THE USURPATIONS OF SLAVERY. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 WILLIAM H. SEWARD, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 BILL TO PROTECT OFFICERS OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 FEBRUARY 23, 1855. 
 
 Mr. President : 
 
 The scene before me, and all its circumstances 
 and incidents, admonish me that the time has 
 come when the Senate of the United States is 
 about to grant another of those concessions, 
 which have become habitual here, to the power 
 of Slavery in this Republic. For the second time, 
 in a period of nearly three months, the brilliant 
 chandelier above our heads is lighted up; the 
 passages and galleries are densely crowded; all 
 the customary forms of legislation are laid aside. 
 The multifarious subjects, which have their rise 
 in all parts of this extended country, are sudden¬ 
 ly forgotten, in a concentration of feeling upon a 
 single question of intense interest. The day is 
 spent without adjournment. Senators, foregoing 
 their natural relaxation and refreshment, remain 
 in their seats until midnight approaches. Ex¬ 
 citement breaks out in every part of the Chamber. 
 Criminations and recriminations, and denuncia¬ 
 tions of Senators individually, and of Senators by 
 classes, equally of those who have participated 
 in the debate, and of those who have remained 
 silent, grate harshly upon the ear. Such as these 
 were the incidents that heralded the passage of 
 the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Such as these 
 attended the abrogation of the Missiouri Com¬ 
 promise in 1854. I know full well that the fall 
 of Constitutional Liberty is as certain to follow 
 these incidents occurring now, as it followed the 
 like incidents on the sad occasions to which I 
 have referred. And, for aught I know, the teem¬ 
 ing gun, which proclaimed those former triumphs 
 of Slavery, is already planted again under the 
 eaves of the Capitol, to celebrate another victory. 
 My course, on this occasion, has been the same 
 as on all former occasions of a like character. I 
 have forborne from engaging in the debate, until 
 near the end of the controversy, that the country 
 may know who it is, and who it is not, that dis¬ 
 turbs the public harmony, and breaks the public 
 peace, by the agitation of Slavery in these Halls ; 
 and I shall speak now, less in the form of an ar¬ 
 
 gument against the bill before us, than of a pro¬ 
 test, upon which I shall take my stand, to abide 
 the ultimate judgment which shall be rendered 
 by the American People. 
 
 For myself, there is a painful association con¬ 
 nected with the rise of this debate. I arose in 
 my place at eleven o’clock this morning, simul¬ 
 taneously with the honorable Senator from Con¬ 
 necticut, [Mr. Toucey,] and each of us demanded 
 an audience, which was assigned by the Chair to 
 him. He announced this bill, which, however 
 obscure in its language, was, as we all instantly 
 knew, designed for the protection of officers of 
 the United States, who are engaged in executing 
 the Fugitive Slave Law. On the other side, I 
 held in my hand a proposition, to be submitted 
 to the Senate, for the erection of a bronze monu¬ 
 ment, fifty feet high, in the city of Washing¬ 
 ton, which should illustrate the life and the 
 death of Thomas Jefferson, and commemorate 
 the immortal names of the Signers of the Decla¬ 
 ration of American Independence. It was a new 
 acknowledgment which I was about to ask from 
 the Senate of the United States to the great fact 
 on which the liberties of this country and all its 
 Constitutions rest—that all men are created 
 equal. Sir, the success which the honorable 
 Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Toucey] obtained 
 over me, when the floor was assigned to him, 
 was ominous. The Senate of the United States 
 will erect no monument to the memory of Jef¬ 
 ferson, who declared, that, in the unequal contest 
 between Slavery and Freedom, the Almighty had 
 no attribute which could take part with the op¬ 
 pressor. But the Senate will, on the other hand, 
 promptly comply with the demand to raise an¬ 
 other bulwark around the institution of Slavery. 
 
 Mr. President, as there is nothing new in the 
 circumstances of this transaction, so it has hap¬ 
 pened now, as on all similar occasions hereto¬ 
 fore, that everything foreign from the question at 
 issue has been brought into the debate. The in¬ 
 troduction of these foreign matters has, as here- 
 
