Skip to main content

Full text of "John Bell's record"

See other formats 


JOHN  BELL'S  REGOfiD. 


ROOMS  OF  THE  NATIONAL  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  OF  THE 

"  Constitutional  Uniok  Party," 
157  D  Street,  Washington,  July  31,  1860. 

A  full  exposition  of  Mr.  Bell's  course  on  the  Slavery  question,  from  the  commence  - 
ment  of  the  Abolition-petition  agitation  in  1835  down  to  the  termination  of  his  Congres- 
sional career  in  1859,  has  been  prepared  by  a  distinguished  gentleman  of  Tennessee, 
and  recently  published  at  Nashville,  by  the  Union  Committee  of  that  State. 

This  document  the  National  Executive  Committee  has  republished,  and  now  presents 
to  the  people  of  the  United  States.  It  will  be  found  to  contain  an  authentic  expression, 
from  his  own  speeches  and  votes,  of  Mr.  Bell's  opinions  on  the  Slavery  question  in  all 
its  aspects,  and  will  be  sufiBcient,  of  itself,  to  enable  every  supporter  of  Mr.  Bell,  every 
speaker  and  writer  who  proposes  to  take  an  active  part  in  the  Presidential  canvass,  to 
silence  any  man  who  may  charge  Mr.  Bell  with  ever  having  enunciated  a  prin- 
ciple or  advocated  a  doctrine  in  regard  to  Slavery,  whicli  should  render  him  unworthy 
of  the  confidence  .and  support  of  his  fellow-citizens,  in  any  section  of  our  country,  for  the 
higjiest  office  in  their  gift. 

^  By  order  of  the  Committee  : 

ALEXANDER  R.  BOTELER,  Chairman. 

W.  H.  Moom,  Printer. 


TO    THE    T^UBLIC. 


la  the  outset  of  the  political  canvass  for  the  Presidency  just  commenced,  it  is  thought 
important  by  the  undersigned,  who  are  the  Central  Union  Committee  of  Tennessee,  that 
a  fair  presentation  should  be  made  of  the  political  opinions  of  Mr.  Bell,  bearing  upon  the 
most  important  issues  now  before  the  country.  With  this  view  the  Editor  of  the  "Na- 
tional Union ''  has  carefully  collated  and  compiled  from  his  public  speeches,  acts  and 
writings,  such  extracts  as  might  most  fully  exhibit  him  in  his  character  of  statesman  and 
politician.  With  his  private  life  (though  in  all  respects  unblemished)  the  public  has  not 
so  much  to  do, 

Jn  his  public  life,  as  thus  exhibited,  we  think  he  has  shown  firmness,  forbearance, 
moderation,  foresight,  far  reaching  thought,  and  in  a  high  degree  the  spirit  of  concilia- 
tion and  compromise.  He  has  ever  shown  himself  a  son  of  the  Union,  a  Representative 
of  the  Nation,  of  comprehensive  mind  and  of  catholic  spirit.  See  what  he  has  done : 
hear  what  he  has  said.     By  his  acts  he  is  ready  to  be  judged. 

-•    '^'^' ii-uu  ,'.  .  ,.      ..     .--..,.--•     ■  EDWJN  H.  EWING, 

^noOeMK')  f;'-»;»i!nlKr'"t'»!ll'»tflwnh  .-.'^«r  rjj  r.V       NEILL  S.  BROWN, 

ALLEN  A.  HALL, 
JOHN  LELLYETT, 
P.  W.  MAXEY, 
HORACE  H.  HARRISON, 

Committee.- 
Nabhvillk,  Tenn.,  July,  I8C0, 

Mr.  Bell  entered  the  public  service,  as  a  Representative  in  Congress,  at  the  age  of 
thirty-one  years.  It  was  in  1827,  towards  the  close  of  the  Presidential  term  of  John 
Quihcy  Adams,  and  shortly  preceding  the  election  of  Gen.  Jackson  to  the  Presidency. 
During  the  marked  and  eventful  administration  of  the  latter,  many  great  and  exciting 
questions  arose  and  were  decided,  for  good  or  evil.  All  the  strong  passions  of  our  na- 
ture were  roused  and  brought  into  action  hy  the  greatest  talent  and  address  on  both 
sides,  and  the  very  fabric  of  the  governmenit  was  shaken  and  convulsed  to  its  centre. 

Though  acting,  throughout  this  exciting  period,  with  a  party,  with  the  principles  of 
which  he  in  the  main  agreed,  and  to  which,  so  far  as  principle  was  concerned,  he  was 
M^er  faithful,  yet,  Mr.  Bell  was  at  no  time  so  blindly  attached  to  the  one  party  or  opposed 
Co  the  other,  as  to  be  insensible  to  the  motives  which  probably  actuated  both.  More 
inteat  upon  watching  and  noting  the  peculiar  tendencies  of  our  system  of  government- — 
the  dangers  which  most  beset  it — the  points  most  exposed  to  attack,  and  those  to  be 
particularly  guarded — more  intent  upon  the  solution  of  these  problems,  than  zealous  in 
the  succefis  of  every  party  movement,  he,  at  times,  incurred  the  censure  of  some  of  his 
])arty  friends  for  what  appeared  to  them  indifference  to  the  interests  of  "  the  party." 

The  truth  i-o,  that  the  qualities  of  Mr.  Bell's  mind,  and  the  views  which,  at  a  very  early 
period  of  his  public  life,  he  formed  of  the  nature  and  tendencies  of  our  government,  and 
of  the  duties  of  American  statesmen,  utterly  disqualified  him  for  ever  becoming  the 
blind  follower  of  ajiy  party  leader,  however  great  and.distinguished,  or  a  successful  party 
Jcader  himself,  if  the  condition  of  such  leadership  were  a  ready  compliance  on  his  part 
with  all  the  dictates  of  mere  party  expediency. 

What  these  characteristic  qualities  of  Mr.  Bell'^  mind  are — what  his  views  of  the  ten- 
dencies and  dangers  pertaining  to  our  system  of  government  and  of  the  duties  of  Ameri- 
can statesmen — and  what  fthe  principles  which  have  governed  him  throughout  the  whole 
of  Ms  long  public  life,  can  he  .made  very  clearly  to  appear  by  reference  to  a  few  passages 
in  his  political  record: 


MR    BELL  LV   1829'/f-^''^;  -'-' 

Bis  Opinions  a*  to  Ihe  safest  mode  of  construing  the  Consfitution^the  Principle  of  CompTomise. 

The  following  passage  occurs  in  a  speech  delivered  bv  Mr.  Bell,  in  the  Hou^e  of  Hep- 
resentatives,  on  the  10th  of  February,  1829,  on  a  bill  fo'r  the  preservation  and  repair  of 
the  Cumberland  road  ; 

"  While  I  am  upon  the  subject  of  this  diversity  of  opinion  which  exists  as  to  the  safest 
mode  of  construing  the  Constitution,  I.  hope  it  will   not  be  considered   impror.er  or  pre- 
sumptuous in  me  to  make  a  remark  or  two  in  regard  to  the  two  great  parties  which  di- 
vide this  country  upon  all  (juestions  of  this  kind.     Thev  had   their  origin  as  far  back  'is 
the  tormation  of  the  Federal  compact.     Their  foundatio'us  were  laid  in  the  difference  (/' 
sentiment  which  prevailed  at  that  time,  as  to  the   wisdom  of  the  provisions  of  thu,  in- 
strument.    They  arc,  in  short,  the  fruit  of  that  discord  of  opinions  and  feelings   without 
a  compromise   of  M-hich   at  the  time,  we  should   have  had  no  Constitution  at  all.     One 
opinion  was,  that  sufficient  power  was  not  conferred    upon   the  Federal  Government  to 
assure  the  quiet,  happiness,  and  prosperity  of  the  couutry;  while  the  opinion  of  otbr-r-- 
was,  that  the  power  actually  conceded  would  prove   too  strong  for  the  preservation  of 
liberty.     The  most  zealous  and  active  of  the  partizans  on  both  sides,  never  abandoned 
their  creeds  ;  both  parties  became  sufficiently  powerful  to  propagate  their  opinions-  ard 
as  one  or  the  other  predominated  in  the  administration  of  the  Government,  a  tincture  of 
the  hivorable  notions  of  each  was  infused  into  its  measures.     Both  have  sou-dit  bv  con 
struction,  to  make  the  Constitution  what  thev  wished  it  to   be  in  fact:   ihe\'ne   bv  en- 
larging Its  powers  beyond  its  letter  and  spirit,  the  other  bv  narrowing  them  down  to  the 
standard  ol  their  wishes.     Although  it  will  be  seen  that  I  know  and  feel  what  p,'rtv  h'ls 
bad  the  ascendency  for  several  years  past,  and  where  the  great  danger  is   vet  it  may  be 
said  that  both  these  great  parties  are  in  some  degree  hostile,  not  to  liberty,  not  to  their 
country,  but  to  the  Constitution  as  it  is  written  ;  to  that  instrument  which  we  are  bound 
b.y  the  most  sacred  obligations  to  support;  to  that  instrument,  to  which,  for  one   I  am 
disposed  to  cling,  with  or  without  such  modifications  as  may  he  effected  by  amendment 
both  the  great  parties  to  which  1  have  alluded,  seem  to  me  to  have  abandoned  the  prin- 
cipe  of  comprormse.     I  would  adhere  to  it  as  the  only  principle  by  which  the  States  were 
able  to  agree  upon  any  compact,  and  without  an  acquiescence  in  which,  we  are  not  des- 
tined long  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  the  one  adopted.     He,  sir,  who  shall  renounce  the  «- 
tremes  of  both  these  great  parties,  as  dangerous  to  order  and  union  ;  he,  who,  by  his  talents 
experience  and  weight  of  characte-  shall  succeed  iu  placing  himself  c^  the  head  of  a  great 
constitutional  party,  and  shall  become  the  advocate  of  the  administration  of  the  ■Govern- 
ment upon  theprmciple  of  compromise,  as  it  was  understood   to  have  operated  in  the  for- 
mation of  the  Constitution,  will   deserve  the  highest  gratitude  of  his  country  ''     fSee 
Congressional  Debates,  vol.  5,  page  349.]  '  '         "■ 

It  cannot  but  be  regarded  as  a  most  extraordinary  coincidence,  that  more  than  thirty 
years  after  the  utterance  of  these  opinions,  "a  great  Constitutional  party"  should  rise 
up,  which,  '-renouncing  the  extremes"  of  both  the  other  great  parties  in  the  country 
^  as  dangerous  to  order  and  union,"  should  be  led  by  its  high  estimate  of  .Mr  BcKs 
''talents,  experience,  and  weight  of  character."  to  sele'ct  him  to  lead  them  in  a  contest 
for  "  the  administration  of  the  Government  upon  the  principle  of  compromise  as  is  was 
understood  to  have  operated  in  the  formation  of  the  Constitutioa ! " 


MR.  BELL  IN  183'^. 

His  Speech  on  the  Tariff,  June  8,  1832—^  Flea  for  the  Union— Uuti/  of  a  Representative. 

With  the  dangers  which  threatened  the  Union  in  1832,  in  consequence  of  the  intense 
disc_ontent  which  prevailed  in  the  southern  States,  and  particularly  in  South  Carolina 
at  the  working  of  the  protective  tariff,  many  of  our  readers  are  acquainted  To  this 
discontent  and  its  threatened  consequences,  Mr.  Clay  adverted  in  his  opening  speech  on 
the  subject  of  the  tariff,  in  the  Senate,  during  the  session  of  that  year.  In  allusion  to 
menaces  ot  disunion  which  had  been  heard  from  South  Carolina,  he  entreated  "  the 
patriotic  people"  of  that  State  "  to  pause,  solemnly  pause!  and  contemplate  the  frightful 
precipice  which  lay  before  them."  "  To  advance,  was  to  rush  on  certain  and  inevitable 
disgrace  and  destruction."  The  danger  to  the  Union,  however,  did  not  lie.  he  thought 
on  the  side  of  persistence  in  the  American  system,  but  in  that  of  its  abandonment! 
Could  It  be  expected  that  two-thirds,  if  not  three-fourths  of  the  people  of  the  United 


4 

States,  would  consent  to  the  destruction  of  a  policy  believed  to  be  indispensably  neces- 
sary to  their  prosperity  ?  Let  New  England,  the  West,  and  the  Middle  States,  together 
with  the  mammoth  States  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  become  firmly  persuaded  that 
their  industry  was  paralyzed  and  their  prosperity  blighted,  by  the  enforcement  of  the 
British  colonial  system,  under  the  delusive  name  of  free  trade — let  them  feel  that  they 
were  the  victims  of  a  mistaken  policy,  and  despair  of  any  favorable  change^  and  "  then, 
indeed,  might  we  tremble  for  a  continuance  of  the  Union." 

"  Here,"  in  the  language  of  an  eminent  statesman,  now  deceased,  "  was  an  appaling 
picture  presented :  dissolution  of  the  Union  on  either  hand;  and  one  or  tBe  other  of  the 
alternatives  obliged  to  be  taken.  If  persisted  in,  the  opponents  to  the  protective  system 
at  the  South  were  to  make  the  dissolution:  if  abandoned,  its  friends  at  the  North  were 
to  do  it!" 

With  this  brief  reference  to  the  condition  of  the  country  at  the  time,  we  shall  the 
better  appreciate  the  course  of  Mr.  Bell,  as  a  representative  in  Congress,  at  that  perilous 
crisis : 

"  This  debate,"  said  Mr.  Bell,  "  it  seems  to  me,  was  not  commenced  in  the  most  fortu- 
nate spirit,  nor  has  it  been  conducted  altogether  in  the  manner  which  the  nature  and 
intrinsic  delicacy  and  difficulty  of  the  subject  demanded.  A  disposition  has  been  mani- 
fested, and  sentiments  avowed  by  some  gentlemen,  equally  unexpected  and  abhorrent  to 
my  feelings.  It  has  been  openly  attempted  to  prejudice  this  question  by  holding  it  up 
as  a  contest  between  free  labor  and  slave  labor  ;  between  laboring  States  and  those  whose 
citizens,  it  is  alleged,  do  not  labor.  It  is  openly  and  vauntingly  proclaimed,  by  one  gen- 
tleman, to  the  complaining  sections  and  interests,  that,  if  they  shall  not  be  content  to 
abide  by  what  he  is  pleased  to  call  the  established  policy  of  the  country,  "  they  may 
take  the  consequences  !  "  Sir,  I  am  no  alarmist,  but  when  I  reflect  upon  all  I  see  and 
hear  connected  with  this  subject,  when  I  look  to  the  growing  distractions  of  the  country, 
I  feel  myself  justified  in  designating  the  sum  of  what  I  shall  say  upon  this  question,  as 
a  plea  for  the  Union!  Upon  such  a  subject — upon  an  occasion  so  interesting — I  shall  not 
consider  myself  as  the  representative  of  any  particular  section  or  interest;  I  shall  not 
consider  myself  either  as  a  tariff  or  anti-tariff  man.  I  claim  to  be  considered  and  to  be 
heard  as  a  representative  of  the  whole  country,  most  anxiously  concerned  for  its  perma- 
nent prosperity,  its  stability  and  glory.  I  claim  to  be  heard  as  the  advocate  of  higher 
interests  than  those  which  are  the  immediate  subject  of  consideration.  It  is  no  longer  a 
question  whether  the  farmer  shall  get  seventy-five  cents  or  one  dollar  and  twenty-five 
cents  a  bushel  for  his  wheat ;  whether  the  wool  grower  shall  receive  forty  or  seventy- 
five  cents  a  pound  for  his  wool ;  whether  the  planter  shall  get  eight  or  twelve  cents  a 
pound  for  his  cotton ;  or  whether  the  manufacturer  shall  make  twelve  and  a  half  or 
twenty  per  cent,  upon  his  capital.  The  interests  of  wool  and  of  woolens,  of  cotton,  of 
iron,  of  sugar,  and  of  the  whole  range  of  domestic  products,  sink  into  insignificance  in 
comparison  with  those  which  now  force  themselves  upon  our  attention,  and  claim  our 
guardian  care  and  protection.  The  interests  of  domestic  peace,  of  free  Government,  of 
liberty  itself,  are  involved  in  this  question." 

STATE    OF    THE    UNION   IN    1832. 

"  What,  then,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  the  state  of  the  Union?  In  a  time  of  profound  peace- 
*  *  *  *  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest  abundance  of  all  the  necessaries  and 
even  comforts  of  life,  that  God  in  his  providence  ever  decreed  to  be  the  rewards  of  virtue 
and  industry"  "  discontents,  jealousies,  and  rancorous  sectional  hates  have  arisen  and 
are  encouraged.  Fostered  by  these  unhappy  feelings,  disaffection  to  the  Government 
itself  makes  a  slow  but  steady  progress  in  the  hearts  of  thousands  of  honest  and  patri- 
otic citizens.  A  want  of  confidence  in  the  mutual  justice  and  forbearance  of  brethren  of 
the  same  political  family  manifests  itself.  Confidence  in  our  system,  consequently,  io 
every  quarter,  has  diminished  and  is  diminishing.  Men's  minds  are  set  to  work  in  new 
and  unwonted  channels,  and  upon  new  theories  of  Government,  for  a  country  of  such  a 
diversity  of  pursuits  and  interests  ;  upon  theories  thought  to  be  exploded,  or  rendered 
useless,  by  the  practical  operation  of  the  established  government,  until  lately.  The  value 
of  the  Union  itself,  its  date,  and  the  consequences  of  its  disruption,  begin  to  be  tolerated 
and  canvassed  in  private  discourse — nay,  in  public  debate  in  this  Hall,  when,  but  as  yes- 
terday in  the  period  of  our  existence  as  an  independent  people,  to  breathe  such  discourse 
would  have  been  thought  little  less  than  downright  blasphemy." 

Condition  of  Parties  in  1832 — Extreme  doctrines  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Supreme  Court  on 
the  one  hand  and  of  Nullification  on  the  other. 

"  It  is  now  more  than  forty  years,"  continued  Mr.  Bell,  "  since  the  adoption  of  the 
Constitution,  and  has  the  contest  between  the  original  elements  of  party,  as  I  have  de- 
scribed them,  ceased  ?    I  answer,  no !    The  war  between  them,  acquiring  new  vigor  from 


the  infusion  of  selfish,  political,  and  mercenary  calculation?,  on  both  sides,  has,  at  this 
moment,  reached  its  highest  and  most  critical  juncture.  In  some,  sections  the  whole 
country  is  in  a  state  of  mental  conflagration.  In  the  intensity  of  the  conflict  between 
the  extremes,  the  leaders  on  the  side  of  the  republican  or  vanquished  party — for  van- 
quished they  are — cry  out,  and  departing  from  the  sjnrit  of  the  Constitution,  proclaim  their 
determination  to  accept  no  compromise;  while,  on  the  other  side,  the  victors,  the  majority — 
that  majority  which  holds  the  destiny  of  this  country  in  their  hands,  more  calm,  equally 
determined,  but  with  less  excuse  or  reason,  announce  their  determination  to  yield 
nothing?  Yes,  sir,  in  the  face  of  an  imploring  country,  the  majority  proclaim  that  rather 
than  one  jotror  tittle  of  the  powers  they  exercise,  or  the  advantages  they  enjoy,  shall 
pass  away,  they  are  ready  to  stand  the  hazard  of  the  entire  overthrow  of  the  whole  fabric 
of  our  policy  and  of  our  glorious  Republic.  We,  too,  they  proclaim,  will  make  no  com- 
promise, and  '  let  the  minority  take  the  consequences  I '  This  is  the  language  of  those 
who  control  the  issues  of  all  that  is  dear  to  the  patriot,  and  who  are  able  to  dictate  the 
pages  of  the  future  history  of  this  country.  It  is  not  surprising  that  in  a  contest  which 
menaces  the  repose  of  the  country,  the  leaders,  on  both  sides,  should  start  new  and  un- 
tried theories,  for  the  purpose  of  effecting  their  respective  objects.  Accordingly,  we  find 
that  on  the  side  of  the  victors,  in  order  to  secure  the  benefits  of  their  conquest  forever, 
the  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Supreme  Court  is  avowed  as  the  only  means  of 
securing  the  stability  of  the  Government.  On  the  side  of  the  vanquished  or  republican 
])arty,  the  doctrine  of  nullification  has  been  invented,  and  is  proclaimed  as  the  only 
infallible  mode  of  efifecting  the  same  object.  These  are  the  tests  to  which  all  questions 
of  power  under  the  Federal  Government  are  proposed  to  be  brought  for  final  decision. 
But  is  it  not  manifest  that  both  these  newly  invented  doctrines  are  equally  hostile  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Constitution  ?  Not  to  the  Union,  for  both  parties,  I  verily  believe,  are  friendly 
to  the  Union,  but  to  a  Union  upon  their  own  terms!  Is  it  not  manifest  that  this  is  a  con- 
test between  two  extremes,  equally  distant  from  the  true  medium  point  of  the  Constitu- 
tion?" 

Importance  to  the  country  of  a  Middle  or  Moderate  party. — Moderation  aiid  Compromise  the 
only  salvation  for  the  Country. 

