Page images
PDF
EPUB

and we gave it to the Courts.

declarations that I am willing to make before my own "And whatever the political department of the Government constituents; I made the declarations that I am willing shall recognize as within the limits of the United States, the to stand here and repeat. (Applause.) We had confiJudicial Department is also bound to recognize, and to administer in it the laws of the United States, so far as they apply, dence in our own view of our own rights. Our northern and to maintain in the territory the authority and rights of the friends had their views. It was a paradoxical question, Government, and also the political right and rights of property of individual citizens as secured by the Constitution. All we Well, the Courts did decide the very question, which mean to say on this point is, that as there is no express reguhad been submitted to them, not upon a case from Kan-lation in the Constitution defining the power which the General sas, but in another case. Without going into the argu-citizen in a territory thus acquired, the Court must necessarily Government may exercise over the person or property of a ment, for time does not permit of that, let me give you look to the provisions and principles of the Constitution and it the conclusion. In the opinion of the Court in the case distribution of powers, for the rules and principles by whic of Dred Scott, it is said: its decision must be governed."

So that in regard to slave property, as in regard to any other property recognized and guarded by the Constitu tion, it is the duty, according to the Supreme Court, of al the Courts of the country to protect and guard it by their decision, whenever the question is brought before them To which I will only add this, that the judicial decisions our favor must be maintained-these judicial decision in our favor must be sustained. (Applause.)

"Upon these considerations, it is the opinion of the Court that the act of Congress which prohibits a citizen from holding and owning property of this kind in the Territory of the United States, north of the line herein mentioned, is not warranted by the Constitution, and is therefore void; and that neither Dred Scott himself nor any of his family were made free by being carried into this Territory, even if they had been carried there by the owner, with the intention of becom-in ing a permanent resident."

Again:

"The powers over person and property of which we speak, are not only not granted to Congress, but are in express terms denied, and they are forbidden to exercise them. And this prohibition is not confined to the States, but the words are general, and extend to the whole territory over which the Constitution gives it power to legislate, including those portions of it remaining under Territorial government, as well as that covered by States. It is a total absence of power everywhere within the dominion of the United States, and places the citizen of a Territory, so far as those rights are concerned, on the same footing with citizens of the States, and guards them as firmly and plainly against any inroads which the General Government might attempt, under the plea of implied or incidental power. And if Congress itself cannot do thisif it is beyond the powers conferred on the Federal Government-it will be admitted, we presume, that it could not authorize a Territorial government to exercise them. It could confer no power on any local government, established by its authority, to violate the provisions of the Constitution." Thus the highest court in the United States settled the very question referred to it as the disputed point, not legislative in its character, on which Congress could not agree when the Kansas-Nebraska bill passed. The view that we in the Southern States took of it was sustained, that in the Territories, the common property of the Union, pending their Territorial condition, Congress itself nor the Territorial Government had the power to confiscate any description of property recognized in the States of the Union. The Court drew no distinction between slaves and other property. It is true some foreign philanthropists and some foreign writers do undertake to draw this distinction, but these distinctions have nothing to do with our system of Government. Our Government rests not upon the speculations of philanthropic writers, but upon the plain understanding of a written constitution which determines it, and upon that alone. It is the result of positive law; therefore we are not to look to the analogy of the supposed law of nations, but to regard the Constitution itself, which is the written expression of the respective powers of the Government and the rights of the States.

UNFRIENDLY LEGISLATION.

Well, that being the case, and it having been authoritatively determined by the very tribunal to which it was referred that Congress, had no power to exclude slave property from the Territory, and judiciously determined that the Territorial Legislatures, authorities created by Congress, had not the power to exclude or confiscate slave property, I confess that I had not anticipated that the doctrines of unfriendly legislation would be set up. Hence, I need not say to you that I do not believe in the doctrine of unfriendly legislation; that I do not believe in the authority of Territorial Legislatures to do by indirec tion what they cannot do directly I repose upon the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, as to the point that neither Congress nor the Territorial Legislature has the right to obstruct or confiscate the property of any citizen, slaves included, pending the territorial condition. (Applause.)

I do not see any escape from that decision, if you admit that the question was a judicial one; if you admit the decision of the Supreme Court, and if you stand by the decision of the highest Court of the country.

