SPEECH OF HON. JACOB COLLAMER, OF VERMONT, ON THE ACQUISITION OF CUBA; DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 21, 1859 s .- WASHINGTON: PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 1859. SPEECH. The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having re¬ sumed the consideration of the bill making appropriation to facilitate the acquisition of the Island of Cuba by negotia¬ tion— Mr. COLLAMER said: Mr. President: It has appeared to me that this bill, with the necessary consequences which are involved in it, and the policy which it initi¬ ates, is the most important measure that has ever been presented to the consideration of Congress since I have had any connection with it in either House. It is not so much the mere proposition to purchase Cuba; that is but a single step; but, as I have said, the policy which it involves, the great ultimate projects which necessarily lie be¬ hind it, and which follow in its train when that step is once taken, make up the importance of the measure. Our policy in relation to Cuba has certainly been a very uniform one, so far as the public have known it; and the first thing that strikes the mind in this measure, is, that jt is proposed entirely to change that policy. I say our policy has been clear and distinct and uniform, so far, at least, as the public have known it. I feel, Mr. President, that I ought to verify this assertion; and I there¬ fore desire now to refer to the different expres¬ sions of our Government, at different periods, when thismatter has been the topic of negotiation. Mr. Clay, during the administration of Mr. Ad¬ ams, states it thus: “The United States are satisfied with the present condi¬ tion of those islands (Cuba and Porto Rico) in the hands of Spain, and with their ports open to our commerce, as they are now open. This Government desires no political change of that condition.” Mr. Van Buren, in writing to Mr. Van Ness under General Jackson’s administration, says: “ Your general instructions are full upon the subject of the interest which the United States take in the fate of those islands, (Cuba and Porto Rico,) and particularly of the former; they inform you that we are content that Cuba should remain as it now is, but could not consent to its transfer to any European Power.” Mr. Buchanan, under President Polk, says, in his letter to Mr. Saunders, our Minister to Spain: “ You might assure him [the Spanish Minister for For¬ eign Affairs] that, whilst the Government is entirely satis¬ fied that Cuba shall remain under the dominion of Spain, we should in any event resist its acquisition by any other nation.” Mr. Everett, in his letter of December 1,1852, says: “ A respectful sympathy with the fortunes of an ancient ally and a gallant people, with whom the United States have ever maintained the most friendly relations, would, if no other reason existed, make it our duty to leave her in the undisturbed possession of this little remnant of her mighty transatlantic empire.” Here, then, we have the expression of opinion from the accession of the younger Adams down to the last President,*one uniform expression of opinion, that this country is perfectly content that Cuba should remain in the possession of Spain, and will not interfere in regard to it, unless it is attempted to be transferred to some other coun¬ try. It appears to me that there should be shown to us some occasion, some new cause, some in¬ tervening subject-matter, which has arisen to change our national policy. The President says he has had no communication with Spain on the subject; he has nothing new to lay before us; he has no new matter to present. Of course, then, it follows that what we are now called upon to do, is ~to do the very thing which we have assured Spain and the world over and over again it was not our policy to entertain. The proposition for the acquisition of Cuba is presented to our attention in the message of the President, and in the report of the Committee on Foreign Relations which accompanies this bill. We have in this report, I take it, the great prin¬ ciple, the substratum on which it is claimed we should enter upon this policy. Now, what is it ? It all lies in a very narrow compass, and is this. I read from page 9 of the report: “ The law of our national existence is growth. We can¬ not, if vve would, disobey it. While we should do nothing to stimulate it unnaturally, we should be careful not to im¬ pose upon ourselves a regimen so strict as to prevent its healthful development. The tendency of the age is the ex¬ pansion of the great Powers of the world. England, France, and Russia, all demonstrate the existence of this pervading principle. Their growth, it is true, only operates by the ab¬ sorption, partial or total, of weaker Powers—generally of 4 inferior races. So long as this extension of territory is the result of geographical position, a higher civilization, and greater aptitude for government, and is not pursued in a di¬ rection to endanger our safety'or impede our progress. we have neither the right nor the disposition to find fault with it. Let England pursue her march of conquest and annex¬ ation in India, France extend her dominions on the south¬ ern shores of the Mediterranean, and advance her frontiers to the Rhine, or Russia subjugate her barbarous neighbors in Asia; we shall look upon their progress, if not with fa¬ vor, at least with indifference. VVe claim on this hemis¬ phere the same privilege that they exercise on the other— ‘ Hanc veniam petimusque damusque vicissim.’ In this they are but obeying the laws of their organiza¬ tion. When they cease to grow, they will soon commence that period of decadence which is the fate of all nations as of individual man.” There is the great principle enunciated in a very well chosen form of expression; and what is it? It is that great nations must increase in their territorial extent: that they do it; that France, England, Russia do it, and do it how? Doit by Conquest, do it by force; and what is claimed here is that we must do it for the same cause; that is, that when we cease to increase in territory we shall commence our decadence; that it is the law of national existence and that we shall do it, too, as they do it, because not only their acquisition, but the manner of that acquisition is here quoted with approbation and as worthy of our imitation; for the report says: “ We claim on this hemisphere the same privilege that they exercise on the other.” That is, the privilege of extending our territory by arms and by force: t£ In this they are but obeying the laws of their organiza¬ tion. When they cease to grow, they will soon commence that period of decadence which is the fate of all nations.” There is laid down the broad principle, the substratum of the course of national policy, which we are asked now to initiate by the passage of this bill. It needs very few words to explain or enlarge on these views. They certainly are very clear; they are very distinct; and the question now is, will the Congress of the United States in¬ dorse them by the passage of this bill? because that is but an initiatory step in this policy. It here becomes me, in the first place, to say that I utterly deny, I entirely take issue with, the first principle laid down in this proposition. I deny that it is a law of national progress and improve¬ ment that a nation must extend its territory. That entirely depends on how much it has al¬ ready, and how far that which it has is adapted to its wants. If it is true, that when a nation ceases to extend its territory its decadence com¬ mences, it must be on the ground that this people and this nation are utterly incapable of any prog¬ ress in the way of maturity; that they are utterly incapable of any progress by way of improve¬ ment on what they already possess. It goes upon the ground that nothing can be gained to the nation; that it can make no progress in national grandeur and greatness and power, unless it steals from its neighbors. 