'if

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 06097 0481

^y^:fr>V>j>

Cc5 LOo

m/L 

STV-VW-i

f

SELECTIONS

FROM THE

SPEECHES, SERMONS,

Addresses, etc.,

SAMUEL 6LEMENT FESSENDEN

¦ NEW YORK :
WM. P. TOMLINSON, 39 NASSAU STREET.
1869.

¦*>7- M "

John J. Reed, Dook and Job Printer, 43 Centre St., N, Y.

CcS XOo

3) JE 1) I Col TI OJV.

To my wife Mary A. G. A. Fessenden, and our children,
Marcia Grosvenor ; Joshua Abbe ; Eliza Grosvenor ;
Lucia Williams ; Samuel ; Mary Elizabeth ; Deborah
Chandler ; Susan Spofford ; Seth Grosvenor ; Oliver
Griswold ; and Abby Caleb Fessenden.
You did not need this book, to be made acquainted with the
doctrines which have shaped my "religious and political creed"
and action ; but those of our name may succeed to whom it
will be likewise a source of just pride that I did something at
least to disseminate and perpetuate the principles on which,
as I believe must stand to be permanent, the pillars of our
Government and national superstructure. Hostile ideas have
been contending, and for years to come must contend for the '
possession of this continent. Religion and Irreligiou ; Free
dom and Slavery. The war between them is not to be accom
modated by compromise, or concession, or barter of any kind.
Thank God, that in this war it has not been questionable on
which side I declared myself, or whether I was outspoken for
Justice and the Right.
In this regard, may it prove to be true of my children and
their children—" Like father, like child," — only more so.
Samuel Clement Fessenden.
Stamford, Ct., Sept. 25, 1868.

SAMUHZ C. FJZSSU.rD&A \

Mr. Fessenden' is now serving his first term in the House of
Representatives. Though a new man in the National Congress,
he is by no meain new in the Roman sense, as being the first of
his race. His name has long been familiar to the public.
His father, Hon. Samuel Fessenden, of Portland, Me., has been
for many years a distinguished lawyer, of rare ability and un
spotted integrity. In person, too, he has the stamp of nobil
ity. Hon. Wm. P. Fessenden, of the United States Senate,
able, terse, and independent, is the oldest of a numerous family
of brothers. Tlie subject of this sketch represents the Rock
land District, Maine. He was elected at the second sharp
contest, by about nine hundred majority. Mr. Fessenden is
now forty-seven, years of age — of which twenty-two were
passed in childhood and in the reception of his literary educa
tion at Bowdoin College, and a theological education at
Bangor Seminary ; for nearly twenty years he was Pastor of
the same church at Rockland, Me. Failing health and politi
cal affinities then led him to the law and to politics. Mr. Fes
senden is of medium height, slender in form, of florid complexion,
with an oval face and blue eyes. In manners he is graceful
and courteous, and the opponent must be very rude who could
compel him for a moment to say a harsh word, or do an
ungentlemanly act. In debate he is fluent and affluent. He

VI S. C. FESSENDEN.
began life as an earnest and zealous laborer in the works of re
form and human improvement. If age and experience have
abated somewhat of youthful hope, they have taken nothing
from the earnestness, sincerity, and zeal of the pursuit. As a
specimen of his style and mode of thought, we quote a passage
from his speech, delivered January 20, 1862, on the " Issues of
the Rebellion" :
" Sir : I honor the man of an ilea to which they cling with tne tenacity
of death, as the very life of the Republic ; who scorn to run, with bare
headed debasement, the race of popularity ; who take not counsel of ma
jorities, but only-of truth. Thess men of the Calhoun idea, that ' Slavery
is the most safe and stable basis of public institutions in the world ' — who
cling to it as the very life of the Republic ; they do not run the scrub-race
of popularity ; they take not counsel of majorities; I cannot add only of
truth. But still I honor them for the fearlessness with which they utter
their convictions ; in these convictions I believe them to be conscientious.
And will they not grant that we are conscientious in the idea that liberty
to all, the black as well as the white man, is the life of the Republic ? And
in the idea of which we cannot be rid, that if Slavery should be terminated
by this war, it would be, in the language of Lord Brougham of the great
emancipation struggle and victory in England, ' the greatest triumph mortal
m%n ever wan over the greatest crime man ever committed ." "
— Extract from Glyitdoti's Sketches of the XXXVIIth Congress, 1862.

Samuel C. Fessenden was bom in New Gloucester, Maine,
March 7, 1815 ; graduated at Bowdoin College in 1834, and
completed his education at the Bangor Theological Seminary
in 1831 ; in 1838 he was ordained and installed as Pastor of
the Second Congregational Church, in Thomaston, now Rock
land, and dismissed, at his own request, in 1856 ; during that
year he established " The Maine Evangelist" ; in 1853 he
entered upon the practice of the Law ; soon after taking that

The Slavery Question —
In the House of Representatives, Jan, '22, lN(i'2  11
Virginia Contested Election —
In the House of Kepresentativts, Feb. -20, 1802. ,  29
Tax Bill —
In the Huuse of Representatives, March 21), 1802. . ,  *l;i
Pacific Kail Road Bill —
In the House of Representatives, April 17, 18<i2  l(i
Confiscation of Rebel Property —
In the House of Representatives, May 22, 18(52  52

Diplomatic Relations —
Thirty-seventh Congress, June 3, 1802  73
Resolutions —
In the House of Representatives, Dee. 13, 18(52  7S
Annulmekt of Indian Treaties —
In the House of Representatives. Jan. 3, 1803  81
Bankrupt Law —
In the House of Representatives, Feb. -1, 1803  U2
Fortification Bill —
In the House of Representatives, Feb. 12, 1803  101
Conscription Bill —
In the House of Representatives, Feb, 2-1. 1803  , . , 110

Xll CONTENTS.
SERMONS.
Sermon— At East Thomaston, July 26, 1846  127
Sermon— At New York, Oct. 19, 1851  139
Sermon — At Rockland, Me., Jan. 8, 1854  151
Sermon— At Portland, Me., June 27, 1855  162
Sermon— At Rockland, Me., March 26, 1864  180
LECTURE.
Slavery Examined —
Delivered before the Anti-Slavery Society at East Minor, Me. ,
Sept. 28, 1836  A REVIEW
Of Mr. Lovejoy's Lecture on the subject of Prohibitory Laws,
in regard to the Use of Intoxicating Drinks  219
APPENDIX.
Speech — Delivered at Stamford, Conn., Nov. 3, 1868, on which
day Grant was elected President, and Schuyler Colfax Vice
President of the United States of America  251

SPEECHES

THE SLAVERY QUESTION.

Ir\ tl\e House of Representatives, Jar\. 22, 1862.

The House having resolved itself into the Committee
of the Whole on the State of the Union, on House
Bill, No. 208, Mb. Fessenden spoke as follows : —
Mr. Chairman — It is obvious if it were not for that
wheel in the machinery of " rules " of this body, which, in its
revolutions, occasionally resolves the House into the " Commit
tee of the Whole on the State of the Union," not all would be
said that might be as to measures in relation to which, whether
adopted or rejected by the Congress of the United States, no
member should be refused the opportunity of expressing his
views. I avail myself of " the hour," and propose to speak of
the rebellion in the aspect in which it presents itself to my con
stituents. With whatever thoroughness and consummate ability the
questions for which the rebellion has given occasion have been

12 SPEECHES.
discussed here — and I am confident there has been no deficiency
in this respect on either side — it is by no means to exclude, I
trust, any member from availing himself of the right to be
heard, in the performance of his duty to speak, as the proper
medium through which his constituents are represented, and I
hold it to be my duty to represent what I understand to be the
will of my constituents. I am theirs to serve in this regard in
this Hall — a service which I cannot conscientiously render
them and my country, only as I bring to the consideration of
every measure all the mental faculties I possess, and then act
upon these measures in view of my responsibility to my coun
try and my God.
What I understand to be the will of my constituents is, that
this wicked rebellion should be put down. That this Govern
ment should, as speedily as possible, bring to bear upon it its
gigantic power, for its utter extinguishment and extirpation,
and so effectually that, when the work is done, it shall be as
utterly impossible for it so much as to breathe again, as it is
impossible for this rebellion to-day to give breath again to the
slain, whose blood it has causelessly, wickedly shed.
My constituents are loyalists. They hold to the subordina
tion of State to Federal authority — the unconditional support
by the States of the Federal Government, within the limits of
its constitutional powers. They maintain that, with secession
in its final form, a rebellion backed by an army, we will not,
cannot, compromise. That the only conditions, on the part of
the States here represented, on which this contest can be ter
minated, are, that the rebel States lay down their arms, dis
solve their pseudo confederacy, restore the national property
which they have feloniously seized, and give up the leaders in

Missing Page

Missing Page

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 13
this rebellion to merited punishment. That they do this uncon
ditionally, without any proviso for the perpetuity of slavery.
Sir, my constituents are not for endeavoring to allure the rebel
States, by saying to them, if you will but desist and return,
you may come with your bosom institution, with the hope on
your part, and the expectation on ours, that it will be so dis
emboweled of its hideous heart and nature, so improved and
strengthened, as to be forever hereafter regarded as a beautiful
polished stone in our national fabric. No, sir ; they know that
this would be to seek to allure their return with a lie in reser
vation ; with as base a lie as ever fell from mortal lips, so
flagrant and so barefaced that Lucifer himself would blush to
have them utter it.
My constituents have not, in so brief a period, forgotten the
words of "honest" Abraham Lincoln — and honest I believe
him to be — of whom they were told he would never forget
his own words, nor would one act of his Administration be
inconsistent with their truthfulness, come what might —
" A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this Govern
ment cannot endure permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect
the Union to be dissolved ; I do not expect the house to fall ; but I do ex
pect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the
other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it,
and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the
course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it
shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as well
as South." Aud again :
" I believe this Government has endured half slave and half free, because
duriDg all that time — eighty-two years — until the introduction of the Ne
braska bill, the public mind did rest in the belief that slavery was in the
course of ultimate extinction."
I would to heaven that during the hours of this debate,

14 SPEECHES.
these words of an honest man and a true patriot — who spoke
what he meant, and meant as he spoke, were written in letters
of fire on the four walls of this Council Chamber 1 And then,
lest some vail of cotton or gold or national expediency should
intervene to avert the eye from such a spectacle, I would that
every occupant of these listening galleries were God's swift
prophetic ministers, to cry continually, " Your legislation must
be in agreement with these words, or Ichabod ! will be your
nation's doom and epitaph !"
Sir, but a very, very brief period has elapsed since the llth
of June, 1858. If then it had become so perfectly demonstra
ble to the far-seeing eye of the statesman, now President of
the United States, that this Government could not perma
nently endure half slave and half free, that he could say, " /
believe it " — is it less so now ?
If then it was his belief that the reason why this Govern
ment had endured half slave and half free was, because during
all that time — eighty-two years — until the introduction of the
Nebraska bill, the public mind did rest in the belief that sla
very was in the course of ultimate extinction, ought it to be
the less his belief now ? When he came to Washington, to
take his place in the presidential chair, he said he would suffer .
death, rather than yield the principles on which he was elected.
He fearlessly taught the great truth of the " irrepressible con
flict " on the prairies of Illinois. Is the conflict less irrepressi
ble now than then ?
The public mind resting in the belief that slavery was in the
course of ultimate extinction, the Constitution and the Union
have been . sustained. Sir, there is a question of the utmost
significance in respect to this conflict, which, as it seems to me,

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 15
we cannot wisely refuse to consider. If every rebel State could
be brought back to-day, of what avail would it be, if this
Government cannot endure permanently half slave and half
free ?
In Secretary Seward's letter to Mr. Dayton (Papers rela
ting to Foreign Affairs, page 182), I read :
" The condition of slavery in the several States will remain just the same,
whether it [the revolution] succeed or fail. There is not even a pretext for
the complaint that the disaffected States are to he conquered by the United
States if the revolution fail ; for the rights of the States, and the condition
of every human being in them, will remain subject to exactly the same
laws and forms of administration, whether the revolution shall succeed or
whether it shall fail. In the one case, the States would be federally con
nected with the new confederacy ; in the other, they would, as now, he
members of the United States ; but their constitutions and laws, customs,
habits, and institutions, in either case will remain the same."
"Words," said a distinguished diplomatist, a few days before
his withdrawal from the palace to the tomb, " words were
given to conceal, not to express thought." Not so in this in
stance, at least. There is no circumlocution in this language ;
no attempt to conceal, by phraseology of doubtful meaning,
that which it was intended to enunciate. Let no one of that
class of men who are continually taunting us in this world,
where " circumstances alter cases," with the exclamation that
" consistency is a jewel," allege that there is any inconsistency
between the language of Secretary Seward to the minister of
the United States in France, and Governor Seward of. New
York, who, in declining to comply with a requisition of the
Governor of Virginia, for the rendition of three men who had
abducted a slave from Virginia, said : /
" I remain of opinion that a being possessed of physical, moral and in
tellectual faculties common to the human race, cannot, hy force of any
constitution or laws, be goods or chattels, or a thing."

16 SPEECHES.
I aimit it would seem as if —
" Men change with fortune — manners change with climes,
Tenets with books, and principles with times."
No, sir, the eternal principles of right and of righteous
Governments, do not change with " the times," nor by the lapse
of time. Quod ab initio non valet, tractu temporis convales-
cere non potest — that which had no force in the beginning, can
gain no strength from the lapse of time. A claim or title origi
nally defective, cannot derive any additional weight from pre
scription. Is it not the philosophy of history, though we may ignore it,
that all the Governments of the world have approached sta
bility, just in proportion as they have settled down in the prin
ciples of right ; and that " the nation which over-rides justice
and humanity, is ever spawning the seeds of its own destruc
tion ?"
But slavery as it was'and is, is to remain, whether the loyal
States are successful or unsuccessful in this war for the defense
of the Constitution and the Union. Those laws and customs
and habits of slavery under which, in the year preceding Presi
dent Lincoln's inauguration, seven hundred and twenty-three
men from the North were treated with brutal violence at the
South ; between forty and fifty were murdered ; many were
tarred and feathered, or cruelly whipped ; many were impris
oned, and robbed of their money and clothing, and no local
authorities interfered for their protection. Laws and customs
which would as effectually exclude millions of men in the North
and West fiqom the South, who are prosecuting this war, as
though there were no South ; constitutions which, if they are
to remain, leave not one particle of advantage gained by the

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 17
free States over causes which induced the South to separate, but
with these causes still existing in full force, having been strength
ened and not in the least weakened with a people who look at
all times with contemptuous astonishment on those who — I
quote the words of Mr. Leigh in the Virginia convention of
1829— -
" Depend upon theft- daily labor for their daily subsistence, can never
enter into political affairs ; never do, never will, never can."
If this be so — if such is to be the result of this war, in case
the rebellion does not succeed, then this Government will have
inherent in it, as it has hitherto, the elements of its destruc
tion. Certainly, the public mind North, in this event, could no
longer rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate
extinction. How could it so much as reach forward to this
belief ? Or, if to this belief it could attain, how could it pos
sibly rest in it, since the battles would have been fought, the
victories won, at such a sacrifice of treasure and life^as could
not be estimated by any rule of human computation ; and still
the Union restored, the disaffected States brought back with
their constitutions and laws, customs, habits, and institutions,
as they existed previous to the rebellion ? And the public
mind South would rest in the belief — rest did I say ? No, sir ;
as heretofore it has known no rest, but has been restless, active,
aggressive, in the belief, so it would continue to be, that sla
very must have extension and political recognition, until it shall
become alike lawful in all the States. And why not ? They
regard " slavery as the most safe and stable basis for republican
institutions in the world ;" " as the corner-stone of our republi
can edifice ;" " that no human institution is more manifestly
consistent with the will of God than domestic slavery." They

18 SPEECHES.
do not believe that this Union can permanently endure without
the basis is so broad that the whole superstructure shall stand
upon it. As patriots — as philanthropic Christian men, who
would see to it that an institution fraught with such inestimable
blessings, and so manifestly consistent with the will of God,
should onward move, until its advantages and blessings are in
the possession and enjoyment of every State — they are under
the most solemn obligations to contend for it, live for it while
they live, and die for it, if they must, if so be that through
their instrumentality this institution may accomplish its glorious
destiny, and the corner-stone of our republican. edifice be im
movably fixed forever. In regard to the Cincinnati platform,
Mr. Benton was reported to have said at a political ratification
meeting : —
" I have told you of the attempts to kill off Buchanan in the Convention,
under the two-thirds rule. There was another attempt of a different kind
to do the same thing. It was with a platform, a patibulary structure, with
a rope over the head and a trap-door under the feet, and so contrived that
if he got on it he was swung up in the North ; if not, he was laid out at
the South. His friends found out the game. It was determined tbat he
should mount the platform, be it what it might.''
In 1836, Governor McDuffie said, in his message to the
Legislature of South Carolina, " that within twenty-five years,
slavery would be extended to the Northern States." From
that day to the hour of the rebellion, has that State, with its
co-laborers in thought and action, vigorously endeavored to
bring about the fulfillment of this prediction, and thus "kill off"
the North. And now the attempt has culminated in this rebel
lion, inasmuch as the quarter of a century has elapsed, and the
prediction has not been accomplished.
By the aid of the rebellion, a platform has been constructed,
a patibulary structure, with a rope over the head of the loyal

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 19
States and a trap-door under their feet, so that, if the States
take their stand upon it, the nation is destined one day to end
its existence in the North ; for it is "laid out" in its robe of
dissolution and decay by the South. This platform is that con
struction of the Constitution by which slavery is so ingeniously
bolted and riveted into it, that you can in no wise use it to
crush the rebellion, but on the contrary, must so make use of it
as to foster and uphold it ; and in the event of its being crush
ed, that construction by which the constitutions and laws, cus
toms, habits, and institutions, of the now disloyal States, are
to remain the same as they were previous to the insurrection.
The loyal States are asked to mount this platform. The rope
is above. The trap-door is ready for them on which to take
their stand. Shall they mount it ? Is there no scheme about
it which will be fatal to the North and to the Union in the
end ?
I do not know what answer the President of the United
States in 1862 would make to this question, if it were put to
him. But I do know, and his countrymen must know, that
Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, would, in 1858, have said, in
answer to the question, " Any platform, however and by whom
soever constructed, for the perpetuity of this Government, half
slave and half free, must inevitably break down by force of
that principle which works, it may be slowly, but surely, to its
erid, for its vitality is in the decrees of the Almighty. ' A
house divided against itself cannot stand.' I refer you to my
speeches in reply to Senator Douglas, in which, if there is any
one proposition which I had supposed I had demonstrated, it
was that this Government cannot endure permanently half slave
and half free." *

20 SPEECHES.
Mr. Chairman, possibly we may ultimately be successful in
this war, without taking such measures as shall result in the
abolition of slavery. Possibly we may be strong enough to do
this, and leave slavery in the- slave States in statu quo ante
bellum. I do not believe, however, that we are sufficiently
powerful to accomplish this object, if it be our object, because
I cannot disbelieve that God has good still in store for us. But
possibly, I say, we may have this power, as many have the will.
But in this event, we return from victory, as did the Thracian
horse, still bearing a master on his back.
When a Roman emperor put his colleague and brother to
death, he requested Papinian to write him out such a defense
of the deed as it might be proper for him to read before the
Senate. The old jurist answered, in the noblest spirit of jus
tice, that it was a great deal easier to commit a murder, than
to justify it. And though the answer cost him his- life ulti
mately, posterity has never ceased to admire the boldness and
truth of that reply. We may be able to quell this rebellion,
and leave slavery as it was before the war. A Papinian would
tell us that this were easier done than to justify the deed in the
face of a people deeply conscious that slavery is the primum
mobile of this rebellion ; that it feeds its flame continually ; and
that to bring it back with the States, is to restore with them
that condition of things under the influence of which this
Government cannot endure. It may exist in name, but the
name will become a deception. It will be like the Roman republic,
which existed in name under the Cassars, but the reality of
which had completely disappeared.
Sir, I am to be found with those who plant themselves
squarely on the ground that trfe constitutional, legal, and pro-

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 21
vidential aim of this war is to preserve and vindicate the
Government of the United States. This is the aim of the war.
We are agreed — do I hear from gentlemen on the other side of
the house ? And so we are as to the aim of the war. But it
is as to the means which are to be employed in carrying it for
ward that we differ. On the one side it is proposed to confis
cate the property of rebels, slaves included ; the slaves of loyal
men, to free them, and compensate their owners, as included in
the means by which this rebellion can be the most speedily and
effectually quelled, and the aim of the war accomplished. On
the other, it is contended that these means ought not to be
employed ; that they are not adapted to meet the end proposed ;
that, if they wefe, the Republican party is pledged not to
employ them, and the Government is pledged not to use
them ; but more than all, that to make use of these
means, would be unconstitutional. Not adapted to meet the
end proposed ! Then the converse of the proposition is true.
To let the rebels retain their slaves, and to let loyal men retain
theirs — in whatever way these slaves may be used by rebels,
it matters not — is a part of the means adapted to crush the
rebellion, and give success to our arms. But this obviously is
not true, because if they are employed to till the soil, build
intrenchments, or to bear arms, they are employed in the same
manner against us, that the disloyal white men at the South
are employed ; and there would be just as much propriety in
asserting that a part of the means adapted to crush the rebel
lion and give success to our Government, should be not to take
and disarm these white men, as not to take and disarm these
slaves. But is not our policy in this matter to be shaped by the clear

22 SPEECHES.
teachings of the war ? If, in prosecuting the war, wc have
been taught that slaves afford aid and comfort to the enemy ;
and no aid, but much discomfort to us, is it not the part of
wisdom so to shape our policy as to deprive our enemies of so
much of the sinews 6f their strength ? No, say some ; the
Republican party, and the Government, without distinction of
party, is pledged not to meddle with slavery. When did they
make this pledge ? Not when at Chicago it was resolved —
" That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especi
ally the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institu
tions, according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that
balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political
faith depends;''
for this rebellion was not in existence then. When did the
President give the pledge not to meddle with slavery in any
way in this war ? In his very last message he has told us,
" the Union must be preserved ; and hence all indispensable-
means must be employed." Suppose it should, in his judg
ment, constitute a part of the " indispensable means " to be
employed in preserving the Union, that slavery should be at
tacked at every point, is he under any pledge to hold back
the sword ? On the contrary, are not these very words his
pledge to use the sword for the extinction of slavery, if, in his
judgment, such use of it is indispensable for the preservation of
the Union ?
Was the passage of the Crittenden resolutions a pledge that
we would, in no event, interfere with slavery ? The resolutions
declare —
" That this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression,
nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrow
ing or interfering with the rights or establishedinstitutions of those States,
but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution, and to pre-

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 23
serve the Union with all the dignity, equality and rights ef the several
States unimpaired ; that as soon as these objects are accomplished, the war
ought to cease."
This resolution is both negative and positive in declaring the
object, the purpose of the war, and must be so interpreted as to
have all its parts agree, or it is valueless.
If the construction you put on a part of these resolutions,
makes another part of them null and void, your construction
cannot stand. If gentlemen so construe the phraseology, " this
war is not waged upon cur part in any spirit of oppression, nor
for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of
overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established insti
tutions of these States," in such manner as to restrict the
Government from employing such constitutional means as it may
deem necessary, be these constitutional means what they may,
"to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution,
and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality, and
rights of the several States unimpaired," their construction must
be erroneous.
The question, after all, is in the point, well made, are the
means which it is proposed to employ, and especially so far as
the use that is to be made of slaves and slavery, " to defend
and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to pre
serve the Union," constitutional ?
On this question there is, and must of necessity be, a differ
ence of opinion. Who shall decide, where doctors of the law
disagree ? As to Government and legislators, when the duty
is forced upon them, as it is, they must decide, each man for
himself, notwithstanding doctors of the law disagree. I know
of no other course.
I do not propose to discuss the question as to the constihi-

24 SPEECHES.
tionality of these measures. Discussed as it has been and will
be by able legal gentlemen on the floor of this house, we shall
get all the light we can have upon it, without any exhibition of
my want of good taste in endeavoring to augment this light.
But, sir, my point still is — it must be clearly shown that the
means proposed are unconstitutional, before it can be made to
appear that they are not to be employed to defend and main
tain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union.
It is the remark of an eminent jurist :
" The history of man does not present a more illustrious monument of
human invention, sound political principles, and judicious combinations,
than the Constitution of the United States."
Sir, I have yet to see it proved, if proved it can be, that, in
its " judicious combinations " we find such prohibitions as must
inhibit either the Commander-in-Chief of the Army or the
Congress of the United States, from employing " confiscation
or emancipation," if. in their wisdom necessary in prosecuting
this war. And if proved, it will give additional force to the
truth of the remark, that " the best constitution which can be
framed, with the most anxious deliberation that can be bestowed
upon it, may in practice be found imperfect and inadequate to
the true interests of society."
Sir, I listened with pleasure to the speech of the honorable
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Wadsworth,) because "it was the
other side of this question" most ably and candidly and
eloquently discussed. Although he did not show, in my hum
ble opinion, that the position of my honorable friend from Ohio
(Mr. Bingham,) in regard to the power of Congress relative
to this whole subject-matter of slavery in prosecuting the war,
was unsound, he was eminently successful in setting forth his

THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 25
views, and what I understand to be the position of all the slave
States. For this I thank him. He did not hesitate to declare
that, " if you are for the emancipation of the slaves, you arm
each man in those States against you." " You must choose
between negro slavery or the white people of fifteen States in
opposition to you." Yes, sir, here are the terms ; let the North
not mistake with respect to them. If it does, it will not be the
fault of my honorable friend from Kentucky.
But pray, sir, let me ask, is not this as much conditional sup
port of the Government and the war, on the part of this gen
tleman, and those for whom he speaks, as it is conditional sup
port of the Government and the war, on the part of the
honorable gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Conway,) or the honor
able gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Eliot), and those for
whom they speak, when the one declares that " he will not vote
another man or another dollar for this war, unless it is made a
war against slavery ;" and the other, " that there should be no
restoration of this Union with slavery in it." This language I
quote from the speech of the honorable gentleman from Ken
tucky, but I have failed to find it in the timely and able speech
of the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts. Why then
complain of conditionalism, when, in fact, it is to be found just
as much with some southern as with some northern loyalists ?
Why not admit that the same error, if it be an error, belongs
to each, though it mocks them in different ways ? No slavery,
no Union ; but the white people of fifteen States in opposition
to you. May we of the North not as frankly declare, no
liberty for the slaves, no Union ; but the people of nine
teen States against you ? If you are not fanatics who
insist on no Union if no slavery ; then we are not fanatics who

26 SPEECHES.
insist on no Union if no liberty to the slaves. Or if the one is
the fanaticism of slavery, and the other of universal liberty, if
we must choose between them— as it seems we must — for my
part I choose the fanaticism of liberty. I cannot but think —
though the honorable gentleman from Kentucky will not con
cur with me — that sooner or later the people of the North and
West will choose this fanaticism, since choose they must.
Sir, I honor the men of an idea to which they cling with the
tenacity of death, as the very life of the Republic ; who scorn to
run with bare-headed debasement the scrub race of popularity ;
who take not counsel of majorities, but only of truth. These
men of the Calhoun idea, that " slavery is the most safe and
stable basis for republican institutions in the world ;" who cling
to it as the very life of the Republic — they do not run the scrub
race of popularity ; they take not counsel of majorities ; I can
not add, only of truth. But still I honor them for the fearless
ness with which they utter their convictions ; in these convic
tions I believe them to be conscientious". And will they not
grant that we are conscientious in the idea that liberty to all,.
the black as well as the white man, is the life of the Republic ?
And in the idea, of which we cannot be rid, that if slavery
should be terminated by this war, it would be, in the language
of Lord Brougham, of the great emancipation struggle and
victory in England, ¦' The greatest triumph mortal ever won over
the greatest crime man ever committed f" If you condemn us
for this, let your condemnation be first of Jefferson and his
compeers, who said :
"One day of American slavery is worse than a thousand years ot that
which we rose in arms to oppose."
Pass all along the line of departed statesmen, and select the

THE SLAVERY QUESTION, 27
most illustrious of their age in every land, and condemn them.
If you have any anathema to pronounce, let it likewise*fall on
Seward, and Chase, and Lincoln ; for they are among the living
whose well-sowed seed of truth is now raising our expectations
of hearing shouted, ere long, the "harvest-home" of the reap
ers for liberty 1 What then ? What of all this, do you ask ?
Why just this, and nothing less and nothing more. Let not
this contest end — it cannot terminate with principles so antago
nistic living in the hearts and ever kindling the deeds of the
men North and South, and a lasting Union be secured. Do
not let us deceive ourselves or the people in this matter. I
think Carlyle was not far from the truth when he said :
" America's battle is yet to fight, and she will have her own agony and
her own victory, but on other terms than she is yet quite aware of."
Men and money my constituents would have me vote for this
war ; men and money I will unhesitatingly vote for it — all of
both that Government may require. The State of Maine —
one of whose Representatives in this Congress I have the honor
to be — has already sent into the field sixteen thousand men —
five hundred more than her quota of the five hundred thousand
which were thought requisite for this war. If you call for them,
she will as promptly and cheerfully furnish sixteen thousand
more. But let not the war policy of the Cabinet be founded
on the idea of pacification without conquest, and without dis
turbing slavery, the continued existence of whioh has been con
sidered, we fear, an essential element of pacification, whether-
with or without conquest,
And do not ask us to believe that the end is to be the resto-
ration of the Union with slavery intact. Let us at least cheer
our hearts with the thought, the hope, that it may be otherwise j

28 SPEECHES.
and that with the end of this war, there will come the end of
that Which caused it, and which Mr. Rhett said, in the South
Carolina Convention, " has been gathering head for thirty '' —
he might have said for more than thirty — " years." Confisca
tion — emancipation, even I Do you tell me the people will not
bear it ? I do not comprehend how loyal men can help bear
ing what the Congress, in such a day of the nation's peril, may,
in its wisdom, have the resolution to do.
I have somewhere read that on a medal struck by the city of
Worms in 1611, there is represented a burning candle, standing
upon an open Bible, with a serpent endeavoring to extinguish
it, and a hand from the clouds pointing to it, and intimating
that divine strength feeds the flame. One inscription on the
medal is, " 0 Lord, let it shine on forever !"
It is divine strength which feeds the flame of the burning
candle of liberty, so brightly ablaze, still supported by our
Constitution ; while the green and gilded serpent of slavery, in
the shape of rebellion and secession, is endeavoring to twine its
slimy folds about it to extinguish it. Do you assert that sla
very is not this serpent ? Be it what it may, then, in this we
we are agreed : we will strangle it to death. And may liberty,
supported by the Constitution of our fathers, shine on forever !

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION.

Ir\ tl\e House of Representatives, Feb. 26, 1862.

The election of S. Ferguson Beach — Mr. Beach de
nying the right of the Hon. Charles H. Upton to
his seat as the Representative from the Seventh
Congressional District of Virginia — being under
consideration in the following resolution :
Resolved, That Charles H. Upton is not entitled to a seat in
this House as a Representative of the Seventh Congressional
District of Virginia ;
Mr. Fessenden said :
Mr. Speaker — The instructions of this House to its Com
mittee of Elections were, " to inquire into the question of
the eligibility " of the honorable gentleman who claims to be
the Representative of the Seventh Congressional District of
the State of Yirginia in the Thirty-Seventh Congress, " and
the regularity of his election." As to the eligibility, it is
conceded by the committee. The only question is as to its
regularity. And the conclusion to which the committee has
arrived is :
" That the incumbent has produced no evidence which, either under the
Statutes of Virginia, or in accordance with any precedent known to them,

30 SPEECHES.
would be admitted as satisfactory proof that any votes were legally cast for
him as a candidate for Representative to the Thirty-Seventh Congress,
either at the voting precinct at Ball's Cross Roads or elsewhere in the
seventh congressional district."
But the question at once presents itself, is it necessary that
this evidence should be produced before he can be entitled to
a seat in this House 1 Are there no conditions which, having
been fulfilled, preclude the necessity the existence of which the
committee has taken for granted, and on which they have pre
dicated the resolution under consideration ? — the resolution
that Charles H. Upton is not entitled to a seat in this House
as a Representative of the seventh congressional district of
Virginia. Were any votes cast for the incumbent as a candi
date for Representative to the Thirty-Seventh Congress, either
.at the voting precinct at Ball's Cross Roads, or elsewhere with
in the district ? Did he have a majority of all the actual
votes cast f
In submitting for the consideration of this House the re
marks which I may make on this case, I propose these ques
tions as pertinent to the issue.
That some votes were cast for the incumbent at Ball's Cross
Roads, I understand to be admitted ; that he had a majority
of all the votes actually cast, no one is disposed to doubt. We
return then to the first question, which is, in substance, as fol
lows : is it necessary that the sitting members should produce
satisfactory proof that any votes were legally cast for him as
a candidate before he can be entitled to a seat in this House ?
Now this, I think, will be admitted : votes legally cast for
him must have been votes cast in accordance with the laws of
Virginia in such cases made and provided, The laws of Vir
ginia, in this case provide, " That the county court shall

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 31
biennially appoint five freeholders commissioners of election
for each place of voting in the county, any two of whom,
together with another officer, called the conductor, are author
ized to hold the election. After the polls are closed, the
correctness of the poll-book is required to be certified by the
commissioners and conductor. It is then made the duty of
these officers, within five days after the commencement of the
election, to report and deliver the poll-book so certified to the
officer conducting the election, at the court-house in the same
county^ In the case of a congressional election, these last-
named officers in the several counties in the district meet,
canvass the poll-books, and make out a certificate of the result,
one of which is transmitted to the Governor." It appears like
wise that, previous to opening the poll, the commissioners and ¦
conductor must make oath that they will faithfully " execute
the office" according to law.
If such be the election laws of Virginia, they provide for some
six or eight special acts on the part of certain officers, either of
which not being performed, I do not see how a candidate
could be legally elected, notwithstanding he may have had a
majority of the votes, provided there is to be a strict construc
tion of the law. Suppose the State of Virginia had been, as a
* State, on the 23d day of May last, as it was on the 23d day
of May, 1858, all right as to the Union, and at peace, and at
the congressional election the provisions of the law, in the
seventh congressional district, were not complied with ; no
sworn commissioners and conductor held the election ; no poll-
book was certified by the proper officer, or, if otherwise in
these respects, these officers had no meeting to canvass the
poll-books and make out a certificate of the result ; or, having •

32 SPEECHES.
held a meeting for this purpose, they failed to transmit a copy
of their certificate to the Governor, what then ? Why, it is
perfectly obvious that, according to a strict construction of the
law, the election would have been null and void. Or, will it
be said this or that provision of the law is not material to
render the election valid ? There may have been no con
formity with some particular requisition of the law, and still, in
fact, one of the candidates was elected. But if you are at
liberty, under some circumstances, to overrule one provision of
the law and declare the candidate to have been elected, not
withstanding said provision was not complied with, may you
not, under some circumstances, likewise overrule every pro
vision of the election laws of Virginia, and declare the candi
date to have been elected, notwithstanding these laws were
disregarded ? I do not say that at the election in May
last, by which the incumbent claims to hold his seat, there was
non-compliance with all or any of the election laws of the State
of Virginia. But suppose there was : is this a valid reason
for his ejectment ? This is the question.
It is well said, that " reason is the soul of the law, and
when the reason of any particular law ceases, so does the law
itself." When the congressional election of which we are
speaking took place, where was the soul of the law by which
certain officers in* the several counties, or in any county in the
seventh congressional district of Virginia, were required to
meet, canvass the poll-books, make out a certificate of the
result, and transmit it to the Governor of the State ? It had
become defunct. It had been carried off vi et armis by the
disloyal Governor of Virginia, his sheriffs, and conductors, and
its very life taken from it. There was no more occasion or

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 33
use for any of these officers to meet, canvass the poll-books,
make out a certificate of the result, and transmit it to the
Governor of Virginia, than there was for them to meet and go
through this form and transmit a copy of their certificate to
the Governor of Maine. There was no Governor of Virginia
to receive their certificate, just as there was no Governor of
Maine who would receive it. There would have been no
reason for their so doing. The reason for the act was gone ;
the soul of the law was wanting ; it had been divested of its
spirit and meaning. There was nothing left of it but the
letter, which was of no account.
But " no return was made of the election at Ball's Cross
Roads to the sheriff or conductor at the court-house in Alex
andria." The sheriff had fled ; he had no intention of being
there to receive the return. And suppose he had not fled,
but could have been found at the court-house on some of the
five days after the commencement of the election, to receive
the return of the commissioners ; what reason would there
have been in their making the return to this disloyal sheriff for
the purpose of his sending " the certificate" to the disloyal
Governor ? There were armed men at the opening of the
polls at Ball's Cross Roads on the 23d day of May, " in active
rebellion ;'' the roads were traveled daily by many violent
secessionists. Why should these commissioners persist in going
to the court-house to see a sheriff who was not there, to afford
him an opportunity of sending a certificate to a Governor who
had no official existence — an opportunity which, if the Gov
ernor had been officially alive, the sheriff would have had no
inclination to improve ?

34 SPEECHES.
" But the result of the election" —
we read in the report of the committee —
" was in no manner certified, authenticated, or proved by the officers con
ducting the election at that precinct, or in any other mode known to the
law." By the election laws of the State of Virginia, " the officers"
were to certify " the result of the election" according to a
certain prescribed mode. Any other mode than that pre
scribed by the laws would have been illegal. There is no
evidence that they did not so certify, other than that arising
from presumption, based on the fact that it was quite, if not
altogether, impossible for them to certify, or authenticate, or
prove the result of the election in accordance with the pro
vision of the law. The commissioners made oath " faithfully
to execute the office of commissioner." Aud it is to be pre
sumed that they did faithfully execute the office to the best of
their knowledge and ability. It is a sound law maxim, I be
lieve, " that all things are taken to be lawfully done until proof
is adduced to the contrary." Fraud shall never be intended or
presumed or adduced by the law, unless it is expressly averred.
-If a faithful execution of their trust required these commission
ers to certify to the correctness of the poll-book, and to do
certain other things as declarative of the result, who shall
venture to assert that they were not done, because no further
evidence or proof than the oath of the commissioners to do
these acts is adduced to show that they were performed ?
Then, again, the result of the election is in a "manner"
certified, authenticated, and proved by some of the officers
conducting the election at that precinct. It is truthfully
certified ; no one will assert to the contrary.

