1 That is, for the slaves now being run in from Africa.
SOURCE: Allan Nevins and Milton Halset Thomas, Editors, Diary of George Templeton Strong, Vol. 3, pp. 42-3
1 That is, for the slaves now being run in from Africa.
SOURCE: Allan Nevins and Milton Halset Thomas, Editors, Diary of George Templeton Strong, Vol. 3, pp. 42-3
Barton95 has been with us two days, it being too wet to plough at home. . . .
Senator Green
The Weekly Mo. Rep:[ublican] of June 17 contains a set speech of Hon: James. S. Green,96 on Politics, gotten up, no doubt, with a special eye to his future — another election — He cannot fully defend Buchanan's administration, yet supports it — He is against Douglas'97 popular Sovereignty, yet supports him98 — On one point of Territorial government however, he is clear, i. e — Congress ought to intervene to put down Polygamy and other crimes in Utah.
[A clipping from the National Intelligencer of June 15, 1859, charging that the expedition sent to Paraguay under Captain Simbrick99 was insufficiently provided with ammunition.]
[A long editorial from the Missouri Daily Democrat of June 29, 1859, denouncing Secretary Cass and President Buchanan for surrendering a right maintained by President Fillmore and Secretary Everett in the case of Mr. Francis Allibert,1 the country of whose birth claimed his military service. The editorial is headed "Degradation and Disfranchisement of Naturalized Citizens by the National Democracy . . ."]
[A reprint from the New York Express referring to this case.]
Naturalized citizens — Secy. Cass — See back 3 pages — Forward 6 pages.2
[A column from the Washington Constitution on "The Rights and Liabilities of Naturalized Citizens" in justification of Secretary Cass’s position.]
[A newspaper copy of Senator Douglas's letter to Colonel John L. Peyton written August 2, 1859, about the LeClerc matter and the slave trade.]
95 Mr. Bates's eldest son. See supra, " Introduction."
96 An anti-Douglas Democrat from Missouri; successor of Douglas as chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories; leader of the revolt against Benton in 1849 ; congress man, 1847-1851; U. S. senator, 1857-1861. His Confederate sympathies led to his arrest by Federal troops at the outbreak of the Civil War and to his expulsion from the Senate.
97 Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois: Democratic congressman, 1843-1847; U. S. Senator 1847-1861; chairman of the Committee on Territories; nominee of the Northern Democrats for the Presidency in 1860.
98 Douglas and Buchanan had recently split the Party in their quarrel over " popular sovereignty." Green was a clever politician indeed if he could support both at once.
99 William B. Shubrick had entered the Navy in 1806, and had served in the War of 1812 and the Mexican War. For the naval expedition against Paraguay which he commanded see supra, April 20, 1859, note 13.
1 Francis Allibert was a native of France who left in 1839 just as he was drawn as a conscript. He became a naturalized American in New Orleans in 1845. On his return to France in 1852, he was arrested, but upon protest of the United States was ultimately released.
2 The references are to June 15 and July 19.
3 James C. Welling: literary editor of the National Intelligencer in Washington, 1850-1865; advocate of Bell and Everett in the election of 1860; loyal supporter of Lincoln during the War; assistant clerk of the Court of Claims under Bates 1863-1865: later, president of St. John's College and then of Columbia University.
SOURCE: Howard K. Beale, Editor, Annual Report of The American Historical Association For The Year 1930, Vol. 4, The Diary Of Edward Bates, pp. 25-6
A Mr. Venable, of
North Carolina, is making a speech against any special efforts to colonize
Liberia. He thinks the negro settlements there will fail; that the settlers are
incapable of civilization, and will soon relapse into barbarism. This is a fine
commentary upon that view of the special providences which justifies the slave-trade
and slavery in this country for these hundred years, in order to return the
race to the land from which it came, and thus introduce or transfer our
civilization into that region of the earth!
The days wear away
beautifully. Ought any one to be placed in such a position as to desire the
lapse of time? . . .
SOURCE: Mary Tyler
Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 332
We, whose names are
hereunto annexed, address you in discharge of what we believe to be a
solemn duty, on the most important subject ever presented for your
consideration. We allude to the conflict between the two great sections of the
Union, growing out of a difference of feeling and opinion
in reference to the relation existing between the two races, the European and
African, which inhabit the southern section, and the acts of aggression
and encroachment to which it has led.
The conflict
commenced not long after the acknowledgment of our independence, and
has gradually increased until it has arrayed the great body of the
North against the South on this most vital subject. In the progress of this
conflict, aggression has followed aggression, and encroachment encroachment,
until they have reached a point when a regard for your peace and safety will
not permit us to remain longer silent. The object of this address is
to give you a clear, correct, but brief account of the whole
series of aggression and encroachments on your rights, with a
statement of the dangers to which they expose you. Our object in
making it is not to cause excitement, but to put you in full possession of all
the facts and circumstances necessary to a full and just conception of a
deep-seated disease, which threatens great danger to you and the whole body
politic. We act on the impression, that in a popular government like ours, a
true conception of the actual character and state of a
disease is indispensable to effecting a cure.
We have made it a
joint address, because we believe that the magnitude of the subject
required that it should assume the most impressive and solemn form.
Not to go further
back, the difference of opinion and feeling in reference to the
relation between the two races, disclosed itself in the Convention that framed
the Constitution, and constituted one of the greatest difficulties in
forming it. After many efforts, it was overcome by a compromise, which provided
in the first place, that representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned
among the States according to their respective numbers; and that, in
ascertaining the number of each, five slaves shall be estimated as
three. In the next, that slaves escaping into States where slavery does not
exist, shall not be discharged from servitude, but shall be delivered up on
claim of the party to whom their labor or service is due. In the
third place, that Congress shall not prohibit the importation of slaves
before the year 1808; but a tax not exceeding ten dollars may be imposed on
each imported. And finally, that no capitation or direct tax shall be laid, but
in proportion to federal numbers; and that no amendment of the
Constitution, prior to 1808, shall affect this provision, nor that relating to
the importation of slaves.
So satisfactory were
these provisions, that the second, relative to the delivering up of fugitive
slaves, was adopted unanimously, and all the rest, except the third, relative
to the importation of slaves until 1808, with almost equal unanimity.
They recognize the existence of slavery, and make a specific
provision for its protection where it was supposed to be the most exposed. They
go further, and incorporate it, as an important element, in determining the
relative weight of the several States in the Government of the
Union, and the respective burden they should bear in laying capitation and
direct taxes. It was well understood at the time, that without them the
Constitution would not have been adopted by the Southern States, and of course
that they constituted elements so essential to the system that it never would
have existed without them. The Northern States, knowing all this, ratified the
Constitution, thereby pledging their faith, that faith has been kept and that
pledge redeemed we shall next proceed to show.
With few
exceptions of no great importance, the South had no cause to complain
prior to the year 1819—a year, it is to be feared, destined to mark a
train of events, bringing with them many, and great, and fatal
disasters, on the country and its institutions. With it commenced the agitating
debate on the question of the admission of Missouri into
the Union. We shall pass by for the present this question, and others of the
same kind, directly growing out of it, and shall proceed to consider
the effects of that spirit of discord, which it roused up
between the two sections. It first disclosed itself in the North, by hostility
to that portion of the Constitution which provides for the delivering
up of fugitive slaves. In its progress it led to the adoption of hostile
acts, intended to render it of non-effect, and with so much success
that it may be regarded now as practically expunged from the Constitution. How
this has been effected will be next explained.
After a careful
examination, truth constrains us to say, that it has been by a clear and
palpable evasion of the Constitution. It is impossible for any
provision to be more free from ambiguity or doubt. It is in the following
words: "No person held to service, or labor, in one State, under the laws
thereof, escaping into another State, shall, in consequence of any
law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor
may be due." All is clear. There is not an uncertain or equivocal word to
be found in the whole provision. What shall not be done, and what shall be
done, are fully and explicitly set forth. The former provides that the fugitive
slave shall not be discharged from his servitude by any law or regulation of the
State wherein he is found; and the latter, that he shall be delivered up on
claim of his owner.
We do not deem it
necessary to undertake to refute the sophistry and subterfuges by which so
plain a provision of the Constitution has been evaded, and, in
effect, annulled. It constitutes an essential part of the
constitutional compact, and of course of the supreme
law of the land. As such it is binding on all, the Federal and State
Governments, the States and the individuals composing them. The sacred
obligation of compact, and the solemn injunction of the
supreme law, which legislators and judges, both Federal and State, are bound by
oath to support, all unite to enforce its fulfilment, according to its plain
meaning and true intent. What that meaning and intent are, there was no
diversity of opinion in the better days of the Republic,
prior to 1819. Congress, State Legislatures, State and Federal Judges and
Magistrates, and people, all spontaneously placed the same interpretation on
it. During that period none interposed impediments in the way of the
owner seeking to recover his fugitive slave; nor did any deny his right to have
every proper facility to enforce his claim to have him delivered up. It was
then nearly as easy to recover one found in a Northern State, as one found in a
neighboring Southern State. But this has passed away, and the provision is
defunct, except perhaps in two States.1
When we take into
consideration the importance and clearness of this provision, the
evasion by which it has been set aside may fairly be regarded as one of the
most fatal blows ever received by the South and the Union. This cannot be more
concisely and correctly stated, than it has been by two of the
learned judges of the Supreme Court of the United States.
