[
86]
Chapter 4: seditious movements in Congress.--Secession in South Carolina, and its effects.
- Conduct of Southern Representatives in Congress
-- Committee of thirty — three, 86.
-- amendments to the Constitution proposed, 87.
-- the “Crittenden Compromise,” 89.
-- temper and wishes of the South Carolina politicians, 91.
-- earlier Secession movements, 92.
-- Memminger on a revolutionary mission to Virginia
-- why Virginians hesitated, 94.
-- power of the politicians in South Carolina, 95.
-- R. Barnwell Rhett and his incendiary speech, 96.
-- appeals to the passions of the people
-- officers of the Army and Navy invited to resign, 97.
-- a gala day in Charleston
-- Secession foreordained, 98.
-- assembling of the South Carolina Secession Convention, 100.
-- Reassembling in Charleston, 101.
-- proceedings of the Convention, 102.
-- rejoicings in Charleston, 104.
-- signing of the Ordinance, 106.
-- Commissioners to Washington appointed, 109.
-- addresses and Declaration, 109-110.
-- the nationality of South Carolina proclaimed, 111.
-- rejoicings because of the revolutionary Act at Charleston, 113.
-- Impressions in the Free-labor States, 114.
-- financial condition of the country, 115.
Whilst Treason was rampant and defiant in the
Senate Chamber, it was equally determined, but less demonstrative at first, in the hall of the House of Representatives.
It first gave utterance there when
Alexander R. Boteler, of
Virginia, proposed, by resolution, to refer so much of the
President's Message as “related to the present perilous condition of the country,” to a select committee, consisting of one from each State (thirty-three), with power to report at any time.
This resolution was adopted by a vote of one hundred and forty-five to thirty-eight.
During the voting, many members from the Slave-labor States exhibited their treasonable purposes, some by a few words, and all by a refusal to vote.
“I do not vote,” said
Singleton, of
Mississippi, “because I have not been sent here to make any compromises or patch up existing difficulties.
The subject will be decided by a convention of the people of my State.”
Hawkins, of
Florida, said:--“The day of compromise has passed.
I am opposed, and so is my State, to all and every compromise.
I shall not vote.”
Clopton, of
Alabama, considered secession as the only remedy for existing evils, and would not sanction any temporizing policy.
Pugh, of
Alabama, said:--“As my State intends following
South Carolina out of the
Union, by the 10th of January next, I pay no attention to any action taken in this body.”
No less than fifty-two members from the Slave-labor States refused to vote on this occasion.
These comprised all of the
South Carolina delegation, and most of those from
Florida,
Alabama,
Mississippi, and
Georgia.
By this action, they virtually avowed their determination to thwart all legislation in the direction of compromise or conciliation.
And when
Mr. Morris, a Democrat from
Illinois, offered a resolution,
that the House of Representatives were “unalterably and immovably attached to the Union of the States,” these men opposed it, and stayed the further consideration of it that day by carrying a motion to adjourn.
It was clearly apparent that they had resolved on disunion, and that nothing in the way of concession would be accepted.
The appointment of the
Select Committee of Thirty-three was made by the
Speaker,
1 and it became the recipient, by reference, of a large
[
87]
number of resolutions, suggestions, and propositions offered in the
House for the amendment of the
National Constitution, most of them looking to concessions to the demands of the Slave interest; for there was such an earnest desire for the preservation of peace, that the people of the Free-labor States were ready to make every reasonable sacrifice for its sake.
The most important of these conciliatory suggestions were made by
Representatives John Cochrane and
Daniel E. Sickles, of New York;
Thomas C. Hindman, of
Arkansas;
Clement L. Vallandigham, of
Ohio; and
John W. Noell, of
Missouri.
Mr. Cochrane, who was afterward a general in the
National Army, fighting the Slave interest in rebellion, and also a candidate of the “Radical Abolitionists” for the office of
Vice-President of the
United States, proposed the
 |
|
Hall of the House of Representatives. |
acceptance of the decision of the Supreme Court, in the case of
Dred Scott, that the descendant of a slave could not be a citizen of the
United States,
2 as the settled policy of the
Government toward the inhabitants of the country, of
African origin.
