maHlB*'."''"'''f s^K-.-ij-.' ^yi|BO|jnffi*^-*^-rrT -' ,' ^ ''.' gHjM]fjffH*¥^ygw;BtKj ¦ ffiSS^^^ffir'f-' flMpnun^^ T ^.^"J^fe- -¦¦¦ YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY -^ift of Samuel R. Betts JOffl CALDWELL CALHOUN. THE LOE JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. JOHN S. JENKINS, AUTHOR OF THE " HISTORY OP THE WAR WITH MEXICO ;" " LIFE OF JAMES K. POLK," ETC., ETC. Justum ac tenacem propositi virum, Non civium ardor prava jubentlum, Non vultu3 instantis tyranni, Mente quatit solids. HoRAT. Carm. iii, 3. AUBaRN AND BUFFALO: JOHN E. BEARD8LEY. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1850, by JAMES M. ALDEN. In the Clerk's Office for the Northern District of New York. STEREOTYPED BY THOMAS B. SMITH 316 WILLIAM STREET, H. T. TO THE ^upU nf Imtli dDKinlina, THIS VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED. PREFACE. One after another of the remarkable men of our country has gone down to the tomb, until the number of the distinguished dead far exceeds that of the living who have become illustrious. The history and fame of the former constitute the glory and greatness of the country, and the promise of the latter is its hope and admiration. To portray the character of the one is to excite the emulation of the other ; and to depict the virtues of a single individual, may be to scatter the seeds that will germinate, and bud, and blossom, and bring forth similar fruit, in due season. For more than thirty-five years, Mr. Calhoun has been one of the most prominent statesmen in the American Union, and during that long period their history is woven together. No important question has been agitated since he first entered Congress, in which he heis not participated, or with which he Viii PREFACE. I has not in some way or other been connected. His biography, therefore, if executed as it ought, should be full of interest to the American reader. I have been aware, from the first, of the diffi culties and embarrassments in the way of preparing a memoir that would be acceptable to both of the parties occupying extreme grounds on the sectional questions with which Mr. CaUioun was identified. It has been my aim, however, to present all things truly; and, having done this, to rely upon the generous kindness of the public. It cannot be that passion and prejudice will foUow the dead, to disturb the quiet slumbers of the grave ; and if these are forgotten, there can be no doubt that jus tice will be done to the memory of Mr. Calhoun. He was emphatically a great man, — a model states man, — one of those who visit us, like angels, " few and far between." He lived in eventful times,- and his history is full of important incidents. A minute account, therefore, of the details of his life would require a much larger volume than the present. Bat it is the design of this work [to exhibit his character with sufficient distinctness to satisfy the general reader, and faith fully to represent his course and position with reference to the important questions that arose during hia PREFACE. IX public career. In order to accomplish this object, I have found it necessary to insert a number of his speeches, that he might be allowed to speak for himself far more ably and eloquently than I could hope to do. In making the selections of the speeches, I have preferred to take those delivered on subjects of great temporary importance, or which are likely to possess a permanent value from their connection with the federal constitution and its proper interpretation. No apology need be offered for occupying so large a space with the history of Nullification. It was the great episode in the life of Mr. Calhoun, and the principle of state interposition, or state veto, was very dear to him. " If you should ask me the word," said he, " that I would wish engraven on my tomb stone, it is Nullification." CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. FAGU Roman Virtue and Integrity — Often paralleled in America — Char acter of Mr. Calhoun — His Reputation — Attachment of the People of South Carolina to him-^Influence — Ancestors — His Father — Characteristic Traits — His Birth, 15 CHAPTER n. Early Development of Character — Hia Education — Enters College — Graduates — Studies Law — Commences Practice-^ '^ "sessional Reputation — Enters the Arena of Politics — Electea to the State Legislature — Services in that Body — Populari!. among liis Oon- atitnenta — Chosen a Member of Congress, 26 CHAPTER m. \ * Enters the House of Repreaentativea — Appointed on the Committee of Foreign Affairs — Speech on the^SaC— Hia Character — Stand ing — Support of jyiadison 8 Administration and the War Meas ures — The Restrictive System — ^Remarks of Mr. Calhoun — Course m regard to the Embargo— Speec£~ontne LoanBIflj't'™''^. . SI CHAPTER IV. Eeelection of Mr. Calhoun— Results of the War — ^The Commercial Treaty— Course of Mr. Calhoun— His Speech— The United States XU CONTENTS. Ti.as Bank— Mr. Dallas' Bfll— Opposition of Mr. Calhoun to this Meas ure — Its Defeat — Chairman of the Committee on the Currency — Report of a Bank Bill— Speech — Passage of the BUI, . . 64 CHAPTER V. Changes in Politics — Consistency of Mr. Calhoun — Resolutions of • 1816— The Direct Tax— Hpefich- Tariff Act of 1816- Views of Mr. CaUioun — Principle of .the Law— ^The Military Academy — The Compensation Act — Temporary Displeasure of his Constitu ents — Internal Improvements — Veto of Mr. Madison, . . 100 CHAPTER VI. Expiration of his Service in the House of Representatives — Ap pointed Secretary of War — Management of the Affairs of the Department — Financial System — Other Improvements intro duced — Reorganization of the Army — System of Fortifications — Medical Statistics — Missouri Compi'omise-^^^^J'ariff Act of 1824 — Internal Improvements 140 CHAPTER Vn. Presidential Election of 1824— Mr. Calhoun chosen Vice-President — Character as Presiding Officer — Refusal to leave his Seat when a Tie Vote was anticipated — Decision in regard to the Right to call to Order — Opposition to the Measures of Mr. Adams — Re election of Mr. Calhoun— The Tariff Question— Matured Opin ions—Address, 152 CHAPTER Vm. Nullification — The Protective System introduced — Act of 1828 Opposition in the Southern States — State Interposition proposed — Mr. Calhoun's Views — Election of General Jackson — Distribu tion and Protection combmed — Dissolution of the Cabinet— Dif ficulty between Mr. Calhoun and General Jackson — Letter to CONTENTS. XIU PAas Governor Hamilton — Convention in South Carolina — Mr. Oal- uoun elected a Sensutor in Congress, . . . : . 188 CHAPTER IX. ^- . -- ^ t ^ Journey to Washington — Takes his Seat in the Senate — Special Message of the President — Mr. Calhoun's R'esolutions — The Force BjU^^peecj^^stit— The Debate— Argument o7 Mr. Web- " ster — ^Reply of Mr. CaUioun — Character of this Effort — Passage of the dompromise Act — Peaceful Termmation of the Contro versy, 246 CHAPTER X. 'J. ^ tlemoval of the Deposits — Opposition of Mr. Calhoun to the Jack- -^ — son Administration — Course in Regard to the Bank — Executive Patronage — Reelected to the Senate — Abohtion Excitement — O Sce^^m^he^^eceptio^f^^dition-Petitions — Admission of Michigan — Separation of the Government h'fflir the Banks — Speech of Mr. Calhoun — Reply to Mr. Clay, . . . • 316 CHAPTER XL Ettsohiuons on tie Subject of Abolitionism — Opinions of Mr. Cal houn — Assumption of State Debts — Bankrupt Bill — Case of the Enterprise — Support oi Mr. Van Buren — Election of Harrison and Tyler — rhe Public Lands— 'Distribution — The Bank Bills — ''\ *" Defence ot the Veto Possr — Mr. Clay's Resolutions — Tariff of ^ffJ^S^BSoPITeatyr^ 379 CHAPTER Xn. The Oregon Question — Resignation of Mr. Calhoun — Appomted Secretary of State — Annexation of Texas — Administration of Mr. Polk — Declines Mission to England — Returns to the Senate —Memphis Convention — Improvement of Harbors and Rivers — triumph of Free Trade — War with Mexico — Continued Agita- XIV CONTENTS. tion of the Slavery Question — Southern Address — ^Mr. Clay's Plan of Compromise — Last Speecfi ofl&r Oalliou^, . . . 39» CHAPTER Xin. Death of Mr. Calhoun — Funeral Honors — His Family — Personal Appearance — Character — Habits in Private Life — Mental Pow ers—Style as a Speaker and Writer;3ryork on Government — Manner as an Orator — Course as a Statesman — Popularity — Memory, 441 LIFE OF JOHN C. CALHOUN. CHAPTER I. Roman Virtue and Integrity — Often paralleled in America— Character of Mr. Calhoun — ^His Reputation — ^Attachment of the People of South Carolina to him — ^Influence — Ancestors — ^His Father — Characteristic Traits— His Birth. When Brennus, the Gallic chieftain, and the dark and uncouth, but stalwart and intrepid warriors, whom he led forth from their transalpine homes down upon the fair and fertile plains of Italy, entered the gates of the Eternal City, — and their startling cry of " Vcb me tis I" — ^woe to the conquered ! — awoke a thousand echoes in her ancient streets and thoroughfares, in her palaces and her temples, — her defeated soldiery and her af frighted inhabitants fled for refuge to the Capitoline Hill, "that high place where Rome embraced her heroes." But some few of the nobler spirits of the re public, reverencing the memories of the past, cherish ing its patriotic impulses, and practicing its virtues, remained in the Forum, and seated in their curule chairs, fearlessly and calmly awaited the approach of the enemy. Rude and unpolished as were the invaders, though 16 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [173^ reckless of danger and indifferent to peril, they were instantly struck with astonishment at this exhibition of firmness and devotion, of patriotism and virtue ; and they regarded with awe, the sublime majesty of the countenances in which dignity and determination were so nobly blended. These Romans were the types of a once numerous class, whose character has been held in admiration for ages, in every clime and among every people to whom their history is known. Roman virtue — th9,t virtue which constituted the bright peculiar trait of statesmen, and soldiers, and citi zens, in the earlier and purer days of republican sim plicity, and whose light, though shorn of many of its beams, was not wholly lost amid the glory and splendor of the Empire, till the throne of the Caesars had crum bled into dust — the virtue thus exemplified and thus ennobled in Rome, has been often paralleled, if not sur passed, in the great republic of the West. While we have in some degree imitated her form of government, we have also copied the traits of character which ren dered her distinguished men so famous ; and it is justly esteemed no small praise among us, to be commended for the possession and practice of Roman virtue and Roman integrity. It is, too, a fit subject for congratu lation, that our country, though so young in years, has produced so many men deservedly entitled to this high distinction : they have not appeared only once in a generation or an age, but like the branches of the golden tree which opened the portals of the lower world, when one is torn away another is not wanting,* — when * Primo avulso non deficit alter Aureus. Yixgli,./£!neid,yi 143. 1733.] ATTACHMENT OP SOUTH CAROLINA. 17 one is numbered with the dead, another springs up to fill his place, to emulate his virtues, and to follow his example. Not the least worthy, and not the least conspicuous among them, was the subject of this memoir. For nearly forty years he occupied a prominent place among the most eminent statesmen of America. His reputa tion, furthermore, had crossed the Atlantic, where he had himself never been, and had elicited the most flattering encomiums from those high in ability and in station. At home, among his own countrymen, his in dependence of thought, his fearlessness in the expression of his opinions, and his unbending and uncompromising integrity, caused him to be generally admired even among those who differed from him the most widely upon political questions. While, therefore, his senti ments with reference to matters of public policy were not always cordially approved, but were oftentimes earnestly opposed, his character and his talents were held in esteem in every section of the Union, and it may be truly said that his fame was national, and was bounded only by the confines of our territory. For much the greater portion of the period during which he was in public life, he held a seat in the legis lature of his native state, or represented her in one or other of the two houses of Congress. To the people of South Carolina he was closely endeared, as well by the sterling qualities of his head and heart, as by his fidelity in watching over and protecting their interests, and his long and arduous services in the councils of the state and nation. Open and frank in the avowal of his sentiments upon the great questions that divided 18 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1733. the public mind — prompt and energetic — faithful and true — he commanded alike their respect and their ad miration. To most of them personally a stranger, yet when his name was uttered, it awoke many a lofty and animat ing recollection, and around it clustered hosts of stir ring associations. They looked up to him as their leader and their head, — they trusted in him to carry them safe through every emergency, and to sustain them in every crisis. Did danger threaten them from within or with out, he was invoked as the guardian genius who pos sessed the power to heal all dissensions, and to triumph over all opposition. Did the gathering clouds on the political horizon forebode aught of disaster, to him they applied as to one who could not be daunted by the omens that filled the souls of others with terror and awe ; and when the warning voice, the counsels, or the admonitions, of that statesman-planter, were heard roll ing down from his distant home at the foot of the Blue Ridge over the lowlands of South Carolina, few there were who did not heed and obey them. Like a gallant knight he was foremost in every position of danger, and when his banner was unfurled in the midst of the timid and faint-hearted, they raised their eyes to it in the confidence of faith, and turned from it full of encourage ment and hope. Possessing such traits of character, and uniting with them a commanding intellect, and an indomitable will, it is not surprising that he exerted an influence so wide^ spread and so powerful. " When a firm decisive spirit is recognized," says Mr. Foster, " it is curious to see how the space clears around a man, and leaves him 1733.] influence and memory. 19 room and freedom. * * * A conviction that he understands and that he wills with extraordinary force, silences the conceit that intended to perplex or instruct him, and intimidates the malice that was disposed to attack him. There is a feeling, as in respect to Fate, that the decrees of so inflexible a spirit must be right, or that, at least, they will be accomplished."* It was so with Mr. Calhoun. Without an effort on his part, other than the natural operations of his mind and character in the progress of development, he ac quired a reputa,tion of which his fellow-citizens were exceedingly proud, as they well might be. They soon learned to love him, and loving, to admire and revere. For twenty years he was first and foremost in their affections, and the dearest hopes of thousands followed him to the silence of the tomb. In their hearts his mem ory must long be enshrined, and the spot hallowed by the presence of all that remained of his mortal existence must be to them as " holy ground," — like Mecca to the followers of the Prophet, or the meadow of Griitli to the peasantry of Switzerland. It is consecrated earth that contains beneath its bosom " Ashes which make it holier, dust which is Even in itself an immortality." The paternal ancestors of Mr. Calhoun came origi nally from Ireland, that fruitful hive from which sprung most of the early inhabitants of the eastern slopes of the Alleghany mountains. His grandfather emigrated with his family to Pennsylvania in the year 1733 ; they afterward removed to Virginia, and in 1756 finally * Essay on Decision of Character, Letter ii. 20 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1756 established themselves permanently in the province of South Carolina, near the base of the Blue Ridge, and in the fine healthy region drained by the tributaries of the Savannah river. His father, Patrick Calhoun, was born in Donegal, but was a mere child when the family left Ireland. Accustomed from his earliest years to sights and scenes well calculated to heighten the natural daring of his spirit, and to render him courageous and self-reliant ; familiar with hardship and privation, with war and bloodshed ; he was distinguished for his boldness and intrepidity, his determined energy, and his manly inde pendence, — traits which were reproduced and reex- emplified in the life and character of his distinguished son. The family were driven from their temporary home in Virginia by the hordes of ruthless savages let loose upon the frontier settlements in consequence of the defeat of Braddock, and in the hostile encounters that took place previous to their removal, Patrick was old enough to take a prominent part. He subsequently participated in the frequent skirmishes between the white settlers of South, Carolina and the Cherokee In dians previous to and during the Revolution. For a long time he commanded a company of rangers, who did good service in keeping off the marauders that hovered upon the borders of the infant colony, seeking an opportunity to plunder and destroy. His occupation was that of a farmer or planter, and he resided upon and cultivated the same place where his father's family first settled, and which now belongs to the heirs of his youngest son. He was married in 1770 to a young lady, whose maiden name was Cald 1776.] HIS FATHER. 21 well, and who was a native of Charlotte county, Vir ginia. Her father was a Scotch- Irish Presbyterian, and was one of the founders of the settlement on Cub Creek. The elder Mr. Calhoun was an industrious and enter prising citizen. To great natural shrewdness he added an inquiring disposition, and a boldness and independence of sentiment that were rarely imitated. He thought, and spoke, and acted for himself. He was a Whig in prin ciple long before the Revolution, and when the crisis came, he did not hesitate publicly to make profession of "the faith that was in him." He battled manfully against the Tories; he contended with them in speech; and at the head of his rangers aided essentially in putting them down with the strong hand. Both the Caldwells and the Calhouns were active and zealous Whigs. As such, they were the peculiar objects of the red man's hate and the Tory's vengeance. Of three of the Cald wells able to bear arms during the revolutionary strug gle, one was murdered by the Tories in cold blood, in his own yard, after his house had been set on fire ; an other fell dead at the battle- of the Cowpens, being pierced with thirty sabre wounds ; and the third was taken prisoner by the enemy, and confined for nine months in a loathsome dungeon at St. Augustine. Nothing but his stout arm and intrepidity of soul, saved Patrick Calhoun from experiencing a similar fate. " Upon one occasion," — says a memoir of his son, pub lished by his political friends during the presidential canvass of 1843-4, — " with thirteen other whites, he maintained a desperate conflict for hours with the Cherokee Indians, until overwhelmed by superior num bers, he was forced to retreat, leaving seven of his 22 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1782. companions dead upon the field. Three days after, they returned to bury their dead, and found the bodies of twenty-three Indian warriors, who had perished in the same conflict. At another time, he was singled out by an Indian distinguished for his prowess as a chief, and for his skill with the rifle. The Indian tak ing to a tree, Calhoun secured himself behind a log, from whence he drew the Indian's fire four times by holding a hat on a stick a little above his hiding-place. The Indian at length exhibited a portion of his person in an effort to ascertain the effect of his shot, when he received a ball from his enemy in the shoulder, which forced him to fly. But the hat exhibited the traces of four balls by which it had been perforated. The effect of this mode of life upon a mind naturally strong and inquisitive was to create a certain degree of contempt for the forms of civilized life, and for all that was mere ly conventional-in society. He claimed all the rights which nature and reason seemed to establish, and he acknowledged no obligation which was not supported by the like sanctions. It was under this conviction that, upon one occasion, he and his neighbors went down within twenty-three miles of Charleston, armed with rifles, to exercise a right of suffrage which had been disputed : a contest which ended in electing him to the Legislature of the state, in which body he served for thirty years. Relying upon virtue, reason, and courage, as all that constituted the true moral strength of man, he attached too little importance to mere iiiTor- mation, and never feared to encounter an adversary who, in that respect, had the advantage over him : a confidence which many of the events of his life seemed 1782.] POLITICAL VIEWS, 23 to justify. Indeed, he once appeared as his own advo cate in a case in Virginia, in which he recovered a tract of land in despite of the regularly-trained dispu tants, who sought to embarrass and defeat him. He opposed the Federal Constitution, because, as he said, it permitted other people than those of South Carolina to tax the people of South Carolina, and thus allowed taxation without representation, which was a violation of the fundamental principle of the revolutionary struggle. " We have heard his son say, that among his earliest recollections was one of a conversation when he _,was nine years of age, in which his father maintained that govefninent to be best which allowedjhe largest_amounj^ onHdivIdual liberty compatible with social order and tranquillity, and insisted that fhe rmproTementsln"po^ liticai science would be found to consisi; in throwing off raaiiy of the restraints then imposed by law, and deemed necessary to an organized society. It may well be sup posed that his son John was an attentive and eager audi tor, and such lessons as these must doubtless have served to encourage that free spirit of inquiry, and that intrepid zeal for truth, for which he has been so much distin guished. The mode of thinking which was thus en couraged may, perhaps, have compensated in some degree for the want of those early advantages which are generally deemed indispensable to great intellectual progress. Of these he had comparatively few. But this was compensated by those natural gifts which give great minds the mastery over difficulties which the timid regard as insuperable. Indeed, we have here another of those rare instances in which the hardiness 24 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1782. of natural genius is seen to defy all obstacles, and de velops its flower and matures its fruit under circum stances apparently the most unpropitious." Patrick Calhoun died in 1795. His wife was a wo man of rare excellence, whose many virtues endeared ner to all that knew her, and are still held in grateful remembrance by those who witnessed the evidences of her worth and profited by her kindness. They had five children, four sons and a daughter, of whom John Cald well Calhoun was the youngest save one. He was born in Abbeville District, South Carolina, at the resi, Hence of his father, on the 18th of March, 1782, and was named after his maternal uncle. Major John Cald well, who was murdered by the Tories. CHAPTER II. Early Development of Character — His Education — Enters College- Graduates — Studies Law — Commences Practice — Professional Repu tation — Enters the Arena of Politics — Elected to the State Legisla ture — Services in that Body — Popularity among his Constituents — Chosen a Member of Congress. BoEN and nurtured amid the closing scenes of the Revolution, and when its dying thunders were still heard faintly echoing in the distance, the stirring inci dents of that protracted contest, and the legends and traditions of border warfare, were among the first and earliest recollections of young Calhoun. They were often recounted in his hearing, and left their impress upon his character, in its sternness, and what might almost be called its harshness. He inherited, too, from his father, the active energy, firmness and determina tion, that characterized him, and from his mother's farnily, their ardency of feeling, and their high-toned and impulsive enthusiasm. When a lad he was re marked for his thoughtful disposition, his quickness of apprehension, his decision of character, and his steady and untiring perseverance in the accomplishment of any plan he had conceived, or in the pursuit of any object which he desired to secure. The early trials and struggles, the hopes and disap pointments, of those who are successful in life, what- 26 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1795. ever may be the calling or profession, differ oftener in kind than in character. Few minds are so peculiarly constituted as not to require to be submitted to the ordeal, when in the early stages of development. The discipline of the young is like the task of the pruner. What is unsightly or unproductive is removed, in ordei; that the thrifty or more promising shoots may grow with greater vigor, and bud and blossom with in creased luxuriance. " It is no doubt a true observa tion," remarked Bishop Patrick, " that the ready way to make the minds of youth go awry, is to lace them too hard, by denying them their just freedom ;" but when the regimen is properly advised and faithfully ob served, it is healthful, and strengthens and invigorates the character for the sterner and severer duties of ad vanced years. Chance sometimes fairly thrusts her favors upon those who seem little inclined to profit by them, but like Dead Sea fruits, though fair and tempt ing without, they turn to dust and ashes within. For tune is proverbially a blind goddess, and she has nevei maintained a very high reputation for her impartiality. The French have a political maxim, that " Time is a statesman's principal assistant." This is equally ap plicable to the career of every man, in boyhood and in age : — Time, Patience, Energy, and Perseverance, like the brothers in the fairy tale, find nothing so difficult that it cannot be overcome. In the life of Mr. Calhoun, this triith is strikingly ex emplified. The advantages which he possessed in so far as an education was concerned, while he remained at home, are noW exceeded by those enjoyed by the child of the humblest citizen of his native state. The 1795.] HIS education. 27 upper country of Virginia and the two Carolinas was settled mainly by Irish and Scotch-Irish emigrants, — a very different class of people from the more polished and refined Huguenots and descendants^ of the Cava liers, who dwelt in the lower valleys of their noble rivers. The former were poor in this world's goods, but rich in those sterling qualities of heart and soul that fitted them so well for the hardships and priva tions of a pioneer life, and which constituted a richer legacy to their children than the wealth secured by their industiw among the hills and dales of their forest homes. Among such a people, the means of instruc tion were, of course, quite limited, and children were taught the rudiments of learning principally by their parents. Mr. Calhoun was indebted for the most part to his father and mother for the information acquired in his youth. There were few or no schools in the sparsely settled district where they resided, and the only branches of education taught in them were reading, writing, and arithmetic. When he was old enough they sent him to an ordinary country school, at which he learned al. that his teacher could communicate. These draughts from the fountain, turbid though it was, created a thirst for more ; but as there was not a single academy in the whole upper region of the state, and none within fifty miles, except in Columbia county, Georgia, of which Mr. Waddell, a Presbyterian clergyman who had mar ried his sister, was the principal ; and as his father was unwilling, both on account of his limited means, and of his aversion to the learned professions, to send him away from home ; he reached the age of thirteen with- 28 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [l /95, out having added anything to his stock of knowledge, except the limited amount of information he was able to pick up in conversation with others, and to obtain from the few books to which he had access. At the age of thirteen he was placed under the care of his brother-in-law, and commenced a course of study in the higher branches. H# had but just made a beginning in this new occupation, with which he was perfectly delighted, when the death of his father took place. His sister shortly after died, and Mr. Waddell imnojediately discontinued his academy. John con tinued to reside with his brother-in-law ; but as the latter was absent for the greater part of the time, en gaged in the performance of his clerical duties, he was left to depend upon his own resources for amusement. The plantation was in a remote district, and he had not a single white companion, with the exception, at inter vals, of Mr. Waddell, and an occasional visitor. In this situation, had he fallen a victim to hstlessness and ennui, it could not have been wondered at. But his active mind required employment, and in the house he found what proved to him a rich mine of intellec tual wealth. His brother-in-law was the librarian of a small circu lating library, and to this he at once resorted. No one counselled or directed him in the selection of books for perusal, but as if led by instinct, he discarded fiction entirely^ and occupied himself, to the exclusion of all lighter reading, with hfetorical works. These were few in number, but he devoured them eagerly. Rollin's Ancient History; Robertson's Life of Charles V., and History of America; and a translation of Voltaire's 1800.] FONDNESS FOR READING HISTORY. 29 Charles XII., first attracted his attention. He was completely fascinated with the inexhaustible store of information which the French scholar had accumu lated, and admired the well-turned periods and graceful and easy diction of Scotland's great historian, while he hung with delight upon the thrilling account of the dar ing exploits of the Swedish monarch. Having dis patched these volumes, he took up the large edition of Cook's Voyages, Brown's Essays, and Locke on the Understanding, the last of which he was unable to finish, for the reason that he had already overtasked his strength, and his health had become considerably im paired. "All this was the work of but fourteen weeks. So intense was his application that his eyes became seri ously affected, his countenance pallid, and his frame emaciated. His mother, alarmed at the intelligence of his health, sent for him home, where exercise and amusement soon restored his strength, and he acquired a fondness for hunting, fishing, and other country sports. Four years passed away in these pursuits, and in atten tion to the business of the farm while his elder brothers were absent, to the entire neglect of his education. But the time was not lost. Exercise and rural sports invigorated his frame, while his labors on the farm gave him a taste for agriculture, which he always retained, and in the pursuit of which he found delightful occupa tion for his intervals of leisure from public duties. " About this time an incident occurred upon which turned his after life. His second brother, James, who had been placed at a counting-house in Charleston, re turned to spend the summer of 1800 at home. John 30 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1800. had determined to become n planter; but James, ob jecting to this, strongly urged him to acquire a good education, and pursue one of the learned professions He replied that he was not averse to the course ad vised, but there were two difficulties in the way : one was to obtain the assent of his mother, without which he could not think of leaving her, and the other was the want of means. His property was small, and his resolution fixed : he would far rather be a planter than a half-informed physician or lawyer. With this determi nation, he could not bring his mind to select either without ample preparation ; but if the consent of their mother should be freely given, and he (James) thought he could so manage his property as to keep him in funds for seven years of study, preparatory to entering his profession, he would leave home and commence his education the next week. His mother and brother agreeing to his conditions, he accordingly left home the next week for Dr. Waddell's, who had married again, aiid resumed his academy in Columbia county, Georgia. This was in June, 1800, in the beginning ot his nine teenth year, at which time it may be said he com menced his education, his tuition having been pre viously very imperfect, and confined to reading, writ ing, and arithmetic, in an ordinary country school. His progress here was so rapid that in two years he entered the junior class of Yale College, and graduateTwith jJIstinction JiL 1804, "just four years from the time he commenced his Latin grammar. He was highly esteemed by Dr. Dwight, then the president of the college, although they differed widely in politics, and at a time when political feelings were intensely bitter 1804.] ENTERS COLLEGE. 31 The doctor was an ardent Federalist, and Mr. Calhoun was one of a^ very few, in a class of more than seventy, who had the firmness openly to avow and maintain the opinions of the Republican party, and, among others, that the people were the only legitimate source of polit ical power. Dr. Dwight entertained a different opinion. In a recitation during the senior year, on the chapter on Politics in Paley's Moral Philosophy, the doctor, with the intention of eliciting his opinion, propounded to Mr. Calhoun the question, as to the legitimate source of power. He did not decline an open and direct avowal of his opinion. A discussion ensued between them, which exhausted the time allotted for the recita tion, and in which the pupil maintained his opinions with sijoh vigor of argument and success, as to elicit from his distinguished teacher the declaration, in speak ing of him to a friend, that the young man had talent enough to be President of the United States, which he accompanied by a prediction that he would one day attain that station."* At the commencement, an English oration was as signed to Mr. Calhoun. The subject which he selected was — " The qualifications necessary to constitute a per fect statesman" — from which it may be inferred that he had already set his heart upon a political career, and that he loved to contemplate that heau ideal in states manship, wMtch he afterward attempted to illustrate in his own career. HayingJake.iLJus.jiegr.ae,, he com menced the study of the law, which he regarded as the stepping-stone to the higher position at which he aimed. He spent three years in his legal studies, and in miscel- * Biographical Sketch of Mr. Calhoun, 1843. 32 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1807. laneous reading. For about half this time, he attended the celebrated law school at Litchfield, Connecticut, under" the charge of Judge Reeve and Mr. Gould, and at which so rinany of the most eminent members of the profession in the northern and southern states received their legal education. At this school he acquired and maintained a high reputation for ability and application, and in the debadng society formed among its members, he successfully cultivated hiFlaTents^ for extemporary speaking^ and in this respect is admittecT to Tiave ex celled all his associates. On "leaving Litchfield, Mr. Calhoun repaired to Charleston, and Entered the office of Mr. De Saussure, subsequently Chancellor of South Carolina, in order to familiarize himself with the statute laws of his state, and the practice of the courts. Li the office^ of^r^De Saussure, and of Mr. George Bowie, of Abbeyille, he 'completed his studies. He then presented himself for examTnafion, was duly admitted to the bar in 1807, and commenced practice in the Abbeville District. He im- Txiediately took a place in the front rank of his profes sion, among the ablest and most experienced of its members. Clients flocked around him, and a lucrative practice was the reward of his long and severe course of study. Had he remained at the bar, his great talents must have enabled him to attain a high standing, but he left it so soon that this can only be a matter of spec ulation. The reputation which he acquired during the short period of his forensic career, was certainly an enviable one, and augured most auspiciously for the future. " While he was yet a student," says the memoir be 1808.] A MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE. 33 fore quoted, " after his return from Litchfield to Abbe- ville, an incident occurred which agitated the whole Union, and contributed to give to Mr. Calhoun's life, at that early period, the political direction which it has ever since kept — the 'attack of , the English frigate Leopard on the American frigate Chesapeake. It led to public meetings all over the Union, in which resolu tions were passed expressive of the indignation of the people, and their firm resolve to stand by the govern ment in whatever measure it might think proper to adopt to redress the outrage. At that called in his na tive district, he was appointed one of the committee to prepare a report and resolutions to be presented to a meeting to be convened to receive them on an ap pointed day. Mr. Calhoun was requested by the com mittee to prepare them, which he did so much to their satisfaction, that he was appointed to address thejneet- ing on the occasion before the vote was jtaken on the resolutions. The meeting was large, and it was the first time he had ever appeared before the public. He acquitted himself with such success that^ his name was presented as a candidate for the, state Legislature at the next election. He was elected at the head of the ticket, and at a time when the prejudice against law yers was so strong in the district that no one of the profession who had offered for many years previously ¦had ever succeeded. This was the. commencement of his political life, and the first evidence he ever received of^he confidence of the people of the state — a confi- ^Ence which has continued ever since constantly in creasing, without interruption or reaction, for the third of a century ; and which, for its duration, universality, 2* 84: ' JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1808. and strength, may be said to be without a parallel in any other state, or in the case of any other public man. "He served two sessions Jn_^the_state_Legislature. It was not long after he took his seat before he distin guished hiniself. Early in the session an inTormal meeting of the Republican portion of the members was called to, nominate candidates for the places of Presi dent and Vice-President of the United States. Mr. Madison was nominated for the presidency without op position. When the nomination for the vice-presi dency was presented, Mr. Calhoun embraced the oc casion to present his opinion in reference to coming events, as bearing on the nomination. He reviewed the state of the relations between the United States and Great Britain and France, the two great belliger ents which were then struggling for mastery, and in their struggle trampling on the rights of neutrals, and especially ours ; he touched on the restrictive system which had been resorted to by the government to pro tect our rights, and expressed his doubt of its efficafey, and the conviction that a war with Great Britain would be unavoidable. ' It was,' he said, ' in this state of things, of the utmost importance that the ranks of the Republican party should be preserved un disturbed and unbroken by faction or discord.' He then adverted to the fact, that a discontented portion of the party had given unequivocal evidence of rally ing round- the name of the venerable vice-president, George Clinton (whose re-nomination was proposed), and of whom he spoke highly ; but he gave it as his opinion, that should he be nominated and reelected, he 1808.] HIS POPULARITY. 35 would become the nucleus of all the discontented portion of the party, and thus make a formidable divi sion in its ranks should the country be forced into war. These persons, he predicted, would ultimately rally under De Witt Clinton, the nephew, whom he de scribed as a man of distinguished talents and aspiring disposition. To avoid the danger, he suggested for nomination the name of John Langdon, of New Hamp shire, of whom he spoke highly both as to talents and patriotism. " It was Mr. Calhoun's first effort in a public capacity. The manner and matter excited great applause ; and when it is recollected "yiatjhese^^narks preceded~lF^ declaration of war more than three years, and^how events" Fappened according to his anticipations, it affords a striking proof of that sagacity, at so early a period, for which he has since been so much distin. guished. It at once gave him a stand among the most distinguished members of the Legislature. During the short period he remained a member, he originated and carried through several measures, which proved in practice to be salutaiy, and have become a permanent portion of the legislation of the state." His cour.se in the Legislature secured him an ex traordinary degree of popularity and influence in the section of the state in which he resided. His constit uents were especially proud of him, and many there were at that early era of his fortunes, who predicted for him a briUiant destiny ; and, in truth, the promise of his life and conduct warranted these high expecta tions. " Give a man nerve," says an eloquent writer, " a presence, sw ay over language, and, above all, en- 36 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN [1810. thusiasm, or the skill to stimulate it ; start him in the public arena with these requisites, and ere many years, perhaps many months, have passed, you will either see him in high station, or in a fair way of rising to it."* In none of these essentials to success was Mr. Cal houn wanting, as those who knew him will promptly bear witness. He had nerve and intrepidity, enthu siasm, the air of one born to command, and fine argu mentative powers ; and his words were like the verba a'^dentia of Cicero, captivating and convincing, melt ing all hearts and fairly burning into every ear that listened. As is well known, the members of the twelfth Con gress were generally selected with particular reference to the apprehended war with Great Britain. The prominent stand taken by Mr. Calhoun in the Legisla ture had drawn public attention to him, and the Repub licans of his congressional district demanded his selec tion as their representative. He accordingly presented himself before the people for their suffrages, and in the fall of 1810 was elected by a triumphant majority over his opponent. * Francis' Orators of the Age. CHAPTER III. Enters the House of Representatives — Appointed on the Committee of Foreign Afeirs — Speech on the War — His Character — Standing — ¦ Support of Madison's Administration and the War Measures — The Restrictive System — Remarks of Mr. Calhoun — Course in regard to the Embargo — Speech on the Loan Bill. However true it may be that the Jay treaty was the best < 98 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1813-16. ure in which they now did. The disease arose in time of war — the war had subsided, but left the disease, which it was now in the power of Congress to eradicate — but, if they did not now exercise the power, they would become abettors of a state of things which was of vital conse quence to public morality, as he showed by various illustrations. He called upon the house, as guardians of the public weal, of the health of the body politic which -depended on the public morals, to interpose against a state of things which was inconsistent with either. He- ap pealed to the house, too, as the guardians of public and private faith. In what manner, he asked, were the public contracts fulfilled ? In gold and silver, in which the government had stipulated to pay ? No ; in paper issued by these institutions; m paper greatly depreciated; in paper depreciated from five to twenty per cent, below the currency in which the government had contracted to pay, &c. He added another argument — ^the inequality of taxation, in consequence of the state of the circulating medium, which, notwithstanding the taxes were laid with Bt lict regard to the constitutional provision for their equaUty, made the people in one section of the Union pay perhaps one fifth more of the same tax than those in another. The constitution having given Con gress the power to remedy these evils, they were, he contended, deeply responsible for their continuance. The evil he desired to remedy, Mr. C, said, was a deep one ; almost incurable, because connected with public opinion, over which banks have a great control — they have, in a great measure, a control over the press ; for proof of which he referred to the fact, that the present wretched state of the cuculatlng medium had scarcely been denounced by a single paper within the United States, The derangement of a circulat ing medium, he said, was a joint thrown out of its socket ; let it remain for a short time in that state, and the sinews will be so knit, that it cannot be replaced — apply the remedy soon, and it is an operation easy though painful. The evil grows, whilst the resistance to it be comes weak ; and, unless checked at once, will become irresistible. Mr. C. concluded the speech of which the above is a mere outline, which the imagination of the reader must fill up, by observing, that he could have said much more on this important subject, but he knew how difficult it was to gain the attention of the house to long ad dresses. The foregoing is, indeed, but a meagre sketch of 1813-16.] PASSAGE OF THE BILL. ' 99 Mr. Calhoun's speech, yet it will suffice to show his position at that period. The question of the constitu tionality of a national bank he did not consider. He seems to have regarded it as a settled one, and advo cated the incorporation of a bank as a matter of neces- sit}^ and expediency, — as " the only adequate resource," in the language of President Madison, " to relieve the country and the government from the present embar rassment." It was necessary, to enable the govern ment to provide a constitutional currency for the peo ple, and highly expedient as one of the features in a general system of preparation against the manifold evils arising out of a state of war from which the country had just escaped. Mr. Calhoun defended the bill throughout the whole debate with great ability, and it finally passed the House on the 14th of March, 1816, by a vote of 80 to 71, his name being recorded in favor of its passage The bill likewise received a favorable vote in the Sen ate, and being approved by the President, became the law of the land. CHAPTER V.' Changes in Politics — Consistency of Mr: Calhoun — Resolution of 1816 — The Direct Tax— Speech— Tariff Act of 1816— Views of Mr. Calhoun — Principle of the Law — The Military Academy — The Compensation Act — Temporary Displeasure of his Constituents — Internal Im provements — Veto of Mr. Madison. How true is it that there are no absolute rules in politics, — that the occasion often serves to establish the principle, rather than the principle to govern the oc casion. Truth has no attribute — not her simplicity nor her beauty — more lovely than her consistency with herself Her principles are unchanging and unchangeable, — " The eternal years of God are hers I" The great laws of Nature endure forever ; they are ^s f)ermanent and as immovable as He who established them. The earth and its sister orbs, although ages have elapsed since the period of their creation, con tinue to move on in the courses to which they have been accustomed from the beginning. The bow of promise displays the same gorgeous colors, as when it first broke, like some blessed vision, on the raptured gaze of Noah and his family. One season is succeeded by another, in the appointed order. The storm alter nates with the sunshine, the flower blossoms and per- 1815-16.] CHANGES IN POLITICS. 101 ishes, and life and vigor are followed by decrepitude and decay ; yet all is in accordance with a system, a harmony, and a law. But whatever bears the impress of humanity, or is of human invention, is constantly altering its char acter, and presenting itself in some new shape or ap pearance. Two spirits — the spirit of preservation and the spirit of destruction — are continually warring against each other. Conservatism and Progress, like the good and the bad angel, are ever striving for the ascendency ; the former clinging with tenacity to whatsoever the past has hallowed, and the latter gain ing ground inch by inch and foot by foot. Things old and venerable are every day being supplanted by strange inventions. " Revolution" is not merely the impres sive catch-word of the Frondeur or the rebel, and de signed to arouse the oppressed to resistance ; its influ ence is everywhere visible, and is everywhere felt. Innovation is not now confined to powder, wigs, curls, hoops, and the thousand and ten thousand appendages which have been invented by fashion, sometimes to make up for the deficiencies of the outer man and the outer woman, but oftener to mar and spoil the fair pro portions of the Almighty's handiwork : — it is a govern ing, and a controlling power, in the court and in the cabinet ; it rules in the humble cottage of the laborer and in the splendid mansion of the millionaire ; it pre sides in the ball-room and at the f6te, in the council- chamber and at the political convention ; it is with the farmer at his plough, the artisan in his workshop, the beauty at her toilet, the scholar in his study, the judg« on the bench, and the statesman in his closet. 102 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. " Times change and men change with them" — is, if anything, truer at this day than it was nineteen hun dred years ago. It is very common to decry politi cians who act from motives of expediency, — entirely regardless of the fact that there are two classes of such motives, the one base and selfish, and the other honor able and praiseworthy. He cannot be a just, or an enlightened statesinan, who adheres to ancient forms and precedents, indifferent to the age in which he lives, and to the circumstances by which he is surrounded. A great principle, indeed, is too important to be idly sacrificed, yet it may be made to conform to the changes daily taking place in the condition and in the relations of men, without sacrificing any portion of its spirit. Hence, it is not to be regretted, that there are no absolute rules in politics ; and the statesman who feels compelled by the force of causes which he cannot control, to alter the system of policy which he has ad vocated, or to substitute one measure for another which he has favored, though still watching closely the principles, which, as beacon lights, have guided his course, deserves far more of honor than of censure. Few among modern statesmen, have maintained a higher character for consistency than Mr. Calhoun. As has been remarked, he set aside the question of the constitutionality of a national bank, when the subject was first presented to him, and advocated the establish ment of such an institution, in order to put an end 1o the suspension of specie payments, and to restore to the people the national currency — that of gold and sil ver — alone recognized by the constitution, of which they had been for years deprived. He never lost sight 1815-16.] RESOLUTION OF 1816. 103 of this great principle in regard to the constitutional currency, and in furtherance of it, earnestly supported, and voted for, the resolution of 1816, which provided that specie, or the notes of banks paying specie, should alone be received in payment of government dues. This was the first step taken toward the entire separa tion of the general government from the banking sys tem, — a measure which he lived to see accomplished, and, in no small degree, through his own disinterested and untiring efforts. T);e immediate effect produced by the incorporation of the bank in 1816, and the adoption of the specie I'^solution, was salutary ; and through their agency, the currency of the country was soon brought back, as Mr. Calhoun desired, to the specie standard. Two other most important questions, intimately con nected with each other, and with the finances of the country, were agitated at the session of 1815-16. At an early day in the session, Mr. Lowndes, as the chair man of the committee of ways and means, reported a series of resolutions, providing for the continuance, for a hmited period, of the direct tax which had been im posed on account of the exigencies of the war, and contemplating the establishment of a new tariff of duties. The direct tax was ordered to be continued by a vote oFthe House, xvlr. Calhoun voting with the majority! Tn regard to a new tariff there was, per- haps, more diversity of opinion as to minor details, but not so much as to the general principle. In March, 1816, the tariff act of that year was reported from the committee of ways and means, and received the sup port of Mr. Calhoun. Probably no one act of his life 104 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815—16. has been more severely criticised and censured than his connection with the tariff of 1816. Before pro ceeding to notice particularly his course in relation to that measure, it may be well to consider the motives which governed him, and the reasons which influenced his action, as expressed by himself. Premising, that during the debate on the direct tax, and the tariff act proper, the whole question in regard to the permanent defence of the country, the develop ment and improvement of its resources, and the pro tection of all its great interests, including that of manufactures then in its infancy, was considered, — let us see how he has put himself upon the record. In the course of the debate on the direct tax, he made the following speech, which was delivered on the 4th of April, 1816. SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX, Mr. Calhoun commenced his remarks by observing, that there were in the afeirs of nations, not less than that of individuals, moments, on the proper use of which depended their fame, prosperity and duration. Such he conceived to be the present situation of this nation. Blecently emerged from a war, we find ourselves in possession of a physical and moral power of great magnitude ; and, impressed bjTEe misKiftunes whichHave resulted from want of forecast heretofore, we are disposed to apply our means to the purposes most valuable to the country. He hoped, that in this interesting situation, we should be guided by the dictates of truth and wisdom only, that we should prefer the lasting happiness of our country to its present ease, its security to its pleasure, fair honor and reputation, to inglorious and inactive repose. We are now called on to determine what amount of revenue is neces- BarylBr"ffiir^ffi!l^m~llHI6"5f"p?ace7^1iis~mvorve3TEe"aH^question, what are the means which the true interests of this country demand! The principal expense of our government grows out of 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. 105 measures necessary for its defence ; and in order to decide what those measures ought to be, it will be proper to inquhe what ought to be our pohcy towards other nations ? and what will probably be theirs towards us ? He intentionally laid out of consideration the financial questions, which some gentlemen had examined in the debate ; and also the question of retrenchments, on which he would only remark, that he hoped, whatsoever of economy entered into the measures of Con gress, they would be divested of the character of parsimony. Beginning with the pohcy of this country, it oup^ht he said, to cor- respond with the character of its politi^_instttllt>ona.-^.What then is their cEaracter i They rest on justice and reason. Those being the foundations of our government, its policy ought to comport with them. It is the duty of all nations, especially of one whose institutions recog nize no principle of force, but appeal to virtue for their strength, to act with justice and moderation ; with moderation, approaching to forbear ance. In aU possible conflicts with foreign powers, our government should be able to make it manifest to the world, that it has justice on its side. We should always forbear if possible, until all should be sat isfied, that when we-^ake up arms, it is not for the purpose of conquest, but maintaining our essential rights. Our government, however, is also founded on equality ; it permits no man to exercise violence ; it permits none to trample on the rights of his fellow citizen with impunity. These maxims we should also carry into our intercourse with foreign nations, and as we render justice to all, so we should be prepared to exact it fi'om all Our policy should not only be moderate and just, but as high-minded as it isjmoderate_gcl just. This, said Mr, C, appears to me the true line of conduct. In the policy of nations, said he, there are two extremes : one extreme in which justice and moderation may sink into feebleness — another in which that lofty spnit, which ought to animate all nations, particularly firee ones, may mount up to military violence. These extremes ought to be equally avoided ; but of the two, he considered the first far the most dangerous, far the most fatal. There were, he said, two splendid examples of nations which had ulti mately sunk by military violence — the Komans in ancient time, the French in modern. But how numerous were the instances of nations gradually sinking into nothingness through imbecility and apathy. They have not indeed struck the mind as forcibly as the instance just mentioned ; because they have sunk ingloriously, without anything in their descent to excite either admiration or respect I consider the ex- 106 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN', [1815-16. treme of weakness not only the most dangerous of itself, said Mr. C, but as that extreme to which the people of this country are peculiarly liable. The people are, indeed, high-minded ; and, therefore, it may be thought my fears' are unfounded. But they are blessed with much happiness ; moral, political and physical : these operate on the dispo sitions and habits of this people, with something like the effects attrib uted to southern climates — they dispose them to pleasure and to inac tivity, except in the pursuit of wealth, I need not appeal to the past history of the country ; to the indisposition of this people to war from the commencement of the government — arising from the nature of our habits, and the disposition to pursue those com-ses which contribute to swell our private fortunes. We incline, not only from the causes already mentioned, but from the nature of our foreign relations, to that feeble policy, which I consider as more dangerous than the other ex treme. We have, it is true, dangers to apprehend from abroad — ^but they are far off, at the distance of three thousand miles : which pre vents that continued dread which they would excite if in our neighbor hood. Besides, we can have no foreign war which we should dread, or ought to fear to meet, but a war with England ; t;iut a war with her breaks in on the whole Industry of the countrj^, and affects all its pri vate pursuits. On this account we prefer suffering very great wrongs from her, rather than to redress them by arms. The gentleman from Pennsylvania asked if the country did forbear tUl it felt disgraced, whose fault was it? Not, ho said, that of the administrations of Wash ington or Adams ; for neither of them had left it so. A few words, ¦ said Mr, G, on this point The fault was principally in neither of our several administrations ; in neither of the two great parties. It arose from the indisposition of the people to resort to arms, from the reason already assigned. It arose also from two incidental circumstances — thS want of preparation, and the untried character of our government in war. But there were other circumstances connected with the party to wliich the gentleman belongs, which caused the country to forbear too Jong, That party took advantage of the indisposition of the people to an English war, and preached up the advantages of peace when it had become ignominious ; and until we had scarcely the ability to defend ourselves. The gentleman from Pennsylvania further said, if peace had not been made when it was, wo should not have been here delib erating at this time. This assertion is an awful one, if true. If the nation was on the verge of ruin, the defects which brought it to that 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. 107 situation ought to be known, probed and corrected, even if they rose out of the constitution. But Mr. 0. said, it is an assertion that ought not to be lightly made. The effects are dangerous ; for what man hereafter, with such consequences before his eyes, would venture to propose a war ? If such were the admitted fact, a future enemy would persist in war, expecting the country to sink before his efforts : his arms would be steeled. Ills exertions nerved against us. The position was in every view, one of that dangerous bearing on the future relations of the country, that it ought not to he admitted without the strongest proof What said Mr. C, was the fact ? What had been the progress of events for a few months preceding the termination of the war ? At Balti more, at Plattsburg, at New Orleans, the invaders had been signally defeated ; a new spirit was diffused through the whole mass of the community. Can it be believed then, that the government was on the verge of dissolution ? No, sir ; it never stoij^d firmer on its basis than at that moment It was true, indeed, we labored under great difficul ties ; but it is an observation made by a statesman of great sagacity, Edmund Burke, when Pitt was anticipating the downfall of France through her finances, that an instance is not to be found of a high- minded nation sinking under financial difficulties — and it would have been exemplified in our country had the war continued. Men on all sides began to unite in defence of the country ; parties in this house began to rally on this point, and if the gentleman from Pennsylvania had been a member at that time, he also, from what he has said, would have taken that ground. The gentleman had taken a position -on this point as erroneous as it was dangerous ; and, Mr. C. said, he had thought proper thus to notice it. As a proof, said Mr, C, that the sittiationpXihe country naturally inclines us to too nmch feebleness rather than too much violence, I re- fer to thT5,c^lhat 5irare are on this^oor, men whoare jntirely op-) pose3~'to'armies7to naviesTto every means of defence. Sir, if their { lioiitics prevail, the country will be disarmed, at the mercy of any for- ' eigri power. On the other side, sir, there is no excess of military fer vor, no party inclmlng to miUtary despotism : for, though a charge of such a disposition has been made by a gentleman in debate, it is with out the shadow of foundation. What is the fact in regard to the army ! Does it bear' out his assertion? Is it even preportionally larger now than it was in 1801-2, the period which the gentleman considers as the standard of political perfection ? It was then about 4000 men ; it was 108 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. t larger in proportion than an army of 10,000 men would now be. The charge of a disposition to make this a military government exists only in the imaginations of gentlemen ; it cannot be supported by facts ; it is contrary to proof and to evidence. Having dismissed this part of the subject, Mr. 0. proceeded to con sider another part of it, in his opinion equally Important, viz. : What wiU be the probable policy of other nations ? With the world at large, said he, we are now at peace. I know of no nation with which we shall probably come into collision, unless it be with Great Britain and Spain. With both of these nations we have considerable points of collision : I hope this country will maintain, in regard to both of them, the strictest justice : but with both these nations there is a possibility, sooner or later, of our being engaged in war. As to Spain, I will say nothing, because she is the inferior .of the two, and those measures which apply to the superior power, will include also the inferior. I shall consider our relations then with England only. Peace now exist8~Eetween the two countries. As to its duration, I will give no opinion, except that I beheve the peace will last the longer foF the"war which has just enUedT Evidences have been~furnished dur- ing the war of the capacity and character of this nation, which will make her indisposed to try her strength with us on slight grounds. But, what is the probable course of events respecting the future rela tions between the two countries! England J3_ the most formidable power in the world: she^has thejnost numerous army and navy at her command We, on the contrary, are the most growing nation on earth ; most rapidly improving in those very particulars, in which she excels. This question then presents itself : will the greater power per mit the less to attain its destined greatness by natural growth, or will she take measures to disturb it ? Those who know the history of na tions, will not believe that a rival will look unmoved on this prosperity. It has been said, that nations have heads, but no hearts. Every states man, every one who loves his country, who -wishes to maintain the dig nity of that country, to see it attain the summit of greatness and pros perity, regards the progress of other nations with a jealous eye. The English statesmen have always so acted. I find no fault with them on that account, but rather to point it out as a principle which ought also to govern our conduct in regard to them. Will Great Britain permit us to go on in an uninterrupted march to the height of national great ness and prosperity S I fear not But, admitting the councils on that 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. 109 side of the water to be governed by a degree of magnanimity, and jus tice, the world has never experienced from them, and I am warranted in saying never will, may not some unforeseen collision involve you in hostiUties with Great Britain ? Gentlemen on the other side have said, that there are pomts of difference with that nation (existing prior to the war) which are yet unsettled. I grant it If such, then, be the fact, does it not show that points of collision remain — that whenever the same condition of the world that existed before the war shall recur, the same collisions will probably take place ? If Great Britain sees the opportunity of enforcing the same doctrines we have already con tested, wiU she not seize it S Admitting this country to maintain that pohcy which it ought ; that its councils be governed by the most per fect justice and moderation, we yet see, said Mr. Calhoun, that by a difference of views on essential points, the peace between the two na tions is liable to be jeopardized. I am sure, that future wars with England are not onlv possible ; but. I will sav more, that they are highly probable — nay, that they will certainly take place. Future wars, I fear, with the honorable Speaker, future wars, long and bloody, will exist between this country and Great Britain : I lament it — ^but I will not close my eyes on future events ; I will not betray the high trust reposed in me ; I will speak what I believe to be true. You wlU have to encounter British jealousy and hostility in every shape, not im mediately manifested by open force or violence, perhaps, but by indi rect attempts to check your growth and prosperity. As far as they cau, they will disgrace everything connected with you ; her reviewers, paragraphists and travellers will assail you and your institutions, and no means will be left; untried to bring you to contemn yourselves, and be contemned by others, I thank my God, they have not now the means of effecting it which they once had. No; the late war has given you a mode of feeling and thinking which forbids the acknowl edgment of national inferiority, that first of political evils. Had we not encountered Great Britain, we should not have had the briUiant points (o rest on which we now have. We, too, have now our heroes and illustrious actions. If Britam has her Welhngton, we have our Jack- sons, Browns and Scotts. If she has her naval heroes, we have them not less renowned, for they have snatched the laurel from her brows It is impossible that we can now be degraded by comparisons ; I trust we are equally above corruption and intrigue : it only remams then to try the contest by force of arms. 110 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. Let us now, said Mr. C, consider the measures of preparation which sound policy dictates. First, then, as to extent, without reference to the kind : They ought to be^raduated by a reference to tlie character £53 capacity of both countries, England excels in means all countries that now exist or ever did exist ; and has besides great moral re. sources — intelligent and renowned for masculine virtues. On our part, our measures ought to correspond with that lofty policy which become freemen determined to defend our rights. Thus circumstanced on both sides, we ought to omit no preparation fairly in our means. Next, as to the species of preparation, which opens siil^'pp.t.a nf grpnt. extent, nnd importance. The navy most certainly, in any point of view, occupies 'f&8"'ftrBt"ptecer"It"lS~£Ke"most sale, most effectual, and the cheapest mo3e of defence. For, let the fact be remembered, our navy cost less per man, including all the amount of extraordinary expenditures on the Lakes, than our army. This is an important fact, which ought to be fixed in the memory of the house ; for, if that force be the most effi cient and safe, which is at the same time the cheapest, on that should be our principal reliance. We have heard much of the danger of standing armies to our liberties — the objection cannot be made to the navy. Generals, it must be acknowledged, have often advanced at the head of arms to Imperial rank and power ; but in what instance had an Admiral usurped on the liberties of his country ? Put our strength in the navy for foreign defence, and- we shall certainly escape the whole catalogue of possible ills, painted by gentlemen on the other side. A naval power attacks that country, from whose hostility alone we have ¦aiiyiiEing to~3rea3J wTiere she Is most; assailable, and defends this coun try where "it. is weakest Wliere'ls ' Gf ear~Britain "mcSFvuIiierable S In whaTpoinFis she rSost accessible to attack ? In her commerce — in her nfivigation. There she is not ooly exposed, but the blow is fatal. There is her strength ; there is the secret of her power. Here, then, if ever it become necessary, you ought to strike. But where are you most exposed ? On the Atlantic line ; a line so long and so weak, that you are peculiarly liable to be assailed in it How is it to be de fended ? By a navy, and by a navy alone can it be efficiently defended. Let us look back to the time when the enemy was in possession of the whole line of the sea coast moored in your rivers, and ready to assault you at every point The facts are too recent to require to be painted — I will only generally state that your commerce was cut up ; yom' specie circulation destroyed ; your internal communication interrupted, your 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. Ill best and cheapest highway being entirely in possession of the enemy ; your ports foreign, the one to the other ; your treasury exhausted, in merely defensive preparations and militia requisitions, not knowing where you would be assailed, you had at the same moment, to stand prepared at every point A recurrence of this state of things, so op pressive to the country, in the event of another war, could be pre vented only by the establishment and maintenance of a sufficient naval force. Mr. C. said he had thought proper to press this point thus strongly, because, though it was generally assented to that the navy ought to be increased, he foimd that assent too cold, and the approba tion bestowed on it too negative in its character. It ought, it is said, to be gradually increased. If the navy is to be increased at all, let its augmentation be limited only by your ability tobtuld, officer, and man.. If it is the kind of force most safe, and at the same time most efficient I to guard against foreign invasion, or repel foreign aggression, you ought to put your whole force on the sea side. It is estimated that we have in om- country eighty thousand sailors. This would enable us to man a considerable fleet, which, if well directed, would give us the habitual command on our own coast ; an object in every point of view, so de sirable. Not that we ought, hastily, without due preparation, under present circumst juces, to build a large number of vessels ; but we ought to commence prep.tiation, establish docks, collect timber and naval stores, and, as soon as the materials are prepared, we ought to com mence building, to the extent which I have mentioned. If anything can preserve the country in its most imminent dangers from abroad, it is this species of armament. If we desire to be free from future wars, as I hope we may, this is the only way to effect it We shall have peace then, and what is of still higher moment with perfect security. In regard to our present mUltary_ establishment. Mr. C. said, it was small enough, ITiat point the honorable Speaker had fully demon strated: it_wa3 not sufficiently large at praseilLtfljaeemg-alLflurJor- tresses. Gentlemen had spoken in favor of the militia, and against the army. In regard to the militia, said Mr. C, I would go as far as any gentleman, and considerably farther than those would who are so vio lently opposed to our small army. J[^ would not only arm the militia, but I would extend their term of service, and makfe them efficient. To talk about the efficiency of mihtia called into" active service for six months only, is to impose on the people ; it is to ruin them with false hopes. I know the danger of large standing armies, said Mr. C. I 112 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16 know the nailitia are the true force ; that no nation can be safe at home and abroad, which has not an efficient militia ; but the time of service ought to be enlarged, to enable them to acquire a knowledge of the duties of the camp, to let the habits of civil life be broken. For though militia, freshly drawn from their homes, may, in a moment of enthusi asm, do great service, as at New Orleans, in general they are not calcu lated for service in the field, until time is allowed for them to acquire habits of discipline and subordination. Your defence ought to depend on the land, on a regular draft from the body of the people. It is thus in time of war the business of recruiting will be dispensed with ; a mode of defending the country every way uncongenial with om- republican institutions ; uncertain, slow in its operation, and expensive, it draws from society its worse materials, introducing into our army, of necessity, all the severities which are exercised in that of the most despotic gov ernment Thus compounded, our army ui a great degree lose that en thusiasm with which citizen-soldiers, conscious of liberty, and fighting in defence of their country, have ever been animated. All free nations of antiquity entrusted the defence of their country not to the dregs of so ciety, but to the body of citizens ; hence that heroism which modem times may admire but cannot equal. I know that I utter truths un pleasant to those who wish to enjoy liberty without making the efforts necessary to secure it. Her favor is never won by the cowardly, the vicious, or indolent It has been said by some physicians that life is a forced state ; the same may be said of freedom. It requires efforts; it pre-supposes mental and moral qualities of a high order to be generally diffused in the society where it exists. It mainly stands on the faithful ~HiscEarge of two great duties which every citizen of proper age owes the republic ; a wise and virtuous exercise of the right of suffrage ; and a prompt and brave defence of the country in the hour of danger. The first symptom of decay has ever appeared in the backward and neg ligent discharge of the latter duty. Those who are acquainted with the historians and orators of antiquity know the truth of this assertion. The least decay of patriotism, the least verging towards pleasure and luxury will there immediately discover itself Large standhig and mercenary armies then become necessary ; and tnose who are not wiU- ihg to render the military service essential to the defence of their rights, soon find, as they ought to do, a master. It is the order of nature and cannot be reversed. This would at once put an adequate force in your hands, and render you secure. I cannot agree with those who think 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. 113 that we are free from danger, and need not to prepare for it, because we have no natiou in our immediate neighborhood to dread. Recollect that the nation with whom we have recently terminated a severe con flict, lives on the bosom of the deep ; that although three thousand miles of ocean intervene between us, she can attack you with as much facility as if she had but two hundred or two hundred and fifty miles over land to march. She is as near you as if she occupied Canada instead of the islands of Great Britain. You have the power of assailing as well as being assailed ; her provinces border on our territory, the dread of los ing which, if y«u are prepared to attack them, will contribute to that peace which every honest man is anxious to maintain as long as pos sible with that country. llr, C. then proceeded toa point of less but yet of great importance — he meant, the establishment of roads, and opening canals in various parts of the country. Your country, said he, has cei'tain points of feebleness and certain "points of strength about it. Yom' feebleness should be re- moved, your strength improved. Your population is widely dispersed. Though this is greatly advantageous in one respect, that of preventing the country from being permanently conquered, it imposes a great dif ficulty in defending your territory from invasion, because of the difficulty of transportation from one point to another of your widely-extended frontier. We ought to contribute as much as possible to the formation of good multaiy roads, not only on ttie score of general jiolificarecono- ^my, but to" enable us on emergencies" to collect the whole mass of our mihtary means on the point menaced The people are brave, great, and spirited, but they must be brought together in sufficient number, iind with a certain promptitude to enable them to act with effect The importance of military roads was well known to the Romans : the re mains of their roads exist to this day, some of them uninjured by the ravages of time. , Let us make great permanent roads, not like the Ro mans, with a view~^f subjectmg and ruUng provinces, but for the more honorable purpose of defence ; and connecting more closely the interests of various sections of this great country. Let any one look at the vast cost of transportation during the war, much of which is chargeable to the want of good roads and canals, and he will not deny the vast im portance of a due attention to this object Mr. C. proceeded to another topic — the encouragementproper to be afforded to the industry of the counti-y. In regard to the question, how fer manufactures ought to be fostered, Mr. C. said it was the_duigcjpf. 314 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. this country, as a means of defence, to encourage the domestic industry of the country, more especially that part of it which provides the neces- sSyTJaterials for clothing and defence. Let us look at the nature of me war most likely to occur. EnglanJis in the possession oi the ocean no man, however sanguine, can believe that we can deprive her soon of her predominance there. That control deprives us of the means of maintaining our army and navy cheaply clad. The question relating to manufactures must not depend en the abstract principle, that industry left to pursue its own course, will find in its own interest all the en couragement that is necessary. I lay the claims of the manufacturers entirely out of view, said Mr. C. — but on general principles, without re gard to their interest, a certain encouragement should be extended at least to our woollen and cotton manufactures. There was another poi^it of preparation wbidi, Mr. C. said, ought not to be overlooked-tthe defence of our coast, by means other than thpv navy, on which we^oughFto rely mainly, but not entirely. The coast is om" weak part, which ought to be rendered strong, if it be in our power to make it so. There are two points on our coast particularly weak, the mouths of the Mississippi and the Chesapeake Bay, which ought to be cautiously attended to, not however neglecting others. TEe'admiriistration which leaves these two points inaiiotEer'war without fortification, ought to receive the execration of the country. Look at the facility afforded by the Chesapeake Bay to maritime powers in at tacking us. If we estimate with it the margin of rivers navigable for vessels of war, it adds fourteen hundred miles at least to the line of our sea-coast ; and that of the WOTst character, for when an enemy is there, it is without the fear of being driven from it : he has, besides, the power of assaulting two shores at the same time, and must be expected on both. Under such circumstances, no degree of expense woidd be too. great for its defence. The whole margin of the bay is besides an ex tremely sickly one, and &tal to the militia of the upper country. How it is to be defended, military and naval men will best judge, but I be Ueve that steam frigates ought at least to constitute a part of the means ; the expense of which, however great, the people ought and would cheerfully bear. There were other pomts to which, Mr. C. said, he m%ht call the at tention of the committee, but for the fear of fatiguing them. He would mention only his views in regard to our finance, as connected with pre paratory measures. A war with Great Britain, said he, will immedi^. 