.1* A 
 
 ^ i, * . . ♦ 
 
 

 'oK 
 
 ^-1^^ .' 
 
 .'^ .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ ..^''^ ^C 
 
 * "y . 
 
 
 '>o^ 
 
 
 lO-T--, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .^^^'"^^ wj§^^V4.^% ^- 
 
 
 
 * <V 
 
 
 
 
 9^yJ^.^^. 
 
 ' .^ 
 
 
 
 ''->..;^- 
 
 'bV 
 
 
 
 
 ;* <^^^ 
 
 
 V^ .*: 
 
 
 
 
 
TO THE 
 
 HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 

TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 Your letter to the Governor of South-Carolina has just appeared. 
 No inconsiderable compliment was paid you in the eagerness with which 
 all classes of your fellow-citizens hastened to obtain copies for their pe- 
 rusal. You have enjoyed in more than ordinary degree, the confidence 
 of your fellow-citizens. You have represented them in the Federal 
 Council, ably and truly. You enlisted yourself in the last struggle be- 
 tween this State and the Federal Government, and joined the ranks of 
 that party which braved the power of the President, enforced by a 
 submissive and obedient Congress. You merited, you received, and 
 have enjoyed the confidence of those who knew you. When you chose 
 to hold under the Federal Government, the place of Collector of its cus- 
 toms, all were gratified. Though well understood as not entertaining 
 the opinions of that large majority in this city and State who advocated 
 the doctrines of the democratic party, you had no supporters more 
 steadfast than those who belonged to that party. They sustained you 
 a whig, in office, under a democratic President. In no way in which 
 men could show their affection, confidence and respect, have they ever 
 been wanting. They felt that however you might differ with them on 
 mere questions of party, whenever the time arrived that would test the 
 fidelity of the citizen, and the duty he should render to the State, in 
 the imi)onng crisis so rapidly hastening on, you would be found where 
 you ever had been, rendering, and proudly offering your allegiance to 
 the State of South-Carolina. That if, in so doing you should incur 
 danger or expose youreelf to sacrifice, it would make the duty more 
 pleasant to you. And the more helpless, and exposed the position of your 
 State, the more glory would you feel in standing foremost among those, 
 who were arming for her defence, not with the spirit of lip service, but 
 the more hardy and enduring temper that perils life, liberty and honour 
 in her cause. We had no reason to suppose that you had any doubt on 
 the present absorbing question of the day. You were known to have 
 a personal interest in the question. But still more, you were known to 
 have sympathized, and deeply too, in the present attitude of our State, 
 and her sister slaveholding States. You were known to have smarted 
 under the lash which an insolent majority had attempted to apply to 
 us. You were known to have felt, that the aggressions with which we 
 were not only threatened, but which were put upon us, must have 
 an end, and also a remedy. That with the unprincipled combi- 
 nations through whose agency these measures had been brought to their 
 present unhappy maturity, there would be no end. That Congress would 
 not and could not afford a remedy. You were known to be w here we 
 
^1 f6'S '/•. 
 
 4 TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 all now are: Relying on ourselves for our only protection. It is our 
 painful duty to examine those reasons, as set forth in your letter, which 
 have induced you to forsake your position, and abandon your State. 
 To maintain the propriety of your position, you have been forced to an- 
 nounce a proposition, wliich will no doubt startle every man in the 
 slaveholding States, I choose to state it in your own language. " It 
 cannot, then, with any justice, be said, that there has been any infrac- 
 tion of the Constitution in the measures lately adopted by Congress. 
 Neither can it be asserted that j)ublic o]iinion in the Southern States 
 has ever given any clear and unmistakeable evidence of conviction on 
 the part of our people that they can no longer continue their social, 
 civil and political relations with the Northern States," p. 1*7. I had not 
 supposed that in the Southern States, with the exception of a few who 
 have returned from Washington with the reputation of having sold 
 their country, there lived any who did not entertain the belief 
 that the action of the last Congress had been obedient to that agra- 
 rian and free soil spirit at the North, East and West, which now rocks 
 this Union to its centre. Is this mi?itake? If so believe me, that \\o\s- 
 ever unprincipled, we have been accustomed to consider the course of 
 the non-slaveholding States, if you are right, our course has been more 
 imprincipled and contemptible. If it is so, that we have no well found- 
 ed discontent with the sentiment and conduct of our opponents, tlien 
 have we been guilty of the cowardly pretext of assigning a false rea- 
 son 'or our conduct We have mocked the images of truth and justice, 
 with our appeals, and stand exposed to all the self debasement that 
 must attach to falsehood and hypocrisy. If such were my ojiinion, in 
 this land, not for one moment would I dwell. If T could believe that 
 such were my fellow-citizens, I should depart from them, without 
 regret, other than such as I would feel in leaving the bone of the hon- 
 oured dead resting in a land so obnoxious to the censure of all honest men. 
 I should endeavour to furget that I was born among such a people ; and in 
 the same proportion in which I now thank my God, who cast my lot in life 
 amidst this people, would I then sorrow in jirofonnd humiliation at the 
 curse to wliich I would feel I had been subject. But it is not so. 
 You have done us all great injustice. We have not the satisfaction of 
 feeling that in the estimate we have made of our wrong we have been 
 honestly mistaken. There has been too much time — too much discus- 
 sion. In Congress and out of Congress — In popular assemblies — in pri- 
 vate circles — at the private fire-side — in the temples dedicated to the 
 worship of God — in all of these, has this question b"en again and 
 as'ain presented to us. The rays of light from every imaginable quar- 
 ter, have been concentrated and thrown upon it. Passion coii'd not 
 mislead us, for mere ))assion would have passed away in the length of 
 time through which the discussion has run. Prejudice if it created, 
 could not have supported the opinion, for it has bi^en too ofti^n exposed 
 nakedly to us, to leave us that pretext. If we liave erred, we have 
 wilfully erred. If we exaggerate, intentit)nally have we done so. 
 
