BY DAVID OVER,
SPEECH
OF
HON. EDWARD M'PHERSON,
Of Pennsylvania, Delivered In the
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAN.
23, 1361.
The House having under consideration the ro
port from the select committee of thirty-three—
Mr. McPHERSON said:
Mr. SPEAKER: It has been saiil, we are !n the
midst of a revolution. It is moro accurate to say,
that we arc in the presence of a vast conspiracy,
which has at length assumed the proportions of
revolution. I propose to examine and try to un
derstand it.
Whence comes it? By what means ? Whither
does it tend ? Threo pregnant questions.
THE CONSPIRACY.
The blow comes from conspirators, who admit
that long ago they laid tbe plan, that '•arebilly they
have prepared tho means, and that such has been
their life-labor. Turning to the proceedings of tho
Legislature of the State of South Carolina ia 1850,
in a debate upon a propositiou for a southern Con
gress, we find that one member (Mr. W. S. Lyles)
said that the remedy for their wrongs was the union
of llit South and the formation of a soul hern confed
eracy. Several members declared their purpose so
to vote on tho pending bill a3 to hasten the dissolu
tion of the Union. Iu tho "sovereign convention"
of South Carolina, reoeutly in session, one member
(Mr. Parker) said, in tho debate upon the secession
ordinance, "this is no spasmodic effort t hat has
come suddenly upon us ; but it has been gradually
culminating for a long scries of years, until, at last,
it has come to that point when wc may say the
matter is entirely right." Another member (Mr.
l'jglis) said: "Most of us have had this matter un
der consideration for the last twenty years." Anoth
er member, (Mr. Keitt,) recently a member of this
House, said he "had been engaged in this move
mi nt ever since lie entered political life." Ho re
joicingly proDOunecd the Union buried, and drop
ped its flag on the grave. Another member, (Mr.
Rheit,) once a member of this House, aud after
wards a Senator of the United States, said iliat
"the secession of South Carolina is not an event
of a day, is not produced by Mr. Lincoln's election,
or by the non-execution of the lugitive slave law,
hut is a matter which has been gatkei tug hcail for
thirty years." Thus the conspiracy is Confessed. —
Ex-lieprosentatives, ex-Senators, in the face ot
the world, declare that tho overthrow of tho Gov
ernment was their great object of desire and effort,
while they were sworn officers of that Government,
receiving compensation from it, and intrusted with
the care of its vast interests.
Ilad it not been confessed, It could easily been
proved. As far back as 1844, Mr. Clay wrote to a
citizen of Alabama;
' From developements now being made in South
Carolina, it is perfectly manifest that a party exists
in that State, seeking a dissolution of the UnFon,
and lor that purpose employ the pretext of the
rejection of Mr. Tyler's abolninable treaty."
Jn May, 183-3, Genera! Jackson, in bis letter to
Lev. Andrew J. Crawferd, after congratulating
himself on the death of nullification, and the defeat
ind dishonor of its advocates, remarked as fellous;
•The tariff, it is now known, was a mere pretext."
* * * * "Therefore the tariff was
only the pretext, and disunion and a southern con
federacy the real object."
lie then adds the prophetic words :
"The next pretext will be the negro or slavery
question."
How accurately tbo sagacious patriot measured tbe
conspirators; how thoroughly he comprehended
them ; how clearly he foresaw their net-work of
devices!
ilow firmly they seized the pretext, how perse
venngly they have handled it,let,their ever increas
ing agitation, their ever-rising exactions, their de.
struction of men and parties for infidelity to it, and
their more and more unreasonable demands, give
answer. Do you need further evidence f Recall
the secession excitement of 1850, the Nashville
convention of 1851, the frequent (so-called) south
ern commercial conventions, the repeated flllibus
tering expeditions, the secession demonstrations of
1857-68. and the organization of "United South
erners," described and recommended by Mr. Yan
cey, in his Slaughter letter of June 15,1868, whoso
purpose was to "establish committees of safety"
all over the cotton States, to "fire the southern
heart, instruct the sootheru mind, give courago to
each other, and, at the proper raomout, by one or
ganized, concerted action, to precipitate tbe cotton
States into a revolution." This league included
men of all parties who, (such is tbe description,)
"keeping up their old party relations on all other
questions, will hold the southern issue paramount,
and will influence parties, Legislatures, and states
men." What tearful, if not fatal, measure of suc
cess has crowned their ceaseless endeavors to rouse,
excite, and inflame the southern mind to the de
sired points of revolution, the seditious condition
of the Gulf States demonstrates.
