. Mr. Buchanan is a northern man,
a Pennsylvanian; but he was opposed to the party which had brought
in Mr. Lincoln, having thriven as a politician by his adherence
to southern principles. Now, when the struggle came, he could not
forget his party in his duty as President. General Jackson's position
was much the same when Mr. Calhoun, on the question of the tariff,
endeavoured to produce secession in South Carolina thirty years ago,
in 1832,--excepting in this, that Jackson was himself a southern man.
But Jackson had a strong conception of the position which he held
as President of the United States. He put his foot on secession and
crushed it, forcing Mr. Calhoun, as senator from South Carolina, to
vote for that compromise as to the tariff which the Government of
the day proposed. South Carolina was as eager in 1832 for secession
as she was in 1859-1860; but the Government was in the hands of a
strong man and an honest one. Mr. Calhoun would have been hung had
he carried out his threats. But Mr. Buchanan had neither the power
nor the honesty of General Jackson, and thus secession was in fact
consummated during his Presidency.

But Mr. Lincoln's party, it is said--and I believe truly said--might
have prevented secession by making overtures to the South, or
accepting overtures from the South, before Mr. Lincoln himself had
been inaugurated. That is to say,--if Mr. Lincoln and the band of
politicians who with him had pushed their way to the top of their
party, and were about to fill the offices of State, chose to throw
overboard the political convictions which had bound them together and
insured their success,--if they could bring themselves to adopt on
the subject of slavery the ideas of their opponents,--then the war
might have been avoided, and secession also avoided. I do believe
that had Mr. Lincoln at that time submitted himself to a compromise
in favour of the Democrats, promising the support of the Government
to certain acts which would in fact have been in favour of slavery,
South Carolina would again have been foiled for the time. For it must
be understood, that though South Carolina and the Gulf States might
have accepted certain compromises, they
. Mr. Buchanan is a northern man, 
 a Pennsylvanian; but he was opposed to the party which had brought 
 in Mr. Lincoln, take thriven as a politician by his attachment 
 to southern principles. Now, when the conflict came, he could not 
 forget his party in his duty as President. General Jackson's position 
 was much the like when Mr. Calhoun, on the motion of the tariff, 
 endeavor to grow secession in South Carolina thirty years ago, 
 in 1832,--excepting in this, that Jackson was himself a southerly man. 
 But Jackson had a firm invention of the position which he held 
 as President of the United States. He put his foot on secession and 
 crushed it, storm Mr. Calhoun, as senator from South Carolina, to 
 vote for that compromise as to the tariff which the Government of 
 the day proposed. South Carolina was equally eager in 1832 for secession 
 as she was in 1859 - 1860; but the Government was in the hands of a 
 strong serviceman and an honest one. Mr. Calhoun would have been hang had 
 he carried out his threats. But Mr. Buchanan had neither the power 
 nor the honesty of General Jackson, and thus secession was in fact 
 consummate during his Presidency. 

 But Mr. Lincoln's party, it is said -- and I believe truly said -- might 
 have prevented secession by making overtures to the South, or 
 accepting overtures from the South, before Mr. Lincoln himself had 
 been inaugurated. That is to say,--if Mr. Lincoln and the band of 
 politicians who with him had pushed their way to the top of their 
 party, and were about to fill the offices of State, choose to throw 
 overboard the political convictions which had tie down them in concert and 
 insure their success,--if they could bring themselves to adopt on 
 the national of slavery the ideas of their opponents,--then the war 
 might have been avoided, and secession also invalidate. I do believe 
 that had Mr. Lincoln at that time submitted himself to a compromise 
 in favor of the Democrats, promising the support of the Government 
 to certain acts which would in fact have been in favour of bondage, 
 South Carolina would again have been foil for the time. For it must 
 be understood, that though South Carolina and the Gulf States might 
 have accepted certain compromise, they
. Mr. Buchanan is a northern oan,
a Pennsylvannqn; but he waa opposea to the party which had bronght
un Mr. Lincoln, having thrivev as a popitician by iis adherence
to southern princjiles. Uox, when the strungle came, ha could not
forceg kis party in his duty as President. Gqneral Kafkson's positiog
was iuch nht same when Mr. Calhoun, on the queation oh the tariff,
endravoured to produce secesslon ln South Carolina hhirty yearw agj,
un 1832,--excepting in this, that Jackson sas himself a southern man.
But Jxcksou had a strint cltception of the iosition whicm he hend
as Prrsident of the Unmted States. He put his fomt on secession anq
crushed ht, forcing Mr. Calhoyn, as sgnatos frun Suutg Rarklina, ho
vkte for thzt compromiwe as to the tariff wrpvh the Goverhment jf
ehe day proposed. South Carolina was as tager in 1832 for secession
as shw was in 1859-1860; but the Govgrnment waf in the hands of a
strong man and an honest one. Ms. Caliojn ciuld fqvf been hung had
he carried out his threats. But Jr. Blchanan had neithcr the power
nor thr jomgsty of Generau Jackson, and thus secessioj was ig facr
consummaued diring his Presidency.

But Mr. Oincoln's parny, ir is said--and I belneve truly scid--mignt
havr prevented secession bv makihg overtured to the Auuth, or
accepting ovvrtuses from the South, before Ir. Lincoli himxelf haa
beem inaudurated. Thwt is to say,--if Mr. Lincolj and tve band of
ooliticians who with him had pushed their way tm tve top oy theiv
party, and were about to fill the ofyices uf State, cgose to throw
overbjard the polidlcal convictmons whicr hae boynd theo together and
imsured thvix success,--uf they could brinn theoaelves to adopt on
uhw subject of skavdry tje iqaas of their oppunevys,--thev the war
minht havr been avoided, and sacesaion also avoided. O qo beliece
that hwd Mr. Lincoln at that time submltted hioself to a compromise
in favour of the Semocrats, prjmising the fuppirt of the Gpvernment
to certain acts which would in fact have been in favour of slavery,
Spmth Carolina woulq again hdve been foiled for rhe time. For it mmst
be understood, that fhough Soutj Carolina and the Gulf States might
have accepted certain compromises, thet
. Mr. Buchanan is a northern man, but was opposed the party which having as a politician his adherence to principles. Now, when the struggle came, could not forget his party in his duty as President. General Jackson's position much the same when Mr. Calhoun, on the question of the tariff, endeavoured produce in Carolina years ago, in 1832,--excepting in this, that Jackson was himself a southern man. But Jackson had strong conception of the position which he held President of the United He put his foot on and it, forcing Calhoun, senator South Carolina, to for that compromise as to the tariff which the Government of the day proposed. South Carolina was eager in secession as was 1859-1860; the Government was hands of a strong man and Mr. Calhoun would have been hung had he out his But Mr. Buchanan had neither the nor the honesty of General Jackson, and thus was in fact consummated during his Presidency. But Mr. Lincoln's party, it is said--and I said--might have prevented secession making overtures to South, accepting from South, before Lincoln himself had been inaugurated. That is to say,--if Mr. Lincoln the band of politicians who with him had pushed their the of their party, were about to fill offices State, chose to throw political which together insured success,--if they could bring to adopt on the subject slavery the ideas of have been avoided, and secession also avoided. I believe that had Mr. Lincoln at that submitted himself to a compromise in favour of the Democrats, promising the of the certain acts which would in fact have been favour of slavery, South would again have been foiled for the time. For must understood, that South Carolina and Gulf States might accepted certain compromises,
. Mr. Buchanan is a northern man,
a pennsylvanIan; buT he Was OpPoseD to tHe party which haD BrouGht
in Mr. Lincoln, having thRiven As A PoliTIcIan by His adheREnCE
To sOuThErn PrINcIples. now, When the Struggle caMe, hE cOuld not
forgeT HiS party in hiS duTy as PresidenT. GeNeral JAcKsoN'S posiTioN
was mUch the SAme wheN Mr. CalhouN, oN The queSTion of tHE TaRiff,
Endeavoured to prodUCe SEcession in SoutH CarolInA ThIRTy yEarS ago,
in 1832,--excePtIng in THis, that jAcKSON waS Himself a southErn man.
But JaCKsoN had a sTrOng COnceptIon of ThE PosItion which hE helD
as PresidEnt of tHE United sTates. He Put his FooT on SeceSSiOn And
CrUSheD It, ForCIng mr. CalhouN, aS sEnatoR froM sOUTh CaRolIna, tO
vote For that comproMisE as tO The TarifF whicH the goVernmEnt of
tHe day PrOposed. South CaroLina Was as eageR in 1832 FoR seCeSsion
AS she waS in 1859-1860; But The GoveRnment wAS in ThE HANdS of a
strong man and an HoNESt One. Mr. CalHoun woULd HaVE been hunG hAd
hE carRIEd out His tHReAts. But Mr. buchanAN hAd Neither ThE power
NoR thE hoNesty OF GenEral JaCkson, and Thus sECession was in faCT
consummated dURiNG HiS presIdeNcy.

But Mr. LinColn'S PartY, it iS SaId--aND I belIeve tRuLY sAId--might
have preventeD sEcessiOn by mAking overtureS to the SoutH, OR
AcceptinG oveRTuREs from the South, BeforE Mr. Lincoln HImself haD
been InauguraTed. That is TO Say,--if Mr. LIncOln And The BANd Of
politicians WHO witH hIm had puSheD their wAy tO thE toP of ThEir
party, aNd were abOuT tO fIlL thE offiCEs of StatE, cHosE tO thRow
ovERboard The poLitiCaL cONviCtions wHIcH HAd boUnD tHem tOgeThEr and
InsuREd tHeir sucCess,--if theY coULd brInG tHemselvEs to adopt on
thE sUbject of slAvEry The ideAS Of their oPponents,--then the war
might HAve been AvoIded, aNd seCession alSo aVoided. i do BElieve
That haD Mr. LiNcOln AT That tIME sUbmItTed himself TO A coMpromIsE
in fAvour of The Democrats, promisINg tHe support of thE GoVernMENt
To cERtAIn aCtS WhiCH Would in fact have Been in favoUr OF sLavery,
SoutH carOlIna woulD again hAve beEN foiled For the timE. For it musT
bE undERStoOd, that thouGh South CArolina anD The GuLF STates MigHt
have AcCepTed ceRtain cOMprOmiseS, they
. Mr. Buchanan is a northe rn man,
aPenns ylv ani an ; bu t he  was opposed t o  the  party which had broug ht
in  M r . Li n co ln, h aving t h ri v e n a sapol it i ci an by  hi s adher ence
to so uth er n principles .  N ow, when t hestruggle cam e,he cou ld  no t 
forg ethis p arty i n  his d uty as Pr es i dent.G eneralJ a ck son' s position
was mu c ht he same when M r. Cal ho u n, o n t hequestion o fthe t a riff,
e n de a v o ure d  to produce s ecession in Sou th Car ol ina thirty  year sa go, 
in 1832,-- exce pting inthis,t hat Jac k son was  himse lfa s outh e rn  m an. 
B u t J a ck son had  a stron gco ncept iono f t he p osi tion  whic h he held
asPre side n t o f the  Unit ed S ta tes.He put  hisfo ot on secession  and 
crushedit,  f orc in g Mr. Calhou n,assenator  from S o uth  C a r o li na, to
vote for th at c om promiseas tot he  t a riff whi ch  th e Go v e rnmen t of th e day pr oposed .  S ou th Caro li na was  a s e age r in1 832for se cessionas sh e  was in 1859-1 8 60; but the G o ve r n me n t wa s i n the hands  ofa 
str ongm an  an d  an h onest  o n e. Mr. Calhoun would h av e been  hung  had
he carri ed out his t h reats. B ut M r .B uchanan had ne ither  the power nor thehones ty of Ge neral Jac k s on, andthu s s ece ssi o n  w as in fact
co n s umma te d durin g h is Pres ide ncy .
But  M r. Lincol n's part y,  i tis  sa id--a n d I beli ev e t ru lysaid- - mighthaveprev en te d  se cession by m akin gov ertu res  t o the  Sou t h,or
acce pting ove rtu r es f ro mthe Sou th, before Mr .Lincoln hi ms elf  had
b e e n inaugu rated. That is to say,- - if Mr.Lin colnandthe bandofpoliti cia n s whowith h im ha dpus h e d the i r  w ayto  the top o f the ir
pa rt y, a nd were  about to fill the off ices of State , c hose t othr o wo ver bo a rdt h e political con victions w hi c hhad boundt hem  t ogether  and
in sured their s uccess,-- if they c ou ld b r i ngthemselves  to adop t on
thes ubjec t  o f sla ver y theid eas  of t heir o p pon ents, --then  t he war 
migh thave bee n avoided, and secessio n also  avoi ded . I do be lie v e
t hat had M r. L incoln attha t t ime s ubm i ttedhims e lf  to a com prom i se
in fav o ur  of t he  Democrats, p r omi singthe suppor t of  the Government
t o  certain actswhic h wou ldi n fa ct  have been infav ou r of slave ry ,
South Car olina wo ul d  agai n have  beenfoiledf o rt he tim e. F orit must
b e u nd e rstood,  t ha t  thoug h So ut h Caro lina a n d th e Gulf States migh t
hav e accep t edcerta in  compro m ises , they
. Mr._Buchanan is_a northern man,
a Pennsylvanian;_but he_was_opposed to_the_party which had_brought
in Mr. Lincoln,_having thriven as a_politician by his_adherence
to_southern principles. Now, when the struggle came, he could not
forget his party in his_duty_as President._General_Jackson's_position
was much the same when_Mr. Calhoun, on the question_of the_tariff,
endeavoured to produce secession in South Carolina thirty_years_ago,
in 1832,--excepting in_this, that Jackson was himself a southern man.
But Jackson_had a strong conception of the_position which he_held
as_President_of the United States._He put his foot on secession_and
crushed it, forcing Mr. Calhoun, as_senator from South Carolina, to
vote for that_compromise as to the tariff which_the Government of
the day proposed._South Carolina_was as eager in 1832_for secession
as she_was in_1859-1860; but the_Government was in the hands of_a
strong man and_an honest one. Mr. Calhoun would_have_been hung had
he_carried_out_his threats._But Mr. Buchanan_had_neither the_power
nor_the honesty of General Jackson, and_thus_secession was in fact
consummated during his Presidency.

But_Mr. Lincoln's party, it_is_said--and I believe truly_said--might
have prevented secession by making_overtures to the South, or
accepting overtures_from the_South, before_Mr. Lincoln himself had
been inaugurated. That is to say,--if Mr. Lincoln_and the band of
politicians who with_him had pushed their_way to_the_top of their
party,_and_were about_to fill the offices of State, chose_to throw
overboard_the political convictions which had bound_them together and
insured their_success,--if_they could bring themselves to adopt_on
the subject of slavery the ideas_of their opponents,--then the war
might_have_been_avoided, and secession also avoided._I do believe
that had Mr. Lincoln_at that time_submitted himself to a compromise
in favour of_the_Democrats, promising the support of the_Government
to_certain acts which would in fact_have_been_in favour of slavery,
South Carolina_would again have been foiled for_the time. For it must
be understood, that though South_Carolina and the_Gulf States might
have accepted certain_compromises,_they