34th Cong....3D SESS. Revival of the African Slave Trade-President's Message—Mr. Etheridge. Ho. OF REPs. by the compromise measures of 1850. The death "It is evident that the Missouri compromise CANNOT BE of that Congress, and many of its members were "Mr. JOHN W. Howe. I wish to inquire of the gentle. man from Ohio,[Mr. GIDDINGS,] whom I see in bis seat now, and who I believe is a member of the Committee on Ter ritories, why the ordinance of 1787 is not incorporated in this bill? [Laughter.] I should like to know whether he or the cominittee were intimidated on account of the platform of 1852. [Laughter.] The gentleman pretends to be something of an anti-slavery man; at least I have understood so. "Mr. GIDDINGS. With the permission of the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Richardson,] I will say to my friend that the south line of this Territory is 36° 30'. The law authorizing the people of Missouri to form a State government, enacted in 1820, provides, in express language "That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of 36° 30' north latitude, not included within the limits of the State contemplated by that act, (Missouri,) slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than for crimes whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby forever, prohibited.' "This law (said Mr. GIDDINGS) stands perpetually, and I did not think that this act would receive any increased validity by a reenactment. There I leave the matter. It is very clear that the territory included in that treaty must be forever free unless that law be repealed. "Mr. JOHN W. HOWE. I should like to know from the gentleman from Ohio, if he has not some recollection of a compromise made since that time? compromise had not been repealed, but he said to that fact known and believed, that no Senator, or it need, slavery has heretofore rested, and I am content still to rest it there. I will not invoke the Bible to support or put down the institution. Nor will I, unnecessarily, shock the judgment or sensibilities of any portion of my countrymen by asserting it to be the corner-stone of republicanism, or that without it, free States or free society must relapse into barbarism. During the last year, while the fires of the presidential contest were raging, and when for a time it appeared that Mr. Atchison then resided álmost within sight the opposing parties were drifting toward a colof the Territory. Its organization was very de-lision, at that moment, when good men had most to fear and least to hope for, at that period it was that leading Democratic speakers, editors, and authors, gave expression to opinions upon the subject of slavery which, if attempted to be propagated in the slave States, would meet a resistance which slavery and the Government could not both withstand-opinions which no northern community was expected to subscribe to, and which no free laborer in the South should be required or expected to indorse. Sir, but for the charity with which I judge mankind, and especially the modern Democratic party, [laughter,] I should long since have believed, what I now very much fear, that the purpose was to drive the opposing parties into a deeper hatred, to widen the breach between the sections, and produce such an estrangement between the North and the South, as must have resulted in the disunion of the States. To some of these opinions I will refer presently; but before I do so, I wish to say a word or two to my colleague [Mr. WRIGHT] in relation to some remarks he made in his speech a few days ago. In that speech he arraigns Mr. SEWARD in the usual Democratic style. To this I have no objection. My object now is not to offer a defense for Mr. SEWARD, but to ascertain my colleague's opinion of prominent members of the present Democratic party-those who have avowed opinions quite as objectionable as those of Mr SEWARD. My colleague, in order to prove that the Republican party at the North are determined to destroy slavery in the States, quotes the following passage from a speech of Mr. SEWARD delivered at Cleveland, Ohio, in 1848: The events of the last four years, Mr. Chairman, have done much to convince me that, under the rule of the Democratic party, I mean the southern wing of it, for it is that division which rules, the country is to have no speedy exemption from this most pernicious and useless agitation. I go further: it is from that party, its policy in the past, its present purposes as avowed by some of its most distinguished and energetic leaders, its immediate tendencies, that slavery in the States has most to fear. Not that I believe they desire such a result, but its overthrow must inevitably follow the destruction of the Government, an event which we all know many of them desire, and which is being fast precipitated upon us by those who are ever complaining of oppression and of wrong. Sir, complaints of this kind, but seldom well-founded and always exaggerated, are "Mr. GIDDINGS. That does not affect the question." it. domestic discord. We are now told by many Were it in my power, I would rescue the insti- As a boundary line the whole country would readily acknowledge its fitness. It had long existed as a memorial of peace between the North and the South, and was better known than any of the great rivers, lakes, or mountains of that vast territory. Again: it was Mr. GIDDINGS-SO well calculated to excite southern apprehensionwho read the Missouri compromise to the House, and relied upon it as making the Territory "forever free, unless that law be repealed. It was Mr. GIDDINGS Who declared that the compromise measures of 1850 did "did not affect the question. And no