"  Mr.  Chairman,  in  the  almost  interminable  waste  of  hqpe  which  lies  before  us,  there 
is  one  bright  spot  to  which  the  patriot  may  direct  his  eye,  in  some  confidence  that  relief 
may  come.  In  all  the  past  civil  strifes  and  revolutions  which  have  agitated  this  countrj', 
and  sometimes  threatened  its  institutions,  there  has  always  been  a  moderate  party  of 
suSicient  strength  and  influence  to  turn  the  balance  between  the  extremes,  and  to  impress 
upon  the  action  of  the  Government  some  portion  of  that  spirit  of  moderation  and  compro- 
mise which  are  characteristic  of  the  constitution  itself.  This  middle  er  moderate  party  is 
never  in  much  esteem  with  the  extremes  on  either  side.  It  is  said  to  be  composed  of 
men  who  are  more  disposed  to  submit  to  oppression,  than  to  preserve  unimpaired  the 
rights  of  freemen.  Still,  to  this  party  I  choose  to  cling  ;  and  we  shall  see  who  will  prove 
the  stoutest  defenders  of  the  liberties  of  the  country.  This  party  has  always  found  its 
support  in  the  good  sense  and  moderation  of  the  great  body  of  the  people.  It  has,  in 
fact,  owed  its  existence  to  the  sound  practical  judgment  and  good  feeling  v.-hich,  I  trust, 
notwithstanding  the  vices  of  the  time,  still  constitute  the  leading  traits  in  the  American 
population.  It  has  been  the  sound,  uncorrupted  sentiment  of  the  great  bndy  of  the 
American  people,  which  has  always,  heretofore,  stepped  in  between  the  comb  itant  lead.- 
ers,  and  brought  them  to  terms  of  compromise.  It  is  this  public  sentiment  which  has 
still  caused  the  republican  party,  when  in  power,  to  become  less  rigid  in  their  construc- 
tion of  the  Constitution,  than  when  in  opposition.  It  is  the  same  public  sentiment  which, 
when  the  federal  party,  being  in  power,  have  indulged  their  enlarging  propensities  too 
fiir,  either  displaced  them,  or  restrained  their  action  within  reasonable  limits.  I  trust 
there  yet  remains  a  portion  of  that  pure  and  unaffected  public  sentiment  to  preserve  the 
country  from  the  confusion  and  discord  which  now  menace  it.  The  contest  may  become 
even  more  violent.  What  to-day  is  only  a  breeze  of  popular  discontent,  may  to-morrow 
swell  into  a  very  tornado,  threatening  to  overthrow  and  prostrate  in  the  dust  all  the 
sacred  edifices  dedicated  to  freedom  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  I  But  still  my  trust  is 
in  the  solidity  of  the-ir  foundations." 

The  duties  of  American  statesmen. 

"  To  calm,''  said  Mr.  Bell,  "  the  rising  elements  of  discontent ;  to  assuage  the  feverish 
symptoms  of  the  body  politic,  is  the  business  of  every  American  statesman.  An  Ameri- 
can statesman !  Who  and  what  are  the  duties  and  attributes  of  an  American  statesman 
at  this  day?     They  are,  or  they  ought  to  account  themselves  the  high-priests  of  liberty, 


6 

a'iiniu!rtii;r\ug  her  rights  tor  the  benefit  of  her  disciples  in  every  country  ;  for  this  favor- 
ite people  first,  and  then  for  all  nations,  tiuch  is  the  high  and  noble  ca'lHng  of  an  Amer- 
ican statesman.  What  is  the  first  great  care  of  an  American  statesman?  To  preserve 
our  free  in!<tituHons.  1  will  not  go  into  an  argument  to  show  that  the  only  effective  mode  of 
discharging  tJm  great  tm'st  i^  to  preserve  and  cherish  the  Union.  That  is  an  axion  in  Ameri- 
can politic.-;,  I  trust,  too  firmly  established  to  be  09-erthrown  by  the  theories  of  any  new 
professors  in  the  science,  however  distinguished  for  genius  and  talents.  What  is  the 
next  great  duty  of  American  statesmen?  tio  to  administer  their  ofhces  as  to  secure  com- 
fort and  happiness  to  the  greatest  possible  number  of  the  citizens  of  this  free  country. 
These  are  the  wh'olc  law  and  the  prophets  for  the  guidance  of  our  statesmen.  These  are 
the  sum  of  all  the  commandments  in  the  book  of  our  political  faith." 

Majorities  and  Miyiorilies. — He  counsels  mutual  concession  for  the  safety  of  the  Union. 
"  I  maintain  that  each  representative  is,  by  the  theory  of  the  Government,  a  repre- 
.■^entative  of  the  whole  people  of  the  (,'nited  States  ;  that  the  principle  of  a  representation 
by  .State.-^  or  districts  was  adopted  for  convenience  in  making  the  selection  of  representa- 
tives by  the  people,  and  for  the  purpose  of  securing  to  the  National  Legislature  that 
knowledge  of  the  interests,  sentiments,  and  condition  of  the'  whole  country,  which  can 
be  only  had  through  a  representative  chosen  by  each  small  section  or  district.  The  in- 
t'lests  and  conditions  of  each  section  are  entitled  to  be  considered  and  respected  in  the 
l''gislative  enactments,  but  only  in  the  proportion  which  they  hear  to  the  aggregate  in- 
terests and  sections.  It  may  and  often  must  happen  in  the  career  of  this  Government, 
without  any  concert  or  design,  that  a  majority,  either  large  or  small,  shall  fashion  the 
legislation  of  the  country  and  administer  the  Government  in  reference  to  their  own  in- 
terests, without  a  'due  regard  to  the  interests  and  condition  of  sections  represented  by 
the  minority;  but  this  is  an  evil  which  is  necessarily  incidental  to  all  societies  and  all 
governments,  great  or  small.  But,  sir,  Avhen,  in  this  country,  a  majority  of  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  different  sections  in  Congress  shall  admit  the  principle,  and  establish  it 
in  practice,  that  it  is  their  right  and  privilege  to  consult  the  interests  and  prosperity  of 
the  sections  and  ijiterests  which  they  represent  exclusively,  from  that  moment  the  action 
of  the  Government  becomes  vicious  and  tyrannical.  Congress  can  no  longer  be  held  up 
as  the  great  council  in  which  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  whole  people  may  be  con- 
sulted. The  Government  ceases  to  fulfill  the  ends  of  its  creation,  and  the  proscribed 
interests  and  sections  must  bf  expected  to  redress  their  grievances  in  any  manner  they 
are  able.  There  is  no  example  in  history  of  the  submission  of  a  minority,  under  such 
circumstances,  when  it  had  the  power  of  redress.  Whether  those  in  the  minority  shall 
be  able  to  redress  the  grievances  in  any  way,  always  depends  upon  circumstances.  In 
the  present  case,  I  know  not  whether  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  good  or  evil  fortune,  that 
the  proscribed  interests  and  sections  lie  in  a  compact  form,  constituting  many  contigu- 
ous States,  giving  them  facilities  for  redress  which  no  other  circumstances  could  afford. 
If  the  present  action  of  the  Government  is  to  continue  with  unabated  energy  and  vigor, 
it  is  surely  fortunate  that  the  means  of  redress  are  convenient  and  acceptable  to  the  op- 
pressed interests;  but  if  under  the  smart  of  temporary  injustice  the  bands  which  bind  the 
Union  shall  be  precipitately  sundered,  all  earth  may  well  deplore  and  curse  the  fatal 
facilitie*  for  so  instant  and  fatal  a  remedy.  I  trust  there  is  no  settled  purpose  in  any 
portion  of  the  oppressed  sections,  to  avail  themselves  of  the  means  of  redress  which  they 
may  have  at  their  disposal ;  but  I  conjure  those  who  sway  the  power  of  the  House,  seri'- 
ously  and  earnestly  to  consider  the  alternative  of  modifying  a  system  of  policy  sustained 
upon  the  principle  1  have  described,  or  of  beholding,  sooner  or  later,  the  Union  broken 
up,  and  this  last  and  noblest  sanctuary  of  freedom  polluted  and  destroyed.  I  trust  I  do 
not  offend  by  lifting  up  an  admonitory  voice  upon  this  subject  at  this  alarming  juncture 
of  our  affairs.  I  speak  in  the  sincerity  and  with  the  fervency  which  belong  to  the  rep- 
resentatives of  a  portion  of  the  people  of  this  country,  who,  so  far  from  having  any  dis- 
position to  countenance  disunion,  regard  such  a  catastrophe  as  the  last  and  direst 
calamity  which  fate  can  have  in  store  for  their  country,  short  of  absolute  slavery  and 
oppression.  But  they  cannot  close  their  eyes  to  the  dangers  which  stare  them  in  the 
face,  and  they  invoke,  through  me,  their  brethren  everywhere — of  every  quarter  of  the 
country,  of  every  party  and  of  every  pursuit — to  concede  something  to  this  greatest  common 
interest,  the  safety  of  the  Union." 

Jn  the  same  speech  from  which  the  foregoing  extracts  are  taken,  Mr.  Bell  said,  the 
"immediate  and  practical  question"  before  Congress  and  the  country  was  as  to  "the 
degree  of  protection  which  ought  to  be  given  to  manufactures,  under  all  the  circumstances 
of  the  country" — whether  the  then  existing  tariff  system  should  be  "enforced  with  rigor, 
or  in  a  spirit  of.i'oncessiou  and  moderation."  Believing  the  system  to  have  been  pushed 
to  an  extreme,  and  seeing,  as  he  said,  that  it  had  "been  the  means  of  bringing  the  country 
to  the  very  verge  of  disunion,"  he  expressed  his  "strong  conviction  of  the  necessity,  in 


the  existing  state  of  the  country,  of  modifying  it."  It  was  modified  by  the  celebrated 
Compromise  Tariff  Act,  which  was  passed  very  shortly  afterwaajfls.  When,  however, 
under  the  practical  workings  of  this  act,  the  degree  of  protection  afforded  by  it,  fell 
below  "a  just  and  expedient  standard,"  Mr.  Bell  favored  the  policy  of  raising  it  to  that 
standard. 

Extremt*  of  Party  in  1 832. —Nullification  and  the  Force  Bill. 

Three  years  afterwards,  in  his  celebrated  speech  at  VauxhfiU,  Nashville,  referring  to 
the  excesses  to  which  the  protective  system  had  been  carried — to  Nullification  which 
grew  out  of  those  excesses,  and  to  the  Force  Bill  which  grew  out  of  Nullification,  Mr. 
Bell  said: 

"I  have  not  yet  shown  how  it  happened,  that  the  questions  which  have  arisen  within 
the  last  ten  years  came  to  excite  so  unusual  a  degree  of  heat  and  violence.  Need  I  at- 
tempt this  seriously?  What!  have  we  so  soon  forgotten,  that  while  the  party  to  which 
we  belong  [the  Jackson  party;]  while  it  was  contending  for  the  mastery,  and  even  for 
years  afterwards,  in  some  of  the  large  States  in  which  the  contest  was  most  fierce  and 
doubtful,  each  party,  one  in  order  to  gain,  and  the  other  to  maintain,  party  ascendency, 
and  both  utterly  regardless  of  all  other  consequences,  contended  which  should  go  farthest 
in  the  support  of  both  branches  of  the  American  system,  the  tariff  and  internal  improve- 
ment? In  all  history,  there  is  not  a  more  striking  and  characteristic  instance  of  the 
absurd  and  headstrong  spirit  of  party.  In  regard  to  the  tariff,  all  men  of  unprejudiced 
feelings  and  judgment  must  have  seen,  and  did  see,  from  the  first,  that  the  result  would 
be  either  a  re-action  which  might  reduce  it  below  a  just  and  expedient  standard,  or  that 
the  Union  itself  would  be  severed.  The  immediate  consequences  of  the  extremes  into 
which  the  supporters  of  the  tariff,  in  one  section  of  the  Union,  were  driven,  in  a  struggle 
for  political  power,  was  to  excite  an  extreme  antagonist  action  in  another  section.  The 
leaders  in  the  anti-tariff  region  sought  to  counteract  the  excesses  to  which  they  saw  the 
protective  policy  was  likely  to  be  carried  by  a  combination  in  its  favor,  between  both 
political  partiesto  the  North  and  East,  thought  it  necessary  to  proceed  to  equal  or  greater 
extremes  in  order  to  protect  the  interests  of  the  minority  to  the  South.  This  state  of 
parties  gave  birth  to  Nullification,  by  which  the  projectors  of  it  sought  to  equalize  the 
action  of  the  Government,  by  questioning  the  validity  of  its  regular  enactments,  and 
seeking  to  set  them  aside  upon  the  authority  of  a  separate  State  and  local  construction 
of  the  Federal  power.  Before  a  sufficient  time  was  allowed  for  reason  to  resume  her 
sway,  in  correcting  the  excesses  into  which  the  spirit  of  party  had  hurried  both  sides,  so 
many  political  interests,  so  many  personal  views  and  resentments  commingled  in  the 
strife,  that  an  erAreme  remedial  action  [the  Force  Bill]  of  the  Government  itself  became 
a  necesnart/  expedient,  in  the  Judgment  of  moderate  and  unprejudiced  men,  though  involving  in 
its  issues  civil  war,  disunion,  and  a  total  overthrow  of  the  Constitution." 


:f  ,-lo';    -J.-lj/ii 


MR.  BELL  IN  1835. 
Extracts  from  a  Speech  delivered  at  Vauxhall,  Nashville,  on  the  2'Sd  of  lifdi/,  T!?35. 

KXCESSE3    OF    PAKTY. 


"It  will  be  a  circumstance,  in  my  course,  to  which,  as  long  as  I  lire,  I  can  nvert  with 
conscious  satisfaction,  that  I  have  ever  opposed  what  appeared  to  me  to  be  tli'i  excesses 
in  the  party  with  which  I  have  acted,  with  all  the  influence  I  could  employ,  .md  in  the 
only  way  in  which  I  could  do  so  without  injury  to  its  principles.  While  I  have  studied 
to  make  myself  useful,  I  have  never  set  myself  up  as  a  leader  of  (he  party,  or  of  a  party." 

Moderation  and  a  Spirit  of  Conciliation  indispensably  necessary  in  the  Administration  of  the 

Government.  , 

'•I  have  said  that  there  was  nothing  in  the  questions  which  have  arisen  within  the  last 
eight  or  ten  years  in  this  country,  necessarily  productive  of  the  extremes  to  which  they 
have  been  carried.  1  re-affirm  the  proposition.  Nor  is  there,  from  my  observation,  in 
the  federative  feature  of  our  system,  or  in  the  extent  of  territory  over  which  it  operates, 
or  even  in  the  institution  of  slavery  itself,  as  established  in  some  of  the  States,  taken 
together,  or  separately  considered,  which  essentially  impairs  the  prospects  of  harmony, 
duration,  and  a  prosperous  action  of  our  system.  If  we  except  the  danger  to  the  local 
society  into  which  slavery  is  admitted,  there  is  no  peculiarity  in  our  condition  from 
which  we  have  anything  to  fear,  except  in  connection  with  the  designs  of  bad  men,  who  have, 
or  may  acquire,  an  ascendency  in  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  parties,  which  must  ever 
have  a  decided  influence  upon  the  action  of  the  Government.     Even,  then,  some  of  these 


peculiarities  are  useful  rather  than  injurious.  They  present  formidable  obstacles  to  the 
consolidation  of  powflf  in  any  one  set  of  men,  or  any  party,  founded  upon  unworthy  or 
bad  motives  and  principles.  As  long  as  moderation  and  the  spirit  of  conciliation 
shall  preside  over  the  administration  of  the  federal  government,  any  faction  which  shall 
seek  to  divide  the  Union,  either  by  rousing  a  sense  of  injustice  and  inequality  in  the 
action  of  the  government  in  one  section,  or  by  seizing  upon  the  delicate  and  inflammable 
question  of  slavery  in  the  other,  can  always  be  shorn  of  its  strength  and  defeated  in  its 
object,  without  the  slightest  convulsive  sensation  in  our  system." 

The  Real  Danger  to  our  System  of  Oovernment. 

"  The  real  danger  to  our  system,  as  in  every  other  system  of  free  Government,  is  a 
violent  party  action  of  the  government  itself.  A  proscribed  and  disregarded  minority,  re- 
spectable for  its  numbers,  its  talents — and  even  for  the  virtues  of  many  of  its  members, 
for  virtue  is  never  the  exclusive  attribute  of  any  one  party — such  a  minority  is  always 
tempted,  in  resentment  for  its  real  or  imaginary  wrongs,  in  redress  for  its  violated  privi- 
leges as  American  citizens,  in  being  deprived  of  all  actual  participation  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country — compelled  to  obey  laws  and  be  the  subjects  of  a  policy,  prescribed 
and  directed  exclusively  by  their  opponents ;  such  a  minority,  I  repeat,  is  constantly 
tempted  to  seize  upon  every  vexed  and  irritating  question,  to  make  common  cause  with 
the  spirit  of  fanaticism  itself  in  an  effort  to  right,  or  at  all  events,  to  avenge  their  inju- 
ries.    This  is  the  danger  of  our  system." 


MR.  BELL  AND  THE  SLAVERY  QUESTION— 1840. 
abolition  petitions. 

The  reader  will  note  the  difference  between  rejecting  the  prayer  of  a  petition,  and  re- 
jecting or  refusing  to  receive  the  petition  itself.  When,  in  1790,  three  years  after  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution,  the  Society  of  Friends,  of  Pennsylvania,  forwarded  a  peti- 
tion to  Congress  praying  its  interference  with  the  African  slave  trade,  the  petition  was 
received^  although  it  contained  an  unconstitutional  request — Congress  being  expressly 
prohibited  by  the  Constitution,  for  twenty  years  to  come,  from  meddling  with  the  slave 
trade.  No  question  as  to  the  reception  of  this  petition  was  made,  although  its  reference 
or  commitment  to  a  committee,  with  a  view  to  its  being  reported  upon,  was  vehemently 
opposed  by  some  of  the  Southern  members,  on  the  ground  that  it  asked  Congress  to  do 
that  which  was  unconstitutional.     Mr.  Madison  advocated  its  reference : 

"Gentlemen,"  he  said,  '/might  vote  for  the  commitment  [or  reference]  of  the  petition 
without  any  intention  of  supporting  the  prayer  of  it." 

On  a  subsequent  day,  the  debate  still  continuing,  Mr.  Madison  said : 

"The  debate  has  taken  a  serious  turn,  and  it  will  be  owing  to  this  alone,  if  an  alarm 
is  created ;  for,  had  the  memorial  been  treated  in  the  usual  way,  it  would  have  been 
considered  as  a  matter  of  course,  and  a  report  might  have  been  made  so  as  to  have 
given  general  satisfaction.  *         *  *  *  -x-  *         *  xhe  petition 

prayed  in  general  terms,  for  the  interference  of  Congress,  so  far  as  they  were  constitu- 
tionally authorized ;  but  even  if  its  prayer  was  in  some  degree  unconstitutional,  it  might 
be  committed,  as  was  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Churchman's  petition,  one  part  of  which  was 
supposed  to  apply  for  an  unconstitutional  interference  by  the  General  Government." 

From  1*790  down  to  1335,  when  the  question  of  the  reception  of  abolition  petitions  was 
first  made  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  all  petitions,  couched  in  decorous  and  respect- 
ful terms,  were  received  by  Congress,  whatever  their  subject  matter  might  be.  This  fact 
was  stated  by  the  late  Felix  Grundy,  in  a  speech  made  by  him,  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States,  on  the  2d  of  March,  1836,  from  which  the  following  is  an  extract: 

MR.    GRUNDY    ON    ABOLITION    PETITIONS. 

"  Therefore,  if  there  were  no  constitutional  doubts  existing,  (as  to  the  right  of  Con- 
gress to  refuse  to  receive  the  petitions,)  he  would,  as  a  matter  of  expediency,  vote  to  re- 
ceive the  petitions,  to  be  followed  up  with  a  vote  to  reject  their  prayer.  But  he  con- 
fessed that  the  Constitutional  right  to  refuse  to  receive  a  petition  was  very  far  from 
being  clear.  The  right  of  petition  existed  before  the  formation  of  the  Constitution.  It 
was  well  understood  by  the  frameTs  of  that  instrument ;  and  although  it  only  declares 
that  Congress  shall  pass  no  laws  to  prevent  citizens  from  peaceably  assembling  and  pe- 
titioning for  a  redress  of  grievances,  it  never  could  have  entered  into  their  minds,  that 
those  to  whom  the  petitions  were  to  be  addressed  would  refuse  to  receive  them.     Of  what 


value  is  the  right  of  petition,  if  those  to  whom  petitions  are  addressed  mil  not  receive 
them,  and  act  upon  them?  The  framers  of  the  Constitution  remembered  that  the  Parlia- 
ment of  Great  Britain  had  passed  liAvs  prohibiting  citizens  from  assembling,  consulting, 
and  petitioning  for  a  redress  of  grievances.  They  recollected  the  acts,  commonly  called 
the  riot  acts,  and  therefore  they  inserted  the  provision  contained  in  the  Constitution. 
But  it  never  entered  into  their  minds  that  petitions,  when  signed,  would  not  be  received 
by  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed.  It  was  a  matter  of  very  little  consaguence  to 
citizens  that  they  are  permitted  to  assemble  and  petition  for  a  redress  of  gn*'ances,  if, 
after  they  have  done  so,  their  petitions  are  not  to  be  received  or  considered  by  those 
who  have  the  power  to  act  upon  the  subject-matter  of  the  petition.  To  his  mind  these 
arguments  were  too  strong  to  be  disregarded';  and  he  was  unwilling  to  give  the  Aboli- 
tionists the  benefit  of  them.  At  present  they  have  no  foundation  on  which  to  stand. 
They  are  giving  way  to  the  pressure  of  the  public  intelligence  in  the  non-holding  States. 
But  if  we  shall  enable  them  to  blend  the  right  of  petition  with  their  abolition  schemes, 
they  may  raise  a  storm  which  will  shake  the  very  foundation  of  this  Government.  From 
the  year  1790  down  to  the  present  day,  all  petitions  have  been  received  by  this  body 
which  were  respectful  and  decorous,  whatever  the  subject-matter  of  the  petition  might 
be;  and  at  every  session,  the  petition  of  the  Society  of  Friends,  clothed  in  similar  lan- 
guage with  the  present  one,  has  been  received.  Mr.  G.  would  not  depart  now  from  the 
established  usage.  He  considered  the  reception  of  the  petition  and  the  rejection  of  the 
prayer  as  the  strongest  course  against  abolition  that  could  be  adopted." 

