fugitive slaves to their owners. They also said that the election of a President on a sectional and abolition platform was the forerunner of Negro emancipation. That if they did not get some guarantee for slavery they would secede from the Union, peaceably if they could, if not, by force. That they wanted that Congress would guarantee that the general government would not interfere with slavery.

In

The Southern people, particularly the women, feared that if the Republicans got control of the Federal government they would abolish slavery in the states, and turn the South into a second San Domingo. In the midst of this excitement they were made to believe, that France and England would become Southern allies, that Northern commerce and manufactures would be crippled, and that the Southern army would make New York and Boston its headquarters. By such arguments the people of the South were seduced into rebellion. "All know the immediate cause of it" (the war). "The North and South were at length arrayed against each other, in two great political parties on the question of slavery. Thus the breach between the North and South gradually widened, till without some radical change, it became apparent that a separation or attempted separation was inevitable. Scenes were enacted in every Congress that did not tend to allay excitement and even gradually became more hostile in feeling and sentiment than any two entirely separate nations, in the civilized world. this emergency, some Whigs of its old leaders cast about for something on which to organize a new party, and seeing how deep and widespread was the anti-slavery sentiment of the North, determined to make it in some form its platform. This was the first great step towards placing the North and South face to face to each other in a struggle for the control of the government." Headley vol. 1, p. 37. The Republicans of the North held out to the deluded followers the hope that there would be no war at all, that after the South had made a few secession speeches in Congress that the excitement would die out, and peace would reign in Mosco! But the leaders well knew that there would be war, but they were waiting for an opportunity to precipitate it. They knew well that the people would have to support the authorities right or wrong! The people were led into war before they were aware of its frightful dimensions. Thousands thought that it would be over in thirty days! Indeed, the Republicans wished to plunge the country into war. They spoke of impeaching President Buchanan. They spoke of Cromwell's triumph over Charles the First, and of the Red Republicans of France over Louis XVI. They depicted in vivid colors the American reign of terror, as effectually as if they knew the bloody programme that was about to deluge the country with human gore. While the extremists North and South were endeavoring to precipitate the country into internecine war, the Douglas democrats appealed to both extremists North and South to settle the troubles of the country by compromise. In the midst of this posture of affairs the patriot John C. Crittenden offered his famous compromise measures 18 December, 1860, to save the Union, by restoring the Missouri compromise, which would have placed the question of slavery out of the reach and control of the Federal government. "But the party clamor at the north by the Republican party drowned all patriots. Headley vol. 1. p. 46.-Crittenden Compromise. Globe, 1860-61. p. 114. The Republican press and politicians, a few weeks previous, when South Carolina left the Union, said let the South go in peace, as a wayward sister;—that a union held together by bayonets was a despotism; that the union should not be held together by force now; they said that the "days of compromises were gone by;" that they would make no more compromises with slavery. They

denounced the Crittenden Compromise. All who advocated a compromise were branded as traitors, who were in league with the Southern rebels, or as sympathizers, giving them aid and comfort. They proclaimed in the Halls of Congress, and through the leading press, that they would let the Union slide rather than the Chicago platform. So the Republicans preferred their party platform to peace. Jeff Davis said that if the compromise came from the north, the south would not leave the Union; but the Republicans would not compromise.-Greeley, Am. Conf. vol. 1, p. 383. Indeed, they showed a want of sincerity in not adopting the Crittenden Compromise; as they gained strength from the democratic ranks by the clamor raised after the repeal of the Missouri compromise. Now, they refused to restore it, as they voted against extending it to the Pacific, in 1850. Indeed, it was the repeal of the Missouri compromise which gave power to the abolitionists as they were able to fuse with all parties opposed to the Kansas and Nebraska act and the repeal of the Missouri compromise. The responsibil ity of secession and rebellion must be divided between the fanatics of the North and the Fire-Eaters of the South, who for years had labored to bring about a dissolution of the Union. The majority of the southern people were deceived and believed they were in danger of subjugation and that they would have to contend with an insurrection of the slaves after emancipation." Headley vol. 1, p. 48.

December, 1860, Mr. Adrian offered a resolution in Congress, the purport of which was that Congress should abandon the doctrine of interference with slavery in the territories.-Cong. Globe 1860, p. 77. That the personal liberty bills in the states interfering with slavery should be repealed. That the fugitive slave law should be obeyed and that the states should faithfully adhere to the compromises of the constitution. This resolution was opposed by the Republicans as being in conflict with their platform. They said that they would not abandon the Chicago platform if the heavens should fall! December 1860, Mr. Mallory offered a resolution to protect slavery south of the line of 36 deg. 30 min.-Cong. Globe, 1860-61 p. 78. So far were the Republicans from conceding to these new demands of the South that Mr. Kilgore offered a resolution December 12, 1860, that the right of trial by Jury should be allowed to fugitive slaves which would in many of the northern states amount to a substantial repeal of the fugitive slave law.-Cong. Globe 1860-61, p. 78.

