Presidential Candidates Part 15

"HON. P. S. BROOKS,

"SIR: Your note of the 27th inst. was placed in my hands by your friend General Lane, at twenty minutes past ten o'clock to-day.

"I characterized, on the floor of the Senate, the a.s.sault upon my colleague as 'brutal, murderous, and cowardly.' I thought so then, I think so now. I have no qualifications whatever to make in regard to those words.

"I have never entertained or expressed in the Senate or elsewhere, the idea of personal responsibility in the sense of the duellist.

"I have always regarded duelling as the lingering relic of a barbarous civilization, which the law of the country has branded as a crime. While, therefore, I religiously believe in the right of self-defence in its broadest sense, the law of my country and the matured convictions of my whole life alike forbid me to meet you for the purpose indicated in your letter.

"Your obedient servant,

"HENRY WILSON."

This prompt and emphatic response, declining to fight a duel, but at the same time avowing his readiness to maintain the right of self-defence, was most enthusiastically approved and applauded by the people and presses of the North, and he received many letters, from men of the highest character, warmly commending his n.o.ble and dignified course.

On the 13th of June, General Wilson made a full and elaborate reply to Mr. Butler, and in defence of Mr. Sumner. This speech and his speeches on the bill to admit Kansas, his speech in defence of the acts of Col.

Fremont, and against using the army to enforce the acts of the territorial legislature of Kansas, were largely circulated through the country.

On the adjournment of Congress, General Wilson entered into the Presidential campaign, and gave all his energies to secure the triumph of the Republican cause.

During the sessions of 1856-7-8 and 1858-9, General Wilson was in constant attendance upon Congress, and his duties, owing to the prolonged absence of his colleague, were very arduous and pressing. In those sessions he took his full share of labor in the committee rooms, on the floor of the Senate, and on matters of legislative action. He took part in the debates during these sessions, upon all questions of importance, and on most of the questions before the Senate, he delivered elaborate speeches. Those upon the affairs of Kansas exhibit an amount of information, concerning that territory, surpa.s.sed by no other member of either House of Congress, and his speeches on the Treasury Note bill, the expenses of the Government, the revenue collection appropriations, the tariff, the President's Message, and the Pacific Railroad, are remarkable for fullness and accuracy of facts, and clearness and force of statement. His speech in March, 1850, in reply to Mr. Hammond of South Carolina, is one of the most effective speeches ever delivered in Congress, in defence of free labor. It is full of facts and points of great power, and few speeches ever made in Congress have had a wider circulation, or received warmer approval, in the free States.

Mr. Hammond characterized the manual laborers as "slaves"--the "mud-sills" of society. This extract is quoted from General Wilson's reply:

"Mr. President, the senator from South Carolina tells us that 'all the powers of the world cannot abolish' 'the thing' he calls slavery. 'G.o.d only can do it when he repeals the fiat, "the poor ye have always with you;" for the man who lives by daily labor, and your whole cla.s.s of hireling manual laborers and operatives, are essentially slaves! Our slaves are black; happy, content, unaspiring; yours are white, and they feel galled by their degradation. Our slaves do not vote; yours do vote, and, being the majority, they are the depositaries of all your political power; and if they knew the tremendous secret, that the ballot-box is stronger than an army with banners, and could combine, your society would be reconstructed, your government overthrown, and your property divided.'

"'The poor ye have always with you!' This fiat of Almighty G.o.d, which Christian men of all ages and lands have accepted as the imperative injunction of the common Father of all, to care for the children of misfortune and sorrow, the senator from South Carolina accepts as the foundation-stone, the eternal law, of slavery, which 'all the powers of earth cannot abolish.' These precious words of our Heavenly Father, 'the poor ye have always with you,'

are perpetually sounding in the ears of mankind, ever reminding them of their dependence and their duties. These words appeal alike to the conscience and the heart of mankind. To men blessed in their basket and their store, they say 'property has its duties as well as its rights!' To men clothed with authority to shape the policy or to administer the laws of the State, they say, 'lighten by wise, humane, and equal laws, the burdens of the toiling and dependent children of men!' To men of every age and every clime they appeal, by the Divine promise that 'he that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord!' Sir, I thank G.o.d that I live in a commonwealth which sees no warrant in these words of inspiration to oppress the sons and daughters of toil and poverty. Over the poor and lowly she casts the broad s.h.i.+eld of equal, just, and humane legislation. The poorest man that treads her soil, no matter what blood may run in his veins, is protected in his rights and incited to labor by no other force than the a.s.surance that the fruits of his toil belong to himself, to the wife of his bosom, and the children of his love.

