The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1865-05-08
ANDREW JOHNSON.
THE RECORD OF HIS OPINIONS.
A speech by Him in 1861.

Speech ~ nlM III AoVAs
In the senate of the United States, Febru-
ary, 1861, referring to charge OF Senator
Lane that Mr.. johnson was in favor OF war
on the south, Mr.. johnson said
Imarch down upon South Carolina Did
propose any such thingf No. War is not
the natural element of my mind and, as L
stated in that speech, my thoughts were
turned on peace, aid not on war. l want no
strife, / want NJ war. In the language OF
q denomination that is very numerous In the
country I may say | hate gar and love peace.
/ belong to the peace party, 1 thought,
when | was making that speech, that was
holding out the olive branch OF peace. 1
wanted to give quiet and reconciliation to
distracted aud excited country. That was
the object had in view. War, repeat, is
not the natural element of my mind. l
would rather wear upon my garments the
tinpe of the shop and the dust of the field, as
badges of the pursuits of peace, than the gau-
DIV epaulst upon my shoulder, or sword
dangling by my side, with its glittering scab-
bard, the insignia of strife, OF war, OF blood,
of carnage sometimes of honorable and glo-
rious war. But, sir, would rather see the
peopls of the United States at war with every
war with each other. If blood must be shed,
let it not be shed by the people OF these
states, the one contending against the 9TH
er. -
know that the term, "to coerce a state,"
ia used in an ad cdptlndHna manner. 1t Is a
sovereignty that is to be crushed How Is
a state In the Union? hat is her connec
ton with it? All the connection she has
with the other states is that which Is agreed
upon in the connection between the states
1 do not know whether you may consider 1t
in the Union or one of the Union, or whether
YOU simply consider it connection or dis
connection with the other states but to the
extent that a state nullifes or sets aside any
law or any provision IF the constitution, to
that extent it has dissolved its connection,
and no more think the states that have
passed their personal liberty bills, in viola
ton of the CONSTITUTE ton of the United States,
coming in conflict with the fugitive slave law,
to that extent have dissolved their connec-
ton. and to that extent it is a revolution
But because some of the free states havebpass.
ed laws violative of the constitution because
they have, TO some extent, dissolved their
connection with this government, does that
Justify us of the south IN following that bad
example? Because they have passed per.
sonal liberty bills, and have, to that extent,
violated the compact which is reciprocal,
shall we turn around, on the other hand, and
violate the constitution by coercing them to a
compliance with it Will we do SO
Then / come back to the starting point; let
us stand in the Union and upon the consrltu
ton, and if any body g to leave this Union,
or violate its guarantees, 1t shall be tn ose
who have taken the initiative, and passed
their personal liberty bills. l am in the
Union, and intend to stay In It, intend
hold on to the Union, and the guarantees IN
der which this Union has grown and dc
not intend to be driven from it, nor out of i,
by their unconstitutional eDacments.
But, Mr.. President, recurring to what
said Yesterday there are two parties in this
country that want to break DIP the govern
ment What are they? The nullifers prop
or of the south, the secessionists or disunion.
ists-for use them all as synonymous terms
There is a portion of them who per &c, desire
the disruption of this goveonment for purpos.
es of their own aggrandizement. l do not
charge upon them that they want to break
up the government for the purpose of affect
ing slavery; yet I charge that the breaking
up of the government would have that effect
the result would be The same. Who else il
for breaking up this government? refer to
some bad men In the north. There is a sol
of men who are called abolitonists and they
want to break up the government. They
are disunionists they are nuliifers.
Bad men north say provoking .things in ref
erence TO the institutions of the south, and
men and bad-tempered men of the south say
provoking and insulting things in return
and 30 goes on war of elimination and re-
elimination in reference to the two sections o
the country, and the institutions peculiar tc
each. They become enraged and insulted
and then they are documentary of each other
and what is the result? The abolitionists
and those who entertain their sentiments
abuse the men of the south and men of the
south abuse them in return. They do no
fight each other but they both become of
Tended and enraged. One is dissatisfied
with the other one is insulted by the other
and then, to seek revenge, to crafty them
selves. they both agree to make war upon til,
Union, that never offended or injured eithsr
Is this right? What has the Union done p
Why should these contending parties make
war upon it because they have insulted and
aggrieved each other? This glorious Unior
that was spoken into existence by the fathers
of the country must be made war upon t.
gratisfv these animosities. Shall We be-
cause we have said bitter things of each 9th
or, which have been offensive, turn upon the
government, and seek its destruction, and en-.
tail all the disastrous consequences upon
commerce, upon agriculture, upon the indus.
r L. .A.~T hat - 4