1 P:
BY S. J. KOV.
CLEARFIELD, PA., WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1862.
VOL. 8.-AT0. 3S.
THE DEMOCRATIC ADDKESS.
Below wc publish aa address to the Democ
racy ot the United States, issued by 14 mem
ersof the House of Representatives, (among
whom is Vallandigham,) urging the reorgani
zation of their party. Wo bespeak a careful
pernsal or this extraordinary document, and
ask the reader to note several of ite most re
markable features, to wit : It does not say
one word against tbo rebels who are trying to
destroy the Government; It does not con
gratulate the country upon the victories a
thieved by the Union armies over the trait
or It charges the Administration of Mr.
Lincoln as one of continued usurpation, etc.,
Jt claims that the Democracy has always, and
is now the party that fights for and upholds
the Constitution, and the Union, and charges
that the Republican party h responsible for
the Rebellion, &c. .Bui read the address.
ADDRESS
0 Democratic Members of Conjrc.-a to the De
mocracy of the United Etatti
Kti.Low CiTizt.N3 : The perilous condition
of our country demand that we should coun
sel togetHer. Party organization, restricted
within proper limits, is a positive good, and
indeed essential to the preservation of public
liberty. Without it the best Government
would soon degenerato ii to the worst ot tyran
nies. In despotisms tho chief use of power Is
In crushing out party opposition. In our own
country the experience of tho last twelve
months proves, more than any lesson in his
tory, the necessity of party organization.
The present Administrat ion was chosen by a
party, and in all civil nets and appointments
has recognised, and atill does, its fealty and
obligations to that party. There rou?t and
will be an opposition. The public satety and
good demand it. Shall it be a new organiza
tion or an old one 1 The Democratic party
was founded more than sixty years ago. It
has never been disbanded. To-day it numbers
one tnillioh live hundred thousand electors in
(he States still loyal to the Union. Its recent
numerous victories in municipal elections in
the Western and M iddle States prove its vi
tality. Within the last ten months it has
held State Conventions and nominated full
Democratic tickets In every Free State in the
Union. Ot no other party opposed to the Re
publicans can the same be said.
MULL THE JfEMOCRATIC PARTT BE NOW DI3-
bandei ? Why should it? Arc its ancient
i'Hi.vcPLKs wrong 1 What are they 1 Let its
platlorms for thirty years speak :
"Resolved, That tho American Democracy
place their trust in the intelligence, tho pa
triotism, and the discriminating justice of the
American people. '
That we regard this as a distinctive fea
ture in our political creed, which we arc proud
to maintain before the world, as the preat
moral element in a form of goverment spring
ing from and upheld by the popular will ;
and we contrast it with the creed and practice
of Federalism, under whatever name or form,
which seeks to palsy tho will of the constitu
ent, and which conceives ho imposture too
monstrous for tlie popular credulity.
"Thi the Federal Government is one of
limited power, derived solely from the Consti
tution; and the grants of power made therein
viight to bo strictly construed by all the de
partments and agents of the Government ; and
that it is inexpedient and dangerous to exer
cise doubtful constitutional powers."
And as explanatory of these the following
from Mr. Jefferson's first inaugural :
The support of tho State Governments
in all their rights as the most competent ad
ministrations of our domestic concerns and
the surest bulwarks against anti-republican
tendencies.
"Tho preservation of the General Govern
ment in its whole constitutional vigor as the
sheet-anchor of our peace at homo and safety
abroad.
"A jealous care of the right of election by
the people.
"The scpremact of the civil over tub
MItlTART AUTHORITY.
"Economy in the public expense, that labor
may bo lightly burdened.
"The honest payment of our debts and sa
cred preservation of the public faith.
treedom or keligion, freedom of tue
Tkess, and freedom of person under protec
tion OF THE HABEAS CORPrfl. AND TRIAL ItT JU
RIES IMPARTIALLY SELECTED."
Such, Democrats, are the principles of your
party, essential to public liberty and to the
stability and wise administration of the Gov
ernment, alike in peace and war. They are
the principles upon which the Constitution
and the Union were founded ; and, nnder tho
control of a party which adheres to them, the
Constitution would bo maintained and thi
Union could not be dissolved.