1 utterly deny that there is any such principle of national growth. A nation may grow in lumbers, in wealth, in civil¬ ization, may grow for centuries, and never en¬ large its territories one inch. The commandment of God to the family of men that they should go forth, multiply, and replenish the earth, and sub¬ due it, that is cultivate it, applies with equal force to a nation like ours. Improve what you have, multiply and replenish, and subdue your country. That word “subdue” is not a com¬ mandment to filibuster against your neighbors. But, Mr. President, it,will become us to con¬ sider whether there is not a very broad mark of difference between the political condition of our country and those countries which are cited to us here as examples worthy of imitation. What use do England and France and Russia make of their conquests of the countries which they sub¬ due abroad? What do they want them for? Take England, with which we are most acquainted: they subdue a country, take possession of it, and occupy it, what for? For a colony; for a colo¬ nial dependency, forever to be holden in a condi¬ tion of colonial dependence; to be subsidized to their own use; to be the hewers of wood and the bearers of burdens for the country at home. Those colonies have no participation in the Government of England itself. They never have any partici¬ pation in the laws, the regulations, the proceed¬ ings for the administration of the home Govern¬ ment and the shaping of the destinies of the mother country, England; and they never are to have any participation. But how is it with us? Can we hold colonies? In the very much noted Dred Scott decision, in which certainly there are some general principles announced that we may agree in, though not in all the particulars, the Supreme Court say: “ There is certainly no power given by the Constitution to the Federal Government to establish or maintain colonies bordering on the United States or at a distance, to be ruled and governed by the pleasure of Congress.” This is more fully repeated and enlarged upon in another part of the decision which I shall not take time now to read; but clear it is, that we have no power to obtain colonies near to us, and at a distance, and to retain them and govern them as colonies, as dependencies. Whatever country we take becomes a part of our own. It must, as soon as its population and condition will permit, be represented. It is to be received as an integral part of our Government, to contribute to the form¬ ation of our own institutions, to the molding of our national affairs, to have an equal participation in everything that is done by this Government. While other nations, by foreign conquests, obtain colonies which may be serviceable to them, we can never do so. All that can ever be of any ser¬ vice to us is to obtain territory adjoining our own which we may incorporate into our own national Government, into which we can march our mil¬ itia, or our Army, to defend and maintain them, and from which they can march to us for the same purpose. Another thing: the manner in which they ob¬ tain these foreign countries is entirely unadapted to our condition. As this report says and ap¬ proves, they obtain them by conquest, and it is claimed that we are to exercise the same power on this continent. Now, sir, we go upon the ground that ours is a popular system of govern¬ ment; that it is the government of the people’s own choice. Therefore, to obtain a foreign coun¬ try, even if you annex it to this, against the will and pleasure of its people, to obtain it by fraud or by force, is as inconsistent with the principle or our Government as it is to attempt to propagate Christianity by the sword. Do you suffer that people to have the choice of their own govern¬ ment if you pursue this policy? Clearly,notatall. 5 I have thought it proper to call attention to these two leading features, attempting to show that what the committee approve of, and lay¬ down as the basis of the policy which this Gov¬ ernment is to initiate by this bill, is a policy ut¬ terly inconsistent with the whole framework of our Government. That is, the obtaining, by conquest and by force, foreign acquisitions. Besides, Mr. President, the obtaining of a coun¬ try not bordering on our own, into which we can¬ not march our armies to protect them, and when they cannot contribute to our protection, neces¬ sarily implies that the nation which attempts to make such conquests, and hold such colonies, must always have a large standing army and a large and powerful fleet. England may hold col¬ onies at any distance from home. She has a fleet to hold intercourse with them, to send to them to protect them against invasion. She has an army which she can transport by her fleet, and put in a position to hold and to defend any colony of which they may choose to take possession. That is all contrary to our institutions. We have no large armv, and we expect none; and we desire to avoid all that policy which shall require one. In the ne?a place, we have no great and exten¬ sive and powerful navy. We expect none, and we are opposed to any policy which shall require us to have one. Both these things will be neces¬ sary, however, when this policy of foreign ac¬ quisition is once entered upon. Mr. President, I think it cannot be disguised that the undertaking to entertain a policy of this kind seems to be based upon the notion that our people have a certain voracity for obtaining land and country, which is utterly irresistible and un¬ controllable. This has been designated by high- sounding names; it is said to be an infirmity of the Anglo-Saxon family. I do not know that it is peculiar to them. 1 am sensible that our people have a great desire for land, but they want it to be pretty good soil and such as they can use them¬ selves. I have thought that one of the most pow¬ erful reproaches of that sort of feeling was found in an incident recited in Stone’s life of Rrandt. Our people would go beyond the Ohio against the Indians. The Indians thought, after our treaty with England, that we had no right beyond the Ohio, without a treaty with them. Our people would go there. They went there from all quar¬ ters of the country, and got into a controversy with the Indians. They had a severe Indian war, and they penetrated at one time, under General St. Clair, pretty far into the Indian country. They encountered the Indians there, and were most fatally defeated. They fled from the field and left large numbers on the ground. When a few days afterwards they returned to bury their dead, they found the mouths of all those dead people stuffed full of earth, saying in the symbolic language of the Indians, “ you would have earth; take your fill of it.” It is supposed that this great desire for obtaining land is so uncontrollable and so vora¬ cious, that you iiave nothing to do but present a project to obtain land, and it is totally immaterial with what it is encumbered, it is totally immaterial where it is situated, the blind avidity of this peo¬ ple is such that they can be made to swallow it without discrimination; and the proposition is presented to them much as if they were like the ostrich, or like the shark following a ship, to which you can throw even a hot stone, no mat¬ ter whether it is digestible or not, they will swal¬ low it. I do not believe that this presumption upon the voracity of our people in relation to land, on account of their