Newspaper Page Text
lisa saaMh
■lV, mis $2 OO A Year.
VtlaniP
lit Mpson filot.
SPEECH OF
HO y JOHN J. CHITTENDEN,
OF KENTUCKY,
oN relation of states.
r r.'<red in the Senate of the U. States,
m May 25th, 1860.
vnate resumed the consideration of the
aIZ* submitted by Mr. Davis on the Ist of
1 . V I*6o, relative to the equality of the States
0 f all the citizens to emigrate to the
Ses with slave property, and denying the
r r.f Confess or a Territorial Legislature to
?% with this right, Mr. CRITTENDEN
aid:
Mr President: It is not my purpose
toma ice a speech. I have no prepared speech,
r r anv preparation for a speech. I desire
, v to express my views in relation to cer
•ain particular questions that have been
with some prominence in the
Curse of this long debate ; and one ot the
. st interesting and important of those
questions is that which affects the relation
existing between a territorial government
aal the Government of the United States.
It is supposed by some, as it seems, that
ti. se territorial governments, when organ
blunder the authority of Congress, have
rtaiu independent powers of their own,
not conferred, but inherent in them, as a
sort J sovereignty or political power inde
cent of any that may have been confer
red by express delegation of Congress.
My idea upon that subject, Mr. Presi
ient’ without a shadow ot doubt, is that a
territorial government is the mere creature
of Congress, made and fashioned by Con
fess as it pleases, with what functions it
pleases, with what power it thinks proper
to confer; that all these powers are liable
to be resumed at any time, or to be sash
ed aud controlled and changed at the
leasure of Congress, and according to its
iiscretion. Os course, there is no sover
itrnty or particle of sovereignty in the Ter
ritory ; ail is a mere delegation of power,
and is in subordination at all times to the
Congress of the United States. I know of
tio sovereignty in this country, no supreme
political power, except that originally vest
iin the people of the United States.—
TUy are the natural depositaries, they are
the natural oWfcers of everything like su
p-ffle power or sovereignty. They have,
to form this Government, delegated a cer
tain portion of that sovereignty to theCon
{M of the* United States. The whole,
then, of this sovereignty, exists, as to that
part not delegated, in the people. As to
that part which they have delegated, that
bin Congress ; and here is the disposition
* the whole sovereign supreme power of
s country. None has been delegated to
n y one else. None, certainly, has been
‘leli-gated to the territorial governments.
They are, as I first stated, the mere urea- j
turcs ot Congress, without any power, any
in tion, eNeept what Congress, by the tict
‘* % .Mishing that government, has pleased
o’ grant and that always held at the arbi- j
rament of Congress itself. There can he !
’"other. There is no place in our writ- j
n system of laws for it. The people is !
‘it' 1 original and the natural source of all
sovereignty. All remains in them ex
what they have granted. They have
SHrifM no portion of it except to tlieGen
uivernment. Certainly, they have
granted Done to the territorial governments.
w h°le practical sovereignty of the
r y over its Territories is vested in the
Egress of the United States then what
■■} have granted to the Territories belongs
11,1 Territories, and nothing more. That
! ;v idea on this subject. Congress, in
“uting the territorial government,
ttl - T just so much as it pleases of the
; “ er °t legislation, and any other power
ver n, to the Territorial government;
‘he territorial government may exer
’ whatever is granted to it. If Congress
the power, for instance, of expelling or
• iding slavery from the Territories, they
~ ‘ht grant even that to the territorial
r :v t:rnm en t;.
Not wasting any more time upon this
inject, I wish to call the attention of the
‘late for a moment to a calm
“of the real grievance at which these
utions are aimed, and for the correc-
a of which they are intended. What is
p-v si r ? The grievance complained of
,'vUu slave property in the Territories is
J 1 . without adequate protection,
°J be } e ft without adequate protec
but may be left to measures of the
m tonal government impairing the right
i P r,) perty in slaves. That is the griev-
H is in apprehension that the terri
’ will not give laws adequate to the
and ! ’ion of such property, but on the con
c • aa y act against that property by hos
ier legislation. That is the
friended J believe my honorable
n d from Mississippi, who introduced
did at the time he pro
• and them admit that there existed now
;j , a ’mal grievance calling for the interpo
of this Government.
tQ i r ; IS. As my friend from Ken-
I di] re^er ? *° me > I would merely say that
iQe f DOt * nten( l either to admit or deny
* considered the declaration of
of OCT 0 C T e *° Le coeternal with the existence
>b e r S°vernment, and coextensive with
dent ° e countr y> not necessarily depen-
a Qv h n particular fact in relation to
ded | art j CU^ar locality ; and neither inten
ts admit or deny?
