SPEECH

A '1,‘

MARS]}I17‘IEfI.I),

 

AND HIS

 S1§j’EEOI~I ON TIWIE OREGON BILL.

ii;
§



%

§

E

.1;

i?

g

‘2 .
§

8

S

3

E

3

§

1

3

.’

P

T’ W
2

6 V
of: E’.

 

MR. WE{BSTER’S SPEECH

MARSHFIELD, MASS.

DELIVERED SEPTEMBER 1,1848,

‘AND HIS

SPEECH ON THE OREGON BILL,

DELIVERED IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE,

AUGUST 12, 1848.

B 0 S T 0 N : M
IPRESS OF T. R. MARVIN, 24 CONGRESS STREET.

1848.

The following‘ correspondence explains the occasion of the Meeting at Marshfield, at
which Mr. Webster’s Speech was delivered.

MARSHFIELD, Ms., AUG. 2, 1848.
Hon. DANIEL WEBSTER: t

DEAR SIR,-—Tlie undersigned, VVhigs and fellow citizens ofynurs, are desirous of seeing
and coiiferriiig with you on the subject of our National Policy, and of hearing your opinions
freely expressed thereoii. We look anxiously on the present prospect ofpublic aliairs, and
on the position in which the ,Wliig party, and especially Northern Whigs, are now placed.
We should be grieved indeed to see Gen. Cass--so decided an opponent ofall those measures
which we think essential to the honor and interests of the cotintry and the prosperity of all
classes»-—-elected to the Chief Magistracy. On the other hand, it is not to be concealed, that
there is much discontent with the nomination made by the late Philadelphia Convention, of’
a Southern man, a military man, fresh from bloody fields, and known only by his sword, as
a Whig candidate for the Presidency.

So far as is in our humble ability, we desire to preserve the Union and the VVhig Party,
and to perpetuate Whig principles; but we wish to see also that these priiiciples may be
preserved, and this Union perpetuated, in a manner coiisistent with the rights of the ree
States, and the prevention of the farther extension of‘ the Slave power; and we dread the
cfiiacts of‘ the precedent---wliicli we think eminently dangerous, and as not exhibiting us in a
favorable light to the Nations of the Earth--of elevating a mere military man to the Presi-

deucy.
We think a crisis is upon us; and we would. gladly know how we may best discharge our

duties as true Americans, hottest men, and good Whigs. To you, who have been so long in

public life, and are able from your great experience and unrivalled ability to give us llIl'Ol‘*,
mation and advice, and upon w tom, as neighbors and friends, we think we have some claims,
we naturally look, and we should be exceedin 'ly gratified if, in any way, public or private,
you would express your opinion upon interesting public questions now. pending, with that

oldiiess and distiiictiiess with which you are accustomed to declare your sentiments. If you
can concur with our wishes, please signify to us in what manner it would be most agreeable
to you that they should be carried into effect.

Withilvery great regard,
Your Obedieut Servants,

DANIEL PHILLIPS,

GEORGE LEONARD,

GEO. H. WE'l‘Hl:1RBEE,
and many others.

 

To this invitation Mr. Webster returned the followiiig reply :---

MARSHFIELD, AUG. 3, 1848.

GENTLEMEN.---I have received your letter. The critical state of things at W ashiiigton
obliges me to think it my duty to repair thither immediately and take my seat in the Senate,
iiotwithstaiiding the state of my health and the heat of the weather render it disagreeable for
me to leave home.

I cannot, therefore, comply with your wishes at present 3 btit on my return, if such should
continue to be your desire, I will meet you and the other Whigs of Marshficld, in an uncere-
monious manner, that we may confer upon the topics to which your letter relates.

I am, Gentlemen, with esteem and friendship,
Your obliged fellow citizen, .

DANIEL .WEBSTER.

To Messrs. Dttsisi. PHILLIPS, Guoaen LEONARD, %

Geo. H. Wsrnsassn, and others.

Soon after; Mr. Webster's return, it was arranged that the Meeting sliould take place at
the “ Winslow House,” the ancient seat of the Winslow Family, now forming a part of l
Mr. Webster’s farm,-yon Friday, the first day of September.

"5' .

”” vitally connected, in myjudgment,

season,

Although it is not my purpose, during the recess of Congress, to address
public assemblies on political subjects, I have felt it my duty to comply
with your request, as neighbors and townsmen, and to meet you to-day;
and lam not unwilling to avail myself of this occasion to signify to the
people of the United States my opinions upon the present state of our public
affairs. I shall perform that duty, certainly with great franltness, I hope
with candor. It is not myintention to-day to endeavor to carry any point,
to act as, any man’s advocate, to put up or put down any body. I I wish,
and I propose, to address you in the language and in the spirit of confer«
ence and consultation. In the present extraordinary crisis of our public
concerns, I desire to holdrno man’s conscience but my own. Mylown
opinions I shall communicate, freely and fearlessly, with equal disregard
to consequences, whether they respectmyself or respect others. I

We are on the eve of a highly important Presidential election. In two

or three monthsthe peopleof this country will be called upon to elect an
Executive Chief Magistrateofthe United States; and all see, and all feel,
that great interests of the country are to be affected, for good or evil, by
the results of that election. ’

Of the interesting subjects over which the person who shall be elected
must necessarily exercise more or less control, there are especially three,
with the honor and happiness of the
country. . ‘ » r t I t

In the first place, the honor and happiness of the country irnperatively

require, that there shall be a chief magistrate elected whoshall not plunge.

us into further wars of ambition and conquest. I

And in “the second place, in my judgment, the interestsof the country
and the feeling of a vast majority of the People“ require that a President
of I these United States should be electedpwho will neither use oflicial
influence to promote, nor who feels any desire in his heartltopromiote, the
further extension of Slaveryin this community, [Great clteer-z'wg,] orthe
further influence of it in the public councils. ; I I   I it t I

In the third place, if I have any just estimate, if an experience, (not now
a short one,) in public affairs has enabled‘ me to know any thing of what the
public interest demands,
country does require an essential reform in the system of revenue and
finance, such as shall restore the prosperity, by prorribting the industry
and fostering the labor of the country, in its various branches. I l y ‘

Thereare other things important. Iwwill not -alludeto them. These
three I hold to be essential.* t I r t I

There are three candidates presented‘ to thechoice or the American-

people :

General Taylor is the Whig candidate, standing upon the nomination

of the Whig Convention. General Cassie
and now dominant party in the country;
in the person of

the candidate of the opposing
and a third candidate is presented

in the next place I. say, that the state of the

Mr. ‘Van Buren, by a convention of citizens assembled at

4

Buffalo, whose object, or whose main object, as it appears to me, is cone
tained in one of those considerations which I have mentioned; and that
is, the prevention of the further increase of slavery. An object in which
you and I, gentlemen, so far as that goes, entirely concur with them, I am
sure.

Most of us who are here to-day are Whigs, National Whigs, Massachu-
setts Whigs, Old Colony Whigs, and Marshfield ‘Whigs, [Clzeers-]; and if
the Whig nomination made at Philadelphia were entirely satisfactory to the
people of Massachusetts and to us, our path of duty would be plain.

But the nomination ofa candidate for the Presidency made by the Whig
Convention at Philadelphia, is not satisfactory to the Whigs of Massachu-
setts; that is certain : and it would be idle to attempt to conceal the fact.
It is now more just and more patriotic, it is more manly and practical, to
take facts as they are, and things as they are, and to deduce our own con-
viction of duty from what exists before us. .

However respectable and distinguished in the line” of his ownliprofession,
or however estimable as a private citizen, Gen. Taylor is a military man,
and a military man merely. He. has had no training in civil affairs. He
has performed no functions ofa civil nature under the Constitution of his
country. He has been known, and is known, only byhis brilliant. achieve-
ments at the head of an army. I I I t. I t it , v

Now the Whigsof Massachusetts, and I among them,'are of opinion
that it was not wise, not discreet, to go to the army for the selection of a
candidate for the Presidency of the United States. It is thefirst instance
in our history in which any man of mere military character has been pro-
posed for that high office.

Gen. Washington was a great military character; but by far a greater civil
character. He had been employed in the councils of his country from the
earliest dawn of the Revolution. He had been in the Continental Con--
gress, he had established a great character for civil wisdom and judgment.
After the war, as you know, he was elected a member of that Convention
which formed the Constitution of the United States; and it is one of the
most honorable tributes ever paid to him, that by that assembly of good
and wise men he was selected to preside over their de-liberaetions. And he
put his name first and foremost, to the Constitution under which we live.

President Harrison was bred a soldier, and at different periods of his
life rendered important military services. But President Harrison, never»-
theless, was, for a much greater period of his life, employed in civil, than
in military service. For twenty years he was either ‘Governor of a Ten-
ritory, member of one or the other House of Congress, or Minister abroad ;
and discharged allrthese duties to the satisfaction of his country.

