• ••* 
 
 
 
 
 .^^ 
 
 r ^^ 
 
 
 •V I- 
 
 '•^^o* 
 
 jp-nK V 
 
 
 
 
 .•^i.% ^°«:^^'> y.-^iX <'°.:r^- °- 
 
 
 
 
 
^^-^J" "v'^^v* ^V'^^^'y* "v^^^'^o'* % 
 
 i.^''\ •.^.- #^% '.ip.- /'-^^ %^^.- #"% \^, 
 
 
 f 
 i^"^^. 
 
 .i-y' ••-wt^t.% ^ 
 
 
 .•-_/►»», ■• 
 
 *v « * ■ • • ^^ 
 
SPEECH 
 
 H0¥. THOMAS L. OLmGMAF, 
 
 OF NORTH CAROLINA^ 
 
 THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT OF THE 
 ANTI-SLAVERY PARTY; 
 
 DELIVERBD 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 16, 1860. 
 
 WASHINGTON : 
 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 18G0. 
 

SPEECH. 
 
 Mr. CLINGMAN said: 
 
 Mr. President: It is my purpose to speak to- 
 day of the condition of the country, as connected 
 with asjitation of the slavery question. I shall do 
 this with perfect frankness, and with no reserve, 
 except what parliamentary rules and Senatorial 
 courtesies impose. By such a course only can the 
 real nature of tlie impending evil be ascertained, 
 and a remedy suggested. Having carefully stu- 
 died the subject during the greater part of my 
 political life, and from differeiW, points of view, I 
 mtend to express my opinions seriously, and as 
 fully as the occasion seems to require. 
 
 Before speaking directly to the merits of the 
 subject, I shall devote a few minutes to a prelim- 
 inary question. It has been contended that the 
 Democratic party is responsible for the anti-sla- 
 very agitation of the North. A retrospect into 
 the past will vindicate it most triumphantly from 
 the charge. The course of the old Federal party, 
 in the war of 1812, had brought it into discredit 
 and disgrace with the American people. Its lead- 
 ers, with a view of recovering the popular favor, 
 and through it the control of the Government, 
 seized upon the occasion of the application of 
 Missouri for admission into the Union, and, by 
 appealing to the anti-slavery feeling of the northern 
 States, created a sectional party powerful enough 
 to prevent, for a time, the admission of the State. 
 During the struggle, a provision was adopted that 
 slavery should never exist in the territory west of 
 Missouri and north of the line of latitude of .36° 
 30'. Though this arrange^jient was distasteful to 
 the South, and by many regarded as dishonorable 
 and unconstitutional, it was acquiesced in for the 
 sake of peace. And when, in 1845, Texas was 
 annexed to the Union, by the Democratic party 
 mainly, this Missouri line was extended through 
 it, and slavery, which legally existed in every part 
 of that State, was abolished and prohibited north 
 of the line. 
 
 When, subsequently, territory was acquired 
 from Mexico, the Democratic party, with but few 
 exceptions, attempted to apply the same princi- 
 ples to it, and extend the line of 36° 30' through 
 
 it. The proposition was again and again brought 
 forward by the distinguished Senator from Illinois 
 [Mr. Douglas] and others, and as often rejected 
 by the combined vote of the entire Whig party of 
 the North, and a portion of the Democrats of that 
 section. After years of fruitless struggle it was 
 abandoned, and the principle of congressional non- 
 intervention adopted by the compitunise measures 
 of 1850. 
 
 In other words, it was then established, in sub- 
 stance and effect, that the people of the Territo- 
 ries, free from all congressional legislation on the 
 subject of slavery, should regulate it for them- 
 selves, subject only to the limitations of the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, as interpreted by 
 the courts of the country. This settlement, like* 
 the proposition for the extension of the Missouri 
 line, was resisted by the great body of the north- 
 ern Whigs, who were for the Wilmot proviso and 
 against the extension of slavery in any mode. It 
 was also opposed by the southern friends of the 
 Missouri line, who preferred that system to con- 
 gressional non-intervention, and who still cher- 
 ished the hope that it might be adopted. In the 
 final struggle, they were reduced to a dozen south- 
 ern Senators and thirty Representatives, of whom 
 I was one. 
 
 I call the attention of Senators to another strik- 
 ing fact in this connection. It is charged not only 
 by the northern Opposition, but also by the south- 
 ern opponents of the Democratic party, that it is 
 responsible for the alleged evils of congressional 
 non-intervention and the disturbances of so-called 
 "squatter sovereignty" in the Territories. I affirm 
 that, in 1850, when this system was adopted, it 
 was sustained by the representatives of the south- 
 ern Whigs with the greatest unanimity. I was 
 no exception to this remark, for I had announced 
 already my separation from the organization of 
 the Whig party. I repeat that the southern Op- 
 position of that day, under the lead of Mr. Clay, 
 were the first portion of their fellow-citizens to 
 abandon the Missouri line and support the prin- 
 ciple of non-intervention by Congress. On the 
 other hand, the last and firmest friends of the 
 
Missouri line were those represented at the Nash- 
 ville convention — vi^hose ultimahim it was — and 
 such Senators and Representatives trom the South 
 as were in that day denounced as ultras and fire- 
 eaters, hccause of their not adopting the principle 
 of congressional non-intervention in lieu of the 
 Missouri line. When these facts are remembered, 
 will the present southern Opposition and its or- 
 gans continue to assail the Democratic party for 
 an act which they themselves earnestly and uni- 
 tedly concurred in ? Can theytukc the ground that 
 it was right to abolish the Missouri line, in order 
 that free States should be made south of it, but 
 that it should not, in like manner, be obliterated 
 to place the South on an equal footing north of it? 
 After a majority both of the South and of the 
 Democratic party had adopted the principle of 
 congressional non-intervention, we who had op- 
 posed it acquiesced , and the Democratic and Whig 
 conventions of 1853 both sanctioned it. 
 
 When the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska 
 were admitted, the Democratic party applied the 
 same principle to them; and, in so doing, foiHid 
 it necessary to repeal the old Missouri restriction, 
 in order that there might be no intervention by Con- 
 gress to control in any way the inhabitants of those 
 Territories. Were they not committed to do this, 
 in the strongest and most emphatic terms, by their 
 platform and tlicir late action as to the Mexican 
 territoriis, while the Whig or Opposition conven- 
 tion ht'd profissed, in its platform, to have acqui- 
 esced in the same principles ? But it is said tliat 
 both parties had drclared themselves opposed to a 
 further agitation of the slavery question. So they 
 had; but there was a specific pledge in favor of con- 
 gressional non-intervention in the Territories; and 
 the carrying it out ought to have produced no 
 agitation whatever, and would not m a healthy 
 state of public opinion in the North. The Dem- 
 ocratic party could not honorably avoid doing 
 what it did; and would have been liable to the 
 charge, had it failed to do this, of shifting its prin- 
 ciples from time to time, and so shaping its course 
 fts to favor non-interviMition when it would thereby 
 admit free States into the Union, and of going/oj- 
 congressional intervention, on the other hand, when 
 it might thereby prevent the formation of a slave- 
 holding Slate. Had it tailed to maintain its prin- 
 ciples on this occasion, it would have been justly 
 exposed to this charge. Their opponents in the 
 North, however, on the repeal of the Missouri 
 restriction, raised at once an immense clamor, 
 showing that their friendship for non-intervention 
 was only pretended, and that they had acquiesced 
 in the measures of 1850 only because they created 
 a free State south of 36° 30', and did not intend 
 the principles to be applied in a case in which, by 
 any possibility, the South might carry its institu- 
 tions north of this line. We all know that, prior 
 to 1854, they as regularly and vehemently de- 
 nounced the Missouri compromise as they have 
 since done the Kansas iniquity; but as soon as it 
 was proposed to repeal this restriction to carry 
 out the principle of congressional non-interven- 
 tion, they suddenly became the warm advocates 
 of this same Missouri line, and deplored its re- 
 moval. From tlie first to the last, they showed 
 themselves to be Free-Soilers, and deti>rmined to 
 exclude the South from all share in the' public ter- 
 ritory of the Union. While the Kansas bill was 
 pending, they threatened tp hire men to occupy 
 
 that Territory; and did, in fact, send bodies of 
 armed ruffians to hold it by force, constituting, as 
 the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] said, a 
 military occupation. This movement provoked 
 retaliation ; and the strife thus occasioned was re- 
 ferred to by them as evidence against the policy 
 of non-intervention. By the same effort on their 
 part, they could have created disorders in any 
 State of the Union, and might, with as much jus- 
 tice, have attempted to discredit the principle of 
 State sovereignty. In fact, they refer to the late 
 invasion of the State of Virginia, by some of their 
 employes, as an argument against the state of 
 society prevailing in the South. 
 
 It is undoubtedly true, however, that in conse- 
 quence of the re}ieal of the Missouri restriction, 
 true and patriotic men were deteated in the North 
 by Frce-Soilers and Abolitionists. When the 
 Democratic party had the manliness and the states- 
 manship to reform the currency system in part by 
 the adoption of the sub-treasury plan, jt sustained 
 severe losses for a time. In the more arduous un- 
 dertaking of placing the slavery question on a per- 
 manent and solid basis, with reference to the action 
 of the Federal Government, it has had to encoun- 
 ter, perhajis, greater difficulties. I am not sure, 
 however, that it would have been as much weak- 
 ened, but for accidental circumstances which it 
 could not foresee. During the excitement arising 
 out of the repeal of the Missouri restriction, there 
 occurred that singular organization called the 
 American party, which carried a majority of al- 
 mostevery one of the northern States. It severed, 
 during this period of excitement, and permanently 
 separated from the Democratic party, many who 
 would otherwise have returned to it. On its sud- 
 den collapse, mo*of its members in the free States 
 united with a few outside Abolitionists and formed 
 the present Black Republican party. But for these 
 occurrences, I have no doubt that the Democratic 
 party would have, ere this, recovered its ascend- 
 ency in several of the northern States. 
 
