able. It was admitted to be true constitutional doctrine, and I have borrowed the language from the resolutions of that day.

Mr. Crittenden.—I had the honor to be one of the men who took part in the debate on the resolutions at that time, though not certainly of that class to which the gentleman has particularly alluded "as the greatest and best men of the country." Mr. Davis. I would include the senator among that class, and the country certainly includes him among them.

Mr. Crittenden.-I did not intend to make any question about it, but to avoid all egotism by saying simply I was there. I know the question was then made. I wanted to ask the senator from Virginia whether he supposed that it affected the character of the government which was established, whether it was done by the States or by the people.

Mr. Davis.—Oh, yes, materially, I think I will say in the absence of my friend from Virginia. To say that it was a government established by the States and not by the people is a material distinction.

Mr. Crittenden. On that question I have a different opinion. It has seemed to me that the Constitution having been made and its obligations acknowledged, it was not the less sacred for having been made by the States or by the people. It was the same instrument; it had the supreme authority of the United States for its sanction in one form or other. I wished to know whether, in the opinion of the gentleman, holding that it was made by the States, they considered it varied the character of the Constitution or the character of the government formed under it?

Mr. Davis. There is so much confusion in the chamber that I do not know whether I heard the gentleman distinctly or he heard me. The historical fact intended to be asserted here is, that the Federal Constitution was adopted by the States severally; that is, the people of each State acting independently, not by the people en masse. It is merely the statement of a historical fact, and intended to guard the State right and sovereignty which has never been surrendered.

Mr. Crittenden.-I do not intend to take exception to this phraseology, but only wished to know if the gentleman who had used it intended it as I understood it; that is, as signifying that the Constitution was made by the highest sovereign power in this country.

Mr. Davis. I say so.

Mr. Crittenden.-Whether made by the people through the States or by the States for the people, in my judgment the phraseology is not important. I wished to know if that was also the case in the judgment of others. I am content with it in that sense. My opinion is that it was made by the people

of the United States. The States themselves derived their authority from the people. I do not intend to make any argument on this subject, nor to pursue it, much less to enter into a history of the manner in which the Constitution of the United States was formed. My authority is this, the first line of the Constitution: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, etc., have made this Constitution." Now, sir, I say there is no higher authority than that.

Mr. Mason. Will the senator indulge me? I was out of the Senate, but I understand the senator has made allusion to me on some question.

Mr. Crittenden.-The inquiry which I made has been answered. I will not press the matter further.

Mr. Davis. The venerable and distinguished senator from Kentucky, I use the language towards him which the country has applied to him,—has read from the first line in the Constitution the words, "We, the people of the United States." Our fathers used the word "people" as a collective noun; I use it so. I believe never until the advent of Kossuth did we ever have in this country a plural to that collective noun. Perhaps now if the Constitution were rewritten to express the same idea, it would appear, "We, the peoples of the United States." There it meant simply the people of each one of the United States; could have meant nothing else, because it was done by their delegates and submitted to the States for ratification.

Mr. Crittenden. Mr. President, I have not participated in the long debate which has arisen on these resolutions, because there was much of it which I did not regard as interesting to the country at large, and from which I was somewhat excluded by the nature of the topics which entered into the discussion. I had nothing to do with the long discussion that has taken place in regard to the proceedings of the Charleston convention. I had nothing to do with the long argument; and vindication, and accusation in relation to Mr. Douglas, his transgressions or his orthodoxy, his fidelity to bargains made with his political confederates or his infidelity to them. I had nothing to do with them. I have said nothing about them. The subject proper for discussion was so ably argued by others that I must really claim for myself the right of adding that my diffidence prevented me from taking a part in the debate. But I have feared that it might appear to others as if I was shrinking from the responsibility of these questions. No such feeling ever influenced me; and I feel now, without any intention of entering into the general argument, disposed to make an explanation of my opinions in regard to the power of the Territories on the subject of slavery (if that must be the topic), always an

unpleasant one to me. And here, in the commencement, let me say that when the Missouri Compromise was repealed, when that established line had been the line of peace to this country for years and years

Mr. Polk.-Mr. President, it is now late; if the senator wishes to give his views at all at length, I think it due to him that we adjourn.

Mr. Crittenden.-I would not ask it, but I am weary and not well, have been unwell for several days, but I am unwilling to be the cause of delay.

The motion was agreed to, and the Senate adjourned.

