-■ ./ '^:^] 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME 
 FROM THE 
 
 SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND 
 
 THE GIFT OP 
 
 1891 
 
Cornell University Library 
 JK311 .G73 
 The case of M.S2MIh„,?afM,,ltl!llllIlflSlll|■' 
 
 3 1924 030 469 617 
 
 olir 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030469617 
 
THE CASE OF THE SOUTH 
 AGAINST THE NORTH: 
 
 HISTORICAL EVIDENCE JUSTIFYING THE 
 SOUTHERN STATES OF THE AMERICAN 
 UNION IN THEIR LONG CONTROVERSY 
 WITH THE NORTHERN STATES 
 
 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN GRADY, 
 
 A RKPRKSENTATIVE IN THB FIFTY-SECOND AND FIFTY-THIRD 
 CONGRESSES OF THE UNITED STATES 
 
 KdWARDS & BrOUGHTON, PUULISUKRS, 
 KALEIGU, N, C. 
 
 3 
 
"'By enlarged intellectual culture, especially by philosophic 
 studies, men come at last to pursue truth for its own sake, to esteem 
 it a duty to emancipate themselves from party spirit, pi'^udices, 
 and passion, and through love of truth to cultivate a judicial spirit 
 in controversy. They aspire to the intellect not of a sectarian but of 
 a philosopher, to the intellect not of a partisan but of a statesman. '' 
 
 — Lbcky. 
 
 COPYRIGHTED, 1898, BY B. F. GRADY. 
 
EREATA. 
 
 On page S-i", second line from bottom, rend " unacUiiowl- 
 edoed '" for " acknowledged." 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This work, addressed to those who hold that a public 
 office is a public trust and that the moral law of Chris- 
 tendora is .as binding on organized communities as on 
 iadividuals, has for its primary object the removal from 
 the public mind of some of the wrong impressions which 
 have been made during the last thirty-seven years. A 
 few of them are : 
 
 1. That the States of the Union are mere fractions 
 of the "American Nation." 
 
 2. That the people of the Southern States committed 
 treason against "the Government" in 1861. 
 
 3. That the people of the Southern States attempted 
 in 1861-'65 not only to destroy the Federal Government, 
 but, in the words of Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg, 
 November 19, 1863, to cause " government of the peo- 
 ple, by the people, and for the people" to "perish from 
 the face of the earth"; and 
 
 i. That the Southern States inaugurated the war for 
 the purpose of preserving African slavery in their bor- 
 ders. 
 
 The time has not yet come when the events here 
 recorded can be discussed with absolute freedom from 
 passion; but the eternal verities demand that we wait 
 not for that time, especially since a fresh movement has 
 been made in certain quarters to "make treason odious. " » 
 The lesson these events teach is indispensable io us 
 when we are called on for our voice and vote in remod- 
 
 ' This movement was made in the early months of 1897 by the or- 
 ganized veterans of the North. 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 eling the foundations of government, in promoting any 
 line of policy, or in choosing our public servants. 
 Briefly stated the lesson i§ : 
 
 1. Many of the mischiefs done by governments are 
 traceable to the ignorance of those appointed to admin- 
 ister them. 
 
 2. Extravagance is almost unavoidable when the 
 method of taxation enables the Legislature to lay unper- 
 ceived burdens on the shoulders of the taxpayers. 
 
 3. Whenever the Legislature is beyond the reach of 
 the critical eye of the people, local, sectional, or class 
 interests will encroach on the rights of the people. 
 
 4. The property of the community or of individuals 
 will be wasted or diverted from legitimate uses when- 
 ever placed at the disposal of a Legislature. 
 
 5. No mere quorum ought to be empowered to enact 
 laws affecting the rights of the people ; and no law ought 
 to be valid unless it has received at least the approval 
 of a major part of the total membership of the Legisla- 
 ture. 
 
 6. Written Constitutions present no effective barrier 
 to the avarice of classes, the ambition of individuals, 
 the schemes of party, or the machinations of fanatics ; 
 and 
 
 7. So long as the mass of the people are unable to un- 
 derstand the structure and administration of their Gov- 
 ernment they will continue to be dupes of callow states- 
 men and professional office-seekers, and victims of mis- 
 government. 
 
 We can not retrace our steps or right the wrongs of 
 the past ; but it is not too much to hope that a more 
 enlightened generation now entering upon the duties of 
 guarding themselves and their posterity from recurren- 
 ces of the mistakes of the past, may strive to restore 
 and vivify the principles on which alone any just gov- 
 
PREFACE. VII 
 
 ernment can be founded, and, by reestablishing the sys- 
 tem of governments in and between these States which 
 our fathers hoped would be indestructible, ' ' insure do- 
 mestic tranquillity' ' and ' ' secure the blessings of liberty ' ' 
 to themselves and their posterity. 
 
 The secondary object of the work — secondary only as 
 a logical conclusion — is to demonstrate beyond a possi- 
 bility of doubt that the cause of the South was the cause 
 of Constitutional government, the cause of government 
 regulated by law, and the cause of honesty and fidelity 
 in public servants. No nobler cause did ever man fight 
 for! 
 
 Time is healing the wounds of the past ; the genera- 
 tion of the war period is passing away and giving place 
 to new men, to whom the passions of that period are 
 becoming a tradition ; and in a few more years Jeffer- 
 son Davis and Abraham Lincoln, Kobert E. Lee and 
 Ulysses S. Grant, and Stonewall Jackson and Winfield 
 S. Hancock will be thought of, North and South, with 
 no more passion than that excited in out" bosoms by the 
 mention of Oliver Cromwell and Charles I, or George 
 Washington and Earl Cornwallis. Each one of these 
 men may possibly appear to the future student as a pro- 
 duct — an inevitable result — of forces, hereditary and 
 contemporaneous, of which he was not the creator. 
 And, tracing those forces, as best he may, to their 
 ^erms, possibly he may find ignorance a,nd unenlight- 
 ened selfishness to have been among the most fertile of 
 those from which sprang the forces to which he may 
 attribute any deviations from his standard of right. 
 
 The author regrets the necessity forced on him by the 
 object he had in view of removing the veil behind which 
 have stood for generations the revered figures of the 
 "fathers," and of exhibiting some of them to the close 
 inspection which never fails to discover in them "like 
 
ym PREFACE. 
 
 passions with " ourselves. He trusts, however, that, 
 since truth can be no respecter of persons, he may be 
 pardoned for this offense. 
 
 He regrets also a lack of logical consistency in the 
 chapters^ dealing with the causes of the Revolutionary 
 war and the motives of the principal actors in it. This 
 was unavoidable, because no thoroughly truthful and 
 exhaustive history of that war has ever been written ; 
 "and," as ex-President John Adams wrote, January 3, 
 1817, to the editor of Niles's Register, "nothing but mis- 
 representations, or partial accounts of it, ever will be 
 recovered." — Niles's Register, January 18, 1817. 
 
 In conclusion, it may be well to inform the reader 
 that these chapters were written during the year 1897, 
 and that most of the notes have been suggested by sub- 
 sequent reading and reflection ; and that even some of 
 the chapters have been partially rewritten, chiefly with 
 a view to condensation. 
 
 Turkey, N. CI, November, 1898. 
 
A SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 It is not easy for a man to say much about himself 
 without indulging somewhat in self -laudation ; hence 
 this sketch shall be short. It may be considered a piece 
 of vanity that I write at all; but I do so solely to gratify 
 the natural desire we all have to know something of the 
 author of a book which claims our attention. 
 
 I v/as born October 10, 1831, on a farm in Duplin 
 County, North Carolina. My great-great grandfather, 
 on my father's side, was an Irishman who came to 
 North Carolina about the middle of the eighteenth cen- 
 tury. By intermarriages his blood in my veins is min- 
 gled with that of the Whitfields, Bryans, Outlaws and 
 Sloans. 
 
