Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-04-02

Of slavery what even /, humble as am. could have
done in my own State. l did not state it to show
that was actuated By principle. I understand the
principles on which this great institution Of slavery
stands; and in the section Of the State Of Tonnes
see where live, where there arc but few slaves,
took the bold ground which l stated yesterday, in
reference TO the nature Of the institution ITSELF and
have continued to maintain it. But the gentleman
here has attempted 10 Jug in on this occasion some
things that are understood at home in an undercur
rent. Il was the reason and cause Of my reply to
his remarks yesterday on the subject of slavery
The ides with some is and it is industriously cult
vated-"0h, be lives in Eastern Tennessee; there
not many slaves there, he does not own many"
and hence the inference is "hat he is be doubted
aad will try TO array all the slave feeling in the
strong slaveholding counties against him" That is
the game they play.
l wish he would bring here the speech he refers
to- instead Of relating it some kind Of
ton picked up from itnerants here and there and
read the speech itself, which he says was made on
Broad street, in which l threw out some strange
doctrines about squatter sovereignty and in refer
enee to slavery. In that very speech my views are
laid down on the question Of slavery, and argued
on the principle upon which slavery stands. If |
ed been disposed to play the demagOgue, l might
hqve done so; but is there any evidence Of it? In
regard to my speech Broad street, says that his
friends Orsomebody else, told him andso and gave
him this version, that version of it. Now if you
D
lfttle scrap Of information here, loose remnant
there, and a sentence somewhere else. and put all
this together and make position of it, you csn de-
monstrate ANYTHING the face of the earth. dis.
claim and deny that sort Of process Of reasoning
It is not legitimate it is not according the rules
Of the lOgcian; it is far from the character Of q
statesmao
l did make a speech in Broad street, and pub
lished it all. 1t was read, and I thought when
got it DOM, to speak rather in the language of the
sehoolmaster, that there was some right good read
ing in it 1t took pretty well: it was read, aud
sought for. My colleague made a speech in the
market-house He made one ofthose moving speeches;
lie commenced with a good large crowd, and he
spoke it all ava y Laughter few days after
wards he published half Of it, but the other half has
never been published yet. That is what he did.
But he refers to my course in the Legislature by
way Of relief but in all that he has said, has he
showu't that was inconsistent in anything: 1 do
not claim to belong TO the stiff necked family that
never change an opinion but has he shown any in
consistency? Not the slightest But take my
competitors course before coma to the negro idea
involved in this reference 70 my course in the Ten
nessee Legislature, and what is it? The lines
presented yesterday are clear and good illustration
of 1t. lie vas for the compromise awhile and then
for the action policy; for the repeal Of the
Missouri compromise and against it. He voted to
repeal it in 1850, and voted against its repeal in
1854. Take his course and his speech. We are
getting to be sort Of poetic here, and think of two
other little lines; they from negro melodies, and
they may be pardoned as negroes seem TO be the
great subject 10 these times, like Aaron's rod
swallowing up all other questions. What is his
speech? Here is one point and there is another
point here is inconsistency and there is another
inconsistency, and know nothing better to illus
trate it by than the negrOs melody:
''There's Point Look-ou and Point LOck-in,
There's Point nOPoint, and Point Agin"
ton of his speeches here and elsewhere and Of his
course, speaking on both Sides seeming to be with
both parties, going along between wind and water
| am speaking Of him politician. Has he shown
my inconsistency? Not at all What was the main
thing he relied upon? That, in the Legislature,
had been somewhat strange in my proceedings or
course in reference to the question of slavery.
dislike in a discussion with an honorable colleague
to follow him along step by step, and remove his
arguments or statements piece by piece; and after
having removed them all, when We march up to this
last position, it is almost painful to me. l see him
standing like cripple, resting upon crutch; and
tsppears to be somewhat unkind after having driven
him to his crutch, to walk up and kick the crutch
from under him; and l am almost inclined, on this
point, to let the cripple 90.
