The North is vitally interested in the preservation of peace, in the preservation of her commerce, and other relations with the South.

These relations cannot be broken up without great injury to the Northern people. My heart would rejoice if we could think alike upon these propositions, and adopt them with a degree of unanimity that would give them weight with the country.

I would not a.s.sail the motives of gentlemen. Doubtless there are men who honestly believe that such a proposition ought only to be considered in a General Convention. In my judgment such a Convention would be utterly useless. It would lead to endless discussion, which would not be conducted with the decorum that characterizes these proceedings. It would amount to nothing.

No, gentlemen, there is a better way than that. Let us have no General Convention, but let us induce Congress to submit our propositions at once to the people. In no other way, in my judgment, can we avoid the disunion that threatens us. In no other way can the country be saved in her present peril.

Mr. DAVIS, of North Carolina:--[2]

[Footnote 2: The speech of Mr. DAVIS is, I believe, the only one delivered in the Conference which I did not hear, and of which I did not preserve minutes more or less full. The reason for the omission was this: The morning session was protracted until a late hour, and the labor of reporting the remarks of the members had been very severe. The evening session commenced with some observations of my own; and after reporting the remarks of Mr. LOGAN, which followed mine, I found myself in such a condition of physical exhaustion that I was obliged to retire to my room. It was during this temporary absence that the remarks of Mr. DAVIS were made. I was informed that his speech was very animated and in excellent temper--that he took the position that North Carolina was loyal to the Union, but that he fully concurred with the Southern States in the necessity of demanding const.i.tutional guarantees; and that if these were not given, her relations were such with South Carolina and the Gulf States that, however much she might regret the necessity, she could not do otherwise than to leave the Union and unite her future with those of the seceded States.

I have been unable to communicate by letter with any of the members representing the States now in insurrection. As Mr. DAVIS was the only representative from North Carolina who entered into a general discussion of the reports of the majority and minority of the Committee of One from each State, I was the more desirous of securing some report of his remarks. But in all the material which has been furnished me, by the many members with whom I have corresponded, I find that none of them preserved notes of his speech.]

Mr. ORTH:--Mr. President, I have thus far avoided any partic.i.p.ation in the general discussion of questions which have claimed the attention of this Conference. My purpose has been to give a calm and careful attention to whatever may be offered for our consideration; to hear with unbia.s.sed judgment the grievances which are the subject of complaint, and to afford redress, if redress be necessary.

Virginia, rich in her patriotism of the past, rich in her historic treasures, has called upon her sisters to convene and consult with reference to the condition of the Union, and the matters which are supposed to threaten our future peace and welfare. Indiana heard and heeded that call. To her it was as the voice of a mother to her child.

It was a voice which none of the States of the great Northwest--carved out of that vast domain which Virginia granted to the United States as the common property of all--could fail to hear with favor. If dangers threaten the common welfare, if the future peace of this land is to be disturbed, it was well for Virginia, as in other days of danger, to sound the alarm, and invite a general council. In pursuance of that call, Indiana is here, and here to listen. She feels conscious that she has by no act of hers infringed upon the rights of any of her sister States; that she has been faithful to her const.i.tutional obligations--seeking for nothing but what was right, and ever ready to remedy any wrong. Occupying this position, her representatives on this floor would be derelict in their duty if they attempted to a.s.sume any other, or to pursue any course of action inconsistent therewith.

What, then, in all candor, are the grievances of some of our sister States, as presented by their delegated authority to this Conference?