"The senator from South Carolina exclaims, 'The man who lives by daily labor, your whole cla.s.s of manual laborers, are essentially slaves'--'they feel galled by their degradation!' What a sentiment is this to hear uttered in the councils of this democratic Republic! The senator's political a.s.sociates who listen to these words which brand hundreds of thousands of the men they represent in the free States, and hundreds of their neighbors and personal friends as 'slaves,' have found no words to repel or rebuke this language. This language of scorn and contempt is addressed to senators who were not nursed by a slave; whose lot it was to toil with their own hands--to eat bread earned, not by the sweat of another's brow, but by their own. Sir, I am the son of a 'hireling manual laborer' who, with the frosts of seventy winters on his brow, 'lives by daily labor.' I, too, have 'lived by daily labor.'

I, too, have been a 'hireling manual laborer.' Poverty cast its dark and chilling shadow over the home of my childhood, and want was there sometimes--an unbidden guest. At the age of ten years--to aid him who gave me being, in keeping the gaunt spectre from the hearth of the mother who bore me--I left the home of my boyhood, and went to earn my bread by 'daily labor.' Many a weary mile have I travelled

"'To beg a brother of the earth To give me leave to toil.'

"Sir, I have toiled as a 'hireling manual laborer' in the field and in the workshop; and I tell the senator from South Carolina that I never 'felt galled by my degradation.' No, sir--never!

Perhaps the senator who represents that 'other cla.s.s which leads progress, civilization, and refinement,' will ascribe this to obtuseness of intellect and blunted sensibilities of the heart.

Sir, I was conscious of my manhood; I was the peer of my employer; I knew that the laws and inst.i.tutions of my native and adopted States threw over him and over me alike the panoply of equality; I knew, too, that the world was before me, that its wealth, its garnered treasures of knowledge, its honors, the coveted prizes of life, were within the grasp of a brave heart and a tireless hand, and I accepted the responsibilities of my position all unconscious that I was a 'slave.' I have employed others, hundreds of 'hireling manual laborers.' Some of them then possessed, and now possess, more property than I ever owned; some of them were better educated than myself--yes, sir, better educated, and better read, too, than some senators on this floor; and many of them, in moral excellence and purity of character, I could not but feel, were my superiors. I have occupied, Mr. President, for more than thirty years, the relation of employer and employed; and while I never felt 'galled by my degradation' in the one case, in the other I was never conscious that my 'hireling laborers' were my inferiors.

That man is a 'sn.o.b' who boasts of being a 'hireling laborer,' or who is ashamed of being a 'hireling laborer;' that man is a 'sn.o.b'

who feels any inferiority to any man because he is a 'hireling laborer,' or who a.s.sumes any superiority over others because he is an employer. Honest labor is honorable; and the man who is ashamed that he is or was a 'hireling laborer' has not manhood enough to 'feel galled by his degradation.'

"Having occupied, Mr. President, the relation of either employed or employer for a third of a century; having lived in a commonwealth where the 'hireling cla.s.s of manual laborers' are 'the depositaries of political power;' having a.s.sociated with this cla.s.s in all the relations of life; I tell the senator from South Carolina, and the cla.s.s he represents, that he libels, grossly libels them, when he declares that they are 'essentially slaves!'

There can be found nowhere in America, a cla.s.s of men more proudly conscious or tenacious of their rights. Friends and foes have ever found them

'A stubborn race, fearing and flattering none.'

"Ours are the inst.i.tutions of freedom; and they flourish best in the storms and agitations of inquiry and free discussion. We are conscious that our social and political inst.i.tutions have not attained perfection, and we invoke the examination and the criticism of the genius and learning of all Christendom. Should the senator and his agitators and lecturers come to Ma.s.sachusetts on a mission to teach our 'hireling cla.s.s of manual laborers,' our 'mud-sills,' our 'slaves,' the 'tremendous secret of the ballot-box,' and to help 'combine and lead them,' these stigmatized 'hirelings' would reply to the senator and his a.s.sociates, 'We are freemen; we are the peers of the gifted and the wealthy; we know the "tremendous secret of the ballot-box;"

