35TH CONG....1ST SESS. The late Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina, said, in his speech of the 15th March, 1854: "If the natural laws of climate and of soil exclude us from a Territory of which we are the joint owners, we shall not and we will not complain." Mr. Butler, of South Carolina, said, on the 2d of March, 1854: "If two States should ever come into the Union from them, [the Territories, ] it is very certain that not more than one of them could, in any possible event, be a slaveholding State; and I have not the least idea that even one would be." Mr. KEITT, of South Carolina, in his speech of 30th March, 1854, quoted Mr. Pinckney, of his own State, that "Practically, he thought slavery would not go above the line of 36° 30' by the laws of physical geography, and, therefore, that the South lost no territory fit for slavery." Senator DAVIS, of Mississippi, and Senator MASON and Senator HUNTER, of Virginia, confirmed the above. Senator KENNEDY, American, of Maryland, said: "Mr. President, this agitation of slavery, upon which so inuch has been said-this harp of a thousand strings, which has been vibrated from one extreme of the country to the other-has no practical political bearing on the institution of slavery in the South to-day. It is a matter of political economy simply; and if gentlemen will turn to the tables with which your departments are filled, they will find that with your three million two hundred thousand slaves, tak ing the very strongest view you can possibly admit, you cannot get more than half that number-some one million six hundred thousand slaves-as laborers and producers in this country. Gentlemen talk to me about creating a vast excitement over this land as to whether or not slavery is to go into Kansas and Nebraska; but permit me to say that, by the immutable laws of political economy alone, if this body declared to day that no more emigrants should go into one of these Territories north of thirty-five degrees, I do not honestly believe that you could retain slavery there five years." Mr. SEWARD replied by stating his course was influenced by a regard to the interests of the whole country. He knew nothing nor cared nothing for party. He thought the mistake of Mr. HALE and others was in thinking the battle was not yet over WHEN IT WAS. It was a struggle for numerical ascendency between free and slave States. There were now sixteen free and fifteen slave; and whatever Administrations, or anybody else might do, there would be before another year NINETEEN to FIFTEEN. Mr. THAYER, Republican, from Massachusetts, said: Admission of Kansas-Mr. Marshall. would have brought no comment from me; I should have "Mr. President, no man in this body knows better than in this Union, or a single representative of the slaveholding States. If they have, I demand of that Senator now to say Ho. OF REPS. sequences. It is not whether Kansas shall be admitted as a slave State or a free State, for the latter is conceded a fixed fact; but it is whether the Democracy of this Union shall be overthrown or survive the coming conflict. To day it is the only surviving party in the history of our Government; all others have disappeared. To-day it is the only party that carries the flag of our Union; the only party whose ranks, filled with the toiling millions, keep step to the "music of the Union." In its past struggles for ascendency many have deserted, many have fallen; but, thank God, their places have been filled in its advancing columns. None know so well as our oft-beaten enemies on the other side that their only path to victory is over the prostrate Democracy of this Union. so. We are now warned by the other side that a crisis has arrived in our political history, and that the fate of this great party is sealed. It may be If it be true, God knows I desire not to lift the vail which hangs over the future of my country. I am no alarmist, but I will utter the honest sentiment of my heart, that I as solemnly believe as I believe in my God, that if the Democracy of this Union goes down, the flag of the Union will go down to be trampled in fraternal blood under the feet of northern and southern hosts contending for the empire of this continent. Yes, sir, go down to rise no more-never again to float from the dome of this Capitol. But, sir, it will not go down. The Democracy of this Union has a higher, it has a divine destiny. Its mission must and will be fulfilled. Its mission in this Republic is to maintain this Union Sir, the appeal is constantly made from both wings of this Capitol, to the free laborers of the North to rally and meet the aggressive slave power upon our Territories. These appeals come from either weak, distempered, or dishonest minds. It is imbecility or ignorance that trembles at these false alarms. None know better than our opponents that there is not an inch of territory on this continent that free labor will not occupy where our free laborers can live and thrive; their countless throngs are already pressing through the gorges of the Rocky Mountains. If they would elevate and dignify the free laborers of the North, let them pass the bill giving them homesteads from the public domain, instead of giving millions of its acres to colossal corporations to be their future landlords-equality to all its sections, equality to all its citand masters, and perhaps in the end to be reclaimed from them through violence and blood, as the plebeians rescued the public domain, won by their blood from the grasp of the patricians in the days of imperial Rome. But, sir, this kind of practical philanthropy towards the free laborers of the North would cost something; they believe in a cheap philanthropy; long prayers of their political priests, and New England psalmody, are more to their taste and habits of economy. Underground railroads their employés can always be paid with checks, they believe in, because they can run cheap, as certified by their political priests, payable in the other world. Slavery, sir, has constantly been receding south since the formation of the Union-not from the pressure of a popular fanaticism or increase of vital piety in the North-not from congressional interference-but because slave labor was more "We of the North have too high an idea of the power book of the ship of State, and not the steam-engine that propels the ship, nor the wind that fills the canvas. We would like to have the log-book kept right, to show our true position; but we do not now consider the Government as the motive power. The motive power of this nation, and of all nations, is the people in their homes; and as the people in their homes are, so is your progress. If the people in their homes in Kansas had been pro-slavery, what could the North have opposed to it? It was emigration, and emigration only, that could have made Kansas a State, either slave or free." Here, then, sir, is the combined testimony of northern and southern Senators, Republicans, Americans, and Democrats, all concurring that Kansas will be a free State, and that climate, soil, and population, will determine that species