OCR Interpretation

Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, May 10, 1856, Image 1

Image and text provided by Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82014835/1856-05-10/ed-1/seq-1/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

yQL a- " _ TRI-WEEKLl "?-96
Ward's Building, near til* Capitol,
Try-Weekly ?*? 00
2 00
To Club* or hidividuaU, *ubter%bivg to >v? or
more cop us?
Tri-Weekly per auuum, ia advance $3 00
Weekly " "
One square, (ten lines,)..1 year ...$b 00
?? '? 0 months 3 00
u ii 3 " 3 00
Two squares ?.l year..... 12 00
ii ii 6 UlOUltl*. o 00
1. 3 " 5 00
Three squares 1 year. . 13 00
6 months 10 00
.1 3 " 1 00
One-third column .1 ye?r.. 18 00
? i. 6 months.. 1? OU
u ?? 3 " 8 00
One oolumn 1 year. . 30 00
it ii 6 months JO CO
All advertising for a less time thaa three months,
will be at the usual rates?$1 per square for the
iirst three insertions, aad twajuy-five coats for
each subsequent issue.
B^uLettera on business should be addressed
to John Shaw, Sentinel office, Washington.
Of Copatbal 11* Chambers itiest, Mi *?
GENTLEMEN.?The valuable medicinal
properties of Balsam Copaiba have long
been recognized by the faculty, but the great dis
advantage arising from its nauseous taste has
hitherto prevented its administration in many
diseases lor which it is particularly adapted. The
usual 1 modut oytrandF of prescribing it, either
in the form of an Emulsion or Gelatinous Cap
sules. has not been found satisfactory, bomg liable
to some objection, either from the difficulty expe
rienced by some individuals in tho deglutilion ol
the Capsule or the small quantity of Copaiba gen
erally Ibund in the Emulsion.
Joyce's tasteless solution of Copaiba is ihe
most unique preparation yet introduced to the
medical profession, as it contains 50 per cent, ol
the purest Para Copaiba, without taste or smell,
and at same time mixes clearly and Ireely with
water, and is pronounced by the most eminent
physicians and analytical chemists in Ihe old ant
new worlds to contain all the medicinal proper
ties of Balt>am Copaiba without its disagreable
It is an efficient preparation tor all diseases ol
the mucous membranes, and particularly Gono
rheusa, Leucorrhaa, Gleet, painful hemorrhoida.
hflections, and in chronic irritatiou ol the bladder.
Sold in Washington wholesale, by
nnd retail by Messrs. C. Siott & Co., M. P
Kings, Patterson & Nairn, Ford & Brothers,
D. S. Dyson, J. B Moore, L>r. W. B
R. A. Payne. Bury & Co., Navy Yard; H. M
McPherson, jr, F. S. Walsh, V Harbaugb
Benjamin Frankin, Mclotire,Dr. ?.k.iy
son J- S>- Lovejoy, J W. Nairn, Wallace blliotl
and John A. Mitbuni, and Pierpoiut, Alex
Oct 3?bin ^
XTKA Heavy-plated Tea Sets, Albata
\ Forks, Spoons, See.?M. W. Gait Bro.
have just received a beautiful assortment of?
lixtra Plated Tea Sets, latest styles
Ca.tors, Cake Baskets, Card Trays,
ANo, superior Albata Forks and Spoons.
The above are of the very beat quality, and un
usually low. ^ w fc BRQ
OK LBAtiE OK RENT?The aubicrl
s ber having determined to discontinue teach
ing school, oilers for Lease or Rent the Rappa
hannock Academy, which he wishes to
for ihe next lour Nears. There has been a school
at the place for forty years. It is situated seven
i^en miles below Fredencksbi-rg, immediately on
the road be.ween ihat place and Port Royal.
The locality can be surpassed by none for beauty
or healthfulneaa, is supplied with all oeces.ary
building*, which are in good repair and will *c
commodate seventy borders. . .
Teachers wishing to keep a boarding achoo
will do well by calling to see the placo before
"SS STwtSib.,.. p?. fu,i. o..
Ml AM BKOOKU, from Philadelphia, will
lor young Ladies, on Mutuiay, &epttmUr lOtb,
1*55, at No. 133, Penn. Avenue, corner o<
Seven Building* and I9ih street. Mm liROOKK
will be assisted by the moat coinpeteot Profes
aora in every department.
A French lady, recently from Pari*, is engaged
aa a resident governess, and every means will be
used to accomplish her pupils in that language.
Drawing will be taught in various and elegant
. " My friend, Mias Brooke, is a most estimsble
lady, of great intelligence, whose qualifiauonn ax
a teacher, and whose accomplishments in English
literature, entitle her to high consideration.
" Miss Brooke is well known to me aa a lady
who la entirely capable of conducting successfully
the education of young ladies, snd in every way
worthy ot (he patronage of pareuu.
The Right Rev ALONZO POTTER, D. D.,
LL. D.,
Right Rev. O. W. DOANE, D. D., LL. D.
Professor A. DALLAS BACHE, Supt. Coast
Proiessor JOSEPH HENRY, Secy ofSmith
soian Institution.
Gen. JOHN MASON, Washington, D. C.
JOHN S. MEEHAN, Esq., Librarian to Con
Hon. JAMES CAMPBELL. P. M. General.
Hon. ELLIS LEWIS, Chief Justice of tha S.
Court, Pa.
