The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1864-10-28
BEL AIR. MD FRIDAY MORNING, OCTOBER 49, 1864

Mr. Hemphill, one of the Senators who
withheld histvote, was au open advocate
of the compromise.
la referring to the final vote, which
was taken on the Sd of March, you say
"the proposition was lost by single vote"
How absurd. 1t is true one vote more
would have given it majority, but it
would have required II or Is to have
given it two-thirds, the constitutional
vote.
Speaking of the Cotton State men, you
say, chad they remained and voted for the
compromise it would have been adopted. -
1t tries ones patience, General, to seri-
ously notice such fragrant perversons.
There is not man, of either party, who
served with you in the Senate at that time,
who will sanction that assertion. You
know perfectly we'll that the Constitution
requires vote Of two,thirds in both houses
Of Congress to submit amendments for the
ratification of the States, as you also do,
that the vote of every Senator from the
South, of whatever party, uniting with the
vote OF every Democratic Senator from the
North, it would still have required eight
or nine Republican votes to have passed
it by the constitutional majority, and as
no Republican Senator ever voted for it,
or declared his intention to do SO, with
what show of fairness or truth can you
say that it would have been adopted had
the Southern Senators voted for it? In
other words, as the Republican Senators
numbered more than one third of a full
Senate, how could vote of two-thirds be
cast against their consent?
But, suppose the Constitution did not
require a vota of two-,hirds, and the
Southern Senators, uniting with the North,
ern Democratic Senators, had adopted it,
of what service could such measure have
been? That would, truly, have been the
play of Hamlet with Hamlet out. 1t was
a compromise and settlement between the
two sections, and the radical men of the
two sections, that was necessary. Any
measure sanctioned by one side only would
have been as futile as Mr.. Liucoln's pro-
clamation freeing slaves in the rear of the
rebel army. The Republican was the
dominant party, and it would have been
worse than folly to attempt any adjust
meut that did not command their active
support before the country. The simple
truth is, the proposition was fairly tender
ed to the Republicans as basis of peace
aud Union, and by them rejected.
Iu conclusion, you say "the chief OBJ
ject in abiding to this matter is to show
that when, before the overt act Of war
was committed, the South had the election
of compromise or war, she, through her
highest dignitares, deliberately chose
war"
am again indebted to you for the ad-
mission that the adoption of the compro-
mise would have averted war. But to
coucede the truth of what you alege
against the Southern members, pray tell
US what the Republican members did to
avert dissolution and war by just and
honorable settlement Of the sectional con-
troversy which they had helped to create.
When did they vote for the Crittenden
Compromise, or advocate it, or any other
effective measure. In what way did they
attempt to assuage popular passion aud
prejudice? If what YOU allese against
the Southern members be true, il only
proves what often happened, that the rad.
icals of both sections acted in concert to-
gether to prevent concession and compro-
mise--it would only show that the seces.
sion members acted as bad as you and
your party. But how is that argument
to avail you in contest with the North.
ern Democracy, whose representatives in
both branches exerted themselves to the
utmost to avert dissolution and war, by
proper adjustment, in the same spirit in
which the Union had been formed But
you know as well as | do that your aIlega-
ton, as against the Southern members
generally, is unjust. You know that
Messrs Crittendvn, Hunter and Powell,
of the South, voted for the compromise in
the Committee of Thirteen, and | know
that Mr.. Davis and Mr.. Toombs proposed
to 20 for it, if Messrs. Seward and Wade,
and their followers, on the other side,
would unite with them. | know this, for
| heard them make the proposition. You
were present, in the Senate, On the Sd of
January, when Mr. Douglas stated that
in the Committee of Thirteen "every mem.
Der from the South, including those from
the Cotton States, (Messrs Davis and
Toombs,) expressed their readiness to ac-
cept the proposition of my venerable friend
from Kentucky, as Il final seitien',ntct tie
controversy, if rendered and sustained by
the Republican members. Hence the sole
responsibility OF our disagreement, and the
only difficulty in the way Of amicaolc ad-
justment, is with the Republican party
Now, General, if these allegations were uu-
true, why did you not rise i'll your place
and contradict them? Why was it that
no Republican member of the Committee
of Thirteen did so q? Why was not the Re-
publican party prompt vindicated against
those sweeping allegations? The answer
is, that no defense could be made Mr..
Pugh subsequently stated on the Senate
Hnnr that Mr. TIA vic had told him fh,t ha