The American Annual Cyclopaedia and Register of Important Events of the Year, 1861-1865, vols. 1-5. New York: Appleton & Co., 1868.

Congress of the United States, 1861 - Part 2

Subsequently the bill to provide a temporary government for the territory of Arizona being before the Senate,

Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, moved an additional section, providing that the act of the Legislature of New Mexico, providing for the protection of property in slaves, be extended to Arizona. To this motion Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, moved an amendment, providing that the law of Mexico, respecting African slavery, as it existed in said territory upon its acquisition, should remain unchanged.

Mr. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, then took the floor, and declared that he should support the amendment. The people of this country have lived together in peace for more than seventy years. That peace has rested upon two fundamental ideas: first, that the Federal Government and the citizens of the free States shall make no aggression upon slavery in the States; and the other, equally fundamental, that neither the Federal Government nor the slaveholders of the slave States shall make any aggressions upon or undertake to overturn freedom in the territories. Upon these grounds the people may live for generations to come; but if the citizens of the free States or the Federal Government shall undertake, directly or indirectly^ to overturn slavery in the States where it exists, or if the citizens of the slave States or the Federal Government shall undertake to overturn freedom in the territories, they cannot have peace.

After examining the Constitution on the subject of slavery, and the objections urged to the Republican platform by Senator Nicholson, he emphatically declared his sentiment thus: "I say to these gentlemen that, upon that idea that the Constitution establishes slavery, you cannot have peace on the slavery question; and you may just as well know it first as last. The people of the United States do not believe that the Constitution is, and will never consent that it shall be altered so that it will become, a slavery-extending Constitution by force of its own terms. We do not ask either that you put upon it that construction which shall abolish slavery in any State or in any territory. We say, let the Constitution be as our fathers made it; let it be neutral—neither affirming nor denying, and then you can have peace."

After discussing the various causes of irritation, he observed that those men who are regarded as the Abolitionists in this country; I those men who have denounced the Constitution as being a covenant with hell, because they were bound to return these fugitives to slavery, stand looking on with an anxiety and intensity of interest which cannot be conceived. Their prayers go up, day and flight, that this Union may be broken—that the free States of the North may no longer be compelled by the bond of Union to surrender the fugitive slaves; and proceeded by saying that the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and every citizen of the United States, therefore, owes a double allegiance; one to this Federal Government, and another to the State in which he lives. He may be guilty of treason against either; he may be guilty of treason against both; but within their spheres each government is sovereign and supreme. If Congress steps beyond the powers delegated by the Constitution, to enact any law, it is absolutely void. If the State should step beyond the Constitution of the United States, which limits the power of the States to enact a law in conflict with it, it is simply unconstitutional, null, and void.

Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana, wished to ask the gentleman from Wisconsin, if, in his opinion, under that form of government a citizen can be placed, by the conflict between these two governments, in a position where he must of necessity be guilty of treason to the one or the other, and therefore be bound to be hung any way?

Mr. Doolittle replied: "No, sir; he cannot; for if the State declares that to be treason which by the Constitution of the United States is void, as being in conflict with it, it is no treason; for the Constitution of the United States is the fundamental law of your State, and any act or declaration making it treason to do an act which is in conflict with the Constitution of the United States, cannot be made treason by the State, although they may declare it so."

Mr. Benjamin: "If they declare it so, and hang the citizen because they declare it so, what advantage would it be to him that in theory the decision was wrong?"

Mr. Doolittle: "The citizen must judge at his peril. If a law is enacted by Congress which is within the Constitution of the United States, the citizen will judge at his peril; and if he undertakes to break up the Government of the United States, and to be guilty of treason against the Government of the United States, any act which the State may declare in conflict with it is simply unconstitutional, null, and void."

Mr. Benjamin: "As a practical proposition, if the citizen of a State is, by the action of his State, which he cannot control, commanded to do a certain thing under the penalty of being hanged under the law of the State; and if that Page 189 thing is treason under the Constitution and laws of the United States, is it possible, under the law of nations, and under the common sentiments of humanity that govern mankind, for the Federal Government to undertake to act upon the individual who is placed under duress to commit treason, instead of first relieving him from that duress by making war upon the State?"

Mr. Doolittle: "If the man is to be hung if he does the act, and to be hung if he does not, undoubtedly, so far as he is concerned, it will make no great difference, (laughter;) but, as a question of law, if he does an act which is treason against the United States, and is compelled to do that act by a law of the State, the state law is void, because it is in conflict with the Constitution of the United States."

Mr. Benjamin: "Then would the hanging be void?"

Mr. Doolittle: "The hanging would be a certainty, (laughter;) it would not be void for uncertainty. I say, Mr. President, that where the Constitution of the United States speaks in language clear enough to delegate power to this Government, it is not in the power of one, ten, one hundred, or all the citizens of a State, to annul that act of Congress; because the Constitution and the acts in pursuance of it are the supreme law of that State, and binding on every citizen and upon all the citizens in that State, and every citizen must, of course, act at his peril."

Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, continued the debate by saying: "It seems to me that Northern Senators most perniciously overlook the main point at issue between the two sections of our Confederacy. We claim that there is property in slaves, and they deny it. Until we shall settle, upon some basis, that point of controversy, it is idle to talk of going any further. The Southern people have $4,000,000,000 locked up in this kind of property. I do not mean to say that their slaves are worth so much; but their real property, their stock, their household goods, and all that belongs to them, are dependent upon the security of that kind of property.

"During the first forty years of our national existence, I undertake to affirm that no man, North or South, pretended to deny the great fact that there was such a thing as property in slaves. About 1818, 1810, 1820, this doctrine of refusing to recognize the right of property in slaves sprang up. It has continued to intensify from that day to this, until we find ourselves in our present condition. Now, I ask Senators on the other side if, looking at this thing calmly, they can for an instant suppose that, under any possible conceivable state of the case, we can voluntarily consent to live under a Government passing into the hands of a power, on the 4th of March, which openly and undisguisedly tells us that all this vast interest is to be outlawed under the common Government; that the $4,000,000,000 invested in this property, the accumulation of centuries of hard labor, muscular and physical labor, is going to be voluntarily abandoned—abandoned, I mean, be far as the action of this Federal Government is concerned; and that we, the inhabitants of fifteen States of this Union, will consent to live under a Government outlawed by its authority? That is the stern proposition which yon submit to us. That is the proposition which we as sternly reject. Can we ever consent to remain in any Government, and know it only through its taxing power? Do rational men of the North suppose that nine million Southern people can ever consent to live in a Government outlawed by the Government, and known by it only when it wants tribute?

"I have no hope, no expectation, of changing the judgment of Senators on the other side, and very little hope of ever reaching their constituents; but there are some stubborn facts in history, which it were well enough their constituents should come to learn."

Mr. Green, of Missouri, referring to the question before the Senate, observed that when Mexico ceded all this territory to us by the Gadsden treaty, no slavery existed there except the peonage; but the very moment it became ceded to us, and became part of the United States, it was under the Constitution of the United States. There is no such thing as a constitutional Government acquiring property, and yet that property not be subject to the Constitution; and it is a contradiction to say so. If we have the power to acquire, it is by virtue of our organization under the Constitution; and the moment you acquire it, it is subject to that Constitution.

Mr. Doolittle replied, that the Senator of Missouri assumed, as a proposition which ought not to be doubted, that the Constitution of the United States entered the territory acquired from Mexico, repealed the Mexican law abolishing slavery, and established a law in its favor. This proposition was in direct contravention of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Prigg case, in which they held expressly that "the state of slavery is deemed to be a mere municipal regulation, founded upon, and limited to, the range of the territorial laws." It was in violation of the decisions of the supreme court of every State, both North and South, previous to 1848. "When John O. Calhoun, on the floor of this Senate, first announced the doctrine that the Constitution of the United States, by its own positive force, guaranteed the right to take and hold slaves as property in the territories of the United States, it did not have half a dozen supporters in either House of Congress.

Mr. Mason, of Virginia, wished the privilege of saying, as Mr. Calhoun lives no longer, and had no representative of his State on that floor, that he never understood him, nor ever understood any jurist in the land, in giving a considered view of this question, as declaring that the Constitution of the United States established slavery anywhere; but he understood that Page 190  great man, and those who concurred with him in opinion, to say this: that a slave is property, and nothing but property; and that the Constitution of the United States would protect that property in the territories, or upon the high seas as it would protect any other property. It establishes nothing; it recognizes property because it is property. That he understood to be Mr. Calhoun's view. Again he remarked: "We say, not that the Constitution establishes slavery anywhere, but that there is the same obligation upon those who administer the Constitution to protect the property in a slave as property, as in any thing else, wherever the Constitution is administered. That is what we claim."

Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, observed that here was a region of country about to be organized into a territorial government, which, at the time we acquired it, was under a law excluding African slavery from it. Now, the question was, when it becomes incorporated with this Government, without any action of the people there, or any desire to have that law changed, whether we should not continue the existing state of things.

Mr. Green, of Missouri, urged that this was a mistaken view. The law which the Senator from Mississippi proposes to make the permanent law, is the existing law. The debate here dropped, and the bill was subsequently passed without any provision for the exclusion of slaves from the territory.

_____

On the 11th of January a resolution was offered in the Senate by Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, authorizing the retrocession by the President of the forts and arsenals within any State upon the application of the Legislature, or a convention of the people of such State, taking at the same time proper security for their safekeeping and return, or payment for the same.

To this an amendment was offered, by Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, approving the act of Major Anderson in abandoning Fort Moultrie and taking possession of Fort Sumter.

Mr. Hunter followed in a lengthy speech, embracing all the important points of the crisis. To him it appeared to be a question of reunion. "I say that, so far as I can weigh the question, it is no more a question of Union, but one of reunion. To produce reunion it is essential that the Southern States should be allowed to take that position which it is obvious they are going to take, in peace. You must give, too, all the time you can, and offer all the opportunities you may, to those who desire to make an effort for the reconstruction of this Confederacy. Sir, I say I am one of those; for while I believe that the South owes it to itself first to secure its own position, to provide for its own protection, to unite in such strength as will enable it to defend itself against all goers and comers, I also believe that the interests of mankind, our own interests, and the interests of our confederates, would then require that we should reconstruct the old Union if we can, or rather construct a new Union on terms of equality and of justice." Mr. Harlan, of Iowa, replied: "Whatever may be pretended to the contrary, the real grievance inflicted on 'the South by the North,' is the invitation extended to the Southern Democracy, on the 6th day of last November, to resign the reins of Government into the hands of their political opponents. This will become manifest on an examination of the alleged causes of complaint. These are all stated in general and ambiguous terms, without specification. The most usual allegation, which has been reiterated to-day, is that the provisions of the Constitution have been violated. The secession argument which follows is, that when a contract has been violated by one party it may be declared void by the other party to its provisions; that the Constitution of the United States is such a contract between the several States; that the Federal Government is merely their agent appointed to carry out its provisions; that this contract having been broken by some of the States, the other States may voluntarily secede, and demand a division of liabilities and assets."