Hon. G. W. ^OODWARD, Assocista Jurlgo
of the S. Court of Penna.
Hon. GEORGK VAIL, M. C., N. Jersey.
Lieut. M F. MAURY, LL D, U. S. Obse. /?.
Circulars stating the terms to b? had at the
principal Book Stores, or of Miss Rrooka, No
138 Pa. Avenue.
August 30?3tawlm.
TUB Muburlbcri, having made addition
to their active capital, are now prepared to
purchase an unlimited quantity of 1 ,an J Warranta,
not only at the very highest market prices, but at
timtt will pay more than any house in this city,
Baltimore, Philadelphia, or New York, and cer
tainly always aa much ; and will deal very liberally
with correspondents, forwarding Warrants by
mail, always allowing them more liberal rale* in
consideration of the loss of time neeeaaary for their
transmission to this city, and our return drafts on
Northern and Southern citieain payment. Address
J. M. CLARKE Ac Co.. Bankers, and
Dealers in Land Warrants, Washington, D. C.
C?lonel James Ik Berrm, Poatmaater, Waah
ington. D. C.
Suter, Lea, Ac Co., Bankers, Washington, D. C.
All the Ufllcers of tha Banks in Wheeling,
Beebee At Co., Bankers, New York.
Petora, Wpenoe, AI Oo. Bankers, Lynchbnrg, Va.
Paul At Hintoa, Bankers, Peteraburg. Va.
R. H. Maury At Co., Bankers, Richmond, Va.
Cashier Bank of Virginia, Rk-hnr.ond, Va.
Cashier Farmers' (tank of Virginia, Richmond, Va.
Cashier M. and M. Bank, Parketaburg, Va.
Jamea Robb At Co., Bankers, New Orleans.
J. W. Clark As Co., Banker*. Boston.
W. M. At J. C. Martin, Baak?ra,Cliarleaton,S. C.
P. At A. Vinton, B&jikera, New Philadelphia, 0.
Jan. 19?Ins.
Delivered in the Senate, May 2, I860.
The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole,
having under consideration the bill (S. No.
172) to authorize the people of the Territory of
Kansas to form a constitution and State gov
ernment, and to provide for their admission
into the Union when they have the requisite
Mr. BENJAMIN said: Mr. President, this
is the third time within the short history of our
republic that its internal peace has been im
perilled. Thrice already has the bond which
binds together the different States of the con
federacy been menaced with disruption, and
on each occasion the disturbing element has
been the same. This Union, which, at the date
of the adoption of the Constitution, was formed
one nop-slaveholding and twelve alavehold
Mg mMUMW mm JMWM an array of lixtMn
the- former, and only fifteen of the latter. '
Causes, which are too obvious to require enu- I
meration, have operated since the foundation
of the Government in producing the abolition
of slavery in the Northern portion of the
On the rirst of these occasions, Mr. Presi
dent, in 1820, more than thirty years after the
formation of the Union, the North for the
first time endeavored to secure the admission
of Maine into the Union, while at the same
time it attempted to exclude Missouri?and
that, too, in defiance of the provisions of the
treaty of cession of 1803, the words of which
are that " the said Territory shall be admitted
into the Union at the earliest possible period
consistently with the principles of the Federal
Constitution." The history of that contro
versy has been too frequently and too thorough
ly discussed on this floor within the last two
years to permit me to dwell upon it at any
length. I must, however, be permitted to ex
press my regret that the eminent men who had
charge of the interests of the South at that
time ever yielded their consent to a compro
mise which in my judgment is contrary tc the '
true theory of the Constitution, irreconcilable I
with a just regard to the principle of equality
amongst the States, and whicn, as a mere I
measure of policy, was totally inadeqnate to I
the end proposed?of securing perfect harmony I
upon the subject of a division between the
different sections of the confederacy of that
Territory which was common to all. It never
answered its purpose?not for a single year.
Scarcely had it been passed when it was broken
by nearly every Nothern State. Whenever ap
pealed to by the South, it was scorned, derided,
and repudiated. When in 1850, we proposed
the extension of its principles to the Territory
acquired in the Mexican war, our proposition
was contumeliously rejected. When, in 1854,
we finally agreed to repeal in terms that which
for more than a quarter of a century had
ceased to have any active effect, it was made
use of as a subject of vituperation towards the
South. We were accused of violating "plighted
faith"?with very much the same regard for
truth as has recently been displayed on this
floor in those mendacious tales which have
been brought to us about the state of affairs in
I repeat, Mr. President, the policy of seeking
for some other compromises than those which
are contained in the Constitution was a mis
taken policy on the part of the South. The
condition of the country this day shows the
fact. I thank Heaven that the South has at
length become aware of this mistake. She
has no longer any compromises to offer or to
accept. She looks to those contained in the
Constitution itself. By them she will live; to
them she will adhere; and if those provisions J
which are contained in it shall be violated to
her wrong, then she will calmly and resolotely
withdraw from a compact, all the obligations
of which she is expected scrupulously to fulfil,
from all the benefits of which she is ignomin- I
iously excluded.
Upon each of these occasions long debate
has taken place upon the Question of the power
of Congress to exclude slavery from the Ter
ritories by law. The discussion on this subject
has been so full and thorough, every aspect in
which it is capable of being presented has
been so minutely examined, that 1 cannot de
tain the Senate,by a further discussion of it.