 But again, Mr. President, "when, in the year 
 1857, R(^bert J. Walker was made Governor of 
 Kansas, he publicly declared that the climate of 
 that Territory fitted it only to be a free State; and 
 also assured the peojtle that the whole constitution 
 should be submitted to them. This position was 
 condemned generally in the South as amounting 
 to Executive interference, or intervention with the 
 right of the citizens of the Territory to decide 
 these questions for themselves. By way of de- 
 fense for Governor Walker, it was said that a 
 number of southern men had expressed the opinion 
 that it would be a free State. Every one saw, how- 
 ever, that if Governor Walker had taken the other 
 side, he might, with even more plausibility, have 
 declared that Kansas ought to be a slaveholding 
 State, because it was on the same parallel of lati- 
 tude with Missouri, Kentucky, Virginia, Mary- 
 land, and Delaware, all of which were slavehold- 
 ing States; and this position of his might have 
 been fortified by any number of declarations of 
 prominent Free-Soilers and Abolitionists, to the 
 effect that, under the Kansas act, that Territory 
 would inevitably be a slaveholding State. The en- 
 tire South, almost, condemned his position, there- 
 fore, as unfair, and an unjust exercise of Execu- 
 tive influence in the Territory. It so happened, 
 however, that, for months, the paper at the seat 
 of Government, and others supposed to represent 
 
the views of the President, sustaiiied, in the strong- 
 est and most emphatic terms, the position of Gov- 
 ernor Walker. Ahnost the entire Democracy of 
 the free States, therefore, took this ground in sup- 
 port of what they understood to be the views of 
 the Administration, and assured their fallow-citi- 
 zens that the people of Kansas were to have the 
 privilege of voting on the whole constitution of the 
 State. 
 
 But, towards the close of that year, die conven- 
 tion of the Territory decided to submit only the 
 slavery clause to the voters generally. The Pres- 
 ident, therefore, recommended the admission of 
 the State under the constitution so adopted. That 
 this recommendation of his was right, I never 
 doubted; because I think it has been fully settled 
 by the usages of the States, that their conventions 
 may submit or not, as they choose, either the whole 
 or a part of their constitutions to a vote of the 
 people. Nevertheless, tliis position being incon- 
 sistent with that wluch had been so generally 
 taken in the North, many men who zealously 
 sustained it were afterwards defeated at home 
 because of their party having been previously 
 committed to a different line of policy. I know 
 that many southern men who had no doubt that 
 the action of the Kansas convention was theo- 
 retically and as a matter of constitutional law, 
 right, nevertheless regretted that action, because 
 it had the appearance of seeking to avoid an op- 
 portunity for a fair expression of the popular 
 will. While we held that Congress had no right 
 to interfere with the action of the Territory in 
 this respect, yet we felt that the issue was one 
 which was injuring our friends in the North, and 
 could not possibly benefit us. If there ever had 
 been any chance of its becoming a slave State in 
 fact, the course of Governor Walker had already 
 cut that off by carrying over all the officials and 
 their influence in the Territory to the side of the 
 Free-Slate party. With no purpose to cast cen- ! 
 .sure on any one, I n-svertheless frankly refer to 
 this as a circumstance for which the Democratic 
 party, as a whole, are not justly responsible, but 
 which aided the anti-slavery party, as at present 
 organized. On a survey of the entire ground, I 
 maintain that it,will appear that the action of the | 
 Democratic party for the last fifteen years on the 
 shivery question, has been wise, patriotic, 'and i 
 statesmanlike. I 
 
 I proceed, however, to the consideration of the i 
 great question before the country. Immediately i 
 alter the presidential election in 1856, I met the | 
 veteran Secretary of State, then a Senator from ; 
 Michigan, on the floor of the Senate, and in reply ' 
 to an inquiry as to how he v/as, he answered:! 
 "Well in health, but depressed in spirits. Sir," 
 .said he, " I formerly thought that the Union would 
 never be dissolved ; but I am now not without pain- ' 
 ful apprehensions of adifterent result. They say I 
 that the excitement in the North has grown out i 
 of the Kansas bill. A hundred Kansas bills would | 
 not have produced this result. These people mean j 
 to abolish slavery in your section. You may think 1 
 that they are not fanatics; but the misfortune is ■ 
 that they are. .You will gain nothing by making | 
 to them concessions; you cannot thereby help us; i 
 but you will ruin yourselves. By standing firm, | 
 you can at least protect yourselves. I 
 
 His words made the deeper impression upon I 
 me because they were in accordance v/ith my own ' 
 
 settled convictions. But now the evil has attained 
 such alarming dimensions that it demands con- 
 sideration. When a dark and rapidly advancing 
 cloud has already covered half the heavens, and 
 the mutterings of the distant thunder and the wail- 
 ings of the coming storm are loudly heard, none 
 but a false sentinel will proclaim a calm. Emi- 
 nently futile, too, and mischievous, are declara- 
 tions of southern men against agitation and in favor 
 of union and harmony. When a man is threat- 
 ened with violence, will he stay the hand of the 
 assailant by proclaiming his love of peace? When 
 a country Is invaded by a public enemy, can the 
 inhabitants protect themselves by passing reso- 
 lutions in favor of peace and harmony.' All the 
 world regards such things as evidence of weak- 
 ness or cowardice, and as only calculated to stim- 
 ulate the invaders. When Philip of Macedon was 
 threatening Greece, liis hired partisans recom- 
 mended repose and quiet, and denounced Demos- 
 thenes as a political agitator. It was in the midst 
 of men who were crying out " peace ! peace ! " that 
 Patrick Henry thundered that there was " no 
 peace !" If the Abolitionists in the North could 
 be induced to abandon agitation on the subject of 
 slavery, it would be well; but they reject with de- 
 rision the suggestion, and become only more inso- 
 lent as southern men cry out the louder for quiet 
 and union. 
 
 When, some twenty-five years ago, the abolition 
 society at Boston, under the lead and guidance of a 
 British subject, attracted public attention, though 
 it declared that its purposes were merely peaceful, 
 and intended to persuade men to liberate the 
 slaves, yet so insignificant in numbers was it, that 
 the candidate for Congress in that district refused 
 to reply to its interrogatories, or to give any 
 pledges as to his course on the suliject of slavery. 
 For this he was complimented by Harrison Gray 
 Otis, who, nevertheless, said with prophetic sa- 
 gacity: 
 
 " And can you doubt, fellow-citizen.t, tliat those associa- 
 tions will act together for political purposes.' Is it inhuman 
 nature for such combinations to forbear.' If, then, their 
 numbers should be augmented, and the success the.v anti- 
 cipate realized in making proselytes, how soon might you 
 see a majority in Congress returned under the influence of 
 the associations.' ,\nd how long afterwards would this 
 Union last.'"' 
 
 Though few in numbers, the Abolitionists went 
 resolutely and actively to work. 
 
 There was a strong feeling in favor of liberty 
 pervading the public mind generally, while its 
 attention had never been called to the specific dif- 
 ferences — physical, mental, and moral — existing 
 between the white man and the negro. The point 
 of operations selected was one remote from negro 
 slavery, where the people were ignorant of its 
 actual features, and thus fitted more easily to be 
 imposed upon. In that vicinity, too, were the 
 remains of old prejudices against the southern 
 section of the Union. The effort of the Abolition- 
 ists was directed to the corrupting of knowledge 
 at its fountain heads, by the diffusion of publica- 
 tions directed to that end. Its first fruits were 
 seen in its influences on women, preachers, teach- 
 ers, and professors, persons of lively sensibili- 
 ties generally, not so much accustomed to deal 
 with matters of fact, more easily deluded by cun- 
 ningly-devised sophisms, and more frequently act- 
 ing from the influence of feelings. Soon abolition 
 sentiments appeared in books of education; got 
 
6 
 
 possession of schools, colleges, and churches. As 
 Us powers increased, its efforts were multiplied, 
 until it covered the land with its publications. 
 Some twelve months ago, it was stated in the news- 
 papers that one of the anti-slavery organizations 
 had resolved to circulate, during the following 
 year, in the State of New York, one million of its \ 
 tracts. Can such an amount of printed matter as j 
 this, consisting, as it does, of ingeniously written 
 misrepresentations and falsehoods, fail to produce 
 some eflect ? Remciitber that this is repeated from 
 year to year, and aided by hired and voluntary 
 lecturers, speakers, and preachers. Abolitionism, 
 to a great extent, pervades the literature of the 
 free States. So strong is the feeling against sla- 
 very there, that the writers of novels and plays, 
 to secure the public patronage, exercise their wits 
 in imagining all that can be conceived as worst in 
 human nature, and represent it as a true type of 
 the state of society in the South. The bulk of the 
 newspaporpress, too, in the North, is anti-slavery. 
 Such IS the character of the entire press of the ; 
 dominant party there, and of a large portion of 
 the neutral and religious papers; while a part even | 
 of the minority, or Democratic press, avoids the . 
 subject as much as possible, instead of attempting 
 to stem the current. Though northern city papers 
 are much read in the South, on the contrary, our | 
 papers have little or no circulation in the North, j 
 If they had, the eftorts of the anti-slavery party 
 would, to some extent, be counteracted. The 
 cities of New York and Philadelphia, for exam- 
 ple, are not abolitionized; and this is attributed, 
 by some, to the fact that they are engaged largely : 
 in southern trade. But the mechanics of Massa- \ 
 chusettsare justas much interested, and yet they ! 
 are intensely anti-slavery in their feelings. The ! 
 true solution, I think, will be found in the fact! 
 that these cities arc the resort of so many south- j 
 erners; that our state of society is thereby better j 
 understood, andcannotbe sosucces.sfully defamed. 
 The same reason applies to the free States on the 
 borders of the slaveholding country. It is not, 
 as the Abolitionists allege, that their consciences 
 are so much blunted that they cannot appreciate 
 the evils of slavery; but simply because they do 
 understand it, that they cannot be imposed upon 
 by the falsehoods of the anti-slavery writers. In 
 addition to this reason, the western States have a 
 large influx of soutliern emigrants. While Ver- 
 mont is intensely abolitionized. New Hampshire, 
 adjoining it, is less so. This may be accounted 
 for from the foct that New Hampshire was ori- 
 ginally strongly Democratic, and its press resisted, 
 therefore, to'some extent, ihe statements of the 
 Abolitionists. Had not New Hampshire been 
 a small State and surrounded with adverse in- 
 fluences, she would probably not have been over- 
 powered. 
 