Nothing of a tangible nature calling for practical and definite action. A deliberative body ought not to act upon the fears or imaginations of those desiring such action. The mere election of President of the United States by the votes of the northern portion of this Union, affords no just ground of complaint. That election is valid, being in strict conformity with all the requirements of the Const.i.tution. The peculiar notions or political opinions of that President cannot be the ground of a just complaint, so long as these opinions in their practical operations do not interfere with or contravene the provisions of that Const.i.tution. The opinions and principles of the President elect, however obnoxious they may be to any portion of the people of this Union, are harmless so long as his political opponents have in their control the legislative and judicial departments of the Government. The question of slavery in the Territories, if ever any real cause of grievance to any portion of the Union, is in process of final settlement, and will be settled before the close of the present Congress in a manner acceptable to a large majority of the American people. What, then, is left? "Personal Liberty bills" in some of the States; and these are being repealed as rapidly as possible; and so far as practical results are concerned, they have been a dead letter on the statute books ever since their enactment.

The non-enforcement of the fugitive slave law. The history of the country since the year of its enactment clearly shows that no law among the national statutes has received more prompt and vigorous execution, notwithstanding its exceedingly odious features. Here, then, is the list of grievances, or I might more properly say supposed grievances; and for a failure to redress them, this Government is threatened with civil war. To justify this unnatural and diabolical resort to arms, the chimera of "State sovereignty" is invoked. And what is State sovereignty? The gentleman from North Carolina has endeavored to enforce this doctrine, and deduce from certain premises, the right of a State, when she feels herself aggrieved, to secede from her sister States, and a.s.sume an independent position and a separate nationality. The fallacy of the gentleman's position, in fact the fallacy of the doctrine of "State rights," and the deductions made therefrom by the school of politicians and statesmen to which the gentleman belongs, arises from confounding the terms State rights and State sovereignty, and using these as though they were convertible terms. The several States of this Union possess certain rights clearly defined, and known and understood by the reader of American political history. Subject to the restrictions of the national Const.i.tution, they have the right to establish, regulate, and control their internal police and entire polity so far as it affects the persons and property subject to their jurisdiction; to regulate trade, commerce, contracts, marriage, the acquisition, possession, control, and disposal of real and personal property; also the a.s.sessing and collecting of taxes, and disburs.e.m.e.nt of the public revenue.

These are some of the main rights belonging to the States as such, but these do not in any just sense const.i.tute sovereignty. The several States of the Union are not now and never have been sovereign States.

They never possessed the right to declare war, to make peace, to coin money, to enter into treaty with nations, and none of them ever endeavored or attempted to exercise any such rights as these. These are attributes of sovereignty, as laid down by writers upon the laws of nations, and recognized as such by the civilized world. Examine the history of your several States, and tell me whether in any one of them any act or fact can be found which would ent.i.tle either of them at any time, past or present, to be recognized as sovereign independent nations?

Mr. RUFFIN:--Will the gentleman from Indiana permit me to inform him that during the Revolutionary War, the State of North Carolina had laid the foundation of a navy, and at the close of hostilities she transferred her vessels to the United States.

Mr. ORTH:--I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for the interruption, and for the allusion to the local history of his State, of which I was not before aware.

There, then, we have a single instance of one of the States taking one step toward sovereignty, by the establishing of a navy. I believe this is the only instance now remembered, and this instance affords the strongest argument in favor of the position I a.s.sume and am endeavoring to enforce. North Carolina, it seems, had taken one step toward sovereignty; and yet upon the adoption of our national Const.i.tution, upon the creation of the only sovereign Government in this Union, the _Government of the Union_, she transfers to that sovereign her infant navy; she relinquishes her only attribute of sovereignty--if such it be--to the United States, and merges herself with her sister States into that Union of States which has. .h.i.therto been our boast and pride, as well as the admiration of the world.