of labor which will occupy our Territories. Why will gentlemen, in the face of this accumulated testimony, argue that Kansas can be made a slave State? Why will they persist that there is danger that the slave power will overrun our Territories, and that the southern slave dealers are even conspiring to carry slavery into free States? I know no way so conclusively to reply to these clamors as to add, from the debate the other day in the Senate, the reply of Senator TooмBS to Senator DOUGLAS, which I beg to read. Senator TOOMBS, having stated why he had not previously participated in the debate, said: "But that Senator having arraigned, in my judgment, and unjustly arraigned, the section of this Union from which I come, for the purpose of his own defense, I desire to be heard for a short time upon his course, and in vindication of theirs. "The last two hours of the Senator's speech have been devoted to two single points. The first was an article in the Washington Union of the 17th of November. I should have let the Senator settle his difficulty with that newspaper in his own way, either here or elsewhere-and I think it would have been more consistent with the dignity of the Senate and of the subject to settle it elsewhere than here; still, it tropical productions, and their increased demand "The moment the labor of the slave ceases to be profit- The gentleman from Massachusetts planted his abolition on profit. He thought Yankees might own slaves South, if it would improve their social condition, especially if they found it necessary in order to marry a wife. Now, sir, those who know the Yankees well would not doubt his proposition. They, I think, would concede more to the liberality of the Yankee. They would even believe the Yankee would not object to the wife, even if she happened to own a few negroes. So far as the issue of the rejection or admission "For Mr. Chairman, my time will only permit me to The doctrine attributed to the Union's article by Senator DOUGLAS, was subsequently disavowed by the Union itself. izens in their constitutional, religious, civil, and personal rights. Its mission on this earth is universal emancipation. Wirt, in his eulogy on the immortal Jefferson, the father of Democracy, said: "From the working of the strong energies within him, there arose an early vision which cheered his youth, and man throughout the world." accompanied him through life-the vision of emancipated In the war of the crusades, among the gorgeous ensigns which Christian knights bore on the fields of Palestine, there was one banner, plain and unadorned, containing one inscription. Wherever that banner was borne the Saracen ranks gave way, and the shouts of victory from the Christian hosts went up. That banner contained this simple inscription: "God wills it." ADMISSION OF KANSAS. SPEECH OF HON. S. S. MARSHALL, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois, said: Mr. CHAIRMAN: I had not intended, till within the last few days, to submit any remarks of my own on the subject of this much vexed Kansas question. It is entirely exhausted. It is impossible to present anything in the way of novelty or argument, or even of declamation, on a subject which has been so long discussed before the House and before the country. I do not propose this evening to go into anything like a general discussion of the various points that have been mooted and discussed on this floor; and were it not that this question has assumed an importance in the public mind far beyond what it is entitled to, in my estimation; were it not for the fact that the people of one section of the Confederacy are agitated, and seem to think their peculiar institutions and their constitutional rights are involved in this issue; were it not for the fact that a large portion of the people of the country seem to think that on the result of this question now before the House, depends the perpetuity of the Union; and as serious results may, in fact, follow the action of Congress, it beconies important not only that we should record our votes, but that the country should be informed what were our views and motives for so doing; were it not for these facts, I would have been content to cast a silent vote. But, sir, as the record in reference to the con 35TH CONG....1ST SESS. duct of the members of this House will be looked to hereafter, and as the Representatives from one section of the Confederacy are charging that those who oppose the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution, are doing it on sectional grounds, and for sectional motives, and that our conduct is governed by anti-slavery sentiments, I wish to place myself right on the record before the House and before the country. Before coming, however, to any question which legitimately bears on the subject now before the committee, I wish to allude to one or two points, rather incidental than directly, bearing on the questions that have been brought up in the course of this debate. And, first, I will notice very briefly the fact that it has been, time and again, insinuated by gentlemen coming from one section or another of this Confederation that the opposition, and the sole opposition, to the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution arises from the pressure of anti-slavery sentiments. Now, sir, if gentlemen who make this charge know it to be false, their conduct in making it is scandalously unjust to those who have been, during their whole lifetime, warring against the greatest obstacles in favor of the constitutional rights of the South; and if they do not know it to be false, their ignorance is inexcusable. I know, Mr. Chairman, that a large portion of those who are opposing the admission of Kansas under this Lecompton constitution are opposed to the admission of any more slave States, and consequently are not willing, as a general rule, to let the people interested settle this question of slavery for themselves. This is the position, as I understand it, of most of the members of the Republican party. It is well known here and elsewhere that I dissent from this view entirely. I am for the perfect equality of the people of all sections, whether they are in the States or Territories. Admission of Kansas-Mr. Marshall. that I have made no preparation whatever for this discussion. I have had my mind directed to other subjects entirely, and the remarks which I shall make will necessarily be very desultory. The only proper doctrine in regard to this question of slavery is that which I supposed had been adopted and was thoroughly understood by the Democratic party of this country: the doctrine of nonintervention which was embodied in the KansasNebraska bill and in the Cincinnati platform. Upon that idea the contest and canvass for President was made which carried Mr. Buchanan into the presidential chair. I think that at the time of the canvass of 1856 the doctrine of non-intervention was understood by the American people and by the Democratic party. But we are again all at sea. Since this Congress convened, for the purpose of forcing through a favorite project of