gentleman wants people to administer this
government who believe that the State of
Maryland ought to separate from the United
States, and to set up an independent nation-
ality of her own, in order that here the prin-
ciples of free government may be established
If the State of Maryland has been unable to
protect herself in this war, and to protect her
citizens whose rights have been ruthlessly
trampled upon, I ask how she is to be ex-
pected in the future to be able to protect the
lives and liberties of the people of the State?
This war has shown the people of Maryland
that there is no safety for them except in the
preservation of this government.
What would the gentleman from Wash-
ington counity think of the perpetuation for
all time of the state of things along on the
Western Potomac? Does not everybody know
that if the Potomac is made the line of divis-
ion, the western part of the State must be-
come depopulated; that these guerilla bands
which for the last two years have been con-
solidating in that neighborhood, would come
over and prey upon them at will? Could
anybody live there for the next twenty years?
No, sir; the condition of things would arise
which has prevailed in France and other
countries in times past, when bands of out.
laws trained in civil war roamed through
the country for years together. Men who
have taken up arms in civil conflict upon the
open battle field, will not lay them down for
some time, unless there is a strong power to
force them to do it. It will require some
common government here upon the BORDER=0
line, to prevent the perpetuation of these rob-
ber bands throughout the whole BORDER=0 coun-
try on the Potomac down to Tennessee and
Kentucky. And if Maryland is to separate
from this country or consent to a division as a
public policy, she must become a BORDER=0 State,
whether in the Northern or the Southern
confederacy. We have seen a practical ex-
emplification of the result of being aBORDER=0
State, since the events of 1860; and we know
that Mary land could not be defended. The
State of Maryland must become the Belgium
of this continent, if there is to be any other
result of the war than the restoration of the
government of the United States over at least
a large portion of this country. It is evi-
dent therefore the Union is the absolute ne-
cessity of our people.
The gentlemen object that this oath makes
them swear to support the Union under all
circumstances, it is because we believe that
under all circumstances it must be preserved.
What has usurpation to do with this ques-
tion? Suppose these gentlemen were citi-
zens of France, acting under a king or a
despot, what would they do? If the revo-
lutionist makes an infernal machine and
blows him up, there is an end to the king
only. But if he goes to work and gets
France divided, the result is that each divis- |
ion has its king or its despot. Would it not
' be a more manly act to fight the king, as was
done in our own country, than to divide and
destroy the nationality of the county, and
leave it subject, after its nationality has been
crushed out, to be acted upon by external
forces, worse than the despotism which con-
trolled it?
Are we to be told that the President has
usurped authority in this country? He has,
at any rate, but a four years rule; and be-
sides the principle of impeachment exists in
our constitution by which we may reach
even the President of the United States, if he
shall usurp power not rightfully' belonging
to him. And when a man swears to support
the government, that does not bind him not
to resist usurpation if it is attempted. I do
not care whether Mr. Lincoln has usurped or
not, so far as this question is concerned.
What is the obligation to support the gov-
ernment bounded by? It is necessarily
bounded by the practical power to support
it. It would be very foolish to make a man
swear positively that he would preserve the
government under all circumstances, because
external force might prevent him from pre- .
serving it. I suppose that no one ever
thought this amendment required of any
man to preserve the Union, if impossible, but
it only means that to the extent of his power
and ability, he will try to preserve it,
It has nothing to do even with the ques-
tion of peace. I do not want to see any
man bold office in this State who is in favor
of peace upon any terms other than the en-
tire restoration of the power of the govern-
ment over the whole territory of the Union;
but I do not know that this proposition pre-
vents a man from judging honestly and fairly
about the practical mode of acquiring (power,
further than that it must not be by entering
into any combination the object of which is
to destroy the government and destroy the
Union, Is there a man in the democratic
school who does not deny that his object is
to dissolve the Union? What do they say ?
They say that the war has demonstrated to
them that the government has failed, and
that therefore they may be obliged unwill-
ingly to consent to the dissolution of the
Union. The answer is that the man is to
swear that he will to the best of his ability,
protect and defend it, if in his power to de-
fend it; and that he shall not be estopped
from doing so except by circumstances out-
side of his own will or his own feeling, cir-
cumstances which it is impossible for him to
control.
All I have to say here as to my feelings with
regard to this matter is, that if gentlemen
think this is the result of any partizan feel-
ing or partizan bias, I may be mistaken in
this, as every human being is liable to be
mistaken in his feelings; but if ever I came
to aconclusion solemnly and deliberately, in |
