Chapter V: Part 5

I have presented it to my family and friends as the proudest
passage in the history of an eventful life, and shall transmit it
to my posterity as a sacred and cherished memento of friendship. I
thank Heaven that it has fallen to my lot to be associated with
yourself and others in resisting the mad current of disunion which
threatened to overwhelm us; and the recollection that my course
upon a question so momentous has received the approbation of the
most distinguished American statesman, has more than satisfied my
ambition. Believe me, my dear sir, that of all the patriots that
came forward in the evil day of their country, there was no voice
so potential as your own. Others could buffet the dark and angry
waves, but it was your strong arm that could roll them back from
the holy citadel.

May that beneficent Being who holds the destiny of men and
nations, long spare you to the public service, and may your vision
never rest upon the disjointed fragments of a convulsed and ruined
confederacy.

I pray you to accept and to present to Mrs. Webster the kind
remembrance of myself and family, and believe me sincerely yours,

D. S. DICKINSON.

He (Mr. Dickinson) was a member of the Baltimore Convention of 1848. In 1852, he was again a member. The convention failed to nominate on the first day of its sitting. The second day, on assembling in the morning, the Virginia delegation presented his name for the Presidency. Having been the friend and supporter of Gen. Cass for the nomination, whose name in the balloting then stood at about 100, he thought that in honor he could not become a candidate, and arose in the convention and declined the use of his name in a speech which did honor to his patriotism and self-sacrifice, and was received with the warmest applause, though many of his friends and the sound democracy of the country regretted his decision. Virginia subsequently brought forward, in the same manner, the name of Gen. Pierce, and he was nominated and elected.

In 1853, he was appointed to the valuable office of Collector of the Port of New York, which he declined. In 1858, the honorary degree of Doctor of Laws was conferred on him by the Faculty of Hamilton College, New York. Since the expiration of his senatorial term, he has been entirely devoted to professional and rural occupations, and is at present conducting a large professional business. He has not mingled extensively in political affairs since, but was upon the stump in the presidential campaigns of 1852 and 1856, in his own and some of the other States.

Mr. Dickinson possesses a strong constitution, land firm and uniform health. His habits are those of exact regularity and active industry. He is capable of great concentration of effort, and of endurance, and performs every day of his life, either at the courts, in his office, upon his grounds, or keeping up his extensive correspondence, a vast amount of labor.

He is devoted to his family and friends, is domestic in his tastes, and his most cherished hours are those spent in the confidence and quietude of home.

Cheerful, genial and hospitable in his disposition and intercourse, he is exceedingly popular in social life; his ready wit and fund of anecdote, with his varied and more solid powers of conversation, always make him welcome, and render him in society the centre of many a delighted circle.

He writes with facility, and in a style pointed and vigorous.

His speeches are characterized always by plain and direct purpose, sound argument and happy illustration, and often by sparkling repartee and passages of stirring eloquence. Some of his most effective efforts have been made without previous preparation. In public life his distinguishing characteristics have been fidelity to friends and party, and the courage and intrepidity with which, regardless of considerations personal to himself, his opinions have been maintained.

In public or in private life, the integrity and purity of his character have never been questioned.

To show how Mr. Dickinson is regarded by his political friends, we quote a few paragraphs from a sketch of the man in a New York journal friendly to him:

"Mr. Dickinson is, in the true and democratic sense of the term, a
_national_ man. And while there have been, and still are, a few,
both North and South, who have believed, and do believe, that
emergencies may arise in the affairs of our country, when it would
be better to 'let the Union slide,' his course will show that in
his belief, under no possible or conceivable circumstances, could
a greater misfortune happen to our country and the cause of
humanity itself, than a rupture or dismemberment of the American
Union. This conviction has animated and controlled all his conduct
as a man and a public servant. In the elements of his character,
there is no neutrality or non-committal; his leading peculiarities
are point and positiveness--there is nothing negative about the
man, his convictions are all absolute, and they are always
vitalized into practical efficiency. Hence no man has warmer or
more attached personal friends, and none more bitter political
opponents, than he. The Van Buren men of New York, who defeated
Gen. Cass, in 1848, by their treachery to the democratic party,
have acted as though they thought his very political existence was
a standing rebuke and shame for their treasonable desertion; and
hence they have spared no pains or efforts to vilify his character
by the grossest misrepresentations. Yet notwithstanding these
efforts of a false and disappointed faction, the people of the
country feel, that there is no man to whom its true friends are
more indebted than to him, for his fearless course in stemming the
torrent of fanaticism and disunion. When the Abolitionists raised
the '_Black Flag_' of treason in the North, and the decree went
forth from the immediate friends and abettors of the Van Burens,
that every man in the State of New York who did not join with them
in their insane attempts to tear down the constitution of the
country, and trample its sanctions and compromises in the dust, in
order to invade the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the
South, should be tabooed and turned over to the mercies of the
political guillotine, Mr. D. threw himself into the van of the
opposition and dared to beard the lion in his den; and proclaimed
in stern and patriotic tones of defiance, that for himself, 'he
knew no North, no South, no East and no West--nothing but his
country.'"