gentlemen here, we are every day hearing new ideas in regard to the doctrine of intervention and non-intervention which were never dreamed of until now. Now, sir, what is the doctrine of non-intervention? It is plain and simple, and when you present it to the mind it can be distinctly comprehended and understood. There is no difficulty about it. It is simply this: that the Federal Government shall, in no manner whatever, attempt to dictate or control the local laws or domestic institutions of any State or Territory; that " the people thereof shall be left perfectly free" to determine these matters for themselves; and if they get into a squabble or quarrel among themselves, as they have done in Kansas, that we shall keep our hands off, and have nothing to do with them until they peacefully and quietly, fairly and honestly, settled the form of their government for themselves. Congress has no power, in regard to the Territories, to legislate upon the subject of slavery. Of this, at least, I have no doubt. It is not within the legitimate province of the General Government. But it does not follow that Congress, or any member of Congress, is under any obligation to vote for the admission of new States, either with slavery or without slavery in their constitutions, when there is any other proper and legitimate objection to such admission; want of population, want of presentation by the people themselves for admission, want of fairness, or any other honest and legitimate objection. Sir, if it should appear to my satisfaction that the great the Territory were felons or outlaws or rebelsas the President calls the people of Kansas-that would be sufficient, in my judgment, not only to lead me, but to force me, acting as the Representative of a free people, and looking to the interests of this great country, to give my vote against the admission of any such State or any such people into this Confederacy. If the people of Kansas were felons or outlaws, or belonged to a degraded race, such as free negroes,who had conferred upon themselves, by their own action, the rights of citizenship; a population which I did not think worthy to be placed on an equality with myself and those I represent, in administering and taking part in the affairs of the Government, I should not hesitate to oppose the admission of such a State into this Confederacy. I think this doctrine of congressional prohibition is sectional, unjust, and dangerous in its tendency, and that if ever a party takes possession of all the branches of this Government acting on that basis, and attempts to carry out that principle, it will lead inevitably to a dissolution of the Union, and a breaking up of this great Confederacy. That is my view about it. But it by no means follows, as is charged by those who are in favor of the admission of Kansas under the Le-body of the population constituting the people of compton constitution, that those of us who are opposed to that measure are influenced by any intention or desire to exclude a bona fide slave State. I am opposing it because I will not sanction what I believe to be a gross outrage upon the very principles on which the American Revolution was fought; because I will not sanction frauds which I believe are as deep and black as ever were perpetrated in this or any other country, and because I believe that I would be sanctioning, if I were to vote for it, the miserable spawn which has come from the machinations of the Lecompton conspirators, for I look upon the authors of that constitution as nothing else but conspirators against the liberties of those whose will they ought to have regarded. Mr. Chairman, that the Lecompton constitution tolerates slavery is not only not my main objection to it, but it constitutes no part of my objection. I state here before the House and the country, that so far as I am concerned, I hold that the people of Kansas have the same right to adopt a pro-slavery constitution, if they are in favor of it, as they have to adopt a free-State constitution. I have no right, in my opinion, and certainly I have no disposition, as a member of this Congress, to dictate or even attempt to influence the action of the people of Kansas on this or any other subject. Upon this question of the right | of the people of Kansas to adopt a pro-slavery constitution, if they desire it, I have not a shadow of a doubt. If I could influence their action one way or the other I certainly should not do so. I have not a particle of feeling on the subject, one way or another. Upon some other occasion I might have thought proper to go into this question at greater length, But I will so do it as questionat propose hast ening through the few points which I intend to present. I will remark, in justification of myself, But, sir, I will not dwell upon this. There is another point to which I wish to call attention, and that is to what I call the indecent attempt to ostracize, whip in, or read out of the party Democrats whose consciences and judgments will not sanction these frauds. I do not intend to dwell upon this, although it is a subject worthy of the gravest consideration. There has been an attempt to brand, as rebels and as traitors-notwithstanding what might be the judgment of gentlemen, notwithstanding what their consciences and their constituents might dictate-those who will not bow down to power and lick the hand that attempts to lash them into the traces. For myself, I will say, that I have as strong an attachment for the Democratic party and the Democratic Executive as any man upon this floor or in the country, but I am not a spaniel to be whipped into the service of any man or set of men. I will think and act as the Representalive of a great and free people who owe nothing to Presidents or Cabinets. In acting with the Democratic party I do so from my conviction of right Ho. OF REPS. and duty, and from no other motive whatever. I will permit no man on earth to think for me, or dictate my course of action. I have the honor of representing the strongest Democratic district in this Union; a district which, with the sectional issue presented in the last presidential contest, increased its Democratic majority more than any other in the country, which swelled the majority for Mr. Buchanan ten thousand over any former vote. Mr. HUGHES. Will the gentleman permit me? Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I will yield to the gentleman with pleasure, if he will ask a direct question, and waive his usual preamble. Mr. HUGHES. I will try to ask a question without a preamble. It is this: who is it that has attempted to establish this test, and to read men out of the party? Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. That is a very direct question for the gentleman. It is done notoriously by the present Administration. It is done by the organ of the Administration in this city. It is done by the Administration throughout the country; and it is well known that the tenure of office depends upon whether the incumbent will bow down his conscience and his judgment to this Lecompton scheme. Mr. HUGHES. Has the gentleman been excluded from a Democratic caucus of the whole Democratic party because of his opinion on this question? Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. Not at all; I do not pretend that there has been any direct action, because it so happens that a congressional caucus has no such power conferred upon it, either by the people, the Constitution, or even the Cincinnati platform. Mr. LAWRENCE. Does the gentleman from Illinois know how soon he may be excluded from a Democratic caucus after to-morrow? Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois I do not know, and I do not care. The matter does not disturb my equanimity for a moment. Mr. LAWRENCE. Nor mine either. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I know that a congressional caucus has no such power. This is a matter of fidelity to the party, to be settled by the conventions of the party in the States, and by the national convention. For myself, I think a man is a good Democrat who always votes the Democratic ticket without scratching, and manfully battles for the principles of his party, the rights of the people, and the Constitution of his country. Mr. CLARK, of New York. I think if the gentleman refers to the proceedings of last evening, that he will see that this conclusion is not fairly deducible from those proceedings. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I do not refer to that; but is it not known to gentlemen on this floor that a paper in this city, recognized as the organ of this Administration, has forgotten the Know Nothing party, the Abolition party, and Black Republican party, and has gone down into the sewers of filth and defamation for the purpose of fishing up epithets to hurl at Democrats upon this floor, denouncing them as traitors and rebels, with other similar choice epithets. Mr. HUGHES. One more question without a preamble. Yes, sir; if it Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. is without a preamble. [Laughter.] Mr. HUGHES. Before any party tests were established, did not the gentleman from Illinois meet in caucus repeatedly with gentlemen who were opposed to the Lecompton constitution? Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. The gentleman has been propounding that question a great many times, and I do not know whether he has got a satisfactory answer or not; but permit me to say that those who are in favor of the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution, I do not care what they call themselves, whether Democrats or Know Nothings, have the right to adopt whatever means, after consultation, they may deem proper, which may harmonize them and best subserve the end they have in view. But that is not establishing a party test. Those who are opposed to it, and think it is fraudulent, who think it is a violation of the principles of our Government, if they really want to defeat it, may get 35TH CONG....1ST SESS. together and agree upon such a course as will se cure their object. For myself, I have never gone into caucus or consultation with anybody except Democrats, in regard to this or any other political question. Mr. HUGHES. I want to say this: If I can get the floor after the gentleman has concluded his speech, I will give my views on this subject. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I have no objection to that, and I have no doubt that the gentleman will throw much additional light on the subject. I will resume my remarks: Who are the men against whom this crusade is made? Who are the men that are denounced as Free-Soilers, as Abolitionists, as traitors, and rebels? Of what material are they made? It so happens that the anti-Lecompton Democrats who oppose this odious measure (I speak of the measure, and not of those who support it) have to a man got a clean Democratic record. You will find none of your broken-down Free-Soilers among us. It is not in the ranks of the anti-Lecompton Democrats, but in your own that you will find your authors and advocates of the Buffalo platform. Your Hon. JOHN COCHRANES, (now, by the grace of God and special favor of Lecomptonites, chairman of the "Democratic caucus" that is to establish the test of orthodoxy,) your Van Burens, and your Dixes, and your James Gordon Bennetts, and men of that character. There is not a man among us, who, from his first vote down to the present time, has not a clear Democratic record, without spot or blemish, and beyond all suspicion. I invite any gentleman who may desire it to enter into the investigation. Mr. HUGHES. I will do that. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I would like to take up the record of my friend, and a few other of such immaculate Democrats, but I cannot do it to night. I cannot confer that favor upon them. But, sir, it affords me no pleasure to pursue this line of remark. I would much rather avoid all crimination of every kind, and see our Democratic friends all move on harmoniously together. But one thing is worthy of remark. It so happens that those gentlemen who are so rampant to read us out of the Democratic party are mostly men who have, until very recently, warred against Democracy their whole lives. It is a good illustration of the old doctrine that new converts are always more zealous than old members of the church, [laughter;] they take a far greater interest in the church than those who have been in it all their lives. I repeat-what you all know to be the fact-that a great portion of these very men, who are now so eager to read out of the Democratic party men who have been in it all their lives, are men who have gone down with other parties, and who have jumped upon the Democratic platform to keep from going to the bottom. I make these remarks in no spirit of crimination. I have no lectures to read these gentlemen for their past sins and transgressions. I was one of those, sir, who received gladly and welcomed cordially the returning prodigals into the bosom of the Democratic party. But I would advise a little more modesty in their deportment for the future. Let their conduct not lead us to suspect that they entered the party only to distract and divide. Let us not be forced to the conclusion that, Judas like, they kissed only that they might more easily betray. Mr. Chairman, while on this subject of party fidelity, there is one other matter to which I suppose I had as well allude here. It is, I know, not a matter of much importance, and certainly not a thing which disturbs my equanimity a particle; but it has become a subject of remark, and probably deserves some notice. I refer to it the more readily because I know that my sincere regard for my southern friends will not be questioned. There is in the South a certain class of politicians-far from constituting a majority, I am happy to say— who arrogate to themselves a superior wisdom, plume themselves upon their superior Democracy, and claim the right, as if they had a patent from God Almighty for the purpose, to declare what is and what is not Democracy. These men, often as destitute of brains as of modesty, assert by their deportment, and