was always ready to abandon it for another? Is it possible that those who changed leading doctrines as easily as they changed their clothes, should have cared for principle at all? Could it be true conviction that ruled them? And if it was not conviction that ruled them, what concern could their consciences have in their politics?
Oh, what a sight is this! In the old world I saw the spirit of noble nations subdued by the bayonets of hireling armies. I have seen their battalions, themselves formed of the children of the people, shoulder their muskets and march against their own friends and brothers, the defenders of their common rights and liberties; but it was not their choice to do so, for the terror of command overawed their hearts, and brutal necessity directed their steps. And I have seen other thousands sacrifice all they had, and fight and suffer and die, in order to bequeath to the people the right to express their true convictions and their free-will at the ballot-box, and for no other cause has humanity struggled more, and for no other has more of the noblest blood of mankind been shed. To see the efforts of a liberty-loving nation crushed down by brute violence is a spectacle that fills our soul with sadness, but we do reverence to those who perish in their noble attempts. More deplorable still, because less honorable, is the lot of those who are forced to fight against their own rights and their own liberty; they are the victims of despotism, without being the champions of freedom. But what feelings have our hearts, what designation has our language, for those who, in a free country like this, unfettered by any kind of despotism, with no terror to overawe and no force to coerce them, sacrifice their convictions and their consciences to a moral tyranny of their own making? [Cheers.] And these we find in our midst. Do not try to disguise the fact. There are no bayonets here against convictions. There is no power here that could prevent
