Showing posts with label Millard Fillmore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Millard Fillmore. Show all posts

Sunday, March 24, 2024

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: February 2, 1865

Bright and beautiful, and pleasantly frosty. Gen. Sherman is advancing as usual in such dubiety as to distract Gen. Hardee, who knows not whether Branchville or Augusta is his objective point. I suppose Sherman will be successful in cutting our communications with the South—and in depreciating Confederate States Treasury notes still more, in spite of Mr. Trenholm's spasmodic efforts to depreciate gold.

Yesterday the Senate passed a bill dropping all commissaries and quartermasters not in the field, and not in the bureaus in Richmond, and appointing agents instead, over 45 years of age. This will make a great fluttering, but the Richmond rascals will probably escape.

Military men here consider Augusta in danger; of course it is! How could it be otherwise?

Information from the United States shows that an effort to obtain "peace" will certainly be made. President Lincoln has appointed ex-Presidents Fillmore and Pierce and Hon. S. P. Chase, commissioners, to treat with ours. The two first are avowed "peace men;" and may God grant that their endeavors may prove successful! Such is the newspaper information.

A kind Providence watches over my family. The disbursing clerk is paying us "half salaries" to-day, as suggested in a note I wrote the Secretary yesterday. And Mr. Price informs me that the flour (Capt. Warner's) so long held at Greensborough has arrived! I shall get my barrel. It cost originally $150; but subsequent expenses may make it cost me, perhaps, $300. The market price is from $800 to $1000. I bought also of Mr. Price one-half bushel of red or "cow-peas" for $30; the market price being $80 per bushel. And Major Maynard says I shall have a load of government wood in a few days!

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2p. 406-7

Sunday, March 17, 2024

Albert G. Brown’s Speech on Millard Fillmore’s Message Concerning the Texas Boundary, August 8, 1850

SPEECH IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AUGUST 8, 1850, ON PRESIDENT FILLMORE'S MESSAGE CONCERNING THE TEXAN BOUNDARY.

MR. BROWN said:—When the President's message was read at the clerk's desk on Wednesday, it struck me as the most extraordinary paper which had ever emanated from an American President. I have since read it carefully, and my first impressions have been strengthened and confirmed.

The document is extraordinary for its bold assumptions; extraordinary for its suppression of historical truth; extraordinary for its war-like tone; and still more extraordinary for its supercilious defiance of southern sentiment.

The President assumes that to be true which covers the whole ground in controversy, and to do this he has been driven to the necessity of suppressing every material fact; and having thus laid the basis of the message, he proceeds to tell us what are the means at his disposal for maintaining his positions; and winds up with a distinct threat, that if there is not implicit obedience to his will, these means will be employed to insure the obedience which he exacts.

Kings and despots have thus talked to their subjects and their slaves, but this is the first instance when the servant of a free people, just tossed by accident into a place of power, has turned upon his masters, and threatened them with fire and sword if they dared to murmur against his imperial will.

The President sits down to address his first important message to Congress, and, as if forgetful of his position, and mistaking this for a military, instead of a civil government, he tells us he is commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states when called into actual service. He next proceeds to inform us that all necessary legislation has been had to enable him to call this vast military and naval power into action. No further interposition of Congress is asked for or desired. His duties are plain, and his means clear and ample, and we are told with emphasis, that he intends to enforce obedience to his decrees.

A stranger, who knew nothing of our institutions, might well have supposed, from the reading of the message, that the President was a military despot; and to have seen him striding into the House of Representatives with a drawn sword, pointing first to the army, and then to the navy, and then to the militia, one, by a very slight transition, might have supposed himself in the presence of Oliver Cromwell, instead of Millard Fillmore. Why, sir, this redoubtable military hero, who "never set a squadron in the field, nor does the division of a battle know more than a spinster," talks as flippantly to Congress and the people about commanding the army and navy and militia of the United States, as if he were a conquering hero addressing his captives, instead of a civil magistrate making his first obeisance to his superiors.

Am I to be told by the friends of the President, that no threat was implied in his late insolent and insulting message—that he did not mean to threaten or menace Texas or the South, by the language employed in that paper? Then why inform us that he is commander-in-chief of the naval and military power of the government? Why buckle on his armor? Why present himself here panoplied, as if for war, if his mission was one of peace? Was it necessary for the information of Congress, or of the country, that the President should tell us that he is the constitutional commander-in-chief of the army and navy? Why tell us with so much of precise detail, what laws were in force amplifying his powers under the Constitution, if he did not mean to intimidate us? Why, sir, did he inform us that his duty was plain, and his authority clear and ample, if he did not mean to close the argument, and rely upon the sword? The whole scope and purpose of the message is clear and palpable. It was intended to drive Texas and the South into meek submission to the executive will. Instead of entering into a calm and statesman-like review of the matters in controversy, he leaps at one bound to his conclusions—asserts at once that Texas has no rightful claim to the territory in dispute. He plants his foot, brandishes his sword, and, in true Furioso style, declares that

"Whoso dares his boots displace,
Shall meet Bombastes face to face."

Well, sir, we shall see how successful this display of military power on the part of the illustrious "commander-in-chief of the army and navy" will be in bringing the South to a humiliating surrender.

If there be any one here or elsewhere, Mr. Chairman, who supposes that the President has acted properly in this matter, let me speak to him calmly. Is there an instance on record where a friendly power has gone with arms in his hands to treat with another friendly power? Texas is not only a friendly power, but she is a state of this Union, allied to us by every tie, political, social, and religious, which can bind one people to another. Her chief magistrate has witnessed with pain and sorrow, an attempt on the part of this government to wrest from his state a portion of her territory. He thinks the President may not be cognisant of these transactions. He knows it is being done without authority of law; and what course does he take? He writes to the President a respectful note, informing him, in substance, that an officer of the army, stationed in Santa Fé, had interposed adversely to the authority of Texas, and was fomenting discord, and exciting the inhabitants to rebellion. He made a respectful inquiry, as to whether this officer was acting in obedience to the will or wishes of the President. Now, sir, how was this inquiry answered? Did the President make a respectful answer to a respectful inquiry? No, sir. He goes off in a blaze of military fire; points to his military trappings—"Here is my army, here is my navy, and there is the militia; my mind is made up; I do approve of the conduct of my civil and military governor in Santa Fé; and if you attempt to displace him, or question his authority, war, war, war to the knife, will be the consequence.” Such, sir, is my reading of the President's message. Was there ever such a beginning to a friendly negotiation? Suppose Great Britian had sent a military force to take possession of our northeastern territory or of Oregon, and the British officer in command had issued his proclamation calling the inhabitants together to make and establish a government adverse to the United States, and in total disregard of her claim; suppose that, on seeing this, the President of the United States had addressed a respectful inquiry to the British government, to know if this proceeding was approved; and then, sir, suppose the British Minister had replied, "Her majesty has so many ships of the line, so many war-steamers. Her military resources are thus and so. She approves of the conduct of her officer in Oregon or in Maine. Her duty is plain, and her means ample for maintaining the authority she has assumed." What, let me ask you, men and patriots, would have been thought of conduct like this? Would the American President have dared to outrage the sentiment of his country by pocketing such an insult, and then proceeding with the negotiation? If he had, is there one man in all this broad land who would not, with his last gasp, have heaped curses and imprecations upon his head? And shall this government force an insult upon Texas, a sister of the confederacy, which she would not and dare not take from any power on God's earth?

I know not what course Texas may think it her duty to take in this emergency. But, sir, if she strike for her honor—if she strike for her altars and her firesides if she strike for liberty and law, I warn her oppressors that she will not strike alone.

But, Mr. Chairman, I have said that the President has virtually taken this question of the disputed boundary between Texas and the United States out of the hands of Congress, and has assumed, by an executive pronunciamiento, to settle the whole matter adversely to Texas; and I will show that he means this, if he means anything.

As for anything which appears in the message, Texas never had a shadow of claim to any part of the country in dispute. The President is particular in stating that the country was a part of New Mexico prior to the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, and recites at full length the fifth, eighth, and ninth articles of that treaty, to show that the country belongs to the United States, and that he is bound to protect it by military power. But he wholly omits to say anything of the grounds on which Texas bases her claim; not one word of her revolutionary rights; nothing of her treaties with Mexico; not a syllable about her boundary as defined in her constitution of 1836; no reference to the negotiations which led to her annexation; nothing of the opinions of his predecessors and their cabinets, recognising the rights of Texas within the boundary as prescribed by her constitution; and lastly, no mention of the crowning act of annexation—the resolutions of March 1, 1845, by which the star of her existence was blotted out and her political institutions buried in those of the United States.

If Mr. Fillmore had thought it worth his while to look into these matters, he would have found his duty not quite so plain, nor the obligation quite so imperative to use the naval and military power of this government to crush Texas, if she dared to assert her rightful claim to the country in dispute.

I commend the history of this transaction to the President and his advisers before they commence hanging the Texans for treason. Perhaps it may be found that Texas acquired some rights by her revolution and by her treaty with Santa Anna. It may turn out that she placed the evidence of her rights on record in the enduring form of a written constitution. It may appear that these rights were recognised by every department of this government in its negotiations and debates on the. treaty of annexation. It will most certainly appear that these rights were solemnly recognised by this government in the final consummation of that treaty. By the resolutions of annexation, approved March 1, 1845, it was provided, among other things, that all that part of Texas lying south of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, should be admitted into the Union with or without slavery as the people might elect; and in all that part lying north of the said parallel of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, slavery should be prohibited. Now, sir, what does this language mean, and why was it employed? Texas, as we all know, had defined her boundaries; she fixed her western limits on the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its source, and she extended her northern limits to the parallel of 42°. Hence, when she asked admission into the Union, there was no dispute between her and the United States as to where her boundaries were. She presented herself with fixed boundaries, and we took her as she was. By a solemn compact, as binding in its forms as a treaty between nations could make it, and as plain in its terms as our language could express it, we accepted her, and shaped her policy through all after time on the subject of slavery. Her territory north of 36° 30' was to be free, and all south of that line was to be slave territory. Such was the contract between Texas and the United States—the only contracting parties. Texas presented herself bounded on the west by the Rio Grande and on the north by the 42d parallel, and we took her as she presented herself. We had either to do this or not take her at all. All the debates, all the negotiations, all that was written or said on the subject pending the treaty of annexation, shows that this was the understanding of both parties. True, there was an outstanding dispute between Texas and Mexico about the separate or independent existence of Texas. Mexico denied the nationality of Texas. The United States admitted it; and treated with her as a sovereign. Mark you, Mexico did not dispute with Texas about a boundary, but about her separate national independence. We admitted Texas, by a treaty entered into between her and the United States, into the Union of these states, and we undertook to defend, to protect and maintain her against Mexico. We did this in good faith—we went to war with Mexico. That war resulted in Mexico giving up all the territory that lay within the limits of Texas, as defined by herself, and in her ceding other vast tracts of country to the United States. Now, sir, what do we hear? Why, that certain territory within her constitutional limits at the period of annexation, never did belong to Texas; but that it was an integral part of Mexico. And though we assumed to say how much of it should be free and how much slave territory, it was in truth and in fact foreign territory. By what right did the American Congress undertake to say that so much of Mexican territory as lay north of 36° should be free, and all below that slave territory? Congress undertook no such thing. We all thought then, as I think now, that the country belonged to Texas; and we consulted with no one else—contracted with no one else in regard to it.

