■Cll^ 
 
E 423 
 .C115 
 Copy 1 
 
 THE SLAVE QUESTION. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 HON. e/c/^ABELL, of FLOMDA, 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, xMARCH 5, 1850, 
 
 In Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the PresideJiVs Message com- 
 municating the Constitution of California. iAj^ 
 
 Mr. WiNTHROp, like myself, was opposed to its 
 acquisition. He ao:reed with me in regard to the 
 proper conduct of the v;ar, which tiie House of 
 Representatives had declared to be "unnecessarily 
 and unconstitutionally begun." He was the rep- 
 resentative of the conservative feeling of the coun- 
 try, which, if it could have found a place in the 
 breast of the late Administration, would have pre- 
 vented a state of things, threatening the overthrow 
 of the Constitution, and a dissolution of the Union. 
 But, sir, contrary to his wishes, to my wishes, and 
 to the wishes of the entire Whig party, territory 
 wasacquired. Anew issue is presented. We, of the 
 South, not Whigs or Democrats, but all the south- 
 ern people, claim a right to possess and enjoy in 
 common with the people of the North, at least a 
 portion of the country which we have fought for, 
 and are to pay for. The caucus which nominated 
 Mr. WiNTHROP, denied us this right, by refusing 
 to adopt a resolution declaring that " Congress 
 ought not to pass any law prohibiting slavery in 
 the territories of California and New Mexico, nor 
 any law abolishing slavery in the District of Co- 
 lumbia." 
 
 The refusal to adopt this and another resolution 
 submitted, mi^ht properly be regarded as equiva- 
 lent to the affirmation of their converse. I resolved 
 not to sanction doctrines so fatal to my section of 
 the Union, and to the Union itself, by voting for 
 the nominee of that caucus. 
 
 Sir, there are other facts and other considera- 
 tions, to which I need not now allude, which re- 
 moved all doubt from my mind of the propriety of 
 the course pursued by the five southern Whigs 
 who acted witii me. We have no reason to regret 
 what we did — we are satisfied that good has come 
 out of it. If the House had continued disorgan- 
 ized for a few weeks longer, the qusslions now 
 distracting the country would have been settled. 
 All now admit that the crisis is at hand \vhich we 
 then sav/, and the minds of men, in every section, 
 are directed to a consideration of the means of re- 
 moving the causes of danger. 
 
 But, sir, enough on this subject. Let me say, 
 however, in this connection, that I have heard 
 much, and said much, to my constitvi.ents, respect- 
 ing the conservathm of the northern Whig party. 
 I believed what 1 said. And I do not hesitate to 
 express the opinion now, that on all questions, ex- 
 cept this of slavery, they do constitute the con- 
 servative body of the North; and on this they are 
 more reliable than the northern Democratic party. 
 With individual exceptions, entitled to our moat 
 
 Mr. CABELL said : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : It is perhaps as well, or better 
 for me, that I have not, till now, succeeded in ac- 
 complishing my wish to address the committee on 
 the "absorbing question of the day." Much that I 
 desired to say, has been better said by other gentle- 
 men, who entertain views similar to my own, on the 
 subject of slavery and " the rights of the South." 
 Particularly has my friend from Georgia, who sits 
 near me, [Mr. Toombs,] anticipated the expression 
 of my opinions, in his very able speech recently 
 delivered — the sentiments of which I endorse and 
 adopt. In what I may say, I shall endeavor not 
 to weary the committee by a detailed argument of 
 points made by other gentlemen. 
 
 While the House was in a state of disorganiza- 
 tion, from its inability to elect a presiding officer, 
 I was prevented, by the adoption of a resolution 
 stopping debate, from giving the reasons which 
 induced me to decline to act v/ith the V/hig party 
 in the election of Speaker. 
 
 At the commencement of the last Congress, I 
 had cheerfully voted for the accomplished Repre- 
 sentative from the city of Boston. For this my 
 political opponents at home assailed me. I did 
 not excuse, but justified myself, for I did ichat was 
 right. My constituents sustained me. They all 
 expected me to vote for Mr. Winthrop again. 
 Had I done so, there would have been no com- 
 plaint against me. With the Whig party of my 
 State, Mr. Winthrop is a great favorite — no man 
 from a non-slaveholding State as much so. They 
 would have been gratified, if I could have felt au- 
 thorized to cast my vote for him. With the expe- 
 rience of the last canvass, the Democratic party 
 would not again have ventured to charge me with 
 want of fealty to the South. I was not, there- 
 fore, influenced by any fear of embarrassment at 
 home. 1 regret that I could not give my support 
 to a gentleman between whom and myself there 
 exists the kindest feelings of personal friendship. 
 
 This subject, Mr. Chairman, has lost its inter- 
 est; and if it had not, I have not time now to speak 
 of it. My constituents have confidence enough in 
 me to believe that my course was dictated solely 
 by a regard for their interests, and that I would 
 not have voted against the candidate of my party, 
 and a gentleman held in such high esteem as the 
 late Speaker of this House, without the most sat- 
 isfactory reasons. It will suffice to say, sir, that 
 thecircurnstancesatlending the meeting of the pres- 
 ent, and the last Congress, were widely different. 
 Mexican territory had not then been acquired. 
 

 grateful thanks, men of all parties advocate the 
 most dtstructire measures- 
 
 A few weeks ago, we had an illustration of the 
 meaning which northern gentlemen attach to con- 
 servatism. A gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Schenck] 
 made a very good speech on what he called tiie 
 " spirit of conservatism," which influenced his 
 political action, in the course of which he de- 
 nounced one of his colleagues [Mr. Giddikgs] as 
 0)1 ugltalor. Now, sir, terms of condemnation too 
 strong cannot be applied to the agitating meniber. 
 But, as the conservative meniber proceeded, we 
 found him conieiiding that, for all practical meas- 
 ures, he was more of an anti-slavery man than the 
 agitator. Indeed, sir, the ordy controversy be- 
 tween the two gentlemen was, which icas the best 
 Free-Soiler or Jinti Slaveryite. 
 
