FEB. 5, 1833.] The Tariff Bill. [H. OF R. him to draw into this discussion topics which have nothing ed." Do they not express the same idea? Do they not to do with the bill before this committee, and to invite both assert precisely the same historical fact, viz. that the us, by the course of his remarks, to enter upon that wide union of the States was assented to by the people of the field of political metaphysics which, from another source, States, as such? had been unfortunately spread out upon the political Let us look a little further into this preamble. What arena prematurely, unnecessarily, and, in my judgment, did "the people of the United States" propose to do? unwisely. I allude to the President's proclamation. Why, to form a more perfect union, &c. Now, who ever The gentleman has avowed opinions, in relation to one heard of a union of people in a political association? The of those questions, which have thus been presented to term union, applied to States, is intelligible and approthe American public, involving some principles in re-priate. It was, then, the people of the States who agreed lation to the origin and character of this Government, to the union of the States. The whole amount of it was which the State of Virginia has uniformly and strenu- that they resolved to continue the union, which existed ously denied to be true, and which I feel it my duty, con- before under the articles of confederation, and to make curring, as I do, in this opinion, and since no other of that union more perfect. This union, it is admitted by her delegation have chosen to do so, not to permit to the gentleman, constituted a mere confederacy; but the pass without entering my protest against, and making origin of both is the same; created alike by the authority an humble effort to refute them. I shall confine myself of the States; their assent being given, in one case, by to those topics which the gentleman has drawn into dis- the State Governments; in the other, by the people of "cussion, and will not enter upon any of the others con- each State. And what was it that, in this last case, was nected with them in the document to which I have al-created? a constitution for the people of America? a conready referred; and for the full discussion of all the the-stitution for the people of the United States? No; neither; ories contained in which, a more suitable occasion will be but, as the preamble itself declares, "a constitution for afforded, in all probability, during the session. the United States." This was not a new name even for The proposition which he asserts, in substance, is, the Government; the first section of the articles of confethat this Government is a completely sovereign Govern-deration declares that "the style of this confederacy shall ment, created by the people of the United States, as one be the United States of America." people, and exercising its powers by the authority of This view of the question is fully sustained by an authe people, as one political community. And by what thority which, in Virginia, has always been regarded as argument does he sustain this proposition? It is founded entitled to the highest respect, and cannot fail to be so exclusively upon a part of the preamble of the constitu- regarded every where, for the ability with which it treats tion, "We, the people of the United States." And he of the origin and character of the Government, and the says that, not to admit the truth of his proposition, is lucid manner in which it expounds those doctrines of con"to give the lie" to the express declaration of the con- stitutional construction upon which the republican party stitution itself. Sir, it seems to me that a candid exami-came into power in 1801. I beg leave to read a passage nation of this part of the preamble, as well as every other which places this matter, which I am now considering, in part of it, leads to an opposite conclusion; and that, to a clear light. admit the interpretation contended for by him, is not only In support of that branch of the third resolution of to pervert the obvious sense of the passage he relies on, 1798, which affirms "that the States are parties to the but "to give the lie," to borrow the gentleman's lan- constitution," after enumerating the various senses in guage, to the whole preamble, to the article of ratifica- which the term "States" is used in the constitution, and, tion, and to the most notorious historical facts. This ex-among others, that, "lastly, it means the people compospression of "We, the people of the United States," was ing those political societies in their highest sovereign objected to by Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Conven- capacity," the report drawn by Mr. Madison proceeds tion called to consider of the ratification of the constitu- thus: "In the present instance, whatever different contion, as justifying the inference that a consolidated Go-structions of the term "States," in the resolution, may vernment was intented to be created. And he asked have been entertained, all will at last concur in that last by what authority the convention had used the expres-mentioned, because in that sense the constitution was sion "We, the people," instead of "We, the States." submitted to the "States;" in that sense the "States" He was answered by Mr. Madison, also a member of that ratified it; and in that sense of the term "States," they convention, who had then recently been a member of the are consequently parties to the compact, from which the convention who framed the constitution, who had taken a power of the Federal Government results. This is, in