Much discussion as to the relations existing between the territorial government and the government of the United States had taken place while the resolutions of Mr. Davis were before the Senate. On the 25th of May, 1860, Mr. Crittenden made a speech on this subject. Nothing but such measures as seemed to promise pacification had any political interest for him. His idea was that a territorial government was a mere creature of Congress, made and fashioned by Congress, with the power it thought proper to confer, and that all powers thus conferred were liable to be resumed at any time, or changed, according to the discretion of Congress. He considered the people of the United States the natural owners of all supreme power. They had delegated a portion of that sovereignty to Congress. Congress, in constituting a territorial government, might grant as much as it pleased of power to govern. If Congress had the power of expelling slavery from the Territories, they might grant even that to the territorial government. The power of the government was invoked in the resolutions of Mr. Davis for the purpose of securing slave property in the Territories. The Supreme Court of the United States had determined that any citizen of the United States might go into a Territory and carry his slaves with him, and hold them there. Mr. Crittenden was of the opinion that the Constitution was bound to protect the property which it had authorized to go. When such property shall require such interposition, it would be the duty of Congress to interpose and grant protection. There was no case now demanding interference. The evil in a territorial government was but temporary. He thought there was no case calling for congressional interference now, and none likely to

exist. Kansas was soon to be taken from the class of territorial governments, and there would be no question about slaves in Washington, Utah, or New Mexico; the evil was too distant to be the cause of agitation. When, in 1854, the Missouri Compromise was repealed, one of its promised benefits was that the discussion as to slavery would be removed from the halls of Congress and transferred to the Territories,-made a local and not a national question. The Kansas-Nebraska bill was framed with that view, but the promised effect has not been produced. The effect of that law has been modified by the decision of the Supreme Court. Mr. Crittenden would not say that the law would have warranted the legislature of Kansas in excluding slavery altogether. It was not known whether this was in the power of Congress to grant such a power. The Dred Scott case was then depending. That case now determines that Congress had not the power, and could not of course convey it by the Kansas act. The Constitution, as interpreted by the Federal court, declares that slavery is not a subject of legislation on the part of Congress. Government was the combination of the powers of all to protect the rights, lives, and liberties of each. Slave property must be protected, but unless the case imperiously demanded it, he would be slow to interpose the positive authority of the government, would try other means. The salus populi is at last the great law of nations. The Republican party has made progress, and this beautiful scene of human happiness and peace which our country presents has received its wound from the agitations they have made on the subject of slavery. Moderation is demanded of us all now, on all sides. We are told in the good book, that if we are at the altar, and remember that our brother is offended with us, to go and be reconciled to our brother, and then offer to our Maker the evidence of our devotion. thus act both North and South.

Let us

CHAPTER XII.

1860.

Amos A. Lawrence to Crittenden-Everett to Crittenden-Senate-Oregon War Debt-Pension for Mira Alexander-Letter to Smallwood and BowmanWashington Hunt-Mr. Crittenden to his Wife-Senate-President's Message -George Robertson to Crittenden.

(Amos A. Lawrence to J. J. Crittenden.)

BOSTON, May 25, 1860.

Y DEAR SIR,—If you had allowed the convention at Baltimore to nominate you for President, it is possible that we might have stirred up some enthusiasm here in favor of the ticket. That appeared to be the only course if we aspired to any degree of success; but, from what has transpired since, I think you may be congratulated upon having avoided so trying a position. If Mr. Bell could see how difficult it is for us to make even a respectable opposition to the enthusiasm of the Republicans, he would cease to look in this direction for available support. Circumstances may change this, but so it stands now all through New England. The whole public sentiment which appears on the outside is in favor of "Old Abe" and his split rails. The ratificial meeting here last night was completely successful. Faneuil Hall was filled and the streets around it. Meantime we have not found the material for a meeting at all, except in collecting a crowd of boys to hear one hundred guns fired on Boston Common. In addition to this we have the weight of Mr. Everett's indecision about accepting the nomination, and it appears probable that he may decline at last. The intelligent conservative men, the great merchants and manufacturers, express great satisfaction at our nominations, and always add-it is of no use. They avoid politics altogether, except to vote; some refuse to do that. All this is discouraging, and I would not write it to any one but yourself, nor would I do that, except that I presume you desire to know the real facts. We have no idea of surrender in any contingency. With great respect and regard, yours truly, AMOS A. LAWRENCE

Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.