by a savage foe, to injustice on beds of ease; you discredit our later fathers, who, few in numbers and weak in resources, yet strong in their cause, did not hesitate to brave the mighty power of England, already encircling the globe with her morning drum-beats. Yes, sir, of such are the fanatics of history, according to the senator. But I tell that senator, that there are characters badly eminent, of whose fanaticism there can be no question. Such were the ancient Egyptians, who worshipped divinities in brutish forms; the Druids, who darkened the forests of oak, in which they lived, by sacrifices of blood; the Mexicans, who surrendered countless victims to the propitiation of their obscene idols; the Spaniards, who, under Alva, sought to force the Inquisition upon Holland, by a tyranny kindred to that now employed to force slavery upon Kansas; and such were the Algerines, when in solemn conclave, after listening to a speech not unlike that of the senator from South Carolina, they resolved to continue the slavery of white Christians, and to extend it to the countrymen of Washington! Ay, sir, extend it! And in this same dreary catalogue faithful history must record all who now, in an enlightened age, and in a land of boasted freedom, stand up, in perversion of the constitution, and in denial of immortal truth, to fasten a new shackle upon their fellow-man. If the senator wishes to see fanatics, let him look round among his own associates; let him look at himself.

'But I have not done with the senator. There is another matter regarded by him of such consequence, that he interpolated it into the speech of the senator from New Hampshire [J. P. Hale], and also announced that he had prepared himself with it, to take in his pocket all the way to Boston, when he expected to address the people of that community. On this account, and for the sake of truth, I stop for one moment, and

tread it to the earth. The North, according to the senator, was engaged in the slave-trade, and helped to introduce slaves into the southern states; and this undeniable fact he proposed to establish by statistics, in stating which his errors surpassed his sentences in number. But I let these pass for the present, that I may deal with his argument. Pray, sir, is the acknowledged turpitude of a departed generation to become an example for us? And yet the suggestion of the senator, if entitled to any consideration in this discussion, must have this extent. I join my friend from New Hampshire in thanking the senator from South Carolina for adducing this instance; for it gives me an opportunity to say, that the northern merchants, with homes in Boston, Bristol, Newport, New York, and Philadelphia, who catered for slavery during the years of the slave-trade, are the lineal progenitors of the northern men, with homes in these places, who lend themselves to slavery in our day; and especially that all, whether north or south, who take part, directly or indirectly, in the conspiracy against Kansas, do but continue the work of the slave-traders, which you condemn. It is true, too true, alas! that our fathers were engaged in this traffic; but that is no apology for it. And in repelling the authority of this example, I repel also the trite argument founded on the earlier example of England. It is true that our mothercountry, at the peace of Utrecht, extorted from Spain the Assiento Contract, securing the monopoly of the slave-trade with the Spanish colonies, as the whole price of all the blood of great victories; that she higgled at Aix-la-Chapelle for another lease of this exclusive traffic; and again, at the treaty of Madrid, clung to the wretched piracy. It is true, that in this spirit the power of the mother-country was prostituted to the same base ends in her American colonies, against

indignant protests from our fathers. All these things now rise up in judgment against her. Let us not follow the senator from South Carolina to do the very evil to-day, which in another generation we condemn.'

Next, referring to Mr Douglas, senator from Illinois, he proceeded: 'Standing on this floor, the senator issued his rescript, requiring submission to the usurped power of Kansas; and this was accompanied by a manner-all his own-such as befits the tyrannical threat. Very well. Let the senator try. I tell him now that he cannot enforce any such submission. The senator, with the slave-power at his back, is strong, but he is not strong enough for this purpose. He is bold. He shrinks from nothing. Like Danton, he may cry, "L'audace! l'audace! toujours l'audace!" but even his audacity cannot compass this work. The senator copies the British officer, who, with boastful swagger, said that with the hilt of his sword he would cram the "stamps " down the throats of the American people; and he will meet a similar failure. He may convulse this country with civil feud. Like the ancient madman, he may set fire to this temple of constitutional liberty, grander than Ephesian dome; but he cannot enforce obedience to that tyrannical usurpation.

The senator dreams that he can subdue the North. He disclaims the open threat, but his conduct still implies it. How little that senator knows himself, or the strength of the cause which he persecutes ! He is but a mortal man; against him is an immortal principle. With finite power, he wrestles with the infinite, and he must fall. Against him are stronger battalions than any marshalled by mortal arm-the inborn, ineradicable, invincible sentiments of the human heart; against him is nature in all her subtile

forces; against him is God. Let him try to subdue these.'

We need not follow Mr Sumner through his lengthened speech, for the narrative of the struggle in Kansas, which formed its main feature, has been already presented in these pages. In concluding, he admonitorily appealed to the sense of justice of the people. The contest which, beginning in Kansas, has reached us, will soon be transferred from congress to a broader stage, where every citizen will be not only spectator, but actor; and to their judgment I confidently appeal. To the people, now on the eve of exercising the electoral franchise, in choosing a chief magistrate of the republic, I appeal, to vindicate the electoral franchise in Kansas. Let the ballot-box of the Union, with multitudinous might, protect the ballot-box in that territory. Let the voters everywhere, while rejoicing in their own rights, help to guard the equal rights of distant fellow-citizens; that the shrines of popular institutions, now desecrated, may be sanctified anew; that the ballot-box, now plundered, may be restored; and that the cry, "I am an American citizen," may not be sent forth in vain against outrage of every kind. In just regard for free labour in that territory, which it is sought to blast by unwelcome association with slave labour; in Christian sympathy with the slave, whom it is proposed to task and to sell there; in stern condemnation of the crime which has been consummated on that beautiful soil; in rescue of fellow-citizens, now subjugated to a tyrannical usurpation; in dutiful respect for the early fathers, whose aspirations are now ignobly thwarted; in the name of the constitution, which has been outraged-of the laws trampled down-of justice banished-of humanity degraded―of peace destroyed-of freedom crushed to earth; and, in the name of the Heavenly Father,

whose service is perfect freedom, I make this last appeal.'

Candidly considered, there were some passages in this speech neither in the best taste, nor in accordance with English notions of parliamentary licence; but there was nothing out of the usual routine of congressional harangues on occasions of party difference; and we have to remember that Mr Sumner spoke under a deep sense of the grievous wrongs committed in Kansas, through the agency of the party of which Mr Butler and Mr Douglas were, in a sense, the leaders. Whatever may be thought of Mr Sumner's harangue, nothing could justify the form of reprisal, a bare allusion to which shocks every sensitive feeling.

Mr Sumner's speech enraged the extreme southern party in congress; and as is now alleged, the Hon. Preston S. Brooks,* member of the House of Representatives, from South Carolina, was appointed to commit an assault on Mr Sumner, under the name of a chastisement for his allusions to Mr Butler, who was at the time absent. Whether Brooks so acted from the incitement of his friends or only from his own will, is indifferent. On the 22d of May, the senate adjourned at an early hour, in consequence of the death of a member; but after the adjournment, as is not unusual with senators, Mr Sumner remained at his desk writing. There were also present Mr Crittenden, of Kentucky, and several other senators, who had not left the chamber, some of the subordinate officers, and a number of other persons. While Mr Sumner was seated writing, Mr Brooks, accompanied by Mr Keitt,

*Members of both branches of congress receive the title of Honourable, which they seem to retain through life-a curious example of titular distinction in a republican country.