 All these families were Whigs during the Revolution- 
 ary war ; and they were advocates of what was called 
 "strong government" in l788-'89. Most of them, 
 however, if not all, gradually drifted toward Jeffer- 
 son's exposition of the powers of the Federal Govern- 
 ment ; and my father, Alexander Outlaw Grady, became 
 a disciple of John C. Calhoun in 1832-'33, after hearing 
 that statesman defend his position before the General 
 Assembly of North Carolina, of which my father was a 
 member. In 1860-'61 he was a secessionist.^ 
 
 My boyhood days were spent on the farm, where I 
 worked with the slaves during nine months of each 
 year, and attended a three- months school in the winter. 
 When I was about eighteen years of age I began to at- 
 tend high schools, and after studying four years at the 
 University of North Carolina I received the degree of 
 A.B. in 1857. 
 
 I then taught for two years in Grove Academy, Ke- 
 
X BIOGRAPHY. 
 
 nansville, N. 0., associated with Rev. James M. Sprunt, 
 the gentleman who prepared me for entrance into the 
 University. At the end of this period 1 was elected 
 Professor of Mathematics and the Natural Sciences in 
 Austin College, then located in Huntsville, Texas. I 
 taught there till the war caused the college to suspend 
 operations. About th9,t time I had what my physician 
 called the typhoid fever, which disabled me for active 
 work till the early months of 1862. Then I joined a 
 cavalry company which was organizing for the Confed- 
 erate military service, which, became Company K in the 
 Twenty-fifth Eegiment. We were soon dismounted, 
 however, by the order of General Hindraan, and served 
 ever afterwards as infantry. At Arkansas Post, Janu- 
 ary 11, 1863, the whole command to which I was at- 
 tached was captured, and we were all sent to Camp 
 Butler, near Springfield, Illinois, where we were impris- 
 oned for about three months. The rigors of winter in 
 that latitude, against which our thin Southern clothing 
 afforded us insufficient protection, prostrated nearly all 
 of us with diseases; but in a short time a supply of 
 blankets and woolen cldthing came to us from some 
 ladies of Missouri and Arkansas, and improved our con- 
 dition very much. 
 
 Prison life was rather monotonous; but there was oc- 
 casionally a little stir among us produced by an exhibi- 
 tion of authority by a small fellow called Colonel Lynch, 
 who was our master. On one occasion he had us all 
 rushed out of the barracks, and into line, and while one 
 set of his underlings were searching our sleeping placeis — 
 for "spoons," perhaps — another set were searching our 
 persons for money. On another occasion a detail of us, 
 including myself, were ordered out by this little tyrant 
 to shovel snow out of his way — not out of ours. And 
 when we got on the cars to leave the place, he sent men 
 
BIOGRAPHY. XI 
 
 through each coach with orders to rob us of everything 
 we had except what we had on our backs and one 
 blanket apiece. 
 
 Exchanged about the middle of April, I was sent to 
 General Bragg's army at TuUahoma, Tenn., in which I 
 served till the close of the war in Granbury's Brigade, 
 Cleburne's Division, Hardee's Corps, participating in 
 all the skirmishes and battles (except at Nashville and 
 at Bentonville) in which my Brigade was engaged. I 
 was twice wounded — in my face and through my right 
 hand— in the chai ge on the enemy's main line of breast- 
 works, November 30, 1864, at Franklin, Tenn., and not 
 many yards from where Cleburne and Granbury fell. I 
 had been in what appeared to be more dangerous places, 
 as at Chickamauga, September 19 and 20, 1863; at Mis- 
 sionary Eidge, where Cleburne's -Division defeated Sher- 
 man's flanking column while Bragg's main army was 
 being routed ^by Grant, November 25, 1863; 'at Ring- 
 gold, where Cleburne's Division repelled the repeated 
 assaults of the troops of Sherman and Hooker from day- 
 light till 2 o'clock in the evening, thus enabling the 
 wagons, artillery, etc., of our army to get out of the 
 reach of these invaders, November 27, 1863; at New 
 Hope church, where Granburj-'s Brigade, assisted by 
 one of General Gov an' s Arkansas regiments, defeated 
 and drove off the ground Howard's Fourth Army Corps, 
 wnich was attempting to flank Jo. Johnston on his 
 right, May 27, 1864; at Atlanta, where a prolonged 
 seige exposed us to danger day and night, etc., etc. 
 But 1 had never received a scratch before. 
 
 After Hood's disastrous campaign in Tennessee we 
 went to the northern part of Mississippi, from there by 
 railway to Mobile, from there by water and railroad to 
 Montgomery, and from there, partly on foot and partly 
 on the few pieces of railroad which Sherman's vandals 
 
XII BIOGRAPHY. 
 
 had not destroyed, we came to North CaroUna to assist 
 in repelling Sherman. 
 
 On the 19th of March, 1865, while the cannon were 
 booming at Bentonville, and my command preparing to 
 leave the railroad for the scene of action, I was sent by 
 our surgeons back to Peace Institute Hospital in Ral- 
 eigh, where typhoid fever kept me till May 2. 
 
 Without money, without decent clothing, and suffer- 
 ing from the effects of the fever, I went to my father's, 
 and obtaining employment in the neighborhood at my 
 chosen profession. I waited on him in his last sickness 
 and saw him die of a broken heart' in the year 1867, 
 having survived the war and lived to see the black 
 shadow of ' ' reconstruction ' ' and government by the 
 ex-slaves hovering over his beloved Southland. 
 
 I remained in North Carolina, teaching until 1875, 
 most of the time in Clinton, Sampson County. Then 
 my health faihng, for lack of sufficient exercise, I aban- 
 doned teaching, and went to farming. On the farm my 
 life was, not eventful ; indeed 1 had no opportunity to 
 distinguish myself as a farmer. I was appointed a Jus- 
 tice of the Peace in 1879, and in 1881 I was elected Su- 
 perintendent of Public Instruction for my (Duplin) 
 County, and held that position for eight years. 
 
 In 1890 and again in 1892 I was elected to represent 
 the Third North Carolina District in the Congress of the 
 United States. 
 
 I did not agree with my father regarding the policy 
 of nullification or of secession. While I subscribed to 
 the doctrine that no State in the Union had ever relin- 
 quished the right to be its own judge of the mode and 
 
 ' Two of his sons had been killed in the war, one at Bristoe Sta- 
 tion and the other at Snicker's Gap, both in Virginia; and the only 
 remaining son — the youngest — besides myself, had lost the thumb 
 and two fingers of his right hand. 
 
BIOGRAPHY. Xm 
 
 measure of redress whenever its welfare and its peace 
 should be put in jeopardy by the other States, acting 
 separately or jointly, I doubted whether the nullifica- 
 tion of a Federal act was consistent with the obligations 
 imposed by the " firm league of friendship "' with the 
 unoflPending States, if any ; and I held that South Caro- 
 lina should have set a better example than Massachu- 
 setts had, and. submitted to the tariff as other States 
 did whose interests were identical with her own, and 
 united with them in appeals for justice to the people of 
 the offending States. 
 
 As to secession, I believed it to be the best for the 
 Southern States to remain in the Union, and trust to 
 time and the good sense of the intelligent people of the 
 Northern States for justice to themselves and their 
 children. This hope was strengthened by the circum- 
 stance that the interests of the expanding West being 
 identical with those of the South, the time was not far 
 distant when that section would join the South in the 
 struggle for riddance from the burdens imposed by the 
 shipping, fishing, commei'cial and manufacturing States 
 of the East. 
 
 This was the stand I took and held until Mr. Lincoln 
 compelled me to choose whether I would help him to 
 trample on the Constitution and crush South Carolina, 
 or help South Carolina defend the principles of the Con- 
 stitution and her own "sovereignty, freedom and inde- 
 pendence." I went with South Carolina as my fore- 
 fathers went with Massachusetts when "our Royal Sov- 
 ereign" threatened to crush her. 
 
