In this declaration there is unmistakably intense feeling for the Union; but also some indecision; for what could have been a more practical application of Calhoun’s teaching than Rhett’s amendment to Slade’s bill to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia? That was a resolution upon which some strong action could be erected. Twelve years had passed, nothing had been done, and now came the resolution of the Vermont Legislature. In the first shock which it gave him, Calhoun was unjust to his own following. He said: “Mr. President, I intended not to say a word on this subject. I have long labored faithfully to repress the encroachments of the North, at the commencement I saw where it would end and must end; and I despair of ever seeing it ended in Congress. It will go to its end, for gentlemen have already yielded to the current of the North which they admit they cannot resist, Sir, what the South will do is not for me to say. They will meet it, in my opinion, as it ought to be met.”[78] A month later he reviewed the political situation in a most elaborate and searching analysis, his last great speech, read for him by Senator Mason, of Virginia. “How Can the Union be Preserved?” In endeavoring to give an “answer to this great question,” he asserted that the discontent of the South was due to the fact that political power had been taken from that section and transferred to the North, not through natural causes, but by legislation which could be classed under three heads, the first of which was exclusion from common territory; second a system of revenue under which an undue portion of the burden of taxation had been imposed upon the South, and the proceeds appropriated to the North; third a system of measures changing the original character of the government. The result, he claimed, had been a change from a Constitutional Federal Republic to the despotism of a numerical majority in which a question of vital importance to the minority was threatened: “The relation between the races in the Southern section ... which cannot be destroyed without subjecting the two races to the greatest calamity, and the section to poverty, desolation and wretchedness.”[79] Whether right or wrong, the first of these claims had been settled by the Missouri Compromise in 1820, which the South had acquiesced in. The second Calhoun, himself, had undertaken to right in 1832, and if there had been a failure it was due in some measure to his inability to diagnose with sufficient accuracy the situation at that time.