forward a provision negativing, in express terms, any such effect as a result of this bill.  I am rejoiced to know that while the proposition to abrogate the eighth section of the Missouri act comes from a free State, the proposition to negative the conclusion that slavery is thereby introduced, comes from a slave-holding State.  Thus, both sides furnish conclusive evidence that they go for the principle, and the principle only, and desire to take no advantage of any possible misconstruction.

Mr. President, I feel that I owe an apology to the Senate for having occupied their attention so long, and a still greater apology for having discussed the question in such an incoherent and desultory manner.  But I could not forbear to claim the right of closing this debate.  I thought gentlemen would recognize its propriety when they saw the manner in which I was assailed and misrepresented in the course of this discussion, and especially by assaults still more disreputable in some portions of the country.  These assaults have had no other effect upon me than to give me courage and energy for a still more resolute discharge of duty.  I say frankly that, in my opinion, this measure will be as popular at the North as at the South, when its provisions and principles shall have been fully developed, and become well understood.  The people at the North are attached to the principles of self-government, and you cannot convince them that that is self-government which deprives a people of the right of legislating for themselves, and compels them to receive laws which are forced upon them by a Legislature in which they are not represented.  We are willing to stand upon this great principle of self-government every-where; and it is to us a proud reflection that, in this whole discussion, no friend of the bill has urged an argument in its favor which could not be used with the same propriety in a free State as in a slave State, and vice versed.  No enemy of the bill has used an argument which would bear repetition one mile across Mason and Dixon’s line.  Our opponents have dealt entirely in sectional appeals.  The friends of the bill have discussed a great principle of universal application, which can be sustained by the same reasons, and the same arguments, in every time and in every corner of the Union.

CHARLES SUMNER,

OF MASSACHUSETTS.’ (BORN 1811, DIED 1874.)

On the crime against Kansas;

Senate, may 19-20, 1856.

MR. PRESIDENT: 

You are now called to redress a great transgression.  Seldom in the history of nations has such a question been presented.  Tariffs, Army bills, Navy bills, Land bills, are important, and justly occupy your care; but these all belong to the course of ordinary legislation.  As means and instruments only, they are necessarily subordinate to the conservation of government itself.  Grant them or deny them, in greater or less degree, and you will inflict no shock.  The machinery of government will continue to move.  The State will not cease to exist.  Far otherwise is it with the eminent question now before you, involving, as it does, Liberty in a broad territory, and also involving the peace of the whole country, with our good name in history forever more.