He also proposed that neither Congress nor the people of any Territory should interfere with Slavery therein, while it remained a
[
88]
Territory; that the
Missouri Compromise, as to the limits of Slavery, should be revived; that Congress should not have power to abolish the inter-State Slave-trade; that the
Fugitive Slave Law should be reaffirmed; that slave-holders might pass unmolested with their slaves through any Free-labor State, and that all nullifying laws of State Legislatures should be inoperative,; also, a declaration that the
Constitution was an article of agreement between Sovereign States, and that an attempt of the
National Government to, coerce a Sovereign State into obedience to it would be levying war upon a substantial power, and would precipitate a dissolution of the
Union.
3
Mr. Sickles, who afterward fought the secessionists in arms, as a commanding general, and lost a leg in the fray, proposed an amendment declaring that when a State, in the exercise of its sovereignty, should secede, the
Government of the
United States should appoint commissioners to confer with duly appointed agents of such State, and agree upon the disposition of the public property and territory belonging to the
United States Tying within it, and upon the proportion of the public debt to be assumed and paid by that State; also authorizing the
President, when all should be settled, to proclaim the withdrawal of such State from the
Union.
This was substantially
Clingman's proposition, when he made his seditious speech in the Senate a fortnight before.
4
Mr. Hindman, afterward a general in the armies of the conspirators arrayed against the
Republic, proposed an amendment that should guarantee the express recognition of slavery wherever it existed; no interference with the inter-State or domestic Slave-trade, from which
Virginia was receiving a large annual income; to give free scope for slaveholders with their slaves while traveling in Free-labor States; to prohibit to any State the right of representation in the
Congress whose Legislature should pass laws impairing the obligations of the
Fugitive Slave Law; to give the Slave-labor States a negative upon all acts of the
Congress concerning Slavery; to make these, and all other provisions of the
Constitution relating to Slavery, unamendable; and to grant to the several States authority to appoint all National officers within their respective limits.
5
Mr. Vallandigham, who was afterward convicted of, and punished for, alleged treasonable acts,
6 submitted a proposition for a change in the
National Constitution, providing for a division of the
Republic into four sections, to be called, respectively,
The North, The West, The Pacific, and
The South.
7 His proposition, says a late writer, “: was the fullest and most logical embodiment yet made of
Mr. Calhoun's subtle device for enabling a minority to
[
89]
obstruct and baffle the majority under a political system preserving the forms of a republic.”
8
Mr. Noell proposed to instruct the
Committee to inquire and report as to the expediency of abolishing the office of
President of the
United States, and establishing, in lieu thereof, an Executive Council of three members, to be elected by districts composed of contiguous States, as nearly as possible, and each member to be invested with a veto power.
He wished the
Committee also to inquire whether the equilibrium between the Free-labor and Slave-labor States might not be restored and preserved, particularly by a voluntary division on the part of some of the latter States into two or more States.
9
There were other propositions for conciliation and the preservation of the
Union presented, some similar and some quite dissimilar to those already mentioned; and it was evident to the people at large that the
Republic: would not be saved by the wisdom of their representatives alone.
There seemed to be a general desire among patriots to concede every thing but honor and the best interests of the country for the preservation of the
Union,, while the conspirators, having trampled both honor and patriotism under their feet, would yield nothing, and even presented their requisitions in such.
questionable shapes, that they might interpret them, at the critical moment, of final decision, as their interests should dictate.
The result of the labors of the
Committee of Thirty-three, and the action on measures proposed outside of that Committee, will be considered hereafter.
In the Senate there was a like desire, on the part of many of the members; from the Free-labor and the Border Slave-labor States, for conciliation, and a disposition to compromise much for the sake of fraternal good — will and peace.
On motion of
