|
|
Jefferson Davis's Farewell to the U.S.
Senate
January 21, 1861
I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have
satisfactory evidence that
the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people, in convention assembled,
has declared her
separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course, my functions are
terminated
here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce
that fact to
my associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go
into argument;
and my physical condition would not permit me to do so, if it were otherwise; and yet it
seems to become
me to say something on the part of the State I here represent on an occasion as solemn as
this.
It is known to Senators who have served with me here that I have for many years advocated,
as an
essential attribute of State sovereignty, the right of a State to secede from the Union.
Therefore, if I had
thought that Mississippi was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing
necessity, I
should still, under my theory of the Government, because of my allegiance to the State of
which I am a
citizen, have been bound by her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do
think she has
justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people before that act
was taken,
counseled them then that, if the state of things which they apprehended should exist when
their
Convention met, they should take the action which they have now adopted.
I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with the advocacy of the
right of a State
to remain in the Union, and to disregard its constitutional obligation by the
nullification of the law. Such is
not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often confounded, are, indeed, antagonistic
principles.
Nullification is a remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, against the agent
of the States. It is
only to be justified when the agent has violated his constitutional obligations, and a
State, assuming to
judge for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals to the other
states of the Union for a
decision; but, when the States themselves and when the people of the States have so acted
as to convince
us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time,
arises the doctrine of
secession in its practical application.
A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has often been arraigned for want of
fealty to the
Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification because it preserved the Union. It was
because of his
deep-seated attachment to the Union -- his determination to find some remedy for existing
ills short of a
severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States -- that Mr. Calhoun
advocated the
doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be within the limits of
State power, not to
disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the
States for their
judgement.
Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis
that the states are
sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again when a
better
comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable rights of the people of
the States,
will prevent any one from denying that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the
grants which it
has made to any agent whomsoever.
I, therefore, say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi, believing it to be
necessary and
proper, and should have been bound by their action if my belief had been otherwise; and
this brings me to
the important point which I wish, on this last occasion, to present to the Senate. It is
by this confounding
of nullification and secession that the name of a great man whose ashes now mingle with
his mother earth
has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase, "to execute
the laws," was an
expression which General Jackson applied to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws
while yet a
member of the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be
executed over the
United States, and upon the people of the United States. They have no relation to any
foreign country. It
is a perversion of terms -- at least, it is a great mis-apprehension of the case -- which
cites that expression
for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union. You may make war on a
foreign state. If
it be the purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has withdrawn from
the Union;
but there are no laws of the United States to be executed within the limits of a seceded
State. A State,
finding herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is -- in which her
safety requires that
she should provide for the maintenance of her rights out of the Union -- surrenders all
the benefits (and
they are known to be many), deprives herself of the advantages (and they are known to be
great), severs
all the ties of affection (and they are close and enduring), which have bound her to the
Union; and thus
divesting herself of every benefit -- taking upon herself every burden -- she claims to be
exempt from any
power to execute the laws of the United States within her limits.
I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the bar of the Senate,
and when
the doctrine of coercion was rife, and to be applied against her, because of the rescue of
a fugitive slave in
Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of egotism, but to
show that I am not
influenced in my opinions because the case is my own, I refer to that time and that
occasion as containing
the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct is based. I then
said that if
Massachusetts -- following her purpose through a stated line of conduct -- chose to take
the last step,
which separates her from the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one
dollar nor one man to
coerce her back; but I will say to her, Godspeed, in memory of the kind associations which
once existed
between her and the other States.
It has been a conviction of pressing necessity -- it has been a belief that we are to be
deprived in the
Union of the rights which our fathers bequeathed to us -- which has brought Mississippi to
her present
decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created free and equal, and
this made the
basis of an attack upon her social institutions; and the sacred Declaration of
Independence has been
invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration is to be
construed by the
circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their
independence;
the people of those communities were asserting that no man was born -- to use the language
of Mr.
Jefferson -- booted and spurred, to ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created
equal -- meaning
the men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no man
inherited the right
to govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to families; but
that all stations
were equally within the grasp of each member of the body politic. These were the great
principles they
announced; these were the purposes for which they made their declaration; these were the
ends to which
their enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it
that among the
items of arraignment against George III was that he endeavored to do just what the North
has been
endeavoring of late to do, to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration
announced that
the negroes were free and equal, how was the prince to be arraigned for raising up
insurrection among
them? And how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the colonies to
sever
their connection with the mother-country? When our Constitution was formed, the same idea
was
rendered more palpable; for there we find provision made for that very class of persons as
property; they
were not put upon the equality of footing with white men -- not even upon that of paupers
and convicts;
but, so far as representation was concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste,
only to be
represented in the numerical proportion of three-fifths. So stands the compact which binds
us together.
Then, Senators, we recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when
you deny
them, and when you deny us the right to withdraw from a Government which, thus perverted,
threatens
to be destructive of our rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim
our
independence and take the hazard. This is done, not in hostility to others, not to injure
any section of the
country, not even for our own pecuniary benefit, but from the high and solemn motive of
defending and
protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our duty to transmit unshorn to our
children.
I find in myself perhaps a type of the general feeling of my constituents towards yours. I
am sure I feel no
hostility toward you, Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever
sharp
discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now say, in the presence of my
God, I
wish you well; and such, I feel, is the feeling of the people whom I represent toward
those whom you
represent. I, therefore, feel that I but express their desire when I say I hope, and they
hope, for peaceable
relations with you, though we must part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the
future, as they
have been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on every portion
of the country,
and, if you will have it thus, we will invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them
from the power
of the lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our trust in
God and in our firm
hearts and strong arms, we will vindicate the right as best we may.
In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a variety of
Senators, I see now
around me some with whom I have served long; there have been points of collision, but,
whatever of
offense there has been to me, I leave here. I carry with me no hostile remembrance.
Whatever offense I
have given which has not been redressed, or for which satisfaction has not been demanded,
I have,
Senators, in this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in the
heat of
discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered by the remembrance of any injury
received, and
having discharged the duty of making the only reparation in my power for any injury
offered.
Mr. President and Senators, having made the announcement which the occasion seemed to me
to require,
it only remains for me to bid you a final adieu.
(Source: The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, vol. 1, pp. 221-225, 1958
reprint
edition).