The Supreme Court seems to have recognized it as the duty-as the duty of the Courts of this Union in their proper sphere to execute this constitutional right, thus adjudicated by the Supreme Court, in the following lan. guage. In speaking of the acquisition of territory, they pronounce it a political question for Congress to determine what territory they acquire and how many. Now mark the words of the Court:

SLAVE CODE.

If present remedies are adequate to sustain these decisions, I would have nothing more done, I, with many If they are not-if they cannot be enforced for want of other public men in the country, believe they are able the proper legislation to enforce them, sufficient legislation must be passed, or our Government is a failure. (Applause.) Gentlemen, I see no escape from that conclusion.

At the same time, fellow-citizens, I make no hesitation in saying to you that I trust the time will never come I trust the time will never come when it may be deemed necessary for the Congress of the United States in any form to interfere with this question in the Territories. So far it has been only productive of evil to us, and it would portend only evil in the future. At present there is no question before Congress. No Southern Representative or Senator proposes legislation on that point-no complaint comes from any territory-there is no evidence that the existing laws and decisions of the Courts are not adequate to protect every description of property recognized by the several States. None whatever. Therefore, in my opinion, and I submit it humbly and with deference, our true policy is not to anticipate trouble, but to let the matter rest upon the Executive, upon the existing laws, and upon the decisions of the Courts. (Applause.) I will add this: we must never give up the principle, we must never give up the question that has been judiciously decided, that this constitutional right exists. We must stand by that decision. We must hold to our constitutional rights, but I would never prematurely raise the question to distract the country, when there is no voice calling for it, North, East, South or West. (Applause.) I say we must hold to the principle-we must stand by it. We stand in a good position. We have the Executive, we have the laws, we have the decisions of the Courts, and that is a great advance from where we stood ten years

ago.

I am glad-although we did not succeed as we desired in Kansas-I am glad that the territorial question is nearly fought out. It is nearly fought out. I know of no existing Territory where this question can arise. As to the territory south of the line, where slave labor is really profitable, I have not a doubt but that the climate and interest, and the proximity of slaveholders, and the Constitution and laws, and the decision of the Court, will sustain and protect us there in the full enjoyment of our rights, and in making Southern territory out of Southern soil. While I would not give up the principle, I never have believed, and I do not believe now, in the possibility of Slavery planting itself in a territory against the determined opposition of the inhabitants, any more than I believe the institution of Slavery could continue in existence in Kentucky for three years against the desire of the voters of the Commonwealth, even with the constitutional restictions that are here thrown around it.

Still, I would save the question and the principle, and never let go the constitutional right, because our protec tion in the Union consists in a strict adherence to the

provisions of the Constitution. When we allow an infraction of the Constitution on any one point, we lose our to the last that the Constitution of the country shall be sustained in every particular. (A voice-" Good.")

claim to the observance of the whole. We should insist

THE PERIL OF THE COUNTRY.

Fellow-citizens, if you will allow me, I will offer you some observations upon another aspect of public affairs. We have been talking of things that concern us no more than they concern others, but we have questions to deter. mine that come nearer home-questions that come to our

aresides. According to my humble judgment, the condition of our country was never so perilous as it is at this hour; and if things go drifting on as they have of 'ate, we shall have to determine questions of far nearer vitality than the territorial question.

I hope I do not speak in the spirit of an alarmist or a 1emagogue, but since I have been acquainted with public affairs (and men older and wiser than myself say the same thing) there never was a time when the interests of this Union were in so much peril, and when the feelings of our people were so much alienated as at this hour. Certainly if the aspect of affairs at Washington is in the slightest degree indicative of the feeling elsewhere, that remark is truth.

ITS CAUSE.

Fellow-citizens, the danger arises, in the opinion of our wisest and best men, from the character and purpose and aim of an organization in the country called the Republican party.

I do not think we fully realize what are the objects, purposes and aims of the Republican party, what it intends, and what would be the consequences to us of their success and dominion in the United States. If you will allow me, therefore, I have gathered together three or four facts-mere expressions-mere illustrations or examples, from many thousands of kindred characters, for the purpose of showing what its objects are-to show what we may expect to follow their success.

HIS VIEWS OF REPUBLICANISM.

First is their platform, made three years ago, but beyond which they have far advanced. Like all aggressive organizations, the rear rank of the Republican party marches up and comes upon the ground that the advanced guard occupied months before, while the advanced guard is going ahead. The Republicans are far in advance of their platform, but we have there enough to put us on our guard.