This, however, I will say?that all admit that
the power to legislate for the Territories is
nowhere given in express'terms in the Con-I
stitution. It is true, sir, that the honorable
Senator from New Hampshire, [Mr. Hale,]
who opened the discussion on this subject, did
say something about that power being con
tained in a clause of the Constitution which
vests in Congress authority to dispose of the
public property. The argoment on that point,
however, has been so often refuted, and was on
that occasion so triumphantly answered by my
friend from Georgia, [Mr. Toombs,] that it is
entirely unnecessary to advert to it any further. I
Sir, I propose to place this question on higher
grounds than any reference to the mere text of
the Constitution. I propose to seek for its
true spirit, to inquire into its true theory, to
look into the condition of these States when
the Constitution was framed,and to see whether,
from all the circumstances that surrounded the
adoption of the Constitution, it be possible that
Congress can exercise ^he power lo exclude
slaves from the Territories.
In connection with this subject, I desire to
read a passage from the speech of the Senator
from New York, [Mr. Seward,] who has given
currency to a fallacy which is popular, which
was briefly adverted to by my friend from Ala
bama, [Mr. Clay,) and which I think deserving
of some more extended consideration. I read
this passage from that speech :
" Slavery is an outlaw under the law of na
tions. Still further, the Constitution of the
United States has expressly incorporated into
itself all of the laws of comity for regulating I
the intercourse between independent Btates
which it deems proper to adopt. Whatever is
forbidden expressly by the Constitution is un
lawful. Whatever is not forbidden is lawful."
I maintain, on the contrary, that the Consti
tution may be just as flagrantly and palpably
violated by the abnse of powers expressly con
ceded as by the usurpation of powers expressly
prohibited. This is no novel doctrine. It ob
tains not only under this government?it has
ever obtained in all governments in which con
stitutions nnd laws are not mere empty words.
Let us take up the Constitution and ex
amine some of its clauses in illustration of mv
Congress shall have power "to establish post
offices and post roads."
Snppose, by an increase in the number of the
free States, they obtain control of the legislative
and executive departments, and then proceed
to appropriate the money of the government
exclusively for postal facilities in those States,
j1'8! appropriations to the others.
It has power to "erect forts, magazines, and
.Suppose a Northern majority to use the com
mon fund of the Ijnion for protecting its own
coasts, and to refute all appropriations for that
purpose to the slaveholding States.
The President, with the advice and consent
of the Senate, "shall have power to appoint
ambassadors, judges of the courts, and othei
public officers."
Suppose all the officers of the government to
be regularly and systematically selected from
one section of the country which might possess
a preponderating power j that every"jndge, col
lector, and postmaster required for service in
the South should be selected from the North.
Can any man doubt, sir, that in any of these
cases the Constitution would be as clearly and
shamelessly violated by such an abuse of power
as it could possibly be by the usurpation of an
authority not granted ?
Mr. President, quite recently, across the At
lantic, in the country from which we derive
most of our ideas of law and liberty, an at
tempt was made by the Queen to appoint to
the House of Lords a single peer, with a peer
age for life. The power of the Crown to appoint
peers, was undoubted; the ministry advised the
appointment; and jet opposition was made in
the House of Lords, and the proposition was
advanced, maintained, and sustained, that, al
though the prerogative of creatingpeers existed,
the exercise of it, by the creation of a life peer
sge, was an abuse, and contrary to the funda
mental constitution of the kingdom. The
Crown, yielded, and the lords triumphed.
Sir, look at your Declaration of Indepen
dence. Upon what grounds was it that its im
mortal author placed the right of the people of
this country to assert their independence, and
to declare that for the future they would hold
the people of Great Britain "enemies in war,
in peace friends?" Look at the eutire list of
grievances. There is scarcely one of them
that is the usurpation of an unconstitutional
power; every one of them is the abuse of an
admitted constitutional power. Upon that
principle your revolution rests; and, sir, it is
not to-day, nor before a body like this, that
those who represent Southern interests are to
be told that the question is, whether.a particu
lar power is granted by the. terms of the Con
stitution without ref"r:uccya its spirit Ai;
feel at once, sir, that th< ins. voce* which I
have suggested would be gross abuses, entirely
contrary U> that spirit. What, then, is the
priociple that underlies that whole compact
for onr common government, and which we
should all instinctively feel to have been out
raged by such abuses ? It is, sir, the equality
of the free and independent States which that
instrument links together in a common bond of
Union?entire, absolute, complete, unqualified
equality?equality as sovereigns, equality in
their rights, equality in their duties. This was
the spirit that presided over the formation of
the Constitution; this tbe living spirit that
breathes through every line of it; this the ob
ject professed by it of forming "a more perfect
union "?
" Great were the thoughts and strong the minds,
Of those who framed in high debate,
The immortal league of love that binds
Our fair, broad empire State to State."
Take away this leagne of love; convert it
into a bond of distrust, of suspicion, or of hate;
and the entire fabric which is held together by
that cement will crumble to the earth, and rest
scattered in dishonored fragments upon the
Now, sir, apply these principles to the ques
tion of the division of that territory which is
common to the country. Amidst all the wild
theories, the fantastic propositions, which upon
this subject have been broached, I have heard
no man yet contend that the territory which
has been acquired by treaty, purchased by the
common treasure, or conquered by the common
valor of the country, is not the common prop
erty of all; and I ask you if, upon any fair
construction of the rights of those States which
formed this confederacy, as they are laid down
in the Constitution, this common territory ca?
any more be appropriated to the exclusive use
of one section of the Union than the common
treasure can be employed for the exclusive ser
vice of thai same section ?