sometimes by their language, a superiority for southern gentlemen and southern Admission of Kansas-Mr. Marshall. Democrats over those who happen to hail from northern States. Now, sir, for one, I am tired of these peacock gosterings and baseless assumptions. I wish to make no comparisons; I wish to impeach no man's motives or fidelity to his party. But truth and justice to myself and those with whom I act require that I should say, that in all the issues on the slavery question which the Democratic party have made for the maintenance of the constitutional rights of the South, you gentlemen from that section deserve no particular credit for the position you have assumed; you are floating with the current of popular opinion in your own section; you are fighting for your own interests, for your altars and your firesides, your "domestic institutions;" you dare not take any other position; you could not do so and stand before your constituents for a moment. A But how is it with northern Democrats? more unselfish, devoted, self-sacrificing band of men have never existed in any political organization. In the face of the natural anti-slavery sentiments of our own section-in the face of the Abolition and Free-Soil waves, mountain high, which threatened to ingulf us, and which were too often raised and strengthened by the rashness and folly of southern men-we have, year by year, breasted this Free-Soil deluge, and beaten back its fierce waves. We have battled for your rights, Ho. OF REPS. But now, as if to add insult to injury, you have dragged into my presence a hybrid monster, conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity; the miserable offspring of conspiracy and crime, covered with fraud and bearing with it the marks of infamy; a bastard bantling, disowned, repudiated, loathed, and despised by the people whose child it claims to be; you have dragged into my presence this fetid monster, offensive to my eyes and my nostrils, labeled it "Lecompton constitution," christened it by the name of DEMOCRACY, and ask me to bow down and worship it as my idol. I tell you I will not do it. With my convictions it would be dishonorable in me to do so. You may denounce and proscribe, pile epithet upon epithet, and hurl your anathemas until you are sick with your own folly, and it will all pass by me as the idle winds which I heed not. There is no power on earth that could induce me to sanction this wrong. And now, let me say to my southern friends, you have carried this thing far enough. You are asking us to take a position upon which we could not and ought not to stand. Before you further heap epithets and denunciation upon us, it would be well for you to pause and study the history of the Democratic party. The sacrifices have been altogether on our side, and not yours. We have never been strengthened one particle by any act of yours. I wish to know what concession you have ever made in our party organization for the purpose of strengthening our hands? What do we owe you? When have we been strengthened in our course upon this floor, or before our constituents, by any concession you have made? Mr. JONES, of Tennessee. If the gentleman will permit me to ask him a question, I desire to know if the southern Democracy have ever asked northern men or any other men to concede anything but their constitutional rights? If we have ever gone beyond the Constitution, we ask you not to concede it. All we ask of you is the Con not because they were yours, but because we intend always to defend the right, without regard to section, and regardless of consequences. We have done this without a murmur, unaided and alone; for we have been more often crippled by the rashness and assumptions of southern men than strengthened by any aid from them. We have freely, without hesitation, united with you in these issues, by which our ranks have been thinned and broken, and thousands of our bravest captains overwhelmed and driven from the field. We have, without a murmur, united with you in these issues, by which you have been strength-stitution of the country and Democratic princiened, until you have been able to break down all opposition, and come up here a united and unbroken column. And now, forgetting the means by which you have been strengthened and we weakened, too many of you have become arrogant and dictatorial, and claim for yourselves all the credit of the victory, and the right to set up new and unheard-of tests of Democracy. ples. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I am not aware that you have asked more until now. I have said before my constituents, and before the country, in public addresses, that my conviction is that as far as the legislation of the country up to this time is concerned, the South has asked nothing which is not her right under the Constitution of the United States. But I am sure, if you call this Lecompton constitution a southern measure, you are asking that which is an insult to the people both of the North and South, as I honestly believe it ought to be considered. Mr. HUGHES. I wish to say a word right here in justice to the gentleman from Illinois. The gentleman has made an insinuation here, in reference to my record. If ever a people deserved commendation for a faithful, unflinching adherence to right and duty, the northern Democracy deserve that commendation. If any people are entitled to gratitude for an unselfish and perilous defense of the rights of others, the northern Democracy ought to have been met with that gratitude. But what are the facts? When the great sectional battle had been fought and won; when the Opposition were, by thousands, abandoning their sectional platform of con- Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. Oh, I cannot gressional prohibition; we come up here, and, in-yield the floor further. I do not intend to go into stead of gratitude, friendship, or even common that. courtesy, we are met with contumely, denunciation, proscription, insult, and injustice. We are denounced as traitors, rebels, and renegades, because we have determined at all hazards to defend the rights of the white man to govern himself, and to resist to the last every attempt to subjugate him by fraud or violence. We are proscribed because we will not basely bow the knee to power, or yield to the seductive influences of executive patronage. Sir, I have been taught that Democracy is a glorious principle, emanating from God and having its home in the hearts of honest men. I have been taught that it is based on the golden rule of doing unto others as we would that they should do unto us; that it defends the equal rights of all men, and works injustice to none; that, "like the dews of heaven, it dispenses its blessings to all alike," and resists wrong, fraud, usurpation, and oppression, from whatever quarter they may come; that popular rights constitute its base and that its apex points to the eternal principles of truth and justice. This, sir, is what is understood by Democracy in the humble school where I was educated, and among that gallant people whom I am proud to represent here. As the representative of that principle, that people gave a cordial and almost unanimous vote to Mr. Buchanan for President. Mr. HUGHES. I just wish to say that I challenge that gentleman, or any other gentleman, to assail that record. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. My friend must excuse me. I do not intend to go into small matters this evening. [Laughter.] Mr. HUGHES. I do; for I expect to answer you. [Laughter.] Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. The gentleman had better discuss himself, as he seems anxious to make himself conspicuous by attempting to magnify very small things. [Laughter.] Mr. HUGHES. If I desired to make myself conspicuous, I should seek to array myself against some man of more standing than the gentleman from Illinois. [Renewed laughter.] Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. This is not the first time I have seen small things trying to magnify their own importance. It is not the first time I have heard of flies buzzing around and trying to attract the attention of objects much larger than themselves. [Laughter.] Mr. HUGHES. Buzzing around very dirty places. [Excessive laughter.] Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. The very kind of places in which I should expect to find the gentleman from Indiana. [Continued laughter.] Mr. HUGHES. It is just the place I find myself, when I follow after you. 35TH CONG....1ST SESS. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. Well, I hope the gentleman will enjoy his situation. But I must ask pardon of the committee for indulging in this badinage. I have been led into it unexpectedly. Let it stop here. I have no unkind feelings towards the gentleman from Indiana, and I hope he will so consider it. If he is satisfied now, I am very sure that I am. [Laughter.} Mr. Chairman, the presentation of this Lecompton constitution to Congress offered the people of the South the best opportunity they have ever had of building up a great national and conservative party, which would have been a bulwark to the constitutional rights of the South in all time to come. And why? What was our difficulty throughout the North during the last presidential canvass, in maintaining the doctrine of the Kansas-Nebraska bill and the Cincinnati platform-the doctrine of leaving the people free to form and regulate their own domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States? What was the difficulty? It was not that there was anything in the doctrine hostile to the sentiments of the great body of the northern people. Our opponents charged that the Democratic party were not acting in good faith, and did not mean what they said, or intend to carry out the principles they professed; that the Democratic was a pro-slavery organization; that we, the men of the North, who were supporting it, were doughfaces, hirelings, doing the bidding of the slaveocracy; and that when the Democrats got into power, they would not leave it to the people of Kansas to settle the matter at the polls, but would force slavery upon them; that the Kansas-Nebraska bill was passed for that very purpose. We denied this charge everywhere, and insisted that the Democratic party was honest in its professions, and that the people would be permitted to frame their constitution and regulate their domestic affairs according to their own will. And I tell you, if we could have satisfied the people of the North that such would be the practical effect of the doctrines of the Democratic party, and of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the Republican party would have been reduced not only thousands, but hundreds of thousands, and the Democratic representation from the North upon this floor would have been doubled. Admission of Kansas-Mr. Marshall. not their constitution, and that they are not ask- Let me make another remark or two in regard The Democratic party seemed to be melting away like snow before them. On one side was the Know Nothing party, and on the other the Republican party, which seemed to spring into existence spontaneously after the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. The Democrats were flying before them, both on the right hand and on the left, and the spaniel-like time-servers of the party were running howling back to their kennels to evade the contest, and there lurked to await the result of the fierce battle that was approaching. Ho. OF REPS. tide and saved the party from destruction-are now proscribed and hunted down, as if they were in fact felons and traitors; and miserable timeservers are endeavoring to blacken and befoul their characters with their slime. My God, Mr. Chairman, was such ingratitude ever heard of in any country? [Several voices: "Never!"] And why are they read out of the party? One, the author of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and who ought to know something of what that bill means, and of whose fidelity to the Constitution and to the rights of the South there ought to be no question, says he is not satisfied that the people of Kansas were left to settle and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way. He is not satisfied that this constitution is a fair and legal embodiment of their will; there is a doubt about it; and he would rather wait, keep hands off, and let the matter be settled by themselves, before he was called to act upon it. For that, and that alone, the hue and cry was raised that he has abandoned the doctrine of non-intervention, and he must be read out of the Democratic party; and that, too, by the authors of the Buffalo platform, and others of that kidney. And the great organ for the purpose of doing that is the celebrated New York Herald, the leading organ of John C. Frémont in the last presidential contest. Mr. Chairman, I am as warm a friend of Mr. Buchanan as he has on this floor. I expended a considerable sum out of my scanty fortune, and u great deal of time and labor, for the purpose of helping to bring him into the presidential chair. From the time I left this House after the memorable session of 1856, until the polls were closed and the votes counted in my district and State, I scarcely laid my head one night on my own pillow at home. Night and day, amid storms and sunshine, where ever there was a blow to be struck and a battle to be fought, my weak arm was found attempting to strike that blow, and to assist in that contest. I am as devoted to the principles of the party, and as anxious for the success of this Administration, as any man can be. But let me tell you, Mr. Chairman, that throughout this country there are more than half a million of men who supported Mr. Buchanan with all their hearts, and who are his best friends, who never will sanction this Lecompton movement under any circumstances. Let me tell you that they are men who owe Presidents and Cabinets nothing, and who expect nothing at their hands. They will think for themselves. And, if the President wants to maintain the integrity of Terror spread throughout the whole country. in denunciations of those who do not act with Well, sir, here