FLT-bird: "Try reading rather than just responding to respond some time.
Speech of Mr. J. R. Underwood, upon the resolution proposing to censure John Quincy Adams for presenting to the House of representatives a petition praying for the dissolution of the union.
This is not the first time I've posted it."
So, turns out you don't have a quote, even though claiming you posted it now more than once.
Your link goes to the title of an 1842 anti-Adams speech, not to a quote from Adams.
But with some digging, I was able to turn up a tiny bit of information on this.
So let me say first, I like John Quincy Adams, an amazing fellow.
As a young man in 1781 he was a diplomat in the Revolutionary War and as an old man in 1847 he passed on its principles to a young Illinois Congressman named Abraham Lincoln.
Adams opposed slavery and fought it with everything he had in Congress from 1831 until his death in 1848.
Some of Adams' tactics in Congress were quirky & convoluted, especially in trying to oppose slavery despite the "gag rule" against that.
These tactics won Adams froth-at-the-mouth hatred from Democrats, on a par with what we see today against our President.
In 1837 [some say 1842] Adams was arguing against slavery despite the "gag rule" and presented a petition from 46 citizens in Haverhill, Massachusetts calling for disunion rather accepting slavery.
Some say Adams himself claimed disunion preferable to slavery, and that drove Democrats insane with rage and calling for Adams censure on grounds of "perjury" and "high treason".
The vote failed, 106 to 93.
So the key point to note from this, whether or not Adams himself proposed disunion, is that in 1837 (or 1842?) Southern Democrats considered even a suggestion of secession "high treason".
So why, by 1860 was secession no longer "high treason"?
Answer: because they were typical Democrats.
Young & old John Quincy Adams:
