SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, pp. 7-8
Friday, January 16, 2026
Cadet William T. Sherman to John Sherman, April 13, 1839
Cadet William T. Sherman to John Sherman, March 7, 1840
I acknowledged the receipt of your last in my letter to mother, since which time I have been waiting in hopes that something might turn up to write you about; but although the river has opened, and is alive with steamboats and sloops, still West Point appears as dull as ever; in fact, the only visitors we have had so far have been tailors, shoemakers, etc., etc., who prowl about us, knowing our inexperience and the necessity we are under of getting a full supply of clothing at their prices. The snow has entirely disappeared, and for the past three weeks the weather has been beautiful, and reminds me very much of sugar-making times at home, and I have no doubt, if your weather has been as fine as ours here, your farmers have not been idle in their camps. An evening at old Mr. Buchanan's or Wilson's sugar-camp would be great.
I presume the idea of your studying law has been decided upon by Mr. Reese and Taylor, so that it would be rather impertinent for me to object in the least; but for my part, it would be my last choice. Everybody studies law nowadays, and to be a lawyer without being exceedingly eminent — which it is to be hoped you will be some day — is not a sufficient equivalent for their risks and immense study and labor. However, if you decide upon anything, you should immediately commence to carry it into execution. As to me, I am already provided for. As soon as I graduate I am entitled by law to a commission in the army, and from my standing in the class to a choice of corps. To be stationed in the east or west, to be in the artillery, infantry, or dragoons, depends entirely on my choice. This choice will be, unless war breaks out with England, the Fifth Regiment of Infantry, because it is stationed on the northwest frontier, a country which I have always felt a strong inclination to see; and if it meets my ideas, formed from descriptions of travellers and officers, it must be the finest spot on this continent. Also it is probable that the Indians will break out again, in which case I should have an opportunity of seeing some active service. Should war, however, be the consequence of this Maine difficulty, I should prefer the artillery, for the reason that it is stationed east of the mountains, which would be the seat of war, and it is an arm of service which I would prefer in a war against a civilized people. But as there is scarce a possibility of this, I have concluded to go to the west, and have accordingly ordered an infantry uniform. Whether I remain in the army for life or not is doubtful; but one thing is certain, — that I will never study another profession. Should I resign, it would be to turn farmer, if ever I can raise enough to buy a good farm in Iowa. If I can spare money when I am at the city of New York, I intend to get one of Colt's patent rifles to shoot ten times in succession as fast as you can cock and pull the trigger. They cost from $40 to $60, more than, I fear, I can spare. I have been very well indeed all winter.
Tuesday, December 30, 2025
Diary of Henry Greville: Saturday, December 28, 1861
We are in a state of
great suspense as to peace or war. The English newspapers are filled with
extracts from the American journals, breathing fire and fury against England, and
expressing the conviction, real or pretended, that as they have the law on
their side, we shall bluster a little, but in the end submit, and that there is
no fear of our going to war. The vessel bearing our ultimatum will have reached
Halifax on the 15th. It was passed at Cape Race by one of our steamers, and its
contents will have been telegraphed from Halifax to Washington and New York on
that day; so that on Monday we may know the general effect produced by them.
People are betting even on the result, and I hear that Palmerston has no faith
in peace. At Paris the general opinion is that the French despatch will produce
no effect, and very likely that the American Government will refuse to accept
it, because it is styled the 'Federal,' not the United States Government.
I have had an
interesting letter from Mary Ponsonby, with further details of the Windsor
tragedy. When the gentlemen who were sent to Lisbon to condole on the late King
of Portugal's death returned, and after the Prince had seen them, the Queen
told Charles Grey that the Prince said to her, You may be glad, my dear, that I
have not got a fever, for if I had, it would be just the same case as Pedro's.'
And he then went on to say, what he had often told her before, that he did not
care enough to live, to make a struggle for it, though he was very happy. The
Queen felt alarmed at the dejected way in which he spoke of himself, and when
Jenner told Her Majesty the following day that he believed the Prince's malady
to be gastric fever, she desired that he would on no account mention this to
anyone, for fear the Prince might hear of it, as she felt how fatal it would be
if he got it into his head that he should not recover. Jenner kept his own
counsel until the Saturday, when he told Phipps and Charles Grey that he had no
doubt of the nature of the illness, as the appearance of spots made it evident.
The next week was considered to be the eight days' crisis; Jenner always said
he saw his way over four days of the time, but he doubted much whether he would
pull him through the week.
However, the fever
symptoms and all the characteristics of the illness abated from that moment,
and they were all full of confidence that he would do well until the
Friday, when congestion of the lungs came on, which he had no strength to fight
against. The opinion was that he would not live through the night. There was a
slight rally on Saturday, but the difficulty of breathing came on at the same
hour as on Friday, and at eleven he expired. His muscular strength surprised
the doctors, for he half got out of bed on Saturday, and those who attended him
would not believe him to be dying, for except the look of fever, he had no
appearance of being wasted or weak. He knew the Queen to the last, telling her
in German that he loved her, and there was more speaking when they were alone,
which those who were in the next room might have heard, as the doors were open,
but they of course kept away. The last words he said to Princess Alice were
'Good child.' The Queen has appointed Lord James Murray Groom of the
Bedchamber, vacant by the death of Bowater, and has made Francis Seymour, who
was one of the Prince's oldest servants, an Extra Groom of the Bedchamber.
The young Portuguese
Prince who was here lately with the present King has fallen ill of the same
fever as that which carried off his two brothers. The King, at the urgent
request of his Ministers and people, has removed from the Palace, and there
have been tumults in the streets, a suspicion having arisen that the late King
and his brothers had been poisoned. They probably were so by the bad drainage
of the Palace, and a Sanitary Commission has been appointed to inquire into the
matter. It would really seem as though the Coburgs were particularly bad
subjects for fever, or had bad constitutions, and one cannot but feel some
anxiety for our own Royal Family, who are also the offspring of first cousins.
King Leopold arrived at Osborne yesterday.
SOURCE: Alice
Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1861-1872,
pp. 3-6
Friday, June 6, 2025
Senator John C. Calhoun to Andrew Pickens Calhoun, February 23, 1848
Senate Chamber 23d Feb. 1848
MY DEAR ANDREW, The treaty with Mexico has just been laid before the Senate, and read. It will be warmly opposed, but I think it will be approved by the body. It will be a fortunate deliverance, if it should be. A sudden impulse in that case, would be given to commerce, accompanied by a rise of price in our great staple so soon as it is known in England.
The Slave question will soon come up, and be the subject of deep agitation. The South will be in the crisis of its fate. If it yields now, all will be lost.
I enclose a speech by Mr Yulee on his amendment to Mr Dickenson resolutions. They express substantially my views. Indeed, (in confidence), he is one of the members of our mess and has conversed with me freely on the principles, which control the question involved; but the execution is all his own. Love to all.
SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, p. 744
Tuesday, March 4, 2025
John J. Crittenden’s Address on the Life and Death of Henry Clay, Delivered at Louisville, September 29, 1852
LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN,—I am very sensible of the difficulty and magnitude of the task which
I have undertaken.
I am to address you
in commemoration of the public services of HENRY CLAY, and in celebration of
his obsequies. His death filled his whole country with mourning, and the loss
of no citizen, save the Father of his Country, has ever produced such
manifestations of the grief and homage of the public heart. His history has
indeed been read "in a nation's eyes." A nation's tears proclaim,
with their silent eloquence, its sense of the national loss. Kentucky has more
than a common share in this national bereavement. To her it is a domestic
grief,—to her belongs the sad privilege of being the chief mourner. He was her
favorite son, her pride, and her glory. She mourns for him as a mother. But let
her not mourn as those who have no hope or consolation. She can find the
richest and the noblest solace in the memory of her son, and of his great and
good actions; and his fame will come back, like a comforter, from his grave, to
wipe away her tears. Even while she weeps for him, her tears shall be mingled
with the proud feelings of triumph which his name will inspire; and Old
Kentucky, from the depths of her affectionate and heroic heart, shall exclaim,
like the Duke of Ormond, when informed that his brave son had fallen in battle,
"I would not exchange my dead son for any living son in Christendom."