 The same line of arj;ument was followed by my 
 friend from New York, [Mr. Duer,] in a letter to 
 his constituents, which has become quite famous. 
 So with other gentlemen. We all listened with 
 interest, a few days ago, to the speech of the late 
 Speaker of the House of Representatives, [Mr. 
 WiKTHROP,] in which he administered a well de- 
 served castigation to the " Free-Soil sect." He 
 was specially severe upon another agitaling mem- 
 ber from Ohio, [Mr. Root,] against whom it can- 
 not be denied he made out a clear case. But, sir, 
 what was the burden of his complaint against that 
 member .' Why, that he [Mr. R.] was the great- 
 est enemy of the Wilmot proviso — that if the 
 proviso was killed, " its death must lie at the door 
 of the member from Ohio" — it was " a victim to 
 the restless vanity and headstrong rashness" of 
 that member. He went on then to say, that the 
 member from Ohio had committed " worse than a 
 fault;" that he had committed " a mistake — a fatal 
 blunder;" that he should not then have called on 
 " the J^'orlh to show its hand." 
 
 Now, Mr. Chairman, what matters it to us by 
 what names gentlemen choose to call themselves, 
 or to characterize others, whether Abolitionists, 
 Agitators, Free-Soilers, or Conservatives, so long 
 as they all advocate the iviost destructive measures. 
 I know no subistaniial difference between Dem- 
 ocrats, Free-S:ilers, and Whigs, at the North, 
 except in their party organizalion. With a few 
 individual exceptions, they are all waging ruth- 
 less war on the institutions of the South, which 
 they seem resolved to circumscribe, cripple, and 
 destroy, if they can. There is rarely a measure 
 proposed by the Agitator, which is not voted for 
 by the Conservative. The Agitator boldly threat- 
 ens, and ]5lainly tells us his purpose and object — 
 the Conservative says nothing, but quietly and 
 stealthily binds our arms, and places the rope 
 round our necks. If the southern man resists, he, 
 too, is called an Agitator — if he tamely submits, 
 his executioner dignifies him with the title of Con- 
 servative. We may have such Conservatives 
 among us. 1 am, and ever shall be, a Conserv- 
 ative in the true sense of the term; but sir, I am 
 not such a one as this. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, 1 have watched with painful 
 anxiety the progress of anti-slavery feeling and 
 anti-slavery action in the non-slaveholding States. 
 I believe that the sentiment of hostility to the in- 
 stitution of slavery, is commun to alt parties, and 
 that there is a deteimination to invoke all the pow- 
 ers of the Federal Government to break down that 
 institution, and thus to destroy more than fifteen 
 
 hundred millioiis of the property of the South. It is 
 this, sir, which causes our anxiety. Is it to be 
 wondered at, that southern men evince alarm and 
 excitement on this subject .' It is this which gives 
 such absorbing interest to questions now engaging 
 our attention, that Congress finds itself unable to 
 proceed with the ordinary business of the country. 
 
 This deplorable state of things, Mr. Chairman, 
 has not come unexpectedly to many of us. It was 
 foreseen, loretold, and deprecated by every Whig 
 member of the last and the preceding Congress, 
 The entire Whig party warned the country of the 
 danger to result from the acquisition of Mexican 
 territory. But, sir, unfortunately, our counsels 
 were not heeded. The late Administration rushed 
 recklessly on in its mad career of conquest, re- 
 gardless of consequences. We have acquired for- 
 eign territory, but it is at the risk of our own glo- 
 rious Confederacy. The Union is rocked to its 
 very centre; and all the wisdom, and all the patri- 
 otism of the best men of our country, are required 
 to save it from destruction. The evil day which 
 was predicted, has come. The danger is upon us, 
 and we should meet it as patriots, not as parti- 
 sans. Let us " look not mournfully into the past," 
 but anxiously at the present and into the future. 
 Perils surround us on every hand. Particularly 
 is there danger to the southern States. Their 
 safety, and the foundations of civil society among 
 them, are threatened. This is no time for personal 
 or party crimination. The questions involved 
 rise far above all party considerations. Southern 
 men should now be banded together as one man, 
 in defense of their honor and their constitutional 
 rights — their individual, State, and sectional inter- 
 ests. ^ 
 
 I must here be permitted to express my abhor- 
 rence of the course pursued by certain partisan 
 editors, who profess to advocate southern rights 
 and interests, and to desire union among southern 
 men. There are some men whose souls cannot 
 embrace their country, and who have not an aspi- 
 ration above their party. Who is not struck with 
 tins, in reading the Washington Union newsjjaper.^ 
 1 have not time to do more than to refer to this 
 paper. The person who writes its editorials, seems 
 to have no other object than to make party capital 
 out of the questions we are now so anxiously 
 considering. Professing a desire to " unite the 
 South," he wantonly charges the President of the 
 Uniieti States — the choice of the entire Whig party 
 of the South — with countenancing, if not advis- 
 ing, the incendiary resolutions of the New York 
 Legislature, and others of similar character — with 
 taking to his bosom, as "confidential advisers," 
 the Senator from New Hampshire, and other Abo- 
 litionists, and with "/ojnejiiiiig-," in every way, that 
 agitation which threatens such disastrous conse- 
 quences. These charges, known to be without 
 foundation by him who makes them, can only 
 have the eflect of preventing a union of the friends 
 of the President at the South, with the Democrats 
 of the South. There is scarcely a number of the 
 paper, to which I allude, which does not charge, 
 that the entire Wliig party is responsible for evils 
 which surround us, and that southern Whigs are 
 in alliance with northern Abolitionists. I read a 
 single paragraph, which is nothing more than what 
 we see in almost every number: 
 
 "The Federal or Whig parly of the United States — the 
 Abuiitioa Federalists of the North, and tlie biavehulaing 
 
Whias of the South, aclina in alliancp— are the aiitliors of 
 all the present evils and danaerr^ that afflict the country, and 
 imperil the peace of the Union."' 
 