Wade said, on the 17th day of December, 1860:

"If I know myself I am the last man that would be the advocate of any law or any act that would humiliate or dishonor any section of this country, or any individual in it: and, on the other hand, let me tell these gentlemen I am exceedingly sensitive upon that same point. Whatever they may think about it, I would rather sustain an injury than an insult or dishonor; and I would be as unwilling to inflict it upon others as I would be to submit to it myself. I never will do either the one or the other if I know it."-Cong. Globe 1860-61, p. 100.

Seward said to Mr. Adams, United States minister to London: "For these reasons he (Mr. Lincoln) would not be disposed to reject a cardinal dogma of theirs (the secessionists) namely, that the Federal government could not reduce the seceding states to obedience by conquest, even although he were disposed to question that position, but in fact the President willingly accepts it as true, only an imperial or despotic government could subjugate thoroughly disaffected and insurrectionary members of the state. This Federal Republican system of ours is of all forms of government the very one most unfitted for such labor."

Was this the true sentiment of the leading Republicans, or was it a delusion and a snare to blind the people, by making them think that there would be no war? Was not this a mere sham to prevent and defeat compromise; to delude the people into the belief that everything would be all right and that peace would reign n Warsaw? Their object being delay until the Republican party was in an attitude to make war and then to dictate their own terms at the point of the bayonet. The conclusion drawn from the after acts of the Republican drama is irresistible that they were not sincere in their professions of peace.

On the 17th January, 1861, Florida seceded from the Union: Mississippi on January the 9th, 1861: Alabama January 11, 1861: Georgia January 20, 1861: Louisiana January 26, 1861, and Texas February 1, 1861. Thus, in three months after Lincoln's election, all the cotton states had seceded from the Union and seized the New Orleans mint, they had secured all the forts and arsenals except Sumter and Fort Pickens.

Resolutions were offered in Congress calling for a national convention, but they were defeated by the Republicans.-Globe 1860-61, pp. 114-17 316. Buchanan's message, Dec. 3, 1860:

"The different sections of the Union are now arrayed against each other, and the time has arrived, so much dreaded by the father of his country when hostile geographical parties have been formed. I have long foreseen and often forewarned my countrymen of the now impending danger." "Violent agitation of the slavery question throughout the North for the last quarter of a century has at length produced its malign influence on the slaves, and inspired them with vague notions of freedom. Hence a sense of security no longer existed around the family altar. This feeling of peace at home has given place to apprehensions of servile insurrection. Many a matron throughout the South retires at night in dread of what may befall herself and her children before the morning. Should this apprehension of domestic danger, whether real or imaginary, extend and intensify itself until it shall pervade the masses of the southern people, then disunion will become inevitable." "It cannot be denied that, for five and twenty years, the agitation at the North against slavery in the South has been incessant. In 1835, pictorial handbills and inflammatory appeals were circulated extensively throughout the South, of a character to excite the passions of the slaves; and, in the language of General Jackson, to stimulate them to insurrections, and produce all the horrors of a servile This agitation has ever since been continued by the public press, by the proceedings of state and county conventions, and by abolition sermons and lectures. The time of Congress has been occupied in violent speeches on this never-ending subject; and appeals in pamphlet and other forms, indorsed by distinguished names, have been sent forth from this central point, and spread broadcast over the Union.

war.

"How easy would it be for the American people to settle the slavery question forever." All that is necessary to accomplish the object, and all for which the slave states have ever contended, is to be let alone, and permitted to manage their domestic institutions in their own way."

"The most palpable violations of constitutional duty which have yet been committed consist in the acts of different State Legislatures to defeat the execution of the fugitive slave law."

"In order to justify secession as a constitutional remedy, it must be on the principle that the Federal government is a mere voluntary association. of states, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the contracting parties If this be so, the confederacy is a mere rope of sand, to be penetrated and dis solved by the first adverse wave of public opinion in any of the states "

"The question fairly stated is: Has the constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce a state into submission which is attempting to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from the Confederacy? If answered in the affirmative, it must be on the principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war against a state. After much serious reflection I have arrived at the conclusion that no such power has been delegated to Congress or to any other department of the Federal Government. It is manifest upon an inspection of the constitution, that this is not among the specific and enumerated powers granted to Congress; and it is equally apparent that its exercise is not necessary and proper for carrying into execution any one of these powers. So far from this power having been delegated to Congress, it was expressly refused by the Convention which framed the constitution.

