E 458 .1 .P86 Copy 2 SPEECH HON. ELISHA R. POTTER, OF SOUTH KINGSTOWN, T7PON THE tS0lnti0u itt ^mmt »f iU ^\m% AVITH AN ADDITIONAL NOTE. PROVIDENCE : COOKE & D.VNIELSON, PRINTERS TO THE STATE, 16 WEYBOSSET STREET. 1861. .1 T-- SPEECH OF HON. ELISHA E. POTTEE, OF SOUTH KINGSTOWN, IN THE SENATE OF RHODE ISLAND, DURING THE SPECIAL SESSION, AUGUST 10, 18GL Mr. Potter, of South Kingstown, offered tlie followino- reso- lutions : Resolved, That in the present crisis of our public affairs, tlicre ought to be a full and sincere union of all political parties in support of the constitutionally elected government of the United States, and that this General Assembly pledges to the President of the United States the best exertions of the govern- ment and people of Rhode Island, and its entire resources, for the pi-eservation of the Union. l\(-solrc(l, That Ilis Excellency the Governor be requested to cause a copy of this resolution to be transmitted to the President of the United States. Mr. Potter said : — Before taking tlie question on the resohitions I have introdu- ced, I wis] I to offer a few remarks. Tlie resohitions are intended to encourao-e and l)rino- ahout a union of all parties for the sake of the Union. Sinee the affair of Fort Sumter, there has been a general disposition manifested in this State to support the national administration. The Dem- ocrats were generally disj)()sed to su})poi't the President in his ef- forts to ])i-eserve the Union, if they could be allowed to do so, but luii'ortunately thei'e was with a few persons a disposition to denounce every one as a secessionist Avho did not agree with them in full, and more especially if they had an old grudge against him. 5^6 Wlieii I heard the address of Governor Sprague, at the opeii'^ ilag of the session, in which he spoke of the power and resources of the South, I could not help thinking that if that address had been made three weeks ago, the Governor himself would have been denounced as a secessionist, notwithstanding all he had done and risked in defence of the Union. When General Scott and the Cabinet are accused of treason, who can expect to escape ? A few weeks ago the people seemed determined not to hear the truth. It would not do for any one to say a word about the extent or productions of the slave States ; and to express the opinion that they could not be starved oiit, or that they would not all run away as soon as we marched against them, Avas rank treason in the eyes of some. But the late battle has changed all that. The effect of the battle at the South would be to unite and encourage them, and so far Avas bad for us ; but the effect at the North would be good. It would put a stop to all the bragging and blustering and parade soldierins which had been o-oino- on so lono;, and it would lead people to look upon it as a serious matter, as it was. I thought a great many times that if an intelligent foreigner had been amongst us, who had seen military service and battles abroad, lie would have been perfectly disgusted with the manner in which our people and newspapers spoke of the war, how we boasted of our grand army, and how we magnified every skir- mish into a great victory, where the Southerners always ran, almost before they Avere attacked. And this defeat had rendered a union of parties more neces- sary and easier to be brought about. As the Avar advanced and Ave felt its pressure, aa^c should be more disposed to give up all our OAvn little bickerings and contentions, and to sacrifice per- sonal feeling to the good of the country. And it has rendered us more Avilling to listen to the truth about our enemies. We had been trying to conceal the truth from ourselves, and this miserable policy of self-deception had cost us the loss of the battle of Manassas, the loss of many val- uable lives, and had probably added years to the contest. We should learn hereafter not to underrate our enemies. This Avould be one good effect of the defeat, that the people Avould noAV be Avilling to hear the truth ; and Avith this A'iew I propose to give some statistics of the productions of the South, a subject on which our people appeared to be entirely ignorant. The general idea Avas that all the South raised Avas cotton, rice, and a very little grain ; and that nearly all the corn and Avlieat U was raised in the great West. The census tells a different story. We should be surprised to find that these Southern States raised t)ne half of all the corn raised in the M-hole Union, and a good proportion of other grains. In order to make the statement fair, I class the eight Southern, or cotton States together, and put the four Northern States, Vir- gnna, Kentucky, North Carolina and Tennessee, together, and leave out of the account, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware, although there is a great deal of sympathy for the slave cause in those States. 8 Southern States— S. Car., Geo., Flor., AI., Miss., Louisiana, ArkiiD.. Va., Kcnn., N. Whole '■'^'exas- Car., Tcuu.' U. States. Neat Cattle, number. - - 5,393,000 2,864,000 18 878 000 bheep, " - . 1,844,000 3,818,000 21,723000 wV"l' , ," , " " ■ 'J'053,000 <.>,83(i,000 30,374,000 Wheat, bushels, - - 2,820,000 17,103,000 100,485,000 ^yf' "... 134,000 1,191,000 14,188,000 X^ts, " ^ . 