One of the editors of the "Dublin Nation," while travelling in this country, gave the subjoined sketch of Mr. Dickinson, as he found him in an American court:

"I learned that a court of assize was sitting just then in the
town; I was quite glad of an opportunity of seeing for myself a
sight supposed to be such a compound of the farce and the row, 'an
American court of justice in the rural districts.' I found out the
courthouse; a dilapidated old building, crowning the rising ground
at one end of the principal street. I entered the hall. On one
side a rickety door, with a half moon grating near the top, marked
the apartment (about twelve feet by fifteen), which served as the
district jail. It was strong enough, probably, to be any barrier
to the liberty of a lame ewe; yet it was large enough and strong
enough for the requirements of the locality! I ascended the
stairs, and, pushing open a door on the first landing, I found
myself in 'court.' Accuse me not, oh hilarious reader, if I herein
depart from all precedent and prefer not fun to fact; if I declare
that I saw no revolvers, no bowie knives, heard neither cursing
nor squabbling; possibly these are to be seen, and I may see them
ere I return to Ireland--but here, at least, I declare, that I saw
gravity and dignity on the bench and at the bar; order and decorum
in the audience. The latter I attribute to the circumstance that
there were no policemen to disturb the quiet of the place, by
perpetually bawling out 'silence!'--an intolerable nuisance which
_we_ have to endure. The room was about thirty feet square and
fifteen in height. At the end opposite the entrance was the bench;
in the middle of the apartment an oval shaped space was railed off
on the floor; one end reaching to the desk (immediately under the
bench), at which sat the county clerk and the sheriff. The oval
space was alloted to the professors of the law. On each side,
rising gradually to the rear, were rows of seats, or rather pews,
for the auditors. The jury sat in one of these 'pews,' immediately
on the left of the judge. Two large stoves, whose flue-pipes cut
sundry capers in the air--with the laudable intention of giving us
all the benefit possible of the heat they contained--kept the
place comfortably warm. Occasionally the high sheriff would walk
quietly down to one of the stoves, open the door, poke up the
fire, and put in a fresh log. Accustomed from childhood to
associate so largely the judicial functions with a horse-hair wig,
and a black silk gown--indeed, rather inclined to think that these
constituted the judge, and that without them there could be no law
in the land, it seemed hard to believe that the gentleman on the
bench before me, in civilian costume, could be a real genuine
judge and no mistake....

"Yet I do not know that I ever saw in the same official position
more dignified demeanor. I never saw a judge listened to with more
deference, and treated with more respect than in this instance, in
this same village court, in the 'wilds' of western New York,
though Judge Balcom wears his own hair--black as Morven's--and
came to court without the blowing of even so much as a penny
whistle.

* * * * *

"Seated within the railed space--his arms folded on his breast,
his face raised upward in attentive listening attitude--was a man
who instantly struck me as being singular among the throng around
him. He might be sixty years of age; a powerfully built frame and
expansive chest gave indication of physical strength and energy;
but it was _the face_ that impressed me. It was one of those that
Rembrandt loved to paint; the grave serenity of strength in
repose; the warm glow of life's autumn evening upon a countenance
expressive of quiet dignity and intellectual power. The spacious
dome of a massive head was covered with silvery--nay, snow-white
hair, lending a venerable, though not an aged, aspect to the man.
He was very plainly dressed; the blue cloth body-coat, with brass
buttons, was perfectly American; the large high shirt-collar
standing out from the lower part of a face entirely shaven; and a
black silk neckerchief loosely fastened around in the very
carelessness of effect or appearance, was in perfect keeping with
the simplicity of his _tout ensemble_. This was the Honorable D.
S. Dickinson, the contemporary in politics of Webster, who found
in him, in many a passage of arms, a foeman worthy of his steel.
For some years Mr. Dickinson has remained in retirement from
active public life, notwithstanding many efforts to induce him to
reenter the arena. Yet it is shrewdly suspected that his counsel
is not seldom sought and acted upon by the great ones of that
party of which he once was so active and able a leader."

We now proceed to make a few extracts from Mr. Dickinson's public speeches. Here is an extract upon disunion:

"The spirit of sectional hate, which is now inculcated by the
votaries of a corrupt and stultified Abolitionism, by bigots,
zealots, fanatics and demagogues; in desecrated pulpits, in ribald
songs, in incendiary presses and strife stirring orators, has
already promoted a feeling of irritation which should fill the
patriotic mind with apprehension and alarm. No feud is so bitter
as that which exists between brethren--no persecution so
relentless as that which pursues an estranged friend--no war so
ruthless as one of domestic strife; and yet this evil genius,
disguised with the garb of superior sanctity--the blear-eyed
miscreant disunion--is walking up and down the earth like Satan
loosed from his bondage of a thousand years, endeavoring to array
one section of the Union against the other upon a question which
was wisely disposed of by those who laid the broad and deep
foundations of our government.

"With one hand it essays to tear out from the Constitution the
pages upon which are written its holiest guaranties, and with the
other, it seeks to erase from our nation's flag fifteen of the
stars which help to compose the pride and hope and joy of every
American. It would, in pursuit of its miserable and accursed
abstractions, array man against man, brother against brother, and
State against State, until it covered our fair land with anarchy
and blood, and filled it with mourning and lamentation; until
every field should be a field of battle, every hill-side drenched
in blood, every plain a Golgotha, every valley a valley of dry
bones; until fire should blast every field, consume every
dwelling, destroy every temple, and leave every town black with
ashes and desolation; until this fiendish spirit, compounding all
the elements of fury and horror, would sweep over this fair and
fertile portion of God's heritage, like the infuriated Hyder Ali
on the Carnatic, leaving it one everlasting monument of barbarous
vengeance."

