right; being refused this partition; being denied this privilege, were to separate from the Northern States, and do it peacefully, and then were to come to you peacefully and say, “let there be no war between us; let us divide fairly the Territories of the United States”; could the northern section of the country refuse so just a demand?  What would you then give them?  What would be the fair proportion?  If you allowed them their fair relative proportion, would you not give them as much as is now proposed to be assigned on the southern side of that line, and would they not be at liberty to carry their slaves there, if they pleased?  You would give them the whole of that; and then what would be its fate?

Is it upon the general principle of humanity, then, that you (addressing Republican Senators) wish to put an end to slavery, or is it to be urged by you as a mere topic and point of party controversy to sustain party power?  Surely I give you credit for looking at it upon broader and more generous principles.  Then, in the worst event, after you have encountered disunion, that greatest of all political calamities to the people of this country, and the disunionists come, the separating States come, and demand or take their portion of the Territories, they can take, and will be entitled to take, all that will now lie on the southern side of the line which I have proposed.  Then they will have a right to permit slavery to exist in it; and what do you gain for the cause of anti-slavery?  Nothing whatever.  Suppose you should refuse their demand, and claim the whole for yourselves, that would be a flagrant injustice which you would not be willing that I should suppose would occur.  But if you did, what would be the consequence?  A State north and a State south, and all the States, north and south, would be attempting to grasp at and seize this territory, and to get all of it that they could.  That would be the struggle, and you would have war; and not only disunion, but all these fatal consequences would follow from your refusal now to permit slavery to exist, to recognize it as existing, on the southern side of the proposed line, while you give to the people there the right to exclude it when they come to form a State government, if such should be their will and pleasure.

Now, gentlemen, in view of this subject, in view of the mighty consequences, in view of the great events which are present before you, and of the mighty consequences which are just now to take effect, is it not better to settle the question by a division upon the line of the Missouri Compromise?  For thirty years we lived quietly and peacefully under it.  Our people, North and South, were accustomed to look at it as a proper and just line.  Can we not do so again?  We did it then to preserve the peace of the country.  Now you see this Union in the most imminent danger.  I declare to you that it is my solemn conviction that unless something be done, and something equivalent to this proposition, we shall