9 , 
 
 tofore, been attended with a profusion of re¬ 
 proaches and calumnies and epithets, as inappo¬ 
 site to the occasion as they are inconsistent with 
 the decorum and dignity of an august Legisla¬ 
 ture. Those of us upon whom such denuncia¬ 
 tions, calumnies, and epithets, have been show¬ 
 ered, have endured them long, and I think no 
 one will deny that we have endured them pa¬ 
 tiently. To such Senators as have given utter¬ 
 ance to their opinions in that form of argument, 
 I make, for myself, only this reply—that that 
 field of debate is relinquished exclusively to 
 themselves. Now, as on similar occasions here¬ 
 tofore, the relations of political parties, and their 
 respective merits and demerits, have entered 
 largely into the discussion. Sir, I shall forbear 
 from entering into that part of the debate, for the 
 reason that I am addressing, not politicians, but 
 statesmen. So far as the jnstice or expediency 
 of the measure under consideration is concerned, 
 it can make no difference whether those who ad¬ 
 vocate it or those who oppose it are Whigs of are 
 Democrats, or belong to that new class of men 
 who are popularly called Know Nothings. Argu¬ 
 ments based on such grounds may have their 
 weight somewhere else—outside of this Cham¬ 
 ber—or possibly up there—[pointing to the gal¬ 
 leries]—but certainly not down here. Inquisition 
 has been made concerning the circumstances and 
 influences which attended the recent elections of 
 members not only of this House, but of the House 
 of Representatives, for the purpose, as it seems, 
 of awakening prejudices against those who op¬ 
 pose the passage of this bill. I give notice to 
 honorable Senators who have adopted this line 
 of argument, that it is neither required by the 
 people whom I represent here, nor is it consistent 
 with their dignity and honor, that I should assume 
 to interpret the motives which determined their 
 choice of legislators. The results are before the 
 world. They explain themselves. Equally de¬ 
 rogatory from my duty, and disrespectful to the 
 statesmen around me, and to the States which 
 they represent, would it be, were I to inquire into 
 the manner or circumstances of the elections 
 made by those States. I recognise every Senator 
 here as the exponent of the opinions and princi¬ 
 ples of the State from which he comes. And I 
 hear no voice from any State but that to which 
 its representatives give utterance. Nevertheless, 
 Mr. President, I shall not shrink from such an 
 exposition of my own opinions and sentiments on 
 collateral issues, as shall tend to disembarrass a 
 good cause, by relieving it from unjust prejudices, 
 directed against myself as its advocate. 
 
 First, in regard to what is called the Nebraska 
 Question. I freely confess, that I regard the ab¬ 
 rogation of the Missouri Compromise by the Ne¬ 
 braska bill of the last session as an unjust, un¬ 
 necessary, dangerous, and revolutionary act. I 
 voted against it as such. Let that vote stand 
 against me, in the minds and in the hearts, if it 
 must be so, of those Senators who regard it as a 
 cause for reproach. Certainly, this is not the 
 time to justify that vote. A time to do so was, 
 when the vote was given, and its vindication was 
 then duly made. There is probably another 
 time coming for the renewal of that vindication— 
 
 a time in the near future, when the question of a 
 restoration of Freedom throughout thfe Territories 
 of the United States will arise in the Senate. 
 Then, if God shall bless me with continued life 
 and health and strength, I hope again to do my 
 duty. To that future time I adjourn the argu¬ 
 ment on the bill for the abrogation of the Mis- 
 souri Compromise. 
 
 There is more of propriety in the discussions of 
 the Fugitive Slave Law, which have been re¬ 
 opened during this debate. I have no need, how¬ 
 ever, to speak on that subject. I have fully de¬ 
 bated it heretofore, on more occasions than one, 
 in this place. Every word of what I then said, 
 is recorded in the legislative history of the United 
 States. There is not a thought that I would wish 
 to add ; there is not a word that I am willing to 
 take away. Time is full surely and quite rapidly 
 enough resolving the question whether those 
 were right who pronounced the Fugitive Slave 
 Law a just, and necessary, and constitutional 
 act, full of healing to a wounded country, or 
 whether the humble individual who now stands 
 before you was right when he admonished you 
 that that law was unnecessary, unwise, inhuman, 
 and derogatory from the Constitution, and that 
 it would never be executed without new and 
 continued usurpations. The transaction of this 
 night takes place, in order that the words of that 
 prophecy may be fulfilled. 
 
 I am not allowed, sir, to reach the merits of 
 this question, without alluding to a body of men 
 who sport in the public gaze under a name which 
 I hardly know how to repeat in the presence of 
 so grave and reverend an assemblage as this—the 
 Know Nothings. They are said to have contrived 
 their disguise with so much ingenuity, that one 
 ; who is not a novitiate cannot deny a knowledge 
 j of their ceremonies and principles, without im¬ 
 plying his communion and membership with 
 them. Nevertheless, I must reply to the Senator 
 from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] who charges me, 
 among others, with suen an affiliation, that I 
 have no knowledge of that body of men, other 
 than what is afforded me by the publications of 
 the day. Thus informed, I understand the Know 
 Nothings to be a secret society or order, consist¬ 
 ing of two or three grades, colleagued and mutu¬ 
 ally sworn to elect individuals of their own Order, 
 or at least persons maintaining the principles 
 which that Order entertains, to all offices of trust 
 and profit in the United States. Those principles 
 I understand to be, in general, the same which, 
 before the organization of the Know Nothings, 
 passed under the name of Native Americanism. 
 I, sir, have no connection with that Order. I am 
 under no responsibility for it's doings, and I have 
 not the least sympathy with its principles or sen¬ 
 timents. I belong to one voluntary Association 
 of men, which has to do with spiritual affairs. It 
 is the Christian Church—that branch of it, all 
 imperfect though I think it is, which, according 
 to my notions, most nearly retains, in their puri¬ 
 ty, the instructions of the Gospel. That Associa¬ 
 tion is an open one, which performs all its rites 
 and gives all its instructions with publicity, and 
 invites every man, in the language of its Divine 
 Founder, to come in and partake of the privileges 
 
