Chapter IX: Part 9

"The man whose mind on virtue bent,
Pursues some greatly good intent
With undiverted aim,
Serene beholds the angry crowd,
Nor can their clamors fierce and loud
His stubborn honor tame.
Not the proud tyrant's fiercest threat,
Nor storms, that from their dark retreat
The rolling surges wake;
Not Jove's dread bolt that shakes the pole,
The firmer purpose of his soul
With all its power can shake."

In the latter years of his life, actuated by a desire to be useful in his day and generation, wherever opportunity and his ability might allow, he accepted the office of justice of the peace, an office which, to the honor of those who have filled it in North Carolina from the first organization of civil government until now, has ever been performed without pecuniary reward, and took considerable interest in administering justice in the County Courts of Wake, giving to this inferior tribunal the dignity and value of a Superior Court, to the great satisfaction of the bar and the public.

He was thrice married; first, as before mentioned, to the daughter of Governor Turner; second, to the daughter of Colonel William Polk, and third, to Mrs. Delia Williams, daughter of Sherwood Haywood, Esq., in each instance forming an alliance with an old family of the State, distinguished by public service and great personal worth from an early period. The last named lady, the worthy companion of his life for thirty years, who survives him as his widow, receives in her bereavement the condolence and sympathy, not merely of this community and State, but that of those in distant lands and in other States of the Union whom, not the lapse of years nor the excitement of intervening events, nor the fiery gulf of civil war shall separate from a friendship accorded to her and her departed husband, as representatives of the personal character, the society and domestic virtues of their native State in better days of the republic. By the two latter marriages he left numerous descendants.

While taking his accustomed walk at an early hour in the morning of January 5, 1863, he was prostrated by a paralytic stroke, near the mineral spring in the environs of the city of Raleigh, and although retaining his self-possession and ability to converse until assistance was kindly furnished, on the way home his mind wandered, and before reaching his residence his faculty of continuous speech deserted him, never again to return. His mental powers after a brief interval rallied, insomuch that he took pleasure in reading and in listening to the conversations of friends, whose visits afforded him much satisfaction; and, with assistance, he could walk for exercise in the open air; but was never afterwards able to command language, except for brief sentences, failing often in these to convey his full meaning. In this condition he lingered until the 11th of May, 1866, when, after a few days' illness from renewed attacks of the same nature, he expired, having recently completed his seventy-first year.

My task is done. I have endeavored but "to hold the mirror up to nature." If the image reflected appears, in any of its features, magnified, it was not so intended. Yet the memory of a friendship, dating back to kind offices and notice in my student-life, extending through all my active manhood, may not have been without its influence in giving color to the picture. But the character in our contemplation was of no ordinary proportions. At the bar of the State he wore the mantle of Gaston and Archibald Henderson for a much longer period than either, worthily and well, with no diminution of its honors. In the highest court of the Union he was the acknowledged compeer of Webster, Crittenden, Ewing, Johnson, Berrien, Walker and Cushing. That he did not sit in the highest seat of justice in the State and nation, as proposed successively by the Executive of each, is imputable to no deficiency or unworthiness for the station, his adversaries being judges. In the Senate, when Clay, Webster, and Calhoun still remained there, not to name others of scarcely inferior repute, he was among the foremost, upholding the rights of his own State and section with manliness and ability, but with candor, moderation, and true wisdom, which sought to harmonize conflicting elements and avert the calamities of civil strife. In morals he was inflexible, without stain or suspicion of vice; in manners and social intercourse, genial, frank, hospitable, with colloquial powers to instruct, amuse, and fascinate alike, and "with a heart open as day to melting charity." The fame of such a man is a source of natural and just pride to the people of the State. This sentiment is that which the poet describes in the Englishman, when he sings

"It is enough to satisfy the ambition of a private man,
That Chatham's language was his mother tongue,
And Wolfe's great name compatriot with his own."

How much he will be missed as a member of the community, as the friend of order and law, religion and morality, as a professional man, counsellor, and advocate of unrivalled ability and reputation, as an intellectual and cultivated man, with armor bright and powers ever at his command, presenting a model for the emulation of our ingenuous youth, as a public character, as adviser and true friend, but no flatterer of the people, and an unflinching supporter of their rights, wherever truth and duty might lead, time and experience may demonstrate. There is no public aspect, however, in which his loss is so much to be deplored as in the relation he bore to the past, and his probable efficiency in solving the problem of the day. Who so capable of interpreting the Constitution which forms our government, and the alleged laws of war by which it is claimed to be suspended or superseded, as that gifted mind and sincere nature, so trusted on these topics in former years, and so thoroughly imbued with the spirit and teachings of Marshall? Who so deserving to be heard on the best means of pacification and reestablishment of order and right among thirty-five millions of freemen as he who, by his temperance, calmness, and intelligent constitutional opinions, in the commencement of our national difficulties, incurred the censure of many in our own section of country, without receiving the approbation of their adversaries? Who so fitted for the exposure and correction of error, of allaying the ignoble passions of hatred and revenge, and rekindling the national affections inspired by a common and honorable history? Who so skillful to remove the scales from the eyes that will not see, and who so wise and brave to rebuke the age of faction, threatening to realize the assertion of Mr. Fox, in his history of James II., that "the most dangerous of all revolutions is a restoration?"