SentW -TEN DEN. I understand the
f r °pOße 1^ Q n ° W ‘ amendment which is
Object of Tv w bich is now the immediate
*>Uch e • . ®bate, declares that there is no
* lu o grievance at the present wo-
ment It is then, according to the resolu
tion itself, an apprehended or prospective
mischief against which the power of this
Government is to be invoked for the pur
pose of securing that description of proper
ty in the Territoiies. As the territorial
government has no sovereign or indepen
dent right to act on this subject, the Su
preme Court of the United States having
determined that every citizen ot the United
States may go into that Territory carrying
his slaves with him, and holding them there,
my opinion is, that the Constitution is to
protect that property which it has author
ized to go there. Os course, that is a logi
cal conclusion. It seems to me it is un
questionable. To assert my right to go
there, to carry my property there, and to
enjoy that property, and then to say there
is anybody stronger or mightier or more
sovereign than the Constitution that can
take from me that which the Constitution
says I shall have and enjoy, or shall expel
me from the place where the Constitution
says I may go, I can imagine nothing so in
consistent and so contradictory. I say,
therefore, when the proper or extreme case
occurs ; when property going there under
the sanction of the Constitution, as inter
preted by the Supreme Court of the United
States, shall require such interposition,
that it is the duty of Congress to interpose
and grant protection. Give it, and give it
adequately. That is my opinion.
But still there is much to be considered
in relation to this subject. When your
property goes there; when it constitutes a
part of the political community ; and when
a limited control over that property is giv
en to a territorial government, who is to
make police laws to regulate such property?
Is it not, in every case, a question of expe
diency, whether this Government will in
terfere ? Here is a community made Up
of citizens differing in opinion, as we do,
upon this subject of slavery ; here is ample
power to pass all police laws, and all laws
for the internal government of the country,
blacks as well as whites included. When
is Congress to interfere ? Is there anv case
now demanding an interference ? This re
solution supposes not; 1 suppose hot. I
suppose that there is no existing case in
which Congress Would think it wise or ex
pedient now to interfere by the exercise of
its admitted power of interposition When
necessary. Would it be policy in Congress
to interpose except ih au extreme case ?
The ground upon which you w'ould inter
fere must he made up of a variety of cir
cumstances, to be judged of at the time.—
What is the difficulty in the interference ?
What is the state of tilings existing in the
Territory? What is the opposition likely
to ensue from tbe people of the territory ?
What is the magnitude of the evil which
you are to correct ? Is it a very small one
likely soou to pass away ? Is it of such
magnitude ts to require yoUr interposition?
These are considerations that must always
enter into that question of expediency when
it is presented to Congress ; and it is grate
ful to oie to be able to say, as gentlemen
seem to ‘admit here, that there is now no
necessity for such an interposition. Exact
right may not he done ; exact treatment
may not he extended to slaveholders in ter
ritories where there is a great majority of
Republicans; hut still they are not of such
magnitude as to justify a great national
movement on the subject. There is a max
im that it is better that a particular wrong
should be endured than a great public in
convenience incurred. That is tlie law at
least, Whether to be applied literally or not.
I quote it merely as a warning to 11s not to
interfere upon too slight grounds. I ad
mit the right to interfere ; I admit even
the duty to interfere when the proper case
is presented ; hut that proper case must be
an extreme one to require the exercise of
an extreme power on our part. The evil
at best, in a territorial government, is a
temporary one. It likely will not consist
in more than a few individual instances or
i-ases. The question of the right of such
property to be held and to exist in a Ter
ritory is so firmly established that I can
not conceive any Territorial Legislature
will, so far, consider itself warranted in
usurping the power of expelling the slaves
which the Constitution has said, by inter
pretation of the Federal court, to be sure,
may be carried and may be held there.—
That would require only that we should
repeal that law. That I would be perfect
ly willing to do.
