i^Sie«.«4l 
 
 .^ 
 
 \\Dh.'3-'^- ^^-^^^^ "^^^^'^ 
 
 oO 
 
 ~\\s«. ^\«Vx:, o-t"^* Ulirtton 
 
 


 
 CopV 
 
 SPEEC EC 
 
 O 
 
 
 HON 
 
 B.'' F WADE, OF OHIO, 
 
 THE STATE OF THE UNION, 
 
 DKI.IVERKB IX 
 
 THE SENATE OF THE UNITSID' STATES, DEC. 17, I860, 
 
 WASHINGTON : 
 
 ll'«ILL k WITHEROW, PEINTBRS 
 1860. 
 

SPEECH 
 
 ^ 
 
 The Senate re«umeJ ibe consideratiou uf the resolution of Mr. PowiiLi., tu refur su much of ttt« 
 President's message as relate* to the pruKeui »Li'ated and distracted condition of the country, to a 
 tpecial committee of thirteen. 
 
 Mr. WADE. Mr. President, at a time like tliis, when there seems to be a wild 
 ^ and unreasoning excitement in many parts of the country, I certainly have very 
 
 -U little faith in the efficacy of any argument that may be made ; but at the same 
 
 time, I must say, when 1 hear it stated by many Senators in this Chamber, where 
 we all raised our hands to Heaven, and took a solemn oath to support the Consti- 
 tution of tlje United States, that we are on the eve of a dissolution of this Union, 
 and that the Constitution is to be trampled under foot — silence under such cir- 
 cumstances seems to me akin to treason itself. 
 
 I have listened to the complaints on the other side patiently, and with an ardent 
 desire to ascertain what was the particular difficulty under which they were labor- 
 ing. Many of those who have supposed themselves aggrieved have spoken ; but 
 I confess that I am now totally unable to understand precisely what it is of which 
 they complain. Why, sir, the party which lately elected their President, and are 
 prospectively to come into power, have never held an executive office under the 
 General Government, nor has any ipdividual of them. It is most manifest, there- 
 fore, that the party to which I belong have as yet committed no act of which any- 
 body can complain. If they have fears as to the course that we may hereafter 
 pursue, they are mere apprehensions — a bare suspicion ; arising, I fear, out of 
 their unwarrantable prejudices, and nothing else. 
 
 I wish to ascertain at the outset whether we are right ; for I tell gentlemen, if 
 they can convince me that I am holding any political principle that is not war- 
 ranted by the Constitution under which we live, or that trenches upon their rights, 
 they need not ask me to compromise it. i will be ever ready to grant redress, 
 and to right myself whenever I am wrong. No man need approach me with a 
 threat that the Government under which I live is to be destroyed ; because I hope 
 1 have now, and ever shall have, such a sense of justice that, when any man shows 
 me that I am wrong, I shall be ready to right it without price or compromise. 
 
 Now, sir, what is it of which gentlemen complain ? When I left my home in 
 the West to come to this place, all was calm, cheerful, and contented. I heard of 
 no discontent. I apprehended that there was nothing to interrupt the harmoni- 
 ous course of our legislation. I did not learn that, since we adjourned from this 
 place at the end of the last session, there had been any new fact intervening that 
 should at all disturb the public mind. I do not know that there has been any 
 encroachment upon the rights of any section of the country since that time ; and 
 therefore expected to have a very harmonious session. It is very true, sir, that 
 the great Republican party which has been organized ever since you repealed the 
 Missouri compromise, and who gave you four years ago full warning that their 
 growing strength would probably result as it has resulted, have carried the late 
 election ; but I did not suppose that would di.sturb the equanimity of this body. 
 I did suppose that every man who was observant of the signs of the times might 
 well see that things would result precisely as they have resulted. Nor do I un- 
 derstand now that anything growing out of that election is the : » isc of the present 
 excitement that pervades the country. 
 
IThy, Mr. President, this is a most singular state of thingij. Wlio is it that is 
 complaining ? They that have been in a minority ? They tJiat have been the 
 subjects of an oppressive and aggressive Government ? No, sir. Let us siippose 
 that when the leaders of the old glorious Revolution met at Philadelphia eighty- 
 four years ago to draw up a bill of indictment against a wicked King and hi.s min- 
 isters, they had been at a loss what they should set forth as the causes of their 
 complaint. They had no difticulty in setting them forth so that the great article 
 of impeachment will go down to all posterity as a full justilication of all the acts 
 they did. But let us suppose that, instead of its being these old patriots who had 
 met there to dissolve their connection with the British Government, and to tram- 
 ple their flag under foot, it had been the ministers of the Crown, the leading mem- 
 bers of the British Parliament, of the dominant party that had ruled Great Britain 
 for thirty years previous : who would not have branded every man of them as a 
 tra,itor ? It would be said: "You who have had the Government in your own 
 hands ; you who have been the ministers of the Crown, advising everything that 
 has been done, set up here that you have been oppressed and aggrieved by the 
 action ©f that very Government which you have directed yourselves." Instead of 
 a sublime revolution, the uprising of an oppressed people, ready to battle against 
 unequal power for their rights, it would have been an act of treason. 
 
 How is it with the leaders of this modern revolution ? Are they in a position to 
 complain of the action of this Government for years past? Why, sir, they have 
 had more ttian two thirds of the Senate for many years past, and until very re- 
 cently, and have almost that now. You — who complain, I ought to say — repre- 
 sent but a little more than one fourth of the free people of these United States, 
 and yet your counsels prevail, and have prevailed all along for at least ten years 
 past. In the Cabinet, in the Senate of the Uniteii States, in the Supreme Court, 
 in every department of the Government, your officers, or those devoted to you, 
 have been in the majority, and have dictated all the policies of this Governmeot. 
 Is it not strange, sir, that they who now occupy these positions should come here 
 and complain that their rights are stricken down by the action of the Govern- 
 ment ? 
 
 But what has caused this great excitement that undoubtedly prevails in a por- 
 tion of our country? If the newspapers are to be credited, there is a reign of 
 terror in all the cities and large towns in the southern portion of this community 
 that looks very much like the reiga of terror in Paris during the French revolu- 
 tion. There are acts of violence that we read of almost every day, wherein the 
 rights of northern men are stricken down, where they are sent back with indigni- 
 ties, where they are scourged, tai'red, feathered, and murdered, and no inquiry 
 made as to the cause. I do not suppose that the regular Government, in times of 
 excitement like these, is really responsible for such acts. I know that these out- 
 breaks of passion, these terrible excitements that sometimes pervade a commu- 
 nity, are entirely irrepressible by the law of the couutj-y. I suppose that is the 
 case now ; because if these outrages against northern citizens were really author- 
 ized by the State authorities there, were they a foreign Government, everybody 
 knows, if it were the strongest Government on earth, we should declare war upon 
 her in one day. 
 