What are our rights? Have we not a right to have our fugitives returned? If there is a plainer provision than that in the instrument, what is it? Have we not a right to live in peace in this Union? What was the Constitution formed for? When the Constitution was made, was it not made by brethren? Was it not made that this political organization should be carried on in peace and harmony? Have we not a right to demand of our sister States, that we may live together in peace with our respective State institutions, with our whole domestic policy? And is it not a gross violation of the Constitution not to allow us to live in peace, as to refuse to return our fugitives from labor that have escaped into other States? Do they intend to do it? No, they do not. They begin by declaring the Declaration of Independence is a rule of our political action. Here is the declaration of the Republican platform, adopted three years ago, beyond which they have now far advanced:

[ocr errors]

" Resolved, That with our Republican fathers we hold it to be a self-evident truth that all men are endowed with the inalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior design of our Federal Government were to secure these rights to all persons under Its exclusive jurisdiction; that as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished Slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no person should be deprived of life, liberty and property, without due process of law, it becomes our duty to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing Slavery in the Territories of the United States by positive legislation, prohibiting

its existence or extension therein.

This is a positive pledge, that as soon as that party obtains power, it will recognize the equality of the negro with the white man. Its object will be to give him those rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To maintain that equality what follows? Everybody knows that when they obtain the power in the District of Columbia, they will abolish Slavery there; when they obtain the power, they will undertake to abolish it in the forts, arsenals, and dock-yards of the United States throughout the South; they will undertake to abolish the internal slave-trade. Already they declare that not another Slave State shall be admitted into the Union, and they will go beyond that. How can we expect to live in peace and harmony, when declarations of this sort are uttered:

"Resolved, That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign power over the Territories of the United States for their government, and that, in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress, to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism-polygamy. and Slavery."

Is that in the spirit of our revolutionary ancestors? Is it in the spirit of our revolutionary ancestors for a great and growing party, that now claims, and perhaps

have, dominance in the Northern States of the Union, te say of an institution of their Southern relatives they are harboring a relic of barbarism? That shows you, fellow citizens, their indomitable purpose, their deep-seated hate. I am sorry that it exists, but it is true. How can you expect a great political organization that obtains power, to fail to exercise that power when in its opinion this Union is stained or defiled as to one-half, perhaps, of its inhabitants, by a relic of barbarism, which it classes with the crime of polygamy.

SEWARD QUOTED

This is not all. I could have brought here the decla ations of its representative and leading men from ali parts of the Northern States, going infinitely further thaz is contained there. Allow me, however, to read one or two of the most striking from the most eminent of ther leaders. I beg you, fellow-citizens, though they may be familiar, not to weary with a few extracts, for these us terances are the rallying cry of millions of men. I hold in my hand a speech delivered by a Senator of the State of New-York, who is to-day the most influential publie man in this Union, on whose words millions hang, and by whose direction millions move. Is this the Constitu tion and Union that our fathers founded?

Last year, in a speech delivered at Rochester, tha gentleman uttered the following language:

"Our country is a theatre which exhibits, in full operation two radically different political systems; the one resting o the basis of servile or slave labor, the other on the basis of voluntary labor of freemen.

But they are more than incongruous. They are incompat"The two systems are at once perceived to be incongruous. ible. They never have permanently existed together in one country, and they never can.

"Hitherto the two systems have existed in different States, but side by side within the American Union. This has hap pened because the Union is a confederation of States. But on another aspect the United States constitute only one nation. Increase of population which is filling the States out to their very borders, together with a new and extended net-work of railroads and other avenues, and an internal commerce which daily becomes more intimate, is rapidly bringing the States into a higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation. Thus these antagonistic systems are constitutionally coming into close contact and collision results."

Yes, "collision ensues," and his prophecy was fulfilled in less than twelve months after it was made.

"Shall I tell you what this collision means? It is an irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces; and it means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, nation. Either the cotton and rice fields of South Carolina, become entirely a slaveholding nation, or entirely a free-labor and the sugar plantations of Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free labor, and Charleston and New-Orleans become marts for legitimate merchandise alone; or else the rye-fields and surrendered by their farmers to slave culture, and to the prowheat-fields of Massachusetts and New-York must again be duction of slaves, and Boston and New-York become once more markets for trade in the bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend this great truth that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at final compromise between the Slave and Free States, and it is the existence of this great fact that renders all such pretended compromises, when made, vain and ephemeral."