 But, sir, I must pass on. I have seen a few 
 other partisan papers at the South, which follow 
 the example of the "Union." There is one in 
 my own State, in which 1 some time ajo saw the 
 atrocious sentiment, that " southern Whi^s are no 
 more to be trusteil than northern Democrats." I 
 have generally observed, Mr. Chairman, that men 
 who speak thus of southern men, are natives of 
 non-slavfiholdins States, who hope to secui-e ihe 
 favor of southern people, by being " more south- 
 ern than the South itself." I have never suspected 
 that the senior editor of " The Union," wrote one 
 of the articles of the character referred to. He is ■ 
 a native of Ihe South, and would not thus slander j 
 and vilify those amons: whom he was born. j 
 
 Is it true, Mr. Chairman, that only the Whis: 
 party of the Noi'th is in alliance with Abolitionists.' 
 Do you not know, sir, that this is not so? The 
 northern Democracy court the favor of Abolition- j 
 ists, as do the northern Whigs, and far more fre- I 
 -quently do we find them forming regular coalitions. 
 Every Democratic Legislature of the northern 
 States has passed resolutions expressing senti- 
 ments hostile to southern interests — Whig Legi.s- 
 latures have done the same thing. In Vermont, 
 last year, the Democrats and Abolitionists held 
 their conventions at the same time and place; 
 and, on a comparison of the sentiments of the 
 members of the two conventions on the subject of 
 slavery, there was found to be such an entire co- 
 incidence of opinion, that the two parties, as they 
 expressed it, "fiised" into one. In Connecticut, 
 we know that three Whig candidates for Congress 
 were defeated, by a coalition of Democrats and 
 Abolitionists, who, having adopted the " Buffalo 
 platform," elected three free-soil Democrats to this 
 House. The Democratic member.s of the Ohio 
 Legislature united with Abolitionists, and elected 
 the Abolition Senator from that State, [Mr. Chase.] 
 But, sir, why multiply proof? We all know the 
 principle on which the late Presidential canvass 
 was conducted at the North. General Cass was 
 recommended to the people, on the ground that he 
 was, in every particular, an anti-slavery man. 
 The Whigs said the same of General Taylor. 
 Sir, all patties at the North are hostile to us, and 
 I can never place confidence in any, till they slough 
 ofl' the putrescence of Abolitionism. I protest 
 against ihe allegation, that southern Whiirs are 
 untrue to the South, and that ihe Democratic party 
 of the North merits southern confidence. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have been surprised and mor- 
 tified at the character of the speeches of many of 
 my southern Democratic friends. They all pro- 
 fess, and I doubt not desire, a union of southern 
 men. Yet they pursue a course which must es- 
 trange us from each other, and divide the South. 
 Their speeches are calculated to destroy the confi- 
 dence of southern constituency in southern Whigs. 
 They may thereby secure a party advantage. But 
 I must say to my friends, that we are not prepared 
 to go over to the Democratic party. When we 
 tell them that we desire Union with them on this 
 vital question of slavery, we mean a union of the 
 South for the sake of the South, not for the benefit 
 of the Democratic party. 
 
 A Whig representative from the State of North 
 Carolina, [Mr. Clingman,] who commenced this 
 
 debate, to prove how entirely he was uninfluenced 
 by party associations, made a speech far more ac- 
 ceptable to Democrats than to Whigs. He was 
 followed by a gentleman from Texas, who com- 
 menced with a vindication of his own party at the 
 North from the suspicion of free-soilism, but 
 charged that there was a coalition of Whigs and 
 Free-Snjlers. Then followed my friend from Vir- 
 ginia, [Mr. Seddon,] in a speech highly offensive 
 to the friends of the President, charging him with 
 offences and usurpation of power which, if true, 
 would justify his impeachment. Most of the gen- 
 tlemen who have spoken on that side of the House, 
 while they uphold the rights of the South, have 
 not failed to labor hard for their party. There 
 are exceptions. My friend before me [Mr. Ven- 
 able] is one. The gentleman from Maryland, 
 [Mr. McLane,] who spoke a day or two ago, 
 seems not to have thought of aught else but his 
 party. Party, party, party, we heard nothing but 
 "the Democratic party," from beginning to the 
 end. That I may not misrepresent my friend from 
 Maryland, I quote his words: "It (the Demo- 
 cratic party) might run away from non-interven- 
 tion; it might run away from the free-trade prin- 
 ciples of the tarilTof '46; it might even come here 
 and offer to make terms with the protectionists; but 
 still he believed that tlie great heart of the Demo- 
 cratic party would live." Farther on, the gentleman 
 says, " he held the sentiments to-day which he had 
 expressed the first day of the session, that he was 
 with the national Democracy; that he did not 
 care if he stood side by side with men who enter- 
 tained different opinions from him on the subject 
 of slavery," &c. Whatever it does, whatever its 
 opinions and ils policy may be, I understand that 
 the gentleman from Maryland will stick to the 
 Democratic party. Never was love more devoted: 
 " I know not, I ask not, if guilt'.s in that heart: 
 1 know thai I love thee, wliatever thou art." 
 
 These gentlemen say, that the only hope of the 
 country is in the Democratic party. I — southern 
 Whigs — do not think so. if this is to be the basis 
 of our union, I tell gentlemen plainly we can not 
 be united. 
 