Sir, in every case where the framers of the
Constitution foresaw any temptation which
could induce a majority from onescctioi) of the
Uoion to legislate for their own exclusive ad
vantage, they have expressly prohibited such
an abuse in order to preserve equality between
the States. They tell you that "no capitation
or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in pro
portion to the census or enumeration hereinbe
for? directed to be taken." They tell yotr that
" no tax or duty shall he laid on articles ex
ported from any State." They tell you that
" no preference shall be given by any regula
tion of commerce or revenue, to the ports of
one State over those of another; nor shall ves
sels bound to or from one State be obliged to
enter, clear, or pay duties in another." In the
very preface of the instrument, in declaring its
objects, yon are told that it was " to form a
more perfect Union, establish justice, insure
domestio tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general welfare" of the
land. Take it up under any aspect that you
please, and no fair, no proper, no candid con
struction of the instrument can lead to any
other conclusion than that which I have an
Those who are unwilling to meet the force of
these principles, who find that it is impossible
to refute them, endeavor to evade their appli
cation. We are told that the South is not ex
cluded from the common territory; that we
have all just the same right to go there which
people from the North have; that all that is
done is to say that we shall not carry a partic
ular species of property there; and the honor
able senator from Ohio, [Mr. Wade,] I remem
ber, in a speech delivered by him on the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill, compared the prohibition by
Congress of the introduction of slaves into the
Territories to the prohibition of the introduc
tion of spirituous liquors, or of gunpowder, or
of any dangerous substance about which Con
gress might paae police regulations in legislat
ing for tne 1 erritories.
? Mr. President, an argument like this is as
insulting to the intelligence of the people of
the South as the maintenance of the proposi
tion which it seeks to sustain would be inju
rious to their interests. The fallacy, to our
minds, is so obvious that I believe no one has
hitherto undertaken to answer it. It appears
to carry its own answer. But, sir, we have
been taught by sad experience that arguments,
however plainly their fallacy may appear to
some, are frequently efficient instruments in
deceiving others. Some mischief may be done
by this statement, and I propose to give it a
few moments' consideration.
What is the condition of the common terri
tory to which this argument is made to apply?
It is an. uncultivated waste. It is covered
either by the primeval forest, or it is still car
peted by the waving grass, over which no hu
man shadow has been cast since its dewy sur
face first glittered in the morning sun. It is
utterly unfitted for any other human purpose
than cultivation. Man could not there exist
without obtaining his subsistence from the
fruit* of the earth. What is the condition of
the South to which this argument is addresed?
Almost its entire agricultural population con
sists of negro slaves ; and this is precisely the
population which it ia proposed to exclude. So
that we are insulted aud mocked by the offer
to give us our portion of the common property,
coupled with a condition which makes it im
possible for us to use it, and which reserves it
for the exclusive use of the North; and then,
when we utter some faint complaint, when we
modestly suggest that this is not very fair, we
are answered by 44 shrieks for freedom," and
the people of the North have their prejudices
and passions intlamed by appeals in which
they are told .of 44 southern aggression" and of
the'4 usurpations of the southern slave power."
before leaving this branch of the subject, I
desire to say a few words in relation to the
principles contained in the Kansas-Nebraska
act?not that they are necessary in my part of
the country?not that the people of the South
have the slightest doubt in relation to the
policy or propriety of these enactments?but
for the purpose of answering a disingenuous
argument which has been repeatedly urged in
both brauches of Congress. We are told that
those who advocated the passage of this act,
aud now sustain it, when at the North endeav
or to persuade northern people that it is the
best possible enactment for freedom ; and that
its advocates at the South tell the people of the
South that it is an entire security for the right
of the South ; and then it is said, with some
show of reason, that one side or the other has
been cheated.
Mr. President, those who use that argument
at the North are right; those who sustain that
bill upon the grounds which I have just men
tioned, at the South, are right. Neither cheats^
neither is cheated. The history of the passage
of that bill is familiar to us all. There was a
series of propositions presented to its advo
cates, upon all of which they could agree save
one. All agreed upon the right of a State to
enter into this Uuion whenever it had sufficient
population, and had formed a republican con
stitution, whether that constitution established
or prohibited slavery. That provision was,
therefore, inserted in the bill. All agreed that
it was prejudicial to the best interests of the
country that the subject of slavery should bo
discussed in Congt-ess. All agreed that,
whether Congress had the power or not to ex
clude slavery from the Territories, it ought not
to exercise it. All agreed that, if that power
was owned by us, we ought to delegate it to
the people whose interests were to be affected I
by the institutions established at home. YVs
therefore put that into the bill.
Then came the point upon which we dis
agreed. Some said, as I say, Congress has no
power to exclude slavery from the common
territory; it cannot delegate it, and the people
in the Territory cannot exercise it except at
the time when they form their constitution.
Others said, Congress has the power; Congress
can delegate it, and the people can exercise it.