 But what has caused this great excitement? Sir, I will tell you what I suppose 
 it is. I no not (and I say it frankly) so much blame the people of the South ; be- 
 cause they believe, and they are led to believe by all the information that ever 
 comes before them, that we, the dominant party to-day, who have just seized upon 
 the reins of this Government, are their mortal enemies, and stand ready to tram- 
 ple their institutions under foot. They have been told so by our enemies at the 
 North. Their misfortune, or their fault, is that they have lent a too easy tar to 
 the iniiinuations of those who are our mortal enemies, while they would not hear 
 us. 
 
 Northern Democrats have sometimes said that we had personal liberty bills in 
 some few of the States of the North, which somehow trenched upon the rights of 
 the South under the fugitive bill to recapture their runaway slaves — a position 
 that in not more than two or three cases, so far as I can see, has the slightest 
 foundation in fact; and even of those where it is most complained of, if the pro- 
 visions of their law are really repugnant to that of the United States, they are 
 Mtterly void, and the cou.r-s' wuoid declare them so the moment yon brought 
 
them up. Thus it is that I am glad to hear the candor of those genrlftmen on the 
 other side, that they do not complain of these laws. The Senator from Georgia 
 [Mr. Iverson] himself told us that they had never suffered any injury, to his 
 knowledge and belief, from those bills, and they cared no'hing about ihem. The 
 Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason] said the same thing; and 1 believe the Sena- 
 tor from Mississippi, [Mr. Bkown.J You all, then, hiv? given up ibis bone of 
 contention, this matter of complaint which northern men hnve ser t'ortb us a griev 
 ance more than anybody else. 
 
 Mr. MASON. Will the Senator indulge me one mt>ment? 
 
 Mr. WADE. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. MASON. I know he does not intend to misreiireient me or other gentlemen 
 here. What 1 said was, that the repeal of those laws would furnish no cause of 
 satisfaction to the southern States. Our opinions of those laws we gave freely. 
 We said the repeal of those laws would give no gatisfactioa. 
 
 Mr. WADE. Mr. President, I do not intend to misrepresent anything. I under- 
 stood those gentlemen to suppose that they had not been iujured by them. I un- 
 derstood the Senator from Virginia to believe that they were enacted in a spirit of 
 hostility to the institutions of the South, and to object to them not because the acts 
 themselves had done them any hurt, but because they were really a stamp of de- 
 gradation upon southern men, or something like ihat — I do not quote his words. 
 The other Senators that referred to it probably intended to be understood in the 
 same way; but they did acquit these laws of having done them injury to their 
 knowledge or belief. 
 
 I do not believe that these laws were, as the Senator supposed, enacted with a 
 view to exasperate the South, or to put them in t^position of degradation. Why, 
 sir, these laws ngainst kidnapping are as old as the common law itself, as that 
 Senator well knows. To take a freeman and forcibly carry him out of the juris- 
 diction of the State, has ever been, by all civilized countries, awjadged to be a great 
 crime; and in most of them, wherever I have understood anythiiig about it, they 
 have penal laws to punish such an offence. I believe the State of Virginia has one 
 fo-day as stringent in all its provisions as ahnost any other of which you complain. 
 I have not looked over the statute-books of the South ; but I do not doubt that 
 there will be found this species of legislation upon all your statute-books. 
 
 Here let me say, because the subject occurs to me right here, the Senator from 
 Virginia seemed not so much to point out any specific acts that northern people 
 had done iujurioas to your property, as what he took to be a dishonor and a degra- 
 dation. 1 tliink I feel as sensitive upon that subject as any other man. If I know 
 myself, 1 am the last man that would be the advocate of any law or any act that 
 would humiliate or dishonor any section of this country, or any individual in it ; 
 and, on the other hand, let me tell these gentlemen I am exceedingly sensitive upon 
 that samp ooint, whatever they may think about it. I would rather sustain an in- 
 jury thai n insult or dishonor ; aud I would be as unwilling to ioflict it upon 
 others as . would be to submit to it myself. I never will do either the one or the 
 other if I know it. 
 
 I have already said that these gentlemen who make these complaints have for a 
 long series of years had this Government in their own keeping. They belong to 
 the dominant mnjority. I may say that these same gentlemen who rise up on this 
 floor and draw their bill of indictment against us, have been the leaders of that 
 dominant party for many years past. Therefore, if there is anything in the legis- 
 lation of the Federal Government that is not right, you, and not we, are responsible 
 for it; for we have never been invested with the power to modify or control the 
 legislation of the country for an hour. I know that charges have been made and 
 rung in our ears, and reiterated over and over again, that we have been unfaithful 
 in the execution of your fugitive s'ave bill. Sir, that law is exceedingly odious to 
 any free people. It deprives us of all the old guarantees of liberty that the Anglo- 
 Saxon race everywhere have considered sacred — more sacred than anything else. 
 Mr. GREEN. Will the Senator from Ohio allow me to say a word ? 
 Mr. WADE. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. GREEN. It is simply this: It has been said that the practicnl operation 
 of the so-called liberty bills of the North has not affected anybody ; but they do act 
 as evidence of a public sentiment adverse to the execution of the Federal law to 
 rect&im our slaves under the Constitution ; and a repeal of those laws wonld not 
 
be worth one single straw while the sentiment remains. I know from practical 
 observation that in nine cases out of ten you cannot catch a fugitive slave ; and I 
 know more than that: you forfeit your life whenever you make the attempt. 
 
 One word more: when it is said that this fui;itive slave law is ob loxious to the 
 North, and runs counter to these old guarantees concerniiig personal liberty, I say 
 that the recovery v.. ,u;,'itives from justice is, under the Constitution and under 
 the law, just as summary without trial by jury, and must of necessity be so. 
 Why is not the same complaint made about forgers, and murderers, and scoundrels 
 that steal? Not a word of liberty hills in their behalf; but all for the negro. 
 [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 Mr. WADE. Mr. President, the gentleman says, if I understood him, that these 
 fugitives might be turned over to the authorities of the State from whence they 
 came. That would be a very poor remedy for a free man in humble circumstances 
 who was taken under the provisions of this bill in a summary way, to be carried 
 — where? Where he came from? There is no law that requires that he should 
 be carried there. Sir, if he is a free man he maybe carried into the marketplace 
 anywhere in a slave State ; and what chance has he, a poor, ignorant individual, 
 and a stranger, of asserting any rights there, even if there were do prejudices or 
 partialities against him ? That would be the mere mockery of justice and nothing 
 else, and the Senator well knows it. Sir, I know that from the stringent, sum- 
 mary provisions of this bill, free men have been kidnapped and carried into cap- 
 tivity and sold into everlasting slavery. Will any man who has a regard to the 
 sovereign rights of the State rise here and complain that a State shall not make a 
 law to protect her own people against kidnapping and violent seizures from abroad? 
 Of all men, T believe those who have made most of these complaints should be the 
 last to rise and deny the power of a sovereign State to protect her own citizens 
 against any Federal legislation whatever. These liberty bills, in my judgment, 
 have been passed, not with a view of degrading the South, but with an honest pur- 
 pose of guarding the rights of their own citizens from unlawful seizures and ab- 
 ductions. I was exceedingly glad to hear that the Senators on the other side had 
 arisen in their places and had said the repeal of those laws would not relieve the 
 case from the difficulties under which they now labor. 
 
