E458 3 fig"" ""'™™"'' "-'""^ ^i'?niii^mif,,iir,?I!„ ^"*stlon, and how to settle oljn 3 1924 032 776 282 Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032776282 THE AMERICAN QUESTION, AND HOW TO SETTLE IT. CANADA. NOETH. L _A SOUTH. FEEE TEADE. 'Thb Weibabb 01' TEE Peoeib is the Highest Law.' LONDON: SAMPSON LOW, SON, AND CO., 47, LXTDO-ATE HILL. 1863. \The right of translation is reserved.^ PEIHTED BY •TO HIT EDWAED TATLOE, LITTLE QUEEST BTEEET, MWCOLM'S ITTH" FIELUa. "^PresiJsnt White CONTENTS. — ♦ — Page Inteoductoet 1 The Ameeican Question 5 How TO Settle it 17 The Blockade Question .... ... 21 The Eight oe Secession 24 Effects op the Union 41 Defects op the Union . .60 Political Opbeation op the Union 75 The Stettggle poe Powee ... 86 Taeipfs 100 The Fugitive Slave Law .... 113 The Noeth and South ... . . .... 131 The Emancipation Question 150 The Teeatment op Slaves ... 182 The Boundaet Question 240 Conclusion 252 THE AMERICAN QUESTION, HOW TO SETTLE IT. CHAPTER I. INTEODUCTOET, On the 30th October 1862, M. Drouyn de Lhuys, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, addressed a despatch to the Ambassador of France at London, and at St. Petersburgh, pro- posing an Armistice between the Northern and Southern States of America, with a view to the mediation of the two great maritime neutral Powers. The following are a few of the translated para- graphs from that State document : — "Europe watches with a painful interest the struggle which has been raging for more than a year upon the American Continent. The hosti- lities have provoked sacrifices and efforts cer- Z THE AMERICAN QUESTION. tainly of a nature to inspire the highest idea of the perseverance and energy of the two popula- tions ; but this spectacle which does so much honor to their courage, is only given at the price of numberless calamities and at a prodigious ef- fusion of blood. To these results of a civil war, which from the very first assumed vast propor- tions, there is still to be added the apprehension of a servile war, M'hich would be the culminating poiut of so many irreparable disasters." " Under the influence of the intimate relations which the extension of intercourse has multiplied between the various regions of the globe, Europe itself has suffered from the consequences of a crisis which dried up one of the most fruitful sources of the public wealth, and which became for the great centres of labor the cause of the most sad trials. "When the conflict commenced we held it our duty to observe the most strict neutrality, in concert with the other maritime Powers, and the Washington Cabinet has repeatedly acknow- ledged the honorable manner in which we ad- hered to that line of conduct. The sentiments which dictated it to us have undergone no change. But the benevolent character of that neutrality, instead of imposing upon the Powers INTRODUCTORY. 3 an attitude which might resemble indifference, ought rather to make them of service to the two parties, by helping them out of a position which seems to have no issue." ■jp ^t "^ 7p Tfs " All these circumstances taken together point to the opportunity of an armistice." * * " The three Cabinets would exert their influ- ence at Washington, as well as with the Con- federate States, to obtain an Armistice for six months, during which every act of war, direct or indirect, should provisionally cease on sea as well as on land, and it might be, if necessary, ulte- riorly prolonged. " These overtures would not imply on our part any judgment on the origin or issue of the struggle, nor any pressure upon the negociations wliich might, it is to be hoped, ensue in favor of an Armistice. Our task would consist solely in smoothing down obstacles and in interfering only in the measure determined upon by the two parties. We should not, in fact, believe our- selves called upon to decide, but to prepare the solution of the difficulties which hitlierto have opposed a reconciliation between the belligerent parties." * * » « « " Should the event not justify the hope of the B 2 4 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. three Powers, and should the ardour of the: struggle overrule the wisdom of their councils,, this attempt would not be the less honorable for them. They would have fulfilled a duty of hu- manity, more especially indicated in' a war in which excited passions render all direct attempts at negociation more difficult. It is the mission) which international law assigns to neutrals, at the same time that it prescribes to them a strict impartiality, and they could never make a nobler use of their influence than by endeavoring to put an end to a struggle which causes so much suffering, and compromises such great interests; throughout the whole world. "Finally, even without immediate results, these overtures would not be entirely useless, for they might encourage public opinion to views of conciliation, and thus contribute to hasten the moment when the return of peace might become possible." * * » In the sentiments expressed in this admirable State Paper most impartial minds will concur. CHAPTER II. THE AMERICAN QUESTION. To doubt the cause of Secession, or to attribute it to anything but Slavery, is to show little ac- quaintance with the history of the American Union. That secession of the Southern States from the Northern was an inevitable consequence of such ■a Union, if slavery had not existed, may be as- sumed, but that is not the question^ The question is, — What has been the cause of recession ? ' The answer is, — Slavery ; and this is the only answer which will bear examination. ' Political causes, to be found in conflicting in- terests arising out of the union of so many and distant States, of different capacities and powers, under one Pederal Government, have all operated, but as secondary causes only. These, in time, without Slavery, must have joperated to the disruption of such a Union, and '.would then have been primary causes. .; 6 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. All these have been hastened in their operation by the baneful effects of Slavery, and the Union is broken for ever. The mischief, if it be a mischief, is irreparable, and the abolition of Slavery now could not re- store the Union. Secondary causes would then be primary, and must prevail. The Union is gone for ever. No Union, under a Republican form of Go- vernment, ever has held together, or ever will hold together, for any great length of time, so great an extent of territory as comprised in the American Union. As population increases, and interests become diverse, the struggle for power will arise and grow, and the machinery of govern- ment will become weaker and weaker, until it stops and falls to pieces. Those who look closely into the question will see that, this is a vain at- tempt to set aside providential laws by human ingenuity. A purely republican form of government never has endured for any considerable length of time ; not that there is any Divine right in a King, but that a constituted head is a Divine institution. It is quite true, that the power is with the People, but it is no less true that they will exer cise the power to their own destruction, without a constituted and acknowledged head, whether THE AMERICAN QUESTION. 7 King or President, and that he governs only by the will of the People. The Sovereign will can- not long be maintained against the will of a ma- jority, or a large and powerful body, of the Peo- ple, whether right or wrong. The question of right or wrong affects only the ultimate result of good or evil. It may be right or wrong in a People to remove their chosen Head, but the re- sponsibility is with them, and from that there is no escape. They may elect their Head for a li- mited time, and may remove him when he is best able to serve them. They may invest him with more or less power, — with too much or too little, — but the responsibility and the consequence is still with them. If with more power than is compatible with the free exercise of their own right of thought and action, they will certainly soon find them- selves in the power of a tyrant : if with less than is required for their own protection against them- selves, they will certainly soon find themselves in a state of conflict with each other, which must end in rebellion, and the discomfiture of one party or the other, and the weakest must yield to the strongest. If they found their Government on a true prin- ciple, which in practice they deny, and thereby outrage Divine law and feelings common to hu- 8 .THE AMERICAN QUESTION. nianityj they are like the people who build their houses within reach of the volcano, which, sooner or later will overwhelm and destroy their work, however skilfully laid, and however many years ' enduring. If they be a wise people they will never build up again on the same foundation. • If the two cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii had been built beyond the reach of Vesuvius, they might have been standing now, or, at least, they would not have been buried under the burn- ing cinders. It is trifling to talk of the reversal of the " ba- lance of power " — " embittered feelings " — " en- dangered interests "■ — as the cause of the disrup- tion of the American Union. All these are but consequences. The cause is — Slavery. That is the volcano. The balance of power, embittered feelings, endangered interests, are the burning cinders. It is, no doubt, true that the same consequence? would, at a more distant period, have ensued from inherent defects in the Constitution of the United States ; but that is another question, now unnecessary to be considered. It is, perhaps, impossible to hold such a vast extent of territory, with such a diversity of in- terests, under one Federal, Government^ as at,- THE AMERICAN QUESTION. 9 tempted in the United States of America, but it is clearly impossible to do so with the hostile in- terests let in by Slavery. The only possible set- tlement of this question is, in the abandonment of Slavery, or of the Union. To restore the Union, with Slavery, by conquest, is impossible ; and, if possible, inexpedient for the interest of the States, or any of them. The States which adhere to the institution of Slavery must eventually come to ruin, and must involve more or less in the evil all the States in union with them. It, therefore, •becomes an imperative duty in the Free States, not only to separate from the Slave States, but also to define the limits beyond which Slavery shall not extend. This can now be done, and this is all that can now be done. To show how this can now be done is the ob- ject. It is no part of the present purpose to show the truth of what is here assumed. This has been already shown in the very able works of Mr. Spence and Mr. Cairnes, confirmed in all material facts by the native American writer, Mr. Olmsted, in his several works of great value from their practical character. It is unnecessary to repeat arguments and facts so ably put forward by these writers. Each takes his own view diffe- rent from the other, but in the conclusion they .all agree, that to restore and maintain the Union, with Slavery, is now impossible. 10 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. Mr. Spence's book is by far the most able whicli has been written in favor of the Southern interest. It proves, by unquestioned facts and unanswer- able arguments, the injuries which have been in- flicted on the Southern States by their union with the Northern ; but it proves that all these injuries have arisen out of the institution of Slavery, and that far greater injuries have been thereby in- flicted on all the non-slavery States. It proves that, the present conflict, on the part of the South is for independence, with the power to maintain and extend the institution of Slavery ; and, on the part of the North, for the Union. It proves that, whichever way the conflict ter- minates, the continuance of these hostile interests in union is impossible. It also proves that the Latin proverb — " Vox populi, vox Dei," is something very different from the outcry of the multitude. The proverb rests on the assumption that the foundations of man's convictions are laid in the truth, and that no con- viction of universal humanity can rest on an un- toue ground ; but that the faith of mankind has a reality corresponding to it ; for, as Jeremy Tay- lor has said : " It is not a vain noise, when many nations join their voices in the attestation or de- ttestation of an action;" and Hooker: "The ge- THE AMERICAN QUESTION. 