CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



153 



This is nil I have to say at present on recon- 

 struction, mid 1 turn at onco to tho precise 

 question before us." Ho then remarked : 



"The proposition now before you is the most 

 important ever brought into Congress, unless, 

 perhaps wo may except the amendment abol- 

 ishing slavery, and to my mind it is the most 

 utterly reprehensible and unpardonable. Tho 

 same sentiment whirh led us to hail tho aboli- 

 tion ot' slavery with gratitude as the triumph 

 of justice, should make us reject with indigna- 

 : device to crystallize into organic law tho 

 tli-'franchisement of a race. It is with infinite 

 regret that I differ from valued friends about 

 me, but I cannot do otherwise. I bespeak in 

 advance their candor, and most cheerfully con- 

 cede to nil from whom I differ the same indul- 

 gence which I claim for myself. In exposing 

 such an attempt, I must speak frankly, as on 

 other occasions, in exposing tho crime against 

 Kansas, or the infamy of that enactment which 

 turned the whole North into a hunting-ground, 

 where man was the game. The attempt now 

 is on a larger scale, and is more essentially bad 

 than the crime against Kansas or the Fugitive 

 Slave Bill. Such a measure, so obnoxious to 

 every argument of reason, justice, and feeling, 

 BO perilous to tho national peace, and so in- 

 jurious to the good name cf the Republic, must 

 be encountered as we encounter a public enemy. 

 There is no language which can adequately 

 depict its character. Thinking of it, I am re- 

 minded of those words of Chatham, where he 

 held up to undying judgment a measure of the 

 British ministry, which I think had already 

 received the sanction of the House of Commons 

 as the present attempt has already received the 

 sanction of the House of Representatives. Chat- 

 ham did not hesitate, nor did ho tame his words, 

 but exclaimed : 



I am astonished, shocked, to hear such princi- 

 ples confessed ; to hear them avowed in this House 

 or in this country ; principles equally unconstitu- 

 tional, inhuman, and unchristian. I call upon you 

 to stamp upon them an indelible stigma of the public 

 abhorrence. 



" Then, rising to still higher flight, he ex- 

 claimed : 



My lords, I am old and weak, and at present un- 

 able to say more ; but my feelings and indignation 

 were too strong to have said less. I could not have 

 slept this night in my bed, nor reposed my head on 

 my pillow, without giving this vent to my eternal 

 abhorrence of such preposterous and erroneous prin- 

 ciples. 



" But what was tho measure which thus 

 aroused the veteran orator compared with that 

 which is now before us? It was only a tran- 

 sient act of wrong, small in its proportions, 

 which he denounced. Iam to denounce an act 

 of wrong permanent in its influence, colossal in 

 its proportions, operating in an extensive re- 

 gion, affecting millions of citizens, positively 

 endangering the peace of the country, and cov- 

 ering its name with dishonor. Such is the 

 character of the present attempt. I exhibit it 

 as I see it. Others may not see it so. Tho British 



ministry did not see tho measure w iich Chat- 

 ham denounced as he saw it, and as history now 

 sees it. Of course Senators would not -upport 

 the present proposition if they thought it dis- 

 graceful; nor would the British rniniMrr 

 supported that earlier proposition had they 

 thoii'_'ht it disgraceful. Unhappily, they did 

 not think so; but I trust you will be warned 

 by their example. 



" With the eloquence of Chatham, another 

 person from his place in the House of Lords 

 held up to reprobation that apprentice system, 

 which, under tho sanction of both Houses of 

 Parliament, followed emancipation in the Brit- 

 ish West Indies. I refer to Brougham. Ho 

 did not hesitate to exclaim : 'Prodigious, por- 

 tentous injustice! ' and then continuing, ho 

 exclaimed again: 'The gross, tire foul, the out- 

 rageous, the incredible injustice of which we 

 are daily and hourly guilty toward the whole 

 of the ill-fated African race ! ' But how small 

 was the injustice which aroused his reproba- 

 tion compared with that which you are now 

 asked to perpetuate in constitutional law I The 

 wrong which he arraigned was against eight 

 hundred thousand persons in distant islands, to 

 whom the people of Great Britain were bound 

 by no ties of gratitude, and who were to them 

 only fellow-men. The wrong which I now ar- 

 raign is against four million persons, consti- 

 tuting a considerable portion of the ' people ' 

 of the United States, to whom we are bound by 

 ties of gratitude, and who are to ua fellow - 

 citizens. 



" From the moment I heard this proposition 

 first read at the desk, I have not been able to 

 think of it without pain. The reflection that 

 it might find a place in the Constitution, or 

 even that it might be sanctioned by Congress, 

 is intolerable." 



He then proceeded in an argument for the 

 rejection of the proposition, which the Senator 

 thus recapitulated : 



" Following it from the beginning you have 

 seen, first, how this proposition carries into the 

 Constitution itself the idea -of inequality of 

 rights, thus defiling that unspotted text; sec- 

 ondly, how it is an express sanction of the 

 acknowledged tyranny of taxation without rep- 

 resentation ; thirdly, how it is a concession to 

 State rights at a moment when we are recover- 

 ing from a terrible war waged against us in the 

 name of State rights ; fourthly, how it is the 

 constitutional recognition of an oligarchy, aris- 

 tocracy, caste, and monopoly, founded on color ; 

 fifthly, how it petrifies in the Constitution the 

 wretched pretension of a white man's Govern- 

 ment ; sixthly, how it assumes what is false in 

 constitutional law, that color can be a ' qualifi- 

 cation ' for an elector ; seventhly, how it posi- 

 tively ties the hands of Congress in fixing the 

 meaning of a republican government, so that 

 under the guaranty clause it will be constrained 

 to recognize an oligarchy, aristocracy, caste, 

 and monopoly, founded on color, together with 

 the tyranny of taxation without representation. 



