on to the position you have now assumed, and forward to the consequences
it will produce. Something more is necessary. Contemplate the condition
of that country of which you still form an important part; consider its
government uniting in one bond of common interest and general protection
so many different States--giving to all their inhabitants the proud
title of AMERICAN CITIZENS--protecting their commerce--securing their
literature and arts--facilitating their intercommunication--defending
their frontiers--and making their name respected in the remotest parts
of the earth! Consider the extent of its territory, its increasing and
happy population, its advance in arts, which render life agreeable, and
the sciences which elevate the mind! See education spreading the lights
of religion, morality, and general information into every cottage in
this wide extent of our Territories and States! Behold it as the asylum
where the wretched and the oppressed find a refuge and support! Look on
this picture of happiness and honor, and say, WE, TOO, ARE CITIZENS OF
AMERICA--Carolina is one of these proud States her arms have
defended--her best blood has cemented this happy Union! And then add, if
you can, without horror and remorse, this happy Union we will
dissolve--this picture of peace and prosperity we will deface--this free
intercourse we will interrupt--these fertile fields we will deluge with
blood--the protection of that glorious flag we renounce--the very name
of Americans we discard. And for what, mistaken men! For what do you
throw away these inestimable blessings--for what would you exchange your
share in the advantages and honor of the Union? For the dream of a
separate independence--a dream interrupted by bloody conflicts with your
neighbors, and a vile dependence on a foreign power. If your leaders
could succeed in establishing a separation, what would be your
situation? Are you united at home--are you free from the apprehension
of civil discord, with all its fearful consequences? Do our neighboring
republics, every day suffering some new revolution or contending with
some new insurrection--do they excite your envy? But the dictates of a
high duty oblige me solemnly to announce that you can not succeed. The
laws of the United States must be executed. I have no discretionary
power on the subject--my duty is emphatically pronounced in the
Constitution. Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their
execution, deceived you--they could not have been deceived themselves.
They know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution
of the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their
object is disunion; but be not deceived by names; disunion, by armed
force, is TREASON. Are you really ready to incur this guilt? If you are,
on the head of the instigators of the act be the dreadful
consequences--on their heads be the dishonor, but on yours may fall the
punishment--on your unhappy State will inevitably fall all the evils of
the conflict you force upon the government of your country. It cannot
accede to the mad project of disunion of which you would be the first
victims--its first magistrate can not, if he would, avoid the
performance of his duty--the consequence must be fearful for you,
distressing to your fellow-citizens here, and to the friends of good
government throughout the world. Its enemies have beheld our prosperity
with a vexation they could not conceal--it was a standing refutation of
their slavish doctrines, and they will point to our discord with the
triumph of malignant joy. It is yet in your power to disappoint them.
There is yet time to show that the descendants of the Pinckneys, the
Sumpters, the Rutledges, and of the thousand other names which adorn the
pages of your revolutionary history, will not abandon that Union to
support which so many of them fought and bled and died. I adjure you, as
you honor their memory--as you love the cause of freedom, to which they
dedicated their lives--as you prize the peace of your country, the lives
of its best citizens, and your own fair fame, to retrace your steps.
Snatch from the archives of your State the disorganizing edict of its
convention--bid its members to re-assemble and promulgate the decided
expressions of your will to remain in the path which alone can conduct
you to safety, prosperity, and honor--tell them that compared to
disunion, all other evils are light, because that brings with it an
accumulation of all--declare that you will never take the field unless
the star-spangled banner of your country shall float over you--that you
will not be stigmatized when dead, and dishonored and scorned while you
live, as the authors of the first attack on the Constitution of your
country!--its destroyers you can not be. You may disturb its peace--you
may interrupt the course of its prosperity--you may cloud its reputation
for stability--but its tranquillity will be restored, its prosperity
will return, and the stain upon its national character will be
transferred and remain an eternal blot on the memory of those who caused
the disorder.
