Life and select literary remains of Sam Houston of Texas/Chapter 23
CHAPTER XXIII.
The 4th March, 1853, brought in Gen. Franklin Pierce as President; with Gov. Wm. L. Marcy, the controlling mind of the administration, as Secretary of State, Senator King, of Alabama, who had presided with such impartiality and dignity in the Senate under Mr. Fillmore's administration, was elected Vice-President; but his extreme illness and his death on the i8th April, 1853, prevented his taking his seat as President of the Senate. In his absence. Senator J. D. Bright, of Indiana, was chosen President pro tem. Among the new Senators who took their seats in the Thirty-third Congress, which then opened, were: Judah P. Benjamin and John Slidell, of Louisiana; both of whom became eminent and noted after the formation of the Southern Confederacy, From the New England States came two new men, who proved especially able: Wm. Pitt Fessenden, of Maine, and Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts; the latter being preceded for a few months by that model of statesmanlike culture and urbanity, Edward Everett.
During this, the Thirty-third Congress, Houston, whose reputation and influence were now at their height, was especially calm, clear, and dignified in debate. During the Executive session to receive and ratify new appointments made by the President, on April 6, 1853, Houston urged the printing of the Report of Bartlett and Gray, on New Mexico, on the ground that the thirst for such works should be encouraged in the American people. On the reassembling of Congress, the Kansas - Nebraska bill of Senator Douglas, was early introduced, and was urged as an administration measure. On the 15th February, 1854, Houston reviewed his own course as to the Missouri Compromise, which that bill proposed to set aside; with the supposed idea that the territory west of the Mississippi, once belonging to France, would be open for the introduction of slavery. As the bill involved the removal of the Indians, Houston reviewed again his relations to them from 1818. In justifying his course on the Missouri Compromise, he alluded to the fact, that of three hundred men in the Senate and House of Representatives when that measure was finally made effective to the harmony of Northern and Southern interests, only three remained; Everett of Massachusetts, Benton of Missouri, and himself. He closed with this appeal: "We are acting as trustees for posterity; and according to our decision our children are to live in harmony or in anarchy! " On the 3d March, just on the eve of the passage of the bill, Houston made that logical and earnest appeal which first appeared in the "Life of Sam Houston," published in New York the following winter. He said, in substance: "Mr. President, this unusual night's sitting is without precedent in the history of any previous Congress at this stage of the session. The extraordinary circumstances in which we find ourselves placed would seem to indicate a crisis in the affairs of the country of no ordinary importance; a crisis that portends either good or evil to our institutions. The extraordinary character of the bill before the Senate, as well as the manner in which it is presented to the body, demands the greatest deliberation. This, sir, is the anniversary of a protracted session in which the organization of the Territory of Nebraska was elaborately discussed on the last day of the last session, as to-night, until the morning dawn." Remarking then that the opposition at that time was, to the provisions as to Indian tribes; while now, it was proposed to repeal the Missouri Compromise, he alluded to the boldness of the measure and the sophistry of its proposal, and exclaimed: "Mr. President, I can not believe that the agitation created will be confined to the Senate Chamber. From what we have witnessed here to-night, this will not be the exclusive arena for the exercise of human passions. If the Republic be not shaken, I will thank heaven for its kindness in maintaining its stability." Analyzing then the argument that the people of a Territory are sovereign in admitting or excluding slavery, he showed its incorrectness from the ordinance of 1787 in new States brought into the Union, both North and South. He alluded to the fact that the South had stood by the Compromise; and he met the objections of Mr. Atchinson, of Missouri, that it had not been applied to Oregon; Houston showing that it was applied to Texas; and it was upon its provisions that the State came into the Union. He showed that the South could only be injured by it; and especially argued that Texas, the terminus of the slave population, would have the largest disproportion between slaves and whites; and he exclaimed: "Then, sir, it will become the gulf of slavery, and there its terrible eddies will whirl, if convulsions take place." He then urged that no necessity for abrogation, since the Compromise, had arisen; adding: "Three years have passed in tranquillity and peace. How, and where, and why, and when, and with whom this measure originated. Heaven only knows; for I have no cognizance of the facts. So far back as 1848, President Polk recognized the Missouri Compromise as a binding force upon this country. The astute statesmen who managed and controlled its adoption, Clay and Webster, never contemplated its repeal." He proceeded then to show how the affiliation of Abolitionists and Free-Soilers with the weaker party, the Whigs in the North, would bring in dangerous partisan combinations, and exclaimed: "This is an eminently perilous measure; and do you expect me to remain here silent, or to shrink from