 How is it with the execution of your fugitive bill ? Sir, I have heard it here, I 
 have read it in the papers, I have met it everywhere, that the people of the free 
 States, and especially the great Republican party, were unfaithful on this subject, 
 and did not properly execute this law. It has been said, with such a tone and 
 under such circumstances here, that, although I was sure that in the State from 
 which I come these insinuations had no foundation in truth, I could not rise here 
 and repel them in the face of those who say. We will not believe a single word you 
 say. I never did, and I never would, until our enemies, those who have ever op- 
 posed us and who have censured us upon this subject, had arisen here in their 
 places, and at length, with a magnanimity that I commend, have said that this was 
 not so. My colleague, with a magnanimity for which I give him my thanks, has 
 stood forth here to testify that in the State which 1 in part represent, the Repub- 
 lican courts and the Republican juries have fulfilled this repulsive duty with per- 
 fect faithfulness. So said the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas;] and if I un- 
 derstood him, so also said the Senator from Indiana, [Mr. Fitch.] Therefore, sir, 
 this calumny upon us is removed so far as the statement of our political enemies 
 can make the averment good. I know that our courts, when a case is brought be- 
 fore them — I do not care what their politics may be — feel b^und to administer 
 the law just as they find it; and let me say to gentlemen from the South upon the 
 other side, where you have lost one slave from the unfaithfulness of our legislative 
 or judicial tribunals, we have had ten men murdered by your mobs, frequently 
 under circumstances of the most savage character. 
 
 Why, sir, I can hardly take up a paper — and I rely, too, upon southern papers — 
 which does not give an account of the cruel treatment of some man who is traveling 
 for pleasure or for business in your quarter ; and the lightest thing you do is to 
 visit him with a vigilance committee, and compel him to return. '• We give you so 
 long to make your way out of our coast." "What is the accusation?" " W^hy, 
 sir, you are from Ohio." They do not even inquire what party he belongs to, or 
 what standard he has followed. I say this is the case, if I may rely on the state- 
 ments of your own papers ; and many of these outrages occur under circumstances 
 
of cruelty that would disgrace a savage ; and we have no security now in traveling 
 in nearly one-half of the Union, and especially the gulf States of this Confederacy. 
 I care not what a. uiau's character may be : he may be perfectly innocent of every 
 charge; he may be a man who never has violated any law under heaven ;, and yet 
 if ho goes down into those States*, and it is ascertained that he is from the North, 
 and especially if he differs from them in the exercise of his political rights, if he 
 has voted for Liaci)lu instead of for somebody else, it is a mortal offense, punish- 
 able by indignity, by rar and feathers, by stripes, and even by death; and yet you, 
 whose oanstituents are guilty of all these things, can stand forth and accuse us of 
 being unfaithful to the ('oustitutiou of the United States! Gentlemen had better 
 look at home. , 
 
 Gentlemen, it will be very well for us all to take a view of all the phases of this 
 controve^;sy before we come to such conclusions as seem to have been arrived at in 
 some quarters. I make the assertion here that I do not believe, in the history of 
 the world, there ever was a nation or a people where a law repugnant to the gen 
 eral feeling was ever executed with the same faithfulness as has been your most 
 savage and atrocious fugitive bill in the North. You yourselves cau scarcely point 
 out any case that has come before any northern tribunal in which the law has not 
 been enforced to the very letter. You ought to know these facts, and you do know 
 them. You all know that when a law is passed anywhere to bind any people, who 
 feel, in conscience, or for anj' other reason, opposed to its execution, it is not in 
 human nature to enforce it with the same certainty as a law that meets with the 
 approbation of the great mass of tfie citizens. Every rational man understands 
 this, and every candid man will admit it. Therefore it is that I do not violently 
 impeach you for jour unfaithfulness in the execution of many of your laws. You 
 have in South Carolina a law by which you take free citizens of Mastachlisetts or 
 any other maritime State, who visit the city of Charleston, and lock them up in 
 jail under the penalty, if they cannot pay the jail-f.-es, of eternal slavei-y staring 
 them in the face — a monstrou'^ law. revolting to the best feelings of humanity and 
 violently in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. I do not say this 
 by way of recrimination ; for the excitement pervading the country is now so great* 
 that I do not wish to add a single coal to the flame ; but nevt'rtheless I wish the 
 whole truth to appear. _\ 
 
 Then, sir, what is it of which complaint is male? You have the legislative power 
 of the country and you tiave had the Executive of the country, as 1 have said al- 
 readj'. You own the Cabinet, you own the Senate, and, I may add, you own the 
 I'resident of the United States as much as you owfi tht^ servant upon your own 
 plant:itiou. [Laughter.] I cannot !-ee, then, vei-y clearly, why ik is that southern 
 men can rise here and complain of the action of this Government. I have already 
 stiowu that it is perfectly impossible f'lr you now to point out any act of which the 
 Republican party can possibly be guilty, of which you complain; because at no 
 period yethave they had thepower of making any rule or regulation of law that could, 
 by possibility, afl'ect you ; and, therefoBe, I understand that when Senators rise up 
 here to justify the overthrow of this Government, to break it up, to resolve it into 
 its original ejements, they do so upon the mere suspicion that the Republican party ' 
 may somehow afl'ect their rights or violate the Constitution. 
 