1815-16.] SPEECH ON THE DIRECT TAX. 115 ately distress your finance, as far as your revenue depends on imports. It is impossible during war to prepare a system of internal revenue in TfipeT&TnSBtTKe^elect thus occasioned Will Congress then leave the hiition wholly dependent on foreign commerce for its revenue ? This nation, Mr. C. said, was rapidly changing the character of its industry. When a nation is agricultural, depending for supply on foreign markets its people may be taxed through its impost almost to the amount of its cap&city. The nation was, however, rapidly becoming to a considerable extent a manufacturing nation. We find that exterior commerce (not including the coasting trade) was every day bearing less and less pro- portion to the entire wealth and strength of the nation. The financial resources of the iiation wiHI'thereforeTHaily become weaker and weaker, instead of growing with the nation's growth, if we do not resort to"olher objects than our foreign commerce for taxation. But, gentlemen say, 'the moral power of the nation ought not to be neglected, and that moral power is inconsistent with oppressive taxes on the people. It certainly is with oppressive taxes, but to make them so they must be both heavy and unnecessary. I agree, therefore, with gentlemen in their premises, but not in their conclusion, that because an oppressive tax destroys the whole moral power of the country, there ought therefore to be no tax at all. Such a conclusion is certainly erroneous. Let us, said Mr. C, examine the question, whether a tax laid for the defence, security, and lasting prosperity of a country, is calculated to destroy the moral power of this country. If such be the fact as indispensable as I believe these facts to be, I will relinquish them ; for of all the powers of the government, the power of a moral kind is most to be cherished. We had better give up all our physical power than part with thatjfBut what is moral power ? The zeal of the country, and the confidence in tEi"a3mmistration of its government, \ Will it be diminished by laying ""ESK'wisely, necelsarilyrand moderately ? If yon suppose the people intelligent and virtuous, it cannot be admitted. But if a majority of them are ignorant and vicious, then it is probable a tax laid for the most judicious purpose may deprive you of their confidence. The people, I believe, are intelligent and virtuous. The wiser then you act ; the less you yield to the temptation of ignoble and false security, the more you attract their confidence. The very existence of your government proves their intelligence : for, let me say to this house, that if one who knew nothing of this people were made acquainted with its government, and with the fact that it had sustained itself for thirty years, he would 116 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16 know at once that this was a most intelligent and virtuous people. Convince the people that measures are necessary and wise, and they will maintain them. Already they go far, very far before this house in ¦ energy and public spirit If ever measures of this description become unpopular, it will be by speeches here. Are any willing to lull the people into false security ? Can they withdraw their eyes from facts menacing the prosperity, if not the existence, of the nation ? Are they willing to inspire them with sentiments injurious to their lasting peace and prosperity ? The subject is grave ; it is connected with the happiness and existence of the country. I do most sincerely hope that this house are the real agents of thepeople_i .they are brought here not to consult their ease ^cl convenience, but their general defence and common welfare. Such is the language of the constitution. I have faithfully, in discharge of the sacred trust reposed in me by those for whom I act, pointed out those measures which our situation and relation to the rest of the world, render necessary for our security and lasting prosperity. They involve no doubt much expense ; they requue considerable sacrifices on the part of the people ; but are they on that account to be rejected ? We are called on to choose ; on the .ine side is great ease it is true, but on the other the security of the "counfiy. We" rnay^lspense with the taxes; we may neglect every measure"or"precautlon~ and feel no immediate disaster ; but in such a state oFthings what virtuous, what wise citizen, but what must look on the future "with dread ! I know of no situation so responsible. If prop erly considered, as ours. We are charged by Providence not only with the happiness of this great and rising people, but in a considerable r of the people. This might formerly have been true lo a considerable extent, before the perfec tion of machinery, and when the success of the manu factures depended on the minute sub-division of labor. At that time it required a large portion of the popula tion of a country to be engaged in them ; and every minute sub-division of labor is undoubtedly unfavorable to the intellect ; but the great perfection of machinery has in a considerable degree obviated these objections. In fact it has been stated that manufacturing districts in England furnish the greatest number of recruits to her army, and that, as soldiers, they are not materially inferior to the rest of her population. It has been further asserted that manufactures are the fruitful cause of pauperism ; and England has been referred to as furnishing conclusive evidence of its truth. For his part, he could perceive no such tendency in them, but the exact contrary, as they furnished new stimulus and means of subsistence to the laboring classes of the community. We ought not to look to the cotton and woollen establishments of Great Britain for the prodigious numbers of poor with which her population was disgraced. Causes much more efiicient exist. Her poor laws and statutes regulating the price of labor. 128 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. with heavy taxes, were the real causes. But if it must be so, if the mere fact that England manufactured more than any other country, explained the cause of her having more beggars, it is just as reasonable to refer her courage, spirit, and all her masculine virtues, in which she excels all -other nations, with a single ex ception ; he meant our own ; in which we might with out vanity challenge a preeminence. Another objec tion had been made, which he must acknowledge was better founded, that capital employed in manfacturing produced a greater dependence on the part of the em ployed, than in commerce, navigation, or agriculture It is certainly an evil and to be regretted ; but he did not think it a decisive objection to the system ; espe cially when it had incidental political advantages which in his opinion more than counterpoised it. It produced an interest strictly American, as much so as agricul ture ; in which it had the decided advantage of com merce or navigation. The country will from this de rive much advantage. Again, it is calculated to bind together more closely our widely-spread republic. It will greatly increase our mutual dependence and inter- ' course ; and will as a necessary consequence, excite an increased attention to internal improvement, a sub ject every way so intimately connected with the ulti mate attainment of national strength and the perfection of 'our political institutions. He regarded the fact that it would make the parts adhere more closely, that it would form a new and most powerful cement, far out-weighing any political objections that might be urged against the system. In his opinion the liberty and the union of this country were inseparably 1815—16.] THIS SPEECH UNPREMEDITATED. 129 united ! That as the destruction of the latter would most certainly involve the former ; so its maintenance will with equal certainty preserve it. He did not speak lightly. He had often and long revolved it in his mind ; and he had critically examined into the causes that destroyed the liberty of other states. There are none that apply to us, or apply with a force to alarm. The basis of our repubUc is too broad and its structure too strong, to be shaken by them. Its extension and organization will be found to afford effectual security against their operation ; but let it be deeply impressed on the heart of this house and country, that while they guarded against the old they exposed us to a new and terrible danger, disunion. This single word compre hended almost the sum of our political dangers ; and against it we ought to be perpetually guarded." In connection with the foregoing remarks of Mr. Cal- noun on the tariff act, it should be mentioned, that he had no present intention of taking part in the debate, when they were delivered. His speech was an unpre meditated effort, made on the spur of the occasion, upon the particular and urgent request of his friend Mr. Ingham, of Pennsylvania. The tariff bill was then under discussion, and the House had fallen into confusion. Mr. Calhoun was not a frequent speaker, but was always listened to with great deference and respect. He was therefore entreated to make some remarks, that order and tranquillity might be restored. He had been engaged in writing at his desk, and had made no preparation for the debate. Moreover, his time and attention had been so completely taken up with his appropriate duties on the currency committee, 130 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. that he had reflected but little on the merits of the tariff question. His remaj-ks were, consequently, of a general character, and only designed to present the leading and more striking considerations in favor of the proposed law. It is undoubtedly true that this subject was a new one, in so far as the protective policy was concerned — for previous tariff acts had been based on revenue principles — and if Mr. Calhoun erred in giving the measure his support, it must be attributed to that fact. But he would never himself admit, that there was any thing inconsistent in his course on this occasion, as contrasted with his subsequent action ; and in his cele brated speech on the Force Bill, in 1832, he repelled the charge which had been made against him, with much warmth. '¦" The political aspect of the tariff question in 1816, was, indeed, very different from what it afterward be came. The interests affected by the law that year, and the circumstances attending its passage, were peculiar. From 1792 to 1805, the United States en joyed a degree of commercial prosperity without par allel in their history. The desolating wars in Europe, and the conflict with Great Britain, put an end to this era of successful commerce, and the capital which had been so profitably employed was now driven into other channels. Manufacturing establishments sprung up in the northern and eastern states, and under the influ ence of the non-intercourse policy they were highly prosperous. But when peace came, and our markets were again opened to foreign importations, it was not expected by any one, that they would be able to sus- 1815-16.] PRINCIPLE OF THE LAW. 131 tain themselves against the competition which they would be obliged to encounter. It was then urged, and with a great deal of plausibility, that the infant manufactures of the country, hitherto fostered and sus tained by the existence of the war, were deserving of encouragement — not protection, be it remembered — and that this could be afforded in no better way than by a tariff law enacted for the purpose of raising the revenue needed for the support of the government. This idea of encouraging an important interest while in its infancy, and until it became strong enough to support itself, which, it was said, it would be able to do in ten or twelve years, was one hkely to tiave its full weight with Mr. Calhoun, who was yet compara tively a young man, full of hope for himself and his country, enthusiastic and patriotic. But it will be seen from his speech on the direct tax, and his remarks on the tariff bill, that other considerations connected with the state of the country, its future prosperity, and its defence against foreign powers, were of paramount im portance with him. The leading governments of Europe had banded together to put down the popular impulses which threatened the permanency of mon archical institutions, and Legitimacy was now in the ascendant. What further projects might be contem plated by the Holy Alliance, were left solely to conjec ture ; but it was advisable to be prepared for any fortune. The lessons of experience were not to be despised, and a regard for the safety of the Union imperatively demanded that she should be placed in a condition of defence, and of entire independence of foreign influ- 132 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16. ences. The former, as Mr. Calhoun contended, might be secured, by the augmentation of the army and navy and the fortification of the sea-coast, and the latter, by increasing the prosperity and wealth of the people, to which end a sound currency and the encouragement of domestic interests were essential. Protection, to a certain but limited extent, was af forded by the law of 1816, but it cannot be denied that the revenue idea was the controlling one, inasmuch as the average rate of duties imposed by the act barely exceeded thirty per cent. This is further made evi dent by the fact, that the sum of ten millions of dol lars was appropriated annually to the sinking fund, pro vided for the payment of the public debt; and it was also anticipated, that there would be a still further ex cess of revenue, to be carried to the same object. If the measure, then, was not mainly of a revenue char acter, it would have been the height of folly to have indulged 'any such expectations ¦(' for it is undoubtedly true, as a general rule, that the duties realized from a high protective tariff are much less in amount than those afforded by a low; or strictly revenue tariff. ') There were two features of the acb of 1816, and only two, which trespassed beyond the revenue limit. Most of the leading objects of protection were subject to a duty of only twenty per cent. ; but the duty on iron was first fixed at seventy-five cents the hundred weight, and afterward reduced to forty-five cents ; and the minimum principle was introduced in establishing the high duties on coarse cotton. These were great errors, as Mr. Calhoun subsequently admitted.* Leav- * Speech against the Force BUI. 181.5-16.] ERRORS. 133 ing them out of view, the law was not essentially dif ferent, in any of its details, from what it would have been had not a single manufacturing establishment ex isted on this side of the Atlantic. jMr. Calhoun never denied the power of Congress to impose duties for revenue, nor that the favorable effects of such imposition on the manufacturing interest might be properly taken into consideration in the enactment of tarifl" laws. Such were his opinions in 1816, and they were never changed at any period of his life. Coming from a state whose great staples were not all required for home consumption, but were driven in part to seek a foreign market, where the prices realised for the surplus governed the value of the whole, the posi tion which he occupied on the tariff question, and which South Carolina held through him, was a most magnanimous One.^When the manufacturing interest was in its infancy he was disposed to encourage it, but when he saw it becoming a powerful monopoly, daily waxing stronger and stronger, and like. the banyan tree extending itself in every direction, and overshadowing the land whose nourishing properties it exhausted, — when he beheld a powei-ful party in the country arrayed on its side, and the fidelity of the other to republican principles not always proof against temptation, — he felt bound to raise his voice in remonstrance ; but those who are sincere in the opinion that he committed errors then, should not forget any of the circumstances, — they should remember the cause and the provocation. f^As Mr. Calhoun had ever been one of the most prominent advocates of the improvement of the army, as well in its discipline as in its materiel, |he was a 134 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1815-16 warm friend to the military academy, and with Mr. Forsyth and others, successfully resisted an attempt made at this session to reduce the number of cadets. He maintained that active and good soldiers might easily be made out of any portion of the population of the United States, but in order to accomplish this, the more general diffusion of military science was neces sary, for without it the militia would be totally ineffi cient, and "but a rabble without discipline." During the session of 1815-16, also, a bill was passed changing the mode of compensation of members of Congress, from the per diem allowance to an annual salary of fifteen hundred dollars. Although this meas ure was probably as fair and as just a one as could have been devised, it proved to be unpopular with the people all over the Union ; and in a great majority of cases, those members who had voted for it were not again returned by their constituents, Mr. Calhoun had supported the bill throughout, and on his return home he found the current setting strongly against him. His uncle, Joseph Calhoun, who resided in Abbeville, and General William Butler, of Edgefield, both of whom had previously represented his district, con demned his course in decided terms, and the latter offered himself as a candidate against him. Indeed, the prevailing opinion was so decidedly hostile, that very few of his friends had sufficient courage to face the storm of censure and openly to vindicate his vote. Many thought it was not advisable for him to subject himself to a public expression of the displeasure of his constituents, by offering for reelection. Others urged nim to apologize for his course, and to appeal to the 1816-17.] HIS RE-ELECTION. 135 kind feelings of those whom he had represented, to overlook this, his single error, during a service of five years. To one and all he returned for answer, that he had supported the compensation act because he thought it was right, and he only asked that his constituents would allow him an opportunity to defend himself, and grant him a fair hearing. The request was too just a one to be denied. A day was fixed in each of the dis tricts of Abbeville and Edgefield, for Mr. Calhoun to address the people at the court-houses. The ties be tween them and the able and talented representative to whom they had been so long and so warmly attached, were far too strong to be lightly severed, and they cheerfully came together in great numbers to hear what he had to say in his defence. Instead of apologizing for his course, or appealing to their feelings and sym pathies, he manfully defended his vote, and so power ful and convincing were his arguments that he was triumphantly reelected. Such is always the reward of fidelity, honesty, and independence, in the legislator. Misrepresentation and calumny may meet with temporary success ; he may be prostrated for a time ; but his day of triumph will surely come, when his virtues will shine more brightly than ever, as they burst forth from the clouds which had obscured their effulgence. At the ensuing session of Congress, — in 1816-17, — a bill repealing the compensation act was introduced ; but Mr. Calhoun still refused to yield to the clamor which had been raised against the law. He again dis cussed the merits of the question, and defended 'the policy and justice of the measure. But the majority 136 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [I81&-17- could not withstand the tempest of popular indigna tion ; they did not attempt to disabuse the public mind of the false impressions under which it labored, but hastened to conciliate their constituents by erasing the unfortunate enactment from the statute-book. So con spicuous was Mr. Calhoun on this occasion, for his un compromising integrity and the independence of his course, that Mr. Grosvenor, a federal member from New York, who had had a personal difference with the former in one of the secret sessions during the war and was not on speaking terms with him, took occasion to say in the course of the debate on the repeal bill,. that " he had heard, with pecuhar satisfaction, the able, manly, and constitutional speech of the gentleman from South Carolina" (Mr. Calhoun). "I will not be restrained," he added. " No barrier shall exist which I will not leap over, for the purpose of offering to that gentleman my thanks for the judicious, independent, and national course which he has pursued in this House for the last two years, and particularly upon the subject now before us. Let the honorable gentleman continue with the same manly independence, aloof from party views and local prejudices, to pursue the great interests of his country, and fulfil the high des tiny for which it is manifest he was born. The buzz of popular applause may not cheer him on his way, but he will inevitably arrive at a high and happy elevation in the view of his country and the world." Among the other subjects connected with the de fence and prosperity of the country, which Mr. Cal houn considered in his speech on the direct tax, was that of internal improvements. In common with most 1816-17.] INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. 13/ of the younger members of the republican party at that day, he was favorably impressed in behalf of the construction of such works, and thought the power of Congress over the subject was embraced in that " to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare." Subsequent reflection and experi ence taught him his error, when his opinions were promptly corrected ; but in 1816 he expressed himself in favor of the establishment of roads and opening canals in various parts of the country, for the con venience of our widely-dispersed population, and of the construction of military roads, the want of which for the transportation of munitions of war and supplies, during the war of 1812, had been attended with such disastrous consequences. In his annual message at the first session of Con gress after the close of the war, Mr. Madison called the attention of members to the subject of internal im provements, and recommended Congress to exercise all its constitutional powers in the premises, and if they were found inadequate, to take the necessary steps to amend the constitution. Acting in accordance with what he supposed to be the views and wishes of the President, Mr. Calhoun* introduced a resolution into the House, on the 16th of December, 1816, directing that a committee should be appointed to inquire into the expediency of setting apart the bonus paid to the United States by the national bank, and the net annual profits on their stock, as a permanent fund for internal improvements. The resolution was adopted and the committee appointed — Mr. Calhoun being 'its chairman. 138 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1816-17. On the 23rd instant he reported a bill which he had prepared, setting apart and pledging the bonus and dividends as contemplated by the resolution. But little discussion was had on the bill, and after being amended, on motion of Mr. Pickering, so as to require the ob taining of the assent of a state to the construction of roads or canals within its territorial limits, it was passed by a small majority. In the Senate it was also sustained by a majority vote, and was sent to the President. Although the bill of Mr. Calhoun did not claim for Congress the power to construct works of internal improvement within the states, or pretend in any way to define the power, it was undoubtedly taken for granted. In his speech on the bill, Mr. Calhoun did not examine the constitutional question, notwithstand ing he was urged to do so, but contented himself with saying that he believed the power existed, though he was not prepared to say to what extent. The bill was laid before the President a few days prior to the ad journment of Congress and the close of his administra tion, and when Mr. Calhoun called to take his leave, the latter learned for the first time, much to his regret and chagrin, that it did not meet with the approbation of the executive. On the 3rd day of March, 1817, the bill was returned to the House with the objections of the President, based mainly upon the want of power in Congress until the constitution was amended as he had suggested. The bill was now lost, — not two thirds of the members voting in its favor. Mr. Calhoun, how ever, with Mr. Forsyth, and his colleague, Mr. Huger, still supported' the measure. 1816-17.] MR. calhoun's bill. 139 No actual appropriation of money was made by this bill, nor were any particular works of internal improve ment authorized to be constructed, yet the constitu tional principle wasi probably involved in it, at least indirectly. The views of Mr. Calhoun upon the ques tion subsequently underwent a material change, as the reader will discover. CHAPTER VI. Expiration of his Service in the House of Representatives — Appointed Secretary of War — Management of the Affairs of the Department — Financial System — Other Improvements Introduced — Reorganization of-the Army — System of Fortifications — Medical Statistics — Missouri Compromise — ^Tariff Act of 1824 — Internal Improvements. With the 3rd day of March, 1817, closed the period of Mr. Calhoun's service in the popular branch of Con gress. The trust confided to him was now returned to those whom he had represented — -in such a spirit of devotion to their interests, and with such credit to him self,— not diminished or impaired in aught, but rendered more valuable by the fidelity with which it had been guarded, and the enviable reputation he had won in its defence. He had been chosen for another term, but a( the time of his reelection he did not anticipate the honors which Fortune had in store for him. Although he had been in Congress but for the short period of six years, his character was known and under stood in every part of the country. His friends and admirers were numerous, and the new President en tertained a high opinion of his talents and integrity. " Shortly before the meeting of Congress at the next session, [in December, 1817,] he received an invitation from Mr. Monroe to take a place in his cabinet as Sec retary of War.* It was unsolicited and unexpected. * Mr. Calhoun was appointed in the . place of Governor Shelby, of 1817-25.] APPOINTED SECRETARY OF WAR. 141 His friends, with some exceptions, advised against his acceptance, on the ground that Congress was the proper theatre for his talents ; Mr. Lowndes concurred in this advice, and, among crther reasons, urged that his im provement in speaking had been such that he was de sirous to see the degree of eminence he would reach by practice. Indeed, the prevailing opinion at the time was, that his talent lay more in the power of thought than action. His great powers of analysis and gener alization were calculated to make the impression, which was not uncommon at that time, that his mind was more metaphysical than practical, and that he would lose reputation in taking charge of a department, especially one in a state of such disorder and confusitin as the war department was then. The reasons assigned by his friends served but to confirm Mr. Calhoun in the opinion that he ought to accept. He beheved the impression of his friends was erroneous as to the char acter of his mind ; but if not, if his powers lay rather in thinking and speaking than in execution, it was but the more necessary he should exercise them in the lat ter, and thereby strengthen them where they were naturally the weakest. He also believed that he could render more service to the country in reforming that -great disbursing department of government, admitted to be in a state of much disorder, than he could possi bly do by continuing in Congress, where most of the great questions growing out of a return to a state of peace had been discussed and settled. Under the in fluence of these motives, he accepted the proffered ap- Kentucky, who had declined the appointment tendered to him by Mr. Monroe. 142 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1817-25. pointment, and entered on the duties of the department early in December, 1817. " Thus, after six years of distinguished services in Congress, during which Mr. Calhoun bore a prominent and efficient part in originating and supporting all the measures necessary to carry the country through one of the most trying and difficult periods of its existence, and had displayed throughout great abihty as a legis lator and a speaker, we find him in a new scene, where his talents for business and administration for the first time are to be tried. He took possession of his depart ment at the most unfavorable period. Congress was in session, when much of the time of the secretary is necessarily occupied in meeting the various calls for information from the two Houses, and attending to the personal application of the members on the business of their constituents. Mr. Graham, the chief clerk, an able and experienced officer, retired shortly afterward, and a new and totally inexperienced successor had to be appointed in his place^ The department was almost literally without organization, and everything in a state of confusion. Mr. Calhoun had paid but little atten tion to military subjects in any of their various branches. He had never read a treatise on the sub ject, except a small volume on the Staff". " In this absence of information, he determined at once to do as little as possible at first, and to be a good listener and a close observer till he could form a just conception of the actual state of the department and what was necessary to be done. Acting on this pru dent rule, he heard all and observed everything, and reflected on and digested all that he heard and saw. 1817-25.] NEW RULES AND REGULATIONS. 143 In less than three months he became so well acquainted with the state of the department, and what was re quired to be done, that he drew up himself, without consultation, the bill for organizing it on the bureau principle, and succeeded in getting it throug'. Congress against a formidable opposition, who denounced it as wild and impracticable. But, on the contrary, this organization has been proved to be so perfect, that it has remained unchanged through all the vicissitudes and numerous changes of parties till this time, a period of twenty-five years. "But that was only the first step. The most perfect system is of little value without able and faithful officers to carry it into execution. The President, under his advice, selected to fill the several bureaus such officers as had the confidence of the army for ability and integrity, and possessing an aptitude of tal ent for the service of the bureau for which they were respectively selected. With each of these Mr. Cal houn associated a junior officer, having like qualifica tions, for his assistant. But, to give effect to the sys tem, one thing was still wanting — a code of rules for the department and each of its bureaus, in order to give uniformity, consistency, efficacy, and stability to the whole. These he prepared, with the assistance of the heads of the respective bureaus, under the pro vision of the bill for the organization of the depart ment, which gave the secretary the power to establish rules not inconsistent with existing laws. They form a volume of considerable size, which, like the act itself, remains substantially the same, though, it is to be feared, too often neglected in practice by some of his 144 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1817-25. successors. All this was completed in the course of a few months after the passage of the act, and the sys tem put into active operation. It worked without a jar. " In a short time its fruits began to show themselves in the increased efficiency of the department and the correction of abuses, many of which were of long stand ing. To trace his acts through the period of more than seven years, during which Mr. Calhoun remained in the war-office, would be tedious, and occupy more space than the object of this sketch would justify. The results, which, after all, are the best tests of the system and the efficiency of an administration, must be taken as a substitute. Suffice it, then, to say, that when he came into office, he found it in a state of chaos, and left it, even in the opinion of opponents, in complete organization and order. An officer of high standing and a competent judge pronounced it the most perfectly organized and efficient military establishment for its size in the world. He found it with upward of $40,000,000 of unsettled accounts, many of them of long standing, going back almost to the origin of tfie government, and he reduced them to less than three millions, which consisted, for the most part, of losses, and accounts that never can be settled. He prevented all current accumulation, by a prompt and rigid en forcement of accountability ; so much so, that he was enabled to report to Congress in 1823, that " of the entire amount of money drawn frorn the treasury in 1822 for military service, including pensions amount ing to #4,571,961 94, although it passed through the hands of two hundred and ninety-one disbursing officers. 1817-25.] MANAGEMENT OF DEPARTMENT. 145 there has not been a single defalcation, nor the loss of a single cent to the government" He found the army proper, including the Military Academy, costing an nually more than $451 per man, including officers, pro fessors, and cadets, and he left the cost less than $287 ; or, to do more exact justice to his economy, he dimin ished such parts of the cost per man as were suscepti ble of reduction by an efficient administration, exclud ing pay and such parts as were fixed in moneyed compensation by law, from $299 to $150. All this was effected by wise reforms, and not by parsimony {for he was liberal, as many supposed, to a fault) in the quality and quantity of the supplies, and not by a fall of prices ; for in making the calculation, allowance is made for the fall or rise of prices on every article of supply. The gross saving on the army was $1,300,000 annually, in an expenditure which reached $4,000,000 when he came into the department. This does not in clude the other branches of service, the ordnance, the engineer arid Indian bureaus, in all of which a like rigid economy and accountability were introduced, with similar results in saving to the government. " These great improvements were made under ad verse circumstances. Party excitement ran high dur ing the period, and Mr. Calhoun came in for his full share of opposition and misrepresentation, which may be explained by the fact that his name had been pre sented as a candidate for the presidency. He was often thwarted in his views and defeated in his meas ures, and was made for years the subject of almost in cessant attacks in Congress, against which he had to defend himself, but with such complete success, finally, 146 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1817-25. as to silence his assailants. They had been kept con stantly informed of every movement in his department susceptible of misconstruction or of being turned against him. One of the representatives, who boarded in the same house- with his principal assailant, offered to disclose to Mr. Calhoun the channel through which his opponents in Congress derived the information on which they based their attacks. Mr. Calhoun declined to receive it. He said he did not object that any act of the department should be known to his bitterest enemies : that he thought well of all about him, and did not desire to change his opinion ; and all that he regretted was, that if there was any one near him. who desired to communicate anything to any member, he did not ask for his permission, which he would freely have given. He felt conscious he was doing his duty, and dreaded no attack. In fact, he felt no wish that these attacks should be discontinued. He knew how difficult it was to reform long-standing and inveterate abuses, and he used the assaults on the department and the army as the means of reconcihng the officers, who might be profiting by them, to the measures he had adopted for their correction, and to enfist them heartily in cooperating with him in their correction, as the most certain means of saving the establishment and themselves. To this cause, and to the strong sense 'of justice which he exhibited on all occasions, by the decided support he gave to all who did their duty, and his no less decided discharge of his duty against all who neglected or omitted it, is to be attributed the fact that he carried through so thorough a reform, where there was so much disorder and abuse, with a 1817-25.] MANAGEMENT OP DEPARTMENT. 147 popularity constantly increasing with the army. Never did a secretary leave a department with more popu larity or a greater degree of attachment and devotion on the part of those connected with it than he did. " In addition to the ordinary duties of the depart ment, he made many and able reports on the subject of our Indian affairs, on the reduction of the army, on in ternal improvements, and others. He revived the Mili tary Academy, which he found in a very disordered state, and left it in great perfection ; he caused a minute and accurate survey to be made of the military frontier, inland and maritime, and projected, through an able board of engineers, a plan for their defence. In con formity with this plan, he commenced a system of forti fication, and made great progress in its execution, and he established a cordon of mihtary posts from the lakes around our north-western and south-western frontiers to the Gulf of Mexico. " Another measure remains to be noticed, which will be regarded in after-times as one of the most striking and useful, although it has heretofore attracted much less attention than it deserves. In organizing the medi cal department, Mr. Calhoun, with those enlarged views and devotion to science which have ever characterized him, directed the surgeons at all the military posts ex tending over our vast country, to report accurately to the surgeon-general at Washington every case of' disease, its character, its treatment, and the result, and also to keep a minute regis.ter of the weather, the tem perature, the moisture, and the winds, to be reported in like manner to the surgeon-general. To enable them to comply with the order, he directed the surgeons at 148 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1817-25 the various posts to be furnished with thermometers, barometers, and hygrometers, and the surgeon-general from time to time to publish the result of their observa tions in condensed reports, which were continued dur ing the time he remained in the war department. The result has been, a mass of valuable facts, connected with the diseases and the climate of our widely-ex tended country, collected through the long period of nearly a quarter of a century."* The important facts thus obtained under the auspices of Mr. Calhoun, were afterward collected and arranged by the late Dr. Samuel Forry, then of the United States Army, and, together with other materials, published by him in three different works, entitled " Medical Statis tics of the United States," " The Climate of the United States and its Endemic Influences," and " Meteorology." Besides rendering his aid and assistance in securing these valuable contributions to the cause of science, Mr. Calhoun was one of the earliest friends and advo cates of that great national enterprise — the coast sur vey — originated during the administration of Mr. Monroe. He laid the foundation, too, of the extensive gallery of Indian portraits which long adorned the walls of the War office, and constitute now one of the most attractive and interesting ornaments of the halls of the National Institute. In every branch of his duties as the presiding officer of the war department, Mr. Calhoun did the state good service ; and the influence of his clear mind, his pre cision and love of order, his punctuality and integrity, was felt by all his subordinate officers and agents. The * Memou- of Mr. Calhoun, 1843. 1817-25.] IMPROVEMENTS INTRODUCED BV HIM. 149 improvements which he introduced were not evanescent in their character, nor of temporary duration ; but they were designed to be permanent, and the sequel proved them such in reality. His purgation of the Augean stable was complete. Unsettled accounts were no longer left to accumulate till the halls of Congress echoed and reechoed with the clamors of the public creditor ; the reorganization of the army was as admirable in prac tice as in theory ; the system of fortifications which he proposed, maritime as well as frontier, afforded all the protection needed or desired ; and the removal of the Indians beyond the Mississippi, which he warmly rec ommended, as experience has demonstrated, was a boon and a blessing to t!ie red men of the forest. * The system of financial administration which he first estab lished, is still in operation — daily bearing witness to the practical talents of the great mind that originated it. So perfect has it been found, that notw'ithstanding the im mense amount of money disbursed by the department since he was at its head, exceeding two hundred millions of dollars, no losses of any importance have happened.* From his position as a member of the cabinet, and the necessity of de'voting his whole time to the perform ance of his official duties, Mr. Calhoun had httle leisure, as he had not much inclination, for participating in the strifes and contests upon the various pohtical questions agitated during the administration of Mr. Monroe. Though averse to the legislation by Congress on the subject of domestic slavery, he approved of the course of Mr. Monroe in regard to the Missouri compromise, * From 1821 to 1836, there was no loss on an expenditure of-one hundred millions. 150 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. fl817-25. viewing it strictly as a measure of conciliation and peace ; but his opinions on the subject were afterwards changed. The tariff question was again presented under this administration. The act of 1816 contemplated a re duction of duties in 1819. The manufacturing interest had increased to the proportions and stature of a giant, but like the plant forced in a hothouse, it still required some artificial stimulus. In 1818, the friends of a high protective tariff beset Congress with their applications • for an increase of duties. The profits of the manufac turers were large, but like the daughters of the horse leech, they continued to cry "give! give!" In 1819 they siicceeded in procuring the appointment of a com mittee on manufactures. This was a decided innova tion, as previous to that time the subject had been en tirely under the control of the appropriate revenue com mittee. Mr, Monroe, against the advice of Mr. Calhoun, was finally induced to recommend additional encourage ment, and at length the act of 1824, which established an average rate of duties of about thirty-eight per cent. Was passed. This bill originated with the iron manu facturers of Pennsylvania and the other middle states, who had recently held a convention at Pittsburg, but it was not countenanced or approved by the manufac turers of the eastern states. The members of the South also opposed it in a body. Mr. Calhoun concurred in sentiment with his political friends from the same sec tion of the Cdur.try, although he thought that injustice had been done to the iron interest in Pennsylvania by the act of 181G.* * Speech against the Force BiU. 1S17-25.] INT'ERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. 151 During the administration of Mr. Monroe the sub ject of internal improvements was likewise again agi tated. Mr. Calhoun was, in the main, an idle but not an indifferent spectator, of what was going on around him. He was led to reflect more than he had ever be fore done on the power of Congress under the constitu tion to construct works of internal improvement, on account of the continued agitation of the subject, and the impression ultimately made upon his mind, that no such power existed, was clear and abiding. He did not approve, therefore, of Mr. Monroe's recommenda tions in regard to internal improvements, though the ophiions advanced in the special message of May 4th, 1822, corresponded essentially with those which he him self entertained. CHAPTER VIL Presidential Election of 1824 — Mr. Calhoun chosen Viee-Presideirt— Character as Presiding Officer — Refusal to leave his seat when a tie vote was anticipated — Decision in regard to the right to call to order ' — Opposition to the Measures of Mr. Adams — Reelection of Mr. Cal houn — The Tariff Question — Matured Opinions — Address. It is very common for a certain class of people to lament the degeneracy of the present age, — as com mon as it is for another class to maintain, that " Old politicians chime on wisdom past. And totter on in blunders to the last." The one are true conservative bigots, wedded to ancient forms and usages, and the other ultra proges- sionists, fond of overturning for the sake of overturn ing, and never so well pleased as when the destruction of an old system furnishes the opportunity of substitut ing some favorite theory of their own. Human insti tutions are by no means perfect, and it would, perhaps, be impossible to frame a law or a constitution, for one generation, which should be construed by another, un der a change of time and circumstances, in the same manner. One abuse is very apt to be followed by a score, and innovation is the prolific mother of a numer ous brood. Yet, after all, he has studied the great book of human nature to but little purpose, who imagines that politicians are, in the main, any more corrupt at 1825-32.] PRESIDENTIAL CANVASS. 153 this day than they were a hundred years ago. No class of men are more liable to selfishness, and they are not more influenced by that feeling now than they have ever been. If we examine the political controversies that oc curred in the early history of our country, we find them presenting the same characteristics which similar disputes now do. Adams and Jefferson were abused and calumniated, with as much zeal and bitterness, by the cotemporaneous newspaper press, in 1800, as were Polk and Clay in 1844. Madison and Monroe, too, were treated with as little consideration by their op ponents as were the younger Adams, General Jackson, or Mr. Van Buren. The contest for the presidency in 1808, or that in 1816, was as earnest and animated, and the opposing candidates and their friends as anx ious, as was the case in 1848 ; and the election of 1840 was not viewed with more interest by politicians than that of 1824. Latterly, the people have more directly participated in the presidential elections, because the candidates are nominated in popular conventions, and the electors are everywhere chosen, with but one ex ception, by the popular suffrage ; yet it is very doubt ful whether the present system is better than the old. Congressional caucuses were bad enough, but it is questionable, whether the inflence that secures the nomination of a particular candidate by a national convention, does not most commonly emanate from the political coteries at Washington. From the pecuhar circumstances attending the con test for the presidency in 1824, it was characterized by as much, if not more, asperity and virulence, than were 7* 154 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1825-32. Usual on such occasions. The course pursued by the federal party in relation to the war of 1812 had com pletely alienated from them the affections of the people, and their organization was almost entirely lost during the " era of good feeling" introduced by Mr. Monroe. The party as a party split into fragments. Many still continued to adhere to their old principles, but the greater number henceforth eschewed them, and adopted, in whole or in part, those of the republican school. Long before the expiration of Mr. Monroe's second term, it was quite evident to every observing mind, that the federalists, as such, were scarcely to be taken into account so far as the question of his successor was concerned. None but a republican could be elected — that needed no demonstration. But among the republicans themselves, there was a great diversity of opinion. Six different candidates were in the first place proposed by their respective friends, each one of whom claimed to belong to the republican party. In the northern and eastern states John Quincy Adams was the favorite ; Henry Clay was the choice of Ken tucky, Ohio, and Missouri ; Andrew Jackson was the most popular in the south-west, and the southern states generally were divided between him, and WiUiam H. Crawford ; while the state of South Carolina presented the name of one of her most distinguished sons, Wil liam Lowndes, and Pennsylvania that of another, Mr. Calhoun. The nomination of Mr. Calhoun was not anticipated by himself; neither was Mr. Lowndes aware of the kind wishes and intentions of his friends till his name was regularly proposed. Between the two there had 1825-32.] PRESIDENTIAL CANVASS. 155 long existed a warm personal friendship, and as soon as Mr. Calhoun heard of his nomination, he called on Mr. Lowndes, and assured him that it had been made with out his procurement or solicitation, and that he should much regret to have the circumstance of their being opposing candidates produce any change in their private relations. His friendly feelings were cordially recipro cated by Mr. Lowndes, and the canvass would un doubtedly have proceeded to its close without impairing their mutual esteem, had not the untimely death of Mr. Lowndes, in October, 1822, forever removed him from the political arena. The relations of Mr. Calhoun with all the other candidates, except Mr. Crawford, were like wise friendly. In 1816, Mr. Calhoun had preferred Mr. Monroe to Mr. Crawford, and though opposed to the plan of holding a congressional caucus, he attended that which was held and supported the candidate whom he preferred. This occasioned some slight bitterness of feeling, which was heightened by the continued oppo sition of Mr. Calhoun to Mr. Crawford when the latter was a second time brought forward, as the successor to Mr. Monroe. It is unnecessary, however, to recapitulate all the cir cumstances attending the presidential election in 1824. The friends of Jackson, Adams, Clay, and Calhoun, who constituted a majority of the republican members of Congress, refused to go into a caucus, as is well known, whereupon the minority met and nominated Mr. Craw ford. As between the other candidates, Mr. Calhoun preferred General Jackson ; and as it was likely that a warm contest would spring up between their respective 156 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1825-32. friends in Pennsylvania, the name of the former was finally withdrawn in compliance with his wishes. Mr. Calhoun being no longer a candidate for the presidential office, he was instantly taken up by the friends of General Jackson and Mr. Adams as their candidate for the vice-presidency. He also received the support of a portion of the friends of Mr. Clay, for the same office. South CaroHna gave her electoral vote to General Jackson and Mr. Calhoun, and her members were unanimous in their preference of the former over Mr. Adams, the successful candidate, when the question came before the House of Representatives for their decision. Mr. Calhoun himself was chosen vice-president by the colleges, — he receiving one hun dred and eighty-two of the two hundred and sixty-one electoral votes. On the 4th day of March, 1825, Mr. Calhoun took his seat in the Senate of the United States as its presiding officer. He left the war department, not as he foimd it, in confusion and disorder, but in every branch regulari ty and order had been restored or introduced. The great energy and vigor of his mind, as well as the happy combination of his administrative talents, had been dis played in its management ; and so apparent were the importance and appropriateness of the reforms which he had originated, that General Bernard, the chief of the Corps of Engineers while Mr. Calhoun was secretary of war, and a favorite officer of Napoleon, often com pared him to that great man. His course, too, v/as cal culated to gain the respect, while he did not lose the esteem, of the officers of the army, for he did away en tirely with the system of favoritism which had been 1825-32.] CHARACTER AS PRESIDING OFFICER. 157 tolerated from mistaken notions of expediency, and left merit to make its own way, without unduly forcing it, or obstructing it by checks and restraints. As vice-president, the duties of Mr. Calhoun were limited and not often arduous. He always appeared in his seat early in the session and remained there till shortly before its close. He was prompt and punctual, regular in his attendance, and never remiss in his duties. He was simple yet dignified ; urbane and courteous ; careful himself to observe the rules of decorum, and to exact the same from others. He contributed a great deal to raise the dignity of the Senate and to elevate its character. It had been usual for senators when re ferring to each other, and for the chair in putting ques tions, to use the term " gentlemen." /*Mr. Calhoun sub stituted for this the more appropriate and dignified term of "senators," which has ever since been preserved^ He was never absent from his seat when a tie vote on any important question was anticipated. Occasions of this kind were not of frequent occurrence ; but one, in particular, deserves to be mentioned. When the tariff bill of 1828 was pending before the Senate, Mr. Calhoun was the repubhcan candidate for vice-president on the same ticket with General Jackson, and as many of the friends of the latter in the northern states were favorable to the bill, it was feared that the supporters of Mr. Adams would, as an electioneering trick, so arrange matters in the Senate as to compel Mr. Calhoun to give the casting vote against the bill, in accordance with his well-known opinions. He was warmly urged, there fore, to leave his seat, in the event of a tie vote, be cause, it was said, this would be in fact a defeat of the 158 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1825-32. bill, and he would avoid prejidicing the election of the republican candidates. But it was not in his nature to shrink from any responsibility, — and the duty or power of giving the casting vote he regarded as one of great solemnity. It was one of the checks and balances de vised by the wisdom of the framers of the constitution. and he was the last man to underrate its importance. He informed his friends, therefore, that he could not consistently vacate his seat, but that they need have no fears in regard to the election of General Jackson, for, if he was obliged to give the casting vote against the bill, as he certainly should do if the emergency con templated by the constitution occurred, his name would be promptly withdrawn from the ticket. This was not rendered necessary as the bill was passed by a majority vote, but Mr. Calhoun is none the less entitled to credit for resisting the temptations which would have allured him from the path of duty. Mr. Calhoun also signalized his term of service as vice-president by the stand he took in defence of the rights of the Senate against his own power. At the outset of his administration, Mr. Adams encountered a most violent opposition on the part of the friends of General Jackson, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Calhoun, and a part of the former supporters of Mr. Clay. The Panama question, involving the principle contended for by the federalists during the discussions on Jay's treaty that the treaty-making power was supreme, pre sented the first opportunity for the trial of strength in Congress. Party feeling was high, and the debates in both Houses were unusually animated. Mr. Ran dolph, then a senator from Virginia, was extremely 1825-32.] RULES OF ORDER. 159 bitter in his attacks upon the administration, and not contenting himself — as he never could — with discussing the merits of the question at issue, he condemned the motives of the president and the cabinet in the strongest terms, and denounced the Secretary of State, (Mr. Clay) in particular, for his agency in producing the election of i\Ir. Adams. The friends of the administration writhed under these attacks, but instead of retorting as they had been provoked to do, they censured the vice-president for not calling Mr. Randolph to order for words spoken in debate. Mr. Calhoun was opposed to the Panama mission, in toto, and to the federal doctrines maintained by the friends of Mr. Adams, but no motives of this kind influenced him in deciding that he did not possess the power to call to order. His decision was upheld by Mr. McLane, Mr. Van Buren, Mr. Macon, Mr. Tazewell and Mr. Tyler, though some of them were of opinion that the power ought to be given to the vice-president, as was in fact afterward done. But Mr. Adams himself entered the lists as his own cham pion, and attacked the decision through the columns of the National Intelligencer over the signature of Patrick Henry. Mr. Calhoun replied over the signature of Onslow in two numbers, both of which were replete with sound arguments and convincing illustrations, and, taken together, constituted a complete justification of his course. As Mr. Calhoun was opposed to the Panama mission, so he did not regard with favor the other leading meas ures of the administration of Mr. Adams — a high tariff for protection and a general system of improvements. 160 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1825-32. The mission question having been settled, the " Ameri can System," of which the protective tariff and in ternal improvement system were features, in one or other of its phases, was agitated during the whole term of Mr. Adams ; nor was it even temporarily disposed of till the Maysville veto, and the passage of the com promise act. Mr. Calhoun was reelected vice-president in 1828, as the republican candidate on the same ticket with General Jackson. His opponent was Richard Rush of Pennyslvania, who received only eighty-three of the electoral votes while more than double that number were given to Mr. Calhoun. The republican friends of Mr. Crawford in Georgia, however, supported Wil liam Smith of South Carolina, and gave him the vote of the state. While Mr. Calhoun filled the office of vice-president he had abundant leisure for study and reflection, with out encroaching on the time necessarily devoted to his duties. His opinions upon the theory of the govern ment, the true construction of the constitution, and political questions generally, underwent a thorough examination and I'evision, and, with the exception of some slight changes or modifications subsequently made, were now fully matured. In regard to the _ta£iff, he came to the conclusion jhat _the__general government had^no power to collect any more revenue. tha,n. was sufficient to 5eIray~IlTe expenses of thegoy^ernment economically'administered, and thatjji. antieipatiQn..,of the payment of the public debt there ought to be a ¦gradual reduction of the duties to the revenue standard. Having come to this conclusion, he was then led to 1831.J ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 161 consider what remedy was provided, in case the op- posije doctrines prevailed, as he had but too much reason to fear they would. These can be expressed in no better manner than in the language of his address to the people of South Carolina dated at Fort Hill, July 26th, 1831, which is here subjoined: ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. The.question of the relationjwhirhjhe States and General Govern ment bear to each other is not one of recent origin. From the com- mencemenTofTjiur'systetii', it has"3ivi3e3~piiblio' sentiment. Even in the Convention, while the Constitution was struggling into existence, there were two parties as to what this relation should be, whose differ ent sentiments constituted no small impediment in forming that instru ment. After the General Government went into operation, experience soon proved that the question had not terminated with the labors of the Convention. The great struggle that preceded the political revolu tion of 1801, which brought Mr. Jefferson into power, turned essentially. on it, and the docti'ines and arguments on both sides were embodied and ably sustained : on the one, in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, and the Report to^Ee Virginia "Legislature ; and on the other, in the repUes of the Legislature of Massachusetts and some of «the other Istates. These resolutions and this report, with the decision of the Si(- preme Court of Pennsylvania about the same time (particularly in the case of Cobbett, delivered by Chief-justice M'Kean, and concurred in by the whole bench), contain what I beUeve to be the true doctrine on this important subject. I refer to them in order to avoid the necessity of presenting my views, with the reasons in support of them, in detail As my object is simply to state my opinions, I might pause with this reference to documents that so fully and ably state all the points immediately connected with this deeply-important subject ; but as there are many who may not have the opportunity or leisure to refer to them, and as it is possible, however clear they may be, that differ ent persons may place different interpretations on their meaning, I win, in order that my sentiments may be fully known, and to avoid all ambiguity, proceed to state summarily the doctrines which I eonceiv? they embrace. 162 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. The great and leading principle is, that the General Government eriianated from the people of the several states, forming distinct pblTti- "caTcommunities, and actlngjn their separate and sovereign ca|)acity, and not from all of the people forming one aggregate political com munity ; that the Constitution of the United States is, in fact, a c"oin- pact, to which each state is a party, in the character already described ; and th.at^everal states, or parties, have a right to judge of its infrac tions ; and in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of power not delegated, they have the right, in the last resort, to use the language of the Virginia Resolufions, " to interpose for arresting the 'progressof the' evil,' andfor mamiiimna, within their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and Hberties appertaining to them!' This right ofinterposltion, thus solemnly asserted by the State of Virginia, be it called what it may — State-right, veto, nulUfication, or by any other name— I conceive to be the fundamental principle of onr system, rest ing on facts historically as certain as our revolution itself, and deduc- ti'ins as simple and demonstrative as that of any political or moral truth whatever ; and I firmly believe that on its recognition depend the stability and safety of our political institutions. I am not Ignorant that those opposed to the doctrine have always, now and formerly, regarded it in a very different light, as anarchical and revolutionary. Could I believe such, in fact, to be its tendency, to me it would be no recommendation. I yield to none, I trust, in a deep and sincere attachment to our political institutions and the union of these states, I never breathed an opposite sentiment; but, on the contrary, I have ever considered them the great instruments of pre serving our liberty, and promoting the happiness of ourselves and our posterity ; and next to these I have ever held them most dear. Nearly half my life has been passed in the service of the Union, and whatever public reputation I have acquired is indissolubly identified with it. To be too national has, indeed, been considered by many, even of my friends, to be my greatest political fault With these strong feelings of attachment, I have examined, with the utmost care, the bearing of the doctrine in question ; and, so far from anarchical or revolutionary, I solemnly believe it to be the only solid foundation of our system, and of the Union itself ; and that the opposite doctrine, which denies to the states the right of protecting their reserved powers, and which ¦would vest in the General Government (it matters not through what department) the right of determining, exclusively and finally, the 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 163 powers delegated to it, is incompatible with the sovereignty of the states, and of the Constitution itself, considered as the basis of a Federal Union. As strong as this language is, it is not stronger than that used by the illustrious Jefferson, who said to give to the General Government the final and exclusive right to judge of its powers, is to make " its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers ;" and that, " in all cases of compact between parties having no common judge, each party has an egy' xwM ^'' j"^y^/"- 'tf'flf n- trll rf th' jv- fraction as of the mode and measure of redress." Language cannot be more expEcTtrnoFcanTugEer authority be adduced. That different opinions are entertained on this subject, I consider but as an additional evidence of the great diversity of the human intellect. Had not able, experienced, and patriotic individuals, for whom I have the highest respect, taken different views, I would have thought the right too clear to admit of doubt ; but I am taught by this, as well as by many similar instances, to treat with deference opinions differing from my own. The error may, possibly, be with me ; but if so, I can only say that, after the most mature and conscientious examination, I have not been able to detect it. But, with aU proper deference, I must think that theirs is the error who deny what seems to be an essential attribute of the conceded sovereignty of the states, and who attribute to the General Government a right utterly incompatible with what all aclniewledge to be its limited and restricted character : an error origi nating principally, as I must think, in not duly reilecting on the nature of our institutions, and on what constitutes the only rational object of all political constitutions. It has been well said by one of the most sagacious men of antiquity, that the object of a constitution is to restrain the government, as that of laws is to restrain individuals. ¦ The remark is correct ; nor is it less true where'lh'e'government is vested in a majority than where it is in a single or a few individuals — in a republic, than a monarchy or aristoc racy. Wo one can have a higher respect for the maxim that the ma jority ought to govern than I have, taken in its proper sense, subject to the restrictions imposed by the Constitution, and confined to sub jects in which every portion of the community have similar interests ; but it is a great error to suppose, as many do, that the right of a ma jority to govern is a natural and not a conventional right, and therefore absolute and unlimited. By nature every individual has the right to govern himself ; and g overnments, whether founded on majorities or 164 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. minorities, inust derive their right from the assent, expressed or im plied, of the governed, and be subject to such limitations as they maj impose. Where the interests are the same, that is, where the lawr that may benefit one will benefit all, or the reverse, it is just and propel to place them under the control of the majority ; but where they an dissimilar, so that the law that may benefit one portion may be ruin ous to another, it would be, on the contrary, unjust and absurd to sub ject them to its will ; and such I conceive to be the theory on which our Constitution rests. That such dissimilarity of interests may exist, it is impossible to doubt. They are to be found in every community, in a greater or less degree, however small or homogeneous, and they constitute every where the great difficulty of forming and preserving free institutions. To guard against the unequal action of the laws, when applied to dis similar and opposing interests, is, in fact, what mainly renders a con stitution indispensable ; to overlook which, in reasoning on our Consti tution, would be to omit the principal element by which to determine its character. Were there no contrariety of interests, nothing would be more simple and easy than to form and preserve free institutions. The right of suffrage alone would be a sufficient guarantee. It is the conflict of opposing interests which renders it the most difficult work of man. Where the diversity of Interests exists in separate and distinct classes of the community, as is the case in England, and was formerly the case In Sparta, Rome, and most of the free states of antiquity, the rational constitutional provision is that each should be represented in the government, as a separate estate, with a distinct voice, and a nega tive on the acts of its co-estates, in order to check their encroachments. In England the Constitution has aSsumed expressly this form, while in the governments of Sparta and Rome the same thing was effected under different, but not much less efficacious forms. The perfection of their organization, in this particular, was that which gave to the consti tutions of these renowned states all their celebrity, which secured their liberty for so many centuries, and raised them to so great a height of power and prosperity. Indeed, a constitutional provision giving to the great and separate interests of the community the right of self-protec tion, must appear, to those who will duly reflect on the subject, not less essential to the preservation of liberty than the right of suffrage itself. They, in fact, nave a common object, to effect which the one is as neces- 1831,] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 165 eary as the other to secure responsibility : that is, that those who make and execute the laws should be accountable to those on wliirni the laws in reality operate— -the only solid and durable foundation of liberty. If, without tlie right of suffrage, our rulers would oppress us, so, without the right of self protection, the major would equally oppress the minor interests of the community. The absence of the former would make the governed the slaves of the rulers, and of the latter, the feebler in terests, the victim of the stronger. Happily fur us, we have no artificial and separate classes of society. We have wisely exploded all sudi distinctions ; but we are not, on that account, exempt from all Contrariety of interests, as the present dis tracted and dangerous condition of our country, unfortunately, but too clearly proves. With us they are almost exclusively geographical, result ing mainly from difference of climate, soil, situation, industry, and produc tion, but are not, therefore, less necessary to be protected by an ade quate constitutional provision than where the distinct interests exist in separate classes. The necessity is, in truth, greater, as such separate and dissimilar geographical interests are more liable to come into con flict, and more dangerous, when in that state, than those of any other description : so much so, that oiirs is the first instance on record where they have not formed, in an extensive territory, separate and indepen- dent comiiiaimiHes, or subjected the whole to despotic sway. TEat such may-Bot be' our "unhappy fate also, must be the sincere prayer of every lover of his country. So numerous and diversified are the interests of our country, that they could not be fairly represented in a single government, organized so as to give to each gi-eat and leading interest a separate and distinct voice, as in governments to which I have referred. A plan was adopted better suited to our situation, but perfectly novel in its char acter. The powers of the government were divided, not as heretofore, in reference to classes, but geographically. One General Government was formed for the whole, to which was delegated all the powers sup posed to be necessary to regulate the interests common to all the states, leaving others subject to the separate control of the states, being, from their local and pecuhar character, such that they could not be subject to the will of a majority of the whole Union, without the cer tain hazard of injustice and oppression. It was thus that the interests of the whole were subjected, as they ought to be, to the wiU of the whole, while the pecuhar and local interests were left under the con- 166 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831 trol of the states separately, to whose custody only they could be safeli confided. This distribution of power, settled solemnly by a constitu tional compact, to which all the states are parties, constitutes th( peculiar character and excellence of our political system. It is trulj and emphatically American, without example or parallel. To realize its perfection, we must view the General Government and those of the states as a whole, each in its proper sphere independent ; each perfectly adapted to its respective objects ; the states acting sepa rately, representing and protecting the local and peculiar interests ; acting jointly through one General Government, with the weight re spectively assigned to each by the Constitution, representing and pro tecting the interest of the whole, and thus perfecting, by an admirable but simple arrangement, the great principle of representation and responsibility, without which no government can be free or just. To preserve this sacred distribution as originally settled, by coercing each to move in its prescribed orb, is the great and difficult problem, on the solution of which the duration of our Constitution, of our Union, and, in all probability, our liberty depends. How is this to be effected ? The question is new when applied to our peculiar political organiza tion, where the separate and conflicting interests of society are repre sented by distinct but connected governments ; but it is, in reality, an old question under a new form, long since perfectly solved. Whenever separate and dissimilai' interests have been separately represented in any government ; whenever the sovereign power has been divided in its exercise, the experience and wisdom ot ages have devised but one mode by which such political organization can be preserved — the mode adopt ed in England, and by all governments, ancient and modern, blessed with constitutions deserving to be called free — to give to each co-estate the right to judge of its powers, with a negative or veto on the acts of the others, in order to protect against encroachments the interests it particularly represents : a principle which all of our Constitutions recognize in the distribution of power among their respective depart ments, as essential to maintain the independence of each, but which to all who will duly reflect on the subject, must appear far more essential, for the same object, in that great and fundamental distribution of powers between the General and State Governments, So essential is the prin ciple, that to withhold the right from either, where the sovereign power is divided, is, -in fact, to annul the division itself, and to consolidate in the one left in the exclusive possession of the right all powers jf govern 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 167 ment ; for it is not possible to distinguish, practically, between a govern ment having all power, and one having the right to take what powers it pleases. Kor does it in the least vary the principle, whether the distribution of power be between co-estates, as in England, or between distmctly organized but connected governments, as with us. The rea son is the same in both eases, while the necessity is greater in our case, as the danger of conflict is greater where the interests of a society are divided geographically than in any other, as has already been shown. These truths do seem to me to be incontrovertible ; and I am at a loss to imderstand how any one, who has maturely reflected on the na ture of our institutions, or who has read history or studied the principles of free government to any pmpo.-e, can call them in question. The ex planation must, it appears to me, be sought in the fact that in every free state there are those who look more to the necessity of maintaining power than guarding against its abuses, I do not intend reproach, but simply to state a fact apparently necessary to explain the contrariety of opinions among the intelligent, where the abstract consideration of the subject would seem scarcely to admit of doubt. If such be the true cause, I must think the fear of weakening the government too much in this case to be in a great measure unfounded, or, at least, that the dan ger is much less from that than the opposite side. I do not deny that a power of so high a nature may be abused by a state, but when I reflect that the states unanimously called the General Government into exist ence with all its powers, which they freely delegated on their part, under the consietion that their common peace, safety, and prosperity required it ; that they are bound together by a common origin, and the recollection of common suffering and common triumph in the great and splendid achievement of their independence ; and that the strongest feelings rof our nature, and asaong them the love of national power and distinction, are on the side of the Union, it does seem to me that the fear which would strip the states of their sovereignty, and degrade them, in fact, to mere dependent corporations, lest they should abuse a right in dispensable to the peaceable protection of those interests which tSiey reserved under their own peculiar guardianship when they created the General Government, is unnatural and unreasonable. If those who voluntarily oreated the system cannot be trusted to preserve it, who can' So far from extreme danger, I hold that there never was a free state in which this great conservative principle, indispensable to all, was ever 168 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. so safely lodged. In others, when the co-estates representing the dis similar and conflioting interests of the community came into contact, the only alternative was compromise, submission, or force. Not so in ours. Should the General Government and a state come into conflict, we have a higher remedy ; the power which called the General Government into existence, which gave it all its authority, and can enlarge, contract, or abolish its powers at its pleasure, may be invoked. The states them selves may be appealed to, three fourths of which, in fact, form a power whose decrees are the Constitution itself, and whose voice can silence al! discontent The utmost extent, then, of the power is, that a state act ing in its sovereign capacity, as one of the parties to the constitutional compact, may compel the government, created by that compact, to sub mit a question touching its infraction to the parties who created it ; to avoid the supposed dangers of which it is proposed to resort to the novel, the hazardous, and, I must add, fatal project of giving to the General Government the sole and final right of interpreting the Consti tution, thereby reversing the whole system, .making that instrument the creature of its wUl instead of a rule of action impressed on it at its creation, and annihilating, in fact, the authority which imposed it, and from which the government itself derives its existence. That such would be the result, were the right in question vested in the legislative or executive branch of the government, is conceded by all. No one has been so hardy as to assert that Congress or the Presi dent ought to have the right, or deny that, if vested finally and exclu sively in either, the consequences which I have stated would necessari ly follow : but its advocates have been reconciled to the doctrine, on the supposition that there is one department of the General Government which, from its peculiar organization, affords an independent tribunal through which the government may exercise the high authority which is the subject of consideration, with perfect safety to all. I yield, I trust, to few in my attachment to thejudiciary department. I am fuUy sensible of its importance, and would maintain it to the fullest extent in its constitutional powers and independence ; but it is impossi ble for me to believe that it was ever intended by the Constitution that it should exercise the power in question, or that it is cMupetent to do so ; and, if it were, that it would be a safe depositary of the power. Its powers are judicial, and not political, and are expressly confined by the Constitution " to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and the treaties made, esi 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 169 which shall be made, under its authority ;" and which I have high au thority in asserting excludes political questions, and comprehends those only where there are parties amenable to the process of the court,* Nor is its incompetency less clear than its want of constitutional authori ty. There may be many, and the most dangerous infractions on the part of Congress, of which, it is conceded by all, the court, as a judicial tribimal, cannot, from its nature, take cognizance* The tariff Itself is a strong case in point ; and the reason applies equally to all others where Congress perverts a power fr&tn an object intended to 0')U not intended, the most insidious and dangerous of all infractions ; and tvhich may be extended to all its powers, more especially to the taxing and appropria ting. But supposing it competent to take cognizance of all infractions of every description, the insuperable objection still remains, that it would not be a safe tribunal to exercise the power in question. It is a universal and fundamental political principle, that the power to protect can safely be confided only to those interested in protecting, or their responsible agents — a maxim not less true in private than in public affairs. The danger in om- system is, that the General Govern ment, which represents the interests of the whole, may encroach on the states, which represents the peculiar and local interests, or that the latter may encroach on the former. In examining this point, we ought not to forget that the government, through all its departments, judicial as well as others, is administered by delegated and responsible agents ; and that the power which really controls, ultimately, all the movements, is not in the agents, bitt those zvho elect or appoint them. To imderstand, then, its real character, and what would be the action of the system in any supposable case, we must raise om- view from the mere agents to this high controlling power, which finally impels every movement of the machine. By doing so, we shall find all under the control of the will of a majority, compounded of' the majority of the states, taken as corporate bodies, and the majority of the people of the states, estimated in federal numbers. These, united, constitute the real and final power which, impels and directs the move ments of the General Government. The majority of the states elect the majority of the Senate ; of the people of the states, that of the House of Representatives; the two united, the President; and the President and a majority of the Senate appomt the judges : a majority * I refer to the authority of Chief-Justice Marshall, in the case of Jonathan Rob- oins. I have not been able to refer to the speech, and speak from memory. 