Mr. BIRCH offered the following amendment:

Amend the seventh resolution by adding these words: "And if the said committee shall be of opinion hereafter, that there is no longer a necessity for the re-assembling of this Convention, and shall so declare by public communication, then and in that case the Convention shall not re-assemble on the third Monday in in December, 1861, but may be called together by a majority of said committee at any subsequent period."

Mr. KNOTT called for the ayes and noes on agreeing to the amendment of Mr. Birch.

Mr. WILSON offered the following substitute, which was accepted by Mr. Birch:

That by request of a majority of all the members of this Convention, in writing, delivered to said committee prior to said third Monday in December next, the said Committee shall on that day adjourn this Convention sine die.

Mr. SHACKELFORD, of Howard, offered the following amendment to the accepted substitute of Mr. Wilson:

Provided, that if the Convention does not assemble on the third Monday in December, 1861, the Convention shall stand adjourned sine die.

Pending which, on motion of Mr. SHEELEY, the Convention adjourned until to-morrow morning at ten o'clock.

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Monroe.

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved.

Mr. HENDERSON, from the Committee heretofore appointed, to whom was referred the communication from the Hon. Luther J. Glenn, Commissioner from the State of Georgia to this Convention, made a report which was read. Majority Report of Committee on Commissioner

from Georgia.

MR. PRESIDENT: Your Committee, to whom was referred the communication of the Hon. Luther J. Glenn, who appeared before the Convention as a Commissioner from Georgia, and having presented the ordinance of secession adopted by said State, was pleased to "invite the co-operation of Missouri with Georgia and the other seceding States in the formation of a Southern Confederacy," have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report as follows:

The Committee sincerely regret that the commission under which Mr. Glenn was accredited to our State, was limited in its scope to a mere invitation to withdraw from the Government of our fathers, and form a distinct confederacy with the Gulf States. His mission seems to contemplate no plan of reconciliation-no measure of redress for alleged grievances, which being adopted would prove satisfactory to Georgia. Having chosen secession as the only remedy for existing ills, Georgia, through her Commissioner, supposes that similar interests, connected with the

THURSDAY, MARCH 21, 1861. exigency precipitated upon us by the action of the Cotton States, will impel Missouri to withdraw from the Union and cast her lot with them.

The reasons assigned by Mr. Glenn for this action on the part of his State are: First, that the laws of Congress imposing duties on imports have been so framed as to discriminate very injuriously against Southern interests; Second, that a great sectional party, chiefly confined to the Northern States of the Union, whose leading idea is animosity to the institution of negro slavery, has gradually become so strong as to obtain the chief executive power of the nation, which is regarded as a present insult to the South; and, Third, that the ultimate object of this party is the total extinction of slavery in the States where it now exists by law, and the placing upon terms of political equality, at least, the white and black races; and to prevent evils of such magnitude, as well as to preserve the honor and safety of the South, Georgia and some of her sister States have deliberately resolved to withdraw from the Union, never to return.

Your Committee trust that they duly appreciate the gravity of the communication thus made to the people of Missouri.

Missouri entered the Union at the close of an angry contest on the subject of slavery. Her geographical position, the variety of the branches of industry to which her resources point, her past growth and future prospects, combine to demand that all her councils be taken in the spirit of sobriety and conciliation.

Your Committee waive for the moment the consideration of the moral aspect of what they

conceive to be the heresy of secession, because if they entered, in the first instance, upon this examination, its results would preclude any inquiry into the material consequences of the action to which Missouri is solicited.

The peculiar position of our State is different from that of Georgia or any other of the cottongrowing States. If it be true, as represented, that the revenue laws of the country operate oppressively upon them-and this objection is now heard for the first time after an interval of nearly thirty years-it can not be pretended that any part of this particular grievance touches Missouri.

Acknowledging as we do the power of Congress to impose such duties for revenue purposes at least, and trusting to the wisdom and justice of that body for impartial legislation, we are unwilling to seek, in a step promising nothing but the most unequivocal calamities, a refuge from imaginary evils.

