of the Secessionists-that a State has the right and the power to sit in judgment on acts of Congress-even if the Liberty laws were nullifying in their nature (which they were not) they would have to be justified by the revolutionists themselves. 5th. The hostility of the President-elect to Slavery. Upon this point the Southern leaders of the rebellion founded their strongest argument with their people, and, by a zealous use of fact and fancy, succeeded in " precipitating" action upon the announcement of Mr. Lincoln's election. The Anti-Slavery sentiments most frequently quoted against the candidate, by his Pro-Slavery opponents, was from his speech in June, 1858, before the Springfield Convention, in which he said: "In my opinion the Slavery agitation will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and to the secession leaders to prove to the masses of the South the hostile character of the new administration, and thus startled them into open revolution. Without entering at all into a discussion of the views expressed, we may state that, in assuming the doctrine of the irreconcilable nature of Slave labor and Free, both Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Seward were anticipated by Mr. Calhoun himself, who grounded his entire theory of the necessity of a Slave Confederacy upon an assumption of the irreconcilable relations of the Free and Slave institutions. In his great Nullification speech, in the United States Senate, (1833,) he said : The contest between the North and the South will, in fact, be a contest between power and liberty, and such he considered the present; a contest in which the weaker section, with its peculiar labor, passed. A house divided against itself cannot productions and situation, has at stake all that is stand.' I believe this Government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved-I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of Slavery will arrest the further spread of it-place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, the old as well as the new-the North as well as the South." This, taken in confirmation with Mr. Seward's somewhat celebrated Rochester Speech, in which the "irrepressible conflict" doctrine was avowed, gave argument enough ferred results to the States, as one of the incidents of sovereignty too dear to be trusted to the General Government. Our Southern members strove for the passage of the law, and strove honorably; but it shows the evils of our unfortunate condition, that, in the urgency of our contest with an aggressive adversary, we lose the landmarks of principle. To obtain an illusive triumph, we pressed the Government to assume a power not conferred by the instrument of its creation, and to establish a precedent by which, in all after time, it will be authorized to assume unconstitutional powers, and wearied with so many efforts to confine it to its limits of legitimate powers, we are pleased to have assistance from Massachusetts, and if the question shall be determined in her favor we shall sincerely rejoice at such a vindication of the Constitution." dear to freemen." Commenting on the above, Mr. Benton remarked: 'Here is a distinct declaration that there was then a contest between the two sections of the Union, and that that contest was between power and liberty, in which the freedom and the slave property of the South were at stake. This declaration at the time attracted but little attention, there being then no sign of a Slavery agitation, but to close observers it was an ominous revelation of something to come, and an apparent laying an anchor to windward for a new agitation on a new subject, after the tariff was done with." The expression above quoted from Mr. Lincoln's lips, in 1858, was not the strongest to which he had given utterance, although it was most frequently referred to by the Southern leaders. In his Peoria speech, Oct. 16th, 1854, [see Howell's Life of Lincoln, page 279,] he said: "What I do say is, that no man is good enough to govern another man without the other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American Republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident-that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights Govern ments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed.' 'I have quoted so much at this time merely to MR. DOOLITTLE'S SPEECH. 141 show that, according to our ancient faith, the pow- | reader is at liberty to make his own concluers of Government are derived from the consent of sions in the premises, and to say if these the governed. Now, the relation of master and slave mere opinions of the President were sufficient is, pro tanto, a total violation of the principle. The cause for the attempt to break up the master not only governs the slave without his conUnion. sent, but he governs him by a set of rules altogether different from those which he prescribes for himself. Allow all the governed an equal voice in the Gov These sentiments are, however, disarmed of their asserted "hostility," by their mere gen ernment; and that, and that only, is self-govern-erality, as well as by the fact that no Presi ment." In September, 1858, he further added to his opinions of the equality of men of all races and conditions: "That central idea in our poiitical system at the beginning was, and until recently continued to be, the