Is the roLtCY of the Democratic party wrong
that it should be disbanded ?
Its policy is consistent with its principles,
and may be summed up, from the beginning,
as follows ; The support of liberty as against
power; of the people as against their agents
and servants ; and of State rights as against
consolidation and centralized despotism ; a
simple government; no public debt; low
taxes; no high protective tarilT; no general
lutein of internal improvements by Federal
authority; no .National Dank; bard money
for the Federal public dues; no assumption of
State debts ; expansion of territory ; self gov
ernment for the territories, subject only to the
Constitution; the absolute compatibility of a
union of the States, "part slave and part free ;"
the admission of new States, with or without
slavery, as they may elect; non interference
'y the Federal Government with slavery in
State and Territory, or in the District of Co
lumbia ; and, Anally, as set forth in the Cin
cinnati Platform, in 185G, and reaffirmed in
1SG0, absolute and eternal "repudiation of all
actional parties and platform3 concerning
domestic slavery which seek to embroil the
States and incite treason and armed resistance
to law in the Territories, and whose avovied
Purposes, if consumaled, must end in civil war
Discnion."
Such was the ancient and the recent policy
f tl.e Democratic party, running through a
period of sixty years a policy consistent with
n principles of the Constitution, and abso
lutely essential to the preservation of the
Lnion.
Coos the bistort of. the Democratic party
rrrte that it or.ght to bo abandoned ? "By
ihetr rruits shall ye know them." Sectional
parties do not achieve Union triumphs. For
sixty years from the inauguration of Jefferson
on the 4th of March, 1801, the Democratic
patry, wjth short intervals, controlled the
power and the policy of the Federal Govern
ment. For forty-eight year's out of theso six
iy, democratic men ruled the countrv ; for
fifty-lour years and eight months the Demo
cratic policy prevailed. During this period
Louisiana, Florida, Texas, New Mexico, and
California were successively annexed to our
territory, with an area more than twice as
large as all the original Thirteen States to
gether. Eight new States were admitted un
der strictly Democratic Administration one
nnder the Administration of Fillmore. From
five millions, the population increased to
thirty-one millions. The Revolutionary debt
was extinguished. Two foreign wars were
successfully prosecuted, with a moderate out
lay and a small army and navy, and without
the suspension of the habeas corpus ; without
one infraction of tho Constitution; without
one usurpation of power; without suppressing
a single newspaper; without imprisoning a
single editor; without limit to the freedom of
the press, or of speech in or out of Congress,
but in tho midst of the grossest abuse of both ;
and without the arrest of a single "traitor,"
though tho Hartford Convention sat during
ono of tho wars, and in tho other Senators
invited the enemy to "greet our volunteers
WITH BI.OODT HANDS AND WELCOME THEM TO IIOS
TITABLE GRAVES."
During all this time wealth increased, busi
ness of all kinds multiplied, prosperity smiled
on every side, taxns were low, wages wero
high, tho North and the South furnished a
market for each other's products at good
pi ices; public liberty was secure, private
rights undisturbed ; every man's bouse was
hi3 castle; tho courts were open to all ; no
passports for travel, no secret police, no spies,
no informers, no bastiles; the right to assem
blu peaceably, the right to petition ; freedom
of religion, freedom of speech, a free ballot,
and a free press; and all this timo tho Consti
tution maintained and the Union of the States
preserved
Such were the choice fruits of Democratic
principles and policy, carried out through the
wholo period during which the Democratic
party held the power and administered the
Federal Government. Such has been tho his
tory of that party. It is a Union party, for it
preserved the Union, by wisdom, peace, and
compromise, tor more than halt a century
Then, neither the ancient principles, the
policy, nor the past history of the Democratic
party require tor would justify its disband
ment.
Is there anything in the present crisis which
demands it 7 The more immediate issue is,
TO MAINTAIN THE CONSTITUTION A3 IT 13, AND TO
RESTORE THE UNION A3 IT WAS
To maintain the Constitution is to respect
tne rights ot tho States and the liberties of
the citizens. It is to adhere faithtullv to the
very principles and policy which the Demo
cratic party has professed for more than half
a century. Let its history, and the results,
from tho beginning, prove whether it has
practised thc:n. We appeal proudly to the
record
The first step towards a restoration of the
U nion as it was is to maintain the Constitution
as it is. So long as it was maintained in fact,
and not threatened with infraction in spirit
and in letter, actual or imminent, the Union
was unbroken.
