The greatest political excitement, having an important bearing upon the feeling between the North and South, was the opposition of the South to the protective Tariffs of 1824 and 1828, and to the question of Internal improvements. As a culmination of her opposition, South Carolina passed a Nullification Ordinance in 1832, based upon the doctrine of State rights as advocated by John C. Calhoun, but the difficulty was settled by Clay's Compromise Tariff Bill of 1833. The opprobrium of nullification and secession, however, does not rest entirely with the South; the Federal Press of New England and many Federal leaders in Congress deliberately discussed and planned a Secession Movement in 1803-4 because they thought that the purchase of the Louisiana Territory was unconstitutional and that it would give the South an advantage which the North would never overcome. This movement, however, never gained strength enough to be serious.
One result of the Missouri Compromise, most important in its political effect, was that it created a solid South, and divided the North into various opinions as to what should exactly be done to meet the evil. It was this uncertainty on the part of the North and the lack of organization on the direct subject of slavery opposition that permitted the South to hold out so long after she had been greatly outnumbered in population and left far behind in material progress.
CHAPTER VI.
THE ABOLITIONISTS.
"If we have whispered Truth,
Whisper no longer;
Speak as the tempest does,
Sterner and stronger."
"Song of the Free," Whittier, 1836.
Great changes in the political and economical life of a nation seldom take place abruptly. The forces responsible for a change or modification of conditions are generally at work long before the final result. Nations, like individuals, grope for the truth, forming different opinions, trying different plans—now radical, now conservative—often failing to see and grasp the solution when it is at hand, but all the while bringing about conditions which, when the crisis comes, form a solid and decisive basis for action. Such is the history of this country with reference to slavery for the three decades prior to the Civil War. From 1833 to the organization of the Republican Party, and after that event to the promulgation of the Emancipation Proclamation, public opinion was incessantly agitated by the organized efforts of the Abolitionists, although they differed among themselves and divided as to the best plan under which to act.
While the Northerners grouped into the Whig and Democratic Parties, and condemned the constant agitation of the slavery question as disturbing the public peace and jeopardizing party success, still they could not help recognizing the cogency of the abolition argument; and as year after year went by, and the aggressions of the slave power continued, a steady change went on in the North and the anti-slavery sentiment became more and more pronounced. When active political opposition to slavery finally began it found the North not exactly unanimous as to what should be done, but with her mind almost made up on one point, that slavery should at least be restricted to the territory it then occupied; it required a great political shock, such as came in 1854, to amalgamate this sentiment. From this standpoint the opinions in the North reached out to the extreme views of Garrison and his followers, that slavery should be stamped out regardless of all consequences.
The Quakers, who, from the early colonial days, had been strongest in their expressions against slavery, formed the first Anti-Slavery Society in the United States at Philadelphia in 1775. The Revolution interrupted their work, but at its conclusion they resumed their efforts patiently and incessantly, year after year, in their attempts to arouse the public mind to the enormity and dangerousness of the slave evil. Although other States organized anti-slavery societies immediately after the Revolution, the Pennsylvania Society took the leading part, and was comparatively alone for many years in the work. In the First Congress this Society presented a Memorial, asking Congress to exercise its utmost powers for the abolition of slavery. The subject was the occasion of a heated debate, and Congress decided that under the Constitution it could not, prior to 1808, abolish the slave trade; but that it had authority to prevent citizens of the United States from carrying on the African slave trade with other nations (a law to this effect was subsequently passed); and that it had no authority to interfere with the emancipation of slaves or their treatment in any of the States. The Pennsylvania Society watched Congress closely and worked along patiently year after year, meeting with failure after failure. This early Abolition movement had among its supporters the foremost men of the day —Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton, Jay and Henry are some of the illustrious names connected with the movement, just as in England the names of Burke, Fox and Pitt are recorded against the iniquity. When the purchase of the Louisiana Territory came before Congress, the Pennsylvania Society petitioned that measures should be taken to prevent slavery in the new territory, but the Federalists were more engrossed with a discussion of Constitutional questions, and the opportune moment went by without any action on the matter.
The agitation connected with the Missouri question brought about the formation of a stronger anti-slavery sentiment in the North, and a group of fearless men sprang up to devote their lives and energies to an Abolition movement. They were radical in their views, progressive in their methods and absolutely fearless in their denunciations. Benjamin Lundy, a Quaker, may be said to be the father of the Abolition movement. In 1821 he began the publication of The Genius of Universal Emancipation, the first Abolition paper; he was joined at Baltimore in 1829 by William Lloyd Garrison, henceforth to be the most zealous, unceasing and uncompromising of all the Abolitionists. Garrison, extreme in his views, left Lundy, and in January, 1831, at Boston, without capital and with little help, started The Liberator, and placed at its head, "The Constitution of the United States is a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell," which declaration was printed in every edition of the paper until President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, when it was changed to "Proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof."
As a result of Mr. Garrison's activity many new abolition societies were formed, and on December 4, 1833, a National Convention of them was held at Philadelphia, and the American Anti-Slavery Society was organized, with Beriah Green as President and Lewis Tappan and John G. Whittier as Secretaries. This Convention decided to petition Congress to suppress the domestic slave trade between the States, and to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and in every place over which Congress had exclusive jurisdiction. It admitted that Congress had no right to interfere with slavery in any State, but its plan was to circulate extensively anti-slavery tracts and periodicals, not only in the North but throughout all of the slave-holding States, and to organize anti-slavery societies in every city and village where possible, and to send forth its agents to lift their voices against slavery. It frowned on the work of the American Colonization Society, which had been organized in 1816, for the purpose of colonizing parts of Africa with American negroes, as tending to deaden the public conscience on the question.
With this energetic organization the anti-slavery movement now gained rapidly in strength, but its political work for many years was confined to a fruitless interrogation of candidates and to sending hundreds of petitions and memorials to Congress. Anti-slavery pamphlets and papers were also sent broadcast North and South. On seeing The Liberator, with its extreme views, and on reading the anti-slavery pamphlets, the South was enraged beyond all bounds. A North Carolina Grand Jury indicted Garrison, and Georgia offered a large reward for his arrest and conviction. On July 29, 1835, all anti-slavery papers were taken from the postoffice at Charleston, S. C., by a mob and destroyed. The following year Mr. Calhoun, in the Senate, demanded the suppression of the right of petition on any matter connected with slavery, and in 1838 the House adopted the infamous Atherton Gag-Rule, "Every Petition, Memorial, Resolution, Proposition or Paper touching or relating in any way or to any extent whatever to slavery or the abolition thereof, shall, on presentation and without further action thereon, be laid upon the table without being debated, printed or referred." This remarkable rule was adopted year after year in the House until 1844, when it was repealed through the efforts of John Quincy Adams, who for ten years fought nobly for the Right of Petition, although he was not entirely in sympathy with the Abolitionists.
During this period the sentiment against the Abolitionists was very strong in the North. In many places mobs seized upon and destroyed their papers and printing presses, and broke up their meetings and mobbed the speakers. James G. Birney's paper, The Philanthropist, was twice mobbed in Cincinnati. On November 7, 1837, the Abolition cause was baptized in blood by the murder of Elijah P. Lovejoy, who was shot while defending his paper and press from the attack of a pro-slavery mob at Alton, Illinois. The following month Wendell Phillips delivered his first abolition speech against the aggressions of the Slave Power and the murder of Lovejoy. The continued despotism of the Slave Power, its attempts to muzzle the freedom of speech and press, to deny the Right of Petition, to obstruct the mails, and to obtain an Extradition Law for the trial of citizens in slave States on charges of circulating anti-slavery documents, and the use of violence against all who dared raise their voices against the slavery dogmas, aroused the abolition societies to more radical action, and a group of Abolitionists now formed, determined on political action. This was one of the causes of the disruption of the American Anti-Slavery Society and the withdrawal of Garrison and his followers, who refused to take part in any election held under the pro-slavery Constitution.
The great leaders of the Whigs and Democrats in the North, who were aspirants to the presidency, dared not take any active stand against the growing demands of the Slave Power, and both parties bowed abjectly to the monster and passed in silence these gross violations of constitutional rights. Both parties deprecated the slavery agitation, especially the Whigs, who were highly incensed because it jeopardized their candidates more than it did those of the Democrats. The failure of the two great political parties to act led to the first political organization of the anti-slavery sentiment. At Warsaw, New York, on November 13, 1839, the Abolitionists held a convention and nominated James G. Birney, of New York, for President, and Thomas Earl, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President. This was subsequently called the "Liberty Party," and was the first of the three anti-slavery parties to appear in national politics. Its platform demanded the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia and in the territories; stoppage of the interstate slave trade, and opposition to slavery to the fullest extent of Constitutional powers. Mr. Birney did not desire the nomination, and in the election of 1840, that resulted in the defeat of Van Buren by Harrison, the Abolitionists received only 7069 votes out of a total of two and one-half millions. The membership of the abolition societies at this time was about 200,000; the failure to show strength at the polls may be accounted for by reason of the refusal of many to vote at any election held under the Constitution, and also that many feared the dissolution of the Union, and preferred, if they voted at all, to remain with the Democratic or Whig Parties in the hope that their party would take some decisive action on the question.
While the Slave Power in the United States was making violent efforts to perpetuate itself and stifle all opposition, all the other civilized countries of the world were abolishing slavery. Great Britain abolished it in all her colonies in the year 1833 at a cost of one hundred millions of dollars; but the United States, already showing itself to be the most progressive nation in the world, could not throw off the evil, and it remained a cause of bitter distraction until overthrown politically by the success of the Republican Party and removed by Secession, War, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the amendments to the Constitution.
Although the Abolition cause seemed hopeless after the election of 1840, they persisted in their work, and soon a series of events happened— Texas Annexation, the Mexican War, and the Wilmot Proviso, which, independent of their efforts, brought about a direct issue between the North and South on the great question—an issue to be finally decided only by the Civil War. The work of the early Abolitionists, however, had an influence of inestimable value and weight on the immediate success of the Republican Party when it was organized.
CHAPTER VII.
COMPROMISE OF 1850.
"That, as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory."
Wilmot Proviso, August 8, 1846.
From the campaign of 1844 to the Civil War the slavery question dominated all others in politics, North and South. During this period almost every legislative question was decided with reference to its effect on slavery. Press, Pulpit and Platform felt the baleful influence of its presence, and aspirants to the presidency and to lesser political honors sacrificed principle, conscience, and the support of their friends to obtain the favor of the aggressive and dominating Slave Power. The Democratic Party during this entire period took a bold stand on the question; an anti-slavery wing of the party appeared in the North, but at no time was it successful in changing the party platforms. The Whig Party, with its strong pro-slavery wing in the South, and with its northern members desirous of party success, omitted entirely any mention of slavery in its platforms, and although the anti-slavery members of the party were outspoken in their private views of slavery, they attended the party conventions and acquiesced in the platforms until 1852, when there was a general desertion of the Whig platform and candidate. The refusal of the Whig Party to make a direct issue of the slavery question doomed it, sooner or later, to dissolution; and although the party was successful in 1840 and in 1848, its disintegration really began after the election of 1840.
To say that the result of the "Log Cabin and Hard Cider" campaign was a bitter disappointment to both Democrats and Whigs is putting it mildly. The Democrats were deeply chagrined at the defeat of their candidate by a "clap-trap" campaign, and the disappointment of the Whigs came with the death of President Harrison and the succession of Tyler, who played directly into the hands of the Democrats and the Slave Power, bitterly antagonizing the party that elected him.
The Texas question now came up to disturb politics and again bring slavery directly before the people. Texas had gained her independence from Mexico, and had applied, in 1837, to be received into the Union, but the offer was declined by President Van Buren. The tragic death of Mr. Upshur, Secretary of State, on February 28, 1844, and the appointment of Mr. Calhoun to that office, made possible the completion of a long conspiracy to admit Texas, and to further extend the slave area by a war with Mexico. A Treaty of Annexation was immediately prepared (April 12, 1844) and presented to the Senate, but was subsequently rejected. It then became apparent that the South intended to make a political issue of the Texas question, and there was great alarm in the North, for the admission of Texas meant a slave area capable of being divided into five or six slave States. In addition, it meant war with Mexico over disputed boundaries, and the fact that Mexico had not fully recognized the independence of Texas, and the result of that war would unquestionably be the acquisition of more area contiguous to the South.
Mr. Clay and Mr. Van Buren at this time were the only ones prominently mentioned as possibilities for the Whig and Democratic nominations for the presidency; both published letters in which they opposed the annexation of Texas. Mr. Van Buren's letter cost him the Democratic nomination, for when the Convention met at Baltimore on May 27, 1844, he was unable to obtain a sufficient vote under the two-thirds rule, and the South forced the nomination of James K. Polk of Tennessee. This division on the slavery question in a Democratic Convention is of great historical importance as a link in the chain of events which led to the final great political division between the North and South. The Democratic Platform was emphatic in its support of slavery and the condemnation of the Abolitionists; it advocated the annexation of Texas and the occupation of Oregon, and the Democrats went into the campaign with the rallying cry of "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight," in the North—a promise of more free soil—and in the South the "Annexation of Texas."
Mr. Clay's letter had made him stronger than ever with his party and he was nominated unanimously. The Whig Platform, however, was absolutely silent about the Texas question, and there was absolutely no mention of any opposition to slavery; the whole question was totally ignored. Mr. Clay would have defeated Polk had he not been led into the blunder of writing another letter on the Texas question, in which he largely withdrew from his earlier position; this alienated great numbers of the Northern Whigs and threw thousands of votes to the candidate of the Liberty Party. This party, in a convention at Buffalo the preceding year, had again nominated James G. Birney for President. Its platform was long and elaborate, and contained strong denunciations of slavery and pledged the party to work for its abolition. The Liberty Party polled a total of 62,300 votes, defeating Clay, who lost New York, the pivotal State, with its thirty-six electoral votes, by 5,106, the Liberty Party casting 15,812 votes in that State. Texas annexation followed the election, but the pledge in regard to Oregon was cast aside. "Fifty-four Forty or Fight" was nothing more than a campaign cry, never intended to be followed up, and, in truth, could not have been without a war with England.