Fellow-citizens of the United States! The threat of unhallowed
disunion--the names of those, once respected, by whom it is uttered--the
array of military force to support it--denote the approach of a crisis
in our affairs on which the continuance of our unexampled prosperity,
our political existence, and perhaps that of all free governments, may
depend. The conjecture demanded a free, a full, and explicit
enunciation, not only of my intentions, but of my principles of action;
and as the claim was asserted of a right by a State to annul the laws of
the Union, and even to secede from it at pleasure, a frank exposition of
my opinions in relation to the origin and form of our government, and
the construction I give to the instrument by which it was created,
seemed to be proper. Having the fullest confidence in the justness of
the legal and constitutional opinion of my duties which has been
expressed, I rely with equal confidence on your undivided support in my
determination to execute the laws--to preserve the Union by all
constitutional means--to arrest, if possible, by moderate but firm
measures, the necessity of a recourse to force; and, if it be the will
of Heaven that the recurrence of its primeval curse on man for the
shedding of a brother's blood should fall upon our land, that it be not
called down by any offensive act on the part of the United States.
Fellow-citizens! The momentous case is before you. On your undivided
support of your government depends the decision of the great question it
involves, whether your sacred Union will be preserved, and the blessing
it secures to us as one people shall be perpetuated. No one can doubt
that the unanimity with which that decision will be expressed, will be
such as to inspire new confidence in republican institutions, and that
the prudence, the wisdom, and the courage which it will bring to their
defense, will transmit them unimpaired and invigorated to our children.
May the Great Ruler of nations grant that the signal blessings with
which He has favored ours may not, by the madness of party, or personal
ambition, be disregarded and lost, and may His wise providence bring
those who have produced this crisis to see the folly, before they feel
the misery, of civil strife, and inspire a returning veneration for
that Union which, if we may dare to penetrate His designs, He has
chosen, as the only means of attaining the high destinies to which we
may reasonably aspire.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States to be
hereunto affixed, having signed the same with my hand.
Done at the City of Washington, this 10th day of December, in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two, and of the
independence of the United States the fifty-seventh.
ANDREW JACKSON.
By the President.
EDW. LIVINGSOE, _Secretary of State_.
MONROE DOCTRINE.
EXTRACT FROM PRESIDENT MONROE'S ANNUAL MESSAGE, WASHINGTON, DEC. 2,
1823.
The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most friendly
in favor of the liberty and happiness of their fellow-men on that side
of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating
to themselves, we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with
our policy so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded, or
seriously menaced, that we resent injuries or make preparations for our
defence. With the movements in this hemisphere, we are, of necessity,
more immediately connected, and by causes which must be obvious to all
enlightened and impartial observers. The political system of the allied
powers is essentially different, in this respect, from that of America.
This difference proceeds from that which exists in their respective
Governments. And to the defence of our own, which has been achieved by
the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of
their most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed
unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted.
We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing
between the United States and those powers, to declare, that we should
consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion
of this hemisphere, as dangerous to our peace and safety.
With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power, we
have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But, with the Governments
who have declared their independence, and maintained it, and whose
independence we have, on great consideration, and on just principles,
acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of
oppressing them, or controlling, in any other manner, their destiny, by
any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an
unfriendly disposition towards the United States.
In the war between those new Governments and Spain, we declared our
neutrality at the time of their recognition, and to this we have
adhered, and shall continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur,
which, in the judgment of the competent authorities of this Government,
shall make a corresponding change on the part of the United States,
indispensable to their security.
THE DRED SCOTT DECISION.
DRED SCOTT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, _vs._ JOHN F.A. SANDFORD.
This case was brought up by writ of error, from the Circuit Court of the
United States for the district of Missouri.
It was an action of trespass _vi et armis_ instituted in the Circuit
Court by Scott against Sanford.
Prior to the institution of the present suit, an action was brought by
Scott for his freedom in the Circuit Court of St. Louis county, (State
court,) where there was a verdict and judgment in his favor. On a writ
of error to the Supreme Court of the State, the judgment below was
reversed, and the case remanded to the Circuit Court, where it was
continued to await the decision of the case now in question.