the discharge of my duty in admonishing the South of what I conceive the results will be? What, if a measure unwholesome or unwise is brought into the Senate, and it comes from the party of which I am a member? While its introduction is an error, is it not my duty to correct that error as far as I possibly can? When every look to the setting sun carries me to the bosom of a family dependent upon me, think you I could be alien to them? Never! never!!" Satirizing then the idea that additional territory for the introduction of slavery was proffered to the South, he pictured Jacob proffering a share of his booty to Esau, and Esau's reply: "I have enough, my brother; keep that thou hast unto thyself," and he added: "If this is the only offering tendered to the South, we will not ask it; we do not want it; the people will be angry if you give it. If you are indebted in anything to the South, all I have to say is, that you might find some other occasion when it would be more agreeable to cancel the obligation.' Replying to the objection that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional, he said: "Mr. Jefferson confessed that he found no constitutional authority for the acquisition of Louisiana." He asked if the acquisition of Florida or of Texas was constitutional; and replied that "compromises, like compacts, are legitimate matters of legislation." In closing this branch of his subject, he said: "I had fondly hoped, Mr. President, that having attained to my present period of life, I should pass the residue of my days, be they many or few, in peace and tranquillity; that as I found the country growing up rapidly, and have witnessed its immeasurable expansion and development, when I closed my eyes on scenes around me, I would at least have the cherished consolation and hope that I left my children in a peaceful, happy, prosperous, and united community. I had hoped this. Fondly had I cherished the desire and the expectation from 1850, until after the introduction of this bill. My hopes are less sanguine now. My anxieties increase, but my expectation lessens. Sir, if this repeal takes place, I will have seen the commencement of the agitation; but the youngest child now born, I am apprehensive, will not live to witness its termination. Southern gentlemen may stand up and defend this measure. They may accept it from the Northern gentlemen who generously bestow it; but if it were beneficial to the South, it would have been asked for. It was not asked for—nor will it be accepted by the people. It furnishes those in the North who are enemies of the South, with efficient weapons to contend with." Taking up then the case of the Indians, and alluding to the statement that God had made them an inferior race, and that there is no use in doing anything for them, he cited the argument of Ross, the Cherokee, in his defence of their treaty with the United States, as superior in skill and effect to Spanish diplomats as to Florida; and, alluding to the common suggestion, that Indians like Canaanites, might be exterminated, he showed that Indians were not idolaters, but believers in the Great Spirit, ready to receive Christianity, and advanced in American civilization. He severely rebuked the suggestion that sickly sentimentalism prompted appeals for the Indians; and declared: "If you will not do justice to them, the sin will lie at your door. Providence, in His own way, will accomplish all His purposes; and He may some day avenge the wrongs of the Indians upon our nation. As a people, we can save them; and the sooner the great work is begun, the sooner will humanity have cause to rejoice in its accomplishment." He closed with this eloquent appeal: "Sir, the friends who have survived the distinguished men who took prominent parts in the drama of the compromise of 1850, ought to feel gratified that those men are not capable of participating in the events of to-day; but that they were permitted, after they had accomplished their labors, and had seen their country in peace, to leave the world, as Simeon did, with the exclamation: 'Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation.' They departed in peace, and they left their country in peace. They felt, as they were about to be gathered to the tombs of their fathers, that the country they had loved so well, and which had honored them—that country upon whose name and fame their doings had shed a bright lustre which shines abroad throughout all Christendom—was reposing in peace and happiness. What would their emotions be if they could now be present and see an effort made, if not so designed, to undo all their work and to tear asunder the cords that they had bound around the hearts of their countrymen! They have departed. The nation felt the wound; and we see the memorials of woe still in this Chamber. The proud symbol (the eagle) above your head remains enshrouded in black, as if deploring the misfortune which had fallen upon us; or, as a fearful omen of future calamities which await our nation, in the event this bill should become a law. Above it I behold the majestic figure of Washington, whose presence must ever inspire patriotic emotions, and command the admiration and love of every American heart. By these associations I adjure you to regard the contract once made to harmonize and preserve this Union. Maintain the Missouri Compromise! Stir not up agitation! Give us peace. This much I was bound to declare — in behalf of my country; as I believe, and I know in behalf of my constituents. In the discharge of my duty I have acted fearlessly. The events of the future are left in the hands of a wise Providence."