In anticipation of the acquisition of territory from Mexico, on account of the Mexican war, the famous Wilmot proviso passed the House of Representatives at the heel of the session in 1846. As an antidote for the proviso, Mr. Dickinson introduced the following resolves into the Senate, Dec. 14, 1847:

"_Resolved_, That true policy requires the Government of the
United States to strengthen its political and commercial relations
upon this continent by the annexation of such contiguous territory
as may conduce to that end, and can be justly obtained; and that
neither in such acquisition nor in the territorial organization
thereof, can any conditions be constitutionally imposed, or
institutions be provided for or established, inconsistent with the
right of the people thereof, to form a free, sovereign State, with
the powers and privileges of the original members of the
confederacy.

"_Resolved_, That, in organizing a territorial government for
territory belonging to the United States, the principles of
self-government upon which our federative system rests will be
best promoted, the true spirit and meaning of the Constitution be
observed, and the Confederacy strengthened, by leaving all
questions concerning the domestic policy therein to the
legislatures chosen by the people thereof."

In a speech of power, delivered in the Senate Jan. 15, 1848, he tried to demonstrate the correctness of the principle of these resolves. From this, the first speech made during the slavery controversy in favor of congressional non-intervention with slavery in the territories, we make the following extracts:

"The Republican theory teaches that sovereignty resides with the
people of a State, and not with its political organization; and
the Declaration of Independence recognizes the right of the
people to alter or abolish and reconstruct their government.
If sovereignty resides with the people and not with the
organization, it rests as well with the people of a territory, in
all that concerns their internal condition, as with the people of
an organized State. And if it is the right of the people, by
virtue of their innate sovereignty, to 'alter or abolish,' and
reconstruct their government, it is the right of the inhabitants
of territories, by virtue of the same attribute, in all that
appertains to their domestic concerns, to fashion one suited to
their condition. And it, in this respect, a form of government
is proposed to them by the Federal Government, and adopted or
acquiesced in by them, they may afterward alter or abolish it at
pleasure. Although the government of a territory has not the same
sovereign power as the government of a State in its political
relations, the people of a territory have, in all that appertains
to their internal condition, the same sovereign rights as the
people of a State....

"That system of government, whether temporary or permanent,
whether applied to States, provinces, or territories, is radically
wrong, and has within itself all the elements of monarchical
oppression, which permits the representatives of one community to
legislate for the domestic regulation of another to which they are
not responsible, which practically allows New York and
Massachusetts, and other Atlantic States, to give local laws to
the people of Oregon, Minnesota and Nebraska, to whom and whose
interests, wishes and condition, they are strangers."

The following extracts from a campaign speech in 1856, of Mr. Dickinson, will give the reader some idea of his wit and power before an out-door audience. He is speaking of the Pennsylvania election:

"In Pennsylvania every ill-omened bird in the nation had gathered
and croaked. Every device that those bent on evil could conceive
had been resorted to. Money had been spent with a lavish hand. All
this had been done in order to induce the people of that State to
favor the doctrines of the so-called Republican party. How well
had she stood the test in the last great fight! There, fanaticism
had been rebuked, hypocrisy had been unmasked, and villainy
discomfited. The Democratic candidates had been placed in the
field, and that being the home of Mr. Buchanan, the Republicans
had strained every nerve to defeat him there. But how gallantly
had old Pennsylvania come up to the work--how glorious the result!
How had they tried and judged that party--that political
mermaid--half-colored woman and half-scaly fish! The result
reminded him of a conference between Mrs. Jones and Mrs. Smith.
Mrs. Jones, calling on Mrs. Smith, said, 'Why, haven't you
finished your washing yet?' To which Mrs. Smith replied, 'Oh! no,
dear, we have a very great washing; it takes us a whole week to do
our washing, and I don't think we can get it done in a week!'
'But, said Mrs. Jones, 'you haven't a _great_ many clothes-lines,
and they are not _very_ long, and you don't seem to hang out any
more clothes than other people! 'Oh, no,' replied Mrs. Smith; 'but
then you know what we hang out is a very small portion of what we
wash.' So it was with the Republicans of Pennsylvania. What they
hung out on election day was in miserable proportion to the amount
of washing they had done. Proceeding, he said that the Democrats
had hung out their banners--their principles were those of the
Constitution, and their candidates were upon them. The
Republicans, on the contrary, had but few principles, and scarcely
any candidates. The Democratic candidates represented the
principles of the Democratic party. And now of the general issue
between the parties.

