.^•' 
 

 '. -^^ .^ 
 
 -^^^ ►t^it./'^... .> .!:.^*. V. .-j.*^^ 
 
 
 P^v;«k.>o ^/\-^i.% /..r^-.-'-o. 
 
 -^^o^ 
 
 
 
 /\ '^ 
 
 
 
 . *• A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^<b--^^ W^^; ^^^\ \^^/ .5''^'"''^^ -.^^W* '^^' ^^ '^ 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. JOHN J. PEAKCE, 
 
 OF PENNSYLVANIA, 
 
 ^ i 
 
 ON 
 
 THE SLAVERY QUESTION 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES, AUGUST 9, 1856. 
 
 « — __ _____ 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 1856. 
 
^A3^ 
 
 <?-ii 
 
.V 
 
 
 THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 
 
 The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the 
 «tate of the Union — 1 
 
 Mr. PEARCEsaid: j 
 
 Mr. Chairman: I have been desirous, for a 
 long time, to express my views and feelinf^s on 
 the great question that is agitating this mighty 
 nation from its center to its circumference, but- 
 my feeble health has prevented tlie execution of 
 that purpose until the present time; and even now 
 I find myself so much debilitated that I can hardly 
 hope to carry out my desire successfully. | 
 
 Sir, my feelings are deeply interested in the 
 absorbing question; and while I shall at least 
 attempt to say something expressive of the senti- 
 ments of my constituents, it is not ray intention 
 10 add fuel to the fire. No, I am free to say that 
 a. spirit of an inflammatory character has been 
 manifested to too great an extent by both sides of 
 tlie House; and I would much rather, were I able, 
 pour oil upon the wounds than deepen or aggra- 
 vate them. 
 
 Our common and beloved country is at this 
 lime in a state of excitement that'is indeed alarm- 
 ing; never before was it equaled. There may 
 have been as much feeling and bitterness in other 
 years, both in this House and in the other end of 
 the Capitol, by the representatives of the people, 
 when the question of slavery extension was being 
 discussed, and when that question had reached a 
 crisis. But, sir, the feeling and excitement then 
 were, comparatively speaking, confined there; 
 now, the mighty people are moved; they are like 
 the ocean, blown into tempestuous commotion by 
 the fury-winds of heaven. Yes, sir, all that has 
 passed heretofore, is only as " the cloud no larger 
 than a man's hand" — but look you now: see how 
 that cloud has increased until it darkens the whole 
 heavens, and East, West, North, and South, you 
 see the flood is coming! Yes, the great crisis 
 has arrived, and must be met; and, Mr. Chairman, 
 what is the cause of this lamentable state of 
 things? You see the two great sections of the 
 country battling with each other. A mighty strug- 
 gle is going on; and I ask for what.' And let the 
 answer go home to every American's heart like 
 a thunderbolt: It is a struggle between slave labor 
 and free labor; and that not in the States where 
 slavery is established, but in the Territories which 
 
 are held in common by the Union ! You may 
 look at the question in whatever light you please; 
 you may connect with it other side issues, but, 
 sir, it resolves itself into this one question: shall 
 slave labor or free labor succeed in the Territo- 
 ries? Our southern brethren have reasons and 
 interests which prompt them to toil that slave 
 labor may succeed; and the North, the West, and 
 the East, have reasons for struggling that free 
 labor may prevail; and, sir, I propose to notice, in 
 a general way, the reasons of both. 
 
 The great question of the South is that of self- 
 interest. Every new slave State runs up a hand- 
 some per centum upon every negro owned in the 
 South, by creating a demand for them; and as 
 the principal weaUh of the South consists in hold- 
 ing human beings in bondage, (the right or the 
 justice of which I have neither the time nor the 
 inclination to discuss at present,) the more slave 
 territory that is added to the Union, the greater 
 the demand; and of course the institution, which 
 ;they say, and say truly, was entailed on them, 
 spreads in a corresponding ratio, with all its 
 national evils. 
 
 j But the South has another reason why they 
 desire slave labor to succeed, and it is this: that 
 ■they may maintain their representative strength 
 in the Senate and House. On what other ques- 
 tion does the North and South differ about, to 
 make them jealous of superior numbers in their 
 representative force, any more than the East and 
 the West? Does the North or the West com- 
 plain when either adds to their representative 
 strength ? No; nor would the South, were it not 
 for the slavery question. Does not, then, this 
 ! second reason resolve itself into the first? And is 
 not the great absorbing and only reason of the 
 South for extending slavery, self-interest — the 
 desire of gain, in extending a demand and a mar- 
 ket for a tratHc injhuman beings— the extension 
 of an institution now violently demanded as a 
 right by the South, which eminent southern states- 
 men, though dead, yet living in the memories of 
 the people, have denounced as a national curse.* 
 
