believed the freedmen would be induced by the presence of these soldiers to be continually lying around their camps to the neglect of their crops, but these fears were unfounded; for the freedmen were seldom seen around the camps unless they came to exchange products for soldier clothes or for money.

After Governor Marvin had concluded his remarks, Hon. D. S. Walker, Governor-elect, came forward and took the oath of office, which was administered by the Hon. C. H. Dupont, Chief Justice. The Governor began his address by warning the Joint Assembly and the large audience against the bitterness of party strife, which four years previously had plunged the country into civil war. He said:

"By failing to regard the disinterested warnings of the Father of his country against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, and particularly when founded on geographical discrimination; by omitting, as he advised, to remember that the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake against the insiduous wiles of foreign influence, and by neglecting, as he recommended, to frown indignantly upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts, the people of the United States, nearly five years ago, became involved in the terrific civil strife which has but recently ended. We now hope that by a strict adherence to his advice, the unity of the government which constitutes us one people will again become dear to us."

The Governor then turned his attention to the subject of secession, which he attempted to defend in a very astute manner, well calculated to lead the youth of the State to believe that it was right. He said:

"During the late unhappy conflict, some of us were known as Union men; some as Constitutional Secessionists; and others as Revolutionists. A glorious opportunity is now afforded to fling away these names, and with them the strifes they have engendered, and to meet, as brethren ought to meet, upon the platform of the Constitution which our fathers made for us in 1787. If I shall be permitted to administer the government, I shall know no distinctions between citizens on account of past political differences. I will not condemn the Union man, be

cause I know from experience how completely the love of the Union becomes a part of our very existence, and how it is endeared to us by a thousand glorious recollections and as many brilliant anticipations. I know that the heart of Florida's greatest and most renowned citizen was literally broken by the severance of the Union. Nor will I condemn the Constitutional Secessionist, because I know that, though he differed from me, his side of the question was supported by arguments, if not unanswerable, yet of great plausibility, and by the authority of many of the greatest names that this country has ever produced. Nor yet will I condemn the Revolutionist, for I know that he, though originally opposed to secession, went into the war, after the fact was done, upon the conviction that it was no longer an open question, and that it was the duty of every man to stand or fall with his own section. In fact, great questions connected with the integrity of the Union were, before the war, so unsettled, and the opinions of great men so varied, that it required a man greatly superior to myself to say with certainity who was right and who was wrong. Seeing the different luminaries which guided our people, I am not astonished that the very best men in our land were found arrayed in opposing ranks. I need not enumerate the host of great men who stood with the immortal Clay for the integrity of the Union and against the doctrine of secession. The logic of events has proved that they were right. But among those who held the contrary doctrine that a State might secede from the Union without infraction of the Federal Constitution, we find the names of such men as Mr. Rawle, a distinguished lawyer of Pennsylvania, to whom General Washington more than once tendered the office of Attorney-General of the United States; John Randolph, of Roanoke; Nathaniel Macon, of North Carolina; Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina; P. P. Barbour, a late Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States; and Judge McKean, a late Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Those who advocated the right of revolution quoted the remarks of Mr. Webster, that 'a bargain broken on one side was broken on all sides,' and that ‘if the North should not obey the Constitution in regard to the rendition of fugitive slaves, the South would no longer be bound by the compact.' Mr. Greeley, then, as now, a great leader of

Northern sentiment, had said that he could not see how twenty millions of people could rightfully hold ten, or even five, in a Union with them by military force;' and again, if seven or eight States should send agents to Washington to say we want to get out of the Union, he should feel constrained by his devotion to human rights to say, let them go.' In this connection he also quoted the Declaration of Independence, that Governments are instituted for the benefit of the governed;' and that when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government. Mr. Lincoln, prior to his first election, had acknowledged this principle, with the addition, that not only a people, but any part of a people, being sufficient in numbers to make a respectable government, might set up for themselves. Mr. Tyler, a late President of the United States, held to the doctrine of secession, and Mr. Buchanan, the then President of the United States, said, just before the commencement of the war, that while he thought a State had no right to leave the Union, yet if she should leave it, the remaining States would have no right to coerce her to return. Amidst these various and conflicting views, all supported by the highest authority, it is no wonder that our people should have been bewildered, or that, being forbidden by the turn of events, to remain neutral, some should have adhered to the Union and others to the State."

