Page images
PDF
EPUB

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

which, added to the original cost of the vessels, makes an expenditure of $1,830,152. From the unhealthy character of the station, and the great exposure to disease, it is fair to presume that oneeighth of the officers, seamen, and marines on board will, either in person or their families, be made pensioners on the treasury of the Government. The number of men (including officers) to be employed on the station is 708. The commerce which this disproportionably large squadron is designed to protect, is insignificant in the extreme. From the commercial report for twelve months ending the 30th September, 1841, it appears that there was imported into the United States, from Africa, $408,955 of merchandise; during the same time, the total amount of exports to that country was $636,768-making a commerce of $1,045,723. The actual cost of the ships exceeds the whole amount of the importations; and the annual expense exceeds 25 per cent. of the whole commerce. But the amount of commerce stated includes the whole of all Africa-that on the Mediterranean (which is by far the greatest portion) as well as that on the eastern coast; and it is doubted whether that which it is designed especially to protect would amount to ten per cent. of the whole amount; and whether the annual expenses of the squadron would not more than double it in amount. That portion of the commerce on the Mediterranean is defended by a squadron now there; that on the eastern coast, by the Pacific squadron."

Ifsimilar protection was extended to our commerce elsewhere--assuming that the whole amount of that of Africa comes from the region to be covered by our navy-the annual expenses of our naval establishment would greatly exceed fifty millions of dollars. Hitherto, the Government has not found it necessary to keep upon that coast more than one or two vessels of small size. England has of late years assumed the right of searching all that were suspicious, and upon no occasion has an American ship been found engaged in the piratical slave-trade. Nor does any information reach us that any good or bad cause exists to create the belief that our citizens are preparing to engage in that trade. Why, then, has this very sudden and very large increase of expense been added to our national expenditures? Is it to furnish a fleet to aid England in detecting the villany of her own subjects, and to tax the people of the United States for the benefit of her treasury? Or has she haughtily menaced us with the continued practice of searching our vessels? and, as terms of compromise, and to "buy our peace," has our Government surrendered the right --to be cloaked, however, by its mutuality on her part, and as a consideration for the specious covering which veils it, stipulated for an annual tribute, to be furnished in vessels and men?

Viewing the provisions of the eighth article in whatever light possible, no other conviction can be arrived at, than that to give it validity by the action of the Legislature is to dishonor the American name, and to prostrate the interests and rights of American citizens.

SPEECH OF MR. GIDDINGS,

OF OHIO.

In the House of Representatives, February 13, 1843.— On his motion to reconsider the vote taken upon the final passage of the "bill for the relief of the owners of slaves lost from on board the Comet and Encomium."

The SPEAKER having announced the questionMr. GIDDINGS remarked that he had made the motion to reconsider the vote just taken, more for the purpose of calling the attention of the country to the character of the bill under consideration, than with the expectation of preventing its passage.

I have (said he) moved the reconsideration, more for the purpose of absolving myself from afl participation in the guilt of aiding in the objects contemplated by its framers, than with the hope of saving the country, and this Congress, from becoming participators in the odium justly attached to this "execrable commerce in human beings." I will remark, that the duty which now devolves upon me has resulted from the action of other gentlemen. I have not sought it, but it has been forced upon me. I call the House and the country to witness, that neither now, nor on any former occasion, have I unnecessarily thrust this subject of slavery, or the slave-trade, upon the House. On the contrary, the war on my part has, at all times, been

Indemnity for slaves—Mr. Giddings.

one of defence; it is peculiarly so at this time. The House are fully aware that "a bill for the relief of the owners of slaves on board the Comet and Encomrum" was reported at an early period of the late session. It directed certain officers of this Government to institute an inquiry, and to ascertain who were the owners of the persons on board the slave ships Comet and Encomium; and having determined upon the title by which certain persons owned certain other persons, such officer was to pay over the sum of more than seven thousand dollars, obtained from the British Government by Martin Van Buren, late President of the United States, and by the late Secretary of State, John Forsyth, paid to William Selden, Treasurer, and by him placed to the credit of the Government.

Seeing a bill reported by one of the regular committees of this House, which thus plainly, upon its face, sought to encourage the slave-trade, I examined the subject, so far as to satisfy myself that the whole proceedings of the President, and our minister at the Court of St. James, had, from the commencement to their termination, been a most palpable violation of our Constitution, and of the constitutional rights of the free States, as well as a reproach upon our national character. I determined to oppose its passage to the extent of my humble ability. It came up on several days allotted to such private bills as were not objected to, and, as often as it was called, I objected to its passage; and, on being appealed to by the honorable chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, who reported it, I assured him that my objections were substantial and sincere, and that in no way could I consent to the passage of any bill for the benefit of those who deal in human flesh.

The gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. STANLY] came to my seat, and requested me to withdraw my objections, and appeared to think it unkind in me to persist in obstructing its passage. Entertaining a high opinion of his liberality and courtesy, I felt anxious to satisfy him that I was governed by no frivolous objection. I stated to him that the money had been paid to the Treasurer without authority of law, and could be safely withdrawn without any action of Congress, for it had never been the money of the nation; it was received without our sanction, and the sureties of the Treasurer were not holden for it; and that we had no legitimate control over it. He said the Treasurer would not take it from the treasury without a law for that purpose. I stated to him that I merely objected to staining our hands in the guilt of that transaction, and that no one desired to keep the money; that, as it was the price of blood, and a stain upon our national character, I was anxious to get rid of it; and suggested that the bill might be so amended as to avoid any objections on my part. He asked me to draw such an amendment, and I did so at my seat. The amendment simply authorized the Treasurer to withdraw the money from the treasury, without committing ourselves or the nation in any manner to its further disposition. I thought this would save Congress and the people from participating in the guilt and disgrace of this slave-trading transaction, and would save the discussion into which I am now most unexpectedly forced, without preparation, and under circumstances which render my efforts hopeless. The gentleman consulted with his colleagues, and agreed to the amendment, which he subsequently offered, and which was adopted on his motion; and without further objection the bill passed, and was sent to the Senate.

