Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

m ?-rioa? opposition, referred. and reported .Z*>V a committee. Tbe report stated iti it the General Goverftment had no power to alwtMl slavery is it existed in the several State,, and that these Slates themselves had exclusive jurisdiction over rhe subject. I ne fe:x>rt was generally acquiesced in, and sat \sT4Ciloo and tranquility ensued ; tbe aboli tion societies thereafter limiting their exer ttoaar** *e*pget tffthcbteck population, to o&ces of humanity witbm the^sqop* of ex isting h**- \ ^ .. , The next period when the subject of slave ry, aad ^litio* ?c^|jll^;Wa|i?ught Into notice and discussion, was on the TKCSsiod ofthe adniisiori of the State of Missouri into the Union. The struct)* waslrfttg^Stfeniious, and fearful.- It is too r eeent to unices necessary to do mom tb*B itterety to advert to it, and say, that it w**:&n*lty composed by one of those eora prtHiwses- characteristic of our institutions, arid Of which tile Constitution itself is the first si gifctf instance. - The third is that in whinh we now find our seltfts* Various causes, Mr. President, have contributed to produce the existing excite ment on the subject of abolition. The prin cipal one, perhaps, *? the example of British emancipation ofthe slaves in the islands adr jacent to onr country. Such is the sHpnar ity id laws, ir>4aoi*ua?e. in institutions, and iu common origin, between Great Britain ?e<f*be United States, that no great measure .df national policy can be- adopted in one wtthotit producing a considerable degree of indsence ifF rhe other. * Confounding the totaltadtt&rent cases together, of the powers of the British Parliament and those of the Congteseofthe tinted Slates, and the to laHvdiff*rti*ttfttiafioas of the Bntish West ^i^o^-toa^ ^in the sovereign and^todependeofc^ates of Confederacy s*8?rle?*M$o have inferred from the un decided Kritfsfc experiment the practicability 0f abolition of slavery in these States. Tfte powers of tie British ParHament are uttfimited/ tnd are often described to be om nipotent v The 'powers of the American Cewarcss,on theeOntrary, are few, cautious ly scrupulously excluding all that MM not granted, and above' ail, carefully and tbOlntrlj exc hiding all power over the ex istence Or continuance of slavery in the sev eral States. f*T^o slaves, too, upon which British feeislation operated, were not in the boson* of tbe Kingdom, but in remote and feeble colonies having no voice m Parliament. TlieWes t India ' slave hofder was neither lepftBterited nor representative in that Parlia ?22 And whilst I fervently wish com plete BOccess to the British experiment of WttSt India emancipation, I confess that I have fearful forebodigs of a dissastrous ter mination of it. Whatever it may be, I think IthsuStbe admitted that, if the British ParlMefW treated the West India slaves as frf&meo, it also treated the West India freemen as slaves. I? instead of these slaves beingseparated bv a wide ocean from the pa rent country; three or four millions of African nettosTaves'liad been dispersed Over England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland; and their own ers h*3 been members of the British Parlia merrt? acas -which would have presented gatoe analogy to that of our own country? does any one believe that it would have been expedient or practicable to have emancipated th*n, teavW them to remain, wiril all their enifetttered feelings, in the United Kingdom boundless as the powers of the British rar liameot are 7 . , Other causes have conspired with the British example to produce the existing "T say it with ? with no intention to elsewhere, that there are persons in both parts of the Union who have soogk to mingle abolition with ^MStod to array one portion oftheLnion a against the other. It is the misfortune in free effsntfies t&t, in high party times, a dispo sition too often prevails t*seizehoH of every which can strengthen the one side or ,*aken the other. Charges of fostenng aboli tibn designs have been heedlessly and unjust ly made by one party against the ot her.? Prior to the late election ofthe present Pres ident of the "United States, he was charged with bctn" an abolitionist, and abolition de stgns were imputed to many of his support ed Much as I was opposed to bis election arid am to Vis Ad ninistration, I neither shared in malting nor behevmg the truth of the charge. He was scarcely installed in office before the same charge was directed szainst those who opposed his ejection. Bit President, it is not true, and I rejoice that it is not true, that either of the two great parties in this count*y has any design or aim it abolition. I should deeply lament if it were true. I should consider if it were true, that the danger to the stability of our system would he infinitely greater than any which does,! hope, actually exist. Whilst neither n|& atk be, f think, justly accused of any rtriLm tendency or purpose, both have mftfete&Snd both have been injured, in par tfcti&f- localities, by the accession or abstrac d^f aboiitiok support. If the account were fairly staled, I believe the party to which heldngJ But' I am far, for that reason, from being disposed to accuse our adversaries of I of being abolitionists, , And now, Jfr- .President, allow me to con sider the several cases In which the authori ty of CoQgress i* invoked hy these abolition petkioaers opon the subject of domestic sla very*. The fipst refetes to it as it exists in the District of Colombia. The following is the provision of the Constitution of the UaiteJ States in referreuce to that matter. ':?