 The reasons of the North are more numerous 
 and more varied. There are in the Northafev, 
 and, sir, I may say but few, who arc Abolition- 
 ists — real, bonafide Abolitionists, who would not 
 only interdict slavery in the Terriiorics, but ex- 
 
tirpate it in the States, regardless of constitutional 
 rights or social consequences. They found their 
 hostility upon 'he conviction that the institution is 
 a sin against God. They class it with the worst 
 of sins, and in their misguided zeal would support 
 measures to procure its abolishment everywhere, 
 without regard to consequences. But, sir, I have 
 said there are but few in the North, and I will 
 say they are fewer now than in former years. If 
 I understand the principles of that other party in 
 the North, the East, and the West, now almost 
 as the stars in heaven for numbers, which you 
 haveseenfit to call the " Black Republican, "they, 
 as a party, have no sympathy with those Abo- 
 lition mad-caps. No, sir, our patriotism rises 
 above our prejudices; and, though opposed to 
 slavery in the abstract, we are willing to stand by 
 and maintain the compromises of the Constitution 
 as enacted and established by our fathers. We 
 are not disposed to interfere with it in the States 
 where it is already established, because it is se- 
 cured by the compromises of the Constitution. 
 We will teach our southern brethren by our ex- 
 ample some regard for the sacredness of plighted 
 faith — of the inviolability of compromises. But in 
 the Territories where slavery docs not exist — 
 where it was absolutely prohibited by a com- 
 promise which has been ruthlessly and wantonly 
 destroyed, we are determined to exercise our con- 
 stitutional rights as freemen to prevent and pro- 
 hibit its introduction. Who does not know that, 
 with these conservative views, this party, stig- 
 matized as " Black Republicans," has alike in- 
 curred the displeasure, condemnation, and spleen 
 of the Abolitionists and pro-slavery advocates.' 
 
 Then, sir, there are others in the North, who 
 think with many good people in the South, that 
 slavery is wrong — that it is an evil that has been 
 entailed on them, and one for which they are not 
 responsible; and let me tell gentlemen here from 
 the South, that the great mass of the Republican 
 party do not condemn them because their section 
 is blighted with what we think an evil, moral, 
 social, and national. No, sir, we would rather 
 sympathize with you than condemn you. We 
 know how this great curse (as we think it is) came 
 upon you, and we are ready to defend your con- 
 stitutional rights in the States, and even the insti- 
 tution we would so much dread ourselves, know- 
 ing that you have been educated in the midst of 
 it, and that all your sympathies and interests are 
 identified with it. But, as 1 said before, we are 
 opposed to spreading an evil into virgin soil 
 "where the excuse that it has been entailed cannot 
 "he set up or urged. 
 
 But perhaps the great reason why the North, 
 the East, and the West, oppose the extension of 
 BJavery, maybe characterized as twofold; thatis, 
 self-preservation, and national pride. In view 
 of these two sentiments, which pervade every 
 rational and honest heart, let me ask, what good 
 has the institution of slavery ever done for our 
 country, to command our admiration or our 
 approbation? In answering this question, we 
 will necessarily have to answer another: it is, 
 what evil has it done.' But how can we best 
 answer these questions.' I imagine, by contrast- 
 ing the North, where slavery does not exist, with 
 the South, where it has its uninterrupted sway. 
 And what is the contrast .' What is the difference 
 in point of population.' Does not the North out- 
 
 number the South almost ten to one .' Why thi.s 
 difference.' Is the South not as old as the North.' 
 Then why, I ask, this discrepancy in numbers? 
 Is it not because of the blighting influences of 
 slavery? What is the difference in a commercial 
 point of view? Have we not a great preponder- 
 ance over the South ? and has not the latter the 
 same natural advantages for commercial opera- 
 tions? What is the difference in agricultural pur- 
 suits, or products? Examine the agricultural 
 statistics of the North and South, and compare 
 them, and see if there is not in the result an argu- 
 ment perfectly irresistible in favor of free labor. 
 Now look at the almost incredible difference 
 between the North and the South in point of 
 manufacturing interests, and see what a sad 
 commentary you find against slave labor when 
 compared with free labor. Again, look, if you 
 please, at the difference between the North and 
 the South in point of internal improvements. 
 Why, who does not know that the South is fifty 
 years behind the North, in this respect ? And has 
 slavery had nothing to do with making this dif- 
 ference ? See also the contrast between the North 
 and the South in point of revenue to the General 
 Government. Will you look at these statistics, 
 and see? Would that all might not only look 
 and see, but feel the truth, that the difference 
 between free labor and slave labor is as the dif- 
 ference between the light of day and the darkness 
 of the night. 
 
