age; his features expressed great mental and moral energy, and his voice was clear and musical.

On taking the chair, Mr. Cushing addressed the Convention with great vigor. He declared it to be the mission of the Democratic party to "reconcile popular freedom with constituted order," and to maintain "the sacred

reserved rights of the Sovereign States." He declared the Republicans to be those who were "laboring to overthrow the Constitution," and "aiming to produce in this country a permanent sectional conspiracya traitorous sectional conspiracy of one half of the States of the Union against the other half; those who, impelled by the stupid and half insane spirit of faction and fanaticism, would hurry our land on to revolution and to civil war." He declared it to be the "high and noble part of the Democratic party of the Union to withstand-to strike down and conquer" these "banded enemies of the Constitution." These utterances formed a key-note that harmonized with the feelings of a large body of the delegates, and was a symphony to their action.

CALEB CUSHING.

At the close of the second day the Convention was in fair working order. Some contests for seats were undecided, there being two sets of delegates from New York and Illinois; but the vitally important Committee on Resolutions, composed of one delegate from each State, had been appointed without much delay. It was the business of that committee to perform the difficult and delicate task of making a platform of principles for the action. of the Convention, and the stand-point of the party during the approaching canvass and election. For this purpose it had been sent to Masonic Hall, at five o'clock in the afternoon; and then and there the electric spark, which kindled the prepared combustibles of civil war into a quick and devouring flame, was elicited by the attrition of radically opposing ideas.

The subject of Slavery, as we have observed, was the troubling spirit of the Convention. It appeared in the open Hall, and it was specially ap parent in the room of the Committee on Resolutions. A large number of the delegates from the Slave-labor States had come instructed; and were resolved, to demand from the Convention a candidate and a platform which should promise a guaranty for the speedy and practical recognition, by the General Government and the people, of the system of Slavery as a national and permanent institution. Impelled by this resolution, they had determined to prevent the nomination of Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois (an able statesman, and effective popular orator, then in the full vigor of middle age), who was the most prominent candidate for the suffrages of the Convention. They opposed him because he was so committed to the doctrine of "Popular Sovereignty," as it was called.-that is to say, the doctrine of the right of the people of any Territory of the Republic to decide whether Slavery should 1 Official Proceedings of the Democratic National Convention, held in 1860, at Charleston and Baltimore, page 17.

THE CINCINNATI PLATFORM OFFERED.

21

or should not exist within its borders,-that he could not, with honor or consistency, make any further concessions to the Slave interest. This, and the positive committal of the Democratic party to a pro-slavery policy in the administration of the National Government, were the chief business of several delegates in the Convention who were led by such men as John Slidell, of Louisiana, and William L. Yancey, of Alabama, then, and long before, arch-conspirators against the life of the Republic.

In June, 1856, a National Democratic Convention was held at Cincinnati, when James Buchanan was nominated for President of the United States. A platform was then framed, composed of many resolutions and involved declarations of principles, drawn by the hand of Benjamin F. Hallet, of Boston. These embodied the substance of resolutions on the subject of Slavery, drawn up by Benjamin F. Butler, of Massachusetts (afterwards a major-general in the armies of the Republic), and adopted by the Democratic Convention of that State. On the topic of Slavery and State supremacy, the resolutions were clear and explicit. They recognized the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty as "embodying the only sound and safe solution of the Slavery question, upon which the great national idea of the people of this whole country can repose in its determined conservation of the Union, and non-interference of Congress with Slavery in the Territories or in the District of Columbia." This doctrine harmonized with the spirit of popular government; and the platform, of which it was an essential part, was accepted by the Democratic party throughout the Union, as a true exposition of their principles and policy. With this understanding, Mr. Butler, now a member of the Committee on Resolutions sitting in Masonic Hall, on that warm April evening in 1860, proposed as a platform for the Convention and the party the one constructed at Cincinnati four years before, without addition or alteration. He offered a resolution to that effect, when, to the surprise of the representatives of the Free-labor States, the proposition was rejected by a vote of seventeen States (only two of them free) against fifteen States. Recently created Oregon gave the casting vote against it, and, with California, was arrayed on the side of the Slave-labor States.

