Page images
PDF
EPUB

cisely the opposite views. He insisted that the extension of slavery was too great a price to pay even for the attainment of peace; that a peace purchased on such terms would be only a hollow truce; that it would be disturbed by new and deeper agitations; that freedom and slavery were essentially antagonistic in their nature; and that no reconciliation could be effectual until the latter should abandon its pretensions to new territories and new conquests. The soundness of Mr. Seward's opinions have been confirmed by subsequent events. The exciting congressional discussion of the subject continued for several months. Its effect was favorable to the policy of President Taylor and Mr. Seward. It promised to guaranty the establishment of free institutions, unvitiated by the presence of slavery, to the vast possessions between the organized states and the Pacific ocean.

An unforeseen casualty changed the fortunes of the conflict. President Taylor died in the month of July, 1850, and by the terms of the constitution Millard Fillmore, the vice-president, was advanced to the executive chair of the United States. A citizen of New York, he had already exhibited symptoms of jealousy in regard to the influence of Mr. Seward-a feeling which was shared by many of his triends. At the same time he was understood to concur with Mr. Seward in the general principles of policy which had guided the course of the latter on the slavery question. Mr. Seward advised the new president to retain the cabinet of President Taylor and endeavor to carry out his views. But this course was in direct opposition to the views of the compromisers. They urged the importance of abandoning the policy hitherto pursued and of appointing a cabinet committed to their own. Mr. Fillmore accepted their advice. His administration was in reality founded on the principles of the party which his election had defeated. Of course, it relied for support on a coalition between members of that party and so many of his own as could be gained to his views. Soon after this change in the executive, many of the opponents of the compromise fell off from the side of Mr. Seward, while others attempted to steer a middle course, expressing themselves in language of moderation, or preserving a total silence.

Although the compromise bill itself, as introduced by Mr. Clay, was defeated, the measures which it embodied were submitted to a separate discussion, and successively passed. The whigs of the free

states were thrown into perplexity by this sudden change. The coalition demanded the acceptance of the compromise as the final adjustment of the slavery controversy.' No favors were to be expected from the administration by those who failed to comply with the terms. A refusal was deemed sufficient evidence of disloyalty to the government and of hostility to the Union. But Mr. Seward was not influenced by the motives thus held out.

His opposition to the compromise measures was unabated. He gave no heed to the denunciations of power. For the present, the vital question had been settled in congress, and had now passed over to the tribunal of the country. In fact, it waited the judgment of the civilized world. Mr. Seward, unwilling to expose himself for a moment to the danger of misapprehension, neglected no proper occasion to declare his adhesion to the principles which he had expressed throughout the congressional debates; although he declined to engage in any defense or explanation of his course amid the excitement of popular assemblies.

The question of slavery, in its comprehensive bearings, formed the turning point in the presidential canvass of 1852, which resulted in the election of Mr. Pierce, and at a subsequent period, in the abrogation of the Missouri compromise and the enactment of the Kansas and Nebraska bill.

The national democratic convention which nominated Mr. Pierce, unanimously adopted a platform approving the compromise of 1850 as the final decision of the slavery question. The whig party were widely divided on the question of acquiescence in the compromise measures, and still more at variance in regard to the claims of rival candidates for the presidency. Mr. Seward's friends in the free states united in the support of General Scott, who had, to a considerable extent, stood aloof from the agitations of the last few years. On the other hand, the exclusive supporters of the compromise, as a condition of party allegiance, were divided between Millard Fillmore, at that time acting president, and Daniel Webster, secretary of state. The whig convention met in Baltimore on the 17th of June, 1852,

1 The bill for the admission of California passed the senate by a vote of 34 to 18, and the house by 150 to 56.

The fugitive slave act, in the senate, received 27 ayes to 12 nays. In the house, under the previous question, it passed without debate. Ayes, 109; nays, 75.

The bill abolishing the slave trade in the District of Columbia passed the senate by 33 to 19; the house by 124 to 59.

Mr. Seward moved a substitute for this bill, abolishing slavery itself in the District. It received only 5 votes.

two weeks after the democratic convention, and nominated General Scott as their candidate for president. A large majority of the delegates from New York and a considerable number from other states, maintained their opposition to the test resolutions which were proposed by the other branch of the party. These resolutions, however, were adopted, and a platform was thus established resembling, in its main features, that of the democrats. Many voted for it who may be presumed to have brought themselves to accept its principles, while others were doubtless influenced by their fears of a disruption of the party. Supported by several advocates of this new platform on the ground of his personal popularity, General Scott received the nomination. He was, however, regarded with great suspicion by a large number of whigs in the slaveholding states. It was feared that if he was elected to the presidency Mr. Seward would be called to the office of secretary of state, and thus exert a leading influence on the administration. General Scott lost no time in attempting to remove these prejudices; and in announcing his acceptance of the nomination, he promptly declared his adhesion to the principles of the platform adopted by the party. At the instance of the friends of the candidate, Mr. Seward disclaimed all private objects in connection with the election of General Scott, and with his characteristic frankness and fidelity to political associates, he publicly announced his determination to accept no office at the hands of the president in case of General Scott's success. This had been his course hitherto, and it would not be changed under a future administration."