Still others said?my honorable friend from
Michigan [Mr. Cass] said?that the power to
legislate on that subject was a power inherent
in every people with whom the doctrine of self
government was anything more than an empty
name. On this proposition we disagreed; and
to what conclusion did we come? We said in
this bill that we transferred to the people of
that Territory the entire power to control, by
their own legislation, their own domestic insti
tutions, subject only to the provisions of the
constitution; that we would not interfere with
them; that they might do as they pleased on
the subject; that the constitution alone should
govern. And then, in order to provide a
means by which the constitution could govern,
by which that single undecided question could
be determined, we of the South conscious that
we were right, the North asserting the same
confidence iu its own doctrines, agreed that
every question touching human slavery or hu
man freedom should he appealable to the
Supreme Court of the United States for its de
There is the Kansas bill. Therefore, when
I advocate this bill among my people at home,
conscious that they share my confidence in the
correctness of the principles which I here enun
ciated, I say to them, in all candor and sin
cerity, 4,You are safe under this bill." Let the
gentlemen of the North, who profess an equal
confidence in what they believe to be constitu
tional principles on this subject, go to the same
tribunal, and follow the example which the
South has ever set them, of being a law-abiding
and law-observing people, and this question
will then be finally settled by a tribunal from
which none of us will attempt an appeal.
Strange, strange, sir, that that section of this
Union which bears throughout the country the
reputation of being so excitable, so passionate,
so violent, is always ready to submit its claims
to the decision of the tribunals of the country;
while that which is called the calm, cold, quiet,
calculating North, always obeying the law,
always subservient to the behests of the consti
tution, whenever this question of slavery arises
?and this alone?appeals to Sharpe's rifles
instead of courts of justice.
Mr. BUTLER. Those rifles are now better
Known an Beccoer a uioies.
Mr. BENJAMIN. Mr. President, is there
not something significant in this? Does not the
simple statement of this fact establish conclu
sively upon which side is the right? What
man, confident of his title, ever hesitated to
submit it to the Supreme Court of the Uuited
States? What man, conscious of the weakness
of his pretensions, did not dread to submit
those pretensions to that tribunal? Let the
people of the country compare the attitude of
the two sections of the confederacy on this sub
ject, and let them draw their own inference.
The next proposition to which I wish very
briefly to advert is one which emanates from
the distinguished author of almost every heresy
that appears on this subject. The honorable
Senator from New York (Mr. Seward} has
thought proper to tell us that "slavery is an
outlaw under the law of nations." Well, sir,
that Will be spread through the machinery of
the federal post office. It is printed in your
Globe. It will be read, probably, by millions
of people who know nothing whatever in rela
tion to the Inw of nation; but they will think
that a man of the eminent reputation of the
distinguished Senator from New York as a
lawyer and as a statesman could not possibly,
before the Senate of the United States, assert
a principle of the law of nations so broadly
and so unqualifiedly unless it were correct.
8ir, it has done its mischief, and it will do more.
No such faint voice as mine can follow it to
every village, to every hamlet, to every cottage
to which it has spread. Still, it is not improper,
as these propositions in turn are made, that in
turn they should be refuted. Mine be the easy
task on this one?too easy to merit the least
I refer to but a single volume. This is not
the place for elaborate discussion on legal ques
tions. I there/ore refer to a single work by an
American anthor, the most recent on the law
of nations in this country, and he tells ns that
the honorable senator from New Yorlt, when he
says that slavery is an outlaw under the law of
nations, has taken up and adopted a principle
that Gr?*at Britain attempted to establish as the
basis of her right of search for a quarter of a
centofy?a principle which was constantly r?
pudi&ted and rejected by those who managed
the negotiations in behalf of this country?a
principle which was put down by John Quincy
Adams, who, I imagine, will scarcely be repudi
ated as authority upon any question touching
the abolition of slavery by gentlemen identified
either with the republican or abolitionist party.
He tells us this not only on the faith of the ne
gotiations betweeu the two governments, but
he proves that our government was right, not
merely by citations of distinguished authors on
national law, but by the abjudications of the
courts of justice of the highest class abroad
and at home. That has been declared to be
the law by the high court of Admiralty of
Great Britain; that has been declared to be the
law by the court of King's Bench of Great Bri
tain; and, finally, in our own Supreme Court
that sits below us, it was held (the venerable
Chief Justice Marshall delivering the opinion of
the court) that slavery was not an outlaw under
the law of nations; that slavery was protected
by the law of nations; nay sir, that the horrible
sluve trade which we have proscribed, which
we have denounced as piracy in our statutes, is
protected by the law of nations. I refer the
senator, if he desires to see where the authori
ties are collected on the subject, to Wheaton's
Treaties on the Law of Nations, pages 632 and
following. I will, however, request our Secre
tary to read a passage from the decision of
Chief Justice Marshall, which is copied on the
G35th page.
The Secretary read the extract, as follows;
"But from the earliest times war had existed,
and war conferred rights in which all had ac
quiesced. Among the most enlightened nations
of antiquity one of these rights was that the
victor might enslave the vanquished. That
which was the usage of all nations could not be
pronounced repugnant ,to the law of uations,
which was certainly to be tried by the test of
general usage. That which had received the
assent of all must be the law of all.
('Slavery then, had its origin in force; but as
the world had agreed that it was the legitimate
result of torce, the state of thing: which was
thus produced by general consent could not be
pronounced unlawful.
'Throughout Christendom this harsh rule
had been exploded, and war was no longer con
sidered as giving a right to enslave captives.