 Sir, it is not true that I, or the Whig party, are 
 in any way responsible for the state of things 
 which we so much deplore. You have got us 
 into the difficulty, which we did all in our power 
 to avoid. But, making common cause with you, 
 we shall do all we can to get you out of it. Sir, I 
 feel that in approaching this question. I shall 
 know no party. My interests, my associations, my 
 affiliations, my affections, are with the South. The 
 people of the South are my people, " their Gods 
 shall be my Gods," their fate my fi\te. If they 
 come out of the struggle in which they are engaged 
 triumphantly, I shall rejoice with them; if they 
 go down, and ruin overwhelmn them, I shall be in- 
 volved in the same common ruin. The cause of 
 the South is the cause of right and justice. It is 
 the cause of ihe country, and appeals to the pa- 
 triotic and constitution-loving of every section of 
 the Union. 
 
 What do we of the South ask ? We have fought 
 for, and are to pay for, the territory acquired from 
 Mexico, and we merely ask that we may not be 
 excluded from its enjoyment. We cannot go, 
 unless you permit us to take our property with us; 
 and we contend that Congress, with its limited 
 powers, can not, and, with any powers, should not, 
 
exclude us. As well may we say that, because 
 policy requires that we should do all in our power 
 to increase the population of the newly-acquired 
 territory, none but' married men shall be allowed 
 to £0 to it. Or, because it is against the dictates 
 of humanity to expose women and children to the 
 rigors and hardships of a frontier life, no man 
 shall carry with him his wife or his daughters. 
 Or, because we believe that the collection of masses 
 of men in manufacturing towns has an anli- republi- 
 can tendency, that the men who are to occupy this 
 territory shall not carry machinery with them, nor 
 establish manuflictures. Or, because agricultural 
 and pastural pursuits are most congenial to liberty, 
 none shall go but those who are thus engaged. Or, 
 because slavery tends to independence of thought, 
 feeling, and action, and those who hold their 
 fellow- men in bondage, never can become slaves, the 
 interest and perpetuity of the Republic demand that 
 slavery should be established, and, therefore, that 
 none but slaveholders shall be allowed to occupy 
 the territory. 
 
 Admit this power, sir, and there is no limit. I 
 liave no doubt of the constitutional right of the 
 southern people to go, ^vith their property, to all 
 the territories of the United States, and of the 
 duty of this Government to protect them in the en- 
 joyment of that property. We stand by the Con- 
 stitution, which gaurantee.s equal rig;hts to all. 
 The people of the North and of the South, have 
 an equal right to possess and enjoy this territory. 
 If you exclude slavery, we cannot go; and you 
 invade our rights. If you admit it, you may 
 go; if you do not, it is a mere matter of taste. 
 In the latter case, you orTend a moral sentiment, 
 or sickly sentimentality. In the former, you vio- 
 late a guarantied constitutional right. For the 
 sake of the Union — for the sake of peace, har- 
 mony, and good fellowship, we may make conces- 
 sions to your taste; and, while we insist on our 
 right to carry our property with us to every por- 
 tion of our common territory, we may, as a com- 
 promise, suriender something of our constitu- 
 tional rights. Such were the motives which influ- 
 enced southern men in giving their assent to the 
 Missouri compromise, in which the gentleman 
 from Illinois [IVIr. Baker] says, we recognized 
 the power of Congress, against which I am now 
 contending. We did not, in that case, recognize 
 this power. Vie claimed a constitutional right to 
 occupy, in common with you, the whole territory 
 then belonging to the United States; but, for the 
 reasons just mentioned, we surrendered a portion 
 of our rights. 
 
 We ask you to protect us in the enjoyment of 
 our property, and the gentleman from Illinois says, 
 we thereby admit the power of Congress V> inhibit 
 slavery. He contends that the power to protect 
 necessarily implii/s the power to destroy. iS'ot so, 
 sir. Congress may and should protect the citizens 
 of this District in the enjoyment of their lands, 
 houses, cattle and other property; but no one 
 clairns for it power to take away or destroy sucli 
 property. So, also, Congress can protect us in 
 the enjoyment of onr slave properly in the States, 
 but not even the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
 GiDDiNcs] claims for it the power to abolish or 
 destroy that properly. 
 
 But, sir, I care not whether Congress has the 
 constitutional power or not, to exclude us from our 
 common territory. The exercise of that power is 
 
 against right and justice, and I shall resist it as 
 strongly as though it was palpably and admittedly 
 unconstitutional. I will resist such a law, or the 
 abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, 
 or the slave trade betv.'een the Slates, or in the 
 States, whatever may be the decision of the 
 Supreme Court, as to the powers of Congress. 
 Laws so fatally unjust and oppressive, should not 
 be submitted to, v/hatever power may be conceded 
 to Congress. You, gentlemen of the North, would 
 resist under similar circumstances. Su|ipose 
 Congress, in the exercise of a power clearly con- 
 stitutional, should refuse to do anything for the 
 benefit of commerce in the New England Slates, 
 should refuse to build or light your light-houses, or 
 should destroy them and remove the bouys and 
 beacons, marking the channels leading into her 
 harbors, and should abolish her post offices, and 
 refuse to establish others — I ask you, men of New 
 England, if you would not "resist, at any hazard," 
 such legislation again.-^t your interest. You would 
 be unvvorthy of your proud and noble ancestors 
 if you did not. 
 
