The decade embraced between the years 1835 and 1845 may be termed the third epoch in the history of this movement. In that period, the grand experiment of the abolitionists was most effectually tried. They had felt the public pulse, developed their power and resources, had the benefit of experience, and ascertained to what extent the public mind could be prejudiced by the course of agitation which they had pursued. It was in fact an era of lessons, as well to the country as to themselves. From a mere handful, the original organization had grown to be a power within itself--a power at the ballot-box--a power for right or wrong, for good or mischief, too self-reliant and too strong to be disregarded. Neither legislative enactments, nor riots, nor personal chastis.e.m.e.nt, nor public opinion, had been able to restrain its rapid advances towards the consummation of its hopes. It lost ground nowhere, and in every non-slaveholding State its friends and funds were greatly multiplied. As an indication of its extraordinary growth, the number of anti-slavery societies in the United States, in the year 1838, may be safely estimated at two thousand, with at least two hundred thousand persons enrolled as members.
These, however, were not all ent.i.tled to the suffrages of the party. They were the children and wives of fanatics who learned their lessons of abolition in the Bible cla.s.ses, Sunday and secular schools, and from their parents and husbands. The sentiment was intruded, indeed, in all the relations of life--social, financial and domestic, and even in the affairs of love, Cupid himself was made subservient to its ascendancy. The belles of the day would hardly look upon a suitor who was not as well a worshipper at the shrine of their political pa.s.sion, as of their beauty, and no youngster"s domestic destiny was at all certain of fruition who was not sound upon what was then regarded as the soul-saving question of abolitionism. The youths of 1840 have become the men of 1860, and in the enormous increase of the republican party, we see the result of the early influences thus set at work.
For the first time in its history, the organization began to be regarded as a political element in the land, and worthy of a courtship by those who desired its influence and support. Candidates for office began to be catechised, and such men as William H. Seward, Levi Lincoln, William L.
Marcy and others, found time to give lengthy replies to the authors of this new inquisition, setting forth their views. In local politics, it was the moral and political test by which men were measured, and it lay at the foundation of all the subsequent State action of the Northern Legislatures upon the subject of anti-slavery.
In both branches of Congress, also, the question of abolition for the first time occupied a large share of the deliberations, and was discussed under every possible aspect. From 1831, when John Quincy Adams presented fifteen pet.i.tions in a single bunch, for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, similar doc.u.ments, got up and circulated by anti-slavery societies, poured into both branches of the National Legislature in a steady stream. They also called for a prohibition of what was termed an "internal slave trade" between the States, avowing at the same time that their ultimate object was to abolish slavery, not only in the District, but throughout the Union. It was, indeed, the only mode in which the fanatics could agitate the question in Congress, and was a part of the scheme by which they expected to accomplish their purposes. Under the influence of the feelings excited by these causes, the Southern Senators and members declared, almost to a man, that if the Southern States could not remain in the Union without having their domestic peace continually disturbed by the systematic attempts of the abolitionists to produce dissatisfaction and revolt among the slaves and incite their wild pa.s.sions to vengeance, the great law of self-preservation would compel them to separate from the North. This persistent demand of the abolitionists, through pet.i.tions, continued from session to session, until, becoming a nuisance, an effort was made to prevent their farther reception. The effort was, for a time, successful, and resulted in what was called the "era of gags"--these gags being simply a rule of the House, "That all pet.i.tions, memorials, resolutions and propositions relating in any way or to any extent to the question of slavery shall, without either being printed or referred, be laid on the table, and no further action whatever shall be had thereon."
This was respectively pa.s.sed in 1836, 1837 and 1838, and in 1840 it was incorporated into the standing rules of the House--being thenceforward known as the "Twenty-first Rule." The vote upon this was--yeas, 128; nays, 78.
The excitement produced in the House on the occasion of these several votes was intense, and speeches were made upon the question by the most distinguished men of the country.
In 1837, the immediate occasion of the contest was the pertinacious effort of Mr. Slade, of Vermont, to make the presentation of abolition pet.i.tions the ground of agitation and action against the inst.i.tution of slavery in the Southern States. Mr. Rhett, of South Carolina, warned him of the consequences of such inflammatory harangues, and his refusal to desist from them was the signal for a general disorder and uproar. The next morning a resolution similar to that above quoted was adopted by a vote of 135 yeas to 60 nays--the full two-thirds and fifteen. "This," says Thomas H. Benton, "was one of the most important votes ever delivered in the House." Upon its issue depended the quiet of the House on one hand, and on the other the renewal and perpetuation of the scenes of the day before--ending in breaking up all deliberation and all national legislation.