In regard to the apprehensions expressed relative to the future policy of the Republican party he thus expressed his views: "You may feign fear that we will interfere with your institutions in the slave States. Time at last will develop the fact that nil those fears are groundless. If any man will read the speeches and the letters of the President of the United States elect, he can come to no other conclusion than that he will administer the Government, so far as he has power, precisely on the policy originally proposed by Henry Clay, who participated so largely in securing the compromise measures to which I have alluded. Why not consent to this? Why attempt the fearful experiment of destroying this Government, which has stood the test of time so well, under the vain hope of forming a better? But if you must do something to raise a smoke under which to retire from your unenviable position, admit the territories as States, and thus end the controversy forever. If this proposition is acceptable to the Republicans, surely it ought to be acceptable to you."

Mr. Polk, of Missouri, followed on the opposite side, and described the commercial condition of the country as of the most alarming character: "What," he asked, " is the condition of things all over the entire Confederacy, both North and South? Universal panic, prostration of credit, public and private. Our Government has just advertised for a loan of $5,000,000, and she could only get half of it bid for; nor even that except at usurious rates of interest, running up to the extreme of thirty-six per centum per annum. Failures and bankruptcies, stagnation and embarrassments everywhere and among all classes. Business languishing; trade crippled; commerce curtailed; Page 191 industry paralyzed; artisans and mechanics idle for the want of employment; factories stopped and operatives discharged; suffering among the laboring poor; and families without necessaries even now and want and perhaps starvation just before them in the future; and this glorious fabric of our Union even now tottering to its fall. Four of the pillars that sustained the towering edifice are already removed; and among them, one of the original thirteen upon which it first reposed. Six others are on the point of being removed; soon to be followed, it may be, by half of the residue, including among the slaveholding States the first and the last to come into the Union."

Passing to an examination of the claims of the South, he urged in the most emphatic terms that they should be conceded, or, if dissolution finally took place, it should be peaceful.

No action was taken by the Senate upon this resolution.

On the 8th of January a message on the state of the Union was received in the Senate, together with copies of documents from the Commissioners from South Carolina.

Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, took the floor after the message had been read, and proceeded to express his views on passing events: "I intended to adduce some evidences, which I thought were conclusive, in favor of the opinions which I entertain; but events, with a current hurrying on as it progresses, have borne me past the point where it would be useful for me to argue, by the citing of authorities, the question of rights. To-day, therefore, it is my purpose to deal with events. Abstract argument has become among the things that are past."

On the seizure of forts in South Carolina and elsewhere, the reason given in justification was that self-preservation is the first law of nature; and when the people there no longer had confidence that this Federal Government would not seize the forts constructed for their defence, and use them for their destruction, they only obeyed the dictates of self-preservation when they seized the forts to prevent the enemy from taking possession of them as a means of coercion, for they then were compelled to believe this Federal Government had become an enemy.

The remedy for this state of affairs Mr. Davis proposed in these words: "To assure them, the people of the South, that you do not intend to use physical force against them is your first remedy; to assure them that you intend to consider calmly all the propositions which they make, and to recognize the rights which the Union was established to secure; that you intend to settle with them upon a basis in accordance with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. When, you do that, peace will prevail over the land, and force become a thing that no man will consider necessary." 

The right of a State to withdraw from the Union was then asserted, without any purpose to argue the question, and he proceeded to ask what shall be done with events as they stood? Taking the ground that separation is inevitable, he says: "There remains to us, I believe, as the consideration which is most useful, the inquiry, how can this separation be effected so as to leave to us the power, whenever we shall have the will, to reconstruct? It can only be done by adopting a policy of peace. It can only be done by denying to the Federal Government all power to coerce. It can only be done by returning to the point from which we started, and saying, 'This is a Government of fraternity, a Government of consent; and it shall not be administered in a departure from those principles.'

"There are two modes, however, of dissolving the Union. One alone has been contemplated. It was that which proceeded from States separating themselves from those to whom they are united. There is another. It is by destroying the Constitution; by pulling down the political temple; by forming a consolidated Government. Union, in the very meaning of the word, implies the junction of separate States. Consolidation would be the destruction of the Union, and far more fatal to popular liberty than the separation of the States. But, if fanaticism and sectionalism, like the blind giant of old, shall seize the pillars of the temple to tear them down, in order that they may destroy its inmates, it but remains for us to withdraw, and it will be our purpose to commence the erection of another on the same plan on which our fathers built this. We share no such common ruin as falls upon a people by consolidation and destruction of the principles of liberty contained in the Constitution; by interference with community and social rights; and we go out of such a Government whenever it takes that form, in accordance with the Constitution, and in defence of the principles on which that Constitution rests. We have warned yon for many years that you would drive us to this alternative, and you would not heed. I believe that you still look upon it as a mere passing political move, as a device for some party end, knowing little of the deep struggle with which we have contemplated this as a necessity, not as a choice, when we have been brought to stand before the alternative—the destruction of our community independence, or the destruction of that Union which our fathers made. You would not heed us. You deemed our warning to be merely to the end of electing a candidate for the miserable spoils of office, of which I am glad to say I represent a people who have had so little indeed that they have never acquired an appetite for them. Yet you have believed—not looking to the great end to which our eyes were directed—that it was a mere political resort, by which we would intimidate some of your own voters. You have turned upon those true friends of ours at the North who have vindicated Page 192 the Constitution, and pointed out to you the danger of your course, and held them responsible for the censure you received, as though you had not, in fact, aggressed. Even at this session, after forty years of debate, you have asked us what was the matter."

Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, immediately rose to reply, saying: "We have listened to the Senator from Mississippi, and one would suppose, in listening to him here, that he was a friend of this Union, that he desired the perpetuity of this Government. He has a most singular way of preserving it, and a most singular way of maintaining the Constitution. What is it? Why, he proposes that the Government should abdicate. If it will simply withdraw its forces from Charleston, and abdicate either in favor of a mob or of the constituted authorities of Charleston, we will have peace! He dreads civil war, and he will avoid it by a surrender! He talks as if we Republicans were responsible for civil war if it ensues. If civil war comes, it comes from those with whom he is acting. Who proposes to make civil war but South Carolina? Who proposes to make civil war but Mississippi and Alabama and Georgia, seizing, by force of arms, upon the public property of the United States? Talk to us of making civil war! You inaugurate it, and then talk of it as if it came from the friends of the Constitution and the Union. Here stands this great Government; here stands the Union—a pillar, so to speak, already erected. Do we propose to pull it down? Do we propose undermining the foundations of the Constitution or disturbing the Union 1 Not at all; but the preposition comes from the other side. They are making war, and modestly ask us to have peace by submitting to what they ask!"

On a subsequent day the consideration of this message was again called up, and Mr. Seward improved the occasion to address the Senate on the state of public affairs. After saying what actions, in his opinion, would not save the Union, he declared his abhorrence of civil war in these words: "I dread, as in my innermost soul I abhor, civil war. I do not know what the Union would be worth if saved by the use of the sword. Yet, for all this, I do not agree with those who, with a desire to avert that great calamity, advise a conventional or unopposed separation, with a view to what they call a reconstruction. It is enough for me, first, that in this plan, destruction goes before reconstruction; and, secondly, that the strength of the vase in which the hopes of the nation are held consists chiefly in its remaining unbroken.

"Congressional compromises are not likely to save the Union. I know, indeed, that tradition favors this form of remedy. But it is essential to its success, in any case, that there be found a preponderating mass of citizens, so far neutral on the issue which separates parties, that they can intervene, strike down clashing weapons, and compel an accommodation. Moderate concessions are not customarily asked by a force with its guns in battery; nor are liberal concessions apt to be given by an opposing force not less confident of its own right and its own strength. I think, also, that there is a prevailing conviction that legislative compromises which sacrifice honestly cherished principles, while they anticipate future exigencies, even if they do not assume extra-constitutional powers, are less sure to avert imminent evils than they are certain to produce ultimately even greater dangers.

"Indeed, Mr. President, I think it will be wise to discard two prevalent ideas or prejudices, namely: first, that the Union is to be saved by somebody in particular; and, secondly, that it is to be saved by some cunning and insincere compact of pacification."

The immediate duty of Congress was, he thought, to redress any real grievances of the offended States, and then to supply the President with all the means necessary to maintain the Union in the full exhibition and discreet exercise of its authority. Beyond this, with the proper activity on the part of the Executive, the responsibility of saving the Union belonged to the people, and they are abundantly competent to discharge it.

Instead of regarding the Constitution as a compact upon which the Government was founded, his view of its authority was expressed in these words: "I fully admit the originality, the sovereignty, and the independence of the several States within their spheres. But I hold the Federal Government to be equally original, sovereign, and independent within its sphere. And the government of the State can no more absolve the people residing within its limits from allegiance to the Union, than the Government of the Union can absolve them from allegiance to the State. The Constitution of the United States, and the laws made in pursuance thereof, are the supreme law of the land, paramount to all legislation of the States, whether made under the Constitution, or by even their organic conventions. The Union can be dissolved, not by secession, with or without armed force, but only by the voluntary consent of the people of the United States, collected in the manner prescribed by the Constitution of the United States."

The question of the moment, the simple question to be then decided was, whether it conduces more to the interests of the people of this country to remain, for the general purposes of peace and war, commerce inland and foreign, postal communications at home and abroad, the care and disposition of the public domain, colonization, the organization and admission of new States, and, generally, the enlargement of empire, one nation under our present Constitution, than it would to divide themselves into separate confederacies or States.

The plan which he preferred to adopt in relation to the territories and to the troubles of Page 193 the country was thus stated: "When the eccentric movements of secession and disunion shall have ended, in whatever form that end may come, and the angry excitements of the hour shall have subsided, and calmness once more shall have resumed its accustomed sway over the public mind, then, and not until then —one, two, or three years hence—I should cheerfully advise a convention of the people, to be assembled in pursuance of the Constitution, to consider and decide whether any and what amendments of the organic national law ought to be made."

On the conclusion of Mr. Seward's remarks the Senate immediately adjourned, and no action took place upon the message.