 Sir, what doctrines do we hold detrimental to you? is the next inquiry that I"] 
 wish to make. .Ire we the setters foi'th of any new doctrines under the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States ? I tell you nay. There is no principle held to-day by this 
 great Republican party that has not bad the sajotion of your Government in every 
 department for more than seventy years. You have changed your opinions. We 
 stand whera we used to stand. That is the only difference. Upon the slaverifj 
 question, the only doetriue you can find touching it in our platform or our action, 
 the only positi ju we occupy in regard to it. is that formerly occupied by the most 
 revered statesmen <if tlds nation. Sir, we st'ind where Washington stood, where 
 Jefferson scoOil, where Madison stood, where Monroe stood. We stand wherp Adams 
 and Jacksop, and even Polk, stood. That revered statesman, Henry Clay, of blessed 
 memory, with his dying breath asserted the doctrine that we hold to-day. Why, 
 then, are we held up before the community as violators of your rights? You have 
 come in late in the day to. accuse us of harboring these opinions. 
 
 I ask, then, what doctrines do we hold of which you can rightfully complain? 
 You have pointed out none. You do not complain of theiexecution of the fugitive 
 
8 
 
 slave bill; you do not complain of the liberty bills; you do not complain that Mr. 
 Lincoln is a violent man, who will probably do you any injury. The Senator from 
 Georgia told us that he had no apprehensions that Mr. Lincoln, in his administra- 
 tion, would do any act in violation of your rights, or in violation of the Constitution 
 of the United States. 
 
 Mr. IVERSON. Will the Senator allow me to ask him when I said that? 
 
 Mr. WADE. I do not quote the Senator's words, but I believe I have them here. 
 
 Mr. IVERSON. The Senator is mistaken. I made no ^uch remark. 
 
 Mr. WADE. Then I would thank the Senator to repeat what his remark was on 
 that point; for I understood him as I have stated. 
 
 Mr. IVERSON. I refer the Senator to the record of my speech. 
 
 Mr. WADE. I think it is there. I understood the Senator express'y to say what 
 I have stated — I will look up the sentence — that he had not any apprehension that 
 Mr. Lincoln would do anything in violation of the Constitution of the United States; 
 but the Senator's grievance, as I understood it, was, that a hostile Chief Magistrate 
 might, within the power of the Constitution, so administer the Government as to dci 
 away with slavery in len years. That is what I understood him to say. 
 
 Mr. IVERSON. I did say, in substance, that the Republican party having the 
 power of the Government, without any palpable violation of the Constitution, might 
 so operate upon the institution of slavery as to atfect it, and probablj' extinguish 
 it; but I did not say that I did not apprehend from Mr. Lincoln any violation of 
 the Constitution of the United States. I do apprehend that he will violate the 
 Constitution whenever he can with impunity ; wherever he can affect the in.-^titu- 
 tion of slavery by such violation. 
 
 Mr. WADE. It is of no great consequence what the Senator said on that subject. 
 I will only say that fr.im Mr. Lincoln's character and conduct, from his youth up, 
 you have no right to draw any inference that he will trespass upon the rights of 
 any man; and if you harbor any such suspicion, it is in consequence of an unwar- 
 ranted prejudice, and nothing else. 
 
 Now, sir, I should like to have the Senators on the other side tell me whenever a 
 Republican has violated, or ever proposed to violate, a right of theirs. I have lis- 
 tened to your arguments here for about a week. They are all in very general terms. 
 They are very loosely drawn indictments, and I do not know where to meet you at 
 all. Is there anything in our platform detrimental to your rights, unless in modern 
 limes you have set up a construction of the Constitution of the United States difTt r- 
 ing from ours '' — we following the old beaten track of every department of the 
 Government for mure than seventy years, and you switching ofl". as it were, upon 
 another track, and setting up .yours as orthodox — that is all. [Laughter.] You 
 say that we must follow you. We choose to follow the old landmarks. That is the 
 complaint against us. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, I have shown, I think, that the dominant majority here 
 have nothing to complain of in the legislation of Congress, or in the le^slation of 
 any of the States, or in the practice of the people of the North under the fugitive 
 slave bill, except so far as they say certain State legislation furnishes sonic evi- 
 dence of hostility to their institutiops. And here, sir, 1 beg to make an observa- 
 tion. I tell the Senator, and I tell all the Senators, that the Republican party of 
 the northern States, so far as I know, and of my own State in particular, hold the 
 same opinions with regard to this peculiar institution of yours that are held by all 
 the civilized nations of the world. We do not differ from the public sentiment of 
 England, of France, of Germany, of Italy, and every other civilized nation on 
 God's earth ; and I tell you frankly that you never found, and you never will find, 
 a free community that are in love with your peculiar institution. The Senator 
 from Texas [Mr. Wigfall] told us the other day that cotton was king, and that 
 by its influence it Avould govern all creation. He did not say so in words, but thai. 
 was the substance of his remark: that cotton was king, and that it had its sub- 
 jects in Europe who dared not rebel against it. Here let me say to that Senator, 
 in passing, that it turns out that they are very rebellious subjects, and thej' are 
 talking very disrespectfully at present of that king that he spoke of. They defy 
 you to exei'cise your power over them. They tell you that they sympathize in 
 this controversy with what you call the Black Republicans. Tlierefore I hope 
 that, 90 far as Europe is concerned at least, wo shall hear no more of this boast 
 
 \ 
 
that cotton bking; and that he is going to rule all the cmhzed nations ol the 
 world and bring them to his footstool. Sir, it will never be done. 
 
 Bat sh- I wish to inquire whether the southern people are injured by or have 
 anv iJst liArto complain of, that platform of principles that we put out, and on 
 Thirwe have el t"d a President and Vice President. I have no concealments 
 To makTand I shall talk to you, my southern friends, precisely as I would talk 
 upoTth; stimp on the subject. Itell you that in that platform we did lay it 
 d^^n hat we w':)uld, if we had the power, prohibit slavery from another inch of 
 free territory under this Government. I stand on that position to-day. I have _j 
 argued it ^r'obably to half a million people. They stand there and \-ll^om-..s. 
 sioned and enjoined me to stand there forever ; and, so help me God 1 will, i say 
 vou fiankly, gentlemen, that while we hold this doctrine, there is no Republi- 
 can therel u^ convention of Republicans, there is no paper that speaks for them 
 Se s no orator that sets forth their doctrines, who ever pretends that they have 
 .nvHgirin your States to interfere with your peculiar institution ; but, on the 
 o he -hand, our authoritative platform repudiates the idea that we have any right 
 or any intention ever to invade your peculiar institution in your own States. 
 
