Benson J. Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War. Volume 1.

“ [79] and poor men against the wealthy. I have no doubt that would be their leading policy, and they would be very quiet about it. They want to get up that sort of ‘free debate’ which has been put into practice in Texas, according to the Senator from New York [Mr. Seward], for he is reported to have said, in one of his speeches in the Northwest, alluding to recent disturbances, to burnings and poisonings there, that Texas was ‘excited by free debate.’ Well, Sir,” continued Clingman, with peculiar emphasis, “a Senator from Texas¹ told me, the other day, that a good many of those ‘debaters’ were hanging up by the trees in that country!”

When Clingman ceased speaking, the venerable John Jay Crittenden, of Kentucky, tottering with physical infirmities and the burden of seventy-five years--the Nestor of Congress — instantly arose and mildly rebuked the Senator, while his seditious words were yet ringing in the ears of his amazed peers. “I rise here,” he said, “to express the hope, and that alone, that the bad example of the gentleman will not be followed.” He spoke feelingly of costly sacrifices made for the establishment of the Union; of its blessings and promises; and hoped that “there was not a Senator present who was not willing to yield and compromise much for the sake of the Government and the Union.”

Mr. Crittenden's mild rebuke, and earnest appeal to the patriotism of the Senate, was met by more scornful and violent harangues from other Senators, in which the speakers seemed to emulate each other in the utterance of seditious sentiments. Clingman, more courteous than most of his compeers, said, “I think one of the wisest remarks that Mr. Calhoun ever made was, that the Union could not be saved by eulogies upon it.” Senators Alfred Iverson, of Georgia, Albert G. Brown, of Mississippi, and Louis T. Wigfall, of Texas, followed. They had been stirred with anger by stinging words from Senator Hale, of New Hampshire, who replied to some of Clingman's remarks:--“If the issue which is presented is, that the constitutional will of the public opinion of this country, expressed through the forms of the Constitution, will not be submitted to, and war is the alternative, let it come in any form or in any shape. The Union is dissolved, and it cannot be held together as a Union, if that is the alternative upon which we go into an election. If it is preannounced and determined that the voice of the majority, expressed through the regular and constitutional forms of the Constitution, .will not be submitted to, then, Sir, this is not a Union of equals; it is a Union of a dictatorial oligarchy on the one side, and a herd of slaves and cowards on the other. That is it, Sir; nothing more; nothing less.”

The conspirators were not accustomed to hear such defiant words from their opponents. They indicated a spirit of resistance to their demands — powerful, resolute, and unyielding. They were astonished and enraged. They felt compelled to cast off all disguises and cease circumlocution. Hale had said, “The plain, true way, is, to look this thing in the face — see where we are.” The conspirators now thought so too, and accepted the challenge. Senators Iverson and Wigfall, the most outspoken of the disloyalists present,