ITS CHARACTERISTICS.
The conspiracy was wide-spread, combined many
powerful influences, and appropriated the apt agen
cy of a secret, and probably oath-bound, organisa
tion It apparently invaded the Cibiuet, making
executive otlicors connivers at, if aot participants
in, its atrocious policy. It penetrated the Depart
ments, and used their machinery for its nefarious
purposes. And it has been suggested, not im
probably, that the House and Sonato Chambers
nave not escaped dclilement. At its touch, privacy
was penetrated, secret doors opened, all informa
tion gained, and all desirable dispositions effected.
So intelligent were tho guiding spirits, and so per
fect their arrangements, that when, at a given sig
nal. treason liited its bead in a thousand quarters,
few supposed that the sudden and simultaneous
movement was the lcsult of foresight and prop
cration. A conspiracy so wide, complete, and ex
tensive, never before threatened tho overthrow of
the national Constitution, and the destruction of
human hopes and rights.
If judged by its causes, real or pretended, it must
be pronounced unjustified ; if by its characteris
tics. wicked sad diabolical. la every element, it
is hateful and despicable. It was conceived in
disappointed personal ambition, and born of cun
ning and calculating malignity. It has ted and
thrived upon the worst of passions, aud its very
groaancsa betrays the bideousncss of its life. Its
footprints are plainly traceable upor the nation's
pathway for a quarter ot a century ; and now into
this magnificent but uncompleted Capitol has come
its ghastly and horrid form, its scowiiDg face and
wrathful words and hating heart. To many, un
suspicious of such depravity, it has come unawares.
Otters have long observed its stealtny creep. It
has been here before. A year ago it moved an
grily through these marble Halls. It has returned,
tenfold more violent and vicious. As it is, we
must meet it—either succumb to it, parry it, or
niamtaiu the contest necessary to destroy it.
ITS HISTORY.
1 his suggests the second point: What means
have brought it ? These conspirators live in south
ern States, but have, or have had, allies in north
ern. Their first attempt upon the Government was
made in 1832, when they met the iron will and
•titling patriotism ol Andrew Jackson, whose Ko
man Tiituc no bribes could sway or threats subdue,
i hey retired vanquished, fleeing to the sand bills
ct the Palmetto State, where, nursiug their wrath,
; - v kept it warm. While the hero lived, he
A Weekly Paper, Devoted to Literature, Politics, the Arts, Sciences, Agriculture, &c., &c—Terms: One Dollar and Fifty Cents in Advance.
cbscked and thwarted them. Dying, he, with won
derful significance, enjoined his family to use the
memorials of his bravery in defending the Union
from "domestic traitors," as weH as foreign eno
mics From 1840 to 1848 they labored assiduous
ly to corrupt the popular heart, using artfully the
agitation consequeut upon Texan annexation. In
1851 they took steps towards the overt act, but
the southern heart had not yet been fired, and the
cotton States would not be precipitated into revo
lution. Crafty in the use of pretexts—as observed
by Jackarm, Clay, and Benton, and now by ail
thoroughly intent flpon their single purpose, watch
ful of and eager for opportunity, and gathering
energy from defeat, tbey have labored relentlessly
the last ten years; and, aided by tbo excitement
created by the ruthless repoal of the Missouri com
promise, and the subsequent despotic Kansas poli
cy of two democratic Administrations, they arc
now, in 1861, as if to prove the continuity of their
life, executing the programme marked out in 1851,
as most efficient for tbe destructive work.
For years they suffered for want of a suitable
agency through which, uususpected, to reach the
public. For a time they wore, excluded from the
Democratic party ; but they at length reentered it,
and at once its decay bqgan. By a gradual process
they changed both its cried and policy. They re
versed, as a necessary preliminary, the theory of
the very nature of the Government, and tho source
of its power. Jackson, following Jfeßß|iJh ora >
taught that—
"This Is a Government in whicfc nil the people
are represented ; which operates di rectly on the
people individually; not updti ttaArafee , C*v re
tain ail the power theju did Bu'tgtach
State, having exprcasf*
ers as to constitute, jointly jMyHRHr rfpes,
a single nation, cannot possess
any right to Beccde i became apJPWcdSslon does
not break a league,-but destroys tkm unity of a na
tion ; and uny injury to that Mjpity is not only a
breacli which would result from the contravention
of a compact, but it is an offence against the whole
Union. To say that any State miy at pleasure
secede from the Union, is to say that tbe United
States aro not a nation ; because it would bo a
solecism to contend that any part of a nation might
dissolve its connection with other parts, to their
injury or ruin, without committing any offence."