In one of his decisions2 Judge Story said:
"Historically it is well known that the object of this clause
was to secure to the citizens of the slaveholding States the complete
right and title of ownership in their slaves, as property, in every
State of the Union, into which they might escape, from the State
wherein they were held in servitude." "The full recognition of this
right and title was indispensable to the security of this
species of property, in all the slaveholding States, and, indeed, was
so vital to the preservation of their interests and institutions,
that it cannot be doubted, that it constituted a fundamental article without
the adoption of which the Union would not have been formed. Its true
design was to guard against the doctrines and principles prevalent in the
non-slaveholding States, by preventing them from intermeddling with, or
restricting, or abolishing the rights of the owners of slaves."
Again: "The
clause was therefore of the last importance to the safety and
security of the Southern States, and could not be surrendered by them
without endangering their whole property in slaves. The clause was accordingly
adopted in the Constitution by the unanimous consent of the framers of it—a
proof at once of its intrinsic and practical necessity."
Again: "The
clause manifestly contemplates the existence of a positive
unqualified right on the part of the owner of the slave,
which no State law or regulation can in any way regulate, control, qualify, or
restrain."
The opinion of the
other learned judges was not less emphatic as to the importance of this
provision and the unquestionable right of the South under it. Judge
Baldwin, in charging the jury, said:3 "If there are any
rights of property which can be enforced, if one citizen have any
rights of property which are inviolable under the protection of the
supreme law of the State, and the Union, they are those which have
been set at nought by some of these defendants. As the owner of property,
which he had a perfect right to possess, protect, and take away—as a
citizen of a sister State, entitled to all the privileges and
immunities of citizens of any other States—Mr. Johnson
stands before you on ground which cannot be taken from under him—it is the same
ground on which the Government itself is based. If the defendants can be
justified, we have no longer law or government." Again, after referring
more particularly to the provision for delivering up fugitive slaves, he said:
"Thus you see, that the foundations of the Government are laid,
and rest on the right of property in slaves. The whole structure must
fall by disturbing the corner-stone."
These are grave and
solemn and admonitory words, from a high source. They confirm all for which the
South has ever contended, as to the clearness, importance, and fundamental
character of this provision, and the disastrous consequences which
would inevitably follow from its violation. But in spite of these
solemn warnings, the violation, then commenced, and which they were intended to
rebuke, has been full and perfectly consummated. The citizens of the
South, in their attempt to recover their slaves, now meet, instead of aid
and co-operation, resistance in every form; resistance from hostile acts of legislation,
intended to baffle and defeat their claims by all sorts of devices,
and by interposing every description of impediment—resistance from
judges and magisrates—and finally, when all these fail, from mobs,
composed of whites and blacks, which, by threats or force, rescue the
fugitive slave from the possession of his rightful owner. The attempt
to recover a slave, in most of the Northern States, cannot now be
made without the hazard of insult, heavy pecuniary loss,
imprisonment, and even of life itself. Already has a worthy
citizen of Maryland lost his life4 in making an attempt to
enforce his claim to a fugitive slave under this provision.
But a
provision of the Constitution may be violated indirectly as well as
directly; by doing an act in its nature inconsistent with that which is
enjoined to be done. Of the form of violation, there is a
striking instance connected with the provision under consideration. We allude
to secret combinations which are believed to exist in many of the
Northern States, whose object is to entice, decoy, entrap, inveigle, and seduce
slaves to escape from their owners, and to pass them secretly and rapidly, by
means organized for the purpose, into Canada, where they will be beyond the
reach of the provision. That to entice a slave, by whatever artifice,
to abscond from his owner, into a non-slaveholding State, with the intention to
place him beyond the reach of the provision, or prevent his recovery,
by concealment or otherwise, is as completely repugnant to it, as its open
violation would be, is too clear to admit of doubt or to require illustration.
And yet, as repugnant as these combinations are to the true intent of the
provision, it is believed, that, with the above exception, not one of the
States, within whose limits they exist, has adopted any measure to suppress
them, or to punish those by whose agency the object for which they were formed
is carried into execution. On the contrary, they have looked on, and witnessed
with indifference, if not with secret approbation, a great number of slaves
enticed from their owners, and placed beyond the possibility of recovery,
to the great annoyance and heavy pecuniary loss of the bordering
Southern States.
When we take into
consideration the great importance of this provision, the
absence of all uncertainty as to its true meaning and intent, the
many guards by which it is surrounded to protect and enforce it, and then
reflect how completely the object for which it was inserted in the Constitution
is defeated by these two-fold infractions, we doubt, taking all together,
whether a more flagrant breach of faith is to be found on record. We
know the language we have used is strong, but it is not less true than strong.
There remains to be
noticed another class of aggressive acts of a kindred
character, but which instead of striking at an express and specific
provision of the Constitution, aims directly at destroying the
relation between the two races at the South, by means subversive in their
tendency of one of the ends for which the Constitution was
established. We refer to the systematic agitation of the question by
the Abolitionists, which, commencing about 1835, is still continued in all
possible forms. Their avowed intention is to bring about a state of things
that will force emancipation on the South. To unite the North in fixed
hostility to slavery in the South, and to excite discontent among the slaves
with their condition, are among the means employed to effect it. With a view to
bring about the former, every means are resorted to in order to render the
South, and the relation between the two races there, odious and hateful to the
North. For this purpose societies and newspapers are everywhere established,
debating clubs opened, lecturers employed, pamphlets and other publications,
pictures and petitions to Congress, resorted to, and directed to that single
point, regardless of truth or decency; while the circulation of incendiary
publications in the South, the agitation of the subject of abolition
in Congress, and the employment of emissaries are relied on to excite
discontent among the slaves. This agitation, and the use of these means,
have been continued with more or less activity for a series of years,
not without doing much towards effecting the object intended. We regard both
object and means to be aggressive and dangerous to the rights of the
South, and subversive, as stated, of one of the ends for
which the Constitution was established. Slavery is a domestic institution. It
belongs to the States, each for itself to decide, whether it shall be
established or not; and if it be established, whether it should be abolished or
not. Such being the clear and unquestionable right of the States, it
follows necessarily that it would be a flagrant act of aggression on a State,
destructive of its rights, and subversive of its
independence, for the Federal Government, or one or more States, or their
people, to undertake to force on it the emancipation of its slaves.
But it is a sound maxim in politics, as well as law and morals, that no one has
a right to do that indirectly which he cannot do directly, and it may be added
with equal truth, to aid, or abet, or countenance another in doing it. And yet
the Abolitionists of the North, openly avowing their intention, and
resorting to the most efficient means for the purpose, have been attempting to
bring about a state of things to force the Southern States to
emancipate their slaves, without any act on the part of any Northern
State to arrest or suppress the means by which they propose to accomplish it.
They have been permitted to pursue their object and to use whatever means they
please, if without aid or countenance, also without resistance or
disapprobation. What gives a deeper shade to the whole affair, is the fact,
that one of the means to effect their object, that of exciting
discontent among our slaves, tends directly to subvert what its preamble
declares to be one of the ends for which the Constitution was
ordained and established: "to insure domestic tranquillity," and that
in the only way in which domestic tranquillity is likely ever to be disturbed
in the South. Certain it is, that an agitation so systematic—having such an
object in view, and sought to be carried into execution by such means—would,
between independent nations, constitute just cause of remonstrance by
the party against which the aggression was directed, and if not heeded, an
appeal to arms for redress. Such being the case where an aggression of the
kind takes place among independent nations, how much more aggravated must it be
between confederated States, where the Union precludes an appeal to arms, while
it affords a medium through which it can operate with vastly increased force
and effect? That it would be perverted to such a use, never entered into the
imagination of the generation which formed and adopted the Constitution,
and, if it had been supposed it would, it is certain that the South never would
have adopted it.
We now return to the
question of the admission of Missouri into the Union, and
shall proceed to give a brief sketch of the occurrences connected
with it, and the consequences to which it has directly led. In the latter
part of 1819, the then territory of Missouri applied to
Congress, in the usual form, for leave to form a State Constitution and
Government, in order to be admitted into the Union. A bill was reported for the
purpose, with the usual provisions in such cases. Amendments were offered,
having for their object to make it a condition of her admission, that
her Constitution should have a provision to prohibit slavery. This brought on
the agitating debate, which, with the effects that followed, has done so much
to alienate the South and North, and endanger our political institutions. Those
who objected to the amendments, rested their opposition on the high
grounds of the right of self-government. They claimed that
a territory, having reached the period when it is proper for it to form a Constitution
and Government for itself, becomes fully vested with all the rights of self-government;
and that even the condition imposed on it by the Federal Constitution, relates
not to the formation of its Constitution and Government, but its
admission into the Union. For that purpose, it provides as a condition, that
the Government must be Republican.
They claimed that
Congress has no right to add to this condition, and that to assume it would be
tantamount to the assumption of the right to make its entire
Constitution and Government; as no limitation could be imposed, as to the
extent of the right, if it be admitted that it exists at all. Those
who supported the amendment denied these grounds, and claimed the right of Congress
to impose, at discretion, what conditions it pleased. In this agitating debate,
the two sections stood arrayed against each other; the South in favor of the
bill without amendment, and the North opposed to it without it. The debate and
agitation continued until the session was well advanced; but it became
apparent, towards its close, that the people of Missouri were fixed
and resolved in their opposition to the proposed condition, and that they would
certainly reject it, and adopt a Constitution without it, should the bill pass
with the condition. Such being the case, it required no great effort of mind
to perceive, that Missouri, once in possession of a Constitution and
Government, not simply on paper, but with legislators elected, and officers
appointed, to carry them into effect, the grave questions would be presented,
whether she was of right a Territory or State; and, if the latter,
whether Congress had the right, and, if the right, the power, to abrogate her
Constitution, disperse her legislature, and to remand her back to the
territorial condition. These were great, and, under the circumstances, fearful
questions—too fearful to be met by those who had raised the agitation. From
that time the only question was, how to escape from the difficulty.