These things would have no consequence if they were the individual opinions of their author, but they are the opinions of a large and formidable and growing party in this Union; of a party that now claims a majority in the House of Representatives, and which looks, at no very distant day, to have a majority in the Senate. I ask you if that was the Union formed by our fathers? Did they anticipate such a political party would arise to declare that there "is an irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces" in the United States?

It is not my purpose to characterize or stigmatize this doctrine now, but to set forth what we are to expect and what we are to meet.

that same distinguished Senator uttered the following At a later period, in the Senate of the United States, language, (I well remember the occasion and the speech :)

"A free Republican Government like this, notwithstanding all its constitutional checks, cannot long resist and counteract the progress of society."

They don't expect the provisions of the Constitution and its checks to prevent them from taking their onward progress Indeed, they have a facility of construing that instrument, which makes it as dust in the balance. They construe it to authorize them not to return fugitive slaves; to authorize them to make a war upon one half of the nation. There is no provision of the Constitution which has stood in their way as to any right of ours that we have claimed upon this great question. Not only did he announce in the Senate of the United States,

that constitutional checks cannot stand for any time | crops of cotton, and a trifle over, to do it. That was against the progress of Northern opinion, but,

"Free labor," says Mr. Seward, "has at last apprehended its rights and its destiny, and is organizing itself to assume the government of the Republic. It will henceforth meet you boldly and resolutely here (Washington;) it will meet you everywhere, in the Territories and out of them, wherever you may go to extend Slavery. It has driven you back in California and in Kansas; it will invade you soon in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Missouri and Texas. It will meet you in Arizona, in Central America, and even in Cuba."

Not content with confining it to the Territories, he adds:

indorsed, I tell you again, by sixty-eight or sixty-nine members of the House of Representatives, and the very gentleman who they are running for Speaker of that body indorsed it. It is true, his friends say that he indorsed it without having read it. Admit that to be true, he has again and again, when called upon, refused to disavow those sentiments, hence the excuse is paltry, HARPER'S FERRY.

That is the condition of affairs, and that is the condition of the Republican organization of this country, "You may, indeed, get a start under or near the tropics. if any reliance is to be placed in their record, in their and seem safe for a time, but it will be only a short time, declarations, in their public attitude, in the attitude Even there you will found States only for free labor to main- which they defiantly assume before the country. Their tain and occupy. The interest of the white race demands the purpose is to make war, eternal war, upon the instituultimate emancipation of all men. Whether that consummations of one half of the States of the Union. Gradually tion shall be allowed to take effect, with needful and wise precautions against sudden change and disaster, or be hurried on by violence, is all that remains for you to decide. The white man needs this continent to labor upon. His head is clear, his arm is strong, and his necessaries are fixed. It is for yourselves and not for us to decide how long and through what further mortifications and disasters the contest shall be pro: tracted, before freedom shall enjoy her already assured triumph! You may refuse to yield it now, and for a short period, but your refusal will only animate the friends of freedom with the courage and the resolution, and produce the union among them, which alone are necessary on their part, to attain the position itself, simultaneously with the impending overthrow of the exciting Federal Administration, and the Constitution of a new and more independent Congress,"-and they think they have that Congress.

I tell you again, fellow-citizens, this is not the opinion of Mr. SEWARD alone. It is Mr. SEWARD and, with one or two exceptions, the other Republican Senators in the Senate of the United States, and nine-tenths of the Republican members of the House of Representatives. Could that language have been uttered with impunity or been sustained at the epoch of 1779, when the Constitution was formed? Did not the Constitution languish and stop just because there was some question about inserting these checks about the institution of the Southern States? Were they not put into the Constitution by the great men who formed it, and are not all the citizens of all the States bound to respect the relations that exist

between them, and to give the Southern States peace in
this Union? How do you receive the declaration that
there is an irrepressible conflict waging-that there shall
be no peace? There is no use attempting to turf over
the volcano, there is no use crying peace when there is
no peace.
It is the avowed purpose of the Republican
party to agitate, agitate; to overturn the Constitution
itself, until they succeed not only in drawing a cordon
around you, and shutting you within your present limits,
but to put you in a position where you were about, for
peace sake, to emancipate your slaves.

Well might we say, as was once said in France, "Oh, Constitution! what crimes are committed in thy

sacred name!"

HELPER'S CRISIS.

