notice them. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bayly) had complained of his (Mr. Giddings's) want of respect for the institution of slavery. That gentleman had, in his characteristic manner, assailed his (Mr. Giddings's) motives. Now, he would not stay to reply to that gentleman's censure, nor to his attempt to make them believe that slavery was a moral and justifiable institution. He would prefer to read a few passages from an author of that gentleman's own state. In Jefferson's Notes he found the following:

464

There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submission on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his philanthropy or his self-love for restraining the intemperance of passion toward his slave, it should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. The parent storins, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to the worst of passions, and, thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, can not but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circum

stances.'

“This was from the apostle of Democracy, a native of the Old Dominion, whose emphatic assertion was, that that man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved' by slavery. He would commend these words to the consideration of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bayly). He would appeal to those present, when that gentleman delivered his speech on Friday last, if this description of the gentleman's manner was not true to the life? Were not his empty vaporings, his unbounded vanity, a perfect fulfillment of this prophecy?

That member, in his official station, had attempted to argue the Honse into the belief that slavery was a blessing. He would refer again to Mr. Jefferson's opinion, as recorded by himself. That statesman, in his Notes on Virginia, says:

And with what execration should the statesman be loaded who, permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other, transforms those into despots and these into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the amor patriæ of the other; for, if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference to that in which he is born to live and labor for another; in which he must lock up the faculties of his nature, contribute, as far as depends on his individual endeavors, to the evanishment of the human race, or entail his own miserable condition on the endless generations proceeding from him. With the morals of the people, their industry is also destroyed; for in a warm climate no man will labor for himself who can make another labor for him.' This was the effect of slavery as portrayed in every portion of the slaveholding country. But as he had but a moment left, he would refer to that portion of the gentleman's speech in which he had declared that the Abolitionists looked to insurrection among the slaves. And, he would ask, who did not look to that result? Could any reflecting man shut his eyes to that inevitable consequence of slavery? Did not Mr. Jefferson look to such a finale of that system of oppression which now cripples the energies and impoverishes the people of the whole South? Mr. Jefferson, speaking in the most emphatic language, says:

666

And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God; that they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed,

1

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice can not sleep forever; that, considering numbers, nature, and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of Fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.'

“No,” concluded Mr. Giddings, “the Almighty has no attribute that will permit him to take sides with oppression, outrage, and crime. When the day of retribution shall arrive, a holy and just God can take no part with slaveholders. "Mr. Giddings was here cut off by the expiration of his hour, and the whole subject was then laid on the table, as heretofore stated."

We will add to these extracts the following debate, as given in the official reports, which took place in the Senate on the 20th of April, on the bill introduced by Mr. Hale, of New Hampshire, relating to riots and unlawful assemblages in the District of Columbia. The bill had its origin in the transactions connected with the schooner "Pearl."

"Mr. Foote. On the 4th of March, 1837, the American people of all parties assembled at this Capitol for the purpose of witnessing the inauguration of a President of the United States. That President was a Northern man. I had the honor of listening to his inaugural speech; and in it he wisely and patriotically asserted a principle, of which I approved at the time, which I still admire, and which has a close affinity to the question so suddenly presented to this body. Martin Van Buren dared to declare, in his inaugural speech, that though it was his opinionand it certainly is not mine-that Congress has the power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, yet he conceived that the act could not be done without the most odious and unpardonable breach of faith toward the slave states of the Confederacy, and especially Maryland and Virginia. This declaration, not altogether unexpected, gave temporary quiet and satisfaction to the South. I had thought, until recently, that there were very few men in the Republic, claiming any thing like a prominent standing among their fellow-citizens, who entertained a different opinion from that thus expressed, or who, if entertaining it, would undertake to express it in the national councils of this Republic. But the abolition movement has not been quite so successful as some desired it to be; and now we see plain indications that individuals-for I can not conscientiously call them gentlemen-asserting themselves to be champions of freedom, have resolved to carry into execution a scheme-an attempt to remove, by any means whatever, all the slaves now within this district; so that those who have been in the habit of retaining slaves in their possession will be discouraged from bringing others here, and that citizens who may hereafter settle here will, of course, on the principle of obvious pecuniary policy, decline bringing such property with them; and that thus, in this covert and insidious manner, the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia may be accomplished.