supposed indiscrimination and blind proceeding, is well founded. I believe the people of this country, notwithstanding all their desire for land, are capable of understanding whether what is now presented to them is adapted to their wants, and to reject it if it is not. If we search the history of our country for manifestations of the disposition of this nation upon thaP topic, I think I shall be fully borne out in my presumption that their proceedings have been conducted with great discrimination, and they have obtained only such acquisitions as were adapted to their wants. What have they been ? The first was the obtaining of Louisiana. What was it ? Almost a million square miles of country, about one third of all weown now, almost utterly uninhabited, with only a French settlement down at the mouth of the Mississippi, and here and there a scattered Indian post. It was a territory adjoining to ourselves; it was an extensive region of country, of great fertility, exactly adapted to the wants of our people, open to their settlement. The small French settlement at the mouth of the Mississippi, though it might be regarded as a slight incumbrance, being composed of people who were foreigners to us, was so slight as to be a matter of very little or no consideration. It was clearly seen that when that country was settled • up to any considerable extent, it would be Amer¬ icanized; whatever French population there was would disappear in the progress of our own fam¬ ily. Besides, there was a large and extensive tract of fertile, country with which to replace in the Treasury ten times over the money we paid. Did that purchase manifest any want of discrim¬ ination in what ou rpeople were buying, as adapted to their wants? Certainly not at all. Was it not a country into which our people could go, and carry with them and build up and promote all the institutions of our own land—a country, too, no^ only into which they might go, but into which they must go, and expected 'to go, as they have gone, carrying with them their wives and their little ones, their household gods and all their in¬ stitutions, and there building up, all over its sur¬ face, their churches, their school-houses, and their court-houses, in which they aid in adminis¬ tering those laws which they have participated in making ? What was the next? We obtained Florida, a large country, with a small, scattered Spanish population. I am sensible that in regard to Flor¬ ida, and its resources and fertility, there has bedn a great deal of disappointment at almost all ages. In 1762, our people went and took possession of Cuba; and four thousand of the troops who weht there, in what was called the old French war, went from New England; and they conquered the country, and took possession of Havana. The very next year England surrendered it to Spain, in exchange for Florida; for all the golden drearhs of Florida, and the expectations that there was to be found the spring that would rejuvenate man¬ kind, had not passed away; nor did all the eh- chantments round about the name of Florida pass away until a very recent period, and per¬ haps they have not now passed away entirety. 6 But our people obtained that country, and they obtained it because it lay immediately adjoining to ourselves; it was a country which we could defend; it was a country which 'we could build up; it was a country which we could assimilate to our own. What further acquisition have we made? We acquired Texas. Texas was contiguous territory to ours; and, besides, it was very sparsely peo¬ pled, and therefore furnished the opportunity for our people to Americanize that too. But that was not all; the main leading feature was, that the people who were there were ours; there was comparatively a small number of Mexicans. The people of Texas were bone of our bone—children of our families, who went there to engage in the Texas controversy with Mexico; who declared themselves independent; who had for some time sustained their independence, and joined them¬ selves to us at their desire. We gave no money; we got no land—that was left to the people of Texas. We paid nothing; u r e got nothing, in a pecuniary point of view; but we knew what the ; country was; we knew what its people were; we knew what its position was; we knew it was adapted to our wants; it was a country for which we could furnish defense; it was a country that ij could furnish defense to us whenever it was filled up with population. The acquisition of Texas, j therefore, shows no want of discrimination in this people in obtaining territory; that is, to ob- H tain no territory but such as is adapted to their wants and their condition; such as adds to out¬ growth, and strengthens us as a people, by ob¬ taining people of the same language, the same in- |j terest, and the same attachment. But, Mr. President, what is proposed now ? In the first place, it is proposed to get an island, a country that is not contiguous to us, that does not join us—a country into which we cannot march our army if we want to defend it—a country which, if ever so well filled up and assimilated to us, could not furnish defense to us. Besides, it is a country all owned by private individuals; there 1 is no land there which our nation could obtain if we bought the country, or conquered the country; j no land which we could sell to replace what we paid from our Treasury. There is no land we could get to give our people, either as bounties to our soldiers or inducements to our settlers— nothing by which we could begin the process of; Americanizing such a country. The land is all jj in private hands now; the country is thickly pop- i ulated, for the number of people in proportion to the square mile is as large as it is in Virginia or in Tennessee. It is a well-inhabited country; comparatively, a populous country. Then, sir, what are we obtaining? Any coun¬ try that is contiguous to us ? No. Any country adapted to the wants of our people? Certainly not. Any country where our people can go to get land to cultivate ? Certainly not at all. Any¬ thing that we, as a nation, obtain that we can de¬ liver to them? Nothing at all. It does not fall within any one of that category of circumstances which would commend a country as desirable to us. It is sometimes said that it is wanted for our defense. I am not much of a military man, but clear 1 am that we should take no country that requires the use of Army and of Navy to sustain it. I agree with Mr. Jefferson in hig notions of progress, when he said in the beginning, “ Noth¬ ing should ever be accepted which should require a navy to defend it.” That was said by him in the very beginning of our country. Well, sir; what is now said about Cuba being necessary for our defense? It has been said over and over again, that we have no fear, nor can weexpect-anv dan¬ ger from that country while it remains in the hands of Spain; but that it might be a dangerous place of deposit, and dangerous as a naval depot in the hands of a nation of extensive naval power; that they might find harbors of refuge for then- ships, and places for the construction of vessels, out of which harbors they might run, to the an¬ noyance of our commerce passing in and out of the Gulf of Mexico. That may be true; but what is such a nation? Who are they? The real ap¬ prehension our people ever have on this subject is from England, a great naval Power. Is it dan¬ gerous for us to have England in possession of a country in which there may be naval stations, out of which they can send a force to annoy our commerce? We have thought that we were go¬ ing on pretty largely in our progress yi prosper¬ ity, and yet we have Great Britain now in pos¬ session of a country ranging two