of increasing the slavery agitation, and giving the abolitionists ground to stand upon in giving them the right of petition to defend. He said:

petition had been laid on the table without objection from any one, and consequently by a unanimous vote of the senators present. Here, then, was a most emphatic declaration, by gentlemen representing the Northern States as "This being among the Southern members a well as those from other parts of the Union, by mere difference of form in the manner of disposthis vote, that they will entertain no attempt at ing of the subject, I regret exceedingly that the legislation on the question of slavery in the District of Columbia. Why, then, asked Mr. senator from Carolina has thought it his duty (as he doubtless has) to press the subject upon B., should we now adopt a mode of proceeding the consideration of the Senate in such form as calculated to disturb the harmonious action of not only to permit, but in some measure to the Senate, which had been produced by the create, a necessity for the continued agitation of former vote? Why (he would respectfully ask the subject. For he believed, with others, that of honorable gentlemen who press the motion tion and excitement than such motions as that to refuse to receive the petition) and for what nothing was better calculated to increase agitabeneficial purpose do they press it? By per- of the senator from South Carolina. What was sisting in such a course it would, beyond all the object of the motion? Senators said, and doubt, open a wide range of discussion, it would no doubt sincerely, that their object was to quiet not fail to call forth a great diversity of opinion the agitation of the subject. Well, (said Mr. K.,) We differ, in relation to the extent of the right to petition my object is precisely the same. under the constitution. Nor would it be conthen, only in the means of securing a common fined to that question alone, judging from an end; and he could tell the Senators that the expression which had fallen from an honorable value of the motion as a means would likely be gentleman from Virginia [Mr. TYLER], in the estimated by its tendency to secure the end decourse of this debate. That gentleman had de- sired. Would even an affirmative vote on the clared his preference for a direct negative vote motion quiet the agitation of the subject? He by the Senate, as to the constitutional power thought, on the contrary, it would much increase of Congress to emancipate slaves in the District it. How would it stop the agitation? What of Columbia. He, for one, protested, politically would be decided? Nothing, except it be that speaking, against opening this Pandora's box in the Senate would not receive the particular methe halls of Congress. For all beneficial and morial before it. Would that prevent the prepractical purposes, an overwhelming majority sentation of others? Not at all; it would only of the members representing the Northern increase the number, by making a new issue for States were, with the South, in opposition to debate, which was all the abolitionists wanted; any interference with slavery in the District of Columbia. If there was half a dozen in both or, at any rate, the most they now expected. These petitions had been coming here without branches of Congress who did not stand in en-intermission ever since the foundation of the tire opposition to any interference with slavery, government, and he could tell the senator that in this District or elsewhere, he had yet to if they were each to be honored by a lengthy learn it. Was it wise, was it prudent, was it discussion on presentment, an honor not heremagnanimous, in gentlemen representing the tofore granted to them, they would not only conSouthern States, to urge this matter still further, tinue to come here, but they would thicken upon and say to our Northern friends in Congress, us so long as the government remained in exist'Gentlemen, we all agree in the general conence. We may seek occasions (said Mr. K.) to clusion, that Congress should not interfere in rave about our rights; we may appeal to the this question, but we wish to know your reasons guaranties of the constitution, which are denied; for arriving at this conclusion; we wish you to we may speak of the strength of the South, and declare, by your votes, whether you arrive at pour out unmeasured denunciations against the this result because you think it unconstitutional North; we may threaten vengeance against the or not?' Mr. B. said that he would yield to abolitionists, and menace a dissolution of the none in zeal in sustaining and supporting, to the Union, and all that; and thus exhausting ourextent of his ability, what he believed to be the selves mentally and physically, and setting down true interest of the South; but he should take to applaud the spirit of our own efforts, Arthur leave to say that, when the almost united will Tappan and his pious fraternity would very of both branches of Congress, for all practical coolly remark: Well, that is precisely what I purposes, was with us, against all interference wanted; I wanted agitation in the South; I on this subject, he should not hazard the peace wished to provoke the aristocratic slaveholder" and quiet of the country by going on a Quixotic to make extravagant demands on the North, expedition in pursuit of abstract constitutional which the North could not consistently surrenquestions." der them. I wished them, under the pretext of securing their own rights, to encroach upon the rights of all the American people. In short, I wish to change the issue; upon the present issue we are dead. Every movement, every de