In reference to the more important matter presented as a reason for the action of Georgia, your Committee would say, that Missouri has watched with painful anxiety the progress of a great sectional party in the North based upon the exclusion of slavery from the Territories, which are the common property of the whole Union. Doing the Republican party the justice to believe that it means to carry out the articles of its political creed, as stated in its platform and indicated by its recent votes in Congress, we deem it incorrect to declare that it cherishes any present intention to interfere with slavery in the States of the Union. Any such attempt would justly arouse the highest exasperation in every slaveholding State; but it is considered unwise to go out of our way to denounce hypothetically a design which, so far from being threatened, is disavowed by that party.

We are aware that individual members of the Republican party have at times enunciated most dangerous heresies, and that some of its extremists have, with apparent deliberation, embodied in the form of resolutions and published to the world, sentiments which would fully authorize, if regarded as the views of the whole organization, the condemation due to principles at war with the security of rights of property in nearly half the States of the Union; but we must guard ourselves against the double error of imagining that all the bad rhetoric and uncharitable speech of orators whose highest aim is to produce a sensation, are to be taken as the true exponent of the sober views of their party, and that language recklessly used by a party seeking to obtain power is a faithful index of the conduct it will pursue when power has been once obtained.

In support of these views, your Committee may instance the adoption of a constitutional amend

ment by the requisite two-thirds vote of each branch of the last Congress, after the representatives from seven Southern States had withdrawn, providing against all interference by Congress with the institution of slavery, as it may exist in any State of the Union-a provision irrevocable without the consent of every State. From this it may be seen that the extremists attached to the Republican party have so far been unable to control it.

In proof of the proposition that parties are more radical in the acquisition that in the exercise of power, we may refer to the recent organization of three several Territorial Governments, upon the principles contained in the compromise measures of 1850-and afterwards applied, upon demand of the South, to the provisional governments of Kansas and Nebraska.

But notwithstanding these evidences denoting thus far a proper appreciation of the rights and wishes of the people of the South, the Honorable Commissioner was pleased to assure us that Georgia had lost all confidence in the North. Such, Mr. President, is not the sentiment of Missouri. That many of the citizens of the North, including the turbulent demagogues who incite to treason, and their deluded followers who execute their teachings, by invading other States, with a view of inaugurating revolution or setting at defiance by forcible resistance the Federal laws on their own soil, have forfeited our confidence, will not be denied. But to denounce the innocent with the guilty, and charge whole communities with the crimes or bad faith of a few, does not accord with the moral or political ethics of Missourians.

It is true that some of the Northern States have enacted laws, the provisions of which seem designed to impede the prompt and faithful execution of the fugitive slave law, but such enactments are void. They disgrace the statute books on which they appear, and serve no other purpose than to weaken the fraternal ties that should bind together the people of different sections of the Union. These enactments are fast disappearing; and the hope may be indulged that, in the course of a few months, this source of irritation will be permanently removed.

So far, then, from having lost all confidence in the North, Missouri is assured, by the history of the past, that every right she may constitutionally claim will be accorded to her. Let the passions of the day, engendered by political conflict, subside, and the ultra dogmas of party leaders will be discarded. Let the American mind once more be directed to the importance of perpetuating the blessings of a good government, instead of indulging vain hopes of establishing a better one, at the close of the most dangerous and criminal revolutions, and then the peace of the country will have been restored.

We are not advised that concessions demanded by the Southern people, on the subject of slavery, have been heretofore refused by those of the North. No Federal legislation, discriminating against the institution, has ever been imposed upon the South by the sectional power of the North. The ordinance of 1787, prohibiting slavery in the Northwest territory, ceded to the General Government by the State of Virginia, was proposed and advocated by one of the most distinguished sons of the "Old Dominion." The proposition was seconded and supported by Southern men, and, though the result of the measure was the exclusion of slavery from the soil of five large States of the Union, yet the South should not be so unjust as now to complain of the deed.

