not in the range of the whole vocabulary of
the English language, words strong enough
or pungent enough to express the indignant
surprise of that body, or the outraged feelings
of the people of Maryland Does history
hear me out in this fact? Let me point to
my authority. I will read from the Journal
of the proceedings of the House of Delegates
in 1861, the resolutions then offered,
You all recollect the circumstances under
which that election was made. It was my
first experiment in public life. I recollect
being in the Senate at the time that Governor
Bradford delivered his inaugural, in which
he spoke of the unprecedented majority of
30,000 in favor of the Union party. The vote
of the preceding year for the Presidential
candidate, Mr. Lincoln, was 92,000 votes. In
this hall, where we are now assembled, sal
but six members of the opposition. Every
other member, with the exception of these
six members was a friend of the present ad-
ministration, The resolutions to which I
have referred were introduced in consequence
of the excited and agitated discussion which
had taken place in the city of Washington
in regard to emancipation in the District of
Columbia, and it was anterior to the signature
of the President to the District emancipation
bill. These resolutions were introduced by
Mr. Price; and they were voted for by every
solitary member of that body then present—
58. The resolutions were these :
" The General Assembly of Maryland have
seen with concern certain indications at the
seat of the General Government of an inter-
ference with the institution of slavery in the
seceded States, and cannot hesitate to express
its sentiments and those of. the people they
represent, in regard to a policy so unwise
and mischievous. This war is prosecuted by
the nation with but one object, that namely
of a restoration of the Union, just as it was
when the rebellion broke out. The rebellious
States are to be brought back to their places
in the Union, without change or limitation
of their constitutional rights. In the lan-
guage of the resolution adopted by both
Houses of Congress, at its extra session in
July last, with remarkable unanimity, this
war is declared to be prosecuted not 'in any
spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of
conquest or subjugation, or purpose of over-
throwing or interfering with the rights or
established institutions of these States, but
to defend and maintain the supremacy of the
Constitution and to preserve the Union with
all the dignity, equality, and rights of the
several States unimpaired, and that as soon
as those objects are accomplished, the war
ought to cease.'
" The objects and purposes of the war thus
impressively declared, are those alone which
the nation can rightfully contemplate in its
prosecution; and the moment the object of
the war changes from a simple restoration of |
the Union, as known to the Constitution to
something else in conflict with the guarantees
in that instrument, from that moment the
war itself changes its character. The duty of
the government in a great crisis like the
present is a very plain one—it is to preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the
United States; and, thankful as we have
reason to be, for our exemption from the
devastation and ruin of civil war, we rely
further upon the wisdom and firmness of the
President in the discharge of the high and
solemn trust committed to his hands, to resist
and rebuke all attempts from any and from
every quarter to convert this war into a
crusade against the institution of domestic
slavery as it exists in the Southern States,
under the guarantees of the Constitution, or
to take advantage of the troubled condition
of our country, for the gratification of per-
sonal views or sectional prejudices."
We had the honor, Mr. President, of serv-
ing together in the Senate on that occasion.
Mr. Charles Goldsborough introduced at that
session what was called a Convention Bill.
I do not see the hill here, but I see the vote,
and if I mistake in regard to that bill I hope
the President will correct me. The last clause
of that bill, if my memory serves me right,
was that in the event of the people determin-
ing in favor of calling a Convention, this
Convention when assembled should pass no
law interfering with the existing relation of
master and slave as now preserved by the
Constitution of this State. Every member of
the Senate, save and except the honorable
President and Mr. Whitaker, voted infavor
of it. Here is the record :
Affirmative—Messrs. Bayne, Billingsley,
Blackiston, Denison, Everett, Goldsborough,
of Dorchester, Harrison, Heckart, Jenkins,
Lankford, Sellman, Smith, Townsend, Waters,
Watkins, Willis—16.
My honorable friend from Calvert (Mr.
Briscoe) was absent.
Negative—Messrs. Goldsborough, President,
Whitaker—2.
This was in 1862. I know the argument
the gentleman is going to urge in regard to
that matter; that the Legislature of Maryland
had no right to put in such a provision, that
they had no authority to bind a Constitu-
tional Convention. Granted. But what was
then the state of the country. It was eminent-
ly proper that Maryland should then declare
her opinion, her political status in regard to
this great question, because it was the all-
absorbing question of the country. She did
so express herself. Although when the Sen-
ate bill reached the House of Delegates, that
was expunged on the ground that they bad
no such constitutional or legal power; yet
it did not change the state of public opinion.
Recollect that a larger majority of Union
members then represented the State of Mary-
land than represents them in this Convention; |
