oppression would be practiced; and they wisely resisted at the start. Now, sir, I take it for granted that Lincoln would resort to no overt acts in the first instance. I cannot conceive that he would have the folly to do so. I presume he would be conservative in his declarations, and I should attach just as much weight to them as I would to the soothing words and manner of a man who wanted to mount a wild horse, and who would not, until he was safely in the saddle, apply whip or spur. I take it for granted, when he comes in, he will make things as quiet as he can make them at first. I presume the policy of the party would be to endeavor to divide the South. They complain that abolition documents are not circulated there. They wish to have an opportunity, by circulating such things as Helper's book, of arraying the non-slaveholders and poor men against the wealthy. I have no doubt that would be their leading policy, and they would be very quiet about it. They want to get up that sort of "free debate" which has been put into practice in Texas, according to the Senator from New York, for he is reported to have said in one of his speeches in the Northwest, alluding to recent disturbances, to burnings and poisonings there, that Texas was excited by "free debate." Well, sir, a Senator from Texas told me the other day that a good many of these debaters were hanging up by the trees in that country. I have no doubt, also, they would run off slaves faster from the border States, and perhaps oblige the slave-owners to send them down further South, so as to make some of those States free States; and then, when the South was divided to some extent, the overt acts would come, and we should have, perhaps, a hard struggle to escape destruction.

Therefore, I maintain that our true policy is to meet this issue in limine; and I hope it will be done. If we can maintain our personal safety, let us hold on to the present government; if not, we must take care of ourselves at all hazards. I think this is the feeling that prevails in North Carolina. I have spoken of there being two parties there, but I may say to you, Mr. President, that that party which is for immediate action, is gaining strength rapidly. I do not believe there has been a meeting yet held in the State where there was a collision of opinion, that ultra resolutions have not been adopted. This feeling is not confined to either of the political parties which made a struggle there in the late elections. The current of resistance is running rapidly over the South. It is idle for men to shut their eyes to consequences like these. If anything can be done to avert the evil, let those who have the power do it. I will not now detain the Senate longer.

Mr. Crittenden. Mr. President, I regret that the honorable Senator from North Carolina has thought proper to make the speech which he has just addressed to the Senate. I did hope that we had all come together upon this occasion duly impressed with the solemnity of the business that would devolve upon us, duly impressed with the great dangers that were impending over our country, and especially with those dangers which threaten the existence of our Union. That was the temper in which I hoped we were now assembled. I hope this debate will proceed no further. The gentleman has hardly uttered a sentiment or an opinion in which I do not disagree with him-hardly

one, sir. I have hopes of the preservation of that Union under which I have so long lived; I have hopes that that Union which was the glory of our fathers will not become the shame of their children. But I rise here now, sir, not for the purpose of making a speech, and I intend to stick to my purpose. I wish the gentleman had stuck to his when he said he rose not to make a speech. I rise here to express the hope, and that alone, that the bad example of the gentleman will not be followed, and that we shall not allow ourselves now to be involved in an angry debate. We had better not have come here at all if that is our purpose. If we have not come here to give a deliberate and a solemn consideration to the grave questions are thrust upon us, we are not fit for the places which we occupy. This Union was established by great sacrifices; this Union is worthy of great sacrifices and great concessions for its maintenance; and I trust there is not a Senator here who is not willing to yield and to compromise much in order to preserve the government and the Union of the country.

I look forward with dismay and with something like despair to the condition of this country when the Union shall be stricken down, and we shall be turned loose again to speculate on the policies and on the foundation upon which we are to establish governments. I look at it, sir,,with a fear and trembling that predispose me to the most solemn considerations that I am possibly capable of feeling, to search out if it be possible, some means for the reconciliation of all the different sections and members of that Union, and see if we cannot again restore that harmony and that fraternity and that Union which once existed in this country, and which gave so much of blessing and so much of benefit to us all. I hope we shall not now engage in any irritating or angry debate. Our duties require of us very different dispositions of mind; and I trust none of us will allow ourselves to be irritated or provoked, or through any inadvertance involved in any angry or irritating discussions now. Calm consideration is demanded of us; a solemn duty is to be performed; not invectives to be pronounced; not passions to be aroused; not wrongs to be detailed and aggravated over and over again. Let us look to the future; let us look to the present only to see what are the dangers and what are remedies; and to appeal, for the adoption of these remedies, to the good feeling of every portion of this House. It is in that way only that we can arrive at a peaceable and satisfactory conclusion.