The southern Democracy of this day, almost
with unanimity, assert and miiutain this "right of
secession while many northern (especially Breck
inridge) Democrats, mildly denying it, give them
"aid and comfort," by skillfully prating of the un
constitutionality of coercion. To justify this form
of reasoning, they deny the popular character of
the Government, and rest it upon the States, defin
ing the relations between tho States as a league,
and the General Government as au agent, which
each one is at liberty to discard at ploasure, and
which, as recently expressed, the secedors are about
to hand over to the remaining partners—themselves
retiring ! Largely depriving the national Govern
ment of vitality, they havo proportionably exag
gerated the State Governments—allegiance to
which, in violation of tho precise language and
the entire theory of the Constitution, they have
placed first in the scale of obligation. From de
facing the creed of tbe party. they proceeded, by
an irresistible logic, to denationalize its policy, de
stroying its noblei features, ami supplanting them
with either the shadows of former substance or the
denial of former attributes. They havo denied the
right and paralyzed the power of the Government
to protect the labor of tho country. They have
made of no effect its power to conslruct river and ,
harbor improvements, or aid internal commerce.—
They have destroyed its efficiency for many im
portant, practical, and useful purposes, not now
necessary to be named, and have limited its agency
to the narrowest fields—thus removing, it as far as
possible, from the people ; and whilst, by numerous
means, destroying the centripetal tendencies in our
system, they have intensified the centrifugal, al
ready increased by our widened territory and its
divers® interests, by unduly elevating the claims
and rights of the States, to whos£ "peculiar sys
tem," as contrasted with tho nation's, they are
now, by natural consequence, attempting to* give
extra territorial vitality in derogation of tho gen
eral weal. The necessary result of this policy,
embraced by many with that view, has been to
weaken the bonds of tho Union, and, by a gradual
but certain process, to prepare tbe peoplo sought
to be enticed for the rebellious and revolutionary
purposes now avowed. On every occasion, in every
mode, and on every subject save one, they have
dwarfed the policy of tho Democratic partv, and
left it a husk without life-giving or life-sustaining
quality.
1 have said, on every subject save one. I
refer, of coarse, to that wbioh i 9 their ehiefest
pretext. On all questions affecting slavery,
they treat tbo Constitution with violence,
stretching it far beyond its letter or spirit.—
To this end they havo adapted themselves,
successively, with amazing readiness, to every
necessity of the hour. Anxious to break down
the doctrine of Congressional prohibition, they
adopted the theory of leaving to the Territor
ial Legislatures the control of the 'domestio
institutions' of the people. That passing pur
pose sufficiently socurod, they denied the pow
er of the Territorial Legislatures kostiloly to
touch slavery. Using this doctrine for a tem
porary purpose, they throw it aside as worth
less, scttiog up in its plaoo the dogma that, as
the Constitution recognizes slavery, noitber
Congress nor tho Territorial Legislature can
prohibit it, and both must protect it against a
hostile local sentiment Proclaiming the sanc
tity of compromises until that of 1850 is ao
ceptod, they repudiato all such notions in 1854
aud destroy the Missouri compromise of 1820,
whioh while not in thoir way, was esteemed
well nigh sacred, and fit to be extended to the
Paoific. la their eagerness for the admissioo
of slave States, thoy sought, iu 1858, to drag
Kansas into tho Union against the will of her
people, under a fraudulent slavery constitution
whioh did not embody the popular wish, and
was known to be in opposition to it—a moasure
;of wrong repudiated by the Territory, con
demned by the cotfccienoe of tho country, and,
after the act, confessed by a distinguished sup
porter, to have been a disgraceful measure,
which "should have been kicked out of Con
gress." While in 1860 and 1861, they re
sisted to the last point the admissiou of Kan
sas with free institutions oonformable to the
popular will. So wholly have tho conspirators
wielded the Democratic organization in their
destruction of the old landmarks set np by
great moo to be preserved forever.