To  the  same  conclusion  with  Mr.  Grundy — namely,  that  the  petitions  ought  to  be  re- 
ceived and  acted  upon,  came  Mr.  Bell,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  following  extract  of  a  letter 
written  by  him  to  the  late  Hon.  Geo.  R.  Gilmer,  of  Georgia,  in  1840,  and  published  in  a 
number  of  the  newspapers  of  the  day  : 

MR.  BELL    IN    1840 ABOLITION    PETITIONS, 

"When  the'abolitionmoYement'at  the  North  had  reached  a  point  of  excitement  which 
began  to  be  felt  in  Congress,  I  was  actively  engaged  in  the  canvass  between  Judge  White 
and  Mr.  Van  Burcn.  The  question  was  of  such  a  nature  as  to  render  it  almost  imppssi- 
ble,  in  an  assembly  composed  of  so  many  ardent  and  impulsive  spirits  as  the  Congress 
of  the  United  States,  that  it  should  not  become,  in  some  shape  or  degree,  connected  with 
the  party  conflicts  of  the  day.  Some  of  my  most  valued  and  cherished  friends  thought 
Mr.  Van  Buren  fairly  and  justly  assailable  in  the  South,  on  the  ground  of  his  vote  to  in- 
struct the  Senators  of  New  York  against  the  admission  of  Missouri.  The  favor  which 
his  friends  and  supporters  at  that  time  showed  to  abolition  petitions,  by  voting  for  their 
reception,  and  also  for  their  reference  under  Pincknej^'s  resolution,  appeared  to  them  to 
afford  a  proper  ground  of  attack  before  the  people.  I  remonstrated  earnestly  with  my 
friends  against  the  policy  of  such  a  course,  and  against  any  proceeding  whatever  which 
might  tend  to  bring  about  a  division  of  parties,  to  any  extent,  upon  such  a  delicate,  not 
to  say  dangerous  issue.         ***-x-****-5(-** 

"At  the  period  to  which  I  refer,  (1836,)  the  opposition  to  Mr.  Van  Buren  in  the  South 
and  Southwest,  with  few  exceptions,  took  the  position  that  the  right  of  petition  did  not 
exist  in  this  case.  This  opinion  was  maintained  upon  the  ground  that  Congress  had  no 
right  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia  ;  and  it  was  contended  that  a  peti- 
tion to  do  an  unconstitutional  act  was  not  entitled  to  notice,  and  ought  not  to  be  re- 
ceived. The  argument  was  carried  still  further.  It  was  strenuously  urged  that  the  ad- 
mission of  the  power  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  district  would  be  fatal  to  the  South. 

"  My  opinion  was,  that  whether  the  petitioners  had  strict  right  on  their  side  or  not, 
sound  policy  dictated  the  reception  and  reference  of  their  petitions.  I  believed  that  any 
unusual  course  in  regard  to  them  would  give  undue  importance  to  the  movements  of  the 
abolitionists,  furnish  new  ground  for  agitation,  and  rather  increase  the  existing  excite- 
ment than  allay  it." 

Under  these  convictions,  Mr.  Bell  only,  of  all  the  southern  representatives  in  Congress, 
(save  Mr.  Bouldin,  of  Vii'ginia,)  voted  against  the  second  clause  of  the  fifth  of 

THK    ATHEP.TON   RESOLnTIONS, 

which  provided,  that  all  petitions  "  relating  in  any  way  or  to  any  extent  whatever  to 
slavery  as  aforesaid,  or  the  abolition  thereof,  should,  on  the  presentation  thereof,  with- 
out any  further  action  thcroon,  be  laid  on  the  table,  without  being  debated,  printed,  or 
referred." 

The  origin  of  these  Atherton  resolutions  was  as  follows :  On  the  night  of  the  8th  of 
December,  1838 — Martin  Van  Buren  being  President — there  was  a  meeting  in  Washing- 
ton of  a  few  administration  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  from  the  South  and 


10 

a  few  from  tbe  Nortt.  The  meeting  was  called  at  the  instance  of  the  Hon.  R  B  Rhett 
of  South  Carolina,  who,  since  the  days  of  nullification,  has  had  the  strongest  proclivities 
towards  disunion,  and  is  now  an  open  disunionist,  to  consider  certain  resolutions  which 
(he  had  prepared  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  The  resolutions  were  considered  and  adopted 
ajid  as  It  was  deemed  expedient  that  they  should  be  oflfered  by  a  northern  man  Mr' 
Atherton,  of  New  Hami>shire,  was  selected  for  that  purpose.  Accordingly,  he  presented 
them  to  the  House  three  days  afterwards,  made  a  speech  explanatorv  o/  his  reasons  for 
•Gftenng  tliem,  and  concluded  by  calling  the  previous  question,  so  as"to  cut  off  all  debate 
^n.d  amendments.  Gov.  Wise  was  at  that  time  a  Whig  representative  from  Virginia 
He  denounced  the  whole  proceeding  in  the  most  indignant  terms  on  the  floor  of  the 
House ;  and  on  a  subsequent  occasion,  in  a  public  address  to  a  portion  of  his  constitu- 
ents, he  stated  that  these  resolutions  were  prepared  in  secret,  so  far  as  the  Whig  repre- 
sentatives from  the  South  and  North  were  concerned,  and  agreed  upon  by  some  few  or 
more  Van  Buren  men  of  the  South,  with  others  from  the  North,  without  permitting  the 
Whig  slave-holding  members  of  the  South  to  know  anything  of  the  matter,  until  it  was 
sprung  upon  the  House,  with  a  call  for  the  previous  question.  He  said  these  resolu- 
tions, thus  prepared  and  brought  forward,  were  "the  first  of  a  strict  party  proceedino-  " 
known  to  our  national  history.  .  "' 

This  was  the  first  organized  effort  at  slavery  agitation  for  strictly  party  purposes.  The 
concoctors  and  authors  of  the  proceedings  were  southern  Democrats,  who  contrived  to 
secure  the  co-operation  of  a  portion  of  the  northern  Democrats  of  the  House.  Mr  Rhett 
who  prepared  the  resolutions,  is  a  confessed  disunionist.  Mr.  Atherton  who  was  in- 
duced to  offer  them,  voted  in  1847  for  the  Wilmot  Proviso.  And  Mr.  Van  Buren  of 
whose  administration  the  parties  to  the  movement  were  all  supporters,  became  in  ■1848 
the  Froesoil  candidate  for  the  Presidencj,  on  the  Buffalo  platform— receiving  the  support 
of  a  majority  of  the  Democracy  of  New  York  over  Gen.  Cass. 

The  same  patriotic  considerations  which  moved  Mr.  Bell  to  vote  against  the  clause  iu 
the  Atherton  resolutions,  impelled  him  to  vote  against  the  famous 

TWENTY-FIRST  RULE 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  which  was  as  follows  : 

**  That  no  petition,  memoriiil,  or  resolution,  or  other  paper,  praying  the  abolition  of 
slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  or  any  State  or  Territory,  or  the  slave-trade  between 
the  States  or  Territories  of  the  United  States,  in  which  it  now  exists,  shall  be  received 
by  this  House,  or  entertained  in  anj  way  whatever." 

The  rule  was  adopted,  in  a  House  where  parties  were  nearly  balanced,  by  114  yeas  to 
108  nays— Messrs.  Bell  and  Gentry,  of  Tennessee,  and  Anderson,  Calhoun";  and  Under- 
wood, of  Kentucky,  being  the  only  southern  representatives  who  voted  in  the  neo-ative 

At  the  next  Congress,  (the  27th)  the  House  being  Whig,  the  rule  was  again  ad^opted 

At  the  next  Congress,  (the  28th)  on  the  3d  of  December,  1844,  on  motion  of  John 
Qiiincy  Adams,  the  rule  was  rescinded  by  a  vote  of  108  yeas  to  80  nays. 

In  the  House  by  which  the  rule  was  rescinded  by  this  very  decided  majoritv  the 
IJenwcrats  had  a  majority  of  two-thirds !  '  .  '  ' 

The  grounds  upon  which  the  rule  was  rescinded  by  this  overwhelmingly  Democratic- 
House  had  been  very  fully  discussed  by  leading  Democrats  from  the  free  States  at  the 
preceding  session  of  the  same  Congress.  Among  these  was  a  distinguished  Democratic 
representative  from  New  York,  the  late  Samuel  Beard.slkt,  who,  in  a  speech  delivered 
on  the  5th  of  January,  1844,  said  : 

"  What  has  the  refusal  to  receive  these  petitions  done,  but  to  create  perpetual  strife 
and  denunciation?         *  *  *  *  *  *  ^-  * 

The  remedy  of  driving  petitioners  out  of  doors  is  a  wrong  course  ;  it  is  affronting  to 
them  and  in  my  vicnv  a  violation  of  the  Constitution.  It  never  will  end  agitation  either 
here  or  elsewhere.  I,  therefore,  would  beseech  and  entreat  of  the  South  to  change  the 
question.     I  pray  them  to  consider  and  respect  the  right  of  petition." 

The  rescinding  of  the  rule  was  strongly  advocated  by  another  distinguished  Democrat, 
the  Hon.  J.  A.  Wright,  of  Indiana,  now  United  States  Minister  at  Berlin,  who  was  at 
that  time  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  who  used  the  following  lan- 
guage : 

"  You  now  see,  since  the  adoption  of  this  rule  in  1840.  these  misera'ble  fanatics  and 
enthusiasts  going  through  the  country,  setting  up  their  notices  and  placards,  large  .hs  life 
and  in  all  these  announcements,  they  are  for  lectures  to  be  given  on  the  riffht  of  peti- 
tion—the  right  of  petition.     Thus  we  have  an  issue  made  whollr  different  from  that  of 


11 

abolition.  And  I  now  ask  gcnllemen  to  say  whether  they  insist  on  this  false  Issue  ? 
Will  they  press  the  question  in  this  shape?  I  ask  them  to  change,  and  to  meet  the 
question  in  some  other  way — either,  as  Mr.  Grundy  says,  by  rejecting  the  prayer  of  the 
petition,  after  the  recejHion,  or  by  some  direct  vote  putting  the  matter  to  rest.  For  one,  I 
am  determined  to  vote  so  as  to  give  this  question  its  true  appearance.  I  have  a  sovereign 
contempt  for  these  wild,  deluded,  enthusiastic  abolitionits  ;  yet  I  cannot  vote  for  the 
rule.  /  leant  to  take  this  weapon  out  of  their  hands,  and  let  them  stand  forth  on  their  own 
principles;  and  if  they  had  not  this  rule,  or  question  of  the  right  of  petition,  (connected 
as  it  is  with  their  movements)  they  would  not  be  worth  iu  a  short  time  a  passing  notice. 
********** 
"  I  hope  that  gentlemen  see  this  question  as  understood  by  the  people  ;  that  it  is  not  re- 
garded as  one  of  abolitionism,  but  one  of  petition.  And  it  becomes  the  duty  of  this 
House  to  change  the  issue.  It  is  now  regarded  by  the  great  mass  of  the  people  of  the 
free  States  as  a  blow  struck  at  what  they  consider  as  the  right  of  every  citizen  in  this 
country — the  right  to  be  heard."  ,« 

Upon  these  grounds,  thus  earnestly  urged  by  the  Democratic  leaders  of  the  free  States, 
the  famous  Twenty-First  Rule,  after  a  four  years'  trial,  was  rescinded  by  a  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives numbering  two  Democrats  for  every  Whig  !  And  it  was  in  this  way,  by 
actual  remits,  and  the  votes  of  an  overwhelmingly  Democratic  House,  that  the  course  of 
Mr.  Bell  on  the  subject  of  abolition  petitions  was  most  signally  vindicated ! 

SLAVERY    AGITATION .STRIKING    ILLUSTRATION  OF  MR.  BELL'S    FORESIGHT. 

The  letter  from  Mr.  Bell  to  Gov.  Gilmer,  above  referred  to,  was  written  and  published 
just  twenty  years  ago.     In  it  there  occur  the  following  passages  : 

"The  deliberate  and  persevering  obstinancy  with  which  the  supporters  of  the  Adminis- 
tration [Martin  Van  Buren's]  in  the  slave  States  persist  in  making  abolition  one  of  the 
issues  between  the  two  great  parties  which  now  divide  the  country,  I  consider  wicked 
and  mischievo'M  in  the  highest  degree.  *  *  *  What  ought  to  be  the  measure  of  indignation 
and  punishment  which  should  be  dealt  out  to  those  holloio  and  false  guardians  of  southern 
interests,  who  ivill,  for  the  sake  of  a  trifling  party  advantage,  put  every  thing  to  hazard  by 
perpetual  agitation  ?  For  there  is,  and  always  has  been,  quite  a?  much  to  be  apprehended 
ou  this  subject  from  those  who  agitate  the  question  on  political  account,  in  the  South,  as 
from  the  abolitionists  themselves. 

I  have  been  a  member  of  Congress,  as  you  know,  from  the  commencement  of  the  agi- 
tation upon  the  subject.  I  have  witnessed  all  that  has  taken  place  in  Congress  in  rela- 
tion to  it.  I  saw,  and  I  think  I  fully  understood,  the  game  that  was  playing  by  some 
gentlemen,  but  I  was  not  inclined  to  take  part  in  it,  because  I  thought  the  stakes  too 
high.  It  was  a  common  impression  that  the  first  movements  of  the  abolitionists  at  the 
North  were  not  looked  upon  with  any  deep  regret  by  a  portion  of  our  fellow-citizens  of 
the  South.  The  fanatic  spirit  was  rather  provoked  than  deprecated.  The  North 
without  distinction,  was  freely  charged  with  a  feeling  of  settled  hostility  to  southern  in- 
terests ;  and  many  injurious  reflections  were  cast  upon  their  motives,  calculated  to  give 
strength  to  the  cause  of  the  fanatics,  by  uniting  with  them  a  more  rational  and  calcu- 
lating class  of  the  Northern  people.  The  motive  to  this  policy  in  the  South,  to  whatever 
extent  it  was  adopted,  was,  beyond  all  doubt,  to  combine  the  South  and  Southwest  more 
closely  in  their  political  movements  and  preferences.  I  then  thought  the  experiment  a 
dangerous  one,  regarding  it  in  a  political  view  only;  for  it  struck  me  that,  if  the  ambi- 
tious aspirants  of  the  North  should  take  it  into  their  heads  to  play  the  same  sort  of  game 
in  retaliation,  the  South  would  soon  be  thrown  into  a  settled  minority,  and  forthwith 
deprived  of  political  power. 

To  these  views,  entertained  and  published  by  Mr.  Bell,  twenty  years  ago,  we  ask  the 
candid  attention  of  the  people  of  the  slave-holding  States,  as  eminently  v/orthv  of  their 
grave  consideration  at  the  present  juncture,  and  as  pouring  a  flood  of  light  upon  .Mr. 
Hell's  whole  course  upon  the  slavery  question.     He  saw  the  "game  "which  the   Tari 

Bureu  leaders  of  the  Southern  Democracy  would  play  with  slavery  agitation a  game 

for  party  purposes — and  foretold  what  would  be  the  result,  if  persisted  in.  He  reo-arded 
it  as  a  most  dangerous  and  reckles.?  game  for  the  South  ;  for  it  struck  him,  •'  that'^if  the 
ambitious  aspirants  at  the  North  should  take  it  into  their  heads  to  play  the  same  sort  of 
game  in  retaliation,  the  South  would  be  thrown  into  a  settled  minority,  and  forthwith 
deprived  of  political  power." 

The  southern  Democratic  aspirants  would,  however,  persist  iu  the  game,  until  northern 
aspirants  took  it  into  their  heads  to  play  the  same  in  retaliation,  and  the  result  has  been 
that  Freemont  came  near  being  elected  to  the  Presidency  in  185G,  and  that  Lincoln  may 


12 

possibly  be  elected  in  1860 — in  which  event  those  "hollow  and  false  guardians  of 
southern  interests  "  who  originated  the  game — who  have  been  industriously  playing  it 
ever  since,  and  who  have  put  up  their  last  stakes  upon  it  now,  have  announced  their  in- 
tention to  break  up  the  Union,  if  they  can  ! 

The  people  of  the  South  can  thus  fully  understand  why  Mr.  Bell  has,  through  the 
whole  of  his  long  public  life,  uniformly  opposed  the  making  of  unnecessary  or  immete- 
rial  issues  between  the  iSouth  and  the  North  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  Does  not  the 
present  unhappy  and  alarming  state  of  the  Union  conclusively  prove,  that  Mr.  Bell,  in 
pursuing  that  course,  has  shown  himself  to  be  a  most  sagacious  and  patriotic  stateman, 
and  a  true  and  loyal  son  of  the  South  ? 

THE  SLAVERY  QUESTION  IN  1850. 

In  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  on  the  3d,  4th,  5th  and  6th  days  of  July,  1850,  Mr. 
Bell  gave  his  views  on  the  slavery  question  in  all  its  varied  aspects.  His  opinions  on 
all  the  material  points  inv(^ed  in  the  subject  will  be  found  in  the  passages  from  his 
speech  which  we  proceed  to  give: 

Territorial  Rights  of  the  South. 

"In  the  opinion  of  by  far  the  greater  number  of  the  most  eminent  jurists  of  the  United 
States,  the  laws  of  Mexico  prohibiting  slavery  at  the  [time  of]  the  cession  are  still  in 
force,  and  must  remain  so  until  they  are  expressly  repealed,  either  by  Congress  or  the 
local  legislature.  This  is  the  opinion  of  the  distinguished  Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr. 
Clay]  himself.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  scarcely  less  distinguished  Senator  from 
Michigan,  [Gen.  Cass;]  and  such  is  the  opinion  of  the  able  and  eminent  statesman,  the 
Senator  from  Massachusetts,  [Mr.  Webster;]  three  leading  champions  of  this  bill.  I  do 
not  forget  another  Senator  from  the  South,  of  high  rank  in  his  profession,  [Mr.  Badger,] 
Avho  is  also  a  supporter  of  this  bill.  Thus,  sir,  slavery,  if  it  goes  into  New  Mexico  at  all, 
must  force  its  way  there,  in  despite  of  all  the  obstructions  of  local  laws,  and  of  the 
interdict  imposed  by  this  bill  on  the  territorial  legislature.  Still*it  is  contended  that 
the  South  is  secured  in  the  full  benefit  of  the  doctrine  held  by  some  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished champions  of  its  rights,  who  maintain  that  the  GonstitMtion,  proprio  vigorc, 
that  the  flag  of  the  Union  protects  the  citizen  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  rights  of  property 
of  every  description  recognised  as  such,  in  any  of  the  States,  on  every  sea,  and  in  every 
territory  of  the  Union.  And  this  doctrine,  it  is  said,  is  well  founded,  and  if  it  shall  be 
so  declared  by  the  Supreme  Court,  will  authorize  the  introduction  of  slavery  into  New 
Mexico.  The  soundness  of  the  general  doctrine  held  upon  this  point,  I  think,  cannot 
well  be  questioned  or  disproved;  and  if  the  question  related  to  a  territory  situated  as 
Oregon  was,  when  the  United  States  came  into  possession  of  it,  property  in  slaves  would 
be  entitled  to  the  protection  of  the  laws  and  Constitution  of  the  United  States;  but  the 
question  is  more  doubtful  and  formidable  to  the  interests  of  the  South,  where  it  is  raised 
in  reference  to  New  Mexico,  where  there  has  been  ari  organized  society  and  government 
for  two  centuries,  and  where  slavery  was  prohibited  by  the  local  sovereignty  before  and 
at  the  date  of  the  -cession  to  the  United  States;  and  where  under  that  prohibition  slavery 
had  ceased  to  exist.  The  Constitution,  in  its  application  to  this  Territory,  is  expected 
not  merely  to  protect  property  in  slaves,  as  in  the  case  of  Oregon,  before  there  was  any 
exercise  of  sovereignty  upon  the  subject  one  way  or  the  other,  but  to  supercede  the  local 
laws  in  force  prohibiting  slavery,  when  the  United  States  came  into  possession  of  it.  If 
the  obstructions  interposed  by  these  laws  were  removed,  then  the  principles  of  the  Con- 
stitution would  be  left  to  their  full  and  fair  operation,  and  the  South  might  look,  with 
some  confidence,  to  the  protection  of  slave  property  in  this  territory  through  the  courts 
of  the  United  fctates." 

Mr.  Bell  was  in  favor  of  removing  these  "obstructions,"  in  order  that  the  "principles 
of  the  Constitution"  might  be  left  "to  their  full  and  fair  operation,"  and  that  "the  South 
might  look  with  some  confidence  to  the  protection  of  slave  property  in  this  territory, 
through  the  courts  of  the  United  States,"  as  will  appear  by  his  vote  in  favor  of  the 
following  amendment  to  the  Compromise  bill  offered  by  Mr.  Davis  of  Mississippi: 

"And  that  all  laws,  or  parts  of  laws,  usages  or  customs,  pre-existing  in  the  territories 
acquired  by  the  United  States  from  Mexico,  and  which  in  said  territories  restrict,  abridge 
or  obstruct  the  full  enjoyment  of  any  right  of  person  or  property''  of  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  as  recognized  or  guaranteed  hy  the  Constitution  or  laws  of  the  United 
States,  are  hereby  declared  and  shall  be  held  as  repealed." 

The  yeas  and  nays  on  the  adoption  of  this  proposition  to  repeal  or  abolish  the  Mexican 
laws  prohibitory  of  slavery,  were  as  follows  : 


13 

«*  u-.^„   nv\i    Rprripn   Clemens,  Davis  of  Mississippi,  Dawson,  Foote, 


same  volume  and  page.] 

