012 026 461 8 
 
 pH8^ 
 
E 440 
 .5 
 
 .T455 
 Copy 1 
 
 STATE OF THE UNION. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 -^ OF 
 
 .JAMES H. THOMAS, OF TENNESSEE, 
 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 17, 18G1. 
 
 The House being In the Committee of the Wliolc on tlie 
 State of tlio Union — 
 
 Mr. THOMAS said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: The object of our discussion 
 in the House should be to promote the general 
 welfare of the country. To eft'ect that object, a 
 harmonious feeling sliouid predominate, if possi- 
 ble; but I must say that the character of tlie debate 
 which has preceded has not been to my taste. 
 Yet, sir, we must conform ourselves to the cir- 
 cumstances by which we are surrounded; and, 
 with a view of discharging my duty, I desire to 
 submit some remarks to the consideration of the 
 committee, upon the subject which now so seri- 
 ously engrosses public attention. 
 
 This question of slavery has ever been trouble- 
 some to this country. Yet our fathers were en- 
 abled to dispose of it, and to dispose of it in such 
 a way as to secure, not only our liberties, but the 
 establishment of a Government which has led to 
 a happiness and prosperity of oin- people unex- 
 ampled in the history of the human family. When 
 the Declaration of Independence was framed, 
 every State of this Union was a slaveholdingState. 
 They went through that war, and this trouble- 
 some question troubled not the council, the camp, 
 or the battle-field. We conducted that war to a 
 successful termination, and to the establishment of 
 our independence. In process of tijjie, when our 
 convention assembled to establish a constitution, 
 we had twelve slave States and but one free State. 
 There was then in the northern mind a hostility 
 to slavery. 
 
 We frequently hear from the other side of this 
 Chamber, the position taken that they want to 
 bring back this Government to the principles of 
 its fathers. It would be well for those gentlemen 
 who desire to effect that object, to look to the 
 spirit which actuated those wise and patriotic 
 fathers of ours while assembled in convention. 
 What do we find them doing then? Why, sir, 
 the slave trade was then in existence, and was 
 tolerated by many of the States of this Union, and 
 some southern States were averse to its abolition. 
 We find that when the first rough draft of the 
 Constitution was submitted for discussion, it gave 
 Congress the power to abolish the slave trade any 
 time after 1800. A proposition was then made 
 
 i that that trade should be extended to 1808. Ma- 
 ryland and Virginia voted against that extension. 
 ' A distinguished member of that convention from 
 I Connecticut (Roger Sherman) said that the south- 
 ern States were essential for their welfare, and 
 I that they would rather tolerate the slave trade 
 I than part with two States — Georgia and South 
 Carolina; and on a vote upon the proposition to 
 I extend the slave trade eight years. New Hamp- 
 : shire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut voted to 
 give that extension, and, by their votes, the prop- 
 osition was carried, and the slave trade extended 
 eight years beyond the time to which some of the 
 slave States contended it should be limited. And 
 now what do we see upon this occasion .' Not a 
 singlememberfromeitherof those three States will 
 tolerate a southern State in removing one single 
 one of those slaves, or their descendants, which 
 were imported during those eight years, into 
 any one of our Territories. But we pass on. We 
 find that those fathers accommodated this matter 
 among themselves; and they established a Con- 
 stitution which has eminently served its purposes 
 for nearly three quarters of a century. 
 
 What is the history of the Government after- 
 wards? Your Washington, your first and greatest 
 President, approved and signed bills to appre- 
 hend fugitive slaves, and to admit slave States 
 into the Union. Your second President, John 
 Adams, of Massachusetts, approved and signed 
 a fugitive slave bill for the District of Columbia, 
 and bills recognizing slavery in the southwestern 
 Territory. Your Jefferson acquired the Terri- 
 tory of Louisiana, with its slave property, and he 
 signed and approved a bill to regulate the coast 
 slave trade, by which slaves were permitted to be 
 taken from one section of the Union to another 
 for sale. And, sir, every President up to the pres- 
 ent hour has approved and signed bills in con- 
 formity to the views which arc contended for upon 
 the part of the South; and it is only within the 
 last few years that this opposition to the institu- 
 tion'of the South has advanced to its present for- 
 midable and threatening position. And why is it? 
 It may be traced back to a morbid — pardon me, 
 for lintend to say no thing intentionally offensive — 
 but, in my judgment, it may be traced back to a 
 morbid sensitiveness upon the part of tlie north- 
 