* exercise exclusive legislation in all caste whatsoever over such District (not ex ^ceedieg ten miles square) as may by cession *of particuJar States* and the acceptance of ^Con^ress, Jbecenae the Seat of Government f the United States. ^ $ This provision preceded, in point of time, the actual cessions which were made by tbe State s-ef &a*ytend aad Virginia. The ob Jict ofthe cBsssen Was te establish a Seat of Government of the Un*ted States ? and the grant in the Constitution of exclusive legisla tes most be understood, and should always he interpreted, as having relation to the ob ject of theeessioa- it was with a fsH knowJ edge ef his clause in the Constitution that those two States ceded to the Geoeral Gov ejmmoat the ten miles Square, constituting the District of Columbia. In making the ces??B,: they supposed rhat it was to be ap slici sol&iy, to the purpose of a seat of Qos^Sament, for which it was asked. When it was made, slavery existed in both those Qemmonweaitbs, and in the ceded ter. sitory, as it pow continues to exist in all of ^hetn. Neither Maryland nor Virginia coald hare anticipated that, whilst the insulation remained wkhio their respective limits, its ^bolkion would be attemjMed by Congress without their consent. Neither of them jMrofes Wjr hsve made an oncoodi tionaJ GffMioa, ifthay eould have antieipated j 9uch a result. From the nature of the provision ia the Constitution, and ihe avowed* object of the acquisition of the territory, t*o duties arise on the part of Congress. The first is, to render the District available, comfortable and convenient, as a seat of Government of the whole Union; the other is, to govern the people within the District so as best to pro mote their happiness and prosperity. These objects are totally distinct in their nature and in interpreting and exercising the grant of the power of exclusive legislation, that distinction should be constantly borne in f tnind. Is it necessary, in o^der to render this palce a comfortable seat of the Gene ' ral Government, to abolish slavery within itsJimits? No one can or will advance such a proposition* The Government has remain ed here near forty years without the slightest inconvenience from the presence of domes tic slavery. It is necessary to the well being of the people of the District that slavery should be abolished from amongst them.'? They do not only neither ask nor desire, but are almost unanimously onposed to it. It exists here in the mildest and most mit I igated form. In a population of 39,834 there * were at the last enumeration of the population I of the United States, but 6113 slaves. The I number has not probably much increased ! since. They are dispersed over the ten miles 'square, engaged in the quiet pursuits of husbandry, or in menial offices in domestic life. If it were necessary to the efficiency of thjs place as a seat of the General Gov ernment to abolish slavery, which is utterly denie&*the abolition should be confined to the. necessity which prompts it, that rs, to the limits of the City of Washington itself. Beyond those limits, persons concerned 10 the Government of the United Stales have no more to do with the inhabitants ot the Dis trict than they have with the inhabitants^ of the adjacent count es of Maryland and \ ir ginia whicn lie beyond the .District. To abolish slavery within the District of Columbia, whilst it remains in Virginia and Maryland, situated as that District is, within the very heart of those States, would expose them to great practical inconvenience and annoyance. The District would become a place of refuge and escape for fugitive slaves from the two States, and a place from which a spirit of discontent, insubor lination, and insurrection might be fostered and encour aged in the two States. Suppose, as was at one time under consideration, Pennsylvania had granted ten miles square within its limits for the purpose of a* Seat of the (general Government ; . could withouta violation of good faith, have introduced and established slavery within the bosom of that Common wealth, in the ceded territory, after she had abolished it so long ago as the year ,1780 ?, Yet the inconvenience to Pennsy .vauia iu the case supposed would have been much less than that to Virginia and Maryland in the case we are arguing.^ It was upon this view of the subject that ? the Senate, a* its last session, solemnly de clared that it would be a violation of implied faith, resulting from the transaction of the cession, to abolish slavery within the Dis trict of Columbia. And would it not be? ?