3 
 
 with which He invested it, and of the blessings 
 which He promises. I belong to one temporal 
 society of men, and that is the political party 
 which, according to my notions, embodies most 
 fully and most truly, although, I confess, as in 
 the other case, very inadequately, the principles 
 of the Declaration of Independence and of the 
 Constitution of the United States. This Associa¬ 
 tion also, of which I have last spoken, is an open 
 one. All its transactions are conducted in the 
 broad daylight, and it invites all citizens, and all 
 men who become subjects of the power of this 
 Government, of whatever clime or race or color 
 they may be, to enter into its ranks, to participate 
 in its labors, and to co-operate in maintaining 
 good Government and in advancing the cause of 
 Human Nature. These two Associations, the one 
 spiritual and the other temporal, are the only 
 voluntary Associations to which I now belong, or 
 ever have belonged since I became a man ; and, 
 unless I am bereft of reason, they are the only 
 Associations of men to which I shall ever suffer 
 myself to belong. Secret societies, sir! Before 
 I would place my right hand between the hands 
 of other men, in a secret Lodge, Order, Class, or 
 Council, and, bending my knee before them, enter 
 into combination with them for any object, per¬ 
 sonal or political, good or bad, I would pray to 
 God, that that hand and that knee might be par¬ 
 alyzed, and that I might become an object of the 
 pity and even of the mockery of my fellow men. 
 Swear, sir! I, a man, an American citizen, a 
 Christian, swear to submit myself to the guidance 
 and direction of other men, surrendering my own 
 judgment to their judgments, and my own con¬ 
 science to their keeping! No, no, sir. I know 
 quite well the fallibility of my own judgment, and 
 my liability to fall into error and temptation. But 
 my life has been spent in breaking the bonds of 
 the slavery of other men. I thereiore know too 
 ■well the danger of confiding power to irresponsi¬ 
 ble hands, to make myself a willing slave. Pro¬ 
 scribe a man, sir, because he was not born in the 
 same town, or county, or State, or country, in 
 which I was born ! Why, sir, I do most earnestly 
 and most affectionately advise all persons here¬ 
 after to be born, that they be born in the United 
 States, and, if they can without inconvenience, to 
 be born in the State of New York, and thus avoid a 
 great deal of trouble for themselves and for others. 
 [Laughter.] Moreover, I do most affectionately 
 •enjoin upon all such persons as are hereafter to 
 be born, that they be born of fathers and of moth¬ 
 ers, of grandfathers and of grandmothers, of pure 
 American blood. Still more, sir, I do affection¬ 
 ately enjoin upon all who shall thus have the 
 wisdom to come into existence on this side of the 
 Atlantic, and of such pure and untainted ances¬ 
 try, to be either born in the Protestant faith, or 
 to be converted as speedily as possible to that 
 good and true Protestant Church, within whose 
 pale I myself am accustomed to worship. 
 
 More than that, sir. Speaking from a full 
 knowledge and conviction of the serious incon¬ 
 veniences which absolute and eternal Slavery 
 entails upon Man and upon races of men, I do 
 earnestly, strenuously, and affectionately conjure 
 all people everywhere, who are hereafter to be 
 
 born, to be born white. [Laughter.] Thus, be¬ 
 ing born in this free and happy country, and be¬ 
 ing born white, they will be born free. But, 
 Mr. President, this is the length, and this is the 
 breadth of my connection with the new and mys¬ 
 terious Order of Patriots. And, if there shall 
 hereafter come among us persons who, because 
 from ignorance they may not be able to profit 
 by my advice and counsel, shall be born in for¬ 
 eign lands; or, even if there shall be any who, 
 in despite of my counsel, shall persist in being 
 Roman Catholics, or Jews, or Turks, or Chinese; 
 or if there shall be others, who, disregarding my 
 persuasion, shall insist upon coming into the 
 world with blackened faces and twisted hair, all 
 I can say, in regard to them, is, that I have done 
 my duty, and I shall not add a feather’s weight 
 to the disabilities which they will incur by their 
 presumption and perverseness. [Laughter.] 
 