 It is then in no idle spirit that I take up yom- proposition, that " i 
 cannot with any justice be said that there has been any infraction of the 
 
TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 Constitution in the measures lately adopted by Congress." I do so not 
 only to satisfy you, if possible, that there has been and is ; but more- 
 over, to wipe from the escutcheon of the State, a stain which there would 
 be indelibly impressed, if you were right. 
 
 Can you go to California with your slaves ? No. Can you go to 
 Georgia ? Yes. If you can to the latter, and not to the former, why 
 is it so ? Because of the so-called constitution of California. Who 
 made that constitution ? Do you know ? If California had tolerated 
 slavery in its constitution, could she have been admitted ? Certainly 
 not. What then induced her admission 1 The prohibition of slavery. 
 Can you deny it ? If so, you and I have widely differed in our read- 
 ing of the debates of the last Congress. If, then, the prohibition of 
 slavery was the inducement which led to the admission of that State 
 into the Union, is not that prohibition an insult and injury to you ? If 
 it is an insult and injury, does it not demand your interference ? If it 
 is an insult and injury committed on you, with the constitution held 
 ■ before it to screen its iniquity, but that charter so mutilated and torn, 
 that through it may be seen the infamous conduct attempted to be 
 practised behind it, does it not admonish you of unscrupulous ojipres- 
 sion, hesitating not at the desecration of all political justice, if it but aids 
 in the accomplishment of the impious work ? You are a citizen of 
 South-Carolina. Soutii-Carolina is one of the sovereign States, to which 
 the Territory of California belonged. How did she acquire the right ? 
 It resulted from the Mexican war. Did South-Carolina furnish her 
 quota of men ? Yes. Did she supply that Federal Treasury, from 
 which the expenses were paid ? Yes. Does she contribute still to 
 those resources, from which the unpaid debt is to be defrayed ? Yes. 
 She was, then, in all respects, entitled to a portion of that which re- 
 sulted from the war ? She had some rights. What were they ? What 
 are they ? While the Territory of California was territory, she was 
 entitled, in common with any other State, to the enjoyment of that 
 which belonged to her in common with them. But, immediately upon 
 the acquisition of that territory, came that revelation of mighty trea- 
 sure, which at once drew to the new land, adventurers from all parts of 
 the world. Scarcely do they land, when they erect themselves into a sor 
 called government, and call for admission into the Union. Do they, in so 
 doing, continue to afford you, as a citizen of South-Carolina, the right to 
 go there ? No ; they prohibit you. This is the right you now have ! 
 Through what agency was this effected ? The Conr/ress of the United 
 States f And you call upon me to admit, that in this, there is no jus- 
 tice in saying that Congress has been guilty of an infraction of the con- 
 stitution. Have you not been identitied with an institution, which has 
 been interdicted ? are not you classed with pohtical lepers ? is not your 
 republicanism denied, your equality scouted, your right, as a citizen of 
 Carohna, to go to California, with all your rights as a citizen of Caro- 
 lina, spurned ? are not all these things before you ? do you not see 
 them, feel them? do they not flush your cheek, and chafe your spirit? 
 And are these things no infraction of the constitution ? Believe me 
 that I can find no excuse for one who does not feel that these are 
 wrongs of the deepest hue, and calling for the highest sacrifices, except 
 
6 TO THE HON. TT. J. GRAYS05. 
 
 it be in the unbounded adherence to the slavish doctrine, that the king 
 can do no wrong. 
 