It will thus be seen that the form of the bill, as it then passed the House, was such as met the views of that gentleman and his friends, as well as of myself. I supposed him to act in good faith, and had not the least suspicion that he would have acted with less liberality and candor toward me, than I had manifested toward him. But for his apparent satisfaction with the amendment, I should have persisted in my objections; and should have kept the bill in committee, where it would have been fully discussed, and its merits understood. I did not then expect the bill to come here in its present form; but had I known that it would have returned in its present shape, I could not have believed that the gentleman from North Carolina would have attempted to prevent the expression of my views by springing the previous question. This management has created in me some unpleasant emotions, for it comes from a source from which I had not expected it. However, the bill was sent to the Senate, where it was amended, by striking out the

H. of Reps.

whole of it, and restoring the original as it was reported to this House. This amendment of the Senate came up this morning for concurrence, and the gentleman from North Carolina obtained the floor; and, after briefly stating that the money was in the treasury, and that, from my peculiar views, I was opposed to its passage, but that no other mem ber had objections to the bill, he called for the previous question. I appealed to him to withdraw his call, to enable me to state my objections. This he refused; and, in so doing, has forfeited that claim to courtesy which I supposed him to possess. I mean nothing disrespectful to that gentleman when I say that I had not authorized him to state to the House that I was opposed to this bill. I had never constituted him the exponent of my views.

[ocr errors]

Again, sir: If that gentleman intended to say that I was the only member who entertained objec tions to this bill, he has stated that which he was not authorized to say. Such is not the fact. Other gentlemen were anxious to state their objections; but his adroitness in calling the previous question has denied them the privilege, which I have saved to myself by a sort of legislative stratagem, which, under almost any other circumstances, I would not practise. Having done this, and now being in the legitimate possession of the floor, I beg leave to say to the House that it is no part of my purpose unnecessarily to call up unpleasant feelings in the mind of any member; yet I intend to speak with perfect frankness, and I intend calling things by their right names, without circumlocution, or particular delicacy, in regard to this slave-trade.

We are called on to interpose the supreme pow er of the nation to aid the pecuniary views of certain individuals resident in this District and vicin ity, who, in 1831, entered into a commercial specu lation for the purchase, exportation, and sale of a certain other portion of the population resident here and in the surrounding country. For this purpose they chartered the ship "Comet," to sail from Alexandria to New Orleans; they then made their purchases of men, women, and children. Here, sir, in sight of the hall in which we are now sitting, and in full view of the "star-spangled banner" which floats over this edifice, consecrated to the maintenance of our national honor and human freedom, they examined the bodies, viewed the proportions, determined upon the age, and fixed the value of fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and children. Then came the separation. All the ties of domestic life were severed; the child torn from its parents; brothers were taken, while parents and sisters were left; the fond mother chained to the cofle, and forced from her home and hearth amid the heart-rending cries of her child; while deep agony and unutterable anguish sat upon every countenance, except those of the slave-dealers, who, without a pulsation of human sympathy, with whip in hand, forced their drove of "human chattels❞ on board the slave ship lying at yonder wharf, in plain view of the windows in front of our hall. I cannot say what was going on here when these unfortu nate members of our common family were thrust on board that ship, and each took his last, long, lingering look at the towering dome of this Capi tol-the pride and ornament of our nation. Prob ably some Democrat was at that moment expatiating upon the "inalienable rights of man"-upon that "largest liberty," so constantly the theme of their party; or, peradventure, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE] was demonstrating to this House that Congress has no constitutional right to interfere with this slave-trade, upheld by, and carried on under, an act of Congress; and which we are called on to-day to encourage and sustain, by the passage of the bill before us, in this District. Whatever was the business here, the slaves were driven on board; the sails were unfurled; and this ship, crowded with "weeping humanity," under the guidance of her piratical master and those speculators, was wafted down the Potomac on her voy. age to New Orleans.

But, sir, these "women buyers" failed to accomplish their mercenary purposes; and we are now sitting here, gravely legislating to enable them to carry out the objects of their undertaking. Yes, sir; place this subject in whatever attitude you pleasethrow around it whatever sophistry you can-the truth will be developed to the world, that, in the year 1843, an American Congress sat gravely le gislating for the benefit of "slave-breeders" and

Mr. GIDDINGS Voted in the affirmative, on the passage of the bill, for the purpose of moving a reconsideration, which coul could not be done by any one voting in the minority,

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

"slave-dealers." Sir, let it go upon record. Let the archives of the nation bear witness, in all coming time, that two hundred and forty-two American statesmen sat in this hall, deliberating upon granting pecuniary relief to persons engaged in that traffic, which Jefferson said had "rendered us the scoff of infidel nations." But, sir, let not my name be found among the number of its advocates; let not my descendants in future years be called to blush on reading the record of this day's proceedings. Sooner, far sooner, would I have it stricken from the records of this House. Yea, sooner would I have it blotted from existence, than see it placed on record in favor of the bill before us. Yet, sir, the bill will pass, and become a law. My personal and my political friends will vote for it; not that they would knowingly and considerately aid and abet those who live and become rich upon the anguish and sufferings of mankind; but because they have not examined this subject, and have not looked into the effects and weighed the consequences resulting from the passage of this bill. The House is already committed, and are impatient at the delay occasioned by my remarks. When I shall close, the previous question, or a call to lay the motion to reconsider upon the table, will be made; and we shall be driven on to the consummation of a deed, in contemplation of which my soul shrinks back with horror. But I proceed with the statement of facts.

These hucksters in human flesh voluntarily carried their cargo beyond the line of this District, and beyond the jurisdiction of any slave State. The slaves thereby became free, in law. The moment they crossed the line of the slave States, and entered upon the high seas, that moment they were, to all intents and purposes, freemen. That moment, in the eye of the law, their shackles fell, and they stood upon the deck of that ship clothed with all the attributes of Americans and of freemen. I state this as a legal principle. It has been substantially so decided in the slave States, and in the free States, and in the courts of the United States; and it is no longer to be denied or doubted.

After these people had thus become tree by the voluntary action of their owners, and when they were possessed of the same legal and moral right to take their former owners to Africa, and sell them there as slaves, as their owners had to carry them to New Orleans for that purpose, they were suddenly shipwrecked near the island of New Providence. The wreckers carried them and their former masters to Nassau, where they all landed, and each, as he had a legal and moral right to do, sought his own happiness. Here, sir, was the misfortune from which we are called on to-day to relieve these speculators--these outlaws from human sym. pathy. They saw their fellow men escape from their grasp; the slaves suddenly became transformed into freemen. The owners had not the physical power to hold them in subjection, and the officers of the British Government would neither furnish bloodhounds nor slave-catchers to aid them. There they stood in mute astonishment, contemplating the immense loss they had sustained in this locomotive property-like Milton's devil looking into Paradise, from which he had been-thrust. The slaves heeded not their grief or entreaties, but went their way rejoicing at being for once on free soil. Thus closed the voyage, and these dealers in the bones and sinews of their fellow-men made their way back to this city, and applied to the then President of the United States (Andrew Jackson) for the influence and efforts of the nation to help them out in their contemplated speculation in the bodies of men, women, and children. General Jackson meekly consented to become the agent of these slave-dealers, and to act the part of an agent to transact the business between these traffickers in children and the British Government. Unmindful of his high station, and of the honor of our nation, he condescended to become the solicitor of these Virginia pirates, to urge upon Great Britain the payment in dollars and cents for American freemen who had taken up their residence in the island of New Providence. Sir, Great Britain might, with the same propriety, demand of this nation a compensation for the thousands of freemen who have come from that island and taken up their res idence among us. The claim, therefore, was without foundation; and the assertion of it was frandulent, from the beginning to the end of the transaction. Sir, from the purchase of the first man of that cargo in this city, up to the presentation of the claims to this House, the proceedings have been no