 These, Mr. Chairman, are some of the reasons 
 why the North is opposed to slave labor, and 
 thus seek to introduce free, instead of slave labor 
 into the new States — a labor that gives to freedom 
 such a superiority in numbers, in commerce, in 
 manufactures, in agriculture, in internal improve- 
 ments, and in ability to give a revenue to the 
 General Government. 
 
 Now, if this contrast is a true one — if these 
 statistics do not lie, it is a matter of self-preser- 
 vation with the North, that slave labor should not 
 be introduced into the new States, for this obvious 
 reason: the northern States have their teeming 
 millions, whilst.the South has but a sparse pop- 
 ulation; and how rapidly are the former increas- 
 ing in numbers, not only by a natural process, 
 but look at the millions of foreigners crowding 
 our shores, and seeking in this great nation a 
 home. 
 
 Now, how long, at this ratio, will it be before 
 we are pressed with a population as dense as that 
 of the Old World; and do you not observe that 
 this great foreign element do not, and will not, 
 locate themselves in slave States ? There is plenty 
 of room for them there, and an abundance of 
 vacant or unoccupied land that might be purchased 
 at a low rate; but they touch it not, because they 
 have their own notions of slavery, and associate 
 with it the idea of tyranny and oppression; and 
 I it was this that led them to leave their own coun- 
 try to find a home in the land of liberty. Again, 
 they will not go to slave States, because most of 
 them are poor, and are seeking employment, and 
 they find it not there. And let me ask, Mr. 
 Chairman, what has given our country its great 
 glory and superiority over other nations? First, 
 it is because of our republican form of govern- 
 ment; and secondly, it is because of the length 
 and breadth of our Territories, the facilities of- 
 fered to the poor of going to a new country, and 
 
making themselves rich, and providiiis; abund- 
 antly for their growing; families. Why, sir, a 
 poor man from the JVortli, or a foreisrner comings: 
 to this country, with five hundred dollars in his 
 pocket, can go to Nebraska, or to Kansas, if it is a 
 free State, and investing his little all in lands, by 
 industry and economy, make a comfortable living, 
 and in a few years, when he ii;is passed the me- 
 ridian of life, and iiis children have come toman- 
 hood, he finds himself not only independent, but 
 his whole family well provided for; the country 
 has been populated, improvements have been 
 made, and he and hia family iiave grown up with 
 the country, become identified with it, and feel, 
 as I have said, like independent freemen But 
 would it be so were slavery introduced there ? Is 
 it so in slave States? No! Look at the great 
 free West, and tell me what it would have been 
 if the institution of slavery had been introduced 
 and tolerated. Her glory then would only be as 
 the faint glimmering of a star in the dark cloud, 
 to the brilliancy of the unobscured sun. 
 
 I have said, sir, that it is with the North a mat- 
 ter of self-preservation that compels an opposi- 
 tion to the introduction of slavery into the Terri- 
 tories; and I ask, wlien you look at our immense 
 and increasing native population, in connection 
 with the great foreign population coming in upon 
 us like a flood, and both their interests alike an- 
 tagonistic to tlie extension of slavery, do I not 
 represent the facts and condition of things fairly 
 and truly? I have also said that national pride 
 has influenced the North in iis opposition to the 
 extension of slavery; and where is the Ameri- 
 can who does not, from his national pride, feel 
 prompted to oppose every obstacle that stands in 
 the way of national growth and expansion in 
 population, commerce, agriculture, and general 
 wealth ? Sir, I need not repeat that other reason, 
 assigned by others— the imperative duty of re- 
 moving from us, so far as we can constitutionally, 
 that which has made us, in the eyes of other 
 nations, a hissing and a by-word. Sir, \ have 
 heard it said repeatedly on tlie floor of this House, 
 that if the party wiio advocate the doctrine of free 
 labor in the Territories, or who are opposed to 
 the extension of slavery, should succeed, that the 
 Union would be dissolved, and I confess that 1 
 have been amazed at these declarations. Now, if 
 the party opposing the extension of slavery into 
 the Territories were laboring to disturb that insti- 
 tution where it already exists in the States, and 
 where it has existed' coeval with the Republic 
 itself, then I could make some allowance for such 
 a threat. But I have neither known nor heard of 
 any attempt to be made by this party upon the 
 institution where it exists. On the other hand, 
 this party is as much opposed to any interference 
 of this kind as any poliiical party in the country; 
 their only opposition is to its extension — an op- 
 position invited and legalized, if illegal before, by 
 the Kansas and Nebniska bill repealing the Mis- 
 souri compnmiise. In that bill the friends of the 
 measure declare that it is the true intent and 
 meaning of the act not to legislate slavery into or 
 out of the Territory, but to leave the people free 
 to say whether they will have slavery or not. 
 This act only reiterated a right which we always 
 had, and, ihoughiiis believed that the declaration 
 in the bill was made in duplicity, we claim the 
 right, as a portion of the people, to say that sla- 
 