 Satisfied with California, it creates no surprize that you should see 
 nothing in the act, creating a boundary for Texas, to excite your indig- 
 nation. But, do you seriously believe that the Congress of the United 
 States has the. right to speculate upon the necessities of the people of 
 a State, and a])ply the money of these sovereign States, to purchase a 
 part of its soil, /or the purpose of confining the area within which 
 slavery should exist? You must say, no. Yet that is the case with 
 Texas. And there is not one man in Congress, whose word carries 
 belief with it, who will not admit, that this and this only was the object 
 that suggested and concluded that most infamous bargain. Why, sir, 
 where are we ? In what atmosphere are we breathing \ Have we the 
 bow-string before our eyes, that we are afraid to think ? Can ant/thing 
 so delude the understanding, and steal away our intelligence — can any 
 thing make us* so forgetful of the value of political libertj^, that we could 
 be made to consent, to shut our eyes and be robbed, least, if we seem 
 awake, our throats should belong, with our purses, to the robber ? Con- 
 gress dare not avow the robbery, but we know that it is done. Shall we 
 hesitate iq exposing the detection, until the culprit makes confession ? 
 Or, shall we wait until our masters shall be so thoroughly satisfied of our 
 weakness, that they will rob, and tell us that they did so ? No Sir. 
 Believe me, that this bribe to Texas is not without its parallel. Your 
 cultivated taste has often led you to linger over those pages which pour- 
 tray the stirring incidents of that people, who, rising from obscurity, in 
 course of time, became in themselves a world. You have admired that 
 virtue and courage which sustained them in the defence of their homes, 
 and when these qualities grew stronger, enabled them to carry their 
 language and laws among those whose natures were as savage as the 
 wilds in which they roved. You have seen one cloud, and then another, 
 and still another, come between you and the noon-day brilliancy of their 
 history, until the light of their life was gone, and the transient gleams 
 that arose only from their own corruption, enabled you to see how 1o\t 
 their fortunes had fallen. You missed the voice of the people proclaim- 
 ing whom they chose for their rulers. You saw the gold of the pow- 
 erful buying theswoixl of the soldier, to cut for the spoiler the road to 
 that distinction and the enjoyment of that power, which once was 
 sacred to merit and virtue. You have read of the influence of money 
 in the history of the most powerful nations of antiquity. You may see 
 another illustration in our own day. 
 
 Permit me to say, that in no })art of jour letter, am I more sur- 
 prised at the argument wliich has satisfied you, than that which you have 
 adopted in relation to Utah and New Mexico. I infer that you think 
 it a matter over which we should rejoice, that in the Territorial bills for 
 these places, the Wilmot Proviso was not inserted. But have you 
 satisfied yourself why this Proviso was not adopted ? One reason only 
 exists, and that is because there was no necessity for it. A more secret, 
 more subtle, more dangerous, but equally effective plan was discovered. 
 These reasons made that plan preferable to the Wilmot Proviso. But 
 if it had been left to the Congress of the United States, to say whether 
 
TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. ' 
 