"What a spectacle! A slavery more base and abject than any African
slavery that was ever dreamed of; an enslavement of white men, in
order that their leaders may war against their brethren. How they
would make up their dividend of profits he could not see. Their
case would be similar to that of the man who thought he was going
to get a great deal of money by his wife. She had often told him
that when her father died, she would have considerable coming to
her. Well, the old man died, and it turned out that he had left
$9,000 and ten children. The husband tried to figure it up. He
said, 10 from 9 you can't. He tried it again and said, 10 from 9
you can't. Turning to his wife, and greatly perplexed, he said,
'you told me that when the old man died, you would have something
coming to you.' His wife replied that she had--that she had always
understood her father had $9,000. 'So he has,' says the husband;
'but then he's got ten children--and 10 from 9 you can't. We won't
get a d----d cent.' So it would be with the Republicans. They had
resorted to political huckstering, such as had never before been
heard of. They had run through every issue, and had talked
thread-bare every principle. Kansas was now their great hobby.
They said they did not care so much about other issues. But
Kansas--bleeding Kansas, absorbed their very souls. Kansas was to
them what ale was to Boniface--it was meat, drink, washing and
lodging. Now, though Kansas was an important section of the
country, he did not think that it was worth while to upset the
Government, whether slavery went there or not. The Democracy were
willing to leave that question entirely with the people of that
country. They had no fear from slavery there, even if it had all
the evils pictured by the fanatics. New York could have slavery if
it wished, so could all the other States, and all the Democracy
wanted was that the people should do as they liked in the
question, whether slavery should be there or no.

"In any event, slavery was not so bad or so baneful in its
influences as the trickery that had been resorted to in
Pennsylvania, and by the so-called Republicans. But, Kansas,
bleeding Kansas, they cry continually. Why, they had run poor,
bleeding Kansas until it was as dry as a turnip. It was to them
what the lamp was to Aladdin. When he wanted to raise the wind, he
rubbed his lamp, and when the Republicans wanted blood, they cried
'bleeding Kansas.' Kansas, to them, was like the Yankee's clock,
that would strike whenever he told it to do so. But one day he
told it to strike, and it didn't; he told it again, but still no
strike. Finally, a voice was heard from behind the clock, saying,
'I can't strike--the string's broke.' To this pass has it come at
length with the Republicans and their poor 'bleeding Kansas! When
they call for blood, the answer comes, 'The string's broke.'"

In a territorial speech in the United States Senate, January 12, 1848, Mr. Dickinson said:

"Our form of government is admirably adapted to extend empire.
Founded in the virtue and intelligence of the people, and deriving
its just powers from the consent of the governed, its influences
are as powerful for good at the remotest limits as at the
political centre.

"We are unlike all communities which have gone before us, and
illustrations drawn from comparing us with them, are unjust and
erroneous. The social order which characterizes our system is as
unlike the military republics of other times, as is the religion
of the Saviour of men to the impositions of Mahomet. Our system
wins by its justice, while theirs sought to terrify by its power.
Our territorial boundary may span the continent, our population be
quadrupled, and the number of our States be doubled, without
inconvenience or danger. Every member of the Confederacy would
well sustain itself and contribute its influences for the general
good; every pillar would stand erect, and impart strength and
beauty to the edifice. In matters of national legislation, a
numerous population, extended territory, and diversified
interests, would tend to reform abuses which would otherwise
remain unredressed, to preserve the rights of the States, and to
bring back the course of legislation from the centralism to which
it is hastening. One-half the legislation now brought before
Congress would be left undone, as it should be; a large portion of
the residue would be presented to the consideration of State
legislatures, and Congress would be enabled to dispose of all
matters within the scope of its legitimate functions without
inconvenience or delay.

"The present political relations of this continent cannot long
continue, and it becomes this nation to be prepared for the change
which awaits it. If the subjects of the British crown shall
consent to be ruled through all time by a distant cabinet, Mexico
cannot long exist under the misrule of marauders and their
pronunciamentos, and this was as clearly apparent before as since
the existence of the war. If then, just acquisition is the true
policy of this Government, as it clearly is, it should be pursued
by a steady and unyielding purpose, and characterized by the
sternest principles of national justice. It should not rashly
anticipate the great results which are in progress, nor thrust
aside the fruits when they are produced and presented. The
national existence of Mexico is in her own keeping, but is more
endangered at this time by her own imbecility and
stubbornness--her national ignorance and brutality--than from the
war we are prosecuting and all its consequences. She has been
hastening to ruin for years upon the flood-tide of profligacy and
corruption; and if she is now rescued, and her downfall arrested
and postponed for a season, it may justly be attributed to the
salutary influences of the chastisement she has received."

These general ideas upon the subject of territorial acquisition will indicate Mr. Dickinson's views upon the Cuban and Mexican questions of to-day.

JOHN BELL.

John Bell is a man of the old school in politics, an ancient southern Whig, who has preserved his whiggery intact, and has not been swallowed up in the Democratic party, but has rather sympathized to a great extent with the party in the North which has taken the place of the old Whig organization--the Republican party. Coming from a slave State, and himself a slaveholder, of course Mr. Bell does not belong to the Republican organization. He could not well do so without occupying an anti-slavery attitude in Tennessee. But he has acted in concert with the Republicans on most issues in Congress, and upon many of the issues which slavery has raised, he has taken sides with the North. In this manner he has gained the respect of his colleagues who go further than he does in opposition to slavery.

John Bell is an honest, upright man, and has been for years one of the ablest members of the U.S. Senate. He has evinced the highest courage in taking his stand against measures which were either proposed by politicians from his own section of the country, or were expected to inure to the benefit of that section. He came out boldly against the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the Kansas-Nebraska act, although in doing so he exposed himself at home, among his constituents, to the raking fire of his political enemies. He also opposed with great eloquence and vigor the Lecompton bill. For a southern senator to do these things requires pluck as well as principle, and we may be sure that John Bell lacks neither. His enemies will give him credit for both.