Mr. King, of Georgia, was still more pointed than Mr. Brown in deprecating the course Mr. Calhoun pursued, and charging upon it the effect

monstration of feeling among our own people, shows that upon the present issue the great body of the people is against us. The issue must be changed, or the prospects of abolition are at an end.' This language (Mr. K. said) was not conjectured, but there was much evidence of its truth. Sir (said Mr. K.), if Southern senators were actually in the pay of the abolition directory on Nassau-street they could not more effectually co-operate in the views and administer to the wishes of these enemies to the peace and quiet of our country."

Mr. Calhoun was dissatisfied at the speeches of Mr. Brown and Mr. King, and considered them as dividing and distracting the South in their opposition to his motion, while his own course was to keep them united in a case where union was so important, and in which they stood but a handful in the midst of an overwhelming majority. He said:

whole or of a large portion of the people of the North. I do protest against the countenance that is here given to the idea that the people of the North generally are interfering with the rights and property of the people of the South. "There is no course that will better suit the few Northern fanatics than the agitation of the question of slavery in the halls of Congressnothing will please them better than the discussions which are taking place, and a solemn vote of either branch denying them the right to prefer petitions here, praying that slavery may be abolished in the District of Columbia. A denial of that right at once enables them, and not without color of truth, to cry out that the contest going on is 'a struggle between power and liberty.'

"Believing the intentions of those who have moved simultaneously to get up these petitions at this time, to be mischief, I was glad to see the first petition that came in here laid on the

terposed a motion which opens a debate that may be continued for months. He has chosen to agitate this question; and he has presented that question, the decision of which, let senators vote as they may, will best please the agitators who are urging the fanatics forward.

table without discussion, and without reference to any committee. The motion to lay on the "I have heard with deep mortification and table precludes all debate; and, if decided affirregret the speech of the senator from Geor-matively, prevents agitation. It was with the gia; not that I suppose that his arguments view of preventing agitation of this subject that can have much impression in the South, but I moved to lay the second set of petitions on because of their tendency to divide and dis- the table. A senator from the South (Mr. Caltract the Southern delegation on this, to us, all-houn) has chosen a different course; he has inmomentous question. We are here but a handful in the midst of an overwhelming majority. It is the duty of every member from the South, on this great and vital question, where union is so important to those whom we represent, to avoid every thing calculated to divide or distract our ranks. I (said Mr. C.), the Senate will bear witness, have, in all that I have said on this subject, been careful to respect the feelings of Southern members who have differed from me in the policy to be pursued. Having thus acted, on my part, I must express my surprise at the harsh expressions, to say the least, in which the senator from Georgia has indulged."

The declaration of this overwhelming majority against the South brought a great number of the non-slaveholding senators to their feet, to declare the concurrence of their States with the South upon the subject of slavery, and to depreciate the abolitionists as few in number in any of the Northern States; and discountenanced, reprobated and repulsed wherever they were found. Among these, Mr. Isaac Hill of New Hampshire, thus spoke :

"I have said the people of the North were more united in their opposition to the plans of the advocates of antislavery, than on any other subject. This opposition is confined to no political party; it pervades every class of the community. They deprecate all interference with the subject of slavery, because they believe such infare of the Union itself, and because they underterference may involve the existence and welstand the obligations which the non-slaveholding States owe to the slaveholding States by the compact of confederation. It is the strong desire to perpetuate the Union; it is the determination which every patriotic and virtuous citizen has made, in no event to abandon the 'ark of our safety,' that now impels the united North to take its stand against the agitators of the antislavery project. So effectually has the strong public sentiment put down that agitation in New England, that it is now kept alive only by the power of money, which the agitators have collected, and apply in the hiring of agents, and in issues from presses that are kept in their employ.