thousand miles along our whole frontier, over which they may march an army anywhere, any day; and they are in possession of the whole coast north of us, which commands our commerce, for all our com¬ merce passing to the eastern continent by the At¬ lantic goes directly along the borders of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland. It is a saying among the ship officers who navigate the Atlantic, that when you wish to make a pros¬ perous and successful voyage to Europe, your right way is to follow the Gulf stream, to run so close as to scrape the sea-weeds off Cape Race. Directly in the train of our commerce, our vessels • go within the reach of British harbors, out of which they can at any time send a force to annoy our commerce, but yet we feel easy about that. Cuba can only be dangerous to us in the hands of a powerful naval nation in time of war. In time of peace, it can annoy nobody. Well, then, in time of war who will have possession of Cuba? It is an island lying in the Atlantic, almost eight hundred miles long, and, upon the average x oniy about forty miles broad, filled with bays artd in¬ lets and harbors on both sides, with a coast two thousand miles in length around. Cannot a naval power, as a matter of course, take and hold pos¬ session of that island ? Certainly, the most pow¬ erful one will do it. If, then, we have that island, whenever a war takes place, the most powerful nation of the two w-ho are engaged in it will take possession of Cuba, Rs a matter of course. That idea, then, of its being necessary to us for our de¬ fense, has in it nothing in the world, in my opin¬ ion. It is a mere pretext. It appears to me, Mr. President, that if we are ever to take in with ourselves a country where we do not get land for our people to settle, where we have no space for them to occupy, and no op¬ portunity for them to Americanize, we should stop to consider what people it is we propose to take in. As we are not obtaining it for our ben¬ efit, as we are to take nothing but the people, for land we get none, and to take merely the sover¬ eignty and political disposition of them, it would 7 very properly become us to stop and inquire what sort of people it is we are going to take in. Are they a people adapted to our institutions ? Are they a people who, if they understood those in¬ stitutions, would desire them ? Are they a people whom we should desire to have? Inasmuch as this is to be a marriage into the family, the question is, are they adapted to come in, are they suitable for us ? Well, now, what are the people of Cuba? In round numbers there is very little over half a million of Spanish creole persons there; a few intelligent persons among them, but the mass of them entirely unintelligent. In the next place, there are between four and five hundred thousand slaves, and there are two hundred thousand free blacks. They^ire totally unadapted to our condi¬ tion. They have passed no apprenticeship in pop¬ ular government. They have always endured an entirely absolute Government from abroad over them. They are undrilled, unintelligent, speak¬ ing the Spanish language, unacquainted with ours. How are you going to make such a people as that become a part of a society like ours, with our schools, our churches, our institutions of learning, our notions of popular self-government ? What are we to take them in for? To help us to admin¬ ister our own Government ? to assist us, by their enlightenment and power, to select a President? to aid us here in shaping the institutions of our own country? We have had two particular subjects of agita¬ tion, which in recent days at least, have created a great degree of ill-blood in this country; nor are they entirely removed. These two subjects are: first, the question of slavery, into the merits of which I do not propose to enter, but certainly it is a disturbing topic in this country; and secondly, the great accession of foreigners, invited if you please, and coming into this country in great num¬ bers, who, after very short periods of probation, are admitted to all the rights of citizenship, un¬ educated to our institutions, and unfitted, as I think, in a great measure, to the exercise of those powers. They certainly deeply disturb the prob¬ able success of our political experiment, at least in the most populous part of the country. At times there have been misgivings in the minds of our most intelligent men in relation to this experiment of ours, especially in our populous cities; and in a great measure this element of foreign population is calculated to create not only disturbance, but at limes matter of alarm. But, now, what is proposed here? Strip it of all other circumstances, and what is there of it ? We are to say to the people of this country, a majority of whom are in the free States, that they shall contribute their portion of $30,000,000— which is one dollar for every man, woman, and child in the United States—to begin to facilitate the acquisition of Cuba. Not that that is to ob¬ tain Cuba; not at all. Well, what is the purpose? what are you going to effect by it? You want to repeal the law against the importation of foreign slaves so far as to allow the importation, at one sweep, of four hundred thousand. There are four hundred thousand slaves in Cuba; and, if we take [ in Cuba, we import that number of slaves into our country. Now, I would ask gentlemen, es¬ pecially those who better understand that sort of property, as they call it property, to tell me, arc i| - 1 -- they really sincere? do they really believe it is best to aggravate this disturbing topic by adding four hundred thousand more slaves to our num¬ ber to-day? and, especially, do they think it a very modest request, to ask the majority of the people of the'United States, in the free States of this country, to vote this money for that purpose ? Does that manifest any spirit of conciliation on their part? It has not always been perfectly easy to convince our people that our southern friends should be protected and preserved in the use of their slaves as they please, without our inter¬ fering at all; and that that is by virtue of the Con¬ stitution. I say, it has not always been easy; and you have not always succeeded in convincing them of it; but gentlemen now say, “ we want you to overcome that; tell your people in New England that we want them to furnish, by their own accord, by their own votes, their share of $30,000,000, to begin to try the experiment of importing four hundred thousand slaves at one sweep.” It is suggested to me that, when we have invested the money, the men who now own the slaves own them still, and we are not to get anything. Our southern friends, who desire to get slaves, get not a single negro by it after they have paid their money. In the next place, there has been some difficulty as to what we were to dp with our free colored population. If anything that we read is true in relation to the agitation of that question in the slaveholding States, it certainly is a very trouble¬ some question with them. What more is there in this proposition? Why, we are asked to pass a law to take in Cuba, and thereby take into our country two hundred thousand free blacks. That is rather a startling proposition. But, further, you are disturbed about the naturalization of foreign¬ ers^ with the facility with which it is done, and their great and rapid increase of numbers. There have not been quite so many foreigners imported this year as there have been for some years past, and I take it some persons begin to be alarmed. They fear they are not going to get them in fast enough, and now it is proposed to pass a law by which, by taking in Cuba, we shall take in a Spanish creole