*y implied faith is meant that when a grant is made for one avowed and declared purpose, known to the parties, the grant should not be perverted to another purpose, una vowed and undeclared, and injurious to the grantor. The grant, in the case we are considering, of the territory of Columbia, was for a scat of Government. Whatever power is necessary to accomplish that object is carried along by the grant. But the abolition of slavery is not necessary to the enjoyment of this site as a seat of the General Government. The grant in the- Constitution, of exclusive pow er of legislation over the District, was made to ensure the exercise of an exclusive au thority of the General Government to render this place a safe and secure seat of Govern ment, and to promote the well-being of the < inhabitants of the District. The power granted ought to be interpreted and exercised solely, by the end for which it was granted^ The language of the grant was necestojrily broad, comprehensive, and exclusive because at', the exigencies which might anse to ren der this a secure seat of the General Gov ernment ceuld not have been foreseen and provided for. -The language may possibly be sufficientlv comprehensive to include a power of abolition, but it would not at all the?cer follow that the power could be rightfully exercised. The case may be re sembled to that of a plenipotentiary invested with a plenary power, but who, at the same time, has positive instructions from his Gov ernment as to the kind of treaty which he is to negotiate and conclude. If he violates those instructions, and concludes a different treaty, his Government it not bound by it. And if the foreign Government is aware of the violation.it acts in bad f^th. Or it may be41Vustrated by an example drawn from private life. I am an endorser for my friend on a 'note' discounted in bank. He applies to me to endorse another to renew it, which I do in bank. Now, this gives him power to make any other use of my note which he pleases. But if, instead of apply in? it to the intended purpose, he goes to a broker aiid sells it, thereby doubling the re sponsibility for him, he commits a breach of trust, and a violation of the good faith implied in the whole transaction. 'But, Mr. President, if this reasoning were as erroneous as T believe it to be correct and conclusive, is the affair of the liberation of six thousand . negro slaves in this District disconnected with the three millions of slaves in the United States, of sufficient magnitude to agitate, and embitter this great Confeder acy 1 The next case in which the petitioners ask the exercise of the power of Congress relates to slavery in the Territory of Florida. Florida is the extreme southern portion of j the United States. It is bounded on all its i land sides by slave States. It almost extends | within the tropics, and the nearest important island to it on the water side is Cuba, a slave island. " This simple statement of its geogra phical position should of itself decide the j question. When, by the treaty of 1819. with Spain, it was ceded to the United states, sla very existed within it. By the terms of that treaty, the efforts and property of the inhabi tants are secured to them, and they are al lowed to remove and take them away, if ihey think proper to do so, without limitation as to time. ^ If it were expedient, therefore, to abolish slavery in it, it could not be done consistently with the treaty, without geantmg to the ancient inhabitants a reasonable time to remove their slaves. But further. By the compromise which took place on the passage of the act fer the admission of Mis souri into the Union, ia the year 1820, it was agreed and understood that the line ol 36 deg. 30 min, of north latitude should mark the boundary between I he free States and the State# to to b# created in territories of the United State* ceded by the treaty of Louisiana; those situated south of \t_ being slave States, and those north of it free States. * . But Florida is south of that line, and conse quently. according to the spirit of the un derstanding Which' prevailed at the period al luded to, should be a slave state. It may be true that the compromise does not in terms embrace Florida, and that it is not absolute ly binding and obligatory ; but all candid and impartial men must agree that it ought not to be disregarded without the most weighty considerations, & that nothing could be more 'to be depreciated than to open a new the bleeding wounds which were happily bound up and healed by that compromise. ? Florida is the only remaining Territory to be admit ted into the Union with the institution of do mestic slavery, while Wisconsin and Iowa ' are now Dearly ripe for admission without it. The next instance in which the exercise of the po-ver of Congress is solicited is that of prohibiting what is denominated by the petitioners the slave trade between the States, or, as it is described in abolition petitions, the traffic in human beings between the States. This excrcise of the power, of Congress is claimed under that clause of the Constitution which invests it with authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes. The power to regulate commerce among the several States, like other powers in the Con stitution, has hitherto remained dormant in respect to the interior trade by land between the S ates. It was a power granted, likj^all the other powers of the General Govefbiifent to secure peace and harmony among he States. ? Hitherto it hits not been necessary to exercise it. All the cases in which, during the progiess of time, it may become ^xpe3i ent to exert the general authority-to regulate commerce between the States, cannot be conceived. We may easily imagine, how ever, contingencies