To that good Being, in whose hands are the destinies of nations and individuals, by whose divine agency crooked paths are often made straight and issue granted out of all troubles, in ways not visible to human eyes, let us unite in commending every interest of our beloved country.

* * * * *

The foregoing sketch, in the form of an address on the life and character of George E. Badger, was delivered in Raleigh, July 19, 1866, at the request of the Wake county bar. Though much of it is not strictly biographical, it is interesting on account of its distinguished author, as well as for giving us a view of the times and events discussed.

The address delivered by Mr. Badger at the State University in June, 1833, before the two Literary Societies, is said, by those who heard him on other occasions, not to afford a fair illustration of his great powers as a speaker. He was in fact never a florid orator, powerful to move the passions above reason, but his mind was so clear, his manner so unhesitating, his knowledge so great, his flow of language so easy, his memory so accurate, and his presence so commanding that he was bound to make a powerful impression whenever he spoke to men in public or in private.

He was not greatest as a statesman--he had his run in the technical learning of the law too long--statesmen must be early and specially trained and educated in the business of statecraft.

He was too reserved, austere at times, and perhaps sensitive, ever to win the affections of men in the same proportion that his great talents commanded their respect and admiration.

His short tribute to Judge Gaston, hereto subjoined, is valuable for the purpose for which it was uttered, and as a fair sample of his style, showing his choice of words, in easy command, when occasion called them forth. Judge Gaston died in January, 1844, and, at the meeting held in honor of his memory, Mr. Badger said: "This meeting of the members of the bar of the Supreme Court has learned with profound grief the melancholy and totally unexpected bereavement which the Court and the country have sustained in the death of the Hon. William Gaston. Struck down suddenly by the hand of God, in the midst of his judicial labors, dying as he had lived in the enlightened and devoted service of his country, endued by learning and adorned by eloquence with their choicest gifts, enobled by that pure integrity and firm and undeviating pursuit of right which only an ardent and animating religious faith can bestow and adequately sustain, and endeared to the hearts of all that knew him by those virtues which diffuse over the social circle all that is cheerful, refined, and benevolent, he has left behind him a rare and happy memory, dear alike to his brethren, his friends, and his country."

Governor Graham undertakes to set forth Mr. Badger's reasons for finally favoring the secession of North Carolina from the Union, but the reader will see from the subjoined resolutions that it is best to allow Mr. Badger to speak for himself. He and the people of North Carolina then assumed as axiomatic that Lincoln's call for troops to invade the South was utterly without warrant of law. Strong as was the language of the resolutions, it was not strong enough to express the indignation of the people at Lincoln's usurping the authority to begin the war on his sole responsibility. Not mainly because the institution of slavery was threatened, nor yet because we were wedged between seceding States, but because the people, as one man, believed that the most vital powers of a government of three departments had been violently seized by the Executive, that the seizure was supported by a conspiracy of States, and that the Constitution and the Union of the fathers were already outraged and dismembered.

The resolutions above alluded to, and a part of the speech delivered in the United States Senate, March 19, 1850, instructive in themselves, are given also as specimens of Mr. Badger's style.

ORDINANCE OF SECESSION.

PROPOSED BY GEO. E. BADGER.

"Whereas, Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, and Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine, were chosen President and Vice-President of the United States by a party in fact and avowedly entirely sectional in its organization, and hostile in its declared principles to the institutions of the Southern States of the Union, and thereupon certain Southern States did separate themselves from the Union, and form another and independent government, under the name of 'The Confederate States of America'; and

"Whereas, the people of North Carolina, though justly aggrieved by the evident tendency of this election and of these principles, did, nevertheless, abstain from adopting any such measures of separation, and, on the contrary, influenced by an ardent attachment to the Union and Constitution, which their fathers had transmitted to them, did remain in the said Union, loyally discharging all their duties under the Constitution, in the hope that what was threatening in public affairs might yield to the united efforts of patriotic men from every part of the nation, and by their efforts such guarantees for the security of our rights might be obtained as should restore confidence, renew alienated ties, and finally reunite all the States in a common bond of fraternal union; meantime, cheerfully and faithfully exerting whatever influence they possessed for the accomplishment of this most desirable end; and

"Whereas, things being in this condition, and the people of this State indulging this hope, the said Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States did, on the fifteenth day of April, by his proclamation, call upon the States of the Union to furnish large bodies of troops to enable him, under the false pretense of executing the laws, to march an army into the seceded States with a view to their subjugation, under an arbitrary and military authority, there being no law of Congress authorizing such calling out of troops, and no constitutional right to use them, if called out, for the purpose intended by him; and