comes up, after the election, this famous Calhoun convention in Kansas; and they frame a constitution which everybody knowsthere is no use discussing it-and which the members of that convention know-to be a fraud and a misrepresentation of the will of the people of Kan-ing into hiding places, and when men, now loud sas. They knew, at the time they assembled, that the people of Kansas expected-for such was the impression everywhere, and many of the delegates were pledged to it beforehand-that when the constitution should be formed it should be submitted to the people, that they might decide whether it embodied their sovereign will or not. When this was done, and when this pro-slavery constitution was formed; when there was nothing to be gained by urging this thing, and when everything was to be gained by a contrary course, if the South had come up in a body and spurned and repudiated this fraud; if they had said, "as we will not submit to, so we will not insist upon, any advantage obtained by wrong or fraud;" if they had declared now, when their motives could not have been questioned for so doing, that they were determined to leave the people free to frame their constitution for themselves, and have slavery or not, as they pleased; that if there was any doubt about there having been a fair expression of the popular will they would have nothing to do with it; that they would hold their hands off until the people should settle it for themselves; if you had done that, you would have given the public confidence in the honesty of your professions, and broken down sectionalism and fanaticism forever. Oh, but this would be intervention! Surely, sir, the meaning of words, as well as the principles of parties, must be undergoing a rapid change. Mr. Calhoun brings a paper here which he calls the constitution of Kansas, but which the people of Kansas, in every mode in which they can speak, declare is not their constitution. Their Delegate upou this floor says it is not their constitution; their Territorial Legislature, the only legal legislative body existing in that Territory, say it is NEW SERIES--No. 21. who brought him into power, and who love and venerate him; if he expects to leave a bright record, which those who love the party and those who love his name may look upon with respect and love and regard hereafter, he must call off his hounds. He must drive his spaniels that are barking at the heels of better men than themselves, back to their kennels; and the dirty puppies who are spewing forth their filth through their dirty sheets here and through the country, must be muzzled. [Laughter.] This course cannot be followed through all time. If the integrity of the Democratic party is to be maintained, this thing must stop. Blows will not be always struck on one side. It is not in human nature to tolerate this thing forever. If you keep hammering a man over the head-I care not how good a friend he may be-he will at length resent the indignity, and return blow for blow. There is no doubt that such must be the result. If the President consults his own interests, the interests of the Administration, and of the party of which he is the guardian, I repeat, he must stop this thing. Mr. KUNKEL, of Maryland. Does the gentleman mean to say that the President of the United States has incited what the gentleman thinks proper to denominate the little petty puppies of newspapers to make this war on any man or set of men? And who were these leaders who came forward at this opportune time, and saved the Democratic Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. I will say this party from destruction? One was a northern man, to the gentleman. I would be glad to believe otherthe author of the Kansas-Nebraska bill; the otherwise; but I am sorry to say that the evidence was a southern man, the present Governor of the much-honored “Old Dominion." have hardly passed away, and now these men, who made the issues on which Mr. Buchanan was brought into power-these men who turned the Two years forces me to the conclusion that the President favors this thing. The special organ of the Administration here, supposed to be in the confidence of the President, has been most bitter and vituperative. The Pennsylvanian, also supposed 35TH CONG....1ST SESS. to be in the immediate confidence of the President, has been equally bitter and vituperative. Mr. KUNKEL, of Maryland. Without any personal knowledge of the fact, I pronounce it a libel upon the President. Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. If the gentleman has no personal knowledge, he ought not to speak about a matter he knows nothing about. [Laughter.] Mr. Chairman, I say this in no unkind spirit. I say it because this thing has been pursued long enough. I say it because it is unjust-unjust to men who are as true friends of the President as any man in the country, and have as little idea of abandoning his general support. Surely, sir, the President and the Administration have mistaken the relation which they bear to the party and the country. Why are we called traitors? Whom have we betrayed? To whom do we owe allegiance? Sir, we are not sent here to represent or reflect the will of the Executive. We do not come here to register the edicts of a master. We owe allegiance, first, to the Constitution, and then to our constituents; and we owe it to no other tribunal or power on carth. If our fidelity is brought in question, we appeal to our constituents to determine the matter, and their verdict is final and conclusive. If they are satisfied, who has any right to complain? The President has his appropriate functionsmembers of Congress have theirs. He has no right to interfere with the passage of bills through Congress, and it is a breach of the privileges of the House for him to do so. We, who aided in elevating the President to the exalted office which he holds, are his friends, not his slaves. He is our servant, not our master. If there is any treason, it must be on the part of the servant, and cannot be on the part of the master who owes no allegiance. The Democracy of Illinois, who supported him so cordially, owe him none, and have a right to think and act for themselves. I was about to remark, when interrupted a while ago, that there is something very singular in the fact that upon every question except one, men may think and act as they please, without their party fidelity being called in question. The President has recommended a great many measures, and there is not a Democrat in Congress who supports the President in every position taken in his message. If there is such a man here I should like him to show himself. And yet there is no complaint. Men may oppose the President on his Army bill, on his Nicaragua policy, on his Treasury note bill, and upon other measures, and there is no complaint. There is something that men must notice as remarkable in regard to this, and that is that this thing of proscription and denunciation stops just as soon as you reach Mason and Dixon's line. It is not right, sir. It ought to be stopped. And those from the North, and from