 very shall not go into the Territories. In the face 
 of the declaration thus made in the Kansas bill 
 by the fi-iends of slavery, I would ask, is the in- 
 c^ease of slave territory the only terms on which 
 the Union can be maintained? Is it so, that the 
 fair lands of the West are to be appropriated to 
 slave-breeding, and their wealth and jiromising 
 advantages thereby blighted, as the only condi- 
 tion of niaintaiiiing the Union? Why, sir, the 
 North has been charged with fanaticism on this 
 subject. Is there no fanaticism in such declara- 
 tions or conditions ? Dissolve the Union because 
 slavery cannot be extended ! What has it done 
 that it should l)e magnified into such imjiortance? 
 Will some one writi; or sjieak its eulogy? Has 
 It not cursed your soil, |iaralyzed the increase of 
 j yonr population, produced indolence amongyour 
 1 white population, and created indigence and mis- 
 lery? Are not these and other charges made 
 .against the " institution" true? and yet is it so, 
 that it must be spread into the Territories, or the 
 I Union be divided? Would it not come with a 
 I better grace from the North, with her crowding 
 j population and her increasing enterprise, to say, 
 I that if slavery shall interpose its blighting, witn- 
 I ering influence into the Territories, and there ex- 
 clude her white population, the Union shall be 
 dissolved? Yet the North says no such thing; 
 and I hofte she never will so far forget the mem- 
 ories of her revered ancestors, or the iilood they 
 poured out in the battles of the Revolution, as to 
 be guilty of any such consummate folly. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, notwithstanding these 
 threats, the people of the free States are in earn- 
 est, and their determination is as immovable as 
 the everlasting hills are firmly fixed; and I would 
 say in all kindness and frankness to gentlemen 
 here from the South, that they have but an im- 
 perfect idea of the extent of the anti-slavery ex- 
 tension spirit of the people of the North. A great 
 contest is now going on in the nation for the Pres- 
 idency; and if gentlemen here think that the Re- 
 publican sentiment is confined to the friends of 
 Mr. Fremont, they are greatly mistaken. No, 
 sir, the feeling is almost as general among the 
 friends of Mr. Fillmore. Why, sir, in the North, 
 the American party, in many ]ilaces, when calling 
 a Fillmore and Donelson meeting, head the hand- 
 bills " Friends of fri'edom, rally!" — and we call 
 ourselves the American Republican party. Nor 
 is tlie opposition to slave labor alone to be found 
 among the friends of Fillniore and Fremont; for, 
 strange as it may seem, many others are in favor 
 of the views of this same despised Black Repub- 
 lican parly who go in for Buchanan, and you will 
 see the evidence of it in tiie future. Yes, many 
 hitherto good and true Democrats are to be found 
 who tell you thc-y intend to vote for Buchanan, 
 but further the deponent saith not; others spit 
 upon th(! platform, and go for Buchanan, forget- 
 ting that tin; saliva falls upon the venerable sage 
 himself, for he is no more James Buchanan, hav- 
 ing lost jiis identity in the platform. Many 
 have lost not only their identity, but even their 
 lives, upon platforms. Others .say nothing, but 
 will do something, no doubt, in November; and, 
 sir, a goodly number of others aver tiiat they vvill 
 not sup|>oriany man who stands on the; Cincin- 
 nati platform, and they will vote, aouK^ for Fill- 
 more, and soiTie for Fremont; and then this spirit 
 is increasing, and what it may be by the coming 
 
6 
 
 election is yet to be seen. It is due, however, 
 from me to state, that the friends of Mr. Fillmore 
 think themselves more conservative tlian those of 
 Mr. Fremont. But, sir, this is a great mistake. 
 On this great question there can be no conserva- 
 tism. Hovvcai^ there be? What is the question? 
 It is this: Are you in favor of extending slavery, 
 or are you opposed to it? Who can show me 
 an intermediate position? Neither would inter- 
 fere with slavery in the States — yet both are 
 equally opposed to an extension of the evil, and 
 both, as they suppose, are resorting to the same 
 lawful means to prevent it. Where, then, I ask, 
 is the conservatism? I cannot see it; and if the 
 success of the Black Republican party would dis- 
 solve the Union, why would not the triumph of 
 the American Republican party, who avow the 
 same principles, and are laboring to accomplish 
 the same end, in the same way? 
 