 Sir, my honorable friend from Connecticut 
 [Mr. Gillette] has thought this was a good 
 occasion to invite us to consider the question of 
 abolishing Slavery in the District of Columbia, 
 and has thereby incurred some censure. He cer¬ 
 tainly had a warrant in the latitude which the 
 debate had already assumed, although the sub¬ 
 ject was not very germane to the question be¬ 
 fore us. I have no hesitation to disclose my 
 fanaticism in that direction. Five years ago, I 
 proposed, in the Congress of the United States, 
 the emancipation of all the slaves in the District 
 of Columbia, with the consent of its citizens, to 
 be expressed through the customary forms of a 
 popular election, and with full compensation, to 
 be paid out of the public Treasury, to the indi¬ 
 viduals w'ho should suffer damage in their for¬ 
 tunes by so great an act of National humanity 
 and justice. I am ready to go with my honora¬ 
 ble friend that length now. I shall be ready to 
 go the same length to-morrow—next year—al¬ 
 ways. This is enough, I trust, on that subject. 
 
 I and others here, sir, are denounced as Abo¬ 
 litionists, in a broader sense, and therefore as 
 traitors. I have no hesitation in confessing the 
 whole truth on that point. I believe that I do 
 not know a human being who maintains or sup¬ 
 poses that the Government of the United States 
 has lawful authority or right to abolish Slavery 
 in the States of this Union. Certainly, in my 
 own opinion, that Government has no such pow¬ 
 er or right. But, sir, I am a man, none the less 
 because I am a citizen and a Senator of the 
 United States. And, although I have no power 
 to exercise in a slaveholding State, I very freely 
 say, that if I were a member of such a communi¬ 
 ty, I should recommend to and urge upon my 
 fellow-citizens there, with patience which could 
 endure until the necessary reform could safely 
 be obtained, some measure of Emancipation, im¬ 
 mediate or prospective, with compensation for 
 damages, through the action of the State Legis¬ 
 lature, upon the ascertained consent of the Peo¬ 
 ple. I add, further, to meet the requirements of 
 those who suppose that a proposition of gradual 
 Emancipation to the slaveholding States is either 
 timely now, or soon will be so, that while I re¬ 
 tain a place in the National Councils, any slave¬ 
 holding State willing to adopt the humane policy 
 
4 
 
 which has been already adopted by my own State 
 and by other States, shall have my vote for any 
 aid, either in lands or money, from the Federal 
 Government, which the condition of the public 
 Treasury and of the National domain will allow, 
 in furtherance of an object in which not only the 
 slaveholding States are interested, but which 
 concerns the whole Union, and even Human Na¬ 
 ture itself. 
 
 Mr. President, I have made my way at last, 
 through the intricate mazes of this discussion, to 
 the actual question before the Senate. The bill 
 before us is in these words: 
 
 “If a suit be commenced or pending in any 
 £ State court, against any officer of the United 
 ‘ States or other person, for or on account of any 
 4 act done under any law of the United States, or 
 4 under color thereof, or for or on account of any 
 4 right, authority, claim, or title, set up by such 
 4 officer or other person, under any law of the 
 4 United States, and the defendant shall, at the 
 4 first term of such State court after the passage 
 ‘ of this act, or at the first term of such State 
 4 court after such suit shall be commenced, file a 
 ‘ petition for the removal of the cause for trial 
 4 into the next circuit court to be held in the dis- 
 4 trict where the suit is pending, or, if there be no 
 4 circuit court in such district, then to the district 
 4 court invested with the powers of a circuit court 
 4 next to be held in said district, and offer good 
 4 and sufficient surety for his entering in such 
 4 court, on the first day of its session, copies of 
 4 said process against him, and also for his there 
 4 appearing and entering special bail in the cause, 
 4 if special bail was originally requisite therein, it 
 4 shall then be the duty of the State court to 
 4 accept the surety, and proceed no further in the 
 4 cause; and any bail that may have been taken 
 4 shall be discharged, and the said copies being 
 4 entered as aforesaid in such court of the United 
 4 States, the cause shall there proceed in the same 
 4 manner as if it had been brought there by orig- 
 4 inal process; and any attachment of the goods 
 4 or estate of the defendant by the original pro- 
 4 cess shall hold the goods or estate so attached 
 4 to answer the final judgment, in the same man- 
 4 ner as by the laws of such State they would 
 4 have been holden to answer such final judgment, 
 
 4 had it been rendered by the court in which the 
 4 suit commenced; and the party removing the 
 4 cause shall not be allowed to plead or give evi- 
 4 dence of any other defence than that arising 
 4 under a law of the United States, as aforesaid.” 
 