The Governor next turned his attention to that problem which had perplexed the statesman, the philanthropist and the philosopher for more than half a century :-" What shall we do with the Negro ?" He said:

"I think we are bound by every consideration of duty, gratitude and interest, to make these people as enlightened, prosperous and happy as their new situation will admit. For generations past they have been our faithful, contented and happy slaves. They have been attached to our persons and our fortunes, sharing with us all our feelings, rejoicing with us in our prosperity, mourning with us in our adversity. If there were exceptions to this general rule, they were only individual exceptions. Every Southern man who hears me knows that what I say is literally true in regard to the vast mass of our colored

population. The world has never before seen such a body of slaves. For not only in peace, but in war, they have been faithful to us. During much of the time of the late unhappy difficulties, Florida had a greater number of men in the army beyond her limits than constituted her entire voting population. This of course stripped many districts of their entire arms-bearing inhabitants, and left our females and infant children almost exclusively to the protection of our slaves. They proved true to their trust. Not one instance of insult, outrage or indignity has ever come to my knowledge. They remained at home and made provisions for our army. Many of them went with our sons to the army, and there, too, proved their fidelity-attending them when well, nursing and caring for them when sick and wounded. We all know that many of them were willing, and some of them anxious, to take up arms in our cause. Although for several years within sound of the guns of the vessels of the United States, for six hundred miles along our seaboard, yet scarcely one in a thousand voluntarily left our agricultural service to take shelter and freedom under the flag of the Union. It is not their fault that they are free-they had nothing to do with it; that was brought about by the results and operations of the war. But they are free. They are no longer our contented and happy slaves, with an abundant supply of food and clothing for themselves and families, and the intelligence of a superior race to look ahead and make all necessary arrangements for their comfort. They are now a discontented and unhappy people, many of them houseless and homeless, roaming about in gangs over the land, not knowing one day where the supplies for the next are to come from; exposed to the ravages of disease and famine; exposed to the temptations of theft and robbery, by which they are often overcome; without the intelligence to provide for themselves when well, or to care for themselves when sick, and doomed to untold sufferings and ultimate extinction unless we intervene for their protection and preservation. Will we do it? I repeat, we are bound to do it, by every consideration of gratitude and interest."

The whites being to some extent exasperated about the freedom of the slaves, and not knowing what their conduct might be as free laborers, talk of the importation of white labor from

Germany, Ireland, Italy and other countries, was quite prevalent.

As to this subject the Governor said:

"But let us always remember that we have a laboring class of our own which is entitled to the preference. It is not sufficient to say that white labor is cheaper. I trust we are not so far degraded as to consult interest alone. But interest alone would dictate that it is better to give these people employment and enable them to support themselves, than have them remain upon our hands as a pauper race; for here they are, and here, for weal or woe, they are obliged to stay. We must remember that these black people are natives of this country and have a pre-emption right to be recipients of whatever favors we may have to bestow. We must protect them, if not against the competition, at any rate against the exactions of white immigrants. They will expect our black laborers to do as much work in this climate as they have been accustomed to see white ones perform in more northern latitudes. We know that they cannot do it. They never did it for us as slaves, and the experience of the last six months shows that they will do no better as freedmen. Our fathers of 1783 knew that it takes five black men to do the work of three white ones, and consequently, in adjusting the apportionment of taxes upon the basis of labor and industry of the country, eleven of the thirteen States of the old confederation recommended that every five blacks be counted as only three. And if we can offer sufficient inducements, I am inclined to think that the black man, as a field laborer in our climate, will prove more efficient that the imported white."

said:

Referring to the question of negro suffrage, the Governor

"We have been able to give an honest and conscientious assent to all that has been done, but each one of us knows that we could not give either an honest or conscientious assent to negro suffrage. There is not one of us that would not feel that he was doing wrong, and bartering his self-respect, his conscience and his duty to his country and to the Union itself, for the benefits he might hope to obtain by getting back into the Union. Much as I worshipped the Union, and much as I would rejoice to see my State once more recognized as a member thereof, yet it is better, a thousand times better, that she should remain out