tain resolutions, which were formally communicated to Congress, recommending for its consideration an amendment of the Constitution by which this clause should be abolished. [See title, JOHN Q. ADAMS.] These resolutions were referred to a select committee, of which Mr. Ingersoll was a member, and who, in behalf of himself and one other member, Garrett Davis, of Kentucky, made an elaborate report.

"The high source," says this document, "from which the recommendation comes, single as it is, and altogether unsustained by similar movements on the part of other Legislatures, entitles it to respect; and the general interest felt in the whole subject to which it refers, claims for it prompt and attentive consideration. If the conclusion at which the committee, has arrived, and this candid exposition of some of its members, should not precisely meet the wishes which have been intimated by the representatives of a great commonwealth, the committee will derive rich consolation in reflecting that Massachusetts has shared largely in the benefits and blessings of the Constitution which she proposes to change; that her participation in them is hourly increasing; and that the alteration which she recommends could have little direct influence upon her own condition, however, in the estimation of many, it might reflect credit upon her statesmen for the indulgence of a spirit of far-reaching and itinerant philanthropy. This consolation finds as little abatement in anticipation as in retrospect. The past prosperity of that important member of the Union, derived essentially from the Union, has rested upon principles which, in their nature, can not change. It had for its forerunner a bright career of military glory, and an early combination of patriotic efforts, which contributed largely to achieve the independence of the whole nation. These recollections afford a pledge for the continuance of advantages in connection with the Union, at least as abundant for the future as they have been glorious and productive in the past. The reflections which have consoled the committee, in not being able to unite in any measures to further the amendment recommended, will, it is hoped, be no strangers to the authors of the resolutions themselves. While unable to concur with them in facilitating their objects, or even in the estimate which they appear to have made of the inherent nature of the change proposed, and its congruity with the purposes of

the Constitution respecting amendments, the committee has not withheld from the subject an attention proportioned to its magnitude. The House of Representatives has so far acted upon the application of the single state as to consider its resolutions entitled to formal reference. The subscribers will do no more than discharge an obvious duty to the body of which the committee itself is merely the agent and organ, in submitting to the House, in the absence of any formal report, their own individual views.

"In treating the subject, the undersigned have felt that the committee possessed the power of choosing between distinct and different paths. Were it composed of heated zealots or infuriated partisans, anxious only to achieve a short-lived victory in active and animated discussion, or to retire from it with the bitter fruits of discord as the reward of uncompromising struggles in unbecoming strife, it might select the one. Were it animated by loftier motives, and bound by an ardent love of country, to exercise, if possible, a persuasive influence over excited passions, and to contribute, in public position, to advance the natural tendencies of individual benevolence, to tranquilize and assuage, it would pursue the other. Feeling has been inflamed by long-continued controversy. Taunts and reproaches have been freely and reciprocally flung. Censure has poured out its stores of contumely upon those who never sought, and who devoutly believe that they can not, if they would, abandon the subject of reproach. Enough has been done and suffered from ill will. In selecting a course of conciliation and forbearance, or, rather, in obeying the dictates of patriotism, which should control the official guardians of the public weal-members of a body which should reflect, as from a mirror, the wishes and interests of the whole nation-the subscribers devoutly believe that they shall discharge a solemn duty. They are sensible, at the same time, that the discussion will be tedious and tame. Where a theme is replete with topics of exciting interest, and the treatment of it, upon both sides, is habitually ardent and impassioned, cool reflection and sober reason have little claims upon popular sympathy or applause. Passion is always contagious, and, for the most part, eloquent. It readily invests its efforts with the attractions of fancy, and draws into its vortex the feelings, if not the judgments, of men. In its most ordinary

influences it is pernicious. When it assumes the direction of distant and complicated interests, and assails the delicate positions of a deeply-rooted sensibility, it threatens to stir up an agitation that may not speedily be repressed. Mistaken sympathies abroad, leagued with partial efforts of domestic hostility, have done much to provoke and wound. If they should now be seconded by keen invective from the heart of the legislative council of the nation, none but fatal consequences can ensue. We are one people. If there are common errors to be amended, let us correct them as we can; but let us not add the folly and the meanness of self-abuse to the malignity of foreign denunciation. By such means the Constitution-the acknowledged work of sages and statesmen, whose memories are embalmed in the hearts of a grateful and admiring country-will be canceled and torn to pieces; a union, the fruit of blood and toil, glorious in its formation, and successful in its results beyond precedent and almost beyond hope-the fairest work of human hands, if cherished and preserved-will be dissolved; a large portion of this fair land may be made the scene of massacre and bloodshed; all the rest will be exposed to be overwhelmed with incongruous associations, forbidden by the laws of nature and of man. And all for what? For the indulgence of little else than an abstract theory on the part of those who, in security, unconsciously stir up the prodigious mischief, at the threatened cost of life and treasure to their brethren, who alone can become the sufferers; a theory, too, the elements of which have lain buried since the formation of the Union, and are now gathered, like the spell of the necromancer, from the decayed bodies and phosphoric lights of charnel-houses, to spread noisome pestilence among the living. Burning thoughts and words may be given out, and may not, by any will or power, be recalled. They will extend with the fatal rapidity of Phrygian fire. If the result should be destruction to the fabric which has been reared by patriotism and consecrated to freedom, foreign nations will rejoice over the downfall which they have confidently predicted of the last great experiment of popular self-government.”