 But it is not my purpose, in these remarks, to 
 make political capital for, or against, either of 
 the candidates, but simply to correct an impres- 
 sion that some have received, that the free-soil 
 strength of the North is all to be found in the 
 Fremont party. No, sir; and if many were not 
 deceiving themselves, and all the anti-slavery- 
 extension men were to unite, every northern State 
 would report such majorities as would astonish 
 and amaze the whole nation; and, sir, the iime is 
 very near at hand wlien, if slavery i.*^ -Xtended 
 by the means which have been resorted to in 
 Kansas, all the free States will be a unit on 
 that subject; party drill or affinities will be too 
 feeble to prevent it. If such means are repeated, 
 and sanctioned by the Administration, every other 
 question will become subordinate to this one in 
 the North, without distinction of party. And, 
 now, Mr. Chairman, what sane man does not 
 know that the present storm, increasing in vio- 
 lence every hour, and threatening danger, is the 
 fruitful and legitimate offspring of Democratic 
 legislation? Wliat was the condition of the coun- 
 try before the "little giant" of the West, as his 
 party is pleased to call him, laid his vile and bar- 
 barous hand on that sacred compact and compro- 
 mise, made by the united wisdom and patriotism 
 of our fathers, and tore it asunder with the ruthless 
 ignorance or wickedness with which the savage 
 of the plains rends the beautiful and harmonious 
 mechanism of the watch to sport its wiieels as 
 ornaments? By this ill-timed and uncalled-for am- 
 bitious act he opened the flood-gates of excitement, 
 sectional animosities, civil war, and bloodshed. 
 Was not the country, sir, in peace and harmony? 
 Why, sir, the old wounds were healed by this 
 balm,. and time had effectually effaced even the 
 ecars; and the country was like the setting sun, 
 without an intervening cloud. The storm had 
 long since jjassed, and all was quiet. And, sir, 
 1 ask, for what was the compromise violated? 
 Gentlemen from the South have rejieatediy said 
 here that they did not ask for it — that it was a 
 northern measure, pressed upon them, and they 
 would have been unwise to have repelled the 
 proffered boon. Sir, the secret is here: that same 
 "little giant," that has almost doubly damned 
 the once great and pure Democratic party, and 
 stamped upon it ihe broad seal of infamy, led by 
 a reckless, itching ambition, attempted a chef 
 d'auvre for the cluef executive ofiice of this great 
 nation, which was to prostrate every rival, and 
 
 leave him alone in the line of promotion He was 
 playing the Bonaparte — snatching the crown from 
 the Pope, and placing it on his brow with his own 
 hands. The destruction of the peace of the United 
 States was a bold undertaking for a small man. 
 A gnat can worry a huge elephant into a storm 
 of rage. It is much easier to tear down and de- 
 stroy, than to build up. The "little giant" was 
 but too successful in destroying the Missouri 
 compromise, and setting the country on fire. A 
 weak and passive Administration rather aided 
 than imposed a barrier to the consumination of 
 this purpose. But the "little giant" and the head 
 of this Administration have been indignantly 
 repudiated by tlie country— repudiated even by 
 that portion of the Democratic party South, whos* 
 favor and influence the reckless act was perpe- 
 trated to conciliate and secure. 
 
 And now, sir, what is this great Nebraska 
 Kansas bill ? Who will tell me what I am to un- 
 derstand by it? In the North, we are told by 
 the leading exponents of Democracy that it 
 means squatter sovereignty, or popular sover- 
 eignty — the right of the people of a Territory 
 to govern themselves; and this was the plausible 
 and deceptive argument used during the passage 
 of the bill. Senators from the South urged that 
 it could not be productive of slave States, be- 
 cause they were weak, few in numbers, whilst 
 the North had her hundreds of thousands of sur- 
 plus population, and would always have the ma- 
 jority. And further, they urged that slavery never 
 could go to Kansas; that the climate and soil 
 were such as to render slave labor unprofitable- 
 Northern Senators, participators in the act, went 
 a step further, and declared on the stump, in the 
 canvass following, that the repeal of the Missouri 
 compromise would not only make Kansas free, 
 but would carry freedom south, to the Isthmus 
 of Darien ! But now, sir, this doctrine of squat- 
 ter or popular sovereignly is denied by gentle- 
 men from the South, or rather its construction or 
 interpretation is disputed — one branch insisting 
 that it confers the right upon the residents, or in- 
 terlopers, at any time, and without regard to 
 numbers, to establish permanent rules and prin- 
 ciples, which shall bind and govern all who may 
 thereafter seek a home in it; while another branch 
 says it confers the right to do so only when the 
 population assumes a magnitude in numbers 
 qualifying it for admission in the Union as a 
 State. General Cass ranges himself with the 
 class who advocate the first branch of construc- 
 tion. The General is honest, and thinks there 
 can be no discrimination as to the time when the 
 right commences, if the right is conceded at alL 
 Southern gentlemen embrace and adojH the sec- 
 ond branch of construction. But, ask the Demo- 
 cratic party's "little giant," the father of the 
 bill, his views, and what does he say? Why, 
 sir, in perfect keeping with his usual duplicity, 
 he dodges an expression of opinion, and says it 
 is a judicial question, and not one for him to an- 
 swer. His is the non-commiital of the fox, who 
 informed his majesty, the lion, when invited to 
 express an opinion of the odor of his den, thai 
 he had "a bad cold, and couldn't smell at all, 
 at all." 
 
