Year: 1864




by the substitution Gin effect) of what i
!. known as the "Clark amendment" Th


record shows that the vote on the motion


to substitute was-yeas 25, nays 80. Th
, vote on the adoption of the Clark propo
, sltlon, taken directly afterward, was
= yeas 90, nays %. The presumption
would be, naturally, that if the South
had votes enough to reject the substitute
it would also have had enough to reject
the proposition'when offered independent
ly. There was falling off in the negative
vote on the proposition, as compared with
that on the first motion to substitute, oil
seren votes. This is accounted for by the
fact that Senators Benjamin and Slidell,
of Louisiana; Wigfall aud Hemphill, of
Texas; lverson, of Georgia and johnson,
! OF Arkanas-str Southern iSenatorS-sat
an their seat and refused to uote.-Had
these six Southern men voted "no," the
Clark proposition would have been defea-
ted by majority of four votes, and the
Crittenden compromise could have been
taken up and carried by same majority.
1t appears Of record, then, that the Crit
Itenden compromise was rejected because
six of the leading Senators from the South
virtually refused to vote for it. A motion
to reconsider was carried some weeks la
ter, and direct vote upon the compro-
mise was taken. The proposition was
lost by single vote. But one of the six
Senators referred to voted on that occa-
sion, nearly all of them having withdrawn
on the secession of their respective
States. Had they remained to vote for
the compromise, it would have been adop-
ted.


The chief object in alluding to this
matter is to show chat when, before the
overt act of war was committed, the
South had the election of compromise or
war, she, through her highest dignitaries,
deliberately chose war.


The South would not have compromise
then. Is it reasonable to suppose that it
would accept such an accommodation
now? Her rulers have the Southern
masses by the throat, and can mould them
to their imperious will They are play
ing for a great stake. They could not
withdraw from the contest now unless
forced into withdrawal Pride, love of
power-both inbred and fostered by the
institution of slavery-would force them
to elect, as they declare they do elect, ex-
termination rather than submission and
Union.


Early in the struggle, before the Gov
ernment had taken the aggressive, Presi-
dent Lincoln offered peace on most liber-
al terms. The terms were, briefly, the
laying down of arms and the abandon
ment Of their hostile attitude The world
knows how these terms were met. 1t
need not be repeated here The desola-
ton of Southern fields, and the vacant
seats in thousands upon thousands of
homes, both North and South, bear the
record. Still later, amnesty and pardon
have been offered by the President; still
the chiefs of the rebellion abate not IL
tie of their energy to maintain themselves
in their wrong. They demand recogni-
ton and independence of Government
they hate. Intimate knowledge of the
directing minds of the rebellion teaches
that they will never abandon their wicked
scheme until obliged to do so by the
sheer force Of such iron circumstances as
control the results of war.


There is no ground, then, for hope or
peace through compromise; no hope Of
permanent peace. There is no such dis
charge in this war. Those who 90 be-
fore the country upon such vicious pre-
texts are not deceived themselves, how
ever much they may deceive the ignorant
and unsuspecting. To charge self-decep-
ton upon them in a matter SO unmistaka-
bly, clear would be equivalent to charging
them with imbecility. They do not de-
ceive themselves This pretext of seek
ing the defeat of Mr.. Lincoln that peace
may return to our borders covers a sinis-
ter purpose. IF they wish peace they
can have it but in two ways-in a cow
ardly abandonment of the struggle, fol-
lowed by disunion, or by more vigorous
(if possible) prosecution of the war.


Thus the true issue upon which the
campaign is TO be made becomes sharply
defined. None can deprecate the horrors
OF war OF desire Tue TeIuTu Vi peace uOIc
than the warmest supporters of the Ma
tional Union nominees. But they ask for
and will acquiesce in no peace that is not
founded upon the integrity of the Union
and established upon the principles of the
declaration of independence. They rec
ognize greater evils than war, such as
this is in which the nation is plunged
Divide the nation geographically, and to
what end do we inevitable gravitate p
With the precedent and justice of seces-
sion established and acknowledged, who
can presume to say that we shall not re-
peat the humiliating history of Mexico
and the South American States Uni
ted, the common danger was, and would
continue to be, our common security
Divided, the land, would groan with the
wreaking out of individual vengeance
Divided, the torch and brand would new
er be idle along the line of division. The
country would at last awake to the bitter