"Whereas, this call for troops has been answered throughout the Northern, Northwestern, and Middle non-slaveholding States with enthusiastic readiness, and it is evident, from the tone of the entire press of those States and the open avowal of their public men, that it is the fixed purpose of the governments and people of those States to wage a cruel war against the seceded States, to destroy utterly the fairest portion of this continent, and reduce its inhabitants to absolute subjection and abject slavery; and

"Whereas, in aid of these detestable plans and wicked measures, the said Lincoln, without any shadow of rightful authority, and in plain violation of the Constitution of the United States, has, by other proclamations, declared the ports of North Carolina, as well as all the other Atlantic and Gulf States under blockade, thus seeking to cut off our trade with all parts of the world; and

"Whereas, since his accession to power, the whole conduct of said Lincoln has been marked by a succession of false, disingenuous and treacherous acts and declarations, proving incontestably that he is, at least in his dealings with Southern States and Southern men, devoid of faith and honor; and

"Whereas, he is now governing by military rule alone, enlarging by new enlistments of men both the military and naval force, without any authority of law, having set aside all constitutional and legal restraints, and made all constitutional and legal rights dependent upon his mere pleasure and that of his military subordinates; and

"Whereas, in all his unconstitutional, illegal and oppressive acts, in all his wicked and diabolical purposes, and in his present position of usurper and military dictator, he has been and is encouraged and supported by the great body of the people of the non-slaveholding States;

"Therefore, this convention, now here assembled in the name and with the sovereign power of the people of North Carolina, doth, for the reasons aforesaid, and others, and in order to preserve the undoubted rights and liberties of the said people, hereby declare all connection of government between this State and the United States of America dissolved and abrogated, and this State to be a free, sovereign, and independent State, owing no subordination, obedience, support or other duty to the said United States, their Constitution or authorities, anything in her ratification of said Constitution or of any amendment or amendments thereto to the contrary notwithstanding; and having full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do, and appealing to the Supreme Governor of the world for the justice of our cause, and beseeching Him for his gracious help and blessing, we will, to the uttermost of our power and to the last extremity, maintain, defend, and uphold this declaration."

SPEECH ON SLAVERY AND THE UNION.

BY GEORGE E. BADGER.

I concur entirely in what has so often been said on this floor that there can be no peaceable separation of this Union. From the very nature of the case, from the character of our institutions, from the character of our country, from the nature of the government itself, it is, in my judgment, impossible that there can be a peaceable separation of this Union. But if there could be, I agree entirely with the honorable Senator from Kentucky, that the state of peace in which we should separate must be speedily ended, must terminate in intestine conflicts, in wars, which, from the nature of the case, could know no amicable termination, no permanent peace but, until the superiority of the one or the other side in the conflict should be completely established, would admit of nothing but hollow truces, in which each might breathe from past exertions, and make preparations for future conflicts.

Sir, the idea of a separation of these States into distinct confederacies was thought of, and considered, and spoken of before the adoption of this Constitution. At the time that the question was before the American people, whether the Constitution proposed by the Convention should be adopted, it was then spoken of. It is probable--yea, certain--consequences were referred to by the writers of that admirable series of papers denominated the "Federalist"; and I beg the indulgence of the Senate while I read a very brief extract, conveying the views of those eminent men:

"If these States should either be wholly disunited, or only united in partial confederacies, a man must be far gone in utopian speculation who can seriously doubt that the subdivisions into which they might be thrown would have frequent and violent contests with each other. To presume a want of motives for such contests, as an argument against their existence, would be to forget that men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious. To look for a continuation of harmony between a number of independent, unconnected sovereignties, situated in the same neighborhood, would be to disregard the uniform course of human events, and to set at defiance the accumulated experience of ages."

If this was a just view of the probable--the certain--results of a separation of these States at that time, and under the then existing circumstances, I pray you, sir, upon what, at the present day, can we found a better hope? Then the States were fresh from the conflict of the Revolutionary war. Then, not only had they a lively remembrance of the contest in which they had fought and in which they had gathered victory and honor together, but the leading men of that time were those choice spirits who had carried them through that recent conflict, who had established the independence of the country, and who exercised an influence in public affairs proportioned to their patriotism, their valor and their wisdom. Then they might have separated without the same causes of hostility and alienation which must exist in any separation of these States at the present day. If we separate now, we do it with feelings of mutual distrust and bitterness. We divide, not by common consent, as partners who can no longer carry on their joint business with mutual profit, each to pursue, for his own separate advantage, that course of business in which he thinks he can best succeed, but we part with the feelings of those who consider themselves mutually wronged. A sense of injustice and oppression rankles in the hearts of one portion of the new confederacies, and a sense in the other of defiance and indignity.

Under such circumstances, "what can ensue" (to borrow the language of the great English moralist) "but a continual exacerbation of hatred, an unextinguishable feud, an incessant reciprocation of mischief, a mutual vigilance to entrap and eagerness to destroy?"