To restore the Union, it is essential, first,
to give assurance to every State and to the
people of every section that their rights and
liberties and property will be scure within
the Union under the Constitution. What as
surance so doubly sure as the restoration to
power of that ancient organized consolidated
Democratic party which tor sixty years did se
cure the property, rights, and liberties of the
States and of the people ; and thus did main
tain the Constitution and preserve the Union,
and with them the multiplied blessings which
distinguish us above other nations ?
To restore the Union is to crush out section
alism North and South. To begin the great
work of restoration through the ballot-box is
to kill abolition. The bitter waters of seces
sion flowed first and are fed still from the tin
e'ean lountain of abolitionism. That fountain
must be dried up. Armies may break down
tho power of the Confederate Government in
the South; but the work of restoration can
enly be carried on through political organiza
tion and the ballot in the .North and West.
In this great work we cordially invite the co
operation of all men of every party who are
opposed to tho fell 'spirit of abolition, and
who, in sincerity, desire the Constitution as
it is and the Union as it was. Let the dead
past bury its dead. Rally, lovers of the Union,
the Constitution, and of Liberty to the stand
ard of the Democratic party, already in the
field and confident of victory. That party is
the natural and persistent enemy ci abolition.
Upon this question, its record as a national
organization, ho ever it may have been at
times with particular men or in particular
States, is clear and unquestionable. From
the beginning of tho anti-slavery agitation to
the period of the last Democratic National
Convention it has held but ono language in re
gaid to it. Let the record speak :
" Resolved, That Congress has no power un
der the Constitution to interfere with or con
trol the domestic institutions of the several
States, and that such States, are tho tole and
proper judges of everything appertaining to
their own aflairs not prohibited by the Consti
tution ; that all efforts of the Abolitionists or
others made to induce Congress to interfere
with questions of slavery, or to take incipient
steps in relation thereto, are calculated to
lead to the most alarming and dangerous con
sequences, and that all such efforts have an
inevitable tendency to diminish the happi
ness of the people and endanger the stability
and permancy oi the Union, and ought not to
be countenaced by any friend of our politlcaj
institutions.''
Upon these principles alone, so far as relates
to slavery, can the Union ns it was be restored ;
and no other Union, except the Unity of Des
potism, can be maintained in this couutry ;
and this last we will resist, as our fathers did,
with our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred
honor.
But it is said that you must disband the
Democratic party "to support the Govern
ment." We answer that the Democratic par
ty has always supported the Govenment; and
whilo it was in power preserved tho Govern
ment in all its vigor and tntegrity, not by
force and arms, but by wisdom, sound policy,
and peace. But it never did admit, and nev
ci win, mat mis Administration, or any Ad
ministration, is "tbe Government." It holds
ana ever has held, that the Federal Govern
ment is the agent of th people of the several
states composing the Union ; that it consists
ot three distinct departments the Legislative
tho Executive, and the Judicial each equal
iy a pari oi tne government, and equally en
tinea to the confidence and support of the
States and the people ; and that it is the duty
of every patriot to sustain the several depart
ments of the Government in the exercise of all
the constitutional powers of each which may be
necessary ana proper Jor the preservation of the
Government in its principles and in its vior arid
integrity, and to stand by and defend to the ut
most the flag which represents the Government
the Union, and the country.
In this sense the Democratic party has al
ways sustained, and will now sustain, the
government against all foes, at home or a
broad, in the North or tho South, open or
concealed, in office or out ef office, in peace
or in war.
If this is what the Republican party mean
by supporting the Government, it is an idle
thing to abandon the old and tried Democratic
party, which for so many years and through
so many trials supported, preserved, and main
tamed the Government of the Union. But if
their real purpose be to aid the ancient ene
mies of tho Democracy in subverting our pres
ent Constitution and form of government, 8nd,
under pretence of saving the Union, to erect a
strong centralized despotism on its ruins, the
Democratic party will resist them as the worst
enemy to the Constitution and the Union,
ana to tree government everywhere.
