1851, 626 : at New York, 307. Reformation, provisions for religious in- struction in schools at time of, 526. Religion, the only conservative principle, 524; state of society without, 525; sup- posed case of a graduate of Girard Col- lege questioned in regard to, 525; neces- sity of, to man, 650. Removal from Office, speech of Webster on, •"IT ; ppwerof President in regard to, 347, 397, 399 ; decision of Congress in regard to, :U7; Mr. Madison's opinion in regard to, :I17 ; Mr. Jefferson's use of the power of, 348; concerning the press, 351; ex- tract from constitution of England on, 389; dangers of unlimited power in, 395; acl of L820 in regard to, 396, 397; act of 1789on,397, 101,402,404,405; Constitu- tion of U. S. on, 398; manner of, 400; power of, incident to power of appoint- ment, 400, 401, 402; effect of a nomina- tion on, I'll ; concerning inferior officers, 402; reasons must be stated for, 404. Removal of Deposits, object of, :;06 ; by ex- eeut ive power, 869. Reply to Hayne, by Webster, 227. Representation, American Bystem of, 46; in connection with government, 841; in- equality of, produced by annexing slave States, 661j ol slaves, complaints of the North against, 620 ; popular governments established on the basis of, 642 ; in House of Commons, 642 ; the foundation for law, 643. Representative Government, experiment of, 341. Representative System in England, 538. Republican Government. See Government, American. Repudiation denounced, 494. Resolutions, for appointment of an agent to Greece, 57 ; by John Adams, preparatory to the Declaration, 103; of Congress on Declaration of Independence, 165; of Foot in Congress, in regard to Public Lands, '1-1~ ; of Congress concerning slav- ery, 233; of Calhoun concerning State sovereignty, 273 ; of Convention of 1787, 287; of Senate concerning executive veto, 368 ; on slaver)' in District of Co- lumbia, 445 ; on Mr. Webster's speech on Girard will, 505 ; from State Legislatures respecting slavery, 618. Retrospective law, defined, 14 ; extract from Chief Justice Kent on, 14; passage of, prohibited, 14. Revenue, Mr. Webster's views on, 428. Revolution, defined, 277. Revolution, American, causes of, 37; begun in New England, 42 ; commemorated by Bunker Hill Monument, 125, 126 ; sur- vivors of, at Bunker Hill, 127 ; character of state papers of, 130; originated on a question of principle, 371. Revolution in Greece, speech on, 57. Revolution of 1840, its objects, 488. Revolution, Political, 132. Rhetoric, Daniel Webster as a master of English style, xi. Rhode Island, argument on government of, 535; proceedings of revolutionary party of 1841 in, 535; proceedings of the Dorr party in, 514; new constitution of, 545 J action of President Tyler in respect to insurrection in, 547; error of charted government of, 519 ; good effects of the agitation in, 5 19. Rich, ('apt. Benjamin, 487. Richmond, Va., address to the ladies of, 478. Right of Approach, of ships of war at sea. 664. Right of Search, letter of Mr. Webster oi the, 660; British claim to, 662; not die tincl from right of visit, 662; view of the United States, on, 664-666; Lord Aber ileell on the, 670. Rights, Legal, not affected by pecuniary; profit, 12 ; of electors, 12 ; of individuals INDF.X. 708 in regard to own property, 12 ; individ- ual, protected by law, 16. Rio Grande, Texas claims to line of, 682; worthlessness of the valley of the, 666. Hives, \Y. ('., Opinions Of the Constitution, 284. Bobbins, Rev. Chandler, delivers address on anniversary of landing of Pilgrims, 26. Robinson, Rev. John, 80, 81. Rome, liberty of, 6 12. Rusk, Mr., Senator from Texas, 668, Russia, extract from Emperor on proper policy, 64; under Peter the Great, 89; excited the Greeka to rebellion, 69; under ( atharine the Second, 70 ; her trade with the United states, 98 ; Emperor of, bound by the law of nations, 698 ; Emperor of, demands Kossuth of Turkey, 698. Ruxton, Mr., description of New Mexico, 667. Sabbath, convention at Columbus, 0., in regard to