 The anti-slavery movement has gone on with 
 increasing strength, until it has educated a. large 
 portion of the nortliern people to entertain feel- 
 ings of hostility to slavery and the southern 
 States. The movement has progressed independ- 
 ently of political occurrences, but it has occasion- 
 ally been accelerated or retarded by them. For 
 example: in 1850 it was weaken^'d somewhat, 
 partly by the great discussion at tifat time, which 
 enlightened somewhat the popular mind, and also 
 by the peculiar character of the legislation of the 
 period. California was admitted as a free Slate, 
 
 with boundaries reaching far south of the.Mis- 
 souri line, and giviu'g the North the majority in 
 this body; while the principle of non-intervention 
 applied to Utah and New Mexico, was regarded 
 as a fruitless abstraction, the general opinion pre- 
 vailing that, to use the words of Mr. Webster, 
 the law of God had excluded slavery from them. 
 As to the fugitive slave L'w, it was seen that it could 
 practically , like its predecessor, the act of 1793, be 
 rendered a nullity by State action and individual 
 resistance. It is a grea!t mistake to suppose that 
 the repeal of the Missouri restriction in 1854 pro- 
 duced the present anti-slavery organization. In 
 1847 and 1848 the House of Representatives, by 
 large majorities, repeatedly passed the Wilmot 
 proviso; and this was understood to have been 
 done in accordance with the wishes of their con- 
 stituents. Prior to 1850, most of the churches had 
 been divided by this issue. 
 
 From year to year the apti-slavery sentiment 
 acqiiired more and more political influence; and 
 in 1848 it took possession of the greater portion 
 of the Whig party in the free States. No one 
 was so influential in effecting this result as the 
 Senator from New York. In a speech delivered 
 during that year in Ohio, the object, in part, of 
 which was to induce the anti-slavery men to join 
 the Whig party rather than the Buffalo-platform 
 Free-Soilers, he uses such expressions as these. 
 I call the attention of Senator^ particularly to 
 them, because I shall have occasion to refer to 
 them again presently: 
 
 " Tlie party of treedoin soeks complete iind universaJ 
 emancipation." * * * * * * * 
 
 " Slavery is the sin of not some of tlie States only, but ol 
 them all ; of not one nation only, but of all nations. It per- 
 verted and corrupted the moral sense ofmankind deeply and 
 universally, and this corruption became a universal habit. 
 Habits of thought become lixed principles. No American 
 State has vet delivered itself entirely from these habit.-. 
 We, in New York, are guilty of slavery still by withholding 
 the right of suffrage from the race we have emancipated. 
 You, in Ohio, are guilty in the same way by a sysiem of 
 black laws still more aristocratic and odions. It is writti-n 
 in the Constitution of the United States that five slaves shall 
 count equal to three freemen as a basis of representation ; 
 and it is written also, in violation of Divine law, that we 
 shall surrender the fugitive slave who takes refuge at our 
 lireside from his relentless pursuer. You blush not at these 
 things, because tliey have become as familiar as housolioUl 
 words ; and your pretended Free-Soil allies claim peculiar 
 merit, for maintaining these miscalled guarantees of slavery 
 which they find in the national compact. Does not all this 
 prove that' the Whig party have kept up with the spirit of 
 the age.' that it is as true and faitliful to human freedom as 
 the inert conscience of the American people wUI permit it 
 to be .' What, tlicu, you say, can nothing be done for free- 
 dom because the public conscience remains inert.' Yes, 
 much can be done, everything can be done. Slavery can 
 be limited to its present bounds. It can be ameliorated. It 
 can be and must be abolished, and you and I can and must 
 do it. The task is simple and easy, as its consummation 
 will be beneficent and its rewards glorious. It requires 
 only to follow this simple rule of action : To do everywhere 
 and on every occasion what we can, and not to neglect or 
 refuse to da what we can at any time, because at that pre- 
 cise time and on that particiilar occasion we cannot do 
 more. 
 " Circumstances determine possibilities." * * 
 " But we must begin deeper and lower than the compo- 
 sition and combination of factions or parties, wherein the 
 strength and securitv of slavery lie. Y'ou answer that it lies 
 in the Cimstitution of the United States and the constitu- 
 tions and laws of slaveholding States. Not at all. It is 
 in the erroneous sentiment of the American people. Con- 
 stituUons and laws can no more rise above the virtue of the 
 people than the limpid stream can climb above its native 
 spring. Inculcate the love of freedom and the equal right.'* 
 of man under the paternal roof; see to it that they are taught 
 in the schools and in the churches ; reform your own code ; 
 extend a cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary 
 
limbs at your door, and defend liim as you would your pa- 
 ternal gods ; correct your own error, that slavery lias any 
 constitutional guarantee which may not be released, and 
 ought not to be relinquished." 
 
 " Whenever the public mind shall will the abolition of 
 slavery, the way will open for it. 
 
 " r know that you will tell me this is all too slow. Well, 
 then, go faster if you can, and I will go with you ; but, re- 
 member the instructive lesson thit was taught in the words, 
 'these things ought ye to have uone, and not to have left 
 the others undone.' " 
 
 Such efforts as this were persevered in from 
 time to time. In 1850 he made that speech in 
 which he proclaimed that there was a " higher 
 law" than the Constitution, for which he received 
 the emphatic denunciation of Mr. Clay. His sub- 
 sequent efforts have been in this same line; and 
 at Rochester more recently he endeavored to ren- 
 der the slaveholders of the South as odious as 
 possible, and declared that there was an "irre- 
 pressible conflict" between the free and the slave- 
 holding States. To stimulate the northern people 
 to attack us, he affirmed that unless they abolished 
 slavery throughout the entire South, we would 
 extend slavery over all the northern States. In 
 substance he says, to protect themselves they 
 must destroy our social and political system. 
 When a man says that there is an irrepressible 
 conflict between him and me, and that my head 
 or his must fall, he proclaims himself my deadliest 
 enemy. It avails aothing if he even adds that he 
 intends to act quietly and legally, but that my 
 head must fall to save his own. In the present 
 instance, the Senator says that it is for the South 
 to decide whether its system of society shall be 
 destroyed peaceably or by "rio/ejice." He is 
 benevolent enough to say, that if we will submit, 
 the work shall be done for us quietly and peace- 
 ably. By his efforts and those of others, the bulk 
 of the old Whig party was abolitionized, and its 
 members, with the aid of accessions from the 
 Democratic ranks and Abolition societies, have 
 constituted tiiat political organization which to- 
 day threatens the existence of the Republic. It 
 claims for itself the name of Republican party, 
 and by its opponents is designated as the Black 
 Republican party. The latter designation is proper 
 to distinguish it from the old Republican party, 
 whose "image and superscription" it seeks to 
 counterfeit; and also because its efforts are entirely 
 directed to advance the black or negro race. 
 
 What are the principles of this party, as indi- 
 cated by its declarations and its acts .' It has but a 
 single principle, and that is hostility to negro sla- 
 very in the United States. Some of its members 
 have called it a party for human freedom; but this 
 is a mistake; for though there are in the state of 
 slavery in different parts of the world, men of 
 all races, yet it has manifested no sympathy for 
 any but the negro; and even to negro slavery, it 
 seems indifferent outside of the United States. I 
 maintain it has no principle whatever, but hostil- 
 ity to negro slavery in the United States. A man 
 might be for or against the tariff, the bank, the 
 land distribution, or internal improvements; he 
 might be a Protestant or Catholic, a Christian or 
 infidel; but if he was only actuated by an intense 
 feeling of hostility to negro slavery, or, as that is 
 interwoven with the social system of the South, 
 if it were only knOwn that he V-as anxious that 
 the Federal Government should exercise all its 
 powers for the destruction of the southern States, 
 
 that man would have been accepted as a good 
 member of the Black Republican party. 
 
 But while all the members of the party are ac- 
 tuated by this principle or feeling, they differ as 
 to the particular steps or measure to be taken . The 
 most moderate of them say they are merely op- 
 posed to the extension of slavery, and therefore 
 they are for prohibiting it in the Territories, and 
 opposed to the admission of any other slavehold- 
 ing States. The Senator from Vermont [Mr. 
 Collamer] said not long since that this was his 
 position, that he was for confining slavery to its 
 present limits, so that in time it might cease to be 
 profitable, andjn that way be extinguished. As 
 this position is taken by many men who claim to 
 be moderate and conservative in their views, lot 
 us examine it for a few moments. They say that 
 if slavery be confined to its present limits, the 
 slaves will increase in numbers to that extent that 
 slave labor will in time be so abundant that the 
 supply will exceed the demand; and that the own- 
 ers will, from choice, set them free rather than be 
 at the expense of maintaining them for their la- 
 bor. Let it be assumed for illustration that it 
 costs ten cents to feed and clothe a slave: then if, 
 owing to the great number of slaves who exist in 
 the Territory, their labor would be worth less 
 than ten cents per day, undoubtedly it would be 
 an advantage for the owners to liberate them. But 
 remember that when the labor of a negro should 
 be worth only ten cents, that of the white man 
 would likewise come down to this price. The re- 
 sult, therefore, is, that population is to be crowded 
 in the South to that extent that every laborer is 
 to be reduced to the starving point, as it was in 
 Ireland during the times of the ftimine. Now, I 
 would ask the Senator from Vermont this ques- 
 tion in all candor: if a system was proposed to 
 be instituted by M'hich his constituents were to 
 be reduced to the starving point, and thus crushed , 
 would he counsel them to await such a result.' 
 or would he not advise them to stand from under 
 before they were destroyed? As there are already 
 four million slaves in the South, when theirnum-* 
 bers are increased many times, no one will pre-' 
 tend that they ever would be removed. The plan 
 is to keep the negroes and such whites as are com- 
 pelled to stay among them down at the starving 
 point for all time. And this is the policy of the 
 most moderate and conservative of the Black 
 Republican party. 
 
 There are others of them who say, that in addi- 
 tion to this the fugitive slave law must be repealed; 
 slavery abolished in the District of Columbia, the 
 forts and arsenals, and wherever the United States 
 has exclusive jurisdiction. Others of them con- 
 tend likewise that the slave trade between the 
 States must be abolished, and also the coastwise 
 trade between the States. Other classes insist, 
 too, that slavery should be attacked in the States 
 themselves. The largest number of the party, 
 however, stand on the same ground of the Sen- 
 ator from New York, [Mr. Seward.] He says 
 that slavery has no "constitutional guarantee" 
 which may not be released and ought not to be 
 relinquished; that "circumstances determine pos- 
 sibilities;" that they must stand ready "to do 
 everything when and on every occasion that we 
 can;" and that " whenever the public mind shdl 
 will the abolition of slavery, the way will be open 
 for it;" that "it can be and must be abolished, and 
 
^ 
 
 you and I can and must do it." More recently 
 he Bfiid: 
 
 " ITie interest of tlie wbite race demands tlie ultimate 
 emancipation of all men. \Vlicther that consummation 
 shall be allowed to take effect, with needful and wise pre- 
 cautions against sudden change and disaster, or be hurried 
 on by violence, is all that remains for you to decide." 
 