and we mold and fas.h.i.+on these inst.i.tutions that bless and adorn our proud and free Commonwealth! These public schools are ours, for the education of our children; these libraries, with their acc.u.mulated treasures, are ours; these mult.i.tudinous and varied pursuits of life, where intelligence and skill find their reward, are ours. Labor is here honored and respected, and great examples incite us to action. All around us in the professions, in the marts of commerce, on the exchange, where merchant-princes and capitalists do congregate; in these manufactories and workshops, where the products of every clime are fas.h.i.+oned into a thousand forms of utility and beauty; on these smiling farms, fertilized by the sweat of free labor; in every position of private and of public life, are our a.s.sociates, who were but yesterday "hireling laborers," "mud-sills," "slaves." In every department of human effort are n.o.ble men who sprang from our ranks--men whose good deeds will be felt and will live in the grateful memories of men when the stones reared by the hands of affection to their honored names shall crumble into dust. Our eyes glisten and our hearts throb over the bright, glowing and radiant pages of our history that records the deeds of patriotism of the sons of New England who sprang from our ranks and wore the badges of toil. While the names of Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, Nathaniel Greene and Paul Revere live on the brightest pages of our history, the mechanics of Ma.s.sachusetts and New England will never want ill.u.s.trious examples to incite us to n.o.ble aspirations and n.o.ble deeds. Go home, say to your privileged cla.s.s, which, you vauntingly say, "leads progress, civilization and refinement,"

that it is the opinion of the "hireling laborers" of Ma.s.sachusetts, if you have no sympathy for your African bondmen, in whose veins flows so much of your own blood, you should at least sympathize with the millions of your own race, whose labor you have dishonored and degraded by slavery! You should teach your millions of poor and ignorant white men, so long oppressed by your policy, the "tremendous secret that the ballot-box is stronger than an army with banners!" You should combine and lead them to the adoption of a policy which shall secure their own emanc.i.p.ation from a degrading thralldom!'"

Early in January, 1859, Gen. Wilson was relected United States Senator for six years from March 3, 1859. He had in the Senate 35 to 5 votes, and in the House of Representatives 199 to 36 votes. Before the people and in the legislature, he was without a compet.i.tor in the ranks of his own party; and the unity of sentiment in favor of his relection was a n.o.ble tribute of which any public man might justly be proud.

JEFFERSON DAVIS.

Jefferson Davis is a native of Kentucky. His father took him, when he was an infant, to Mississippi Territory, about the year 1806. His father was moderately wealthy and gave his son an excellent education.

He had the ordinary course at the schools, and then entered Transylvania University College, Kentucky. There he remained till his father removed him to West Point as a cadet. This was in 1822, and in 1828 he left it with honor as brevet second lieutenant, and was at once placed in active service. He served in the Indian war of the times so ably as to gain almost immediately a first lieutenant's commission. The famous Indian chief, "Black Hawk," became his prisoner, and a strong friends.h.i.+p was struck up between the lieutenant and his prisoner, which lasted till the death of the latter.

In 1835, Mr. Davis, sickened of military life without the excitement of actual engagement with an enemy, and retired from the service, settling down upon a cotton plantation in Mississippi. For nearly ten years he remained on his plantation in quiet, cultivating cotton and his intellect at the same time, for he was during all these years of rural life a great student and reader. He was contentedly preparing himself for the future occasion which should call for his services. In 1843, he took the stump for Mr. Polk, and such was his ability before the people that they sent him to Congress in 1845. When he had been in Was.h.i.+ngton but a few months, the war with Mexico broke out, and his const.i.tuents raised a regiment of volunteers, who elected Mr. Davis as their colonel. He immediately resigned his seat in Congress, and went with his regiment to join General Taylor in Mexico. The history of Col. Davis' career in Mexico is full of interest, but we cannot stay to elaborate it. At Buena Vista he won laurels of glory, in the parlance of the soldier. Says a friend of his:

"His men--though volunteers--showed a steadiness which equalled anything that might have been expected of veteran troops; and they were handled in so masterly a way, that, if the glory of that day were to be a.s.signed to any one corps rather than any other, they would probably bear away the palm. Every one remembers the proud appeal of Colonel Davis to another regiment of volunteers, who were finding the fire rather warm, to 'Stay and re-form behind that wall'--pointing to his Mississippians. Throughout the war, he and his brave riflemen loom up at intervals whenever the fire grows hot or the emergency grave, and never without good effect.