From these same abundant sources we may hope that the widowed partner of his
life, who now sits in sadness at Ashland, will derive some pleasing
consolations. I presume not to offer any words of comfort of my own. Her grief
is too sacred to permit me to use that privilege. You, sons and daughters of
Kentucky, have assembled here to commemorate his life and death. How can I
address you suitably on such a theme? I feel the oppressive consciousness that
I cannot do it in terms adequate to the subject, or to your excited feelings. I
am no orator, nor have I come here to attempt any idle or vainglorious display
of words; I come as a plain Kentuckian, who, sympathizing in all your feelings,
presents you with this address, as his poor offering, to be laid upon that
altar which you are here erecting to the memory of Henry Clay. Let it not be
judged according to its own value, but according to the spirit in which it is
offered. It would be no difficult task to address you on this occasion in the
extravagant and rhetorical language that is usual in funeral orations; but my
subject deserves a different treatment—the monumental name of Henry Clay rises
above all mere personal favor and flattery; it rejects them, and challenges the
scrutiny and the judgment of the world. The noble uses to which his name should
be applied, are to teach his country, by his example, lessons of public virtue
and political wisdom; to teach patriots and statesmen how to act, how to live,
and how to die. I can but glance at a subject that spreads out in such bright
and boundless expanse before me.
Henry Clay lived in
a most eventful period, and the history of his life for forty years has been
literally that of his country. He was so identified with the government for
more than two-thirds of its existence, that, during that time, hardly any act
which has redounded to its honor, its prosperity, its present rank among the
nations of the earth, can be spoken of without calling to mind involuntarily
the lineaments of his noble person. It would be difficult to determine whether
in peace or in war, in the field of legislation or of diplomacy, in the
springtide of his life, or in its golden ebb, he won the highest honor. It can
be no disparagement to any one of his contemporaries to say that, in all the
points of practical statesmanship, he encountered no superior in any of the
employments which his constituents or his country conferred upon him.
For the reason that
he had been so much and so constantly in the public eye, an elaborate review of
his life will not be expected of me. All that I shall attempt will be to sketch
a few leading traits, which may serve to give those who have had fewer
opportunities of observation than I have had something like a just idea of his
public character and services. If, in doing this, I speak more at large of the
earlier than of the later periods of his life, it is because, in regard to the
former, though of vast consequence, intervening years have thrown them somewhat
in the background.
Passing by,
therefore, the prior service of Mr. Clay in the Senate for brief periods in
1806 and 1810-11, I come at once to his Speakership in the House of Representatives,
and his consequent agency in the war of 1812.
To that war our
country is indebted for much of the security, freedom, prosperity, and
reputation which it now enjoys. It has been truly said by one of the living
actors in that perilous era, that the very act of our going to war was heroic.1
By the supremacy of the naval power of England the fleets of all Europe had
been swept from the seas; the banner of the United States alone floated in
solitary fearlessness. She seemed to encircle the earth with her navies, and to
be the undisputed mistress of the ocean. We went out upon the deep with a sling
in our hands. When, in all time, were such fearful odds seen as we had against
us?
The events of the
war with England, so memorable, and even wonderful, are too familiar to all to
require any particular recital on this occasion. Of that war,—of its causes and
consequences,—of its disasters, its bloody battles, and its glorious victories
by land and sea, history and our own official records have given a faithful
narrative. A just national pride has engraven that narrative upon our hearts.
But even in the fiercest conflicts of that war, there was nothing more truly
heroic than the declaration of it by Congress.
Of that declaration,
of the incidents, personal influences, and anxious deliberations which preceded
and led to it, the history is not so well or generally known. The more it is
known the more it will appear how important was the part that Mr. Clay acted,
and how much we are indebted to him for all the glorious and beneficial issues
of the declaration of that war, which has not inappropriately been called the
Second War of Independence.
The public grounds
of the war were the injustice, injury, and insults inflicted on the United
States by the government of Great Britain, then engaged in a war of maritime
edicts with France, of which the commerce of the United States was the victim,
our merchant ships being captured by British cruisers on every sea, and
confiscated by her courts, in utter contempt of the rights of this nation as an
independent power. Added to this, and more offensive than even those outrages,
was the arrogation, by the same power, of a right to search American vessels
for the purpose of impressing seamen from vessels sailing under the American
flag. These aggressions upon our national rights constituted, undoubtedly,
justifiable cause of war. With equal justice on our part, and on the same
grounds (impressment of seamen excepted), we should have been warranted in
declaring war against France also; but common sense (not to speak of policy)
forbade our engaging with two nations at once, and dictated the selection, as
an adversary, of the one that had power, which the other had not, to carry its
arbitrary edicts into full effect. The war was really, on our part, a war for
national existence.
When Congress
assembled, in November, 1811, the crisis was upon us. But, as may be readily
imagined, it could be no easy matter to nerve the heart of Congress, all
unprepared for the dread encounter, to take the step, which there could be no
retracing, of a declaration of war.
Nor could that task,
in all probability, ever have been accomplished, but for the concurrence,
purely accidental, of two circumstances: the one, the presence of Henry Clay in
the chair of the popular branch of the national legislature; and the other,
that of James Monroe, as Secretary of State, in the executive administration of
the government.
Mr. Monroe had
returned but a year or two before from a course of public service abroad, in
which, as minister plenipotentiary, he had represented the United States at the
several courts, in succession, of France, Spain, and Great Britain. From the
last of these missions he had come home, thoroughly disgusted with the
contemptuous manner in which the rights of the United States were treated by
the belligerent powers, and especially by England. This treatment, which even
extended to the personal intercourse between their ministers and the
representatives of this country, he considered as indicative of a settled
determination on their part, presuming upon the supposed incapacity of this
government for war, to reduce to system a course of conduct calculated to
debase and prostrate us in the eyes of the world. Reasoning thus, he had
brought his mind to a serious and firm conviction that the rights of the United
States, as a nation, would never be respected by the powers of the Old World
until this government summoned up resolution to resent such usage, not by
arguments and protests merely, but by an appeal to arms. Full of this
sentiment, Mr. Monroe was called, upon a casual vacancy, when it was least
expected by himself or the country, to the head of the Department of State.
That sentiment, and the feelings which we have thus accounted for, Mr. Monroe
soon communicated to his associates in the cabinet, and, in some degree it
might well be supposed, to the great statesman then at the head of the government.
The tone of
President Madison's first message to Congress (November 5, 1811), a few months
only after Mr. Monroe's accession to the cabinet, can leave hardly a doubt in
any mind of such having been the case. That message was throughout of the
gravest cast, reciting the aggressions and aggravations of Great Britain, as
demanding resistance, and urging upon Congress the duty of putting the country
"into an armor and attitude demanded by the crisis and corresponding with
the national spirit and expectations."
It was precisely at
this point of time that Mr. Clay, having resigned his seat in the Senate,
appeared on the floor of the House of Representatives, and was chosen, almost
by acclamation, Speaker of that body. From that moment he exercised an
influence, in a great degree personal, which materially affected, if it did not
control, the judgment of the House. Among the very first acts which devolved
upon him by virtue of his office was the appointment of the committees raised
upon the President's message. Upon the select committee of nine members to
which was referred "so much of the message as relates to our foreign
relations," he appointed a large proportion from among the fast friends of
the administration, nearly all of them being new members and younger than
himself, though he was not then more than thirty-five years of age. It is
impossible, at this day, to call to mind the names of which this committee was
composed (Porter, Calhoun, and Grundy being the first named among them),
without coming to the conclusion that the committee was constituted with a view
to the event predetermined in the mind of the Speaker. There can be no question
that when, quitting the Senate, he entered the representative body, he had
become satisfied that, by the continued encroachments of Great Britain on our
national rights, the choice of the country was narrowed down to war or
submission. Between these there could be no hesitation in such a mind as that
of Mr. Clay which to choose. In this emergency he acted for his country as he
would in a like case for himself. Desiring and cultivating the good will of
all, he never shrank from any personal responsibility, nor cowered before any
danger. More than a year before his accession to the House of Representatives
he had, in a debate in the Senate, taken occasion to say that "he most
sincerely desired peace and amity with England; that he even preferred an
adjustment of all differences with her to one with any other nation; but, if
she persisted in a denial of justice to us, he trusted and hoped that all
hearts would unite in a bold and vigorous vindication of our rights." It
was in this brave spirit, animated to increased fervency by intervening
aggressions from the same quarter, that Mr. Clay entered into the House of
Representatives.