The President has with great care traced out the line between the United States and Mexico, as defined in the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, and has dwelt on the fifth, eighth, and ninth articles of that treaty with great apparent unction, as sustaining his position of hostility to Texas. Sir, what had Texas to do with that treaty? What matters it with Texas as to what contract the United States may have made with Mexico? Time was, when Texas was a sovereignty among the nations of the earth; we so acknowledged her; we contracted with her in that capacity—what she demands to-day is, that you fulfil the contract made with her. She is no party to your contract with Mexico; she demands good faith in the execution of that contract by which you obtained her sovereignty, and agreed to protect her against Mexico; she protests against your protecting her against Mexico, and dismembering her yourself.

When, Mr. Chairman, the President was telling us what were his duties under our treaty with Mexico, I pray you, was it not his duty to have told us what were his duties under the treaty with Texas? And when he was dwelling with so much delight upon the three articles of the treaty of Hidalgo, as the law which he was going to enforce with fire and sword, was it not worth his while to have made some passing notice of the treaty of 1845 with Texas? Or has it come to this, that a Free-Soil President feels under no obligations to execute a contract with a slave state? I suppose, with true Catholic instincts, he does not feel bound to keep faith with heretics.

Santa Fé, the country where Lieutenant-General Fillmore is going to halt his grand army, and through which, I suppose, Commodore Fillmore may be expected to sail with his naval fleet, lies not only south of the northern boundary of Texas-that is, 42° north latitude—but it is in fact south of the compromise line of 36° 30' by many miles. Not only has the President, in setting aside the legal boundary of Texas, as defined in her constitution and recognised by this government in various forms, outraged her rights, and covered at one sweep every inch of ground in dispute between the United States and Texas, but he has gone further, much further; he has established, or attempted to establish, a principle which threatens the very existence of Texas as a separate state.

What says the President? That he is bound, by the highest official obligations, to protect the Mexican inhabitants of Santa Fé or New Mexico, as he is pleased to call it, against the authority of Texas. He has announced, that if Texas attempts to assert her authority in that country, and to punish those who commit overt acts of treason against her, he will resist her with the whole naval and military power of the government. Bear in mind, that this country is within her limits, as defined by her constitution of 1836, and within the limits of the slave portion of this territory, as defined by the resolutions of annexation. Now, where does the President look for his authority thus to resist the authority of Texas? Not, sir, to the treaty of annexation, but to the treaty with Mexico, and to the eighth and ninth articles of that treaty. He finds here that Mexicans residing in the territory ceded to the United States by Mexico, shall be protected in their lives, liberty, property, and religion. Planting himself on these stipulations, he announces his fixed determination to defend the Mexican inhabitants against the authority of Texas. The treaty with Mexico is the only law for his government in this regard. He wholly discards and treats with contempt the treaty with Texas. He looks to but one boundary—that established by the Mexican treaty. He looks to but acquisition, and that the acquisition from Mexico. Now, sir, what is this boundary? and what this acquisition? The boundary is the Rio Grande to the southern limit of New Mexico, thence to the Gila river, and to the Pacific. The acquisition embraces all the territory lying between Louisiana and Arkansas and the Indian territory, on the one side, and this Mexican boundary on the other. We must recollect that Mexico never recognised the independence of Texas; and when we treated with her, we treated for California and New Mexico, and Texas from the Louisiana line to the Rio Grande. The President does not respect the line of Texas, as defined in her constitution and recognised by the resolution of annexation. He kicks this line out of his way, and has announced his intention to be governed alone by the treaty of Hidalgo. He says he will resist Texan authority below the line of forty-two degrees; aye, he will resist it below thirty-six and a half degrees. I know of no other line. The President admits in his message that he does not know where the true boundary is. Then it becomes a matter of interesting inquiry where his authority is going to stop. If the only boundary known to any law as existing between the United States and Texas, is disregarded, and the President is resolved to protect all Mexicans living on territory ceded to the United States by Mexico, and it is true, as we have seen, that Texas was as much а cession, so far as the treaty of Hidalgo is concerned, as New Mexico and California; and if the President is going to protect Mexicans against the authority of Texas in Santa Fé,—I should like to know how much further down he is going to extend his protecting care. Will he go down to Austin? Will he punish as far down as Houston? May Mexicans expect the shield of his protecting care in Galveston? Is the authority of Texas everywhere to fall before the triumphant march of this most valiant hero-this commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States? It might economize blood, sir, if this conquering chief would only deign to fix a boundary—put up a sign-post at the point where he intends to stop hanging and chopping off heads.

Mr. Chairman, I have great respect for true and genuine heroism; but I confess myself rather restive in the presence of the bastard progeny which this slavery agitation has brought forth. When we were threatened with thirty-nine western regiments, I grew impatient; when we were threatened with ten thousand Kentuckians, led on by the great compromiser, I felt still more provoked; but when Millard Fillmore mounts his Pegasus, and attempts to drive over us with the whole naval and military power of the nation, I cannot think or speak with patience. When Jackson threatened, there was dignity in the threat. When Taylor threatened, it was not quite contemptible; but for Millard Fillmore, a mere come-by-chance—a poor little kite, who has fallen by accident into the eagle's nest—when he attempts to play the hero, and to threaten the South, one scarcely knows what limit to fix to contempt and scorn. If these feelings have a deeper depth in the human soul, let the upstart hero, not yet warm in the seat of accidental honor, know and feel that he has reached that deeper depth in the heart of every true and faithful son of the yet proud and independent South.

What, Mr. Chairman, is the meaning of all this? Why does the President disregard the most solemn obligations? Why, sir, does he manifest so much of impatience to wrest successfully from Texas that which is so justly her own, and which she never can surrender without dishonor? And why, sir, independent of all considerations of justice and national faith, are we of the South bound to make common cause with Texas? Because, sir, you and I, and every other southern man, know that the question of slavery lies at the bottom of all these movements. That question out of the way, and the President and his cabinet, and his friends on this floor, would not care a single rush whether Santa Fé was in Texas or New Mexico. That question out of the way, and we should have no disputing about this country. The treaty obligations between the United States and Texas would be faithfully maintained, and harmony would be restored in twenty-four hours. Is it not melancholy, is it not alarming to every true patriot, to see that this war upon a section, this eternal and never-ending assailment of the South, has not only warped the judgment of the best and purest men of the North, but has so far influenced the action of the President of the United States, that he not only does not execute a treaty for the advantage of slavery, but, in dereliction of the plainest dictates of duty, absolutely refuses to do so? Can any man look at this state of things and not see the frightful end we are approaching? What was the manifest duty of the President, and in this conjuncture of our affairs—admitting that he thought, as I certainly do not, that there was reasonable grounds of dispute as to the true boundary of Texas? Was it not,

sir, to have occupied the country peaceably and quietly until the question was settled—taking no advantage to himself, and giving none to the other party? I hear a voice say, That is just what he did. Not so, sir. His predecessor, General Taylor, found a military government there, and he allowed that military government to foment disloyalty to Texas, and to take incipient steps for throwing off the authority of Texas. The acting President goes further, and not only approves this conduct, but gives us to understand that he means to maintain it by force of arms. The President knows full well that if the rebels against Texas throw off her authority and establish an anti-slavery constitution, a free-soil majority here stand ready to admit her into the Union as a state. It is said that the President never threatened to use military power until Texas had first threatened. We all know, Mr. Chairman, on what state of facts the movements of Texas have been based. We all know that Texas acquiesced in your sending a military establishment to Santa Fe, under an assurance that it was not to be used against her claim, or to her prejudice; and we all know that this same military power in the hands of the President was used to subvert the authority and trample under foot the rights of Texas. Thus it was, sir, when Texas saw herself, by means like these, driven from her rightful possession, that she first spoke of force. But even then, sir, she asked respectfully what was meant by all these proceedings, and whether the President approved them; and we have already seen in what spirit that civil inquiry was responded to. Texas would be unfaithful to her past history if she feared to assert her rights, or faltered in maintaining them against whatever odds.

In what attitude, Mr. Chairman, does the northern Democracy present itself on the question of the Texas boundary? It is within your recollection, that in the memorable political contest of 1844, Texas was inscribed on all our banners; and from the loud huzzas that went up continually, I thought it was inscribed on all our hearts. Mr. Van Buren was discarded, and Mr. Clay crippled in the affections of his friends on account of their mutual hostility to the project of annexation. Mr. Polk was nominated and elected on the issue. The measure was consummated in compliance with the people's mandate. War ensued, and the people turned out en masse to prosecute it to a successful termination. The first blood was shed between the Nueces and the Rio Grande; and the Democracy voted on their oaths that it was American blood shed on American soil. You defended the President through the whole of the war, always maintaining that the Texas we acquired, was Texas according to the constitution of 1836; Texas as she presented herself, and as she was accepted under the resolution of annexation. Now, where are you? Will you vote to-day as you voted in 1844? Will you vote to-day as you continued to vote through the whole of the Mexican war? And if not, why? I can understand a northern Whig who votes against the claim of Texas. He belongs to a party who was opposed to annexation; opposed to the war; opposed to the acquisition of additional territory; opposed to everything that you and I were for. But how you can oppose this claim, recognised as it has been in every form, supported as it has been by you and me through all its various forms and phases, I must confess myself at fault to understand.

There is one other matter to which I must advert. It is become quite too common of late, for certain political censors, in and out of Congress, to speak of southern men who demand justice for the South, as ultras; and if we persist in our demands, and can neither be bribed or brow-beaten into acquiescence with northern wrongs, the next step is, to whistle us down the winds as disunionists and traitors. It is not, sir, because I fear the effects of charges like these on the minds of my constituents that I now speak. They have known me for many long years; I have served them here and elsewhere; and if there is any earthly power to persuade them that I am a disunionist or a traitor to my country, I would scorn to receive office at their hands. I allude to charges like this, that I may hold them up to public scorn and reprobation. The miserable reptiles who sting the South while they nestle in her bosom, are the authors of these base calumnies. Sooner or later they will be spurned as the veriest spaniels who ever crouched at the footstool of power. I fancy, sir, that there is perfect harmony of sentiment between my constituents and myself on the subjects which now divide the North and the South. We are southerners and go for the Constitution, and the Union subordinate to the Constitution. Give us the Constitution as it was administered from the day of its formation to 1819, and we are satisfied. Up to that time Congress never assumed to interfere with the relation of master and servant. It extended over all, and gave to all equal protection; give it to us to-day in the same spirit, and we are satisfied. Less than this we will not accept. You ask us to love the Constitution, to revere the Union, and to honor the glorious banner of the stars and stripes. Excuse me, gentlemen; but I must say to you, in all candor, that the day has gone by when I and my people can cherish a superstitious reverence for mere names. Give us a Constitution strong enough to shield us all in the same degree, and we will love it. Give us a Union capacious enough to receive us all as equals, and we will revere it. Give us a banner that is broad enough to cover us as a nation of brothers, and we will honor it. But if you offer us a broken constitution—one that can only shield northern people and northern property—we will spurn it. If you offer us a union so contracted that only half the states can stand up as equals, we will reject it; and if you offer us a banner that covers your people and your property, and leaves ours to the perils of piracy and plunder, we will trample it under our feet. We came into this Union as equals, and we will remain in it as equals. We demand equal laws and equal justice. We demand the protection of the Constitution for ourselves, our lives, and our property. Wherever we may be, we demand that the national flag, wherever it may wave, on the land or on the seas, shall give shelter and security to our property and ourselves. These are our demands: will you comply with them? You have the power to grant or refuse them. Grant them, and our feelings of harmony and brotherhood will be restored. These evidences of decay that we witness all around us will vanish, and a strong, healthy, vigorous national prosperity will spring up. I shall not predict the consequences of your refusal; they are so plain that “a wayfaring man though a fool" cannot mistake them. They exhibit themselves in a thousand different forms—in the divisions of our churches, in the estrangement of family ties, in jealousies between the North and the South, in the gradual but certain withdrawal of all confidence and fellowship between the people of the two great sections. Where is the patriot heart that has not throbbed with the deepest anxiety as from day to day the growth and progress of these things has become more apparent? I will not dwell upon a theme so full of melancholy; but allow me to add, in conclusion, I sincerely hope your conduct may not force us in the end to say, We once were brothers, but you have become our enemies and we are yours.

