The Great Conspiracy, Volume 2 - John Alexander Logan

[Immediately after Mr. Anthony's appeal to the Southern Senators, a motion was made by Mr. Collamer to postpone the Crittenden Resolutions and take up the Kansas Admission Bill. Here was the chance at once offered to them to respond to that appeal—to make a first step, as it were. They would not make it. The motion was defeated by 25 yeas to 30 nays—Messrs. Benjamin and Slidell of Louisiana, Hemphill and Wigfall of Texas, Iverson of Georgia, and Johnson of Arkansas, voting "nay." The question at once recurred on the amendment of Mr. Clark—being a substitute for the Crittenden Resolutions, declaring in effect all Compromise unnecessary. To let that substitute be adopted, was to insure the failure of the Crittenden proposition. Yet these same six Southern Senators though present, refused to vote, and permitted the substitute to be adopted by 25 yeas to 23 nays. The vote of Mr. Douglas, who had been "called out for an instant into the ante-room, and deprived of the opportunity of voting "—as he afterwards stated when vainly asking unanimous consent to have his vote recorded among the nays—would have made it 25 yeas to 24 nays, had he been present and voting, while the votes of the six Southern Senators aforesaid, had they voted, would have defeated the substitute by 25 yeas to 30 nays. Then upon a direct vote on the Crittenden Compromise there would not only have been the 30 in its favor, but the vote of at least one Republican (Baker) in addition, to carry it, and, although that would not have given the necessary two-thirds, yet it would have been a majority handsome enough to have ultimately turned the scales, in both Houses, for a peaceful adjustment of the trouble, and have avoided all the sad consequences which so speedily befell the Nation. But this would not have suited the Treasonable purposes of the Conspirators. Ten days before this they had probably arranged the Programme in this, as well as other matters. Very certain it is that no time was lost by them and their friends in making the best use for their Cause of this vote, in the doubtful States of Missouri and North Carolina especially. In the St. Louis journals a Washington dispatch, purporting (untruly however) to come from Senators Polk and Green, was published to this effect.

"The Crittenden Resolutions were lost by a vote of 25 to 23. A motion of Mr. Cameron to reconsider was lost; and thus ends all hope of reconciliation. Civil War is now considered inevitable, and late accounts declare that Fort Sumter will be attacked without delay. The Missouri delegation recommend immediate Secession."

This is but a sample of other similar dispatches sent elsewhere. And the following dispatch, signed by Mr. Crittenden, and published in the Raleigh, N. C., Register, to quiet the excitement raised by the telegrams of the Conspirators, serves also to indicate that the friends of Compromise were not disheartened by their defeat:

"WASHINGTON, Jan. 17th, 9 P. M.

"In reply the vote against my resolutions will be reconsidered. Their failure was the result of the refusal of six Southern Senators to vote. There is yet good hope of success.

"JOHN J. CRITTENDEN."

There is instruction also to be drawn from the speeches of Senators Saulsbury, and Johnson of Tennessee, made fully a year afterward (Jan. 29-31, 1862) in the Senate, touching the defeat of the Crittenden Compromise by the Clark substitute at this time. Speaking of the second session of the Thirty-sixth Congress, Mr. Saulsbury said:

"At that session, while vainly striving with others for the adoption of those measures, I remarked in my place in the Senate that—

"'If any Gibbon should hereafter write the Decline and Fall of the American Republic, he would date its fall from the rejection by the Senate of the propositions submitted by the Senator from Kentucky.'

"I believed so then, and I believe so now. I never shall forget, Mr. President, how my heart bounded for joy when I thought I saw a ray of hope for their adoption in the fact that a Republican Senator now on this floor came to me and requested that I should inquire of Mr. Toombs, who was on the eve of his departure for Georgia to take a seat in the Convention of that State which was to determine the momentous question whether she should continue a member of the Union or withdraw from it, whether, if the Crittenden propositions were adopted, Georgia would remain in the Union.

"Said Mr. Toombs:

"'Tell him frankly for me that if those resolutions are adopted by the vote of any respectable number of Republican Senators, evidencing their good faith to advocate their ratification by their people, Georgia will not Secede. This is the position I assumed before the people of Georgia. I told them that if the party in power gave evidence of an intention to preserve our rights in the Union, we were bound to wait until their people could act.'

