torical truth it has been in the same quarter, asserted that slavery is the creation of local law. As property is regulated by law-but where are the statutes creating it? Traced to the time of the law giver Moses, we find it then treated as an established state of society, and regulations made for it as such. So it is viewed in our federal compact. Its condition or existence is to be decided by state sovereignties only, being beyond the range of federal legislation, and above the power of territorial government. This issue, in the form in which it is presented, admits of no compromise; one or the other must yield before there can be any basis for adjustment. The southern states have to some extent shown a willingness to consider the Missouri compromise as a compact, and to extend and continue it; but this cannot be acceded to by those who contend for the total exclusion of slavery from the territories, resting as it must upon our rights as joint proprietors of the public domain. In deciding the question, with which of the two great parties of the Union, should the south affiliate, it is important to inquire how they stand affected towards us upon this grave issue.

So far as shown by their representatives in congress it does not appear that either of the parties in the north are fully with us, but there is this important difference, so far as fraternal feeling was manifested by the non-slave-holding states, it wa; found in the ranks of the democracy. Denounced and divided at home because of their support of the constitutional rights of the south, shall they be suspected and repulsed by us? Have we reached the point at which no northern man can be trusted to administer the government; if so, we have reached the limit beyond which our union ceases to be a blessing.

For what, under such a state of facts, and with the avowal of such a position can a sectional minority hope.

In viewing the progress of the present canvass at the north, we find the nominee of the Baltimore convention opposed by a portion of the old democratic party, whose watch word, is opposition to the extension of slavery. What higher recommendation could he have to your confidence? It is not necessary, nor would the limits of a letter permit, that I should discuss the characters, qualifications, and services of men so well known as Cass and Butler. As little can it be required that I should testify to you my intention at the approaching presidential election, to vote, as on past occasions the democratic electoral ticket. Having already extended this letter beyond my original design, I will only further trouble you, gentlemen, with a request that you will make my apology to such of our friends as may

have expected my attendance, and with the ardent hope that our canvass will be conducted with the harmony and conciliation becoming men, who have common interests which lie beyond, and are of paramount importance to it. Allow me to offer to you, individually, my thanks for your kindness and best wishes for your prosperity.

Very truly your friend,

JEFFERSON DAVIS.

Messrs. H. R. Davis, B. Killgore, J. H. King, W. J. Hodge, R. Philips, H. Strong-Committee, of Invitation.

Remarks of Jefferson Davis on a petition on the subject of colonizing free negroes. Jan. 12, 1849.

Mr. DAVIS, of Mississippi. It is really to be regretted, Mr. President, that from day to day those who assemble here for the purpose of discharging their constitutional duties in legislation, should find themselves beleaguered by irritating questions forced upon them by individuals whose piety is so great that they must always be appropriating to themselves other men's sins. When did the South ask for this vicarious repentance, and whence do you derive your power to instruct her in her moral duty? Answer me these questions satisfactorily, or cease this perfidious interference with the rights of other men. But, sir, of all the clap-trap that ever issued from the lips of the advocates of such a policy, that which relates to the question of the right of petition is the greatest. What did the Constitution guaranty at the time that right was introduced, and for what purpose was it introduced? When these States were infant colonies, who ever denied the right of the colonists to petition? That was a right granted them. The right to assemble was the only right that was ever interfered with, and the right of petition carried with it the idea of the suppression of a grievance. Those rights are fully maintained in the Constitution. But what grievance is there to any non-slaveholding State if other communities think proper to keep slaves? And does that circumstance interfere with their right peaceably to assemble, guaranteed to them, under the Constitution? Sir, does this poor right to beg, as it has been described, carry with it the obligation to grant? This is the whole question before Congress. Shall we receive, entertain, and discuss petitions upon a subject which every one recognizes we have no right to grant, upon which we have no power to grant anything? It is an idle waste and a base abandon

ment of the duties of members upon this floor thus to squander the time which should be devoted to some useful purpose. Sir. it has been stated, in the progress of this debate, that the course of southern men, in objecting to these petitions, has created all this excitement. Let those who entertain this opinion refer to the action of the House of Representatives, and they will there find a decision against them. In the House, where this question has been made, where these petitions have been received, referred, and discussed, abolitionism has gone on step by step, steadily progressing; whilst in the Senate, where the wiser and more dignified rule has been adopted to lay the question of reception on the table without discussion, there was scarcely an allusion to the topic, until some over-zealous, over-pious, latterday saints have come into the Senate and forced the subject upon us. We are told by them, sir, that they are for enlarging he circle of human sympathy; and it does appear, with many of these advocates of the enlargement of such circle here, that they cannot rest satisfied in any other circle than that of affection for the negro race. It begins, and ends, and has its middle with the negro race. I can hear of nothing else, sir; I can hear of nothing which is progressive in human reform, nothing which does not concentrate itself in this question concerning the African

And what is the proposition, sir, now before us? Why, it is to take money from the treasury and bestow it upon a certain class of passengers to another country. What right, I ask, have you thus to distinguish between one class of passengers and another? None, sir. And when the Senator from Kentucky appealed to the North for their support, he should have said, You were the men who imported these negroes into this country; you enjoyed the benefits resulting from their carriage and sale; and you, having reaped the largest profit accruing from the introduction of the slaves, should of course contribute to carry them back whence they came, and not lay a new and oppressive burden upon the already burdened South. As to any influence that may be exerted upon the State of Kentucky, I not only agree with the Senator from Virginia, but go further, and say that I would be unwilling to allow any influence to operate upon the convention of Kentucky, believing that they are able to take care of themselves upon this subject, and it is their right so to do.