member, sir, from the North or the South dared to take issue with him, or indicated a purpose to revive the slavery agitation by proposing a repeal of that compromise. After two or three days discussion, the bill was reported to the House, and passed by a vote of 98 yeas to 43 nays-southern Whigs and Democrats voting side by side with Mr. GIDDINGS for the passage of the bill. And, sir, when that bill had passed the House of Representatives, it contained not one word about sla-ceived with abhorrence at the North, and if urged very, or the repeal of the Missouri compromise. What more? The bill was sent to the Senate; its passage there was prevented only by lack of time, as the necessary appropriation bills consumed most of the last few days of the session. Mr. DOUGLAS and other Senators, however, urged the Senate to pass the bill without any material amendment, and no one objected to it because it was silent on the subject of slavery, or did not repeal the Missouri compromise. But the proceedings of the Senate establish another factthat that body knew, and in effect admitted, that the Missouri compromise had not been repealed will encounter a stern opposition, as they ought, Sir, it is only recently that leading Democrats in "What, then, you say, can nothing be done for freedom because the public conscience is inert? Yes; much can be done, everything can be done. Slavery can be limited to its present bounds; it can be ameliorated. It can be, and must be, abolished; and you and I can, and must, do it." I care not whether this extract from Mr. SEWARD's speech does, or does not, answer my colleague's object. My present purpose is to call lights and acknowledged leaders of the present attention to more recent opinions of the great harmonious Democracy. I have before me a copy of a letter written by the Hon. G. N. FITCH, of Indiana, in 1849, addressed to the national Democracy. It must be borne in mind that he That his opinions may be the better understood, was then a Democratie candidate for Congress. I will read the letter to which that of Mr. FITCH was intended as a reply: PLYMOUTH, August 4, 1849. SIR: As there are a few who think you have not been quite definite enough on some of the questions involved in the present canvass, I wish you to answer the following questions, to wit: 1. Will you, if elected, vote for the unconditional repeal of slavery in the District of Columbia? 2. Will you vote for the abolition of the inter-State slave trade? 3. Will you vote for the Wilmot proviso being extended over the Territories of California and New Mexico, and against any law authorizing slaves to be taken there as property? Please answer the above questions, yes or no, without comment. GROVE PONEROY. 34TH CONG....3D SESS. Revival of the African Slave Trade-President's Message-Mr. Etheridge. Ho. of Reps. and but little for substance, in the mode of his election, but his success was hailed with Democratic satisfaction, and his entrance into the Senate considered most fortunate for his party. Mr. WRIGHT, of Tennessee. Do I understand my colleague to say that Mr. SEWARD does not reflect the opinions of the Republican party? Mr. ETHERIDGE. I never inquired of him in this respect, but I expect he does. And now I will ask my colleague if Mr. FITCH does not reflect the sentiments of the Democratic party? [Great laughter.] Mr. WRIGHT, of Tennessee. I will answer my colleague by saying, that if Mr. FITCH said what my colleague has read, he did not in that reflect the sentiments of the Democratic party of Indiana, or any other State. Mr. ETHERIDGE. He certainly wrote the letter I have just read; and if he does not, therefore, represent the Democracy ofany State, whom does he represent, and why did the Democracy of Indiana elect him to a seat in the Senate within the last thirty days? Now, the difference between Mr. SEWARD and Mr. FITCH is this: Mr. FITCH wrote his letter to elect himself to Congress, while the speech of Mr. SEWARD (however objectionable parts of it may be) was made in behalf of General Taylor, who was then a candidate for the Presidency against General Cass and Martin Van Buren. General Taylor was then the owner of a hundred slaves, and Mr. Van Buren the regularly recognized and somewhat formidable FreeSoil candidate. I do not think Mr. SEWARD Was doing much for the Abolitionists in supporting General Taylor. He ought rather to have advocated the election of that national Democrat, Martin Van Buren. But my colleague, Mr. Fitch, and Mr. Van Buren, are all now of the national Democracy; all, of course, in good standing, and ready, I apprehend, to let by-gones. be by gones. of the negro race. The Jewish slaves were not negroes; and to contine the justification of slavery to that race would be to weaken its Scriptural authority, and to lose the whole weight of profane authority, for we read of no negro slavery in ancient times," "Slavery, black or white, is right and necessary." "Nature has made the weak in mind or body slaves." "The wise and virtuous, the brave, the strong in mind and body, are born to command." * "Men are not born entitled to equal rights. It would be far nearer the truth to say, that some were born with saddles on their backs, and others booted and spurred to ride them-and the riding does them good. They need the reins, the bit, and the spur." "Life and liberty are not inalienable." "The Declaration of Independence is 'exuberantly false, and aborescently fallacious.""" * The Richmond Enquirer is one of the oldest, best established, and most ably conducted Democratic journals in the South. Its influence is felt and acknowledged everywhere. I submit the following extracts from that