 What is proposed here is an innovation—a 
 new thing—a thing unknown in the laws of the 
 country, since the States came into a Federal 
 Union. That new thing is, that a person, civilly 
 prosecuted in a State Court, and justifying under 
 authority or color of a law of the United States, 
 may oust the State of its jurisdiction, and remove 
 the cause into a Court of the United States. The 
 first question which arises is, How does the thing 
 stand now? How has it hitherto stood? What 
 are the powers of the State Courts, and what are 
 their duties ? What are the rights of parties 
 in the State Courts ? The Constitution of the 
 United States binds together iu Federal Union 
 thirty-one States, which, while they remain equal 
 
 and qualified sovereignties, at the same time con¬ 
 stitute, in the aggregate, another qualified sove¬ 
 reignty. In so much as the chief business of gov¬ 
 ernment is to protect the rights of its citizens or 
 subjects, and as the performance of that duty is, 
 under free Governments, assigned to Courts of 
 Justice, and in so much as the citizen is simul¬ 
 taneously the subject of a State Government and 
 of the Federal Government, the State Courts and 
 the United States Courts exercise concurrently 
 or co-ordinately the power of trying civil actions 
 which are brought against persons acting as of¬ 
 ficers of the Federal Government. The public 
 officers of the United States are, as we all know, 
 numerous, and of many classes—civil, military, 
 and naval. They are engaged in executing laws 
 relating to the army, the navy, the customs, the 
 public lands, the post office, the judiciary, and 
 foreign relations. These agents may be called 
 upon to answer by any person who is aggrieved, 
 either in the proper Federal Court or in a Court 
 of the State where the grievance happened. A 
 case which will illustrate the subject now occurs 
 . to me. Two or three years ago, I successfully 
 maintained in the Supreme Court of the United 
 States an action on the case, which had been 
 brought in a Justice’s Court of the State of New 
 York, by a woman, against a postmaster, who 
 had refused to deliver to her a newspaper, on 
 which the postage which could be rightfully de¬ 
 manded was one cent. The Postmaster pleaded 
 before the Justice, and before the Supreme Court 
 of the State, and before the Court of Appeals of 
 the State, that none but a Federal Court could 
 assume jurisdiction in the case. When his plea 
 was finally overruled in the Court of last resort 
 in the State, he appealed from that decision to 
 the Supreme Court of the United States. That 
 Court affirmed the decision of the State Court, 
 and thus defined the law to be, that United States 
 officers are amenable to civil actions in the State 
 tribunals. The law now remains as it was then 
 expounded, and so it has always stood since the 
 establishment of the Constitution itself. It is 
 wise and beneficent, because it surrounds the 
 citizen with a double safeguard against extortion, 
 oppression, and every form of injustice committed 
 by the authority or in the name of the great cen¬ 
 tral Executive Power. 
 
 The second question is, What is the nature 
 and extent of the change which you propose to 
 make by the bill which is under consideration ? 
 That question is answered in a word. Whenever 
 the rights of a citizen are invaded in any State 
 within the Union, by a person holding a com¬ 
 mission, whether civil or military, from the Pres¬ 
 ident of the United States, he shall henceforth 
 have only a single safeguard, instead of that 
 double panoply which has hitherto shielded him, 
 and he must either forego redress, or seek it in a 
 tribunal of the United States, in which justice is 
 administered by Judges appointed by the Presi¬ 
 dent and the Senate, and irremovable, except on 
 impeachment by the House of Representatives, 
 and, therefore, responsible in the least possible 
 degree to that wholesome Public Opinion which 
 is the guardian of public liberty. Every post¬ 
 master and his deputy, every marshal and his 
 
5 
 
 deputy, every mail-contractor, every stage-driver, 
 every tide-waiter, every lieutenant, every ensign, 
 and even every midshipman, will be independent 
 of State authority, and, when prosecuted before a 
 Magistrate or Court, in the immediate vicinage 
 where his offence is committed, will defy the 
 party aggrieved, and remove the action com¬ 
 menced against him into a Federal tribunal, 
 whose terms are rarely held, and then in remote 
 and practically inaccessible places. One-half of 
 the power residing in the States is thus to be 
 wrested from them at a single blow, and they 
 will henceforth stand shattered monuments of 
 earlier greatness. 
 