The States of Florida and Alabama, having retired from the Union, so far as any action on the part of their State conventions could effect it, the next step was taken by their Senators and Representatives in Congress, who withdrew from their seats. The Senators from South Carolina resigned before the session of Congress commenced. They had not, therefore, been in their seats. The Senate was called to witness this novel scene for the first time on the 21st of January.

Mr. Yulee, from Florida, taking the floor, said: "Mr. President, I rise to make known to the Senate, that in consequence of certain proceedings, which have lately taken place in the State of Florida, my colleague and myself are of the opinion that our connection with this body is legally terminated.

"The State of Florida has, through a convention of her people duly assembled, decided to recall the powers delegated to this Government, and to assume the full exercise of all her sovereign rights as an independent and separate community.

"I am sure that I truly represent her, when I say that her people have not been insensible to the many blessings they have enjoyed under the Constitution of the United States, nor to the proper advantages of a Union directed to the great purposes of 'establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquillity, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity.' They have held in patriotic reverence the memories that belong to the Union of American States in its origin and progress, and have clung with a fond assurance to the hope that its wise plan, and the just principles upon which it was based, would secure for it a perpetual endurance and transcendent usefulness.

"They have decided that their social tranquillity and civil security are jeoparded by a longer continuance in the Union, not from the contemplated or necessary operation of the Constitution, but from the consequences, as they conceive, of an unjust exercise of the powers it conferred, and a persistent disregard of the spirit of fraternity and equality in which it was founded. Recent events have impressed them with the belief that the peace of their homes and the preservation of their community interest can only be secured by an immediate withdrawal from the dangers of a perverted and hostile employment of the powers of the Federal Government. They are not willing to disturb the peace of their associates by an inflamed and protracted struggle within the Union, for rights they could never, with self-respect or safety, surrender, and against a policy of administration which, although sanctioned and authorized by the late decision of a majority of the States, they regard to be hostile to their best interests, and violative of the legitimate duty and trusts of the Government. They have preferred to abandon all the hopes they rested upon the common growth and common power of the Union, and to assume the serious responsibilities of a separate existence and new and untried relations. It is only under a deep sense of duty to themselves and their posterity that so important a step has been taken. I am sure that the people of Florida will ever preserve a grateful memory of their past connection with this Government, and a just pride in the continued development of American society. They will also remember that although, to their regret, a majority of the people in the States of the Northern section of the Union have seen their duty to lie in a path fatal to the safety of Southern society, they have had the sympathies of a large array of noble spirits in all those States, whose sense of justice, and whose brave efforts to uphold the right, have been not the less appreciated, nor will be the less remembered, because unsuccessful.

"We have not been wanting in timely warning to our associates of the unhappy tendency of their policy. It was in the unhallowed pursuit, as we thought, of sectional aggrandizement, and the indulgence of unregulated sentiments of moral duty, that the equilibrium of power between the sections, which had been maintained until then, was ruthlessly and unwisely destroyed by the legislation of 1860. The injustice, and danger of those proceedings were considered by a large portion of the South to be so flagrant, that we resorted to an unusual formality in bringing our views and apprehensions to the attention of the country. Upon our official responsibility, a number of the Senators, those of Florida among them, giving expression to the opinions of their constituents, presented a written protest against the wrong to which our section was subjected, and a fraternal warning against the dangerous tendency of the policy which incited to that wrong. That protest was refused a place in the journals of this body, contrary, as we thought, to the express duty enjoined by the Constitution; hut it went before the public, and I think it proper to recall the attention of this body to its contents, in the hour when the apprehensions it expressed are fatally realized.*

_____________________________________

* The following Is the protest referred to in Mr. Yulee's remarks, and which was presented in the Senate by Mr.

Page 194

 "Let me be pardoned, Mr. President, for detaining the Senate with a further remark. The circumstance that the State of Florida was formed upon territory acquired by the United States, and the paucity of her numbers, has been occasionally remarked upon. Owing to causes she could not control, her settlement has been, until recently, comparatively slow. But her population exceeds that of seven of the sixteen States that composed the Union when the census of 1790 was taken under the new Constitution; and six of the thirteen original States had fewer numbers when they formed the Constitution. Rights of sovereignty and liberty depend not upon numbers.

"It is quite true that her limits comprehend a part of the territory to which the title was acquired by the United States from Spain. But it is also true that a part of the consideration for the cession was a reservation to the inhabitants of the right to admission into the Federal Union upon terms of equality; and it was in view of this right that most of the inhabitants remained there. If their number has been increased by subsequent immigration, it was mostly of citizens from others of the United States, who were lineal inheritors of the glories and fruits of the American Revolution. "In pursuance of this stipulation, and of the established policy of the country, they were admitted into the Union; and, in the act of admission, Florida was expressly recognized and declared to be a State, and admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever.' "In the exercise of her equal right in the

___________________________________

Hunter on the 14th of August, 1850, with a motion for leave to have it spread upon the journal of the Senate:

We, the undersigned Senators, deeply Impressed with the importance of the occasion, and with a solemn sense of the responsibility under which we are acting, respectfully submit the following protest against the bill admitting California as a State into this Union, and request that it may be entered upon the journal of the Senate. We feel that it Is not enough to have resisted In debate alone a bill so fraught with mischief to the Union and the States which we represent, with all the resources of argument which we possessed, but that It Is also due to ourselves, the people whose interests have been Intrusted to our care, and to posterity, which, oven in its most distant generations, may feel its consequences, to leave, in whatever form may be most solemn and enduring, a memorial of the opposition which we have made to this measure, and of the reasons by which we have been governed. Upon the pages of a journal which the Constitution requires to be kept so long as the Senate may have an existence, we desire to place the reasons upon which we are willing to be judged by generations living end yet to come, for our opposition to a bill whose consequences may be so durable and portentous as to make it an object of deep interest to all who may come after us. We have dissented from this bill because it gives the sanction of law, and thus imparts validity to the unauthorized action of a portion of the Inhabitants of California, by which an odious discrimination is made against the property of the fifteen slaveholding States of the Union, who are thus deprived of that position of equality which the Constitution so manifestly designs, and which constitutes the only sure and stable foundation upon which this Union can repose. Because the right of the slaveholding States to a common and equal enjoyment of the territory of the Union has been defeated by a system of measures which, without the authority of precedent, of law, or of the Constitution, were manifestly contrived for that purpose, arid which Congress must sanction and adopt, should this bill become a law. In sanation  this system of measures, this Government will admit that the Inhabitants of its territories, whether permanent or transient, and whether lawfully or unlawfully occupying the same, may form a State without the previous authority of law; without even the partial security of a territorial organization formed by Congress; without any legal census or other sufficient evidence of their possessing the number of citizens necessary to authorize the representation which they may claim; and without any of those safeguards about the* ballot-box which can only be provided by low, and which are necessary to ascertain the true sense of a people. It will admit, too, that Congress, having refused to provide a government except upon toe condition of excluding slavery by law, the executive branch of this Government may, at its own discretion. Invite such Inhabitants to meet in convention under such rules as it or its agents may prescribe, and to form a constitution affecting not only their own rights, but those also of fifteen States of the Confederacy, by including territory with the purpose of excluding those States from its enjoyment, and without regard to the natural fitness of boundary, or any of the considerations which should properly determine the limits of a State. It will also admit that the convention thus called Into existence by the Executive may be paid by him out of the funds of the United States without the sanction of Congress, in violation not only of the plain provisions of the Constitution, bat of those principles of obvious propriety which would abide any act calculated to make that convention dependent upon It; and lost, but not least, in the series of measures which this Government must adopt and sanction in passing this bill, is the release of the authority of the United States by the Executive alone to a government thus formed, and not presenting even sufficient evidence of its having the assent of a majority of the people for whom It was designed. With a view of alt these considerations, the undersigned are constrained to believe that this Government could never be brought to admit a State presenting itself under such circumstances, if it were not for the purpose of excluding the people of the slaveholding States from all opportunity of settling with their property in that territory.

Because, to vote for a bill passed under such circumstances, would be to agree to a principle which may exclude forever hereafter, as it does now, the States which we represent, from all enjoyment of the common territory pf the Union—a principle which destroys the equal rights of their constituents, the equality of their States in the Confederacy, the equal dignity of those whom they represent as men and as citizens in the eye of the law, and their equal title to the protection of the Government and the Constitution. Because the admission of California as a State into the Union without any previous reservation assented to by her of the public domain, might involve an actual surrender of that domain to, or at all events places its future disposal at the mercy of that State, as no reservation In the bill can be binding upon her until she assents to it, and as her dissent hereafter" would In no manner affect or Impair the act of her admission.

Because all the propositions have been rejected which have been made to obtain either a recognition of the right of the slaveholding States to a common enjoyment of all the territory of the United States, or to a fair division of that territory between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding States of the Union; every effort having failed which has been made to obtain a fair division of the territory proposed to be brought in as the State of California.

But lastly, we dissent from this bill, and solemnly protest against its passage, because, in sanctioning measures so contrary to former precedent, to obvious policy, to the spirit and intent of the Constitution of the United States, for the purpose of excluding the slaveholding States from the territory thus to be erected into a State, this Government In effect declares that the exclusion of slavery from the territory of the United States is an object so high and important as to justify a disregard, not only of  the principles of sound policy, but also of the Constitution itself. Against this conclusion we must now and forever protest, as it is destructive of the safety and liberties of those whoso rights have been committed to our care, fatal to the peace and equality of the States which we represent, and must lead. If persisted in, to the dissolution of that Confederacy in which the slaveholding States have never sought more than equality, and in which they will not be content to remain with less.

J. M. MASON,

R. M. T. HUNTER,  Virginia

R. B. BARNWELL,  

H. L. TURNEY. Tennessee.

PIERRE SOULE, Louisiana.

JEFFERSON DAVIS, Mississippi.

DAVID R. ATCHISON, Missouri.

JACKSON MORTON,  Florida

D.L. YULEE, Florida

SENATE CHAMBER, August 13,1860.

Union, and moved by a common sympathy with the people of the section of which her territory forms the extreme southern part, and with whose fate her destiny is indissolubly bound, Florida has resolved to withdraw from the present Union. Her course derives sanction from the important fact that she is preceded in it by the chivalrous State which, by a spirited act in 1765, became, by acknowledgment of a Massachusetts historian, 'the founder of the Union.' And her resolution is rendered more fixed by the development, since her movement began, of a general tendency in the public mind of the majority section to a theory of the Constitution, and to principles of construction, which must convert this Government into an unlimited despotism. She sees fast rising above all others the great issue of the right of the people of the States to sovereignty and self-government within their respective territorial boundaries; and in such an issue she is prepared to devote the lives and fortunes of all her people.