We do not purpose to consider now the
causes which led to the present unhappy civil
war. A titter time will come hereafter for
such discussion. But we remind you now
that compromise made your Union, and com-
pronise fifteen months ago would" have saved
it. Ilepeated efforts wero made at the last
session or tho thirty-sixth Congress to this
end. At every staee, the creat mass of tho
South, with tho whole Democratic party, and
thf whom IJonstitutional narfv nl fh Tnrth
and West, united in favor f certain amend-
ments to the Constirution and chief amonj
them, the well-known "Crittenden. Froposi
tions," which would have averted civil war
and maintained the Union. At every stage,
all proposed amendments inconsistent -with
the sectional doctrines of the Chicago Plat
form were strenuously resisted and defeat by
the KepuDlican party. The" Jrittenden Prop
ositious" never received a single Republican
vote in either House. For the proof we ap
peal to the Journals of Congress and to the
Congressional Globe.
Wo scorn to reply to the charge that the
Democratic party is opposed to granting aid
and support to the Federal Government in
maintaining its safety, integrity, and constitu
tional supremacy, and in tavor of disbanding
our armies ana succumbing to tne South.
The charge is libellous and false. No man
has advocated any such proposition. Demo
crats recognise it as their duty s patriots to
support the Government in all constitutional,
necessary, and proper effort to mamtian its
safety, integrity, and constitutional authority;
but at tho same time they are inflexibly oppos
ed to waging war against any of the States or
people of this Union in any spirit of oppres
sion, or for any purpose of conquest or subju
gation, or of overthrowing or interfering with
the rights or established institutions of anv
State. Above all, the Democratic party will
not support tne Administration in any thins
which looks or tends to the loss of our politi
cal or personal rights and liberties, or a change
of our present democratical form of govern
ment. But no, Democrats, it is not the support of
tho Government in restoring the Union which
the party in power require of you. Ton are
asjed to give up your principles, your policy,
and your party, and to stand by the Adminis
tration of the party in power, in all its acts.
Above all it is demanded of you that yon yield
atleast a silent support to their whole policy, and
to withhold all scrunity into their public con
duct of every kind, least you should "embar
rass tho Administration." Ytu are thus ask
ed to renounce one of the first principles and
the chief security of a Democratic govern
ment the right to hold public servants respon
sible to their master tl.i people ; to render the rep
resenlalive accountable to the constituent ; the an
cient and undoubted prerngifive of Americans to
canvass public measures and public men. It is
this "high constitutional privilege" which
Daniel Webster declared he would "defend
and exercise within the House and out of the
House, and in all places in rime of war, in time
of peace, and at all times I" It is a right se
cured by the constitution a right inestimable
to tho people, and formidable to tyrants only.
If ever there was a time when the existence
and consolidation of the Democratic party
upon its principles and policy was a vital ne
cessity to public and private liberty, it is now.
Unquestionably the Constitution gives am
ple power to the several Departments of the
Government to carry on war strictly subject
to its provisions, and, in case of civil war,
with perfect secuiity to citizens of the loyal
States. Every act necessary for the safety
and efiicency of the Government, and for a
complete and most vigorous trial of its
strengh, is yet wholly consistent with the ob
servance of every provision of that instrument,
and of the laws in pursuance of it, if the sole
motives of those in power were the suppres
sion of the "rebellion," and no more. And
yet the history of the Administration for the
twelve months past has been and continues to
be a history of repeated usurpations of power
and of violations of the Constitution, and of
the public and private rights of the citizen.
For the proof we appeal to facts too recent to
need recital here, and too flagrant and heinous
for the calm narrativo which we propose.
Similar acts were done and a like policy pur
sued in the threatened war with France in the
time of John Adams, and with the same ulti
mate purpose. But in two or three years the
people forced them into an honorable peace
with France, rebuked the excesses and abuses
of power, vindicated the Constitution, and
turned over the Federal Government to the
principles and policy of the Democratic party.
To the "sober second thought of the people,"
therefore, and to the ballot-box, wo now ap
peal when agaiu in like peril with our fathers.