This case, therefore, stands by itself; without a precedent or justification
from any thing in our previous history. It is for this reason, as I imagine,
that the Whigs of Massachusetts feel dissatisfied with this nomination.
There may be others, there are others; they are, perhaps, of less impor-
tance and more easily to be answered. But -this is a well-founded objec-
tion ; and in my opinion it ought to have prevailed, and to have prevented
this nomination. I know enough of history ‘to see the dangerous tenden-
cy of such resorts to military popularity. i it .

But, if} may borrow a mercantile expression, I may now venture to say,
that there is anotherside to this account. The impartiality with which I
propose to discharge my duty to-day, leads me to consider of that; And
in the first place, it tisllrto be considered, that.Gen. Taylor thus been nomi-
nated by a WhigConventi¢on, holden in conformity with the usages of the

“Whig party, and fairtly n»om‘inated, so far as I know. It is _*to be consid-

-ered, also, that he is the only Whig before the people, as a candidate for

the Presidency; and no citizen of thecount-ry, with any effect, can vote
for any other Whig, Ilet his preferences be what they might or may.

In the next place, it is proper to consider the personal character of Gen. ’

Taylor, and his political opinions, relations and connections, so far as they
are known. ' _ . v

New, gentlemen, in advancing to a few observations on this part of the
-case, I wish every body to understand that I have no personal acquaint-
ance whatever with Gen. Taylor. I never saw him but once, and that but
for a «few moments in the Senate. The sources of information are
open to you, as well as to me, from which I derive what I know of his
IchaIra—cte~r and opinions. ‘But I have endeavored to obtain access to those
sources. I have endeavored to inform and instruct myself by communica-
Itien with those who have known him in his profession as a soldier, in his
associations as a man, in his conversations and opinions on political
subjects; and I will tell you frankly what I think of him, according to the
best lights which I have beenable to obtain.

I need not say, that he is a skillful, brave and gallant soldier. That is I

admitted by all. With me, all that goes but very little way to makeout
the proper qualifications for President of the United States. But what is
more important, I believe that he is an entirely honest and upright man.
I believe that he is modest, clear~headed, of independent and manly
character, possessiiig amind trained by proper discipline and self-control.
I believe that he is estimable and amiable in all the relations of private
life. I believe that he possesses a reputation for equity and fair judg-
ment, which gives him an inlinence over those under his command,
beyond what is‘~con.ferred' by the authority of station. I believe that
he is a man possessing the confidence and attachment (Jill all vvhohave
been near him and know him. And I believe, that if elected President,
he will do his best to relieve the country from present evills, and guard
it against future dangers. . ‘So much for what I think of the personal
charIacterVol' Gen. Taylor. v I I I I
II, will say, too, that so far; as I have observed, hisconductisince he has
been a candidate for the oflice of PresiIdent,.has been irreproachabIl=e. I
-hear no intriguelirnputed to him, no contumelious treatment of rivals.  I
«do not find him making promises or holding out hopesto any men or any
party. I do notified him putting forth any pretensions of his own, and
therefore I think of him very much as he seems to think of himself, that he
is an honestman, of an independent mind and of upright intentions.
And as to his qualifications for the Presidency, he has himself nothing
tosayabontit. .  II ” t I_ I
l And now, ifriends and fellow tovvnsmen, with respect to his political
opinions andllrelatious, I can say at once, I that I.beI‘lieve him to be; a
Whig; I believe him to hold to the main doctrines of the Whig party.
To think otherwise, would be to imputelto him a degree of tergiversatjion
and fraudulent deception, of which I snpp:ose him to be entirely incapable.
Gentlemen, it is worth our while tcwconsider in what manner General
Taylor has become a candidate~ forthe Presidency of the United. States.
It would be at great mistake to suppioseIthat he was made such merely
by the nomination of the PhiladelphiaConviention; forhe had been nom-
inated for the Presidency in a great many States, by various conventions
and meetings of the people, a year befere 4the,ConvenIItion, at Philadelphia
assembled. . I“ w I I I I  t I
1 an

6

r Gentlemen, the whole history of the world shows, whether in the most
civilized or the most barbarous ages, that the affecticris and admiration
of mankind are always easily carried away towards successful military
achievements. The story of all Republics, and all free Governments show
this. And we know in the case now before us, that so soon as brilliant suc-
cess had attended Gen. 'I‘aylor’s operations on the Rio Grande, at Palo
Alto and other places, spontaneous nominations sprang up for him.

And here let me say, that, generally, these were Whig nominations.
Not universally, but generally, these nominations, made at various times
before the assembly of‘ the Philadelphia Convention, were Whig nomina-
tions. General Taylor was esteemed, from the moment that his military
achievements brought him into public notice, as a Whig General. ,

You all remember that when we were discussing his merits in Congress,
upon the question of giving thanks to the army under his command, and
to himself, among other questions, the friends and supporters of Mr. Polk’s
administration denounced him as being, and because he was, a Whig Gen-
eral. a

My friends near me, whom I am happy to see here,” belonging to the
House of R.epresent.atives, will remember that a leading man of"the party
of the Administration declared in his place in Congress, that the policy of
the Administration connected with the Mexican war would never prosper,
till the President recalled those Whig,G_-enerals, Scottrandt Taylor. The
policy was a Democratic policy. The argument was-, that-the men to carry
out this policy should be‘Democratic men, The oflicers to light the bat-
tles should be Democratic officers, and on that ground, the ordinary vote

of l£l1E’i.I’lltS was refused to Gen. Taylor, on the part of the friends of the

Administration. -

Let me remark, in the next place, that there was no particular purpose
connected with the advancement of Slavery, entertained, generally, by
those who nominated him. As I have said, they were Wliig nominations,
more in the Middle and Northern, than in the‘ Southern States, and by
persons who never entertained the slightest desire, by his nomination, or
by any other means, to extend the area of slavery of the human race, or
the influence of th_e slave-holding States in the Councils of the Nation.

The Qualcer city of Philadelphia nominated Gen. Taylor; the Whigs
all over the Union nominated him, with no such view. A great conven-
tion was assembled in New York, of highly influential and respectable
gentlemen, very many of them well l£I1OWl'1 to me, and they nominated
Gen. Taylor with no such view. Gen. Taylor’s nomination was hailed,
not very extensively, but by some enthusiastic and not very far-seeing
people in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. = , i

There were, even among us, in our own State, Whigs quite early enough,
certainly, in manifesting their confidence inthis nomination; a little too
early, it may be, in uttering notes of exultation in our anticipated triumph-.
It would have been better if they had waited. a ,

Now the truth is, gentlemen, the truth is, and no man can avoid seeing
it, unless, as sometimes happens, the object is too near our eyes to be dis-
tinctly discerned, the truth is, that in these nominations, and also in the
nomination at .Philadelphia,_in these Conventions,.and also inthe Conven-
tion at Philade-lphia, Gen. Taylor was nominated exactly form this reason:
That, believinghim to bee :Whig, they thought he could bechosen more
easily than any other, Whig. This is the whole of it. That sagacions,
wise, far-seeing doctrine of availability, lies at thebottom of the whole
matter. [‘Trememl0us entlms-iasm and applause} r "

7

So far, then, from imputing any motive to these'Convcntions over the
country, or to the Convention in Philadelphia, as operating on a majority
of the members to promote slavery by the nomination of Gen. Taylor, I do
not believe a word of it,—--not one word. I see that one part of what is
called the platform of the Buffalo Convention, says that the candidates be»
fore the public were nominated under the dictation of the slave power.
I do not believe a word of it. [Applause] I :I

In the first place, the Convention at Philadelphia was composed, in a
very great majority, by members from the Free "States. By a very great
majority they might have nominated any body they chose. I

But the Free States did not choose to nominate a Free State man, or a
Northern man ; even our neighbors, the States of New England, with the
exception of New Hampshire and a part of Maine, neither proposed nor
concurred in the nomination of any Northern man; Vermont would hear
nothing but the nomination of a Southern and slaveholding candidate;
Connecticut was of the sarne mind, and so was Rhode Island; the North
made no demand, nor presented any request for a Northern candidate ;. not

attempted any union among themselves for the purpose of promoting the

nomination of such a candidate. , .

They were content to take their choice among the candidates of the
South. It is preposterous, therefore, to pretend that a candidate from the
Slave States has been forced upon the North by Southern dictation.