The question has been asked, What can the States do, supposing them to be divided--separated into distinct subdivisions or independent sovereignties? Allow me to answer that question in the words of one of the most eminent men whom my State has ever produced: a man of clear and comprehensive intellect, of a sound heart and enlarged and ardent patriotism, who shed a glory around his native State, and whose name is held in just veneration by every one who acknowledges himself a North Carolinian. At another period of our history the same question was asked. In the years 1831 and 1832 it had become an inquiry, a subject of disquisition in my State, and the late Judge Gaston, in an address delivered in 1832 before the Literary Societies of the University, thus treats of the subject:

"Threats of resistance, secession, separation, have become common as household words in the wicked and silly violence of public declaimers. The public ear is familiarized with, and the public mind will soon become accustomed to, the detestable suggestion of disunion. Calculations and conjectures--what may the East do without the South, and what may the South do without the East?--sneers, menaces, reproaches, and recriminations--all tend to the same fatal end. What can the East do without the South? What can the South do without the East? They may do much; they may exhibit to the curiosity of political anatomists, and the pity and wonder of the world, the _disjecta membra_--the sundered, bleeding limbs of a once gigantic body instinct with life, and strength, and vigor. They can furnish to the philosophic historian another melancholy and striking instance of the political axiom, that all republican confederacies have an inherent and unavoidable tendency to dissolution. They will present fields and occasions for border wars, for leagues and counter leagues, for the intrigues of petty statesmen and the struggles of military chiefs, for confiscations, insurrections, and deeds of darkest hue. They will gladden the hearts of those who have proclaimed that men are not fit to govern themselves, and shed a disastrous eclipse on the hopes of rational freedom throughout the world. Solon, in his code, proposed no punishment for parricide, treating it as an impossible crime. Such, with us, ought to be the crime of political parricide--the dismemberment of our 'fatherland.'"

To me, sir, these sentiments convey a just representation of what will be the future and unavoidable result of a separation of the people of this great country into distinct and independent confederacies. And when I look at the prospect before us it is one so dark, filled with such horrid forms of dread and evil, that I willingly close my eyes upon it, and desire to believe that it is impossible it should ever be realized. * * * * * * * *

Nor, Mr. President, must I forget that, in considering the effect which this proviso [the Wilmot Proviso] is likely to have upon the condition of the Southern mind, we must look to what has been said by Northern gentlemen in connection with this subject. Permit me to call the attention of the Senate to a very brief extract from a speech delivered in the other end of the Capitol:

"In conclusion, I have only to add, that such is my solemn and abiding conviction of the character of slavery, that, under a full sense of my responsibility to my country and my God, I _deliberately_ say, better disunion, better a civil or a servile war, better anything that God in His providence shall send, than an extension of the bounds of slavery."

SEVERAL SENATORS. Whose speech is that?

A SENATOR. Mr. Mann's.

MR. BADGER. We have heard much, Mr. President, of the violence of Southern declamation. I have most carefully avoided reading the speeches of Southern gentlemen who were supposed to be liable to that charge. I happened, however, in the early part of this session, and before the other house was organized, to be in that body when there were some bursts of feeling and denunciation from Southern gentlemen, which I heard with pain, mortification, almost with anguish of mind. But, sir, these were bursts of feeling; these were passionate and excited declarations; these had everything to plead for them as being spontaneous and fiery ebullitions of men burning at the moment under a sense of wrong. And where, among these, will you find anything equal to the cool, calm, deliberate announcement of the philosophic mind that delivered in the other house the passage which I have read: "Better disunion, better a civil or a servile war, better anything that God in His providence shall send, than an extension of the bounds of slavery?" In other words, it is the deliberate, settled, fixed opinion of the honorable gentleman who made that speech, that rather than the extension of the bounds of slavery _one foot_--yes, sir, there is no qualification, _one foot_--he would prefer a disunion of these States, he would prefer all the horrors of civil war, all the monstrous, untold, and almost inconceivable atrocities of a servile war, he would pile the earth with dead, he would light up heaven with midnight conflagrations; all this--yea, and more--all the vials of wrath which God in His providence might see fit to pour down on us he would suffer, rather than permit, not one man who is now free to be made a slave--that would be extravagant enough--but rather than permit one man who now stands upon the soil of North Carolina a slave, to stand a slave upon the soil of New Mexico!

Yes, sir, here is a sacrifice of life and happiness, and of all that is dear to the black and white races together, to a mere idealism--a sacrifice proposed by a gentleman who claims to be a philosopher, and to speak the language of calm deliberation, a sacrifice of our glorious Union proposed by a patriot, not rather than freemen should be made slaves, not rather than the condition of even one human being should be made worse than it now is, but rather than one man shall remove from one spot of the earth to another without an improvement of his condition, without passing from slavery to freedom! Sir, after that announcement thus made, which I beg to say, sir, I did not seek--for the speech I have never read--the extract I found in one of the newspapers of the day--after that announcement, talk not of Southern violence, talk not of Southern egotism, talk not of our disposition to sacrifice to our peculiar notions and our peculiar relations the peace and happiness, the growing prosperity, and the mutual concord of this great Union. Now, sir, if that announcement goes abroad into the Southern country, attended by this wanton application of the Wilmot Proviso, an irritating commentary upon that patriotic announcement, what can be expected? What but the deepest emotions of indignation in the bosoms of those born and brought up where slavery exists, and taking totally different views of the institution from those which are taken by the honorable gentleman who has placed himself in this cool and deliberate, humane, and philosophical position!