8 170 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. of whom, and a majority of the Senate and House, with the President, really exercise all the powers of the government, with the exception of the cases where the Constitution requires a greater number than a majority. The judges are, in fact, as truly the judicial representatives of this united majority, as the majority of Congress itself, or the Presi dent, is its legislative or executive representative ; and to confide the power to the judiciarji to determine finally and conclusively what powers are delegated and what reserved, would be, in reality, to confide it to the majority, whose agents they are, and by whom they can be controlled m various ways ; and, of course, to subject (against the funda mental principle of our system and all sound political reasoning) the reserved powers of the states, with all the local and peculiar interests they were intended to protect, to the will of the very majority against which the protection was intended. Nor will the tenure by which the judges hold their office, however valuable the provision in many other respects, materially vary the case. Its highest possible effect would be to retard, and not finally to resist the will of a dominant majority. But it is useless to multiply arguments. Were it possible that rea son could settle a question where the passions and interests of men are concerned, this point would have been long since settled forever by the State of Virginia, The report of her Legislature, to which I have already referred, has really, in my opinion, placed it beyond' contro versy. Speaking in reference to tins subject, it says ; " It has been objected" (to the right of a state to interpose for the protection of her reserved rights) " that the judicial authority is to be regarded as the sole expositor of the Constitution, On this objection it might be ol/- served, first, that there may be instances of usurped powers which the forms of the Constitution could never draw within the control of the judicial department ; secondly, that, if the decision of the judiciary be raised above the sovereign parties of the Constitution, the decisions of the other departments, not carried by the forms of the Constitution before the judiciary, must be equally authoritative and final with the decision of that department. But the proper answer to the objection is, that the resolution of the General Assembly relates to those great and extraordinary cases in which all the forms of the Constitution may prove ineffectual against infractions dangerous to the essential rights of the parties to it The resolution supposes that dangerous powers, not delegated, may not only be usurped and executed by the other departments, but that the judicial department may also exercise or 1831. J ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 171 sanction dangerous powers, beyond the grant of the Constitution, and, consequently, that the ultimate right of the pai-ties to the Constitution to judge whether the compact has been dangerously violated, must ex tend to violations by one delegated authority, as well as by another — by the judiciary, as well as by the executive or legislative." Against these conclusive arguments, as they seem to me, it is ob jected that, if one of the parties has the right to judge of infractions of the Constitution, so has the other ; and that, consequently, in cases of contested powers between a state and the General Government, each would have a right to maintain its opmion, as is the case when sovereign powers differ in the construction of treaties or compacts, and that, of course, it would come to be a mere question of force. The error is in the assumption that the General Government is a party to the constitutional compact. The states, as has been shown, formed the compact, acting as sovereign and independent communities. The Gen eral Government is but its creature ; and though, in reaUty, a govern ment, with aU the rights and authority which belong to any other gov ernment, within the orbit of its powers, it is, nevertheless, a government emanating from a compact between sovereigns, and partaking, in its nature and object, of the character of a joint commission, appointed to superintend and administer the interests in which all are jointly con cerned, but having, beyond its proper sphere, no more power than if it did not exist To deny this would be to deny the most incontestable &cts and the clearest conclusions ; while to acknowledge its truth is to destroy utterly the objection that the appeal would be to force, in the case supposed. For, if each party has a right to judge, then, under our system of government, the final cognizance of a question of con tested power would be in the states, and not in the General Govern ment. It would be the duty of the latter, as in all similar cases of a contest between one or more of the principals and a joint commission or agency, to refer the contest to the principals themselves. Such are the plain dictates of both reason and analogy. On no sound principle can the agents have a right to final cognizance, as against the princi pals, much less to use force against them to maintain their construction of theu- powers. Such a right would be monstrous, and has never, heretofore, been claimed in similar cases. That the doctrine is applicable to the case of a contested power be tween the states and the General Government, we have the authority not orJiy of reason and analogy, but of the distinguished statesman 172 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. already referred to. Mr. Jefferson, at a late period of his life, after long experience and mature reflection, says, " With respect to our State and Federal Governments, I do not think their relations are correctly understood by foreigners. They suppose the former are subordinate to the latter. This is not the case. They are coordinate departments of one simple and integral whole. But you may ask, If the two de partments should claim each the same subject of power, where is the umpire to decide between them ? In cases of little urgency or im portance, the prudence of both parties will keep them aloof from the questionable ground ; but, if it can neither be avoided nor compro mised, a convention of the states must be called to ascribe the doubtful power to that department which they may think best." It is thus that our Constitution, by authorizing amendments, and by prescribing the authority and mode of making them, has, by a simple contrivance, with its characteristic wisdom, provided a power which, in the last resort, ¦jupersedes effectually the necessity, and even the pretext for force : a oower to which none can fairly object ; with which the interests of all are safe ; which can definitively close all controversies in the only effectual mode, by freeing the compact of every defect and uncertainty, by an amendment of the instrument itself It is impossible for human wisdom, in a system like ours, to devise another mode which shall be safe and effectual, and, at the same time, consistent with what are the relations and acknowledged powers of the two great departments of our government It gives a beauty and security pecuhar to our system, which, if duly appreciated, will transmit its blessings to the remotest generations ; but if uot, our splendid anticipations of the future will prove but an empty dream. Stripped of all its covering, the naked question is, whether ours is a federal or a consolidated government ; a constitutional or absolute one ; a government resting ultimately on the soUd basis of the sovereignty of the states or on the unrestrained will of a majority ; a form of government, as in all other unlimited ones, in which injustice, and violence, and force must finally prevail. Let it never be forgotten that, where the majority rules without restriction, the minority is the subject ; and that, if we should absurdly attribute to the former the exclusive right of construing the Constitution, there would be, in fact, between the sovereign and subject, under such a gov ernment, no constitution, or, at least, nothing deserving the name, or serving the legitimate object of so sacred an instrument." How the states are to exercise this high power of interposition, 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 173 which constitutes so essential a portion of their reserved rights that it cannot be delegated without an entire surrender of their sovereignty, and converting our system from a federal into a consolidated government, is a question that the states only are competent to determine. The arguments which prove that they possess the power, equally prove that they are, in the language of Jefferson, "the rightful judges of the mode and measure of redress." But the spirit of forbearance, as well as the nature of the right itself, forbids a recourse to it, except in cases of dangerous infractions of the Constitution ; and then only in the last resort, when aU reasonable hope of relief from the ordinary action of the government has failed ; when, if the right to interpose did not exist the alternative would be submission and oppression on one side, or resistance by force on the other. That our system should afford, in such extreme cases, an intermediate point between these dire alterna tives, by which the government may be brought to a pause, and thereby an interval obtained to compromise differences, or, if impracticable, be compelled to submit the question to a constitutional adjustment, through an appeal to the states themselves, is an evidence of its high wisdom : an element not, as is supposed by some, of weakness, but of strength ; not of anarchy or revolution, but of peace and safety. Jfsjieneral recognition would of itself, in a great measure, if not altogether, su^er- sede thd necessiiyof~iIi'exercise, by impressing on the movements of the 'gmefnJmSS'TfiM'lnZ^^^ to harmony and peacejm'a country of -nichljastexterii and diversity of interests as ours ; "and would, if controversy ^ should come, turn the resentment of the aggrieved from the system to those who had abused its powers (a point all-important), and cause them to seek redress, not in revolution , or overthrow, but in reformation. It is, in fact properly understood, a substitute, where the alternative would be force, tending to prevent, and, ifUmrjaUsrioTorrect peaceaElylliFWerraMmrToWB^~aU~TysRms 'Tir^TidBlf, ' 'arid' which, if permitted 'ta. accumidate.mtkout correction, 'Inusffinaily end in a general catastrophe. Ihave now said'-WhatI intended m reference to the abstract question of*the relation of the states to the General Government and would here conclude, did I not believe that a mere general statement on an abstract question, without including that which may have caused its agitation, would be considered by many imperfect and unsatisfactory. FeeUng that such would be justly the case, I am compelled, reluctantly, to' touch on the tariff, so far, at least, as may be necessary to illustrate 174 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. the opinions which I have already advanced. Anxious, however, to intrude as little as possible on the public attention, I will be as brief as possible ; and with that view will, as far as may be consistent with my object avoid all debatable topics. Whatever diversity of opinion may exist in relation to the principle, or the effect on the productive industry of the country, of the present, or any other tariff of protection, there are certain political conse quences flowing from the present which none can doubt, and all must deplore. It would be in vain to attempt to conceal, that it has divided the country into two great geographical divisions, and arrayed them against each other, in opinion at least, if not interests also, on some of the most vital of political subjects — on its finance, its commerce, and its industry^subjects calculated, above all others, in time of peace, to produce excitement, and in relation to which the tariff has placed the sections in question in deep and dangerous conflict. If there be any point on which the (I was going to say, southeru section, but to avoid as far as possible, the painful feelings such discussions are calculated to excite, I shall say) weaker of the two sections is unanimous, it is that its prosperity depends, iu a great measure, on free trade, light taxes economical, and, as far as possible, equal disbm'sements of the public revenue, and unshackled industry, leaving them to pursue whatever may appear most advantageous to their interests. From the Potomac to the Mississippi, there are few, indeed, however divided on other points, who would not, if dependent on their volition, and if they re garded the interest of their particular section only, remove from com merce and industry every shackle, reduce the revenue to the lowest point that the wants of the government fairly required, and restrict the appropriations to the most moderate scale consistent with the peace, the security, and the engagements of the pubhc ; and who do not believe that the opposite system is calculated to throw on them an unequal burden, to repress their prosperity, and to encroach on their enjoyment On all these deeply-important measures, the opposite opinion pre vails, if not with equal unanimity, with at least a greatly preponderat ing majority, iu the other and stronger section ; so much so, that no two distinct nations ever entertained more opposite views of policy than these two sections do on all the important points to which I have referred. Nor is it less certain that this unhappy conflict, flowing directly from the tariff, has extended itself to the haUs of legisla- 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 175 tion, and has converted the deliberations of Congress into an annual struggle between the two sections ; the stronger to maintain and in crease the superiority it has already acquired, and the other to throw off or diminish its burdens : a struggle in which aU the noble and gen erous feelings of patriotism are gradually subsiding into sectional and selfish attadiments,* Nor has the effect of this dangerous conflict ended here. It has not only divided the two sections on the important point already stated, but on the deeper and more dangerous questions, the constitutionality of a protective tariff, and the general principles and theory of the Constitution itself : the stronger, in order to main tain their superiority, giving a construction to the instrument which the other believes would convert the General Government into a con- goUdated, irresponsible government, with the total destruction of lib erty ; and the weaker, seeing no hope of relief 'with such assumption of powers, turning its eye to the reserved sovereignty of the states, as the only refuge from oppression. I shall not extend these remarks, as I might I>y showing that, while the effect of the system of protection was rapidly alienatmg one section, it was not less rapidly, by its neces sary operation, distracting and corrupting the other ; and, between the two, subjecting the administration to violent and sudden changes, totally incon=i-teut with all stability and wisdom in the management of the affairs of the nation, of which we already see fearful symptoms. Nor do I deem it necessary to inquire whether this unhappy conflict ^ows out of true or mistaken views of interest on either or both sides. Regarded in either light it ought to admonish us of the ex treme danger to which our system is exposed, and the great modera tion and wisdom necessary to preserve it If it comes from mistaken views — if the interests of the two sections, as affected by the tariff, be really the same, and the system, instead of acting unequally, in reality diffuses equal blessings, and imposes equal burdens on every part — it ought to teach us how liable those who are differently situated, and who view their interests under different aspects, are to come to differ ent conclusions, even when their interests are strictly the same ; and, consequently, with what extreme caution any system of policy ought * This system, if continued, must end, not only in subjecting the industry and property of the weaker section to thecontrol of the stronger, but in proscription and political disfranchisement. It must finally control elections and appointments to offices, as well as acts of legislation, to the great increase of the feelings of animosity, and of the fatal tendency to complete alienation between the sections. 176 . JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. to be adopted, and with what a spirit of moderation pursued, in a cotmtry of such gi-eat extent and diversity as om-s. But if, on the contrary, the conflict springs really from contrariety of interests — if the burden be on one side and the benefit on the other — then are we taught a lesson not less important, how little regard we have for the interests of others while in pursuit of our own ; or, at least, how apt we are to consider our own interest the interest of all others ; and, of course, how great the danger, in a country of such acknowledged diversity of interests, of the oppression of the feebler by the stronger interest, and, in consequence of it, of the most fatal sectional conflicts. But whichever may be the cause, the real or supposed diversity of interest, it cannot be doubted that the political consequences of the prohibitory system, be its effects in other respects beneficial or other wise, are really such as I have stated ; nor can it be doubted that a conflict between the great sections, on questions so vitally important, in dicates a, condition of the country so distempered and dangerous, as to demand the most serious and prompt attention. It is only when we come to consider of the remedy, that, under the aspect I am viewing the subject, there can be, among the informed and considerate, any diversity of opinion. Those who have not duly reflected on its dangerous and inveterate character, suppose that the disease will cure itself; that events ought to be left to take their own course ; and that experience, in a short time, will prove that the interest of the whole community is the same in reference to the tariff, or, at least whatever diversity there may now be, time will assimilate. Such has been their language from the begin ning, bnt, unfortunately, the progress of events has been the reverse. The country is now more divided than in 1824, and then more than in 1816. The majority may have increased, but the opposite sides are, be yond dispute, more determined and excited than at any preceding period. Formerly, the system was resisted mainly as inexpedient ; but now, as imconstitutional, unequal, unjust, and oppressive. Then, rehef was sought exclusively from the General Government; but now, many, driven to despair, are raising their eyes to the reserved sovereignty of the states as the only refuge. If we turn from the past and present to the future, we shall find nothing to lessen, but much to aggravate the danger. The increasing embarrassment and distress of the staple states, the growing conviction, from experience, that they are caused by the prohibitory system principally, and that under its continued 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 177 operation, their present pursmts must become profitless, and with a con viction that their great and peculiar agricultural capital cannot be di verted from its ancient and hereditary channels without ruuious losses, all concur to increase, instead of dispelling, the gloom that hangs over the future. In fact to those who will duly reflect on the subject, the hope that the disease will cure itself must appear perfectly illusory. The question is, in reality, one between the exporting and non-export ing interests of the country. Were there no exports, there would be no tariff. It would be perfect^ useless. On the contrary, so long as there are states which raise the great agricultural staples with the view of obtaining their supplies, and which must depend on the general .market of the world for their sales, the conflict must remain if the sys tem sboidd continue, and the disease become more and more inveter- ¦ate. T^aeir interest, and that of those who, by high duties, would con fine the purchase of their supplies to the home market, must, from the nature of things, in reference to the tariff, be in conflict. Till, then, we <;ease to raise the. great staples cotton, rice, and tobacco, for the general market and tdl we can find some other profitable investment for the immense amount of capital and labor now employed in their produc tion, the present unhappy and dangerous conflict cannot terminate, un less with the prohibitory system itself In the mean time, while idly waiting for its termination through its own action, the progress of events in another quarter is rapidly bring- mg the contest to an immediate and decisive issue. We are fast ap proaching a period very novel in the history of nations, and bearing ,ctory exjiliination, the opposite views that prevail in the two sections, as to the effects of the system, ought to satisfy all of its unequal action. There can be no safer, or more certain rule, than to eupuose each portion of the country equally capable of understanding 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF S. CAROLINA. 183 its respective interests, and that each is a much better judge of the effects of any system or measures on its pecuUar interest than the other can possibly be. But, whether the opinion of its tmcqual action be correct or ewone- eus, nothing can be more certain than that ihe impression is -widely extending itself, that the system, under all its modificatioBs, is essen tially unequal", and if to that be added a conviction still deeper and more universal, that every duty imposed /or the purpose of protection is not only unequal, but also wnconstitiiUon^jt would be a fatal error to suppose that any remedy, short of that which I have stated, can heal our poUtical disorders. In order to understand more fuUy tlie difficulty of adjusting this un happy contest on any other ground, it may not be improper to present a general view of the constitutional objection, that it may be clearly seen how hopeless it is to expect that it can be yielded by those who have embraced it. They believe that all the powers vested by (he Constitution in Con gress are not only restricted by the limitations expressly imposed, but also by the nature and object of the powers tliemselves. Thus, though tjie power to impose duties on imports be granted in general terms, ¦without any other express limitations but that they shall be equal, and CO preference shall be given to the ports of one state over those of an other, yet, as being a portion of the taxing power given v/ith the view cf raising the revenue, it is, from its nature, restricted to that object, as much so as if the Convention had expressly so limited it ; and that to use it to effect aay other purpose not specified in the Constitution, Is an infraction of the instrument in its most dangerous form — an infrac tion by perversion, more -easily made, and more difficult to resist, than any other. The same view is believed to be applicable to the power of regtdating commerce, as well as all the other powers. To surrender this important principle, it is conceived, would be to surrender all power, and to render the government unlimited and despotic ; and to yield it up, in relation to the particular power in question, would be, in fact, to surrender the control of the whole industry and 'capital of the country to the General Government, and would end in placing the weaker section in a colonial relation with the stronger. For nothing are more dissimilar in their nature, or may be more unequally affected by the same laws, than different descriptions of labor and property and if taxes, by increasing the amount and changing the intent only. 184 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN, [1831 may be perverted, in fact mto ai system of penalties and rewards, it would give all the power that could be desii-ed to subject the labor and property of the minority to the will of the majority, to be regulated -without regarding the interest of the formei- in subserviency to the -wiU of the latter. Thus thinking, it would seem unreasonable to expect that any adjustment, based on the recogDitien of the correctness of a construction of the Constitution which would admit the exercise- of such a power, would satisfy the weaker of two sections, particularly with its pecuUar industry and property, which experience has shown may be so injuriously affected by its exercise. Thus much for one side. The just claim of the other ought to be equalfy yespeetedi What ever excitement the system has justly caused in certain portions of our counrtry, I hope and beUeve all wiU conceive that the change should be made with the least possible detriment to the interests of those who may be liable to be affected by it, consistently with what is justly due to others, and the principles of the Constitution. To effect this will require the kindest spirit of conciliation and the utmost skill; but, even with these, it will be impossible to make the transition without ai shock, greater or less, though I trust, if judiciously effected, it will Siot be without many compensating advantages. That there will be some such cannot be doubted. It wiU, at least, be followed by greater sta bility, and wUl tend to Karmoiiize the manufacturing -with all of the other great interests of the country, and bind the whole in mutual affection. But these are not all. Another advantage of essential im portance to the ultimate prosperity of our manufacturing industry will ibllow. Jt will cheapen production ; and, in that view, the loss of any orie'brancE ¦will be nothing Uke in proportion to the reduction of duty on that particular branch. Every reduction will, in fact, operate as a bounty to every other branch except the one reduced ; and thus the effect of a general reduction will be to cheapen, universaUy, the price of production, by cheapening living, wages, and materials, so as to give, if not equal profits after the reduction — profits by no means re duced proportionaUy to the duties — an effect which, as it regards the foreign markets, is of the utmost importance. It must be apparent, on reflection, that the means adopted to secure the home market for our manufactures are precisely the opposite of those necessary to obtain the foreign. In the former, the increased expense of production, in consequence of a system of protection, may be more than compensated by the increased price at home of the article protected ; but in the lat- 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPT.E OP S. CAROLINA. 185 ter, this advantage is lost ; and, as there is no other corresponding compensation, the hacreased cost of production must be a dead loss iu the foreign market. But whether these advantages, and many others that might be mentioned, will ultimately compensate to the full extent or not the loss to the manufacturers, on the reduction of the duties, certain it is, that we have approached a point at which a great change cannot be much longer delayed ; and that the more promptly it may be met, the less excitement there wiU ])e, and the greater leisure and calmness for a cautious and skillful operation in making the transition ; and which it becomes those more immediately interested to duly con sider. Nor ought they to overlook, in considering the question, the dif ferent character of the claims of the two sides. The one asks from government no advantage, but simply to be let alone in the undis turbed possession of their natural advantages, and to secure which, as far as was consistent with the other objects of the Constitution, was one of their leading motives in entering into the Union ; while the other side claims, for the advancement of their prosperity, the positive interference of the government. In such cases, on every principle of &irness and justice, such interference ought to be restrained within limits strictly compatible with the natural advantages of the other. He who looks to aU the causes in operation, the near approach of the final payment of the pubUo debt, the growing "disaffection and resist ance to the system in so large a section of the country, the deeper principles on which opposition to it is gradually turning, must be, in deed, infatuated not to see a great change is unavoidable ; and that the attempt to elude or much longer delay it must finally but Increase the shock and disastrous consequences which may foUow. In forming the opinions I have expressed, I have not been actuated by an tmkind feeling towards our manufacturing interests I now am, and ever have been, decidedly friendly to them, though I cannot con cur in all the measures which have been adopted to advance them, I beUeve considerations higher than any question of mere pecuniary in terest forbade their use. But subordinate to these higher views of poUcy, I regard the advancement of mechanical and chemical improve ments in the arts with feeUngs little short of enthusiasm ; not only as the proUfic source of national and individual wealth, but as the great means of enlarging the domain of man over the material world, and thereby of laying the solid foundation of a highly-improved condition of society, morally and politically. I fear not that we shall extend 186 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1831. our power too far over the great agents of nature ; but, on the con trary, I consider such enlargement of our power as tending more cer tainly and powerfully to better the condition of our race than any one of the many powerful causes now operating to that result. With these impressions, I not only rejoice at the general progress of the arts in the world, but in their advancement in our own country ; and as far as protection may be incidentally afforded, in the fair and honest exercise of our constitutional powers, I think now, as I have always thought, that sound policy, connected with the security, independence, and peace of the country, requires it should be done, but that we can not go a single step beyond without jeopardizing our peace, our har- -mony, and our liberty — considerations of infinitely more importance to us than any measure of mere policy can possibly be. In thus placing my opinions before the pubUc, I have not been actu ated by the expectation of changing the pijbUc sentiment Such a motive, on a question so long agitated, and so beset with feelings of prejudice and interest, would argue, on my part, an insufferable vanity, and a profoimd ignorance of the human heart To avoid as far as pos sible the imputation of either, I have confined my statement, on the many and important points on which I have been compelled to touch, to a simple declaration of my opinion, without advancing any other reasons to sustain them than what appeared to me to be indispensable to the full understanding of my views ; and if they should, on any point, be thought to be not clearly and expUcitly developed, it will, I trust, be attributed to my soUcitude to avoid the imputations to which I have alluded, and not to any desire to disguise my sentiments, nor to the want of arguments and iUustratious to maintain positions which so abound m both, that it would require a volume to do them anything like justice. I can only hope that truths which, I feel assured, are essentially connected with aU that we ought to hold most dear, may not be weakened in the public estimation by the imperfect manner ¦ in which I have been, by the object iu view, compelled to present them. With every caution on my part, I dare not hope, in taking the step 1 have, to escape the imputation of improper motives ; though I have, without reserve, freely expressed my opinions, not regarding whether they might or might not be popular. I have no reason to beUeve that they are such as wiU concUiate pubhc favor, but the opposite, which I greatly regret, as I have ever placed a high estimate on the good opinion of my fellow-citizens. But, be that as it may, I shall, at least, 1831.] ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OP S. CAROLINA. 187 be sustained by feelings of conscious rectitude. I have formed my opinions after the most carefid and deliberate examination, with all the aids which my reason and experience could furnish ; I have ex pressed them honestly and fearlessly, regardless of their effects per- BonaUy, which, however interesting to me individually, are of too little importance to be taken into the estimate, where the liberty and hap piness of our country are so vitally involved. CHAPTER VIII. KuUification — The Protective System uitroduced — Act of 1828' — Oppo sition in the Southern States — 'State Interposition proposed — Mr. CaUioun's Views — Election of General Jackson — Distribution and Protection combined— Dissolution of the Cabinet — Difiiculty between Mr. Calhoun and General Jackson — Letter to Governor Hamilton — Convention in Soutb CaroUna — Mr. Calhoun elected a Senator in Congress. We now approach the most important and eventful period in the life and history of Mr. Calhoun — the period of Nullification— -in which the great battle between State-rights and the Consolidation doctrines of the fed eral party was fought on the floor of Congress. Of the former he was the especial champion. He stood forth as the prominent advocate of the cherished principles of the old republican creed ; and although, in the opinion of many, perhaps the most of his former party associates, he went beyond 'what they supposed the design and in tention of those by whom that creed was originally formed and adopted, he defended his position with a zeal that knew no abatement, and with a resoluteness of purpose that left no room to doubt his sincerity. In the midst of calumny and detraction he was always calm and self-possessed. Though the particular object of misrepresentation, he only claimed a hearing for his opinions, and if that were denied, he left it to time — that true touc'cstoae .^i merit in men and in things — to test 1824-32.] THE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM. 189 their correctness and their importance. Torrents of obloquy and abuse were poured upon him without stint or favor ; yet, like Galileo exclaiming in the midst of his persecutors, indignant at his renunciation of the Copernican system, " E pur si muove !"* — so he main tained, in and through all, that the truth and the right were on his side. The Nullification controversy, as it has been termed, grew out of the system of high protective duties long contended for by the manufacturing interest and the friends of the American system, and finally established by the act of 1828. By the act of 1816, a reduction of five per cent, on woollen and cotton goods was made in 1819 ; and the protectionists forthwith commenced their efforts to procure a modification of the law rriore favor able to their interests. Their exertions were continued from year to year, till they were ultimately cro-wned with success, through the efforts, in great part, of Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay. The act of 1816 went beyond the true revenue limit, but so long as the policy was merely to foster and build up domestic manufactures, and while the public debt remained unpaid, Mr. Cal houn, and others who entertained similar views, were conteijt not to insist upon a reduction of the duties to the revenue standard. The debt must be provided for, and this, it was probable, would absorb the surplus of revenue for a long time to come. In 1824, the protectionists procured the passage of the act of that year increasing the«,profits of certain branches of manufactures already established, and ofTer- ing great inducements for the establishment of others. ¦* " And yet, it moves 1" 190 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32 Three years later — at the .session of 1826-7 — " the woollens' bill," designed almost exclusively for the bene fit of the manufacturers, was brought before Congress. Public attention was now fully aroused to the proceed ings of the manufacturers, and»various interests appear ed in the field, each contending for a share of the bene fits to be derived from a high protective tariff The doctrine of temporary protection, partially forgotten in 1824, was now to be entirely abandoned, and favoritism substituted for encouragement. The manufacturers of the Eastern states, the iron manufacturers in Pennsyl vania and New Jersey, and the producers of wool and hemp in the Northern and Western states generally, were all earnestly enlisted in favor of a high tariff but their interests were so often found to be conflicting, that harmony of action could not be secured. Political considerations at length entered into the controversy. The growing popularity of General Jack son filled the friends of Mr. Adams with alarm, and when it was seen how many powerful interests at the north were arrayed in favor of a high tariff an effort was made to secure their support in the approaching canvass, for without their assistance it was certain that the administration would not be sustained. A conven tion of the advocates of a protective tariff was therefore called and held at Harrisburg, in July, 1827, at which a system of high duties was fixed upon, which was satis factory to all the manufacturing interests, but not ac ceptable to the agricultural friends of protection. The supporters of Mr. Adams now counted with great con fidence on the election of their candidate, for, said they, " if the friends of General Jackson in the tariff states 1824-32.] BILL OF ABOMINATIONS. 191 pppose the Harrisburg plan, the electoral votes of those states will be lost to him, and his defeat must then cer tainly follow ; and on the other hand, if they support the plan, the southern and south-western states will not vote for him unless he disavows the proceedings of his friends at the north." But the friends of General Jackson were not so easi ly entrapped. They elected their speaker in the House of Representatives at the session of 1827-8, and obtain ed a majority on the committee on manufactures. A bill was then prepared, calculated to favor the wool and hemp growers and to satisfy the iron manufacturers, but not affording the desired protection to the manufac turers of woollen and cotton goods, though it was after ward arranged so as to be more agreeable to them. In this contest for political power, the great principles of truth and justice were disregarded and the interests of the staple states at the south completely overlooked. After a long struggle the act of 1828 was passed by the votes of nearly all the friends of a high protective sys tem in Congress. This bill was fitly termed by one pf its authors " a great error," and by a leading advocate of protection /or the sake of protection, " a bill of abom inations." It imposed a tariff of duties averaging nearly fifty per cent, on the imports, and considerations of revenue had very little to do with the maniier in which it was formed, or with its passage. Only three representatives from the southern states, with the exception of the whole delegation from Ken tucky, who either supported the American System of Mr. Clay or were influenced by the protection given to hemp, voted for the act of 1828. Its passage elicited 192 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32 a general expression of indignation in the Southern states, and most of their legislatures adopted strong resolutions condemning it in unqualified terms as being unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional. Mr. Calhoun was now regarded with almost filial af fection and reverence by the citizens of his native state, and on his return home at the close of the session, he was visited by a number of leading and influential men, and the question was repeatedly propounded to him — what must be done ? His reply was, that they must not hazard the election of General Jackson, upon whom he relied to counteract the dangerous tendencies of the times, and it was better to wait and see whether his ad ministration would not reduce the duties to the revenue standard before the public debt was paid, or, at least, take the necessary steps to secure that reduction when ever it should be finally discharged. But if they were disappointed, then he advised that the unconstitutional laws should be resisted, and that a resort should be had to state interposition, or, in other words, nullification. • Resistance had previously been recommended, at a public meeting of the citizens of Colleton district held in June, 1828, and at other gatherings of the people similar sentiments were freely avowed. Mr. Calhoun was firmly of the opinion that nullification was the right ful remedy, but his advice of forbearance was followed by his friends. He consented, however, to give ex pression to his views, and at the request of a member of the legislature, prepared a paper exposing the ob jectionable features of the act of 1828 and the injurious effects which must result from it, and pointing out the remedy for the evil. Five thousand copies of this paper l»2i;-32.] NULLIFICATION RECOMMENDED. 193 were ordered to be printed by the legislature, which met in December, 1828, under the title of " The South Caro lina Exposition and Protest on the subject of the Tariff." The legislature then contented itself with passing a res olution declaring the tariff acts of Congress for the )rotection of domestic manufactures unconstitutional, and that they ought to be resisted, and inviting other states to cooperate with South Carolina in measures of resistance. By this legislature, also, electors were chosen who gave the vote of the state to General Jack son and Mr. Calhoun. Time wore on. General Jackson was inaugurated, but no relief came. The influence of the tariff friends of the administration was controlling, and the president expressed the opinion that no satisfactory adjustment of the tariff could be made, which would not leave a large annual surplus beyond what was required by the govern ment for its current service, wherefore he recommended the adoption of some plan for its distribution or appor tionment among the states, to be expended on objects of internal improvement.* This recommendation ap peared to Mr. Calhoun to be an aggravation of the original cause of complaint, and he could see nothing in the scheme of distribution but a premium and an in ducement to the friends of a high protective tariff to persist in maintaining the system which they had fas tened upon the country. He viewed it as a bribe to the states, to secure their support of the system as the fixed and settled policy of the national government. Meanwhile the friendly relations previously existing between General Jackson and Mr. Calhoun had been *¦ Annual Messages of 1829 and 1880. 194 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32 interrupted. Mr. Van Buren was secretary of state, and both he and Mr. Calhoun were looked upon as can didates for the succession. Their respective friends in the cabinet became discontented with each other ; the bad feelings which had been engendered, were increased by difficulties between their families, and by the absence of harmony of opinion in regard to the tariff, and finally ended in the resignation of all the secretaries and the attorney-general, and the construction of an entire new cabinet. This took place in the spring of 1831, and from that time Mr. Calhoun was regarded as one of the opposers of the administration. He and General Jackson were probably too much alike in disposition long to agree cordially together, and the feelings of ani mosity cherishe^ by the latter were much heightened by the disclosure to him, about this time, of the fact that Mr. Calhoun, as a member of Mr. Monroe's cabinet, had advised that he should be punished or reprimanded for his course during the Seminole campaign, in the execution of Arbuthnot and Ambrister. Each possess ed an iron will, and each had inherited many of the traits peculiar to their common ancestry. It was impossible that the public action of Mr. Cal houn should not be affected by this change in his per sonal and political relations, and it may sometimes have so far influenced him as to bias his views and feelings in many particulars. Shortly after his resignation of the office of Secretary of State Mr. Van Buren was nom inated minister to England, and at the session of 1831- 32, he was rejected in the Senate by the casting vote of the vice-president, Mr. Calhoun, who thought that the instructions of the late secretary to Mr. McLane, 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 195 then minister to England, in regard to the West India trade, were not consistent with the dignity of the coun try, inasmuch as they proposed an apology, as he thought, for the acts of the previous administration. In the mean time, Mr. Calhoun had complied with the importunities of his numerous friends in South Caro lina, and issued the address heretofore given, dated at Fort Hill, in July, 1831. This address was followed by the annexed letter" to Governor Hamilton, which ap peared in the ensuing year : LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. FoET HiLt, August 28th, 1832. Mt Deak Sie — I have received your note of the 31st July, request ing me to give you a fuUer development of my views than that con tained in my address last summer, on the right of a state to defend her reserved powers against the encroachments of the General Gov ernment As fully occupied as my time is, were it doubly so, the quarter from which the request comes, with my deep conviction of the vital impor tance of the subject, would exact a compUance. No one can be more sensible than I am that the address of last sum mer fell far short of exhausting the subject. It was, in fact, intended as a simple statement of my views. I felt that the independence and candor which ought to distinguish one occupying a high pubUc station, imposed a duty on me to meet the call for my opinion by a frank and full avowal of my sentiments, regardless of consequences. To fulfil this duty, and not to discuss the subject, was the object of the address. But, in making these preliminary remarks, I do not intend to prepare you to expect a full discussion on the present occasion. What I pro pose is, to touch some of the more prominent points that have received less of the public attention than their importance seems to me to de mand. Strange as the assertion may appear, it is, nevertheless, true, that the great difficulty in determining whether a state has the right to de- ?iend har reserved powers against the General Government, or, in fact. 196 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. any right at all beyond those of a mere corporation, is to bring the public mind to realize plain historical facts connected with the origin and formation of the government Till they are fully understood, it is impossible that a correct and just view can be taken of the subject. In this connection, the first and most important point is to ascertain distinctly who are the real authors of the Constitution of the United States — whose powers created it — whose voice clothed it with au thority ; and whose agent the government it formed in reality is. At this point, I commence the execution of the task which your request has imposed. The formation and adoption of the Constitution are events so recent, and all the connected facts so fully attested, that it would seem im possible that there should be the least uncertainty in relation to tliein ; and yet, judging by what is constantly heard and seen, there are few subjects on which the public opinion is more confused. The most in definite expressions are habitually used in speaking of them. Some times it is said that th^ Constitution was made by the states, and at others, as if in contradistinction, by the people, without distinguishing between the two very different meanings wliich may be attached to those general expressions ; and thia, not in ordinary conver6ation,*but in grave discussions before deliberative bodies, and in judicial investi gations, where the greatest accuracy on &o important a point might be expected ; particularly as one or the other meaning is intended, con clusions the most opposite must follow, not only in reference to the subject of this communication, but as to the nature and character of our political system. By a state may be meant either the government of a state or the people, as forming a separate and independent com munity ; and by the people, either the American people taken collec tively, as forming one great community, or as the people of the several states, forming, as above stated,. sepaiate and independent communi ties. These distinctions are essential in the inquiry. If bv the people be meant the people collectively, and not the people of the several states taken separately ; and if it be true, indeed, tliat the Ccmstitution is the work of the American people collectively ; if It originated with them, and derives its authority from their will, then there is an end of the argument The right claimed for a state of defending her reserved powers against the General Government would be an absurdity. View ing the American people collectively as the source of political power, the rights of the states would be mere concessions— concessions from 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 197 the common majority, and to be revoked by them with the same facility that they were granted. The states would, on this supposition, bear to the Union the same relation that counties do to the states ; and it would, in that case, be just as preposterous to discuss the right of in terposition, on the part of a state, against the General Government, as that ot the counties against the states themselves. That a, large portion of the people of the United States thus regard the relation be tween the state and the General Government, including m-any who call themselves the friends of State-rights and opponents of consolidatinn, can scarcely be doubtejt, as it i.^ only on that supposition it can be ex plained that so many of that description should denounce the doctrine for which the state contends as so absurd. But, fortunately, the sup position is entirely destitute of truth. So far from the Constitution being the work of the American people collectively, no such political body either now, or ever did, exist In that character the people of this country never performed a single poUtical act, nor, indeed, can, without an entire revolution in all our political relations, I challenge an Instance. From the beginning, and in all the ch.anges of political existence through which we have passed, the people "of the United States have been united as forming political communities, and not as individuals. Even in the first stage of existence, they formed distinct colonies, independent of each other, and politically united only through the British crown. In their first imperfect union, for the pur pose of resisting the encroachments of the mother-country, they united as distinct political communities ; and, passing from their colonial condition, in the act announcing their independence to the world, they declared themselves, by name and enumeration, free and independent states. In that character, they formed the old confederation ; and, when it was pro posed to supersede the articles of the confederation by the present Con stitution, they met in convention as states, acted and voted as states ; and the Constitution, when formed, was submitted for ratification to the people of the several states : it was ratified by them as states, each state for itself; each by its ratification binding its own citizens ; the parts thus separately binding themselves, and not the whole parts ; to which, if it be added, that it is declared in the preamble of the Consti tution to be ordained by the people of the| United States, and in the article of ratification, when ratified, it is declared " to be binding between the states so ratifying:' The conclusion is inevitable, that the Constitu tion is the work of the people of the states, considered as separate and 198 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. independent poUtical communities; that they are its authors — their power created it, their voice clothed it with authority — that the govern ment formed is, in reality, their agent ; and that the Union, of which the Constitution is the bond, is a union of states, and not of individuals. No one, who regards his character for intelligence and truth, has ever ventured directly to deny facts so certain ; but while they are too certain for denial, they are also too conclusive in favor of the rights of the states for admission. The usual course has been adopted — to elude what can neither be denied nor admitted ; and never has the device been more successfully practised. By confounding states with state governments, and the people of the states with the American people collectively — things, as it regards the subject of this communication, totally dissimilar, as much so as a triangle and a square — facts of themselves perfectly certain and plain, and which, when well understood, must lead to a cor rect conception of the subject, have been involved in obscurity and mystery. I will next proceed to state some of the results which necessarily foUow from the facts which have been established. The first, and, in reference to the subject of this communication, the most important, is, that there is no direct and imm.ediate connection be tween the individual citizens of a state and the General Government. The relation between them is through the state. The Union is a union of states as communities, and not a union of individuals. As members of a state, her citizens were originally subject to no control but that of the state, and could be subject to no other, except by the act of the state itself The Constitution was, accordingly, submitted to the states for their separate ratification ; and it was only by the ratification of the state that its citizens became subject to the control of the General Government. The ratification of any other, or all the other states, without its o-wn, could create no connection between them and the Gen eral Government, nor impose on them the sUghtest obligation. With out the ratification gf their owa state, they would stand in the same re lation to the General Government as do the citizens or subjects of any foreign state ; and we find the citizens of North Carolina and Rhode Island actually bearing that relation to the government for some time after it went into operation ; these states having, in the first instance, decUned to ratify. Nor had the act of any individual the least influence in subjecting him to the control of the General Government, except as it might influence the ratification of the Constitution by his own state 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 199 Whether subject to its control or not, depended wholly on the act of the state. His dissent had not the least weight against the assent of his state, nor his assent against its dissent. It follows, as a necessary consequence, that the act of ratification bound the state as a community, as is expre.ssly declared in the article of the Constitution above quoted, and not the citizens of the state as individuals : the latter being bound through their state, and in consequence of the ratification of the former. Another, and a highly important consequence, as it regards the sub ject under investigation, foUows with equal certainty : that, on a ques tion whether a pajticular power exercised by the General Government be granted by the Constitution, it belongs to the state as a member of the Union, in her sovereign capncity in convention, to determine defini tively, as far as her citizens are concerned, the extent of the obligation which she contracted; and if, iu her opinion, the act exercising the power be unconstitutional, to declare it null and void, which declaration ^vould be obligatory on her citizens. In coming to this conclusion, it may be proper to remark, to prevent misrepresentation, that I do not claim for a state the right to abrogate an act of the General Govern ment, It is the Constitution that annuls an unconstitutional act Such an act is of itself void and of no effect What I claim is the right of the state, as far as its citizens are concerned, to declare the extent of the obligation, and that such declaration is binding on them — a right, when Umited to its citizens, flowing directly from the relation of the state to the General Government on the one side, and its citizens on the other, as already explained, and resting on the most plain and solid reasons. Passing over, what of itself might be considered conclusive, the obvious principle, that it belongs to the authority which imposed the obUgation to declare its extent, as far as those are concerned on whom the obligation is placed, I shall present a single argument, which of ¦ itself is decisive. I have already shown that there is no immediate connection between the citizens of a state and the General Government, and that the relation between them is through the state. I have also shown that, whatever obUgations were imposed on the citizens, were imposed by the act of the state ratifying the Constitution. A similar act by the same authority, made with equal solemnity, declaring the extent of the obUgation, must, as far as they are concerned, be of equal authority. I speak, of course, on the supposition that the right has not been transferred, as it wUl hereafter be shown that it has not. A citi zen woiUd have no more right to question the one than he would have 200 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32, the other declaration. They rest on the same authority : and as he was bound by the declaration of his state assenting to the Constitution, whether he assented or dissented, so would he be equaUy bound by a declaration declaring the extent of that assent, whether opposed to, or in favOT of, such declaration. In this conclusion I am supported by analogy. The case of a treaty between sovereigns Is strictly analogous. There, as in this case, the state contracts for the citizen or subject ; there, as in this, the obUgation is imposed by the state, and is indepen dent of his will ; and there, as in this, the declaration of the state, deter mining the extent of the obUgation contracted, is obligatory on him, as much so as the treaty itself. Having now, I trust, estabhshed the very important point that the declaration of a state, as to the extent of the power granted, is obUga- tory on its citizens, I shall next proceed to consider the effects of such declarations in reference to the General Government ; a question which necessarily involves the consideration of the relation between it and the states. It has been shown that the people of the states, acting as dis tinct and independent communities, are the authors of the Constitution, and that the General Government was organized and ordained by them to execute its powers. The government, then, with all its departments, b, in fact, the agent of the states, constituted to execute their joint wiU, as expressed in the Constitution. In using the terra agent, I do not intend to derogate in any degree from its character as a government. It is as truly and properly a gov ernment as are the state governments themselves. I have applied it simply because it strictly belongs to the relation between the General Gov ernment and the states, as, in fact, it does also to that between a state and its own government. Indeed, according to our theory, governments are in their nature but trusts, and those appointed to administer them trustees or agents to execute the trust powers. The sovereignty re sides elsewhere — in the people, not in the government ; and with us, the people mean the people of the several states originally formed into thirteen distinct and independent communities, and now into twenty- four. Politically speaking, in reference to our own system, there are no other people. The General Government, as well as those of the states, is but the organ of their power : the latter, that of their re spective states, through which are exercised separately that portion of power not delegated by the Constitution, and in the exercise of which •Bch state has a local and peculiar interest ; the former, the joint orgaia 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 201 of all the states confederated into one general community, and through which they jointly and concurrlngly exercise the delegated powers, in which aU have a common interest. Thus viewed, the Constitution of the United States, with the government it created, is truly and strictly the Constitution of each state, as much so as its own particular Consti tution and government, ratified by the same authority, in the same mode, and having, as far as its citizens are concerned, its powers and obligations from the same source, differing only in the aspect, under which I am considering the subject, in the plighted faith of the state to its co-states, and of which, as far as its citizens are considered, the state, in the last resort, is the exclusive judge. Such, then, is the relation between the state and General Govern ment, in whatever light we may consider the Constitution, whether as a compact between the states, or of the nature of the legislative en- actmeut by the joint and concurring authority of the slates in their high sovereignty. Iu whatever light it may be viewed, I hold it as necessarily resulting, that, iu the case of a power disputed between them, the government, as the agent, has no right to enforce its con struction against the construction of the state as one of the sovereign parties' to the Constitution, any more than the state governpient would have against the people of the state in their sovereign capacity, the relation being the same between them. That such would be the case between agent and principal in the ordinary transactions of life, no one wiU doubt, nor will it be possible to assign a reason why it is not as applicable to the case of government as to that of individuals. The principle, in fact, springs from the relation itself, and is applicc^ble to it in all its forms and characters. It may, however, be proper to notice a, distinction between the case of a single principal and his agent, and that of several principals and their joint agent, which might otherwise cause some confusion. In both cases, as between the agent and a prin cipal, the construction of the principal, whether he be a single principal or one of several, is equally conclusive; but, in the latter case, both the principal and the agent bear relation to the other principals, which must be taken into the estimate, in order to understand fully all the results which may grow out of the contest for power between them. Though the construction of the principal is conclusive against the joint agent, as between them, such is not the case between him and his as sociates. They both have an equal right of construction, and it would be the duty of the agent to bring the subject before the principal to be 9* 202 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. adjusteiJ , according to the terms of the instrument of association, and of the principal to submit to such adjustment. In such cases the con tract itself is the law, which musf determine the relative rights and powers of the parties to it. The General Government is a case of joint agency — the joint agent of the twenty-four sovereign states. It would be its duty, according to the principles established in such cases, instead of attempting to enforce its construction of its powers against that of the states, to bring the subject before the states themselves, in the only form which, according to the provision of the Constitution, it can be — by a proposition to amend, in the manner prescribed in the in strument, to be acted on by them in the only mode they can, by ex pressly granting or withholding the contested power. Against this conclusion there can be raised but one objection, — that the states have surrendered or transferred the right in question. If such be the fact, there ought to be no diiEculty in establishing it. The grant of the powers delegated is contained in a written instrument, drawn up with great care, and adopted with the utmost deliberation. It provides that the powers not granted are reserved to the states and the people. If it be surrendered, let the grant be shown, and the controversy will be terminated ; and, surely, it ought to be shown, plainly and clearly shown, before the states are asked to admit wh.it, if true, would not only divest them of a right which, under aU its forms, belongs to the principal over his agent, unless surrendered, but which cannot be sur rendered without in effect, and.for all practical purposes, reversing the relation between them ; putting the agent in the place of the princi pal, and the principiil in that of the agent ; and which would degrade the states from the high and sovereign condition which they have ever held, under every form of their existence, to be mere subordinate and dependent corporations of the government of its own creation. But, instead of showing any such grant, not a provision can be found in the Constitution authorizing the General Government to exercise any con trol whatever over a state by force, by veto, by judicial process, or in any other form — a most important omission, designed, and not acciden tal, and, as will be shown in the course of these remarks, omitted by the dictates of the profoimdest wisdom. The journal and proceedings of the Cojivention which formed the Constitution afford abundant proof that there was in the body a pow erful party, distinguished for talents and influence, intent on obtaining, for the General Government, a grant of the very power in question. 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 203 and that they attempted to effect this object in all possible ways, but fortunately, without success. The first project of a Constitution sub mitted to the Convention (Governor Randolph's) embraced a proposi tion to grant power " to negative all laws contrary, in the opinion of the National Legislature, to the articles of the Union, or any treaty subsisting under the authority of the Union ; and to call forth the force of the Union against any member of the Union failing to fulfil his duty under the articles thereof." The next project submitted (Charles Pinckney's) contained a similar provision. It proposed, "that the Legislature of the United States should have the power to revise the /aws of the several states that may be supposed to infringe the powers exclusively delegated by this Constitution to Congress, and to negative and annul such as do." The next was submitted by Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, which provided, " if any state, or body of men in any state, shaU oppose or prevent the carrying into execution such acts or treaties" (of the Union), " the federal executive shall be authorized to caU forth the powers of the confederated states, or so much thereof as shaU be necessary to enforce, or compel the obedience to such acts, or observance of such treaties." General Hamilton's next succeeded, which declared " all laws of the particular states contrary to the Con stitution or laws of the United States, to be utterly void ; and, the better to prevent such laws being passed, the governor or president of each state shall be appointed by the General Government, and shall have a negative on the laws about to be passed in the state of which he is governor or president." At a subsequent period, a proposition was moved and referred to a committee to provide that " the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court shall extend to all controversies between the United States and any indi vidual state ;" and, at a still later period, it was moved to grant power " to negative all laws passed by the several states interfering, in the opinion of the Legislature, with the general harmony and interest of the Union, provided that two thirds of the members of each house assent to the same," which, after an ineffectual attempt to commit, was withdrawn. I do not deem it necessary to trace through the journals of the Con tention the fate of these various propositions. It is sufficient that they were moved and failed, to prove conclusively, in a manner never to be reversed, that the Convention which framed the Constitution was op posed to granting the power to the General Government in any form. 204 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. through any of its departments, legislative, executive, or judicial, to coerce or control a state, though proposed in all conceivable modes, and sustained by the most talented and influential members of the body This, one would suppose, ought to settle forever the question of the sur render or transfer of the power under consideration ; and such, in fact, would be the case, were the opinion of a large portion of the community not biased, as, in fact, it is, by interest. A majority have almost always a direct interest in enlarging the power of the government, and the in terested adhere to power with a, pertinacity which bids defiance to truth, though sustained by evidence as conclusive as mathematical dem onstration ; and, accordingly, the advocates of the powers of the Gen eral Government, notwithstanding the Impregnable strength of the proof to the contrary, haveboldly claimed, on construction, a power, the grant of which was so perseveringly sought and so sternly resisted by the Convention, They rest the claim on the provisions in the Constitution which declare "that this Constitution, and the laws made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the land," and that "thfe judicial power ,shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shaU be made, under their authority," I do not propose to go into a minute examination of these provisions. They have been so frequently and so ably investigated, and it has been so clearly shown that they do not warrant the assumption of the power claimed for the government, that I do not deem it necessary. I shall, therefore, confine myself to a few detached remarks, I have aheady stated that a distinct proposition was made to confer the very power in controversy on the Supreme Court, which failed ; which of itself ought to overrule the assumption of the power by con struction, unless svistained by the most conclusive arguments ; but when it is added that this proposition was moved (20th August) subsequent to the period of adopting the provisions, above cited, vesting the court with its present powers (18th July), and that an effort was made, at a still later period (23d August), to invest Congress with a negative on all state laws which, in its opinion, might interfere with the general in terest and harmony of the Union, the argument would seem too con clusive against the powers of the court to be overruled by construction however strong. Passing by, however, this, and also the objection that the terms cases in law and equity are technical, embracing only questions between 1824-32.] LETTER yo governor HAMILTON. 205 parties amenable to the process of the court, and, of course, excluding questions between the states and the General Government — an argu ment which has never been answered — there remains another objection perfectly conclusive. The construction which would confer on the Supreme Court the power in question, rests on the ground that the Constitution has conferred on that tribunal the high and important right of deciding on the constitu tionality of laws. That it possesses this power I do not deny, but I do utterly deny that it is conferred by the Constitution, either by the pro visions above cited, or any other. It is a power derived from the ne cessity of the case ; and, so far from being possessed by the Supreme Court exclusively or pecuharly, it not only belongs to every court of the country, high or low, civil or criminal, but to aU foreign courts, before which a case may be brought bivolving the construction of a law which may conflict with the previsions of the Constitution. The reason is plain. Where there are two sets of rules prescribed in reference to the same subject, one by a higher and the other by an inferior authority, the judicial tribunal called in to decide on the case must unavoidably deter mine, should they conffict, which is the law ; and that necessity compels it to decide that the rule prescribed by the inferior power, if in its opinion inconsistent with that of the higher, is void, be it a coniUct be tween the Constitution and a law, or between a charter and the by-laws of a corporation, or any other higher and inferior authority. The prin ciple and source of authority are the same in all such cases. Being de rived from necessity, it is restricted within its limits, and cannot pass an inch beyond the narrow confines of deciding in a case before the Court, and, of course, between parties amenable to its process, excluding thereby ,political questions, which of the two is, in reality, the law, the act of Congress or the Constitution, when on their face they are incon sistent ; and yet, from this resulting limited power, derived from ne cessity, and held in common with every court in the world which, by possibility, may take cognizance of a case involving the interpretation of our Constitution and laws, it is attempted to confer on the Supreme Com-t a power which would work a thorough aud«-adical change in our system, and which, moreover, was positively refused by the Conven tion, The opinion that the General Government has the right to enforce its construction of its powers against a state, in any mode whatever, is, in truth, founded on a fundamental misconception of our system. At the 206 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. bottom of this, and, in fact, almost every other misconception as to the relation between the states and the General Government, lurks the radical error, that the latter is a national, and not, as in reality it is, a confederated government; and that it derives its powers from a higher source than the states. There are thousands influenced by these im pressions without being conscious of it, and who, while they believe them selves to be opposed to consolidation, have infused into their conception of our Constitution almost all the ingredients which inter into that form of government. The striking difference between the present govern ment and that under the old confederation (I speak of governments as distinct from constitutions) has mainly contributed to this dangerous im pression. But, howeyer dissimilar their governments, the present Con stitution is as far removed from consolidation, and is as strictly and as purely a confederation, as the one which it superseded. Like the old confederation, it was formed and ratified by state au thority. The only difference in this particular is, that one was ratified by the people of the states, and the other by the state governments ; one forming strictly a union of the state governments, the other of the states themselves ; one, of the agents exercising the powers of sove reignty, and the other of the sovereigns themselves ; but both were unions of political bodies, a.? distinct from a union of the people individ ually. They are, indeed, both confederations, but the present in a higher and purer sense than that which it succeeded, just as the act of a sovereign is higher and more perfect than that of his agent ; and it was, doubtless, in reference to this difference that the preamble of the Constitution, and the address of the Convention laying the Constitution before Congress, speak of consolidating and perfecting the Union ; yet this difference, which, while it elevated the General Government in re lation to the state governments, placed it more immediately in the relation of the creature and agent of the states themselves, by a natural misconception, has been the principal cause of the impression so preva lent of the inferiority of the states to the General Government, and of the consequent right of the latter to coerce the former. Raised from below to the same level with the state governments, it was conceived to be placed above the states themselves, I have now, I trust, conclusively shown that a state has a right, in her sovereign capacity, in convention, to declare an unconstitutional act of Congress to be null and void, and that such declarations would be obUgatory on her citizens, as highly so as the Constitution itself, and 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 207 conclusive against the General Government, which would have no right to enforce its construction of its powers against that of the state. I next propose to consider the practical effect of the exercise of this high and important right — which, as the great conservative principle of our system, is known under the various names of nulUfioatioo, inter position, and state veto — in reference to its operation viewed under different aspects : nulUfication, as declaring null an unconstitutional act of the General Government, as far as the state is concerned ; inter position, as throwing the shield of protection between the citizens of a state and the encroachments of the Government ; and veto, as arrest ing or inhibiting its imauthorized acts within the limits of the state. The practical effect, if the right was fully recognized, would be plain and simple, and has already, in a gi-eat measure, been anticipated. If the state has a right, there must, of necessity, be a corresponding obU gation on the part of the General Government to acquiesce in its exer cise ; and, of course, it would be its duty to abandon the power, at least as far as the state is concerned, to compromise the difficulty, or apply to the states themselves, according to the form prescribed in the Constitution, to obtain the power by a grant. If granted, acquies cence, then, would be a duty on the part of the state ; and, in that event, the contest would terminate in converting u. doubtful constructive power into one positively granted ; but, should it not be granted, no alternative would remain for the General Government but a com promise or its permanent abandonment In either event, the contro versy would be closed and the Constitution fixed ; a result of the utmost importance to the steady operation of the government and the stabiUty of the system, and which can never be attained, under its pres ent operation, without the recognition of the right, as experience has shown. From the adoption of the Constitution, we have had but one con tinued agitation of constitutional questions embracing some of the most important powers exercised by the government ; and yet, in spite of aU the abiUty and force of argument displayed in the various dis cussions, backed by the high authority claimed for the Supreme Court to adjust such controversies, not a single constitutional question, of a poUtical character, which has ever been agitated during this long period, has been settled in the public opinion, except that of the uncon stitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Law ; and, what is remarkable, that was settled against the decision of the Supreme Court, The tend- 208 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. ency is to increase, and not diminish, this conflict for power. New questions are yearly added without diminishing the old ; while the con test becomes more obstinate as the list increases, and, what is highly ominous, more sectional It is impossible that the government can last under this increasing diversity of opinion, and growing uncertainty as to its power in relation to the most important subjects of legislation ; and equally so, that this dangerous state can terminate without a power somewhere to compel, in effect, the government to abandon doubtful constructive powers, or to convert them into positive grants by an amendment of the Constitution ; in a word, to substitute the positive grants of the parties themselves for the constructive powers interpolated by the agents. Nothing short of this, in a system con structed as ours is, with a double set of agents, one for local and the other for general purposes, can ever terminate the conflict for power, or give uniformity and stability to its action. Such would be the practical and happy operation were ths right recognized ; but the case is far otherwise ; and as the right is not only denied, but violently opposed, the General Government, so far from acquiescing in its exercise, and abandoning the power, as it ought, may endeavor, by all the means within its command, to enforce its construc tion against that of the state. It is under this aspect of the question that I now propose to consider the practical effect of the exercise of the right, with the view to determine which of the two, the state or the General Government, must prevail in the conflict ; which compels me to revert to some of the grounds already estabhshed. I have already shown that the declaration of nullification would be obligatory on the citizens of the state, as much so, in fact, as its decla ration ratifying the Constitution, resting, as it does, on the same basis. It would to them be the highest possible evidence that the power con tested was not granted, and, of course, that the act of the General Government was unconstltutionaL They would be bound, in all the relations of Ufe, private and political, to respect and obey it ; and, when called upon as jurymen, to render their verdict accordingly, or, as judges, to pronounce judgment in conformity to it The right of jury trial is secured by the Constitution (thanks to the jealous spirit of Uberty, doubly secured and fortified) ; and, with this inestimable right — inestimable, not only as an essential portion of the judicial tribunals of the country, but infinitely more go, considered as a popular, and still more, a, local representation, iu that department of the government 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 209 which, without it, would be the farthest removed firom the control of the people, and a fit instrument to sap the foundation of the system — with, I repeat, this inestimable right, it would be impossible for the General Government, within the limits of the state, to execute, legally, the act nullified, or any other passed with a view to enforce it ; while, on the other hand, the state would Jje able to enforce, legally and peaceably, its declaration of nullification. Sustained by its court ami juries, it would calmly and quietly, but successfully, meet every effort of the General Goverement to enforce its claim of power. The result would be inevitable. Before the judicial tribunal of the country, the state must prevail, unless, indeed, jury trial could be eluded by the refinement of the court, or by some other device ; which, however, guarded as it is by the ramparts of the Constitution, would, I hold, be impossible. The attempt to elude, should it be made, would itself be unconstitutional ; and, in turn, would be annulled by the sovereign voice of the state. Nor would the right of appeal to the Supreme Court, under the judiciary act, avail the General Government. If taken, it woidd but end in a new trial, and that in another verdict against the govemmeut ; but whether it may be taken, would be op tional with the state. The court itself has decided that a copy of the record is requisite to review a judgment of a state comrt, and, if neces sary, the state would take the precaution to prevent, by proper enact ments, any means of obtaining a copy. But if obtained, what would it avail against the execution of the penal enactments of the state, in tended to enforce the declaration of nulUfication ? The judgment of the state court would be pronounced and executed before the possibUity of a reversal, and executed, too, without responsibiUty incurred by any ona Beaten before the courts, the General Government would be com- peUed to abandon its unconstitutional pretensions, or resort to force : a resort, the difficulty (I was about to say, the impossibiUty) of which would very soon fully manifest itself, should foUy or madness ever make the attempt. In considering this aspect of the controversy, I pass over the fact that the General Government has no right to resort to force against a state — to coerce a sovereign member of the Union — ^whidi, I trust, I have estabhshed beyond all possible doubt. Let it, however, be deter mined to use force, and the diffictdty would be insurmountable, tmless, indeed, it be also determined to set aside the Constitution, and to sub- %-est the system to its foundations. 210 JOHN CALDWEtL CALHOUN. [1824- Against whom would it be applied ? Congress has, it is true, right to caU forth the mibtia " to execute the laws and suppress in rection ;" but there would.be no law resisted, unless, indeed, it be ca resistance for the juries to refuse to find, and the courts to rei Judgment, in conformity to the wishes of the General Government insurrection to suppress ; no armed force to reduce ; not a sword sheathed ; not a bayonet raised ; none, absolutely none, on whom i could be used, except it be on the unarmed citizens engaged peacei and quietly in their daily occupations. No one would be guilty of treason (" levying war against the Ui States, adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort"), or other crime made penal by the Constitution or the laws of the Ui States. To suppose that force could be caUed in, implies, indeed, a g mistake, both as to the nature of our government and that of the troversy. It would be a legal and constitutional contest — a conflic moral, and not physical force — a trial of constitutional, not miU power, to be decided before the judicial tribunals of the country. Dot on the field of battle. In such contest, there would be no obj'ec force, but those peaceful tribunals^nothing on which it coulc employed, but in putting down courts and juries, and preventing execution of judicial process. Leave these untouched, and aU miUtia that could be called forth, backed by a regular force of ten t the number of our small, but gallant and patriotic array, could have the slightest effect on the result of the controversy ; but subvert t by an armed body, and you subvert the very foundation of this free, constitutional, and legal system of government, and rear ii place a military despotism. ' Feeling the force of these difficulties, it is proposed, with the vie suppose, of disembarrassing the operation, as much as possible, of troublesome interference of courts and juries, to change the scen< coercion from land to water; as if the government could have particle more right to coerce a state by water than by land ; but, ur I am greatly deceived, the difficulty on that element will not be n less than on the other. The jury trial, at least the local jury ¦ (the trial by the vicinage), may, indeed, be evaded there, but ir place other, and not much less formidable, obstacles must be enci tered. There can be but two modes of coercion resorted to by wat« 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON 211 blockade and aboUtion of the ports of entry of the state, accompanied by penal enactments, authorizing seizures for entering the waters of the state. If the former be attempted, there will be other parties besides the General Government and the state. Blockade is a belligerent right : it presupposes a state of war, and, unless there be war (war in due form, as prescribed by the Constitution), the order for blockade would not be respected by other nations or their subjects. Theu- vessels would proceed directly for the blockaded port, with certain prospect!