A few days after this speech of Houston, a memorial, signed by 3,000 New England clergymen, was presented to the Senate, protesting against the repeal of the Missouri Compromise as it related to Kansas and Nebraska. A long and heated discussion followed. Houston defended the right of the memorialists in a lengthy speech.
Prior to the assembling of the second session of the Thirty-third Congress, an event occurred which gave special significance to Houston's subsequent speeches in the Senate. On the nth Oct., 1854, the General Committee of the Democracy of New Hampshire met, and after deliberation nominated as "The People's Candidate," for the office of President of the United States, from March 4, 1857, Gen. Sam Houston, of Texas. In an address prepared by their organ, Hon. Edmund Burke, the fact that the Democratic administration in power had yielded to the agitation which demanded an "unsettling of the compromise measures of 1850," is urged as the cause of defections from the party in the New England, Middle, and Western States; and, it is urged, that nothing can arrest this tendency but "the immediate nomination, by the people, for the office of President of the United States, of some citizen of the Republic distinguished alike for his abilities, experience in public affairs, and unquestionable statesmanship." The propriety of a "people's nomination" is urged from history; that from the origin of the Government, beginning with the nomination of John Adams, the second President, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, had been nominated by a Congressional caucus; the corruption of which system appeared when Wm. H. Crawford, the regular Democratic Congressional nominee, was overwhelmingly outvoted by Gen, Jackson, the people's candidate; and when by Congressional intrigue John Quincy Adams was made President, which led to the popular election in 1828 of Gen. Jackson. As to the proposed candidate, Houston's brilliant military career, as successful as that of Jackson, is traced; to which, far beyond the previous record of Jackson, his civil career is summarized thus:
"Throughout his long career, Gen. Houston has been an inflexible Democrat. He is a disciple of the school of Jefferson and Jackson. He has filled many of the highest public offices, in all which he has acquitted himself with remarkable ability and with unsuspected integrity. In all positions, the most responsible as well as the most trying and perilous, he has been eminently successful. He has ever proved himself equal to any emergency in which he has been placed. As General, statesman, orator, and legislator, he has displayed talents and ability of the first order. He is a man of honor. He keeps faith with the humblest as well as the highest. He has never broken his word with the humblest Indian with whom he has had to deal, nor with sovereign States. He believes in the sacredness of treaties, of compacts, and of compromises, whether in the form of conventions, constitutions, or solemn acts of Congress. He preserves his faith with the North, as he would require the North to preserve its faith with the South. Under his administration, the rights of all sections of the Union would be protected and preserved. He is a Union man, and never would permit this glorious confederacy of sovereign States to be dissevered by the aggressions of fanaticism on the one side, nor by unjustifiable rebellion on the other. He would secure justice to the States and to the people."
This address, appearing a few weeks before the meeting of the second session of the Thirty-third Congress, naturally called forth the bitter opposition of the men whose selfish ambition, which had nearly brought ruin on Texas, had been thwarted by the hero and patriot who had made Texas the type of nobleness in her independence; and thus, too, had made its moulder the hope of the times in which he was then moving, as events showed! The "Life of Sam Houston," which shortly after appeared, was rendered necessary by false publications, which he was too high-minded to stoop to contradict; that Life justifying the writer's announcement on the title-page—"The only authentic memoir of him ever published."