observance of the, 518; the ob- servance of, a part of Christianity, 518. St. Asaph, Bishop of, extract from dis- course, 040. Salem, sentiments of, at the closing of port of Boston, 1'2'J ; General Court at, 162. Sargent, Henry, picture representing Land- ing of the Pilgrims, by, 52. Schools, founded by charity, must include religious instruction, 528. Schools of New England, 174. Science and literature, 51. Scio, destruction of, 7:!. Scott, Gen. Winfield, brilliant campaign of, 554 ; referred to, 578. Seamen, letter of Daniel 'Webster on im- pressment of, 658. Search. See Right of Search. Secession, defined, 276; right of States to, denied, 278, 282; practical consequences of, 27'.t ; no such thing as peaceable, 621 ; of Virginia, improbability of, 646 ; men of the Southern States addressed in re- spect to, 647. Secretary of the Treasury, his custody of the public moneys, 308. Senate of the United States, a body of, equals, 229; resolution concerning execu- tive veto, 368; its right of self-defence, 872. Bhakspeare, use of words, xiii. Shaw, Chief Justice, 532. Sheridan, remark of, xxv. Sherman, Roger, appointed to draft the Declaration, 104. Shipping Interest, how affected by tariff of 1824, 108. Shipping of England, provisions in respect to, 109. Ships of War, 1 1 1- ■ i r right to approach Bell at sea, 66 1. Silk, manufacture of, in England! N7. Siisbee, Hon. v. 849 "Sink or swim, survive or perish," • 168 Slave, and Slavery, words not found in the ( lonstitution, 606, Slave-holding States, advantages of, in re spect to representation, 288; rights of, in regard to new territories, 672. Slave Labor, its relation to free, 678; com- pared with laboring men of the North, 620. Slavery, prohibited by ordinance of 17-7. -■'A ; petitions to tir.«t ( longress to abolish, •j:'.l' ; memorial from Pennsylvania to abol- ish, 282; Gov. Randolph, sentiments on, 232; Mr. Webster's sentiments on, 232 Congress has no power over, in the State*, 288; plans for exclusion of, in Northwestern Territory, 284 ; resolution of Rufus King in regard to, 236 ; views of Mr. Webster on, 42',> ; beyond the power of Congress, 129; recognized by the Constitution, 429, 670 ; inexpediency of annexing slave States. 129; in District of Columbia, remarks on, 146; Mr. Web- ster's opinion in regard to power of Con- gress over, 462 ; speech on exclusion of from the territories, 669 J peculiarity of American, 670; entailed upon the colo- nies by England, 671 ; Congress has no control over. 671, 686; excluded from Northwestern Territory, ".71 ; exists by local laws, .",7:1; Mr. Webster's opinion of extension of slavery and Blave repre- sentation, 574; the Compromise Line in respect to extension of, 688; resplul of Henry Clay in respect to, 600; pros- pect of California and New Mexico being free States, 602 J its exist, •nee among the Greeks and RomanB, 603; Bentiments of the North and South on, at framing of the Constitution, 605 ; Ordinance of 17^7 in respect to, 606 ; Mr. Madison's opinion on, 606; concurrence of sentimenl be- tween North and South on BUbjeCl of, 607: causes which led to an extension of, in the South. 608 ; change ai opinion of the South in respect t< haracter Ol all the territory of the I nited 8 fixed beyond power of the government, 609; excluded from California and New Mexico by law of nature. 61 flfeci 704 INDEX. of abolition societies at the North, 619; proposition of Mr. Randolph in respect to, 619; comparison of slaves of South and laboring people of the North, 620; complaints of the North concerning repre- sentation in Congress, 620 ; concerning transportation of free colored people, 623; Mr. Webster's course concerning, 630; proceedings of antislavery conven- tions, G35. Slaves, emancipation of, in District of Co- lumbia, 375; provision of the Constitu- tion in respect to fugitive, 629. Slave Trade, remarks of Mr. Webster on, 49; American policy concerning the, 666. Smith, (Jen., vote on bank question, 328. Smith, Hon. Truman, speech referred to, 