 they would adopt tlie Wilmot Proviso, or reject it, without the adop- 
 tion of some kindred measure, jou would have soon seen for what 
 you ask us to be thankfuh The Wihnot Proviso prohibited the 
 introduction of slavery into these territories. This was the object. 
 It had to be attained. There was a choice only as to the means. 
 What were these means ? They were two. Congress might adopt 
 the Wilmot Proviso, or inasmuch as the Mexican laws had abo- 
 hshed slavery in these territories before they were ceded to the United 
 States, it might be understood that these Mexican laws should be held 
 as being now of force. The latter was the chosen plan.' And in or- 
 der that it should fully succeed. Congress declared that it was not com- 
 petent for the Territorial Legislature to act upon the question of slave- 
 ry. This was making assurance doubly sure. The Mexican laws pro- 
 hibited slavery. It was understood they should continue of force. 
 And least by any chance the Legislature of these territories might be 
 induced to tolerate slavery, all ])ower over the subject was expressly 
 denied. It was well supposed that the Mexican laws were sufficient, 
 especially when any re[)eal of them was prohibited Am I wrong in 
 saying it was more secret, more subtle, more dangerous, and equally 
 eftectual, with the AVilmot Proviso ? But you say the Mexican laws 
 were not adopted by Congress. True, there was no act passed to adopt 
 them. But I say it was understood they should be the substitute for 
 the Wilmot Proviso. The test is this. Can you now go there with 
 your slaves ? You cannot. Why ? Because the Mexican law will 
 not allow you. By what authority do the Mexican laws exist in these 
 territories ?" By the authority of the Congress of the United States. 
 Did any one in either Hall of Congress dare to get up and say that in 
 rejecting the Wilmot Proviso, it was intended even indirectly to affirm 
 the right of the slaveholder to go there with his slaves ? Not one. 
 And are we so reduced, that we must thus compromise with our wound- 
 ed feelings ? Have we no balm, save that which while it seems to cure 
 our wound, robs us of our senses ? For what good end shall we thus 
 dally with our honor, and patch up truces with our understanding? 
 Will patience restore us to our equality ? Will the conscience of those 
 who degrade us, give us back our rights ? Does power become tamed 
 by submission ? Is freedom preserved by never ending submission ? 
 When we knoiv the spirit and motive that prompts to the commission 
 of an act, shall we forbear because prudence may induce our oppressors 
 to conceal the purpose which governed them ? When you joined your 
 State in resisting the Tariff act, what did you do ? You nullified an 
 act giving undue encouragement to manufactures. But who so named 
 that act ? You and those who opposed it. Its friends said it was a 
 bill for raising revenue. A purpose in itself constitutional. You then 
 disdained to have your vision obscured with a cobweb. You treated 
 the matter as it was meant, and not as it was expressed. You went to 
 the spirit, and heeded not the letter. You felt that if you were op- 
 pressed, it did not matter hoio it was done. Whether you were robbed 
 or cheated, you were equally the loser, and for your loss, must be re- 
 dressed. As it was with you then, so it is with us now. A deep, hon- 
 est, religious conviction has satisfied us, that our political existence is 
 overcast, if not entirely overthrown. That Congress has become the 
 
8 TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 obedient instrument tbrough which a series of oppressions have been 
 made, sapping our strength, and subverting our institutions. We have 
 been placed under the ban. We have been debarred the enjoyment of 
 property that belongs to us, because that property is said to be anti- 
 republican. The foundation therefore of the argument which excludes 
 us, invites the Federal Congress to remodel our institutions even in our 
 own States. For it is made the duty of Congress to guarantee to each 
 State a republican form of government. The evil then is at our own 
 door. Its train is already laid beneath our dwellings. The match is 
 about to be applied. We have waited until we must choose between 
 our own destruction, or that of those who so conduct themselves. One 
 moment is left us, and you exclaim to us, pause still longer. I am sure 
 you do not know that your judgment has been fearfully swayed in es- 
 timating the danger to which we are exposed, when you ask us to pause. 
 Better would it be for him to pause, whose descending blow will save 
 his own life : better for him to stop, whose utmost speed will but mul- 
 tiply his chances of escape from destruction : better for him to slumber, 
 who locked up in regions of ice, knows that the sleep which courts him 
 to its embrace, will be the sleep of death ; than that we should pause 
 in our resolves — stop in their execution, or slumber amid the dangers 
 which encompass us. 
 
 But you distinguish between the sources through which this danger 
 approaches us. You consider its origin social, not political. That it 
 is the act of individuals, and not that of the Government. This was 
 the Syren song that first lulled the slaveholding States into that pas- 
 siveness and inactivity, which have been so long practised. Had the 
 stand been taken at the first appearance of the smallest specs, that we 
 now take, far better might it have been. Although no human agency 
 could probably do more than defer the time at which new combinations 
 of States would arise from this present confederation, it might have 
 been that our separation would not have been marked by the angry 
 feelings which now have been developed. But we were told to be pa- 
 tient, and we were patient. We were advised to wait, and we did wait. 
 But while thus patient, and thus waiting, how changed has become the 
 appearance of that which is opposed to us. It has swelled to gigantic 
 proportions. No longer despised, its voice is heard potential in all po- 
 pular assemblies, and the Congress of the United States dares not op- 
 pose its violence and sway. It has become an element of social hfe 
 and political existence. It is taught to the young children in their 
 schools — becomes the confirmed opinion of the rising generation — while 
 unprincipled demagogues, still lash it on to that consummation of its 
 fury, which only will end in the attempt to subvert the institution of 
 slavery in the States W'here it now exists. 
 