Early in the second
month of the session, availing himself of the right then freely used by the
Speaker to engage in discussion while the House was in committee of the whole,
he dashed into the debates upon the measures of military and naval preparation
recommended by the President and reported upon favorably by the committee. He
avowed, without reserve, that the object of this preparation was war, and war
with Great Britain.
In these debates he
showed his familiarity with all the weapons of popular oratory. In a tempest of
eloquence, in which he wielded alternately argument, persuasion, remonstrance,
invective, ridicule, and reproach, he swept before him all opposition to the
high resolve to which he exhorted Congress. To the argument (for example)
against preparing for a war with England, founded upon the idea of her being
engaged, in her conflict with France, in fighting the battles of the world, he
replied, that such a purpose would be best achieved by a scrupulous observance
of the rights of others, and by respecting that public law which she professed
to vindicate. "Then," said he, "she would command the sympathies
of the world. But what are we required to do by those who would engage our
feelings and wishes in her behalf? To bear the actual cuffs of her arrogance,
that we may escape a chimerical French subjugation. We are called upon to
submit to debasement, dishonor, and disgrace; to bow the neck to royal
insolence, as a course of preparation for manly resistance to Gallic invasion!
What nation, what individual, was ever taught, in the schools of ignominious
submission, these patriotic lessons of freedom and independence?" And to
the argument that this government was unfit for any war but a war against
invasion,-so signally since disproved by actual events,-he exclaimed, with
characteristic vehemence, "What! is it not equivalent to invasion, if the
mouths of our outlets and harbors are blocked up, and we are denied egress from
our own waters? Or, when the burglar is at our door, shall we bravely sally
forth and repel his felonious entrance, or meanly skulk within the cells of the
castle? What! shall it be said that our
amor patriæ is located at these desks? that we pusillanimously cling to our seats here, rather than vindicate the
most inestimable rights of our country?" Whilst in debate upon another
occasion, at nearly the same time, he showed how well he could reason upon a question which demanded
argument rather than declamation. To his able support of the proposition of Mr.
Cheves to add to our then small but gallant navy ten frigates, may be ascribed
the success, though by a lean majority, of that proposition. Replying to the objection,
urged with great zeal by certain members, that navies were dangerous to
liberty, he argued that the source of this alarm was in themselves. “Gentlemen
fear," said he, "that if we provide a marine it will produce
collision with foreign nations, plunge us into war, and ultimately overturn the
Constitution of the country. Sir, if you wish to avoid foreign collision, you
had better abandon the ocean, surrender all your commerce, give up all your
prosperity. It is the thing protected, not the instrument of protection, that
involves you in war. Commerce engenders collision, collision war, and war, the
argument supposes, leads to despotism. Would the counsels of that statesman be
deemed wise who would recommend that the nation should be unarmed; that the art
of war, the martial spirit, and martial exercises, should be prohibited; who
should declare, in a word, that the great body of the people should be taught
that national happiness was to be found in perpetual peace alone?"
While Mr. Clay, in
the capitol, was, with his trumpet-tongue, rousing Congress to prepare for war,
Mr. Monroe, then Secretary of State, gave his powerful co-operation, and lent
the Nestor-like sanction of his age and experience to the bold measures of his
young and more ardent compatriot. It was chiefly through their fearless
influence that Congress was gradually warmed up to a war spirit, and to the
adoption of some preparatory measures. But no actual declaration of war had yet
been proposed. There was a strong opposition in Congress, and the President,
Mr. Madison, hesitated to recommend it, only because he doubted whether
Congress was yet sufficiently determined and resolved to maintain such a
declaration, and to maintain it to all the extremities of war.
The influence and
counsel of Mr. Clay again prevailed. He waited upon the President, at the head
of a deputation of members of Congress, and assured him of the readiness of a
majority of Congress to vote the war if recommended by him. Upon this the
President immediately recommended it by his message to Congress of the first
Monday of June, 1812. A bill declaring war with Great Britain soon followed in
Congress, and, after a discussion in secret session for a few days, became a
law. Then began the war.
When the doors of
the House of Representatives were opened, the debates which had taken place in
secret session were spoken of and repeated, and it appeared, as must have been
expected by all, that Mr. Clay had been the great defender and champion of the
declaration of war.
Mr. Clay continued
in the House of Representatives for some time after the commencement of the
war, and having assisted in doing all that could be done for it in the way of
legislation, was withdrawn from his position in Congress to share in the
deliberations of the great conference of American and British Commissioners
held at Ghent. His part in that convention was such as might have been expected
from his course in Congress—high-toned and high-spirited, despairing of
nothing.
I need not add, but
for form, that acting in this spirit, Mr. Clay, and his patriotic and able
associates, succeeded beyond all the hopes at that time entertained at home, in
making a treaty, which, in putting a stop to the war, if it did not accomplish
everything contended for, saved and secured, at all points, the honor of the
United States.
Thus began and ended
the war of 1812. On our part it was just and necessary, and, in its results,
eminently beneficial and honorable.
The benefits have
extended to all the world, for, in vindicating our own maritime rights, we
established the freedom of the seas to all nations, and since then no one of
them has arrogated any supremacy upon that ocean given by the Almighty as the
common and equal inheritance of all.
To Henry Clay, as
its chief mover and author, belongs the statesman's portion of the glory of
that war; and to the same Henry Clay, as one of the makers and signers of the
treaty by which it was terminated, belong the blessings of the peacemaker. His
crown is made up of the jewels of peace and of war.
Prompt to take up
arms to resent our wrongs and vindicate our national rights, the return of
peace was yet gladly hailed by the whole country. And well it might be. Our
military character, at the lowest point of degradation when we dared the fight,
had been retrieved. The national honor, insulted at all the courts of Europe, had
been redeemed; the freedom of the seas secured to our flag and all who sail
under it; and what was most influential in inspiring confidence at home, and
assuring respect abroad, was the demonstration, by the result of the late
conflict, of the competency of this government for effective war, as it had
before proved itself for all the duties of a season of peace.
The Congress which
succeeded the war, to a seat in which Mr. Clay was elected while yet abroad,
exhibited a feature of a national jubilee, in place of the gravity and almost
gloom which had settled on the countenance of the same body during the latter
part of the war and of the conference at Ghent. Joy shone on every face. Justly
has that period been termed "the era of good feeling." Again placed in
the chair of the House of Representatives, and all important questions being
then considered as in committee of the whole, in which the Speaker descends to
the floor of the House, Mr. Clay distinguished himself in the debates upon
every question of interest that came up, and was the author, during that and
following Congresses, of more important measures than it has been the fortune
of any other member, either then or since, to have his name identified with.
It would exceed the
proper limits of this discourse to particularize all those measures. I can do
no more than refer to a very few of them, which have become landmarks in the
history of our country.
First in order of
these was his origination of the first proposition for the recognition of the
independence of the states of South America, then struggling for liberty. This
was on the 24th of March, 1818. It was on that day that he first formally
presented the proposition to the House of Representatives. But neither the
President nor Congress was then prepared for a measure so bold and decisive,
and it was rejected by a large majority of the House, though advocated and
urged by him with all the vehemence and power of his unsurpassed ability and
eloquence. Undaunted by this defeat, he continued to pursue the subject with
all the inflexible energy of his character. On the 3d of April, 1820, he
renewed his proposition for the recognition of South American independence, and
finally succeeded, against strong opposition, not only in passing it through
the House of Representatives, but in inducing that body to adopt the emphatic
and extraordinary course of sending it to the President by a committee
especially appointed for the purpose. Of that committee Mr. Clay was the
chairman, and, at its head, performed the duty assigned them. In the year 1822
Mr. Clay's noble exertions on this great subject were crowned with complete
success by the President's formal recognition of South American independence,
with the sanction of Congress.
