Page images
PDF
EPUB

were Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Fillmore; for Mr. Buchanan had the support of the entire slaveholding interest, and of all who were concerned for the maintenance of the political power of the slavery system. But in the North the Republicans conducted a canvass rivalling that of 1840 in enthusiasm, and having behind it what the "hard cider " campaign lacked, a definite moral purpose and clearly understood policy. Great political clubs were organized, which marched from place to place visiting each other, uniformed and bearing torches. Immense public meetings were held, and the Northern heart was fired as it had never been before. Nevertheless the Republican canvass was destined to end in defeat, although the earlier elections of the autumn indicated a Republican victory. In Vermont more than three fourths of the votes were Republican; and Maine, which had been carried in 1855 by a fusion party of Democrats and "straight" Whigs, was now carried by the Republicans by almost 18,000 majority. But the October elections were unfavorable; for, while Ohio gave a Republican majority, Indiana was lost, and Pennsylvania gave the Democratic candidates on the state ticket a majority over the Republican and Whig vote combined. "The Quakers did not come out," it was said; but all who could read the signs of the time knew that the election was lost for the Republicans.

Thirty-one States participated in the election. The popular and electoral votes are given on the next page.

The count of the electoral vote was enlivened by a scene unlike any which had ever occurred. The usual resolution for counting the votes was adopted. If it was known in advance that there was anything unusual in the certificate of any State, it does not so appear from the record; but, in point of fact, the electors for Wisconsin had not met on the day fixed by law, which day, says the Constitution itself, "shall be the same throughout the United States," but on the next day after. A severe snowstorm had prevented the electors from reaching the capital of the State in season to give their votes on the 3d of December, and they had met and voted on the 4th.

When the votes of Wisconsin were presented at the joint meeting of the two Houses, an objection was made to counting them. The president pro tempore of the Senate, the Hon. James M. Mason, of Virginia, ruled that debate was not in order while the tellers were counting the votes.

The

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

count having been concluded, Mr. Letcher, of Virginia, of the House of Representatives, inquired if it would then be in order to move that the votes of Wisconsin be excluded. The president ruled that it was not in order. Senator Crittenden, of Kentucky, asked if the chair decided "that Congress, in

no form, has power to decide upon the validity or invalidity of a vote." The president, having disclaimed the intention to make any such decision, proceeded to recapitulate the votes, giving Buchanan and Breckinridge 174 each, and Frémont and Dayton 114 each (which included the votes of Wisconsin), and to declare the election of the Democratic candidates. Protests were raised on all sides, from both parties and by members of both Houses. In spite of the declaration of the presiding officer that no debate was in order, a long and rambling debate ensued, in which the most diverse views were advanced. The discussion was at last cut short by the withdrawal of the Senate. The matter was immediately resumed in each House, and discussion was continued for two days. The debates on that occasion are the most valuable for the student of political history, as to this casus omissus of the Constitution, that have ever taken place, because the question was considered without a spirit of partisanship. The vote of Wisconsin would not affect the result, whether counted or rejected. There was much ignorance of the Constitution displayed by many of the speakers; but, on the other hand, some of them discussed the question with profound learning and with great ability.

It is impossible here to give a sketch of this most interesting debate. Nothing more can be done than to summarize some of the views advanced. On the main question, Republicans generally thought the votes of Wisconsin ought to be counted; Democrats, for the most part, took the contrary view. Upon the question who, under the Constitution, should count, that is, who decide what were votes, the divergence of opinion was amazing. Some contented themselves with asserting that the power was in Congress to decide upon the validity of votes, leaving the method of exercising the power to be determined by law. But it was maintained in the Senate, by Mr. Thompson, of Kentucky, that the "votes are to be returned to us, and counted by us, and the House of Representatives are admitted to be present at the count to prevent a combination, a clandestine operation, a secret session, a coup d'état. . . . The votes are to be returned to the Senate, and counted by the Senate." On the other hand, Mr. Humphrey Marshall, of Kentucky, maintained in the House that that body was the sole judge, and Mr. Henry Winter Davis, of Maryland, took the same view. The ground of this opinion was, that it was

for the House to decide whether or not to go into an election of President.

There was still another point on which the difference of opinion was decided. The president of the Senate stoutly affirmed that he had neither counted nor rejected the votes, although he had said: "The state of the votes as delivered by the tellers is . . . for John C. Frémont, of California, 114 votes." Many senators sustained the assertion of Mr. Mason that he had not counted the votes, while others declared that he had counted them. Numerous resolutions were offered in each branch, but the debate produced nothing more than a resolution of formal notification to Messrs. Buchanan and Breckinridge that they had been elected. The opinion that the whole subject ought to be taken up and considered, and the doubtful points determined by law, was generally expressed; but, as soon as the matter in hand was disposed of, the subject was dropped. The Congress was then in the last month of its term, and it was too busy to take further notice of a danger past which might never return. Consequently the disputed point was left for a Republican Congress to decide, according to the political exigency of the hour, in the midst of a civil war.

XXI

THE LAST STRUGGLE OF SLAVERY

DURING the whole of Mr. Buchanan's administration the country was drifting steadily toward civil war. The issue between slavery and anti-slavery was joined at all points. The Dred Scott decision, promulgated by the Supreme Court soon after the new President was inaugurated, sustained the Southerners' contention as to their rights of property so fully as to justify the bitter comment upon it that it made "Slavery national, Freedom sectional." The Republicans would not accept the dictum as final. If the Constitution must be taken to support the view taken by the court, they would refuse to obey the Constitution and follow the "higher law" proclaimed by Seward.

The struggle over Kansas, which had begun in the first year of Pierce's administration, continued under his successor until early in 1861, after secession had begun, when the State was admitted without slavery. The story of the contest fills one of the darkest pages of American political history. It is a record of perfidy and violence. The attempt to force the Lecompton constitution upon the people, under the patronage of the executive department of the government, was matched in baseness by the offer by Congress of a bribe to the people if they would accept it. The South, struggling

as it was to maintain the political power of the section and of its social system, and backed by the highest judicial authority in the land, had a technical justification for every claim which it put forth to the possession of Kansas as a field for the extension of slavery. But, on the other hand, the moral sense of the Northern people was outraged by the effort to force slavery upon an unwilling people, and by the repeated violations of good faith which were resorted to in order to make the attempt successful. Kansas had seven governors in five years. One of them was removed because he would not be made the tool of the pro-slavery party. Another, a

« PreviousContinue »