With the great Texas victory achieved, the South now turned herself to the acquisition of more territory, and war with Mexico was declared May 11, 1846. The Whig Party in the North was strongly against the Mexican War, and a strong element also expressed itself in the northern Democratic ranks as against it; the opposition became so threatening that, as a new House was to be elected in the Fall of 1846, the Administration decided to end the War, if possible, and Congress was asked to give $2,000,000 to be used in negotiating a Treaty with Mexico, fixing the disputed boundaries. Immediately David Wilmot, of Pennsylvania, introduced a Proviso, which had been prepared by Jacob Brinkerhoff, of Ohio (both Democrats, and both afterwards members of the Republican Party), to the effect that slavery should be prohibited in any territory acquired from Mexico. This Proviso carried in the House, but the Senate adjourned its session without coming to a vote on it. The Proviso appeared again often in Congress, but was never adopted; it caused more excited debate between the North and South than anything that had ever been introduced by the anti-slavery element in Congress. Although defeated, it served to amalgamate the anti-slavery forces, and from that day they rallied around it as representing the fixed and unalterable sentiment of the North; on it the Free-Soil Party entered the Campaign of 1848 and it was the underlying principle in the organization of the Republican Party in 1854. As a counter-balancing action to the Wilmot Proviso, Mr. Calhoun, in February, 1847, introduced in the Senate a long resolution to the effect that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in any territory, and that any attempt to do so would be a violation of constitutional rights and lead to a dissolution of the Union. No vote was ever taken on this resolution, and it was nothing more than a deliberate attempt to force the issue with the North.
The Thirtieth Congress met December 6, 1847, and had among its members Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, and Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, the former elected as a Whig and the latter as a Democrat; in the Senate Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois, took his seat for the first time in that body. Opposition to the war was strong, and it was finally closed by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed February 2, 1848; by its terms vast stretches of new territory were acquired by the United States. This land had been free soil by the Laws of Mexico since 1827, but the South, as a matter of course, expected, and had planned, to make it slave soil, and she was determined to oppose to the utmost any attempt to keep slavery out of this new territory; the North was equally determined that it should remain free. The campaign of 1848 came on with the question undecided. The Democratic Convention nominated Lewis Cass, of Michigan, and adopted a platform similar to those of 1840 and 1844, but nothing was said about slavery in the new territory. The Whigs nominated Major-General Zachary Taylor, of Louisiana, for President, and Millard Fillmore, of New York, for Vice-President, and their Convention adjourned without adopting any platform at all.
The failure of the two great parties to take up the prohibition of slavery in the new territory was regarded with great indignation by many members of both parties in the North, especially so by the Whigs; in addition, an element of political revenge crept into the situation to help the anti-slavery sentiment. The defeat of Van Buren in the Democratic Convention of '44, and the anti-slavery sentiment in the Democratic Party, had divided it, in New York, into two factions known as "Barnburners" and "Hunkers"; the former being those who were opposed to the extension of the slave area, and were likened to the Dutchman who burned his barn to rid it of rats; and the latter were "Administration Democrats"—"Northern men with Southern principles," who "hankered" after office. Samuel J. Tilden and Benjamin F. Butler were two of the leading "Barnburner" leaders. When the Democratic National Convention convened in 1848, both "Barnburners" and "Hunkers" applied for admission; the Convention offered to permit the New York vote to be cast between them. This was refused by the "Barnburners," and they withdrew and held an enthusiastic meeting in New York, and soon became known as "Free-Soil Democrats." A National Convention was called to meet at Buffalo, August 9, 1848. The old Liberty Party had already held their Convention in November, 1847, and had nominated John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, for President, but Mr. Hale withdrew and the Liberty Party joined in the new movement and attended the Free-Soil Convention. Mr. Van Buren was nominated for President, and Charles Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, for Vice-President. The Free-Soil Platform was, of course, strongly antagonistic to the Slave Power, and concluded with the stirring words, "We inscribe on our banner, 'Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Labor and Free Men,' and under it will fight on and fight ever, until a triumphant victory shall reward our exertions."
The Free-Soil Party was the second predecessor of the Republican Party, and it was a curious circumstance that in this campaign it was to have at its head a man who had been a Democratic President. The Free-Soilers of New York later nominated Senator John A. Dix for Governor, and the split in the Democratic Party in that State was complete, and lost the election for the National ticket. Many Whigs hesitated between Taylor and Van Buren, but Horace Greeley, in the New York Tribune, advocated the election of Taylor. The vote in New York, which was again the pivotal State, was: Taylor, 218,603; Cass, 114,318; Van Buren, 120,510. The total Free-Soil vote was 291,263. It was a strange and fateful effect that made the Liberty Party in 1844 divide the Whigs and give the victory to the Democrats; and in 1848 the Free-Soil Party, a successor of the Liberty Party, divided the Democrats and gave the Whigs the victory.
The Campaign of '48 assumes another important aspect, in that Mr. Lincoln took an active part in it; it fixed his ideas on slavery, and impressed him with the utter hopelessness of reconciling the North and South on this question. Mr. Lincoln had made his debut in the House in December, 1847, with the famous "Spot Resolutions." In the Spring of '48 he urged his Illinois friends to give up Clay and support Gen. Taylor. He attended the Whig Convention at Philadelphia and was well satisfied with the nominations and the prospects of victory. Late in July he made a strong speech for Taylor on the floor of the House, attracting the attention of the campaign managers to such an extent that he was sent to New England where he delivered a number of speeches, pleading with the New Englanders not to join the Free-Soil movement, but to vote with the Whig Party. Here he saw the strength of the anti-slavery movement, and what he heard made him think deeper on the great question of the hour. After listening to one of Governor Seward's speeches at Boston, in September, he said, "Governor Seward, I have been thinking about what you said in your speech; I reckon you are right. We have got to deal with this slavery question, and got to give more attention to it than we have been doing." Later in the campaign Mr. Lincoln stumped Illinois for Taylor.
When the Thirty-first Congress convened for its first session, on December 3, 1849, all was confusion and uncertainty in regard to the situation. A great many felt that the crisis had been reached at last, and that nothing but a civil war could result. The South feared that its long cherished plan of more slave territory was to be frustrated, and the anxiety in the North that the territory acquired from Mexico might be made slave was equally great. An event now occurred that brought matters directly to an acute crisis and necessitated a settlement or a war. Gold had been discovered in California early in 1848, and instantly there was a tremendous influx of population, with the result that late in 1849 California was ready for admission into the Union, not as a slave State, as the South fondly hoped, but as free soil. With the convening of Congress came the President's message, and it was a severe blow to the South, for it advocated the admission of California as a free State. The South now indeed saw its plan rapidly weakening. Violent opposition was at once made to the admission of California as disturbing the equal balance between the two sections, and in addition the South complained bitterly of the difficulty of capturing slaves who escaped into the free States. She also complained of the constant agitation of the slave question, and now demanded that the territories should be open to slavery, and asserted that any attempt to enforce the Wilmot Proviso or to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia would lead to an immediate dissolution of the Union.