ButWhat ist that did in the Legislature? Hethinks
it is the first Legislature ever in. 1t seems TO
be all conjecture, mysterious incOmprehensble,
ndefnable sort of mass that's floating along through
but 1t is all confusion, somehow or Other-I cannot
exactly tell how. You have seen that illustrated in
the effort to-day to eXricate himself from the votes
pinned upon him in the JOurnsl; and even after he
got the document and was reading from it. showed
that the position l assumed yesterday was true to
the letter But in the Legislature introduced some
resolutions; and what we're they? Did he show that
was inconsistent? Did he show thatI had backed
cut from them, that had disavoWed any opinion
had ever entertained? l was a member Of the Leg
isature in 1912, after Congress had made the appOr
tOnment number to which the
several States were entitled according to the exist
ing ratio Tennessee was entitled to eleven members
in Congress under that ratio. The number was
settleo Three fths Of the slaves were added to the
whole number of whites. In making the spportion-
ment under the Constitution, to whom is it made?
Is it made to particular districts is it made to
particular localities, or is the apportonment made
to the States The apportiOnment is made to the
States; and Tennessee, under the Constitution, re-
ceived eleven members, getting the benefit of three
fths of the slaves That point was settled that was
over; that was done.
In the Legislature Of 1872 l introduced two reso.
lutions. There seems to be contrariety Of opinion
about them; and l will state just what occurred, so
that my colleague can readily remember it the next
time undertakes to tell it. What those two res
olutions Some said elect by general ticket some by
districts, some one way, and some another. said:
" Gentlemen, if you elect by general ticket, the
qualified voters will elect all the members How do
you elect members now! Do you not elect by gene.
raj ticket! and who does elect them? The voting
population. Your State in making up this electoral
college has the benefit Of three-ftths of the slaves
because that college consists of number Of electors
equal to the whole number of Senators and Repre-
sentatives. That's the basis Of the college" Then
in the Legislature of 1912, after my State had the
benefit Of the three-ffths prnciplein the spporton
ment of members Of Congress, introduced reso-
hat 1os1 So
the districts shall be composed of the several eoun-
ties in the State, without regard to slave population
Another resolution was that the one hundred and
twenty thousand qualified voters of the State should
be divided by eleven, and that each eleventh Of the
qualified voters Of the State should elect one Repre-
sentative was for it then, and am for it now
1t is right, and it is correct In the States we hold
that slaves are property. We hold in laying our
States off into senatorial and representative dis
trics that property is not an element of represen
tatiOn. These resolutions we're substantially in the
words Of the constitution Of the State that the rep.
shall be appOrtiOned according to the
number of qualified voters.
Is there any abolition in that? Coming back to
the idea have entertained since formed an opin-
ion in reference to sovereignty what ia it that CON
suutes State? Is it not the qualified voters? Is
it not the thinking, living, acting producing intel
gent portion Of the population who have the right
Of suffrage? If they constitute the State, are they
not all eQualSs ana Wnere GO you derive the rght
in appOrtOning your representatives to discriminate
between sOvereigns in the same State, and to give
one a larger representation than you do snotheri
Does the Senator show any inconsistency in this |
was attacked upon it, and it was discussed from
one extreme of the State TO the other. had to |
discuss the question in the strongest slsve-holdng
county in the S ate Of Tennessee-Fsyette. / dis |
,ussed it with Augustus Henry, who is called the |
eagle Orator-the lineal descendant of the forest
born DemOsthenes, Patrick Henry. He, with all |
his eloqueRce and the attachment and devotion the
Wing party had for him. pressedt question with all
he power that was in him; and in the strongest
iave-hOlding county in the State increased the
Democratic vote; and the State, which was under
tOod then to be directly Wing in its complexion,
vas carried by the Democracy by handsome ma
GRITTY.
Do none of the other southern States do what
proposed then? l think some of them do. / believe
louisiana has incorporated, to some extent the
anne principle into her policy; and so have Nsss-
ippi and Alabama. Where's the difference between
his principle and electing the members by general
icket? Suppose you put all your members on one
icket do not the whole number Of qualified voters
lect themi Suppose you divide the State into dis
riots: does not each division elect its member?
10 We see what that amounts to; but the gentleman
as relied uDOn il as the main thing as a set off.