As the conspirators debauched the creed
and policy of the Demooratio party, 60 they
manipulated the men of that party, or dis
carded those they eould not manipulate. In
1844, when Van Buren promisod to be un
yielding, they prevented his nomination by es
tablishing in the ocDventioo a novel und arbi
trary rale, till then unknown, whiob transferred
control of the patty from the majority to the
BEDFORD. PA., FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1861.
minority, who have hold it ever siaoe, and thro'
It have ruled the oountry. In 184.7, they
threatened the 'crushing out' process against
all who advocated the Wilraot proviso. In
1848, Gen. Cass gained thoir support by aban
doning former opinions, and adopting new
ones, couohod, bowevor, in such Dclpbio w6rds
that they were interpreted oppositely in differ*
ent sections, la 1840-50, a sagacious and
patriotic southern Presidont, when resisting
their machinations, was struck dowu by death.
In 1852, they nominated General Pierce,
whoso antecedents and surroundings wore sat
isfactory. During his administration vast evil
was douo, and vastly more prepared. In 185G
thsy gracefully yielded to the necessity of the
nomination of Mr. Buchanan, who did not
falter in their servioo until it would have been
treasonable to go further. In 1860, their real
cbaraoter and purpose was disclosed. Fearing
and hating Mr. Douglas for one act of disobe
dienoo, they expended every effort to prevent
his nomination. The two third rulo and other
appliances failing, they kept the Charleston
Cenvontion several weeks in session, forced an
adjournment to Baltimore, where failing to
defeat Mr. Douglas, tbey seceded, broke the
convention in twain, nominated a second cant
didato, hopelessly divided the Democratic
party, and compelled a Republican victory.
Thus, tbo Dcmooratio party divided, the
Republican party triumphant, the whole south
ern people purposely misled as to its opinions
and policy, and the fitting occasion supposed
to have arrived for placing the match to the
magazine, the conspiracy was unveiled. To
day it stands before the American peoplojhe
most hideous development in their history or
that of auy other nation.
irs PURPOSE AND PATH.
I proceed to the third question: whither
docs it tend, and by what path? The path is
tbo asserted right of secession; the end, the
dissolution of the present Union. On the oth
or quostion, at least equally important: what
shall follow dissolution? there is groat differ
ence of opioiou. Some prefer a southern
confederacy, with a constitution much like the
praacut, others propose a reconstruction of
this Government, with new guarantees and
conditions, on tho extent of which they again
differ. All, howevor, 1 believe, agree in
"sloughing off" New England. Others in
cline to a constitutional UMmarchy:
again, as forosbndowatf by Governor Pfokcns,
of bouth Carolina, to a strong military gov
ernment. There is much method in their mad
ness; tboy agree upon tho destructive pari of
thoir policy, but largely differ upon the con
structive; no new experience, since to pull
down requires only brute force; to build up
requires great qualities. I havo hoard it late
ly said that three things were necessary in
goyernmontai construction: wise mcu, money,
and the favor of God. If this be true, this
southern movement must have disastrous ter
mination.
Tho path chosen is by the alleged right pos
sessed by each State to secede at plcsture
from the Uuioo. It is scarcely necessary to
say that this is a doctrine wholly without au
thority, against common sense, and repudiated
iu terms by tho most eminent of statesmen.—
Mr. Madison, in the recently published letters
to N. P. Trist, Esq., written in 1832, says:
"1 partake of tbo wonder that the men you
name should view secession in the light men
tioned. The essential difference between a
frco government and a government But froe is,
that tho former is founded in compact, tho
parties to which aro mutually and equally
bound by it. A either of them, tturejoic, con
have a greater right to break off from the
bargain than the. others have to hold him to it.
And cortainly there is nothing in tho Virginia
rcsolutisns of 1798 adverse to tins prinoiple,
which is that of ooiumon sense and common
justice. Tho fallaoy which draws a different
conclusion from them lies in confounding a
single party with tho parties to the constitu
tional compact of the United States. The Ut
ter, having made the compact, may do what
-they will with it. The former, as one of tho
parties, owes fidelity to if till released by con
sent, or absolved by an intolerable abuse of
the power created."