Fortunately, a means was afforded. A Compromise (as it was called) was offered,
based on the terms, that the North should cease to oppose the admission of Missouri
on the grounds for which the South contended, and that the provisions of the
Ordinance of 1787, for the government of the Northwestern
Territory, should be applied to all the territory acquired by the United States
from France under the treaty of Louisiana lying North of 36°
30', except the portion lying in the State of Missouri. The Northern
members embraced it; and although not originating with them, adopted it as
their own. It was forced through Congress by the almost united votes of the
North, against a minority consisting almost entirely of members from
the Southern States.
Such was the
termination of this, the first conflict, under the Constitution,
between the two sections, in reference to slavery in connection with the
territories. Many hailed it as a permanent and final adjustment that would
prevent the recurrence of similar conflicts; but others, less
sanguine, took the opposite and more gloomy view, regarding it as the
precursor of a train of events which might rend the Union
asunder, and prostrate our political system. One of these was the
experienced and sagacious Jefferson. Thus far, time would seem to favor his
forebodings. May a returning sense of justice and a protecting
Providence, avert their final fulfilment.
For many years the subject of slavery
in reference to the territories ceased to agitate the country. Indications,
however, connected with the question of annexing Texas, showed
clearly that it was ready to break out again, with redoubled violence, on some
future occasion. The difference in the case of Texas was adjusted by
extending the Missouri compromise line of 36° 30', from its terminus,
on the western boundary of the Louisiana purchase, to the western
boundary of Texas. The agitation again ceased for a short period.
The war with Mexico
soon followed, and that terminated in the acquisition of New Mexico
and Upper California, embracing an area equal to about one half of the
entire valley of the Mississippi. If to this we add the portion of Oregon
acknowledged to be ours by the recent treaty with England, our whole territory
on the Pacific and west of the Rocky Mountains will be found to be in
extent but little less than that vast valley. The near prospect of so
great an addition rekindled the excitement between the North and South in
reference to slavery in its connection with the territories, which has become,
since those on the Pacific were acquired, more universal and intense than ever.
The effects have
been to widen the difference between the two sections, and to give a more
determined and hostile character to their conflict. The North no longer
respects the Missouri compromise line, although adopted by their almost unanimous
vote. Instead of compromise, they avow that their determination is to
exclude slavery from all the territories of the United States,
acquired, or to be acquired; and, of course, to prevent the
citizens of the Southern States from emigrating with their property
in slaves into any of them. Their object, they allege, is to prevent
the extension of slavery, and ours to extend it, thus making the
issue between them and us to be the naked question, shall slavery be extended
or not? We do not deem it necessary, looking to the object of this
address, to examine the question so fully discussed at the last session,
whether Congress has the right to exclude the citizens of the South
from immigrating with their property into territories belonging to the
confederated States of the Union. What we propose in this connection
is, to make a few remarks on what the North alleges, erroneously, to be the
issue between us and them.
So far from
maintaining the doctrine, which the issue implies, we hold that the Federal
Government has no right to extend or restrict slavery, no more than to
establish or abolish it; nor has it any right whatever to distinguish between
the domestic institutions of one State, or section, and another, in
order to favor the one and discourage the other. As the federal
representative of each and all the States, it is bound to deal out,
within the sphere of its powers, equal and exact justice and favor to
all. To act otherwise, to undertake to discriminate between the domestic
institutions of one and another, would be to act in total
subversion of the end for which it was established—to be the common
protector and guardian of all. Entertaining these opinions, we ask
not, as the North alleges we do, for the extension of slavery. That
would make a discrimination in our favor, as unjust and unconstitutional as the
discrimination they ask against us in their favor. It is not for them, nor for
the Federal Government to determine, whether our domestic institution is good
or bad; or whether it should be repressed or preserved. It belongs to us, and
us only, to decide such questions. What then we do insist on, is, not to extend
slavery, but that we shall not be prohibited from immigrating with our
property, into the Territories of the United States, because we are
slaveholders; or, in other words, that we shall not on that account be
disfranchised of a privilege possessed by all others, citizens and
foreigners, without discrimination as to character, profession, or color. All,
whether savage, barbarian, or civilized, may freely enter and remain, we only
being excluded.
We rest our claim,
not only on the high grounds above stated, but also on the solid
foundation of right, justice, and equality. The territories
immediately in controversy—New Mexico and California—were acquired by the
common sacrifice and efforts of all the States, towards which the
South contributed far more than her full share of men,5 to
say nothing of money, and is, of course, on every
principle of right, justice, fairness, and equality, entitled to
participate fully in the benefits to be derived from their acquisition. But as
impregnable as is this ground, there is another not. less so. Ours is a Federal
Government—a Government in which not individuals, but States, as distinct
sovereign communities, are the constituents. To them, as members of the
Federal Union, the territories belong; and they are hence declared to be
territories belonging to the United States. The States, then, are the joint
owners. Now it is conceded by all writers on the subject, that in all such
Governments their members are all equal—equal in rights and equal in dignity.
They also concede that this equality constitutes the basis of such
Government, and that it cannot be destroyed without changing their nature and
character. To deprive, then, the Southern States and their citizens of their
full share in territories declared to belong to them, in common with the other
States, would be in derogation of the equality belonging to them as
members of a Federal Union, and sink them, from being equals, into a
subordinate and dependent condition. Such are the solid and impregnable grounds
on which we rest our demand to an equal participation in the territories.
But as solid and
impregnable as they are in the eyes of justice and reason, they
oppose a feeble resistance to a majority, determined to engross the whole. At
the last session of Congress, a bill was passed, establishing a
territorial government for Oregon, excluding slavery therefrom. The President
gave his sanction to the bill, and sent a special message to Congress assigning
his reasons for doing so. These reasons presupposed that the Missouri
compromise was to be, and would be, extended west of the Rocky
Mountains, to the Pacific Ocean. And the President intimated his intention in
his message to veto any future bill that should restrict slavery south of the
line of that compromise. Assuming it to have been the purpose and
intention of the North to extend the Missouri compromise line as
above indicated, the passage of the Oregon bill could only be
regarded as evincing the acquiescence of the South in that line. But
the developments of the present session of Congress have
made it manifest to all, that no such purpose or intention now exists with the
North to any considerable extent. Of the truth of this, we
have ample evidence in what has occurred already in the House of Representatives,
where the popular feelings are soonest and most intensely felt.
Although Congress
has been in session but little more than one month, a greater number of measures of an
aggressive character have been introduced, and they more aggravated and
dangerous, than have been for years before. And what clearly discloses whence
they take their origin, is the fact, that they all relate to the territorial
aspect of the subject of slavery, or some other of a
nature and character intimately connected with it.
The first of this
series of aggressions is a resolution introduced by a member from
Massachusetts, the object of which is to repeal all acts which
recognize the existence of slavery, or authorize the selling and
disposing of slaves in this District. On question of leave
to bring in a bill, the votes stood 69 for and 82 against leave. The next was a
resolution offered by a member from Ohio, instructing the Committee on
Territories to report forthwith bills for excluding slavery from California and
New Mexico.6 It passed by a vote of 107 to 80. That was
followed by a bill introduced by another member from Ohio, to take the
votes of the inhabitants of this District, on the question
whether slavery within its limits should be abolished.
The bill provided,
according to the admission of the mover, that free negroes and slaves
should vote. On the question to lay the bill on the table, the votes stood, for
106, against 79. To this succeeded the resolution of a member from
New York, in the following words:
"Whereas
the traffic now prosecuted in this metropolis of the Republic in
human beings, as chattels, is contrary to natural justice and the fundamental
principles of our political system, and is notoriously a reproach to our
country, throughout Christendom, and a serious hinderance to the progress of republican
liberty among the nations of the earth. Therefore,
"Resolved, That the Committee for the
District of Columbia be instructed to report a bill, as soon as
practicable, prohibiting the slave trade in said District."
On the
question of adopting the resolution, the votes stood 98 for, and 88
against. He was followed by a member from Illinois, who offered a resolution
for abolishing slavery in the Territories, and all places where Congress has
exclusive powers of legislation, that is, in all forts, magazines,
arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings, purchased by Congress with
the consent of the Legislature of the State.
This resolution was
passed over under the rules of the House without being put to vote.
The votes in
favor of all these measures were confined to the members from the
Northern States. True, there are some patriotic members from that section who
voted against all of them, and whose high sense of justice
is duly appreciated; who in the progress of the aggressions upon the
South have, by their votes, sustained the guaranties of the
Constitution, and of whom we regret to say many have been sacrificed
at home by their patriotic course.
We have now brought
to a close a narrative of the series of acts of aggression
and encroachment, connected with the subject of this address,
including those that are consummated and those still in progress. They are
numerous, great, and dangerous, and threaten with destruction the greatest and
most vital of all the interests and institutions of the
South. Indeed, it may be doubted whether there is a single provision,
stipulation, or guaranty of the Constitution, intended for the security of the
South, that has not been rendered almost perfectly nugatory. It may even be
made a serious question, whether the encroachments already made, without the
aid of any other, would not, if permitted to operate unchecked, end in
emancipation, and that at no distant day. But be that as it may, it hardly
admits of a doubt that, if the aggressions already commenced in the
House, and now in progress, should be consummated, such in the end would
certainly be the consequence.