 Sir, we have the Kansas-Nebraska bill, with all 
 its beautiful results; and the very party ihat pre- 
 pared it, cannot agree as to what it means. The 
 
North contends that it is an exemplification of 
 the great doctrine of squatter sovereio;nty ; and 
 the South, that it is standing evidence that Con- 
 gress has no power to legislate upon the subject 
 of slaverV) and that they have a right to go into 
 the Territories, and to take with them the insti- 
 tution of slavery, just as the North has the right 
 to take with them any species of property they 
 may possess. In the agitation of this doctrine of 
 squatter sovereignly, and the denial of any right 
 in Congress to interfere in the Territories, we 
 should remember, that there is a Territory lying 
 beyond, but adjacent to, Kansas and Nebraska, 
 watching our movements, and wailing to take ad- 
 vantage of the doctrine of squatter sovereignty, 
 to introduce themselves into the Union with the 
 institution of polygamy as a part of their political 
 and religious rights. I refer to the Territory of 
 Utah. In this case the new doctrine may place 
 some members in an awkward predicament. 
 
 Now, sir, if there beany meaning at all in the 
 Kansas bill, it is that the people of a Territory 
 are to decide for themselves whether they will or 
 will not have slavery — it is ^jopular sovereignty; 
 and whatever other views the party with which 
 I am acting may take, I, speaking for myself 
 only, with this interpretation of the bill, am ready 
 to meet and fight the great question by it, and I 
 am sure of success with but half a chance. I do 
 not mean to say, that the principle laid down in 
 the Nebraska bill is my preference. No, I believe 
 the restoration of the Missouri compromise would 
 be far better; but the South say, " If you restore 
 the compromise, then we will dissolve the Union. " 
 Very good. Then let us meet the question on the 
 principle of popular sovereignty, and I am sure 
 It will lead to the same thing. It must be so. 
 What does the bill say .' In effect it says: Now, 
 here is a new Territory; if the North can send 
 more emigrants into it than the South, then shall 
 the Territory be free: on the other hand, if the 
 South can outnumberand outvote the North, then 
 is the Territory to be made a slave State. And, 
 Mr. Chairman, who does not see, that as the 
 North and the South are deeply interested in the 
 question — not only interested in it, but in many 
 places excited almost to desperation, that both 
 will pour in their population until the Territory 
 cannot supply their actual wants. The South and 
 the North will meet with all their interested feel- 
 ings and prejudices; every means, honest and dis- 
 honest, will be resorted to to defeat each other; 
 and can you imagine that they can settle the ques- 
 tion without the shedding of blood? No, sir; 
 and the first blow will lead to a general engage- 
 ment; and what though you have an army there, 
 the emigration will far surpass it. Now, if the 
 Union must be dissolved in the event of the res- 
 toration of the Missouri compromise, then, sir, 
 as the question must be met, I go for the Kansas- 
 Nebraska bill, meaning as it does the doctrine of 
 popular sovereignty; and if you ask me what 
 then are the chances of free labor, I tell you 
 they are as the chances of thirteen millions to 
 six millions, and I do not blame our southern 
 friends for cursing the doctrine of squatter sove- 
 reignty. 
 
 This, to my mind, Mr. Chairman, is a dark 
 
 ricture, look at it in any aspect you please, and 
 trust in God some other means may yet be 
 presented that will drive away the threatening 
 
 ruin; and let me ask, what claim has the South 
 on Kansas? Do they not seek to establish their 
 institution there in violation of the compromise? 
 Let us examine for a moment, and see how the 
 slave and the free States stand, as to the propor- 
 tion of territory ceded to, and occupied by each, 
 as acquired by the General Government. As the 
 exact area of our territorial acquisitions cannot 
 bo made, I will give their cost, and then see how 
 they are divided: 
 