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 35
Admit, for the sake of the argument, that the result is not
certified in any manner known to the law, still, if we have the
truth stated, we have the substance, and something in the
manner or mode of stating the result which ought to be known
to the law, and held in great respect by lawyers as it is.
Why, Mr. Speaker, the wonder to me is, when I consider the
circumstances in which these commissioners were placed, not
that they failed to certify, authenticate, and prove the result
of the election in a mode known to the law, but that they
certified, authenticated, and proved the result in any manner
or mode whatever.
There they were — the Governor of Virginia in open rebel
lion against the United States ; the sheriff and conductors in
rebellion ; not a few of the people iu rebellion ; angry dis
cussion in almost every house ; armed men walking about
avowing their secession doctrines, and ready to assault any
loyal man who objected to them ; all excitement ; all anxiety ;
and no man feeling that there was any security left for himself,
his family, or his property ; it is wonderful if the commissioners
were so calm, so collected amidst the storm of passion, as to so
much as think of certifying to a return of the election ; more
wonderful still had they been so cool as to make it in accord
ance " with laws which," as they were counseled, " had ceased
to be the laws of the State," " and that to observe these laws
would be highly illegal and improper."
Do you ask the incumbent to produce "satisfactory proof"
that he was elected Representative to the Thirty-Seventh
Congress in the seventh congressional district of Virginia, and
say to him that the only proof that can be so regarded is that
which will show that he has been legally elected, and you mean

36 SPEECHES.
by " legally," in accordance witii the election laws of that
State in 1858 ? You require of him that which he cannot do.
The law does not seek to compel a man to do that which he
cannot possibly perform. Says Sir W. Scott :
" The law itself, and the administration of it, must yield to that to which
everything must bend— to necessity; the law, in its most positive and per
emptory injunctions, is understood to disclaim, as it does in its general
aphorisms, all intention of compelling to impossibilities, and the adminis
tration of laws must adopt that general exception in the consideration of
all particular cases.
" In the performance of that duty, it has three points to which its atten
tion must be directed.
• " In the first place, it must see that the nature of the necessity pleaded
be such as the law itself would respect, for there may be a necessity
which it would not — a necessity created by a man's own act, with a fair
previous knowledge of the consequences that would follow, and under
circumstances which he had then a power of controlling, is of that nature.
" Secondly, that the party who was so placed used all practicable en
deavors to surmount the difficulties which already formed that necessity,
and which, on fair trial, he found insurmountable. I do not mean all the
endeavors which the wit of man, as it exists in the acutest understanding,
might suggest, but such as may reasonably be expected from a fair degree
of discretion and an ordinary knowledge of business.
it " Thirdly, that all this shall appear, by distinct and unsuspected tes
timony ; for the positive injunction of the law, if proved to be violated, can
give way to nothing but the clearest proof of the necessity that compelled
the violation.
" It is, theh, a general rule which admits of ample practical illustration,
that impoteniia excusat legem, where the law creates a duty or charge, and
the party is disabled to perform it, without any default in him, and has no
remedy over — there the law will in general excuse him."
In the matter of the election in the seventh congressional
district of the State of Virginia, on the 23d day of May last,
the law created a certain duty which commissioners, conductors,
and sheriffs were unable wholly to perform. They were dis
enabled, without any default in them, and have no remedy
over ; and here the law should excuse them. The nature of
the necessity which was laid upon them, their unavailing prac
ticable endeavors to surmount the difficulties which formed

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 37
that necessity, and this having been made to appear by distinct
and unsuspected testimony, is sufficient to render them justified
in the eye of the law for not having complied with its pro
visions. By reason of their failure to do that which they could
not possibly perform, it is that the incumbent has failed — if he
has failed — to do that which he could not possibly perform, I
beg to quote again the language of the eminent jurist, and to
say that here we have a case — if there ever was such a case —
to which the principle is applicable, and to which justice in the
case requires that it be applied :
" The law itself, and the administration of it, must yield to that to whicli
everything must bend — to necessity ; the law, in its most positive and per
emptory injunctions, is understood to disclaim, as it does in its general
aphorisms, all intention of compelling to impossibilities, and the adminis
tration of laws must adopt that general exception in the consideration of
all particular cases."
The Constitution provides that —
"Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns, anl qualifi
cations of its own members."
It is as judges, it is iu a judicial capacity, we are here to,
decide this case. It is a well-known judicial maxim, that " it
is the duty of a judge, when requisite, to extend the limits of
his jurisdiction." Bkooji says :
" The maxim of the English law is to amplify its remedies, and, without
usurping jurisdiction, to apply its rules to the advancement of substantial
justice; and, accordingly, the principle upon which our courts of law act
is to enforce the performance of contracts not injurious to society, and to
administer justice to a party who can make that justice appear by enlarg
ing the legal remedy, if necessary, in order to attain the justice of the case ;
for the common law of the land is the birthright of the subject, and bonus
judex secundum acquum et bonu'm judical, et aequitatem siricto juri praefert."
Lord Hobart observes :
" I commend the judge who seems fine and ingenious, so it tend to right
and equity ; and I condemn them who, either out of pleasure to show a

38 SPEECHES.
subtle wit will destroy, or out of incuriousness or negligence will not labor
to support the act ofthe party by the art or act ofthe law."
Now, is it not our duty in this case to enlarge the legal re
medy in order to the advancement of substantial justice, and to
administer justice to a party who makes that justice, to
appear, to the end that the justice of the case may be
attained ?
Not long since I listened to the honorable gentleman from
New York, [Mr. Diven.] Ho said :
r " 1 desire, however, to draw a distinction between rebellious States and
rebellious people, and to draw a distinction between a civil and a foreign
war. In a foreign war, all the citizens of the State with which we are at
war are our common enemies — no matter whether they are engaged in the
conflict or not. But, sir, in civil war, none are our enemies but the persons
who voluntarily embark in the war ; and the rules and usages of war can
not apply to any other of the citizens than those who are actually engaged
in it. Even those who may be forced into a position by the rebel power
are just as much entitled to our protection, although they may have their
domicile in South Carolina, as though their domicile may be in Connecti
cut. All laws applicable to the protection of the property and persons of
citizens ofthe United States, extend all over the United States. It makes
no sort of difference where the citizen may dwell, he can say, ' I am a
citizen of the United States, and I appeal to the protection of our Consti
tution and our Laws.' "
While he enforced the rights of a citizen of the United
States under the Constitution, and while he made some state
ments, advanced some views, to which I could not assent, ho
did state a proposition to which I would call your attention in
this connection as coming within the 'scope of my argument,
Mr. Speaker, the question I have to ask is, if even those
who may be forced into a hostile position by the rebel power
are just as much entitled to our protection, although they may
have their domicile in South Carolina, as though their domi
cile. may be in Connecticut ; if all laws applicable to the pro
tection of the property and persons of citizens of the United

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 39
States extend all over the United States ; if it makes no sort
of difference where the citizen may dwell, he can say, I am a
citizen of the United States, and I appeal to the protection of
our Constitution and our laws — if this be true with respect to
those who may be forced into a hostile position by the rebel
power, how much more is it true in regard to those who loyally
and heroically stand out against the rebel power, and boldly
assert and maintain their rights ? So stood forth the hon
orable gentleman from the seventh congressional district of
Virginia on the 23d of May last, and the few noble men who,*
with their lives in their hands', went to the polls on that day
and deposited their votes, or demanded their right to do so,
for a Representative to the Thirty-Seventh Congress.
The honorable gentleman did not seek to be the candidate.
He earnestly entreated other gentlemen to suffer themselves to
do so good a work for a periled State and nation. But no ;
as the convention of Virginia had, by ordinance, declared that
no election for members of Congress should be held in the State,
these gentlemen regarded it " as highly illegal and improper,"
at least very inexpedient, for either of them to think of being
a candidate. And they were neither candidates nor voters on
that day. They left the incumbent to do the best he could for
his State and country without their assistance. They left the
brave men and true patriots, few as they were in number, to
breast the storm alone, and be shipwrecked by it for all they
cared. And now they come into this Congress to-day to take
advantage of their own wrong, and disloyalty it may be, and
to deprive the incumbent and his constituents of the justice
which is their due ; to deprive them of their right to be repre
sented on this floor. They claim — tho constituents of the

40 SPEECHES.
incumbent who voted for him and those who would have voted
for him— that they conformed to the election laws of Virginia
as far forth as they were permitted and were able to do so.
They claim that the honorable gentleman is the man of their
choice, the man who stood by them, his State, and the nation,
when others fled ; risked his all, and cared not what would be
the consequences if he could only do them, Virginia <and the
United States, the service which he would have been a coward
and a traitor had he not then rendered.
Shame on the poltroons, who, having mustered courage
enough under the protection of three or four hundred thousand
muskets to hold an election for member to Congress in the
seventh district, now come into this House and ask that the
incumbent be ejected to give place to the man who would take
it from him ; and that the few voters, who well deserve what
they ask, should be unheeded, to gratify the many voters if
you please, who do not deserve to have their request ; for they
are here with the everlasting disgrace upon them of having
failed to show their loyalty when their State and country
stood most in need of it. The law and equity and the Con
stitution regard those only who watch, and not those who
sleep. They are for the protection of those who take due care
of their rights ; who make it to appear that they set a proper
value upon them.
I have no hesitation in saying that to my mind here is a case
in which we have a right to enlarge the legal remedy, in which
it is our duty to do so. Substantial justice will be done by our
so doing ; and, to my view, substantial injustice, if we take a
different course. The justice of the case is far, very far from
being attained, if we say to the incumbent and his constituents :

VIRGINIA CONTESTED ELECTION. 41
although you are citizens of the United States, you appeal in
vain to the protection of our Constitution and our laws in a
matter so vital to your interests as is that of being represented
on the floor of this House in a day when, if ever, you need as
loyal citizens all the encouragement and protection which you
can derive from this regard for your rights.
Bitt it is obtaining a seat in Congress at too cheap a rate, it
has been alleged, to permit a gentleman to take a seat here,
backed by so few votes. Sir, it is no mean price which this
man or any of the honorable gentlemen of this Congress from
the border States have paid for the high honor, whetiier the
votes by which they were elected were many or few. Pro
scribed and hunted and robbed and peeled by rebels on
their track — by rebels who will hang them to the nearest tree,
if perchance they can lay hold of them, which God forbid —
this is the price these gentlemen pay ; this is the price the
honorable gentleman from the seventh district has paid in part,
and he may yet have to pay it iu whole.
I have thus, as briefly as I could, endeavored to set forth
the principles by which I shall be governed in the vote which
I shall give. But I have another word to add to those which
I have already spoken, before I take my seat. I have a right
to speak of the honorable gentleman as well as of his case.
If an acquaintance, early ripened into close friendship, which
had its commencement nearly thirty years since, under the
smile of our alma mater, and has been perpetuated during all
this period, to this dark day in our nation's existence, when
she needs and will have the undivided support of the true
hearts and strong arms of all her loyal sons, and when the
taint of disloyalty must and ought to condemn any man to

42 SPEECHES.
whom it justly attaches to everlasting ignominy ; if till this,
and conjoined with this, a vivid recollection of the fearful night
I "passed under his hospitable roof, which had so long min
istered to the wants of our brave officers and soldiers, to be
succeeded by the more fearful morning when he gathered around
him his family and was compelled to take a hasty departure
and to abandon his all to the enemy, never again, it may^ be, to
have his homestead restored to him ; if all this does not give
me a right to speak of him, what can give me or any man this
right ? Not his keen perception of the fitness of things, which
fitness of things he may be fearful I shall violate ; not his
frown of displeasure shall deter me from the exercise of this
right. It is not his to dictate to me to-day what I shall say
of him, no more than it is his to dictate my action on his case.
I have to say what, it is true, need not be said to any man who
knows him, or to any man who lives to know him, that he is
no suppliant for favor ; he demands justice only of this House
for himself and his constituents. He would not take as a
favor, if he could have it, that which your sense of justice
would lead you to withhold. Be the decision of this House
what it may, this is left to him, aud of it he cannot be divested ;
nothing can make him swerve from his loyalty and the path of
duty for his country's good ; nothing on earth or in hell,
nothing in heaven, would. His only desire, is to see the Con
stitution maintained, the 'Union restored, as the result of
victories which our Army must and will aciiieve, and he cares
not to what use he or his may be put, if so be that he renders
some service towards accomplishing so glorious an object.

TAX BILL.

Irv the House of Representatives, March 20, 1862.

The question being on the Amendment offered by
Mr. Steele, of New Tork, to reduce the Tax on
Lager Beer to twenty-five cents per barrel / in the
course of the debate, Me. Fessenden made the fol
lowing remarks :
Mr. Chairman — I oppose the amendment to the amendment
for the reason assigned by the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Steele] for opposing it. The gentleman said he was in
favor of the amendment because the provision as it stood in
the bill would amount to an absolute prohibition of the manu
facture of the article. Now, sir, I am in favor of it for that
very reason, if it be true that the tax proposed to be levied
would amount to a prohibition of this traffic. If the sale of
lager beer, strong beer, and porter; could be confined to the
section of country from which the gentleman comes, I should
have no objection to it in any aspect in which the gentleman
might choose to consider it ; but, sir, the kind of liquor of
which he speaks, this beer, alo, porter, is doing us far more

44 SPEECHES.
damage in the East than your whisky and your brandy. Our
young men take their first lessons in intemperance in the strong
beer, lager beer, and porter which they get. They progress
then to whiskey, and finally graduate, such graduation as it is,
with brandy.
Mr. Blair, of Missouri. I ask the gentleman to allow me
to say that I do not think he understands the meaning of lager
beer. It is not a strong beer at all.
Mr. Fessenden. I understand that.; but does the gentle
man say that lager beer is not intoxicating ?
Mr. Blair, of Missouri. Has the gentleman ever drank
lager beer ? [Laughter.]
Mr. Fessenden. I have.
Mr. Blair, of Missouri. Well, sir, I am satisfied the gentle
man is laboring under a delusion. It was not lager beer that
he drank ; it was something spurious. [Laughter.]
Mr. Fessenden. Not at all. It was the genuine article.
Mr. Blair, of Missouri. The meaning of lager beer is laid
beer. It does not mean strong beer at all.
Mr. Fessenden. I ask the gentleman if he is of opinion
that lager beer possesses no intoxicating qualities ?
Mr. Blair, of Missouri. I have drank a great deal of it,
and never felt any effect from it, and I am surprised to hear
the declaration made by the gentleman from Maine in regard
.to it,
Mr. Fessenden. The declaration that I made and repeat
in regard to it is, that if there is auything intoxicating in it I
shall be glad if a duty is imposed upon it sufficiently high to
prohibit the traffic in it so far as my section of the country is
concerned. That is all. The point I desire to present is,

TAX. BILL. -±0
that 1 am in favor of imposing such a duty, if possible, as snali
prohibit the manufacture or sale of all intoxicating liquors.
Now, sir, so far as ale, porter, and lager beer are concerned,
I believe that if such a duty should be imposed upon them as
should result in an absolute prohibition, the revenue of the
Government would rather be increased than diminished thereby.
I believe the men who use it in the section from whence I come
would have the money wherewith to purchase other articles
upon which a larger revenue would be derived, by being de
prived of the use of all intoxicating liquors. I am, therefore,
in favor, in respect to these articles, and in respect to all
articles of intoxicating liquors, of increasing the duty upon
them to an extent that shall make it prohibitory ; and in that
way I believe we should increase our revenue rather than
diminish it.

PACIFIC RAILROAD BILL.

Ir\ the House of Representatives, April 17, 1862.

The House having resolved itself into the Committee
of the Whole on the State of the Union, the Pacific
Railroad Bill being before the Committee for its
consideration, in the course of the debate Mr. Fes
senden made the following remarks:
Mr. Chairman — I have a few words to say on this subject.
The project has been before the country and before Congress
for several years. It has' been discussed in all the newspapers
of the land. It has been incorporated certainly into the plat
form of the Republican party, and I believe into the platform
of the Democratic party.. It has been presented heretofore in
both branches of Congress by members of the Democratic
party. It is familiar to us all that at the convention of the
Republican party, by which Abraham Lincoln was nominated
for President, a plank was inserted into the platform to the
effect that a railroad to the Pacific ocean was imperatively
demanded by the interests of the whole country.
If a railroad to the Pacific ocean was imperatively demanded

PACIFIC RAILROAD BILL. 47
by the interests of the whole country then, 1 ask whether that
railroad is not imperatively demanded by the interests of the
whole country now ? I ask gentlemen upon this floor what
has transpired in this country, what change has taken place iu
our interests, that should render this resolution nugatory ?
Mr. Pike. Let me ask whether the war was included in
the Chicago platform ?
Mr. Fessenden. No, sir, it was not ; but I take the ground
that the war is an additional reason, and makes it still more
imperative, so far as the interests of the country are concerned,
that this railroad should be constructed. Why, sir, we hear
time and again upon the floor of this House that there is im
minent danger that a war with foreign nations may be involved
in the issues of this civil war, and the question arises what, in
such an emergency, is to become of the Pacific States ? If wo
are to have a war with other nations, and we are in the same
condition as regards the communication with the Pacific coast
that we are to-day, I repeat, what are we to do ? I hold, sir,
that the military necessities of the country afford an additional
reason for the speedy construction of this road to those which
operated upon us when we met as a party in convention at
Chicago and adopted our platform, upon which, as the Re
publican party, we intend to stand.
Now, I do not believe it will do for ns as a party — if I may
mention party in this connection — to ignore this plank in our
platform. I do not believe it will do for us to deceive the
people in this respect. We were in earnest, we meant what
we said when we declared that the best interests of the country
required the construction of this road. And now the people
of the country ask ns to come forward and redeem our pledge

48 SPEECHES.
thus solemnly made. They say to us to-day, " give us a bill,
give us a chance to act ;" and when the gentleman asks where
is the money to build the road with, it is sufficient to reply
that the people have impliedly said that they will furnish the
money by asking for the authority to build the road. They
propose to furnish the money if Congress will furnish them the
authority to expend it in the construction of the road.
Let us pass this bill, and the responsibility will rest .with the
people. It will have been removed from our shoulders to
those of the people. If they cannot construct the road, if they
have not the money, or if they decide that this is not the time
to construct the road, they cannot turn round and say to Con
gress, " the responsibility is upon you,"
I believe with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and with
every gentleman upon this floor, that this is a work for a nation
to accomplish. I believe that when constructed, if it ever be
constructed, it will be a chain running through every State,
binding them all together, every link of which is welded by a
common interest and a common destiny. I believe it will be
taking a great step towards a point at which we are some day
to arrive, when American minds, American systems, and Ame
rican influence will control throughout the world ; towards
the point which we hope one day to reach, when our ideas will
prevail in the nations of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
But, sir, I am not in favor of the substitute which has been
introduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania as the Pacific
railroad bill which this House should pass. I think the
objections to that bill have been well stated by the honorable
gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Lovejoy. J I am rather in favor
of the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Illinois, and

PACIFIC RAILROAD BILL. 49
I rise more particularly to say that if gentlemen on the floor of
the House will examine the two bills, and compare them with
each other, they will find that the amendment proposed by the
gentleman from Illinois is far preferable to that proposed by
the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Let me say in reference to the substitute introduced by the
gentleman from Illinois, that it is based upon a company
chartered by the State of Maine, and I can say of the gentle
men mentioned in the bill as composing the company, that they
are among the most respectable men in our State. They are
men who do not enter upon any project without giving it due
consideration. They are men, in short, who are capable, and
may be relied on to carry through any project which they un
dertake. I believe the substitute of the gentleman from
Illinois is, in reality, is in fact, the project for which the people
ask, and which they will sustain, if we will give them the op
portunity ; and that a road built under it would emphatically
be the people's railroad.
Now, sir, I disagree with my colleague [Mr. Pike] as to the
propriety of postponing the consideration of this bill until De
cember next. I believe that it will not do to postpone it ; that
the people will not be satisfied with its postponement. I be
lieve it is better to give them what they ask now, and then we
shall see whether they will be true to their contract on their
part — whether they will carry out the provisions of this bill.
Give them the chance, and not, in consequence of frivolous ob
jections,- or of any objections, withhold from them what they
ask — an opportunity to show that they are in earnest. I shall
vote for the substitute of the gentleman from Illinois, and not
for that of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. „

{50 SPEECHES.
And now, Mr. Chairman, I will finish my remarks by de
siring that the following extract from a paper which I hold in
my hand as expressive of views in which I concur, relating to
the substitute of the gentleman from Illinois, may be read.
The Clerk read, as follows ;
" From the foregoing synopsis, it is apparent that this is the simplest,
plainest, and most practical bill yet presented for the consideration of
Congress", in connection with this great national object. It is simply a con
tract between one company and the Government for the construction of
this road and telegraph, every feature of which looks straight forward to
the substantial, sure, and early completion of the work, with very reason
able assistance from the United States.
" There are no speculative features about it, no mystery, no confusion,
no difficulty. The company will be sustained by the people of the United
States, for it is eminently ' the people's road.' They will subscribe to its
stock, will pay their subscriptions, and those subscriptions, the Govern
ment bonds, and the lands, will be used to build the road. It will be com
pleted as speedily as possible, not less than at the minimun rate fixed by
the bill, but probably much faster. By these means the Atlantic and Pacific
sections of our country will be brought within a few days of each other,
and will be bound together with bands of iron, and of mutual fee.ings, in
terest, and commerce, that will make us eminently one people. If the amount
appropriated should be in excess of that actually required, the bonds will
not be used, but returned. The lands will be settled as they are sold, and
the proceeds faithfully applied to this great work. Bonds and lands will be
passed over to the company only as the work progresses, and hence there
can be no possibility of loss or misapplication. If the amount appropriated
is not sufficient, the company will raise the balance, and promptly and effi
ciently complete the work ; or, the Government will have its remedy in its
own hands by foreclosing on the company and taking all its property."
Mr. Thomas, of Massachusetts. I desire to ask the gentle
man from Maine whether the platform of which he speaks
contains this resolution :

" Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States,
and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic
institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that
balance of powers on which tlie perfection and endurance of our political
fabric depends."

PACIFIC RAILROAD BILL. 51
Mr. Fessenden. It does ; and I will inform the gentleman
that the same platform also contains this resolution :
" That a railroad to the Pacific ocean is imperatively demanded by the
interests ofthe whole country."
Mr. Thomas, of Massachusetts. Then, in God's name, if
you keep the one, keep the other.
Mr. Morrill, of Vermont. I am delighted to hear these
plaudits, these magnificent descriptions of the business, the
commercial interests of our country, and its future prospects.
But we, as legislators, must look at this question in a plain and
practical view, and step down from the lofty heights of the
imagination. Now, in regard to the platform of the Republican party,
alluded to by the gentleman from Maine, I will say that I re
cognize the plank there inserted. But the times have changed,
and when the question is whether I shall knock out my brains
against a plank, or take the plank out of the way. I prefer to
sacrifice the plank before I will sacrifice my brains : I will
sacrifice the plank before I will peril the existence of the
country. Mr. Fessenden. I do not propose that the gentleman shall
do that. I think by passing this bill is the way to keep the
brains in the Republican party.

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY.

SECOND SESSION OF THE THIRTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS.

In the House of Representatives, May 22, 1862.

The House having under consideration tlie Bills to
Confiscate the Property and Free the Slaves of
Rebels, Mr. Fessenden said :
Mr. Speaker — I ask leave of the House to have the Reso
lutions of the Legislature of the State of Maine read at the
Clerk's desk.
The resolutions were read as follows :
" Resolved, That we cordially indorse the Administration of Abraham
Lincoln in the conduct of the war against the wicked and unnatural ene
mies of the Republic, and that in all its measures calculated to crush this
rebellion speedily and finally, the Administration is entitled to, and will re
ceive, the unwavering support ofthe loyal people of Maine.
" Resolved, That it is the duty of Congress, by such means as will not
jeopard the rights and safety of the loyal people of the South, to provide
for the confiscation of estates, real and persona], of rebels, and for the for
feiture and liberation of every slave claimed by any person who shall con-

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 53
tinue in arms against the authority of the United States, or who shall in
any manner aid and abet the present wicked and unjustifiable rebellion.
"Resolved, That in this perilous crisis of the country, it is the duty of
Congress, in the exercise of its constitutional power, to ' raise and support
armies,' to provide by law for accepting the services of able-bodied men of
whatever status, and to employ them in such manner as military necessity
and the safety of the Republic may demand.
" Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be sent to the Senators and
Representatives in Congress from this State, and that they be respectfully
requested to use all honorable means to secure the passage of acts em
bodying their spirit and substance."
Mr. Fessenden. Mr. Speaker, on the 7th of March, 1862,
the Legislature of the State of Maine passed four resolves ; in
the Senate by a vote of twenty-four yeas to four nays ; and in
the House by a vote of one hundred and four in the affirmative
to twenty-six in the negative. It was ordered that a copy of
these resolves be sent to the Senators and Representatives
from the State in Congress, and " that they be respectfully re
quested to use all honorable means to secure the passage of
acts embodying their spirit and substance." These resolutions
have just been read. I intend, as one of the Representatives
in this Congress from the State of Maine, to comply with this
request ; and if the House will bear with me for a short hour,
I will give my reasons. To give my reasons is a part of the
" honorable means" which it is my duty to employ, in accord
ance with the will of the State.
Mr. Thomas, of Massachusetts. Will the gentleman allow
me to ask him whether he holds that the course which the Le
gislature of the State of Maine may have selected in respect to
the decision of the constitutional question is one which he is
bound to follow, although his own convictions may be to the
contrary ?
Mr. Fessenden. Not nnder all circumstances.

54 SPEECHES.
Mr. Thomas, of Massachusetts. Do you under these circum
stances, when a question of constitutional right is involved ?
Mr. Fessenden. Not at all. I should be sorry to have the
gentleman refer to them as an admission that I feel myself
to be bound by them, whatever my convictions of duty may be.
There are, however, some two or three preliminary questions
which, from my stand-point, must be decided before I can well
proceed to the conclusion to which I hope to arrive. One
question is this : is it possible to bring forward a bill by which
Congress can constitutionally confiscate the property of rebels,
real and personal, and for the forfeiture and liberation of every
slave claimed by any person who shall continue in arms against
the United .States ?
I admit, it would seem as if it is not possible. Several at
tempts have been made to frame and bring forward what was
declared and believed by soma to be such a bill. The Com
mittee on the Judiciary early made the attempt and failed. A
minority report from this committee gave us a bill drawn up by
the able gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Bingham] ; and the able
gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Thomas,] and other
gentlemen learned in constitutional law, were of opinion that it
was, in some of its sections, manifestly unconstitutional. We
have before us the bills now under consideration, and amend
ments and substitutes, and still there are gentlemen whoso
opinion is deserving of great weight, who have no~hesitation in
declaring that these bills are not constitutional in some of
their provisions.
The honorable gentlemen who have ^introduced these bills
have done their best, and failed of accomplishing the object, it
may be. And we arc bonnd to believe that the honorable

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 55
gentlemen, whose opinion it is that these bills are unconsti
tutional, could have done no better, because iu their judgment
no bill of confiscation and forfeiture would be constitutional.
Suppose, then, we assume it to be true that it is not possible
for Congress to bring forward such a bill as is comprehended
in the question proposed. To my mind it follows that the
Congress cannot do what rebels, under the protection of the
Constitution, have done and may continue to do. They con
fiscate the property, real and personal, of the loyal subjects of
this Government. This act of theirs does not remove them
from constitutional protection. Their estate, real and personal,
is still made secure to them as far forth as the Constitution of
this Government is concerned. Such is the result of this con
stitutional prohibition ; it is protection for the rebels, but no
protection for him in his estate who is not a rebel, since the
rebel may seize it if he can, and Congress has no power to com
pensate the robbed loyalist, by saying to him, we will confiscate
the rebel's estate, and restore by this means your property.
The rebels can say to the loyalist, your slaves are free, and
freed they are. But Congress cannot say to the rebel, your
slaves, are set free, aud the slaves of rebel masters still they
are. A few miles from this city there lives a gentleman who pre
ferred to abandon his homestead rather than be a rebel. His
rebel brother stepped in the day he was driven out, and said,
" all this property is mine." This rebel, who is worth his
thousands, took his brother's estate, and for no other reason
than because he would not serve under the rebel flag ; and
though this loyal man lias his homest'ead to-day, which the re
bel brother has been compelled to abandon. vebels in the

56 SPEECHES.
neighborhood break down his fences, pillage from his barn,
carry off his timber — rebels who read in the newspapers,
" Congress cannot constitutionally confiscate our property or
liberate our slaves." It is good for the rebels — such reading —
but it is hard for loyal men. In this regard, the rebels
certainly have that which may give them, which does give
them, great advantage in this war. They can say to any man
who hesitates to cast in his lot with them, " come with us ;
your estate we take if you do not. You shall pay gold for all
the real and personal property you have in the District of Co
lumbia, or New York, or Massachusetts into our treasury. If
you do come with us, we do not take your estate ; neither will
the United States take it. Congress cannot constitutionally
confiscate your property or liberate your slaves, though you
are a rebel. Read it in the Daily Globe. Do not as able ju
rists as they have in Congress say this ? You retain your
estate by fighting on our side, by guarantee both from the
South and North." But the United States calls, as she has a
right to do, for the services of this 'man. Yet all she has to
say to him is, " you must let your property, South and North,
"if the rebels can get hold of it, go to destruction ; you must be
taxed ; you must fight ; nor can we constitutionally confiscate
a dollar of rebel property to make up your loss, but you will
have the satisfaction of knowing that you do all this to preserve
tlie Constitution and save the Union." Sir, it is a Constitu
tion under which, by such a construction of it, men in this con
dition are subjected to an egregious wrong ; and a Union
which, if restored, must leave them with heart-burnings such as
must exist in the breast ofthe victims of injustice.
It is an advantage for rebels to be able to make those whom

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 57
they would influence believe that they would do them no
wrong, ho harm in body or estate, while they would suffer
injury in estate, if not in body, by casting their lot with loyal
men. Again : it is not impossible that the rebels may put their
estate, real and personal, to such effective use in the prose
cution of this war as to show beyond question that so long as
they are permitted to retain their estates the war will not term
inate. In this event, this " constitutional barrier" becomes a
very serious matter. It is " a dead lock ;" and the nation's
epitaph would be : " Killed by its Constitution."
Impossible for Congress constitutionally to confiscate the
property of rebels, and liberate their slaves ! Then it is not
true that " the laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving
our country when in danger, are of higher obligation than a
strict observance of the written law," Thomas Jefferson's
opinion to the contrary notwithstanding. Says Mr. Jef
ferson :
" To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law
would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those
who are enjoying them with us ; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the
means." The President of the United States did not admit that he
was so bound by " constitutional shackles" that he could not
shake them off when this war commenced, and th'e pressure of
stern emergency was upon him, and do that for the doing of
which he had no constitutional authority, unless you find it in
the spirit of this instrument and not in the letter. He had no
idea of losing the country by a scrupulous adherence to the
very letter of the Constitution. He is a Hamiltonian Presi-

58 SPEECHES.
dent. But notwithstanding this illustrious example, if it be
that the property of rebels cannot be constitutionally confis
cated and their slaves forfeited, however imperative this
measure may seem to be, it follows that the power of Congress
in this regard is not co-extensive with that .of the President.
He can do that to save the country which Congress cannot do.
Sir, to-day he is dear to the hearts of us all, because, when
this extreme case called for a remedy so violent even as that of
disregarding the letter of the Constitution, he had the wisdom
and patriotism to apply it. He was " constrained to call up,
invoke, and put iu. exercise" " more of power, more of force
than the Constitution provides, or than is limited by the Con
stitution." This is the view which some entertain as to what
he actually did. He " was constrained from our necessities to
do it." Nor did he " acknowledge before the world," in pur
suing this course, " that our institutions are insufficiently
founded, and that we are, after all, compelled in the period of
trial to resort to the force which they say is necessary to the
existence of nations, and [that] our experiment is a failure ;"
but he did accede to the soundness of the Jeffersonian doctrine,
" that circumstances do sometimes occur which make it a duty
in officers of high trust to assume authorities beyond the law,"
and that the Constitution must be so construed that the means
shall be proportioned to the end.
But, again : if it is possible to bring forward a constitutional
confiscation and liberation bill, is it expedient ? Is it expe
dient to pass such a bill ?
I hold it to be expedient, because it is the policy which jus
tice dictates and demands. This rebel war is an extreme case.
Let the remedy iu whole or in part be as violent as it may,

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 59
justice demands the application of it. Do you say "confis
cation" is no part of the remedy ? How do you know that
until it is tried ? It is not required of us to know the certainty
of the remedy before justice would have ns use it. Its proba
bility, in an emergency, authorizes and demands its application.
Edmund Burke has said : "Justice is of itself the great stand
ing policy of civil society ; and an eminent departure from it
under any circumstances lies under suspicion of being no policy
at all." It is the highest policy of that Government which is
bound by the maxim, " salus populi suprema est lex," as the
only means of obtaining the end. By no other means can the
main end of every just Government be attained than by that
policy which is based on a supreme regard for justice.
But do you say that the bill proposed would inflict retro
spective punishment — a punishment not previously affixed by
law — and is therefore inconsistent with justice ? This is upon
the assumption that in no case has retrospective punishment
been justly inflicted. Will any gentleman maintain this ?
Even Hallam, in his Constitutional History of England, admits
" that a punishment not previously affixed by law to the
offences of Strafford should have been inflicted ; that he
should have been degraded from his rank, and condemned to
perpetual banishment, by act of Parliament ;" and Macaulay,
in his review of Hallam, sustains this principle of retrospective
punishment in the case of a powerful and wicked statesman.
There are instances of perfidy and atrocity which you cannot
reach by a punishment previously affixed by law ; but reached
they must be, or justice will be outraged. So in this rebellion.
The crime on the part of these leading rebels is perfidious and
atrocious ; aud if the bill was not limited in its application to

60 SPEECHES.
those who continue in rebellion, and was retrospective in its
action,, it would no more than meet the claims of justice.
Further : I hold it to be expedient to liberate the slaves of
rebels because it will be a constitutional step towards the ulti
mate annihilation, as we may hope, of a moral, social, and
political wrong, which alone has at any time imperiled our
liberty and prosperity. The peril in which it has put our in
stitutions, and 'it alone, was so obvious to the now President of
the United States, that in 1858 he asked the question, and it
was not answered by his opponents by showing that there was
any other thing which threatened the existence of this Union
and our liberty. He asked the question —
" Has anything ever threatened the existence of this Union save and
except this very institution of slavery ? What is it tbat we hold most dear
among us? Our own liberty and prosperity.' What has ever threatened
our liberty and prosperity save and except this institution of slavery ?"
Again, in his speech at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858,
Mr.' Lincoln said :
" I leave it to you to say whether, in the history of our Government, this
institution of slavery has not always failed to be a bond of union, and, on
the contrary, been an apple of discord and an element of division in the
house. I ask you to consider whether, so long as the constitution of men's
minds shall continue to be the same, after this generation and assemblage
shall sink into the grave and another race shall arise, with the same moral
and intellectual development we have, whether, if that institution is stand
ing in the same irritating position in which it now is, it will not continue
an element of division ? If so, then I have a right to say that, in regard to
this question, the Union is a house divided against itself."
Once more, in his speech at Alton, Illinois, October 15,
1858, in which he clearly defined the status of the Republican

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 61
party in this regard, and from which it has taken no departure,
lie said :
" The real issue in this controversy — the one pressing upon every mind —
is the sentiment on the part of one class that looks upon the institution of
slavery as a wrong, and of another class that does not look upon it as a
wrong. The sentiment that contemplates the institution of slavery in this
country as a wrong is the sentiment of the Republican party. It is the sen
timent around which all their actions, all their arguments circle, from
which all their propositions radiate. They look upon it as being a moral,
social, and political wrong ; and while they contemplate it as such, the.y
nevertheless have due regard to its actual existence among us, and the
difficulties of gettmg rid of it in any satisfactory way, and to all the consti
tutional obligations thrown about it. Yet, having a due regard for these,
th£y desire a policy in regard to it that looks to its not creating any more
danger. They insist that it should, as far as may be, be treated as a wrong,
and one of the methods of treating it as a wrong is to make provision that
it shall grow no larger. They also desire a policy that looks to a peaceful
end of slavery at some time as being wrong. These are the views they
entertain in regard to it, as I understand them ; and all their sentiments, all
their arguments and propositions are brought within this range. I have Faid,
and I repeat it here, that if there be any man among us who does not think
that the institution of slavery is wrong in any one of the aspects of which
I have spoken, he is misplaced, and ought not to be with us. And if there
be a man among us who is so impatient of it as a wrong as to disregard its
actual presence among us and the difficulty of getting rid of it suddenly in
a satisfactory way, and to disregard the constitutional obligations thrown
about it, that man is misplaced if he is on our platform. We disclaim
sympathy with him in practical action. He is not placed properly with
us." I would say to the honorable gentleman from New York
[Mr. Diven] that these are no " garbled extract(s) from Mr.
Lincoln's speeches" — I am not in the habit of making such
from any man's speeches — " to leave the impression upon the
House and on the minds of the people, so far as the circulation
of his [Mr. Fessenden's] speech is concerned, that Mr. Lin
coln is the advocate of the abolition of slavery by congressional.
action or by the war power." But I shall take it for granted
that his sentiments in 1858, as they are found in these extracts,
are his sentiments in 1862.

62 SPEECHES.
Hence, I am led to the remark, that take the constitutional
step of liberating the slaves of rebels, and, in my judgment,
you adopt a policy in regard to slavery that looks to its not
creating any more danger.
Sir, there is great horror manifested on the part of some
gentlemen lest the cause of the slave should in some way be
identified with this war. Well, sir, if it does not become
identified with this war, it will be for the same reason that
Cataline rejected the slaves that crowded to enlist in his army :
it was " lest he should seem to identify their cause with that of
the citizens." The Cataline of this conspiracy, which has cul
minated in this rebellion, forces slaves into his army, while we
reject the slaves that would enlist in our army ; while we re
ject colored men, be they slayes or not, lest we should seem to
identify their cause — the cause of freedom — with that of the
citizens. It will be a blot on the page of the history of this
nation in ages to come, that though we fought for the preser
vation of our liberty, it was for our liberty, and not for the
liberty of humanity — a Catalinish fear controlled us, and we
lost the golden opportunity forever.
But the honorable gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Mal
lory,] who addressed the House this afternoon, asked gentle
men, what do you propose to do with the slaves if, in
accordance with your hopes and wishes, they are set free ? I
reply to that gentleman, we do not propose to do anything
with them. We propose to allow them to do for themselves.
We propose, in respect to them, to have it known that in no
State or Territory in this Union sliall they from henceforth be
regarded as goods and chattels, to all intents and purposes
whatsoever, We propose to let them know that every hus-

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 63
band may have his own wife, that every wife may have her
own husband ; that all parents may have their .own children ;
that they may earn wages, and receive and demand the wages,
if withheld, which their labor entitles them to receive ; that
they may have all the benefits accruing from living under the
administration of just laws, and that they may breathe God's
free air as white men breathe this air.
The honorable gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Richardson]
asserts that the negro race is greatly inferior to that of the
white man. Is he fearful that this inferior race will become
the superior if these disabilities are removed under which the
colored race in the United States has been crushed under the
heel of oppression ? " The white man shall rule in America,"
said a Senator in his place, " and the nigger never !" For one,
sir, I say, and I believe I express the feelings of my constituents,
at least, when I declare that there is no objection to the negro
having a fair chance in America ; and if he shows himself to
be the superior race, the more shame for us, and the more
praise for them for coming out at the head when we had placed
them, and designed to keep them, at the very foot of
civilization. Mr. Speaker, I am well aware that in making such quo
tations as I have from the speeches of Mr. Lincoln, I shall
subject myself to the suspicion of being an extremist, an abo
litionist. I cannot help it, however. I could not find so much
truth so well expressed in any other book at my command.
The high encomium which has been passed upon him onthis
floor, as " a far-seeing statesman and judicious President," will
not, I trust, be thought to be the less deserved by reason of
my thus making use of his wisdom, by any gentleman on this

64 SPEECHES.
side of the House ; I am sure it will not be by any gentleman
on the other side.
I know that the honorable member from Missouri [Mr. Rol
lins] will regard the course which I have taken, the views
which I have expressed, as affording additional evidence of the
perverted sense or nonsense to which is brought the man of
" one idea." But this will be my misfortune. Let me say,
however, there is no misfortune in having but " one idea," if it
be really a sound one, a live one, " and it be put to living uses
in the ages."
To show me my folly, in the course of his speech a few days
since, he read an extract from an interesting book, which he
cordially commended to the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Fes
senden,] and I believe to the gentleman from Illinois,
[Mr. Lovejoy,] and to those who acted with them. I am
obliged to the gentleman, and, I assure him that I have given
it the attention which it well deserved, both from its high
source and its approval by the gentleman himself, who seldom
fails to get at the meat of the nut which he can find an oppor
tunity to crack on the head of one whom he regards as an. ex
tremist. I will have the extract read. Its diction is so terse,
its comparison so admirable, and its logic so forcible, that I
cannot forego the pleasure.
The extract was read, as follows :
" Among the objects of interest very often, if not always, to be found at
the foot of dams and cataracts, are what are called ' pot holes.' They are
round holes worn in the solid rock by a single stone kept in motion by the
wate"r. Some of them are very large, and others are small. When the
stream becomes dry there they are, smooth as if turned ont by machinery,
and the hard round pebbles at the bottom by which the curious work was
done. Every year, as the dry season comes along, we find that these holes
have grown larger, and the pebbles smaller, ahd that no freshet has been

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 65
powerful enough to dislodge the pebbles and release the rock from its
attrition. " Now, if a man will turn from the contemplation of one of these ' pot
holes,' and the means by which it is made, and seek for that result and that
process in the world of mind which most resemble them, I am sure that he
will find them in a man of ' one idea.' In truth, these scenes that I have
been painting were all recalled to me by looking upon one of these men,
studying his character, and watching the effect of the ' single idea' by which
he was actuated. ' There,' said I, involuntarily, ' is a moral pot hole with
a pebble in it, an 1 the hole grows larger and the pebble smaller every
year.' "I suppose it is useless to undertake to reform men of ' one idea.' The
real trouble is that the pebble is in them, and whole freshets of truth are
poured upon them only with the effect to make it more lively in its grind
ing, and more certain in its process of wearing out itself and them. The
little man who, when ordered by his physician to take a quart of medicine,
informed him with a deprecatory whimper that he did not hold but a pint,
illustrates the capacity of many of those who are subjects of a ' single
idea.' They do not hold but one, and it would be useless to prescribe a
larger number. In a country like ours, in which everything is new, and
everybody is free, there are multitudes of self-constituted doctors, each of
whom has a nostrum for curing all physical and moral disorders and dis
eases — a patent process by which humanity may achieve its proudest pro
cess and its everlasting happiness. The country is full of hobby riders,
booted and spurred, who imagine they are leading a grand race to a golden
goal, forgetful of the truth that their steeds are tethered to a single idea,
around which they are revolving only to tread down the grass, and wind
themselves up, where they may stand at last amid the world's ridicule,
and be stoned to death."
Mr. Fessenden. As General Jackson is reported to have
said, that by the oath which he took to support tlie Constitu
tion of the United States, he swore to support it as he under
stood it ; so, I trust, the honorable gentleman will not insist
on my giving his construction and application to this extract,
but will let me give the construction and application that suits
me best.
On analyzing this extract, I find that " the moral pot hole"
is intended to represent the mind of the man of the " single
idea ;" the " pebble" the " single idea." The " single idea"
grows smaller and the mind grows larger evei'y year. Now,

66

SPEECHES.

look at this. The pot hole is worn iu the solid rock by a
single pebble kept in motion by the water. Day after day
the water falls incessantly on the pebble, and the pebble
strikes persistently on the one place on the rock, until at length
the indentation is made ; attrition begins and continues until
into that solid rock the pebble makes its way, and does tho
very work and service the God of nature appointed it to do.
How exceedingly apt an illustration have we here of the
mighty power there is in a single idea, if there be in it a grain
of truth even, much more if it is all truth, well and persistently
used to extirpate the evil it is designed to reach. I suggest to
the gentleman that influence, as a power, does not consfst so
much in the number of ideas which a man has, as it does from
the nature of the ideas themselves. The one idea of one man
may be of vastly more power and vastly greater influence than
the twenty ideas of another man, and by it a vast deal more of
evil or good may be effected. How was it with Ignatius
Loyola, who planted himself in his institute of Jesuitism in
the heart of the Catholic Church, permeated that whole vast
body, and influenced the counsels, the legislation, tlie acts of
the civilized world ? The learned Isaac Taylor says of him :
•' It was the task of Loyola to forge upon many hundred minds the idea
of the society; and in the execution of this task, far more than in the com
pilation of its code, he displayed a power and a unity of purpoS3 surpassed
by few of the achievements of either philosophers or legislators.''
Richard Chevenix Trench, who is thought to be one of the
profonndest and most learned thinkers of this or any age,
says :
"Certainly there is nothing in the study of the past which fills one.whh
more awe and wonder than the infinite significance of a single man."

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 67
True, the history of the world shows how great events,
whole epochs, have hung or hinged upon some single man —
some Luther or Cromwell. Sir, I will be bound to say, it
was one ideaism which made these men infinite. It was a
single but comprehensive masterly idea, using these men as
levers that moved the masses, moved the world, moved the
ages, and is moving us to-day, carrying us onward, straight on
ward, over every obstacle to the temple of liberty, the doors of
which " thinking bayonets" will now throw wide open, and
keep open until the men of this country, o£ whatever color or
language — it matters not — shall enter in. It is to the temple
of liberty— r- " Men of thought— men of action-
Clear the way !''
But, Mr. Speaker, wide apart as the gentleman and myself
may be on the question at issue, I think he will admit that it
does require the unity and concentration of a single idea to
bore the bony shells in which the minds of some men are en
cased. And many are the instances, alas ! when you have
reached these minds that you have your labor only for your pains,
for you find there no " moral pot hole" in which to lodge the
smallest pebble of truth ; but the hole is quite the reverse of mo
ral, in which the truth falls as a pebble dropped into the Dead
Sea, where all is dead, and where there is so much corruption
that nothing remains to you but despairful forebodings.
In this national crisis, what we want is " that rare courage
which dares commit itself to principle, believing that nature is
its ally and will create the instruments which it requires, and
more than make good any petty and injurious profit which it
may disturb." The salvation of the country depends upon its

68 SPEECHES.
having this want supplied. Such courage here would give to
the people what they ask for — a confiscation and liberation
bill. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I take this opportunity to re
mark that, since I have been upon the floor of this House, I
have observed that there is no better abused class of men than
tlie abolitionists. I take occasion to say that, in the extracts
which I have read this evening from the speeches of Abraham
Lincoln, we have abolitionism as I understand it.
Mr. Wickliffe.. Does the gentleman charge the President
with being an abolitionist ?
Mr. Fessenden. Do I charge him with being an abolition
ist ? I charge him with the abolitionism avowed by the sen
timents which he has uttered, and which utterances I have
read to-night ; and I declare them to be sufficient abolitionism
for me. When gentlemen on the other side of the house
charge me with beiDg an abolitionist, I wish them to under
stand that I am no more of an abolitionist than Abraham Lin
coln's sentiments in the matter of slavery sustain me in being.
If he is an abolitionist by uttering these sentiments, then so
am I.
I say, sir, such were the abolition sentiments which were
uttered as- long ago as 1835, and from those sentiments the
abolitionists have never departed, except those who are called
Garrison abolitionists. Time will not permit me to substan
tiate the truth of this remark by reading the paper I have be
fore me, and which I expect to put into ray speech. And such
is the abolitionism which I would thank gentlemen to charge
me with when they state that I am an unconstitutional
abolitionist.