And in the next‘ place, itis true that there were persons from New Enu
gland, most zealous and active, and who were most earnest in procuring
the nomination of Gent Taylor, and men who would cut off their right
hands before they would do any thing t.o promote slavery in the United
States. I do not admire their policy, indeed I have very little respect for
it, understand that; but I acquit. them of had motives. I know the leading
men in that Convention. I thinltl understand the motives that governed
them. I Their reasoning was this: “Gen. Taylor is a Whig; not eminent
in civil life, not known . incivil life, but still a man of sound Whig princi-
, les. I Circumstances have given hirna reputation and «solar iuthe country.

f he shall he the Whig candidate, he will be chosen I; and with him, there
will come into: the two Houses of Congress an augrrtentatioriI,of Whig
strength. ,The Whig majority in the House of Representatives will be
increased“ The Loco Foco majority in the Senate will be diminished.
That was theview, and such was the motive, however wise orhoweier
unwise,Ithat governed avery large majority of those who composed the
Convention at Philadelphia.. t I I ~ . t

i Now, gentlemen, in my opinion this wasa wholly unwise policy; it was
short.-»sighted and teni,pr)1*isit1gv on questions of greatprinciples. But I
acquit thosewho adopted it of any such motives as have been ascribed to
them, and especially what has been ascribed to them in a part of this Buf-
falo Platform. i . r I ~ II  t , a

Such, gentlemen, are the circumstances connected with the nomination
of Gen. Taylor. I only repeat, that . those. who had the most agency
originally in briiigirig him before the people,-wereIWliig Conventions, and
Whip; meetings inthe several States,Free States, and, that a great major-
ity ofthat Convention which nominated~h‘im in Philadelphia were from the
Free States and might have rejected him if they had ichosenI,.and selected
any body else on whom they could have united. II a l I. y

r This is the case, .gentlemen,. as far as I can discern it, and exercising
upon it as impartial a judgment asJI can form, this is the case. presented to

T8

the Whigs, so far as respects the personal fitness and personal character of

‘Gen. Taylor, and the circumstances which have caused his nomination».
Now, fellow citizens, if we were weighing the propriety of nominating

such a person to the Presidency, it would be one thing; if we are considm

ering the expediency, or I may say the necessity, (which to some minds

may seem to be the case-,) of well meaning and patriotic Whigs supporting
himafter he is nominated, that is quite another thing. And that leads to
the consideration of what the Whigs of Massachusettspare to do, or such
of them as donut see fit to support Gen. Taylor. Of cotirse they must vote
for Gen. Cass; or they must -vote for Mr. Van Buren; or they must omit
to vote at all.

I agree that there are cases in which, if we do not know in what direc-
tion to move, we -ought to stand still till we do. I admit that there are
cases in which, if one does not know what to do, he had better not do
he knows not what. But on a question so important to ourselves and the
country ; on a question of a popular election under Constitutional forms in
which it is impossible that every man’s private judgment can prevail, or
every man’s private choice succeed, it becomes a question of conscientious
duty and patriotisnnwthat it is best to do upon the whole. And that leads
to the considerations which should influence Whigs, in my opinion, upon
the question now before us.‘ I I _ t l 

Under the practical administration of the Constitution of the United
States, there cannot be a great range of personalril choice in regard to the
candidate for the Presidency. In order that their votes may be effective,
men must give them for some one of thosewho are prominently before
the public. This is the necessary result of our forms of government, and
from the provisions of the Constitution And it does, therefore, bring men
sometimes to the necessity of choosing between candidates, neither of
whom would be their original, personal choice. *

Now, what is the contingency? What is the alternative presented to the
Whigs of Massachusetts’! In my judgment, fellow citizens, it is merely
one: the question is between Gen. Taylor and Gen. Cass. And that is
the only question. [Gr-cat ser2Sati0n.]

I am no more skilled to foresee political occurrences than others. Ijudge

"only for myself. But, in my opinion, there is not the least probability of any

other result. than the choice of Gen. '"l"‘aylor or Gen. Cass.

I know that the enthusiasm of a new-formed party, that the popularity
‘of’ a new-formed name, without cotnmt1ni'catir'ig any new-«formed idea,
[Eat/zusiasrrt] may lead men to think that the sky is to fall, and that larlts
are suddenly to be taken. I entertain no such expectations. I speak
without disrespect ofthe Free Soil Party. I have read their platform, and

though I think there are some unsound places in it, I can stand‘ on it

pretty well. ‘But I see nothing in it both new and valuable. What is
valuable is not new, and what is new is not valuable. I

lfthe term of Free Soil party, or Free Soil men, designate those who are
‘fixed, and unalterably fixed, in favorof the restriction of slavery, are so to
-day andwere so iyesterday, and have been so for some time, [Lang/tier]
then I hold myself to be as good a Free Soilrman as any of thelBufl'alo
Convention. if 1lIztc7tvcla_p“pirtg.] I prayto know who is to put beneath my
feet afreer soi""than that upon which I have stood ‘ever since I have been
inpublic life’! I pray to know who is to make my lips freer than they
lalways *havetbeen, or toiuspire into my breast a more resolute and fixed
determination to resist the advancesiand encroacyhinrents of the slave power

9.

than has inhabited it since I, for the first time, opened * my‘ mouth in the
councils of the-country’! [Great e:t:cz'trment.],

The gentlemen at Buffalo have placed at the head of their party, Mr.‘

Van Buren, a gentleman for whom I have all the respect that I should
entertain for one with whom I have beenassociated, in some degree, in
publiclife for many years, and who has held thehighest oflicesa in the
country. But really, speaking for myself, ifll were to express confidence
in Mr. Van Buren and his politicson any question, and most especially
this very question of slavery, I think the scene wouldtborder upon the
ludicrous, if not upon the contemptible.

I never proposed anything in my life,of a general and public nature, that
Mr. Van Buren did not oppose. Nor hasit happened to me to support
any important measure that he did propose. And if he and I now were to
find ourselves together under the Free Soil flag, I am sure, that with his
accustomed good nature, herwould laugh. [Lauglttm] If nobody were
present, we should both laugh [z'ncreused tang/ztcr-jhom the ourfience] at the
strange occurrences and stranger jumbles of political life, that should have
brought. him and me to sit down cosily and snugly, side by side, on the
same platfiorm. That the leader of the Free Spoil party should so sud-
denly have become the leader of the Free Soil party, would be a joke to
shake his sides and mine.

Gentlemen, my first acquaintance in public life with Mr. Van Buren was
when he was pressing with great power, the election of Mr. Crawford to
the Presidency, against Mr. Adams. Mr. Crawford was not elected,«and
Mr. Adams was. Mr. Van Buren was in the Senate nearly the whole

of that Administration ; and during the remainder of it, he was Governor

of the State of. New York. And it is notorious, that he was the soul and
centre, throughout the whole of Mr. Adams’s term, ofthe opposition made
to him. And he did more to prevent Mr. Adams’s election in 1825, andito
obtain Gen. .Iackson’s election, than any other man, yes, than any ten
other men. » A ' A r ”

Gen. Jackson was chosen. Mr". Van Buren was appointed his Secretary
ofstate. It so happened that in July, 182%), Mr. McLane went to England
to arrange the“ controverted, difficult and disputed point on the suh_j~ect of
the colonial trade. ' Mr. Adams had held. a high tone on that subject. He
had demanded, as a reciprocity and a right, the introdiuction. of ouripro-l
ducts into all parts of the British territory, freely, in our own vessels,
since Great. Britain was allowed ‘to bring her produce intothe United
Stat-esiupon the same terms. Mr. Adams‘ placed this upon terms of re-
ciprocity and justice... Great Britain would not yield. Mr. Van Bnren, in
his instructions to,Mr. Mcluane, told him to yield I that question of right,‘
and thenwent on to say, that the administration in which he was Secre-
tary of State, that is Gen.i.l'ackson’s, fought notto be debarred in "England

bythe English government -from the enjoympent of that which he was

willing to call notaright, but a boon, or a privilege. Gen. .Iackson’s
adminwistration, he said, ought not who refused ‘that,on. ‘account of the
misbehavior of Mr. Adams’s adrministration. A That is the sum and sub»
stancelofr the instruction. _ - i l  3 J   t 1 
;Well, gentlemen, it was one of theumost painful duties of my . life, on
account of this, to refuse my assentto Mr. Van Burs-n’s'nomination. It
was novel in our history, when an adrninistration c~hanges,for the new

administration to seek ‘to obtain privileges on the assertion that they
haveabandoned the ground of their predecessors. I suppose that suchiar
  course is holden to be taltogether‘ undignified, byiall public men. When I

to

went into the Department of State under General Harrison, I found in

the conduct of my predecessor many things that I could havewished had
been otherwise. Did I retract a jot”‘or tittle of what Mr. Forsyth had said’!
I took the caselas he had left it, and conducted it upon the principles
which he left. And I should have considered that I disgraced myself,
if I had said, “ Pray, my Lord Ashburton, we are more rational persons

than our predecessors, we are more c‘onsiderat;e than they, and intend to

adopt an entirely opposite policy. Consider, my dear Lord, how much
more friendly, reasonable, and amtable we the successors are, than our
predecessors.” I