I think therefore, sir, if there is no case
existing now, it will be still less likely to
exist hereafter. All this debate, all this
earnest and zealous and heated controver
sy is merely in prospect of an evil which is
only apprehended. None exists. hen
is it likely to exist, and where ? With ev
ery day I trust the danger of such necessi
ty is diminished. Kansas will soon be ta
ken from the class of territorial govern-*
ments. Where are we likely to have any
such difficulty as that which these resolu
tions apprehend, of an assault made by the
Territorial Legislatures upon slavery with
in their Territories ? Are there any slaves
in Washington ? Will there be any ques
tion about slavery in Utah ? In New Mex
ico ? Why, sir, these are not regions to
which you could by invitation carry slave
ry. Well, where is there to be a Territory
hereafter formed in which any controversy
whatever about slavery is likely to arise ?
Kansas disposed of, does there remain ant
territory to which slavery if invited would
go ? I know of none. I will not affirm
it is so exactly in regard to every portion
ot our territory ; but I believe there is none
of sufficient importance to form a State
which would be at all acceptable to the
slaveholders, if permitted without the least
‘THE UNION OF THE STATES:-DISTINCT, LIKE Tut BILLOWS; OHE, LIKE Tflfe SLA”
THOMASTON. GEORGIA. SATURDAI MORNING, JUNE 23, 186 ft
hinderance to take possession of it. They
can find a more genial climate, and a bet
ter soil on which to employ this labor.
There is, then, not only no actual exist
ing evil, hut there is no prospect of any.—
Why, then, at such a time, should the
country be agitated by the prospect of such
a distant evil ? The evil of the day is
enough ; and, it seems to me, if this be so,
we are making a present evil out of an ap
prehension of a future one, and that fu
ture one never likely to occur. Should we
quarrel now, as a nation, about remedies
for evils that do not exist ? Shall we quar
rel about remedies for evils that not only
do not exist, but which it is not probable
ever will exist ? Is that wisdom ? When
■hall we he freed from trouble, if this be
the course of policy to be pursued ? If it
is said to he wise to look far ahead of us
to anticipate evil, and by anticipating it,
preventing it, the question is, shall we an
ticipate the evil for the purpose of making
a quarrel over it now—a quarrel over a fu
ture cause of quarrel that we barely appre
hend, and which may never occur ? I want
the people of the United States to under
stand this thing. I want the slaveholder
to know, that though there may be slave
holders and slaves in Territories now exist
ing, and territorial governments now ex
isting, yet there has occurred no necessity
for the interposition of this Government ;
that all, so far, has gone on well and qui
etly enough under the domestic legislation
of the Territory.
Sir, when, in 1854, that great measure
of the repeal of the Missouri compromise
was adopted by the Congress of the Uni
ted States, one of its promised benefits
was-, that it should remove from the Halls
of Congress, and from all national contro
versy or discussion, the question of slavery.
That was supposed to he one of the bene
fits that would result. It was to transfer
all those questions to the Territories ; make
them local instead of national questions ;
making the disturbance local to the Terri
tor3 r , and not national, to extend through
out the limits of the Whole Republic. That
was one of the promised benefits of that
measure ; and if it had tended even to ac
complish that object, much more if it had
accomplished it, it Would have been agreat
benefit to this country. Wit framed the
Kansas-Nebraska hill with that view.—
You gave them large powers of self-gov
ernment. To be sure they were, as ot ne
cessity they must be, subject to this Gov
ernment-, liable to be changed or taken
away at any time it was thought proper
by this Government, liable to be changed
or taken away at any time it was thought
proper by this Government to do so ; but
still, you did it with the very purpose of
transferring all these slavery questions to
them. Sir, the act itself has not produced
the promised consequences ; hut when We
look back to it, and when we interpret it,
we must know that was one of the purpo
ses and objects in view of the legislators
who passed that bill.