 Now what do you complain of? You are going to break up this Governmem ; 
 youTre going to involve us in war and blood, from a mere suspicion that we shall 
 do that which we stand everywhere pledged not to do. Wou d you be jus med in 
 The eves of the civilized world in taking so monstrous a position and predicating 
 t onl bare, groundless suspicion ? We do not love slavery. Did you not know 
 ha^ before tiday? before this session commenced Have you not a perfect 
 confidence that the civilized world are against you on this sulyect of loving slavery 
 or believing that it is the best institution in the world ? Why, sir, everythmg 
 remains precisely as it was a year ago. No great catastrophe has occurred. There 
 sno reint occasion to accuse us of anything. But all at once, -hen we meet 
 here a kind of gloom pervades the whole community and he benae Chamber. 
 Gentlemen rise and tell us that they are on the eve of breaking up this Govern- 
 ment Sat seven or eight States are going to break off their connection with the 
 Gove •nment. retire from the Union, and set up a hostile Government of their own, 
 ami they look imploringly over tons, and say to us, V, ^ °^ ^r "^''T ' f^j, w« 
 can do nothing to prevent it; but it all lies with you.' Well sir, what can we 
 do to PI event it ? You have not even condescended to tell us what you want ; but 
 I think I see through the speeches that I have heard from gentlemen on the other 
 side If we wouldl-ive up the verdict of the people, and take your platform I do 
 not know but you would be satisfied with it. I thiuk the Senator from Texas 
 rather intimated, and I think the Senator from Georgia more than intimated, that 
 [fwe would take what is exactly the Charleston platform on which Mr. Breckin- 
 i^dge was placed, and give up that on which we won our victory, you would grum- 
 hlinclv and hesitatingly be satisfied. , , , , , 
 
 Mr IVEESON. I would prefer that the Senator would look over my ireinarks 
 before quoting them so confidently. 1 made no such statement^as that^ I did not 
 sav ha I would be satisfied with any such thing. I would no be satisfied with it^ 
 
 M" WADE I did not say that the Senator said so; but by construction I ^ 
 gathered that from his speech. 1 do not know that I was nght in it. 
 Mr IVERSON. The Senator is altogether wrong in his construction. 
 Mr WADE Well, sir. I have now found what the Senator said on the other 
 point'to which he called my attention a little while ago. Here it is : 
 
 -Nor do we suppose that th...e wH, »>« -/ °-;* -f^rTe^/'V'ht '^r^^I'^P^ of^r^FederM 
 not dr..8rl tbe.e orevt acts, l do Tiot P'-^P^f^ ^^J^'^'^f^ *XiaTe^^^^ southern States, as that, 
 
 Ooveroment could be .0 exeiv<sed »gMnst Ihe in titation of slaverj >n me ^ u^ , 
 
 without nn overt act, the ">---;'X^;^X;'mav"be ::Sy n the^isttneeT we are de'termined to seek 
 r ow^s'^fe-; ^X:;';".^ C:i:t:^:ri^:^^^ and overwhelm us with its fury, when we 
 > live not in a situation to defeod ourselves." 
 
 That is what the Senator said. 
 
 \\r IVEKHON. Yes; that is what 1 said. 
 
 Mr' W \DE Well, then you did not expect that Mr. Lincoin would commit any 
 overt act'againsr, the Constitution-that was not it-you were not going to wait 
 ?or that but were going to proceed on your supposition that probably he might ; 
 and thiit is the sense of what I eaid before. 
 
10 
 
 Well, Mr. President, I have disavowed all intention on the part of the Republican 
 party to harm a hair of your heads anywhero. We hold to no doctrine that can 
 possibly work you an inconvenience. We have been faithful to the execution of 
 all the laws in which you have any interest. a« stands confessed on this floor by 
 your own party, and as is known to me without their confessions. It is not, then,, 
 that Mr. Lincoln is expected to do any overt act by which you may be injured; 
 you will not wait for any; but anticipating that the Government may work an 
 injury, you say you will put an end to it, which means simply that y<iu intend 
 either to rule or ruin this Government. That is what your complaint comes to ; 
 nothing else. We do not like your ioslitutiou, you say Wfrll, we never liked it 
 any better than we do now. You might as well have dissolved the Union at any 
 other period as now, on that account, for we stand in relation to it precisely as we 
 have ever stood : that is, repudiating it among ourselves as a matter of policy and 
 morals, but nevertheless admitting that where it is out of our jurisdiction, we have 
 no hold upon it, and no designs upon it. 
 
 Then, sir. as there is nothing in the platform on which Mr. Lincoln was elected 
 of which you complain. I ask, is there anything in the character of the President 
 elect of which you ought to complain? Has he not lived a blameless life? Did 
 he ever transgress any law? Has he ever c immitted any violation " of duty of 
 which the most scrupulous can complain ? Why, then, your sui^picions that he 
 will? I have shown that you have had the Government all the time until, by some 
 misfortune or maladministration, you brought it to the very verge of destruction, 
 and the wisdom of the people had discovered that it was high time that the scepter 
 should depart from you, and be placed in more competent h.ands : I say that this 
 being so, you have no constitutional right to complain; especially when we dis- 
 avow any intention so to make use of the victorj' we have won as to injure you at 
 all. 
 
 This brings me, sir, to the question of compromises. On the first day of this 
 session, a Senator rose in his place and offered a resolution for the appointment of 
 a committee to inquire into the evils that exist between the different sections, and 
 to ascertain what can be done to settle this great diflSculty ! That is the propo- 
 sition, substantially. I tell the Senator that I know of no difficulty; and as to 
 compromises. I had supposed that we were all agreed that the day of compromises 
 was at an end. The most solemn compromises we have ever made have been vio- 
 lated without a whereas. Since I have had a seat in this body, one of considerable 
 antiquity, that had stood for more than thirty years, was swept away tV' tu your 
 statute-books. When I stood here in the minority arguing against it; when I 
 asked you to withhold your hand; when I told you it was a sacred compromise 
 between the sections, and that when it was removed we should be brought face to 
 face with all that sectional bitterness that has intervt^ned ; when I told you that 
 it was a sacred compromise which no man should touch with h's fiiiger, what was 
 your reply? That it was a mere act of Congress — nothing more, nothing less — 
 and that it could be swept away by the same majority that pas-'od it. That was 
 true in point of fact, and true in point of law : but it showed the weakness of 
 compromises. Now, sir, I only speak for my.^^elf ; aud I say that, in view of the 
 manner in which other compromises have been heretofore treated, 1 should hardly 
 think any two of the Democratic party would look each other in the faco aini ?ay 
 "compromise" without a smile. [Laughter.] A compromise to b brought about 
 by act of Congiess, after the experience we have had, is absolutely ridiculous. 
 