It requires some
little exertion, at this day, to turn our minds back and contemplate the vast
importance of the revolutions then in progress in South America, as the subject
was then presented, with all the uncertainties and perils that surrounded it.
Those revolutions constituted a great movement in the moral and political
world. By their results great interests and great principles throughout the
civilized world, and especially in our own country, might, and probably would,
be materially affected.
Mr. Clay
comprehended the crisis. Its magnitude and its character were suited to his
temper and to his great intellect.
He saw before him,
throughout the vast continent of South America, the people of its various
states or provinces struggling to cast off that Spanish oppression and tyranny
which for three hundred years had weighed them down and seeking to reclaim and
re-establish their long-lost liberty and independence.
He saw them not only
struggling but succeeding, and with their naked hands breaking their chains and
driving their oppressors before them. But the conflict was not yet over; Spain
still continued to wage formidable and desperate hostilities against her
colonies to reduce them to submission. They were still struggling and bleeding,
and the result yet depended on the uncertain issues of war.
What a spectacle was
there presented to the contemplation of the world! The prime object of
attention and interest there to be seen was man bravely struggling for liberty.
That was enough for Henry Clay. His generous soul overflowed with sympathy. But
this was not all; there were graver and higher considerations that belonged to
the subject, and these were all felt and appreciated by Mr. Clay.
If South America was
resubjugated by Spain, she would in effect become European and relapse into the
system of European policy, the system of legitimacy, monarchy, and absolutism.
On the other hand, if she succeeded in establishing her independence, the
principle of free institutions would be established with it, and republics,
kindred to our own, would rise up to protect, extend, and defend the rights and
liberties of mankind.
It was not, then, a
mere struggle between Spain and her colonies. In its consequences, at least, it
went much further, and, in effect, was a contest between the great antagonist
principles and systems of arbitrary European governments and of free American
governments. Whether the millions of people who inhabited, or were to inhabit,
South America, were to become the victims and the instruments of the arbitrary
principle, or the supporters of the free principle, was a question of momentous
consequence now and in all time to come.
With these views,
Mr. Clay, from sympathy and policy, embraced the cause of South American
independence. He proposed no actual intervention in her behalf, but he wished
to aid her with all the moral power and encouragement that could be given by a
welcome recognition of her by the government of the United States.
To him belongs the
distinguished honor of being the first among the statesmen of the world to
espouse and plead the cause of South America, and to propose and urge the
recognition of her independence. And his own country is indebted to him for the
honor of being the first nation to offer that recognition.
When the magnitude
of the subject, and the weighty interest and consequences attached to it, are
considered, it seems to me that there is no more palmy day in the life of Mr.
Clay than that in which, at the head of his committee, he presented to the President
the resolution of the House of Representatives in favor of the recognition of
South American independence.
On that occasion he
appears in all the sublimity of his nature, and the statesman, invested with
all the sympathies and feelings of humanity, is enlarged and elevated into the
character of the friend and guardian of universal liberty.
How far South
America may have been aided or influenced in her struggles by the recognition
of our government, or by the noble appeals which Mr. Clay had previously
addressed, in her behalf, to Congress and to the world, we cannot say; but it
is known that those speeches were read at the head of her armies, and that
grateful thanks were returned. It is not too much to suppose that he exercised
great and, perhaps, decisive influence in her affairs and destinies.
Years after the
first of Mr. Clay's noble exertions in the cause of South America, and some
time after those exertions had led the government of the United States to
recognize the new States of South America, they were also recognized by the
government of Great Britain, and Mr. Canning, her minister, thereupon took
occasion to say, in the House of Commons, "there (alluding to South
America) I have called a new world into existence!" That was a vain boast.
If it can be said of any man, it must be said of Henry Clay, that he called
that “new world into existence.”2
Mr. Clay was the
father of the policy of internal improvement by the general government. The
expediency of such legislation had, indeed, been suggested, in one of his later
annual messages to Congress, by President Jefferson, and that suggestion was
revived by President Madison in the last of his annual messages. The late Bank
of the United States having been then just established, a bill passed, in
supposed conformity to Mr. Madison's recommendation, for setting aside the
annual bonus, to be paid by the bank, as a fund for the purposes of internal
improvement. This bill Mr. Madison very unexpectedly, on the last day of the
term of his office, returned to the House of Representatives without his
signature, assigning the reasons for his withholding it,―reasons which related
rather to the form than the substance,—and recommending an amendment to the
Constitution to confer upon Congress the necessary power to carry out that
policy. The bill of course fell through for that session. Whilst this bill was
on its passage, Mr. Clay had spoken in favor of it, declaring his own decided
opinion in favor of the constitutionality and expediency of the measure. Mr. Monroe,
immediately succeeding Mr. Madison in the Presidency, introduced into his first
annual message a declaration, in advance of any proposition on the subject, of
a settled conviction on his mind that Congress did not possess the right to
enter upon a system of internal improvement. But for this declaration, it may
be doubted that the subject would have been again agitated so soon after Mr.
Madison's veto. The threat of a recurrence to that resort by the new President
roused up a spirit of defiance in the popular branch of Congress, and
especially in the lion heart of Mr. Clay; and by his advice and counsel a
resolution was introduced declaring that Congress has power, under the
Constitution, to make appropriations for the construction of military roads,
post-roads, and canals. Upon this proposition, in committee of the whole House,
Mr. Clay attacked, with all his powers of argument, wit, and raillery, the
interdiction in the message.
He considered that
the question was now one between the executive on the one hand, and the
representatives of the people on the other, and that it was so understood by
the country; that if, by the communication of his opinion to Congress, the
President intended to prevent discussion, he had “most wofully failed;"
that in having (Mr. Clay had no doubt the best motives) volunteered his opinion
upon the subject, he had "inverted the order of legislation by beginning
where it should end;" and, after an able and unanswerable argument on the
question of the power, concluded by saying, “If we do nothing this session but
pass an abstract resolution on the subject, I shall, under all circumstances,
consider it a triumph for the best interest of the country, of which posterity
will, if we do not, reap the benefit." And the abstract resolution did
pass by a vote of 90 to 75; and a triumph it was which Mr. Clay had every right
to consider as his own, and all the more grateful to his feelings because he had
hardly hoped for it.
Referring on the
final success, at a distance of thirty-five years, of the principle thus
established, in the recent passage by Congress of the act for the improvement
of certain of the ports and harbors and navigable rivers of the country, let
"posterity" not forget, on this occasion, to what honored name is
undoubtedly due the credit of the first legislative assertion of the power.
Mr. Clay was,
perhaps, the only man since Washington, who could have said, with entire truth,
as he did, "I had rather be right than be President." Honor and
patriotism were his great and distinguishing traits. The first had its spring
and support in his fearless spirit; the second in his peculiar Americanism of
sentiment. It was those two principles which ever threw his whole soul into
every contest where the public interest was deeply involved, and above all,
into every question which in the least menaced the integrity of the Union. This
last was, with him, the Ark of the Covenant; and he was ever as ready to peril
his own life in its defense as he was to pronounce the doom of a traitor on any
one who would dare to touch it with hostile hands. It was the ardor of this
devotion to his country, and to the sheet-anchor of its liberty and safety, the
union of the States, that rendered him so conspicuous in every conflict that
threatened either the one or the other with harm. All are familiar with his
more recent, indeed, his last, great struggle for his country, when the
foundations of the Union trembled under the fierce sectional agitation, so
happily adjusted and pacified by the wise measures of compromise which he
proposed in the Senate, and which were, in the end, in substance adopted. That
brilliant epoch in his history is fresh in the memory of all who hear me, and
never will be forgotten by them. An equally glorious success, achieved by his
patriotism, his resoluteness, and the great power of his oratory, was one which
few of this assembly are old enough vividly to remember; but which, in the
memory of those who witnessed the effort, and the success of that greatest
triumph of his master-spirit, will ever live the most interesting in the life
of the great statesman. I mean the Missouri controversy. Then, indeed, did
common courage quail, and hope seemed to sink before the storm that burst upon
and threatened to overwhelm the Union.
