« PreviousContinue »
der. I declare that those men at the North who are called Abolitionists stand looking on to-day, with an anxiety you cannot conceive of, and their prayers are going up to
speech part of the Republican platform, which | slaves, worth, on an average, $800—at least, declares an essential principle to be the main- before the panic-making $400,000,000. The tenance of State rights, in order to maintain loss of $100,000 is only one-fortieth of one the balance of power, and denounced the in- per cent., or about one-quarter of a mill on a vasion of any State on whatever pretext. dollar. This is less than the risk incurred in Why did not the Senator quote from the any other species of property in the United speeches of the President elect, when he had States. Suppose the people of the Border declared over and over again that he did not States resolve themselves into an insurance intend or wish to interfere with Slavery in company, how small would be the premium the States? He then read from Mr. Lincoln's to cover the loss! This special property has speeches, where he declared that he had no special advantages. It has advantages of purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere representation, and is it strange that such with Slavery in the States. He believed he property should be subjected to peculiar had no lawful right to do so, nor had he any risks? What will those gentlemen gain by inclination to do so. The Constitution, he severing the bond of the Union? If they run averred, was formed by men who knew the this slight risk now, what will they run then, meaning of the words they employed. They when the Northern States will be under no recognized the right of Slaveholding States obligations to return their property? Would to persons held to service, and made it the ten per cent. cover the loss of the State? Let duty of the Free States to deliver up such the bond of Union be broken, and Slave propersons; but left each State perfectly sover-perty would of necessity retire from the boreign over its own laws. The law of the Slave States makes slaves property. The law of the Free States does not make them property. The Constitution does neither. Upon the idea that the Constitution estab-night that this Union may be broken up; lishes Slavery, we cannot have peace on the Slavery question, and we may as well know it first as last. The people of the United States will never consent that the Constitution be so altered as to become by its own force a Slavery-extending Constitution. But they do not ask a construction put upon it which will make it abolish Slavery in any State or Territory. We simply ask-let the Constitution stand as our fathers made it, neither affirming nor denying; then we can true, that a State by its own mere motion can ashave peace. He said Mr. Lincoln was in semble in convention a mass of its citizens, by resofavor of giving the South the Fugitive Slave lutions dissolve its connection with the Federal Govlaw, and read speeches to support the asser-ernment, and put an end to the supremacy of the tion. The South complain that they lose a Constitution and laws of the United States, several great deal by fugitives, and few are reclaim- other consequences must follow. If one State can ed. This arises from the fact that they pos- secede from all the rest, I suppose the Senator from sess a species of property with a will of its Louisiana will not deny but that all the rest can seown, and legs of its own, and desire of its cede from one, and that of necessity gives to this Government the power to expel a State. own to get away. This is no fault of ours, and the North are not responsible for that. The Senator from Virginia (Mr. Mason) told us that, a few years ago, Virginia lost annually $100,000, and he believed she lost the same now. He would concede that, for the sake of argument, Virginia had about 500,000
* * * *
that the Free States at the North must no
zens of a State, to annul an act of Congress, because
the Constitution of the United States and an act in
pursuance of it is a supreme law of that State, and
binding upon every citizen of that State, and every
citizen must act at his peril. Now, if this doctrine is
right of secession involves the right of expulsion. Let us go a little further, ana see how this doctrine would apply in time of war. We were engaged in a war with Great Britain in 1812, and the New England States, it is said, were rather disaffected, and met in Convention at Hartford. Now, if the doctrine of the gentleman is correct, any of the New England States
could have resolved itself out at its pleasure and gone over to the enemy. Our fortresses in Boston Harbor, which we had manned, built, and filled with munitions and guns, they might have withdrawn from and surrendered to the enemy, and turned our own guns upon us. This is the consequence of this doctrine. But, again, take it in time of peace. Apply the doctrine to Pennsylvania, that she, by a simple resolution of her people, can withdraw from the United States.