The several propositions now pending before us do not meet my approbation, and cannot receive my support. They are in the shape of amendments to the Const.i.tution, and are all in the interest of slavery, seeking to strengthen that inst.i.tution, and to give it an importance far beyond what the fathers were willing to concede. While the North is willing to recognize and enforce the requirements of the Const.i.tution touching the various aspects of the slavery question, so nominated in the bond, they feel unwilling to grant new guarantees to a system which the civilized world is beginning to hold in detestation, and which is inimical to free inst.i.tutions, and the only subject of contention that will ever seriously disturb the peace and prosperity of the Union. I am opposed to the proposition before us: First, because the grievances complained of are not of that serious character requiring any amendment of our fundamental laws. Secondly, because I am in favor of the Const.i.tution as it is, firmly believing that no good reason exists for its change, and that an honest adherence to its wise provisions is our surest guarantee for real or supposed grievances, and that the present of all times is the most unpropitious moment to attempt any change or modification. Party politics in all their embittered madness rule the hour, but calm times and cool heads will be required whenever the American people desire to enter upon so hazardous an experiment. Let the Const.i.tution remain; it has. .h.i.therto been, and will continue to be, the palladium of our rights, the sheet anchor of our safety. Thirdly, under no state of circ.u.mstances that can possibly arise among us as a people, will I ever consent, by word, thought, or deed, to do any thing to strengthen the inst.i.tution of slavery. I regard it as an evil which all good men should desire to see totally eradicated; and I hope for the day to dawn speedily when, throughout the length and breadth of the land, freedom shall be enjoyed by every human being, without reference to caste, color, or nationality. While I am willing to tolerate its existence where it now is, I am unwilling to extend its boundaries a single inch, and will not give it any guarantee, protection, or encouragement, save what it can exact by the strict letter of the fundamental law. Beyond that I will never go; beyond that Indiana will never go; and to this, gentlemen from the other side had as well become reconciled. It is the _ne plus ultra_ of the American people, and to that they will adhere through all coming time. If, in consequence of this position, the foundations of society are to be broken up, civil war inaugurated, and the destruction of the Government attempted, you must remember we are standing upon the Const.i.tution, in favor of sustaining the laws of the land, denying the existence of any real grievance; and standing thus with that consciousness of strength which integrity imparts, you must strike the first blow, cross the Rubicon, commit the foul and d.a.m.ning crime of treason, and bring upon your people ruin, devastation, and destruction, and call down upon your guilty heads the curses of your children and the disapprobation of the civilized world!

Mr. BRONSON:--For what purpose was this Conference called? Why have we come here? I suppose we are here to do something, to accomplish something. If we are only here to make speeches, and not to arrive at conclusions, our mission is useless. The greater portion of the debate hitherto has been made up of set speeches, all like the circ.u.mlocution office in one of d.i.c.kens' novels, showing "how not to do it." I am not in favor of pursuing this course any longer. Let us talk the subject over like business men, in a sensible way, and then come to a vote. I think we may do something which will prove effectual, and I hope we shall. My political opinions are well known. For more than forty years I have belonged to one political party. I did not come here to speak.

I did not intend to speak at all, and shall now only submit a few observations.

I hail from the old Democratic party. The most of you are members of the opposition. I do not know how or why I was selected as one of the delegates from New York. I do not even know how the vote of that delegation will stand on these proposals of amendment. I suppose the dominant party has taken care to send a majority of its members. If I was a mere politician, I do not know but I should be in favor of breaking up the Conference, and of doing nothing; but being only a Democrat, I desire to transmit to posterity the blessings of a good Const.i.tution and a good Government.

The country has become disquieted. Its peace has been disturbed by the acts of politicians. Many have become disgusted with the present condition of affairs, and are unwilling to act or vote. A large portion of our people have become alarmed. They think their rights have been invaded. Some of the States have gone. G.o.d knows whether they will ever come back again. If we act wisely, perhaps they may.

But there is occasion enough for alarm. I have felt alarmed for a long time. One way suggested to get these States back is by conquest. But what are we to do with a conquered State? Shall we establish a military despotism over it?

We all have the right to express our opinions, and I will express mine. There are eight other slave States whose condition is to be considered. If we do not act here, will they not leave us and join their sisters? I hope they will not. I would not raise my voice in this Conference, if it were not for the purpose of inducing them to stay.

Virginia, that n.o.ble old Commonwealth, has invited us together. She proposes the CRITTENDEN resolutions, and asks us to consider them. Now she is charged with standing in the way of the Government. This is not true. Blessed are the peacemakers, and the position of Virginia in this matter is that of a peace-maker. I thank her for bringing us together.