Thus were stifled, and in future, for a few years at least, prevented in the House the inflammatory debates on these disturbing pet.i.tions. It was the great session of their presentation, being offered by hundreds and signed by hundreds of thousands of persons--many of them women, who forgot their s.e.x and their duties to mingle in the inflammatory work; and some of them clergymen, who forgot their mission of peace to stir up strife among those who should be brethren. After long and protracted efforts by John Quincy Adams, who was then champion of the abolitionists on the floor of the House, this restriction upon the right of pet.i.tion was removed in December, 1845, by a vote of 108 to 80. Among the acts of this statesman in 1839, was the presentation of a resolution that the following amendments to the Const.i.tution of the United States should be proposed to the several States of the Union:--
"1. From and after the 4th July, 1842, there shall be throughout the United States no hereditary slavery; but on and after that day, every child born in the United States, their territory or jurisdiction, shall be born free.
"2. With the exception of the Territory of Florida, there shall henceforth never be admitted into this Union any State, the Const.i.tution of which shall tolerate within the same the existence of slavery.
"3. From and after the 4th July, 1845, there shall be neither slavery nor slave trade at the seat of government of the United States."
This proposition of course received no favor either North or South, and was speedily laid aside. Subsequently he presented a pet.i.tion praying for a dissolution of the Union--the first of the kind ever offered to the government--whereupon a resolution was submitted to Congress to the effect that Mr. Adams in so doing had offered the deepest indignity to the House and insult to the people of the United States, and that, for thus permitting, through his instrumentality, a wound to be aimed at the Const.i.tution and existence of his country he merited expulsion from the national council and the severest censure. It concluded--"This they hereby do for the maintenance of their own purity and dignity; for the rest, they turn him over to his own conscience and the indignation of all true American citizens."
The resolution was discussed for several days, in which Mr. Adams and his anti-slavery propagandism were handled without gloves; but finally the whole subject was laid upon the table.
THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.
Another source of discussion, both in and out of Congress, about this time, was the Texas question. As far back as 1829, the annexation of Texas was agitated in the Southern and Western States, being urged on the ground of the strength and extension it would give to the slaveholding interest.
This fact at once enlisted opposition from the entire anti-slavery sentiment of the North, in which British abolitionism took part, and every effort was made on the other side of the water to increase the sectional jealousy already known to be existing. The English press, Parliament and statesmen, all treated the proposed acquisition as one in which they felt called upon to interfere. The famous "Texan plot," which was matured at the "World"s Anti-Slavery Convention," held in London in 1840, was one of the results.
The part to be performed by the British government embraced a double object. The large territory claimed by Texas was known to contain most of the remaining cotton lands of North America. A virtual control of these lands would, therefore, be invaluable to British commerce. The country was but thinly settled, and the number of slaves was small enough to render emanc.i.p.ation of easy attainment. Thus, if by a timely interposition of her influence and diplomacy, Great Britain could establish a rival cotton producing country at our very door, and prevent the growth of slavery there, she would partially prevent a growing dependence on the slave products of the United States, and at the same time set up a barrier to the further extension of Southern civilization in that direction. There was but one obstacle in the way. Texas preferred annexation to the United States, and, notwithstanding British a.s.sistance, believed to have been proffered to Santa Anna in 1842, when he resolved to send an invading army into the territory for the purpose of declaring emanc.i.p.ation, and other objects; notwithstanding the resolutions of Northern Legislatures and acrimonious debates in Congress; notwithstanding every effort, home and foreign, to prevent annexation; through the patriotic efforts of General Jackson, President Tyler, Mr. Calhoun and other statesmen, on the 16th of December, 1845, Texas was admitted into the Union.
Though thus defeated in their immediate designs, one point was gained by the friends of anti-slavery. They succeeded in obtaining a position in Congress which enabled them to agitate the whole Union. From that time their power began to increase, until the infection has diseased the great ma.s.s of the people of the North, who, whatever may be their opinion of the original abolition party, which still keeps up its distinctive organization, never fail, when it comes to acting, to co-operate in carrying out their measures.