But this triumph had not been universal. The
parties to the modern law of nations do not
propagate their principles by force; and Africa
I had not yet adopted them. Throughout the
whole extent of that immense continent, so far
as we know its history, it is still the law of na
tions that prisoners are slaves. The question,
then, was, could those who had renounced this
law be permitted to participate in its effects by
purchasing the humau beings who are its vic
"Whatever might be the answer of a moralist
to this question, a jurist must search for its le
gal solution in those principles which are sanc
tioned by the usages, the national acts, and the
general assent of that portion of the world of
which he considers himself a part, and to whose
law the appeal is made. If we resort * ? this
btandard as the test of international low, the
question must be considered as decided iu fa
vor of the legality of the trade. Both Europe
and America embarked in it, and for nearly
two centuries it was carried on without opposi
sition and without censure. A jurist could not
Bay that a practice thus supported was illegal,
and that those engaged in it might be punished
either personally or by deprivation of property."
Mr. BENJAMIN. Now, Mr. President, 1 op
pose the authority of Chief Justice Marshall, on
a question of international law, to theritc/umof
the honorable senator from New York.
It is a matter which excites the deepest in
terest in our minds to inquire what are the
motives of this constant, cruel, unrelenting .
warfare which is waged by some of the people
of the North against the rights of the South.
What interest have they iu the question
whether or not a slave shall be moved from
Louisianaor South Carolina to Kansas? Regard
for the slave is not the motive; that is clear.
That was once used as a pretext, but having
lost its force it is now abandoned from very
shame. No man proposes to increase the num
ber of slaves. No man can pretend for an
instant that it is hurtful to the slave that his
msster should have the choice of leaving one
location, where his fortunes are adverse, and
seeking another where they may be favorable,
because on that may depend the physical com
fort and ample supply of necessaries for the
slave. The motive is not the interest of the
slave at all.
Why, sir, what better proof do we want than
this fact? This very faction?this very Kansas
faction, of which certain gentlemen on this floor
are the exclusive supporters and friends, and
about which they are now making all the noise
that is made in the country?has done, and is
now doing avowedly, everything within its
power to prevent the freedom of slaves. What
has it in its power? The only thing that it
can possibly do towards securing the freedom
of the slave is to offer a refuge for the emanci
pated slave. Everybody knows that ooe of the
chief obstacles to be overcome in the South
towards the emancipation of the slave is to find
a refuge for him. Here is a virgin soil, and
there are tens of thousands of acres of ground
for every individual who can be found within
its limits. It grants nothing so much as popu
lation. The South has slaves, and many
Southern slaveholders have slaves that they are
ready to emancipate; but the Southern laws
think it dangerous that the two classes of
colored population should be kept together.
Yet this very Kansas faction, which could offer
a refuge to those liberated and emancipated
slave*, uses the very first instant when it can
evince its intentions by the passage of an en
actment, to pass a constitutional provision pro
hibiting liberated slaves from entering within
its borders. Conduct like this is ample for the
purpose of evincing the motives which actuate
the minds of men who are guilty of it. I say,
once more, on the question of the interest which
the North has on this subject, that it is not re
gard to the slave. That is proven; no man
ran deny it. Now that that pretext has been
abandoned, what are the others?
Sir, if this were not a very grave subject, it
would be ainnsing to listen to the frivolous pre
texts which hate been pot forth by Senators on
this floor to justify their conduct towards the
South. The honorable Senator from New
Hampshire [Mr. Hale] has a tender conscience,
and is very much exercised for fear that the
people who will live one hundred years hence
in Kansas may look hack and find that he did
not help to keep slavery out, and will cnrse his
memory I There is one motive. The honora
ble Senator who sits alongside of him, the
Senator from Iowa, [Mr. Harlan,] can by no
possibility consent to degrade himself by work
ing in a State where slaves work. That may,
as he *ays, be thought by us to be sickly senti
mentality, but still it is a deep-seated feeling in
his bosom. He would consider himself de
graded if he put his hand to any work in any
region of country where a slave was working!
There is another pretext for waging this war
On the South j whilst the honorable 8enator
from Massachusetts [Mr. Wilson J contents him
self with a general shriek for "freedom ovei
God's heritage," forgetting, overlooking the in
formation which he ought to have giveu the
Senate, how his particular desire for "freedom
over God's heritage" was to be gratified, or its
gratification impeded by the removal of a slave
from one State to another.
The flimsy nature of these pretexts suffices
to show that there is another motive behind;
and that motive has been avowed in the other
House much more candidly than in this. The
motive is a struggle for powar?for political
power?for the chance of subverting that equal
ity of the States to which I have adverted; not
for power in the other branch, because whether
a slave is in Louisiana or in Kansas, he is
equally entitled to be counted in the basis of
Federal representation, and the number of
Federal Representatives would be the same.
The struggle is for power here, on this floor.
It was triumphantly avowed, the other day, by
the Senator from Massachusetts. He told as,
with a smile of conscious superiority which is
so becoming him, that the N<>rth would"tata
this matter into its own bands; it would thin
out around here, and send men who would
follow his lead and show the country what a
true Democratic administration would be. Ay,
sir, it is a struggle for power in this body; and
for what purpose? My honorable friend from
Alabama, [Mr. Clay,] in the masterly speech
which he delivered the other day in the Senate,
drew back the curtain behind which these con
spirators are endeavoring to sap the very foun
dations of the Constitution of their country.