* of gain ; if seized under the order of blockade, through the claim of indemnity against the General Government; and, if not, by a profitable market, without the exaction of duties. The other mode, the abolition of the ports of entry of the state, would also have its difficulties. The Constitution provides that "no preference shaU be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another ; nor shall vessels bound to or from one state be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another :" provisions too clear to be eluded even by the force of construction. There wiU be another difficulty. If seizures be made in port, or within the distance assigned by the laws of nations as the Umits of a state, the trial must be in the state, with all the emban-assments of its courts and juries ; while beyond the ports and the distance to which I have refen-ed, it would be difficult to poiut out any principle by which a foreign vessel, at least, could be seized, except as an incident to the right of blockade, and, of course, with all the difficulties belonging to that mode of coercion. But there yet remains another, and, I doubt not, insuperable barrier, to be found in the judicial tribunals of the Union, against all the schemes of introducing force, whether by land or water. Though I cannot concur in the opinion of those who regard the Supreme Court as the mediator appointed by the Constitution between the states and the General Government ; and though I cannot doubt there is a natural bias on its part towards the powers of the latter, yet I must greatly lower my opinion of that high and important tribimal for inteUigence, justice, and attachment to the Constitution, and particularly of that pure and upright magistrate who has so long, and with such distinguished honor to himself and the Union, presided over its deliberations, with all the weight that belongs to an intellect of the first order, united -with the most spotless integrity, to beUeve, for a moment, that an attempt so plainly and manifestly unconstitutional as a resort to force would be in 212 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. such a contest, could be sustained by the sanction of its authority. In whatever form force may be used, it must present questions for legal adjudication. If in the shape of blockade, the vessels seized under it must be condemned, and thus would be presented the question of prize or no prize, and, with it, the legality of the blockade ; if in that of a repeal of the acts establishing ports of entries in the state, the legality of the seizure must be determined, and that would bring up the ques tion of the constitutionality of giving a preference to the ports of one state over those of another ; and so, if we pass from water to land, we will find every attempt there to substitute force for law must, in like manner, come under the review of the courts of the Union ; and the unconstitutionality would be so glaring, that the executive and legisLi- tive departments, in their attempt to coerce, should either make an attempt so lawless and desperate, would be without the support of the judicial department I will not pursue the question f.irther, as I hold it perfectly clear that, so long as a state retains its federal relations ; so long, in a word, as it continues a member of the Union, the contest between it and the (rcMieral Government must be before the courts and juries ; and evei'y attempt, in whatever form, whether by land or water, to substitute force as the arbiter in their place, must fail. The uncon stitutionality of the attempt would be so open and palpable, that it would be impossible to sustain it. There is, indeed, one view, and one only, of the contest in which force could be employed ; but that view, as between the parties, would supersede the Constitution itself: that nullification is secession, and would, consequently, place the state, as to the others, in the relation of a foreign state. Such, clearly, would be the effect of secession ; but it is equally clear that it would place the state beyond the pale of all her federal relations, and, thereby, all control on the part of the other states over her. She would stand to them simply in the relation of a foreign state, divested of all federal connection, and having none other between them but those belonging to the laws of nations. Standing thus towards one another, force might, indeed, be employed against a state, but it must be a, belligerent force, preceded by a declaration of war, and carried on with aU its formalities. Such would be the certain effect of secession ;^ and if nullification be secession — if it be but a different name for the same thing— such, too, must be its effect ; which presents the highly important question. Are they, in fact, the same*? on the decision nf which depends the question whether it be a peaceable and constitu- 1824-32,] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 213 tional remedy, that may be exercised without terminating the federal relations of the state or not. I am aware that there is a considerable and respectable portion of our state, with a very large portion of the Union, constituting, in fact, a great majority, who are of the opinion that they are the same thing, differing only in name, aud who, under that impression, denounce it as the most dangerous of all doctrines ; ."ind yet, so far from being the saijie, they are, unless, indeed, I am greatly deceived, not only perfectly distinguishable, but totally dissimilar in their nature, their object, and effect; and that, so fir from deserving the denunciation, so properly belonging to the act with which it is confounded, it is, in truth, the highest and most precious of ail the rights of the states, and essential to preserve that very Union, for the supposed effect of destroying which it is so bitterly anathematized, I shall now proceed to make good my assertion of their total dis similarity. Firsts they are wholly dissinjiiar iu their nature. One has reference to the parties the^nsehes, and the other iu titi.ir agents. Secession is a witlidrawal from the Union : a separation itom partners, and, as far as depends on the member withdi awing, a dissolution of the partnership. It presupposes an association ; a union of several states or individuals for a common object. Wherever these exist, secession may ; and where they do not, it cannot. Nullification, on the contraiy, presupposes the relation of principal and agent : the one granting a power to be ex ecuted, the other, appointed by him with authority to execute it ; and is simply a declaration on- the part of the principal, made in due form, that an act of the agent transcending his poiiier is null and void. It is a right belonging exclusively to the relation between principal and agent, to be found wherever it exists, and in all its forms, between sev eral, or an association of principals, and their joint agents, as weU as between a single principal and his agent. The difference in their object is no less striking than in their nature. The object of secession is to free the withdrawing member from the obligation of the association or union, and is applicable to cases where the object of the association or union has failed, either by, an abuse of power on the part of its members, or other causes. Its direct and vn- mediate object, as it concerns the vnthdrawlng ¦}npmher, Is the dissolution of the association or union, as far as it is cr)ncer-oed. On the contrary, the object of nuUification is to confine the agent within the limits of his 314 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. powers, by arresting his acts transcending them, not with the viea of destroying the delegated or trust power, but to preserve it, by compel ling the agent to fulfil the object for lohich the agency or trust was cre ated; and is applicable only to cases where the trust or delegated powers are transcended on the part of the agent. Without the power of seces sion, an association or union, formed for the common good of all the members, might prove ruinous to some, by the abuse of power on the part of the others ; and without nullification the agent might, under color of construction, assume a power never intended to be delegated, or to convert those delegated to objects never intended to be compre hended in the trust, to the ruin of the principal, or, in Case of a jojnt agency, to the ruin of some of the principals. Each has, thus, its ap propriate object, but objects in their nature very dissimilar ; so much so, that, in case of an association or union, where the powers are del egated to be executed by an agent, the abuse of power, on the part of the agent, to the injury of one or more of the members, would not justify secession on their part The rightful remedy in that case would be nullification. Tliere would be neither right nor pretext to secede ! not right, because .secession is applicable only to the acts of the mem bers of the association or union, and not to the act of the agent ; nor pretext, because there Is another, and equally efficient remedy, short of the dissolution of the association or union, which can only be justi fied by necessity. Nullification may, indeed, be succeeded by secession. In the case stated, should the other members undertake to grant the power nullified, and should tlie nature of the power be such as to defeat the object of the associatinn nv iiiiion, at least as far as the member nub Ufying is concerned, it would then become an abuse of power on the part of the principals, and thus present a, case Where secession would apply ; but in no other could it be justified, except it be for a failure of the association or union to effect the object for Which it Was Created, independent of any abuse of power. It now remains to show that their effect is as dissimilar as their nature or object, NulUfication leaves the members of the association or union in the cnmlitlon It fuilnd them — subject to all its burdens, and entitled to all its advuutagob, compreheudiiig the member nullifying as well as the others — its object being, not to destroy, but to preserve, as has been stated. Tt simply arrests the act of the agent, as far as tte principal is concerned, leaving in every other respect the operation of the joint 1824-32.] LETTER TO GOVERNOR HAMILTON. 215 concern as before ; secession, on the contrary, destroys, as far as the withdra-wing member is concerned, the association or union, and re stores him to the relation he occupied towards the other members be fore the existence of the association or union. He loses the benefit, but is released from the burden and control, and can bo longer be dealt -with, by his former associates, as one of its members. Such are clearly the differences between them — differences so marked, that, instead of being identical, as supposed, they form a con trast in all the aspects in which they can be regarded. The appUca- tion of these remarks to the poUtical association or Union of these twenty-four states and the General Government, their joint agent, is too obvious, after what has been already said, to require any additional illustration, and I wUl dismiss this part of the subject with a single additional remark. There are many who acknowledge the right of a state to secede, but ¦pinion can possibly check it They, in fact, but tend to aggravate the disease. It seems really surprising that truths so obvious should be so iaiperfectly understood. Tliere would appear, indeed, a feebleness in our intellectual powers on poUtical sub jects when directed to lai-ge masses. We readily see why a single indi vidual, as a ruler, would, if not prevented, oppress the rest of the com munity ; but are at a loss to understand why seven millions would, if not also prevented, oppress six millions, as if the relative members on either side could in the least degree vary the principle. In stating what I have, I have but repeated the experience of ages, comprehending aU free governments preceding ours, and ours as far as it has advanced The pkaotical operation of ours has been substan tially on the principle of the absolute majority. We have acted, with some exceptions, as if the General Government had the right to in terpret its own powers, without limitation or check ; and though manj cirumstances have favored us, and greatly impeded the natural pro gress of events, under such an operation of the system, yet we already see, in whatever direction we turn our eyes, the growing symptoms oi disorder and decay — the growth of faction, cupidity, and corruption; and the decay of patriotism, integrity, and disinterestedness. In the midst of youth, we see the flushed cheek, and the short and feverish breath, that mark the approach of the fatal hour ; and come it will, unless there be a speedy and radical change — a return to the great con servative principle which brought the Republican party into authoiity, but which, with the possession of power and prosperity, it has long ceased to remember. I have now finished the task which your request imposed. If I liaye been so fortunate as to add to your fund a single new illustration 232 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. of this great conservative principle of our government, or to furnisb an additional argument calculated to sustain the state in her noble and patriotic struggle to revive and maintain it, and in which you have acted a part long to be remembered by the friends of freedom, I shall feel amply compensated for the time occupied in so long a communica tion. I believe the cause to be the cause of truth and justice, of union, Uberty, and the Constitution, before which the ordinary party struggles of the day sink into perfect insignificance ; and that it will be so re garded by the most distant posterity, I have not the slightest doubt. With great and sincere regard, I am yours, &c., dec, John 0. Calhoun. His Excellency James Hamilton, Jun., Governor of South Carolina. This elaborate production exhausted the whole argu ment in defence of the position assumed by Mr. Cal houn, and, with his address, was regarded as a political text book by the nullifiers of South Carolina. They looked upon it as their Magna Charta, which promised them deliverance from wrong and oppression, and be hind which were safety and protection. Before proceeding further, let us see what was in truth the position of Mr. Calhoun ; for upon no subject was he more frequently misrepresented, and none of the great constitutional questions which have been agitated, is so little understood at this day in many sections of the Union : — He held, then, 1. that the federal constitution was a compact adopted and ratified by and between the states, in their sovereign capacities as states ; 2. that the general government contemplated and authorized by this constitution was the mere agent of the states in the execution of certain delegated powers, in regard to the extent of which the states themselves were the final judges ; and 3. that when the reserved powers were in- 1824-32.] HIS POSITION. 233 fringed by the general government, or the delegated powers abused, its principals, the states, possessed the right of state interposition or nullification, otherwise there would be no remedy for any usurpation of the re served or abuse of the delegated powers. These were the great leading features of Mr. Calhoun's creed, and he claimed that the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, and Mr. Madison's report, fully sustained him in the position he had assumed. And it is diffi6ult to see wherein they did not thus sustain him. The Virginia resolutions declared, i-n express terms, the right of the states to interpose, whenever their reserved powers were infringed, and to maintain " within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties, ap pertaining to them ;" and in the Kentucky resolutions, Mr. Jefferson held, " that in all cases of an abuse of delegated powers, the members of the general govern ment being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy ; but where powers are assumed, which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy that every state has a natural right to, in cases not in the compact (casus non foederis), to nullify, of their own authority, all assumptions of powers within their limits." Such was the platform laid down by Jefferson and Madison, the great founders of the Republican party, and upon which Mr. Calhoun planted himself His views were, of course, diametrically opposed to the consolida tion doctrines of the federal school of politicians ; and with respect to the minor questions collateral to, or growing out of, these first principles, the difference was as broad and as well-defined. Among Republicans, 234 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. however, the State Rights doctrines were generally popular, during the nullification controversy, and they have since become even more so, in consequence of the able and convincing expositions of Mr. Calhoun. But the great majority of his old political friends, out of the state of South Carolina, differed with him as to the ap plication of those doctrines. He insisted, that the power delegated to Congress by the constitution, of laying taxes, duties, imposts and excises, was limited, by its terms, to the following purposes — the payment of the debts and providing for the defence and general welfare of the United States :^he admitted the power of Congress to impose duties for revenue, but denied it for protection. On the other side it was said, that the right to impose duties for protection existed somewhere ; that the fed eral constitution expressly took away from the states the power to lay imposts or duties on imports or ex ports ;+ and that, as this power could not be utterly extinct, it must be lodged in the general government. J To this Mr. Calhoun replied, that the idea of protecting the domestic interests of the country was not contem plated by the framers of the constitution ;;¦ that every tariff" prior to 1816 was a revenue tariff"] and that the cession of the public lands by the states to the general government was made to enable it to pay the public debt, and that this cession would have been unnecessary for such a purpose, if a high protective tariflf was thought to be constitutional. , All the opponents of Mr. Calhoun in the Republican party, did not maintain that a tariff", with protection as its primary feature, was con- * Article i.. Section 8, f Ibid, Section If). % Annual Message of President Jackson, 1880. 1824-32.] PROTECTION. 235 sti^utional. This doctrine was held by the northern .ederalists, and by only a small portion of the friends of the administration of General Jackson. The Republi cans, generally, agreed that revenue should be the con- troUing consideration; but many, and perhaps all wno were not nullifiers, thought that it was proper, in the im position of duties, to discriminate for purposes of pro tection. This, too, Mr. Calhoun regarded as an error, for discrimination for protection was neither more nor less than protection itself — not so glaring, not so unjust, it might be — yet involving the same identical principle. Admitting that the words " general welfare" in the constitution, as has been contended by many, would appear to authorize a tariff" for the protection of domes tic interests : is it true that the general welfare, which obviously means the good of the whole, the benefit and advantage of each and every of the states, equally and alike, can be promoted by a protective tariff"? Prob ably no question has given rise to more sophistry, to greater or more absurd fallacies, than this. Many specious arguments, the arguments of chance or cir- cuinstance, have been resorted to by the advocates of protection, but they may all be embraced in a few prop ositions. In the first place, it is said, that a protective tariff" reduces the prices of manufactured goods, and as the evidence of this, the friends of protection point to the diff"erence in the cost of certain articles, previous to 1816, and at the present time. But this is all decep tion. The establishment of manufactories in this coun try may have contributed in a very slight degree to re duce prices, but the great causes of this reduction are 236 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. to be found in the improvements in machinery origina ting in the inventive genius of Arkwright, Danforth, Montgomery, Gore, and Roberts, and in the wonderfully increased facilities for the production, and consequent cheapness, of the raw material. One of two things is self-evident : — the duty upon an article either increases the cost to the consumer, or else it aff"ords no protection. If an article can be imported this year and sold at one dollar, and if a duty is next year imposed upon it, all things entering into or making up the value of the article remaining unchanged, the price in the market is increased, — by the amount of protection, if the duty be a prohibitory one, and if less than that, by the amount of the duty itself So obvious is this, that the contrary proposition carries with it, in its absurdity, its own ref utation. In the second place, it is urged, that a protective tariff" aff"ords a home-market for agricultural products. But is this so ? The agricultural interest all admit to be the great interest of the country ; but facts show, that no home-market has ever yet been afforded to it by a pro tective tariff". Centuries must elapse, if, indeed, that time ever arrives, before our agricultural products will all be consumed at home. There is a large amount of surplus produce annually disposed of in foreign mar kets. In 1847, there were produced in the United States, 694,491,700 bushels of grain used for bread- stuflfs, of which the surplus for exportation amounted to 224,384,.502 bushels, or nearly one third of the whole amount.* During the year ending the 31st of August, 1849, there were 2,227,844 bales of cotton exported from * Report of the Commissioner of Patents, January, 1848. 1824-32.] EVILS OP THE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM. 237 the United States to foreign ports, while the much boasted home-market consumed but 520,000 bales, not one fifth part of the whole production.* The value of the domestic exports of the United States during the year ending on the 30th of June, 1849, was $ 1 32,666,955, f of which the agricultural products amounted to fill, - 059,378, or more than three fourths of the whole amount.J In view of these facts, no unprejudiced person can for a moment consider the vast territorial extent of these states, and the variety and amount of their productions, without being forcibly impressed with the conviction that a home-market is entirely out of the question. The manner in which a protective tariff" operates to the prejudice of the farmer and planter is this : — the prices obtained for their surplus in foreign markets constitute the standard of value for the whole production. The internal trade, that of the home-mar ket, is. mere barter ; but the foreign trade is the true commercial traific which regulates and controls prices. The value of breadstuff"s is not determined in the city of New York, but in the foreign markets where the sur plus is disposed of; and the prices of cotton at Charles ton, Mobile, and New Orleans, are not made at Provi dence or Lowell, but at Liverpool and Manchester. Restrictions upon the trade with foreign countries, in the shape of high duties, are therefore injurious to the agricultural interest generally, and are in eff"ect a tax * Hunt's Merchants' Magazine. f The total value of the exports, of domestic and foreign produce, was |145,'765,820. X House of IRepresentatives, Exec. Doc. IS— 'Ist session, Slsi Oon- groM— pp. SQ, 81. 238 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. upon it to the amount of the increased prices of the protected articles consumed by it ; in the southern and planting states they are felt to be particularly oppressive, because nearly one half of the domestic exports of the country are produced there, the value of the rice, cotton and tobacco, exported in the year ending June 30, 1849, amounting to about seventy-five millions of dollars, con siderably more than one half of the whole exports dur ing that period.* Again, it is contended, that without a protective tariff" the balance of trade is against us. It is very questionable, whether it would in fact be desirable to have the balance of trade always in our favor, for if we drew ten millions of dollars annually from foreign coun tries, their supplies of specie would soon be exhausted, and trade would be at an end. Any one who will examine the tables of imports and exports for the last sixty years, will find that the balance has sometimes been in our favor, and sometimes against us — one way this year, and another the next ; and that it has been greater against us, under the operation of a protective tariff", than under the revenue tariff" of 1846. It was so after the passage of the acts of 1816. 1824, and 1828 ; the same thing was witnessed, too, after the passage of the compromise act, while the prolective duties were collected, though the balance was in this case increased by the excessive importations induced by the specula ting tendencies of the times. After the act of 1842 had gone fairly into operation, in 1845 and 1846, the balance was decidedly against us ; but for three years subse- * House of Representatives, Exec. Doc. 16 — Ist session, 31st Con- gr«st~-pp, SO, SI, 1824-32.] BALANCE OF TRADE. ,439 quent to 1846 the net balance was in our favor.* But this idea in regard to the balance of trade is all delusive ; for among the imports are included various items which enter into the substantial wealth of the country, — such as the goods and eff"ects of immigrants, gold and silver sent here to be invested, or the avails of exports sold or of loans obtained for the construction of public works. It is further said, that we need a high tariff" to pro tect our laborers and mechanics against the pauper labor of Europe. This is the worst of all arguments, because it is agrarian in its character and tendency. Without doubt, the labor of the country is the basis and support of its capital, — that is, the means of production constitute its real wealth. Labor, then, is deserving of encouragement and protection ; but a protective tariff" is designed to favor only a class of laborers, and not the whola. Hence it must be partial and unjust, and the protection afforded to the comparatively small number of laborers engaged in manufactures is a tax upon the industry of the great mass of laborers. This, also, operates with peculiar hardship in the great staple states at the south, where the avails of labor are sent abroad to a foreign market. * The following is a table of the imports and exports for three years subsequent to the passage of the act of 1846 ; 1841 1848. 1849. Imports. Exjftrts. 1146,545,638 $158,648,622 154,977,876 164,032,131 147,857,439 145,755,820 $449,380,953 $458,436,573 449,380,953 STst balanc« in fawxr of V. 9. $9,066,620 240 . JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. A strong argument against the protective tariff's known in the legislation of this country, is to be found in the deceptive features introduced by those who framed them, and which would not have appeared if they had been in themselves just and proper. Of this character are the specific and minimum duties. By the former, articles of very unequal value pay the same duty, which is as palpably unjust as it would be for an assessor to value all the farms in his town or district at the same price, though their actual worth varied from one thousand to one hundred thousand dollars. The minimum principle operates in this way : A duty of perhaps twenty per cent, is imposed on cotton goods, which would seem to the farmer and laborer a quite moderate one ; but to ascertain the actual amount of duty, a system of false valuations is adopted, and all cotton cloth worth less than twenty cents the square yard is valued at twenty cents. Upon this false valua tion the duty is calculated ; as for instance, a yard of cotton cloth, whose actual cost is but four cents, is valued at twenty cents, and a duty of twenty per cent. on this valuation is four cents the yard — thus making the duty in fact one hundred per cent, instead of twenty per cent. It may be said that this duty is a prohibitory one, and therefore it matters not what it may amount to. So ipnuch the worse. If the duty be prohibitory, let it be avowed, and let the bill declare it to be fifty, sixty, eighty, or one hundred per cent., as may be in tended, and not by means of this deceptive feature, lead those who do not understand the subject, to suppose that the duty is only twenty per cent. In regard to the remedy for the evils complained of, 1824-32.] REDUCTION OF DUTIES. 241 Mr. Calhoun and the nullifiers also diff"ered from their republican friends in other states. He held that the right of interposition by a state was immediate upon an infringement of her reserved powers; while they thought it to be "the -rightful remedy" only in the last resort, and that an appeal should first be made to the other state governments to redress the wrong before adopting any measures of resistance. This course was recommended by Mr. Jeff"erson in the Kentucky reso lutions, although he did not declare it to be absolutely requisite. If Mr. Calhoun erred, however, in the con struction of this great republican doctrine, and in the ipplication of the principles of the republican creed, he was sincere in that error. His attachment to the Uniot was firm and devoted ; he ardently desired to see it perpetuated ; and no definite steps were taken by South Carolina toward the protection of what she conceived .o be her just rights, until the expiration of four years ifter the passage of the act of 1 828. While the state was thus agitated with the throes of .ncipient revolution, a ray of hope shot athwart the be clouded sky. The law of 1828 was far more productive of revenue than had been anticipated by its framers ; the public debt was being rapidly extinguished ; and the treasury was seriously threatened with plethora. The disposition of the constantly accumulating surplus of revenue was of the first importance, and it was gen erally conceded by statesmen of all parties that a reduc tion of duties ought forthwith to be made. The surplus might have been absorbed by a vast increase of the ex penditures, but this no party would toie. ate. In his annual message, therefore, in December, 1831, Presi- 11 242 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-82: dent Jackson announced- that the public debt woul^ soon be entirely discharged, and recotiamended the re duction of the duties in order tO' relieve the people from unnecessary taxation. So' apparent was the necessity 'for a retrograde move ment, that all appeared to concur in it, and at this session of Congress the act of 1832 was passed. This bill was declared to be the ultimatum of the friends of protection, and was intended by the immediate friends of the administration, and by the opposition beaded by Mr. Clay, as a final adjtjstment of the duties. The re duction made by the bill was rather imaginary than real. The duties upon the protected articles were aug mented, while those on the unprotected articles were alone diminished. So far, therefore, from abandoning the principle of protection, it was presented in this bill in the most odious form. Mr. Calhoun and his friends would have been content with the present reduction, if a prospective reduction to the revenue standard had Leen contemplated ; but instead of this, it was declared that the bill should be the permanent system of revenue after the extinguishment of the debt. Immediately after the passage of the bilJ, the repre sentatives frona the state of South Carolina who thought with Mr. Calhoun, that nullification was the rightful remedy, issued an address to the people of the state, advising them that the protecting system might now be regarded as the settled policy of the country, and that all hope of relief from Congress was irrecoverably gone. The people of South Carolina were not unanimous in sustaining, the positions assumed by Mr. Calhoun. A small party calling themselves Unionists, embracing 1824-32.] S^ TTU CAROLINA CONVENTION. 243 several popular and inflluential men, among whom were ex-Governor Manning, Judge Smith, Colonel Drayton, Mr. Pettigru, and Mr. Poinsett, had been formed, and, aided by the whole weight of the influence and patronage pf the federal executive, they entered with zeal into the canvass preceding the annual election. A fierce and violent contest ensued, which terminated in the choice of a large majority of nullifiers to the state legislature. Mr. Calhoun was not, in the meanwhile, an idle or indiff"erent spectator. He did not withhold his counsel or advice, and no one individual contributed more powerfully than he to this result. It had all along been conceded by the Unionists that the State Rights party were in the ascendant, and the great struggle at the election was to prevent the latter from obtaining the constitutional majority in the legis lature. Without a majority of two thirds a convention could not be called, and this was the only mode in which, as the nullifiers admitted, the people of the state could declare an act of the United States unconstitutional and void. The State Rights party, however, returned more than the constitutional number to both houses. The legislature convened on the 22d of October, 1832,'and the first business of the session was the passage of a law authorizing the election of delegates to a State Conven tion, to meet at Columbia on the 19th day of November following. / Delegates were accordingly chosen, and the Conven- ' tion was held at the appointed time. On the 24th instant they adopted the celebrated Ordinance of Nulli fication, declaring the acts of 1828 and 1832 absolutely null and void, within the state of South Carolina ; pro- 244 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1824-32. viding that no appeal should be permitted to the Su preme Court of the United States upon any question concerning the validity of the ordinance, or of the laws that might be passed to give eff"ect thereto ; prohibiting the authorities of the state, or of the general govern ment, from enforcing the payment of duties within the state, from and after the 1st day of February, 1833; and declaring that any attempt to enforce the revenue laws, otherwise than through the civil tribunals, would be inconsistent with the longer continuance of South Carolina in the Union, and the people of the state would then proceed forthwith to the formation of an indepen dent government.* This ordinance was accompanied by two addresses— one to the people of South Carolina, and the other to the people of the other states in the Union — setting forth the motives which had prompted the adoption of the ordinance, and the principles upon which it was founded. These proceedings were had with the knowledge, and in part under the advice, of Mr. Calhoun ; and, consequently, they met with his ap probation. The Convention then adjourned to meet again in March, after the adjournment of Congress. The South Carolina legislature being still in session, the necessary laws to give effect to the ordinance were passed ; and as it had been threatened by the Unionists that the President would direct the collection of the revenue by force of arms, " the state placed itself in an attitude of military preparation for the defence of its position ; organized and armed its own phvsical force ; and succeeded in arousing so determined and excited a state of feehng in its citizens, that we think there can * Niles' Register, vol. xliii. p. 277. 1824-32.] ELECTED A SENATOR IN CONGRESS. 245 be no doubt that it would have maintained its position to the last extremity, — a position, manifestly, exceed ingly difficult to be overcome, if thus maintained, by any physical power which could have been brought against it."* The proceedings in South Carolina were followed by the proclamation of the President declaring the ordi nance of the State Convention subversive of the federal constitution, and his intention to enforce the laws at whatever hazard, and warning the people of the state against obedience to the ordinance as involving the crime of treason against the United States. Meanwhile, General Hayne, the able aud accoinplished senator in Congress froiri South Carolinti, had been elected gover nor of the state by the legislature and had entered upon the duties of his office ; and in reply to the President's proclamation, he issued a counter proclamation defend ing the position assumed by the state, and calling out twelve thousand volunteers. By the election of General Hayne as governor, a vacancy had been produced in the representation of the state in Congress. It was important at this par ticular juncture that the state should be represented in the federal councils by the ablest of her sons, and all eyes were now instinctively turned toward Mr. Calhoun. Prior to the adjournment of the legislature, therefore, in December, 1832, he was chosen as the successor of Mr. Hayne in the senate of the United States. Mr. Calhoun v/as prompt to regard the call of his native state ; her claims were paramount ; and he readily con sented to become her champion and defender. * Democratic Review, April, 1838. CHAPTER IX. Journey to Washington — Takes his Seat in the Senate — Special Message of the President — Mr. Calhoun's Resolutions — The Force BUI — Speech against it— The Debate — Argument of Mr. Webster — Reply of Mr. Calhoun — Character of this Effort — Passage of the Compromise Act- Peaceful Termination of the Controversy. The Senate of the Union was the theatre of Mr. Calhoun's proudest triumphs— the great field of his usefulness and fame. His jouruey to Washington was like that of Luther to attend tho diet at Worms. Out of South Carolina public opinion was certainly against him, and it was only here and there he found a good Frondsberg to whisper in his ear, " If you are sincere, and sure of your cause, go on in God's name, and fear nothing ; God will not forsake you !" It was queried by many whether he would not be apprehended, and some stoutly asserted that he would be arrested ere he reached Washington. He was called the head and front of the nullification cause, but he esteemed it an honor to be thus designated. He was stigmatized an arch-traitor and denounced as a dis- unionist, yet he pursued his way unmoved by clamor or denunciation. It was said that he aimed to over throw the Constitution, and that his presence at the Capitol would endanger the peace and security of the Union. But he had no such end in view. His errand 1833.] TAKES HIS SEAT IN THE SENATE. 247 was one of peace. He loved the Union too well lightly to peril it. He looked upon the state governments as the pillars, to use the language of a distinguished states man of New York,* " which support the magnificent dome of our national government," and if but one of them should be removed, the strength and beauty of the edifice reared above them would be gone forever. He desired, therefore, to maJte one moTe last eff"ort for re dress, and he could not but feel assured, that if passions and prejudices did not overrule the judgments of men, it would prove successful. Having resigned the office of vice-president, he took his seat in the Senate shortly after the commencement of the session in December, 1832. Many aflTected to doubt, for those who really understood his position could not have questioned his readiness to abide by the Constitution, whether he would take the oath of office. The floor of the senate-chamber and the galleries were thronged with spectators. ' They saw him take, the oath with a solemnity and dignity appropriate to the oc casion, and then calmly seat himself on the right of the chair, among his old political friends, nearly all of whom were now arrayed against him. In a few days after he entered the Senate, he intro duced a resolution, calling upon the president to lay before that body the ordinance of South Carolina, and other documents connected with it, which had been transmitted to him by the executive of the state. Be fore any action was had upon tire resolution, the special message of the president, dated the 16th January, 1833, was sent in. This message took strong ground * De Witt Clinton. 248 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1833 against South Carolina, and Mr. Calhoun felt that the occasion required something in the nature of a reply from him. He had been out of the habit of public speaking, yet he could not shrink from his duty. He arose, therefore, after the reading of the message had been concluded, and delivered an eloquent and eff"ective speech in defence of his state, which he concluded by declaring, most emphatically, that if the national gov ernment should be brought back to the principles of 1798, he would be Ihe last to abandon it. The message of the president and the accompanying documents were referred to the committee on the judi ciary, of which Mr. Grundy was chairman. Mr. Webster was also a member of the committee, and he had publicly avowed his intention to use his utmost eff"orts to put down the nullification doctrines of South Carolina. A bill, known as the Force Bill, was soon after reported by this committee, which extended the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States in cases arising under the revenue laws, and clothing the presi dent with additional powers. The object of this bill, which was not disguised, was to enable the federal ex ecutive to enforce the collection of the revenue in South Carolina. Mr. Calhoun desired that the impor tant constitutional question at issue should undergo a preliminary discussion, before the bill was called up, and with the view of provoking debate, he introduced the following resolutions, affirmatory of the great prin ciples for which he and his "beloved and virtuous state" were contending : — " Resolved, That the people of the several states composing ..these United States are united as parties to a constitutional compact, to which 1833.] HIS RESOLUTIONS. 249 the people of each state acceded as a separate and sovereign com munity, each binding itself, by its own particular ratification ; and that tiie Unionj^^f which the said compact is the bond, is a union between the states ratifying the same. " Eesolved, That the people of the several states, thus united by a constitutional compact, in forming that instrument, in creating a General Government to carry into effect the o^ectsjjor. wlij^__k wasformed, 3elegated to that government for_Uiat_purgo^,.cgi;.taiin .definite, powers, to be exercised jointly, reserving, at the same time, each state to itself, the resTdfiafy'inass of powers, to be *tercised by its own separate gov ernment; and that, whenever the General Government assumes the exercise of powers not delegated by the compact, its acts are unauthor ized, void, and of no effect ; and that the said government is not made the final judge of the powers delegated to it, since that would make its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers ; but that, as in aU other cases of compact among sovereign parties, without any common judge, each has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of the infraction as of the mode and measure of redress. "Resolved, That the assertions, that the people of these United States, taken collectively as individuals, are now, or ever have been, united on tie principle^ of the social compact, and, as such, are now formed into one nation or people ; or that they have ever been so united ih'any one stage of their poUtical existence ; or that the people of tho several states comprising the Union have not, as members thereof, retained their sovereignty ; or that the allegiance of their citizens has been transferred to the General Government ; or that they have parted with the right of punishing treason through their respective state gov ernments ; or that they have not the right of judging, in the last resort, as to the extent of the powers reserved, and, of consequence, of those delegated, are not only without foundation in truth, but are contrary to the most certain and plain historical facts, and the clearest deductions of reason ; and that all exercise of power on the part of the General Government, or any of its departments, deriving authority from such erroneous assumptions, must of necessity be unconstitutional; must tend directly and inevitably to subvert the sovereignty of the states, to destroy the federal character of the Union, and to rear on its ruins a consolidated government, without constitutional check or limitation, and which must necessarily terminate in the loss of liberty itself." These resolutions covered the whole ground in dif- 11* 250 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1833. pute, and it was but just that the principles, involv6d should be settled before proceeding to the consideration of the bill ; for if South Carolina was right in her po sition, the passage of the bill would be a gross act of injustice. But in the progress of the controversy, many bad feehngs had been aroused on both sides, and a dis position was manifested on the part of the supporters of the administration, to ^ress matters to a crisis at once. Under the influence of this prevailing disposi tion, the resolutions of Mr. Calhoun were laid upon the table, and the bill taken up for discussion. Previous to this, however, Mr. Grundy had off"ered a series of resolutions declaring the several acts of Congress lay ing duties on imports to be constitutional, and denying the power of a single state to annul those laws or any other constitutional law; but conceding the point in favor of South Carolina, that with respect to an uncon stitutional law, the states themselves were the final judges, and possessed the power of annulling it. Mr. Webster, and other senators occupying the extreme federal ground upon this question, did not, of course, approve of Mr. Grundy's resolutions, but they supported the Force Bill with great earnestness. The debate was ably conducted. Many of the re publican senators from the southern states opposed the bill in eff'ective speeches, and resisted its passage at every step. Not a single senator off"ered to take up the gauntlet thrown down by Mr. Calhoun while the bill was pending before the Senate, although Mr. Web ster, in particular, was well known to diff'er from him toto caslo. It had been the intention of the former to reply to Mr. Webster, but when it became known that 1832^33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 251 he would not speak first, Mr. Calhoun himself took the floor in opposition _to_.the„ mea.stire, jjld Jn I3itsnfiJ8.,_o£ _South Carolina. jHe also replied to the personal attacks which had been made upon him, and repelled, in elo quent and indignant terms, the charge, that he had been influenced by disappointed ambition. SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. Mk. Presideht — 1 know not which is most objectionable, the provision of the bill, or the temper in which its adoption has been urged. If the extraordinary powers with which the bill proposes to clothe the executive, to the utter prostration of the Constitution and the rights of the states, be calculated to impress our minds with alarm at the rapid progress of despotism in our country ; the zeal with which every circumstance calculated to misrepresent or exaggerate the conduct of Carolina in the controversy, is seized on with a view to excite hostility against her, but too plainly indicates the deep decay of that brotherly feeling whidi once existed between these states, and to which we are indebted for our beautiful federal system, and by the continuance of which alone it can be preserved. It is not my intention to advert to all these misrepresentations, but there are some so well calculated to mislead the mind as to the real character of the controversy, and hold up the state in a light so odious, that I do not feel myself justified in permitting them to pass unnoticed. Among them, one of the most prominent is the false stateinent that the object of South Carolina is to exempt herself from her ^hafe.oXthe "public burdens, v^hile-she-participates jn„th.e.advantagea„of .the govern ment. If the charge were true — if the state were capable of being actuated by such low and unworthy motives, mother as I consider her I would not stand up on this floor to vindicate her conduct. Among her faults, and faults I will not deny she has, no one has ever yet charged her with that low and most sordid of vices — avarice. Her con duct, on all occasions, has been marked with the very opposite quality. From the commencement of the Revolution — from its first breaking out at Boston till this hour, no state has been more profuse of its blood in the cause of the coimtry, nor has any contributed so largely to the common treasury in proportion to wealth and population. She has iu 252 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. that proportion contributed more to the exports of the Union, on the exchange of which with the rest of the world the greater portion of the pubhc burden has been levied, than any other state. Ifo : the con troversy is not such as has been stated ; the state does not seek to participate in the advantages of the government without contributing her full share to the public treasiuy. Her object is far different. A deep constitutional question lies at the bottom of the controversy. The real question at issue is, Has the government a right to impose burdens on the capital and industry of one portion of the country, not with a view to revenue, but to benefit another ? and I must be permitted to say that, after the long and deep agitation of this controversy, it is with surprise that I perceive so strong a disposition to misrepresent its real character. To correct the impression which those misrepresentations are calculated to make, I will dwell on the point under consideration for a few moments longer. The Federal Government has, by an express provision of tlie Con- s(;iTuEibn;"thg' right to lay duties on imports. The state has never denied or resisted this right, nor even thought of so doing. The governmeii t_ has, however, not been contented with exercising this power as she had 'aTlght to do, but has gone a step beyond it, by laying imposts, not for revenue, biit for protection. This the state considers as an unconstitu tional exercise of power — highly injurious and oppressive to her and the other staple states, and has, accordingly, met it with the most determined resistance. I do not intend to enter, at this time, into the argument as to the unconstitutionality of the protective system. It ig not necessary. It is sufficient that the power is nowhere granted ; and that, from the journals of the Convention which formed the Constitution, it would seem that it was refused. In support of the journals, I might cite the statement of Luther Martin, which has already been referred to, to show that the Convention, so far from conferring the power on tha Federal Government, left to tho state the right tj impose duties on im ports, with the express view of enabling the several states to protect their own manufactures. Notwithstanding this. Congress has assumed, without any warrant from tho Constitution, the right of exercising this most important power, and has so exercised it as to impose a ruinous burden on the labor and capital of the state of South Carolina, by which her resources are exhausted — the enjoyments of her citizens curtailed — the means of education contracted— and all her interests essentially and injuriously affected. We have been sneeringly told tl; at 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 253 she is a small state ; that her population does not much exceed half a million of souls ; and that more than one half are not of the European race. The facts are so. I know she never can be a great state, and that the only distinction to which she cau aspire must be based on the moral and intellectual acquirements of her sons. To the development of these much of her attention has been directed ; but this restrictive system, which has so unjustly exacted the proceeds of her labor, to be bestowed on othar sections, has so impaired the resources of the state, that, if not speedily arrested, it will dry up the means of education, and with it deprive her of the only source through which she can aspire to distinction. There is another misstatement, as to the nature of the controversy, so frequently made in debate, and so well calculated to mislead, that I feel bound to notice it. It has been said that South..QMsliri.a..clainis the right to annul the Coa-titutTon and laws of the United States; and to r'ebiit this supposed claim, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Rives) has gravely quoted the Constitution, to prove that the Constitution, and the laws made in pursuance thereof, are the supreme laws of the land — as if the state claimed the right to act contrary to this provision of the Constitution. Nothing can be more erroneous : her object is not to resist laws made in pursuance of the Constitution, but those m^e wifEoiirits authority, and whicli encroach onher reserved powers. She claims not even the right of judging of the delegated powers ; but of tEose '{haf are reserved, and. to resist the fqrrner,_ when they encroach upon the latter. I will pause to illustrate this important point. All must admit that there are delegated and reserved powers, and that the powers reserved are reserved to the states respectively. The powers, then, of the system are divided between the general and the state government; and the point immediately under consideration is, whether a state has any right to judge as to fhe extent of its reserved powers, and to defend them against the encroachments of the General Government. Without going deeply into this point at this stage of the argument, or looking into the nature and origin of the government, there is a simple view of the subject which I consider as conclusive. The very idea of a divided power implies the right on the part of the state for which I contend. The expression is metaphorical when applied to power. Every one readily understands that the division of matter con sists in the separation of the parts. But in this sense it is not applica ble to power. What, then, is meant by a division of power S I cannot 254 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. conceive of a division, without giving an equal right to each to judge of the extent of the power allotted to each. Such right I hold to be essential to the existence of a division ; and that, to give to either party the conclusive right of judging, not only of the share allotted to it, but of that allotted to the other, is to annul the division, and would confer the whole power on the party vested with such right. But it is contended that the Constitution has conferred on the Supreme Court the right of judging between the states and theftGeneral Govern ment. Those who make this objection overlook, I conceive, an impor tant provision of the Constitution. By turning to the 10th amended article, it will be seen that the reservation of power to the states is not only against the powers delegated to Congress, but against the United States themselves ; and extends, of course, as well to the judiciary as to the other departments of the government. The article provides, that all powers not delegated to the United States, or prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. This presents the inquiry. What powers are delegated to the United States 1 They may be classed under four divisions : first, those that are delegated by the states to each other, by virtue of which the Constitution may be altered or amended by tln-ee fourths of the states, when, without which, it^would have required the unanimous vote of all; next, the powers conferred on Congress ; then those on the President ; and, finally, those on the judicial department — aU of which are particularly enumerated in the parts of the Constitution which organize the respective depart ments. The reservation of powers to the states is, as I have said, against the whole, and is as full against the judicial as it is against the executive and legislative departments of the government It catmot be claimed for the one without claiming it for the whole, and without, in fact, annulling this important provision of the Constitution. Against this, as it appears to me, conclusive view of the subject, it has been urged that this power is expressly conferred on the Supreme Court by that portion of the Constitution which provides that the judi cial power shaU extend to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made imder their authority. I believe the assertion to be utterly destitute of any foundation. It obviously is the intention of the Constitutioa simply to make the judicial power commensurate with the law-making and treaty-making powers ; and to vest it with the right of applying the Constitution, the laws, and the treaties, to the cases which might 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 255 arise under them ; and not to make it the judge of the Constitution, the laws, and the treaties themselves. In fact, the power of applying the laws to the facts of the case, and deciding upon such application, constitutes, in truth, the judicial power. The distinction between such power, and that of judging of the laws, will be perfectly apparent when we advert to what is the acknowledged power of the court in reference to treaties or compacts between sovereigns. It is perfectly established, that the courts have no right to judge of the violation of treaties ; and that, in reference to them, their power is limited to the right of judging simply of the violation of rights under them ; and that the right of judging of infractions belongs exclusively to the par ties themselves, and not to the courts : of which we have an example in the Frendi treaty, which was declared by Congress null and void, in consequence of its violation by the government of France. Without such declaration, had a, French citizen sued a citizen of this country under the treaty, the court could have taken no cognizance of its in fraction ; nor, after such a declaration, would it have heard any argu ment or proof going to show that the treaty had not been violated. The declaration of itself is conclusive on the court. But it will be asked how the court obtained the powers to pronounce a law or treaty unconstitutional, when they come in conflict with that instrument. I do not deny that it possesses the right, but I can by no means concede that it was derived from the Constitution. It had its origin in the necessity of the case. Where there are two or more rules established, one from a higher, the other from a lower authority, which may come into conflict in applying them to a particular case, the judge cannot avoid pronouncing in favor of the superior against the inferior. It is from this necessity, aud this alone, that the power which is now set up to overrule the rights of the states against an express provision of the Constitution was derived. It had no other origin. That I have traced it to its true source, will be manifest from the fact that it is a power which, so far from being conferred exclusively on the Supreme Court, as is insisted, belongs to every court-.-inferior and superior — state and general — and even to foreign courts. But the senator from Delaware (Mr. Clayton) relies on the journals of the Convention to prove that it was the intention of that body to confer on the Supreme Court the right of deciding in the last resort between a state and the General Government. I will not follow him through the journals, as I do not deem that to be necessary to refute 256 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. his argument. It is suiScient for this purpose to state, that Mr. Rut- ledge reported a resolution, providing expressly that the United States and the states might be parties before the Supreme Court. If this proposition had been adopted, I would ask the senator whether this very controversy between the United States and South Carolina might not have been brought before the court? I would also ask hun whether it can be brought before the court as the Constitution now stands ? If he answers the former in the affirmative, and the latter in the negative, as he must, then it is clear, his elaborate argument to the contrary notwithstanding, that the report of Mr. Rutledge was not, in substance, adopted as he contended ; and that the journals, so far from supporting, are in direct opposition to the position which he at tempts to maintain. I might push the argument much further against the power of the court, but I do not deem it necessary, at least in this stage of the discussion. If the views which have already been pre sented be correct, and I do not see how they can be resisted, the con clusion is inevitable, that the reserved powers were reserved equally against every department of the government, and as strongly against the judicial as against the other departments, and, of course, were left under the exclusive will of the states. There still remains another misrepresentation of the conduct of the state which has been made with the view of exciting odium. I allude to the charge, that South Carolina supported the tariff of .1?16.>. aad.is, therefore, responsible for the. protective ^system. To determine the truth of this charge, it becomes necessary to ascertain the real charac ter of that law — whether it was a tariff for revenue or for protection — which presents tie inquiry. What was the condition of the country at that period ? The late war with Great Britain had just terminated, which, with the restrictive system that preceded it, had diverted a large amount of capital and industry from commerce to manufactures, particularly to the cotton and woollen branches. There was a debt, at the same time, of one hundred and thirty millions of dollars hanging over the country, and the heavy war duties were still in existence. Under these circumstances, the question was presented, to what point the duties ought to be reduced. That question involved another — at what time the debt ought to be paid ; which was a question of policy involving in its consideration all the circumstances connected with the then condition of the country. Among the most prominent arguments in favor of an early discharge of the debt was, that the high duties 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 257 which it would require to effect it would have, at the same time, the effect of sustaining the infant manufactures, which had been forced up under the circumstances to which I have adverted. This view of the subject had a decided influence in determining in favor of an early payment of the debt The sinking fund was, accordingly, raised from seven to ten millions of doUars with the provision to apply the sur plus which might remain in the treasury as a contingent appropriation to that fund ; and the duties were graduated to meet - this increased expenditure. It was thus that the policy and justice of protecting tho large amount of capital and industry which had been diverted by the measures of the government into new channels, as I have stated, was combined with the fiscal action of the government, and which, while it secured a prompt payment of the debt, prevented the immense losses to the manufactmrers which would have followed a sudden and great reduction. StiU, revenue was the main object, and protection but the incidental. The bill to reduce the duties was reported by the Com mittee of Ways and Means, and not of Manufactures, and it proposed a heavy reduction on the then existing rate of duties. But what of itself, without other evidence, was decisive as to the character of the bill, is the feet that it fixed a much higher rate of duties on the unpro tected than on the protected articles. I will enumerate a few leading articles only : woollen and cotton above the value of 25 cents on the square yard, though they were the leading objects of protection, were subject to a permanent duty of only 20 per cent Iron, another leadmg article among the protected, had a protection of not more than 9 per cent, as fixed by the act, and of but fifteen as reported in the bill. These rates were all below the average duties as fixed in the act, in cluding the protected, the tmprotected, and even the free articles. I have entered into some calculation, in order to ascertain the average rate of duties under the act. There is some uncertainty in the data, but I feel assured that it is not less than thirty per cent, ad valorem : showing an excess of the average duties above that imposed on the protected articles enumerated of more than 10 per cent, and thus clearly estabhshing the character of the measure — that it was for rev enue, and not protection. Looking back, even at this distant period, with all otu: experience, I perceive but two errors in the act : the one in reference to iron, and tha other the minimtmi duty on coarse cottons. As to the former, I coa- ceive that the bill, as reported, proposed a duty relatively too low, 258 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 which was still farther reduced in its passage through Congress. The duty, at first, was fixed at seventy-five cents the hundred weight ; but, in the last stage of its passage, it was reduced, by a sort of caprice, occasioned by an unfortunate motion, to forty-five cents. This injustice was severely felt in Pennsylvania, the state, above all others, most pro ductive of iron; and was the principal cause of that great reaction which has since thrown her so decidedly on the side of the protective policy. The other error was that as to coarse cottons, on which the duty was as much too high as that on iron was too low. It introduced, besides, the obnoxious minimum principle, which has since been so mis chievously extended ; and to that extent, I am constrained, in candor, to acknowledge, as I wish to disguise nothing, the protective principle was recognized by the act of 1816. How this was overlooked at the time, it is not in my power to say. It escaped my observation, which I can account for only on the ground that the principle was then new, and that my attention was engaged by another important subject — the question of the currency, then so urgent, and with which, as chairman of the committee, I was particularly charged. With these exceptions, I again repeat, I see notliing in the bUl to condemn ; yet it is on the ground that the member#from the state voted for the bill, that the attempt is now made to hold up Carolina as responsible for the whole system of protection which has since followed, though she has resisted its progress in every stage. Was there ever greater injustice ? And how is it to be accounted for, but as forming a part of that systematic misrepresen tation and calumny which has been directed for so many yeai's, without interruption, against that gallant and generous state ? And why has she thus been assailed ? Merely because she abstained from taking any part in the Presidential canvass — believing that it had degenerated into a mere system of imposition on the people — controfled, almost ex clusively, by those whose object it is to obtain the patronage of the government, and that without regard to principle or policy. Standing apart from what she considered a contest in which the public had no interest, she has been assailed by both parties with a fury altogether tmparaUeled ; but which, pursuing the course which she believed liberty and duty required, she has met with a firmness equal to the fierceness of the assault In the midst of this attack, I have not escaped. With a view of inflictmg a wound on the state through me, I have been held up as the author of the protective system, and one of its most strenuous advocates. It is with pain that I allude to myself on so deep and grave 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 259 a subject as that now under discussion, and which, I sincerely believe, involves the liberty of the country. I now regret that, under the sense of injustice which the remarks of a senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Wilkins) excited for the moment, I hastily gave my pledge to defend myself against the charge which has been made in reference to my com-se in 1816 : not that there wiU be any diOiculty in repelling the charge, but because I feel a deep reluctance in turning the discussion, in any degree, from a subject of so much magnitude to one of so little importance as the consistency or inconsistency of myself, or any other individual, particularly in connection with an event so long since passed. But for this hasty pledge, I would have remained silent, as to my own course, on this occasion, and would have borne with patience and calm ness this, with the many other misrepresentations with which I have been so incessantly assailed for so many years. The charge that I was the author of the protective system has no other foundation but that I, in common with the almost entire South, gave my support to the tanTof 1816. It is true tEat I advocated that measiire, for whicElmay rest my defence, without taking any other, on the'grouifd'tliat it was a tariff^for revenue, .aad.Xiot.fQr,.prQtection, which I have established beyond the power qf, .controversy. But my speech on the occasion has been brought in judgment against me by the senator from Pennsylvania. I have since cast my eyes over the speech ; and I will surprise, I have no doubt, the senator, by telling him that, with the exception of some hasty and unguarded expressions, I retract nothing I uttered on that occasion. I only ask that I may be judged, in reference to it, in that spirit of fairness and justice which is due to the occasion : taking into consideration the circumstances under which it was delivered, and bearing in mind that the subject was a tariff for revenue, and not for protection ; for reducing, and not raising the revenue. But, before I explain the then condition of the country, from which my main arguments in favor of the measure were drawn, it is nothing but an act of justice to myself that I should state a fact in con nection with my speech, that is necessary to explain what I have called hasty and unguarded expressions. My speech was an impromptu, and, as such, I apologized to the house, as appears from the speech as printed, for offering my sentiments on the question without having duly reflected on the subject. It was delivered at the request of a friend, when I had not previously the least intention of addressing the house. I allude to Samuel D. Ingham, then and now, as I am proud to say, a 260 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. personal and political friend— a man of talents and integrity— with a clear head, and firm and patriotic heart ; then among the leading mem bers of the house : in the palmy state of his political glory, though now for a. moment depressed— depressed, did I say? no! it is his state which is depressed — Pennsylvania, and not Samuel D, Ingham 1 Penn sylvania, which has deserted him under circumstances^ which, instead of depressing, ought to have elevated him in her estimation. He came to me, when sitting at my desk writing, and said that the house was falfing into some confusion, accompanying it with a remark, that I knew how diflBcult it was to rally so large a body when once broken on a tax bill, as had been experienced during the late war. Having a higher opinion of my influence than it deserved, he requested me to say some thing to prevent the confusion. I replied that I was at a loss what to say ; that I had been busily engaged on the currency, which was then in great confusion, and which, as I have stated, had ^een placed par ticularly under ray charge, as the chairman of the committee on that subject He repeated his request, and the speech which the senator from Pennsylvania has complimented so highly was the result I wUl ask whether the facts stated ought not, in justice, to be borne in mind by those who would hold me accountable, not only for the general scope of the speech, but for every word and sentence which it contains ? But, in asking this question, it is not ray intention to repu diate the speech. All I ask is, that I may be judged by the rules which, in justice, belong to the case. Let it be recollected that the bill was a revenue bill, and, of course, that it was constitutional, I need not remind the senate that, when the measure ia constitutional, all arguments calculated to show its beneficial operation may be legiti mately pressed into service, without taking into consideration whether the subject to which the arguments refer be within the sphere of the Constitution or not If, for instance, a question were before the body to lay a duty on Bibles, and a motion were made to reduce the duty, or admit Bibles duty free, who could doubt that the argument in favor of the motion, that the increased circulation of the Bible would be iu favor of the morality and religion of the country, would be strictly pro per ? Or who would suppose that he who adduced it had committed himself on the constitutionality of taking the religion or morals of the country tmder the charge of the Federal Government ? Again : sup pose the question to be to raise the duty on silk, or any other article of luxury, and that it should be supported on the ground that it was an 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 261 article mainly consumed by 'Jxe rich and extravagant, could it be fairly inferred that in the opinion of the speaker, Congress had a right to pass sumptuary laws ? I only ask that these plain rules may be ap plied to my argument on the tariff of 1816. They turn almost entirely on the benefits which manufactures conferred on the country in time of war, and which no one could doubt The country had recently passed through such a state. The world was at that time deeply agitated by the effects of the great conflict which had so long raged in Europe, and which no one could tell how soon again might return, Bonaparte had but recently been overthrown : the whole southern part of this continent was in a state of revolution, and was threatened with the interference of the Holy Alliance, which, had it occurred, must almost necessarily have involved this country in a dangerous conflict. It was under these circumstances that I delivered the speech, in which I urged the house that, in the adjustment of the tariff, reference ought to be had to a state of war as well as peace, and that its provisions otight to be fixed on the compound views of the two periods — making some sacrifice in peace, in order that less might be made in war. Was this principle false ? and, in urging it, did I commit myself to that sys tem of oppression since grown up, and which has for its object the enriching of one portion of the country at the expense of the other ? The-plain rule in all such case^ in. thiit whrTtii mi'iriiiri' i'l pr'ii[iTFipd, the first thing is to ascertain its constitutionality : and, t'^"*"' be''"g ascer- itiinoA^ fl^p fjp-yf- ia ila q^jporlioni-y ; -whlch last OpCnS the wholo field of argument for and against. Every topic may be urged calculated to prove it wise or unwise ; so in a bill to raise imposts. It must first be ascer tained that the bill is based on the principles of revenue, and that the money raised is necessary for the wants of the country. These being ascertained, every argument, direct and indirect, may be fairly offered, which may go to show that under all the circumstances, the provisions of the bill are proper or improper. Had this plain and simple rule been adhered to, we shovdd never have heard of the complaint against Carolina. Her objection is not against the improper modification of a bin acknowledged to be for revenue, but that under the name of Imposts, a power essentially different from the taxing power is exercised — par taking much more of the character of a penalty than a tax. Wothing is more common than that things closely resembhng in appearance shovdd widely and essentially differ in their character. Arsenic, for instance, resembles flour, vet one is a deadly poison, and the other that which -262 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. constitutes the staff of life. So duties imposed, whether for revenue or protection, may be called imposts ; though nominally and apparently the same, yet they differ essentially in their real character. I shall now return to my speech on the tariff of 1816. To determine what my opinions really were on the subject of protection at that time, it will be proper to advert to my sentiments before and after that period. My sentiments preceding 1816, on this subject, are matter of record I came into Congress, in 1812, a devoted friend and supporter of the then administration ; yet one of my first efforts was to brave the administration, by opposing its favorite measure, the restrictive system — embargo, non-intercourse, and all — and that upon the principle of fi'ee trade. The system remained in fashion for a time ; but, after the overthrow of Bonaparte, I reported a bill from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to repeal the whole system of restrictive measures. While the bill was under consideration, a worthy man, then a member of the house (Mr. M'Kim, of Baltimore), moved to except the non-importation act, which he supported on the ground of encouragement to manufac tures. I resisted the motion on the very grounds on which Mr. M'Kim supported it I maintained that the manufacturers were then receiving too much protection, and warned its friends that the withdrawal of the protection which the war and the high duties then afforded would cause great embarrassment ; and that the true policy, in the mean time, was to admit foreign goods as freely as possible, in order to diminish the an ticipated embarrassment on the return of peace ; intimating, at the same time, my desire to see the tariff revised, with a view of affording a moderate and permanent protection. Such was my conduct before 1816. Shortly after that period I left Congress, and had no opportunity of making known my sentiments in reference to the protective system, which shortly after began to be agi tated. But I have the most conclusive evidence that I considered the arrangement of the revenue, in 1816, as growing out of the necessity of the case, and due to the consideration of justice ; but that even at that early period, I was not without my fears that even that arrangement would lead to abuse and future difficulties. I regret that I have been compelled to dwell so long on myself; but trust that, whatever censure may be incurred, will not be directed against me, but against those who have drawn my conduct into the controversy ; and who may hope, by assailing my motives, to wound the cause with which I am proud to b» identified. 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 263 I may add, that all the Southern States voted with South Carolina in support of the bill : not that they had any interest in manufactures, but oj the ground that they had supported the war, and, of course, felt a corresponding obligation to sustain those estabhshmeuts which had grown up under the encouragement it had incidentally afforded ; while most of the New England members were opposed to the measure, prin cipally, as I believe, on opposite principles. I have now, I trust, satisfactorily repelled the charge against the state, and myself personally, in reference to the tariff of 1816. What ever support the state has given the bUl, originated in the most dissin- terested motives. There was not within the Umits of the state, so far as my memory serves me, a single cotton or wouUen establishment. Her whole depen dence was on agriculture, and the cultivation of two great staples, rice and cotton. Her obvious policy was to keep open the market of the world unchecked and unrestricted : to buy cheap, and to sell high ; but from a feehng of kindness, combined with a sense of justice, she added her support to the bUl. We had been told by the agents of tJie manu facturers that the protection which the measure afforded would be suf ficient ; to which we the more readily conceded, as it was considered a final adjustment of the question. Let us now turn our eyes forward, and see what has been the conduct of the-parties to this arrangement. Have CajoUna and the South dis- turbed-thJa-adjastmeniX—JSo : they have never raised their voice in a single instance against it, even though this measure, moderate, compara tively, as it is, was felt with no inconsiderable pressure on their inter ests. Was this example imitated on the opposite side ? Far other wise. Scarcely had the president signed his name, before application was made for an increase of duties, which was repeated, with demands ¦continually growing, till the passage of the act of 1828, What course now, I would ask, did it become Carolina to pursue in reference to these demands? Instead of acquiescing in them, because she had acted gen erously in adjusting the tariff of 1816, she saw, in her genero-ity on that occasion, additional motives for that firm and decided re.