Indemnity for slaves—Mr. Giddings.

less than a series of violations of truth, of morality, of honor, and of the Constitution. Corruption has marked every stage of its progress, and baseness has characterized those who have aided in carrying it forward. The whole was managed by slave-breeders and slave traders, aided by "Northern men with Southern principles."

The executive chair was then filled by a slaveholding President. He sympathized deeply with those dealers in mankind, having in early life followed that employment. He at once entered into their views, and espoused their cause. The claims of humanity, the rights of the free States, and the Federal Constitution presented but slight obstacles to his mind, when the protection of slavery was con cerned. Here, sir, is the point at which the obligations of our federal compact were departed from. The President had no constitutional power to prostitute our national influence to the support of this slave-trade on the high seas. That power was never delegated to him nor to us. I deny the constitutional right of the President or of Congress to involve my constituents, or the people of my State, in the disgrace of this slave trade. I have, on a former occasion, expressed my own views on this point; but I insist that it is time for Representatives on this floor to speak out, and to let the country understand what they think concerning this power exercised by General Jackson and Mr. Van Buren. I desire to hear from gentlemen of the North, of both parties. What say you? Has the Federal Govern ent the constitutional right to involve the nation in a war to support this slave-trade? Have you the just right and constitutional power to compel your constituents, the independent electors of our free States, to go into battle, to shed their blood, and sacrifice their lives, in order to protect these dealers in human flesh, while they pursue their accursed vocation? Was such the design of those framers of the Constitution who spoke of this traffic with horror and execration? Is there a member on this floor, or a man in this nation, who would cast such an imputation upon Franklin, or Madison, or King, or Wilson, or Ellsworth?

Yet all will agree that if General Jackson had the constitutional right to exert the influence of this nation to support the slave-trade, it is the duty of the Government to enforce the demands of the slave-dealers on board the Enterprise, the Hermosa, and the Creole, even at the expense of our blood and treasure. No schoolboy would admit that our duty would be limited to a mere demand for reparation; that when a demand is made, our duty to the slave-dealers ceases, and the Government is to be absolved from all further notice of their interests. No, sir; such docrine would be too absurd to merit refutation by argument. If we assume the right and the power to maintain this traffic to any extent, it follows irresistibly that we should do so to all extent. If we have the right to involve the nation in the disgrace of this traffic, we have the same right to involve them in the expense of a war to maintain it. If it be our duty to disgrace ourselves and the nation by passing this bill, for the benefit of those slave-breeders and slave dealers, it is equally our duty to demand reparation of the British Government for the fifteen thousand fugitive slaves now in the Canadian provinces, and to enforce that demand at the point of the bayonet. If those slave-breeders and slave-dealers may demand the sacrifice of Northern honor and Northern principles to aid them in this speculation, they may, with equal propriety, demand the sacrifice of Northern lives for the same purpose. And I would as soon see my constituents pierced by British bayonets, as to see them despoiled of their honor, by a servile submission to this slave-breeding influence, and made the supporters of this disgraceful slavetrade.

But, Mr. Speaker, the President, in his official character, entered upon his new duties as agent for these slave-dealers. He was under the necessity of employing an assistant to carry on the negotiation which he was about to open with the Government of Great Britain, in order "to catch the negroes," or obtain pay for them. He appointed as an assistant, resident in this city, Martin Van Buren, who had honorably deferded the rights of mankind in the councils of his own State, but who now condescended to become an assistant broker in this slavedealing concern. Although a Northern man, it became the boast of his friends that he possessed "Southern principles;" and he soon gave satisfactory evidence of his devotion to the interests of his employers. Indeed, had he been bred up in the

H. of Reps.

business, he would scarcely have discovered more attachment to the interests of slave-growers and slave traders than he manifested on that occasion. Anxiety for the success of that "execrable commerce" appears to have been uppermost in his mind, and to have superseded all other matters of mere State policy. The overshadowing importance to which he considered this matter entitled, was well expressed in his official communication to our minister at the Court of St. James, dated in 1836, in which he says: "In the present state of our diplomatic relations with the Government of his Britannic Majesty, the most immediately pressing of the matters with which the United States legation at London is now charged, is the claim of certain citizens against Great Britain for a number of slaves, the cargoes of the three vessels wrecked in the British islands in the Atlantic."

We then had a controversy with Great Britain in regard to our Northeastern boundary. In order to protect our interests there, soon after the date of this letter Congress provided, and placed at the disposal of the President, ten millions of dollars, and gave him power to raise fifty thousand troops. Yet the vast interests at stake in that quarter and in the Northwest-for the maintenance of which attempts are now making to expend millions of moneywere all matters of minor consideration, when compared with these "cargoes." Mark the language of à Northern Democrat: "Cargoes" of women, "cargoes" of men, and "mixed cargoes" of humanity. This, sir, is the language of him who is considered the very paragon of Northern Democracy; of him who is now regarded by one of our great political parties as the very embodiment of orthodox Democracy; and who is destined, by the magic of his influence, to prostrate the political aspirations of the talented favorite of the slave Democrats of the South. Sir, will our Democratic friends at the North-those who, with the patriots of '76, hold that "men are created equal"-consider this language, this servile truckling to the slave-breeding interests, as a sufficient passport to the favor of this nation? Sir, I wish I could ring the question in the ears of every member of that party north of Mason and Dixon's line. I would point to this language, and repeat the interrogatory. Sir, I may be led to confide in the honor of a slave-holder; but a "servile doughface" is too destitute of that article to obtain credit with me. Mr. Van Buren has placed the evidence of his servility conspicuously upon the records of our country. There it will remain, and will be regarded as an enduring memento of the degeneracy of the age, and of the men who then filled our public stations.