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY. 69
TO the public.
Iu behalf of the American Anti-Slavery Society, we solicit the candid
attention of the public to the following declaration of our principles and
objects. Were the charges which are brought against us made only by
individuals who are interested in the continuance of slavery, and by such
as are influenced solely by unworthy motives, this address would be unne
cessary ; but there are those who merit and possess our esteem, who would
not voluntarily do us injustice, and who have been led by gross misrepre
sentations to believe that we are pursuing measures at variance not only
with the constitutional rights of the South, but with the precepts of hu
manity and religion. To such we offer the following explanations and
assurances :
1. We hold that Congress his no more right to abolish slavery in the
Southern States than ia the French West India Islands. Of course, wo
desire no national legislation on the subject.
2. We hold that slavery can only be lawfully abolished by the Legisla
tures of the several States in which it prevails, and that the exercise of
any other than moral influence to induce such abolition is unconstitutional.
3. We believe that Congress has the same right to abolish slavery in the
liistiict of Columbia that the State Governments have within their respec
tive jurisdictions, and that it is their duty to efface so foul a blot from the
national escutcheon. *
4. We believe that American citizens have the right to express and
publish their opinions of the constitution, laws, and institutions of any and
every State and nation under heaven ; and we mean never to surrender the
liberty of speech, of the press, or of conscience, blessings we have in
herited from our fathers, and which we intend, so far as we are able, to
transmit unimpaired to our children.
5. We have uniformly deprecated all forcible attempts on the part of
the slaves to recover their liberty. And were it in our power to address
them, we would exhort them to observe a quiet and peaceful demeanor,
and would assure them that no insurrectionary movement on their part
would receive from us the slightest aid or countenance.
G. We would deplore any servile insurrection, both on account of the
calamities which would attend it, and on account of the occasion which
it might furnish of increased severity and oppression.
7. We are charged with sending incendiary publications to the South.
If by the term incendiary is meant publications coutaining arguments and
facts to prove slavery to be a moral and political evil, and that duty and
policy require its- immediate abolition, the charge is true. But if this term
is used to imply publications encouraging insurrection, and designed to
excite the slaves to break their fetters, the charge is utterly and unequivo
cally falsa. We beg our fellow-citizens to notice that this charge is made
without proof, and by many who confess tint they have never read our

70 SPEECHES.
publications, anl that those who make it offer to the public no evidence
from our writings in support of it.
8. We are accused of sending our publications to the slaves, and it is
a3ssrted that their tendency is to excite insurrection. Both the charges
are false. These publications are not intended for the slaves, and were
they able to read them they would find in them no encouragemeutto in
surrection. 9. We are accused of employing agents in the slave States to distribute
our publications. We have never had one such agent. We have sent no
packiges of our papers to auy person in those States for distribution, ex
cept to five respectable resident citizens at their own request. But we
have sent by mail single papers addressed to public officers, editors of
newspapers, clergymen, and others. If, therefore, our object is to excite
the slaves to insurrection, the masters are our agents ! '
10. We believe slavery to be sinful, to be injurious to this and to every
other country in which it prevails; we believe immediate emancipation to
be the duty of every slaveholder, and that the immediate abolition of sla
very by those who have the right to abolish it wovrld be safe and wise.
These opinions we have freely expressed, and we certainly have no inten
tion to refrain from expressing them in future, and urging them upon the
consciences and hearts of our fellow- citizens who hold slaves or apologize
for slavery.
11. We believe that the education of the poor is required by duty, and
by a regard for the permanency of our republican institutions. There are
thousands and tens of thousands of our fellow-citizens, even in the free
States, sunk in abject poverty, and who, on account of their complexion,
are virtually kept in ignorance, and whose instruction in certain cases ia
actually prohibited by law ! We are anxious to protect the rights an 1 to
promote the virtue and happiness of the colored portion of our population,
and on this account we have been charged with a design to encourage in
termarriages between the whites and blacks. This charge has been re
peatedly, and is now again denied ; while we repeat that the tendency of
our sentiments is to put an end to the criminal amalgamation that prevails
wherever slavery exists.
12. We are accused of acts that tend to a dissolution of the Union, and
even of wishing to dissolve it. We have never " calculated the value of
the Union," because we believe it to be inestimable, and that the abolition
of slavery will remove the chief danger of its dissolution ; and one of the
many reasons why we cherish and will endeavor to preserve the Constitu
tion is, that it restrains Congress from making any law " abridging the
freedom of speech or of the press.' '
Such, fillow-citizens, are our principles. Are they unworthy of Repub
licans and of Christians ? Or 'are they iu truth so atrocious, that iu order
to prevent their diffusion, you are yourselves willing to surrender at the
dictation cf others, the invaluable privilege of free discussion, the very

CONFISCATION OF REBEL PROPERTY.. 71
birthright of Americans ? Will you, in order that the abominations of sla
very may be c mcealed from public view, and that the Capital of your Re
public may continue to be, as it now is. under the sanction of Congress, the
great slave mart of the American continent, consent that the General
Government, in acknowledged defiance of the Constitution and laws, shall
appoint throughout the length and breadth of your land ten thousand cen
sors of the press, each of whom shall have the right tb inspect every docu
ment you may commit to the post-office, and to suppress every pamphlet
an! newspaper, whether religious or political, which, in his sovereign
pleasure, he may adjudge to contain an incendiary article? Surely we
need not remind you that, if you submit to such an encroachment on" your
liberties the days of our Republic are numbered, and that although abolition
ists may be the first, they will not-be the last victims offered at the shrine
of arbitrary power. ARTHUR TAPPAN, President.
JOHN RANKIN, Treasurer.
WILLIAM JAY,
Secretary Foreign Correspondence.
EL1ZUR WRIGHT, Jk.,
Secretary Domestic Correspondence.
ABRAHAM L. COX, M. I).,
Recording Secretary.
LEWIS TAPPAN,
JOSHUA A. LEAVITT,
SAMUEL E. CORNISH,
SIMEON S. JOCELYN,
THEODORE S. WRIGHT,
Members of the Executive Committee.
New York, September 3, 183.3.

All honor to those noble men and their compeers, William
Lloyd Garrison not excepted, who more than a quarter of a
century since had the Pauline boldness not to take counsel of
men, but of truth, and who in their property and persons took
the consequences in the outrages to which they were subjected
for the sake of the poor slave and the rights of American citi
zens, white men as well. They have lived to see that " he who
has God on his side, is always in the majority." We learned
the lessons at their feet, and from their success to rely upon

72

SPEECHES

the merits of our cause and upon God, who to tlie right will
give the victory.
I hope that the bills now under consideration will be passed
by the Thirty-Seventh Congress.

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS.

Tlvirty-Seventl\ Congress, Jur\e 3d, 1862.

The Bill authorizing the establishment of Diplomatic
relations with Hayti and Liberia being under con
sideration, Mr. Fessenden made, the following re
marks thereon :
Mr. Speaker — The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Gooch]
in support of the bill for the appointment of diplomatic repre
sentatives to the republics of Hayti and Liberia, urged the.
measure as a matter of justice and expediency. In the course
of his remarks, he adduced some statistics to show the com
mercial standing and importance of these countries, and that
the commercial relations of the United States would be benefited
by the appointment of such representatives.
The friends of this bill could not reasonably expect that it
would pass without opposition. They had reason to expect,
however, that the opposition, from whatever quarter it might
come, would be that of an analysis and review, and a refute
tion, if possible, of the cogent arguments by which the gentle.
man from Massachusetts [Mr. Gooch] supported his bill.

74 SPEECHES.
I was expecting such a review when the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Cox] took the floor, and which, though it might
fail to convince, would afford additional evidence of the com
prehensive and statesmanlike views of the honorable gentleman,
of his liberal culture, and genuine patriotism. But I have to
confess I was exceedingly disappointed. He had not been ten
nor more than five minutes in his speech before, by reason of a
question put by myself, in all good faith, because I wanted
light and thought he might be able to give it, his ruling passion
took possession of him, and his intense disgust for anything that
looks negroward, carried him into that fanatical strain of
remark into which he is sure to be carried whenever the shadow
of a black man crosses his path.
The gentleman from Massachusetts had said that he wished
to put Hayti on the same footing as other independent nations ;
and if that republic should send a minister, we should receive
him just the same as England and Prance do. The gentleman
from Ohio replied that she would send negro ministers here,
with all the rights and dignities enjoyed by Lord Lyons and
Count Mercier ; and I asked the gentleman what objection
there was to that. To this question the gentleman replied,
with a good degree of feeling, and very emphatically : " What
objection 1 why, does the gentleman want to introduce black
ministers into the White House ? I object to it. I am
opposed to this step towards putting the negro on an equality
with the white man." And he said he believed that this
attempt to have Hayti and Liberia recognized, had its origin in
the fact that they were nations of black men, and in the desire
of abolitionists to aid in tlie emancipation of the slaves through
the recognition ofthe independence of, these countries..

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS. 75
Now, I repeat the question, what objection is there to these
countries sending to the United States such ministers as they
please, and to our receiving them as we are bound by the
comity of nations to receive them ? Hayti and Liberia will
expect this if their independence is acknowledged. They have
not as yet reached that national dignity to which they should „
attain before they are made the recipients of this acknowledg
ment, if they expect or consent to take anything less. But
is it the opinion of the gentleman from Ohio that no man can
be found in all nayti or Liberia of sufficient intelligence and
refinement and wisdom to discharge the duties of an embas
sador ? If it is, I think the gentleman needs light. Hayti
has its literary institute ; Liberia its college, of no mean repu
tation. The chief magistrate of Liberia, and the judge of its
supreme court, are said to be, by gentlemen who are well
informed on this point, men of intelligence, of literary arid pro
fessional acquirements, in no ordinary degree. There is in one
of the British West India Islands a black man who was
liberally educated in England, a man of the first order of intel
ligence, aud of honor and wealth. I refer to Hon. Samuel J.
Prescod, of Barbadoes,' of whom Dr. Lloyd observes, in his
Letters from the West Indies : " We thought we had never
met with more intelligence and refinement." And it is by no
means a sure thing, as the gentleman from Ohio assumes it to
be, that Hayti and Liberia cannot furnish men of this stamp.
And would it be derogatory to this country, at home or abroad,
to receive such men from these countries as their embassadors —
such men as Damier, who is at St. James, and L'Espinage, who
is a man of color, at Paris ? I do not know that the gentle
man would-be obliged to choose them for his company.

76 SPEECHES.
Mr. Cox. I understand the gentleman, then, to say that he
would be willing to receive any one, without regard to color,
who might be sent as minister to this country.
Mr. Fessenden. Yes, sir ; any one who may be sent by a
Government with whom we have diplomatic relations.
Mr. Cox. I ask the gentleman whether, upon the same
principle, he would allow the Sublime Porte to send here a
Turk, with a harem of a hundred wives, if he chose to send him
here accompanied with that domestic institution ?
Mr. Fessenden. I am, perhaps, not as well posted as the
gentleman from Ohio as to what the law of nations would re-
• quire in the case to which he refers. My opinion, however, is,
that we are bound to receive such embassadors from the
nations with which we maintain diplomatic relations as they
may see fit to send. This is in accordance with the comity of
nations, as I understand it.
Prejudice in favor of the colored mail and emancipation is it,
that leads any of us to desire to do a simple act of justice by
these nations with a national claim for the recognition of their
independence, which France, England, Italy, Spain, Holland,
Prussia, Russia, Austria, and various lesser Powers, have long
since acknowledged 1 Sir, if the gentleman would rid himself
of his prejudice against the colored man, and his groundless fear
of abolitionism, I think he would be found on the side of justice
in behalf of these nations. Yes, sir ; and he would admit that
he has either seen or heard of men, black men, in his day, of
sufficient knowledge and refinement to be fit representatives in
any Court, and to be received into society of the highest rank,
from which prejudice against color, if it excludes them, is pre
judice against civilization and humanity, and the " God who

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS. 77
made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on all the face
of the earth."
Sir, the whole argument of the gentleman centered in this :
Hayti and Liberia are not to be acknowledged — no matter
what reasons may be given to the contrary — because, if other
wise, we shall see black embassadors in Washington.
In my opinion, the speech of the gentleman was unworthy
of his head and heart. I hope and believe that the House will
pass this bill.

RESOLUTIONS,

Ir\ tl\e House of Representatives, Dec. 15, 1862.

Mr. Fessenden offered the following Resolutions,
which were passed — yeas, 78 / nays, 51 :
Resolved, That the Proclamation of the Presideat of the
United States, of the date of 22d September, 1862, is warranted
by the Constitution.
Resolved, That the policy of Emancipation, as indicated in that
proclamation, is well adapted to hasten the restoration of peace,
was well chosen as a war measure, and is an exercise of power
with proper regard for the rights of the States, and the perpe
tuity of free government.
Mr. Holman. I move that the Resolutions be laid on the
table, and on that motion I call for the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken ; and it was decided in the negative
—yeas 53, nays 81 ; as follows :
Yeas — Messrs. William J. Allen, Ancona, Baily, Biddle, William G.
BrowD, Calvert, Cobb, Cox, Cravens, Crisfield, Crittenden, Delaplaine,
Dunlap, English, Fouke, Granger, Grider, Hall, Harding, Harrison, Hol
man, Kerrigan, Knapp, Law, Leary, Mallory, Maynard, Menzies, Morris,
.Noble, Norton, Odell, Pendleton, Price, Richardson, Robinson, James S.
Rollins, Sheffield, Shiei, Smith, John B. Steele, Stiles, Benjamin P. Thomas,

RESOLUTIONS. 79
Francis Thomas, Vallandigham, Wadsworth, Ward, Whaley, Chilton A.
White, Wickliffe, Woodruff, Wright, and Yeanian— 53.
Nays — Messrs. Aldrich, Alley, Arnold, Babbitt, Baker, Beaman, Bing
ham, Samuel S. Blair, Blake, Bufflnton, Burnham, Chamberlain, Clark,
Colfax, Frederick A. Conkling, Roscoe Conklinjr, Cutler, Dawes, Delano,
Deleplaine, Duell, Dunn, Edgerton, Edwards, Fenton, Samuel C. Fessen
den, Thomas A. D. Fessenden, Fisher, Franchot, Frank, Gooch, Goodwin,
Gurley, Haight, Hickman, Hutchins, Julian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg,
William Kellogg, Killinger, Lansing, Loomis, Lovejoy, Low, McPherson,
Moorhead, Anson P. Morrill, Nixon, Noell, Patton, Pike, Pomeroy, Porter,
Potter, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Riddle, Edward H. Rollins,
Sargent, Shanks, Shellabarger, Sloan, Spau'ding, Stevens, Stratton,
Train, Trimble, Trowbridge, Van Horn, Van Valkenburgh, Van Wyck,
Verree, Walker, Wall, Wallace, Washburne, Albert S. White, Wilson,
Windom, and Worcester— 81.
So the House refused to lay the resolutions on the table.
The question then recurred on seconding the demand for the
previous question.
The previous question was seconded ; and the main question
ordered. Mr. Holman demanded the yeas and nays on the adoption of
the resolutions.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken ; and it was decided iu the affirm
ative — yeas 78, nays 51 ; as follows :
Yeas — Messrs. Aldrich, Alley, Arnold, Babbitt, Baker, Beaman, Bigkam,
Samuel S. Blair, Blake, Bufflnton, Burnham, Chamberlain, Clark, Colfax,
Frederick A. Conkling, Roscoe Conkling, Cutler, Dawes, Delano, Duell,
Edgerton, Edwards, Eliot, Ely, Fenton, Samuel C. Fessenden, Thomas A.
D. Fessenden, Fisher, Franchot, Frank, Goocli, Goodwin, Gurley, Haight,
Hickman, Hooper, Hutchins, Julian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, William
Kellogg, Killinger, Lansing, Loomis, Lovejoy, Low, McPherson, Mitchell,
Moorhead, Anson P. Morrill, Justin S. Morrill, Noell, Patton, Pike, Pome
roy, Porter, Potter, Alexander H. Rice, lohn H. Rice, Riddle, Edward H.
Rollins, Sargent, Sedgwick, Shellabarger, Sloan, Spaulding, Train, Trow
bridge, Van Valkenburgh, Van Wyck, Verree, Walker, Wall, Washburne,
Albert S. White, Wilson, Windom, aud Worcester — 78.
Nays — Messrs. William J. Allen, Ancona, Bailey, Biddle. Calvert, Cobb,
Cox, Cravens, Crisfield, Crittenden, Dunlap, English, Fouke, Granger,

80 RESOLUTIONS.
Grider, Hall, Harding, Harrison, Holman, Kerrigan, Knapp, Leary, Mallory,
Maynard, Menzies, Morris, Noble, Norton, Odell, Pendleton, Perry, Price,
Richardson, Robinson, James S. Rollins, Sheffield, Shiel, Smith, John B.
Steele, Stiles, Benjamin F. Thomas, Francis Thomas, Vallandigham, Wafis-
worth, Ward, Whaley, Chilton A. White, Wickliffe, Woodruff, Wright, and
Yeaman— 51.
• So the resolutions were adopted.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden moved to re-consider the vote by which
the resolutions were adopted ; and also moved that the motion
to re-consider be laid upon the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES.

THIRD SESSION OF THE THIRTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS.

Ir\ tl\e House of J^epresei\tatives, Jar\. 5, 1863.

The Speaker having stated the first business in order to
be on the passage of the House Bill No. 582, to An
nul and Abrogate all Treaties between the United
States and certain bands of Sioux Indians, on which
the yeas and nays had been ordered, Mr. Fessenden
was recognized by the Speaker, and said :
Me. Speaker — I am not prepared to vote for the bill now
before the House for its consideration ; not because I do not
concur with the honorable gentleman froni Minnesota [Mr.
Windom] that there has been one of the most terrible and de
structive Indian outbreaks ever known on this continent, for
which these guilty tribes should be held strictly accountable
and be visited with the penalty of the violated laws ; not be
cause I do not concur with him that every treaty stipulation on
their part has been violated ; nor because I am not in favor of

82 SPKKCIIKS.
having the Government take immediate steps Jbr indemnifying
those who have suffered from these depredations.
But the questions which suggest themselves to me are : is
it expedient to take this trust fund and appropriate it at this
time in the manner proposed ? and is the object which this
bill has in view sufficiently comprehensive to meet the exigen
cies of the case ? The United States hold in trust for these
Indians an aggregate sum of $3,301,000, on which they re
ceive interest at the rate of five per cent, per annum. It is
proposed to appropriate the sum of $1,500,000 from the
Treasury of the United States, out of any money not other
wise appropriated, for the purpose of indemnifying persons who
have suffered damages from the depredations committed by
these Indians ; the said sum, when so taken, to be charged to
and be a, pro tanto extinguishment of the trust fund of said In
dians held by the United States pursuant to the treaties of the
United States with said Indians. In considering the expedi
ency of this appropriation, it seems to be eminently wise to
search for the proximate, if not the remote, cause of this ter
rible Indian outbreak. What occasioned it ? The Secretary
of the Interior, iu his report, referring to -the causes of the
onslaught, says :
" Many of the Indians were dissatisfied with the treaties by which they
had agreed to part with their lands. They complained that they had been
deprived of their hunting grounds and the means of subsistence. They
also complain of alleged frauds on the part of Indian agents and traders,
some of which may have been well founded, but many were doubtless
groundless. These complaints were aggravated and increased by in
sidious and false representations made by traderswhose licenses had been
revoked, and who were smarting under the deprivation of the profits they
had been accustomed to make from their traffic with the Indians. These
causes combined had for some time tended to produce a spirit of discontent
and insubordination in the Indians."

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES. 83
The report further says :
" The causes of the Indian hostilities in Minnesota have been a subject
of much discussion. After a carefnl examination of all the data which the
Indian Bureau has been able to obtain, bearing upon the causes which pro
duced the immediate outbreak, I am satisfied that the chief cause is to be
found in the insnrrection of the Southern States."
I wish that the honorable Secretary had been somewhat more
specific on this point. I wish he had told us why " the Indians were
dissatisfied with the treaties by which they had agreed to part
with their lands/' and whether they had any ground for the
complaint " that they had been deprived of the means of sub
sistence." And since he has told us that " they complained of
alleged frauds on the part of Indian agents and traders, some
of which may have been well founded, but many were doubtless
groundless," I wish that, if possible, he had told us, likewise,
what, in his judgment, were some of the many frauds which
were groundless, and some, at least, of the frauds which were
well founded, and of which they had reason to complain ; and
further, whether at the doors of Indian agents and traders
alone these frauds were to be laid down as something for which
they are responsible, or whether some of them could not be
traced to this Government, and for which it ought to be and
will be held accountable by a tribunal which holds the scales of
justice with an even balance. Let me read an extract from a
statement made by the Bishop of Minnesota — Bishop Whip
ple — which will go to show in part the proximate cause of that
massacre which has carried sorrow and death into the many
families that were overtaken by it. And, I take it, there is no
question as to the truthfulness of this statement :
. " Four years, ago the Sioux sold the Government about eight hundred
thousand acres of land, being a part of their reservation. The plea for

84 SPEECHES.
this sale was the need of more funds to aid them in civilization. This treaty
provided that the chiefs should return home and hold an open council to
decide what should be done with the money. Three of the principal chiefs
— the ones most deserving of credit — allege that they were not present at
such council, and did not know that it had been held. Of $96,000 due to
the Lower Sioux they have never received a cent.
" All has been absorbed in claims except $880,58, which is to their credit
on the books in Washington. Of the portion belonging .to the Upper
Sionx, $88,351.62 was also taken for claims. Of the large balance due the
Upper Sioux, neither the agent nor the Indians knew when or how it was
to be paid. For two years the Indians have demanded to know what has
become of their money, and again and again they have threatened revenge
unless they were satisfied.
" Early this last spring the traders informed the Indians that the next
payment would only be half of the usual amount, because the Indian debts
had been paid at Washington. They were in some instances refused credit
on this account. It caused deep and wide-spread discontent. The agent
was alarmed, and as early as May he wrote to me that this new fraud must
bring a harvest of sorrow, saying, ' God only knows what will be the re
sult.' In June, at the time fixed by past custom, they came together for
the payment. The agent could give no satisfactory reason for the delay.
There was none. The Indians waited at the agencies two months, dissatis
fied, turbulent, mad, hungry, and then came the outbreak — a tale of horrors
enough to curdle one's blood. The money reached Fort Ridgely the day
after the outbreak. A part of the annuity had been taken for claims, and
at the eleventh hour, as the warrant on the Treasury shows, it was made
up from other funds to save an Indian war. It was too late."
Ninety-six thousand dollars due the Lower Sioux of which
they had not received one cent ! Eighty-eight thousand three
hundred and fifty-one dollars and sixty-two cents taken for
claims, of the portion belonging to the Upper Sioux, and the
balance remaining unpaid ! When the day for the payment of
these Indians arrived, the agent had no funds to pay them, aud
could give no satisfactory reason for the delay. By fraud
somewhere, these Indians have had money withheld from them
which was justly their due. Was it by the frauds of Indian
agents and traders alone, or had Hole-in-the-Day reason for
saying to Commissioner Dole, " the Government has swindled
my people out of their due for years."

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES. 85
I do not think the causes of the Indian hostilities in Minne
sota need have been a subject of much discussion, as though
they were hard to be ascertained. I am of the opinion that a
slight examination even of a portion of the data which the Indian
Bureau might have obtained within its own archives would
satisfy the country that the proximate, if not the chief cause of
this outbreak, is to be found, not in the insurrection of the
Southern States, but in the fact that the Government withheld
from the Indians the money which by treaty it was bound to
pay at the time and place of agreement ; while at the same
time it permitted this money to be absorbed and consumed by
claims of Indian agents and traders, and claims of Government,
thus annihilating the funds which they hoped to realize from
the sale of a part of their reservation. It was no just cause for
these hostilities, we all admit. We maintain, and justly so,
that nothing which this Government has done, or has failed to
do, can for a moment be urged in justification of such bloody
and barbarous steps as were taken by these Indians.
But here is the proximate cause. And now it is proposed
to appropriate a portion of their trust fund for the relief of the
sufferers. True, by the terms of the treaty we have a right to
do this — that is to say, if this Government was not the first to
be guilty of an infraction of .the treaty. But is this expedient
at this time, and under existing circumstances ?
At this time, when these Indians are smarting under that
consciousness of injury which maddened them for these mur
derous deeds, and before any judicial examination has been
instituted by which the facts can be ascertained and some ap
proximation made as to the measure of guilt which belongs to
each tribe, is it expedient to bring to bear the penalty upon

86 SPEECHES.
every tribe alike by transferring the payment of this fund from
these Indians — who have, it may be, forfeited all claims to it—
to the sufferers from their depredations ? I ask this question,
not with reference to the welfare of these Indians, but with re
ference to the welfare of those to whom this bill would afford
relief — who have suffered already beyond expression, and who
must suffer still more if 'there is another outbreak of these
savages. The measures proposed by this bill will deprive them of that
fund, or a large portion of it, on which they are greatly de
pendent for their means of support ; it will turn them adrift to
do for themselves as they best can, with the hand of every
white man against them, and their scalping knives against every
white mam There is reason to fear that this will be the result.
Let it be remembered that " these Indians have it in their
power to break up all the white settlements and depopulate an
extensive region of country, unless a large military force shall
be kept there." And it is just now problematical whether this
Government can send at once a military force sufficiently large
and effective to cope successfully with the Sioux Indians, con
nected as they are with kindred tribes, extending from the Mis
sissippi river, and bordering upon the British possessions to the
Rocky Mountains.
The various tribes united can bring into the field ten thou
sand warriors. They are supplied with arms and ammunition
to a considerable extent. They have it in their power to inflict
upon the white settlements throughout that whole region great
injury. Their proximity to the British possessions would en
able them to escape pursuit by crossing the line, where our
troops could not follow them. Let it not be said that I am

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES. 87
opposed to granting these sufferers immediate relief. By no
manner of means is this the case. But my point is that, under
existing circumstances, there is reason to fear that the measure
proposed will not give them the relief which they have the
right to demand, but, on the other hand, that it will augment
their difficulties, and the more expose and subject them to In
dian hostilities.
But is the object which this bill has in view sufficiently com
prehensive to meet the exigencies of the case ? This bill
provides for indemnifying the sufferers by reason of these depre
dations. It is for their relief. Can there be any such relief
afforded as the exigencies of the case demand which does not
include their protection, and the protection of all the citizens
of Minnesota from such horrible Indian massacres in time to
come ? Says the Secretary of the Interior :
" The people of Minnesota ask not only indemity for the destruction of
their property, but they insist upon guarantees of future protection. This,
they think, can be obtained only by the removal of the Indians to some
point so remote from the settlements as to preclude the possibility of
another attack. No promises of forbearance and future good conduct on
the part of the Indians can allay their fears. It is apparent, that while
they remain in the vicinity of the settlements they have desolated, those
settlements cannot be re-peopled. The treachery and cruelty of the recent
attack upon a confiding and unsuspecting people , involving helpless women
and children'jin indiscriminate slaughter, forbid the indulgence of con
fidence in the future."
" Guarantees of future protection." They have a right to
ask this. To ask it, did I say ? To demand it of this Gov
ernment in any bill which Congress shall pass. A bill, the
object of which is less comprehensive, cannot meet the urgent
necessities of their case. But this bill gives no '' guarantees of
future protection."
Further. The object which this bill should have in view, in*-

88 SPEECHES.
order to meet the exigencies of the case, as it seems to me, is
not only the relief and protection of the people of Minne
sota, but the relief and protection of the Indians upon their
borders ;-and for this reason, if there were no other : it would
go very far toward effecting for the people of Minnesota that
which it is so desirable to see accomplished — the relief of these
Indians by providing for an equitable adjustment of their exist
ing grievances ; their protection, as far as possible, from the
dishonesties of unscrupulous men. •
TBe Right Reverend Bishop Whipple, whose residence is
near the scene of disaster, has told us, that " the outrage was
owing to a system which leaves the Indian without protection
of law and subject to the dishonesties of unscrupulous men ;"
and that " the only being in America who has no law to pun
ish the guilty or protect the innocent is the treaty Indian."
From the memorial to the President of the United States,
adopted at a meeting recently held in Cooper Institute, in the
city of New York, I read as follows :
" Your memorialists respectfully represent that credible testimony
sanctions the belief that, with fair treatment on the part of the agents,
there would be no difficulty with the Indians, and that the late tragedy in
Minnesota was owing to the intense exasperation to which they were
driven by the frauds and robberies of unscrupulous men, against whom
they had no protection.' '
Mr. Speaker, there is no disguising the fact that citizens,
editors, legislators, heads of Departments, and the President
himself, alike agree that the Indian Department has, to a
lamentable and shocking extent, been characterized by inefi-
ciency and fraud. Government employ6s, with a few noble
exceptions, have been notorious for profanity, debauchery, and
dishonesty ; school and civilization funds have been wasted ;

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES. 89
contracts for supplies conceived in fraud ; and even dead
men's names placed on the pay-rolls. The office of Indian
Agent has been made an office of reward for political service
only. A shame it is, and shame upon the Congress that will
longer tolerate the wrong without an effort to apply the re
medy. This office of Indian agent has been sought and given
to men, not because it was one of the noblest trusts ever com
mitted to any man, to try and redeem the Indians by leading
them to the light of Christiau civilization, but because upon a
pittance of a salary a fortune could'be realized in four years.
The Indians have given to our Government by treaty the
largest and best portion of their lands, on condition of their
receiving its protection, with the means of self-sustainment by
the arts of civilization ; but this protection — these means — the
Government has failed to give them. Indubitable facts bear
me out in this declaration.
I make the assertion, therefore — it is made and stands as
the ground of truth, justice, and equity— =-t'iat thsse Indians
have a right to relief and protection. The honorable Secre
tary of the Interior, in his report, has forcibly said :
' ' The duty of the Government lo protect the Indians, and prevent their
suffering for the want of tho necessaries of life, should be fully recognized.
They should be taught to earn their subsistence by labor, and be instructed
in the cultivation of the soil. The Government should designate the place
where they shall reside, and afford them protection in the lands which are
assigned to them for a home, and furnished them with such aid as, with the
fruits of their own labor, will afford them an adequate support. They
should'be taught to rely on the cultivation of the soil for subsistence, and
that they can become independent on'y through their own industry."
He should have added, when the Government shall have
performed this duty, it.will have fulfilled a promise long since
made to the Indians, and to this hour disregarded, " that their

90 SPEECHES.
homes should be secured to them by a patent ;" no patent has
ever, as yet, been issued. I believe that, should the Indians
receive this relief and protection to which they are entitled,
and, at the same time, the Government make ample provision
to meet the necessities of those persons who have suffered from
Indian hostilities — not, however, by taking a portion of the
trust-fund for this purpose, for there can be devised a better
way — it would be found the best method of giving to the
people of Minnesota that relief and security which the exigen
cies of the case demand.
But this is no part of the object of this bill. It is not,
therefore, in .my judgment, sufficiently comprehensive. I can
not concur with gentlemen who are of the opinion that gua
rantees of future protection can be obtained only by the removal
of the Indians to some point so remote from the settlements as
to preclude the possibility of another attack.
Let their removal be ever so remote from the borders of the
States where they are now to be found, civilization and
Christianity alone are the mighty enginery of God, by which
their fierce spirits can be controlled, and their heaits molded
to " the humanities of life."
I have thus briefly adverted to the principal reasons by
which I am constrained to vote against this bill. After all, I
must grant there is but little ground of hope for the future of
the aborigines of what wo claim as our domain. They are
destined to extermination. As " onward the course of empire
takes its way," onward they will be driven, despoiled of all
their lands, until at last they can be driven nowhere beyond,
for a beyond for them on this continent will nowhere exist.
Then will come their hist contest and their last defeat ; and

ANNULMENT OF INDIAN TREATIES. 91
they will fall into the arms of our common mother earth, from
which no lusting of this nation for acres and empire can ever
wrest them. Thus our national domain will be extended. But
there is a hereafter, from whose reckoning no nation can escape ;
and puras Deus, non plenas, ad spicit manus.

BANKRUPT LAW.

THIRTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS.

Ii\ tl\e House of Representatives, Feb. 4, 1863.

On the Bill to establish a Uniform System of Bank.
ruptcy throughout the United States, Mr. Fessenden
said :
Mr. Speaker — The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts
[Mr. Thomas,] in his remarks upon this bill a few days since,
said that he thought this measure of a bankrupt law one of the
most important subjects on which we are to act during the
present session. Be this as it may, one thing is certain ; the
petitioners to this Congress were so numerous and so respectable,
and the subject was deemed of so grave importance, that it
was thought best by this body to refer it to a special commit
tee, and the result has been, thus far, the bill now before the
¦ House. This subject has, likewise, engaged the attention of the
Senate, and there is now pending in that body a bill for the

BANKRUPT LAW. 93
establishment of a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the
United States.
Iu the brief remarks which I have to make, I do not propose
to discuss the merits of the bill now upon your table. I feel
my inability to do so. I have no experience iu mercantile
business, and if, as some assert, a bankrupt law is one to be
treated of by practical men only, I ought not to venture on the
subject. Still, it has its principles, and the principles of the
subject belong to all men. Truths are important as a basis,
and without them, either as a point to start from or towards*
which to go, experience is of little account. In the course of
the remarks of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Roscoe
Conkling,] as well as of the remarks of my friend from Massa
chusetts, [Mr. Thomas,] allusion was made to the bankrupt
law of 1841. There are several points to which I wish to
advert in speaking of this law. It was repealed during the
Congress by which it was enacted, and it has been alleged that
the fact of its repeal and that there has been no uniform bank
rupt law upon our statute-books since the time of its repeal,
goes to show that the operation of the law was far from being
salutary ; that the people called for its repeal, and that no in
terests of debtor or creditor in this country require a bank
rupt law.
Now, how is this ? How are we to ascertain the facts in
this regard ? For, I admit, if what is here alleged is true,
then we have had an experience which ought to have no little
weight with us in the conclusion to which we may come. For-
. tunately we may acquaint ourselves with the facts.
You have before you the testimony of the judges and clerks "
and attorneys of the district courts of 1841, 1842, and 1843,

94 SPEECHES.
upon this very subject. Then there were twenty-six' States,
and Mr. Webster, then Secretary of State, sent his circulars
for information into all these States and laid before the Senate
the result of his investigation, in the communications which he
received from these gentlemen'; gentlemen whose official posi
tion was such as to give them the best possible opportunity for
furnishing the information required.
Let me read the letter of the Hon. Ashur Ware, then, as
now, judge of the district court of Maine ; for it is the basis
*of what 1 have to say in regard to the operations of the law,
and its effect upon the country. (Senate Documents, Third
Session, Twenty-Seventh Congress, 1842-43, vol. 2, doc. 19.)
Portland, December 22, 1842.
Sir : I have received your letter of the 16th instant, covering a resolu
tion of the Senate, and asking for certain information with respect to the
bankrupt law, and I avail myself of the first moment of leisure to give you
an answer.
In regard to the first point of your inquiries, that is, as to any alterations
or amendments of the law, I can say nothing farther than that it has been
in operation for so short a time, that the adequacy cf the general provis
ions ofthe law to effectuate its general objects has not yet, perhaps, been
sufficiently tried to enable one to form a decided opinion. Hitherto I have
not perceived but that the provisions of the law are sufficient for the purpose ;
but further experience may point out defects that have not yet been made
apparent. In regard to the other point of your inquiries, what have been the effects
and operation of the law, I can speak more explicitly. The law embraces
two distinct systems of bankruptcy, voluntary and involuntary. So far as
the act is compulsory, and enables creditors to coerce a debtor into bank
ruptcy, it has introduced an important change into the relation of debtor
and creditor in this State, that is altogether in favor of the creditor, and my
belief is that in the present state of the law of debtor and creditor in this
State, it will be found in its operation decidedly salutary. And such, 1.
think, is the prevailing opinion among the creditor class ofthe community.
With regard to the system of voluntary bankruptcy, I do not feel pre
pared to give so explicit an answer, but I am strongly inclined to the opin
ion that thus far the effects of the law have, on the whole, been favorable,
but that its benefits have not been clear and unmixed with evil. The first
operation ofthe law in this Stale may be very plainly inferred from a view

BANKRUPT LAW. 95
of the schedules of debts and assets annexed to the petitions. It has been
to redeem a great number of persons from hopeless insolvency. The
amount of indebtment is so large and so disproportionate to the assets,
that it is obvious, indeed too clear to admit of any doubt, that in by far the
greater number of cases the debts never could be paid. If the debts had
been left as legal and subsisting obligations, they must have remained in
the hands of the creditors entirely worthless. By canceling them, the
debtor is relieved from embarrassments from which no diligence or
prudence on his part could ever extricate him. And as the effort, if made
by the debtor, would be made without hope, the presumption, is that it
would not be made at ali. The result, therefore, is that the debtor is re
lieved, with the opportunity of becoming a useful member of the commu
nity, without any real injury to the creditor. If no bankrupt law had been
passed, the statute of limitations would gradually have performed the same
operation as the law has accomplished at once. But this operation would
have been slow, and, as many debts have been converted into judgments,
the period of the debtor's emancipation would have been postponed to so
late a day, and in so "many cases to such an advanced period of his life, that
it would have been of little value when it arrived.
These observations will apply to a large portion, probably a large ma
jority, ofthe voluntary petitioners in this State.
The voluntary bankrupts in this State may be divided into two classes.
The first comprehends persons who have been engaged in large and un
fortunate speculations, and aVe involved to a large amount — quite too large
to admit even a distant hope of their ever being paid if no bankrupt law
had existed. Generally speaking, they could have had as little hope of
ever settling with their creditors by compromise ; for having lost, by mis-
furtune or imprudence, the whole or nearly the whole of their property,
they have nothing left to offer their creditors by way of compromise.
The second and by far the most numerous class consists of persons
whose indebtment is comparatively small. A large part of them are far
mers and mechanics. From misfortune or otherwise they have become
involved in debts which, compared with'' the debts of merchants or others
who have done a large business, look, it is true, very small, and quite in
significant; but to persons of their occupations and habits of life are
formidable, and such as they could have but little, if any, hope of ever be
ing able to pay ; and though their debts are not large, they are usually due
to creditors of that class that it is quite as difficult for them to effect a com
promise as it is for merchants or speculators, whose debts are larger, and
I] am inclined to think usually more so. The only chance they could
ever have of being placed in a situation in which they could enjoy the
fruits of their labor beyond what was consumed by their daily subsistence,
that is, in a condition iu which they could labor with cheerfulness, was by
a discharge under a bankrupt law. The number of persons of this class
who have applied for the benefit of the law is much larger than I had anti
cipated. Many have applied, I have no doubt, who would have acted more

9b SPEECHES.
wisely, as well as more honestly and honorably, not to have done it. But
still the* relief which the law has given is very extensive, and, though not
unmixed with evil, the good, upon the whole, greatly preponderates.
This opinion, which is the result of my own observation, as far as it has
extended, is confirmed by the remarks which I have heard from others who
have had better opportunities of witnessing, the effects of the law, par
ticularly in relation to this class of petitioners. These observations apply,
of course, to the first effects of the law. What may be its ultimate ope
ration on the morals and business habits of the community, and especially
on what is called the credit system, can, I suppose, only be ascertained by
further experience. On the whole, looking at the system of voluntary
bankruptcy as somewhat in the nature of an experiment, the effects of
which can be determined only by longer experience, I should say, that if
any substantial alteration is made at present, it should be by a simple re
peal of the law so far as it enables a person to be declared a bankrupt, and
obtain a discharge by proceedings instituted by himself, leaving it in force
without alteration so far as it establishes a system of compulsory bank
ruptcy. • •
I have the honor to be, with sentiments of great respect, your most obe
dient servant, ASHUR WARE.
Hon. Daniel Webster, Secretary of State.
Judge Ware is supported iu his views by the District Attor
ney of Maine, a brief extract from whose letter I will read.
(Senate Documents, Third Session, Twenty-Seventh Congress,
vol. 3, doc. 12.)
"The operation of this act in this district has, I think, been salutary.
Debtors, deeply insolvent, have resorted to it for relief; and, so far as my
observations have extended, and I have been a very close observer, there
have been few cases of fraud.
" In the district court here, the examination of bankrupts has been very "
strict, and the ordeal a severe one ; and I know of no cases where I even
suspect that fraud has escaped detection. Its retrospective effect is nearly
over, and, in prospect, creditors were beginning to look to it as a regu
lator to check and control credit."
Let me analyze this testimony.
In regard to the general provisions of the law, to effectuate
its general objects,, the judge did not perceive but that the
provisions of the law were sufficient for the purpose. In re
gard to the effects of the operation of the law, both as to its

BANKRUPT LAW. 97
voluntary and involuntary system, his opinion is that it#has
been favorable, but that its benefits have not been clear and
unmixed with evils ; that the debtor has been relieved from
embarrassments from which no diligence or prudence on his
part could ever extricate him — with the opportunity of becom
ing -a useful member of the community, without any real
injury to the creditor ; that the relief which the law has given is
very extensive, and, though not unmixed with evil, the good,
upon the whole, greatly preponderates. The district attorney
of Maine supports the judge iu his opinion that the operation
of the law was salutary ; and he says, moreover, that under it
— and he was a very close observer — there were very few cases
of fraud, and that he knew of no cases where he even suspected
that fraud had escaped detection.
Now, I undertake to say on the floor of this House, and any
gentleman who will give himself the time to investigate will
find the statement correct, that, if you will classify the commu
nications received from the judges and attorneys and clerks in
teply to the call for information from the Secretary of State,
you will find that nine-tenths of this very respectable body of
men concur with the views of the gentlemen whose letters I
have read, in regard to the operation and effects of the bank
rupt law in the States respectively represented by these gentle
men. A salutary law — salutary in its operation and effects.
Good for the debtor and good for the creditor. A preventive
of rather than an inducement to fraud ; aud, therefore, pro
motive of the commercial interests of the whole country.
If it be true, as the gentleman from Massachusetts said, that
the bankrupt law of 1841, as to its effect, " was simply to
wipe out and expunge "millions of debt," and " in the adminis-

98 SPEECHES.
tration of it the creditors got nothing," it was not because the
rights of creditors were not properly guarded, nor by reason of
frauds on the part of debtors ; but for the reason stated by
Associate Justice Story, (Senate Documents, Third Session,
Twenty-Seventh Congress, vol. 3, doc. 21, p. 8,) in his letter
to the Secretary of State on the bankrupt law. He writes :
" It is true that the dividends for the creditors have hitherto been small ;
but this has arisen, not from fraud or concealment of property, but from
the fact that whole classes were insolvent, in ruin, before the system exist
ed ; and, therefore, its principal operation has hitherto been to relieve
debtors, and not to give much relief to creditors. At the same time, I am
well satisfied that it has not done to these creditors generally any harm or
mischief. They have received their share of all the debtor had, be it more
or less." Nor was the judge alone of this opinion. His views, as here
expressed, are supported by corroborative testimony on nearly
every page of this Senate document. If the law was "a
sponge to wipe out debts," it was merely the sponging out in
form what was, on all hands, held to be lost in fact. Thirty-
three thousand seven hundred and thirty-nine debtors availed
themselves of the benefits of this law 1 And how many thou
sand creditors were benefited by it, I will leave you to de
termine. Nor did the country ask for the repeal of the bankrupt law
of 1841. Senator Berrien, in his report to the Senate, Feb
ruary 3, 1843, uses this language i
" No general, authentic expression of public opinion, unfavorable to the
act in all its provisions, and calling for its entire repeal, is known to the
committee, or is believed to exist. If the public press be resorted to as
the index of that opinion, it will be found, where it is adverse to the exist
ing law, to indicate its modification, not its repeal. If recourse is had to
the petitions presented at the late session of Congress, affording the most
recent, general expression of public opinion, in, this form, it will appear by
reference to a document prepared in the office of the Secretary of the

BANKRUPT LAW. 99
Senate, and annexed to this report, that the number of persons who pe
titioned the Senate at its late session on the subject of bankruptcy was
50,298 ; that of that number 42,169 prayed the Senate not to repeal thelaw ;
that 1,206 of the petitioners asked for its modification ; that 4,343 desired
its modification or repeal; and that 447 asked a postponement of its ope
ration. So that, out of 50.29S petitioners, there remained only 2,133 who
desired an absolute and entire repeal of the law. The time has been too
short to permit any general expression of public opinion in the form of
petition during the present session of the Twenty-Seventh Congress; but
so far as such an expression has been received, it is favorable to the con
tinuance of the act, at least in some modified form, as will also appear by
the statement before referred to."

Am I not justified in saying, in view of these facts, that the
country did not call for the repeal of this law ?
I have thus endeavored to show to some extent, and to an
extent sufficient for the specific object which I have in view,
the nature, operation, and effects of the bankrupt law of
1841. My honorable friend from Massachusetts, [Mr. Thomas,] said
that the law of 1841 was " a very imperfect law, and, as com
pared with the bill before the House, the mere skeleton of a
bill." He had "great pleasure in saying that the learned
chairman of the committee which reports this measure has
drawn up a very good and sensible bill, the fruit of much labor
and skill." Very well, if such was the nature, operation, and
effects of that " very imperfect law," relieving so many debtors
and creditors, and causiug so little dissatisfaction in any portion
of the country, that of 50,298 petitioners on the subject of
bankruptcy, in 1843, 2,133 only desired an absolute and entire
repeal of the law, what must be. the nature, operation, and
effects, should, the bill become a law, of the uniform bankrupt
system, as developed by the chairman of tlie committee which
has reported this measure ?

