SLAVERY:
LETTERS AND SPEECHES,
BY
HORACE MANN,
THE FIRST SECRETARY OF THE MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF
EDUCATION.
BOSTON:
PUBLISHED BY B. B. MUSSEY & CO.
1851.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1851, by
HORACE MANN,
In the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the
District of Massachusetts.
STEREOTYPED AT THE
BOSTON STEREOTYPE FOUNDRY.
TO
THE YOUNG MEN
OF
MASSACHUSETTS
THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY
Dedicated
BY
THE AUTHOR.
This work comes from one in whose mind present Memories are taking the
place of early Hopes. It is specially addressed to those in whose minds
future Memories will soon take the place of present Hopes. Hence a
fitting occasion presents itself for the statement of a few principles,
by whose unerring guidance the exulting Hopes of Youth may always be
transformed into the happy Memories of Age.
The Youth of all climes and times have a common attribute. The desire
of happiness is a universal desire. God fixes this element in the core
of life. Far back in our moral organization, before human conduct can
come in to control or modify, this longing for happiness, this hope of
future welfare, is radicated in the soul; so that it seems to have been
the first attribute which was taken for the constitution of our nature,
and around which the other attributes were gathered, rather to have
been added to the rest as a secondary or incident. The desire of some
form of happiness being secured, as a motive power, it seems to have
been left very much to the option of each individual to select his own
objects of enjoyment, whether noble or ignoble, and to devise his own
means for obtaining them, whether righteous or unrighteous.
The emulous and aspiring youth of a Free People will always find much
of their private, and most of their public welfare, indissolubly
connected with the institutions and laws of their country. In these,
therefore, their interest is both public and personal;--it pertains
to the citizen as well as to the man. All great moral questions,
though touching them but lightly at first, will come closer and closer
home, as long as they live;--growing into greater importance for
their posthumous memory than for their living fame, and affecting the
fortunes of their posterity even more than their own.
Though all Young Men are substantially alike in their desire of well
being, yet, in regard to the guiding principles by which the objects
of hope are pursued, in order to obtain happiness, three marked
distinctions, or classes, exist among them.
1. There are those who adopt with implicit and unquestioning faith the
views of their parents, or of the circle, or caste, into which they
were thrown by the accident of birth. They never venture to explore or
wander outside of the ideas and opinions among which they were born
and bred. For them, an hereditary boundary encloses thought, belief,
hope. Whether the opinions amid which they live are insular in their
narrowness, or continental in their breadth; whether they belong to
the earth, came up from the dark regions below, or descended from the
realms of purity above, they are taken into the receptive soul, as
unfledged birds take whatever food is offered them, from friend or foe,
with closed eye and opened mouth. Even if practically right, therefore,
they are never rationally right, for they have never discerned between
good and ill; and all their convictions, whether true or untrue, rest
upon the foundation of bigotry alone.
2. The second class look eagerly beyond family or caste. They anxiously
inquire what views, what dogmas, are in the ascendant among men,--what
party predominates or outvotes, what avowals or professions will most
readily open avenues to wealth, propitiate power, win patronage,
insure advancement. Finding where the preponderance of forces lies,
they attach themselves to the stronger. No matter whether the tide
ebbs or flows, they drift with the current. If popular views change,
they change, “like a wave driven with the wind and tossed;” like a
chameleon, changing its color with every contact.
Some of this class, more sagacious, though not less false to principle,
than the rest, ascend an eminence, whence they can survey the direction
of forces, mark the future point and period of their union, and then
they strike at once for the spot whither those forces are converging
They, not less than their fellows, warp eternal principles to suit the
vice of the hour, only it is an hour somewhat future, instead of the
present one.
3. But there is a third class of Young Men who are true to the sacred
instincts of virtue, and devoutly reverent of duty. They seek, not for
the time-hallowed, but for the truth-hallowed. They have learnt that,
in the divine classification, there are but two great objects in the
universe,--God and Mankind. These are the only existences recognized in
those two supreme laws, which, by divine prerogative, hold all other
laws in their embrace. Hence the two resulting and all-comprehending
duties,--love to God and love to Man. The convictions and sentiments
which belong to the Brotherhood of the one, stand upon the same basis
of authority as those which belong to the Fatherhood of the other.
Hence all other entities and possibilities,--opulence, power, fame,
genius, things present, or things to come,--are, and forever must be,
secondary and subordinate to these primary and everlasting laws. No
names so lofty, no multitude so large, that they can abolish these
truths, or abstract one jot or tittle from their binding force, in
this life, or in any life. They are coëternal with their Author;
unchangeable as He, and moral life and moral death wait upon their
award.
When the Young Man of this class looks within himself, he finds the
constitution of his own moral nature to be such, that annihilation with
truth is better than the most favored existence with error. And when he
looks without himself, he sees there is a God enthroned above, mightier
than every “god of this world,” and that there is a divine law higher
than any laws of fallible men. Hence he knows that Right and Truth
will assuredly triumph, and that all who oppose them will be scattered
as the whirlwind scatters the chaff. The patriarchs sold Joseph into
Egypt; yet God was with him, and raised him to honor, and at last put
the lives of his treacherous brethren into his hands.