The majority now proposed an affirmance of the Cincinnati platform, but with additional resolutions, the most vital of which declared that Congress had no power to abolish Slavery in the Territories, and that Territorial Legislatures had no power to abolish Slavery in any Territory, nor to prohibit the introduction of Slavery therein, nor to exclude Slavery therefrom, or to impair or destroy the right of property in slaves by any legislation whatever. This resolution was a positive rejection of the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty. The minority of the committee, composed wholly of delegates from the Free-labor States, and representing a majority of the Presidential electors (one hundred and seventy-two against one hundred and twenty-seven), were amazed because of the bad faith and arrogant assumptions of their Southern brethren. It was clearly seen that the latter were united, evidently by preconcert, in a determination to demand from the people of the Free-labor States further and most offensive concessions to their greed for political domination.

The manhood of the minority was evoked, and they resolved that the limit of concession was reached, and that they would yield to no further

22

REBELLION OF THE MINORITY.

demands. They at once proposed an affirmance of the Cincinnati platform in letter and spirit, at the same time expressing, by resolution, a willingness to abide by any decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on questions of constitutional law. They offered a word for conciliation by denouncing, in another resolution, the acts of certain State Legislatures known as Personal Liberty Laws, as "hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effects." Mr. Butler was opposed to making even this concession, and adhered to his proposition for a simple affirmance of the.Cincinnati platform.

The labors of the Committee resulted, on the evening of the fourth day of the session, in the production of three reports, and on the following morning these were submitted to the Convention: the majority report by William W. Avery, of North Carolina; the minority report, drawn by H. B. Payne, of Ohio, and a resolution for the affirmance of the Cincinnati platform without alteration, by B. F. Butler.

• 1860.

Mr. Avery opened debate on the subject, by frankly assuring the Convention that if the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty should be adopted as the doctrine of the Democratic party, the members of the Convention from the Slave-labor States, and their constituents, would consider it as dangerous and subversive of their rights, as the adoption of the principle of Congressional interference or prohibition. From that time until Monday, the 30th of April," the debate was continued, in the midst of much confusion and disorder in the Convention. The streets of Charleston in the pleasant evenings resounded with music, the speeches of politicians, and the huzzas of the multitude. Society there was in a bubble of excitement, and the final vote of the Convention on the resolutions was awaited with the most lively interest. The hour for that decision at length arrived. It was on the morning of the 30th." The Hall was densely crowded. A vote was first taken on Butler's resolution. It was rejected by a decisive majority. The minority report-the Douglas platform-which had been slightly modified, was now offered by B. M. Samuels, of Iowa. It was adopted by a handsome majority. In the Convention now, as in the Committee, the voices of Oregon and California, Free-labor States, were with those of the Slave-labor States.

April, 1860.

Preconcerted rebellion now lifted its head defiantly. The spirit manifested in the resolutions, specches, and deportment of the representatives of the Slave interest, now assumed tangible form, in action. L. P. Walker, who was afterward one of the most active insurgents against the National Government, as the so-called Secretary of War of Jefferson Davis, led the way. He spoke for the delegates from Alabama, who had been instructed by the convention that appointed them not to acquiesce in or submit to any Popular Sovereignty platform, and, in the event of such being adopted, to withdraw from the Convention. That contingency had now occurred, and the Alabama delegates formally withdrew, in accordance with a previous arrangement. They were followed by all the delegates from Mississippi, all but two from Louisiana, all from Florida and Texas, three from Arkansas, and all from South Carolina. On the following morning, twentysix of the thirty-four Georgia delegates withdrew; and Senator Bayard and Representative Whiteley, delegates from Delaware, also left the Conven

DISRUPTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

23

tion and joined the seceders, who had repaired to St. Andrew's Hall the previous evening for consultation.

The disruption of the Democratic party represented in Convention was now complete. The wedge of Slavery had split it beyond restoration. The event had been amply provided for in secret; and when D. C. Glenn, of Mississippi, in announcing the withdrawal of the delegates from that State, said, "I tell Southern men here, and, for them, I tell the North, that in less than sixty days you will find a united South standing side by side with us," there was long and vehement cheering, especially from the South Carolinians, who were joyous over the result. Charleston, that night, was the scene of unbounded pleasurable excitement.

So the arrogant representatives of the Slave interest, in contempt of the democratic principle of acquiescence in the fairly expressed will of the majority, which lies at the foundation of all order in popular government, and with an eye single to the accomplishment of an intensely selfish end, began a rebellion, first against the dominant party then in possession of the National Government, and secondly against that Government itself, which resulted in a bloody civil war, and the utter destruction of the vast and cherished interest, for the conservation of which they cast down the gauntlet defiantly and invited the arbitrament of the sword.