Tke  cause  of  Freedom  .rapped  up  in  tke  Constitution  and  tke  Union-^^a  Wretck  u-l.o  does  not 
•'  deserve  to  live. 

uTbe  gentleman  from  Ohio,  [Mr.  Chase]  New  York  [Mr  Se.ard,]  and  ^^^^^^^^ 

[Mr.Hafe,]talk  about  the  ^--J^xl'ras  it  m^  appe  r^^  -e\hat 

Lbout  the  cause  of  freedom.    .P^^'^/^^^^al  as  ^t  may  app  .^  ^^^  ^  .^^^ 

concerns  the  cause  ot  freedom  ^^J'  nf  L  Luth  to  S  and  toil  in  Califoruia  and  New 
whether  youwill  permit  a  fe.v  ^-^^^^^ ^^^^^^t  The  cause  of  freedom  is  wrapped 
Mexico,  but  it  IS  a  question  of  freedom  eve^wneie  i^uj^arks-the  Chinese  wall 

1  T  tm'^^Ttr reVrok^"  own,?nrchTand  Stary  despotism  become  our  in- 
ot  ff  ^*i«^-T,  J^^'tirsTake  t^^^  extent  at  issue  now.    If  we  allow  faction-tanatical 

iXicede  to  nothing  but  what  ^^S:^ ^^^^^^l^^^,  difficulties,  I  would  say 
"So,  sir,  I  could  dictate  the  course  o    Congress   n  t^^  pe^^^f        conciUation.     Let  us 
let  the  adjustment  be  ^--^^^^^{^^^^^^^^  L  permanent.     Stay  this  agita- 

have  some  assurance  that  the  P^omisea  iiaii       ^  ^^     system.     Terminate  this 

tion;  allay  this  ^^^^^^^  ^1''^\'}tllfTrinov^^^^  If  we  of  the  South  have 

suspense,  which  is  ;-«;;>  ,-^j;\-f^^i!  to  endure  nothing;  or  if  a  better  spirit  actuates  us, 
made  up  our  '^''^'i^;?^^;^^^^^^.  \^J^^ometSrng  and  to  eAdure  something,  and  yet  cannot 
and  we  are  prepared  both  to   vieia  7'^^^'''"/  .   prmitable  arranoement,  and  they 

bring  our  northern  ^^^eA^^"  *'^  ^^^^  ^^^^..^f,  Cever^  M  ^^^^^^  '^^^' 

will  continue  to  vex  and  harrass  us,  '^"^^^^^^J^^^t'^^gt-t^iil  never  come  to  this  issue, 
us,  to  manage  our  own  affairs  in  our  own  w-y^    I  trust^t  wi  ^^  ^^^^.^^^^  ^^ 

Sir,  to  suppose  that  there  -  -     -m^- «^  ,,  adjustme/t  of  these  ques- 

concede  something  ot  ^'^  ,'7\^^*'Xd-es  to  which  he  may  owe  his  position  here,  and 

HUMANITY    AND    JUSTICE    OF    THE    DIFFUSION    AND    EXTENSION    OF    SLAVERY. 

1         i-„.»nt«i;=;tcj  of  the  North,  Avith   all  the  countenance  they  re- 

"  The  fanatics  and  ^^^^'^J^^^J^jf  ^^^  f oPPon^^ts  of  the  institution  of  slavery,  would 

ceive  from  the  more  just  and  ^^^^f ''^"'^"'^^fPu^t  for  their  alliance  with  other  auxiliary 

not  have  been  able  to   conjure  up  ^h  J  ^^°™|  -ealousies!  the  interests  of  party  and  per- 

and  exciting  elements  of  agitauon-sect^^^  by  the  appeals  from 

sonal  ambition.  ^  ^  /.f^nm^n  wrongs  and  the  violation  of  human  rights.  I  am 
the  North  upon  the  ^^^^ject  of  human  wiongsa^^^^^^^^  ^^^  anti-slavery-extensiou  policy  of 
not  to  be  misled  as  to  the  J^al  ana  true  g  ^         ^.    ^  of  freedom  and  the 

the  North,  by  the  fine  f  ""timents  so  often  expressea  on  J^^.^ientious  the   anti- 

claims  of  humanity.  I  know,  ^i' .  th^tJiowe^JJ/^^;  ^f  ^^^^^^^  ^or  a  sentiment  of 
slavery  sentiment  of  the  North  may  be  ^^^^'^//^^^^^^^^^^  ^f  the  North.     Were  it  pro- 


14 


th^^  policy  of  diffurnri  ^^^^t::^^':'^^:::^;^:^'^^^''''' 


INVOKES    THE    JUSTICE    OF    THE    NORTH. 


the  period  of  southern  asfendenrvintiv.r^H^  '  ^    '  T"^-  '*  "^^"^"^  ''^  disguised  that 

.  ^    u        .         .  manliest,  that  a  benator.  who  snoke   n  this  HoKut«   ^.^,  u 

not  forbear  taunting  the  South   with  the  prospect  of  their  decfinlLfn.f  I    ^^^ 

HE  HOLDS  FAST  TO  THE  CONSTITUTION. 

"  But,  Sir,  as  to  myself,  I  shall  hold  fast  to  the  Constitution  until  I  see  that  it  nn  i. 

MR.   BELL    ON    AFRICAN    SLAVERY. 

q.H'v!!'?''^.';"*'  ^  ''''''"°'  conclude  my  remarks  without  taxing  the  indulgence  of  th^ 
Senate  yet  further  m  saying  a  few  words  upon  the  subject  of  that  in^thntlon  •     .  !u 

extension  of  which  to  the  new  territories,  some  gentlemen  manifeTor;.^^^!"^ 
It  has  been  denounced  in  this  debate  as  a  great  moralTnd  p^itica   eil  -^  ,,  ' 

wrong  and  oppression  to  the  race  which  are  the  subiects  o?  i?  «  m  l\  '  ^  e^evous 
country  which  tolerates  it,  and  a  sin  ^pon  thrconSco--  o/tf  ^  '^'"^-  ''^'''  *° '"^^ 
I  am  identified  with  this  so  much  abtiL^d  L^\ituTi"n?brr.y  rlp^ern^tuv^po^^^^^^^^^ 

charges  of  my  northern  countrymen.     *  *  *     t^nef^reply  loathe  accusatory 

"  For  the  purposes  of  my  aVgument,  the  origin  and  progress  of  sl-verv  in  tha'  tt  ■.  ^ 

States  may  be  briefly  told.     Without  pretending  to  accurfcv  of  le/a^irit  Z    \       "\''^ 

«w.  native  ha,^.3,  w^re  caught  up  and", ra'^^i^Vte^T  t  esc  shtc,  rel  "d^'t'ol  ^  at 
of  bondage  and  they  and  their  descendents  held  in  slavery  until  this' dAvWi!!,j 

the  race  of  their  masters.     Search  the  annals  of  all  history,  and  .Merfrfo  E  S^X.  ,? 
.tnJ.n,  and  .,ond^ful,  one  so  .^orthy  the  contemplation  of  'tie  pMlosophZ  'ti:  fuLUZ tt 


15 

VhTistiuii  and  the  philanthropist  9  This  great  fact  stands  out  boldly  before  the  world  ;  and 
in  the  impressive  language  of  the  Senator  from  Missouri,  (Mr.  Benton,)  it  stanch  for  an 
ansxcer  ;  and  it  7nust  ever  stand  for  an  answer.  Sir,,  it  can  never  be  successfully  ansivered.  Has 
humanity  cause  to  drop  a  tear  over  the  record  of  this  great  fact  ?  Has  Africa  any  cause  to 
mourn  ? 

"  But  there  are  some  other  and  subordinate  facts,  fairly  deducible  from  the  greater 
and  more  prominent  one,  -which  may  likewise  defy  contradiction  or  answer.  The  rapid 
multiplication  and  improved  lineaments  of  this  people  attest  the  fact,  that  the  yoke  of 
bondage  has  pressed  but  lightly  upon  them  ;  and  that  they  have  shared  freelj',  with  their 
masters,  of  the  fat  of  the  land.  Go,  I  repeat,  and  search  the  pages  of  historj',  and  where 
will  you  find  a  fact  comparable  to  this?  The  history  of  the  Hebrew  bondage  presents 
no  parallel — nothing  so  wonderful.  The  family  of  Jacob  (the  germ  of  the  Hebrew  nation) 
were  of  a  superior  race,  and  civilized.  There  is  one  singular  analogy,  however,  beside.^ 
that  of  bondage,  which  may  be  traced  in  the  history  of  these  two  peoples.  While  the  re- 
ligious institutions  of  the  one  forbade  any  amalgamation,  social  or  political,  with  their 
masters  and  surrounding  nations,  nature,  by  laws  more  stringent  and  inexorable,  forbids 
to  the  other  any  equality,  social  or  political,  with  the  race  which  holds  them  in  bondage. 

"As  to  the  lawfulness  or  sinfulness  of  the  institution  of  slavery — M'hatever  phrenzied 
or  fanatic  priests,  or  more  learned  and  rational  divines  may  preach,  whatever  they  may 
affirm  of  Christian  precepts  or  moral  and  religious  duties  and  responsibilities  ;  whatever 
interpretation  of  the  law  of  nature  or  of  Almighty  God  they  may  announce  ;  whatever 
doctrines  or  theories  of  the  equality  of  human  rights,  and  of  the  different  races  of  man- 
kind, diversified  as  they  are  by  complexion,  by  physical  formation  and  mental  develop- 
ment, infidel  philanthropists,  or  the  disciples  of  a  transcendental  creed  of  any  kind,  may 
hold  or  teach  ;  however  they  may  dogmatize  upon  this  hypothesis,  and  declare  it  to  be 
a  violation  of  the  law  of  nature,  for  any  one  race,  with  whatever  superiority  of  mental  or 
physical  faculties  that  may  be  endued,  to  subjugate  those  of  an  inferior  grade,  and  make 
them  the  instrument  of  improvement  and  amelioration  in  their  own  condition,  as  well 
as  in  that  of  masters  or  conquerors,  in  carrying  forward  the  great  work  of  civilization^ 
until  we  shall  be  enlightened  by  revelation  from  a  higher  source  than  themselves,  I  must 
claim  the  privilege  of  interpreting  the  law  of  nature  by  what  I  see  revealed  in  the  history 
of  mankind  from  the  earliest  period  of  recorded  time,  uncontradicted  by  Divine  authority. 
I  must  interpret  that  law  according  to  the  prominent  facts  connected  with  the  subject, 
ns  they  have  stood  out  in  the  past,  and  as  they  stand  out  before  us  at  this  day.  Looking 
through  the  eyes  of  history,  I  have  seen  slavery  or  involuntary  servitude,  the  hand- 
maid of  Hindoo,  Egyptian  Assyrian,  Jewish,  Greek  and  Roman  civilization.  I  have  seen 
the  institution  recognized  by  the  theocratic  government  of  the  Jews — the  chosen  depo- 
sitaries of  the  Word  of  Life — by  democratic  Athens  and  republican  Rome.  I  have  seen, 
upon  the  overthrow  of  Roman  civilization  by  the  savage  hordes  of  the  north,  that  those 
new  masters  of  western  Europe  and  their  successors,  adopted  and  continued  to  uphold 
the  same  institution,  under  various  modifications,  adapted  to  the  changing  condition  of 
both  slave  and  master,  and  still  under  an  adyancing  civilization,  until  a  comparatively 
recent  period.  I  see  the  same  institution  tolerated  and  maintained  in  eastern  Europe, 
at  this  day.  I  see  the  native  race  of  all  British  India,  at  this  moment,  bowing  the  neck 
under  a  system  of  quasi  slavery.  But  above  all,  I  have  seen  here— on  this  continent,  and 
in  these  United  States,  the  original  lords  of  the  soil  subdued — some  of  them  subdued  to 
slavery,  others  expelled,  driven  out,  and  the  remnant  still  held  in  subordination  ;  and  all 
this  under  an  interpretation  of  the  law  of  nature,  which  holds  good  at  this  day  among 
our  northern  brethren ;  and  I  have  yet  in  reserve  that  great  fact  to  which  I  have  already 
alluded — three  millions  of  the  African  race,  whose  labor  is  subject  to  the  will  of  masters, 
under  such  circumstances  that  their  condition  cannot  be  changed,  though  their  masters 
should  will  it,  without  destruction  alike  to  the  interests  and  welfare  of  both  master  and 
slave.     These  are  the  lights  by  which  I  read  and  interpret  the  law  of  nature. 

"  Now,  sir,  permit  me  to  say  a  few  words  upon  the  effects  of  this  institution  upon  the 
country  which  tolerates  it.  To  the  great  fact  to  which  I  have  more  than  once  alluded, 
conjoined  with  the  system  of  equal  laws,  which  our  ancestors  brought  to  these  shores 
perfected  and  consolidated  at  the  Revolution,  and  by  the  adoption  of  the  present  form 
of  Union,  we  are  indebted — the  world  is  indebted  for  that  other  great  phenomenon  in  the 
history  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  nations  ;  a  phenomenon,  in  all  its  bearings,  not  yet 
fully  comprehended  by  the  nations  of  the  Old  World,  nor  even  by  ourselves:  and  which, 
in  all  future  time,  will  be  the  study  and  admiration  of  the  historian  and  philosopher;  I 
mean  not  the  founding  of  a  republic  on  these  shores,  so  recently  the  abode  only  of 
savage  and  nomadic  tribes,  but  its  amazing  growth  and  development ;  its  magic-like 
spring,  from  small  beginnings — rising,  as  it  were,  by  a  single  effort,  by  one  elastic 
bound,  into  all  the  attributes  of  a  first-rate  power  ;  a  great  republican  empire — able  not 
only  to  maintain  its  rights  of  sovereignty  and  independence,  by  land   and  sea,  against  a 


16 

hostile  world,  but  at  the  same  time,  by  its  example,  shaking  to  their  foundatious  the 
despotic  powers  of  the  earth  ;  a  great  incorporation  of  freedom,  dispensing  its  blessings 
to  all  mankind.  Sir,  the  fable  birth  of  Minerva,  leaping  in  full  panoply  from  the  head 
of  Jove,  if  a  truth,  and  no  fiction,  would  scarcely  be  more  wonderful,  or  a  greater  mys- 
tery, without  the  clue  which  African  slavery  furnishes  for  the  solution  of  it. 

"  Sir,  making  all  due  allowances  for  American  enterprise  and  the  energies  of  free  labor, 
with  all  the  inspiring  advantages  of  our  favorite  S3'stem  of  government,  I  doubt  whether 
the  power  and  resources  of  this  country  would  have  attained  more  than  half  their  present  extra- 
ordinary proportions,  but  for  the  so  much  reviled  institution  of  slavery.  Sir,  your  rich  and 
varied  commerce,  external  and  internal ;  your  navigation  ;  your  commercial  marine,  the 
nursery  of  the  military ;  your  ample  revenues ;  the  public  credit ;  your  manufactures ; 
your  rich,  populous,  and  splendid  cities — all,  all  may  trace  to  this  institution  as  their  well- 
spring,  their  present  gigantic  proportions ;  nourished  and  built  up  to  their  present  amazing 
height  and  grandeur  by  the  great  staples  of  the  South — the  products  of  slave  labor. 

"  Yet,  slavery,  in  every  form  in  which  it  has  existed  from  the  primitive  period  of  or- 
ganized society — from  its  earliest  and  patriarchal  form  to  this  time,  in  every  quarter  of 
the  globe— and  all  its  results — even  the  magnificent  result  of  African  slavery  in  the 
United  States,  is  declared  to  be  against  the  law  of  nature.  Though  contributing  in  a 
hundred  varied  forms  and  modes,  through  a  period  of  thousands  of  years,  to  the  amelio- 
ration of  the  condition  of  mankind  generally;  though  sometimes  abused  and  perverted, 
as  all  human  institutions,  even  those  of  religion,  are  still  contributing  to  advance  the 
cause  of  civilization ;  though,  if  you  please,  having  its  origin  in  individual  cupidity,  still 
mysteriously  working  out  a  general  good;  yet  slavery  and  all  its  beneficent  results  are 
pronounced  to  be  against  the  will  of  God,  by  those  who  claim  a  superior  illumination 
upon  the  subject.  This  may  be  so ;  but  I  must  say  that  this  conclusion,  so  confidently 
announced,  is  not  arrived  at  in  accordance  with  the  Baconian  method  of  reasoning,  by 
which  we  are  taught  that  from  a  great  many  particular  and  well-established  facts  in  the 
physical  economy,  we  may  safely  deduce  a  general  law  of  physical  nature ;  and  so  of 
morals  and  government.  It  seems  to  my  weak  faculties,  that  it  is  rather  an  arrogant 
and  presumptuous  ari-angement  of  the  ways  of  Providence,  mysterious  as  we  know  them 
to  be,  for  feeble  man  to  declare,  that  that  which  has  been  permitted  to  exist  and  prosper 
from  the  beginning,  among  men  and  nations,  is  contrary  to  its  will. 

"  But  whoever  has  studied  the  history  of  civilization,  the  progress  of  society — of  laws 
and  government — must  have  perceived  that  certain  abstract  or  theoretic  truths,  whether 
in  civil  or  religious  policy,  have  been,  and  can  only  with  safety  to  the  ultirn#,te  ends  of 
all  societies  and  governments,  be  unfolded  by  degrees,  and  adjusted  at  every  step,  ac- 
cording to  the  advance  of  society  from  its  infancj'  to  a  higher  civilization  and  a  more  en- 
lightened comprehension — such  as  the  equality  of  natural  rights  of  self-government,  and 
freedom  of  speech  and  opinion.  These  general  truths,  though  they  cannot  be  success- 
fully controverted  at  this  day,  yet,  as  they  have  been  seldom  admitted,  in  their  length 
and  breadth,  in  the  practical  operations  of  government,  with  success,  some  law-givers 
have  been  led  to  deny  that  they  are  found|d  in  reason;  and  when  they  have,  at  any  time, 
been  suddenly  embraced  by  the  controlling  minds  among  the  people,  the  misfortune  has 
been  that  they  were  applied  in  excess,  and  without  due  regard  to  the  actual  condition 
of  the  people  who  were  to  be  afifected:  and  hence  they  have,  so  far,  failed  of  success  in 
some  of  the  most  highly  civilized  nations  of  Europe.  But  it  is  more  to  the  point  to  refer 
to  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  of  St.  Domingo — one  of  the  first  explosive  effects  of  the 
sudden  recognition  of  the  rights  of  man  by  the  French  people.  It  would  be  difficult  to 
demonstrate,  at  this  day,  that  the  cause  of  humanity,  or  of  human  progress  has  been,  in 
the  slightest  degree,  promoted  by  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  that  fertile  and  beautiful 
island.  It  is,  I  believe,  now  pretty  well  understood,  that  British  statesmen  committed 
an  error  in  the  policy  of  West  Indian  emancipation,  forced  upon  them  by  fanatical  re- 
formers. They  were  driven  to  adopt  a  sentiment,  instead  of  a  practical  truth,  as  the 
foundation  of  a  radical  change  in  the  social  condition  of  a  people,  who  were  not  prepared 
either  to  appreciate  or  profit  by  it.  Even  the  reformation  in  religion  and  church  gov- 
ernment, commenced  some  three  centuries  ago,  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  most  pro- 
found inquiries,  has  failed  of  that  complete  success  which  ought  to  have  attended  it,  for 
the  reason  that  the  general  truths  and  principles  upon  which  it  was  founded  were  ap- 
plied in  excess.  The  zealous  champions  of  reform,  in  throwing  aside  all  ceremonies  and 
observances  which  affect  the  senses,  and  in  spiritualizing  too  much,  there  is  reason  to 
believe,  have  stayed  the  progress  of  substantial  reform,  and  checked  the  spread  of  reli- 
gious restraints  upon  the  evil  passions  of  men.  But  this  is  a  delicate  subject,  and  I 
must  forbear. 

"  These  examples  may  show  that  there  are  certain  abstract  truths  and  principles  which, 
however  incontrovertible  in  themselves,  like  every  other  good  thing,  may  be,  and  often 
are,  misconceived  and  abused  in  their  application.     It  is  the  business  of  statesmen,  in 


17 

every  countrj'.  to  apply  them  with  safety,  and  to  give  them  the  utmost  practical  inflnence 
and  effect  coiasistent  with  the  existing  state  of  society.  The  most  interesting  illustratioa 
of  this  sentiment,  and  the  most  striking  example  of  the  superiority  of  practical  troth 
over  theoretic  axioms,  in  the  formation  of  government,  to  be  found  in  all  history — and 
one  which  chiims  the  special  attention  uf  the  people  of  this  country  at  this  moment— was 
exhibited  by  our  ancestors,  when,  with  their  own  recognition  of  the  aljstract  truth  of  the. 
equality  of'uatural  rights  still  vibrating  on  their- tongue?,' they  j-et  fearlessly  set  their 
seals  to  a  covenant  of  union  between  these  States,  containing  an  express  recognition  of 
slavery,  I  say  express  recognition;  because,  whatever  the  Jesuitical  doctors  of  the 
North  may  say.  the  clauses  in  the  Constitution  relating  to  the  importation  of  persons  un- 
der certain  limitations,  and  fixing  the  basis  of  direct  taxes  and  representation  in  Con- 
gress, I  aSirm,  do  amount  to  an  express  recognition  of  slavery." 

Search  the  debates  of  Congress  on  this  exciting  subject  from  1T90  down  to  the  present 
time — examine  diligently  the  speeches  of  the  most  distinguished  leaders  of  the  southern 
'Democracy,  Mr.  Calhoun  and  his  coropeers — pore  over  all  that  has  been  said  and  written 
by  the  whole  tribe  of  southern  politicians  v.'ho  have  made  it  a  part  of  their  business,  in 
season  and  out  of  season,  to  instil  into  the  southern  ear  doubts  and  suspicions  of  Mr. 
Bell's  "  soundness  on  the  slavery  question,''  and  say  if,  among  them  all,  there  can  be 
found  so  masterly  a  refutation  of  the  accusatory  charges  urged  against  the  people  of 
the  South  on  account  of  the  existence  in  their  midst  of  the  institution  of  African  slavery. 

MR.  BELL  IN  1854— THE  KANSAS-NEBRASKA  BILL. 

We  come  now  to  what  may  justly  be  considered  as  the  most  important  act  of  Mr, 
Bell's  public  life — his  opposition  to  the  Kansas-Nebraska  act,  A  few  brief  passages 
from  the  two  speeches  made  by  him  in  the  Senate  on  that  memorable  occasion  will  suffice 
to  place  before  the  people  of  the  South  (where  his  vote  against  the  bill  has  been  made 
the  subject  of  bitter  coudemnation)  the  motives  and  reasons  by  which  he  was  governed. 
Hear  him,  fellow-citizens : 

Repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise — A  great  practical  question — Its  probable  results  con- 
sidered. 