Such was the acute situation in December, 1849, and the men, scenes and debates which attended the solution of this grave crisis present a remarkable and dramatic picture. All eyes now turned to Mr. Clay, the great Compromisor, then in his seventy-third year. In January, 1850, he began his efforts to bring about what proved to be the last compromise between the North and the South. Four great speeches were delivered on the resolutions introduced by him. Mr. Clay, so feeble that he had to be assisted up the Capitol steps, spoke early in February. On March 4th Mr. Calhoun, too weak to speak himself, had his speech, full of antagonism and foreboding, read by a colleague. Three days after Calhoun's speech, Webster delivered his famous "Seventh of March" speech, in which he sacrificed the support of thousands of friends, and demoralized the entire North by condemning the Abolitionists and advocating the passage of the Compromise measures. On March 11th Mr. Seward delivered his "Higher Law" speech, denouncing the Compromise. The great triumvirate, Clay, Calhoun and Webster, appeared in this debate for the last time before the American public. Calhoun died on the last day of March. Late in '51 Clay resigned his seat in the Senate and died at Washington, June 29, 1852. Webster took the office of Secretary of State, received a few votes in the Whig Convention and refused to support General Scott in the election of 1852, and died broken-hearted October 24, 1852.
The Compromise of 1850, as finally agreed on, provided that Utah and New Mexico should be organized into territories without reference to slavery; California to be admitted as a free State; $10,000,000.00 to be paid Texas for her claim to New Mexico; a new Fugitive Slave Law; and the slave trade to be abolished in the District of Columbia. The compromise was viewed with great indignation by the North, and was in many respects extremely unsatisfactory to the South, who was now certain that her plan of extension of slave area was lost. The political leaders of both parties now argued and pretended that the slavery question was absolutely settled, inasmuch as there was no further territory to be partitioned, and that Clay's Compromise had included all possible phases of the subject. But it was apparent to those who looked beneath the surface that the situation was not settled at all; nobody in the North, however, looked for such a startling and rash course as was adopted by the South in 1854, and which resulted, in that year, in the formation of the Republican Party.
CHAPTER VIII.
BIRTH OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
"Resolved, That of all outrages hitherto perpetrated or attempted upon the North and freedom by the slave leaders, and their natural allies, not one compares in bold and impudent audacity, treachery and meanness with this, the Nebraska Bill, as to the sum of all its villainies it adds the repudiation of a solemn compact, held as sacred as the Constitution itself for a period of thirty-four years."
Adopted at First Meeting, Ripon, Wis., February 28, 1854.
The new Fugitive Slave Law (passed as a part of the Compromise) was unreasonable and extremely harsh in its terms, and did more than anything else to continue the bitterness between the North and the South. Opposition to it appeared in the North almost immediately after its passage, and it was clear that, because of its terms, it would prove to be more of a dead letter than the original law of 1793. The fact of the matter was that the South forced its passage in the harshest terms conceivable, with the sinister plan of compelling the North to violate it so that bad faith could be charged; and the North did not hesitate to violate a law so repugnant to constitutional and natural rights and human sympathy. Personal Liberty Laws were passed in many Northern States, practically nullifying the Act; and as a result of it, the Underground Railroad, which had been organized about 1839 by the Quakers, did its most effective work. This mysterious organization had a chain of stations, leading from the slave across the free States into Canada, to assist in the escape of fugitive slaves. Mrs. Stowe, moved by the wrongs and sufferings of the fugitives, published "Uncle Tom's Cabin" in the summer of 1852, and it had a telling effect in creating and solidifying the anti-slavery sentiment in the North.
The campaign of 1852 found the Democrats united; but the Whigs had no promising candidate, and were sorely disorganized, with a stronger anti-slavery element than ever before in its midst. The Democrats nominated Franklin Pierce, of New Hampshire, for President, and their platform contained the following emphatic promise: "The Democratic Party will resist all attempts at renewing in Congress, or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question in whatever shape or color the attempt may be made." The Whig Party nominated General Winfield Scott, of Virginia, for President, and their platform also contained a resolution pledging the party to the Compromise Measures as a settlement in principle and substance of the slavery question. The Free-Soil Party, though it had received little support at the polls, still retained a strong organization, and nominated John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, for President, and George W. Julian, of Indiana, for Vice-President, and denounced both the Whig and Democratic Parties as "hopelessly corrupt and utterly unworthy of confidence." The electoral vote gave Pierce 254 and Scott only 42, but the popular vote was much closer: Pierce, 1,601,474; Scott, 1,386,580; Hale, 156,667.
President Pierce's first message went to Congress December 5, 1853, and he congratulated the country on the settlement of the slavery question; but in the following month, notwithstanding the express promises made in both the party platforms of the preceding election, the event came that stunned the North, and as the realization of its enormity grew, aroused her to the wildest excitement and the most bitter denunciation, finally resulting in direct and emphatic political action in the organization of the Republican Party.
On January 4, 1854, Senator Douglas introduced a Bill organizing the Territory of Nebraska. Twelve days later Senator Dixon, of Kentucky, gave notice that he would move an Amendment, repealing the Missouri Compromise, thereby permitting slavery in the new Territory. Senator Douglas then reported (January 23d) a new Bill, making two territories out of the same territory of the first Bill, the southern part to be called Kansas and the northern part to be called Nebraska, and the Missouri Compromise, "being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by Congress with slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850, commonly called Compromise Measures, is hereby declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and meaning of the Act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way." The Bill passed the Senate March 3d, but the South was not certain of its success in the House, and final action was postponed until May 24th, and this iniquity became a law on May 30, 1854. While setting forth the doctrine of non-intervention and popular sovereignty the Bill was in effect the forcing of slavery into the Territories, and that this was the plan became practically assured when it was discovered that throughout the summer and fall of 1853 the people of western Missouri had been deliberately planning to settle in the territory west of them (now called Kansas) and to make it slave soil. The whole plot, as revealed by the legislation to which Douglas gave his support, was to force Kansas into the Union as a slave State, thereby counterbalancing the admission of California, which had destroyed the equilibrium between the two sections.
A storm of indignation swept over the North in the opening months of 1854, gaining in intensity and fury as the baseness of the new scheme of the Slave Power was fully realized. Thousands of letters poured in on Congressmen protesting against the passage of the Act, and hundreds of memorials and petitions were presented to the Senate and the House. The newspapers all over the North, beginning late in January, contained constant articles calling on the people to hold meetings and protest against the Nebraska outrage, and hundreds of these meetings were held in churches, schoolhouses and public halls, and the anti-Nebraska sentiment dominated everything. Douglas received the brunt of all this opprobrium, and was compared to Benedict Arnold. The foreign element was the strongest in opposition to the Nebraska measure, and the German newspapers and the Germans, North and South, were the most emphatic in their denunciation, and the success which the new political party was to have must be attributed largely to them. The Western States, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa, were the leaders in the anti-Nebraska movement, and also in the organization of political opposition. The election of 1852 had badly demoralized the Whig Party, and now the Kansas-Nebraska measures swept it away almost entirely in the Western States, but the Eastern States, while condemning the Douglas Bill and adopting resolutions similar to the Republican platforms of the West, were loath to give up their party organization, and the Whig Party continued in several of them until after the election of 1856. During the period between 1852 and 1854 it probably occurred to many in the North, who watched and analyzed the popular sentiment and vote, that the Whig Party would soon be swept away, and that the dissatisfied masses of Abolitionists, Free-Soilers, Anti-Nebraska Whigs, Anti-Nebraska Democrats and Know-Nothings must and would unite into a party under a new name with a platform acceptable to the anti-slavery elements in politics. The Douglas Bill demanded political action in the North, but how was a new party to be formed? Who would lead it, and what would be the success of the new movement?