the South, who are in the confidence of the President in regard to this measure, ought to say to him to hold off his hands, for every one knows that upon the least intimation on the part of the President to these papers that are feeding and fattening on his patronage, that this thing was unpleasant to him, it would be stopped in a moment. Everybody knows that. Admission of Kansas-Mr. Marshall. been dictated by sound policy, the interests of the The assaults which have been made upon the of other States have been defeated and driven Of all the States, the most true to the Constitu- one of her sons has ever, at any time, received a Ho. OF REPS. insinuations, and attempts by distinct charges to assail the motives of Judge DOUGLAS and his associates. One of these arraignments is in these words: "Mr. SMITH, of Virginia. I will say this in conclusion: that the delegation from Illinois, or a portion of them at any rate, met together here, when Congress assembled, to consider the course which a certain gentleman in the other end of the Capitol should pursue, and the means he should use, in order to secure his reelection to the United States Senate. I say that much; and I will make out the case when I have the time. I say that certainly extraordinary action has resulted in a concerted movement, having an eye alone to his reelection." I have already stated on the floor of the House, that this charge is wholly and entirely destitute of truth. It has no foundation whatever in fact. I allude to it now, for the purpose of adding that the honorable member ought to have known at the time that it could not be true. It was known throughout the whole country (the matter was discussed in the newspapers some time before Congress convened) that the Senator from Illinois was opposed to the unqualified admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution. Upon his arrival in this city, some days before Congress convened, almost his first act was to wait on the President, and state to him frankly his views in regard to this question. Their meeting was said to be cordial, and their conference frank and friendly, but their differences on this question were also said to be radical and irreconcilable. An account of this visit and conference was at the time published in the various papers throughout the country, and ought to have been known to the honorable gentleman. I take it for granted, however, that he had forgotten or overlooked these facts which were so well known to the whole country. The honorable member has been equally unfortunate in the other specific charge which he thought proper to make. It is equally baseless, and equally destitute of the semblance of truth. That charge is made in the following language: "Let me say here, also, that Mr. Calhoun wrote to Judge DOUGLAS, not as a Senator, but as a friend, stating the plan that was to be pursued, and asking his advice in reference to it. No answer to that letter was ever received, but the Chicago Times came out and indorsed the proposed plan. I state, as a fact, which will not be disputed in any quarter, that Senator DOUGLAS, not as a Senator, but as a conspicaous friend of this gentleman, was written to in the month of September, asking his advice as to the course to be pursued in the submission of the constitution, and that he never responded to that letter by dissent or affirmation. I repeat, the Chicago Times, understood to be under his influence, was published, containing an article indorsing the sugges tions of that letter. I have not time to go into this question as I would like; but such are the facts in relation to this maller." Mr. Chairman, I am utterly amazed that any gentleman, and especially the honorable member, should travel out of his path and his line of argument for the purpose of bringing forward and placing on record a charge of this character against a distinguished leader of his own party; and that leader a man who has been more prominent, open, bold, and constant in the advocacy of the constitutional rights of the South, and the principles of the Democratic party, than any man now living. If the charge were true, the propriety of that gentleman bringing it forward in the manner and under the circumstances in which he lugged it into his speech, would be at least questionable; but what will the House and the country think of it when I state, what I now do, broadly and distinctly, that in every essential particular it is utterly destitute of foundation or truth? Let me be distinctly understood. It is not contended that Judge DOUGLAS ever wrote to Mr. Calhoun on the subject. The charge plainly and distinctly insinuated, rather than directly made, is that the author of the Kansas-Nebraska act, not openly and boldly, but in an underhand and skulking manner, indicated to Calhoun, through the columns of the But the honorable gentleman from Virginia Chicago Times, the mode of submission of the [Mr. SMITH] has made himself conspicuous by his constitution which was adopted by the Lecompassaults upon Illinois and her distinguished Sen- ton convention. I repeat, sir, that the charge is ator. Following the example of ladies of doubt- as destitute of truth as any charge could possibly ful reputation, he, too, seems desirous of patching be. Judge DOUGLAS is in no manner responsible up his own political character by assailing that of for the editorial conduct of the Chicago Times. other men. He has arrogated to himself a supe- That is an independent Democratic journal, friend||rior sanctity, and stands up in the market-placesly, in the main, to the distinguished Senator from and "thanks God that he is not as these publicans and sinners." Towards the close of his singular speech he abandons, for a time, generalities and Mr. Chairman, there is one feature which has pervaded the discussions of this Kansas question during the entire session, that could hardly failedged talents and statesmanship in her midst, not to have attracted the attention of the most casual observer. I allude, sir, to the extreme anxiety many professed Democrats have shown to be able to make some point, or find some plausible ground of attack, against Judge DOUGLAS, or the Illinois delegation in the House, or even the State and the Democracy we have the honor to represent. Many have seemed to think, if they could only hunt up some fact that would throw discredit upon that Senator, or weaken him in the esteem of the country, they had accomplished a great end, and all that was necessary to establish their own superior statesmanship. It is every day becoming more and more apparent, that the extraordinary bitterness and vindictiveness manifested in this contest, has resulted from the scheming of aspiring demagogues, who would move heaven and earth to break down and discredit that distinguished statesman. The war has been, to a great extent, a personal one; and, to accomplish their purpose, a course has been pursued which never could have Illinois; but its editorial conduct is in charge of a gentleman who thinks, acts, and writes for himself, without submitting to the direction or dicta |