 Why. is it, sir, that gentlemen object to the dif- 
 fusion of slavery, and the addition of more slave 
 States to the Union .' How is it possible that any 
 interest of the North can be injuriously aftected .' 
 How can we commit aggressions on you .' The 
 gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Campbell] tells us, 
 that the annexation of Texas, was southern poli- 
 cy, by which the North has been injured. This 
 point has been already answered by others. The 
 gentleman knows, that Texas was acquired by 
 Mr. Polk, who was elected by a majority of 
 northern voles, over a gentleman [Mr. Clay] who 
 was opposed to annexation. He says, the North 
 is opposed to the admission of more slave States 
 into the Union, because they send free-trade men 
 to Congress, who will legislate, injuriously, to the 
 interests of the free white labor of the North. 
 But is this the real objection .' No, sir. When a 
 southern Stale is admitted, the political parly, 
 which happens to be in the ascendant, sends its 
 Representatives and Senators to Congress. My 
 own State sends me, a Whig. On all questions of 
 party policy, I vote with the northern Whigs. The 
 Slates of Texas and Arkansas, send Democrats, 
 who vote with the Democratic party of the North. 
 The reason which the gentleman from Ohio as- 
 signs, for opposition to the admission of more slave 
 States, should cause northern Democrats to advo- 
 cate their admission. Bi>t, sir, this is not the rea- 
 son of his opposition. It was no more the vote of 
 Texas, which defeated the tariff Liill of '42, than of 
 Iowa. That bill was defeated by the casting vole 
 of a Vice President from Pennsylvania, and by 
 Democratic votes from dee, as well as slave States. 
 If it was because slave States send free-trade men 
 to Congress, that the gentleman opposes the ad- 
 mission of more slave States, why is it that he 
 is now advocating 'the admission of California, 
 knowing, as he docs, that there will, thereby, be 
 added, two free-trade men to the number of Sena- 
 tors of the United States. No, sir; this is but a 
 pretext. That gentleman, and oiliers, are influ- 
 enced solely by feelings of hostility to the institu- 
 tion of slavery, and unreasonable jealousy of the 
 South. They made no ol)jeciion to the admissior* 
 of Iowa, Wisconsin, and other new States of the 
 West, though all of those States send men to the 
 Senate of the United Stales, as much "opposed 
 
to the interest of the free labor of tlie North," 
 as are the Senators from Texas. The true diffi- i" 
 culty, is the one I have stated. 
 
 The gentleman professes to regard slavery a 
 curse, and tells us of the opinion of Mr. Jefferson 
 and others of his day. That, sir, is his opinion, 
 and theirs. I do not intend to argue this ques- 
 tion. We do not so regard it AVe believe that 
 in tropical, or warm climates, where two months 
 moderate labor secures all the necessaries of life, 
 involuntary labor is essential to the development of 
 the resources of the country. History teaches us, 
 that the most stable governments have been those \ 
 in Vv-hich slavery existed. I cannot go into details 1 
 on this branch of the question, but shall merely j 
 refer gentlemen to the history of the ancient Jews, | 
 and of Lacedcemon. Rome did not lose her lib- 
 erties, until the number of her Freedmen became 
 nearly equal to the original Roman citizens. The 
 strongest Governments on this continent, except 
 our own, are those of Cuba and Brazil. And 
 here, in our own country, we do not find that 
 southern men have less of energy and influence, 
 than men of the North. Indeed, we daily hear 
 northern gentlemen complaining of the undue in- 
 fluence of the South, in the aflairs of this Confed- 
 eracy. This does not proceed from the force of 
 numbers, but from the moral power of slavery. 
 Nowhere is there so pure a spirit of freedom 
 and true republicanism, as with us. It is true, 
 that our population is not so dense as with 
 you. But numbers do not necessarily constitute j 
 national strength, as is exemplified by the his- 
 tory of Ireland and China. We hear northern 
 men boasting of the great increase of their pop- , 
 ulation. They tell us of fifty thousand foreign- : 
 ers becoming citizens of some of their States in a i 
 single year, and exclaim, " See how wonderfully I 
 prosperous we are !" Does this accession add to \ 
 their prosperity .' Their alms-houses become filled 1 
 with paupers, and their poor lists alarmingly in- j 
 creased. Sir, 1 do not believe there are a dozen , 
 paupers in my whole State. Nowhere is there so j 
 much individual happiness, as among the southern j 
 people. We have numbers enough for all politi- | 
 cal purposes— enough to insure the respect of other : 
 Governments. This point having been attained, I | 
 think it would be better for us to reserve our 
 country for our own citizens, and their ciiildren. ; 
 Can you say that life, liberty, or property, are j 
 more secure with you than with us? Is the hap- , 
 piness of the present inhabitants increased by the ! 
 influx of foreign population? When we look to 
 the power acquired by strangers to our institu- 
 tions, are your Governments better — more pure, or 
 more secure, than with us? Is there not some- 
 thing alarming in the disposition we see among 
 honorable Senators— candidates for the Presidency 
 — to pander to this power. But, sir, I cannot 
 dwell longer on this subject. 
 
 You, gentlemen of the'North, denounce slavery, 
 and tell us it ought to be abolished. You wish to 
 exterminate it. But you will not sutler our eman- 
 cipated slaves to go among you. Members of the 
 last Congress will recollect the declarations of a 
 gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Sawyer,] who was as 
 firm and decided an advocate of southern rights, as 
 we have ever had from a non-slaveholding State. 
 But he told us that if we set our slaves free, none 
 of them should go to his State. " Three hundred 
 thousand freemen of Ohio would line the banks of 
 
 the Ohio river to receive them on the pointsV 
 their bayonets, and drive them from his State.X 
 You will not receive them when they go among^ 
 you with our assent. You only take them to \ 
 your hearts when they abscond from their mas- 
 ters. Your people will steal, but will not accept 
 them as a gift. Northern men who seem to be most 
 sensitive on this subject, are those who profess to 
 take the sacred Scriptures for their rule of moral 
 action. Let me cite them a single passage from 
 the Old Testament: 
 
 " But Ahraiii said unto Sarai, Beholrl, thy maifl is in thy 
 hands ; do to her as it pleases thee. And when Sarai dealt 
 hardly with lier, slie fled from her face. And the Angel of 
 the Lord found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, 
 by the fountain in the way of Shur. And he said, Hagar, 
 Sarai's maid, whence cornest thou .' and whither wilt thou 
 eo? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai. 
 And the Ansel of the Lord said unto her, Return to thy 
 mistress, and submit thyself unto her hands." Genesis, cb. 
 xvi., vers. 6-9. 
 