paper, portions of which are startling, and, in my judgment, indefensible: "Until recently, the defense of slavery has labored under great difficulties, because its apologists- for they were merely apologists-took half-way grounds. They confined the defense of slavery to mere negro slavery, thereby giving up the slavery principle, admitting other forms of slavery to be wrong, and yielding up the authority of the Bible, and of the history, practices, and experience of mankind. Human experience showing the universal success of slave society, and the universal failure of free society, was unavailing to them, because they were precluded from employing it, by admitting slavery in the abstract to be wrong," The line of defense, however, is changed now, and the North is completely cornered, and dumb as an oyster. The South now maintains that slavery is right, natural, and necessary. It shows that all divine, and almost all human authority justifies it. The South further charges that the little experiment of free society in Western Europe has been, from the beginning, a cruel failure, and that symptoms of failure are abundant in our North. While it is far more obvious that negroes be slaves than whites-for they are only fit to labor, not to direct-yet the principle of slavery is in itself right, and does not depend on difference of complexion. Difference of race, of lineage, of language, of habits and customs, all tend to render the institution more natural and durable; and although slaves have been generally white, still the masters and slaves have generally been of different national descent. Moses and Aristotle, and the earliest historians, are both authorities in favor of the difference of race, but not of color." * * * "The Democrats of the South, in the present canvass, cannot rely on the old grounds of defense and excuse for slavery; for they seek not merely to retain it where it is, but to extend it into regions where it is unknown. Mucli less can they rely on the mere constitutional guarantees of slavery, for such reliance is pregnant with the admission that slavery is wrong, and but for the Constitution should be abolished. This constitutional argument for slavery, standing alone, fully justifies the Abolitionists. They are clearly right if slavery be morally wrong; for to get rid of it under the Constitution, or by amending the Constitution, is confessedly impracticable." It is our fanatics at home-our southern fanatics-from whom we have no little to fear. I have observed that the ultra, secession, filibustering wing of the Democratic party is always strongest in the South when radical Abolitionism is most rampant at the North. That their power and influence rise and fall pari passu. When the prospects of the former seem brightest, the hopes of the latter are strongest. Each quotes the opinions of the other. Each complains loudly of real or pretended injuries, and each regards the dissolution of the Union as probable or necessary. I will not agree that either fairly represents any considerable portion of the people, North or South; yet, in my judgment, the very best thing happy and best situated in the condition of slavery. If we for the country is to withhold political power from them all. * "Nor will it avail us aught to show that the negro is most stop there, we weaken our cause by the very argument intended to advance it; for we propose to introduce into new territory human beings whom we assert to be unfit for men. We must go a step further. We must show that African slavery is a moral, religious, natural, and probably, in the general, a necessary institution of society. This is the only line of argument that will enable southern Democrats to maintain the doctrines of State equality and slavery extension. "Northern Democrats need not go thus far. They do not seek to extend slavery, but only to agree to its extension as a matter of right on our part. I spoke of certain very extraordinary opinions liberty, self-government, and equal association with other which, during the last year, were avowed by various editors, authors, politicians, and public men of the South. In my opinion, they are as little defensible, and as well calculated to do the South an injury as the most extravagant declarations of Theodore Parker, Wendell Phillips, or William Lloyd Garrison. I have now before me a book published in Richmond, Virginia, in 1854. It is styled Sociology for the South, or the Failure of Free Society; by George Fitzhugh." Many southern Democratic newspapers and politicians have spoken of it approvingly, or advanced sentiments quite as indefensible as any avowed by the author. Among many other things, quite as objectionable, he says: "Make the laboring man the slave of one man, instead of the slave of society, and he would be far better off." "Two hundred years of liberty have made white laborers a pauper banditti." "Free society has failed, and that which is not free must be substituted." "Say the Abolitionists: Man ought not to have property in man. What a dreary, cold, bleak, inhospitable world this would be, with such a doctrine carried into practice!"