"Although the present means of Florida are acknowledged to be limited, yet, having once assumed the rank of a State, she assumed with its rights its duties also, and its responsibilities to her people and their posterity. These she must fulfil, according to her best judgment, with all the more jealousy of control because weak, but with none the less claim on that account to the respect of all true men.

"Acknowledging, Mr. President, with grateful emotions, my obligations for the many courtesies I have enjoyed in my intercourse with the gentlemen of this body, and with most cordial good wishes for their personal welfare, I retire from their midst in willing loyalty to the mandate of my State, and with full approval of her act."

Mr. Mallory, of Florida, followed: "Concurring, as I do, with all that my colleague has said, I ask but to add a word or two.

"In retiring from this body, I cannot but feel, and I will not forbear the expression of, profound regret that existing causes imperatively impel us to this separation. When reason and justice shall have asserted ascendency over party and passion, they will be justly appreciated; and this Southern movement, demanded by considerations dear to freemen in every age, will stand proudly vindicated.

"Throughout her long and patient endurance of insult and wrong, the South has clung to the Union with unfaltering fidelity; a fidelity which, while nourishing irritation in the hearts of her own sons, has but served to nerve the arms of her adversaries.

"Florida came into the Union fifteen years ago, upon an equality with the original States, and their rights in the Confederacy are equally her rights. She could not, if she would, separate her action from her Southern sisters; and, demanded as her action is, by those considerations which a free people can never ignore, she would not if she could. From the Union, governed by the Constitution as our fathers made it, there breathes not a secessionist upon her soil; but a deep sense of injustice, inequality, and insecurity, produced by the causes to which I have adverted, is brought home to the reason and patriotism of her people; and to secure and maintain those rights which the Constitution no longer accords them, they have placed the State of Florida out of the Confederacy.

"In thus turning from the Union to the veiled and unknown future, we are neither ignorant nor reckless of the lions in our path. We know that the prompt and peaceful organization of a practical republican government, securing liberty, equality, and justice to every citizen, is one of the most difficult, as it is one of the most momentous duties devolving upon men; and nowhere perhaps upon the earth, beyond our own country, could this great work be achieved. But so well are human rights and national liberty understood by our people; so deeply are they imbued with the spirit of freedom and knowledge of government, that were this Republic utterly broken and destroyed, like the shattered vase of the poet, to whose very fragments the scent of the roses still clung, its very ruins breathing the true spirit of civil and religious liberty, would plead for and demand a wise and noble reconstruction.

"Whatever may be the immediate results, therefore, of the momentous crisis now upon us, I have no fears for the freedom of my countrymen. Nor do I admit for a moment that the great American experiment of government has proved or can prove a failure; but I maintain, on the contrary, that passing events should inspire in the hearts of the patriot and statesman, not only hope, but confidence. Five States have already dissolved their connection with the Union; and throughout the several stages by which their people, in their sovereign capacity, have reached secession, they have exhibited a calmness and deliberation which find no parallel in the history of mankind. This is entirely the result of our admirable system of independent State governments. And, sir, were this Federal District, with President, Congress, Departments, and Courts, and all the machinery of Federal Government, suddenly sunk a thousand fathoms deep, under the admirable working of these State governments the rights and liberties of their people would receive no shock or detriment.

"In thus severing our connection with sister States, we desire to go in peace, to maintain towards them an attitude not only of peace, but, if possible, of kindness; and it is for them to determine whether we shall do so or not; and whether commerce, the great pacificator of earth, is to connect us as producers, manufacturers, and consumers, in future friendly relations. If folly, wickedness, or pride shall preclude the hope of peace, they may at once rear np difficulties in our path, leading at once to what I confess I regard and dread as one of the greatest calamities that can befall a nation Page 196 —civil war; a civil war embracing equally North and South. But, sir, be our difficulties what they may, we stand forth a united people to grapple with and to conquer them. Our willingness to shed our blood in this cause is the highest proof we can offer of the sincerity of our connections; and I warn, nay, I implore you, not to repeat the fatal folly of the Bourbons, and mistake a nation for a faction; for the people of the South, as one man, declare that, sink or swim, live or die, they will not, as freemen, submit to the degradation of a constrained existence under a violated Constitution. But, sir, we desire to part from you in peace. From the establishment of the Anglo-Saxons upon this continent to this hour, they have never, as colonies or States, shed the blood of each other; and I trust we shall be spared this great calamity. We seek not to war upon or to conquer you; and we know that you cannot conquer us. Imbue your hands in our blood, and the rains of a century will not wash from them the stain, while coming generations will weep for your wickedness and folly.

"In thus leaving the Senate, and returning to my own State, to pursue with unfaltering head and heart that path, be it gloomy or bright, to which her honor and interests may lead, I cannot forbear the acknowledgment of the kindness and courtesy which I have ever received from many of the gentlemen of the Opposition; Senators to whom I am indebted for much that I shall cherish through life with pleasure, and toward whom I entertain none but sentiments of kindness and respect. And I trust, sirs, that when we next confront each other, whether at this bar or that of the just God who knows the hearts of all, our lips shall not have uttered a word, our hands shall not have committed an act, directed against the blood of our people. On this side of the Chamber, we leave, with profound regret, those whom we will cherish in our hearts, and whose names will be hallowed by our children. One by one, we have seen the representatives of the true and fearless friends of the Constitution fall at our side, until hardly a forlorn hope remains; and whatever may be our destiny, the future, with all of life's darker memories, will be brightened by the recollection of their devotion to the true principles of our Government, and of that wealth of head and heart in their intercourse with us, which has endeared them to us and to ours forever."

Mr. Clay: "I rise to announce, in behalf of my colleague and myself, that the people of Alabama, assembled in convention at their capitol on the 11th of this month, have adopted an ordinance whereby they withdraw from the Union, formed under a compact styled the Constitution of the United States, resume the powers delegated to it, and assume their separate station as a sovereign and independent people. This is the act, not of faction or of party, but of the people. True, there is a respectable minority of that convention who opposed this act, not because they desired to preserve the Union, but because they wished to secure the cooperation of all, or of a majority, of the Southern or of the planting States. There are many cooperationists, but I think not one Unionist in the convention; all are in favor of withdrawing from the Union. I am therefore warranted in saying that this is the act of the freemen of Alabama.

"In taking this momentous step they have not acted hastily or unadvisedly. It is not the eruption of sudden, spasmodic, and violent passion. It is the conclusion they have reached after years of bitter experience of enmity, injustice, and injury at the hands of their Northern brethren; after long and painful reflection; after anxious debate and solemn deliberation; and after argument, persuasion, and entreaty have failed to secure them their constitutional rights. Instead of causing surprise and incurring censure, it is rather matter of amazement, if not reproach, that they have endured so much and so long, and have deferred this act of self-defence until to-day.

"It is now nearly forty-two years since Alabama was admitted into the Union. She entered it, as she goes out of it, while the Confederacy was in convulsions, caused by the hostility of the North to the domestic slavery of the South. Not a decade, nor scarce a lustrum, has elapsed, since her birth, that has not been strongly marked by proofs of the growth and power of that anti-slavery spirit of the Northern people which seeks the overthrow of that domestic institution of the South, which is not only the chief source of her prosperity, but the very basis of her social order and State polity. It is to-day the master-spirit of the Northern States, and had, before the secession of Alabama, of Mississippi, of Florida, or of South Carolina, severed most of the bonds of the Union. It denied us Christian communion, because it could not endure what it styles the moral leprosy of slaveholding; it refused us permission to sojourn, or even to pass through the North with our property; it claimed freedom for the slave if brought by his master into a Northern State; it violated the Constitution and treaties and laws of Congress, because designed to protect that property; it refused us any share of lands acquired mainly by our diplomacy and blood and treasure; it refused our property any shelter or security beneath the flag of a common Government; it robbed us of our property, and refused to restore it; it refused to deliver criminals against our laws, who fled to the North with our property or our blood upon their hands; it threatened us by solemn legislative acts, with ignominious punishment if we pursued our property into a Northern State; it murdered Southern men when seeking the recovery of their property on Northern soil; it invaded the borders of Southern States, poisoned their wells, burnt their dwellings, and murdered their people; it Page 197 denounced us by deliberate resolves of popular meetings, of party conventions, and of religious and even legislative assemblies, as habitual violators of the laws of God and the rights of humanity; it exerted all the moral and physical agencies that human ingenuity can devise or diabolical malice can employ to heap odium and infamy upon us, and to make us a by-word of hissing and of scorn throughout the civilized world. Yet, we bore all this for many years, and might have borne it for many more, under the oft-repeated assurance of our Northern friends, and the too fondly cherished hope that these wrongs and injuries were committed by a minority party, and had not the sanction of the majority of the people, who would, in time, rebuke our enemies, and redress our grievances.

"But the fallacy of these promises and folly of our hopes have been too clearly and conclusively proved in late elections, especially the last two Presidential elections, to permit us to indulge longer in such pleasing delusions. The platform of the Republican party of 1856 and 1860 we regard as a libel upon the character and a declaration of war against the lives and property of the Southern people. No bitterer or more offensive calumny could be uttered against them than is expressed in denouncing their system of slavery and polygamy as "twin relics of barbarism." It not only reproaches us as unchristian and heathenish, but imputes a sin and a crime deserving universal scorn and universal enmity. No sentiment is more insulting or more hostile to our domestic tranquillity, to our social order, and our social existence, than is contained in the declaration that our negroes are entitled to liberty and equality with the white man. It is in spirit, if not in effect, as strong an incitement and invocation to servile insurrection, to murder, arson, and other crimes, as any to be found in Abolition literature.

“And to aggravate the insult which is offered us in demanding equality with us for our slaves, the same platform denies us equality with Northern white men or free negroes, and brands us as an inferior race, by pledging the Republican party to resist our entrance into the territories with our slaves, or the extension of slavery, which—as its founders and leaders truly assert—must and will effect its extermination. To crown the climax of insult to our feelings and menace of our rights, this party nominated to the Presidency a man who not only endorses the platform, but promises, in his zealous support of its principles, to disregard the judgments of your courts, the obligations of your Constitution, and the requirements of his official oath, by approving any bill prohibiting slavery in the territories of the United States. 