population of five hundred thou¬ sand foreigners in one day, and naturalize the whole of them; because, when we acquire the country, as I have already shown, we cannot hold it as a colony; it becomes an integral part of our country; it contributes to the forming of our des¬ tinies, and our institutions. Have any of the people who lived in New Mexico, or California, when Mexico ceded them to us, or have the peo¬ ple of Louisiana, that were there when we took it, ever gone through any process of naturaliza¬ tion? Never at all. They all became citizens at once when we took them in, and now it is pro¬ posed by this process, by a single law, to take in five hundred thousand persons of Spanish descent and naturalize them at a single sweep. Even if we could make the purchase, even if we could secure it peaceably and quietly by paying out, if you please, one hundred or one hundred and fifty million dollars to buy that people from Spain, such as they are, never consulting them about it, we should pay from two hundred to three hun¬ dred dollars a head for them, black, white, and gray—the whole of them, and agree to incorpo¬ rate them in our family, set them down by our threshold to participate in our institutions, and to select our officers to administer our Govern¬ ment. The next topic to which I wish to direct atten¬ tion is this: It is said that the obtaining of Cuba would check, and perhaps put an end to the Af¬ rican slave trade. I am sensible that if that were a well-founded idea, it would be one that would address itself with some considerable force to a Targe body of my people. It would be with them a question of humanity. But I have seen, on all occasions like this, a vast deal of pretension, which was utterly unfounded. If any man had heard and could recollect all the various addresses which were made to the people of this country, in order to induce them to take in Texas, and how utterly they failed, how the people were deluded; and I do not know but that many of them desired to be deluded—I fancy he would hardly listen to propositions of this kind without very serious examination. We were told that by acquiring Texas, the slave would move on down through Texas, and slide away into Mexico and disap¬ pear. Has any man seen that process commence in the fourteen years since that day? Can an in¬ stance of that kind be found? And yet it is said that many people were deluded with that. So, too, it was said, if Texas were obtained, all the manufactures of the North would flourish; there would be an outlet for them all; and there, too, as they would raise cotton, was to be found a sale for all the productions of the northwest. There has never a bushel gone to them, never a single particle of it, been realized. It has been a total failure. In relation to the African slave trade, we must look at the present condition of slavery in Cuba, and the present condition of the slave trade, to judge what effect would be produced by annexing Cuba to the United States. 1 have in my hand a production by Mr. Torrente, a Spaniard, a man of high intelligence, a former member of the Cortes of Spain, who resided many years in Cuba. This gentleman was in England when much fault was found with the conduct of the Spanish Gov¬ ernment in the Island of Cuba in relation to the slave trade. It was contended that they had acted with insincerity, and thereupon he published a memoir, giving, as he said, the true condition— and no doubt it is, for it has never been disputed— of that subject as it existed in Cuba; and he agrees entirely with the Senator from Louisiana, [Mr. Benjamin,] who informs us that the island is utterly valueless, and of no sort of importance unless it be cultivated by slave labor, or compul¬ sory labor, as he termed it—labor by Africans, if you please—whites not being adapted to' its cultivation. It will be recollected, that in 1817, Spain made a treaty with England by which she agreed to abolish the African slave trade with Cuba, and she received $2,000,000 in consideration of it. At that time, or immediately afterwards, there was a further arrangement made by the setting up of a mixed commission in Cuba, which was to judge of all the negroes brought before them said to be imported contrary to law, and set them at large, if it were proven to be so. From that time for¬ ward, England has surrounded the coast of Cuba with fleets to break up this trade. They have placed their fleets, too, on the coast of Africa, made a treaty with us, by which we assist in putting a naval force on the coast of Africa, and what has been the effect? The truth is, the slave trade to Cuba has gone on in the same degree as before, with very little check. The slave trade to Brazil, to be sure, has been broken up within a few years, by the action of the Government of Brazil; but the slave trade with Cuba has gone on the same as before; and he says it is utterly im¬ possible for that people to have any value left in their land on any other ground. He says: “ I will pass on to the fifth and last part of my disserta¬ tion, which is confined to proposing the means for terminat¬ ing amicably and peaceably the negro question—the never- ending source of annoyance and contention. These means England herself has furnished. Why have so many diffi¬ culties and compromises been raised, since the signing of the treaty for the abolition of the slave trade? Why have the English had to maintain, and still keep up at immense expense, numerous squadrons on the coasts of Africa and Cuba ? Why have they been*compelled to establish super¬ intending commissions in both places ? All these sacrifices have been necessary for suppressing that illicit traffic. And have they attained their object, or can they attain it? We can well advance the same negative answer as would be given to whosoever should question the possibility of put¬ ting down the smuggling of English produce, which is un¬ ceasingly carried on in the Peninsula.”— Torrente’s Slave¬ ry in the Island of Cuba, page 47. The same author says these expeditions are fitted up, and subscriptions made for them, by the planters themselves. They agree to take shares in the expedition, as low as $500 and $1,000 up to $5,000 or more. The slaves are landed and partitioned out to these people; and the secrecy with which it is done is never broken, and never can be broken. Such being the character of the slave trade there, it is pursued, and pursued not¬ withstanding all that England can do, and not¬ withstanding the aid which theUnited States give, and notwithstanding the aid within the island it¬ self. I cannot here but refer to what is quoted in the report of the committee, on that subject, as coming from Admiral Hotham. His examination before the British Parliament is alluded to on page 14 of the report: “ Sir Charles Hotham, one of the most distinguished offi¬ cers of the British navy, and who commanded on the coast of Africa for several years, was examined by that select committee. He said that the force under his command was in a high state of discipline; that his views were carried out by 1 1 is officers to his entire satisfaction ; that, so far from having succeeded in stopping the slave trade, he hpd not even crippled it to the extent of giving it a permanent check ; that the slave trade had been regulated by the com¬ mercial demand for slaves, and had been little affected by the presence of his squadron, and that experience had proven the system of repression by cruisers on the coast of Africa futile—this, too, when the British squadron counted twenty-seven vessels, comprising several steamers, carry¬ ing about three hundred gyns and three thousand men. The annual expense of the squadron is about ,>$3,500,000, with