Louisiana was admitted, she would never have been admitted. I tell you, sir, if any such doctrine had been asserted, her people would never have been permitted to take possession of the swamps of Louisiana. They will not willingly consent that she should hold the mouths of the Mississippi, and thus control the commerce that goes out into the Gulf. How has it been with Texas? The Federal Government admitted Texas at a time when she had a sparse population, and there were many debts against her treasury, and her credit was impaired and broken. We took her, as one of the States, into this Confederacy. The result of her annexation brought the Mexican war, which cost us 40,000 lives and nearly $100,000,000. Now, when we have made her a good State, built fortifications, paid her debts and raised her to position as a State in this Confederacy, with prospects as glorious, perhaps more so than any other Southern State, is she now, in a single hour or moment of pas sion, to resolve herself out of the Union and become a foreign power? Suppose we had paid $200,000,000 for Cuba, and acquired her, with all her fortifications, could she now go out, and turn our own guns against us? What is all our great boasted nationality? Is it a farce and a delusion? Gentlemen sometimes complain that the Republican party are disposed to do injustice to the citizens of the South, and to their social institutions especially. But what has been the history of the Government since it was formed under the Constitution? We have acquired Florida, Louisiana, Texas and the Territory from Mexico. We have surrendered a part of Maine, and given up our claim to a large part of Oregon. Florida cost us $40,000,000. It has been given up to the social institutions of the South. We purchased Louisiana Territory, and two-thirds of the good land has been given up to the social institutions of the South. The annexation of Texas, the war with Mexico, and the acquisition of all those territories from Mexico, may be regarded as one transaction.
She could cut off all the mail routes going across Pennsylvania, and we could not go from Virginia to New York without going across a foreign country. So, too, with Illinois; if this doctrine is correct, we of the North-west could be cut off entirely from the East; and especially if the Union is to be broken up, we could not go to New York except by leave of Illinois, or without going through the State of Kentucky; and you propose to make that a foreign jurisdiction. Apply this doctrine further. How is it with Florida, a little State of the Gulf that has 50,000 white inhabitants-almost as many as some of the counties in the State where I live? We purchased this peninsula, and paid for it, to get rid of the foreign jurisdiction over it also to get possession of the Key, and command the entrance to the Gulf. We paid $35,000,000 to take the Seminoles off from it, and now these 50,000 people, whom the good people of the United States permitted to go there and settle their territories--they had hardly population enough to be admitted as a State, but we have admitted them to full fellowship-and Florida now attempts, by mere resolution of her people gathered together, to resolve herself out of the Union, and take all those fortresses, which we have spent thousands of dollars to make, with all our own guns, and turn them against us. How is it with Louisiana? The Government of the United States upon wise national principles of great national policy, purchased from the Emperor of France, or the First Consul, the Territory of Louisiana, at an expense of $15,000,000. We purchased it to obtain possession of the great valley of the Mississippi, and, above all things, to hold the mouth of that River which controls all its commerce, and discharges it upon the high seas of the world. Now, can it be contended here that because the ple whom the Federal Government has permitted to go there and occupy its lands, and permitted to be introduced into the family of this Union, that she, in a moment of passion aud excitement, by the mere resolution of her citizens, can resolve herself outside of the Confederacy, declare that she is a foreign power, and take with her the control of the mouths of the Mississippi? I tell you, Mr. Presi-history-none whatever. *** What do we deny to dent, and I tell the Senator from Louisiana, that if any such doctrine had been understood when
I ask you, gentlemen, in all fairness and candor, to say whether we have not surrendered to your social institutions your full share, comparing the number of persons who are employed in your peo-system of labor with the free white citizens of the United States? When you speak of injustice, it is without foundation. You have had your full share, and more than your share, of the Territories we have acquired from the beginning up to this hour. I am sick and tired of hearing gentlemen stand up here and complain of the injustice done to this institution of the South. There is no foundation for it in our
you that we do not deny to ourselves? What single right have I in New Mexico that you have not? You
THE COMMITTEE OF THIRTEEN.
Bay this law excludes your social institution. So it excludes our banking institutions and our manufacturing corporations. Your social institution is a kind of close corporation, existing under the laws of your States, not existing by the common law of the country. We deny you no right which we do not deny ourselves. *** If we acquire territory, you are asking too much when you ask us to convert it to Slave Territory. It is impossible that we can have peace upon any such doctrine as that. You must allow the Free Territories to remain free. We will not interfere with your institution where it exists. Sir, that is peace. I repeat, that non-interference by the General Government or by the Free State men, with Slavery in the States, and non-interference by the General Government or by the Slaveholders against freedom in the Territories, is peace." Mr. Doolittle was frequently interrupted by Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana, Wigfall, of Texas, and Brown, of Mississippi-all of whose inquiries he answered with decision and candor. Mr. Brown made a brief reply, declaring that Northern Senators would overlook the main point at issue. We claim that there is property in slaves, and they deny it. Until we can settle on some basis this question, it is idle to talk of peace. He claimed that the doctrine of non-recognition of property in slaves was a new doctrine. He said the South had $400,000,000 in this kind of property. Is it to be supposed that the South would consent to live under a Government outlawing this kind of property? Can millions at the South consent to live under a Government as outlaws, only recognized when the Government wants tribute? If the Government continue to outlaw the South, there is only two ways-separate in peace or by
Mr. Brown's Reply.