 No such change as this was anticipated by the 
 framers of our Federal and State Constitutions. 
 They established the Federal Constitution chiefly 
 for the protection of the whole country agaiust 
 foreign dangers. They gave to it a stronger Ex¬ 
 ecutive than they gave to the States, respectively. 
 They established the State Constitutions chiefly 
 for the protection and defence of personal rights. 
 They knew that this Central Government would 
 grow stronger and stronger, and would ultimately 
 become an imperial power. It has realized that 
 expectation, and has become even a Continental 
 Power. Hitherto, the citizen has enjoyed his 
 double safeguard. Why shall one-half of his 
 panoply be now torn aAvay from him ? What 
 lawful and proper object of the Federal Govern¬ 
 ment has failed to be obtained by reason of the 
 exercise of jurisdiction by State authorities over 
 officers of the United States ? None. Why, then, 
 shall the ancient law and custom be changed ? 
 Is there danger that the citizen will be too se¬ 
 cure under the double protection of the State 
 Courts and of the Federal Courts ? That was 
 not the doctrine of the earlier days, and that is 
 not sound doctrine now. 
 
 I demand, in the third place, a reason for this 
 innovation. In reply, you urge, first, a prece¬ 
 dent. Precedents, in every country, are the stair¬ 
 way of tyrants. What is this precedent? It is a 
 law which protects the public Treasury, by with¬ 
 drawing from the State Courts certain actions 
 against collectors of the revenue. Who knows now, 
 without more examination than you allow time 
 for us to make, on what ground, or under what 
 circumstances, or upon what exigency, that sin¬ 
 gle departure from the ancient system was made? 
 I do not know that I should have been in favor 
 of that departure. Nor can you show that the 
 innovation thus made, and which you now plead 
 as a precedent, was necessary. We are always 
 wiser in our judgments in retrospect than in an¬ 
 ticipation. I can now see, when the precedent 
 is pleaded to justify a further departure from the 
 ancient system, abundant reasons to regret that 
 the precedent was ever established. 
 
 You tell me, in the next place, that there is 
 danger of insubordination—danger that the State 
 Governments will nullify the laws of the Federal 
 Government. This is always the ready plea for 
 Federal usurpations. It is the same ground 
 which the British Government assumed towards 
 British subjects in the American Colonies, when 
 it transported them beyond seas, to be tried for 
 pretended offences. I proclaim in your ears 
 
 here,jjand I proclaim before my countrymen, that 
 there is no necessity and no shadow of necessity 
 for this great and fearful change. From every 
 tribunal in any State of this Union which ren¬ 
 ders a final judgment that can affect the rights 
 of any public officer of the United States, there 
 is an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, reserved to him by the Constitution and 
 laws of the United States; and that high tribunal 
 can, merely by its mandate, annul that judgment, 
 and discharge the party from all its consequen¬ 
 ces. This, and this alone, was the security which 
 your forefathers established to prevent the evils 
 and dangers of insubordination by the State au¬ 
 thorities. I proclaim, further, that when the 
 Constitution of the United States was submitted 
 to the People in the several States, to be adopted 
 by them, the chief objection which was urged 
 against it, the objection which was urged with 
 the most zeal, the most energy, and the most 
 effect, was, that the liberties of the citizen would 
 be brought into jeopardy by the extended power 
 of the Federal Judiciary. So strenuously was 
 this objection urged, that the Constitution was 
 not adopted until it was demonstrated, by Hamil¬ 
 ton, Jay, and Madison, in the Federalist, that the 
 State jurisdiction, which you are now about to 
 strike down, was left to the States, and could 
 never be wrested from them without an act of 
 Congress, which there was no reason to presume 
 would ever be passed. 
 
 Sir, this is an important transaction. I warn 
 you that it is a transaction too important to be 
 suddenly projected, and carried out with unusual 
 and unseemly rapidity. It is a transaction that 
 will be reviewed freely, boldly, and through long 
 years to come. You would have done well to 
 have given us a week, or a day, or at least one 
 hour, to prepare ourselves with arguments to dis¬ 
 suade you from your purpose and to stay your 
 hands. Suffer me to say, with all deference, that 
 you would have done well if you had allowed 
 yourselves time to consider more deliberately the 
 necessity for a measure so bold, and the conse¬ 
 quences which must follow it. 
 
 I repeat, sir, that there is no necessity for this 
 act. In every case which is intended to be reach¬ 
 ed by it, the mandate of the Supreme Court of 
 the United States annuls the judgment of the 
 State Court which has mistaken its own powers, 
 or encroached upon the Federal authority; and 
 the State itself, with all its dignity and pride, 
 falls humbled and abased at the foot of central 
 and imperial power. I habitually contemplate 
 everything connected with the development of 
 the resources and with the extension and ag¬ 
 grandizement and glory of this my country, with 
 an euthusiasm which I am sure I do not always 
 find burning in the hearts of all with whom it is 
 my duty to act in her Councils. But, sir, I shudder 
 when I think that this development, this exten¬ 
 sion, this aggrandizement, and this accumula¬ 
 tion of glory, are going on firmly, steadily, and 
 crushingly, at the expense of these noble, inde¬ 
 pendent States ; that the majestic dome, while it 
 spreads itself more widely and erects itself high¬ 
 er and higher, is pressing into crumbling frag- 
 
6 
 
 merits the pillars which constitute its true and 
 just support. 
 