In tho same letter, Mr. Madison alludes to
Mr. Jefferson's opinions as expressed in his
lcttors to Monroe and UarriDgton, to the ef
fect that it was not necessary to find a "right
to cocrcc iu the Federal articles, that being
inherent in the nature of a compact/'
Mr. Madison again says:
"Many seem to have lost sight of the great
principle, that compact is the basis and essence
of free government; and that no right to dis
regard it belongs to a party till reloased from
it by causes of which the other parties have an
equal right to judge, la tho event of an irrc
concilablo conflict, not of rights but of opinions
and claims of right; force becomes the ar
biter."
Again: he called upon all real friends of
the Union to "finally rally against those spec
ulative errors, which, assuming a practical
character, must subvert it."
The same views ore found in his correspond
ence with Mr Webster, and, at an earlier date,
with Alexander to whom pending
the ratification of tbe Constitution by the State
of New York, he avid:
"My opinion is, that a reservation ot tbe !
right to withdrawal arm udux uts be cot deoi- •
ded ou under tee form of tho Constitution,
witbiu a certain time, is u conditional ratifica
tion; that it does not make New York a mem
ber of tbe Union, and consequently that she
should uot he reoeived ou that plan. Compacts
must be reciprocal; this principle would not, in
such case, be preserved. The Constitution
requires au adoption in toto ND FOREVER."
Genoral Jackson is repeatedly ou record,
and in his message to Congress on the 16th of
Jauuary, declared that
"The right of the people of a single State fo
absolve themselves at will, and without the
consent of tbe other States, from their most
solemn obligations, aud hazard the liberties
and happiness of tho millions composing this
Union, cannot be acknowledged; and that such
authority is utterly repugnant both to the
principles upon which the General Government
is constituted and the objeota which it was ex
pressly formed to attain:
'."ho dootrino has-never been countenanced
by the Snprerce Court, or by such statesmen
as John Quinoy Adams, Clay, Benton, or
Webster. It is a dootrine unknown in histo
ry, ancient or modern, and especially in thoso
confederacies whose frames wero so carefully
studied by tho fathers of our Government. IH
1833, the Legislature of Kentucky declared,
by "csolution, that "the right of secession is
not only unauthorized by the Constitution, bat
is repugnant to its letter and spirit." In
1851, the State convention of Mississippi,
called to consider the compromise measures of
1850, resolved that
"Tbe asserted right of secession from tho
Union on the part of a State is utterly un
-BBn-tioned by tho Federal Constitution."
Mississippi is now a seceding State—so read
ily are discarded opinions assumed when suited
to R supposed emergency.
So much for the path, which has been hewn
by .'orce, and does not legally exist.
ITa^CSTIFICATION.
Now for the justifying reasons. Mr. Madi
son says a people may be absolvod from allegi
ance when there is, on the part of Government,
'an intolerable abuse of the power created.'—
Do? i that abuse exist?
1 propose to examine this point fairly—waiv
ing all technical point?—and thcroforo to con
dense from the papers issued by the convenlion
ofjsouth Carolina a statoment of their gricv
audes in justification of their action. Those
papers are two in nnmbcr—the address to the
slaveholding States, and tho declaration of in
dependence, each prepared by a separate com
mittee; the former reported by Mr. Mommingcr,
the Jitter by Mr. Rhett—both gentlemon in
harmony with tbe sentiment of their State, and
thoroughly familiar with tho causes of corn
plaint.
The former paper is the moro elaborate. It
opes# with a statement "that tho one great
evil, from which all other evils bavo flown, is
'Ho the Constitution of the United
Spates," the Guverument being no longer free,
but a despotism, sach a Government as our i
fathers resisted in 1776. It assumes a paral- j
Iclisfn between the complaints of South Caro- j
lina aod tbe colonies, and sustains it by assert- j
ing that the Northern States, "Having the ma
jority in Congress, claim the same power of
omnipotence in legislation as tho British I'or
liaineut"—tho "genoral welfare" being the only
limit to the legislation of cither; that the i
Southern States are taxed for tho benefit of the j
Noith,and that the representation of tho south
ern States in Congress is useless to protect
them against taxation. It also oomplains that,
for the last forty years, tho people of tho South !
bavo been taxod by duties on imports, not for I
rcneoue, but for an object inconsistent with
rovouue—to promote, by prohibition, northern j
interests in the promotion of their mines and
manufactures; and that of the taxos oollected j
from them, three-fourths are expeuded at the
North, thus impoverishing tho former and en
riching tho latter. This exhausts one branch !
of tbo argument. To all of which it may be j
answered—
First— That tbo Constitution, so far from
being overthrown, has been administered upon
substantially tbe same principles, "makiug duo
allowance for tbe imperfection and errors inci
dent to ail human affairs," from the organiza
tion of tho Government to tho present time.—
During it, the Supremo Court has ohanged less
frequently than any othor department of the
Government: and for many years a majority of
the judges Lave been from the southern States.