"If  this  measure  shall  appear  to  be  as  important  to  the  interests  of  the  country  as  ita 
friends  assume,  1  shall  feel  no  embarrassment  arising  from  any  of  the  questions  to  which 
I  have  just  alluded,  in  giving  my  support  to  the  principle  of  non-intervention,  embraced 
in  the  provisions  of  the  bill  before  the  Senate.  I  think  it  is  a  wise  and  expedient  prin- 
ciple, for  general  application,  and  upon  this  point,  it  will  be  perceived,  that  there  is  no 
difl'erence  between  myself  and  any  of  my  Southern  friend;.  It  is  not  a  new  principle.  It 
was  the  principle  adopted  in  the  compromise  acts  of  1850,  and  had  my  full  concurrence 
and  suppoi't.  But  in  the  application  of  this  principle  to  the  Territories  proposed  to  be 
organized  by  this  bill,  in  order  to  give  it  a  free  and  unembarrassed  operation,  it  is  pro- 
posed to  repeal  the  Missouri  Compromise;  and  thus  a  great  practical  question  is  directly 
J)resented;  and  one  which,  above  all  others,  claims  the  dispassionate  consideration  and 
reflection  of  every  statesman  of  the  country,  north  and  south:  Is  it  wise,  is  it  expedient  to 
disturb  the  Missouri  Compromise?  Does  the  repeal  of  the  slavery  rcstrictioii  clause  of  the  act  of 
1820  promise  such  important  and  beneficent  results  to  the  country  that  all  objections  should  be 
yielded?  " 

1  Missouri  restriction  unjust  to  the  South. 

.  "Sir,  it  is  contended  that  by  applying  the  principle  of  non-intervention  to  the  Terri- 
tories, we  shall  harmonize  the  action  of  the  government  by  conforming  it  to  the  principle 
of  the  compromise  acts  of  1850.  Admitted.  It  is  said  that  the  slavery  restriction  clause 
of  the  act  of  1820  was  a  violation  of  the  obligations  of  the  treaty  by  which  France  ceded 
to  the  Dnited  States  the  Territory  of  Louisiana,  I  admit  it.  It  is  contended  that  the 
restriction  upon  slavery  imposed  by  the  Missouri  Compromise  was  unjust  to  the  South. 
That  is  also  true. 

The  attempt  of  the  North  in  1820  to  interdict  slavery  in  Missouri,  as  a  condition  of  her 
Admission  into  the  Union,  and  the  continued  resistance  offered  to  the  application  of  that 
State  for  admission,  until  the  South  agreed  to  accept  the  proposition  to  interdict  slaver}' 
in  all  the  remaining  territory  ceded  by  France,  lying  north  of  the  line  of  36°  30^,  waa 
just  such  a  proceeding  that  the  great  names  invoked  by  the  honorable  Senator  from 
Massachusetts,  [Mr.  Sumner,]  to  sustain  him  in  his  course  as  an  abolitionist — Washing- 
ton, Franklin,  Jefferson,  and  Hamilton,  had  they  been  living  at  the  time,  anti-slaverj'  in 
sentiment  though  they  were,  would  have  raised  their  united  voices  against  it,  as  conceived 
in  a  spirit  the  very  reverse  of  that  which  controlled  their  own  course  wben  they  gave 


•18 

their  saiu-tlou  to  the  Conatitutiou;  when  they  eontritjuttd  the  lull  weight  of  their  great 
names  unci  characters  iu  conciliating  and  reconciling  the  strongest  antagonisms  of  senti- 
ment and  interests  betwefen  the  North  and  the  South;  and  in  blending  all  in  one  great 
organic  instrument  of  Union,  unparralleled  in  the  wisdom  of  its  provisions  and  the 
grandeur  of  its  results.  Jefferson  did  raise  his  voice  against  it,  but  unhappilj'  his 
glorious  compatriots  of  the  revolution  had  passed  away,  and  he,  iu  his  retirement,  was 
no  longer  able  to  control  the  active  passions  of  the  day." 

lie  fears  the  consequences  of  -repealing  the  Missouri  Covipromise. 

''Having  thus  gone  over  all  the  grounds  of  objection  suggested  against  the  validity  of 
the  iMissouri  Compromise,  I  trust  it  will  be  seen  that  I  am  not  disposed  to  controvert 
them  either  as  to  fact  or  doctrine,  with  such  exceptions  only  as  upon  more  deliberate 
consideration,  b}-  those  who  asserted  them,  will  be  allowed  to  be  well  taken.  But,  sir, 
admitting  them,  with  the  exceptions  I  have  stated,  to  be  incontrovertiblj  true,  still  the 
main  question  remains  to  be  considered  and  decided:  Do  these  facts  and  doctrines  demon- 
strate the  expediency  of  diMurhinf/  the  Missouri  Compromise  under  existing  circumstances?  and 
jn  coming  to  an  affirmative  conclusion  upon  this  point,  I  hesitate,  I  pause.'' 

Probahle  consequences  of  the  Repeal  further  considered. 

"I  have  listened  with  attention  to  all  the  luminous  expositions  of  theories  of  con- 
stitutional construction,  and  of  popular  sovereignty;  to  the  ingeneous  application  of 
doctrinal  points  to  questions  of  compacts  and  compromises  by  the  friends  of  this  measure. 
The  question  has  been  fruitful  of  themes  for  dialectic  display;  for  the  exhibition  of 
great  powers  of  analysis  and  logical  acumen;  but  the  whole  argument  has  been  singularly 
defective  and  unsatistactory  upon  the  main  question:  What  practical  advantage  or  benefit 
to  the  country  generally,  or  to  the  South  inparticular,  will  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise 
secure  ? 

It  is  asserted  with  great  confidence  that  the  application  of  the  principle  of  non-inter- 
vention to  these  Territories,  and  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  Avill  have  the 
effect  to  transfer  to  the  local  legislatures,  the  Territories  and  States,  and  to  relieve  Con- 
gress for  the  future  from  the  most  dangerous  and  distracting  subjectof  controversy  which 
ever  has,  or  ever  can  disturb  its  deliberations;  that  the  source  of  those  sectional  con- 
flicts and  agitations  upon  the  subject  of  slavery',  which  have  more  than  once  threatened 
the  peace  of  the  country,  will  be  removed;  that  justice  will  be  done  to  the  South;  that 
the  Constitution  will  be  restored  and  vindicated,  and  a  new  guarantee  provided  for  the 
stability  of  the  Union.  I  need  not  say  that,  if  one-half  the  many  beneficent  results  predicted 
of  this  measure  can  be  shoivn  to  follmv  as  a  probable  consequence  of  its  adoption,  I  would  no 
longer  hesitate  to  give  it  my  support;  but  unfortunately  the  argument  has  proceeded  no 
further  than  the  affirmation,  without  showing  how  these  results  must  or  will  follow." 

Wisdom  of  the  Repeal  doubted. 

'•  Sir,  I  believe  there  is  a  better  feeling  prevailing  at  the  North  towards  the  South  than 
formerly;  but  would  it  not  be  wise  on  the  part  of  the  South  to  do  nothing  to  reverse  the 
current  of  that  better  feeling,  unless  urged  by  some  great  necessity  in  vindication  of  its 
rights '?" 

What  has  the  South  to  gain  by  it  ? 

"What  has  the  South  to  gain  by  the  measure?  *  *  *  *  -x-  will 
slavery  be  established  in  the  Kansas  Territory  proposed  to  be  organized  under  its  pro- 
visions? Does  any'oue  who  has  fully  considered  the  subject,  believe  that  this  Territory 
will  become  a  slave  State  ?" 

Jle  differs  with  his  Southern  friends  only  as  to  the  results  of  the  measure. 

"  I  have  said  already,  and  I  repeat,  that  if  I  could  take  the  view  of  the  importance  of 
this  measure  to  the  country  which  my  southern  friends  do — cutting  o9'  the  source  of  all 
future  controversy  between  the  North  and  the  South — putting  an  end  to  agitation  in 
both  sections  upon  the  subject  of  slavery — lAvould  feel  justified  in  waiving  all  my  objec- 
tions to  this  bill,  and  in  uniting  heartily  with  them  in  its  support.  We  differ  only  as  to 
the  results  of  the  measure." 

The  foregoing  extracts  are  from  the  first  speech  of  Mr.  Bell  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill,  delivered  in  the  Senate  on  the  3d  of  March,  1854.  (See  Appendix  to  Congressional 
Globe,  vol.  29,  page  407.) 

From  his  second  speech  on  the  bill,  delivered  on  the  24th  and  25th  of  May,  1854,  we 
laake  the  subjoined  extracts,  for  which  see  Congressional  Globe,  vol.  29,  pages  947-958. 


19 

Probable  comequences  of  the  Repeal  farther  considered. 

'•The  people  of  Tennessee  will  doubt  the  propriety  and  wisdom  of  adding  fuel  to  the 
flame  kindled  by  the  aboliiionists  of  the  North,  by  repealing  the  Missouri  Compromise. 
They  will  see  that  it  must  and  will  have  a  bad  eO'ect  on  the  steady,  sober,  patriotic,  na- 
tional men  of  the  North.  There  are.  many  gentlemen  at  (he  South  who  may  not  care  what 
consequences  may  flow  from  such  a  course.  The  people  of  Tennessee  have  sense  enough, 
judgment  ^d  penetration  enough,  to  perceive  that,  though  the  feeling  of  the  North,  ex- 
cited by  the  passage  of  this  bill,  may  be  restrained  within  such  bounds  as  not  to  threaten 
inunediate  disunion,  yet  that,  perhaps,  no  more  fugitive  slaves  may  be  captured  and 
returned  from  the  North,  and  that  the  swelling  tide  of  fanaticism,  and  the  more  intense 
sentiment  of  hostility  to  the  institutions  of  the  South,  created  by  this  bill,  may  lead  to 
such  excess  that  irritation  and  resentment  will  be,  in  turn,  excited  and  kindled  into  flame 
at  the  South ;  and  that  then  we  shall  find  all  the  fears  and  apprehensions  of  civil  war  and 
disunion  renewed,  which  spread  consternation  throughout  the  land  in  1850." 

•  Squatter  Sovereignty. 

"As  to  the  principle  of  'squatter  sovcignty,'  I  wish  further  to  say,  that  in  the  late 
contest  between  General  Taylor  and  the  honorable  and  distinguished  Senator  from  Mich- 
igan, [General  Cass,]  it  was  distinctly  brought  forward  as  an  issue  before  the  people  of 
Tennessee.  *         *         *  ******  Jn  th^t  contest,  in 

common  with  the  South  generally,  they  [the  people  of  Tennessee]  repudiated  the  idea, 
that  a  handful  or  any  number  of  inhabitants,  in  a  Territory  of  the  United  States,  should 
have  the  power  granted  to  them  by  Congress  of  regulating  their  domestic  institutions, 
and  at  their  discretion,  to  deny  to  the  citizen  of  one  section  of  the  Union  the  power  to 
enjoy  his  right  of  property  in  slaws.  We  were  not  prepared  to  reverse  and  set  aside  the 
previously  established  practice  and  doctrines  of  the  Government,  from  1789  to  that  time. 
We  could  see  no  peace,  no  quiet,  no  end  of  agitation  that  was  to  result  from  such  a  course. 
We  thought  that,  if  a  Territorial  Legislature  should  in  one  or  two  years  establish  or 
abolish  slavery,  the  agitation  of  the  question  of  slavery  would  still  go  on.  We  in  Ten- 
nessee at  that  time  believed  we  were  advocating  principles  and  doctrines  on  this  subject 
approved  in  all  the  Southern  States.  The  principle  then  contended  for  was  that  the 
people  of  a  Territory,  when  they  came  to  form  their  State  Constitution,  and  then  only, 
were  qualified  to  establish  their  domestic  institutions." 

Must  discharge  his  duty  to  the  country  at  whatever  sacrifice. 

"When  I  informed  honorable  Senators  that  I  did  not  hold  myself  committed  to  this 
bill,  I  was  told,  by  some  of  my  friends,  that  if  I  opposed  the  bill,  such  a  course  would  be 
utterly  destructive  to  me;  that  it  would  lead  to  a  disruption  of  the  Whig  party  in  Ten-' 
nessee,  and  furnish  a  plausible  ground  for  imputations  uj)on  my  motives.     And  those 
friendly  warnings  were  given  to  me  up  to  the  time  of  the  final  vote  in  the  Senate.     *     * 

*  *  Sir,  when  a  question  is  presented  here  involving  great  principles  of  any 
kind,  when  any  great  measure  is  proposed,  and  a  man  occupying  a  responsible  positioa 
becomes  strongly  impressed  with  the  conviction  that  its  adoption  would  have  a  deep, 
and  permanent,  and  injurious  effect  upon  the  future  prospects  of  the  country,  threaten- 
ing the  stability  of  the  Constitution,  and  the  Union  itself,  he  should  be  willing  to  sacri- 
fice himself,  and  surrender  all  prospects  that  may  be  held  out  to  him  which  stand  in 
conflict  witii  his  duty.  Why  should  a  mau  abandon  his  convictions  upon  such  a  ques- 
tion for  the  sake  of  doubtful  political  chances?  I  consider  the  position  of  a  Senator  of 
the  United  States,  which  I  now  enjoy,  as  the  proudest  and  most  independent  that  any 
American  citizen  can  occupy — the  noblest  and  most  desirable  to  any  man  who  will 
boldly  do  his  duty.  Sir,  I  acknowledge  my  weaknesses.  I  know  that  kind  feelings  and 
a  deference  for  the  opinions  of  others  have  often  induced  me  to  give  my  support  to  meas- 
ures of  inferior  importance,  which  my  judgment  did  not  approve.  But  when  a  great 
question  is  presented  ;  when  I  have  deliberately  reflected  upon  it ;  when  I  have  lights 
before  me  by  which  to  guide  my  course,  whatever  sacrifices  of  political  standing  may  be 
required  of  me,  whatever  obstacles  and  embarrassments  of  any  kind  may  stand  in  my 
way,  I  trust  I  shall  always  have  the  firmness  to  do  what,  upon  deliberate  reflection,  I 
consider  my  duty  to  the  country." 

A  Conservative  Sentiment  at  the  North — Danger  of  alienating  it. 

"I  wish  honorable  Senators  to  understand,  that  if  I  thought  there  was  really  any  great 
principle  to  be  establi.'^hed  or  settled  by  this  Ijili,  of  importance  or  value  to  the  South, 
and  to  the  couQtry  generally,  it  would  be  a  Uitfereut  question.     But  I  must  not  be  di- 


rertecl  from  the  issue  made  -with  me,  that  there  is  no  great  body  of  conservative  and 
national  Whigs  at  the  North,  ready  to  stand  by  the  South  on  questions  affecting  their 
rights  and  institutions.  I  deny  the  assertion.  I  know  that  there  is  a  large  body  of  pat- 
riotic and  noble  Whigs  at  the  North,  who,  though  they  do  not  approve  this  bill,  have 
Bte.adily  opposed  the  Abolition  movement  at  the  North,  from  its  inception,  and  have 
always  deprecated  all  agitation  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  They,  like  all  northern  men, 
liave  been,  from  training  and  education,  opposed  to  slavery ;  but  they  have  been  trained 
to  respect  and  revere  the  Constitution  and  its  compromises ;  and  they  have  shown  their 
determination  to  respect  and  stand  by  the  compromises  of  1850,  in  their  unwavering  eflbrts 
to  silence  opposition  to  the  fugitive  slave  law,  and  to  secure  its  faithful  execntion.  And, 
sir,  I  would  inquire  of  those  who  assert  that  there  is  no  sound  national  Whig  party  at 
the  Noith,  what  has  become  of  that  noble  Whig  phalanx  at  the  North,  who  stood  by 
and  sustained  Daniel  Webster  in  his  bold  advocacy  of  the  compromises  of  1850?  Where 
the  supporters  of  Millard  Fillmore  at  the  North  ?  Where  the  Union  Whigs  of  New  York? 
Where  the  conservative  spirit  which  prompted  five  hundred  of  the  most  respectable  citi- 
zens of  Boston,  said  to  be  the  very  hot-bed  of  fanaticism,  to  enroll  themselves  as  special 
constables  to  secure  the  execution  of  the  fugitive  slave  law?  Is  there  no  consideratiou 
due  to  the  position  of  such  Whigs  as  those  at  the  North  in  deciding  upon  measures  so 
'well  calculated  as  the  present  to  weaken  their  position  and  influence,  or  rather,  to  use 
the  forcible  language  of  the  Attorney  General,  '  to  crush  them  oat?  ' 

"  But,  sir,  there  is  a  conservative  sentiment  in  the  North,  outside  the  ranks  of  those 
Whigs  known  as  the  supporters  of  Mr.  Webster  and  Mr.  Fillmore,  even  among  those 
denominated  Freesoilers,  or  the  opponents  of  the  extension  of  slave  territory,  bekinging 
to  the  Whig  and  Democratic  parties  :  I  allude  to  those  who  acquiesced  in  the  compro- 
mises of  1850 — those  who  are  opposed  to  the  plans  of  the  abolition  organization,  and 
entertain  no  purpose  of  pressing  their  anti-slavery  feelings  and  doctrines  to  the  point  of 
disunion.  Is  there  any  wisdom  or  sound  policy  in  adopting  a  measure  not  called  for  by 
any  public  necessity  or  interest,  but  so  well  calculated  to  incite  that  large  class  of  north- 
ern citizens  to  form  combinations  which  may  lead  to  a  permanent  alienation  betweeii 
the  North  and  the  South  ?  " 

Rise  of  the  Republican  party  predicted  as  a  consequence  of  the  Repeal. 

"  Sir,  the  tendency  of  this  bill  is  to  stimulate  the  formation  of  a  sectional  party  organ- 
ization. And,  as  I  said  in  ray  speech  on  the  passage  of  the  Senate  bill,  I  regard  that  a3 
the  last  and  most  fatal  evil  which  can  befall  this  country,  except  the  dissolution  of  the 
Union;  and  that  last  and  greatest  calamity  to  the  country,  the  success  of  such  a  move- 
ment would  infallibly  bring  about.  I  trust,  sir,  that  ray  fears  on  this  subject  will- 
prove  to  be  groundless,  and  that  no  such  results  as  I  have  indicated  will  ever  be 
realized." 

Mr.  BELI.  IN  1856— ADMISSION  OF  KANSAS. 

The  following  are  extracts  from  a  speech  made  by  Mr.  Bell  in  the  Senate,  on  the  2d  of 
July,  1856,  on  the  bill  to  authorize  the  people  of  Kansas  to  form  a  Constitution  and  State 
Government  preparatory  to  their  admission  into  the  Union  : 

HE    ADVOCATES    ITS    EARLY    ADMISSION. 

"  Whoever  has  looked  closely  into  this  subject,  and  comprehends  all  its  bearings,  must 
be  satisfied  that,  though  we  may  remove  some  of  the  more  fruitful  sources  of  the  exist- 
ing disturbances  in  Kansas,  dissension  and  discord  will  still ,  continue,  not  only  in  Kan- 
sas, but  throughout  the  country,  until  Kansas  shall  become  a  State.  The  excitement 
and  agitation  at  the  North  may  be  expected  to  continue,  even  with  increased  intensity, 
80  long  as  there  remains  any  prospect  ot  the  success  of  the  pro-slavery  party,  in  order  to 
unite  and  consolidate  public  sentiment  in  opposition  to  the  admission  of  Kansas  as  a 
slave  State.  Can  the  country — can  the  Union,  stand  five  years  of  unmitigated  agitation 
upon  this  distracting  subject?  It  seema  inevitable  that  agitation  must  continue  through 
the  present  canvass  for  the  Presidency.  There  is  no  remedy  for  that  evil.  Had  I  the 
})ower,  by  my  voice,  I  would  paralyze — I  would  crush  this  many-headed  monster — this 
Kansas  hydra  at  once ;  but,  as  that  is  impossible,  I  protest  against  the  extension  of  this 
controversy  into  the  next  ensuing  contest  for  the  purple.  I  protest  against  that,  as 
equally  unnecessary  and  perilous." 

Practical   Workings  of  Squatter  Sovereignty. 

"  This  pi'iyciijjle  of  popular  sovereignty,  connected,  as  it  was  in  this,  case,  with  the 
repeal  of  the  Missouri  Coajpromi,^e,  was  thought  by  its  friends  to  be  of  such  Iransceudaut 


21 

jraportance,  that  when  the  Nebraska  bill  passed  the  Senate,  at  a  late  hour  of  the  2d  of 
March,  1854,  the  inhabitants  of  the  national  metropolis  were  awakened  from  their  slum- 
bers by  peal  after  peal  of  deep-mouthed  artillery,  announcing  the  glad  tidings  that  the 
great  principle  of  popular  sovereignty  was  triumphant;  that  justice  was  vindicated  by 
the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise ;  that  the  reign  of  the  Constitution  would  now  be 
restored  ;  and  that  slavery  agitation  would  return  no  more  to  vex  the  land  !  As  though 
some  great  victory  had  crowned  our  arms  over  a  public  enemy,  as  at  Buena  Vista  or 
Ccrro  Gordo  heights,  the  reverberations  of  the  cannon  had  scarcely  ceased,  when  the 
same  joyful  tidings  were  carried  with  electric  speed  to  every  quarter  of  the  Union. 

"  I  trust  I  may  be  permitted,  without  offence,  to  say  that,  in  a  long  tract  of  time,  no 
example  can  be  found  of  a  delusion  engendered  in  the  heat  of  controversy,  more  com- 
plete than  that  which  appears  to  have  taken  possession  of  those  who  pressed  the  Ne- 
braska bill  to  its  tinal  passage  through  Congress.  Where,  now,  do  we  find  the  realiza- 
tion of  those  pleasing  dreams  which  doubtless  inspired  the  authors  of  that  measure? 

TT  -TT  -A-  ^  ^  ^ 

'•  Mr.  President,  I  do  not  wish  to  say  any  thing  that  can  be  considered  offensive  :  but 
I  must  say  I  do  not  know  any  way  in  which  I  can  so  well  illustrate  the  true  character 
and  tendency  of  the  organic  law  of  Kansas,  as  by  comparing  it  to  the  preliminary  ar- 
rangements which  usually  attend  the  sports  of  the  ring.  Without  any  far-fetched  anal- 
ogy, that  law  may  be  said  to  have  inaugurated  a  great  national  prize  fight.  The  ample 
lists  were  regularly  marked  out — they  were  the  boundaries  of  Kansas.  The  two  great 
sections  of  the  Union,  the  North  and"  the  South,  were  to  furnish  the  champions  and  to 
be  th^ir  backers.  The  pri^e  of  victor.-  was  to  be  a  slave  State  on  the  one  side  and  a  free 
State  on  the  other.  But  as  the  victory  was  to  be  decided  by  the  number  of  the  cham- 
pions, to  encourage  their  enlistment  and  prompt  attendance,  the  prize  of  a  choice  quar- 
ter section  of  land,  at  the  minimum  price,  was  to  be  awarded  to  the  thampions  on  either 
side. 