-istiujct ¦which she has since made againrt the system of protection. She jicenrd- Jngly commenced a systematic opposition to all farther encroao.lime-iit«, which continued from 1818 tiU 1828 : by discussions .and by resolutions, by remonstrances and by protests through her Legislature. These all proved insufficient to stem the current of encroachment ; but, notwitb- 264 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 standing the heavy pressure on her industry, she never despaired of reUef tiU the passage of the act of 1828 — that bill of abominations — en gendered by avarice and political intrigue. Its adoption opened the eyes of the state, and gave a new character to the controversy. TUI then, the question had been, whether the protective system was consti tutional and expedient ; but, after that she no limger considered the question whether the right of regulating the industry of the states was a reserved or delegated power, but what right a state possesses to de fend her reserved powers against the encroachments of the Federal Government : a question on the decision of which the value of aU the reserved powers depends. The passage of the act of 1828, with all its objectionable features, and under the odious circumstances under which it was adopted, almost, if not entirely, closed the door of hope through the General Government It afforded c<»iclusive evidence that no rea sonable prospect of relief from Congress could be entertained ; yet the- near approach of the period of the payment of the pubUc debt, and the elevation of General Jackson to the presidency, still afforded a ray of hope — not so strong, however, as to prevent the state from turning her eyes for final relief to her reserved powers. Under these circumstances commenced that inquiry into the nature and extent of the reserved powers of a state, and the means which they afford of resistance against the encroachments of the General Govern ment, which has been pursued with so much zeal and energy, and, I may add, inteUigence. Kever was there a political disctission carried on with greater activity, and which appealed more dkectly to the intelligence of a community. Throughout the whole, no address has been made to the low and vulgar passions ; but on the contrary, the discussion has turned upon the higher principles of political economy, connected with the operations of the tariff system, calculated to show its real bearing on the interests of the state, and on the structure of our poUtical system ; and to show the true character of the relations between the state and the General Government, and the means which the states possess of defending those powers which they reserved in forming tha Federal Government In this great canvass, men of the most commanding talents and acquurements have etgaged with the greatest ardor; and the people have been addressed through every channel — ^by essays in the pubUo press, and by speeches in their pubUc assembUes — until they have Itecome thoroughly instructed on the nature of the oppression, and 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 265 on the rights which they possess, under the Constitution, to throw it off If gentlemen suppose that the stand taken by the people of Carolina rests on passion and delusion, they are wholly mistaken. The case is far otherwise. No community, from the legislator to the ploughman, were ever better instructed in their rights ; and the resistance on which the state has resolved is the result of mature reflection, accompanied with a deep conviction that their rights have been violated, and thai the means of redress which they have adopted are consistent with the principles of the Constitution. But while this active canvass was cairied on, wliich looked to the reserved powers as the final means of redress if all others failed, the state at the same time cherished a hope, as I have already stated, that the election of General Jackson to the presidency would prevent the necessity of a resort to extremities. He was identified with the interests of the staple states ; and, having the same interests, it was believed that his gi'eat popularity — a popularity of the strongest character, as it rested on miUtary services — would enable him, as they hoped, graduaUy to bring down the system of protection, without shock or injury to any interest. Under these views, the canvass in favor of General Jackson's election to the presidency was carried on with great zeal, in conjunction with that active inquiry into the reserved powers of the states on which final reUance was placed. But little did the people of Carolina dream that the man whom they were thus striving to elevate to the highest seat of power would disappoint all their hopes. Man is, indeed, ignorant of the future ; nor was there ever a stronger illustration of the observation than is afforded by the result of that election ! The very event on which they had built their hopes has been turned against them, and the very individual to whom they looked as a deUverer, and whom, vmder that impression, they strove for so many years to elevate to power, is now the most powerful instrument in the hands of his and theu- bitterest opponents to put down them and their cause I Scarcely had he been elected, when it became apparent from the organization of his cabinet, and other indications, that all their expecta tions of reUef through him were blasted. The admission of a single individual into the cabinet under the circumstance? which accompanied that admission, threw all into confusion. The mischievous influence over the President, through which this individual was admitted into the cabinet, soon became apparent Instead of turning his eyes forward ts 12 266 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. the period of the payment of the pubUc debt which was then near at hand, and to the present dangerous political crisis, which was inevitable unless averted by a ^imely aud wise system of measures, the attention of the President was absorbed by mere party arrangements, and circumstances too disreputable to be mentioned here, except by the most distant aUusion. Here I must pause for a moment to repel a charge which has been so often made, and which^Teu'the President hasjeiterated in his proclama tion — the cbaTjJe that I harre-been-actiiated, in the_ part jEhidbl have takggjby feeUngs of disappointed ambition. I again repeat, that I deeply regret the necessi^^^oTIBOticlng myself in so important a discus sion ; and that nothing can induce me to advert to my own course but the conviction that it is due to the cause, at which a blow is aimed through me. It is only in this view that I notice it. It illy became the chief magistrate to m.ake this charge. The course which the state took, and which led to the present controversy between her and the General Government, was taken as far back as 1828 — in the very midst of that severe canvass which placed him in jDower — and iu that very canvass Carolina openly avowed and zealously maintained those very principles which he, the chief magistrate, now officially pro nounces to be treason and rebellion. That was the period at which he ought to have spoken. Having remained silent then, and having, under his approval, implied by that silence, received the support and the vote of the state, I, if a sense of decorum did not prevent it, might recriminate with the double charge of deception and ingratitude. My object, how ever, is not to assail the President but to defend myself against a most unfounded charge. The time alone at ^ifhlch the course upon which this charge of disappointed ambition is founded, will of itself repel it, in the eye of every vmprejudiced and honest man. The doctrine which I now sustain, under the present difficulties, I openly avowed and maintained immediately after the act of 1828, that " bill' of abominations," as it has been so often and properly termed. Was I at that period disappointed in any views of ambition which I might be supposed to entertain ? I was Vice-president of the United States, elected by an overwhelming majority. I was a candidate for re-election on the ticket with General Jackson himself, with a certain prospect of a triumphant success of that ticket, and with a fau prospect of the highest office to which an American citizen can aspu-e. What was my course under these prospects ? Did I look to my own advancement, or to an honest and faithful discharge 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 267 of my duty ? Let facts speak for themselves. When the biU to which I have referred came from the other house to the Senate, the almost universal impression was, that its fate would depend upon my casting vote. It was known that, as the bill theu stood, the Senate was nearly equally divided ; and as it was a combined measure, originating with the poUticians and manufacturers, and intended as much to bear upon the Presidential electjon as to protect manufactures, it was believed that, as a stroke of poUtical poUcy, its fate would be made to depend on my vote, iu order to defeat General Jackson's election, as well as my own. The friends of General Jackson were alarmed, and I was earnestly entreated to leave the chair in order to avoid the responsibility, under the plausible argument that, if the Senate should be equally divided, the bfll would be lost without the aid of my casting vote. The reply to this entreaty was, that no consideration personal to myself could induce me to take such a course ; that I considered the measure as of the most dangerous character, and calculated to produce the most fearful crisis ; that the payment of the pubUc debt was just at hand ; and that the great increase of revenue which it would pour into the treasury would accelerate the approach of that period, and that the country would be placed in the most trying of situations — with an immense revenue without the means of absorption upon any legitimate or constitutional object of appropriation, and would be compelled to submit to all the corrupting consequences of a large surplus, or to make a sudden reduc tion of the rates of duties, which would prove ruinous to the very interests which were then forcing the passage of the bill. Under these views I determined to remain in the chair, and if the biU came to me, to give my casting vote against it, and in doing so, to give my reasons at large ; but at the same time I informed my friends that I would reture from the ticket, so that the election of General Jackson might not be embarrassed by any act of mme. Sir, I was amazed at the folly and infatuation of that period. So completely absorbed was Congress in the game of ambition and avarice, from the double impulse of the manufacturers and politicians, that none but a few appeared to anticipate the present crisis, at which now aU are alarmed, but which is the inevitable result of what was then done. As to myself, I clearly fore saw what has since followed. The road of ambition lay open before me — I had but to follow the corrupt tendency of the times — but I chose to tread the rugged path of duty. It was thus that the reasonable hope of relief through the election of 268 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. General Jackson was blasted ; but stiU one other hope remained, that the final discharge of the public debt — an event near at hand — would remove ovu- burden. That event would leave in the treasury a large surplus ; a surplus that could not be expended under the most extrava gant schemes of appropriation, having the least color of decency or con stitutionality. That event at last arrived At the last session of Con gress, it was avowed on all sides that the public debfr, for all practical purposes, was in fact paid, the small surplus remaining being nearly covered by the money iu the treasury and the bonds for duties, which had already accrued ; but with the arrival of this event our last hope was doomed to be disappointed. After a long session of many months, and the most earnest effort on the part of South Carolina and the other Southern States to obtain relief, all that could be efl'ected was a smaU reduction in the amount of the duties ; but a reduction of such a char acter, that, while it diminished the amount of burden, distributed that burden more unequally than even the obnoxious act of 1828 ; reversing the principle adopted by the bill of 1816, of laying higher duties on the unprotected than the protected articles, by repealing almost entirely the duties laid upon the former, and imj^osing the burden almost entirely on the latter. It was thus that instead of relief — instead of an equal dis tribution of the burdens and benefits of the government, on the payment of the debt, as had been fondly anticipated — the duties were so arranged as to be, in fact bounties on one side and taxation on the other ; thus placing the two great sections of the coimtry in direct conflict in refer ence to. its fiscal action, and thereby letting in that flood of political cor ruption which threatens to sweep away our Constitution and our liberty. This unequal and unjust arrangement was pronounced, both by the administration, through its proper organ, the secretary of the treasury, and by the opposition, to be a permanent adjustment ; and it was thus that all hope of relief through the action of the General Government terminated, and the crisis so long apprehended at length arrived, at which the state was compelled to choose between absolute acquiescence in a ruinous system of oppression, or a resort to her reserved powers — powers of which she alone was the rightful judge, and which only, in this momentous jvmcture, can save her. She determined on the latter. The consent of two thirds of her Legislature was necessary for the call of a convention, which was considered the only legitimate organ through which the people, in their sovereignty, could speak. After an arduous struggle, the State Rights party succeeded : more than two 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 269 thirds of both branches of the Legislature favorable to a convention were elected ; a convention was called — the ordinance adopted. The convention was succeeded by a meeting of the Legislature, when the laws to carry the ordinance into execution were enacted : aU of which have been communicated by the President, have been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and this bUl is the result of their labor. Having now corrected some of the prominent misrepresentations as to the nature of this controversy, and given a rapid sketch of the move ment of the state in reference to it, I wUl next proceed to notice some objections connected with the ordinance and the proceedings under it. The first aud most prominent of these is directed against what is call ed the test oath, which an effort has been made to render odious. So far from deserving the denunciation which has been leveUed against it, I view this provision of the ordinance as but the natural result of the doctrines entertained by the state, and the position which she occupies. The people of the state believe that the Union is a union of states, and not of individuals ; that if was formed by the states, and that the citi zens of the several states were bound to it through the acts of their several states ; that each state ratified the Constitution for itself, and that it was ordy by such ratification of a state that any obligation was imposed upon the citizens : thus believing, it is the opinion of the people of Carolina that it belongs to the state which has imposed the obligation to declare, in the last resort, the extent of this obUgation, as far as her citizens are concerned ; and this upon the plain principles which exist in all analogous cases of compact between sovereign bodies. On this principle, the people of the state, acting in their sovereign capacity in convention, precisely as they adopted their own and the federal Consti tution, have declared by the ordinance, that the acts of Congress which imposed duties under the authority to lay imposts, are acts, not for revenue, as intended by the Constitution, but for protection, and there fore null and void. The ordinance thus enacted by the people of the state themselves, acting as a sovereign community, is as obligatory on the citizens of the state as any portion of the Constitution, In prescrib ing, then, the oath to obey the ordinance, no more was done than to prescribe an oath to obey the Constitution, It is, in fact, but a particu lar oath of aUegiance, and in every respect similar to that which is pre scribed under the Constitution of the United States, to be administered to aU the officers of the State and Federal Governments ; and is no more deserving the harsh and bitter epithets which have been heaped 270 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. upon it than that, or any similar oath. It ought to be borne in mind, that, according to the opinion which prevails in Carolina, the right of resistance to the unconstitutional laws of Congress belongs to the state, and not to her individual citizens ; and that though the latter may, in a mere question of meum and tuum, resist, through the courts, an uncon stitutional encroachment upon their rights, yet the final stand against usurpation rests not with them, but with the state of which they are members ; and such act of resistance by a state binds the conscience and allegiance of the citizen. But there appears to be a general misappre hension as to the extent to which the state has acted under this part of the ordinance. Instead of sweeping eveiy officer by a general pro scription of the minority, as has been represented in debate, as far as my knowledge extends, not a single individual has been removed. The state has, in fact, acted with the greatest tenderness, all circumstances considered, towards citizens who differed from the majority ; and, in that spirit, has directed the oath to be administered only in cases of some official act directed to be performed in which obedience to the ordinance is involved. It has been 'farther objected that the state has acted precipitately. What I precipitately ! after makimi^ strenuous resistance for twelve years— by discussion here and in the other hoiise^f Congress^by essays in all forms — by resolutions, remon^trances7~and' protests on the ptirt, nf hrr Tirgiiliitnrr — and, finally^hy attempting an appeal to the j ndicialjTowflr nf-Hw-Trmtej Ht,n,t.e.<.i- I say attempting, for they have been prevented from bringing the question fairly before the court, and that by an act of that very majority in Congress who now upbraid them for not making that appeal ; of that majority who, on a motion of one of the members in the other house from South Carolina, refused to give to the act of 1828 its true title — that it was a protective, and not a revenue act The state has never, it is true, relied upon that tribunal, the Supreme Court, to vihdlcate Us reserved rights ; yet they have always considered It as an auxiliary means of defence, of which they would gladly have availed themselves to test the constitutionality of protection, had they not been deprived of the means of doing so by the act of the majority, N'nt.with.at.ii.riH^ing tlij,^ ]png dAUrjrTrr-iTmro-%ffl:, »nr| y°t.ri, n"d°r this continued encroachment of the government, we now hear it on all sides, by friends and foes, gravely pronounced that the state has acted pre cipitately — that her conduct has been rash 1 That such should be the 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 271 language of an interested majority, who, by means of this unconstitu tional and oppressive system, are annually extorting millions from the South to be bestowed upon other sections, is not at all surprising. Whatever impedes the course of avarice and ambition will ever be de nounced as rash and precipitate ; and had South Carolina delayed her resistance fifty instead of twelve years, she would have heard from the same quarter the same language ; but it is really surprising that those who are suffering in common with herself, and who have complained equally loud of theu: grievances, who have pronounced the very acts which she has asserted within her lunits to be oppressive, unconstitu tional, and ruinous, after so long a struggle — a struggle longer than that which preceded the separation of these states from the mother- country — ^longer than the period of the Trojan war — should now com plain of precipitancy ! No, it is not Carolina which has acted precipi tately ; but her sister states, who have suffered in common with her, have acted tardily. Had they acted as she has done, had they performed their duty with equal energy and promptness, our situation this day would be very different from what we now find it Delays are said to be dang^ous ; and never was the maxim more true than in the present case, a case of monopoly. It is the very nature 'of mo nopolies to grow. If we take from one side a large portion of the proceeds of its labor and give it to the other, the side from which we take must constantly decay, and that to which we give must prosper and increase. Such is thp action of the protective system. It exacts from the South a large portion of the proceeds of its industry, which it bestows upon the other sections, in the shape of bounties to manufac tures, and appropriations in a thousand forms ; pensions, improvement of rivers and harbors, roads and canals, and in every shape that wit or ingenuity can devise. Can we, then, be surprised that the principle of monopoly grows, when it is so amply remunerated at the expense of those who support it I And this is the real reason of the fact which we witness, that all acts for protection pass with small minorities, but soon come to be sustained by great and overwhelming majorities. Those who seek the monopoly endeavor to obtain it in the most exclu sive shape ; and they take care, accordingly, to associate only a suffi cient number of interests barely to pass it through the two houses of Congress, on the plain principle that the greater the number from whom the monopoly takes, and the fewer on whom it bestows, the greater is the advantage to the monopoUsts. Acting in this spurit, we 272 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. have often seen with what exact precision they count : adding wool to wooUens, associating lead and iron, feeling their way, until a bare ma jority is obtained, when the bill passes, connecting just as many in terests as are sufficient to ensure its success, and no more. In a short time, however, we have invariably found that this lean becomes a de cided majority, under the certain operation, which compels individuals to desert the pm'suits which the monopoly has rendered unprofitable, that they may participate in those pursuits which it has rendered profitable. It is against this dangerous and growing disease which South Carolina has acted : a disease whose cancerous action would soon have spread to every part of the system, if not arrested. There is another powerful reason why the action of the state could not have been safely delayed. The public debt as I have already stated, for aU practical purposes, has already beeu paid ; and, under the existing duties, a large annual surplus of many mlUlons must come into the treasury. It is impossible to look at this state of things with out seeing the most mischievous consequences ; and, among others, if not speeddy corrected, it would interpose powerful and almost insuper able obstacles to throwing off the burden under v^ich the South has been so long laboring. The disposition of the surplus would become a subject of violent and corrupt struggle, and could not fail to rear up new and powerful interests in support of the existing system, not only in those sections which have been heretofore benefited by it, but even in the South itself I cannot but trace to the, anticipation of this state of the treasury the sudden and extraordinary movements which took place at the last session in the Virginia Legislature, in whichthe whole South is vitally interested.* It is impossible for any rational man to believe that that state could seriously have thought of effecting the scheme to which I allude by her own resources, without powerful- aid fi-om the General Government It is next objected, that the enforcing acts have legislated the United States out of South Carolina. I have already replied to this objection on another occasion, and wiU now but repeat what I then said : that they have been legislated out only to the extent that they had no right to enter. The Constitution has admitted the jurisdiction of the United States within the limits of the several states only so far as the dele gated powers authorize ; beyond that they are intruders, and may * Having for their object the emancipation and colonization of slaves. 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 273 rightfully be expelled ; and that they have been efficiently expelled by the legislation of the state through her civil process, as has been ac knowledged on all sides in the debate, is only a confirmation of the truth of the doctrine for which the majority in Carolina have con tended. The very point at issue between the two parties there is, whether nuUification is a peaceable and an efficient remedy against an unconsti- tiiti"nal!irl^_fvrt^i' G cnnrni Giovernment^ and -whlch^ niay bt^..!""«rt.ed as such through the state tribunals. Both parties agree that the acts against which it is directed are unconstitutional and oppressive. The controversy is only as to the means by which our citizens may be pro tected against the acknowledged encroachments on their rights. This being the point at issue between the parties, and the very object of the majority being an efficient protection of the citizens through the state tribunals, the measures adopted to enforce the ordinance of course re ceived the most decisive character. We were not children, to act by halves. Yet for acting thus efficiently the state is denounced, and this bill reported, to overrule, by miUtary force, the civil tribunals and civil process of the state ! Sir, I consider this bill, and the arguments which have been urged on this floor in its support, as the most trium phant acknowledgment that nuUification is peaceful and efficient, and 60 deeply intrenched in the principles of our system, that it cannot be assailed but by prostrating the Constitution, and substituting the su premacy of miUtary force in lieu of tiie supremacy of the laws, lifc fact, the advocates of this bUl refute their own argument. They tell us that the ordinance is unconstitutional ; that they infract the Consti tution of South CaroUna, although, to me, the objection appears absurd, as it was adopted by the very authority which adopted the Constitu tion itself They also tell us that the Supreme Court is lie appointed arbiter of aU controversies between a state and the General Govern ment Why, then, do they not leave this controversy to that tribunal ? Why do they not confide to them the abrogation of the ordinance, and the laws made in pvirsuance of it and the assertion of that supremacy whidi they claim for the laws of Congress ? The state stands pledged to resist no process of the court. Why, then, confer on the President the extensive and unlimited powers provided in this biU? Why authorize him to use military force to arrest the civil process of the letate ? But one answer can be given : That, in a contest between the *tate and the General Governmait, if the resistance- be limited on both 274 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832^3l& Sides to the civil process, the state, by its inlierent sovereignty, stand ing upon its reserved powers, wiU prove too powerful in such a contro versy, and must triumph over the Federal Government, sustained by its delegated and limited authority ; and in this answer we have an acknowledgment of the truth of those gi-eat principles for wliich the state has so firmly and nobly contended. Having made these remarks, the great question is now presented, Has Congress the right to pass this biU? which I will next proceed to consider. The decision_o£-thic qncntion mvaives the im^uiry into the prff?isioi5rof the bUl. What are they ! It puts at the disposal of the Ffesi3ent the army and navy, aad the entire miUtia of the country ; it enables him, at his pleasure,, to subject every man in the United States,. not exempt from militia duty, to- martial law : to call liim, from his ordinary occupation to the field,, aud under the pen,alty of fine and im- prisomnent, inflicted by a court-martial, to compel him to imbrue his hand in his brothers' blood. There is no Umitation on the power of the Bword, and that over the purse is equ.illy without restraint ; for, among the extraordinary features of the bill, it contains no appropriation, which, under existing oircumstances, is tantamount to an unlimited ap propriation. The President ma.y, unxier its autlwrlty, incur any expendi ture, and pledge the national faith to meet it He may create a new national debt, at the very moment of the termination of the former — a debt of milUons, to be paid out of the proceeds of the labor of that section of the country whose dearest constitutional rights this bill pros trates! Thus exhibiting the extraordinary spectacle, that the very section of the coimtry which is urging this measure, and cai-rying the sword of devastation against us, are, at the same time, incurring, a new debt, to be- paid by those whose rights are violated ; while those who violate them are to receive the benefits, in the shape of bounties and expenditures. And for what purpose is the unUmited control of the pvtrse and of the sword thus placed at the disposition of the executive ? To make war against one of the free and sovereign, members of this confedera tion, which the biU proposes to deal with, not as a state, but as a col lection of banditti or outlaws. Thus exhibiting the impious spectacle of this government the creature of the states, making war against the power to which it owes its existence. The bill violates the Constitution, plainly and palpably, in many of its provisions, by authorizing the President, at his pleasure, to place the> 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 275 different ports of this Union on an unequal footing, contrary to that pro vision of the Constitution which declares that no preference shall be given to one port over another. It also violates the Constitution by authorizing him, at his discretion, to impose cash duties on one port, while credit is allowed in others ; by enabling the President to regulate commerce, a power vested in Congress alone; and by drawing within the juiisdiction of the United States courts powers never intended to be conlerred on them. As great as these objections are, they become insiguiiicant in the provisions of a biU which, by a single blow — by treatinij the states as a mere lawless mass of individuals — prostrates all the barriers of the Constitution. I will pass over the minor con siderations, .and proceed directly to the great point. This bill proceeds on the ground that the entire sovereignty of this country belongs to the American people, as forming one great community, and regards the states as mere fractions or counties, and not as an integral part of the Union : having no more right to resist the encroachments of a govern ment than a county has to resist the authority of a state ; and treat ing such resistance as the lawless acts of so many individuals, without possessing sovereignty or poUtical rights. It has been said that the bill declares war against South CaroUna, No. It decrees a massacre of her citizens ! War has something ennobUng about it and, with all its horrors, brings into action the highest qualities, inteUectual and moral. It was, perhaps, in the order of Providence that it should be permitted for that very purpose. But this bill declares no war, except, indeed, it be that which savages wage — a war, not against the commimity, but the citizens of whom that community is composed. But I regard it as worse than savage warfare — as an attempt to take away life under the color of law, without the trial by jury, or any other safeguard which the Constitution has thrown around the life of the citizen ! It authorizes the President, or even his deputies, when they may suppose the law to be violated, without the intervention of a cotirt or jury, to kiU without mercy or discrimination. It has been said by the senator from Tennessee (Mr. Grundy) to be a measure of peace ! Yes, such peace as the wolf gives to the lamb — the kite to the dove. Such peace as Russia gives to Poland, or death to its victim ! A peace, by extinguishing the political existence of the state, by awing her into an abandonment of the exercise of every power which constitutes her a sovereign community. It is to South CaroUna a question of self-preservation ; and I proclaim it, that should this bill 276 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. pass, and an attempt be made to enforce it it will be resisted at every hazard — even that of death itself Death is not the greatest calamity : there are others stUl more terrible to the free and brave, and among them may be placed the loss of liberty and honor. There are thousands of her brave sons who, if need be, are prepared cheerfully to lay down their lives in defence of the state, and the great principles of constitu tional Uberty for which she is contending. God forbid that this should become necessary ! It never can be, unless this government is resolved to bring the question to extremity, when her gallant sons will stand prepared to perform the last duty — to die nobly. I go on the ground that this Constitution was made by the states ; that it is a federal union of the states, iu which the several states still retain their sovereignty. If these views be correct, I have not charac terized the bill too strongly, which presents the question whether they be or not I will not enter into the discussion of that question now. I will rest it for the present, on what I have said on the introduction of the resolutions now on the table, under a hope that another oppor tunity will be allorded for more ample discussion. I will, for the present, confine my remarks to the objections which have been raised to the views which I presented when I introduced them. The authority of Luther Martin has been adduced by the senator from Delaware, to prove that the citizens of a state, acting under the authority of a state, are liable to be punished as traitors by this government. As eminent as Mr, Martin was as a lawyer, and as high as his authority may be considered on a legal point, I cannot accept it in determining the point at issue. The attitude which he occupied, if ta.ken into view, would lessen, if not destroy, the weight of his authority. He had been vio lently opposed in Convention to the Constitution, and the very letter from which the senator has quoted was intended to dissuade Maryland from its adoption. With this view, it was to be expected that every consideration calculated to effect that object should be urged; that real objections should be exaggerated ; and that those having no foundation, except mere plausible deductions, should be presented. It is to this spirit that I attribute the opinion of Mr. Martin in reference to the point under consideration. But if his authority be good on one point, it must be admitted to be equaUy so on another. If his opinion be sufficient to prove that a citizen of the state may be punished as a traitor when acting vmder allegiance to the state, it is also sufficient to show that no authority was intended to be given in the Constitution for the protection 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 277 of manufactures by the General Government, and that the provision in the Constitution permitting a state to lay an impost duty, with the consent of Congress, was intended to reserve the right of protection to the states themselves, and that each state should protect its own in dustry. Assuming his opinion to be. of equal authority on both points, how embarrassing would be the attitude in Which it would place the senator from Delaware, and those with whom he is acting— that of using the sword and the bayonet to enforce the execution of an un constitutional act of Congress. I must express my surprise that the sUghtest authority in favor of power should be received as the most conclusive evidence, while that which is, at least, equally strong in favor of right and libefty, is wholly overlooked or rejected. Notwithstanding all that has been said, I must say that neither the senator from Delaware (Mr. Clayton), nor any other who has spoken on the same side, has directly nnd fairly met the great questions at issue ! Is this a federal union? a union of states, as distinct from that of individuals ? Is the sovereignty in the several states, or in the American people in the aggregate ? The very Luiguage which we are compelled to use, when speaking of our p liticai institutions, affords proof conclu* sive as to its real character. Tlie terms union, federal, united, all imply a combination of sovereignties, a confederation of states. They are never applied to an association of individuals. Who ever heard of the United State of New York, of Massachusetts, or of Virginia? Who ever heard the term federal or union applied to the aggregation of individuals into one community ? Nor is the other pointless clear — ^that the sovereignty is in the several states, and that our system is a union of twenty-fom- sovereign powers, under » constitutional compact, and not of a divided sovereignty between the states severaUy and the United States. In spite of all that has been said, I maintain that sovereignty is in its nature indivisible. It is the supreme power in a state, and we might just as well speak of half a square, or half of a triangle, as of half a sovereignty. It is a gross error to confound the exercise of sovereign powers with sovereignty itself, or the delegation of such powers with a surrender of them. A sovereign may delegate his powers to be exer cised by as many agents as he may think proper, under such conditions and with such Umitations as he may impose ; but to surrender any por tion of his sovereignty to another is to. annihilate the whole. The senator from Delaware (Mr, Clayton) calls tliis metaphysical reasoning, which, he says, he cannot comprehend. If by metaphysics he means 278 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. that scholastic refinement which makes distinctions without difference, no one can hold it in more utter contempt than I do ; but if, on the contrary, he means the power of analysis and combination — that power which reduces the most complex idea into its elements, which traces causes to their first principle, and, by the power of generaUzation and combination, unites the whole in one harmonious system — -then, so far from deserving contempt, it is the highest attribute of the human mind, It is the power which raises man above the brute^which distinguishes his faculties from mere sagacity, which he holds iu common with inferior animals. It is this power which has raised the astronomer from being a mere gazer at the stars to the high inteUectual eminence of a Ne-wton or Laplace, and astronomy itself' from a mere observation of insulated "facts into that noble science which displays to our admiration the system of the universe. And shall this high power of the mind, which has effected such wonders when directed to the laws which control the material world, be forever prohibited, undur a senseless cry of metaphys ics, from being applied to the high pui pose of political science and legislation ? I hold them to be subject to laws as fixed ac matter itself, and to be as fit a subject for the [ip)ilicati(m of the highest intellectual power. Denunciation may, indeed, fall upon the philosophical inquirer into these first principles, as it did upon Galileo and Bacon when they first unfolded the great discoveries which have immortaUzed their names ; but the time will come when truth will prevail in spite of pre* ¦'udice and denunciation, and when' politics and legislation will be considered as much a science as astronomy and chemistry. In connection wilh this p.nt of the subject I understood the senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives) to any that sovereignty was divided, and that a portion remained with the states severally, and that the residue was vested in the Union. By Union, I suppose the senator meant the United States. If such be his meaning — if he intended to affirm that the sovereignty was in the twenty-four states, in whatever light he may ¦view them, our opinions will not disagree ; but, according to my concep tion, the whole sovereignty is in the several states, whUe the exercise of sovereign powers is divided — a part being exercised under compact through this (Jeneral 6o\ermi]ent, and the residue through the separate state govevuuK'iits. But if the senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives) means to assert that the twenty-four states form but one community, with a singlp so^'prpisrn power as to the objects of the Union, it will be but the revival of the old question, of whether the Union is. a union 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 279 between states, as distmct communities, or a mere aggregate of the American people, as a mass of individuals ; and in this light his opmiona would lead directly to consolidation. But to return to the bfll It is said that the bill ought to pass, because the law must be enforced. The law must be enforcea. The imperial edict must be executed. Ij is vmder snch_§ffiphig|i:.YtC9uched in general terms, without looking to tihe. limitations w.hlchjnust ever exist in thepracHoair exercise of power, that the most cruel and despotic acts ¦ever have been covered. It was such sophistry as this that cast Danid into theTioirs'aeHTSSd'tEe three Iimecents into the fiery furnace. Under the same sophistry the bloody edicts of Nero and Caligula were executed The law must be enforced. Yes, the act imposing the " tea- tax must be executed." This was the very argument which impeUed Lord North aad his administi-ation in that mad career wliich forever -separated us from the British crown. Under a similar sophistry, "that religion must be protected," how many massacres have been perpetrated ? and how many martyrs have been tied to the stake ? What 1 acting on this vague abstraction, are you prepared to enforce a law without con sidering whether it be just or unjast, constitutional or unconstitutional'? Will you collect money wlien it is acknowledged that it is not wanted ¦? He who earns the money, who d?gs it from the earth with the sweat of his brow, has a just title to it against the universe. No one has a right to touch it without his consent except his government and it only to the extent of its legitimate wants ; to take more is robbery, and you propose by this biU to enforce robbery by nwrder. Yes: to this result you must come, by this miserable sophistry, this vague abstraction of ^iforcing the law, without a regard to the fact whether the la-!^ be just or vmjust, constitutional or unconstitutional In the same spirit, we are told that the Union must be preserved, without regard to the means. And~h«3sL_isjtproposed to preserve the Union ? By force ! Does any man iu his setSes~believe that this beaufi?ul structure — this harmonious aggregate of states, produced by The jomfconseiit of aU— _can_be_pres£ci£d-hy_foi-ce ? Its very introduc tion ¦wm'be certain destruction of this Federal Union. No, no. You cannot keep the states united in their constitutional and federal bonds by force. Force may, indeed, hold the parts togeUier, but such union would be the bond between master and slave : a vmion of exaction on one side, and of unqualified obedience on the other. That obedience which, we are told by the senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Wilkins), is 280 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 the Union 1 Yes, exaction on the side of the master ; for this very bfll is intended to collect what can be no longer called taxes — ^the volvmtary contribution of a free people — ^but tribute — tribute to be coUected under the mouths of the cannon ! Your custom-house is already transferred to a garrison, and that garrison with its batteries turned, not against the enemy of your country, but on subjects (I wiU not say citizens), on whom you propose to levy contributions. Has reason fled from our borders ? Have we ceased to reflect ? It is madness to suppose that the Union can be preserved by force, I tell you plainly, that the biU, shoidd it pass, cannot be enforced. It wiU prove only a blot upon your statute-book, a reproach to the year, and a disgrace to the American Senate. I repeat that it wiU not be executed : it will rouse the dormant spirit of the people, and open their eyes to the approach of despotism. The coimtry has sunk into avarice and poUtical corruption, from which nothing can arouse it but some measure, on the part of the government, of foUy and madness, such as that now under consideration. Disgujse it as yon mav the controversy is one Itetiyeen— powEr and Ubertjjand I wiU teU the gentlemen who are opposed to me,J;hat as strong as may be tKeTSVeTTf-pgweroirthcii-'side. the love of liberty is ii(ill iiliiiiini I III! iinii I TTi iliiij furnishes many instances of simflar struggles where the love of liberty has prevailed against power under every disadvantage, and among them few more striking than that of our own Revolution ; where, as strong as was the parent country, and feeble as were the colomes, yet under the impulse of Uberty, and the blessing of God, they gloriously triumphed in the contest. There are, indeed, many and striking analogies between that and the present controversy : they both originated substantiaUy in the same cause, -with this differ ence, that, in the present case, the power of taxation ig converted into that of regulating industry ; in that the power of regvflating industry, by the regulation of commerce, was attempted to be converted into the power of taxation. Were I to trace the analogy farther, we should find that the perversion of the taxing power, in one case, has given pre cisely the same control to the Northern section over the industry of the Southern section of the Union, which the power to regulate commerce gave to Great Britain over the industry of the colonies ; and that the very articles in which the colonies were permitted to have a free trade, and those in which the mother-country had a monopoly, are almost identically the same as those in which the Southern States are per mitted to have a free trade by the act of 1832, and in which the Nor- 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL 281 thern States have, by the same act, secured a monopoly : the jnly dif ference is in the means. In the former, the colonies were permitted to have a free trade with aU countries south of Cape Finisterre, a cape in the northern part of Spain ; while north of that the trade of the colonies was prohibited, except through the mother-covmtiy, by means of her commercial regulations. If we compare the products of the country north and south of Cape Finistfirre, we shall find them almost identical ¦with the list of the protected and unprotected articles contained in the act of last year. Nor does the analogy terminate here. The very argu ments resorted to at the commencement of the American Revolution, and the measures adopted, and the motives assigned to bring on that contest (to enforce the law), are almost identically the same. But to retvurn from this digression to the consideration of the biU. Whatever difference of opinion may exist upon other points, there is one on which I should suppose there can be none : that this bill rests on principles which, if carried out, wiU ride over state sovereignties, and that it wfll be idle for any of its advocates hereafter to talk of state rights. The senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives) says that he is the ad vocate of state rights ; but he must permit me to tell Wm that, although he may diff'er in premises from the other gentlemen with whom he acts on this occasion, yet in supporting this bfll he obUterates every vestige of distinction between him and them, saving only that, professing the principles of '98, his example will be more pernicious than that of the most open and bitter opponents of the rights of the states. I wfll also add, what I am compelled to say, that I must consider him (Mr. Rives) as less consistent than our old opponents, whose conclusions were fairly dra-wn from their premises, while his premises ought to have led hira to opposite conclusions. The gentleman has told us that the new-fangled doctrines, as he chooses to call them, have bi'ought state rights into dis repute. I must teU him, in reply, that what he calls new-fangled are but the doctrines of '98 ; and that it is he (Mr. Rives), and others with him, who, professing these doctrines, have degraded them by explaining away their meaning and efficacy. He (Mr. R,) has disclaimed, in behalf of Virginia, the authorship of nuUification. I will not dispute that point. If Virginia chooses to throw away one of her brightest ornaments, she must not hereafter complain that it has become the property of another. But whfle I have, as a representative of Carolina, no right to complain of the disavowal of the senator from Virginia, I must beUeve that he (Mr. R.) haa done his native state great injustice by declarmg on this 982 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-38. floor that, when she gravely resolved, in''98, that " 'u cases of deUberate and dangerous mfractions of the Constitution, the states, as parties to the compact have the right and are iu duty bound, to interpose to arrest the progress of the evil, and to maintain within their respective limits the authorities, rights, and Hberties appertaining to them," she meant no more than to ordain the right to protest and to remonstrate. To suppose that in putting forth so solemn a declaration, which she afterward sustained by so able and elaborate an argument, she meant no more than to assert what no one had ever denied, would be to sup pose that the state had been guilty of the most egregious trifling that ever was exhibited on so solemn an occasion. In reviewing the ground over which I have passed, it wfll be apparent that the question in controversy involves that most deeply important of all poUtical questions, whether ours is a federal or a consolidated government : a question, on the decision of wliich depend, as I solemnly believe, the Uberty of the people, their happiness, and the place which we are destined to hold in the moral and intellectual scale of nations. Never was there a controversy in which more important consequences were involved : not excepting that between Persia and Greece, decided by the battles of Marathon, Platea, and Salamis; which gave ascendency to the genius of Europe over that of Asia ; aud which, in its conse quences, has continued to affect the destiny of so large a portion of the world even to this day. There are often close analogies between events apparently very remote, which are strikingly iUustrated in this case. In the great contest between Greece and Persia, between European and Asiatic policy and civiUzation, the very question between the federal and consoUdated form of government was involved. The Asiatic govern ments, from the remotest time, -with some exceptions on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, have been based on the principle of consoU- dation, which considers the whole community as but a unit, and consoli dates its powers in a central point The opposite principle has pre vailed in Europe — Greece, throughout all her states, was based on a federal system. All were united in one common, but loose bond, and the governments of the several states partook, for the most part, of a complex organization, which distributed poUtical power among different members of the community. The same principles prevafled in ancient Haly ; and, if we turn to the Teutonic race, our great ancestors — the race which occupies the first place in power, civflization, and science, Rnd which possesses the largest and the fairest pai-t of Europe — yre 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 283 shall find that their governments were based on the federal organiza tion, as has been cleai-ly iUustrated by a recent and able -writer on the British Constitution (Mr. Palgrave), from whose writings I introduce the following extract ; " In this manner the first establishment of the Teutonic States was effected. They were assemblages of septs, clans, and tribes ; they were confederated hosts and armies, led on by princes, magistrates, and chieftains; each of whom was originally independent, and each of whom lost a portion of his pristine independence in proportion as he and his compeers became united under the supremacy of a sovereign, who was superinduced upon the state, first as a military commander, and afterward as a king. Yet, notwithstanding this political connection, each member of the state continued to retain a considerable portion of the rights of sovereignty. Every ancient Teutonic monarchy must be considered as a federation : it is not a unit of which the smaller bodies politic therein contained arc the fractions, but they are the integers, and the state is the multiple Which results from thera. Dukedoms and counties, burghs and baronies, towns and townships, and shires, form the kingdom ; all, in a certain degree, strangers to each other, and sep arate in jurisdiction, though all obedient to the supreme executive au thority. This general description, though not always strictly appUcable in terms, is always so substantially and in effect ; and hence it becomes necessary to discard the language which has been very generally em ployed in treating on the English Constitution, It has been supposed that the kingdom Was reduced into a regular and gradual subordination of government and that the Various legal districts of Which it is com posed arose from the divisions and subdivisions of the country. But this hypothesis, which tends greatly to perplex our history, cannot be supported by fact ; and instead of viewing the Constitution as a whole, and then proceeding to its parts, we must examine it synthetically, and assume that the supreme authorities of the state were created by the concentration of the powers originally belonging to the members and Corporations of which it is composed." [Here Mr. C. gave way for a motion to adjourn.] On the next day Mr. Calhoun said, I have omitted at the proper place, in the covirse of my observations yesterday, two or three points, to which I -wfll now advert, before I resume the discussion where I left off I have stated that the ordinance and acts of South CaroUna were directed, not against the revenue, but against the system of protection. 284 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 But it may be asked. If such was her object, how happens it that she has declared the whole system void — revenue as well as protection, without discrimination ! It is this question which I propose to answer. Her justification wiU be found in the necessity of the case ; and if there be any blame, it cannot attach to her. The two are so blended, through out the whole, as to make the entire revenue system subordinate to the protective, so as to constitute a complete system of protection, in which it is impossible to discriminate the two elements of which it is com posed. South Carolina, at least, could not make the discrimination, and she was reduced to the alternative of acquiescing in a system which she believed to be unconstitutional, and which she felt to be oppressive and ruinous, or to consider the whole as one, equally contaminated through all its parts, by the unconstitutionality of the protective por tion, and, as such, to be resisted by the act of the state. I maintain that the state has a right to regard it in the latter character, and that, if a loss of revenue follow, the favUt is not hers, but of this government, which has improperly blended together, in a manner not to be separated by the state, two systems wholly dissimilar. If the sincerity of the state be doubted ; if it be supposed that her action is against revenue as well as protection, let the two be separated : let so much of the duties aa are intended for revenue be put iu one bill, and the residue intended for protection be put in another, and I pledge myself that the ordinance and the acts of the state will cease as to the former, and be directed exclusively against the latter. I also stated, in the course of my reisarka-jesterday, and I trust I have conclusJEely nhown, that tlia.act_ofl816, witntEe"B;sc6ption of a nn^IrTfrm, to whirh T hnvr nlliided. Was, in reality, a revenue measure, and that Carolina and the other states, in supporting it, have not incur red the -sljrfitest responsibiUty in relation to the system of^protection whichjjas sTnca gtoanup, and wmch now so deeply distracts the country. Sir, I am wiUingTaS' Oily uf Llrg' representatives of Carolina, aadTbalieve I speak the sentiment of the state, to take that act as the basis of a permanent adjustment of the tariff, simply reducing the duties, in an average proportion, on all the items to the revenue point I make that offer now to the advocates of the protective system ; but I must, in candor, inform them that such an adjustment would distribute the revenue between the protected and unprotected articles more favorable to the state, and to the South, and less so to the manufacturing interest, than an average uniform ad valorem, and, accordingly, more so than 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 285 that now proposed by Carolina through her convention. After such an offer, no man who values his candor wiU dare accuse the state, or those who have represented her here, with inconsistency in reference to the point under consideration. I omitted, also, on yesterday, to notice a remark of the senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives), that the oifly difficulty in adjusting the tariff grew out of the ordinance and the acts of South Carolina. I must attribute an assertion so inconsistent with the facts to an ignorance of the occur rences of the last few years in reference to this subject, occasioned by the absence of the gentleman from the United States, to which he himself has aUuded in his remarks. If the senator will take pains to inform himself he -will find that this protective system advanced with a continued and rapid step, in spite of petitions, remonstrances, and protests, of not only Carolina, but also of Virginia and of all the Southern States, until 1S'J8. when Carolina, for the first time, changed the character of her resistance, by holding up her reserved rights as the shield of her defence against farther encroachment. This attitude alone, unaided by a single state, arrested the farther progress of the system, so that the question from that period to this, on the part of the manufacturers, has been, not how to acquire more, but to retain that which they have acquired I wiU inform the gentleman that if this attitude had not been taken on the part of the state, the question would not now be how duties ought to be repealed, but a question, as to the protected articles, between prohibition on one side and the duties estab lished by the act of 1828 on the other. But a single remark will be sufficient in reply to what I must consider the invidious remark of the senator from Virginia (Mr. Rives). The act of 1832, which has not yet gone into operation, and which was passed but a few months since, was declared by the supporters of the system to be a permanent adjustment, and the bfll proposed by the Treasury Department, not essentially differ ent from the act itself, was in like manner declared to be intended by the administration as a permanent arrangement What has occurred since, except this ordinance, and these abused acts of the calumniated state, to produce this mighty revolution in reference to this odious sys tem ! Unless the senator from Virginia can assign some other cause, he is bound, upon every principle of fairness, to retract this vmjust aspersion upon the acts of South Carolina. The senator from Delaware (Mr. Clayton), as well as others, has relied -with great emphasis on the fact that we are citizens of the 286 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. United States. I do not object to the expression, nor shaU I detract from the proud and elevated feelings with which it is associated ; but I trust that I may be permitted to raise-the inquiry. In what manner are we citizens of the United States ? without weakening the patriotic feeling with which, I trust, it will ever be uttered. If by citizen of the United States he means a citizen at large, one whose citizenship extends to the entire geographical Umits of the country, without having a local citizenship in some state or territory, a sort of citizen of the world, all I have to say is, that such a citizen would be a perfect nondescript ; that not a single individual of this description can be found in the entire mass of our population. Notwithstanding all the pomp and display of eloquence on the occasion, every citizen is a citizen of some state or territory, and, as such, under an express provision of the Constitution, is entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states ; and it is in this, and in no other sense, that we are citizens of the United States. The senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. DaUas), indeed, relies upon that provision in the Constitution which gives Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and the operation of the rule actually established under this authority, to prove that naturaUzed citizens are citizens at large, without being citizens of any of the states. I do not deem it necessary to examine the law of Con gress upon this subject, or to reply to the arguments of the senator, though I cannot doubt that he (Mr. D.) has taken an entirely erroneous view of the subject It is sufficient that the power of Congress extends simply to the estabUshment of a uniform rule by which foreigners may be naturalized in the several states or territories, without infringing in any other respect, in reference to naturalization, the rights of the states as they existed before the adoption of the Constitution. Having suppUed the omissions of yesterday, I now resume the sub ject at the point where my remarks then terminated. The Senate wfll remember that I stated, at their close, that the great question at issue is, whether ours is a federal or a consolidated system of govern ment; a system in which the parts, to use the emphatic language of Mr. Palgrave, are the integers, and the whole the multiple, or in which the wliole is a unit and the parts the fractions ; that I stated, that on the decision of this question, I beUeve, depended not only the liberty and prosperity of this country, but the pla,ce which we are destined to hold in the inteUectual and moral scale of nations. I stated, also, in my remarks on this point that there is a striking analogy between thia 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 287 and the great struggle between Persia aud Greece, which was decided by the battles of Marathon, Platea, and Salamis, and which immortal ized the names of Mfltiades and Themistocles. I fllustrated this an alogy by showhig that centralism or consoUdation, with the exception of a few nations along the eastern border of the Mediterranean, has been the pervading principle in the Asiatic governments, while the federal system, or, what is the same in principle, that system which or ganizes a commvmity in reference to its parts, has prevafled in Europe. Among the few exceptions in the Asiatic nations, the government of ^e_t3Eslve tribes of Israel, in its parly pB'-'"'^| '° t*^" mnot striking. THeir government, at first, -was a mere confederation without any cen tral power, till a mflitary chieftain, with the title of king, was placed at its head, without, however, merging the original organization of the twelve distinct ti-ibes. This was the commencement of that central action among that pecuUar people which, iu three generations, ter minated in a permanent division of their tribes. It is impossible even for a careless reader to peruse the history of that event without being forcibly struck Avith the analogy in the causes which led to their separa tion, and those which now threaten us with a similar calamity. With the estabUshment of the central power in the king commenced a sys tem of taxation, which, under Kmg Solomon, was greatly increased to defray the expense of rearing the temple, of enlarging and embellish ing Jerusalem, the seat of the central govemmeut, and the other pro fuse expenditures of his magnificent reign. Increased taxation was foUowed by its natural consequences — discontent and complaint ; which before his death began to excite resistance. On the succession of his son, Rehoboam, the ten tribes, headed by Jeroboam, demanded a re duction of the taxes ; the temple being finished, and the embeUishment of Jervisalem completed, and the money which had been raised for that purpose being no longer required, or, in other words, the debt being paid, they demanded a reduction of the duties — a repeal of the tariff. The demand was taken under consideration, and after consulting the old men, the counsellors of '98, who advised a reduction, he then took the opinion of the younger politicians, who had since grown up, and knew not the doctrines of their fathers ; he hearkened unto then- covmsel, and refused to make the reduction, and the secession of the ten tribes under Jeroboam foUowed. The tribes of Judah and Ben jamin, which had received the diabursements, alone remained to the house of David. 288 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. But to return to the point immediately under consideration. I know that it is not only the opinion of a large majority of our country, but it may be said to be the opinion of the age, that the very beau ideal of a perfect government is the government of a majority, acting through a representative body, without check or limitation in its power ; yet, if we may test this theory by experience and reason, we shall find that, so far from being perfect, the necessary tendency of all governments, based upon the wfll of an absolute majority, without constitutional check or limitation of power, is to faction, corruption, anarchyj and despotism ; and this, whether the will of the majority be expressed directly through an assembly of the people themselves, or by their representatives. I know that, in venturing this assertion, I utter that which is unpopular both within and without these walls ; but where truth and liberty are concerned, such considerations should not be re garded. I will place the decision of this point on the fact that no gov ernment of the kind, among the many attempts which have been made, has ever endured for a single generation, but, on the contrary, has in variably experienced the fate which I have assigned to it Let a single instance be pointed out, and I wfll surrender my opinion. But, if we had not the aid of experience to direct our judgment, reason itself would be a certain guide. The view which considers the com munity as a unit, and all its parts as having a similar interest, is radi cally erroneous. However small the community may be, and however homogeneous its interests, the moment that government is put into operation, as soon as it begins to collect taxes and to make appropria tions, the different portions of the community must, of necessity, bear different and opposing relations in reference to the action of the gov ernment. There must inevitably spring up two interests — a direction and a stockholder interest — an interest profiting by the action of the government and interested in increasing its powers and action ; and another, at whose expense the political machine is kept in motion. I know how difficult it is to communicate distinct ideas on such a sub ject, through the medium of general propositions, without particular iUustration ; and in order that I may be distinctly understood, though at the hazard of being tedious, I will iUustrate the important principle which I have ventured to advance by examples. Let us, then, suppose a smaU community of five persons, separated from the rest of the world ; and, to make the example strong, let us suppose them aU to be engaged in the same pursuit, and to be of equal 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 289 -wealth. Let us further suppose that they determine to govern the commvmity by the -will of a majority ; and, to make the case as strong as possible, let us suppose that the majority, in order to meet the ex penses of the government, lay an equal tax, say of $100, on each indi vidual of this Uttle community. Their treasury would contain five hundred dollars. Three are a majority ; and they, by supposition, have contributed three hundred as their portion, and the other two (the minority), two hundred. The three have the right to make the appro priations as they may think proper. The question is. How would the principle of the absolute and undbecked majority operate, under these circumstances, in this Uttle commvmity 3 If the three be governed by a sense of justice — if they should appropriate the money to the objects for which it was raised, the common and equal benefit of the five, then the object of the association would be fairly and honestly effected, and each would have a common interest in the government But, should the majority pursue an opposite course — should they appropriate the money in a maimer to benefit their own particular interest, -without re gard to the interest of the two .(and that they wiU so act, unless there be some efficient check, he who best knows human nature wiU least doubt), who does not see that the three and the two would have directly opposite interests in reference tb the action of the government ? The three who contribute to the common treasury but three hvmdred dollars, covfld, in fact, by appropriating the five hvmdred to their own vise, convert the action of the government into the means of making money, and, of consequence, would have a durect interest hi increasing the taxes. They put in three hundred and take out five : that is, they take back to themselves aU that they had put in, and in addition, that which was put in by their associates ; or, in other words, taking taxa tion and appropriation together, they have gained, and their associates have lost two hundred dollars by the fiscal action of the government Opposite interests, in reference to the action of the government, are thus created between them : the one ha-ving an interest in favor, and the other against the taxes ; the one to increase, and the other to de crease the taxes ; the one to retain the taxes when the money is no longer wanted, and the other to repeal them when the objects for which they were levied have been executed. Let us now suppose this commvmity of five to be raised to twenty-four individuals, to bj governed, in Uke manner, by the -will of a majority: it is obvious that the same principle would divide them into tw« 13 290 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33. interests — into a majority and a minority, thirteen agamst eleven, or in some other proportion; and that all the consequences which I have shown to be appUcable to the small community of five would be equally appUcable to the greater, the cause not depending upon the nvunber, but resulting necessarily from the action of the government itself. Let us now suppose that, instead of governing themselves directly in an assembly of the whole, without the intervefatiou of agents, they should adopt the representative principle, and that instead of being governed by a majority of themselves, they shovdd be governed by a majority of their representatives. It is obvious that the operation of the system would not be affected by the change : the representatives being responsi ble to those who chouse them, would conform to the wfll of their con stituents, and would act as they would do were they preseut and acting for themselves ; and the same conflict of interest, which we have shown would exist in one case, would equally exist in the other. In either case, the inevitable result would be a system of hostile legislation on the part of the majority, or the stronger interest, against the minority, or the weaker interest: the object of which, on the part of the former, would be to exact as much as possible from the latter, which would necessarily be resisted by all the means in their power. Warfare, by legislation, would thus be commenced between the parties, with the same object, and not less hostile than that which is carried on between distinct and rival nations — the only diBtinotion would be in the instru ments and the mode. Enactments, in the one case, would supply what could only be effected by arms in the other ; and the inevitable opera tion would be to engender the most hostUe feelings between the parties, which would merge every feeUng of patriotism — that feeUng which embraces the whole, and substitute in its place the most violent party attachment ; and, instead of having one common centre of attachment, around which the affections of the community might raUy, there would, in fact, be two — tlie interests of the majority, to which those who con stitute that majority would be more attached than they would be to the whole, and that of the minority, to which they, in like manner, would also be more attached than to the interests of the whole. Faction would thus take the place of patriotism ; and, with the loss of patriot ism, corruption must necessarily follow, and in its train, anarchy, and, finally^ despotism, or the estabUshment of absolute power in a single individual, as a means of arresting the conffict of hostfle interests : on the principle that it is better to submit to the -wiU of a single individual. 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 291 who, by being made lord and master of the whole commvmity, would have an equal interest in the protection of aU the parts. Let us next suppose that in order to avert the calamitous train of consequences, this Uttle commvmity should adopt a written constitution, -with Umitations restricting the will of the majority, in order to protect the minority against tlie oppression which I have shown would neces sarily result without such restrictions. It is obvious that the case woifld not be in the sUghtest degree varied if the majority be left in possession of the right of judging exclusively of the extent of its powers, without any right on the part of the minority to enforce the restrictions imposed by the Constitution on the will of the majority. The point is almost too clear for iUustration. Nothing can be more certain than that, when a constitution grants power, and imposes limitations on the exer cise of that power, whatever interests may obtain possession of the government, -will be in fgkvor of extending the power atjflte-expense of \Jhe limitation ; and that unless those in whftqff VipVialf tha Hmknt.inna -iTPre jmpngmHra-iWp-ul-gQmp tnrm nrmodi^^-tligright of enforcing them, the power wiU ultimately supersede the limitation, and the government must operate precisely in the same manner as if the wfll of the majority governed without constitution or limitation of power. I have thus presented all possible modes in which a government founded upon the wiU of an absolute majority wiU be modified, and have demonstrated that, in aU its forms, whether in a majority of the people, as in a mere Democracy, or in a majority of their representatives, -without a constitution or with a constitution, to be interpreted as the ¦will of the majority, the result wiU be the same : two hostile interests wfll inevitably be created by the action of the government, to be followed by hostile legislation, and that by faction, corruption, anarchy, and despotism. The great and solemn question here presents itself. Is there any remedy for these evils ? on the decision of which depends the question, whether the people can govern themselves, which has been so often asked with so much skepticism and doubt There is a remedy, and but one, the effects of which, whatever may be the form, is to organize society in reference to this conflict of interests, which springs out of the action of government ; and which can only be done by giving to each part the right of self protection ; which, in a word, instead of consider ing the community of twenty-four a single commvmity, having a common interest, and to be governed by the smgle -will of an entire majority. 292 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 shall, upon aU questions tending to bring the parts into conflict the thirteen against the eleven, take the will, not of the twenty-four as a unit but that of the thirteen and that of the eleven separately, the majority of each governmg the parts, and where they concur, governing the whole, and where they disagree, arresting the action of the govern ment. This I wiU call the concurring, as distinct from the absolute majority. It would not be, as was generally supposed, a minority governing a majority. In either way the number would be the same, whether taken as the absolute or as the concurring majority. Thus, the majority of the thirteen is seven, and of the eleven six ; and the two together make thirteen, which is the majority of twenty-four. But, though the nuinber is the same, the mode of counting is essentially different : the one representing the strongest interest, and the other, the entire interests of the community. The first mistake is, in supposing that the government of the absolute majority is the government of tliis people — that beau ideal of a perfect government which has been so enthusiastically entertained iu every age by the generous and patriotic, where civilization and liberty have made the smallf st progress. There can be no greater error : the government of the people is the govern ment of the whole community — of the twenty-four — the self-government of all the parts — too perfect to be reduced to practice in the present, or any past stage of human society. The government of the absolute majority, instead of the government of the people, is but the govern ment of the strongest interests, and, when not efficiently checked, is the most tyrannical and oppressive that can be devised. Between this ideal perfection on one side and despotism on the other, none other can be devised but that which considers society in reference to its parts, as differently affected by the action of the government and which takes the sense of each part separately, and thereby the sense of the whole, in the manner already iUustrated. These principles, as I have already stated, are not affected by the number of which the community may be composed, and are just as ap pUcable to one of thirteen millions, the number which composes ours, as of the small community of twenty-four, which I have supposed for the purpose of iUustration ; and are not less applicable to the twenty-four states united in one community, than to the case of the twenty-fom- indi- -viduals. There is, indeed, a distinction between a large and a smaU community, not affecting the principle, but the violence of the action. In the former, the sinularity of the interests of all the parts wfll limit 1832-33.] SPEECH AGAINST THE FORCE BILL. 293 * the oppression from the hostile action of the parts, in a great degree, to the fiscal action of the government merely ; but in the large commuuity, spreading over a counti-y of great extent, and having a great diversity of interests, with different kinds of labor, capital, and production, the conflict and oppression wiU extend, not only to a monopoly of the ap propriations on the part of the stronger interests, but wiU end in unequal taxes, and a general conflict between the entire interests of confiicting sections, which, if not arrested, by the most powerful checks, wfll ter minate in the most oppressive tyranny that can be conceived, or in the destruction of the community itself If we turn our attention from these supposed cases, and direct it to our government and its actual operfition, we shall find.a practical con- fii-mation of the truth of what has been stated, not only of the oppres sive operation of the system of an absolute majority, but also a striking and beautiful illustration, in the formation of our system, of the princi ple of the concurring majority, as distinct from the absolute, which I have asserted to be the only means of efficiently checking the abuse of power, and, of course, the only solid foundation of constitutional liberty. That our government, for many year.s, has been gradually verging to consoUdation ; that the Constitution has gradually become a dead letter ; and that all restrictions upon the power of government have been vir tually removed, so as practically to convert the General Government into a government of an absolute majority, without check or Umitation, cannot be denied by any one who has impartiaUy observed its opera tion. It is not necessary to trace the commencement and gradual progress of the causes which have produced this change in our system ; it is sufficient to state that the change has taken place within the last few years. What has ,been the resvflt ? Precisely that which might have been anticipated : the growth of faction, corruption, anarchy, and, if not despotism itself, its near approach, as witnessed in the provisions of this bill. And from what have these consequences sprung ? We have been involved in no war ! We have been at peace with all the world. We have been visited with no national calamity. Our people have been advancing in general intelligence, and, I wiU add, as great and alarm ing as has been the advance of political corruption among the merce nary corps who look to government for support the morals and vfrtue of the community at large have been advancing in unprovement What, I wiU again repeat is the cause ? No other can be assigned but 294 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1832-33 a departure fi-om the fundamental principles of the Constitution, which has converted the government into the will of an absolute and irrespon sible majority, and which, by the laws that must inevitably govern in all such majorities, has placed in conflict the great interests of the coun- tiy: by a system of hostile legislation, by an oppressive and unequal imposition of taxes, by unequal and profuse appropriations, and by ren dering the entire labor and capital of the weaker interest subordinate to the stronger. This is the cause, and these the fruits, which have converted the gov ernment into a mere instrument of taking money from one portion of the community to be given to another, and which hi of the character of the whole. (Here the Secretary, on the caU of Mr. CaUioun, read the two petitions.) Such, (resumed Mr, C.,) is the language ^eld_ towards us and ours; the pecuUar institution of the South, that on the maintenance oFwfiTch {Ee"very exist ehc'e of the slaveholding states depends^ js^ pronquncecT to beSnftll and-"bdiou3,™ifIEe^iprrof"(ao3and man; and this with a sys- ~leniatrc design of rendering us hateful in the eyes of the world, with a view to a general crusade against us and our institutions. This, too, in the legislative haUs of the Union, created by these confederated states for the better protection of their peace, their .^safety, and their respective institutions ; and yet we, the representatives of twelve of these sove reign states against whom this deadly war is waged, are expected to sit here in silence, hearing ourselves and our constituents day after day denounced, without uttering a word ; if we but open our lips, the charge of agitation is resounded on all sides, and we are held up as seeking to aggravate the evil wliich we resist Every reflecting mind must see in all this a state of things deeply and dangerously diseased, I do not belong, said Mr, C. tp tlip .grhnp] which holdsthat aggression is toTieniet by concession. Mine is the opposite creed, which teaches thai encroachments must be met at the beginning, and that those who acf on the opposite principle are prepared to become slaves. In this case, in particular, I hold coiicession or compromise to be fatal If we concede an inch, concession would follow concession — compromise would foUow compromise, until our ranks would be so broken that effectual resistance would be impossible. We must meet the enemy on the fron tier, with a fixed determination of maintaining our position at every hazard. Consent to receive these insulting petitions, and the next de mand ¦will be that they be referred to a committee, in order that they m^ be deUberated and acted upon. At the last session, we were 1837.] SPEECH ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 331 modestly asked to receive them simply to lay them on the table, without any view of ulterior action. I then told the senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Buchanan), who strongly urged that course in the Senate, that it was a position that could not be mamtained ; as the argument in favor of acting on the petitions, if we were bound to receive, could not be resisted. I then said that the next step would be to refer the petition to a committee, and I already see indications that such is now the mteution. If we yield, that wiU be foUowed by another, and we would thus pro ceed, step by step, to the final consummation of the object of these peti tions. We are now told that the most effectual mode of arresting the progress of abolition is to reason it down ; and with this view, it is urged that the petitions ought to be referred to a committee. That is the very ground which was taken at the last session in the other house ; but, in stead of arresting its progress, it has since advanced more rapidly than ever. The most unquestionable right may be rendered doubtful if once admitted to be a subject of controversy, and that would be the case in the present instance. The subject is bey-ond the jurisdiction of Congress • — they have no right to touch it in any shape or form, or to make it the subject of deliberation or discussion. In opposition to this view, it is m-ged that Congress is bound__by_,iy[ie Constitution to receive petitions J£'efei5T£S..^ni„9-a..£XS£X_subject, -whietiier within its constitutional competency or not. I hold the doctrine "to Be absurd, and do solemrily^eUeye^'tEarif wou easy.to^irgve thatit has the right to aboUsh slavery, as that it is bound to receive "petitions for that purpose! The very existence of the rule that requires a question to be put on the reception of petitions, is conclusive to show that there is no such obUgation. It has been a standing rule from the commencement of the government, and clearly shows the sense of those who formed the Constitution on this point. The question on the recep tion would be absurd, if, as is contended, we are bound to receive : but I do not intend to argue the question ; I discussed it fuUy at the last session, and the arguments then advanced neither have nor can be an swered. As widely as this incendiary spirit has spread, it has not yet infected this body, or the great mass of the intelligent and business portion of the North ; but unless it be speedily stopped, it wiU spread and work upward tUl it brings the two great sections of the Union into deadly conflict. This is not a new impression with me. Several years since, in a discussion -with one of the senators from Massachusetts (Mr. 332 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. Webster), before this fell spirit had showed itself, I then predicted that the doctrine of the proclamation and the force biU — that this govern ment had a right, in the last resort, to determine the extent of its own powers, and enforce it at the point of the bayonet, which was so warmly maintained by that senator — ^would at no distant day arouse the dor mant spirit of Abolitionism ; I told him that the doctrine was tantamount to the assumption of unlimited power on the part of the government, and that such would be the impression^ on tiie public nujiid in~a Ege porEon of the Union, The consequence would be inevitalile^a large "^rf ion of "tlie WortKern States believed slavery to be a sin, and would believe it to be an obUgation of conscience to abolish^t, iT'they" should -feel'themselves in any degree responsible for its continuance, and that his doctrine would necessarily lead to the belief of such responsibUity. I then predicted that it would commence, as it has, with this fanatical portion of society ; and that they would begin their operation on the ignorant, the weak, the young, and the thoughtless, and would gradually extend upward till they became strong enough to obtain poUtical con trol, when he, and others holding the highest stations in society, woidd, however reluctant, be compelled to yield to their doctrine, or be driven into obscurity. But four years have siuce elapsed, and aU this is already in a course of regular fulfilment. Standing at the point of time at which we have now arrived, it will not be more difficult to trace the course of future events now than it was then. Those who imagine that the spirit now abroad in the BTorth wiU die away of itself without a shock or convulsion, have formed a very inadequate conception of its real character ; it wUl continue to rise and spread, unless prompt and efficient measures to stay its progress be adopted. Already it has taken possession of the pulpit, of the schools, and, to a considerable extent, of the press ; those great instruments by which the mind of the rising generation wUl be formed. However sound the great body of the non-slaveholding states are at present, in the course of a few years they will be succeeded by those who have been taught to hate the people and institutions of nearly one half of this Union, with a hatred more deadly than one hostile nation ever entertained towards another. It is easy to see the end. By the necessary course of events, if left to themselves, we must become, finally, two people. It is impossible, under the deadly hatred which must spring up between the two great sections, if the present causes are per mitted to operate unchecked, that we should continue under the samei 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNENT FROM BANKS. 