 When you say that the spirit of emancipation is a social, and not a 
 ]}olit{ca.l evil, do you believe that it does not influence and govern the 
 deliberations of Congress? Do you not know that, if a few honest 
 spirits are found, bold enough to venture upon giving to the South 
 what the most niggard conscience cannot withhold, that the most ex- 
 alted reputation and loftiest dignity cannot shield them from the punish- 
 ment prepared for them ? Do you not remember the case of Daniel 
 
TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. » 
 
 Webster ? "Who would have supposed that Massachusetts would 
 ever have abandoned Mr. Webster for doing that, which Massachu- 
 setts sent him to Washington to do, and swore liim to perform ? Yet 
 is it 80. Though with no lavish hand, nor overflowing generosity, 
 Mr. Webster admitted that we had some rights, and were entitled to 
 be protected in them. At once there came upon him a storm, to avoid 
 the fury of which, he was forced to abandon that seat in the Senate 
 Chamber which he had filled with such world-wide renown, and leave 
 to another the difficult task, of reconciling his conscience with the 
 reckless exactions of a fsmatical and licentious party. Is not the case 
 of Mr. Webster sufficient to satisfy you that the voice of abolition no 
 longer is confined to the distance, but now rings throughout the halls 
 of Congress, and drowns in its din every thing that may be said against 
 it ? What has been the fate of Mr. Dickinson ? He has dared some- 
 thing, too. Yet where has he found his reward ? The commentary on 
 his conduct will be seen in the amalgamation of all classes of the 
 democratic party, and the adoption of John Van Buren ; while the whig 
 party, not to be beaten in this infamous race, endorse the sentiments of 
 William H. Seward, and boldly proclaim that the constitution of the 
 United States, so far as it tends to the protection of slavery, is against 
 the law of God, and the " higher law " absolves them from all obliga- 
 tion to enforce the provisions of the constitution, which they have sworn 
 to protect and defend. What candidate for the presidency dares to 
 disregard the voice of the abolition party ? What candidate for Con- 
 gress, is safe unless he caters for their vote ? What member so 
 abounding in moral courage as not to tamper with his oath, and, how- 
 ever he may delay, ultimately refuse that obedience which they so un- 
 scrupulously demand ? That the action of Congress is made obedient 
 to the demands of the free soil party is a fact which you alone deny. 
 The press puts in its confession of the truth, and it is known that, in 
 more than one instance, when members from the free soil States have 
 been appealed to, to stand up and 'arrest the onward march of these 
 movements, so rapidly bringing in their train the dismemberment of 
 this confederacy, they have replied, We dare not! Dare not do what? 
 Dare not do justice — dare not preserve the truth — dare not regard their 
 oaths — dare not defend the constitution — dare not give to the slave- 
 holding States what so rightfully belongs to them. And why do they 
 dare not ? Because of that overwhelming social sentiment, which has 
 grown into a potitical element, governing and controlling every other 
 consideration that could be presented. Our senators return to us,^ and 
 say there is no hope. Our members come back, and say there is no 
 hope. Our citizens, induced by the absorbing character of the question, 
 go to the capitol to look with their own eyes, and they come back 
 and repeat the cry, there is no hope. All feel that we bave ap- 
 proached a point in our destiny — that a struggle is at hand, and can- 
 not be avoided. The most timid are nerved to the encounter, and if 
 there are any who have fancied that f!iey could repose still longer, even 
 since the adjournment of the last Congress, there has come rolling down 
 upon them the echo of those gatherings in the free soil States, where 
 principles which would become the wildest days of the revolution in 
 
10 TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 France, are hailed with loud acclaim, and all men devote themselves to 
 their support. They have felt that now, indeed, there could no longer 
 be a doubt. And you tell us that this is social, not political — the act of 
 individuals, not the r/overnment — that it does not indicate danger — and 
 that we are criminally regardless of the blessings we enjoy, if we en- 
 tertain the idea of separating ourselves from those who have declared 
 that our institutions are an abomination in the sight of God, and 
 should be extirpated by the hand of man. Have you forgotten the 
 pretext under which an interference with our institutions is attempted? 
 Are they not declaimed against as ajMlitical evil ? Has not State after 
 State recorded its opinion on the subject 1 Put that opinion in the 
 shape of resolves, and instructions to its members in Congress, and laid it 
 down as a rule of conduct for them ? Do not these members so recog- 
 nize it, vote upon it, conform their conduct to it, adjust the ojjerations 
 of the government to it ? And, with these things before you, you say 
 the aggression is social, not political — that it is the act of individuals, and 
 there is no cause of complaint against Congress ! We all have heard of 
 remarkable cases, where men of undoubted courage, for the moment 
 influenced by some unaccountable panic, have falsified many well spent 
 years in an hour, and stupefied with wonder the friends who .admired 
 them. But soon they became restored, and were themselves again. 
 I trust that yours is a similar case. That you have hastily abandoned 
 your matured opinions, for those which you have lately expressed ; but 
 whatever circumstance has operated on you, its controlling influence 
 will soon be removed, and you again be, what you have been, and I trust 
 ever will be. 
 