“A large majority of the Northern people have declared at the ballot-box their approval of the platform and the candidates of that party in the late Presidential election. Thus, by the solemn verdict of the people of the North, the slaveholding communities of the South are 'outlawed, branded with ignominy, consigned to execration, and ultimate destruction.'

"Sir, are we looked upon as more or less than men? Is it expected that we will or can exercise that godlike virtue which 'beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things;' which teaches us to love our enemies and bless them that curse us? Are we devoid of the sensibilities, the sentiments, the passions, the reason, and the instincts of mankind? Have we no pride of honor, no sense of shame, no reverence of our ancestors, no care of our posterity, no love of home, or family, or friends? Must we confess our baseness, discredit the fame of our sires, dishonor ourselves, degrade our posterity, abandon our homes, and flee from our country, all for the sake of the Union? Must we agree to live under the ban of our own Government? Must we acquiesce in the inauguration of a President chosen by confederate but unfriendly States, whose political faith constrains him, for his conscience and country's sake, to deny us our constitutional rights, because elected according to the forms of the Constitution? Must we consent to live under a Government which we believe will henceforth be controlled and administered by those who not only deny us justice and equality, and brand us as inferiors, but whose avowed principles and policy must destroy our domestic tranquillity, imperil the lives of our wives and children, degrade and dwarf, and ultimately destroy, our State? Must we live, by choice or compulsion, under the rule of those who present us the dire alternative of an "irrepressible conflict " with the Northern people in defence of our altars and our fireside, or the manumission of our slaves, and the admission of them to social and political equality? No, sir, no! The freemen of Alabama have proclaimed to the world that they will not; and have proved their sincerity by seceding from the Union, and hazarding all the dangers and difficulties of a separate and independent station among the nations of the earth.

"They have learned from history the admonitory truth, that the people who live under governors appointed against their consent by unfriendly foreign or confederate States, will not long enjoy the blessings of liberty, or have the courage to claim them. They feel that were they to consent to do so, they would lose the respect of their foes and the sympathy of their friends. They are resolved not to trust to the hands of their enemies the measure of their rights. They intend to preserve for themselves, and to transmit to their posterity, the freedom they received from their ancestors, or perish in the attempt. Cordially approving this act of my mother State, and acknowledging no other allegiance, I shall return, like a true and loyal son, to her bosom, to defend her honor, maintain her rights, and share her fate."

Mr. Fitzpatrick: "Mr. President, I rise merely to add, that having had an opportunity of Page 198 knowing beforehand the sentiments which my colleague has expressed; and believing that they fairly represent the feelings opinions, and purposes of our constituents, and correctly explain the reason and causes of their late action, he was fully warranted in saying he had my full concurrence in the views which he has just submitted. I therefore deem it unnecessary, if not improper, to abuse the privilege which the courtesy of the Senate accords to me, by further remarks. I feel that I am bound by the act of Alabama, and cannot claim the rights and privileges of a member of this body. 1 acknowledge no loyalty to any other power than that of my sovereign State; and shall return to her with the purpose to sustain her action and to share her fortunes, for weal or woe."

Mr. Davis: "I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people in convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course, my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce the fact to my associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into argument; and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become mo to say something on the part of the State I here represent, on an occasion so solemn as this.

"It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty, the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think she has justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people before that act was taken, counselled them then that if the state of things which they apprehended, should exist when the convention met, they should take the action which they have now adopted.

"I hope none who hear mo will confound this expression of mine with the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the law. Such is not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals to the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its practical application.

"A great man, who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment.

"Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it has made to any agent whomsoever.

"I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi, believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by their action, if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that the name of a great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth, has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase "to execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws, while yet a member of the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United States. They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States to be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is, in which her safety requires that she should provide for the maintenance of her rights out of the Union, surrenders all the benefits, (and they are known to be many,) deprives herself of the advantages, (they are Page 199 known to be great,) severs all the ties of affection, (and they are close and enduring,) which have bound her to the Union; and thus divesting herself of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within her limits.

"I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife, and to be applied against her, because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my own opinion because the case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar nor one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other States.

"It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man was born—to use the language of Mr. Jefferson—booted and spurred to ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equal—meaning the men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to families, but that all stations were equally within the of each member of the body-politic, were the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for which they made their declaration; these were the ends to which their enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it that among the items of arraignment made against George III. was that he endeavored to do just what the North has been endeavoring of late to do—to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration announced that the negroes were free and equal, how was the Prince to be arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the colonies to sever their connection with the mother country? When our Constitution was formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for there we find provision made for that very class of persons as property; they were not put upon the footing of equality with white men—not even upon that of paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste only to be represented in the numerical proportion of three-fifths.

"Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when you deny them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a Government which, thus perverted, threatens to be destructive of our rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our independence, and take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to others, not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own pecuniary benefit; but from the high and solemn motive of defending and protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to transmit unshorn to our children.

"I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you, Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure, is the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire, when I say I hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our trust in God, and in our own firm hearts and strong arms, we will vindicate the right as best we may.

"In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of offence there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile remembrance. 'Whatever offence I have given, which has not been redressed, or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.

"Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the occasion seemed

Page 200 to me to require, it only remains for me to bid yon a final adieu."

The State of Louisiana having passed an ordinance of secession from the United States, her Senators in Congress, Messrs. Slidell and Benjamin, took leave of the Senate on the 4th of February.

Mr. Slidell, in addressing the Senate for the last time, made a very full statement of the views and purposes entertained by the seceding States, particularly Louisiana. They anticipated reconstruction, although South Carolina said the Union was gone forever. lie said: "The occasion, however, justifies, if it does not call for, some parting words to those whom we leave behind, some forever, others we trust to meet again, and to participate with them in the noble task of constructing and defending a new confederacy; which, if it may want at first the grand proportions and vast resources of the old, will still possess the essential elements of greatness, a people bold, hardy, homogeneous in interests and sentiments, a fertile soil, an extensive territory, the capacity and the will to govern themselves through the forms and in the spirit of the Constitution under which they have been born and educated. Besides all these, they have an advantage which no other people seeking to change the Government under which they had before lived have ever enjoyed; they have to pass through no intervening period of anarchy; they have in their several State Governments, already shaped to their hands, every thing necessary for the preservation of order, the administration of justice, and the protection of their soil and their property from foreign or domestic violence. They can consult with calmness and act with deliberation on every subject, either of immediate interest or future policy.

"But, if we do not greatly mistake the prevailing sentiment of the Southern mind, no attempt will be made to improve the Constitution; we shall take it such as it is; such a3 has been found sufficient for our security and happiness, so long as its true intent and spirit lived in the hearts of a majority of the people of the free States, and controlled the action not only of the Federal but of the State Legislatures. "We will adopt all laws not locally inapplicable or incompatible with our new relations; we will recognize the obligations of all existing treaties—those respecting the African slave trade included. We shall be prepared to assume our just proportion of the national debt; to account for the cost of all the forts and other property of the United States, which we have been compelled to seize in self-defence, if it should appear that our share of such expenditure has been greater than in other sections; and, above all, we shall, as well from the dictates of natural justice and the principles of international law as of political and geographical affinities and of mutual pecuniary interests, recognize the right of the inhabitants of the valley of the Mississippi and its tributaries to its free navigation; we will guarantee to them a free interchange of all agricultural productions without impost, tax, duty, or toll of any kind; the free transit from foreign countries of every species of merchandise, subject only to such regulations as may be absolutely necessary for the protection of any revenue system we may establish, and for purposes of police.

"As for such States of the Union as may not choose to unite their destinies with ours, we shall consider them, as we shall all other foreign nations, ‘enemies in war, in peace friends.' We wish and we hope to part with them amicably; and, so far as depends on us, they shall have no provocation to pursue a hostile course; but in this regard we, from the necessities of the case, can only be passive; it will be for the people of the non-slaveholding States to decide this momentous question. This declaration, however, requires some qualification. Could the issue be fairly presented to the people of those States, we should have little doubt of a peaceful separation, with the possibility of a complete, and the probability of a partial, reconstruction on a basis satisfactory to us and honorable to them; but, with the present representations in either branch of Congress, we see nothing to justify our indulging any such expectation. We must be prepared to resist coercion, whether attempted by avowed enemies, or by a band heretofore supposed friendly; by open war, or under the more insidious, and, therefore, more dangerous pretext of enforcing the laws, protecting public property, or collecting the revenue. We shall not cavil about words, or discuss legal and technical distinctions; we shall consider the one as equivalent to the other, and shall be prepared to act accordingly. Utroque arbitrio parati. You will find us ready to meet you with the outstretched hand of fellowship, or in the mailed panoply of war, as you may will it; elect between these alternatives.

"We have no idea that you will even attempt to invade our soil with your armies; but we acknowledge your superiority on the sea, at present, in some degree accidental, but in the main, natural, and permanent, until we shall have acquired better ports for our marine. You may, if you will it, persist in considering us bound to you during your good pleasure; you may deny the sacred and indefeasible right, we will not say of secession, but of revolution— ay, of rebellion, if you choose so to call our action—the right of every people to establish for itself that form of government which it may, even in its folly, if such you deem it, consider best calculated to secure its safety and promote its welfare. You may ignore the principles of our immortal Declaration of Independence; you may attempt to reduce us to subjection, or you may, under color of enforcing your laws, or collecting your revenue, blockade our ports. This will be war, and we shall meet it with Page 201 different but equally efficient weapons. We will not permit the consumption or introduction of any of your manufactures; every sea will swarm with our volunteer militia of the ocean, with the striped bunting floating over their heads, for we do not mean to give up that flag without a bloody struggle—it is ours as much as yours; and although for a time more stars may shine on your banner, our children, if not we, will rally under a constellation more numerous and more resplendent than yours. You may smile at this as an impotent boast, at least for the present, if not for the future; but if we need ships and men for privateering, we shall be amply supplied from the same sources as now almost exclusively furnish the means for carrying on, with such unexampled vigor, the African slave-trade—New York and New England. Your mercantile marine must either sail under foreign flags or rot at your wharves.

"But, pretermitting these remedies, we will pass to another equally efficacious. Every civilized nation now is governed in its foreign relations by the rule of recognizing governments 'de facto’. You alone invoke the doctrine of the  ‘de jure’ or divine right of lording it over an unwilling people, strong enongh to maintain their power within their own limits. How long, think you, will the great naval powers of Europe permit you to impede their free intercourse with their best customers for their various fabrics, and to stop the supplies of the great staple which is the most important basis of their manufacturing industry, by a mere paper blockade? You were, with all the wealth and resources of this once great Confederacy, but a fourth or fifth-rate naval power, with capacities, it is true, for large, and in a just quarrel, almost indefinite, expansion. What will you be when not merely emasculated by the withdrawal of fifteen States, but warred upon by them with active and inveterate hostility?