The Missouri Compromise was agreed upon by the representatives of both sections of the country, and neither should now reproach the other. It was proposed by a Southern man, received the assent of the South, and acquiesced in by the people of the nation.

And though, it may be said, the compact was made in ignorance of the law, as recently declared by the Supreme Court, the people of the South will scarcely now sacrifice their high sense of honor, so long claimed as a leading characteristic, in eager and unnatural desire to find causes of quarrel with their brethren of the North.

At a subsequent period the South demanded a repeal of the Missouri compromise line, and the adoption of the principle of non-intervention upon the subject of slavery in the Territories. The demand was acceded to, and territorial government established in accordance with their wishes. That portion of the Territory, once covered by the restriction of 1820, was thus opened to the introduction of slavery, and now, for the first time since the organization of the Federal Government, has slavery become lawful upon every part of the public domain. Georgia and Missouri united in this appeal to the patriotism and justice of the North. The concession was made, and Missouri would be false to every principle of honor should she find in the act a pretext for the charge of broken faith.

The operation of this principle having become distasteful to some of our Southern friends, it was thought by them advisable to make yet another demand upon the people of the North. The doctrine of Congressional protection of slavery in the Territory was urged as a substitute for that of popular sovereignty, so recently adopted at their own instance and request. The demand, however, is only made in a political convention, and admitted, by the parties urging it, to be an unnecessary and impracticable abstraction. When attempted to be engrafted upon the legislation of the country, it is repudiated by nearly the entire South, and even by Georgia herself.

Your Committee are by no means satisfied that even this request would be refused by a large proportion of the Northern people, were it necessary to preserve the Union, or secure the rights of their brethren. But, until it shall be acknowledged as a vital and living principle by the South, and refused by the North, Missouri will be slow even to complain of injustice, much less to enter into any schemes for the destruction of the Government.

Missouri is not yet ready to abandon the experiment of free government. She has not lost all confidence in the people of any section of the nation, because the past furnishes assurance to the contrary; the present is cheered by her unshaken faith in the capacity of man to govern himself and the future invites to peace and continued Union, for the prosperity of all.

If evils exist under the Constitution and laws, as they are, let the proper appeal be addressed to the American heart, both North and South, and these evils will be removed. If, in the heat of partisan rancor, the expressions or deeds of the vicious shall point to future aggressions, the patriotism of the masses needs only to be invoked for new guaranties against anticipated wrong.

From what has been already said it will be seen that the views of Georgia, as expressed by her Commissioner, and those of your Committee, in reference to the policy to be pursued by the Southern States in the present emergency, are essentially different. We believe that Missouri yet relies upon the justice of the American people, whilst Georgia seems to despair. The one recognizes friends in the North, whose lives, if necessary, will be devoted to her defense; the other regarding them as unworthy of her confidence, spurns their friendship and defies their enmity. Missouri looks to the Federal Constitution to protect the rights of her citizens, whilst Georgia unnecessarily rushes into revolution and hazards all upon a single issue. Georgia, seeming to regard the Union as the source of imaginary ills, adopts secession as a remedy; Missouri, feeling that she is indebted to the Union for the prosperity of her citizens, her power and wealth as a State, yet clings to it with the patriotic devotion of earlier days.

Your committee, so far, have confined themselves to an examination of the causes alleged for the revolution in the Southern States, and the apparent want of necessity for so extraordinary a movement, at the present time. Indeed so rapid and ill-advised has this action been, that it seems rather the execution of meditated conspiracy against the Government by restless and uneasy demagogues, than the slow and determined movement of a reflecting people. We see many of the dangerous men who controlled the nullification plot of South Carolina in 1832, the promi nent actors in the present desperate experiment

against the peace and happiness of the country. Feeling, as we do, the total inadequacy of the causes presented for this ruinous policy, your Committee will be excused in the expression of some doubt as to the deliberation and wisdom with which the Honorable Commissioner was pleased to assure us Georgia had acted in the premises. And in this connection we will be further excused for commending to the serious consideration of the good citizens of Georgia, and other seceding States, who may for the moment have been seduced from the paths of safety by the artful schemes of bad men, the following memorable words from one whose patriotism will not be doubted, and whose unerring sagacity is being daily verified in the history of the Republic:

"WASHINGTON, May 1, 1833.