 But what have we to compromise? Sir, I am one of those who went forth with 
 zeal to maintain the principles of the great Piepublicau party. Id ti constitutional 
 w.ay we met, as you met. We nominaied our candidates for President and Vice 
 President, and you did the s.ame for yourselves. The issue was made up ; and we 
 went to the people upon it. Although we have been usually in the minority; al- 
 though we have been generally beaten, yet, this time, the justice uf our principles, 
 and the maladministration of the Government in your hands, convinced the people 
 that a change ought to be wrought; and after you had tried your utmost, and we 
 had tried our utmost, we beat you; and we beat you upon the plainest and most 
 palpable issue that ever was presented to the American people, and one that they 
 understood the best. There is no mistaking it; and now, when we come to the 
 Capitol, I tell you that our President and our Vice President must be inaugurated, 
 and administer the Government as all their predecessors have done. Sir, it would 
 
11 
 
 be humiliating and dishonorable to us if we were to listen to a compromise by 
 which he who has the verdict of the people in his pocket, should make his way to 
 the presidential chair. When it comes to that, you have !io government; anarchy 
 intervenes ; civil war may follow it ; all the evils that may come to the human im- 
 agination may be consequent upon such a course as that the moment the American 
 people cut loose from the sheet anchor of free government and liberty — that is, 
 whenever it is denied in this Government that a majority fairly given shall rule, 
 ihe people are unworthy of free government. Sir, I know not what others may 
 do ; but I tell you that, wirh the verdict of the people given in favor of the plat- 
 form upon which our candidates have been elected, so far as I am concerned, I 
 would suffer anything to come before I wonM compromise that away. 1 rpgard it^ 
 .as a case where I have no right to extend comity or generosity. A right, an ab- 
 solute right, the most sacred that a free people can ever bestow on any man, is 
 'their undisguised, fair verdict, that gives him a title to the office that he is chosen 
 to fill ; and he is recreant to the principle of free government who will ask a ques- 
 tion beyond the fact whether a man ha-- the verdict of the people, or if he will en- 
 tertain for a moment a proposition in addition to that. It is all f wnnt. If we 
 cannot s'and there, we cannot stand anywhere. Any other principle than that 
 would be as fatal to you, as to us Oa any other principle, anarchy must immedi- 
 ately ensue. 
 
 You say that he comes from a particular section of the country. What of that ? 
 If he is an honest man, bound by his constitutional duties, has he not as good a 
 right to come from one side as the other? Ifere, gentleman, we ought to under- 
 stand each other. I apreai to every candid man upon the other side, and I put 
 this question : if you had elected your candidate, Mr. Breckinridge, although we 
 should have been a good deal disheartened, as everybody is that loses his choice 
 in such a matter a« this; although it would have been an overthrow that we 
 should have deplored very much, as we have had occasion almost always to deplore 
 the result of national elections, still do you believe that we would have raised a 
 nand against the Constitution of our couatry because we were fairly beaten in an 
 election? Sir. I do not believe there is a man on the other side who will not do us 
 more credit than to suppose that if the case were reversed, there would be any 
 •complaint on our side. There never has been any from us under similar circum- 
 stances, and there would not be now. Sir, I think we have patriotism enough to 
 overcome the pride and the prejudice of the canvass, and submit gracefully to the 
 mnmistakable verdict of the people ; ^nd aB I have shown that you have nothing 
 •else to complain of, I take it that this is your complaint. Some of you have said 
 that the election of Mr. Lincoln showed hostility to you and your institution. Sir, 
 it is the common fate of parties to diff r, and one dees not intend to follow exactly 
 the course of policy of the other; b\it when you talk of constitutional rights and 
 duties, honest men will observe them a'.ike, no matter to what party they belong. 
 
 I say, then, that so far as I am conct^rned, I will yield to no compromise. I do 
 not come here begging. eHh^r. It won d be an indignity t.o the people that I rep- 
 resent if I were to stand her"^ pirl^ying as to the rights of the party to which I 
 belong. We have won our right to the Chief Magistracy of this nation in the way 
 that you have always won your predominance; and if you are as willing to do jus- 
 tice to others as to exact it from them, you would never raise an inquiry as to a 
 committee for compromises. Here I beg, barely for myself, to say one thing more. 
 Many of you stand in an attitude hostile to this Government; that is to s ly, you 
 occupy an attitude where you threaten that, unless we do so and so, you will go 
 out of this Union and destroy the Government. I say to you, for myself, that, in 
 my private capacity, I never yielded to anything by the way of threat, and in my 
 public capacity I have no right to yield to any such thing; and therefore I would 
 not entertain a propositi'in for any compromise; for, in my judgment, this long, 
 chronic controversy that has existed between us mutt be met, and met upon the 
 principles of the Constitution and laws, and met now. 1 hope it may be adjusted 
 to the satisfaction of all; and I know no other way to atijust it, except that way 
 which is laid down by the Constitution of the United States. Whenever we go 
 astray from that, we are sure to plunge ourselves into difficulties. The old Con- 
 stitution of the United States, although commonly aud frequently in direct oppo- 
 sition to what I could wish, nevertheless, iu my judgment, is the wisest and best 
 Constitution that ever yet organized a free Government; and by its prtfvisiona J^ . 
 
12 
 
 am willing, and intend, to stand or fall. Like the Senator from Mississippi, I ask 
 nothing more. I ask no ingrafting upon it. I ask nothing to be taken awa.y from 
 it. Under its provisions a nation has grown faster than any other in the history 
 of the world ever did before in prosperity, in power, and in ail that makes a nation 
 great and glorious. It has ministered to the advantages of this people; and now 
 I am unwilling to add or take a,w,iy anything till I can see much clearer than loan 
 now that it' wants either any addition or lopping off. 
 ''^ There is one other subject about which I ought to say something. On that side 
 of the Chamber, you claim the constitutional right, if I understand you, to secede 
 from tae Government at pleasure, and set up an adverse Government of your own ; 
 that one State, or any number of States, have a perfect constitutional right to do it. 
 Sir, I can find no warrant in the Constitution for any doctrine like that. In my 
 judgment, it would be subversive of all constitutional obligation. If this is so, we 
 really have not now, and never have had, a Government; for tisat certainly is no 
 Government of which a State can do just as it pleases, any more than it would be 
 of an individual. How can a man be said to be governed by law, if he will obey 
 the law or not, just as he sees fit? It puts you out of the pale of Government, and 
 reduces this Union of ours, of which we have a'l boasted so much, to a mere con- 
 glomeration of States, to be held at the will of any capricious member of it. As to 
 South Cirolina, I will say that she is a .'mall State ; and probably, if she were sunk 
 by an earthquake to-day, we would hardly ever find it out, except by the unwonted 
 harmony that might prevail in this Chamber. [Laughter.] But I think she is un- 
 wise. 1 would be willing that she should go her own gait, provided we ..ould do it 
 without an example fatal to all government; but standing here in the highest 
 council of the nation, my own wishes, if I had any, must be under the control of 
 my constitutional duty. 
 