It is sufficient here to state, that all those false publications originated from two sources. First, the narrow men, who from the day of Houston's grand victory at San Jacinto, which made him the recognized head among both the Northern and Southern settlers of Texas, because he alone had the united impartiality and justice to appreciate both, and the skill and heroism to harmonize the two elements, were eaten up with the gangrene of envy. Second, the determined disunionists of the Gulf States, few in number, and only found in those States, irritated by jealousy, were ready to use any means to drive from the path of their selfish ambition the man who, more than all others united, blocked their way to the accomplishment of their ends. The former class sought in offensive publications to disaffect the people of the South, who confided in Houston's integrity and wisdom. The latter class soon met him in debate in the Senate. Still others, in published manifestoes, arraigned his motives, declaring them to be inspired by personal ambition to secure the Presidency rather than by genuine regard to the welfare of the people of the entire country. With this call of the New Hampshire Democracy before the country, and with this "Life of Houston" just in the hands of the people, the second and short session of the Thirty-third Congress met Dec. 4, 1854.
The speech of Houston, in reply to the numerous assaults made on him, which brought out the whole nobleness of his character, was made on the last day of the year, Dec. 31, 1854. From the most opposite points, from the younger Dodge of Iowa, in the Northwest, and from Mr, Mallory in the Southeast, came the coincident charge that Houston was inspired by either a real or professed sickly sentimentality in his appeals for justice to the Indians; Senator Dodge averring that an abolitionist of Western New York could not show greater weakness; Senator Mallory insinuating that Houston was seeking to win the vote of the "Know Nothings," who opposed the promotion of Irish Catholics, in his expected canvass for the Presidency; while the spirit of detraction went so far as to charge that when, more than two years before, he was one of the Senate Committee to convey the body of Henry Clay for burial to Kentucky, he had, for effect's sake, kissed the forehead of the admired leader in compromise, when the coffin was opened for his fellow-citizens to view, for the last time, the face of their adored political leader. Houston's reply was calm, dignified, and heroic. He said, in the progress of his speech:
"Mr. President, I hardly know what to say in reply to the Senator from Iowa. In the first place, let me say to that Senator, and to the honorable Senator from Florida, that they were talking about things of which I know very little, for I was not in the United States when the occurrences to which they alluded took place, and I was not, therefore, familiar with the history of those wars. I have already stated that occasions occur where outlaws among the Indians commit acts of aggression on the whites, and the whites immediately retaliate on the Indian nations; and these nations, in self-defence, become involved in war. But I never knew a case where a treaty, which was made and carried out in good faith, was violated by the Indians. I have stood here alone in this body, against a powerful array of talent and influence, contending for what I conceived to be a great principle, and which must obtain, or the Indian race be exterminated." After quoting high authorities who agreed with him, Houston added: "There are not less than two thousand prisoners in the hands of the Comanches; four hundred in one band in my own State. The prisoners can be reclaimed from these Indians, who are coming down to settle upon their reservations. They take no prisoners but women and boys. The boys they treat with a degree of barbarity unprecedented, and their cruelties toward the females are nameless and atrocious. Our Government is silent in relation to them. Has humanity no claims upon us in this respect? Has justice no demand unanswered? In my boyish days, before manhood had hardened my thews and muscles, I received balls and arrows in this body in defence of suffering humanity, particularly women and children, against the Indians; and I aided in reclaiming the brightest spot of the South—Alabama. When I remember that, in those early days, I assisted in rescuing females and children from the relentless tomahawk and scalping-knife, it seems to me that the charge that I have stooped to court favor by the expression of my sentiments on this question, is one which falls harmless at my feet. I hardly know what to think of the gentleman's remarks as to catering for the Presidency. Of the 'Know Nothings' I know nothiing. If the object of those to whom the Senator from Iowa has referred is to prevent men of infamous character and paupers from coming here, I agree with them. I would say, establish a law requiring every person from abroad, before being received here, to bring an endorsement from one of our Consuls abroad, and produce evidence of good character from the place, whence he emigrates, so that when he comes here we may receive him into full communion with all the rights guaranteed to him by the laws which may exist at the time of his emigration. When the Senator from Iowa supposes that I would cater for the Presidency of the United States he does me great injustice. I would not cater for any office beneath Heaven. . . . . But, sir, I know one thing; if it were to be thrust upon me, I should make a great many changes in some small matters."