Little, in truth,
would be left to be done after we have been excluded from all the territories,
including those to be hereafter acquired; after slavery is abolished in this
District and in the numerous places dispersed all over the South, where
Congress has the exclusive right of legislation, and after the other
measures proposed are consummated. Every outpost and barrier would be carried,
and nothing would be left but to finish the work of abolition at
pleasure in the States themselves. This District, and all places over which
Congress has exclusive power of legislation, would be asylums for fugitive
slaves, where, as soon as they placed their feet, they would become, according
to the doctrines of our Northern assailants, free, unless there
should be some positive enactments to prevent it.
Under such a
state of things the probability is, that emancipation would soon
follow, without any final act to abolish slavery. The depressing effects of such
measures on the white race at the South, and the hope they would create in the
black of a speedy emancipation, would produce a state of feeling
inconsistent with the much longer continuance of the existing
relations between the two. But be that as it may, it is certain, if
emancipation did not follow, as a matter of course, the final act in
the States would not be long delayed. The want of constitutional power
would oppose a feeble resistance. The great body of the North is
united against our peculiar institution. Many believe it to be sinful, and the
residue, with inconsiderable exceptions, believe it to be wrong. Such being the
case, it would indicate a very superficial knowledge of human nature,
to think that, after aiming at abolition, systematically, for so many years, and
pursuing it with such unscrupulous disregard of law and Constitution,
that the fanatics who have led the way and forced the great body of the
North to follow them, would, when the finishing stroke only remained to be
given, voluntarily suspend it, or permit any constitutional scruples or
considerations of justice to arrest it. To these may be added an
aggression, though not yet commenced, long meditated and threatened to prohibit
what the abolitionists call the internal slave trade, meaning thereby the
transfer of slaves from one State to another, from whatever motive
done, or however effected. Their object would seem to be to render them
worthless by crowding them together where they are, and thus hasten the
work of emancipation. There is reason for believing that it will soon
follow those now in progress, unless, indeed, some decisive step should be
taken in the mean time to arrest the whole.
The question then
is, Will the measures of aggression proposed in the House be adopted?
They may not, and
probably will not be this session. But when we take into consideration, that
there is a majority now in favor of one of them, and a
strong minority in favor of the other, so far as the sense of the
House has been taken; that there will be in all probability a considerable
increase in the next Congress of the vote in favor of them,
and that it will be largely increased in the next succeeding Congress under the
census to be taken next year, it amounts almost to a certainty that they will
be adopted, unless some decisive measure is taken in advance to prevent it.
But, if even these
conclusions should prove erroneous—if fanaticism and the love of power
should, contrary to their nature, for once respect constitutional barriers, or
if the calculations of policy should retard the adoption of these
measures, or even defeat them altogether, there would be still left one certain
way to accomplish their object, if the determination avowed by the North to
monopolize all the territories, to the exclusion of the South, should
be carried into effect. That of itself would, at no distant day, add
to the North a sufficient number of States to give her three
fourths of the whole; when, under the color of an
amendment of the Constitution, she would emancipate our slaves,
however opposed it might be to its true intent.
Thus, under every
aspect, the result is certain, if aggression be not promptly and decidedly met.
How it is to be met, it is for you to decide.
Such then being the
case, it would be to insult you to suppose you could hesitate. To destroy the
existing relation between the free and servile races at the South would lead to
consequences unparalleled in history. They cannot be separated, and cannot live
together in peace, or harmony, or to their mutual advantage, except in their
present relation. Under any other, wretchedness, and misery, and desolation
would overspread the whole South. The example of the British West
Indies, as blighting as emancipation has proved to them, furnishes a very faint
picture of the calamities it would bring on the South. The
circumstances under which it would take place with us, would be entirely
different from those which took place with them, and calculated to lead to far
more disastrous results. There the Government of the parent country
emancipated slaves in her colonial possessions—a Government rich and powerful,
and actuated by views of policy (mistaken as they turned out to be),
rather than fanaticism. It was besides, disposed to act justly towards the
owners, even in the act of emancipating their slaves, and to protect
and foster them afterwards. It accordingly appropriated nearly $100,000,000 as
a compensation to them for their losses under the act, which sum, although it
turned out to be far short of the amount, was thought at the time to
be liberal. Since the emancipation, it has kept up a sufficient military and
naval force to keep the blacks in awe, and a number of magistrates, and
constables, and other civil officers, to keep order in the towns and on
plantations, and enforce respect to their former owners. To a considerable
extent these have served as a substitute for the police formerly kept on the
plantations by the owners and their overseers, and to preserve the social and
political superiority of the white race. But, notwithstanding all
this, the British West India possessions are ruined, impoverished, miserable,
wretched, and destined probably to be abandoned to the black race.
Very different would
be the circumstances under which emancipation would take place with us. If it
ever should be effected, it will be through the agency of the Federal
Government, controlled by the dominant power of the Northern
States of the Confederacy, against the resistance and struggle of the
Southern. It can then only be effected by the prostration of the
white race; and that would necessarily engender the bitterest feelings of hostility
between them and the North. But the reverse would be the case between the
blacks of the South and the people of the North. Owing
their emancipation to them, they would regard them as friends, guardians, and patrons,
and centre, accordingly, all their sympathy in them. The people of the
North would not fail to reciprocate and to favor them, instead of the
whites. Under the influence of such feelings, and impelled by
fanaticism and love of power, they would not stop at emancipation.
Another step would be taken—to raise them to a political and social equality
with their former owners, by giving them the right of voting and
holding public offices under the Federal Government. We see the first step
toward it in the bill already alluded to—to vest the free blacks and slaves
with the right to vote on the question of emancipation in this
District. But when once raised to an equality, they would become the fast
political associates of the North, acting and voting with them on all
questions, and by this political union between them, holding the white race at
the South in complete subjection. The blacks, and the profligate whites that
might unite with them, would become the principal recipients of federal
offices and patronage, and would, in consequence, be raised above the
whites of the South in the political and social scale. We would, in a
word, change conditions with them—a degradation greater than has ever yet
fallen to the lot of a free and enlightened people, and one from
which we could not escape, should emancipation take place (which it certainly
will if not prevented), but by fleeing the homes of ourselves and
ancestors, and by abandoning our country to our former slaves, to become the
permanent abode of disorder, anarchy, poverty, misery, and
wretchedness.
With such a prospect
before us, the gravest and most solemn question that ever claimed the
attention of a people is presented for your consideration: What is to
be done to prevent it? It is a question belonging to you to decide. All we propose
is, to give you our opinion.
We, then, are of the
opinion that the first and indispensable step, without which nothing can be
done, and with which every thing may be, is to be united among yourselves, on
this great and most vital question. The want of union and concert in
reference to it has brought the South, the Union, and our system of government
to their present perilous condition. Instead of placing it above all
others, it has been made subordinate, not only to mere questions of policy,
but to the preservation of party ties and ensuring of party
success. As high as we hold a due respect for these, we hold them subordinate
to that and other questions involving our safety and happiness. Until they are
so held by the South, the North will not believe that you are in earnest in
opposition to their encroachments, and they will continue to follow, one after
another, until the work of abolition is finished. To convince them
that you are, you must prove by your acts that you hold all other questions
subordinate to it. If you become united, and prove yourselves in earnest, the
North will be brought to a pause, and to a calculation of consequences;
and that may lead to a change of measures, and the adoption of a
course of policy that may quietly and peaceably terminate this long
conflict between the two sections. If it should not, nothing would remain for
you but to stand up immovably in defence of rights, involving your
all—your property, prosperity, equality, liberty, and safety.
As the assailed, you
would stand justified by all laws, human and divine, in repelling a blow so
dangerous, without looking to consequences, and to resort to all means
necessary for that purpose. Your assailants, and not you, would be responsible
for consequences.
Entertaining these
opinions, we earnestly entreat you to be
united, and for that purpose adopt all necessary measures. Beyond this, we
think it would not be proper to go at present.
We hope, if you
should unite with any thing like unanimity, it may of itself apply a
remedy to this deep-seated and dangerous disease; but, if such should not be
the case, the time will then have come for you to decide what course to adopt.
R. M. T. HUNTER,Virginia.
JAMES M. MASON, “
ARCHIBALD ATKINSON, “
THOMAS H. BAYLY, “
R. L. T. BEALE, “
HENRY BEDINGER, “
THOMAS S. BOCOCK, “
WILLIAM G. BROWN, “
R. K. MEADE, “
R. A. THOMPSON, “
J. R. J. DANIEL, North Carolina.
A. W. VENABLE, N. Carolina.
A. P. BUTLER, South Carolina.
J. C. CALHOUN, “
ARMISTEAD BURT, “
I. E. HOLMES, “
R. B. RHETT, “
R. F. SIMPSON, “
D. WALLACE, “
J. A. WOODWARD, “
H. V. JOHNSON, Georgia.
ALFRED IVERSON, “
HUGH A. HARALSON, “
DAVID L. YULEE, Florida.
S. U. DOWNS, Louisiana.
J. H. HARMANSON, “
EMILE LA SERE, “
I. E. MORSE, “
T. PILSBURY, Texas.
DAVID S. KAUFMAN, “
SOLON BORLAND, Arkansas.
