The sentiment to which he was called to respond excited memories which

called up proud emotions, though their associations were sad. He could

not reply to a compliment paid to the gallantry of his comrades in the

war with Mexico, without remembering how many of them now mingle with

the dust of a foreign land, and how many of them have sunk after the

day of toil was done by reason of the exposure endured in the service

of their country. The land has mourned, and still mourns, the fall of

its bravest and best, and truly are our laurels mingled with the

cypress, ’tis well, and ’tis wise, ’tis natural and ’tis proper, that

in looking on the laurels of our glory we should pause to pay a tribute

to the cypress which weeps over them, and having paid this tribute to

the gallant dead, the memory of whose service can never die, we pass to

the consideration of their acts, and the beneficial results which their

sacrifices have secured. When that war begun, our history recorded

evidence only of the power of our people for defence. The Fabian policy

of Washington, admirably adapted to the condition of the Colonies,

achieved so much in proportion to the means, that he would be rash

indeed who should attempt to criticise it. The prudent, though daring

course of Jackson, fruitful as it was of the end to be attained, did

not yet serve to illustrate the capacity of our people for the trials

and the struggles attendant on the operations of an invasive war. Hence

it was commonly asserted that the American people, though they might

resist attack, were powerless to redress aggression which was not

connected with the invasion of their territory. The idea of reliance

upon undisciplined militia was treated with contempt and derision. To

borrow a simile from the pit, we were regarded as dung-hill soldiers,

who would only fight at home. In the war with Mexico our armies carried

their banners over routes hitherto unknown, through mountain passes

where nature had almost completed the work of defence, and penetrated

further into the enemy’s country than any European army has ever

marched from the source of its supplies. Not to prolong the comparison

by a reference to events of a remote period, he would only refer to the

last campaign in European war. The combined armies of France and

England, after preparation worthy of their great military power,

advanced through friendly territory to the outer verge of the country,

against which they directed a war of invasion, and after a prolonged

siege by sea and by land, finally captured a seaport town which they

could not hold. Before them lay the country they had come to invade,

but there, at the outer gate, their march was arrested, and in sight of

the ships which brought them supplies and reinforcements, they

terminated a campaign, the scale and proclaimed objects of which had

caused the world to look on in expectation of achievements the like of

which man had not seen. Why was it so? was it not that they were unable

to move from the depot of supplies, though a distance less than half of

that over which our army passed before reaching a productive region

would have brought the allied forces to a country filled with all the

supplies necessary for the support of an army. Is it boastful to say

that American troops, and an American treasury, would have encountered

and have overcome such an obstacle? He did not forget the complaints

which had been made on account of the vast expenditures which had been

made in the prosecution of the war with Mexico; but he remembered with

pride the capacity which the country had exhibited to bear such

expenditure, and believed that our people had no money standard by

which to measure the duty of their government, and the honor of their

flag. We bear with us from the wars in which we have been engaged no

other memory of their cost than the loss of the gallant dead. To the

printed reports and tabular statements we must go when we desire to

know how many dollars were expended. The successful soldier when he

returns from the field is met by a welcome proportionate to the leaves

which he has added to the wreath of his country’s glory. Each has his

reward; to one, the admiring listener at the hearthstone; to another,

the triumphal reception; to all, the respect which patriotism renders

to patriotic service. To the soldier who, in the early part of the

Mexican war, set the seal of invincibility upon American arms, and

subsequently by a signal victory dispersed and disorganized the regular

army of Mexico, his countrymen voted the highest reward known to our

government. Twice before have the people in like manner manifested

their approbation and esteem. Thus has the military spirit of the

country been nursed; to-day it needs not the monarchial bundles of

ribbons, orders and titles to sustain it. Thus has the American citizen

been made to realize that it is sweet and honorable to die for one’s

country; and to feel proudest among his family memories of the names of

those who successfully fought or bravely died in defence of the

national flag. Often he had had occasion to feel, and to mark the

mingled sensation of pride and of sorrow with which friends revert to

those who gallantly died in the field. Even at this now remote day he

could not travel in Mississippi without having the recollection of his

fallen comrades painfully revived by meeting a mother who mourns her

son with the agony of a mother’s grief; a father, whose stern nature

vainly struggles to conceal the involuntary pang, or tender children

who know not the extent of their deprivation, though it is indeed the

sorest of all. Let none then be surprised that he could not see thee

laurel save through the solemn shade of the cypress. Time, however,

softened the shadow long before it withers the leaf. On his way to this

place he learned that it was possible, and he seized the occasion to

visit the residence of Gen. Knox, of revolutionary memory. His own

desire to see something which had been identified with a patriot

soldier who had so largely contributed to the success of the

revolution, and the establishment of the institutions we inherited, was

but an indication of the military sentiment which lives in the American

heart. It turns the step of the traveller from his direct path, it

attracts the boy in his first reading, it fires the ambition of the

youth, and encircles the veteran with the kindness of his neighbors,

and swells the train which follows his bier when, his duty to his

country performed, he answers the summons of his God, and is translated

to a better sphere. It is that same military enthusiasm which calls you

from the avocations and the pleasures of home to the duties and

discomforts of the camp, that you may prepare yourselves whenever your

country needs it to render her efficient service. On the militia of the

country the rights of its citizens, and the honor of its flag, must

mainly depend in the event of a war; they only need to be organized and

instructed to render them a secure reliance. Mingled with the great

body of the people, identified with their feelings and their interests,

proud of the prowess of their fathers and jealousy careful of the

country’s honor, if properly instructed and prepared, the first trumpet

call should bring from plain and from mountain a citizen soldiery who

would encircle the land and check the invader with a wall of fire. Your

plan of encampment seems best suited to the purposes of practical

instruction. A pilgrim in search of health, his steps had been

fortunately directed to Maine, the courtesy of the commander of this

encampment had induced him to visit it and to review the troops. In all

respects it had been to him most gratifying. The appointments, the

movements, the stern faces, and stalwart forms of the men, spoke of the

power to do, and the will to dare whatever it was needful and proper to

perform. This day to manifest respect to a citizen of a distant State,

whose only claim upon them is that he has been an American soldier, and

is an American citizen, they had cheerfully marched through heavy mire.

So much had they given to so small a demand on their natural sentiment,

he could not doubt they would with equal alacrity, and with the same

firm step, march over a field miry with the blood of comrade and of

foe, where opposing causes make to men a common fate.

Among the objects which were of interest to him and which he had hoped

to visit, was the fortification at the narrows of the Penobscot. During

the last session of congress he had endeavored to obtain an

appropriation for the completion of the work which had advanced to the

point which made it effective against shipping, but left still liable

to be carried by land attack. He was not of those who thought it

necessary to raise walls wherever an enemy might land and march, for he

would say that henceforward there would remain to an invading army but

to choose between captivity and a grave. To protect commercial ports

against naval assault forts are needful and should be completed so as

to render them defensible by small garrisons, and to save those

garrisons as far as possible from the sacrifice of life. Our people

require no wall to separate them from other countries, unless it be

needful for our own restraint. Our policy is peace, and the fact shines

brightly on the pages of our history that not one acre of its extensive

acquisitions have been claimed as the spoil of the sword. Unpeopled

deserts have been purchased, and on its own application a community has

been admitted to our family of states. But we have offered to the world

the singular example of conquered territory returned to the vanquished.

Permit me in this connection, whilst ever mindful of the just relation

and necessity for concurrent action between the civil and military

departments of government, to bear testimony to the value of the

militia for the purposes of peace. The principle of self-government and

the spirit of independence are so deep rooted in the American mind that

our people would illy brook the enforcement of law by any extraneous

power, and it is to be hoped we never will see a case in which the

people of a State will not be able to maintain the civil authority, and

vindicate offended law against all opposers whomsoever. To give energy

and activity to such popular action the organization of the militia

will be most convenient whenever force shall be needful. It is not a

little remarkable that though the first Presidents in emphatic language

from time to time recommended a thorough organization of the militia as

one of the most important duties of the government, but little more has

yet been done than to make provisions for supplying them with arms, and

for calling them out when required for federal purposes. There is a

moral effect arising from the spectacle of each State possessed of a

body of instructed militia, ready not only to maintain its government

at home, but to unite with the militia of other States and to form an

army upon which all can rely whenever a common danger calls for a

common defence. It has been thus that from time to time the fraternity

of our revolutionary fathers has been renewed among their sons, and

additional assurance has been given that the sentiment of nationality

on which our Union was founded could never die. That the expansion of

the circle did not weaken its cohesive power, nor the piling of arch

upon arch endanger the foundation on which our political temple was

built. It was not a structure of expediency; master workmen cleared

away the surface where the errors and prejudices of ages had

accumulated, dug deep down to the unmutable rock of truth, and with

unchanging principles constructed the walls to stand till time should

become eternity. Who is there, then, forgetful of his revolutionary

descent, insensible to the pride which the name of the United States

justly inspires, faithless to the duty which the bond of his fathers

imposes, and reckless of all which the honorable discharge of that duty

ensures, would unite with impious purpose to destroy that foundation,

and strive, with sacrilegious hand to tear the flag under which we had

marched from colonial dependence to our present national greatness.

Away with speculative theories, and false philanthropy of abstractions,

which tend to destroy one half, one third, aye, or a single star of

that bright constellation which lights the pathway of our future

career, and sends a hopeful ray through the clouds of despotism which

hang over less favored lands.

Our mission is not that of propagandists—our principles forbid

interference with the institutions of other countries; but we may hope

that our example will be imitated, and should so live that this model

of representative liberty, community independence, and government

derived from the consent of the governed, and limited by a written

compact, should commend itself to the adoption of others. We now stand

isolated among the great nations of the earth; the opposition of

monarchial governments to the theory on which ours is founded, points

to the possibility of an alliance against us, by which what is termed

national law may be modified and warped to our prejudice if not to our

assailment. It needs the united power, harmonious action and

concentrated will of the people of all these States to roll the wheel

of progress to the end which our fathers contemplated, and which their

sons, if they are wise and true, may behold. May the kindness and

courtesy which have characterized the present occasion on which

Mississippi has been greeted by Maine, be a type of the feeling which

shall ever exist between the extremes of our common country. From

Florida to California, from Oregon to Maine, from the centre to the

remotest border, may the possessors of our constitutional heritage

appreciate its value, and faithfully, fraternally labor for its

thorough development, looking back to the original compact for the

purposes for which the Union was established, and forward to the

blessing which such union was designed and is competent to confer.

Speech at the Portland Meeting.

When it became known that Mr. Davis had arrived at the Hall, he was

loudly called for. Hon. Joseph Howard, chairman of the meeting, then

introduced Mr. Davis, who, on coming forward, was greeted with cheer

upon cheer from the vast audience. As soon as the prolonged and

enthusiastic applause with which he was welcomed had subsided, Mr.

Davis, addressing the audience as fellow citizens and Democratic

brethren, said that the invitation with which he had been favored to

address them, evinced a purpose to confer together for the common

good—for the maintenance of the constitution, the bond of union. He

would not be expected to discuss local questions; he would not in this

imitate the mischievous agitators who inflame the Northern mind against

the Southern States. He came among them, an invalid, advised by his

physician to resort to this clime for the restoration of his health; as

an American citizen, he had not expected that his right to come here

would be questioned; as a stranger, or if not entirely so, known mainly

by the detraction which the ardent advocacy of the rights of the South

had brought upon him, he had supposed that neither his coming nor his

going would attract attention. But his anticipations had proved

erroneous. The polite, the manly, elevated men, lifted above the

barbarism which makes stranger and enemy convertible terms, had chosen,

without political distinction, to welcome his coming, and by constant

acts of generous hospitality to make his sojourn as pleasant as his

physical condition would permit.

On the other hand, men who make a trade of politics, and whose capital

consists in the denunciation of the institutions of other States, had

erroneously judged him by themselves, and had regarded his coming as a

political mission; wherefore it was, he was led to suppose, that the

scavengers of that party had been employed in the publication of

falsehoods, both in relation to himself and his political friends at

the South.

So far as it affected him personally their attacks were no more than

the barking of a cur, which, by its clamor, indicates the inhospitable

character of the master who keeps him. If his friends and himself were,

as had been falsely charged, Disunionists and Nullifiers, they might

naturally have looked for kinder considerations from a party which

circulates petitions for a “prompt and peaceful dissolution of the

Union” on account of the incompatibility of the sections—from a party,

which, having proved faithless to the obligation of the constitution in

relation to the fugitive from service or labor, then declares null and

void the law which their dereliction made it necessary for Congress to

enact. The fealty of himself and friends to the constitution, and their

honorable discharge of its obligations was their rebuke to this party,

in whose hostility he found the highest commendation in their power to

bestow.

By reckless fabrication, by garbling and inserting new words into

extracts, they had attempted to deceive the people here as to his

opinions, and had crowned the fraud by the absurd announcement that his

was the creed on which the people of Maine must vote next Monday.

It was due to the hospitality which he had received at their hands that

he should not interfere in their domestic affairs, and he had not

failed to remember the obligation; when republicans had introduced the

subject of African slavery he had defended it, and answered pharisaical

pretensions by citing the Bible, the constitution of the United States

and the good of society in justification of the institutions of the

State of which he was a citizen; in this he but exercised the right of

a freeman and discharged the duty of a Southern citizen. Was it for

this cause that he had been signalized as a slavery propagandists? He

admitted in all its length and breadth the right of the people of Maine

to decide the question for themselves; he held that it would be an

indecent interference, on the part of a citizen of another State, if he

should arraign the propriety of the judgment they had rendered, and

that there was no rightful power in the federal government or in all

the States combined, to set aside the decision which the community had

made in relation to their domestic institutions. Should any attempt be

made thus to disturb their sovereign right, he would pledge himself in

advance, as a State-rights man, with his head, his heart and his hand,

if need be, to aid them in the defence of this right of community

independence, which the Union was formed to protect, and which it was

the duty of every American citizen to preserve and to guard as the

peculiar and prominent feature of our government.

Why, then, this accusation? Do they fear to allow Southern men to

converse with their philosophers, and seek thus to silence or exclude

them? He trusted others would contemn them as he did, and that many of

our brethren of the South would, like himself, learn by sojourn here,

to appreciate the true men of Maine, and to know how little are the

political abolitionists and the abolition papers the exponents of the

character and the purposes of the Democracy of this State.

And now having brushed away the cob-webs which lay in his path, he

would proceed to the consideration of subjects worthy of the audience

he had the honor to address.

Democrats, patriots, by whatever political name any of you may be

known, you have a sacred duty to perform to your ancestry and to

posterity. The time is at hand when for good or for evil, the questions

which have agitated the public mind are to be solved. Is it true as

asserted by northern agitators that there is such contrariety between

the North and the South that they cannot remain united! Or rather, is

it not true as our fathers deemed it, that diversity in the character

of the population, in the products and in the institutions of the

several States formed a reason for their union and tended to secure to

their posterity the liberty which was the common object of their love,

and by cultivating untrammeled intercourse and free trade between the

States, to duplicate the comforts of all?

There was a time when the test of patriotism was the readiness to sever

the bond which bound the colonies to the mother country. Recently our

people with joyous acclamation have welcomed the connection of the

United States with Great Britain, by the Atlantic cable. The one is not

inconsistent with the other. When the home government violated the

charters of the colonies, and assumed to control the private interests

of individuals, the love of political liberty, the determination at

whatever hazard to maintain their rights, led our fathers to enter on

the trial of revolution. Having achieved the separation, they did what

was in their power for the development of commerce. They secured free

trade between the States, without surrendering State independence.

Their sons, not only free, but beyond the possibility of future

interference in their domestic affairs, now seek the closest commercial

connection with the country from which their fathers achieved a

political separation.

Had the proposition been made to consolidate the States after their

independence had been achieved, all must know it would have been

rejected—yet there are those who now instigate you to sectional strife

for the purpose of sectional dominion and the destruction of the rights

of the minority. Do they mean treason to the Constitution and the

destruction of the Union? Or do they vilely practice on credulity and

passion for personal gain? The latter is suggested by the contradictory

course they pursue. At the same time they proclaim war upon the slave

property of the South, they ask for protection to the manufactures of

the staple which could not be produced if that property did not exist.

And while they assert themselves to be the peculiar friends of commerce

and navigation, they vaunt their purpose to destroy the labor which

gives vitality to both; whilst they proclaim themselves the peculiar

friends of laboring men at the North, they insist that the negroes are

their equals; and if they are sincere they would, by emancipation of

the blacks, bring them together and degrade the white man to the negro

level. They seek to influence the northern mind by sectional issues and

sectional organization, yet they profess to be the friends of the

Union. The Union voluntarily formed by free, equal, independent States.

We of the South, on a sectional division, are in the minority; and if

legislation is to be directed by geographical tests—if the constitution

is to be trampled in the dust, and the unbridled will of the majority

in Congress is to be supreme over the States; we should have the

problem which was presented to our Fathers when the Colonies declined

to be content with a mere representation in parliament.

If the constitution is to be sacredly observed, why should there be a

struggle for sectional ascendency? The instrument is the same in all

latitudes, and does not vary with the domestic institutions of the

several States. Hence it is that the Democracy, the party of the

constitution, have preserved their integrity, and are to-day the only

national party and the only hope for the preservation and perpetuation

of the Union of the States.

Mr. Jefferson denominated the Democracy of the North, the natural

allies of the South. It is in our generation doubly true; they are

still the party with whom labor is capital, and they are now the party

which stands by the barriers of the constitution, to protect them from

the waves of fanatical and sectional aggression. The use of the word

aggression reminded him that the people here have been daily harangued

about the aggressions of the slave power, and he had been curious to

learn what was so described. It is, if he had learned correctly, the

assertion of the right to migrate with slaves into the territories of

the United States. Is this aggression? If so, upon what? Not upon those

who desire close association with the negro; not upon territorial

rights, unless these self-styled lovers of the Union have already

dissolved it and have taken the territories to themselves. The

territory being the common property of States, equals in the Union, and

bound by the constitution which recognizes property in slaves, it is an

abuse of terms to call aggression the migration into that territory of

one of its joint owners, because carrying with him any species of

property recognized by the constitution of the United States. The

Federal government has no power to declare what is property anywhere.

The power of each State cannot extend beyond its own limits. As a

consequence, therefore, whatever is property in any of the States must

be so considered in any of the territories of the United States until

they reach to the dignity of community independence, when the subject

matter will be entirely under the control of the people and be

determined by their fundamental law. If the inhabitants of any

territory should refuse to enact such laws and police regulations as

would give security to their property or to his, it would be rendered

more or less valueless, in proportion to the difficulty of holding it

without such protection. In the case of property in the labor of man,

or what is usually called slave property, the insecurity would be so

great that the owner could not ordinarily retain it. Therefore, though

the right would remain, the remedy being withheld, it would follow that

the owner would be practically debarred by the circumstances of the

case, from taking slave property into a territory where the sense of

the inhabitants was opposed to its introduction. So much for the oft

repeated fallacy of forcing slavery upon any community.

If Congress had the power to prohibit the introduction of slave

property into the territories, what would be the purpose? Would it be

to promote emancipation? That could not be the effect. In the first

settlement of a territory the want of population and the consequent

difficulty of procuring hired labor, would induce emigrants to take

slaves with them; but if the climate and products of the country were

unsuited to African labor—as soon as white labor flowed in, the owners

of slaves would as a matter of interest, desire to get rid of them and

emancipation would result. The number would usually be so small that

this would be effected without injury to society or industrial

pursuits. Thus it was in Wisconsin, notwithstanding the ordinance of

’87; and other examples might be cited to show that this is not mere

theory.

Would it be to promote the civilization and progress of the negro race?

The tendency must be otherwise. By the dispersion of the slaves, their

labor would be rendered more productive and their comforts increased.

The number of owners would be multiplied, and by more immediate contact

and personal relation greater care and kindness would be engendered. In

every way it would conduce to the advancement and happiness of the

servile caste.

No—no—it is not these, but the same answer which comes to every inquiry

as to the cause of fanatical agitation. ’Tis for sectional power, and

political ascendency; to fan a sectional hostility, which must be, as

it has been, injurious to all, and beneficial to none. For what

patriotic purpose can the Northern mind be agitated in relation to

domestic institutions, for which they have no legal or moral

responsibility, and from the interference with which they are

restrained by their obligations as American citizens?

Is it in this mode that the spirit of mutual support and common effort

for the common good, is to be cultivated? Is it thus that confidence is

to be developed and the sense of security to grow with the growing

power of each and every State? Is it thus that we are to exemplify the

blessings of self-government by the free exercise in each independent

community of the power to regulate their domestic institutions as soil,

climate, and population may determine?

Speeches of the Hon. Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi; delivered during the summer of 1858. · 第 2 / 9 段