11,620,000 30.135,000 146,584,000 ^o^"' " - - 124,734,000 174,142,000 592,071,000 lotatoes, " - - 27,106,000 15,181,000 104,066,000 Barley, "... 22,000 124,000 5,167,000 leas and Beans, " . - 4,892,000 2,576,000 9 219 000 Butter and Cheese, pounds, 21,478,000 34,245,000 418 88l'oOO ■"Ji^^^"' " 209,562,000 5,745,000 215,313,000 Thus these States raise all the great crop of rice, one-fifth of all thc^ wheat, one-half of all the corn, and a respectable propor- tion of other crops. And there is a large field crop of peas and beans, a crop hardly known here. And the number of cattle, sheep, &c., is large. Two-thirds of all the hogs are in these twelve Southern States and nearly half tlie neat cattle. These facts are from the census of 1850, as the agricultural statistics of 18(30 are not yet pul)Hshed. And since 1850, Texas has increased in population and wealth, and the crop of corn, this year, in Texas alone, is said to be enough to sustain the whole South. lam very glad to see in the New York Workl (the adminis- tration organ,) of yesterday, a few of these facts stated under the very significant caption of " starvation a fallacy." I will give my views ])resently of the mode of prosecuting the war. We used to suppose that the Germans in Texas would be anti-slavery, and would make a free State there. But it is said they have begun to buy slaves, and liaxing gone to Home, arc doing as Ilomans do. I>ut there is another thing we ought to consider, as it was ulways poor policy to underrate our enemies. By the census of 18(J0, the whole population of these twelve States is over 10,000- 000, of whom six and a lialf millions are whites. Let us see the number of wliites of mihtary age (between 18 and 45) in those States. The 8 SoutJiern States have - - - 50(3,000 The 4 Northern States have - - - - 706,000 The whole United States have ~ - . 5,433,000 So that we see the cotton States alone can send a large armv into the field and still leave a large force at home.* In these calculations I have omitted Missouri and Maryland, and given the statistics of Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, because, although there is a strong Union party in these four States, yet the sympathies of a large portion of the people are with the South, and whatever may "happen they are not going to see their Southren brethren starve. So also with Maryland and Missouri. The Union men there would like to have their Southern brethren come back into tlie Union ; but they would not like to see them suffering. The South, too, are fighting with the same advantage against us that our forefathers had in our revolution agamst the English. They are at home, where they know every road, brook, hill and woodpath, and are accustomed to the climate, and among friends. We are fighting among strangers, Avhere a soldier cannot leave his camp^ without danger, and with no one to rely on for aid or information. But it may be said, these figures are all true, but why publish theni to discourage us ? We charge the Southern leaders with keeping the people in ignorance, and yet we are doing the same here. I am not afraid to trust the people with the facts. The knowledge of the truth would lead to a better conduct of the war. If the Republicans expected to carry on the war as Re- piiblicans, it would be a miserable failure. We need the union of the whole North, and we ought to be willing to sacrifice all personal and political feelings to bring it about." And Republi- cans being in a majority at the Nortli^' ought to be willing to sac- rifice the most. Suppose once in awhile a Democrat from old habit can't keep from damning the al^olitionists ? They don't mind it. They are used to it. Let him alone, and by-and-by misery and suffering will bring us all together. The " on to Richmond party" if not dead, is at least suspend- ed. But there is another faction, equally if not more dano-er- ous, and that is the " on to England" party. '^ * The wliole population of the fifteen slave States is over twelve millions. There was one newspaper professino- to support the Admhils-' tration, which was now doing more mischief to the Union cause than all the secession newspapers North and South put together. I do not mean the Tribune^ but the New York Herald. If it was in the pay of the secessionists, it could not do more mischief. It has been for weeks abusing England, and threatening to con- quer Canada. And we are now getting from the English and Canadian papers, the returns in kind for this abuse. It was alienating them from us when wx> needed their sympathies. It was trying to get us into two wars, when we coidd hardly carry on one. Unfortunately the Herald was almost the only American news- paper seen abroad. It was conducted with superior ability, and very few knew the magnitude of the mischief done by it in this war. Very probably there may be in England a few who are jeal- ous of the power of owy Union, and would not be sorr\' to see it broken up ; but generally the sym])athies of the English were in our favor, until our papers began to abuse them. Neither England nor France have done anything but what they are justified in doing, not only by the law of nations, but by American precedents. Our own precedents are strongest against us. England had a right under the laws of nations to admit South- ern prizes into her ports, but she has refused to do it. All