11 neral and perpetual voice of men is as the sen- tence of God Himself. Tor that which all men have at all times learned, nature herself must needs have taught ; and God being the Author of nature, her voice is but His instrument." (Ec- cles. PoL b. 1, § 8.) As Dean Trench says, in his admirable little book on Proverbs, from which the foregoing quo- tations are taken ; — " The task and difficulty, of course, must ever be to discover what this faith and what these convictions are ; and this can only be done by an induction from a sufficient number of facts, and in sufficiently different times, to en- able us to feel confident that we have indeed seized that which is the constant; quantity of truth in them all, and separated this from the incon- stant one of falsehood and error, evermore offer- ing itself in its room; that we have not taken some momentary cry, wrung out by interest, by passion, or by pain, for t/ie voice of God; but claimed this august title only for that true voice of humanity, which, unless everything be -false, we have a right to' assume an echo of the voice of God."* He takes as an example, the natural horror everywhere felt in regard of marriages contracted between those very near in blood, as a potent * Trench, on Proverbs, p. 126. 12 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. argument against such unions; and although some pagan nations, and savage tribes, have to some extent disregarded this feehng, yet these 'exceptions can only be looked upon as violations of the divine order of man's life ; not as evi- dences that we have falsely imagined an order ■where there was none. Here is a true voice of the people, and we have a right to assume this to to be a voice of God as well. This man or that, this generation or the other, might be deceived, but all men and all generations could not ; the vow populi makes itself felt as a vox Dei. And so of Slavery — no man's testimony in favor of slavery can be worthy of credit, but must be taken as wrung out by interest, or pas- sion ; and, because it is against the true voice of humanity, we know it to be false, and we have no right to assume it to be an echo of the voice of God, because it is an outcry of the multitude. No reasoning can reconcile us to what our in- stinct repels. There is something in the heart that repels all arguments, all facts, in favor of slavery. We know, by a moral instinct, that a man is a man, and not a chattel, and no philo- sophy can stifle that voice within us. We want no declaration that all men, — in the common acceptation, — are born equal ; we know it from innate conviction. . ■ THE AMERICAN QUESTION. 13 In this way the evidence of Mr. Spence, his arguments and conclusions, are very valuable, but not altogether in the way which he intended. Mr. Cairnes is, undoubtedly, the best advo- cate for the Northern States, against Slavery, His book proves that slave-labor is incompati- ble with free-labor, and with all human inte- rests ; — that the institution of slavery is an out- rage against humanity, and must inevitably de- teriorate the people engaged in it, or who come in contact with it ; that it must ultimately work the ruin of the country, — and work out its own extinction. Mr. Olmsted's books are valuable for facts, all leading to the same conclusion, and he writes as a practical man, accustomed to the sight of negroes in slavery, and in freedom, from his own observations and experience in America, his native country. He says, in a Letter to a Southern Friend,* — " Comparing Texas with New York, I can speak entirely from personal ob- servation. I believe it is a low estimate, that every dollar of the nominal capital of the substantial farmers of New York represents an amount of the most truly valuable commodities of civiliza-r tion, equal to five dollars in the nominal wealth of Texan planters. And this, notwithstanding that * Olmsted, ' .Journey through Texas,' p. xii. 14 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. the climate of Texas has a great superiority over that of New York or Iowa. I think that the labor of one man in Texas will more easily pro- duce adequate sustenance and shelter for a fa- mily and an ordinary farm-stock of working- cattle, than that of two anywhere in the Free States." Again, he observes : " And this, with- out regard to that quality of the climate which enables the Texan to share in the general mono- poly of the South in the production of cotton — a quality so valuable that Texans sell scarcely anything out of the State but cotton, which they even find it profitable to exchange for corn raised in Ohio, and taxed with the expense of a great transportation, and several exchanges. . . . We even saw much white and free labor applied to the culture of cotton with a facility and profit at least equal to that attending the labor of enslaved negroes, at the same distance from market." With regard to the effects of Slavery in Texas, he thus sums up his evidence : — " All things con- sidered, I believe that the prosperity of Texas,, measured by the rapidity with vrhich the incon- veniences and discomforts, inevitable only in a wilderness or an uncivilized state of society, are removed, would have been ten times greater' than it is, had it been, at the date of its annex- ation, thrown open, under otherwise equally favor- THE AMERICAN QUESTION. 15 able circumstances, to a free immigration, with a prohibition to slavery. I think that its export, of cotton would have been greater than it now is ; that its demand from, and contribution to, com- merce would have been ten times what it now is ; that it would possess ten times the length of rail- road ; ten times as many churches ; ten times as ^nany schools, and a hundred times as many school-children as it now has. ... In the. East- ern counties, that spectacle so familiar and so me- lancholy in all the older Slave States, is already not unfrequently seen by the traveller — an aban- doned plantation of ' worn-out' fields, with its little village of dwellings, now a home only for wolves and vultures." These are but a few specimens of a large class of observations which, as Mr. Olmsted says, jus- tify him " in asserting that the natural elements of wealth in the soil of Texas will have been •more exhausted in ten years, and with them the rewards offered by Providence to labor will have been more lessened than, without Slavery, would have been the case in two hundred." It thus seems that the economical disadvan- tages of slave-labor are compensated, — if such can be called compensation, — by fraud and vio- lence, and by consuming the very soil itself at the cost of posterity. 16 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. It isj therefore, the only argument steadily and boldly urged in the South for an extension of territory suitable to Slave-labor, and that slavery- must be extended in order to preserve the equa- ■ lity of the South in the republic. Southern Edi- tors and orators have constantly declared that it would be a folly to suppose that the South, un- less she can retain such an equality, would re- main in association with the North. 17 CHAPTER III. HOW TO SETTLE IT. To ascertain the cause of the evil, is the first step to the remedy. In no other way can inquiry in- to the cause be useful. In the present case, whether or not any milder remedy than separation, if applied in time, might have been effectual, it is now useless to consider, being clearly now too late. This is like the case of a mortified limb, and the only remedy is amputation. -There is nothing left for it but severance of the dead from the liv- ing body. It would have been better, if the seve- rance had been earlier ; but it is now a question of life or death, and the sooner this question is settled the better. The remedy of severance is very simple, but to effect it may be difficult. But the only difficulty lies in obtaining the sufferers' consent. To obtain this consent, much may de- pend on the manner of setting about it. The best way would be by an Armistice, as pro- 18 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. posed in the French despatch, to be followed up by the mediation of England and France. For the Armistice, the consent of the Northern and Southern States alone is required. For the Mediation, their concurrence with Eng- land and France alone is required. Assuming the object of the mediation to be, as it ought to be, the perpetual severance of the Free from the Slave States, and the establishment of both on terms of equal independent sovereignty, all that remains is only matter of detail. If the contending parties settle it between them- selves — which they never will — ^then there is an end of the question. But if the settlement is to be through the mediation of Foreign Powers, then it is proposed that the mediation should be conducted in some such way as the following : — 1. Commissioners to be appointed by the Northern States : — the like number by the South- ern States : — the like number by Canada : — the like number by Great Britain : — the like number by France. In case of difference. Great Britain to appoint the Umpire. 2. The Commissioners, so appointed, to define and fix the Boundary Line of Canada, across the Northern part of the State of Maine, so as to unite Canada with New Brunswick. HOW TO SETTLE IT. 19 The same Commissioners to define and fix the Boundary Line between the Northern and the Southern States of America, about 36° 30" lati- tude north, across from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans. The decision of the majority of the Commis- sioners to be final. In case of difference, with equal numbers, the decision of the Umpire, appointed by Great Britain, to be final. 3. Any Slave setting foot on free soil to be free. This Law to be perpetual, and every Law to the contrary to be repealed, and declared null and void. 4. The Navigation of all Rivers, Lakes, Har- bors, and Seaboard of Canada and the Northern and Southern States, to be open and free. 5. Canada and the States of the North and South respectively to be independent sovereign- ties, and subject only to their own respective Go- vernments. 6. Canada and the States of the North and South to be governed respectively by their own Laws, but no duty of Customs or Excise to be imposed, levied, on raised, on any goods exported from, or imported into, Canada, or any of the States of the Northern or Southern Union. This Law to be perpetual, and every Law to c 3 20 THE AMERICAN aUESTION. the contrary to be repealed, and declared null and void. 7. Each independent State to bear its ownDebt, and the rights of all persons to be acknowledged and respected. 