The "Life of Houston," issued at that period, contained ex tended speeches bearing on Indian affairs made by him in the Senate just at that juncture. Among these lengthy speeches the following utterances are worthy of enduring record. On the 29th January, 1855, Houston in the Senate argued: "They are a people isolated in their interests, and solely dependent for protection and justice upon the Government of the United States. The Indians have been charged with an aggressive and hostile spirit toward the whites; but we find, upon inquiry, that every instance of that sort which has been imputed to them has been induced and provoked by the white man, either by acts of direct aggression upon the Indians, or by his own incaution, alluring them to a violation of the security of the whites." After citation of numerous instances, in which he alludes to early days, Houston said: "The course which has been pursued, since the days of William Penn to the present moment, has not been entirely successful in conciliating the Indians. But under the management of Washington, of the first Adams, of Madison, of Monroe, of the second Adams, of Jackson, and of Polk, we have, with few exceptions, been very successful in maintaining peace with them. The suggestions made by our fathers in relation to their civilization and humanization are exemplified and illustrated in the present condition of the southern tribes, who have received the greatest benefits of the light shed on them; and they have responded to it by the cultivation of mind, by the development of resources, both physical and intellectual, which reflect lustre on their character.
"When Texas was annexed to the United States, these Indians, on account of faith having been maintained with them by the then Executive of Texas, refused to meet and confer with the commissioners sent to them by the President of the United States until they had the sanction of the Government of Texas; and the symbols of confidence were put in the hands of the commissioners before the Indians would treat with them. Take an illustration: One of their chiefs, with his wife and child, and twelve men came to Fort Belknap, some one hundred and fifty or two hundred miles west of the fort at Hamilton's Valley. Property had been stolen by Indians. It was not known which of thirteen different tribes had taken it, for outlaws occasionally congregated from each, half a dozen of them stealing off from their tribes without the influence of their chiefs operating upon them. They were outlaws, careless of the destiny of their tribes, and reckless of the crimes which they might commit, so long as they could gratify their cupidity, and recompense their daring. These men had taken some property. Dragoons came on in the direction of the Red River, and reached Fort Belknap. So soon as they arrived, the officer said to this chief: 'Sir, I retain you as a prisoner. It is true you came here under a white flag: but I am an officer; I have the power; I take you prisoner, and you must stay here a prisoner until the horses are brought back. Your men must stay, too, except one, whom I will send to your tribe with the intelligence of the fact.' The chief said: 'My tribe have not committed the robbery; it is a great distance from me; it is in another direction. I come from the rising sun; that is toward the setting sun; I was far from it; you are between me and it; I did not do it.' 'But,' said the officer, 'you are a prisoner.' The officer put him in the guard-house. Imprisonment is eternal infamy to an Indian. A prairie Indian would rather die a thousand deaths than submit to the disgrace of imprisonment. You may wound and mutilate him as you please, you may crush every limb in the body of a prairie Indian, and if he can make no other resistance he will spit defiance at you when you come within his reach. This chief, meditating upon his deep disgrace, knowing that he was irreparably dishonored, unless he could wash out his stains with blood, resolved that night that he would either die a free man or rescue himself from dishonor. He rose in the night. He would not leave his wife and child in the hands of his enemy; so he took his knife, and stabbed his squaw and little one to the heart. Not a groan was heard, for he well knew where to apply the poignard. He went and shot down the sentinel, rushed upon the superior officers, was shot, and perished like a warrior, in an attempt to wipe a stain from his honor. His men fled, and returned to their tribe, but it was to bring blood, carnage, and conflagration upon our settlements. They came not again as brothers to smoke the calumet of peace, but with brands in their hands to set fire to our houses. Contrast that with the previous years; contrast it with the harmony which had before existed, and you see the lamentable results of sending, as Indian agents and army officers to take charge of Indians, men who know nothing about the Indian character. Sir, while people are seeking to civilize and Christianize men on the banks of the Ganges, or the Jordan, or in Burrampootah, why should not the same philanthropic influence be extended through society, and be exerted in behalf of the American Indians? Is not the soul of an American Indian, in the prairie, worth as much as the soul of a man on the Ganges, or in Jerusalem? Surely it is."