which, if they Were to happen, might require the interposition of the common authority. If. for example, the State of Ohio were, by law, to prohibit any vessel entering the port of Cincinnati, from the port of Louisville, in Kentucky, if that case be not already provided for by the laws which regidate our coasting trade, it would be competent to the General Government to annul the prohibition emanating from State authority. Or, if the State of Kentucky were to prohibit the introduction within its limits, of any articles of trade, the production of the industry of the inhabitants of the State of Ohio, the General Government might, by its authority, supersede the State enactment. But I deny ,lhat the General Government has any authority* whatever, from the Constitu tion, to abolish what is called the slave trade, or, in other words, to prohibit the removal of slaves from one slave state to another slave State. u The grant in the Constitution is of a pow er of regulation* and not prohibition. It is conservative not destructive. Regulation ex vi termini implies the continued existence or prosecution of th? thing regulated. Prp; hibition implies total discontinuance or anni hilation. The regulation intended was de signed to facilitate and accommodate, not to obstruct and incommode the commerce to be regulated/ Can it be pretended that, under this power to regulate commerce among the States, Congress has the power to prohibit the transportation of live stock which, in countless numbers, are daily passing ffom the Western and interior States to the South ern, Southwestern, and Atlantic States. The moment the incontestable fact is ad mitted, that negro slaves are property, the law of moveable property irresistibly attaches itself to them, aid secures the right of car rying them frompfee to another State, where they are recognised as property, without any hindrance whatever from Congress. But, Mr. Presicfebt, I will not detain the Senate longer on thesubject of slavery with in the District and in Florida, and of the -right of Congress to prohibit the removal of Saves from one State to another. These, as I have already intimated, with ultra abolition ists are but so many masked batteries , con cealing the real and ultimate point of attack. That point of attack is the institution, of do mestic slavery as it exists in these States. It is to liberate three millions of slaves held in bondage within them. And now allow me, sir, to glance at the insurmountable obsta cles which he in the way of the accomplish ment of this end and of some of the conse quences which would ensue if it were possi ble to attain it. The first impediment is the utter anu ab solute want of all power on the part of the General Government to effect the purpose. The Constitution of the United States crea tes a limited Government, comprising com paratively few powers, and leaving the residu ary mass of political power in the possession of the several States. It is well known that the subject of slavery interposed one of the areatest difficulties in the formation of the Constitution. It was happily compromised and adjusted in a spirit of harmony and pat riotism. : According to that compromise, nb power whatever was granted to the General Government in respect to domestic slavery, but that which relates to taxation and re presentation, and the power to restore fugi tive slaves to their lawful owners. All other power in regard to the institution of slavery was retained exclusively by the States, to be exercised by them severally, according to their respective views of their own peculiar interest. The Constitution of the United States never could have been formed npon the principle ofinvesting the General Government with authority to abolish the institution at its pleasure, 'it never can be continued for a single day if the exercise of such a power be assumed or usurped. But it may be contended by these ultra abolitionists that their object is not to stimu late the action of the General Government, but to operate upon the States themselves in which the institution of domestic slavery ex ists. If that be their object, why are these abolition societies and movements all confined to the free states] Why are the slave States wantAnly and cruelly assailed 1 Why do the abolition presses teem with publications tending to e*cite hatreu and animosity ou the part of the inhabitants of the free St.ites agaios those of the slave States? Why is Congress petitioned? The free btates have no more power or right to interfere with in- j stitutions in the slave States, confided to the exclusive jurisdiction of those States, than thef Wfculd have to interfere with institutions existing in any forqign.country. What would be thought of the formation of societies in Great Britain, the issue of numerous inflam matory publications, and the sending out of j lecturers throughout the kingdom, denoun cing and aiming at the destruction of any of the institutions of France? Would they be regarded as proceedings warranted by good neighborhood ? Or what would be thought of the formation of societies in the slave States, the issue of violent and inflammatory I tracts, ind rtftiiepntation of the missiona riei, pouriog out.impatjioned denunciations against the institutions under the exclusive eontfotof the free