But if every Democrat concHrred in the pol
icy of prosecuting the war to the utter sub
jugation of the South and'lor'the subversion
ot ner otateiiovernmeni wiin ner msiuuwous,
without a Convention of the States, and witl-
out an overture for peace, wo should just a
resolutely resist the disbanding of the Demo
cratic party. It is tho only party capable of
carrying on a war; it is the only party which
has ever conducted a war to a successful issue,
and the only party which has done it without
abuse of power, without molestation to the
rights of any class of citizens, and with due
regard to economy. All this, if need be,
it is able to do again. If success, then, in a
military point of view be required, the Demo
cratic party alono can command it.
To conclude: Inviting all men, without dis
tinction of State, section, or party, who are
for the Constitution as it is and the Union as
it wan, to unite with us in this great work up
on terms of perfect equality, we insist that
The restoration ol the Union, whether
through peace or by war, demands the contin
ued organization and success of the Democrat
ic party ; -
Tl. j preservation of the Coustitution de
mands it ;
The maintenance of liberty and free demo
cratical government demands it;
The restoration of a sound system of inter
nal policy demads it;
Economy and honesty in the public expen
ditures, now at the rate of lour millious'of
dollars a day, demands it;
I he rapid accumulation of an enormous and
permanent pubic debt demand it a public
debt already one thousand millions of dollars,
and equal at the present rate, in three years,
to Englaud's debt of a century and a half in
growth;
The heavy taxation, direct and indirect,
State and Federal, already more than two hun
dred millions of dollars 4 year, eating out the
substance of the people, augmenting every
year, demands it ;
Reduced wages, low prices, depression of
trade, decay of business, scarcity of work,
and impending ruin on every side demand it ;
And, fiuHlly, the restoration of the concord,
good feeling, and prosperity of former years,
demands that the Democratic party shall be
maintained and made victorious.
W. A. RICHARDSON, of Illinois.
A. L. KNAPP, of Illinois.
J. C. ROBINSON, of Illinois.
JOHN LAW, of Indiana.
I). W. VOORHEES,ot Indiana.
W. ALLEN, of Ohio.
C. A. WHITE, of Ohio.
WARREN P. NOBLE, of Ohio.
GEO. II. PENDLETON, of Ohio.
JAS. R. MORRIS, of Ohio.
C. L. VALLANDIGHAM, of Ohio.
PHILIP JOHNSON, of Penn.
S. E. ANCONA, of Penn.
GEO. K. SHIEL, of Oregon.
BY REQUEST.
"OCCASIONAL'S" REVIEW OF THE DEMO
CRATIC ADDKESS.
From the Philadelphia Press, of May Oth.
Washington, May 8, 1862. ,
A document called the address of Democrat
ic members of Congress to the Democracy of
the United States appears in tho National In
telhgencer this morning. It is signed by only
fourteen members of the House. Not a single
Democrat in the Senate and not a single Ren-
O - '
resentativc from the Border States seems to
have given it his sanction. And when its
statements are examined, in the light of history
and tested by fair argumentation, even those
who havo endorsed it will be heartily ashamed
of it. No more emphatic admonition of the
purposes entertained by the leaders of the
present Democratic organization could have
been laid before the American people than this
extraordinary production. 2sot a single word
appears in this address in favor of the war for
the maintenance of the Government, or in oppo
sition to the rebels who are fighting for Us over
throw. Is it not amazintr. in such a crisi no
this, while nearly seven hundred thousand
freemen are offering their lives as a sacrifice
to the flag while hundred of families are
mourning tbo loss of their husbands, fathers,
sons, and brothers, and with the record before
their eyes of the monstrous atrocities perpe
trated upon the wounded who have fallen into
the hands of the traitors, and even upon the
dead bodies of those who died in honorable
battle that distinguished gentlemen, profess
ing to represent a large portion of the people
of the United States, should deliberately and
coldly refuse to say that the war in which we
are now engaged is a just war, and that it is
being conducted to preserve the freest and
most generous Government in the world ?
The bravery, and the skill, and the moderation
which have extorted from hostile and foreign
nationsexpressions of astonishment and praise,
do not awaken a single throb in the breasts of
theso fourteen "Democratic members of Con
gress." Instead of this, wo find a studied ef
fort to misrepresent the Administration of Mr.