The object is to attain such power as shall put
these parties in possession of sufficient repre
sentation, in both branches of Congress, to
change the Federal Constitution, and to deprive
the South of that representation which is already
inadequate to protect her rights. When that
?hall have been done?when, she is reduced to
a feeble minority, utterly incompetent to move
hand or foot, and bound subserviently to the
will of the North?then will the last act of the
drama be played; and then will the Abolition
sentiments which they hide now, but which
they daUtttdin in their heart of hearts, be de
veloped to the country, and ruin and desdlfitiou
spread over fifteen of the States of this Union.
That is the object?disguised, concealed, but
transparent through the flimsy veil by which
they attempt to conceal their nefarious pur
Now Mr. President this being the sole motive
for which the North is struggling?the acquisi
tion of power?will the Senate permit me to be
so far wanting in respect for its intelligence as
to say a few words in comparison of the in
terests which the South holds in this stake?
Property, safety, honor?existence itself?
depend on the decision of the questions which
are now pending in this Congress: property,
for $2,000,000,000 cannot purchase, at a low
average price, the slaves which now belong to
the people of the South, whilst no human
calculation can reach the estimate of the de
struction of other property which would neces
sarily be involved in any measure which should
deprive us of our slaves; safety, because our
population, now kept in proper subjection,
peaceful and laborious, would be converted in
to an idle, reckless, criminal population, eager
for rapine and murder, led on to their foul
purposes by inflamed passions?passions in
flamed by fanatical emissaries from another
portion of a common country, who formed a
common government to cherish brotherly feel
ings; honor, because we should be degraded
from our positions of free, sovereign, self
dependent States, into a servile subserviency to
Northern will; existence?av, existence itself?
because the history of Hayti is written in
characters so black, so dark, ao prominent, that
we cannot be ignorant of the fate that awaits
us if measures similar to thoae which have pro
duced that result there are also to be inaugu
rated in onr Southern States.
Now, Mr. President, when we see the?e two
interests contrasted?the North struggling for
the possession of a power to which she has no
legitimate claim under the Constitution, for the
aole purpose of abusing that power?the South
struggling for property, honor, safety?all that
is dear to man?tell me if the history of the
world exhibits an example of a people occupying
a more ennobling attitude than the people of the
South? To vituperation they oppose calm
reason. Tq menaces and threats of violence,
and insulting assumptions -of superiority, they
disdain reply. To direct attacks on their rights
or their honor, tbey appeal to the guarantees of
the Constitution; and when those guarantees
shall fail, and not till then, will the injured,
outraged South throw her sword into the scale
of her rights, and appeal to the God of battles
to do her justice. I say her sword, because I
am not one of those who believe in the possi
bility of a peaceful disruption of the Union. It
cannot come on til every possible means of con
ciliation have been exhausted; it cannot come
until every angry pamion shall have been
roused; it caanot come until brotherly feeling
shall have been converted into deadly hate;
and then, sir, with feelings embittered by the
consciousness of injustice, or passions nigh
wrought and inflamed, dreadful will be the in
ternecine war that must ensue.
Mr. President, amongst what I consider to
be the most prominent dangers that now exist
is the fact that the leaders of the Republican
Party at the North have succeeded in persuad
ing the maa^es of the North that there is no
danger. Tbey have finally so wrought upon
the opinion of their own people at bome by the
constant iteration of the same false statements
and the same false principles, that the people
of the North cannot be made to believe that
the South is in earnest, notwithstanding its
calm and resolute determination which pro*
duces the quiet so omnious of evil if ever the
clouds shall burst. The people of the North
are taught to laugh at the danger of dissolution.
One honorable senator is reported to have said,
with exquisite amenity, that the South could
not be kicked out of the Union. The honora
ble senator from New York says:
"The slaveholders, in spite of all their tbreata,
are bound to it by the same bonds, and they
are bound to it also br a bond peculiarly their
own?that of dejtendence on U for their own
safety. Three million* of slaves are a hostile
force constantly in tketr presence in their very
midst. The servile war is always the roost
fearful form of war. The world without sym
pathizes with the servile enemy. Against that
war tho American Union is the ?nlj defence of
the slaveholders?their only protection. If ever
they shall, in a season of madness, recede from
that Union, and provoke that war, they will?
soon come back again."
The honorable senator from Massachusette, j
[Mr. Wilnoa,] indulges in the repetition of a j
figure of rhetoric that seems peculiarly to j
please his ear and tickle his fancy. He repre
sents the Southern mother as clasping her in
Cant with convulsive and closer embrace beoanee
the black avenger, with uplifted dagger, would
be at the door, and he tells ns that ts a bond of
union which we dare not violate.
The South has no answer to make to these
taunts?to these insults. Bet I tell honorable
senators that they are totally mistaken if tbey
suppose for one moment that the condition of'
Subject to the Decision of the National Con
the South, as regards its slave property, would
not be vastly ameliorated by this very separa
tion of which they speak so glibly.
Sir, it was said the other day by my friend
from Missouri [Mr. Geyer,J that there existed
more comity between any two foreign nations
now on the face of the earth, than there exist*
on the part of the Northern States towards the
South. Why is this ? It is because it does
not cost the North oae cent; it is because the
North makes no sacrifice: it is because,
garding the obligations ot the Constitution and
treading them under fooj, she dares to
the honor and the interests of the South, which
are protected by the provisions of that Constitu
tion, whilst the Sooth, loyal to her duties and
to her faith, is bound hand and foot by the
same Constitution, and prevented from making
reprisals or evincing resentment.
but, sir, suppose these bonds were to fail for
a moment?suppose this common compact
once repudiated by all?think you that the
North would be found pursuing this warfare
upon the Sonth ? Think you that she would
' * li d |ia t A &C
nuT Dc Cuiupcnfu iiiiuiwwiiiiT ?? ~ "
cept treaties of extradition for our fugitive
slaves? Think you she would not come and
tender such treaties to us, and pass laws for
bidding our slaves crossing tneir frontiers?