States 1 Is their purpose to appeal to our understandings, ana to ac tuate our humanity ? And do they expect i to ac omplish that purpose by holding us .up to the scorn and contempt, and devastation of the people of the free States and the whole civilized world ? The slavery which exists amongst us is our affair, not theirs ; and they have oo more just concern with it than they have with slavery as it exists throughout the world. Why not leave it to up, as the common Constitution of our country has left it, to be dealt with, under the guidance of Providence, as best as may or can ? ^ The next obstacle in the way of abolition arises out of the fact of the presence in the slave States of three millions of slaves. They are there, dispersed throughout the land, part and parcel of our population. They were brought into the country originally under the authority of the parent Government whilst we were colonies, aod their importa tion was continued in spite of all the remon stances of 'our ancestors. If the question were an original question, whether, there be ing no slaves within the country, we should introduce them, and incorporate them into our society, that would be a totally different question. Few, if any, of the citizens of the United States would be found to favor their introduction. No man in it would op pose, upon that supposition, their admis sion with more determined resolution and conscientious repugnance than I should. But that is not the question. The slaves are here ; ho practical scheme for their removal or separation from us has been yet devised or proposed ; and the true inquiry is, what is best to be done with them. In human af fairs we are often constrained, by the force of circumstances and the actual state of things, to do what we would not do if that state of things did not exist. The slaves are here, and here must remain, in some condi tion ; and, I repeat, how are they to be best governed? ? What- is best to be done for their happiness and our own ? In the slave States the alternative is, that the white man must govem the black, or the black govern the white. In several of those States, the number of the slaves is greater than that of the white population. An Immediate aboli tion of slavery in them, as these ultra-aboli tionists propose, would be followed by a des perate struggle for immediate ascendancy of the black race over the white race, or rather , it would be followed by instantaneous colli sions between the t*o races, which would break out into a civil war that would end in the extermination or subjugation of the one race or the other. In such an alternative, who can hesitate ? Is it not .better for both p ?rties that the existing state of things should be preserved, instead of exposing them to the horrible strifes and contests which would in evitably attend an immediate abolition ? This is our true ground of defence for the contin ued existence of slavery in our country* It is that which our Revolutionary ancestors assumed. It is that which, in my opinion, forms onr justification in the eyes of all Christendom. A third impeditnet to immediate abolition is, to be found in the immense amount of capital which is invested in slave property. The total number of slaves in the United Stales, according to the last enumeration of the population, was a little upwards of two millions. Assuming their increase at a ratio, which it probably is, of five per cent, per an num, their present number would be three millions. The average value of slaves at this time is stated by persons well iuformed to be as high as five hundred dollars each. To be certainly within the mark, let us suppose that it is only four hundred dollars. The total value, then, by that estimate, to the slave property, in the United States is twelve hundred millions of dollars.? This property is diffused throughout all classes and condi tions of society. It is owned by widows and orphans, by the aged and infirm, as well as the sound and vigorous. It is the subject of mortgages, deeos of trust, and family settle ments. It has been made the basis of nu meious debts contracted upon its faith, and is the sole reliarabe ; in many instances, of creditors within and without the slave States for the payment of the debts due to them. And now it is rashly proposed, by a siugle fiat of legislation, to annihilate this immense amount of property! To annihiliate it with out indemnity and without compensation to its owners! Does and considerate man be lieve it to be possible to effect such au ob ject without convulsion, revolution, and bloodshed ? I know that there is a visionary dogma which holds that negro slaves cannot be the subject of property. I shall not dwel1 long with this speculative abstraction. That is property which the law declares to be proper ty. Two hundred years of legislation have sanctioned and sanctified negro slaves as pro perty. Under all the forms of government which have existed upon this continent during that long space of time? under the British Government? under the Colonial Govern ments? under all the State Constitutions and Governments ? and under the Federal Government itself? they have been deliber ately and solemnly recognised as the legiti mate subjects of property. To the wild spec ulations of theorists and innovators stands opposed the fact, that in an uninterrupted period of two hundred years' duration, under every form of human legislation, and by all the departments of human government, Af rican negro slaves have been held and re spected, have descended and been transfer red as lawful and indisputable property. They were treated as property iu the very British example which is so triumphantly appealed to as worthy of our imitation.