But now, on this very subject of the extension of the slave power, I

would by no means do the least injustice to Mr. Van Buren. If he has
come up to some of the opinions expressed in the platform of the Buffalo
Convention, I am very glad ‘of it. I do not mean to say that there may
not be very good reasons for those of his own party who cannot con-r
scientiously vote for General Cass, to vote for him, because I think him
much the least dangerous of the two. I . i
Butin truth, looking at Mr. Van Buren’s conduct as President of the
United Sta,tes,I am amazed to find that he should be placed at the head:
of a party professing to be, beyond all other parties, friends of liberty
and enemies of African slavery in the Southern States. Wily, the very
first thing that Mr. Van Buren did after he was President, was to declare
that if COl‘)gl'eSS interfered with slavery in the District of Columbia he
would apply the Veto to their Bills. ‘ ~
Mr. Van Buren in his Inaugural, quoting from his letter accepting his
nomination, tsaysthatvhe therein declared that “I must go into the
Presidential chair the inflexible and uncompromising opponent of every
attempt on the part of Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Co»-
lumbia, against the wishes of the slaveholding States; and also with a
determination equallydecided to resist the slightest interference with it in
the States Where it exiS=t8.”v He then proceeds, “I submitted also to my
fellow citizens, with fulness and frankness, the reasons which led. me
to this determination. The result authorizes me to believe that theyihave
been approved and are confided in, by a majority of the people of the
United States, including those whom -they most intrnediatelytafifect. It
now only remains to add, that no bill conflicting with these views can ever
receive my constitutional sanction.” -t i i .
In the next place, we know that Mr. Van Burenfs casting vote was
given for a law of very doubtful propriety, a law to allow Postrnasters to
open the mails and see if there was any incendiary matter in them, and
if so, to destroy it. I do notlsay that there was no consstitutional power to
pass such a law. Perhaps the Southern statesmen thought it was necessary"
to protect themselves from insurrections. So far asanything enclangers
the lives and property of the tSouth,so far I agree that there may be such
legislation in Congress as shall prevent such results. i _ 1
But, gentletneu,no, man has exercised a more controling influence on
the conduct of his tfriends, in this country, than Mr. Van Bureu. *-I take

it,._that the most important event in our time, tending to the extension.
of-tslavery and its everlas~t~tng ‘esta—bltshtnenton this continent, wasthe

me ask,——-p-three orfour years ago, whzere was he madam’! , .

E~very.>friend iirolt’. Mr.‘ Van. t:BllI'€I1l,jvS0~ far as I know, supported 
rneasure._ _~'I‘he two a Senators; from New York supported iit,»and the
members of the Housesof R»epr~e:sentatti*ves.tfrom New Yorksupported “it,
and nobody resisted but Whigs.

anniettationtofrTexas,in 184.4. f Where was Mr.» Van Buren th~e»n’l i Let

11

And I say in the face of the world, I say in the face of those connected
with, or likely to be benefited by, the Buffalo convention, I say to all of
them, that there has been no party of men in this country, which has
firmly and sternly resisted the progress of the Slave Power bu_t the Whigs.

Why, look to this very question of the annexation of Texas. We talk

of the dictation of the Slave Power! At, leastrthey do, I do not. I do .

not allow that any body dictates to me. They talk of the triumph of the
Southiiover the. North ‘i There is not a word of truth or reason in the
whole of it. I am bound to say, on my conscience, that of allthe evils
-inflicted upon us by these acquisitions of slave territory, the North has
borne its full part in the infliction. Northern votes, in fullproportion,
have been given in both Houses, for the extension of territory, and forthe
extension of . slave territory.- . y it

We talk of the North. There has been no North. I think the North
Star is at last discovered; I think there will be a.Nurt/L; but up to the
recent session of Congress there has been no North. What I mean to
say is, I am to understand a geographical section of the country, in
which there has been found a strong, conscientious, and mtited opposi-
tion to Slavery, no such North has existed.
, Pope says, you know,

“ Ask ‘ where ’s the North?’ At York, ’tis on the Tweed;
In ‘Scotland, at the Orcades; and there,
At Greenland, Zembla, or the Lord knows where.”

Now, if there has heretofore been such a North as I have described, a
North, strong in opinion and united in action against Slavery, if such
a, North has existed any where, it has existed ‘ the Lord knows where,’ I
do not. Why, on this very question of the admission of Texas, it may
besaid with truth, that the North let in Texas. The Whigs, North and
"South, resisted Texas. Ten Senators from slave holding States, of the
Whig party, resisted Texas. Two only, as I remember, voted for it.
‘But the Southern Whig votes against Texas were overpowered by the
Democratic votestfrom the free States, and from New England among
the rest. Yes, if there had not been votes from New England infavor of
Texas, Texas would have been out to this day. Yes, if men from . New
England had been true, Texas would have been nothingibnt Texas still.-

There were four votes in the Senate from New England in favor of the
admission of Texas, Mr. Van Buren’s friends, Democratic Amemhers: one
vfromt Maine; two from New Harnpshire; one from Connecticut. Two
of these gentlemen were confidential friends of Mr. Van Buren, and had
both been members of his Cabinet. They voted for Texas; and they let
in Texas, against Southern Whigs and «Northern ‘Whigs. That is the
truth of it, my friends. Mr. Van Buren, by the wave of his hand, could
have kept out Texas. A word, a letter, though . ithad been even shorter
than Gen. Cass’s letter to the Chicago Convlention, would have been
lenough, and would have done the work. But he was silent. A
tWh~en Northern mernbers of Congress voted, in 1818, for the Missouri
Contnpromise, against the known williiof their constituents, they were
called I“ ough Faces.” I am afraid,fe,l?low citizens, that the generation
of I“ dougih faces” will be taslperrpetualllas the generation of men.

In 1844, as we all know, Mr. Van. Buren was a candidate for the Presi-
dency, on the part of the Democratic party, but lost the nomination at
Baltilmtore. Aindyrwe nowillearnifrornva letter from General] Jackson to Mr.

i:1B»utler, that  Van :B‘uren’s cla.irns were superseded because, after all,

.12

the South thought that the accomplishment of the annexation of Texas
might be more safely intrusted to Southern hands. "We all know that t-he
Northern portion of the Democraticparty were friendly to Mr. Van Buren.
Our neighbors from New Hampshire, and Maine, and elsewhere, were Van
Buren men. But the moment it was ascertained that Mr. Polk was the
favorite of the South, and the favorite of the South upon the ground that I
have mentioned, as a man more certain to bring about the annexation of
Texas than Mr. Van Buren, these friends of Mr. Van‘ Buren in the North
all “ caved in ;” not a man ofthern stood. Mr. Van Buren himself wrote
a letter very complimentary to Mr. Polk and Mr. Dallas, and found no fault
with the nomination. .

Now, gentlemen, if they were. “dough faces” who voted for the Miss-
souri Compromise, what epithet shall describe these men, here in our New
England, who were so ready, not only to change or abandon shim whom
they most cordially wished to support, but did so in order to make more
sure the annexation of Texas. i . ~,

They nominated Mr. Polk at the request of gentlemen of the South, and
voted for him, through thick and thin, till the work wasaccomplished, and
Mr. Polk elected. ‘ i

For my part, .I think that “ dough faces” is an epithet not sufliciently
reproachful. Now, I think, such persons are dough faces, with dough
heads, and dough hearts, and dough souls; [Slwzzts of laughter] that they
are all dough; that the coarsest potter may mould them to vessels of honor
or dishonor,-—---most readilyrto‘ vessels of dishonor. I

,Now, what do we see! Repentance has gone far. There are among
theseverypeople, these very gentlemen, persons who espouse, with great
zeal the interestsof the Free Soil party. I hope their repentance is as

sincere as it appears to be. I hope it is honest conviction, and not merely
:a new chance for power, under a new name and a new party. . But, with
-all their pretensions, and with all their patriotisrn,I see dough still sticking

on some of their cheeks. And therefore I have no confidence, not a par»
ticle. I do not mean to say, that the great mass of the people, especially
those who went to that Convention from this State, have not the highest
and purest motives. I think they act, unwisely, but I acq,uit~them of dis-
honest intentions. But with respect to others, and those who have been
part and parcel, those who have brought slavery into this Union, I distrust
them all. If they repent,» let them, before we trust them, do works worthy
of repentance. r t r r

I have said, gentlemen, that in my opinion,if it were desirable to place
Mr. Van Buren at the head of Government, there isno chance for him.
Others are as good judges as I am. But I am not able to say that I see
any State in the Union in which there is a reasonable probability that he
will -get the vote. There may be. Others are more versed in such statistics
thanl am.. But I see none, and thetrefore I think that the issue is reduced
exactly to be between Gen..Cass and Gen. Taylor.