The effects of that law have been modi
fied, to be sure, by the decision of the Su
preme Court. Ido not know, I will not
interpret it to say-, tbit that law would
have warranted the Legislature of Kansas
in excluding slavery altogether, if it had
been in, the power of Congress to have
granted such a power. It was not known
whether it was in the power of Congress or
not. The case of Dred Scott was then de
pending, and not decided. The case of
Dred Scott determines that Congress had
not the power, and of course could not, hv
the Kansas act, give it. The Kansas act
could not confer the power of expelling
slavery, or excluding it, upon the Legisla
ture of the Territory of Kansas. The pow
er was limited then by that decision. But
for that decision, I think it would be diffi
cult to deny that the Kansas-Nebraska
bill gave full power to the territorial gov
ernment on the subject. “Power to regu
late their own domestic institutions in
their own way.” What broader terms could
be used ? “Power to act on all subjects
of rightful legislation.” What exception
can you make to the generality of these
powders ? The Constitution, as subsequent
ly interpreted by the Federal court, I ac
knowledge, declares that slavery is not a
subject of legislation on the part of Con
gress.
Mr. President, I do not want to enlarge
upon this subject. My object is to be as
brief as possible. I say, then, I assume
that, and I shall vote for that resolution.
Ido not see that that resolution has pro
claimed a case which would authorize Con
gress to undertake the responsibility of
now interposing and now legislating for
the protection of slavery. Ido not know
that there aie not sufficient laws now for
its protection in any Territory. I have no
such knowledge myself. No such case has
been proclaimed here, and the resolutions
are to lay the foundations of remedies for
cases to arise hereafter. If there had been
any existing, my friend from Mississippi,
as the careful and able guardian of these
rights, would have introduced a bill giv
ing that protection, instead of a vain reso
lution that operates nothing—proclaims
the mischief, and yet forbears to give re
dress. That would not have been his
course if there was an existing ease: There
is no case now ; there can arise no case
hereafter, because there is no Territory to
which slavery is likely to go.
To produce the grievance, What must
occur ? To produce the grievance not
now existing, in any future Territory, or
in any Territory now existing, we must
suppose it to be so desirable as to allure
slaveholders with their slaves to settle in
it. Is there any probability of that ?
\\ here is the Territory to which it will
go ? \Y ell, sir, you are to make that im
probable conjecture; but that will not
raise the case. You must suppose that,
when the slaves have been carried to this
new Territory, the Legislature of the ter
ritorial government will act hostilely to
wards it, and, by unfriendly legislation,
attempt to drive it out or to impair its
value if it remains. You are to suppose
their migration to that Territory; and
then you are to suppose that the legisla
tors of that country, in violation of the du
ties imposed upon them by the constitu
tional law as it has been interpreted and
laid down, will assail a property there by
law, bv the assumption of rights ; that
they will assail a property that is there by
the Constitution of the United States.—
All these suppositions have to be made, in
4>rder to get a case out of which this griev
ance can ari§£
What apprehension is there, then, to be
entertained of an evil depending upon so
many improbable events —an evil that can
orilv result from so inanv contingencies ?
W e must be prompt, we must be prone as
well as prompt, it seems, to controversy,
if we can presume all these things for the
future ;if we can presume that with so
much zeal as to bring them forward, and
make the future, the possible future, a
cause of present mischief and of present
quarrel, further to disturb the peace of
this great country. Sir, I do not think it
is right. When you have got them there;
when all these contingencies happen, and
this improbable mischief, this improbable
grievance, has beeu complained of and is
upon us, it will then he a question of con
sideration, how far, under what circum
stances, under what extremity of evil, it
will be best for this Government to inter
pose. The question will not be, whether
a private w’rong has been done to A, B, or
C, in the property of his slaves, but the
question will be then one of great national
expediency with a just regard for the rights
of individuals, with a just and sacred de
termination to maintain them under all
proper circumstances ; for I hold that
Government is made for the protection of
rights. Government is but the combina
tion of the powers of all to protect the
rights, and to protect the lives and liber
ties, of each. That is the origin of Gov
ernment, and the substance and end of all
true Government ; but still there must be
a prudence in the management of that
Government. There are a thousand con
siderations that the legislator has to take
into view. The interests of all are con
cerned. every question of ex
pediency ; aiW this must be a question of
expediency also with this Government,
wheh to interpose, and when not to inter
pose.
