Year: 1860

Few observers of the course Of humal


affairs hesitate to admit that politica


events, as well as natural phenomena. ar
I regulated by certain laws, imperfect.


understood indeed. but not the less reguia


therefore in operation. The progress o


every country in civilization determine


what civil and social questions must, from


time to time challenge solution and settle


ment Every co community necessarily


strives to adjust its established order il


harmony with the ideas of justice and th'


greatest good. In a country of free iIisti-


tutisns, the people, seeking the same gen.


eral end, but differing as to the best mode


of attaining it, divide, naturally into par


ties, and whatever question may be at the


time, most prominent in the public consid-


Grafton, is determined for the occasion at


least, by the success Of enc or the other


as the popular voice may decree.


Now he must be blind indeed. who


does not see that the question of slavery
has for a long time been becoming more
and more weighty and important. For
twenty years it has been taking higher
and higher rank among the political ques-
tiOns which have sgitated the country.
No art or device of politicians has given ii
prominence or consequence. Every art
and device of politicians on the contrary
has been employed to evade or suppress
the discussion. But the question would
not down. 1t mixed itself IN re and more
with all political movements and organiza-
tions. 1t entered more and more nto the
whole administration of government at
home and abroad 1t influenced more and
more the whole course of legislation and
judicial action. Necessarily. therefore. and
inevitably, it challenged more and more Of
public attention and consideration, until
it became what it is now ac ac,nowledged on
all hands to be, the paramount and control
ling question before the American peo-
pie.


Is it not clear then, hat the time has
come that the qnestion must be settled?-
Is it not clear that other great public IN
terests must suffer so long as it remains
unsettled? Is it not then the part of wis
dom and patriotism to meet this question
directly and squarely, and ascertain exactly
upon principle aud in what ILcde it can be
settled, constitutiOnally, bcnefcally, and
permanently?


The public judgement of the country
certainly answers these questions in the
The people are earnestly en-
gagged in the consideration Of various plans
of settlement proposed; and the result Of
the pending Presidential election depends
Oh their choice OF them.


Permit Inc, then, to examine these plans.
and to as your candid judgement Of the
views which l shall submit to you.


Your parties h;ve nominated candidates
for the Presidency and the Vice Presidency,
and urge their election upon considerations
mainly derived from their relations to the
slavery question.


The friends of Mr.. Breckinridgc insist
that the National Constitution recognizes
slaves as property, and that in virtue of
this recognition, the stakeholder has a
Constitutional right to take his slaves into
Nationa! Territories, and hold them there
as property. and be protected in So holding
them by the power of the Federal Govern
ment 1t is difficult to see how, if this
doctrine be admitted, the right to take
slaves as property into any State can be
denied or practically limited. At any
rate, it is certain, that tho doctrine pro-
posed by Mr.. Breckenridge, as the true
basis for this settlement of the controversy
in which we are involved, makes slavery
outside of States wherein it is
prohibited by law, and imposes on the
Government of the country, the duty and
response bility of its maintenance and pro-
lection.


Now this certainly is novel theory
1t is said however. to have the counteu-
ance of the Supreme Court Of the Uuited
States, and candor requires me to admit
that the opinion of the majority eff that
court delivered by the Chief Justice in the
bred Scott Case does sanction the claim
But it must be remembered that GecisiOn
9f this point was not necessary to the ad-
Indication of the case, and that there fore
the opinion thus pronounced is not entitled
to full authority even as a precedent for
The determination of future cases. And it
must be remembered also that two of the
lblest and learned Judges on the bench
lissented from the majority. and in this
dissent they are sustained 10y the concur
-ence of many of the most enlightened
awyers in the country.


But | must insist that on a question of
his sort the judgment of neither courts or
awyers is to be preferred to the common
of the people. Every man
an read the ConstitutiOn-every man can
cad the debates of the trainers of the
Constitution for himself, and l confess |
10 not see how any man can read either
md come to the conclusion that property
n slaves is anywhere recognized in that
instrument. Certainly Mr.. Madison did
lot think so. for lie declared expressly that
t "was wrong to admit in the COnStitu-
len the idea that there could be property
n men" Certainly Mr.. Randolph did
lot think so. for it was upon his motion
hat in the clause relating to representation. /
he word service was substituted for servi-
udo, upon the express ground that the
after described the condition of slaves,
7hile the former expressed the obligation
f free persons. Not only is there 10 re
ognition, but there is careful avoidance
f recognition of men. Whenever and
wherever slaves are referred to in the
constitution they arc always mentioned
s persons, never as property.


1t is only in modern times that the the
ry now insis ed on by She supporters of
lr. Breea imidge, has found favor. Itwas
rst broachad by Mr. Calhoun, and was
romptly condemned 10y all the other great
tatesman of the country, and by none
lore emphatically than by Henry Clay
t was found essential, however, to tse
cheme of slavery extension, and slowly