In his personal appearance in the Senate, Mr. Bell is noticeable. Though his hair is grey, the fire of his eye is undimmed, and the freshness of his countenance is youthful. Few men in the Senate speak so vigorously as he. His voice is sonorous and loud, and the energy of his tone, his style, and his gesticulation remind one of an orator of thirty. We remember very well how during the Lecompton debate in the Senate, Mr. Johnson, Bell's Democratic colleague, was replying with great severity to his speech against the Lecompton bill. A portion of his remarks were very personal, and must have somewhat irritated the brave old senator. Johnson was fresh from the stump, and its phrases and language were so beaten into his mind that he could not shake them off. So, frequently in the course of his speech in alluding to Mr. Bell, instead of saying "my colleague," he said "my _competitor_." This was done several times, when Mr. Bell half-rose in his seat, his face flushed red with his indignation, and hurled out at his colleague, "_Competitor! I am not the gentleman's competitor!_" No one who witnessed the scene will ever forget it. The Senate was convulsed with laughter.

Mr. Bell was born near Nashville, Tennessee, in February, 1797; his father being a farmer in moderate circumstances. He--the son--was educated at what is now Nashville University--afterward studied law, and was admitted to the bar in 1816. He then settled down in Franklin, Tennessee, from which place he was elected to the State Senate, in 1817, he then being but twenty years old. During the next nine years he forsook politics and confined himself to his profession, but in 1826 he ran for Congress, in opposition to Felix Grundy. He had the support of General Jackson, and triumphed by one thousand majority. The canvass was long and exciting, and Mr. Bell was justly proud of his victory. For fourteen consecutive years he remained in the House of Representatives from this district. When first elected he was a follower of Calhoun and an opponent of a Protective Tariff. He afterward, by reading and argument, saw fit to change his position in this respect, and has long been known as an advocate of the old Whig tenets--a high tariff, internal improvements, etc. etc. He was for ten years in the House, chairman of the committee on Indian Affairs, was once chairman of the Judiciary committee. The breach between himself and Jackson was on the question of the removal of the deposits, and the result was that Mr. Bell went over to the Whigs. In 1834, he was made Speaker of the House of Representatives, his opponent being James K. Polk. The Whigs and a wing of the Democrats who disliked Van Buren voted for Mr. Bell, and elected him. Mr. Bell opposed Mr. Van Buren for removing men from office on account of their politics, and he made a strong speech in the House against this policy. He refused to support Van Buren for the presidency and went in for Judge White, who carried the State of Tennessee. Mr. Bell was afterward reelected to Congress from the Hermitage district, showing that the people even in Jackson's district supported him in the position he had taken. It was at this time that he had the courage to vote _in favor_ of receiving anti-slavery politicians, when many northern politicians voted to strike down this right of the people under the most despotic forms of government. He also voted _against_ Atherton's famous Gag Resolutions. In 1841, Gen. Harrison made him Secretary of War, but he resigned when Tyler came into power. He was soon elected to the United States Senate, where he remained till March 4th, 1859.

Mr. Bell supported the compromise measures of 1850--was opposed to the annexation of Texas--and, as we have remarked, opposed the Kansas-Nebraska act and the Lecompton Constitution. He is opposed to the _taking_ of Cuba or buying it at an extravagant price--opposes all kinds of filibustering. We make a few extracts from Mr. Bell's great speech against the Lecompton bill. Upon Popular Sovereignty he thus expressed himself:

"What is the true doctrine on this subject? I had supposed that
there could be no disagreement as to the true principles connected
with the rights and powers of the people in forming a State
Constitution; but since I have heard the speech of the senator
from Georgia, I do not know what principle he agrees to. I say
that in no disrespect; but I thought he was particularly wild,
shooting _extra flammantia maenia mundi_, on those high points of
doctrine which he, in some parts of his speech, thought proper to
enunciate. Does any person here deny the proposition, that the
people of a territory, in the formation of a State Constitution,
are to that extent--_quoad hoc_--sovereign and uncontrollable,
though still owing obedience to the provisional government of
the territory? Will any senator contend that the territorial
legislature can either give to the people any power over that
subject which they did not possess before, or withhold from them
any which they did possess? The territorial legislature cannot
dictate any one provision of the constitution which the people
think proper to form. Who is prepared to contend that Congress can
do anything more in this respect than a territorial legislature?
It is usual for the territorial legislature, when the people
desire to apply for admission into the Union, in the absence of an
enabling act of Congress, to pass a law providing for the
assembling of a convention to form a State Constitution. But that
is a mere usage, resorted to when Congress has not thought proper
to pass what is called an enabling act. What is an enabling act?
Nothing more than to signify to the people of a territory, that if
they shall think proper to meet in convention and form a State
Constitution, in compliance with certain forms therein prescribed,
to insure a fair expression of the people's will, Congress is
prepared to admit them into the Union as a State.