auxiliary establishments on the coast costing at least $1,500,000 more.” The honorable Senator from Louisiana, [Mr. Benjamin,] who seems to be familiar, as he con¬ siders, with that country, says on the same sub¬ ject: “ I affirm, then, Mr. President, that this magnificent fab¬ ric, built up by the slave labor of Cuba, must perish, or must, whilst Cuba is a Spanish colony, be sustained by the slave trade ; a trade branded as piracy by her own laws, by ours, bv those of G reat Britain ; forbidden to her by treaty volunta¬ rily made by Spain; forbidden by our treaty with England ; and which, by the treaties of the three nations, each is sol¬ emnly bound to prevent. The last refuge on earth for this trade is now found in the Island of Cuba. The combined power of England and the United States is now exerted at the cost of nearly six millions per annum in the suppression 9 «of this traffic. Its continuance has, on more than one occa¬ sion, brought us to the very verge of hostilities with Great Britain for the protection of our flag, and yet tens of thou¬ sands of slaves are annually imported into Cuba.” Notwithstanding the united forces of Great Britain and the United States are kept up at this great annual expense, and although the trade is contrary to the laws of Spain over Cuba, so great is the demand for slaves that they will run all these hazards, and successfully run them too, and carry into that island ten thousand a year. Mr. BENJAMIN. Twenty-five thousand. Mr. COLLAMER. No matter; I will say ten thousand, at least. I want to be moderate in all statements of this kind. Now, what is it that carries these slaves there? My opinion is, that any people who desire to have slaves, and will pay enough for them, can have them in any coun¬ try. They went by from forty to fifty thousand a year to Brazil, as long as Brazil would take them. The people of Cuba buy these slaves and use them; and no doubt now a large majority of the slaves in that country are imported, are known perfectly to be so, and yet all the power of that Government, with a mixed commission court sitting in the Island of Cuba, does not re¬ lieve one of them, and does not prevent their being taken there. They pay for them—that is | all; and they will not themselves execute the laws j of Spain against their own interest. I have no doubt that our people of the Gulf States, if they desire to have slaves, will have them. That is ; a point which will regulate itself; as Admiral Hotham says, it depends on the demand and sup¬ ply; it depends on the price of the article. But, now, what is thp price of these slaves in Cuba ? The extreme has been $500; and yet that price has been a sufficient inducement to men to beard and defy the whole power of England and Amer¬ ica with the laws against the trade. Mr. SLIDELL. Will the Senator from Ver¬ mont allow me to say that the price is fifty ounces -—$850? Mr. COLLAMER. That is since the recent rise here. Our price here is $1,600 or $2,000; but that does not alter my proposition. When Cuba belongs to the United States, what will be the price of the slaves? You cannot expect that when you have between three and four million in the United States, their price is to be lowered down to the price of the less than half a million in Cuba; not at all. The price of slaves in Cuba, when it belongs to us, will be the same as the rice of slaves of the same ability here; because, take it, you can bring a cargo of slaves—of course you can do it according to lav/ when the country belongs to us—from Cuba, into Charles¬ ton, or New Orleans, for a dollar a head. The transportation cannot cost more than that. Mr. MALLORY. Ten dollars, at least. Mr. COLLAMER. That will depend on whether you can pursue the business legally. I suppose now it would cost something, because you have to run the gauntlet, and a man has to import them with a halter around his neck; but the moment you make it lawful, the moment Cuba belongs to us, I venture to say you will find Yan¬ kee vessels enough to carry them in cargoes of five hundred for a dollar a head. I say Yankees, because there is nobody else, in fact, who navi¬ gate your vessels to any considerable extent, and there are probably men enough in all our cities of the North, ready to supply the market with slaves, if you will give price enough. Then the price of slaves in Cuba, when it belongs to us, will be the price of slaves here, and vice versa; because the price of transportation from one place to the other is merely nominal, when it can be done lawfully. Now, I simply put the proposition thus: If $500 a head is enough inducement to bid defiance to the whole power of England and America to prevent the traffic, what will $1,000, or $1,500, a head do? The very statement of the proposition furnishes a reply: $500, $600, or $800, now, as it is said, does defy all power to stop the trade. What will the $1,000, or $1,500, a head do? It is said Cuba is the only place to which African slaves are now carried; and if we receive Cuba into this country, I take it the British will stop the keeping of their fleet on the coast; because, they will say, now there is no country that allows their importation. If their fleet is withdrawn, it will be simply left to what the United States may do. We know what little they will do by know¬ ing what even they and England put together could not do. Suppose, further, we should really un¬ dertake that business, and undertake it with suc¬ cess. Now we find that $6,000,000 a year, laid out by England and America, does not stop the trade at all, I ask you how much will stop it alto¬ gether if we should build a fleet, and sustain it, actually sufficient for the purpose? It is utterly beyond the reach of our power. Therefore, I say that the undertaking to obtain Cuba, for the purpose of putting an end to the African slave trade, is a delusion, an utter delu¬ sion. So far from that, the necessary effect of it would be that, instead of stopping this trade, Cuba would be the depot, the point of putting out, and the point of bringingin, all the slaves wanted for the South and the southwestern part of the United States. Does any man believe that the Gulf States, who desire so much the acquisition of Cuba, really mean to take that country, and expect to supply to it from ten to twenty or thirty thousand slaves a year from the United States? Or, do they expect to leave it to the decimation which the honorable Senator from Louisiana says it must come to unless it is supplied ? We all know they never can be furnished in that way; there is not a supply for them. Another thing: the States in the extreme South have no desire to have Cuba supplied with slaves from Maryland and Virginia and Kentucky. They want all their own, and more, too. They do not want the border slave States shaded off into being what they call, if you please, abolition. They are not entering into this policy with a view to anything of that kind at all. They do not expect to supply slaves for Cuba in that way. I have a single word to say in relation to the un¬ suitableness of that people to become a part of ourselves. One leading feature of our institutions is the entire freedom of religion. I am not now ! tocommence any tirade against Roman Catholics, 1 or any other order of the Christian Church of any kind; but it is a very leading feature of our system that we not only tolerate, but encourage, the pub¬ lic administration of the ordinances of religion in all the forms in which men profess it, and protect each other in the exercise of this privilege. Now, l what are these people? They are bigoted and 10 tenacious; so that on these points, I may say from want of enlightenment, they cannot endure the performance of any of