"But enough, perhaps somewhat too much, of this. We desire not to speak to you in terms of bravado or menace. Let us treat each other as men, who, determined to break off unpleasant, incompatible, and unprofitable relations, cease to bandy words, and mutually leave each other to determine whether their differences shall be decided by blows or by the code which some of us still recognize as that of honor." The cause of their action, he says, is not the mere election by the forms of the Constitution, of a President distasteful to them, as it was so often and so confidently asserted. "It is this: we all consider the election of Mr. Lincoln, with his well-known antecedents and avowed principles and purposes, by a decided majority over all other candidates combined in every non-slaveholding State on this side of the Pacific slope, noble, gallant New Jersey alone excepted, as conclusive evidence of the determined hostility of the Northern masses to our institutions. We believe that he conscientiously entertains the opinions which he has so often and so explicitly declared; and that, having been elected on the issues thus presented, he will honestly endeavor to carry them into execution."

__________

The proceedings of the House of Representatives, from the commencement of the session until this time, although of the same general character with those of the Senate, serve, when taken in connection with the latter, to show more clearly the views thus far entertained of the powers and duties of the Government, and its ability to obviate the crisis. In the House the difficulties of the country produced as much impression as upon the public at large. The first apprehensions had settled into a firm conviction that the movement begun in South Carolina was calm, deliberate, and decided. The leaders in the extreme South made up in bold determination and bitterness of crimination for what they lacked in numbers. The Republicans in the North, restive and uneasy, maintained a firmness and fixedness of purpose which brooked no change, and which was largely due to the extreme portion of their party. Meantime, the mass of the people in the central States, in the heart of the Union, who enjoyed all its genial blessings, were filled with alarm. The defeated Democratic party, always interpreting the Constitution after that strict construction peculiar to the Southern States, and aware by long experience of the true nature of the difficulties, were not only equally alarmed, but greatly embarrassed by being stripped of all political power.

Not a step was taken to arrest the progress of secession before Congress assembled. In the House, a body so sensitive of the public impulses and convictions, a flood of propositions aiming to restore the harmony of the country were promptly introduced. Scarcely had the President's Message been read, when Mr. Botelor, of Virginia, and Mr. Cochran, of New York, rose to move resolutions in reference to so much of it as related to the condition of the country.

The resolution adopted was this:

Resolved, That so much of the President's Message as relates to the present perilous condition of the country, be referred to a special committee of one' from each State.

The vote was—ayes, 145; noes, 38.

Pending the vote the spirit of many of the members from the most Southern States was conspicuously shown. Mr. Singleton, of Mississippi, declined to vote for the reason that the Legislature of the State of Mississippi had called a convention of the people of that State to take into consideration the subject-matter before the House. He was not sent here for the purpose of making any compromise, or to patch up existing difficulties. "I leave, sir, to the sovereign State of Mississippi to determine for herself her present Federal relations."

Mr. Hawkins, of Florida, stated that a convention Page 202 had been called in that State to consider the same subject. The people of that State had resolved to determine in convention, in their sovereign capacity, the time, place, and manner of redress. It was not for him to take any action on the subject. "While I am up, Mr. Speaker, I may as well say, in advance, that I am opposed, and I believe my State is opposed, to all and every compromise. The day of compromise has passed."

Mr. Clopton, of Alabama, declined to vote, for the reason that a convention had been called in Alabama to consider what action is required to maintain her rights, honor, and safety. Believing that a State had a right to secede, and that the only remedy for present evils was secession, he would not hold out any delusive hope, or sanction any temporizing policy.

Mr. Miles, of South Carolina, said: "Mr. Speaker, the South Carolina delegation have not voted on this question because they conceive they have no interest in it. We consider our State as already withdrawn from the Confederacy in every thing except in form."

Mr. Pugh: "As my State of Alabama intends following South Carolina out of the Union by the 10th of January next, I pay no attention to any action taken in this body."

Subsequently the committee was announced by the Speaker to consist of the following members of the House:

Messrs. Corwin, of Ohio; Millson, of Virginia; Adams, of Massachusetts; Winslow, of North Carolina; Humphrey, of New York; Boyce, of South Carolina; Campbell, of Pennsylvania; Love, of Georgia; Ferry, of Connecticut; Davis, of Maryland; Robinson, of Rhode Island; Whiteley, of Delaware; Tappan, of New Hampshire; Stratton, of New Jersey; Bristow, of Kentucky; Morrill, of "Vermont; Nelson, of Tennessee; Dunn, of Indiana; Taylor, of Louisiana; Davis, of Mississippi; Kellogg, of Illinois; Houston, of Alabama; Morse, of Maine; Phelps, of Missouri; Rust, of Arkansas; Howard, of Michigan; Hawkins, of Florida; Hamilton, of Texas; Washburn, of Wisconsin; Curtis, of Iowa; Burch, of California; Windom, of Minnesota; and Stout, of Oregon.

Mr. Hawkins, of Florida, asked to be excused, and said: "The idea of getting up this committee was one of unanimity—a great peace and Union-saving measure; and, as I said the other day, I am opposed to any thing of that kind, believing that the day has gone by, and the time for compromise has passed forever."

Mr. Cochran, of New York, replied to this request: "Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of regret to the application that has been made by my friend from Florida to be excused from service upon this committee. It has been well intimated hero to-day that the gray shadow of the dark wing of dissolution is reaching and extending over the House and over the country; and so deep is the gloom under its influence that hardly can members be brought to attend to their ordinary duties. Men's minds have been devoted, for now these weeks past to this one great absorbing topic of conversation, that enlists all minds, commands all judgments, and demands of every individual, from every section, his best exertions, his purest emotions, and justest wisdom.

"Sir, it is of importance in this issue that the Republic should command the exertions and efforts of all her sous; and I believe, sir, that now, in the midst of a vital crisis, perils impending and dangers upon us, as has been proclaimed, there is no good reason why this assemblage of the representative patriotism of the country should, of either its prudence or discretion, excuse my friend from Florida. I believe that even now, from his State, from its glades and everglades, whence the eyes of his constituents are directed with anxious vigilance upon our proceedings, could their voice penetrate, a beseeching appeal would be heard that their Representative should stand forward at this juncture in the front of the controversy.

"I appeal to him, therefore, sir, in the name of our common humanity; I appeal to him in the hour of peril and in the name of our common country; I appeal to him by the memories of the past, by the prosperity and continued existence of the State sovereignty in which he glories, to remain on the committee to which he is presented. If, sir, this appeal be unheard, should it prove vain and ineffectual, I may be permitted further to appeal to the House, representing that common country whose integrity is threatened, that, without intentional reflection upon him, but under the obligation of a great duty to be performed, it negative the motion that my friend from Florida be excused."

After this eloquent appeal from Mr. Cochran, the House spent some time on minor details relative to its action, and adjourned without taking the question on excusing Mr. Hawkins.

On a subsequent day the question was taken up, and, stating at length his reasons for declining, Mr. Hawkins objected to the composition of the committee as " unfortunate and ill-advised." "No Democrat from the powerful and mighty Northwest was a member." He said: "If asked what is all this to me, inasmuch as I decline to serve upon the committee, I answer, I want the country to know that it cannot, does not, represent the true sentiment of some of the States, and that a great moral effect is sought to be produced by something that savors of a constructive fraud. So far as the extreme South is concerned, I tell them this committee is the Grecian horse introduced into Troy. The object is to gain time; delay and demoralize the South by holding forth to its people that there is a great pacificator at work, certain to bring about a political millennium."

Mr. Vallandigham, of Ohio, observed that he

Page 203 was absolutely precluded from voting to place the member on the committee by the consideration that there was not a single representative of the Democratic party on the committee from the sixteen free States of the Union.

Mr. McClernand, of Illinois, asked what was the cause of this offensive discrimination? Is it because the Northern Democracy have become insignificant in numbers and influence? No, sir. He continued: "Although defeated in the late election, they polled, according to official and unofficial returns, one million three hundred and forty three thousand one hundred and eighty-four votes; and, including the vote of the national Democracy in the South, their whole vote is one million five hundred and sixty-four thousand six hundred and fifty; thus showing that the vote of the Northern Democracy alone is greater than that which elected either Pierce or Buchanan, and is larger than that ever before polled in any Presidential election.

"And how is it with the other political organizations in the country? Let facts speak for themselves. With a popular vote, according to the same returns, of five hundred and eighty thousand two hundred and forty-nine, in the same election, the Union party is represented by three of its members on the committee. With a popular vote of six hundred and seventy-five thousand seven hundred and eighty-two, the Breckinridge party is represented by six members; while the Republican party, comparatively with but few more votes aggregately than the national Democracy, and no votes in most of the slaveholding States, and only twenty-six thousand five hundred and eight votes in all of them, is represented by sixteen members. If so, then the Republican party, with only one million eight hundred and forty-six thousand two hundred and three votes, is represented by sixteen members; while all the votes opposed to it, in the late election, amounting to two millions eight hundred and twenty thousand six hundred and eighty-one, are only represented by eleven members.

"How unjust such constitution of an important committee! There is no parallel or precedent for it in parliamentary history, so far as I know." On a division, the House refused to excuse the member from Florida from serving on the special committee. Ayes, 05; noes, 101. Upon a call of the States and territories for bills and resolutions to be submitted to the Committee of Thirty-three, the following propositions were received and referred: By Mr. Thayer, of Massachusetts: That no territory should ever be acquired, to be owned by the United States or to be governed by Congress; that there should be no congressional legislation whatever on the subject of slavery; that every congressional district should be an election district. By Mr. Cochran, of New York: That the Constitution be so amended as to make all territory north of 86° 30' free territory; and in all territory south of that line neither Congress nor any territorial Government shall pass any law prohibiting or impairing the establishment of slavery. No law shall prohibit or interfere with the trade in slaves between the slaveholding States and territories; importation of slaves from a foreign country prohibited; the surrender of fugitives and the right of transit and temporary sojourn to be guaranteed.

By Mr. Adrain, of New Jersey: The nonintervention by Congress over the subject of slavery in the territories to be adopted; all territories, on application, etc., to be admitted as States, without regard to whether their Constitution permits or prohibits the institution of domestic slavery; all laws of States in conflict with the Constitution to be repealed; no obstacles to be put in the way of the execution of the fugitive slave law by State Legislatures. The people should be permitted to regulate their own internal affairs without interference.