 Sir, we have had, on this occasion, as we al¬ 
 ways have on painful occasions of this kind, pa¬ 
 thetic allusions to the safety of this Federal 
 Union. And these allusions have been address¬ 
 ed to me, although I have hitherto been content 
 to be a silent listener to this debate. What do 
 you think must be the feelings of a man, himself 
 a Representative-of three millions, one-eighth of 
 your whole people—a Representative of one-sixth 
 of all the freemen in the Republic—a Represent¬ 
 ative of even a larger proportion of the whole 
 wealth of the country—a Representative of } r our 
 whole Concentrated Commerce—when he finds 
 himself surrounded by men who think that a i 
 community so numerous and so intelligent, and 
 enjoying such wealth and cherishing such inter¬ 
 ests, are so far habitually blinded by passion as 
 to be disloyal to the Union on which all their \ 
 safety depends ? Sir, I almost forget my cus¬ 
 tomary toleration, when I see around me men 
 who know how the interests and affections of 
 their own homes cluster and entwine themselves 
 with every fibre of their own hearts, and who yet 
 seem to forget that those interests and affections 
 are the offspring of humanity itself, and therefore 
 common to all men, and suppose that it is trea¬ 
 son against the country to protest against the 
 oppression of any one of its many and various 
 masses and races. 
 
 I warn you, Senators, that you are saving this 
 Union at a fearful cost. This is a Republican 
 Government—the first and only one that has 
 ever been widely and permanently successful. 
 Every man in this country, every man in Chris¬ 
 tendom, who knows anything of the philosophy 
 of Government, knows that this Republic has 
 been thus successful, only by reason of the stabil¬ 
 ity, strength, and greatness, of the individual 
 States. You are saving the Union of those States, 
 by sapping and undermining the columns on 
 which it rests. You reply to all this, that there 
 is a newly developed necessity for this act of 
 Federal aggrandizement. There is no such new 
 necessity whatever. The Courts of the several 
 States have exercised their concurrent jurisdic¬ 
 tion over officers and agents of the United States 
 for a period of sixty years, in cases which involv¬ 
 ed life, liberty, property, commerce, peace, and 
 war, subject to supervision by the supreme tribu¬ 
 nal of the Union, and while individual rights 
 have been maintained, the public peace has been 
 everywhere preserved, and the public safety has 
 never received a wound. During all that time, 
 there has never been an agent or apologist of the 
 Federal power, so apprehensive for the public 
 safety as to propose the measure which is now 
 before us. There has never been a time when 
 such a proposition would have been received with 
 favor. There have indeed been discontents, but 
 they have been local and transient. Such dis¬ 
 contents are incident to free society everywhere, 
 and they are inevitable here. It is through the 
 working of such discontents, that free communi¬ 
 ties, acting by constitutional restraints, and within 
 constitutional Courts, work out the reformation 
 of errors, the correction of abuses, and the ■ 
 
 advancement of society. All that has happened 
 is a change of the scene of these discontents, re¬ 
 sulting from a change in the geographical direc¬ 
 tion which the action of the Federal Government 
 takes. Heretofore, the murmurs of discontent 
 came from the South. Now, the breeze which 
 bears them sets in from the North. When the 
 ■wind blew from a Southern quarter, the rights of 
 the citizen were not safe without the interposi¬ 
 tion of the State tribunals. Now, when it comes 
 from an opposite point of the compass, a Senator 
 from Connecticut [Mr. Toucey] requires Congress 
 to prohibit that interposition, and to arm the 
 Federal Government with new and portentous 
 power. 
 
 ! Mr. President, all this trouble arises out of the 
 Fugitive Slave Law. The transaction in which 
 we are engaged is by no means the first act of 
 a new drama. You began here, in 1793, to ex- 
 
 ' tend into the free States, by the exercise of the 
 Federal power, the war of races—the war of the 
 master against the slave. The Fugitive Slave 
 Law w r hich was then passed, became obsolete. 
 Though no great inconvenience was sustained, 
 the pride of the slaveholding power was wounded. 
 In 1850, you paesed a new Fugitive Slave Law, 
 and connected it with measures designed to ex¬ 
 tend the Territorial jurisdiction of the United 
 States over new regions, without inhibiting Sla¬ 
 very. You were told at that time, as distinctly 
 as you are told to-night, that your new law could 
 not be executed, and would become obsolete for 
 the same reasons that the old law had become 
 obsolete; that the failure of the old law had re¬ 
 sulted, not from its want of stringency, but from 
 its too great stringency. You were told then, as 
 distinctly as you are now told, that your new law, 
 with all its terrors, would fail, because, like the 
 old law, and more than the old law, it lacked the 
 elements to command the consent and approval 
 of the consciences, the sympathies, and the judg¬ 
 ments, of a Free People. 
 