333 poUtical system. The conflicting elements would burst the Union asunder, as powerful as are the links which hold it together. AboUtion and the Union cannot coexist. As the friend of the Union, I openly proclauu it, and the sooner it is known the better. The former may now be controlled, but in a short time it will be beyond the power of man to arrest the course of events. We of the South wiU not, cannot surrender our institutions. To maintain the existing relations between the two races inhabiting that section of the Union is indispensable to the peace and happiness of both. It cannot be subverted without drenching the country iu blood, and extirpating one or other of the races. Be it good or bad, it has grown up -with our societies and insti tutions, and is so interwoven with them that to destroy it would be to destroy us as a people. But let me not be understood as admitting, even by impUcation, that the existing relations between the two races, in the slaveholding states, is an evU : far other-wise ; I hold it to be a good, as it has thus far proven itself to be, to both, and will continue to prove so, if not disturbed by the fell spirit of abolition. I appeal to facts. Never before has the black race of Central Africa, from the dawn of -history to the presenFday, attained a condition so civiUzed and so improved, not only physically, but morally and intellectuaUy, It came among us in a low, degraded, and savage condition, and, iu the course of a few generations, it has grown up under the fostering care of our institutions, as reviled as they have been, to its present compara tive civiUzed condition. This, with the rapid increase of numbers, is conclusive proof of the general happiness of the race, in spite of aU the exaggerated tales to the contrary. In the meanjtini^ the white or Europeari race has not degenerated It has kept pace with its brethren in other sections of the Union where slavery does not exist._ It is odious to make comparison ; but I appeal to aU sides whether the South is not equal in virtue, inteUigence, pa triotism, courage, disinterestedness, and all the high quaUties which adorn our nature. I ask whether we have not contributed our full share of talents and poUtical wisdom in forming and sustaining this political fabric: and whether we have not constantly inclined most strongly to the side of liberty, and been the first to see, and first to resist, the encroachments of power. In one thing only are we inferior — the arts of gain ; we acknowledge Brfl'weTT5"l^TweaRFy 'tEan tEe NortEern "section of this' Union, but I trace this mainly to the jfiscal action oFtliis government, which has extracted much from, and spent 334 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. Uttle among us. Had it been the reverse — if the exaction had been froLA tiie other section, and the expenditure with us — this point of su periority would not be against us now, as it was not at the formation of this government. But I take higher ground. I hold that, in the present state of civiU- zatlon, where two races of different origin, anddistinguished by color, 'affd^ other physical differences, as weU as intellectual, are brought to- gether, the relation now existing in the slaveholding states between the two is, instead of an evil^ a goo^ — ^a_po3itiye_ goo37~Ifeel myself called upon to speak freely upon the subject, where the honor and interests of those I represent are involved, I hold, then, that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of thft community did not, in point of fact, Uve on the labor of the other. Broad and general as is this assertion, it is fully borne out by history. This is not the proper occasion, but if it were, it would not be difficult to trace the various devices by which the wealth of all civilized com munities has been so unequally divided, and to show by what means so smaU a share has been aUotted to those by whose labor it was pro duced, and so large a share given to the non-producing class. The de vices are almost innumerable, from the brute force and gross supersti tion of ancient times, to the subtle and artful fiscal contrivances of mod ern, I might well challenge a comparison between them and the more direct, simple^ and patriarchal mode by which the labor of the African race is among us commanded by the Europeaa I may say, with truth, that in few countries so much is left to the share of the laborer, and so little exacted from him, or where there is more kind attention to him in sickness or infirmities of age. Compare liis condi tion with the tenants of the poor-houses in the most civilized portions of Europe — look at the sick, and the old and infirm slave, on the one hand, in the midst of his family and friends, under the kind superintend ing care of his master and mistress, aud compare it with the forlorn and wretched condition of the pauper in the poor-house. But I will not dwell on this aspect of the question : I turn to the political ; and here I fearlessly assert, that the existing relation between the two races in the South, against which {Eese~BIiii3"fanatics"afe" waging war, forms the most solid and durable foundation on which to rear free and stable poUtical institutions. It is uselesstg^ disguise the fact. There Ts, and always has been, in an advanced stage of wealth and civilization, a conflict between labor and capital. The condition of society in the 1837.] SPEECH ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 335 South exempts us from the disorders and dangers resulting from this conflict; and which explains why it is that the political condition of tho slaveholding states has been so much more stable and quiet than those of the North. The advantages of the former, in this respect, wiU be come more and more manifest, if left undisturbed by interference from -without, as the country advances in wealth and numbers. We have, in fact, but just entered that condition of society where the strength and durabUity of our poUtical institutions are to be tested ; and I venture nothing in predicting that the experience of the next generation wiU fuUy test how vasUy more favorable our condition of society is to that of other sections for free and stable institutions, provided we are not disturbed by the interference of others, or shall have sufficient intelli gence and spirit to resist promptly and successfully such interference. It rests -with ourselves to meet and repel them. I look not for aid to this government, or to the other states; not but there are kind feelings towards us on the part of the great body of the non-slaveholding states ; but, as kind as theu: feelings may be, we may rest assured that no poUtical party in those states -will risk their ascendency for our safety. Ifjf^_dQjnot_dfifend. Diirselies,-nonE jsdlLilfifend_BaxiLEe_yjeldjjwe wiU be more and more pressed as we recede ; and, if we submit, we -will be trampV-i under_ loot, Be assured that emancipation itself -wouldnot sati.-ify these fenatics : that gained, the next step would be to raise the negroes to a social and political equaUty with the whites ; and, that being effected, we would soon find the present condition of the two races reversed. They, and their Northei-n allies, would be the masters, and we the slaves ; the condition of the white race in the British West India Islands, as bad as it is, would be happiness to ours ; there the mother-country is interested in sustaining the supremacy of the European race. It is true that the authority of the former master is destroyed, but the African wfll there still be a slave, not to individu als, but to the community — forced to labor, not by the authority of the overseer, but by the bayonet of the soldiery and the rod of the civd magistrate. Surrounded, as the slaveholding states are, with such imminent perUs, I rejoice to think that our means of defence are ample, if we shall prove to have the inteUigence and spirit to see and apply them before it is too late. All we want is concert, to lay aside all party differences, and unite with zeal and energy in repeUing approaching dangers. Let there be concert of action, and we shall find ample means of security 336 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. -without_resprtigg.ia-SfiC^sion_or_^igjinion I speak with fuU knowl edge and a thorough examination of the subject, and, for one, see my way clearly. One thing alarms me — the eager pursuit of gain which overspreads the land, and which absorbs every faculty of the mind and every leeling oTTEe heart. Of all passions, avarice is the most bUnd and compromising — the last to see, and the first to yield to danger, I dare not hope that anything I can say will arouse the South to a due sense of danger; I fear it is beyond the power of mortal voice to awaken it in time from the fatal security into which it has fallen. So conclusive were the objections urged by Mr. Cal houn, and so powerfully' were they presented, that a majority of the Senate came partly over to him, and it ¦was agreed that the motion to receive petitions of this character should be laid upon the table, which has been the rule uniformly adopted since that time. In January, 1837, Mr. Calhoun made another very able speech in opposition to the admission of the state of Michigan, — his opposition being based entirely upon the ground, that there had been no regular convention held to approve the terms of admission prescribed by Congress. Meanwhile Mr. Van Buren had been elected to the presidency of the United States. Mr. Calhoun, was comparatively a silent spectator of the contest. He adhered to his old position of neutrality, and advised his friends in South Carolina not to vote for either of the Whig candidates. Judge White or Mr. Clay, and in other states he recommended their support of the former. South Carolina gave her vote for Willie P, Mangum and John Tyler, both State Rights men. The inaugural message of Mr. Van Buren, particu larly so far as it related to the abolition excitement, was entirely satisfactory to Mr. Calhoun. A few 1837.] SPEECH ON INDEPENDENT TREASURY. 337 weeks passed, and the terrible commercial revulsion of 1837 swept over the country as with the besom of destruction. Mr. Calhoun had long anticipated this disaster, and had advised his friends engaged in trade or connected with banks to reef their sails before the blast of the tempest came in its fury upon them. Con gress was now called together by executive proclama tion, and commenced their session on the 4th day of September. Previous to this time it had been inti mated that the president would recommend an en tire separation of the government from the banks, and in a letter witten from Edgefield, when on his way to Washington, Mr. Calhoun signified his intention to support the administration if such should be their course. As had been predicted, Mr. Van Buren recommended the divorce of bank and state, which had already taken place in point of fact by the suspension of specie pay ments on the part of the banks ; and in a speech on a bill providing for the issue of treasury notes, delivered on the 19th of September, and in the following speech on the main question, delivered on the 3d day of Oc tober, Mr. Calhoun fully indicated his intentions to go with the administration, and to secure an entire sepa ration of the government from the banks : — SPEECH IN FAVOR OF A SEPARATION OP THE GOVERN MENT FROM THE BANKS. Me. Peesident; In reviewing this discussion, I have been struck •with the fact, that the argvunent on the opposite side has been limited, almost exclusively, to the questions of reUef and the currency. These are, undoubtedly, important questions, and well deserving the deUberate consideration of the Senate ; but there are other questions involved ia 15 338 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. this issue of a far more elevated character, which more imperiously de mand our attention. The banks have ceased to be mere moneyed in corporations. They have become great political institutions, with vast influence over the welfere of the community ; so much so, that a highly distinguished senator (Mr. Clay) has declared, in his place, that the question of the disunion of the government and the banks involved in its consequences the disunion of the states themselves. With this dec laration sounding in our ears, it is time to look mto the origin of a sys tem which has already acqmred such mighty influence ; to inquire into the causes which have produced it, and whether they are stiU on the increase ; in what they wUl terminate, if left to themselves ; and, finaUy, whether the system is favorable to the permanency of our free institutions ; to the industry and business of the country ; and above aU, to tiie moral and intellectual development of the community. I feel the vast importance and magnitude of these topics, as weU .-ts theu great delicacy. I shall touch them with extreme reluctance, aud only because I beUeve them to belong to the occasion, and that it would be a dereUction of public duty to witlihold any opinion, which I have deUberately formed, on the subject under discussion. The rise and progress of the banking system- is one of the most re markable and curious phenomena of modern times. Its origin is mod ern and humble, and gave no indication of the extraordinary growth and influence which it was destined to attain. It dates back to 1609, the year that the Bsmk of Amsterdam was established. Other bank ing institutions preceded it ; but they were ins-alated, and not immedi ately connected with the ^stems which have since spuung up, and which may be distinctly traced to that bank, which was a bank of de posit — a mere storehouse — established under the authority of that great commercial metropolis, for the purpose of safe-keeping the precious metals, aud facUitating the vast system of exchanges which then centred there. The whole system was the most simple and beautiful that can be imagined. The depositor, on delivering his bullion or coin in store, received a credit, estimated at the standard value on the books of the bank, and a certificate of deposit for the amount, which was transfer able from hand to hand, and entitled the holder to withdraw the de posit on payment of a moderate fee for the expense and hazard of safe-keeping. These certificates became, in fact, the circulating medium of the community, performing, as it were, the hazard and drudgery, ^hile tha precious metals, which tbey, in truth, represented, guilder Sbst 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT PROM BANKS. 339 guilder, lay quietly in store, without being exposed to the wear and tear, or losses incidental to actual use. It was thus a paper currency was created, having aU the solidity, safety, and uniformity of a metallic, with the facility belonging to that of paper. The whole arrangement was admirable, and worthy of the strong sense and do-wnright honesty of the people -with whom it originated. Out of this, which may be called the first era of the system, grew the bauk of deposit, discount, and circulation — a great and mighty change, destined to effect a revolution in the condition of modern so ciety. It is not difficult to explain how the one system should spring from the other, notwithstanding the striking dissimUarity in features and character between the offspring and the parent. A vast sum, not less than three miUlons sterUng, accumulated and remained habituaUy in deposit in the Bank of Amsterdam, the place of the retm-ned certifi cates being constantly supplied by new depositors. With so vast a standing deposit, it required but Uttle reflection to perceive that a very large portion of it might be withdrawn, and that a sufficient amount would be stUl left to meet the retm-ning certificates ; or, what would be the same in effect, that an equal amount of fictitious certiScates might be issued beyond the sum actually deposited. Either process, if interest be charged on the deposits withdrawn, or the fictitious cer tificates issued, would be a near approach to a bank of discount. This once seen, it required but Uttle reflection to perceive that the same process would be equally appUcable to a capital placed in bank as stock ; and from that the transitipn was easy to issuing bank-notes pay able on demand, on bUls of exchange, or promissory notes, having but a short time to run. These, combined, constitute the elements of a bank of discoimt, deposit, and cu-culation. Modern ingenuity and dishonesty would not have been long in per ceiving and turning such advantages to account ; but the faculties of the plain Belgian were either too blunt to perceive, or his honesty too stern to avafl himseK of them. To his honor, there is reason to be Ueve, notwithstanding the temptation, the deposits were sacredly kept, and that for every certificate in circulation, there was a corresponding amount in bullion or coin in store. It was reserved for another peo ple, either more ingenious or less scrupulous, to make the change. The Bank of England was incorporated in 1694, eighty-five years after that of Amsterdam, and was the first bank of deposit, discount, and circulation. Its capital was £1,200,000, consisting wholly of gov- 340 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. ernment stock, bearing an mterest of eight per cent, per annum. Its notes were received in the dues of the government, and the pubUc reve nue was deposited in the bank. It was authorized to circulate ex chequer bUls, and make loans to government. Let us pause for a mo ment, and contemplate this complex and potent machine, under its various character and functions. As a bank of deposit, it was authorized to receive deposits, not simply for safe-keeping, to be returned when demanded by the depos itor, but to be used and loaned out for the benefit of the institution, care being taken always to be provided with the means of return ing an equal amount, when demanded. As a bank of discount and circulation, it issued its notes on the faith of its capital stock and de posits, or discounted bills of exchange and promissory notes backed by responsible endorsers, charging an interest something greater than was authorized by law to be charged on loans ; and thus allowing it, for the use of its credit, a higher rate of compensation than what individ uals were authorized to receive for tiie use and hazard of money or capital loaned out, • It will, perhaps, place this point in a clear Ught, if we should consider the transaction in its true character, not as a loan, but as a mere exchange of credit. In discounting, the bank takes, in the shape of a promissory note, the credit of an individual so good that another, equally responsible, endorses his note for nothing, and gives out its credit in the form of a bank-note. The transaction is obviously a mere exchange of credit. If the drawer and endorser break, the loss is the Bank's ; but if the Bank breaks, the loss falls on the community ; and yet this transaction, so dissimilar, is conformded with a loan, and the bank permitted to chai-ge, on a mere exchange of credit, in which the hazard of the breaking of the drawer and endorser is incurred by the Bank, and that of the Bank by the community, a higher sum than the legal rate of interest on a loan ; in which, besides the use of his capital, the hazard is aU on the side of the lender. Turning from these to the advantages which it derived from its con nection with the government, we shall find them not less striking. Among the first of these in importance is the fact of its notes being received in the dues of the government, by which the credit of the government was added to that of the Bank, which added so greatly to the increase of its circulation. These, again, when coUected by the government, were placed in deposit in the Bank; thus giving to it not only the profit resulting from thefr abstraction from circulation. 1837.] SEPARATION OP GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 341 from the time of collecting tiU disbursement, but also that from the use of the public deposits in the interval. To complete the picture, the Bank, in its capacity of lender to the government, iu fact paid its own notes, which rested on the faith of the government stock, on which it Was drawing eight per cent. ; so that, in truth, it but loaned to the gov ernment its own credit. Such were the exti-aordinary advantages conferred on this institution, and of which it had an exclusive monopoly ; and these are the causes which gave such an extraordinary impulse to its growth and influence, that it increased in a littie more than a, hundred years — from 1694, when the second era of the system commenced, with the establishment of the Bank of England, to 1'797, when it terminated^rom l,200,O0OZ. to nearly 11,000,000Z., and this mainly by the addition to its capital thi-ough loans to the government above the profits of its annual divi' dends. Before entering ou the tiird era of the system, I pause to make a few reflections on the second. I am struck, in casting my eyes over it, to find that, notwithstanding the great dissimilarity of features which the system had assumed in passing from a mere bank of drposit, to that of deposit, discount, and circulation, the operation of the latter was confounded, throughout tliis long period, as it regards the effects on fhe currency, with the bank of deposit. Its notes were universally regarded as representing gold and sflver, and as depending on that representation exclusively for their cir culation ; as much so as did the certificates of deposit in the original Bank of Amsterdam, No one supposed that they could retain their credit for a moment after they ceased to be convertible into the metals on demand ; nor were they supposed to have the effect of increasing the aggregate amount of the currency ; nor, of course, of increasing prices, In a word, they were in the public mind as completely identified with the metallic currency as if e-very note in circulation had laid up in the vaults of the Bank an equal amoimt, pound for pound, into which aU its paper could be converted the moment it was presented. All this was a great delusion. The issues of the Bank never did represent, from the first, the precious metals. Instead of the representa tives, its notes were, in reality, the substitute for coin. Instead of being the mere drudges, performing aU the out-door service, while the coins reposed at ease in the vaults of the banks, free from wear and tear, and the hazard of loss or destruction, as did the certificates of deposit in the original Bank of Amsterdam, they substituted, degraded, and 342 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. banished the coins. Every note cu-culated became the substitute of so much coin, and dispensed with it in circulation, and thereby depreciated the value of the precious metals, and increased then- consumption in the same proportion ; while it diminished in the same degree the supply, by rendering mining less profitable. The system assumed gold and silver as the basis of its circulation ; and yet, by the laws of its nature, just as it increased its cu-culation, in the same degree the foundation on which the system stood -was weakened. Tlie consumption of the metals increased, and the supply diminished. As the weight of the super structure increased, just in the same proportion its foundation was un dermined and weakened. Thus the germ of destruction was implanted in the system at its birth ; has expanded with its growth, and must terminate, finally, in its dissolution, unless, indeed, it should, by some transition, entirely change its nature, and pass into some other and en tirely different organic form. The conflict between bank circulation and metalUc (though not perceived in the first stage of the system, when they were supposed to be indissol ubly connected) is mortal ; one or the other must perish in the strugglu. Such is the decree of fate ; it is irreversible. Near the close of the second era, the system passed the Atlantic, and took root in our country, where it found the soil still more fertile, and the climate more congenial than even in the parent country. The Bank of North America was establislied in 1781, with a capital of §400,000, and bearing all the features of its prototype, the Bank of England, In the short space of a Uttle more than half a century, the system has expanded from one bank to about eight hundred, including branches (no one knows the B.-cact number, so rapid the increase), and from a capital of less than half a million to about $300,000,000, with out, apparently, exhausting or diminishing its capacity to increase. So accelerated has been its growth with us, from causes which I explained on a former occasion,"* that already it has approached a point much nearer the limits beyond which the system, in its present form, cannot advance, than in England. During the year 1797, the Bank of England suspended specie pay ments ; an event destined, by its consequences, to effect a revolution in public ()pinion in relation to the eystem, and to accelerate the period -* See Speech on Mr. Webster's motion to renew the charter of the United States Bauk in 1834. 1'837.] SEPARATION OF GOVflkNMENT FROM BANKS. 343 which must determine its fate. England was then engaged in that gigantic struggle which originated in the French Revolution, and her financial operations were on the most extended scale, foUowed by a corresponding increase in the action of the Bank, as her fiscal agent. It sunk under its over-action. Specie payments were suspended. Panic and dismay spread through the land — so deep and durable was the impression that the credit of the Bank depended exclusively on the punctuality of its payments. In the midst of the alarm, an act of Parliaanent was passed making the notes of tie Bank a legal tender; and, to the surprise of all, the iastitutioa proceeded on, apparently without any diminution of its credit Its notes circulated freely as ever, abd without any deprecia tion, for a time, compared with gold and silver ; and continued so to do for upward of twenty years, with an average diminution fit about one per cent, per annum. Tins shock did much to dispel the delusion that bank-notes represented gold and silver, and that they circulated in con sequence of such representation, but without entirely obliterating the eld impression which had taken such strong hold on the pubUc mind. The credit of its notes during the suspension was generally attributed to the tender act, and the great and united resources of the Bank and the government. But an event followed of the «amo kind, under circumstances entirely different, -which did more than any preceding to shed light on the true nature of the system, and to unfold its vast capacity to sustain itself -without exterior aid. We finaUy became involved in tlie mighty strug gle that had so long desolated Europe aud enriched our country. War was declared against Great Britain in 1812, and in the short space of one year our feeble banking system sunk under the increased fiscal action of government. I was then a member of the otiier house, and had taken my full share of responsibility in the measures which had led to that residt. I shall never forget the sensation which the suspension, and the certain anticipation of the prostration of the currency of the coimtry, as a consequence, excited in my mind. We could resort to no tender act ; we had no great central regulating power, Uke the Bank of England; and the credit and resources of the government were comparatively small. Under such circumstances, I looked forward to a sudden and great depreciation of bank-notes, and that they would fall speedily as low as the old continental money. Guess my surprise when I saw them sustaha their credit -with scarcely any depreciation, 344 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837, for a time, from fhe shock. I distinctly recoUect when I first asked myseK the question. What was the cause ? and which directed my in quiry into the extraordinary phenomenon. I soon saw that the system contained within itself a self-sustaining power ; that there was between ihe banks and the community, mutually, the relation of debtor and creditor, there being at all times something more due to the banks from the community than from the latter to the former. I saw, in this re ciprocal relation of debts and credits, that the demand of the banks on the community was greater than the amount of theu- notes in circulation could meet : and that, consequently, so long as their debtors were sol vent, and bound to pay at short periods, their notes could not fail to be at or near » par with gold and sUver. I also saw that, as their debtors were principaUy the merchants, they would take bank-notes to meet their bank debts, and that that which the merchant and the gov ernment, who are the great money-dealers, take, the rest of the com munity would also take. Seeing aU this, I clearly perceived that self- sustaining principle which poised the system, self-balanced, like some celestial body, moving with scarcely a perceptible deviation from its path, from the concussion it had received. Shortly after the termination of the war, specie payments were coerced -with us by the estabUshment of a National Bank, and a few years afterward, in Great Britain, by an act of ParUament, In both countries the restoration was followed by -wide-spread distress, as it always must be when effected by coercion ; for the simple reason that banks cannot pay unless their debtors first pay, and that to coerce the banks compels them to coerce their debtors before they have the means to pay. Their failure must be the consequence; aud this in volves the faUure of the banks themselves, caiTying with it universal distress. Hence I am opposed to aU kinds of coercion, and am in favor of leaving the disease to time, with the action of pubUe sentiment and the states, to which the banks are alone responsible. But to proceed with my narrative. Although specie payments were restored, and the system apparentiy placed where it was before the suspension, the great capacity it proved to possess of sustaining itself without specie payments, was not forgot by those who had its direction The impression thatit was indispensable to the circulation of bank-noter that they should represent the precious metals, was almost obUterated ¦ and the latter were regarded rather as restrictions on the free ana profitable operation of the eystem than as the means of its security 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 345 Hence a feeling of opposition to gold and silver graduaUy grew up on the part of the banks, which created an esprit du corps, followed by a moral resistance to specie payments, if I may so express myself, which in fact suspended, in a great degree, the conversion of their notes into the precious metals, long before the present suspension. With fhe gro-wth of this feeling, banking business assumed a bolder character, aud its profits were proportionably enlarged, and with it the tendency of the system to increase kept pace. The effect of this soon displayed itself in a striking manner, which was followed by very important con sequences, which I shall next explain. It so happened that the charters of the Bank of England and the late Bank of the United States expired about the same time. As the period approached, a feeling of hostUity, growing out of the causes just explained, which had excited a strong desu-e in the community, who could not participate in the profits of these two great monopolies, to throw off their restraint, began to disclose itself against both institutions. In Great Britain it terminated in breaking down the exclusive monopoly of the Bank of England, and narrowing greatly the specie basis of the system, by making the notes of the Bank of England a legal tender in all cases, except between it and its creditors, A sudden and vast in crease of the system, with a great diminution of the metaUic basis in proportion to banking transactions, followed, which has shocked and weakened the stabiUty of the system there. With us the result was different. The Bank feU under the hostUity of the government. All restraint on the system was removed, and banks shot up in every direction almost instantly, under the growing impulse which I have explained, and which, -with the causes I stated when I first addressed the Senate on this question, is the cause of the present catas trophe. With it commences the fourth era of the system, which we have just entered — an era of struggle, and conflict, and changes. The system can advance no farther in our country, -without great and radical changes. It has come to a stand. The conflict between metallic and bank cur rency, which I have shown to be inherent in the system, has, in the course of time, and with the progress of events, become so deadly that they must separate, and one or the other faU. The degradation of the value of the metals, and their almost entire expulsion from their appropriate sphere ajs the medium of exchange and the standard of value, have gone so far, under the necessary operation of the system, 15* 346 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. that they are no longer sufficient to form the basis of the widely-extend ed system of banking. From the first, the gravitation of the system has been in one direction — to dispense with the use of fhe metals ; and hence the descent from a bank of deposit to one of discount; and hence, from being the representative, their notes have become the substitute for gold and silver ; and hence, finally, its present tendency to a mere paper engine, totally separated from the metals. One law has steadily gov erned the system throughout^the enlargement of its profits and mflu- ence ; and, as a consequence, as metallic currency became insufficient for circulation, it has become, in its progress, insufficient for the basis of banking operations ; so much so, that, if specie payments were restored, it would be but nominal, aud the system would in a few years, on the first adverse current, sink down again into its present helpless condition. Nothing can prevent it but great and radical changes, which would diminish its profits and influence, so as effectuaUy to arrest that strong and deep current which has carried so much of the wealth and capital of the community in that direction. Without that, the system, as now constituted, must fall ; unless, indeed, it can form an aUiance -with the government, and through it establish its authority by law, and make its credit, unconnected with goldand silver, the medium of circulation. If the aUiance should take place, one of the first movements would be the establishment of a great central institution ; or, if that should prove impracticable, a combination of a few selected and powerful state banks, which, sustained by the government, would crush or subject the weaker, to be followed by an amendment of the Constitution, or some other device, to Umit their number and the amount of their capital hereafter. This done, the next step would be to confine and consolidate the supremacy of the system over the currency of the country, which would be in its hands exclusively, and, through it, over the industry, business, and politics of the country ; aU of which would be wielded to advance its profits and powers. The system ha-ving now arrived at this point, the great and solemn duty devolves on us to determine tliis day what relation this govern ment shall hereafter bear to it. Shall we enter into an alliance with it and become the sharers of its fortune and the instrument of its aggran dizement and supremacy ? This is the momentous question on which we must now decide. Before we decide, it behooves us to inquire whether the system is favorable to the permanency of our free repub lican institutions, to the industry and business of the country, and, above 1837.] SEPARATION OP GOVERNMENT PROM BANKS. 347 all, to our moral and intellectual development, the great object for which we were placed here by the Author of our being. Can it be doubted what must be the effects of a system whose opera tions have been shown to be so unequal on free institutions, whose foun dation rests on an equaUty of rights ? Can that favor equality Which gives to one portion of the citizens and the country such decided advan tages over the other, as I have shown it does in my opening remarks ? Can that be favorable to liberty which concentrates the money power, and places it under the control of a few powerful and Wealthy individ uals ? It is the remark of a profound statesman, that the revenue is tiie state ; and, of course, those . who control the revenue control the state ; and those who can control the money power can control the rev enue, and through it the state, with the property and industry of the country, in aU its ramifications. Let us pause for a moment, and re flect on the nature and extent of this tremendous power. The currency of a country is to the community what the blood is to Ihe human system. It constitutes a small part, but it circulates tlu-ough every portion, and is indispensable to aU the functions of Ufe. The cm-rency bears even a smaUer proportion to the aggregate capital of the community than what the blood does to the soUds in the human system. What that proportion is, has not been, and perhaps cannot be, accurately ascertained, as it is probably subject to considerable varia tions. It is, however, probably between twenty-five and thirty-five to one. I wiU assume it to be thirty to one. With this assumption let us suppose a community whose aggregate papital is ^31,000,000 ; its currency would be, by supposition, one million, and the residue of its capital thirty millions. This being assumed, if the currency be increas ed or decreased, the other portion of the capital remaining the same, according to the weU-known laws of currency, property would rise or fall with the increase or decrease : tiiat is, if the currency be increased to two miUions, the aggregate value of property would rise to sixty milUons ; and, if the ciurency be reduced to $500,000, it would be re duced to fifteen milUons. With this law so well established, place the money power in the hands of a single individual, or a combination of individuals, and they, by expanding or contracting the currency, may raise or sink prices at pleasure ; and by purchasing when at the great est depression, and selUng at the greatest elevation, may command the whole property and industry of the community, and control its fiscal operations. The banking system concentrates and places this power m 848 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. the hands of those who control it, and its force increases just in propor tion as it dispenses with a metallic basis. Never was an engine invent ed better calculated to place the destiny of the many in the hands of the few, or less favorable to that equaUty and independence which Ues at the bottom of our free institutions. These views have a bearing not less decisive on tiie next inquiry—. the effects of the system on the industry and wealth of the country. Whatever may have been its effects in this respect in its early stages, it is difficult to imagine anything more mischievous on all of the pursuits of Ufe than the frequent and sudden expansions and contractions, to which it has now become so habitually subject that it may be consid ered its ordinary condition. None but those in the secret know what to do. All are pausing and looking out to ascertain whether an expan sion or contraction is next to foUow, and what wiU be its extent and duration ; and if, perchance, an error be committed— if it expands when a contraction is expected, or the reverse — the most prudent may lose by the miscalculation flie fruits of a Ufe of toil and care. The conse quence is, to discourage industry, and to convert the -whole community into stock-jobbers and speculators. The evil is constantly on the increase, and must continue to increase just as the banking system becomes moi-e diseased, tiU it shaU become utterly intolerable. But its most fatal effects originate in its bearing on the moral and in teUectual development of the community. The great principle of de mand aud supply governs the moral and intellectual world no less than the business and commercial. If a community be so constituted as to cause a demand for high mental attainments, or if its honors and rewards are allotted to pursuits that require their development, by creating a demand for intelligence, knowledge, wisdom, justice, firmness, courage, patriotism, and the like, they are sure to be produced. But if, on the contrary, they be aUotted to pursuits that require inferior qualities, the higher are sure to decay and perish. I object to the banking system, because it aUots the honors and rewards of the community, in a very undue proportion to a pursuit the least of all favorable to the develop ment of the higher mental quaUties, intellectual or moral, to the decay of the learned professions, and the more noble pursuits of science, litera ture, phUosophy, and statesmanship, and the great and more useful pur suits of business and industry. With the vast increase of its profits and influence, it is graduaUy concentrating in itself most of the prizes of life —wealth, honor, and influence, to the great disparagement and degrada- 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT PROM BANKS. 349 tion of all the liberal, and useful, and generous pursuits of society. The rising generation cannot but feel its deadening influence. The youths -who crowd our coUeges, and behold the road to honor and distinction terminating in a banking-house, -wiU feel the spirit of emulation decay -within them, and -wUl no longer be pressed forward by generous ardor to mount up the rugged steep of science as the road to honor and dis tinction, when, perhaps, the highest point they could attain, in what was once the most honorable and influential of all the learned professions, would be the place of attorney to a bank. Nearly four years since, on the question of the removal of the de posits, although I was opposed to the removal, and in favor of their restortifion, because I believed it to be Ulegal, yet, foreseeing what was coming, and not wisliing there should be any mistake as to my opinion on the banking sj'stem, I stated here in my place what that opinion was, I declared th;it I had long entertained doubts, if doubts they might be caUed, which were daily increasing, that the system made the worst possible distribution of the wealth of the community, and that it would ultimately be found hostile to the farther advancement of civiUzation and Uberty. TMs declaration was not lightly made ; and I have now unfolded the grounds on which it rested, and which subsequent events and reflection have matured into a settied conviction. With all these consequences before us, shaU we restore the broken connection ? ShaU we again unite the government -with the system ? And what ai-e the arguments opposed to these high and weighty objec tions ? Instead of meeting them and denying their truth, or opposing others of equal weight, a rabble of objections (I can call them by no better name) are urged against the separation : one currency for the government, and another for the people ; separation of the people from the government ; taking care of the government, and not of the people ; - .tnd a whole fraternity of others of Uke character. When I first saw them advanced in the columns of a newspaper, I could not but smile, in thinking how admirably they were suited to an electioneering can vass. They have a certain plausibiUty about them, which makes them troublesome to an opponent simply because they are merely plausible, -without containing one particle of reason. I Uttle expected to meet them in discussion in this place ; but since they have been gravely introduced here, respect for the place and company exacts a passing notice, to which, of themselves, they are not entitled. I begin -with that which is first pushed forward, and seems to be most 350 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. relied on — one currency for the government and another for the peo ple. Is it meant that the government musi take in payment of its debts whatever the people take in payment of theirs ? If so, it is a very broad proposition, and would lead to important consequences. Tlie people now receive the notes of non-specle-paymg banks. Is it meant that the government should also receive them ? They receive in change all sorts of paper, issued by we know not whom. Must the government also receive them ? They receive the notes of banks issuing notes imder five, ten, and twenty dollars. Is it intended that the government shall also permanently receive them ? They receive bUls of exchange. ShaU government, too, receive them ? If not, I ask the reason. Is it because they are not suitable for a sound, stable, and uniform currency ? The reason is good : but what becomes of the principle, that the government ought to take whatever the people take ? But I go farther. It is the duty of government to receive nothing in its dues that it has not the right to render uniform and stable in its value. We are, by the Con stitution, made the guardian of the money of the country. For this the right of coining and regulating the value of coins was given, and we have no right whatever to receive or treat anything as money, or the equiva lent of money, the value of which we have no right to regulate. If this principle be true, and it cannot be controverted, I ask. What right has Congress to receive and treat the notes of the state banks as money ? If the states have the right to incorporate banks, what right has Con gress to regulate them or their issues ? Show me the power in the Constitution. If the right be admitted, what are its limitations, and how can the right of subjecting them to a bankrupt law in that case be denied i If one be admitted, the other foUows as a consequence ; and yet those who are most indignant against the proposition of subjecting the state banks to a bankrupt law, are the most clamorous to receive their notes, not seeing that the one power involves the other. I am equaUy opposed to both, as unconstitutional and inexpedient. We are next told, to separate from the banks is to separate from the people. The banks, then, are the people, and the people the banks — united, identified, and inseparable ; and as the government belongs to the peo ple, it follows, of course, according to this argument, it belongs also to the banks, and, of course, is bound to do their biddings. I feel on so grave a subject, and in so grave a body, an almost in-vincible repugnance in replying to such arguments : and I shaU hasten over the only remain ing one of the fraternity which I shall condescend to notice with aU 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 351 possible despateh. They have no right of admission here, and, if I were disposed to jest on so solemn an occasion, I should say they ought to be driven fi-om this chamber, under the 47th rule.* The next of these formidable objections to the sepai-ation from the banks is, that the government, in so doing, takes care of itself, and not of the people. Why, I had supposed that the government belonged to the people : that it was created by them for their own use, to promote their interest, and secm-e their peace and liberty ; that, iu taking care of itself, it takes the most effectual care of the people ; and in refusing all embarrassmg, entangling, and dangerous alliances with corporations of any description, it was but obeying the great law of self-preservation. But enough ; I cannot any longer waste words ou such objections. I intend no disre spect to those who have urged them ; yet these, and arguments like these, are mainly reUed on to countervaU the many and formidable ob jections, drawn from the highest considerations that can influence the action of governments or individuals, none of which have been refuted and many not even denied. The senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) urged an argument of a very different character, but which, in my opinion, he entirely failed to estabUsh. He a.9serted that the ground assumed on this side was an entire abandonment of a great constitutional function conferred by the Constitution on Congress. To establish this, he laid down the proposi tion, that Congress was bound to take care of the money of the country. Agreed ; and -with this view the Constitution confers on us the right of coining and regulating the value of coins, in order to supply the coun try with money of proper standard and value ; and is it an abandon ment of this right to take care, as this biU does, that it shall not be expelled from cu-culation, as far as the fiscal action of this government extends ? But having taken this unquestionable position, the senator passed (by what means he did not condescend to explain) from taking care of the money of the country to the right of estabhshing a currency, and then to the right of establishing a bank currency, as I understood him. On both of these points I leave him in the hands of the senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Buchanan), who, in an able and constitutional argument, completely demolished, in my judgment, the position assumed by the senator from Massachusetts. I rejoice to hear such an argument * It is the rule regulating the admission of persons in the lobby of the Senate. 352 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837 from such a quarter. The return of the great state of Pennsylvania to the doctrines of rigid construction and state rights sheds a ray of light on the thick darkness which has long surrounded us. But we are told that there is not gold and silver enough to fill the channels of circulation, and that prices would fall Be it so. What is that, compared to the dangers which menace on the opposite side ? But are we so certain that there is not a sufficiency of the precious metals for the purpose of circulation ? Look at France, -with her abundant supply, -with her channels of circulation full to overflowing with coins, and her flourishing industry. It is true that our supply is insufficient at present. How could it be otherwise? The banking system has degraded and expeUed the metals — driven them to foreign lands — closed the mines, and converted their products into costly vases, and splendid utensils and ornaments, administering to the pride and luxury of the opulent, instead of being employed as the standard of value, and the instrument of making exchanges, as they were manifestly' intended mainly to be by an all-wise Providence. Restore them to their proper functions, and they will return from their banishment ; the mines wiU again be opened, and the gorgeous splendor of wealth wUl again reas- Bume the more humble, but useful, form of coins. But, Mr, President, I am not driven to such alternatives, I am not the enemy, but the friend of credit — not as the substitute, but tho associate and the assistant of the metals. In that capacity, I hold credit to possess, in many respects, a vast superiority over the metals them selves. I object to it in the form which it has assumed in the banking system, for reasons that are neither Ught nor few, and that neither have nor can be answered. The question is not whether credit can be dis pensed with, but what is its best possible form — the most stable, the least Uable to abuse, and the most convenient and cheap, I threw out some ideas on this important subject in my opening remarks. I have heai-d nothing to change my opiniom I beUeve that government credit, m the form I suggested, combines aU the requisite quaUties of a credit circulation in the highest degree, and also that government ought not to use any other credit but its o-wn hi its financial operations. When the senator from Massachusetts made his attack on my suggestions, I was disappointed. I expected argument, and he gave us denunciation. It is often easy to denounce, when it is hard to refute ; and when that senator gives denunciations instead of arguments, I conclude that it is because the one is at his command, and the other not 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 353 We are told the form I suggested is but a repetition of the old Con tinental money — a ghost that is ever conjured up by aU who -wish to give the banks an exclusive monopoly of government credit. The asser tion is not true : there is not the least analogy between them. The one was a promise to pay when there was no revenue, and the other a promise to receive in the dues of government when there is an abundant revenue. We are also told that there is no instance of a government paper that did not depreciate. In reply, I affirm that there is none, assuming the form I propose, that ever did depreciate. Whenever a paper receiva ble in the dues of government had anything like a fair trial,-it has succeeded. Instance the case of North Carolina, referred to in my opening remarks. The draughts of the treasury at this moment, -with aU their encumbrance, are nearly at par with gold and silver ; and I might add the instance alluded to by the distinguished senator from Kentucky, in which he admits that, as soon as the excess of the issues of the Commonwealth Bank of Kentucky were reduced to the proper point, its notes rose to par. The case of Russia might also be mentioned. In 1827, she had a fixed paper circulation, in the form of bank-notes, but which were inconvertible, of upward of $120,000,000, estimated hi the metaUic ruble, and which had for years remained without fluctua tion, having nothing to sustain it but that it was received in the dues of the government, and that, too, with a revenue of only about 190,000,000 atmuaUy. I speak on the authority of a respectable traveller. Other instances, no doubt, might be added, but it needs no such support. How can a paper depreciate which the govermnent is bound to receive ui all its payments, and while those to whom payments are to be made are under no obUgation to receive it ? From its nature, it can only circulate when at par with gold and sUver ; and if it should depreciate, none could be injured but the government But my coUeague objects that it would partake of the increase and decrease of the revenue, and would be subject to greater expansion and contractions than bank-notes themselves. He assumes that government would increase the amount "with the increase of the revenue, which is not probable, for the aid of its credit would be then less needed ; but if it did, what would be the effect ? On the decrease of the revenue, its bUls would be returned to the treasury, from which, for the want of demand, they could not be reissued ; and the excess, instead of hanging on the circulation, as in the case of bank-notes, and exposing it to catas- 354 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. trophes like the present, would be gradually and silently withdrawn, without shock or injury to any one. It has another and striking ad vantage over bank circulation — in its superior cheapness, as well as greater stabiUty and safety. Bank paper is cheap to those who make it, but dear, very dear, to those who use it — fuUy as much , so as gold and sUver. It is the Uttie cost of its manufacture, and the dear rates at which it is furnished to the community, which give the great profit to those who have a monopoly of the artide. Some idea may be formed of the extent of the profit by the splendid palaces which we see under the name of banking-houses, and the vast fortunes which have been accumulated in this branch of business ; aU of which must ultimately be derived from the productive powers of the community, and, of course, adds so much to the cost of production. On the other hand, the credit of government, while it would greatly facUitate its financial ope rations, would cost nothing, or next to nothing, both to it and the people, and, of course, would add nothing to the cost of production, which would give every branch of our industry, agriculture, commerce, and manu factures, as far as its circulation might extend, great advantages both at home and abroad. But there remains another and great advantage. In the event of war, it would open almost unbounded resources to carry it on, without the necessity of resorting to what I am almost disposed to caU a fraud — pubUc loans. I have already shown that the loans of the Bank of England to the government were very little more than loaning back to the government its own credit ; and this is more or less true of all loans, where the banking system prevails. It was preeminently so in our late war. The circulation of the government credit, in the shape of bills receivable exclusively with gold and silver in its dues, and the sales of pubUc lands, would dispense with the necessity of loans, by increasing its bUls with the increase of taxes. The increase of taxes, and, of course, of revenue and expenditures, would be foUowed by an increased demand for government bills, while the latter would furnish the means of paying the taxes, without increasing, in the same degi-ee, the pressure on the community. This, with a judicious system of fund ing, at a low rate of interest, would go far to exempt the government from the necessity of contracting public loans in the event of war. I am not, Mr. President, ignorant, in making these suggestions (I wish them to be considered only in that light), to what violent opposi tion every measure of the kind must be exposed. Banks have been so 1837.J SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT PROM BANKS. 355 long in the possession of government credit, that they very naturally conclude they have an exclusive right to it, and consider the -withdrawal of it, even for the use of the goverment itself, as a positive injury. It was my fortune tb take a stand on the side of the government against the banks during the most trying period of the late war — the winter of 1814 and 1815 — and never in my life was I exposed to more cal umny and abuse — ^no, not even on this occasion. It was my first lesson on the subject I shall never forget it. I propose to give a very brief narrative of the scenes through which I then passed ; not with any feeUng of egotism, for I trust I am incapable of that, but to illustrate the truth of much I have said, and to snatch from obUvion not an un important portion of our financial history. I see the senators from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) and of Alabama (Mr. King), who were then members of the House of Representatives, in their places, and they can vouch for the correctness of my narrative, as far as the memory of transactions so long passed wUl serve. The finances of the country had, at that time, fallen into great con fusion, Mr. Campbell had retired from the head of the treasury, and the late Mr. Dallas had succeeded — a man of talents, bold and decisive, but inexperienced in the af&irs of the department. His first measure to restore order, and to furnish the supplies to carry on the war, was to recommend a bank of 850,000,000, to be constituted almost exclu sively of the new stocks which had been issued during the war, to the exclusion of the old, which had been issued before. The proposed bank was authorized to make loans to the government, and was not bound to pay specie during the war, and for three years after its termi nation. It so happened that I did not arrive here till some time after the commencement of the session, having been detained by an attack of bilUous fever. I had taken a prominent part in the declaration of the war,, and had every motive and disposition to sustain the administra tion, and to vote every aid to carry on the war. Immediately after my arrival, I had a full conversation -with Mr. Dallas, at his request I en tertained very kind feelings towards him, and assured him, after he had explained his plan, that I would give it my early and favorable atten tion. At that time I had reflected but Uttle on the subject of banking. Many of my political friends expressed a desire that I should take a prominent part in favor of the proposed bank. Their extreme anxiety aroused my attention, and, being on no committee (they had been ap- 356 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. pointed before my arrival), I took up the subject for a fuU investigation, -with every disposition to give it my support I had not proceeded far before I was struck with the extraordinary character of the project : a bank of $50,000,000, whose capital was to consist almost exclusively of government credit in the shape of stock, and not bound to pay its debts during the war, and for three years afterward, to furnish the gov ernment with loans to carry on the war ! I saw at once that the effect of the arrangement would be, that government would borrow back its own credit, and pay six per cent per annum for what they had already paid eight or nine. It was impossible for me to give it my support under any pressure, however great, I felt the difficulty of my situation, not only in opposing the leading measure of the administration at such a crisis, but, what was far more responsible, to suggest one of my own, that would afford relief to the embarrassed treasury, I cast my eyes around, and soon saw that the government should use its own credit directly, without the intervention of a bank ; which I proposed to do in the form of treasury notes, to be issued in the operations of the gov ernment and to be funded in the subscription to the stock of the bank. Treasury notes were, at that time, below par, even with bank paper. The opposition to them was so great on the part of the banks, that they refused to receive them on deposit, or payment at par with their notes; while the government, on its part, received and paid away notes of the banks at par with its own. Such was the influence of the banks, and to such degradation did the government, in its weakness, submit. All this influence I had to encounter with the entire weight of the adminis tration thrown into the same scale. 1 hesitated not I saw the path of duty clearly, and determined to tread it, as sharp and rugged as it was. When the bill came up, I moved my amendment, the main features of which were, that, instead of government stock already issued, the capital of the bank should consist of funded treasury notes ; and that instead of a mere paper machine, it should be a specie-paying bank, so as to be an ally instead of an opponent, in restoring the cur rency to a sound condition on the return of peace. These were, with me, indispensable conditions, I accompanied my amendment with a short speech of fifteen or twenty minutes, and so overpowering was the force of truth, that, notwithstanding the influence of the administration, backed by the money power, and the Committee of Ways and Means, which was unanimous, with one exception, as I understood, my amend ment prevailed by a large majority ; but it in turn, faUed — ^the opposi- 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 357 tion, the adherents of the administration, and those who had constitu tional scruples, combined against it. Then followed various, but unsuc cessful, attempts to charter a bank. One was vetoed by the Pj:esident, and another was lost by the casting vote of the speaker (Mr. Qheves). After a large portion of the session was thus unsuccessfully consumed, a caucus was called, in order to agree on some plan, to which I and the few friends who still adhered to me fitter such hard service, were espe cially invited. We, of course, attended. 'The plan of compromise was unfolded, which approached much nearer to our views, but which was still objectionable in some featm-es, I objected, and required farther concessions, which were refused, and was told tne bill could be passed without us ; at which I took up my hat and bade good-night The biU was introduced in the Senate, and speedily passed that body. On the second reading, I rose and made a few remarks, in which I entreated the house to remember that they were^ about to vote for the measure against their conviction, as had been frequently expressed ; and that, in so doing, they acted under a supposed necessity, which had been created by those who expected to profit by the measure. I then re minded them of the dangler of acting under such pressure; and I said that they were so sensible of the truth of what I uttered, that, if peace should arrive before the passage of the bill, it would not receive the support of fifteen members. I concluded by saying that I would re serve what I intended to say on the question of the passage of the bUl, when I would express my opinion at length, and appeal to the country. My objections, as yet, had not gone to the people, as nothing that I had said had been reported — such was my solicitude to defeat the bill with out extending our divisions beyond the walls of the house, in the then critical condition of the country. My object was to arrest the measure, and not to weaken confidence in the administration. In making the supposition, I had not the sUghtest anticipation of peace. England had been making extensive preparations for the ensu ing campaign, and had made a vigorous attack on New Orleans, but had just been repelled ; but, by a most remarkable coincidence, an opportunity (as strange as it may seem) was afforded to test the truth of what I have said. Late in the evening of the day I met Mr. Stur- ges, then a member of Congress from Connecticut. He said that he had some information which he could not withhold from me ; that a treaty of peace had been made ; and that it had actuaUy arrived in New York, and would be here the next day, so that I would have an 358 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. opportunity of testing the truth of my prediction, 'He added, that his brother, who had a mercantile hou^e in New York, had forwarded the mformatipn to him by express, and that he had forwarded the informa tion to connected houses in Southern cities, with direction to purchase the great staples in that quarter, and that he wished me to consider the information as confidential. I thanked him for the intelligence, and promised to keep it to myself The rumor, however, got out, and tho next day an attempt was made to pass through the bill ; but the house was unwiUing to act till it could ascertain whether -a treaty had been made. It arrived in the course of the day, when, on my motion, it was laid on the table ; and I had the gratification of receiving the thanks of many for defeating the bill, who, a short time before, were almost ready to cut my throat for my persevering opposition to the measure. An offer was then made to me to come to my terms, which I refused, declaring that I would rise in my demand, and would agree to no bill which should not be formed expressly with the view to the speedy restoration of specie payments. It was afterward postponed, on the conviction that it could not be so modified as to make it acceptable to a majority. This was my first lesson on banks. It has made a dura ble impression on my mind. My colleague, in the course of his remarks, said he regarded this measure as a secret war waged against the banks. I am sure he could not intend to attribute such motives to me. I wage no war, secret or open, against the existing institutions. They have been created by the legislation of the states, and are alone responsible to the states, I hold them not answerable for the present state of things, which has been brought about under the silent operation of time, without attract ing notice or disclosing its danger. Whatever legal or constitutional rights they possess under their charters ought to be respected; and, if attacked, I would defend them as resolutely as I now oppose the sys tem. Against that I wage, not secret, but open and uncompromising hostiUties, originating not in opinions recently or hastily formed. I have long seen the true character of the system, its tendency and des tiny, and have looked forward for many years, as many of my friends know, to the crisis in the midst of which we now are. My ardent wish has been to effect a gradual change in the banking system, by which the crisis might be passed without a shock, if possible ; but I have been resolved for many years, that should it arrive in my time, I would discharge my duty, however great the difficulty and danger. 1837.] SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENT FROM BANKS. 359 I have thus far faithfully performed it, according to the best of my abUities, and, with the blessing of God, shaU persist regardless of every obstacle, with equal fideUty, to the end. He who does not see that the credit system is on the eve of a great revolution, has formed a very imprafect conception of the past and an ticipation of the future. What changes it is destined to undergo, and what new form it will ultimately assume, are concealed in the womb of time, and not given us to foresee. But we may perceive in the pres ent many of the elements of the existing system which must be ex pelled, and others which must enter it in its renewed form. In looking at the elements at work, I hold it certain, that in the pro cess there -will be a total and final separation of the credit of govern ment and that of indivi-duals, -wliich have been so long blended. The good of society, and tlie ioteresta of both, imperiously demand it, and the growing inteUigence of the age will enforce it It is unfair, unjust, unequal, contrary to the spirit of free institutions, and corrupting in its consequences. How far the credit of government may be used in a separate form, -with safety and convenience, remains to be seen. To the extent of its fiscal action, Umited strictly to the function of the col lection and disbursement of its revenue, and in the form I have sug gested, I am of the impression it may be both safely and conveniently used, and with great incidental advantages to 'the whole community. Beyond that Umit I see no safety, and much danger. What form individual credit will assume after the separation, is stUl more uncertain, but I see clearly that the existing fetters that restrain it will be thrown off; The credit of an individual is his property, and belongs to him as much as his land and houses, to use it as he pleases, -with the single restriction, which is imposed on aU our rights, that it is not to be used so as to injure others. What Umitations this restriction may prescribe, time and experience wiU show; but, whatever they may be, they ought to assume the character of general laws, obligatory on all aUke, and open to aU; and under the provisions of which all may be at Uberty to ase their credit, jointly or separately, as freely as they now use their land and bouses, without any preference by special acts, in any form or shape, to one over another. Everything lite monop oly must ultimately disappear before the process whidh has begun will finally terminate. I see, not less clearly, that, in the process, a separation -wiU take place Siatwfien the use of capital and the use of credit. They are whoUy dif • 360 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837, ferent, and, under the gro-wing inteUigence of the times, cannot mucb longer remain confounded in their present state of combination. They are as distinct as a loan and an endorsement ; in fact, the one is but gi-dng to another the use of our capital, and the other the use of our credit ; and yet, so dissimilar are they, that we daUy see the most pru dent individuals lending their credit for nothing, in the form of endorse ment or security, who would not loan the most inconsiderable sum -with out interest. But as dissimilar as they are, they are completely con founded in banking operations, which is one of the main sources of the profit, and the consequent dangerous flow of capital in that direction. A bank discount, instead of a loan, is very little more, as I have shown, than a mere exchange of credit — an exchange of the joint credit of the drawer and endorser of the note discounted for the credit of the bank in the shape of its own note. In the exchange, the bank insures the parties to the note discounted, and the community, which is the loser if tiie bank fails, virtuaUy insures the bank ; and yet, by confounding this exchange of credit with the use of capital, the bank is permitted to charge an in terest for this exchange, rather greater than an individual is permitted to charge for a loan, to the great gain of the bank and loss to the com munity. I say loss, for the community can never enjoy the great and fuU benefit of the credit system, till loans and credit are considered as entirely distinct in their nature, and the compensation for the use of each be adjusted to their respective nature and character. Nothing would give a greater impulse to aU the business of society. The su perior cheapness of credit would add incalculably to the productive powers of the community, when the immense gains which are now made by confounding them shall come in aid of production. Whatever other changes the credit system is destined to undergo, these are certainly some which it must ; but when, and how the revolu tion will end — whether it ig destined to be sudden and,convulsive, or gradual and free from shock, time alone can disclose. Much will depemi on the decision of tlie present question, and tJie course which the advocates of the system will pursue. If the separation takes place, and is acquiesced in by those interested in the system, the prospect wUl be, that it will gradually and quietly run down, without shock or convnblons, which is my sincere prayer ; but if not — ^if the reverse shall be insisted on, and, above all, if it should be effected through a great poUtical struggle (it can only be so effected), the revolution would be violent and convulsive. A great and thorough change must take place. It is wh«dly unavoidsi- 1837.] SEVERITY OF THE PRESSURE. 361 ble. The pubUc attention begins to be roused throughout the civiUzed world to this aU-absorbing subject 'There is nothing left to be controU ed but the mode and manner, and it is better for all that it should be gradual and quiet than the reverse. All the rest is de,stiny. I have now, Mr. President, said what I intended, without reserve or disguise. In taking the stand I have, I change no relation, personal or political, nor alter any opinion I have heretofore expressed or entertained. I desire nothing from the government or the people. My only am bition is to do my duty, and shall follow* whatever that may lead, re gardless aUke of attachments or antipathies, personal or poUtical. I know full weU the responsibiUty I have assumed. I see clearly the magnitude and the hazard of the crisis, and the danger of confiding the execution of measures in which I take so deep a responsibiUty, to those in whom I have no reason to have any special confidence. But all this deters me not when I beUeve that the permanent interest of the coun try is involved. My course is fixed. I go forward. If the adminis tration recommend what I approve on this great question, I wiU cheer fully give my support ; if not, I shaU oppose ; but, in opposing, I shall feel bound to suggest what I believe to be the proper measure, aud which I shaU be ready to back, be the responsibiUty what it may, look ing only to the country, and not stopping to estimate whether the bene fit shaU inure either to the administration or the opposition. ¦ The time to which Mr. Calhoun had looked forward with SO many ardent hopes and eager expectations had at length arrived. The day of deliverance — of deliver ance from the banking sj'stem — was at hand. But it dawned in the midst of sorrow and gloom. He had often predicted the commercial revulsion experienced in 1837, yet the severity of the blow exceeded his ex pectations. The shock convulsed the whole nation. Every commercial interest staggered, or was prostrated before it. Private individuals, banks and chartered companies, and many of the state governments even, were brought to the verge or plunged into the abyss of bankruptcy. A fictitious credit system had been built 16 362 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1837. upon the surplus revenue, which, in the vaults of the deposit banks, had served as the basis of immense loans and consequent indebtedness. The legitimate results of the high tariff policy were now witnessed. The time for payment came — it could not be evaded or postponed — and the frail fabric toppled down upon the heads of those who had reared ii. The stimulus had been far too powerful, and the reaction was terrible to witness. But the evil was not without good. The effect of the resolution of 1816 and the deposit act, by which the notes of none but specie-paying banks could be received in payment of government dues, was promptly to sever the connection between the government and the banks, because the latter had suspended specie payments throughout the country. Mr. Calhoun had never re garded the connection with favor, and he was the last man to renew it when it had once been broken off at least when the country was at peace, and abounded in so many of the elements of prosperity. The general government itself did not escape unscath ed. So far as its interests were affected, the distribu tion of the revenue among the states operated unfavor ably, both for the reason, that so large an amount of the basis of the currency being withdrawn, individual debtors of the United States dependent upon it were rendered bankrupt, and because, if the surplus had been expended in the purchase of state stocks, this conse quence would not have been so immediate, and the stocks might have been used to sustain the government. But the surplus was no longer in the treasury, and resort was therefore had to treasury notes, alid ultimately to loans. Yet this is an argument rather as to the time 1837.] INDEPENDENT TREASURY. 363 than as to the effect, of certain causes, for that was sure to come sooner or later, whatever policy had been adopted. To return to the events of the extra session in 1837 : On the 14th of September, Mr. Wright of New York, as the chairman of the committee on finance, reported a bill, as recommended by Mr. Van Buren, providing for the divorce of bank and state. In its original shape, the bill contained no provision whatsoever in regard to the character of the funds to be thereafter received by government. Mr. Calhoun was not hostile to paper money, as all his speeches on this question most con clusively show ; he thought the use of credit in this way to.be often highly desirable, not to say necessary, in business transactions between individuals. But he was totally opposed to the reception of paper money by the government, unless it were of its own creation, such as treasury notes or something of a similar character. When the bill of Mr. Wright came before the Senate, he expressed his fears that there existed a design on the part of the administration to restore the connection with the banks by receiving their money. Mr. Wright un equivocally disavowed this intention, and Mr. Calhoun then prepared an amendment, at the suggestion of the friends of the administration, providing for the collec tion of the public dues in specie — the only constitutional currency.* In favor of this amendment, his second speech, heretofore given, advocating an entire separa tion of the government from the banks, was delivered. Two counter propositions were brought forward ; the reincorporation of a national bank, by the ultra Whigs ; * "Madison Papers," (Debates in the Convention) pp. 3'78, 435. 364 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838. and a system of special deposits with the state banks, by a small faction which had cleaved off from the Re publican or Democratic party and followed the lead of Mr. Rives, of Virginia. The bank project was lost by a vote of more than two to one, Mr. Calhoun voting with the majority against it ; and Mr. Rives' plan was defeated by a vote of twenty-six to twenty-two. The Independent Treasury bill then passed the Senate with the vote of Mr. Calhoun, but failed in the House. At the regular session commencing in December, the Sub-Treasury plan, as it was termed by its opponents, was again the prominent subject of debate and con sideration. Mr. Wright once more reported a bill more perfect in its details than that presented at the extra session, and containing the specie clause. This bill was framed expressly with a view to meet Mr. Calhoun's wishes, and he gave it his cordial support. He took a prominent part in the debate, and advocated the passage of the bill in a speech delivered on the 15th of February, 1838, presenting an able and lucid array of facts and arguments in its favor ; and he subse quently defended it against the attacks of Mr. Webster and Mr. Clay, in two speeches made in reply to those senators. Mr. Rives' plan was now supported by the united opposition, consisting of Whigs and Conserva tives, for the reason that all hope of securing the incor poration of a national bank had been abandoned ; but the attempt to substitute it for Mr. Wright's bill, was successfully resisted. Public opinion, however, was not yet arrayed on the side of this great measure ; on the contrary, the misrepresentations as to its character industriously made by the friends of the banking and 1838.] ATTACKS UPON HIM. 365 stock interests, had produced a strong feeling against it even among a considerable portion of the friends of the administration who afterward approved it. Several of the state legislatures had instructed their senators to oppose the specie clause, and it was finally stricken out against the earnest remonstrances of Mr. Calhoun. He contended that the bill would prove a complete abortion without this clause, and presented this position with so much ability that no one attempted to confute his arguments, which were subsequently approved by the whole Republican party. This bill failed to become a law, and at the ensuing session a similar bill was also defeated. But in Decem ber, 1839, a new House of Representatives came together, and there had been several changes in the Senate. The Independent Treasury was this time brought forward under more favorable auspices, and a bill again passed the Senate containing the specie clause, with the vote of Mr. Calhoun. It was sustained in the House, and on the 4th day of July, 1840, was signed by the President. Mr. Calhoun's course with reference to the separation of the government from the banks, though perfectly consistent with his previous life and with his well- known and often exjtressed views upon the subject of the currency, did not escape the criticism and censure of the Whig party. In his speech in 1834, on Mr. Webster's motion to renew the charter of the United States Bank, he emphatically declared, that he was the partisan of no class — nor of either political party, " I am neither of the opposition nor administration," said he. " If I act with the former in any instance, it is 366 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838. because I approve of their course on the particular occasion, and I shall always be happy to act with them when I do approve. If I oppose the administration, if I desire to see power change bands, it is because I dis approve of the general course of those in authority." Yet in the face of this declaration, and of the fact that he had never attended the political caucuses or meetings of the opposition, he was charged with having gone over to the enemy — to the administration party. So long as these attacks were confined to the public press he took no notice of them, but when Mr. Clay repeated the charge on the floor of the Senate, and attempted to chasti.se hiin by word of mouth, Mr. Cal houn felt bound to notice it, and in his reply to the senator from Kentucky, before alluded to, he gave utterance to his feelings in a strain of indignant elo quence never surpassed in that chamber. " Mr. Calhoun," said a writer in the Democratic Review* alluding to this debate, "has evidently taken Demosthenes for his model as a speaker — or rather, I suppose, he has studied, while young, his orations with great admiration, until they produced a decided im pression upon his mind. His recent speech in defence of himself against the attacks of Mr. Clay, is precisely on the plan of the famous oration De Corona, delivered by the great Athenian, in vindication of himself from the elaborate and artful attacks of ^schines. While the one says : ' Athenians ! to you I appeal, my judges and my witnesses !' — the other says : ' In proof of this, I appeal to you, senators, my witnesses and my judges on this occasion !' iEschines accused Demosthenes of * April No,, 1838. 1838.] REPLY TO MR. CLAY. 367 having received a bribe from Philip, and the latter re torted by saying that the other had accused him of doing what he himself had notoriously done. Mr. Clay says, that Mr. Calhoun had gone over, and he left to time to disclose his motive. Mr. Calhoun retorts : " Leave it to time to disclose my motive for going over ! I, who have changed no opinion, abandoned no princi ple, and deserted no party ; I, who have stood still and maintained my ground against every difficulty, to be told that it is left to time to disclose my motive ! The imputation sinks to the earth, with the groundless charge on which it rests. I stamp it, with scorn, in the dust. I pick up the dart, which fell harmless at my feet. 1 hurl it back. What the senator charges on me unjustly, he has actually done. He went over on a memorable occasion,* and did not leave it to time to disclose his motive.' " Other charges made by Mr. Clay were repelled in similar language by Mr. Calhoun ; and his conduct was justified, his consistency maintained, and his political position explained, with great clearness and ability. He said that Mr. Clay had admitted he once bore a character for stern fidelity, but insinuated that it had now been forfeited. He replied, that if he were to. select an instance on which, above all others, to rest his claim to such a character, it would be his course at this crisis. A powerful party taking advantage of the pecuniary embarrassments of the country to displace the administration would be opposed to him, and he * In allusion to the course of Mr. Clay, in the winter of 1825, with reference to the election of Mr. Adams, and his acceptance of the office of Secretary of State. 