Let me take a word of warning and of counsel from the same author; yes, from the same imaginary speech of Quintus Capitolinis, whence Mr.
Webster has drawn his motto:--_Ante portas est bellum: si inde non pellitur, jam intra maenia erit, et arcem et Capitolium scandet, et in domos vestras vos persequetur._ The war [against the extension of Slavery, not against the Volscians, in this case] is before your very doors: if not driven thence, it will be within your walls [namely, it will be in California and New Mexico]; it will ascend the citadel and the capitol [to wit, it will be in the House of Representatives and the Senate]; and it will follow you into your very homes [that is, the curse of Slavery will corrupt the morals of the nation].
_Sedemus desides domi, mulierum ritu inter nos altercantes; praesenti pace laeti, nec cernentes_ EX OTIO ILLO BREVI MULTIPLEX BELLUM REDITURUM.
We [the famous Senators of the United States] sit idle at home, wrangling amongst ourselves like women [to see who shall get the lease of the Presidency], glad of the present truce [meaning that which is brought about by a compromise], not perceiving that for this brief cessation of trouble, a manifold war will follow [that is, the "horrid internecine war" which will come here, as it has been elsewhere, if justice be too long delayed]!
It is a great question before us, concerning the existence of millions of men. To many men in politics, it is merely a question of party rivalry; a question of in and out, and nothing more. To many men in cities, it is a question of commerce, like the establishment of a bank, or the building of one railroad more or less. But to serious men, who love man and love their G.o.d, this is a question of morals, a question of religion, to be settled with no regard to party rivalry, none to fleeting interests of to-day, but to be settled under the awful eye of conscience, and by the just law of G.o.d.
Shall we shut up slavery or extend it? It is for us to answer. Will you deal with the question now, or leave it to your children, when the evil is ten times greater? In 1749, there was not a slave in Georgia; now, two hundred and eighty thousand. In 1750, in all the United States, but two hundred thousand; now, three millions. In 1950, let Mr. Webster"s counsels be followed, there will be thirty millions. Thirty millions!
Will it then be easier for your children to set limits to this crime against human nature, than now for you? Our fathers made a political, and a commercial, and a moral error--shall we repeat it? They did a wrong; shall we extend and multiply the wrong? Was it an error in our fathers; not barely a wrong--was it a sin? No, not in them; they knew it not. But what in them to establish was only an error, in us to extend or to foster is a sin!
Perpetuate Slavery, we cannot do it. Nothing will save it. It is girt about by a ring of fire which daily grows narrower, and sends terrible sparkles into the very centre of the shameful thing. "Joint resolutions" cannot save it; annexations cannot save it--not if we re-annex all the West Indies; delinquent representatives cannot save it; uninstructed senators, refusing instructions, cannot save it, no, not with all their logic, all their eloquence, which smites as an earthquake smites the sea. No, slavery cannot be saved; by no compromise, no non-intervention, no Mason"s Bill in the Senate. It cannot be saved in this age of the world until you nullify every ordinance of nature, until you repeal the will of G.o.d, and dissolve the union He has made between righteousness and the welfare of a people. Then, when you displace G.o.d from the throne of the world, and instead of his eternal justice, reenact the will of the Devil, then you may keep Slavery; keep it forever, keep it in peace. Not till then.
The question is, not if slavery is to cease, and soon to cease, but shall it end as it ended in Ma.s.sachusetts, in New Hampshire, in Pennsylvania, in New York; or shall it end as in St. Domingo? Follow the counsel of Mr. Webster--it will end in fire and blood. G.o.d forgive us for our cowardice, if we let it come to this, that three millions or thirty millions of degraded human beings, degraded by us, must wade through slaughter to their unalienable rights.
Mr. Webster has spoken n.o.ble words--at Plymouth, standing on the altar-stone of New England; at Bunker Hill, the spot so early reddened with the blood of our fathers. But at this hour, when we looked for great counsel, when we forgot the paltry things which he has often done, and said, "Now he will rouse his n.o.ble soul, and be the man his early speeches once bespoke," who dared to fear that Olympian head would bow so low, so deeply kiss the ground? Try it morally, try it intellectually, try it by the statesman"s test, world-wide justice; nay, try it by the politician"s basest test, the personal expediency of to-day--it is a speech "not fit to be made," and when made, not fit to be confirmed.
"We see dimly in the distance what is small and what is great, Slow of faith how weak an arm may turn the iron helm of fate; But the soul is still oracular; amid the market"s din, List the ominous stern whisper from the Delphic cave within-- "They enslave their children"s children, who make compromise with sin.""
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Mr. John Quincy Adams.
[2] Alas, a single year taught me the folly of this confidence in Boston! See No. VI. of this volume.
[3] Motto of Mr. Webster"s speech.
II.
SPEECH AT THE NEW ENGLAND ANTI-SLAVERY CONVENTION IN BOSTON, MAY 29, 1850.
Mr. President,--If we look hastily at the present aspect of American affairs, there is much to discourage a man who believes in the progress of his race. In this republic, with the Declaration of Independence for its political creed, neither of the great political parties is hostile to the existence of slavery. That inst.i.tution has the continual support of both the whig and democratic parties. There are now four eminent men in the Senate of the United States, all of them friends of slavery. Two of these are from the North, both natives of New England; but they surpa.s.s their southern rivals in the zeal with which they defend that inst.i.tution, and in the concessions which they demand of the friends of justice at the North. These four men are all compet.i.tors for the Presidency. Not one of them is the friend of freedom; he that is apparently least its foe, is Mr. Benton, the Senator from Missouri. Mr.
Clay, of Kentucky, is less effectually the advocate of slavery than Mr.
Webster, of Ma.s.sachusetts. Mr. Webster himself has said, "There is no North," and, to prove it experimentally, stands there as one mighty instance of his own rule.
In the Senate of the United States, only Seward and Chase and Hale can be relied on as hostile to slavery. In the House, there are Root and Giddings, and Wilmot and Mann, and a few others. "But what are these among so many?"
See "how it strikes a stranger." Here is an extract from the letter of a distinguished and learned man,[4] sent out here by the King of Sweden to examine our public schools: "I have just returned from Washington, where I have been witnessing the singular spectacle of this free and enlightened nation being buried in sorrow, on account of the death of that great advocate of slavery, Mr. Calhoun. Mr. Webster"s speech seems to have made a very strong impression upon the people of the South, as I have heard it repeated almost as a lesson of the catechism by every person I have met within the slave territory. It seems now to be an established belief, that slavery is not a _malum necessarium_, still less an evil difficult to get rid of, but desirable soon to get rid of.
No, far from that; it seems to be considered as quite a natural, most happy, and essentially Christian inst.i.tution!"
Not satisfied with keeping an inst.i.tution which the more Christian religion of the Mohammedan Bey of Tunis has rejected as a "sin against G.o.d," we seek to extend it, to perpetuate it, even on soil which the half-civilized Mexicans made clear from its pollutions. The great organs of the party politics of the land are in favor of the extension; the great political men of the land seek to extend it; the leading men in the large mercantile towns of the North--in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia--are also in favor of extending slavery. All this is plain.
But, Sir, as I come up here to this Convention year after year, I find some signs of encouragement. Even in the present state of things, the star of hope appears, and we may safely and reasonably say, "Now is our salvation nearer than when we first believed" in anti-slavery. Let us look a little at the condition of America at this moment, to see what there is to help or what to hinder us.
First, I will speak of the present crisis in our affairs; then of the political parties amongst us; then of the manner in which this crisis is met; next of the foes of freedom; and last, of its friends. I will speak with all coolness, and try to speak short. By the middle of anniversary week, men get a little heated; I am sure I shall be cool, and I think I may also be dull.
There must be unity of action in a nation, as well as in a man, or there cannot be harmony and welfare. As a man "cannot serve two masters"
antagonistic and diametrically opposed to one another, as G.o.d and Mammon, no more can a nation serve two opposite principles at the same time.
Now, there are two opposite and conflicting principles recognized in the political action of America: at this moment, they contend for the mastery, each striving to destroy the other.
There is what I call the American idea. I so name it, because it seems to me to lie at the basis of all our truly original, distinctive and American inst.i.tutions. It is itself a complex idea, composed of three subordinate and more simple ideas, namely: The idea that all men have unalienable rights; that in respect thereof, all men are created equal; and that government is to be established and sustained for the purpose of giving every man an opportunity for the enjoyment and development of all these unalienable rights. This idea demands, as the proximate organization thereof, a democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; of course, a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of G.o.d; for shortness" sake, I will call it the idea of Freedom.