 I do not see how any man can contend that a State can go out of this Union 
 at pleasure, though I do not propose now to ai'gne that question, because that 
 has been done by men infinitely more able to argue it than I am. When it was 
 raised some thirty years ago, and challenged the investigation of the best minds 
 of this nation of all parties, it received a verdict that I supposed had put it at 
 rest forever. General Jackson, with all the eminent men that surrounded him in 
 his Cabinet, and in the councils of the nation, with hardly any exception, except. 
 Mr. Calhoun, held that the doctrine was a delusion, not to be found in the Consti- 
 tution of the United States; and not only so, but utterly destructive of all Gov- 
 ernments. Mr. Cadioun held the contrary. Mr. Webster, in his great controversy 
 with Mr. Hayne upon that subject, was supposed to have overthrown him, even 
 upon nullification, so utterly, that it was believed at the time that the doctrine 
 could never arise or sprout up again. But here it is to-day in full bloom and 
 glory : a State has a right to secede. Mr. Calhoun did not hold so. He held that 
 a State had a right to nullify a law of Congress that they believed to be unconsti- 
 tutional. Me took that distinction between the power of a State to nullify a law 
 of Congress and secession. Grounding herself upon the resolutions of 1798-99, 
 he held that a State, in her sovereign capacity, judging in the last resort as to 
 whether a law was warranted by the Constitution or not, must be the sole judge 
 of the infraction of the Constitution by the enactment of a law, and also of the 
 mode of remedy. In that, he hardly had a second at that period. But when you 
 come to the doctrine of seiiession, he himself says that that is not a constitutional 
 remedy. He did not treat it as such. Nay, sir, he goes much further than the 
 rres'dent of the United States has gone in his message, in which he declares that 
 the United States has no power to make war upon a seceding Stale. Mr. Calhoun 
 says we undoubtedly have that power. One remedy he calls peaceable and con- 
 stitutional, and the other not. I have not the book with me ; I intended to have 
 brought it, but forgot it ; but you will find this doctrine laid down in his famous 
 letter to Governor Hamilton, taking and working out the distinction between 
 peaceable nullification and secession, that puts an end to all the relationship be- 
 tween the General Government and the State, and enables the General Govern- 
 ment, if they see fit, to declare war upon such a State. Therefore I take it that 
 a State has no constitutional right to go out of this Government. 
 
 I acknowledge, to the fullest extent, the right of revolution, if you may call it 
 a right, ^nd the destruction of the Government under which we' live, if we are 
 di8contente<l with it, and on its ruins to erect, another more in accordance with 
 
■ 13 
 
 our wishes. I believe nobody at this dny denies the right ; but ihey that under- 
 take it, undertake it with this hazard: if tliey are successful, tlien all is right, 
 and they are heroes ; if they are defeated, they are rebels. That is the character 
 of all revolution : if successtul, of course it is well : if unsuccessful, then the Gov- 
 erument from which they have rebelled treats them as traitors. 
 
 I do not say this because I apprehend that any party intends to make war upon 
 a seceding State. I only assert their right from the nature of the act, if they see 
 rit to do so ; but I would not advise nor counsel it. I should be very tender of 
 the rights of a people, if I had full power over them, who are about to destroy a 
 Government which they deliberately come to the conclusion they cannot live un- 
 der ; but I am persuaded that the necessities of our position compel us to take a 
 more austere ground, and hold that if a State secedes, although we will not make 
 war upon her, we cannot recognize her I'ight to be out of the Union, and she is not 
 out until she gains the consent of the Union itself; and that the Chief Magistrate 
 of the nation, be he who he may, will find under the Constitution of the United 
 States that it is his sworn duty to execute the law in every part and parcel of this 
 Government ; that he cannot be released from that obligation; for there is noth- 
 ing in the Constitution of the United States that would warrant him in saying 
 that a single star has fallen from this galaxy of stars in the Confederacy. He is 
 sworn not to know that a State has seceded, or pay the least respect to their 
 resolutions that claim they have. What follows? Not that we would make war 
 upon her, but we should have to exercise every Federal right over her if we had 
 the power ; and the most important of these would be the collection of the rev- 
 enues. There are many rights that the Federal Government exercises over the 
 States for the peculiar benetit of the people there, which, if they did not want, 
 they could dispense with. If they did not want the mails carried there, the Presi- 
 dent might abolish the offices, and cease to carry their mails. They might forego 
 any such duty peculiarly for the benefit of the people. They might not elect their 
 ofi&cers and send them here. It is a privilege they have ; but we cannot force them 
 to do it. They have the right under the Constitution to be represented upon equal 
 terms with any other State; but if they see fit to forego that right; and do not 
 claim it, it is not incumbent upon the President to endeavor to force them to do 
 an act of that kind. 
 
 Eut when you come to those d4fti9s which impose obligations upon them, in com- 
 mon with the other members of the Coufederacy, he cannot be released from his 
 duty. Therefore, it will be incumbent on the Chief Magistrate to proceed to col- 
 lect the revenue of s-liips entering their ports, precisely in the same w.ay and to the 
 same extent that he does cow in every other St:i,te of the Union. We capnot re- 
 lease him from that obligation. The Constitution, in thunder tones, demands that 
 he shall do it alike in the ports of every State. What follows? Why, sir, if he 
 shiUs up the ports of entry so that a ship cannot dischai-ge her c.nrgo there or get 
 papers for another voyage, then r-hips will cease to trade; or, if he undertakes to 
 blockade her, and thus collect it, she has not gained her independence by seces- 
 sion. What must she do ? If she is contented to live in this equivocal state al) 
 would be well, perhaps ; but she could not live there. Ko people in the world 
 could live in that condition. Y\ hat will they do? They must take the initiative 
 and declare war upon the United States : and the moment that they levy w>»r force 
 must be met by force ; and they must, therefore, hew out their independence by 
 violence and war. There is no other v;ay under the Constitution, that I know oi', 
 whereby a Chief Magistrate of any politics could be released from this duty. If 
 this State, though seceding, should declare war against the United States, I do not 
 suppose there is a lawyer in this body but what would say that the act of levying war 
 is treason against the United States. That is where it results. We might just as 
 well look the matter right in the face. 
 
 The Senator from Texas says — it is not exactly his language — we will force 
 you to an ignominious treaty up in Faneuil Hall. Well, sir, you may. We know 
 you are brave : we understand your prowess; we want no fight with you; but, 
 nevertheless, if you drive us to that uecesiity, we mnst use all the powers of this 
 Government to maintain it intact in its integrity. If we are overthrown, we but 
 share the fate of a thousand other Governments that have been subverted. If you 
 are the weakest, then you must go to the wall; and that is all there is about it. 
 