By Mr. Morris, of Pennsylvania: That the committee review the personal liberty laws, and report which of them are in conflict with the Constitution, and also what amendments they are susceptible of to effectually prevent kidnapping.

By Mr. Stewart, of Maryland : That the committee inquire if any measures can be adopted to preserve in their purity the constitutional rights of all the States within the Union; if this appears impracticable, then further to inquire as to the most reasonable mode by which their rights may be secured in a state of separation; each sovereign State, in that event, being repossessed of its delegated authority to the Federal Union, and adjusting the relative liabilities of each, with such other measures of fair settlement as may appear to them just; and recommend some plan by which, in that event, disputes that arise may be fairly and speedily adjusted.

By Mr. Leake, of Virginia: That Congress should be deprived of all power and jurisdiction over the subject of slavery in the States or Territories, or District of Columbia, and also over the internal slave-trade, except to protect slavery by legislation in any territory or district where it exists; that no Territorial Legislature shall have jurisdiction over the subject; that the rights of owners, in sojourn or in transitu with their slaves, shall be guaranteed; that fugitives shall be given up on demand, or, where lost in consequence of State legislation, to be paid for by such State.

By Mr. Smith, of Virginia: That the committee consider the policy of declaring out of the Union every member which shall, by her legislation, aim to nullify an act of Congress.

By Mr. Jenkins, of Virginia: That the committee inquire what amendments are necessary to the fugitive slave law; also, to provide for the better security of the rights of slaveholders in the territories; also, what checks are demanded by a sense of self-preservation on the Page 204 part of slaveholding States against the operation of the Federal Government, when administered by those who have come into power avowedly on grounds of hostility to their institutions; whether a majority of the slave interest should not be required to sanction the measures of the Government; also, a dual executive be established, etc.  

By Mr. Cox, of Ohio: That the committee inquire what further legislation is necessary to carry out the fugitive slave law, especially so as to punish attorneys, judges, and others who obstruct its operation.

By Mr. Hutchins, of Ohio: That the committee inquire what legislation is necessary, if any, to secure to the citizens of each State all the privileges and immunities of the citizens in the several States; also, to secure the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, effects, etc.

By Mr. Sherman, of Ohio: That the only effectual remedy for the dissensions is a faithful observance of all the compromises of the Constitution, and the laws made in pursuance thereof. By Mr. Bingham, of Ohio: That the committee report such further legislation as may be necessary to put down armed rebellion against the laws and authority of the United States, etc.  

By Mr. Mallory, of Florida: That the line of 30° 30' be adopted, etc.; all future States to be admitted with or without slavery, as their Constitution may provide; that Congress shall not interfere with the internal slave-trade, or abolish slavery whore it has exclusive jurisdiction.

By Mr. Stevenson, of Kentucky: That it be made felony to resist the officers, or to attempt to rescue a fugitive in their custody.

By Mr. English, of Indiana: That the territory of the United States be divided, and that when either portion has a sufficient population, it shall be admitted as a State, without regard to the question of slavery. Congress shall not interfere with the rights of property in the slaveholding portion of the territory; and whenever a fugitive is rescued from his master, the township in which it takes place shall be liable in double the amount.

By Mr. Kilgore, of Indiana: To give right of trial by jury in fugitive slave cases; also, allow a writ of error; rescued slaves to be paid for; and those who obstruct the operation of the law to be criminally prosecuted.

By Mr. Holman, of Indiana: That the Constitution is a compact of mutual and permanent obligation—duty of the Federal Government to enforce the laws, and that the committee inquire if the acts of Congress now in force are sufficient for that purpose.

By Mr. Niblack, of Indiana: That the committee inquire if Congress is competent to provide by law for the payment of the value of fugitives, and, if so, to report accordingly.

By Mr. Noell, of Missouri: That the committee report the propriety of abolishing the office of President, and establishing an Executive Council of three, each armed with the veto power, etc.; also, report what measures may be necessary to restore the equilibrium of the States.

By Mr. Hickman, of Pennsylvania: An express recognition of the right of property in slaves; a denial to the Government of all right or power to prohibit the trade between the slaveholding States; the right of property in slaves to be protected in the territories; every territory to be admitted with or without slavery, as their Constitution may provide, safety of slave property in transitu, etc.

By Mr. Larrabee, of Wisconsin: That it be recommended to the several States to request Congress to call a convention to amend the Constitution.

Mr. Anderson, of Missouri, submitted the following resolution, with a proposition that the questions contained therein be submitted to the Supreme Court for their decision:

That the questions at issue between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding States now involving the integrity and stability of the Union, are: 1. The constitutional power of Congress to prohibit the introduction of slaves into the territories of the United States by persons emigrating to said territories from States wherein slavery exists. 2. The constitutional power of a Territorial Legislature to prohibit or establish slavery. 3. The constitutional right of Congress to protect slave property in the territories of the United States. 4. The constitutional power of Congress to pass laws making it a criminal offence for any person to prevent or obstruct, or attempt to prevent or obstruct the execution of the "fugitive slave act." 5. The constitutional power of Congress to pass laws punishing any person who shall, directly or indirectly, aid or assist any other person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, to escape from the person to whom such service or labor may be due. 6. The constitutional right of a State to pass laws preventing, hindering, or in any way, directly or indirectly, obstructing the execution of the ""fugitive slave act."

Many other propositions were offered and referred to the same committee. They embraced generally the points of the preceding ones, except the following, offered by Mr. Sickles, of New York, as an amendment to the Constitution: Whenever a convention of delegates, chosen in any State bv the people thereof, under the recommendation of its Legislature, shall rescind and annul its ratification of this Constitution, the President shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate shall appoint commissioners, not exceeding three, to confer with the duty appointed agents of such State, and agree upon the disposition of the public property and territory belonging to the United States lying within such State, and upon the proportion of the public debt to be assumed and paid by such State; and if the President shall approve the settlement agreed upon by the commissioners, he shall thereupon transmit the same to the Senate, and upon the ratification thereof by two-thirds of the Senators present, he shall forthwith issue his proclamation declaring the assent of the United States to the withdrawal of such State from the Union.

A series of manoeuvres was then commenced, to secure some kind of expression in the House

Page 205 which might be looked upon as a proof that conciliation was its ultimate purpose.

Mr. Adrain, of New Jersey, moved a preamble and resolution deprecating the spirit of disobedience, and recommended that all laws conflicting with the Constitution be repealed. On a division of the House this was adopted. Ayes, 153; noes, 14.

As an offset to this, Mr. Lovejoy, of Illinois, offered a preamble and resolution similar to the preceding, except that it embraced also the repeal of all "nullification laws so called," together with other laws conflicting with the Constitution.

Upon this, Mr. Crawford, of Georgia, boldly declared: “The truth is, Mr. Speaker, that there is no propriety, as I conceive, in undertaking to fool each other or-the country by the resolutions that may be introduced. Now, let us meet this question fairly. The gentleman from Illinois is not afraid to vote for any thing which he is in favor of; nor am I. Let a resolution be introduced by the member from Ohio, or the member from Illinois, or any other member, stating exactly what each of us understands to be our constitutional rights in regard to slavery, and let us vote on it. I have no objection to vote on any proposition that may be presented."

This resolution of Mr. Lovejoy was adopted by ayes, 136; noes, none.

Upon the first opportunity after the passage of this preamble and resolution, Mr. Morris, of Illinois, claimed the floor. He had been endeavoring for some days, without success, to get before the House a strong Union resolution. The report in detail of the proceedings is not without its interest.

Mr. Morris, of Illinois: "Mr. Speaker, I now send up to the Clerk's desk a resolution upon which I desire the vote of the House." Mr. Landrum: "I rise to a question of order. I call for the regular order of business."

The Speaker: "The Chair must be allowed to say to the gentleman from Louisiana that, although these proceedings seem a little irregular, yet, under the rules, the House is now proceeding with the regular order of business."

Mr. Morris: "I am now entitled to the floor, and I do not yield it to any one, nor do I intend to be cheated out of it." The Speaker: "The Chair has assigned the floor to the gentleman from Illinois, and he will submit his proposition." Mr. Morris: "Yes, sir, I have the floor, and I want to see a fair fight. This House has to-day, by large majorities, recommended the repeal of the acts of the State Legislatures, known as personal liberty laws, recommending the repeal of the nullification laws, and all laws in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States. Now it only remains for ns to declare our devotion to the Union of these States."

Mr. Barksdale: "I call the gentleman from Illinois to order."

Mr. Morris: "I do not yield to the gentleman from Mississippi, or to any other gentleman."

Mr. Hughes: "Permit me to call the attention of the Chair to the question of order before the House. I think that while the House is carrying out the regular order of business under the 130th rule, the motion to suspend the rules is not in order."

Mr. Morris: "I decline to yield the floor to the gentleman from Maryland or to any other gentleman. I ask that my resolution may be read." The resolution was read, as follows:

Resolved by the House of Representatives, That we properly estimate the immense value of our national Union to our collective and individual happiness; that we cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; that we will speak of it as of the palladium of our political safety and prosperity; that we will watch its preservation with jealous anxiety; that we will discountenance whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can, in any event, be abandoned, and indignantly frown upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or enfeeble the sacred tics which now link together the various parts; that we regard it as a main pillar in the edifice of our real independence, the support of tranquillity at home, our peace abroad, our safety, our prosperity, and that very liberty which we so highly prize; that we have seen nothing in the past, nor do we see any thing in the present, either in the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency of the United States, or from any other existing cause, to justify its dissolution; that we regard its perpetuity as of more value than the temporary triumph of any party or any man: that whatever evils or abuses exist under it ought to be corrected within the Union, in a peaceful and constitutional way; that we believe it was sufficient power to redress every wrong and enforce every right growing out of its organization or pertaining to its proper functions; and that it is a patriotic duty to stand by it as our hope in peace and our defence in war.

Mr. Landrum: "I object to that resolution."

Mr. Branch: "I have no objection to the reception of the resolution; but I move that it be referred to the Select Committee of Thirty-three."

Mr. Morris: "As I understand there is objection to the resolution, I move a suspension of the rules. The resolution is in the language of the Farewell Address of the Father of his Country, and I want to see who will vote against it."

Mr. Jenkins: "I desire to ask the gentleman from Illinois, whether Lincoln had been elected in Washington's time?" [Cries of "Order!"]

The question was taken, and the rules were suspended, (two-thirds having voted therefor.)