It may be said, upon principle in gener
al, that the local government is the gov
ernment best qualified to take care of the
local interests of the Country in which they
govern. Here is ohe subject, however,
placed beyond their control—slavery. They
are taught that this is property, and enti
tled to protection as such. Ido not mean
to make any question about property in
slaves or property in the service of slaves.
It is all one and the same thing ; and I im
agine that the slaveholder does riot care
how it is denominated so that the substance
of his right to the practical enjoyment of
it is left to him. If the gentleman on the
other side of the G’hamber Inject the idea
of property in man, and say that it is but
property in the service of man* as service
is all that can be obtained from the slaves,
it is perfectly equivalent, in my judgment,
and, for one, I would be perfectly satisfied
with that.
That property is to he protected, and
must he protected, When necessary ; but I
confess, like the gentleman from Georgia,
(Mr. Toombs,) I should be very slow to
interpose the positive authority of this
Government, unless the case was one im
periously and by necessity, as it were, de
manding it. I would try other means, even
to the abolition of the territorial govern
ment, and a change of its form, a change
of its administrators ; hut protection at last
the man is entitled to ■ and if the Govern
ment cannot give it to him, or thinks it
would be determined to the interests of the
nation to forbear in consequence of great
national evils that might be anticipated,
let them pursue that policy. The Sethis
populi is at last the great law of all com
munities, of all nations. It must influence
our interpretations and our consideration
of all quesfions of mere expediency. If the
Government does not think proper to in
terfere and furnish protection, let the Gov
ernment indemnify the citizen lor the
wrongs he has suffered. There might be
cases of that sort.
But, sir, I did not intend to go into these
imaginary cases. That was not my pur
pose. It was to express the opinion that
there w r as no necessity for it now, in the
midst of all the strife we have had on the
subject, and it not likely any future griev
ance will arise, because of the want of ter
ritory in which it could occur. If any ter
ritory should be found which would attract
slaveholders with that property there, it is
not to be presumed that a Territorial Leg
islature, subordinate as it is to this Gov
ernment —its Governor liable to be turned
out, its Judges liable to be all turned out
bv the President in a take
upon itself, in the very face of the decision
of the Supreme Court of the Lnited States,
to legislate against slavery, for the purpose
of destroying or impairing the Value ot the
property of one of their fellow-citizens. —
Would The Governor allow it, so far as he
could help it 9 Would the Judges allow
it, with the certain knowledge that their
removal from office would be, as it ought
to be, the consequence of srtcU. a departure
from their duty : ‘There would be a just
apprehension on the part of the whole Ter
ritory that the Government of the United
States, who had giVen them these large
powers, and the pnVileges of exercising a
sort of self-government, might take away
power koto tbe hands of those \\ho defied
the public authority, and abused tlieitrust
with which they had been invested. YvYuht
they not be uuder the just apprehension
that all these powers would be taken away
by the Government whose authority they
had abused? Would not that restrain
them from any attempts at the violation
of the property of their neighbors ? I
want the people of the United States to
consider all these things, and subdue the
alarms which they now feel, as though
there were an instant overhanging danger
upon the country.
Sir, there is nothing so marvelous in the
history of the country, under its present
aspect, as the agitation which now exists
throughout its borders, compared with the
general prosperity which prevails. In all
its glorious progress, did ever this couutry
exhibit a fairer picture of human prosperi
ty and human happiness than it does to
day ? Nature has bestowed all her boun
ties. This is a land of plenty and abun
dance, without weight or measure; the
freest Government on earth. What citi
zen of this Republic is unlawfully impris
oned to-day, from one end of this country
to the other ? What white man can say
he is unjustly oppressed by the Govern
ment? Do you know of one ? Doesany
body know of one ? Can such a thing be
said of any country on the face of the globe
but our own ? Prisoners of state can be
found everywhere else. The voice of op
pression can be heard elsewhere. In our
country that voice is unknown. And yet,
sir, these agitations upon this subject have
created a discontent from one end of the
land to the other. The minds of the peo
ple are disturbed in the midst of all this
prosperity.
