"a Union sentiment there, worth cherishing," suggested "a Convention of
the People, consisting of delegates appointed by the States, in which it
would not be found unprofitable for the North and South, bringing their
respective griefs, claims, and proposed reforms, to a common
arbitrament, to meet, discuss, and determine upon a future"--before a
final appeal to arms. So, too, Horace Greeley, in the New York
Tribune,--[November 9, 1860.]--after weakly conceding, on his own part,
the right of peaceable Secession, said: "But while we thus uphold the
practical liberty, if not the abstract right, of Secession, we must
insist that the step be taken, if it ever shall be, with the
deliberation and gravity befitting so momentous an issue. Let ample
time be given for reflection; let the subject be fully canvassed before
the People; and let a popular vote be taken in every case, before
Secession is decreed." Other leading papers of the Northern press, took
similar ground for free discussion and conciliatory action.

In the Senate, as well as the House of Representatives--as also was
shown by the appointment, heretofore mentioned, of Select Committees to
consider the gravity of the situation, and suggest a remedy--the same
spirit of Conciliation and Concession, and desire for free and frank
discussion, was apparent among most of the Northern and Border-State
members of those Bodies. But these were only met by sneers and threats
on the part of the Fire-eating Secession members of the South. In the
Senate, Senator Clingman of North Carolina, sneeringly said: "They want
to get up a free debate, as the Senator (Mr. Seward) from New York
expressed it, in one of his speeches. But a Senator from Texas told me
the other day that a great many of these free debaters were hanging from
the trees of that country;" and Senator Iverson, of Georgia, said:
"Gentlemen speak of Concession, of the repeal of the Personal Liberty
bills. Repeal them all to-morrow, and you cannot stop this revolution."