* Although the West India planters h td no voice in the uni ted Parliament of the British Isles, au irre sistable sense of justice extorted from that Legislature the grant of twenty millions of pounds sterling to compensate the colonists for their loss of property. If, therefore, these ultra-abolitionists are seriously determined to pursue their scheme of immediate abolition, they should at once set about raising a fund of twelve hundred millions of dollars, to indemnify the owners of slave property. And the taxes to raise that enormous amount can only be justly assessed upon themselves or upon the free States, if they can persuade them to assent to such an assessment; for it would be a mockery of all justice and an outrage against all equity to levy any portion of the tax upon the slave States to pay for their own unques tioned properly. ;v-" If the considerations to which I have al ready adverted arc uot sufficient to dissuada the abolitionists from further perseverance in their designs, the inten sr of the very cause which they profess to espouse, ought to check their career Instead of advancing, by their efforts, that cause, they have thrown hack for half a century the prospect of any species of einancipation'of the African race, gradual orimmtdiate, in any of th? Stttot They hate dob* more ; JthAJ have increas ed the rigors of legislation against slaves in most, if no^ all, of the slave States. Forty vears agdthe question was agitated in the State of Kentucky of a gradual eman cipation of the slaves within its limits. By gradual emancipation, I mean that slow but safe and cautious liberation of slaves which was first adopted in Pennsylvania at the instance of Dr. Franklin, in the year ]780, and, according to which the generation in being were to remain in slavery, but all their offspring born afler a spe ified day were to be free at the age of twenty eight, and, in the mean time, were to receive preparatory insruction to qualify them for the enjoyment of freedom. That was the species of emancipation which, at the epoch to which I allude, was discussed in Kentucky. No one was rash enough to propose or think of immediate abolition. No one was rash enough to propose or think of throwing loose upon the community, ignorant and unprepared the untutored slaves of the Stare. Many thought, and I amongst them, that as each of the slave States had a right exclusively to fudge for itself in respect. to the institution of domestic slavery, the proportion of slaves compared with the white population in that State, at that time, was so inconsiderable that a system of gradual emancipation might have been safely adopted without any hazard to the security and interests of the Common wealth. And I still think that the question of such emancipation in the farming States is one whose solution depends tipon the re lative numbers of the two r<*ces in any given State. If I had been a citizen of the State of Pennsylvania, when Franklin's plan was adopted, 1 should have voted for it, because by no possibility could the black race ever acquire the ascendancy in that State. But if I had been then, or were now, a citizen of any of the planting States? the Southern or Southwestern States ? I should have op posed, and would continug>to oppose, any scheme whatever of emancipation, gradual or immedi -te. because of?e dangeyif an ul timate ascendancy of the bladk rac$; or of a civil contest which might terminate in the extinction of one race or fhe other. The proposition in Kentucky for a gradu al emancipation did not prevail, but it was sustained by a large and respectable minori ty. That minority had increased, and was increasing, until the abolitionists commenced their operations. The effect has been to dissipate ^11 prospects whatever, for the pre sent, of any scheme of gradual or other eman cipation. The People of that State have become shocked and alarmed by these aboli tion movements, and the number who would now favor a system even of gradual emanci pation is probably less than it was in the year^ ]798-'9., At the session of the Legis lature held in l_837-*8, the question or call in i a convention was submitted to the con sideration of the People by a law passed in conformity with the Constitution of the State. Many motives existed for the passage of the law, and among them that of emancipation had its influence. ? When the question was passed upon by the People at their last an nual election, only about one-fourth of the whole voter* ot the State supported a call of a convention. The apprehension of the dan ger of abolition was the leading consideration amongst the People for opposing the call. But for that, but for the agitation of the qurstion of abolition in States whose popu lation had no right, in the opinion of the People of Kentucky, to interfere inTthe mas ter, the vote for a convention would have been much larger, if it had not'been