Sir, we know, with regard to two or more of the Southern States, emphatic pledges have been given, through their Legislatures, that _some_ mode of resistance to this proviso will be adopted. Now, what is to be the result of the Nashville Convention which has been called for June next, should that body assemble and find matters in their present condition? If no bill shall have passed to do us justice by affording, as far as the law can afford it, the effectual restoration of fugitive slaves; if a bill shall have passed, or be likely to pass, with the insult of the Wilmot Proviso causelessly and wantonly inserted in it, after the announcement made in the extract of the speech which I have just read, and after that made by the Senator from New York that so far from there being an obligation to restore to us our fugitive slaves, the duty of hospitality requires that they shall be received, kept and retained from us and that the constitutional law which requires their restoration to us is contrary to the law of God, and not binding in conscience; and, still more, after the settled policy is fully realized that those who visit our shores, coming under the protection of the American flag within our jurisdiction, and, in violation of our laws, seduce our slaves from us, and carry them to the North, shall not be surrendered up as fugitives from justice, because the same high and overruling law which puts the Constitution down, and makes it a nullity, has converted what we call a crime into a high and meritorious act of duty, what will be the result of this convention, meeting under such circumstances, what may be, what probably will be, the consequence? I say it not because I wish it, I do not wish it; the conviction has been forced upon my mind by evidence reluctantly received; and therefore I wish my friends around me to give, for that reason, the more credit to what I say--if that convention shall meet under such circumstances, in my judgment the Union is from that day dissolved. I do not say that dissolution will follow instantly; I do not say but that a connection, an external Union, may not be maintained, and linger on for a few years longer: but the meeting of that convention will be to our institutions, in the language of Napoleon, "the beginning of the end"; it will be the initiative step in such a course of measures, North and South, as will result in convulsing us so far that the ills to which we fly, cannot, in our judgment, exceed those we bear; and thus will be put upon the people of the South the necessity, the painful, hard necessity, of a dissolution, a final separation. Now, sir, why do I take this view? In the first place, the meeting of the Nashville Convention is, upon its face, a step towards a separate and distinct organization of the Southern States. The very movement separates them for a time, in purposes and intent, from the great mass of the population of the country. They meet there for what purpose? To consider, to deliberate, to debate--what? What course of action shall, by mutual agreement, be taken by the States whom this convention will represent, what manner of resistance, what mode of redress? Now, sir, in all matters of this kind, in all revolutions, in all dissolutions of the ties which bind us together, the first step is the great difficulty. It is so even in social and private life; it is so in the married state. The first wanton and public outrage on the part of one towards the other of the parties is easily followed by such steps as end in total and thorough estrangement. Well, then, suppose no measures are proposed which look to a separation of the Union, as I have no reason to suppose that any will be proposed looking to that as an object, I fully believe that that convention in Mississippi which terminated its session in the call for this convention was influenced by high and patriotic motives, seeking to preserve and not to destroy the Union. If I wanted anything to satisfy me of that (besides other reasons which I have), the very fact that the convention was presided over by the venerable and venerated Chief Justice Sharkey, a most learned jurist and patriotic gentleman, would be sufficient for me. But when we have ascertained what people design by any particular movement, we are far, very far, from having ascertained what they may accomplish by it. Now, suppose this meeting should resolve that, by a common concurrence of the States represented, laws should be passed, police regulations be adopted, in those States, of the most irritating and offensive kind towards the Northern portion of the Union: such a course will not appear surprising, if we bear in mind the fact that slaves are constantly taken from our ports by vessels that visit them for the purpose of commerce; that, thus taken, they are withheld from us, and their seducers are neither discountenanced at home, nor restored to us for punishment; and that a flagrant wrong on one side naturally provokes to measures at once of protection and retaliation from the other. But, Mr. President, the moment these States, by mutual compact and agreement, have come to a resolution to adopt a particular course of measures upon this subject, they have left the platform of the Constitution; they are no longer upon it, because the Constitution expressly forbids a State to enter into any compact or agreement with another State without the consent of Congress. When this first step is taken, the process is easy and need not be traced to a final dissolution of our present Union: and, therefore, in the event of the meeting of this convention, with the slavery question in the situation I have mentioned, I have, I repeat, gloomy apprehensions of what may be, and most probably will be the result upon the destinies of our country. Force, Mr. President, cannot keep the States of this Union together, cannot preserve the constitutional Union. I distinctly admit what has been said by the honorable Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Webster], that no State has a _right_ to secede from this Union. I distinctly admit that the Constitution, looking to perpetuity, makes no provision directly or indirectly, for the separation of its parts. But, in point of fact, from the very nature of our institutions, the States cannot be kept in union by force. The majority, or the most powerful portion, may conquer and reduce to subjection the other; but when this is done, the States are not in union, the constitutional connection is not restored. It is but the spectacle of a conquered people submitting to superior power; and no ties of affection, no cooperation in a common government, no _American_ Union can reasonably be hoped between the conquerors and the conquered. Believe me, sir, if ever the unhappy hour should arrive when American blood is shed in a contest between the States--some desiring to secede, and the others endeavoring to compel them by force of arms to remain in the Union--whenever that hour comes, our connection is immediately broken, to all beneficial purposes, for the happiness or prosperity of the country.