566. Smith, Mr., of South Carolina, on protec- tion, 304. Smitlison, Hugh, founded Smithsonian In- stitute, 65'2. Smithsonian Institute, establishment, 652. Social system, elements of a, established by compact of the Pilgrim Fathers, 35. Society, rights of, affected by principles of Holy Alliance, 62, 64. South, policy of, toward Western improve- ment, 238 ; complaints concerning their rights, 572 ; the lead in the politics of the country, 608; complaints of, against the North, 617. South America, combination of European Sovereigns against, 66; position of U. S. government towards, 66 ; revolution in, 134 ; Spanish colonies of, 134. Si in ih American Republics, our relations to, 152. South Carolina, concerning internal im- provements, 238, 243 ; her action on tariff of 1816, 248; radical party in, 244; at- tack on, disclaimed, 253; eulogium on, (Webster,) 254; doctrine of, concerning State rights, 255; in 1775, and 1828, 259 ; relation to England in 1776,259; resist- ance to laws of the Union advised, 259; practical operation of nullification in, 266; nullification threatened in, 355. Southern Confederacy, impossibility of , 621. Spain, French invasion of, 67, 168 ; want of protection in, 99; overthrow of popular government in, 158; invites co-operation of Holy Alliance over colonies in Ameri- ca, 154. Spanish Settlements in America, 144. Specie, unusual demand for, and the cause, 81 ; drain of, owing to French Indem- nity Loan, 81; the exportation of, 95; experiment of an exclusive specie cur- rency, 362 ; treasury order concerning payments for public lands, 438 ; its uses, 441 ; the effect of withholding circula- tion, 441. Specie Payment, suspension of, 443. Speech on the '" Panama Mission," 152. Si>encer, Judge, 319. Sprague, Judge, 632. Standish, Miles, 27. State Banks, issue of small notes by, not advisable, 363. State Interposition, right of, 292. State Laws, in opposition to law of Con- gress, supreme, 122 ; prohibition on, con- cerning bankruptcy, 186 ; prohibition on, in regard to contracts, 187 ; in conflict with the Constitution, 265. State Rights Party, Mr. Calhoun's espousal of the, 464. States, concurrent power of, argued, 110, 117 ; doctrine of South Carolina concern- ing rights of, 255; resolution of Virginia, 1798, concerning rights of, 256,203; sov- ereignty limits of, 257 ; right of, whence derived, 264; Calhoun's resolutions on sovereignty of, 273 ; taxing power of, limited, 336 ; have no sovereignty over public lands, 426 ; concerning insurrec- tion in one of the, 543 ; inequality of representation in annexing slave States, 561. Stevenson, Andrew, 487. Stiles, Mr., correspondence of, relating to Hungary, 682. Stillingfleet, Bishop, argument on power of visitation over corporations, 8. Story, Mr. Justice, death of, 532; eulogy of Mr. Webster on, 532; respect of English lawyers to, 533 ; character of, 534. Strogonoff, Baron, concerning the massacre of the Greeks, 71. Sturges v. Crowninshield, decision in bank- ruptcy case of, 180. Suffrage, principles of American govern- ment in respect to, 539. Sullivan, William, 137. Supreme Court of United States, its object, 293 ; judges of, how appointed, 318 ; concerning a nomination for judge of, 413. Sweden, export of iron fron, 105. T. Tariff, bill to amend the (1828), 77 ; speech of Mr. Webster on, 77 ; " American " and "foreign policy" applied to system of, 78; protective By stem of England, 84; IM'I \ 705 of 1816 and 1824, respecting manufac- tures, 99; of 1824, carried by Middle States, 1 10 ; of 1824, Massachusetts rated iin-t, 110 1 earliest advocates of, 248; of 1816, 248; of 1824, 248; of 1828, 248, 268; course pursued i>y .Mr. Webster in regard to, 247, 168; resolutions adopted in Boston in regard to, 463; of 1816, a South Carolina measure, history of, 165; of 1816, New England against, 166; of 1842, how passt-il, 489. Taxation, effect of, on landholders in Eng- land, 44. Taylor, Gen. Zachary, at Buena Vista. 