<^ <^ .H<^^ ''t*..-^ '»bv^ "^ *^S^" *^^^^* !^i2^» v«^^ ^ .^"""^ A^ '^^ "'•* ^ .. *^«^ ••-• a9 ^ *•'•'• -5 SPEECH OT HON. F. W. PICKENS, f)ELIVERED EEFORE A PiJSLIC MSSTINS 0? THE PEDPLS 0? THE DI3TBICT, HELD AT EDGEFIEI.D €. H., S. C, JULY 7, ISjI. EDGEFIELD, S. C. PRLYTED AT THE ADVERTISER OFFICE. 185L !l'8U2^' >ir^ V SPEECH OF HON. F. W. PICKENS. Mr. Chairman ! Fellow Citizens : I return you my sincere thanks for the kind manner in which you are pleased to re- ceive me — It is far more than I had a right to expect. It is with the utmost reluctance that I am induced to trespass upon you at the present time. I assure you in great sincerity, that up- on no previous occasion of my life have I risen to speak more reluctantly or under feelings of deeper embarrassment and anxiety for the future. I thank God ! that I have been able, for the last few years, to withdraw myself entirely from all the bitter conflicts of party feeling. It was my lot, when very young, to have been thrown into many angry con- tests in the excited party warfare of the day. I know that I have said many things, which perhaps in cooler moments I might \iave wished unsaid. But removed, as I have been, for years, from all active strug- gles in politics, I can truly say that what- ever harshness may have been generated by collision, I, at present, feel not a lingering sentiment of unkindness towards any party or any men, with whom it has ever been my lot to come in conflict through the past scenes of life. I never wish again to mingle in the bitter, and, for the most part, heartless struggles of politics. I have enough, in the endearments of home, to give contentment to the heart of any man. But, gentlemen, we are on the eve of mighty events. And the emergency of the country rises superior to all parties or all party con- tests. Entitled to an inheritance, transmitted through treason and revolution, I would be untrue to those from whom I claim my ori- gin, and prove myself but a bastard, if I could hesitate to risk that inheritance and life itself, if necessary, in defence of the .an- cient liberties and independence of South Carolina. If we expect to go through the present controversy successfully, the very first thing to be done, is to produce union, concert of action, cordial and kind feelings at home, in every citizen of the State and between all classes and all parties. We must forgive and forget the past — we must come together as brethren of one family — we must bury all feelings in a consecrated and holy devotion to the State, and nothing but her true honor and interests. Division at home will be fatal to South Carolina — and through her to Southern Independence. All know that to divide South Carolina is to paralyze her arm, and to make her imbecile is to destroy all hopes of Southern co-operation or Southern resistance. Our strength has heretofore con- sisted in our union, and this has made us a fit basis to commence Southern resistance. We are a small State, and have been isolated by detraction and abuse. The minions of Federal power and the tools of Northern ag- gression have singled us out for their con- stant denunciation, because they well knew we stood in their way and were their main difficulty in perpetrating schemes of plunder and usurpation. If we become united, they [ 4 ] become bitter. If we Ijcpome divided, our [orfy at least to every Englishman and Amer- deadly enemies begin lo exult, and fawn upcn awd flatter tiiose who m;iiion8 in South Carolina, and that we will (five and take, and ifwe difrur,wesliall difTeras friends and as brothers, with no imid or nnkiud a?- persions whatever. The day of trial is com- ing, and let no mnn suppose we are to rru Ih'rough without difficulty and without dan- gers. Commercial credit is sensi.ive and dreads a convulsion ; banking capital is also nensitive, ;ind to the amount of millions will be deeply felt in any movement calculated to shake society. But if the people of tiie State, with all the interests of the State, be united and we move with judfroment and firmness — standing upon our chartered rights as fixed in the compact and dedueible from the history of the Confederacy— we can do any thing tliat a sovereign people dare do — we can save ourselves by joint co-operation with our sister States of the South, if pos- f ible to be obtained by prudence and concil- iation — but if all hope of co-operation be lest and we should be driven to the last sad alternative, if we are cordially united at liome, we can save oiirsehes alone. Fellow Citizens: — The great struggle in modern times is for se|.ai'ale ii.de- pendcnce and equality of the States i< es-^en- lial to guard ami protect those interests in (Uir system. Stale equality is an essential principal of liberly. We may haw general interests in our external relations and foreign interconrse united, but when the General Government acts upon the organized loeal instil utions of the country, then it nece^s.