Two-thirds of the speeches here have been made by those of a political party to which I never belonged. I do not understand either their purposes or wishes. Perhaps I may be behind the times. I have not been actually engaged in politics for more than twenty-five years. During a large part of that time I have been engaged, in my humble way, in the administration of justice in the State I here in part represent. I do not know but I may be falling into the common fault of making a speech. If I do, you must check me. Again I say, I thank Virginia for her invitation. Why should we not confer together? Six or seven States--no matter which--are gone. If nothing is done, eight or nine others will follow, and other divisions will come as a matter of necessity. Rhode Island--patriotic Rhode Island--will not go with New England in this Conference. She will not separate from her southern sisters. Connecticut, I think, will not stay, and New York, I believe, will stand with the South.

How is it, or why is it, that we should do nothing? Why should we break up and go home? Have not all the States asked us to come here and do this work? Why did their legislatures take the trouble to send us here? All this circ.u.mlocution might have better been done at home.

Will a Convention answer the purpose, when another Confederacy has been formed in our very midst? It would be two years at least before any thing could be accomplished by a Convention, and then it would be too late. We all know how delegates to such a Convention are elected.

We all know how much time would be consumed before the Convention could meet. I say we cannot bear the delay. I ask the gentleman (Mr.

BALDWIN) of Connecticut whether he thinks it would be safe to delay.

Mr. BALDWIN:--I think it is always safe to follow the Const.i.tution. I think we can follow the example of Kentucky.

Mr. CLAY:--I would suggest to the gentleman from Connecticut that the representatives of Kentucky are here to speak for her.

Mr. BRONSON:--Kentucky has sent delegates to this Convention since she pa.s.sed the resolutions to which the gentleman refers. I think we cannot stand upon the ground taken in these resolutions. I do not believe Kentucky herself would be satisfied with them now.

It is strange to see gentlemen so cool and apathetic under such circ.u.mstances. Is no one alarmed for the safety of the old flag about which so much is said? Can the Border States stay with us when their brethren are gone? If the action of the North in relation to slavery is such as to drive out South Carolina, can Delaware and the other Border States remain? For one, I do not wish to put this Const.i.tution into the hands of a General Convention. Who can tell what such a convention would do with the Const.i.tution; what it would do with the decisions of the Supreme Court, under which so many of the vexatious questions have been settled? It would be worse than attempting to settle our differences in a town meeting. I would hesitate long before I would submit such questions to a convention. Before they could be settled in that way, the Union would be gone forever. The process would be too slow. I have nothing to gain in this matter. My only wish is to spend my few remaining days in the United States, and to transmit the blessings of our Government to my children.

Some of the Republican members here subordinate their platform to their country. I commend them for it; these are n.o.ble sentiments. Men should abandon platforms when they tend to destroy the country. I concur in the sentiments of the gentleman from Illinois, uttered this morning. They also are n.o.ble sentiments.

I venerate our Const.i.tution. When made, it was equal to any ever framed. Nothing short of Almighty Wisdom could have framed a better.

But was it given to human wisdom, to WASHINGTON and MADISON, to foresee all the events of the future? The Const.i.tution has held us together for three-fourths of a century; that is a wonder in itself; but its makers did not foresee this day--a day when Freedom itself was in danger of perishing.

Why this hesitation about amending the Const.i.tution? New York accepted it reluctantly, and only ratified it upon the a.s.surance that it should be amended as she proposed. It is not so holy a thing now, that it may not be amended. WASHINGTON, you must remember, signed the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793, as well as the Const.i.tution.

We are told by gentlemen from New York and Connecticut (Mr. NOYES and Mr. BALDWIN), that the action proposed here is unconst.i.tutional. It does not become these gentlemen to raise this objection. There was never an amendment of the State Const.i.tutions, in either of the States they represent, adopted, that was not brought before the people in substantially the same way.