The tendency of its decisions, also, has, within
the last thirty years, been moro and more nar
rowing dowu to the standard of South Carolina
school, as is known by every student of our
politics. Besides, the general legislation of
our country has beeu closely confined, and in
repeated instances havo been nullified, by the
interposition of tho executive power, whioh has
without material exemption, been in the bands
or under the control of the southern States.
Second —Tbo attempted parallel fails, be
cause the colonies were not represented in Par
liament; and the southern States aro represent
ed in Congress, precisely in proportion to tbeir
claims and in accordance with tho provisions of
the Constitution ratified by all and binding all.
It fails, also, bcoauso the British Parliament is
omnipotent; and the Congress is limited, as all
admit, by tbo grants of tbe Constitution, whioh
tho Supreme Court has interpreted with much
severity and uniformity. Neither is tbo par
allel more happy as tbe results than as to the
principle; for, although it is asserted that the
"representation of tho southern States is use
less to protect them against taxation," I chal
lenge any oue to poiut out a oaso in which a
measure of taxation has been resisted by the
South and enforced by tho North. There is
no such case. But if tbcro wero, it would not
necessarily relievo the southern States from
tbeir allegiance; for, to bo justified, they must
be able to point out an "intolerable abuse."—
That is impossible. The claimed parallelism
not existing, it is easy to sec whorein the two
parties essentially differ. The colonists plant
ed themselves npon their principle, without re
gard to tbe emoont; tbe South Carolinians,
chitjiy upon tbe amount, upon tbe
principle, anu erroneously upon both.
Third —The allueion to the tariff question is
wisely restricted to tbe last forty years, sinee,
prior to that rime, South Carolina Representa
tives voted for protective tariffs. Mr. Calhoun
made an able speech, in this House, in favor of
the tariff sot of 1816; and South Carolina and"
other southern members supported it against
tbe protest of New England. Neither is this
tbe complaint which the people of tho South
fan make, for they have never boen united in
favor of a purely revenue tarifi. No protec
tive bill over passed without southern support;
and that of 1842, which had a majority of but
one vote in eaeb House, received thirteen south
ern votes in the House and five in tbo Senate.
The tariff poliay was inaugurated under Wash.
ingtoD, and has continued with various modifi
cations up to the present time; and it is a ro
markable, and for the authors of tbe address a
humiliating faot, that the present tariff law was
voted for by the whole South Carolina delega
tion in Congress, of whbm one is knowD to have
declared himself opposed to all tariffs, revenue
jor protective, and iu favor of direct taxation.
Furthermore, for the last fourteen years, the
changos in onr tariff system havo been from one
reduction to another, and complaint is Jess jus
tified on this point now than at any former
period. Besides, it is not true that northern
interests have teen solely protected by our
tariffs, for in all, the southern interests of sugar,
tobacco, and hemp, to say nothing of tho iron
interest of the South, have been iargcly pro
tected. Thus this petulant complaint disap
pears—being, if an offence, not exclusively a
porthern one; if a benefit to aDy interests, not
exclusively to nothem
Fourth— it is complained that tho taxes col
lected among them are iot expended among
them. I bavo no means of knowing what amoant
of money has been expended by Government
for various purposes in the Southern States; but
I do not recall a single instance in which aid
was refused to an important work because loca
ted in a southern State. As to tho fortifica
tions erected by Government, most of which
arc now in the possession of seceding States, a
report rnado a lew years ago showed that $13,-
366,000 had been expended upon them, aud it
is known that these works were completed and
strengthened, others commenced; and that in
the last three ycats large sums have been spent
upon public buildings in Charleston, New Or
leans, and other southern cities. As to the
other pbasos of this petty complaint, I commend
attention to the subjoined extract from a
speech made in tbo convention of South Caro
lina: • v
"When we complain in the aggregate, or in
general terms when we say that the grievances
of South Carolina arc found in tbo fact that
the Treasury has beon depleted by illegal
means, and in undue proportion administered
to the North, I question whether we arc quite