But, gentlemen, I hold in my hand another book, which is of no consequence as the opinions of its individual author, but is of consequence as indorsed by the distinguished gentleman from whose productions I have read, and as indorsed also by sixty-eight or nine Republicans of the House of Representatives, who represent a constituency of seven millions of people. This, then, may be considered as the declaration of near seven millions of men. What is it? It is a book called the "Impending Crisis of the South," by a person called Helper, who professes to be a North Carolinian. Whether he is or not I am unable to say. (I will read very little, gentlemen.) In this book, thus indorsed by nearly seventy members of the House of Representatives, representing nearly seven millions of the people, this

sentiment is declared:

The slaveholding oligarchy say we cannot abolish Slavery without inf.inging on the right of property. Again we tell them we do not recognize property in

men.

But the Constitution does; the bond of our Union does, and the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that it does. Our fathers so considered it. It has been so admitted all the time, until the apostles of the new doctrine spoke. At another point he says:

For the services of the blacks from the 20th of August, 1620, up to the 4th of July, 1869-an interval of precisely two hundred and forty-eight years, ten months and fourteen days-their masters, if unwilling, ought, in our judgment, to be compelled to grant them their freedom, and to pay each and every one of them at least sixty dollars cash in hand.

He goes on to remark that it would only take two

we approach the crisis until at last is not the legitimate result of the irrepressible conflict of which they speak, of the crime of which they say we are guilty, to put down these relics of barbarism? The ignorant and fanatical throw off the obligations of the Constitution and invade by violence the Southern States of the Union, and although I am far from holding the Republican party of the North, or any large portion of them, responsible for the late atrocious proceedings in Virginia, I do say that that proceeding was the carrying out of the logical result of their teachings-carrying it into execution. How did they receive it? Why gentlemen, the conservative portion of the North abhors it; but, in the Senate and House, in the great body of their public press, what do they say of it? That they regret it-they deplore it-they even condemn it--they say, because it was against law, and they stand for law. These are the honeyed and qualified phrases with which they characterize the most atrocious act of treason, rapine, and murder combined, that was ever known in the Republic, and then, as though afraid of what they have said, they immediately go on to eulogize the man and his motives, much as they regret the act.

A VOLLEY OF COMPLAININGS.

Gentlemen, have we no complaints in other respects? Are laws passed for the purpose of punishing those who make inroads into the border States and rob us of our property? Suppose a Kentuckian should go into the State of Ohio and rob a citizen of that State, does any one doubt that we would pass a law to punish him and to prevent the recurrence of the outrage? So far from this being their course, they are encouraged, and we are subject to constant secret predatory incursions by which we lose annually hundreds of thousands of dollars, these people availing themselves of the bond of amity between us, to perpetrate the outrage.

That is not all! About one half of the Northern

States have passed laws and made it a criminal and penal offence for their citizens to give any assistance in the rendition of fugitive slaves. Massachusetts has passed laws closing her jails to us, and making it a penal offence to aid in the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave law, or to appear as council to try such a case, thus. nullifying the laws of Congress, and of the United States, distinctly, and some seven or eight States have passed similar laws refusing all remedy and making it penal in their citizens to obey the behests of the Constitution.

I have not uttered these things for the purpose of arousing any spirit of disloyalty to the Constitution and the Union. I hope I love them as reverently as any man within the sound of my voice, but let us look and see the facts as they are. What may be set down as the unquestioned purpose of this organization? It is avowed that it is to exclude all and any Slave States from the Union hereafter. It is to give us no fugitive slave law, declaring that the States under the Constitution must provide for that, and then to give no remedy in the States; it is to pass no laws for the purpose of preventing the robbery of our property but, on the contrary, in many States to make it penal to enforce the law; it is to abolish Slavery in the District of Columbia; to abolish the internal slave-trade and the coastwise slavetrade, and then to agitate and agitate, giving us no peace as long as we retain this relic of barbarism and crime, as they call it.

Are you

This is the purpose. Are you ready for it? ready to say we will make no stand in any form for your Constitutional rights? I think you are not! Yet that is the present condition of affairs-but what are we to do?

PRACTICAL REMEDIES.