-iri- ly becomes a despotism — an engine turned njion the in'erior liberty of secliims, instead istcnt with the liber- ty of the parts. This is the original concep- tion of our system, and a part of its very o.^- i.stence. But many oppose that the constitution final dcci.-ion bv independent and sovereign itself has created :\ common arbiler in the St.-ites wi.h all their mord and poll ieal Sn])reme Court of the United States — in- wei^-lit. In this point of vie>v, the States are stead of the tribnnal ot the States. This the Peers of each other. And if three-fuur.hs is a great ini>concei)'.ion. In the clause cou- deeide .-ig.dnst a sovereion State, then miy fering jurisdiction upon the Court, the won- jirise the question of ./?)/-'?/ secession — andifjderfnl wi.^dum of the instrument is illns- tliree-foulhs, n<'t onlv afiirm the power, bat | Ir.ited as well as in every other clause. Th© grant force to the use of the government to i words .-u'c, "iiie judicial power shall extend Cirry out that atlirm.ili"n, seces>ion cm then i to all cases in. Law and Eguily,i\rMng under be adopted finally at the ri>koftiie Slate. : this, the constiir.ion. the l.iWs of the l.md But if compulsion or force be used before and treaties &c." An .-.meiidment to the this, it is lawless and the Gtwernment as- conslitniion, made at the instance of Georgii, smnes a power not granted and must end in j also prohibits a State being sued. Those despotism. who drew this cl.use were l.iwvers and well The States of the confederacy in many understood the legal language they used. points of view are the esiales of Ike Realm, i '-C; ses in Law and Equity." are such as can And on all vital questions involving the or- | be made tip by pleadings where the rights of ganic law by which they are uniied, their power must be recognized or there can be DO real independence. There can be no political liberty unless these estates are fully and fairly consulted. Without this we bavo made no advance over Europe in civil liberty itself, to suit tho issues of modern society. meu7n and Luum are involved, where indi- vidiuils can appear— where mere rights of property can be decided. But where a State makes an issue in her sovereign capacity on the compact itself— it is a high poli.ical (pies- tion, beyond the pleadings to be made up by individuals. Wlicu a State (secedes or chooses [ M to release her citizens from the obligations of the federal constitution, her citizens can no longer be reached by federal power in any form. The State cannot be sued, for it is express- ly prohibited, and when she makes an issue, it is political and not "in Law or Equity." The very nature of the issue is the reverse of any thing in "Law and Equity." There is no forced construction that can give jurisdic- tion. To do so, would pervert the whole genius of the Court and make it more than a 'Star' Chamber Court ever was. True, politi- cal opinions of individuals and even of cor- porations were brought under the jurisdiction of the old 'Star' Chamber Court, but sover- eign States were never brought there. No ! there is no umpire. The sovereign States themselves are the judges in the last resort, and from the nature of things there can be no other judges compatible with sovereignty. The power to interfere and check in extreme & vital cases,involving the liberty of the state, is inherent in the nature of the compact itself. Without this we have made no advance in the system of regulated liberty. It is the great distinctive feature of American freedom. — It is the great fundamental law of the Ameri- can compact, without which we are under a consolidated despotism, one, from which we will have to march sword in hand and through the perils of revolution. Under the recognition of this great fundamental right belonging to the States, there can be peace and no revolution. A fair adjustment and new understanding of the compact may yet give life to the confederacy. But without it our doom is fixed. — the hand writing is upon the W"all, and we have no alternative, but an appeal to arms and the God of battles. But the right of a State to secede or inter- pose was not questioned by the republican party of old. The Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798, drawn by Jefferson and Madison, expressly laid down the doctrine boldly and ably, and it was universally re- cognized by the republican party from that day until now. Virginia did actually inter- pose and declare the alien and sedition laws of no force, null and void within her territo- ries — and empowered the Legislature to car- ry it out. The Government was checked and' controlled, and a civil revolution was brought about. If those who enacted these laws had held power and persevered in enforcing them the Union would then have been dissolved. But