Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, May 8, 1866

The subject of admitting Colorado was to-day before the Cabinet. The bill has passed both houses after having been once rejected. Congress in 1863 authorized the formation of a State constitution, and the people refused to take upon themselves local State government. Subsequently the people formally adopted it by a small majority in a vote of some six thousand, and elected Senators, who are here anxious to get their seats. After the proposition and Senators were rejected, it was ascertained the latter would vote with the Radicals, and that their votes would contribute to overrule and defeat the Executive. This new light led Senators to revise their votes. The Constitution restricts suffrage to the whites, but Senators and others who insist on negro suffrage where the blacks are numerous, and in States where Congress has no right to intervene, voted for Colorado.

Seward, McCulloch, and myself were against admitting the State. She had a population of less than twenty thousand, as claimed by some, and not exceeding thirty or thirty-five thousand, as insisted by the most strenuous for admission. As a principle I have uniformly opposed recognizing and admitting States with a population below the ratio for one Representative. This has always ruled. The slaveholders thrust in Florida and Arkansas as an offset to Free States; and Kansas was authorized under peculiar and extraordinary circumstances to form a constitution with, I think, less than sixty thousand. There was, perhaps, some excuse for admitting and authorizing Colorado to frame a constitution when the difficulties of the country and the attempts of the Rebels to lessen the number of States was before us. But the people then refused self-government.

I therefore had no difficulty in coming to my conclusions on general principles. Stanton thought it might in this instance be well enough to let them in and avoid further trouble. Harlan argued for admission with some ability and tact, but did not meet the great underlying principle. He thought it expedient, and with so much effect as to cause Dennison to doubt, who was at first opposed to the bill. The question was deferred.

The subject of sending naval vessels to attend the laying of the Atlantic telegraph was considered. Seward, Dennison, and Harlan in the affirmative. McCulloch and Stanton opposed. I felt very indifferent; had advised Field to go to Congress. Told him I should not act without authority from Congress or an order from the Executive. Stated to the President that we could, without any difficulty or much additional expense, detail a vessel, Mr. Seward having said we did not require all the four ordered to the fishing-ground. Although my faith in the success of the ocean telegraph is not great, yet, in view of the fact that Congress had once ordered a vessel and of our present ability to spare one, and the further fact that a vessel had been ordered to assist or be present at laying the Russian telegraph, it might be expedient to show a friendly feeling as regards this, and I would assent, though unwilling to advise it.

The President thought it would be well for Congress to take up the subject, or, at all events, that we should delay a day or two before deciding. This I approved as the better course. Stanton, who had seen my previous indifference, immediately slapped me on the shoulder and said I could decide readily with the President. I said I could, for he usually was not far wrong. Stanton was vexed.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 502-4

Charles Sumner to Theodore Parker, April 19, 1851

Court Street, Boston, April 19, 1851.

May you live a thousand years, always preaching the truth of Fast Day!¹ That sermon is a noble effort. It stirred me to the bottom of my heart, at times softening me almost to tears, and then again filling me with rage. I wish it could be read everywhere throughout the land.

You have placed the commissioner in an immortal pillory, to receive the hootings and rotten eggs of the advancing generations.

I have had no confidence from the beginning, as I believe you know, in our courts. I was persuaded that with solemn form they would sanction the great enormity, therefore I am not disappointed. My appeal is to the people, and my hope is to create in Massachusetts such a public opinion as will render the law a dead letter. It is in vain to expect its repeal by Congress till the slave-power is over thrown.

It is, however, with a rare dementia that this power has staked itself on a position which is so offensive, and which cannot for any length of time be tenable. In enacting that law, it has given to the Free States a sphere of discussion which they would otherwise have missed. No other form of the slavery question, not even the Wilmot Proviso, would have afforded equal advantages.

Very truly yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

_______________

¹ On the rendition of Sims, a fugitive slave.

SOURCE: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 246; John Weiss, Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker, Vol. 2, p. 107

From the N. Y. Courier and Enquirer

“Let the levees on the Mississippi be at once prostrated in a hundred places, while the water is high, and let the Traitors and Rebels living on the Lower Mississippi be drowned out, just as we would drown out rats infesting the hull of a ship. Nor is this all. Let the negroes in the Border States understand that all moral obligations on the part of the North to sustain the peculiar institution has ceased; and let the Traitors thus be taught at once the price of rebellion and its legitimate fruits.

What we desire to see at once is a call for an additional one hundred and fifty thousand volunteers from the Free  States, and the establishment of a land blockade of the strictest kind, extending from the Atlantic to the Mississippi—accompanied by the flooding of the country bordering on the lower Mississippi. Do this and the inevitable consequence of such a state of affairs—the extinction of slavery in the Border States—will soon bring the rebels to their senses.”

SOURCES: “From the N. Y. Courier and Enquirer,” Daily Nashville Patriot, Nashville, Tennessee, Thursday, May 16, 1861, p. 2; “A Diabolical Suggestion,” The Daily Exchange, Baltimore, Maryland, Friday, April 26, 1861, p. 1;

Senator Jesse D. Bright* to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, September 2, 1854

MADISON, IND., September 2d, 1854.

DEAR HUNTER: Yours of the 15th ultimo with letter in behalf of Mr. Lyle is received and for which accept my thanks.

Several of our Papers have come out in favor of your Bill, but not as plainly and pointedly identifying you with it, as they might and ought to have done. I have this day written two articles on the subject, one for the "Madisonean" and the other for the "Democratic Platform " published at the Capitol. I will see that they go into the Cincinnati and Louisville papers, and that they are generally copied into our County papers. Tucker shall be furnished with copies. Nothing was done in reference to the Military reservation up to the time I left Washington. I wrote Wilson last week on the subject but have not as yet received a reply. I also wrote Mr. Cameron to-day about it.

Letters from Robertson and Rice speak in the most flattering manner of the property of Superior. Robertson says he is selling Lots rapidly and at fair prices. For fear that I could not get off this Fall, (on account of our elections which are forcing me into the Hustings) I sent my nephew Michael S. Bright Esqr. up to Superior last week, and if there is to be a Partition, he will be present and see fair play. I gave him all the particulars, he is smart and I will guarantee, look after your interests, Dawson's, Corcoran's, Douglass' and mine closely. I may go up myself about the 20th of this month, I certainly shall, if I find my friends will not complain, at my leaving the mongrel mixed up political Canvass going on here now. I am afraid my friend from the signs, that the Free States (Indiana included) are lost for the time being to our Party. Iowa has set a significant example. Dodge stands not the least chance of a reelection.

The title Bonds I forwarded for the signature of Robertson, has not yet been returned, when they are you shall have yours. It will be all right.