SOURCE: M. W. Cluskey, Editor, Speeches, Messages, and Other Writings of the Hon. Albert G. Brown, A Senator in Congress from the State of Mississippi, p. 200-8

Saturday, March 16, 2024

Congressman Horace Mann, September 10, 1850

SEPT. 10.

This is Tuesday, my black-chalk day; for, on this day, I get no letter from home. The House is now discussing the question, whether the representatives from California shall be admitted as members of the House. They are objected to because they were chosen by the people long before California became a State. The bill to admit California was signed by the President yesterday, and these claimants were chosen nearly a year ago: so that they were chosen to represent a State before there was any such State.

What a mighty country ours is! It has all the means of greatness but intelligence and integrity. In these how deficient it is! I hope God will let us live through our youthful follies and vices, as he does some individuals; and that, later in life, something may be done to atone for the follies of these early days.

The time for our adjournment is fixed. Then-oh then! I will not think too much of what may lie between me and my hopes.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 325-6

Congressman Horace Mann to Samuel Downer, September 13, 1850

WASHINGTON, Sept. 13, 1850.
S. DOWNER, Esq.

MY DEAR SIR,—Is it true that you say, or that you have been informed, that I have written any apologetic or any explanatory or deprecatory letter to the editor of the "Boston Bee," which he is privately showing?

It certainly shows native genius when men can build so large a superstructure of falsehood on so small a foundation of truth. I will tell you the whole story, so that you may see how big a bird can be hatched out of a small egg.

Some time during the present session, I think, last winter, one of the editors of the "Bee," Mr. R—— called on me here. I saw him several times, and he appeared friendly, and our interviews were agreeable; that is, to me. He asked some favor of me, which I gladly rendered. He then expressed his thanks, quite as warmly as I could have desired; told me that his paper had done me injustice formerly (during my controversy with the Boston schoolmasters); said he resisted it at the time, but was overcome by his partners; and then expressed to me, in strong terms, his regret for the injury that had been done me. I gave him to understand, that, at the time, I had felt the injustice, but that the occasion had passed away, and with it almost all recollection of it; and that I should be none the less ready to do him a favor when occasion should offer.

In July or August last, when the "Bee" published that gross falsehood, that I (with others) had visited Mr. Fillmore, and had interfered to persuade him not to appoint Mr. Webster as a member of his Cabinet, the interviews which I had had with Mr. R———, his apology for the wrong done me by the " Bee," &c., came to my mind. At that period, the "Bee" had, for some time, been assailing me through what was called a "Washington correspondent." Under these circumstances, I thought I would write a letter to Mr. R———, remind him of our former intercourse, and put him upon his bearings as a man of honor and truth. I did not know his partners, and did not wish to write to them, or put myself in their hands in any way. I thought, if I had not entirely mistaken the character of Mr. R———, I would prevent further abuse and falsification by appealing to him. I therefore wrote him the letter marked private, or confidential, in which I referred to our former interview, reminded him of his apology, and remonstrated with him for the course taken in charging me with what I had not done. There was not a word in the letter which a gentleman might not write or receive; nothing clandestine, nothing partisan; no threats for anger, no intercessions for favor. Not knowing Mr. R's partners, and at the same time knowing how such things get distorted and misrepresented and falsified when they pass through a partisan medium, I wrote to him alone; and I can hardly conceive that he should show the letter, even to his partners. Certainly, if I did not entirely mistake his character as a man of honor, he cannot have been showing that letter to the public or to individuals, or suggesting that there is one idea in it unworthy of me, as a man of truth and sincerity, to feel or to express.

I desire, therefore, that you would go to Mr. R, and, if the letter is in being, ask him to show it to you (for which this is my permission), and learn for yourself whether it contains any thing which I might not write, or any thing which would authorize him to break the seal of silence by showing it.

Yours very truly,
HORACE MANN.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 327-8

Saturday, March 9, 2024

Daniel Webster to Millard Fillmore, November 5, 1850

Boston, November 5, 1850,

MY DEAR SIR—I left New Hampshire yesterday, having be come free of disease, and well, except so far as this protracted catarrh has reduced me. I am quite aware how inconvenient my long absence is to you, and to the government, and some times feel, that as this illness is of annual recurrence, I ought to regard it as unfitting me for an office, the duties of which require constant attention; I must now go to Marshfield for a few days. When there a fortnight ago, I was hardly able to go out doors, and could do nothing about arranging my little affairs.

On public subjects things are here becoming quiet. The excitement caused by the Fugitive Slave Law is fast subsiding, and it is thought that there is now no probability of any resistance, if a fugitive should be arrested. Thousands of young men have tendered their services to the marshal at a moment's warning. There is an evident and a vast change of public opinion in this quarter since the adjournment of Congress.

There is much talk of a Union meeting, and a great desire to hold one. Very many persons have spoken to me on the subject, since my arrival yesterday. My opinion is, that such a meeting should be held, but that I should not attend it. My opinions are all known, and they may perhaps be topics of comment, before the meeting. Besides it is, I think, expedient to bring out new men. Mr. Gray, Mr. B. R. Curtis, &c., &c., and the people are also anxious to hear Mr. Choate's voice once more.

To avoid misconstruction, I think the meeting will not be holden till after our election, on Monday next.

I look upon the result of our election, so far as respects governor, as very doubtful.

Yours always, truly,
DAN'L WEBSTER.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 400-1

Daniel Webster to Millard Fillmore, November 13, 1850

(PRIVATE.)
Boston, November 13, 1850.

DEAR SIR,—I took leave of Marshfield yesterday, not with out regret. The trees were leafless, but the fields were green, and the sea was calm as summer.

Among the things which detained me, was the seeing to the completion of a vault or tomb, for the deposit of me and mine.

I have lost one wife and three children. Their remains are now under a church in this city, which the progress of change is very likely ere long to remove.

At Marshfield, by my own land, on the margin of the upland, is a spot on which a party of pilgrims from Plymouth, erected a church, in the very earliest period of the colony; and here is the ancient burial-ground. It is quiet, and secure against change, and not far from my house.

To this spot I shall be taken not many years hence, and those loved ones, whose spirits have gone before me to another world, will be gathered around me.

I dwell on these things without pain. I love to see a cheerful old age; but there is nothing I should dread more than a thoughtless, careless, obtuse mind, near the end of life. Of course, it makes no difference in our future state, on which spot we mingle again with our parent earth; but it sobers the mind, I think, and leads us to salutary reflections, to contemplate our last resting-place.

Yours truly,
DANIEL WEBSTER.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 402-3

Thursday, February 22, 2024

John J. Crittenden to Count Eugène de Sartiges, October 22, 1851

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, October 22, 1851.

The undersigned, acting Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor to remind M. de Sartiges, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the French republic, that in the interview which he had with him on the 8th instant, he stated that he might have occasion to address him in writing on the subject of the information which M. de Sartiges then communicated, that the French government had issued orders to its ships of war, then in the West Indies, to give assistance to Spain, and to prevent by force any adventurers of any nation from landing with hostile intent on the island of Cuba. Having imparted that information to the President, the undersigned has now the honor, by his direction, to address M. de Sartiges in regard to it.

M. de Sartiges is apprised that a few days prior to the interview adverted to the chargé d'affaires of her Britannic Majesty had given to this department official notice that his government had issued similar orders to its naval forces. The President had regarded this as a matter of grave importance, but its gravity is greatly increased by the concurrence and co-operation of France in the same measure. It cannot be doubted that those orders have been occasioned by the recent unlawful expedition of less than five hundred men, which, having evaded the vigilance of this government, and escaped from New Orleans, were landed by the steamer Pampero upon the island of Cuba, and were soon captured, and many of them executed. That such an incident should have incited the combined action of two great European powers, for an object to which neither of them is a direct party, and in a manner that may seriously affect the people of the United States, cannot fail to awaken the earnest consideration of the President.

He cannot perceive the necessity or propriety of such orders, while he entertains the strongest apprehensions that their execution by French and British cruisers will be attended with injurious and dangerous consequences to the commerce and peace of the United States. They cannot be carried into effect  without a visitation, examination, and consequent detention of our vessels on our shores, and in the great channels of our coasting trade, and this must invest British and French cruisers with the jurisdiction of determining, in the first instance at least, what are the expeditions denounced in their orders, and who are the guilty persons engaged in them. It is plain, however different may have been the intentions of the respective governments, that the exercise of such a power and jurisdiction could hardly fail to lead to abuses and collisions perilous to the peace that now so happily prevails. By such an interference those governments seem to assume an attitude unfriendly to the United States. The President will not, however, allow himself to believe that this intervention has been intended as an admonition or reproach to his government. He has signally manifested his condemnation of all such lawless enterprises, and has adopted active measures for their prevention and suppression. It must also be known to the governments of France and England, in common with all the world, that this government, since it took its place among nations, has carefully preserved its good faith, and anxiously endeavored to fulfill all its obligations, conventional and national. And this it has done from motives far above any apprehensions of danger to itself. From its beginning, under the present Constitution, it has sedulously cultivated the policy of peace, of not intermeddling in the affairs of others, and of preventing by highly penal enactments any unlawful interference by its citizens to disturb the tranquillity of countries with which the United States were in amity. To this end many such enactments have been made, the first as early as the year 1794, and the last as late as 1838. The last having expired by its own limitation, and all the preceding legislation on the subject having been comprehended in the act of Congress of the 20th of April, 1818, it is unnecessary to do more than to refer M. de Sartiges to its provisions as marking the signal anxiety and good faith of this government to restrain persons within its jurisdiction from committing any acts inconsistent with the rights of others, or its own obligations. These laws were intended to comprehend, and to protect from violation, all our relations with and duties to countries at peace with us, and to punish any violations of them by our citizens as crimes against the United States. In this manifestation of its desire to preserve just and peaceful relations with all nations, it is believed that the United States have gone before and further than any of the older governments of Europe. Without recapitulating all the provisions of those laws by which the United States have so carefully endeavored to prohibit every act that could be justly offensive to their neighbors, it is deemed enough for this occasion to say that they denounce all such enterprises or expeditions as those against which the orders in question are directed.

The undersigned thinks it is of importance enough to call the attention of M. de Sartiges more directly to this law. A literal copy of it is accordingly herewith communicated. Besides the ordinary legal process, it authorizes the President to employ the military and naval forces of the country for the purpose of preventing such expeditions and arresting for punishment those concerned in them. In the spirit of this law, the President condemns such expeditions against the island of Cuba as are denounced by the orders in question, and has omitted nothing for their detection and prevention. To that end he has given orders to civil, naval, and military officers from New York to New Orleans, and has enjoined upon them the greatest vigilance and energy. This course on the subject has been in all things clear and direct. It has been no secret, and the undersigned must presume that it has been fully understood and known by M. de Sartiges. An appeal might confidently be made to the vigilant and enlightened minister of Spain that his suggestions for the prevention of such aggressions, or the prosecution of offenders engaged in them, have been promptly considered, and, if found reasonable, adopted by the President; his course, it is believed, has been above all question of just cause of complaint. This government is determined to execute its laws, and in the performance of this duty can neither ask nor receive foreign aid. If, notwithstanding all its efforts, expeditions of small force hostile to Cuba have, in a single vessel or steamer, excited by Cubans themselves, escaped from our extensive shores, such an accident can furnish no ground of imputation either upon the law or its administration. Every country furnishes instances enough of infractions and evasions of its laws, which no power or vigilance can effectually guard against. It need not be feared that any expeditions of a lawless and hostile character can escape from the United States of sufficient force to create any alarm for the safety of Cuba, or against which Spain might not defend it with the slightest exertion of her power. The President is persuaded that none such can escape detection and prevention, except by their insignificance. None certainly can escape which could require the combined aid of France and England to resist or suppress. Cuba will find a sure, if not its surest, protection and defense in the justice and good faith of the United States.