prominent part in forming, and has since done more to truth, nothing more than a condensed statement of historescue it from the perversions and misconstructions to rical facts. which it has, at different times, been exposed, than any man living or dead. This is his language: The article of ratification found at the close of the constitution seems to me to confute the interpretation for "Who are the parties to it? (the constitution.) The which he contends. The ratification of nine States shall people; but not the people as composing one great body, be "sufficient for the establishment of this constitution but the people as composing thirteen sovereignties. between the States so ratifying the same;" not over the Were it, as the gentleman asserts, a consolidated Govern- people of America, or over the people of the United ment, the assent of a majority of the people would be States even, but between the States so ratifying the same. sufficient for its establishment; and as a majority have The charter itself thus, at the end of it, declaring, in uneadopted it already, the remaining States would be bound quivocal terms, its character, when formed, to be a governby the act of a majority, even if they unanimously repro- ment between States, as in the preamble it had deduced its bated it. Were it such a Government as is now suggest- own origin from, and declared its object to be for a union ed, it would be now binding on the people of this State, of States. Compare this article of ratification, and the without having had the privilege of deliberating upon it. preamble of the constitution, with the old articles of canShould all the States adopt it, it will then be a Govern- federation. They are called "articles of confederation, ment established by the thirteen States of America, not and perpetual union between the States of New Hampby the intervention of the Legislature, but by the people shire, Massachusetts Bay," &c. &c., naming the whole at large." thirteen; their style was, as before stated, the United I should be glad to know what is the difference be- States of America." They were then, "articles of contween these two expressions, "we, the people of the federation and perpetual union between the United States, United States," and "we, the people of the States unit-of America;" and so this constitution was established "be H. OF R.] The Tariff Bill. [FEB. 5, 1833. tween the United States of America." I put it to any tine commotions and civil wars, and the arm of our candid man to say if there can be a distinction made be- defence against foreign aggression. But the only just tween the foundation and origin of the two Governments, and legitimate protection which this Government, or any as to the question whether they were compacts between other Government, can extend to individuals or classes of States. The source from which both Governments were individuals, is to secure them in the enjoyment of the derived was the same. The articles of confederation con- fruits of their own industry; in the unfettered exercise stituted a Government for the confederacy as much as of their own skill and enterprise, and in the pursuit of the constitution constitutes a Government for the Union. their own happiness in their own way; with this restric They are both Governments-constitutional Govern- tion only, in the language of the maxim of the civil law, ments-compacts between sovereign States. They differ that they shall so use their own as not to injure that of as to the extent of the powers conferred upon the Go- another. This great rule is the corner stone of every vernment, and in the mode in which those powers are well constructed edifice of Government. I believe the to be exercised: in one case, the action of the Govern- Government of this Union was designed by its framers to ment being upon the States; in the other, upon the citi- rest on this solid and just foundation; and if it were thus zens directly. In its mode of action, this Government administered, it would secure all the purposes for which is partly national, and partly federal; in its origin and it was formed; "establish justice, ensure domestic tranfoundation, it is wholly federal. The States created-quillity, provide for the common defence, promote the the States preserve-the States alone can reform, alter, general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to or abolish it. ourselves and our posterity." But when any GovernThe honorable gentleman says, and he seemed to be ment imposes burdens upon the community which the transported into the regions of poetry at the thought, legitimate purposes of the Government do not call forthat there is a moral grandeur and sublimity" in the takes money out of the pockets of the people at large, idea of this great Government over the whole people as not required for public uses, but for the benefit of a parone people. I will not dispute with him about a matter ticular class of individuals, its action is essentially unjust of taste, though it seems to me to be an essential ingre- and tyrannical, no matter under what former pretexts it dient in the grandeur and sublimity of an idea of Govern- is done. And, sir, when a claim is made to persevere in ment, that it should have some foundation in truth. If a system of unequal and unjust taxation, (as we of the the picture of moral grandeur and sublimity presented to South regard the tariff system to be,) even at the hazard the mind by this imaginary Government of one people of civil war, upon the allegation that the South receives was only completed, as there is some reason to appre- an equivalent for these