Into the history of
what is familiarly known as the "Missouri Question," it is not
necessary, if time would allow, that I should enter at any length. The subject
of the controversy, as all my hearers know, was the disposition of the House of
Representatives, manifested on more than one occasion, and by repeated votes,
to require-as a condition of the admission of the Territory of Missouri into
the Union as a State-the perpetual prohibition of the introduction of slavery
into the Territories of the United States west of the Mississippi. During the
conflict to which this proposition gave rise in 1820, the debates were from the
beginning earnest, prolonged, and excited. In the early stages of them Mr. Clay
exerted to the utmost his powers of argument, conciliation, and persuasion,
speaking, on one occasion, it is stated, for four and a half hours without
intermission. A bill finally passed both houses, authorizing the people of the
Territory of Missouri to form a constitution of State government, with the
prohibition of slavery restricted to the territory lying north of 36 deg. 30
min. of north latitude. This was in the first session of the Sixteenth
Congress, Mr. Clay still being Speaker of the House. On the approach of the
second session of this Congress, Mr. Clay, being compelled by his private
affairs to remain at home, forwarded his resignation as Speaker, but retained
his seat as a member, in view of the pendency of this question. Mr. Taylor, of
New York, the zealous advocate of the prohibition of slavery in Missouri and
elsewhere in the West, was chosen Speaker to succeed Mr. Clay. This fact, of
itself, under all the circumstances, was ominous of what was to follow.
Alarmed, apparently, at this aspect of things, Mr. Clay resumed his seat in the
House on the 16th of January, 1821. The constitution formed by Missouri and
transmitted to Congress, under the authority of the act passed in the preceding
session, contained a provision (superfluous even for its own object) making it
the duty of the General Assembly, as soon as might be, to pass an act to
prevent free negroes and mulattoes from coming to or settling in the State of
Missouri "upon any pretext whatever." The reception of the
constitution with this offensive provision in it was the signal of discord
apparently irreconcilable, when, just as it had risen to its height, Mr. Clay,
on the 16th of January, 1821, resumed his seat in the House of Representatives.
Less than six weeks of the term of Congress then remained. The great hold which
he had upon the affections, as well as the respect, of all parties induced upon
his arrival a momentary lull in the tempest. He at once engaged earnestly and
solicitously in counsel with all parties in this alarming controversy, and on
the 2d of February moved the appointment of a committee of thirteen members to
consider the subject. The report of that committee, after four days of
conference, in which the feelings of all parties had clearly been consulted,
notwithstanding it was most earnestly supported by Mr. Clay in a speech of such
power and pathos as to draw tears from many hearers, was rejected by a vote of
83 nays to 80 yeas. No one, not a witness, can conceive the intense excitement
which existed at this moment within and without the walls of Congress,
aggravated as it was by the arrival of the day for counting the electoral votes
for President and Vice-President, among which was tendered the vote of Missouri
as a State, though not yet admitted as such. Her vote was disposed of by being
counted hypothetically, that is to say, that with the vote of Missouri, the
then state of the general vote would be so and so; without it, so and so. If
her vote, admitted, would have changed the result, no one can pretend to say
how disastrous the consequences might not have been.
On Mr. Clay alone
now rested the hopes of all rational and dispassionate men for a final
adjustment of this question; and one week only, with three days of grace,
remained of the existence of that Congress. On the 22d of the month, Mr. Clay
made a last effort, by moving the appointment of a joint committee of the two
houses, to consider and report whether it was expedient or not to make
provision for the admission of Missouri into the Union on the same footing of
the original States; and, if not, whether any other provision, adapted to her
actual condition, ought to be made by law. The motion was agreed to, and a
committee of twenty-three members appointed by ballot under it. The report by
that committee (a modification of the previously rejected report) was ratified
by the House, but by the close vote of 87 to 81. The Senate concurred, and so
this distracting question was at last settled, with an acquiescence in it by
all parties, which has never been since disturbed.
I have already
spoken of this as the great triumph of Mr. Clay; I might have said, the
greatest civil triumph ever achieved by mortal man. It was one towards which
the combination of the highest ability and the most commanding eloquence would
have labored in vain. There would still have been wanting the ardor, the
vehemence, the impetuousness of character of Henry Clay, under the influence of
which he sometimes overleaped all barriers, and carried his point literally by
storm. One incident of this kind is well remembered in connection with the
Missouri question. It was in an evening sitting, whilst this question was yet in
suspense. Mr. Clay had made a motion to allow one or two members to vote who
had been absent when their names were called. The Speaker (Mr. Taylor), who, to
a naturally equable temperament, added a most provoking calmness of manner when
all around him was excitement, blandly stated, for the information of the
gentleman, that the motion "was not in order." Mr. Clay then moved to
suspend the rule forbidding it, so as to allow him to make the motion; but the
Speaker, with imperturbable serenity, informed him that, according to the rules
and orders, such a motion could not be received without the unanimous consent
of the House. "Then," said Mr. Clay, exerting his voice even beyond
its highest wont, “I move to suspend ALL the rules of the House! Away with them!
Is it to be endured, that we shall be trammeled in our action by mere forms and
technicalities at a moment like this, when the peace, and perhaps the
existence, of this Union is at stake?"
Besides those to
which I have alluded, Mr. Clay performed many other signal public services,
which would have illustrated the character of any other American statesman.
Among these we cannot refrain from mentioning his measures for the protection
of American industry, and his compromise measure of 1833, by which the country
was relieved from the dangers and agitations produced by the doctrine and
spirit of "nullification." Indeed, his name is identified with all
the great measures of government during the long period of his public life. But
the occasion does not permit me to proceed further with this review of his
public services. History will record them to his honor.
Henry Clay was
indebted to no adventitious circumstances for the success and glory of his
life. Sprung from an humble stock, “he was fashioned to much honor from his
cradle;" and he achieved it by the noble use of the means which God and
nature had given him. He was no scholar, and had none of the advantages of
collegiate education. But there was a "divinity that stirred within
him." He was a man of a genius mighty enough to supply all the defects of
education. By its keen, penetrating observation, its quick apprehension, its
comprehensive and clear conception, he gathered knowledge without the study of
books; he could draw it from the fountain-head,— pure and undefiled; it was
unborrowed; the acquisition of his own observation, reflection, and experience;
and all his own. It entered into the composition of the man, forming part of
his mind, and strengthening and preparing him for all those great scenes of intellectual
exertion or controversy in which his life was spent. His armor was always on,
and he was ever ready for the battle.
This mighty genius
was accompanied, in him, by all the qualities necessary to sustain its action,
and to make it most irresistible. His person was tall and commanding, and his
demeanor—
"Lofty and sour to them that loved him not;
But to those men that sought him sweet as summer.”
He was direct and
honest, ardent and fearless, prompt to form his opinions, always bold in their
avowal, and sometimes impetuous or even rash in their vindication. In the
performance of his duties he feared no responsibility. He scorned all evasion
of untruth. No pale thoughts ever troubled his decisive mind.
Be just and fear
not" was the sentiment of his heart and the principle of his action. It
regulated his conduct in private and public life; all the ends he aimed at were
his country's, his God's, and truth's.
Such was Henry Clay,
and such, were his talents, qualities, and objects. Nothing but success and
honor could attend such a character. We have adverted briefly to some portions
of his public life. For nearly half a century he was an informing spirit,
brilliant and heroic figure in our political sphere, marshaling our country in
the way she ought to go. The "bright track of his fiery car" may be
traced through the whole space over which in his day his country and its
government have passed in the way to greatness and renown. It will still point
the way to further greatness and renown.
The great objects of
his public life were to preserve and strengthen the Union, to maintain the
Constitution and laws of the United States, to cherish industry, to protect
labor, and to facilitate, by all proper national improvements, the
communication between all the parts of our widely-extended country. This was
his American system of policy. With inflexible patriotism he pursued and
advocated it to his end. He was every inch an American. His heart and all that
there was of him were devoted to his country, to its liberty, and its free
institutions. He inherited the spirit of the Revolution in the midst of which
he was born; and the love of liberty and the pride of freedom were in him
principles of action.
