Not satisfied with going beyond the pale of civilization and common decency, to say nothing of courtesy, the legislature followed up these resolutions with an act to banish, fine and imprison any person entering the State for the purpose of hindering or questioning the operation of the laws relative to free persons of color.

These resolves and acts were promulgated before the presence of Mr. Hoar became generally known. Charleston rose to a ferment of rage. The sheriff called on him to say that his mission was considered "an insult to the State;" that the people were highly incensed; his life was in imminent peril and the best thing to do was to leave the city at once.

The attorney-general wrote a letter practically suggesting a resort to lynching-that is, he wrote that Mr. Hoar should be warned to leave in order to avoid being lynched, which "would be a disgrace to the city." He did not care for Mr. Hoar, apparently, but did not like to "disgrace" Charleston by hanging him.

The venerable emissary declined to depart, saying he had been charged in a legal way with a legal duty, and he could not leave without attending to it. As warnings increased he offered to make up a case and take it to the Supreme Court for the purpose of receiving a decision in the most remote way possible. This offer the sheriff accepted; but as the flesh-brokers saw that the matter would thus be fairly brought before a court where their chances for success were doubtful, they ordered him to withdraw it and renewed their clamors for Mr. Hoar's instant departure.

Finally, a bank president and two eminent lawyers, one of them McGrath, subsequently a leader in the Rebellion, called and half ordered Mr. Hoar to leave the city. He refused, saying he had come in a lawful manner, had kept the peace and the laws, and could not be rightfully disturbed. They replied that they "would return soon and escort him to the boat." He replied that, although he was too old to

fight, he would not fly, and therefore they would find him there on their return to be disposed of as they might see fit.

As they turned to depart Mr. Hoar observed that his daughter was with him, to which Rose, the bank president, replied: "It is that which creates our embarrassment."

They were embarrassed in deciding how to dispose of him in the presence of his daughter without employing too much barbarity. If he had been alone it is easy to surmise what would have become of him. He was "escorted" out of the city, as it was, with his daughter by his side, and returned in sorrow and humiliation to Massachusetts.

The outlawry of South Carolina, which has been painfully demonstrated again and again during the last fifty years, in this case took a more wantonly discourteous form than it ever had before. Although the Constitution of the United States declares that "citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States," she vauntingly defied and violated that provision not only as to the seamen temporarily entering her ports, but hustled from her midst Samuel Hoar and daughter, two of the most respectable, peaceable, refined and accomplished children of the Old Bay State.

But the Democratic disgrace of South Carolina was not without company. At the same time Mr. Hoar went to Charleston, Henry Hubbard, a respectable and able lawyer, was sent to New Orleans on a similar errand. His arrival there precipitated demonstrations hardly less violent than had that of Hoar in Charleston. Pierre Soule, subsequently the brilliant United States Senator from Louisiana, called with others and warned Mr. Hubbard to leave, as a general mob outbreak was apparent, and lynching was prepared for and threatened. Mr. Hubbard stated that he was not an Abolitionist, did not intend to infringe or comment upon the rights of the Pelican State, but only hoped to protect citizens of

Massachusetts imprisoned and sold into slavery without crime.

This disclaimer only added fuel to the flames. Several former citizens of Massachusetts, observing that Mr. Hubbard was about to be publicly hanged, begged him to leave, which he did. Returning home he made a brief report of his flight to escape death at the hands of the "respectable and law-abiding" people of Louisiana, and resigned.

Gayerre's History of Louisiana, written, it must be presumed, for the use of the young in schools, sanctions the hustling of Hubbard out of New Orleans by a mob, and declares with complacent relish that the Massachusetts agent "was not permitted to accomplish all the mischief that was intended." By mischief he meant preventing the free citizens of Massachusetts from being sold into bondage in Louisiana.