equality of men. And although it was always submitted patiently to, whatever inequality there seemed to be, as a matter of actual necessity, its constant working has been a steady progress toward the practical equality of all men. "In what I have done I cannot claim to have acted from any peculiar consideration of the colored people as a separate and distinct class in the community, but from the simple conviction that all the individuals of that class are members of the community, and in virtue of their manhood entitled to every original right enjoyed by any other member. We feel, therefore, that all legal distinction between individuals of the same community, founded in any such circumstances as color, origin, and the like, are hostile to the genius of our institutions, and incom patible with the true history of American liberty. Slavery and oppression must cease, or American liberty must perish. "In Massachusetts, and in most, if not all, of the New England States, the colored man and the white are absolutely equal before the law. "In New York the colored man is restricted as to the right of suffrage by a property qualification. In other respects the same equality prevails. "I embrace with pleasure this opportunity of declaring my disapprobation of that clause of the Constitution (of Illinois) which denies to a portion of the colored people the right of suffrage. True Democracy makes no inquiry about the color of the skin, or place of nativity, or any other similar circumstance of condition. I regard, therefore, the exclusion of the colored people as a body from the elective franchise as incompatible with the true Democratic principle." This, we believe, was the record of the President-elect to which the South took most violent exceptions, and which its incendiary leaders used in their efforts to influence the popular mind to the point of revolution. The dent has power to change laws, to abrogate decisions, or to forestall Congressional Legislation. The Supreme Court is superior to him; the Constitution is superior to him; the House of Representatives is superior to him; his tenure of office is brief; and, even if he were Mahommedan or Brahmin, Monarchist or Socialist, he has no power to affect the laws of the land for evil. But, the President did not go before the people without a most specific record on all the great questions agitating the public mind. In considering charges of "hostility" to any section of the Union and its institutions, it is necessary to examine into his declarations in regard to individual acts and provisions which he may be called upon to enforce, and to scrutinize those views of public policy which he might seek to embody through the legislation of his partisans. We have, in his Freeport (Ill.) speech, Aug. 27th 1858, his replies to the questions put to him by his opponent, Mr. Douglas. These furnish us with his specific executive views at length. The questions and answers were as follows: 'Question 1. I desire to know whether Lincoln, today, stands, as he did in 1854, in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave law? Answer. I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave law. Q. I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged to-day, as he did in 1854, against the admission of any more Slave States into the Union, even if the people want them? A. I do not now, nor ever did, stand pledged against the admission of any more Slave States into the Union. Q. I want to know whether he stands pledged against the admission of a new State into the Union, with such a Constitution as the people of that State may see fit to make. A. I do not stand pledged against the admission of a new State into the Union, with such a Constitution as the people of that State may see fit to make. Q. I want to know whether he stands, to-day, pledged to the abolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia? A. I do not stand pledged to-day to the abolition become most cruel Slave-masters. of Slavery in the District of Columbia. of existence. We know that some Southern men do free their slaves, go North, and become tip-top Abolitionists; while some Northern ones go South, and Q. I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged to the prohibition of the slave trade between the different States? "When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of Slavery than we, I acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the insti tution exists, and that it is very difficult to get rid A. I do not stand pledged to the prohibition of the of it in any satisfactory way, I can understand and slave trade between the different States. Q. I desire to know whether he stands pledged to prohibit Slavery in all the Territories of the United States, north, as well as south, of the Missouri Compromise line? A. I am impliedly, if not expressly, pledged to a belief in the right and duty of Congress to prohibit Slavery in all the United States' Territories. Q. I desire him to answer whether he is opposed to the acquisition of any new Territory, unless Slavery is first prohibited therein? A. I am not generally opposed to honest acquisition of Territory, and in any given case I would or would not oppose such acquisition, accordingly as I might think such acquisition would or would not aggravate the Slavery question among ourselves." Lincoln's feelings