You may remember, that in the discussions of 1944, when Mr. Birney

was drawing ‘of? votes from the Wliig candidate, I said that every vote
for Mr. Birney was rhalfairrvote for Mr. Polk. Is it nottrue that the
Liberty vote abstracted from. Mr. lClay’s vote in the State of New York,

made Mr. Polk President’! at That is as clear as anyrhistorical fact. i And
in rmyejudgment,litgwillr be so now. I consider every Whig ‘vote given
to Mr. Van. Buren, directly. aiding the election of Mr. Cass. Mark, I say,
Whig rvoteur-1i,,Nowl. there may be» States iulwhich Mr. Van Buren may
draw from the other side largely. But I speak of Whig votes, in this

13

State and in any State. And I am of opinion that any such vote given

to Mr. Van Buren, inures for Gen. Cass. ,
, Now as to Gen. Cass, gentlemen. We need not go to the Baltimore

platform: to instruct ourselves as to what his politics are, or how he will

conduct the Government. Gen. Cass will go into the Government, if at
all, by the same party that elected Mr. Polk; and he will “ follow in the
footsteps of his illustrious predecessor.” [Laz1.g}iter.] I hold him, I con-
fess, in‘ the present state of the country,to be the most dangerous man in
whom the powers of the executive Chief Magistracy could well be placed.
He would consider himself notias conservative, not as protective to pre-
sent institutions, but as belonging to the party of the Progres.-:. He
believes in the doctrine OI:.AIIlel‘lCZ'lIl destiny; and that that destiny isto go
through wars, and 1ni*asions, and maintain vast armies, to establish a
great, powerl'ul, domineeririg government over all this continent. We
know that if Mr. Cass could have prevented it, the treaty with Eiigland in
1842 would not have been made; we know that if Mr. Cass could have
prevented it,dthels§t1t{l5einentof' the Oregon question would not have been
accom lishe in - . l ‘ I

We [lmow that Gen. Cass could have prevented the Mexican war; and
we know that he was first and foremost in pressing that war. We know
that he is a man of talent, of ability,oi‘ some celebrity as a statesman, in
every way superior to_his predecessor, if he should be the successor of Mr.
Polk. Biitl tliirik him a man ofrasli politics, pushed on by a rash party,
and committed to it course of policy, as I believe, not in consistency with
the happiness and security of the country. Therefore it is for you, and
for me, and for all of us, Whigs, to consider, whether in this state of the
case_we_can, or cannot, we will, or will not, giye our votes for the Whig
nomination. I leave that to everylpiaii’s conscience. I have endeavored
to state the case as it presents itse tome.

Gentlerneii, be.f‘ore Gen. T‘aylor’s nomination, I stated always, when the
subject was mentioned by my _friends, that I did not and could not recom-
mend the norniiiatioii of a military man to the people of‘ the United States,
for the office of‘ President. It was against my conviction ofiwliat was
due to the best interests of the country, and to the character of the repuls-
lic." I stated always, at the same time, that if Gen. Taylor should be
nominated bythe Wliig convention, fairly, I should not oppose his elec-
tion. I stand now ii . on the same declaration... I

Gen. Taylor has blien nominated fairly, as far as I know, and I cannot,
therefore, and shall not, oppose his election. At the same time, there
is no man who isrriore firmly of opinion that such a nomination was not
fit to be made. But the declaration, that I would not oppose Gen. Taylor,
if nominated by the Whicr arty, was of course, subject, in the nature of‘
things, to some exceptioiisp If I believed him to be a man who would

iplunge the country into further wars for any purpose of ambitionor

conquest, I would oppose him, let h_im be nominated by whom he might.
IfI.helieved that he was a man who would exert his official influence for
the further extension of the slave power, I would oppose him, let him be
nominatecl by whom he might. But I do not believe either. [A ppZrmsc.]
, I believe that he has been, from the first, opposed to the policy of the
Mexican war, as improper, impolitic and in_expedient.. I believe from the
best informatiion I icanobtain, and you will take this as my opinion,

_gentl,emen,I believe, from the best inf'ormation,I can obtain, that he has
(no disposition to go to war, or to increase the limits of slavery to form

it new States.

14

Gentlemen, so much for what may be considered as belonging to the
Presidency as a nationalrquestion. But, the case by no means stops here.
We are citizens of Massachusetts. We are Whigs of‘ Massachusetts.
We have supported the present government of the State for years, with
success; and I have thought that most Whigs were satisfied with the ad-
ministration of the State government in the hands of those who have had
it, But now it is proposed, I presume, on the basis of the Buffalo platform,

to carry this into the State elections, as well as into the nationai election-s.

There is to be a nomination of a candidate For Governor, against Mr.
Briggs, or whoever maybe nominated by the Whigs; and there is to be
a nomination of a candidate for Lieutenant Governor, against Mr. Reed,
or whoever may be nominated by the Whigs; and there are to be nomi-
nations against the present members of‘ Congress, Now, what is the
utility or the necessity of this’! We have ten members in the Con»
gress of the United States. 1 know not ten men of any party who are
more zealous, and firm, and inflexible in their opposition again-st slayery
in any form. « ,

And what will be the result? Suppose that a considerable number of
Whigs secede from the Whig party and support a candidate of this new
party, what will be the result? Do we not know what has been the case
in this State’? Do not we know that this District has been unrepre-
sented from month to month, and from ,-year to year, because there has
been an opposition to as good an antbslavery man as breathes the air of
this District’! On this occasion, and even in his own presence, I may
allude to our Representative, Mr. Hale. ,Do we want. a man to give at
better vote in Congress than Mr. Hale gives’? Why, E undertake to say
that there is not one of the Liberty party, nor will there‘ be one of‘ this
new party, who will have the least objection to Mr. Hale, except that he
was not nominated by themselves 'l'en to one, if the Whigs had not
nominated him, they would have nominated him tliernselves; doubtless
they would, if he had come into their organization, and called himself ‘at
third party man. i .

Now, gentlemen, I remember it to have occurred, that on very important
questions in Congress, the vote was lost For want of two or three mam»
bers which Massachusetts might have sent, but which, in consequence
of the division of parties, she did not send. And now I foresee that if in
this District any considerable number of Whigs think it their duty to join
in the support of Mr. Van Buren, and in the support of gentlemen whom
that party may nominate for Congress, l foresee the same i ‘thing will take
place, and we shall be without a Represer1tative,lin all probability, in the
first session of the next Congress, when the battle is to be fought on this
very slavery question. And the same is likeiy to happen in other Districts.
I am sure that honest, intelligent and patriotic Whigs, wiil lay this con-
sideration to their consciences, and judge of it as they think they ought
toudo. ‘ l 1 l ‘ r
Gentlemen,I will detain you but a moment longer. You know that
I gave my vote in Congress againstthe treaty of peace with Mexico because

itcontained these oessions of territory, and brought under the authorityiof
the United States, with a pledge of future admission into the Union, the

great, vast, and almost unknown countries of New Mexico and California.
In the session before the last, one of the Southern Whig Senators, Mr.
Bjerrien“ of Georgia, had moved, a resolution, t-o the effect that the war

ought not to be ciontinuedf for the purposes of conquest and acquisition.

The Resolution declared thatthe war with Mexico ought notto be proso-

15

outed by this Government with any view to the dismemberrnent of that
Republic, or to the acquisition, by conquest, of any portion of her territory.
That proposition he introduced in the forth“ of a resolution into Congress;
and I believe that every Whig in the Senate, but one, voted for it. But
the Senators belonging to the Loco Foco or Democratic party voted
against it. The Senatorsfrorn New York voted against it. Gen. Case,
from the free State of Michigan; Mr. Fairfield, from Maine; Mr. Niles,
from Connecticut; and others, voted against it, and the vote was lost.
That is, these gentlemen, some ofthem very prominent friends of Mr. Van
Buren, and ready to take the field for him, these very gentlemen voted not
to exclude territory, that might be obtained by conquest. They were wil-
ling to bring in the territory and then have a squabble and controversy,
whether it should he slave or free territory. I was of opinion that the
true and'sal'e policy was, to shut out the whole question by getting no terri-
tory, and thereby keep off all controversy. The territory will do us no
good, if free; it will he an incumhrance, if free. To a great extent it will
produce a preponderance in favor of the South inthe Senate, even if
it be free. Let us keep it out therefore. But no. rWewill make the
acquisition, bring in the territory, and manage it afterwards. That was
the policy. t ‘ i

Gentlemen, in an important crisis, in English history, in the reign of
Charles 2d, when the country was threatened by the accession to the
throne of a Prince, then called the Duke of York, who was a bigot to the
Roman Catholic religion, a proposition was made to exclude him from the
crown. Some said that was a veryrash measure, brought forward by
very rash men, that they had better admit him, and then put limitations
upon him, chain him down, restrict him. ‘When the debate was going
on, a gentleman is reported to have risen and expressed his sentiments
by rather a grotesque comparison, but one,of' considerable force.