safo iu alleging that as a grievance of South
Carolina, without qualification. Tbero has
been an unfaithful execution of the Constitu
tion on the part of its own general agent in
that respect. But let us not forgot to confess
tho truth under any and all oirouuistancos.—
What havo we ourselves been doing? And in
the city of Charleston, too, where Lave you
brought your supplies, and with whom do you
trade? Whore has tho groat surplus of your
money been ncoessarily spent? Where has it
gone to? lias it not gono to these people who
havo received tbe Federal money? Govern
ment and individuals have sought tbe same
market. Why? Because nobody else could
furnish the artiolos each wanted. Can you say,
thercforo, that tho Federal Government is to
ho blamed for spending a large auiouut of
monoy in the non-slavcboldiug States? Where
was the Federal Government obliged to get its
necessary support for tbo Army and Navy?—
Whero could tho Federal Government fill up
tho rauks of its Army and Navy? Will you
not allow tho Government to buy of its own
citizens, as wc havo all done? if by the cun
ning of tbeso men in tho non-slaveholding
States they havo been able to present to the
Government inducements to obtain tbeir sup
plies, can wo complain? Where else oouid
they have been procured? So far, tho Govern
ment has been obliged to spend its money
among tbo people of the North and Northwest
for bacon, lard, and all the supplies of the
Army and Navy. I submit these views for
the purpose of drawing the attention of the
convention to the fact that we may go too far
in tins documeut, and use assertions too
strong."
Their last grievance has refereooe to tbe
slave question. While oomplaining of the con
gressional prohibition of slavery from tho Ter
ritories—a policy inaugurated by tho consent
of Virginia and other slaveholding States, at
tho beginning of the Government, and now only
contemplated to a limited extent by any partv
—tho address chargos that tho purpose of the
Republican party is, tbe interference with sla
very in the slaveholding States; a complaiut,
also prospective, but mde in spite of the dis
tinct and emphatio deUration to the contrary,
iu the Chicago platform, and by Republicans
everywhere. Indeed, it is safe to say, that tbe
Republican members of Congress will oonseLt,
with substantial uoanimity to initiate proceed
ings by which such a prohibition shall bo insert
ed in the Constitution, should it appear that
this complaint is sincerely, and not hypocriti
cally made. The declaration of independence
of South Carolina touches this subject in detail,
alleging:
First—That tbe laws of tho General Gov
ernment fail to make effective and valuable
the fugitive clauso of the Constitution.
Second—That fifteen States havo enacted
laws which either nullify the laws of Cougress
or prevent their execution.
Third 1 hat Mr. Lincoln has been cboscn
President
Fourth—That certain States have elevated
to citizeuship certain persons who, by tho su
preme law of the laud, are incapable of be
coming citizens.]
Fifth—That after tho 4th of March next,
tbe equal rights of tho States will be lost, and
tho slaveholding States will no longer have tho
power of self preservation.
To all tbeso it is easily auswered:
i Irt not a single Case h* the fugitive slave
VOL. 34, NO. ?.
law been renJoreJ inoperative; but in ovcry
oaso it baa baoa executed, and generally with
out disorder; that it has been more faithlully
executed than certain corresponding laws in
tbe southern States; and that in no case has
an allogcd siave escaped except when adjudged
free by the commissioner.
That the legislation of the fifteen States
named proves the imputations cast upon them
false; or if they have tbe appearance of truth
there is no reason to donbt that tbe laws will
bo revised, and placed in proper shape; bat if
this were not so, there is a remedy for the ease
in the Uuion, and under the Constitution.—
That the election of an adverse President has
always hitherto been peacefully acquiesced in
by those now victorious; that the mere cleo
tion is not an offenoe; that the opinions of tbe
President eloot are grossly misrepresented and
perverted in the State papers before named;
that if disposed, ho could not do what is
wrongfully attributed to him; and that, as the
next Congress would bo constituted, the Pres
: ident would be powerless to control legisla
tion. That the question of citizenship is one
of constitutional law, which tribunals have
been specially erected to decide. And that
the last complaint is a prediction —not a fact
a prediction not founded on a truo statement
of past or present occurrences, and with no
probability or possibility of realization.