With the permission of the House, I will now call their attention to another gentleman who figured somewhat conspicuously in carrying on this negotiation. He, sir, was bred in the "Old Dominion"-where (to use the words of one of her most talented sons) "men are reared for the market, like oxen for the shambles." It was, therefore, expected that he would bring to the discharge of his duties as assistant agent, resident in London, all the zeal and devotion which subsequently characterized his efforts to subserve the interests of his employers. I refer to Andrew Stevenson, our late minister at the Court of St. James. But, sir, I speak of him, and the others, as agents for these slave merchants, for the reason that they acted as such. When thus acting without any constitutional authority, they were to be regarded in their individual characters, and not as public officers. Had they, or either of them, undertaken to act as the commission agent or broker for a band of pirates, we should not have considered them entitled to respect. Yet they possessed the same constitutional authority to do one, as they had to perform the other. They possessed as much constitutional right to involve the people of the free States in any other piratical transaction, as they had to involve us in a slave-trading negotiation.

But, sir, I have not time to go into detail, lest that hour rule-which I regard as the most salutary rule ever adopted by this House-should cut me off before I shall have fairly entered upon the subject before me. I crave the attention of the friends of Mr. Stevenson, (if he has any upon this floor,) and hope they will defend his reputation, so far as truth and justice will permit. I call the attention of the House to the following extract of an official letter of Mr. Stevenson, addressed to Lord Palmerston, dated in December, 1836, and to be found in Senate documents of 1837-'8, in which that gentleman

says:

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

"The undersigned feels assured that it will only be necessary to refer Lord Palmerston to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, and the laws of many of the States, to satisfy him of the existence of slavery, and that slaves are regarded and protected as property; that, by these laws, there is, in fact, no distinction in principle between property in persons and property in things; and that the Government have, more than once, in the most solemn manner, determined that slaves killed in the service of the United States, even in a state of war, were to be regarded as property, and not as persons, and the Government held responsible for their value."

It is to the last clause of this extract that I more particularly desire to call the attention of the House and of the country. In that clause, Mr. Stevenson asserts that "the Government have more than once, in the most solemn manner, determined that slaves killed in the service of the United States, even in a state of war, were to be regarded as property, and not as persons, and the Government held responsible for their value." Now, sir, I have bestowed examination and thought upon this subject, and know well what I am about to say. And, sir, with a full knowledge of the responsibility resting upon me, I say to the House and to the country, and to the British ministry, (should my remarks ever meet their eyes,) that this official declaration of Mr. Stevenson is untrue and unfounded. It was, and still is, a misrepresentation of the character of this Governmentunjust and offensive to the people of the free States. That, so far from being correct, its reverse is literally true. This Government, so far from being held responsible for the value of slaves killed in the public service, in time of war, have, from its formation to this day, distinctly and uniformly refused such payment. And I say to the gentleman who made this assertion, and to his friends on this floor, that it can scarcely be supposed that he was ignorant that the contrary principle is fully sanctioned and sustained by documentary evidence, as I proved to this House a few days since. I then called the attention of the House to a report drawn up by my respected predecessor, (the Hon. Elisha Whittlesey,) chairman of the Committee of Claims, made to this House in 1831. The report was made upon the memorial of Francis Sarche, who owned a slave, a horse, and cart, all which were pressed into the public service at New Orleans on the day of the great battle near that city. The horse and slave were killed, and the cart was destroyed by cannon shot, and Sarche applied to Congress for compensation. The Committee of Claims, composed of both Southern and Northern members, reported unanimously against paying for the slave, and in favor of paying for the horse and cart. The committee, in their report, say that they had examined the records of the Register of the Treasury, and found that slaves had never been paid for by this Government, either in the revolutionary war, or since that period. The report also refers to several instances in which attempts had been made to pass a law allowing indemnity for slaves killed in the public service; all which had failed. I then stated that the records of the Committee of Claims showed distinctly, that, since the year 1794, (the date of their earliest record,) all such applications, referred to that committee, had been rejected without exception. It is not a little remarkable, that Mr. Stevenson, as I understand, filled the office of Speaker at the time when this report of Mr. Whittlesey was made. I am not informed of the time he served in this hall, but it was many years; and I hesitate not to say that it is a most extraordinary fact, that the report to which I have alluded, and this practice of Government, should have escaped his notice; but it is still more wonderful that he should have asserted the existence of a practice diametrically opposed to the uniform action of this body at the very time when he officiated as its presiding officer.

I return to the prosecution of this negotiation. These misrepresentations were pressed upon the consideration of the British ministry. They were not familiar with the distinctions between our national and State Governments, as was well remarked the other day by the venerable gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. ADAMS.] Mr. Stevenson was the representative of this Government, and Lord Palmerston had a right to expect all matters of fact to be truly stated-particularly so far as the regulations and the action of our Government were concerned. Relying upon these representa

Indemnity for slaves-Mr. Giddings.

tions; and believing this to be a Government dedicated to the support of slavery instead of liberty; and impressed with the full conviction that, by the laws of Congress, slavery upon the high seas, on board of American vessels, was allowed and protected, and that these persons were in truth slaves, instead of freemen, when they entered the port of Nassau, -the British ministry agreed to deal with us as they do with semi-barbarous nations, and to pay for these people a ransom of twenty-five thousand pounds sterling. Before the money was obtained, Mr. Van Buren was installed President of the United States; yet he continued to act as the agent of these slave-dealers--for such he evidently considered himself. The money was not paid into the treasury, nor was Congress consulted as to the disposition of the funds; it was kept in the custody of the Executive, who paid it out as his judgment dictated. But to whom it was paid, or how much was paid to each individual, I believe we have not the means of determining-no report having been made to either branch of Congress, except a report of the amount of moneys paid from the treasury as expenses incurred in transacting the business for these slave-dealers. This amount was charged to the contingent fund of the State Department, and, in that shape, came before the House of Representatives. This money came from the pockets of our constituents, and was paid directly for the benefit of these wholesale and retail enders of humanity. I attempted to make some remarks on that subject; but, as it was then held to be a subject on which Congress had no power to act, I was cut short in the expression of my views, according to the most approved practice under our congressional gag-rules.

But to proceed with the facts: When Mr. Van Buren and his cabinet were about to retire from office, the Secretary of State (not of the Treasury) had in his possession some seven thousand dollars of the money thus extorted by fraud and misrepresentation from the British Government. Mr. Van Buren, not having fully completed the business in which he had been so long engaged as the representative of slave merchants, bequeathed to William Selden, Treasurer of the United States, the trust of closing the transaction. The money was paid to him, and a receipt taken. This was done without any authority of law whatever; and the Treasurer might return it to the slave-owners by virtue of the same authority as that by which he had received it. The veriest tyro in law will at once see that it is not in the power of any man who pleases to charge the Government with moneys, by making a deposite with the Treasurer, unless it be authorized by law; no such law existed in this case, and the only legal effect was to make the Treasurer liable, in his individual capacity, as trustee of the persons who possess the real interest in the money. Now, I think it perfectly clear, that no action whatever of Congress was necessary to authorize the withdrawal of this money from the treasury. In contemplation of law, it had never been there; but was in the private custody of Mr. Selden. Yet we are called on now to close up this slave-dealing agency by a solemn act of Congress: thereby making ourselves and constituents participants in the fraud, the moral turpitude, and the crime that have characterized this transaction, from the purchase of these cargoes up to the time of paying the money to Mr. Selden. They will not be satisfied with the money, but insist that we shall share in the disgrace with them. They remind me of a drunkard who lay wallowing in the mud and filth of a gutter, when a friend, who was passing by, offered to pull him out; he rejected this offer, but insisted that his friend should come and lie down with him. If my friends show themselves willing to go and lie down with these slave breeders, and share in the moral filth and corruption of this slave-trade, I may admire their kindness, but I cannot approve their taste.

I had like to have omitted all notice of the loss of slaves on board the Encomium. That, too, was a slave ship, regularly fitted out from the city of Charleston, South Carolina-a city which, at this time, is enjoying as profitable a commerce in mankind as any other on this side of the Atlantic. Indeed, I believe it already equals many of the refined cities of Africa in the extent of its slave-trade. Should we pass this bill, and continue to pass bills hereafter, for the benefit of the slave merchants of that city, and at the same time hang all who engage in that business upon the African coast, Charleston

H. of Reps.

may, at some future day, rival even Timbuctoo in the extent and splendor of its slave-markets and other embellishments. This vessel, I believe, was fitted out in the year eighteen hundred and thirtythree; she, too, was lost, and the slaves escaped in the same manner as those on board the Comet. The owners applied to the President, who espoused their cause also. Their demand was pressed, and the money obtained in the same way, and at the same time, as the indemnity for those on board the Comet.

For many years the people of the free States have endeavored to relieve the nation from the deep odium resting upon it by reason of this slavetrade on the high seas. For that purpose they

have sent to us their petitions, couched in the most respectful language, asking that it may be prohib ited, under suitable penalties. And what treatment have these freemen-these supporters of our national character-met in this half? Why, sir, they have been assailed with almost every op probrious epithet which our language could supply. Their petitions have been scouted from our presence without being read, or heard, or even received at the hands of their Representatives. I myself have presented the requests of thousands of our most worthy citizens-of our philanthropists, our divines, our jurists, and statesmen-invoking the action of this body in regard to this slavetrade upon the high seas, and to save them and the nation from the disgrace which will be fastened upon them by such measures as that now before us. But, sir, if I happened to cast my eye upon the petition, or assumed the appearance of reading it, cries of "order, order, order," would be shouted from the mouths of scores of slave-breeders and overseers; while a stentorian voice on my right, rising at least an octave above all others, would call on the Speaker "to enforce the 21st rule."

Sir, what magic wand has been waved over us, that we now sit so quietly deliberating upon this bill to encourage the slave-trade; or, rather, why do we now pass this bill without deliberation? Shall we turn round at the bidding of this slave-breeding influence, and quietly submit to the passage of a bill to aid and support the slave-trade? Sir, I feel humbled, deeply humbled, when I cast my eyes around this hall, and see Representatives of the free States sitting in mute silence, and aiding, by their vote, the passage of a bill shamelessly bearing on its title the character of a bill for the relief of slave-traders. What power has thus miraculously silenced the voice of Northern freedom and Northern bonor? What spell has now palsied the arms which should defend the rights and interests of the free States? It is the previous question, forced upon us by Southern members and their Northern allies. Shall we now submit to the bidding of this slaveholding infla ence, and meanly assist in carrying out this attempt to involve ourselves and our constituents in the dis grace of the slave-trade? Wherewith shall we humble ourselves before those who claim this control over us? Where shall we find sackcloth with which to cover our bodies, or ashes to cast upon our heads, when, with downcast eyes and trembling voices, we give a faint response in favor of these slave-growers, and to the disgrace of those whom we represent? Sir, the trembling slave, who dares not look up in the presence of his tyrant master, bas some excuse for his degradation; but I can find no justification whatever for Northern men-the Representatives of freemen-who thus tamely sur render the rights and the honor of their constitu ents, and become the willing instruments for carry. ing on and sustaining this detestable commerce in slaves.

Mr. Speaker, I have a curiosity to witness the response of members to the questions which will soon be propounded, and see how many gentlemen on this floor will now vote in favor of this bill, who, for years, have regularly voted to gag their own constituents upon this identical subject, on which they are now called to act in favor of slave-breeders and slave dealers. If I were to dictate a subject for the pencil, it should be the one on which I am now commenting. I would select a Northern Democrat, holding a gag in the mouth of his constituent with one hand, while the other is employed to examine his pockets for money to pay the expenses of this slave agency; at the same time most solemnly saying to his constituent, "you have nothing to do with the slave trade;" "you have no right to interfere with the matter."

I regret being forced into these remarks. I have made every effort to escape from so doing which

27TH CONG....SD SESS.

duty and independence would permit; bọt, notwithstanding my exertions for that purpose, I have been driven to it; and I trust that gent emen will excuse me if I speak frankly. The subject of slavery, or of the slave-trade, never ought to have been mentioned in this hall. Accursed be the memory of him who first profaned this temple of freedom with the discussion of slavery and the slave-trace. Let the execrations of posterity rest upon those who involved the National Government in these subjects, by trampling on the Constitution and constitutional rights of the free States. But we have become involved in these questions; and it shall be my object Dow, and at all times, to correct the error into which we have fallen. I will use my utmost exertions to banish it from our deliberations-to erase it from our records-to separate the people of the free States and this Government from i-and to place an impassable gulf between our people of the free States and an institution which we detest. It was this desire which led me to consent to the arrangement by which these persons might have obtained this money, without involving us in their guilt and disgrace.

Yet, sir, this bill is thrust upon us; not, however, with the intention of discussing it, but for the purpose of forcing us to pass it without discussion, and without investigating its merits. We are asked to sustain it without examination; and if we refuse to do that, it is to be forced upon us by means of the previous question. This want of examination, and consequent ignorance of the bill, is one reason why I cannot support it; but I have many other cogent reasons for opposing its passage.

1st. Its passage is entirely unnecessary to enable the claimants to obtain the money, if it belongs to them.

2d. Its passage would be a palpable violation of the Constitution.

3d. Respect for ourselves, and for the honor of the free States, forbids its passage.

4th. Its passage is entirely opposed to the principle so strongly urged and maintained in this hall for the last six years, "that this House has no right to act on this subject."

Aside from these, I have some objections to the passage of this bill, which apply to me personally. It is now less than eleven months since I introduced to the consideration of gentlemen here certain reso. lutions, setting forth my views of the constitutional right of the people of the tree States to be exempt from the expense, the disgrace, and the guilt of this slave-trade. They expressed my solemn belief in regard to that subject; and I am not aware that any member here has, to this day, been found willing to deny their correctness. But, sir, this assertion of the rights of the people of Ohio, and of the free States, did not suit the views of certain "natural allies" of the slave-breeding Democracy of the South. They appear to have sounded peculiarly harsh in the ear of my colleague from the Butler district. His Democratic principles appeared to be severely shocked at the thought of our people being exempt from this business of slave-breeding and slave-trading. Yes, sir, such was his horror at the bare proposition of such a separation, that he felt it his duty immediately to introduce a resolution of censure upon me for so unpatriotic an act. Nor was that all; he went further, and demanded the previous question, in order to prevent me from being heard in my defence; fearing, I presume, that I might be guilty of uttering irreverent expressions concerning this "delicate subject," and thereby call down upon myself further punishment. I I would not be understood as imputing any unkind motives to my colleague; no, sir, I am bound to say that I think he was guided by nis best judgment. Well, sir, you, with an impartiality which I feel bound to say has characterized the discharge of the arduous duties of Speaker during the present Congress, decided that the previous question would not deprive me of making a defence, nor others of the right of making a defence for me, as it was a question of privilege.

To this decision my friend, the honorable chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, took exception; and appealed to the House, who sustained his appeal. I impute to that gentleman no personal unkindness, but presume he did it to prevent the waste of time, and consequent delay of the public business.

Mr. FILLMORE stated, that at the time he took the appeal, he did not anticipate the passage of the resolution of censure; that he did it merely to prevent

Indemnity for slaves-Mr. Giddings.

the delay of public business, and not from any feeling of unkindness, or to favor the resolution.

Mr. GIDDINGS resumed. I had no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that such was the fact; and I have now alluded to the appeal more for the purpose of enabling that gentleman to set himself right before the country, than from any considerations personal to myself. But, Mr. Speaker, these resolutions-drawing the line of demarcation between this slavetrade and the people of the free States, appear to have met with but little favor in the mind of my experienced political friend over the way, from Vermont, [Mr. EVERETT.] He, sir, is a leading member of that party with whom I have been proud to act; but the mere introduction of these resolutions was characterized by him as a "firebrand course,” which he informed the country he looked upon “with abhorrence." The subject is now introduced by those who act in favor of the slave-trade; but I have heard nothing of that gentleman's “abhorrence." It is pressed through the House with as much indecent haste as was the resolution of cen sure; but I have heard nothing from that gentleman in regard to this "firebrand course." There is an old and common saying, that "circumstances alter cases."

Another gentleman, representing in part the old Bay State, which has ever been forward in the cause of liberty and patriotism-the gentleman at my right, [Mr. CUSHING,] who was bred almost in sight of Faneuil Hall," designated as the "cradle of liberty;"--the resolutions proved unacceptable to him; and I must do him the justice to say that he has, so far as I know, been a consistent advocate of this slave-trade. Indeed, I am not aware of a single instance, since I have been a member here, when that gentleman has spoken on the subject, in which he has failed to advocate the interests of that commerce. His sense of propriety was so greatly shocked at the doctrine contained in my resolutions, that he unhesitatingly pronounced them "an approximation to treason;" and, from his acknowledged consistency on this subject, I entertain no doubt that he will now lend his aid and influence to sustain the interests to which he has exhibited so much attachment. I should have been pleased to pass over this portion of the political history of our legislative action concerning the slave-trade, but, having been pressed into the consideration of it, I could not,in duty to myself omit some slight allusion to matters that transpired at the time when I last had the honor of calling public attention to it; and I apprehend that no gentleman will think them calculated to make a very favorable impression upon my own mind in regard to the bill under consideration.

It will be recollected that, on a recent occasion, the member from Georgia, in front of the Speaker, alluded to this vote of censure in terms not very courteous.

[Mr. BLACK interrupted Mr. GIDDINGS, and said: "I wish to know if the gentleman from Ohio intends to allude to my remarks on a former occasion? If he does, I shall surely call him to order."

Mr. GIDDINGS. When that question shall come up in parliamentary form, I will answer it.

The SPEAKER said he should endeavor to call the gentleman from Ohio to order, if he wandered from the question before the House.

Mr. BLACK sat down, and Mr. GIDDINGS resumed.]

That gentleman remarked that this House, by its vote of censure, had "stripped me of the influence which I had once possessed."

When I returned to this hall, and resumed my official duties, in May last, determined never to allude, in a public manner, to the transaction to which the gentleman from Georgia referred. The matter had gone to the people. With them I was willing it should rest. I could not add to its importance; and I was unwilling to detract from the salutary consequences which I believed would result from such an outrage upon the representative character. The record of that transaction is fully made up; and I shall attempt to make no alteration or interlineations: nor did I expect that any member who had voted for the censure wou'd desire to drag the subject again before the country. I was willing to leave it where the votes of my constituents had placed it. I will also take this occasion to say, that I feel no heartburnings towards those who sustained the resolution of my colleague. The people of my district have so fully and so triumphantly repelled the injury offered to themselves and to me, that it would be do

H. of Reps

ing injustice to them for me to add one word to the judgment which they have given of the transe action. To many of those who voted to censure me, I shall bear with me, to private life, recallcetions of friendship and respect; and to them I would not say a word which should call up an unpleasant thought of what is past. But to the gentleman from Georgia I will say: Sir, I hold my seat here by virtue of the sovereign will and pleasure of ninety thousand free people of the gallant State of Ohio. My commission comes from them, and not from the member from Georgia, nor from the members of this House. Those freemen have conferred on me whatever political influence I possess; and no slave breeder or overseer, nor the representative of slaves, has the moral power to disrobe me of it. To those electors of the "banner district" I shall soon resign my influence, untainted and unaffected by the foul breath of slaveholding or slave dealing Democracy. Whether this House has stripped n.e of my influence, or my constituents have stripped this House of its influence on this subject, is not for me or the member from Georgia to say: the country will deter mine that point; and I am willing to await their verdict. These are circumstances, however, which conduce to my personal opposition to this bill: they are matters that cannot apply with equal force to other members.