force. He said the South could not take less than justice, and asked no more. They recognized the right of the Government to protect the property of the North, but the North would not recognize the right of protection to the property of the South. If they persisted in the idea that the Government would not recognize property in slaves, and protect it, then, standing in the high presence of and before Almighty God, he declared the Union could not last ninety days.
This day's proceedings did not bring the discordant elements into closer harmony. The spirit of Mr. Doolittle's speech was emi
nently kind and candid; and, if it failed to make any impression on the points at issue, its circulation among the people served to strengthen the confident and determined spirit of the vast mass of Northern people. It unquestionably had the endorsement of four-fifths of the voters in the North-western States.
No further proceedings of this week's (the 4th) session particularly related to the "question of questions." It was understood that Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana, would address the Senate on Monday, January 1st. All looked forward with interest to that speech, as Mr. B. would unquestionably define the course which the united Southern States were to pursue.
The Committee of Thirty-three.
The Committee of Thirty-three having adjourned December 21st to December 27th, accomplished little during their sessions of Thursday and Friday, December 27th-28th. On Thursday the propositions of Mr. Rust [See page 103] were urged to a vote, and were rejected, by 12 to 15. On Friday the Committee considered Mr. Adams' proposition. It proposed an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting Congress from passing a law interfering with slavery in the States where it exists. It was agreed to by nearly an unanimous vote, the several dissents considering that the Constitution already gives that security.
ing "in the State from which the fugitive es- | tutional and Federal relations as any other species caped." This was carried, and then the of property so recognized; and, like other proper whole proposition was voted down by the ty, shall not be subject to be divested or impaired Democrats, all the Republicans sustaining it. by the local law of any other State, either in escape This was lost, as follows: thereto, or by the transit or sojourn of the owner therein. And in no case whatever shall such pro
“YEAS.—Messrs. Grimes, Seward, Wade, Doolittle,
Collamer, and Crittenden--6.
"NAYS.—Messrs. Powell, Hunter, Toombs, Douglas, Davis, Bigler, and Rice-7."
The Southern men voted adversely, upon the ground that, though it was not openly assigned, this proposition would affect their laws imprisoning colored seamen.
It will be seen that the extremists would not sustain the propositions intended to meet the very cases they had specifically charged against the North.
Mr. Toombs' resolutions were then called up, and four of them voted upon, Mr. Doug las refusing to go upon the record. They were then postponed till Wednesday, Mr. Toombs and the ultras resisting any delay, for the transparent object of using the action of the Committee to operate upon the pending elections for the Southern Conventions. Mr. Davis offered the following resolutions, which went over with the others:
perty be subject to be divested or impaired by any
Toombs and Davis resolutions. Subsequent-
1y, Mr. Seward offered the following on be-
"Resolved, That under the fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution, Congress should pass an efficient law for the punishment of all persons engaged in the armed invasion of any State from another by combinations of individuals, and trial and conviction in the State and District where punishing all persons in complicity therewith, on their acts of complicity were committed in the Fed
Mr. Toombs proposed to amend by including "insurrections," and Mr. Douglas, by inserting his sedition law of last session, after which the resolution was voted down.
Mr. Douglas explained that he declined voting on the Toombs and Davis resolutions, on Monday, because he had presented amendments to the Constitution, in due form, cov
That it shall be declared by amendment of the
INCIDENTS AND RESULTS OF THE EVACUATION OF FORT MOULTRIE.