Whatever may be the peculiar madness of the hour, in whatever direction
the gauds of wealth may beckon, or the prizes of ambition call, let the
Young Man remember, _that_ only can be honorable which is just, that
only can be safe which is right. Hence, though the perfumed breezes
of flattery may entice him on one side, and a storm of maledictions
beat fiercely against him on the other, let him consecrate himself
to Justice and Truth, and be inspired with the faith that, though
the earth should quake or the heavens fall, an omniscient eye will
over-watch, and an omniscient arm will protect him.
Among the wiles of the sorceress that beguile the young to their ruin
there is no more seductive, yet fallacious temptation, than the value
which seems to belong to the passing hour, and to the pleasures it may
bring. How infinitely small a part of existence is the present day,
or year! How insignificant its point compared with the ages to come!
What are its huzzas, its ostentation, and its pride, when placed in
the balance against the eternity of rewards that crown allegiance to
duty? O, how insane and fatuous to barter the undecaying honors of the
future for the transitory joys of the present! In the future, lies the
wealth of every man; the present is only an opportunity to make its
title secure. The temporizer must snatch from hour to hour at some new
expedient, which, if he fails to seize, he sinks to perdition. The
virtuous man binds himself to a principle, and soars securely through
all worlds.
* * * * *
Nothing stands upon a more adamantine basis of truth than the
principles which decide between Human Freedom and Human Slavery. These
eternal principles happen now, in a peculiar degree, to be implicated
in the shifting and uncertain current of politics; and political storms
may seem for a time to overwhelm them. But the cloud which obscures the
sun does not annihilate it; and these principles are sure to emerge and
shine unclouded in their native splendor forever. Every act, whether
of individuals or of governments, whether committed in past days or
in our day, which compromises the sacred principles of Human Freedom,
or postpones its interests to other interests, is set down, in the
calendar of fate, for ultimate and universal execration. This is just
as certain as it is that the great crimes of the race committed in
past ages,--the persecutions of the early Christians, the tortures of
the Inquisition, or the atrocities of the African Slave trade,--are
now condemned by the awful verdict of history and the ever-sounding
reprobation of mankind. In the spread of Christianity, in the advance
of civilization, in the moral development of the people, a tribunal is
now preparing, which will pronounce sentence of condemnation against
the abetters of slavery, to be promulgated as from Sinai, and preserved
in the archives of eternity. The Progress of the Age bears us on, not
only to a forward, but to an upward point; and what we now say against
the apostates to duty and the traitors of mankind, in past ages,
however much they may have been honored, caressed, and rewarded in
their day, will soon be said of every one amongst ourselves who leads
or joins the band of conspirators against the Rights of Man.
Every Young Man, however obscure or powerless he may seem, can do
something for the cause of freedom. Whatever disadvantages the youth
may labor under, they have one all-compensating advantage. A longer
period of life is before them, and deeds which can only be accomplished
through years of labor, they can achieve. But our success depends
infinitely less upon our strength than upon our motive. When we
supply the virtuous will, God supplies the power; so that the result
corresponds, not to our weakness, but to his omnipotence. We are thus
made able
----“to join
Our partial movements with the master wheel
Of the great world, _and serve that sacred end,
Which He, the unerring Reason, keeps in view_.”
Those Young Men of Massachusetts, then, of the noble lineage of the
Pilgrims, who have been nursed amid the influences of sanctuary
and school, in whose bosoms is the sacred depository of future and
boundless hopes, but who are now counselled to abandon their integrity,
who are brought into peril of being corrupted by the lures of wealth,
or fascinated by the dazzling of worldly honors, or swept away by the
pressure of the multitude that do evil, I adjure to stand fast and
immovable on those sacred and eternal principles of Human Liberty
which came down to us _through_ the fires of oppression and the agony
and blood of martyrs, but came _from_ God;--principles that can never
suffer the decays of time, which kings nor senates of kings can ever
abolish, and which, however much the passions of men may seek to taint
or defile them, are ever beautiful and fair, as the names of all their
disciples shall hereafter be. I call upon Young Men to throw themselves
forward in imagination into middle life, or old age, and there behold
how these mighty questions will look in the retrospect of time, when
the brilliant robes which now gild the tempter are gone, and only the
ghastly fiend remains; when the passion that prompted the crime is
dead, and only the remorse survives. Think not of luxury, or wealth,
or ignoble ease, but only of an heroic conflict, careless of the
present strength of the foe. Take no bribe from the hand of power, in
whatever disguise of beauty it may come, but spurn it and its author
alike. Let your future manhood realize the generous aspirations of your
youth; and, amid the seductions of the present hour, prize only the
jubilant memories you can lay up for old age. It may grieve you to
break friendships, but truth and duty are your nearest friends. It may
