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 ot what I conceive the results will be? I will do it in spite of all the intimidations, or threats, or discountenances that may be thrown upon me. Sir, the charge that I am going with the Abolitionists or Free-Soilers affects not me. The discharge of conscious duty prompts me often to confront the united array of the very section of the country in which I reside, in which my associations are, in which my personal interests have always been, and in which my affections rest. 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. Well, sir, it I am now accidentally associated with Abolitionists, in voting against this measure of repeal—if I vote with them, and with individual Senators with whom my relations have always been courteous and polite personally, they well know that I feel no sympathy with their notions—that I think them fanatical—I do not esteem it a greater misfortune attendant upon me than I have witnessed before, in this Chamber, with other Senators from the South. In the passage of the Compromise bill of 1850, I saw associations of extremes quite as extraordinary as on this occasion. I almost thought that the extremes of the Abolitionists and Secession parties had become Siamese twins; they were so intimate that I could not help but remark it.
Mr. Seward. Who?
Mr. Houston. I need not mention who; I merely throw out the suggestion. I do not inquire into the motive which induced the introduction of this bill into the Senate. I cast no reflections on gentlemen, either for its introduction or for its support; but I deprecate the consequences which will flow from it. I have conversed with several Senators, and I have never heard the first who would not admit that it was an unfortunate and ill-advised measure. The venerable and distinguished Senator from Michigan [Mr. Cass] the other day, in his speech, declared, in substance, that he thought it was an unfortunate circumstance that it had ever been introduced into the Senate, although it meets with his approbation when it is here. And now, when he who has been in the councils and transactions of this country for fifty years, who has witnessed all the vicissitudes and mutations through which the country has passed, who has been an actor in the most important scenes of the Union—when he does not recognize it as a healing and welcome measure, I ask Senators if I err in resisting it? They say it is here. It is here, and, if I had the power, I would kick it out. What, if a measure unwholesome or unwise is brought into the Senate, and it comes from the party of which I am a member, and its introduction is an error, is it not my duty to correct that error as far as I possibly can? Sir, I stand here for that general purpose. My constituents send me here for that purpose.
But I will not admit for a moment that this meets the sanction of the Executive. All his antecedents are in the face of it. Supporting him as I did, I most believe him consistent and truthful. He is upon the record as an opponent to agitation of any kind, whether in the Halls of Congress or anywhere else. He is pledged to keep down and resist agitation, as far as in his power, and that the institutions of the country shall sustain "no shock" during his Administration. If this bill passes, will there be no shock? Depend upon it, Mr. President, there will be a tremendous shock; it will convulse the country from Maine to the Rio