We come now to the organization and first meetings of the Republican Party. Alvan E. Bovay was the founder of the Republican Party. Not only were the name and early principles of the party clearly outlined and decided on in his mind, and talked about by him long before any action was taken by any other person, but he took the first practical steps looking to the dissolution of existing parties, and with patience and much difficult work brought about the first meeting and pointed out clearly and unanswerably the course to be taken.
[Illustration: Alvan E. Bovay, Founder of the Republican Party.]
Mr. Bovay was born in July, 1818, at Adams, New York; graduated from Norwich University, Vermont, and was Professor in several eastern schools and colleges, and later was admitted to the New York bar. In October, 1850, he went West with his family, and settled at Ripon, Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin, and soon became the recognized leader of the Whig Party. He studied the political situation carefully, and with his liberal education and the principles of freedom taught by life in the West, he imbibed a hatred for the institution of Slavery, and saw clearly that, at least, its extension must be opposed to the utmost. He remained with the Whig Party, "following its banners, fighting its battles faithfully, at the same time praying for its death," as he expressed it in later years. He was fortunate in numbering among his close friends Horace Greeley, the editor of the New York Tribune, the greatest exponent of the northern views of slavery. The Tribune in 1854 had a circulation of about 150,000 per week, and therefore wielded a vast influence on public sentiment in the North. In 1852, while the Whig Convention was in session, Mr. Bovay dined with Mr. Greeley in New York City, and the conversation turned to the prospects of General Scott, the Whig nominee. Mr. Bovay predicted his overwhelming defeat, and that the Whig Party would be utterly demoralized in the North, and that it would become necessary to organize a new party out of the debris. He there suggested to Greeley the name "Republican" for the new party, but Greeley received the proposition with little enthusiasm because he not only believed that Scott would be elected but that the Whig Party should not be dissolved. Mr. Bovay says that he advocated the name Republican because it expressed equality—representing the principle of the good of all the people; that it would be attractive to the strong foreign element in the country because of their familiarity with the name in their native lands, and that in addition the name possessed charm and magnetism. After the defeat of General Scott, Mr. Bovay corresponded with Mr. Greeley often in regard to the political situation. He was fully determined to do his utmost to organize a new party and call it Republican, and he talked over the matter persistently with all his neighbors in the little village of Ripon, and waited for the time to act. That time came with the violent agitation caused by the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, and Mr. Bovay achieved the result he had planned so long. After talking over the matter with two friends, Jehdeiah Bowen, a Free-Soil Democrat, and Amos Loper, a call was issued for a mass meeting to be held in the Congregational church in Ripon, February 28, 1854, with the object of ascertaining the public sentiment. This little frontier village had a small population, and the country around it was sparsely settled, but so earnest was the political thought of the time that the meeting was a great success, and the church was crowded with men and women, and even some children, who were attracted by the seriousness of their elders. Deacon William Dunham, of the church, acted as Chairman of this meeting, and there was a full and free discussion of the situation and the best action to be taken. Mr. Bovay pointed out that the only hope of defeating the extension of slavery was to disband the old parties and unite under a new name. Before the meeting had progressed very far the sentiment was practically unanimous. Those who hesitated were overcome by the enthusiasm and logical arguments of the speakers. The name Republican was suggested at this meeting, but no action was taken on it for the reason that this was looked upon as merely a preliminary meeting to be followed by a later one. As the Kansas-Nebraska Bill had not yet passed the Senate nothing further could be done at this meeting, and after adopting the following well-worded and prophetic resolutions, the meeting adjourned to await the action of Congress:
"WHEREAS, The Senate of the United States is entertaining, and from present indications is likely to pass, Bills organizing governments for the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska, in which is embodied a clause repealing the Missouri Compromise Act, and so admit into these Territories the slave system with all its evils, and
"WHEREAS, We deem that compact repealable as the Constitution itself; therefore
"Resolved, That of all outrages hitherto perpetrated or attempted upon the North and freedom by the slave leaders and their natural allies, not one compares in bold and impudent audacity, treachery and meanness with this, the Nebraska Bill, as to the sum of all its other villainies it adds the repudiation of a solemn compact, held as sacred as the Constitution itself for a period of thirty-four years;
"Resolved, That the northern man who can aid and abet in the commission of so stupendous a crime is none too good to become an accomplice in renewing the African slave trade, the services which, doubtless, will next be required of him by his Southern masters, should the Nebraska treason succeed;
"Resolved, That the attempt to withdraw the Missouri Compromise, whether successful or not, admonishes the North to adopt the maxim for all time to come, 'No more Compromises with Slavery';
"Resolved, That the passage of this Bill, if pass it should, will be a call to arms of a great Northern Party, such an one as the country has not hitherto seen, composed of Whigs, Democrats and Free-Soilers, every man with a heart in him united under the single banner cry of 'Repeal! Repeal!'
"Resolved, That the small but compact phalanx of true men who oppose the mad scheme upon the broadest principle of humanity, as well as their unflinching efforts to uphold the public faith, deserve not only our applause but our profound esteem;
"Resolved, That the heroic attitude of General Houston, amidst a host of degenerate men in the United States Senate, is worthy of honor and applause."
The Senate, as we have already seen, passed the Kansas-Nebraska Bill on March 3d. Mr. Bovay and his co-workers lost no time in signing and publishing the following call for a second meeting:
"A Bill expressly intended to extend and strengthen the institution of Slavery has passed the Senate by a large majority, many Northern Senators voting for it, and many more sitting in their seats and not voting at all, and it is evidently destined to pass the House and become a law unless its progress is arrested by a general uprising of the North against it;
"Therefore, we, the undersigned, believing the community to be nearly unanimous in opposition to the nefarious scheme, would call a public meeting of the citizens of all parties to be held in the schoolhouse at Ripon, on Monday evening, March 20th, at 6:30 o'clock, to resolve, to petition and to organize against it."
Through the efforts of Mr. Bovay, the meeting on the night of March 20th was largely attended, and the little schoolhouse on the prairie was filled with men, all voters. "We went in," wrote Mr. Bovay, "Whigs, Free-Soilers and Democrats; we came out Republicans, and we were the first Republicans in the Union." It is true, however, that this meeting did not formally adopt the name Republican, but it was discussed, as it had been for months in the village, and was practically agreed upon, but the meeting felt that it would be better not to use the name until a more pretentious movement of a national character was made. The meeting lasted well into the night, and the "cold March wind blew around the little building and the tallow candles burned low" as these pioneers in this frontier town made history. A motion was duly made and carried that the Town Committees of Whigs, Free-Soilers and Democrats be dissolved and a new Committee to represent the new party be appointed. The first Republican Committee was composed of Alvan E. Bovay, Jehdeiah Bowen, Amos A. Loper, Jacob Woodruff and Abraham Thomas, all courageous, outspoken and fearless men of the West, whose very names seem towers of strength, speaking the unalterable purpose of the new party.