J. K. SEBASTIAN, “
R. W. JOHNSON, “
HOPKINS L. TURNEY, Tennessee.
F. P. STANTON, “
D. R. ATCHISON, Missouri.
WILLIAM R. KING, Alabama.
B. FITZBATRICK, “
JOHN GAYLE, “
F. W. BOWDON, “
S. W. HARRIS, “
S. W. INGE, “
JEFFERSON DAVIS, Mississippi.
HENRY S. FOOTE, “
P. W. TOMPKINS, “
A. G. BROWN, “
W. S. FEATHERSTON, “
JACOB THOMPSON, “
1 Indiana and Illinois.
2 The case of Prigg vs. the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
3 The case of Johnson vs. Tompkins and others.
4 Mr. Kennedy, of Hagerstown, Maryland.
5 Being nearly two on the part of the South to one on the part of the North. But taking into consideration that the population of the North is two thirds greater than the South, the latter has furnished more than three times her due proportion of volunteers.
|
Total number of volunteers
from the South—Regiments |
33 |
|
Battalions |
14 |
|
Companies |
120 |
|
Total number of volunteers
from the South, |
45,640 |
|
Total number of volunteers
from the North-Regiments |
22 |
|
Battalions |
2 |
|
Companies |
12 |
|
Total number of volunteers
from the North, |
23,084 |
6 Since reported to the House.
SOURCES: Richard
Crallé, Editor, The Works of John C.
Calhoun: Volume VI: Reports and Public Letters of John C. Calhoun, p.
290-313; James Stryker, Editor, The American Quarterly Register and Magazine, Volume 3, No. 1, p. 276-87; The American Review:
A Whig Journal, Devoted to Politics and Literature, New Series Vol. III.—Whole
Vol. IX, No. XV March 1849, p. 313 for the date of the address.
NOVEMBER 6, 1850.
MR. CHAIRMAN, AND
YOU, MY FELLOW-CITIZENS:
Cold and insensible
must I be, not to be touched by this welcome. I thank you for the cause, whose
representative only I am. It is the cause which I would keep ever foremost, and
commend always to your support.
In a few days there
will be an important political election, affecting many local interests. Not by
these have I been drawn here to-night, but because I would bear my testimony
anew to that Freedom which is above all these. And here, at the outset, let me
say, that it is because I place Freedom above all else that I cordially concur
in the different unions or combinations throughout the Commonwealth, ——— in Mr.
Mann's District, of Free-Soilers with Whigs, ——— also in Mr. Fowler's District,
of Free-Soilers with Whigs— and generally, in Senatorial Districts, of
Free-Soilers with Democrats.
By the first of
these two good men may be secured in Congress, while by the latter the friends
of Freedom may obtain a controlling influence in the Legislature of
Massachusetts during the coming session, and thus advance our cause.
[Applause.] They may arbitrate between both the old parties, making Freedom
their perpetual object, and in this way contribute more powerfully than they
otherwise could to the cause which has drawn us together. [Cheers.]
Leaving these
things, so obvious to all, I come at once to consider urgent duties at this
anxious moment. To comprehend these we must glance at what Congress has done
during its recent session, so long drawn out. This I shall endeavor to do
rapidly. "Watchman, what of the night?" And well may the cry be
raised, “What of the night?" For things have been done, and measures
passed into laws, which, to my mind, fill the day itself with blackness. ["Hear!
hear!"]
And yet there are
streaks of light—an unwonted dawn in the distant West, out of which a
full-orbed sun is beginning to ascend, rejoicing like a strong man to run a
race. By Act of Congress California has been admitted into the Union with a
Constitution forbidding Slavery. For a measure like this, required not only by
simplest justice, but by uniform practice, and by constitutional principles of
slaveholders themselves, we may be ashamed to confess gratitude; and yet I
cannot but rejoice in this great good. A hateful institution, thus far without
check, travelling westward with the power of the Republic, is bidden to stop,
while a new and rising State is guarded from its contamination. [Applause.]
Freedom, in whose hands is the divining-rod of magical power, pointing the way
not only to wealth untold, but to every possession of virtue and intelligence,
whose presence is better far than any mine of gold, has been recognized in an
extensive region on the distant Pacific, between the very parallels of latitude
so long claimed by Slavery as a peculiar home. [Loud plaudits.]
Here is a victory,
moral and political: moral, inasmuch as Freedom secures a new foothold where to
exert her far-reaching influence; political, inasmuch as by the admission of
California, the Free States obtain a majority of votes in the Senate, thus
overturning that balance of power between Freedom and Slavery, so
preposterously claimed by the Slave States, in forgetfulness of the true spirit
of the
Constitution, and in mockery of Human Rights. [Cheers.] May free
California, and her Senators in Congress, amidst the trials before us, never
fail in loyalty to Freedom! God forbid that the daughter should turn with
ingratitude or neglect from the mother that bore her! [Enthusiasm.]
Besides this Act, there
are two others of this long session to be regarded with satisfaction, and I
mention them at once, before considering the reverse of the picture. The
slave-trade is abolished in the District of Columbia. This measure, though
small in the sight of Justice, is important. It banishes from the National
Capital an odious traffic. But this is its least office. Practically it affixes
to the whole traffic, wherever it exists, not merely in Washington, within the
immediate sphere of the legislative act, but everywhere throughout the Slave
States, whether at Richmond, or Charleston, or New Orleans, the brand of
Congressional reprobation. The people of the United States, by the voice of
Congress, solemnly declare the domestic traffic in slaves offensive in their
sight. The Nation judges this traffic. The Nation says to it, "Get thee
behind me, Satan!" [Excitement and applause.] It is true that Congress has
not, as in the case of the foreign slave-trade, stamped it as piracy, and
awarded to its perpetrators the doom of pirates; but it condemns the trade, and
gives to general scorn those who partake of it. To this extent the National
Government speaks for Freedom. And in doing this, it asserts, under the
Constitution, legislative jurisdiction over the subject of Slavery in the
District, thus preparing the way for that complete act of Abolition which is
necessary to purge the National Capital of its still remaining curse and shame.
The other measure
which I hail with thankfulness is the Abolition of Flogging in the Navy. ["Hear!
hear!"] Beyond the direct reform thus accomplished — after much effort,
finally crowned with encouraging success is the indirect influence of this law,
especially in rebuking the lash, wheresoever and by whomsoever employed.
Two props and stays
of Slavery are weakened and undermined by Congressional legislation. Without
the slave-trade and without the lash, Slavery must fall to earth. By these the
whole monstrosity is upheld. If I seem to exaggerate the consequence of these
measures of Abolition, you will pardon it to a sincere conviction of their
powerful, though subtile and indirect influence, quickened by a desire to find
something good in a Congress which has furnished occasion for so much
disappointment. Other measures there are which must be regarded not only with
regret, but with indignation and disgust. [Sensation.]
Two broad
territories, New Mexico and Utah, under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress,
have been organized without any prohibition of Slavery. In laying the
foundation of their governments, destined hereafter to control the happiness of
innumerable multitudes, Congress has omitted the Great Ordinance of Freedom,
first moved by Jefferson, and consecrated by the experience of the Northwestern
Territory: thus rejecting those principles of Human Liberty which are
enunciated in our Declaration
of Independence, which are essential to every Bill of Rights, and without
which a Republic is a name and nothing more.
Still further, a
vast territory, supposed to be upwards of seventy thousand square miles in
extent, larger than all New England, has been taken from New Mexico, and, with
ten million dollars besides, given to slaveholding Texas: thus, under the plea
of settling the western boundary of Texas, securing to this State a large sum
of money, and consigning to certain Slavery an important territory.
And still further,
as if to do a deed which should "make heaven weep, all earth amazed,"
this same Congress, in disregard of all cherished safeguards of Freedom, has
passed a most cruel, unchristian, devilish law to secure the return into
Slavery of those fortunate bondmen who find shelter by our firesides. This is
the Fugitive Slave Bill,—a device which despoils the party claimed as slave,
whether in reality slave or freeman, of Trial by Jury, that sacred right, and
usurps the question of Human Freedom, the highest question known to the law,
committing it to the unaided judgment of a single magistrate, on ex parte
evidence it may be, by affidavit, without the sanction of cross-examination. Under
this detestable, Heaven-defying Bill, not the slave only, but the colored
freeman of the North, may be swept into ruthless captivity; and there is no
white citizen, born among us, bred in our schools, partaking in our affairs,
voting in our elections, whose liberty is not assailed also. Without any
discrimination of color, the Bill surrenders all claimed as "owing service
or labor" to the same tyrannical judgment. And mark once more its
heathenism. By unrelenting provisions it visits with bitter penalties of fine
and imprisonment the faithful men and women who render to the fugitive that
countenance, succor, and shelter which Christianity expressly requires.
["Shame! shame!"] Thus, from beginning to end, it sets at nought the
best principles of the Constitution, and the very laws of God. [Great
sensation.]
I might occupy your
time in exposing the unconstitutionality of this Act. Denying the Trial by
Jury, it is three times unconstitutional: first, as the Constitution declares
"the right of the people to be secure in their persons against
unreasonable seizures"; secondly, as it further provides that "no
person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law"; and, thirdly, because it expressly establishes, that "in suits
at Common Law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the
right of trial by jury shall be preserved." By this triple cord the
framers of the Constitution secured Trial by Jury in every question of Human
Freedom. That man is little imbued with the true spirit of American
institutions, has little sympathy with Bills of Rights, is lukewarm for
Freedom, who can hesitate to construe the Constitution so as to secure this
safeguard. [Enthusiastic applause.]