There is another point of view in which this intervention on the part of France and England cannot be viewed with indifference by the President. The geographical position of the island of Cuba in the Gulf of Mexico, lying at no great distance from the mouth of the river Mississippi and in the line of the greatest current of the commerce of the United States, would become, in the hands of any powerful European nation, an object of just jealousy and apprehension to the people of this country. A due regard to their own safety and interest must, therefore, make it a matter of importance to them who shall possess and hold dominion over that island. The government of France and those of other European nations were long since officially apprised by this government that the United States could not see, without concern, that island transferred by Spain to any other European state; President Fillmore fully concurs in that sentiment, and is apprehensive that the sort of protectorate introduced by the orders in question might, in contingencies not difficult to be imagined, lead to results equally objectionable. If it should appear to M. de Sartiges that the President is too apprehensive on this subject, this must be attributed to his great solicitude to guard friendly relations between the two countries against all contingencies and causes of disturbance. The people of the United States have long cherished towards France the most amicable sentiments, and recent events which made her a republic have opened new sources of fraternal sympathy. Harmony and confidence would seem to be the natural relations of the two great republics of the world, relations demanded no less by their permanent interests than by circumstances and combinations in continental Europe, which now seem to threaten so imminently the cause of free institutions. The United States have nothing to fear from those convulsions, nor are they propagandists, but they have at heart the cause of freedom in all countries, and believe that the example of the two great republics of France and America, with their moral and social influences, co-operating harmoniously, would go far to promote and to strengthen that cause. It is with these views that the President so much desires the cultivation of friendly feelings between the two countries, and regards with so much concern any cause that may tend to produce collision or alienation. He believes that this Cuban intervention is such a cause. The system of government which prevails most generally in Europe is adverse to the principles upon which this government is founded, and the undersigned is well aware that the difference between them is calculated to produce distrust of, if not aversion to, the government of the United States. Sensible of this, the people of this country are naturally jealous of European interference in American affairs. And although they would not impute to France, now herself a republic, any participation in this distrustful and unfriendly feeling towards their government, yet the undersigned must repeat, that her intervention in this instance, if attempted to be executed, in the only practicable mode for its effectual execution, could not fail to produce some irritation, if not worse consequences. The French cruisers sailing up and down the shores of the United States to perform their needless task of protecting Cuba, and their ungracious office of watching the people of this country as if they were fruitful of piracies, would be regarded with some feelings of resentment, and the flag they bore-a flag which should always be welcome to the sight of Americans—would be looked at as casting a shadow of unmerited and dishonoring suspicion upon them and their government. The undersigned will add that all experience seems to prove that the rights, interests, and peace of the continents of Europe and America will be best preserved by the forbearance of each to interfere in the affairs of the other. The government of the United States has constantly acted on that principle, and has never intermeddled in European questions. The President has deemed it proper to the occasion that his views should be thus fully and frankly presented for the friendly consideration of M. de Sartiges and his government, in order that all possible precautions may be used to avert any misunderstanding, and every cause or consequence that might disturb the peace or alienate, in the least, the sentiments of confidence and friendship which now bind together the republics of the United States and France. The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to offer to M. de Sartiges the assurance of his very distinguished consideration.

JOHN J. CRITTENDEN.
M. DE SARTIGES.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 13-7

Wednesday, February 21, 2024

Congressman Horace Mann, August 23, 1850

I stay at home this morning to write to you. I long to be at home; but the time of our departure cannot be seen by any political astronomer. There is a probability that we shall come to some of the exciting questions this week. We are as ready now to meet them as we ever shall be. The great influence of Mr. Webster is brought with full force to bear against all security for freedom in the Territories. His name, his reputation for talent, and, above all, his power of patronage and influence in the Government, tell with prodigious force upon all measures. His going into the cabinet may be the salvation of Mr. Fillmore's administration; but it is even more likely that it will be fatal to the cause of freedom. See what comes of intellect without morality!

We had another furious storm last night. It reminded me of the last, the one in which Sumner's brother and Margaret Fuller were lost; and, when I hear the winds howl and sweep so at night, my mind always goes out to watch along the seashore, and then I cannot but see what the next papers relate of disaster and death. I always had a special horror for a shipwreck. It seems to me the most terrible form of death that is not ignominious. If, however, — and I often have a vivid intellectual perception of this, regarded death as we should, it would cease to be the dreadful spectre that it now is. How much of this, in all after-life, must depend upon education!

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 316-7

Monday, February 19, 2024

Daniel Webster to Franklin Haven, Tuesday, September 27, 1850—7 a.m.

Tuesday morning, seven o'clock, September 27, 1850.

MY DEAR SIR,—There is no chance of doing any thing for the tariff, this session, for want of time, and from the crowded state of business in Congress. If we had three or four of those precious weeks which were spent in making speeches on the Wilmot Proviso, the revenue of the country might be settled, I think, on a satisfactory foundation. There is a clear majority in the House of Representatives in favor of a reform in the tariff of duties, although some Southern Whigs feel very angry. Three of the North Carolina members, for instance, good men and good Whigs, were found hanging off. I was asked to speak to them, or cause them to be spoken to. They said that the Northern members, Whigs and all, had done little else for six months, than assail their rights, their property, and their feelings, as Southern men, and now those Northern men might take care of their own interests. These gentlemen, however, will come into their places in the ranks, after a little cooling and reflection.

I hope the important measures, such as the appropriation bills, may get through to-day and to-morrow, yet I am afraid of some mishap. Such a mass of unfinished things never existed before, at so late a moment of the session.

It is a great misfortune that Mr. Ashmun should leave Congress. The Whigs in the House of Representatives need a leader, and if he could stay, he would be that leader by general consent. He is sound, true, able, quick in his perceptions, and highly popular. I hardly know how his place could be filled.

At the other end of the avenue things go on very smoothly. There is entire confidence and good-will between the President and all those about him. Mistakes will be made, no doubt, but nothing will be done rashly, and no step is likely to be taken which shall endanger the peace of the country, or embarrass the general business either of the government or the country.

Some day next week I hope to set out for the North. I never wanted to see home more. My catarrh is going off, or else is having a long intermission; and, for whichever it may be, I am truly thankful.

I pray to be remembered most kindly to Mrs. Haven and your daughters.

Yours always, truly,
DANIEL WEBSTER.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 390-1

Daniel Webster to Millard Fillmore, October 14, 1850

Marshfield, October 14, 1850.

MY DEAR SIR,—Leaving Washington Friday, the 4th, I came that day to Philadelphia, and the next to New York, and staying on Sunday in that city, reached Boston Monday evening, the 7th, feeling tolerably well. Tuesday, the 8th, I was to have gone into State street to meet the people, but did not find myself well enough. The next day, Wednesday, I came down to my house, a good deal sick, and have hardly been out of doors from that day to this. My catarrh has held on uncommonly, and for three or four days last week, I was quite ill with it, so much so, that I called in a physician. Very sensibly, he recommends nothing but rest, patience, and herb teas. It is usual enough for the disease in its last stages to assume the form of a kind of asthmatic cough. This I have had, and hope I am now nearly over it. To-day the weather is cold, the skies bright, and every thing out doors looks well, and I hope to go over the farm. To-morrow the Turkish commissioner and suite are to be here, and I have asked some friends to meet them. It is difficult entertaining a guest, with whom one cannot exchange a word, and whose habits and wants are so unknown. We shall take care to keep all swine's flesh out of his sight; give him beef, poultry, and rice, and let him get on as well as he can, having always coffee in plenty.

Of political occurrences, and the political state of things in New York, and further south, your information is, of course, fuller and fresher than mine. In New England, affairs and opinions stand thus:

All true Whigs are not only satisfied, but gratified with every thing done by you, since the commencement of your administration. Men of property and business feel a degree of confidence and security, which it is certain they did not feel under the late administration. Indeed, I am at a loss to account for that want of confidence which appears to have prevailed. A gentleman of discernment said to me in Boston, that within a week after you had taken the chair, men met together, and, without saying a word, sufficiently manifested to one another, that, in their judgment, a highly important and conservative change had taken place.

The respectable portion of the Democratic party incline to treat the administration with respect.

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

Yours, always truly,
DAN'L WEBSTER.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 394-5

Friday, January 26, 2024

John M. Clayton to John J. Crittenden, October 8, 1851

BUENA VISTA, DELAWARE, October 8, 1851.

MY DEAR CRITTENDEN,—Square yourself, for I have a favor to ask of you for one of my friends. Don't knit your brows, nor utter one of those significant snorts which you are accustomed to give when reading anything unpleasant, especially an application for an office. I must have what I am about to ask for, and if you grant it I will give you a receipt in full, and do you be thankful that I let you off so easily; for the appointment I want is no great affair, and it will do more to make the administration popular in this section of the country than any other appointment they could make.

I want you to obtain a promise from President Fillmore to appoint Charles I. Dupont, Jr., a purser in the navy of the United States, on the happening of the first vacancy.

Now, if I had you with me, just seated in the arm-chair opposite my table, I would talk to you in my own peculiar and sensible way; and I would give you such reasons as would start you right off to obtain the promise of this appointment. Deprived, as I am, of the influence of my colloquial eloquence, which was always deservedly great upon you, I shall present my wishes in less vivid colors and with much more feeble power by the aid of my pen.

I have often boasted to you of the Dupont family of Delaware; I have told you how proud I was of their friendship, and therefore I need not repeat to you the story of their merits. Eleuthere Irene Dupont and Victor Dupont, sons of one of the most virtuous and distinguished noblemen of France, both narrowly escaped the malice of Robespierre and the deadly hostility of the Jacobins during the French Revolution, and emigrated to this country and settled on the banks of the Brandywine, where, by their industry and talents, they converted what was but a rocky desert into one of the most beautiful and enchanting portions of our country. No men were more beloved and honored in their day, and it has always been with me a source of high gratification, amidst the struggles of this life, to reflect that I enjoyed their friendship and kind regard. Each of these left a family, whose sons are all highly esteemed and beloved in Delaware for their own virtues. Victor left two sons, Charles I. Dupont, the celebrated manufacturer of the Brandywine, known to you as your friend, and Captain S. F. Dupont, one of the most distinguished officers of our navy. Young Dupont, the applicant, is the son of Charles. He is a young man of the finest qualities of heart and head, well educated, moral, temperate, and industrious, of business habits, and possessing the same character, integrity, and honor which mark every member of the family, without an exception.

Now, my dear Crittenden, these Duponts have spent a fortune for the Whig party, and have never received a favor from it, for they never desired any, they have been the chief prop and support of our party ever since its origin; they did more to build it up, originally, than any other family in the State, and but for their powerful influence we should have sent two Locofoco senators to Congress for the last twenty years.

Charles has now set his heart upon the appointment of his son as a purser, and he is sustained in this application not only by the just influence of his relatives and personal friends, but by all the Whigs of the State and the friends of the administration, who feel that they owe more and have paid less to these Duponts than to any other family.