100 SPEECHES.
" A good and sensible bill ;" and if in any respect it is not
a good and sensible bill, let it be amended until, as far as pos
sible, it shall be perfected ; and is it not reasonable to suppose
that its operation and effects will be far more beneficial and
extensive than the operation and effects of the law of 1841 ?
Will there not be less dissatisfaction, if any, with the law of
1863, than there was with the law which was repealed on the
petition of 2,133 persons, in opposition to 42,169 persons who
prayed the Senate not to repeal the law ? True, there has
been no uniform-bankrnpt law upon our statute-book since the
repeal of this law ; not, however, because it has not been
asked for time and. again, and its importance urged upon the
consideration of Congress. But for the reason that debtors
and creditors have been unable hitherto to get " a hearing "
here, while interests of less importance by far in their relation
to the commercial welfare of the nation, have been pressed in
before it ; and they have waited, relying upon the justness of
their cause, which has gained strength even by delay, until now
it would seem as if the necessity for a uniform bankrupt law
must be patent to every man. As a matter of fact, may not
the reasons, substantially, which were urged as evincing the
necessity of the law of 1841, be urged with fourfold strength
in demonstration of the necessity of the proposed law of
1863? The number of debtors and creditors to be benefitted by this
law has vastly more than quadrupled. If there was a peculiar
condition of the commercial sphere then, in consequence of
which it was supposed that it stood in special want of that
electric influence which a uniform bankrupt law alone could
give it, is there not emphatically a peculiar condition of the

BANKRUPT LAW. 101
commercial sphere now, waiting for the electric spark by which
alone the brains, and hearts, and hands, of many thousands can
have knocked off from them the shackles of debt, " damning
debt," that makes a man a slave to consuming cares, without
the shadow of a hope ? Compute the amount of indebtedness
to be as small as you may, still it is the incubus pressing with
mountain weight upon men, the most of whom are honest but
unfortunate, defying their resources, paralyzing their energies,
and abstracting from their sum of human happiness an amount
so large that the remainder is not worth the mention, when
compared with the happiness of that man who is not crushed
to the earth, himself and wife and children, by unrelenting, life
long debt.
If in 1841 we were necessarily thrown back upon the imper
fect and discordant systems of twenty-six States, had Congress
abstained from the exercise of the authority with which the
Constitution has invested them in the matter of a uniform
bankrupt law, are we not now thrown back upon the discordant
and imperfect systems of thirty-four States, if Congress turns a
deaf ear to these creditors' and debtors' most earnest appeal ?
It is the appeal of two hundred thousand petitioners, who are
the representatives of many more than two hundred thousand
debtors and creditors, and not one hundred men are found —
not one hundred men did I say ? — not one man is found in all
this country protesting against a uniform bankrupt law. Where
are the protestors to-day, if they anywhere exist ? Why are
they not here by their petitions, forwarded to your table
through their representatives, that we should refrain from the
exercise of our power in this direction ?
This is not a movement for a bankrupt law which has been

102 SPEECHES.
" hid under a bushel." It has been as open as though it were
proclaimed upon the housetops. Every press in the land has
published it, and scarcely one without giving it approval. Has
the public press been bribed, or does it speak " the will of the
people?" It is not that Maine — it is not that New England— is in
greater need of a uniform bankrupt law than any other section
of the country, that I desire the passage of this bill. Look at
the statistics, as you will find them in the document to whichi
have more than once referred, and you will observe that of the
•whole number of pe/sons in the United States who availed
themselves of the law of 1841, there were as few in New
England, fewer in fact — other things being equal— than in
any other section of the country. New England can take
care of herself, with or without a bankrupt law. She will
suffer as little as any part of the country from the non-existence
of this law. But what then ? Is she opposed to its passage
as a national measure ? Not at all. She is opposed to nothing
that is for the good of the country, however small may be the
share of benefit that inures to her» The votes of her Repre
sentatives in this body during this Congress, ahd during every
preceding Congress, will show this.
Mr. Speaker, one object of a uniform bankrupt law is very
easily understood. It is to provide for the certain, equitable,
and economical distribution of the assets of an insolvent among
his creditors, without any fraudulent reservations or discrimina
tions. It is to guard the rights of creditors as carefully as it
guards the rights of debtors, and be of lasting benefit to both.
It is to make its truly beneficent operation co-extensive with
its necessity ; to harm no interest ; to benefit every interest in

BANKRUPT LAW. ' 103
the land. This is its object — nothing less, nothing more. Can
any gentleman show that this is not the object of this bill ?
And if he can, then, even, let him not hastily reject it. Let
him mold it to the object. Let him remold every section of it, if
need be, until he shall be able to say, it is the best bill that
can be had under the circumstances, and he will do his country
men a service which will not be forgotten.
I repeat it, it was not my intention to discuss the merits of
this particular bill. It has been framed by no novice in juris
prudence, but by a gentleman who, as an old writer would have
said, " hath cute understanding of that severe but sublime
science, law." I trust his painstaking has not been in vain,
but that now what has been repeatedly asked for will be given
to the people. Whether this Congress shall pass this bill or
not, there will soon be a session of Congress that will give the
nation a uniform bankrupt law. There will be a Congress to
which these petitioners will not appeal in vain, but which will
give the people the benefit of a system which has found its
place in the codes of nearly if not all commercial nations, and
is approved by their experience. And the Congress that will
do this, thus equalizing and protecting the rights of citizens of
the different States and Territories, when the " act " in its na
ture, and operation, and effects, is compared with the bankrupt
laws of the several States, will deserve and receive a like enco
mium to that recorded by the historian when he wrote of an
emperor, that " he found a city built of bricks, and left it con
structed of marble."

FORTIFICATION BILL,

III tl\e House of I^epreseritatives, Feb. 12, 1863.

The Committee proceeding to the consideration of
House Bill No. 707, making appropriations for the
construction, preservation, and repairs of certain
fortifications and other works of defense, for the year
ending June 30, 1864, the debate being upon clause
reading —
"Tor Fort Scamuiel, Portland Harbor, Maine, $150,000"—
Mr. Fessenden said — I move to amend this paragraph by
striking out the appropriation of " $150,000," and inserting in
place thereof " $200,000."
Now, Mr. Chairman, a few days since we had before us a
bill for the enlargement of the Michigan and Illinois canal, for
the improvement of the Illinois river, and for the enlargement
of the locks of the Erie and Oswego caiials. The ground
upon which this measure was urged was that it was a military
necessity ; that it was for our military defense. Now, sir, I
wish to suggest to the House some reasons for enlarging this
appropriation for the defense of the sea-board of Maine.

FORTIFICATION BILL. 105
The first reason I present is the geographical position of
Maine in its relation to the provinces of Great Britain, and in its
relation to the Union. If you will look upon the map you will
find that the State of Maine stands as a wedge driven up to
the but between the provinces of New Brunswick and Canada.
You will find that so far as Maine is concerned, she is, as it
were, in the middle of a Foreign Power. In case there should
be a war with Great Britain or with France, the first attack
would be upon the State of Maine.
The British North American colonies extend across the con
tinent from ocean to ocean, with an extent of territory larger
than that possessed by the United States. Now look, I say,
at the geographical position of the State of Maine. It is such
as will show conclusively, to any one who will glance at it, that
she needs imperatively that her. fortifications shall be placed in
the most effective position, looking only to her location in re
lation to Great Britain alone.
But what is her position in respect to the Union ? She
stands as a frontier State ; she stands as one of the out-posts
of the Union. We very well know that in the war of 1812
she was without military defense ; her harbors were unprotect
ed ; and what was the result ? From Castine to St. Croix
Great Britain had possession of her harbors. And we have
practically no more defenses in point of fact to-day than we
had then. Great Britain has already authorized measures, un
derstood as war measures, in her great lines of railroad to
provide for the contingency of a future war.
As to our defenses to-day, we have some four or five forts,
but none of them are completed. There is a fort at Eastport.
There is one at the mouth of the Penobscot — Fort Knox.

106 SPEECHES.
There are forts in the harbor of Portland. Surely with these
forts uncompleted the harbor of Portland cannot be defended.
We come here, therefore, and ask that there sliall be an en
largement of the appropriations for the defense of the State of
Maine. We ask to have that enlargement upon the ground
that she has done everything in her power to show that she is
a loyal State. She has furnished, to put down this rebellion,
more than her quota of men for the army ; she has given more
than thirty thousand men for the defense of the country. She
has furnished more men, in proportion to her population, to the
regular and volunteer navy of the United States than any
other State. We feel, when provision is being made for the
construction of forts of defense in other parts of the country,
that a large appropriation should be made to defend the har
bors of Maine. That State has an extent of three hundred
miles upon the ocean to be defended, and a coast-line of some
three thousand miles. On that sea-board of three hundred
miles we have more than one hundred towns at which ships
can be built and manned. General Totten, in the report that
he makes in regard to the defenses of Maine, says that every
town of considerable importance should be protected. And
Secretary Seward, in a lengthy communication which he made
on this subject, calling the attention of the executive of Maine
to the importance of defending that State, said that it was of
the highest importance that measures should be taken, and
directly taken, for the purpose of defending all of her harbors.
In 1851 and 1852, Mr. Conrad, Secretary of the Navy, re
commended that some ten places should be defended on the
coast of Maine. As I have stated, we have four or five forts
on that coast, but they are incomplete, even at this day.

FORTIFICATION BILL. 107
Now, if there be any ground for the danger, as portrayed the
other day by the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Olin,] of a
collision of this nation with foreign Powers, we ought at once
to look to. the defense of our sea-ports.
Why, Mr. Chairman, they talk upon the floor of this House
about the amount of money which has been expended for the
defense of Maine. There has not been expended upon the de
fenses of Maine an amount of money as yet adequate to com
plete her fortifications. And this is the point at which I am
aiming. A siugle custom-house in the city of Charleston has
had expended upon it, within the last ten years, half the
amount of money that has been expended on the fortifications
of Maine since 1820, when she was admitted into the Union,
large as is the whole sum.
Mr. Maynard asked a question, which was not heard by the
reporters. Mr. S. C. Fessenden. Precisely so ; Maine can be invaded
upon her north-eastern boundaries, and we think we ought to
have defenses there. I stated at the outset that one reason
why Maine should have defenses upon her sea-board, and one
reason why the harbor of Portland should be defended, was,
that if she was not defended, and for that reason Portland
should fall into the hands of a foreign Power, that Power
could drive American commerce from the Atlantic ocean and
the great lakes. If that Power were in possession of Portland,
all cf the peninsula east of Lake Champlain would be subjected
to its control.
I know very well that efforts are being made — and gentle
men here have alluded to the fact — to slough off Maine, in
case there should be a restoration of this Union. I have no

108

SPEECHES.

doubt that if the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Cox,] and some
other gentlemen I have heard speak upon this floor, could suc
ceed in their efforts, New England would be left out in the cold.
Mr. Wadsworth. Does the gentleman refer to me ?
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. I do not. I have a word to say
upon that point. They ought to have the generosity, if they
propose to leave us out, to leave us in a condition to take care
of ourselves.
The Chairman. The gentleman will confine his remarks to
the subject before the House.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. I intend to do so. I say, one
reason why we should have these fortifications on the coast of
Maine, is the effort which is made by some gentlemen, and in
which they hope to succeed some day, to re-construct the
Union with New England left out.
Mr. Wadsworth. One word upon that point, if you please.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. Certainly.
Mr. Wadsworth. I wish to know whether, if all these for
tifications are for defense against Great Britain, and Maine is
left out, and she goes over to Great Britain, will they not be
useless ?
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. Let not the gentleman give himself
any uneasiness on that score. I can assure him, as I have
heretofore done, that Maine is to remain in the Union ; and
her fortifications, therefore, can at no time be useless for the
nation's defense. And my honorable friend, as I know he has
said, is not for having Maine, or any other State, left out.
.The fortifications of which I have spoken are for defense
against any foreign Power whatever — against France as well
as any other.

FORTIFICATION BILL. 109
Mr. Chairman, I urge this appropriation upon the con
sideration of the House, and I want to hear what gentlemen
from the West and South have to say in relation to it. I say
again, these fortifications ought to be completed, and I say
that the day may come when, if they are left uncompleted,
gentlemen will have occasion to regret it. I say the day may
come when they will see that it would have been well for the
country had they put upon the coast of Maine all the defenses
which are asked for.
Sir, I coincided with my colleague [Mr. Pike] when he told
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Cox] that we are not willing
to be sloughed off, but if we are, we would have the North
west and the South, and all parts of this country understand
that New England can take care of herself in the Union or out
of it. Thank God, we have no favors to ask of our friends or
of our enemies in that respect.
I promised to yield a few minutes of my time to the gentle
man from Illinois, [Mr. Arnold,! and I now yield to him.

CONSCRIPTION BILL.

THIRTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS-THIRD SESSION.

Ir\ tl\e House of T^epresei\tatives, Feb. 24, 1863.

The Conscription Bill being under consideration, the
House having resolved itself into a Committee of the
Whole on the State of the Union, Mr. Fessenden
spoke as follows :
Mr. Speaker — I thank the gentleman from New York,
[Mr. Steele,] for yielding the floor to me, for I have some
thing to say, and should like to say it, upon this bill. It has
been said upon the floor of this House that no more important
measure has been brought before Congress at its present ses
sion, than that involved in this bill.
Mr. Speaker, the East has not been heard from with respect
to this measure ; and as we have heard from New York, and
from other States of this Union, something should be said with
regard to the manner in which this bill will be received, should
it be enacted by Congress, in New England.

CONSCRIPTION BILL. Ill
Before proceeding with my remarks, however. I wish to
make a single statement in regard to what was said by the
honorable member from Indiana, [Mr. Holman,] with respect
to the clergy of this country. I did not distinctly understand
what the gentleman said, and I would ask him to repeat the
remark which he made in reply to the gentleman from Penn
sylvania. Mr. Holman. Mr. Speaker, I attached no importance to
the remark at the time, and am unable to recall it. I will
not, therefore, take up the gentleman's time by referring to it.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. I inferred from the gentleman's re
marks that he intimated that the clergymen of the country
were not loyal and patriotic men.
Mr. Holman. I think not. On the contrary, I intimated
that they were an exceedingly warlike class of men. I simply
asked the question in general terms. I will not attempt to
recall my language. There was another gentleman speaking of
the religious character of the country, and of the warlike tem
per of the times, and I merely asked him whether he knew any
class of men in this country who had exhibited more martial
spirit than the clergy in general. I believe that was the sub
stance of my inquiry, although something else may have been
said which now escapes my recollection. But I desire to say
to my friend from Maine that the remark was not made in any
spirit of disrespect to the high character of the clergy of the
United States.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. I am happy to hear the explanation
of the honorable gentleman ; and I wish to say that there is
not a more patriotic or more loyal class of men in the country,
than the clergy of the United States. We are greatly in-

112 SPEECHES.
debted to them for the course they have pursued in regard to
this war. They, have stood up in their pulpits, and have en
couraged men to enlist ; and under that influence, hundreds and
thousands have gone into the army, who might never have been
there, but for the patriotic sermons preached from the pulpits
of New England and the free States.
Mr. Mallory. Will the gentleman yield to me for a ques
tion ?
'Mr. S. C. Fessenden. I cannot yield just now. Sir, it has
been so with respect to every war that has ever taken place
between this country and any other nation. I will read an
extract from a sermon preached by Eev. Dr. Gardiner Spring,
of New York, on the subject of the clergy of the Revolution.
Said Dr. Gardiner Spring, in a sermon which he preached on
the influence that the clergy had steadily exerted on the revolu
tionary war :
" That great event in the history of the world — the American Revolution
— never would have been achieved without the influence of the pulpit.
Political society ' moved on the axis of religion.' The religious-movement
gave its character to the social movement. Men who knew there was ' a
Church without a bishop,' knew also there could be ' a state without a
king.' Had the pulpit of New England and the Presbyterian Church occu
pied the same position on this question which was occupied by so many of
the pulpits which I could name, we should have been Colonies still."
Snch was the power of the pulpit in the days of the Ameri
can Revolution.
Mr. Thomas, of Massachusetts. Will the gentleman from
Maine allow me to ask him the date of that sermon ?
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. It was preached in 1835, I believe.
What is true in reference to the clergymen of that day, is true
with reference to the clergy of this day. Throughout New
England, and I presume throughout every part of the country

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 113
— I speak of course of the loyal States — the clergymen are
p atriots. They are loyal men. And when the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, [Mr. Wright,] said he would offer an amendment
to this bill, that clergymen should not be enrolled, I was on the
point of saying that if it were for the reason that by their
remaining at home among their people, they could be more
useful to the service, and do our country and the cause the
most good, it was well ; but that otherwise it was not well.
Sir, they are as ready to enlist to-day as any class of men to
be found in the United States. But I tell gentlemen that it is
for the benefit of the country that the clergy should be left at
home, to preach to their congregations the Gospel, and such
patriotic sermons as they have been preaching. They can do
far more good in that way than they can do by enlisting as
soldiers in the Army of the United States. It would be a sad
day for our country if it should take our clergymen from their
pulpits into the field. I repeat it — where they can do the most
good in this hour of our trial, is with their flocks. Now I pass
for a moment to the consideration of this bill. It is a bill for
the enrolling and calling out the national forces, and for
other purposes.
Mr. Mallory. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a
question ?
Mr. Morrill, of Maine. I object.
Mr. S. C. Fessenden. Now, I have a word to say in refer
ence to this bill. It is for enrolling and calling out the national
forces. What is the object of it ? Its object is distinctly
declared in the title of the bill. And what does it propose to
do ? It proposes to give to the President of the United States
power to call out, enroll, enlist, and bring into the national

114 SPEECHES.
force, such men as are classified in the bill. Does any gentle
man object to the object of the bill ? I do not understand that
such is the case. And for what purpose are these forces to be
enrolled ? The great purpose for which they are to be enrolled,
is the prosecution of this war with the utmost vigor, until the
rebellion is put down. For what purpose is this war waged on
the part of the rebels ? I have heard it said on tho floor of
this House, over and over again, that tlie war was not waged
on the part of the South for the purpose of perpetuating
slavery, nor for the purpose of restoring the African slave
trade. Now on that point, I beg leave to read here an extract
from a letter addressed by Hon. Mr. Spratt, of Charleston,
South Carolina, to Hon. John Perkins, delegate from Louisiana
to the Montgomery convention :
" The South is now in the formation of a s.'ave republic. This, perhaps,
is not admitted generally. There are many contented to believe that tho
South, as a geographical section, is in mere assertion of its independence ;
that it is instinct with no especial truth, pregnant of no distinct social
nature ; that for some unaccountable reason, the two sections have become
opposed to each other ; that for reasons equally insufficient, there is disa
greement between the peoples that direct them : and that from no over
ruling necessity, no impossibility of co-existence, but as mere matter of
policy, it has been considered best for the South to strike out for herself,
and establish an independence of her own. This, 1 fear, is an inadequate
conception of the controversy.
" The contest is net between ihe North and South as geographical sections,
for between such sections merely there can be no contest; nor between the
people of the North and the people ofthe South, for our relations have been
pleasant, and on neutral grounds there is still nothing to estrange us. Wo
est together, trade together, and practice yet in intercourse, with great
respect, the courtesies of common life. But the real contest is between
the two forms of society whichhave become established, the one at the North
and the other at the South. Society is essentially different from govern
ment — as different as is the nut from the bur, or the nervous body of the
shell-fish from the bony structure which surrounds it ; and within this Gov
ernment two societies had become developed as variant in structure and
distinct in form as any two beings in animated nature. The one is a society
composed of one rnce, th? other of two races The on? is bound together

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 115
but by the two great social relations of husband and wife, and parent and
child ; the other by the three relations of husband and wife, and parent and
child, and master and slave. The one embodies in its political structure the
principle that equality is the right of man ; the other that it is the right of
equals only. The one, embodying the principle that equality is the right of
man, expands upon the horizontal plane of pure democracy; the other,
embodying the principle that it is not the right of man, but of equals only,
has taken to itself the rounded form of asocial aristocracy. In the one there
is hireling labor, in.the other slave labor ; in the one, therefore, in theory
at least, labor is voluntary; in the other, in-voluntary; in the labor of the ¦
one there is the elective franchise, in the other there is not; and as labor is
always in excess of direction, in the one the power of Government is only
with the lower classes ; in the other the upper. In the one, therefore, the
reins of Government come from the heels, in the other from the head of
the society ; in the one it is guided by the worst, in tho other by the best
intelligence ; in the one it is from those who have the least, in the other
from those who have the greatest stake in the continuance of existing order.
In the one the pauper laborer has the powerto rise and appropriate by law
the goods protected by the State — when pressure comes, as come it must,
there will the motive to exert it — and thus the ship of State turns bottom
upwards. In the other there is no pauper labor with power of rising ; the
ship of State has the ballast of a disfranchised class ; there is no possibility
of political upheaval, therefore, and it is reasonably certain that, so
steadied, it will sail erect and onward to an indefinitely distant period.
" Snch are some of the more obvious differences in form and constitution
between these two societies which had come into contact within the limits
of the recent Union."
" Such, then, was the nature of this contest. It was inevitable, lt was
inaugurated with the Government."

" But will slavery be established as a normal institution of society, and
stand the sole exclusive social system of the South ? That is the impending
question, and the fact is yet to be recorded. That it will so stand somewhere
at the South, I do not entertain the slightest question. Jt may be over
looked or disregarded now. It has been the vital agent of this great con
troversy. It has energized the arm cf every man who acts a part in this
great drama." *******
" If you shall elect slavery, avow it and affirm it, not as an existing fact,
but as a living principle of social order, and assert its right, not to tolera
tion only, but to extension, and to political recognition among the nations
ofthe earth; if, in short, you shall own slavery as the source of your
authority, and act for it, and erect as you are commissioned to erect, not
only a Southern, but a slave republic, the work will be accomplished.

116 SPEECHES.
Those States intending to espouse and perpetuate the institution, will enter
your Confederacy ; those that do not, will not. Tour republic will not re
quire the pruning process of another revolution ; but, poised upon its insti
tutions, will move on to a career of greatness and of glory unapproached
by any other nation in the world."
* * * * v * * •
" Is it, then, in the just performance of your office that you would impose
a constitutional restriction against the foreign slave trade ?" * *
" Believing, then, that this is a test of slavery, and that the Institution
cannotbe right if the trade be not, /regard the constitutional prohibition
as a great calamity."
*******
" It will be said that at the outset of our career it were wise to exhibit
deference to the moral sentiment of the world. The obligation is as per
fect to respect the moral sentiment of the world against the institution.
The world is just as instant to assert that slavery itself is wrong ; and if we
forego the slave trade in consideration of the moral feeling of the world,
then why not slavery also ? It were madness now to blink the question.
We are entering at last upon a daring innovation upon the social constitu
tions of the world. We are erecting a nationality upon a union of races,
where other nations have but one. We cannot dodge the issue ; we cannot
disguise the issue ; we cannot safely change our front in the face of a vigilant
adversary." Here you have the views of a gentleman who took a promi
nent part in the steps by which this civil war has been precipi
tated upon us. No man has a larger share of the confidence of
the South than Hon. L. W. Spratt. He speaks with authority
in expounding the purport and bearing of the civil revolution
to which he has so largely contributed — what ends it seeks and
is determined to attain under the conduct of its orginators and
supporters. He assures ns that the agitation, call it by what
name you will, let it assume what form it may, is destined to
endure until at last slavery shall " stand serene, erect, aloft,
unquestioned as to its rights or its integrity," at some point
within the limits of the Southern States, and until there shall
be " no constitutional restriction against the foreign slave
trade." Sir, the history of this war in all its stages shows

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 117
that Mr. Spratt is right in what he declared to be its object on
the part of the South. He conceals nothing, he would have noth
ing concealed. Why, then, with snch incontrovertible evidence
before them, do gentlemen on the floor of this house undertake
to show that this war is waged by the South for any other
purpose ?
Now the object of this bill is to enroll the national forces to
prosecute the war with vigor, and, in substance, to prevent the
establishment of the confederate government based upon those
two principles. Mr. Spratt says in this letter that if the con
vention will pass a resolution or a law permitting the re-opening
of the slave trade, then the great movement that was' inaugu
rated would have a practical result. He asserted that it was
absolutely necessary the foreign slave trade should be re-open
ed, in order that the secession government should be estab
lished. The purpose of this bill is to clothe the President with tho
means of prosecuting the war vigorously, so as to prevent the
establishment of the southern confederacy, which has for its
object the perpetuation of slavery, and the re-opening of the
slave trade. And I ask whether any gentleman on this floor is
opposed to a bill for such a purpose ?
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of this bill, because it
will do much toward bringing into service a class of men who
will not voluntarily enlist, and who do all in their power to
dissuade others from enlisting. These men are to be found in
all parts of the country. They are to be found in New Eng
land. They are to be found in my own State. I know a man
there who has represented our city in the Legislature, and who
has from the outset been opposed to this war, and has done, I

118 SPEECHES.
have no doubt, all in his power to dissuade men from enlisting
in the Army of the United States. He is reported to have
sent his son abroad, in order that he might escape the draft,
and that very son holds at this day an office in the quartermas
ter's department. These men arc called copperheads in sonic
parts of the country. They are called copperheads in the
part of the country from which I conic, and in which I live. I
am in favor of a bill which will bring these men into the Army,
who have up to this very hour not only refused to enlist them
selves, but have done all they could to dissuade all others from
enlisting. I am in favor of all such men, wherever they are
found, being drafted and sent into the Army.
I understood the honorable gentleman from Indiana, [Mr.
Voorhees,] yesterday to say, in speaking of the part of the
country from which he came and the district which he repre
sents, that God never spread out such broad acres as are to be
found in that region. Why, sir, if God did not spread them
out, it must have been the devil that created them, and there,
to snch a region of country, is where I would have these cop
perheads sent, if they cannot be compelled to be enrolled or to
desist from their treasonable practices. [Laughter.]
I am in favor also of the passage of this bill for another
reason : because it will bring into the Army men who love the
cause of the country ; not that our Army is not composed of
such men now, but such men as will not give occasion for the
repetition of such a remark as was made by the honorable
gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Wright,] the other day,
that the Army would not fight as in his judgment an army
should fight, unless they could choose their general. I refer to
that gentleman from Pennsylya|iia who was speaking in refer-

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 119
ence to General McClellan. He is not now in his scat,
although he is seldom absent. I will read his words :
"It is idle to blind our eyes to the condition of things existing in the
Army of the Potomac, and to some extent, in the Army ofthe West to-day.
Tnere is a way, gentlemen, in which you may save this Union. If you will
but restore to the command of the Army of the Potomac, General McClel
lan, I do believe you can save the counti'3'."
* * * * * * #
"Mr. Speaker, I have no particular feeling of interest for Geneial Mc
Clellan personally. I have nothing to say against him. But I telieve at
this day there is no man in the Army who embodies, to the same extent,
the confidence of that Army and of the people that he does. He who does
not see and realize this fact, is blind or deaf to the vibrations of public
opinion. So far as I have been enabled to gather the feelings and opinions
of the army of the Potomac, I cannot be mistaken in this impression. That
army is with him. I believe that to be a fact. And let me tell you, if you
would carry victory before your banners, you must have a commander in
whom the Army has confidence. It is idle to talk about victories, with a
demoralized and disorganized army. So far as General McClellan is con
cerned, I have never been his especial advocate here. I have never, in
the 'debates in this House, spoken to his discredit. I do not profess
to be a competent judge in regard to his military qualifications. But I
know this fact, and I say it to you. that he has the heart of the American
Army. Yes, sir, he has the heart of the Army with him."
*******
" It is my honest desire to save the Union, and I believe the most effectual
means to do this would be the restoration of this general to the command of
the Army. v
" There is another thing which, in my opinion, should be done. Let this
Administration make up its Cabinet of a mixed character. Let it represent
the two great political parties of the country. Let it do that, and restore
at the same time General McClellan to the army of the Potomac, and it
may, with entire certainty of success, call for two hundred thousand men
— white men ; they will rally around your standards at once. Then we will
bring this war to a successful close. I as firmly believe in it as I beHeve I
have an existence."
Now, sir, it is obvious to my mind, if the honorable gentle
man' from Pennsylvania is at all correct in his remarks, that
there needs to be a leaven in onr Army, such a leaven as will
lead it to fight undp.r any general, and under one general just

120 SPEECHES.
as well as under another. I believe the army of the Potomac
will do it now. Still it may be well to give it the leaven which
these new recruits will infuse into it, fresh from the people. It
is well to do so. I tell you they will have no such exalted
opinion of General McClellan, that they cannot fight under
General Hooker, or under any other of our brave generals.
What they want is a general to lead them against the enemy.
Such a general will lead them to victory.
General McClellan — for I will venture to express my opinion,
since the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania has expressed
his — General McClellan is the Essex of our Army. What we
want is a Hampden. An extract which I will now read from
Macaulay's review of Lord Nugent's Memorials of Hampden,
shows to what this historian attributed the " military errors "
of Essex. It shows likewise Mr. Macaulay's views of
Hampden :
"The military errors of Essex were probably produced in some degree
by political timidity. He was honestly but not warmly attached to the
cause of the Parliament ; and, next to a great defeat, he dreaded a great
victory. Hampden, on the other hand, was for vigorous and decisive meas
ures. When he drew the sword, as Clarendon has well said, he threwaway
the scabbard. He had shown that he knew better than any public man of
his time how to value moderation. But he knew that the essence of war is
violence, and that moderation in war is imbecility. On several occasions,
particularly during the operations in the neighborhood of Brentford, he
remonstrated earnestly with Essex. Wherever he commanded separately,
the boldness and rapidity of his movements presented a striking contrast to
the sluggishness of his superior.''
Mr. Speaker, the generals of the Essex school and age will
not do for the Army, if we are to crush this rebellion by the
speedy and steady onward march of our entire Army, until it
shall meet to conquer our rebel foes. If time, and reasonable
time only, shall show that we have not a Hampden in General

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 121
Hooker, then, I say, let him be removed, and let the President
find the coming Hampden, for we have him somewhere in our
country, who will let us know, in the exercise of a wise discre
tion, " that the essence of war is violence, and that moderation
in war is imbecility."
But I have another reason to give for the passage of this
bill. Let it become a law, and it will test the question whether
the people do really choose to continue the war under existing
circumstances at the South and in the loyal States, or to have
it at once brought to au end on any terms ; whether, if what
this war may cost prospectively iu money, time, and life, will
not dissuade from the further prosecution of it. True, it has
cost us already a mint of gold. The prospect is that it will
cost us millions and millions more, if we will go on. Months
have been given to this war. The South tell us we must give
to it years before they can be made, if ever made, to give over
the contest. Thousands of lives have already been surrendered
on the battle-field, in the hospitals, and in naval engagements
on the ocean, in prosecuting this war ; and many more of the
best men iu the land must perish, if we are to persist in our
efforts to restore the Union. The" conscription bill puts the
question to the people, shall the war go on ?
Sir, I believe that the spirit with which the people will re
ceive this bill will return to us in emphatic words the answer,
and it will be, yes, it shall go on, cost what it may, until these
rebel States return to their allegiance to this Government. We
are for no " short peace " when it comes. Give us rather " a
long war,'' if without it we cannot have, when peace comes,
perpetual peace.
As Germany had to wage a civil war of thirty years to

122 SPEECHES.
secure religious liberty, in which war almost every chief town
was sacked by successive armies, and yet the prize was worth
the cost, so the people of the loyal States will contribute
money, time, and men, for all of thirty years, to this war, if
need be, that they may secure the end for which they are now
engaged in it, and this though every chief town iu the country
should be sacked ; and then they would not give the contest
over, for the prize to be gained — " liberty, and the future of
this land " — would be worth the cost.
This bill should be passed in my judgment, for another
reason. It will unite, by a demonstrated fact, the East and
the West, the Border States and tho North, between which
there are those that would engender strife and division. The
demonstrated fact, should this bill become a law, will be this,
that as the people have expected that Congress would do its
duty by providing with certainty for a national force to carry
on this war, so this Congress expects that the people of the
loyal States will do their duty, by responding in the spirit of
true patriotism to the requirements of this bill. The Congress
has not disappointed the people. The people will not disap
point the Congress. The division and disunion which peace
men and traitors would engender between the East and the
West, the border States and North, will thus be prevented, for
it will be seen that there is no loyal State anywhere the people
of which will not approve of this law, or any law that can be
of essential aid to this Government in the noble work, and
gigantic as noble, which it has in hand.
I know of but one member of this Congress, [Mr. Vaixan-
digham,] whose boast and whose shame, in my judgment, it is
that he laid down the rule for himself, and faithfully adhered

CONSCRIPTION BILL. 123
to it to the end, " neither to vote for or against any purely war
measure of the Administration ;" who " has not voted for any
Army bill, or Navy bill, or Army or Navy appropriation bill,
since the meeting of Congress on the 4th of July, 1861."
The " peace party on any terms " will find in the honorable
gentleman a worthy chief. Or, if he cannot be had, I would
recommend the honorable gentleman from the Columbus district
in Ohio, [Mr. Cox,] whose speech on " Puritanism in politics,"
before the Democratic Union Association of New York, will
render him .very popular with the " peace party " in New Eng
land ; and on these terms, says the Richmond Enquire)', can
" the peace party on any terms " have peace :
"If they repudiate the debt they have contracted, and abandon the
Government they have established, and recant their vows, and break
pledges, and eat dirt, it is well ; we shall be charmed ; the movement will
suit us perfectly ; and although we shall not exactly respect the actors in
that affair, yet we shall not be nnwillng to trade with them— holding our
noses a little— and to show them all suitable civilities, but at a proper
distance." " Holding our noses a little," says the Enquirer. Verily
noses need to be held when you have to deal with constitu
tional dirt eaters, for they are rank all over with treason.
As a member of the ThirtySeventli Congress, now so near
its end, I shall return to my constituents with the conscious
ness that, as their Representative, I have done all in my power
to aid this House in that legislation, by the help of which we
hope soon to see a cemented Union, " and a nationality so
strong and deep that no selfish or sectional appeal can ever
occasion its dissolution."

SEKMONS

SERMON
Preached at East Thomastoi\, July 26, 1846.

" God forbid that I should glory, save in the Cross of our Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, aud I unto
the world." — Gal. vi. 14.

The Cross of Christ is the Christian's glory. This is the
subject which the text suggests for our meditations.
We are called to glory in the cross of Christ ; would that
all could exclaim, with as much sincerity as the exclamation
and the prayer fell from the lips of the Apostle, " But God
forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus
Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me and I unto the
world." You will observe, his prayer was not, that God should keep

128 SERMONS.
him from glorying, for, as Dr. D'Aubigne has truthfully re
marked, " God did not choose to deprive man of all occasions
of glorying. To glory is one of the most characteristic pro
pensities of our nature. It is seen in every class of society, and
in every portion of the human race. From the highest dig
nitary to the lowest beggar, from the enlightened and refined
citizen to the savage, in whose mind scarcely a spark of reason
appears, all discover something in which they think they can
glory." Nor would the desire of the Apostle have been ex
pressed in the sentence, " God forbid that I should glory."
The fulness of his desire could alone come forth in the words —
" save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ." And hear the
reason which he gives for this : " By whom [or whereby] the
world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." — Let me
propose this question for our consideration.
Was this a reason for which he might well glory in the cross
of Christ, and in that only ? Look out for a moment upon the
world : In its material structure, it is a glorious world.
When God created it, " the morning stars sang together, and
all -the sons of God shouted for joy." "Day unto day utter-
eth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge." It is
all His handy work ; and God saw that it was good. And
when He made man, He made him a little lower than the
angels, and crowned him with glory and honor. God made
him to have dominion over the works of His hands. He put
all things under his feet. " All sheep, and oxen ; yea, and the
beasts of the field, the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea,
and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas. O
Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth !"
And would the Apostle have such a world crucified unto film,

SERMONS. 129
and himself crucified unto it ? And is this a reason for his
glorying only in the cross of Christ ?
Look again. You behold a world in ruins — a world alien
ated from God, and this is a world in ruins. Sin hath entered
into it, and polluted it from centre to circumference. On man,
the'noblest work of God, sin has placed its mark of defilement
and infamy. Man's physical powers — man's intellect — man's
heart — all devoted to the service of sin : the whole race of man
alienated from God. " For all have sinned and come short of
the glory of God ;" and the world has usurped in the heart of
man the place of God, the world over, and this is true.
It is not a charge which is preferred against such alone as
apparently tower above their fellow-men, in the magnitude of
their transgressions of the Divine law. Here is a level on which
the whole human family meet ; here the governors and the
governed on earth meet together ; the men of every clime, and
every tongue. " As by one man sin entered into the world, and
death by sin, death passed upon all men, for that all have
sinned." (Rom. v. 12.) And because the world has usurped
the place of God in the human heart, God has found it neces
sary to say, "If any man love the world, the love of the
Father is not in him." Now it is such a world the Apostle had
crucified unto him by the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. He
was crucified unto the world and the things of the world ; or,
as it is expressed in the text, " By whom the world is crucified
unto me, and I unto the world." " Crucified I" We must com
prehend the meaning of this word, brethren — for I conceive
that we may question if we do, as yet, understand its full im
port — before we can begin to compass the nature of that death
of which Paul had been a subject, and which was effected

130 SERMONS.
through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ ; or before we can
begin to appreciate the worth of the cross in the power which:
it imparts to overcome the world. The Lord Jesus Christ, by
his crucifixion, by his repose in the grave, became dead to all
surrounding objects, as the dead always are.
How truthfully it is said : "In the cold and silent grave, the
eye is closed to all the fascinating and bewildering scenes which
sin would bring within the circle of vision. There the pomp of
riches is at an end ; there the voice of ambition, as under its
influence myriads of the world's votaries' are pressing on to the
goal, does not enter ; there is not a hateful passion that can
move the inanimate form that is lodged in yonder narrow sepul
chre ; to that form all is still and silent as the grave." In a
sense similar to this, by the cross, the world became dead ¦ to
Paul, and he became dead to the world. Worldly ambition ;
the love of money ; the pride and pomp of life ; the dominion
of evil and hateful passions, ceased to control in his heart.
Though he had been taught at the feet of Gamaliel, and could
cope with any of his time for the highest honors in Church or
State ; though he might have entered the field before him with
the fairest prospect of securing to himself the riches of this
world, if on being rich he had set his heart ; still, by the cross
of our Lord Jesus Christ, from all these things he had been
effectually weaned, and more than weaned — for they were to
him, and he to them, as though he were dead. It is written,
" He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty ; he that
ruleth his spirit, than he that taketh a city ;" so, through the
cross of Christ, Paul does better than the mighty, or than he
that taketh a cii-y ; for, though a man of strong passions,
through the instrumentality of the cross, they were brought

SERMONS. 131
into captivity to the obedience of Christ. And still —
% paradoxical as it may seem — his was a crucifixion, a death
unto life. For in this same epistle, _he writes, " I am
crucified with Christ. Nevertheless I live ; yet not I, but
Christ liveth in me, and the life which I now live in the flesh,
I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself for me." He reckoned himself "to be dead indeed
unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."
Alive from the dead in trespasses and sins, him had God quick
ened ; alive to the sweet consciousness that he was no longer
under the law, but under grace ; and that the law had fulfilled
its mission with him, in having been a schoolmaster to bring
him unto Christ, that he might be justified by faith. (Rom.
iii. 24.) Moreover, his was a crucifixion unto life, in that,
from that hour, he was alive to the great objects which ought
to interest the immortal mind ; to the glory of God, as the
chief end for which man was created ; and to the solemn truth
that around him were millions of his fellow-men, in the broad
road that leads to death, whose feet could be turned into the
paths of righteousness only by the grace of God, through the
cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the efficient operation of the
Spirit's influences upon their hearts. Nor are we for a moment
to suppose that when the Apostle speaks of the cross, he means
that visible sign, a representation of which is frequently seen in
many countries of Christendom. He refers to the death of the
Son of God ; his death on the cross, which, in the fulness of
time, took place for the remission of sins. The Lamb of God,
suffering, dying on the cross 1 This was his glory ; for it had
been written, " Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree ;"
and by the death-of the Saviour did he redeem Paul from the

132 SERMONS.
curse of the law, being made a curse for him, and not for him
only, but for the world, since Christ died as the propitiation foi»
the sins of the whole world ; and now God can be just and
the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus, lt was the doctrine
of Christ's perfect atonement — salvation by the blood of the
Lamb — in which he gloried. The blood shed on the cross
which Simon bore unto a place called Golgotha, and on which
the Saviour was crucified, had reached Paul's heart, through
faith in his name.
He stood not in need of a cross of ivory or gold, to wear as
a remembrancer of the Saviour's death ; he desired no repre
sentation of Christ on the cross before which to kneel, that he
might tl<e more glory in the cross — for the import of the cross
had been so written on his heart, through faith in the blood
that was there shed, to cleanse from all sin, that he could ex
claim, " But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross
of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto
me, and I unto the world."
This crucifixion of the world to Paul, and of Paul to the world,
was, then, his deliverance from the power of Satan and the
dominion of sin, into the glorious Jiberty of a freeman in Christ
Jesus. To him belonged all the blessings and promises con
nected with that liberty. His was the victory that overcometh
the world ; his to be a cc-worker with God and with Jesus
Christ, in bringing an alienated world back to God ; his to be
an heir of God, and joint-heir with Christ, to an inheritance
incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away ; his
the white robe at tbe last, and the white throne, with palms of
victory in his hands. " Who is he that overcometh the world,
but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God ?" " He

SERMONS. 133
that overcometh, the same shall be clothed iu white raiment ;
and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I
will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.''
Blessed words of Him who died on the cross I
Paul might glory only in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ,
for he was dead, and by it he was alive again ; he was lost,
and by it he was found.
I remarked that the subject which the text suggested for our
meditations was, the cross of Christ the Christian's glory, and
I have individualized Paul, for he was in very deed a Christian,
and dwelt particularly upon the reason which he gave in the
text for glorying in the cross of Christ, for the very purpose of
showing why the cross of Christ, and that only, is the Chris
tian's glory. The Apostle might have assigned other reasons,
but he chose to confine himself to this. He gloried in the
cross of Christ, because by it the world was crucified unto him,
and he was crucified unto the world.
The cross of Christ the Christian's glory.
Now if there be one who bears the name of Christian, if he
glories in anything save the cross of Christ, how came he by
that name, or how is it that he can venture to think himself
one of Christ's disciples ? Do you ask to-day, you who bear
the name of Christian, whether you are one of Christ's
flock? The Saviour asks in reply, in what is thy glory ? He points
you to Gethsemane, and there you shall look on Him " who
was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniqui
ties ;" and he repeats the question, is this thy glory, even this
only, that Christ died for your offences, and rose for your justi
fication ? and by His death is the world crucified unto you, and

131 SERMONS.
you unto the world ? Then you are his — sealed with the seal
of his atoning blood.
Brethren, it is such a crucifixion of the world unto us, and
of ourselves uuto the world, by the cross of Christ, as that
through which the Apostle passed, that we need and must have,
if we would ever obtain the victory ; if we would be dead to
sin, and yet alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
It is related of the Emperor Constantine, that he gloried in
a visible cross, because, as he was marching towards Rome, at
ths head of his army, there suddenly appeared to him, a little
after midday, a pillar of light above the sun, in the form of a
cross, with this inscription, " Conquer by this." The phenome
non, the historian declares, " confirmed his uncertain faith, and
afforded him the truest omen of victory." The Emperor sent
for the ablest artificers and workmen, and ordered them to
frame a cross of gold aud precious stones, according to the
directions which he gave them, as a standard under which
he might lead to victory. Under this standard he entered
Rome, and for many following years, it was only necessary
that it should be displayed, to excite the enthusiasm of his
soldiers. What the visible cross is said to have been to Constantine,
must be Christ on the cross to the Christian's eye of faith. The
promises of God encircle the Cross, and have written in letters
of light, above the brightness of the sun, " By this conquer.''
No cross of gold and precious stones, but the cross stained
with the blood of Christ — a- sin-offering more precious than
rubies. Let this ever excite in us, brethren, a holy enthusiasm
to wage the contest unto death with sin and the world.