exactions in some peculiar protechend it will be, by engrafting upon the constitution, and tion which is afforded by the constitution and the Union establishing in practice, the "common defence" doctrine to our slave interest, I feel it to be proper to meet the asof the gentleman from Massachusetts, and the "general sertion and argument on the threshold, and to examine if welfare" doctrine by which the gentleman from Rhode it has any foundation in the constitution. I deny it utterly. Island [Mr. BURGES] resolves all questions of constitu The gentleman from Massachusetts has referred to vational power, then we should have established a vast rious provisions of the constitution as sustaining him in consolidated empire, with a Government of unlimited this novel position. powers, apparently the consummation of the hopes and efforts of one class of politicians in this country. Let me oppose to this idea of moral grandeur and sublimity the sentiment of the venerable sage and patriot of Montpelier, who says, in that report which I have already quoted, that it adds to the stability and dignity, as well as to the authority of the constitution, that it rests on the legitimate and solid foundation," derived from its being formed by "the sanction of the States, given by each in its sovereign capacity." It may suit the fancy of a poet to revel in the "moral grandeur and sublimity of an idea" of Government which exists only in the imagination-the offspring of fiction; but, to my mind, there is something more grand and elevating in the contemplations of a statesman who admires the stability and dignity of a Government resting upon the solid basis of truth and reality. I will proceed to reply to some other portions of the gentleman's remarks. A new, I believe perfectly new, and most extraordinary argument is advanced by him in favor of the protection which he claims for domestic manufactures. 1st. The provision by which, in apportioning representation among the States, it is required that three-fifths of the slaves shall be enumerated. 2d. The fourth section of the fourth article of the constitution, which provides that the United States shall, "on application of the Legislature or of the Executive," when the Legislature cannot be convened "protect each❞ State "against domestic violence." 3d. The authority given to Congress to raise and support armies and a navy. As to the first, I need hardly remind this committee, and certainly not the gentleman from Massachusetts, that the question as to the proper basis of taxation and representation, in relation to the slave interest of the South, was coeval with the declaration of independence. Immediately after that event, the articles of confederation were discussed in the old Congress of '76. The article relating to this matter, as originally proposed, and finally adopted, provided, that "all charges of war, and other expenses incurred for the common defence and general welfare, &c. shall be defrayed out of a common treasury," to he "supplied by the several colonies in proportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex, and quality," &c. It was proposed by Mr. Chase, of Maryland, to amend it so that the quota should be fixed by the number of the white inhabitants. It is claimed as an equivalent for the protection given (as is alleged) by the constitution to the slave interest of the South. Far be it from me to undervalue the benefits conferred upon the South, no less than other parts of the country, by this Union. I have endeavored to calculate It is a curious piece of political history, especially taken its value, and deem it incalculable. I should regard its in connexion with a sentiment expressed by the gentledissolution as one of the greatest evils which could befall, man from Massachusetts, that, in the decision of that not ourselves and our posterity only, but the whole hu- question, all the slave-holding States, Delaware, Maryman family; it would blast forever the best hopes of the land, Virginia, North and South Carolina, (Georgia being friends of freedom throughout the world, and extinguish divided,) voted in favor of the amendment; and New the fire of liberty upon all the altars on which it has been Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, kindled by our example and our success. The benefi- New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, all substancent protection afforded by the Union is, that it is the tially non-slave-holding States, voted against the amendbond of domestic tranquility, the safeguard against intes-ment, and rejected it. It is worth while to notice the argument by which this decision was sustained, and for this purpose I will read an extract from one of the most distinguished, eloquent, and (notwithstanding that the violence of party spirit induced many to undervalue his services and character,) I will say one of the most patriotic of our revolutionary men. [H. of R. The representatives of the slave-holding States, in the Convention, as well as those of the non-slave-holding States, were fully sensible of this truth; and, by their course in that body, gave a new illustration of it; the interests without doors were represented by interests within; and the slave-holding States insisted that they were entiI read from the speech of Mr. John Adams. He ob- tled to representation for their whole slave population; serves: "That the number of people were taken, by and the free States, that the slaves should not be counted this article, as an index of the wealth of the State, and at all. This contest resulted in the adoption of the rule not as subjects of taxation; that, as