be painful to live amongst those who upbraid and condemn you; but be a
coward when virtue is in peril, and your own accusing conscience you
must live with forever. Study those exemplars of excellence who came
purified and resplendent out of fiery trials. It is said of Francis
the First, that when he read the valorous exploits of Gaston de Foix,
he wept tears of emulation. Rejoice, then, though marshalled in the
fore front of battle when the Rights of Humanity are in danger, and
you shall rejoice again and forever in their triumph. Read and ponder
what was so nobly said by one of the heathen of the old world, and be
ashamed, yea, weep for your country and your kind, if the Christianity
of America has fallen below the paganism of Rome. Seneca says,--
“Virtue covets danger; and whatever may be her aim, she never stops
to consider how much she may suffer, since her sufferings are a part
of her glory. Military men glory in their scars. With exultation they
point us to their blood flowing in an honorable cause. Though they who
return _unharmed_ from the field of battle may have done as many and
as noble deeds, yet it is the _wounded_ soldier who receives double
honors. God provides for those whom he would make most honorable, by
furnishing them with opportunities for achieving valiant and noble
deeds. Hence he strews difficulties along their path. It is in the
storm you see who is worthy to be a pilot; and in battle, who is
the soldier.... How can I know with what constancy and endurance
one will bear up against reproach and obloquy and popular odium, if
he has grown old amidst the applauses of the world, if he has never
encountered misfortune, and has been followed by the indiscriminating
favor of men?... Be not affrighted, I beseech you, at the dangers
which were intended by the immortal gods only as stimulants to
exertion. The season of calamity is virtue’s opportunity. _They_,
rather, are to be esteemed wretched, who lie torpid in luxurious
ease, whom a sluggish calm detains on the great voyage, like vessels
that lie weltering on a sea without a gale. Whom God approves and
loves, he exercises, and tries them again and again, and thus inures
them to hardship; but those whom he designs to enervate, he spares
and indulges and saves them from impending ills.... The _bravest_ of
the army are they whom the commander selects for the most perilous
service. The general details his choicest men to send on secret
expeditions by night, or to explore an unknown way, or to dislodge
a garrison from their entrenchments. No man chosen for such an
enterprise is ever heard to say, ‘_My commander has wronged and
dishonored me_,’ but rather, ‘_He has known well whom to choose._’
Such, too, is the language of those who are required to suffer what
would make the timid and the ignoble weep. We stand honored in the
divine regards when the great experiment, _how much human nature can
endure for a virtuous cause_, is tried in ourselves.... As teachers
deal with their scholars, so God deals with good men. He demands most
of those in whom he has most confidence.”
WEST NEWTON, October, 1851.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
LETTER ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION FOR THE THIRTIETH CONGRESS, 1
SPEECH, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED
STATES, JUNE 30, 1848, 10
SKETCH OF THE OPENING ARGUMENT IN THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES
_vs._ DANIEL DRAYTON, 84
LETTER ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION FOR THE THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS, 119
SPEECH, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED
STATES, FEB. 23, 1849, 121
SPEECH, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED
STATES, FEB. 15, 1850, 180
TWO LETTERS ON THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY, AND ON THE RIGHT OF AN
ALLEGED FUGITIVE SLAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY, 236, 282
LETTER: THE ORDINANCE OF 1787, 238
LETTER ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION FOR THE THIRTY-SECOND CONGRESS, 340
SPEECH, DELIVERED AT DEDHAM, NOV. 6, 1850, 357
SPEECH, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED
STATES, FEB. 28, 1851, 390
SPEECH, DELIVERED AT LANCASTER, MAY 19, 1851, 473
SPEECH, DELIVERED IN BOSTON, APRIL 8, 1851, 523
SPEECH, DELIVERED AT WORCESTER, SEPT. 16, 1851, 536
LETTER
ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION FOR THE THIRTIETH CONGRESS, MADE BY THE WHIG
CONVENTION OF DISTRICT NO. 8, MARCH, 1848.
GENTLEMEN;
Your communication of the 16th inst., being directed to Newton,
(instead of West Newton, where I reside,) did not reach me until
this morning. I thank you cordially for the kind expressions of
personal regard with which you have been pleased to accompany it. You
inform me that at a convention of delegates assembled in Dedham, on
Wednesday, the 15th inst., I was nominated as a candidate to fill the
vacancy in Congress occasioned by the death of the great and good man
whose irreparable loss we, his constituents, with a nation for our
fellow-mourners, deplore.
At first thought, the idea of being the immediate successor of John
Quincy Adams in the councils of the nation might well cause any man
to shrink back from the inevitable contrast. But it is obvious, on a
moment’s reflection, that the difference is so trivial between all the
men whom he has left, compared with the disparity between them and
him, as to render it of little consequence, in this respect, who shall
succeed him; and the people in the Eighth District, in their descent
from Mr. Adams to any successor, must break and bear the shock of the
fall, as best they can.