“ I hear a lion, in the lobby, roar! . ,
Say, Mr. Speaker, shall we shot the door,
And keep him out ;, or shall we let him, in,

‘ And see if we can get him out again .9”

I was for shutting the door and keeping the lion out. Other more con-
tident spirits, who are of the character of Wombwell, were for letting him
in, and disturbing all the interests of the country. And when this Mexi-
can treaty came before the Senate, it had certain clauses ceding New
Mexico and California to the United States. A Southern gentleman, Mr.
Badger, of North Carolina, moved to strike out those clauses Now you
understand, that if a motion to strike out a clause be supported by one-
third, it will be struck out, that is, two-thirds of the Senate must vote for
each clause, in order to have it retained. The ‘vote on this question of
striking out stood 38 to 14; not quite one-third being against the cession,
and so the clause was retained. I C

And why were there not one-third’! Just because there were four New
England Senators voting for these new territories.’ , Thiatiis the reason-

I hope I am as ardent an advocate for peace as any man living; but I
would not beicarried away bythe desire for peace to commit an act which
I believed highly injurious, likely to have consequences of a permanent
character, and indeed to endanger the existencerpof the Government.
Besides, I believed that we could have struck out the cessions of territory,
and had peace just asrsoon. Andi Iwould bewilling to go before the
people and leave it to them to say, whether they would carry on the war

16

any longer for acquisition of territory. If they would, then they were
the artiticers of their own fortunes. I was not afraid of the people on that
subject. But if it had continued the war some time longer,  would have
preferred that the war should continue some time longer, rather than that
those territories lying on our southern border, should come in hereafter
as new States. I should speak, perhaps, with more confidence, if some
Whigs of the North had not voted for the treaty. . My own opinion was then
clear and decisive. I thought‘ the case a perfectly plain one, and no man
has yet stated a reason t.o convince me to the contrary. a it

I voted to strike out the art.icles of cession. They would have been struck
out if four of the New England Senators had voted it. I ‘then voted against
the ratification of the treaty, and that treaty would have failed if three
New England Senators had voted as I did, and Whig Senators too. I
should do the same thing again, and with much more resolution. I would
have ran a still greater risk, I would have endured a still greater shock,
before I would have risked any thing, rather than have been a participator
in any thing which should have a tendency to annex southern territory to
the States of the Union. I hope it will be remembered, in all future time,
that on this question of the accession of these. new territories of almost
boundless extent, I voted against them, and against the treaty which con-
tained them, notwithstanding all inducements to the contrary, and all the
cries, which I thought hasty and injudicious, of “ Peace! peace, on any
terms.” I will add, that those who voted against the treaty were gentle-
men from so manyfparts of the country, that its rejection would have been
rather a national, than a local resistance to it. There were votes against
it from both parties, and from all parties, the South and the West, the
North and the East. What we wanted was a few more New England
‘votes. »
Gentlemen, after I had the honor of receiving the invitation to meet my
"fellow citizens, I found it necessary in the discharge of my duty, though
with great inconvenience to my health, to be present at the closing scenes
of the session. You know what there transpired. You know the important
decision that was made in both houses of Congress, in regard to Oregon.
The immediate question respected Oregon, or rather the bill respected

‘Oregon, but the question more particularly these new territories.

The effect of the bill as passed in the Senate was to establish thesenew
territories as slaveholding States. The House disagreed. The Senate
receded from their ground, and the bill passed, establishing Oregon as a

‘free territory, and" making no provision for the newly acquired territories
-on the South. I

Now, gentlemen, my vote andthe reasons I gave for it are known to the

good people of Massachusetts, and I have not heard that they have ex--

pressed any particular disapprobat ion ofthem. [A[)pZ(m.s'(3.]

But this question is to be resumed the first session of the next Congress,
_I think not in this Congress, I think at least there is no probability that it

will be settled at the next sessionof this Congress; but the first session
-of the next Congress, this question will be resumed. . It will enter atthis

very period into all the elections of the South. .
‘And now I venture to say, gentlemen, two things : the first well known
to you, that General Cass isin‘f'avor of what is called the Compromise
Line; and is of opinion that the Wilmot Proviso,«or the Ordinance of
1787, which excludes slavery from territories, ought not to be applied to
territories ly'ing south of 36 deg. 30 min. He announced this before he
was nominated, and" if he had not announced it,he would have been

17

thirty-six degrees thirty minutes farther off from being nominated. In the
next place, he will do all he can to establish that compromise line; and
lastly, which is a matter of opinion, in my conscientious belief, he will
establish it.

Give him the power and the patronage of the government, let him exer-
cise it over certain portions of the country whose representatives voted on
this occasion to put off that question for future consideration, to settle it
that Oregon shall be free, and leave New Mexico and California to be
decided hereafter; let him have the power of this government with his
attachments, with his inducements, and we shall see the result. I verily
believe that unless there is a renewed strength, an augmented strength of
Whig votes in Congress, he will accomplish his purpose. He will surely
have the Senate, and with the patronage of the government, with every
interest which he can bring to bear, co-operating with every interest which
the South can bring to hear, he will establish the comprornise line. We
cry safety, before we are out of the woods, if we feel that the danger, re-
specting the territories, is over. ,

Gentlemen, I came here to confer with you as friends and countrymen,
to speak my own minds and hear yours; but if we all should speak, and
occupy as much time as I have, we should make a late meeting. I shall
detain you no longer. I

I have been long in public life, longer, far longer, than I shall remain
there. I have had some participation for more than thirty years in the
councils of the nation ; I profess to feel a strong attachment to the liberty
of the United States, to the constitution and free institutions of this coun-
try, to the honor, and I may say the glory, of my native land.

I I feel every injury inliicted upon it, almost asa personal injury. I blush
for every fault which I think I see committed in its public councils, as if
they were faults or mistakes of my own.

Iknow that at this moment, the~re is no object upon earth so much
attiracting the gaze of the intelligent and civilized nations of the earth. as
this great Republic. All men look at us, all men examine our course,
all good men are anxious for a favorable result to this great experiment of
Republican liberty. ,  I

We are on a hill and cannort be bid. We cannot withdraw ourselves
either from the cornmendation or the reproaches of the civilized world.
They see us as that star of empire which half century ago wasrepre-
sented to be making its way westward. I I wish they may see it as a mild,
placid, though brilliant orb, making its way, athwart the whole heavens,
to the enlightening and cheering of mankind :and note meteor of fire and

blood, terrifying the nations.

ME.WE13srER’ss1>EEcH

  OREGON BILL,

DELIVERED IN THE SENATE 01:‘ THE uNrrED STATES, saron-
DAY EVENING, AUG. 12, 1s4s.

THE question being on the motion by Mr. BENTON, that the Senate re-
cede from its amendments, to which the House had refused to agree :

Mr. WEBSTER rose andsaid: I am very little inclined to prolong this
debate, and I hope I am utterly disinclined tobring into it any new
warmth or excitement. I wish to say a few words, however, first, upon
the question as it is presented to us, as a parliamentary question; and
secondly, upon the general political question involved in the debate.

As a question of parliamentary proceeding, I understand the case to be
this: The House of Representatives sent us a bill for the establishment of
a Territorial Government in Oregon; and no motion has been made in the
Senate. to strike out any part of that bill. The bill purporting to respect
Oregon, simply and alone, has not been the subject of any objection in
this branch of the legislature. The Senate has proposed no important

amendment to this bill, affecting Oregon itself; and the honorable member 4

from Missouri (Mr. Benton) was right, precisely right, when he said that
the amendtnent now under consideration had no relation to Oregon. That
is perfectly true; and therefore the amendment which the Senate has
adopted and the Houseihas disagreed to, has no connection with the im-
mediate subject before it. The truth is, that it is an amendment by which
the Senate wish to have now, a public, legal declaration, not respecting
Oregon, but respecting the newly acquired territories of California and
New Mexico. It wishes now to make a line of Slavery, which shall in»
clude those new Territories. The amendment says that the line of the
“Missouri compromise” shall be the line to the Pacific;‘and then goes
on to say, in the language of the bill as it now stands, that the Ordinance
of '87 shall be applicable to Oregon ; and I therefore I say that the amend-
ment proposed is foreign to the immediate object of the bill. It does
nothingto modify, restrain or affect, in any way, the government which
we’ propose to establish over Oregon, or the condition or character of that
government or of the people under it. In a‘ parliamentary view, this is
the state of the case. I I l E i I I i
Now, Sir,this amendment has been attached to this bill by aistrongtmas

E jority of the Senate. That majority had the right, asit had the power,

19

to pass it. The House disagreed to that amendment. Well, if the man-
jority of the Senate, who attached it to the bill, are of opinion that
a conference with the House will lead to some adjustment of the question,
by which this amendment, or something equivalent to it, may be adopted by
the House, it is very proper for them to urge a conference. It is very
fair, quite parliamentary, and there is not a word to be said against it.
But my position is that of one who voted against the amendment, who
thinks that it ought not to be attached to this bill, and therefore I natu~
rally vote for the motion to get rid of it, that is, “ to recede.”