"I communicated the answer. The Substitute of the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Clark] was subsequently adopted, and from that day to this the darkness and the tempest and the storm have thickened, until thousands like myself, as good and as true Union men as you, Sir, though you may question our motives, have not only despaired but are without hope in the future."

To this speech, Mr. Johnson of Tennessee subsequently replied as follows in the United States Senate (Jan. 31, 1862)

"Sir, it has been said by the distinguished Senator from Delaware [Mr. Saulsbury] that the questions of controversy might all have been settled by Compromise. He dealt rather extensively in the Party aspect of the case, and seemingly desired to throw the onus of the present condition of affairs entirely on one side. He told us that, if so and so had been done, these questions could have been settled, and that now there would have been no War. He referred particularly to the resolution offered during the last Congress by the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Clark], and upon the vote on that he based his argument. * * * The Senator told us that the adoption of the Clark amendment to the Crittenden Resolutions defeated the settlement of the questions of controversy; and that, but for that vote, all could have been peace and prosperity now. We were told that the Clark amendment defeated the Crittenden Compromise, and prevented a settlement of the controversy. On this point I will read a portion of the speech of my worthy and talented friend from California [Mr. Latham]; and when I speak of him thus, I do it in no unmeaning sense I intend that he, not I, shall answer the Senator from Delaware. * * * As I have said, the Senator from Delaware told us that the Clark amendment was the turning point in the whole matter; that from it had flowed Rebellion, Revolution, War, the shooting and imprisonment of people in different States—perhaps he meant to include my own. This was the Pandora's box that has been opened, out of which all the evils that now afflict the Land have flown. * * * My worthy friend from California [Mr. Latham], during the last session of Congress, made one of the best speeches he ever made. * * * In the course of that speech, upon this very point he made use of these remarks:

"'Mr. President, being last winter a careful eye-witness of all that occurred, I soon became satisfied that it was a deliberate, wilful design, on the part of some representatives of Southern States, to seize upon the election of Mr. Lincoln merely as an excuse to precipitate this revolution upon the Country. One evidence, to my mind, is the fact that South Carolina never sent her Senators here.'

"Then they certainly were not influenced by the Clark amendment.

"'An additional evidence is, that when gentlemen on this floor, by their votes, could have controlled legislation, they refused to cast them for fear that the very Propositions submitted to this body might have an influence in changing the opinions of their constituencies. Why, Sir, when the resolutions submitted by the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Clark], were offered as an amendment to the Crittenden Propositions, for the manifest purpose of embarrassing the latter, and the vote taken on the 16th of January, 1861, I ask, what did we see? There were fifty-five Senators at that time upon this floor, in person. The Globe of the second Session, Thirty-Sixth Congress, Part I., page 409, shows that upon the call of the yeas and nays immediately preceding the vote on the substituting of Mr. Clark's amendment, there were fifty-five votes cast. I will read the vote from the Globe:

"'YEAS—Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, and Wilson—25.

"NAYS—Messrs. Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Douglas, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hemphill, Hunter, Iverson, Johnson of Arkansas, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, Sebastian, Slidell and Wigfall—30.

"The vote being taken immediately after, on the Clark Proposition, was as follows:

"YEAS—Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson and Wilson—25.

"NAYS—Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennefly, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury and Sebastian—23.

"'Six senators retained their seats and refused to vote, thus themselves allowing the Clark Proposition to supplant the Crittenden Resolution by a vote of twenty-five to twenty-three. Mr. Benjamin of Louisiana, Mr. Hemphill and Mr. Wigfall of Texas, Mr. Iverson of Georgia, Mr. Johnson of Arkansas, and Mr. Slidell of Louisiana, were in their seats, but refused to cast their votes.'