 How different is the conduct of your Bible- 
 loving and law-abiding Abolitionist ! V\rhat says 
 a gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Giddi.mgs ?] 
 
 " When a fugitive slave was on the free soil of Ohio * * 
 they left the slave to his natural right to dtfend himself, and 
 if the slave slew the master in self-defence, he would pro- 
 nounce him a good fellow." 
 
 Now, gentlemen — I appeal to you as candid and 
 fair men — if you succeed in your purpose to 
 abolish slavery against our will, I submit to you, 
 whether it is right and just, that you should insist 
 on their remaining witii us, as freed-men. Your 
 own sense of justice would require you to suffer 
 them to be distributed among all the States, in 
 proportion to the white population. You say you 
 are "calculating men." Have you ever calculated 
 how many free negroes each of your States would 
 receive, according to your present population, and 
 the number of slaves in the South ? The State of 
 New York would have near five hundred and fifty 
 thousand. The cities of New York and Philadel- 
 phia each about ninety thousand. Are you de- 
 sirous to show this " evidence of your prosperity" 
 by such an addition to your population ? 
 
 If you take away our slaves, you should pay 
 for them. Have you calculated the amount each 
 State would have to pay? In 1840, the number 
 of slaves was two millions four hundred and 
 eighty-seven thousand. They are now ever three 
 mTllions — worth more than fifteen hundred millions 
 of dollars. The proportion for the State of New 
 York would be about two hundred and fifty 
 millions. 
 
 These are considerations which fair, reasonable, 
 and just men nhould not lose sight of. 
 
 If you do not propose to pay us for our slaves, 
 can you ask us to throw away so large an amount 
 of properly ? 
 
 If they are not to be sent out of our country, 
 (and all the resources of this Government will not 
 defray the expense of iheir transportation,) it be- 
 comes me to enquire what will be the condition of 
 that part of the South which I in part represent. 
 Within the period I have named, the number of 
 slaves will have doubled, and by that time. Dele- 
 ware, Maryland, Virginia and Kentucky will prob- 
 ably have aboli-shed slavery, and all the slaves of 
 those States, with their increase, be precipitated 
 upon us. Then indeed will slavery be an intolerable 
 evil, if slave territory be circumscribed as you pro- 
 pose. You will not let our blacks come among you. 
 It will be utterly out of our power to send them to 
 
6 
 
 Africa. We should have no alternative but to 
 abandon our homes, or exterminate the slaves. I 
 And this, sir, is the state to which northera plii- ! 
 lanthropy will reduce us! j 
 
 In contemplation of the future, we demand an ' 
 outlet for our blacks, through which they may ' 
 find their way to the equatorial regions, where, if, 
 you please, they may become free. This, you ] 
 say, you will not give us. You avow your pur- 
 pose to hedge us in, tcitli the vieio to force emanci- 
 pation on the southern States. A gentleman from j 
 Pennsylvania, [JVIr. Stevens,] said, a few days i 
 ago: j 
 
 " I am opposed to the diffusion of slavery, because con- 
 fining it witliin its present limits, will bring the States i 
 themselves to ils urariual abolition. ***** This 
 admitted result is, to my mind, one of the most agreeable 
 consequences of live ki;itiinaie restriction of slavery. Con- | 
 fine this malady within its present limits, !^urround it by a | 
 cordon of frei^men , {ha.1 it cannot spread, and in less than [ 
 twenty-five years, every slaveholding Slate in the Union, ! 
 will have on its statute books a law for the gradual aiid 
 final extinction of slavery." | 
 
 But, I am told, this gentleman is a fanatic, and 
 that we should not regard what he inay say. But, 
 sir, did we not hear virtually the same sentiment 
 from a moderate co^servattve Member, the gentle- ' 
 man from Illinois, [Mr. Baker,] when he told us 
 there should be no more slave I erritory, and no more 
 slave States admitted into the Union? Similar decla- 
 rations ha\e been made again and again, and what , 
 northern man on this floor has denied that this was ' 
 the settled purpose of the North? Perhaps the | 
 gentleman from Pennsylvania " showed the hand ' 
 qf the JVorlh" too soon and too plainly. j 
 
 If the powers of this Federal Government, are ' 
 to be used for the avowed purpose of crippling and 
 and ultimately destroying the great interests of the 
 southern States, what is the value of the Union to ' 
 us.' I 
 
 Mr. Chairman, this Union was formed on cal- 
 culation — on ihe very nicest calculation, and can 
 only be continued on calculation. When it is used 
 as an instrument of wrong and op[iression to one 
 of its sections, it cannot last. God knows I am 
 far, very far, from desiring its dissolution ! Love 
 of Union is a cherished and most sacred sentiment i 
 among the southern people. To preserve it, they 
 will make almost any sacrifice short of their hon- 
 or, or rights involving their independent existence. I 
 The idea of calculating its value has been abhor- 
 rent to us; but it has been forced upon us; and 
 you know, sir, that the sentiment of love, not con- i 
 Biderations of interest, which chiefly attaches us ' 
 to the Union, is fast being weakened by the coursa , 
 of our northern fellow-citizens. 
 
 We have resolved to " resist, at every hazard, 
 and to the last extremity," what is called the 
 '• spirit of the age," which would place us " under 
 the ban of the empire," and array the powers of, 
 our Government against the interests of our sec- j 
 tion. 
 
 Legislature after legislature instructs Senators 
 from the northern and northwestern States to vote 
 for laws abolishing slavery in " every foot of 
 ground over wiiich the United States has jurisdic- 
 tion " — in otir "dockyards, arsenals, and forts," 
 as well as in the District of ColunU)ia,and the ter- 
 ritories. Nothing but respect, which you profess 
 to feel for the direct requirements of the Constitu- [ 
 tion, prevents you from laying your hands on it i 
 within the limits and jurisdiction of the States, i 
 
 The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Stevens] 
 says: 
 
 " By those compromises, Congress has no power over 
 slavery in the States. I greatly regret that it is so; for, if it 
 were within our legitimate control, I would go, regardless 
 of all threats, for some just, safe, and certain means for its 
 final extinction." 
 