.TA^^ 
 
 eni mind upon this subject. This hostility to 
 slavery at its origin attracted little attention at the 
 North, and few gave countenance to it; but it 
 gradually got into the school-houses, into the 
 school-books, into the pulpit, and into all the va- 
 rious modes of education, and into all the means 
 used in the formation of the moral sentiments of 
 the people. It has been continued; and the pres- 
 ent generation have been brought up and edu- 
 cated from the nursery in a feeling of hostility to 
 this institution, which was thus tolerated by the 
 fathers of the Revolution in every State of the 
 Union. This system of education has gone on 
 until a large majority of the people of the North 
 have grown up to manhood under such influences. 
 And what is the result? It has formed political 
 associations, and a political party which now pro- 
 poses to take control of the Government of the 
 country, and to do it upon the one singly, isolated 
 idea of hostility to southern institutions. In 1856, 
 this party first assumed a prominent and threat- 
 ening attitude toward the South. And what do 
 we find them declaring upon that occasion? When 
 they formed the Republican party, in 1856, they 
 formed it without regard to past political dift'er- 
 ences and divisions. When they came to lay 
 down their principles, they announced that as their 
 cardinal doctrine. In that body we find men who 
 had been Whigs, Democrats, and Americans; 
 men who had belonged to all the political parties 
 of the country; but all their past party predilec- 
 tions were to be laid aside, and the new party, 
 without regard to them, was to be formed. It 
 Avas so formed, and their declaration was: 
 
 " Resolved, That tlie Constitution confers upon Congress 
 sovereign power over tlie Territories of tlic United States 
 for tlieir government, anil in the exercise of that power, It 
 Is both tli'e right and the duty of Congress to prohibit in ail 
 tlie Territories the twin relics of barbarism — polygamy and 
 slavery." 
 
 In 1860 the same party again laid down their ' 
 platform; which was as follows: ' 
 
 " 8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the 
 United States is that of freedom. That as our republican 
 fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national 
 territory, ordained that ' no person should be deprived of 
 life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,' it I 
 becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legisla- I 
 tion is necessary, to maiiitain this provision of the Consti- | 
 tution against all aUempts to violate it; and we deny the 
 authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any [ 
 individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any Terri- 
 tory of the United States." i 
 
 When that party, in 1860, in convention, came ' 
 to look out for a representative of tlie principles ' 
 which they intended to inaugurate in the Govei n- \ 
 ment, provided they succeeded, it looked all over 1 
 the country for such an individual. The two i 
 most prominent and eminent men who presented I 
 themselves for that nomination were Hon. Mr. 
 Seward, of New York, and Mr. Lincoln, of the 
 State of Illinois. Upon the first ballot Mr. Sew- 
 ard received a large plurality of the votes. But 
 he was not nominated; and Mr. Lincoln was 
 finally unanimously nominated and elected by 
 that party; and it is now openly declared to the 
 country that the former gentleman, Mr. Seward, 
 is to be the prime minister of Mr. Lincoln, the 
 successful candidate of the Republican party for 
 President. These gentlemen owe their elevation 
 
 to office to their opposition to southern institu- 
 tions. They were selected and voted for, not for 
 personal predilections, but for their devotion to 
 the doctrines which they were known to have 
 advocated, and for opinions they were known to 
 entertain. 
 
 Now, I call the attention of the committee and 
 of the country to what, in brief, these opinions . 
 were. Mr. Seward declares: 
 
 " Slavery can bf limited to its present bounds; it can be 
 ameliorated ; it can be, and it must be abolished, and you 
 and I can and must do it. The task is as simple and easy 
 as its consummation will be beneficent, and its rewards 
 glovt'ing. It only requires to follow this simple rule of ac- 
 tion : to do everywhere and on every occasion what wo 
 can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can, at any 
 time, because at that precise time, and on that particular 
 occasion, we cannot do more. Circumstances determine 
 possibilities." * * * * " Extend a cordial 
 welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your 
 door, and defend him as you would your paternal gods. 
 
 " Correct your own error that slavery has any constitu- 
 tional guarantees wliich may not be released, and ought not 
 to be relinquished." * * * * " You will soon 
 bring the parties of the country into an effective aggression 
 upon slavery." 
 
 Again, he declares: 
 
 " What a commentary upon the history of man is the fact, 
 that eighteen years after the death of John (iuincy Adams, 
 the people have for their standard-bearer Abraham Lincoln, 
 confessing the obligations of the higher law, which the sage 
 of Quincy proclaimed, and contending, for weal or woe, for 
 life or death, in the irrepressible conflict between freedom 
 and slavery. I desire only to say that we are in the last 
 stage of the conflict, before the great triumphal inauguration 
 of this policy into the Government of the United States." 
 
 Now, sir, Mr. Seward was the highest candi- 
 date on the first ballot, and is to be the prime 
 minister of the incoming Administration. We 
 now come to the declaration of the candidate who 
 was ultimately nominated unanimou.vly by that 
 convention. What does Mr. Lincoln declare? 
 And it is such declarations as these that have 
 given him his present high position in the coun- 
 j try. He says: 
 
 " What I do say is, that no man is good enough to govern 
 another man without the other man's consent, I say this is 
 the leading principle, the sheet anchor of ^itncrican Rc- 
 puhlicanism.'' 
 
