he likened the condition of the States towards
the Federal Government, to the condition of
the counties of the States towards the States.
Is not that consolidation? Is not that a com-
plete change in our system of laws and our
organic condition? He proposes to do this
with one sweep of the pen, and he said very
frankly that that was a peculiar view of his
own; be admitted that none of the wise men
of the past entertained such views, not even
Alexander Hamilton, the leader of the Federal
party, at the time when he took issue with
Thomas Jefferson upon that very question;
for Alexander Hamilton was in favor of a
concentration of power in the Federal head,
while Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand,
wanted to preserve the States in their original
integrity, and preserve the separate govern-
ment of the States.
My friend went on to proclaim that he was
in favor of, and indeed he repeated the her-
esy—I call it a heresy when practically
considered—contained in the Declaration of
Independence, that "all men are created
equal." That never was and never could be
maintained even by Thomas Jefferson him-
self, the author of that instrument. Does
the gentleman forget that this was a govern-
ment of and tor white men? What was in-
tended to be conveyed in the statement that
"all men are created equal," was that they
are equal as to the benefits of the laws and the
institutions under which they live. It is well
known that no two men in the whole coun-
try are alike. They halve all some peculiari-
ties personal to themselves. There is a dis-
tinctive mark upon every plant, upon every
leaf. You cannot find in the foliage of trees,
two leaves slipped entirely alike. The same
is true of the organization of men. In the
organization of the body, through the wis-
dom of Providence, we differ as much as the
leaves of the trees differ from each other.
Each has some distinctive mark.
My friend passed a beautiful eulogy on
what he supposed would be the future when
freedom shall reign in this land, when the
dark blot of slavery shall be wiped out. How
does the gentleman propose to wipe it out?
By one clause of this Constitution they pro-
pose to abolish slavery, an institution which
has been protected ever since the organization
of the Government, and even before, sup-
ported and maintained by the. common law,
an institution that has been regarded as sacred
under the Constitution of the United States
which the hand of the abolitionist has only
within the last few years polluted by their
doctrines. They propose to put another
clause into this Constitution that the Legis-
lature shall pass no law to pay the citizen for
his property, the property recognized by the
law of the land, and supported by the Con-
stitution. They propose without due consid-
eration to take it from us, without compensation.
My God I Mr. President, to what are |
we coming? I would say, in the language
of Shakespeare,
" Oh judgment thou art fled to brutish beasts'
And men have lost their reason"
Let me then leave my friend from Balti-
more city with the Latin maxim—
" — Oh formose puer,
Nimium ne crede colori."
Mr ABBOTT, I hope the gentleman will
use the English language, which we all un-
derstand.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's, I will try
to do so, but am sure neither Latin or Eng-
lish will be appreciated by the gentleman.
And now let me paly my respects to my par-
ticular friend from Baltimore city, (Mr. Ab-
bott,) and I must say that I have searched
both ancient and modern history and even
heathen mythology, without being able to
find his like. I think it is no where to be
found. And I would suggest to the gentle-
man in the language of Moore :
" I pray you, if 'tis not too far,
Go ask of Nature what you are,
And what she meant to make you."
I have looked over the precedents in all
ages, but I have not met with my friend's
equal yet, except that I think I may perhaps
class him with the Latter Day Saints. He
may be a Mormon, sir. If he has any ethics
at all, they are contrary to good morals and
true politics. He comes here and wants us
to make a Constitution in two days, and
make it all his own way; and seems offended
if every one does not tall into his own views.
Let me tell that gentleman that we are not
making a Constitution for the war; but I
hope we are making the Constitution for
peace. I hope that this war will soon be
ended; and if it is ended I want to live under
equal laws; because I hold that no govern-
ment can be kept together, unless it be based
upon the affection of the people, for that and
that alone is the support of our institutions.
No state of fear will ever keep it together.
No exercise of tyranny will ever keep it to-
gether. But you must address yourself to
the good sense and affection of the people.
in that stands the bulwark of liberty, the
only safeguard of our institutions. I do not
intend, like the gentleman, to bend the obse-
quious knee to the powers that be. I respect
them for their position, I have a right to
differ with them, and I do differ with them,
and declare it boldly, that I differ with them
in all the essential positions which they have
assumed in the administration of the affairs
of this Government. I have this right as an
American citizen, I hold that we are still
free, although the shackles of slavery have
been thrown around us, and Maryland holds
a position which I regret as one of her sons.
I regret that this administration, instead of
exercising the tyranny over the people of Ma-
ryland that it has done, had not appealed to |