669 ; as a candidate for President, 676-679; personal character of, 577 ; liis interest in the revolutionary movement in Hungary, 679. Tea, increase of its consumption, 80. Terrett i>. Taylor, protection of grant, 20. Territory, cession of, by Virginia, 606. Texas, history of, 428; independence of, recognized, 428; annexation to United States objectionable, 429 ; opposition of Mr. Webster to admit into the Union, 559; President Tyler's project of annex- ing, 560; how its annexation affects representation, 561 ; population of, in 1848, 562; territory of, 562; admitted into the Union, 562, 563, 600; suitable time for annexing, 563; the vote for the admission of, 583 ; extract from resolu- tion for admission of, 609 ; States to be formed from, 609, 615; votes of New England for admission of , 610 ; extracts from speech of Mr. Webster on, 613,631 ; separated from Mexico, 630 ; vote of New York for annexing, 631; admitted as a slave State, 633 ; fortunate adjustment by Congress of controversy in (1850), 638. Timber, English duties on, 89. Toast, to City of New York, 319; to mem- ory of Washington, 346; at Dinner of New England Society in New York, 503. Tonnage, how affected by tariff of 1824, 100 ; no State can lay duty on, 122. Trade of United States, with foreign mar- kets, 93. Transportation of free colored people, 623. Treason, denned, 267. Treasury of United States, order concern- ing specie payment, 440; effect of the order, 441. Tudor, William, interest in Bunker Hill Monument, 123, 137. Turkey, its oppression of Greece, 68. Tyler, John, at Bunker Hill, 139; confi- dence in Mr. Webster, 481 ; action in reaped to insurrection In Rhode bland, ■"■17 ; project of annexing I • I . Onion, Mr. Webster's sentiments on con- solidation of, 246 ; apostrophe to, - speech of March 7, I860, on preservation oi the, 600; impossibility of drawing the line in case of diss.. luti, ,n ,,t ■ !,,„. tation to citizens of Buffalo to preserve the, 627; Mr. Jefferson's opinion of ad- mitting Louisiana into the, 680 Union of the States, important, 1 10, 21 I 42".; not a league, 278; how regarded by Washington, 846 ; our duQ to the, 4£ United Colonies, declared tree and inde- pendent States, 6 II I'nited States, peaceful policy of, 59; duty of, Concerning international law, 60, 61, 66; interest and duty of, in international law, 66; position of government towards South America, 66 ; exports of, com- pared, 79; navigation of, 88; trade with Holland and Russia, 98 ; duties as citizens of the, 176 ; how affected by pacification of Europe, l'12; attention of, directed to internal improvements, 242 ; alliance with France declared void, 278 ; d mger to, of dismemberment, 346 ; table Bhowing prog- ress in, from 1798 to 1861,646; prog of, in arts and sciences, 648 ; coast survey of, 648 ; military resources of, 649; posi- tion of, in respect to the Holy Alliance, 681 ; conduct of, toward revolution in Hungary, 683. United States Bank Bill, speech of Webster on, 320. Upshur, Mr., correspondence in regard to Texas, 611 ; his object for admission of Texas, 611 ; Secretary of State, 560. V. Van Buren, Martin, policy of his adminis- tration, 455; appoint..! Secretary of State, 581 ; his instructions to Mr. M.- Lane, 581; nominated bj I ree "soil Par- ty, 681; views of, relative to slavery in the District of Columbia, "> s 2 ; intlii- in annexing Texas, 682; candidate for Presidency in 1844, Vansittart. Mr., resolution on the worth of a bank note, 191 . Verona. Congn raat, l- - ."-'. 