Now, Mr. President, with regard to my own State. Should this proviso be adopted, and should satisfaction not be given in the other particulars which I have mentioned, will North Carolina join in resisting, in any mode, the action of this government? Will she unite in measures for secession, for revolution, or for retaliatory legislation? I am so far, sir, from undertaking to speak upon this subject for the South, which I wish to be understood now and always as disavowing, that I do not feel myself even empowered to speak what will be the judgment and conduct of my own State. As was well said the other day by my friend and colleague [Mr. Mangum], in presenting some resolutions to the Senate, disunion is a question which we cannot discuss here as one for Senatorial action. We are sent here to represent the State under the Constitution, and to discharge ordinary legislative and executive duties, which presuppose the Constitution to be entire and in full force. We of course have no delegated authority to speak the views of North Carolina upon any such question as that which I have just stated. Last year the Legislature of my State passed a series of resolutions, in which, after expressing in very strong and decided terms the sense felt by the people of that State of the wrong of the Wilmot Proviso, and other kindred measures, they nevertheless adopted an extract from the Farewell Address of Washington, embodying the sentiment that we were not to look upon the Union as _in any event_ to be abandoned. Making all proper modifications of that large and most comprehensive expression, "in any event," it could have no less interpretation than this, that none of the events alluded to by the preceding resolutions would furnish ground for the abandonment of the Union. Since that time this matter has been much discussed in North Carolina; primary meetings have been held; different resolutions have been passed by those meetings, some discountenancing and declining to be represented in the Nashville Convention, others approving the call, and resolving to send delegates; and one meeting, with a somewhat singular inconsistency, while protesting against a government of unlimited powers, solemnly pledged itself to adhere to, abide by, and support whatever the Nashville Convention shall determine. I hope, sir, that North Carolina will not concur on account of the passage of the Wilmot Proviso, in any measures for the dissolution of the Union or resistance to the Government. My own opinion is that it would furnish no sufficient ground for such a procedure. I say that here; I shall say it at home when the proper time arrives, if a time shall ever arrive when it shall be necessary to say it. But this I say, also, that I shall feel, if such an event as the adoption of the proviso should happen, that a serious indignity has been offered to us; not, perhaps, designed--I will not charge any with a deliberate design to insult--but yet an indignity, because such must be the wanton adoption of an objectionable and useless measure, after distinct notice that it will be considered in that light. And rely upon it, sir, that whatever may be the result in regard to any external action of the people of the Southern States, if something satisfactory is not done respecting fugitive slaves, and if the application of this Wilmot Proviso is insisted upon, there will be left in the hearts of our people a rankling sense of injustice and offense. They will have less of hope in the future operation of the Constitution. They will feel, to a certain extent, a painful conviction that the large majority of the inhabitants of the free States have not that sympathy with their feelings and regard for their rights, that justice and moderation in the exercise of the known powers, and that abstinence from the needless exercise of doubtful and questionable ones which are so essential to keep the mind of the country united; and, unless our minds are united, the forced association of reluctant communities, who stay together, not to obtain good from their connection, but to avoid evils of separation, does not deserve the name of Union.

Mr. President, I am sorry that I have occupied the Senate so long. I will endeavor to draw the few remaining remarks I have to make to a speedy close. I have submitted with entire frankness the views which I entertain. I believe, conscientiously believe, that there is in the Northern States of the Union a sincere attachment to the Constitution, a firm adherence to the compromises of the Constitution, and a just consideration for the rights and feelings of their Southern brethren. And I have a strong hope, an abiding confidence, that these sentiments will, on every proper occasion, be manifested by the great body of inhabitants in the free States. If I thought otherwise, I should be without hope, and should be inclined to consider my birth an event to be deplored, as imposing upon me the necessity of witnessing the utter destruction of my country. But, sir, let a proper bill for the recapture of fugitive slaves be passed, let this Wilmot Proviso be dropped (and, if possible, sink into insignificancy and oblivion), and I will be willing to deal with every question before the Senate in the utmost liberality of compromise. Yes, sir, I have no objections to compromise. The Union sprung out of compromise. The Union is supported by legislative compromise, a compromise incorporated in the fundamental law, the Constitution. Springing out of compromise, this Union can only be preserved and made to promote the great and good ends designed by and hoped from it, by our carrying on the government habitually in the spirit of compromise. In that view, sir, I am willing to withdraw all objection to the admission of California, with or without an alteration of her limits as settled by her constitution. And when I say that, Mr. President, permit me to say that I make a great sacrifice. Sir, I occupy the same position with regard to California now as I did at the last session. The honorable Senator from Mississippi, now in his seat [Mr. Davis], knows that I was with him upon a committee charged with the subject of admitting those Territories as States. I announced to him at once that I was totally and absolutely opposed to their admission in any form, and with any subdivision of territory. I have heard nothing to remove the objections I then entertained; but, in the manner of the organization of the government there, I find additional objections, strong in themselves, and giving additional force to those which I had before. And if I could believe that the views expressed by the Senator from New York [Mr. Seward], the other day, upon this subject, are the views entertained by the people of California, or by the gentlemen who are sent here to represent them, my objections would rise almost to an insurmountable repugnance, to a perpetual opposition; for that Senator has not hesitated to tell us, in substance, that we have no choice about admitting California; that she is a State, and a State she will continue, irrespective of any act of Congress; that she comes here and demands admission into this Union, and, if not admitted here, our authority will be cast aside, and she will be an independent republic upon the Pacific. But, sir, I cannot believe, and do not believe, that such an insolent dictation to us is designed by the people of California. And I personally know the two gentlemen whom she has selected as Senators, and am sure they would be the first to disown and renounce the position assumed by their patron upon this floor.

