Year: 1865

|
johnson, then Senator from Tennessee, adj
dressed the United States on Feb lst, in the
following words:


Referring 10 charge of Senator Lane,
that Mr.. Johnson was in favor of war on
the South, Mr.. johnson said l march down
upon South Carolina! Did l propose any
such thing! No. War is not the natural
element of my mind; and as l stated in that
speech my thoughts were turned on peace,
and not on strife. want no war. In the
language OF "a denomination that is very nu.
merous in the country, | may say that hate
war and love peace. belong to the peace
party. | thought when l was making that
speech, that | was holding out the olive
branch of peach. wanted to give quiet and
reconciliation to a distracted and quiet coun-
try. That was the object had in view
War, | repeat, is not the natural element
of my mind. | would rather wear upon my
garments the tinge Of the shop and the dust
of the field, as badges of the pursuits Of peace,
than the gaudy epaulet upon my shoulder,
or sword dangling by my side, with its
gliltering scabbard, the insignia of strife or
war, Of blood or carnage, sometimes of hon





rather see the people of the United States at
war with every other power upon the habit
able globe than be at war with each other.
If blood must be shed, let it not be shed by
the people of these States, the one contend
ing against the other"
IL do not believe the Federal Government
has the power to coerce State; for by the
elventh amendment of the Constitution of
the United States it is expressly provided
that you cannot even put one OF the States
before courts of The country AS party. AS
a State the Federal Government has no pow.
er to coerce ii; but it is a membe of the
compact to which it agreed in common with
the other States, and this Government has
the right to pass laws, and to enforce those
laws upon individuals within the limits of
each State. While the one proposition is
clear the other is equally So This Cow
ernment can, by the Constitution of the
country and by the laws enacted in confor
nifty with the Constitution, operate upon
individuals within the limits Of the State. |
know that the term, "to coerce State" is
used in an ad captandum manner. 1t is
sovereignty that is to be crushed! How is a





tiou with it? All the connection she has
with the other States is that which is agreed
upon in the connection between the States
do not know whether you may consider it
in the Union or out OF the Union, or wheth-
er you simply consider it connection or
disconnection with the other States; but to
the extent that State nullifies or seis aside
any law or any provision of 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 Constitution of the United States,
coming in conflict with the fugitive slave
law, to that extent has dissolved their con.
neclon, and to that extent it is revolution
But because some of the free States have
passed laws vioative of the Constitution; be.
cause they have to some extent dissolved
their connection with this Government, does
that justify us of the South in following their
example. Because they have passed person.
al liberty bills, and have, to that extent, vio-
lated the compact, which is reciprocal, shall
we turn around, on the other hand, and vio-
late the Constitution by coercing them to
compliance with il? Will we do SO? Then
| come back to the starting point; let US
stand in the Union and upon the Cons,itu,
ton, and If anybody is to leave this Union
or violate its guarantees, it shall be those
who have taken the initiative, and passed
their personal liberty bills. am in the
Union, and intend to stay in it. intend to
bold on 10 the Union, and the guarantees
under which this Union has grown; and l
do not intend to be driven from it, nor out
Of it, by their unconstitutional enactments."


But Mr.. President, recurring to what l
said yesterday, there are two parties in this
country that want to break up the Govern
ment Who are they? The nufers prop
er of the South, the secessionists or disunion,
ists-for use them all as synonymous terms.
There is portion of them who, per Sc, de-
sires the disruption of the Government for
purposes of their own aggrandizemeut. l
do not charge upon them that they want to
break up the Government for the purpose of
affecting slavery; yet | charge that the break
ing up of the Government would have that
effect; the result would be the same. Who
else is for breaking up this Government l
is set Of men called Abolilionists, and they
want to bpeak up the Government. They
are dsuuionists they are nuli6ers"


bad men North say provoking things in
reference TO the institutions of the South,
and men and bad tempered men Of the South
say provoking and insulting things in return;
and SO goes on war of crimnation and re-
elimination in reference to the Two sections
of the country, and the institutions peculiar
to each. They become enraged and insult,
ed, and then they are denunciatory of each
other; and what is the resullg The Aboi-
tionsts, and those who entertain their senti-
ments, abuse men of the South, and men of
the South abuse them in return. They do not
fight each Others; but they become offended
and enraged. One is dissatisfied with the 9th.
er; one is insulted by the other; and then, to
seek revenge, to crafty themselves they both
agree 10 make war upon the Union, hat
never offended or injured either. Is this
| -l.1 L IL