I think I am boring you with some things as well known to you as to me; let me, therefore, cut my letter short by begging you, as soon as you have read this letter, to go down and see the President, and tell him he would do more to gratify his friends by this little appointment than he could by a full mission abroad. Take a glass of Bourbon whisky before you start; call on Graham, and get him to go along with you, and do not leave the President until you get a promise that young Dupont shall have the first vacancy. This little appointment will do more to enable us to redeem the State at the next election than anything else the President could do for us.

I am, dear Crittenden, faithfully yours,
JOHN M. CLAYTON.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 10-11

John M. Clayton to John J. Crittenden, October 27, 1851

BUENA VISTA, DELAWARE, October 27, 1851.

MY DEAR CRITTENDEN,—I see our friend Conrad has ordered my nephew, James C. Douglass, to the Portsmouth sloop of war, about to go to the Pacific. I am convinced that a voyage round the Horn would finish him now. Any ship going to a mild climate would save his life. I have lost all my children, and this nephew is nearly the only relation I have in the world. Do ask Conrad to order him to another ship. I believe if he goes to the Pacific I shall never see him again. Hurrah for the new Secretary of State! You have done nobly. If Mr. Webster shall resign I will lend you my countenance now to be his permanent successor. I pray that if the office shall become vacant you may take it. If you do accept it, the Whigs will rally on Mr. Fillmore. As soon as I hear of your appointment I shall go to Washington to apprise you of some things. Do not refuse if you have any regard for the Whig party. If you reject it, the party will not rally. Mr. Webster is going to Washington avowedly to resign before the session of Congress. Do not reject the permanent appointment of Secretary of State, unless you have resolved to see your friends in the dust, your party in ashes.

I tell you that you are the connecting link between the Whigs of Pennsylvania and Mr. Fillmore. I would be your man of work, without pay or clerk hire. The department would be right side up in three months. Now recollect that you were the man who induced me to accept this office. I have a right, therefore, to ask you to accept it.

Ever yours,
J. M. CLAYTON.
Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 12

Thursday, January 25, 2024

Congressman Horace Mann, July 29, 1850

JULY 29, 1850.

We have just heard that Mr. Winthrop has been appointed senator to fill the place made vacant by Mr. Webster. Under the circumstances, the duty of appointing devolved upon Gov. Briggs. I am so certain, that I can almost say I know this appointment has been very disagreeable to Gov. Briggs, and that he has been forced into it by the Webster influence. The promotion, and therefore indorsement, of Mr. Webster by President Fillmore, has given the proslavery party a prodigious advantage in this contest. If the South, and their proslavery friends at the North, do not carry this measure, it will be almost like a miracle. But there is a goodly number of us who will stand firm. For my part, I would rather have the feeling of free thought and free speech within me than to have the highest office which the nation can bestow.

The Compromise Bill is coming to a crisis, and the contest becomes intense. Two tie-votes were taken yesterday in the Senate on important amendments, which shows how nearly parties are divided.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 310


Congressman Horace Mann, August 7, 1850

AUG. 7, 1850.

The President's message, yesterday, on the subject of the Texan boundary, gives general satisfaction. The extreme Southern men, who are for the doctrine of States Rights, or nullification, or secession, of course denounce it. But the Constitution men from all parts of the country will, I think, uphold it. . . . Mr. Webster's letter to Gov. Bell is deprecatory in its tone, — a letter coaxing or fearful or timid. The prospect now is that there will be a settlement of the most exciting and alarming topics before Congress, and that the country will have peace out of the commotion in which it is now involved. It may postpone the close of the session for a few days, or even weeks; but this we must bear for the general good.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 311-2

Congressman Horace Mann, August 15, 1850

Aug. 15. The House is engaged in an earnest debate on the subject of the President's message about Texas; the North generally defending and upholding it, while the South is declaiming against it con furore. The South is becoming, to appearance, more desperate; and the men talk treason as they take their daily meals. We are to have warm times here before we leave. Calling the yeas and nays, and practising all manner of delays, will be resorted to, no doubt; and we shall have one or two night sessions. But it is thought we are strong enough to divide, and work by relays; that is, one half of us stay by for twelve hours, and the other half for the next twelve.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 312

Friday, January 19, 2024

Daniel Webster to Professor Stuart, August 10, 1850

Washington, August 10, 1850.

MY DEAR SIR,—So many things have occupied my attention of late, that I have neglected those I love most, and am most indebted to. I have no other apology for suffering your letter to remain so long unanswered.

The cabinet is not yet full, but will be if Mr. McClelland accepts the Department of the Interior. They are all sound men, of fair and upright character, sober minds, and national views. The President himself is a man of sagacity, entire fairness, and a good deal of vigor.

There is yet to be a warm contest in the House of Representatives, extremes coöperating as usual. The southern gentlemen, in number about forty, had a meeting last night. They resolved to resist, and try to amend the bill for the settlement of the Texan boundary, but not to make any factious opposition, by calling ayes and noes, &c. It is probable the bill will pass the House, as it went from the Senate.

It is hoped the California bill will get through the Senate on Monday.

All Southern men of intelligence and fairness, admire your pamphlet, and they intend, in a quiet way, to give it extensive circulation. The most learned and respectable clergymen this way, all say the scriptural argument is unanswerable. Badger, who is learned and discerning in such things, particularly admires it. I shall join very cordially in an attempt to spread its influence and usefulness. No matter who, or how many attack you. If they will only quote you fairly, you have nothing to fear. But some periodicals, calling themselves religious, have an abominable habit of misrepresenting an adversary's statements and arguments.

I am rather ashamed of my change of position.1 I fear I've come from home; but here I am, and shall do as well as I can. I have great occasion to be thankful for excellent health. Yours, with affectionate regard,

D. WEBSTER.
_______________

1 Leaving the Senate for the [State] Department.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 383-4

Tuesday, October 24, 2023

Robert Jefferson Breckinridge to John J. Crittenden, May 3, 1851

LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY, May 3, 1851.
Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

DEAR SIR,—I regret very much to perceive by your letter of the 21st ultimo that you considered my letter to you of the 12th April wanting in proper respect to you, and prompted by irritation on my part. I retained no copy of that letter; but, assuredly, I know very little of myself if it contained the evidences of either of those states of mind.

For the first time in my life I had condescended to solicit, from any human authority, anything, either for myself or any member of my immediate family, though many hundreds of times I have done what I could for others. It was particularly distressing to me that I had been seduced into such a position by the extreme kindness of an old personal friend (Mr. Duncan), as I explained in my first letter to you, and, by some ridiculous notion, that the present administration might consider itself any ways connected with that of General Taylor, so as to feel disposed to fulfill any expectations it may have raised.

Unless my memory deceives me, my first letter, making the application, intimated to you that I was not sure it was proper in me to write you such a letter, and asked you to excuse the impropriety, if indeed one existed. Such, I remember well, was the state of my mind, and I think I expressed it. The only notice ever taken of that letter, by you, is the allusion to it in your letter before me. What took place in the mean time may be uttered in a sentence, and need not be repeated here.

Under all the painful, and to me altogether unprecedented, circumstances of a very humiliating position, I thought it due to you to express my regret at having implicated you, in any degree, in such an affair by my letter of application to you; and I thought it due to myself to express to you, under such circumstances, my regret at allowing myself, in a moment of parental weakness, to embark in a matter which, in all its progress and its termination, was especially out of keeping with the whole tenor of my life and feelings. If my letter, to which yours of the 21st April is an answer, expresses more or less than these things, it is expressed unhappily and improperly. If, during the progress of the affair, you had judged it necessary or proper to have treated it differently, or had had it in your power to do so, I should not have been more bound to feel obliged by any other or further service than I am now bound to feel obliged, by such as your letter informs me you were good enough to render me, under circumstances which, it is now obvious, must have been embarrassing to you, and which, if I had known, I would have instantly released you from. But all this, as it appears to me, only the more painfully shows how inconsiderate my first application to you was, and how needless it was for my subsequent expression of regret for having made it to be taken in an offensive sense.

The sole object of this letter is to place the whole affair on the footing which, in my opinion, it really occupies.

Certainly I had no right to ask anything of the sort I did ask at your hands. But assuredly having been weak enough to ask it, and having, in the course of events, had full occasion to perceive that weakness, I had the right without offense to express sincere regret for what I had inconsiderately done,—to the needless annoyance of yourself and others, and to the wounding of my own self-esteem.

Permit me, in conclusion, to say that altogether the most painful part of this affair, to me, is that I should have given offense to a man who, for nearly if not quite thirty years, I have been accustomed to regard with feelings of the greatest esteem, admiration, and confidence, and for whom, at any moment during those thirty years, I would have periled everything but my honor to have served him; such a man will know how to appreciate the workings of a nature perhaps oversensitive and overproud, in the midst of unusual and oppressive circumstances. If not, it is better to forget all than lose our own self-respect.

As to Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Conrad, strange as it may seem to you, I would never, under ordinary circumstances, have asked either of them for any favor whatever. I rather considered myself asking you and Mr. Clay and Judge Underwood and Judge Breck and a few other old friends to whom I brought myself to the point—not without great difficulty—of saying what I did. This may seem very absurd to you; perhaps it is so; it is nevertheless the truth; and most certainly I did not suppose that any administration of which yourself and Mr. Clay and Judge Underwood and Judge Breck were avowed, if not confidential, supporters, would, under the entire circumstances of this case, have it in its power to refuse so paltry a boon; and after seeing the published list of successful applicants, from which alone I learned the fate of my application, I saw still less reason to comprehend such a result. As to yourself, three particulars separated your case from that of the other friends I have named: 1st. I loved you most, and relied most on you. 2d. I the most distrusted the propriety of writing to you, on account of your connection with the cabinet. 3d. From you alone I had no word of notice; and for these two last reasons, the more felt that an explanation was demanded of me as due both to you and myself.

If you have had patience to read this letter, it is needless for me to say more than that I still desire to be considered your friend.

R. J. B.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 387-9

Monday, October 23, 2023

Congressman Horace Mann, July 12, 1850

July 12. To-day the city is dressed in mourning. No one as yet seems to know what will be the policy of the new President, whether it will be for freedom or for slavery, or whether he will not profess to adopt such a middle course as that slavery will be sure to get the advantage in the end. I look upon the movement in New Mexico that of inserting the prohibition of slavery in their new constitution as even more valuable than I did before. They will be far less likely to recede from this ground, having once adopted it.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 307-8

Congressman Horace Mann, July 21, 1850

July 21. Four of the seven members who compose the cabinet are from the slaveholding States: so, if we consider Mr. Webster a proslavery man, they have five out of seven. But one thing is very observable, though four are from the slaveholding States, yet one is from Missouri, one from Kentucky, one from Maryland, and one from North Carolina. All these are just south of Mason and Dixon's line; and they are from the States that hold slavery in its more mitigated forms, and not one of them is an intense proslavery State. The men selected are, I suppose, moderate men, comparatively, on this subject. Therefore, though the South have no confidence in Mr. Webster as an honest man, yet his late change of position on this subject renders him less offensive to the extreme men, and more acceptable to the moderate men.

If Mr. Fillmore has taken this course to conciliate the South in the first instance, and, with his Cabinet, eventually to subserve Northern feeling on this subject of slavery, then the whole may eventuate well; but if it is a concession to the South, on the surface, to be followed by an adoption of their views as to slavery ultimately, then it deserves all reprobation. For myself, I shall not give my confidence to this Administration, on this point, until it earns it. When it does earn it, then, as a matter of justice, I shall no longer withhold it; though, in the honesty of one of the members composing it, I have not, and probably never shall have, the slightest confidence. I therefore await developments. It has proved, so far, a godsend to Mr. Webster; for I do not believe he could have withstood the opposition against him in Massachusetts. Now, instead of being defeated, he escapes from the conflict. Still I can have no confidence in his ultimate success; for no one can safely prophesy success of a dishonest man.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 308-9

Saturday, October 21, 2023

Charles Sumner: Our Immediate Antislavery Duties, November 6, 1850

OUR IMMEDIATE ANTISLAVERY DUTIES.