I most heartily concur with you in that estimate of the services, and
veneration for the character, of our late representative, which your
resolutions so eloquently express. To be fired by his example, to
imitate his diligence and fidelity in the discharge of every trust, to
emulate his moral intrepidity, which always preferred to stand alone by
the right, rather than to join the retinue and receive the plaudits of
millions, as a champion of the wrong,--this would be, in the beautiful
language of the Roman historian, “to ascend to glory by the path of
virtue.”
One of the resolutions adopted by your convention declares the three
following things:--
1. That the successor of Mr. Adams, on the floor of Congress, should
be a man “whose principles shall be in consonance with those of his
predecessor.”
2. That his fidelity to the great principles of human freedom shall be
unwavering. And,--
3. That his “voice and vote shall on all occasions be exercised in
extending and securing liberty to the human race.”
Permit me to reäffirm these sentiments with my whole heart. Should the
responsibilities of that successorship ever be devolved upon me, I
shall endeavor so to fulfil them, that these dead words should become
a living soul. I should deem it not only an object of duty, but of the
highest ambition, to contend for the noble principles you have here
expressed, as Mr. Adams contended for them; though, unhappily, it would
be only as a David in Saul’s armor. Bear with me for a moment while I
enlarge upon these sentiments.
1. “_In consonance with his principles._”--I believe it was the
sovereign rule of Mr. Adams’s life to act in obedience to his
convictions of duty. Truth was his guide. His conscience was
non-elastic. He did not strain at a gnat before company, on account
of its size, and then, privately, swallow a camel. His patriotism was
coëxtensive with his country; it could not be crushed and squeezed in
between party lines. Though liable to err,--and what human being is
not?--yet his principles were believed by him to be in accordance
with the great moral laws of the universe. They were thought out from
duty and religion, and not carved out of expediency. When invested
with patronage, he never dismissed a man from office because he was a
political opponent, and never appointed one to office merely because
he was a political friend. Hence he drew from Mr. Holmes, of South
Carolina, this noble eulogium,--a eulogium, considering the part of
the country from which it came, as honorable to its author as to
its object,--that “he crushed no heart beneath the rude grasp of
proscription; he left no heritage of widows’ cries or orphans’ tears.”
Could all the honors which Mr. Adams ever won from offices held under
the first five Presidents of the United States, and from a public
service, which, commencing more than fifty years ago, continued to the
day of his death, be concentrated in one effulgent blaze, they would be
less far-shining and inextinguishable than the honor of sacrificing his
election for a second presidential term, because he would not, in order
to obtain it, prostitute the patronage and power which the constitution
had placed in his hands. I regard this as the sublimest spectacle in
his long and varied career. He stood within reach of an object of
ambition doubtless dearer to him than life. He could have laid his
hands upon it. The “still, small voice” said, No! Without a murmur, he
saw it taken and borne away in triumph by another. Compared with this,
the block of many a martyr has been an easy resting-place.
2. “_Unwavering fidelity to the great principles of human
freedom._”--The Declaration of American Independence, in 1776, was
the first complete assertion of human rights, on an extensive scale,
ever made by mankind. Less than three quarters of a century have
elapsed, and already the greatest portion of the civilized world
has felt the influence of that Declaration. France, for years, has
had a constitutional monarchy; perhaps, to-day, her government is
republican. Holland and Belgium are comparatively free. Almost all
the states of the Germanic Confederation have a written constitution,
and a legislature with a popular branch. Prussia has lately commenced
a representative system. The iron rule of Austria is relaxed under
the fervent heat which liberty reflects from surrounding nations.
Naples and Sicily have just burst the bonds of tyranny. In Rome and
the States of the Church, where, under the influence of religious and
political despotism, the heart of Freedom was supposed to be petrified
into insoluble hardness, that heart is now beginning to pulsate with a
new life, and to throb with sympathy for humanity. Great Britain and
Denmark have emancipated their slaves in the West Indies. Measures
are now in progress to ameliorate the condition of Russian serfs.
Even half-barbarous, Mahometan Tunis has yielded to the tide of free
principles. To what bar of judgment will our own posterity bring us,
what doom of infamy will history pronounce upon us, if the United
States shall hereafter be found the only portion of Christendom where
the principles of our own Declaration of Independence are violated in
the persons of millions of our people?
3. “_The exercise, on all occasions, of voice and vote, in extending
and securing liberty to the human race._”--There is a crisis in our
affairs. A territory, in extent far exceeding that of the thirteen
original states, when they repelled the power of Great Britain,
has lately been added, or is, doubtless, about to be added, to our
national domain. The expanse of this territory is so vast, that it
may be divided into a dozen sections, and these sections may be
erected into separate states, each one of which shall be so large that
Massachusetts would seem but an inconsiderable court-yard, if placed
in front of it. Parts of this territory are fertile and salubrious. It
is capable of supporting millions and millions of human beings, of
the same generation. The numbers of the successive generations, which
in the providence of God are to inhabit it, will be as the leaves of
the forest, or the sands on the sea-shore. Each one of these is to
be a living soul, with its joys and sorrows, its hopes and fears,
its susceptibilities of exaltation or of abasement. Each one will be
capable of being formed into the image of God, or of being deformed
into the image of all that is anti-godlike.
These countless millions are to be our kindred; many of them, perhaps,
our own descendants; at any rate, our brethren of the human family;
for has not God “made of one blood all nations of men to dwell upon
all the face of the earth”? In rights, in character, in happiness; in
freedom or in vassalage; in the glorious immunities and prerogatives
of knowledge, or in the debasement and superstitions of ignorance;
in their upward-looking aspiration and love of moral excellence,
or in their downward-looking, prone-rushing, and brutish appetites
and passions, what shall these millions of our fellow-creatures be?
I put it as a practical question, What shall these millions of our
fellow-creatures be?--for it is more than probable that this very
generation,--nay, that the actors in public affairs, before the sands
of the present year shall have run out,--will prescribe and foreördain
their doom. That doom will be what our present conduct predestines.
If we enact laws and establish institutions, under whose benign
influences that vast tract of territory shall at length teem with
myriads of human beings, each one a free-born man; each one enjoying
the inalienable right of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;”
each one free for the cultivation of his capacities, and free in the
choice and in the rewards of his labor;--if we do this, although
the grand results may not manifest themselves for a thousand years,
yet when the fulness of time shall come, the equity and the honor
of framing these laws and institutions will belong to us, as much
as though the glorious consummation could be realized to-morrow. On
the other hand, if we so shape the mould in which their fortunes are
to be cast, that, for them or for any portion of them, there shall
be servitude instead of liberty, ignorance instead of education,
debasement instead of dignity, the indulgence of bestial appetites
instead of the sanctities and securities of domestic life,--then, until
the mountains shall crumble away by age, until the arches of the skies
shall fall in rottenness, these mountains and these arches will never
cease to echo back the execrations upon our memory of all the great
and good men of the world. And this retribution, I believe, will come
suddenly, as well as last forever.
In one of the South-western States a vast subterranean cave has been
discovered, deep down in whose chambers there is a pool of water, on
which no beam of sunlight ever shines. A sightless fish is said to
inhabit this rayless pool. In this animal, indeed, the rudiments of a
visual organ are supposed to be dimly discernible; but of an orb to
refract the rays of light, or of a retina to receive them, there is
no trace. Naturalists suppose that the progenitors of these animals,
in ages long gone by, possessed the power of vision; but that, being
buried in these depths by some convulsion of nature, long disuse at
first impaired, at length extinguished, and has at last obliterated
the visual organ itself. The animal has sunk in the scale of being,
until its senses are accommodated to the blackness of darkness in which
it dwells. Were this account wholly fabulous, it has the strongest
verisimilitude, and doubtless describes what would actually occur under
the circumstances supposed.
Thus will it be with faculties above the surface of the earth, as
well as below it. Thus will it be with human beings, as well as with
the lower orders of creation. Thus will it be with our own brethren
or children, should we shut up from them the book of knowledge, or
seal their senses so that they could not read it. Thus will it be
with all our God-given faculties, just so far as they are debarred
from legitimate exercise upon their appropriate objects. The love of
knowledge will die out, when it ceases to be stimulated by the means
of knowledge. Self-respect will die out, under the ever-present sense
of inferiority. The sentiments of truth and duty will die out, when
cunning and falsehood can obtain more gratifications than frankness
and honesty. The noblest impulses of the human soul, the most sacred
affections of the human heart, will die out, when every sphere is
closed against their exercise. When such a dreadful work is doing,
or threatens to be done, can any one stand listlessly by, see it
perpetrated, and then expect to excuse himself, under the false,
impious pretext of Cain, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
Fully, then, do I agree with you and the delegates of the convention
you represent, in saying that the successor of Mr. Adams should be
one “whose voice and vote shall, on all occasions, be exercised in
extending and securing liberty to the human race.” Of course I do not
understand you to imply any violation of the constitution of the United
States, which every representative swears to support.
Permit me to say a word personal to myself. For eleven years, I have
been estranged from all political excitements. During this whole
period, I have attended no political meeting of any kind whatever. I
have contented myself with the right of private judgment and the right
of voting, though it has usually so happened that my official duties
have demanded my absence from home at the time of the fall elections.
I have deemed this abstinence from _actively_ mingling in political
contests both a matter of duty towards opposing political parties, and
a proper means of subserving the best interests of the cause in which I
had embarked. I hoped too, by so doing, to assist in rearing men even
better than those now belonging to any party.
The nature of my duties also, and all my intercourse and associations,
have attracted me towards whatever is worthy and beneficent in all
parties, rather than towards what is peculiar to any one. Not believing
in political pledges, I should have had the honor to decline giving any
to you, had you not had the first and greater honor of asking none from
me. After what I have said above in favor of liberty for all mankind,
it would be a strange contradiction did I consent to be myself a slave
of party. The hands which you raised in behalf of yourselves and
your constituents, when you voted for the noble sentiments contained
in the resolution I have quoted, could never degrade themselves by
forging a fetter for the free mind of another, or fastening one upon
it; and the hand with which I have penned my hearty response to those
sentiments can never stretch itself out to take a fetter on. Should
your nomination, therefore, be accepted and be successful, it must be
with the explicit understanding between us that I shall always be open
to receive the advice of my constituents, shall always welcome their
counsel, always be most grateful for their suggestions, but that,
in the last resort, my own sense of duty must be the only arbiter.
Should differences arise, the law opens an honorable escape for both
parties,--declination on my part, substitution on yours.
I must add, in closing, that so far as personal preferences are
concerned, I infinitely prefer remaining in my present position, with
all its labor and its thanklessness, to any office in the gift of
the people. I had hoped and intended, either in a public or private
capacity, to spend my life in advancing the great cause of the people’s
education. Two considerations alone could tempt me to abandon this
purpose. The first is important. The enactment of laws which shall
cover waste territory, to be applied to the myriads of human beings
who are hereafter to occupy that territory, is a work which seems to
precede and outrank even education itself. Whether a wide expanse of
country shall be filled with beings to whom education is permitted,
or with those to whom it is denied,--with those whom humanity and the
law make it a duty to teach, or with those whom inhumanity and the law
make it a _legal_ duty not to teach, seems preliminary to all questions
respecting the best systems and methods for rendering education
effective.
The other consideration is comparatively unimportant; though, for
the time being, it has embarrassed me greatly. I now learn that
expectations were excited at your convention, that if a nomination were
tendered me, it would not be declined. Had I anticipated the favorable
regards of the convention, or foreseen that such expectations would be
raised, I should not have hearkened to the proposition for a moment;
and I may be permitted to add, that when I saw my name announced in
the papers, my first act was to prepare a letter of declination. It
was only when I went to deliver the letter that I learnt what had been
done, and that, in the opinion of persons whose judgment I am bound to
respect, I had been so far committed by my too partial friends, as that
no option remained.
Yielding to these considerations, I submit myself to the decision of my
fellow-citizens.
With sentiments of high personal regard,
I am, gentlemen,
Your friend and servant,
HORACE MANN.
Hon. THOMAS FRENCH, President; SAMUEL C. MANN, JOHN K. CORBETT, EDWARD
CREHORE, Esqs., Secretaries.
WEST NEWTON, March 21, 1848.
SPEECH
DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, JUNE
30, 1848, ON THE RIGHT OF CONGRESS TO LEGISLATE FOR THE TERRITORIES OF
THE UNITED STATES, AND ITS DUTY TO EXCLUDE SLAVERY THEREFROM.
MR. CHAIRMAN;
I have listened with interest, both yesterday and to-day, to speeches
on what is called the “Presidential Question.” I propose to discuss a
question of far greater magnitude,--the question of the age,--one whose
consequences will not end with the ensuing four years, but will reach
forward to the setting of the sun of time.
Sir, our position is this: The United States finds itself the owner of
a vast region of country at the west, now almost vacant of inhabitants.
Parts of this region are salubrious and fertile. We have reason to
suppose, that, in addition to the treasures of wealth which industry
may gather from its surface, there are mineral treasures beneath
it,--riches garnered up of old in subterranean chambers, and only
awaiting the application of intelligence and skill to be converted
into the means of human improvement and happiness. These regions, it
is true, lie remote from our place of residence. Their shores are
washed by another sea, and it is no figure of speech to say that
another sky bends over them. So remote are they, that their hours
are not as our hours, nor their day as our day; and yet, such are
the wonderful improvements in art, in modern times, as to make it no
rash anticipation, that, before this century shall have closed, the
inhabitants on the Atlantic shores will be able to visit their brethren
on the Pacific in ten days; and that intelligence will be transmitted
and returned between the eastern and the western oceans in ten minutes.
That country, therefore, will be rapidly filled, and we shall be
brought into intimate relations with it, and, notwithstanding its
distance, into proximity to it.
Now, in the providence of God, it has fallen to our lot to legislate
for this unoccupied, or but partially occupied, expanse. Its great
future hangs upon our decision. Not only degrees of latitude and
longitude, but vast tracts of time,--ages and centuries,--seem at
our disposal. As are the institutions which we form and establish
there, so will be the men whom these institutions, in their turn,
will form. Nature works by fixed laws; but we can bring this or that
combination of circumstances under the operation of her laws, and thus
determine results. Here springs up our responsibility. One class of
institutions will gather there one class of men, who will develop one
set of characteristics; another class of institutions will gather there
another class of men, who will develop other characteristics. Hence
their futurity is to depend upon our present action. Hence the acts we
are to perform seem to partake of the nature of creation, rather than
of legislation. Standing upon the elevation which we now occupy, and
looking over into that empty world, “yet void,” if not “without form,”
but soon to be filled with multitudinous life, and reflecting upon our
power to give form and character to that life, and almost to foreördain
what it shall be, I feel as though it would be no irreverence to
compare our condition to that of the Creator before he fashioned the
“lord” of this lower world; for we, like Him, can ingraft one set of
attributes, or another set of attributes, upon a whole race of men. In
approaching this subject, therefore, I feel a sense of responsibility
corresponding to the infinite,--I speak literally,--the _infinite_
interests which it embraces.
As far as the time allowed me will permit, I propose to discuss two
questions. The first is, “_Whether Congress can lawfully legislate on
the subject of slavery in the territories_.”
On this question a new and most extraordinary doctrine has lately been
broached. A new reading of the constitution has been discovered. It is
averred that the 3d section of the 4th article, giving Congress power
“to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting
the territory or other property belonging to the United States,”
only gives power to legislate for the land _as land_. It is admitted
that Congress may legislate for the land _as land_,--geologically or
botanically considered,--perhaps for the beasts that roam upon its
surface, or the fishes that swim in its waters; but it is denied that
Congress possesses any power to determine the laws and the institutions
of those who shall inhabit that “land.”
But compare this with any other object of purchase or possession. When
Texas was admitted into the Union, it transferred its “navy” to the
United States; in other words, the United States bought, and of course
owned, the navy of Texas. What power had Congress over this navy, after
the purchase? According to the new doctrine, it could pass laws for the
hull, the masts, and the sails of the Texan ships, but would have no
power to navigate them by officers and men. It might govern the ships
as so much wood, iron, and cordage, but would have no authority over
commanders or crews.
But we are challenged to show any clause in the constitution which
confers an _express_ power to legislate over the territories we
possess. I challenge our opponents to show any clause which confers
express power to acquire those territories themselves. If, then, the
power to acquire exists, it exists by implication and inference; and
if the power _to acquire_ be an implied one, the power _to govern what
is acquired_ must be implied also. For, for what purpose does any man
acquire property but to govern and control it? What does a buyer pay
for, if it be not the right to “dispose of”? Such is the doctrine of
the Supreme Court of the United States: “The right to govern,” says
Chief Justice Marshall, “may be the inevitable consequence of the right
to acquire.” _Amer. Ins. Co._ vs. _Canter_, _1 Peters_, 542. See also
_McCullough_ vs. _Maryland_, _4 Wheat._, 422. _The Cherokee Nation_ vs.
_Georgia_, _5 Peters_, 44. _United States_ vs. _Gratiot_, _14 Peters_,
537.
But I refer to the express words of the constitution, as ample and
effective in conferring all the power that is claimed. “Congress
may dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations,” &c. If
Congress may “dispose of” this land, then it may sell it. Inseparable
from the right to sell is the right to define the terms of sale. The
seller may affix such conditions and limitations as he pleases to the
thing sold. If this be not so, then the buyer may dictate his terms to
the seller. Answer these simple questions: Supposing the United States
to own land in fee simple, then, is the government under guardianship,
or disabled by minority? Is it _non compos mentis_? If no such
disability applies to it, then it may sell. It may sell the fee simple,
or it may carve out a lesser estate, and sell that. It may incorporate
such terms and conditions as it pleases into its deed or patent of
sale. It may make an outright quitclaim, or it may reserve the minerals
for its own use, or the navigable streams for public highways, as
it did in regard to the territory north-west of the river Ohio. It
may insert the conditions and limitations in each deed or patent;
or, where the grantees are numerous, it may make general “rules and
regulations,” which are understood to be a part of each contract, and
are therefore binding upon each purchaser. No man is compelled to buy;
but if any one does buy, he buys subject to the “rules and regulations”
expressed in the grant; and neither he, nor his grantees, nor his or
their heirs after them, can complain. I want, therefore, no better
foundation for legislating over the territories than the fact of
ownership in the United States. Grant this, and all is granted. If I
own a farm, or a shop, I may, as owner, prescribe the conditions of its
transfer to another. If he does not like my conditions, then let him
abandon the negotiation; if he accedes to the conditions, then let him
abide by them, and hold his peace.
Sir, in the state to which I belong, we hold temperance to be a great
blessing, as well as a great virtue; and intemperance to be a great
curse, as well as a great sin. I know of incorporated companies
there, who have purchased large tracts of land for manufacturing
purposes. They well know how essential is the sobriety of workmen to
the profitableness of their work; they know, too, how wasteful and
destructive is inebriety. In disposing of their land, therefore, to the
men whom they would gather about them and employ, they incorporate the
provision, as a fundamental article in the deed of grant, that ardent
spirits shall never be sold upon the premises; and thus they shut up,
at once, one of the most densely-thronged gateways of hell. Have they
not a right to do so, from the mere fact of ownership? Would any judge
or lawyer doubt the validity of such a condition; or would any sensible
man ever doubt its wisdom or humanity? Pecuniarily and morally, this
comes under the head of “needful rules and regulations.” If tipplers
do not like them, let them stagger away, and seek their residence
elsewhere.
But the United States is not merely a land owner; it is a sovereignty.
As such, it exercises all constitutional jurisdiction over all its
territories. Whence, but from this right of sovereignty, does the
government obtain its power of saying that no man shall purchase land
of the natives, or aborigines; and that, if you wish to buy land in
the territories, you shall come to the government for it? Is there
any express power in the constitution authorizing Congress to say to
all the citizens of the United States, “If you wish to buy ungranted
land in the territories, you must come to us, for no one else can
sell, or shall sell”? This right, sustained by all our legislation and
adjudications, covers the whole ground. _Lessee of Johnson et al._ vs.
_McIntosh_, _8 Wheaton_, 543; _5 Cond. Rep._ 515.
But, leaving the constitution, it is denied that there are precedents.
The honorable gentlemen from Virginia [Mr. Bayly] has not only
contested the power of Congress to legislate on the subject of slavery
in the territories, but he has denied the existence of precedents to
sustain this power. Sir, it would have been an assertion far less bold,
to deny the existence of precedents for the election of a President of
the United States; for the instances of the latter have been far less
frequent than of the former. Congress has legislated on the subject
of slavery in the territories all the way up from the adoption of
the constitution to the present time; and this legislation has been
sustained by the judiciary of both the general and state governments,
and carried into execution by the executive power of both. See _Menard_
vs. _Aspasia_, _5 Peters_, 505; _Phebe et al._ vs. _Jay_, _Breese’s
Rep._ 210; _Hogg_ vs. _The Zanesville Canal Co._, _5 Ohio Rep._ 410;
_Martin’s Louisiana Rep. N. S._ 699; _Spooner_ vs. _McConnell_, _1
McLean’s Rep._ 341; _Harvey_ vs. _Deeker_, _Walker’s Mississippi Rep._
36; _Rachael_ vs. _Walker_, _4 Missouri Rep._ 350.
So far as the uniform practice of sixty years can settle a doubtful,
or confirm an admitted right, this power of legislating over the
territories has been taken from the region of doubt, and established
upon the basis of acknowledged authority. In legislating for all that
is now Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Missouri,
Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida, we have legislated on
the subject of slavery in the territories. Sixty years of legislation
on one side, and not a denial of the right on the other.
But the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bayly] says, that the action
of Congress in regard to the territories has been rather that of
constitution-making than of law-making. Suppose this to be true;
does not the greater include the less? If Congress could make a
constitution for all the territories,--an organic, fundamental law,--a
law of laws,--could it not, had it so pleased, make the law itself? A
constitution prescribes to the legislature what it shall do, and what
it shall not do; it commands, prohibits, and binds men by oaths to
support itself. It says, “Hitherto SHALT thou come, and no farther.”
And if Congress can do this, can it not make the local law itself? Can
aught be more preposterous? As if we could _command_ others to do what
we have no right to do ourselves, and prohibit others from doing what
lies beyond our own jurisdiction! Surely, to decree on what subjects a
community shall legislate, and on what they shall not legislate, is the
exercise of the highest power.
But Congress has not stopped with the exercise of the
constitution-making power. In various forms, and at all times, it has
legislated for the territories, in the strictest sense of the word
_legislation_. It has legislated again and again, and ten times again,
on this very subject of slavery. See the act of 1794, prohibiting the
slave trade from “any port _or place_” in the United States. Could any
citizen of the United States, under this act, have gone into one of
our territories and there have fitted out vessels for the slave trade?
Surely he could, if Congress had no right to legislate over territories
only as so much land and water.
By statute 1798, chapter 28, § 7, slaves were forbidden to be brought
into the Mississippi Territory from without the United States, and all
slaves so brought in _were made free_.
So the act of 1800, chapter 51, in further prohibition of the slave
trade, applied to all citizens of the United States, whether living in
territories or in organized states. Did not this legislation cover the
territories?
By statute 1804, chapter 38, § 10, three classes of slaves were
forbidden to be introduced into the Orleans Territory.
Statute 1807, chapter 22, prohibiting the importation of slaves after
January 1, 1808, prohibited their importation into the territories in
express terms.
Statute 1818, chapter 91, statute 1819, chapter 101, and statute
1820, chapter 113, prohibiting the slave trade, and making it piracy,
expressly included all the territories of the United States.
Statute 1819, chapter 21, authorized the President to provide for the
safe-keeping of slaves imported from Africa, and for their removal
to their home in that land. Under this law, the President might have
established a depot for slaves within the limits of our territories, on
the gulf, or on the Mississippi.
By statute 1820, chapter 22, § 8, Congress established what has been
called the Missouri compromise line, thereby expressly legislating on
the subject of slavery. So of Texas. See _Jo. Res. March 1, 1851_.
By statute 1819, chapter 93, statute 1821, chapter 39, § 2, and statute
1822, chapter 13, § 9, Congress legislated on the subject of slavery in
the Territory of Florida.