* * R "Slavery has been too universal not to be necessary to nature, and man struggles in vain against na* "Free society is a failure. We slaveholders say, you must recur to domestic slavery, the oldest, the best, and most common form of socialism." "We know that we utter boid truths; but the time has now arrived when their utterance can be no longer postponed. The true issue should stand out so boldly and clearly that none may mistake it." "Repeatedly have we asked the North, Has not the experiment of universal liberty FAILED? Are not the evils of FREE SOCIETY INSUPFERABLE? and do not most thinking men among you propose to subvert and reconstruct it?" Still no answer. This gloomy silence is another conclusive proof, added to many other conclusive evidences we have furnished, that free society in the long run is an impracticable form of society; it is everywhere starving, demoralized and insurrectionary. "We repeat, then, policy and humanity alike forbid the extension of the evils of free society to new people and coming generations. "Two opposite and conflicting forms of society cannot, among civilized men, coexist and endure. The one must give way and cease to exist, the other become universal. "If free society be universal, inimoral, or unchristian, it must fall, and give way to slave society-a social system old as the world, universal as man.” A Democratic paper in South Carolina (I cannot now give the name of the paper) during the last year, said: "Slavery is the natural and moral condition of the laboring man, whether wurre or black. The great evil of northern free society is, that it is burdened with a servile class of MECHANICS and LABORERS, unfit for self government, and yet clothed with the attributes and powers of citizens. Master and ave is a relation in society as necessary as that of parent and child; and the northern States will yet have to introduce it. The theory of free Government is a delusion." The Richmond Examiner, during the late Presidential contest, and while it was urging Mr. Buchanan's election with its acknowledged ability, gave expression to the following sentiments: "We have got to hating everything with the prefix FREE, from free negroes down and up through the whole catalogue -FREE farins, FREE labor, FREE Society, FREE will, FREE thinking, FREE children, and FREE Schools-all belonging to the same brood of damnable isms. But the worst of all these abo minations is the modern system of FREE SCHOOts. The New England system of free schools has been the cause and prolific source of the infidelities and treasons that have turned her cities into Sodoms and Gomorrahs, and her land into the common nestling places of howling Bedlamites. We abominate the system, because the SCHOOLS ARE FREE.” About the same time, the Muscogee Herald, another Democratic paper, published in Alabama, as if determined not to be behind its cotemporaries, proclaimed the following opinions: "Free society! we sicken of the name. What is it but a conglomeration of GREASY MECHANICS, FILTHY OPERATIVES, SMALL-FISTED FARMERS, and MOON STRUCK THEORISTS? All the northern, and especially the New England States, are devoid of society fitted for well-bred gentlemen. The prevailing class one meets with is that of mechanics struggling to be genteel, and small farmers who do their own drudgery-and yet who are hardly fit for association with a gentleman's body servant. This is your free society which the northern hordes are endeavoring to extend into Kansas." These opinions are advanced by southern Democrats. Of course they are extensively copied by northern newspapers. If they are not defensible in the South, how can they be otherwise than prejudicial to us at the North? And do they not tend to make wider and deeper the gulf which now separates the free and slave States? As I said before, such opinions, if attempted to be enforced, will and ought to arouse the stern opposition of every free man in the South, who is not the victim of partisan madness or folly. The bare announcement of such opinions indicates violence to southern sentiment, or that the people are to be taught new lessons upon the subject of slavery -lessons which they will never learn, until they are themselves fit to be slaves. If my loyalty to my country, or any part of it, is to be tested by conformity to any such opinions, I am ready for the heretic's brand and the outlaw's doom. My denunciations of such opinions as these have brought upon myself the political malevolence and hate of the Democratic leaders of my own State. Even now they are pursuing me with a vindictiveness which discovers treason in every motive, and selfishness in every act. My sole offense, the very "head and front of my offending," has been, that I resisted a policy which involved us in civil war, and which they defended mainly because it was their own. Sir, the whole history of the country for the last fifteen years, under Democratic rule, establishes the fact that to give that party power is to offer a reward for alienations between the North and the South-a premium for that policy which mingles the question of slavery with political contests everywhere. When they have been in power sectionalism has been fostered and encouraged. Mr. Tyler's administration was one of doubtful political gender, and as no party respected or claimed him, the slavery question excited but little notice while he was President. The contest between Mr. Poik and Mr. Clay followed. The latter was the first and greatest victim to the charge of "unsoundness upon the slavery question." Mr. Polk's administration left us with a powerful sectional party, led on by Mr. Van Buren. General Taylor was elected, and Mr. Fillmore, who succeeded him, handed over the Government to President Pierce, at a time when the latter could congratulate the country upon the restoration of peace and harmony between a people who had been parties to a bitter sectional strife. Mr. Hale, at the election which made Mr. Pierce President, had received far fewer votes than had been given to Mr. Van Buren four years before. Under Mr. Fillmore's administration, the Free-Soil party at the North had dwindled to almost nothing, while the Disunionists at the South remembered