"MY DEAR SIR: * * * * I have had a laborious task here; but nullification is dead, and its actors and courtiers will only be remembered by the people to be execrated for their wicked designs to sever and destroy the only good Government on the globe, and that prosperity and happiness we enjoy over every portion of the world. Haman's gallows ought to be the fate of all such ambitious men, who would involve their country in civil war, and all the evils in its train, that they might reign and ride on its whirlwind and direct the storm. The free people of these United States have spoken, and consigned these wicked demagogues to their proper doom. Take care of your nullifiers; you have them among you; let them meet with the indignant frowns of every man who loves his country. The tariff, it is now known was a mere pretext. The next pretext will be the negro or slavery question.

"ANDREW JACKSON.

"Rev. ANDREW J. CRAWFORD."

The Commissioner was pleased to invoke the identity of interests and feeling between the people of Georgia and Missouri, as a reason that we should abandon the Government of our fathers and take our position with the seceding States. It will be borne in mind that this proposition was urged, not with a view of securing such guaranties as might ultimately lead to a reunion of the States and the establishment of fraternal peace, but for the purpose of constructing permanently a separate and distinct confederacy.

If the union of these two great States, under the same government-and we admit the factbe so desirable to Georgia, we will be pardoned in the expression of astonishment that she saw fit to dissolve that connection, which had been peaceful and happy for the last forty years, without consulting the interests or wishes of Missouri. It may not be intended, but the inference is forced upon us, that longer to enjoy the beneficial results to flow from union with our revolting sisters, we must surrender our own convictions of duty

and follow the imperative behests of others.— Missouri must resign her place in the present galaxy of States, where the lustre and brilliancy of each but add harmony and beauty to the whole, and accept such position as may be assigned her in the new constellation, whose light, we fear, may never penetrate beyond the southern skies.

The importance of the accession of Missouri to any confederacy formed upon the ruins of the present Union will be readily granted; but before accepting any such invitation without any guaranty for the future, it behooves us now to examine the character of the remedy proposed, and also its inevitable consequences upon the people of Missouri. Should the Government become destructive of the ends for which it was instituted, and oppression become the established rule of its action, we presume that none will deny the revolutionary right of redress. This, however, is a remedy outside of the provisions of the federal constitution and one that must necessarily address itself to the moral sense of the civilized world. It depends for its success upon deep convictions of wrong by citizens of the revolting district, claiming, when justifiable, the encouragement and sympathy of other nations. It is the last remedy of injured man to obtain in violence and bloodshed, if need be, the establishment of an incontestible right. It presumes the total inefficiency of his government to redress his wrongs. It supposes that all the efforts of peace have been exhausted, and that present evils are beyond endurance.

If it be true "that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes," it occurs to your Committee that a proper appreciation of this truth will at once dispel all ideas of present revolution.

Secession, on the other hand, is claimed as a right resulting from the nature of our Government; that the Constitution is a mere compact between the States, not subject even to the ordinary rules governing contracts; that it is a confederation of States, not a government of the people.

It will be observed that no attempt of a serious character has ever been made to overthrow the Government without adopting this theory as the best means to accomplish the end. The reason is obvious; for although it is declared in the instrument itself, that "this Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made under the au' thority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding," this doctrine interposes State authority between the rebellious citizen and the consequences of his crime. Hence the delegates from

the five New England States who met at Hartford, Connecticut, in 1814, in response to the call of the Massachusetts Legislature, saying "it was expedient to lay the foundation for a radical reform in the National compact, and devise some mode of defense suitable to those States, the affinities of whose interests are closest and whose intercourse are most frequent," after enumerating their grievances against the Government, declare that "in cases of deliberate, dangerous and palpable infractions of the Constitution, affecting the sovereignty of a State, and the liberties of the people, it is not only the right but the duty of such a State to interpose its authority for protection, in the manner best calculated to secure that end. When emergencies occur which are either beyond the reach of the judicial tribunals, or too pressing to admit of the delay incident to their forms, States which have no common umpire must be their own judges and execute their own decisions."