Again, the Act is
unconstitutional in the unprecedented and tyrannical powers it confers upon
Commissioners. These petty officers are appointed, not by the President with
the advice of the Senate, but by the Courts of Law,—hold their places, not
during good behavior, but at the will of the Court,—and receive for their
services, not a regular salary, but fees in each individual case. And yet in
these petty officers, thus appointed, thus compensated, and holding their
places by the most uncertain tenure, is vested a portion of that "judicial
power," which, according to the positive text of the Constitution, can be
in "judges" only, holding office during good behavior,"
receiving "at stated times for their services a compensation which shall
not be diminished during their continuance in office," and, it would seem
also, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, being three
conditions of judicial power. Adding meanness to violation of the Constitution,
the Commissioner is bribed by a double fee to pronounce against Freedom.
Decreeing a man to Slavery, he receives ten dollars; saving the man to Freedom,
his fee is five dollars. ["Shame! shame!"]
But I will not
pursue these details. The soul sickens in the contemplation of this
legalized outrage. In the dreary annals of the Past there are many acts of
shame,—there are ordinances of monarchs, and laws, which have become a byword
and a hissing to the nations. But when we consider the country and the age, I
ask fearlessly, what act of shame, what ordinance of monarch, what law, can
compare in atrocity with this enactment of an American Congress?
["None!"] I do not forget Appius Claudius, tyrant Decemvir of ancient
Rome, condemning Virginia as a slave, nor Louis the Fourteenth, of France,
letting slip the dogs of religious persecution by the revocation of the Edict
of Nantes, nor Charles the First, of England, arousing the patriot rage of
Hampden by the extortion of Ship-money, nor the British Parliament, provoking,
in our own country, spirits kindred to Hampden, by the tyranny of the Stamp Act
and Tea Tax. I would not exaggerate; I wish to keep within bounds; but I think
there can be little doubt that the condemnation now affixed to all these
transactions, and to their authors, must be the lot hereafter of the Fugitive
Slave Bill, and of every one, according to the measure of his influence, who
gave it his support. [Three cheers were here given.] Into the immortal
catalogue of national crimes it has now passed, drawing, by inexorable
necessity, its authors also, and chiefly him, who, as President of the United
States, set his name to the Bill, and breathed into it that final breath
without which it would bear no life. [Sensation.] Other Presidents may be
forgotten; but the name signed to the Fugitive Slave Bill can never be
forgotten. ["Never!"] There are depths of infamy, as there are
heights of fame. I regret to say what I must, but truth compels me. Better for
him, had he never been born! [Renewed applause.] Better for his memory, and for
the good name of his children, had he never been President! [Repeated cheers.]
I have likened this Bill to the Stamp Act, and
I trust that the parallel may be continued yet further, by a burst of popular
feeling against all action under it similar to that which glowed in the breasts
of our fathers. Listen to the words of John Adams, as written in his Diary at
the time.
"The year 1765
has been the most remarkable year of my life. That enormous engine, fabricated
by the British Parliament, for battering down all the rights and liberties of
America, I mean the Stamp Act, has raised and spread through the whole
continent a spirit that will be recorded to our honor with all future
generations. In every colony, from Georgia to New Hampshire inclusively, the
stamp distributors and inspectors have been compelled by the unconquerable rage
of the people to renounce their offices. Such and so universal has been the
resentment of the people, that every man who has dared to speak in favor of the
stamps, or to soften the detestation in which they are held, how great soever
his abilities and virtues had been esteemed before, or whatever his fortune,
connections, and influence had been, has been seen to sink into universal
contempt and ignominy."1 [A voice, "Ditto for the
Slave-Hunter!"]
Earlier than John
Adams, the first Governor of Massachusetts, John Winthrop, set the example of
refusing to enforce laws against the liberties of the people. After describing
Civil Liberty, and declaring the covenant between God and man in the Moral Law,
he uses these good words:
"This Liberty
is the proper end and object of authority, and cannot subsist without it; and
it is a liberty to that only which is good, just, and honest. This liberty you
are to stand for, with the hazard not only of your goods, but of your lives, if
need be. Whatsoever crosseth this is not authority, but a distemper
thereof."2
Surely the love of
Freedom is not so far cooled among us, descendants of those who opposed the
Stamp Act, that we are insensible to the Fugitive Slave Bill. In those other
days, the unconquerable rage of the people compelled the stamp distributors and
inspectors to renounce their offices, and held up to detestation all who dared
to speak in favor of the stamps. Shall we be more tolerant of those who
volunteer in favor of this Bill? ["No! no!"]—more tolerant of the
Slave-Hunter, who, under its safeguard, pursues his prey upon our soil?
["No! no!"] The Stamp Act could not be executed here. Can the
Fugitive Slave Bill? ["Never!”]
And here, Sir, let
me say, that it becomes me to speak with caution. It happens that I sustain an
important relation to this Bill. Early in professional life I was designated by
the late Judge Story a Commissioner of his Court, and, though I do not very
often exercise the functions of this appointment, my name is still upon the list.
As such, I am one of those before whom the panting fugitive may be dragged for
the decision of the question, whether he is a freeman or a slave. But while it
becomes me to speak with caution, I shall not hesitate to speak with plainness.
I cannot forget that I am a man, although I am a Commissioner. [Three cheers
here given.]
Could the same
spirit which inspired the Fathers enter into our community now, the marshals,
and every magistrate who regarded this law as having any constitutional
obligation, would resign, rather than presume to execute it. This, perhaps, is
too much to expect. But I will not judge such officials. To their own
consciences I leave them. Surely no person of humane feelings and with any true
sense of justice, living in a land "where bells have knolled to
church," whatever may be the apology of public station, can fail to recoil
from such service. For myself let me say, that I can imagine no office, no
salary, no consideration, which I would not gladly forego, rather than become in
any way the agent in enslaving my brother-man. [Sensation.] Where for me were
comfort and solace after such a work? [A voice, "Nowhere!"] In dreams
and in waking hours, in solitude and in the street, in the meditations of the
closet and in the affairs of men, wherever I turned, there my victim would
stare me in the face. From distant rice-fields and sugar-plantations of the
South, his cries beneath the vindictive lash, his moans at the thought of
Liberty, once his, now, alas! ravished away, would pursue me, repeating the
tale of his fearful doom, and sounding, forever sounding, in my ears,
"Thou art the man!" [Applause.]
The magistrate who
pronounces the decree of Slavery, and the marshal who enforces it, act in
obedience to law. This is their apology; and it is the apology also of the
masters of the Inquisition, as they ply the torture amidst the shrieks of their
victim. Can this weaken accountability for wrong? Disguise it, excuse it, as
they will, the fact must glare before the world, and penetrate the conscience
too, that the fetters by which the unhappy fugitive is bound are riveted by
their tribunal,—that his second life of wretchedness dates from their agency,
that his second birth as a slave proceeds from them. The magistrate and marshal
do for him here, in a country which vaunts a Christian civilization, what the
naked, barbarous Pagan chiefs beyond the sea did for his grandfather in Congo:
they transfer him to the Slave-Hunter, and for this service receive the very
price paid for his grandfather in Congo, ten dollars! ["Shame!
shame!"]
Gracious Heaven! can
such things be on our Free Soil? ["No!"] Shall the evasion of Pontius
Pilate be enacted anew, and a judge vainly attempt, by washing the hands, to
excuse himself for condemning one in whom he can "find no fault"?
Should any court, sitting here in Massachusetts, for the first time in her
history, become agent of the Slave-Hunter, the very images of our fathers would
frown from the walls; their voices would cry from the ground; their spirits,
hovering in the air, would plead, remonstrate, protest, against the cruel
judgment. [Cheers.] There is a legend of the Church, still living on the
admired canvas of a Venetian artist, that St. Mark, descending from the skies
with headlong fury into the public square, broke the manacles of a slave in
presence of the very judge who had decreed his fate. This is known as "The
Miracle of the Slave," and grandly has Art illumined the scene.3
Should Massachusetts hereafter, in an evil hour, be desecrated by any such
decree, may the good Evangelist once more descend with valiant arm to break the
manacles of the Slave! [Enthusiasm.]
Sir, I will not
dishonor this home of the Pilgrims, and of the Revolution, by admitting nay, I
cannot believe that this Bill will be executed here. [“Never!”] Among us, as
elsewhere, individuals may forget humanity, in fancied loyalty to law; but the
public conscience will not allow a man who has trodden our streets as a freeman
to be dragged away as a slave. [Applause.] By escape from bondage he has shown
that true manhood which must grapple to him every honest heart. He may be
ignorant and rude, as poor, but he is of true nobility. Fugitive Slaves are the
heroes of our age. In sacrificing them to this foul enactment we violate every
sentiment of hospitality, every whispering of the heart, every commandment of
religion..
There are many who
will never shrink, at any cost, and notwithstanding all the atrocious penalties
of this Bill, from effort to save a wandering fellow-man from bondage; they
will offer him the shelter of their houses, and, if need be, will protect his
liberty by force. But let me be understood; I counsel no violence. There is
another power, stronger than any individual arm, which I invoke: I mean that
irresistible Public Opinion, inspired by love of God and man, which, without
violence or noise, gently as the operations of Nature, makes and unmakes laws.