 Again, in Chicago, o!) the lOih of July, 1858, 
 he said: 
 
 " T should like to know if, taking the old Declaration of 
 Independence,^which declares that all men are equal upon 
 principle, and making exceptions to it, where will it stop.-' 
 If one man says it does not mean a negro, why not another 
 say it does not mean some other man .' If that declaration 
 is not the truth, let us get the statute-book in which we find 
 it, and tear it out. Who is so bold as to do it.' If it is not 
 true, let us tear it out. [Cries of < No !' ' No !'] Let us 
 stick to it, then ; let us stand firmly by it, then." * * 
 * * " Let us discard all this quibbling about this man 
 and the other man — this race and that race and the other 
 race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed in an 
 interior position — iliscarding the standard that we have left 
 us. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people 
 throughout this land until we shall once more stand up de- 
 claring that all men are created equal." * * ♦ * 
 " I leave you, hoping that the lamp of liberty will burn in 
 your bosom until there shall no longer be a doubt that all 
 men are created free and equal." 
 
 Now, sir, here we liave placed before us the 
 ground on which this candidate was presented 
 for election. And what is it? It is not that he 
 either favored or was opposed to a protective tariff; 
 not that he was for one policy or the other, dis- 
 
connected with slavery. I ask you wlicthcr, if , 
 tlierc had been no slaves in the United 8:ates, and I 
 it" he liad entertained Kimihir opinions ahoiit sia- ' 
 very in Cuba or Hrazil, would .sucii opinions ever i 
 have been considered when the nomination eame 
 to be made? No, sir, that nomination was made j 
 solely, mainly, and particularly, on the f^round of; 
 hostility to slavery. It is one of his open declar-1 
 ations that he iiates slavery as had as any AI)oli- 
 tionisl. It M-as that very hatred which gave him 
 the confidence of the party that has elected him | 
 to power. I 
 
 Then, how do we stand r Here is a party com- 
 posed of men of the northern iSlati s alone, of 
 whom not one sinjjle individual owns a slave; 
 and probably not one twentieth of those who] 
 voted for Mr. Lincoln ever saw a slave. Theyj 
 have none of the evils or advantao;es of that in- 
 stitution among them. And yet they chose Mr. ' 
 Lincoln for his opinions in re2;ard to an institu-! 
 tion with which they have no connection, and 
 in which they have no practical interest, llej 
 was selected liecause of his liatred to slavery. In ! 
 other words, he was selected, not for any jmrtic-j 
 ular views of policy that he has in regard to { 
 northern institutions or northern interests, but| 
 because of the views which he entertains in re-; 
 gard to southern interests. He was elected, not! 
 to govern the North, but to govern the South; to ; 
 govern a portion of the Union in which he has no i 
 party, and where there is no respectable portion 
 of citizens who, for a moment, tolerate his elec- ! 
 tion to office on such principles. So far as the | 
 South is concerned, we of the South have had [ 
 no more to do in the election of Mr. Lincoln than i 
 we have had to do with the election of the Emperor: 
 of France. He is to us a foreign ruler. He is, 
 elected by men who have no sympathy with us,' 
 who are hostile to our great interests. < 
 
 I submit to the consideration of every candid 
 mind, if any court on earth would ajipoint a 
 guardian over a property where the application' 
 was made for the sole purpose of destroying the 
 estate; where the applicant was hostile to the in- 
 terest of which he desired to have the control, and, 
 only sought the trust for its destruction; is there 
 a court on earth, claiming to know what equity 
 and justice is, who would for a moment think of 
 appointing him ? And yet you are determined to; 
 place the guardianship of the rights of the South ; 
 on the slavery question, in the liandsof men who 
 come here declaring their hostility to slavery, and 
 claiming the right to take charge of that institu- 
 tion to which they are hostile, and on the destruc- 
 tion of which they are determined. I submit to 
 the consideration of this committee, and of the 
 country, whether it is an American principle, that 
 ihe party who has no interest in the subject-mat- 
 ter should select a guardian for it, and choose him 
 from among those hostile to it.' I 
 
 But it may be said that our Government is one 
 of majorities. True: in on(; sense it is a Govern- , 
 ment of majorities. But Mr. Lincoln has only a ^ 
 bare majority of the electoral vote; and when you 
 come to examine the record of the great popular 
 voice of the people of the United States, you will 
 find that he is nearly a million in the minority. 
 Thus, by nearly a million minority of votes, has 
 
 Mr. Lincoln been elected to iht office of President 
 
 of the United Stales. 
 
 Again, sir; this idea of majorities governing 
 ought to be limited to the people who are inter- 
 ested in the subject. The people of Mns.sacliu- 
 setts or the people of Virginia might well submit 
 a .subject to the will of their rea|iective States, and 
 be governed by the majority; but the principle 
 does not hold good where the question in sub- 
 mitted to those who have no interest whatever 
 in it. 
 
 Upon the subject of slavery, or any local in- 
 terest of the South, I maintain that if majorities 
 in the North, or if every man in the North, were 
 in favor of hostile legislation, it would be anti- 
 American, and contrary to all llie principles of our 
 Govcrimient for them to assume to govern such 
 local institution, and especially to govern it in such 
 a way as to bring about its destruction. Why is 
 it that the northern people have felt it incumbent 
 on them to jfiin in a crusade against this institu- 
 tion .' We are often told that the slave power has 
 had the control of the Government; but I main- 
 tain that the Government has not been controlled 
 with a view to promote slavery, or in opposition 
 to slavery; and that is the view in which the 
 South has ever maintained the Government should 
 be controlled. But slavery is a living, existing 
 interest in the country, and should share the com- 
 mon weal or common woe of the country, like 
 other great interests. 
 