the Nashville Convention with a sigh, or mentioned it only to prove an alibi. Mr. Pierce was inaugurated at a time when the 34TH CONG....3D SESS. Revival of the African Slave Trade-President's Message-Mr. Etheridge. Ho. OF REPS. future was bright and auspicious. He had been chosen by twenty-seven of thirty-one sovereign States of the Union. And what has another four years of Democratic rule done for us? Mr. Buchanan has been elected, it is true, but where is the triumphant majority which four years before swept the country as a whirlwind? He is elected legally and constitutionally, yet he is in a minority of nearly half a million. Eleven of the sixteen free States (all of which voted against Mr. Hale four years ago) are found arrayed under the Republican flag! And this is the result of four years of Democratic rule! Almost any Administration might have accomplished less, but no human power could have done more. And this is the party whose wisdom I am required to commend; this the policy I dare not question unless I would be the victim doomed for political slaugh ter. Of Mr. Buchanan's administration, I can do nothing but hope. Age and success, I trust, have made him no longer ambitious. If this be so, and he is wise, I shall yet have a respite from those who malign my motives, and pursue me with a fiendish hate. When he stands in their way, as I trust he will, he will learn that the same lips which now breathe his praise can heap burning maledictions upon his head. SENATE-SPECIAL SESSION. IN SENATE. WEDNESDAY, March 4, 1857. In accordance with a proclamation of the President of the United States, the Senate convened to-day in special session. The Secretary (ASBURY DICKINS, Esq.) called the Senate to order. Mr. DOUGLAS submitted the following resolution; which was unanimously adopted: Resolved, That the oath of office be administered by the Hon. JAMES A. PEARCE to the Hon. JAMES M. MASON, Senator elect from the State of Virginia, and that he be, and hereby is, chosen President pro tempore. Mr. PEARCE having administered the oath prescribed by law to Mr. MASON, he took the chair. The Secretary read the list of new Senators, as follows; who were severally qualified by taking the oath prescribed by law, except Messrs. BATES and Foor, who were not present: Hon. MARTIN W. BATES, of Delaware. At half past twelve o'clock the Hon. JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE, Vice President elect, appeared in the Chamber, accompanied by Hon. JAMES A. PEARCE, chairman of the committee of arrange ments. The PRESIDENT pro tempore administered the oath of office and relinquished the chair to the VICE PRESIDENT, who addressed the Senate as follows: SENATORS: In assuming the duties of this station, I am quite conscious that I bring to their discharge few other qualities than a deep sense of the importance of this body in the scheme of the Government, and a feeling of respect for its members. Happily, my duties are comparatively few and simple, and I am sure that they will be made easy by a pervading sense of propriety which will of itself be sufficient on all occasions to preserve the dignity and decorum of the Senate. In administering the rules which you have adopted for the convenience of your proceedings, I shall often need your kind indulgence, and I anticipate with confidence your forbearance towards the errors that spring from inexperience. Cherishing the hope that our official and personal intercourse will be marked by mutual confidence and regard, I look forward with pleasure to our association in the performance of public duties. It shall be my constant aim, gentlemen of the Senate, to exhibit at all times, to every member of this body, the courtesy and impartiality which are due to the representatives of equal States. 371 Proceedings of the Special Session. At ten minutes past one o'clock, p. m., the incoming President of the United States, Hon. JAMES BUCHANAN, and the outgoing President, Hon. FRANKLIN PIERCE, entered the Chamber with the members of the Committee of Arrangements, Hons. JAMES A. PEARCE, WILLIAM BIGLER, and SOLOMON FOOT. All the persons entitled to admission according to the arrangements made by the committee having been conducted to the seats assigned to them, they proceeded to the eastern portico of the Capitol, where the PRESIDENT delivered the following INAUGURAL ADDRESS. FELLOW-CITIZENS: I appear before you this day to take the solemn oath "that I will faithStates, and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, fully execute the office of President of the United protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." In entering upon this great office, I must humbly invoke the God of our fathers for wisdom and firmness to execute its high and responsible duties in such a manner as to restore harmony and ancient friendship among the people of the several States, and to preserve our free institutions throughout many generations. Convinced that I owe my election to the inherent love for the Constitution and the Union which still animates the hearts of the American people, let me earnestly ask their powerful support in sustaining all just measures calculated to perpetuate these the richest political blessings which Heaven has ever bestowed upon any nation. Having determined not to become a candidate for reëlection, I shall have no motive to influence my conduct in administering the Government except the desire ably and faithfully to serve my country, and to live in the grateful memory of my countrymen. We have recently passed through a presidential contest in which the passions of our fellow-citizens were excited to the highest degree by questions of