 He also declares that he will go with those who 
 can show him the fastest road to effect the object. 
 Such is the governing principle and spirit of the 
 party, to use all the power they have, or can by 
 any possibility acquire, for the abolition of sla- 
 very. 
 
 When we look to the acts of this'party, in what 
 attitude is it presented.' It has made the whole 
 newspaper press subject to its control intensely 
 hostile to the southern section of the Union. Such 
 is the power of the public press that it was able 
 to keep England and France for centuries in a 
 state of hatred and war with each other. Only 
 a few weeks since, to prevent a collision between 
 the two countries, the Emperor of France pub- 
 licly checked the press of his own country; and 
 yet the fiercest articles in the French journals 
 were modei-ate in comparison with the general 
 tone of the anti-slavery press towards the South. 
 
 This party, too, sends up representatives to the 
 two Houses of Congress from time to time, who, 
 neglecting all the public business of the country, 
 devote themselves to preparing and reciting de- 
 nunciatory harangues against the southern States. 
 Some years ago, an intelligent foreigner, who 
 happened to hear one of these tirades in this body, 
 expressed his astonishment at the quiet manner 
 in which it was listened to by southern Senators. 
 He declared that if, when a European congress 
 had met for business purposes, a similar course 
 had been taken, the congress would at once have 
 been broken up. In our State Legislatures, such 
 things, if they occur, are soon stopped by per- 
 Bonal collisions. In Congress, out of deference 
 to sectional feelings, there is no attempt to check 
 8uch men as choose to embark in the trade of heap- 
 ingall manner of oblocjuy on our constituents. 
 
 This anti-slavery party has torn to pieces most , 
 of the great Christian associations of the country; 
 in spite of all the resistance which the esprit du 
 coiysand Christian charity prevailing among them 
 could present. It has stricken down every pub- 
 lic man in the North Muthin its reach, who has 
 shown a willingness to administer the Constitu- 
 tion fairly in relation to slavery. 
 
 Whenever it has obtained the control of the 
 Legislature, it has caused them to jiass the most 
 stringent acts for the nullification of that clause of 
 the Constitution which provides for the return of 
 fugitive slaves. AVhen, many years ago, the State 
 of South Carolina threatened to nullify a law of 
 Congress, the whole Union was thrown into a 
 state of the greatest excitement; but so common 
 have these proceedings become in the free States, 
 that they now scarcely excite a remark when 
 
 This party, too, has organized societies, and 
 hired agents to steal and carry away slaves from 
 the southern States; and when a gang of twenty 
 or more is taken off at a time, it is made a matter 
 of public rejoicing; and their papers boast of the 
 perfection of the underground railroads, and of the 
 millions of dollars' worth of property that they 
 have taken from the South. 
 
 The Federal system, instead of giving us pro- 
 tection, only affords our enemies itnmunities and 
 facilities for attack. Instead of being a shield, 
 the Union has been converted into a sword to 
 stab us the more deeply. 
 
 It is idle for Senators to say that a majority of 
 the people of their States are not in favor of these 
 unlawful proceedings. If only one man out of 
 every hundred should be a thief, and the other 
 ninety -nine, should not restrain them, by legisla- 
 tion or otherwise, this minority of thieves would 
 be able to steal all the property in the community. 
 If societies were formed in Massachusetts to steal 
 property in Connecticut, or New York, the Le- 
 gislature and people of the State would doubtless 
 take stops to restrain them. This is done even 
 with reference to foreign countries, to prevent war 
 between them. American citizens are punished 
 for going into Canada to disturb that British com- 
 munity. 
 
 If societies were formed in Canada for a similar 
 purpose, andwere,infact, to steal an equal amount 
 of property from New England , New York, Ohio, 
 and other northern States, to what is carried away 
 by the Abolitionists from the South, we should 
 be involved in a war with Great Britain in less 
 than six months. What would be the feeling of 
 those border States, if Canadian orators should 
 boast that their societies had robbed them of 
 $45,000,000 worth of their property, just as they 
 now say they hold that value of southern run- 
 away slaves .' But men who combine to plunder 
 the people of the southern States, so far from 
 being punished, arc, in many of the free States, 
 encouraged by the legislation there. 
 
 During the last session, the Senator from New 
 York [Mr. Seward] introduced a proposition for 
 additional legislation to prevent the foreign or 
 African slave trade to the tfnited States. In 1808, 
 Congress passed laws to prohibit that trade, and 
 since that time, a period of more than fifty years, 
 as far as I know or have reason to believe, the 
 law has been violated but in a single instance. 
 What other law on your statute-book has been 
 so well kept? I repeat, what law has Congress 
 ever passed, which there was a temptation to 
 violate, that has been so well observed? That it 
 was not broken often, is not owing to any want 
 of opportunity. Northern, as well as foreign ships, 
 have been engaged in the trade, and the extent of 
 the southern coast affords much greater facilities 
 for the introduction of slaves than does the Island 
 of Cuba, into which large numbers are annually 
 carried. This law has not been broken, simply 
 because the people of the South loere not willing 
 to violate it. Now, sir, let me state a case for the 
 consideration of the Senate. Suppose, instead 
 of what has actually occurred, the State of Geor- 
 gia, where some negroes were landed, and a 
 number of other southern States, had passed 
 the strongest laws which could be devised to de- 
 feat the act of Congress forbidding the African 
 slave trade, and encouraging that traffic by all 
 the means in their power; suppose, further, that 
 southern Senators, and other prominent public 
 men, had, in their speeches, earnestly recom- 
 mended the violation of the law of Congress, 
 and that all through the South money was sub- 
 scribed and associations formed to defeat the law, 
 and provide facilities by railroad or otherwise for 
 'the introduction of Africans, and mobs gotten up 
 
9 
 
 to overpower the United States marshals, could 
 not a hundred negroes have been imported for 
 every one that the Abolitionists have stolen ? 
 Yes, with a shore-line of more than ten thousand 
 miles, millions might have been imported. This 
 proceeding would have been a violation of the laws 
 of the United States, just like that which has 
 occurred with reference to the fugitive slave law. 
 In the case supposed, however, the southern men 
 would have had greatly the advantage on the 
 score both of political economy and morality. 
 They might have said, with truth, that the ne- 
 groes imported from Africa added to the produc- 
 tion and wealth of the United States, while those 
 carried North by the Abolitionists were generally 
 converted into idle vagrants. It might also have 
 been said that African savages were by being 
 brought to the United States partially civilized, 
 and not only made more intelligent and moral, but 
 also christianized in large numbers; while the ne- 
 groes carried to the North become so worthless 
 and so vicious, that many of the States there were 
 seeking to exclude them by legislation, as com- 
 munities do the plague and other contagious dis- 
 orders. And the Senator from New Yorlc, who 
 has declared that it is a religious duty of the peo- 
 ple of the North to violate the fugitive slave law, 
 and urged them, instead of delivering up the run- 
 away negroes, to protectand defend them as they 
 do their paternal gods, stands up in the face of the 
 American Senate and complains of violation of the 
 laws against the African slave trade ! Was there 
 ever such an exhibition .' I repeat, was the like ever 
 seen since the creation of the world .' I may use 
 strong language, but truth demands it. That Sen- 
 ator, too, has fully indorsed the incendiary and 
 revolutionary doctrines of the Helper book, as a 
 large majority of the members of his party in the 
 House have done. 
 
 Such, then, Mr. President, are the views of this 
 party, as indicated alike by its declarations and 
 Its acts. Its members are moving on with an ac- 
 celerated velocity. While the more moderate of 
 them now occupy the ground of the Abolitionists 
 twenty years ago, most of them are ftir in advance 
 of that position. Ought we to stand still until all 
 the States are as thoroughly abolitionized as Alas- 
 sachusetts now is ? If not, what can be done to 
 arrest the mischief.' I propose, then, seriously, 
 to consider this question. 
 
 In my judgment there are two modes in which 
 it can and ought to be met. The first is under the ' 
 Constitution; tlie second may be outside of it. j 
 
 If abolitionism be a popular delusion, can it not 
 be dispelled by proper efforts ? Truth can over- j 
 come error; but to enable it to do so it must be 
 properly presented to the human mind. As the | 
 anti-slavery party have acquired their present as- 
 cendencyby vigorous and widely-extended efforts, j 
 if they are to be overthrown, it is only by decided ; 
 andperseveringexertionsontheotherside. There i 
 are, in my opinion, sufficient conservative ele- ' 
 ments in the free States for this purpose, if they | 
 can only be properly arrayed in opposition. It I 
 is necessary that the discussion should be widely j 
 extended and also directed to the merits of the j 
 question involved. The constitutional argument j 
 is sufficient for the intelligent and honest; but if j 
 it be said, for example merely, that slavery as ex- j 
 isting in the southern Slates is a^rcat wrong and ; 
 a great evil, yet that under the Constitution the i 
 
 people of the North have no right to interfere with 
 It, the party so defending will in the end lose 
 ground; becauses masses of men when excited by 
 real or imaginary wrongs will in time break over 
 mere legal restraints which they regard as unjust 
 and criminal. They hold that " where there is a 
 will, there is a way, "and will find some mode of 
 action. But in this case the real issue is, whether 
 or not the negro is the equal of the white man 
 physically, intellectually, and morally.' Though 
 usually evaded in the discussion, this is the real 
 question which lies at the foundation of the con- 
 troversy. If the people of the northern States 
 should regard the negro as being the equal of the 
 white man, then they will continue to fuel a sym- 
 pathy for him in slavery, and can be excited to 
 efforts for his liberation. : If, on the contrary, he 
 be different in material respects from the white 
 man, and also inferior, then his case must be de- 
 cided on its own merits and not from any sup- 
 posed analogy to that of the white man. It is not, 
 as the Abolitionists in their silliness assert, a 
 mere question of color or prejudice against a 
 black skin. If the negro were in fact in all other 
 r?spects like the white man, his blackness would 
 have been of no more consequence than the dif- 
 ference between black and red hair or light and 
 dark eyes. The feeling against him grows out of . 
 the fact that he is in all respects different from the 
 white man and inferior. When I put the ques- 
 tion to any one that I may meet here, the chances 
 are that he will at once agree with me, in private 
 conversation, and admit, in the language used 
 I some time ago by the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. 
 Trumbull,] that Omnipotence has made a differ- 
 j ence between the white man and the negro; and 
 j yet it is this very opposite view in favor of negro 
 equality which gives its main force and vitality 
 j to the anti-slavery movement. When, sir, some 
 ^ twelve years ago I, in discussion, threw out SHg- 
 ' gestions about the difference of races, I was de- 
 nounced as one who attributed injustice to God 
 I Almighty in alleging that He had made the ne- 
 ! groes inferior.. Will any Senator on the other 
 I side of this Chamber tell me why it is that Prov- 
 idence brings half the children that arc born in 
 New England into the world with constitutions 
 so feeble that they cannot live until they are 
 twenty -one years of a^^ Or will they, upon their 
 views of His justice, explain why it is that in the 
 same family one brother is provided with a good 
 constitution and strong intellect, while a second 
 has from his birth the seeds of debility and incur- 
 able disease, and a third is mentally imbecile or 
 perhaps idiotic' Would the injustice to the feeble, 
 be greater if they were black men J Are we to 
 refuse to believe the facts which nature constantly 
 Di-esents to us, because they do not harmonize 
 with our ideas of the justice of the Creator? The 
 Bible itself does not explain to us why it is that, 
 while ten talents are given to one man, to another 
 but a single talent is given. Fonthe inequality 
 of the negro. Providence is responsible, as He 
 is for the entire creation which surrounds us. 
 When human laws are in accordance with the sys- 
 tem of nature, they are wise; but if in opposition 
 to it, they are productive only of mischief. The 
 question is significantly asked in the Scripture, 
 " Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leop- 
 ard his spots.'" The ancients expressed their 
 opinions on this subject in the fable which rep- 
 
•10 
 
 resented a black man as having been killed in an 
 effort to wash him white. 
 
 TluTc is no middle ground which can be main- 
 tained on this question. If the negro be your 
 equal, why do you exclude him from your par- 
 lors ? If he be unequal, your whole argument has 
 in fact lost it^ foundation and fails. If it once be 
 admitted that the negro is inferior, then the entire 
 edifice of Abolitionism falls to the ground, because 
 itis intimately interwoven with, and owes its vital- 
 ity to, the opposite belief. When pressed boldly 
 on this issue, the Abolitionists of late are trying 
 to evade it. It is a singular and striking fc\ct, that 
 when this issue has been made in the free States 
 directly, and discussed before the people, they 
 have decided the point against the negro. Such 
 was the case in Connecticut and New York on the 
 question of suffrage, and also in the States of Illi- 
 nois and Indiana on the proposition to exclude 
 free negroes from those States. In the contest, 
 too, in Illinois, in the year 1858, which resulted 
 in the triumph of the distinguished Senator from 
 Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] this was theleadingissue. 
 Had that Senator contented himself with simply 
 saying that slavery was an evil which his con«- 
 stituents had no constitutional right to interfere 
 with, I do not believe he would have been suc- 
 .cessfyl. But he understood the question, went at 
 once into the merits of it, and carried the war into 
 the enemy's ranks. And his op])onent early in 
 the contest began to cower and shrink from his 
 blows, and tried in vain to evade the issue. The 
 American people understand the negro, and where 
 a direct appeal is made to them they truly respond. 
 Though the story of Dean Swift, in which, in a 
 certain country, he represents the horse as being 
 greatly superior to the man, is an ingenious one, 
 yet it misleads nobody among us, because horses 
 are so common tiiat their qualities are under- 
 stood. So the romances of the Abolitionists, 
 in which they represent the negro as being equal 
 and even superior to the white man, deceive no 
 one familiar with the negro. In southern Ohio, 
 for example, where free negroes are quite com- 
 mon , there is little or no Abolitionism ; while in the 
 northern part, in which the negro is seldom seen, 
 anti-slavery carries everything before it. Euro- 
 pean writers know little or nothing of the negro, 
 and hence our professors,'''preachers, and other 
 mere hook-men of the North, are easily led astray 
 by European and American Abolitionists; but the 
 people of the country, who are accustomed to look 
 at facts, are not so readily imposed on. A thorough 
 investigation of the subject shows the negro to be 
 inferior, and hence the principles which apply to 
 white men cannot be extended to him. No farmer 
 assumes that what is advantageous to the hog, for 
 example, is necessarily so to the sheep. To de- 
 termine, therefore, what is to be done with the 
 negro, you must study the negro himself. Re- 
 member, I do not undertake to decide how or when 
 the negro race became different from the white. 
 They may, as many men of science contend, have 
 been created of different species, or they may have 
 been rendered different since their creation, by an 
 act of Providence. Some plausibly say, that inas- 
 much as we learn from the Scripture that a certain 
 race were condemned to be slaves through all time, 
 the negro best fulfills this description, and hence 
 take him as the representative of that class. With- 
 out attempting to decide who is right as to theory, 
 
 I think it clear that the difference between the 
 white race and the negro is as great as that be- 
 tween certain different species of animals of the 
 same genus, that approximate each other in their 
 structure and habits. But it is said. Do you deny 
 the manhood of the negro .' No more than I should 
 deny the monkeyhood of an ape if I should say he 
 is not a baboon, or the duckship of a mallard if I 
 deny that he is a canvas-back duck. 
 
 Instead of indulging in vague generalities about 
 human liberty and the rights of man, examine the 
 nature and condition of the negro himself. Four 
 thousand years ago, in the climate best suited to 
 his constitution, lie was a savage and a slave. In 
 his own country he stands in the same category 
 with ivory, dates, and other tropical productions. 
 If transferred, as merchandise, to a foreigner, he 
 is usually benefited by escaping from .a master 
 who will eat him in times of scarcity to one who 
 treats him with more lenity and often with kind- 
 ness. Egypt was the seat of the earliest civiliza- 
 tion known to man, and the Egyptians held the 
 negro as a slave, but were not able to civilize his 
 race; though subsequently, in contact with the 
 Carthagcnians, Romans, and Saracens, he still 
 remained a savage and a slave. 
 
 In the West Indies, and in other portions of 
 America where they form independent communi- 
 ties, notwithstanding the ad vantages they had iVom 
 the teachings of wliile men, and their great pow- 
 ers of imitation , tliey seem to be returning to their 
 original savage state. When we turn to the free 
 negroes of the United States, what shall I say of 
 them.' Why northern as well as soutliern men, 
 and even Canadians, characterize tiiem as the most 
 worthless of the human race. Formerly the Ab- 
 olitionist ascribed their degradation to the want of 
 political and social privileges. But during the 
 middle ages, in Eurojie, the Jews were not only 
 witliout political privileges, but were, as a class, 
 odious and severely persecuted, yet they were, nev- 
 ertheless, intelligent, energetic, and wealthy. In 
 point of fact, in some portions of the northern 
 States, the negro has been made a pet of, and but 
 for his native inferiority, must have thriven and 
 even become distinguished. On the other hand, 
 it is an indisputable fact that the four million ne- 
 groes who are held in slavery in the South, when 
 theircondition is considered witli reference to their 
 physical well-being and comfort, their productive- 
 ness as laborers, their intelligence, morality, and 
 religion, stand superior to any other portion of 
 their race. While the free negroes in the North, 
 with fresh accessions from abroad, diminish in 
 numbers, the slaves of the South increase as rap- 
 idly as the white race, and, upon the whole, per- 
 haps, add as much to the wealth of the country in 
 which they are located as any equal number of 
 laborers in the world. 
 
 What the Abolitionists have to do is to find, or 
 create, a negro community which is superior to 
 that of the slaves of the South, When they shall 
 have done this, they will have laid some grounds 
 for their appeals in behalf of emancipation. Hith- 
 erto they have enlisted the sympathies and feel- 
 ings of the North by falsely assuming that the 
 negro and white man have in all respects the same 
 nature. Let the inequality which the Creator has 
 made be recognized, and their system falls to the 
 ground. 
 
 But the Abolitionists sometimes say that, even 
 
11 
 
 if it be true that the negro is inferior, for that 
 reason, namely, on account of his weakness, he 
 ouglit not to be enslaved. Does this reasoning 
 apply to children? The average of human life is 
 less than forty years, and how can you justify 
 depriving human beings of liberty for more than 
 half that time? If children were the equals of 
 adults it would be wrong to control them. It is 
 simply because they are inferior that we justify 
 their subjection to the will of others. Upon these 
 principles the negro, being, as compared with the 
 white man, always a child, is benefited by the 
 control to which he is subjected. 
 
 When pressed on these points by an array of 
 facts, the Abolitionists fall back on the opinions 
 of Mr. Jefterson and others of the last century. 
 But since their day the sciences have made a pro- 
 digious advance, and in all that relates to the 
 peculiarities and distinctions that exist between 
 the diflerent races of men, there has been the 
 greatest progress of any. In fi^ct, it is a science 
 which has almost grown up in our day, and it 
 has made such strides as to have taken possession 
 of the intellect of America. Already there are 
 hundreds who have adopted the doctrine to one 
 who believed it ten years ago. It is only neces- 
 sary for the true men to take it up boldly, and 
 press it home, and the Abolitionists can be routed 
 throughout the North. 
 
 The shrewder anti-slavery men, however, see- 
 ing that they cannot make longer a successful 
 fight for the negro, affirm that their objection to 
 slavery is not on his account, but for the sake of 
 the white men, and that they and the South are 
 injured by the institution, and that our people are 
 for that reason wanting in enterprise and industry. 
 To that argument I have this to say in reply. 
 Where,Mr.Pri;sident,in all history was it known 
 that one nation was so strongly under the influ- 
 ence of benevolence, as to cause it to make war 
 upon another merely to compel the nation attacked 
 to become more enterprising cfnd prosperous? 
 Who has invaded Spain or Turkey to compel the 
 Spaniards or Turks to become more industrious 
 and thrifty? Will any one gravely pretend that 
 this torrent of fanaticism in the North has no 
 other origin except a desire to^ompel the people 
 of the South to be more industrious, and to take 
 better care of their own interest, and be more 
 attentive to their own business? The idea is 
 preposterous. 1 have no doubt but that misrep- 
 resentations on these points have contributed to 
 strengthen the anti-slavery party. But, sir, is 
 there any difliculty in ntakmg a complete defense 
 on this point? With no wish, Mr. President, to 
 wound the sensibilities of any one, or to claim 
 superiority for my section, let us, nevertheless, 
 look at some of the principal facts. One of the 
 best tests of tlie prosperity of a country and its 
 healthy condition is the progress of its popula- 
 tion. Compare the population of the fifteen slave- 
 holding States with that of all the free States as 
 shown by the census of 1840 and of 1850, the last 
 decade ascertained. If we deduct from both sec- 
 tions the foreign emigrant population, which is 
 an accidental increment, it will be found that the 
 slaveholding States have increased much faster 
 in population than the free States. 
 
 Again, sir, a fair estimate of the wealth of the 
 two sections will show that the citizens of the 
 southern States are as rich per head, I think in 
 
 fact richer than those of the free States. It was 
 also shown by Mr. Branch, a colleague of mine, 
 some two years ago, that of the old Atlantic 
 States the slaveholding had more miles of railroad 
 in proportion to their white population than the 
 free States. There are other evidences of our 
 material wealth, to which I will presently advert. 
 On the score of morals, it may be said that we 
 have fewer criminals and paupers, and, propor- 
 tionally , church accommodations for a larger num- 
 ber of members. 
 
 It is said, however, that any one who merely 
 looks at the two sections will see the inferiority 
 of the southern system. Bvit you must remember 
 that our population is extended over a territory 
 of nine hundred thousand miles in extent, while 
 many of the northern States have a dense popu- 
 lation. It is the tendency of an agricultural 
 people, with an unlimited area, to extend itself 
 rapidly at first, while commerce and manufactures 
 concentrate population. Tried by this standard, 
 any one of a dozen monarchies which I passed 
 through, during the past summer, has the advan- 
 tage of any portion of the Union. Even in Italy, 
 oppressed as it has been for ages, in its agricul- 
 tural landscape can bring to shame the best cul- 
 tivated Slate of New England. According to the 
 logic of the Abolitionists, these States ought to be 
 placed under the dominion of the House of Aus- 
 tria or the Pope of Rome. The entire State of 
 Massachusetts is not larger than one of the con- 
 gressional districts of North Carolina. Where a 
 million of people are br^ught within a small area, 
 the eye of an observer rests on many habitations 
 and fields. In time,'the whole Union, if filled with 
 people, may be superior to the best cultivated 
 parts of Europe; but even now, the inhabitants of 
 sparsely-settled districts have as much wealth and 
 comfort, all things being considered, as those who 
 live in crowded communities. At no period of 
 our history have the southern States been more 
 prosperous than at present, and even during the 
 commercial pressure of 1857 which has so seri- 
 ously affected the northern States. 
 
 I do not, however, propose, Mr. President, to 
 enter into a general argument on these topics, iiut 
 to maintain that the conservative men of the North 
 have within their reach facts enough to establish 
 two propositions. The first is, that the negro, 
 in the condition of slavery, is not a proper object 
 for sympathy, and is, in fact, benefited by his 
 subjection. The second one is, that the white 
 race are not injured by the institution; that the 
 southern States constitute, in the aggregate, a 
 prosperous community, and ought not to be the 
 subject of denunciation at the North. Shoujd this 
 be made to appear, then, whatever of real feeling 
 exists against us will he diminished, and, in that 
 event, we may expect that persons who, like the 
 Senator from New York, [Mr. Skward,] patron- 
 ize abolition from such motives as induce a jockey 
 on a race-course to back the horse that he thinks 
 likely to win — all such persons, I say, will find 
 it expedient to abandon anti-slavery agitation as 
 a trade. To efl'ect such results, however, the 
 friends of the Constitution in the North must 
 make up their minds to undergo the labor of a 
 thorough canvass of their region against the anti- 
 slavery men, and by proper publications refute 
 their misrepresentations. 
 
 The Abolitionists declaim constantly against 
 
m 
 
 the slave power. Why, sir, it is sixteen year? since 
 there was any attempt by the Democratic party 
 to nominate a citizen of the sUiveholding States 
 for tiie office of President; and for the last ten 
 years, in the conventions of all parties, the contest 
 has been solely among northern men. In fact, 
 during that period no electoral vote has been given 
 in a slaveholding State, for the office of President, 
 to any southern man. Our only object has been 
 to select among northern gentlemen one who was 
 not our encmy^ The men chosen have been as- 
 Bailed by our opponents, not because they were 
 neglectful of any northern interest, but simply 
 because they were willing to do us equal justice 
 with the other section, and refused to exercise the 
 powers of the common Goverimicnt against us. 
 
 Ithas been urged that the southern States should, 
 by retaliatory legislation, prohibit the sale within 
 their limits of the productions of those of the north- 
 ern States that have failed to do us justice. As the 
 Constitution of the United States has been inter- 
 preted, both by the Federal and State courts, there 
 is ample power to effect this by imposing a tax 
 on articles after they have been imported and the 
 packages broken; in other words, on retailers. 
 Two objects are expected to be effected by this 
 system. In the first place, to make it the interest 
 of the northern States to counteract the efforts of 
 the Abolitionists; and secondly, to prepare the 
 southern States for a separation, if they should 
 find it necessary to take such a step. 
 
 I have often thought, Mr. President, that it \yas 
 unfortunate that the framCrs of the Constitution 
 made no provision for the expulsion of a State. If 
 the Union be a place of misery, then, to punish re- 
 fractory members, they shoidd undoubtedly be i 
 kept in it, as criminals are detained in pcnitentia- | 
 ries; but if, on the other hand, it be a beneficial and i; 
 desirable thing to remain in the Union, then bad j 
 members ought to be excluded from it. No State, 1 
 in my judgment, has a right to enjoy the advant- i 
 ages of the" Union, and yet refuse to submit to the I 
 obligations it imposes." Such laws of Congress j 
 as are held by the courts to be constitutional | 
 ought to be obeyed by all the States that share j 
 the advant;iges of the Union. If, for example, I 
 when a dozen years ago the State of Massachu- j 
 setts passed laws to nullify the act for the recov- ] 
 ery of fugitives, if she had been exffelled from the ! 
 Union, two striking effects would have been pro- ; 
 duced. In the first place, the consciences of the i 
 inhabitants of that State would have been freed i 
 from all responsibility for the sin and turpitude '• 
 of slavery; and, secondly, their goods, when 
 brought into the United States, would have been ! 
 taxed ^sthoseofotherforeignersare. Theimpres- I 
 sion which such an occurrence would have made [ 
 on their minds and those of the country gener- j 
 ally, might possibly then have arrested the ami- ; 
 slavery movement when it was comparatively : 
 feeble. In the present condition of things, such | 
 a course would not be practicable, perhaps. 
 
 If, however, Mr. President, this hostile move- 
 ni£nt of the anti-slavery party cannot be arrested ; 
 under the Constitution, let us consider the second i 
 remedy, namely, a temporary or permanent sep- j 
 aration of the southern from the northern States. I 
 Senators on the other side of the Chamber do 
 not think this will occur. When Giddings and 
 others proclaim that " the South cannot be kicked 
 out of the Union,"' such a declaration is received 
 
 by the anti-slavery party of the country with evi- 
 dent satisfaction, and generally with applause. 
 You, Senators, and your supporters do not be- 
 lieve there is danger in any event, because prom- 
 inent slaveholders and men of wealth occasionally 
 tell you they are conservative, and that the south- 
 ern people will submit to any treatment you may . 
 think fit to impose. But you should remember 
 that these persons are not always the readiest to 
 volunteer to defend the country in time of war, 
 and that many of them dread civil commotions. 
 During our Revolution there were wealthy tories 
 in every one of the colonies; and at the time Gen- 
 eral Washington evacuated the city of New York, 
 he was urged by one of his subordinate officers, a 
 northern man, to burn the <'ity , for the reason that 
 two thirds of the property to be destroyed be- 
 longed to tories. 
 
 You do not believe, also, because you say that 
 if the South were in earnest, it would be more 
 united, and would not send up, as she does from 
 certain districts, members of Congress who assist 
 you in party movements, and in answer to your 
 threats proclaim their love of the Union. 
 
 You should understand, however, that the con- 
 stituencies of such members are merely misled as 
 to the purposes, principles, and power of your 
 party by those ne\vspa]:)ers on which they rely 
 for information. Let them have proper knowl- 
 edge as to the condition of tht! country where your 
 influence prevails, and they will manifest the same 
 feeling that therestof the South does. Gradually 
 a knowledge of your movements and objects is 
 spreading over the southern States. Two occur- 
 rences have materially cont ributed to unmask your 
 objects and disclose the dangers which threaten. 
 The first was the vote which Mr. Fillmore re- 
 ceived in 1856. When it was seen that a man 
 like him,of avowed anti-slavery opinions, merely 
 because lie showed his willingness to enforce the 
 fugitive slave law, and declared his pur|)ose to 
 : give to the Soutlf the benefits of the Constitution, 
 was beaten lai-gelyin every free State, by a mere 
 adventurer like Fremont, a great impression was 
 made on the conservative men of the South. They 
 began to realize the state of feeling in the North, 
 and more disunionists were made by that occur- 
 rence than perhaps any one which preceded it. 
 
 The second incident which caused even a much 
 stronger impression on the minds of the southern 
 ^ people, was the manner in which the acts of John 
 Brown were received in the North. Instead of 
 the indignation and abhorrence which the atro- 
 ciousness of his crimes ought naturally to have 
 excited, there were manifestations of admiration 
 and sympathy. Large meetings were held to 
 : express these feelings, sermons and prayers were 
 made in his behalf, church bells tolled and cannon 
 fired, and more significant than all these, were the 
 declarations of almost the entire Republican press, 
 ' that his punishment would strengthen the anti- 
 \ slavery cause. Yet Senators tell us that these 
 I things were done because of the courage Brown 
 exhibited. But our people think you are mis- 
 \ taken. Though the mere thief may be and usually 
 is a coward, yet it is well known that men who 
 engage in robbery or piracy as a profession gen- 
 erally possess courage. Criminals have been 
 executed frequently in New England who, both 
 in the commission of their crimes, and in their 
 death, manifested asmuch courage as John Brown, 
 
13 
 
 and yet none of them called forth such feelings 
 of sympathy. At a meeting in Boston, where 
 thousands were assembled, when Emerson, a lit- 
 erary man of eminence, proclaimed that Brown 
 had made " the gallows as glorious aa the cross," 
 he was rapturously applauded. At the large meet- 
 ing at Natick, where the Senator from Massachu- 
 setts [Mr. Wilson] was a spectator, the principal 
 orator, Wright, declared that the people of the 
 North look upon "Jesus Christ as a deadfailure," 
 and hereafter will rely on " John Brown, and him 
 hanged." 
 
 In the southern States, where old-fashioned 
 Christian notions still prevail, it would be thought 
 right to beat such blasphemers even out of a church, 
 if they had congregated there. We are told now 
 that tlicy were not interrupted because the people 
 of Massachusetts are laiv-abiding, and in favor of 
 the liberly of speech. But our constituents do not 
 believe one word of this, because they know that, 
 of all the people in the Union, the inhabitants of 
 Massachusetts are the most excitable and the 
 most intolerant and overbearing. They know that 
 men who dare to oppose the anti-slavery party 
 there are persecuted with intense hatred; that 
 mobs can be gotten up on the smallest occasions, 
 and that ten thousand men can bo assembled on 
 the shortest notice to rescue a runaway negro from 
 the custody of a United States marshal. 
 