The Republican party, it seems to me,
has taken some progress ; but, I must say
this beautitul picture of peace and happi
ness has received its only wound from the
agitation which they have maintained on
the subject of slavery. I say this ih a Spir
it of the most perfect fraternity. We en
ter on a cause productive of evils without
knowing, without intending them We
are urged on, and one step is takeu after
another, until we see the evil and regret
it ; but other interests and other passions,
and other purposes, still urge us on, and
we take the hazard of all the evils we see.
It is said it is but agitation ; that will de
stroy nobody. Sir, moderation is deman
ded of us now’ on all sides. The restora
tion ot peace and tranquility is all that is
necessary to consumate that national pros
’ perity and that national happiness to which
! I have referred. Providence has done ev
i erything for us, and w r e are the authors of
! all that mars the picture. Is there any
real or substantial cause tor pursuing a
| course in politics that we see and know 7 has
led to this discontent and this alienation ?
Is there any object that you can accom
plish by it that is at all worth that ? Is
there any price too high for that which
will purchase the restoration o( kindness
and natural affection with a brother with
whom we have been offended ? What
price -would you not set upon that j and
what sacrifice would you not make for it ?
You are told if you are at the altftr ready
with your offspring, and remember that
your brother is offended with you, to lay
down your offering, go and be recoticilbd
to your brother, and then go add offer to
your Maker the evidence of yottr devotion.
We should employ a little of that spirit
With our own people. Let us all do that,
North and South
Mr. President, I speak of these subjects
with a judgtrient as firm and determined as
iny judgment is capable or sitsccptible of
but withodtany Utikindness, much less with
acrimony. lam one of those who would
desire fcefore I make my offering even
to be reconciled to my brother. Men
must be supposed to intend all that their
acts tend to produce. They are the author
of them whether they hold themselves re
sponsible or not. They are not more re
sponsible for tire act they do, than they are
for the natural, probable, ensuing conse
quences of the act. There have been in
discretions on all sides. The blame has Uot
been on one side, so far as ill language and
mutual reproaches are concerned ; it has
been on all sides. The controversy of bit
ter words once commenced spreads every
! where, though you may not be able to find
the beginning of it.
But now, if what T have said in relation
to the probability of slavery desiring or
seeking to be carried into these Territories
be at all true, what reason is there for your
pursuing a policy which the circumstances
of Kansas did at one time seem to give
some plausibility to P That is settled.—
That was the jrreat cause which led you to
action. It was ?o proclaimed. The object
was to repair the wrong done to Kansan by
the repeal of the Missouri compromise, or
in consequence of it. That was the mis
chief complained of. To redress that was
the ground on Which this noW jb'oWerful
and great party arrayed itself. That you
have accomplished. You have accomplish
ed it by ways and means that must have
been disagreeable to you in their Conse
quences. You saw that it offended your
brethren ; you saw that it injured your
brethren. The discussion of such a sub
ject, pressed to their very borders, pressed
in Advance.
aver their borders, and among- their
could not be otherwise than hurtful,, aa
well as offensive. As States ot this Uuion,
in the language of these resolutions, they
considered themselves pledged to hold fast
to and to give all necessary aid and com
fort to every State with which they were
associated in the Vnioh—to all their Bit
ter States ; to use that language which sig
nifies affectionate relations. But in incon*
sipteftCC witji, whether or not in violation,
of, those relations, whether falsely or inad- 1
vertently done, you brought these heated
discussions up to the very burdens, ot your
sister States. The rffc'e went abroad
through their land of a character calculq-,
ted to produce insurrection, calculated to
produce every crime known to us. Was
this right ? Yoti Say you have a right to,
discuss the morality of every subject that
affects any of your countrymen, in order
to inform them and reason with them. Aa
a general propositidh it. is true, ..and such
admonition ought, perhaps, to be thank
fully received. But this is a case whero
every man must see exceptional reasons ap
ply. This is ah exception. Would a mili
tary man, a commander-in-chief, be justi
fied in acting upon this doctrine ot allow
ing every evil to be denounced, and giving
a free and unlimited aud chartered right
to all who choose to discuss these evils ; to
give out their own undigested ideas, for
eign ideas, novel ideas, in order to infiu-,
ence others ? Would that be tolerated in
a camp ? Suppose one of the good men of
the world now, who is the advocate of uni
versal peace, and looks ujion war as the
greatest of all human cringes—suppose one
of these apostles of peace were lo insist up
on going into the camp, and, as one of the.