deep and vital importance; but when the people proclaimed their will, the tempest at once subsided, and all was calm. The voice of the majority, speaking in the manner prescribed by the Constitution, was heard, and instant submission followed. Our own country could alone have exhibited so grand and striking a spectacle of the capacity of man for self-government. What a happy conception, then, was it for Congress to apply this simple rule-that the will of the majority shall govern' to the settlement of the question of domestic slavery in the Territories! Congress is neither "to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." As a natural consequence, Congress has also prescribed that when the Territory of Kansas shall be admitted as a State, it "shall be received into the Union with or without slavery, as their constitution may prescribe at the time of their admission." A difference of opinion has arisen in regard to the point of time when the people of a Territory shall decide this question for themselves. This is, happily, a matter of but little practical import ance. Besides, it is a judicial question which legitimately belongs to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it is now pending, SENATE. and will, it is understood, be speedily and finally settled. To their decision, in common with all good citizens, I shall cheerfully submit, whatever this may be, though it has ever been my individual opinion that, under the Nebraska-Kansas act, the appropriate period will be when the number of actual residents in the Territory shall justify the formation of a constitution with a view to its admission as a State into the Union. But, be this as it may, it is the imperative and indispensable duty of the Government of the United States to secure to every resident inhabitant the free and independent expression of his opinion by his vote. This sacred right of each individual must be preserved. That being accomplished, nothing can be fairer than to leave the people of a Territory free from all foreign interference to decide their own destiny for themselves, subject only to the Constitution of the United States. The whole territorial question being thus settled upon the principle of popular sovereigntya principle as ancient as free government itself— everything of a practical nature has been decided. No other question remains for adjustment; because all agree that under the Constitution slavery in the States is beyond the reach of any human power except that of the respective States themselves wherein it exists. May we not, then, hope that the long agitation on this subject is approaching its end, and that the geographical parties to which it has given birth, so much dreaded by the Father of his Country, will speedily become extinct? Most happy will it be for the country when the public mind shall be diverted from this question to others of more pressing and practical importance. Throughout the whole progress of this agitation, which has scarcely known any intermission for more than twenty cars, whilst it has been productive of no positive good to any human being, it has been the prolific source of great evils to the master, to the slave, and to the whole country. It has alienated and estranged the people of the sister States from each other, and has even seriously endangered the very existence of the Union. Po Nor has the danger yet entirely ceased. Under our system there is a remedy for all mere political evils in the sound sense and sober judgment of the people. Time is a great corrective. litical subjects which but a few years ago excited and exasperated the public mind, have passed away, and are now nearly forgotten. But this question of domestic slavery is of far graver importance than any mere political question, because, should the agitation continue, it may eventually endanger the personal safety of a large portion of our countrymen where the institution exists. In that event, no form of government, however admirable in itself, and however productive of material benefits, can compensate for the loss of peace and domestic security around the family altar. Let every Union-loving man, therefore, exert his best influence to suppress this agitation, which, since the recent legislation of Congress, is without any legitimate object. It is an evil omen of the umes that men have undertaken to calculate the mere material value of the Union. Reasoned estimates have been presented of the pecuniary profits and local advantages which would result to different States and sections from its dissolution, and of the comparative injuries which such an event would inflict SENATE. on other States and sections. Even descending to this low and narrow view of the mighty question, all such calculations are at fault. The bare reference to a single consideration will be conclusive on this point. Proceedings of the Special Session. Territories by furnishing them a hardy and independent race of honest and industrious citizens, but shall secure homes for our children and children's children, as well as for those exiles from foreign shores who may seek in this country to We, at present, enjoy a free trade throughout improve their condition, and to enjoy the blessour extensive and expanding country such as the ings of civil and religious liberty. Such emigrants || world has never witnessed. This trade is con- have done much to promote the growth and prosducted on railroads and canals, on noble rivers perity of the country. They have proved faithand arms of the sea, which bind together the ful both in peace and in war. After becoming North and the South, the East and the West of citizens they are entitled, under