The honorable Senator from New York [Mr. Seward], seems to consider the admission of California as a matter beyond all price and all value, to be attained at every hazard and every sacrifice, and therefore, notwithstanding the opinion he has expressed with regard to slavery, though he considers it a high, hospitable duty to entertain the fugitive slaves from the South, and to keep them from their masters, though he has a holy horror of the extension of slavery into the Territories now free, and considers every obligation imposed by the Constitution in reference to slavery overborne and annulled by the supreme law of God--he tells us, that so all-important is the admission of California, under the circumstances, that he would have voted for her admission with an express recognition by her constitution of the right to carry slaves into her territory. An allusion to this subject seems to have a strange effect upon the Senator from New York. He is carried back at once to the last session, when certain measures were pending here for the purpose of organizing some temporary government for California and New Mexico; and alluding to the gentleman who is now the source of power and patronage in this Government, he thus expresses himself:

"May this republic never have a President commit a more serious or more dangerous usurpation of power than the act of the present eminent Chief Magistrate, in endeavoring to induce the legislative authorities to relieve him from the exercise of military power, by establishing civil institutions, regulated by law, in a distant province. Rome would have been standing this day if she had had such generals and such tribunes."

Yes, sir, if Rome had been blessed with a Zachary Taylor for commander of her armies; if Rome had been blessed with a Zachary Taylor for a tribune, the Goths, the Vandals, and the Huns, Attila, and all his hordes, would have poured upon the empire in vain--they would have been repelled, overcome upon the embattled plain, and driven back to their fastnesses in the North, and Rome would stand this day proud mistress of the world! Now, sir, whether the President of the United States can swallow such an adulation as this, I will not undertake to decide; but such is my estimate of his intelligence and his merit, of his modesty--a just modesty, which usually accompanies true merit--that I believe he has no powers of deglutition sufficient to get it down.

I have said, Mr. President, that I should make a great sacrifice in my vote for the admission of California; yet I will make the sacrifice, not grudgingly, but cheerfully; and, as said by the Senator from Michigan [Mr. Cass], the other day, if asked "What would I do to restore harmony to the country, and make this still a united and happy people," I would answer like him, "I scarcely know what I would _not_ do to accomplish such an end."

Mr. President, I feel the importance of this great subject, and my utter want of power to treat it as it deserves. I wish to excite or to irritate the angry feelings of no section of this country; I am conscious, in my own bosom, of no sentiment towards any portion of my countrymen, except one of respect and cordial attachment. But I may be permitted to except from this general declaration those mischievous associations in the Northern part of the United States, which, to our injury, and to the great and permanent injury of the unfortunate slaves among us, have been, with an unholy pertinacity, agitating the subject of this domestic institution of ours for the last fifteen years. Towards them, even, I trust I have no feeling of hatred. For every portion of the American people, I care not whether in the East or West, the North or South, I have the heart and hand of a brother. There is no gentleman upon this floor, among my immediate associates around me, no gentleman upon the other side of the chamber, for whom I have not always manifested a proper personal consideration and kindness; but I wish to make our Northern friends aware of the danger to which we are exposed. My own views have never been extreme, my position has ever been moderate; and I trust some credit will be given me when I declare my deliberate judgment, that consequences the most serious, even the most calamitous, may follow a particular disposition of this subject by the present Congress. If it should be believed throughout the Southern country that sentiments which we have heard here uttered, are the sentiments of the whole body of the North, every desire to remain together would sink in Southern hearts. We would be together, then, not for love or affection, not from the hope of happiness or improvement; and if we would remain united at all, it would be solely from dread of the greater and darker calamities that might follow our separation. If this subject is met in a proper spirit, it can be easily settled and adjusted. So far as I am concerned, I am willing to meet upon any reasonable ground. I am willing to yield much that I wish, to do much for which I have a strong and serious repugnance.