carried. [ felt myself constrained to?take immediate, bold, and decided ground against it. Prior to the agitation of this subject of abolition, there was a progressive melioration in the condition of slaves throughout all the slave States. In some of thein. schools of instruction were opened by humane and re ligious persons. These are all now check ed ; and a spirit of insubordination having shown itself in some localities, traceable, it is believed, to abolition movements and ex ertions, the legislative authority has fouud it expedient to infuse fresh vigor into the police, and laws which regulate the conduct of-the slaves. And now, Mr. President, if it were possi " ble to overcome the insurmountable obsta cles which lie in the way of immediate abol ition, let us briefly contemplate some of the consequences which would inevitably ensue. One of these has been occasionally alluded to in the progress of these remarks. It is the struggle which would instantaneously arise between the two races in most of the Southern and Southwestern States. And what a dreadful struggle would it not be! Embittered by all the recollections of the pasr, by the unconquerable prejudices which would prevail between the two races, and stimulated by all the hopes and fears of the future, it would be a contest in which the extermination of the blacks, or their ascen dancy over the whites, would be the sole al ternative. Prior to the conclusion, or dur ing the progess of such a contest, vast num bers, probably, of the black race would migrate into the free States ; and what effect would such a migration have upon the labor ing classes in those States! Now the distribution of labor in the Unit ed States is geographical ; the free laborers ?occupying one side of the line, and tlx? slave laborers the other ; each class pursuing its own avocations almost altogether unmixed with the other. But on the supposition of immediate abolition, the black class, migra ting into the free States, would enter into competition with the white class, diminish ing the wages of their labor, and augmenting the hardships of their condition. This is not all. The abolitionists strenu ously eppose all separation of the two races. I coufess to you, sir, that 1 have seen with regret, grief, and astonishment, their resolute opposition to the project of colonization. No scheme was ever presented to the accep tance of man, which, whether it be entirety practicable or not, is characterized by more unmixed humanity and benevolence than that of transporting, with their own consent, the free people of color in the United States to the land of their ancestors. It has the powerful recommendation that whatever it does is good, and if it effects nothing, it in flicts no one evil or rrjischief upon any por tion of our society. There i9 no necessary hostility between the onjects of colonization and abolition. Colonization deals only with the free man of color ; and that with his own free, voluntary consent. It has nothing to do with slavery. U disturbs no man's pro perty, seeixs to impair no power in the slave States, nor to attribute any to the General Governmeut. All its action and ail its ways and means are voluntary, depending upon the blessing of Providence, which hitherto has graciously smiled upon it. And yet, beneficient and harmless as colonization is, no portion the of People ofthe United States denounces it with so mnch persevering zeal and such unmixed bitterness as do abolition isti. They pat themselves in direct apposition to any separation whatever between the two races. They would keep them forever pent up together within the same Jimits, perpetu ating their animosities, and constantly en dangering the peace of the community. They proclaim, indeed, that color is nothing ; that the organic and characteristic differen ces between the two race# ooght to be en tirely overlooked and disregarded. And, elevating themselves to 'a sublime, but im practicable philosophy, they would teach 129 to eradicate nil tb^epugnaojces-ofour nature, and to take to ourbosomsoad ourooards the black- man as. ?ado the-white?; oil the Mine footing of equal social condition. Do they not perceive that in thus confounding alt the distinctions which God himself has made, they arraign the goodness of Proyidguce.. it self? It has been His divine pleasure to make the black man black and *white man white, and to distinguish them by. other re pulsive constitutional differences. It is nor necessary for me to maintain, nor shall t endeavor to prove, that it was any part of His divine intention that the one race should be held in perpetual bondage br the other'; but this I will say, that those whom He has created different, and has declared, by their physical strUbture and color, ought to be kept as under, should not be brought together by any process whatever of unnatural amalga mation. * tJg X'kK&iPi"*, ?C Vlw cjyt! cpnjsst which 1 have supposed. could bp avoided, se paration or amalgamation is the only peace ful alternative, if it were possible to effectu ate the project of abolition. The abolitiojusts oppose all colonisation and jt irresistibly follows, whatever they>may protestor declare, that they are in favor of amalgamation. And who are to bring about this amalgamation ? 