I know they will consider the consequences, and carefully consider the consequences of any serious collisions

in this Union. I know we duly appreciate the position of our own State, not only a border State, but an interior border State having no ocean outlet I know that we have read history to some purpose, and that we have seen what have been the consequences of the disruption of amicable relations between those who have banded themselves together as a confederation of States. We need but go back and see the consequence upon the Greeks when they carried on the Peloponnesian war, until at last exhausted, they fell into the lap of despotism The same fate might meet us. What would be our condition? War! War! Inevitable war, in all hunan p.obability, would be our position, and then in time we might be driven into deg. ading alliances with fo. eign powers-the most degrading position for American citizens.

the circumstances then? Andrew Jackson was President of the United States, and he was a native of South Caro lina; the question was a mere question of policy; few of the other States sympathized with the movement of that little State. Henry Clay was alive, and Calhoun was ready to give the benefit of his influence to peace and harmony, and yet that little question, when Jackson, a native son of that State, was President, and Clay and Calhoun were in the Senate, brought on a struggle that shook this Union to its centre, and imperilled it in the estimation of the wisest and best of men. Look at it as it may be, with disaffection. spread all over the South, with a very different state of feelings in the North to what existed then, with Clay dead, and Calhoun dead, and none to take their places, with such a man as Seward, not only not native, but hostile to the South, in the Chair of State. Cannot a child read the result? Cannot we see that one State falling away, our Union will be like an arch with two or three stones dropped out, the whole fabric may fall in pieces.

These are facts which it becomes the people of Kentucky, with all their loyalty to the Union, to observe, to know, to see, to think of, and then to act upon, with the dignity and moderation which marks and so well becomes them.

Then the spectacle would be presented of America falling back under the control of Europe, and American liberty sinking down under European despotism. Besides this, could we ever hope that a fairer state of things would arise? Could we ever hope that Providence itself would ever exercise its omnipotent power to create a State, or Union of States, under more favorable auspices than in these? Would it not be worse than impiety itself, to presume that the Almighty would ever attempt to sustain a But, gentlemen, what is the mode that occurs to any man confederation of Free States under circumstances more -because no man, I take it, in Kentucky, will back on bright or favorable than in our system? I know that the this subject, except as a friend of the Union of the States State of Kentucky is devoted to the Union, not only be--what is the mode? I see none, except it be the union cause of her interests, but from that feeling of affection of all the conservative elements of the country, North and and of loyalty, and that sentiment of love that have South. The South must first be united, and I am sure she always marked her people from the earliest period of her | will, for I take it there is not a citizen of Kentucky that history. I do not believe there is a man under the sound would associate himself with an organization whose march of my voice who would not view as the last, the greatest to triumph would be over the ruins of our rights. of all evils, the wreck of the Union I do not believe there is the man in the State that would compete to enjoy the highest honors within the State, purchased at such a price.

WHAT IS TO BE DONE.

At the same time steps must be taken, something must be done. I do not believe that if the Constitution is allowed to remain permanently violated in its important provisions, we can have hope under it. None whatever! Broken in one particular, it will soon fall to pieces in all. I recollect when I was a boy, to have read that great speech of Demosthenes, for the crown, where the real question at issue was the charge that he was the author of the public misfortunes, because he had advised the Greeks to make a last stand for their country, against Philip of Macedon. He was arraigned, and on trial and in his great defence, he says: "What, though we did fail? We did our duty. We responded in the temper and character of our forefathers.' The result is such as God gives to each; and even those degenerate Greeks acquitted him, and crowned the world's great orator as a benefactor; debased as they were in national character, they did this, and from that day have never known or read of the success of him who would be deterred from the assertion of fundamental rights for fear of offence.

MEND OUR MANNERS DOWN SOUTH.

Ought we not first to put ourselves right in Court? Some little there is to complain of us. I say to you, in my opinion, those who appeal to the Constitution and the laws should obey the Constitution and the laws. I would have the South, if I might ventu. e, as one of her humblest but truest sons, to advise her to obey the laws of our country. (Applause.) I would have the South first obey the laws of the Union which prohibit the foreign slave-trade. (Applause.) That is the law of the land. It rests not with us to complain of the violation of law by others, when in a portion of our S.ates the citi zeus violate the laws themselves. Let us f.own down any attempt to violate those laws upon the part of our States. Let us do more. Let us do more, by preventing the fitting out of fil.bustering expeditions upon our shores, to invade feeble sister countries. That is the law, and we live by the Constitution and the law, and let us obey it, and whatever expansion of territory we make, let us make it in a manner becoming the dignity of this glorious Confederacy under our own flag. Then let us call to our aid the pure elements of conservatism and ruth that we can find in the northern States. What are they? I did not intend to introduce any party question to-night, but the largest organization I see is the Democratic Party of the North. As a historical fact, it is undisputed; as a current fact of the day, it is undisputed, that you do not find these declarations of hostility issu ing from the Northe.n Democracy; you do not find these attempts to overturn the laws coming f.om Democratie sources; you do not find these denunciations of you and your institutions coming from Democratic lips and Democratic Presses. On the contrary, you find them at home, and in most cases in the minority, sustaining with unfaltering courage your rights and institutions, at odds and risks that you little think of.