Speaking in the open air, this warm weather is more than working on the "Appropriation Bills" with Gwinn¹ thrown in, to oppose. By the way I have information which satisfies me he cannot be re-elected, and for which God and the Californians be praised. Glad to hear from you whenever you can find time to write.

_______________

* Democratic Senator in Congress from Indiana, 1845-1862, when he was expelled for having, in a letter to Jefferson Davis, recognized him as President of the Confederated States."

¹ William McK. Gwin, United States Senator from California, 1850-1855, 1857-1861.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 158-9

Isaac Edward Holmes* to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, June 8, 1855

CHARLESTON, [S. C.], 8th June, 1855.

MY DEAR HUNTER: Some weeks since I rec[eive]d y[ou]r letter and thank you for y[ou]r efforts in behalf of my brother. I seldom ask anything and rather opine, that my last request is made. I sincerely congratulate you on the success of the Virginia Election. I feared the result, and believe the victory truly auspicious. If the Know Nothings had succeeded, if the Frontier State of the Southern Confederacy had "given-way" our institutions would have been placed in great hazard; as it is, "They are by no means safe." Fanaticism never goes-back and for the first time in our history, abolitionism has the ascendant in Congress.

I see that Senator Wilson has declared, That henceforth no Slave owner, or pro-slavery man shall be President. As the Democratic party are a minority in the North, and as the entire South will most probably act as one man in the next Election, it is essential that we have a Southern man for our Candidate. The sooner we make up the Issue, the better. If we are to be in a hopeless minority, and the Slave States to remain "in statu quo," We must share the fate of the British West Indies. Not only will slavery be abolish[e]d in the District, but in the Territories. Not only additional Slave States be excluded, but free ones made Ad Libitum until the constitution is altered and the entire labour of the South be destroyed. This cant be termed speculation. The effect is as sure as the result of any cause can be. It is my sincere desire that the Union may be saved, but its salvation depends upon the next Presidential Canvass. Virginia must lead off. There should commence an active correspondence between the politicians of the Old Dominion and the Leaders of the Northern Democracy. Before we go into a Caucus we should have a distinct understanding upon all the leading points. Otherwise we should have only a Southern Caucus, irrespective of parties, and proceed to an ulterior organization. I hope Wise may pursue the true course, and "entrenous," I hope that his ambition may not be so stimulated by his late Triumph as to aspire to the purple. Virginia ought to give the President. Her position at this time is potential, and amongst her own people there should be entire unanimity before going into Caucus. Remember that the nominating Caucus will meet during the next Session of Congress, not a Twelve month hence. I am not a politician, but I deem the times so pregnant, that, if alive next Winter, my efforts shall be given to prepare the Southern mind for the Presidential Election. South Carolina, whilst she keeps in the rear of Virginia, must nevertheless be represented in the Caucus. She must no longer be isolated. Thank God, the Cuba question seems settled for awhile. It promised much distraction, and I employed my pen, for the first time these many years, in the endeavor to show the Southern States that the acquisition of Cuba was not to their benefit. One of my pieces or letters was transferred to the National Intelligence[r]. I am writing you from the sick Chamber of Mrs. Holmes who has for a long period been confin[e]d to her room. Alas with little prospect of a recovery. I hope that y[ou]r own family are well.

_______________

* A Representative in Congress from South Carolina, 1839-1851.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 164-5

Senator Robert M. T. Hunter to Richard Rowzee, August 9, 1852

WASHINGTON, [D. C.], August 9th, 1852.

MY DEAR SIR: I regret to learn from your letter that there are democrats in our county who hestitate in relation to voting for Pierce and King upon the suspicion that the former entertains "abolition principles." You ask my opinion in relation to this charge. I have no hestitation in saying that I have never given this charge the least credence. Gen[era]l Pierce's course upon this subject whilst he was in Congress was such as to have made it highly improbable that he could have uttered any such statement. The charge too has been denied by persons who heard the speech at New Boston, first by Messrs. B. F. Ager and James M. Campbell. The certain respectibility and credibility of these gentlemen have been vouched by Mr. Norris, a Senator from New Hampshire, and Messrs. Hibbard and Peaslee members of the Ho[use] of Rep[resentative]s from the same state. These are gentlemen of the very highest standing, men whose word no one can doubt who knows them. The statement of Messrs. Ager and Campbell has been sustained by more than one hundred persons who were present when the speech was delivered and who have published a document to that effect. But in addition to all this an editorial of the Union for which I presume Genl. Armstrong is responsible states that he has seen a letter from Genl. Pierce himself denouncing the charge as being "grossly false."

It seems to me that this evidence ought to satisfy any unprejudiced mind. I may add that I was a member of the Ho[use] of Rep[resentative]s whilst Gen[era]l Pierce was in the Senate and had some opportunities to observe his course. The result of these observations was a conviction that he was one of the most reliable politicians upon this subject of slavery of all whom I knew in the non-slaveholding states.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 146-7

Congressman Horace Mann, March 13, 1850

MARCH 13, 1850.

The hallucination that seizes the South on the subject of slavery, is, indeed, enough to excite our compassion; but an excuse of their conduct to themselves on this ground, would, perhaps, enrage them more than any thing else. I would be willing to offer them any pecuniary indemnity which they might desire. Indeed, I had thought of bringing forward some such idea in my speech; but I feared they would only scout it.

I do not think Mr. Webster can be honest in the views expressed in his speech. I would struggle against a belief in his treachery to the last minute; but this speech is in flagrant violation of all that he has ever said before.

You are in an error in supposing that the exclusion of slavery from the Territories will affect the growth of cotton or rice unfavorably. Slaves are in great demand now for the cotton and rice fields. No production of the Territories would come in competition with their great staples. It is a fear of losing the balance of power, as they call it; and no doubt, in some cases, a fear that this is only a beginning of a war upon slavery in the States themselves. On this latter point, they will not be pacified by any declarations made by the North. Then, again, on this subject they are not a reasoning people.

To recur to Mr. Webster again. He has said some things it was quite unnecessary to say, and some things not true. Look at his interpretation of the admission of Texas! The act was, as he has quoted in his speech, that four new States—no more might be formed from Texas: those south of 36° 30′ might be slave States, and those north must be free States. Now, he says we are bound to admit four slave States. But we are bound to admit only four in the whole. Why, then, admit all these four as slave States, and then others, that is, if we get the consent of Texas, as free States? No: we are to admit but four in the whole; and, as one or two of these are to be free, there must not be four slave. He therefore not only proposes to execute that ungodly bargain, but to give one or two slave States to the South as a gratuity.