 I submit to the committee and to the country, 
 what reason can be given, from a review of his- 
 tory, for so bitter a contest against this institution 
 of the South ? Has slavery made such rapid 
 strides since the foundation of this Government as 
 to alarm those philanthropists, if philanthropists 
 they be? At the time of the treaty of peace in 
 178M, the States now called southern owned ter- 
 ritory to the extent of 6.38,01G square miles, and 
 the northern States 169, 6G2; or tlie South owned 
 468,354 square miles more than the North. Vir- 
 ginia ceded territory to the extent of 239,558 
 square miles, and excluded slavery therefrom; 
 thus giving the North 40!),220, and reducing the 
 Soutli to 398,458 square miles. The South was 
 then strong, and the North was weak. How has 
 that generosity and magnanimity been requited? 
 How is it now proposed to be requited by the 
 northern Slates : The very States of the North- 
 west, of the territory thus generously ceded by 
 the State of Virginia, are this day enlisted in the 
 ranks of our adversaries; and a large majority of 
 their Representatives on this floor are voting and 
 acting to-day with the party that is attempting 
 to deprive tne old mother Commonwealth, the 
 mother of those States, of any right in the Terri- 
 tories that have been subsequently acquired, al- 
 though they were acquired by the joint blood and 
 trea.sure of Virginia with all the States. 
 
 Biit,sir, let us follow out that idea: By the Lou- 
 isiana purchase, we acquired 1,136,496 square 
 miles. Of this th.e North has secured 977,602 
 square miles, and the South 333,624— the North 
 acquiring 643,978 square miles more than the 
 South. 
 
 By the Florida purchase, the South acquired 
 59,268; and by the annexationof Texas, 274,356; 
 
total by these last two acquisitions, 333,624 square 
 miles. 
 
 By the Mexican treaty, the total acquisition is 
 665,486 square miles. Of this the North has Cal- 
 ifornia, containing 188,981 square miles, leaving 
 476,505 square miles in New Mexico and Utah 
 tobesettled. And the present efi'ort of your party 
 is to exclude the South from the whole of this; 
 while the South only asks equality in it. And, 
 sir, I may remark, in relation to that territory, 
 that it is the most barren, bleak, mountainous, 
 and unproductive territory that this Government 
 has ever acquired. The soil and climate of that 
 territory are such that your own distinguished 
 Daniel Webster declared that slavery could never 
 go there; that the law of nature prohibited it; and 
 that, to enact the Wilmot proviso in regard to it, 
 would be only to retinact the law of God. 
 
 I will refer again to the statistics that I have 
 collected from the report of the Commissioner of 
 the Land Office: 
 
 Square miles. 
 
 In 178.3 the South owned 638,016 
 
 Virginia ceded 239,558 
 
 Leaving tlie South but 398,458 
 
 From the Louisiana purchase tlie South ac- 
 quired but 158,896 
 
 Florida 59,268 
 
 Texas '. 274,356 
 
 Present South 890,978 
 
 Total increase of tlie South 252,982 
 
 In 1783, the North had 169,662 
 
 Virginia cession 239,558 
 
 Louisiana purchase 977,602 
 
 Me.xican treaty 188,981 
 
 1,575,803 
 
 Total increase of the North since 1783 1,406,141 
 
 In seventy-six years the South has gained but 
 252,962 square miles, and the North, in the same 
 period, has gained 1,406,141 square miles. The 
 South has increased her limits about 33 per cent., 
 while the North has extended near 1,000 per cent. 
 In 1,217,160 square miles of the territory thus ac- 
 quired by the North, slavery existed by law, but 
 is now abolished. Of the small amount acquired 
 by the South, it was all slave territory when 
 acquired, and so remains. 
 
 That is the history of the progress of the two 
 sections. Where, then, is there the slightest pre- 
 text of our northern friends for one moment en- 
 tertaining the belief that slavery is to be spread 
 all over the country. This idea that the 8outh, 
 ""or the Democratic party, or any party at the South, 
 are slavery propagandists, by and through the 
 Federal Government, is a mistake, and northern 
 
 Soliticians have misled the public mind of the 
 forth when they have attempted to promulge 
 such an idea. The only position taken by any 
 party in the South is, that we of the South are 
 equals in this Union, and that when Territories 
 are acquired our citizens have the right, under our 
 Constitution, to go there, and that no power short 
 of the people of the Territories themselves can at 
 any time exclude them from this right. There is 
 some division among us as to when the people of 
 
 a Territory should act — whether they should do 
 it while in a territorial capacity, or whether they 
 should wait until they form a State constitution; 
 but all agree that there is no power which can ex- 
 clude the South from her rights in a Territory 
 but the people who settle that Territory. We are 
 in favor of the largest liberty to the people to go 
 to the Teri'itories that are acquired by the com- 
 mon blood and the common treasure of all the 
 States and of all the citizens of all the States, and 
 to stand upon a perfect equality in relation to their 
 rights in those Territories. 
 