to this mattes, it was of apportioning representation and direct taxes by the of no consequence by what name you called your people, same ratio, and estimating three-fifths only of those slaves whether by that of freemen or slaves; that, in some coun- in regard to each. On what authority, then, does the tries the laboring poor were called freemen, in others gentleman refer to this clause of the constitution, as conthey were called slaves; but that the difference, as to the ferring peculiar protection to the slave interest in the State, was imaginary only. What matters it whether a South? Why may not we, with as much propriety, insist landlord employing ten laborers on his farm, gives them that it had secured to the labor of the North an advantage annually as much money as will buy them the necessaries to which it was not entitled; and, for which, in the adof life, or gives them those necessaries at short hand? ministration of the Government, we ought to have an The ten laborers add as much wealth annually to the equivalent? Instead of having our whole population reState-increase its exports as much in the one case as the presented, as we thought it ought to have been, and for other. Certainly, five hundred freemen produce no more which we had the authority of Mr. Adams, we insisted profits, no greater supplies for the payment of taxes, only upon a part being represented, while the whole pothan five hundred slaves; therefore the State in which the pulation of the North was told. It was the result of that laborers are called freemen, should be taxed no more spirit of compromise which presided in the formation of than that in which they are called slaves. Suppose, by the constitution; which, on several occasions, since its an extraordinary operation of nature, or of law, one-half establishment, has effected its preservation; which must of the laborers of a State could, in the course of one be invoked again, and now; and will not be invoked in night, be transformed into slaves; would the State be made poorer, or less able to pay taxes? That the condition of the laboring poor in most countries, that of the fisherman, particularly of the Northern States, is as abject as that of slaves," &c. Here is the argument (in which there is certainly great force) upon which the southern States were taxed, from the beginning, in proportion to their whole slave population. It goes to prove that both kinds of labor ought to contribute to the support of Government equally; and authorizes the inference, as a legitimate deduction, that they are entitled to the same kind and degree of protection, and in the same mode-by being represented. But the argument here is that a different and additional protection is to be given to the labor of the North, and that too at the expense of the labor of the South, though the character of the labor is the same as to the State, as well as the actual condition of the laborer. There was no inconsistency in the course and opinions of the distinguished man whose argument I have just quoted. Immediately after the decision referred to, came on another question: how the States should be represented in the Congress of the confederacy? He spoke in favor of each State voting in proportion to the numbers of her people. Some of them who had voted for taxing us, according to the number of our inhabitants, and who represented large States, were in favor of voting in proportion to the number of free inhabitants. On this ques. tion the interests of the small States preponderated; and it was settled that each State should have one vote. In the Convention these questions again arose; and the arrangement of the subjects of taxation and representation, in reference to the slaves, constituted one of those distracting subjects of controversy which brought the Convention to the verge of dissolution without agreeing to a plan of Government. It could not but produce diffi-} culty; it was not a question that could be settled by any rule of abstract right. For, to borrow again the language of Mr. Adams, in the same debate, "Reason, justice, and equity, never had weight enough, on the face of the earth, to govern the councils of inen; it is interest alone which does it, and it is interest alone which can be trusted; that, therefore, the interests within doors should be the mathematical representatives of the interests with out doors."* * Memoirs and correspondence of Jefferson, vol. 1, page 27. vain, if the professions of devotion to the Union are as sincere as they are loud, frequent, and ostentatious. The gentleman from Massachusetts tells us, if the bargain were to be made over again, he would not make that compromise. I do not wonder at all at it. If that unyielding spirit of fortitude (as he calls it) which he has manifested, had prevailed in the convention, or a tithe part of it, we should never have had this glorious Union, which he now professes so much anxiety to preserve. If his spirit of fortitude be substituted for their spirit of concord and conciliation, and his doctrines, as to the power and authority of the Government, prevail, it requires little foresight to perceive that the Government must end, sooner or later, either in an irretrievable dissolution of the bonds of the Union, or be converted into one vast consolidated Government; which would be the sure and speedy precursor of a military despotism. Sir, I had fondly hoped that, at this momentous epoch, Massachusetts would have been found standing by Virginia, in the cause of peace and harmony. I could not fail to remember, with lively sensibility, their early and constant association in