"But such an act gives no more power to the people over the
subject of a constitution than an act of a territorial
legislature. But, suppose the people, either under an act of the
territorial legislature or of Congress, meet in convention, by
delegates chosen by the people, and form a constitution, what
then? Has it any vitality as a constitution? Does it transform the
territory into a State? Has it any binding force or effect, either
upon individuals or upon the community? Nobody pretends that it
has any such force. It is only after the acceptance of the
constitution, and the admission of the territory into the Union as
a State, that there is any vigor or validity in a constitution so
formed. Before that time, it is worth no more than the parchment
on which its provisions are written, so far as any legal or
constitutional validity is concerned.

"But, upon principle, the people of a territory, without any act
of the territorial legislature, without an enabling act of
Congress, can hold public meetings and elect delegates to meet in
convention for the purpose of forming a constitution; and when
formed, it has all the essential attributes of a valid
constitution, as one formed in any other way. Many senators
contend that it is the inalienable and indefeasible right of the
people of a State at all times to change their constitution in any
manner they think proper. This doctrine I do not admit, in regard
to the people of a State; but, in reference to the formation of a
constitution by the people of a territory, there can be no
question as to the soundness of this doctrine. They can form a
constitution by delegates voluntarily chosen and sent to a
convention, but what is it worth when it is formed? Nothing at
all, until Congress shall accept it and admit the territory into
the Union as a State under that constitution. It is worth no more
in that case than in the case of a constitution formed under a
territorial act or an act of Congress; but it is worth just as
much."

Upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the effects which followed the act, he remarked:

"Four years ago, when it was proposed to repeal the Missouri
Compromise--to adopt the principle of non-intervention, and
concede to the people of the territories the right to settle the
question of slavery in their own way--it was said by the advocates
of the measure, that, as soon as the principles of it came to be
understood, all agitation and discussion upon the subject of
slavery in the territories would be localized--excluded from
Congress--and the country would be left in undisturbed repose. So
boldly and confidently were these views maintained, that the whole
southern delegation in Congress, Whigs and Democrats, with seven
or eight exceptions, together with many Democrats from the free
States, came into the support of the measure. How were these bold
predictions verified? In less than one month of the time during
which the Kansas-Nebraska bill was pending in Congress, nearly the
whole North was in a flame of resentment and opposition. Old men,
of high character and great influence, who had for twenty years
opposed the policy and designs of the Abolition faction in the
North, suddenly became its allies and coadjutors. Thousands of the
best citizens at the North, who had exerted all their energies to
repress all opposition to the execution of the Fugitive Slave law
of 1850, became suddenly converts to Free-Soilism. The religious
feelings of whole communities became frenzied. The pulpit was
converted into an engine of anti-slavery propagandism, and
hundreds of thousands of sober-minded and conservative people at
the North, who had never countenanced sectional strife on the
subject of slavery, evinced that they had thrown off their
conservatism, and were ready to array themselves under the banner
of any party leader or faction, to check the progress of the South
in what they considered its aggressive policy.

"After that demonstration of opposition at the North, but little
more was said in debate of the tranquillizing character of the
measure. But its most influential supporters from the South,
becoming inflamed and irritated by the fierce invectives with
which the measure was assailed, both within and out of Congress,
became, in their turn, reckless (apparently at least) of all
consequences, and seemed only bent on victory--on obtaining a
triumph by passing the bill! It was in vain that they were
admonished that they were adding largely to the abolition faction
at the North; that they were increasing the free-soil element of
political power in that section. They admitted no distinction
between Abolitionists and Free-Soilers, and denounced all at the
North who opposed the bill as Abolitionists and foes to the South.
Some gentlemen declared that the screams of the Abolitionists were
music to their ears. It was idle to warn men in such a tempest of
passion, that, instead of sowing the seeds of peace, as they had
promised, they were sowing dragons' teeth, that would spring up
armed men. So intense did the feeling become on the subject, that
some southern members of Congress, who had gone into the support
of the bill on the idea that the Missouri restriction act was a
violation of the treaty with France, and who would not have
listened for a moment to the admission of aliens to the right of
suffrage in the territories, lost sight of these views under the
influence of the furor that was gotten up among the friends as
well as the opponents of the measure; and they became even more
determined champions of the bill when these grounds of their
original adhesion were entirely swept away--one by the rejection
of the Clayton amendment, and the other by the Badger
proviso--than they were at the outset.

"There were, however, a few of the supporters of the bill who to
the last contended that the intemperate demonstrations of
opposition at the North were but the ebullitions of temporary
excitement, which would subside as soon as the equitable and just
principles of the bill should be exhibited in their practical
operation in Kansas. On what flimsy grounds that delusion was
indulged, and how soon and under what circumstances it vanished, I
need not recount. The recollection of every patriot must still be
painfully impressed with them. It is enough to say, that soon
after these principles were put in operation in Kansas, disorder,
anarchy, and civil war, ensued in rapid succession. It required
the strong arm of the government of the United States and the
interposition of the military force to sustain the territorial
government; and even now, after the lapse of four years, we still
find that the presence of a military force is necessary to
maintain peace. So much for the effect of that measure on Kansas
and the country. How has it been in Congress? Need I ask that
question? Has not the subject of slavery in the territory been the
absorbing subject of our thoughts and discussions at every session
of Congress since the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act? And as
for the character and temper of the debates upon this subject,
have they not, in asperity and fierceness, far exceeded those of
any antecedent period of our history?