"The attempt to legislate directly upon this subject in the national councils is at war with the Constitution, repugnant to all principles of good faith, and violative of all sentiments of patriotism. With whomsoever it originates, this movement, made directly or indirectly, within Congress or out of it, which has been so justly denounced by my colleague, is simply a nefarious attempt to commit grand larceny upon the owners of slaves in this district. I undertake to say that there is not a man, who has given his countenance to this transaction in any shape, who is not capable of committing grand larceny; or, if he happened to be a hero (as such men are not), of perpetrating highway robbery on any of the roads of

this Union. He is not a gentleman. He would not be countenanced by any respectable person any where. He is amenable to the law. I go further-and I dare say my sentiments will meet the approbation of many even who do not live in slave states-and I maintain, that when the arm of the law is too short to reach such a criminal, he may be justly punished by a sovereignty not known to the law. Such proceedings have taken place, and there are circumstances which not only instigate, but justify such acts. I am informed, upon evidence on which I rely, that this very movement out of which the bill originates has been instigated and sanctioned by persons in high station. It is even rumored, and it is believed by many-I am sorry, for the honor of this body, to say so-that a senator of the United States is concerned in the movement. Certain it is that a member of another body, meeting in a certain hall not far distant, was yesterday morning engaged in certain reprehensible contrivances, and that, but for his abject flight from the place of his infamous intrigues, he would have been justly punished-not by the mob, but by high-spirited citizens convened for the purpose of vindicating their rights thus unjustly assailed.

666

Why is it that this question is continually agitated in the Senate of the United States? that it is kept here as the subject of perpetual discussion? Is it simply that gentlemen wish to be popular at home? I suppose so. Is it because of their peculiar sympathies for that portion of the population which constitutes slavery as recognized at the South? What is the motive? Is the object to obtain popularity? Is it to gain high station? Is it to keep up a local excitement in some portions of the North, with the view of obtaining political elevation as the reward of such factious conduct? But I care not for the motives of such acts. I undertake to say, that in no country where the principles of honesty are respected, would such a movement as that now attempted be promoted, or even counte nanced for a moment. I feel bound on this occasion to say, that the bill proposed could not have any good object. What does it declare? It declares that any attempt on the part of the people of this district, through the only means which they may have in their power, to protect their property, and prevent it from being taken from them, either by stealth or open robbery, shall subject them to be mulcted in heavy pecuniary damages! It amounts, then, to this: that if hereafter any occurrence similar to that which has recently disgraced the district should happen, and the good people of the district should assemble and proceed to the vessel in which their property had been placed, and the captain of which had become the agent in the nefarious transaction, and should then and there dare to use the only means to prevent that vessel from sailing, and their property from being taken away before their eyes, they would be compelled to pay heavy pecuniary damages. It is a bill, then, obviously intended to cover and protect negro stealing. It is a bill for the encouragement and immunity of robbery! That is its true character; and, whatever the gentleman's own self-sufficiency may induce him to entertain of his own conduct on this occasion, I only tell him now the judgment which every honest man will pronounce upon it. If the object of the senator was as I have described it, and as is apparent on the face of the bill, he guilty as if he had committed highway robbery. I regret that I am obliged to use harsh terms, but they are true. The senator from South Carolina asserted, with great truth, that the time had come when the South should not only let her voice be heard, but disclose to all her enemies that she not only knows her rights, but, knowing, dare maintain them"-maintain them by all constitutional means ―by all legal expedients-if necessary, by bloodshed. The senator from New Hampshire is evidently attempting to get up a sort of civil war in the country, and is evidently filled with the spirit of insurrection aud incendiarism. He may bring about a result which will end in the spilling of human blood. I say to him.

is as

however, let him come forward boldly, and take the proper responsibility. Let him say, "Now I am ready to do battle in behalf of the liberties of my friends the blacks, the slaves of the District of Columbia." Let him buckle on his armor -let him unsheath his sword, and at once commence the contest; and I have no doubt he will have a fair opportunity of shedding his blood in this holy cause on the sacred soil of the District of Columbia. If he is really in earnest, he is bound, as a conscientious man, to pursue this course, which can not be persevered in without all those awful scenes of bloodshed and desolation, long anticipated by good men in every part of this republic. When, I ask, was it that Southern men ever undertook to invade the quiet and happiness of the North? I hope I may be pardoned in making this suggestion. I do not wish to institute any invidious comparisons. I thank Heaven, I have an abiding confidence in the good sense, the virtuous patriotism, and regard for the rights of property, of my Northern brethren; and I believe that there are many of them, of both parties, who are perfectly sound upon this question, and who will condemn the act of this morning. The South has been forbearing. She has exercised more than complaisancemore than forbearance. But when, I ask, has any Southern man, occupying a seat in either house of Congress, attempted to interfere with any local interests in the North?