the struggle for independence. Together they rocked in the cradle of the revolution; together they nursed and fostered the glorious offspring of that revolution-the union of these States--while it was rearing into vigor and maturity. They have differed, indeed, but I trust in no hostile spirit, as to the proper construction of the title-deeds, and the most judicious mode of managing the estate. Yet, I did hope that, animated by the same holy and ardent love of justice and liberty, they would yet be found standing together again, and employing their moral and political strength in the preservation of the noble inheritance of union from being despoiled by the hand of injustice, or its existence destroyed by the hand of violence. Sir, that hope is gone. The spirit which is here indicated was not that which animated the venerated band of sages, heroes, and patriots, who composed the convention; they had not yet learned to forget-they were deeply imbued with that fraternal sympathy and affection which had been generated in the hearts of the American people, by their common suffering-their common perils-their common triumphs in a common cause. When the old confederacy was upon the eve of falling to pieces, and from causes which would have led inevitably to conflicts between the parties to it, the members of that convention, many of "Heroes of the last disclosure," (the very last,) "Who look on blood and carnage with due composure." Dermot Me Morrogh. [FEB. 5, 1833. YEAS.--New Jersey, Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia. NAYS.--New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland. whom had hazarded their lives, sacrificed their fortunes, tion and the argument, there have been two instances of and, in the cabinet or in the field, given their support to domestic violence against the State or colonial Governthe cause to which they had pledged their sacred honor, ments, by discontented and insurrectionary white men came forward, and, with true and genuine fortitude, laid-I mean Bacon's rebellion, in Virginia; and another of upon the altar of their country their prejudices, their a character wholly different, and which I am ashamed to passions, and their local interests. The idea of resorting mention in the same connexion-I mean Shay's insurrecto arms for the purpose of avoiding the apprehended tion in Massachusetts. They were both very formidable. conflicts and quieting the existing disputes, was the last I have an impression on my mind-the gentleman from that would have entered into their minds. It was the Massachusetts knows as well as any other man whether it alternative most abhorred, and to prevent which almost is well founded or not-that I have seen it stated by some every thing was to be yielded. authority entitled to confidence, as a part of the political But now, when a crisis scarcely less appalling is per- history of this Government, that the extent and formidaceived by all to exist, what is the spirit displayed-the ble character of the resistance to the State authorities in sort of fortitude" recommended to us as more worthy Massachusetts by Shay and his followers, contributed of admiration even than the fear of doing injustice? very essentially to overcome the reluctance which that Every exasperating topic, calculated to inflame passion State felt and manifested to send delegates to the conand frighten away harmony, is sought for, and forced vention in 1787.* Perhaps this fact may account for the into the debate; and we have an exhibition of fortitude peculiar arrangement of the States in voting upon a mowhich, if it does not delight in, is determined to do nothing tion made in that convention by a Southern member, to to prevent, a civil commotion; fortitude which enables gen- strike out the words "domestic violence," and insert tlemen, rather than make any concession, rather than "insurrections"-probably on the ground that the last make any change even in the form of a law, to rejoice in word more distinctly embraced the kind of domestic viothe prospect of making an experiment of the strength of lence that might be apprehended from the slaves. The the Government, as philosophers kill rats in an air-pump votes were thus: to illustrate the truths of science; and with cold-blooded indifference regard the approach of a conflict between Governments in arms, which, if it shall once begin, no eye hath seen, nor ear heard, nor can any tongue adequately tell, its termination, or all its train of unuttera- Perhaps there was no essential difference between the ble horrors. This is not the fortitude of patriots and two phrases; but it is not at all unlikely that the vote for statesmen, but that of professors and poets turned poli-retaining the words in the constitution was given in the ticians; those full and awful recollection of that formidable resistance to the State of Massachusetts, which was so extensive as, in many places, to prevent the administration of justice, by driving the judges from their seats, and shutting up The gentleman, in the next place, deduces an argu- the court-houses. And it is recorded of one of the judges, ment in favor of this notion, that some peculiar protec- who happened to be something of a "military chieftain" tion is afforded to the slave interest of the South, from too, that he marched into his court at the head of some that provision of the constitution which stipulates that the hundreds of the people who stood by the Government, United States shall protect each State against domestic in the face of a larger body of the rebels assembled to violence. Is an opposition to the State laws and