 TerritDry of Louisiana (purchased from France 
 
 ill the year 1803) ^l.'ijOOOjOOO 
 
 Interest paid 8,327,353 
 
 Florida, (purchased of Spain) 5,000,000 
 
 Interest liaid 1 ,-130,000 
 
 Texas, (for boundarv) 10,000,000 
 
 Texas, (for indemnity) 10,000,000 
 
 Texas, (for creditors, last ('ongrcss) TjT.WjOOO 
 
 Indian expenses of all kinds, (say) 5,000,000 
 
 To purchase navy, pay troops, &e 5,000,000 
 
 All other expenditures 3,000,000 
 
 Evpense of the Mexican war 217,175,575 
 
 iSoldiers' pensions, and bounty lands, &c., (say) 15,000,000 
 
 Exppiii-es of the Florida war, (say) 100,000,000 
 
 Soldiers' pensions, bounty lands, &c., (say) . . . 7,000,000 
 To remove Indians, suppress hostilities, &c., 
 
 (sav) 5,000,000 
 
 Paid bv treaty, for New Mexico 15,000,000 
 
 Paid to extineiiish Indian titles, (say) 100,000,000 
 
 Paid to Georgia 3,082,000 
 
 $832,764,928 
 
 Many of the above items can be accurately 
 stated; others can only be estimated. But our 
 acquisitions of territory have cost us an immense 
 amount, and led to large expenditures. Theabove 
 is merely an approximation towards it. The ex- 
 pense of the Mexican war is given as slated offi- 
 cially by the Secretary of the Treasury in his re- 
 port in 1851. (See Appendix to Globe, volume 
 23, page 21.) This was, as Mr. Clay said in his 
 great speech in 1850, a war " made essentially 
 by the South, growing out of our annexation of 
 Texas;" a war into which the country was pre- 
 cipated by the action of a southern President; 
 a war of conquest, which Congress declared " was 
 unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by 
 the President of the United States." 
 
 It was at the instance of the slaveholding sec- 
 tion of the Union, and for its immediate benefit, 
 that all our purchases of foreign territory have 
 been made. It was most emphatically the South, 
 and the voice of "southern councils," that led 
 to the acquisition of Louisiana, Florida, Texas, 
 and New Mexico; and as it regards all sectional 
 issues — all questions of political ascendency — all 
 these acquisitions of territory have been made, 
 and have operated, for the direct and immediate 
 benefits of the slaveholding Stales. 
 
 Not one inch of territory has ever been pur- 
 chased or acquired of any foreign Power, since 
 the Constitution was adopted, at the instance of 
 the free-States, or which was intended for their 
 benefit. 
 
 Yet the free States have paid more than two 
 thirds of the entire cost of all these acquisitions 
 of territory, and the consequent expenditures 
 since incurred. They have borne their full share 
 in the wars which led to, or resulted from, these 
 acquisitions, in the expenditure of money, and in 
 the sacrifice of human life. 
 
 How has the purchased territory been divided.' 
 From the territory thus purchased, and paid for 
 by all the States, /ive new slave Stales have been 
 
8 
 
 admitted, having the following extent of terri- 
 tory and representation in Congress: 
 
 States. Square Miles. Senatars. Representatives. 
 
 1. Lnui.-iaiia 41, -246 2 4 
 
 2. MUsouri 65,037 2 7 
 
 3. Arkansas 5-2,191 2 2 
 
 4. Florida 59.268 2 1 
 
 5. Texas 335.389 2 2 
 
 5 Slave States.. ..543,369 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 The free States, if any, are yet-to be admitted! 
 Kansas and Nebraska, unless tlie unjust legisla- 
 tion that opened these free Territories to slavery, 
 and the violent measures adopted to establish it 
 in Kansas, aidrd and abetted by the present Ad- 
 ministration, shall enable slavery to take all, 
 even that part once secured to freedom, and from 
 whicli slavery was " forever prohibited .'" 
 
 At a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, 
 (over eight hundred millions,) we have obtained 
 the Territory for these five new slave States, by 
 which the slavoholding section have gained polit- 
 ically (and tiiat is the all-important object) ten 
 United States Senators and sixteen members of tids 
 House ! 
 