SPEECH AT A FREE-SOIL MEETING AT FANEUIL HALL,

NOVEMBER 6, 1850.

MR. CHAIRMAN, AND YOU, MY FELLOW-CITIZENS:

Cold and insensible must I be, not to be touched by this welcome. I thank you for the cause, whose representative only I am. It is the cause which I would keep ever foremost, and commend always to your support.

In a few days there will be an important political election, affecting many local interests. Not by these have I been drawn here to-night, but because I would bear my testimony anew to that Freedom which is above all these. And here, at the outset, let me say, that it is because I place Freedom above all else that I cordially concur in the different unions or combinations throughout the Commonwealth, ——— in Mr. Mann's District, of Free-Soilers with Whigs, ——— also in Mr. Fowler's District, of Free-Soilers with Whigs— and generally, in Senatorial Districts, of Free-Soilers with Democrats.

By the first of these two good men may be secured in Congress, while by the latter the friends of Freedom may obtain a controlling influence in the Legislature of Massachusetts during the coming session, and thus advance our cause. [Applause.] They may arbitrate between both the old parties, making Freedom their perpetual object, and in this way contribute more powerfully than they otherwise could to the cause which has drawn us together. [Cheers.]

Leaving these things, so obvious to all, I come at once to consider urgent duties at this anxious moment. To comprehend these we must glance at what Congress has done during its recent session, so long drawn out. This I shall endeavor to do rapidly. "Watchman, what of the night?" And well may the cry be raised, “What of the night?" For things have been done, and measures passed into laws, which, to my mind, fill the day itself with blackness. ["Hear! hear!"]

And yet there are streaks of light—an unwonted dawn in the distant West, out of which a full-orbed sun is beginning to ascend, rejoicing like a strong man to run a race. By Act of Congress California has been admitted into the Union with a Constitution forbidding Slavery. For a measure like this, required not only by simplest justice, but by uniform practice, and by constitutional principles of slaveholders themselves, we may be ashamed to confess gratitude; and yet I cannot but rejoice in this great good. A hateful institution, thus far without check, travelling westward with the power of the Republic, is bidden to stop, while a new and rising State is guarded from its contamination. [Applause.] Freedom, in whose hands is the divining-rod of magical power, pointing the way not only to wealth untold, but to every possession of virtue and intelligence, whose presence is better far than any mine of gold, has been recognized in an extensive region on the distant Pacific, between the very parallels of latitude so long claimed by Slavery as a peculiar home. [Loud plaudits.]

Here is a victory, moral and political: moral, inasmuch as Freedom secures a new foothold where to exert her far-reaching influence; political, inasmuch as by the admission of California, the Free States obtain a majority of votes in the Senate, thus overturning that balance of power between Freedom and Slavery, so preposterously claimed by the Slave States, in forgetfulness of the true spirit of the Constitution, and in mockery of Human Rights. [Cheers.] May free California, and her Senators in Congress, amidst the trials before us, never fail in loyalty to Freedom! God forbid that the daughter should turn with ingratitude or neglect from the mother that bore her! [Enthusiasm.]

Besides this Act, there are two others of this long session to be regarded with satisfaction, and I mention them at once, before considering the reverse of the picture. The slave-trade is abolished in the District of Columbia. This measure, though small in the sight of Justice, is important. It banishes from the National Capital an odious traffic. But this is its least office. Practically it affixes to the whole traffic, wherever it exists, not merely in Washington, within the immediate sphere of the legislative act, but everywhere throughout the Slave States, whether at Richmond, or Charleston, or New Orleans, the brand of Congressional reprobation. The people of the United States, by the voice of Congress, solemnly declare the domestic traffic in slaves offensive in their sight. The Nation judges this traffic. The Nation says to it, "Get thee behind me, Satan!" [Excitement and applause.] It is true that Congress has not, as in the case of the foreign slave-trade, stamped it as piracy, and awarded to its perpetrators the doom of pirates; but it condemns the trade, and gives to general scorn those who partake of it. To this extent the National Government speaks for Freedom. And in doing this, it asserts, under the Constitution, legislative jurisdiction over the subject of Slavery in the District, thus preparing the way for that complete act of Abolition which is necessary to purge the National Capital of its still remaining curse and shame.

The other measure which I hail with thankfulness is the Abolition of Flogging in the Navy. ["Hear! hear!"] Beyond the direct reform thus accomplished — after much effort, finally crowned with encouraging success is the indirect influence of this law, especially in rebuking the lash, wheresoever and by whomsoever employed.

Two props and stays of Slavery are weakened and undermined by Congressional legislation. Without the slave-trade and without the lash, Slavery must fall to earth. By these the whole monstrosity is upheld. If I seem to exaggerate the consequence of these measures of Abolition, you will pardon it to a sincere conviction of their powerful, though subtile and indirect influence, quickened by a desire to find something good in a Congress which has furnished occasion for so much disappointment. Other measures there are which must be regarded not only with regret, but with indignation and disgust. [Sensation.]

Two broad territories, New Mexico and Utah, under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress, have been organized without any prohibition of Slavery. In laying the foundation of their governments, destined hereafter to control the happiness of innumerable multitudes, Congress has omitted the Great Ordinance of Freedom, first moved by Jefferson, and consecrated by the experience of the Northwestern Territory: thus rejecting those principles of Human Liberty which are enunciated in our Declaration of Independence, which are essential to every Bill of Rights, and without which a Republic is a name and nothing more.

Still further, a vast territory, supposed to be upwards of seventy thousand square miles in extent, larger than all New England, has been taken from New Mexico, and, with ten million dollars besides, given to slaveholding Texas: thus, under the plea of settling the western boundary of Texas, securing to this State a large sum of money, and consigning to certain Slavery an important territory.

And still further, as if to do a deed which should "make heaven weep, all earth amazed," this same Congress, in disregard of all cherished safeguards of Freedom, has passed a most cruel, unchristian, devilish law to secure the return into Slavery of those fortunate bondmen who find shelter by our firesides. This is the Fugitive Slave Bill,—a device which despoils the party claimed as slave, whether in reality slave or freeman, of Trial by Jury, that sacred right, and usurps the question of Human Freedom, the highest question known to the law, committing it to the unaided judgment of a single magistrate, on ex parte evidence it may be, by affidavit, without the sanction of cross-examination. Under this detestable, Heaven-defying Bill, not the slave only, but the colored freeman of the North, may be swept into ruthless captivity; and there is no white citizen, born among us, bred in our schools, partaking in our affairs, voting in our elections, whose liberty is not assailed also. Without any discrimination of color, the Bill surrenders all claimed as "owing service or labor" to the same tyrannical judgment. And mark once more its heathenism. By unrelenting provisions it visits with bitter penalties of fine and imprisonment the faithful men and women who render to the fugitive that countenance, succor, and shelter which Christianity expressly requires. ["Shame! shame!"] Thus, from beginning to end, it sets at nought the best principles of the Constitution, and the very laws of God. [Great sensation.]

I might occupy your time in exposing the unconstitutionality of this Act. Denying the Trial by Jury, it is three times unconstitutional: first, as the Constitution declares "the right of the people to be secure in their persons against unreasonable seizures"; secondly, as it further provides that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"; and, thirdly, because it expressly establishes, that "in suits at Common Law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved." By this triple cord the framers of the Constitution secured Trial by Jury in every question of Human Freedom. That man is little imbued with the true spirit of American institutions, has little sympathy with Bills of Rights, is lukewarm for Freedom, who can hesitate to construe the Constitution so as to secure this safeguard. [Enthusiastic applause.]

Again, the Act is unconstitutional in the unprecedented and tyrannical powers it confers upon Commissioners. These petty officers are appointed, not by the President with the advice of the Senate, but by the Courts of Law,—hold their places, not during good behavior, but at the will of the Court,—and receive for their services, not a regular salary, but fees in each individual case. And yet in these petty officers, thus appointed, thus compensated, and holding their places by the most uncertain tenure, is vested a portion of that "judicial power," which, according to the positive text of the Constitution, can be in "judges" only, holding office during good behavior," receiving "at stated times for their services a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office," and, it would seem also, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, being three conditions of judicial power. Adding meanness to violation of the Constitution, the Commissioner is bribed by a double fee to pronounce against Freedom. Decreeing a man to Slavery, he receives ten dollars; saving the man to Freedom, his fee is five dollars. ["Shame! shame!"]

But I will not pursue these details. The soul sickens in the contemplation of this legalized outrage. In the dreary annals of the Past there are many acts of shame,—there are ordinances of monarchs, and laws, which have become a byword and a hissing to the nations. But when we consider the country and the age, I ask fearlessly, what act of shame, what ordinance of monarch, what law, can compare in atrocity with this enactment of an American Congress? ["None!"] I do not forget Appius Claudius, tyrant Decemvir of ancient Rome, condemning Virginia as a slave, nor Louis the Fourteenth, of France, letting slip the dogs of religious persecution by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, nor Charles the First, of England, arousing the patriot rage of Hampden by the extortion of Ship-money, nor the British Parliament, provoking, in our own country, spirits kindred to Hampden, by the tyranny of the Stamp Act and Tea Tax. I would not exaggerate; I wish to keep within bounds; but I think there can be little doubt that the condemnation now affixed to all these transactions, and to their authors, must be the lot hereafter of the Fugitive Slave Bill, and of every one, according to the measure of his influence, who gave it his support. [Three cheers were here given.] Into the immortal catalogue of national crimes it has now passed, drawing, by inexorable necessity, its authors also, and chiefly him, who, as President of the United States, set his name to the Bill, and breathed into it that final breath without which it would bear no life. [Sensation.] Other Presidents may be forgotten; but the name signed to the Fugitive Slave Bill can never be forgotten. ["Never!"] There are depths of infamy, as there are heights of fame. I regret to say what I must, but truth compels me. Better for him, had he never been born! [Renewed applause.] Better for his memory, and for the good name of his children, had he never been President! [Repeated cheers.]

 I have likened this Bill to the Stamp Act, and I trust that the parallel may be continued yet further, by a burst of popular feeling against all action under it similar to that which glowed in the breasts of our fathers. Listen to the words of John Adams, as written in his Diary at the time.

"The year 1765 has been the most remarkable year of my life. That enormous engine, fabricated by the British Parliament, for battering down all the rights and liberties of America, I mean the Stamp Act, has raised and spread through the whole continent a spirit that will be recorded to our honor with all future generations. In every colony, from Georgia to New Hampshire inclusively, the stamp distributors and inspectors have been compelled by the unconquerable rage of the people to renounce their offices. Such and so universal has been the resentment of the people, that every man who has dared to speak in favor of the stamps, or to soften the detestation in which they are held, how great soever his abilities and virtues had been esteemed before, or whatever his fortune, connections, and influence had been, has been seen to sink into universal contempt and ignominy."1 [A voice, "Ditto for the Slave-Hunter!"]

Earlier than John Adams, the first Governor of Massachusetts, John Winthrop, set the example of refusing to enforce laws against the liberties of the people. After describing Civil Liberty, and declaring the covenant between God and man in the Moral Law, he uses these good words:

"This Liberty is the proper end and object of authority, and cannot subsist without it; and it is a liberty to that only which is good, just, and honest. This liberty you are to stand for, with the hazard not only of your goods, but of your lives, if need be. Whatsoever crosseth this is not authority, but a distemper thereof."2

Surely the love of Freedom is not so far cooled among us, descendants of those who opposed the Stamp Act, that we are insensible to the Fugitive Slave Bill. In those other days, the unconquerable rage of the people compelled the stamp distributors and inspectors to renounce their offices, and held up to detestation all who dared to speak in favor of the stamps. Shall we be more tolerant of those who volunteer in favor of this Bill? ["No! no!"]—more tolerant of the Slave-Hunter, who, under its safeguard, pursues his prey upon our soil? ["No! no!"] The Stamp Act could not be executed here. Can the Fugitive Slave Bill? ["Never!”]