A remarkable trait
in the character of Mr. Clay was his inflexibility in defending the public
interest against all schemes for its detriment. His exertions were, indeed, so
steadily employed and so often successful in protecting the public against the
injurious designs of visionary politicians or party demagogues, that he may be
almost said to have been, during forty years, the guardian angel of the
country. He never would compromise the public interest for anybody, or for any
personal advantage to himself.
He was the advocate
of liberty throughout the world, and his voice of cheering was raised in behalf
of every people who struggled for freedom. Greece, awakened from a long sleep
of servitude, heard his voice, and was reminded of her own Demosthenes. South
America, too, in her struggle for independence, heard his brave words of
encouragement, and her fainting heart was animated and her arm made strong.
Henry Clay is the
fair representative of the age in which he lived, an age which forms the
greatest and brightest era in the history of man,-an age teeming with new
discoveries and developments, extending in all directions the limits of human
knowledge, exploring the agencies and elements of the physical world and
turning and subjugating them to the uses of man, unfolding and establishing
practically the great principles of popular rights and free governments, and
which, nothing doubting, nothing fearing, still advances in majesty, aspiring
to, and demanding further improvement and further amelioration of the condition
of mankind.
With the chivalrous
and benignant spirit of this great era Henry Clay was thoroughly imbued. He
was, indeed, moulded by it and made in its own image. That spirit, be it
remembered, was not one of licentiousness, or turbulence, or blind innovation.
It was a wise spirit, good and honest as it was resolute and brave; and truth
and justice were its companions and guides.
These noble
qualities of truth and justice were conspicuous in the whole public life of
Henry Clay. On that solid foundation he stood erect and fearless; and when the
storms of state beat around and threatened to overwhelm him, his exclamation
was still heard, “truth is mighty and public justice certain." What a
magnificent and heroic figure does Henry Clay here present to the world! We can
but stand before and look upon it in silent reverence. His appeal was not in
vain; the passions of party subsided; truth and justice resumed their sway, and
his generous countrymen repaid him for all the wrong they had done him with
gratitude, affection, and admiration in his life and tears for his death.
It has been objected
to Henry Clay that he was ambitious. So he was. But in him ambition was virtue.
It sought only the proper, fair objects of honorable ambition, and it sought
these by honorable means only,-by so serving the country as to deserve its
favors and its honors. If he sought office, it was for the purpose of enabling
him by the power it would give, to serve his country more effectually and
pre-eminently; and, if he expected and desired thereby to advance his own fame,
who will say that was a fault? Who will say that it was a fault to seek and
desire office for any of the personal gratifications it may afford, so long as
those gratifications are made subordinate to the public good?
That Henry Clay's
object in desiring office was to serve his country, and that he would have made
all other considerations subservient, I have no doubt. I knew him well; I had
full opportunity of observing him in his most unguarded moments and conversations,
and I can say that I have never known a more unselfish, a more faithful or
intrepid representative of the people, of the people's rights, and the people's
interests, than Henry Clay. It was most fortunate for Kentucky to have such a
representative, and most fortunate for him to have such a constituent as
Kentucky, fortunate for him to have been thrown, in the early and susceptible
period of his life, into the primitive society of her bold and free people. As
one of her children, I am pleased to think that from that source he derived
some of that magnanimity and energy which his after-life so signally displayed.
I am pleased to think, that, mingling with all his great qualities, there was a
sort of Kentuckyism (I shall not undertake to define it) which, though it may
not have polished or refined, gave to them additional point and power, and free
scope of action.
Mr. Clay was a man
of profound judgment and strong will. He never doubted or faltered; all his
qualities were positive and peremptory, and to his convictions of public duty
he sacrificed every personal consideration.
With but little
knowledge of the rules of logic, or of rhetoric, he was a great debater and
orator. There was no art in his eloquence, no studied contrivances of language.
It was the natural outpouring of a great and ardent intellect. In his speeches
there were none of the trifles of mere fancy and imagination; all was to the
subject in hand, and to the purpose; and they may be regarded as great actions
of the mind, rather than fine displays of words. I doubt whether the eloquence
of Demosthenes or Cicero ever exercised a greater influence over the minds or
passions of the people of Athens and of Rome, than did Mr. Clay's over the
minds and passions of the people of the United States.
You all knew Mr.
Clay; your knowledge and recollection of him will present him more vividly to
your minds than any picture I can draw of him. This I will add: He was, in the
highest, truest sense of the term, a great man, and we ne'er shall look upon
his like again. He has gone to join the mighty dead in another and better world.
How little is there of such
a man that can die?
His fame, the memory of his benefactions, the lessons of his wisdom, all remain
with us; over these death has no power.
How few of the great
of this world have been so fortunate as he? How few of them have lived to see
their labors so rewarded? He lived to see the country that he loved and served
advanced to great prosperity and renown, and still advancing. He lived till
every prejudice which, at any period of his life had existed against him, was
removed; and until he had become the object of the reverence, love, and
gratitude of his whole country. His work seemed then to be completed, and fate
could not have selected a happier moment to remove him from the troubles and
vicissitudes of this life.
Glorious as his life
was, there was nothing that became him like the leaving of it. I saw him
frequently during the slow and lingering disease which terminated his life. He
was conscious of his approaching end, and prepared to meet it with all the
resignation and fortitude of a Christian hero. He was all patience, meekness,
and gentleness; these shone round him like a mild, celestial light, breaking
upon him from another world,
"And, to add greater honors to his age
Than man could give, he died fearing God."
1 Hon. Mr. Rush.
2 See Mr. Rush's letter to Mr. Clay, vol. i.
Collins's Life of Henry Clay.
SOURCE: Ann Mary
Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With
Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 39-57
Thursday, November 14, 2024
Edward Bates to the Whig Committee of New York, February 24, 1859
St. Louis, Feb. 24, 1859.
To Messrs. J. PHILIPS PHOENIX, WILLIS BLACKSTONE, H. M. BININGER, DAVID J. LILET AND H. R. SMITH, Committee, New York.
Sirs: A short time ago I was favored with your note of the 7th inst., covering a resolution of the Committee, to the effect that it is inexpedient at this time further to discuss or agitate the Negro question, but rather to turn the attention of the people to other topics — "topics of general importance, such as our Foreign Relations, including the Extension of Territory; the building of Railroads for National purposes; the improvement of our Harbors, the navigation of our Rivers to facilitate Internal Commerce; the subject of Currency, and a Tariff of Duties, and other means of developing our own internal resources, our home wealth, and binding together by ties of national and fraternal feelings, the various parts and sections of our widely extended Republic."
Your letter, gentlemen, opens a very wide field, in asking for my "opinion upon the subject, and my views as to the signs of the times." Books have been written upon these matters, and speeches delivered by the thousand ; and yet the argument seems as far from being exhausted as it was at the beginning ; and I take it for certain that you do not expect or desire me to discuss at large, all or any of these interminable quarrels. That I have opinions upon all or most of them, is true — not the opinions of this or that party, ready to be abandoned or modified to suit this or that platform, but my own opinions — perhaps the more fixed and harder to be changed because deliberately formed in the retirement of private life, free from the exigencies of official responsibility and from the perturbations of party policy. They are my own opinions, right or wrong.
As to the Negro question — I have always thought, and often declared in speech and in print, that it is a pestilent question, the agitation of which has never done good to any party, section or class, and never can do good, unless it be accounted good to stir up the angry passions of men, and exasperate the unreasoning jealousy of sections, and by those bad means foist some unfit men into office, and keep some fit men out. It is a sensitive question into whose dangerous vortex it is quite possible for good men to be drawn unawares. But when I see a man, at the South or the North, of mature age and some experience, persist in urging the question, after the sorrowful experience of the last few years, I can attribute his conduct to no higher motive than personal ambition or sectional prejudice.
As to the power of the General Government to protect the persons and properties, and advance the interests of the people, by laying taxes, raising armies and navies, building forts and arsenals, light houses, moles, and breakwaters, surveying the coasts and adjacent seas, improving rivers, lakes, and harbors, and making roads — I should be very sorry to doubt the existence of the power, or the duty to exercise it, whenever the constituted authorities have the means in their hands, and are convinced that its exercise is necessary to protect the country and advance the prosperity of the people.