THE BEGINNING OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY--THE LIBERTY PARTY.
The year 1840 was marked by two important events, namely, the formation of a distinct political party of abolitionists, and a division in the two leading anti-slavery societies of the country. The Liberty Party arose from the fact that, after a protracted experiment, the candidates of the old parties could not, to any extent, however questioned or pledged, be depended upon to do the work which the abolitionists demanded of them.
Such an organization was advocated by Mr. Garrison as early as 1834; but it was not until the annual meeting of the New York Anti-Slavery Society at Utica, in September, 1838, that a series of resolutions or a platform was adopted, setting forth the principles of political action, and solemnly pledging those who adopted them to vote for no candidates who were not fully pledged to anti-slavery measures. In July, 1839, a National Anti-Slavery Convention was held at Albany, and the mode of political action against slavery, including the question of a distinct party, was fully discussed, but without coming to any definite decision by vote farther than to refer the question of independent nominations to the judgment of abolitionists in their different localities. The Monroe county convention for nominations at Rochester, N. Y., September, 1839, adopted a series of resolutions and an address prepared by Myron Holly, which have been regarded as laying the real corner-stone of the Liberty party. He may, therefore, be regarded, more than any other man, as its founder.
In January, 1840, a New York State Anti-Slavery Convention was held in Genesee county. The traveling at that season of the year was bad, and delegates were in attendance from only six States. Among these were Myron Holly and Gerrit Smith. By this convention, a call was issued for a National Convention, and accordingly, April 1, 1840, it a.s.sembled at Albany--Alvan Stuart presiding. After a full discussion, the Liberty party was organized, and James G. Birney and Thomas Earle were nominated for President and Vice-President of the United States. At the Presidential election in the autumn of that year, the entire vote of the Liberty party amounted to 7,059. In 1844, the Liberty candidates, James G. Birney and Thomas Morris, received 62,300 votes. These, however, were but a small part of the professed abolitionists of the United States, the great majority voting for the nominees of the old parties--Harrison, Van Buren, Polk and Clay.
The other event of the year 1840, to which we have alluded, was the division in the Ma.s.sachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in Boston, and a division in the American Anti-Slavery Society of New York, the causes in each case being more or less identified with each other. Without going into the subject, it may be briefly stated that the princ.i.p.al cause in both instances was a difference of opinion on theological questions as applied to politics and reformatory measures, and especially theological jealousies. The most rabid among the abolitionists have been infidels, or little less, from the start, and have absorbed every species of fanaticism, in whatever shape it has appeared since. Another question resulting in the division appears to have been "Woman"s Rights," or, in other words, what position females ought to occupy in the society. As early as 1835, these moral hermaphrodites were in the habit of delivering public lectures and scattering publications through the land; but their wagging tongues finally became such a nuisance that several clergymen published a pastoral letter in 1837, strongly censuring all such unwomanly interference. The result was, as has been stated, great excitement and a subsequent separation of the respective opponents.
Shortly after this division, we find the American Anti-Slavery Society, at one of its annual meetings, raising the flag of "No Union with Slaveholders," demanding a dissolution of the Union, and denouncing the federal const.i.tution as pro-slavery--"a covenant with death and an agreement with h.e.l.l."
To resume the history of the progress of the party. In 1835 a State Convention of abolitionists was held at Port Byron, New York, at which an address was presented embodying the views of a number of individuals, who, while they were abolitionists at heart, were not rabid or ultra enough to be prepared to act with the Liberty party. This was printed, circulated, and gained adherents, and upon its basis, in 1847, a convention a.s.sembled at Macedon, New York, when Gerrit Smith and Elihu Burrit were nominated for President and Vice-President of the United States; but the latter declining, the name of Charles C. Foote was afterwards subst.i.tuted. This party was known by the name of the Liberty League. Subsequently its principles became merged into the Buffalo platform of 1847. Gerrit Smith was then again proposed as a candidate for the Presidency; but the course of leading men in the convention required the nomination of a different man. Accordingly, Hon. John P. Hale, of New Hampshire--an "independent democrat," as he termed himself--and Hon. Leicester King, of Ohio, were nominated. This, however, was only temporary; and another convention was called, and held at Buffalo, August 9, 1848, composed of "the opponents to slavery extension, irrespective of parties," and including, of course, all those committed to the one idea of abolition. It was one of the most remarkable political meetings on record, for it was the beginning of the political drama which has since resulted in a dissolution of the Union.