the Constitution our Confederacy. Annihilate this trade, arrest and laws, to be placed on a perfect equality with its free progress by the geographical lines of jeal-native-born citizens, and in this character they ous and hostile States, and you destroy the pros- should ever be kindly recognized. perity and onward march of the whole and every part, and involve all in one common ruin; but such considerations, important as they are in themselves, sink into insignificance when we reflect on the terrific evils which would result from disunion to every portion of the Confederacy-to|| the North not more than to the South, to the East not more than to the West. These I shall not attempt to portray, because I feel an humble confidence that the kind Providence which inspired our fathers with wisdom to frame the most perfect form of Government and Union ever devised by man, will not suffer it to perish until it shall have been peacefully instrumental by its example in the extension of civil and religious liberty throughout the world. Next in importance to the maintenance of the Constitution and the Union is the duty of preserving the Government free from the taint or even the suspicion of corruption. Public virtue is the vital spirit of republics; and history proves that when this has decayed, and the love of money has usurped its place, although the forms of free Government may remain for a season, the substance has departed forever. Our present financial condition is without a parallel in history. No nation has ever before been embarrassed from too large a surplus in its Treasury. This almost necessarily gives birth to extravagant legislation. It produces wild schemes of expenditure, and begets a race of speculators and jobbers, whose ingenuity is exerted in contriving and promoting expedients to obtain public money. The purity of official agents, whether rightfully or wrongfully, is suspected, and the character of the Government suffers in the estimation of the people. This is in itself a very great evil. The natural mode of relief from this embarrassment is to appropriate the surplus in the Treasury to great national objects for which a clear warrant can be found in the Constitution. Among these I might mention the extinguishment of the public debt; a reasonable increase of the Navy, which is at present inadequate to the protection of our vast tonnage afloat, now greater than that of any other nation, as well as to the defense of our extended sea-coast. It is beyond all question the true principle that no more revenue ought to be collected from the people than the amount necessary to defray the expenses of a wise, economical, and efficient administration of the Government. To reach this point, it was necessary to resort to a modification of the tariff; and this has, I trust, been accomplished in such a manner as to do as little injury as may have been practicable to our domestic manufactures, especially those necessary for the defense of the country. Any discrimination against a particular branch, for the purpose of benefiting favored corporations, individuals, or interests, would have been unjust to the rest of the community, and inconsistent with that spirit of fairness and equality which ought to govern in the adjustment of a revenue tariff. But the squandering of the public money sinks into comparative insignificance as a temptation to corruption when compared with the squandering of the public lands. No nation in the tide of time has ever been blessed with so rich and noble an inheritance as we enjoy in the public lands. In administering this important trust, whilst it may be wise to grant portions of them for the improvement of the remainder, yet we should never forget that it is our cardinal policy to reserve these lands as much as may be for actual settlers, and this at moderate prices. We shall thus not only best promote the prosperity of the new States and The Federal Constitution is a grant from the States to Congress of certain specific powers; and the question whether this grant should be liberally or strictly construed has more or less divided political parties from the beginning. Without entering into the argument, I desire to state, at the commencement of my administration, that long experience and observation have convinced me that a strict construction of the powers of the Government is the only true, as well as the only safe theory of the Constitution. Whenever, in our past history, doubtful powers have been exercised by Congress, these have never failed to produce injurious and unhappy consequences. Many such instances might be adduced, if this were the proper occasion. Neither is it necessary for the public service to strain the language of the Constitution; because all the great and useful powers required for a successful administration of the Government, both in peace and in war, have been granted either in express terms, or by the plainest implication. Whilst deeply convinced of these truths, I yet consider it clear that, under the war-making power, Congress may appropriate money towards the construction of a military road, when this is absolutely necessary for the defense of any State or Territory of the Union against foreign invasion. Under the Constitution, Congress has power" to declare war, ""to raise and support armies," "to provide and maintain a navy," and to call forth the militia to " repel invasions." Thus endowed, in an ample manner, with the war-making power, the corresponding duty is required that the United States shall protect each of them (the States) against invasion." Now, how is it possible to afford this protection to California and our Pacific