 What objection can the North have to that? 
 It is not that slavery will go up North. Every 
 man who knows the character of the northern 
 people, knows that they look well to their own 
 interests, and they have abolished slavery in the 
 northern States; and in doing that, they have 
 shown by their example that there is no fear that 
 slavery will ever go where it is unprofitable. This 
 being so, why is it that there is this hostility in 
 the public mind at the North against this insti- 
 tution of slavery ? Sir, they have got ingrafted 
 on their minds an idea that slavery is sinful, 
 and that this Government is responsible for the 
 sin of slavery, if it be tolerated. Doubtless a large 
 majority of the people of the North are devoted 
 to the Constitution! of this country, and are will- 
 ing to give us our constitutional rights, if they 
 were not misled upon this subject. In my hum- 
 ble judgment they have been, whether intention- 
 ally or not, grossly misled. They have been 
 taught that the Constitution of the country does 
 not recognize the right of property in man, and 
 that if slavery is permitted to go into any of the 
 Territories it will make them accessory to thia 
 great sin of slavery. Why, sir, we must look to 
 the circumstances that attended our Declaration of 
 Independence, and the formation of this Consti- ' 
 tution. The ships of the North and of the South 
 were then engaged in the African slave trade. 
 They were going to Africa, and there buying or 
 kindnapping negroes, and bringing them to the 
 United States, and selling them to the citizens of 
 the Union as slaves. A proposition was made to 
 abolish that trade, or to give Congress the power 
 to abolish it; but the North, the States of Massa- 
 chusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire, said 
 that they wanted the trade extended, at least until 
 1808; thus giving them twenty years more to bring 
 this species of property to the United States, sell 
 it, and pocket the profits of the sale. It was 
 the idea entertained then, universally. Nobody 
 thought of any thing else than that they were 
 legally bought and sold as property. 
 
 But, sir, when you came to organize the Mis- 
 sissippi Territory, you put in your bill, that any 
 man being the owner of a slave might take that . 
 slave into that Territory and there reside. And 
 every Administration from that day to this, and 
 every President of the United States, has recog- 
 nized the same idea. Congress has again arid 
 again recognized it, and directed slaves to be paid 
 for as property. Your treaties have recognized 
 it. And, sir, not only that, but your courts have 
 again and again recognized it. Your Government 
 in all its branches, executive, legislative, and ju- 
 dicial, have been treating slaves as property up to 
 
this good hour. And now, when an individual 
 pursues his shive into the State of Ohio, if you 
 please, and apprehends him, by what ri<cht does 
 he apprehend him ? Why, umlor the right to tlio 
 service and iiibor of the slave. Tiiat is technically 
 the right under the language omployud by the Con- 
 stitution; but what does it mean ? It matters not 
 whether the individual who has escaped owes ser- 
 vice for a day, for a year, or for life -.he is subject to 
 be delivered up when a fugitive from his master. 
 Upon what other ground lias the master the right 
 to reclaim his slave who has escaped into another 
 State, unless it be a right conceded under the Con- 
 stitution, that he has the sole and exclusive con- 
 trol over the services of the slave to as full nn 
 extent as he has over any other species of prop- 
 erty, real or jiersonal, not inconsistent with the 
 laws of humanity ? 
 
 The gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Stanton,] the 
 other day, contended before this House that the 
 admission that slaves were property would in- 
 volve us in interminable difficulties. Why? He 
 objected to the admission of the right; for the rea- 
 son, among others, that, if a man in Iransitu 
 through a free State with his slave should die, and 
 die indebted to the citizens of such free State, an 
 administrator in such State could not inventory 
 the slave as property, or subject him to the pay- 
 ment of such indebtedness. "VVhy, sir, if the gen- 
 tleman from Ohio had reflected upon the result of 
 that provision of the Constitution relating to fugi- 
 tive slaves, according to his own construction of 
 it, he would have seen that the same difficulty 
 might occur. Suppose a slave escaping from Ken- 
 tucky into Ohio is pursued- and apprehended by 
 his master, but before his return his master dies, 
 owing debts in that State: the slave could not be 
 sold there; a writ of fieri facias could not reach 
 him; but he could be taken back to Kentucky, and 
 there be sold in the marKCt. Suppose the slave 
 escapes, and is apprehended by his owner in a 
 free State, where the master dies: surely his per- 
 sonal representative — his heirs or administrators 
 — would have the right to carry him iiack, and 
 apply the proceeds of his sale to the debts of his , 
 deceased owner. 
 
 But again: the gentleman from Ohio says, sup- 
 pose the master, while in transitu through a free 
 State, kills his slave, or his slave kills him: what 
 is then to be done ? Precisely the same difficulty 
 "would arise in case the owner of a fugitive slave, 
 having apprehended him in a free State, should, 
 while returning, in the exercise of his authority, 
 kill, or be killed by the slave. The gentleman's 
 State should provide for such a contingency; and 
 if they have not legislated upou the subject, it is 
 not my fault. . 
 
 And so in respect to all the difficulties which i 
 our friends of the North find growing out of the 
 recognition of the right of property in slaves. 
 There are no difficulties which did not exist in 
 the minds of our fathers who framed the Consti- 
 tution, and which were not fully met by them in 'j 
 the instrument framed by them, with the intention j 
 of compromising and settling them upon princi- ; 
 pies having respect to the rights of all the States I 
 of the Union. i. 
 