"I sat right behind Mr. Benjamin, and I am not sure that my worthy friend was not close by, when he refused to vote, and I said to him, 'Mr. Benjamin, why do you not vote? Why not save this Proposition, and see if we cannot bring the Country to it?' He gave me rather an abrupt answer, and said he would control his own action without consulting me or anybody else. Said I: 'Vote, and show yourself an honest man.' As soon as the vote was taken, he and others telegraphed South, 'We cannot get any Compromise.' Here were six Southern men refusing to vote, when the amendment would have been rejected by four majority if they had voted. Who, then, has brought these evils on the Country? Was it Mr. Clark? He was acting out his own policy; but with the help we had from the other side of the chamber, if all those on this side had been true to the Constitution and faithful to their constituents, and had acted with fidelity to the Country, the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire could have been voted down, the defeat of which the Senator from Delaware says would have saved the Country. Whose fault was it? Who is responsible for it? * * * Who did it? SOUTHERN TRAITORS, as was said in the speech of the Senator from California. They did it. They wanted no Compromise. They accomplished their object by withholding their votes; and hence the Country has been involved in the present difficulty. Let me read another extract from this speech of the Senator from California

"'I recollect full well the joy that pervaded the faces of some of those gentlemen at the result, and the sorrow manifested by the venerable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Crittenden]. The record shows that Mr. Pugh, from Ohio, despairing of any Compromise between the extremes of ultra Republicanism and Disunionists, working manifestly for the same end, moved, immediately after the vote was announced, to lay the whole subject on the table. If you will turn to page 443, same volume, you will find, when, at a late period, Mr. Cameron, from Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider the vote, appeals having been made to sustain those who were struggling to preserve the Peace of the Country, that the vote was reconsidered; and when, at last, the Crittenden Propositions were submitted on the 2d day of March, these Southern States having 'nearly all Seceded, they were then lost but by one vote. Here is the vote:

"YEAS—Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bright, Crittenden, Douglas, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Polk, Pugh, Rice, Sebastian, Thomson and Wigfall—19.

"'NAYS—Messrs. Anthony, Bingham, Chandler, Clark, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Harlan, King, Morrill, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson and Wilson—20.

"'If these Seceding Southern senators had remained, there would have passed, by a large vote (as it did without them), an amendment, by a two-third vote, forbidding Congress ever interfering with Slavery in the States. The Crittenden Proposition would have been indorsed by a majority vote, the subject finally going before the People, who have never yet, after consideration, refused Justice, for any length of time, to any portion of the Country.

"'I believe more, Mr. President, that these gentlemen were acting in pursuance of a settled and fixed plan to break up and destroy this Government.'

"When we had it in our power to vote down the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, and adopt the Crittenden Resolutions, certain Southern Senators prevented it; and yet, even at a late day of the session, after they had Seceded, the Crittenden Proposition was only lost by one vote. If Rebellion and bloodshed and murder have followed, to whose skirts does the responsibility attach?

"What else was done at the very same session? The House of Representatives passed, and sent to this body, a Proposition to amend the Constitution of the United States, so as to prohibit Congress from ever hereafter interfering with the Institution of Slavery in the States, making that restriction a part of the Organic law of the Land. That Constitutional Amendment came here after the Senators from seven States had Seceded; and yet it was passed by a two-third vote in the Senate. Have you ever heard of any one of the States which had then Seceded, or which has since Seceded, taking up that Amendment to the Constitution, and saying they would ratify it, and make it a part of that instrument? No. Does not the whole history of this Rebellion tell you that it was Revolution that the Leaders wanted, that they started for, that they intended to have? The facts to which I have referred show how the Crittenden Proposition might have been carried; and when the Senators from the Slave States were reduced to one-fourth of the members of this body, the two Houses passed a Proposition to Amend the Constitution, so as to guarantee to the States perfect security in regard to the Institution of Slavery in all future time, and prohibiting Congress from legislating on the subject.

"But what more was done? After Southern Senators had treacherously abandoned the Constitution and deserted their posts here, Congress passed Bills for the Organization of three new Territories: Dakota, Nevada, and Colorado; and in the sixth section of each of those Bills, after conferring, affirmatively, power on the Territorial Legislature, it went on to exclude certain powers by using a negative form of expression; and it provided, among other things, that the Legislature should have no power to legislate so as to impair the right to private property; that it should lay no tax discriminating against one description of Property in favor of another; leaving the power on all these questions, not in the Territorial Legislature, but in the People when they should come to form a State Constitution.