And here, Sir, let me say, that it becomes me to speak with caution. It happens that I sustain an important relation to this Bill. Early in professional life I was designated by the late Judge Story a Commissioner of his Court, and, though I do not very often exercise the functions of this appointment, my name is still upon the list. As such, I am one of those before whom the panting fugitive may be dragged for the decision of the question, whether he is a freeman or a slave. But while it becomes me to speak with caution, I shall not hesitate to speak with plainness. I cannot forget that I am a man, although I am a Commissioner. [Three cheers here given.]

Could the same spirit which inspired the Fathers enter into our community now, the marshals, and every magistrate who regarded this law as having any constitutional obligation, would resign, rather than presume to execute it. This, perhaps, is too much to expect. But I will not judge such officials. To their own consciences I leave them. Surely no person of humane feelings and with any true sense of justice, living in a land "where bells have knolled to church," whatever may be the apology of public station, can fail to recoil from such service. For myself let me say, that I can imagine no office, no salary, no consideration, which I would not gladly forego, rather than become in any way the agent in enslaving my brother-man. [Sensation.] Where for me were comfort and solace after such a work? [A voice, "Nowhere!"] In dreams and in waking hours, in solitude and in the street, in the meditations of the closet and in the affairs of men, wherever I turned, there my victim would stare me in the face. From distant rice-fields and sugar-plantations of the South, his cries beneath the vindictive lash, his moans at the thought of Liberty, once his, now, alas! ravished away, would pursue me, repeating the tale of his fearful doom, and sounding, forever sounding, in my ears, "Thou art the man!" [Applause.]

The magistrate who pronounces the decree of Slavery, and the marshal who enforces it, act in obedience to law. This is their apology; and it is the apology also of the masters of the Inquisition, as they ply the torture amidst the shrieks of their victim. Can this weaken accountability for wrong? Disguise it, excuse it, as they will, the fact must glare before the world, and penetrate the conscience too, that the fetters by which the unhappy fugitive is bound are riveted by their tribunal,—that his second life of wretchedness dates from their agency, that his second birth as a slave proceeds from them. The magistrate and marshal do for him here, in a country which vaunts a Christian civilization, what the naked, barbarous Pagan chiefs beyond the sea did for his grandfather in Congo: they transfer him to the Slave-Hunter, and for this service receive the very price paid for his grandfather in Congo, ten dollars! ["Shame! shame!"]

Gracious Heaven! can such things be on our Free Soil? ["No!"] Shall the evasion of Pontius Pilate be enacted anew, and a judge vainly attempt, by washing the hands, to excuse himself for condemning one in whom he can "find no fault"? Should any court, sitting here in Massachusetts, for the first time in her history, become agent of the Slave-Hunter, the very images of our fathers would frown from the walls; their voices would cry from the ground; their spirits, hovering in the air, would plead, remonstrate, protest, against the cruel judgment. [Cheers.] There is a legend of the Church, still living on the admired canvas of a Venetian artist, that St. Mark, descending from the skies with headlong fury into the public square, broke the manacles of a slave in presence of the very judge who had decreed his fate. This is known as "The Miracle of the Slave," and grandly has Art illumined the scene.3 Should Massachusetts hereafter, in an evil hour, be desecrated by any such decree, may the good Evangelist once more descend with valiant arm to break the manacles of the Slave! [Enthusiasm.]

Sir, I will not dishonor this home of the Pilgrims, and of the Revolution, by admitting nay, I cannot believe that this Bill will be executed here. [“Never!”] Among us, as elsewhere, individuals may forget humanity, in fancied loyalty to law; but the public conscience will not allow a man who has trodden our streets as a freeman to be dragged away as a slave. [Applause.] By escape from bondage he has shown that true manhood which must grapple to him every honest heart. He may be ignorant and rude, as poor, but he is of true nobility. Fugitive Slaves are the heroes of our age. In sacrificing them to this foul enactment we violate every sentiment of hospitality, every whispering of the heart, every commandment of religion..

There are many who will never shrink, at any cost, and notwithstanding all the atrocious penalties of this Bill, from effort to save a wandering fellow-man from bondage; they will offer him the shelter of their houses, and, if need be, will protect his liberty by force. But let me be understood; I counsel no violence. There is another power, stronger than any individual arm, which I invoke: I mean that irresistible Public Opinion, inspired by love of God and man, which, without violence or noise, gently as the operations of Nature, makes and unmakes laws. Let this Public Opinion be felt in its might, and the Fugitive Slave Bill will become everywhere among us a dead letter. No lawyer will aid it by counsel, no citizen will be its agent; it will die of inanition, like a spider beneath an exhausted receiver. [Laughter.] Oh! it were well the tidings should spread throughout the land that here in Massachusetts this accursed Bill has found no servant. [Cheers.] "Sire, in Bayonne are honest citizens and brave soldiers only, but not one executioner," was the reply of the governor to the royal mandate from Charles the Ninth, of France, ordering the massacre of St. Bartholomew.4 [Sensation.]

It rests with you, my fellow-citizens, by word and example, by calm determinations and devoted lives, to do this work. From a humane, just, and religious people will spring a Public Opinion to keep perpetual guard over the liberties of all within our borders. Nay, more, like the flaming sword of the cherubim at the gates of Paradise, turning on every side, it shall prevent any SLAVE-HUNTER from ever setting foot in this Commonwealth. Elsewhere he may pursue his human prey, employ his congenial bloodhounds, and exult in his successful game; but into Massachusetts he must not come. Again, let me be understood, I counsel no violence. I would not touch his person. Not with whips and thongs would I scourge him from the land. The contempt, the indignation, the abhorrence of the community shall be our weapons of offence. Wherever he moves, he shall find no house to receive him, no table spread to nourish him, no welcome to cheer him. The dismal lot of the Roman exile shall be his. He shall be a wanderer, without roof, fire, or water. Men shall point at him in the streets, and on the highways.

“Sleep shall neither night nor day

Hang upon his penthouse-lid;

He shall live a man forbid;

Weary sevennights nine times nine

Shall he dwindle, peak, and pine.”     [Applause.]

Villages, towns, and cities shall refuse to receive the monster; they shall vomit him forth, never again to disturb the repose of our community. [Repeated rounds of applause.]

The feelings with which we regard the Slave-Hunter will be extended soon to all the mercenary agents and heartless minions, who, without any positive obligation of law, become part of his pack. They are volunteers, and, as such, must share the ignominy of the chief Hunter. [Cheers.]

I have dwelt thus long upon the Fugitive Slave Bill especially in the hope of contributing something to that Public Opinion which is destined in the Free States to be the truest defence of the slave. I now advance to other more general duties.

We have seen what Congress has done. And yet, in the face of these enormities of legislation—of Territories organized without the prohibition of Slavery, of a large province surrendered to Texas and to Slavery, and of this execrable Fugitive Slave Bill,—in the face also of Slavery still sanctioned in the District of Columbia, of the Slave-Trade between domestic ports under the flag of the Union, and of the Slave Power still dominant over the National Government, we are told that the Slavery Question is settled. Yes, settled, settled, — that is the word. Nothing, Sir, can be settled which is not right. [Sensation.] Nothing can be settled which is against Freedom. Nothing can be settled which is contrary to the Divine Law. God, Nature, and all the holy sentiments of the heart repudiate any such false seeming settlement.

Amidst the shifts and changes of party, our DUTIES remain, pointing the way to action. By no subtle compromise or adjustment can men suspend the commandments of God. By no trick of managers, no hocus-pocus of politicians, no "mush of concession," can we be released from this obedience. It is, then, in the light of duties that we are to find peace for our country and ourselves. Nor can any settlement promise peace which is not in harmony with those everlasting principles from which our duties spring.

Here I shall be brief. Slavery is wrong. It is the source of unnumbered woes, not the least of which is its influence on the Slaveholder himself, rendering him insensible to its outrage. It overflows with injustice and inhumanity. Language toils in vain to picture the wretchedness and wickedness which it sanctions and perpetuates. Reason revolts at the impious assumption that man can hold property in man. As it is our perpetual duty to oppose wrong, so must we oppose Slavery; nor can we ever relax in this opposition, so long as the giant evil continues anywhere within the sphere of our influence. Especially must we oppose it, wherever we are responsible for its existence, or in any way parties to it.

And now mark the distinction. The testimony which we bear against Slavery, as against all other wrong, is, in different ways, according to our position. The Slavery which exists under other governments, as in Russia or Turkey, or in other States of our Union, as in Virginia and Carolina, we can oppose only through the influence of morals and religion, without in any way invoking the Political Power. Nor do we propose to act otherwise. But Slavery, where we are parties to it, wherever we are responsible for it, everywhere within our jurisdiction, must be opposed not only by all the influences of literature, morals, and religion, but directly by every instrument of Political Power. [Rounds of applause.] As it is sustained by law, it can be overthrown only by law; and the legislature having jurisdiction over it must be moved to consummate the work. I am sorry to confess that this can be done only through the machinery of politics. The politician, then, must be summoned. The moralist and philanthropist must become for this purpose politicians, not forgetting morals or philanthropy, but seeking to apply them practically in the laws of the land.

It is a mistake to say, as is often charged, that we seek to interfere, through Congress, with Slavery in the States, or in any way to direct the legislation of Congress upon subjects not within its jurisdiction. Our political aims, as well as our political duties, are coextensive with our political responsibilities. And since we at the North are responsible for Slavery, wherever it exists under the jurisdiction of Congress, it is unpardonable in us not to exert every power we possess to enlist Congress against it.

Looking at details:

We demand, first and foremost, the instant Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill. [Cheers.]

We demand the Abolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia. [Cheers.]

We demand of Congress the exercise of its time-honored power to prohibit Slavery in the Territories. [Cheers.]

We demand of Congress that it shall refuse to receive any new Slave State into the Union. [Cheers, repeated.]

We demand the Abolition of the Domestic Slave Trade, so far as it can be constitutionally reached, but particularly on the high seas under the National Flag.

And, generally, we demand from the National Government the exercise of all constitutional power to relieve itself from responsibility for Slavery.

And yet one thing further must be done. The Slave Power must be overturned, so that the National Government may be put openly, actively, and perpetually on the side of Freedom. [Prolonged applause.]

In demanding the overthrow of the Slave Power, we but seek to exclude from the operations of the National Government a political influence, having its origin in Slavery, which has been more potent, sinister, and mischievous than any other in our history. This Power, though unknown to the Constitution, and existing in defiance of its true spirit, now predominates over Congress, gives the tone to its proceedings, seeks to control all our public affairs, and humbles both the great political parties to its will. It is that combination of Slave-masters, whose bond of union is a common interest in Slavery. Time would fail me in exposing the extent to which its influence has been felt, the undue share of offices it has enjoyed, and the succession of its evil deeds. Suffice it to say, that, for a long period, the real principle of this union was not observed by the Free States. In the game of office and legislation the South has always won. It has played with loaded dice,—loaded with Slavery. [Laughter.] The trick of the Automaton Chess-Player, so long an incomprehensible marvel, has been repeated, with similar success. Let the Free States make a move on the board, and the South says, "Check !” [“Hear! hear!"] Let them strive for Free Trade, as they did once, and the cry is, "Check!" Let them jump towards Protection, and it is again, "Check!" Let them move towards Internal Improvements, and the cry is still, "Check!" Whether forward or backward, to the right or left, wherever they turn, the Free States are pursued by an inexorable "Check!" But the secret is now discovered. Amid the well-arranged machinery which seemed to move the victorious chess-player is a living force, only recently discovered,—being none other than the Slave Power. It is the Slave Power which has been perpetual victor, saying always, "Check!" to the Free States. As this influence is now disclosed, it only remains that it should be openly encountered in the field of politics. [A voice, “That is the true way.”]