* * * * *

"I now ask the attention of the Senate to the effect of the
experiment of localizing slavery agitation in the territories,
made in 1854, in changing the complexion of parties both in
Congress and in the country. In the Congress which passed the
Kansas-Nebraska bill, we have seen that there was at the
commencement of the session, in December, 1853, a Democratic
majority of eighty-four in the House of Representatives, and only
four Free-Soilers, and in the Senate a like number--so small, yet
so distinct in their principles, that neither of the two great
parties then known to the country knew well how to arrange them on
committee.

"MR. HALE.--You left them off.

"MR. BELL.--The Whigs were afraid to touch them. Mr. Chase was a
Democrat, and was so recognized by his brethren in the Senate, and
was taken care of by them in arranging the committees; yet he was
one of the gentlemen whom I have designated as Free-Soilers. Now,
let us see what was the effect of the Kansas-Nebraska act on the
elections which ensued in the fall of 1854, just on the heels of
the adoption of that measure. One hundred and seven Free-Soilers
were returned to the House of Representatives, and the Democratic
party, instead of having a majority of eighty-four in that House,
found itself in a minority of seventy-six; and in the Senate the
number of Free-Soilers was increased to thirteen. Such was the
complexion of the two houses of Congress in the 33d Congress,
which assembled in December, 1855. Now, we find in the Senate
twenty Free-Soilers. How many more they may have in the next
Congress, will depend upon the disposition we make of the question
_now before the Senate_. I call upon the senator from Georgia to
say whether he will have that number limited or not. Does he want
a sufficient number to prevent the ratification of any future
treaty of acquisition? How long will it be before we have that
number, if the southern Democracy persist in their present course?
They would seem to be deeply interested in adding to the power of
the Republican party.

"I consider that the most fearful and portentous of all the
results of the Kansas-Nebraska act was to create, to build up a
great sectional party. My friend from Ohio, who sits near me, [Mr.
Wade] must allow me to say, that I regard his party as a sectional
one.

"MR. WADE.--Is not the other side a sectional party?

"MR. BELL.--So far as they are confined to the South they are, but
they say that they lap over.

"MR. WADE.--Lap over further South still.

"MR. BELL.--I consider that no more ominous and threatening cloud
can darken the political horizon at any time. How formidable this
party has already become, may be well illustrated by the fact that
its representative candidate, Mr. Fremont, was only beaten in the
last Presidential election by the most desperate efforts; and I
feel warranted in saying, that but for the imminent prospect of
his success, which shone out near the close of the canvass, Mr.
Buchanan would not have attained his present high position."

From these extracts the reader will readily perceive the position of Mr. Bell upon the great political question of the day.

JOHN P. HALE.

John P. Hale comes of good old New England stock. His ancestors were the men who founded those New England institutions which are alike the glory of that section of the country and the whole nation. The grandfather of Mr. Hale--Samuel Hale--was a lawyer of ability and success, and he educated his son John--father of the present Mr. Hale--to the same profession. The father of Mr. Hale married a Miss O'Brien, daughter of Capt. Jeremiah O'Brien. Of this ancestor Mr. Hale is justly proud. The following true story is told of his gallantry at the beginning of the Revolutionary War:

"When the news of the struggle with the mother country reached
Machias, in Maine (then a province of Massachusetts), on the 9th
of May, 1775, an armed British schooner, the Margaretta, was lying
in port, with two sloops under her convoy, loading with lumber in
behalf of the king's government. An attempt was made to capture
the officers of the Margaretta while they were at church, but they
escaped on board, weighed anchor, and dropped down the river. On
the 11th, a party of thirty-five volunteers was hastily collected,
and, taking one of the lumber sloops, they made sail. The
Margaretta, on observing their appearance, weighed and crowded
sail, to avoid a conflict; the sloop proved to be a better sailor.
As she approached, the schooner opened a fire with four light guns
and fourteen swivels, to which the sloop replied with musketry,
and soon the Americans boarded and captured the Margaretta. The
loss of life in this affair was not very large, though twenty men
on both sides are said to have been killed and wounded. It was the
first blow struck on the water in the Revolutionary struggle, and
it was characterized by a long chase, a bloody struggle, and a
triumph.

"There was originally no commander in the sloop, but previously to
engaging the Margaretta, Jeremiah O'Brien was selected for that
station. Transferring the armament to a sloop, he engaged
separately, and captured two English cruisers sent out from
Halifax expressly to take him, and carried their crews as
prisoners to Watertown, where the provincial Legislature of
Massachusetts was assembled. His gallantry was so generally
admired, that he was appointed a captain in the marine of the
colony, and afterward distinguished himself as a continental
officer. Two of his brothers, uncles of Mrs. John P. Hale, senior,
were also noted for their nautical bravery."