Vast mult.i.tudes, from all parts of the non-slaveholding States, of all political parties, came together, and seemed to be melted into one by their common zeal against the aggressions of slavery. Though they looked only to the restraint of slavery within the bounds which they claimed our fathers had erected for its protection, still the opposition sprang from the strong anti-slavery sentiment already pervading the country. It was the springing up of the green blade, and the forming of the ear from the many years sowing of the abolitionists. The nomination of Martin Van Buren and Charles Francis Adams, of Ma.s.sachusetts, was made with great unanimity and enthusiasm, though by a body composed of original elements of the most extreme contrariety. Messrs. Hale and King, as was expected, withdrew their names. The old Liberty party was absorbed in the new organization, whose platform was broad enough to satisfy any reasonable abolitionist.
Ma.s.s meetings were held in every village to hear the new word, and within a few months an impulse was communicated to the great ma.s.s of the Northern mind which has const.i.tuted the basis of its action ever since. The number of votes cast for these candidates in 1848 was 291,263.
The platform was substantially as follows:--That the people propose no interference by Congress with slavery within the limits of any State; that the federal government has no const.i.tutional power over life, liberty or property without due legal progress; that Congress has no more power to make a slave than to make a king--no more power to establish slavery than to establish a monarchy; that Congress ought to prohibit slavery in all the territories; that the issue of the slave power is accepted--no more slave States and no slave territory; no more compromises; and finally, the establishment of a free government in California and New Mexico.
In 1852, this same party nominated John P. Hale and George W. Julian. The number of votes then cast was 155,825. The platform was much the same as that which preceded it four years before, though more progressive and revolutionary in several of its ideas, one of its clauses being "that slavery is a sin against G.o.d and a crime against man, which no human enactment nor usage can make right, and that Christianity, humanity and patriotism, alike demand its abolition." Another clause was to the effect that the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, being repugnant to the principles of Christianity and the principles of the common law, had no binding force upon the American people.
The republican party of 1856 was merely an enlargement or extension of the old free-soil organization of the preceding eight years. It was modified, it is true, by many of the events of the time, but its foundation was laid upon precisely the same principles that had been enunciated during the previous twelve years. It was emphatically a Northern party, extending only here and there by some straggling outposts over the slave boundary.
It was so far anti-slavery as to resent the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and oppose the introduction of slavery into new territory. As events progressed, the forces combatting on either side of the great question of the day became more concentrated and determined, and more inspirited by a single purpose, until the one idea of anti-slavery became distinctly developed and firmly fixed in the Northern mind.
The Republican Convention a.s.sembled at Philadelphia, June 18, 1856, when John C. Fremont and Wm. L. Dayton were nominated for President and Vice President of the United States, and in the following November received 1,341,264 votes.
The election for 1860 has only recently terminated in the elevation to the head of the Federal Government of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin, by a purely anti-slavery vote of 1,865,840. The events which preceded it are too fresh to require repet.i.tion; but, for the first time in the history of our confederacy, we look upon the spectacle of a sectional party, defiant, unyielding and uncompromising, whose principles aim a blow direct at the annihilation of one of the inst.i.tutions of the South, in the full flush of victory, singing poeans of glory over its success, with a Union dissolving around it, while another portion of the country is agitated to its very centre in preparations for self-protection against the usurpations which, from press and pulpit, and floor of Congress, have been so boldly threatened. Whether as abolition, liberty, free-soil or republican, the party has always shown the cloven hoof, and the best efforts of its more considerate friends have never been able to cover the deformity. Into the ma.s.ses it has instilled the most unrelenting hatred to slavery, until all other ideas, feelings and pa.s.sions have, for the time, been swallowed up in this one overwhelming sentiment.
It has dissolved the Union, though formed and cemented in the blood of our fathers, rather than it should tolerate an inst.i.tution which is older than the Union. It has shed the blood of innocent white men while engaged in the discharge of their sworn duty, and made widows and orphans rather than return an escaped servant to his master and obey the Const.i.tution of the country. Such is the spirit which controls this party, by whatever name it may be known.
Its leaders, claiming to stand by principle, hug to their bosom the most d.a.m.ning political heresies. Pretending to obey G.o.d and reverence the Bible, some of them are the most unblushing infidels, who boldly proclaim that the Sacred Word is not worth the paper upon which it is printed, unless it denounce slavery and applaud abolitionism, and would teach that the Const.i.tution of our country is the consummation of every iniquity.