the rites and ceremonies of the Christian Church in any other form than that approved by the Government; nay, so far is this carried that they will not permit it at the fu¬ neral of a Protestant. I know it has been some¬ times complained that there, as well as in Spain, they do not permit the interment of the bodies of Protestants in their burial grounds and ceme¬ teries. I believe that is usual with the Catholic church. I do not myself think that furnishes much ground of complaint; but it is said they deny them the right of Christian burial. This same Mr. Torrente, from whose pamphlet I read before, undertakes to answer this objection, and insists that it is not well founded; but see the conclusion to which he comes: It has never objected to such individuals purchasing and inclosing pieces ot' ground in the form of cemeteries for the ! purpose of depositing therein, with all decency, the mortal remains of their brother religionists ; but it (the Govern¬ ment) cannot do less than oppose ostentation in such funer¬ als, as well as all other religious ceremonies different from that of the Catholic faith.” * * * “ They will be allowed to do so, provided they renounce all pomp and ceremonies, except such as are in accordance with the religion of the State.” That is to say, we cannot do more than permit you to bury your dead in burying-grounds of your own making; we cannot permit, even at a funeral, any religious ceremonies whatever, but such as is according to the religion of the State. How can such a people be in any way molded in with us, and cheerfully indulge and encourage the free exercise of religious ceremonies? There is no thought, 1 believe scarcely the slightest hope, indulged or expressed by any ob- j serving man that it is expected we are to purchase Cuba under this proposition. That is not left in doubt or uncertainty. Jt is perfectly known that it cannot be purchased. 1 cannot but observe, that since the report was made some disclosures have been made on this point. On the 9th page of the report we find this expression: “ Mach 1ms been said of the indelicacy of this mode of proceeding; that the offer to purchase will offend the Span¬ ish pride, be regarded as an insult, and rejected with con¬ tempt; that instead of promoting a consummation that all admit to be desirable, it will have the opposite tendency, it this were true, it would be a conclusive argument against the bill.” Thus the committee state, that if we knew the matter was objectionable to Spain, and would be regarded by her as offensive, it would be a suffi¬ cient objection against the bill. We have th»t concession from the committee. Well, sir, im¬ mediately after the publication of this report, we had information of the action of the Spanish Min¬ istry and Spanish Cortes, leaving no possible doubt about it, utterly abnegating any possibility of the purchase; and yet, were the exertions to carry this bill through in the least remitted? Not at all. Is the sentiment of the report, that that would be a conclusive objection against the bill, regarded as true? We all perfectly understand j that Cuba is not for sale; that Spain will deem it offensive for us to make the offer. It is not for me here to say whether that ought to be so or not: it is enough that it is so. The truth is, it is preposterous to make the offer, and it is to them about as objectionable as the proposition of Simon Magus; and the only answer which will be re¬ turned to it is that which was returned to himr “ Thy money perish with thee.” I do not mean to take time on this point. It is enough for us to know that Cuba is not for sale, and cannot be bought, and nobody expects to buy it. Well, then, if this island is not wanted for de¬ fense,. if it is not wanted for settlement, if it is not wanted to put an end to the African slave trade, if it is not wanted as a good purchase, pray what is the purpose of this bill ? what is the object of it? Here, of course, I must be left, in some measure, to conjecture; but I shall state what l believe to be the purpose, and my reasons for entertaining that belief. It is intended to make the offer with the expect¬ ation that it will be rejected. It is then intended to take measures to get up as many claims and charges and complaints against Spain as you can,, and then to seize the island by way of satisfaction. I do not say all this is to be done in a day or in an hour; but that is the process to be entered upon. In the first place, you will observe that the President of the United States does not ask for any $30,000,000. His proposition was to get some¬ thing like what Mr. Polk had, something like what. Mr. Jefferson had,in the cases he cites. How much was that? Two million dollars. He does not mention the sum, but cites these cases by way of example. He does not ask any $30,000,000. What the President wants is a legislative expres¬ sion of our approbation of this policy. Before he enters upon the prosecution of it, in all its rela¬ tions, lie desires to be backed by having his prop¬ ositions in some way indorsed by legislative ac¬ tion, by an expression of the will of Congress, There is no other way in which that can be prop¬ erly and regularly and legitimately expressed,, but in the form of an appropriation of some kind;, that is, legislative action. Resolutions containing expressions of opinion would not be anything of a legislative character; would not be within the scope of our delegated powers. He wants legis¬ lative action, as I say, for the purpose of initiating his policy. A man can hardly avoid, in this discussion, asking why this comes up at this time, and in this way, and why it is that the President fiuds some ground of expectation that he can be doing, something that anybody will indorse? On that point, I hold in my hand a speech of the honor¬ able Senator from South Carolina, which has ob¬ tained for him something like a national reputa¬ tion. It has been spread broadcast over the land, and read with much approbation, if you please. Now, what is the sum and substance of this “ad¬ dress of the Hon. James H. Hammond, at Barn¬ well Court-House?” I have read it, and reread it. It is essentially an effort on the part of the honorable gentleman to dissuade his audience and the people of the South from three or four no¬ tions which they entertain. I allude to it merely for the purpose of showing what those notions are, so that it may not be said I have charged the people of the South with entertaining them; but I show from this speech that Governor Hammond labors with them and tries to dissuade them from entertaining these notions. I take it that proves that they do entertain them. What are they ? In the first place they desire to obtain Mexico. What for ? To form it into slave country, in order that the slaveholding States may come back again II to an equal position in the Senate with the free States. I will not say there is anything discred¬ itable in that; but that was a sentiment of Mr. Calhoun. It was what he called equality of States. He thought the free and the slave States should be an equal number in the Union; and, of course, have equal power in the Senate. That, with him, was a desideratum, and he seemed to consider it necessary for the safety of the slaveholding States. When the disturbing topic of slavery was settled by the Missouri compromise, he agreed to it; he participated in it; and I ought, in credit and honor to him, to say, he never attempted to disturb it. But it was found, before a great many years, that by admitting Louisiana and Missouri and Ar¬ kansas and Florida, they had used up pretty much all the territory that could be used for making slave States south of the line, and it would be ne¬ cessary, as