I want them all. We need them all. We need every Southern State, and every honest man every where not willing to enter into he crusade against us.

Gentlemen, the condition of affairs existing here, and existing generally, I am happy to say, throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky, is not a fair indication of the feeling in many parts of the Union. I have seen the evi dence growing within a few years, and culminating during the last few weeks, of a determined purpose in the South to attain and maintain the complete power in Union, and I have seen, upon the other hand, in the representatives of the lower Southern States, a most resolute and determined spirit of resistance. The representatives from Georgia-from Alabama-from South Carolina-from Mississippi, not to speak of other Southern States, say that they represent their constituents-nay, say that they do not go so far as their constituents, and they declare that they are ready at any moment for a separate organization. God forbid that such a thing should take place. God forbid the overt act should ever be done; but we know enough of our political institutions, that when once done the subject becomes involved in inexplicable distress. If one were to fall upon Washington and see the state of feeling there, he would think that the President of your country was the Executive of two hostile countries. The feeling of alienation seems to be almost complete from the expression of the public press and public men. (I mean not your inflammatory, furious speakers, but men of thought and reflection.) They are alarmed, other men are alarmed, we all are alarmed. It is not a craven fear, but it is the ennobled fear that patriots feel for an imperilled country. Suppose this should occur-do you not remem-ciety. ber, in 1832 when South Carolina arrayed herself against the Federal Government, upon a mere question of policy connected with the collection of taxes, that it did shake the Union to its centre. Such is the nature of our system, that it did shake the Union to the very centre. What were

There is another element No. th, not large but noble and true. They are the scatte. ed and wandering cohorts of the old Whig pa.ty, who have refused to alloy themselves with the Republicans of the North-men of whom EVERETT and CHOATE and others are illustrious examples. There are thousands of thein in the Northern States. When this great crisis comes upon us, I have confidence that men like these will be found to unite with the Democratic party in maintaining the laws and the Constitution.

These are the elements upon which we are to rely. When you get them together, let us see if there cannot be a general revolt of the intelligence, virtue, and loyalty of the country, against these pernicious isms, and if not, let us see how far these pernicious isms control so

Besides these, there are many thousands of men in the Northern States who, silent, are not heard in the midst of the clamor that surrounds them--men who seldom attend the polls. Let us hope that that feeling will be in our favor.

Fellow-citizens, I have uttered these things because I

believe we are standing to-day not in the presence of spectres and shadows, but in the presence of terrible realities. There is a mode by which we can have peace-a permanent peace-and that is by an utter and absolute surrender of all our rights upon the subject to which I have referred, at the call of this Republican Party. If we do not make this surrender, we will have no peace until the Republican Party is destroyed, which can only be done by producing a reaction upon the public mind of the North. As it is, without our being aware of it, things are getting worse every day. I had almost intended to say, that we were absolutely dissolving month by month, and year by year. I see no mode-wiser men than I see no mode to avoid this, except to produce a reaction in the public mind, and to bring up sharply, in some form, the question, Can we not, North and South, live in peace with our several State institutions, after the manner of our fathers? For myself, I yet believe in, and I have an abounding hope of, the ultimate destiny of our common country. I believe a reaction will take place; and I believe that out of this commotion is destined to come for us an era of tranquillity and peace. Of this I am quite certain, that this Commonwealth of Kentucky will pursue a course answerable to her

character and history; she will stand by the union of the
States as long as there is a thread of the Constitution t
hold it together. We know that if madness, and folly, and
fanaticism shall succeed in tearing down the fairest fabrie
ever erected to liberty among men-we know that ou
honored State will conduct herself with so much modera
tion and prudence that she shall stand justified for hel
acts before men and in the eye of Heaven.
Fellow-citizens, I do not propose to detain you by more
extended observations. I have trespassed too far upon
your time already. I think, if you will allow me to say so,
that I know something of the temper, and spirit, and inte-
rest of this people; and, as far as my humble abilities ex-
tend, I propose, in the sphere to which you have devoted
me, to serve you with all the fidelity of a grateful heart.
At all times, and under all circumstances, I owe my alle-
giance to the State, and I am ready, and willing, and anx-
ious to devote whatever faculties of mind and body I pos-
sess to serve you, and to serve you with the uncalculating
devotion of a man who loves the green mountains and
smiling plains, the clear running streams and the generous
people of the State, and with one who loves all her infirmi
ties with the affection of a son.