 Now, sir, when we look at the history of this I 
 
 country and see its progress; when we see the 
 difficulties which have from time to time come up 
 and been settled by the wisdom of our fathers, is 
 it not strange that our friends in the North should 
 unite in such numbers upon an issue that has so 
 little in il, affecting not only their owti welfare, 
 but the welfare of the whole country? Why, sir, 
 if we are permitted to tak<' our slaves into the 
 common Territories of the country, il does not 
 add a single one to the number; ildoes not bring 
 anotln.T slave within the limits of the United 
 States. It only authorizes the master to change 
 his location; itdois not luing him nearer to you. 
 Most likely it will liave the eflect of removing him 
 further from those gentlemen from the North who 
 represent that section upon this floor. But gen- 
 tlemen tell us they want these Territories for freo 
 labor. Mr. Chauman, I submit tiiat there is 
 much in the conduct of this party at ihe North 
 calculated to break up and forever destroy that 
 feeling of friendship which once existed, ana must 
 again exist before we ran sustain a united Gov- 
 ernment. The Territories of the Govcrnm(?nt arc 
 the common properly of all thi' Slates. No man 
 will say that ihe South has failed to contribute 
 her share in their acquisition, wlielhcr it be in 
 cash or blood. No man can say it. 
 
 Then why .sliould we not liavea common right 
 to that territory ? Wiiatare you gentlemen of the 
 North indicating by your policy in this House ? 
 It is not to Secure the territory for your own chil- 
 dren. You do not expect to populate it by your 
 own offspring; certainly not m the present day. 
 You have, during the present session, passed a bdl 
 giving an inheritance in that territory not only to 
 your children, but to the children of every man in 
 the v.'orld who chooses to go there, to the children 
 even of the Hessian, who, for a price, fought 
 against our fathers in the war of the Revolution; 
 while you refuse to permit the descendants of 
 General Green, or of any of the heroes of the Rev- 
 olution in the South, to go there and lake their 
 property with them. 
 
 Call you this fair dealing? Is this loyalty to 
 us or to the memories of the Revolution ? Is it 
 that spirit that actuated the framers of the Con- 
 stitution, when they, compromising all the diffi- 
 culties before them, framed the Government under 
 which we have grown up and existed as a nation 
 so long and so prosperously? 
 
 Sir, these difficulties are continually thrown in 
 our way. A determined disposition is manifested 
 to take that territory from us, to circumscribe us 
 within our present limits; while they will permit 
 homesteads to be granted to the descendants of 
 our former enemies, and will populate it with men 
 who cannot even speak our language, and to whom 
 they should be bound by no stronger ties of aflec- 
 tion than they should be to the men of the South, 
 who shared in all the dangers and hardships of 
 its acquisition. 
 
 I have no hostility to foreigners; but, sir, when 
 I see the legislative bodies of my country legis- 
 lating with a view to give them precedence over 
 the descendants of the revolutionary sires of the 
 South, I feel that it is time for us to speak out — 
 to demand at least the rights of the people of the 
 South. There can be nothing wrong in that. 
 
6 
 
 We do not claim any exclusive right in any of 
 tTie Territories. We only claim the same right 
 in those Territories that are secured to the people 
 of the North. We demand nothing more; \vc 
 can submit, sir, to nothmg less. We do not ask 
 to exclude one of the northern people, or any 
 species of property possessed by the northern 
 people. But you propose to exclude us, unless 
 we divest ourselves of our household servants — 
 a property which is endeared to us from our ear- 
 liest recollections, and for which we have higher 
 regard than for any other species of our prop- 
 erty. The relations which exist between the mas- 
 ter and servant create a sympathy unlike that 
 ■which you feel for your homestead and your farm 
 horses and wagons. It is a kind of friendship. 
 It is a devotion of fellow-feeling characteristic of 
 that institution, which never has been, and which 
 I fear never will be, justly appreciated by the 
 North. They are a part of us. They sympathize 
 with us, and we sympathize with them. Our 
 rights are tlieir rights; and when we prosper, ; 
 they prosper. If we can go to a country where 
 we can do better than where we are, the slaves 
 that go with us are bettered in an equal propor- [ 
 tion with ourselves. Hence, sir, it is that we 
 claim all the rights of equality in this Union. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, the time lias gone by for 
 the discussion of tliis question at length. We | 
 Iiave passed from theories and come to facts. Such 
 has been the character of the dealings of the North i 
 toward the South — all of which 1 have not the 
 tirrie, in the few minutes left me, to refer to — that 
 the South feels her rights are no longer safe in ! 
 this Government without some new guarantees \ 
 for their protection. Under that feeling, four States ! 
 have already seceded from the Union; and, sir, I 
 probably while I am addressing this committee, ' 
 the fifih will take its leave of us. These are the 
 facts that stare us in the face. Disunion has taken [ 
 place. Many of the great minds of the South 
 have taken the ground that the right of secession 
 is a right over and above the Constitution — but a j 
 right recognized by the peculiar manner in which [ 
 that instrument was framed. I have not the time ; 
 on this occasion, nor do I think the great body of ; 
 the South are going to take time to investigate the [ 
 very nice and very able legal arguments made o)i 
 this subject. We go back to first great principles. | 
 It is enough for the people of the South to look I 
 to the Declaration of Independence. We believe ! 
 that— I 
 