new free States were formed north of 36° 30', to balance them by some country ac¬ quired, for we had no more country to make into slave States. Hence, the annexation of Texas was put on foot for that purpose; which was not disguised at all. In the making of the treaty, which did not succeed, Mr. Calhoun, then Secre¬ tary of State under President Tyler, officially an¬ nounced that the policy was to sustain and per¬ petuate the institution of slavery; that that was the object of obtaining Texas. I know that many of our people were humbugged with the idea that it was going to be one of the institutions for abol¬ ishing slavery; but the author of it, the man who formed the treaty, Mr. Calhoun, as Secretary of State, announced officially that the purpose was to sustain slavery; but those who rather chose to be humbugged by Mr. Walker’s statements in regard to it, would not take the official announce¬ ment. We know that treaty failed; and the mat¬ ter was presented to the Democratic party in their convention at Baltimore. Everybody expected that they would run Mr. Van Buren; but when they came together, it v/as found that Mr. Van Buren had written and published a letter‘against the annexation of Texas; and that was the end of him. Then the Democracy of the North were plainly told, if you choose a President to carry into effect this purpose of ours, you can have a Democratic President; if you will not let us take one that we select for that purpose, you cannot have a Democratic President at all; and they were constrained to agree to it. We know that the re¬ sult was, that Texas was annexed by a joint res¬ olution; and provision was made for dividing her into three or four States, with her own consent, so that they might be brought in as slave States, to balance the free States as they came in. I do not say there was anything discreditable in this. All that, however, did not seem to answer. I do not know exactly why Texas has not been divided; but I believe that State, on the whole, does not like to be dismembered; she rather de¬ sires to retain her importance as a great State; and I am not sure but that there may be another view, and that is, if they should divide it with a view to make more slave States, it is problematic whether some of them would not turn out to be free States. At any rate, no attempts have been made toward that division. Then the people who had entertained these no¬ tions, desiring to keep up this equality of States, enter upon the business of obliterating the Mis- ^ souri compromise. Mr. Calhoun is dead; all that generation has passed; another has come up “ that knew not Joseph;” and then it was that the line j of 36° 30' was obliterated from the map, for the purpose of getting some slave States north of the line, as there was no other country to make into slave States. I need not go over now the efforts which have been made to form Kansas into a slave State, nor detail particularly the instrumen¬ talities which the party have thought proper to use in countenancing fraud, violence, and blood, to effect that purpose; but all has failed. What next? Is the idea abandoned? I know that the Senator from South Carolina, in his Barnwell speech, undertakes to convince these people that they had better abandon that idea; but they have not abandoned it; it is not given up. The effort now made before us is part and parcel of the same thing, because one of those views was the acquisition of Cuba. He labors that point in his speech, 1 think, with very much ability, and very much candor; and I respect him for it; but I think he has hardly succeeded in convinc¬ ing that people to give it up. At any rate, I think the President has adopted their notion, and is pushing it forward on us, as being one that will give him great strength at the South, in his opinion. So, too, of the acquisition of Mexico. The Senator labors to convince his people that that is a delusion; that it cannot be effected. This busi¬ ness of acquiring Mexico for the'purposes of that ! people, is a very doubtful affair. Slavery has failed in Mexico once already. That mixed pop¬ ulation are not exactly of the kind that they can reasonably expect the institution of African sla¬ very will prosper with. I am very suspicious that ji it would hardly do to undertake to take Mexico for this purpose, except it was in homeopathic doses. Sweep in Mexico at present, and it is the beginning of amalgamation. That is a people of mixed race and blood. So far fro is fast getting to be, a very delicate subject and a rather troublesome point. A ship goes out—the Wanderer; it brings in a cargo of slaves; they are scattered through the country and carried on the railroad cars; but does any man reclaim any of them and deliver them to the Government to be taken home ? Not one. ; Is there a governing public opinion against the im¬ portation of slaves when three hundred imported Africans can be scattered through the southern country in the most public manner, and not one of them reclaimed? What is it for? With po¬ litical men it is looked at in this way: “ we desire to obtain Mexico, to make an equality of States; we desire to open the slave trade, that we may get slaves with which to settle new States, and make them slave States in order to produce that equality ; and we want Cuba, because it is already filled with slaves; we shall not have to import slaves to add to our numbers there; we will just levy a tax on all the free people so as to raise 030,000,000 now, and $100,000,000, or more, af¬ terwards, to buy that for the purpose of adding to our political weight. ” That is the proposition. The question is, whether our people will do it? Mr. SLIDELL. Will the Senator from Ver¬ mont permit me to make a remark here? Mr. COLLAMER. Certainly. Mr. SLIDELL. He states, what is the fact, that the slaves brought in by the Wanderer have been openly carried through Georgia and Ala- 1 bama; but there is no power, no authority, that will enable anybody to arrest these slaves under the law of the United States. The efforts of the Government, up to this time, have been entirely directed towards the prosecution of the men who j have dealt in them, who haye purchased and sold them; and I will only say to the Senator from Vermont, that if he will introduce a bill bv which the power shall be conferred upon the Govern¬ ment of the United States to arrest a slave ille¬ gally introduced into the United States, I will cooperate with him very cheerfully in the passage of it. Mr. COLLAMER. There is a bill lying on the table now; it has lain there for weeks and weeks; and has any southern gentleman tried to move it? It has been reported from the committee long since. Does the honorable Senator wish to clear his State of this apparent imputation, or, if not his own State, other southern States? Is the least effort made about it? He wants that I should do something. I have nothing to do with it. Mr. SLIDELL. I will answer the Senator if he desires it. 1 think that the sentiment of the southern portion of the United States is decidedly adverse to the traffic in slaves, so long as it is pro¬ hibited by the laws of the United States. I think that is the universal sentiment. There is a por¬ tion of the people of the southern country who think that the interests of civilization and human¬ ity, and the industry of the country, would, per¬ haps, be promoted by the renovation of the slave trade, under certain regulations. I think they are still a very small portion of our community; but if the slave trade be not suppressed in other coun¬ tries; if the people of Cuba can purchase slaves at a very reduced price; if the Emperor of France can take them in unlimited numbers into his col¬ onies, the people