Let this Public Opinion be felt in its might, and the Fugitive Slave Bill will
become everywhere among us a dead letter. No lawyer will aid it by counsel, no
citizen will be its agent; it will die of inanition, like a spider beneath an
exhausted receiver. [Laughter.] Oh! it were well the tidings should spread
throughout the land that here in Massachusetts this accursed Bill has found no servant.
[Cheers.] "Sire, in Bayonne are honest citizens and brave soldiers only,
but not one executioner," was the reply of the governor to the royal
mandate from Charles the Ninth, of France, ordering the massacre of St.
Bartholomew.4 [Sensation.]
It rests with you,
my fellow-citizens, by word and example, by calm determinations and devoted
lives, to do this work. From a humane, just, and religious people will spring a
Public Opinion to keep perpetual guard over the liberties of all within our
borders. Nay, more, like the flaming sword of the cherubim at the gates of
Paradise, turning on every side, it shall prevent any SLAVE-HUNTER from ever
setting foot in this Commonwealth. Elsewhere he may pursue his human prey,
employ his congenial bloodhounds, and exult in his successful game; but into
Massachusetts he must not come. Again, let me be understood, I counsel no
violence. I would not touch his person. Not with whips and thongs would I
scourge him from the land. The contempt, the indignation, the abhorrence of the
community shall be our weapons of offence. Wherever he moves, he shall find no
house to receive him, no table spread to nourish him, no welcome to cheer him.
The dismal lot of the Roman exile shall be his. He shall be a wanderer, without
roof, fire, or water. Men shall point at him in the streets, and on the
highways.
“Sleep
shall neither night nor day
Hang
upon his penthouse-lid;
He
shall live a man forbid;
Weary
sevennights nine times nine
Shall
he dwindle, peak, and pine.” [Applause.]
Villages, towns, and
cities shall refuse to receive the monster; they shall vomit him forth, never
again to disturb the repose of our community. [Repeated rounds of applause.]
The feelings with
which we regard the Slave-Hunter will be extended soon to all the mercenary
agents and heartless minions, who, without any positive obligation of law,
become part of his pack. They are volunteers, and, as such, must share the
ignominy of the chief Hunter. [Cheers.]
I have dwelt thus
long upon the Fugitive Slave Bill especially in the hope of contributing
something to that Public Opinion which is destined in the Free States to be the
truest defence of the slave. I now advance to other more general duties.
We have seen what
Congress has done. And yet, in the face of these enormities of legislation—of
Territories organized without the prohibition of Slavery, of a large province
surrendered to Texas and to Slavery, and of this execrable Fugitive Slave
Bill,—in the face also of Slavery still sanctioned in the District of Columbia,
of the Slave-Trade between domestic ports under the flag of the Union, and of
the Slave Power still dominant over the National Government, we are told that
the Slavery Question is settled. Yes, settled, settled, — that is the word.
Nothing, Sir, can be settled which is not right. [Sensation.] Nothing can be
settled which is against Freedom. Nothing can be settled which is contrary to
the Divine Law. God, Nature, and all the holy sentiments of the heart repudiate
any such false seeming settlement.
Amidst the shifts
and changes of party, our DUTIES remain, pointing the way to action. By no
subtle compromise or adjustment can men suspend the commandments of God. By no
trick of managers, no hocus-pocus of politicians, no "mush of
concession," can we be released from this obedience. It is, then, in the
light of duties that we are to find peace for our country and ourselves. Nor
can any settlement promise peace which is not in harmony with those everlasting
principles from which our duties spring.
Here I shall be brief.
Slavery is wrong. It is the source of unnumbered woes, not the least of which
is its influence on the Slaveholder himself, rendering him insensible to its
outrage. It overflows with injustice and inhumanity. Language toils in vain to
picture the wretchedness and wickedness which it sanctions and perpetuates.
Reason revolts at the impious assumption that man can hold property in man. As
it is our perpetual duty to oppose wrong, so must we oppose Slavery; nor can we
ever relax in this opposition, so long as the giant evil continues anywhere
within the sphere of our influence. Especially must we oppose it, wherever we are
responsible for its existence, or in any way parties to it.
And now mark the
distinction. The testimony which we bear against Slavery, as against all other
wrong, is, in different ways, according to our position. The Slavery which
exists under other governments, as in Russia or Turkey, or in other States of
our Union, as in Virginia and Carolina, we can oppose only through the influence
of morals and religion, without in any way invoking the Political Power. Nor do
we propose to act otherwise. But Slavery, where we are parties to it, wherever
we are responsible for it, everywhere within our jurisdiction, must be opposed
not only by all the influences of literature, morals, and religion, but
directly by every instrument of Political Power. [Rounds of applause.] As it is
sustained by law, it can be overthrown only by law; and the legislature having
jurisdiction over it must be moved to consummate the work. I am sorry to
confess that this can be done only through the machinery of politics. The
politician, then, must be summoned. The moralist and philanthropist must become
for this purpose politicians, not forgetting morals or philanthropy, but
seeking to apply them practically in the laws of the land.
It is a mistake to
say, as is often charged, that we seek to interfere, through Congress, with
Slavery in the States, or in any way to direct the legislation of Congress upon
subjects not within its jurisdiction. Our political aims, as well as our
political duties, are coextensive with our political responsibilities. And
since we at the North are responsible for Slavery, wherever it exists under the
jurisdiction of Congress, it is unpardonable in us not to exert every power we
possess to enlist Congress against it.
Looking at details:
We demand, first and
foremost, the instant Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill. [Cheers.]
We demand the
Abolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia. [Cheers.]
We demand of
Congress the exercise of its time-honored power to prohibit Slavery in the
Territories. [Cheers.]
We demand of
Congress that it shall refuse to receive any new Slave State into the Union.
[Cheers, repeated.]
We demand the
Abolition of the Domestic Slave Trade, so far as it can be constitutionally
reached, but particularly on the high seas under the National Flag.
And, generally, we
demand from the National Government the exercise of all constitutional power to
relieve itself from responsibility for Slavery.
And yet one thing
further must be done. The Slave Power must be overturned, so that the National
Government may be put openly, actively, and perpetually on the side of Freedom.
[Prolonged applause.]
In demanding the overthrow
of the Slave Power, we but seek to exclude from the operations of the National
Government a political influence, having its origin in Slavery, which has been
more potent, sinister, and mischievous than any other in our history. This
Power, though unknown to the Constitution, and existing in defiance of its true
spirit, now predominates over Congress, gives the tone to its proceedings,
seeks to control all our public affairs, and humbles both the great political
parties to its will. It is that combination of Slave-masters, whose bond of
union is a common interest in Slavery. Time would fail me in exposing the
extent to which its influence has been felt, the undue share of offices it has
enjoyed, and the succession of its evil deeds. Suffice it to say, that, for a
long period, the real principle of this union was not observed by the Free
States. In the game of office and legislation the South has always won. It has
played with loaded dice,—loaded with Slavery. [Laughter.] The trick of the
Automaton Chess-Player, so long an incomprehensible marvel, has been repeated,
with similar success. Let the Free States make a move on the board, and the
South says, "Check !” [“Hear! hear!"] Let them strive for Free Trade,
as they did once, and the cry is, "Check!" Let them jump towards
Protection, and it is again, "Check!" Let them move towards Internal
Improvements, and the cry is still, "Check!" Whether forward or
backward, to the right or left, wherever they turn, the Free States are pursued
by an inexorable "Check!" But the secret is now discovered. Amid the
well-arranged machinery which seemed to move the victorious chess-player is a living
force, only recently discovered,—being none other than the Slave Power. It is
the Slave Power which has been perpetual victor, saying always,
"Check!" to the Free States. As this influence is now disclosed, it
only remains that it should be openly encountered in the field of politics. [A
voice, “That is the true way.”]
Such is our cause.
It is not sectional; for it simply aims to establish under the National
Government those great principles of Justice and Humanity which are broad and
universal as Man. It is not aggressive; for it does not seek in any way to
interfere through Congress with Slavery in the States. It is not contrary to
the Constitution; for it recognizes this paramount law, and in the
administration of the Government invokes the spirit of its founders. It is not
hostile to the quiet of the country; for it proposes the only course by which
agitation can be allayed, and quiet be permanently established. And yet there
is an attempt to suppress this cause, and to stifle its discussion.
Vain and wretched
attempt! [A band of music in the street here interrupted the speaker.]
I am willing to stop
for one moment, if the audience will allow me, that they may enjoy that music.
[Several voices, "Go on! go on!" Another voice, "We have better
music here." After a pause the speaker proceeded.]
Fellow-citizens, I
was saying that it is proposed to suppress this cause, and to stifle this
discussion. But this cannot be done. That subject which more than all other
subjects needs careful, conscientious, and kind consideration in the national
councils, which will not admit of postponement or hesitation, which is allied
with the great interests of the country, which controls the tariff and causes
war, which concerns alike all parts of the land, North and South, East and
West, which affects the good name of the Republic in the family of civilized
nations, the subject of subjects, has now at last, after many struggles, been
admitted within the pale of legislative discussion. From this time forward it
must be entertained by Congress. It will be one of the orders of the day. It
cannot be passed over or forgotten. It cannot be blinked out of sight. The
combinations of party cannot remove it. The intrigues of politicians cannot
jostle it aside. There it is, in towering colossal proportions, filling the very
halls of the Capitol, while it overshadows and darkens all other subjects.
There it will continue, till driven into oblivion by the irresistible Genius of
Freedom. [Cheers.]