So his offer to take the proceeds of the public lands to deport free blacks is of the greatest service to slavery. It is just what the South wants, to get rid of its free blacks. It would enhance the value and the security of the slave property so called. Had he proposed to give the proceeds of the lands to deport manumitted slaves, that would encourage manumission, and be of real service to humanity. Indeed, the more I think of the speech, the worse I think of it.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 295-6

Congressman Horace Mann, June 9, 1850

WASHINGTON, June 9, 1850.

Yesterday I read Prof. Stuart's pamphlet in defence of Mr. Webster. It is a most extraordinary production. He begins by proving biblically that slavery is a divine institution, permitted, recognized, regulated, by God himself; and therefore that it cannot be malum in se. The greater part of the work consists in maintaining this point both from the Old and New Testaments; but he spends a few pages at the close in showing that it is contrary to all the precepts and principles of the gospel, and is little better than all crimes concentrated in one. How it can be both of these things at the same time, we are not informed.

He says, with Mr. Webster, that we are bound to admit four slave States from Texas, although we were to admit but four in the whole; and one at least, if not two, of the four were to be free States. But he says it is to be by the consent of Texas; and Texas may give consent to only four slave States taken in succession. Now, the answer to this is so plain, that it is difficult to see why even an Old-Testament orthodox minister should not see it.

When a contract is executory, as the lawyers say (that is, to be executed in future), and it contains mutual stipulations in favor of each of the parties, then nothing can be more clear than that each of the successive steps for fulfilment must have reference to what is to be done afterwards. Neither party can claim that the contract shall be so fulfilled by the other party in any one particular as to render the fulfilment of the whole impossible. Each preceding act of execution must have reference to what, by its terms, is to be subsequently executed.

So he says the Wilmot Proviso for a Territory is in vain, because the Territory, as soon as it is transformed into a State, can establish slavery. But the Wilmot Proviso over a Territory defends it against that class of population that would establish slavery when it becomes a State. It attracts to it that class of population which will exclude slavery; and therefore such proviso is decisive of the fate of the State.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 301-2

Amos Tuck to Rev. James C. Boswell and Samuel A. Haley, November 20, 1846

EXETER, Nov. 20, 1846.

TO REV. JAMES C. BOSWELL, President, and SAMUEL A. HALEY, ESQ., Secretary, &c.

Gentlemen:—I have received your letter of October 24th, in reference to the proceedings at the Convention of Independent Democrats and Liberty men of the First Congressional District, and I embrace the earliest opportunity which my engagements have allowed to send you an answer.

I believe it to be the object of those assembled at the above named convention, to re-affirm the fundamental principles of republican liberty, and to act out with fearless devotion the doctrines of human equality and universal justice. Entertaining these views, I rejoice in their free expression, and am content to stand or fall with the others in their defense.

Two causes have contributed more than all others to effect the late change in the political balance of parties. The first has been the despotism of party power, by which generous impulses have been repressed and discouraged, the exercise of private judgment made dangerous, and all individuality of character sought to be extinguished, by compelling men to believe, or to profess, those sentiments only which were suggested by a selfish and ever-shifting policy and sanctioned by self-constituted party leaders. No tyranny is more galling than that which would quench the free thoughts of free men; no tyrants are more despicable than those who, "dressed in a little brief authority," would attempt in a democracy to exercise the power and the prerogatives hereditary despots; no engine of influence is more dangerous or more execrable than a hireling press, speaking no words for truth or justice, but devoting all its energies to the perpetration of human servitude. To free New Hampshire from such influences, and to expose in their deformity those who had wielded them too long, was one object in our organization, and this object, I rejoice in believing, has been in a good degree accomplished.

The second and chief cause of the late change has been the existence and progressing power of the institution of slavery. The encroachments of the slave-holding interests, and the subserviency of public men to its numerous exactions, have been so exorbitant and so notorious as to have become just cause of alarm to every friend of humanity and the country. The people, irrespective of party, have at length turned their attention to the subject, and by unequivocal manifestations are teaching their public servants that hereafter other things will be expected of them than a base and servile homage to the dark spirit of slavery; that some efforts will be demanded at their hands, more efficient than a “masterly inactivity," or a halting opposition to an abstract idea; that it is time for them to stand up like men, and, echoing the strong voice of a free people, to say to the sweeping tide of oppression, "thus far and no farther." The inquiry now is, what can be done, what can Congress do to free the master and the slave and the nation from the sin and the retributions of slavery? Of cowardly discussion about the extent of our powers we have had enough. The exigency of the country as well as the spirit of the age require now the performance of those acts whose constitutionality and propriety are beyond reasonable doubt. They require that the shadow of slavery shall no longer darken the District of Columbia, and that the trader in human beings shall no longer be permitted to shelter himself from the scorn of the Christian world beneath the wings of the national capitol. They require that no new slave state, with a constitution recognizing slavery, shall hereafter be admitted to the Union, and that no existing state, whether Texas or Florida, shall be dismembered to subserve the slave holding interest. They require that the domestic, inter-state slave trade, a traffic in no respect less infamous than that foreign slave trade which has been branded by the civilized world as piracy, shall, under the clause in the Constitution which gives power to Congress, "to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states," be utterly and forever prohibited. They require that the labor and interest of the free states should be respected, and that slavery be no longer permitted to give character to our legislation.

Let the people of the free states come now to the rescue of freedom and the Constitution, and something may be done to perpetuate the Union,—let them be found wanting in this trial of their integrity, and let the South for a few years more continue unchecked her schemes in behalf of slavery, and no human power can prevent a dissolution. For the sake then of the Union, let the people of the free states be careful to discern and perform on this subject the duties of patriotism and humanity.

One other subject claims attention. The present war with Mexico cannot be lost sight of in any discussion of the public interest. Originating in the unauthorized and iniquitous scheme of the annexation of Texas, it is now prosecuted without that public necessity which can justify us on the page of impartial history, and with no prospect of “conquering a peace," or effecting an honorable reconciliation. It has become a war of conquest, and as such is in violation of every principle of a popular government, as well as of every precept of Christianity. It is adding immense territory to the southern portion of the country, and is thus threatening to destroy the balance of the states, and to consign the nation more hopelessly to the control of slaveholders. It is waged against a neighboring nation, a younger republic, which for years, in weakness and distraction, endeavored to follow the example of our prospering nation; and as such, the war is disgraceful and mean. It is carried on at the expense of the blood of brave men, whose valor is worthy of a better cause, and has already exhausted the treasury of the country, and involved the nation in a heavy debt. Under these circumstances there can be no doubt that the honor and best interests of the country demand a speedy end of the contest, and that all matters in dispute be settled by arbitration or negotiation.