In my own opinion, a government that has no power to protect the harbors of its country against winds and waves and human enemies, nor its rivers against snags, sands and rocks, nor to build roads for the transportation of its armies and its mails and the commerce of its people, is a poor, impotent government, and not at all such a government as our fathers thought they had made when they produced the Constitution which was greeted by intelligent men everywhere with admiration and gratitude as a government free enough for all the ends of legal liberty and strong enough for all the purposes of national and individual protection. A free people, if it be wise, will make a good constitution; but a constitution, however good in itself, did never make a free people. The people do not derive their rights from the government, but the government derives its powers from the people; and those powers are granted for the main, if not the only, purpose of protecting the rights of the people. Protection, then, if not the sole, is the chief end of government.
And it is for the governing power to judge, in every instance, what kind and what degree of protection is needful — whether a Navy to guard our commerce all around the world, or an Army to defend the country against armed invasion from without, or domestic insurrection from within; or a Tariff, to protect our home industry against the dangerous obtrusion of foreign labor and capital.
Of the existence of the power and duty of the Government to protect the People in their persons, their property, their industry and their locomotion, I have no doubt; but the time, the mode and the measure of protection, being always questions of policy and prudence, must of necessity be left to the wisdom and patriotism of those whose duty it is to make laws for the good government of the country. And with them I freely leave it, as the safest, and indeed the only, constitutional depository of the power.
As to our Foreign Policy generally, I have but little to say. I am not much of a progressive, and am content to leave it where Washington [Jefferson] placed it, upon that wise, virtuous, safe maxim — "Peace [. . .] with all nations; entangling alliance[s] with none." The greedy and indiscriminate appetite for foreign acquisition, which makes us covet our neighbor's lands, and devise cunning schemes to get them, has little of my sympathy. I view it as a sort of political gluttony, as dangerous to our body politic as gluttony is to the natural man — producing disease certainly, hastening death, probably. Those of our politicians who are afflicted with this morbid appetite are wont to cite the purchase of Louisiana and Florida, as giving countenance to their inordinate desires. But the cases are wholly unlike in almost every particular. Louisiana was indispensable to our full and safe enjoyment of an immense region which was already owned, and its acquisition gave us the unquestioned control of that noble system of Mississippi waters, which nature seems to have made to be one and indivisible, and rounded off the map of the nation into one uniform and compacted whole. Nothing remained to mar and disfigure our national plat, but Florida, and that was desirable, less for its intrinsic value, than because it would form a dangerous means of annoyance, in case of war with a Maritime Power, surrounded as it is, on three sides by the ocean, and touching three of our present States, with no barrier between. The population of Louisiana and Florida, when acquired, was very small compared with the largeness of the territory; and, lying in contact with the States, was easily and quickly absorbed into and assimilated with the mass of our people. Those countries were acquired, moreover, in the most peaceful and friendly manner, and for a satisfactory consideration.
Now, without any right or any necessity, it is hard to tell what we do not claim in all the continent south of us, and the adjacent islands. Cuba is to be the first fruit of our grasping enterprise, and that is to be gotten at all hazards, by peaceful purchase if we can, by war and conquest if we must.2 But Cuba is only an outpost to the Empire of Islands and continental countries that are to follow. A leading Senator3 has lately declared (in debate on the Thirty Million bill4) that we must not only have Cuba, but all the islands from Cape Florida to the Spanish Main, so as to surround the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, and make them our "mare clausum" like the Mediterranean, in old times, when the Roman Emperor ruled both its shores, from the pillars of Hercules to the Hellespont.5 This claim of mare nostrum implies, of course, that we must own the continent that bounds our sea on the west, as well as the string of islands that inclose it on the east — that is, Mexico, Central America, and all South America, so far south at least as the Orinoco.6 In that wide compass of sea and land there are a good many native governments, and provinces belonging to the strongest maritime powers, and a narrow continental isthmus which we ourselves, as well as England and France, are wont to call the highway of nations. To fulfill the grand conception, and perfect our tropical empire, we must buy or conquer all these torrid countries, and their mongrel populations. As to buying them, it strikes me that we had better waite [sic] awhile, at least until the Government has ceased to borrow money to pay its current expenses. And as to conquering them, perhaps it would be prudent to pause and make some estimate of costs and contingencies, before we rush into war with all maritime Europe and half America.
I am not one of those who believe that the United States is not an independent and safe nation, because Cuba is not a part of it. On the contrary, I believe that we are quite capable of self-defense, even if the "Queen of the Antilles" were a province of England, France or Russia; and surely, while it remains an appendage of a comparatively feeble nation, Cuba has much more cause to fear us than we have to fear Cuba. In fact, gentlemen, I cannot help doubting the honesty of the cowardly argument by which we are urged to rob poor old Spain of this last remnant of her Western empire, for fear that she might use it to rob us.
But suppose we could get, honestly and peaceably, the whole of the country — continental and insular — from the Rio Grande to the Orinoco, and from Trinidad to Cuba, and thus establish our mare clausum, and shut the gate of the world across the Isthmus, can we govern them wisely and well? For the last few years, in the attempt to govern our home Territories of Kansas and Utah, we have not very well maintained the dignity and justice of the nation, nor secured the peace and prosperity of the subject people.7 Can we hope to do better with the various mixed races of Mexico, Central and South America, and the West India Islands? Some of those countries have been trying for fifty years to establish republican governments on our model, but in every instance have miserably failed; and yet, there was no obstacle to complete success but their own inaptitude.
For my part, I should be grieved to see my country become, like Rome, a conquering and dominant nation; for I think there are few or no examples in history, of Governments whose chief objects were glory and power, which did ever secure the happiness and prosperity of their own people. Such Governments may grow great and famous, and advance a few of their citizens to wealth and nobility; but the price of their grandeur is the personal independence and individual freedom of their people. Still less am I inclined to see absorbed into our system, "on an equal footing with the original States," the various and mixed races (amounting to I know not how many millions) which inhabit the continent and islands south of our present border. I am not willing to inoculate our body politic with the virus of their diseases, political and social — diseases which, with them, are chronic and hereditary, and with us could hardly fail to produce corruption in the head and weakness in the members.
Our own country, as it is, in position, form and size, is a wonder which proclaims a wisdom above the wit of man. Large enough for our posterity, for centuries to come: All in the temperate zone, and therefore capable of a homogeneous population, yet so diversified in climates and soils, as to produce everything that is necessary to the comfort and wealth of a great people: Bounded east and west by great oceans, and bisected in the middle by a mighty river, which drains and fructifies the continent, and binds together the most southern and northern portions of our land by a bond stronger than iron. Beside all this, it is new and growing — the strongest on the continent, with no neighbor whose power it fears, or of whose ambition it has cause to be jealous. Surely such a country is great enough and good enough for all the ends of honest ambition and virtuous power.
It seems to me that an efficient home-loving Government, moderate and economical in its administration, peaceful in its objects, and just to all nations, need have no fear of invasion at home, or serious aggression abroad. The nations of Europe have to stand continually in defense of their existence; but the conquest of our county by a foreign power is simply impossible, and no nation is so absurd as to entertain the thought. We may conquer ourselves by local strifes and sectional animosities; and when, by our folly and wickedness, we have accomplished that great calamity, there will be none to pity us for the consequences of so great a crime.
If our Government would devote all its energies to the promotion of peace and friendship with all foreign countries, the advancement of Commerce, the increase of Agriculture, the growth and stability of Manufactures, and the cheapening, quickening and securing the internal trade and travel of our country ; in short, if it would devote itself in earnest to the establishment of a wise and steady policy of internal government, I think we should witness a growth and consolidation of wealth and comfort and power for good, which cannot be reasonably hoped for from a fluctuating policy, always watching for the turns of good fortune, or from a grasping ambition to seize new territories, which are hard to get and harder to govern.
The present position of the Administration is a sorrowful commentary upon the broad democracy of its professions. In theory, the people have the right and ability to do anything; in practice, we are verging rapidly to the One-Man power.
