Year: 1860

:
our Union All that he has said, all that any other
man has said, all that the most eloquent tongue
utter in behalf of the blessings and the adj
vantages of this glorious Union fully endorse But
still, sir, i am prepared TO say that the Union is
glorious only when the constitution IL preserved inyi-
olatc. He eulogzed the Union l. too, am for the
Union endorse the euogies; but still, what is the
Union worth unless the constitution il preserved and
maintained invioate in all its proyisionsl


Sir, / have no faith in the Union-loving
sentiments of those who will not carry
out the constitution in good faith as our
fathers made it. Professions of fidelity
to the Union will be taken for naught
unless they are accompanied by obedi-
ence to the constitution upon which the
Union rests. have right to insist
that the constitution shall be maintained
inviolate in all its parts; not only that
which suits the temper of the North, but
every clause of that constitution, whether
you like it or dislike it. Your oath to
support the constitution binds you to
every line, word, and syllable of the in
strument, You have no right to say that
any given clause is in violation of the
Divine law, and that, therefore, you will
not observe it. The man that disobeys
any one clause, on the protext that it
violates the Divine law, or any other
protext, violates his oath of office.


"But sir, what commentary is this
pretext that the constitution is violation
of the Divine law, upon those revolution
airy fathers whose euloges we have heard
here today. Did the trainers of that
instrument frame a constitution in viola
ton of the law of God? If so, how do
your consciences allow you to take the
oath of office If the Senator from
New York still holds to his declaration
that the clause in the constitution rela-
tive to fugitive slaves is violation Of
the Divine law, how burst he, as an hon
est man, take an oath to support the
instrument ? Did he understand that he
was defying the authority of Heaven
when he took the oath to support that
instrument?


Thus, we see, the radical difference
between the republican party and the
Democratic party is this: we stand by the
constitution as our fathers made it, and
by the decisions of the constituted author
tiles as they are pronounced in obedience
to the constitution. They repudiate the
instrument, substitute their own will for
that of the constituted authorities, annul
such provisions as their ianaticism, or
policy may declare to be in violation of
Gods law, and then say, We will pro-
tect all your rights under the constitu.
ton as expounded by ourselves, but not
as expounded by the tribunal created for
that purpose"


Mr.. President l shall not occupy fur
ther time in the discussion of this ques-
tion tonight. did not intend to utter
word, and | should not have uttered
word upon the subject if the Senator
from New York had not made broad
arraignment of the democratic party, and
especially of that portion of the action of
the party for which was most immedi-
ately responsible. Everybody knows
that | broght forward and helped to carry
through the Kansas n ebraska act, and
that | was active in support of the com
promise measures of 1850. have heard
bad faith attached to the democratic party
for that act too long to be willing to re-
main silent and seem to be willing to
sanction it even by tacit acquiescence.
Mr.. DAVIS. Mr.. President-


Mr.. GREEN. Permit me to make
motion on winch these remarks will be
more appropriate, and that is, to refer
the bill to the Committee on Territories.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Fitzpat-
rick in the chair.) That is the motion
on which the Senator from Mississippi is
entitled to the floor.


Mr.. DAVIS. When the Senator from
New York closed the studied and eabor-
ate address which he delivered to-day, /
rose for the purpose, not of replying to
all the points which he had made, wherein
| found rather those generalities not suf-
ficiently glittering to delude, but only for
the purpose Of noticing some of the sail
ent positions which he assumed, and to
one of which the Senator from Illinois
has very happily esponded-that wherein
he charged the democratic party with
having violated its faith which was
pledged in 1850. The Senator from
Illinois performed his duty on two occa-
sons: first, his duty to the whole country
when he moved an amendment which he
believed would bring to it peace and
permanent settlement of grave question;
next, he performed the duty which he
owed to himself; for when the Congress
enacted measures against the voice Of
certain southern Senators and members,
and pledged themselves to the policy of
non-intervcntion with slavery in the Ter
ritores, he, being a party to that trans
action, owed it to himself, and discharged
duty which it imposed upon his honor,
when he moved to repeal the restriction
in palpable violation of the agreement
which was thc:, made. He has answered
well as TO that point, and have nothing
to add.


But the Senator from New York in
vokes us by bis love for the Union, and
in the spirit of fraternity. / have moth
ing to object to the tone in which he has
addressed us, but l wish we could have
acts instead of words. Faith might fol-
low something more significant than high
sounding professions of attachment to the
Union, and fraternity to its various men,
bers. If the Senator would show to us,
by his adherence to the constitution, and
| his faithful maintenance Of tho oath bo