The Thirty-fourth Congress did not present many occasions to call forth Houston, and that for two reasons: first, as he was before the country as a candidate for the next Presidential canvass, it seemed becoming that he should confine himself only to his official duties as Senator; second, as is usual during the latter half of any Presidential term, party leaders seek to avoid new issues which may compromise them before the people, and hence bring forward few new issues. The first session of the Thirty-fourth Congress opened December 3, 1855, and closed August 18, 1856. Important bills left unpassed, seeming to call for it, the President recalled Congress before they had left Washington, and an extra session was held from August 21st to August 30th. The second session met December i, 1856, and closed March 4, 1857. During this entire period Houston was prompt in the special business which demanded his attention; while he was a silent but impartial actor amid scenes of excitement, where his balanced judgment forbade him to become a participator.
On the 2ist February, 1856, Houston took part in a discussion which was part of a series, in which his clear mind pointed out the distinction between the duties and authority of naval officers called in the ports of other nations to delicate yet imperative duties, and the duties and authority of army officers within the national territory. The instructions given to Commodore McAuley, then cruising on special duty in the West Indies, having been called for, Houston in a brief speech set forth the peculiar duties of naval officers, making it bear on the practical matter of the pay allowed them in their public relations. This was followed by farther explanations called out March 10th. On the 1st April the trial cf Capt. Ritchie, an officer of the army, drew from him his usual balanced views. The exciting incident of the session was the assault made May 22d by Hon. Preston S. Brooks, a member of the House of Representatives from South Carolina, on Hon. Charles Sumner, Senator from Massachusetts. In a speech which occupied two days of the session, Mr. Sumner had delivered his carefully prepared address entitled "The Crime against Kansas." Portions of its statements were regarded as personally offensive to Senator Butler, of South Carolina. The age of the venerable Senator led his young kinsman to assume his place, and to inflict an assault with a cane upon Senator Sumner while seated in his place after the close of the morning session of May 22d; which, as the blows fell on his head, left scalp-wounds which required weeks of healing, and left also a permanent spinal affection. It was not the province of the Senate, but of the House, to take action in the premises. All calm judges, both in and out of Congress, regretted the act of Mr. Brooks as a youthful indiscretion. Houston's silence was more impressive than words could be. He saw in the heat called forth on both sides another indication that his patriotic efforts could not stay the progress which hot words were making toward deadly blows. On the 15th July discussions again calling out contrasts between the army and navy came up, and for some weeks Houston's ripe and rare experience was called out. In a speech on the Naval Retiring Board he showed that there were more naval officers than could be employed, and that the army furnished in this regard no analogy, since there were so many ways in which army officers at home could be employed, while naval officers abroad could have no corresponding employ. On the 16th August, again, when there was a proposal to increase the officers of the army, he urged their employ as engineers, in place of civilians, on surveys, and also on public works, such as custom-houses; since this employ was required both for economy and efficiency. At the same time he opposed an increase of the rank and file of the army; since, in case of war, the better reliance was on volunteers, who had homes to protect and who only needed trained officers.
To the honor of the administration of Gen. Pierce, and of his Secretaries, Marcy of the State Department, Dobbin of the Navy, is to be mentioned the effective inauguration of plans for the suppression of the slave-trade, brought about by the employ of American cruisers in American waters, while British cruisers were accomplishing little on the African coasts. Houston supported this effort.