 You assert that there is no unmistakeable evidence of a conviction on the 
 part of our people that they can no longer continue their social, civil and 
 political relations with the Northern States. What do you consider the 
 resolutions which have been adopted in all the slaveholding States? What 
 do you consider the tone of the press, every where, at the South, except 
 where it is disgraced by venal writers, who have prostituted their talents, 
 and are now marked with the finger of scorn ? What do you consider the 
 popular gatherings which have been held in every slaveholding State ? 
 What do you consider the Nashville Convention ? What do you con- 
 sider the proclamation of Governor Towns ? Or that of Governor 
 Quitman ? Are not these unmistakeable evidences ? What do you 
 consider the opinion of your best friends — men in whose patriotism 
 you confide — in whose judgment 3-ou rely ? What do you think of the 
 conviction which I have no doubt has been present to your own mind ? 
 What do you consider that necessity which you say has forced you from 
 your quiet ? Sir, when you tell us that '• the present occasion is too 
 momentous" for you to remain quiet — when you admit that "it is preg- 
 nant with the fate of our whole country for all coming time," — you fur- 
 nish an answer to the doubt you suggest. These are evidences, and 
 unmistakeable, of that conviction which you seem inclined to dispute. 
 As decided as is the indication of a s])irit to oppress, equally strong is 
 that with us of a determination to resist. What would we be if it were 
 not so ? With social feelings spurned — political privileges denied — 
 even religious communion dechned — how low, indeed, would be our po- 
 
TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 11 
 
 sition if we had not the fortitude to adopt the conclusion that, when 
 they who hve on the other side of the Potomac forget— nay, more, 
 spurn the fraternal relation, we could no longer even talk of a bro- 
 therhood between us. See Georgia, hampered and embarrassed with the 
 traitorous counsels of those who'abused her confidence, yet rising in her 
 might, and going into convention of her people. Will you tell me the 
 convention will do nothing ? I tell you the convention itself is the evi- 
 dence for which you inquire. True," thinking as I do, I should rejoice 
 that the convention would now decide the question before us. But, even 
 " trodden down," it cannot be " trodden out." The people are reading 
 and thinking. They have begun the work. It is now a question only of 
 time. As surely as any result may be predicted from the exercise of hu- 
 man ajxency, will the leading Southern States secede from a confederacy 
 which, in its progress, has trampled down that political equality which was 
 the keystone of the arch. Their approach to this end has been so gradual; 
 so reluctantly have they yielded to those necessities which, piled one 
 upon another, forced them to this conclusion, that their cahnness has 
 been mistaken for acquiescence, their patience for submission. They 
 have stooped. But, when the insolent foeman would put his foot upon 
 them, the pride of freedom and of manhood has lifted them to the high- 
 est position. Every paralyzing consideration has been cast off, and 
 they are rallying under .hose banners which declare that they will "no 
 longer continuetheir social, civil and political relations with the North- 
 ern States." 
 
 You do not consider that the secession of the Southern States would 
 be a remedy, and principally because you seem to consider that a con- 
 federation of these Southern States could not be had, or, if had, that in- 
 ternal discord wuuld make such a confederation less desirable than that 
 under which we now live. You propose to substitute a system of non- 
 intercommunication. I need not stop to argue this point with you, 
 that non-intercommunication is secession without the name— -the only 
 ditfereuce being that non-intercommunication would admit still of the 
 existence of the General Government. But, if the States withdraw all 
 communication with each other, of what use would be the Government? 
 If it is not the Government of States identified with each other in senti- 
 ment and interest, it had better be abolished. And, how would you 
 terminate intercourse ? By law ? Would you say that Northern pro- 
 duce should not be sold in a Southern market and to a Southern buyer ? 
 If so, the Northern man would have a right to say that, by the Consti- 
 tution, he was allowed to buy and sell in any State ! Would you leave 
 it to the people to observe "this compact among themselves ? I need 
 not show you how continuing in the Union, such an understanding, ho- 
 nestly observed by our own people, would be a premium for strangers to 
 come among us, and grow rich before our foces by disrpg-^rding, on their 
 part, the rule we established for our government. Of all the remediei 
 -which have yet been suggested, this is the least harmful ; and, if we 
 could be brought to its adoption, instead of arresting the movements 
 now progressing against us, it would be a premium to multiply our in- 
 juries, if such conduct could only confirm us in this glorious mode of 
 avenging our wrongs by destroying ourselves. 
 