Let me not be misunderstood. I am not here
to pretend for a moment that the South U equal
in population or military strength with the
North. I do not refer to that at all. I speak
of that compulsion which would be exercised
upon the North by a regard to its own inter
ests, by the necessity of avoiding the destruc
tion of large commercial and manufacturing
properties at the North.
Why, sir, if the people of New England had
to pay a tax for every word they utter with a
view of aggression upon the South, how many
words would they utter ? But that would be
the case if there was a disruption. W e should
be compelled in self-defence to wage a continual,
unremitting war in which no sacrifice would be
| too costly, because we should be bound to it by
all the bonds of which gentlemen hive spoken;
we never could abandon such a warfare because
our very safety and existence would be at stake.
What would be the interest of the North?
Would she pay lai after tax t-Would sbe
meet the expenses of a dreadful war, continued
through a long series of years, for the pleasure
of exercising her philanthropic propensities in
receiving some fugitive slaves? Not at all,
sir. Those are ignorant of human nature who
believe such a thing to be possible. Therefore,
it is idle to talk to us about the risks we run
in regard to our particular institution that woald
result from a disruption of the Union.
' I see that my friend from New York is study
ing the law of nations. I will give him another
little passage from Cooper's Justinian:
u Slavery is where one msn is subjected to tbf
domination of another according lo ihe law ol
Mr. SEWARD. Have you no more ancient
Mr. BENJAMIN. I give you the earliest
and the latest.
Mr. SEWARD. I beg to eorrect the honor
able senator. He did not read the whole of the
pansaHe ought to be candid and read
the whole sentence.
Mr. BENJAMIN. "Slavery is where one
man is subjected to the dominion of another,
according to the law of nations, though contra
ry to natural rights."
Mr. SEWARD. u Though contrary to na
tural rights."
Mr. BENJAMIN. The proportion of the
senator from New York did not touch natural
rights. He spoke of the'laws of nations.
Mr. President, one of the principal causes
which operate in inducing the masses of the
people in the North to sustain the leaders of
the black republican cause is their ignorance of
fact) their having been mislead by so continu
ous, so persistent a perversion of truth on this
subject, that tbey have finally been induced to
hate white men and love black men in prefer
ence. If a traveller or a philosopher came to
this country, and weredesiroos of ascertaining
in what manner a body of nearly four millions
of the people of the country were treated,
whether they were well fed, well clothed, kindly
treated, and exempted from suffering, to what
Source would that traveller or that philosopher,
if he were a man of intelligence, address him
self for the purpose of arriving at a correct re
sult? He would take the statistics of the
country; he would say to himself, " All expe
rience has proved that this rule is unbending
?physical comfort and kind treatment will pro
mote the increase of population, whilst the
absence of that physical comfort, want or suf
fering, will produce the contrary result" Then,
if be took up the statistics which the officers
of this government have been paid so much
money for collecting?most of whom have
been employed from tbe northern States?
be would nnd, strange as it may appear,
that since the year 1810, at which period
importations of slaves into this country bad
ceased, if you deduct from the white popula
tion its increase resulting from emigration, and
if you add to the black population the de
crease which has resulted from the emanci
pation of slaves, tbe ratio of tbe increase of
slaves is greater than that of tbe whites.
Sir, the philosopher or traveller to whom I
have referred would at once come to his con
clusion and note it down as an established fact:
bat your Black Republican is not to be misled
by any such chicanery as this I He has read
in a novel the authentic fhct that Mr. Legree
whipped Uncle Tom to death, and that is a
thousand times more satisfactory than any such
foolish things as official documents.
Sir, we sire told, u if, however, your negroes
are so well treated, if the same humanity is
displayed towards them as you wish to lead us
to believe, why is it that so many of them run
away?" I have looked to the census to find
something on that point if I could, and I found
that out of this population, one in twenty-seven
hundred runs away. It stmick me that it might
perhaps be an interesting inquiry for our ami
able philanthropic friends to ascertain whether,
in their own beloved North, there might not be
one restless man in twenty seven hundred who
would abandon even wife, children, and tbe
comforts of home, whatever might be the com
forts of his position, and go and seek some
strange fortune elsewhere. If that be so, and
if this calculation be not exaggerated, I do
not think the fact of one in twenty-seven hun
dred running away amounts to a great deal
towards proving that southern slaves are harsh
ly treatea.
But, sir, there is snotber significant fact to
be found in that same census. 1 ha State of
Msissachusetts has opened wide her arms for
the reception and proper entertainment, and
admission to social and political privileges, of
free colored persons. The State of Virginia
thinks that class of population dangerous to
her peace as long as slavery exists. There
fore, the State of Virginia, by a series of en
actments of the severest character, is sndes
voring to drive her free-colored population oal
of the State. Here is the State of Virginia
driving them out, the State of Massachusetts
opening her arms for their reoeption ; and jet

xml | txt