Year: 1860

l mean the principle that Congress shall pass no
law upon the subject of slavery in the Terrific
rics either for or against it, in any way-that
they shall not interfere act upon it at all-or,
in the express words of Mr.. Calhoun the great
Southern leader that Congress shall '.lcave the
whole subject where the Constitution and the
great principles of se-government place it,
This has been emnently a Southern doctrine.
1t was announced by Mr.. Calhoun, in his speech
in the Senate, on the 9th of June, 1649; and,
after two years Of discussion was adopted as the
basis of the adjustment finally made in 1861
1t was the demand Of the South, put forth by
the South, and since its establishment has been
again and again affirmed and re-aflirmed as the
S tiled policy of the South, by party Conven-
| tlons and State Legislatures, in every form that
people can give authoritative expression t.
their will and wishes. This cannot now be mat
ter Of dispute. 1t is history, as indelibly fixed
upon the record as the fact that the colony of
Georgia was settled under the auspices of Ogle-
thorpe, or that the war of the American Revo-
luton was fought in resistance to the unjust
claim Of power on the part of the British Parlia-
. ment


refer to this matter of history connected with
the subject under consideration barely as start
ing puint-to show how we stand in relation to
it. 1t is not new question. 1t has been up
before, and, whether rightly or wrongly, it has
been decided-decided and settled just as the
South asked that it should be-not, however,
without great effort and prolonged struggle.
The question now is, shall the South abandon
her own position in that decision and settlement?
This is the question virtually presented by the
action of the seceders from the Charleston Con-
vention, and the grounds upon which they bas-
ed their action; or, stated in other words, it
amounts to this: whether the Southern States
after all that has taken place on the subject,
should now reverse their previous course, and
demand Congressional Intervention for the pro-
lection of slavery in the Territories, as condi-
ton of their remaining longer in the Union p
For | take it for granted that it would be con-
sidered by all as the most mischievous folly to
make the demand unless we intend to push the


issue to it's ultimate and legitimate results. Shall
the South, then, make this demand of Congress,
and when made, in case of failure to obtain it.,
shall she secede from the Union, as portion Of
her delegates (some under instructions and some
from their own free willy seeded from the Con-
vention on their failure to get it granted there


Thus stands the naked question, as | under
stand it, presented by the action of the secedcrs,


in its full dimensons-its length, breadth, and
depth, in all its magnitude. 1t is presented not
to the Democratic party alone. 1t is true a
Convention of that party may first act on it, but
it is presented to the country, to the whole peo-
pie of the South, of all parties. And men of all
parties shogld duly. and timely consider If, for
a &C. ti;tye. .ts ia y sfiafsir of
ldter. IG Nses n importance high above any
party organization Of the present day. and it
may, and ought to if need be, sweep them all
from the board. My judgment is against the
demand. If it were a new question, presented
in its present light for the first time, my views
upon it might be different from what they are.


1t is known to you and the country that the
policy of non-intervention, established at the
instance Of the South, was no favorite one of
mine. As to my position upon it, and the doc
trine now revived when they were original and
open questions, as well as my present views. [
will cite you to an extract of speech made by |
me in Augusta. in July last, Oh taking final
leave Of my constituents. l could not restate
them more clearly or more briefly. In speak
ing of and reviewing the matter, then said:


'And, you all may know, it (non- -interven- |
tion) came short of what wished. 1t was, in my
view. not the full measure of our rights-that re-
quired, in my judgment, the enactment by Con- |
gress of all needful laws for the protection of slave
property in the Territories, SO long the Terrific
rial condition lasted.


ssiSut an overwhelming ma iority of the South was
against that position. 1t said that who
maintained it yielded the whole question by yield
ing the jurisdiction, and that if we conceded the
power to protect, we necessarily conceded with It
the power to prohibit. This by no means followed,
IN my Judgment But such was the prevailing
opinion And it was not until it was well asccr
tanned that large majority of the South would not
that those of who were for it yielded to non
intervention, because, though it came short OF our
wishes, yet it contained no sacrifice OF princi-
pie, and nothing aggressive in it, and secured, for
yI,ot tod
the unrestricted ght of expansion over the COM
mon public domain as inclination, convenience, or
necessity may require on the part of our people,


ssThus the settlement was made; thus the record
stands, and by it / am still willing to stand, it
was fully up the demands of the South through
her Representatives at the time, though not up to
my own and as by it the right of expansion to the
extent of population and capacity IS amply secur-
ed.''


In this you clearly perceive what think of
the proper course now to be taken on the same
subject While in the beginning of this con-
troversy not favorable to the policy adop
ted, yet I finally yielded my assent 1t was
yielded to the South-to the prevailing senti-
ment of my own section. But it never would
have been yielded if had seen that any of our
important rights or any principle essential to
our safety or security could, by possibility, re-
suit from its operation. Nor would I now be
willing to abide by it if l saw in its practical
workings any serious injury to the South likely
to arise from it. Allparties in the South, after
the settlement was made gave it the sanction of
their acquiescence, if not cordial approval
What, then, has occurred since to cause lis to
change position in relation to it? Is it that
those of the North who stood by us in the strug
gle from 1S4S to 1850 did afterwards stand
nobly by lis in 1854 in taking off the old Con-
gressional restriction of 1920, SO as to have COM
plete -i'teruention throughout the length and
breadth of the common public domain :? Was
this heroisn, on their part, in adhering to prin-
ciple at the hazard and peril of their political
lives and fortunes, the cause of present COM
plant ? This cannot be; for never was act
of Congress so generally and so unanimously
hailed with delight at the South as this was
mean the Kansas-Nebraska act Of 1854. tt
was not only endorsed by all parties in Georgia,
but every one who did not agree to its just pro-
visions upon the subject of slavery was declared
to be unfit to hold party associations with any
party not hostile to the interests of the South.