the increase of their influence, they extended the sphere of their action.  In a short time after the commencement of their first movement, they had acquired sufficient influence to induce the legislatures of most of the Northern States to pass acts, which in effect abrogated the clause of the Constitution that provides for the delivery up of fugitive slaves.  Not long after, petitions followed to abolish slavery in forts, magazines, and dock-yards, and all other places where Congress had exclusive power of legislation.  This was followed by petitions and resolutions of legislatures of the Northern States, and popular meetings, to exclude the Southern States from all territories acquired, or to be acquired, and to prevent the admission of any State hereafter into the Union, which, by its constitution, does not prohibit slavery.  And Congress is invoked to do all this, expressly with the view of the final abolition of slavery in the States.  That has been avowed to be the ultimate object from the beginning of the agitation until the present time; and yet the great body of both parties of the North, with the full knowledge of the fact, although disavowing the abolitionists, have co-operated with them in almost all their measures.

Such is a brief history of the agitation, as far as it has yet advanced.  Now I ask, Senators, what is there to prevent its further progress, until it fulfils the ultimate end proposed, unless some decisive measure should be adopted to prevent it?  Has any one of the causes, which has added to its increase from its original small and contemptible beginning until it has attained its present magnitude, diminished in force?  Is the original cause of the movement—­that slavery is a sin, and ought to be suppressed—­weaker now than at the commencement?  Or is the abolition party less numerous or influential, or have they less influence with, or less control over the two great parties of the North in elections?  Or has the South greater means of influencing or controlling the movements of this Government now, than it had when the agitation commenced?  To all these questions but one answer can be given:  No, no, no.  The very reverse is true.  Instead of being weaker, all the elements in favor of agitation are stronger now than they were in 1835, when it first commenced, while all the elements of influence on the part of the South are weaker.  Unless something decisive is done, I again ask, what is to stop this agitation, before the great and final object at which it aims—­the abolition of slavery in the States—­is consummated?  Is it, then, not certain, that if something is not done to arrest it, the South will be forced to choose between abolition and secession?  Indeed, as events are now moving, it will not require the South to secede, in order to dissolve the Union.  Agitation will of itself effect it, of which its past history furnishes abundant proof—­as I shall next proceed to show.