 The new law, however, was adopted, in defi¬ 
 ance of our protest that it was an act of Federal 
 usurpation, that it virtually suspended the writ 
 of habeas corpus , that it unconstitutionally denied 
 a trial by jury, and that it virtually commanded 
 a judgment of perpetual Slavery to be summarily 
 rendered, upon ex parte evidence, which the party 
 accused was not allowed to refute in the due and 
 ordinary course of the common law. You adopt¬ 
 ed new and oppressive penalties, in answer to all 
 these remonstrances ; and, under threats and 
 alarms for the safety of the Union, the Fugitive 
 Slave Bill received the sanction of the Congress 
 of the United States, and became a law. That 
 was the second act. When murmurs and loud 
 complaints arose, and remonstrances came in 
 from every side, you resorted to an old and much- 
 abused expedient. You brought all the great 
 political parties in the United States into a coa¬ 
 lition and league to maintain this law, and every 
 word and letter of it, unimpaired, and to perpet¬ 
 uate it forever. All your other laws, although 
 they might be beneficent, and protective of human 
 rights and of human liberty, could be changed, 
 but this one unconstitutional law, so derogatory 
 from the rights of Human Nature, was singled 
 
7 
 
 * 
 
 out from among all the rest, and was to be, like 
 the laws of the Medes and Persians, a decree for¬ 
 ever. 
 
 This was the third act. And where are you 
 now? It is only five years since the Fugitive 
 Slave Law was passed. You have poured out 
 treasure like water to secure its execution. The 
 public police, the revenue service, the army and 
 the navy, have been at your command, and have 
 all been vigorously employed, to aid in enforcing 
 it. And still the Fugitive Slave Law is not exe¬ 
 cuted, and is becoming obsolete. You demand a 
 further and a more stringent law. The Federal 
 Government must be armed with new powers, 
 subversive of public liberty, to enforce the ob¬ 
 noxious statute. The bill before us supplies those 
 new powers. This is the fourth act. It is easy 
 to be seen that it cannot be the final one. 
 
 Sir, I look with sorrow, but with no anxiety, 
 upon these things. They will have their end 
 before long in complete discomfiture. I abide 
 the time, and wait for the event. I perform my 
 duty, the only duty which remains for me now. 
 in protesting against the enactment of this law, 
 and in expressing to you my conviction that you 
 are travelling altogether in the wrong direction. 
 If you wish to secure respect to the Federal 
 authorities, to cultivate harmony between the 
 States, to secure universal peace, and to create 
 new bonds of perpetual union, there is only one 
 way before you. Instead of adding new penal¬ 
 ties, employing new agencies, and inspiring new 
 terrors, you must go back to the point where your 
 mistaken policy began, and conform your Federal 
 laws to Magna Charta, to the Constitution, and 
 to the Rights of Man. 
 
 UUKIiU & RLAN CHARD, PRINTERS, WASHINGTON, l>. C. 
 
 % 
 
4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 t. •• it»b .Ci• • T 1 ? fl •• ,J * f ’ r ' • • ' K ‘;;' * 
 
 
 V 
 
 . • : ■ • 
 
 - , I •■■■■■'' 
 
 • » ( ■ " ! ' J 
 
 Jao 
 
 ii ,/. .4 'I 
 
 or 
 
 ■ ■ ■ ' 
 
 i 1 t ' ' r< , , .. t >. i • i • i - . , - 
 
 < ! 51 i *1 -• 1 -! < l-i r'JiJWfcW i 
 
 ' ’• •' i . 
 
 >»*• •* ‘ 1A ' ' ■ ■ • ■' . • f ,< ! cvti n not'. -I 
 
 ■ V ' 1 ■ * -• ■ ■: rm)> 
 
 % 
 
 0/! ■ ■ «• * - ,j . ■ 
 
 - ■ ■ ■ . 
 fl : }\ > 30 ;, u: \ i|f»* •• U r <“ X *‘ • " ’ 
 
 . m! 
 
 ‘ : • I:)i c •' * rt ■ 
 
 .... i ..t I > ■! 
 
 , !. ill' J ' *'*<' •" 1 ' 1 
 
 
 ' 1)1/ mi 
 
 i 0 #t v »n 
 
 I ?•)*)• *.iil of 
 
 ,/v •»% v'KV 
 
 
 \ 
 
 ■ Vi ' - ,U ■ ’• '• ‘ 
 
 I