Many ardent friends of the compromise, notwithstanding, refused to rally around General Scott, distrusting his fidelity to the compromise platform; while a large number of the whigs of the free states, through aversion to the platform, assumed a neutral position or gave their support to a third candidate.' Another portion of the whig party nominated Mr. Webster, who died, not only refusing to decline the nomination, but openly avowing his disgust with the action of the party.

4

Mr. Seward and his friends could not so far belie their convictions as to approve the principles of the platform, but yielded their

1 The platform was adopted by a vote of 227 to 60. The first ballot for president stood: Fillmore, 182; Scott, 131; Webster, 29. The 58d and last: Scott, 159; Fillmore, 112; Webster, 21. 2 See Vol. III, p. 416.

8 A convention of the free democracy, at Pittsburg, nominated John P. Hale for president, and Geo. W. Julian for vice-president, and declared in favor of "free soil, free land, internal improvements," &c.

4 October 24, 1852.

support to General Scott in the manner which, in their opinion, was best adapted to secure his election and defeat the ultra pro-slavery party. The result, however, was what might have been expected. The democratic party, forgetting its past divisions, at least for the time, supported Mr. Pierce with unanimity and zeal, giving him the electoral votes of twenty-seven of the thirty-one states.1

The loud exultations of the prevailing party, as well as of those whigs who had sympathized with it during the canvass, showed their belief that, in the defeat of General Scott, Mr. Seward was not only overthrown, but politically annihilated. The whig party, also, was, in their opinion, forever destroyed, at least as an enemy of the slave power. Many prominent members of that party took an early opportunity of offering their support to Mr. Pierce's administration, while others more secretly, but no less efficiently, gave their aid to its policy.

It was under these discouraging circumstances that Mr. Seward resumed his seat in the senate at the opening of the second session of the thirty-second congress, in December, 1852. But neither his speeches nor his public conduct were colored by the remembrance of the recent disastrous struggle. No traces of disappointment were visible in his bearing, and he at once devoted himself to the business of the session with the same calmness and assiduity which had always marked his congressional career. His speeches during this session were on questions of great practical interest. His remarks in the debate on "Continental Rights and Relations," although grave and forcible, were interspersed with incidental touches of effective satire; and included a graceful and feeling tribute to the character of John Quincy Adams.” On the proposal "to abolish or suspend the duty on railroad iron," Mr. Seward addressed the senate in one of his most characteristic speeches, warning the country of the danger of an approaching revulsion in railroad and financial affairs generally, which proved no less just than prophetic. The revulsion predicted actually occurred in 1857. This, and the other speeches made by him during the session, were marked by an admirable union of statistical narrative, general reasoning and lofty sentiments.*

3

1 The states which voted for General Scott were Vermont, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Kentucky. In the free states Mr. Pierce received 1,156,513 votes, General Scott 1,022,757, John P. Hale 157,685. 2 See Vol. III, p. 605. 3 See Vol. III, p. 656.

4 These speeches are briefly noticed in the concluding pages of the Memoir, in Vol. I.

After an extra session of five weeks duration, the senate, on the 11th day of April, 1853, adjourned. Mr. Seward was occupied most of the summer in the courts of the United States.

He, however, found time during the recess to prepare and deliver two addresses of remarkable power and beauty. The first, at the dedication of a university at Columbus, Ohio, rises to the dignity of an oration.' In it he pleads eloquently the cause of Human Nature as especially committed to the care of the people of the United States. "To disseminate knowledge and to increase virtue," he maintains, "is to establish the principles on which the recovery and preservation of the inherent rights of man depend, and the state that does this most faithfully, advances most effectually the cause of Human Nature." In October, he delivered the annual address before the American Institute, in the city of New York. This is a stirring appeal to the American people to rise to a higher tone of individual and national independence in thought, sentiment and action. "Let this prevail," he says, “and we shall cease to undervalue our own farmers, mechanics and manufacturers, and their productions; our own science and literature; in short, our own infinite resources and our own peculiar and justly envied freedom."

1

Both of these productions possess merit and interest of a permanent character.

On the first Monday in December, 1853, the first congress under Mr. Pierce's administration assembled." It commenced deliberations under inaugural promises which seemed either designedly delusive or promulgated with an imbecility of purpose unworthy a chief magistrate. High expectations of much beneficent legislation had been formed. Among the measures which it was anticipated would come up for consideration were the modification of the tariff so as to enlarge the field of national industry; the construction of a railroad between the Atlantic and Pacific states; the substitution of a system of gratuitous allotments of land in limited quantities to actual settlers, instead of the policy of sales of the public domain; the improvement and reform of the army and navy; the regulation of the commercial marine in regard to immigrant passengers; the endowment of the states with portions of the public lands as a provision for the

1 See present volume.

2 Linn Boyd (democrat) was elected Speaker by 143 votes to 74 for all others. In the senate. the administration was proportionately strong.

« PreviousContinue »