SERMONS. 135
" Our faith adores Thy bleeding love,
And trusts for life in One who died ;
We hope for heavenly crowns above,
From a Redeemer crucified.
" Let the vain world pronounce it shame,
And fling their scandals on the cause,
We come to boast our Saviour's name,
And make our triumphs in his cross."
And while to-day we are all called to glory in the cross of
Christ, we are not called to this duty and enjoyment without an
opportunity being given of contrasting the glory of the Chris
tian with the glory of the sinner.
Thine ear may be heavy, boastful traveller to eternity, whose
glory is not in the cross of Christ, and you may not hear the
voice that for nearly two thousand of years has sounded forth
from Calvary, and that comes to you on this blessed day, with
the question, In what is thy glory ? Is it in thy beauty ?
Clothed in the habilaments of the dead, it will cease to attract
the admiring gaze of any ; it will be undistinguished in the
corruptions of the tomb. Thine- accomplishments ? You can
not boast of them when on the very confines of the grave ; for
though they may have served to glue you to the world, they
cannot serve to alleviate a single pain, or dispel the darkness
that gathers over the bed of death. Thy learning, or strength,
or wealth, or worldly honors, do you find your glory in any or
all of these ? Then do you glory in weakness, and rejoice in
infirmity ; for learning cannot open to you the gate of heaven ;
your strength will soon fail ; your wealth will not ward off dis
ease ; it will not smooth the couch of death ; it will not save
the soul. Your worldly honors will leave you all unclothed in
the presence of the King of kings.
The sinner's glory, how evanescent, how vain ! Contrasted

136 SERMONS.
with the glory of the Christian, it becomes nothing, and less
than nothing, ; and that which is the sinner's glory, should be
his shame, since it is for these trifles that he despises to glory
in the cross of Christ, and risks the everlasting interests of his
souL " All is glory around the cross. It was a glorious Sa
viour who died ; it was glorious love that led him to die ; it
was a glorious object to redeem a world ; and it is unspeakable
glory to which "he would raise lost and mined sinners."
Let us cease to marvel, then, that man must be born again
to enter the kingdom of God. " Jesus answered and said unto
Nicodemus, verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be
born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." There is a
wide, a heaven-wide difference, between the glory of the king
doms of this world, and the glory of the kingdom of God. Of
the one God has written " foolishness," of the other " wisdom."
The one is human glory, that continues for a little time, and
then vanisheth away ; the other is the glory of the cross —
Christ crucified — eternal glory, to the believer. The one is
desired, and loved, and eagerly pursued by the carnally minded ;
the other hajth no beauty, is hated and rejected of men, in their
ahenation from God. The one is of the Devil ; the other, of
the Spirit of God. " But the natural man receiveth not the
things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him ;
neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Hence the preaching of Christ crucified, the Christian's glory,
is unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks fool
ishness. Since, then, there must be the new birth ; since the natural
man must be born of water and of the Spirit, that he may
spiritually comprehend the glory of the kingdom of God, and

SERMONS. 137
participate in that glory, let our prayers be, for tlie sinner's
sake, Come, Holy Spirit, with thine own quickening influences,
and unfold the glory of the cross of Christ to every heart. Let
this prayer go up for our own sakes, that we may the more
earnestly desire to glory iu nothing, save in the cross of our
Lord Jesus Christ, as that by which the world is crucified unto
us, and we unto the world.
In conclusion, let me remark that our conceptions of the
power of the cross of Christ, and of the triumphs which await
it, as its revenue of glory, and for which, withal, the Christian
glories in the cross of Christ, cannot exceed the reality. For
who shall tell the number of those who through its power have
already obtained the victory, and are now seated on thrones of
glory, praising the Lamb ? Who sliall count them up, who
have not, as yet, ended life's journe}', but who, sustained by
sin-conquering strength from the cross, are as strangers and pil
grim? on earth, travelling to that city out of sight ? Oh ! how
many have looked, in the throes of spiritual death, upon the
uplifted cross, and lived ? " And I," said the Saviour, " if I
be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."
Though the cross of Christ has already achieved the victory
over many nations, yet the full import of this prophecy and
promise remains to be written down, in the kings and nations
that are yet to come and prostrate themselves before it ; for
Jesus Christ is to have " dominion from sea to sea, and from
the rivers unto the ends of the earth." Superstition and infidel
ity are in vain arrayed against the uplifted cross. It has over
come many adversaries — it will overcome them all. This, this
i-i its revenue of glory, for ths song of the ransomed will be :
'• Thou art worthy to tako the book, and to open the seals

138 SERMONS.
thereof, for thon wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God'by
thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and
nation." Come, come, dying hearer, as yet unreconciled to God, and
let thy glory, from this moment, be only in the cross of Christ.
On the cross, Jesus Christ was slain for you ; by it be the
world now crucified unto you, and you unto the world, that
you may be found amongst the redeemed unto God by his
blood 1

SERMON
Preached at New York, October 19, 1851,

" Who is he that overcometh the world, but lie that believeth that
Jesus is the Son of God ?" — 1 John v. 5.

It is a cardinal truth, that all that is within these hearts of
ours, and all that is without, which is opposed to God, must
be overcome, before we can enter the kingdom of heaven. This
is what the Apostle means by " the world." The natural, ma
terial world, as God has made it, is good, and we have no
contest with it ; but the world within our hearts, the sinful
things of the world, which have obtained a lodgment there,
and about which our affections cluster, with them we ought to
be in conflict ; they would keep us estranged from God, and
would forever hold our souls in slavish subjection to sin and
Satan. " And who is he that overcometh the world, but he
that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God ?" Here, evidently,
the Apostle conveys the idea that faith in Jesus as the Son of
God, sustains a significant relation to the issue of our contest
with the world ; and here, too, he challenges investigation with
special reference to the actual result, according as one is
Supremely influeneed or uninfluenced' by this faith."

140 SERMONS.
Let our attention be directed, on the present occasion, first,
to the question, What is it to believe that Jesus is the Son of
God ? In the next place, we would meet the inquiry contained
in the text, viz. : Who is he that overcometh the world, but he
that believeth that Jesns is the Son of God ?
On opening the New Testament, we find that the most
common appellations given to the Saviour are, " Son of Man,"
and " Son of God." And as the humanity of Christ, or in
other words, that he was possessed of a human nature, is clearly
taught in the Gospel, we do not question ; but the former ap
pellation was assumed to denote that he was a man, and to
guard against the impression that he who appeared, at least, to
be in many things more than a man, was not truly a human
being. But here, too, is the appellation " Son of God ; and it
stands in contrast with the title, " Son of Man." And what,
we ask, is the meaning of this phrase ? for, to believe that Jesus
is the " Son of God," implies, certainly, that we believe the
truth concerning Jesus, which is involved in the name which is
here given to him. Now the natural, and obvious, and Scrip
tural meaning of the phrase is, that the Lord Jesus was a man,
and why is it not the natural and obvious import of the title
" Son of God," that he was something more than a man ; that
he was possessed of another and higher than human nature,
which could not properly be designated by any other title than
the august one given him, in the words " the Son of God." Nor
need we be at a loss to understand the Scriptural import of
this appellation. The Jews understood it to mean that he was
possessed of a nature which made him equal with God ; nor
did the Saviour inform them that, in this respect, they were
laboring under a mistake. On the contrary, he immediately

SERMONS. 141
proceeded to confirm them in this meaning. It is written —
" Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he
not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also, that God was
his Father, niaiiiug liimself equal with God. Then answered
Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, the
Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father
do .; for what things soever he doeth, these also doetli the Son
likewise. For the Father loyetli the Son, and showeth him all
things that himself doeth ; and he will show him greater
works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the Father
raiseth up the dead and quickenth them, even so the Son
quickeneth whom he will : For the Father judgeth no man,
but he hath committed all judgment uuto the Son ; that all
men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He
that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father which
liath sent him." (John v. 18-23.)
I have introduced these verses for the purpose of showing
how the Saviour, on a certain occasion — nor is this a solitary
instance — proceeded to confirm the idea that he was possessed
of a divine nature, and that this was the import of the title,
" the Son of God." Here he was accused of making himself
equal with God ; and so far from denying it is he, that ho
claims to be honored even as the Father is to be houored —
to be loved, obeyed, and worshipped, even as the Father is
to be.
In the Lord of glory, then, dwelt all the fulness' of the God
head bodily ; ahd he it was, " who being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God ; but made him
self of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a ser
vant, and was made in ths likeness of men. And being found

142 SERMONS.
in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient
unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God hath
highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every
name ; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of
things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the
earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is
Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Phil. ii. 6-11.) Thus
have we seen that the leading truth concerning the Saviour,
involved in the title " Sou of God, is that he was of a divine
nature, in contradistinction from the nature which he had, and
by which he was known, as the " Son of Man." And to be
lieve in Jesus, therefore, as the Son of God, is the practical
reception of this great truth — first, in confessing our need of
such a Saviour.
The unbelieving Jews rejected the Saviour, because he
claimed to be the Son of God ; for this they accused him of
blasphemy. Many did not feel, neither did they confess, their
need of such a Saviour as Jesus Christ represented himself to
be. He came to seek and save that which was lost — to bring
back the revolted race of man to its allegiance to God. To do
this, the offering of himself, who was none other than God
manifest in the flesh, was necessary. To the ignominious cross
was the Son of God to be led a sin-offering, that sinners might
be made the righteousness of God in him.
But He was despised and rejected of men — rejected, not as
the Son of Mail, but as " the Son of God ;" and is it not so to
this day ? Do sinful men feel their need of such a Saviour ?
Do they confess that it needed no less a personage to die on
the cross for their sins, than such as Jesus Christ is declared to
be in the title, " the Son of God."

SERMONS. 143
But let us look on the other.side of this picture. You have
read of the Ethiopian treasurer. He was not by birth a Jew.
He was an alien from the Commonwealth of Israel, and a
stranger to the covenants of promise. He was a foreigner —
an African — a negro— a Gentile — an eunuch — and how was he
to become one of the people of God? how was he to believe
that Jesus is " the Son of God ?" The Apostle tells ns that
he was returning from Jerusalem, sitting in his chariot, reading
Esaias the prophet ; and Philip was sent unto him, and he
heard the eunuch reading what we have in the 53d chapter of
Isaiah, in which is predicted almost every fact, and is set forth
every doctrine, connected iu the person* the offices, and the
work of Christ. Then Philip opened his mouth, and begau at
the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. He preached
him, not as the Son of Man only, but as " the Son of God ;"
for as he preached, the Ethiopian asked, " What doth hinder
me to be baptized ?" And Philip said, " If thou believest with
all thine heart thou mayest ;'' and he answered and said, " I
believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." He had been at
Jerusalem, where Immanuel, God manifest in the flesh, had
preached, and suffered, and died, ahd had risen from the dead ;
but on his way back to the land of spiritual darkness from
whence he came, as yet unconverted, he is reading the Scrip
tures ; and as he read, and Philip preached, he felt and con
fessed his need of just such a Saviour as "the Son of God"
alone can be. I repeat his words. " I believe (he said) that
Jesus is the Son of God." We do not now enter upon the
question, why was it necessary that the Saviour should possess
any other than a human nature, in order that he might te
amply qualified to save us from our sins ? This question I -may,

144 SERMONS.
not be able to answer satisfactorily to others, or even to myself.
I do not know that the Bible answers the question. I do not
know that the answer to it forms any part of that which the
Scriptures would have us believe.
But the fact itself, viz. : that Jesus vvas " the Son of God,"
and all that the Bible ascribes to him by virtue of his beino-
" the Son of God," we are to believe, if we believe in him
according to the meaning of the text. And how, I ask, are
we to believe, unless we confess our need of such a Saviour ?
As long as we confess not our need of the interposition of the
very Son of God, to save us from our sins, we are in unbe
lief. This confession *from the heart is, obviously, implied in
believing. An Indian missionary was once seated by the side of a chief,
to tell him how to be at peace with God, and how to be saved
from wrath to come. He spoke of the birth, and life, and
death, of the Saviour, and the object of that death ; and in
conclusion, he dwelt upon the fact that it was " the Son of
God " — possessed of all the attributes which the Scriptures as
cribe to him as the Word made flesh — who came to seek and
save. As the missionary thus spoke, iu such simplicity of lan
guage as to make himself understood, the Chief caught the
idea, and with an eye beaming with emotion, and 'a heart over
flowing with gratitude, as the light of hope entered his heart,
he exclaimed, " Such is the Saviour that I need 1" and con
verted sinners everywhere hold the same language. Such are
their views of the law of God, and their condemnation by that
law, of an atonement ; of what that atonement must be to be
effectual with Him whose law has been broken, and of the
power requisite to keep them in the straight and narrow path

SERMONS. 145
that leads to heaven, that they are ready to confess that none
but au almighty Saviour can meet their case. Could you take
away the almighty power of the Lord, and leave sinners no
other atonement than that which a mere man, or an angel,
might make ; no other arm in which to trust, than one pos
sessed of human strength alone, you would for ever put an end
to redemption from sin, and blast the hopes now cherished in
Christian hearts, and fill them with despair. They can now
say, even as Paul said, " I know whom I have believed, and
am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have com
mitted unto him against that day ;" and the stability of their
confidence is that Jesus is " the Son of God."
But again. To believe in Jesus as " the Son of God," is not
only the practical reception of this great truth, in confessing
our need of such a Saviour ; but, secondly, in trusting
implicitly in his atonement for salvation. He died that God
might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.
"Whoso believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."
" Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Ghrist is come in the
flesh, is of God ; and every spirit that confesseth not that
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God." Here the
Apostle holds up the truth that the Son of God incarnate — that
is, invested with flesh — is the Saviour of the world. And to
believe in him, is to trust implicitly in the atonement of " the
Son of God " incarnate for salvation. The meaning of confes
sion here is implicit trust in him. " For with the heart man
believeth unto righteousness, and with the month confession is
made unto salvation." When the Saviour appeared unto his
Disciples, among whom was Thomas, he said to Thomas " Reach
hither thy finger and behold my hands ; and reach hither thy

146 SERMONS.
hand and thrust it into my side ; and be not faithless but believ
ing." And Thomas answered and said unto him, " My Lord
and my God !" Here was his confession that " the Son of
God " in the flesh died on the cross, and rose for our justifica
tion. Then it was he believed in his heart, and confessed with
his month, Jesus Christ as bis Saviour.
To make a proper acknowledgment of this doctrine, it is not
enough that we admit it to be a doctrine of the Bible ; we are
to receive it in such a manner as to influence our conduct and
whole future life. We are to receive it with a special applica
tion of it to the case of our own souls ; closing with Christ and
his atonement, as our Saviour ; resting on him as all our salva
tion and all our desire. This the Philippian jailer did, this we
must all do, if we would with unreserved confidence trust in
his atonement. It is then the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son,
cleanseth us from all sin. My hearers, there is no other saving
faith in the Son of God, than that of which we speak. A
faith that so makes it a thing of reality with us, that he died
for our offences, as to bring us to him. To live, pray, do, suffer,
hope, and walk as in Christ ; to think much of our sins, but
more of Christ's atonement and grace ; of our guilt and his
blood ; of our wants and his fulness ; of our wretchedness and
his righteousness ; our weakness and his strength.
'"Tis not to plant your hope
Where all things change and die ;
But anchored to the cross of Christ,
Look upward to the sky."
But we were to meet the inquiry contained in the text, viz. :
Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth
that Jesus is the Son of God ? Do we ask again, What is it
to -obtain the victory over the world ? It is not simply togaiu

SERMONS. • 147
a victory over one worldly passion, or to subdue one evil pro
pensity ; it is not to break away from one form of sin, from
one circle of sinful companions. It is not to get rid of those
tastes and habits of childhood and youth for which there is an
early fondness, to be the devotee of other tastes and other
habits, which are, in fact, only the ripe fruit of the same vicious
seed. Nor is it to be what is commonly known as the moral
man ; an approved husband, a good father, an exemplary citi
zen. There are those who exchange the ardent passions of
youth for the becoming soberness of increasiug years ; there are
those who so see the folly of a life of frivolity, as to give it over
forever. There are those who have become disgusted, if not
satiated, with riches, and to whom all their real or fancied
enjoyments are as nothing, in comparison with what they are
with those who are in hot pursuit of wealth. Disappointed in
some scheme of ambition, how many have withdrawn from
political conflicts forever. In weariness of flesh, how many
have ceased from much study, making many books ? There
are those, too, whose hearts are crushed and broken by losses ,
and by the death — or, what is worse than death — by the in
gratitude of their children, and who, abandoning the hope that
their family will be honored, and their name perpetuated, by
those whom they tenderly love, would now seek a lodgment in
some vast wilderness, that they might shun the face of man.
But of these classes, to which can we point as having overcome
the world ? Alas ! all are to be found iii the same condem
nation. If the days of youth could be restored ; if the calamities
which have come upon them could be withdrawn ; if the stream
of their prosperity could return ; they would show as much of

148 . SERMONS.
the spirit of the world as ever they did, and would pursue its
follies and vanities as greedily as they had done before. We
must not mistake dejection, and sadness, and brokenness of
spirit, and lamentations, and want of cheerfulness, for victory
over the world. Indeed, they but prove that the spirit of the
world still reigns in our hearts.
And moreover, all this dejection and sadness, though it may
come from the doings of death even, will pass away, and leave
no trace of any conquest we have seemingly made of the world,
if we are not led by this path to Christ.
We have seen worldly mothers come from the chamber of
death, to introduce another daughter into, the gay world, with
all the brilliancy which fashion prescribes. We have seen a
worldly father mourning over the death of a son, and think
ing that this would wean him from the world— but then,
before many weeks, in the whirl of business, in the -exciting
scenes of ambition, he has proved that his heart is as much
wedded to the world as it ever was. A gay daughter and a
dissolute son have been seen weeping in agony by the bedside of
a dying mother, and promising amendment ; and then, forgetful
of all parting admonitions, have soon gone, with augmented
avidity, into the sinful pleasures of the world. It needs some
thing more than any principle we have by nature, or can obtain
from the world ; it needs something more than any strength
which we have within us — even a strength without us to be
brought within, and made a part of us — if we would overcome
the interior world of these selfish hearts, and the exterior world
of self-indulgences. And when the Apostle asks, " Who is he
that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is
the Son of God ?" he docs, in fact, assert that all others arc

SERMONS. 149
overcome of the world. As has been before remarked, he chal
lenges investigation with special reference to the actual result,
according as one is supremely influenced or uninfluenced by this
faith. And have we not investigated ? and what should be our
decision ? Or do we still hold back from the conclusion to
which we feel that we should come ? Then delay a moment
longer, whilst we put another witness on the stand. What are
you doing, if you are not a Christian, which evinces that you
have overcome the world — your life in evidence ? Are you not
amongst the number of its most devoted friends ? Are you not
wrapped up, engrossed with it ? Does it not have you in wil
ling captivity ? As in heaven's chancery, let your consciences
answer these questions.
Yet again. Go with me to yonder dwelling. It is not the
abode of affluence, nor of poverty. There is a competency of
this world's goods ; and if there was not, it would not spoil the
illustration. Now we have crossed the threshold — now we have
entered the room — and now your eye falls upon a man who,
physically, intellectually, and morally, is not a whit your infe
rior. Moreover, were he desirous of political honors, of literary
fame, of large possessions — of anything which is thought desir
able for this world — might not he make his prospects as fair, if
not fairer, for them, than your own ? But you recognize in him
the unobtrusive, yet stirring, industrious, honest, benevolent,
and professedly Christian citizen — the man who is apparently,
obviously, living for the glory of God ; one to whom you have
for years looked as being what Burke says the Christian is —
''the highest style of man ;" one of God's noblemen ; one of
Christ's unmistakable disciples ; one on whom you have looked
and said, " If there be a Christian, that man is one ; and that

150 SERMONS.
there are Christians, I cannot doubt, since he is what he is."
One of whose death you have thought, and as you thought
been ready to exclaim, " Let me die the death of the righteous,
and let my last end be like his."
This is not a picture of the imagination. Such men have
lived ; such men do live ; you know some such men. But they
are Christians — veritably Christians. They have eome to
Jesus, confiding their all for time and for eternity to him, in
Whose shed blood they alone trust ; they show by an honest
conversation that Christ is in them ; and they ' have overcome
the world, or it has been overcome by no one. They are born
of God ; and whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world.
And this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our
faith. Who, then, is he that overcometh the world, but he
that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God ?
And he that believeth ! No matter who or where he is ; he
that believeth — uo matter of what sex or condition, or color,
or clime — whether a king or his subject, male or female, in
affluence or in want ; of color black as Egyptian darkness, or
white as Caucasian lilly, and even more, soul stained with sins
of crimson dye ; he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God,
overcometh'the world.
My hearers, our whole nature and condition is one perpetual
call for faith I 0 the fulness that there is in Christ 1 0
blessed the peace of a child-like faith ! " I want it 1 I must
and will have it !" May this be the feeling uppermost and
enduring in our hearts. " X would not e'er forsake
The strength that cannot fail,
A poor, blind wanderer ofthe dust,
An atom on the gale."

SERMON
Preached at I\ocklai\d, Me., Jai\. 8, 1854.

"I am crucified with Christ : nevertheless I live ; yet not I, bu
Christ liveth in me ; and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live
by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for
me." — Gal. ii. 20.

If any man could say, " I live," — it was Paul, a servant of
God, au Apostle of Jesus Christ.
He did not mean by this brief sentence, what we mean
when we say of one, " he is alive."
We mean, that there is still the breath of life ; that the soul
has not left its clayey tabernacle ; that the body has not be
come rigid in death : the Apostle meant far more than this :
Let us look for a moment at his manner of life. In point
of intellectual culture and attainments, as well as natural vigor
and energy of mind, he was not inferior to any man of his day.
He had enjoyed the best opportunities which his age
afforded, for becoming acquainted with Greek and Jewish
literature : he had genius to relish, and industry to profit by
these advantages. — A man of iron will aud iron constitution ;
» man whose power of endurance was unequalled ; who

152 SERMONS.
studied under Gamalial, a member of the council and. a doctor
of the law ; who profited in the Jews' religion above many his
equals, and who was qualifying himself for the sacred office of
Scribe and for membership in the Sanhedrim, the highest posi
tion to which he could attain, a persecutor of the church of
Christ. In short, a learned and zealous and persecuting formalist,
resting in the correctness of his creed and the decency of his
life and the- strictness of his religious observances, while his
heart was far from being right with God. — Such was Paul pre
vious to his conversion.
But even subsequent to his conversion and commencing with
the period when he put the question to Jesus Christ, " Lord,
what wilt thou have me to do ?" he was another and a differ
ent man in hig manner of life. Then he brought his talents, his
learning, his energies of body and mind, and consecrated them
to the services of his Redeemer, a living sacrifice, holy, accept
able unto God. — Then, he reckoned himself to be indeed dead
unto sin, but alive unto God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.
And what does his manner of life show, but that he lived ?
Lived to labor faithfully and effectually in the cause of his di
vine Master ; lived to do more for the advancement of the
Redeemer's kingdom by his labors, by the spirit which he man
ifested, by the churches which he organized, by the epistles
which he wrote, than any of his co-temporaries. Lived to die
with the victorious exclamation on his lips, " I have fought a
good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith."
Lived to receive the crown of righteousness at his death. —
Well might the Apostle l\ave written to the Galatians — " I
live." Never man lived, if he did not.

SERMONS. 153
History does not furnish his parallel. No man that has
ever lived, could speak the words, " Hive," with more truth
fulness, or with greater conviction to the minds of those for
whom they were spoken, than did the Apostle to the Gentiles.
Here, then, we may meet at once the question — What is it
to live ? What is it to say— "I live ?" Of whom will God
write in the Book of Life which is to be opened when the dead
will be judged out of those things which are written in the
books, according to their works, of whom will God have written,
" he lived ?"
To say, " I live." Can it be said by him whose life is one of
sensual pleasure ? Whose life is in meats and drinks, and in
the indulgence of the lowest propensities ? — He has the breath
of life in him : so has the brute. But this man of pleasure is
dead while he liveth.
What good has he done ? What better is the world for his
having lived in it ? By what one act" of his, has he glorified
his Maker ?
To say — " I live." Is it well said by the man whose God is
Mammon ?
He lives to-day, as he has lived ; living, scheming, aiming
for the riches which perish. He sees nothing, knows nothing,
cares for nothing, but accumulation ; and to accumulate silver
and gold is his life.
Does he live ? — He heapeth up riches and knoweth not who
shall gather them. He leaves it unto the man who shall be
after him ; and who knoweth whether he shall be a wise man
or a fool ?
" Be hot thou afraid when one is made rich ; when the glory
of his house is increased. For when he dieth, he shall carry

154 SERMONS.
nothing away ; his glory shall not descend after him. Though
while he lived he blessed his soul, (and men will praise thee,
when thou doest well to thyself,) he shall go to the generation
of his fathers ; they shall never see light." He does not so
much as make to " himself friends of the mammon of unright
eousness, that they may receive him into everlasting habita
tions." Of such the Bible declares, that they are fools.
Nor can it be said, " I live," by the men who have chased
till they have won and only won the honors of the Statesman
or the fame of the Jurist.
That eminent statesman, Lord Dundas said, when wished a
happy new year, " It had need be happier than the last, for I
never knew one happy day in it."
Lord Eldon, the successful lawyer, when the whole Bar was
envying the Chancellor, wrote in his journal, " A few weeks
will send me to dear Encombe, as a short resting place be
tween vexation and tlie grave." And there are many who
have won distinction at the dear price of no resting place
between vexation and the grave.
One of the most gifted artists the world has ever beheld,
wrote in the little library where he painted last, " I repent."
" This desire for fame," he asked, " what has it done for
me?" It was St. Helena's kingly prisoner, who exclaimed in
brokenness of heart, " I die before my time, and my body will
be given back to earth, to become food for worms. Such is
the fate of him who has been called the great Napoleon.
What an abyss between my deep misery and the eternal king
dom of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved, adored ; and which
is everlasting over the whole earth." No ! no ! these men of

SERMONS. 155
worldly fame and power, could not say, at their best estate,
" I live." This is not life as God reckons life ; nor of such is
it written as of Paul, they lived.
To say, " I hve." 0 this may be said and only said by him
who lives a life of goodness ; a life of devotion to Jesus Christ
in a good life. Wilberforce, of whom Lamartine as beautifully,
as truly, said, " he went up to the throne of the Eternal with
a million of broken fetters in his hands as evidence of a life
well spent ;" Buxton, Arnold, Robert McCheney, and Henry
Martyn, and others like to them ; the man or woman whose
life is one of earnest goodness, in the sphere in which they
move and according to their ability, can say, in all truthfulness,
in the very words of Paul, " I live." This is life, life all
glorious ; life all victorious ; this is what it is to live. Paul
was more active and zealous after his conversion than he was
before. — The effect of religion is not to make one dead to the
putting forth of the energies of the soul. True rehgion never
made a man indolent and lethargic.
It has converted many a man of indolence, and effeminacy
and self-indulgence, to a man actively engaged in doing good.
It is well said, " if a professor of religion is less .active in the
service of God than he was in the service of Satan ; less la
borious and zealous and ardent than he was before his supposed
conversion, he ought to set it down as full proof that he is an
utter stranger to true rehgion." It. was not so with Paul.
Live, then, to labor in your Master's vineyard. Live to
make your life tell for good on the welfare of mankind. Let
the close of every day register your Christ-like works in the
Book of Life. A blessed life this which pan leave no chasm
between thee and the " Anointed." But you will observe, the

156 SERMONS.
text is something more than the expression on which we have
dwelt, though it be of itself sufficient for a text.
fi The Apostle proceeded — " yet not I, but Christ liveth in
me." In the previous clause, he had said — that he lived. And,
now, lest it should be inferred that he meant to say, it was by
his own energy and power, he lived, he points to Jesus Christ
as the source of all the life he had.
Christ lived in him by his doctrines, his precepts, his
example ; his spirit, his fellowship, his promises. Here was
the great moving power, the ever acting force of his life. — He
had become a new man in Christ. — He had new views of him
self ; new views of God ; of the law ; of the gospel as God's
truth ; of Jesus as God's Christ ; of the world as apostate
from God ; of the church as God's people ; and of the Saviour
as the head of it, by whose name alone man could be saved.
Christ living in the heart of man ; this it is which makes him
live. And before Christ is in him, the hope of glory, he is dead.
And do we ask, How did Paul know that Christ lived in him ?
He had just said, " I am crucified with Christ." And by
his crucifixion with Jesus,- he rose with him to newness of life.
" Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall
also live with him."
"I am crucified with Christ."
By this he meant, as he in another place in his Epistle to
the Galatians expresses himself that, by the cross of Christ,
the world was crucified unto him and he unto the world. This
is to say, that the effect of the death of Christ on the cross had
been such upon him, as to break the world's hold upon his

SERMONS. 157
mind and heart and life and bring him on to the side of the
Saviour. This was how he knew that Christ lived in him.
And so we may know, if Christ be in us and we in him.
If by the sufferings and death of the Redeemer for our sins ;
if by the love of Christ, we have been led to take our affec
tions from things of earth and place them on things above ; if
the dominion of sin in our hearts has been broken ; if ambition
for fame and power, and riches ; if the pride and pomp of life ;
if hateful passions are now so obnoxious to us that in them we
see the sins that brought the Saviour to the tree, and renounc
ing them, we do, henceforth, devote ourselves to the service of
Him, who bare our sins in his own body, that we being dead
unto sin, might be alive unto God, through Jesus Christ our
Lord ; surely the Saviour is in us as he was in the Apostle, by
His doctrines, precepts, example, spirit, fellowship, power and
grace. " And the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the
¦ faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for
me." " And the life which I now live in the flesh."
Brethren, what a blessed life was this when compared with
the life which the Apostle had previously led !
His soul was on fire when he thought of the Cross and a
perishing world. He would not, he could not refrain from
effort. Ease might proffer him indulgence ; wealth might dis
play her bribes ; pleasure might exhibit her charms ; perse
cution might bring out and spread in his path a fearful array
of scourges and chains and axes — but he looked at the Cross ;
and beholding the Son of God suspended there, he armed him
self, likewise, with the same mind. As he now lived amoDg

158 SERMONS.
men, he was by no means exempted from the cares and anxie
ties of this life, but he carried the life-giving principles of
rehgion into all his duties and all his trials.
Ever sustained by these principles, he was making a safe pas
sage over the stormy sea to the haven of an eternal rest. And
what is religion worth to us ? What is it worth to any man ?
Wherein does it make us to differ from others, if it be not a re
ligion of power, of vitality sufficient to be to us all that we
need? If we want religion at all, we want it for daily duties ; we
want it for daily trials ; we want it for that which nothing but
religion can afford. We have put to the test worldly max
ims ; we have tried stolid philosophy ; we have been under the
yoke of the law, and we can write of them all, vanity. " Yanity
of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities ; all is van
ity." But to fear God and keep his commandments ; — by this
life which the Christian now lives in the flesh, doing this by the
power of the gospel which he could not do by the law, this is
the religion of life-giving principle. It makes the life what it
ought to be ; it animates with the hope of a glorious immortal
ity. It changes death into a sleep in Jesus to rise with him,
having our vile bodies " fashioned hke unto his glorious body,
according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue
all things unto himself."
And Paul's life in the flesh was what it was, by faith.
He Jived by the faith of the Son of God. By confiding in
him, by looking to him for strength.
It is by faith alone we are joined to Christ crucified. " And
this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith."
i Never could he have said of himself — " I am crucified with

SERMONS. 159
Christ" — had he not believed in him ; and believing in him, his
strength was equal to the day.
Here is consolation, You are asking, perhaps, as you are
thinking upon the question, what must I do to be saved ? and
hear the reply of Jesus, as he gave it to the young ruler — " Fol
low me ;" how can I do this ? — I am weak, I am tempted.
Ease, honor, wealth, friends, home — they all conspire to keep
me from becoming a disciple. — If to-day, I come to the Lord's
side, shall I not soon dishonor my profession ?
" Do this," said Jesus, pointing to the bread and wine, as he
gave it to his disciples, in remembrance of Me. But a father's
command ; a husband's displeasure ; a mother's feeling, stand
between me and this table.
We have said, here is consolation to one thus enquiring, and
thus agitated by conflicting emotions ; consolation in the great
truth, that the life which you are required to live in the flesh,
can be lived by faith in the Son of God. In this was the
triumph of Paul. And there have been, and are triumphs of
faith equal to his : — It is said to you, live this life, not by your
own strength, but by the strength of faith, which is the
strength of the Son of God.
But the comfort of a comforting hope, you can get in no
other way. Jesus will not let you hope with a hope, which
shall be an anchor to the soul, both sure and stedfast, while
you are so distrustful of Him that, you venture not to take him
at his word. •
It was the Son of God who loved Paul and gave himself for
him. " For God so loved the world, that he gave his only be
gotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish,
but have everlasting life." The appeal of the love of Christ is

160 SERMONS.
as truly and as much to every sinner, as it was to Paul.
There is not a hint in the Scriptures that can suggest the ap
prehension to any sinner that the Saviour did not give himself
to death for him.
There is not the remotest allusion to any class of sinners for
whom the Son of God did -not die, though there are many re
ferences to classes for whom he died in vain I There is no
text of Scripture that expresses the sentiment that Jesus did
not die for every man.
The class of passages which assert that He died for " his
sheep," and that he gave himself for " his Church," do not at
all exclude others. Such passages only point out the actual
result of his death, and not its design and aspect and adapta
tion. This is truth, that Christ tasted death for every man ;
therefore every man can say, and ought to believe, that the
Redeemer died for him. He can use the language of Paul —
" who loved me, and gave himself for me ;" for the Saviour
died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live
unto themselves, but unto Him who died for them.
It is this appeal of the love of Christ, the love evinced by
the blood shed on Calvary for every man, which is to-day
made, as it has been of long time made, to every impenitent
sinner. It is. this appeal of the love of God, who spared not his own
Son but delivered him up for us all, which is brought to the
door of every heart, tad waits at that door, for the decision
which admits or excludes the Saviour.
We have only to add, when we view the matter in this
aspect, the guilt of a sinful life, as well as of a sinful death, is
evident.

SERMONS. 161
Sinful men ask, wherein is the guilt in' living as we do? —
Wherein is the guilt of not believing in the only begotten Son
of God ? — The guilt consists in the great fact that life after
the flesh is a life of transgression of the holy law of God. The
guilt consists in neglecting " so great salvation" — the basis of
the appeal of which to your heart is that of love.
YotLgrant that such is the nature of this appeal that it is of
more avail with you than any other appeal can be ; it is so in
the things of this world. Let the word of admonition, or re
proof, or entreaty fall upon your ear from the lips of one who
has given evidence of love for you which you cannot gainsay
and you are affected ; — you promise amendment. But, why
so insensible to the appeal of the Saviour, who has given the
strongest possible proof of his love for your soul ? This is
guilt unparalleled.
Neglector of the cross of Christ, you will see it to be such
guilt in the world to which you are hastening. In the world
to come, nothing will intervene to hide from your view the vast
dimensions of the guilt which accrued from rejecting the atone
ment of the Son of God. We would that to-day, the appeal
of a Saviour's love might be effectual, that you may say in the
language of Paul —
"lam crucified with Christ : nevertheless, I live ; yet nbt
I, but Christ liveth in me ; and the life which I now live in
the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me
and gave himself for me."

SERMON
Preached at Portland, Me., Jur\e 27, 1855,

Sefore the Maine Missionary Society, at its Anni
versary.

"And this I do for the Gospel's sake, that I might be partaker
thereof with you." — 1 Cob. ix. 23.

Man's life begins in action ; in the action of the lungs and
heart, the opening of the valves, the circulation of life's cur
rent in every part of the system, and in the exercise of the
mental faculties. For, who can show that the mind of the
infant is inactive ? Who beheves that it has not its field of
observation and thought, into which it enters at once on its
discoveries — the circle of which in continuation enlarges its
circumference ?
Life, with all its energies, its intellectual and moral and
physical powers, does, and must, have an object, for the sake
of which it is spent. Most deplorably ignoble would life be,
were it otherwise. With every man there is a " this," which
he is doing as the means to an end. And it becomes the chief
subject of his thoughts, concentrating his energies ; it is the
development of the decision to which he has come, fixing the
course of his activity, in which his deeds will make for them-

SERMONS. 163
selves a channel, broad and deep, to the judgment of " the
quick and the dead."
It was so with the Apostle, for he wrote to the Corinthians :
" And this I do for the Gospel's sake, that I might be partaker
thereof with you."
The text naturally leads us to consider : The Course of the
Apostle ; the Cause for which such was his course ; and the
Reason which he gave for his course.
I. The Course of Paul. " This I do," he said. And what
was it he did ?
There is a synoptical view of the ninth chapter of the first of
Corinthians, from which we get aid in this inquiry. Analyzed,
we find the chapter to be a record of rights which Paul claims
for himself and his fellow Apostles, and in a way which shows
that he thought the Corinthians to be harboring unwarrantable
inferences in questioning these rights. His right to main
tenance, with whatever family he had, at the expense of those
among whom he labored ; his right to forbear manual labor, as
did some of the Apostles. And still, it is a record of his waiv
ing these rights.
It is the Apostle's declaration of freedom from any obliga
tion by which his fellow men could demand that he should be
the servant of men for their conversion, with the assertion that
he enslaved himself to all, complied with the rites and customs
of both Jews and Gentiles to the extent of- accommodating
himself in all things to all men, that he might by all means save
some. Have we not here the positive in the life of the Apostle,
within which was his entire course for the Gospel's sake ; ex
cluding, on the one hand, everything that was incompatible

164 SERMONS.
with his purpose, and including, on the other, everything that
could be made subservient to it ?
Was he of rich intellectual culture, and of ample means to
indulge his literary taste ; in judicial knowledge not a novice ;
of singularly untarnished reputation, and in his religion an ap
proved zealot ? Did he desire to go, too, from the school of
Gamaliel to the title and office of a doctor of the law, and " to
be an eminent member of that theological party, to which so
many of the Jews were looking for the preservation of their
national life, and the existence of their national creed ?" And
surrounded by influential friends, and distinguished for the
ardor with which he prosecuted his design of exterminating the
infant Christian Church, was he rapidly gaining the goal for
which he aimed ? The knowledge which he had intensely
sought, he eagerly abandoned as he came into the light which
beamed from the mountains of Judea, eclipsing all that ever
shone from Olympus or Parnassus.
The religion in which he was nurtured, and which he consci
entiously believed, he renounced ; and this renunciation, involved
self-excision from Jewish kindred and society and church, and
from the literature, science, and philosophy of his sphere.
And the work on which Paul entered, was that of preaching
the doctrines of the despised one of Nazareth, who was mocked
and crucified at Jerusalem, who died and was buried — to
spend his life with all his powers, to know nothing but to do
everything in the face of all obstacles, until seas were crossed
and continents traversed, and every kingdom leavened with the
glad tidings of Christ. In his Second Epistle to the Corinth
ians, he graphically, with his customary brevity, shows what
were the obstacles, and perils, he surmounted.

SERMONS. 165
And, moreover,- there was his labor for daily bread during
his Apostleship, insomuch that his hands were scarred with the
toil of years when he held them to the views of the elders at
Miletus. And to the Thessalonians he wrote, as he might have
written to all the churches, " ye remember, brethren, our labor
and travail : for laboring night and day, because we would not
be chargeable unto any of you, we preached unto you the
Gospel of God."
The world crucified unto him, and he unto the world ; he
crucified with Christ, that he might live the" life which, as an
Apostle, he lived in the flesh. How comprehensive, therefore,
is the nfeaning of the words " this I do," as they come from
the Apostle of the Gentiles.
" This I do," was his life of renunciation — excision — conse
cration — crucifixion, " for the Gospel's sake."
II. The Cause for the sake of which such was the course of
the Apostle. .
" This I do, for the Gospel's sake."
We remark — It was a cause, of the greatest moral dignity.
The cause is comprehended in the name of Jesus, which Paul
was to bear " before the Gentiles, and Kings, and the children
of Israel," as the alone " name under Heaven, given among
men, whereby we must be saved."
The cause " of the Gospel of the Grace of God," — the salva
tion of souls, and the conversion of the world by God's grace,
through our Lord Jesus Christ. It is impossible to conceive
of another cause which, from its nature, is invested with such a
measure of moral dignity ; since in this respect it luminously,
and immeasurably, transcends every other.
The progress and consummation of many another cause may

166 SERMONS.
be attended with good to the bodies and souls of men ; but it
must infinitely fail of doing for either what the Gospel, in its
achievements, does for both ; for, by its inherent properties, its
scope compasses the good there is in every cause.
The Gospel begins its work for the good of mankind, where
no other cause, having in view the welfare of man, begins its
work, — at the heart, to new create it, that from henceforth it
be the workmanship of God " created in Christ Jesus unto
good works."
There is contained in the Gospel a system of Moral Science,
and Christian Ethics, and Divine Philosophy, which effectually
works, and is worked by, the peculiar truths which the sacred
writers teach respecting our depravity and ruin, our redemption
by Christ, and the result of our present conduct in a state of
endless retribution.
For a city besieged the problem was once solved, how to
rid the nation of its enemies by their universal destruction.
But for a world conquered by " the prince of the power of
the air," the problem which the Gospel solves is, how to hurl
this prince from his throne, and change the enemies of God
into his friends,-— whether found in the palace or the hovel, —
the schools of philosophy and chief places of learning, or in the
nurseries of ignorance" and superstition, — how to raise them
from the depths of sin to the true dignity of manhood and
brotherhood on earth, and to the sublimity " of kings and
priests unto God" in heaven. Such is the nature of every
other cause except that of the Gospel, that, benevolent as the
cause may be, it can never trace its triumphs into that world,
where the everlasting anthem of redemption is sung, — the key
notes of which the Gospel alone can give.