I will not now allude further to any of the questions which the gentleman has presented. I shall not discuss the question whether Mr. Lincoln's election be or be not a good cause for resistance. I tell you there is at least diversity, great diversity of opinion, which should make us regard it as a question for consideration. I do not believe there is a man in the State of Kentucky-we have parties there, we have divisions there-but I do not believe there is a man in Kentucky, of any party, that agrees with the gentleman on that question. We are all a Union-loving people, and we desire that all these dissensions may be healed, and a remedy applied to all the grievances of which we have a right to complain, and that there may be a restoration of peace and tranquility. That is what we desire. I hope, judging from

the general character of my friend from North Carolina, and judging from the noble character of the State which he represents here-a State that has always, while exhibiting the firmness that belongs properly to her, carried the olive branch in her hand constantly, and has taught peace, harmony, and union, heretofore in this country-I hope from him that, on reconsideration and calmer reflection, he will unite with us here in as true a spirit of union and devotion to the country as any man.

I am content, sir, that the gentleman's motion for printing the message shall be passed, and I will waive any remarks which I might have been disposed otherwise to make on that message. I do not agree that there is no power in the President to preserve the Union. I will say that now. If we have a Union at all, and if, as the President thinks, there is no right to secede on the part of any State, (and I agree with him in that,) I think there is a right to employ our power to preserve the Union. I do not say how we shall apply it, or under what circumstances we should apply it. I leave all that open. To say that no State has a right to secede, that it is a wrong to the Union, and yet that the Union has no right to interpose any obstacles to its succession, seems to me to be altogether contradictory.

Mr. Clingman. Mr. President, I occupy a different position towards the distinguished Senator from Kentucky from that which he occupies toward me. I approve of much that he says, though I regret, of course, that he does not agree with me on any of my points. I approve of his desire to see these questions harmoniously settled

of his wish to preserve the Union on honorable terms; but we differ as to the proper mode of doing it. It seems to me that ignoring these evils is like talking of health when a man is very ill. You must apply remedies that will reach the disease; and I have spoken, therefore, frankly my impression; and I think I shall be sustained by a vast majority of the people of my State in what I have now said. He is pleased to compliment the State, and I, as one of her representatives appreciate it. North Carolina was the last State but one to come into the Union; she hesitated a long while. I think she has shown great devotion to it; but whenever it ceases to protect her honor and provide for her safety, she will bid it farewell, though she may be reluctant to do so. The Senator no doubt knows, far better than I do, the feeling of Kentucky; but from what I have seen in all parts of the country in which I have been, I think this movement among the people will go on unless a remedy be applied.

Mr. Crittenden. It is to find that remedy that we are here.

Mr. Clingman. I think one of the wisest remarks that Mr. Calhoun ever made was, that the Union could not be saved by eulogies upon it. We have had eulogies upon the Union until they have been productive of mischief. The Abolitionists say that "the South cannot be kicked out of the Union," and Southern men say amen to it. I do not refer to the Senator; but I mean that the tone and language in the South has been calculated to encourage the Abolitionists, and render them only the more insolent and aggressive. It was, therefore, I

frankly made the declarations already uttered. I will join the honorable Senator, in good faith, in an effort to avert the evil that threatens us, if any fair prospect should be presented. Failing in this I will stand by my State in any effort she may find necessary to protect her interest and maintain her honor.

ANDREW JOHNSON.

At the time when Congress met such were the manifestations in the South that it seemed not improbable that most, if not all of the slaveholding States would secede. This prospect produced a profound impression upon the Northern mind and induced the Republicans to consider the best means of counteracting the movement. On meeting Senator Collamer, of Vermont, he said to me in a very kind manner, "You must let us know your terms, for we do not want to part with you." A prominent member of the House from New York said, "I have no doubt but that Kentucky and the whole South will go." The desire for a settlement seemed general among the Northern members. Mr. Crittenden moved with a view of settling the difficulties. His propositions were regarded with much favor. Even Mr. Toombs and Mr. Davis said that if his plan were adopted it would be satisfactory. The desire for settlement on some such basis seemed to pervade the minds of a majority of the Northern Senators.