Some of them aspire to be the followers of Jesus, but convert their sacred desks into political rostrums, from which are fulminated the falsest denunciations that a diseased mind can conjure into existence. Claiming to be teachers of religion and peace, they prove the authenticity of their holy commission by exhorting to civil war, making collections for Sharpe"s rifles, and playing the _role_ of spiritual demagogues among the falling ruins of the republic.
The year 1841 was marked by another attempt at insurrection. On the 22d of July, during a hot night, several negroes were overheard conversing in their quarters, on a plantation, near New Orleans, respecting an insurrection in which they intended to join. An investigation was made the next day, and resulted in tracing out a widely-extended organization among the slaves of the neighborhood, having a general rising in view. This early discovery of the plot of course prevented its consummation, and the execution and punishment of the instigators soon quelled every design of an outbreak.
In 1845 we find Ca.s.sius M. Clay mobbed in Lexington, Ky., and his paper, the True American, stopped, the presses, type, &c., being packed up and forwarded to Cincinnati, for advocating the incendiary doctrines of the abolitionists, and thereby producing an excitement among the slaves, and arousing apprehensions in the community lest they should rise in rebellion against the whites.
THE MEXICAN WAR.
We have already brought our chronological history down to the year 1845, when Texas was admitted as a State. It was during the progress of annexation that the government of Mexico served a formal notice on the United States that annexation would be viewed in the light of a declaration of war. This notice, however, was of little avail, and before the close of the year 1845, Congress had consummated the act. The war broke out in April, 1846, the second year of Mr. Polk"s administration, and on the 11th of May the President issued his proclamation to that effect. A large portion of the western domain of Texas, as now described, was disputed territory, occupied by Mexicans and under Mexican rule at the time of and after annexation. General Taylor was ordered to march from Corpus Christi, and take up his position on the Rio Grande, opposite Matamoras, thus traversing the disputed territory from its eastern to its western border. The Mexican army, on the opposite side of the river, immediately commenced hostilities, and soon after followed the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma. How the war was continued and terminated are matters of general history. Peace was at last dictated to Mexico on the 30th of May, 1848, and resulted in a surrender by her of a large belt of her northern territories, extending from the Rio Grande to the Pacific, including California, though at that time its immense wealth and great importance were not fully appreciated. In Congress and among the people of the North the war was not popular. It was said to be a scheme for the acquirement of more slave territory, and this fact of itself excited contention throughout the land.
THE WILMOT PROVISO.
On the 12th of August, 1846, a bill being under consideration in the Committee of the Whole, making further provision for the expenses attending the intercourse between the United States and Mexico, Mr. David Wilmot, of Pennsylvania, moved the following amendment:--
"Provided, that as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of territory from the republic of Mexico, by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall first be duly convicted."
This amendment was adopted by a vote of yeas 77, nays 58. The bill was not voted on in the Senate, that body adjourning _sine die_ before it reached that stage.
On the 8th of February, the Three Million Bill being under consideration, a similar amendment was offered in the House, and on the 15th was adopted by a vote of 115 yeas and 106 nays. The Senate having pa.s.sed a similar bill, which came before the House on the 3d of March, 1847, Mr. Wilmot moved to amend the same by adding his proviso thereto; but it was rejected by a vote of yeas 97, nays 102. The Senate bill, without the amendment of Mr. Wilmot, then became a law. This celebrated proviso has been offered, by different senators and representatives, to various bills since. Its popular use, in fact, since that time, const.i.tutes a great chapter in the political history of the country. For a long time it has rung in the ears of the public, and it will never cease until the question of slavery ceases to be a political question in the organization of new Territories and new States.
In 1848, Connecticut, which had never pa.s.sed a law completely abolishing slavery, and which then contained some eight or ten slaves, through her Legislature enacted its total abolition forever, compelling the masters of the few slaves existing to support them for life.
The escape of slaves from the South has been one of the princ.i.p.al practical effects of abolition ever since the idea a.s.sumed shape, in 1830.
Men and women have been found, North and South, who, either from philanthropic motives or under the pecuniary inducements of abolition societies, have aided in their escape. Among these, New England "schoolmarms" and schoolmasters have played an active part, and several were from time to time arrested.