she was bound to do in case of a civil war was to treat both parties alike, and if she admitted the prizes of one party to admit those of the other. When the Si)anish provinces revolted from Spain and declared their independence, avc almost innnediately atlmitted their flags and prizes into our ports, yea/s before we acknowledged their independenc^e. And our courts acknowledged the state of neu- trality, and the lawfulness of the prize, in numerous cases. Texas declared herself independent of Mexico in March, 1836, and within six months after, her flag ajipeared in New York city : and when the Mexican ^Minister remonstrated, our government answered that in the ])revi()us civil wars between Sjjain and her colonies, "it had never been held necessary as a ))reliminary to the extension of the rights of lios])itality to either [party] that the chances of war should l)e balanced, and tlu' probability of eventual success determined. For this ])ur])ose it had been deemed sufficient that the party had actually declared its inde- pendence, and at the tinn' was actually miiintaini)ig it." And tills rule has been recoouized by Adains, Clay aiul Web- ster, in the discussions growing out of the case of the Spanish Colonies. A great deal of coniiision has arisen from confounding what England has done, viz., recognizing them as belligerents, (i. e., declaring neutrality and treating both parties alike,) with recog- nizing independence, which is a very different thing. Even if England had done the latter, accordino; to the authoritv of Adams, Webster and Clay, it would be no just cause of war on our part. But she has not done it. But there is yet a stronger precedent against us and in favor of England than any I have mentioned. It was our case with Denmark. In 1779 Commodore Paul Jones took some British prizes, and they were carried into a Danish port. Denmark delivered them up to the English, on the ground that they (Denmark) had not recognized our independence. Our gov- ernment took the ground that in civil war, as well as in case of war between nations of acknowledged independence, and even before the independence of the revolutionary goA'ernment was acknowledged by the old government, or by any government, each party has a right to carry its prizes into the ports of any other nation, unless that nation is bound by treaty not to admit them, or has given previous notice that they will not admit them. This was the ground taken by Dr. Frtinklin ; it was taken and most ably maintained by Henry Wheaton ; it was sustained by John Quincy Adams in a report, when Secretary of State, and only a few years ago by Mr, Cameron, now v^ecretary of War, in a report made to the Senate. Wheaton took the ground that in 1779 the United States were de facto sovereign, engaged in war, and carrying it on in the usual manner, exchanging prisoners and recognizing the usual laws of war. It has been said that England is not treating us as well as we treated her in her Irish and Canadian rebellions. There is no similarity in the cases. The Irish never set up a government at all ; and though McKenzie, in Canada, undertook to set up a provisional government, it never had any strength. And it can- not be denied that notwithstanding Van Bnren's proclamations of neutrality, a large portion of our people did encourage these rebellions by their sympathies. And it is only by England recognizing the South as bellige- rents, and maintaining a neutrality between us, that our govern- ment is released from being responsible for Southern injuries to British citizens and commerce. When Spain remonstrated against England's treating the Spanish cohjnies as independent governments, Mr. Canning, one of the greatest of English statesmen, replied that they must either hold Spain res})onsible for the acts of the colonies, 'or they must treat them as indepen- dent and responsible for their own acts. Our Administration seemed to have hesitated whether to treat this as an ordinary insurrection or a civil war ; and they have thus involved themselves in some real or apparent inconsistency. If it is a mere insurrection, then the President has no right to take any measures to put it down except those pointed out by the laws. He might draft militia, but he had no right to call for volunteers, or to do many things he has done. On the other hand, if it is a civil ^mr,then it is a case not pro- vided for by the Constitution or lav/s ; and the President is justi- fied in resorting to all means required by the necessity, and pub- lic sentiment will justify him in doing it. And I am glad to find that the leading administration paper before referred to, admits that it is a war, and not a very small one either. And if it is a war, it is to be carried on by us as civilized people, and not as savages. We are to recognize the usages of war, and even if there are cases of inhumanity on the other side, that will be no justification for us. We have always claimed that the North had nearly all the religion in the United States. This will put it to the test. And our government has in fact recognized this as a state of ■ivar bv declriring a blockade. A nation never blockades its own ports.' It would be a mere abuse of language to call it so. Our government took this very ground in the case of our claims on the Two Sicilies, that a