State prevent him from going on with his business, and used authorities, by "domestic violence," more likely to arise this memorable expression on taking his seat: that "he in the slave-holding States than in the non-slave-holding would live a judge, or die a general." States? deny it. Let it be proved. Virginia has been a Gentlemen may rest assured that the people of the slave-holding State, or community, for upwards of two Southern slaveholding States estimate this vaunted prohundred years. During all that time, there has never tection to our slave interest so far as it is regarded as furbeen any rising of the slaves against their masters of a nishing us any peculiar safeguard, unconnected with the character so formidable as to require any foreign aid general blessings of union, as of very little worth. I exwhatever; none which could not have been suppressed in a pect there is not a Southern man within the sound of my few days by the people of the neighborhood, with the ut-voice who will not bear me out in the expression of the most ease, without even marshalling the State authorities. opinion that there is no people on earth who live in less Indeed, I know of but one event of the kind in the whole apprehension from "domestic violence" than the people Southern country, and that was the Southampton tragedy, which occurred in Virginia a year or two ago. This, in truth, was scarcely entitled to be regarded as an insurrection at all; it was a truly bloody but aimless outrage of a madman, and a few drunken followers. It is true, that, under the influence of a temporary panic occasioned by it, and a thousand unfounded rumors of contemplated and concerted risings in other places, an extraordinary and unfortunate debate was got up in the Virginia Legislature, principally promoted and sustained, however, by those who have comparatively no direct interest in the subject: for there, as here, it so happens that the anxiety which is manifested for the safety of the owners of slaves against "domestic violence," comes principally, not from slave-owners themselves, nor from the slave-holding part of the country, but from the gratuitous, though I dare say amiable solicitude of those who have little or no concern in the matter. Shall I be told that we have been indebted for our security, while a colony, to the protection afforded by the mother country, their object, together with the abolition of debts, the division of proand since, by the Union? Unfortunately for the proposi-perty, and a reunion with Great Britain," &o, of the South. In support of this opinion, I beg leave to read a passage from a work which contains an able, comprehensive, and philosophical analysis of all those questions of slavery, colonization, abolition, &c. which I would most earnestly and respectfully request our Northern friends to peruse in a candid and dispassionate temper. If they will do so, I think they will at least be convinced that there is no occasion for them to suffer so much kind and anxious solicitude for our safety, or the comfort of our slaves. I read from Professor Dew's Review of the Debate in the Virginia Legislature, in 1831 and 1832: sustained by Marshall's Life of Washington, page 111, 5th volume; the Government. Some of the leaders avow the subversion of it to be FEB. 5, 1833.] The Tariff Bill. [H. OF R. who felt any alarm from the negroes previous to the of the South is furnished by the standing army and navy, Southampton tragedy, and we believe at this moment on the score of which we ought to acquiesce in the prothere are very few who feel the slightest apprehension. tection of domestic manufactures. We have no doubt, paradoxical as it may seem to some, And does the North derive no benefit from the army but that the population of our slaveholding country enjoys and navy? Is it for the South to be reproached with the as much or more conscious security than any other people expense of keeping up the army and navy? It has been on the face of the globe. You will find throughout the a standing reproach against us that we were not willing whole slaveholding portion of Virginia, and we believe it to consent to a sufficiently large force being kept up. is the same in the Southern States generally, that the The State of Virginia gave very strong evidence of her houses are scarcely ever fastened at night, so as to be indisposition to have a standing army, and that she did completely inaccessible to those without, except in the not want any such protection. One of the amendments towns. This simple fact is demonstration complete of proposed by her convention, at the time of the adoption the conscious security of our citizens, and their great con- of the constitution, was, "that no standing army or regufidence in the fidelity of the blacks." lar troops shall be raised or kept up in time of peace, The only well-grounded cause of apprehension that we without the consent of two-thirds of the members present have, proceeds from the perpetual teasing interference of in both Houses." The present army is a mere skeleton, deluded, but, I dare say, well-disposed fanatics, who in- and the navy is inconsiderable in point of strength, though fest our country with homilies about colonization, aboli- it has attracted universal favor by its valor and achieve. tion, and emancipation. Sir, the only protection we have ments. But what are they? Not raised or kept up, cerever required, or probably ever will require on this sub-tainly, for the purpose of giving protection to the slave ject, is, to "let us alone," and we will leave the entire interest of the South; they are the fruits of the "second