possessions, except by means of a military road through the Territories of the United States, over which men and munitions of war may be speedily transported from the Atlantic States to meet and to repel the invader? In the event of a war with a naval Power much stronger than our own, we should then have no other available access to the Pacific coast, because such a Power would instantly close the route across the isthmus of Central America. It is impossible to conceive that, whilst the Constitution has expressly required Congress to defend all the States, it should yet deny to them, by any fair construction, the only possible means by which one of these States can be defended. Besides, the Government, ever since its origin, has been in the constant practice of constructing military roads. It might also be wise to consider whether the love for the Union which now animates our fellow-citizens on the Pacific coast may not be impaired by our neglect or refusal to provide for them, in their remote and isolated condition, the only means by which the power of the States on this side of the Rocky Mountains can reach them in sufficient time to " protect" them "against invasion." I forbear for the present from expressing an opinion as to the wisest and most economical mode in which the Government can lend its aid in accomplishing this great and necessary work. I believe that many of the difficulties in the way which now appear formidable will, in a great degree, vanish as soon as the nearest and best route shall have been satisfactorily ascertained. It may be proper that, on this occasion, I should make some brief remarks in regard to our rights and duties as a member of the great family of nations. In our intercourse with them there are some plain principles, approved by our own experience, from which we should never depart. We ought to cultivate peace, commerce, and friendship with all nations, and this not merely as the best means of promoting our own material interests, but in a spirit of Christian benevolence towards our fellow-men, wherever their lot may be cast. Our diplomacy should be direct and frank, neither seeking to obtain more nor accepting less than is our due. We ought to cherish a sacred regard for the independence of all nations, and never attempt to interfere in the domestic concerns of any, unless this shall be imperatively required by the great law of self-preservation. To avoid entangling alliances has been a maxim of our policy ever since the days of Washington, and its wisdom no one will attempt to dispute. In short, we ought to do justice in a kindly spirit to all nations, and require justice from them in return. It is our glory that, whilst other nations have extended their dominions by the sword, we have never acquired any territory except by fair purchase, or, as in the case of Texas, by the voluntary determination of a brave, kindred, and independent people to blend their destinies with our ow own. Even our acquisitions from Mexico form no exception. Unwilling to take advantage of the fortune of war against a sister Republic, we purchased these possessions, under the treaty of peace, for a sum which was considered at the time a fair equivalent. Our past history forbids that we shall in the future acquire territory unless this be sanctioned by the laws of justice and honor. Acting on this principle, no nation will have a right to interfere or to complain if, in the progress of events, we shall still further extend our possessions. Hitherto, in all our acquisitions, the people under the protection of the American flag have enjoyed civil and religious liberty, as well as equal and just laws, and have been contented, prosperous, and happy. Their trade with the rest of the world has rapidly increased; and thus every commercial nation has shared largely in their successful progress. I shall now proceed to take the oath prescribed by the Constitution, whilst humbly invoking the blessing of Divine Providence on this great people. The Senate having returned to its Chamber, On motion of Mr. MASON, it was Ordered, That when the Senate adjourn to day, it be to meet to-morrow at one o'clock. On the motion of Mr. BRIGHT, the Senate adjourned. IN SENATE. THURSDAY, March 5, 1857. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. Mr. COLLAMER. My colleague, the Hon. SOLOMON FOOT, was absent yesterday in the discharge of the duties assigned to him by the Senate as a member of the committee to make arrangements for the inauguration, and therefore had not the oath of office administered to him for his new term, commencing yesterday. I ask that he be now qualified. The VICE PRESIDENT administered the oath prescribed by law to Mr. Foor, and he took his seat in the Senate. Mr. ALLEN offered the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That a committee, consisting of two members, be appointed to wait on the President of the United States, and inform him that the Senate is assembled, and is ready to receive any communication he may be pleased to make. Mr. ALLEN and Mr. CRITTENDEN were appointed the committee. The committee subsequently reported that they had discharged the duty assigned them, and received for answer that the President of the United States would communicate with the Senate to morrow. PAPERS WITHDRAWN. Mr. HAMLIN. I ask the consent of the Senate to withdraw from its files the papers relating to the claim of Vassal D. Pinkham. They contain the evidence of his case. By an act of the recent session of Congress, the whole case has been referred to the Postmaster General, and it is necessary that that functionary should have the papers, in order to be able to adjudicate |