tional appropriations. Let it be judged by an example, from which in this country there can be no appeal. Here is the speech of George III., made from the Throne to Parliament, in response to the complaints of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, which, though smarting under laws passed by usurped power, had yet avoided all armed opposition, while Lexington and Bunker Hill still slumbered in rural solitude, unconscious of the historic kindred which they were soon to claim. Instead of Massachusetts Bay, in the Royal speech, substitute Kansas, and the message of the President will be found fresh on the lips of the British King. Listen now to the words, which, in opening Parliament, 30th of November, 1774. his majesty, according to the official report, was pleased to speak: “ My Lords and Gentlemen: “It gives me much concern that I am obliged, at the opening of this Parliament, to inform you that a most daring spirit of resistance and disobedience to the law still unhappily prevails in the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, and has ip divers parts of it broke forth in fresh violences of a very criminal nature. These proceeding shave been countenanced in other of my Colonies, and unwarrantable attempts have been made to obstruct the Commerce of this Kingdom, by unlawful combinations. I have taken such measures and given such orders as I have judged most proper and effectual/or carrying into execution the laws which were passed, in the last session of the late Parliament, for ttie protection and security of the Commerce of my subjects, and for the restoring and preserving peace, order, and good government, in the Province of the Massachusetts Bay P—American Arch., 4th series, vol. 1, p. 1465. The King complained of a “ daring spirit of resistance and disobedience to the law;” so also does the President. The King adds, that it has “ broke forth in fresh violence of a very criminal nature;” so also does the President. I he King declares that these proceedings have been ^countenanced and encouraged in other of my Colonies;” even so the President declares that Kansas has found sympathy in “remote States.” The King invei^s against u unwarrantable measures ” and “ unlawful combinations;” even so inveighs the President. The King proclaims that he has taken the necessary steps “for carrying into execution the laws,” passed in defiance of the constitutional rights of the colonies; even so the President proclaims that he shall “exert the whole power of the Federal Executive” to support the Usurpation in Kansas. The parallel is complete. The Message, if not copied from the Speech of the King, has been fashioned on the same original block, and must be dismissed to the same limbo. I dismiss its tyrannical asumptions in favor of the Usurpation. 1 dismiss also the petition for additional appropriations in the affected desire to maintain order in Kansas. It is not money or troops that you need there; but simply the good will of the President. That is all, absolutely. Let his complicity with the Crime cease, and peace will be restored. Fur inyself, I will not consent to wad the Nation, artillery with fresh appropriation bills, whcl its murderous hail is to be directed against tl constitutional rights of my fellow-citizens. Next comes the Remedy of Folly, whicl indeed, is also a Remedy of Tyranny; but i| Folly is so surpassing as*-to eclipse even il Tyranny. It does not proceed from the Pred dent. With this proposition he is not in arl way chargeable. It comes from the Senatdl from South Carolina, who, at the close cl a long speech, offered it as his single contribtl tion to the adjustment of this question, an who thus far stands alone in its support. J might, therefore, fitly bear his name; but th] which I now give to it is a more suggestiv synonym. This proposition, nakedly expressed, is thd the people of Kansas should be deprived o their arms. That I may not do the leas, injustice to the Senator, I quote his precis words: “The President of the United States is under the highe, and most solemn obligations to interpose; and if I were t indicate the manner in which he should interpose in Kar sas, I would point out the old common law process. ] would serve a warrant on Sharpe’s rifles, and if Sharpe rifles did not answer the summons, and come into court o a day certain, or if they resisted the sheriff, I would surr mon the posse comitatus, and would have Colonel Sumner1 regiment to be a part of that posse comitatusP Really, sir, has it come to this ? The rifl< has ever been the companion of the pioneer and, under God, his tutelary protector agains the red man and the beast of the forest Never was this efficient weapon more needet in just self defence, than now in Kansas, am at least one article in our National Constitu tion must be blotted out, before the complete right to it can in any way be impeached And yet, such is the madness of the hour, that, in defiance of the solemn guarantee^ embodied in the Amendments to the Constitu* tion, that “the right of the people to keen and bear arms shall not be infringed,” the people of Kansas have been arraigned foi seeping and bearing them, and the Senate] from South Carolina has had the face to say openly, on this floor, that they should be disarmed—of course, that the fanatics of Slavery, his allies and constituents, may meet nd impediment. Sir, the Senator is venerable with years; he is reputed also to have worn at home, in the State which lie represents, judicial honors; and he is placed here at thd head of an important committee occupied particularly with questions of law ; but neither his years nor his position, past or present, can give respectability to the demand be lias1 made, or save him from indignant condemna’ tion, when, to compass the wretched purposes of a wretched cause, he thus proposes to tram-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=