SERMONS. 167
We adduce the nature of the Gospel, to show that its cause
is of the greatest moral dignity.
Again. It was a cause which the Apostle knew to be effect
ual in its progress.
Even " the power of God and the wisdom of God," " casting
down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself
against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ." It was from Ephe-
sus, that pleasure-loving city in Asia Minor, the most illustrious
seat of idolatry in the whole pagan world, Paul wrote to the
Corinthians — there, where the worship of idols was intrenched
in the hearts of the people, not only by its adaptation to pro
mote every sinful indulgence, but by the learning and wealth
which it there concentrated, and by the strength of the civil
arm which was around it for its defence. For more than three
years had the power of the Gospel, under the preaching of the
Apostle, been witnessed in tnis city, confounding the Jews in
the synagogues, and oppressors in the school of Tyrannus,
gathering a church, and undermining the temple of Diana ;— :
unmistakable evidence, this, of its being effectual in its progress.
And similar was the evidence of the power of the Gospel, in
all the regions through which Paul had passed," and in nearly
all the principal cities which he visited, publishing the name of
Jesus and salvation by none other. He knew that it was
effectual in its operation, and had the trophies of its victories
not only in the cities of the Jews, but in the cities of the Gen
tiles likewise. He had been with Barnabas at Antioch, " the
Heathen Queen and Metropolis of the East," and had seen the
grace of God, and was glad. With Barnabas he had journeyed
on a missionary enterprise to Selucia, Salamis, Paphos, Perga,

168 SERMONS.
Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe ; and such was
the effect with which' the Gospel was preached in these cities,
that many Jews and Gentiles believed, and glorified the word
of the Lord. Churches were established in the faith, and in
creased in number daily. From Troas westward, in answer to
the call for help, the empire of Jesus Christ took its way, " to
subdue the powers of an extensive heathen region, and bring
the civilization of the world into captivity to the obedience of
Christ." In Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, in licentious
Corinth, — so distinguished for its refinement and learning as to
be called " the light of all Greece," the Apostle had preached
Jesus and the resurrection, and had seen the Gospel's might, in
its progress, to get to itself inany believers and faithful disci
ples of its great Teacher, in these strongholds of heathen
darkness. But, more than all, he had himself experienced the
efficacy of the Gospel in its march, when, on his way to Damas
cus, he was made an obedient subject of the faith which he
hated, and called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ, and to wit
ness in others, by his own preaching of the Cross, what in his
own conscience and heart he had felt, that it was mighty
through God for the work whereto it was sent.
With respect to this cause, we observe, moreover, Paul be
lieved in its prospective conquests. He believed that Jesus
Christ of Nazareth, who was crucified, and whom God raised
from the dead, was the corner-stone of a spiritual temple, — the
temple of God, to which the law of Moses and the temple at
Jerusalem would give place ; that Jesus was " the Christ of
God," and the preaching of Christ crucified the power of God
which was to outroot the tenets of Pharisees and Saddueees,
and demonstrate the foolishness of the doctrines of the Rab-

SERMONS. 169
binical schools, and be the glory of God's people, Israel. He
believed that, through the blood of Christ, they who were far
off had been brought near, and both Jews and Gentiles made
one, the wall which parted them being taken down ; and, that
now the light to lighten the Gentiles would shine upon them,
to whom, far hence, he was to go, and of whom there would be
the seals of his Apostleship. With the eye of faith, the Apostle
surveyed the regions through which he was to pass, where so
many millions were sitting in the shadow of death, and saw
the triumphal progress of the Gospel even to Rome ; and that
proud capital of a great pagan empire, yielding to the cross, —
a church in the household of Csesar, — " and her seven hills as
the seven golden candlesticks, to send the light of truth
abroad." " Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every
creature ;" and " lo ! I am with you always, even unto the end
of the world." " And I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto
me." " This command and promise which constitute the great
missionary charter of the Church for all time, and in which
is the sum and theory of all spiritual instrumentality," being
believed by the Apostle, could he question that facilities would
be multiplied to diffuse the knowledge of salvation, until the
whole world would be filled with "the light of the knowledge
of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ," " as the
waters cover the sea ?"
Finally. To this cause — the cause of the Gospel — was justly
due the offering which Paul made.
It was in accordance with the spirit of the Gospel that, hav
ing been made a subject of its renewing grace, and a partaker
of its faith, he should most earnestly desire to be its minister

170 SERMONS.
" according to the gift of the grace of God given unto (him) by
the effectual working of His power, and to make all men see
what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning
of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by
Jesus Christ, to the intent that now unto the principalities
and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church,
the manifold wisdom of God."
This only, on the part of the Apostle, would have been
Christ-like. The cause was the cause of God — who " so loved the world,
that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth
in Him, should not perish, but have everlasting life."
And the cause of him "who, being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God ; but made him
self of no reputation, and took upon himself the form of a
servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And being
found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became
obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." It was the
cause of Him, who, as the Apostle declares, loved him, and
gave himself for him. It was the offering of himself. „" Lord,
what wilt thou have me to do?" Make me what thou
wouldst — use me as thou wilt. My talents, acquirements, pro
perty, time, body, soul, life, in all that life can be — from day to
day, until life shall end, one continued offering I make to thee.
" Zeal and duty are not slow
But on occasion's forelock watchful wait.''
As it pleased God to make the foolishness of preaching the
foremost instrumentality, by which to diffuse the Gospel to the
salvation of them that believe — to the Gospel was justly due

SERMONS. _ 171
what the Apostle could give, himself, to be of the great com
pany of preachers by which the earth should be belted with the
doctrines of the One crucified. Had Paul made a less offering
to the cause, how vastly below the sublimity of the object of
the Gospel would the offering have been ; and how vast the
chasm between it and the transcendent character and rights of
Him with whom the cause originated 1 And standing as the
Apostle did, at the very commencement of " the work-days of
the spirit process," by which the world was to be reclaimed by
such means, as God had appointed to give success to the truth,
of what an illustrious example of life-long preaching of Jesus
Christ, and of missionary zeal, would the Church have been
deprived, had he not devoted his life to the furtherance of the
Gospel ?
III. But let us come to the Reason which the Apostle gave
for his course.
" And this I do for the Gospel's sake, that I might be par
taker thereof with you."
That he might save himself, and those to whom he preached ;
that he mightbe of the number of God's laborers in extending
the kingdom of the Redeemer, gathering and confirming
churches, and at last be hke the Son of God, and see him as
he is, not only made Paul's soul strong to labor, but to en
dure great things for the name of Jesus, This great object
buoyed him up ; it carried him forward ; it enabled him to
surmount obstacles in the way of his preaching the Gospel,
such as have not been exceeded in number nor in magnitude.
Though greatly disappointed, and much grieved, at the unpro-
pitious result of his labor in some places ; and most disappointed
and most grieved by the conduct and state of some of the

172 . SERMONS.
churches, to which he looked for " better things ;" though
deeply conscious of his weakness, and at times filled with fore
bodings and fears, knowing not the things which should befall
him, save that the Holy Ghost witnessed in every city, that
bonds and afflictions were in store for him, and always weary
by incessant toil ; yet, never was he so greatly in this condition,
as not to find in this reason a motive, which made him persist
ent in his service of Christ, to the frequent hazard of. his life,
and through the hottest fires of persecution, even to the block
of martyrdom. He could recollect the years which he spent
in the schools, and all the circumstances which, as they cradled
his infancy and nurtured his manhood, gave occasion for the
highest expectations, with respect to what he would be and do,
for his nation and the Jewish church. All along through his
twenty years Apostleship, there were points from which
Paul must have looked back to the scenes through which he
had passed, and the conflict he had endured, but no expression
of regret, in view of his course, fell from his lips, or had place
in his heart. In his first, and in his second Roman imprison
ment, when most of his earthly friends forsook him, and he
foresaw his sentence to death, not a regretful word did he utter.
His life had been an eventful one, of exhausting service for the
Gospel's sake, for which he was to die, but of which he had no
occasion to speak, as it rapidly approached its end, as spoke
one of Europe's veteran diplomatists of the results of his life :
" Behold eighty-three years past away ! What cares ! What
agitation ! What anxieties ! What ill-will ! What sad com-
plications ! And all without other results, except great fatigue
of mind and body, and a profound sentiment of discouragement
with regard to the future, and disgust with regard to the past !"

SERMONS. 173
By the labors of Paul, the proclamation of the Gospel had
been accomplished in full measure, that all the Gentiles might
hear. And his last words were of his readiness " to be offered,"
and of " a crown of righteousness " which he was confident
awaited him beyond the grave. Nor in that " crown of right
eousness " is all of what is, for what the Apostle did for the
Gospel's sake. But, " bequeathing to the Church, in her gov
ernment - and discipline, the legacy of his apostolic labors —
leaving his prophetic words to be her living oracles — pouring
forth his blood to be the seed of a thousand martyrdoms " —
truly he could have said, " in the very article of death, with
his mind as clear as the setting sun without a cloud, and as
luminous too," and with meaning in the words — " I yet live !"
For, "he being dead yet speaketh," and will speak, until "the
heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements
shall melt with fervent heat."
There is a practical, personal application of this subject by
which it is to be made useful. We come to it in the remark,
that the Gospel should be no less with us than it was with the
Apostle. Is it not to-day the same glorious Gospel of which
he was a preacher — to be preached with like glorious results ?
The same Gospel now as then, and to achieve like victories ?
Truly, to the Gospel all principalities are to come down, even
the crown of their glory ; for by its " Christ, the power of
God and the wisdom of God," the reign of Israel's Redeemer
is to extend from sea to sea and from pole to pole. The claims
of the Gospel upon us can be no less than they were upon the
Apostle. We should be as willing to be wholly used for its
advancement as was Paul. " A good minister of Jesus Christ"
feels the authority of these claims ; therefore he is such for the

174 SERMONS.
Gospel's sake. Free from all men, yet does he make himself
servant unto all, that he may gain the more. And far better
would it be that that man should be out of the ministry, than
in its caUing, who cannot say with the Apostle, " Woe is unto
me, if I preach not the Gospel."
And every sacrifice to preach the Gospel has its example in
Paul. What though the cost to its minister be the relinquishment of
all he counted gain ? What though to continue in the ministry .
he is forced to labor with his own hands, or to lack things
needful for himself and for those whose interests are entrusted
to his care ? What though the measure of his hfe is filled
with cares and perplexities, and shortened too, if it must be,
to preach the Gospel of the grace of God ? Come what will,
and come what may, in fulfilling his ministry, before him in the
path was Paul, who, of " the hope of the Gospel," wrote to
the Colossians : " Whereof I Paul am made a minister ; who
now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is
behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's
sake, which is the Church."
We have heard it said in a censorious spirit, the tendency
of ministers at this day is, to secularization. The complaint is
that some of this holy calling combine with it another, and do
not give themselves wholly to their appropriate work ; as
though they did this of choice, and were not compelled to it by
the meagre hving which is given them by those unto whom
they have sown spiritual things ; as though it were not with
painful reluctance they engaged in any other work, for a day
or an hour, than that of performing the duties of the office in
which their whole sonl is wrapped up, to obtain the means of

SERMONS. 175
subsistence, which all their fidelity in the ministry has never
brought to them from those who, in justice, should have pro
vided these means for their pastor. Yerily, it has come to pass
that if ministers give themselves wholly to the functions of
their office, and have not a sufficiency for themselves and fami
lies, the question is asked with much astonishment, Why do
they continue in the ministry, to the omission of the Christian
duty of providing for their own, and their own house ? But, if
from a people whose society-support of their minister gives him
not enough to fulfill this manifest duty, he goes to another
people of more means, or more willing to have him " live of the
Gospel," then the exclamation of some is : " 0, we see how it
is ; though they are the ministers of Him who was anointed to
preach the Gospel to the poor, yet how unlike the Saviour I
they do not remain to preach it, and suffer with the poor, but
go to bear it to the rich, or where they will get more of the
things of this world."
Now, we hold that that minister is but following in the foot
steps of Paul in sacrifice aud suffering, who, conscious that he
is called to be a preacher of the Gospel, remains in his calling,
though at the cost, if necessity requires it, of daily labor in
some avocation for daily bread, that he may preach the Gospel.
And although in this course there is a hardness which churches,
we are sure, do not lay upon their ministers without the dis
pleasure of God, in his withdrawal or withholding of some
blessing, still it is comforting to such ministers to know that
there was a workshop in Corinth, where Paul made tents, by
reason of the necessity that was put upon him, and at the same
time preached the Gospel to the Corinthians — nor was he for
that reason any the less an ambassador of heaven.

176 SERMONS.
And we may learn from this subject, that the well-sustained
office of the Gospel minister has distinguished honor, as well as
signal labor, and great reward. It is God's ordinance, and
gloriously has he owned and honored it in the world ; and he
will own and honor it while the world lasts. The subject of
the minister is Jesus Christ — his cross his pulpit — his blood his
eloquence. Though his preaching the Gospel " may be a poor
exhibition of a rich subject, still the call of. God is in it ; the
Saviour is in it ; the promise of the Spirit is in it ; and in it
the conversion of souls." I quote the words of Robert Philip :
" Even that kind of preaching which never won applause by
its eloquence, nor kindled public curiosity by its flame, has made
Britain and America whatever they are, as holy nations, and
much of what they are as free and powerful nations. * * *
And a great majority both of the dead in Christ, and of the
living in Jerusalem, were won to Christ, not by the giants of
genius or erudition, but by the watchfulness and fidelity of
hard-working pastors. The claims of the pulpit do not, there
fore, rest upon the memory of its brightest ornaments. They
rest far more upon the memory of its countless converts.
Its record is on high. All in heaven who washed their
robes in the blood of the Lamb, are the vouchers and the
trophies. " The pulpit; — the ordinary pulpit — has always been the
chief means of filling heaven. No other chair of verity can
point to the multitudes around the throne, and say — ' Behold
the children whom God hath given me.'
" The pulpit can say with all truth of all the redeemed
amongst men — ' all these souls are mine ' instrumentally ;
whereas it is more than doubtful whether there be one soul

SERMONS. 177
in heaven, to whom anything on earth was so useful as
preaching." It is so ; and in the faithful performance of the duties of his
office, the Bishop shall both save himself and them that hear
him ; and souls rescued from death are " gems brighter by far
than ever sparkled on the brow of royalty."
It only remains to be said what the text evidently teaches,
that if we speed not the preaching of the Gospel for the Gos
pel's sake, we lack evidence that we are partakers of its ben
efits with those who preach it. For the text is the same as if
the Apostle had said that you, Corinthians, may give evidence
that you are partakers of the Gospel by your endeavors to
diffuse its light and to give it abundant success. And now, that
I likewise may afford evidence of my discipleship, and that I
share with you in its present and future benefits, " this I do " —
such is my life, " for the .Gospel's sake."
As in the Church there are " many members in one body and
all members have not the same office," we do not say that all
are to give themselves to the work of the ministry. But what
we do say is, that all are' to speed the preaching of the Gospel
to every creature, by helping those who are "the called" to
the work, into, and helping them in, the field ; and that if we
do not this, we are wanting in scriptural evidence that we have
been new created by the Gospel, the workmanship of God unto
good works. For how shall men hear the Gospel without a
preacher ? " and how shall they preach, except they be sent ?"
and how shall they be sent, except those who are all indebted
to the Gospel " feel the force of their obligations to send every
where its preachers, and support them in fulfilling their com
mission ?

178 SERMONS.
Through the Maine Missionary Society, we have now, as we
have had, opportunity to further the Gospel in its progress, by
aiding some of its ministers to preach it, where God has placed
them in the field, and others to proclaim its truths whither
soever His providence shall direct. These ministers are not
beggars for our alms. No preacher of the Gospel is of this
class. He is a " servant of Jesus Christ," and " is worthy of
his hire " from those who are blessed by his service, even as he
gives them the opportunity of sending the Gospel to those
who have it not. These missionaries are faithful, but
straightened servants of God, it may be, for they are of the
class of which an eminent statesmen, whose words did not .
exceed _his knowledge, said in the most august tribunal of this
nation :
" I take it upon myself to say that in no country in the
world, upon either continent, can there be found a body of
ministers of the Gospel, who perform so much service to
man, in such a full spirit of self-denial, under so little en
couragement from government of any kind, and under cir
cumstances always much straightened, and often distressed, as
the ministers of the Gospel in the United States, of all denom
inations." There is no ground of apprehension, however large may be
your contribution, that any of these ministers will commit the
offence, for which the Rev. E. Irving said he would be ashamed
of a minister :
" Oh 1 if thou grow rich — oh ! if thou shouldst die rich, I
will be ashamed of thee."
It is true of them that the cloak and parchments, i. e., their
decent apparel and their books — these are their riches. They

SERMONS. 179
are living illustrations in America, of what Dr. Irving meant
when he gave it in charge to Mr. McLeon :
"Brother : If God should bless thee with a wife and child
ren, put no money in the bank for them, but write prayers in
the word of the Book of Life. Be this thy Bank of Faith ;
be this thy Exchange — even the Providence of God, and let
the Lords of the Treasury be the Prophets and Apostles who
went before thee. Go thou out as poor a man as thou comest
in, and let the hving bury thee when thou diest."
Therefore, shew ye to these ministers, *' and before the
Churches, the proof of your love " for your country and for
Jesus Christ, by a ready and Gospel-apportioned contribution
of your silver and gold " for the Gospel's sake " — the more
widely to diffuse, through their instrumentality, a saving
knowledge of the Redeemer of lost Men.

SERMON
Preached at Rockland, March 26, 1864.

'What lack I yet?"— Matt. xix. and a part of the 20th verse.

The Saviour had just laid his hands on little children and
blessed them, thus evincing the comprehensiveness of his sym
pathy, and his acceptance of any token of regard, which is
commensurate with the ability of him who offers it ; and he_
was leaving the hallowed spot, to pursue his work of mercy.
But he cannot at once depart. True, the crowd by which he
was surrounded begins to disperse, but it was only to open the
way for one who was hurriedly approaching, to put to the
Saviour that question of deepest interest : " Good Master,
what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life ?"
And the good Master graciously answered this question. But
why another question from the lips of the young ruler ? " What
lack I yet ?" And why this question after the Saviour had
said, " If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments ?"
Was it because he felt that he lacked nothing to have eternal
life? Or was it because there was still the feeling that he
lacked something more than he already possessed, to fit him for

SERMONS. 181
the kingdom of heaven ? If the former, it was on the ground
that he had already attained what was required. If the latter,
it goes to show that, notwithstanding the highest moral attain
ments, there may be the conviction that something more is
needed to afford an entrance into the kingdom of God.
Let me, then, of every person of this assembly enquire, as
you ask the question, "What lack I yet to have eternal life ?"
do you ask it, feeling that you lack nothing ?
Perhaps you do not profess to be a Christian ; some such
there are of those who hear me. And do you propound the
question, feeling that you lack no one thing to enter heaven ?
You at least, then, have been characterized for your strict
honesty, your high-toned morality, from your childhood. You
early formed, and have retained, the habit of prayer ; you have
obeyed all the second table of the law, or you have not reached
the point to which he attained, or thought he had attained,
who first asked, "What lack I yet to have eternal life ?" For,
hear what he said, " All these things have I kept from my
youth up."
What things ? The things comprehended in obedience to
the commandments : Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not com
mit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false
witness against thy neighbor. " I have honored my father and
mother. . I have loved my neighbor as myself."
If you do not come up to this mark ; if you come short in a
single particular ; if there has been one act of disobedience to
a single requirement of the sacred table of the law, how, then,
can you feel that you lack nothing to enter heaven ? And let
it be remarked here, no one can plead before God that he
has kept all His law except in one point. Observe, we begin

182 SERMONS.
just where the only man in the days of the Saviour, of whom
we have any knowledge, began with his specification of the
good things he had done, and on the ground of which he sup
posed he had kept the commandments, and had a claim for
eternal life. If he had not done these good things, he would
by no means have supposed himself fit for heaven. Certainly,
therefore, no one who falls below this standard, should feel that
he lacks nothing to have eternal life. But let us suppose that
he comes up to this standard in the overt act — that is, there
has been no transgression of the letter of the law. What
then ? Have we never read the Saviour's.interpretation of the
law, whereby he shows that the commandments are not obeyed
by refraining from the external acts merely which they prohibit ?
The Pharisees explained the commandments as extending only
to the external act. No, says the Saviour, they go beyond
this. So exceeding strict and broad is the law, that our very
thoughts and feelings, if contrary to the law,, is the transgres
sion of the law, though they may be forever concealed from the
world. Where the sinful desire is approved, the sin is com
mitted, so far as the heart is concerned ; nothing is wanting
but opportunity for that overt act which is but the further de
velopment of sin.
We come to the spirit, and not to the letter only of the
second table of the law. Honor thy father and mother. Thou
shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt
not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neigh
bor. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house ; thou shalt
not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his
maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy
neighbor's. These commandments I have obeyed, say you, and

SERMONS. 183
what lack I yet ? What 1 obeyed them in spirit, as well as in
letter ? Have never offended in one point ? Open now the
book of recollection, and let conscience do its perfect work. We
plead for the review of a single day — not of days and weeks.
And if you cannot say, all these hav* I kept for a single
day, how can you say, all these have I kept from my child
hood up ?
But there is a first table of the law, likewise. Mark this.
It is comprehended in the reply of the Saviour to the question,
" Master, which is the' great commandment in the law ?" Jesus
said, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." The first com
mandment in the moral code of the Bible is a requisition for
God, not for man. God stands first. For him is claimed the
throne of the heart. " My son, give me thy heart."
Now, if God has not the throne of your heart — if he has
not always had your heart — can you ask, What lack I yet to
enter heaven ? and feel that you lack nothing ? What though
you had kept the second table of the law, and performed the
duties which you owe to your fellow-creatures, still there would
have been no genuine obedience to these precepts of the second
table, only as you had first complied with the first and great
commandment — given your heart to God. To be obedience,
there must be first the love of God in the heart. There must
be the keeping of the commandments from the principle of
love. And you have kept the second table of the law, then,
because you have kept the first — always kept it, from your
childhood up ? Then you may feel that you lack nothing to
inherit the kingdom of God.
But let us recur to the statement that, notwithstanding the

184 SERMONS.
highest moral attainments — for we make a distinction between
moral and religious attainments, the latter always comprehend
ing the former, but the former, as the world defines morality,
not comprehending the latter — that, notwithstanding the
highest moral attainments, there may be the conviction, indeed
some have been conscious of it, that something more is needful
to have eternal life. Why sits that man alone, dejected,
thoughtful, anxious ? Why does he not repair to his work-shop,
or counting-room, or mingle with the throng on change ? What
has taken place that gives him a very different appearance to
day from what he had yesterday ? Has he been guilty of
some heinous offence in the eye of the civil law ? Not at all.
Observe the man. You know him. He is your neighbor —
your friend. You recognize in him a man for whom you have
the greatest respect and esteem, for his moral attainments. A
man of integrity — chaste and sober in his habits of life — *•
amiable in his domestic relations — truthful, and faithful in every
trust — generous in his disposition and practice.
Speak to him, and, all-absorbed in thought, his reply is —
What lack I yet to have eternal life ? What must I do to be
saved ? You' are astonished at the question from his lips.
Whatl your thoughts are, this man, of such high moral at
tainments, asking what he must do to enter the kingdom of
heaven ? It is so.
But go nearer ; speak farther with him. You find him as a
man standing on the verge of a precipice, well aware of his
danger, and solicitous to make good his escape. What has
happened ? Ah ! the law of God has come to him in a light
in which he never saw it before — the law of God in its spirit
uality and comprehensiveness. Righteousness has been laid to

SERMONS. 185
the line and judgment to the plummet. The sounding line has
been given him, and he has sounded for this good deed and
that, but the lead has reached not one act of his life under
which there laid the love of God as its moving cause. He has
sounded, and the lead has revealed a sinfulness — a depravity —
from which he had supposed himself to be many leagues off.
He has sounded, and lo ! the discovery. He thought himself
sailing in the channel of good deeds prosperously on to heaven,
having failed to understand the compass of the law ; but now,
by the chart of God's Word, he finds he has been nearing hell !
The law 1 the law 1 He was alive without it, without un
derstanding it, and thus supposing he was fulfilling it ; he was
alive without it once, but when the commandment came, came
before him, was applied to his heart and conscience, in all its
height, and depth, and length, and breadth, he discovered the
deficiency in all works of the law, by which deficiency there
was the reasonable conviction fastened upon his mind, that he
lacked something more than the highest moral attainments to
have eternal life.
Such instances have occurred ; by the grace of God, they
will still be found. Do not suppose one must have violated
every precept of the decalogue by an overt act, before he can
be convinced of sin ; just as though one might be too far up
on the scale of moral attainments to be a sinner ; just as though
his morality might exempt him from being " born again," to
see " the kingdom of God." What lack I yet to inherit eter
nal life ? And do you feel that yon lack nothing ? Then it is
not because it is actually the case that there is nothing which
you lack. This, we think, has been shown. But suppose that
you are not convinced that you lack something in order to be

186

SERMONS.

saved ? Your want of conviction, we allege, proceeds from
this source. There has been no spiritual application of the
divine law to your heart, or your goodness you would regard as
reprobate silver.
Lack nothing ! 0 dreamer of heaven in the imagined secu
rity of it by your moral character alone ! do you not lack
everything that you may be able to enter in ? -Repentance,
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, obedience— in a word, godliness,
that which js entitled to the precedence of all the virtues ? Nay
more, that which ought to preside over them all, and to infuse
its spirit into them all, and without which they are destitute of
the very first prmciple of true morality.
There is a question suggested just here, which we should do
well to ponder. It may help to show us some of the radical
mistakes which are so prevalent, that there is reason to believe
there are few who are free from them, and under which there
are many who are fatally deceiving themselves. How is it that
the violation of the greatest of all obligations, is not considered
by men as the greatest of all wickedness ?
What is the greatest of all obhgations ? Where does it
stand ? At the head of the first table of the law. It is to
love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul,
with all thy strength, with all thy mind. Has the everlasting
God no dues ? Is not reverence his due ? Is not love his due ?
Is not worship his due ? Is not obedience his due ? Is not
the greatest of all the commandments to have the precedence ?
But how is this ? Almost by common consent there is no
hesitation in saying, he is a wicked man who flagrantly in
fringes on the rights of his fellow-man, and breaks the second
table of the law. He bears false witness ; he fails to give his

SERMONS. 187
fellow-men their dues ; and he is regarded as a flagrant trans
gressor. But refraining from these things, his offence is, having
another god before the true God ; withholding from God the
reverence and obedience which are his due ; not loving God ;
and by the standard of man, he is not so much a transgressor
as to be esteemed very wicked.
Thus by man's standard of morality, to God is given a sec
ondary station, and to man the first. First, duty as it relates to
our fellow-men ; and second, if at all, the duties which we owe
to God, by reason of what He is, and the relation He sustains
to us. Let it be repeated : the law of God, as he himself has
promulgated it, places Him first, and that not merely because
the obligation to God is the first that binds the creature, but
because in this obligation to God all other obligations origin
ate ; they depend upon it ; they are comprehended in it. It is
as His precepts the commands of the second table must be
obeyed ; if, then, they are obeyed at all, it is because we com
ply with them from regard to His authority, or, in other words,
from love to Him. This alone is obedience. Who, then, are
the wicked ? and whom does this class comprehend, according
to the line of demarcation given us in the Scriptures, between
the two great classes of men into which, in the Bible, the whole
race is divided ?
Not those alone, is the reply, who break the second table of
the law, by infractions of relative obligation between man and
man ; but those, likewise, who, notwithstanding they commend
the second table, and do not murder, do not steal, do not com
mit adultery, do not covet, do not bear false witness, disregard,
nevertheless, the precepts of the first, and withhold from God
the heart, the conscience, the obedience, the active service.

188 SERMONS.
It has been said by one of the most eminent ethical writers of
the age, that, " Irreligion and moral principle cannot exist to
gether in the same bosom ; for irreligion is the rejection of that
authority in which all moral obligation has its origin ; and to
live without God, is necessarily to live without virtue." Since
Jesus said of the two requirements, love to God and love to our
neighbor, " On these two commandments hang all the law and
the prophets," to constitute true morality, must not the two be '
united ?
After all, is that deserving of the name of true morality,
which — if such a thing can be — comprehends in our conduct
obedience to the second commandment, and disobedience to the
first ? Can obedience to the second be morality, without
obedience to the first ? True, there are those — you meet with
them iu your every-day walk — who commend the second pre
cept, and allege their obedience to it, while they disregard,
confessedly disregard, the first. They will warmly eulogize the
beautiful morality of the Scriptures, when they sum up our
duty in loving our neighbor as ourselves, and doing to others as
we would that others should do to us. Yet, what would such
men say to us, were we to affirm that the precept of love to
God might be satisfactorily fulfilled without obedience to the
second commandment, love to our neighbor? That a man
might duly love God without loving his neighbor, and do his
duty to God without doing his duty to his neighbor ? Would
they not, and with good reason, scoff at such religion, and tell
us at once, in language most emphatic, that there can be no
religion without morality? We grant it. There is, there can
be, no religion without morality. Such religion is vain.
But if the first precept cannot be fulfilled separately from the

SERMONS. 189
second, on the other hand, the second cannot be fulfilled sepa
rately from the first. If we cannot love God without loving
our neighbor, neither can we duly love our neighbor without
loving God ; if love to God wants its proper evidence, without
love to our neighbor — love to our neighbor wants its proper
principle without love to God. Truly no position can be more
unreasonable than the position that there may be morality —
genuine morality — without religion, while there can be no reli
gion without morality ; since such a position is#the allegation
that the lower obligation may be complied with, without the
higher, though the higher cannot be fulfilled without the
lower ; that the love commended towards our fellow-creatures
may be duly and sufficiently exercised, without any love to Him
by whom the command is given, and in whose character and
authority the obligation to render it originates. "Hence the
utter worthlessness, as the means of salvation, of all that goes
in the world as morality — that something which does not in
clude obedience to the first and great commandment. Hence
our common need of the atonement which was made by the
Son of God. We are unholy ; we do not possess godliness,
however-much we have respect to the duties we owe our fel
low-men, if we do not love God. As unholy, we fall on that
side of the line on which the unholy, be their specific sins what
they may, are found.
But — glorious truth ! — the sufficiency of Christ meets our
insufficiency. The law is our schoolmaster to bring us to
Christ. " For there is verily a disannulling of the command
ment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness
thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing
in of a better hope did ; by the which we draw nigh unto

190 SERMONS.
God." (Heb. vii. 18, 19.) Christ hath given himself an offer
ing for us. Let us, therefore, walk in love.
Love will sanctify our morality. Love is religion, without
which there is no Gospel morality.
If we be in Christ, we lack nothing to have eternal Ufe.
While the wages of sin is death, the gift of God is eternal life,
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Who are free from condemna
tion ? This is the answer of the Apostle ; " There is therefore
now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who
walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. For the law of the .
spirit of Ufe in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of
sin and death." For what the law could not do, in that it was
weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the like
ness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, that
the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk
not after the flesh, but after the spirit." (Rom. viii. 1-4.)

LECTURE.

SLAVERY EXAMINED.

^Delivered before the ^inti- Slavery Society at JEast
Minor, Me., Sept. 28, f836.

There is one difficulty, at this day, attending the prepara
tion of an address on the subject of slavery, not so easily
surmounted. It does not consist in any attempt to trammel
free discussion in these States, which, at the first glance, might
seem to render it necessary that the speaker should have a
special care lest he should utter something particularly dis
pleasing to the " ears fastidious" of these self-constituted guar
dians of the public weal, and thereby expose himself, and the
Society which he addresses, to the manifestation of their dis
pleasure. * It does not consist in any unwillingness of the people
to hear the subject discussed, unless they can be assured that
the speaker shall advance no sentiments at variance with their
own ; neither does it consist in the fear of any injury to the

194 LECTURE.
reputation, or any opprobrious epithet which may be applied to
him who has the privilege and the honor of declaring his senti
ments before an assembly of his fellow-men, on this deeply in
teresting theme. In what, then, does it consist ? It is, my
friends, the difficulty of determining where to begin, what points
to take up, and where to stop, in the discussion of a subject on
which so much can be said, and which carries so many collateral
questions in its train, as that of immediate and total abolition.
But surmount this difficulty, and " 'Ere begun,
One half his labor's done."
It is an obstacle which I have found no little difficulty to
overcome ; and had I not promised to myself much on the
score of the kindlier feelings, the forbearance, the patience, the
sympathy of the audience I now address, should I fail either in
a proper selection on the several points mentioned, or in the dis
cussion of any question to which I may call your attention, I
could not have consented to appear before you. I do not mean
this as a passing compliment. <My inexperience in addressing
public and promiscuous assemblies, on any topic ; the responsi
bility resting on him who is called upon to speak on a subject
of vital importance to the well-being of his country and fellow-
men ; and & feeling of the well-known fact that there are hosts
of men, yea, strong and mighty men in this contest of right
against wrong, some one of whom might have addressed you
with far more glowing lips and thrilling words ; with far more
power to advance, and far greater success in advancing, the
great cause, and with far more satisfaction to yourselves also.
I repeat it : feeling this well known fact, it becomes me to
speak with circumspection, modesty and respect, and to ask

LECTURE. 195
something at your hands, should I fail to meet your expecta
tions. I shall not stop to argue the wrong of slavery. It is a sin,
an evil — physical, pohtical, moral and religious evil. Its ex
istence in these United States is a sin, and an evil, opposed to
the best interests and harmony of the Union. I must ask leave
to assume this point as granted. It may be pronounced as
mere assertion, without a shadow of proof, or the least founda
tion, beyond the pale, of the free States ; and you may be de
nounced as men without reason, because to its truth you yield
your assent. Be this as it may, it is of very little consequence.
And though it does seem in the estimation of him who is of
authority in a sister State, that " no human institution is more
manifestly consistent with the will of God than domestic
slavery ; though in the Senate of the United States it should
be a complaint against Northern petitioners against the
existence of slavery, that they speak of it, and treat of
it as unjust, wicked and diabolical," (as if it were not,
as if all this were not true of it) ; though it might be
well to review the reasoning by which we have come to this
conclusion, when agrarian anarchy, or military despotism, we
are told, will be the result, unless Northern laborers are made
slaves ; yet, notwithstanding all this, I cannot conceive it neces
sary, in my humble estimation, before an enlightened audience of
New England, in this the sixty-first year of American independ
ence, to commence an address on the subject of slavery by proving
the assertion that slavery is wrong. Worse than time wasted
would it be, when in the face of that ennobling, heaven-like, "self-
evident truth," though twice immortalized it be, by the never
to be forgotten and humiliating fact that, coeval with its pro-

196 LECTURE.
mulgation, as the declaration of a free people, recommenced,
under the protection of law, the existence of a system at utter
variance with its truth, and which stamped hypocrisy on the
heartland falsehood on the lips of the people who gave it their
sanction 1
No, men ! To argue this " self-evident truth," would be an
insult to your moral perception, to your common sense, to your
rank as enlightened politicians. Lest peradventure, there should
be one, however, who doubts as to the correctness of the senti
ment in all its length and breadth, such an one I would point
to higher authority, that the doubter might no longer doubt.
Go to the Bible ! Read it, study it, pray over it ; take but a
single text from it : " Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself,"
and see if it be consistent with American slavery. Surely the
spirit of the Gospel, the teachings of the blessed Jesus, were
against oppression !
Go to the Common Law. Blackstone's Commentary, Int.
sect, sec, thus reads : " Those rights which God and nature
have established, and which are therefore called natural rights,
such as life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws, to be
more effectually vested in every man than they are. Neither
do they receive any additional strength when declared by the
municipal laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, no human
legislation has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the
owner himself commits some act that amounts to forfeiture."
Let me refer you to Chancellor Fortescue, whose knowledge of
Common Law, whose integrity and wisdom, were surpassed by
no man of his time. Mark, with what decisive language he
condemns any law which supports slavery, " The law, there
fore, which supports slavery, and opposes liberty, must neces-

LECTURE. . 197
sarily be condemned as cruel ; for every feeling of human na
ture advocates liberty. Slavery is introduced through humau
wickedness ; but God advocates liberty by the nature which he
has given to man. Wherefore, liberty torn from man,, always
seeks to return to him ; and it is the same with everything
which is deprived ofjrts native freedom. On this account it is,
that the man who does not favor liberty, must be regarded as
impious and cruel ; and hence the English law always favors
liberty." Read the history of our country ; mark its present
condition, and tell me if it be not a political evil ! B.ead the
history of slavery and the Church, and judge if it be not a
moral and religious evil !
All anti-slavery societies, as the term is npw used, have for
their object the immediate abolition of slavery. They propose
that the slaves be immediately set free. But the enquiry at
once presents itself, What is here meant by the term free ? To
have this question answered, requires a knowledge of the pre
sent condition of those who are in bonds, and this information
is to be ^obtained in the same manner that all our informa
tion in respect to the condition of any other people is to be
obtained, where they do not reside within our immediate vicin
ity. We turn to authentic sources for information. What, for
instance, are the laws by which the slaves are governed, and to
which they are amenable ? The authentic source, in this case,
is the statute books of the respective States in which slavery
exists. Here we shall surely obtain correct information. In
answer to the question proposed, let us examine the more con
spicuous slave-laws of the several slave-holding»States.
I. As respects their labor.
With the exception of the codes of Georgia, South Carolina,

198 LECTURE.
Louisiana and Mississippi, the laws are silent on this matter.
A law making it a finable offence in the sum of ten shillings, is
contained in the Georgia code, to prevent the master from the
exaction of slave labor on the Lord's day. There is a law' in
the Mississippi code to the same effect, making it a finable of
fence of two dollars. Fine and imprisonment, at the discretion
of the Court, are inflicted on him who, upon sufficient informa
tion, shall be convicted of requiring greater labor from a slave
than he is able to perform, &c. (Georgia code, Act of 1811.)
Note the sentence, "upon sufficient information," for I shall
have occasion to refer to it again, to explain its meaning. In
1140, South Carolina passed a law restrictive of the master's
power in the exaetion of labor from the slave, because, as set
forth in the preamble, " Many owners of slaves, and others
who have the care, management, and over-seeing of slaves, do
confine them so closely to hard labor, that they have not suffi
cient time for natural rest." And what is it thought is the
provision of.this law, and how far does it serve to curb the
avaricious spirit of the master ? This law makes it a finable
offence to exact more than fifteen hours labor out of the
twenty-four ! Louisiana has a law making provision for the
time that shall be allowed the slave to take his food. Up to
the year of 1821, these were the only laws regulating the labor
of slaves in the States above mentioned ; nor did any law on
this subject exist in any of the other slave States up to this
period." Whether the above laws have been repealed since
1821, and new ones made, or whether the other States have
made any law -regulating the number of hours in which labor
may be exacted from the slave, I know not. If they have, may
they have more of mercy in them than those now known to us,

LECTURE. 199
or the hardships of the slave are but little mitigated. Com
pare, if you please, the law regulating the labor of slaves with
the laws regulating the labor of convicted felons confined in the
penitentiaries and State prisons, and sentenced to hard labor.
I think no law can be found which exacts from the convict
more than ten hours hard labor out of the twenty-four. Let
it be asked now, whose lot is adjudged to be the most lenient
in this respect — the convicted felon's, he who is confined to hard
labor in the penitentiary or State's prison, and who has, accord
ing to common law, forfeited his liberty — or the slave of South
Carolina ?
Is there no humiliating lesson to be learned from all this ?
What cheek does not give the crimson blush ? Whose coun
tenance is not fallen, when here he pauses to ask the question :
Is this the law of love ? Let us throw the mantle of oblivion
over the faults of our brethren, when that mantle shall hide a
fault repented of and corrected ; but, however unpleasant the
task, let them be exhibited in noon-day light, when the just
correction of the transgressor, or duty to our fellow-men, re
quires it.
Would that the slave in reality had the protection of those
laws 1 But how wholly inoperative; how incapable of being
executed in favor of the creature to whom they would seem to
extend humanity. How completely nugatory are they, when
backed by that universal rule of slave law, that the testimony
of a colored person, whether bond or free, cannot be received
against a white man ! How, I ask, can the slave have the
protection of any law, . in the existence of such a sweeping
clause — " Upon sufficient information " being laid before the
Grand Jury, the Grand Jury will present the person who

200 LECTURE.
exacts labor from his slave, beyond the number of hours spe
cified by the law ! But who does not know that the master
would not be likely to maltreat his slave in the presence of a
white man ? And if he should not, let the master abuse him
to any extent, in the presence of a colored person only, and
sufficient information to cause his presentation by the Grand
Jury cannot be obtained.
From an examination of the laws in relation to the condition
of the slaves, as regards their labor, we may justly draw this
conclusion — that the master may determine the time of labor to
which the slave shall be subjected.
The almost unlimited power of the master in the corporeal
punishment of the slave, presents us with another view of their
present condition. I know very well that the life of the slave
at least is safe from the authorized violence of the master. And
though there has been a time when, in many of the slave
States, the murder of a slave was followed by a pecuniary fine
only — that^time, to the honor of those States, has passed away.
Such a law no longer disgraces their statute books, to the just
reproach, as it was, of a professedly civilized people ; and the
malicious and deliberate murder of a slave is now declared in
every State to be punishable with death. I cannot forbear to
call your attention to the language of the Constitution of Geor
gia, in relation to the murder of a slave. On the white person
who should maliciously dismember or deprive a 'slave of life,
the same punishment would be inflicted as in case the like of
fence had been committed on a free white person, but with this
proviso, unless such death should happen by accident in giving
such slave moderate correction !
For wilful mutilation, it is fine and imprisonment. Time

LECTURE. 201
will not allow of my making the several quotations from the
laws of the slaveholding States, to substantiate the facts in re
gard to them, which I am about to relate. I can only say,
examine the laws, and if I speak not the truth, then mark me
as a man not to be believed.
It is a fact — and I will relate it in the concise and pertinent
language of George M. Stroud, who has published to the world
a sketch of the slave laws of the respective slave States of this
Union : a book which, I trust, will ere long be read by every
man, woman and child in New England — it is a fact, " that
the master's power to inflict corporeal punishment to any ex
tent, short of life and limb, is fully sanctioned by law, in all the
slaveholding States ; that the master, in at least two States, is
expressly protected in using the horse-whip and cowskin as in
struments for beating his slave ; that he may with entire im
punity, in the same States, load his slaves with irons, or subject
them to perpetual imprisonment, whenever he may so choose ;
that for cruelly scalding, wilfully cutting out the tongue, putting
out an eye, and for any other dismemberment, if proved, in
South Carolina, a fine of one hundred pounds currency is in
curred." Does not the master have almost unlimited power in
inflicting punishment on the person of his slave ? More than
this." May we not say unlimited power, when we call to re
membrance the law to which I have already alluded, and which
I am about to give you as recorded in their statute books. You
will at once perceive the extreme difficulty of obtaining suffi
cient proof to cause the conviction of the master, should he be
guilty of breaking one or all of the laws in the commission of
the offences against which they provide. There is no species
of action against the master, in which the slave can be a party

202 LECTURE.
before their judicial tribunals. A white man alone can give
evidence against white men in the Southern courts of law. The
evidence of a colored person cannot be taken against a white
man. This is the law, without exception or limitation. If this
is not conferring absolute power on the master, I respectfully
ask, what is ? There is not a school-boy who does not perceive
the self-evident and legitimate consequences of a law of such a
nature. Turn to the revised code of Yirginia, and there you
will read an Act of the Assembly in these words : " Any negro
or mulatto, bond or free, shall be a good witness in pleas of the
commonwealth, for or against negroes or mulattoes , bond or free ;
or in civil pleas where free negroes or mulattoes shall alone be
parties, and in no other cases whatsoever." A similar law exists
in Missouri, Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, Maryland, North
Carolina and Tennessee. It is also an Ohio Act of Assembly,
of January 25th, 1821. How protection can be afforded to
the life and happiness of the slave, in the existence of a law so
cruel, unjust and severe, I leave you to judge.
If you examine the penal codes of the above mentioned
States, you will find the slave subject to the punishment of
death in more instances than you could have possibly supposed.
In Mississippi, there are twelve crimes, the perpetrators of
which are punishable by death, whether they be slaves, free
negroes, or white persons. For the commission of any one of
thirty-eight crimes, the slave in that State is answerable with
his life. In Tennessee, the Act of Nov. 8th, 1819, has reduced
the number of capital offences, when perpetrated by persons of
color, to five. In Missouri, six only, when committed by the
slave, are punishable by death. In Kentucky, there are eleven
crimes for the commission of which the slave forfeits his life ;

LECTURE. 203
four only for which a like punishment is inflicted on the white
man. In South Carolina, white persons suffer death for twenty-
seven offences ; colored persons for thirty-six. In Georgia,
whites are punished capitally for three crimes only ; slaves for
nine. Heywood's Manual — being a digest of the laws of North
Carolina, in force at the date of its publication in 1818 — con
tains no general penal code. In Yirginia, there are three
crimes punishable by the death of the offender, whether he be
bond or free, white or colored. But in the penal code, there
are seventy-one crimes for which slaves receive capital punish
ment, though for none of these are whites punished in a man
ner more severe than by imprisonment in the penitentiary.
Tell me, if you can, with what justice do the penal codes of
the slaveholding States bear so much more severely upon slaves
than upon white persons ? Are they not both men f Should
they not be responsible to the same just and equitable laws ?
Will they not stand in judgment before the same God, to be
judged by the same moral law ?
Once more. What is their condition as respects the means
afforded them for intellectual, moral and religious improve
ment ? The negro, though a slave, is an accountable, im
mortal being. And at the last great day, with an assembled
universe, he will stand in the presence of Him who "hath
made of one blood all nations of men," and render an account
for the deeds done in the body. Be it remembered, the bene
fits of education are withholden from the slave. No one can
teach him to read or write under the severest penalties. How
then shall they be fully instructed in those things which per
tain to the eternal interests of man? The Bible— Into the
hands of every creature under the face of the whole heaven,

204 LECTURE.
would you give the blessed book ? To the slave you can not
give it. And if you could, of what possible advantage could it
be ? To him it must remain a sealed book, a dead letter. In a
very cursory manner have I exhibited before you some of the
principal laws of the slave-holding States, as they exist either
for or against their bondmen of color. I have done this that
we might be enabled to judge of their condition, as exhibited
to us by the authority, of law ; those laws which profess to re
gard the best interests of man ; and that we might be enabled
to define the term free, when used by the immediate abolition
ist in respect to the slave.
It has not been in my power to inform myself of any of the
now existing slave laws subsequent to the year of 1821. As
Anti-Slavery Societies, it is said, serve only to bind the bound
more firmly, and make the chains of the oppressed- more gall
ing, if there be any new laws now in operation I can hardly
think them more lenient than those which have been quoted.
I would let the Statute books speak for- themselves. Time
would fail me and your patience would be exhausted, should I
undertake to exhibit their contents more fully. The authen
ticity and credibility of the information we fairly derive from
such a source, can not be gainsayed. It demands your
credence as reasonable men. I have purposely forborne com
ment on the several exhibitions of the law on the points men
tioned, that you might have the plain, unvarnished truth.
And as a jury to try the case of your oppressed countrymen,
judge you, from the law and the evidence, if their condition be
not almost beyond endurance.
They are personal chattels, liable at all times to be treated
as such. They have no legal rights of property in things real

LECTURE. 205
or personal. In point of law, whatever they acquire belongs
• to their masters. They are under the most perfect control of
their masters in every respect. They have absolute power.
At the master's pleasure, he separates husband from wife,
parents from children. They come and go at his bidding, with
the submission of a dog ; and in reality they possess as few
rights as this same quadruped, either as political, physical,
moral or religious beings. I speak the truth and lie not.
Such is the power of man over his brother ; over a rational,
accountable, immortal being — a being who bears the impress
of his Maker — " Man the noblest work of God."
Such, my friends, is the condition of the people, whom every
true-hearted abolitionist proposes to have immediately set free.
We are now ready to meet the question, What is here meant
by the term free ? It means that the masters no longer pos
sess the absolute power of determining the kind and degree and
time of labor to which the slave shall be subjected. That it
shall no longer be at the master's discretion to inflict upon his-
slave any punishment which he, in his wisdom, shall see fit.
That the slave shall no longer be holden as property, and liable
to treatment as such. We mean by it, that the slave shall
have all the privileges and immunities, in our courts of law,
that a white person has ; that he be answerable for penal
offences to like laws with those of white men and none other ;
that the benefits of moral and religious instruction, and of a
common education, be no longer withholden from him ; that he
receive like protection, in all his rights, with those who differ
from him but in one respect, viz. : that of color.
Once more. We mean by it, that henceforth they be
treated as rational beings ; uo longer trodden down as the off-

206 LECTURE.
scouring of the earth, but respected as free citizens of these
United States. This is what I understand by the term free,
when used in connection with " Immediate and Total Aboli
tion." For I call that man free, who is under the protection
of just and equitable laws ; which guarantee to him the pro
tection of his life and liberty ; ¦ the life and liberty of his
children ; the protection of his property ; and the exercise of
one and all of his inalienable rights. Such a man is free. He
enjoys a freedom given him by his Creator, due to him by every
principle of humanity and justice. It is the condition of his
existence, the debt of nature ; cancelled only when his body
shall return to dust, and his spirit unto God who gave it.
Let us now glance at a few of the more prominent questions,
which a discussion of the subject naturally suggests. And is
it asked, What is to be understood by the term immediate ?
It means that the people — the Congress of these United States
and the Legislatures of the several States — immediately enter
upon active and efficient measures to the extent of their power,
for the accomplishment of the object at which we aim. It can
not be accomplished in an instant, in a single day, month or
year, perhaps ; but a course of Measures can at once be
entered upon, which shall accomplish it in a much shorter space
of time than can properly be designated by the term gradual,
as it is now used. We know very well that all this is to begin
with the people — the people arc to begin and carry forward
this train of measures. And hence the efforts now made to
arouse the people, and bring them to examine and reflect upon
the subject, that they may be willing and ready and prepared
to act.
There is not, perhaps, an assertion which abolitionists arc so

LECTURE. 207
often called upon to meet, as this : " You have no right to
meddle with Slavery at the South." It may be disposed of in
a very summary manner. How meddle with it, we reply ? If
you mean by physical power ; why, we agree with you at
once ; we have no right, and who ever supposed that we had ?
It is in the power of the Slave States alone to put an end to
the slavery which exists in their respective States. He who
knows anything of the constitution of his country, the principles
on which her government is formed, knows the reason of this.
One State can not make, or alter the laws of another. But
have we no right to attack slavery at the South in the same
manner in which we attack any other institution, or vice, of
this or any other people ? May we not support, or assail the
institutions of any nation, state or people, with all the weapons
of intellectual or moral warfare ? In this manner we do sup
port or assail them, whether they exist under the eye of a
Russian or Turkish despot, or wheresoever they may be found,
though it be in the very heart of our own nation. By no prin
ciple of international law, or of common sense, which is the
best of all law, can this be forbidden." Be it forbidden or not,
it is of very little consequence. It is a right which free men
will exercise. So think the North ; so think the South, as
the Message of Governor McDuffie conclusively shows, who by
just deductions from the principle advanced, is down upon us
with 7ns weapons of intellectual and moral warfare, weak
though they be, and. has attempted to convince us and the
world, that the absence of domestic slavery, is the capital de
fect in the institutions of the North. Surely we have an
acknowledged right to meddle with slavery at the South in
this way.

208 LECTURE.
Does any one say, this moral revolution is to commence with
the people of the South — the slave-holders ? Not so — not so.
You are under a great mistake here. It is to commence with
the people of the North. Where is the strong-hold of slavery ?
Where the great slave mart, but in the very District in which
we have a common interest, for the laws and doings of which
we are, through our representatives, answerable ? Here we
have an answer to the question, Why agitate this subject at .
the North? Because the District of Columbia, over which
Congress has exclusive jurisdiction, and the people through
those who represent them from year to year, is the prison-
house of seven thousand slaves I
Because there is the great domestic slave market — there, the
headquarters of the slave-prisons 1 There, the slave-coffers are
marching to and fro from day to day, from the boards of the
auctioneers to the private prisons in the District, licensed as
sources of public revenue, and from the slave-prisons back again
to the office of those who are licensed to sell the bodies, if not
the souls, of their fellow-men.
Because, the money of the North assists to build and repair
these prisons. Because if the representatives of the free States
but demanded it, and they would demand it, if it was the will
of their constituents, there would not be a slave within the
bounds of the District. And because, should slavery but cease
to exist there, its death-knell will have commenced, and borne
on the wings of liberty from North to South, from East to
West, its last accents will have been heard only, when the
shouts of the people have announced, it is finished ! Slavery
has fallen ! Liberty is triumphant ! ! I repeat it. Let the
people of the free States be abolitionists in heart as well as in

LECTURE. 209
profession, and demand of their representatives, in a voice not
to be misunderstood, that slavery no longer be suffered to exist
in the District of Columbia, and ere long, there it will have
ended. This gives us a reply to the enquiry too often made, with
the sneer of contempt and the laugh of apparent triumph. You
benevolent men, you advocates for equal rights, why do you
not go South ? The work is not yet done in the North. Pro
fessedly against slavery as we are, it is only in profession.
Is not the proof conclusive on this point ? Well might the
South ask, Why come you here ? Go back, sir — Go back !
Let the North put an end to slavery when she has the power.
First pull the beam from your own eye. Preach to your own
people till you have revolutionized them, and then we will hear
you of this matter. " But you will dissolve the Union by car
rying your measures into effect," I hear from some anti-aboli
tionist. We can not stop to examine this assertion. Would that we
could, but time will not permit of it. The burden of proof is
upon the anti-abolitionist. Let him show us how ? Examine
the matter thoroughly and see on whom the blame will rest,
should such an event occur from the agitation of this subject.
But there is no danger to be apprehended on this score. It
is a bugbear for the free men of New England ; but will be of
. little effect to prevent them from pleading the cause of the op
pressed. Let justice be done. God will take care of the Union.
By moral suasion is this mighty work to be accomplished.
May the bayonet never again glitter, or the sword be un
sheathed in the contest of moral right against moral wrong.
He who said to his follower, " put up again thy sword into its

210

LECTURE.

place," when with a holy zeal it was drawn from the scabbard
to execute, seemingly, merited punishment on him who accom
panied the traitor to the betrayal of his Lord and Master,
never meant, however holy the cause, that mail should shed
the blood of man. In this contest, the weapons of knowledge,
of argument and love, are alone to be used. By the power of
God they . will, in the end, be powerful to conquer ; and the
palms of victory will be the supremacy of right. Let light be
diffused throughout the States ; let a knowledge of slavery be
had in all its ramifications. Let information go abroad
throughout the land ; let every ear be open to listen, and the
lips of every one ready to speak in behalf of the oppressed.
Let slavery be examined and talked of in the domestic and so
cial circle. Let it be discussed in our schools, academies, col
leges, lyceums and public meetings. Let it be incorporated
into our politics, and interwoven it must be with our religion.
Let the pulpits speak by the ministers of God. Tell it not in
Gath ; publish it not in the streets of Askelon ; that the ap
pointed ministers of God are, at this day, so deaf to the Mace
donian cry of those in bonds, who, through oppression on earth,
are traveling to eternal death . Let the churches arouse and,
by their prayers and efforts, roll on the wheels of this mighty
revolution. Here permit -me to remark : it should never he forgotten
that the war is against slavery. The oppressor is to be dealt,
with only in love, and while we brand the sin, we are to med
dle with the man, only so far as duty requires in exposing his
crime. As Burton with his usual quaintness has remarked :
" The hest and surest method of advice
" Should spare the person, though it brand the vice."

LECTURE. 211
Let us iu the discussion of this subject, (and I would that it
were so not only with us, but with all men in the discussion of
every subject,) let us never return evil remark for evil remark,
railing for railing. Not so are we to convince the understand
ings and win the hearts of men. Whether we have any of the
spirit of Christ in our devotedness to a holy cause, God know
eth and not man ; by Him shall we hereafter be judged aud
not by man.
We are told that Anti-Slavery Societies have done nothing
to hasten the abolition of slavery ; that they have only exas
perated the South, and in fact strengthened the chain which
binds the slave. That they have exasperated the South is be
yond a doubt. And if you persevere, you always exasperate
a man, when you touch what he considers to be his interest. A
selfish, avaricious spirit never brooks control. But the truth
of the latter part of the proposition, that we have strengthened
the chain which binds the slave, we may well doubt ; and a
single fact will lead us to pause ere we give our assent to the
truth of an assertion which; if there can any reliance be placed
upon logical reasoning from given premises, is incorrect. You
will recollect the opinion of the Governor of South Carolina,
that " no human institution is more manifestly consistent with
the will of God, than domestic slavery" ; that " it is the cor
ner-stone of our republican edifice." Add to. this the declara
tion of a South Carolinian orator, that " tho relation between
master and slave shall not be changed ; that they will resist
and resist, to the most bitter extremity, all attempts at aboli
tion, whether present or future, general or partial, immediate
or remote." Now, take these sentiments and then ask your
selves, why it is that the spirit of abolitionism should be so bit-

212 LECTURE.
tevly opposed if, as they say, its only tendency is to perpetuate
slavery ? It is the very reason why they should leave us un
molested. We are doing them a great favOr, as is conclusively
shown from their assertion, if it be true, viz., that the tendency
of abolitionism is to perpetuate slavery. We are giving our
influence to support this " corner-stone of our republican edi
fice" ; we are assisting them to maintain " the relation between
master and slave," if we are doing nothing for the overthrow
of slavery ; and still, they bitterly oppose us. The truth is,
they know our efforts do not tend to perpetuate slavery. If
they had this tendency, who does not see, from their own state
ment of the case, that they would not be arrayed against
us ?
Such talk is nonsense, mere assertion, shown to be false from
their own given premises. The Governor of South Carolina
demands the suppression of abolition publications, on the
ground, that a majority of the people of the North will become
abolitionists, if permitted to read them. But why not let them
become abolitionists, if they assist the South in holding her
slaves ? It is a very desirable thing for the South, that the
people of the Northern States should become abolitionists. I
think the correctness of the conclusion can not but be seen.
The tendency of Anti-Slavery Societies is not to procrastinate
emancipation. What have Anti-Slavery Societies done, and what are they
doing, for the immediate abolition of slavery ?
I refer you to a history of their operations and their wonder
ful effects. They have done and arc now doing much, to wake
the people from the apathy and deep sleep which have so long
bound them, in regard to the extinction of slavery. They are

LECTURE. 213
moving the masi of public sentiment in the proper channel, to
effect its utter overthrow. They have caused the press to
speak. Documents containing correct information on this topic,
they have been and are now distributing throughout the land.
They arc sending their agents into every section of the country,
that the people may hear the truth from living lips. They
have moved the North — they have moved the South, aud the
cry is, " let ns hear" ! And many are asking, What shall we
do to advance the great cause ? They will go on. Good men
and true, the yeoman and mechanic, the merchant and mariner,
the Christian philanthropist and politician, the women and the
young men, have enlisted. Their march is onward. Shoulder
to shoulder, with well-combined and concentrated effort will
they move, till this Juggernaut shall have fallen. The once
dead calm is now heard in distant thunder, drawing nearer and
nearer, growing louder and louder, and ere long it will burst,
to the complete overthrow of the most iniquitous system that
ever existed ! In that day which tried the souls of the martyrs ;
when Ridley and Latimer had been given into the hands of the
executioner ; to the Bishop of London, Latimer uttered these
prophetical words :
" We shall this day, my lord, light such a candle in England,
as shall never be extinguished." With a prophetical spirit,
may it be said by the Anti-Slavery Societies of this day : the
spirit of abolition has lighted a candle in America, which shall
never be extinguished until universal emancipation has been
proclaimed !
I must ask your indulgence yet a moment longer, while I
allude to the attempts which have been made to fetter the
press, put clown free discussion, and destroy the saered right

214 LECTURE.
of petition. I do it rather by way of warning and exhortation,
than of extended remark.
Liberty of speech, the freedom of the press, the right, of pe
tition, are guaranteed to us by the Constitution. More than
this : They are the gift of God to freemen. Neither can they
be strengthened or weakened in their view, so far as the justice
alone of the rights are regarded, by the contents of any roll or
parchment. They were the very terms on which we founded
the Union. Without them, we have not yet obtained our
liberties. How far from the threshold of tyranny shall we be, when in
formation on any national topic shall be forbidden under the
penalty of fine, imprisonment and death, from being dissemi
nated throughout the land ?
How far from it, when free citizens are forbidden to meet
either by law or public opinion, it matters not, peaceably to
discuss a matter in which we all have common interest ? How
far from it, when our petitions are spurned by government,
whose duty it is to give them a respectful consideration, and
our inviolable rights thus disregarded and trampled under foot ?
Let every man read Mr. Calhoun's Report on the Freedom
of the Press, made to the Senate of the United States, Feb
ruary 4, 1836, and observe more especially that portion of it
recommending the plan" for the. suppression of any pamphlet,
newspaper, handbill, or o.ther paper, printed or written, touch
ing the subject of slavery. He denied the right of Congress,
and most ably defended his position, to enact any law to pro
hibit the transmission of the above-mentioned or any other pub
lications. He held, in the language of the Report, " It would
be a violation of one of the most sacred provisions of the Con-

LECTURE. 215
stitution,- and subversive of reserved powers, essential to the
preservation of the domestic institutions of the sZaue-holding
States, and with them their peace and security." So it would
be subversive of the domestic institutions, peace and security
of the free States likewise. He mentioned that the freedom
of the press was placed beyond the possible encroachment of
Congress ; that " Congress had no right, in any manner, to
interfere with the freedom of the press."
But oh ! the consistency of man, when interest puts in her
selfish plea ! He advances the position that the Legislatures
of the several States have power to prohibit the introduction
of a certain class of publications through their territories ; to
call on Congress for a law prohibiting the transmission of such
publications through the mail ; and then on the several States
to pass laws in concurrence with their sister States ;. thus giv
ing the States the power of silencing the press — a right which
Congress had not — and conferring this State power too, in the
very face of the rights of the several States, which had effect
ually withholden this assumption of power from Congress.
This he defends by a system of international law, thought to be
as unconstitutional as it is absurd, and as dangerous to our
liberties, if it existed, as the existence of any law made for the
express purpose of undermining them. From this international
scheme rose the plan of the South, which she immediately car
ried into execution, that of endeavoring to prevail on the Le
gislatures of the North to pass laws against the exercise of the
freedom of speech and of the liberty of the press, by the'citi-
zens of New England. From this source has arisen the exist
ence- of the tumultuous assemblies which, from time to time,
have been gathered together in different sections of our coun-

216 LECTURE.
try, to drown by force the voice of free discussion. And yon
have seen another of its effects, in the attempt so recently
made, and so ably opposed, to silence forever the right of peti
tion for the redress of grievances, to which the citizens of New
England will never submit. It is not an unheard-of proeeed-
ing. It is a free Republic's first step to despotism ! It has
for its ultimate object the overthrow of Liberty !
But will any attempts to check the progress of free discus
sion, muzzle the press, and silence the voice of petition, succeed ?
Will they destroy anti-slavery Societies, or arrest the progress
of their principles ? Will it lessen their efforts to accomplish
the object at which they aim ? Will it discourage the stout
hearts that have enlisted, or give them less energy ? No ! It
accelerates the success of their measures. Bishop Taylor, in
his beautiful simile of the zeal of the Christian with the stars,
thus speaks :
" It must shine, (the zeal of the Christian), it must shine like
the stars, though sometimes covered with a cloud, or obscured
by a greater light ; yet they dwell forever in their orbs, and
walk in their circles, and observe their circumstances, but go
not out by day nor night, and set not when kings die, nor are
extinguished when nations change their, government,"
So will it be with the zeal of the abolitionist. It will shine
like the stars, and though sometimes it may be covered by the
cloud of persecution, or obscured by the troubled spirit of the
times, yet it will dwell forever in its orbs, and walk in its cir
cles; and observe its circumstances. It will go not out by day
nor night ; it will set not when kings die, nor be extinguished
when nations change their government. And though it may
be drawn back at times by violence, " yet still," to pursue the

LECTURE. 217
thought in the beautiful language of the simile, " yet still the
fire is kept ahve, it burns within, when the light breaks not
forth, and is eternal as the orb of fire, or the embers of the
altar of incense."
It is a matter of thanksgiving that the late attempts to
which we have alluded, did not succeed. We must guard the
freedom of discussion, the liberty of the press, and the right of
petition, as the apple of the eye. The spirit of the times de
mands that men should manifest both energy and warmth on
this subject. They are assailed in their most inviolable rights.
I repeat it : — The liberty of the press, of free discussion, and
the right of petition, must be preserved from the slightest en
croachment, or our liberties are gone ! I seek not to tax the
powers of the imagination with a description of evils which do
not exist ; but I solemnly ask, Are we not treading on fearful
times ? May not the bright sun of America yet set in gloom ?
Her glory tarnished by intestine commotions, her constitution
annihilated, the dearest rights of her citizens disregarded, and
this now happy land, the prince of the West, the pride of the
earth, in all her glory, become once more the abode of tyranny
and oppression? The dwelling-place of religion and liberty
fallen from her high station ! Check, oh 1 check, the spirit of
moboeracy in its infancy. Look to these things, men — look to
these things — or the epitaph of your country will ere long be
written. It will be short ; it will be but one word, and that
one word — Ichabod! Thy glory has departed ! (1 Sam. iv. 21.)

A REVIEW

OF

REV. MR. LOVEJOY'S LECTURE

ON THE SUBJECT OF

Prohibitory I,aws, in reffard to the use of Intoxi
cating 3)rinks.

We are glad this lecture has been given to the public ; and
we are especially glad it is given to the public just now, at a
time when all coucur in the desire and expectation, that the
opponents of " Prohibitory Laws in regard to the use of
Intoxicating Drinks," may bring forth their " strong reasons."
¦ " Let them bring them forth, and show us what shall hap
pen : let them show the former things, what they be, that we
may consider them, and know the latter end of them ; or
declare us things for to come."
The Rev. gentleman to whom we are indebted for this
lecture is no novice in the Temperance Reformation. "Twenty-
five years ago," he girded on his " harness " in the cause : nor
has he put it off. "In 1840 and '41," he " was employed by
the State Society of Maine; to lecture upon the subject through
the State." During, that period he " made the whole subject

220 REVIEW.
a study, according to the best of his abilities, and arrived at
some fixed and definite conclusions." A very efficient lecturer
he was ; he did the cause good service.
It is gratifying to know, at the outset, that he made the
whole subject "a study ;" and, at that time, " arrived at some
fixed and definite conclusions."
If any have had great experience of wisdom and knowledge
in this cause, Mr. Lovejoy is of this class ; and " wisdom is
profitable to direct."
The able editor of the Christian Mirror speaks of the lecture
on this wise :
" The lecture itself is a performance of no little power. It is one which,
whether right or wrong in its teachings, cannot be ' pugh'd ' down, nor
sneered down, nor 'rummie'd' down, nor disposed of by allowing the
author 'a considerable originating talent,' but denying him 'any great
logical power.' He has brought experience, history, fact, philosophy, to
bear on his argument, with a skill and directness, which it will require a
different sort of weapons from these to arrest or set aside. The common-
sense views, the earnest feeling, the out-spoken plainness of expression,
the honest sincerity, the bold avowals, the pat and pithy sayings and use
of acknowledged facts and principles, cannot fail to have a prodigious effect
upon the popular mind."
Certainly, this " is no faint praise."
And yet, we feel called upon to say, we do not believe it
will have that " prodigious effect upon the popular mind,"— ¦-
certainly not against the law, which some have predicted ;
and, for the reason, as it seems to us, that neither " experience,
history, fact," nor "philosophy" bears on "his argument with
a skill and directness" so convincing as to warrant the conclu
sion to which he has arrived.
Let us come, then, to an analysis of the lecture ; and let us
see how the case stands. It has for its text, Romans v. 20.
" Moreover, the law entered that the offence might abound."

REVIEW. 221
The gentleman's exegesis of this passage ; or rather, the way
in which he uses it to sustain his position, we find, not only in
his introductory remarks, but on pp. 8 and 9 of the lecture, in
such remarks as the following :
" And every man for whom you spill one barrel of rum, which he
believes i3 property, and which you have sanctioned as property by your
law, and license, and sale, will buy ten barrels and give it away ; and in
toxicating drinks will then become a temptation as they never have been
before. Then you have Canada on the north, and every railroad will
become a river of death to the community."
" Every vegetable on earth that has one particle of saccharine matter in
it, has only to be put in water till it ferments, and you have alcohol ; five
dollars, or less, will put a distillery into the house of every man who wants
it. England put a very heavy duty upon whiskey carried into Ireland." —
(Query. Was it because England would outlaw whiskey as a poisonous
beverage ?) Private distillation, concealed distillation went on all over the
kingdom. The British government had not power to stop it by pains and
penalties. Where drinking abounded, introduced and regulated by law, it
did much more abound against the law, — over the law."
We understand then, that, according to Mr. Lovejoy's
exegesis, and application of the text to the Prohibitory Law,
the law is to be held responsible for the attempts that will be
made to evade and transgress its provisions. Indeed, this is
the idea which is held up as properly deduced from a legitimate
use of the text, and as the basis of the lecture. And this is so
obvious that Mr. Cummings in the article from which we have
quoted, after giving the text and Mr. Lovejoy's remarks upon
it, adds :
" That the effect of prohibitions is often such as is here stated, it would
be hard to disprove. What parent, almost, has not seen it in his children —
a perpetual, teazing desire to do something which is forbidden, — a desire
which gains strength, till it becomes invincible. Still we think it behooved
our brother to employ a few words in showing, that this was not the design
of law. The law is not the cause of the offence."
Now, what we have to say is, Paul, according to the opinion

222 REVIEW.
of our most learned and pious commentators, held no such doc
trine as this lecture imputes to him, with respect to the law of
which he spoke. The Apostle shows the falsity of the idea
that the law is to be held accountable for the offence.
He obviously foresaw that because he had said, " Moreover,
the law entered that the offence might abound ;" or in other
words, because he had stated that one effect of the law is the
increase of sin, an objection would be raised against the law
itself; this objection the Apostle anticipates by adding, "What
shall we say then ? Is the law sin ? God forbid." " To this
objection," says Rev. Albert Barnes, " the Apostle replied with
great wisdom, by showing that the evil was not in the law, but
in man ; that though these effects often followed, yet, that the
law itself was good and pure." And is this exegesis unten
able ?¦ If not, then so far as the author of the lecture has
attempted to found an argument against the law on the prin
ciple which is taught by the text, he has failed.
And the very extracts which we have made from the lecture
go to show, — not, what he would have us believe, that the
evils of which he speaks, may justly be attributed to the Pro
hibitory Law, — but, that the real cause of their existence is
in man ; who, in consequence of his love for intoxicating
liquors, will malign, and pervert, and transgress the law to his
destruction. If men, in consequence of the Prohibitory Law,
will now buy their " ten barrels, and give it away ;" and make
" every railroad a river of death to the community ;" and " put
a distillery into the house of every man who wants it ;" the
law, we say, is no more to be held accountable for these
effects, if effects you please to call them, than is the law of
God for the sinfulness of man. No more is it to be held

REVIEW. , 223
accountable for these effects, than the law against larceny for
the repeated thefts of John Smith, because there was not
" power enough in the penalty to maintain the law against the
original desire, and these augmented forces of the desire," of
John Smith, feloniously to take, and carry away, the property
of. his neighbor ; but, in consequence of a law prohibiting
stealing, his " desire pressed against the barrier," and being
resisted, " recoiled with irritation upon itself," and acquired
new strength to break forth as it did. " When you introduce
a law," is the principle laid down in the lecture under review,
" you must look to it, that you have power not only to crush
whatever opposition may now exist, but also all that may be
excited by the irritation which your law will produce ;" this is
the principle to which, as we understand, the author is led by
the text. We should have been glad had he seen fit to be a
little more liberal of "logic" in support of a principle — if a
principle it is — so exceedingly comprehensive.
And as he may give the public something more on this sub
ject, we respectfully propose the question, to which we hope he
will definitely reply, that some service may be rendered to
legislators : How are they to know whether their law, until
it is executed, has power to crush, and not only to crush
whatever opposition may now exist, but also all that may be
excited by the irritation which their law will produce ?
In short, it may be said, with much truth, there is but little
danger of having the statute books of any State encumbered
with new laws for the prevention of crimes, if it is a settled
principle, that a law is not to be put forth, until it is certain
it possesses the crushing power, without which our author tells
us it ought not to become a law. We doubt not, the gentle-

224 REVIEW.
man is well acquainted with the history of legislation. And,
he will oblige some who have read his lecture, by referring to '¦
a few of the many instances in which this principle for the
governing of law-makers was adduced and acknowledged as
obviously correct.
But, suppose we admit, for the sake of the argument, that
the principle, thus categorically laid down, is a sound one.
Has it not been regarded in the proposed Massachusetts Pro
hibitory Law ?
Is the Maiue Law at fault in this respect ? On what page
of the lecture, and by what evidence is it shown that neither
the one nor the other of these laws has power " to crush what*
ever opposition may now exist," in the rumseller ?
Where is it demonstrated that the law has not sufficient;
power " to crush the opposition that may be excited by the
irritation " which it will produce amongst this class of men ?
And the law is designed to make the traffickers in intoxica
ting liquors, as a beverage, desist from their unholy business,
the law itself being the result of legislation, induced by the ',
"^conviction " and "choice" of the people, " and uot by com
pulsion." Is not one great objection to the law the stringency of
its provisions, and their inadequacy to effect its design? But,
its power to do away with the opposition which is based upon
its inadequacy to effect its design, greatly depends on the,
stringency of its provisions. Its advocates endeavor to look to
it, that it shall exert the power to crush all opposition, by.
making it a stringent law for the very object which they are
told they should have in view. And then they are told, —
" 0 your law is altogether too stringent 1"
But, to proceed: "the impotence of the Law of God. on

REVIEW. 225
moral beings," says the lecturer, " is met by the power of the
Gospel." This was the " new expedient" to which God had
recourse, when he found "this newly developed power" in
man, under the influence of the law, " prostrating the law."
But why should we deny to civil law the power of the Gospel ?
May not its power be wielded in support of a law prohibiting
and punishing crime under human legislation as well as under
divine? Does not the Maine Law have all the chance for
success which a rightful use of the Gospel affords ? Does
not the New Testament enjoin obedience to the laws of the
land ?
" Every man," I quote from the sermon of the Rev. Albert
Barnes, on " the Supremacy of the Laws" — " Every man who
is brought under the influence of the Christian religion, is a
man who beheves that civil government is an ordinance of
God ; that the laws are to be obeyed ; and he submits to the
laws, not by constraint, not because he believes it to be a
matter of human prudence, or a compact merely, but because
it is the appointment of God. It becomes a part of his
religion ; and the highest of all sanctions — that of religion — is
brought to bind him to yield obedience to the laws of his
country." Certainly, there is "the power of the Gospel" to.
help the-law.
We now come to the lecturer's " glance at the history and
phases of the temperance cause itself, up to the present time."
By this " glance " it is evidently his intention to show, that its
history, up to the time when the proposed Prohibitory Law
of Massachusetts was called for, (or the Maine Law was passed)
is against the enactment of such a law. He portrays in glow.
ing terms — nor does the description exceed the reality — the

226 REVIEW. ¦
progress ofthe cause from 1821 to 1833. And he ascribes its
progress to this, viz. : " The weapons were, facts, arguments,
pledges of total abstinence." In the favorite language of that
day, " Light and Love." " And never were seven years more
fruitful of good than those seven years. Never in so short a
time, in any country, was such a change in the social habits
and customs of any people."
Then, the cause did not call to its aid, what Mr. Lovejoy
believes to be "a carnal" weapon — the law; and which ought
not, in his opinion, to be " introduced to accomplish a moral
and spiritual end," and the use of which, to accomplish such
an end, is not, as he thinks, in accordance with " Light and
Love." If we understand him, he regards the " Prohibitory Law" of
the liquor traffic, as introduced to accomplish what is solely
" a moral and spiritual end." He classes it with a supposed
law of the Sandwich Islands, prohibiting " the manufacture or
the traffic in idols ;'' with a supposed law in Turkey, outlawing
the Koran " as a beverage to faith ;" and with the prohibitory
law of Constantine to abolish idolatry. " The first prohibitory
law," are his words, " intending to change by law, the habits,
customs and opinions of a large portion of the community,
wielded by the hands of Christian men. There have been
plenty of them since, and they commonly destroy their authors,
after- inflicting, incredible evils upon society." Into this cata
logue, of course, does he put the Maine Law; he in fact
declares, it is of the number of those laws that " commonly
destroy their authors, after inflicting incredible evils upon
society." And still, on another page of his lecture, we find
him emphatically objecting to any inference being made in

REVIEW. 227
favor of the law from what it has accomplished, because it has
been in existence but the brief period of " nine months ;" a
period of time so* limited, that it cannot be known from it,
" what the law is, nor what it will do for society."
He condemns the law in its infancy ; and then, when we
plead its good work, he alleges that its infancy must necessarily
preclude ws from attempting to show, by what it has done,
" what the law is," or " what it will do " towards effecting the
end for which it was made !
There are those who think it would have been, on the
whole, more consistent, had the lecturer waited a decade of
months at least, if not years, in the life of the Maine Law,
before so readily classing it with " the first prohibitory law,"
and " the plenty of them since," which have commonly been
attended with such disastrous results.
But living in Massachusetts — so far from Maine, perhaps he
was ignorant of the fact, that it has not been discovered
" down east," though some in Massachusetts and New York
assert it is otherwise, that our Prohibitory Law has inflicted
" incredible evils " upon the citizens of this goodly State !
And we can say, on reliable authority, that the author of the
Maine Law, though officially dead, was not destroyed in con
sequence of the unpopularity of the law.
Indeed, we have it from a gentleman whose official position
gives weight to his opinion — "The law is very much more
popular in Portland than the late Mayor ;" and again, " you
may set this down to begin with, that his defeat is not the
defeat of the law."
And we know of no reason why, with the eloquent young
senator from Cambridgeport, should the Senator be ostracised

228 REVIEW.
for his vote on the proposed Massachusetts Law, because he
voted and spoke *' according to his convictions," — the late
Mayor of Portland, whose defeat is attributed to his having
acted according to his convictions of the requirements of the
Maine Law, may not be consoled by the saying of a very
shrewd man — " The Athenians sent their best men into exile ;
we, more humane, only remove them from office."
But why, in the early period of the temperance cause, was
not the weapon of the law used for the suppression and annihi
lation of the traffic in ardent spirits as a beverage ? It was
not because the early advocates of the reformation said, " that
the law should not be used ;" so we are told on p. 12 of the
lecture. And, -as on p. 5, he asserts — speaking of the cause
from 1821 to 1833 — "again and again, were coercion, threats
and penalties repudiated ;'' of course, the early advocates of
the cause did not believe, that, to avail themselves of the aid
of law, would be to use " coercion, threats or penalties."
Nor was it, therefore, because they looked upon the law as
"a carnal weapon," the use of which to suppress the traffic
was in no wise consistent with " Light and Love." It was for
the good reason, that, at that time, there was not the settled
conviction which ultimately pervaded the temperance mind,
aud, to this day remains ; that moral suasion had carried the
reform onward to a point, beyond which it could not go with
sufficient power to meet the exigencies of the case without the
aid of prohibitory law.
When this settled conviction had fully come, which was about
the time that Washingtonianism began to ebb, in which ism
moral suasion was regarded as having reached its climax, then
the call was made for law ; the use of which, to suppress the

REVIEW. 229
traffic, but few temperance men, save Washingtonians, (and
the most of this class of temperance men were soon changed in
their opinion) asserted, was inconsistent with " Light and
Love." Indeed, previous to 1840, " the subject of License Laws was
discussed largely in* Legislatures, and some unwise laws were
enacted ;" they were laws designed to restrain the traffic by
imposing certain conditions on the trafficker.
But, let us here introduce an extract from the speech of Rev.
Mr. Kirk ; made at the Chatham street chapel, iu Boston,
October 1st, 1839 ; before the Young Men's Total Abstinence
Society. It is a fitting reply, we think, to what Mr. Lovejoy
has said in his lecture, against the introduction of a Prohibitory
Law to accomplish " a moral and spiritual end ;" and against
the introduction of a Prohibitory Law to do away with the
traffic in intoxicating liquors as a beverage. It will be setting
a Massachusetts man over against a Massachusetts man, and
divine against divine : let them settle it :
" I am glad to see legislative action commenced on this subject. I am
fully averse to every thing that savors of the alliance of Church and State :
in which I include either the execution of civil laws by ecclesiastical
judges, courts, or officers ; or, the infliction of civil penalties for violations
of the divine laws as such.
" But when the majority of a State or community have discovered that
an existing custom or institution is a public evil, corrupting the public
morals, inflicting taxes on the larger portion, merely to sustain a few in an
injurious traffic, then the legislature is but accomplishing its peculiar office, in
employing the whole force of civil enactments and civil penalties to abate
and destroy that nuisance. And while on the other hand, such enactment
has reference solely to the political or social evils resulting from such insti
tution, custom or traffic, and therefore is in no sense a religious law ; yet,
at the same time, it should form no objection in the legislators' minds, that
this law or prohibition happens to coincide exactly with the laws of God.
In this light I should defend our existing, but violated laws concerning the
Sabbath. It is the duty of the legislature to enact a law, which the majority
ofthe community are convinced the public welfare requires. I know not

230 REVIEW.
that defence of this position can be necessary. But 1 would defend it both
from the very nature and design of the social compact, and from the prac
tice of legislation in every civilized country. If we trace the institution of
civil society to the direct action of God, and all authority of civil legislation
to Him, then legislators are his ministers appointed to secure, by every
possible exercise of legislative power, the temporal welfare of the com
munity. Or if society be considered merely in the hght of a human
arrangement, a compact ; then the legislature as entrusted with the wel
fare of community, is bound to promote that welfare, by defending society
against every injurious influence.
" And this principle has guided all legislative action. Many indeed cry.
out against the interference with rights. But did not the slave trader make
the same objection when Britain and America pronounced his traffic piracy,
punishable with death ? The same may be said of every article in the
criminal code. And if it be right for a legislature to make Piracy, Robbery,
Murder criminal, it is equally right, and precisely on tlie same ground, right
to make the Spirit Traffic criminal."
Now, if the sentiments of Mr. Kirk are correct, please to
observe, that with respect to our Maine Law, it is an enact
ment having reference to a civil and social, as well as a moral
evil, and is not " the infliction of civil penalties for violations
of the divine law as such ;" in this respect widely differing from
the prohibitory law of Constantine, which was the infliction of
civil penalties for violations of the divine law as such, and
strictly a religious law.
The principle of the proposed Prohibitory Law and the duty
.of the legislature to enact a Prohibitory Law, Mr. Kirk would
defend, " both from the very nature and design of the social .
compact, and from the practice of legislation in every civilized
country," " And if it be right (is his language) for a legisla
ture to make Piracy, Robbery, Murder criminal, it is equally
right,- and precisely on the same ground right, to make the
spirit traffic criminal." Mr. Lovejoy asks, on p. 14 of the
lecture : " Have you a right to pass it (the prohibitory
liquor law) according to all the established laws of toleration

REVIEW. 231
in the civilized world ?" "To this question," (is his answer)
" I say no, most distinctly." Mr. Kirk, as distinctly says — yes.
The people of Maine have answered — yes. And they may
properly ask Mr. Lovejoy to show, and then his assertion will
be of weight, that the principle and practice of such legislation
are inconsistent with the established laws of ! toleration in the
civilized world.
Again. Please to observe, Mr. Kirk certainly, as early as
1839, did not regard the use of a Prohibitory Law as a carnal
weapon — not to be wielded against the wicked traffickers, and
as inconsistent with " Light and Love."
We are not aware, and, therefore, cannot admit what the
lecturer would have us believe, that " nearly all the early advo
cates of the (temperance) cause," were far from agreeing with
Mr. Kirk in this particular ; or that they "gave public assu
rances that they did not then, nor ever intend " to " grasp
political power, and use it technically for the cause of tem
perance." We are sure this was not the case with Beecher, and
Edwards, and Frelinghuysen, and Lucias M. Sargent, and not
a few more able advocates of the cause, whose names might be
given. Dr. Edwards has always maintained, to use his own words :
" That the cause of temperance is of such importance that it should be
vigilantly guarded on all occasions ; that it should not be sacrificed for any
political considerations; that legal prohibition is the only form of legisla
tive action which we can approve ; that temperance men should yield party
political considerations whenever these conflict with temperance principles,
and that such men, at the polls, should vote only for those candidates who
will most efficiently sustain the temperance cause."
At the Massachusetts Temperance Convention, held in Marl-

232 REVIEW.
borough Chapel, in 1840, the following resolution was intro
duced, and after an animated and full discussion, passed by a
very large majority :
" Resolved, That until the laws of this State, concerning the sale of intoxi
cating liquors, are fully and firmly established upon the basis of prohibition,
and sustained by a correct general sentiment like the other penal and
criminal laws of the Commonwealth, it is, in our opinion„the duty of Tem
perance men, in their several political parties, to vote only for those men as
candidates for legislative and executive officers, who are known and
inflexible friends of such a course of legislation." ;
This looks very much hke grasping political power and
using it specifically, if not technically, for the cause of tem
perance !
And while speaking on this branch of the subject, it may be
as well to say now, as at any time, that the State Society of
Maine once had an able lecturer, who did not come very far
from approving, if he did not advocate, a Prohibitory Law for
destroying " the vending of ardent spirits." He was present at
the third annual meeting of the society, in 1840. The follow
ing is the 9th resolution, which was taken up and discussed at
that meeting :
" Resolved, That a correct public sentiment on this as well as on every
other subject, should be allowed to manifest itself in every suitable way ;
and one of those ways is the establishment of good and wholesome laws.
" Mr. Cram, of New Sharon, moved to amend this resolution by adding
at the end of it the following words :
" And a good and wholesome law on this subject would be a law pro
hibiting the sale of intoxicating drinks as a beverage."
" Mr. Cram said he was instructed by the Society he represented, to go
in favor of a prohibitory law. He wished to have an expression of the
Union in order to know what the opinion of the majority is— whether the
State is prepared for the law—his town was prepared for such a law, and •
would sustain it,"
On this resolution and the amendment, an animated and
protracted discussion ensued. Gen, Appleton, and Gen, Fes-

REVIEW. 233
senden, of Portland ; and Rev. S. L. Pomroy, of Bangor, and
others participating, and the above named gentlemen and
others, whose names we have not given, advocating such
a law.
" Rev. Mr. Adlam contended that the time has not yet arrived when a
prohibitory law can be enforced. He did not believe that tho Legislature
could be induoed to pass such a law— but if it could be passed, it could not
be executed. We cannot execute the present law, and how can we expect
to execute one more obnoxious still ? The Massachusetts Law is not in
reality prohibitory — it allows fifteen gallons to be sold— it allows certain
apothecaries to be licensed. If he was to take his choice between the
resolutions, he should go for the one just laid on the table. He would pre
fer to have the power of deciding vested in towns rather than the law pro
posed in the resolution now under consideration. He said the subject was
surrounded with difficulties — and if what he had said had no other effect, it
might bring out stronger arguments in favor of prohibition."
" Rev. Mr. Pearl did not agree with all the views which had been
advanced. He believed the resolution does not say that now is the time*to
pass a prohibitory law — it merely approves of it in principle. The Law in
Massachusetts was not a Prohibitory Law — it was a fifteen gallon law. If
it had not been for this feature, much of the power brought to bear against
it would haye been wanting. There is such a thing as right principle,
although we may not be able to reach it.''
Rev. Mr. Lovejoy (J. C. ?) " said if it could be shown what law would
destroy the vending of ardent spirits at one blow, he had no doubt that the
present Legislature would pass that law, and pass it willingly. But he saw
many ofthe same difficulties which had been pointed out by the gentlemen
•who preceded him. The present law is prohibitory to a great extent — and
the proposed law will go but little beyond it. The change proposed by the
resolution lying on the table and some other changes in the existing law,
would make it as perfect as law can be made. A law may be passed pro
hibiting the sale to be drunk in shops, and it may be executed. Drunken
ness is a social vice. Scatter it abroad and you may destroy it."
Was this the Mr. Lovejoy who was a resident of Maine, and
an agent of the State Society in 1840, where " the subject of a
prohibitory law was discussed from 1836 to 1841, with a great
deal of earnestness ;" and whose opinions were then, as now,
that " the thing is absurd, impossible and unjust ?" and who
had no doubt, " if it could be shown what law would destroy

234 REVIEW.
the vending of ardent spirits at one -blow, the present legisla
ture (of 1840) would pass that law,, and pass it willingly ?"
How far, we would respectfully ask, would " that law " be
from " a prohibitory law to accomplish a moral and spiritual
end ;" which, in our author's opinion, is to be classed with the
prohibitory law of Constantine " to abolish the idols, and
banish heretics ;" laws which " commonly destroy*their authors
after inflicting incredible evils upon society ?"
We should have supposed that the gentleman whose
" opinions were then, as now," would not so readily have
admitted, to say the least, that the legislature of that year
would have passed such a law willingly. We should have
supposed that he would have manifested a little more earnest
ness, to show its injustice and absurdity.
His opinion that the Legislature would pass such a law so
willingly, would almost lead us to think, had we not his decla
ration to the contrary, that he did not then believe " the thing"
to be so very '.' absurd, impossible, and- unjust."
It should go very far towards establishing the point that the
mass of the people in Maine, as early as 1840, had become
converted to the doctrine of the necessity and justice of a Pro
hibitory Law ; for Legislatures do not often "pass willingly"
a law to which a large majority of the people are known Jo be
opposed. We ask you to take notice of the early conversion of
the people of Maine to the doctrine pf the necessity of a Pro
hibitory Law. It was as early as 1840, the first year of the
gentleman's agency in behalf of the State Temperance Society 1
And do we read aright in the lecture : — " Neutrality upon
any subject where you have formed a definite opinion, is a po
sition only for a coward, and one that no man can long occupy