1860.

At twilight, on the eighth day of the session of the Convention, May, when the excitement occasioned by the withdrawal of many delegates had somewhat subsided, that body proceeded to ballot for a candidate for the Presidency of the Republic. At least two hundred votes were necessary to a choice. Stephen A. Douglas led off with at least fifty less than the requisite number. There was very little variation as the voting went on. Finally, on the tenth day, when fifty-seven ballotings had been taken with no prospect of a change, it was agreed to adjourn the Convention, to meet in the city of Baltimore, in Maryland, on the eighteenth day of June following. It was also resolved to invite the Democracy of the several States to make provision for supplying all vacancies in their respective delegations to the Convention when it should reassemble.

The seceding delegates partially organized a convention at St. Andrew's Hall, on the evening after their withdrawal from the regular body. On the following day, at

noon, they assembled at Military Hall, when they chose James A. Bayard, of Delaware, to be their president. They declared themselves, by resolution offered by Mr. Yancey, to be entitled to the style of the

In this building, as we have observed, the Secession Convention of South Carolina politicians was assembled when it passed the Ordinance of Secession, on the 20th of December, 1860.

24

PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECEDERS.

"Constitutional Convention," and sneeringly called those whom they had abandoned, the "Rump Convention." On the second day of their session they met in the Theater.' The dress circle was crowded with the women of Charleston. They had hitherto filled the galleries of the Institute Hall. Their sympathies were with the seceders, and they now followed them. President Bayard, a dignified, courtly gentleman, sat near the foot-lights of the stage. The painted scene behind him was that of the Borgia Palace,' around which clustered associations of great crimes. The actors on this occasion, contrary to precedent, occupied the pit, or parquette; and there they performed only the first act of a drama to which the whole civilized world became amazed spectators. They adopted the report of the majority, offered by Mr. Avery in the regular Convention, as their platform of principles, but went no further then. They refrained from nominating a candidate for the Presidency of the Republic, and refused to listen to a proposition to send forth an address to the people. Their appointed work for the present was finished. They had accomplished the positive disruption of the Democratic party, which, as a Southern historian of the war says, had become "demoralized" on "the Slavery question," and were "unreliable and rotten," because they held independent views on that great topic of national discussion. The paralysis or destruction of that party would give the Presidency to a Republican candidate, and then the conspirators would have a wished-for pretext for rebellion. The seceders were confident that their work had been effectually performed, and their desired object attained. They well knew that their class held such absolute political control in the Slave-labor States, that the great mass of their constituency would applaud their action and follow their lead. Reposing upon this knowledge, they could afford to wait for further developments; so, on the evening of the 3d of May, they adjourned to meet in the city of Richmond, in Virginia, on the second Monday of June following, for further action. To that Convention they invited the Democracy of the country who might sympathize with their movement and their platform to send representatives.

• 1860.

The seceders reassembled in Metropolitan Hall (on Franklin Street, near Governor), in Richmond, at the appointed time, namely, on Monday, the 11th day of June. In the mean time some of the leading Southern Congressmen, among whom were Robert Toombs, of Georgia, and other conspirators, had issued an address from Washington City, urging that the Richmond Convention should refrain from all important action, and adjourn to Baltimore, and there, re-entering the regular Convention, if possible defeat the nomination of Mr. Douglas, and thus, as they said, with well-feigned honesty of expression, "make a final effort to preserve the harmony and unity of the Democratic party." The consequence was, that the Convention at Richmond

This was the fourth place in which the conspirators met in the course of forty-eight hours. All of these public buildings are now (1865) in ruins.

2 History of the National Political Conventions in 1860: by M. Halstead, an Eye-witness, page 100. 3 First Year of the War: by Edward A. Pollard. Richmond, 1862, page 28.

4 When, in 1832 and 1833, Calhoun and his associates in South Carolina attempted to strike a deadly blow at our nationality, they made a protective tariff, which they called an oppression of the cotton-growing States, the pretext. In May, 1888, President Jackson, in a letter to the Rev. A. J. Crawford, of Georgia, after speaking of the trouble he had endured on account of the Nullifiers, said, "The Tariff was only the pretext, and Disunion and a Southern Confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the Negro or Slavery question.”