/ ^^^^^^v %*^^-/ v^^^v- ^ ♦'TV** -Cr >», 'o.T* A <. ♦7TvT* .0** ^3, ' ri^*/ V*^^^'./ 'V^^'^.o' %'^-'\^^ s^"V • ^ ••••' v$^ *-^% ^oV '^(^ «406 • ao ^i-\ ^'^:^^%"- .//^iX <^^'}^mk''^ • M* v^.i^.:*^; • •» '9^ 4^ • •« "■^^^ .<»*' THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMP^^-'^'^^:^'-^^^ LETTER FROM UON. ALFffi^l? ILf? [ From the i.^^chester ^'Democrat and American " of Jan. 15, 1861. ] The following letter from the Hon. Alfred Ely, in reply to one addressed to him by Aaron ERiCKt^ON, Esq., urging a support of the Crittenden proposition, will he read with interest and satisfaction by the people of this district. Mr. Ely states his objections to that proposition with frankness, and urges str-.ng reasons against its adoption. He discusses the whole question of the impending revolution with ability, and sums up by stating the true reason why it has made such rapid strides during the last sixty days. It was directly aided by the most' intiueutial men in the Federal Government, and, until within, a few days, has met with no check from that quarter. ■ We need scarcely commend the letter to the attention ot our readers. The absorbing interest of the subject will secure for it a general and attentive perusal : Washington, Jannary 7, 1861. Dear Sir : Your letter 'of the 24th ultiiflio has received froni' rrie that careful considei'ation due alike to the isource from which it eniaii- atecl, and the importance of the subject to which it relates, lam not willing to admit that any one of my constituents feels a deeper soli- citude for the preservation of our revered Uni6n than I do. Never- theless, I find it impossible to concur fully with you as to the course; which should be adopted by the Republicans in Congress, with a vieW' to averting the dangers of dissolution, which now threaten us. "^ It is my sincere belief tliat the revolutionary moveirnent, which" has progressed with such fearful strides in certain fSoothern States'^ during the last sixty days, owes much of its present head-way to the fatal mistake made by our Federal Executive, and concurred in by many Union-loving men, of treating it, in its inception, as a disorder to be yielded to, and pallitated by indulgence and concession, instead of being met by unequivocal exhibition of a firm and resolute purpose to maintain the authority of the Constitution and laws against all attempts at forcible resistance whatsoever or by whomsoever made. I do not believe that this revolutionary movement can now be, or ever could haye been, arrested bm-oncessions from the North.' 'It was 86t oil foot, and has been pushecoorward by men who have lone been anxious for a dissolution of the Union, and who have been seeking for a pretext and a suitable occasion to make the attempt they are now making to sever its bonds. They ask no concessions, and will accept none. They give'*iii^^ plainly to understand that no concessions we could propose would ini-(^' duce them to pause a moment in the mad career of rebellion and*'- treason in which they have embarked. ' n-i\ t/j- hiM I fully concur with you as to the importance of preventiiig;i^ possi- ble, the "conservative border States of the South" from joining in this secession movement. The people of these States are more deepljt:. 2 ^x?^z^ interested in the preservation of the Union than any other section of our common country ; and^I believe, the reflecting portion of them duly appreciate their condition in this respect. Moreover, they are in a position to exert a more salutary influence for its preservation, if they will. In the present crisis, it is scarcely too much to say, that they liold the fate of this Union in their liands. The late Presidential election demonstrated that the Union men are in a decided majority in all these border slave States, even if we reckon as such only those who voted against Breckinridge and Lane. I trust, however, that only a small proportion of those who voted that ticket in those States are at heart desirous of breaking up the Union. But how has this open rebellion against the Constitution and laws been met by those who professed, in the Presidential, canvass, pre-eminent fidelity and devotion to the Union ? From whom should it have received a more emphatic rebuke than from those who tri- umphed in those border States, in that canvass, under the significant motto of '' The Union, the Constitution, and the enforcement of the laws?" And yet, how has their influence been exerted in this crisis? Strong in numbers — strong in wealth and intelligence — strong in .the moral power of their position, they could have overawed the I'evolu- ti^nary movement in the beginning of it, if they had boldly stood up to their patriotic motto. . But, instead of this, we have seen them timidly succumb to an in- solent and audacious minority of their own section, intent upon their ruin — ceasing to demand " enforcement of the laws," as soon as any- body threatened to resist them — and giving encouragement to rebel- lion and treason, by insisting that they shall not be opposed ; and some of them even threatening to join the rebellion themselves, ^unless unreasonable concessions, never before thought of, are made, in the form of radical modifications of tlie Constitution. . If thei!