368 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838. should also incur the displeasure of the whole banking interest, with the exception of some of the southern banks. Many State Rights men, too, for whom he cherished a brother's love, would not go with him. " But I saw before me," he said, "the path of duty ; and, though rugged and hedged on all sides with these and many other difficulties, I did not hesitate a moment to take it. Yes, alone, as the senator sneeringly says. After I had made up my mind as to my course, in a conversation with a friend about the responsibility I would assume, he remarked that my own state might desert me. I rephed that it was not impossible ; but the result has proved that I under-estimated the intelli gence and patriotism of my virtuous and noble state. I ask her pardon for the distrust implied in my answer ; but I ask, with assurance it will be granted, on the grounds I shall put it — that, in being prepared to sacri fice her confidence, as dear to me as light and life, rather than disobey, on this great question, the dictates of my judgment and conscience, I proved myself not unworthy of being her representative. " But if the senator, in attributing to me stern fidelity meant, not devotion to principle, but to party, and espe- • cially the party of which he is so prominent a member, my answer is, that I never belonged to his party, nor owed it any fidelity; and, of course, could forfeit in ref erence to it, no character for fidelity. It is true, we act ed in concert against what we believed to be the usurpa tions of the executive ; and it is true that, during the time, I saw much to esteem in those with whom I acted, and contracted friendly relations with many, which I shalL not be the first to forget. It is also true that a common 1838.] REPLY TO ME. CLAY. 369 party designation was applied to the opposition in the aggregate, not, however, with my approbation ; but it is no less true that it was universally known that it consisted of two distinct parties, dissimilar in principle and policy, except in relation to the object for which they had united : the National Republican party, and the portion of the State Rights party which had sepa rated from the administration, on the ground that it had departed from the true principles of the original party. That I belonged exclusively to that detached portion, and to neither the opposition nor administration party, I prove by my explicit declaration, contained in one of the extracts read from my speech on the currency in 1834. That the .party generally, and the state which I represent in part, stood aloof from both of the parties, may be established from the fact that they refused to mingle in the party and political contests of the day. My state withheld her electoral vote in two successive presidential elections; and, rather than bestow it on either the senator from Kentucky, or the distinguished citizen whom he opposed, in the first of those elections, she threw her vote on a patriotic citizen of Virginia, since deceased, of her own politics, but who was not a candidate ; and, in the last, she refused to give it to the worthy senator from Tennessee near me (Judge White), though his principles and views of policy approached so much nearer to hers than that of the party to which the senator fi-om Kentucky belongs. But, suppose the fact was otherwise, and that the fwo parties had blended so as to form one, and that I owed to the united party as much fidelity as I do to that to which I exclusively belonged ; even on that supposition, no conception of 16* 370 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838» party fidelity could have controlled my course on th» present occasion. I am not among those who pay no- regard to party obligations ; on the contrary,. I place fidelity to party among the political virtues, but I assign to it a limited sphere. I confine it to matters of detail and arrangement, and to minor questions of policy. Beyond that, on all questions involving principles, or measures calculated to affect materially the permanent interests of the country, I look only to God and country. " And here,. Mr.. President,. I avail myself of the op portunity to declai-e my present political position, so that there may be no mistake hereafter.. I belong to the old Republican State Rights party of 1798. To- that, and that alone, I owe fidelity, and by that I shall stand through every change, and in spite of every dif ficulty. Its creed is to be found in the Kentucky Res olutions, and Virginia Resolutions and Report ; and its policy is to confine the action of this government within the narrowest limits compatible with the peace and security of these states, and the objects for which the Union was expressly formed. I, as one of the party, shall support all who support its principles and policy, and oppose all who oppose them. I have given, and shall continue to give, the administration a hearty and sincere support on the great question now under discussion ; because I regard it as in strict conformity to om' creed and policy, and shall do everything in my power to sustain them under the great responsibility which they have assumed. But let me tell those who are more interested in sustaining them than myself, that the danger which threatens them lies not here, bu.t in another quarter. This measure will tend to up- 1838.] REPLY TO MR. CLAY. 371 hold them, if they stand fast and adhere to it with fidelity. But, if they wish to know where the danger is, let them look to the fiscal department of the govern ment. I said, years ago, that we were committing an error the reverse of the great and dangerous one that was committed in 1828, and to which we owe our present difficulties, and all we have since experienced. Then, we raised the revenue greatly, when the expend itures were about to be reduced by the discharge of the public debt ; and now, we have doubled the dis bursements, when the revenue is rapidly decreasing : an error which, although probably not so fatal to the country, will prove, if immediate and vigorous measures be not adopted, far more so to those in power. The country will not, and ought not, to bear the creation of a new debt beyond what may be temporarily- neces sary to meet the present embarrassment ; and any at tempt to increase the duties must and ought to prove fatal to those who may make it, so long as the expendi tures may, by economy and accountability, be brought within the limits of the revenue. " But the senator did not confine his attack to my conduct and motives in reference to the present ques tion. In his eagerness to weaken the cause I support, by destroying confidence in me, he made an indiscrimi nate attack on my intellectual faculties, which he char acterized as metaphysical, eccentric, too much of genius, and too ¦ little of common sense, and, of course, want ing a sound and practical judgment. "Mr. President, according to my opinion, there is nothing of which those who are endowed with superior mental faculties ought to be more cautious than to re- 37^ JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838 proach those with their deficiency to whom Providence has been less liberal. The faculties of our mind are the immediate gift of our Creator, for which we are no farther responsible than for their proper cultivation, according to our opportunities, and their proper appli cation to control and regulate our actions. Thus thinking, I trust I shall be the last to assume superior ity on my part, or reproach any one with inferiority on his ; but those who do not regard the rule when ap plied to others, cannot expect it to be observed when applied to themselves. The critic must expect to be criticized, and he who points out the faults of others, to have his own pointed out. " I cannot retort on the senator the charge of beins' metaphysical. I cannot accuse him of possessiagr the powers of analysis and generalization, thosd /ugher faculties of the mind (called metaphysioai t>y those who do not possess them) which decompf»he and resolve into their elements the complex masses of ideas that exist in the world of mind, as che'uistry does the bodies that surround us in the matPr^al world ; and without which those deep and hidden causes which are in con stant action, and producing such mighty changes in the condition of society, would operate unseen and unde tected. The absence of these higher qualities of mind is conspicuous throughout the whole course of the senator's public life. To this it may be traced that he prefers the specious to the solid, and the plausible to the true. To the same cause, combined with an ardent temperament, it is owing that we ever find him mount ed on some popular and favorite measure, which he whips along, cheered by the shouts of the multitude, 1838.] REPLY To Mfi. CLAY. 378 and never dismounts till he has rode it down. Thus, at one time we find him mounted on the protective system, which he rode down ; at another, on internal improvement ; and now he is mounted on a bank, which will surely share the same fate, unless those who are immediately interested shall stop him in his head long career. It is the fault of his mind to seize on a few prominent and striking advantages, and to pursue them eagerly, without looking to consequences. Thus, in the case of the protective sy.stem, he was struck with the advantages of manufactures ; and, believing that high duties was the proper mode of protecting them, he pushed forward the system, without seeing that he was enriching (jne portion of the country at the expense of the otlier; corrupting the one and alienating the other; and, finally, dividing the com munity into two great hostile interests, which termi nated in the overthrow of the system itself So, now, he looks only to a uniform currency, and a bank as a means of securing it, without once reflecting how far the banking system has progressed, and the difficulties that impede its farther progress ; that banking and politics are running together, to their mutual destruc tion; and that the only possible mode of saving his favorite system is to separate it from the government. " To the defects of understanding which the senator attributes to me, I make no reply. It is for others, and not me, to determine the portion of understanding which it has pleased the Author of my being to bestow on me. It is, however, fortunate for me, that the standard by which I shall be judged is not the false, prejudiced, and, as I have shown, unlounded opinion 374 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [l838. which the senator has expressed, but my acts. They furnish materials, neither few nor scant, to form a just estimate of my mental faculties. I have now been more than twenty-six years continuously in the service of this government, in various stations, and have taken part in almost all the great questions which Rave agi tated this country during this long and important period. Throughout the whole I have never followed events, but have taken my stand in advance, openly and freely, avowing my opinions on all questions, and leaving it to time and experience to condemn or approve my course. Thus acting, I have often, and on great questions, sepa rated from those with whom I usually acted ; and if I am really so defective in sound and practical judg ment as the senator represeiiis, the proof if to be found anywhere, must be found in such instances, or where I have acted on my sole responsibility. Now, I ask. In which of the many instances of the kind is such proof to be found ? It is not my intention to call to the recollection of the Senate all such ; but that you, senators, may judge tor yourselves, it is due, in justice to myself, that I should suggest a few of the most prominent, which at the time were regarded as the senator now considers the present > and then, as now, because, where duty is involved, I would not submit to party trammels. "I go back to the commencement of my public life, the war session, as it was usually called, of 1812, when I first took my pent in the other house, a young man without experience to guide me, and I shall select, as the first instnnoe, the navy. At that time, the adminis tration and the party to which I was strongly attached 1838.] REPLY TO ME. CLAY. 375 ^ were decidedly opposed to this important arm of ser vice. It was considered anti-republican to support it ; but acting with my then distinguished colleague, Mr. Cheves, who led. the way, I did not hesitate to give it my hearty support, regardless of party ties. Does this instance sustain the charge of the senator ? ^' The next I shall select is the restrictive system of that day ; the Embai^o, the Non-importation and Non- hitercourse Acts. This, too, was a party measure, which had been long and warmly contested, and, of course, the lines of party well drawn. Young and in experienced as I was, I saw its defects, and resolutely opposed it almost alone of my party. The second or third speech I made, after I took my seat, was in open denunciation of the system ; and I may refer to the grounds I then assumed, the truth of which ha-ve been confirmed by time and experience, with pride and con fidence. This will scarcely be selected by the senator to make good his charge. " I pass over other instances, and come to Mr. Dal las's bank of 1814-15. That, too, was a party meas ure. Banking was then comparatively but little un derstood, and it may seem astonishing, at this time, that such a project should ever have received any counte nance or support. It proposed to create a bank of $50,000,000, to consist almost entirely of what was called then the war stocks ; that is, the public debt cre- atea in carrying on the then war. It was provided that the bank should not pay specie during the war, and for three years after its termination, for carrying on which it was to lend the government the funds. In plaSn language, the government was to borrow back its 376 JOHN CALDWELL CALKOUN. [183S. own credit from the bank, and pay to the institution six per cent, for its use. I had scarcely ever before seriously thought of banks or banking, but I clearly saw through the operation, and the danger to the gov ernment and country; and, regardless of party ties or denunciations, I opposed and defeated it in the man ner I explained at the extra session. I then subjected myself to the very charge which the senator now makes ; but time has done me justice, as it will in the present instance. " Passing the intervening instances, I come down to my administration of the war department, where I acted on my own judgment and responsibility. It is known to all that the department, at the time, was per fectly disorganized, with not much less than $50,000,000 of outstanding and unsettled accounts, and the greatest confusion in every branch of service. Though with out experience, I prepared, shortly after I went in, the bill for its organization, and on its passage I drew up the body of rules for carrying the act into execution, both of which remain substantially unchanged to this day. After reducing the outstanding accounts to a few millions, and introducing order and accountability in every branch of service, and bringing down the expendi ture of the army from four to two and a half millions an nually, without subtracting a single comfort from either officer or soldier, I left the department in a condition that might well be compared to the best in any country. If I am deficient in the qualities which the senator at tributes to me, here in this mass of details and business it ought to be discovered. Will he look to this to make good his charge ? 1838.] REPLY TO MR. CLAY. 377 " From the war department I was transferred to the chair which you now occupy. How I acquitted my self in the discharge of its duties, I leave it to the body .to decide, without adding a word. The station, from its leisure, gave me a good opportunity to study the genius of the prominent measure of the day, called then the American System, of which I profited. I soon perceived where its errors lay, and how it would operate. I clearly saw its desolating effects in one sec tion, and corrupting influence in the other ; and when I saw that it could not be arrested here, I fell back on my own state, and a blow was given to a system des tined to destroy our institutions, if not overthrown, which brought it to the ground. This brings me down to the present time, and where passions and prejudices are yet too strong to make an appeal with any pros pect of a fair and impartial verdict. I then transfer this, and all my subsequent acts, including the present, to the tribunal of posterity, with a perfect confidence that nothing will be found, in what I have said or done, to impeach my integrity or understanding. " I have now, senators, repelled the attacks on me. I have settled and cancelled the debt between me and my accuser. I have not sought this controversy, nor have I shunned it when forced on me. I have acted on the defensive, and if it is to continue, which rests with the senator, I shall throughout continue so to act. I know too well the advantage of my position to sur render it. The senator commenced the controversy, and it is but right that he should be responsible for the direction it shall hereafter take. Be his determination what it may, I stand prepared to meet him." ' 378 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [l838. Mr. Webster also attacked Mr. Calhoun, and charged him with deserting the opposition when victory was within their reach, and his " cooperation only was wanted to prostrate forever those in power." These few words, said Mr. Calhoun in his reply, contained the whole secret of the denunciations levelled against him ; and as Mr. Webster declared that he should soon move for a renewal of the protective policy, he pointed to this declaration as furnishing, if anything had been needed, a complete justification for his course. But he would not rest the matter here. He insisted, that Mr. Webster and himself entertained irreconcilable opinions in rela tion to the character of the government, its principles, and its true policy ; and they were in their appropriate spheres when arrayed in open hostility. A friend who was present during the delivery of Mr. Calhoun's speech in reply to Mr. Clay, says that, although he has heard many public speakers, he never witnessed such intense earnestness, such a display of impassioned eloquence, as characterized this great effort. The keen fulgent eyes of the speaker shot lightnings at every glance, his hair stood on end, large drops of sweat rested on his brow, and every feature and muscle were alive with animation. And while this burning flood of indignation was rolling in a deluge from his lips, the audience were so completely enchained that perfect silence was preserved, 'knd a pin might have been heard to drop in any part of the chamber ; and when he de clared, with a gesture suited to his words, that he hurl ed back the dart which had been thrown against him, the eyes of all were involuntarily turned to witness the effect of the blow. CHAPTER XI. Resolutions on the Subject of Abolitionism — Opinions of Mr. Calhoun- Assumption of State Debts — Bankrupt BIE — C.ise of the Enterprise —Support of Mr. Van Buren — Election of Harrison and Tyler — The Public Lands — Distribution — The Bank Bills — Defence of the Veto Power — Mr. Clay's Resolutions — Tariff of 1843— -Ashburton Treaty. Among the intellectual champions of the Senate, Mr. Calhoun now stood, Hke Gabriel, confessedly preemi nent. A world-wide reputation was his ; no stranger entered the chamber without seeking him out as one of the first among his compeers ; and the warmest admirers of Clay and Webster willingly conceded that he was second only to the objects of their special praise. He attracted the attention, alike of friend and foe — he was " the observed of all observers." In debate he was felt to be powerful, and none dared enter the lists against him single-handed, unless clad in armor of mailed proof. It cannot be said that he never found his match ; but one thing is true — he never owned a superior. The abolitionists had continued to increase in num bers and in influence in the northern states, and one or both parties in that section often coquetted with them at the state elections, in order to secure the success of their candidates, and not, in a majority of cases per haps, with the view of ultimately rendering any assist- 380 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838. ance in the main object which they had in view. But they were thereby emboldened to make still greater efforts ; they began to feel themselves of some conse quence, and to assume the airs natural to those in the position which they occupied — that of a third party, holding, in many of the states, the balance of power. Mr. Calhoun earnestly desired that the Republican party should commit themselves decidedly against the aboli tionists, and with that view he offered the following resolutions at the session of 1837-8 ; — ¦ t RESOLUTIONS ON ABOLITIONISM. "Resolved, That, in the adoption of the Federal Constitution, the states adopting the same acted severally as free, independent, and sove reign states ; and that each, for itself, by its own voluntary assent, en tered the Union with the view to its increased security against all dan gers, domestic as well as foreign, and the more perfect and secure en joyment of its advantages, natural, political, aijd social. " Resolved, That, in delegating a portion of their powers to be exer cised by the Federal Government, the states retained severally the ex clusive and sole right over their own domestic institutions and police, and are alone responsible for them ; and that any intermeddling of any one or more states, or a combination of their citizens, with the domestic institutions and police of the others, on any ground or under any pre text whatever, poUtical, moral, or religious, with a view to their altera tion or subversion, is an assumption of superiority not warranted by the Constitution, insulting to the states interfered with ; tending to endanger their domestic peace and tranquillity, subversive of the objects fol which the Constitution was formed, and, by necessary consequence, tending to weaken and destroy the Union itself " Resolved, That this Government was instituted and adopted by the several states of this Union as a common agent, in order to carry into effect the powers which they had delegated by the Constitution for their mutual security and prosperity ; and that, in fulfilment of this high and sacred trust, this Government is bound so to exercise its powers as to give, as far as may be practicable, increased stability and security to the 1838.] RESOLUTIONS ON ABOLITIONISM. 381 domestic institutions of the states that compose the Union ; and that it is the solemn duty of the Govemmeut to resist all attempts by one portion of the Union to use it as an instrument to attack the domestic institutions of another, or to weaken or destroy such institutions, instead of strengthening and upholding them, as it is in duty bound to do. " Resolved, That domestic slavery, as it exists in the Southern and Western States of this Union, composes an important part of their domestic institutions, inherited from their ancestors, and existing at the adoption of the Constitution, by which it is recognized as constituting an essential element in the distribution of its powers among the states ; and that no change of opinion or feeUng on the part of the other states of tiie Union in relation to it can justify them or their citizens in open and systematic attacks thereon, with the view to its overthrow, and that aU such attacks are in manifest violation of the mutual and solemn pledge to protect aud defend taiii other, given by the states respectively on entering into the Constitutional compact which formed the Union, and, as such, is a manifest breach of faith, and a -violation of the most solemn obUgations, moral aud religious. " Resolved, That the intermeddling of any state or states, or their citizens, to aboUsh slavery in this district, or any of the territories, ou the ground or under the pretext that it is immoral or sinful, or the pas sage of any act or measure of Congress -with that view, would be a direct and dangerous attack on the institutions of all the slaveholding states. " Resolved, That the union of these states rests on an equality of rights and advantages among its members ; and that whatever destroys that equality tends to destroy the Union itself; aud that it is the solemn duty of all, and more especially of this body, which represents the states in their corporate capacity, to resist aU attempts to discriminate be tween the states in extending the benefits of the Government to the several portions of the Union ; and that to refuse to extend to the Southern and Western States any advantage which would tend to strengthen or render them more secure, or increase their limits or popu lation by the annexation of new territory or states, on the assumption or under the pretext that the institution of slavery, as it exists among them, is immoral or sinful, or otherwise obnoxious, would be contrary to that equaUty of rights and advantages which the Constitution was in tended to secure alike to all the members of the Union, and would, in effect, disfranchise the slaveholding states, -withholding them from the advantages, while it subjected them to the burdens, of the Government." 382 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838. Mr. Calhoun defended his resolutions in a sort of running debate, during which he examined the relative rights, obligations, and duties, of the governments and the citizens of the slaveholding and non-slaveholding states. With some slight modifications, all the resolu tions passed the Senate, except the last, which had ref erence obviously to the admission of Florida, opposi tion to which was already threatened, and to the con templated acquisition of Texas. While upon this subject, it will not be amiss to state, once for all, what were the opinions of Mr. Calhoun on the subject of slavery. In his view, it ought not to be considered, as it exists in the United States, in the ab stract ; but rather as a political institution, existing prior to the formation of the government and expressly recog nized in the Constitution.* The framers of that instru ment regarded slaves as property, and admitted the right of ownership in them.f The institution being thus acknowledged, he contended that the faith of all the states was pledged against any interference with it in the states in which it existed ; and that in the District of Columbia, and in the territories from which slavery had not been excluded by the Missouri Compromise, being the common property of all the states, the owner of slaves enjoyed the same rights and was entitled to the same protection, if he chose to emigrate thither, or if already a resident, as if he were in one of the slave states — in other words, that upon common soil, his right of property should be respected. Any interference with it, therefore, direct or indirect, immediate or remote, * Article i., Section 2 ; Article iv.. Section 2. f "Madison Papers," (Debates in the Convention) pp. 181, 391 1838.] OPINIONS ON SLAVERY. 383 he felt bound to oppose, and did oppose to the very close of his life. He held, too, that it was desirable to continue the institution at the south; that it had been productive of more good than harm ; and that " in no other condi tion, or in any other age or country, [had] the Negro race ever attained so high an elevation in morals, intelligence, or civihzation."* Slavery, he was ac customed to say, existed in some form or another, in all civilized countries ; and he was disposed to doubt the correctness of the sentiment contained in the Declara tion of Independence, that all men are born free and equal. Natural rights, indeed, in every age, in every country, and under every form of government, have been, and are, regulated and controlled by political in stitutions. He considered the colored population as constituting an inferior race, and that slavery was not a degradation, but had the direct tendency to improve their moral, social, and intellectual condition. The situation of the slaves was an enviable one in com parison with that of the free negroes at the north, or with that of the operatives in the manufactories, and the laboring classes generally in Great Britain.f Of what value, except relatively, he asked — and asked, too, with a great deal of pertinence — were political rights, when he saw thousands of voters, in the northern states, in the service of powerful monopolies or employed on * Letter to Mr. Pakenham, April 18, 1844. t See Humphrey's Tour, vol i. chap. 20 ; Dmbin's Observations in Europe, vol iL chap. 13 ; Head's Manufacturing Districts of England, passim. 384 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1838 public works, fairly driven to the polls with ballots in their hands ? The negro slave, he contended, felt and acknowledged his inferiority, and regarded his position as a proper and natural one.* The two races in the Southern states were almost equal in numbers. They could not live upon terms of equality. " It may, in truth, be assumed as a maxim," was his language, " that two races differ ing so greatly, and in so many respects, cannot possibly exist together in the same country, where their numbers are nearly equal, without the one being subjected to the other. Experience has proved that the existing rela tion, in which the one is subjected to the other, in the slaveholding states, is consistent with the peace and safety of both, with great improvement to the inferior ; while the same experience proves that * * * the abolition of slavery would (if it did not destroy the inferior by conflicts, to which it would lead) reduce it to the extremes of vice and wretchedness. In this view of the subject, it may be asserted, that what is called slavery is in reahty a political institution, essen tial to the peace, safety, and prosperity of those states of the Union in which it exists. "f Entertaining these views, it is not strange that Mr. Calhoun regarded the movements of the abohtionists as being dictated by a false philanthropy, and that he thought them calculated, if persisted in, to jeopard the happiness and tranquillity of the slave states, and to endanger the peace of the Union ; nor that he so often warned his fellow-citizens of the Southern states against * Dr. Estes' Defence of Negro Slavery, p. Ii. t Letter to Mr. Pakenham. 1838.] EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE. 385 the designs openly avowed, or secretly cherished, which, if not early opposed or counteracted, would prove highly prejudicial to their interests and their welfare. Where so much was at stake, he thought it well to be wise in time. At the session of 1838-39, in a speech characterized by his usual ability, Mr. Calhoun opposed a bill intro duced by Mr. Crittenden, to prevent the interference of certain federal officers in the elections. He took the ground, that the acceptance of an office under the federal government, did not deprive the individual of the right of suffrage guaranteed to him by the constitu tion and laws of his own state, and ought not to debar him from the exercise of any of the privileges incident thereto. He further argued, that the true cause of the increase in strength and in influence of the executive power, was to be found in the large revenue which had been collected and expended, — in the latter operation adding materially to the patronage of the federal govern ment and its head. He stated that it would be pre sumptuous in him to advise the administration, but if they would hear the voice of one who wished them well, he would recommend to them to bring back the government to the true Jeffersonian policy. " You are placed," he said, "in the most remai'kable juncture that has ever occurred since the establishment of the federal government, and, by seizing the opportunity, you may bring the vessel of state to a position where she may take a new tack, and thereby escape all the shoals and breakers into the midst of which a false steerage has run her, and bring her triumphantly into her destined port, with honor to yourselves and safety to those on 17 386 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1840. board. Take your stand boldly; avow your object; disclose your measures, and let the people see clearly that you intend to do what Jefferson designed, but, from adverse circumstances, could not accomplish : to reverse the measures originating in principles and policy not congenial with our political system ; to divest the government of all undue patronage and influence ; to restrict it to the few great objects intended by the Con stitution ; in a word, to give a complete ascendency to the good old Virginia school over its antagonist, which time and experience have proved to be foreign and dangerous to our system of government, and you may count with confidence on their support, without looking to other means of success. Should the government take such a course at this favorable moment, our free and happy institutions may be perpetuated for genera tions, but, if a different, short will be their duration." At the session of 1839-40, several important ques tions were discussed. Mr. Calhoun made able speeches ¦in opposition to the assumption of the state debts by the •general government, — a project then seriously agitated by a number of leading whigs ; and to the bankrupt bill, which he approved, however, as respected its compulsory features relating to individuals. He thought the bill ought not to include banks, and decidedly con demned the insolvent features introduced into it. But his ablest speech at this session was made upon his resolutions in the case of the brig Enterprise, on the 13th of March, 1840. These resolutions affirmed, and Mr. Calhoun maintained with much power and elo quence in his speech, that a ship or a vessel on the high seas, in time of peace, engaged in a lawful voyage, was. 1840.] PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 387 according to the laws of nations, under the exclusive jurisdiction of the state to which her flag belonged, — as much so as if constituting a part of its own domain ; that if such ship or vessel should be forced, by stress of weather, or other unavoidable cause, into the port of a friendly power, she would lose none of the rights apper taining to her on the high seas, but, on the contrary, she, and her cargo and persons on board, with their property, and all the rights belonging to their personal relatiens, as established by the laws of the state to which they belong, would be placed under the protection which the laws of nations extend to the unfortunate under such circumstances ; and that the brig Enterprise, which was forced unavoidably, by stress of weather, into Port Hamilton, Bermuda Island, while on a lawful voy age on the high seas, from one port of the Union to another, came within the principles embraced in his resolutions, and the seizure and detention of the negroes on board, by the local authority of the island, was an act in violation of the laws of nations, and highly un just to our own citizens, to whom they belonged. At the presidential election in 1840, Mr. Calhoun supported Mr. Van Buren, as did his friends in South Carolina. The administration of that gentleman had been conducted, on all important points, in entire con sonance, as Mr. Calhoun believed, with the republican principles ; and he decidedly approved, therefore, of giving the electoral vote of the state to him. But the result in the Union was unfavorable, and General Har rison and Mr. Tyler were elected to the two highest offices in the gift of the American people — not as the exponents of any particular set of principles, for the 388 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1841. convention that nominated them refused to pass any resolutions, and while General Harrison was understood to be an ultraWhig, or under the control of ultra Whigs, Mr. Tyler was equally well known as a State Rights man. Next in importance to the question of the currency, Mr. Calhoun regarded that of the public lands. At the session of 1840-41, he discussed the whole policy of the government with respect to the latter subject. He delivered three speeches ; one on the prospective pre emption bill, which he opposed ; the second on an amendment, offered by Mr. Crittenden as a substitute, providing for the distribution among the states of the revenue arising from the sale of the public lands ; and the third in reply to the speeches of Mr. Webster and Mr. Clay on Mr. Crittenden's amendment. Mr. Cal houn had often reflected on this subject, and was there fore entirely at home upon it. He was opposed, in toto, to the scheme of distribution, and advocated the cession of the public lands to the new states in which they were situated. "As far back as February, 1837, he offered a substitute, in the form of an amendment to the bill 'to suspend the sale of the public lands,' in which he proposed to cede to the new states the por tion of the public lands lying within their respective limits, on certain conditions, which he accompanied by a speech explanatory of his views and reasons. He followed up the subject in a speech delivered in Janu ary, 1839, on the Graduation Bill; and in May, 1840, an elaborate and full report was made from the Com mittee on Public Lands, and a bill introduced by him, containing substantially the same provisions with his original proposition. 1841.] THE PUBLIC LANDS. 389 " There have been few measures ever presented for consideration so grossly misrepresented, or so much misconceived, as the one in question. It has been represented as a gift — a surrender— ^an abandonment of the public domain to the new states ; and having assumed that to be its true character, the most unwor thy motives have been attributed to the author for in troducing it. Nothing is more untrue. The cession is neither more nor less than a conditional sale, not ex tended to the whole of the public domain, as represent ed, but to that portion in the new states respectively, within whose limits they lie ; the greater part of which are mere remnants, which have long since been offered for sale, without being sold. " The conditions on which they are proposed to be ceded or sold are drawn up with the greatest care, and with the strictest provisions to insure their fulfilment ; one of which is, that the state should pay 65 per cent. of the gross proceeds of the sale to the General Gov ernment, and retain only 35 per cent, for the trouble, expense, and responsibility attending their administra tion. Another is, that the existing laws, as they stand, except so far as they may be modified or authorized to be modified by the act of cession, shall remain un changed, unless altered by the joint consent of the General Government and the several states. They are respectively authorized, if they should think proper, to adopt a system of graduation and preemption within well-defined and safe limits prescribed in the conditions ; and the General Government is authorized to appoint officers in the several states, to whom its share of the proceeds of the sale shall be directly paid, without 390 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1841 going into the state treasury ; and these conditions are put under the guardianship of the courts, by providing, if they shall be violated, that all after rules by the state shall be null and void. So far from this being a gift or an abandonment of the public lands to the new states, he has clearly proved, if there be truth in figures, that the government would receive a greater amount of revenue from the lands in the new states, under the system he proposes, than under the present. These demonstrations are based on calculations which neither have nor can be impugned. "But his views extended far beyond dollars and cents in bringing forward the measure. He proposed to effect by it the high political objects of placing the new states on the same footing of equality and independence with the old, in reference to their domain ; to cut off the vast amount of patronage which the public lands place in the hand of the executive ; to withdraw them as one of the stakes, from the presidential game ; to diminish by one fourth the business of Congress, and with it the length and expense of its session ; to enlist the government of the new states on the side of the General Government ; to aid in a more careful adminis tration of the rest of the public domain, and thereby prevent the whole of it from becoming the property of the occupants from possession ; and, finally, to pre vent the too rapid extinction of Indian titles in propor tion to the demand for lands from the increase of popu lation, which he shows to be pregnant with great em barrassment and danger. These are great objects, of high political import ; and if they could be effected by the measure proposed, it is justly entitled to be ranked 1841.] WHIG MEASURES. 391 among the wisest and most politic ever brought for ward. That they can be effected, it is almost impos sible for any well-informed and dispassionate mind de liberately to read the speeches and documents referred to, and to doubt."* What would have been the policy pui-sued by Gen eral Harrison in his administration of the government, we can only conjecture. His cabinet was composed of decided Whigs ; and there is every reason to sup pose he would have approved the measures subsequently proposed by their friends in Congress. But the hand of Providence removed him by death, shortly after his inauguration, and Mr. Tyler succeeded him in the presidential office. Previous to this time, an extra session of Congress had been called, upon the urgent solicitation of leading Whigs, who were in haste to undo the legislation of former years, and to establish, as far as they could by statute, the Utopia in governmental policy which had long been the subject alike of their dreams and their hopes. Congress assembled for the extra session on the last day of May, 1841 ; Mr. Calhoun again appearing in his place in the Senate, to which he had been reelected for another term. High in hope, rendered confident in tone and overbearing in manner by their recent vic tory, and full to overflowing with ardor and enthusiasm, the Whig members of the 27th Congress entered the Capitol. In their haste to carry their favorite measures, they stopped not for forms or ceremonies. They fol lowed without hesitation in the wake of their leader Mr. Clay, who brought forward and urged the adoption ' Memoir of Mr. Calhoun, 1843. 392 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1841. of his plans, with the boldness and manliness, and, withal, the arrogance forming such prominent traits in his character. The Independent Treasury law was repealed, against the votes of Mr. Calhoun and his Re publican friends. In the minority as they were, ii seemed impossible to oppose any checks or hindrances to the movements of the party in power. Having disposed, as they thought forever, of this great Republican measure, the Whigs began to develop their own pohcy. Their system of measures, leaving, out of view minor and comparatively imimportant prop ositions, was a triad — ^the Distribution of the Land Revenue among the states, the Incorporation of a Na tional Bank, and the Revision of the Tariff so as to afford increased protection. Distribution was but another name for' the assump tion of the state debts, and its object was to create a necessity for a high protective tariff, by withdrawing the revenue derived from the sale of the public lands from the treasury. Mr. Calhoun opposed it, as he had done at previous sessions ; and on the 24th of August, 1841, he dehvered one of his ablest speeches against the passage of the bill. It was an effort every way worthy of the cause and the man. He, of course, took the old Republican ground, that the original cession of the public lands was made to furnish the General Govern ment with the means of defence, in opposition to the federal doctrine that it was the trustee of the states making the cession ; and that if this resource were taken away, a much higher tariff would be needed foi revenue — a result which the protectionists were ex tremely anxious to secure — and thus the policy of a 1841.] THE BANK BILLS. 393 high protective tariff with a permanent distribution of the surplus revenue, would be fastened on the country for all time to come. So palpable were the objections raised by Mr. Cal houn and other senators to the policy of distribution, and they were urged with such power and effect, that a sufficient number of Whigs united with them to pro cure the adoption of a proviso to the bill, declaring that the distribution should cease whenever the average rate of duties collected exceeded twenty per cent. Before the law went into operation, the Whigs increas ed the duties beyond that average, and it remained a dead letter on the statute book. The Bankrupt bill was again brought forward at this session, and again oppose'd by Mr. Calhoun. Two different bills providing for the incorporation of a national bank — the second one, however, disguis ing the project under the name of a fiscal agent of the treasury — passed both houses of Congress. Mr. Cal houn now felt free to vote upon the question as if it were an entirely new one ; and as he was totally op posed to any connection between the government and banks, he voted against both measures. President Tyler, true to his State Rights principles, vetoed each bill in turn. The Whig party were confounded and dismayed; Congress adjourned in confusion, and the cabinet was dissolved. At the ensuing session — that of 1841-42 — a fierce onslaught was made, under the auspices of Mr. Clay, upon the President, and upon his exercise of the veto power. However much Mr. Cal houn was disposed to resist the usurpations of the ex ecutive branch of the government, he would by no 394 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1842. means trespass upon its rights; and heregardedthe veto as one of the great conservative features of the Constitution — a check upon hasty legislation and a protection to the Executive,. tkejs,t,a"t."es,-and, the people, against legislative encroachment. -Qne_of Jhe...ablest speechesjie ever _delivered was _made on this question, and in defence of the veto power. which Mr. Clay proposed to take away in part^ from the "President, by an amendment of the Constitution. *~He contended that if the executive power had been unwisely or improperly increased, the fault was in Congress — in their special legislation, in the high tariff system, the collection of more revenue than was needed, the vast expenditures, and the multiplication of officers consequent upon these evils. -"Is it not clear," he said, " that so far from the veto being the cause of the in- crease'oT hTs~[nie~T'VesTdent's] power, it would have acted as a limitation on it jf Jt Jiacn3een~niiofe freely and frequently used? _lf_the PresideirLha^^etoe^^ the original bank — the connection with the banking system — the tariffs of '24 and. '28, and the numerous acts ap propriating money for roads, canals, harbors, and a long list of other measures not less unconstitutional, would his power have been half as great as it now is ?^ He has grown great and powerful, not_bgcause^ Ae used his Vet07 but because he abstained^Jvom_a^'as\t. ' In fact, it is difficult to imagine a case in which its application can tend to enlarge his power, except it be the case of an act intended to repeal a law calculated to increase his power, or to restore the a,uthority of one which, by an arbitrary construction of his power, he has set aside." He also denied, most emphatically, that this 1842.] DEFENCE OF THE VETO POWER. 395 was a government in which the numerical majority were alone potential, as was contended by the Whigs, who affirmed that the people had decided in favor of their measures by the election of General Harrison, although they made no declaration of their principles whatsoever. Jiut he held that this was a government in which the states were Ji^rd^^ajod onejnjevhic^^ pf the minority were respected. This was done by the division of the legislatjie_power..intojhree_bran^ches ;"" anfflo remove one of them, as must be the effect of abolishing or restricting the veto, would be to destroy the beauty and harmony of the whole system. Early in this session, Mr. Clay had introduced a series of resolutions expressive of his views in relation to the revenues and expenditures of the government. He avowed himself friendly to the general principles of the Compromise act and the advalorem feature ; proposed to raise no more revenue than was necessary for the economical administration of the government ; and disapproved of any resort to loans or treasury notes, in time of peace, except to meet temporary deficits. So far Mr. Calhoun agreed with him : But he further proposed to raise all the revenue firom customs, to sur render the land fund to the states, and to repeal the proviso in the distribution act ; and upon these points they wholly disagreed. Mr. Calhoun spoke on the resolutions, on the 16th of March, and protested in earnest terms against any departure from the great principle of the Compromise act, that no duty should be imposed after the 30th day of June, 1842, except for revenue necessary for the government economically administered. 396 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1842 The protest of Mr. Calhoun was unavailing. Mr. Clay himself resigned his seat in the Senate, partly, it may be, because the friends of protection were beseech ing him to lend his aid in raising the duties ; and this he could not have done, without violating his solemn declaration made in 1833, that the compromise act was " a treaty of peace and amity" not to be disturbed,* and departing from the sentiments avowed in his speech on his resolutions, that specific duties and discriminations were unwise and unjust, and the advalorem principle was entitled to the preference.")" But, in the absence of Mr. Clay, there were other champions of protection to take his place, and the renewal of this perilous policy had been predetermined. Were it not for the disordered currency, the large expenditures, and the excessive issues of paper money by the banks, the influence of the compromise act would have been healthy. But the sudden reduction of the duties, on the 31st of December, 1841, in the then embarrassed condition of the country, occasioned a great falling off in the revenue. This was a misfortune, as Mr. Calhoun readily admitted ; and he would cheer fully have favored any temporary expedient, or any moderate change in the tariff system, which would have made good the deficiency and prevented a recurrence of the evil. With this the manufacturers were not con tent ; they wanted to substitute the old protective duties for the revenue duties,J and to restore the specific features and the minimums. * Speech in the Senate, February 16, 1833. t Speech, March 1, 1842. X The terms protective duty and revenue duty are often misapplied 1842.] TREATY OP WASHINGTON. 397 In the first place, a provisional tariff bill was passed, extending the compromise act to the 1st of August, as the minimum was reached on the 30th of June, 1842, and after that date no duty exceeding twenty per cent, was to be collected, nor that even, as was thought by many, without some special law. The provisional bill required the duties to be collected at the same rates as were collectable on the 1st of June : it also postponed the distribution of the proceeds of the public lands, but did not surrender the principle, and Mr. Calhoun and other republican senators therefore opposed it. It was vetoed by the President ; and the act of 1842, establish ing a rate of duties averaging nearly forty per cent on the aggregate value of imports, and of course highly protective, subsequently passed both houses — each by a single vote — and was reluctantly signed by the Presi dent. It is almost unnecessary to say, that Mr. Cal houn opposed the passage of this bill from first to last. He likewise delivered an able speech against it on the 5th of August, and pronounced it to be decidedly worse than " the bill of abominations." Its protective features were artfully concealed under specific rates and mini- mums, but its true character could not be mistaken, and it was generally condemned throughout the country, by all except the manufacturers and the ultra Whigs. On the 20th day of August, 1842, the Senate ratified the treaty of Washington, or the Ashburton treaty, by which the northeastern boundary was satisfactorily A revenue duty is one whose increase would be followed by an increase of revenue, or which is already fixed at the maximum of revenue ; and a protective duty is one of absolute prohibition, or which must be re duced in order to increase the revenue. 398 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1842. settled, by the decisive vote of 39 to 9. Mr. Calhoun voted with the majority, and delivered a speech in favor ot the treaty marked by great ability and power, and which elicited the highest encomiums in England as well as in America. He had never doubted the justice of the claims of Maine, yet, as the United States had in effect agreed to compromise the question by sub mitting it to arbitration, he approved of the treaty as a fair and honorable settlement of the difficulty. He fully concurred in the sentiments afterwards expressed so pertinently and forcibly by Sir Robert Peel, in reference to this and the Oregon question, that it was " the better policy to propose, in the spirit of peace, con ditions perfectly compatible with the honor of each country, and not requiring from either any sacrifice, territorial or commercial, which would not be dearly purchased by the cost of a single week's hostilities."* * Address to his constituents at Tamworth, 1847. CHAPTER XII. The Oregon Question — Resignation of Mr. Calhoun — Appointed Secre tary of State — Annexation of Texas — Administration of Mr. Polk — Declines Mission to England — Returns to the Senate — Memphis Con vention — Improvement of Harbors and Rivers — Triumph of Free Trade — War with Mexico — Continued Agitation of the Slavery Question — Southern Address — Mr. Clay's Plan of Compromise — Last Speech of Mr. Calhoun. For reasons similar to those which had influenced him in voting for the ratification of the Treaty of Washington, Mr. Calhoun opposed the efforts, whether intentional or otherwise, made during the latter part of Mr. Tyler's administration and the first year of Mr. Polk's, to produce a war between the United States and Great Britain on account of the Oregon difficulty. He did not think that the title to the whole of Oregon, as high as 54° 40', was entirely unquestionable. On the contrary, he was of the opinion, that the 49th parallel, or some line near that, should be adopted as the boundary. As he regarded this matter, both par ties were committed, by the negotiations of 1818, 1824 and 1826-27, to a compromise of the question by the mutual surrender of a part of their respective claims ; and at the session of 1842-43, he delivered a speech on the Oregon bill, introduced by Mr. Linn, of Missouri, which provided for granting lands, and for commencing 400 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1843. systematically the colonization and settlement of the territory in dispute. He opposed the bill, and insisted, that it was neither wise nor prudent, to assert at that time the exclusive right to the territory, as the bill con templated. In his view, the position of the United States should be one of masterly inactivity. The pos session of the Pacific coast was of great importance to them, as it could not be doubted that their authority would soon extend from ocean to ocean. The naval superiority of Great Britain, in men and materiel, if not in efficiency, was not to be doubted nor denied, and it was evident that she could dispatch troops and muni tions of war to Oregon with about as much facility as the United States, or, from her East India possessions, with even greater ease. He was in favor therefore, of leaving causes already in operation, to work as they had done, silently. The tide of voluntary emigi-ation from the older states and territories was passing beyond the Rocky Mountains ; and it was more than probable, that in a few years Oregon would contain a large population, ready and willing, if the title of the United States should then be asserted by force of arms, essen tially to aid in its support and defence. At the close of this session, which terminated in March, 1843, Mr. Calhoun resigned his seat in the Senate. His private affairs had become considerably embarrassed, in consequence of his protracted absences from home, and his inability to supervise and direct their management except during brief intervals. Of senatorial honors, too, he had enough to satisfy the am bition of any man. Many of his friends, doubtless, look ed forward to his elevation to the highest office in the 1843.] RESIGNATION AS SENATOR. 401 nation, — as they had a right to do, for he was in every way worthy of this proud distinction, and would have conferred more honor upon it, than would have been reflected upon himself Did he cherish any aspirations of this character, they were confined'to his own bosom, and never gave him a moments' pain. Retired to the pri vacy of his beautiful home at Fort Hill, in the vicinity of Pendleton Court House, he was far happier, in the ¦enjoyment of domestic happiness, and in the occupa tions and pursuits of a planter, than while mingling in the bustle and turmoil of party politics, which was wholly unavoidable while he was at Washington. But as the war-horse never forgets the sights and sounds that animated him on the field of battle, so he remembered the important subjects that had engrossed his attention, and taxed his powers, in the stormy ¦debate ; and if he did not long to participate again in the strife, his thoughts were often turned to the spot where "the war of words was high." The theory of our government — of all governments — was still his study ; and politics, in the enlarged, more comprehen sive, and philosophical sense of the term, daily attended him in his study and in his walks, as familiar spirits with whom he loved to take sweet counsel together. On the 28th of February, 1844, Mr. Upshur, the ta lented and accomplished Secretary of State, was sud denly killed on board the steamer Princeton, by the ex plosion of*one of its guns. Previous to the occurrence of this melancholy event, negotiations had been opened between the authorities of Texas and those of the United States, for the annexation of her territory to that of the latter power. 402 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1844 Mr. Calhoun had been long known as a warm friend to the acquisition of Texas. He was never of the opinion that Louisiana extended beyond the Sabine, and did not, therefore, as a member of Mr. Monroe's cabinet, disapprove of the surrender of the American claim to the territory west of that river.* In May, 1836, he proposed the recognition of the independence of Texas, by a resolution introduced inta the Senate ;, in 1837, he voted for the acknowledgment of her inde pendence ; in 183&, he supported a resolution declaring that the acquisition of Texas was desirable, whenever it could be made with her consent, and consistent with the treaties, faith, and stipulations of the United States ; and when Texas had maintained her position of suc cessful rebellion for a period of nine years, during which time she had exercised before the world all the rights. and powers of an independent state, he did not consider it requisite or necessary to consult the government from whose authority she had revolted, before entering into- a treaty of annnexation with her. There were several powerful reasons, as Mr. Cal houn thought, which imperatively demanded the annexa tion of Texas to the territories of the United States. In the first place, it was important because of its prox imity to New Orleans, the great emporium of the valley of the Mississippi, and the liability of the latter to be attacked from it under numerous disadvantages, in a state of war ; in the second place, it was imp(>rtant, be cause England desired to secure Texas as a commercial dependency,f from which she could obtain cotton, in, * Address to the People of the Southern States, July 6th, 1849. -f See the Speech of Mr. Houston in the U. S. Senate, — Congressional Slobe — 2d session, 29th Congress — p. 469. 1844.] THE TEXAS QUESTION. 403 abundance, for her manufactories, and live oak for the use of her immense naval establishment, — and thus the pecuniary interests of the cotton growing states, which furnished the English manufacturers with their chief supply of the raw material, were likely to be seriously prejudiced; and in the third place, it was important, because England and France were exerting all their influence to prevent the annexation, and the former had favored projects for the abolition of slavery in Texas, which, if it should take place, could not fail to disturb the peace and tranquillity of the American Union.* It is true, that the British Secretary of Foreign affairs (Lord Aberdeen), while admitting the desire of his gov ernment to witness the abolition of slavery in Texas insisted that they had no intention of interfering in any way with the institutions of the United States, or of any portion of them ;t but it is equally true, that frank ness never characterized British diplomacy. Lord Aberdeen had had an interview with a deputation of the World's Convention, upon the subject of procuring the abolition of slavery in Texas ; and he had publicly avowed his feehngs and wishes in this respect, on the floor of Parliament.J It was notorious, too, that the CanadaS had for years been filled with the emissaries of British abohtionists, who were constantly engaged in efforts to promote the escape of slaves from their mas ters in the southern states of the union ; and it could not be doubted that they anticipated a much better * Letter of Mr. Calhoun to Mr. Pakenha;n, April 18, 1844. f Senate Doc. 341 — 1st session, 28th Congress— p. 48. X Conversation in the gouse of Lords, between Lord Brougham and Lord Aberdeen — See London Morning Chronicle, August 19, 1843. 404 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1844, field for their operations, if slavery could be abolished in Texas, close upon the borders of the slaveholding states. Such being the well-known sentiments of Mr. Cal houn with reference to the proposed annexation of Texas, he was invited by President Tyler, who had re constructed his cabinet from the inembers of both politi cal parties, to take the place at the head of the State Department made vacant by the death of Mr. Upshur. After some hesitation, which was at length overcome by the importance of this pending question, Mr. Calhoun accepted the appointment — the nomination having been unanimously confirmed by the Senate with out even going through the formality of a reference to a committee — and immediately repaired to his post at Washington. On the 12th day of April, 1844, he had the gratification of signing a treaty of annexation with the representatives of the Texan government. The treaty was discussed for several weeks in the Senate, but was finally rejected by that body, partly on account of political considerations and the objection of the northern whig senators to the extension of the slave territory of the Union ; but mainly, for the reason, that the boundaries of Texas were not defined, though it was well understood that she laid claim to all the territory North and East of the Rio del Norte, or Rio Grande, not belonging to the United States — the justice of which claim was disputed by most, if not all, the sena tors who voted against the treaty. No provision was inserted in the treaty in regard to the boundary, because it proposed to annex Texas as a territory, and the right to settle it would, of course, belong to the government 1844.] ANNEXATION OP TEXAS. 405 of the United States. In this view of the case, as soon as the treaty was concluded, the American charge d' affaires was instructed by Mr. Calhoun to assure the Mexican Government that the President of the United States desired to settle all questions between the two countries that might grow out of the treaty, or any other cause, on liberal and satisfactory terms ; and that the boundary of Texas was purposely left undefined in the treaty, in order that it might be an open question to be fairly and fully discussed and settled.* An envoy was shortly after sent to Mexico, with instructions to make the same assurances, and with full powers to enter upon the negotiation. "j" Meanwhile, Mr.. Polk had been pat in nomination for the presidency by the Republican party, as the avowed friend of the immediate annexation of Texas ; and at the election in the fall of 1844, he was triumph antly chosen over Mr. Clay, the Whig candidate, and a decided opponent of the measure. Other questions — ¦ such as the protective policy, internal improvements, a national bank and an independent treasury — were like wise at issue. Upon these Mr. Polk coincided with Mr. Calhoun, and the latter was highly gratified at his success. Public opinion being now ascertained to be favorable to the annexation, a joint resolution was brought for ward and passed at the second session of the twenty- eighth Congress, under which Texas was at length an nexed. On the accession of Mr. Polk, in March, 1845, ¦* Senate Doc. 341 — 1st session, 28th Congrc-^s— p. 53, f Documents accompanying President's Message, 2nd session, 28th Congi-ess. 406 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [l844. many of Mr. Calhoun's friends were quite anxious that he should be continued in the office of Secretary of State, but he promptly informed the new president, that he was unwilling to remain in the cabinet. He was not by any means unfriendly to the incoming admin istration, but he desired to maintain a position of quasi independence, and he was daily becoming more of a statesman and less of a politician. But aside from this consideration, there were other reasons that influenced him. There were, among the supporters of Mr. Polk, many who were not favorable to the annexation of Texas, or who were dissatisfied with the manner in which it had been effected ;* and it was to be feared, that if Mr. Calhoun remained in the cabinet, they Would attempt to embarrass the administration, for the reason that he had been the most efficient agent in securing that valuable acquisition of territory. He had also questi9ned the propriety of a resolution adopted by the convention that nominated Mr. Polk, in favor of asserting the title of the United States to the whole of Oregon ; and when he saw an effort making in the north and west, to force the question to a settlement, at the hazard of bringing on a war with Great Britain, he had opened a negotiation with the British minister for the adjustment of the conflicting claims. His course in this respect was not satisfactory to all the republican members from the northern and western states, and the harmony of the party, for the time at least, was probably secured by his retiring from the cabinet. * Among the supporters of Mr. Clay there were probably as many who approved of the annexation, as there were friends of Mr. Polk who opposed it. 1845.] MEMPHIS CONVENTION. 407 But Mr. Polk shared in the feeling common to the prudent and sagacious politicians in both parties, that Mr. Calhoun's abilities — his caution, skill, and fore sight, — might be of great benefit to the country in a diplomatic capacity, and therefore tendered to him the mission to England. This he declined, both on ac count of the indisposition of his daughter, and because of his firm conviction that the Oregon difficulty, in re gard to which he felt great anxiety, could be settled only at Washington — that "the peace," as he said, ¦"was to be made here." Mr. Calhoun had been succeeded in the Senate by Judge Huger, but the expression of the whole South was so earnest and so united in favor of the return of the former to his old position, that the Judge resigned his seat, and Mr, Calhoun was chosen to fill the unex pired term. He would willingly have retired once more to private fife, but his friends insisted that the country had need of his services in the settlement of the Oregon question, and he yielded to their wishes. He again took his place in that august body of which he had long been one of the most distinguished orna ments, and had the proud satisfaction of defending the Oregon treaty of 1846, and of contributing to its rati fication by his vote. In November, 1845, a South- Western Convention,' composed of delegates from the southern and western states, was held at Memphis, Tennessee. Mr. Cal houn attended as a delegate from South Carolina, and was chosen president of the convention. Its object was to promote the development of the resources of the western and south-western states ; and resolutions, 408 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1846. and a memorial to Congress, setting forth the objects had in view, and the action required by the general government, were adopted. Mr. Calhoun did not con cur in all the proceedings though approving of them in the main. He presented the memorial in the Senate, at the first session of the twenty-ninth Congress, and on his motion it was referred to a select committee of which he was made chairman. On the 26th of June-, 1846, he made a report, luminous in style and masterly in argument, in which may be found his matured opin ions upon the subject of improvements by the general government, more particularly with respect to harbors and rivers. He thought that the navigation of the Mississippi river and its navigable tributaries, where three or more states bordered upon them — which was the main sub ject of consideration at the Memphis Convention — might and ought to be improved by the general gov ernment, by the removal of obstructions. He derived the power to make these improvements, hot from the clause in the constitution authorizing Congress to pro vide for the " common defence and general welfare," but from that authorizing Congress " to regulate com merce with foreign nations and among the several states." Harbors for shelter and for the navy, he was of opinion, might be made in the Mississippi and its tributaries ; but canals around falls or other obstruc tions, could not be made, except that where they passed through the public domain, alternate sections of land might be granted to aid in their construction. Where a tributary of the Mississippi was bordered by less than three states, he thought it should be improved by the 1846.] IMPROVEMENT OF HARBORS AND RIVERS. 409 state or states which it intersected, or by individuals. The same principles he applied to other rivers empty ing into the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic, and the lakes. He also expressed the opinion, that the power to regulate commerce embraced the establishment of light-houses, piers, buoys, beacons, and harbors for shelter and the navy, on the sea coast, the lakes, and the rivers intersecting three or more states. Commer cial harbors, he thought, should be constructed by the states ; and Congress should empower them to lay ton nage duties for this purpose. The general govern ment, he maintained, had no power to aid directly in the construction of roads or canals, but, as in the case of canals around falls, alternate sections of the public . land intersected by them might be granted, because such improvements were calculated to raise the value of the remaining sections. Cherishing these views, Mr. Calhoun cordially ap proved of the veto of the Harbor and River bill by President Polk, in August, 1846, and of the general principles of his special message on the subject of in ternal improvements, dated the 15th of December, 1847. At the session of 1845-6, Mr. Calhoun was gratified by the reenactment of the Independent Treasury bill, with some modifications which experience had shown to be necessary, and doubly so, by- the establishment of a new tariff of duties based upon strict revenue principles. The protracted struggle was brought to a close. Free trade was at length triumphant. There was an end of distribution sustained by a protective tariff. The important truths which he had labored so long to establish were now acknowledged with a unani- 18 410 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1846. mity that promised to ensure the much desired perma nence in the imposition and collection of duties. The effect of this great triumph was not confined to this side of the Atlantic ; Cobden and his associates were inspired to new efforts by the success of Calhoun ; and the ablest statesmen of Great Britain, the Peels and the Russells, yielded to the influences that were breaking down the barriers of commercial intercourse. Mr. Calhoun would have been more than human, had he not rejoiced to witness this result of his exertions. But he indulged in no unseemly expressions of gratification. " After a struggle of two and twenty years. Truth and He had been successful, but no personal exultation sparkled in his eye, or triumphed in his words. The measure and its great consequences alone occupied his thoughts."* Having aided in the settlement of the Oregon ques tion, and in the enactment of the tariff law of 1846, Mr. Calhoun would now gladly have returned to the peace and quietude of the happy home, ever cheered and enlivened by his presence ; for his private affairs demanded his attention, and his health was considerably impaired. It was his misfortune, too, to be constantly misrepresented by some of the friends of the adminis tration, who seemed unable to comprehend the motives that prompted him to vote in opposition to them, when required by the rigid adherence to his principles, which it was his pride to maintain. But the war with Mexico induced him to remain in the Senate, to which he was reelected for another term in 1846, and to continue in the position which he had graced, and in which it * Mrs. Maury's Statesmen of America, p. 183. 1847.] THE MEXICAN WAR. 411 was his happy fate to die, " with the harness on his back." Had he conducted the negotiations for the annexa tion of Texas from the beginning, under the adminis tration of Mr. Tyler, it is highly probable that our peaceful relations with Mexico would have been pre served. He was a great enemy to war, and his policy was always that of peace. He had long feared that hos tilities with Mexico would ensue, and yet he thought, to the last, a collision might have been avoided. Influenced by these feehngs, he refused to vote either for or against the act of May, 1846, declaring the existence of a state of war ; yet he supported for the most part the meas ures of the administration, looking to the vigorous pro secution of hostilities, till the session of 1847-8, when he proposed resolutions disapproving of the conquest of Mexico, for the purpose of incorporating it into the Union, or holding it as a province ; and on the 4th of January, 1848, he delivered a speech in their favor. At the previous session he had suggested the with drawal of the American troops to a defensive line, and the occupation of the territory behind it, and the block ade of the ports of Mexico, till terms of peace were accepted. His resolutions were offered for the same purpose, and he enforced his views upon the defensive policy with great ability. Before any final action was had upon his resolutions, the treaty of Guadalupe Hi dalgo was laid before the Senate and ratified with his vote. But a grave and important question arose out of the war — one which Mr. Calhoun anticipated, and which is now (July, 1850) agitating the country from one end 412 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1848. to the other. By the treaty of peace, California and New Mexico were annexed to the United States, and the Rio Grande was established as the southwestern boundary of the Union with the assent and concur rence of the Mexican government. The Abolition feeling had been constantly increasing at the North, and the Whig party there, with very few exceptions, and a considerable portion of the Republicans, were more or less under its influence, even though many of them deprecated the constant agitation of the subject. Sectional animosities had been aroused; at the North, the article of the Constitution, and the laws of Con gress providing for the recapture of fugitive slaves, had been repeatedly disregarded or set at defiance ; and questionable measures of retaliation had been adopted in some of the southern states. An effort was now made in Congress to prohibit the extension of slavery to the territory acquired from Mexico, at the time of forming territorial governments, Mr. Calhoun contributed with all his might and zeal in resisting every effort of this character, and on the 27th of June, 1848, he made an able speech in reply to Mr. Dix of New York, on the bill providing a territorial government for Oregon, which it was proposed to amend, so as forever to exclude slavery therefi'om. He denied that Congress had the exclusive right of legisla tion over the territories, and insisted that it could not, by its action, take away from the people the power of making such municipal regulations as they pleased, when state constitutions were adopted. He also de fended the institution of Slavery, but at the same time contended, that the abstract question of Slavery was 1848.] THE SLAVERY aUESTION. 413 merged in the higher one of self-defence on the part of the southern states. The North, he said, was bent on securing the balance of power, and that once gained, abolitionism would break down the ramparts of the Constitution, and the rights of the states would no longer be respected. At the session of 1847-8, the Slavery question prevented the passage of territorial bills ; but at the ensuing session the subject was again agitated. in the meantime the presidential election had taken place, and the Whig candidate, General Taylor, who refused to commit himself on the question, was elected over General Cass, the Repubhcan nominee, who had opposed the efforts of the Slavery exclusionists. Mr. Calhoun was much chagrined at this result, and when Congress came together in December, 1848, he advised a meeting of the members from the slaveholding states to be held, to deliberate on the course proper to be pursued. His advice was followed; a meeting was held ; and an address prepared by him was adopted, which reviewed the origin and history of the abolition move ment, and the aggressions upon the rights of the South, and pointed out the evils which must result, and the necessity of united and harmonious action to prevent them. This session also passed by without a settlement of the question, and in the summer of 1849, Mr. Cal houn had occasion again to make known his opinions, in an address to the people of the southern states, dated at Fort Hill on the 15th of July, in reply to a speech of Colonel Benton to his constituents in Missouri, charging the former with having repeatedly abandoned the interests of the South, and with endeavoring to 414 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1849. promote the dissolution of the Union. Mr. Calhoun defended himself with more than his usual ability, and sometimes with not a little asperity. He retraced his whole course in pubhc life, and insisted that he had ever been, as he ever should be, firm in maintaining the rights of the slaveholding states under the com promises of the Constitution, and faithful to the Union so long as it could be preserved in the spirit of its in ception. When Congress again came together, Mr. Calhoun was in feeble health, in consequence of a pulmonary complaint of long standing which had been for some time growing upon him more rapidly than it had done, for the reason probably, that his mind was kept in a constant state of excitement by the agitation of the slavery question. Meanwhile California had adopted a state constitution prohibiting slavery, and now ap plied for admission into the Union, supported by a favor able recommendation of the president. General Taylor. The elements of controversy were at once roused up more fiercely than before, and the confederacy seemed about to be violently ruptured. Various propositions were offered with the hope of settling the difficulty for ever, i and among others, Mr. Clay offered a series of resolutions as a compromise, or an amicable arrange ment of the questions in controversy. The general fea tures of Mr. Clay's plan were, — the admission of Cali fornia ; the formation of territorial governments for the remainder of the territory acquired from Mexico, with out containing any provision whatsoever in regard to slavery ; declaring that the abolition of slavery in the district of Columbia was inexpedient, that the trade in 1850.J LAST SPEECH. 415 slaves brought from without the district ought to be prohibited therein, but that Congress possessed no power to obstruct the slave trade between the states ; and the more effectual provision by law for the restitution of fugitive slaves. Mr. Calhoun had convinced himself, that if California were admitted as a state, and the balance of power thus assured to the non-slaveholding states, there would be no security for the south without an amendment of the Constitution. Day after day, in the early part of the session, he took his place punctually in the Senate, until his failing strength warned him that the hand of the destroyer was already upon him. He then retired to his room, and there prepared the following speech — the last great effort of his powerful mind. Unable to deliver it himself, it was read in his presence by his colleague. Judge Butler, on the 4th day of March, 1850: — SPEECH ON THE SLAVERY UUESTION. I have. Senators, beheved from the fiirst, that the agitation of the sub ject of slavery would, if not prevented by some timely and effective measure, end in disunion. Entertaining this opinion, I have, on all proper occasions, endeavored to call the attention of both of the two great parties which divide the country, to adopt some such measure to prevent so great a disaster, but without success. The agitation has been permitted to proceed, with almost no attempt to resist it, until it has reached a period when it can no longer be disguised or denied that the Union is in danger. You have thus had forced upon you the great est and the gravest question that ever can come under your considera tion. How can the Union be preserved ? To give a satisfactory answer to this mighty question, it is indispen sable to have an accurate and thorough knowledge of the nature and the character of the cause by which the Union is endangered. Without Buch knowledge it is impossible to pronounce, with any certainty, by 416 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850 what means it can be saved ; just as it would be impossible for a phy sician to pronounce, in the case of some dangerous disease, "with any certainty by what remedy the patient could be saved, without similar knowledge of the nature and character of the cause of the disease. The first question, then, presented for consideration, in the investigation I propose, in order to obtain such knowledge, is, — What is it that has en dangered the Union ? To this question, there can be but one answer — that the immediate cause is, the almost universal discontent which pervades all the States composing the Southern section of the Union. This widely extended discontent is not of recent origin. It commenced with the agitation of the slavery question, and has been increasing ever since. The next question is, — What has caused this wide-diffused and almost universal discontent ? It is a great mistake to suppose, as is by some, that it originated with demagogues, who excited the discontent with the intention of' aiding their personal advancement, or with disappointed, ambitious individuals, who resorted to it as the means of raising their fallen fortunes. There is no foundation for this opinion. On the contrary, all the great politi cal influences of the section were arrayed agamst excitement, and exert ed to the utmost to keep the people quiet. The great mass of the peo ple of the South were divided, as in the other section, into whigs and democrats. The leaders and the presses of both parties in the South were very solicitous to prevent excitement and restore quiet ; because it was seen that the effects of the former would necessarily tend to weaken, if not destroy, the political ties which united them with their respective parties in the other section. Those who know the strength of party ties, wiU readdy appreciate the immense force which this cause exerted a.gainBt agitation, and in favor of preserving quiet But as great as it was, it was not sufficiently so to prevent the wide-spread dis content which now pervades the section. M"o ; some cause far deeper and more powerful must exist, to produce a discontent so -wide and deep, than the one inferred. Tlie question then recurs, what is the cause of this discontent ? It wUl be found in the belief of the people of the Southern States, as prevalent as the discontent itself, that they cannot remain, as things now are, consistently with honor and safety, in the Union. The next question, then, to be considered is, — What has caused this belief! .