The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1859-12-29
No. 5.

orthodox upon this subject; there was no dis
cordaut note there: there was no, a CLAY
hiy IN all the South who would stand up
and say. This institution Of ours is To be- ius.
tefled upon principles OF m oral right and ius.
tee - not one. So we'll known was this
fact, that l remember il is not more than
four years ago since the speakers in the South
and the reading papers in the South put forth
that doctriee-the Charleston Mercury, l re-
collect, was one-,hat the trainers OF our In
stitutions were all abolitionists. agreeing pre-
ciseiy with our doctrines. land il cannot be
denied. because the record evidence that they
LETT behind them Is perfectly overwhelmingly
but that they did not understand the subject:
they had not made II their study particular
ly; but now the whole South have reviewed
the whole doctrine. and have come to anoth-
er conclusion. They now find that the old
doctrine was altogether at fault; that the re-
laton of master and slave is the true relation
OF msn, upheld BY divine inspiration. instiGu-
ted OF God. and approved OF and in accord
snce with nature itself. The Charleston Mer-
curry went SO far as 70 say that ii this WAS
not SO. the abolilionists were right. Yes, sir.
II staked everything upon the new light ths,
had broken IN, in modern times. " hich shines
so hercely that 1t has dmmed and ob!i,erated
even the Sermon upon the Mount
Yes, sif. this IS modern light that has
sprung up since you began to raise the stan
dard OF slavery, declaring that il should do
inmate over this great nation. and should pro.
strate every other interest. 1t grew up with
your new territorial doctrines; it grew up
with your Dred Scott decision; il grew up
with your mediated design of opening the
African slave trade 1t is key to them all.
IL grew as cotton grows; and We were told
here not long siuce that cotton was king, and
had dictated tins new code Of morals
challenge any Senator to deny that state
this doctrine Alright.
Is 1t not a fact that you claim, that on a
review OF the question of slavery yoa .ye
got new light? The old doctrine was that
1t was wrong in morals and could not ae JUS
titled; but now you hold the contrary. We,
sir. adhere to the old doctrine We have not
seen the new light that has broken in upon
the South. We are no, admitted into the great
council where the investigation was had,
which resulted in finding out that tho inst-
tution ot slavery is in accordance lth IIa-
ture and approved by God.
Ii Is true. sir, that l cannot touch the ia
Stituiion within the boundaries oi the State.
where slavery is established by law. for there
The Constitution does not enable me to reach
'u. am no more responsible for II in yon.
States than | am for il in Turkey or any 9th
q ioieIah country, WbeTe near tt ~ "''"
regret. aaa where have nothing to say UP
on the sahlasis h.t ~h-a s.a undertake. TO
thrust 1t forth where 1t has no foothold, where
there is necessity that il should go, there.
like Mr.. Clay, OF Kentucky, / meet you ~
- '-"h by inch; nay. with him the last
noble sentim mt thss be uttered, would suf-
fer my RI ht arm to fall fromits socket before
with my eonsent this cursed institution should
invade one inch Of territory now Tree.
One word more as to the effect of this doc
trine. Do stand here to accuse a gentle
man who is a Shareholder of the South, with
crime2 | have never done SO. You NAV
say that if we regard slavery as wrong,
and as robbery of the rights OF men, We
should accuse you with being criminal -
Well sir. the logic would seem to he good
enough. were II not modified by the FAC,
that with you it is deemed a necessity | do
not know what you can do with it; | was
almost about to say that do not care what
you do with it; l will say it is none Of my
business what you do with IT, and l never
undertake TO interfere with it. To be sure.
believing it to be wrong--wrong to yourselves
and wrong to those whom you hold in this
abject condition, l wish you could see tho
light | see it; but il you do not, it is mat
ter Of your own concern, and not OF mine.
| can very well have charity towards you,
because with all my opposition to your insti-
tution | can hardly doubt that il We had
changed places, and my lot had been cast
among you, under the circumstances. my
opinions on this subject might be different.
and | might perhaps be here as fierce a FIRE
eater | am now defending against fire
can understand these things, and l accuse
90 man.