So much for the parliamentary question. Now, there are two or three
political questions arising in this case, which I wish to state dispassiouu
ately: not to argue, but to state. a t

The honorable member from Georgia, (Mr. Berrien) for whom I have
great respect, and :with whom it is my delight to cultivate personal friend»-
ship, has stated, with great propriety, the importance of this question.
He has said, that it is a question interestirig to the South and to the
North, and one which may very well, also, attract the attention of man-
kind. He has not stated all this too strongly. It is such a question. With--
out doubt, it is a question which may well. attract the attention of mankind.
On the subjects‘ involved in this debate, the whole world is not now

asleep. It is wide awake; and I agree with the honorable member, that,

if what is now proposed to‘be done by us who resist this amendment, is,
as he supposes, unjust and i[}JUPlOL1S to any portion of this commiiiiityor
against its constitutional riglits, that injustice should be presented to the

civilized world, and we, who concur in the proceeding, ought to submit

ourselves t.o its rebuke. I am glad that the honorable gentleman pro»
poses to refer this question to the great tribunal of Modern Civilization,
as well as the great tribunal of the American People. It is proper. It
is a question of magiiitude enough, of interest enough, to all the civilized
nations of the earth, to call from those who support the one side or the
other a statement of the grounds upon which they act. a i r

Now, I‘ propose to state, as briefly as ‘I can, the grounds upon which I
proceed, historical and constitutional; and will endeavor to use as few
words as possible, so that I may relieve thelSenate from hearing meat
the earliest possible moment. t r ~ ~

In the first place," to view the matter historically: this Constitution,
founded in I787, and the Government underit, organized in 1789, does
recognize the existence of Slavery in certain States, than existing in the
Union; and a particular description of Slavery. Ihope. that what I arii
about. to say may be received, without any supposition thatl lintenrl the
slightest disrespect. But this particular description of Slavery does not, I
believe, now exist in Europe,nor in any other civilized portions of the
habitable globe. It is not a Prediali Slavery. It is not analogous to the
case of’ the [’7*er.lz'r.tl Slaves, or Slaves glance at/scripts’ of Russia, or Hun-
gary, or other States. his a peculiar system of personal Slavery,_by which
the person who is called a Slave is transferrable as achattel, from hand to
hand. I speak of this as a fact. And that is the fact; and I will say
farther, perhaps other.gentlemen~ may rerrieinber the instant.-es, that al-
though Slavery, as a. system of servitude attached to the earth, exists in
various countries of Europe,.I am not atthe present rnornent aware of
anyplace on the globe, in which this property of man in a human being
asa Slave, trarisferable as a chattel, exists except in America. Now, that
it existed in the,t°orrri, in which it still exists, in certain States, at the for-
rnatioii of this Constitution, and the framers of that iiistrurnent, and those

20

who adopted it, agreed that, as far as it existed, it should” not be disturbed;
or interfered with by the new General Government, there is no doubt.

The Constitution of the United States recognizes it as an existing fact,
an existing relation between the inhabitants of the Southern States. I
do not call it an “ institution,” because that term is not applicable to it;
forthat seems to imply a voluntary establishment. I have been here so
long that when I first came here it was a matter of reproach to England,
the mother country, that slavery had been entailed upon the colonies by
her, against their consent, and that which is now considered a cherished
“ institution,” was then regarded as, I will not say an entailed evil, but an
entailment on the colonies by the policy of the mother country against
their wishes. At any rate. it stands upon the Constitution. The Consti--
tution was adopted in 1788, and went into operation in 1789. When it
was adopted, the state of the country was this: slavery existed in the
Southern States; there was a very large extent of unoccupied territory,
the whole Northwest, which, it was understood, was destined to be formed
into States; and it was then determined that no slavery should exist in this
territory. a I gather now, as a matter of inference from the history of the
time, and the history of the debates, that the prevailing motives with the
North tbr agreeing to this recognition of the existence of Slavery in the
Southern States, and giving a representation to those States, founded in
part upon their slaves, was rested on the supposition that no acquisition of
territory would be made to form new States on the Southern frontier of
this country, either by cession or ‘conquest. It is plain, that taking the
history of the times together, the reason why the slave representation was
allowed, was that since the Northwest Territory was destined by the or»
dinance to be free, and since nobody looked to any acquisition by con-—
quest or cession for the creation ofslave States at the South, there was an
insisting on the part of the South to suffer slavery where it did exist, and
to be represented accordingto the principles and provisions of the Con»
stitution, inasmuch as it was limited by these two considerations; first,
that there was to be no slavery in the Territories; and second, that there
was not the least anticipation of the acquisition of any new territory.
And now, sir, I am one who, understandi.ng that to be the purpose of the
Constitution, mean to abide by it.

There is another principle, equally clear, by which ‘I mean to abide; and
that is, that in the Convention, and in the first Congress, when appealed
to on the subject by petitions, and all along in the history of this govern-
ment, it was and has been a conceded point, that Slavery, in the States in
which it did exist, was a matter of State regulation exclusively, and that
Congress had not the least power over it, or right to interfere with it.
Therefore, I say thatall agitations and attempts to disturb the relations
between master and slave, by persons not living in the slave States, are
unconstitutional in their spirit, and are, in my» opinion, productive of
nothing but evil and mischief. I countenance none ofthern. The man-
ner in which the governments of those States, whereislavery exists, are to
regulate it, is“ for their own consideration, under their responsibility to
their constit'uer1ts,rto the general laws of propriety, humanity and justice,
andto God, Associations formed elsewhere, springing from a feeling of
humanity, or any‘ other cause,ihave nothing whatever to do with it, nor right
tointerfere with it. t They have never received any encouragement from me,
and they never will, In my opinion they have done nothingbut todelay
and defeat their own professed objects. I .have now stated, as Iunderstand
it, the state of things upon the adoption of the lConstiitutionof thie_‘United

21

States. What has happened since’! Sir, it has happened that, above and ,

beyond all contemplation or expectation of the original framers of the Con--
stitution, or the People who adopted it, foreign territory has been acquired
by cession, first from France, and then from Spain, on our Southern
frontier. And what has been the result of that’! Five slaveholding
States have been created and added to the Union, bringing ten Senators
intothis body, (I include Texas, which~I consider in the light of a foreign
acquisition also,) and up to this hour in which I address you, not one free
Statehas been admitted to the Union from all this acquired territory, not
one! *

Mn. BERRIEN (in histseat)--—-Yes, Iowa.

Mn. Wezesrzea.--Iowa is not yet in the Union. Her Senators are not
here. When she comes in there will be one to five, one free State to live
slave, formed out of new territories. Now, it seems strange to me that
there should be any complaint of injustice exercised by the North
toward the South. Northern votes have been necessary, they have been
ready, and they have been rendered toaid the formation of these five new
slaveholding States. These are facts; and as the gentleman from Georgia
has very properly put it as a case in which we are to present ourselves
before the world for its judgment, let us now see how we stand. I do
not represent the North. I I state my own case; and present the matter
in that light, in which I am willing, as an i.ndividu.al member of Congress,
to be judged by civilized humanity. Isay, then, that according to true
history, the slaveholding interest in this country has not been a disfavored
interest; it has not been disfavored by the North. The North has con-
curred to bring in these five slaveholding States out of newly acquired
territory, which acquisitions were never at all in the contemplation of the
Convention which formed the Constitution, or of the people when they

agreed that there should be a representation of three fifths of the slaves

in the then existing States. , l _ I I

Mr. President, what is the result of this’! We stand‘ here now, at least
I do, for one, to say, that considering that there have been already five new
slaveholding States formed out of newly acquired territory, and one only,
at most, non-slaveholding State, I do not feel that I am called on to go
farther; I do not feel the obligation to yield more. But our friends of the
South say, You deprive us of all our rights. We have fought for this
territory, and you deny us participation in it. Let us consider this
question as it really is; and since the honorable gentlemen from Georgia
proposes to leave the case to the enlightened and impartial judgment of
mankind, and as I agree with him that it is a case proper to be considered
by the enlightened part of mankind, let us consider how the matter, in truth,
stands. . Gentlemen whoadvocate the case which myhonorable friend from
Georgia, with so much ability, sustains, declare, that we invade their rights,
that: we deprivethem ofa participation in the enjoyment of territories
acquired by the common services and common exertions of all. Is this
true’? How deprived? Of what do we deprive them’! Why, they say
that we deprive them of the privilege of carrying their slaves, as slaves,
into the new territories. Well, sir, What is the amopnt of that? V They
say that in this way we deprive them of the opportunity of going into
this acquired territory with their property. Their “property?” What do
they mean by 2“ property ’!”‘ We certainly do not deprive them ofthe priv--
ilege of‘ going into these’, newly acquired territories with all that, in the
general estimate of ‘human society, in the general, and common, and uni-