A due regard to consistency in legislation forbids the passage of this bill. In our sovereign capacity as a National Legislature, we have declared the crime of slave-trading PIRACY, and have affixed to it the highest penalty known to human laws. We have declared such as commit this most execrable of all crimes unfit to associate with human beings; and we hang them without mercy. The operation of this law is confined, however, to the eastern portion of the Atlantic, while the offences of these applicants were committed upon the western part of that ocean. To-day we are called on to pass a law for the relief of these persons; while we hang, without discrimination, all who pursue the same business a few degrees of longitude further east. I am in favor of dealing out justice with an even hand. I would give these applicants the "same relief" that we grant to those who follow the same business in a different longitude. I would exhibit no more regard for the honor of Africa, than I would for that of our own nation. It is, however, a fact, that if a man goes from this city to Africa, and engages in the slave-trade, the whole world considers him worthy of immediate death; but if he remain here, and buy and export our own people, who have been born and bred with us--whose attachments are formed here, and whose minds are enlightened and christianized--in whose veins "flow the best blood of Virginia;"-why, sir, for this outrage upon humanity we are called to pass laws for his pecuniary relief! Our people of the free States are taxed to pay us and our officers while we are engaged here in legislating for their benefit. Tomorrow, perhaps, we shall be called to tax them to sustain a fleet on the coast of Africa, in order to suppress the slave-trade. Will gentlemen who vote to encour age this trade to-day, face to the right-about tomorrow, and vote millions of the people's money to suppress it? Are gentlemen prepared to vote one way to-day, and directly the contrary to-morrow? We are now using the money of the people of the free States to encourage the slave trade; and will gentlemen appropriate the money of our people to-morrow to suppress it? Are we under such perfect drill, that we face to the right, to the left, or to the right-about, at the bidding of the slaveholding influence? How long shall Northern men continue to march and countermarch at the bidding of this slave-breeding power? Sir, we send our fleets to Africa, at vast expense, to prevent the importation of slaves. We are to expend at least a million of dollars annually, to give a monopoly of this "execrable commerce" to the slave-breeding States; while their Representatives here violently oppose the protection of all other manufactures. This high Virginia tariff is not only to be protected, at our expense, from all foreign competition; but we are to go still further, and make the nation insurers to those who engage in the exportation of this "chattelized population." I am unwilling to involve myself in these inconsistencies, absurdities, and contradictions.

The bill directs the Treasurer to pay this money to the owners of these persons. What is to be the evidence of title by which one man owns another? The proposition is an absurdity too palpable to bes

27TH CONG.... 3D SESS.

Commercial intercourse with China-Mr. J. C. Clark.

placed in our statute-book. The title, and the only title, which one man ever held to another, is that of brute force. It is the title by which the robber claims your purse; the same title by which the pirate claims his captured ship and cargo. It is, however, a title which we, as a nation, do not recognise. It is one which the people of the free States repudiate. It is one to which I will not give even a silent or tacit consent, by instituting such an inquiry.

But the bill goes further, and directs the Treasurer to pay to the owners of each slave "such sum as he is entitled to receive." By this form of expression, I suppose it was intended to give to each the value of the person claimed. How will you estimate the value of a man? Does it depend upon his complexion? for, sir, there are all grades of color in this market. Or which is deemed the most valable-black, or white, or a mixture of both? Or shall our officer be governed by the genealogy of the slave, in estimating his value? If he have descended, in the paternal line, from one of the best families in the "Old Dominion," shall he be deemed of greater value than if he were of pure African blood? Does such mixture improve or deteriorate the value of a man? These, sir, are all of them "delicate; questions," which I should like to hear answered by some of the friends of the bill before I can vote for it. Again: some may desire to know whether intelligence is to fix the value. Is a man who reads and writes, and possesses better information than his master, or than masters gener'ally possess, of more value than one who is stupid, ignorant, and incapable of instructing his owner? And, sir, others may wish to know what the political faith of a man is, before they fix his value. They will inquire whether he be a Whig or a Democrat; or, particularly, whether "he goes the Liberty party." And my friend over here in "the stall," [Mr. SNYDER of Pa.,] would inquire whether he be of pure Dutch descent, or whether he has a "sprinkling" of the Yankee in his veins. These are all difficulties which present themselves to my mind, in making up the estimate of a man's value as property. They may, to be sure, appear of small importance to a grower of slaves-one who is familiar with matters of the kind; but I am unwilling, by legislation, to throw them upon an officer of Government, or to bring the reproach of such an inquiry upon our nation. And 1 cannot, therefore, vote for the bill under consideration.

But, Mr. Speaker, it is said that we hold this money as trustee for the owners of these slaves, and are therefore bound to execute the trust. deny the position. We are not the trustee of these slave breeders; no individual can be made a trustee without his consent; neither can Congress, or any other legislative or corporate body, be made a trustee without his consent. Congress has never given its consent to act as trustee for these slave-trading speculators; nor are we under any obligation whatever to pay over this money, or to do any other act for the benefit of these applicants. We, sir, are supreme; we acknowledge no law in the discharge of our official duties, except that of the Constitution and of justice. The Constitution has not imposed upon us the duty of acting as trustee for slave-dealers. If there be any obligation resting upon us, must be found in the abstract justice of the claims presented by these slave-mongers. The whole ques tion rests here. Neither the President, nor his Secretary of State, nor Mr. Stevenson, nor all of these officers together, conld lay us under the least conceivable obligation to pass this law for the benefit of outlaws, of pirates, and of robbers. Nor could they render it our duty to grant any facility or encouragement to a commerce hated by man and cursed by God. What, sir! is it to be urged, at this period of the world, that the President has power to lay Congress under obligations to sit here and legislate to encourage the breeding and exportation of slaves? Are such arguments to be addressed to a Congress of American statesmen? Can the President and his cabinet release me from my obligations to the Constitution? Can they absolve me from the official oath which I have taken? Can they step between me and my God, and acquit me of the obligations which my Creator has imposed upon me? No, sir. There is no principle of justice or of propriety that requires us to legislate in favor of this commerce in mankind. On the contrary, our love of consistency, our self-respect, our attachment to liberty, our regard for the natural rights of manind; our patriotism, our desire for the honor of

our country, our attachment to the cause of truth, justice, and humanity; our respect for the opinions of mankind, and obedience to the commands of Heaven, forbid that we should become parties to the misrepresentations to which I have alluded, or be made the instruments for consummating this fraud committed upon a friendly nation; or that we should become partners in crime with men who make merchandise of the image of God.

SPEECH OF MR. J. C. CLARK,

OF NEW YORK.