I am not blind to
adverse signs. The wave of reaction, after sweeping over Europe, has reached
our shores. The barriers of Human Rights are broken down. Statesmen, writers,
scholars, speakers, once their uncompromising professors, have become
professors of compromise. All this must be changed. Reaction must be stayed.
The country must be aroused. The cause must again be pressed, with the fixed
purpose never to moderate our efforts until crowned by success. [Applause.] The
National Government, everywhere within its proper constitutional sphere, must
be placed on the side of Freedom. The policy of Slavery, which has so long
prevailed, must give place to the policy of Freedom. The Slave Power, fruitful
parent of national ills, must be driven from its supremacy. Until all this is
done, the friends of the Constitution and of Human Rights cannot cease from
labor, nor can the Republic hope for any repose but the repose of submission.
Men of all parties
and pursuits, who wish well to their country, and would preserve its good name,
must join now. Welcome here the Conservative and the Reformer for our cause
stands on the truest Conservatism and the truest Reform. In seeking the reform
of existing evils, we seek also the conservation of the principles handed down
by our fathers. Welcome especially the young! To you I appeal with confidence.
Trust to your generous impulses, and to that reasoning of the heart, which is
often truer, as it is less selfish, than the calculations of the head.
[Enthusiasm.] Do not exchange your aspirations for the skepticism of age. Yours
is the better part. In the Scriptures it is said that "your young men
shall see visions and your old men. shall dream dreams"; on which Lord
Bacon has recorded the ancient inference, "that young men are admitted
nearer to God than old, because vision is a clearer revelation than a dream."5
It is not uncommon
to hear people declare themselves against Slavery, and willing to unite in
practical efforts. Practical is the favorite word. At the same time, in the
loftiness of pharisaic pride, they have nothing but condemnation, reproach, or
contempt for the earnest souls that have striven long years in this struggle.
To such I would say, If you are sincere in what you declare, if your words are
not merely lip-service, if in your heart you are entirely willing to join in
practical effort against Slavery, then, by life, conversation, influence, vote,
disregarding "the ancient forms of party strife," seek to carry the
principles of Freedom into the National Government, wherever its jurisdiction
is acknowledged and its power can be felt. Thus, with out any interference with
the States which are beyond this jurisdiction, may you help to efface the blot
of Slavery from the National brow.
Do this, and you
will most truly promote that harmony which you so much desire. And under this
blessed influence tranquillity will be established throughout the country.
Then, at last, the Slavery Question will be settled. Banished from its usurped
foothold under the National Government, Slavery will no longer enter, with
distracting force, into national politics, making and unmaking laws, making and
unmaking Presidents. Confined to the States, where it is left by the
Constitution, it will take its place as a local institution, if, alas! continue
it must, for which we are in no sense responsible, and against which we cannot
exert any political power. We shall be relieved from the present painful and
irritating connection with it, the existing antagonism between the South and
the North will be softened, crimination and recrimination will cease, and the
wishes of the Fathers will be fulfilled, while this Great Evil is left to all
kindly influences and the prevailing laws of social economy.
To every laborer in
a cause like this there are satisfactions unknown to the common political
partisan. Amidst all apparent reverses, notwithstanding the hatred of enemies
or the coldness of friends, he has the consciousness of duty done. Whatever may
be existing impediments, his also is the cheering conviction that every word
spoken, every act performed, every vote cast for this cause, helps to swell
those quickening influences by which Truth, Justice, and Humanity will be
established upon earth. [Cheers.] He may not live to witness the blessed
consummation, but it is none the less certain.
Others may dwell on
the Past as secure. Under the laws of a beneficent God the Future also is
secure, on the single condition that we labor for its great objects.
[Enthusiastic applause.]
The language of
jubilee, which, amidst reverse and discouragement, burst from the soul of
Milton, as he thought of sacrifice for the Church, will be echoed by every one
who toils and suffers for Freedom. "Now by this little diligence,"
says the great patriot of the English Commonwealth, "mark what a privilege
I have gained with good men and saints, to claim my right of lamenting the
tribulations of the Church, if she should suffer, when others, that have
ventured nothing for her sake, have not the honor to be admitted mourners. But
if she lift up her drooping head and prosper, among those that have something
more than wished her welfare, I have my charter and freehold of rejoicing to me
and my heirs.6 We, too, may have our charter and freehold of
rejoicing to ourselves and our heirs, if we now do our duty.
I have spoken of
votes. Living in a community where political power is lodged with the people,
and each citizen is an elector, the vote is an important expression of opinion.
The vote is the cutting edge. It is well to have correct opinions, but the vote
must follow. The vote is the seed planted; without it there can be no sure
fruit. The winds of heaven, in their beneficence, may scatter the seed in the
furrow; but it is not from such accidents that our fields wave with the golden
harvest. He is a foolish husbandman who neglects to sow his seed; and he is an
unwise citizen, who, desiring the spread of good principles, neglects to deposit
his vote for the candidate who is the representative of those principles.
Admonished by
experience of timidity, irresolution, and weakness in our public men,
particularly at Washington, amidst the temptations of ambition and power, the
friends of Freedom cannot lightly bestow their confidence. They can put trust
only in men of tried character and inflexible will. Three things at least they
must require the first is backbone; the second is backbone; and the third is
backbone. [Loud cheers.] My language is homely; I hardly pardon myself for
using it; but it expresses an idea which must not be forgotten. When I see a
person of upright character and pure soul yielding to a temporizing policy, I
cannot but say, He wants backbone. When I see a person talking loudly against
Slavery in private, but hesitating in public, and failing in the time of trial,
I say, He wants backbone. When I see a person who coöperated with Antislavery
men, and then deserted them, I say, He wants backbone. ["Hear!
hear!"] When I see a person leaning upon the action of a political party,
and never venturing to think for himself, I say, He wants backbone. When I see
a person careful always to be on the side of the majority, and unwilling to
appear in a minority, or, if need be, to stand alone, I say, He wants backbone.
[Applause.] Wanting this, they all want that courage, constancy, firmness,
which are essential to the support of PRINCIPLE. Let no such man be trusted.
[Renewed applause.]
For myself,
fellow-citizens, my own course is determined. The first political convention
which I ever attended was in the spring of 1845, against the annexation of
Texas. I was at that time a silent and passive Whig. I had never held political
office, nor been a candidate for any. No question ever before drew me to any
active political exertion. The strife of politics seemed. to me ignoble. A
desire to do what I could against Slavery led me subsequently to attend two
different State Conventions of Whigs, where I coöperated with eminent citizens
in endeavor to arouse the party in Massachusetts to its Antislavery duties. A
conviction that the Whig party was disloyal to Freedom, and an ardent
aspiration to help the advancement of this great cause, has led me to leave
that party, and dedicate what of strength and ability I have to the present
movement. [Great applause.]
To vindicate
Freedom, and oppose Slavery, so far as I may constitutionally,—with
earnestness, and yet, I trust, without personal unkindness on my part, is the
object near my heart. Would that I could impress upon all who now hear me something
of the strength of my own convictions! Would that my voice, leaving this
crowded hall to-night, could traverse the hills and valleys of New England,
that it could run along the rivers and the lakes of my country, lighting in
every heart a beacon-flame to arouse the slumberers throughout the land!
[Sensation.] In this cause I care not for the name by which I am called. Let it
be Democrat, or "Loco-foco," if you please. No man in earnest will
hesitate on account of a name. Rejoicing in associates from any quarter, I
shall be found ever with that party which most truly represents the principles
of Freedom. [Applause.] Others may become indifferent to these principles,
bartering them for political success, vain and short-lived, or forgetting the
visions of youth in the
dreams of age.
Whenever I forget them, whenever I become indifferent to them, whenever I cease
to be constant in maintaining them, through good report and evil report, in any
future combinations of party, then may my tongue cleave to the roof of my
mouth, may my right hand forget its cunning! [Cheers.]
And now as I close,
fellow-citizens, I return in thought to the political election with which I began.
If from this place I could make myself heard by the friends of Freedom
throughout the Commonwealth, I would give them for a rallying-cry three words,
— FREEDOM, UNION, VICTORY!
1 Diary, December 18, 1765: Works, Vol. II. p
154.
2 History of New England (ed. Savage), 1645,
Vol. II. p. 229.
3 An eloquent French critic says, among other
things, of this greatest picture of Tintoretto, that "no painting
surpasses, or perhaps equals" it, and that, before seeing it, "one
can have no idea of the human imagination." (Taine, Italy, Florence, and
Venice, tr. Durand, pp. 314, 316.) Some time after this Speech an early copy or
sketch of this work fell into Mr. Sumner's hands, and it is now a cherished
souvenir of those anxious days when the pretensions of Slavery were at their
height.
4 Le Vicomte d'Orthez à Charles IX.:
D'Aubigné, Histoire Universelle, Part. II. Liv. I. ch. 5, cited by Sismondi,
Histoire des Français, Tom. XIX. p. 177, note. I gladly copy this noble letter.
"Sire, j'ai communiqué le commandement de Votre Majesté ses fidèles
habitans et gens de guerre de la garnison; je n'y ai trouvé que bons citoyens
et braves soldats, mais pas un bourreau. C'est pourquoi eux et moi supplions
très humblement Votre dite Majesté vouloir employer en choses possibles,
quelque hasardeuses qu'elles soient, nos bras et nos vies, comme étant, autant
qu'elles dureront, Sire, vôtres."
5 Essays, XLII. Of Youth and Age.
6 The Reason of Church Government, Book II.,
Introduction: Prose Works, ed. Symmons, Vol. I. p. 117.