Page:Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston of Texas (1884).djvu/533

 my private views and opinions. I did not know that they were more orthodox than those of other gentlemen, nor did I wish to bring them in opposition to their views. It is possible that I'm ght be reconciled to the views which they have advanced; but they have not yet convinced me, and I have a right to give my opinion.

I have regretted, Mr. President, that in the course of this discussion it has been deemed necessary to draw any invidious distinctions between the North and the South. That to me for the last twelve or fourteen years has been a subject of deep and inexpressible regret. I have never heard that chord struck but its vibration was painful to me; and the other day, when gentlemen thought proper to advert to it, and when there was crimination and recrimination, I was deeply wounded. I had hoped that that subject was deeply buried, that it never would be resurrected again, at least within my hearing for the short period during which I am to occupy a seat on this floor. That good fortune, however, was not allotted to me. I had to hear the jarring sounds again, not of the death-knell, but of agitation; and what its ultimate consequence is to be, I know not; I hope never the severance of this Union. I hope, I believe, the Union is to be eternal. I can not but think that if the bright capacity, the cultivated intellect, and the undoubted patriotism of gentlemen here could be subsidized to the great object of devising ways and means for the perpetuation of the Union, for harmonizing the discordant sentiments that exist in the community, and reconciling difficulties, it would be a most desirable and commendable employment. It would seem, however, that they were rather devising causes and occasions of disagreement and alienation between the North and the South. Disunion has become a cant phrase. It is talked of familiarly. In olden times, and it is within my recollection, when it was first sounded in the House of Representatives, when it was first suggested in the debate on the tariff of 1824, I thought it was treason, and that the individual ought to have been crucified. It is no more acceptable to me now than it was then. It is more familiar, but that does not commend it either to my affection or to my judgment. Disunion, sir! You might as well tell me that you could have a healthy patient, and a whole man, if you were to cut the main artery of his life.

Have gentlemen ever reflected as to when, v/here, and how they are to begin disunion; and where it is to end? Will they cut the great Mississippi in two? Who is to have the mouth of it? Who is to command its source? Will it be those who agitate the subject, or are ultra upon it? Never, never! Look at the great West, rising like a giant. Think you they will be prohibited the privilege of commanding the great outlet of that river, when their productions are boundless and float upon its bosom every year, and every day of every year? Sir, it is madness. I must remark to my honorable friend from Georgia [Mr. Iverson], with all kindness of feeling personally, that when I heard him speak for the South, I could not but review scenes that passed before me in the old Chamber, when gentlemen rose and spoke for the South as if they were proxies of the South, and held the South in the hollow of their hands, or controlled its destinies by their will. Sir, I am of the South. I was born there. I have lived there. No other man in the whole South has a broader interest in it than myself;