benefit of the constitutional provision now under consi-war of independence," as it has been called, and which deration, to our brethren of the North, as a security certainly did much to establish our national character against domestic violence from their laborers, whom this abroad. tariff system, if carried out and persevered in, will grind This was a Southern war, waged for the protection of down, ultimately, to the point of resistance here as well Northern interests; for "Free trade and sailors' rights." as in England, from which it is borrowed, where the starv- And what have we got? Restricted trade, and our shiping operatives in the manufactories are almost daily found ping and commercial interests heavily burdened. lifting their hands against their employers, committing acts of lawless outrage and desperation, and having to be dispersed by the bayonets of the military. And now the army and navy, which is kept up in case of future national emergencies, and which, in all quarters, has been assented to in consequence of the experience of But this protection to us is alleged to be so peculiar and the want of such establishments at the commencement of important, that it is made the pretext for sustaining a sys-the war, is to be charged to the Southern States, and to tem which, it would seem to be assumed by gentlemen on constitute a reason for subjecting their industry to permaboth sides, is almost exclusively injurious to the slave nent and unequal taxation. And what is to be done with labor of the South, and beneficial to that of the North, them now? This army and navy is to be employed to but which, in my opinion, acts injuriously to the labor crush one of the Southern States-to make all her and industry of the country every where, though not in rivers run red with the blood” of her gallant people; and an equal degree. this for the mere purpose of proving the strength of this But, with these apparently avowed effects, it is asked Government, and illustrating the value of the Union. This that this unjust and unequal system shall be continued; is, indeed, protection: "but it is such protection as vulthat the labor of the North, by means of burdens on the tures give to lambs, covering and devouring them." slave labor of the South, may be lifted above its natural Let me not be misunderstood. I am not either the adelevation in all other countries, so that the North may vocate or apologist of the proceedings of South Carolina. have no occasion for constitutional protection against I do not believe in her doctrine of State interposition. Far "domestic violence," while we shall be compelled to from it. I believe it false in theory, and that in practice reduce the comfort of our slaves, by reason of the dimi- it must be disastrous; inevitably ending in force or separanished profit of slave labor, to the lowest point of de- tion, and perhaps both. The measures that have been pression, and thus the danger of "domestic violence" adopted there, are, in my estimation, rash, precipitate, increased; and we are to be comforted and pacified with and unconstitutional. The citizens of these States cannot, the assurance that protection, thus rendered necessary, is I think, be justified in resisting the regular and lawful ausecured to us by the constitution. thority of this Government by any law or ordinance of the Such is the character of the mild and beneficent pro-State, so long as the State itself remains a member of the tection for which we are to be pursuaded not to act upon Union. And this Government has no discretion but to go this matter at this time, lest one of the Southern States, on and execute the laws which are sanctioned by all its which is not sufficiently sensible of its value, and has constituted authorities. become refractory, should have a triumph, and this Go- Whenever I am called upon to act on that question, vernment should lose so favorable an opportunity of ma-painful as the duty may be, if the attitude now assumed nifesting its energy, by sending the army, the navy, and by South Carolina be persevered in, or should be assumed the militia, "to sweep from the face of the earth the by any other State, as a member of this House, as a rehigh-minded, gallant, and talented representatives of presentative of the State of Virginia, I shall feel impelled that State on this floor;"" to make all her rivers run by the duty I owe to the constitution which I have sworn red with blood, and to exterminate one-half her present to support, to give my sanction to any safe, prudent, and population;" and this spectacle is thus almost invoked constitutional measure to enable this Government to exeby one gentleman in language which "Danton, Marat, cute its laws, taking care to adopt such only as are necesand Robespierre, might blush to own;" and by another, sary and best calculated to avoid collision. I have ever, who, in a sneering tone, says he wants to see this peaceable in public and private, cherished a disposition to acquiesce struggle; and, with heartless irony and derision, urges in the constitutionally expressed will of the majority, so the adoption of his motion, in order that the authorities long as that acquiescence does not sink into submission, to of South Carolina and of this Government may have an deliberate, palpable, and dangerous injustice and oppresopportunity of showing the peaceful character of their sion. In a Government of opinion, such as ours, covering so vast an extent of territory, it is vain to expect that measures. The third source of protection to the slave interest there will not arise great diversity of sentiment, and much |