These preliminary meetings of the new party having been held and a plan of action outlined, Mr. Bovay directed all his efforts toward having some National recognition of the name of the party. Two days before the first meeting at Ripon he wrote Mr. Greeley a strong letter, urging him to publish an editorial and adopt the name. Mr. Greeley gave the matter but little attention, and several months went by before he took any notice of the suggestion, and then it was only taken up in a half-hearted way, but what he said was enough to settle the matter. In the Tribune of June 24, 1854, appeared an article expressing indifference as to what name should be chosen to represent the Anti-Nebraska sentiment in the North, but the article concluded, "We think some simple name like Republican would more fitly designate those who have united to restore the Union to its true mission, the champion and promulgator of liberty rather than the propagandist of slavery."
Another event had occurred to strengthen the adoption of the name Republican for the new party. On the morning after the final passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, a meeting of the Anti-Nebraska members of Congress was held in Washington, and the general political situation and its hopelessness was fully discussed. At this meeting the feasibility of the new party was talked over, and the members present decided to lend their aid to such a movement, and the name Republican was discussed and adopted.
In point of time, Michigan has the honor of being the first State to hold a Convention and formally adopt a platform containing the principles of the new party and using the name Republican. Late in May, and throughout June, 1854, a call was published and copies circulated for signing among the voters of Michigan, in which all citizens, "without reference to former political association," were called to assemble in Mass Convention on Thursday, July 6th, at 1 p. m., at Jackson, Michigan, "there to take such measures as shall be thought best to concentrate the popular sentiment in this State against the aggressions of the Slave Power." The meeting was overflowing in numbers and most enthusiastic and earnest in sentiment. A long and outspoken platform was unanimously adopted, setting forth something of the history of slavery, and denouncing it as a great moral, social and political wrong. The platform condemned the repeal of the Missouri Compromise; pledged the party to opposition to slavery extension; demanded the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law, and demanded an Act to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia; spoke words of cheer to those who might settle in Kansas, and concluded:
"Resolved, That, in view of the necessity of battling for the first principles of Republican Government and against the schemes of aristocracy, the most revolting and oppressive with which the earth was ever cursed or man debased, we will co-operate and be known as Republicans until the contest be terminated."
The State Central Committee was chosen and the first Republican State Ticket in the United States was nominated, headed by Kinsley S. Bingham for Governor. One week later, on July 13th, chosen as the anniversary of the day on which the Ordinance of 1787 was adopted, State Conventions of the Anti-Nebraska members of all parties were held in Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana and Vermont. In Wisconsin and Vermont the name Republican was distinctly adopted, and in these two States, as well as in the others mentioned, platforms similar in sentiment to that of Michigan were agreed on. In Massachusetts the Convention met on July 20th and adopted the name Republican and an Anti-Nebraska platform, and nominated Henry Wilson for Governor, but the peculiar political situation in this State led to the election of the Know-Nothing candidates, but as far as opposition to slavery was concerned, the Know-Nothings in Massachusetts were Republican in sentiment, for they selected Henry Wilson for United States Senator.
Ohio was the first State to suggest a State Convention of the Anti-Nebraska sentiment; a preliminary meeting was held at Columbus March 22d, and was attended by Whigs, Free-Soilers and Democrats. The political situation was thoroughly discussed, and afterwards, as the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill became assured, a call was issued for a State Convention to be held on July 13th. At this Convention the name Republican was not formally adopted, but throughout the State in the Congressional Districts that name was common. In New York the Whigs refused to give up their party organization, but an Anti-Nebraska platform was adopted and the Whig candidate was elected on it. New York joined the Republican party in 1855, and Mr. Seward took his place as a leader of the party in that State. Maine was engrossed with local issues, and did not adopt the Republican organization in 1854, but returned Anti-Nebraska Congressmen. Pennsylvania also held to her old organizations, but returned Anti-Nebraska Congressmen, and the same situation occurred in Illinois. In Iowa the situation was peculiar, but nevertheless emphatic for the new organization. The Whigs held their Convention in that State on February 22d, before the Nebraska Bill had passed the Senate, and before the sentiment in the North had reached an acute stage. But before the election in August the Whig candidate, John W. Grimes, declared himself in favor of the Republican platform and name, and he was practically elected as a Republican Governor, the first in the United States. The South, of course, was solid for the Democratic Party, and no attempt at a Republican organization was made in the Southern States. In the other Northern States not already mentioned the sentiment gradually, but with some slowness, solidified in favor of the new party.
The presence of the American, or Know-Nothing Party, which had come into politics in 1852 as a secret organization, with the prevailing principle of "America for Americans," and which obtained its popular name of "Know-Nothing" because of the invariable answer of its members that they "knew nothing" of the organization, confused the political situation in 1854 and 1855, and makes it difficult to correctly analyze and state the political situation.
It is seen that the Republican Party was strong in the States which had been organized out of the Northwest Territory, but that the East and New England, while fully endorsing the platforms of the new party, entered reluctantly into the movement to adopt its name and organization. In the East there were four distinct parties, the Whigs, Democrats, Know-Nothings and Republicans, but in the West there were but two, the Democratic and Republican. There can be no question, however, that the sentiment of the Know-Nothing Party, which controlled many of the elections in the East during 1854 and 1855, was strongly Anti-Nebraska, and the success of that party in the North may safely be counted as expressing the sentiment of the new party.
The close of 1855 found the Republican Party well organized in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Vermont, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Iowa, Maine, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York and Indiana. In the several other States not mentioned it was rapidly gaining strength, and the prospects for the presidential campaign of 1856 looked fairly bright, and if the remnants of the Whig Party would retire from the field, and if the Anti-Nebraska Know-Nothings would vote with the new party, the chances for victory were exceedingly good. The struggle in Kansas between the free settlers from the North and the pro-slavery citizens from Missouri was now growing in bitterness, and reports of violence and blood-shed, which came from the scene of the conflict, set the North on fire with indignation and tended materially to solidify sentiment in favor of the Republican Party.
[Illustration: Schoolhouse at Ripon, Wisconsin, where the Republican Party was born.]
The Thirty-fourth Congress, which had been elected the preceding year, convened December 3, 1855, and the extent of the great political revolution which had taken place in the North was seen more clearly. The proud Democratic majority of 89 in the preceding House had been swept away, and the Thirty-fourth Congress, as near as it could be classified, which was indeed difficult, was made up of one hundred and seventeen Anti-Nebraska members, seventy-nine Democrats, and thirty-seven Pro-Slavery Whigs and Know-Nothings. After a contest of nine weeks, Nathaniel P. Banks, of Massachusetts, was chosen Speaker over the Southern candidate, and although during this first session of the Thirty-fourth Congress the opponents of slavery were without a party name or organization, the election of Banks was clearly a victory for the young party. Altogether the progress of the party in a period of less than two years had been most satisfactory, and if a strong presidential candidate could be obtained, and if great party leaders would appear, it was evident that the new party would stand an even chance of succeeding in the presidential election of 1856, and early preparations were made for the first great national political contest over the slavery question; a contest certain to be exciting and bitter in its events and portentous in results.
CHAPTER IX.
FIRST REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION.
"Free Soil, Free Men, Free Speech, Fremont."
Republican Rallying Cry, 1856.
The opening of 1856 found the country in a turmoil of political excitement and anxiety. Late in January, President Pierce, in a special message, recognized the pro-slavery Legislature of Kansas, and called the attempt to establish a Free-state Government in that Territory an act of rebellion. This continued subserviency of the Administration to the Slave Power so aroused the North that two days later the Anti-Nebraska members in the House forced through a resolution by a vote of one hundred and one to one hundred, declaring that the Missouri Compromise ought to be restored, but nothing further could be done with the resolution. The House at this time was dead-locked over the election of a Speaker, which was not settled, as we have seen, until February 2d. The situation in Kansas was daily growing more acute, and had the natural effect of creating great bitterness both in the North and the South, and this general unsettled and threatening state of affairs and public opinion confronted the political parties on the eve of another presidential campaign.
The Republican State leaders had decided on an attempt at a National Organization and Convention, and on January 17, 1856, the following call was issued:
"To the Republicans of the United States:
"In accordance with what appears to be a general desire of the Republican party, and at the suggestion of a large portion of the Republican Press, the undersigned, Chairmen of the State Republican Committees of Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin, hereby invite the Republicans of the Union to meet in informal Convention at Pittsburg on the 22d of February, 1856, for the purpose of perfecting the National Organization, and providing for a National Delegate Convention of the Republican Party at some subsequent day, to nominate candidates for the Presidency and Vice-Presidency, to be supported at the election in November, 1856.
"A. P. STONE, of Ohio,
"J. Z. GOODRICH, of Massachusetts,
"DAVID WILMOT, of Pennsylvania,
"LAWRENCE BRAINARD, of Vermont,
"WILLIAM A. WHITE, of Wisconsin."
Because of lack of time the names of the other State Chairmen mentioned in the body of the call were not obtained, but they all approved it by letter. The Pittsburg Convention was to be merely preliminary to the National Convention, but it developed unexpected enthusiasm, and it was seen by the friends of freedom that at last a great National Party was in the field, determined to oppose slavery to the utmost, and to remain until the victory should be won.
Twenty-four States, sixteen free and eight slave, sent their representatives to the Pittsburg meeting. Lawrence Brainard, of Vermont, called the Convention to order, and the delegates chose John A. King, of New York, for temporary Chairman. After a prayer by Owen Lovejoy, brother of the murdered Abolitionist, the Committee on Permanent Organization reported the venerable Francis P. Blair, of Maryland, for President of the Convention, who accepted the honor and read an elaborate paper on the situation, which was listened to with marked attention. The names of eighteen prominent Republicans were presented for Vice-Presidents and five for Secretaries. A Committee was appointed to draft an address to the people of the country. Earnest, hopeful and enthusiastic speeches were made by Horace Greeley, Zachariah Chandler, Preston King, David Wilmot, Joshua R. Giddings, George W. Julian, and others, and a strong Freedom letter was read from Cassius M. Clay. The Committee on Resolutions reported a lengthy address to the people of the United States, setting forth the crimes and continued aggressions of the Slave Power, and closing with three Resolutions, demanding the repeal, and pledging the party to labor for the repeal, of all laws which allowed the introduction of slavery into territory once consecrated to freedom, and declared its purpose to resist by all constitutional means the existence of slavery in any of the Territories of the United States; pledging the Republicans to the support, by every lawful means, of the brethren in Kansas, and to use every political power to obtain the immediate admission of Kansas as a free State; and denounced the National Administration and pledged the party to oppose and overthrow it. A National Committee, headed by Edwin D. Morgan, of New York, was then chosen and the preliminary Convention adjourned on February 23d to await the call of the National Committee.
From Washington, on March 29, 1856, the National Committee issued this call for the First National Convention:
"The people of the United States, without regard to past political differences or divisions, who are opposed to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, to the policy of the present Administration, to the extension of slavery into the Territories, in favor of the admission of Kansas as a free State, and restoring the action of the Federal Government to the principles of Washington and Jefferson, are invited by the National Committee, appointed by the Pittsburg Convention on the 22d of February, 1856, to send from each State three delegates from every Congressional District, and six delegates at large, to meet at Philadelphia on the 17th day of June next, for the purpose of recommending candidates to be supported for the offices of President and Vice-President of the United States."
Pursuant to this call, the first Republican National Convention convened at Philadelphia, in the Musical Fund Hall, on June 17, 1856, the anniversary of the battle of Bunker Hill, and was called to order by Edwin D. Morgan, Chairman of the National Committee. Every Northern State, and also Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Virginia, and the Territories of Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, and the District of Columbia, were represented by full delegations, and there were probably between eight hundred and one thousand delegates in attendance. Robert Emmet, of New York, formerly a Democrat, was made temporary chairman, and accepted the honor in an eloquent and stirring speech. After prayer, Committees on Credentials, Resolutions and Permanent Organization were then appointed. The latter committee reported Henry S. Lane, of Indiana, as President of the Convention, and the names of twenty-four Vice-Presidents and a number of Secretaries. The first National Platform of the Republican Party was then reported by David Wilmot and was adopted with thunders of applause and amid scenes of the highest enthusiasm.
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL PLATFORM, 1856.
This convention of delegates, assembled in pursuance of a call addressed to the people of the United States, without regard to past political differences or divisions, who are opposed to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, to the policy of the present administration, to the extension of slavery into free territory; in favor of admitting Kansas as a free State, of restoring the action of the Federal government to the principles of Washington and Jefferson; and who purpose to unite in presenting candidates for the offices of President and Vice-President, do resolve as follows:
Resolved, That the maintenance or the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution is essential to the preservation of our Republican institutions, and that the Federal Constitution, the rights of the States, and the union of the States, shall be preserved.
Resolved, That, with our Republican fathers, we hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed with the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior designs of our federal government were to secure these rights to all persons within its exclusive jurisdiction; that, as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no person should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, it becomes our duty to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing slavery in any Territory of the United States, by positive legislation prohibiting its extension therein; that we deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, of any individual or association of individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States while the present Constitution shall be maintained.
Resolved, That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign power over the territories of the United States for their government, and that in the exercise of this power it is both the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism— polygamy and slavery.
Resolved, That while the Constitution of the United States was ordained and established by the people in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty, and contains ample provisions for the protection of life, liberty and property of every citizen, the dearest Constitutional rights of the people of Kansas have been fraudulently and violently taken from them; their territory has been invaded by an armed force; spurious and pretended legislative, judicial and executive officers have been set over them, by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced; the right of the people to keep and bear arms has been infringed; test oaths of an extraordinary and entangling nature have been imposed as a condition of exercising the right of suffrage and holding office; the right of an accused person to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury has been denied; the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, has been violated; they have been deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law; the freedom of speech and of the press has been abridged; the right to choose their representatives has been made of no effect; murders, robberies and arsons have been instigated and encouraged, and the offenders have been allowed to go unpunished; that all these things have been done with the knowledge, sanction and procurement of the present administration; and that for this high crime against the Constitution, the Union and humanity, we arraign the administration, the President, his advisers, agents, supporters, apologists and accessories, either before or after the fact, before the country and before the world; and that it is our fixed purpose to bring the actual perpetrators of these atrocious outrages and their accomplices to a sure and condign punishment hereafter.