It appears, from the proceedings of that body, that on the 31st May, 1787, the Clause authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole against a delinquent State came up for consideration. Mr. Madison opposed it in a brief but powerful speech, from which I shall extract but a single sentence. He observed: The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment; and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound!"

"Upon this motion the clause was unanimously postponed, and was never I believe again presented. Soon afterwards, on the 8th June, 1787, when incidentally adverting to the same subject he said: Any government for the United States, formed on the supposed practicability of using force against the unconstitutional proceedings of the States, would prove as visionary and fallacious as the Government of Congress: evidently meaning the then existing Congress of the old confederation.

Without descending to particulars, it may be safely asserted, that the power to make war against a state is at variance with the whole spirit and intent of the Constitution. Suppose such a war should result in the conquest of a state; how are we to govern it afterwards? Shall we hold it as a province, and govern it by despotic power? In the nature of things we could not by physical force, control the will of the people, and compel them to elect senators and representatives to Congress."

"The fact is, that our union rests upon public opinion, and can never be cemented by the blood of its citizens shed in civil war. If it cannot live in the affections of the people, it must one day perish. Congress possesses many means of preserving it by conciliation; but the sword was not placed in their hands to preserve it by force."

This message caused great excitement among the Republicans. Buchanan was openly denounced as a traitor. He was blamed for not sending troops into South Carolina-for making any mention of compromise or reconciliation. The majority of the people north and south were of the opinion that there was no power in Congress to coerce a state. The leading Republicans, such as Greeley of the New York Tribune, held this doctrine. But nearly all except the leading politicians and their fanatical dupes shuddered at the idea of bloodshed. And if a convention of all the states in the union had assembled they would be adverse to bloodshed and would yield to the compromise measures. But the Radicals did not want any compromise which would oust the slavery question from Congress and politics. Buchanan was in favor of a compromise, for he said:

"The explanatory amendment might be confined to the final settlement of the true construction of the constitution on three special points:

1. "An express recognition of the right of property in slaves in the states where it now exists or may afterwards exist.

2. "The duty of protecting this right in all the common Territories throughout their territorial existence, and until they shall be admitted as states into the Union, with or without slavery, as the constitutions may prescribe.

3. "A like recognition of the right of the Master to have his slaves, who had escaped from one state to another, restored and 'delivered up' to him, and of the validity of the fugitive slave law enacted for this purpose, together with a declaration that all state laws impairing or defeating this right are violations of the constitution, and are consequently null and void." This would be adopting both the Dred Scott decision and the recent Breckinridge platform and ingrafting them on the constitution.-The Republicans denounced it and said before they would submit to such an amendment of the constitution they would let the Union slide.-It would in substance swallow up the Chicago platform. Greeley said he would let nine Unions slide before he would give up the Chicago platform.

66

The border states now appealed to the cotton states and to the northern Republicans, to compromise and avert civil war. They said that the border states had suffered more from the intermeddling abolitionists of the north, than the cotton states. That their slaves were stolen and sent north by the 'underground railroad," while the cotton states had lost but very few slaves. That in the event of war between the north and south, all the fighting would be done on the soil of the border states. That they would be continually losing their slaves and other property, by the ravages of war on their soil. That the tide of war passing over their states would desolate their plantations, towns, and cities. That during such war their slaves would easily run away and cross over the line to Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. That after the war was over, should the south gain her independence, yet, their slaves would run over to the free states. That the border states would have to maintain a chain of forts and bristling cannon along the border line to guard against raids from the Free-States. The Republican party refused to pass the Arizona Bill, or the Crittenden compromise, referred to, and the cotton states seceded, not by submitting the question of union or disunion to the people, but by a convention of the seceding states. There was a large union party south, and if encouraged by the Republican party, to compromise secession would be impossible! The border states of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri were adverse to a dissolution of the union. Virginia, the mother of states and statesmen, now entered the lists as a mediator between the north and the cotton states. She thought that she could effect such compromise measures, as would keep the border states in the union. That after some time the cotton states would come back again into the Union. For this purpose, she called on all the states to send delegates to a peace Congress, to be holden at the city of Washington.

This Congress met, with ex-President Tyler as chairman. The States of Michigan, Maine, and Minnesota refused to send Delegates to this Congress. For the Republicans had from time to time declared that they would not pass any compromise that would conflict with the Chicago platform. Numerous petitions were sent to Congress to compromise and save the country from the effusion of blood. North Carolina recommended the adoption of the Crittenden compromise. The Peace Congress broke up without accomplishing anything. This was the second time that the Republicans refused to compromise; preferring the Chicago platform to the peace and welfare of the country, the Constitution and the Union. They were willing