"  When  we  consider  that  the  champions  on  both  sides  of  this  great  national  contest  were 
deeply  imbued,  for  the  most  part,  with  adverse  principles,  sentiments  and  prejudices,  on 
the  subject  of  slaverj-,  excited  and  inflamed  almost  to  frenzy  by  recent  and  violent  agi- 
tation ;  and  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  western  counties  of  Missouri  would  naturally  be- 
come sensitive  and  excited  in  the  highest  degree  by  the  prospect  of  a  free  State  on  their 
borders,  it  is  not  extravagant  to  assert  that,  had  the  most  inventive  genius  of  the  age 
been  called  upon  for  a  scheme  of  policy'  combining  all  the  elements  of  slavery  agitation, 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  insure  the  greatest  amount  of  disorder,  personal  and  neighbor- 
hood fends,  border  disturbance,  and  bloodshed,  in  Kansas,  leading,  at  the  same  time, 
to  permanent  sectional  alienation,  he  could  not  have  succeeded  better  than  by  adopting 
the  provisions  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill."' 

He  insists  vpon  the  importance  of  a  speedy  adjustment. 

"  Sir,  months  ago,  when  authority  was  first  given  by  the  President  to  Governor  Shan- 
non to  call  to  his  aid  the  military  force  of  the  United  States  then  at  Fort  Leavenworth, 
we  were  told  that  there  would  be  no  further  disturbances ;  but  we  have  been  disap- 
pointed. The  disorders  have  rather  increased  than  diminished  since  that  time.  It  may 
be  that  there  will  be  no  more  unauthorized  military  arrajs  on  either  side  ;  but  will  that 
cure  the  evil?  Every  settler  in  Kansas  now  goes  artned,  and  prepared  for  sudden  con- 
'  flict ;  and  does  any  one  suppose  that  any  future  emigrant  to  that  Territory  will  fail  to 
equip  himself  fully  with  the  means  of  self-defence?  Does  any  one  snppose  that  there 
will  be  no  more  secret  associations,  no  longer  any  system  of  intimidation  kept  up,  no 
longer  any  use  for  the  bowie-knife,  revolver,  or  Sharpe's  rifles  ?  Again,  I  ask,  where  is 
all  this  to  end?  Can  quiet  ever  be  established  unless  one  party  or  the  other  is  driven 
out  by  force,  or  shall  voluntarily  abandon  the  contest,  or  until  Congress  shall  adopt 
some  measure  to  end  the  controversy? 

"  And,  sir.  what  forbids  that  we  should  now  adopt  some  measure,  with  provisions  so  faiT 
and  just  in  all  respects,  that  it  cannot  fail  to  mitigate,  if  it  cannot  remove  altogether,  ex- 
isting evils,  and  in  the  shortest  period  consistent  with  this  spirit  offairrie^s  and  justice,  bring 
the  whole  matter  in  controversy  to  a  close,  by  admitting  Kansas  into  the  Union  as  a 
State?     Do  this,  and  we  may  leave  the  issues  in  the  hands  of  a  higher  power.     *  *  * 

'•  Settle  this  slavery  controversy  when  we  may,  now  or  at  any  time,  or  in  any  way,  the 
best  that  can  be  devised,  whatever  section  may  have  a  triumph,  there  will  remain,  on 
the  side  of  the  vanquished,  a  deep  and  rankling  feeling  of  discontent  and  aliena- 
tion; and  a  whole  generation  must  pass  awny  before  they  will  cease  to  mar,  to  some 
extent,  the  general  harmony.  On  the  question  whether  Kansas  shall  be  a  free  or  a  Slave 
State,  as  a  representative  of  Southern  interests,  my  preference,  of  course,  is  for  a  slave 
Stale.    But,  sir,  if  iu  a  fair  corupetitioa  it  must  be  bo,  let  it  be  a  free  State;  let  it  be  retro- 


22 

ceded  to  the  Indians,  the  aboriginal  occnpants  of  the  soil;  let  it  become  another  Dead  Sea, 
rather  than  continue  the  pestilent  source  of  mortal  disease  to  our  system." 

MR.  BELL  IN  1858— THE  LECOMPTON  CONSTITUTION. 

In  the  speech  made  by  Mr.  Bell  in  the  Senate,  on  the  18th  of  March,  1858,  on  the  Le- 
compton  Constitution  bill,  there  occur  the  following  passages: 

Issues  between  the  North  and  the  South — Estimating  the  value  of  the  Union. 

"It  is  more  than  indicated:  it  is  boldly  assumed  by  some  gentlemen  that  the  rejection 
of  this  measure  will  be  regarded  as  a  decision  that  no  more  slave  States  are  to  be  admitted 
into  the  Union,  and  the  consequences  which  may  follow  such  a  decision  are  pointed  to 
in  no  equivocal  language.  There  is  no  gentleman  here  with  whom  1  differ  as  to  the  value 
of  the  union  of  these  States,  to  M'hom  I  do  not  accord  honesty  and  patriotism  of  purpose. 
There  is  simply  between  us  a  difltrence  in  judgmeut  as  to  the  true  interest  of  this  great 
country;  the  true  interest  of  the  South  as  well  as  the  North,  connected  with  the  Union. 
When  my  attention  is  invited  to  the  consideration  of  the  advantages  and  blessings  that 
may  follow  disunion  to  the  South,  I  shun  the  subject  as  one  that  is  speculative  only,  and 
prematurely  brought  forward.  That  is  a  field  of  inquiry  into  which  I  do  not  propose 
now  to  enter.  When  an  issue  is  made;  when  a  question  does  arise  demanding  such  an 
inquiry  as  that,  I  shall  be  ready  to  enter  upon  it,  and  to  estimate  the  value  of  the  Union; 
but  I  will  not  anticipate  the  occurrence  of  any  such  contingency.  When  the  North  shall, 
by  any  deliberate  act,  deprive  the  South  of  any  fair,  and  just,  and  equal  participation  in 
the  benefits  of  the  Hnion — if,  for  example,  the  Territory  now  proposed  to  be  admitted 
into  the  Union  as  a  State,  had  not  been  subject  to  an  interdict  of  slavery  for  thirty 
years — if  it  were  a  Territory  such  as  that  lying  west  of  Arkansas,  by  climate  adapted  to 
slave  labor,  and  by  population  already  a  slave  Territory:  and  if,  on  application  of  such 
R  Territory  for  admission  into  the  Union  as  a  slave  State,  the  powerful  North,  without 
any  of  the  feelings  and  resentments  naturally  growing  out  of  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise  in  regard  to  Kansas,  should  deliberately  announce  to'the  South,  "you  shall 
have  no  more  slave  States,"  that  would  afford  a  pretext  with  which  the  South  might 
with  some  reason,  and  with  some  assurance  of  the  approval  of  the  civilized  world  and  of 
posterity,  seek,  to  dissolve  the  Union.  I  know  that  it  is  supposed  by  some,  that  the  day 
will  come  when  the  North,  in  the  arrogance  of  its  power,  will  furnish  just  such  a  pretext 
as  I  have  indicated;  and  the  Senator  from  Georgia  and  others  have  argued  this  question 
on  the  ground  that  it  will  come;  but  I  must  see  it  come  before  I  will  calculate  the  value 
of  this  Union.  I  trust  that  day  will  never  come.  I  do  not  believe  it  will  come,  if  the 
South  is  wise  and  true  to  itself.  I  would  not  have  them  truckle  or  surrender  any  of 
their  rights.  I  would  not  have  them  yield  one  jot  or  tittle  of  their  rights;  but  I  would 
have  theni  make  no  questionable  issues  in  advance,  stir  up  no  strife  upon  unnecessary 
abstract  questions,  having  no  practical  value;  but  to  do  always  what  is  just  and  right 
upon  all  questions.  When  a  people  or  a  Territory  applies  for  admission  into  the  Union 
under  a  constitution  fairly  formed,  with  the  assent  of  the  people  excluding  slavery,  I 
would  admit  it  promptly;  and  when  an  application  comes,  on  the  other  hand,  from  the 
people  of  a  Territory  who  have  fairly  formed  a  constitution  recognising  slavery,  I  would 
insist  upon  its  adtnission  as  a  slave  State.  If  the  North  should  not  agree  to  this,  it 
•would  then  be  time  enough  to  consider  of  the  proper  remedy.  But  I  would  make  no 
issue  with  the  North  now,  and  before  any  occasion  for  it  has  arisen;  and  I  regret  most 
sincerely  to  hear  any  Senator  from  the  North  suggesting  that  such  an  issue  will  ever  be 
tendered  from  that  quarter." 

WHAT    OUGHT    TO    BE    DONE? 

"  With  regard  to  the  present  question,  I  lay  down  as  the  basi."  of  my  conclusion  as  to 
■what  ought  to  be  done,  that  the  solution  of  it  which  promises  the  speediest  termination 
of  this  dangerous  slavery  agitation  is  the  true  one.  This  dangerous  agitation  has  con- 
tinued long  enough.  There  has  been  no  mitigation  of  it  in  the  last  four  years.  There 
have  been  intervals  of  apparent  repose,  but  it  was  just  such  repose  as  foreboded  increased 
disorder  and  commotion.     It  is  time  to  terminate  it. 

The  question  is.  What  is  that  solution  which  promises  the  speediest  and  most  perma- 
nent remedy  for  these  difliculties?  Divine  that  to  me,  whoever  can,  and  I  will  follow 
his  lead.  How  shall  we  cut  this  Gordian  knot  of  Kansas  potitics?  Shall  we  cut  it  by 
the  sword?  Shall  we  first  subdue  the  rebellious  faction,  said  to  exist  in  Kansas,  by  force 
of  arms,  or  shall  we  endeavor  to  uaravel  this  tangled  skein  by  some  more  peaceful  means  ?" 


Frauds  and  Irregular  if  ies  of  the  Lecompton  CumtUutlon. 

"lly  friend  friend  from  Florida  [Mr.  Mallory]  said,  in  his  able  speech  the  other  drty, 
that  it  would  be  diificult  to  persuade  the  people  of  the  South  that  if  this  Constitution  btJ 
rejected  by  Congress,  it  will  not  be  upon  the  ground  that  it  recognizes  slavery.  That  13 
also  the  opinion  of  this  honorable  Senator  from  (-Jeorgia  and  others.  Unless  it  be  that 
these  honorable  Senators  want  some  imraediaie  pretext  for  a  movement  in  the  South,  I 
advise  them  to  investigate  this  question  more  fully  than  they  seem  to  have  done,  Ijefore 
they  conclude  to  make  the  rejection  of  this  measure,  should  it  be  rejected,  a  caiigi's  dis- 
junctionis  [a  case  for  disunion.]  We  are  told  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  persuade  the 
people  of  the  South  that  any  other  objection  exists  to  this  Constitution  except  that  it 
recognizes  slavery,  and  these  opinions  are  avowed  in  the  face  of  accumulated  frauds  and 
irregularities  connected  with  its  history,  and  though  it  is  clear  that  four-fifths  of  the 
people  ef  Kansas  are  opposed  to  it. 

"  It  will  not  do  lor  these  gentlemen  to  say  that  there  is  no  record  or  other  satisfactory 
proof  to  show  the  frauds  and  irregularities  alleged  against  the  Lecompton  Constitu- 
tion, or  any  other  statements  made  by  the  opponents  of  this  measure  in  relation  to 
the  state  of  things  existing  in  Kansas.  The  supporters  of  this  measure  in  the  Senate 
and  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  have  obstinately  persisted  in  voting  <lown  every 
jiroposition  to  investigate  and  take  proof  upon  the  contested  questions  of  fiict:  and  I 
take  it  for  granted  that  this  course  would  not  have  been  persisted  in,  unless  it  was 
understood  that  the  tacts  would  turn  out  as  thej-  have  been  charged.  If  I  have  not 
wholly  misconceived  and  misstated  the  material  points  in  the  history  of  Kansas  affairs 
which  preceded  the  formation  of  the  Lecompton  Constitution ;  if  I  have  not  misrepre- 
sented the  facts  connected  with  its  formation  ;  if  I  am  not  wholly  mistaken  iu  the  views 
I  have  presented  of  the  existing  state  of  public  sentiment  in  Kansas  in  relation  to 
this  Constitution,  is  it  becoming  the  character  of  the  national  Legislature  to  accept 
this  instrument  as  the  organic  law  of  the  new  State  which  is  proposed  to  be  admit- 
ted into  the  Union? 

"  Is  it  fit,  is  it  becoming  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  to  stamp  this  Constitution 
with  all  its  attendant  circumstances,  with  their  approval,  and  send  it  to  Kansas  to  be 
abided  by  or  resisted  to  blood  by  the  people  there  ?  Surely,  sir,  there  ought  to  be  some 
great  and  overruling  political  necessity  existing  in  the  condition  of  afiairs  to  justify 
such  a  jiroceediug." 

The  passage  of  the  Lecompton  Bill  would  strengthen  Republicanism. 

"  I  now  ask  the  attention  of  the  Senate  to  the  effect  of  the  experiment  localizing 
slavery  agitation  in  the  Territories  made  in  1854.  in  changing  the  complexion  of  parties 
both  in  Congress  and  in  the  country.  In  the  Congress  which  passed  the  Kansas-Ne- 
braska bill,  we  have  seen  that  there  was,  at  the  commencement  of  the  session  in  De- 
cember, 1833,  a  Democratic  majoritj-  of  eighty-four  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  and 
only  four  Free  Soilers  ;  and  in  the  Senate,  a  like  number  [of  the  latter] — so  small,  yet 
so  distinct  in  their  principles,  that  neither  of  the  two  great  parties  then  known  to  the 
country  knew  well  how  to  arrange  them  on  committees.  *•><•*  Now,  let  us  see 
what  was  the  effect  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  act  on  the  elections  which  ensued  in  the  fall 
of  1854,  just  on  the  heels  of  the  adoption  of  that  measure.  One  hundred  and  seven  Free- 
Soilcrs  were  returned  to  the  House  of  Representatives  ;  and  the  Democratic  party,  in- 
stead of  having-  a  majority  of  eighty-four  in  that  House,  found  itself  in  a  minority  of 
seventy-six:  and  in  the  Senate  the  number  of  Free-Soilers  was  increased  to  thirteen. 
Such  was  the  complexion  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress  in  the  Thirty-third  Congress, 
which  assembled  in  December  1835.  Now,  we  find  in  the  Senate  twenty  Free-Soilers. 
How  many  more  they  may  have  in  the  next  Congress  will  depend  upon  the  disposition 
we  make  of  the  question  now  before  the  Senate.  I  call  upon  the  Senator  from  Georgia 
to  say  whether  he  will  have  that  number  limited  or  not.  Does  he  want  a  sufficient  num- 
ber to  prevent  the  ratification  of  any  future  treaty  of  acquisition?  How  long  will  it  be 
before  we  have  that  number,  if  the  southern  Democracy  persist  in  their  present  course  ? 
They  would  seenj  to  be  deeply  interested  in  adding  to  the  power  of  the  Republican  party. 
I  consider  the  most  fearful  and  portentous  of  all  the  results  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  act 
was  to  create,  to  build  up  a  great  sectional  party.  *  *  I  consider  that  no  more  omi- 
nous and  threatening  cloud  can  darken  the  political  horizon  at  any  lime.  Huw  formi- 
dable this  party  has  already  become,  may  be  well  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  its  repre- 
presentative  candidate,  Mr.  Fremont,  was  only  beaten  in  the  Presidential  election  by  the 
most  desperate  efforts ;  and  I  feel  warranted  in  saying,  that  but  for  the'emincnt  prospect 
of  his  success  which  shone  out  near  the  close  of  the  canvass,  Mr.  Buchanan  would  not 
have  attained  hia  present  high  position.  *  '*■  *  -;*  * 


24 

*'  In  tlie  closing  debate  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  I  told  his  supporters  that  thcr 
•could  do  nothing  more  certain  to  disturb  the  composure  of  the  two  Senators  on  the  opposite 
side  of  the  chamber,  the  one  from  Massachusetts,  [Mr.  Sumner,]  and  the  other  from  Ohio, 
[Mr.  Chase,]  than  to  reject  that  bill.  Its  passage  was  the  only  thing  in  the  range  of  pos- 
sible events  by  which  their  political  fortunes  could  be  resuscitated,  so  comjdetely  had  the 
Free-Soil  nioveiiicut  at  the  North  been  paralyzed  by  the  Compromise  measures  of  1850. 
I  say  now  to  the  advocates  of  this  [the  Lecompton]  measure,  if  they  want  to  strengthen 
the  Republican  party,  and  give  the  reins  of  Government  into  their  hands,  pass  this  bill. 
If  they  desire  to  weaken  the  poM^er  of  that  party,  and  arrest  the  progress  of  slavery 
agitation,  reject  it.  And,  if  it  is  their  policy  to  put  an  end  to  the  agitation  connected 
with  Kansas  affairs  at  the  earliest  day  practicable,  as  they  say  it  is,  then  let  them  remit 
this  constitution  back  to  the  people  of  Kansas  for  their  ratification  or  rejection.  In  that 
way  the  whole  difficulty  will  be  settled  before  the  adjournment  of  the  present  Miesion  of 
Congress,  without  the  violation  of  any  sound  principle,  or  the  sacrifice  of  the"  rights  of 
either  section  of  the  Union." 

Mr.  Bell  replies  to  the  complaints  of  the  North  against  the  South,  and  calls  upon  the  folloivers 
of  Mr.  Seward  "  to  arrest  him  in  his  mad  career." 

"  The  honorable  Senator  from  New  York  farther  .announced  to  us,  in  exultant  tones, 
that  '  at  last  there  was  a  north  side  of  this  Chamber,  a  north  side  of  the  Chamber  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  and  a  north  side  of  the  Union,  as  well  as  a  south  side  of  all 
these ; '  and  he  admonished  us  that  the  time  was  at  hand  when  freedom  would  assert  its 
due  influence  in  the  regulation  of  the  domestic  and  foreign  policy  of  the  country. 

"  When  was  there  a  time  in  the  history  of  the  Government  that  there  was  no  north  side 
of  this  Chamber  and  of  the  other?  Wiaen  was  there  a  time  that  there  was  not  a  proud 
array  of  northern  men  in  both  Chambers,  distinguished  by  their  genius  and  ability,  de- 
voted to  the  interests  of  the  North,  and  successful  in  maintaining  them? 

"  Though  it  may  be  true  that  southern  men  have  filled  the  executive  chair  for  much  the 
largest  portion  of  the  time  that  has  elapsed  since  the  organization  of  the  Government, 
jet  when,  in  what  instance  was  it,  that  a  southerner  has  been  elected  to  that  high  station 
Avithout  the  support  of  a  majority  of  the  freemen  of  the  North? 

"  Do  you  of  the  North  complain  that  the  policy  of  the  Government,  under  the  long  con- 
tinued influence  of  southern  Presidents,  has  been  injurious  or  fatal  to  your  interests  ? 
Has  it  paralyzed  your  industry  ?  Has  it  crippled  your  resources  ?  Has  it  impaired  your 
energies?  Has  it  checked  your  progress  in  any  one  department  of  human  eifort?  Let 
your  powerful  mercantile  marine,  your  ships  whitening  every  sea — the  fruit  of  wise  com- 
mercial regulations  and  navigation  laws  ;  let  your  flourishing  agriculture,  your  aston- 
ishing progress  in  manufacturing  skill,  your  great  canals,  your  thousands  of  miles  of 
railroads,  your  vast  trade,  internal  and  external,.your  proud  cities,  and  your  accumulated 
millions  of  moneyed  capital,  ready  to  be  invested  in  profitable  enterprises  in  any  part  of 
the  world — answer  that  question.  Do  you  complain  of  a  narrow  and  jealous  policy'  under 
southern  rule,  in  extending  and  opening  new  fields  of  enterprise  to  your  hardy  sons  in 
the  great  West,  along  the  line  of  the  great  chain  of  American  lakes,  even  to  the  head- 
waters of  the  father  of  rivers,  and  over  the  rich  and  fertile  plains  stretching  southward 
from  the  lake  shores?  Let  the  teeming  populations  ;  let  the  hundreds  of  millions  of  an- 
nual products  that  have  succeeded  to  the  but  recent  dreary  and  unproductive  haunts  of 
the  red  man — answer  that  question.  That  very  preponderance  of  free  States  which  the 
Senator  from  New  York  contemplates  with  such  satisfaction,  and  which  has  moved  him 
exultingly  to  exclaim  that  there  is  at  last  a  north  side  of  this  Chamber,  has  been  has- 
tened by  the  liberal  policy  of  southern  Presidents  and  southern  statesmen,  and  has  it 
become  the  ambition  of  that  Senator  to  unite  and  combine  all  this  great,  rich,  and  pow- 
erful north  in  the  policy  of  crippling  the  resources  and  repressing  the  power  of  the 
South?  Is  this  to  be  the  one  idea  which  is  to  mould  the  policy  of  the  Government, 
when  that  gentleman  and  his  friends  shall  control  it?  If  it  be,  then  I  appeal  to  the 
better  feelings  and  the  better  judgment  of  his  followers  to  arrest  him  in  his  mad  career. 
Sir,  let  us  have  some  brief  interval  of  repose  at  least  from  this  eternal  agitation  of  the 
slavery  question." 

The   Union — Hoto  only  it  can  he  saved. 

"  Let  power  go  into  whatever  hands  it  may,  let  us  save  the  Union  !  I  have  all  the  con- 
fidence other  gentlemen  can  have  in  the  extent  to  which  this  Union  is  intrenched  in  the 
hearts  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people  of  the  North  and  South  ;  but  when  I  reflect  upon 
and  consider  the  desperate  and  dangerous  extremes  to  which  ambitious  party  leaders  aro 
often  prepared  to  go,  without  meaning  to  do  the  country  any  mischief,  in  the  struggle 


25 

for  the  imperial  power,  the  crown  of  the  American  Presidencj-,  I  sometimes  tremble  for 
its  fate. 