Lincoln, and the freshest and plainest events
of the last two years. I have not timo now to
point out more than one or two ot the most
flagrant instances of this misrepresentation.
The-address says :
"We do not propose to consider now the
causes which led to the present unhappy civil
war. A fitter time will come hereafter for
such discussion. But wo remind you now that
compromise made your Union, and compro
mise, fifteen months ago, would have saved it.
Repeated efforts were made at the last session
of the Thirty-sixth Congress to this end. At
every stage, the great mass of the South, with
ine whole Uemocratic party, and the whole I
constitutional Union party, of the North and !
IV est, nnited in favor of certain amendments
o tho Constitution and chief among them. I
the well-known "Crittenden Propositions,"
which would have averted civil wr, and main
tained the Union. At every stage, all propos
ed amendments inconsistent with the sectional
doctrines of the" Chicago platform were stren
uously and unanimously resisted and defeated !
by the Republican party."
Tho t8t witness to refute this astounding
assertion is Andrew Johnson of Tennessee,
who, in the Senate of the United States, on
used, the following
The Seuator told ns that the adoption of
the Clark amendment to the Crittenden reso
lutions defeated the settlement of tbe quta
tions of controversy ; and that, but for that
vote, all could have been peace and prosperity
now. We were told that tbe Clark amend
ment defeated the Crittendencompromi.se, and
prevented a settlement of the controversy
un tnis point I will read a portion of the
speech of ray worthy and talanted friend from
California, Mr. Latham, and when I speak
of him thus, I do it in no unmeaning ense.
I intend that he, not I shall answer the Sena
tor from Delaware. I know that sometimes,
when gentlemen are fixing np their pretty
rhetorical flourishes, they do not take time to
see all the sharp corners they may encounter.
If -they can make a readable sentence, and
float on in a smooth, easy stream, all goes well
and they are satisfied. As I have said, tho
Senator from Delaware told us that the Crark
ureendment was the turning point In the whole
matter; that from it bad flowed rebellion,
revolution, war, the shooting and imprison
ment of people indifferent States perhaps he
meant to include my own. This was tho Pan
dora's box that has beea opened, out of which
all the evils that now aflect the land have
flowed. Thank God I still have hove that all
will yet be saved. My worthy friend from
California, Mr. Latham') during the last ses
sion of Congress, made one of tbe best speech
es he ever made. I bought Ave thousand
copies for distribution, but I had no constitu
ents to send them to, laughter ; and they
have been lying in your document room ever
since, with , the exception of a tew, which I
thought would do good in some quarters. In
the course of that speech, upon this very point,
be made use of these remarks :
"Mr. President, being last winter a careful
eye-witness of all that occurred. I soon became
satisfied that it was a deliberate, wilful design,
on the part of some Repiesentatives of Southern
States, to seize upon the election of Mr. Lincoln
merely as an excuse to precipitate this revolution
upon the country. One evidence, to my mind, is
the fact that South. Carolina never sent Senators
here.''
Then they certainly were not influenced by
the Clark amendment.
"An additional evidence is, that when gen
tlemen on this floor, by their votes, could have
controlled legislation, they refused to cast
them from fear that the very proposition sub
mitted to this body might Lave an.influence
in changing the opinions of their constituen
cies. Wby, sir, when the resolutions submit
ted by the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr.
Clark, J were offered as an amendment to tbe
Crittenden propositions, for the manifest pur
pose of embarrassing the latter, and the vote
taken on the ICth of January, 1861, 1 ask.what
did we see 1 There were fifty-five Senators at
that time upon this floor In person. The Globe
of the secoud session, Thirty-sixth Congress,
part 1, page 499, Miows that upon the call of
the yeas and nays immediately preceeding the
vote on the substitute of Mr. Clark's amend
ment, there were fifty-five votes cast. I will
read the vote from the Globe :
"Yeas Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bineham,
Cameroo, Chandler, Clark, CuUamer, Dixon,
Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster,
Grimes, Hale, Harlin, King, Seward, Sim
mons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade,
Wilkinson, and Wilson 25.