^e (border States could be attached more firmly to the Union by any coiicessions within the bounds of reason, any that could be made withioutanabandoment of the fundamental principles whicli the pepple of the free States liave so recently assented to by an emphatic voice, no one would be more ready than I am to grant them. For instance, I would, not onlf consent to but advise the repeal of all laws enacted by any ^f the free States to obstruct citizens of slave States in th!?,«x(jrcise of their constitutional riadits of reclaiming fugitives from l^bor;, .especially if th?i fugitive slave^t were so modified as to guard against tshe iLseof \t as an instrument for kidnapping free men. If any ^dditionalj gtiiarantiees are required that the Federal power shall never be exerted to abolish slavery in States where it now exists, or to interfere in any way with the exclusive right of the people of those States to ftia,ivJ.geth^ir,dQmi^sti(j institutions : in ..their own.isiay, X p^rO.: seeiQqrPtOPpHQcis ,t6 giyingjjbhemi; ,1 iiiH!T.*nr i; •}^]\i\\ .1; irrlt ::■•>: But we have no indications that atiy concessions, short of a consti- tutiq^i^l igu.i>rs^Hty i^f , the right -to .parry slavery into Territories now fr^p, would; b^f^t all is^ti^factory to citizens of those States, who are d^ma^i^di^g ': concesi^ijQnB, as $,j con4.i|tiou of remaining faithful to the, Union. The people of the tree States will never consent to an amendment of the Constitution which shall make it, in express terms, a slavery- extending instrument. The people of the South have no more right to demand such a modification of the Constitution than we of the North have to demand that it shall be so amended as to make it an instrument for abolishing slavery in the States where it now exists. Even if the present Congress should propose, and submit to the States for their approval, any amendment of the Constitution, by vir- tue of which any portion of the free Territory which we now possess or may hereafter acquire would be converted into slave Territory, the people of the free States would indignantly reject it. Now, a few words in reference to the *' Crittenden proposition to ex- tend the Missouri compromise line to the Pacific," the rejection of which by the Senate Committee of thirteen you " deeply deplore.' What is this proposition, but to establish slavery by an express consti- tutional sanction and guaranty in every rood of Territory which we now own or may hereafter acquire, where there is the remotest possi- bility of its ever going? So far as it would affect the Territory which we now possess, it might be of little or no practical importance, with the exception of a limited tract lying south of Kansas, which we are bound by treaties with Indian tribes not to include within the jurisdiction of any State. New Mexico, (including Arizona,) is the only Territory we now possess south of that line. New Mexico has already, by an act of her Territorial Legislature, theoretically established slavery within her limits. And under the compromise acts of 1850, her people will have the right to choose, when they apply for admission into the Union, 'whether they enter it as a free or slave State. Practically, however, it is scarcely possible that negro slavery can ever exist there to any considerable extent. All the Territory which we own north of that line is now as secure against the introduction of slavery as is the State of New York. You will perceive, therefore^, that this Crittenden proposition becomes })ractically important, mainly on account of its 'application to Territory hereafter to be acquired, and that its effect would be to give a constitutional sanction to slavery in every foot of 3 Territory that we can ever acquire. It should not be forgotten that the Senate Committee of thirteen did not finally reject this Crittenden proposition, until the southern mem- bers of that committee had refuseji.to restrict its operation