Slavery Question

13 tous ; but the disclosures of the organization of secret associations by the slaveholders on the borders of the territory, in connection with the machinations of the then vice president in the same quarter, constitute more than a suspicion, they amount to a Strong presumptive evidence, that the purpose of repealing the compromise, and of making Kansas a slave state, were conceived simultaneously, as events inseparably connected, and to be accomplished at every hazard. They prove further, that the shallow And delusive notion of “squatter sovereignty,” was held up merely to gull a set of shallow, bigoted, and reckless partisans in the free states, as mackerel are caught with red rags. In this view of the case, I ask honest men, north and south, were not these challenges, these taunts, this contempt and insolence, sufficient provocation to put the people of the free states to their mettle—those of them, I mean, who prefer freedom to slavery ? Was it wrong in them—nay, was it not right—nay, was it not a duty which they owed to their principles, (if they had any,) to prove themselves no “ nincompoops,” to use the select phrase of the gentleman from Georgia; but to show themselves equal at least, in intelligence, energy, enterprise, and wealth, to the slaveholders who had thus insultingly challenged them to the trial ? Why, sir, emigrant aid societies, as agencies for the colonization of new and distant countries, are as natural a result of superior wealth, intelligence, and enterprise, as railroads and steamboats are evidence of enterprise, wealth, and skill, superior to those which had only advanced to the invention of the hand-barrow, horse-cart, and flat-boat. Sir, the slave democracy, northern or southern, might as reasonably denounce free-state emigrants to Kansas, for not making their journeys thither, in mule-drawn wagons or scow-boats, instead of journeying by steamboats and railways, as for availing themselves of the superior advantages offered by emigrant aid societies. Nevertheless, there has not been an utterance from those hostile to freedom in Kansas, from the leviathans pigmy giants of the slave democracy in the other end of the capitol, to the president and his cabinet, at the other end of the avenue: or from the guests of the grog-shops, or even the street loafers, the purpose of which has not been to conceal or justify their breach of the nation’s plighted faith, and to shelter themselves from the storm of public odium and contempt, for their treason to the constitution and laws of their country, as well-as to their own professed principles of “squatter sovereignty,” by cursing the “New England emigrant aid society,” by “ bell, book, and candle.” The slave democratic press, at the four cardinal and all intermediate points of the compass, has groaned with these execrations. But when thus insultingly challenged to prove their superiority in wealth, intelligence, and enterprise, (if they possessed them,) by taking an even chance with the slave states in the peaceful colonization of Kansas; and when fairly beaten in the trial, as the slave states have been, it is not only unreasonable, but it is infamous, to turn upon their successful competitors, and charge them with foul play; and not only so, but to resort themselves to the foulest, most infamous, and treasonable measures, to recover what they had lost in the field of open and fair competition. And, sir, I charge the slave democracy with all the mischiefs (and God knows they are but too numerous) which have already resulted, and which, in the dark and stormy future, may result, from this shameless breach of public faith, in the repeal of the Missouri compromise, in order to force the institution of slavery on territory dedicated to freedom for more than the third of a century. Sir, to talk of acquiescence now, in this breach of plighted faith; and this still more aggravated offence of expelling, by the army of the United States, peaceable and innocent emigrants to a territory to which the slave democracy had invited them, is a manifestation of weakness and cowardice which must and will, only invite renewed aggressions. In point of morals, it is as culpable, and in point of policy, more imbecile if possible, than that which threw open the territories to the influx of slavery. A few words in contusion, Mr. Chairman, to those political adventurers, patriots, doughfaces, or what not, from the free states, who at this day, attach themselves to the fortuned of the slave democracy, or to slavery propagandists of any school. I would very respectfully ask of those gentlemen, whether, as a political investment, barring wear and tear of conscience, the business of extending human slavery, and cribbing and confining human liberty, has not, of late, been rather overdone by the rush of political adventurers into this field of speculation ?—whether the compensation is adequate to the excessive labor required in this kind of service ? Formerly, before slavery extension became the main business ofthe holders of office in the government, the president and his cabinet might hold out sound and strong for at least eight years, and subordinate officers indefinitely. But now, since the extension of slavery into free territory, has become almost the sole business of the officers of the federal government, from the president downwards, so excessive and exhausting is the service exacted of its servants by the slave democracy, that in one or two years at the longest, these officers become so worn down and fagged out, that the people are as anxious to be rid of them, as a cleanly housewife would ‘be, to be clear of a gang of strolling beggars, infected with measles, small-pox, or vermin. Mr. Chairman, mankind in general intuitively despise traitors. They do this, even though they may love the treason, or its fruits. This, sir, is a law of our moral nature, all-pervading, and indispensable in the present condition of humanity. This law of our moral being, addressing itself to one of the most powerful affections of our nature, the love of approbation, serves as one of the strongest checks from universal treachery to those, to whom we are under moral obligations alone. So strong is the hold which this law takes of men, controlled by no “ higher law,” that when the traitor returns to receive applause from those who reap the fruits of his treason, the applause he covets, is often turned to loathing and unsuppressed disgust. Milton, sir, with his luxuriant imagination, lias described the force of

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=