unable to take him from his home in Concord, being prevented by his own resistance, that of his sister, and that of his townsmen, who, upon the ringing of fire-bells, assembled in large numbers. A writ of habeas corpus was hastily issued by Judge Hoar, and at once served by Sheriff John S. Keyes, assisted by the citizens present, who were greatly indignant at this arrest of one of their neighbors. Mr. Sanborn sent a memorial to Congress, which was presented by Mr. Sumner on the 10th of April, reciting the facts and asking "redress."

This movement in Congress, the threats and attempts freely made elsewhere to implicate and convict, if possible, any who had aided or had been cognizant of the attempt on Harper's Ferry, with the general excitement then prevailing, naturally made those who had known of Brown's movements, or who had contributed in any way towards them, solicitous and anxious for their safety. Knowing that, in the then excited state of the public mind, there would be little chance for a fair and unprejudiced hearing, they deemed it best to place themselves beyond the reach of federal jurisdiction. Immediately after the assault, Douglass and Morton went to Canada, and thence sailed to England; and Sanborn spent some time in the Queen's dominions. Howe and Stearns, after the investigation was ordered, went to Canada for a few days, but Higginson refused to leave the country. Theodore Parker was in Italy, sick, and soon to die. On the 2d of December, the day of Brown's execution, he wrote to a friend in America, expressing his apprehensions of "fresh scenes of violence," though still hopeful of the final issue. "But such is my confidence," he wrote, "in democratic institutions, that I do not fear the final result. There is a glorious future for America, but the other side of the Red Sea." A still more systematic effort was made to implicate Gerrit Smith. He had for years been a warm friend of Brown, believed in his integrity and honesty of purpose, had sympathized warmly with him in his endeavor to aid escaping slaves, and had contributed small sums to aid him in this behalf. He had also received aid from him in the management of his colored colony in northern New York. He knew and

heartily approved of his proposed attempt to aid slaves to escape to the mountains of Maryland and Virginia, but had no knowledge of his attempt on Harper's Ferry, and afterward, in a letter to a friend, wrote that "he was astonished to hear of it, so unlike was it to that of going to the mountains." But the excitement and a knowledge of these unfriendly attempts so seriously affected his health and spirits that he was sent to the Utica hospital for several weeks.

In their report, the committee said that, while there was no doubt that it was "Brown's plan to commence a servile insurrection on the borders of Virginia, which he expected to extend, and which he believed his means and resources were sufficient to extend, through that State and throughout the entire South," yet, being a man "of remarkable reticence in his habits," he does not appear to have intrusted even his immediate followers with his plans. "Nor have the committee been enabled," they add," clearly to trace knowledge of them to any." They say, too, that, "after much consideration, they are not prepared to suggest any legislation."

In the same direction, as it originated from the same inspiration, was the debate on a resolution offered by Mr. Douglas in January" for the suppression and punishment of conspiracies or combinations in one State against another." The speech of Mr. Douglas in support of his resolution was particularly marked, though exhibiting far more of the partisan than of the patriot, more of the advocate, intent on making out his case, than of the statesman enunciating the great principles of political truth. He quoted Mr. Lincoln's expression of belief that "this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free," and Mr. Seward's utterance concerning the "irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces," as a "fair exposition" of Republican doctrines and policy; and he gave utterance to the insinuation that the causes which produced the Harper's Ferry invasion were then "in active operation."

Mr. Fessenden replied in a speech of great vigor and force. While he yielded too much to the spirit of conservatism, he successfully met and disposed of the unfriendly allegations

and innuendoes of Mr. Douglas, and vindicated the Republican party from the aspersions the latter had so freely cast upon it. But he made the damaging admission that previous to 1850 the country was quiet upon the slavery question; damaging, because during the decade preceding 1854 had been enacted those fearful aggressions of the Slave Power which had excited so much alarm and such indignant protest. The annexation of Texas, the compromise measures, the Fugitive Slave Act, had all been crowded into those ill-fated and illfreighted years. And yet, said Mr. Fessenden, the country was "quiet," and the great parties had "determined there should be no more trouble on the subject." Notwithstanding all the antislavery agitations and teachings of a quarter of a century, and all the outrages committed at the behests of slavery, and all its inroads upon the domain of freedom, this was the statement volunteered in the very presence of those who had led on those aggressive movements.

Mr. Hunter spoke, or rather delivered an elaborate oration, on the slavery question. He began, by a laborious examination of the figures afforded by the commerce between the Northern and Southern States, to show that "these vast interests are not hostile, but of mutual assistance to each other," and that the disturbance threatened by the antislavery agitation would be reciprocally disastrous; these common interests "constituting a mighty arch," he said, “while the very keystone of this arch consists in the black marble block of African slavery. Knock that out, and the mighty fabric, with all that it upholds, topples and tumbles to the ground."

Concerning the assumption that the South could be "whipped into the Union," he said: "It might be provoking, if it were not so absurd." "Sir," he confidently affirmed, "this coercion of which you speak is impossible." He contended that slavery was "the normal condition of society," and in harmony with the Divine requirement, "Do as you would be done by." Those acquainted with Southern society must have doubted the sanity, as well as the candor, of one who could make declarations like these. Other Senators participated in the debate; but nothing came of the resolution, as no vote was reached.

CHAPTER XLVII.

-

CUBA AND CENTRAL AMERICA.

Commanding position of Cuba. -Slaveholding ascendency. South American republics. Slaveholding apprehensions. - Congress at Panaina. Southern hostility and purpose. Randolph, Berrien, and Floyd. - Championship of slavery. - Van Buren's despatch. — Change of feeling. - Efforts to purchase. -Filibustering expeditions. Taylor's proclamation. - Propositions of Eng land and France. Refusal. Ostend manifesto. - General surprise. — Buchanan's message. - Slidell's bill. Action thereon. Brown's speech. Position of the administration. - Designs on Central America. expedition. Purpose. - Failure. - Democratic sympathy.

Walker's

THE proximity of Cuba to the mouth of the Mississippi River and its commanding position in the Gulf of Mexico made that island a matter of interest and importance to the people of the United States, whether it was held by Spain or was independent, slave or free. Here, however, as everywhere else, the interests of slavery were made paramount, and the Slave Power controlled the action of the government, a fact detrimental alike to the well-being and to the honor of the Republic.

When the Spanish colonies in America became independent, they abolished slavery. Apprehensive that the republics of Mexico and Columbia would be anxious to wrest Cuba and Porto Rico from Spain, secure their independence, and introduce into those islands the idea, if they did not establish the fact, of freedom, the slave-masters at once sought to guard against what they deemed so calamitous an event. Soon after the inauguration of John Quincy Adams, Mr. Clay, Secretary of State, wrote to Alexander H. Everett, minister to Spain, instructing him to press upon that government the importance of acknowledging the independence of those colonies. Among the reasons assigned was the fact that the "fortunes" of those islands" have such a connection with the people of the United States," that, in case of a protracted war, of which they should

"become the object and theatre," this government "might not be at liberty to decline" intervention. Though the despatch was couched in diplomatic phrase, and the real object of this caution and menace was not explicitly stated, it was understood then, and more distinetly avowed afterwards, to have been slavery and its defence; and that to guard against abolition in those islands was the main, if not the exclusive, motive of this extreme solicitude.

When the South-Americans proposed the congress at Panama, President Adams recommended that this government should be represented there. The debate on this proposition disclosed the real animus of the Southern members, who did not hesitate to avow that their apprehensions, purposes, and actions were all in the interests of slavery. John Randolph, after asserting that a war would be for the independence of those islands, with the purpose and the "principle, of universal emancipation," asked: "Then, sir, what is the situation of the Southern States?" Berrien of Georgia asked and answered the question: "Can you suffer these islands to pass into the hands of buccaneers drunk with their newborn liberty?" "The vital interests of the South demand its prevention," was his response. Floyd of Virginia, for the same avowed reason, declared that he "would rather take up arms to prevent than accelerate such an occurrence." Thus clearly and unequivocally did this Republic step forth the champion of slavery, and boldly insist that those islands should remain under the hateful despotism of Spain rather than gain their independence by means that should inure to the detriment of its cherished system. Indeed, it would fight to fasten more securely the double bondage on Cuba and the slave. With less circumlocution and more directness, Mr. Van Buren, during the administration of General Jackson, urged upon the American minister at Madrid to press upon the Spanish court the same policy, for the reason, as he expressed it, that "the sudden emancipation of a numerous slave population" "could not but be very sensibly felt upon the adjacent shores of the United States." It seems hardly credible that a Northern man, even "with Southern principles," could have thus boldly