 The sentiment of the people of the northern 
 States is against us. There is among them, an 
 abhorrence of slavery. Gentlemen here, and 
 their State Legislatures, speak of it as a " na- 
 tional disgrace,''' which they are bound to blot out, 
 so soon as it can be done, consistent with their ob- 
 ligation to support the Constitution. How long 
 will it be before you may amend the Constitution.' 
 Free State after free State, as you call thern, are to 
 be admitted. You, and your legislatures, declare 
 that you are " against the admission of another 
 slaveholding State into the Federal Union." You 
 have already avowed your purpose to do indirectly 
 what yon may not do directly, and, will you wait 
 to amend the Constitution, when you get the pow- 
 er of numbers in both houses of Congress? It is 
 getting to be a favorite doctrine, that in our Gov- 
 ernment, " the will of the majority is supreme." 
 It has been said that many clauses in the Consti- 
 tution, confer upon Congress ihe power to abolish 
 slavery in the States. May not the gentleman 
 from Pennsylvania, have hinted'at this, v^hen he 
 declared that the governments of the slave States 
 were not republican, but despotisms. When we 
 compare abolitionism, now, with what it was fif- 
 teen years ago, is the fear unreasonable, that the 
 northern people may be induced to believe it their 
 duly to " guaranty a republican form of government 
 to every State in the Union," as required by the 
 Constitution, and abolish the despotism of slavery. 
 Perhaps the gentleman is " showing the hand of 
 the North" too soon, in this case. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the southern people will resist 
 the consummation of the fatal measures of which I 
 have spoken. Some of our statesmen recommend 
 retaliation, and a suspension of intercourse svith 
 States, which place themselves in hostility to us. 
 I express no opinion of the propriety of this 
 course. A member of the Legislature of Georgia, 
 proposed to make it penal for an attorney of that 
 State, to collect a debt due to a citizen of such 
 State, or for a Georgia sheriff to levy an execution 
 for such debt, but to leave the parties to their 
 remedy before the Federal court. You recollect 
 the holy horror with which this "mad, revolution- 
 ary proposition" was regarded; and yet, sir, the 
 proposed Gieorgia law was but carrying out the 
 spirit, if not a transcript, of the New York law, 
 on the subject of fugitive slaves — striking out fugi- 
 tive slaves, and inserting promissory notes, bonds, 
 and accounts — not a whit more absurd than the 
 laws of northern Slates, against the recovery of our ' 
 property. 
 
 I have recommended, and my State has resolved 
 to resist, to the extent of revolution, the consum- 
 mation of certain measures. To prevent so de- 
 plorable a catastrophe, I shall feel it to be my duty 
 to resort to every constitutional parliamentary ex- 
 pedient, regardless of threats which gentlemen 
 make. Revolution — disunion, will be the inevita- 
 ble consequence of the consummation of these 
 measures. To prevent that consummation, it is our 
 duty to try every expedient. Some of the means 
 may appear revolutionary ; but desperate dis- 
 
^r 
 
 eases require desperate reniedies. Better a tem- 
 porary uisorgdiiization, than permanent dissolu- 
 tion. If, as some of the State legislatures, and 
 many members on this floor, liave declared, you 
 will listen to no plan of compromise — if you refuse 
 to do us justice — if your fanatical love of the slave 
 js greater than your sacretl love of country, and 
 you choose to dissolve the Union, — upon you rest 
 the responsibility ! 
 
 Gentlemen, we desire, ardently desire, union 
 with you. But it must be conslilutional urnon — 
 
 A UNIOM OF " LIBERTY AND EQUALITY. " Dearly 
 
 as we love the Union, we love liberty more. 
 We can only remain in the Union as your equals. 
 All we ask is an equal participaUnn m the beiifiis 
 of our common Government. We claim a right 
 to at least a portion of the territory acquired by 
 our joint exertions. The principle of division has 
 aUvays, till now, been recognized. It was ac- 
 knowledged ill the case of Missouri and Texas. 
 It should not be departed from now. 
 
 if you recuse to recognize our equality — if you 
 insist on degrading us, and disunion follows — 
 upon you be the curse — tlie bitter, Ike deep, the 
 damning curse ! 
 
 We shall be able to take care of ourselves, sir. 
 With a community of interests, and the unbounded 
 resources of the souihern tjiaies, they might be- 
 come one of the greatest Re()ublics the world ever 
 saw. But, gentlemen say, it is unpatriotic and 
 treasonable, to calculate the advantage ot a separ- 
 ate organization. We are driven to do so, sir. 
 Northern gentlemen do it for us. They tell us 
 that the Union is incalculable to us ; that we should 
 submit to any and every ihmg, rather than endan- 
 ger the Union. Self-defence demands that we 
 should show them we are not so entirely depend- 
 ent. Bui, sir, we make no pecuniary calculation 
 of the value of tlie Union. We examine our po- 
 litical relation to, and connection with, ihe Federal 
 Government. 'I'he man who is afiaid to make 
 tliis calculation, deserves not to be free; and the 
 Government, which will not stand the test of 
 examination, deserves not the respect of its citi- 
 zens. 
 
 Sir, this was not the doctrine, nor the practice of 
 our fathers, iiad it been, we should not now be 
 free. It is the docirine inculcated by the present 
 despotic President of France, but repudiated while 
 he was a private citizen. It is the Uoctrine of the 
 Sultan of Turkey; of the Autocrat of Russia; of 
 power everywhere; of the majority here. Tliey 
 all preach blind submission to power, whether in 
 one man, or in many. 1 hold, sir, with the patri- 
 ots of the Revolution, with the authors of our Dec- 
 laration of Independence, that, whenever a Gov- 
 ernment becomes subversive of the ends for which 
 it was formed, it is the right and duty of the peo- 
 ple to alter or abolish it. 
 