* One of the causes is, undoubtedly, to be traced to the long-continued 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 417 agitation of the slave question on the part of the North, and the many aggressions which they have made on the rights of the South, during that time. I will not enumerate them at present, as it will be done hereafter in its proper place. There is another, lying back of it, but with which this is intimately connected, that may be regarded as the great and primary cause. It is to be found in the fact, that the equilibrium between the two sections in the government, as it stood when the Constitution was ratified, and the government put in action, has been destroyed. At that time, there was nearly a perfect equilibrium between the two, which afforded ample means to each to protect itself against the aggression of the other ; but as it now stands, one section has exclusive power of controlling the gov ernment, which leaves the other without any adequate means of pro tecting itself against its encroachment and oppression. To place this subject distinctly before you, I have. Senators, prepared a brief statisti cal statement, showing the relative weight of the two sections in the government under the first census of 1790, and the last census of 1840 According to the former, the population of the United States, includ ing Vermont, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which then were in their incip ient condition of becoming States, but were not actually admitted, amounted to 3,929,827. Of this number, the Northern States had 1,9'7'7,899, and the Southern 1,962,0'72, making a difference of only 25,827 in favor of the former States. The number of States, including Vermont, Kentucky and Tennessee, was sixteen, of which eight, includ ing Vermont, belonged to the Northern section, and eight, including Kentucky and Tennessee, to the Southern, making an equal division of the States between the two sections, under the fir,st census. There was a small preponderance in the House of Representatives, and in the elec toral college, in favor of the Northern, owing to the fact that, according to the provisions of the Constitution, in estunating federal numbers, five slaves count but three ; but it was too small to affect sensibly the per fect equihbrium of numbers which, -with that exception, existed at that time — a true, perfect equilibrium. Such was the equality of the two sections when the States composmg them agreed to enter into a federal Union. Since then, the equihbrium between them has been greatly disturbed. According to the last census, the aggregate population of the United States amounted to 17,063,357, of which the Northern section contained 9,728,920, and the Southern 7,334,437, makmg a difference, in round 18* «18 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. numbers, of 2,400,000. The number of States had increased from six teen to twenty-six, making an addition of ten States. In the mean time, the position of Delaware had become doubtful, as to which section she properly belonged. Considering her as neutral, the Northern States will have thirteen, and the Southern St&tes twelve, malting a difference in the Senate of two Senators in favor of the former. According to the apportionment under the census of 1840, there were 223 members of the House of Representatives, of which the Northern States had 135, and the Southern States, (considering Delaware as neutral) 87 ; making a difference in favor of the former, in the House of Representatives, of 48 ; the difference in the Senate of two members added to ihis, gives to the North, in the electoral college, a majority of 50. Since the census of 1840, four States have been added to the Union; Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida, iiud Texas. They leave the difference in the Senate as it stood when the census was taken, but add two to the side of the North in the House, making the present majority iu the House in its favor, of 50, and in the electoral college, of 52. The result of the whole is to give the Northern section a predominance in every department of the government, and thus concentrate in it the two elements which constitute the federal government — majority of States, and a majority of their population, estimated in federal numbers. Whatever section concentrates the two in itself, must possess control of tlie entire government But we are just at the close of the sixth decade, and the commence ment of the seventh. The census is to be takeu thia year, which must add greatly to the decided preponderance of the North in the House of Representatives, and in the electoral college. The prospect is, also, that a great increase will be added to its present preponderance during the period of the decade, by the addition of new States. Two territories — Oregon and Minnesota — are already in progress, and strenuous efforts are making to bring in three additional States from the territory recently conquered from Mexico, which, if successful, will add three other States in a short time to the Northern section, making five States and increasing its piesent number of States from 15 to 20, and of its Senators from 30 to 40. On the contrary, there is not a single territory in progress in the Southern section, and no certainty that any additional State will be added to it during the decade. The prospect then is, that the two sections in the Senate, should the efforts now made to exclude the South from the newly conquered territories succeed, will stand, 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 419 before the end of the decade, twenty Northern States to twelve Southern (conceding Delaware as neutral), and forty Northern Senators to twenty- four Southern. This great mcrease of Senators, added to the great in crease of members of the House of Representatives, and electoral college, on the part of the North, which must take place upon the next decade, will effectually and eventually destroy the equilibrium which existed when the government commenced. Had this destruction been the operation of time, without the interfer ence of government, the South would have had no reason to complain ; but such was not the fact. It was caused by the legislation of this government, which was appointed as the common agent of all, and charged with the protection of the interests and security of all.. The legislation by which it has been effected may be classed under three heads. The first is that series of acts by which the South has been excluded from the common territory belonging to all of the States, as the members of the federal Union, which has had the effect of extending vastly the portion allotted to the Northern section, and restricting within narrow limits the portion left the South. The next consists in adopting a system of revenue and disbursements by which an undue proportion of the burthen of taxation has been imposed upon the South, and an undue proportion of its proceeds appropriated to the North ; and the last in a system of political measures by which the original charac ter of the government has been radically changed. I propose to bestow upon each of these, in the order they stand, a few remarks, with the view of showing that it is owing to the action of this government, that the equilibrium between the two sections has been de stroyed, and the whole power of the system centred in a sectional majority. The first of the series of acts by which the South was deprived of its due share of the territories, originated with the confederacy, which pre ceded the existence of this government. It is to be found in the provisions of the ordinance of 1787. Its effect was to exclude the South entirely from that va,st and fertile region which lies between the Ohio and the Mississippi, now embracing five States and one Territory. The next of the series is the Missouri compromise, which excluded the South from that large portion of Louisiana which Ues north of 36° 30', excepting what is included in the State of Missouri. The last of the series excludes the South from the whole of the Oregon Territory. AU these, in the slang of the day, were what is called slave territory, and not free 420 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. soU ; that is, territories belonging to slave-holding powers, and open to the emigration of masters with their slaves. By these several acts, the South was excluded from 1,238,025 square miles, an extent of country considerably exceeding the entire =valley of the Mississippi. To the South was left the portion of the territory of Louisiana lying south of 36° 30', and the portion north of it included in the State of Missouri ; the portion lying south of 36° 30', includes the States of Louisiana and Arkansas, and the territory lying west of the latter and south of 36° 30', called the Indian country. A portion lying south of this, with the territory of Florida, now the State, makes in the whole 283,503 square mUes. To this must be added the territory acquired with Texas. If the whole should be added to the Southern section, it would make an I, increase of 325,520, which would make the whole left to the South 609,023. But a large part of Texas is still in contest between the two sections, which leaves uncertain what will be the real extent of the por tion of her territory that may be left to the South. I have not included the territory recently acquired by the treaty with Mexico. The North is making the most streiiuous efforts to ap propriate the whole to herself, by excluding the South from every foot of it If she should succeed, it will add to that from which Southern laws have already been excluded, 527,078 square miles, and would in crease the whole the North has appropriated to herself, to 1,764,023, not including the portion which she may succeed in excluding us from in Texas. To sum up the whole, the United States, since they deckired their independence, have acquired 2,373,048 square miles of territory, from which the North will have excluded the South, if she should suc ceed in monopolizing the newly acquired territories, about three fourths of the whole, and leave the South but about one fourth. Such is the first and great cause that has destroyed the equilibrium between the two sections in the government. The next is the system of revenue and disbursements which has been adopted by the government. It is well known that the main source from which the government has derived its revenue, is from duties on imports, I shall not undertake to show that all such duties must necessarily faU mainly on the exporting States, and that the South, as the great exporting portion of the Union, has in reality paid vastly more than her due proportion of the revenue, because I deem it un necessary, as the subject has on so many occasions been fully discussed. Nor shall I, for the same reason, undertake to show, that a far greater 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 421 portion of the revenue has been disbursed at the North than its due share ; and that the joint effect of these causes has been to transfer a vast amount from the South to the North, which, under an equal sys tem of revenue and disbursement, would not have been lost to her. If to this be added, that many of the duties were imposed, not for reve nue, but for protection, that is, intended to put money, not into the treas ury, but directly into the pocket of the manufacturers, some concep tion may be formed of the immense amount which in the long course of so many years has been transferred from the South to the North. There is no data by which it can be estimated with any certainty ; but, it is safe to say, that it amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars. Under the most moderate estimate, it would be suflicient to add greatly to the wealth of the North, and by that greatly increase her popula tion, by attracting emigration from all quarters in that direction. This, combined with the great and primary cause, amply explains why the North has acquired a preponderance over every department of the government, by its disproportionate increase of population and States. The former, as has been shown, has increased, in fifty years, 2,400,000 over that of the South. This increase of population, during BO long a period, is satisfactorily accounted for by the number of emi grants, and the increase of their descendants, which has been attracted to the northern section from Europe and the southern section, in conse quence of the advantages derived from the causes assigned. If they had not existed — if the South had retained all the capital which has been extracted from her by the fiscal action of the government, and if they had not been excluded, by the ordinance of 1787 and the Missouri compromise, from the region lying between the Ohio and the Missis sippi, and between the Mississippi and the Rocky Mountains, north of 36° 30', it scarcely admits of a doubt that she would have divided the emigration with the North, and by retaining her own people, would have at least equalled the North in population, under the census of 1840, and probably under that about to be taken. She would, also, if she had retained her equal rights in those territories, have maintained an equaUty in the number of States with the North, and have pre served the equilibrium between the two sections that existed at the commencement of the government The loss, then, of the equilibrium is to be attributed to the .action of this government. But while these measures were destroying the equilibrium between the two sections, the action of the government was leading to a radical 422 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. change in its character, by concentrating all the power of the system in itself The occasion will not permit me to trace the measures by which this great change has been consummated. If it did, it would not be difficult to show, that the process commenced at an early period of the government ; that it proceeded almost without interruption, step by step, until it absorbed, virtually, its entire powers. Without, how ever, going though the whole process to establish the fact, it may be done satisfactorily by a very short statement. That this government claims, and practically maintains the right to decide in the last resort, as to the extent of its powers, will scarcely be denied by any one conversant with the political history of the country, is equ.illy certain. That it also claims the right to resort to force, to maintain whatever power she claims against all oppo.9ition. Indeed, it is apparent from what we daily hear, that this has become the prevail ing and fixed opinion of a great majority of the community. Now, I ask, what limitation can possibly be placed upon the powers of a govern ment, claiming and exercising such rights ? And, if none can be, how can the separate government of the States maintain and protect the powers reserved to them by the Constitution, or the people of the several States maintain those which are reserved to them, and'among them, their sovereign powers, by which they ordained and established, not only their separate State constitutions and governments, but also the constitution and government of the United States ? But if they have no constitutional means of maintaining^them against the right claimed by this government, it necessarily follows, that they hold them at its pleasure and discretion, and that all the powers of the system are, in reality, concentrated iu it It also follows, that the character of the government has been changed in consequence, from a federal republic, as it originally came from the hands of its framers, and that it has been changed into a great national consolidated democracy. It has, indeed, at present, all the characteristics of the latter, and not oae of the former, although it stiU retains its outward form. The result of the whole of these causes combined, is that the North has acquired a decided ascendency over every department of this govern ment, and, through it, a control over all the powers of the system. A single section, governed by the will of the numerical majority, has now, in fact, the control of the government, and the entire powers of the sys- tein. What was once a constitutional federal repubUc, is now converted, in reaUty, into one as absolute as that of the Autocrat of Russia, and 1650.] LAST SPEECH. 423 as despotic in its tendency as any absolute government that ever existed. As, then, the North has the absolute control over the government, it is manifest, that on all questions between it and the South, where there is a diversity of interests, the interest of the latter will be sacrificed to the former, however oppressive the effects may be, as the South possesses no means by which it can resist, through the action of the government. But if there were no questions of vital importance to the South, iu ref erence to which there was a diversity of views between the two sections, this state of things might be endured, without the hazard of destruction by the South. But such is not the fact. There is a question of vital importance to the Southern section, in reference to which the views and feelings of the two sections are op.posite and hostile as they can possi bly be. I refer to the relations between the two races in the Southern section, which constitutes a vital portion of her social organization. Every por tion of the North entertains views and feelings more or less hostile to it. Those most opposed and hostile regard it as a sin, and consider themselves under the most sacred obligation to use every effort to de stroy it. Indeed, to the extent that they conceive they have power, they regard themselves as implicated in the sin, and responsible for suppressing it, by the use of aU and every means. Those less opposed and hostOe regard it as a crime — an offence against humanity, as they call it, and although not so fanatical, feel themselves bound to use all efforts to effect the same object While those who are least opposed and hostile, regard it as a blot and a stain on the character of what they call the nation, and feel themselves accordingly bound to give it no countenance or support. On the contrary, the Southern section regards Ihe relation as one which cannot be destroyed without subjecting the two races to the greatest . calamity, and the section to poverty, desola tion, and wretehedness, and accordingly feel bound, by every considera tion of interest, safety and duty, to defend it. This hostile feeUng on the part of the North toward the social organi zation of the South, long lay dormant ; but it only required some cause, which woidd make the impression on those who felt most mtensely tliat they were responsible for its continuance, to call it into action. The in creasing power of this government, and of the control of the Northern section over all of it, furnished the cause. It was they made an im pression on the minds of many, that there was little or no restraint to 424 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850, prevent the government to do whatever it might choose to do. Thi^ was sufficient of itself to put the most fanatical portion of the North in action, for the purpose of destroying the existing relation between the two races in the South. The first organized movement towards it commenced in 1835. Then for the first time societies were organized, presses established, lecturers sent forth to excite the people of the North, and incendiary pubUcations scattered over the whole South through the mail. The South was thoroughly aroused ; meetings were held everywhere, and resolutions adopted, calling upou the North to apply a remedy to arrest the threat ened evil, and pledging themselves to adopt measures for their own protection if it was not arrested. At the meeting of Congress petitions poured in from the North, calling upon Congress to abolish slavery ii» the District of Columbia, and to prohibit what they called the internal slave trade between the States, avowing at the same time, that their ultimate object was to abolish slavery not only in the District, but in the States and throughout the Union. At this period, the number engaged in the agitation was small, and it possessed little or no personal influence. Neither party in Congress had, at that time, any sympathy with them or their cause ; the members of each party presented their petitions with great reluctance. Nevertheless, as smaU and as contemptible as the party then was, both of the great parties of the North dreaded them. They felt that though small, they were organized, in reference to a subject which had a great and a commanding influence over the northern mind. Each party on that account, feared to oppose their petitions, lest the opposite party should take advantage of the one who opposed by favoring them. The effect was, that both united in insist ing that the petitions should be received, and Congress take jurisdiction of the subject for which they prayed ; and to justify their course, took the extraordinary ground that Congress was bound to receive petitions on every subject, however objectionable it might be, and whether they had, or had not, jurisdiction over the subject. These views prevailed in the House of Representatives, and partlaUy in the Senate, and thus the party succeeded, in their first movement, in gaining what they pro posed — a position in Congress, from which the agitation could be ex tended over the whole Union. This was the commencement of the agitation, which has ever since continued, and which, sis it is now ao knowledged, has endangered the Union itself As to myself I believed, at that early period, that, if the party who 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 425 got up the petitions should succeed in getting Congress to take juris diction, that agitation would follow, and that it would, in the end, if not arrested, destroy the Union. I then so expressed myself in debate, and caUed upon both parties to take grounds against taking jurisdiction, but in vain. Had my voice been heard, and Congress refused taking juris diction by the united votes of all parties, the agitation which followed would have been prevented, and the fanatical movements accompanying the agitation, which have brought us to our present perilous condition, would have become extinct, for the want of something to feed the flame. That was the time for the North to show her devotion to the Union ; but, unfortunately, both of the great parties of that section were so in tent on obtaining or retaining party ascendency, that all other consider ations were overlooked or forgotten. What has since followed, are but natural consequences. With the success of their first movement, this small fanatical party began to ac quire strength, and with that, to become an object of courtship of both of the great parties. The necessary consequence was, a farther increase of power, and a gradual tainting of the opinions of both of the other parties with their doctrines, until the infection has extended over both, and the great mass of the population of the North, who, whatever may be their opinion of the original abolition party, which still keeps up its distinctive organization, hardly ever fail, when it comes to acting, to co operate in carrying out their measures. With the increase of their influence, they extend the sphere of their action. In a short period after they had commenced their first movement, they had acquired sufficient influence to induce the legislatures of most of the northern states to pass acts, which, in effect, abrogated the provision of the Con stitution that provides for the delivering up of fugitive slaves. Not long after, petitions followed to abolish slavery in forts, magazines and dockyards, and aU other places where Congress had exclusive power of legislation. This was followed by petitions, and resolutions of legis latures of the Northern States, and popular meetings, to exclude the Southern States from all territories acquired, or to be acquired, and to . prevent the admission of any state hereafter into the Union, which, by its constitution, does not prohibit slavery. And Congress is invoked to do all this, expressly with the view of the final abolition of slavery in the states. That has been avowed to be the ultimate object, from the beginning of the agitation until the present time, and yet the great body of both parties of the North, with the full knowledge of the fact, 426 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. although diso-wning the abolitionists, have cooperated with them in almost all their measures. Such is a brief history of the agitation, as far as it has yet advanced. Now, I ask. Senators, what is there to prevent its further progress, until it fulfils the ultimate end proposed, unless some decisive measure should be adopted to prevent it ? Has any one of the causes, which has added to its increase from its original small and contemptible begmnlng, until it has attained its present magnitude, diminished in force ? Is the ori ginal cause of the movement — that slavery is a sin, and ought to be suppressed — weater now than at the commencement ? or is the abolition party less numerous or influential ? or have they less influence over elections ? or less control over the two great parties of the North in elections ? or has the South greater means of influencing or controUing, the movements of this government now than it had when the agitation commenced ? To all these questions but one answer can be given. No. No. No, The very reverse is true. Instead of weaker, all the ele ments in favor of agitation are stronger now than they were in 1835, when the agitation first commenced. Wliile all the elements of influ ence on the part of the South are weakened, I again .-vsk, what is to stop this agitation, unless something decisive is done, until the great and final object at which it alma — the abolition of slavery in the South — is consummated ? Is it, then, not certain, that if something decisive is not now done to arrest it, the South wUl be forced to choose between abolition or secession ? Indeed, as events are now moving, it wiU not require the South to secede, to dissolve the Union ; agitation will of itself effect it, of wliich its past history furnishes abundant proof, as I shall next proceed to show It is a great mistake to suppose that disunion can be effected by a single blow. The cords which bound these states together in one com mon union, are far too numerous and powerful for that. Disunion must be the work of time. It is only through a long process and in succes sion, that the cords can snap, until the whole fabric faUs asunder. Al ready, the agitation of the slavery question has snapped some of the most important, and has greatly weakened all the others, as I shaU proceed to show. The cords that bind the states together are not only many, but various in character. Among them, some are spiritual or ecclesiastical ; some political ; others social ; others appertain to the benefits conferred by the Union ; and others to the feeling of duty and obligation. 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 427 The strongest of those of a spiritual and ecclesiastical nature, con sisted in the unity of the great reUgious denominations, all of which originaUy embraced the Union. All these denominations, with the ex ception, perhaps, of the CathoUos, -were organized very much upon the principle of our poUtical institutions. Beginning with smaller meetings, corresponding with the poUtical divisions of the country, their organiza tion termmated in one great central assemblage, corresponding very much with the character of Congress. At these meetings, the principal clergymen and lay members of the respective denominations from all parts of the Union met, to transact business relating to their common concerns. It was not confined to what appertained to the doctrines and disciplines of the respective denominations, but extended to plans for disseminating the Bible, estabhshing missionaries, distributing tracts, and of establishing presses for the publication of tracts, newspapers and periodicals, with a view of diffusing religious information, and for the support of the doctrines and creeds of the denommation. All this combined, contributed greatly to strengthen the bonds of the Union. The strong ties which held each denomination together, formed a strong cord to hold the whole Union together ; but, as powerful as they were, they have not been able to resist the explosive effect of slavery agita tion. The first of these cords which snapped under its explosive force, was that of the powerful Methodist Episcopal Church, The numerous and strong ties which held it together are all broke, and its unity gone. They now form separate churches, and instead of that feeUng of attach ment and devotion to the interests of the whole church, which was formerly felt, they are now arrayed into two hostile bodies, engaged in Utigation about what was formerly their common property. The next cord that snapped was that of the Baptists, one of the largest .and most respectable of the denominations ; that of the Presby terians is not entirely snapped, but some of its strands have given way ; that of the Episcopal church is the only one of the four great Protestant denominations which remain unbroken and entire. The strongest cord of a political character consists of the many and strong ties that have held together the two great parties, which have, with some modifications, existed from the beginning of the government. They both extended to every portion ftf the Union, and had strongly contributed to hold all its parts together. But this powerful cord has proved no better than the spiritual It resisted for a long time the explosive tendency of the 428 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. agitation, but has finaUy snapped under its force — if not entirely, nearly so. Nor is there one of the remaining cords which has not been greatly weakened. To this extent the Union has already been destroyed by agitation, in the only way it can be, by snapping asunder and weakening the cords which bind it together. If the agitation goes on, the same force acting with increased intensity, as haa been shown, there wiU be nothing left to hold the States together, except force. But surely, that can with no propriety of language be called a Union, when the only means by which the weaker is held connected with the stronger portion, is force. It may, indeed, keep them connected, but the connection will partate much more of the character of subjugation on the part of the weaker to the stronger, than the union of free, independent and sovereign States in one federal union, as they stood in the early stages of the government, and which only is worthy of the sacred name of Union. Having now. Senators, explained what it is that endangers the Union, and traced it to its cause, and explained its nature and character, the great question again recurs. How can the Union be saved ? To this I answer, there is but one way by which it can be, and that is, by adopt ing such measures as will satisfy the States belonging to the Southern section that they can remain in the Union consistently with their honor and their safety. There is, again, only one way by which that can be effected, and that is by reviewing the causes by which this belief has been produced. Do that, and discontent wdl cease, harmony and kind feelings between the sections be restored, and every apprehension of danger to the Union removed. The question then is. By what means can this be done ? But before I undertake to answer this question, I propose to show by what it cannot be done. It cannot, then, be done by eulogies on the Union, however splendid or numerous. The cry of Union I Union 1 the glorious Union ! can no more prevent disunion, than the cry of health I health ! glorious health 1 on the part of the physician, can save a patient lying dangerously iU. So long as the Union, matead of being regarded as a protector, is regar ded in the opposite character by not much leas than a majority of the States, it wiU be in vain to attempt to concentrate them by pronouncing eulogies on it. Besides, this cry of Union comes commonly from those whom we caimot beUeve to be sincere. It usually comes from our assailants; but we cannot believe them to be sincere : for if they loved the Union, 1850.] LAST SPEECH. , 429 they would necessarily be devoted to the Constitution. It made the Union, and to destroy the Constitution, would be to destroy the Union. But the only reliable and obtain evidence of devotion to the Constitution is, to abstain, on the one hand, from violating it, and to repel, on the other, all attempts to violate it. It is only by faithfuUy performing those high duties, that the Constitution can be preserved, and with it the Union. But how then stands the profession of devotion to the Union by our assailants, when brought to this test ? Have they abstained from viola ting the Constitution? Let the many acts passed by the Northern States to set aside and annul the clause of the Constitution providmg for the delivery of fugitive slaves, answer. I cite this, not that it is the only instance (for there are many others), but because the violation, in this particular, is too notorious and palpable to be denied. Again, have they stood forth faithfully to repel violations of the Constitution ? Let their course in reference to the agitation of the slavery question, which was commenced and has been carried on, for fifteen years, avowedly for the purpose of . abolishing slavery in the States — an object aU acknowledged to be unconstitutional — answer. Let them show a single instance, during this long period, in which they have denounced the agitators, or their many attempts to effect what is admitted to be un constitutional, or a single measure which they have brought forward for that purpose. How can we, with aU these facts before ua, believe that they are sincere in their profession of devotion to the Union, or avoid believing that by assuming the cloak of patriotism, their profession is but intended to increase the -vigor of their assaults, and to weaken the force of our resistance ? Nor can we regard the profession of devotion to the Union, on the part of those who are not our assailants, as sincere, when they pronounce euloo-ies upon the Union evidently with the intent of charging us with disunion, without uttering one word of denunciation against our assail ants. If friends of the Union, their course should be to unite -with us in repplUng these assaults, and denouncing the authors as enemies of the Union. Why they avoid this and pursue the course they obviously do, it is for them to explain. Nor can the Union be saved by invoking the name of the illustrious Southerner, whose mortal remains repose on the western bank of the Potomac. He was one of us— a slaveholder and a planter. We have studied his history, and find nothing in it to justify submission to 430 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850 -wrong. On the contrary, his great fame rests on the solid foundation, that while he was careful to avoid doing -wrong to others, he was prompt and decided in repelling wrong. I trust that, in this respect, we profited by his example. Nor can we find anything in his history to deter us from seceding from the Union, should it fail to fulfil the objects for which it was in stituted, by being permanently and hopelessly converted into the means of oppression instead of protection. On the contrary, we find much in his example to encourage us, should we be forced to the extremity of deciding between submission and disunion. There existed then as well as now, a union — that between the parent country and her then colonies. It was a union that had much to en dear it to the people of the colonies. Under its protecting and super intending care, the colonies were planted, and grew up and prospered through a long course of years, until they became populous and wealthy. Its benefits were not limited to them. Their extensive agri- cultm-al and other productions gave birth to a flourishing commerce, which richly rewarded the parent country for the trouble and expense of estabhshing and protecting them. Washington was born and nur tured, and grew up to manhood under that union. He acquired his early distinction in its service ; and there is every reason to believe that he was devotedly attached to it. But his devotion was a rational one. He was attached to it, not as an end, but as a means to an end. When it failed to fulfil its end, and, instead of affording protection, was converted into the means of oppressing the colonies, he did not hesi tate to draw his sword and head the great movement by which that union was forever severed, and the independence of these States estab hshed. This was the great and crowning glory of his Ufe, which has spread his fame over the whole globe, and will transmit it to the latest posterity. Nor can the plan proposed by the distinguished Senator from Ken • tucky, nor that of the administration, save the Union, I shall pass by, without remark, the plan proposed by the Senator, and proceed directly to the consideration of that of the administration, I however assure the distinguished and able Senator, that in taking this course, no disre spect whatever is intended to him or to his plan, , Ihave adopted it, be cause so many Senators of distinguished abilities, who were present when he deUvered his speech and explanation of hia plan, and who were fuUy capable to do justice to the side they support, have repUed to him 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 431 The plan of the administration cannot save the Union, because it can have no effect towards satisfying the States composing the southern section of the Union, that they can consistently -with safety and honor remain in the Union. It is, in fact, but a modification of the Wilmot proviso. It proposes to effect the same object — to exclude the South from aU the territory acquired by the Mexican treaty. It is weU known, that the Soiith is united against the Wilmot proviso, and has committed itself by solemn resolutions to resist, should it be adopted. Its opposition is not to the name, but to that which it proposes to effect. That the Southern States hold it to be unconstitutional, unjust, incon sistent with their equality as members of the common Union, and cal culated to destroy irretrievably, the equilibrium between the two sec tions. These objections equally apply to what, for brevity, I -will call the Executive proviso. There is no difference between it and the WU- mot, except in the mode of effecting the object ; and in that respect, I must say, that the latter is much the least objectionable. It goes to its object openly, boldly, and directly. It claims for Congress unlimited power over the territories, and proposes to assert it over the territories acquired from Mexico, by a positive proliibition of slavery. Not so the executive proviso. It takes nu indirect course, and in order to elude the Wilmot proviso, an-1 thereby avoid encountering the united and de termined resistance oithe South, it denies, by implication, the authority of Congress to legislate for the territories, and claims the right as be longing exclusively to the inhabitants of the territories. But to effect the object of excluding the South, it takes care, in the meantime, of letting in emigrants from the Northern States, and other quarters, ex cept emigrants from the South, which it takes special care to exclude, by holding up to them the dread of having their slaves Uberated under the Mexican laws. The necessary consequence is, to exclude the South from the territory, just as effectually as would the Wilmot proviso. The only difference in this respect is, that what one piuposes to effect, directly and openly, the other proposes to effect indirectly and covertly. But the executive proviso is more objectionable stiU than the Wil mot, in another and more important particular. The latter, to effect its object, inflicts a dangerous woimd upon the Constitution, by depriving the Southern States, as joint partners and owners of the territories, of their rights in them ; but it inflicts no greater wound than is absolutely necessary to effect its object. The former, on the contrary, while it 432 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. inflicts the same wound, infficts others equally great, ana jf possible greater, as I shall next proceed to explain. In claiming the right for the inhabitants, instead of Congress, to legislate over the territories, in the executive proviso, it assumes thM the sovereignty over the territories is vested in the former ; or, to es press it in the language used in a resolution offered by one of the sena tors from Texas, (Gen. Houston, now absent,) " they have the same in herent right of self-government as the people in the States." The as sumption is utterly false, unconstitutional, without example, and con trary to the entire practice of the government, from its commencement to the present time, as I shall next proceed to show. The recent movement of individuals in CaUfornia to form a Consti tution and a state government, and to appoint senators and representa tives, is the first fruit of this monstrous assumption. If the individuals who have made this movement, had gone into California as adventurers ; and, if as such, they had conquered the territory, and established their independence, the sovereignty of the country would have been vested in them as a separate and independent community. In that case, they would have had the right to form a constitution and to establish a gov ernment for themselves ; and if after that they had thought proper to apply to Congress for admission into the Union as a sovereign and in dependent state, all this would have been regular and according to established principles. But such is not the case. It was the United States who conquered California, and finally acquired it by treaty. The sovereignty, of course, is vested in them, and not in the individuals who have attempted to form a constitution as a state, without their consent. All this ia clear beyond controversy, except it can be shown that they have since lost or been divested of their sovereignty. Nor is it less clear that the power of legislating over the territory is vested in Congress, and not, as is assumed, in the inhabitants of the territories. None can deny that^ the Government of the United States has the power to acquire territories, either by war or by .treaty; but if the power to acquire exists, it belongs to Congress to carry it into execution. On this point there can be no doubt, for the Constitu tion expressly provides, that Congress shall have power " to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to carry into execution the foregoing powers," (those vested in Congreas) " and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof" It matters not, then, where the 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 433 power is vested ; for if vested at all in the government of the United States or any of its departments or officers, the power carrying it into execution is clearly vested in Congress. But this important proviso, while it gives to Congress the power of legislating over territories, im poses important restrictions on its exercise, by restricting Congress to passing laws necessary and proper for cigrrying the power into execu tion. The prohibition extends, not only to all laws not suitable or appropriate to the object, but also to aU that are unjust, unequal or unfair, for aU such laws would be unnecessary and improper, and, there fore, unconstitutional. Ha-ving now estabUshed, beyond controversy, that the sovereignty over the territories is vested in the United States — that is in the several States composing the Union — and that the power of legislating over them is expressly vested in Congress, it follows that the individuals in California who have undertaken to form a constitution and a State, and to exercise the power of legislation, -without the consent of Congress, have usurped the sovereignty of the States and the authority of Con gress, and have acted in open defiance of both. In other words, what they have done is revolutionary and rebelUous in its character, anarchical in its tendency, and calculated to lead to the most dangerous conse quences. Had they acted from premeditation and design, it would have been in fact an actual rebeUion, but such is not the case. The blame Ues much less upon them, than upon those who have induced them to take a course so unconstitutional and dangerous. They have been led into it by language held here, and the course pursued by the executive branch of the gover^iment, I have not seen the answer of the Executive to the calls made by the two houses of Congress, for information as to the course which it took, or the part which it acted, in reference to what was done in CaUfornia. I understand the answers have not yet been printed. But there is enough known to justify the assertion, that those who profess to repre sent and act under the authority of the Executive, have advised, aided, and encouraged the movement which terminated in forming what they call a constitution and a state. General Riley, who professed to act as civil Governor, called the convention, determined on the number and distribution of the delegates, appomted the time and place of its meet ing, was present during the session, and gave its proceedings his appro bation and sanction. If he acted without authority, he ought to have foeen tried, or, at least, reprimanded and disarmed Neither liaving 19 434 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1856. been done, the presumption is that his com-se has been approved Thia, of itself, is sufficient to identify the Executive with his acts, and to make it responsible for them. I touch not the question whether Gen eral Riley was appointed, or received the instructions under which he professed to act, from the present Executive or its predecessor. If from the former, it would implicate the preceding as well as the present ad ministration. If not, the responsibility rests exclusively on the present. It is manifest, from this statement, that the Executive Department haa undertaken to perform acts, preparatory to the meeting of the in dividuals, to form their so called constitution and State government, which appertain exclusively to Congress, Indeed, they are identical in many respects with the provisions adopted by Congress, when it gives permission to a territory to form a constitution and government, in order to be admitted as a State into the Union, Having now shown that the assumption upon which the Executive and the individuals in California acted, throughout tliis whole affair, is informal, unconstitutional, and dangerous, it remains to make a few re marks, in order to show that what has been done is contrary to the entire practice of government, from its commencement to the present time. From its commencement until the time that Michigan was admitted, the practice was uniform. Territorial governments were first organized by Congress. The government of the United States appointed the governors, judges, secretaries, marshals, and other officers, and the in habitants of the territory were represented by legislative bodies, whose acts were subject to the revision of Congress. This state of things con tinued until the government of a territory applied to Congress to per mit its inhabitants to form a constitution and government, preparatory to admission into the Union. The preliraiaary act to giving permission was to ascertain whether the inhabitants were sufficiently numerous to authorize them to be formed into a State. This was done by taking a census. That being done, and the number provmg sufficient, permission was granted. The act granting it, fixed aU the preUminaries — the time and place of holding the convention ; the qualification of the voters ; establishing its boundaries, and all other measures necessary to be set tled previous to admission. The act gi-ving permission necessarily withdraws the sovereignty of the United States, and leaves the inhabii- ants of the incipient State as free to form their constitution and govern ment as were the original States of the Union after they had declared 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 435 then: independence. At this stage, the inhabitants of the territory be came for the first time a people, in legal and constitutional language. Prior to this they were, by the old acts of Congress, caUed inhabitants, and not people. AU this is perfectly consistent with the sovereignty of tlie United States, with the powers of Congress, aud -with the right of a peoi.ile to self-government Michigan was the first case in which there was any departm-e from the uniform rule of acting. Hers was a. very slight departure from established usag& The ordinance of '87 secured to her the right of be coming a State, when she should hiive 60,000 inhabitants. Owing to some neglect Congress delayed taking the census. In the meantime, her population increased until it clearly exceeded more than t-wice the number, which entitled her to admission. At this stage, she formed a constitution and government without the census being taken by the United States, and Congress received the admission without going through the formaUty of taking it, as there was no doubt she had more than a sufficient number to entitle her to admission. She was not ad mitted at the first session she appUed, owing to some difficulty respect ing the boundary between her and Ohio. The great irregularity, as to her admission, took place at the next session, but on a point which can have no possible connection with the case of CaUfornia. The irregularity in all other cases that have since occurred, are of a similar character. In all, there existed territorial governments estab lished by Congress, with officers appointed by the United States. In all, the territorial government took the lead in calling conventions, and fixing preliminaries, preparatory to the formation of a constitution and admission into the Union. They aU recognized the sovereignty of the United States, and the authority of Congress over the territories ; and whenever there was any departure from established usage, it was done on the presumed consent of Congress, and not in defiance of its authori ty, or the sovereignty of the United States over the territories. In this respect, CaUfornia stands alone, without usage, or a single example to cover her case. It belongs now. Senators, for you to decide what part you will act in reference to this unprecedented transaction. The Executive has laid the paper purporting to be the constitution of California before you, and asks you to admit her into the Union as a State, and the question is, will you or will you not admit her ! It is a grave question, and there rests upon you a heavy responsibility. Much, very much will depend 436 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. upon your decision. If you admit her, you endorse and give your sanc tion to aU that has been done. Are you prepared to do so ? Are you prepared to surrender your power of legislation for the territories — a power expreaaly vested in Congress by the Constitution, as has beeu fully estabUshed ? Can you, consistent with your oath to support the Constitution, surrender it ? Are you prepared to admit that the inhabi tants of the territories possess the sovereignty over them ; and that any number, more or less, may claim any extent of territory they please ; may form a Constitution and government, and erect it into a State, without asking your permission ? Are you prepared to surrender the sovereignty of the United States over whatever territory may be here after acquired, to the first adventurers who may rush into it? Are you prepared to surrender virtually to the Executive department all tho powers which you have heretofore exercised over the territories ? If not, how can you, consistently with your duty, and your oath to support the Constitution, give your assent to the admission of California as a State, under a pretended Constitution and government? Can you believe, that the projtct of a. Constitution which they have adopted, has the least validity ? Can you believe, that there is such a State in reaUty, as the State of California ? No ; there is no such State. It has no legal or constitutional existence. It has no validity, and can have none, without your sanction. How, then, can you admit it as a State, when, according to the provisions of the Constitution, your power is limited to admitting new States ? That is, they must be States, exist ing States, independent of your sanction, before you can admit thera. When you give your permission to the inhabitants of a territory to form a Constitution and a State, the Constitution and State they form derive their authority from tho people, and not from you. The State, before admitted, is actually a State, and does not become so by the act of admission, as would be the case with California, should you admit her, contrary to constitutional provisions and estabUshed usage heretofore. The Senators on the other side of the chamber must permit me to make a few remarks in this connection, particularly applicable to them. With the exception of a few Senators from the South, sitting on that side of the chamber, when the Oregon question was before this body not two years since, you took, if I mistake not, universaUy, the ground, that Congress had the sole and absolute power of legislating for the territories. How, then, can you now, after the short interval which has elapsed, abandon the ground which you then took, and thereby virtually 1850.] LAST SPEECH. 43" admit that the power of legislating, instead of being in Congress, is in the inhabitants of the territories ? How can you justify and sanction by your votes the acts of the Executive, which are in direct derogation to what you then contended for ? But, to approach stUl nearer to the present time, how cau you, after condemning, Uttle more than a year since, the grounds taken by the pai-ty which you defeated at the last election, wheel round and support by your votes the grounds which, as explained by the candidate of the party at the last election, are identical with those on which the Executive has acted in reference to California ? What are we to understand by all this I Must we conclude that there is no sincerity, no faith, in the acts and declarations of public men, and that aU is mere acting or hollow profession ? or are we to conclude that the exclusion of the South from the territories acquired from Mexico is an object of so paramount a character in your estimation, that right, justice. Constitution, and consistency must .ill yield, when they stand in the way of our exclusion ? But, it may be asked, what is to be doWe with CaUfornia, should she not be admitted ? I answer, rei uand her back to the territorial condi tion, as was done in the case of Teimes-see, in the early stage of the government. Congress, in her case, had established a territorial govern ment, in the usual form, with a Governor, Judges, and other officers appointed by the United States. She was entitled, under the deed of cession, to be admitted into the Union as a State, as soon as she had 60,000 inhabitants. The territorial government, beUeving it had that number, took a census by which it appeared it exceeded it. She then formed a Constitution and a State, and applied for admission. Congress refused to admit her, on the grounds that the census should be taken by the United States, and that Cougreaa had not determined whether the territory should be formed into one or two States, as it was authorized to do, under the cession. She returned quietly to her territorial condi tion. An act was passed to take a census by the United States, and pro-viding that the territory should form one State. AU afterwards was regularly conducted, and the territory admitted as a State in due forjn. The irregularities in the case of CaUfornia are immeasurably greater, and afford a much stronger reason for pursuing the same course. But, it may be said, CaUfornia may not submit. That is not probable ; but, if she should not, when she refuses, it will then be the time for us to de cide what is to be done. Having now shown what cannot save the Union, I return to the quea- 438 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. tion with which I commenced — How can the Union be saved ? There is but one way by which it can, with any certainty, be saved, and that is by a full and final settlement, on the principles of justice, of all the questions at issue between the two sections. The South asks for justice, simple justice, and less she ought not to take. She has no compromise to offer but the Constitution, and no concessions or surrender to make, She has already surrendered so much, that she has little left to surren der. Such a settlement would go to the root of the evil, remove all fauae of discontent, and satisfy the South that she could remain honestly and safely in the Union, and thereby restore the harmony and fraternal feelings between the sections, which existed anterior to the Missouri agitation. Nothing else can, with any certainty, finally and forever settle the question at issue, terminate agitation, and save the Union. But can this be done ? Tes, easily; not by the weaker party, for it can of itself do nothing — not even protect itself — but by the stronger. The North has only to wUl it, to do justice, and perform her duty, in order to accomplish it-^to do justice by conceding to the South an equal right in the acquired territory ; and to do her duty by causing the stipulations relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfiUed — to ceaso the agitation of the slave question, and provide for the insertion of a provision in the Constitution by an amendment, which will restore in substance the power she possessed of protecting herself before tho equilibrium between the sections was destroyed by the action of this government There will be no difficulty in devising such a provision — . one that will protect the South, nnd which at the same time wiU improve and strengthen the government, instead of impairing or weakening it. But will the North agree to tliis ? It is for her to answer this ques- -iion. But I wiU aay, she cannot refuse if she has half the love of the Union which she professes to have, or without justly exposing herself to the charge that her love of power and aggrandizement is far greater than her love of the Union. At all events, the responsibility of saving the Union is on the North and not the South. The South cannot save it by any act of hers, and the North may save it without any sacrifice whatever, udIkss to do ju.stice and to perform her duties under the Cou- stituiiou be regarduJ by her as a sMcriSce. It is time. Senators, that there should be an open and manly avowal on all sides ss to wh.^t is intended to be done. If the question is not now settled, it ia uncertain whether it ever can hereafter be, and we, as 1S50.] LAST SPEECH. 439 the representatives of the States of this Union, regarded as governments, should come to a distinct understanding as to our respective views, in order to ascertain whether the great questions at issue between the two sections can be settled or not. If you who represent the stronger por tion, cannot agree to settle them on the broad principle of justice and duty, say so, and let the States we represent agree to separate and part iu peace. If you are wiUing we should part in peace, teU us so, and we shall know what to do when you reduce the question to submission or resistance. If you remain silent, you then compel us to infer what you intend. In that case, California -will become the test question. If you admit her under all the difficulties that oppose her admission, you com pel us to infer, that you intend to exclude us from the whole of the ac quired territories, with the intention of destroying irretrievably the equiUbrium between the two sections. We would be blind, not to per ceive in that case, that your real objects are power and aggrandizement; and infatuated, not to act accordingly. I have now. Senators, done my duty, in expressing my opinions fuUy, freely, and candidly on this solemn occasion. In doing so, I have beeu governed by the motives which have governed me in all the stages of the agitation of the slavery question since its commencement, and exert ed myself to arrest it, with the intention of saving the Union, if it could be done, and, if it cannot, to save the section where it has pleased Provi. dence to cast my lot, and which I sincerely believe has justice and the Con stitution on its side. Having faithfully done my duty to the best of my ability, both to the Union and my section, throughout the whole of this agitation, I shall have the consolation, let what will come, that I am free from aU responsibility. Mr. Calhoun's position in regard to the necessity of amending the Constitution was not generally concurred in by the other representatives from the Southern States ; but most of them, if not all, agreed with him, that the South should not be denied an equal participa tion in the acquired territory, and that the true policy of the general government was non-interference, or, in other words, that in the formation of territorial govern ments. Congress should have nothing to do with the 440 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850, question of slavery, but leave the people of the states to be formed free to act as they chose. Non-intervention being conceded, the owners of slaves would have the same right to go to the territories that others would, and to take their slaves with them, just as others could their property. In this way the South would have an equal chance, as Mr. Calhoun contended she ought, in the settlement of the territories. CHAPTER XIII. Death of Mr. Calhoun — ^Funeral Honors — His Family — Personal Ap pearance — Character — Habits in Private Life — Mental Powers- Style as a Speaker and Writer — Work on Government — Manner as an Orator — Course as a Statesman — Popularity — Memory. Faithful to his duty unto the end. Death found Mr. Calhoun at his post. Feeble though he was in body, to the very close of his earthly pilgrimage he was sus tained by the wonderful energy and power of an intel lect that never knew what it was to be dependent. Like Chatham, wrapped up in flannels, he occasionally crawled to the Senate chamber to take his friends by the hand, and to encourage them to stand firmly by the rights of the South ; and on the 13th of March, his voice was heard for the last time in debate, no longer clear as a trumpet, but often giving way with the failure of the powers of utterance — quivering from weakness and husky with emotion, yet still indicating the uncon querable will and determination of his character. It was the triumph of mind over matter, — of the immortal spirit over the frail body that contained it ! The last words of Mr. Calhoun in the Senate were uttered on this occasion, in defence of his proposition for the amendment of the Constitution, which had been assailed by several senators in the course of the dis- 19* 442 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. cussion. The scene was an exciting one; he was nearly overcome, and returned to his private room only to die. The slavery question was the engrossing subject that occupied his mind. He wished to see the Union preserved, but he feared that the slaveholding states would be driven to secede. His friends were not interdicted from visiting him, and he conversed with them freely until it was evident that his powers were fast giving way, and that his evei'-active mind was wear ing out the body. At intervals he employed himself in Writing, or in looking over his papers : this taxed his strength less than conversation, yet intense and earnest thought, like the vampire, was constantly draining the life-blood from his heart. His son, John B. Calhoun, who is a physician, was with him for several weeks previous to his death, and other friends almost equalled his filial devotion in their kind attentions. On the 30th of March, it could no longer be doubted that the hours of the great statesman would soon be numbered. In the morning he was restless and much weaker than he had ever before been. He sat up, however, for a couple of hours during the day; and toward evening, the stimulants which had been employed to protract his life seemed to have re gained their power, and he conversed with apparent ease and freedom, mainly upon the absorbing topic, the slavery question. About half-past twelve, that night, he commenced breathing very heavily — so much so as to alarm his son. The latter inquired how he felt ; he rephed that he was unusually wakeful, but desired his son to lie down. His pulse was then very low, and he said he was sinking ; but he refused to take any more 1850.] HIS DEATH. 443 stimulants. The son lay down, but in a little more than an hour was aroused, by his father calling in a feeble voice, "John, come to me!" His respiration now denoted great physical weakness, though it did not appear to be difficult. When his son approached him, he held out his arm, and remarked that there was no pulsation at the wrist. He then directed his son to take his watch and papers and put them in his trunk, after which he said that the medicine given to restore him had had a delightful effect and produced an agreeable perspiration. In reply to an inquiry as to how he had rested, he stated that he had not rested at all ; but he assured his son that he felt no pain, and had felt none during the whole attapk. A httle after five o'clock on the morning of the 31st, his son asked him if he was comfortable. " 1 am perfectly comfortable," he replied. These were his last words. Shortly before six o'clock, he made a sign to his son to approach the bed. Extending his hand, he grasped that of his son, looked him intently in the face, and moved his lips, but was unable to articulate. Other friends were now called in, and a fruitless effort was made to revive him. Meanwhile he was perfectly con scious, and his eyes retained their brightness, and his countenance its natural expression. But the golden cord was about to be severed — and in a few moments he drew a deep inspiration, his eyes closed, and his spirit passed, " like the anthem of a breeze, away." The death of Mr. Calhoun was announced in the Senate, in a most impressive manner, by his friend and colleague. Judge Butler, on the first of April. Eloquent 444 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. and feeling addresses were also made by Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, the great rivals of the deceased in talents and in fame. Appropriate funeral honors were, of course, paid to his memory by the assembled representatives of the states. The sad event was noi altogether unexpected ; and it elicited, at Washington not only, but in every town throughout the wide Union, a general and sincere expression of regret. Forms and ceremonies may be but idle show, yet this was the genuine homage paid to departed worth. On the 2d day of April, the funeral ceremonies were held, and the remains of Mr. Calhoun were then con veyed to Charleston, accompanied by a committee of the Senate. They found a whole people in tears. South Carolina truly mourned her loss ; and the citizens of her metropolis, with all the outward manifestations of mourning — a funeral procession, halls and balconies draperied in crape, the tolling of bells, muffled drums and plaintive music, drooping plumes and shrouded banners — received all that was left of him who had constituted the chief glory of his native state, and whose greatness, like the giant pine of her virgin forests, towered far heavenward. The body of Mr. Calhoun was temporarily deposited in a vault in the cemetery of St. Philip's Church, Charleston, there to await the action of the Legislature — the family consenting, at the request of the governor, that the state should take charge of the remains of her favorite son. They are to be removed to Columbia, the seat of government of the state, where a monument is to be erected to his memory — and thus the legislators of South Carolina be constantly reminded of the virtues. 1850.] PERSONAL APPEARANCE. 445 and the manly dignity and character, of her distinguish ed statesman. Mr. Calhoun was married in early life to a cousin by the name of Caldwell, who survived him. She has ever been remarked for the quiet grace and ease of her manners, her unassuming deportment, and the mingled simplicity and dignity of her character; and in the private circles of Washington, once adorned by her presence, but to which she may never again return, she is still remembered with affection and regret. They had three sons : Andrew P. Calhoun, a planter ; Patrick, an officer in the army ; and John B., a physician. They had several daughters, also, one of whom married Thomas G. Clemson, of Pennsylvania, late charge, d'affaires to Belgium. No one ever saw Mr. Calhoun for the first time without being forcibly impressed with the conviction of his mental superiority. There was that in his air and in his appearance which carried with it the assur ance that he was no common man. He had not Hy perion's curls, nor the front of Jove. Miss Martineau termed him, in her Travels in America, the cast-iron man, " who looked as if he had never been born." In person he was tall and slender, and his frame appeared gradually to become more and more attenuated till he died. His features were harsh and angular in their outlines, presenting a combination of the Greek and the Roman. A serene and almost stony calm was habitual to them when in repose, but when enlivened in conversation or debate, their play was remarkable — the lights were brought out into bolder relief, and the shadows thrown into deeper shade. 446 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850 His countenance, when at rest, indicated abstraction or a preoccupied air, and a stranger on approaching him could scarcely avoid an emotion of fear; yet he could not utter a word before the fire of genius blazed from his eye and illumined his expressive features. His individuality was stamped upon his acute and in telligent face, and the lines of character and thought were clearly and strongly defined. His forehead was broad, tolerably high, and compact, denoting the mass of brain behind it. Until he had passed the grand climacteric, he wore his hair short and brushed it back, so that it stood erect on the top of his head, like bristles on the angry boar, or " quills upon the fretful porcupine," but toward the close of his life he suffered it to grow long, and to fall in heavy masses over his temples. But his eyes were his most striking features : they were dark blue, large and brilliant ; in repose glowing with a steady light, in action fairly emitting flashes of fire. His character was marked and decided, not prema turely exhibiting its peculiarities, yet formed and per fected at an early age. He was firm and prompt, man ly and independent. His sentiments were noble and elevated, and everything mean or grovelling was foreign to his nature. He was easy in his manners, and affable and dignified. His attachments were warm and endur ing ; he did not manifest his affection with enthusiastic fervor, but with deep earnestness and sincerity. He was kind, generous and charitable ; honest and frank ; faithful to his friends, but somewhat inclined to be un forgiving toward his enemies. He was attached to his principles and prejudices with equal tenacity ; and when he had adopted an opinion, so strong was his reliance 1850.] CHARACTER AND HABITS. 447 upon the correctness of his own judgment, that he often doubted the wisdom and sincerity of those who dis agreed with him. He never shrank from the perform ance of any duty, however painful it might be, — that it was a duty, was sufficient for him. He possessed pride of character in no ordinary degree, and, withal, not a little vanity, which is said always to accompany true genius. His devotion to the South was not sectional, so much as it was the natural consequence of his views with reference to the theory of the government ; and his patriotism, like his fame, was coextensive with the Union. In private life he was fitted to be loved and respected. Like Jefferson, Madison, Marshall, and the younger Adams, he was simple in his habits. When at home, he usually rose at day-break, and, if the weather admitted, took a walk over his farm. He breakfasted at half-past seven, and then retired to his office, which stood near his dwelling house, where he wrote till dinner time, or three o'clock. After dinner he read or conversed with his family till sunset, when he took another walk. His tea hour was eight o'clock ; he then joined his family again, and passed the time in conversation or reading till ten o'clock, when he retired to rest. As a citizen, he was without blemish ; he wronged no one ; and there were no ugly spots on his character to dim the brilliancy of his public career. His social qualities were endear ing, and his conversational powers fascinating in the extreme. He loved to talk with the young; he was especially animated and instructive when engaged in conversation with them, and scarcely ever failed to in spire a sincere attachment in the breasts of those who 448 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850, listened to him. He frequently corresponded, too, with young men, and almost the last letter he wrote, was addressed to a protege attending a law school in New York, and was replete with kind advice and with expres sions of friendly interest. He conversed, perhaps, with too great freedom. He prided himself on being unreserved in the expression of his opinions, and yet this was a fault in his character ; for in the transaction of business, and in deciding and acting upon important pohtical questions, he was ordi- narily cautious and prudent. To his very frankness, therefore, may be attributed, not the misrepresentations, but the occasion of the misrepresentations, of which he was the victim. He often complained that he was not understood, but he sometimes forgot that those who would not comprehend him, might have been already prejudiced by some remark of his, made at the wrong time, or in the wrong presence. His disposition was reflective, and he spent hours at a time in earnest thought. But he was exceedingly fond of reading history and books of travel. Works on government, on the rise and fall of empires, on the im provement and decHne of the races of mankind and the struggles and contests of one with another, always at tracted his attention. Indeed, his whole life was one of study and thought. In his dress he was very plain, and rarely appeared in anything except a simple suit of black. His consti tution was not naturally robust ; but notwithstanding the ceaseless labors of his mind, by a strict attention to regimen and the avoidance of all stimulants, his life was prolonged almost to the allotted three score and ten. 1850.] MENTAL POWERS. 449 To say that he possessed a great mind, would be only repeating a trite remark. It was one of extraordinary compass and power. His rivals and compeers were intellectual giants, and among them he occupied no subordinate position. The most prominent character istics of his mind were its massiveness and soHdity, its breadth and scope, the clearness of its perceptions, and the directness with which they were expressed. It was Vv'ell-balanced, because it was self-poised, and he did not uften " o'erstep the modesty of nature." He was neither metaphysical nor subtle, in the sense in which mere schoolmen use those terms. He had studied the philosophy as well as the rules of logic ; or, if not that, the faculty of reasoning with accuracy was natural to him. He was capable of generalizing and of drawing nice distinctions. He was shrewd in argument, and quick to observe the weak points of an antagonist. Of dialectics he was a complete master, whether syn thetically or analytically considered. But his great power lay in analysis. He could resolve a complex argument or an idea into its original parts, with as much facility as the most expert mechanic could take a watch in pieces ; and it was his very exquisiteness in this re spect, that caused him to be regarded by many as so phistical and metaphysical. He was fond of tracing out the causes which led to an effect, and of considering the vast combinations of circumstances that produced a certain result, or what in politics, he called a juncture or a crisis. In the readi- ness and rapidity with which he analyzed and classified his thoughts; he had no superior, it, he had .an equal, among the public men of his day. While at the law 450 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. school in Litchfieid, he accu'stomed himself to arrange the order of his thoughts, before taking part in a debate, not upon paper but in his mind, and to depend on his memory, which was peculiarly retentive. In this man ner both his mind and memory were sti'engthened, and the former was made to resemble a store-house full to overflowing, but with everything in its appropriate place and ready for any occasion. Like his life, his style was simple and pure, yet, for this very reason, often rising to an elevation of grandeur and dignity, which elaborate finish can never attain. It was modelled after the ancient classics, and distin guished for its clearness, directness, and energetic earn- estnes's" His words were well chosen, and showed severe discipline in his _early_ studies ; but he never stopped to pick or cull theni ipjhejmid^t^ of a speech," for at such times his ideas seemed to come forth full draperied, like Minerva from the brain of Jupiter. Pie occasionally made use of astartling figure, or an anti thetical expression, but there was no redundancy^ of or- iTament, though — if that could be a blemish^there was aTeduhdancy of thought. ~ He was in the habit of laying down a few simple ab stract truths, and arguing upon and explaining and elucidating them. Almost every sentence, therefore, in one of his speeches, was a political text ; arid' the arguments and illustrations which he employed to es tablish the correctness of his great principles were the clippings of the diamond-^scintillations of the brilliant thought from which they emanated. " His speeches, letters, and reports would fill volumes ; yet they are well worthy of collection in a permanent 1850.] J«ANNER AS AN ORATOR. 451 form. They contain a vast fund of information with reference to the political history of the country, and mines of thought on political science. For some years previous to his death, he was engaged on a work in three parts, entitled " The Theory of Governments." The first part was completed early in 1849, and the two remaining parts were nearly finished at the time of his decease. It has been said that he was no orator. It is true that he did not cultivate the graces of oratory, but he wielded its power with a giant's force. In discussing | serious questions, he was usually calm though impres sive ; and when he first rose to speak, he almost always! bent forward as if from diffidence. But when fully aroused, he became stern and erect in his bearing, his voice rang loud and shrill, and his eyes glistened like! coals of fire. A steady flow of words came from his! lips, and sometimes they rushed so rapidly that he seemed obliged to clip them off to make room. In tense earnestness characterized his delivery, and this is one of the highest attributes of true eloquence. In listening to him you felt that he was sincere, and it was impossible to look at him without being moved. As a statesman, his course was independent and high- minded. Principles he regarded as practical things, and he was firm in adhering to them, and bold and fearless in attacking error. He united the fiery ardor of Mirabeau to the steadiness of Malesherbes — the daring of Canning to the moderation of Liverpool. Few men possessed a more happy faculty of ingratiating themselves into the favor of new acquaintances ; but he never practiced the arts of the demagogue, and, as 452 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. he used to say, he was " an object of as great curiosity to people outside of a circle of five miles in this state [South -Carolina], as anywhere else." He was ambi tious, but his ambition was of a lofty character. He was not indifferent to party obligations, but he thought they ought to be limited to matters of detail and minoi questions of policy,, a*id- not extended to important principles. He was no mere theorist. He never desired, as we have seen in his course in regard to the currency and the tariff, to suddenly undo a system of bad measures, and adopt 'an opposite system. He favored gradual changes, and this is high evidence of the practical char acter of his mind. He lived, too, to behold the triumph of most of the great principles for which he had con tended, and this is a proof of anything but an overween ing love for theories and abstractions. The theory of this government was for many years his study ; he was perfectly familiar with our foreign relations ; but upon the currency question he was espe cially at home, and he discussed it with the sagacity of a philosopher, the foresight of a statesman, and the prac tical skill of a financier. Independence and integrity were conspicuous traits in Mr. Calhoun. "I never know," he said, "what South Carolina thinks of a measure. I never consult her. I act to the best of my judgment, and according to my conscience. If she approves, well and good. If she does not, or wishes any one else to take my place, I am ready to vacate. We are even." He was no friend to progressive democracy, nor did he think that liberty and licentiousness were synonymous terms. 1850.) MEMORY. 453 " People do not understand liberty or majorities," he re marked. " The will of a majority is the will of a rabble. Progressive democracy is incompatible with liberty. Those who study after this fashion are yet in the horn book, the a, b, c, of governments. Democracy is level ling — this is inconsistent with true liberty. Anarchy is more to be dreaded than despotic power. It is the worst tyranny. The best government is that which draws least from the people, and is scarcely felt, except to execute justice, and to protect the people from animal violation of law." These opinions undoubtedly indicate the existence of a morbid melancholy in the breast of thpir author — of a proneness to look upon the dark side of human nature — yet they were uttered in all sincerity. Possessing such exalted talents, the question may be asked, why Mr. Calhoun did not reach the presidency ; for his aspirations were often turned in that direction, though he would sacrifice no principle to reach that high station. A late writer* has enumerated three obstacles — his unconquerable independence, his incoi'- ruptible integrity, and the philosophical sublimity of his trenius. That the first two contributed to this result is highly probable, but if by that other quality is meant an elevation of his genius entirely above the compre hension of the multitude, it is unjust to his character. He possessed no such transcendental faculty or attri bute. Truth, in its simplicity and beauty — as Mr. Calhoun presented it — goes home to every heart. He was understood and appreciated by the masses. He was- popular with the people, but not with the politicians. * Gallery of Illustrious Americans, No. 2, 454 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN. [1850. The death of Mr. Calhoun was a loss to the Union" but to South Carolina the blow was peculiarly severe. For more than forty years she had trusted and confided in him, and she never found him faithless or remiss in his duty. He had received many honors at her hands, but not one was undeserved, — she owed him a debt of gratitude which she could never repay. She has pro duced many distinguished men ; yet his memory and fame will be dearer than those of her Laurenses, hei Gadsdens, her Pinckneys, her Rutledges, or her Haynes. Her soil contains no nobler dust than that of John Caldwell Calhoun. "Statesman, yet friend to truth! — of soul sincere. In action faithful, and in honor clear. Who broke no promise, ser ved no private end. Who sought no title, and who lost no friend 1" THE END. 3 9002 .'f><;;;. l.l'.tit;