Looking forward to the ultimate dissolution of the Union and the erection of a Northern Confedcracy as one of the means to secure that end, they recommended amendments to the Constitution which they must have known would not be adopted. Their rejection it was hoped, no doubt, would "fire the Northern mind and precipitate" the New England States "into a revolution." Seeing the enormity of their proceedings and that merited punishment would likely be visited upon them by the Government, they too entered their solemn protest against coercion, and declared "if the Union be destined to dissolution by reason of the multiplied abuses of bad administration, it should be if possible the work of peaceable times and deliberate consent," and that "a separation by equitable arrangement will be preferable to an alliance by constraint among nominal friends but real enemies."

We pause but to remark that the amendments to the Constitution proposed by this sectional Convention were never adopted, the New England States remained in the Union, peace and prosperity again blessed the land, and the conspirators, abhorred and shunned by men, silently passed along to a grave of infamy.

At a subsequent period a movement somewhat similar in its nature was inaugurated in some of the Southern States, and your Committee hope that the allusion will give no offense to Georgia. The grievance complained of was the tariff act of 1828. South Carolina took the incipient step and declared the Constitution to be a compact between States as independent sovereignties and not a government of the people-that the Federal Government was responsible to the State Legislatures, when it assumed powers not conferred-that notwithstanding a tribunal was appointed under the Constitution to decide controversies where the United States was a party, there were some ques

tions that must occur between the Government and the States, which it would be unsafe to submit to any judicial tribunal; and finally, that the State had a right to judge for itself as to infractions of the Constitution. Alabama, Virginia, and Georgia having yielded assent to this exposition of the principles of the Government, a Convention was assembled in South Carolina, which at once declared the obnoxious law to be null and void and of no binding force upon the citizens of that State. It was further resolved, that in case of an attempt by the General Government to enforce the tariff laws of 1828 or 1832, the Union was to be dissolved, and a Convention called to form an independent government of that State; and in order that the nullification might be thorough and complete, it was provided, that no appeal should be permitted to the Supreme Court of the United States in any question concerning the validity of the ordinance or of the laws that might be passed by the Legislature to give it effect. In pursuance of this scheme, the Governor was authorized by the Legislature to call on the militia of the State to resist the enforcement of the Federal laws; arms and munitions of war were placed at his disposal, and the State judiciary was to be exonerated from their oaths to support the Federal Constitution. Treason to the Union became sanctified with the name of patriotism, and its hideous deformity was attempted to be shielded by the mantle of State sovereignty.

At this juncture appeared the proclamation of Jackson, explaining the nature of the American Government, denying the pretended right of sovereignty and claiming the supremacy of the Federal Constitution. A military force was ordered to assemble at Charleston, and a sloop of war was dispatched to the same point, to protect the Federal officers in the discharge of their duties. False theories were exploded; the tide of revolution that threatened to engulf the entire South was checked; the passions of the moment subsided; the public mind that had been maddened by the unlicensed declamation of the demagogue, was remitted to calm reflection, and soon the whole country responded to the patriotic sentiment of the iron-nerved statesman: "Our Federal Unionit must be preserved."

We pause but to remark, that the revenues were collected, peace was preserved, the country was saved, and a new batch of restless men consigned to oblivion by an indignant people. Other instances might be given in which false constructions of the Constitution have been urged with the obvious intention ultimately to destroy it; but your Committee feel assured that the instrument itself, when viewed in connection with the history of its adoption, cannot be so tortured as to sanction the right of secession. It is an instrument of delegated powers, granted by "the people of the United States, in order to form a