"  Two  great  parties  are  now  dividing  the  Union  on  this  qnestion.  It  is  evident,  to  every 
man  of  sense,  who  examines  it,  that  practically,  in  respect  to  slavery,  tjie  result  will  be 
the  same  both  to  North  and  South  ;  Kansas  will  be  a  tree  State,  no  matter  what  m.ay  be 
the  decision  on  this  question.  But  how  that  decision  may  effect  the  fortunes  of  those 
parties,  is  not  certain,  and  is  the  chief  difficulty.  But  the  great  question  of  all.  is  how 
will  that  decision  affect  the  country  as  a  whole? 

"Two  adverse  yet  concurrent  and  mighty /orces  are  driving  the  vessel  of  State  to- 
wards the  rock?  upon  which  she  must  split,  unless  she  receives  timely  aid — a  paradox, 
yet  expressive  of  a  momentous  and  perhaps  a  fatal  truth.  There  is  no  hope  of  rescue 
unless  the  sober-minded  men,  both  of  the  North  and  South,  shall  by  some  sufficient 
influence,  be  brought  to  adopt  the  wise  maxims  and  sage  counsels  of  the  great  founders 
of  the  Government." 

CONCLUmNG    BEMAUKS. 

It  is  particularly  worthy  of  notice,  that  Mr.  Bell's  traducers  have  never  assailed  any 
sentiment,  doctrine,  or  principle  enounced  by  him  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  Their  ob- 
jections lie,  and  are  limited — 

1.  To  his  votes  in  favor  of  receiving  and  acting  upon  abolition  petitions,  as  a  matter 
of  sound  policy  on  the  part  of  the  representatives  from  the  South,  and  in  view  of  the 
injurious  results  which  he  believed  would  follow  the  adoption  of  the  opposite  policy. 
The  results  turned  out  to  be  what  he  thought  and  said  they  would;  and  his  course 
was  ultimately  vindicated,  in  the  fullest  manner,  by  the  repeal  of  the  ''Twenty-First 
Rule,''  after  an  experience  of  four  years,  by  a  Housee  of  Representatives  numbering 
two  Democrats  to  one  Whig! 

2.  To  his  opposition  to  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  which  he  based  solely 
upon  what  he  foresaw  and  predicted  would  be  the  ^'results."  He  could  find  no  warrant 
in  the  Constitution  for  the  clause  in  the  act  of  1820,  restricting  slavery  by  the  line 
of  36-30.  He  regarded  such  restriction  as  unjust  to  the  South,  and  in  violation  of  the 
treaty  by  which  the  territory  was  acquired  from  France.  He  had  voted  in  1850  to 
repeal  the  Mexican  laws  prohibiting  slavery  in  New  Mexico,  which  were  in  force  at 
the  time  of  the  acquisition.  But  when  it  came  to  voting  for  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise,  which  had  been  peacefully  acquiesced  in  for  thirty  years,  he  apprehended 
dangerous  consequences  to  the  South  and  to  the  whole  country  from  the  adoption  of  the 
measure.  He  looked  at  the  probable  results  of  the  measure,  and  guided,  as  he  expressly 
declared,  entirely  by  the  conclusion  which  hi.'*  mind  came  to  as  to  what  those  results 
would  be,  he  voted  against  the  repeal,  and  in  so  voting,  as  the  results  proved,  he  voted 
against  the  creation  of  the  Republican  party  1  It  would  be  a  gross  libel  on  the  majority 
who  repealed  the  Missouri  Compromise,  to  suppose  they  would  have  done  it,  had  they 
been  gifted  with  the  foresight  of  Mr,  Bell,  and  seen,  as  his  far-reaching  sagacity  enabled 
him  to  do,  the  deplorable  consequences  which  followed  from  it. 

No  higher  tribute  could  be  rendered  to  any  man  than  that  which  is  unwittingly  paid 
to  Mr.  Bell  by  the  entire  array,  vasfas  it  is,  of  Democratic  leaders,  speakers  and  writers 
throughout  the  South,  when  they  call  upon  the  people  of  the  South,  as  they  are  every- 
day doing,  by  uniting  under  the  Deraocraiic  flag,  to  interpose  a  barrier  to  the  onward 
march  of  Republicanism — when  they  expatiate  upon  the  danger  to  Southern  institutions 
of  the  government's  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  Republicans — when  they  proclaim  that 
danger  to  be  so  great,  that  the  South  ought  never  to  submit  to  the  inauguration  of  the 
Republican  candidate,  if  elected.  Had  Mr.  Bell's  prudent  counsels — his  wise  admoni- 
tions— his  earnest  remonstrances  been  heeded,  there  would  this  day  have  been  no  Re- 
publican party,  and  the  country  would  now  be  in  the  enjoyment  of  that  repose  and  free- 
dom from  slavery  agitation  which  President  Pierce  congratulated  it  upon  possessing  at 
the  date  of  his  installation  into  the  Presidential  office. 

3.  To  his  vote  against  the  Lecompton  Constitution  bill.  He  voted,  his  accusers  say, 
against  admitting  Kansas  into  the  Union  as  a  slave  State.  "A  slave  State!"  The 
Democrats  of  Tennessee  know,  and  will  give  ready  credence  to  Gen.  Whitfield,  their 
former  fellow-citizen  and  active  co-laborer  in  the  cause  of  Democracy,  who  removed  to 
Kansas  at  an  early  day.  In  his  speech  against  the  Lecompton  bill,  Mr.  Bell  quoted  the 
following  extract  of  a  letter,  written  by  Gen.  Whitfield  to  the  editor  of  the  Wa^hiugtoa 
Union,  dated  Washington  City,  September  2,  1S58 : 

"I  have  seen  the  letter  addressed  by  Dr. Tebbs  to  a  gentleman  in  this  city.  His  letter 
fully  and  fairly  represents  the  condition  of  parties  in  Kansas,  both  before  and  after  the 
advent  of  Governor  Walker ;  and  I  have  been  perfectly  astonished,  upon  my  arrival  i^ere, 
to  find  the  crusade  from  the  South  upon  Governor  Walker,  charging  him  with  an  at- 

3  » 


•26 

lempt  to  "  abolitionize  Kansas."  It  required  no  action  from  Governor  Walker  to  make 
Kansas  a  free  State.  Its  doom,  if  it  is  fixed,  was  fixed  long  before  Robert  J.  Walker  ever 
entered  the  Territory. 

"  I  repeat  again,  sir,  that  knowing  Dr.  Tebbs  well,  and  knowing  him  to  be  thoroughly 
posted  upon  Kansas  affairs,  I  endorse  fully  his  views  and  conclusions  as  expressed  in  his 
letter  to  you." 

From  the  letter  of  Doctor  Tebbs,  referred  to  in  Gen.  Whitfield's  letter,  Mr.  Bell  quoted 
the  following  paragragh  : 

"  That  in  January,  1857,  four  or  five  months  before  Governor  Walker  arrived  in  the 
Territory,  the  pro-slavery  party  held  a  Convention  of  all  the  members  of  the  Legislature 
and  delegates  from  every  county  in  the  Territory,  to  discuss  the  conditionof  parties,  and 
leading  pro-slavery  men  deliberately  declared  it  as  their  opinion  that  the  pro-slavery 
party  proper  was  in  a  hopeless  minority." 

This  Doctor  Tebbs  was  represented  in  the  same  number  of  the  Union  in  which  his 
letter  was  published,  as  a  "  Virginian  by  birth,  a  slaveholder,  and  one  of  the  early  settlers 
of  Kansas,"  who  had  been  a  "  member  of  every  Legislature  since  Kansas  had  become  a 
Territory,"  and  whose  "  radical  views  on  the  slavery  question  had  rendered  him  peculiarly 
obnoxious  to  the  Black  Republicans  of  the  Territory." 

Mr.  Bell's  opposition  to  the  Lecompton  bill,  therefore,  took  place  in  view  of  the  highest 
Democratic  evidence  in  the  Territory — that  "  the  pro-slavery  party  proper  [in  the  Terri- 
tory] was  in  a  hopeless  minority !  " 

Mr.  Bell  also,  by  authentic  facts  and  figures,  demonstrated  that  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  Territory  were  opposed  to  the  Lecompton  Constitu- 
tion. In  view  of  these  facts,  Mr.  Bell  argued,  that  to  impose  that  Constitution  on  the 
unwilling  majority  of  the  people  of  Kansas — large  and  overwhelming  as  it  was — would 
be  an  act  of  arbitrary  power  on  the  part  of  Congress,  in  violation  of  a  fundamental 
principle  of  all  free  institutions,  and  which,  under  all  the  circumstances  connected  with 
it,  could  be  of  no  sort  of  advantage  to  the  South,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  in- 
evitable effect  of  it  would  be  further  to  excite  the  North  against  the  South,  and  to  give 
increased  strength  and  vitality  to  the  Republican  organization. 

The  Republicans  had  already  twenty  Senators.  How  long  would  it,  Mr.  Bell  asked,  be 
before  they  would  have  a  sufficient  number  (one-third)  to  prevent  the  ratification  of  any 
treaty  of  acquisition,  if  the  Southern  Democracy  persisted  in  their  course?  The 
Southern  Democracy  did  persist,  and  the  result  was  as  Mr.  Bell  saw  and  foretold ;  the 
Republican  Senators  have  been  increased  to  more  than  the  requisite  number,  to  enable 
them  to  reject  any  treaty  they  may  see  fit  to  reject. 

Did  the  advocates  of  the  Lecompton  bill,  Mr,  Bell  further  asked,  want  to  strengthen 
the  Republican  party  and  give  the  reins  of  Government  into  their  hands?  If  they  did, 
let  them  pass  the  bill.  Did  they  desire  to  lessen  the  power  of  the  Republican  party,  and 
arrest  the  progress  of  slavery  agitation?  If  they  did,  let  them  reject  the  bill,  and  send 
the  Constitution  back  to  the  people  of  Kansas  for  their  ratification  or  rejection.  These 
are  the  grounds  upon  which  Mr.  Bell  opposed  the  passage  of  the  Lecompton  Constitution 
bill.  If  well  taken,  they  fully  justify  Mr.  Bell's  course.  Who,  at  this  day,  will  say  that 
they  were  not  well  taken?  What  candid  man  will  censure  Mr.  Bell  for  acting  as  he  did 
upon  those'grounds? 


MR.  EVERETT  THIRTY  YEARS  AGO. 


There  is  a  peculiar  fitness  in  the  candidates  of  the  Union  party  to  stand  before  the 
people  as  the  exponents  of  the  platform  of  the  Union,  the  Constitution,  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  laws.  From  the  commencement  of  their  public  career,  throughout  all  their 
service  in  the  councils  of  the  nation,  and  in  every  public  and  private  capacity,  they  have 
both  been  distinguished  for  their  strong  devotion  to  the  union  of  the  States,  their  un- 
wavering maintenance  of  the  Constitution  of  the  country,  and  their  rigid  requirement 
that  the  laws  should  be  justly  enforced.  Upon  the  vexed  and  vexatious  slavery  question 
they  have  occupied  precisely  this  position  and  no  other.  They  have  carefully  avoided 
the  extreme  prejudices  and  opinions  prevailing  in  their  respective  sections  of  the  coun- 
try, and  have  preserved  an  inviolable  nationality. 

Mr.  Bell,  representing  in  Congress  and  in  the  United  States  Senate  a  southern  consti- 
tuency, has  never  faltered  in  his  defence  of  the  rights  of  the  people  of  the  southern  StatcB 


27  ■  •  ■ 

from  any  assault,  and  his  record  presents  no  single  point  of  objection  to  the  national- 
minded  men  of  the  South.  His  past  career  is  to  them  a  sufficient  guaranty  that  in  his 
hands  and  under  his  administration  of  public  affairs  their  rights,  their  interests,  their 
honor  will  be  safe  and  well  protected.  But  while  he  is  firm  in  the  defence  of  State  rights, 
his  course  has  been  guided  so  truly  and  undeviatingly  by  the  provisions  and  compro- 
mises of  the  Constitution,  that  his  eminent  justice  and  nationality  and  patriotism  hat; 
endeared  him  more  than  any  other  southern  statesman  to  the  conservative,  Union-loving. 
Constitution-abiding  citizens  of  the  North,  and  they  have  for  him  a  respect  and  admira- 
tion that  defy  the  calumnies  and  assaults  of  any  opponents. 

Side  by  side  with  John  Bell  in  the  maintenance  of  the  Union,  the  Constitution,  and 
the  equal  rights  of  the  States,  stands  Edward  Everett.  Upon  the  slavery  question  no 
northern  man  occupies  a  more  national  position,  or  is  more  acceptable  to  the  people  of 
the  South.  Again  and  again,  in  reference  to  this  subject,  he  has  expressed  his  determi- 
nation to  abide,  in  good  faith,  by  the  compromises  of  the  Constitution.  Upon  all  neces- 
sary occasions  he  has  boldly  advocated  the  prompt  and  faithful  execution  of  the  fugitive 
slave  law,  and  sternly  opposed  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  question.  In  reference  to 
attempts  to  excite  servile  insurrections  in  the  southern  States,  no  orator  has  ever  spoken 
more  eloquently  or  in  terms  of  more  decided  reprobation.  To  use  his  own  bold  and 
manly  language,  he  does  not  think,  as  far  too  many  northern  people  do,  that  it  is  '■•im- 
moral and  irreligious  to  Join  in  putting  down  a  servile  insurrection  at  the  South."  "There 
18  NO  CAUSE,"  he  bravely  and  patriotically  proclaims,  "in  which  i  wodld  sooner  buckle 

A    KNAPSACK    TO    MY    BACK    AND    PUT    A    MUSKET    ON    MY    SHOULDER    THAN    THAT." 

A  correspondent  of  a  southern  cotemporary  recently  called  attention  to  a  speech  made 
by  Mr.  Everett  during  the  earlier  part  of  his  service  in  Congress,  when,  with  prophetic 
vision,  lie  foresaw  the  deplorable  consequences  of  abolition  agitation,  and  eloquently 
defended  the  compromises  of  the  Constitution.     In  that  speech,  Mr.  Everett  said : 

"  If  there  are  any  members  in  this  House  of  that  class  of  politicians  to  whom  the 
gentleman  from.  North  Carolina  (Mr.  Saunders)  alluded,  as  having  the  disposition,  though 
not  the  power,  to  disturb  the  compromise  contained  in  the  Constitution  on  this  point, 
(the  three-fifths  representative  principle,)  I  am  not  of  the  number.  Neither  am  I  one 
of  those  citizens  of  the  North  to  whom  another  honorable  member  lately  referred,  in  a 
publication  to  which  his  name  was  subscribed,  who  would  think  it  immoral  and  irreli- 
gious to  join  in  putting  down  a  servile  insurrection  at  the  South.  I  am  no  soldier,  sir; 
my  habits  and  education  are  unmilitary ;  but  there  is  no  cause  in  which  I  would  sooner 
buckle  a  knapsack  to  my  back,  and  put  a  musket  on  my  shoulder,  than  that.  I  would 
cede  the  whole  continent  to  any  oue  who  would  take  it — to  England,  to  France,  to 
Spain — I  would  see  it  sunk  to  the  bottom  of  the  ocean  before  I  would  see  any  part  of 
this  fine  America  converted  into  a  continental  Hayti,  by  that  awful  process  of  bloodshed 
and  desolation  by  which  alone  such  a  catastrophe  could  be  brought  on.  The  great  re- 
lation to  servitude  in  some  form  or  other,  with  greater  or  less  departures  from  the 
theoretic  equality  of  man,  is  inseparable  from  our  nation.  I  know  of  no  other  way  by 
which  the  form  of  this  servitude  shall  be  fixed  but  by  political  institution.  Domestic 
slavery,  though  I  confess  not  that  form  of  servitude  which  seems  to  be  the  m')st  bene- 
ficial to  the  master — certainly  that  which  is  most  beneficial  to  the  slave — is  not,  in  my 
judgment,  to  be  set  down  as  an  immoral  and  irreligious  relation. 

"I  cannot  admit  that  religion  has  but  oue  voice  to  the  slave,  and  that  thi-;  voice  is, 
'Rise  against  your  master.'  No,  sir;  the  New  Testament  says,  '  slaves,  obey  yovr  master;' 
and  though  I  know  full  well,  that  in  the  benignant  operation  of  Christianity,  which 
gathered  master  and  slave  around  the  same  communion  table,  this  unfortunaie  institu- 
tion disappeared  in  Europe,  yet  I  cannot  admit  that  while  it  subsists,  and  where  it  sub- 
ciists,  its  duties  are  not  presupposed  and  sanctioned  by  religion.  And  though  I  certainly 
am  not  called  upon  to  meet  the  charges  brought  against  thisinstitution,  yet  truth  obliges 
me  to  say  a  word  more  on  the  subject. 

"I  know  the  condition  of  working  classes  in  other  countries ;  lam  intimately  ac- 
quainted with  it  in  some  other  countries  ;  and  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  I  be- 
lieve the  slaves  in  this  country  are  better  clothed  and  fed,  and  less  hardlj'  worked,  than 
the  peasantry  of  some  of  the  most  prosperous  States  of  the  continent  of  Europe.  To 
consider  the  checks  on  population,  read  Malthas.  What  keeps  population  down? 
Poverty,  want,  starvation,  disease,  and  all  the  ills  of  life ;  it  is  these  that  check  popula- 
tion all  over  the  world.  Now,  the  slave  population  in  the  United  States  increases  faster 
than  the  white,  masters  included. 

"What  is  the  inference  as  to  the  physical  condition  of  the  two  classes  of  society? 
These  are  opinions  I  have  long  entertained,  and  long  since  publicly  professed  on  this 
subject,  and  which  I  have  repeat  in  answer  to  the  intimation  to  which  I  have  already 
alluded.     But,  sir,  when  slavery  comes  to  enter  into  the   Constitution  as  a  political 


28 

clement — when  it  comes  to  affect  the  distribution  of  power  among  the  States  of  the 
Union,  that  is  a  matter  of  agreement.  If  I  make  an  agreement  on  this  subject,  I  will 
adhere  to  it  lilie  a  man  ;  but  I  will  protest  against  anj  interference  being  made  from 
it  of  the  kind  which  was  made  by  the  honorable  mover  of  these  resolutions." 

These  noble  and  patriotic  sentiments  of  Mr.  Everett  will  be  appreciated.  They  will 
sound  gratefully  in  the  ears  of  the  conservative  men  North  and  South.  They  are  in 
marked  contrast  with  the  diabolical  expressions  of  the  favorite  of  Republicanism, 
Charles  Sumner,  and  are  quite  different  in  tone  from  any  of  the  expressions  of  northern 
sentiment  that  have  been  uttered  recently  by  prominent  men  of  any  party  in  the  North. 
This  speech  of  Edward  Everett,  containing  the  boldest,  the  manliest,  and  most  just  vin- 
dication of  the  South  ever  uttered  bj'-  a  northern  man  upon  the  floor  of  Congress,  will 
carry  conviction  to  the  hearts  of  southern  men  that  its  author  will  be  guided  only  by 
sound,  and  safe,  and  conservative,  and  patriotic  principles  in  the  performance  of  every 
public  duty.  The  Union  men — conservative  men  of  all  parties  in  the  South  and  in  the 
North — may  be  proud  to  give  their  support  to  candidates  who  present  a  record  of  such 
proud  nationality  as  John  Bell  and  Edward  Everett. 


MR.    EVERETT    ON    THE    BLAVERY    QUB3TI0K. 

Boston,  June  18,  I860. 

Dear  Sir:  Your  letter  of  the  12th  was  received  by  Mr.  Everett  this  day.  When  he 
accepted  the  nomination  of  the  Baltimore  Union  Convention,  it  was  with  the  under- 
standing that  the  correspondence  which  might  grow  out  of  it,  should  devolve  on  the 
Union  Committee  here.  Your  letter  of  the  r2th  has  accordingly  been  placed  in  my 
hands,  and  as  you  request  an  answer  that  will  reach  you  by  returu  of  mail,  I  have  but  a 
few  moTieuts  to  prepare  it  in. 

The  Coraprimise  measures  of  1850  were  regarded  and  have  been  supported  by  conser- 
vative men  at  the  North,  as  a  fair  and  practicable  basis  of  united  political  action  be- 
tween the  two  great  sections  of  the  country.  To  those  measures  Mr.  Everett  gave  his 
full  concurrence. 

The  papers  enclosed  in  your  letter,  viz  :  the  resolves  of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature' 
Mr.  Borden's  letter,  and  Mr.  Everett's  reply,  date  from  the  year  1S39.  They  were  brought 
before  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  in  1841,  at  the  time  of  his  nomination  as  minister 
to  England,  and  made  the  ground  of  a  motion  for  its  rejection.  Henry  Clay  opposed 
that  motion  with  great  warmth,  and  said  "that  if  through  the  influence  of  the  South, 
the  appoiinment  of  a  man  of  Mr.  Everett's  known  conservative  opinions  was  rejected, 
the  Uniou  was  already  dissolved."  At  the  close  of  a  fervid  speech  by  Rufus  Choate,  in 
support  of  Mr.  Everett'.s  appointment,  the  late  Hon.  W.  C.  Preston  exclaimed,  "lam 
afraid  I  have  committed  myself  to  vote  against  him,  but  by  heaven  he  shall  not  be  re- 
jected." Mr.  Preston  was  heard  to  say  that  "he  regretted  that  vote  more  than  any 
ever  given  by  him."  Mr.  Everett's  nomination  as  the  first  minister  to  China,  two  years 
later,  was.  I  believe,  unanimously  confirmed  in  the  same  Senate,  of  vehich  Mr.  Vice 
President  King  and  Mr.  Calhoun  were  members.  His  nomination  as  Secretary  of  State' 
on  the  death  of  Mr.  Webster  was  unanimously  confirmed  in  1852.  In  the  following  year 
he  was  elected,  by  the  conservative  member.s  of  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  to  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  Everett's  views  with  reference  to  the  sectional  agitation  now  distracting  the 
country,  if  left  in  any  doubt  by  his  own  course,  are  sufficiently  shown  by  the  bitter  hos- 
tility of  the  entire  anti-slavery  press.  They  were  re-affirmed,  to  the  great  acceptance  of 
good  patriots  throughout  the  Union,  in  his  speech  at  Faneuil  Hall,  on  the  occasion  of 
the  attempt  at  Harper's  Ferry  ;  and  they  are  re-stated  in  his  letter  signifying  his  reluct- 
ant acceptance  of  the  Baltimore  nomination. 