I have thus spoken briefly of some of the topics suggested by your resolutions. It remains for me simply to acknowledge my deep sense of the honor which your nomination has conferred upon me. If it is thought that my acceptance of this nomination can subserve the interests of the cause in which we are engaged, I shall not feel at liberty to shrink from the position in which you have placed me; but shall remain,

Your obedient servant,

AMOS TUCK.

SOURCE: Charles R. Corning, Amos Tuck, p. 21-4

John H. McHenry* to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, February 21, 1850

HARTFORD, KY., 21st February, 1850.

MY DEAR SIR: Perhaps you may almost have forgotten the individual who now addresses you, and who retains a vivid recollection of the many meetings and pleasant greetings he had with you when he had the honor of being an humble member of the committee of which you were chairman in the 29th Con[gress].

At the risk however of being entirely forgotten I have concluded to drop you a line if it be only to ascertain the fact.

Since we separated you have been busily engaged in the Senate of the U[nited] S[tates] aiding in the councils of our Nation, while I have been mostly engaged in the practice of the law riding over hills and vallies, swamps and waters as duty or necessity might require. Last year I was elected a delegate and took a part, an humble part, in forming a new constitution for my own native state. Except this I have been wholly disengaged from politics. I have been looking with deep solicitude at the course of events since I left Congress and have seen nothing to change the opinion which I expressed to you in a conversation during the pending of the three million bill or just before I do not now recollect which, "that the Mexican War was gotten up by the abolition raving of the then Cabinet to get a large scope of territory to make free States out of and to surround the slave States entirely to get back what they were pleased to term the balance of power which they said they had lost by giving up half of Oregon,” and advised you if possible to put a stop to the war before the rank and file got into the secret for if you did not the devil himself could not do it, that even Giddings and Culver would come in if they found out what it was for. You told me that you and your immediate friends were doing your best but were powerless, but if I would only keep Garrett Davis from throwing in his d----d resolutions of warning, which were calculated though not intended to bind the party together, that you thought you could possibly do something. I have often thought of this conversation and wondered if you had any recollection of it. Things that have occurred since have indelibly impressed it upon my memory.

In looking about for the causes of the Mexican war, I believed those assigned by the particular friends of the president were some of them insufficient and some of them unfounded and therefore I looked round for some reason to satisfy my own mind, and could find none but that. I named it to several of my friends and colleagues but could find none to agree with me. I formed the opinion first from reading Morey's instructions for raising Stephensons regiment. I thought the intention was to settle that regiment on the southern border of whatever land we might acquire and thus form the nucleus for a settlement from the free states immediately on our southern border and thus prevent a settlement from the slave states, by slave holders at least, within the bounds of the newly acquired territory. Upon due consideration of all that has happened since that time do you not now think that I at least guessed well if I did not form a correct opinion? In my canvass for delegate last summer I had to encounter emancipation in all its forms and triumphed over it. The leading men in this country are with the south but they are also for the Union and do not look to disunion as a remedy for any evil. They will "fight for slavery but die by the Union." As to the boys up the hollows and in the brush who form a considerable portion of our country they are not to [be] relied on in any contest against the Union. In a contest about the Union they would be willing to have the motto of the first soldiers of the revolution "Liberty or death"—but in a contest about slavery they would be a good deal like one Barney Decker who was about to have a soldiers badge and motto made and when the lady who made the badge asked him if he would have the same motto hesitated and then replied "You may put ‘liberty or be crippled.’” I am afraid the boys will say "slavery or be crippled." For God's sake try and settle all these questions of slavery if possible and let us not dissolve the Union.

But if we have to write like Francis the 1st to his mother, "Madam all's lost but honor" let us do it with this and we will have the approval of our own conscience without which a man is nothing.

_______________

* A Representative in Congress from Kentucky, 1845-1847.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 104-6

John Tyler to Henry S. Foote, August 26, 1860

SHERWOOD FOREST, August 26, 1860.

MY DEAR SIR: Your letter of August 21st was forwarded to me from the summer residence of my family, near Hampton, to this place, and only reached me an hour ago, asking of me a declaration in writing expressive of the opinion that the Breckenridge and Lane ticket should not be run in the Free States, and that the Northern field should be left exclusively in the possession of their adversaries. Pardon me, my dear sir, for declining the public expression of such an opinion on a subject with which I am so little acquainted as the relative strength of the several candidates in the unfortunate quadrangular contest which now prevails. It may very well be that in some of the Northern States Mr. Breckenridge is stronger than either Mr. Douglas or Mr. Bell, in which event it would be altogether out of place to advise his withdrawal from the canvass in those States. My remarks to Mr. Withers, to which you refer, had exclusive reference to the State of New York, where, according to the newspaper editors, Mr. Breckenridge has no available force, and where it is said a combination of all the conservative forces is necessary to defeat Mr. Lincoln. To detach New York from his support, or some other of the Free States, is supposed to be the only "open sesame" to the hopes of the other candidates. Whether it is necessary for any one of the other candidates to withdraw, you will much better understand than myself. The rivalry between Messrs Breckenridge, Douglas, and Bell, in the Southern States, is not so much for majorities as puralities, which count as majorities in the end." Non nostrum componere lites." In the midst of faction I should only meet with ridicule for interposing my opinions. Excuse me for preferring the profound quiet which I desire to enjoy.

You do me no more than justice in ascribing to me conservative opinions. The expanding power of these States has been the subject of my warmest contemplation. The future glory of the Union has wrapped me in a vision of ecstasy. Exeter Hall for a season was not permitted by its impertinent interference in our affairs to cast a shadow over so bright a vision. The separation between this country and Great Britain, I flattered myself, had been completed, alike in opinion and government, by the surrender at Yorktown. It is only in these latter days, when that Hall has sent over its agents to foment sectional divisions among us, and American citizens have crossed the ocean to enter into its conferences, esteeming themselves as honored by the plaudits they have received, that I have painfully felt for the condition of the country. The English sentiment engendering bitterness and enmity has to a great extent superseded the American of harmony and love. However, my dear sir, every free government has had its Catalines, and it is hoping against hope to expect that we should escape the fate of other nations. My only reliance is on the good sense of the American people to crush out all wicked designs and put their heels on the necks of the workers of mischief. With high respect and esteem, faithfully yours,

JOHN TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 560-1

John Tyler to Robert Tyler, August 27, 1860

SHERWOOD FOREST, August 27, 1860.