 " When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing 
 invarial)ly tlie same object, evinces a design to reduce tbcm 
 under absolute despotism, it is their riglit, it is llieir duty, |i 
 to throw off such government, and to provide new guards j' 
 for tlieir future safety." j 
 
 The ground is taken here, that we cannot and I 
 will not be permitted to secede peaceably from '' 
 this Union. If the action in the Senate ycster- [ 
 day means anything, it means that. This thing ! 
 of secession is not to be permitted. The Army i 
 and the Navy are to be employed against us. I 
 The money appropriated in the bill now before us 
 — the Army appropriation bill — is to be used for 
 the purpose of sending troops to the South, with 
 a view to the coercion of seceding States, and the 
 pinning of ^his Union once more together by the 
 
 jj bayonet of Federal troops. I will submit an ex- 
 j! tract from the letter of acceptance of Hon. Ed- 
 I ward Evcret', a distinguished citizen of Massa- 
 chusetts. He is entitled to respect. His opinion, 
 at least, will show the opinions and feelings of 
 ' the party which supported him. He says: 
 
 " The suggestion that the Union can be maintained by 
 the luimerical predominance and military prowess of one 
 
 ! section, exerted to coerce the other into submission, is, in 
 my judgment, as self-contradictoiy as it is dangerous. Jt 
 conies loaded with tlie death-smell from fields wet with 
 
 , brothers' blood. If the vital principle of all republican gov- 
 ernment 'is the consent of the governed,' much more does 
 a union of coequal sovereign States require, as its bases, the 
 liarmony of its members and their voluntary cooperation In 
 its organic functions." 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the people of the South regard 
 
 that as the true doctrine. They believe that this 
 
 is a Government founded in the consent of the 
 
 people governed; and that all efforts made to 
 
 coerce a sovereign State will be deemed an attack 
 
 upon the great body of the South. Whenever 
 
 such efforts are made, I venture to say — and with 
 
 no desire to indulge in boasting; it is my solemn 
 
 I conviction — that every State from this to the Rio 
 
 ; Grande will unite as a band of brothers, and as a 
 
 I band of brothers will resist to the last; resist any 
 
 , and every blow struck against a seceding State to 
 
 ; compel her to remain in the Union. 
 
 I Mr. Chairman, we regard the Constitution of 
 
 j the United States as the casket in which our fore- 
 
 i fathers deposited the jewels of justice; of the in- 
 
 j surance of domestic tranquillity; of provision for 
 
 I the common defense; the promotion of the general 
 
 welfare, and the security of the blessings of liberty 
 
 I to ourselves and our posterity. Those were the 
 
 I jewels deposited in the casket. When you rifle 
 
 ] it of these treasures, do you suppose that eulogies 
 
 upon the glorious Union will attach the people and 
 
 the States of the South to it? No, sir; they will 
 
 dash it from them as an unholy thing. It is the 
 
 treasure that gives it value, and not that in which 
 
 the treasure is contained. 
 
 But I have heard the idea frequently thrown 
 out that you do not mean to make war upon the 
 seceding States; that all you mean to do is, to let 
 them do without the United States courts and post 
 offices. It is declared that this Government will 
 let the seceding States do without the advantages 
 of this Union, while they will be compelled to pay 
 their share of the revenue. That is the sort of coer- 
 cion which George III attempted to put in force 
 against the revolted American colonies. He made 
 war upon them for no other purpose but to com- 
 pel them to pay the tea tax and the stamp duty. 
 Is such a war consistent with the principles of 
 American freedoni? If so, then you can prose- 
 cute your war for the purpose of collecting the 
 revenue, and yet use no coercion. Suppose the 
 Constitution of the United States made it the 
 especial duty of the Government to coerce every 
 State that was not willingly subject to its control: 
 what would you do? You would only enforce 
 the law; the very thing, sir, you now claim that 
 you will do, and yet you will not coerce. 
 
 Mr. Chaii-man,"let this thing be attended to; 
 not that I invite it, but let it be attended to; or 
 who can imagine the terrible consequences that 
 must result? Is it not known that one, five, or fif- 
 
 / 
 
teen States cannot be conquered and held in sub- 
 jection? It cannot lie done; nor do I claim lliat 
 we can conquer tiic North. Wiiat did it cost ilii.s 
 Government to getliftcen hundred Seminole war- 
 riors out of the everuiladcs of Florida? We ex- 
 pended more than tliirly million dollars out of 
 the |Hiblic Treasury in llmt littli> war; and now, 
 when you talk of conquerinj,^ Slates, the whole 
 arithmetic fails in figures to count the cost tiint 
 will follow the attempt. I submit this, not as n 
 th .....' 
 