 B. F. Grady. 
 
 Turkey, N. C., November, 1898. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 False definitioQS the foundation of false doctrines. — These false 
 doctrines produced deplorable consequences. — State, sovereign, 
 citizen, and nation the most important of the words incorrectly 
 defined. — State. — How the "fathers" used the word. — When 
 did it lose its proper meaning? — Sovereign. — Sovereignty and 
 allegiance were correlative terms, and allegiance was due to 
 the State. — John Hancock on the sovereignty of Massachu- 
 setts. — Citizen. — The new meaning attempted to be given to 
 the word in lateyear^. — Nation. — What Mr. Jefferson ad vised. — 
 This word and- its derivatives deliberately excluded from the 
 Constitution. — Applied to the peoples of these States to dis- 
 tinguish them from "foreign nations '. — Any department of 
 the Fe.dei"al government can be chosen by a minority of the 
 voters of the Union, and the only majority required anywhere 
 is the majority of States in the Senate. — The correct definition 
 of the word was never disputed till it became necessary to jus- 
 tify aggressions on the rights of certain States. — There are 23 
 States in the Union containing 18 per cent, of the total popula- 
 tion; but their 46 Senators can control legislation, the appoint- 
 ments of judges, foreign ministers, etc., and the ratifications 
 of treaties ._- 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The union of the States, the objects and conditions. — The solution 
 of the problem must be sought in the actions of the Colonies 
 and the States, and not in the opinions and purposes of indi- 
 viduals. — It is hazardous to cite opinions of individuals; al- 
 most every statesman can be cited on both sides of questions of 
 the highest importance.— The provisions of the Constitution 
 and the limitations of the powers of the Congress were ex- 
 plained by the wisest statesmen : and the States were not be- 
 guiled into ratifying it. — Certain amendments added on the 
 demand of several States. — Significance of the word "be- 
 tween ". — Mr. Greeley on the deception of the people. — The 
 draft submitted to the States was to be a Constitution as soon 
 as nine States ratified it. — Formidable opposition in some 
 States. — The action of Massachusetts and the proceedings in 
 Pennsylvania. — By June 26, 1788. all the States had ratified ex- 
 
XVI CONTENTS. 
 
 cept North Carolina and Rhode Island, both of which stood 
 aloof nearly two years. — North Carolina's objections. — Erro- 
 neous constructions of terms, phrases, and provisions due to the 
 secrecy of the proceedings of the Convention which framed 
 the Constitution. — "We, the people." — Mr. Greeley did not 
 read far enough in Elliot's Debates. — To understand clearly the 
 relations of the States in the new Union requires a knowledge 
 of their previous relations. — Unions of the Colonies for mutual 
 defense before the middle of the 18th century. — Opposition to 
 the revenue laws of the mother country. —The passage of the 
 Stamp Act was followed, at the urgent request of Massachu- 
 setts,, by a Congress of nine Colonies, which issued an address 
 denying that the Colonies could be taxed without their con- 
 sent. — Some of the Southern States taxed 16 years without 
 their consent. — Othertax measures. — Conciliatory legislation. — 
 Ea=it India Company's tea too cheap for the New England 
 smugglers. — 'Boston tea party."— Parliament passes the " Bos- 
 ton Port Bill '" and other repressive measures. — Boston asks the 
 other Colonies to join in non-importation measures, and in a 
 general Congress. —Sympathy for the sufferings of the Hos- 
 tonians. — Virginia urges the other Colonies to unite in the pro- 
 posed Congress. — The action of North Carolina. — Provisions and 
 money sent to the Bostonians. — " The cause of Boston the cause 
 of all." — Twelve Colonies meet in a Congress. — It advises the 
 Ijolding of another Congress the next year. — Folly of the Par- 
 liament in passing other measures to punish the New England- 
 ers, — The proposed Congress meets in May, 1775. — Georgia and 
 Canada. — Powers of the delegates. — Reconciliation with Great 
 Britain kept steadily in view. — What Messrs. Hooper, Hewes. 
 and Caswell said.^Battle of Lexington, aad the capture of 
 Ticonderoga, Crown Point, and White Hall by New England- 
 ers. — "The Rubicon" crossed. — The other Colonies stand by 
 Massachusetts. — The rights of British subjects demanded by 
 them through their delegates in the Congress. — An army 
 raised. — A Southerner appointed commander-in-chief. — A 
 stroke of policy. — Reconciliation still in view. — Loyalty of 
 Massachusetts. — Declaration of Independence. — Formal Union 
 proposed. — Articles of Confederation. They become the first 
 Constitution March 1. 1781. — Why amendments and additions 
 were incorporated in a new Constitution seven years after- 
 wards 16 
 
 Note A.— Britisli- taxation — How it affected the loyalty of the 
 Colonists 33 
 
 Note B.— Unreliability of our historians. — "Taxation without 
 representation " no new thing in the Colonies 34 
 
CONTENTS. XVII 
 
 Note p. — Why Georgia lagged, and why Canada refused to join 
 in measures of opposition to Great Britain 84 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Declaration of Independence. — It refers to no government in 
 North America except that of each of the Colonies, and it war- 
 rants no inference that its authors contemplated any other. — 
 Comparison of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitu- 
 tion. — The Legislature two houses instead of one. — The equality 
 of the States preserved in the Senate.— The two modes of sup- 
 plying the Federal treasury. — The President. — His oath. — The 
 mutual covenants of the States. — The oath of State officials. — 
 What it means.— Pension acts framed by pensioners. — Powers 
 delegated by the States. — The Constitution, not '"the Govern- 
 ment," to be supreme. — The only important additions in the 
 Constitution to the powers of the Congress were "to regulate 
 commerce," and " to lay and collect taxes.' etc. — The power to 
 "emit bills of credit " stricken out of the final draft by the 
 votes of nine States against two. — General Davie on the power 
 "to regulate the times, places, and manner." — Powers of the 
 Congress limited.— Habeas corpus and ex post facto laws. — Maj. 
 Henry Wirtz's fate. — "Sovereign powers" delegated in the 
 Articles as well as the Constitution. — This truth hidden by 
 John Fiske and other Northern writers. — Madison on sover- 
 eignty. — The powers reserved by each State. — Tr^ason against 
 a State recognized in the Constitution. — The first ten amend- 
 ment's restrictions of the powei'S of the Federal government- _ ' 36 
 
 Note D. — Acts of doubtful Constitutionality passed by the first 
 
 Congress .53 
 
 Note E. — Restrictions on the Federal government held by high 
 authority to be restrictions on the States or the people 53 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Vicious doctrines. — The true principles of the Government de- 
 nied in order to justify usurpations. — Daniel Webster and 
 Joseph Story.— "One people." — Their arguments. — What Jef- 
 ferson said about the proceedings of the Congress in the sum- 
 mer of 1776. — What James Wilson said in an address to the 
 people of Pennsylvania. — North Carolina first to instruct for 
 independence. — Why the States were not named in the Decla- 
 ration of Independence and in the Constitution. — Allegiance 
 to the State., — Each State retained its freedom, sovereignty, and 
 independence. — It could not retain what did not belong to it. — 
 Webster answers Webster. — Bancroft's nan xequitur. — " Be- 
 tween, "and not "over." — Absurd definition of "state"in Web- 
 ster's Dictionary 54 
 
 Note F. — What the " stars and stripes" signify. 68 
 
XVni CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 New England's shipping interests. — Leyden and its influence on 
 the peopla who came over in the Mayflower. — Commerce and 
 the fisheries, and the African slave trade. — In 1737 the " pauper 
 labor " ship-carpenters in England driven out of the business 
 by the New England builders. — Restrictions on the commercial 
 and fishing interests of New England the incentive to inde- 
 I pendenoe. — Wealth flowed into those States after the war. — 
 jl Algernon Sidney. — Not satisfied with natui-al conditions, they 
 i applied for monopolistic privileges. — The Southern States vainly 
 I opposed their demands. — Phenomenal growth of the shipping 
 ( interests under paternalistic care. — The interests of the South- 
 ern States.— Agriculture did not ask to be quartered on the 
 people's treasury or on other occupations. — How the South was 
 reduced to a state of vassalage to the favored classes of the 
 