That is one idea; and the other is, that one man has a right to hold another man in thraldom, not for the slave"s good, but for the master"s convenience; not on account of any wrong the slave has done or intended, but solely for the benefit of the master. This idea is not peculiarly American. For shortness" sake, I will call this the idea of Slavery. It demands for its proximate organization, an aristocracy, that is, a government of all the people by a part of the people--the masters; for a part of the people--the masters; against a part of the people--the slaves; a government contrary to the principles of eternal justice, contrary to the unchanging law of G.o.d. These two ideas are hostile, irreconcilably hostile, and can no more be compromised and made to coalesce in the life of this nation, than the worship of the real G.o.d and the worship of the imaginary Devil can be combined and made to coalesce in the life of a single man. An attempt has been made to reconcile and unite the two. The slavery clauses of the Const.i.tution of the United States is one monument of this attempt; the results of this attempt--you see what they are, not order, but confusion.
We cannot have any settled and lasting harmony until one or the other of these ideas is cast out of the councils of the nation: so there must be war between them before there can be peace. Hitherto, the nation has not been clearly aware of the existence of these two adverse principles; or, if aware of their existence, has thought little of their irreconcilable diversity. At the present time, this fact is brought home to our consciousness with great clearness. On the one hand, the friends of freedom set forth the idea of freedom, clearly and distinctly, demanding liberty for each man. This has been done as never before. Even in the Senate of the United States it has been done, and repeatedly during the present session of Congress. On the other hand, the enemies of freedom set forth the idea of slavery as this has not been done in other countries for a long time. Slavery has not been so lauded in any legislative body for many a year, as in the American Senate in 1850.
Some of the discussions remind one of the spirit which prevailed in the Roman Senate, A. D. 62, when about four hundred slaves were crucified, because their master, Pedanius Secundus, a man of consular dignity, was found murdered in his bed. I mean to say, the same disregard of the welfare of the slaves, the same willingness to sacrifice them--if not their lives, which are not now in peril, at least their welfare, to the convenience of their masters. Anybody can read the story in Tacitus,[5]
and it is worth reading, and instructive, too, at these times.
Here are some of the statements relative to slavery made in the thirty-first Congress of the United States. Hearken to the testimony of the Hon. Mr. Badger, of North Carolina:
"It is clear that this inst.i.tution [slavery] not only was not disapproved of, but was expressly recognized, approved, and its continuance sanctioned by the divine lawgiver of the Jews."
"Whether an evil or not, it is not a sin; it is not a violation of the divine law.
"What treatment did it receive from the founder of the gospel dispensation? It was approved, first negatively, because, in the whole New Testament, there is not to be found one single word, either spoken by the Saviour, or by any of the evangelists or apostles, in which that inst.i.tution is either directly or indirectly condemned; and also affirmatively." This he endeavors to show, by quoting the pa.s.sages from St. Paul, usually quoted for that purpose.
Nothing would be easier than for St. Paul to have said--"Slaves, be obedient to your heathen masters; but I say to you, feeling masters, emanc.i.p.ate your slaves; the law of Christ is against that relation, and you are bound, therefore, to set them at liberty." No such word is spoken.
Thus far goes the Hon. Senator Badger, of North Carolina.
Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, goes further yet. He knows what some men think of slavery, and tells them, "Very well, think so; but keep your thoughts to yourselves." He is not content with bidding the "Freest and most enlightened nation in the world," be silent on this matter: he is not content, with Mr. Badger, to declare that if an evil, it is not a sin, and to find it upheld in the Old Testament, and allowed in the New Testament; he tells us that he "regards slavery as a great moral, social, political and religious blessing--a blessing to the slave, and a blessing to the master."
Thus, the issue is fairly made between the two principles. The contradiction is plain. The battle between the two is open, and in sight of the world.
But this is not the first time there has been a quarrel between the idea of slavery and the idea of freedom in America. The quarrel has lasted, with an occasional truce, for more than sixty years. In six battles, slavery has been victorious over freedom.
1. In the adoption of the Const.i.tution supporting slavery.
2. In the acquisition of Louisiana, as slave territory.
3. In the acquisition of Florida as slave territory.
4. In making the Missouri Compromise.
5. In the annexation of Texas as a slave State.
6. In the Mexican war--a war, mean and wicked, even amongst wars.
Since the Revolution, there have been three instances of great national importance, in which freedom has overcome slavery; there have been three victories:
1. In prohibiting slavery from the Northwest Territory, before the adoption of the Const.i.tution.
2. In prohibiting the slave-trade in 1808. I mean, in prohibiting the African slave-trade; the American slave-trade is still carried on in the capital of the United States.