Mr. Hale, the subject of this sketch, was born on the 31st of March, 1806, at Rochester, New Hampshire. When a boy he, like most New England boys, attended the common district school of his neighborhood. When he grew up to be a young man, he was sent to Phillips Academy, at Exeter, where the well-known Dr. Abbott also educated Daniel Webster, Edward Everett, Lewis Cass and other distinguished men. In September, 1823, Mr. Hale entered Bowdoin College, and graduated with high honors in 1827. Among his associates in college were Hawthorne, Longfellow, Franklin Pierce, Prof. Stone, and S. S. Prentiss. In 1828, Mr. Hale selected his home, the town of Dover, where he now resides. There he went to study law in the office of D. M. Christie. He was admitted to the bar in 1830, and in 1834 his clients had become so numerous that he was obliged to take a partner. He was never so distinguished as a law-_student_, as for his popular argument with a jury. His forte was then, as now, in appealing directly to the hearts of men. By common sense, humor, pathos and sarcasm he won his cause. Mr. Hale was, we presume, a little more inclined to politics than to law, and if we may judge at all from his looks to-day, he was never over-fond of severe application, mental or physical, to labor.

In 1832, Mr. Hale was elected to represent Dover in the New Hampshire Legislature, and was a staunch Democrat. In 1834, General Jackson appointed him U.S. Attorney for the district of New Hampshire, an office which he filled creditably to himself. Mr. Van Buren continued him in this office, and he filled it till John Tyler removed him. This was a turning point in his history. He fell back to his old practice of the law; but in 1843, he was nominated and elected to Congress, to take his seat in the House of Representatives. A struggle was at that time beginning between the North and the South, and Mr. Hale, apparently to his certain defeat and humiliation, for New Hampshire was then overwhelmingly Democratic, took side with the North and freedom. He was renominated for Congress, but soon afterward he had the courage to come out in a letter denouncing the annexation of Texas. This, as a matter of course, brought down upon him the enmity of his old companions. The State Democratic Committee called a new convention in his district, set his nomination aside, and nominated John Woodbury in his place. It was at this juncture that Mr. Hale showed his nerve, and it is said that his spirited wife sustained him through the campaign with a courage and spirit second only to his own. Suffice it to say, that after an arduous campaign, Mr. Hale triumphed so far as to prevent his competitor from being elected. A majority was required to elect, and no candidate could get that majority. The next year Mr. Hale was sent again to the State Legislature to represent the town of Dover, and he was chosen Speaker of the House of Representatives. He presided so fairly and won so much upon the members, that before the adjournment took place, the Legislature elected Mr. Hale to represent the State, in part, for six years in the United States Senate! This was a great triumph. The man who had been set aside for his faithfulness to his own convictions of right, by party managers, was taken up by the State at large, and sent to represent New Hampshire in the Senate of the United States. His new position was an extraordinary one. He was about to take his seat in the Senate backed by no party, utterly alone, sent there for his individual merits, and not to advance the interests of any party.

A writer not agreeing or sympathizing with Mr. Hale in his peculiar anti-slavery views, speaks of this period of Mr. Hale's history in the following language:

"When Mr. Hale took his seat he was almost alone, and had to combat, single-handed, the political 'giants in those days.' Sometimes he was met with labored arguments, then subjected to bitter reproaches; at times those who were but 'his peers' would affect almost to ignore his presence, and again they would mercilessly denounce him as advocating doctrines dangerous to the liberties of the Republic. But the senator from New Hampshire was not to be intimidated or diverted from what he considered to be his duty. Adopting the _guerrilla_ tactics, he manfully held his ground, and with felicitous humor, pungent retort, or keen sarcasm, made an impression upon the phalanx against which he had to contend. So high were his aims, and so conciliating were his manners, that before the close of his senatorial term, Mr. Hale had beaten down the barriers of prejudice, and fairly conquered sectional discourtesy. He was thus not only the standard-bearer, but the pioneer of the North in the Senate."

In 1853, the Democracy were in the ascendency in New Hampshire, and Mr. Atherton took Mr. Hale's seat in the Senate. Mr. Hale was persuaded at this time to locate himself in the city of New York, to practise his profession. Luckily, he did not give up his house at Dover, his family remaining there, and he paying his poll tax there.

In 1855, he was again elected to serve New Hampshire for an unexpired term; and in 1859, was reelected for another whole term of six years. The same writer from whom we have just quoted, remarks further:

"Senator Hale is especially attentive to his constituents, and never neglects their interests for practice in the Supreme Court or other private business. He is, nevertheless, ever ready to address public assemblages on subjects in which he takes an interest. The sailors will never forget his efforts in procuring an abolition of flogging in the United States navy, in commemoration of which they presented him with a gold medal.

"From the commencement of Senator Hale's career up to the present time, he has been the untiring advocate of whatever he viewed as powerful for good, as calculated to meliorate the condition of man, or as likely to advance the general interests of the American Union, without prejudice to the rights of the section which he represents. He has ever firmly refused to bow before counterfeited images, or to scramble for place in the arena of party, but he has never declined to assume whatever burden of duty his friends counselled him to bear.

"In person, Senator Hale is burly, bluff-looking, with a clear eye, and a hearty grasp of the hand for his friends. His colloquial powers are of a splendid order, and he is a rare humorist, genial, sunshiny and kindly. He laughs with the foibles and shortcomings of the world--not at them; and his laugh is pure and silvery. Married in early life to Miss Lucy H. Lambert, of Berwick, Maine (a lady who combines rare attainments of mind, beauties of character, and personal charms), he has ever found his highest happiness in his own domestic circle, which is now graced by two accomplished daughters, just budding into womanhood. An evening spent with this estimable family is an event to be remembered with pleasure."