DEAR ROBERT: I think it best to enclose you these letters. There are parts of mine you may not be able to decipher accurately. It is the first draft. The gentleman alluded to—Colonel Withers, of Mississippi—called on me at the Villa Margaret, and, as the condition of the times is the fruitful subject of conversation, it came soon to be introduced. I expressed to him the gratification I had felt at the fusion between the Douglas and Bell men in New York, and expressed the hope that all conservatives would unite on the same ticket; that in my view the defeat of Lincoln was the great matter at issue, and that all others were subordinate; and probably said that if I lived in New York, although I was decidedly a Breckenridge man, I would advocate the fusion ticket. This, it seems, he reported to General Foote, and hence the correspondence.

There can be no possible doubt of Lincoln's election unless some one of the so-called free States is snatched from him. I presented also another idea to Colonel Withers, and that was that to defeat Lincoln was to elect Breckenridge or Lane, I cared not which, by throwing the first before the House, the last before the Senate. This has called forth the letter of my old friend General Foote, who is a Douglas man. I enclose it to you, so that if you should see any reference made to my opinions by General Foote, or any other which may call for explanation, you may be in proper position to make it by the publication, if necessary, of my letter. I said to Colonel Withers (and hence the reference to Cataline) that I regarded Seward as the Cataline of our day, and that to reach the presidency he would quaff blood with his fellows, as did Cataline of old, and expressed the hope that there would still arise a Cicero to denounce him in the Senate chamber.

I am here to superintend the delivery of my crop of wheat, which, although full of promise on the 1st of June, turns out a miserable failure. I shall remain during the week, and then back to Hampton.

Do give me some account of Pennsylvania. How goes the night? I think, after all, that everything depends on her. If I deceive not myself, Breckenridge will carry pluralities in a large majority of the Southern States, so as to present Lane to the Senate, should Lincoln not be elected by the popular vote. I live in the hope that a defeat of the negro-men now will dissolve their party. Write me soon. Love to all.

Your father,

JOHN TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 561-2

John Tyler to Robert Tyler, September 14, 1860

VILLA MARGARET, Sept. 14, 1860.

MY DEAR ROBERT: I see the election is gone in Maine, although Douglas confidently calculated on carrying the State. Such were his declarations here. You say nothing to me as to Pennsylvania. Can you hold out any hope in regard to it? I am almost in despair as to results, and deeply meditate the future. The Marylanders have struck upon the right key in nominating Chief-Justice Taney and Nelson. I fear that they move too late. My hope is that many here will come to their reason before it be too late; but it seems to me certain that Lincoln is to be elected, in despite of all combinations. How stand things in New Jersey? The increase of the Republican vote in Maine augurs an increase all through the free States.

What does Seward mean by originating a war on the army and navy? Does he design to hold out inducements to the wide-awakes? In his strategemic game, does he mean to open to the ambition of his organized bands generalships, colonelships, etc., etc., and the $25,000,000 now bestowed on the army and navy; and thus with his train-bands have his will supreme in the execution of his movements on the Constitution and the South? I suspect the man at every step and in every movement. A more arch and wily conspirator does not live. I can understand why, if the army or navy be too large, they should be reduced; but how to get on without them entirely I cannot understand. Or how the militia could be called on to do duty in fortifications and the Indian frontier, or how to collect a revenue, or claim the respect of the world without regular seamen, officers, and men, I cannot understand. If he makes the move, depend upon it he seeks only to further his ambitious schemes. Do write to me your opinion relative to Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

All send love.

Your father,

JOHN TYLER.

SOURCE: Lyon Gardiner Tyler, The Letters and Times of the Tylers, Volume 2, p. 562

H. B., an Old Missionary to John Brown, November 28, 1859

New Haven, Connecticut, Nov. 28.

Dear Sir: Permit a friend of liberty and equitable law to address you a few brief thoughts, which I hope may be acceptable to you and your family. Prayer was yesterday offered for you in a colored congregation in this city, to whom a descendant of Africa, a son of Georgia, a minister of Liberia, and also the writer of this farewell letter, preached the true gospel.

You may be gratified to know that I remember with interest your interview, some two years since, with the cordial friends of Kansas in this city, while that injured territory of our common country was subject to the scorpion lash prepared for the honest advocates of the rights of man, and especially of that freedom which you struggled to establish. These, your New Haven friends, some of whom so ably and so kindly expostulated with our Chief Magistrate in reference to the wrongs of Kansas, remember you with Christian sympathy in your present sufferings.

Take it to your heart that a God of Justice and of Mercy rules, and the Deliverer of Israel from their bondage in Goshen, has mercy in store for a greater number of bondmen and bondwomen, truly as wrongfully oppressed. He has not granted you the full measure of your wishes, but he has allowed you the opportunity of conspicuously and emphatically showing your sympathy for the injured Slave population of our otherwise happy country, and of preaching the duty of giving "them that which is just and equal."

Forty years ago I went among the savages of Polynesia, and preached the gospel of Him whose office it was to proclaim liberty to captives. I plainly taught kings and queens, chiefs and warriors, that He that ruleth men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. I freely exhibited the opposition of God's law and our Saviour's gospel to oppression and every sin found to be prevailing there, and aided my associates in giving them the entire Bible in their own language, and in teaching their tribes to read it and use it freely in all the ranks of life.

Though I labored with them a score of years, and have corresponded with them a score of years more, I have not, lest I should damage my mission, ever told them that I belonged to a nation that deprives three or four millions of their fellow-subjects of Jehovah's Government, of their dearest rights which God has given them one of which is the free use of his own Holy Book.

But when the story of your execution shall reach and surprise them, I will no longer hesitate to speak to my friends there of your sympathy for four millions of the inhabitants of our Southern States, held in unchristian bonds in the only Protestant country on the globe that endorses Slavery.

I can, next week, well afford to endeavor to give them an echo of that protest against the whole system of American Slavery, which on and from the day of your execution, will be louder in the ear of High Heaven than its abettors have been accustomed to hear; rising from the millions of freemen in this noble cordon of Free States, and other millions of now slaveholding freemen, and some slaveholders themselves, in the Slave States.

Have you a kind message to send to the Christian converts at the Sandwich Islands, or to the heathen of Micronesia, a month's sail beyond, where my son and daughter are laboring to give them the Bible and the richest blessings of Christianity? I would gladly forward it to them if you have time to write it.

And now, dear sir, trust in your gracious Saviour; forgive those that have trespassed against you; leave your fatherless children, God will provide for them, and tell your widow to trust in Him, in His holy habitation. "The hairs of your head are all numbered," and not one "shall fall to the ground without your Heavenly Father." Should a lock of your hair fall into my lap before the execution shall help you to shake the pillars of the idol's temple, it would be valued. The Lord bless you, and make your life and death a blessing to the oppressed and their oppressors. Farewell!

Yours faithfully,

H. B.

SOURCE: James Redpath, Editor, Echoes of Harper’s Ferry, p. 403-5

William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, April 25, 1861

OFFICE ST. LOUIS RAILROAD COMPANY, St. Louis, April 25, 1861.

DEAR BROTHER: Virginia's secession influences some six millions of people. No use in arguing about it at all, but all the Virginians, or all who trace their lineage back, will feel like obeying her dictates and example. As a state, she has been proud, boastful, and we may say over-bearing; but, on the other hand, she, by her governors and authority, has done everything to draw her native-born back to their state.

I can not yet but think that it was a fatal mistake in Mr. Lincoln not to tie to his administration by some kind of link, the border states. Now it is too late, and sooner or later Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkansas will be in arms against us. It is barely possible that Missouri may yet be neutral.

It is pretty nearly determined to divert the half million set aside for the July interest for arming the state.¹ All the bankers but one have consented, and the governor and legislature are strongly secession. I understand to-day the orders at the custom house are to refuse clearance to steamboats to seceding states. All the heavy trade with groceries and provisions is with the South, and this order at once takes all life from St. Louis. Merchants heretofore for peace, and even for backing the administration will now fall off, relax in their exertions, and the result will possibly be secession, and then free states against slave – the horrible array so long dreaded. I know Frank Blair desired this plain, square issue. It may be that sooner or later it is inevitable, but I cannot bring myself to think so. On the necessity of maintaining a government and that government the old constitutional one, I have never wavered, but I do recoil from a war, when the negro is the only question. I am informed that McClellan is appointed to command the Ohio militia — a most excellent appointment; a better officer could not be found.

_______________

¹ Missouri. — ED.

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 380-1

Senator John Sherman to William T. Sherman, December 9, 1860

WASHINGTON, D.C., December 9, 1860.

. . . I am clearly of the opinion that you ought not to remain much longer at your present post. You will in all human probability be involved in complications from which you cannot escape with honor. Separated from your family and all your kin, and an object of suspicion you will find your position unendurable. A fatal infatuation seems to have seized the southern mind, during which any act of madness may be committed. . . If the sectional dissensions only rested upon real or alleged grievances, they could be readily settled, but I fear they are deeper and stronger. You can now close your connection with the Seminary with honor and credit to yourself, for all who know you speak well of your conduct, while by remaining you not only involve yourself but bring trouble upon those gentlemen who recommended you.

It is a sad state of affairs, but it is nevertheless true, that if the conventions of the Southern States make anything more than a paper secession, hostile collisions will occur and probably a separation between the free and the slave states. You can judge whether it is at all probable that secession of this capital, the commerce of the Mississippi, the control of the territories, and the natural rivalry of enraged sections can be arranged without war. In that event you cannot serve in Louisiana against your family and kin in Ohio. The bare possibility of such a contingency, it seems to me renders your duty plain, to make a frank statement to all the gentlemen connected with you, and with good feeling close your engagement. If the storm shall blow over, your course will strengthen you with every man whose good opinion you desire; if not, you will escape humiliation. When you return to Ohio, I will write you freely about your return to the army, not so difficult a task as you imagine. . .

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 312-3

William T. Sherman to Ellen Ewing Sherman, July 10, 1860

ALEXANDRIA, July 10, 1860.

. . . I feel little interest in politics and certainly am glad to see it realized that politicians can't govern the country. They may agitate, but cannot control. Let who may be elected, the same old game will be played, and he will go out of office like Pierce and Buchanan with their former honors sunk and lost. I only wonder that honorable men should seek the office.

I do not concieve that any of the parties would materially interfere with the slavery in the states, and in the territories it is a mere abstraction. There is plenty of room in the present slave states for all the negroes, but the time has come when the free states may annoy the slave states by laws of a general declaration, but that they will change the relation of master and slave I don't believe.

All the congresses on earth can't make the negro anything else than what he is; he must be subject to the white man, or he must amalgamate or be destroyed. Two such races cannot live in harmony save as master and slave. Mexico shows the result of general equality and amalgamation, and the Indians give a fair illustration of the fate of negroes if they are released from the control of the whites. Of course no one can guess what the wild unbridled passions of men may do, but I don't believe that the present excitement in politics is anything more than the signs of the passage of power from the southern politicians to northern and western politicians.

The negro is made the hobby, but I know that northern men don't care any more about the rights and humanities of the negroes than the southerners. At present negroes work under control of white men and the consequence is the annual yield of $200,000,000 of cotton, sugar, and other produce that would not be without such labor; and so long as that is the case, I don't fear a change in this respect. . .

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 241-2

John C. Calhoun: Speech on the Reception of Abolition Petitions, delivered in the Senate, February 6, 1837

If the time of the Senate permitted, I would feel it to be my duty to call for the reading of the mass of petitions on the table, in order that we might know what language they hold towards the slaveholding States and their institutions; but as it will not, I have selected, indiscriminately from the pile, two; one from those in manuscript, and the other from the printed, and without knowing their contents will call for the reading of them, so that we may judge, by them, of the character of the whole.

[Here the Secretary, on the call of Mr. Calhoun, read the two petitions.]

Such is the language held towards us and ours. The peculiar institution of the South—that, on the maintenance of which the very existence of the slaveholding States depends, is pronounced to be sinful and odious, in the sight of God and man; and this with a systematic design of rendering us hateful in the eyes of the world—with a view to a general crusade against us and our institutions. This, too, in the legislative halls of the Union; created by these confederated States, for the better protection of their peace, their safety, and their respective institutions;—and yet, we, the representatives of twelve of these sovereign States against whom this deadly war is waged, are expected to sit here in silence, hearing ourselves and our constituents day after day denounced, without uttering a word; for if we but open our lips, the charge of agitation is resounded on all sides, and we are held up as seeking to aggravate the evil which we resist. Every reflecting mind must see in all this a state of things deeply and dangerously diseased.

I do not belong to the school which holds that aggression is to be met by concession. Mine is the

opposite creed, which teaches that encroachments must be met at the beginning, and that those who act on the opposite principle are prepared to become slaves. In this case, in particular, I hold concession or compromise to be fatal. If we concede an inch, concession would follow concession—compromise would follow compromise, until our ranks would be so broken that effectual resistance would be impossible. We must meet the enemy on the frontier, with a fixed determination of maintaining our position at every hazard. Consent to receive these insulting petitions, and the next demand will be that they be referred to a committee in order that they may be deliberated and acted upon. At the last session we were modestly asked to receive them, simply to lay them on the table, without any view to ulterior action. I then told the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Buchanan), who so strongly urged that course in the Senate, that it was a position that could not be maintained; as the argument in favor of acting on the petitions if we were bound to receive, could not be resisted. I then said, that the next step would be to refer the petition to a committee, and I already see indications that such is now the intention. If we yield, that will be followed by another, and we will thus proceed, step by step, to the final consummation of the object of these petitions. We are now told that the most effectual mode of arresting the progress of abolition is, to reason it down; and with this view it is urged that the petitions ought to be referred to a committee. That is the very ground which was taken at the last session in the other House, but instead of arresting its progress it has since advanced more rapidly than ever. The most unquestionable right may be rendered doubtful, if once admitted to be a subject of controversy, and that would be the case in the present instance. The subject is beyond the jurisdiction of Congress—they have no right to touch it in any shape or form, or to make it the subject of deliberation or discussion.

