These objections equally apply to what, for brevity, I will call the Executive Proviso. There is no difference between it and the Wilmot except in the mode of effecting the object; and in that respect I must say that the latter is much the least objectionable. It goes to its object openly, boldly, and distinctly. It claims for Congress unlimited power over the Territories, and proposes to assert it over Territories acquired from Mexico, by a positive prohibition of slavery.

Not so the Executive Proviso. It takes an indirect course, and in order to elude the Wilmot Proviso, and thereby avoid encountering the united and determined resistance of the South, it denies, by implication, the authority of Congress to legislate for the Territories, and claims the right as belonging exclusively to the inhabitants of the Territories. But to effect the object of excluding the South, it takes care, in the meantime, to let in immigrants freely from the northern States and all other quarters except from the South, which it takes special care to exclude by holding up to them the danger of having their slaves liberated under the Mexican laws. The necessary consequence is to exclude the South from the Territory just as effectually as would the Wilmot Proviso. The only difference in this respect is, that what one proposes to effect directly and openly, the other proposes to effect indirectly and covertly.

Having now shown what cannot save the Union, I return to the question with which I commenced,— How can the Union be saved? There is but one way by which it can with any certainty; and that is by a full and final settlement, on the principle of justice, of

all the questions at issue between the two sections. The South asks for justice, simple justice, and less she ought not to take. She has no compromise to offer but the constitution, and no concession or surrender to make. She has already surrendered so much that she has little left to surrender. Such a settlement would go to the root of the evil, and remove all cause of discontent, by satisfying the South that she could remain honorably and safely in the Union, and thereby restore the harmony and fraternal feelings between the sections which existed anterior to the Missouri agitation. Nothing else can, with any certainty, finally and forever settle the question at issue, terminate agitation, and save the Union.

But can this be done? Yes, easily; not by the weaker party, for it can of itself do nothing-not even protect itself-but by the stronger. The North has only to will it to accomplish it—to do justice by conceding to the South an equal right in the acquired territory, and to do hre duty by causing the stipulations relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfilledto cease the agitation of the slave question, and to provide for the insertion of a provision in the constitution, by an amendment, which will restore to the South, in substance, the power she possessed of protecting herself before the equilibrium between the sections was destroyed by the action of this government. There will be no difficulty in devising such a provision-one that will protect the South, and which at the same time will improve and strengthen the government instead of impairing and weakening it.

But will the North agree to this? It is for her to

answer the question. But, I will say, she cannot refuse if she has half the love of the Union which she professes to have, or without justly exposing herself to the charge that her love of power and aggrandizement is far greater than her love of the Union. At all events, the responsibility of saving the Union rests. on the North, and not on the South. The South cannot save it by any act of hers, and the North may save it without any sacrifice whatever, unless to do justice and to perform her duties under the constitution should be regarded by her as a sacrifice.

It is time, Senators, that there should be an open and manly avowal on all sides as to what is intended to be done. If the question is not now settled, it is uncertain whether it ever can hereafter be; and we, as the representatives of the States of this Union regarded as governments, should come to a distinct understanding as to our respective views, in order to ascertain whether the great questions at issue can be settled or not. If you, who represent the stronger portion, cannot agree to settle them on the broad principle of justice and duty, say so; and let the States we both represent agree to separate and part in peace.

If you are unwilling we should part in peace, tell us so; and we shall know what to do when you reduce the question to submission or resistance. If you remain silent, you will compel us to infer by your acts what you intend. In that case California will become the test question. If you admit her under all the difficulties that oppose her admission, you compel us to infer that you intend to exclude us from the whole of the acquired Territories, with the intention of de

stroying irretrievably the equilibrium between the two sections. We should be blind not to perceive in that case that your real objects are power and aggrandizement, and infatuated, not to act accordingly.

I have now, Senators, done my duty in expressing my opinions fully, freely, and candidly on this solemn occasion. In doing so I have been governed by the motives which have governed me in all the stages of the agitation of the slavery question since its commencement. I have exerted myself during the whole period to arrest it, with the intention of saving the Union if it could be done; and if it could not, to save the section where it has pleased Providence to cast my lot, and which I sincerely believe has justice and the constitution on its side. Having faithfully done my duty to the best of my ability, both to the Union and my section, throughout this agitation, I shall have the consolation, let what will come, that I am free from all responsibility.

་

Cass, Lewis, a noted American soldier and politician, born at Exeter, N. H., Oct. 9, 1782; died at Detroit, Mich., June 17, 1866. He served with distinction in the second war with England, and was governor of Michigan Territory, 1813-31. After the expiration of his governorship he continued before the public as Secretary of War, 1831-36; minister to France, 1836-42; United States Senator, 1845-48, and again, 1849-57; and Secretary of State under Buchanan, 1857-60. In 1848 he was an unsuccessful presidential candidate. As a public speaker he was generally popular.

ON THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE.

DELIVERED BEFORE THE ASSOCIATION OF THE ALUMNI

OF HAMILTON COLLEGE, AUGUST 25, 1830.

THIS is not an age of speculation, but of action. Knowledge is spreading from nation to nation, bringing all within the sphere of its operation. Its immediate tendency is to reduce the artificial distinctions which time and power have created, and to establish a common standard of virtue and intelligence. By this standard princes and people must be judged. We cannot be idle spectators of these efforts and their effects. We are connected with other nations by ties of intercourse not easily severed; and we are ourselves deeply interested in the operation of those causes which can meliorate the condition of mankind, either in their social, political, or moral relations; which can add stability to our institutions, prosperity to our country, contentment to our citizens. And of all these causes the progress of knowledge is the life-preserving prin