Such is our cause. It is not sectional; for it simply aims to establish under the National Government those great principles of Justice and Humanity which are broad and universal as Man. It is not aggressive; for it does not seek in any way to interfere through Congress with Slavery in the States. It is not contrary to the Constitution; for it recognizes this paramount law, and in the administration of the Government invokes the spirit of its founders. It is not hostile to the quiet of the country; for it proposes the only course by which agitation can be allayed, and quiet be permanently established. And yet there is an attempt to suppress this cause, and to stifle its discussion.

Vain and wretched attempt! [A band of music in the street here interrupted the speaker.]

I am willing to stop for one moment, if the audience will allow me, that they may enjoy that music. [Several voices, "Go on! go on!" Another voice, "We have better music here." After a pause the speaker proceeded.]

Fellow-citizens, I was saying that it is proposed to suppress this cause, and to stifle this discussion. But this cannot be done. That subject which more than all other subjects needs careful, conscientious, and kind consideration in the national councils, which will not admit of postponement or hesitation, which is allied with the great interests of the country, which controls the tariff and causes war, which concerns alike all parts of the land, North and South, East and West, which affects the good name of the Republic in the family of civilized nations, the subject of subjects, has now at last, after many struggles, been admitted within the pale of legislative discussion. From this time forward it must be entertained by Congress. It will be one of the orders of the day. It cannot be passed over or forgotten. It cannot be blinked out of sight. The combinations of party cannot remove it. The intrigues of politicians cannot jostle it aside. There it is, in towering colossal proportions, filling the very halls of the Capitol, while it overshadows and darkens all other subjects. There it will continue, till driven into oblivion by the irresistible Genius of Freedom. [Cheers.]

I am not blind to adverse signs. The wave of reaction, after sweeping over Europe, has reached our shores. The barriers of Human Rights are broken down. Statesmen, writers, scholars, speakers, once their uncompromising professors, have become professors of compromise. All this must be changed. Reaction must be stayed. The country must be aroused. The cause must again be pressed, with the fixed purpose never to moderate our efforts until crowned by success. [Applause.] The National Government, everywhere within its proper constitutional sphere, must be placed on the side of Freedom. The policy of Slavery, which has so long prevailed, must give place to the policy of Freedom. The Slave Power, fruitful parent of national ills, must be driven from its supremacy. Until all this is done, the friends of the Constitution and of Human Rights cannot cease from labor, nor can the Republic hope for any repose but the repose of submission.

Men of all parties and pursuits, who wish well to their country, and would preserve its good name, must join now. Welcome here the Conservative and the Reformer for our cause stands on the truest Conservatism and the truest Reform. In seeking the reform of existing evils, we seek also the conservation of the principles handed down by our fathers. Welcome especially the young! To you I appeal with confidence. Trust to your generous impulses, and to that reasoning of the heart, which is often truer, as it is less selfish, than the calculations of the head. [Enthusiasm.] Do not exchange your aspirations for the skepticism of age. Yours is the better part. In the Scriptures it is said that "your young men shall see visions and your old men. shall dream dreams"; on which Lord Bacon has recorded the ancient inference, "that young men are admitted nearer to God than old, because vision is a clearer revelation than a dream."5

It is not uncommon to hear people declare themselves against Slavery, and willing to unite in practical efforts. Practical is the favorite word. At the same time, in the loftiness of pharisaic pride, they have nothing but condemnation, reproach, or contempt for the earnest souls that have striven long years in this struggle. To such I would say, If you are sincere in what you declare, if your words are not merely lip-service, if in your heart you are entirely willing to join in practical effort against Slavery, then, by life, conversation, influence, vote, disregarding "the ancient forms of party strife," seek to carry the principles of Freedom into the National Government, wherever its jurisdiction is acknowledged and its power can be felt. Thus, with out any interference with the States which are beyond this jurisdiction, may you help to efface the blot of Slavery from the National brow.

Do this, and you will most truly promote that harmony which you so much desire. And under this blessed influence tranquillity will be established throughout the country. Then, at last, the Slavery Question will be settled. Banished from its usurped foothold under the National Government, Slavery will no longer enter, with distracting force, into national politics, making and unmaking laws, making and unmaking Presidents. Confined to the States, where it is left by the Constitution, it will take its place as a local institution, if, alas! continue it must, for which we are in no sense responsible, and against which we cannot exert any political power. We shall be relieved from the present painful and irritating connection with it, the existing antagonism between the South and the North will be softened, crimination and recrimination will cease, and the wishes of the Fathers will be fulfilled, while this Great Evil is left to all kindly influences and the prevailing laws of social economy.

To every laborer in a cause like this there are satisfactions unknown to the common political partisan. Amidst all apparent reverses, notwithstanding the hatred of enemies or the coldness of friends, he has the consciousness of duty done. Whatever may be existing impediments, his also is the cheering conviction that every word spoken, every act performed, every vote cast for this cause, helps to swell those quickening influences by which Truth, Justice, and Humanity will be established upon earth. [Cheers.] He may not live to witness the blessed consummation, but it is none the less certain.

Others may dwell on the Past as secure. Under the laws of a beneficent God the Future also is secure, on the single condition that we labor for its great objects. [Enthusiastic applause.]

The language of jubilee, which, amidst reverse and discouragement, burst from the soul of Milton, as he thought of sacrifice for the Church, will be echoed by every one who toils and suffers for Freedom. "Now by this little diligence," says the great patriot of the English Commonwealth, "mark what a privilege I have gained with good men and saints, to claim my right of lamenting the tribulations of the Church, if she should suffer, when others, that have ventured nothing for her sake, have not the honor to be admitted mourners. But if she lift up her drooping head and prosper, among those that have something more than wished her welfare, I have my charter and freehold of rejoicing to me and my heirs.6 We, too, may have our charter and freehold of rejoicing to ourselves and our heirs, if we now do our duty.

I have spoken of votes. Living in a community where political power is lodged with the people, and each citizen is an elector, the vote is an important expression of opinion. The vote is the cutting edge. It is well to have correct opinions, but the vote must follow. The vote is the seed planted; without it there can be no sure fruit. The winds of heaven, in their beneficence, may scatter the seed in the furrow; but it is not from such accidents that our fields wave with the golden harvest. He is a foolish husbandman who neglects to sow his seed; and he is an unwise citizen, who, desiring the spread of good principles, neglects to deposit his vote for the candidate who is the representative of those principles.

Admonished by experience of timidity, irresolution, and weakness in our public men, particularly at Washington, amidst the temptations of ambition and power, the friends of Freedom cannot lightly bestow their confidence. They can put trust only in men of tried character and inflexible will. Three things at least they must require the first is backbone; the second is backbone; and the third is backbone. [Loud cheers.] My language is homely; I hardly pardon myself for using it; but it expresses an idea which must not be forgotten. When I see a person of upright character and pure soul yielding to a temporizing policy, I cannot but say, He wants backbone. When I see a person talking loudly against Slavery in private, but hesitating in public, and failing in the time of trial, I say, He wants backbone. When I see a person who coöperated with Antislavery men, and then deserted them, I say, He wants backbone. ["Hear! hear!"] When I see a person leaning upon the action of a political party, and never venturing to think for himself, I say, He wants backbone. When I see a person careful always to be on the side of the majority, and unwilling to appear in a minority, or, if need be, to stand alone, I say, He wants backbone. [Applause.] Wanting this, they all want that courage, constancy, firmness, which are essential to the support of PRINCIPLE. Let no such man be trusted. [Renewed applause.]

For myself, fellow-citizens, my own course is determined. The first political convention which I ever attended was in the spring of 1845, against the annexation of Texas. I was at that time a silent and passive Whig. I had never held political office, nor been a candidate for any. No question ever before drew me to any active political exertion. The strife of politics seemed. to me ignoble. A desire to do what I could against Slavery led me subsequently to attend two different State Conventions of Whigs, where I coöperated with eminent citizens in endeavor to arouse the party in Massachusetts to its Antislavery duties. A conviction that the Whig party was disloyal to Freedom, and an ardent aspiration to help the advancement of this great cause, has led me to leave that party, and dedicate what of strength and ability I have to the present movement. [Great applause.]

To vindicate Freedom, and oppose Slavery, so far as I may constitutionally,—with earnestness, and yet, I trust, without personal unkindness on my part, is the object near my heart. Would that I could impress upon all who now hear me something of the strength of my own convictions! Would that my voice, leaving this crowded hall to-night, could traverse the hills and valleys of New England, that it could run along the rivers and the lakes of my country, lighting in every heart a beacon-flame to arouse the slumberers throughout the land! [Sensation.] In this cause I care not for the name by which I am called. Let it be Democrat, or "Loco-foco," if you please. No man in earnest will hesitate on account of a name. Rejoicing in associates from any quarter, I shall be found ever with that party which most truly represents the principles of Freedom. [Applause.] Others may become indifferent to these principles, bartering them for political success, vain and short-lived, or forgetting the visions of youth in the

dreams of age. Whenever I forget them, whenever I become indifferent to them, whenever I cease to be constant in maintaining them, through good report and evil report, in any future combinations of party, then may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, may my right hand forget its cunning! [Cheers.]

And now as I close, fellow-citizens, I return in thought to the political election with which I began. If from this place I could make myself heard by the friends of Freedom throughout the Commonwealth, I would give them for a rallying-cry three words, — FREEDOM, UNION, VICTORY!

The peroration was received with the most earnest applause, followed by cries of "Three cheers for Charles Sumner!" "Three cheers for Phillips and Walker!" "Three cheers for Horace Mann and the cause!"
_______________

1 Diary, December 18, 1765: Works, Vol. II. p 154.

2 History of New England (ed. Savage), 1645, Vol. II. p. 229.

3 An eloquent French critic says, among other things, of this greatest picture of Tintoretto, that "no painting surpasses, or perhaps equals" it, and that, before seeing it, "one can have no idea of the human imagination." (Taine, Italy, Florence, and Venice, tr. Durand, pp. 314, 316.) Some time after this Speech an early copy or sketch of this work fell into Mr. Sumner's hands, and it is now a cherished souvenir of those anxious days when the pretensions of Slavery were at their height.

4 Le Vicomte d'Orthez à Charles IX.: D'Aubigné, Histoire Universelle, Part. II. Liv. I. ch. 5, cited by Sismondi, Histoire des Français, Tom. XIX. p. 177, note. I gladly copy this noble letter. "Sire, j'ai communiqué le commandement de Votre Majesté ses fidèles habitans et gens de guerre de la garnison; je n'y ai trouvé que bons citoyens et braves soldats, mais pas un bourreau. C'est pourquoi eux et moi supplions très humblement Votre dite Majesté vouloir employer en choses possibles, quelque hasardeuses qu'elles soient, nos bras et nos vies, comme étant, autant qu'elles dureront, Sire, vôtres."

5 Essays, XLII. Of Youth and Age.

6 The Reason of Church Government, Book II., Introduction: Prose Works, ed. Symmons, Vol. I. p. 117.

SOURCES: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 228-9; Charles Sumner, The Works of Charles Sumner, Volume 2, p. 398-424