In the House of Representatives, February 22, 1843-On the bill appropriating forty thousand dollars to enable the President to establish commercial relations between the United States and the Government of China.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: I have more than half promised myself to embrace some fitting opportunity to submit a few remarks to the House. The opportunity is now presented. In the British Parliament, it is a legitimate ground of objection to a supply bill, that the objector has no confidence in the ministry. This bill proposes to vest in the President and Secretary of State a large discretion in the expenditure of forty thousand dollars; and I agree with my friend from Georgia [Mr. MERIWETHER] that there is good reason to doubt the propriety of giving to these men the disbursement of any money not imperiously called for by the exigences of the public service. I place my opposition to this bill solely on the ground of an utter want of confidence in the political integrity of the President and some of his official advisers.

I have, sir, made some ineffectual attempts heretofore to get the floor. But there are certain gentlemen here always on the tiptoe to obtain it, and they are generally successful. Charmed with the melody of their own sweet voices, they fancy that the House is equally delighted, and they lose no opportunity to gratify us with a display of their oratorical powers. Of this I do not complain. It is their right. Many, no doubt, may have been convinced by the brilliancy of their periods and the cogency of their logic.

I regret to consume the time of the House, particularly at this late period of the session. The House will do me the justice to say that I have never obtruded myself upon its indulgence. During this entire Congress, I believe, I have not appropriated to my own use an hour of its time. 'I would not now, but for the conviction that the Whigs of the country ought to be awakened to a just appreciation of the character of the men (or some of them, at least) who have heretofore enjoyed their confidence-enjoyed it only to betray it. And now, being up, I almost repent me of my half-made promise, and regret that my effort to obtain the floor has been successful. I have a great horror of speech-making- and, above all, of speech-making here. Surrounded with talents, eloquence, and criticism of a high order, I dread an exposure to their observation; and, perhaps, to their censure. Moreover, one knows not the temper of the House. He is ignorant of what subject may be acceptable, and is greatly puzzled to know by what proper exordium he may, in advance, gain a nestling place in some corner of its kind feelings. But I am in for a speech, and must bide my chance.

There is, sir, in rhetoric a thing called "aporia”if I mistake not, defined to be "a figure of speech under which a speaker doubts where to begin." Now, sir, if we had another sort of figure under which congressional orators should doubt when to begin-and not only so, but to continue to doubt to the end of the session whether or not they should begin at all-such a figure would be of great advantage to the country, and, perchance, to the orators themselves, (myself included.) But had we such a figure, I could not avail myself of its supposed benefits-for I have begun. And as to the other figure to which I have referred, I am unable to derive any advantage from it-for I believe I known where to begin. And if I begin at the beginning, I shall not bear wide from the mark. Thus beginning, I shall explain to you the circumstances under which I resolved to subject yourself and the House to this infliction.

Not long since, confined to my room, excruciating under the turn of the rheumatic screws, I bethought me of the principle of antagonism, under the operation of which one force is expelled by a counter and superior force; and it occurred

H. of Reps.

to me that if I could expel the enemy which had made a lodgment in my racked tenement, by the introduction of an agent more powerful in the infliction of pain-not that pain which leaves behind it visible scars, but which tortures and harrows up the soul-I should have gained an object of no inconsiderable importance. And here let me sug

gest to you, Mr. Chairman, being a good Whig, the propriety of imitating my example whenever you find yourself in the ultima thule of rheumatism, and on the confines of the gouty regions. I doubt not that you will be benefited by the experiment. In my case, it was eminently successful.

I thought, sir, of the present prostrate condition of that gallant and patriotic party which so joyously marched to victory in the autumn in 1840, and I thought too of the renegades to whom it owes all its calamities. The effect was magical. Corporeal suffering gave place to mental anguish; and in a transport of conflicting emotions of indignation, pity, and contempt, and, I may almost add, of revenge too, I threw aside my crutch, and in fancy took the field, armed at all points, ready to fight the battle over again, and to lend my feeble aid to crush the adders who have so cruelly, so ungratefully, stung the bosom of their benefactors.

In submitting the remarks which I deem it my duty to make on this occasion, I disclaim all pri vate feeling. They will not partake, in the slightest degree, of the spirit of personal unkindness. And if they should seem to any gentlemen to be tinged with too much of acerbity, I beg of them not to attribute them to any malignity in my nature, (for, if I know myself, I do not possess any great stock of that disagreeable article,) but to the conduct of the men who have provoked them, and to the feelings to which that conduct has naturally given birth.

And here let me premise, that I have no exalted admiration of mere greatness-(and when I speak of greatness, I mean intellectual greatness)-none, none, sir-unless it be connected with the moral and political virtues. For I hold these virtues to be identical; and if you show me one hundred political knaves, I will show you of the same ninety-nine moral scoundrels. This greatness, when thus unallied, has no attractions for me. It should neither be an object of desire in the possessor, nor of admiration in the beholder; for it only serves to augment in the former the power of mischievous and guilty perpetration. When, however, to greatness of mind, are joined truth, honor, honesty, fidelity, and patriotism, then we instinctively pay it the homage of our respect and admiration. But when a great man stoops from his high estate, and panders to his diseased appetite for power, a the sacrifice of these ennobling virtues, we loathe im in the inverse ratio which they bear to his genius or his attainments, or to both combined.

Sir, men, and more especially great men, hold their popularity by a frail tenure. A maiden should not be more chary of her honor, than a great man, and particularly a great man in public life, should be jealous and watchful of his; for one false step forever blasts the reputation of both. If a solitary draft of his fidelity or his patriotism be dishonored, his political character at once sinks into irreparable bankruptcy. Guilty of one act of baseness, in vain may he attempt to fall back on his stock of reputation, however great, though hoarded for years with a miser's care. His vir tues (if he has any) must be constant, progressive, and enduring to the end. The Scripture declara tion, where "much is given, much shall be required," has received the practical sanction of the world. Arraigned at the bar of public opinion for one de linquency, in vain he may plead, even in extenua tion, the splendor of his genius, the power of his intellect, or the magnitude of his services.

Arnold has rendered to his country great and distinguished services; but one act of treachery not only cancelled every obligation of gratitude, but consigned his memory to ignominy and contempl Poetry, in the spirit of truth, has doomed to an inglorious immortality the wonder of his age, as

"The wisest, greatest, meanest of mankind." Thus appreciating men--and great men, too-you may not expect of me, when speaking of their blackslidings and deformities, an over-nicety in my selection of rhetorical ornaments. The hunter, (and I am no expert hunter,) when about to immolate the fierce and stealthy panther which may have crossed his path, seeks not for chaplets of roses with which to adorn the sacrifice. Place, however exalted, gives to its possessor no immų,

« PreviousContinue »