Nays Messrs. Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler,
Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Dong
las, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hemphill, Hunter,
Iverson, Johnson of Arkansas, John.son of
Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason,
Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice.
Sanlsbury,Sebastian, Slidell, and Wigfa'.l 30.
"The vote being taken immediately after on
the Clark proposition, was as follows :
"Yeas Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Binaham,
Cameron, Chandler, Clark", Coll imer, Dixon,
Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster,
Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons,
Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wad, Wilkin
son, and Wilson 23.
"Nays: Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg,
Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Fitch, Green,
Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kenne
dy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce,
Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, and
Sebastian 23.
"Six Senators retained their seats and re
fused to vote, thus themselves allowing the
Clark proposition to supplant the Crittenden
resolutions by a voto of 23 to 23. Mr. Benj i
min, of Louisiana, Mr. Hemphill and Mr. Wig-
fall, of Texas, Mr. Iverson, of Georgia, Mr
Johnson, of Arkansas, and Mr. Slidell, of
Louisiana, were in their seats, but refused to
cast their votes."
I sat right behind Mr. Benjamin, and lam
not sure that my worthy friend was not close
by, when he refused to vote, and I said to him,
"Mr. Benjamin, why do you not voto ? Why
not save this proposition and see if we cannot
bring the country to it ?" lie gave me rather
an abrupt answer, and said he would control
his own action without consulting me or any
body else. Said I, "vote and show yourself
an honest man." As soon as tho vote was
taken, he and others telegraphed South, "We
cannot get any compromise." Here wore six
Southern men refusing to vote, when the
amendment would have been rejected by fonr
majority if they had voted- Who, then, has
brought these evils on the country 1 Was it
Mr. Clark ? He was acting out his own policy;
but with tho help we had from the other side
of tho Chamber, it all those on this side had
been true to the Constitution and faithful to
their constituents, and had acted with fidelity
to the country, the amendment of the Senator
from New Hampshire could have been voted
down, the defeat of w hich the Senator from
Delaware says, would have saved the country.
Whose fault was it 7 Who is responsible for
it.? I think that is not only getting the nail
through, but clenching it on the other side,
and the whole staple commodity is taken out of
tbe speech. Who did it? Southern traitors,
as was said in the speech of the Senator from
California. They did it. They wanted no
compromise. They accomplished their object
by withholding their votes; and hence' the
country has been involved in the present diffi
culty. Let mo read another extract from this
speech of the Senator from California :
"I recollect full well the joy that pervaded
the faces of some of those gentlemen at the re
mit, and the sorrow, manifested by the vener
able Senator from Kentucky, (Mr. Crittenden)
Tbe record shows that Mr. Pugh, from Ohio,
despairing of any compromise between the ex
tremes ef ultra Republicans and DisuoiODists,
the 81st of January last
language :
working manifestly for tbe same end, moved,
immediately after tbe vote was announced, to
lay the whole Mil ject on the table. If yea
will turn to page 443, me same volume, yea
will find, when, at a late ueriod. Mr. Cameron.
from Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider the
v-':, appeals having been made to sCstin
those who were struggling to preserve the
peace of the country, that the vote was recon
sidered ; and when, at last, the Crittenden
propositions were submitted on the 2d daj of
March, these Southern States having nearly all
secedfd ; they were then lost by but one vote.
Here is the vote :
"Yeas Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bright.
Crittenden, Douglas, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson
of Tennes.see, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Ma
son, Nicholson. Polk, Pugb, Rice, Sebastian,
Thomson, and Wigfall 19.
"Nays Messrs. Anthony, Bingham. Chan
dler, Clark, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessen
den, Foot, Foster. Grirae3, Harlan, Kie,
Morrill, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wad.
Wilkinson, and Wilson 20.
"If these seceding Southern Senators had
remained, they would have passed, by a Urg
vote, (a3 it did without them.) an amendment,
by a two-third vote, forbidding Congress ever
interfering with Slavery in the Sute3. Tea
Crittenden propositions would have been en
dorsed by a majority vote, tho subject finallj
going belore the people, who have never yet,
after consideration, refused jus'ice, for any
length of time, to any portion of the country.