nation could 7iot blockade its own ports. We, therefore, by blockading them, do in fact acknowledge them to be under another government, and not under ours. AVhile England acknowledges our right to blockade the South- ern ])orts, she denies that we can collect duties there by a mere act of Congress. An act of Congress closing the ports, or au- thorizing a ship of war to collect duties there, is valid so far as our own citizens are concerned, but foreign nations are not bound to respect it. In the theory of government, protection and taxation go together. We have no right to compel an Eng- lish ^'essel to ])ay (Uities there, if we have not the i)ower to per- mit them to land and sell their goods. For all practical ])urposes these ports are out of our jurisiuctiitn ; aiid here, too, om- ])rece- dcnts are against us. Grenada has lately attein])tetl to close some rebelliovis ports bv a mere decree. England admits the right to blockade them, but denies her right to close by a mere paper decree a port not in her actual possession. If it is not a war, then we have no right to search ships for contraband, a right which belongs only to a state of war. And Lord Derby's argument is unanswerable, that if we claim the rights of war for ourselves, we must allow them to the other party. And it is probable that by virtue of old treaties, the South have now a right to carry their prizes into the ports of Prussia. Netherlands and Sweden. And if we recognize a state of war, to be carried on as civili- zed war, on land, why not on the sea also ? It is idle to talk about hanging rebels and pirates. No one but a simpleton ex- pects it. If Ave hang their soldiers or privateersmen, they have but to do as our forefathers did to the officers of George III., thi'eaten to retaliate by hanging ours. The threat was effectual then. I hope we are not less civilized now. I am sorry to hear the report that the administration have sent out their adhesion to the treaty of Paris of 1856, Avhich abolished privateering. It will be said that we do in our weakness what we Avould not do in our strength. And besides, by the law of nations, our adhesion Avould not bind the South so long as they are maintaining an independent government. These facts and arguments are not very pleasant to consider, hut the use I would make of them is this — that we shol^ld pre- pare for a long war and begin to economize ; that we should leave off all silly talk about our own prowess. Southerners being cow- ards, hanging Jeff. Davis, starving the South, conquering Cana- da, whipping England and France, and all the Avorld besides, and come down to look at the case in naked truth and sad reality. Our people talk about a union of parties, but it is only in Avords ; they do not yet realize the necessity of it. When we fully un- derstand it, Ave shall see the necessity of union, and that it requires nothing less than our united strength to cope Avith the enemy. It is a Avaste of Avords to argue for or against the right to se- cede. But Ave cannot deny the right of revolution, and it is of no use quarrelling about Avho is to blame in this contest. Before the Avar was begun, I believe the blame Avas pretty equally divi- ded. The leaders of the South could not have carried the masses Avith them, if it had not been for the iuA^asion of John Brown 10 and its justification by a portion of the North. And the North Avould not have been aroused as it is, if it had not been for the brutal attack on Charles Sumner, and its justification by a por- tion of the South. If the South sent to Congress the gentlemen they used to send, they would still have influence there. I can well recollect when, about 1835 or 1836, a Southern Governor, in a message, first proclaimed that taunt, since so often repeated, and of which so much political use has been made, that the laboring people of the North were slaves in fact, if not in name. But for taunts like these, abolitionists could have done but little. For abolition itself, or for the colored race, the North- ern people generally have cared but little. It is the insolence of Southern politicians which has aroused them. It is evident that the war has got to be a long and expensive one, or a short and bloody one. As long as the war was confined to the cotton States, I thought, with a great many people at the North, that the best way to get them back was to tell them to quit if they wanted to ; and they would soon find selt-governraent a pretty expensive thing. But the case is now entirely changed. It will not do for us to separate from the Northern slave States. It would cut us — not in two — but into three nations. The East and the West would have a mere strip of territory to unite them, and they could not hold together. The commercial interests of the West are entirely opposed to those of the East — and how long would it before the West Avould join the South and reconstruct a pow- erful Union, leaving New England out ? The plan of military operations to reduce the South and pre- serve the Union, which seemed to promise to effect it with the least bloodshed, was the plan generally understood to be favored by General Scott and the President ; to blockade their ports, shut them in and destroy their trade, threaten attacks at various points, and so compel them to keep up a large army, and take awiiy their people from their ordinary agricultural pursiuts. If this ])lan had been pursued for a year, unless human nature at the South is different from what it is here — where we quarrel all the time — they would have ([uarrelled among themselves before long. As soon as elections came on, different parties and candi- dates Avould arise. Causes of dis-sension woidd multiply, and there would in time be a jiarty, which, though it might not dare to assume the name of a Union party at first, would soon be- come one. Notwithstanding the disastrous result of the late battle, the government will })robably endeavor to pursue the same policy. 