The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1860-01-05


orthodox upon this subject; there was no dis
cordant note there there was not Clay Wing
in all the South who would stand up and say,
&c this institution of ours is TO be justified upon
principles of moral right and justice" not one
So well known was 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-tthe
Charleston Mercury, recollect was one-thatthe
farmers of our institutions all Aboltionists,
agreeing precisely with our doctrines, (and 1t
cannot be denied, because the record evidence
that they left behind them is perfectly OVER
whelming,) but that they did not understand the
subject; they had not made it their study par
ticularly 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 fault; that the relation of
master and slave is the true relation of man,
upheld by divine inspiration, instituted of God,
and approved of and in accordance with nature
| itself. The Charleston Mercury went so far as
to say that if this was not So the Abolitionists
| were right. Yes, sir it staked everything upon
| the new light that had broken in in modern
| times, which shines so fercely that it has
dimmed and obliterated even the Sermon upon
| the Mount
Yes, sir this is a modern light that has sprung
up since you began to raise the standard of Sla.
| very, declaring that it should dominate over
| other interest. 1t grew up along with your new
Territorial doctrines it grew up along with your
| bred Scott decision it grew up with your med
itated design of opening the African slave trade.
! 1t is key to them all. 1t grew cotton grows !;
and we were told here not long since that cotton
was king, and had dictated this new code of
morals. challenge any Senator to deny that I
| state this doctrine Alright.
| Is it not fact that you claim that on review
of the question of Slavery you have got new
| light? The old doctrine was, that it was wrong
| in morals, and could not be justified; 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 were
| not admitted into the great council where the
investigation was had, which resulted in finding
out that the institution of Slavery is in accord
ance with nature and approved by God.
| 1t is true sir that cannot touch the institu-
ton within the boundaries of the States where
Slavery is established by law, for there the Con-
stitution does not enable me to reach it. ! am
no more responsible for it in your States than l
am for it in Turkey or any other foreign country,
| where hear of it with regret, and where have
nothing to say upon the subject but when you
undertake to thrust it forth where it has no foot
hold, where there is no necessity that it should
go, there, like Mr.. Clay, of Kentucky, l meet you
to contend inch by inch; nay, with him in the
| last noble sentiment that he uttered, | would
suffer my to fall from its socket before, with
| my consent, this accursed institution should in
wade one inch of territory now free.
One word more as to the effect of this doctrine.
| Do stand here to accuse gentleman who is a
| STAKEHOLDER Of the South with crime? | have
never done so. You may say, that if we regard
| Slavery as wrong, and a robbery of the rights
| of men, we should accuse you with being crini-
nal. Well, sir, the logic would seem to be good
enough, were it not modified by the fact that
with you it is deemed a necessity. l do not
know what you can do with it; was almost
| about to say that | do not care what you do
with it; will say it is none of my business what
| you do with it, and | never undertake to inter-
| fere with it. To be sure, believing it to be
wrong-wrong to yourselves, and wrong to those
| whom you hold in this abiect condition. wish
that you could see the light as / see it 4; but if
you do not, it Is matter of your own concern,
and not of mine. / can very well have charity
towards you, because, with all my opposition to
your institution can hardly doubt that if we
had changed places, and my lot had been cast
among you, under like circumstances, my opin-
ions on this subject might be different, and 1
might be here, perhaps, fierce fire-eater as l
am now defending against fire. I can under
stand these things, and accuse no man.
| There is one thing more which will notice in
passing The Senator from Georgia TMr. IvER-
SON saw fit, in his place in the Senate to assail
L .
| MR. SHERMAN and to impeach him because of a
| transaction which he characterized as exceeding
| ly dishonorabe, and which he thought should
go to destroy that confidence that is reposed in
one so situated. When l heard his denuncia-
| tons, was happy to find that the Senator did
not accuse Mr.. SHERMAN of any erroneous vote,
| or of any wrong action. Mr.. SHERMAN'S course
| in the other branch of Congress, has been known
of all men for some four years past. He has been
| a very active and very worthy member; and if
| there was anything wrong in any principle that
| he has advocated or any vote that he has given,
| am sure that the vigilance of that astute Sena-
| tor would have found it out. | say then, l was
exceedingly gratified to find that my friend in the
| other House was so little assailable upon this
! hoor or anywhere else. We consider him as one
| of the brightest ornaments of the State of Ohio
| That great State seeks to do him honor, and
| rejoice to know that the great party to which
| belong repose in him the utmost confidence
They have found nothing in him but what they
| approve and the Senator, after all his investi-
| cations, could find nothing more than this that
Mr.. SHERMAN had recommended the circulation
of certain book Now, l want to ask the Sem
ator if there is anything in that book that he
thinks dangerous to the people of any sectionr of
this country? / want to know from that Sena-
tor if he believes that that book cannot safely be
intrusted to the hands of any freeman in this
Government The Senator does not choose to
answer me.
Mr.. IVERSON. Mr.. President, do not choose
to stultify myself by answering any such ques-
ton as that 1t is too apparent to any man of
common sense who has read the book, what
would be the effect if its Recommendations were
carried out.
Mr.. WADE. Well, sir, since the question has
been up, l have taken some pains to look through
that book and l find nothing there but argu-
ments addressed by anon-slaveholder of a slave
holding State to his fellow non-slaveholders in
those States, laying down rules and regulations
for their proceedings, and arguing this great
question of Slavery as it affects the interests of
non-slaveholders in the saveholding States.
Unless such arguments are unlawful there, l see
nothing in the book but what is proper for the
consideration of all men who take an interest in
these matters. Why, sir, has it come to this, in
free America, that there must be a censorship of
the press instituted-that a man cannot give
currency to book containing arguments that he
thinks essentially affect the rights of whole
classes of the free population of this nation l
hope not, and l believe not.
Why, sir, the great body of the statistical in
formation in that book, as l read it, is drawn
from the census of the United States from your
public documents, and from the archives of the
nation. Is it improper that arguments deduced
from these sources should be addressed to the
free population of this country anywhere? Ifthey
may not be, it is the hardest argument against
this institution that have seen yet If we really
have among us an institution that we are cher
ishing and seeking to spread broadcast over the
land so delicate in its texture that the free peo-
pie cannot have information that they them
selves claim, ! say again, it is fraught with an
inference more fatal to that institution than any
/ have heard of yet
Mr.. President, 1 have pursued this subject
Il 2--1f 49, IL T