The report takes the ground that, by the principles of the Constitution, this compromise was fairly made, and was intended to be permanent; that it had fulfilled its purposes with respeet to other sections of the Union, and could not now, when

those purposes had been accomplished, justly be abrogated, without the consent of all who were originally parties to the instrument. And it thus concludes:

"Why should an arrangement, which was coeval with the Constitution, and ingrafted upon it, be considered ephemeral? Why should not a compact, solemnly and deliberately made, fully understood and fairly entered into, be perpetual? Why should not patriotic purposes, happy and harmonious in their origin, glorious in their exercise, and fruitful in their consequences, be cherished and preserved? Slavery exists and is protected in one section of the country; it is abrogated in another. The same relative feelings and judgments respecting it which prevailed formerly remain in kind, if not in degree, unchanged. Union is as desirable, harmony and good-will among the states are as much to be cultivated as ever. The people

are the same in their internal condition and their relations toward the world as they were in the year 1787. If a less extent of numbers rendered the whole nation feebler at a former period, and more exposed to encroachments from foreign enemies and dangerous neighbors, a greater extent of numbers, which now makes them more powerful, enables them the more effectually to aid and support each other. If the system of slavery be indeed on the decline, and public sentiment be in truth rapidly accelerating its final extinction, without the necessity of external assaults, why not leave it to the doom which is supposed to await it? Nothing in the present numbers of the slave population, compared with its past extent, justifies neglect. Its actual increase has been great, although it has not kept pace with that of the whites. Two millions four hundred and eighty-six thousand two hundred and twenty-six of this description of persons in 1840, have succeeded to six hundred and fifty-seven thousand and forty-seven in 1790. This quadrupled mass of a separate race does not less require compromise and care, for the sake of an arrangement between those among whom exclusively is its abiding-place and the rest of the republican family, than it did when a fourth only of the number, formidable even then, was found. No matter whether the combination of races in its present form, the Caucasian master and the African slave, is to endure for ages, or, in the sure development of human affairs, is gradually to change its charac

ter, the necessity for existing provisions is, in either aspect, indispensably, and perhaps equally, required. The author to whose tables reference has been made, predicts, that among the grain and cattle-growing states emancipation will be easier and sooner than where products are grown which require much labor and manipulation; and that in the order named it will proceed. Whether the event be distant or near at hand, practicable or impracticable, is matter of speculation and surmise. We will not here indulge in an inquiry, which, however interesting in itself, is not embraced in the duties of this committee. The subscribers, knowing the system to exist and to be recognized in the Constitution, and believing that recognition to have been once essential to the formation, and now necessary to the preservation of the Union, have no desire to gratify or duty to perform, except to leave it upon the basis selected for it by those whose example it is wise to emulate, and whose counsels it is virtuous to obey."

Mr. Ingersoll was also the author of a minority tariff report, in which the principles of the act of 1842 were elaborately vindicated, and any essential change opposed. The circumstances under which that tariff act was matured and reported are not generally known. The Secretary of the Treasury, having been more than once called on by the House of Representatives, communicated, at a somewhat advanced period of the session, to the Committee of Ways and Means, a bill in all of its details. The committee made this bill a very broad basis, and proceeded to examine it, with the constant attendance and assistance of Major Barker, who had been collector of the port of Philadelphia and was employed at the Treasury. Several of the members of the Committee on Manufactures frequently attended the Committee of Ways and Means, and gave them advice and assistance. The sittings were constant and laborious. They took place not only at the ordinary time before the meeting of the House, but occasionally while the House was in session, and in the afternoon and evening. The committee frequently admitted persons representing the various interests which might be affected by the proposed law; even ministers of foreign governments were heard on those points which might affect the people of their country. After great deliberation the bill was reported. It underwent a long and patient discussion, and at