I  will  only  observe,  in  conclusion,  that  as  it  seems  to  us  here,  no  good  can  result  from 
a  review  of  all  ihat  has  been  said  or  written  North  or  South,  for  twenty  or  thirty  years, 
on  the  question  which  now  more  than  ever  distracts  the  country.  Reasonable  men  will 
not,  in  either  section,  expect  to  find  entire  concurrence  in  the  other;  and  if  sentiments 
like  those  entertained,  and  on  all  proper  occasions  avowed  by  Mr.  Everett,  fail  to  win  the 
confidence  of  Union-loving  men  at  the  South,  Mr.  Clay's  emphatic  exclamation  in  1841, 
may  well  be  repeated. 

I  remain,  dear  Sir,  in  haste,  very  respectfullv  vours, 

LEVERETT  SALTONSTALL. 
President  State  Central  Committee  of  the  Constitutional  Union  Party. 

To  Joseph  W.  Taylor,  Esq.,  Eutaw,  Alabama. 


29 

The  Memphis  Bulletin  accompanies  the  publication  of  the  above  letter  with  the  fol- 
lowing apposite  remarks  : 

"Read  this  letter  again.  Mark  the  fact  that  in  1852,  the  year  in  which  the  National 
Democracy  met  in  convention  at  Baltimore,  and  adopted  the  compromise  of  1850  as  a 
part  of  their  platform,  Mr.  Everett  was  unanimously  con6rraed  by  a  democratic  Senate 
as  Secretary  of  State.  Mark  the  other  general  facts  stated  in  this  letter.  Mark  the  fact 
that  he  is  now  acting  against,  and  always  has  acted  against  the  abolition  party.  He  is 
now  in  opposition  to  the  Republicans.  If  he  is  now  in  sympathy  with  them,  why  does 
he  not  go  with  them?  There  is  nothing  the  republicans  would  not  give  him  were  he  a 
member  of  their  party.  Turn  to  our  back  numbers  and  read  what  we  have  from  time  to 
time  published  from  Mr.  Everett.  No  honest  mind  believes  he  is  an  enemy  to  the  South. 
Every  honest  mind  knows  that  he  is  true  and  loyal  to  all  divisions  of  the  Union. 

"  But  if  democrats  will  try  Mr.  Everett  by  his  ancient  record,  they  must  take  all  that  re- 
cord together,  and  not  garble  it  to  make  out  their  case.  Or  if  they  will  not  admit  the 
possibility  of  modification  of  opinion  on  his  part,  even  in  the  presence  of  the  testimony 
to  that  effect,  they  must  make  him  no  exception,  but  judge  all  men  by  the  standard  they 
have  created.  That  is  fair — nothing  less  would  be  honest.  Judiug  democratic  states- 
men by  this  democratic  standard,  the  Natchez  Courier  asks,  '  where  would  stand  Gov. 
Letcher,  of  Virginia,  elected  almost  within  a  year  ;  who,  within  ten  years,  was  an  avowed 
emancipationist  ? '  Where  would  stand  Charles  J.  Faulkner,  of  Virginia,  present  Minister 
to  France,  than  whom  no  man  has  received  more  States  Rights  eulogy  ;  whose  freesoil 
abolition  doctrines  expressed  within  twenty  years,  would,  if  now  avowed,  drive  him  in 
contumely  from  the  State  of  Virginia?  Where  would  stand  John  A.  Dix,  held  up  twelve 
years  ago  by  the  leading  democratic  press  of  the  South  as  worthy  of  the  Presidency ; 
since  that,  the  freesoii  candidate  for  Governor  of  New  York,  on  the  Van  Buren  abolition 
ticket,  and  subsequently  to  that  a  petted  recipient  of  democratic  favor,  and  now  a  pro- 
minent office-holder  under  Mr.  Buchanan?  Mr.  Dix  was  offered  some  time  since,  we 
believe,  the  Ministership  to  England,  and  Mr.  Faulkner  is  now  Minister  to  France  ;  and 
both  freesoilers  and  emancipationi.sts,  since  Mr.  Everett  was  one,  if  ever  ;  and  the  stric- 
tures, now  quoted  against  the  latter,  are  those  that  grew  out  of  his  appointment  to  a 
foreign  embassy  in   1841  ! 

"  How  of  Mr.  Buchanan  ;  who,  in  1826,  considered  slavery  '  a  great  moral  and  poli- 
tical evil ;'  who,  in  1836,  presented  and  voted  to  receive  petitions  for  the  abolition  of 
slavery;  who,  in  1844,  considered  the  subject  of  slavery  the  great  obstacle  to  agreeing 
to  support  the  acquisition  of  Texas ;  who  avowed  his  repugnance  at  that  time  to  extend 
the  limits  and  the  privileges  of  the  Union  over  any  new  slaveholding  territory? 

"How  of  Benj.  R.  Hallett,  of  Mass.,  for  whose  rejection  in  the  Baltimore  Convention 
the  sectional  Southern  democrats  made  a  month  since  their  second  bolt?  Mr.  Hallett, 
in  1849,  ten  years  after  Mr.  Everett's  alleged  offence,  introduced  resolutions  into  the 
Massachusetts  Legislature,  of  which  the  following  are  copies  : 

"  Resolved,  That  we  are  opposed  to  slavery  in  any  form  and  color,  and  in  favor  of  free- 
dom and  FREKSOIL,  wherever  man  lives  throughout  God's  heritage. 

^^  Resolved,  That  we  are  opposed  to  the  extension  of  slavery  to  free  Territories,  and  in 
favor  of  the  exercise  of  all  Constitutional  and  necessary  means  to  restrict  it  to  the  limits 
within  which  it  does  or  may  exist  by  the  local  laws  of  the  State. 

"  This  test  of  democratic  converts  (tried  by  the  Southern  democratic  standard)  might 
be  multiplied.  It  was  only  on  Sunday  morning  last  that  we  showed  from  the  record 
that  in  1836,  Mr.  Gushing,  the  President  of  the  Convention  that  nominated  the  Breck- 
intidge  ticket,  opposed  the  admission  of  our  sister  State  of  Arkansas  into  the  Union,  be- 
cause her  Constitution  tolerated  slavery.  How  does  he  stand  to-day?  At  the  head  of 
the  Southern  party.  Has  he  changed  since  1836  ?  But  you  cannot  assume  that,  so  long 
as  you  deny  to  P^verett  the  benefit  of  a  modification  of  his  views,  and  Mr.  Gushing  stands 
to-day,  according  to  the  rule  by  which  democrats  judge  Mr.  Everett,  an  abolitionist. 
There  is  no  escape  from  this  conclusion." 


HON.  J.  M.  BERRIEN  AND  HON.  EDW^ARD  EVERETT. 

In  1842,  when  the  charge  of  unsoundness  on  the  slavery  question  was  made  against 
Mr.  Everett,  Senator  Berrien  being  called  on  to  defend  his  vote  for  him  as  Minister  to 
England,  vindicated  triumphantly  both  himself  and  Mr.  Everett.  In  hi.s  address  to  the 
people  of  Georgia,  on  that  occasion,  he  said  of  Mr.  Everett : 

"  He  was  an  early,  I  believe  the  earliest,  and  certainly  one  of  the  m6.-t  decided  advo- 
cates, on  the  floor  of  Congress,  of  the  south,  of  their  exclusive  right  to  determine  the 
question  for  themselves,  when  to  the  astonishment  of  the  more  timid  or  more  prudent  of 
his  eastern  brethren,  he  declared  his  readiness  to  shoulder  his  musket  in  defence  of 
them." 


30 

BRECKINRIDGE  AND  EVERETT. 

lu  his  speech  before  the  Kentucky  Legislature,  on  the  21st  of  December  last,  Mr. 
Breckinridge  paid  a  noble  tribute  to  Mr.  Everett.     He  said: 

"  There  is  another  element  at  the  North,  not  large,  but  noble  and  true.  It  consists  of 
the  scattered  cohorts  of  the  old  Whig  party,  of  men  like  EVERETT,  Choate,  and  their 
associates,  whose  consera'atism,  culture,  and  patriotism  rebelled  against  the  repub- 
lican ALLIANCE.  Besides  these,  there  are  many  thousands  in  the  northern  States  who 
seldom  attend  the  poles,  and  whose  voices  have  not  been  heard  amidst  the  clamors  that 
surround  them.  To  all  these  let  us  appeal;  let  us  solemnly  demand  a  general  revolt  of 
the  virtue  and  loyalty  of  the  country  against  the  pernicious  principles  that  threaten  its 
safety,  and  when  all  the  forces  are  arrayed  in  their  proper  ranks,  we  shall  be  able  to  see 
what  remains  to  hope  or  fear." 


From  the  Montgomery  Post,  July  31. 
LETTER  FROM  JOHN  BELL. 

,      Nashville,  July  22,  1860. 

Dear  Sir  :  Your  letter  of  the  9th  instant,  was  received  ten  days  since,  and  it  is  due  to 
you,  as  well  as  myself,  to  state  the  causes  which  have  delayed  my  answer  to  this  late 
day  to  explain  what,  otherwise,  might  be  imputed  to  me  as  discourtesy.  Such  a  state- 
ment is  due  to  numerous  other  gentlemen,  who,  in  the  last  month  or  six  weeks,  have 
addressed  letters  of  inquiry  to  me,  from  different  quarters  of  the  country,  as  to  my  views 
and  opinions  on  the  more  prominent  questions  at  issue  in  thepending  canvass,  and  which 
have  received  no  answer. 

To  the  inquiries  in  all  such  letters,  there  was  but  one  reply,  as  I  conceived,  which 
could,  consistently  and  properly,  be  made,  under  the  circumstances  of  my  position ; 
which  was,  to  refer  the  writers  to  my  past  course  ;  to  the  views  and  opinions 
I  have  heretofore  held  and  expressed  on  the  subjects  or  questions  embraced  in 
their  letters.  But  it  appeared  to  me  that  a  reply,  containing  nothing  more  than 
such  a  general  reference,  without  pointing  out  the  particular  votes,  speeches,  and 
other  evidences  of  what  I  had  said  or  done  in  connection  with  the  questions  made 
the  subject  of  inquiry,  or  stating  where  they  were  found,  would  be  ungracious,  to  say 
the  least  of  it.  To  make  such  references  in  my  answers  would  far  exceed  the  ordinary 
limits  of  a  letter,  and  I  concluded  that  it  would  be  more  convenient  and  satisfactory  to 
both  parties,  to  accompany  my  answers  with  a  printed  collection  of  such  of  my  speeches 
and  letters  as  have  a  direct  bearing  upon  the  subjects  of  controversy;  or  of  such  co- 
pious extracts  therefrom,  as  to  leave  nothing  to  be  supplied  by  further  quotations  from 
them.  The  preparation  of  such  a  compilation  was  immediately  commenced,  by  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Central  Union  Committee  of  Tennessee.  It  is  now  completed,  and  I  transmit, 
herewith,  a  copy  of  it,  printed  in  the  "  National  Union."  It  was  issued  from  the  press  a 
week  later  than  was  anticipated  by  rae,  and  hence,  my  answer  to  your  letter,  as  well  as 
to  others,  has  been  delayed  a  week  beyond  the  time  I  had  proposed  to  myself  to  answer 
them. 

For  the  reasons  which  impel  me  to  decline  any  further  answer  to  the  inquiries  in  your 
letter,  I  refer  you  to  the  first  and  second  pages  of  the  "National  Union."  You  will  ob- 
serve that  the  ground  there  taken  is,  that  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  declared 
views  of  the  Convention  which  placed  me  in  the  position  I  now  occupy  before  the 
public,  to  make  any  new  declaration  of  principles.  But  I  do  not  choose  to  shelter  my- 
self under  the  authority  of  the  nominating  convention  against  any  reproach  I  may  incur 
in  consequence  of  the  course  I  have  thought  it  my  duty  to  pursue  in  relation  to  this 
subject.  Had  I  been  a  member  of  the  convention,  I  would  have  resisted  the  adoption  of 
any  platform,  or  other  declaration  of  principles,  not  embraced  or  implied  in  the  three 
fundamental  propositions  or  objects  intended  to  be  maintained  and  secured  by  the 
National  Union  Party,  and  which  constitute  the  basis  of  its  organization — "  The  Consti- 
tution, the  Union,  and  the  Enforcement  of  the  Laws."  The  great  aim  of  the  National 
Union  Party  is,  to  restore  peace,  with  justice  to  both  sections  of  the  Union — not  to  per- 
petuate strife. 

Whatever  may  be  the  policy  or  designs  of  others,  North  and  South,  who,  in  their  let- 
ters, have  insisted  upon  their  right,  as  a  matter  of  principle,  to  call  upon  me  to  declare 
my  views  and  opinions  upon  any  or  all  of  the  questions  which  have  become  the  subject 
of  controversy  in  the  present  canvass,  and  contend  that  1  cannot  refuse  compliance  with 
their  demands,  without  a  violation  of  the  obligation  they  assume  to  exist,  on  my  part, 
as  a  candidate  for  public  place,  I  have  no  distrust  of  your  sincerity  and  good  faith  in 


31 

making  the  earnest  appeals  to  me,  which  you  do  in  your  letter,  to  take  a  course,  which 
I  hope  you  will,  upon  reflection,  perceive  would  not  be  in  conformity  with  the  intentions 
and  expectations  of  those  who  chose  rae  to  be  their  leader,  and  the  representative  of 
their  policy  and  principles;  nor  do  I  doubt  your  sincere  desire  to  support  the  Union 
ticket,  if  you  can  do  so  consistently  with  your  sense  of  public  duty.  It  is,  therefore, 
with  deep  regret,  that  I  find  myself  constrained  to  differ  with  you  in  any  of  your  views, 
and  most  of  all  to  have  to  say  to  you,  that  I  cannot  go  beyond  the  record  of  my  politi- 
cal life  in  responding  to  the  questions  presented  in  your  letter. 

If  in  the  authentic  exposition  of  my  course  upon  the  subject  of  slavery,  running  through 
a  period  of  twenty-five  years,  you  can  find  nothing  to  inspire  you  with  confidence  that, 
in  the  event  of  my  election,  I  would  so  employ  the  power  and  influence  of  the  Executive 
Department  of  the  Government,  as  to  give  no  just  ground  of  complaint  to  the  South,  or 
any  other  section  of  the  Union,  while  I  would  regret  the  loss  of  your  support  and  that 
of  your  friends,  I  could  not  reasonably  expect  to  receive  it. 

You  are  at  liberty  to  make  any  use  of  this  letter  you  may  think  proper. 
I  am,  M'ith  great  respect  and  the  most  friendly  regard. 

Your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  BELL. 

Col.  Thomas  H.  Watts. 


)  

PLEDGE  AGAINST  SLAVERY  AGITATION. 

After  the  passage  of  the  Compromise  Acts  of  1850,  the  following  declaration  and 
pledge  were  drawn  up  by  ilr.  Clay,  and  first  signed  by  him  and  then  by  some  forty  other 
leading  members  of  the  31st  Congress.  They  vindicate  at  once  the  great  importance  in 
which  Mr.  Clay  held  the  Compromise  then  just  passed,  and  also  the  immense  divergence 
ol'  what  is  now  called  the  Republican  party  from  the  views  then  held.  The  follow- 
ing is  the  declaration : 

"  The  undersigned,  members  of  the  Thirty-first  Congress  of  the  United  States,  believing 
that  a  renewal  of  sectional  controversy  upon  the  subject  of  slavery  would  be  both  dan- 
gerous to  the  Union  and  destructive  of  its  objects,  and  seeing  no  mode  by  which  such 
controversy  can  be  avoided,  except  by  a  strict  adherence  to  the  settlement  thereof  ef- 
fected by  the  compromise  acts  passed  at  the  last  session  of  Congress,  do  hereby  declare 
their  intention  to  maintain  the  said  settlement  inviolate,  and  to  resist  all  attempts  to 
repeal  or  alter  the  acts  aforesaid,  unless  by  the  general  consent  of  the  friends  of  the 
measure,  and  to  remedy  such  evils,  if  any,  as  time  and  experience  may  develope. 

"  And  for  the  purpose  of  making  this  resolution  effective,  they  further  declare  that 
they  will  not  support  for  oflBce  of  President  or  Vice  President,  or  of  Senator  or  of  Re- 
presentative in  Congress,  or  as  a  member  of  a  State  Legislature,  any  man  of  whatever 
party,  who  is  not  known  to  be  opposed  to  the  disturbance  of  the  settlement  aforesaid, 
and  to  the  renewal,  in  any  form,  of  agitation  upon  the  subject  of  slavery. 

Henry  Clay,  Henry  W.  Billiard,  James.  L.  Johnson, 

Howell  Cobb,  Wm.  M.  Gwin,  D.  A.  Bokee, 

C.  S.  Morehead,  F.  E.  McLean,  J.  B.  Thompson, 

William  Duer,  Samuel  Elliott,  Geo.  R.  Andrews, 

Robert  L.  Rose,  A.  G.  Watkins,  J.  M.  Anderson, 

H.  S.  Foote,  David  Outlaw,  W.  P.  Mangum, 

Wm.  C.  Dawson,  Alexander  Evans,  John  B.  Kerr, 

James  Brooks,  H.  A.  Bullard,  Jeremiah  Morton, 

Thomas  J.  Rusk,  C.  H.  Williams.  J.  P.  Caldwell, 

A.  H.  Stephens,  T.  S.  Haymond,  R.  I.  Bowie, 

Jeremiah  Clemens,  J.  P.  Phoenix,  Edmund  Deberry, 

Robert  Toombs,  A.  H.  Sheppard,  E.  C.  Cabell, 

James  Cooper,  A.  M.  Schermerhoru,  Humphrey  Marshall, 

M.  P.  Gentry,  David  Breck,  Allen  F.  Owen, 

Thomas  G.  Pratt,  John  R.  Thnrman. 

President  Pierce  pledged  himself  in  his  Inaugural,  and  again  in  his  first  Message,  that 
by  no  act  of  his  should  the  happy  condition  of  the  country  under  the  Compromise  be 
disturbed  ;  yet  in  1854  the  country  was  again  thrown  into  agitation  on  this  very  subject, 
and  the  Republican  party  thereby  built  up  and  increased.  And  it  is  now  a  lamentable 
fact,  that  some  of  the  signers  of  the  pledge  are  amongst  the  most  ultra  of  the  agitators. 


NATIONAL  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 

OP    THE 

co3srsTiTXJTioisr.A.i:j  xjisrionsr  fj^tit'^. 


Hon.  ALEXANDER  R.   BOTELER,  of  Virginia,  Chairman. 

"  JNO.  A.  ROCKWELL,  of  Connecticut. 

"  WILLIAM  TEMPLE,  of  Delaware. 

"  J.  MORRISON  HARRIS,  of  Maryland. 

"  JOSHUA  HILL,  of  Georgia. 

"  RICHARD  W.  THOMPSON,  of  Indiana. 

"  M.  Y.  JOHNSON,  of  Illinois. 

"  ROBERT  MALLORY,  of  Kentucky. 

"  MARSHALL  P.  WILDER,  of  Massadmsettb. 

"  ANTHONY  KENNEDY,  of  Maryland. 

"  D.  B.   ST.  JOHN,  of  1^     -r  York.  "^  v 

"  JAMES  BiSr  ■■'      fNt.     Jersey. 

"  JOHN  A.   GIL;',.wR,  of  North  Carolina. 

"  HENRY  M.  FULLER,  of  Pennsylvania. 

"  THOMAS  A.  R.  NELSON,  of  Tennessee. 

For  the  District  of  Columbia. 

Hon.  JOSEPH  BRYAN,  of  Alabama. 

BENJ.  OGLE  TAYLOR,  Esq.,  Washington  City. 

R.  H.  WILLIAMSON,  Esq., 

W.  G.  FREEMAN,  Esq.,  " 

JOS.  H.  BRADLEY,  Esq.,  " 

L.  A.  WHITELEY,  Esq.,  of  Maryland,  Secretary. 

Headquartiers  of  the  Committee,  357  D  street,  between  9th  and  10th  streets,  Washing- 
ton, D.  C. 


Headquarters  National  E.xecutive  Committee  Constitutional  Union  Party. 

Washington,  Ji/Zj'  10,  1860. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  National  Executive  Committee  of  the  Constitutional  Union  party 
held  at  their  headquarters,  in  the  city  of  Washington,  this  10th  of  July,  1860,  the  fol- 
lowing resolution  was  unanimously  adopted,  to  wit: 

Resolved,  That,  as  a  weekly  campaign  paper.  The  Union  Guard  has  been  started  in  thii 
city,  at  the  solicitation  of  the  National  Executive  Committee  of  the  Constitutional  Union 
party,  to  be  conducted  by  men  of  experience,  ability,  and  discretion,  who  are  zealous  in 
their  devotion  to  the  cause  of  the  Union  party,  and  sincere  in  their  desire  to  promote 
the  election  rT  Bell  and  Everett,  meets  the  entire  approval  of  this  committee,  and  we 
heartily  commend  it  to  the  friends  of  our  cause  and  our  candidates  as  a  reliable  cam- 
paign paper  and  central  organ  of  the  party,  and  a  staunch  and  unwavering  defender 
and  advocate  of  the  Union,  the  Constitution,  and  the  enforcement  of  the  laws,  and  of  the 
Union  party  nominees.  We  would,  therefore,  respectfully  urge  our  friends  in  all  the 
States  to  use  their  active  efforts,  without  delay,  to  extend  the  circulation  of  the  "  Union 
Guard,"  if  possible,  into  every  county,  and  township,  and  precinct  in  every  State  of  the 
Confederacy. 

By  order  of  the  Committee  : 

L.  A.  WHITELEY,  Secretary. 

fl@°"  Please  circulate. 


'7/.-a/2>^'9   cjx