In opposition to this view it is urged that Congress is bound by the constitution to receive petitions in every case and on every subject, whether within its constitutional competency or not. I hold the doctrine to be absurd, and do solemnly believe, that it would be as easy to prove that it has the right to abolish slavery, as that it is bound to receive petitions for that purpose. The very existence of the rule that requires a question to be put on the reception of petitions, is conclusive to show that there is no such obligation. It has been a standing rule from the commencement of the Government, and clearly shows the sense of those who formed the constitution on this point. The question on the reception would be absurd, if, as is contended, we are bound to receive ; but I do not intend to argue the question; I discussed it fully at the last session, and the arguments then advanced neither have been nor can be answered.

As widely as this incendiary spirit has spread, it has not yet infected this body, or the great mass of the intelligent and business portion of the North; but unless it be speedily stopped, it will spread and work upwards till it brings the two great sections of the Union into deadly conflict. This is not a new impression with me. Several years since, in a discussion with one of the Senators from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster), before this fell spirit had showed itself, I then predicted that the doctrine of the proclamation and the Force Bill,—that this Government had a right, in the last resort, to determine the extent of its own powers, and enforce its decision at the point of the bayonet, which was so warmly maintained by that Senator, would at no distant day arouse the dormant spirit of abolitionism. I told him that the doctrine was tantamount to the assumption of unlimited power on the part of the Government, and that such would be the impression on the public mind in a large portion of the Union. The consequence would be inevitable. A large portion of the Northern States believed slavery to be a sin, and would consider it as an obligation of conscience to abolish it if they should feel themselves in any degree responsible for its continuance,—and that this doctrine would necessarily lead to the belief of such responsibility. I then predicted that it would commence as it has with this fanatical portion of society, and that they would begin their operations on the ignorant, the weak, the young, and the thoughtless,—and gradually extend upwards till they would become strong enough to obtain political control, when he and others holding the highest stations in society, would, however reluctant, be compelled to yield to their doctrines, or be driven into obscurity. But four years have since elapsed, and all this is already in a course of regular fulfilment.

Standing at the point of time at which we have now arrived, it will not be more difficult to trace the course of future events now than it was then. They who imagine that the spirit now abroad in the North, will die away of itself without a shock or convulsion, have formed a very inadequate conception of its real character; it will continue to rise and spread, unless prompt and efficient measures to stay its progress be adopted. Already it has taken possession of the pulpit, of the schools, and, to a considerable extent, of the press; those great instruments by which the mind of the rising generation will be formed.

However sound the great body of the non-slaveholding States are at present, in the course of a few years they will be succeeded by those who will have been taught to hate the people and institutions of nearly one-half of this Union, with a hatred more deadly than one hostile nation ever entertained towards another. It is easy to see the end. Ву the necessary course of events, if left to themselves, we must become, finally, two people. It is impossible under the deadly hatred which must spring up between the two great sections, if the present causes are permitted to operate unchecked, that we should continue under the same political system. The conflicting elements would burst the Union asunder, powerful as are the links which hold it together. Abolition and the Union cannot co-exist. As the friend of the Union I openly proclaim it—and the sooner it is known the better. The former may now be controlled, but in a short time it will be beyond the power of man to arrest the course of events. We of the South will not, cannot surrender our institutions. To maintain the existing relations between the two races, inhabiting that section of the Union, is indispensable to the peace and happiness of both. It cannot be subverted without drenching the country in blood, and extirpating one or the other of the races.

Be it good or bad, it has grown up with our society and institutions, and is so interwoven with them, that to destroy it would be to destroy us as a people. But let me not be understood as admitting, even by implication, that the existing relations between the two races in the slaveholding States is an evil: — far otherwise; I hold it to be a good, as it has thus far proved itself to be to both, and will continue to prove so if not disturbed by the fell spirit of abolition. I appeal to facts. Never before has the black race of Central Africa, from the dawn of history to the present day, attained a condition so civilized and so improved, not only physically, but morally and intellectually. It came among us in a low, degraded, and savage condition, and in the course of a few generations it has grown up under the fostering care of our institutions, reviled as they have been, to its present comparatively civilized condition. This, with the rapid increase of numbers, is conclusive proof of the general happiness of the race, in spite of all the exaggerated tales to the contrary.

In the mean time, the white or European race has not degenerated. It has kept pace with its brethren in other sections of the Union where slavery does not exist. It is odious to make comparison; but I appeal to all sides whether the South is not equal in virtue, intelligence, patriotism, courage, disinterestedness, and all the high qualities which adorn our nature. I ask whether we have not contributed our full share of talents and political wisdom in forming and sustaining this political fabric; and whether we have not constantly inclined most strongly to the side of liberty, and been the first to see and first to resist the encroachments of power.

In one thing only are we inferior—the arts of gain; we acknowledge that we are less wealthy than the Northern section of this Union, but I trace this mainly to the fiscal action of this Government, which has extracted much from, and spent little among us. Had it been the reverse,—if the exaction had been from the other section, and the expenditure with us, this point of superiority would not be against us now, it was not at the formation of this Government.