Much has been said here about modern civilization and the spirit of the age. It is said that these are hostile to slavery. Suppose they are? What have we to do with them? The example of England, also, has been referred to, as well as that of France. True, they have abolished slavery by name, but they have imported apprentices from Africa, and Coolies from Asia, and have placed them under the worst form of slavery ever known. England tolerates slavery in her mining districts to-day in a worse form than that existing in the Southern States. She has millions in India worse off than slaves. She has been the greatest land robber on the earth. She has contributed to the support of the Juggernaut, and has forced the Chinese at the point of the bayonet to eat opium. Do you forget that she ruined the capitol in this city, and blew it up, in 1814? I do not deny her virtues, but I do not care to follow her example.

Our fathers said slavery was strictly a State inst.i.tution, and they would not meddle with it by the Const.i.tution. Their doctrine is true now. The Union cannot be preserved if we interfere with the inst.i.tutions of the States.

I will not stop to refer to the Missouri Compromise, or the compromises of 1850 and 1854. I will only say that the North understood these to settle the slavery question, and professed to agree not to meddle with slavery hereafter in the States. But the cry of freedom was raised, and its new apostles, during the last campaign, went through the land preaching destruction to slavery. What did they mean but that slavery was to be a.s.sailed at every possible point? This doctrine was involved in their platforms, and advocated in their speeches. They collected all the bad things ever said about slavery, whether true or untrue, and published them. The purpose to a.s.sail the inst.i.tution was everywhere owned.

I wish to say a word about the Territories. What great harm would be done if all the Territories were thrown open to slavery? By the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case, they are open already. But in the greater part of them slavery cannot exist at all.

New Mexico has a slave code. So have the Cherokee and other Indian tribes; and yet slavery does not and cannot flourish among them. It cannot make head against the obstacles which oppose it, and yet you will attack it even there. If you do so, civil war is inevitable.

But what mischief is done if slavery does go into the Territories? It will not add another to the degraded race of Africans. It is a blessing to the slave if he may be permitted to go with his master into these new Territories. In the old slave States he is compelled to work in gangs under the whip of a driver, with no one to look after his health or comfort. Take him into one of these new Territories, and there are one hundred white men and women to protect each individual of his race, and to see that he suffers no wrong. It is a blessing to take him out of the plantation gangs, and to place him in a new country. Then why not let him go there and live in peace? Your zeal to exclude slavery from the Territories only injures the African race. If there is a good substantial reason for this exclusion I shall be glad to hear it. Up to this time I have heard no good reason stated.

Although I have declared myself a Democrat, in this Conference I am no party man. Show me any good reason for not adopting these proposals of amendment and I will oppose them. But until that reason is shown they will receive my support. So far as I can judge, no argument has been proposed here against these propositions which is not of a partisan character.

The rights which the slave States now ask to have us recognize, are guaranteed to them by the Const.i.tution as it now stands. We are giving them nothing new. Every lawyer is familiar with the rule of const.i.tutional construction, that all the rights not expressly granted to the General Government are reserved to the States. Let us carry this principle into effect now. It is all that we are asked to do. Let us do something. Let us amend these propositions; make them as un.o.bjectionable as we can, and send them to Congress. Let us urge Congress and the country to adopt them. In their adoption there is safety; there is great danger in their rejection.

Mr. POLLOCK obtained the floor, and at twelve o'clock the Conference adjourned to ten o'clock to-morrow.

FIFTEENTH DAY.

WASHINGTON, FRIDAY, _February 22d, 1861._

The Conference was called to order by President TYLER, at 10 o'clock A.M., and prayer was offered by Rev. Dr. SUNDERLAND.

The Journal of yesterday was read, corrected, and approved.

Mr. WICKLIFFE:--It will be necessary that some plan be adopted to defray the expenses of the Conference, and of printing the Journal. I move the appointment, by the President, of a committee of three to take those subjects into consideration.