The declaration of Scott contained three counts: one, that Sandford had
assaulted the plaintiff; one, that he had assaulted Harriet Scott, his
wife; and one, that he had assaulted Eliza Scott and Lizzie Scott, his
children.
Sandford appeared, and filed the following plea:
DRED SCOTT, }
_vs._ } _Plea to the Jurisdiction of the Court._
JOHN F.A. SANDFORD. }
APRIL TERM, 1854.
And the said John F.A. Sandford, in his own proper person, comes and
says that this court ought not to have or take further cognizance of the
action aforesaid, because he says that said cause of action, and each
and every of them, (if any such have accrued to the said Dred Scott,)
accrued to the said Dred Scott out of the jurisdiction of this court,
and exclusively within the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of
Missouri, for that, to wit: the said plaintiff, Dred Scott, is not a
citizen of the State of Missouri, as alleged in his declaration, because
he is a negro of African descent; his ancestors were of pure African
blood, and were brought into this country and sold as negro slaves, and
this the said Sandford is ready to verify. Wherefore he prays judgment
whether this court can or will take further cognizance of the action
aforesaid.
JOHN F.A. SANDFORD.
To this plea there was a demurrer in the usual form, which was argued
in April, 1854, when the court gave judgment that the demurrer should be
sustained.
In May, 1854, the defendant, in pursuance of an agreement between
counsel, and with the leave of the court, pleaded in bar of the action:
1. Not guilty.
2. That the plaintiff was a negro slave, the lawful property of the
defendant, and, as such, the defendant gently laid his hands upon him,
and thereby had only restrained him, as the defendant had a right to do.
3. That with respect to the wife and daughters of the plaintiff, in the
second and third counts of the declaration mentioned, the defendant had,
as to them, only acted in the same manner, and in virtue of the same
legal right.
In the first of these pleas, the plaintiff joined issue; and to the
second and third filed replications alleging that the defendant, of his
own wrong and without the cause in his second and third pleas alleged,
committed the trespasses, etc.
The counsel then filed the following agreed statement of facts, viz.:
In the year 1834, the plaintiff was a negro slave belonging to Dr.
Emerson, who was a surgeon in the army of the United States. In that
year, 1834, said Dr. Emerson took the plaintiff from the State of
Missouri to the military post at Rock Island in the State of Illinois,
and held him there as a slave until the month of April or May, 1836. At
the time last mentioned, said Dr. Emerson removed the plaintiff from
said military post at Rock Island to the military post at Fort Snelling,
situate on the west bank of the Mississippi river, in the Territory
known as Upper Louisiana, acquired by the United States of France, and
situate north of the latitude of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes
north, and north of the State of Missouri. Said Dr. Emerson held the
plaintiff in slavery at said Fort Snelling, from said last-mentioned
date until the year 1838.
In the year 1835, Harriet, who is named in the second count of the
plaintiff's declaration, was the negro slave of Major Taliaferro, who
belonged to the army of the United States. In that year, 1835, said
Major Taliaferro took said Harriet to said Fort Snelling, a military
post, situated as hereinbefore stated, and kept her there as a slave
until the year 1836, and then sold and delivered her as a slave at said
Fort Snelling unto the said Dr. Emerson hereinbefore named. Said Dr.
Emerson held said Harriet in slavery at said Fort Snelling until the
year 1838.
In the year 1836, the plaintiff and said Harriet, at said Fort
Snelling, with the consent of said Dr. Emerson, who then claimed to be
their master and owner, intermarried, and took each other for husband
and wife. Eliza and Lizzie, named in the third count of the plaintiff's
declaration, are the fruit of that marriage. Eliza is about fourteen
years old, and was born on board the steamboat Gipsey, north of the
north line of the State of Missouri, and upon the river Mississippi.
Lizzie is about seven years old, and was born in the State of Missouri,
at the military post called Jefferson Barracks.
In the year 1838, said Dr. Emerson removed the plaintiff and said
Harriet and their said daughter Eliza, from said Fort Snelling to the
State of Missouri, where they have ever since resided.
Before the commencement of this suit, said Dr. Emerson sold and conveyed
the plaintiff, said Harriet, Eliza, and Lizzie, to the defendant, as
slaves, and the defendant has ever since claimed to hold them and each
of them as slaves.
At the times mentioned in the plaintiff's declaration, the defendant
claiming to be owner as aforesaid, laid his hands upon said plaintiff,
Harriet, Eliza, and Lizzie, and imprisoned them, doing in this respect,
however, no more than what he might lawfully do if they were of right
his slaves at such times.
Further proof may be given on the trial for either party.
It is agreed that Dred Scott brought suit for his freedom in the Circuit
Court of St. Louis county; that there was a verdict and judgment in his
favor; that on a writ of error to the Supreme Court, the judgment below
was reversed, and the same remanded to the Circuit Court, where it has
been continued to await the decision of this case.
In May, 1854, the cause went before a jury, who found the following
verdict, viz.: "As to the first issue joined in this case, we of the
jury find the defendant not guilty; and as to the issue secondly above
joined, we of the jury find that before and at the time when, &c., in
the first count mentioned, the said Dred Scott was a negro slave, the
lawful property of the defendant; and as to the issue thirdly above
joined, we, the jury, find that before and at the time when, &c., in the
second and third counts mentioned, the said Harriet, wife of said Dred
Scott, and Eliza and Lizzie, the daughters of the said Dred Scott, were
negro slaves, the lawful property of the defendant."
Whereupon the court gave judgment for the defendant.
After an ineffectual motion for a new trial, the plaintiff filed the
following bill of exceptions.
On the trial of this cause by the jury, the plaintiff, to maintain the
issues on his part, read to the jury the following agreed statement of
facts, (see agreement above.) No further testimony was given to the jury
by either party. Thereupon the plaintiff moved the court to give to the
jury the following instruction, viz.:
"That upon the facts agreed to by the parties, they ought to find for
the plaintiff. The court refused to give such instruction to the jury,
and the plaintiff, to such refusal, then and there duly excepted."
The court then gave the following instruction to the jury, on motion of
the defendant:
"The jury are instructed, that upon the facts in this case, the law is
with the defendant." The plaintiff excepted to this instruction.
Upon these exceptions, the case came up to this court.
It was argued at December term, 1855, and ordered to be reargued at the
present term.
The opinion of the court, as delivered by Chief Justice Taney, being so
lengthy, we omit all but the summing up, to wit:
Upon the whole, therefore, it is the judgment of this court, that it
appears by the record before us, that the plaintiff in error is not a
citizen of Missouri, in the sense in which that word is used in the
Constitution; and that the Circuit Court of the United States, for that
reason, had no jurisdiction in the case, and could give no judgment in
it. Its judgment for the defendant must, consequently, be reversed, and
a mandate issued, directing the suit to be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction.
PRESIDENTS AND VICE-PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
WITH THE VOTE FOR EACH CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE.
BEFORE THE REVOLUTION.
FIRST CONGRESS, Sept. 5, 1774. Peyton Randolph, of Virginia, President.
Born in Virginia, in 1723, died at Philadelphia, Oct. 22, 1785. Charles
Thomson, of Pennsylvania, Secretary. Born in Ireland, 1730, died in
Pennsylvania, Aug. 16, 1824.
SECOND CONGRESS, May 10, 1775. Peyton Randolph, President. Resigned May
24, 1775.
John Hancock, of Massachusetts, elected his successor. He was born at
Quincy, Mass., 1737, died Oct. 8, 1793. He was President of Congress
until October, 1777.
Henry Laurens, of South Carolina, President from Nov. 1, 1777, to Dec.
1778. He was born at Charleston, S.C., 1724, died in South Carolina,
Dec, 1792.
John Jay, of New York, President from Dec. 10, 1778, to Sept. 27, 1779.
He was born in New York City, Dec. 12, 1745, died at New York, May 17,
1829.
Samuel Huntingdon, of Connecticut, President from Sept. 28, 1779, until
July 10, 1781. He was born in Connecticut, in 1732, died 1796.
Thos. McKean, of Pennsylvania, President from July 1781, until Nov. 5,
1781. He was born in Pennsylvania, March 19, 1734, died at Philadelphia,
June 24, 1817.
John Hanson, of Maryland, President from Nov. 5, 1781, to Nov. 4, 1782.
Elias Boudinot, of New Jersey, President from Nov. 4, 1782, until Feb.
4, 1783. He was born at Philadelphia, May 2, 1740, died 1824.
Thomas Mifflin, of Pennsylvania, President from Feb. 4, 1783, to Nov.
30, 1784. Born at Philadelphia, 1744, died in the same city, Jan. 21,
1800.
Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, President from Nov. 30, 1784, to Nov.
23, 1785. He was born in Virginia, 1732, died 1794.
John Hancock, of Massachusetts, President from Nov. 23, 1785, to June 6,
1786.
Nathaniel Gorham, of Massachusetts, President from June 6, 1786, to Feb.
2, 1787. He was born at Charlestown, Mass., 1738, died June 11, 1796.
Arthur St. Clair, of Pennsylvania, President from Feb. 2, 1787, to Jan.
28, 1788. He was born in Edinburgh, Scotland,----, died in 1818.
Cyrus Griffin, of Virginia, President from Jan. 28, 1788, to the end of
the Congress under the Confederation, March 3, 1789. He was born in
England, 1748, died in Virginia, 1810.
UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.
1789 to 1793.--George Washington, of Virginia, inaugurated as President
of the United States, April 30, 1789. He was born upon Wakefield estate,
Virginia, Feb. 22, (11th old style,) 1732, died at Mount Vernon, Dec.
14, 1799.
John Adams, of Massachusetts, Vice-President. Born at Braintree, Mass.,
Oct. 19, 1735, died July 4, 1826, near Quincy, Mass.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--Geo. Washington, 69; John Adams, 34; John Jay, New
York, 9; R.H. Harrison, Maryland, 6; John Rutledge, South Carolina, 6;
John Hancock, Massachusetts, 4; Geo. Clinton, New York, 3; Sam'l
Huntingdon, Connecticut, 2; John Milton, Georgia, 2; James Armstrong,
Georgia, 1; Edward Telfair, Georgia, 1; Benj. Lincoln, Massachusetts,
1--Total, 69. Ten States voted,--Rhode Island, New York, and North
Carolina not voting, not having ratified the Constitution in time.
1793 to 1797.--George Washington, President, inaugurated March 4, 1793.
John Adams, Vice-President.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--Geo. Washington, 132; John Adams, 77; Geo. Clinton, 50;
Thos. Jefferson, Virginia, 4; Aaron Burr, New York, 1.--Total, 132.
Fifteen States voted.
1797 to 1801.--John, Adams President, inaugurated March 4, 1797.
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia, Vice-President. Born at Shadwell,
Virginia, April 13, 1743, died at Monticello, Virginia, July 4, 1826.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--John Adams, 71; Thomas Jefferson, 68; Thomas Pinckney,
South Carolina, 59; Aaron Burr, 30; Sam'l Adams, Massachusetts, 15;
Oliver Ellsworth, Connecticut, 11; Geo. Clinton, 7; John Jay, 5; James
Iredell, North Carolina, 3; George Washington, 2; John Henry, Maryland,
2; S. Johnson, North Carolina, 2; Charles C. Pinckney, South Carolina,
1.--Total 138. Sixteen States voting.
1801 to 1805.--Thomas Jefferson, President, inaugurated March 4, 1801.
Aaron Burr, of New York Vice-President. Born at Newark, N.J., Feb. 6,
1756, died at Staten Island, N.Y., Sept. 14, 1836.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--Thos. Jefferson, 73; Aaron Burr, 73; John Adams, 65;
Chas. C. Pinckney, 64; John Jay 1.--Total, 13. Sixteen States voting.
There was no choice by the Electoral colleges, and the election was
carried into the House of Representatives, and upon the 36th ballot, ten
States voted for Jefferson, four States for Aaron Burr, and two States
in blank. Jefferson was declared to be elected President, and Burr
Vice-President. The Constitution was then amended, so that the
Vice-President was voted for separately, instead of being the second on
the vote for President.
1805 to 1809.--Thomas Jefferson, President, inaugurated March 4, 1805.
George Clinton, of New York, Vice-President. He was born in Ulster
county, N.Y., 1739, died in Washington, D.C., April 20, 1812.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President, Thos. Jefferson, 162; Chas. Cotesworth
Pinckney, 14.--Total, 176. Seven States voting. For Vice-President,
George Clinton, 162; Rufus King, New York, 14.
1809 to 1813.--James Madison, of Virginia, President, inaugurated March
4, 1809. He was born March 16, 1751, in Prince George county, Va., and
died at Montpelier, Va., June 28, 1836.
George Clinton, of New York, Vice-President, until his death, April 20,
1812.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President, James Madison, 122; Geo. Clinton, 6;
C.C. Pinckney, 47.--Total, 175. Seventeen States voting. For
Vice-President, George Clinton, 113; James Madison, 3; James Monroe,
Virginia, 3; John Langdon, New Hampshire, 9; Rufus King, New York, 47.
1813 to 1817.--James Madison, of Virginia, President, inaugurated March
4, 1813.
Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts, Vice-President, until his death, Nov.
23, 1814. He was born at Marblehead, Mass., July 17, 1744, and died at
Washington, D.C.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President, James Madison, 128; De Witt Clinton, New
York, 89.--Total, 217. Eighteen States voting. For Vice-President,
Elbridge Gerry, 131; Jared Ingersoll, Pa., 86.
1817 to 1821.--James Monroe, of Virginia, President, inaugurated March
4, 1817. He was born in Westmoreland county, Va., 1759, and died in New
York, July 4, 1831.
Daniel D. Tompkins, of New York, Vice-President. Born June 21, 1774, at
Fox Meadows, N.Y., and died at Staten Island, June 11, 1825.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President, James Monroe, 183; Rufus King,
34.--Total, 221. Nineteen States voting. For Vice-President, Daniel D.
Tompkins, 183; John Eager Howard, Maryland, 22; James Ross,
Pennsylvania, 5; John Marshall, Virginia, 4; Robt. Goodloe Harper,
Maryland, 3.
1821 to 1825.--James Monroe, President, inaugurated March 4, 1821.
Daniel D. Tompkins, Vice-President.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President, James Monroe, 231; John Quincy Adams,
Massachusetts, 1.--Total, 232. Twenty-four States voting. For
Vice-President, Daniel D. Tompkins, 218; Richard Stockton, New Jersey,
8; Robert G. Harper, 1; Richard Rush, Pennsylvania, 1; Daniel Rodney,
Delaware, 1.
1825 to 1829.--John Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, President,
inaugurated March 4, 1825. He was born at Quincy, Massachusetts, July
11, 1767, and died at Washington City, Feb. 23, 1848.
John Caldwell Calhoun, of South Carolina, Vice-President. Born in
Abbeville district, S.C., March 18, 1782, and died March 31, 1850, in
Washington City.
POPULAR VOTE.--For President, John Quincy Adams, 105,321; Andrew
Jackson, Tennessee, 152,899; Wm. H. Crawford, Georgia, 47,265; Henry
Clay, Kentucky, 47,087.
ELECTORAL VOTE.--For President Andrew Jackson, 99; John Quincy Adams,
84; Wm, H. Crawford, 41; Henry Clay, 37.--Total, 261. Twenty-four States
voting.