. versal- understandingof mankind, is esteemed pro“perty.t Not at all. The

T22

truth is just this: They have, in their own States, peculiar laws, which
create property in persons. They have a system of local legislation on
which slavery rests; while everybody agrees that it is against natural law,
or at least against the common understanding which prevails among men
as to what is natural law. a

I am not going into metaphysics, for therein I should encounter the Hon.
member from South Carolina, and we should wander in “ endless mazes
lost,” until after the time for the adjournment of Congress. The Southern
States have peculiar laws, and by those laws there is property in slaves.
This is purely local. The real meaning, then, of Southern gentlemen, in
making this complaint, is that they cannot go into the territories of the
United States carrying with them their own peculiar local law, a law
which creates property in persons. This, according to their own state-.
ment, is all the ground of complaint they have. Now here, I think, gentle»
men are unjust towards us. How unjust they are, others will judge, gene-
rations that will come after us will judge. It will not be contended that
this sort of personal slavery exists by general law. It exists only by local
law. I do not mean to deny the validity of that local law where it is
established; but I say it is, after all, local law. It is nothing more. And
wherever that local law does not extend, property in persons does not exist.
Well, sir, what is now the demand on the part of our Southern friends’!
They say, “ We will carry our local laws with us wherever we go. We
insist that Congress does as injustice unless it establishes in the territory
in which we wish to go, our own local law.” This demand I, for one,
resist, and shall resist. It goes upon the idea that there isan inequality,
unless persons under this local law, and holding property by authority of
that law, can go into new territory and there establish that local law, to the
exclusion of the general law. I Mr. President, it was a maxim of the civil
law, that between slavery and freedom, freedom should always be pre-
sumed, and slavery must always be proved. If any question arose as to
the status of an individual in Rome, he was presumed to be free until he
was proved to be a slave. Because slavery is an exception to the general

rule. So, Isuppose, is the general law of’ mankind. An individual is to

be presumed. to be free, until a law can be produced which creates owner-
ship in his person. I do not dispute the force andyvalidity ofthe local law,
as I have already said; but, I say, it is a matter to be proved ; and, there»
fore, if individuals go into any part of the earth, it is to be proved that
they are not freemen, or else the presumption is that they are.

Now, our friends seem to think that an inequality arises from restraining

them from going into, the territories, unless there be a law provided which I

shall. protect their ownership in persons. The assertion is, that we create
an inequality. Is there nothing to be said on the other side, in relation to
inequality? Sir, from the date of this Constitution, and in the councils
that. formed and established this Constitution, and I suppose in all men’s
judgment. since, it is received as a settled truth, that slave labor and free
labor do not exist well together. I have before me ardeclaration of Mr.
Mason, in the convention that formed the Constitution, to that. effect. Mr.
Mason, asis well known, was a distinguished member from Virginia. He

saysthat the objection to slave labor is, thatit puts free white labor in dis-..

reputegi that it makes labor to be regarded as derogatory to the character
ofthe free white man, and that the free white man despises to work, to
use his expression, where slaves areemployed- This is a matter of great
interest to the free. States, if‘ it be true, as to a great extent it certainly is,
that wherereryslave labor. prevails, free white labor is excluded or discour-

23

aged. I agreethat slave labor does not necessarily exclude free labor,
totally. There is free white labor in Virginia, Tennessee, and other
States, where most of the labor is done by slaves. But it necessarily loses
something of its respectability, by the side of, and when associated with,
slave labor. Wherever labor is mainly performed by slaves, it is regarded
as degradingto free men. The free men of the North, therefore, have a
deep interest to keep labor free, exclusively free, in the new territories.

But, sir, let us look farther into this alleged inequality. There is no
pretence that Southern people may not go into territory which shall be
subject to the ordinance of 1787. The only restraint is that they shall
not carry slaves thither and continue that relation. They say this shuts
them altogether out. Why, sir, there can be nothing more inaccurate in
point of fact than this statement. I understand that one half the people
who settled Illinois, are people, or descendants of people, who came from
the Southern States. And I suppose that onejthird of the people of Ohio
are those, or descendants of those, who emigrated from the South; and
I venture to say, that in respect to those two States, they are at this day
settled by people of Southern origin in as great a proportion as they are
by people of Northern origin, according to the general numbers and
proportion of people, South and North. There are as many people from
the South, in proportion to the whole people of the South, in those States,
as there are from the North, in proportion to the whole people of the North.
T/L£7'8 2's, t/rm, no €fEClllSi()7l of Soul/mm people ; t/zero is only the erclusiort
qfa: peculim‘ local law. Neither in principle nor in fact is there any
inequality. ,

The question now is, whether it is not competent to Congress, in the
exercise of a fair and just discretion, to say that, considering that there
have been five slaveholding States added to this Union out of foreign
acquisitions, and as yet only one freeState; ' under this state ofthings it is
unreasonable or unjust, in the slightest degree, to prevent their further
increase. That is the question. I see no injustice in it. As to the power
of Congress, I have nothing to add to what I said the other day. Con-
gress has full power over the subject. It may establish any such govern»-
ment, and any such laws, inlthe territories, as in its discretion, it may
see fit. It is subject, of course to the rules of justice and propriety; but
it is under no constitutional restraints.

I have said that I shall consent to no extension of the area of slavery,
upon this continent; nor to any increase of slave representation in the
other Houseof Congress.

I have now stated my reasons for my conduct and my vote. We of the
North have gone, in this respect, already far beyond all that any Southern
man could have expected, or did expect, at the time of the adoption of
the Constitution. I repeat the statement of the fact, of the creation of
five new slave-holding States out of newly acquired territory. We have
done that which, if',those who framed the Constitution had foreseen, they

never W0lJlCl,haVeiflg‘T€ed to slave representation. We have yielded thus

far; and we have now in the House of Representatives twenty persons
voting upon this v_ery question; and upon all other questions, who are
there only in virtue of the representation of slaves.

Let me conclude, therefore, by remarking that while I am willing to
presentthis as showing my own judgment and position, _in regard to this
case, and I beg, it to be understood that I am speaking for no other
than myself, and while I am willing to offer it to the whole world, as
my own justification,r I rest on these propositions :----Fz'rst : That when

24

this Constitution was adopted, nobody looked for any new acquisition of
territory to be formed into slaveholding States. Secondly : That the
principles of the Constitution prohibited, and were intended to prohibit,
and should be construed to prohibit, all interference of the General Gov-

ernment with slavery as it existed and as it still exists in the States. And

then, that looking to the effect of -these new acquisitions, which have in
this great degree enured to strengthen that interest in the South by the
addition of these five States, there is nothing unjust, nothing of which
any honest man can complain, if he is intelligent; and I feel there is

-nothing which the civilized world, if they take notice of so humble a

person as myself, will reproach me with, when I say, as I said the other
day, that I had made up   my mind, for one, that under no circumstances
would I consent to the farther extension of the area of slavery in the
United States, or to the farther increase of Slave Representation in the
House of Representatives.

Digitization information for the
Daniel Webster Pamphlet Project

University Libraries

University of Missouri——Columbia

Local identifier

web000

Digitization work performed by the
University of Missouri Library Systems Office

Capture information

Date captured
Scanner manufacturer
Scanner model
Optical resolution
Color settings

File types

Source information

Format
Content type
Derivatives — Access copy
Compression
Editing software
Editing characteristics

Resolution
Color

File types
Notes

2004-2005
Minolta
PS7000
600 dpi
Unknown
tiff

Pamphlets
Text with some images

Uncompressed
Adobe Photoshop

600 dpi

Bitonal; images
grayscale

tiff

Pages cropped and
brightened

Blank pages removed

Property marks
removed