 Our people know that these things could not 
 have occurred unless there had been an intense 
 feeling of hostility to the South, and, therefore, 
 strong sympathy with our assailants. Is not this 
 the reason why your leading editors have declared 
 that the punishment of John Brown will strengthen 
 the anti-slavery cause? Such is the construction 
 the people of the South put on this whole matter, 
 and hence the demonstrations you witness among 
 them. 
 
 But you hold that the South is unable and un- 
 willing to resist you; and the Senator from New 
 York [Mr. Seward] has declared, in substance, 
 that the Union is never to be dissolved. He also 
 told the Senate that the contest between the free 
 and slaveholding States had ended by the former 
 winning the victory. He and the rest of you 
 expect us in future to submit quietly to what you 
 may see fit to order. Had the British Parliament 
 believed that the colonies would resist their tax 
 bills our Revolution would not have occurred ; but 
 Lord North and others declared that the clamor 
 in America came from a few seditious agitators, 
 and that the great body of the people wore so loyal 
 to the Government that they were ready to sub- 
 mit to the action of the Parliament. They affirmed 
 that there was no danger of resistance; and, least 
 of all, of their thinkingofdissolvingthe union with 
 the mother country. Our ancestors wisely determ- 
 ined that the cannon of Great Britain were less 
 dangerous than her acts of Parliament. 
 
 Let us look at this matter for a few moments 
 calmly. At this lime the population of the South 
 is nearly thirteen million, of which more than 
 eight million are free persons and four million 
 slaves. At the beginnuig of our Revolution the 
 population of the colonies, both free and slave, 
 was less than three million. The slavi'holding 
 States arc then far more than four times as strong 
 as were the colonies when they dissolved the 
 union with Great Britain. 
 
 Is it likely that after having been independent 
 
 I for eighty years, our people are less attached to 
 I their rights > But many of your Abolitionists say 
 i that slaveholding has enfeebled our people, and 
 I rendered them so spiritless that they are neither 
 willing nor able to make defense. Edmund Burke 
 thought differently, and said that of all men slave- 
 ; holders were themosttenaciousoftheir rights, and 
 j defended their liberties with the highest and 
 I haughtiest spirit. I do not refer to the war of the 
 i Revolution, when all the States were slavehold- 
 ing; but in the last war with Great Britain the 
 southern States sent out more men than the north- 
 ern, and it has never yet, as far as I have heard, 
 been pretended that Harrison and Johnson, Scott 
 and Forsyth, were not as brave as those who 
 went from the free States to the Canada line, or 
 that Jackson and the men under him in the South- 
 west, did not exhibit a proper courage. To the 
 war with Mexico, though much the less popu- 
 lous section, the South sent nearly twice as many 
 men as the North. A leading Black Republican 
 editor says that one regiment from New York 
 would be able to conquer all the southern States. 
 A regiment from the State of New York certainly 
 conducted itself well during the Mexican war; but 
 it has not, I think, been affirmed that it behaved 
 better than the regiments from the slaveholding 
 States. If you, therefore, think that one of your 
 regiments is able to subdue the South, our people, 
 will probably differ with you in opinion. You 
 say that fear of the slaves will prevent any resist- 
 ance to you. Asa sudden movement of a few ne- 
 groes, stimulated by abolition emissaries, might 
 destroy a family or two, there is undoubtedly 
 apprehension felt. Fifty persons, however, arc 
 killed in this country by vicious and unmanage- 
 able horses, to one who suffers from the actof 
 a rebellious negro. There is, in fact, about as 
 much reason to apprehend a general insurrection 
 of the horses as of the slaves of the South when left 
 to themselves. When, during the war of 1812, 
 the British armies were in the slaveholding ter- 
 ritory, though they induced a number of slaves to 
 join them, they found no advantage to result from 
 it, and their Government paid for all carried off 
 at the close of the war. Though the Spartans and 
 Romans were the greatest slaveholders in the 
 world, and though, too, they held in the most rigid 
 servitude men of their own color and race, and 
 therefore liable to rebel in great force, yet they 
 werestrongenough tooverthrowall theirencmies. 
 In our opinion, the slaves are a positive element 
 of strength, because they add to the production 
 of the country, while the white race can furnish 
 soldiers enough. Every man, too, among us, is 
 accustomed to ride and to carry weapons from his 
 childhood. 
 
 There are, however, other important elements 
 to be taken into the account. During the last fis- 
 cal year the exports of the United States, exclu- 
 sive of specie, were $278,000,000. Of this amount, 
 the free States furnished, exclusively, $5,281,000, 
 the slave States $188,693,000, and the two sections 
 jointly, also, $84,417,000. Of this latter sum of 
 '$84,000,000, the slave States probably furnished 
 one third, but certainly one fourth. A fourth 
 added to the amount exclusively furnished by 
 them, makes a total of $210,000,000 as the value 
 of their exports to foreign countries. They also 
 exported a large amount to the free States. New 
 England alone received about fifty million dollars' 
 
14 
 
 worth of southern productions; and to the rdst of 
 the free States were sent, doubtless, more. The 
 entire exports from the slaveholding States to the 
 free States, and to foreign countries combined,' 
 must greatly have exceeded three hundred million |l 
 dollars. As the South sells this much, it, of course, 11 
 can afford to buy a like amount. If, therefore, it jj 
 constituted a separate confederacy, its imports |j 
 would exceed three hundred million dollars ; a duty I i 
 of twenty per cent, on this amount, which would [' 
 be a lower rate tlian has generally been paid under ; 
 our tariffs heretofore, would yield a revenue of 
 $00,000,000. More than fifty million of this sum 
 could well be spared for the defense of our sec- ; 
 tion, and the support of larger armies and navies ]; 
 than the present Government has. Though it may ; 
 seem strange to you that the South should in this i i 
 way raise as large a revenue as the whole Union j' 
 has ever done, and this, too, with a lower tariff, :, 
 you must remember that most of the tariff taxes il 
 the South pays go, in fact, in the shape of protec- jl 
 tion to those northern manufacturers who threaten j ; 
 us with negro insurrections and subjugation. Do J! 
 you think that with these prospects before our:! 
 people they are ready to submit unconditionally 
 to you ? They have the strongest feelings of con- ; , 
 tempt for the avaricious and greedy, the canting 
 and hy]>ocritical, the mean, envious, and mali- 
 . clous Abolitionists. Little as they may think 
 of the free negro, he is, in their judgmcm, more 
 respectable than the white man who comes down | 
 to his level; and with all the world to choose a j 
 master from, your negro-worshiper would be their 
 last choice. • j 
 
 In making up our calculations, we must also j 
 look to the other side. The free 'States have j 
 a population of seventeen or eighteen million, j 
 Though this is considerably more, numerically, 
 than our strength, yet it is much less, relatively, 
 than was the population of Great Britain in 1776. | 
 I have no doubt that your pcojile are courage- 1 
 ous, generally; but the best and bravest of them j 
 are in the Democratic ranks; and, while they 
 would defend their section, if attacked, I doubt if | 
 tfiey would easily be induced to assail us. Many j 
 of your Abolitionists belong to the "peace ])arty," 
 and have little appetite for cold steel, though they | 
 are most efficient in getting up popular clamors, | 
 and are formidable at the ballot-box. It is also . 
 true, that while everything the South needs she ^ 
 can either produce or commonly get cheaper in ' 
 Europe, under a system of free trade, your north- 
 eastern States are especially dependent on the ! 
 South for its productions and freights. Howmany j 
 of your manufacturers and mechanics would emi- j 
 grate to the South to avoid the payment of tariff 
 taxes? If itwere known thatone thn-dof the stores 
 in New York could not be rented , how much would 
 real property fall, then? Deprived of southern 
 freiglits,\vhat would be the loss on your vast ship- 
 ping interest? I give you, in this calculation, the 
 ben'efit of the assumption that all the free States 
 would go with you. In fact, I do not believe that 
 the Northwest would remain connected with New 
 England, still less that you could retain Califor- 
 nia and Oregon. 
 
 But you. Senators, do not believe the South will 
 resist. Look for a moment at the course of things 
 there. In those sections that I am best acquainted 
 with, there are hundreds of disanionists now where 
 there was one ten years ago. By disunionists, I 
 
 mean men who would prefer to see the Union con- 
 tinue, if the Constitution were fairly administered, 
 but who have already deliberately come to the 
 conclusion that this is impossible, and would will- 
 ingly to-day see the Union dissolved. In some 
 of the States, this class constitutes decided ma- 
 jorities now, and in others where they are not, 
 the majority is ready to unite with them upon the 
 happening of some further causes. In my judg- 
 ment, the election of the presidential candidate of 
 the Black Republican party will furnish thatcause. 
 The principles of that party, as announced in the 
 contest of 18.56, were such that no honorable south- 
 ern man could possibly belong to it. I see that 
 the general committee in their call properly take 
 this view, and only extend their invitation to the 
 Opposition in the free States. What precise anti- 
 slavery platform they adopt is not very import- 
 ant, as they will of course make it so as to ob- 
 tain the support of their most moderate members, 
 knowing that the ultra ones will go with them any 
 how. in fact they know that in the language of 
 the Senator from New York, [Mr. Seward,] " cir- 
 cumstances determine possibilities," and that he 
 and they are willing " at all times" to do all they 
 can, in power or out of it, to overthrow slavery. 
 It is said, however, that we ought to wait for 
 some overt act; and the Senator from New Hamp- 
 shire [Mr. Hale] the other day declared that it 
 i was wrong and insolent for southern men to talk 
 j of resisting merely because they, the Republicans, 
 I elected men to carry out "their viercs!^' That 
 1 Senator is very wise, and knows that, when a man 
 j wishes to subdue a wild horse, he treats the animal 
 I with the greatest kindness at first, and commits no 
 oi'ert(ic/onhimuntilheis(Cf//aiu/5eci(re/i/(ierf. Sup- 
 j pose that your candidate was known to be in tavor 
 j of making a treaty with Great Britain, by which 
 i the United States were to be rcannexod as colonies 
 1 to that aountry, and he had been elected by the 
 majority of votes, would the minority, who might 
 still wish to preserve their independence, be bound 
 to wait until the treaty had been actually ratified, 
 and British armies had taken possession of the 
 country, and begun to maltreat the inhabitants? 
 In the present case, the very inauguration of your 
 candidate makes him commander of the Army and 
 Navy. One of his first acts would be, doubtless, 
 to station them advantageously, while, at the same 
 time, he could carefully remove from the South all 
 the public arms, lest the people should take them 
 for defense. He would fill the southern States 
 with postmasters, and other officials, whose efforts 
 would be directed to dividing, as much as possible, 
 the people of the South, and to forming connec- 
 tions with the negroes. Doubtless, some such 
 i policy as this would be adopted before any direct 
 blow was struck at slavery anywhere. Should 
 we, under these disadvantages, begin to resist, a 
 long and bloody struggle, like that of our Revo- 
 lution, might be the consequence. The very im- 
 pression that Fremont was to be elected produced 
 I'l some disturbances among the slaves; and with a 
 I j Black Republican President a hundred such forays 
 ') as John Brown's might occur in a single year. 
 ;: Though the negroes left to themselves are harm- 
 j: less, j'^et, when assisted and led on by Europeans 
 !' in St. Domingo, they destroyed the white inhab- 
 i j itants. As the Senator from New York [Mr. Se w- 
 i' ard] holds that the constitutional guarantees in 
 i favor of slavery, being " in violation of the divine 
 
15 
 
 law," cannot be enforced, and " ought to be relin- 
 quished," he would be on the side of the negro. 
 
