because it was desirable to conciliate their votes, even at the
expense of consistency and the unity of the Constitution. That great
document, while constantly affirmed to be the most broad and liberal
compact ever devised for the governance of man, has always been found
to be narrow enough to serve the purposes of the slave oligarch and
the make-shifts of the party in power; and has always afforded ample
shelter and protection to the lazzaroni of Italy, the paupers of
Ireland, and the incendiary spirits of other countries, but yet cannot
shield a black man, a citizen and to the manor born, in any common,
civil or political right which usually attaches to citizenship.

A putative citizen of the United States commits murder in the
jurisdiction of a friendly power, and the Chief Executive of fifty
millions of people deems it incumbent upon him as the head of the
faction to which he belongs to "call the attention of Congress" to the
fact, ostensibly in the interest of justice and fair-play, but
obviously to court the good will of the American sympathizers of the
assassin. While on the contrary, within a few hundred miles of the
National capital, an armed mob of citizens shoot down in cold blood a
dozen of their fellow-citizens, but the Chief of the Nation did not
deem it at all pertinent or necessary to "call the attention of
Congress" to the matter. And why? Because, forsooth, the newspapers,
voicing the wishes of the rabble and the cormorants of trade, cry down
the "Bloody Shirt," proclaiming, with brazen effrontery, that each
State is "_sovereign_," and that its citizens have a _perfect right_
to terrorize and murder one another, if they so desire. The Bible
declares that "Righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach
to any people." God save the Union!

But such argument is indicative, not only of American politics but of