 You, gentlemen of the North, have well calcula- 
 ted the value of the Union. You make this calcu- 
 lation every day and every hour. Hence the 
 pagans you continually sing to it — hence your 
 declaration of willingness to sacrifice so many 
 thousands of your fellow-citizens to preserve it — 
 hence the absurd threat of a. gentleman from Illi- 
 nois, that his State will send "four times nine 
 regimenis" against the southern States lo force 
 them to Lve the Union. To you it may be incal- 
 f.ulable. To you it may be necessary to save you 
 from the effects of Socialism, Agrarianism, Fanny 
 
 Wrightism, Radicalism, Dorrism and Abolition- 
 ism. The conservatism of slavery may be necessary 
 to save you from tlie tliousand destructive isuis 
 infecting tlie social organization of your section. 
 The great complaint of the gentleman from Ohio 
 [Mr. Campbell] and others, is, that Government 
 does not afford mem protection enough. We ask 
 no protection; we only ask to be let alone. 
 
 I repeat, sir, I have no fears but that the South 
 can maintain its independence, and iustain itself 
 in any struggle which may result from this or 
 any other cause. The threat of another gentle- 
 man from Ohio, [Mr. Root,] is merely ridiculous. 
 A single cannon, planted on tlie banks of the Alissis- 
 sippi, will blow Ills steamboat and ins regiment of 
 Oiiio men, who are to be sent to conquer us into 
 subjection, and lo retain us by force in the Union, 
 into a thousand atoms. Nor do we fear tlie threat 
 of thegentlenmi) from Alassachusetts, [Mr. Ma-vn,] 
 that the noriliern people will steal away our three 
 millions of slaves, tiliould they do so, they will 
 do us, according to their own showing, the great- 
 est benefit, it is fortliem to say what disposition 
 they will make of these three millions of free 
 negroes. But, sir, we should feel less apprehen- 
 sion then than now. We do not find northern 
 gentlemen attempting to purloin slaves from Cuba 
 and Brazil; nor Uid iliey meddle with Texas when 
 a separate Government. Unpleasant restrictions 
 might be placed U[)on their commerce. Another, 
 and perhaps the chief reason for this, is given by 
 the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Ste- 
 vens,] when he says, "This Governiiienl can- 
 not preach a crusade of liberty unto other States 
 and nations.''' The northern Slates, and the 
 northern people say they regard slavery as a ^^ na- 
 tional disgi-ace" — a sin against God and man — a 
 stigma upon them, and for which they, as costituent 
 members of the Confederacy, are responsible. 
 They would have no such feeUng toward a for- 
 eign Government. But I see that 1 cannot pursue 
 this subject farther. 1 must repeat, however, that 
 1 am far, very far, from desiring a separation. My 
 only purpose is to show that we are not so en- 
 tirely dependent on the Federal Government, as 
 to submit to the infamous propositions to dishonor 
 and degrade us. If we do tamely submit to what 
 is proposed, my friend from North Carolina, [Mr. 
 Clingman,] says we deserve to be whipped 
 through our fields by our slaves. I think, sir, we 
 shall merit the deeper disgrace of being kicked, at 
 every corner of the streets, by the gentleman from 
 Ohio, [Mr. GiDDiNGs,] who has sneeringly told 
 us, we "could not be kicked out of the Union." 
 But, sir, we know the danger, the fierce strifes, 
 the bloody wars, and all the horrors of civil con- 
 vulsion, which may ensue. We fear, and would 
 avoid them. The South may go down in the 
 struggle. We do not court this danger, and these 
 possible, and even probable, calamities. But the 
 fear of them will never deter us from maintainin/s; 
 the right. A biave man stops not to calculate the 
 consequences, when his honor, or his rights, are 
 assailed, before he seeks to vintlicate himself. 
 
 I see, sir, the time allotted to me has nearly ex- 
 pired. I regret that it is not in my power to express 
 my views on the subject immediately before the 
 committee — the admission of California into the 
 Union. 1 shall avail myself of the earliest occa- 
 sion to do so. 
 
 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I can only say, 
 
8 
 
 that the southern people will " resist to the last 
 extremity" the doctrine that the powers and func- 
 tions of tlie General Government must be used to 
 assail, and not to protect their riglits, interests, and 
 property. However much we may desire " better 
 saveguards for our future security," we seek no 
 remedy " outside of the Constitution," so long as 
 it is respected in its letter and its sjririt. We are 
 content with its guaranties, and ask no protection 
 than that we may find under its sheltering wing. 
 We stand by the contract our fathers made for us. 
 So long as the spirit of that contract is observed, we 
 shall never look to its dissolution as a remedy for 
 existing evils. 
 
 Regarding the Constitution and the Union as 
 one, nowhere is it held in such high reverence as 
 among the people of the southern States. They 
 compose the ininorily in this Government, and 
 
 look to the Constitution as their shield and their 
 protection. They regard it as the palladium of 
 their rights and liberties. Never will they lay 
 violent or sacrilegious hands upon it. They love 
 it for the thousand endearing associations attach- 
 ing to it. They cling to it as their surest hope. 
 
 Gentlemen of the North, respect the Constitu- 
 tion. Carry out tlie principles of that sacred in- 
 strument in the spirit in which it was framed. 
 Love the Union, as we of the South do — the hal- 
 lowed Union of our common fathers — a Union of 
 " liberty and equality," not a Union to be made 
 an instrument of wrong and oppression. Then 
 may we, and our children, and our children's 
 children, proceed, hand in hand together, in one 
 common pathway of boundless prosperity, cheered 
 by the hopeful prospect of a still brighter and hap- 
 pier future. May this Union be perpetual! 
 
 Printed at the Congiessinnal Globe OfKbe. 
 
 LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 932 924 3 • 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 932 924 3