"I believe more, Mr. President, that these
gentlemen were acting in pursuance cf a tcttiei
and fixed plan 'to break up and destroy this Got
crnment." When we had it in our power to voto down
fhe amendment of tho Senator from New
Hampshire, and adopt the Crittenden resolu
tions, certain Southern Senators prevented ft;
and yet, at a late day of the session, after they
had seceded, th-j Crittenden proposition w
only lost by one vote. If rebellion and blood
shed and murder have followed, to whosa
skirts does the responsibility attach ? I sum
med up all these facts myself in a speech du
ring the last session ; but I have preferred to
read the speech of the Senator from Califor
nia, he being better authority, and having pre
sented the facts better than I cu'.d.
It may be alleged by Mr. ValUn Jingham,
whose name is ot course attached to this ad
dress, and who was probably its antfcor, tint
because the Rebublicans did not vote for tt
Crittenden Compromisa, therefore this formal
declaration of the "Democratic members cf
Congress" stand uncontradicted ; but Andrew
Johnson in the same speech from which I hava
quoted, shows that the Republicans gave th9
strongest assurances of their disposition ami
determination to do everything to convince
the people of the South that they intended no
violation of tbe Constitntion, and no infrac
tion of the rights of any State of tbe Union.
He says :
"What else was done at tbe very sime ses
sion ? The House of Representatives passed,
and sent to this body, a proposition to amend
the Constitution of tbe United States, so aa to
prohibit Congress from ever hereafter interfe
ring with the institution of slavery in tho
States, making that restriction a part of the or
ganic law of the land. That constitutional
amendment came here after the Senators from
seven States had seceded ; and yet it was ps--ed
by a two-third vote in tbe Senate. Havo
you ever hcinl of any cno of tho States which
bad thvn seceded, or whicli has since seceded,
taking up that amendment to the Constitution,
and saying they would ratify it, and make it
part of that instrument I No. Does not the
whole historv of this rebellion tell you that it
was revolution that the leaders wanted, that
they started lor, that they intended to have?
Tho facts to which I have referred show how
the Crittenden proposition might have been
carried ; and when the Senators from tbe slava
States were reduced to one-fourth ot the mem
bers of this body, the two Houses passed a
proposition to amer.d the Constitution, to aa
to guaranty to the States perfect security in
regard to the institution ot slavery in all fu
ture time, and prohibiting Congress from legis
lating on the subject."
It is in the face of such a record an this that
these "Democratic members of Congress'
now come forward and "appeal to tbe journal
of Congress and to the Congressional Globe1' to
establish the deliberate allegation that, during
th? last session of the'Thirty-sixth Congress,
repeated ef.'orts at compromise were made,
"and at every stage all proposed amendmeota
inconMStent with the sectional doctrines of
tho Chicago platform were streuously and
unanimously resisted and defeated by the re
publican party." But these fourteen Demo
cratic members of Congress arc met ty other
evidence equally overwhelming. Oa tne 17th.
of December, 1860, shortly after the election
of Mr. Lincoln, and before Secession had taken
place, the House of Representatives of tb
United States adopted the following preamb'.o
and resolution :
"Whereas, the Constitution of the United
Statf s is the supreme law of the laud, and its
ready and liithtul observance the duty of all
good and law-abiding citizens : Therefore,
"Resolved, That we deprecate the spirit ef
disobedience ta that Constitution wherever
manifested, and that we earnestly recommend
the repeal of all statutes, including personal
liberty bills, so-called, enacted by State Le
gislatures, conflicting with, and In violation
of that sacred instrument, and the Uwa of
Congress made in pursuance thereof."
This resolutian, calling npon the States to
repeal their personal-liberty bills, was passed
by a unanimous tote ; and the States, acting in
the tamo spirit, did proceed to reconsider
them, although they were si:own to be totally
ineffective ;. and for tun year9 tbey bad never
caused the escape of a single fugitive slave.
And again, on the motion of tue Hvn. John
Sherman, of Ohio, at a later day.the following
resolution was partsed by the same body : -.
"Resolved, That neither Congress nor tbo
people or Governments of tbe non-slaveholi-
ecyctcTED e.v rontTH tam '
11