But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good—a positive good. I feel myself called upon to speak freely upon the subject where the honor and interests of those I represent are involved. I hold then, that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of the community did not, in point of fact, live on the labor of the other. Broad and general as is this assertion, it is fully borne out by history. This is not the proper occasion, but if it were, it would not be difficult to trace the various devices by which the wealth of all civilized communities has been so unequally divided, and to show by what means so small a share has been allotted to those by whose labor it was produced, and so large a share given to the nonproducing classes. The devices are almost innumerable, from the brute force and gross superstition of ancient times, to the subtle and artful fiscal contrivances of modern. I might well challenge a comparison between them and the more direct, simple, and patriarchal mode by which the labor of the African race is, among us, commanded by the European. I may say with truth, that in few countries so much is left to the share of the laborer, and so little exacted from him, or where there is more kind attention paid to him in sickness or infirmities of age. Compare his condition with the tenants of the poor houses in the more civilized portions of Europe—look at the sick, and the old and infirm slave, on one hand, in the midst of his family and friends, under the kind superintending care of his master and mistress, and compare it with the forlorn and wretched condition of the pauper in the poor house. But I will not dwell on this aspect of the question; I turn to the political; and here I fearlessly assert that the existing relation between the two races in the South, against which these blind fanatics are waging war, forms the most solid and durable foundation on which to rear free and stable political institutions. It is useless to disguise the fact. There is and always has been in an advanced stage of wealth and civilization, a conflict between labor and capital. The condition of society in the South exempts us from the disorders and dangers resulting from this conflict; and which explains why it is that the political condition of the slaveholding States has been so much more stable and quiet than that of the North. The advantages of the former, in this respect, will become more and more manifest if left undisturbed by interference from without, as the country advances in wealth and numbers. We have, in fact, but just entered that condition of society where the strength and durability of our political institutions are to be tested; and I venture nothing in predicting that the experience of the next generation will fully test how vastly more favorable our condition of society is to that of other sections for free and stable institutions, provided we are not disturbed by the interference of others, or shall have sufficient intelligence and spirit to resist promptly and successfully such interference. It rests with ourselves to meet and repel them. I look not for aid to this Government, or to the other States; not but there are kind feelings towards us on the part of the great body of the non-slaveholding States; but as kind as their feelings may be, we may rest assured that no political party in those States will risk their ascendency for our safety. If we do not defend ourselves none will defend us; if we yield we will be more and more pressed as we recede; and if we submit we will be trampled under foot. Be assured that emancipation itself would not satisfy these fanatics:—that gained, the next step would be to raise the negroes to a social and political equality with the whites; and that being effected, we would soon find the present condition of the two races reversed. They and their northern allies would be the masters, and we the slaves; the condition of the white race in the British West India Islands, bad as it is, would be happiness to ours. There the mother country is interested in sustaining the supremacy of the European race. It is true that the authority of the former master is destroyed, but the African will there still be a slave, not to individuals but to the community, forced to labor, not by the authority of the overseer, but by the bayonet of the soldiery and the rod of the civil magistrate.

Surrounded as the slaveholding States are with such imminent perils, I rejoice to think that our means of defence are ample, if we shall prove to have the intelligence and spirit to see and apply them before it is too late. All we want is concert, to lay aside all party differences, and unite with zeal and energy in repelling approaching dangers. Let there be concert of action, and we shall find ample means of security without resorting to secession or disunion. I speak with full knowledge and a thorough examination of the subject, and for one, see my way clearly. One thing alarms me—the eager pursuit of gain which overspreads the land, and which absorbs every faculty of the mind and every feeling of the heart. Of all passions avarice is the most blind and compromising—the last to see and the first to yield to danger. I dare not hope that any thing I can say will arouse the South to a due sense of danger; I fear it is beyond the power of mortal voice to awaken it in time from the fatal security into which it has fallen.

SOURCE: Richard Crallé, Editor, The Works of John C. Calhoun: Volume 2: Speeches delivered in the House of Representatives, and the Senate of the United States, p. 625-33

William T. Sherman to John Sherman, May 8, 1860

ALEXANDRIA, LA., May 8, 1860.

. . . There is one point which you concede to the Southern States, perfect liberty to prefer slavery if they choose; still, you hit the system as though you had feeling against it. I know it is difficult to maintain perfect impartiality. In all new cases, it is well you should adhere to your conviction to exclude slavery because you prefer free labor. That is your perfect right, and I was glad to see that you disavowed any intention to molest slavery in the district.

Now, so certain and inevitable is it that the physical and political power of this nation must pass into the hands of the free states, that I think you can well afford to take things easy, bear the buffets of a sinking dynasty, and even smile at their impotent threats. You ought not to expect the southern politicians to rest easy when they see and feel their crisis so long approaching, and so certain to come absolutely at hand. . .  But this year's presidential election will be a dangerous one; may actually result in Civil War, though I still cannot believe the South would actually secede in the event of the election of a Republican. . .

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 211-2

Jonathan Worth to D. G. Worth, May 15, 1861

ASHEBORO, May 15, 1861.

I have been forced by surrounding facts to take sides, or rather front, with my section. I regard a prudent peace, even accompanied with the contemplated secession of the State, and her union with the Confederate States, as preferable to a civil war on a gigantic scale; but I have not a particle of confidence in the wisdom or the patriotism of the new rulers to whom we submit. I leave the Union and the flag of Washington because I am subjected and forced to submit to my master-democracy, detesting it with more and more intensity, as I become better acquainted with its leaders and its objects. I still believe that no respectable and stable government can ever be established in America, except on the plan of a Union, such as that we are wickedly and foolishly overthrowing. Even on the plan of a peaceful separation, North America will soon become Mexicanized. New York will next secede, the doctrine being once recognized. The great and populous North west, cut off from the Ocean, excepting by the assent of foreign states will open a road to the great highway of Nations with the sword—but if the free States act on the plan they now avow of preserving the Union by force of arms, no odds at what cost of life or treasure, the civil strife will soon beget the most diabolical purposes.

The masses, already deluded, with the notion that Slavery is the cause, when in fact, it is now only the pretext with the leaders of both sections, will proclaim freedom to the slaves and arm them against us.

I think the South is committing suicide, but my lot is cast with the South and being unable to manage the ship, I intend to face the breakers manfully and go down with my companions.

These are my calm conclusions.

I have been deeply pained at the responsibilities of my position. I have become resigned from conscious impotence to do anything to impede the evils upon us, and have concluded to drift with the current, keeping a sharp lookout for some opportunity, by the aid of Divine Providence, to divert the ship of State from the gulf of ruin towards which we are bound.

What are your plans? Will you stay in Wilmington, or return to the back country and make corn till the war is over?

Soon after the Fourth of July war will begin in earnest, if not sooner; or peace will be made. The former, in my opinion, is most probable. I do not think the North is making her military preparations as a mere bravado.

In the event of war can you continue your business with any prospect of success? If an invasion of this State be made, is not Wilmington likely to be one of the first places attacked?

Have you attached yourself to any of the military organizations so as to forbid your removing from Wilmington? In times of war some must remain at home to provide food for the soldiers and protect and feed the women and children. I hope you will not allow the ardor around you or the apprehension of not being deemed brave, to make you forget that you can contribute to the defense of your country, as effectually as you could by going into the army—and at the same time take care of your wife and children.

SOURCE: J. G. de Roulhac Hamilton, Editor, The Correspondence of Jonathan Worth, Volume 1, p. 144-5