OCR Text |
Show • Charles O'Conor. Mr. O'Conor, in response to a Letter from n Committee of l\lerchnnts nsking for a corrected copy of his Speech, made the following reply : NEw Yon.K, Dec. 20, 1859. GENTJ,.El\tEN : The measure you propose meets my entire approval. I have long thought that our disputes concerning N cgro ~lavery would soon terminate if the I)ublic mind could be drawn to the true issue, and steadily fixed upon. it. To effect this object was the sole nim of my address. ThouO'h its ministers cnn never permit the law of the land to be 0 questioned by private judgment, there is, n evertheless, such a thing ns natural justice. Natural justice has the Divine sanction; nnd it is impos iblc that any human law ·which conflicts with it should long endure. ·where mental cnlightemY~rnt abounds, where morality is professed by all, where the mind is free, ~pccch is free, and the press i~ free, is it possible, in the nature of thiJJg , that a law " ·hich is admitted to conflict with natural justice, and with God's own mandate, should long endure? Y ct all will admit that, within certain limits, at l east, our Constitution docs contain positive guarantees for the preservation of Negro Slavery in the old :tate. through all time, unlcs the local legislatures shall think fit to abolish it. And, consequently. if Negro Slavery, however humanely admini;-;tered or ju<lic.:ious:) regulated, be an institution ·which conflict with natural justice and with God's law, surely the most vehement and extreme admirers of J ohn 13rowu's sentiments arc right; and their denunciations against the Con titution, and against the most hallowed nn~es connected with it, are perfectly justifiable. The friends of truth- the patriotic Americans who would sustain their country's honor against foreign rivalry, and defend their country's interests against all as. ailants, err greatly when they contend with thrsc men on any point but one. Their gcncntl principles cannot be refuted; their logic is irresistible; the error, if any there be, is in their prcmi. cs. They assert that Negro 'lavery i unjust. This, and this alone, of all they say, is capable of being fairly argued against. If this propo ition cannot be refuted, our Union cannot endure, and it ought not to endure. Our negro bondmen can neither be exterminated nor transported to Mrica. They are too numerous for either process, and either, if practicable, would involve a violation of humanity. If they were emancipated, they would relapse into bnrbari:·nn, or n set of negro States would arise in our midst possessing political equality, and entitled to social equality. The di\;sion of parties would soon make the negro Charles O'Conor. members a powerful body in ConO'rcss- would place som f th · . . . . o • co em In htgh pohtlcal stat10ns, nnd occasionally let one into t11c "'~•' t' 1 · • . .C.XCCU lVC C 1Ull', It 1s vam to say that this could be endured· it is simp! · 'bl '\Vhnt, then, r emains.to be discus cd ~ , · y un pos:·n c . . The negro rncc is upon us. 'Vith a Constitution which holds them m bo~dnge, our Federal Union might be preserved; but if so holding them 111 bondage be a thinrr forbidden by Gocl and Natu ·c o 1 , we c.:nnnot lawfully so hold them, and the Union must perish. . Th!s is the inevitable result of that conflict which hns now r eached 1ts chmax. . Amon? t us at the N orth, the sole question for r eflection, stuclv, and fncndly mterchangc of thouO'ht should be- 1·s Nn(Yro cla · · ' , . . . . o . • . . · "o •) <very Ull.JUst ~ 'I he 1 atlonnl and dtspass10nate mquuer will find no d'1ffi" cult · · · )'Ill <lri'IVlfl <>' ~t ~y c.onclu ion. It is fit and proper; it is, in its own nature, as a~ 111 tltu. ttO. n., beneficial to both rnccs, ·, nnd the etwr".. ct of t}11· s assert•w n •t s ~ot dtmtmshed by our admitting that many faults nrc practised under 1t. Is not such the fact in r espect to all human laws and institutions~ I am, gentlemen, with great r csocct, your::; truly, . |