 \ North _ J 69 
 
 Note G. — Comparative wealth of the Colonies 77 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Navigation laws. — The so-called compromise by which navigation 
 acts can be passed by the affirmative votes of one-fourth plus 
 one of the total membership of each House. — What Maclay 
 said. — Greeley's boomerang. — Discriminating tonnage duties.— 
 Tonnage of a vessel. — Disorirninating "light money" tax. — 
 Another restriction on foreign vessels. — The coasting trade 
 monopoly. — Discrinninating taxes laid on goods imported in 
 foreign ships. — No drawback allowed for discriminating tax if 
 such goods re-exported. — "Home market" for ship-builders. — 
 " Outrageous prices " for ships. — What Carey said about the re- 
 sulting impoverishment of the South. — John Lowell's estimate 
 of the gains of the shippers. — .\ circumstance which indicates 
 the extent of the operations of New England's commercial and 
 slave-trading operations. — The magical effect of the different 
 acts. — In 1810 foreign ships controlled only 9 per cent of the 
 foreign commerce of these States. — After mad protection be- 
 gan to allure capital into manufacturing, our foreign commerce 
 began to fall slowly into the hands of foreigners. — The still 
 madder posi-bellum protection gave foreigners 81 per cent, of 
 it. — New favors to shippers. — Ship materials exempt from 
 taxes. — Bounties for carrying the mails. — The remedies appar- 
 ently ineffective. — Why some Southern representatives yielded 
 to the demands of New England. — Why Southern agricultur- 
 ists did not engage in ship-building 78 
 
 Note H. — Evils of quorum legislation 90 
 
CONTENTS. XIX 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The first tariff acts allowed a drawback of duties paid on for- 
 eign salt to exporters of salt fish and provisions. — The petition 
 of the Legislature of Massachusetts. — What Jeferson said. — 
 What John Jay said. — Drawback changed to allowance per bar- 
 rel, quintal, etc.— Salt tax and allowance repealed; in 1807. — 
 In 1813 salt tax revived, and tonnage bounties allowed to fisher- 
 men, but provisions left out.— A judicial decision. — Bounty 
 granted if vess-el wrecked.— Eating out the substance of the 
 people. — What Mr. Benton said. — What President Jackson said 
 about frauds. — William B. Giles and Hugh Williamson on 
 bounties. — Greed deaf to the appeals for justice. — International 
 disputes about the fisheries, and the burdens laid by them on 
 the people. — Damages awarded tq Great Britain.— They may in- 
 volve us in future troubles 93 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 Revolutionary war debts. — Hamilton advised the assumption of 
 the State debts. — Marshall's report of the proceedings. — The 
 continental debt provided for. — State debts rejected by the 
 votes of North Carolina's representatives. — Maolay's account of 
 the proceedings. — Members of Congress speculating in certifi- 
 cates. — A "bargain" hinted at. — What Hawkins, of North 
 Carolina, said about the speculators. — Wadsworth. a member 
 of Congress from Connecticut. — Madison's proposition, and 
 how the speculators received it. — Robbing the people for the 
 benefit of bondholders demanded then as now by " public 
 faith", •• public credit ". and '• honor". — They didn't want any 
 land. — Robert Morris. — Bribery in the air. — The demeanor of 
 the speculators after their failure to burden the people with 
 eight dollai's for every dollar invested in certificates. — Then the 
 "bargain", as reported by Marshall. — What Hildreth says 
 about the "bargain'. — The South got the permanent seat of 
 the Federal capital, and the Northern speculators got what 
 Greeley calls tlie " thrift ".—How much the people paid to the 
 traders during the first three administrations. — Why President 
 Washington approved. such a " bargain ". — Why JefEerson was 
 silent' or acquiescent. — His complaint in his Ana. — "No as- 
 sumption, no Union ".—How Southern people fflt -What cor- 
 rupt schemers learned.— " The direful spring of woes unnum- 
 bered" -- - ■-- 100 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 BANK OP THE UNITED STATiS. 
 
 Another method of strengthening the public credit. — Robert 
 Morris's Bank of North America.— It became the Bank of the 
 
XX CONTENTS. 
 
 United States. — No Constitutional authority. — Hamilton's ob- 
 ject. — President Jack'son's views. — The South against the 
 North. — Private stockholder.s preferred to the United States. — 
 A gratuity to them. — What President Jackson said of the au- 
 thors of the act. — Respect for that Congress diminished by the 
 facts. — Maclay's disgust. — About 33 per cent per annum 
 cleared by the traders. — Money of the South carried North, — 
 Ties of the Union weakened HI 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Revolutionary pensioners. — Another stoiy of injustice. — The 
 South's contribution in the sitruggle for independence, and the 
 criminal discrimination against her in the granting of pen- 
 sions. — How the injustice became greater as tlie North's 
 majority in the Congress grew. — In 1830 the disbursements were 
 in the North §5.65 for every one of her Revolutionary soldiers, 
 and in the South §1.69 for every one of her soldiers.— Washing- 
 ton's salary. — Pension frauds ... 114 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Disposal of the public lands. — The ager publicus. — How the 
 United States acquired the public lands. — Maryland's refusal 
 to join the other States in the Confederation. — The pledge made 
 to the States by the Congress. —Virginia's action. — The con- 
 dition imposed in her deed ^Cessions by other States. Union 
 completed. — .V condition imposed by North Carolina and Geor- 
 gia. — Kentucky and Vermont. — Unconstitutional expansion. — 
 The cost~of all the public lands and their management. — Dis- 
 position of them in disregard of the rights of the people and of 
 the restrictions on the powers of Congress. — Jefferson and 
 Madison on the Constitutional question. — Ignorance, ambition, 
 and party spirit. — New States provided for. temporary govern- 
 ments erected, oflfioers appointed, and conditions of their ad- 
 mission prescribed. " without the lea.st color of Constitutional 
 authority." — Compacts with inchoate States whereby lands 
 were grantaJ to thein in consideration of their relinquishing- 
 certain powers. — Mr. Gallatin's advice to Mr. Giles. — The com- 
 pact with Ohio the precedent until the reasons for the grants 
 were forgotten. — Gratuitous donations to Indiana in 1^16. —The 
 precedent and thp excuse for subsequent educational donations 
 in new States, while in the old States education has been sup- 
 ported by public taxes. — Two qualifications of this assertion. — 
 The Acts of Congress. — The act admitting Indiana. — This a fair 
 sample up to 1848. — Nearl3' twelve and a half millions of Jicres 
 granted to 18 new States and Tfirritories for internal improve- 
 
CONTENTS. XXI 
 
 ments, almost half of the amount to 5 States in the North- 
 west. — Inducements to settle in Oregon, New Mexico, Kansas, 
 Nebraska and Utah. — Nearly four millions acres granted after- 
 wards to the favorite 5 States for canals. — 80,000,000 acres 
 swamp lands to public land States. — Nearly twenty-three and 
 a half millions acres granted to public land States for railroads. — 
 The share of Illinois. — Territories governed from Washington 
 city, and expenses of government paid by the people of all the 
 States. — Effect of this paternalism on the dwellers in the Ter- 
 ritories. - Since 1861 revelry in evtravagance. — The act of 1864 
 authorizing less than 29,000 people in Nebraska to form a State 
 Constitution. — It granted them, per capita, 98 acres of land 
 and $117 in money.— 700,000 acres donated in 1865 to 5 States in 
 the Northwest for canals. — Nearly two hundred millions aci-es 
 granted between 1861 and 1871 for railroads and wagon roads in 
 the Northwest. — 1.000.000 acres of arid land granted to each of 
 the arid-land Stat-^s. — Irrigation. — Pacific Railroads. — Semina- 
 ries, town sites, penitentiaries, universities, normal schools, 
 asylums, public buildings, reform schools, scientific schools, 
 etc , etc. — Free homesteads to Northerners, foreigners, and ne- 
 groes. — Every pledge made to the States violated. — Treasury 
 receipts from sales about four-sevenths of the cost of the lands. 
 A triple crime. — The purpose of the criminals. — Senator Plumb's 
 
 speech . — The prospect I'^O 
 
 Note I. — Personal ambition a factor in land legislation 1 43 
 
 Note K. — The bane of party spirit 14:i 
 
 Note L. — The bargain in the ordinance for the government of the 
 
 Northwest territory ' 144 
 
 Note M. — Government of Territories unauthorized 146 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 War of 1812.— Conduct of New England.— The war debt.— New- 
 England gathered into her coffers everything due her, and re- 
 fused to loan to the administration. — No power to emit paper 
 money. — What Jefferson said. — Indifferent success of efforts to 
 borrow money. — Distress of the Treasury. — Proposals invited. — 
 Loans effected at a discount of nearly 14 per cent. —Some of the 
 bond purchasers. — A wealthy slave-trader of Rhode Island. — 
 Depreciated State bank bills accepted. — New England responsi- 
 ble for the large unearned gains of the investors. — The Hart- 
 ford Convention and its effect. — What Carey says about their 
 conduct. — Ex-President John Adams.— The i-avings of the'New 
 England demagogues. — The olive branch brought forward by 
 the South. —Where the money of the Union had been con- 
 gested 147 
 