12 TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 But, not for a moment have I been shaken by the expression of your 
 doubt in the opinion I have formed, that, in a separate confederacy alone 
 will welind oursafety. No separate and independent States ever possessed 
 so many concurring circumstances to unite them and keep them united as 
 these Southern States. They are each identified with an institution pecu- 
 liar to themselves. Of all the elements which combine to preserve political 
 society and social order, none can be found more potential than domes- 
 tic slavery, as it exists in these States. While it operates, on the one 
 hand, to develope to its highest perfection civil liberty, it removes from 
 the community in wdiich it is found all possible tendency to licentious- 
 ness and agrarianisin. The superiority which it gives to the white 
 class makes them jealous of any arbitrary assumption of power ; while 
 the slaves occupy that position in labour that supplies the place of the 
 lawless population who overturn governments at one time for mischief, 
 at another time for bread. Without antagonism in interest, there can be 
 no partial or unjust legislation. With the world for a market, the only- 
 emulation can be in the value of their productions. Asking the same po- 
 litical privileges — needing the same political protection — their communi- 
 ties resting on the same basis — their laws the same — their language, tastes, 
 sympathies, the same — homogeneous in every thing that pertains to 
 their political, civil or social relations — they would almost seem to have 
 been marked out by Providence as a people created for an union among 
 themselves, and with no one else. Possessing the most superior advan- 
 tages in the cultivation of those staples which regulate the commerce of 
 the world, the preservation of peaceful relations with these States would 
 be as important to the commercial nations of Europe as preserving quiet 
 within their own dominions. Better would it be for England that her 
 Chartists should march unmolested through her land, thitn that these 
 cotton-growing States should refuse her the supply she demands for 
 those factories from which her thousands of a. pauper population are 
 supported in life. Naturally thus secured in the continuance of a com- 
 merce of which the carrying trade has poured out its rich retui'ns into 
 the laps of the Northern States of this confederacy, on its wings would 
 come back to us that wealth which once was ours, and out of which we 
 have been cheated. Thus introduced to the pathway in which national 
 wealth would flow in to reward individual enterprize and labour, we 
 should soon find ourselves advancing to the possession of all that en- 
 riches and adorns civilized life. The tribute we pay to a Government 
 whose aim is but to oppress us, would, by its expenditure at home, de- 
 velope among us those arts which are born with us only to perish, from 
 Avant, in their cradle. While thus, in all the gentler walks of life, we 
 would be destined to a state of improved existence, the organization of 
 our society would ever make us and keep us, as a people, more than 
 adequate to the defence of our altars and homes. With a military spi- 
 rit almost naturally created within us, confirmed by a sense of its ne- 
 cessity and im])roved by our tastes, whilst it would be regulated by our 
 position, we would find, at home, the most perfect protection against 
 aught which would threaten us from without or within. Such, I feel, 
 would be our condition. 
 
TO THE HON. W. J. GRAYSON. 13 
 
 Such would be the destiny which then would be realized by a people 
 who have been driven by a series of unjust and partial enactments, 
 to find themselves the producers of the wealth which enriched a conti- 
 nent, yet, year after year, growing more and more impoverished. I 
 have not coloured the picture. We may yet live to see it true to the 
 life. Yet, glowmg as is the prospect, alone it would never have induced 
 the people of the Southern States to contemplate the idea of a separate 
 confederation. So strong with them has ever been the sentiment of 
 fidelity, that, had the constitution been preserved and the government 
 administered, according to the principles which called it. into being, 
 however great were the privations, or severe the disadvantages under 
 which they laboured, not one man would have been found wilHno- to 
 abandon and destroy a compact into which he had entered in good 
 faith. That our feelings have been alienated — that our aft'cctions have 
 been extinguished — must be placed to the account of those who, for years, 
 made us pay tribute to their insatiable thirst for gold, and, not satisfied 
 with that, seek, in the most diabolical spii'it, to plunge us into utter 
 ruin, to gratify (heir sentimentality. That we have come slowly to the 
 conclusion by which we now stand, is but the evidence that we have 
 come surely to it. If, instead of benefit, there wa's danger in the path 
 which our duty points out to us, it should not deter us. We should 
 disgrace our history, if we would only vindicate our rights when we 
 perilled nothing in the attempt. Gain could not seduce us ; danger 
 shall not deter us. 
 