 California, it is true, has been admitted as a 
 free State; but it was the result of accident. The 
 territory acquired of Mexico, like all the rest, 
 was acquired for the benefit of the South. The 
 discovery of the mineral wealth of California led 
 to its rapid settlement and admission as a State, 
 before slavery had time to be transplanted there. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the party with whom I have 
 been acting here have been charged with section- 
 alism; and why.' Becau.se they are opposed to 
 the extension of slavery, and slaveliolding States 
 will not unite with them in the election of their 
 candidate for President. Now, sir, if the charge 
 be true, I ask the candid if it be not our misfor- 
 tune rather than our fault.' Must we not, in the 
 very nature of things, either be sectional, or give 
 up the great struggle.' I am sure, if the South 
 will join us, we will give them acordial welcome — 
 pledge ourselves to sustain their constitutional 
 rights — give them their fairdivision of the patron- ^ 
 age of the Government, as we will offer them,! 
 (should success crown our labors,) whether they j 
 unite with us or not. All this, and even more, : 
 would we do, but you spurn us from you — you 
 anathematize us with bitter words, and with 
 vulgar names — ay, more, when some of your 
 own citizens, in the exercise of freemen's rights, 
 did come, feeble though their numbers were, to 
 represent their State m the convention held for 
 all, you drove them from your State; and 1 ask, 
 is there no sectionalism in this .' Is there patriot- 
 ism in it; or the recognition of the freedom of 
 speech, or of conscience.' Sir, what is James 
 Buchanan but a sectional candidate.' The great 
 Millard Filbnore you have idolized — you even 
 now glorify his administration, and call him a 
 conservative man — then why do you not support 
 him ? Why is it (hat his old friends in tlie South 
 are forsaking liim in scores, and going over to 
 Buchanan.' Now, when you charge us with sec- 
 tionalism, look to it that you are not yourselves 
 so sectional, so extreme, tliat you desert the very 
 man you admit stood by you; and why do you 
 desert him.' Simply because he says he was 
 
 opposed to the violation of the Missouri compro- 
 mise, and you fear that he might favor its resto- 
 ration. What, I ask, is all this but sectionalism — 
 but ultraism .' Look at Kentucky. The friends 
 of Mr. Fillmore in the North liad hoped, and had 
 counted on Kentucky; but see how she has gone! 
 What encouragement i.s this for conservative 
 northern men .' No, sir, the truth is not to be 
 disguised; it is a sectional figlit, growing out of 
 a contest between free labor and slave labor, and 
 the violation of a fair, sacred, and time-honored 
 compromise; and the South goes for him who 
 goes furtiiest, even the Cincinnati platform in 
 which James Buchanan lias lost h's identity ! 
 
 This, Mr. Chairman, I have seen from the first, 
 and for that' very reason I have gone for Mr. 
 , Fremont. Mr. Fillmore personally is my pref- 
 erence. I believe in his honesty, his patriotism, 
 his great ability, but more especially would I go 
 for liim because he goes for the principles of 
 the American party. But, sir, I must now go 
 for John C. Fremont if 1 would see the party de- 
 feated who have brought all this trouble, this 
 civil war, and blood on us. The great question 
 stares us in the face, and must be met, and I 
 would appeal to the opponents of tjie Democratic 
 party, what chance, what hope have you of the 
 election of Mr. Fillmore .' Is there a single south- 
 ern State that he can carry.' I had hope at one 
 time that there was; but now all hope is gone. 
 ; Kentucky has shown her hand. Tennessee was 
 ! considered favorable; but is there a man here that 
 [ listened to the speech of one of her able Senators 
 j as he took his leave of Mr. Fillmore, that can 
 j hope for success there .' Maryland has been 
 thought most sure of all the souihern States; but 
 : both her Senators, Mr. Pearce and Mr. Pratt, 
 have come out openly for Buchanan; and I ask 
 the friends of Mr. Fillmore, to what southern 
 i State can you look with confidence .' To my 
 I mind it is hopeless; and in view of this deterin- 
 i ination of the South, what will the North do.' 
 ] What ought she to do .' Throw away her votes, 
 give up the great struggle for free labor, submit 
 tamely to the violation of the Missouri compro- 
 mise, the wrongs and outrages perpetrated on the 
 free-Slate people of Kansas, while their blood cries 
 for an avenger, and the smoldering ashes of their 
 dwellings arepleadingtheir cause.' Submittamely 
 while even your own statesmen, your brethren arc 
 now confined in prisons and wearing chains for the 
 pretended violation of infamous laws, passed by a 
 " bogus" Legislature — a Legislature elected by 
 fraudulent voters from Missouri, enacting laws 
 which would have disgraced the dark ages, and 
 which were condemned as unconstitutional even 
 by a Democratic Senate ! Submit without offer- 
 ing relief to these men, still confined in their dark 
 and gloomy cells for exercising the right of free- 
 dom of judgment and freedom of speech, though 
 all these wrongs and sulFcrings are appealing to 
 you .' 
 
 What, I ask, will you do .' For my part I have 
 made up my inind to go for the candidate who 
 will carry with him the North, the East, and the 
 West, just as surely as did the Republicans elect 
 Blair in Missouri, or as the State of Iowa gave 
 six thousand majority for them. 
 
 W46 
 
'^^ ^ , 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 

 D W 
 
 
 
 a5°x. 
 
 
 • T* .0 
 
 
 
 
 
 a5°<v 
 
 
 v..*"- 
 
 
 
 > V^^'S^^ ^^^'^Z ^^/^^\/ "O^^^- 
 
 ntv.lle F^ 
 
 fet 19S';