"All must see that the course of the senator from New Hampshire is calculated to embroil the Confederacy, to put in peril our free institutions, to jeopard that Union which our forefathers established, and which every pure patriot through. out the country desires shall be perpetuated. Can any man be a patriot who pursues such a course? Is he an enlightened friend of freedom, or even a judicious friend of those with whom he affects to sympathize, who adopts such a course? Who does not know that such men are practically the worst enemies of the slaves? I do not beseech the gentleman to stop; but if he perseveres, he will awaken indignation every where; and it can not be that enlightened men, who conscientiously belong to the faction at the North, of which he is understood to be the head, can sanction or approve every thing that he may do, under the influence of excitement, in this body. I will close by saying, that if he really wishes glory, and to be regarded as the great liberator of the blacks-if he wishes to be particularly distinguished in this cause of emancipation, as it is called—let him, instead of remaining here in the Senate of the United States, or instead of secreting himself in some dark corner of New Hampshire, where he may possibly escape the just indignation of good men throughout this republic, let him visit the good State of Mississippi, in which I have the honor to reside, and no doubt he will be received with such hosannas and shouts of joy as have rarely marked the reception of any individual in this day and generation. I invite him there, and will tell him beforehand, in all honesty, that he could not go ten miles into the interior before he would grace one of the tallest trees of the forest, with a rope around his neck, with the approbation of every virtuous and patriotic citizen; and that, if necessary, I should myself assist in the operation.'

"Mr. Hale. I beg the indulgence of the Senate for a few moments. Though Before I proI did not exactly anticipate this discussion, yet I do not regret it. ceed further, as the honorable senator from Mississippi has said that it has been asserted, and he thinks on good authority, that a senator of the United States connived at this kidnapping of slaves, I ask him if he refers to me?"

66 'Mr. Foote. 'I did.'

"Mr. Hale. I take occasion, then, to say, that the statement that I have given the slightest countenance to the procedure is entirely without the least foundation in truth. I have had nothing to do with the occurrence, directly or indirectly; and I demand of the honorable senator to state the ground upon which he has made his allegation.'

Mr. Foote. It has been stated to me, and I certainly believed it; and, believing it, I denounced it. I did not make the charge directly. My remarks were hypothetical. I am glad to hear the senator say that he has had no connection with the movement; but whether he had or not, some of his brethren, in the great cause in which he was engaged, no doubt had much to do with it.'

"Mr. Hale. The sneer of the gentleman does not affect me. I recognize ev. ery member of the human family as a brother; and if it was done by human beings, it was done by my brethren. Once for all, I utterly deny, either by counsel, by silence, or by speech, or in any way or manner, having any knowledge, cognizance, or suspicion of what was done, or might be done, until I heard of this occurrence as other senators have heard of it; and I challenge any one who entertains a different opinion to the proof, here, now, and forever. I go further than that. I never have counseled, advised, or aided in any way, and, with my present impressions, I never shall counsel, advise, or aid in any way, any encroachment upon the Constitution, in any of its provisions or compromises. If the Constitution be not broad enough for the protection that I claim, I will go without it. I trust that on this subject I have been sufficiently understood. I deny, in general and particular, not only cognizance, but all knowledge of any such movements. "While I am up, let me call the attention of the Senate to the case of a man whom I am proud here and elsewhere to call my friend-the editor of the "National Era." This gentleman, in a card published in the "National Intelligencer" of this day, declares:

"[Mr. Hale here read a card, published in the National Intelligencer, from the editor of the National Era, which disclaims any knowledge or connection whatever with the circumstances in regard to the late abduction of the slaves.]

“Mr. Calhoun (in his seat). Does he make any denunciation of the robbery" “Mr. Hale. ‘He had quite enough to do in defending himself; and it was no part of his duty to denounce others.'

Mr. Calhoun (in his seat). I understand that.'

"Mr. Hale. I appeal to the sense of justice of the Senate, and ask what justi fication there can be for assailing the character and property of a man who knew no more of this occurrence than any of its members? I appeal to the honorable senator who spoke so eloquently of the high and chivalric ideas of right which are entertained in his section of the country-'

"Mr. Foote. I ask the senator-and beg to remind him that twenty millions of people are listening to his answer-in the circumstances of the case, evidently known to him, does he suppose that this occurrence could have taken place without extensive countenance and aid from men of standing in this district, whether members of Congress or others?'

Mr. Hale. I have no doubt that those persons could not have got away without some aid. It is enough that I have disclaimed all knowledge of it. I thought that when the honorable senator was speaking, more than twenty millions of people were listening. He invites me to visit the State of Mississippi, and kindly informs me that he would be one of those who would act the assassin, and put an end to my career. He would aid in bringing me to public execution-no, death by a mob. Well, in return for his hospitable invitation, I can only express the desire that he would penetrate into some of the dark corners of New Hampshire; and if he do, I am much mistaken if he would not find that the people in that benighted region would be very happy to listen to his arguments, and engage in an intellectual conflict with him, in which the truth might be elicited. I think, however, that the announcement which the honorable senator has made upon this floor of the fate which awaits so humble an individual as myself in the State of Mississippi, must convince every one of the propriety of the high eulogium which