11 But I have said the war may assume another aspect, and be a short and bloody one. And to such a war an anti-slavery war it seems to me we are inevitabh/ drifting. It seems to me liardy in the power of human wisdom to prevent it. We may com- mence the war without meaning to interfere with slavery ; but let us have one or two battles, and get our blood excited, and we shall not only not restore anymore slaves but sha 1 proclaim freedom wherever we go. And it seems almost judicia\ blind- ness on the part of the South that they do not see that this must be the inevitable result, if the contest is prolonged. _ We know well the power of a ruhng race over an abject and submissive people. A few men accustomed to arms and to rule, can keep in subjection thousands of a race imused to anus and accustomed to submission. We see it in the case o India A few British soldiers there keep in subjection a hundred milhons even of civilized Hindoos. But the slaves have hitherto remained peaceably in slavery, because they had nowhere to flee Once sure of an asylum and safety, fire and poison and the bludgeon will desolate the South. Without justifiable cause and without havinc^ suftered any actual injury, they have begun the conflict ; there will yet be time for refiection, but if warned ot their dan- o-er, they persist in their folly, upon their own heads inust be the Consequences. Compromise is for the present out of the ques- tion. Since the last battle, the South will not, and the ^ortli cannot with selt-respect, ofter terms of peaceable re-umon. After remarks by Mr. Cooke, of Warren, the resolutions were unanimously adopted by the Senate, and on the same day were unanimously concurred in by the House of Representa- tives. NOTE ON THE BLOCKADE AND CLOSING THE POKTS. Our government, either from being new in office, or from multiplicity of business, or from some other cause, _ have been constantly, since the commencement of the war, violating the principles we have ourselves laid down in similar cases hereto- fore. The President declares a blockade, which is an incident of tiie war-making power. By so dohig he admits that it is a civil war, and not" merely a trifling insurrection. But now it is aro-ued that the President can close the ports under the recent statute (although these ports are not de facto under our jurisdic- tion) and that the blockade is merely a coast guard to enforce the law. 1-2 When tlie Spanish American Provinces revolted from Spjlin^ and declared their independence, Spain undertook to pursue the very course our crovernment is now pursuing ; and the Dutch, Eno-lish and the United States protested against it. The Spanish General Morales, by decree of September 15th, 1822, proclaimed a blockade of twelve hundred miles of the coast of the Spanish Main, in South America, and prohibited all foreign commerce with the revolted Provinces as being contraiy to the laws of Spain. At this time the Spaniards had but three vessels of war to blockade twelve hundred miles. This decree led to very serious disputes between the United States and Spain. England went so far as to order reprisals on Spanish commerce. _ [^ John Quincy Adams, the Secretary of State, in his letter of April 28, 1823, to Mr. Nelson, our Minister in Spain, thus de- nounces these proceedings : And if he had foreseen the case of our blockade he could not have described it much better : " To this outrage on all the rights of neutrality [the inefficient paper blockade] they have added the absurd pretension of inter-= dictino- the peaceful commerce of other nations with all the ports of the Spanish Main, upon the pretence that it had been hereto- fore forbidden by the S])anish Colonial laws. " The blockade was a public wrong. The interdiction of all trade was an outrage upon the rights of all neutral nations ; and the resort to two expedients l)ears on its face the demonstration, that they who assumed them both, had no reliance on the jus- tice of either ; for if the interdiction of all neutral trade was law- ful, there was neither use nor necessity for the blockade ; and if the blockade was lawful, there could be as little occasion or pre-- tence for the interdiction of the trade. ***** The blockade and interdiction of trade have, from the first notice of them, not only been denounced and protested against by the gov- ernment and officers of the United States, but by those of Great Britain, even when the ally of Spain, and avIio has not yet acknowledged the indej)endence of the revolted colonies. '' Mr. Audagua attempts, l)y laborious argument, to maintaiii to the fullest and most uiKiualitied extent, the right of the Span- ish privateers to capture, au