8. Any difference arising in the settlement of these details, or any of them, to be finally deter- mined by the Commissioners, or by the Umpire, so appointed as aforesaid. Such is the outUne of the proposed settlement of the American Question. If it be said that these terms will never be ac- cepted, the only answer to be given is — Try. 21 CHAPTER IV. THE BLOCKADE QUESTION. The question of the right of the Federal Govern- ment to blockade the Ports of the Southern States is here considered only with a view to the question, how far this proceeding justifies foreign interference by'mediation. The exercise of any such power by the Pederal Government is an open violation of the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, subscribed to by the Delegates from the thirteen States which originally formed the Union. There can be no pretence to say that the right of blockade is delegated by any Article in this Confederation \. or by any Article in the Constitution as settled and signed in 1787. On the contrary, every Ar- ticle in that Constitution recognizes the indepen- dent sovereignty of each separate State, subject to the powers vested in Congress, and which powers are expressly enumerated in 18 Articles of Sec- tion VIII. The right of the Federal Government to esta- 22 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. blish the blockade seems to have been almost uni- versally assumed ; but nowhere has it been shown that any such right exists. It is alleged to exist as a necessary incident to the supreme power vested in the Federal Government by the Consti- tution. But this cannot be maintained in the face of the 2nd Article of the Confederation, which de- clares that "Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, ju- risdiction, and right which is not by this Confe- deration expressly delegated by the United States in Congress assembled." It is never contended that any such right is expressly delegated, but only that it is necessarily implied. But it is impossible to draw any such inference consistently with " sovereignty, freedom, and in- dependence," which are expressly reserved. Such an interpretation is contradicted by the univer- sally understood meaning of these words, and there is no word to be found in any document to which the Federal Government refers, as forming the Constitution of the United States, which leaves even an opening for this question. It must, there- fore, be assumed that, the only ground for this alleged right is, the necessity of the case, and the only authority, the law of the strongest. THE BLOCKADE QUESTION. 23 This, though not a Constitutional answer, may be an effectual answer to the Southern States; but, certainly, it is neither a good nor an effec- tual answer to neutral Powers suffering there- from. Why the two great maritime neutral powers have quietly suffered so long, is another question. When the States of Georgia and the Carolinas entered the Federal Union, it was expressly stipu- lated that their respective Ports should he for ever free to the commerce of the world. The South, therefore, justly insists that th blockade is a violation of the fundamental terms of the Union, and though the North may answer that, this was a measure of defence against the war previously declared by the South, yet this can be no good answer to neutral nations. With regard to the Mississippi, by the treaty with France which ceded I;ouisiana to the United States, for fifteen millions of dollars, the free navigation of the Mississippi was guaranteed for ever. The United States Government have, therefore, no more right to interfere with the navigation of this river, than they have to interdict the naviga- tion of the " high seas." If " the law of the strongest " be the answer to the South, that can hardly be a good answer to the British nation. 24 CHAPTER V. THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. Closely connected with the question of Block- ade, is the question of Secession. If the rights of "sovereignty, freedom, and independence" be reserved, each State forming part of the Union, subject to that portion of sovereignty, freedom, and independence, " ex- pressly delegated to the United States in Con- gress assembled;" the only question can be — What has been so expressly delegated ? The very term, " expressly delegated" is a denial of every inference. But neither by ex- press terms, nor by inference, can it be main- tained that the " Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union," or the subsequently framed " Constitution of the United States," deprived any State of its " sovereignty, freedom, and in dependence," in the literal sense and common meaning of those words. The circumstances under which the Constitu- tion was framed, and the declared object, must THE BIGHT OF SECESSION. 25 be taken into consideration, for a correct conclu- sion on this question. The revolutionary war was brought to a suc- cessful termination under the control of a Govern- ment, called the Congress, consisting of the House of Representatives, and the Senate. This. was a federal body appointed by the thirteen States then forming the Union. This body was invested with very inefficient powers, legislative and executive. This bond of union was soon so weakened by conflicting views and jealousies as to threaten its total destruction. It was, therefore, resolved to call a Convention of the States, and to amend the " Articles of Confederation" under which the Union existed. The " Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union" were broken up, and the Constitution which followed, and continues, was formed on a similar framework. A consolidation of States was never proposed. The idea of a Republic, one and indivisible, was never popular in the United States. In 1774, it shocked, not only the provincial prejudices of the members of Congress, but also their sense of their own duty. Major Sullivan, in reply to the Virginian Agitator, Patrick Henry, exclaimed : " A little colony had its all at stake S,s well as a great one !" 26 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. Each State retained its own sovereignty for its own municipal government, but deputed to the federal body, the Congress, the charge of all those matters, of a general nature, which could be best regulated for the common good by a common agent. The powers deputed to Congress by the Articles of Confederation were expressly declared to be, the power of making war and peace, of entering into treaties and alliances, of regulating the coin- age, of estabhshing a postage system, of borrow- ing money, of equipping a navy, and appointing all officers in the Federal service. The respective States parted with their so- vereign power to this extent, but no further. Congress was also invested with the functions of a Court of Final Appeal in all disputes between the States. Congress appointed a permanent Committee under a President of its own selection, and through this Committee performed the Executive duties of Government. These Articles are entitled " perpetual," and it is declared in Art. 13, "And the Union shall be perpetual," which was contradicted by the Act of the subsequent Convention. The same Art. 13, declares that : "Every State shall abide by the determinations of the United THE RIGHT OP SECESSION. 27 States, in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this Confederation are submitted to them." That this was intended to apply only to the powers delegated by the same Articles, is clearly shown by the express declaration in Art. 2 ; " Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and indepen- dence." The Convention called for the purpose of amending these Articles, met at Philadelphia on the 14th May, 1787, and was attended by twelve of the thirteen States, Rhode Island decKning to take part in the proceedings, and thereby pro- claiming its own sovereign right and power. This Convention was presided over by Wash- ington, and contained the most eminent men of the country, including Pranklin. Delegates were appointed to it by each State, without restriction as to number, but each delegation gave but one vote. The debates were long and arduous, for the diflBculties of the subject were all but insuper- able. Each State was a sovereign power, and it was the duty of its Commissioners to consult its special interests before any other consideration. On more than one occasion, the Convention was on the point of breaking up in despair. At last, step by step, the various clauses were arranged by a series of compromises, which have remained the incongruities and ruin of the Constitution. 28 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. The decisions of the Convention were not to be final, or binding upon any State, until ratified by its own people. It was anticipated that there would be great difficulty in obtaining these rati- fications ; and provision was made that the new Constitution should come into force, limited in operation to themselves, whenever nine of the thirteen States should have ratified it. The peo- ple of each State elected a Convention, to which the decision was unreservedly left whether to ac- cept or reject it, so far as that State was con- cerned. There was no direct action of the people in the nature of a popular vote ; nor were the respective Conventions elected by any uniform or unqualified sufirage. They met at various dates, without any co-operation. Severe contests occurred in many cases. New York ratified by a majority of three only; in Massachusetts the votes were 187 to 168 ; North Carolina declined to act ; Ehode Island continued aloof altogether.* Thus, it appears that, at the very foundation of the American Union, the independent sove- reignty of each State was recognized and ac- knowledged. That Madison so understood it he himself de- clared in the Convention, on the 31st May 1787, in these words : — " The use of force against a * Spence, " The American Union," p. 205. THE UIGHT OF SECESSION. 29 State would be more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would pro- bably be considered by the party attacked, as a dissolution of all previous compacts : a union of States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction." Again, on the 8th June he said: — "Any Go- vernment formed on the supposed practicability of using force against the unconstitutional pro- ceedings of the States, would prove as visionary and fallacious as the government of Congress." Again, he said : — " The powers of the Federal Government are no further valid than they are plainly authorized by the Constitution, and in case of the exercise of other powers not granted by that compact, the States have a right, and are in duty bound to interfere." Hamilton, the chief actor in the foundation of the Union, and the highest authority, said : — " The first war of this kind would probably ter- minate in a dissolution of the Union." In one of the debates in the New York State Convention, Hamilton made use of these words : - — " To coerce a State would be one of the maddest projects ever devised. No State would ever sufier itself to be used as the instrument for coercing another." John Quincy Adams said : — " If the day shall 30 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. come — may Heaven avert it ! — when the affec- tion of the People of these States shall be alie- nated from each other, when this fraternal spirit shall give way to cold indifference, or coUisions of interest shall foster into hatred, then the bonds of political association will not hold together par- ties no longer attracted by the magnetism of con- ciliated interests and kindly sympathies ; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited States to part in friendship from each other than to he held together by restraint. On this question, Henry Clay said : — " When any State is right, when it has cause for resist- ance, when tyranny, and wrong, and oppression, unutterable arise, I will share her fortunes." Henry Everett, of Massachusetts, in a letter to the ' Boston Courier,' on the 2nd February 1861, wrote : — " To expect to hold fifteen States in the Union by force is preposterous. The idea of civil war, accompanied as it would be by servile insurrection, is too monstrous to be en- tertained for a moment. If our sister States wish to leave us, in the name of Heaven, let them go in peace." Mr. Spence well remarks : — " But there was a consideration of still higher import. The Con- stitution was a voluntary act, framed on the prin- ciples of free mutual assent, and common belief THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. 