"I do not (said he) object to many of the positions taken by senators on the abstract question of Northern interference with slavery in "The antislavery movement, which brings in the South. But I do protest against the excite-petitions from various parts of the country askment that is attempted on the floor of Congress, ing Congress to abolish slavery in the District to be kept up against the North. I do protest of Columbia, originates with a few persons, who against the array that is made here of the acts have been in the habit of making charitable reof a few misguided fanatics as the acts of the ligious institutions subservient to political pur

Freedom." Mr. Hill said it was an abolition paper, printed, but not circulated, at Concord, New Hampshire. He said the same paper had been sent to him, and he saw in it one of Mr. Calhoun's speeches; which was republished as good food for the abolitionists; and said he thought the Senate was well employed in listen

honest might have been their purposes, he believed had done incalculable mischief, and whose movements, he knew, received no more sanction among the great mass of the people of the North, than they did at the South. For one, he (Mr. P.), while he would be the last to infringe upon any of the sacred reserved rights of the people, was prepared to stamp with disapprobation, in the most express and unequivocal terms, the whole movement upon this sub-ing to the reading of disgusting extracts from ject. Mr. P. said he would not resume his scat without tendering to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Mason), just and generous as he always was, his acknowledgments for the admission frankly made in the opening of his remarks. He had said that, during the period that he had occupied a seat in this House (as Mr. P. understood him), he had never known six men seriously disposed to interfere with the rights of the slaveholders at the South. Sir, said Mr. P., gentlemen may be assured there was no such disposition as a general sentiment prevailing among the people; at least he felt confidence in asserting that, among the people of the State which he had the honor in part to represent, there was not one in a hundred who did not entertain the most sacred regard for the rights of their Southern brethren-nay, not one in five hundred who would not have those rights protected at any and every hazard. There was not the slightest disposition to interfere with any rights secured by the constitution, which binds | together, and which he humbly hoped ever would bind together, this great and glorious confederacy as one family. Mr. P. had only to say that, to some sweeping charges of improper interference, the action of the people of the North at home, during the last year, and the vote of their representatives here the other day,

was a sufficient and conclusive answer."

an hireling abolition paper, for the purpose of impugning the statements of a member of the House of Representatives, defending the South there, and who could not be here to defend himself. It was also a breach of parliamentary law for a member in one House to attack what was said by a member in another. Mr. Pierce's statement had been heard with great satisfaction by all except Mr. Calhoun; but to him it was so repugnant, as invalidating his assertion of a great abolition party in the North, that he could not refrain from this mode of contradicting it. It was felt by all as disorderly and improper, and the presiding officer then in the chair (Mr. Hubbard, from New Hampshire) felt himself called upon to excuse his own conduct in not having checked the reading of the article. He said:

"He felt as if an apology was due from him to the Senate, for not having checked the reading of the paragraphs from the newspaper which had just been read by the Secretary. He was wholly ignorant of the contents of the paper, and could not have anticipated the purport of the article which the senator from South Carolina had requested the Secretary to read. He understood the senator to say that he wished the paper to be read, to show that the statement made by the senator from New Hampshire, as to the feelings and sentiments of the people of that State upon the subject of the abolition of have been out of order, for any senator to have slavery, was not correct. It certainly would alluded to the remarks made by a member of the House of Representatives, in debate; and, in his judgment, it was equally out of order to

The newspaper named by Mr. Hill was entirely in the interest of Mr. Calhoun, and the course which it followed, and upon system, and incessantly to get up a slavery quarrel between the North and the South, was undeniable-every daily number of the paper containing the proof of its incendiary work. Mr. Calhoun would not reply to Mr. Hill, but would send a paper to the Secretary's table to be read in contradic-permit paragraphs from a newspaper to be read tion of his statements. Mr. Calhoun then handed to the Secretary a newspaper containing an article impugning the statement made by Mr. Pierce, in the House of Representatives, as to

the small number of the abolitionists in the State of New Hampshire; which was read, and which contained scurrilous reflections on Mr. Pierce, and severe strictures on the state of slavery in the South. Mr. Hill asked for the title of the newspaper; and it was given, "The Herald of

in the Senate, which went to impugn the course of any member of the other House; and he should not have permitted the paper to have been read, without the direction of the Senate, if he had been aware of the character of the

article."