If the people of Kentucky wish to emancipate their slavesthough I should regret such a course-I would interpose no obstacle by saying that we would not make appropriations to transport their slaves, any more than I would offer an inducement

by assuring them that we would make such appropriations. It would be better, sir, if these pious personages who cry out "Good God" were, instead, to cry out "Good devil," when their whole purpose is to scatter the seeds of dissension and disunion; and it would be much more to their credit if, instead of indulging in lamentations about the evils resulting from slavery, they were to look upon the other side of the picture, and ascertain if it has not prevented evils. Has it made any man a slave any more than he was a slave without this institution, or reduced any man from liberty to slavery? That is the question, sir; and I answer, it has not. Under laws older than the records of history men were taken captives in war, and held as slaves. These slaves were purchased from contending warring bands who held their captives in slavery, and the slaves thus purchased were saved from a more ignominious and degrading slavery than they would be subject to on this side of the Atlantic. It benefits them, in removing them from the bigotry and the heathen darkness which hangs like a cloud over the country in the interior of Africa to the enjoyment of all the blessings of civilization and Christianity. Slavery brought with it commerce, sir; for it occasioned the necessity of enlarging our productions; and what is commerce but the parent of civilization, of international exchanges, and all those mighty blessings that now bind the people of the most remote quarters of the globe together? These are some of the fruits, sir, that are to be considered before you judge the tree. It is our tree, sir; and it is only to answer these libelous imputations cast upon an institution with which I am practically acquainted, and about which the aforesaid libelers speak ignorantly and presumptuously, that I deign to enter upon a discussion of this character.

I thank the Senator from Illinois for the fearless manner in which he met this question; and if all those of equal intelligence, representing like constituencies, would thus speak to the men they represent, I feel there is patriotism and good sense enough in the country to recall us from this wandering career, which will terminate in naught but evil. This, sir, is the question which is to destroy our republican institutions, if indeed they are to fall; and now is the time for those men who love the Union better than they love place-still better than they love the negro race to speak plainly to those whom they represent, and tell them that when they raised the question of the restriction of slavery, it was an issue of their own-a mistaken one-and that they are bound first to promote the issue of non-interference with the rights of the slave States, or the disunion of this glorious

Confederacy will follow, causing the destruction of all the bright hopes of liberty based upon its continued establishment. With this issue in mind, let our northern friends appeal to their constituents, and, if they are true descendants of such sires as Hancock and Adams, they will refrain from all further interference with southern rights.

Jefferson Davis to John J. Crittenden.1

(From the Library of Congress Manuscripts Division.)

My dear Govr.

Senate Chamber

30 th Jany 1849

I have been long intending to avail myself of your kindness by writing to you, but you know the condition of a Senator during the session of Congress and may be able to estimate the condition of a lazy man thus situated. It is I hope unnecessary for me to say that my sympathies have been deeply enlisted in the case of Maj. Crittenden and what is more important my conviction complete that he has been unjustly treated.

You know Mr. Polk and your view of the manner in which he should be dealt with as shown by your letters has very closely agreed with my own. Wearied by this hesitation I have called for the proceedings in the case and if he holds out it is a case in which the weaker goes to the wall. I think I will beat him and so you may say in confidence to your gallant Son.

My boy Tom, in which style I hope you will recognize Col. Crittenden has been discreet and I think efficient in a cause where feeling might have warped the judgement of an older

man.

I regret exceedingly to see that Mr. Clay is to return to the Senate, among many reasons is one in which I know you will

1 Crittenden, John Jordan (1787-1863), a political leader, was born near Versailles, Ky., September 10, 1787, and graduated from William and Mary College in 1806. He was Attorney-General of Illinois Territory in 1810; served in the War of 1812 on the staff of General Isaac Shelby; was a member of the Kentucky House of Representatives 1811-1817; U. S. Senator from March 14, 1817, to March 3, 1819, from March 4, 1835, to March 3, 1841, from March 31, 1842, to June 12, 1848, and from March 4, 1855 to March 3, 1861; U. S. district attorney 1827-1829; Attorney General of the United States from March 5 to September 13, 1841, and from July 2, 1850, to March 3, 1853; Governor of Kentucky 1848-1850; a member of the national House of Representatives 1861-1863. He died in Frankfort, Ky., July 26, 1863. Crittenden was one of the stanchest champions of Union in the Southern States and during the Civil War exerted his influence to keep Kentucky in the Union. Consult Mrs. Chapman Coleman, the Life of John J. Crittenden with selections from his correspondence and speeches. 2 vols., 781 pp., Philadelphia, 1871.