REVIEW. 235
without forfeiting his own self-respect, and doing violence to his
moral nature?" and did he then pass through the State,
declaring his unmistakable opinion, iu private and in public,
against a Prohibitory Law ? If so, we have failed to find a
record of it in any report of his labors. Indeed, if he pursued
this course, he must have been eminently unsuccessful, if we may
form an opinion from what is seen to have been his remarks
before the Maine Society, and the remarks of many of its
members. Again, what was the change proposed by " the resolution
lying on the table," to which Mr. Lovejoy alluded iu his re
marks — " and some other changes in the existing law, which
would make it as perfect as law could be made ?" We have
no means of knowing what were the "some other changes in
the existing law," to which Mr. Lovejoy had reference ; but we
have the means of ascertaining what was "the change proposed
by the resolution lying on the table."
" Mr. Clapp, of Bath, offered the following resolution : —
" Resolved, That application be made to the Legislature for an amend
ment in the License Law, that no license be given in any town, unless the
town at its annual meeting in March or April, shall by a vote authorize the
same." " Mr. May, of Winthrop, advocated this resolution. He was not in favor
of legislating faster than public opinion will warrant. The change pro
posed in the law by this resolution, would put it in the power of the friends
of Temperance to ascertain whether the majority in this State is really in
favor of prohibiting the sale of intoxicating drinks — it would enable each
town to regulate such matters for itself.
" The President suggested that such a change would throw the laboring
oar upon the rumselling party, and would strengthen the hands of select
men who have not courage enough to do their duty, But such a resolu
tion would not be consistent with insisting upon the enacting of a prohibi
tory law.
"Mr. H. K. Baker, of Hallowell, said he hoped this resolution would be
thoroughly discussed before the vote is taken upon it. It ought not to be

236 REVIEW.
adopted without deliberation. The Union has for several years taken
ground in favor of a prohibitory law. If a different ground is now to be
taken, it ought not to be done without a full and free discussion.
" The resolution was then laid on the table."
This then (the resolution of Mr. Clapp,) was "the change
proposed," which, " with some other changes in the existing
law, would make it as perfect as law could be made."
But on page 1th of the lecture, the author quotes as follows
from Davis' Half-Century : "From 1836 to 1840, the cause
advanced slowly. The subject of License Laws was discussed
largely in Legislatures, and some unwise laws were enacted,
which diverted the public mind from the great work in which
they had been successfully engaged." And the lecturer asks —
" What were the license laws here spoken of ?" And his reply
is, " Prohibitory Laws !" " During all this time, the Legisla
tures of half the States have been trying to improve the laws
upon this subject, so as to^stop or diminish the traffic in intoxi
cating drinks."
And yet, in 1840, he approved the resolution of Mr. Clapp,
that proposed " a change," which, with " some other changes,"
would make the (then) existing law as perfect as law could be
made I A law which, according to the lecture, must be classed
with " Prohibitory Laws 1"
If he believed " the present law prohibitory to a great ex
tent ;" and that the proposed law (by Mr. Cram), " prohibit
ing the sale of iutoxicating drinks as a beverage," would " go
but little beyond it " — the present law which he himself ap
proved, with the change proposed by the resolution of the gen
tleman from Bath, why did he not strenuously oppose it on the
spot ? Why did he not strenuously oppose any proposed law,
that was thought to be prohibitory, when, at that time, as now,

REVIEW. 237
" a Prohibitory Law upon this subject, to his mind, was just
as impossible in any part of the civilized world, as it is impos
sible to make a broom that would sweep all the stars out of
the sky every night ?" Was not Maine, in 1840, a part of the
civilized world ? Aud again ; we have it from his lips — " But
that the laws of this State (Massachusetts) have done great
good by limiting and restraining the traffic, there can be no
doubt." In these laws of Massachusetts he means to include,
of course, for he makes no exception, the laws from 1836 to
1840 — which he has just told us were " Prohibitory Laws !"
and concerning these laws he adds : " And if they were not
denounced, and were executed as they would be if they were
not denounced, they would do a great deal more good ;" i, e.,
the prohibitory laws of Massachusetts between these years,
would have done a great deal more good, had they not been
denounced— had they been executed as they would have been,
had they not been denounced !
There are some of his readers who think that he strangely
confounds License and Prohibitory Laws ; that he does not
make the distinction between these laws which to most minds
is obvious. They are confirmed in this opinion by the fact that
he tells us : " It is not for the want of attempts at this kind of
legislation (i, e., prohibitory) that there is not such a law now.
Tennessee, Mississippi, Illinois and Massachusetts passed pro
hibitory laws on this subject thirteen years ago, and they imme
diately became a dead letter, or were repealed." Were they
prohibitory, or were they license laws ; laws permitting it to
be sold as a. beverage under certain limitations and restrictions ?
With respect to the Massachusetts law to which the gentleman
alludes, it was not considered, nor was it in reality, " a Pro-

238 REVIEW.
hibitory Law ;" it was styled, at the time, " a fifteen gallon
law ;" it permitted, in fact, the sale and consumption of intox
icating liquor as a beverage, to some extent as right. That
was the principle of the Massachusetts law. It was and is
the principle of all license laws, technically so called.
We have not before us " the Prohibitory Laws" which the
lecture informs us were passed in Tennessee, Mississippi and
Illinois, " thirteen years ago ;" but we venture the assertion,
which stands good until it is made to appear to the contrary,
that the laws of these States were license laws, and not
strictly prohibitory ; not prohibitory, as this principle is found
in the Maine Law, or as it has been brought 'forward in the
proposed Law of Massachusetts. And if they were prohib
itory, the lecture asserts that they did "great good by limiting
and restraining the traffic, there can be no doubt ; and they
might have done a great deal more good had they not been de
nounced." But suppose they were Prohibitory Laws, was it the
prohibitory clause in these laws ; or, in a word, was it the prin
ciple of prohibition in consequence of which they " immediately
became a dead letter, or were repealed ?" Might not their un
popularity with the people, and their repeal, have been traced
to objectionable features, or provisions in these laws, of which
the prohibitory principle formed no part ?
To make out his case, by the aid of the evidence of " all
past experience " against the law, is it not incumbent on him to
prove : 1st. That the laws of Massachusetts, Tennessee, etc.,
passed " thirteen years ago," were prohibitory laws ? And
2d, That it was the principle of prohibition which killed them ?
But he has done nothing of this kind. And here, as it seems,
to us, is the capital defect of the lecture,

REVIEW. 239
It does not, on one of its sixteen pages, grapple with the
prohibitory principle, as such, and subject \t " to the test of
experience, history, fact and philosophy," with a skill and di
rectness which, by fair reasoning, proves " the thing " impossi
ble, unjust and absurd. The author expends his ammunition on
this or that detail, which may be modified or omitted, so long
as the vital principle remains unaffected, and all the time seems
to think he is sending bomb after bomb in a direction that will
inevitably result in the overthrow of the principle of prohib
ition. Could he have become the victim of such a delusion,
had he not somehow gotten into the midst of " a mazy fog,"
which kept him from seeing "the actuality of the gigantic
benefits " — " the diminution of crime ; the wiping out of pau
perism ; the promotion on every hand of industry, and virtue,
and comfort, and salvation," — which come of the operation of
the Law in Maine, and have erected for the principle of pro
hibition one undivided and massive breastwork ?
Admitting that the Massachusetts Bill and the Maine Law
are objectionable in some of their details ; admitting that they
might be amended for the better ; what then ? Does this de
monstrate the injustice and absurdity of the principle ?
He grants that " laws are the most delicate machinery that
happens to be in this world ;" that " a man who makes and
perfects a good law," does a great and a good work, and. a
work that is not done in a day, nor in nine months, nor in a
year ; and yet, because the machinery of the proposed Massa
chusetts Law, and of the Maine Law, is not perfect, he declares
the foundation principle of the machinery to be absurd, and
shouts to the world, Away with it ! There must be no time
for improving the machinery ! The very fact that every part

240

REVIEW.

of it does not work to perfection, and is not of the best finish,
demonstrates the principle on which it is constructed fallacious
to its core. This, we say, illustrates the " logic and rhetoric "
of the lecture now under consideration ; this shows the stuff of
which the arguments are made, and which is to feed the fire
that its enemies have set against the law. Well, the Massachu
setts Bill, or rather the details of the Law, and the Maine Law,
have been subjected to the battering of the Rev. gentleman's
" hot shot," and how do they look now ? What, after all, are
the facts ?
First came the text ; but it did not hit the law ; it struck
on one side of it. Not showing that the Prohibitory Law " is
the cause of the offence," the text does the law no damage.
Indeed, by fair interpretation, according to Dr. Asa Cummings
and Rev. Albert Barnes, the fact that " one effect of the liquor
law (we quote from the Christian Mirror of April 6th) has
doubtless been to disclose an unexpected number of traffickers,
as it certainly has to develop unthought-of specimens of demon
iacal ingenuity in attempts to evade and transgress its provis
ions, is not alone and of itself a conclusive objection to the law,
because it is found to exist "in reference to the perfect law of
God." The text, therefore, though aimed at the law, so strikes
as to favor the law.
Next we have a " glance at the history and phases of the
temperance cause itself, up to the present time." This " glance"
comprises a part of the "history shot ;" but it proves to have
been fractured in the mould, for before it reaches the law, it
'breaks all to pieces 1 It strikes against "facts," and the rea
sonings of Mr. Kirk, and is so shivered, the pieces are carried
whither we know not.

REVIEW. 241
Then we are to " take all past experience," including the
operations of the Maine Law, and " put that down as the
first reason." But lo ! it turns out that there has been no
Prohibitory Law, strictly speaking, in any State save Maine,
and in Maine " it has. worked well ;" -""the people demanded
the law," and " the people will sustain it."- " Nor is th'e result
of the Portland election (such is the testimony of the Portland
newspapers) to be regarded as a popular demonstration against
the liquor law."
Indeed, the spring town meetings, which, without exception,
have brought directly before the people the question — the Law,
or its Repeal ? Rum, or no Rum ? — have nobly sustained the
Law. One hundred and four towns, out of one hundred and
thirty-four, have gone in favor of the Law 1 In seven towns,
not included in the above, " they have elected part temperance
and part opposition." And what is more, but a short time
since, his Honor the Mayor of Portland, attended the Levee
of the " Ladies' Band " of the city, where, in the course of his
speech — " he promised (we quote from a Portland paper) to
execute the Law faithfully and to the letter 1" This is " the
wall of adamant " against which this shot strikes — aud the law,
as yet, is unharmed !
But, as though Mr. Lovejoy was fearful that in " all past
experience," something might be found in the operations
of the Maine Law, from which the proposed Law of Massa
chusetts would gain favor with people, he asks, " what are
nine months in the life of a law ? It shows no more what the
law is, nor what it will do for society, than an infant nine
months old, what kind of a man he will make ;" thus cutting
himself off from making use of any unfavorable operation of

242 REVIEW.
'the Maine Law — had it worked unfavorably — as an argument
against the Maine or Massachusetts Law.
By the by, it will take something more than the ipse dixit
of any man to make the parents of a sound, healthy infant be
lieve that he will not live, or that he will not do the service of
a man, when come to manhood's years. And the friends of
the Maine Law (aud its foes too), must have something more
than the mere opinion of any man, before they can be made to
believe it will die ; or that age will not augment its strength,
since it has not yet manifested the first symptom of any disease,
but has already attacked the Nema3an Lion — we mean devil —
in his den ; where, as they believe, the sturdy infant, without
waiting to become a man, " will choke him to death, and carry
the dead beast along by his beard," to the admiration of the
people 1
But here comes our lecturer's " analysis of the Law, and the
circumstances under which it is to operate." Look out 1 Now
we are to expect something which will hit "the heart" of all
Prohibitory Laws against the sale of intoxicating liquors as a
beverage, and over will fall, not to rise again, the proposed
Massachusetts, and with it, the Maine Law.
Here we have the heavy shot of " fact and philosophy " —
together with "objections" and "questions" to give impetus
to fact and philosophy.
Well, 'examine his " analysis of the law," by observing what ,
his arguments are, and where they strike. Its aim " is to pre
vent crime, by taking away from those who use intoxicating
drinks this temptation to crime." Suppose we grant it ? Is-
there anything wrong in this ? But, " can you reach it by
legislation ?" " Suppose legislation will not and cannot entirely-

REVIEW. 243
remove the temptation, what then ? Is this to preclude the
people from any attempts to remove the evil by these means 1
"You admit by your law that intoxicating liquors must be
made — must be sold — for certain purposes." Yery well ; does
this admission necessarily imply that we must not attempt to
arrest and prohibit its sale for a common drink ? If this had
not been admitted, under existing circumstances, who would
have been the first to exclaim — 0 the absurdity, the tyranny of
the law ! It would ruthlessly and ruinously change the habits
and usages of the sick people and mechanics of this Common
wealth 1 " And when, for any reason, a considerable portion
of the community are, openly or secretly, violators of any law,
in spirit and in form, you cannot execute it."
But it is executed in Bangor, in Portland (this Maine Liquor
Law), and wheucver in the State the necessity for its execution
exists, notwithstanding we read in paper after paper, published
out of the State, that not only a considerable but " a large
portion of the people have the will to violate its provision, such
is their indignation." " But the premises of every man are
subject to search, on the oath of three men that they believe
liquors are kept there, and intended for sale."
But have you heard of direful evils resulting anywhere in
Maine, from that provision of her Liquor Law which takes
hold of " rum houses," as well as rum-shops ?
Then here is the " vengeance " and " wanton waste " feature
of the bill. There was a time when the goring ox was killed,
stoned, and his flesh not eaten ; and a time when hogs, which
were kept iu violation of a Prohibitory Law, were sent
" violently down a steep place into the sea," though oxen were
eatable, and so were hogs. And it is not improbable this course

244 REVIEW.
"stung to madness" the owners of goring oxen and unclean
swine ; and that they exclaimed, " this looks a little like ven
geance ;" this will " neither promote good morals " nor good
eating, and for aught we know, " the destruction " was " es
sential to the law ;" but it did not show that an attempt to
frame a Prohibitory Law was absurd.
In Rockland, Maine, as in some other towns, quite a num
ber of barrels of liquor were destroyed, by turning it into
the gutter. This destruction of liquor in Rockland is com
puted by our wisest men to be a clear gain to the place of more
than three thousand dollars 1 Was it the " wanton waste " of
so much liquor ?
Now examine the " analysis of the law " given in the lec
ture, and put your finger, if you can — we cannot — on the. first
item of the analysis which establishes the poiat that a Prohib
itory Law is unjust, impossible, and absurd. All that is said
under this head " is hacking away at the branches, while the
great trunk and the deep cast roots " are left untouched. It
is not " the logic" of a feather's weight towards proving that
the outlawing of all intoxicating liquors as a beverage, is not
right ; or that it is inexpedient ; or that the evil cannot bo
reached by legislation.
As to the question, " Have you a right to change by coer
cive measures the habits and usages of one-half the people of
this Commonwealth ?" and to which the lecturer replies — " I
doubt it," we have this much to say : Without answering for
the people of Massachusetts, the temperance and order-loving
people of Maine might reply, that as they have never claimed
the right, they have never attempted to change the habits and
usages of any portion of the people of the State of Maine, in

REVIEW. 245
relation to the use of intoxicating liquor, by any "coercive
measures," other than by carrying out the wise provisions of a
constitutional law, to do away with a public evil — which, by
corrupting the public morals, is undermining all virtue, and
will destroy all good, if left to the constantly accelerating forces
which it is drawing to its aid as long as the traffic in liquor as
a beverage is not outlawed 1 In conclusion, we must express
our astonishment — and there are many that are astonished with
us — that any clergyman of New England should, at this day,
regard it as a fact, and take it for granted, that his intelligent
readers admit, that " Christ made and gave away at Galilee "
alcoholic wine 1
In 1840 Professor Bush, in a communication to the New
York Observer, upon the words Bacchus and Anti-Bacchus,
wrote as follows : — " The case is to me now very clear, that
alcoholic liquors are never spoken of with approbation in any
part of the Bible, and that Jesus Christ never made, or gave,
or offered an intoxicating wine in his life to any one." Dr.
Nott, and the late Professor Stuart, and many able commenta
tors and writers on this subject, as Mr. Lovejoy knows, agree
with Professor Bush in this matter. This is doubtless the
belief of four-fifths of the temperance community in England
and in this country, who have at any time been interested in
the question. Whether the Saviour did or did not make and
give away at Galilee alcoholic wine, is, we know, not to be
decided by the authority of great names ; yet there are few
men to be found whose opinions are entitled to higher respect
on this subject, than the opinions of many of those learned and
pious men, who by no means agree with the author of this
lecture in the views he has incidentally expressed of tho

246 REVIEW.
Saviour's use of alcoholic wine. If these men have been guilty
of " a great deal of bad argument and worse exegesis, in trying
to show that the wine spoken of in Scripture (with approbation )
was not. real (i. e., alcoholic) wine," let the lecturer do the
world some service, by unmasking the argument and exegesis
through which he so clearly sees the truth. He ought to have
done this years since.
Again, we are somewhat surprised that the only crumbs of
advice which the lecturer benevolently gives to the advocates
of a Prohibitory Law, are to " punish, overt acts, and let inten
tions alone ;" to try men for acts done, and not arraign them
because some person " believes, and has reason to believe, that
such a person intends to commit an offence ;" and to preach
" original sin " as the best means of preventing rum-selling, and
let Prohibitory Laws alone. And. all this is said just as though
intentions were never discoverable from, overt acts; as though
men were never justly arraigned on the oath of a person or
persons, charged with the intention of stealing, or of commit
ting arson, or of selling, rum, and their intention so considered
a part of their overt acts, as to subject them to punishment, if
proved guilty of that with which they are charged. We know
nothing of the lecturer's success in inducing rum-sellers to
desist, by preaching to them " original sin."
In 1840 he said : " You might as well attempt to tow a
live whale around Cape Cod with a fish-line, as to make all
these men quit the business by the use of moral suasion !"
The Maine Law has been very successful in this work by
preaching to rum-sellers their present crime, without alluding to
" original sip."
In short, we are surprised that the author of the lecture—

REVIEW. 247
who was so near advocating the use of law in 1840 — (see
doings of Maine State Society, at its meeting of that year) —
should now go the " simpering tone " of moral suasion 1 But
so it is. " Tempora mutanlur, et nos mutamur in illis?'
There is nothing fixed or stable, either in situations or
opinions. " Men change with fortune, manners change with climes —
Tenets with books, and principles with times."
Farther, when it was announced that Rev. Mr. Lovejoy had
come out in a lecture against Prohibitory Laws ; and more
especially, when we read in the Christian Mirror the high
encomium on the lecture, by its able editor, then we thought
and said, " Well, at length the heavy artillery is brought to
bear upon the grand principle of Prohibitory Law." We began
to tremble, lest, after all, there would be " a sudden abrogation
of the Law in this State, either by authority, or suffering it to
become a dead letter," which (with Mr. Cummings) we believe
" would be a sad calamity, which should, if possible, be fore
stalled." ' And we were well aware, that if' this " sad calam
ity " came upon Maine, Massachusetts would inevitably take
"the full force of the heavy shock," and it would rumble
through New York, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, and
onward, and onward, spreading dismay in the temperance
ranks ! But there are those who have read the lecture, and
who have made it " a study, according to the best of their
abilities, and arrived at some fixed and definite conclusions."
They are astonished at the nature and magnitude of its defi
ciencies ; its destitution of logical method in arrangement ;
the looseness of its facts ; its poverty of arguments ; its mul
titude of side issues ; its masterly keeping away from a manly,

248 REVIEW.
lucid discussion, or any kind of discussion, of the principle on
the soundness or unsoundness of which Prohibitory Laws stand
or fall ; its dogmatical assumptions ; unwarrantable deduc
tions and conclusions ; and its immeasurable dependence on the
credulity, if not the ignorance of the people 1 It is hardly.
possible that Massachusetts can be really enlightened by it ; it
will take something stronger to irrefragably convince her, that
" to outlaw all intoxicating liquors as a beverage," is unjust pr
inexpedient. Nor, as the result has shown, have the arguments
of the lecture proved to be of much weight with the Massachu
setts Legislators, to say the least ; for though its members
have had ample time to consider these arguments, the proposed
Bill, with some slight modifications, has become a law — i. e., if
the people of the Commonwealth give their verdict of approval.
And the people will show — if we do not greatly mistake
their views on this question — that some stronger, reasons than
those which have been adduced in this lecture, were necessary
to convince them that the rejection of the law would best pro
mote their interests. Its influence to shake the faith of tem
perance men in Maine, in prohibitory legislation against the
traffic, is, and must continue to be, amazingly small. " Society
has been stimulated," — has it ? — upon this subject, " till it has
been strained ;'' and " it asks repose and reflection."
There is a kind of " repose and reflection " for which the
rum-seller and the rum drinker ask ; it is that delightful repose
and reflection which comes to them from giving the one unlim
ited swing in his traffic, and the other the glorious liberty of
drinking when and where he pleases — disease, poverty, crime,
and death to the contrary notwithstanding ! Well, rum-sellers
and rum-drinkers — here is a discovery for you ! "If you want

REVIEW. 249
to do more to destroy temperance in one year " than can be
regained in five — just let this law pass, and the thing is done.
This is the opinion expressed by the lecturer, and you will
believe him— won't you ?
You were not aware of this, or you would not have opposed
the law so strenuously ! From this moment we may look for
your opposition to the law to cease. You will raise no more
funds to prevent the passage of the proposed Massachusetts, or
to repeal the Maine Law ! You want " the excitement and
the strife which (these laws) will produce ; the very soil " —
Mr. Lovejoy tells you — " in which intemperance in drinking
finds its most numerous and easy victims." Here " is a good
time coming " to you then, by these doings of fanatical tem
perance people ; if you will only let them go on — and mark !
though you raise money to any amount, to scatter broad-cast,
" thick as leaves in autumn," the lecture of Mr. Lovejoy against
Prohibitory Laws — it is not because you do not believe Pro
hibitory Laws will do more to destroy temperance in one year
than can be regained in five !
Your faith is affirmative ! You do believe Prohibitory Laws
will do this ! But alas ! the readiness of your fellow-men to
impute to you the worst motives in circulating the lecture.
Alas ! their base attempt to show that you do not want a Pro
hibitory Law, because you want to continue in the traffic and
use of intoxicating liquor. Whereas you would that all might
read the lecture, because you are desirous, exceedingly desirous,
that temperance men should be withheld from getting in their
hot haste, a law that will so far put back, and so long keep back,
the glorious cause of temperance ! " Let the circumcised Jew
believe it " — we do not.

250 REVIEW.
We might have proceeded in the course of this review, to
show formally that the great principle of the Prohibitory
Law is sustained by the Word of God ; and is repeatedly
acknowledged as just in every age of human legislation.
But the principle has been well discussed and considered by
the people. Mr. Lovejoy does not attempt to show that it is
not well founded by any reasoning to the point ; and why
should we then attempt any defence of the " principle," other
than that which incidentally came in — in following out the
main object which wc had in view' — which was "a review of
the lecture ?-"
Mat, 1852.

Missing Page

Missing Page

APPENDIX.

SPEECH
Delivered at Starr\ford, Ct., on the Monday
evening preceding the 4th Nov. 1868,
On which day General Grant was elected 'President,
and Schuyler Colfax Vice-President of the
United States of America.

Mr. Chairman, — We hold that no intelligent citizen is justly
entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship who is indif
ferent to the welfare of his country. We maintain that it is
not only his duty not to be indifferent, but it is his duty to be
deeply interested in her institutions, in conserving all that is
good of these institutions ; and in weeding out and extermi
nating all that is evil. We are on the very eve of a Presi
dential election, by which we are to give public expression to
our sentiments touching questions of vital importance as to the

254 APPENDIX.
future of the nation. And where is the man amongst us who
would maintain the position of neutrality at such a time as
this ?
There was a law of Athens which subjected every citizen to
punishment who insisted on standing aloof in the hour of civil
commotion ; for by joining the better side, he may at least
prevent the success of the worst one ; and, if he do not wholly
approve even that better side, it is only by his accession to it
that he can modify its action ; and that very accession may
have the effect to elevate its progress even up to his own
standard of excellence. ;
The better the man the better the citizen — the more im
portant that he should take his side, that it may be seen which
side he takes. We heartily concur with Dr. Goodwin, of Ox
ford, England, who, in his official letter to the Yorkshire
Association, wrote :
"Let us not in avoiding the noisy strife of heated partizans omit, because
we are Christians, any duty which is binding on us as men and as citizens.
Christianity destroys no social tie ; dissolves no relation of civil society ;
and dispenses with no obligation that was antecedently binding. We do no
honor to Christianity by neglecting our duty as citizens."
There should be — there is in every patriot's heart at least,
. a law which impels him to take sides as to the political par
ties which are engaged in the Presidential campaign of to-day.
And you remember what Stephen A. Douglas well and truly
said. Every man (is his language) must be on the side of the
United States or against them.
There can be no neutrals in this war. There can be none
but patriots and traitors.
Fellow-citizens — there can be no neutrals in this contest.

APPENDIX. 255
Our affinities, our influence, our vote is with the Union Repub
lican Party, or it is with the Disunion Democratic Party. I
say " disunion," for, I allege what I am confident facts incontro-
vertibly establish, that the policy and acts of the Democratic
Party for more than a quarter of a century to the present hour,
have worked for the disunion rather than for the union of the
States which constitute, or ought to constitute, The United
States of America.
We have just subdued one of the most unjustifiable and
wicked, extensive and sanguinary rebellions that ever existed
among a civilized people. We have done it at the cost of mil
lions of treasure and lives. Just think of it.
There were enlisted during the war 2,050,543 men ; all of
?31 vessels were commissioned, manned by 50,000 men,
Every fourth man in the North was either in the army or
navy ; and $1,500,000,000 were expended.
But over and above this, we have 520,000 mounds where
the soldiers sleep to-night the sleep of death ! We have an
army of 300,000 disabled men ; an army of widows and
orphans ; and .taxation, for many a year to come, as the im
mediate result of this secession rebellion !
And mark you : — it was a rebellion of which the rebel Col.
Hill said to General Curtis, at Fredericksburg : "I am op
posed to any terms of peace short of a submission of the Fede
rals to such terms as we may dictate ; which, in my opinion,
should be Mason and Dixon's line as a boundary ; the exclu
sive navigation of the Mississippi below Cairo ; full indemni
fication for all the negroes stolen or destroyed ; and the
restoration of Fortress Monroe, Jefferson, Key West, and all
other strong-holds which may have fallen into their possession

256 APPENDIX.
during the war. If they are unwilling to accede to these
terms, I propose an indefinite continuance of the war, until the
now existing fragments of the old Union break in pieces from
mere rottenness and want of cohesion, when we will step in, as
the only first-class power on the Western Hemisphere, and take
possession of the pieces as subjugated provinces." A rebellion
and war of which Jefferson Davis said : " This war must go on
till the last of this generation falls in his tracks, and his chil
dren seize his musket and fight our battle, unless you acknow
ledge our right to self-government. We are not fighting for
slavery. We are fighting for Independence ; and that, or ex
termination, we will have." Having overcome such a rebellion,
fellow-citizens, and at such a cost, the question substantially
which divides the two political parties in the loyal (and dis
loyal) States, is whether the conquered or conquerers shall
dictate the terms of reconciliation and peace.
There can be no question as to the views of the rebels on
this point previous to the close to which General Grant brought
this war.
Their view was that, if they were successful they, not we,
were to dictate the terms of peace ; and such terms as they
would have dictated, according to this protocol of Colonel
Hill I
Thanks be to the God of our Fathers, we have had to submit
to no such terms.
And thanks be to the brave boys in blue — white and black
— who fought with equal bravery at Milliken's Bend, Fort Pil
low, Port Hudson, Fort Wagner, and on many another bloody
field; — who said, — "our country shall submit 'to no such
terms ; the stars and stripes shall never be pulled down to

APPENDIX. 257
them ; we'll die first !" And at the Baltimore Convention of
the Republican Party, on the 1th of June, 1864, it was re
solved :
" That we approve the determination of the Government of the United
States not to compromise with rebels, nor to offer any terms of peace ex
cept such as may be based upon an unconditional surrender of their hostil
ity and a return to their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the
United States ; aud that we call upon the Government to maintain this po
sition and to prosecute the war with the utmost possible vigor to the com
plete suppression of the rebellion, in full reliance upon the self-sacrifice,
the patriotism, the heroic valor, and the undying devotion of the American
people to their country and its free institutions."
Citizens — If the rebels had uo right then to dictate terms of
peace to us, have they any right to do it now ?
If they had no right to do so through Colonel Hill, General
Lee, or Jefferson Davis, or any other rebel then, have they any
right to do so through any rebel, or through Andrew Johnson
or the Democratic Party now ?
If in 1864 we were justified in declaring that " we would
offer no terms of peace except such as were based upon an
immediate surrender of their hostility and a return to their
just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United
States" — are we not justified in declaring that we will offer.no
other terms in 1868 ? Or, in other words, what have they
done since 1864 to deprive us ofthe right of prescribing terms
of peace, and to vest it in them ?
Nor is this " the whole of the rub and worst of the pinch."
Not only do they insist on making the terms, but their terms
do not include a surrender of theh- hostility and a return to
their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the
United States. The entire history of these Rebel States —
only as an absolute necessity has compelled them apparently to

258 APPENDIX.
modify their course — from the day Lee surrendered to Grant
until now, affords damning proof of the fact that they have not
surrendered their hostility, and that they have not returned to
their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of this
Government. At this moment they are as bitter in their hatred of the
Government, and its people, North and West, and their insti
tutions, as they ever were — if they are to be believed.
And that they are to be believed, who will question, since with
them Emancipation is but a word ; Unionism a degradation ;
Disloyalty a virtue ; and Murder a privilege above the law ?
They avow, it was for the want of means and not for the want
of will to prosecute the war, they were forced to give it up, and
prove by their conduct, "what they do not even faintly deny,
that, if there was the shadow of a chance for them, they would
renew the war — as they hope to do at some future, good op
portunity—an opportunity to come to them, as they think, by
the election of Seymour and Blair ; or, failing in this, through
" some dissension which is yet to breed separation and war be
tween the West and the North."
And listen to " the key-note" as given by General Frank
Blair in his letter, which obtained for him his nomination for
Yice-President :
" There is but one way to restore the Government and the Constitution,
and that is for the President elect to declare those Acts null and void, (the
Reconstruction Acts) compel the army to undo its usurpations at the
South, disperse the carpet-bag State Governments, allow the white people
to re-organize their own Governments and elect Senators and Represen
tatives." And the question returns at this stand-point, in a still more
emphatic form for our consideration, since their terms do not

APPENDIX. 259
include our terms, are they to be permitted to dictate the terms
of re-union and peace ?
A large majority of the loyal people of .the loyal States,
speaking through the 39th and 40th Congress, has said, No 1
A small minority still says, Yes !
You know what constitutes the Reconstruction policy of
Congress, " as evinced by the adoption, in the majority of the
States lately in rebellion, of Constitutions securing Equal Civil
and Political Rights to all."
Talk not of our having proposed such terms to these States
as no people of a noble and chivalrous spirit should accept:
Coming centuries will but confirm the verdict of the nations
of this age, that the loyal States have shown a degree of mag
nanimity and forgiveness such as no other nation has ever deve
loped. " Constitutions securing Equal Civil and Political
Rights to all."
Is it not " the duty of the Government to sustain those in
stitutions, and to prevent the people of these returning States
from being remitted to a state of anarchy ?"
Yet they insist on it, that we show no regard for their
rights. Let us do what we will, we can never equal their dis
regard fpr our wrongs ; the wrongs which they have inflicted
upon us without a cause.
Rights ! What rights have they except such as attach to
convicted traitors ?
" Constitutional rights" — if they had them to-day, they
would have the felon's doom !
I know it is said that we have disregarded and continue to
set at defiance the Constitution in our treatment of these
States, — both during and since the termination of the war.

260 APPENDIX,
But we concur with Abraham Lincoln, who said, "I feel
that measures otherwise unconstitutional might become lawful
by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the Nation."
Such were the comprehensive and just views of a wise states
man and true patriot, — views as applicable to the state of the
nation now, as then, — both as to the North and South. Ycu
will remember that the Baltimore (Republican) National Con
vention approved and endorsed, " as demanded by the emer
gency and essential to the preservation of the ^Nation, and as
within the Constitution, the measures and acts which Mr. Lin
coln had adopted to defend the nation against its open and
secret foes." The Constitution was made for the people, by
the people of the United States, and not the people for the
Constitution. If it has been violated in the letter in any of its
provisions in quelling this rebellion, has it been violated in its
spirit ? Or had it really come to pass that the Constitution
and Government must be overthrown by a rebellion, to carry
down the noble structure which has been raised aloft for the
hope and new creation of the world, — because there is no ele
ment of life revealed or latent in the Constitution by which the
Government could be upheld against the assaults of its ene
mies ? And, just here let me remark, I have no sympathy
with those who are opposed to any changes in our Constitution
or any liberal construction of it ; who will hold us to the letter
regardless of its spirit.
The Hon. Mr. Beaufoy, M. P., in his speech on Parliament
ary Innovations, has cogently and eloquently said — " Let there
be no innovations, is ever the maxim of the ignorant, the in
terested and the worthless. It is the favorite tenet of the
servile advocate of tyranny. It is the motto which Bigotry

APPENDIX. 261
has inscribed on her banners. It is the barrier which opposes
every improvement, political, civil and religious. To repro
bate all innovations on the Constitution, is to suppose that it is
perfect. But perfection was not its attribute at the first. It is
not its attribute at the present moment. Alterations are per
petually necessary in every Constitution, for the Government
should be accommodated to the times, to the circumstances, to
the wants of the people, which are ever changing."
To return. The Union Republican Party resolved, in 1864,
that it is the highest duty of every A merican citizen to main
tain, against all their enemies, the integrity of the Union, and
the paramount authority of the Constitution and laws of the
United States ; and that it would do everything in its power
to aid the Government in quelling the rebellion by force of
arms, and in bringing to the punishment due to their crimes the
rebels and traitors arrayed against it.
And, at the time this resolution was passed, Andrew Johnson,
as well as Abraham Lincoln, took his stand upon it. Mr.
Johnson had said in the Senate of the United States, on that
memorable night which terminated the S6th Congress — (I was
present and heard the words as they fell from his lips) — " The
distinguished Senator from Oregon asks me what I would do
with the rebels were I President of the United States ? I
would have them arrested ; I would have them tried, and if
found guilty, by the Eternal God, I would have them executed."
To his neighbors in East Tennessee he said : " The time has
arrived when treason must be made odious, when traitors must
be punished, impoverished ; their property taken from them,
whether it be their horses, their lands or their negroes, and
given to the innocent, the honest, the loyal upon- whom the

262 APPENDIX.
calamities of this unprovoked and wicked rebellion have fallen
with such crushing weight."
Gentlemen — If the Republican Party has stepped from off
this plank of their platform, it is not that it has ceased to re
gard the Constitution and laws of the United States as of
paramount authority, but it has not brought to the punishment
due to their crimes the rebels and traitors who are arrayed
against it.
What and who has changed within the brief period which
has elapsed between 1864 and 1868 ? The platform of the
Republican Party or the policy of Mr. Johnson as he declared
it be when he was elected Yice-President of the United States?
Judge ye. And still the disloyal States, having violated the
Constitution and laws of the United States in every section
and in every article, — ask, in " a kind of holy horror," can you
at the North and West be so regardless of right as to interpret
the Constitution as you think best with respect to us ?
And like the adulterous woman of whom we read in the
Proverbs of Solomon — so it is with them — " She eateth and
wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness."
It is alleged that " the Republican Party has been running
the Government for the last eight years outside of and without
any Constitution." Well, gentlemen, you will agree with me,
that if this be so, the country, on the whole, is in a much bet
ter condition than could reasonably be expected.
Indeed, such is its condition that, for one I am willing to
leave it for four years more at least in the hands of the Union
Republican rather than turn it over to the Disunion Democratic
Party. My neighbor Jones was, or believed he was, near his
death ; and the doctor calling, he held a long and earnest con-

APPENDIX. 263
versation with him about his chances of life. " Why, man,"
said the physician, " you are likely to die any hour. You have
been living for the last ten years without a constitution ; lungs
gone, liver diseased, and all that sort of thing." " You don't
mean to say," replied Jones questioningly, " that a man can
live for ten years without a constitution ?" " Yes, I do," said the
doctor, " and you are an example." " Then, doctor," and a
bright smile illuminated the face of the hopeful man, — " then,
doctor, I'll go it ten years more on the by-laws."
And he did. Since under the Republican Party the Gov
ernment has done so well for the last eighty years without any
regard to the Constitution, our Democratic friends being
judges, I think we can go it for four or even eight years more
on the amendments, not to speak of by-laws. As to Repudi
ation — this is the language of the Republican Platform : " We
denounce all forms of Repudiation as national crime ; and the
national honor requires the payment of the public indebtedness
in the uttermost good faith to all creditors at home and abroad,
not only according to the letter but the spirit of the laws under
which it was contracted." I will not so far discredit the com
mon honesty of any man who hears me as to suppose he
is not in favor of this resolution. Years ago, when Daniel
Webster found some of the States considering whether they
would repudiate their debts to Europe, he said to* the farmers
of the West : " I would work these arms to the elbow to wipe
off a blot from the remotest corner of my country." Where is
the right-thinking man who will not at least do as much as to
vote against repudiation and thus save his country from this
blot which is sure to come upon it if the Democratic party is
now to be in the ascendant ?

264 APPENDIX.
"If yon would love your country," said Edmund Burke,
" see to it that you make her worthy to be loved." And will
our country be longer worthy of our love, if she suffers to go
on her escuteheon the foul blot of Repudiation ?
In conclusion, I have to say, let it not be forgotten that to
the policy of the Democratic Party for the last quarter of a
century is to be traced this war. In their manipulation of all
interests for the interest of slavery, they opened for us this Pan
dora's Box. Listen to the testimony of " The World" — is it
not good authority ? as late as October 17, 1866 — I quote
from an editorial article in its issue of that date — on the death
of John Yan Buren : " We are doubtless all wiser," (I quote
its language) " in full view of the consequences, than anybody
could have been before ; but even Mr. Calhoun, had he lived
till this time, would freely admit that his zeal for the annexa
tion of Texas was the most misguided and calamitous exertion
of energy he ever made. That acquisition, planned as a bul
wark of slavery, led by swiftly successive, and, as it now
appears, inevitable steps, to its complete overthrow — convulsing
the country, sundering the Union, and opening a hideous
breach which this generation may not see healed. Mr. Cal
houn, a clear-sighted statesman, foresaw that unless slavery
was strengthened, by some additional equipoise to the growing
preponderance of the North, it would be hemmed in, and in
process of time extinguished. Mr. Yan Buren, with superior
sagacity, foresaw that attempts to extend and fortify an insti
tution against which advancing civilization was arrayed, in
fatal hostility, would infuse fervor into a comparatively gentle
opposition, and tended to precipitate, by a violent movement,
what might otherwise be the slow work of centuries. If Texas

APPENDIX. 265
had not been annexedy we should have had no Mexican war, no
consequent acquisition of territory, no fierce convulsing quarrel
about the extension of slavery from such territory, no Wilmot
proviso, no repeal of the Missouri Compromise, no Republican
Party, no Civil War. We are all wise after the event ; we all
see clearly enough that the annexation of Texas, which Mr
Yan Buren (and he might have added many of the, Whigs and
the entire Liberty Party) had the forecast to oppose, was
' the direful spring of woes unnumbered.' "
Was not the annexation of Texas from first to last a De
mocratic measure ?
Let it not be forgotten that the leaders of the Democratic
Party were the leaders of the Rebellion : That this party con
trolled the States in rebellion ; opposed every measure of the
Government to suppress the rebellion ; discouraged enlistment
into the Union army and resisted the draft ; gave aid and com
fort to the rebels in arms during the war ; refused to give our
brave and patriotic soldiers, in the field, fighting for the life of
the nation, the right to vote ; opposed every measure adopted by
Congress to restore peace, harmony and security to the country.
Having forced upon the country, Avithout a cause, a long,
bloody and expensive War — created a vast public debt, and im
posed on the people untold sorrow and burdens grievous to be
borne — the Democratic Party we hold to-day, as responsible
for high taxes, high prices, derangement in business, and all
other bitter fruits of the war. And now it proposes to increase
these burdens by overthrowing the State Governments in the
South and acknowledging the validity of rebel legislation and
their debt. In fine, pronouncing in favor of a Dictator to
overthrow civil government, and to establish caste and class

266 APPENDIX.
legislation — it now asks the free electors of this country to help
them to power for this purpose !
Gentlemen ! the electors of 1868 will do no such thing.
Throughout our entire country the Union Republican Party
are men of the same principles ; they advocate but one policy ;
it is the policy of Justice, which is of itself " the great standing
policy of civil society."
Nor is there any difference of opinion with us in regard to
men. Such a difference exists in the Democratic Party, and at
this stage of the campaign it is principally engaged in one sec
tion of the country in showing that Seymour will sink the
Democratic ship, while in another section, it is equally persis
tent in demonstrating that Blair is the rock on which they will
go to wreck. We are agreed that Grant aud Colfax are the
men who, if elected, and elected they will be — to the office for
which they have been nominated — will carry out the principles
and policy of the Republican Party. Personally acquainted
with both of them as I am — the more I know them the more
highly do I esteem them as men and statesmen — for whom as
President and Yice-President, we shall always deem it a matter
for thanksgiving that we cast our vote.
As to Mr. Seymour and General Blair — their record is
made up, and the verdict of the people will be solemnly ren
dered to-morrow that not to them can be entrusted the gov
ernmental interests of the United States.
"The World" in its leading editorial article of Oct. 31, on
the election of " Seymour or Grant" — declares — and the ques
tion is timely and well put : " This Presidential election in
volves questions of far more consequence than whether the
Southern negroes shall vote ; than whether the reconstructed

APPENDIX. 267
State Governments shall stand ; than whether the public debt
shall be paid in gold or greenbacks ; than whether we shall
maintain great standing armies in time of peace. Important
as these are, the great question of all is, whether we shall sur
render or preserve our free institutions ?" Such is the ques
tion. And " the swinging round the circle" of Governor Sey
mour and General Blair cannot divert the minds of the people
from this question — nor lead them to any other decision in re
gard to it than such as their vote for, and election of, Grant
and Colfax will give. Lamartine beautifully said of Wilber
force : " He went up to the throne of the Eternal with a million
of broken fetters in his hands as evidence of a life well spent."
Thither Abraham Lincoln went with the broken fetters of four
and a half millions of slaves made freemen as evidence that this
civil war has not been in vain. I believe it will be our lot to
see, under the administration of Grant and Colfax, the [resto
ration of all the States on the great and glorious principle of
impartial suffrage and equality of political rights without re
gard to race or color — and this will be the token, whether the
days of the Republican Party hereafter shall be few or many,
that its life has been well spent.
Then, under the broad segis of the American Union, life,
property, reputation and the fruits of industry will be secure
• beyond the point to which such security is enjoyed under any
other government among men.
And then will our nation, by an honest and consistent alle
giance to the laws of morality in its domestic policy and its
foreign relations, have acquired the highest degree of moral
ascendency ; and in this does, the wisdom and strength of a
nation consist.

Missing Page

Missing Page

Missing Page

Missing Page