means of preventing war, to endeavor to
disband the army of his country ; would
jou not hold the commander-in-chief guil
ty who should allow that man, to pyeaqh
with all his eloquence to the soldiers the
great virtue of deserting the standard of
their country, and of being ministers of the
great peace system, which they would ac
complish some part of by rvunifig av*ay
from their otandard; by rising
in mutiny, and putting an end to those of
ficers who, if not destroyed* might be court
ing wars hereafter to teach them the tyr
anny that was exercised over them by their
officers, and say to them, “yoq arc herein 1 :
velgled ip to capig fo* ft few dollars ; you
are, in the mornings drilled by the sergeant ;
you are made to hold yourselves in this
way, and in that wav / and to play the very
slave before him ; now, can you as freemen
bear this,; rise, assert your rights, and
make your way to peace everywhere over
the land What is the difference botweett
that and the course to which I have just
alluded, ? , ,
Sir, i make tliece remarks in no spirit of
offence. You have received wrongs, and
you have inflicted some. In tb'e controver
sies of this world it never happens that all
the wrong is on one side, rind all the right
on the other. No such exquisite devisions
are made on tliis earth. . Where there is a
long quarrel existing, a long trouble, all the
wrong is never on one side ; all the right is
never on one side. A knowledge of this
should teach us all moderation. That is
the great duty we owe our country. The
little petty dfities we owe our party are as
nothing ; yet !n practice we seem to place
them above the great duty to our country.
NoW I see that.this one of thegreat par
ties of the country to which I have allu
ded, after having accomplished the object
which it put fortli to the world as its only
object, still says that the existing state of
things demands the perpetuation of that
party. You now find cause for perpetua
ting it. It has increased in power. What
is the reason why it shotjld be perpetuatedP
Is it to be perpetuated ? Is a party so
founded, so created, and upoti such ques
tions as make up the foundation of the
Kepublican party, now to defclare the nec
essity of its perpetuation for the purpose
of enforcing and enjoying political power P
If you enjoy it actoruiijg id the tenure by
which yoii have obtained it, you must do
it with all this anti-filavery sort of warfare
by which it has arisen. As long as you
stand rirtetVed id that way on the borders
of your sister States where slavery exists —
and I regret to be compelled by the neces
sity of the trise to iise the word “slavery”
here—while you stand thus, you disturb
their peace. You do not intend, the great
liberal and enlightened portion of this
body, who keep up this party for the pur
pose of its political rewards and its politi
cal honors, do not intend really to do any
actual mischief to the other States.—
You acknowledge their rights ; you declare
against the invasion of these rights ; but
that declaration does nothing ; that dec
laration restrains no man’s arm. Do you
not know that when you are denouncing
slavery with all its horrors, and with all
its immoralities as it presents itself to
your minds, though you will not actually
strike, yet there are others by your side
who may strike ; that there are others not
so enliglitefcied, intelligent, or forbearing,’
when urged on by your own very doctrines,
will take upon themselves the lawless and
and the mtirderous task, by thelf own
meads rind their own bloody handy,’ cz bn-,
forcing your doctrines ? You have found
that in one instance ; you may find it in;
others ; and of what advantage is all this?
None that I can see. I know ydii, gentle
men ; and I know that there is (tot one of
you here ■fcbo would countenance such ad
act. 1 kdow it would lidt be more abhor
rent to me than it would be to you. But
when you see that these things will follow
in the course of that great host which you-
oy SECQJSB* PAGE.}
ftuiuiMT