Mr. Morris then submitted his resolution, and demanded the previous question upon it.

The previous question was seconded, and the main question ordered to be put.

Mr. Hindman called for the yeas and nays upon the resolution.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken, and it was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 116; nays, 44. Immediately after these proceedings, Mr. Crawford, of Georgia, offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Constitution of the United States recognizes property in slaves; that Congress has passed laws to aid slaveholders in recapturing their slaves whenever they escape and make their way into the free States; that the Supreme Court of the United States have decided that negroes were not included, either in the Declaration of Independence or in the Constitution of the United States, except as slaves, and that they cannot become citizens; and we, the members of this House, hereby sustain and will support this construction of the Constitution, these laws, and said decision of the Supreme Court.

This is a brief expression of the views generally of the Southern members. It was pushed aside for the day, and on the next day various shifts were resorted to for evading the vote, until it was finally laid on the table. Ayes, 88; noes, 81.

While these scenes were passing in the House, a portion of the people were looking with great anxiety to its action, nattering themselves that some measures might be proposed which would be acceptable to all sections, and restore the country to its previous peaceful and prosperous state. Their hopes were vain, and not even their gloomiest visions presented the dread realities which the impenetrable curtain of the future hid from their sight.

At this time the Representatives from the State of South Carolina withdrew. Their reasons are thus very summarily stated:

                                     WASHINGTON,

                                         December 21,1860.

SIR: We avail ourselves of the earliest opportunity, since the official communication of the intelligence, of making known to your honorable body that the people of the State of South Carolina, in their sovereign capacity, have resumed the powers heretofore delegated by them to the Federal Government of the United States, and have thereby dissolved our connection with the House of Representatives. In taking leave of those with whom we have been associated in a common agency, we, as well as the people of our Commonwealth, desire to do so with feelings of mutual regard and respect for the rights of each other, cherishing the hope that, in our future relations, we may better enjoy that peace and harmony essential to the happiness of a free and enlightened people.

JOHN McQUEEN,

M. I. BONHAM,

W. W. BOYCE,

J. D. ASHMORE.

Hon. William Pennington,

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. Cobb, of Alabama, subsequently rising for a personal explanation, thus alluded to the position which the Republican party had now assumed on the state of affairs:

"But gentlemen say they cannot do any tiling. They say that the edict went forth on the sixth day of November last; that the people decided such and such questions involving certain principles in reference to the slavery question. I deny that the jury impaneled at that time gave any such verdict. There were other questions in issue which entered into that canvass. I tell you what I believe is the truth, and I tell the country what I believe is right; and I say I do not believe the question of slavery was the only question that was submitted to the people, but that other questions entered into that contest which went far to influence the result. Is that so? Have you, Republicans, got a majority of the people of this vast country to indorse your principles?

"I say that the tariff question entered into the controversy at the last election; I say that the internal improvement question entered into that controversy; I say the homestead question entered into that contest; I say the Pacific Railroad question entered into that contest; and I am ashamed to acknowledge that a question entered into that contest in relation to the corruptions of the Administration."

On the great point maintained by the Southern States, that slaves are regarded as property under the Constitution, he laid before the House the following extract from treaties made by the Government in which they are called properly, to wit:

"Provisional Articles between the United States of America and his Britannic Majesty.

"Agreed upon by and between Richard Oswald, Esquire, the commissioner of his Britannic Majesty, for treating of peace with the commissioners of the United States of America, in behalf of his said Majesty, on one part, and John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, and Henry Laurens, four of the commissioners of the said States, &c. "Art.

VII. * * * * All prisoners on both Bides shall be set at liberty, and his Britannic Majesty, with all convenient speed, and without causing any destruction, or carrying away any negroes or other property of the American inhabitants, withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets from the said United States, and from every fort, place, and harbor within the same." ***

"Done at Paris, November 30, 1782.

"RICHARD OSWALD, l. s.

"JOHN ADAMS, l. s.

"B. FRANKLIN, l. s.

"JOHN JAY, l. s.

"HENRY LAURENS. l. s.

"Definitive Treaty of Peace between the United State of America and his Britannic Majesty.

"Art. VII. * * * * And his Britannic Majesty shall, with all convenient speed, and without causing any destruction, or carrying any negroes or other property of the American inhabitants, withdraw all his armies, &c.

Done at Paris, September 3, 1783.

“D. HARTLEY.

"JOHN ADAMS,

"B. FRANKLIN,

"JOHN JAY,

"Treaty of Peace and Amity between his Britannic Majesty and the United States of America.

"(Ratified and confirmed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, February 11,1815.)

"Art. I." * * * "shall be restored without delay, and without causing any destruction, and without carrying away any of the artillery or other public property originally captured in the said forts or places, and which snail remain therein upon the exchange of

Page 207 the ratifications of this treaty, or any slaves or other private property." 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Done, in triplicate, at Ghent, December 24,1814.

"GAMBRIE, l. s.

"HENRY COULBURN, l. s.

"WILLIAM ADAMS, l. s.

"JOHN Q. ADAMS, l. s.

"J. A. BAYARD,  l. s.

"H. CLAY, l. s.

"JONA. RUSSELL. l. s.

"ALBERT GALLATIN, l. s.

"Also, a further evidence that slaves arc regarded by the General Government as property, they sell them for debts due the Government.

The movements in South Carolina had been so rapid that her commissioners had already presented themselves to the President, for the purpose of entering into negotiations for the settlement of difficulties as between separate nations. A Message from the President to the House, on the 8th of January, (see previous pages,) states his proceedings relative to this application. It was, after being read, referred to a committee of five, with instructions to report from time to time. No report which led to any important results was made.

The Committee of Thirty-three reported to the House a joint resolution to amend the Constitution of the United States; an act for the admission of New Mexico into the Union as a State; and an amendment to the fugitive slave law, and the law relating to fugitives from justice. A number of minority reports were also made, embracing other propositions.

The debate on these propositions was continued by Messrs. Corwin, Clemens, Bingham, "Washburne, Lovejoy, and others.

The state of opinion in the House at this period is thus described by Mr. Montgomery: "I think that every impartial observer, who has witnessed our deliberations since the commencement of the session, will admit that there is nothing like unity of sentiment or concurrence of opinion among us. The votes had on the various propositions of compromise presented from time to time, abundantly prove that there is not the slightest probability that a constitutional majority can be obtained for any proposition which will restore harmony and peace to our distracted country. Day after day is spent in the delivery of speeches, many of which only tend to increase our troubles, and add fuel to the flame of public discord. While we are engaged in this profitless controversy—for I doubt whether any speech that has been made, or that will be made, will change the opinion or vote of a single member—State after State is seceding from this Union, and delegation after delegation is bidding us farewell, and vacating the seats around us. While these things are being done, what are we doing to avert this dreadful calamity? Revolution is sweeping over the land. We can feel the temple of our country's liberty tremble, yet we stand here idle."

A general debate followed in the House, which continued some weeks. It not only embraced the topics which had been previously discussed, but looked forward to the great question of the rightfulness and legality of secession, or peace or war, which was coming up for speedy decision.

Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, on this question thus expressed his views: "It is time that this important question was solved. I do not perceive when any better occasion can present itself to decide whether this Union exists by the sufferance of individual States, or whether it requires a constitutional majority to absolve them from their allegiance. If it should be determined that secession is a rightful act, or that there is no power to prevent it, then the Union is not worth preserving for a single day; for whatever disposition shall be made of the present difficulty, fancied wrongs will constantly arise, and induce State after State to withdraw from the Confederacy. If, on the other hand, it should be decided that we are one people, and that the Government possesses sufficient power to coerce obedience, the public mind will be quieted, plotters of disunion will be regarded as traitors, and we shall long remain a united and happy people."

The members of the House from Louisiana presented the ordinance of that State, seceding from the United States. Upon this occasion, Mr. Taylor addressed the House, and thus expressed the views generally held with regard to the importance of cotton to the manufacturing interests of the world:

"If you fulfil your menaces, and blockade Southern ports, the Southern States will lay an embargo upon all cotton seeking transportation through the Northern channels open to it. Not a bale will be permitted to be moved inland in that direction until the commerce of their ports is freed from your impediments. And if your people could stand this state of things, how long do you suppose that England and France would stand by in silence and inaction? And if the two sections are engaged in actual war, so that the cotton is not only arrested in our ports, but not made, will they stand idly by and see you, who have heretofore been the partisans of the right of self-government, engaged in the despotic work of compelling us to submit to be governed at your mere will and pleasure; and that, too, when, by this most gross and palpable violation of the fundamental principle of your own Government, you inflict on them, in common with other countries, an injury which will shake the whole social system of Europe to its very centre? I, for one, think they will not. If those evil times come, to which you seem to look forward, they will be compelled to interpose in their own interest, and yon and we will be at their mercy."

Mr. Bouligney, of the same State, next took the floor, and declared in the most positive language that he should not then withdraw from a seat as a member of the House. He was the only Representative from all the seceding States who maintained his seat in Page 208 the House. He thus expressed his reason for his course:

"In the outset permit me to say that, until a few moments ago, I was in the same condition with my colleague, not having received official information of the passage of the ordinance of secession by the convention of my State. Nor have I received from the Legislature of my State, now in session, any information of the passage by that body of a resolution, instructing her Senators or requesting her Representatives to withdraw from Congress. For one, although I respect that body, I 6hall not obey its request. I was not elected by that body, and I have nothing to do with it, or it with me.

"Mr. Speaker, there is another reason which compels me to differ with the Senators and Representatives of my State. I am the only member of Congress from Louisiana who was elected as an American Union man. To those principles I shall stand forever." [Great applause in the galleries.]

"Again: when I came here, I took the oath to sustain the Constitution of the United States. What does that mean? Does not the Constitution of the United States mean the Union of the United States? I so understand it; and to that oath I shall adhere firmly to the end. Whenever I am instructed by my immediate constituents, and am requested by them to withdraw from Congress, I shall comply with those instructions as soon as they are received. Then, and not until then, I shall resign; and after resigning my position hero, I shall yet be a Union man, and stand under the flag of the country which gave me birth." [Great applause in the galleries and on the floor.]

The following resolution was offered at a subsequent session of the House, and unanimously adopted:

Resolved, That neither the Federal Government, nor the people or the governments of the non-slaveholding States, have the right to legislate upon or interfere with slavery in any of the slaveholding States in the Union.


Source: The American Annual Cyclopaedia and Register of Important Events of the Year, 1861-1865, vols. 1-5. New York: Appleton & Co., 1868.