158; c incoming Grecian independence, 7u. Veto Message, consequences of the, 337; 45 TUG INDEX. denies authority of Supreme Court and ( longress, 338. Veto Power, abuse of, 493. Vienna, society of, to encourage Grecian literature, 72. Virginia, resolutions concerning commerce, 11">; assembly of House of Burgesses in, 148 ; Thomas Jefferson, Governor of, 17l' ; resolution concerning State rights, 256 ; resolutions of 1798 in regard to State rights, 263; ratification of the Constitu- tion by, 289 ; cession of her Northwestern territory, 606; early feeling in regard to slavery, 619 ; cession of her public lauds, 623; improbability of her secession, 640. Visit and Search, identical, 662. Visitation, Lord Holt's judgment on, in rase of Exeter College, 7 ; power of, over corporations, 7 ; Stillingrieet's argument on power of, 8. Visitor, applied to founder of incorporated charity, 7. Volney's." Ruins of Empires," quoted, 520. Voltaire, followers of, admitted to Girard College, 513. Volunteers, difficulty in recruiting, 555. w. Walker, Mr., took lead in annexing Texas, 609. War, only declared by Congress, 287 ; Mr. Webster's defence of his course in, 459 ; of 1812, effect on prices, 81. Warehouse System, of England, and United States, 90. Warren, Gen. Joseph, measures toward erecting a monument to, 123 ; eulogized, 127. Washington, Gen. George, 131, 168,251; remark on battle of Hunker Hill, 142 ; apostrophe to, 149, 653; decease of, 156; administration supported by New Eng- land, 250; his inauguration at New York, 312; centennial anniversary at Washing- ton, 33!); representative government es- tablished under, 311 ; remark of Fisher Ames on, :;ii! ; basis of his character, 342 : policy as i" foreign relations, 343 ; domes- tic policy of, :;il; exhortation against party spirit, 345; his regard for the Union, 3 1:> ; toast of Webster to memory of, 346 ; his practice of addressing ( longress in per- Bon, 874; civil character of, 677 ; founda- tion of Capitol laid by, 614, 652; monu- ment to, 652. Washington City, its favorable situation, 651 ; public dinner at, 3 9 Washington, Treaty of, letter of Mr. Web- ster on the ratification of the, 666. Webster, Daniel, remarks on African Slave Trade, 49 ; resolution to appoint an agent to Greece, 57 ; opinion of paper curren- cy, 82 ; explains his change of opinion on protection, 1 10 ; President of Bunker Hill .Monument Association, 125; address on completion of Bunker Hill .Monument, 13(5; author of supposed speech against the Declaration, 167 ; eloquence defined by, 167 : letter concerning the authorship of speech ascribed to John Adams, 177 ; his portrayal of murder, 195; reply to Hayne, 227 ; views on disposition of pub- lic lands, 237, 238 ; course pursued in Congress on internal improvements, 243; course concerning tariff, 247 ; sentiments on consolidation of the Union, 248; apos- trophe to the Union, 269 ; reply to Cal- houn in regard to State sovereignty, 273 ; speech at public dinner in New York, 307; defence of the Constitution, 317 ; circum- stances of his birth, 319 ; respect of, for judicature of New York, 319 ; toast to City of New York, 319 ; presides at centennial anniversary of Washington, 339 ; toast to Washington, 346 ; sentiments on re-elec- tion of Jackson, 357 ; prediction in regard to irredeemable paper currency, 365 ; remark of J. Q. Adams on, 406 ; reception in New York, 1837, 422 ; opinions on slav- ery, 429; views on hard money, 440; devoted to service of United States, 457; reply to Mr. Calhoun, 458; denies Mr. Calhoun's charges, 458-60; defence of his course in war, 459 ; opposes Mr. Dallas's bill for a bank, 460 ; course in war of 1812, 461 ; early support to the navy, 461 ; answers Mr. Calhoun's charges in regard to slavery, 462 ; answer to Cal- houn's charges on tariff, 463; political differences with Mr. Calhoun, 468; a hard- money man, 468; the log cabin of his fa- ther, 477 ; visit to Richmond, 478 ; speech at his reception in Boston, 481 ; Rep- resentative in Congress, 481 ; reception at Boston, Sept. 30, 1842, 481; Secretary of State under President Harrison, 4t>2 ; visit and speech in England, 483 ; oppo- sition to his remaining in the President's Cabinet (1841), 486 ; delicacy of his po- sition in 1842,486; study of the curren- cy question, 492; speech at dinner of New England Society of New York, 496 ; toast at dinner of New England Society, at New York, 503 ; correspondence arising under Girard Will case, 505; letter to Madam Story on death of her son, 532; INDEX. 