Resolved, That Kansas should immediately be admitted as a State of the Union, with her present free constitution, as at once the most effectual way of securing to her citizens the enjoyment of the rights and privileges to which they are entitled, and of ending the civil strife now raging in her territory.
Resolved, That the highwayman's plea that "Might makes right," embodied in the Ostend circular, was in every respect unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and dishonor upon any government or people that gave it their sanction.
Resolved, That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean, by the most central and practicable route, is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country, and that the Federal government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction; and, as an auxiliary thereto, to the immediate construction of an emigrant route on the line of the railroad.
Resolved, That appropriations by Congress for the improvement of rivers and harbors of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of our existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution and justified by the obligation of government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.
Resolved, That we invite the affiliation and co-operation of freemen of all parties, however differing from us in other respects, in support of the principles herein declared, and believing that the spirit of our institutions, as well as the Constitution of our country, guarantees liberty of conscience and equality of rights among citizens, we oppose all legislation impairing their security.
The time now came to ballot for a candidate for President, but he had been practically decided on some time before the Convention met. The merits of four men had been thoroughly discussed in connection with this honor—Salmon P. Chase and Judge John McLean of Ohio, William H. Seward, of New York, and John C. Fremont of California. Senator Chase had been too open in his opposition to slavery to be available, and his name was withdrawn; Mr. Seward, influenced by Thurlow Weed, did not wish the nomination, and this fact became known several months before the Convention. McLean, of the United States Supreme Court, was strongly favored by many, because it was felt that he alone of the candidates mentioned could carry Pennsylvania, which had already been figured as the pivotal State. The candidate deemed most available was John C. Fremont, whose political experience had been brief, a term from California in the United States Senate, and he would therefore arouse no bitter personal antagonism by reason of his political record. He had been a Democrat, but was in accord with the principles of the Republican Party; in addition, he had a good record in the Army, and was widely known for his explorations in the Rockies. His wife was the daughter of Senator Thomas C. Benton, of Missouri, and altogether he was an attractive and, it appeared at the time, a shrewdly selected candidate.
[Illustration: John C. Fremont, First Republican Candidate for President.]
There were no formal nominating speeches, but the names of all who had been discussed as candidates had been mentioned in the many enthusiastic speeches which were made during the Convention. An informal ballot gave Fremont 359; McLean 190; Sumner 2; Seward 1. A formal ballot was then immediately taken and Fremont received the entire vote of the Convention except 37 for McLean, 1 for Seward, and the Virginia vote, which was not cast because its delegation was not organized; the nomination was then made unanimous. The next day an informal ballot was taken for Vice-President. William L. Dayton, of New Jersey, received 253 votes; Abraham Lincoln, 110; N. P. Banks, 46; David Wilmot, 43; Charles Sumner, 35, and some votes each for Henry Wilson, Jacob Collamer, Joshua R. Giddings, Cassius M. Clay, Henry C. Carey, John A. King, Thomas Ford, Whitefield S. Johnson, Aaron S. Pennington and Samuel C. Pomeroy. Mr. Lincoln was not a candidate for the office, and was named without his knowledge, and he was greatly surprised, several days later, when he learned of it. When his name was put in nomination—the second mentioned—inquiries as to who he was came from all parts of the hall. Mr. Lincoln's speech before the Bloomington Convention, in Illinois, had turned the eyes of the Republican Party in that State to him as its leader, and the Illinois Delegation to the National Convention knew well enough who he was, but his time had not yet come. Mr. Dayton received the nomination for Vice-President on the formal ballot and it was made unanimous. After appointing a committee, headed by Henry S. Lane, of Indiana, to notify the candidates of their nominations, and listening to a number of enthusiastic speeches, the Convention adjourned on June 19th. In one of the speeches reference was made to "Free Speech, Free Press, Free Soil, Free Kansas," when one of the delegates interrupted, "and Fremont"; the utterance and its amendment, with some abridgment, became one of the rallying cries of the campaign.
The selection of Mr. Fremont had also been influenced by the fact that he was looked upon with favor by those delegates who withdrew from the American or Know-Nothing Convention. The Know-Nothings had held their Convention on February 22d, and had nominated Millard Fillmore for President and A. J. Donelson for Vice-President. The delegates from New England, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Iowa, being unable to secure an Anti-Slavery Extension Plank in the Platform, seceded and soon afterwards nominated Fremont for President, and William F. Johnston, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President.
On September 17th the remnant of the Whig Party met at Philadelphia and adopted the nominees of the American Party, Fillmore and Donelson. This Convention and their votes in the ensuing election marked the last appearance of the Whig Party in politics.
The Democrats held their Convention in Cincinnati on June 3d, before the Republican Convention was held, and nominated James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, for President, and John C. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, for Vice-President. President Pierce and Senator Douglas were both candidates for the presidential nomination, but were withdrawn on the fifteenth and sixteenth ballots because the South had already selected a candidate. Mr. Buchanan had been absent as Minister to England during the turmoil over the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. In addition, he came from a Northern State, and was therefore doubly attractive as a candidate; for the South, with its 112 electoral votes, needed 37 more votes to elect their candidate, and Pennsylvania, with 27 votes, was looked on as the pivotal State.
The Democratic Platform, as usual, denounced the Abolitionists, and repeated its hollow promise of 1852, that the party would resist all attempts at renewing the agitation of the slavery question. It denounced the Republican Party as "sectional, and subsisting exclusively on slavery agitation," and it contained the following remarkable and artfully worded plank:
"Resolved, That we recognize the right of the people of all the Territories, including Kansas and Nebraska, acting through the legally and fairly expressed will of a majority of actual residents, and whenever the number of their inhabitants justifies it, to form a Constitution, with or without domestic slavery, and be admitted into the Union upon terms of perfect equality with other States." The ambiguous part of this plank was the insertion of the right of the inhabitants to form a Constitution with or without domestic slavery. Mr. Douglas and the other Democratic speakers argued in the North that this meant that the people of the Territory had the right to decide for or against slavery, but the South looked upon it as fully protecting slavery in any Territory until a Constitution could be formed. In the North and South the plank obtained votes for the party, but the votes were cast in the respective sections on diametrically opposed grounds.
The political situation in this campaign was somewhat complicated at first by the presentation of so many candidates, for, in addition to the candidates already named, the Abolitionists presented a ticket, as did also a number of Americans, who seceded from the second convention of that party, but the situation gradually resolved itself into a contest between Buchanan, Fremont and Fillmore. No electoral tickets were presented for Fremont in the slave States, and the fact that Fillmore could not carry any of the free States weakened him in the South, and it was seen that Buchanan would receive the solid electoral vote of the South, and that the contest would therefore be between Buchanan and Fremont for the Northern electoral votes.