14 
 
 That is the condition in which we stand, provided a State sets hei'self up in oppo- 
 sition to the General Government. 
 
 1 say that is the wa^' it seems to me, as a lawyer. I see no power in the Con- 
 stitution to release a Senator from this position. Sir, if there was any other, if 
 there was an absolute right of secession in the Constitution of the United States 
 when we stepped up there to take our oath of office, why was there not an ex- 
 ception in that oath ? Why did it not run " that we would support the Constitu 
 tion of the United States unless our State shall secede before our term was out ? " 
 Sir, there is no such immunity. There is no way by which this can be done that I 
 can conceive of, except it is standing upon the Constitution of the United States, 
 demanding equal justice for all, and vindicating the old flag of the Union. We 
 ..must maintain it, unless we are cloven down by superior force. 
 
 Well, sir, it may happen that you can make your way out of the Union, and that 
 by levying war upon the Government, you may vindicate your right to indepen- 
 dence. If you should do so, I have a policy in my mind. No man would regret 
 more than myself that any portion of the people of these United States should 
 think themselves impelled, by grievances or anything else, to depart out of this 
 Union, and raise a foreign flag and a hand against the General Government If 
 there was any just cause on God's earth that I could see that was within my reach, 
 of honorable release from any such pretended grievance, they should have it; but 
 they have set forth none ; I can see none. It is ail a matter of prejudice, super- 
 induced unfortunately, I believe, as I intimated before, more because you have 
 listened to the enemies of the Republican party and what they said of us, while, 
 from your intolerance, you have shut out all light as to what our real principles 
 are. We have been called and branded in the North and in the South and every- 
 where else, as John Brown men, as men hostile to your institutions, as meditating 
 an attack upon your institutions in your own States — a thing that no Republican 
 ever dreamed of or ever thought of, but has protested against as often as the 
 question has been up ; but your people believe it. No doubt they believe it be- 
 cause of the terrible excitement and reign of terror that prevails there. No doubt 
 they think so, but it arises from false information, or the want of information — 
 that is all. Their prejudices have been appealed to until they have become uncon- 
 trolled and uncontrollable. 
 
 Well, sir, if it shall be so; if that "glorious Ui»lon," as we all call it, under 
 which the Government has so long lived and prospered, is now about to come to a 
 final end, as perhaps it may, I have been looking around to see what policy we 
 should adopt; and through that gloom which has been mentioned on the other 
 side, if jou will have it so, I still see a glorious future for those who stand by 
 the old flag of the nation. There lie the fair fields of Mexico all before us. 
 The people they are prejudiced against you. They fear you intend to over- 
 run and enslave them. You are slavery propaganda, and you are fillibusters. 
 That has raised a Violent antagonism between you and them. But, sir, if we 
 were once released from all obligation to this institution, in six months they 
 would invite us to take a protectorate over them. They owe England a large 
 debt, and she has been coaxing and inviting us to take the protectorate of 
 that nation. They will aid us in it ; and I say to the commercial men of the 
 North, if you go along with me, and adopt this policy, if we must come to this, 
 you will be seven-fold indemnified by the trade and commerce of that country for 
 what you lose by the secession. Talk about eating ice and granite in the North ! 
 Why, sir, Great Britain now carries on a commerce with Mexico to the amount of 
 nearly a hundred million dollars. How much of it do we get ? Only about eight 
 million. Why so ? Because, by our treatment of Mexico, we have led them to 
 fear and to hate us ; and they have been compelled, by our illiberal policy, to place 
 themselves under the shadow of a stronger nation for their own protection. 
 
 The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] and my colleague [Mr. Pugh] have said 
 that we Black Republicans were advocates of negro equality, and that we wanted 
 to build up a black government. Sir, it will be one of the most blessed ideas of 
 the times, if it shall come to this, that we will make inducements for every free 
 black among us to find his home in a more congenial climate in Central America or 
 in Lower Mexico, and we will be divested of every one of them ; and then, endowed 
 with a splendid domain that we shall get, we will adopt a homestead policy, and 
 we will invite the poor, the destitute, industrious white men from every clime un- 
 
16 
 
 der heaven, to come in there and make his fortune. So, sir, we will build up a na- 
 tion, renovated by this process, of white laboring men. You may build yours up 
 on compulsory servile labor, and the two will flourish side by side; and we shall 
 very soon see whether your principles, or that state of society, or ours, is the most 
 prosperous or vigorous. I might say, sir, that, divested of this institution, who 
 doubts that the provinces of Canada would knock at our doors in a day? There- 
 fore, my friends, we have all the elements for building up an empire — a Republic, 
 founded on the great principles of the Declaration of Independence, that shall be 
 more magnifieent, more powerful, and more just than this world has ever seen at 
 any other period. I do not know that I should have a single second for this policy; 
 but it is a policy that occurs to me, and it reconciles ms in some measure to the 
 threatened loss or secession of these States. 
 
 But, sir, I am for maintaining the Union of these States. I will sacrifice every- 
 thing but honor to maintain it. That glorious old flag of ours, by any act of mine, 
 shall never cease to wave over the integrity of this Union as it is. But if they will 
 not have it so, in this new, renovated Government of which I have spoken, the 4th 
 of July, with all its glorious memories, will never be repealed. The old flag of 177G 
 will be in our hands, and shall float over this nation forever; and this Capitol, that 
 some gentlemen said would be reserved for the southern republic, shall still be the 
 Capitol. It was laid out by Washington; it was consecrated by him; and the old 
 flag that he vindicated in the Revolution shall still float from the Capitol. [Ap- 
 plause in the galleries.] 
 
 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sergeant-at-Arms will take proper measures 
 to preserve order in the gallery or clear it. 
 
 Mr. WADE. I say, sir, I stand by the Union of the States. Washington and his 
 compatriots fought for that good old flag. It shall never be hauled down, but shall 
 be the glory of the Government to which I belong, as long as my life shall continue. 
 To maintain it, AVashington and his compatriots fought for liberty and the rights 
 of man. And here I will add that my own father, although but a humble soldier, 
 fought in the same great cause, and went through hardships and privations seven- 
 fold worse than death in order to bequeath it to his children. It is my inheritance. 
 It was my protector in infancy, and the pride and glory of my riper years; and Mr. 
 President, although it may be assailed by traitors on every side, by the grace of 
 God, under its shadow I will die. 
 
LiBRftRV OF CONGRESS 
 011 895 837 »