The President, the ostensible head of the National Democrats, is eagerly striving to concentrate power in his own hands, and thus to set aside both the People and their Representatives in the actual affairs of government. Having emptied the Treasury, which he found full, and living precariously upon borrowed money, he now demands of Congress to entrust to his unchecked discretion the War power, the Purse and the Sword. First, he asks Congress to authorize him, by statute, to use the Army to take military possession of the Northern Mexico, and hold it under his protectorate, and as a security for debts due to our citizens8 — civil possession would not answer, for that might expose him, as in the case of Kansas, to be annoyed by a factious Congress and a rebellious Territorial Legislature.
Secondly: Not content with this, he demands the discretionary power to use the Army and Navy in the South, also in blockading the coast and marching his troops into the interior of Mexico and New Granada, to protect our citizens against all evil-doers along the transit routes of Tehuantepec and Panama.9 And he and his supporters in Congress claim this enormous power upon the ground that, in this particular at least, he ought to be the equal of the greatest monarch of Europe. They forget that our fathers limited the power of the President by design, and for the reason that they had found out by sad experience that the monarchs of Europe were too strong for freedom.
Third: In strict pursuance of this doctrine, first publicly announced from Ostend,10 he demands of Congress to hand over to him thirty millions of dollars to be used at his discretion, to facilitate his acquisition of Cuba.11 Facilitate how ? Perhaps it might be imprudent to tell.
Add to all this, the fact (as yet unexplained) that one of the largest naval armaments which ever sailed from our coast is now operating in South America, ostensibly against a poor little republic far up the Plate River,12 to settle some little quarrel between the two Presidents.13 If Congress had been polite enough to grant the President's demand of the sword and the purse against Mexico, Central America and Cuba, this navy, its duty done at the south, might be made, on its way home, to arrive in the Gulf very opportunely, to aid the " Commander-in-Chief " in the acquisition of some very valuable territory.
I allude to these facts with no malice against Mr. Buchanan, but as evidences of the dangerous change which is now obviously sought to be made in the practical working of the Government — the concentration of power in the hands of the President, and the dangerous policy, now almost established, of looking abroad for temporary glory and aggrandizement, instead of looking at home, for all the purposes of good government — peaceable, moderate, economical, protecting all interests alike, and by a fixed policy, calling into safe exercise all the talents and industry of our people, and thus steadily advancing our country in everything which can make a nation great, happy, and permanent.
The rapid increase of the Public Expenditures (and that, too, under the management of statesmen professing to be peculiarly economical) is an alarming sign of corruption and decay.
That increase bears no fair proportion to the growth and expansion of the country, but looks rather like wanton waste or criminal negligence. The ordinary objects of great expense are not materially augmented — the Army and Navy remain on a low peace establishment— the military defenses are little, if at all, enlarged — the improvement of Harbors, Lakes and Rivers is abandoned, and the Pacific Railroad is not only not begun but its very location is scrambled for by angry sections, which succeed in nothing but mutual defeat. In short, the money to an enormous amount (I am told at the rate of $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 a year) is gone, and we have little or nothing to show for it. In profound peace with foreign nations, and surrounded with the proofs of National growth and individual prosperity, the Treasury, by less than two years of mismanagement, is made bankrupt, and the Government itself is living from hand to mouth, on bills of credit and borrowed money!
This humiliating state of things could hardly happen if men in power were both honest and wise. The Democratic economists in Congress confess that they have recklessly wasted the Public Revenue; they confess it by refusing to raise the Tariff to meet the present exigency, and by insisting that they can replenish the exhausted Treasury and support the Government, in credit and efficiency, by simply striking off their former extravagances.
An illustrious predecessor of the President is reported to have declared "that those who live on borrowed money ought to break." I do not concur in that harsh saying; yet I am clearly of opinion that the Government, in common prudence (to say nothing of pride and dignity), ought to reserve its credit for great transactions and unforeseen emergencies. In common times of peace, it ought always to have an established revenue, equal, at least, to its current expenses. And that revenue ought to be so levied as to foster and protect the Industry of the country employed in our most necessary and important manufactures.
Gentlemen, I cannot touch upon all the topics alluded to in your letter and resolution. I ought rather to beg your pardon for the prolixity of this answer. I speak for no party, because the only party I ever belonged to has ceased to exist as an organized and militant body.
And I speak for no man but myself.
I am fully aware that my opinions and views of public policy are of no importance to anybody but me, and there is good reason to fear that some of them are so antiquated and out of fashion as to make it very improbable that they will ever again be put to the test of actual practice.
2 This was the substance of the Ostend
Manifesto which Buchanan as Minister to Great Britain had joined Ministers John
Y. Mason and Pierre Soulé in promulgating. As Secretary of State under
President Polk, Buchanan had tried to buy Cuba. In his second, third, and
fourth annual messages he urged Congress to cooperate with him in securing it
by negotiation.
3 Robert Toombs of Georgia: Whig state
legislator, 1837-1840, 1841-1844; states' rights Democratic congressman,
1845-1853; U. S. senator, 1853-1861. He was later a leader in the Georgia
Secession Convention, and congressman, brigadier-general, and secretary of
State under the Confederacy.
4 January, 1859, Senate Reports, 35 Cong., 2
Sess., ser. no. 994, doc. no. 351. The bill purposed to appropriate $30,000,000
"to facilitate the acquisition of Cuba by negotiation." Senator
Slidell (infra, Nov. 24, 1859, note 89) introduced it on January 10. 1859
(Cong. Globe, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 277) ; it was reported favorably by the
Committee on Foreign Relations of which he was chairman, on January 24, 1859
(ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 538) ; it was debated at great length on January 24,
February 9-10, February 15—17, February 21, and February 25 (ibid., 35 Cong., 2
Sess., 538-544, 904-909, 934-940, 960968, 1038, Appendix [155-169], 1058-1063,
1079-1087, 1179-1192, 1326-1363) ; but because of opposition, it was withdrawn
on February 26 (ibid., 35 Cong., 2 Sess., 13S51387). At the next session, on
December 8, 1859, Senator Slidell reintroduced this bill (ibid., 36 Cong., 1
Sess., 53), had it referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations on December
21 (ibid., 36 Cong., 1 Sess., 199), reported it out favorably to the Senate on
May 30, 1860, but because of opposition did not push it (ibid., 36 Cong., 1
Sess., 2456). He promised to call it up again at the next session, but when
that time arrived was too busy seceding to bother about Cuba.
5 On January 24, Toombs had said, "Cuba
has fine ports, and with her acquisition, we can make first the Gulf of Mexico,
and then the Caribbean Sea, a mare clausum. Probably younger men than you or I
will live to see the day when no flag shall float there except by permission of
the United States of America . . . that development, that progress throughout
the tropics [is] the true, fixed unalterable policy of the nation." Ibid.,
35 Cong., 2 Sess., 543.
6 I. e., as far as Venezuela.
7 Bitterness over the slavery question had
reached the point of armed conflict, raids, and murder in Kansas in 1855-1856,
and Utah was at this time subject to frequent Indian raids. It was in 1859,
too, that the Republicans tried to prohibit polygamy in Utah and the Democrats
succeeded, probably with slavery in other territories in mind, in preventing
Congressional legislation on the subject.
8 Dec. 6, 1858, James D. Richardson, Messages
and Papers of the Presidents, V, 514. See infra, Feb. 15, 1860.
9 J. D. Richardson, op. cit., V, 516-517.
10 Supra, April 20, 1859, note 2.
11 J. D. Richardson, op. cit., V, 508-511.
12 Rio de La Plata in South America.
13 An expedition of some 19 ships, 200 guns,
and 2.500 men which was sent against Paraguay because a vessel of that nation
had fired upon the United States steamer Water Witch. A mere show of force
sufficed to secure both an apology and an indemnity on February 10, 1859. The
President of Argentina was so interested and so pleased that he presented the
commander with a sword.
SOURCE: Howard K.
Beale, Editor, Annual Report of The American
Historical Association For The Year 1930, Vol. 4, The Diary Of Edward Bates,
pp. 1-9