 Nortli Carolina to the Rio Graiule, are nearly all- 
 in possession of the seceding Stales. We can be 
 content with no adjustment tlnit will not unite 
 the South with us. The Houthern States have a 
 common inten st and a cummon destiny. 
 
 You censure the soutlifrn Sliilea for their pre- 
 cipitancy. Upon this subject we of the border 
 slave State.q have more reason to complain than 
 you. They and we have l(dd you fuv years, in 
 the most s(demn manner, that we could not sub- 
 
 ■a , but as the plan, conseque-nces of an act of mit to youraggre«sionH,«nd entreate.l you to for- 
 his character. It such poheyas th.s ,s to result bear; yet youT.nve not heeded, but havc".n«u Ited 
 .n no good to any portion ot th.. U.uon, but in us nnJ told u.s that it was with U8 mere boastllil- 
 nUerminnble evil, I submit, why is it necessary !| ness ooasiiui- 
 
 xnedicnt? And let me say, here, that all that 
 
 lid or done upon this subject of conquering. 
 
 or ex 
 is sa 
 
 or using force, or coercion, but adds fuel to the 
 flame through the whole South. If this Govern- 
 ment had manifested aniorepeacL'able disjiosition, 
 and had, from the commencement of this excite- 
 ment, proclaimed through Congress that no force 
 would be used, I believe that not mo 
 
 You complain that the seceding Slates have 
 seized the forts and other public |)rop«rty. These 
 forts were permitted to be erected in these States 
 for their defense, and the arms that have been 
 taken were placed there for the same purpose. 
 The Federal Government has no right to use this 
 
 property for any other purpose. And whenever 
 
 -„-j...,„. ..,„.„. ^. ...„,„..^ ..„,j, uiMviiftaiiy con- 1 I ou complain tliat i<loriUaand othei 
 cur in the idea that the true and proper mode of purchased and paid for, and that they cannot 
 putting down civil war is to grant to the people ' therefore, secedeV Gentlemen are surely for reviv-' 
 what they ask. And what has the South a.sked > ingthe doctrines of the dark ages of the common 
 
 eifin', ,\ p"' ^'f,\"^T. ^'",e"' ncver!|law,by which theywouldmaketheinhabitantsof 
 comeinto the Congress ot the United States and ll the purchased territory n7/«i«., in -rross; attached 
 
 to the freehold, and bought and sold with it. Flor- 
 
 asked for the passage of a law favoring and estab 
 lishing slavery upon any portion of the continent. 
 She has only asked that all the rights we have 
 shall be protected by the Government. We do 
 not get rights from this Government. We have 
 them over and above the Government. The Gov- 
 
 ida cost §5,000,000. Every State of the old thirteen 
 was purchased. They cost the blood of the Rev- 
 olution—a price greatly above that paid for our 
 subsequent acquisitions. In all the treaties ac- 
 quiring territory, we have stipulated for their 
 
 It this matter IS to be settled— and possibly it yet- i You could have quieted the country, and re- 
 may be— It must be done by aconcession. And 1; stored peace and prosperity, at no sacrifice but 
 what do you yield ? What do our northern friends j | the yielding of your prejudices. We cannot, with- 
 yield? Nothing; absolutely nothing. They will i out ruin and dishonor. In the language of a dis- 
 have the same rights m the Territories which ;| tinguished southerner: 
 
 - Pm;nll^'-'"tl "^n ^'"''"^ "" r""' 'i" ^°""' '';•'! '■''''' '"-'y '"^ '-^ '^'■"<'-""" -J"y comparative ea.c. 
 _ equality in the Union, or independence out ot ! gather up our iVct in our beds, ari.l die in peace; but our 
 
 It." That is the watchword. That is the feeling jj e'lildren will go lortli beggarcrl iroiu ilie lioiucs oi" their 
 
 of our people of all sections, so far as m v inform" 1 1 ''"''''^'■^- .Fisli'Tinen will cast their nets where your proud 
 
 ation evtPml« I ^ commercial navy now rides at anclior, and dry them upon 
 
 T<T .• . , 1 , I 'lie shore now covered with your bales of merchandise. 
 
 aiy constituents have not been, nor have I i trapped, circumvented, undernunrd, the Instiiuiions of 
 been, for secession. We have hoped for safety I >'"'"■ ^°i' ^^''1 ^^ overthrown ; and within five and twenty 
 in the Union ; and have desired that all means to I -r^^.l "'« '"f '"'7 o*" Si- Domingo will be the record of the 
 ortv,^. ti,„t „.,,! „i 111 ,1 , >i r .• I f">utn. It dead men's bones can trembe, ours will move 
 
 eftect that end shall be exhausted before a resort is ; under the muttered curses of sons and daughter.-, denounc- 
 had to disunion. But while we waited for your ! j ing the blindness and love of ease which have left them an 
 returning sense of justice towards us, disunion , '"'"^"'^'''^^ o'""'oc." 
 
 has overtaken us; four, and perhaps five. States jl This calamity we will avert; peaceably if we 
 have seceded; and the forts and arsenals, from I can, forcibly if we must. 
 
 Printed at the office of the Congressional Globe. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 012 026 461 8