and that no freshet has been found powerful enough to dislodge the pebbles and release the rock from its attrition.

Now, if a man will turn from the contemplation of one of these "pot-holes," and the means by which it is made, and seek for that result and that process in the world of mind which most resemble them, I am sure that he will find them in a man of one "idea." In truth, these scenes that I have been painting were all recalled to me by looking upon one of these men, studying his character, and watching the effect of the "single idea " by which he was actuated. There," said I involuntarily, "is a moral pot-hole with a pebble in it, and the hole grows larger and the pebble smaller every year."

66

I suppose it is useless to undertake to reform men of "one idea." The real trouble is that the pebble is in them, and whole freshets of truth are poured upon them only with the effect to make it more lively in its grinding, and more certain in its process of wearing out itself and them. The little man who, when ordered by his physician to take a quart of medicine, informed him with a deprecatory whimper that he did not hold but a pint, illustrates the capacity of many of those who are subjects of a "single idea." They do not hold but one, and it would be useless to prescribe a larger number. In a country like ours, in which everything is new and everybody is free, there are multitudes of self-constituted doctors, each of whom has a nostrum for curing all physical and moral disorders and diseases—a patent process by which humanity may achieve its proudest progress and its everlasting happiness. The country is full of hobby-riders, booted and spurred, who imagine they are leading a grand race to a golden goal, forgetful of the truth that their steeds are tethered to a single idea, around which they are revolving only to tread down the grass and wind themselves up, where they may stand at last amid the world's ridicule and be stoned to death.

66

Mr. Chairman, I have been taught to believe that the true theory of our Government is that "the Federal Constitution and the laws passed in pursuance thereof" are the supreme law of the land." Any other view would produce an endless conflict, and it is the opposite doctrine of those who attempt to exalt the States above the general Government, and the pressing of this doctrine to an extreme length, that have been largely instrumental in bringing about the present disastrous state of things. Our first and paramount allegiance is due to the general Government. In his great speech on the compromise measures of 1850 Henry Clay used the following language:

If any one State, or any one portion of the people of any State, choose to place themselves in array against the Government of the Union, I am for trying the strength of this Government. I am for ascertaining whether we have a Government or not, practicable, efficient, capable of maintaining its authority and upholding the powers and interests which belong to a Government. Nor, sir, am I to be alarmed or dissuaded from any such course by intimations of the spilling of blood. If blood is to be spilt, by whose fault is it to be spilt? Upon the supposition I maintained, it will be the fault of those who choose to raise the stand

And, sir, when

ard of Disunion and endeavor to prostrate the Government. that is done, so long as it pleases God to give me a voice to express my sentiments, or an arm, weak and enfeebled as it may be by age, that voice and that arm will be on the side of my country, for the support of the general authority, and for the maintenance of the powers of the Union.

a sub

If Kentucky to-morrow unfurls the banner of resistance, I never will fight under that banner; I owe a paramount allegiance to the whole Union ordinate one to my own State.-HENRY CLAY, in the Senate, 1850.

I stand upon this doctrine to-day. It expresses the true theory of our Government. And when Missouri, or any other State, shall raise the standard of rebellion, I shall feel that my primary allegiance is due to the general Government. And if in a conflict of this kind the nation is involved in war, as it now is, and blood be shed, let the responsibility rest where it properly belongs, on those who have commenced the contest in striking the first blow and firing the first gun. And if disaster and ruin shall follow the interests and institutions of those who have thus involved the nation in an unfortunate and bloody contest to maintain its own existence, I have confidence in the courage and integrity of the masses to believe they will, in due season, visit upon the heads of the authors of those troubles that punishment they so justly merit. Acquiescence in the election of Mr. Lincoln, which was the patriotic duty of every citizen of the Republic, would have saved us all the fearful struggle and all the sacrifices which we have been compelled, individually and as a nation, to make. If he had erred in his administrative duties the party in power, on appeal to the intelligence and patriotism of the people, would only have had a brief existence of four years.

That no great harm could have befallen any particular interest is known by the fact that every other department of the Government stood politically opposed to him, and with a majority in each House of Congress. But the "fiat" had gone forth. Demagogues and "fire-eaters" had partially prepared the public mind, and they were ready to enter upon their bloody experiment. And what was the Government to do? Must it yield to the demand of these maddened leaders? Must the nation's life be sacrificed,

and without an effort to preserve it? Shall our nationality be destroyed, and the Government of the United States struck from the map of the nations of the earth? Shall we be placed in the condition of a second-rate power? Shall we give up the prestige and glory of our great name? Shall we be unmindful of the hallowed memories of the past, and our great obligations to the future?

Sir, men might as well have looked for the great luminary of day to be struck from the heavens without a convulsion in the material world, or the

cross of our Saviour to be darkened and obscured without a pang to the heart of Christianity, as to have seen this great nation, now known and honored throughout all the earth, to die without a struggle more terrible than any which the world has witnessed since the "morning stars sang together." There was but one course for the President of the United States to pursue to meet the obligations of his oath, "to take care that the laws were faithfully executed," and to the best of his ability "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States "; and in the discharge of these high and imperative duties he was entitled to the sympathy and support of every loyal and patriotic citizen of the Republic. No partisan zeal, no past or present difference of opinion on mere political topics, no hostility to supposed extreme theories held by the party in power, no sickly or morbid sympathy with those who were aiming a fatal stab at the nation's heart ought to have prevented us from coming to the rescue and saving the life of the Republic.