 Note N. — Conciliatory acts of the South 1 SS 
 
XXII CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 / 
 
 Indirect taxation. — What Jean-Baptiste Say said. — Of several 
 methods of collecting taxes CoDgress selected the tariff. — 
 Why ? — The Whiskey Insurrection. — The tax could be wrapped 
 up in the merchant's retail price.— If prices were high, the peo- 
 ple would not know who was responsible. — High prices induce 
 people in the United States to engage in manufacturing. — The 
 most advantageous situation for factories in New England. — 
 The effect of non-importation acts and the war of 1812. — The 
 " distress " of the manufacturers after the war. — Three years of 
 protection adopted in 1816. — Manufacturers quartered on the 
 agriculturists secured an extension of privileges. — In 1824 the 
 birth of many •' infants " provided for. — Act of 1828. -^Struggle 
 for sectional supremacy, beginning in 1820, now approaches a 
 crisis. — The South defied in 1832. — Abolition fanatics. — Union 
 of protected interest and fanatics to exclude the South from 
 the common territory, and thereby strengthen the North. — 
 Speech of Thomas B. Reed. — Tiie South's share of exports. — The 
 South paid, per capita, more than six times as much as the North 
 to support the government. — Giving the North the benefit of 
 every doubt, it was more than twice as much. — The disburse- 
 ment of these taxes. — Manufacturers enabled under this system 
 to add nearly §25 to every $100 worth of their products. — Their 
 advocates must explain how they realized 43 per cent under 
 what they called the "free trade tariff" of 1846. — What Mr. 
 Benton said in 1828.— What was said by the Representatives of 
 South Carolina in 1832. — The compromise tariff. — Even this in- 
 sured the manufacturer $1.20 for every 81.00 worth of his prod- 
 ucts. — The pledge of the protectionists broken in 1842. — Presi- 
 dent Tyler's vetoes —Triumph of low tariff advocates. — Even 
 under their tariffs the manufacturer could sell $1.00 worth of 
 his wares for from §1.15 to §1.24. — The plundering of the South 
 for the enrichment of the North. — Shoddy. — Justification of 
 tariff robbery. — Britain would dictate prices. — The "home 
 market" fiction to gull the farmer. — When competition became 
 sharp, prices would fall to " pauper labor " level. — The oppon- 
 ent of protection cruelly disregardful of " the mourning of 
 labor". — " The fo"eigner pays the tax '. — The Southerner who 
 desires to buy his supplies in the market where he sells most of 
 his cotton should be punished for his lack of patriotism. — The 
 effect of protection on the fertility of foreign wheat fields. — 
 Produce everything at home, and be independeht. — The slave- 
 holder who paid no " wages" was morally bound to share his 
 
 profits with the Northern manufacturer who paid wages 157 
 
 Note O. — Some of the iniquities of the McKinley tariff. 173 
 
CONTENTS. XXin 
 
 Note P.^The rates of the act of 1816 opposed by the South 175 
 
 Note Q.— Calhoun's casting vote in 1827 175 
 
 Note R.— Manufaotm-ers dictated rates in 1838. 176 
 
 Note S.—" Certainty of prices" insured to manufacturers at 
 
 the expense of other classes .__ _ 176 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 Personal phase of tariff question. — ^Jaokson vs. Calhoun. — 
 Jackson and Webster vs. Calhoun and Hayne. — Opposition to 
 high tariff rates developed when taxes laid for protection. — The 
 " American system ".—Andrew Jackson suppoi'ted it. — But the 
 co;itest over it was mainly between the North, on one side, and 
 the South, on the other. — The legislature of Georgia condemned 
 protection. — Schemes for" internal improvements" denounced 
 by South Carolina. — A committee of Bostonians protested 
 against the doctrine that we should buy dear domestic goods 
 instead of cheap foreign goods. — Hope deferred. — In 1828 — an- 
 other Presidential-election year — protection more firmly fasten- 
 ed on the country. — Helplessness of the South. — No Constitu- 
 tional remedy against acts Constitutional in form however gross- 
 ly unconstitutional in spirit. — Mr. Drayton's effort to have the 
 act declare its real purpose. — Action of North Carolina, Alabama, 
 and Virginia. — Jackson's inaugural address of March 4th, 1829, 
 recommended a readjustment of rates. — Recommended also in 
 his annual message of December 8. — Nothing done in that session 
 of Congress. — ^'A new question in January, 1830. — Nullification 
 and secession. — Hayne and Webster. — Webster's argument. — 
 What Madison said about the "general welfare" clause.— 
 Webster vs. Webster. — A personal controversy. — The cunning 
 hand of Martin Van Buren. — What Webster said of Calhoun. — 
 Jackson's argument. — Answered by Jackson in his farewell ad- 
 dress. — The " Kitchen Cabinet ". — In December 1831, the Presi- 
 dent recommended a reduction of tariff rates. — The existing 
 law yielded $37,000,000 while the treasury needed only $15,000,- 
 000. — Internal improvement schemes introduced by protection- 
 ists to avoid a reduction of rates. — Jackson's inconsistency — How 
 surpluses are disposed of in later years. — A more objectionable 
 tariff act passed, and approved by Jackson.— An address to 
 their constituents by the South Carolina representatives. — The 
 Northern States " gained more than they lost by the operations 
 of the revenne system". — Nullification proceedings in South 
 Carolina. — Georgia's successful resistance to the execution of a 
 treaty. — The seventh act of resistance to the Federal go-^ern- 
 ment.- -John Hancock, Governor of Massachusetts, set the ex- 
 ample by defying the Federal judiciary. — No moneyed interest 
 
XXIV CONTENTS. 
 
 aflfeoted by previous nullifications. — The President's pr'oclaiua- 
 tion. — Remarkable doctrines. — The soundness of his reason- 
 ing. — Answered himself through the Washington Globe. — Cal- 
 houn vindicated by Jackson. — The power to "call forth the 
 force of the Unioo against any member of the Union'' delib- 
 erately excluded from the plaa of the Union. — The whole sub- 
 ject before Congress. — The legislatures of many States express 
 their opinions. — Congress determined to preserve the public 
 peace by a compromise. — What Mr. Calhoun said. — The terms 
 of the compromise. — Peace preserved, but the Constitution 
 fatally wounded _ 177 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 Sugar and rum drawbacks. — -Frauds on the treasury. — "The 
 wise men of the East ". — Cheap whiskey transformed into rum. 
 — Drawback on exported rum greater than revenue derived 
 from imported molasses. — The lion's share to Massachusetts. _ _ 'i05 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 How Northern school books deal with slavery. — A sample. — In- 
 excusable ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation. — The right 
 of one man to own another not questioned at the time of the 
 first settlements. — The negro and the Indian were not "men " 
 — Battle on Mystic river. — Cheating the West Indian. — Fugitive 
 slave laws in New England. — Massasoit's grandson. — Two distin- 
 guished preachers. — Massachusetts engaged in the slave trade. 
 — Number of slaves in Massachusetts. — Bought and sold as 
 other property. — One sold at auction as late as 1793. — Law 
 against manumission. — Not to be abroad after 9 o'clock. — A 
 new breed of negroes. — Weaned children given away like pup- 
 pies. —New England's moral code. — Emanuel Downing. — Sum- 
 ner's ignorance. — The Fundamentals or Body of Liberties of 
 Massachusetts. — Slavery never abolished in Massachusetts by 
 law. — Her Bill of Rights, — Supreme Court. — Negro slaves less 
 profitable than white servants. — Numbers in the Northern 
 States. — George III and slavery. — Sumner and Massachussetts 
 Supreme Court.— Virginia's Bill of Rights. — Tlie ignorance of 
 Von Hoist, and his "slavocracy ". — " The Guinea trade" 
 — Felt's Salem. — Massachusetts negroes sent to warmer climates 
 and sold. — "Social equality". — The hypDoritical howl. — Free 
 negroes excluded from Northern States. — Could be whipped in 
 Massachusetts. — Economic reasons for decay of slavery in 
 Northern States. — Suppression of African slave trade. — Massa- 
 chusetts not foremost. — Roger Sherman. — African slave trade 
 kept up by New England shippers till 1863. — What Mr. Lowndes 
 said. — Ineffectual efforts of Federal authorities to suppress 
 
CONTENTS. XXV 
 
 slave trade. — Messages of Presidents.— Slave trade made piracy 
 in 1820. — 961 negroes on board the Boston slaver Nightingale 
 in 1861, and "expecting more''. — Naval War Records. — The 
 results of the importations shown by per centage of increase. — 
 
 American Colonization Society a Southern institution 208 
 
 Note T. — Debate between SenatorsSumner and Butler. — Seward's 
 admission ._ _ 335 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 Many of New England's "great moral ideas ' mere Actions. — The 
 truth of history demands exposure of false pretensions.^ — Why 
 abolition sentiment was cheeked in the Southern States. — 
 Experience. — Discriminatibn against free negroes in all the 
 States. — Indiana's Constitution. — Many set free during and after 
 the Revolution. — In North Carolina free negroes voted till 1836. 
 Public charge. — Experience in Northern States. — " Miserable 
 remnant of former well-fed slaves". — -'A nuisance". — Ohio's 
 exclusion. — Greater kindness and indulgence of the Southerner 
 recognized in Uncle Tom's Cabin.— Chattel slavery no more 
 offensive to Northern than to Southern sensibilities. — The vote 
 to prohibit African slave trade. — Petition from Indiana Terri- 
 tory. — Prohibition of slavery in Northwest Territory sup- 
 ported unanimously by the South. — Reports of John Randolph 
 and Jesse Franklin. — No sectional differences. — '■ Extension of 
 slavery ' defined. — Many abolitionists in all the States in early 
 days. — Increase of free blacks in the South. — Abolition senti- ' 
 ment in the South checked by the new issue of sectional con- 
 trol of the Government. — False pretences of Northern free- 
 soilers. — ^Their real object acknowledged in Montgomery's 
 American History. — Missouri Compromise. — Free-soilers not 
 abolitionsts. — The abolitionists a discredited faction. — Garrison, 
 Tappan, and Lovejoy. — Wendell Phillips. — Attorney-General 
 James T. Austin. — The abolitionists avowed disunionists. — 
 Higginson, the patriot. — Hon. Joseph H. Walker makes a reve- 
 lation. — What the free-soilers said as late as 1860. — Abolition 
 societies and their methods. — Jackson's message. — Servile in- 
 surrections. — Sincere abolitionists in the South silenced. — 
 William Gaston. — Abolitionists fuse with free-soilers. — 
 Beecher's advice. — The " campaign liar ". — Jefferson thrust in- 
 to the " pro-slavery party '' — The uninformed told that the strug- 
 gle for sectional_ control was a struggle between "liberty and 
 slavery". — Mrs. Stowe's sneer at the Constitution. — "Great 
 moral ideas " displaced the Constitution. — The slave-holder a 
 monster. — Slave-holders paid no "wages". — The New York 
 World on wages paid in the North. — Tenement houses. — The 
 
XXVI CONTENTS. 
 
 Journal of the Knights of Labor on "American wages". — The 
 
 tramp 337 
 
 Note U. — The effect of the abolition agitation in Virginia 346 
 
 Note V. — The tramp. - 346 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 The "slave-power" fiction the crowing falsehood of the South's 
 traducers. — The slave-trade compromise.- — The " thi-ee-flf ths " 
 compromise. — History of it. — Basis of taxation and representa- 
 tion. — Greeley's fierce assault on his man of straw. — Butler's 
 little Bill of Extras. — Webster on fugitives from service. — 
 Greeley's ignorance. — The purchase of Louisiana, and the 
 motive. — "Slavery never let the North alone". — Florida com- 
 pared to Nebraska. — The annexation of Texas. — History. — " Bad 
 faith " of the " slave power " in regard to the so-called Missouri 
 compromise. — No power delegated to Congress to meddle with 
 slavery in the territory belonging to the United States. — The 
 treaty with France forbade such meddling in the Louisiana 
 purchase. — History of the so-called compromise. — The"North " 
 the first to disregard it. — All the falsehopds supporting the 
 "slave-power" fiction, treated with indignant silence by the 
 South, accepted as history in the North. — But there was one 
 charge the enemies of the South never made. — Her hands are 
 clean . _ _ » 348 
 
 Note W. — First movement to disrupt the Union made by Massa- 
 chusetts 361 
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 Is there exaggeration in the preceding chapters ? — Benton's tes- 
 timony. — Often voted for what his judgement condemned. — 
 Federal measures to tax the South for the benefit of the North. 
 — A convention of Southern States. — Its address to the people. 
 —Unconstitutional working of the Federal government. — Rem- 
 edy proposed — It was tried, butfailed. — Why? — Benton's rem- \ 
 iniscences. — The Union shoxild be preserved. — Worth more to | 
 the North than to the South. „ ^63 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Causes of the war between th^States. — The firm league of friend- 
 / 'sEip^broken. — Madison's delicate truth. — Enumeration of viola- 
 tions. — Lincoln justified secession. — Mutual obligations of the 
 States trampled on, — John Brown. — Webster's appeal to the 
 Northern people to "perm.it" the Southern States to " remain " 
 in the Union. — Slow, stealthy, and misunderstood result of 
 ^ legislation hostile to the South. — Pervasive impression. — Social 
 
CONTENTS. XXVU 
 
 (order endangered — "Fire eaters ".—Recollection of bitterness ■ 
 I of nullification period. — The last feather on the camel's back. — 
 j Lincoln's admission. — South Carolina seceded. --Her reasons. — 
 Sent commissioners to Buchanan. — What he had said in his 
 ; message. — Other grounds of confidence. — Hamilton's admission 
 of the right of a State to secede. — Kentucky and Virginia Reso- 
 ; lutions. — Timothy Pickering. — Tucker's Blaokstone. — Josiah 
 ' Quincy. — Hartford Convention. — Judge Rawle. — J. Q. Adams. 
 Supreme Court. — President W. H. Harrison on " our Confeder- 
 acy." — Massachusetts when. Texas was annexed. — Webster at 
 Capon Springs. — B.F. Wade. — Lippincott's Gazetteer. — Horace 
 Greeley. — Buchanan lacked the courage of his convictions. — 
 Crittenden proposition. — Peace Congress. — The worth of the 
 Union, without " a little blood-letting ". — A Southern Unionist 
 turned secessionist. — Other Southern States seceded. — Confed- 
 erate States of America. — They sent commissioners to Washing- 
 ton. — Friendly relations sought. — Provisional government — 
 Permanent Constitution. — This Constitution basely misrepre- 
 sented to the ignorant and the prejudiced. — Mr. Lincoln inaugu- 
 rated five days before this Constitution adopted. — His inaugural 
 address. — Property " belonging to- the government". — Refused 
 to assemble the Congress. — A declaration of war. — The title of 
 " the Government " to the forts, etc. in Charleston Harbor — No 
 money ever paid to the State for her Revolutionary forts. — No 
 legal right of ownership even in the United States before seces- 
 sion. — They were held by the sufferance of the owner. — Mr. 
 Lincoln's determination to drive out the owner the casus 
 belli. — Waged war against the Confederate States. — His Con- 
 gress refused to sanction his usurpations. — Wilson's resolution, 
 and the action of his party friends. — Lyman Trumbull's respect 
 for his oath. — The language and the contents of the resolution. 
 — Pryor's resolution, and the course of Messrs. Logan, McCler- 
 nand, and Sickles.— Logan's speech denouncing the Northern 
 fanatics. — Northern newspapers criticised Lincoln's position, 
 and justified secession. — Gen. Joseph Lane exposed the decep- 
 tions of the revolutionists. — Soon all cool reason was silenced. 
 — Mendacious fanatics rushed to the front as leaders of the peo- 
 ple, — Logan, McClernand, and Sickles in the ranks of the usur- 
 pers. — Greeley followed them. — The "lower depth" to which 
 Mr. Lincoln sunk in his Gettyburg address. — Patriotism and 
 hatred of the South undistinguishable. — Death and destruc- 
 tion. — Reports of General Sherman and Kilpatrick of their 
 vandalism and pillage in Georgia.— A district larger than Ver- 
 mont laid waste. — 1100,000.000 of property destroyed or carried 
 North. — Thanks of Grant and Lincoln. — Public sentiment in 
 
XXVIII ^ CONTENTS. 
 
 the North in 1898. — Crimes committed by the black and white 
 fiends who disgraced the Federal uniform. — The cost of the war. 
 — The South compelled to pay a part of the cost of its own sub- 
 jugation. — How much the Southern people had paid up to 1894. 
 — Eleven times as grievious as the burden laid on France by 
 Germany. — The cost of what the victorious usurpers inflicted 
 on the South as what they called "legitimate results" of the 
 war incalculable. — The cost of the bonds.— The clear loss in 
 the sale of them. — The South"s burden growing instead of dimin- 
 ishing. — Objectionable Federal ofHcere appointed in the South. 
 — The Union of the Constitution destroyed. — The Southern 
 States conquered provinces. — Reconstruction and destruction. — 
 All this was to preserve and perpetuate "our free in.stitutions." 267 
 
 Note X. — Northern approval of John Brown's crimes. — Governor 
 
 Andrew and " a young merchant of Boston." 804 
 
 Note Y. — The language of imperialism. — " The Government '■ in- 
 stead of " The United States." _ 304 
 
 Note Z. — The victims of subjugation. — The patience and fidelity 
 of the Confederate soldier _ 808 
 
 Note Aa. — Military despotism, and "reconstruction outrages." — 
 Extracts from military orders _ 309 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 The preservation of slavery not among the objects of secession. — 
 Charles Bancroft's admission. — What was said by the platform 
 on which Lincoln was elected.— His inaugural address. — He re- 
 voked Freemont's abolition proclamation. — Gen. J. H. Lane's 
 letter. — Dihvorth's report. — Lincoln revoked Hunter's order. — 
 Lincoln compelled to yield to the demands of the fanatics. — 
 Governor Andrew's letter. — Linoola proposed to liberate the 
 slaves of '■ rebels " only. — Subjugated States and parts of States 
 excepted. — Remarkable doctrines of his proclamation. — Joseph 
 Holt on liberating slaves. — Dealing with the race question since 
 the war. — To punish and degrade the Southern whites the only 
 object. — In 1867 ballots placed in the hands of the negroes of the 
 South, but not of the District of Columbia. — The jewel of con- 
 sistency forced the radicals to enfianchise whites and negroes 
 in that District in 1871. — State and United States offices denied 
 to the negro in the North. — What President Johnson said of the 
 usurpers. — Testimony of .ludge Ewart, a Southern man with 
 Northern principles. — How the negro fares in New England. — 
 "Free citizens ' of Alabama denied the privilege of laboring 
 in Illinois. — Testimony of Zion's Herald. — Apology of Provi- 
 
CONTENTS. XXIX 
 
 denoe Journal. — Falsehoods about compensation to slave-hold- 
 ers 311 
 
 Note Ab. — The fiction abo.ut compensating slave-holders. 319 
 
 Note Ac. — Election laws. — Extract from a speech of the author, 
 
 APPENDIX. ■■ 
 
 The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion, and the Constitution 338 
 
SOUTH AGAINST NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE I. 
 
 FALSE DEFINITIONS THE CHIEF SUPPORT OF THE FALSE 
 DOCTRINES WHICH DESTROYED THE PEACE OF THE 
 UNION. 
 
 " Contemporanea expositio est optima etfortisima in lege.'" 
 
 Wharton's Legal Maxims. 
 
 If we carefully examine the long controversy between 
 the two sections of the Federal Union with the object 
 of satisfying ourselves as to the validity of the reason- 
 ing, the arguments, and the appeals to the intelligence 
 of the people relied on by the respective disputants— 
 disregarding mere appeals to self-interest and passion — 
 we shall find that in their last analysis they were noth- 
 ing but differences of interpretation. The fundamental 
 difference, from which all others logically resulted, was 
 about the significance of the terms employed to name 
 or describe the Colonies and their inhabitants after the 
 4:th of July, 1776. One class of politicians maintained 
 that each one of the States was an independent sover- 
 eignty; that the Federal Government was nothing more 
 than an agent of the States, created by them for cer- 
 tain well-defined purposes ; and ' that whenever this 
 agent usurjzed powers uot granted to it by the States, 
 they were no longer bound to regard it as their agent ; 
 and that, furthermore, a violation of the mutual cove- 
 nants of the States, solemnly '' nominated in the bond," 
 would absolve an injured State from its obligations as 
 a member of the Confederacy. The opposing school of , 
 
 ' Contemporaneous exposition is best and strongest in law.. 
 
2 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 politicians denied the sovereignty of each State ; insisted 
 that " the people of America " united themselves in a 
 social compact without regard to State lines , that they, 
 as " one people," organized a " National Government " 
 to manage the affairs of the whole people, and " local " 
 governments to which were entrusted local interests — 
 in short, that the "National Government" represent- 
 ing the sovereignty of the whole people, is paramount 
 to the local or State governments. 
 
 These conflicting views led to deplorable consequen- 
 ces ; and since it is important that we should be able to 
 ascertain where the responsibility lay, let us apply the 
 test of definition. This may not be infallible, but it is 
 the test which the common sense of mankind has de- 
 cided to be " best and strongest. ' ' 
 
 The four most important of these terms are (1) State, 
 (2) sovereign, (3) citizen, and (4) nation. 
 
 STATE. 
 
 For the true meaniug of this word, when applied to 
 communities or governments, we have the authority of 
 statesmen, scholars, historians, jurists, and poets who 
 lived and wrote during the seventeenth and the eigh- 
 teenth centuries, including the formative period of our 
 Union. Here are some of them : 
 
 (a) Lord Bacon (who died 1626) in his essay " Of 
 Great Place, " begins^ thus: "Men in great place are 
 thrice servants — servants of the sovereign or State, " 
 etc. ; and in his essay " Of Seditions and Troubles " he 
 says; " As there are certain hollow blasts of wind and 
 secret swellings of the seas before a tempest, so are 
 there in States" ; and, again, " Libels and licentious dis- 
 courses against the State, when they are frequent and 
 open : and in like sort false news, often running up and 
 down, to the disadvantage of the State, and hastily em- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 3 
 
 braced, are amongst the signs of troubles. " All through 
 his writings "State" is a synonym for the highest form 
 of an organized community. 
 
 (6) Dr. Thomas Fuller (died 1661) is quoted thus in 
 Eichardson's Dictionary (under " State "): " The word 
 statesman is of great latitude, sometimes signifying 
 such who are able to manage offices of state, though 
 never actually called thereto." 
 