 I have a few words to say in relation to the note which is appended to 
 your letter, and which indicates your opinion on the Fugitive Slave Bill 
 of the last session. I cannot see in it any cause for the satisfaction which it 
 affords you. The Government could do no less. It should have done 
 much more. It should have given us some guaranty for the preserva- 
 tion of our institutions against the assaults to which they stand exposed. 
 I have already shown you that through the Government was our insti- 
 tution denounced. When that was done, how absurd is it to suppose 
 that any remedial measure would be heeded. In one breath the Gov- 
 ernment repudiates an institution, and in another seems to invite the 
 co-operation of the fanatic mobs of the free States, to aid us in the re- 
 capture of our fugitive slaves. If allowed to operate, it would have been 
 nothing. But the timid, unconscientious acts of the Government have 
 in no respect been more rebuked than in the scorn and contempt with 
 which this measure has been received in the free States. I must ask, 
 do you seriously believe that this law can be enforced ? Do you be- 
 lieve it can even live in the Statute Book beyond the first session of the 
 next Cungress? Why, sir, do you not know that in every part of the 
 North, East and \v'est, in their smallest villages — in their largest cities, 
 one unbroken sentiment of defiance has been uttered against the Gov- 
 ernment which enacts, and the officers who may dare to attempt the 
 enfoicement of the law ? Have you not read that in New-York, at 
 mid-day, in the Park, an immense gathering of negroes was had, at 
 which the most violent language was used in reftrence to the slavehold- 
 ing States, and this law supposed to be made for their peculiar benefit ? 
 Have you not seen the proceedings of the meeting in Boston, at which 
 
14 TO THE HON. \V. J. GRAYSON. 
 
 was read a letter from Josiah Quincy, denouncing this law, and pledging 
 its author to such concerted action as might be proper to annul it ? Are 
 you ignorant of the fact that at Lowell, when some fugitive slaves, who 
 had been dwelling there, became alarmed and fled, that the citizens met 
 and sent a committee to bring them back, with a pledge that the law 
 should not be enforced? Sir, I might fill a volume with "elegant ex- 
 tracts," fiom the reported proceedings of these meetings. You ask us 
 " not to mistake the brawling of the beastly rout," for the voice of the 
 people." I sliould be glad to know from what quarter you wait for the 
 " voice of the people ?" While such has been the universal condemna- 
 tion of this measure, point me, if you can, to the first meeting of con- 
 sequence, in which there has been found the expression of a bold pur- 
 pose to maintain the Government, even in this small act of justice to 
 the South. You cannot. Meeting succeeds meeting, but like the 
 waves of the ocean, each is lifted up with its infamous purposes, higher 
 than that which preceded. Would you talk to such collections of the 
 Constitution ? Would you venture to tell them of justice ? Would 
 they know what you meant by forbearance ? Yet to this mass of per- 
 sons have we delegated the defence of rights, if we follow^ your advice, 
 and pause in our career. You are right in this, that it is a "beastly 
 rout. But you are wrong in supposing that it is any thing else but the 
 people. 
 
 I have done. The quiet from which you have torn yourself, is not 
 more agreeable to you, than that which I "have forsaken, is to me. This 
 task, honestly, yet imperfectly done, to that quiet I now again return. 
 There to remain until the State shall designate the position that she 
 chooses her sons to occupy. Let others take their course, mine is clear. 
 And in that path which I am bound to follow, you will find thousands 
 of generous spirits, who would peril life to maintain their equality in the 
 Union and encounter greater danger to maintain their independence out 
 
 ONE OF THE PEOPLE. 
 
 W4S 
 

 o^ 'o . * * A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ co^c;^^''-o /\.^:^\ <p^:k}!^^> J 
 
 'bV" 
 
 ^^0^ 
 
 
 
 ^^-^-^^ 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 V^S' 
 
 
 1. ^'^O^ 
 
 v^-i- 
 
 
 c, 0^ 
 
 0* *^m^^* <>v 
 
 
 ^^•^^, 
 
 
 <)^ - « • 
 
 *S*%' 
 
 
 vv 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^°-'^. 
 
 "o.. •'*^'* ^0^ ^^/* . , , ** ,o,^