These flagrant inroads upon civilization and ordinary comity were laid before Congress, but that body, in deeper slavery to the Democratic masters of the South than were even the blacks themselves, refused to take any action. Mr. Hoar in his report inquired:

*

*

Has the Constitution of the United States the least practical validity or binding force in South Carolina? She prohibits, not only by ber mobs, but by her legislature, the residence of a free white citizen of Massachusetts within the limits of South Carolina whenever she thinks his presence there inconsistent with her policy. Are the other States of the Union to be regarded as the conquered provinces of South Carolina?

Thus the Southern States, determined that everything, including decency, courtesy, humanity and the Constitution, must be subordinate to the interests of bondage, continued these cruel laws upon their statute books until cause and consequence went down together before the fire and sword of the Rebellion.

CHAPTER VIII.

TEXAS, LOPEZ, OREGON, CALIFORNIA.

Texas Relinquished for Florida-Slave-holding Settlers on Mexican Soil-The Machinations of Adventurers and Desperadoes-Americans Forbidden by Mexico to Settle in Texas-Sam Houston's Conquest-Texas Becomes a Quasi-Republic-It Must be Annexed or the Union Dissolved-Protest and Withdrawal of the Mexican Minister--Annexation Followed by War with Mexico-Remarkable Prophecies Against the Slave Power-Expedition of Southerners Under Narciso Lopez to Cuba-Defeat and Death-Young Democrats Captured and Carried to Spain-The Spanish Consul at New Orleans Mobbed-California With or Without Slavery-More Slave States or Disunion-Compromise of 1850-The Barbarous Fugitive Slave Act-Webster's Speech and Prophecy.

In 1803 when Louisiana was ceded by France to the United States, Spain claimed that her cession of the territory to France which the French made over to the United States, did not include Texas, and the United States held that it did— that is, those who favored the extension of slavery so held. Thus Texas became disputed territory, claimed by both this Republic and Mexico, which was a Spanish province. The inhabitants of the slave States rushed upon the disputed territory, formed settlements, introduced slavery, and from 1806 to 1816 made several unsuccessful attempts to forcibly wrest the country from Mexico. In one of these, in 1813, 2,500 Americans and Mexicans were killed, as well as 700 inhabit ants of San Antonio.

In 1819 the river Sabine was established as the boundary between Texas and Louisiana, and the United States, in order to quiet the clamors of the Georgia and Carolina slave masters, relinquished her claim to Texas as a part of the consid eration in purchasing from Spain the territory of Florida.

Citizens of this Republic, however, mostly agents and proprietors of slavery in the South, continued to pour into Texas, and by every known means fomented trouble and rebellion. They defied Mexican laws, committed numerous outrages and counseled revolution. In 1829 slavery was abolished in Mexico, yet Southern adventurers and desperadoes continued to carry slaves into Texas, in open defiance of Mexican law.

These disturbances and insurrections grew into such aggravated forms that the Mexican government was compelled to forbid any more Americans settling within her borders. Soon after, in 1833, led by the agents of slavery, an attempt was made to form Texas into an independent Mexican State, which failed.

Secret agencies were formed throughout the South for enlisting men to capture the Texan Republic, and in 1835 Sam Houston, of Tennessee, succeeded in this plot, and formed a provisional government, and, being chosen commander-inchief, received aid enough from the South to enable him to drive the Mexicans out of Texas. Santa Anna invaded the country, but was finally routed at San Jacinto, and Texas became an independent republic. Her independence was, with indecent haste, acknowledged by the United States in 1837, and by European countries two years later.

Now began a conscienceless and desperate struggle for possession of this new republic, Secretary Calhoun announcing that the United States would take possession of it as soon as possible. The Southern Democrats demanded its annexation because its accession would open up a new and vast field to slavery, and ultimately make several new States with Senators and Representatives to overbalance those of the free North. The Free-Soilers opposed the scheme for that very "We want it," said Hamilton, "to give a Gibralter to the South," and said Henry A. Wise, "to give more weight to her end of the lever."

reason.