towards the South. To this must be added his directly expressed views in regard to the South, his feelings toward it, his wishes regarding their prosperity, &c. These are stated clearly in his Peoria speech above quoted from:— "I think I have no prejudice against the Southern people. They are just what we would be in their situation. If Slavery did not now exist among them, they would not introduce it. If it did now exist among us, we should not instantly give it up. This I believe of the masses North and South. Doubtless there are individuals on both sides who would not hold slaves under any circumstances, and others who would gladly introduce Slavery anew if it were out appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame them for not doing what I should not know how to do my self. If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do as to the existing institution. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might be adopted; but for their tardiness in this, I will not undertake to judge our brethren in the South. * * * "When they remind us of their Constitutional rights, I acknowledge them, not greedily, but fully and fairly; and I would give them any legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives, which should not, in its stringency, be more likely to carry a free man into Slavery, than our ordinary criminal laws are to hang an innocent one." In the face of this solid array of testimony, directly on the point of interest, it is impossible for any candid judge to justify the Southern leaders' assumption of the hostility of the President elect as one prime cause of the rebellion. The bad use made of his abstract belief on points of general economy-the total suppression of his views, wishes, and purposes on the very points involved-if they effected the end designed, of plunging the country into the revolution, will but add another ineradicable witness to prove that the entire disunion movement was based upon a studied deception of the masses in the South. "WASHINGTON, Dec. 28th, 1860. "SIR:-We have the honor to transmit to you a copy of the full powers from the Convention of the people of South Carolina, under which we are authorized and empowered to treat with the Government of the United States for the delivery of the forts, magazines, lighthouses, and other real estate, with their appurtenances, within the limits of South Carolina, and also for an apportionment of the publie debt, and for a division of all the property held by the Government of the United States, as agent of the Confederated States, of which South Carolina was recently a member, and generally to negotiate as to all other measures and arrangements proper to be made and adopted in the existing relation of the parties, and for the continuance of peace and amity between this Commonwealth and the Government at Washington.' "In the execution of this trust, it is our duty to furnish you, as we now do, with an official copy of the Ordinance of Secession, by which the State of South Carolina has resumed the powers she delegated to the Government of the United States, and has declared her perfect sovereignty and independence. "It would also have been our duty to have informed you that we were ready to negotiate with you upon all such questions as are necessarily raised by the adoption of this ordinance, and that we were prepared to enter upon this negotiation with the earnest desire to avoid all unnecessary and hostile collision, and so to inaugurate our new relations as to secure mutual respect, general advantage, and a future of good will and harmony, beneficial to all the parties concerned. "But the events of the past twenty-four hours render such an assurance impossible. We came here the representatives of an authority which could at any time within the past sixty days have taken possession of the forts in Charleston harbor, but, upon pledges given in a manner that we cannot doubt, determined to trust to your honor rather than to its own power. Since our arrival, an officer of the United States, acting, as we are assured, not only without, but against your orders, has disman tled one fort, and occupied another, thus altering to a most important extent the condition of affairs under which we came. "Until these circumstances are explained in a manner which relieves us of all doubt as to the spirit in which these negotiations shall be conducted, we are forced to suspend all discussion as to any arrangements by which our mutual interests might be amicably adjusted. "And, in conclusion, we would urge upon you the immediate withdrawal of the troops from the harbor of Charleston. Under present circumstances, they are a standing menace which renders negotiation impossible, and, as our recent experience shows, threatens speedily to bring to a bloody issue questions which ought to be settled with temperance and judgment. "We have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servants, The President's An-wer. "To the President of the United States." To this the President replied as follows:— "WASHINGTON CITY, Dec. 30, 1860. "GENTLEMEN,-I have had the honor to receive your communication of 28th inst., together with a copy of your full powers from the Convention of the people of South Carolina,' authorizing you to treat with the Government of the United States, on various important subjects therein