 The objections are not personal merely to this 
 Senator, but apply equally to any member of the 
 party elected by it. It has, in fact, been sug- 
 gested that, as a matter of prudence, for the first 
 election they should choose a soutliern Free-Soiler. 
 Would the colonies have submitted more willingly 
 to Benedict Arnold than to Lord Cornwallis? By 
 way of palliation it has been said, that even if a 
 Black Republican should be elected, he would 
 probably disappoint his party, and be more con- 
 servative than they are; and that the worst he 
 would do, might be to plunder the country, by 
 legislation or otherwise. This, however, would 
 be only a reprieve to us; for the very fact of his 
 election on such grounds, and our submission, as 
 it would destroy our friends in the North, would 
 demoralize and degrade our own people and ren- 
 der them incapable of resistance, while our ene- 
 mies, flushed with success, would select, after- 
 wards, more ultra agents to carry out their 
 "views." No other " overt act" can so imper- 
 atively demand resistance on our part, as the sim- 
 ple election of their candidate. Their organiza- 
 tion is one of avowed hostility, and they come 
 against us as enemies; and should we submit, we 
 shall be in tb.e condition of an army which sur- 
 renders at discretion, and can only expect such 
 terms as thehumanity of the conquerormay grant. 
 
 But, we are asked how we will go about making 
 a revolution or dissolving the Union .' This would 
 possibly have been a difficult question to answer 
 during the first year of oar Revolution, when our 
 forefathers were avowedly fighting to get good 
 terms of reconciliation with the mother country. 
 Mr. JefiVrson said that six weeks before the Dec- 
 laration was made, a majority of the men who 
 made it had not even thought of independence. 
 The people of the colonics, though they had not 
 authorized anybody to make it, accepted it, never- 
 theless, as a fact. 
 
 Who anticipated the sudden revolutions that 
 overthrew several monarchies in France ? Though 
 it requires skill to create governments, yet men 
 often destroy them very unscientifically. As the 
 main strength of all governments is in public opin- 
 ion, so, when that is forfeited, they often seem to 
 fall easily and suddenly. As the Government of 
 the United States, with the attachment of its citi- 
 zens, is the strongest in the world, so, when that 
 is lost, it would become one of the weakest. 
 
 [ may say, however, that I do not think there 
 will be any secession of the southern members of 
 Congress from this Capitol. It has always struck 
 me that this is a point not to be voluntarily sur- 
 rendered to the public enemy. If lives should be 
 lost here, it would seem poetically just that this 
 should occur. I cannot find words enough to 
 express my abhorrence and detestation of such 
 creatures as Garrison and Wendell Phillips, who 
 stimulate others to deeds of blood, and, at the same 
 time, are so cowardly that they avoid all danger 
 themselves. As from this Capitol so much has 
 gone forth to inflame the public mind, if our coun- 
 trymen are to be involved in a bloody struggle, 
 I trust in God that the first fruits of the collision 
 may be reaped here. While it is due to justice 
 that I should speak thus, it is but fair to myself 
 to say, that I do not remember a time when I 
 would have been willing to sacrifice the life of an 
 
 innocent person to save my own; and I have never 
 doubted but that it was the duty of every citizen 
 to give his life cheerfully to preserve the Union of 
 these States, while that Union was founded on an 
 honest observance of the Constitution. Of the 
 behefits of the Confederacy to all sections, pro- 
 vided justice be done in the administration of the 
 Government, there can be no question. 
 
 Independently of its advantages to us all, there 
 arc reasons wliy it should be maintained. Con- 
 .siderations of this kind were, during the last year, 
 brought to my mind from new points of view, and 
 with added force. When, last spring, I landed in 
 England, I found that country agitated with ques- 
 tions of reform. In the struggle which was main- 
 tained on both sides with the greatest animation, 
 there were constant references to the United States; 
 and the force of our example was stimulating the 
 Liberals, and tending to the overthrow of aristo- 
 cratic and monarchic restrictions. Our institu- 
 tions and our opinions were referred to only to be 
 applauded, except by a small but influential aris- 
 tocratic clique. That oligarchy cannot forget the 
 Revolution of July, 1776, which deprived Britain 
 of this magnificent western empire; and it sees, 
 with even bitterer feelings, its own waning power 
 and vanishing privileges under the inspiriting in- 
 fluences of our prosperity. It, however, is always 
 ready to take by the hand any American of prom- 
 inent position who habitually denounces and de- 
 preciates his own Government, and labors for its 
 overthrow. 
 
 In this connection, I remember a statementmade 
 to me by the late American Minister at Paris, Mr. 
 Mason. He spoke of having had a conversation 
 with one whose name I do not feel at liberty to 
 mention, but whose influence on the opinion of 
 continental Europe is considerable, who admitted 
 to him that there was nothing in fact wrong in our 
 negro slavery; but who, nevertheless, declared 
 that if the Union of our States continued, at no 
 distant day we should control the world; and, 
 therefore, as an European he felt it to be his duty 
 to press anti-slavery views, as the only chance to 
 divide us. I have other and many reasons to know 
 that the monarchies of Europe, threatened with 
 downfall from revolutionary movements, seek, 
 through such channels as they control, to make 
 similar impressions. A hundred times was the 
 question asked me, " Will you divide in Amer- 
 ica.'" But never once was the inquiry made of 
 me, " Will slavery be abolished, will your coun- 
 try become more respectable in the eyes of the 
 Abolitionists ?" The middle and lower classes of 
 England, who arc struggling to acquire additional 
 privilegas, look with satisfaction and hope to our 
 progress. France, too, is imbued with Ameri- 
 can ideas, and, notwithstanding its despotic form 
 of government, is one of the most democratic 
 countries in Europe. Italy I found in the midst 
 of revolutions, and its monarchies falling down 
 without even a day's notice, and its inhabitants, 
 while recalling the republican ideas of past ages, 
 looked with exultation to that great trans-Atlantic 
 Confederacy, where there are no kings and no 
 dukes; and more than once, while passing through 
 Tuscany or Lombardy, the enthusiasm of the 
 people reminded me, by their music and banners 
 and shoutings, of my own countrymen, at a 
 Fourth of July celebration. Germany, the recep- 
 tacle of millions of letters from thh side of the 
 
16 
 
 water, is being rapidly educated, and is already 
 far advanced to a stable free system. The Swiss 
 and the Belgians are boasting of the resemblances 
 of their Governments and ours. Everywhere, too, 
 are our countrymen distinguished and recognized 
 for their intellectual activity and energy. The 
 people abroad have, perhaps, exaggerated ideas 
 of our immense progress, our vast power, and 
 growing ascendency in the civilized world. The 
 masses, pressed down by military conscriptions 
 and inordinate taxation, look with pride and con- 
 fidence to the great American Republic, that in 
 time they hope will dominate over the earth and 
 break the power of its king^. But the Senator 
 from New York, [Mr. Seward,] and those who 
 act with him, have -determined that these hopes 
 shall no longer be cherished, and that our system 
 shall fall, to'gratify the wishes and meet the views 
 of the British Exeter Hall anti-slavery society. 
 He holds that our Government has hitherto been 
 administered in " violation of the divine law, " and 
 that our former institutions must give way to the 
 "higher Icno," abolitionism, and free negroism. 
 This is the issue we are now called upon to meet. 
 Should the decision of the ides of November 
 be adverse to the fortunes of the Republic, it will 
 become the high duty of the South, at least, to 
 protect itself Northern gentlemen, I believe, 
 with great unanimity say that if the conditions 
 were reversed, they would not be willing to sub- 
 mit for a moment; and many, like Mr. Fillmore, 
 
 do us the justice to say that it would be " mad- 
 ness or foliy to believe" that we would " submit 
 to be governed by such a Chief Magistrate" as 
 Fremont. The general tone of feehng in the 
 South, and the rapid formation of vigilance com- 
 mittees and military companies, indicate that our 
 people have not forgotten the lessons of the Rev- 
 olution, and there may be a contest among the 
 States as to which shall be most prompt to resist. 
 To avoid any such necessity, our people are 
 disposed, generally) to make every effort consist- 
 ent with honor. They will, with great unanim- 
 ity, go into battle upon the old platform of prin- 
 ciples, and, waiving all past issues, heartily 
 support the standard-bearer who may be selected. 
 But the fate of the country mainly depends upon 
 the success which may crown the efforts of those 
 brave and patriotic men in the North, who, in 
 spite of the odds arrayed against them, have so 
 long maintained an unequal struggle against the 
 anti-slavery current. They fight under a flag 
 which waves in every State of the Union. Should 
 it fall, it carries with it an older and a still more 
 honored emblem — that banner under whichWash- 
 ington marched to victory, which Jackson main- 
 tained triumphantly, and which has been borne 
 gallantly and gloriously over every sea. I have 
 still confidence in the good fortune of the United 
 States, and in view of the many providential 
 occurrences in the past, still anticipate a triumph 
 for the Republic. 
 
 54 W 
 
C^^Cr 
 
 

 ^'^ ^\ J" **«iK*. '^^ ^' ^'d 
 
 
 V .♦^"^. 
 
 
 
 
 69^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "CoV 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 e^^^ 
 ^ '^^ 
 
 
 
 
 jJ^-n^. 
 
 
 
 .X'^x: