FREEDOM NATIONAL-SLAVERY SECTIONAL.

SPEECH

OF

HON. JOHN J. PERRY, OF MAINE,

ON THE

Comparative Nationality and Sectionalism of the Republican and
Democratic Parties.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MAY 1, 1856,

In Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, in the discussions | avert the most threatening dangers, and which
that have taken place upon this floor, and at va-
rious other places in the Union, the Republican
party has been charged with "sectionalism."
The authors of this groundless assumption have,
in the same connection, boasted of the nationality
of the Democratic party. These two propositions
I now desire to discuss.

sense of repose and security to the public mind through-home. Only seven members from the free States,

2

lectual giants for its leaders, scarcely has a name | declaration? If there is, then the whole country

in any State, North or South. The once glorious old Democratic party has been stabbed in the house of its friends; and, after retreating before the surging waves of popular indignation, can now only be found around the shades of the Presidential mansion, or in little squads about our custom-houses, post-offices, and such other | places as are dispensed Executive favors, in the shape of "loaves and fishes." As a national party, it has no longer an existence. The causes, to which a brief allusion has been made, have created the necessity for another party. That party has been inaugurated; and as its principles are but the revival of the doctrines of the immortal Jefferson and the Republican fathers, it is perfectly natural and proper for it to assume the time-honored name of "Republican."

As I announced in the commencement of these remarks, I shall now attempt to show that the Republican party is a national party; that it stands upon a platform of principles eminently rational; and that no national man, North or South, East or West, can, with any show of consistency, refuse to stand upon it.

The Republican party, through its delegates at Pittsburgh, on the 22d of February last, adopted an address, containing a "declaration of its principles and purposes," which has been published to the world, and which is briefly summed up as follows:

has been laboring under a delusion ever since our Government was formed. But, to be more specific, it is not to be denied that the great leading idea of the Republican party is the nonextension of Slavery; in other words, opposition to its extension into free territory. This is no new dogma. The heroes of the Revolution, the patriots of the early times, who shaped and fashioned our political institutions, entertained the same views, and incorporated them into their political action. They believed chattel Slavery to be a great moral, social, and political evil. So believing, they adopted every practicable mode in their power to to prevent its spread; at the same time looking forward to the day which should witness the fruition of their earnest hopes-its total abolition. To place this matter beyond all doubt or cavil, I will refer to a few well-authenticated historical facts, in proof of the position here assumed.

George Washington, in a letter to Robert Morris, dated Mount Vernon, April 12, 1786, said: "I can only say tha there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it, [Slavery;] but there is only one proper and effectual mode in which it can be accomplished, and that is by legislative authority; and this, so far as my suffrage will go, shall never he wanting."9 Sparks's Washington, 158.

In a letter to John F. Mercer, September, 9, 1786, he expressed the same sentiment:

"I never mean, unless some particular circumstances should compel me to it, to possess another slave by purchase. it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted by which Slavery in this country may be abol ished by law."—Ibid.

And in a letter to St. John Sinclair he further said:

Thomas Jefferson, in an able article on the rights of the American Colonies, by him prepared and laid before the Virginia Convention which assembled in August, 1774, for the purpose of appointing delegates to the proposed Congress, remarks as follows:

• We declare, in the first place, our fixed and unaltered devoou to the Constitution of the Ui ed States-to the ends for which it was established, and to the means which it provided for their attainment. We accept the sol mn protestation of the people of the United States, that they ordai ed iia order to form a more perf. ct Union, establish justic insur⚫ domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence romote the general welfare. and secure There are in Pennsylvania laws for the gradual abo the 11-ssin s of liberty to themselves and their posterity."lition of Slavery, which neither Virginia nor Maryland We believe that the powers which it confers upon the have at present, but which nothing is more certain than Government of the United States are ample for the accomthey must have, and at a period not remote.” plishment of these objects; and that if these powers are exercised in the spirit of the Constitution itself, they cannot lead to any other resuit. We respect those great ti this which the Consti uti dee ars to be inviolab.e-freedom of speech and of the press, the free exercise of religious belf and the right of the people peaceabl, to assemble •nio petition the Govs rament fra redress of grievances. We woul preserve these great safeguards of ci il freeom, the habeas corpus, the right of trial by jry, and the right of personal 'ibery, unless deprived thereof for crime The abolition of domestic Slavery is the GREATEST by due process of law. We de lare our purpos: to obey. OBJECT of desire in these Colonies, where it was unhap in all things, th requirements of the Constitution, and of pily introduced in their i fant sta e. But, previous to the all laws enacted i pursuance thereof. We cherish a pro- enfranchisement of t slaves, it is necessary to exclude found reverence for the wise and patriotic men by whom further importations from Africa. Yet our repeated arit was framed, and a lively sense of the blessings it has tempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing conferred upon our country and upon mankind throughout duties which might amount to prohibition, have been hiththe world. In every crisis of difficulty and of d nger we erto defeated by his Majesty's negative; thus preferring shall invoke its spirit and proclaim the supremacy of its the immediate advantage of a few African corsairs to the authority. "In the next place, w declare our ardent and unsha-lasting interests of the American States, and the rights of human nature, deeply wounded by this infamous prac ken attachment to this Union of American States which tice."-American Archives, 4th Series, vol. 1. p. 696. the Const tution created and has thus far preserved. We rivere it as the purchase of the blood of our forefathers, Mr. Jefferson further declared his own sentias the condition of our national renown, and as the guar-ments in his Notes on Virginia, when he said: dian and garantee of that liberty which the Constitution was designed to secure. We will defend and protec it against all its enem es. We will recognise no geographicai divisions, no local interes's, no narrow or sectional prejudices. in our endeavors to preserve the union of these States against foreign aggression and domestic strife. What we claim for ourselves we claim for all. The rights, privileges, and liberties, which we demand as our inheritance, we concede as their inheritance to all the citizens of this Republic."

Now, let me candidly ask if there is anything actional in the sentiments contained in the above

"Nobody wishes more ardently than I to see an aboli tion not only of the trade, but of the condition of Slavery and certainly nobody will be more willing to encounter any sacrifice for that object."

In the same work he further said·

"The whole commerce between master and slave is a continual exercise of the most unremitting despotism on the one part and degrading submission on the othe * With what execration should the state man be loaded, who, permitting one half of the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other, transforms those

* * *

*

Nor were these views and anticipations confined to the free States. In the ratification Convention of Virginia, Mr. Johnson said:

"They tell us that they see a progressive danger of bringing about emancipation. The principle has begun since the Revolution. Let us do what we will, it will come round. Slavery has been the foundation of much of that impiety and dissipation which have been so much disseminated among our country men. If it were totally abolished, it would do much good.”—3 Elliot's Debates, 6, 48.

But I will not consume further time to prove this point, but will only add an extract from a speech delivered by Mr. Leigh in the Convention of Virginia, in 1832, which fully corroborates the truth of this position. He said:

"I thought, till very lately, that it was known to every body, that during the Revolution, and for many years

many of our ablest statesmen, who entertained with respect all the schemes which wisdom or ingenuity could suggest for its accomplishment."

Mr. Gerry thought the Convention "had noth-after, the abolition of Slavery was a favorite topic with ing to do with the conduct of the States as to slaves, but ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it."-3 Madison Papers, 1394.

Mr. Mason, of Virginia, said "Slavery discourages arts and manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They produce the most pernicious effects on manners. Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring To go back to the Declaration of Independthe judgment of Heaven on a country."-3 Mad-ence, we find Washington, and Jefferson, and ison Papers, 1391.

Franklin, and Sherman, and Pinckney, and their illustrious compatriots, solemnly subscribing their names to these "self-evident truths, that all men are created equal; that they are Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, said "he was endowed by their Maker with inherent and inalopposed to a tax on slaves, because it impliedienable rights; that among these are life, LIBERTY, they were property."--3 Madison Papers, 1396.

In another place, speaking of this clause, he said:

"It presents us with the pleasing prospect that the rights of mankind will be acknowledged and established throughout the Union. If there was no other lovely feature in the Constitution but this one, it would diffuse a beauty over its whole countenance. Yet the lapse of a few years, and Congress will have power to exterminate Slavery from within our borders."-2 Elliot's Debates, 484. In the ratification Convention of Massachusetts, General Heath said:

“The migration, or importation, &c., is confined to the States now existing only; new States cannot claim it. Congress, by their ordinance for creating new States, some time since declared that the new States shall be re

publican, and that there shall be no Slavery in them."

ritory ceded or to be ceded by individual States to the United States. (See Journals of Congress, April 23, 1784.) One of the provisions of said plan is as follows:

"That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been ersonally guilty."-4 Jour. Cong. Confederation, 371.

Territories were in this article of the Ordinance spoken of as States, because it was contemplated to erect the Territories into States. Under the Articles of Confederation, a majority of the thirteen States was necessary to an affirmative decision of any question. On the 19th of April a vote was taken on this proviso. The vote stood for the proviso-six States, viz: New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania. Against it--three States, víz: Virginia, Maryland, and South Carolina. Delaware and Georgia were not represented. New Jersey, by Mr. Dick, voted ay; but her vote, only one delegate being present, could not be counted. North Carolina was divided---Mr. Williamson voting ay, and Mr. Speight no. From Virginia, Mr. Jefferson voted ay, and Messrs. Hardy and Mercer no. Of the twentythree delegates present, sixteen voted for, and seven against-thus this proviso was defeated by a minority vote. The people were for it, and the States for it; but it failed by a provision which enabled the minority to control the majority.

In the same year, Mr. Rufus King, of Massachusetts, moved the proviso in the following

form:

4

That there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the States described in the resolves of Congress of the 23d of April, 1784, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been personally guilty; and that this regulation shall be an article of compact, and remain a fundamental principle of the Constitutions between the thirteen original States, and such of the States described in the said resolve of the 23d of April, 1784."-4 Jour. Cong. Confed., 481.

But I will not stop here, but proceed to prove that the views of the Republican party on the constitutional right of Congress to prohibit Slavery in the Territories are sustained by the legislation of Congress from the meeting of the First Congress up to 1848, and that such legislation has received the sanction of every President, with a single exception, beginning with General Washington, up to, and including, President Polk. To maintain this proposition, I shall introduce facts direct from the records of the Government:

1. The Ordinance of 1787 was recognised by chapter one, first session of First Congress. There seems to have been no objection to it. Mr. Madison's name appears on the Journal of the proceedings the same day it passed. He was no doubt present, and concurred in the measure. The act was signed by General Washington.

2. On the 7th of April, 1798, an act was passed authorizing the establishment of a Government in Mississippi Territory. It authorized the Presithat in the Territory northwest of the Ohio river, excepting the Jefferson proviso of 1787. It then prohibited the importation of slaves from any place without the limits of the United States. This act passed about ten years before Congress was authorized by the Constitution to prohibit bringing slaves into the States which were originally parties to the Federal compact. This act passed under the Administration of the elder

dent to establish therein a Government similar to

Adams.

3. At the first session of the Sixth Congress, chapter forty-one, laws of 1800, an act was passed creating a Territorial Government for Indiana, out of the Northwest Territory-reaffirming the Ordinance of 1787-and was signed by President Adams.

4. On the 26th of March, 1804, an act was passed, dividing Louisiana into two Territories, and providing that all that part of the Territory south of the thirty-third parallel of latitude, now the southern boundary of Arkansas, should be This was committed by a vote of two to one, erected into the Territory of Orleans. In this act and resulted in the celebrated Ordinance of 1787, there are three provisions in respect to Slavery which expressly prohibited Slavery and involuntary in the Territory: 1. The importation from any servitude, except for crime, throughout the whole ter-place without the limits of the United States was ritory [then belonging to the United States] FOR- prohibited; 2. The importation from any place EVER. This proviso received the votes of every within the United States, of slaves imported since delegate (with a single exception from New York) the 1st of May, 1798, was prohibited; 3. The in the Convention. The First Congress under the importation of slaves, except by a "citizen of the Constitution ratified the Ordinance of 1787. In the United States removing into said Territory for Convention which framed the Constitution there actual settlement, and being at the time of such were twenty men who, were also members of the removal bona fide owner of such slaves," was First Congress under the Federal Constitution. prohibited. This is one of the strongest cases on This proves very clearly that they understood record to show the control of Congress over Slathat Congress had power, under the Constitution | very in the Territories. It was a direct prohibiwhich they themselves had made, to prohibit This act was Slavery in the Territories.

tion of the domestic slave trade.
signed by President Jefferson.

5. On the 11th of January, 1805, an act was passed establishing the Territory of Michigan, reaffirming the Ordinance of 1787.

Thus history vindicates the fact, that the patriots of the Revolution, the members of the old State Confederation, the members of the Convention which framed the Constitution, and the 6. On the 3d of February, 1809, a similar members of the First Congress after the adoption | Government was established for the Territory of of the Constitution, entertained the same senti- | Illinois, recognising the same Ordinance. These ments upon the questions of Slavery extension two last acts were under the Administration of and restriction that are now advocated by the Jefferson. Republican party.

7. On the 4th of June, 1812, an act was passed