Sir, it is idle to say that in meeting this great crisis the President has violated the Constitution of his country. It may be that in some instances doubtful powers may have been exercised and the Constitution not strictly observed. But who caused these things? And with what bad grace does an objection of this kind come from the lips of those who, disregarding all the precepts of our beloved Washington as contained in his farewell address, and the teachings of the great and good men of all parties throughout the history of the Republic, with sacrilegious hands have torn in shreds the very charter of our liberties!—who put in peril the existence of the nation, and by their act threatened to turn back the tide of civilization and of moral and intellectual progress upon the continent? How can these men who have attempted to tear up the tree of liberty, root and branch, complain of those who, in order to preserve it, have only plucked a twig here and there from its ample boughs? Sir, the choice was either to surrender unconditionally to rebellion and thus permit the nation to die, or to resist it with all the power that the Constitution had lodged in the hands of the President in order to "defend, preserve, and protect it"! And, sir, whatever may be the judgment of the present hour, the gratitude of the nation and of mankind will be due to those who may save the Republic from overthrow.

Lovers of peace, looking with dread and horror upon the fratricidal conflict which now pierces their hearts with agony, were willing to let the seceded States go in the vain hope that this might have prevented the shedding of blood, and under the influence of the "sober second thought" they might have returned. Vain delusion! There could be no such thing as peaceable secession. Listen to that man of great renown, the favorite son of New England, but whose fame has added to his country's glory:

Peaceable secession! Peaceable secession! Sir, your eyes and mine are not destined to see that miracle! The dismemberment of this vast country without convulsion! The breaking up of the great fountains of the deep without rippling the surface!

More than twenty-three hundred years ago, in one of the Republics of the Old World, the impolicy of secession was clearly shown. That distinguished Athenian general, statesman, and orator, Pericles, in one of his speeches touching the revolt of Euboea and Megara, two Grecian provinces, used the following remarkable language, so singularly applicable to the present condition of things in our country: "No great government can be respected if fragment after fragment may be detached from it with impunity; if traitors are permitted to delude and discompose the contented and to seduce the ignorant from their allegiance; if loyalty is a weakness, sedition a duty, conspiracy wisdom, and rebellion heroism!"

The very idea of division brings to mind at once a thousand causes that would lead to strife and war. One great inducement with those who formed the American Union was to prevent forever those intestine feuds and ever present dangers which would spring up between independent States. Questions of boundary, of revenues, of large standing armies, of commerce on the sea and on the land, of the free navigation of our great rivers-these and all other questions which from the beginning of time have been the foundation of national disputes and endless wars among the nations of the earth would have existed in full force here. It is far better, if fight we must, to preserve the grandeur and glory of the nation than by separation to lay the foundation of perpetual strife with our posterity throughout all coming time.

Never, Mr. Chairman, in the history of the nation was there a time when we so much needed prudent and wise counsellors as at the present hour. While our armies are advancing with success, and victory is shouted from every battle-field, a single false step taken here may convert all into "Dead Sea fruit." Discarding all Utopian dogmas, let us look steadily and only to the maintenance of the authority of the general Government and the preservation of the Federal Union.

Let all the ends thou aimest at be thy country's.

Let not the people be deceived and deluded in regard to the objects of this war. Let us stand firmly by the resolution passed with such great unanimity at the extra session in July last,

That this war is not waged on our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights and established institutions of those States, but to defend and

maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired, and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.

In most of what I have seen coming from the pen of the President of the United States since his inauguration - in his messages to Congress, in his instructions to our ministers abroad, and in the general influence and tendency of his administration as so eloquently and ably shown by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Voorhees] a few days since I am cheered with the belief that he fully sanctions all that is contained in the foregoing resolution. In regard to the resolution which passed this House a few days since, and which accompanied the special message of the President, while I thought its introduction ill-timed, there were, nevertheless, great principles recognized in it which I cheerfully indorse:

1. That Congress has no constitutional power to interfere with the institution of slavery in any State where it exists.

2. That to the States themselves belongs the exclusive control of the institution of slavery within their respective borders.

3. That if at any time the people of any State should choose to adopt a system of gradual emancipation, the general Government ought to extend pecuniary aid to compensate the owners of slaves for any losses which they might sustain growing out of the change of system.

I repeat that the principle of this resolution is right; the time of its introduction was unfortunate, and especially the indecent haste in which it was hurried through without giving the Representatives from those States most deeply interested an opportunity even of consulting upon the subject. For one, I do not doubt the patriotic intentions of the President in sending here this message and resolution. I believe that his object was to check the progress of radical measures. The people watch with great anxiety the course of the Administration; and in order that the purposes of the President may be distinctly known, I shall take the liberty of re-quoting here some passages from his messages and also from instructions given by him to our ministers abroad.

In his inaugural address the President used the following language:

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists." I believe I have no lawful right to do so; and I have no inclination to do so.