By looking at the debates in the Convention which framed the National Constitution, it will be found that this clause was not hastily or carelessly adopted,--that it was the subject of much discussion, and was viewed as essentially…

But this great concession to the small States was coupled at the time with a condition that “money bills” should originate in the House of Representatives, where the people were represented according to numbers.

I might adduce other authorities; but here surely is enough to show that the provision was in reality one of the important compromises of the Constitution.

I approach the question as an inquirer anxious to find the real purpose.

The compromise between the small States and large States can be made completely effective, according to obvious intent of the authors of the Constitution, only by interdicting the Senate from originating the great appropriation bills.

If this interdict is restricted simply to tariff bills, which occur only at rare intervals, it becomes a very inadequate compensation for the surrender by the large States to the small States in the constitution of the Senate.

It was a maxim, that those who feel can best judge.

How, Sir, can the people hold the purse-strings, unless they hold the bills by which the purse is appropriated?

President, it is a received maxim, that it is the part of a good judge to amplify his jurisdiction; but it will hardly be accepted, that it is the part of the American Senate to amplify its powers, particularly in derogation of the popular…

And it surely cannot escape observation, that the present effort is launched at a moment when the popular branch promises to differ from the Senate on important questions of national policy.

You know well the happiness I find in any coöperation with the young men of that Association, and I need not assure you of the gratification with which I should participate in any services calculated to exalt the example of Washington.

His great name should now be employed for the suppression of that Slave Power which is the fruitful mother of so much wretchedness.

It will not be enough to quote his paternal words for Union: his example must be arrayed against the gigantic wrong which now disturbs this Union to its centre, and, in the madness of its tyranny, destroys the very objects of Union.

The play of Othello without the part of Othello would be a barren spectacle; and the example of Washington, without his testimony against the malevolent force which disturbs the Republic, would be hardly less barren.

Let the young men of Boston be encouraged to dwell on those sentiments and acts which, while they elevate his name, apply with prevailing power to the existing state of things among us.

With these things taken to heart, the example of Washington will exert its just conservative influence over the country, holding it back from the extension of that evil against which he set himself, and arousing the general sentiment to…

But with you I rejoice in this triumph of Freedom, which is the first achieved in the National Government, since the recognition, by the earliest Congress under Washington, of the Ordinance prohibiting Slavery in the Northwestern Territory.

To advance this victory, and to obtain its just fruits, there must be no relaxation of efforts, but constant exertion, with union among good men, and a determination to yield no jot in the conflict.

Thus undertaking, merely with the consent of the Senate, and without the concurrence of the House of Representatives, to abrogate a treaty, the President has assumed a power inconsistent with the Constitution, and disowned by the practice…

Such a usurpation cannot be justified by the good that is sought; for that good might have been sought, and may still be sought, by another course, in entire harmony with the Constitution and the practice of the Government.

Nor will any temporary purpose justify the removal of constitutional safeguards.

The Constitution declares that the President “shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur”; but it does not declare that the President, by and…

The absence of all language conferring this extraordinary power is itself an unanswerable argument against the existence of the power.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, AND ALL TREATIES MADE or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, SHALL BE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND.

Let us at all hazards prevent the extension of Slavery and the increase of the Slave Power.