The first check to this movement was caused by a speech of Andrew Johnson, in the Senate, delivered on the 18th and 19th of December. It is doubtful if in the history of the world there have been many speeches more effective in their consequences. This, however, was not at all owing to the contents of the speech itself. On the contrary, the effort was rather a collection of commonplace matters, and was, in fact, a mere repetition of newspaper articles of former years against secession, old campaign speeches and arguments, with all such things as were best calculated to revive old prejudices against South Carolina, &c. He insisted that force should be used against the people of the States, whether they were unanimous in seceding or not, just as General Washington had put down the whiskey insurrection in Pennsylvania. He quoted whatever he could lay his hands on that seemed best calculated to get up the strongest feeling of opposition against the Southern movement generally, &c. In his manner he was unusually vehement and vindictive, and especially denunciatory of "compromises."

The effect of the speech was, on the contrary, entirely due to the position and character of the speaker. The Senators all knew that he was a man not at all accustomed to give any attention to the public business of the country generally, except so far as he might hope to turn something to his personal advantage. In fact, they knew that he was, as a public man, governed mainly by one single principle, and that was "Andrew Johnsonism." Though they regarded him as a selfish demagogue, yet at the same time, they knew that he was a very cunning one. They felt confident, that he did not intend to be on the unpopular side of any important question, and they looked upon him as a good judge of what would be popular. There was among them a general conviction that he would not have taken such a position unless he felt confident that he would be sustained at home. In fact, most persons regarded him as a very good judge of popular feeling, and the earnestness with which

he spoke made it evident that he expected to be sustained by a majority of the people of the South, and in the end be on the winning side. Consequently there was at once manifested an entire change in the feelings of the Northern Senators. It was evident that they intended to pause for a time and see how far his position would be endorsed in the South.

Johnson was in several respects a peculiar, if not a remarkable man, in his qualities and career. The fact that it was generally understood that he had not enjoyed the advantages of an early education, caused men to estimate his efforts greatly above their intrinsic value. His voice and manner were rather disagreeable, and in his speeches themselves there was little original or striking. In fact, they were mainly made up of extracts and the opinions of others collected with care. He never acquired readiness enough as a speaker to take part in the running debates, but his replies were only made after many days preparation.

Persons occasionally praise his messages while President, without noticing the differences between his first message, which reminds one so much of Mr. Seward, and a powerful later one, which was popularly attributed to the pen Judge Black.

Johnson, however, possessed great industry, energy and perseverence, but the driving forces of his mind were selfishness, envy and malice. He was eminently of the class that Dr. Johnson would have denominated "a good hater." On one occasion Wm. T. Haskell, a brilliant member from Tennessee, was describing certain persons, and among them mentioned his colleague, Andrew Johnson. "He is," said he, "a man that if you and he happened, while travelling on opposite going railroad trains, to meet at a wayside hotel to eat a hasty meal, and if he should look across the table and see that the piece of bread by your plate was larger than his, he would hate you as long as he lived." Though this remark was an exaggeration, yet as caricatures often do, it illustrates a prominent feature.

Even Johnson's speeches for the Union were not so much characterized by love for it, as hatred of its enemies. During the earlier period of his service in Congress his speeches contained attacks on West Point as an aristocratic institution. After the Mexican war had rendered West Point popular, he changed his batteries and leveled them against the Smithsonian Institution; and after the new wings of the Capitol were erected, he assailed their costliness.

While he disliked all those who seemed to have any advantage over him, he was rather kind to those below him. Persons best acquainted with him say he was the reverse of liberal where his own means were to be used. His efforts for the "landless," as manifested in his homestead speeches have been mentioned as evidence of his benevolence. If so, however, it was the same kind of benevolence which in the latter days of the Roman Republic cansed ambitious men to distribute the public money among the populace, and which in modern times induces candidates on the morning of the election to set out "liberal treats.”

It is singular that Johnson should so frequently be spoken of in the papers as "honest." I cannot recollect that any President from Washington to Buchanan, inclusive, was ever commended especially for his honesty. Men no more thought of calling them honest than they do of saying that a lady in respectable American society is virtuous. In fact, it would have seemed rather an insult to one of the earlier Presidents to raise a question as to whether he would have improperly taken money. The circumstance that it was the subject of remark that Johnson would not improperly take money, or receive bribes, shows how much latterly opinions have changed with respect to public

men.