Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1859-12-30

because he cannot live in the administration Of
public affairs up to the finest span theory that
you may produce. All i ask of these great
men they performed. They found themselves
surrounded with this institution-they saw its
workings and its operation-they saw that it
was all wrong in policy and in theery-they
saw that in morals it was equally wrong, and
they wished to get rid of it, and on all proper
occasions they constantly declared it to be a
wrong, and they invoked the people about them
to come up to the work, and, as fast as it could
be done, to do way with it. Therefore, sir,
they were consistent, They knew that their
slaveholding in the States was in direct con-
tradiction Of that great and GOdike declara-
tim, and they sought to get rid of it.
Mr.. President, it is not a great while ago,
since the view that those great men entertain
cd CD this subject was universal, North, South,
East and West. I wish Senators would bear
that in mind, because, perhaps, it would mod
crate their asperity of feeling against those who
still stand where bHt a very short time since,
we all stood together. That slavery is to be
justified as a divine Institution is a doctrine
that is not five years old, in my Judgment. Mr.
Clay at the head of the old Wing party, de-
nounced it down TO a very late period in his
valuable life, in stronger, infinitely stronger
terms, than I could denounce it upon this floor
as wrong. continually wrong, and the great
party that adhered to his standard in the South,
where all are equally orthodox upon this sub
juct there was no discordent note there-thcre
was not a Clay Wing in all the South who
would stand up and say, This institution of
ours is to be justified upon principles of moral
right and justice not one. So well known
is this fact that [ remember it is not much
more than four years ago since the speakers in
the South and the leading papers in the South
put forth that doctrine +: the Charleston Merctr-
ry, / recoliect, was one-that the trainers of
our institutions were all Abolitionists, agree
ing precisely with our doctrine, (and it cannot
be denied, because the record evidence that
they left behind them is perfectly o~vcrwhelm-
ing) but that they did not understand the sub
ject-they had not made it their study partic-
uEarly, but now the South have reviewed the
whole doctrine, and have come to another con-
%clusion. They now find that the old doctrine
was altogether at Eault-that the relation Of
master aud slave is the true relation of man,
upheld by divine inspiration, instituted of God,
and approved ofanl in accordance with nature
itself. The Charleston Mercury went so far as
to say that if this was not 50, tie Abolitionists
were right. Yes, sir, it stakcd everything up
On the new light that had broken in mod
ern times, which shines 50 fiercciy that it has
dimmcd and obliterated even the Sermon on
the Mount.
Veg cir thic iG n u1nInrp Iirbt that has
sprung up since you began to raise the stand
ard of slavery, declaring that it should dOmi-
nate over this great nation, and should pros
trate every other interest. 1t grew up along
with your new territorial doctrines; it grew
up along with your bred Scott decision it
grew mp with your mcditated design of open
ing the African Slave trade. 1t is a key to
them all. 1t grew as cotton grows !; and we
were told here not long since that cotton was
king, and had dictated this new code Of NOR
ais. / challenge any Senator TO deny that l
state this doctrine Alright. '
Is it not a fast that you claim that on re-
view of the question Of slavery you have got
new light ? The old doctrine was that it was
wong in mora's and could not be justified /;
but now you hold the contrary. We, sir, adj
here to the old doctrine. We have not seen
the new light that has broken in upon the
Sonth. We were not admitted into the great
council where the investigation was had which
resulted in finding out that the Institution Of
slavery is in accordance with future and ap-
proved by God.
Ii is true, SIR, that / cannot touch the insti-
tuition within the boundaries of the States
where slavery is established by law, for there
the Constitution does not enable me to reach
it. | am no more responsible for it in your
States than | am for it in Turkey or any 9th
or foreign country, where | hear of it with
and where l have nothing to say upon
the subject but when you undertake to thrust
it forth where it hath no fo%otllo!d, where there
il no necessity that it Should go, there, Ike
Mr. Clay Of Kentucky, l meet yon o contend
inch by inch nay, with him in the last srnti-
mcnt he uttered, | would suffer my arm to fall
from its socket before, with my consent, this
institution should invade one inch Of
territory now free.
One word more as to tile effect Of this doc
Do | stand here to accuse a gentle
man who is a Shareholder OF the South with
| have never done 50. You may say
that if We regard slavery as wrong, and rs
of the rights Of men, we should &C
case You with being criminal. Well, sir, the
logic would seem 10 be good enough were it
not modified by the fact that with you it is
a necessity. [ do not know what yen
do with it | was almost about to sa- |
do not care what you do with it l will say it
is none OF my business what you do with it
be sure, believing it 10 be wrong-wrong
to yourselves, and wrong to those whom you
hold in this ahject condition, l wish that You
see the light as ! can sec it but if You
do not, it is a matter Of your own concern and
not Of mine. l can voty well have charity
you because, with all my opposition,
to your institution, l can hardly doubt that if
we had changed places, and my lot had bceu
cast among you, under like circumstances, MY
on this subject might be different, ami
l might be here, perhaps, as fierce a fire-cater
as | am now defending against fire. | can
understand these things, and / accuse no man.
The principal reason why | undertook to
speak to-day, was on account of personal allu-
81 ons to myself; otherwise | should nave said
on this sabject bat the Senator from
Georgia (Mr. Iverson) saw fit, in his place in
the Senate, to assail my colleague in the House
of Representatives, (Mr. Sherman) and to i'm
peach him because of a transaction which he
characterized as exceedingly dishonorable and
lerogatory, as l understood him, to the char
acter of a gentleman, and which he thought
go to destroy that confidence that is re-
posed in one so situated. When l heard his
foundations l was happy to find that the
did not accuse Mr.. Sherman of any
erroneous vote, or of any wrong action. Mr..
Shcrman's course in that branch of Congress,
las been known of all men for some years
)ast. He has been n very active and a very
worthy member; and if there was anything
wrong in any principle That he has advocated