They were armed with a peculiar rifle, now best known as the Mississippi rifle, chosen by their colonel himself; it was scarcely less deadly than the Mini. Their colonel set the example of intrepidity and recklessness of personal injury: at Buena Vista he was badly wounded at an early part of the action; but he sat his horse steadily till the day was won, and refused even to delegate a portion of his duties to his subordinate officers."

The term of service for which his regiment was enlisted having expired, his medical advisers insisted upon his going home and curing himself of his wounds. He did not stay long, however; for that very year--in the late autumn--he was appointed United States Senator by the Governor of Mississippi to fill a vacancy, and when the legislature of the State came together, it elected him to the same high office for the ensuing six years.

In the Senate he at once took a high position. He was made Chairman of the Military Committee of the Senate, a position he has held during his entire term of senatorial services, and which he has honored. In the long and excited debates of 1849-50, and 1850-51, Mr. Davis took a prominent part, and always what is termed an ultra-sectional position.

He was the champion of the extreme South, and made some of the ablest speeches of the entire slavery debate.

In September, 1851, Mr. Davis was nominated by the Democrats of Mississippi, as their candidate for Governor. He at once resigned his seat in the Senate. He lost an election by a thousand votes--and retired to his plantation.

Upon the nomination of Franklin Pierce to the Presidency, he took the stump for him in several of the more doubtful southern States, and with great success. His popularity before the people as a speaker was great, and his success was in due proportion.

Mr. Pierce rewarded Mr. Davis for his eminent services in the campaign by the offer of the Secretarys.h.i.+p of War--an office which he was peculiarly qualified to fill. He was quite successful as Secretary of War, though his unfortunate quarrel with General Scott (about the merits of which we are incompetent to p.r.o.nounce an opinion), damaged his popularity with a portion of his friends. When the Pierce administration went out, Mr. Davis was relected United States Senator, and he has latterly been looked upon as a Democratic leader in the Senate.

In his personal appearance in the Senate-room, Mr. Davis has few equals. Tall, upright, stern, and with the bearing of a prince, he at once commands the admiration of the stranger so far as his personal appearance is concerned. His military manners have followed him from the camp into the Senate. We say this in no offensive sense, though it is true that the senator often unintentionally offends by the quickness, the savageness, and the irritability of his style and speech. This is not intentional, and though it now and then gives offence, it at the same time gives great force to the sentiment which the senator may be uttering at the time. He has a peculiar voice, keyed high, yet musical, and his words come flowing out like so many cannon-b.a.l.l.s with the force of gunpowder behind them.

The political position of Mr. Davis cannot be misunderstood. He is ultra-southern. Not a disunionist, at all events; but a disunionist in a certain event. He stands by the extreme southern men--occupies an extreme southern position for a man who claims yet to stand by the national Democratic party. His views upon the non-intervention doctrines of Mr. Douglas, we shall quote that we may not do him injustice. He is an enthusiastic and consistent advocate of utter free trade. Nothing short of absolute free trade will suit him or satisfy him. He is also opposed to the Homestead bill, and all like appropriations of the public lands. He is in favor of the acquisition of Cuba, but opposed the Senate resolution--proposed--giving Mr.

Buchanan power to make war upon the southern republics when he should think the occasion demanded it.

If Mr. Davis' position be thought to be extremely southern, it must be remembered that he is an honest, upright man--much more so than some who clamor after office; and that such a man can be trusted generally, in spite of his prejudices, to deal fairly even with his opponents. An honest man, however ultra his position, if he have intellect, is safer to be trusted with a high office, than the mere twaddling politician, who will execute the party's bidding, however iniquitous it may be.

In the great "non-intervention debate" of the Senate, in February, 1859, Mr. Davis said:

"Now, the senator asks will you make a discrimination in the territories? I say yes, I would discriminate in the territories wherever it is needful to a.s.sert the right of a citizen: wherever it is proper to carry out the principle, the obligation, the clear intent and meaning of the Const.i.tution of the United States. I have heard many a siren's song on this doctrine of non-intervention; a thing shadowy and fleeting, changing its color as often as the chameleon, which never meant anything fairly unless it was that Congress would not attempt to legislate on a subject over which they had no control; that they would not attempt to establish slavery anywhere nor to prohibit it anywhere; and such was the language of the compromise measures of 1850 when this doctrine was inaugurated. Since that, it has been woven into a delusive gauze, thrown over the public mind, and presented as an obligation of the Democratic party to stand still; withholding from an American citizen the protection he has a right to claim; to surrender their power; to do nothing; to prove faithless to the trust they hold at the hands of the people of the States. If the theory of the senator be correct, and if Congress has no power to legislate in any regard upon the subject, how did you pa.s.s the fugitive slave law? He repeats, again and again, that you have no power to legislate in regard to slavery either in the States or in the territories, and yet the fugitive slave law stands on the statute-book; and although he did not vote for it, he explained to the country why he did not, and expressed his regret that his absence had prevented him from recording his vote in favor of it.

"From the plain language of the Const.i.tution, as I have read it, how is it possible for one still claiming to follow the path of the Const.i.tution, to a.s.sert that Congress has no power to legislate in relation to the subject anywhere? He informs us, however, that by the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the full power of the inhabitants of a territory to legislate on all subjects not inconsistent with the Const.i.tution, was granted by Congress. If Congress attempted to make such a grant; if Congress thus attempted to rid themselves of a trust imposed upon them, they exceeded their authority. They could delegate no such power. The territorial legislature can be but an instrument, through which the Congress of the United States execute their trust in relation to the territories. Therefore it was, that notwithstanding the exact language of that bill which the senator has read, the Congress of the United States did a.s.sume, and did exercise, the power to repeal a law pa.s.sed in that very territory of Kansas, which they clearly could not have done if they had surrendered all control over its legislation. Whether the senator voted for that report or not, I do not know; I presume he did; but whether he did or not, does not vary the question, except so far as it affects himself. The advocates of the Kansas-Nebraska bill were generally the men who most promptly claimed the repeal of those laws, because they said they were a violation of those rights which every American citizen possessed under the Const.i.tution.

"But the senator says territorial laws can only be set aside by an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. If so, then they have a power not derived from Congress; they are not the instruments of Congress. But in the course of the senator's remarks, and quite inconsistent with this position, he announced that they possessed no power save that which they derived from the organic act and the Const.i.tution. They can derive no power from the Const.i.tution save as territories of the United States, over which the States have given the power of a trustee to the Congress; and being the delegate of the Congress, they have such powers as Congress has thought proper to give, provided they do not exceed such powers as the Congress possesses. How, then, does the Senator claim that they have a power to legislate which Congress cannot revise; and yet no power to legislate at all save that which they derive from their organic act?

"My friend from Alabama presented a question to the senator from Illinois, which he did not answer. It was, whether a law p.r.o.nounced unconst.i.tutional by the Supreme Court was still to remain in force within the territory, Congress failing to provide any remedy which would restore the right violated by that unconst.i.tutional act? The senator answers me from his seat, 'clearly not.' Then I ask him, what is the remedy? The law is p.r.o.nounced unconst.i.tutional, and yet the right which it has violated is not restored; the protection which is required is not granted; the law which deprived him of the protection, though it may be declared unconst.i.tutional, is not replaced by any which will give him the adequate protection to hold his property. Then what is the benefit he derives from the decision of the Supreme Court? The decision of the Supreme Court is binding upon the Congress; but this squatter-sovereignty legislation, seeming to be outside of the Const.i.tution, outside of the legislation of the Federal Government, erects itself into an att.i.tude that seems to me quite inappropriate.

"I concede to the Congress the power, through the instrumentality of a territorial legislature, to legislate upon such subjects as Congress itself has the right to make laws for; no more than that.

More than that the senator cannot claim, unless he can show to us that philosophical problem of getting more out of a tub than it contains; its contents being measured, to find something more which can be taken out of it. If he will not--and I suppose he will not--contend that Congress can delegate more power than it possesses, how does he get the power in the territorial legislature to pa.s.s laws which will interfere with the rights of a citizen choosing to migrate to a territory? It is the common property of the people of the States. Every citizen has a right to go there, and to carry with him whatever property is recognized by the Const.i.tution; the common law of the States forming the Union.

Congress has no power to prohibit it; is bound to see that it is fully enjoyed. Then, I ask the senator, where does he derive the power for the territorial legislature to do it? for he has planted himself now on the ground that they derive their authority from the organic act."

At a subsequent stage of the debate, the subjoined colloquy occurred between Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, who had the floor, and Mr. Davis: