294 The Dawn Of A New Era

THE DAWN OF A NEW ERA A SPEECH BY JOHN A. MARTIN December 31,1856 Transcribed by Ernst F. Tonsing, Ph.D. Thousand Oaks, California July 11, 2004 [Another speech found in the archives of the Kansas State Historical Society in Topeka, Kansas, is an advance on the propositions in John A. Martin's talk three weeks earlier in Brownsville, Pennsylvania, that the founding of the Republican party and its single most important stance against the extension of slavery into the territories, gave hopeful prospects for the future of America. In these eight, hand-written pages, Martin has made a great advance in his skills of persuasion, enlisting not only historical incidences but financial and geographical data showing how the presumed superiority in numbers in the North were far outweighed by the greater territorial area and resources of the South. He is focused and blunt: after reviewing the three eras of the fight against tyranny covered in his earlier speech, Martin asserts that it is slavery that has motivated the murderous situation in "bleeding Kansas," slavery that has shamed America abroad, and opposition to slavery that has created the extraordinary growth of the Republican Party. Martin ends his address with an appeal to remain faithful to the cause. -Ernst F. Tonsing] Three weeks ago, upon the occasion of my being appointed Essayist for the evening, I gave a short sketch of the "Progress of Tyranny."1 In that essay, briefly narrated the different views which the men of various ages of our Country, held in relation to Slavery, dividing them into three different ages; 1st. Opposition to Slavery, when the men of both the North and South united in reprobating Slavery as an evil, and condemning all Statesmen, who, as Mr. Jefferson said, "permit one-half of the citizens thus to trample upon the rights of the other, transforming these into despots, and those into enemies; destroying the morals of the one, and the love of country of the other," 2nd. The age of indifference, when the love of Freedom was sensibly abated, but the Slaveholders themselves had not yet come to defend Slavery as a good or righteous institution; nor sought to extend it; nor dreamed of rendering it co-equal with Freedom; nor denied the power of Congress to prohibit its ingress upon the National Territory; but believed with Chief Justice Marshall, "that Congress, in legislating for the Territories, possesses the combined powers of the State and General government," and many of them united with Harry Clay, who, at this time, strove to persuade the people of Ky. To emancipate their Slaves; and 3d, the present age of Extension, when Slavery just began to exhibit an aggressive character demanding a part of the Missouri territory for itself; making a Compromise to obtain it; destroying that Compromise to grasp more; denying 1

John A. Martin, "The Progress of Tyranny," a speech for the Franklin Literary Institute of Brownsville, Pennsylvania, December 10, 1856, transcribed by Ernst F. Tonsing.

the power of Congress to legislate for the Territories; pretending to leave the settlement of the question to the people; and when the people tried to settle it, murdering them in cold blood, and blockaded the national highways against their ingress. These are the different ages of Tyranny, and I now propose to spend a few moments in giving a history of a new age, which has just burst upon the country like a thunderbolt, and now stands forth in the broad, bright, glorious sunlight of Freedom, a child in years, but a full-grown giant in wisdom, in vigor, in strength, and in love of Liberty. It is the "Dawn of a New Era," the morning of Liberty; the birth of a child of Revolutionary principles. On the morning of Feb. 22nd, 1856, a small body of men met in Layfayette Hall, in the city of Pittsburgh, to organize a new party. They met in pursuance to a call published in the papers, and signed by A. P. Stone, of Ohio; I. J. Goodrich, of Mass.; David Wilmont of Pa.; Lawrence Brainard, of Vt.; and Wm. A. White, of Wis., requesting all those opposed to the present administration, and to the extension of Slavery, to meet with them to form a "Republican Party," and provide for a National Convention of some future time, to nominate Candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the U. S. Francis P. Blair, Sr., of Md., presided at the meeting, and after transacting some business, the Convention adjourned to meet in the City of Philadelphia, on the 17th Day of June, 1856. This was the first meeting of a young party, few in numbers, but destined to become in a few months, the first in point of numbers, in the Union, and whose principles will yet trimumph. It could hardly be called a Convention, however, as its object was only to appoint a day for a National Convention, and hence, we date the birth of the Republican party from the meeting in Philadelphia. June 17th 1856, the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill. Henry S. Lane, of Ind., an old-line Democrat, presided over this meeting; a platform of principles based upon the Declaration of Independence, was adopted, and on the first formal ballet, John C. Fremont, of Cal., was chosen the candidate for the Presidency, receiving 529 votes, while Judge McLean, of Ohio, received 37. Wm. L. Dayton, of N. J., was nominated for the V. P. on the 2nd ballot. With these men as their standard bearers, this young party went into the field to battle for freedom and justice, and although not five months old at the Presidential election, proved themselves the first party, in point of numbers, in the Union, but by the present rascally mode of voting by electors, they were defeated by a minority of 369,553. These are the exploits of this young party, which has sprung up, as if by magic, to crusade for freedom in freedom's birth-place. This is the dawn of the new Era of opposition to the extension of Tyranny. And, now we will ask, what mighty wrong, what unavenged villainy, what disgraceful crime, has so wrought upon the American people, that within 5 months a party should spring up, that could enlist eleven of the greatest States of the Confederacy in its ranks, and carry with it the largest popular vote any defeated candidate ever received. Let us examine into this thing, and see if we can fathom the reason. In 1820 the territory of Mo. Was to be admitted as a State, and presented her Constitution, tolerating Slavery, to Congress. But the Northern Representatives refused to vote for her admission as a Slave State, until, intimidated by a threat of Dissolution, a portion of them gave way, stipulating as a compensation for the surrender of Mo. that all other territory North of the line of 36° 30' should be forever free. This was a mutual

bargain, the South, receiving her valuation at the first by the admission of Missouri as a Slave State. But then the territories of Kansas and Nebraska were to be organized, and unluckily for Slavery, they were north of the Compromise Line. But undaunted by all this, Slavery here took a step unmatched for boldness, and casting aside all justice and plighted faith, repealed the Mo. Compact, and opened to itself the boundless territories of the North-west. Then the slumbering North awoke, surprised, grieved and indignant that the Compromise consecrated by the favor of a Clay and a Webster, and offered to them as a settlement of the question, should be thus ruthlessly violated. They protested against this wrong, and were told, in reply, by the Southerners, that they had too much Territory; that the South purchased it and had a right too [sic] it; that they had left the people perfectly free to regulate their own domestic institutions, and that the Northern men could go there and settle if they wished, but that they already had more power than the South, and had not paid as much for it. These serious charges demanded investigation, and the men of the North found upon examination, that while the 15 Free States contain 13,347,035 free white inhabitants, the 15 Slave States have only 6,184,404, or not half so many; and on the other hand the 15 Slave States contain 928,894 sq. miles, while the 15 Free States have only 454, 344, or not half the number of sq. miles as the 15 Slave States with only half the number of inhabitants. They found that the Louisiana territory, purchased from France in 1803, and Texas and Florida, since acquired, cost the general government the enormous sum of $832,764,928, and on examining how this Territory had been divided, they found that 5 new Slave States, La., Mis., Ark., Flo., and Texas, containing 543, 369 sq. miles, and having a representation in Congress of 10 Senators, and 16 Representatives, had been admitted, while the Free States, if any, were yet to be admitted. They found that out of all the Territory acquired since the Constitution was adopted (leaving Cal., what is called a Free State, but is, in reality, allied to the South, and is not included in any of the above calculations,) not a single Free State has been admitted. As to the South paying the expenses of the general government, they found that the annual receipts from postage in the Slave States, are $1,486,984, and the cost of mail transportation is $2,087,266, while in the Free States the receipts from postage are $4,391, 860; cost of mail transportation, $2,281,607, which large surplus of receipts over expenses in the North, goes to pay the discrepancy [?] in the South, and this they found to be the case in nearly every item of receipts and expenditures. Again, the found, as the late election proves, that while 7 Slave States of Va., S.C., N.C., Del, Flo., Mis., and Geo., having 45 Senators and Representatives in Congress, and 45 electoral votes, poll only 459,137 votes, our own State,2 having only 27 Senators and Representatives, and 27 electors, polls 459,682 votes, more than the 7 Slave States with their 45 electors. But these are not the only causes which called the Republican party into existence. The people of the North went into Kansas in accordance with the Nebraska Bill, to settle that Territory. They went as Democrats, and many of them, like Roberts, Reeder, Lane, Robinson and Walker, were friends of Douglas, and honestly believed the principles of the K. N. Bill3 to be correct if fairly carried out, and the[y] knew the north could send 2

Pennsylvania. The bill, commonly called the "Nebraska Bill," was introduced in January, 1854, and rescinded the agreement of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibiting the introduction of slavery north of the 36° 30' parallel. This line had been agreed to by the concession from the northern states to admit Missouri as a slave state. 3

enough emigrants there to make Kansas a Free State. But Slavery was on the alert, and to prevent the ingress of these men, they blockaded the Mo. River, and forced them to take a circuitous route thru Iowa. And when the Settlers of that Ter. held an election for the purpose of settling their own affairs, armed ruffians from a border State came over, took possession of the ballot-boxes, preventing the free-men of their Territory from exercising the rights guaranteed them by the Constitution and with fire and sword, destroyed the homes of the citizens, and forced their owners to flee for their lives. Then these men, who went away Democrats, came home Republicans, and denounced these outrages to their friends, who also joined with them in opposing the power of Slavery, and rapidly swelled the ranks of this young party. And when a Senator of the U.S., presuming that the Constitution guaranteed the right of free speech, denounced these outrages in fitting terms, he is quickly taught his mistake by a gallant Southern gentlemen, who gave him a good beating from behind his back, for thus daring to think this a land of free speech. This wrong was also proclaimed, and Democrats, who believed with Mr. Sumner, that free speech is one of the fundamental principles of this government, became Republicans. Ministers of the Gospel in the Southern States, happening to proclaim Slavery as inconsistent with religion, were dressed with a coat of tar and feathers, and forced to flee for their lives, while their churches were destroyed by the southern gentlemen. These facts became known, and thousands of the religious portion of the people joined the ranks of the Republicans. Again, editors in Southern States happening to express an opinion that their State would be more prosperous were the Slaves emancipated, were driven from the country by mobs, and their presses and type thrown into the rivers. These men, also, came North, and enlisted in the good fight, while thousands of Northern Editors, hearing their Story, joined with them. Then American citizens went to visit foreign lands. They came to England; visited the work-shops; saw the misery, the degradation, the sorrow which prevailed in these places, where God's free sunshine never penetrates, and where the free wind of heaven never stirs the dust of years. These Americans spoke of this to Englishmen, and their cheeks were made to burn with shame, as they were pointed to their own Slavery, as worse than this horrid, lingering death; told that their own glorious Flag, the Stripes and Stars which they thought the emblem of Liberty, and which they would shed the last drop of their blood to defend, were but emblematic, the stars of the number4 and the stripes of the lashes, inflicted upon the backs of their Slaves daily. They went to bayonet-guarded France, priest-ridden Italy, down-trodden Hungary; iron-ruled Russia, and every country they visited; every land their feet pressed, the same burning, cutting taunts saluted their ear. Even the poor serfs of the Czar, who know no will but their masters, and live in momentary fear of the [foreman?] would look up from their toil to tell them they would rather be Slaves in Russia than in the U.S. So these men returned home, dissatisfied with their journey; and almost disgusted with their country and its institutions, and entered into the new crusade of opposition to the extension of this wrong. These are a few among the multifarious causes which gave rise to the Republican party, and almost swept the country in a few months. True, the slave-power, by ridiculing "bleeding Kansas," and bringing forth their old scarecrow of Dissolution, have frightened enough timid men into their ranks to beat a party not five months old, but their 4

"Murder"? The handwriting is indistinct here.

success, as says the N. O. Delta, a Democratic Paper, "is a moral defeat." [sic] and Slavery will in a short time begin its backward march and forever be blotted from the statute-books of the nation.5 And when that time shall come; when virtue shall once more guide our nation, and Liberty shall again assume her Sceptre, how proud can an American be of his country. No more will the Declaration of Independence be termed a "self-evident lie," and scorned at as the delusion of a fanatical brain. No more will the floor of the American Senate Chamber, or the soil of American territories, be stained with the blood of her greatest orator, or best citizens. No more will American citizens in foreign lands be taunted until he turns with disgust from his native land, and almost wishes himself a native of down-trodden Europe; but all nations will honor our country, and hail her as the model republic of the world, and the first spot upon which freedom found a home. American citizens can then point with pride to their country, while future generations will unite in saying, "Glorious America! On thy pleasant valleys rest the sweet air of Freedom; around thy hills, like mighty mists, thy love of liberty clings; over the broad praries [sic], and beautiful lakes, Freedom's banner floats; and far away, in the dim horizon of thy past gleam the mighty memories of thy two Revolutions—the one against King George and the other against the oppression of King Cotton!" Let those who have enlisted in this new crusade, remain faithful, and every fresh breeze will bring to their ears the sound of the march of new recruits to fan the flame of liberty, andfightthe battles of freedom. "But keep that same old banner, for none can fitter be; Free-speech,free-soil,free-press,free-men,6 Fremont and Victory!" And sound again the bugles, Call the battle roll anew; If months have well-nigh won the field, What may not four years do.

5

The portion of the speech following this sentence is an adaptationfromMartin's speech, "The Republican Party, Not a Disunion Party," which he had crossed out. 6 In Martin's speech, "The Republican Party, Not a Disunion Party," this third line reads: "Press on the same old watchword."