I call upon every conservative gentleman in this body, every one from a free State who desires to perpetuate the institutions of his country in their true spirit and character, who wishes not to convert our Union into an association of discordant and discontented parts, held together by dread or force, but to preserve us one people, united in heart and affection, I call upon him to meet us upon the ground of kindness, compromise, and conciliation. I say to him, drop this odious proviso, a measure powerful for evil and impotent for good; let it not have an immortality of mischief; give us security for the restoration of our fugitive slaves; admit California as you wish, and if you choose to abolish in the District of Columbia this foreign slave-trade, this conversion of the seat of government into a general mart for the slavedealers of the surrounding States, I say abolish it. My colleague [Mr. Mangum] and myself both stand ready to vote for it. Permit me, sir, to say to our Northern friends, that if they suppose Southern gentlemen to be wedded to any of the adventitious evils or abuses of slavery, to be unwilling to correct excesses, or disposed to support cruelty or to patronize inhumanity, they do us great injustice. Upon the rights of property we stand--these we consider sacred--and from our support of them we cannot be moved. But, saving these, make what regulations of police the occasion may require, and I will not only submit, but will give them my hearty concurrence and approbation.

Mr. President, it cannot be--I will not believe it--nothing but demonstration, nothing but the accomplished fact shall satisfy me, that we have so degenerated from our sires of the Revolution as not to be able harmoniously to adjust the questions before us. It cannot be that the true spirit of concession and compromise has fled; that idealisms have taken the place of constitutional obligations and kindly feelings; that fanaticism has dethroned reason, and the Union, the work of our noble fathers, just as it has well commenced its onward progress to a future of real glory and power, is to be broken to pieces by the rude hands of agitation, by cabals abroad or intrigues at home, contrary to the general sentiment and earnest wish of the great mass of the people. Sir, we have had offerings made here for the preservation of this Union from every quarter of this chamber. Often and nobly have they been made by the distinguished Senator from Michigan [Mr. Cass]; firm, steady, constant, and true in this cause has my friend from New York, on the other side of the chamber [Mr. Dickinson], at all times been. The distinguished Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Clay], in his late earnest and patriotic efforts, has added another laurel to the immortal chaplet that binds his brow; and but a few days since, the great expounder of the Constitution [Mr. Webster], that man of mighty mental and moral power, closed the list of great names engaged in this holy cause, in a speech so clear in expression, so comprehensive in patriotism, so noble in self-devotion, that could we doubt the success of these united efforts for harmony and conciliation, we must needs believe that, for some inexpiable crime, God has visited us with judicial blindness, preparatory to the outpouring of his indignation upon our country. Sir, I will not believe this, I do not, I will not despair of a cause so good. On the contrary I trust that we shall yet come together on a common basis of harmonious cooperation, and find ourselves able to adopt, as the expression not only of a patriotic wish, but of an assured and confident hope, the sentiment made immortal by the great Senator from Massachusetts, "_Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable_."

DAVID L. SWAIN.

BY Z. B. VANCE.

That great range of mountains, extending from the St. Lawrence to the plains of Alabama, called by De Soto Appalachian, and by the Indian tribes, Alleghanies, which, in their tongue, signifies the endless, attains its greatest elevation in the Black Mountain group in the western part of this State.

This group lies partly within the counties of Yancey, McDowell and Buncombe; and the tallest peak of the cluster, and of all the peaks east of the Rocky Mountains, is Mt. Mitchell. From its dominating summit there is thrown off a ridge which runs west, south and southwest, in a zigzag shape, alternated with deep gaps, tall summits and frightful precipices, until it melts away in the peninsula of the plain which is enclosed by the waters of the Swannanoa and the French Broad, in the county of Buncombe.

In this range, about seven miles from where these waters meet, there is a little gorge-like valley scooped out of its western slope, which spreads its narrow bosom precisely in the face of the setting sun. The tall dome of Mt. Mitchell literally casts its shadow over this mountain-cradled vale as the sun first comes up from the eastern sea. Great ridges hem it in on either side, gradually melting on the south into the sloping hills on which stands the town of Asheville. A bold fresh brook from springs high up in the heart of the mountain ripples through the bottom of this vale, reenforced by a hundred smaller streams pouring from the ravines on the right and left, and empties its bright, fresh floods into the French Broad five miles below the county-seat. Near the very head of this valley is a charming little homestead, consisting of fertile bits of meadow on the brook-side, above which are open fields swelling upwards to the skirts of the mountain forests. In the midst of these fields, where the ground slopes gently towards the brook, there stood, about the beginning of this century, an old-fashioned log-house of the kind familiarly known to our mountain people as a "double-cabin." An orchard of a growth and fruitful luxuriance peculiar to that region surrounded the house and curtilage, imparting that air of rustic beauty and abundance which constitutes a special charm in simple country homes.

This spot, at the period indicated, was the home of an honest, upright, and intelligent man, whose name was George Swain; and here, on the 4th day of January, 1801, was born the child who became the man to whose memory we desire to do honor this day.