THE evacuation of Fort | indifferent work, the walls of which are only about Moultrie, by Major Ander- fourteen feet high, and that we have, within one hunson, on the night of Dec. dred and sixty yards of our walls, sand hills which 26th, quite took the country by surprise. His command our work, and which afford admirable sites great peril the steady refusal of the Presi- for batteries, and the finest covers for sharp-shooters; dent to allow the dispatch of reinforcements and that, beside this, there are numerous houses, -excited the most painful apprehensions some of them within pistol-shot, you will at once see throughout the entire North for his safety. An occasional note like the following, dated December 24th, came from the gallant commander, to intensify the feeling in his behalf:
"When I inform you that my garrison consists of only sixty effective men, and that we are in a very
that, if attacked in force, headed by any one but
a simpleton, there is scarce a possibility of our being
Trusting that God will not desert us in our hour of trial, I am sincerely yours.
OCCUPATION A MILITARY NECESSITY.
The desertion of this untenable post for the In the mutterings of an excited populacefastness of Fort Sumter, which lay like a vast in the gathering of soldiery-in the resolution monster on the bosom of the waters far out of inquiry [see page 112], Major Anderson in the harbor, was a step certainly never con- detected the evidence of an early occupation templated by the South Carolina authorities of Fort Sumter, if not of an actual assault nor by the President. Anderson's last instruc- upon Fort Moultrie. If Sumter were occutions from the War Depart-pied by an enemy, Moultrie would not be mentas averred by the tenable for five hours. It was, in fact, the President in his correspon- key to the harbor, which, if properly garrisdence with the South Carolina Commissioners oned, would defy the assault of any force for --were as follows: months. Noting carefully the daily, almost
Ander-on's last Instructions.
"Verbal Instructions to Major Anderson, First Ar- hourly, gathering strength of the revolution
tillery, commanding Fort Moultrie, S. C. “You are aware of the great anxiety of the Secretary of War that a collision of the troops with the people of this State shall be avoided, and of his studied determination to pursue a course with reference to the military force and forts of this harbor which shall guard against such a collision. He has, therefore, carefully abstained from increasing the force at this point, or taking any measures which might add to the present excited state of the public mind, or which would throw any doubt on the confidence he feels that South Carolina will not attempt by violence to obtain possession of the public works,
or interfere with their occupancy.
"But as the counsel and acts of rash and impul
sive persons may possibly disappoint these expectations of the Government, he deems it proper that you should be prepared with instructions to meet so unhappy a contingency. He has, therefore, directed me, verbally, to give you such instructions.
"You are carefully to avoid every act which would needlessly tend to provoke aggression, and for that reason you are not, without necessity, to take up any position which could be construed into the assumption of a hostile attitude; but you are to hold possession of the forts in the harbor, and if attacked, you are to defend yourself to the last extremity. The smallness of your force will not permit you, perhaps, to occupy more than one of the three forts, but an attack on, or attempt to take possession of either of them, will be regarded as an act of hostility, and you may then put your command into either of them which you may deem most proper to increase its power of resistance. You are also authorized to take sirular steps whenever you have tangible evidence of a design to proceed to a hostile act.
"D. P. BUTLER,
“FORT MOULTRIE, S. C., Dec. 11, 1860.”
ists; seeing, upon all sides, unconcealed preparations for large military movements; looking wistfully, but in vain, for succor from reinforcements, it would have been a base betrayal of trust for him to have remained in Moultrie when Sumter offered him the shelter of its kindly walls.
The Occupation a Military Necessity.
A correspondent from Washington, under date of December 29th, said: "Major Anderson had command of all the forts of Charleston. He held and occupied them at his discretion. Before he went to his command last autumn he was here, and was depressed at the position he felt he was about to occupy. But his views of duty were wholly those of a soldier. His business was to defend his position, and the fact that he intended to do it was what depressed him. He felt the delicacy of his situation, and he knew the weakness of his command. found himself at Fort Moultrie, threatened with an attack. He besought the Executive for more troops. General Scott, over and over again, urged that they be sent. The President refused. Major Anderson went on strengthening his position, while, at the same time, he urged forward the completion of Fort Sumter, the mounting of its heavy ordnance, &c. This was done as promptly as possible by Captain Foster, of the Engineers. When the engineering labors of Captain Foster were completed, he reported the fact to Major Anderson. Without any special orders or suggestions from the President, the Secretary of War, or the Commander-in-chiet, Major Anderson, looking upon his position
"This is in conformity to my instructions to Major from an exclusively military point of view,
JOHN B. FLOYD,
seeing the weakness of Fort Moultrie and the strength of Fort Sumter, did precisely that