mentioned, and also a copy of the Ordinance, bearing date on the 20th inst., declaring that the Union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the United States of America is hereby dissolved.' The President's Answer. "In answer to this communication I have to say that my position, as President of the United States, was clearly defined, in the message to Congress on the 3d inst. In that I stated that,' apart from the execution of the laws, so far as this may be practicable, the Executive has no authority to decide what shall be the relations between the Federal Government and South Carolina. He has been invested with no such diseretion. He possesses no power to change the relations hitherto existing between them, much less to acknowledge the independence of that State. This would be to invest a mere executive officer with the power of recognizing the dissolution of the Confederacy among our thirty-three sovereign States. It bears no resemblabce to the recognition of a foreign de facto government, involving no such responsibility. Any attempt to do this would, on his part, be a naked act of usurpation. It is, therefore, my duty to submit to Congress the whole question, in all its bearings. Such is my opinion still. I could, therefore, meet you only as private gentlemen of the highest character, and was entirely willing to communicate to Congress any proposition you might have to make to that body upon the subject. Of this you were well aware. It was my earnest desire that such a disposition might be made of the whole subject by Congress, who alone possess the power, as to prevent the inauguration of a civil war between the parties in regard to the possession of the Federal forts in the harbor of Charleston; and I, therefore, deeply regret that, in your opinion, the events of the last twenty-four hours render this impossible.' In conclusion, you urge upon me the immediate withdrawal of the troops from the harbor of Charleston,' stating that, under present circumstances, they are a standing menace, which renders negotiation impossible, and, as our recent experience shows, threaten speedily to bring to a bloody issue questions which ought to be settled with temperance and judgment." "The reason for this change in your position is, that since your arrival in Washington, an officer of the United States, acting, as we (you) are assured, not only without, but against your (my) orders, has dismantled one fort and occupied another-thus altering to a most important extent the condition of affairs under which we (you) came.' You also allege that you came here, the representatives of an authority which could, at any time within the past sixty days, have taken possession of the forts in Charleston harbor, but which, upon pledges given in a manner that we (you) cannot doubt, determined to trust to your (my) honor, rather than to its power.' The President's Answer. "This brings me to a consideration of the nature of those alleged pledges, and in what manner they have been observed. In my Message of the 3d of December last, I stated, in regard to the property of the United States in South Carolina, that it has been purchased for a fair equivalent, by consent of the Legislature of the State, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, &c., and over these the authority to exercise exclusive legislation,' has been expressly granted by the Constitution to Congress. It is not believed that any attempt will be made to expel the United States from this property by force; but if in this I should prove to be mistaken, the officer in command of the forts has received orders to act strictly on the defensive. In such a contingency, the responsibility for consequences would rightfully rest upon the heads of the assailants.' This being the condition of the parties, on Saturday, 8th December, four of the Representatives from South Carolina called upon me, and requested an interview. We had an earnest conversation on the subject of these forts, and the best means of preventing a collision between the parties, for the purpose of sparing the effusion of blood. I suggested, for prudential reasons, that it would be best to put in writing what they said to me verbally. They did so, accordingly, and, on Monday morning, the 10th inst., three of them presented to me a paper signed by all the Representatives from South Carolina, with a single exception, of which the following is a copy: To His Excellency JAMES BUCHANAN, President of the United States: In compliance with our statement to you yesterday, we now express to you our strong convictions that neither the constituted authorities, nor any body of the people of the State of South Carolina, will either attack or molest the United States forts in the harbor of Charleston, previously to the act of the Convention, and we hope and believe not antil an offer has been made through an accredited representative, to negotiate for an amicable arrangement of all matters between the State and the Federal Government, provided that no reinforcements shall be sent into those forts, and their relative military status shall remain as at present. JOHN MCQUEEN, M. L. BONHAM, W. W. BOYCE, LAWRENCE M. KEITT. 'WASHINGTON, December 9, 1860.' "And here I must, in justice to myself, remark that at the time the paper was presented to me, I objected to the word 'provided,' as it might be |