to the Ter-- litory we now own. Witliout such a restriction, it is simply a propo- sition to establish slavery by an express constitutional sanction in every rood of our national Territory, present or prospective, into which anybody would ever desire to take it. Practically, it would be just as effectual for the extension of slavery as the constitutional recognition of the doctrines of the Dred Scott decision. There is another serious objection to this proposition. Give a con-^^ stitutional sanction of slavery to all future acquisitions of Territory south of 3G° W^, and you offer the strongest possible inducements to the fillibustering expeditions from the South for the conquest and an- nexation of Mexico and Central America. If our G-overnment has found it difficult to restrain these fillibustering raids in the absence of any such constitutional guaranty, and when those who encouraged and set them on foot had to inciir the risk of slavery exclusion, after con- i quest and annexation should he accomplished, how mucli more diffi- cult would it he with that risk constitutionally provided against. 1 can conceive of nothing that would so tend to hasten the con- summation of that project, which tlie South has so long nursed, of seiz- ing all the Territory south of us, on this continent, to the Isthmus of Panama, extending slavery over it, and thus securing a permanent preponderance of slave States in this Union. So far as I have observed, most men who entertain the idea of arrest- ing this revolutionary movement by demanding unreasonable conces-' sions from the North, deprecate the use of force to overcome resist- ance to tlie constituted authorities, or to protecit the federal property from unlawful seizure in the rebellious States. '^ The employment of force, they say, will lead to collision and civil war. But do they suppose that collisicm and civil war wi«ll be ulti- mately avertbd by permitting the people of the revolting States to re- sist the collection of the Federal revenue— to scfize the Federal custom- houses, forts, arsenals, and magazines witliih their limits, and' to ap-' pro])riate the public arms and munitions of war to their own use, as'; means of overturning the Government? ' No Rejjublicans, and few Northern men of any jiarty, admit th 6^' r%A^ of a State to secede at' pleasure. And yet, what is this non-re- i sistant policy but the strongest possible recognition of that right? If treason is not be resisted when it sets the Federal laws at defiance, and seizes the Federal pro]»erty in Charleston harbor, at tvliat point is it to be resisted ? When it shall have progressed to the Potomac, entered the National Metropolis, seized tlie navy yard and arsenal of this city, and taken forcible possession of the Capitol, the Treasury, and other public buildings liere, is it still to meet no resistance, for fear of producing collision and civil war ? It is idle to talk of arresting this revolution by palliatives and concessions. Forcible resistance to the constituted authorities and laws must be met and overcome by superior force, or our Government is already broken up, and the Union ordained by our fatliers is merely an incident in the history of the past. ' In conclusion, let me add, that the course of our Federal Executive, ■ in succuiiibing to an insolent and arrogant band of rebels, retaining their open and avowed sympathisers and abettors in his Cabinet, and calling upon good and loyal citizens to pacify them by unreasonable concessions, has drifted the country into a more alarming Condition than when your letter was written. If, as some recent events would seem to indicate, he has at length sewi the error of his way, and re- * solved to amend his course, the Union-loving peoplfe of this country*/ will be profoundly thankful for the change. ' ''■[■' <'- '"'•''^•» "' ' ' •) But he can never repair the mischief which his complicity' With treason, attributable, it is to be hoped, more to the want of moral courage than to a corrupt heart, has inflicted upon the country. Let him now do the utmost in his power to retrieve this false step, and he will enlist in his behalf the sympathies of an immense majority of the American people. ^ Yours, very respectfully , ' ALFRED ELY. To Aaron Erickson, ^aq.,. Rochester, N. Y. 54 «f t • o - ^^^ sV M^, 3, 'o . » * A <* ♦'TV** -6^ ^ '" • * * A^ <*> *'Tvo* IP'S!* ^^0^ ^J.r^ V*"'*\\^'^ >0^ y • >o *4>' 3, '•• * - '*bK • •• d^ •♦: o' ^^^ *.-<* 6*"^^ "ft. ,« ^ *♦ -^v-^^^ .0" • A^-^^. *Ao« '^ *^ ^ ♦•To' ^0^ sK 7^*^^ «.' 0' .•••^ "^ ^'^ ^ •'' a4^ !u";;Sii-S;i;iK!SffihHi^iS# I ! 1 < < <_ p h It '