31 in its advantages. To introduce force as a means of maintaining it, would be repugnant to those principles. It would be a commencement on the voluntary system, to be continued under compulsion. Force is an attribute of monarchy ; the throne represents and wields the strength of the nation. Each part is subservient to the whole, and none can revolt without foreknow- ledge of this force to encounter and overthrow. But the basis of a Federal Republic is the re- verse of all this. It stands upon consent, which is the abnegation of force. In place of submis- sion of part to the whole, the parties are co- equal. Compulsion is not only inapplicable, but opposed to the principle of the system. And the men of that day were too logical to be unaware of this ; they declined to incorporate with the structure they were rearing a principle directly antagonistic to it."* The only argument that can be raised against the right of Secession, is in the omission of any clause forbidding Secession ; and any such ar- gument must rest on an inference. The infer- ence is that the United States exist under the Constitution in the condition of a single, conso- lidated State. But that inference, when extended beyond the purposes enumerated, ceases by ex- press words in the Constitution. * Spence, p. 220. 32 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. The Convention appointed to revise the " Ar- ticles of Confederation" had no general autho- rity. It was summoned by an Act of Congress, which strictly defined its object and powers in these words : — " For the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation, and for reporting to the several legislatures such alterations and pro- visions therein as should, when agreed to in Con- gress and confirmed by the States, render the Federal compact adequate to the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of the Union." There is clearly no authority here to frame a new system, or effect organic change, but simply to make " alterations and provisions," — to effect a vigorous reform. There is no mention of the people, but invariably of the States. The limits of their powers were not overlooked by the mem- bers of the Convention ; but were continually re- feri'ed to in their debates. If they exceeded their authority they knew that the next step was to refer their act to Congress for its approval — to the very source of their authority whose sanction was essential to the success of their labors. As Mr. Spence observes :■ — " Now the ' Arti- cles of Confederation' expressly declare that 'each State retains its sovereignty, freedom, and inde- pendence.' They mutually acknowledge each other as distinct, sovereign communities ; and in THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. 33 this capacity they send delegates to a Convention for the purpose of reforming the Government — their agent — and effecting such improvements in its machinery and details as would render it efficient. Curtis remarks : " We must observe the position of the States, w^hen thus assembled in Convention. Their meeting was purely vo- luntary ; they met as equals ; and they were so- vereign political commimities, whom no power could rightfully coerce into a change of their condition." This being so, it seems to require stronger evidence than a mere epithet to prove that each of them abdicated this sovereignty, and beyond this, to explain to whom it passed."* It is a fact, on historical record, that after the Constitution was framed by delegates of the States, it was finally ratified by a Convention called in each State for the purpose. The deci- sion whether to ratify or not was left absolutely to these Conventions ; they acted independently on their own judgment. The people had really little or nothing to do with this Constitution, and it was well known that they were directly opposed to it. It was framed by men in advance of their age, desirous to secure the welfare of the people by framing a code which they well knew to be opposed to the popular passions of the day. * Spenoe, p. 223. 34 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. " Of all the members of the Convention which framed the Constitution, the ablest was, unques- tionably, Madison. It may be said it was his calm judgment and indomitable perseverance that eventually secured success. Hamilton was, in- deed, the master spirit, but Madison was the able workman." It so happens that we have on record his in- terpretation of this very phrase. In the ratifying Convention of the State of Virginia, Patrick Henry objected strongly to these words, — " We, the people," on the ground that the very con- struction might be given to them which is at- tempted at the present day. But Madison at once showed such a construction to be erroneous. He replied in these words : " The parties to it were to be the people, but not the people as com- posing one great society, but the people as com- posing thirteen sovereignties." Not contented with giving the true meaning of the phrase, he adduced an argument to prove it by adding : " If it were a purely consolidated government, the as- sent of a majority of the people would be suffi- cient to establish it. But it was to be binding on the people of a State only by their own sepa- rate consent." " This argument," as Mr. Spence very properly observes, "seems conclusive."* * Spence, p. 226. THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. 35 This interpretation is further confirmed at the close of the Constitution. Art. 7, says — " The ratifications of the Con- ventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution, between the States so ratifying the same ; " and the Constitu- tion is thus attested : — " Done in Convention by the unanimous consent of the States present." Here follow the names of each of the twelve States which were parties in the Convention, and under each name those of the delegates who re- presented and signed for it. The clauses of the Constitution are directly op- posed to the theory of a single people or State, and the ratification is not only by the States, as States, but describes the Constitution as esta- blished, not over the people, but " between the States." Por the present purpose it can hardly be ne- cessary to pursue this part of the inquiry further; but those who desire it will find the argument more fully set out in Chapter VI. of Mr. Spence's most able work, on this part of the question. If the meaning of a Federal Republic be not, a government constituted of several constituent re- publics, what is the meaning ? To assert that all were fused into one, is really to deny that the United States are a federal republic. To deny D 2 36 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. this would not be more singular than to deny the existence of a federal compact, because its terms are entitled a " Constitution," this being a " fede- ral compact adequate to the exigencies of govern- ment." This Federal Compact reserves powers over property, and over life or death, to each separate State ; but this could not be if those separate States were thereby consolidated into one State. In further elucidation, Mr. Spence refers to Madison, De Tocqueville, and other authorities. The two former of these are too important to be here omitted. Madison, writing his views, of the requirements of a new Constitution, to Randolph, says : — " I think that a consolidation of the States into one simple republic is not less unattainable, than it would be inexpedient." De Tocqueville observes : — " It was not in the power of the American legislators to reduce to a single nation the people for whom they were making laws." Again — Mr. Spence refers to the following,: " In the Convention, one of the ablest members, Luther Martin, observed: 'At the separation from the British Empire, the people of America pre- ferred to estabhsh themselves into thirteen sepa- rate sovereignties, instead of incorporating them- selves into one. To these they look up for the THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. 37 safety of their lives, liberties, and properties. They formed the Federal Government to defend the whole against foreign nations, and to defend the lesser States against the ambition of the larger ones.' " Here it appears, in clear terms, that one of the objects of the system was to prevent that very consolidation, which we are now told was then effected. The evidence of Mr. Seward can- not be objected to by a Unionist. On the 20th March 1850, he thus expressed himself: — " Every man in this country, every man in Christendom, who knows anything of the philosophy of go- vernment, knows that this republic has been thus successful only by reason of the stabihty, strength, and greatness, of the individual States." If their individuality remained distinct, it fol- lows that their original sovereignty continued in each of them. On the day when each State ratified the new Constitution, it was admitted to be an indepen- dent power. The thirteen colonies were acknow- ledged by Great Britain, and other countries, each of them as separately independent. The Articles of Confederation declare the mutual relation in which they co-existed in the Union. If they be no longer separately sovereign, to whom did their sovereignty pass, and what evidence exists that a change of such supreme importance has ever oc- curred ? 38 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. As Mr. Spence observes: "It is clearly the natural conclusion that it remains where it ex- isted before, unless there be evidence to the con- trary ; the onus of proof lies with those who dis- pute this. Nothing can be more complete, than the accordance of all American authorities on this point. One of the latest, Curtis, in his admirable work on the Constitution, observes : ' In America, it has been incontrovertible since the Revolution that the supreme, absolute, and uncontrolled power is in the people, before they make a Constitution, and remains in them after it is made.' " In reality, every State has asserted its distinct sovereignty, on all occasions, and in peremptory terms. The leading supporters of the Union at the present day are citizens of Massachusetts. They have been foremost in asserting and main- taining their independent sovereignty. These and many other instances are given by Mr. Spence, and nothing can be more conclusive than these are.* De Tocqueville says : — " The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the States ; and in uniting together, they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of * Spence, p. 237. THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. 39 the States choose to withdraw from the compact, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so, and the Federal Government would have no means of maintaining its claims directly, either by force or right." A Federal Republic is a partnership of re- publics, or States, and to a partnership of States the words of Madison apply : — " When resort can be had to no common superior, the parties to the compact must themselves be the rightful judges, whether the bargain has been pursued or vio- lated." It is contended that this partnership was to last for ever. But on the point of duration the Con- stitution is silent, except, in the preamble, the expression of a desire " to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." Here is no enactment or injunction. But in the previous " Articles of Confederation," in the title are the words, " perpetual union," and in the body, the express injunction — "And the Union shall be perpetual." On this point, these words seem to possess greater force than any words to oe lound in the Constitution, yet, notwithstanding, these " Articles" were terminated at the end of a few years, and that, too, with liberty to any State to leave the Federation altogether. The Union has, therefore, proved, by its own act, that terms of 40 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. this nature have no force of law, but simply indi- cate the intention and desire of the parties at the time. Thus we arrive at the only sound conclusion, in Mr. Spence's words : — " That secession is a just and clear constitutional right of the States, and no violation of any enactment of the Federal compact." 41 CHAPTER VI. EFFECTS OF THE UNION. It will be convenient here to consider some of the principal effects of the American Union, but this inquiry will be confined to those eff'ects which seem to confirm the conclusion aimed at in these pages. Regarded as a whole the American Union is the grandest attempt at political power which the world has ever witnessed, and, of its kind, unquestionably, the most successful. But in no part of the world has the attempt ever been made under such great advantages as in America. Pos- sessing, for all practical purposes, a boundless extent of territory, diversified with the grandest scenery, and various climates, the most fertile soil, abundant minerals, vast forests, mighty rivers, and a sea-board of several thousand miles with magnificent natural harbors, — bounded east and west by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and the whole forming an undisputed territory, the United States of America presented materials tor an Empire unrivalled in the world for pros- 42 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. perity and power. To these great natural ad- vantages chiefly the United States of America have owed their gi-eat and rapid prosperity. By the extensive immigration of common and skilled labor from the old Empires of Europe, these great natural resources have been brought into more rapid action than by the ordinary in- crease of population in the States. In no way has the form of Government added anything to these natural advantages, further than in allow- ing the liberty of self-government to each State composing the Union. This is a great deal towards prosperity and power as a Nation, but, as now proved, is not everything. This has enabled the States of America to establish Institutions most con- ducive to their own welfare, and to avoid many of the evils of the old Empires of Europe, in unjust patronage, and profligate expendi- ture. It has very clearly and successfully shown the inestimable benefits of self-government in a People ; and also the insecurity of a Govern- ment resting on democracy. Apart from the question of Slavery, it is quite clear that the Federal Government could not have governed, for many years longer, a country so extensive and comprising so many people, and various inte- rests, as were bound together by the American EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 43 Union. Not that laws might not have been made which would have been for the equal be- nefit of all the States, but that the People would never have agreed to make such laws. So true it is that, the power is in the people, and that, unchecked, they always, in the end, use the power for their own destruction. It is generally admitted that in the framing of the American Constitution, a very high order of intellect was brought to bear upon it. If the best were not done, few will deny that the best was done which, under the circumstances, could be done. It was, perhaps, impossible then to frame a better Constitution, but, even then, its defects were not unknown. The most eminent, of those eminent men who did the work, never expressed a confident opinion in its enduring qualities. Washington said only that it was re- spectable, and he never expressed more than a faint hope that it might be from time to time amended, and so maintained. Madison, Hamil- ton, Pranklin, Monroe, and Adams, have re- corded in words too plain to leave any doubt of their opinion, that the Constitution, as framed, carried with it its own destruction. The only question with them was one of time. Jefferson had no hand in it, being then at Paris, but he has recorded his opinion to the same effect, and in the strongest terms of all. 44 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. These great men saw the difficulties of esta- blishing a permanent Union of so many and dis- tant States under one Federal Government, rest- ing on pure Democracy. They saw that such diversity of interests between the Northern and the Southern States must lead to conflicts which would probably terminate in secession. They believed that their Constitution was in theory founded on a grand truth, but they knew that practically they had made it a great lie. They knew that it was a he, and they admitted that they trembled when they thought of it, but they were weak enough to trust in it. Their fears were stronger than their hopes, and their fears are justified. The Providential laws may seem to come into operation slowly, according to our computation of time, but they come with certainty. Jeff'erson was a Southerner, and a slave-holder, but he acknowledged the providential law — he admitted that it must come into operation, and " he trembled for his country when he reflected that God was just ;" that in the event of a rising of Slaves, "the Almighty had no attribute which could take side with slave-owners in such a contest." He framed a plan of abolition, but the power was with the People, and they had no fears — they never have, when they have their own way. EFFECTS OF THE UNION, 45 Washington, a native of the south, and a slave- holder, declared it to be among his first wishes to see Slavery abolished by law, and in his will he provided for the emancipation of his slaves. The other leading Statesmen of that time, Franklin, Madison, Hamilton, Patrick Henry, the Randolphs, Monroe, whether from the North or from the South, whether concurring or not in their views on the practical mode of dealing with the institution, all concurred in reprobating, at least, the principle of Slavery. It seemed to them impossible that a whole people should live permanently in contemplation of a system which does violence to its moral in- stincts. They relied on the moral instincts for leading them to reform the institution which of- fended them. Those instincts prevailed in the Northern States, as De Tocqueville says, "by abolishing the principle of slavery, not by setting the slaves free." The Northern States did not emancipate negroes who were enslaved, but they provided for the future extinction of slavery by legislating for the freedom of their offspring. In the Southern States those instincts do not ap- pear to exist, or, at least, have not prevailed. -Slavery is not regarded there as a barbarous in- stitution, but rather as an admirable system, to be upheld and extended. 46 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. This was distinctly affirmed by Mr. A. H. Stephens, Vice-President of the Southern Con- federacy, in that remarkable speech delivered by him at Savannah, Georgia, on the 21st March 1861, wherein he declared the object and pur- poses of the new Confederacy. This most extraordinary declaration from a leader of the Southern party deserves particular notice, and the following report of the Address is taken verbatim from the Savannah 'Repub- lican' as delivered in the Athenaeum of that City by Mr. Vice-President Stephens, and stands, on the historical record of the Southern Confederacy, as the most audacious blasphemy ever uttered by a Pubhc Man before a Christian audience. The Newspaper says : " Mr. Stephens took his seat amid a burst of enthusiasm and ap- plause such as the Athenaeum has never dis- played within its walls within the recollection of the oldest inhabitant." " Last, not least, the new Constitution has put at rest for ever all the agitating questions relating to our pecular institution — African Slavery as it exists among us, the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the imme- diate cause of the late rupture, and present revo- lution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 47 this, as the 'rock upon which the old Union would split.' He was right. What was conjec- ture with him is now a realized fact. But whe- ther he comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of Nature, that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with ; but the general opinion of the men of that day M'as, that somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent, and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the Constitution, was the prevailing idea at the time. The Constitu- tion, it is true, secured every essential ■ guaranty to the institution, while it should last ; and hence no argument can be justly used against the Con- stitutional guaranties thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. These ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation : and the idea of a government built upon it — when ' the storm came and the wind blew, it fell.' " Our new government is founded upon exactly 48 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. the opposite ideas .- its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man ; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. (Applause.) This our new government is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. " This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the va- rious departments of science. It is so even amongst us. Many who hear me can, perhaps, recollect well that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North who still cling to these errors with a zeal above know- ledge we justly denominate fanatics. All fana- ticism springs from an aberration of the mind, from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteris- tics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises. So with the anti-slavery fanatics : their conclusions are right, if their premises are. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their pre- EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 49 mises were correct, their couclnsions would be logical and just ; but their premises being wrong, their whole argument fails. ^ ^ jj^ ^ ^ " In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side complete, throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly • planted ; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enhght- ened world." After alluding to the slow development of truth in the various branches of science, and re- ferring for illustrations to Galileo, Adam Smith, and Harvey, — the orator and moral philosopher thus proceeds : — " May we not, therefore, look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests ? It is the first government ever instituted upon principles in strict conformity to Nature and the ordina- tion of Providence in furnishing the material of human society. Many governments have been founded upon the principles of certain classes ; but the classes thus enslaved were of the same race and in violation of the laws of Nature. Our system commits no such violation of Nature's E 50 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. laws. The negro, by Nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material, — the granite; then comes the brick or marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by Na- ture for it ; and by experience we know that it is best not only for the superior, but the inferior • race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in con- formity with the Creator. It is not safe for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes He has made one race to differ from another, as one star diifereth from another in glory. The greater objects of humanity are best attained, when con- formed to His laws and decrees in the formation of government as well as in all things else. Our Confederacy is founded on a strict conformity with those laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders, has become the chief stone of the corner in our new edifice ! " 'The devil can quote scripture' — is an old saying. But, passing over this blasphemy, which makes the whole seem as if it were intended for an impious burlesque, — What can be ex- pected from a people who put up in their high places persons holding such opinions as these ? EFFECTS OF THE UNION, 51 Then, look at their Christian Preachers who declare Slavery to be " the beneficent source and wholesome foundation of our civilization — an in- stitution moral and civilizing, useful at once to blacks and whites ;" who say that, " to suppress Slavery would be to throw back civilization two hundred years;" — who say that, "it is not a moral evil. It is the Lord's doing, and marvel- lous in our eyes It is by divine appoint- ment." Then, again; — A Chancellor of South Caro- lina describes Slavery as in accordance with " the proudest and most deeply cherished feelings of his Countrymen, — feelings which others, if they will, may call prejudices." A Governor of Kansas declares that he " loves" the institution, and that he votes for it because he " loves " it. Nor are these sentiments con- fined to the slave-holding minority. The im- portant fact is, that they are shared equally by nearly the whole white population of the South. To be the owner of a slave is the chief object of the " poor white's " ambition. The efiects of this system could not be doubt- ful. Of its efiects in the South there can be but one impartial opinion. With a population of twelve millions, of which one-third is brutaUzed by slavery, and with a law which declares it to E 2 52 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. be a crime, and punishes as such, all attempts to improve that condition by education, the effect can be no other than to brutalize the whole population. The consequence is inevitable — universal depravity throughout the Slave States. If evidence of this be wanting, it is to be found in abundance in all impartial writers acquainted with facts. But what further evidence of a crime can be wanted, after an open avowal of the fact ? Let any one who doubts the truth of the broad assertion here made, only look into the most recent testimony in " The Journeys and Explorations in the Cotton Kingdom," by Mr. Olmsted, himself a native of a Northern State, and well accus- tomed to the servitude of the negro race. Take one instance only, given by this writer, out of two volumes full of such instances, and many much worse. He is travelling in a Southern State. " A party of fashionably-dressed people took the train for Charleston — two families, ap- parently, returning from a visit to their planta- tions. They came to the station in handsome coaches. Some minutes before the rest, there entered the car, in which I was then again alone, and reclining on a bench in the corner, an old nurse, with a baby and two young negro women, having care of half a dozen children mostly girls, from three to fifteen years of age. As they closed EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 53 the door, the negro girls seemed to resume a conversation, or quarrel. Their language was loud and obscene, such as I never heard before from any but the most depraved and beastly- women of the streets. Upon observing me, they dropped their voices, but not with any appear- ance of shame, and continued their altercation, until their mistresses entered. The white chil- dren, in the meantime, had listened without any appearance of wonder or annoyance. The mo- ment the ladies opened the door, they became silent."* What Mr. Olmsted thought of this he has left us in no doubt, by the following notes at the foot of the same page. " Children are fond of the company of negroes, not only because the deference shown them makes them feel perfectly at ease, but the sub- jects of conversation are on a level with their capacity, while the simple tales and the witch and ghost stories, so common among negroes, excite the young imagination and enlist the feel- ings. If, in this association, the child becomes familiar with indelicate, vulgar, and lascivious manners and conversation, an impression is made upon the mind and heart, which lasts for years, perhaps for life. Could we, in all cases, trace * Olmsted, Cotton Kingdom, p. 223. 54 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. effects to their real causes, I doubt not but many- young men and women, of respectable parentage, and bright prospects, who have made shipwreck of all their earthly hopes, have been led to the fatal step by the seeds of corruption which, in the days of childhood and youth, were sown in their hearts by the indelicate and lascivious manners and conversation of their father's ne- groes." Then comes the following specimen " from an address of Chancellor Harper, prepared for and read before the Society for the Advancement of Learning, of South Carolina." — ■" I have said the tendency of our institution is to elevate the female character, as well as that of the other sex, for similar reasons. And, permit me to say, that the elevation of the female character is no less important and essential to us, than the moral and intellectual cultivation of the other sex. It would, indeed, be intolerable, if, when one class of society is necessarily degraded in this respect, no compensation were made by the superior ele- vation and purity of the other. Not only essen- tial purity of conduct, but the utmost purity of manners. And, I will add, though it may incur the formidable charge of affectation or prudery, a greater severity of decorum than is required elsewhere, is necessary among us. Always should EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 55 be strenuously resisted the attempts, which have sometimes been made, to introduce among us the freedom of foreign European, and, especially, of continental manners. Let us say. we will not have the manners of South Carolina changed." After this, from " a Chancellor," — where is the hope from argument, with such persons ! It is often said, and nothing is more true, that great as is the injury of slavery to the blacks, far greater is the injury to the whites. Even Jeffer- son, though himself a slave-holder, asserted that slavery was more pernicious to the white race than to the black. Some, whose chief inheri- tance has been in slaves, acting under this con- viction, have liberated them all. In 1808 the African slave trade was abo- lished ; and the principal source on which the South relied for recruiting its population was thus cut off. Subsequently slavery was abolished in the North, by legislating for the freedom of the off- spring of the slaves. The operation of this plan was to reduce the value of slaves in those States. But this emancipation not extending to the South, the value of Slaves in the Southern States was not materially affected by this change; or, not further than by the transfer of slaves from the North to the South. This facilitated the process 56 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. of abolition in the north, and at a small pecu- niary loss, the Northern States got rid of slavery. But this process can never be applied to the South, vfhich is now the only open market. Assuming the slave-holders to be irapracti- eable on the subject of slavery, the question of emancipation is reduced to very narrow limits in the South. All that remains to be done is to define the limits beyond which slavery shall not be permitted to extend. If the area be confined to its present limits, the period of abolition is not distant, and is cal- culable. If this, or anything to this effect had been done at the time of the UnioUj slavery would long ago have ceased in the United States of America. The effect of the Union was to ex- tend and prolong this evil. The present object should be to shorten, and ultimately terminate it. This evil has, at last, terminated the Union; and for ever ; — at least, as long as the evil con- tinues. The whole world is interested in this termination, but the world is not interested in the restoration of the Union. On the contrary, the interests of mankind re- quire that the Slaves States should be shut up, that the evil may die out from exhaustion, which it will as surely as the flame of an unreplenished lamp. EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 57 Another eflFect of the union of the North with the South has been, to throw the preponderating power of the Government into the Southern States. The turn in the balance of power was shown in the election of Mr. Lincoln, as President. That event was foreseen as the necessary effect of well known causes, long in operation. It is unne- cessary here to review those causes. This review has been taken with such great ability by Mr. Spence and Mr. Cairnes, in their well known works, as to render any further review of these causes quite unnecessary. Althoi;gh they take very different views of the same subject, and in some respects draw wrong conclusions, — yet, be- tween them both they have quite exhausted this part of the subject. The effect of the Union on the national cha- racter has been often observed upon. Washing- ton thus expresses himself in a Letter to Read : — " Such dearth of public spirit, and such want of virtue ; such stock-jobbing, and fertility in all the low arts to obtain advantage of one kind or another, in this change of mihtary arrangements, I never saw before, and I pray God's mercy that I may never be witness to again. I tremble .at the prospect. . . . Such a mercenary spirit per- vades the whole, that I should not be surprised at any disaster tha,! may happen. Could I have 58 THE AMERICAN QUESTION, foreseen what I have experienced, and am Hkely to experience, no consideration on earth should have induced me to accept this command."* These national characteristics are correctly traced to their origin in a democratic govern- ment, and, for all practical purposes^ an unlimited extent of fertile territory, with all the other re- quisites for a powerful and prosperous nation. These national characteristics have continued to grow with the rapid growth of wealth and power by the accession of new States to the Union, un- til the boasting and vain glory of the people, as a nation, has brought down upon them the ridi- cule and contempt of all the older nations of Europe. To this contemptible national charac- teristic, the people in their progress have added audacity and meanness, which has justly brought down upon them the indignation of all Europe ; and, as in the ordinary case of near relationships this feeling is the strongest with those who should have been most closely bound together by their common interests, and natural sympathies. These are some of the effects of the Union, and are the principal effects here to be treated of. It is useless to deny them, or to attempt to hide them ; nor are they referred to here for any other purpose than to render good service where * Spenee, p. 51. EFFECTS OF THE UNION. 59 our interests and sympathies are really enlisted. But far is it from the intention of the writer of these remarks to deny the existence of many and great exceptions in the North and in the South, in the East and in the West ; or to deny that the United States of America are, in the whole, the most striking example to be found in his- tory, of a great nation raised up in the shortest time by the industry and energy of the People. The present object is to show clearly their faults, with a view to their correction, and to help them to extricate themselves from the ruin into which their own faults have plunged them. For this object, the ungracious duty of showing the faults, and dwelling upon them, becomes a necessity. 60 CHAPTER VII. DEFECTS OF THE UNION. To enumerate all the defects of the Union would require a much larger Volume than this. A few only of the principal defects will serve the pre- sent pm-pose. Foremost of these is the foul blot of Slavery, which was admitted into the Consti- tution of the United States, in the face of the following paragraph from the "Declaration of Independence," which purported to be the foun- dation of that Constitution. " We hold these truths to be self-evident : that all men are created equal ; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights ; that among these are life, liberty, and the pur- suit of happiness ; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their jast powers from the consent of the go- verned; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to in- stitute a new government, laying its foundations DEFECTS OF THE TJNION. 61 on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." Tried by these principles the Constitution of the United States is a fraud and a falsehood, because that Constitution recognizes and main- tains slavery as an estabUshed institution, and thereby violates all these most sacred principles professed to be maintained. Now, what has been the course of this evil in the history of the United States of America ? The people fought, and successfully, against their Mother Country, for what they called their liberty and independence, meaning the liberty of self-government. By force of arms they gained their hberty, and established themselves a free and independent Nation. But they retained the baneful gift of slavery, which they had long before received from their Mother Country, in her days of comparative bar- barism, and thereby they denied the sacred truth which they professed. They framed their Constitution on the prin- ciples of Freedom and Equality, and they denied freedom and equality to a large proportion of their population. They formed a Federal Government from the 62 THE AMERICAN QUESTION, People, and they excluded therefrom their best men. They have governed their Country by the will of the People, and they have broken up the Union which bound their States together, and they have involved themselves in a civil war which threatens their mutual destruction. They have conducted their civil war in a man- ner injurious to all the neutral nations of Europe, and they have outraged the dearest feelings of humanity. Such is the end of a Constitution founded on falsehood, and carried on in fraud. The real question, and the only question which concerns Europe, is ; — How much longer is this state of things to be permitted ? To wait until one of the contending parties has conquered the other; or until they have destroyed each other, is to wait an indefinite time, with no probability of a fortunate termina- tion in either event. All the present evils are consequences natu- rally following from such a Union ; and, as Franklin wrote to Joseph Galloway, when urging the separation of the American Colonies from Great Britain, — "it seems like Mezentius coupling and binding together the dead and the hving." The Slave States of the South are fast work- DEFECTS OF THE UNION, B3 ing out their land to sterility and waste, and they have already driven avray nearly the whole of their white laboring population, with the ex- ception of that miserable remnant, called " mean whites," who chiefly supply those ranks known as the " border ruffians." The Lands of the South are abundant and fer- tile, but possess scarcely sufficient hands for the cultivation of the ordinary necessaries of life for the whole population. Slave labor is unsuited for such cultivation; and, as to white laborers, there is neither demand nor supply. The products of the South are chiefly Cotton, Sugar, Rice and Tobacco, and for the cultiva- tion of these, the opinion prevails in the South, that slave-labor is the most suitable. But many competent authorities in the North, and even in the South, most confidently deny this, and many more both in North and South doubt it. All, however, seem to agree in opinion that, white labor does not work well with slave-labor. Many reasons are given for this, all of which seem to be manifest and conclusive. But it is unnecessary here to enter into these reasons. The fact is assumed as undisputed. The conse- quence is that, the Slave States of the South are, to a great extent, dependent on the Free 64 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. States of the North ; and another consequence is that, the interests of the Slave States and the Free States are, to a great extent, conflicting. What may be called the raw produce is raised in the South, and the manufactories are in the North. Even such common articles as carts, carriages, and ploughs, household utensils, arti- cles of clothing, and textile fabrics, are princi- pally supplied from the North ; and the produce of the South is chiefly exported. From the conflicting interests thus existing, or supposed to exist, and, whether really existing or not, clearly originating in the " sacred " insti- tution of Slavery, arose, from the earliest time, the struggle between the Northern and the South- ern States, for the dominant power in the Go- vernment. Until the last election to the Presidency, the dominant power has always been with the South ; when it turned to the North with the election of Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency, then came the secession of the Southern States. They well knew that their political game was then up, and lost to them for ever. The operation of the poli- tical machinery to this result is sufficiently shown by Mr. Cairues, in his book on ' Slave Power,' to need any repetition here. But this working of the political machinery was not the cause of DEFECTS OF THE UNION. 65 Secession. The cause was in the institution of Slavery, and Secession was the foreseen conse- quence. This was the great defect in the Constitution, and has proved fatal to the Union. It was an attempt to unite a dead with a living body. Who that believes in this can wish to see the attempt repeated ? Another defect in the Constitution was, its ten- dency to discourage high character and ability in public men, and to lower the general standard of political morals : and such has been the con- tinuous eiFect. This was noticed by De Tocque- ville, nearly thirty years ago, when he wrote thus : — " It is a well-authenticated fact that, at the present day the most talented men m the United States are very rarely placed at the head of affairs. The race of American Statesmen has evidently dwindled most remarkably in the course of the last fifty years," Everybody is a politician, but few are states- men, and the few are too high-minded to submit to the self-degradation which they must undergo to qualify for high office. That ability has long ceased to form the ground of selection for the presidential office, has long been known, and that is injurious enough. But the evil extends -far beyond this. Under the system which has 66 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. long prevailed, ability is a certain ground of exclusion from high office. This is a necessary consequence of the Constitution based solely on the wiU of the People. That Clay or Webster should be rejected for Polk or Pierce, is a natu- ral consequence. He is chosen, not as the best for the office, but as the best for the purposes of the party which elects him. The will of the People is not only not controlled, but it is not guided. What other result can be expected? The object of the party is its own success, for its own purposes, not for the welfare of the com- munity. Justice Story thus describes the qualifications required for the office of President: — "The nature of the duties to be performed by the President are so various and complicated as not only to require great talents and great wisdom to perform them, but also long experience in office. They embrace all the arrangements of peace and war, of diplomacy and negociation, of finance, of naval and military operations, and of the execution of the laws, through almost infinite ramifications of details, and in places at vast dis- tances from each other." If this be true, as it clearly is, — " how " as Mr. Spence asks, " is it possible that the government can be properly conducted, under a system which so utterly ex- cludes these qualifications ! " DEFECTS OF THE UNION. 67 Mr. Olmsted also observes : — " Unquestion- ably there are great evils arising from the lack of talent applied to our government, — from the lack of real dignity of character, and respect- ability of attainments, in many of the govern- ment oflSces. We cannot afford to employ a heavy proportion of talent or honesty, about the little share of our business which is done at the capital." Not that there is any deficiency of talent and honesty for the purposes of govern- ment, but that the existing institutions excludes them. That universal suffrage, as carried out in the Union, has had an injurious effect, and that this effect has been very greatly aggravated by the large proportion of foreigners, thus placed in the command of political power, without either training or association to fit them for it, cannot be doubted by any reflecting mind. On this subject, Chancellor Kent, one of the highest of American authorities, remarks in his Commentaries : — " The progress and impulse of popular opinion is rapidly destroying every con- stitutional check, every conservative element, in- tended by the sages who framed the earUest Ame- rican Constitutions, as safeguards against the abuses of popular suffrage. In another passage, Chancellor Kent observes :■ — "Such a rapid course F 2 68 THE AMERICAX QUESTION. of destruction of the former constitutional checks, is matter for grave reflection ; and to counteract the dangerous tendency of such combined forces as universal suffrage, frequent elections, all offices for short periods, all officers elective, and an un- checked press, and to prevent them from racking and destroying our political machines, the people must have a larger share than usual, of that wisdom which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated." As these are not the attributes of American character at the present day, it would seem that they really have been " racking and destroying " the political machine. These, and many other defects in the Consti- tution, are visible enough in the present day, though only dimly seen by the framers. But if those great men saw the evils, even dimly, and could not then avoid them, what chance is there of better success now, when all the furious pas- sions of men are let loose and raging ? That some, at least, of these noble-minded men saw, and trembled at what they saw in the future, — and to them no distant future, — they have themselves recorded in unmistakeable lan- guage. But some form of government they must have, and under the greatest difficulties to deal with in DEFECTS OF THE UNION. 69 the People's sovereign will, they formed it as they did. Who will now presume to say that they could have done it better ? And what if they could have done it better ? Why dwell on the defects now, but for the remedy ? And what is the remedy ? If the causes of the evils have been correctly described, the answer has been given in the re- medy proposed. But though the defects of the American Con- stitution be now clearly seen, no one acquainted with its history can say that its chief defect has been its basis on Democracy. Many say that the American Constitution has broken down because it was based on Demo- cracy. They might as well say that the civil war now raging in America has broken down Democracy. The history of the world shows no connection between civil war and Democracy; or that Democracy, more than any other form of Government, leads to civil war. All Govern- ments are hable to civil war, but least of all that Government which rests on the support of the People. This may be taken as a fact confirmed by history. The history of the United States of America, is a history of unexampled prosperity ; and the present interruption of that prosperity is an example of the consequences of that falsehood 70 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. which is stamped on the American Constitution, at variance with the truth in the previous Decla- ration of Independence. It is a simple absur- dity to refer these consequences to Democratic institutions. The same cause must have broken down the most perfect form of representative government on the basis of monarchy. That North America owes much of its rapid progress in prosperity and political power to its liberal institutions must be admitted by those who are most opposed to its form of government, and this may be admitted without acknowledging that form of government to be the best. But to refer to the present disastrous position of the Union to the form of government, is to make an assertion which is contradicted by every fact in the case. The object for which the North and South are fighting has no relation whatever to forms of government. Differences exist between North and South, but in the form of government they are agreed; in the democratic principle there is no difference between them. The South has never complained that the institutions of the North were too popular ; nor has the North ever shown the smallest wish to interfere with the po- litical organization of the South. The victory of either party would leave untouched all the questions which divide aristocrats and democrats ; DEFECTS OF THE UNION. 71 it would not affect government by elective as- semblies ; vote by ballot ; universal suffrage ; or the election of judicial and executive officers. Whatever the merits of the contest may be, the war is beyond all doubt a war for the mainten- ance of the Union on the one side, and for inde- pendence on the other; and it is equally clear that this conflict arose out of a deep-seated and widely-extended difference of views founded on the existence of slavery in the Southern States. The South resolved to break up the Union be- cause if it were maintained Slavery could not be extended; and the North were determined to maintain the Union, not upon any definite grounds as to Slavery, but in a natural pride in the magnificence of that Union, and with a keen sense of its many advantages. This is a lament- able state of things, but in no way discreditable to Democracy. Democracy has nothing what- ever to do with Slavery. Nothing presents in a more striking light the careless way in which some people think and speak, than the ignorant habit which prevails of calling the United States, collectiv£ly, a Demo- cracy. However that term may apply to the government of each separate State, the Federal Constitution is a most elaborate and ingenious contrivance for conducting, under one head, the 72 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. common affairs of a number of independent States, whose sovereign character was expressly recog- nized and reserved by the Constitution, except so far as sovereignty was limited by the express words of that remarkable document. No doubt the officers to whom the management of these affairs was intrusted were chosen by popular election, but once chosen, they had a degree of authority which imposed severe restraints on the direct exercise of the popular will. A President of the United States has, during the term of his office, more authority, and less responsibility than an English King, or Prime Minister, as Mr. Lincoln's proceedings through- out this war sufficiently prove. The Constitu- tion of the Senate is iinything but democratic. In the deliberations of the Senate, the small States of Rhode Island and Delaware have as piuch power as New York and Pennsylvania. Again, the Supreme Court is anything but a de- tnocratic institution. Its judges are appointed for life, and its decisions are superior in autho- rity to the legislative powers of Congress itself, and also to those of every State legislature. It is this part of the institutions of the North which may most truly be said to have broken down, and to have been broken down by Slavery, for it is this part which has proved most inade- DEFECTS OF THE UNION. 73 quate to the functions a]lotted to it, and this is precisely the least democratic part of the whole. It has broken down from a growing and con- stantly increasing dissimilarity between the North and the South in habits, tastes, and feelings, in- troduced by Slavery, and has produced all the pre- sent consequences under political institutions not merely similar but substantially the same. To describe this as the breaking down of Democracy is about as reasonable as to describe the Indian Mutiny as the breaking down of constitutional monarchy. Por the last forty-five years the United States may be said to have enjoyed a sort of holyday. No debt, no taxes, unlimited space for every kind of. enterprise, an unparalleled demand for every sort of labor, and a lavish supply of it from the uncomfortable and dissatisfied part of the whole population of Europe. This is enough to explain everything that can be fairly alleged against them, and, no doubt, there is something in common between this state of things and democracy. The universal race and passion for wealth which the circumstances of the country produce, has a tendency to de- mocracy, and democracy, unchecked, has a ten- dency to run riot. It has run riot in the Union, but for all this the Union might have held to- 74 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. gether for many more years, — and years of con- tinued prosperity, — but for the baneful effects of Slavery, which has broken up the Union, and cast a blight over the whole country. It must, however, be admitted that, in prac- tice the principle of popular sovereignty very soon leads to a negation of the lawfulness of all independent functions, and to a denial of their utility by short-sighted politicians, who are apt to regard them as nothing better than obstruc- tions. If the Government be nothing more than the servant of popular will, and if all means of resist- ance to that will be obliterated, this seems to be identical with the obliteration of all means of re- sistance to the action of the Government. 75 CHAPTER VIII. POLITICAL OPEUATION OP THE UNION. The movements of the political machinery of the Union, and some of their effects, have been al- ready adverted to. How these have effected the disruption of the Union, which, from the com- mencement, was, sooner or later, an inevitable consequence, will now be more clearly shown. The incongruous elements in some of the States, and the great distance of many of them from the central and supreme Government at Washington, rendered a union of interests, with divided Sove- reignty, impossible, under a pure democracy. The struggle for power commenced with the establishment of the Union, and ended only with its overthrow. The Constitution and form of Government en- couraged and kept alive this struggle, but under no Constitution, and under no form of Govern- ment, could the Union have been long main- tained between the Free and Slave States. If Slavery had been continued in the North, the 76 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. Union might have been longer preserved. But then the progress of prosperity to the whole would have been much less rapid than it has been, and the miseries of Slavery would have been much more manifest than thev are. The same evils would have been at work in either case, and with the same certain result in the end — the disrup- tion of the Union, and the extinction of Slavery. The one we have witnessed ; the other must follow. It is only a question of time. All who are acquainted with the history of the American Union know that, within the last forty years, the Union has, on many occasions, been in imminent peril, and that most of these occasions have arisen in Northern, and not in Southern States. Even the State of Massachusetts, the first of all the States to strike off the chains of slavery, and now the loudest in denouncing secession, when inconvenient to herself, has threatened on four separate occasions to secede from the Union. First, in the debates on the adjustment of the State debts ; secondly, on the purchase of Louisi- ana, and its admission into the Union ; thirdly, during the war of 1813 ; and, fourthly, on the annexation of Texas, when one chamber of her legislature actually passed a vote of secession. On these occasions it was no mere act of excited POLITICAL OPERATION OP THE UNION. 77 individuals, but the general voice of tlie commu- nity.* Secession is by no means a novel doctrine. In tbe first session of Congress under the nevr Con- stitution, it was threatened in the first serious contest that arose ; and this in the presence of several of the fraraers of the Constitution. It ap- pears that they very much feared the danger of Secession from the Union, and that they took pre- cautions to prevent it; but it does not appear that there was ever any doubt in the minds of those who, with the facts so recent, were most competent to judge, that the right existed, and might be exercised. The doctrine, indeed, has been maintained and loudly declared, both in the North and in the South, at frequent periods in the history of the Union. Jefferson and Hamilton both refer in forcible terms to the danger of the secession of members, and the separation of the States. The Northern States were the first to raise the question practically. The war of 1813 was highly unpopular in the North, and when called upon by the President to supply their quota of Militia, they absolutely de- clined. But they went far beyond inaction, and secession was threatened in the loudest terms; * Spence, p. 209. 78 THE AMERICAN QUESTION, nor can there be a doubt in the mind of any one acquainted with the events of that period, that the New England States would have seceded from the Union had the war continued.* With the progress of events the elements of con- flict became more numerous. Small States con- fronted the larger — maritime interests competed with agricultural — States exclusively Atlantic against those having Western territory — Slave States with free, or those expecting soon to be free. On all leading questions these various interests contended, each for itself, with a tenacity propor- tionate to the importance and critical nature of the decision to be formed. These, which Mr. Spence correctly describes as, the difficulties which were on the point of breaking up the early Convention in despair, in settling the terms of the Constitution,! were the difficulties continually arising after the Constitu- tion was settled, and which, at last, broke up the Union. These were the difficulties foreseen and urged by the party called the Federalists on the occa- sion of the annexation of Louisiana to the United States in the year 1803. On the 30th April 1808 the treaty with the * Spence, p. 207, 208, 209. t Spence, p. 204 POLITICAL OPERATION OF THE UNION, 79 French Government was concluded for the pur- chase of Louisiana for 80,000, OOOf. in exchange for a dominion the area of which exceeded 1,000,000 square miles. The Federalists of that time reproached Jef- ferson for including a territory within the limits of the Confederation which, by the force of events would be one day led to separate itself from the Atlantic States, after having thinned their popu- lation to increase its own. The pubhc mind then intoxicated with joy, cared very little about such distant possibilities. But these seem to have made more impression on the mind of Jefferson himself, as will appear from the following extract from his Letter to Brackenridge, 12th August, 1803, and now well deserving notice : — "Besides, if it should become the great in- terest of those nations to separate from this, if their happiness should depend on it so strongly as to induce them to go through that convulsion, why should the Atlantic States dread it? But, especially, why should we, their present inhabit- ants, take side in such a question? . . . The future inhabitants of the Atlantic and Mississippi States will be our sons. We leave them in dis- tinct but bordering establishments. We think we see their happiness in their union, and we 80 THE AMERICAN QUESTION. wish it. Events may prove it otherwise ; but if they see their interest in separation, why should we take side with our Atlantic rather than our Mississippi descendants ? It is the elder and the younger son differing. God bless them both, and keep them in union, if it be for their good, but separate them if it be better."* It was a never-ceasing struggle for sovereign power, which each State claimed, but no State really enjoyed. In fact, the sovereign power, M'hich by the Constitution was declared to be in the People, was, practically, on great and exciting occasions, nowhere. It was not in Congress ; it was not in