Suob are their proclaimed grievances and
complaints; such, also, in brief, the facts which
prove them groundless; or, if to any extent real
remedial within the Union. Never did rebel
people so flimsily justify themselves. It wouid
be wonderful if any one believed thoir reasons
satisfactory fur defending so grave a step. In
deed, I think it demonstrable that the members
of tho convention felt tbe weakness of their
statements and their cause. In the debate upon
the declaration, Mr. Maxey Gregg objected that
it was silent on the tariff aud tho unauthorized
expenditures of Government, while it laid "the
ina'n stress upon the incomparable unimportant
point relative to fugitive slaves," and the laws
of northern States in relation thoreto. He
farther protested against weakening their cauo
by "confining themselves to these miserable
fugitive slave laws." Mr. Keitt, defending the
address and its omission of tbe tariff, reminded *
Mr. Gregg that all of South Uarcrfina's Repre
sentatives in Congress had voted for tbe pres
ent tariff! With regard to the fugitive slave
law, of whose non-execution complaint i 3 made,
Mr. Keitt said he had very great doubts about
the propriety of the fugitive slave law;" and
Rbctt sard ho had doubt of its constitutionali
ty, and had expressed it wnen a member of tho
t'cnatc. Touching the (so-called) "personal
liberty bills," Mr. Wardlaw thought tho stress
laid upon thorn gave the address "too much
the appearance of special pleading.'" Judge
\Y ithcrs intimated very distinctly that the
causes stated were cot sufficient to secure his
uarnc to the act of secession; but ho signed it
by rcasoD of other causes, not stitcd, which
wore controlling.
Rooking over lac proceedings of tho conven
tion and the Legislature, I can find but the
following additional causes etated anywhere;
and 1 present them, so as to make their oasc
complete. One is named in the report of a
committee of the Senate of the State, namely;
that the people of the slave-holding States pay
two-thirds of the revenue of the country. In
the same spirit, the Mayor of New York, in
his lato message, claims for that oity that it
"contributes in revenue two-thirds of tbe ex
penses of the Uuitod States." These two self
exaggerating authorities thus account for one.
third moro revenue than is received, and re
lievo the bulk of the population of the country
from all agenoy in supporting rho Govcrnmont.
Another is stated by Judge Withers, and is
to the effect that a jury in Pennsylvania, about
tbirteeu years ago, failed to fiud a true ver
dict in a case of death arising out of tho re
capture of slaves. And another ho states
thus, iu his report from the committee OD the
relations of the slaveboldmg States: The dis
satisfaction with the government is not attrib
utable to "anything in its structure, but to the
false glosses and dangerous misinterpretations
and perversion of suudry of its provisions,
even to the extent, in one particular, of so
covering up the real purposes of certain bgis
istion (meant to proteot domestic manufactures
iu one sectiou) as to estop tbe Supreme Court
in its opinion, from judicially porceiviug its
real design."
This completes the "dreary catalogue," as made
by the champions of disunion. How pitiful tho
list! But it was the best possible. Not one has
tho ring of reality ; not one will bear the test ol
fact. Several members expressed dissatisfaction
with the papers ; but none could strengthen them,
and they wore adopted. Thus they stand upon the
page of history, challenging criticism and judg
ment, being as remarkable for sophistry in argu
ment as inaccuracy in statement. What "tho verdict
of mankind will be, who can doubt upon reading
this paragraph troui the speech of Judge Withers,
uttered immediately before siguing the ordinance ot
secession:
"I think it every member of the convention
should draw up an indictment against the people ol
the unfaithful confederate States, and you might
have any number of addresses upon that subject,
you would probably find no two rery nearly alike. ~
Since, therefore, every one's taste and judgment
cannot be answered, if there be uo substantial ob
jection to the addresses before us, as I think there
is not,it is proper to vote for them, and 1 shall do
so."
Surely, those grievances cannot be very actual
or well defined which no two of one hundred an i
fifty-five members of a convention elected for ttu
purpose did or could agree in slating. Such con
Cession is, itself, complete as au arraignment ami
condemnation of South Carolina, and a defence ot
the Government sought to be overthrown.
I turn willingly from this mortifying exhibition
of maddened men seeking to pull down the pillars
ol tho Republic. I say maddened for what else
induced this passago in their address t
"It is now too lato to reform or restore the Gov
eminent of the United States. All confidence iu
tho North ia lost in the South. The faithfulness of
half a century has opened a gulf of separation be.
tween them which uo promises or engagements can
tilt "