Lincoln telegraph. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1836-1846, 1841-09-30
NO. 81.

the u JOu W w WIN IbdI obN"hlpodb!
They would say that We struck the first blow.
Now, admit that-and none of your State rights
men can deny hadn't that, and all the rest
follows of course. They will say it was wrong
distinctly, fyou please Talking of abstrac-
tons, it wrong for an expedition to come
over and burn the steamboat and send her over
the falls. But what was your steamboat about?
What had she been doing? What was she to do
the next morning. And what ought you to do ;
You have reparation 20 make for all the men and
all the arms and implements of war which we
were transporting and going to transport to the
other side, to foment and instigate rebellion in
Canada. That is what the third party would say
to u.s. And it would come, in the end, after all
the blood and treasure had been wasted by war
between the two countries, to this that we must
shake hands and drink champagne together, af-
ter having made mutual pology for mutua
transgression. That is the way things are set
tied by individuals 'Ifyou said so, why, l said
50 y and thus the dispute is amicably settled
So we should have to do with this national mat
ter; for there is not any great difference, in the
essentials of qnarrelling and of making up, be-
tween nations and individuals. See fight in
the street between two boys, who gave each 9TH
err bloody noses; and when the question
to be settled between them, the basis of the set
Element is, who gave the first blow? And the
award of any honest umpire is, after suffering
the parties 20 fight it out that he who struck the
first blow was in the wrong. And so it is with
nations. Why, then, are you talking of State
rights and of independence in connection with
this question 1t has nothing to do with it.
There is, sir, another point of view in which I
object to this resolution. | have seen here, in
another part of this building, to which it would
not be in order to refer except indirectly, although
| did hear, the other day. such dressing of this
House in that body that thought almost had
right to get up and protest against it, But will
not refer to the matter except in terms which
come within the rules of order ] have heard
there, and seen in the newspapers out of doors,
prodgous affair made of this matter, as if the
Government of the United States had outraged
the State of New York-because the great En-
pire State of New York had undertaken to say
that she would hang Mcleod, whatever Great
Britain or the General Government might do.
Yes, whatever they might do, the great Empire
State of New York would hang Mcleod That
was the language What, sir, | ask is the OBJ
iect of this resolution To inquire of the Presi-
dent of the United States whether any officer of
the army, or the attorney General of the United
States, since the 18th of March last, has visited
the State of New York for any purpose connec1
ted with the trial of Alexander Mcleod?
believe that question was answered before it
was asked | think the information was CON
tanned in document communicated by the Presi-
dent of the United States which stated not only
that General sent, but that instructions
were given to the Attorney General and the
instructions themselves were communicated to
Congress, with the Presidents message, at the
very commencement of the session.
Why, then, should this House be occupied
hour after hour in discussion whether the Attor-
ney General was sent to New York, and what he
was about there, when the President himself has
told you that he was sent and the object of his
mission
Every body knew il before the question was
asked What then? Has not the President
right to send the Attorney General to New York
on that any other subject? Where is the
stitutional provision prohibiting him from send
ing the Attorney General to New York on that
any other of the subjects which are before the
judicial courts of that State? Yes, the Attorney
General has been sent there, and we have his in
structions. And have heard here, on that part
of some Of my forty friends from New York, a
great deal about the conscious dignity and honor
of this Empire State of New York. Now, ] am
not very fond of that term empire State" in
the language of this Union; and / say that if
there is an Empire State in this Union, it is
Delaware. To be magniloquent and talk about
the Empire State may well become the forty gen
tlemen who represent the State on the floor, hav-
ing reference to their own numbers, and the num-
bers of their constituents, or to the extent fertil-
tv, and beauty her soil yet this is distnc-
ton not recognized in the Constitution of the
United States. They are all, as members oflhis
Union, equal and the State of Delaware has as
good right to be called the " Empire State" as
New York. Now, if my forty friends from New
York choose to call it the Empire State, ! will
not quarrel with them. II is only as TO conse
quences that enter my caveat against the too
frequent use Of those terms on this floor for
there is meaning in those words Empire State
when used among co-estates, more than meets
the car. Suppose it was in Delaware that such
an event had occurred, do you suppose my friend