KANSAS-THE MORMONS-SLAVERY.

SPEECH OF SENATOR DOUGLAS.
Delivered at Springfield, Ill., June 12, 1857.

MR. PRESIDENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: I appear before you to-night, at the request of the grand jury in attendance upon the United States Court, for the purpose of submitting my views upon certain topics upon which they have expressed a desire to hear my opinion. It was not my purpose when I arrived among you. to have engaged in any public or political discussion; but when called upon by a body of gentlemen so intelligent and respectable, coming from all parts of the State, and connected with the administration of public justice, I do not feel at liberty to withhold a full and frank expression of my opinion upon the subjects to which they have referred, and which now engrosses so large a share of the public attention.

The points which I am requested to discuss are: 1st. The present condition and prospects of Kansas. 2d. The principles affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred Scott case.

3d. The condition of things in Utah, and the appropriate remedies for existing evils.

KANSAS.

of whose leaders they act, let the blame be visited of fastening upon the people of a new State, institutions repugnant to their feelings and in violation of their wishes. The organic act secures to the people of Kansas the sole and exclusive right of forming and regulating their domestic institutions to suit themselves, subject to no other limitation than that which the Constitution of the United States imposes. The Democratic party is determined to see the great fundamental principles of the organic act carried out in good faith. The present election law in Kansas is acknowledged to be fair and just-the rights of the voters are clearly defined—and the exercise of those rights will be efficiently and scrupulously protected. lience, if the majority of the people of Kansas desire to have it a Free State (and we are told by the Republican party that nine-tenths of the people of that Territory are Free State men), there is no obstacle in the way of bringing Kansas into the Union as a Free State, by the votes and voice of her own people, and in conformity with the principles of the KansasNebraska act; provided all the Free State men will go to the polls, and vote their principles in accordance with their p ofessions. If such is not the result let the consequences be visited upon the heads of those whose policy it is to produce strife, anarchy and bloodshed in Kansas, that their party may profit by Slavery agitation in the Northern States of this Union. That the Democrats in Kansas will pe form their duty fearlessly and nobly, according to the principle they cherish, I have no doubt, and that the result of the struggle will be such as will gladden the heart and strengthen the hopes of every friend of the Union, I have entire confidence.

Of the Kansas ques ion but little need be said at the present time. You are familiar with the history of the question, and my connection with it. Subsequent reflection has strengthened and confirmed my convictions in the soundness of the principles and the correctness of the course I have felt it my duty to pursue upon that subject. Kansas is about to speak for herself through her delegates assembled in Convention to form a Constitution, preparatory to her admission into the Union on an equal footing with the original States. Peace and prosperity now prevail throughout her borders. The law under which her delegates are about to be elected, is believed to be just and fair in all its objects and provisions. There is every reason to hope and believe that the law will be fairly interpreted and impartially exe-political struggles. Give fair play to that principle of cuted, so as to insure to every bona fide inhabitant the free and quiet exercise of the elective franchise. If any portion of the inhabitants, acting under the advice of political leaders in distant States, shall choose to absent themselves from the polls, and withhold their votes, with a view of leaving the Free State Democrats in a minority, and thus securing a Pro-Slavery Constitution in opposi-ber of a common brotherhood. tion to the wishes of a majority of the people living That we are steadily and rapidly approaching that reunder it, let the responsibility est on those who, for sult, I cannot doubt, for the Slavery issue has already partisan purposes, will sac.ifice the principles they pro- dwindled down to the narrow limits covered by the fess to cherish and promote. Upon them, and upon the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the political party for whose benefit and under the direction | Dred Scott case. The moment that decision was pro

The Kansas question being settled peacefully and satisfactorily, in accordance with the wishes of her own people, Slavery agitation should be banished from the halls of Congress, and cease to be an exciting element in our self-government which recognizes the right of the people of each State and Territory, to form and regulate their own domestic institutions, and sectional strife will be forced to give place to that fraternal feeling which animated the fathers of the Revolution, and made every citizen of every State of this glorious confederacy a mem

« PreviousContinue »