Mr. Calhoun said he was entitled to the floor, and did not like to be interrupted by the chair: he meant no disrespect to Mr. Pierce, “but wished the real state of things to be known"— as if an abolition newspaper was better author

ity than a statement from a member in his place in the House. It happened that Mr. Pierce was coming into the Senate Chamber as this reading scene was going on; and, being greatly surprised, and feeling much aggrieved, and having no right to speak for himself, he spoke to the author of this View to maintain the truth of his statement against the scurrilous contradiction of it which had been read. Mr. Benton, therefore, stood up

"To say a word on the subject of Mr. Pierce, the member of the House of Representatives, from New Hampshire, whose statements in the House of Representatives had been contradicted in the newspaper article read at the Secretary's table. He had the pleasure of an intimate acquaintance with that gentleman, and the highest respect for him, both on his own account and that of his venerable and patriotic father, who was lately Governor of New Hampshire. It had so happened (said Mr. B.) that, in the very moment of the reading of this article, the member of the House of Representatives, whose statement it contradicted, was coming into the Senate Chamber, and his whitening countenance showed the deep emotion excited in his bosom. The statement which that gentleman had made in the House was in the highest degree consolatory and agreeable to the people of the slaveholding States. He had said that not one in five hundred in his State was in favor of the abolitionists: an expression uuderstood by every body, not as an arithmetical proposition worked out by figures, but as a strong mode of declaring that these abolitionists were few in number. In that sense it was understood, and was a most welcome and agreeable piece of information to the people of the slaveholding States. The newspaper article contradicts him, and vaunts the number of the abolitionists, and the numerous signers to their petition. Now (said Mr. B.), the member of the House of Representatives (Mr. Pierce) has this moment informed me that he knows nothing of these petitions, and knows nothing to change his opinion as to the small number of abolitionists in his State. Mr. B. thought, therefore, that his statement ought not to be considered as discredited by the newspaper publication; and he, for one, should still give faith to his opinion."

In his eagerness to invalidate the statement of Mr. Pierce, Mr. Calhoun had overlooked a solecism of action in which it involved him. His bill to suppress the mail transmission of incendiary publications was still before the Senate, not yet decided; and here was matter read in the Senate, and to go forth as part of its proceedings, the most incendiary and diabolical that had yet been seen. This oversight was perceived

by the author of this View, who, after vindicating the statement of Mr. Pierce, went on to expose this solecism, and—

If it could

committee on incendiary publications, and read "Took up the bill reported by the select the section which forbade their transmission by mail, and subjected the postmasters to fine and loss of office, who would put them up for transmission; and wished to know whether this incendiary publication, which had been read at the Secretary's table, would be included in the prohibition, after being so read, and thus becoming a part of our debates? As a publication in New Hampshire, it was clearly forbid; as part of our congressional proceedings would it still be forbid? There was a difficulty in this, he said, take it either away. still be inculcated from this floor, then the prohibition in the bill was mere child's play; if it could not, and all the city papers which contained it were to be stopped, then the other congressional proceedings in the same paper would be stopped also; and thus the people would be prevented from knowing what their representatives were doing. It seemed to him to be but lame work to stop incendiary publications in the villages where they were printed, and then to circulate them from this chamber among the proceedings of Congress; and that, issuing from this centre, and spreading to all the points of the circumference of this extended Union, one reading here would give it ten than the printing of it in the village could do. thousand times more notoriety and diffusion He concluded with expressing his wish that the reporters would not copy into their account of offensive to the member of the House [Mr. debate the paper that was read. It was too Pierce], and would be too disagreeable to the people of the slaveholding States, to be entitled to a place in our debates, and to become a part of our congressional history, to be diffused over the country in gazettes, and transmitted to posterity in the volumes of debates. He hoped they would all omit it.”

The reporters complied with this request, and the Congress debates were spared the pollution of this infusion of scurrility, and the permanent record of this abusive assault upon

a member of the House because he was a friend to the South. But it made a deep impression upon senators; and Mr. King, of Georgia, adverted to it a few days afterwards to show the strangeness of the scene-Southern senators attacking their Northern friends because they defended the South. He said:

"It was known that there was a talented, patriotic, and highly influential member of the other House, from New Hampshire [Mr.