1 have heard Of none of these nltra- abolition ists furnishing in their own families or per sons examples of intermarriage: Who is to begin it? Is it their purpose not only to create a pinching competition between black labor and white labor, but do the/ iotend also to contaminate the industriotuf and. labo rious classes of society at the. North bj. a re volting admixture of the black- element *, It is frequently asked, What is to become of the African race amofcg'us? Are they .forever to remain in bondage ? That ques tion was asked more, than half a century ago. It has been answered by fifty years of pros perity but little chequered from this cause. It will be repeated fifty or a hundred years hence. The true answer is, that the same Providence who has hitherto guided and gov - erned us, and averted all serious evils from the existing relation between the two races, will guide andgovern our posterity. Suffi cient to the day is the evil thereof. We have hitheno, with that blessing,; taken care of ourselves. Posterity will fiud* the n^ans of its own preservative)- and prosperity. It is only in the most direful event that can be fal this People that \hi? great interest, and all other of our greatest interests, would be put in jeopardy; ? Although io particular ! districts the black population is gaining upon . the white, it only constitutes one-fifth of the whole population of the United States. Aod* takuig the aggregates ofUie two races, the Europeart is constantly, though s?owlyv,gaior iug upon t6e African portion . This fact is demonstrated by the periodical returns of our population? Let us cease, theo, to . in dulge in gloomy forebodings about the im penetrable future. But, if we may attempt to lift tiie veil, and contemplate what lies be yond it, I, too, have ventured on a specula*: live theory, with which 1 will not uow trou2 ble you, but which has been puoijftbed (o the world. According; fo' that, in Che pro gress of time, some one hundred and iMly or two hundred years hence, but few mtiges of the black race will remaib 'among our posterity... Mr. President, at the period of the forma tion of our Constitutiou, and afterwards; our patriotic ancestors apprehended danger to the Union from.two causes. One was, the Alleghany Mountains, dividing the waters which flow into'the Atlantic, Ocean from 1 hose which found their outlet , ip the Gulf of Mexico. They seemed to preseat a na tural separation. That daoger has vanished before the noble achievements of the spirit of internal improvement, and the immortal genius of Fulr>u. And no w. nowhere Is found a more loyal attachment to the Iliyou than among those very Western people who, it was apprehended, would be the first to burst its ties. .The other cause, domestic slavery, happi ly the sole remaining cause which is likely to disturb our harmony, continues to exist. It was this which created the greatest obsta cle and the most anxious solichiidejn the deliberations of the convention that adopted the general Constitution. And it is. this subject that has ever been regarded with the deepest anxiety by all who are sincerely de sirous of the permanency of ottr .Uriiotf. The Father of his Country, in his last ef fecting and solemn appeal to bis fellow, citi zens, deprecated, as a most calamitous event, the geographical divisions which it .might produce. TheXonvention wisely left.to the several. St ate? the power over the institution of slavery, as a power not necessary to the plan of union which it' devised, aod as one with which the General Government could not be invested without planting the seeds of certain destruction. There let it remain un disturbed by*Jlly aobaUowtfcfh'aod. ? Sir, Iain not in the habit of speaking lightly of the possibility of dissolving fhis happy Union. The Senate knows that I have depreciated allusions, on ordinary- oc casions, to that direful event. * The cotnitry will testify that, if th'fere be anything in the history of my public. career worthy of recol lection, it is the truth and sincerity of my ardent devotion to its lasting- preservation,. But we should be false in on.r 'allegiance to? it, if we diti/not discriminate between the imaginary aud real dangers by Which it may be assailed. Abolition should no louger be regarded as an imaginary danger. '1 he abol itionists, let me suppose, succeed in their present aim of uniting the inhabitants of the free Statef. as one roan agaiust, the inhabi tants pf the slave States. .Quion on the one side will beget union on the other. And this process of reciprocal consolidation witt^be attended with all the violent prejudices;'em bittered passions, and implacable animosities which ever degraded or deformed human nature. A rirtnal dissolution of the Union will have taken place, whilst the forms of its existence remain. The most valuable ele ment of union, mutual fciodness, the feelings of sympathy, the fraternal bonds, which cow happily unite us, will have been extinguish ed forever. Oue section will stand in me nacing and hostile array against the other. The collision of opiniou will be qdickly fol lowed by the clash of arms. 1 will not at tempt to describe scenes: wipch ?*w happily lie concealed from our view. , . AWiU?gi|ta themselves tfould shrink back in d.srapy^tod horror at.. ibti; contemplation- of. desolated fields, conflagrated cities, murdered iqfc*bim