707 opposed admission of Texas into the Union, 659; against extension of slaver; and slave representation, 57 I ; ini ited bj citizens of Marshfleld to address them, •")7"> ; letter' of, to citizens of Marshfleld, 575; addresses the citizens of Marshfleld, 575 ; opinion of Gen. Taylor for President, 676; opinion of (Jon. Cass for 1 'resident, 684; course concerning Texas, 612-614; Secretary of State, 618; in Senate, 618; ideas of peaceable secession, »'>-! ; letter to I'. ils. of National Intelligencer, enclos- ing letter of late Dr. Charming, 624; let- ter of W. E. Channing to, in respect to slavery, 624; reception al Buffalo, Maj 2'_', 1851,626; course concerning slavery, 680; extract from speech on annexing Texas, 631 ; course during the crises of 1850,637; account of laying the corner stone of the Capitol, 652; letter to Lord x\slibnrton on impressment of seamen, 655; letter to Gen. Cass in respect to his construction of the treaty of Washington, 666, 667, 673 ; letter to Mr. Ticknor in re- spect to the Hiilsemann letter, 678; letter to J. G. Hiilsemann in respect to Mr. Mann's mission, 67 l J ; as a master of Eng- lish style, xi ; influence over and respect for the landed democracy, xiv ; manage- ment of the Goodridge robbery case, xv; story told of him by Mr. Peter Harvey, xv ; early style of rhetoric, xviii ; letter to his friend Bingham, xix ; acquaintance with Jeremiah Mason, xix ; incident con- nected with the Dartmouth College argu- ment, xxi ; effect of his Plymouth oration of 1820, xxii ; note to Mr. Geo. Ticknor on his Bunker Hill oration, 1825, xxiii; esteem for Henry J. Raymond, xxiv ; the image of the British drum-beat, x.xix ; power of compact statement, xxxi ; pro- test against Mr. Benton's Expunging Resolution, xxxi ; arguments against nul- lification and secession unanswerable, xxxiii ; moderation of expression, xxxv ; abstinence from personalities, xxxvi ; li- belled by his political enemies, xxxvi; use of the word "respectable," xl ; and Calhoun in debate, xliii ; as a writer of State papers, xliv ; as a stump orator, xlv ; a friend of the laboring man, xlvij compared with certain poets, .xlviii ; death-bed declaration of, li ; fame of his speeches, li.; compared with other ora- tors, 1 v i ; Idealization of the < 'onstitution, lix ; anecdote of hi^ differing from Lord I lamden, Ixii. Webster, Fletcher, letter to Gen I Weir, Robert \ . in> painting of the Em- barkation of the Pilgrimi Wesley, John, anecdote of, •">! 1. West India colonies, 8 1. Wheelock, Rev. E . founder of Dartmouth College, 1. Whig, origin of the term, 176. Whigs, of New York, ii;; ; Convention of, in Boston, 186; of Mais, declare separa- tion from the President, l s 7 ; the revolu- tion of 1840, Buccess of the, I- 1 - ; I len. Taylor Dominated by, 576. White, Capt. Joseph, accounl of the mur- der of, 189; argument of Webster on, 194. White, Mr., lit;. Wickliffe, John, burnt for heresy, 699. Wilkins, Mr., bill of, concerning tariff, "-'To. Williams, Mr., 48 ( J. Wilmot Proviso, to be applied to Texas and other acquisitions, 611, 612; Mr. Polk's opinion of the, 616 ; not to be used as a reproach to Southern State , 616; espoused by the Free-Soil men, 681 ; proposition to apply to New Mexico and California, 632. Windham, Mr., remark of, 622. Winslow, Edward, Jr., first address on an- niversary of landing of Pilgrims de- livered by, 25. Winthrop, R. C, voted for tariff of 1842, 489. Witherspoon, Mr., motion in Congress con- cerning commerce, 115. Woman, how she performs her part in free government, 47'J. Wool, proposition of English Parliament to abolish tax on, 90. Woollen Manufactures, how affected by tariff of 1824, 101; of England and United States, 102. Wright, Silas, voted for tariff of 1842, 489. Y. York, Duke of, anecdote in respect to his accession to the crown, 586. Yp-ilaiiti, Alexander, leads insurrection in Moldavia, 72. H 122 80 ^ o „ o **> *> ,0 i^lffli^ ,.«?> **\ °^ O . . « 4 o> CT ^ ^ * • A o Bf: ^o" o*. ."^ ° **o< 0* • * * % - AR N. MANCHESTER INDIANA 46962'