"Now, I ask, taking the Amendment to the Constitution, and taking the three Territorial Bills, embracing every square inch of territory in the possession of the United States, how much of the Slavery question was left? What better Compromise could have been made? Still we are told that matters might have been Compromised, and that if we had agreed to Compromise, bloody Rebellion would not now be abroad in the Land. Sir, Southern Senators are responsible for it. They stood here with power to accomplish the result, and yet treacherously, and, I may say, tauntingly they left this chamber, and announced that they had dissolved their connection with the Government. Then, when we were left in the hands of those whom we had been taught to believe would encroach upon our Rights, they gave us, in the Constitutional Amendment and in the three Territorial Bills, all that had ever been asked; and yet gentlemen talked Compromise!

"Why was not this taken and accepted? No; it was not Compromise that the Leaders wanted; they wanted Power; they wanted to Destroy this Government, so that they might have place and emolument for themselves. They had lost confidence in the intelligence and virtue and integrity of the People, and their capacity to govern themselves; and they intended to separate and form a government, the chief corner-stone of which should be Slavery, disfranchising the great mass of the People, of which we have seen constant evidence, and merging the Powers of Government in the hands of the Few. I know what I say. I know their feelings and their sentiments. I served in the Senate here with them. I know they were a Close Corporation, that had no more confidence in or respect for the People than has the Dey of Algiers. I fought that Close Corporation here. I knew that they were no friends of the People. I knew that Slidell and Mason and Benjamin and Iverson and Toombs were the enemies of Free Government, and I know so now. I commenced the war upon them before a State Seceded; and I intend to keep on fighting this great battle before the Country, for the perpetuity of Free Government. They seek to overthrow it, and to establish a Despotism in its place. That is the great battle which is upon our hands. * * * Now, the Senator from Delaware tells us that if that (Crittenden) Compromise had been made, all these consequences would have been avoided. It is a mere pretense; it is false. Their object was to overturn the Government. If they could not get the Control of this Government, they were willing to divide the Country and govern part of it.">[

The Clark substitute was then agreed to, by 25 (Republican) yeas to 23 Democratic and Conservative (Bell-Everett) nays—6 Pro-Slavery Senators not voting, although present; and then, without division, the Crittenden Resolutions were tabled—Mr. Cameron, however, entering a motion to reconsider. Subsequently the action of the Senate, both on the Resolutions and Substitute, was reconsidered, and March 2d the matter came up again, as will hereafter appear.

Two days prior to this action in the Senate, Mr. Corwin, Chairman of the Select Committee of Thirty-three, reported to the House (January 14th), from a majority of that Committee, the following Joint Resolution:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all attempts on the parts of the Legislatures of any of the States to obstruct or hinder the recovery and surrender of Fugitives from Service or Labor, are in derogation of the Constitution of the United States, inconsistent with the comity and good neighborhood that should prevail among the several States, and dangerous to the Peace of the Union.

"Resolved, That the several States be respectfully requested to cause their Statutes to be revised, with a view to ascertain if any of them are in conflict with or tend to embarrass or hinder the execution of the Laws of the United States, made in pursuance of the second section of the Fourth Article of the Constitution of the United States for the delivery up of Persons held to Labor by the laws of any State and escaping therefrom; and the Senate and House of Representatives earnestly request that all enactments having such tendency be forthwith repealed, as required by a just sense of Constitutional obligations, and by a due regard for the Peace of the Republic; and the President of the United States is requested to communicate these resolutions to the Governors of the several States, with a request that they will lay the same before the Legislatures thereof respectively.

"Resolved, That we recognize Slavery as now existing in fifteen of the United States by the usages and laws of those States; and we recognize no authority, legally or otherwise, outside of a State where it so exists, to interfere with Slaves or Slavery in such States, in disregard of the Rights of their owners or the Peace of society.

"Resolved, That we recognize the justice and propriety of a faithful execution of the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, on the subject of Fugitive Slaves, or Fugitives from Service or Labor, and discountenance all mobs or hindrances to the execution of such laws, and that citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.

"Resolved, That we recognize no such conflicting elements in its composition, or sufficient cause from any source, for a dissolution of this Government; that we were not sent here to destroy, but to sustain and harmonize the Institutions of the Country, and to see that equal justice is done to all parts of the same; and finally, to perpetuate its existence on terms of equality and justice to all the States.

"Resolved, That a faithful observance, on the part of all the States, of all their Constitutional obligations to each other and to the Federal Government, is essential to the Peace of the Country.