State interposition made the issue palpa- ble and they were overthrown. The right to withdraw or secede is not left to inference, although clear from the very nature of the compact and of sovereignty in the States. But New York, in the conditions upon which she ratified, expressly declared that the 'powers of Government may be reassuraed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary for their happiness.'Virginia; did the same except using the words, "when- soever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." Rhode Island did the same. Those were the conditions these States expressly annexed, and if it was a right they expressly reserved, if it avails any thing, it accrues equally to all; for it was rati- fied by equals and no one could retain a powder which each and all did not have alike. But it does not require that the right should be secured in toiulem verbis. It belongs to the existence and independence of a State and cannot be limited or circumscribed by any parchment on earth. But it is said this would make the Union a rope of sand. So it was said in old times that trial by jury would be a seri- ous clog to an efficient government. To as- sert that it was necessary to obtain the ver- dict of twelve men, before you could convict a State criminal, would embarrass Govern- ment and ministers of state could not get along with powers. All free Governments are full of checks. It is the checks that make liberty. Despotism has no checks. So far from the interposition of States on vital local interests making the Union too weak, it is the only thing that can save the Union. With- out this, in so extensive a country with such variety of interests, its dissolution is as in- evitable as destiny. Heretofore the difference in our social and domestic institutions and our almost distinct orders of civilization, have not been so deeply felt, because we have had a sparse population. But as popu- lation increases and becomes pressed down [ 10] into its different claBsifications, and grows dense — tlivn lliese differences will be deeply felt and the conflict will grow more deadly. Nothing can savo us bat the recorrnized power of the States. What has aided in keepings this Union together hcreioibre has been the fear of European interference if we should separate. Fragmenls of the con- federacy might be subsidized or conquered by European powers with monarchical insti- tutions and thus monarchy might be rein- stated here. This was the great fear in the early days of our Republic. But the last few years have dispelled all such fears. It is now apparent that European monarchies can Bcarcely maintain themselves at home. The convulsions of the last few years camemear overthrowing their own Governments, and the day is now past when there is any danger from European interfi»rence in American Governments. VVashingto.n's farewell ad- dress, which has been so often quoted by dem- agogues, was drawn in reference to the state of the world at that time. We were then, com- paratively speaking, but a handful of people. We had but recently come out of a bloody struggle with Great Britain. There was deep prejudice to our instil uiions in Europe. And the great dread wiih us was, that we might be re-conquered or portions might become subsidised. United we could defend ourselves and divided we would be ruined. To keep us together so as to defend ourselve.s from Europe, was the great object of Washing- ton's address. It was suited to the day in which it was delivered. Wo have now passed from a weak to a powerful people. The ad- dress was to rally us against Foreign power, but nevercontemplated one powerful section of the Republic combining so as to insult and degrade nearly one half of the States of the Republic. It is totally inapplicable to the present stale of the world and to our country. We are now alive to other dangers than dis- union, and the dormant powers of the States may be called out to their fullest dcvelope- ment according to the genius of our system, without at all runing into the dangers that Washington dreaded from European inter- ference. We are now strong enough to de\ elope the true nature of our Government fully, and as it might have been too weak at first to encounter the power of Europe, true patriotism then retiuired a cordial Union to support it. But, if in its progress, it becomes too powerful at the centre i'or the indepen- dence of the parts, then true patriotism would refiuire a cheekintr power, and that the States should be riii.-ed up to assert their original rights and independence, so as to force back the Government itself into a channel com- patible with regulated and enlightened liber- ty. It is vile demngogueism to quote the great Washington's farewell address as ap- plicable to the present state of the country; those who expect to save the Union by simply doing that, without reforming the Govern- ment first, hug to themselves a fatal delusion. Fellow citizens! we now come to investi- gate our present position as a State, and to state fairly what may be our particular duty in the present emergency. I was opposed to the call of the Conven- tion under e.xisting circumstances, and par- ticularly opposed to the meeting of the con- vention being so long after the election. I thought it would give a pretext for divisions amongst our own people. I thought it dangerous to repose the sovereign power of the State, even extending to life and property in its results, in so small a body of men as constitute that (^Jonvention, for so long a time in advance. The great strength of a con- vention consists in coming fresh from the jjcople, and the people themselves deciding all great ':iuestions in advance. J thought there vi'as danger of confusion and feared final imbecility. I therefore would have pre- fered the election of the Convention to take place in October next, instead of February last. But now that we are in Convention — • I am for going through. I am against stand- ing still or taking any step backwards. True, the issues may somewhat change by next Spring when the Convention meets. New questions may arise that may vary the pros- pect of affairs. Allow me to ^ay, with defer- ence to others, that the great danger now is, not rashness, but division and imbecility. The danger is that we will sink under the pressure brought to bear on us. I fear, that if we pass this crisis without doing somethingi [ 11 ] the country will sink. The spirit of our peo- ple will die away. If we permit this accuniu- hition of all power in the Federal liands under the dietation of Northern fanaticism, North- ern prejudice and Northern interests, we will be worn out and prostrated, and finally quail before despotism. Our young men will sink — They will begin to worship Northern power, and become iii- diiferent to their own country. They will bow down before a magnificent Government where liberty will be absorbed in the extend- ed rays of patronage "They will crook the pregnant hinges of the knee AVliere thrift may follow fawning." Our very women will comtemn and des- pise us as a degenerate race, and they will look to others for protection. The first evi- dence of the corruption and decay of a peo- ple, is that the women begin to idolise for- eigners. If the men become cowardly and luxurious, the women begin to look to others for that manliness which they so much ad- mire. Such was the case in Mexico and such will be the case in every country where the men want spirit to defend their rights, I know tliat the great chartered rights and in- dependence of my State are in danger — I feel that we are a degraded people if we do not rise. I desire co-operation with our sister States of the South — I will wait to tiie very last while there is hope — I will yield every emotion of pride and every thing, but a sacri- fice of principle, to procure co-operation. — But it may become our sacred duty ',o acl alone and if so, we must umlk the plank alone like men, although that plank may lead over a gulf of fi'ightful dangers. If it be a right to secede — it is a perfect right, and belongs as much to one State as to all. It is a right in- cident to sovereignty. And the denial of that right by the constituted authorities would make it an imperious duty to exercise it. If this be the issue, the sooner we test the ques- tion of the unlimited powers of the Federal Government, the better. But the gentleman (Capt. Brooks,) has quoted from a speech of mine delivered in Spartanburg last August, urging co-operation and joint action with the South. I do so now. But he must recollect: that speech was delivered under totally diflTerent circumstances from the present. It was delivered before the second meeting of the Nashville Convention when we were ac- tually ill consultation with our Soutlicrn brethren. It was delivered before the elec- tion and meeting of the Georgia ^tate Con- vention — before the meeting of the Virginia liCgislature, before the extra session of the Mississippi Legislature — and before our own Legislature had met or done any thing. I feared that we might become isolated at that time. But all these things have taken place and we exhausted every thing in trying to produce co-operation — and we are now free to take our own course, exercising our best judgment for the wellfare of all. The gentleman will see, in that very speech I ask if others should give way and we should f:iil in co-operation — what then will South Carolina do ? I said then "she dare not sub- mit finally." Let others do as they will, she was bound, (not by any commital, for a State is not comuiitted to herself — and only com- mitted when acting with others,) to go through. I used this language — "what others' may do we cannot say, but I trust I may be excused for saying, ice cannot — we dare not submit finally. If we do, the migiity spirits that sleep under the plains of the Cow- pens and Eutaws would turn in their graves with scorn and indignation for their degene- rate sons." The very speech from which the (rentleraan quoted contains this language. I was for concert and co-operatiun, but I never dreamed that we were to fold our arms and wait forever. I was for waiting and do- ing all that reasonable men could do to pro- duce concert and unanimity in the States, but I never conceived the idea, that in no-emer- gency, should we be forced to act alone. In the first Nashville Convention, I took the ground that decided and concerted action of the leading Southern States would pre- serve our rights^ and the Union too. The States, if they had then united firmly and temperately, could have made an authorita- tive declaration of their rights under the Constitution, and it would have been equiva- lent to a bill of Rights in all time to come. I If Virginia had taken the lead in this matter, { 12] eur rights would have Locn preserved and tlie Union too. I said then, that without tliis, the States would be driven to separate ac- tion, and this would bring on a convulaion and in all human probability disunion. I saw it then and I see it now. Virginia and Geor- gia permitted the occasion to pass, by which they might have saved the Constitution and avoided a convulsion. Those two States act- ing together then, could have controlled the South and dictated terms. They have passed it by and we now must make our own issues and save our own liberties. We were the first State to put forth a written Constitu- tion and form a government independent of Great Britain, even before the joint declara- tion of Independence, and we also as a State won a glorious victory before that declara- tion. And, if we are true to ourselves, we can stand alone again. I do not stop to ask the question, whether, we will have rendition of fugitive slaves secured perfectly, or wheth- er it will affect the value of that species of property and its profits, if we move alone. I scorn and despise this small view of a great question. It is a question of chartered rights ■ — of Constitutional liberty and rises far above these small views. If they have a right to say that you shall not go beyond a certain line with your slaves, Ihey have a right to say you shall not go with any other species of property. If they had declared in so many words that the peo- ple of Mississippi, of Alabama, of Georgia and of South Carolina, shall not go above a certain line into any of the public Territories of the Union — if they had named these States the insult and degradation would have been so pa]pable,thatan army of Southern soldiers would have taken the field at once to avenge the wrong And yet they have done precisely the same thing in effect. If they have a right to exclude you with your slaves,they have the right to exclude you as citizens of the States named. As far as constitutional power is concerned in government, the ingenuity of man cannot show why they should have the power in one instance and not in the other. If they can put the citizens, holding slaves in 'certain statcs.undcr the ban of the confederacy they can put the States themselves by name and the citizens as citizens. The Constitu- tion declares that " the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immuni- ties of citizens in the several States." And yet the government openly asserts that that the citizens of near half the States of this Union, shall not be allowed to go above a certain line with the privileges of their pro- perty, but shall disposses themselves of the most valuable part of that property before they can claim equality, in privileges, with the citizens of Ohio or Massachusetts. They make a Compromise line of 36° 30" when it suits them to seize half the territory of Lou- isiana, and then, instead of carrying out that line in good faith, as it was intended, in spirit and substance to the Pacific, w'hen it suits them to seize territory below it, they do so without remorse and without sluime. Where is their Compromise ? Where is their plighted faith? Are we to be circum- scribed at their pleasure? Are we to be encircled in great penitentiary walls by our masters and our keepers ? Merciful God ! are we born slaves or are we born freemen ? Are the descendants of Cavaliers to let the swords of their forefath- ers hang around them, in their halls, to rust forever ? Do they dread to draw them, be- cause forsooth a nation of Yankee shoe-ma- kers may let drive at them with their awls, or a nation of weavers may threaten to raise their shuttles and spindles ? Mr. Chairman ! the final result of all these measures is to abolish slavery in the States, or to render it valueless, and thus to force those who own them to abandon the country or perish in its ruins. To establish the truth of this — bear with me while I go back and trace the history of events particularly for the last twenty-five years. Look first at its rise and progress in England. When Wil- berforce first proclaimed his doctrines of emancipation for the British West India Is- lands, he had few or no followers, and I be- lieve he was mobbed in the streets of Liver- pool, or at least treated with great indignity. The productions of those Islands and slave labour were then of great importance to England, and the movement was looked upon [ 13] •as a direct blow at her prosperity and com- mercial wealth. The proposition for emanci- pation was scouted, and received l/ut slender support in the British Parliament for years. And yet Wilbcrforce lived to see the day when he bore down the common sense and talent of England by mad fanaticism and wild philanthrophy. The deed was consummated against the judgment of the thinking classes. And the Prime Minister of England, in the same speech, by which he carried the Eman- cipation Bill, congratulated the country that he would thereby fifially be enabled to with- <3niw troops from these West India stations and station them in Ireland ! ! Emancipate the black man of the West Indies and station British bayonets to keep in slavery the white man of Ireland ! What a comment vTpon British Philanthropy ! And what has been the result ? Ireland under the British bayonet — in chains and perishing with starvation. — The West Indies free, yet poor — miserable — wretched, in degradation and ruin. And this is what the world called humanity ! The movements for emancipation in France .and England were then transferred to the United States. And as short time ago, as 1834 and '35, when I first entered Congress, it was talked of as belonging to a f^w ob- scure fanatics who were considered madmen and utterly unworthy of all kind of notice. They were merely laughed at. In' 1836 they began to send in petitions quite frequently to abolish slavery in the District of Colum- bia, &c. Gen. Hammond and myself, al- though very young members, at tliat time, made the question of reception ^on those pe- titions. It produced great excitement, and it was thought even by Southern members that we were ultra and extravagant in our views. I recollect well, in a speech I then delivered, denying the Constitutional right of the Government to abolish slavery in the Dis- trict of Columbia without the consent of Virginia and Maryland. I said that there vi^as danger from this party of abolitionism, and . that the day would come when they would hold the balance of power, and overrun both parties at the North and endanger the exist- ence of this Union. I was pronounced a .madman and it was gravely put forth in a New York paper that I ought to be expelled the House of Representatives for such sen- timents. A large majority even of Southern members had a decided feeling against me on these points. Things went on rapidly growing worse and worse until, in 1837, Mr J. Q, Adams presented a petition from twenty- three slaves of Fredricksburg, Virginia, — praying Congress to abolish slavery, &c. This produced great excitement and, after much discussion, it ended finally in the House passing a resolution which was equivalent to affirming that slaves had a right to petition. The Southern members called a meeting and I proposed that we would not again take our seats until the obnoxious resolution were re- pealed by the non-slaveholding members themselves. After several days of excite- ment, my proposition was voted down and the resolution was repealed by the assistance of Southern votes. I refused to vote at all, and never afterwards attended any caucus of Southern members on the subject of slavery. I was rebuked as an agitator, and, in a circu- lar addressed by the delegation from Missis- sippi to their Constituents I was openly de- nounced as a traitor to the Union, while others were praised for saving the Union. I merely mention these things now, to show the rapid progress of events, and not to show the humble part I may have had in them, for I only happened to be put in that position from the deep interest I then felt in the matter. It was about this period that Mr. Adams began to assume the doctrine, that Congress might have power over the whole subject of slavery in the States — and used the remarka- ble language upon the floor, vi'hen asked by a gentleman from Alabama, what he would do if abolition produced sluices of blood, he exclaimed in great excitement, " Lei it flow ! Let it flow ! .'" I mention Mr. Adams merely because be was the great leader of agitation — and gave form and consistency to Fanati- cism. His high position and eminent abili- ties gave dignity and power to all those move- ments which were started under his advice, and which will end where, I sincerely be- lieved, he desired them to end, in a dissolu- tion of this Union. Tlicn came on the ex- [ 14] citement as to recognition of Indopeiidence and annexation of Texas. A large portion of the Nortli were cnli^sted agaiiHt Texas simply on the ground tliat it miglil increase the power of the Slave States. They de- clared often and over in thuir resolutions and through their papers that annexation of Textis would be a dissolution of the Union. This has been their feeling ever since the purchase of Louisiana. Mr. Josiah Quincy, an able and leading member of Congress, from Mas- sachusetts, when the Bill for the admission of Louisiana was before Congress, used this language, "If this Bill passes it is my de- liberate opinion that it is virtually a dissolu- tion of ihe Union — that it would free the States from their moral obligations ; and that as it will be the right of all, so it will be the duty of some, definitely to froposp for sepa- ration^ amicably if they can, forcibly if they must" Such was the universal doctrine of bitter Federalism then against the admission of Slave States — and such is tiieir doctrine at this day. Mr. Webster in his recent speech at Buffalo, so much lauded, says at the time Louisiana was acquired he was " too young to hold any office or take any share in politi- cal aff.iirs." He says he had " nothing to do with the Florida treaty or the admission of Florida!" He says also, '• I never would con. sent that there should be one foot of slave territory beyond what the old thirteen States had at the time of the formation of the Union." He says, as to the annexation of Texas, " I sought an occasion to proclaim my utter aversion to any such measure, and I de- termined to resist it with all my strength to the last!" He further says in the same speech, " I ivill not noto or hereafter consent to be numbered among those who introduced new slave power into the Union. I was born at the North — educated at the North — have lived all my days at the North — I wish to see all men free. I have no associations out of the Northern States — My people are your people. You will find me true to the North because all my sympathies are with the North." If this had been uttered by a South- ern Statesman he would iiave been denounced by the minions of power as narrow and sec- tional in all his feelings — an ultraist — a dis- unionist And yet when il is proclaimed by the high- est Minister of State, and comes to us with the unction of official dignity and under the patronage of Magisterial authority, it is all eloquence — all genuine American patriotism! What right has he, as an Officer of Govern- ment, to proclaim himself exclusively a North- ern man ? Has it come to this that the gov- ernment is already assumed to belong to one section, and are we to be considered merely as their provinces'? Is he to be Secretary of State for the North alone ! And is this to be his policy in conducting the foreign nego- tiations of the country ? Are we to be out- lawed ? And is he, in no event, to protect slave power or slave property ? Where then is our protection under the national flag? — Talk about a single State not being able to give protection to our interests ! — better, far better stand alone — than to receive such pro- tection as is thus tended to us by the Secre- tary of State for the Union. Is this not a pregnant chapter in the history of our down- ward career? Fellow-citizens ! I tell you, it speaks a language not to be mistaken, and we must be prepared to assert our own rights or we are gone beyond redemption. But, to progress with the history of aboli- tion as connected with the annexation of Texas. — It is well known that a great move- ment was made in this country and also in Great Britain against that annexation be- cause it might strengthen and perhaps perpet- uate slavery in these States. About this period, the " World's Convention" was held in London with representatives from this country as well as every v^here else, for the abolition of African Slavery throughout the world. The Representatives from the North- ern States became fully possessed of the opinions of such men as Mr. Webster and Mr. Adams at that time, and acted strictly in concert with British Philanthropists and Brit- ish Statesmen in all their moves upon Texas. There was a communication" made by Mr. J. Q. Adams to the British Government through J\Ir. Lewis Tapjian and by him pro- claimed in the " World's Convention." Mr. Tappan said, " in a conversation I had with John Quincy Adams on that subject, (the annexation of Texas) he said, ' I deem [ 15] it the duty of Great Britain as a christian nation to tell the Texians that slavery must be abolished; that it shall not be planted there after all the efforts and sacriiices thai have been made to abolish it ail ovir thf world. The annexation of Ti xas will,' he said, 'be a leatii. g t