 (c) Sir Matthew Hale (died 1676) is quoted by Black- 
 stone (first chapter of his fourth book) as* saying: 
 " When offenses grow enormous, frequent, and danger- 
 ous to a kingdom or Staie, " etc. 
 
 {d) Boyer's ITrench-English and English- French Eoyal 
 Dictionary, published in Amsterdam in 1727, defines 
 "State" thus: "(A country living under the same gov- 
 ernment) Etat,^^ etc.; and, again, "(the government of 
 a People Living under the Dominion of a Prince, or in 
 a Commonwealth) Etat, Empire, Souverainete, ou Re- 
 puhlique.'''' 
 
 (e) David Hume (died 1775) says on page 138 of Vol- 
 ume III of his History of England : " Most of the arts 
 and professions in a State are of such a nature, that 
 while they promote the interests of the society, they 
 are also useful or agreeable to some individual"; and, 
 again, ' ' But there are also some callings which though 
 useful and even necessary in a State, bring no particu- 
 lar advantage or pleasure to any individual." All 
 through his volumes the word is used as it is here. 
 
 {/) Sir William Blackstone (died 1780) says in the 
 chapter already referred to, that a knowledge of the 
 criminal law " is of the utmost importance to every in- 
 dividual in the State" ; that the law and its administra- 
 tion "may be modified, narrowed, or enlarged accord- 
 ing to the local or occasional necessiiies of the State" j 
 and that " sanguinary laws are a bad symptom of the 
 distemper of any State." 
 
4 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 [g] Adam Smith (died 1790) says in his Wealth of 
 Nations, Volume II, page 62: " In the plenty of good 
 land the European colonies estt^blished in America and 
 the West Indies resemble and even greatly surpass 
 those of ancient Greece. In their dependency upon the 
 mother State they resemble those of ancient Eome. " 
 
 {h) And Sir Wilham Jones (died 1794)wrote: 
 
 " What constitutes a state ? 
 Not high-raised battlements or labored mound, 
 
 ' Thick wall or moated gate ; 
 Not cities proud, with spires and turrets crowned ; 
 
 Not bays and broad-arm^ed ports, 
 Where, laughing at the storm, rich navies ride ; 
 
 Not starred and spangled courts, 
 Where low-browed baseness wafts perfume to pride. 
 No ! Men — high-minded men. 
 
 These constitute a state ; 
 And sovereign law, that state's collected will, 
 
 O'er thrones and globes elate 
 Sits empress,'' etc. 
 
 It is beyond dispute, therefore, that in 1776 "State," 
 whether applied to a people or to their government, 
 was a general term, while ' ' kingdom, " " empire, ' ' 
 "republic,'' and "commonwealth" were specific terms, 
 denoting sources of political power. It was a more com- 
 prehensive term than either of these. It was so under- 
 stood by the statesmen who put " the State of Great 
 Britain' ' in the Declaration of Independence ; it was so 
 understood by the Colonies when, through their dele- 
 gates in the Continental Coagress, they declared them- 
 selves to be " free and independent States " ; it was so 
 understood by their delegates when they set forth ' ' the 
 necessity which constrains them (the Colonies) to alter 
 their former systems (plural) of government"; it was 
 so understood by the negotiators of the Treaty of Peace 
 of 1783, when they wrote: 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 5 
 
 "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United 
 States, viz : New Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode 
 Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New 
 York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, 
 Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia 
 to be free, sovereign and independent States"; and, 
 again, when they penned the declaration: "There shall 
 be a firm and perpetual peace between his Britannic Maj- 
 esty and the said States"; it was so understood by 
 Massachusetts when she declared herself to be a " free, 
 sovereign, and independent State," although she had 
 adopted ' ' Commonwealth ' ' as her distinctive title ; it 
 was so understood by the Continental Congress when it 
 placed this second Article in its plan of union : ' ' Each 
 State retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independ- 
 ence," etc.; it was so understood by the same body 
 when they recognized the Congress as a Congress of 
 States — "the United States in Congress assembled"; it 
 was so understood by the people of New Hampshire 
 when, in their Constitution of 1792, they declared: 
 ' ' The people of this State have the sole and exclusive 
 right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign and 
 independent State" ; it was so understood by the people 
 of Vermont when, in their Constitution of 1793, they 
 required "every officer, whether judicial, executive or 
 military, in authority under this State, before he enters 
 upon the execution of his office," to " take and sub- 
 scribe the following oath or affirmation of allegiance to 
 this State, unless Jie shall produce evidence that he has 
 before taken the same," etc. ; it was so understood by 
 the States when they defined "treason against a State," 
 and their delegates provided for the surrender of any 
 " person charged in any State with treason" ; it was so 
 understood by the Congress of the Confederation when, 
 using a practically synonymous word in the Thirteenth 
 
6 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Article of the Ordinance for the Government of the 
 Northwest Territory, they said (July 13, 1787, while the 
 Constitutional Convention was in session): " And for 
 extending the fundamental principles of civil and relig- 
 ious liberty, which form the basis whereon these repub- 
 lics,' their laws, etc., are erected," etc. ; it was so un- 
 derstood by the Convention of 1787, which closed its 
 draft of the Constitution with the statement that it 
 was " done in Convention by the unanimous consent of 
 the States present"; and it was so understood by the 
 Congress in 1794, when in framing the Eleventh Amend- 
 ment they proposed to shield the States against suits 
 prosecuted by "citizens or subjects of any foreign State. " 
 
 This long line of authorities reaching back beyond 
 1626, can leave no doubt in the minds of intelligent 
 persons that each one of the States was regarded by 
 itself and by the other States as an independent sover- 
 eignty, possessing all the rights, powers and jurisdic- 
 tions of any other sovereignty; that it could form " a 
 firm league of friendship" with any or all of the other 
 States, or refuse to do so. 
 
 When, we may now ask, did they lose their character 
 as States ? When did "State" lose its proper meaning ? 
 Was it done by one act, or was the operation gradual? 
 The answer to these questions is that it was never done 
 at all up to 1861. 
 
 The claim that it was done when they united in 1776 
 for their mutual defense, is negatived by the second 
 Article of the Articles of Confederation adopted after- 
 wards ; and the assertion that it was done by the first 
 three words of the preamble of the Constitution — ' ' We, 
 the people ' ' — is disposed of by the declaration that the 
 
 'A "republican government is that in which the body, or only a 
 part of the people, is possessed of the supreme power."— Montes- 
 quieu's Spirit of Laws, Book II, Chapter I. 
 
THE SODTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 7 
 
 Constitution was to be " between the States." Equally 
 unfounded is the claim that the people of all the States 
 were consolidated into a Nation because the Oonstitu- 
 tion was to be the supreme law of the laud. Treaties 
 also were to be the supremo law of the land; and, un- 
 questionably, if the construction of the ccnsolidatiouists 
 were correct, both parties to a treaty would be sover- 
 eigns over the States' The truth is. this was simply 
 another way of declaring, as the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion did, that " each State shall abide by ih^ determina- 
 tions of the United States in Congress assembled on al] 
 questions which by this Confederation are submitted to 
 them" ; that "the Articles of this Confederation shall be 
 inviolably observed by every State"; and that " the 
 Union shall be perpetual." 
 
 SOVEREIGN. 
 
 The term sovereign is properlj^ an adjective, being a 
 modern form of the ancient Latin word supremus, which 
 we translate highest. In the course of time it came to 
 be used also as a noun, signifying the man possessing 
 the supreme or highest authority in a State. This was 
 its meaning during the seventeenth century. It was 
 its meaning when these thirteen Colonies freed them- 
 selves from British rule. And it is its meaning to-day 
 in monarchical governments. 
 
 When, however, the sovereignty of the British kmg 
 was successfully renounced by these Colonies, the new 
 order of things inevitably led to some confusion of 
 thought, because, strictly speaking, nobody had inher- 
 ited the sovereignty of the king, who, as to them, was 
 dead. Was each inhabitant a sovereign? Was each 
 State a sovereign ? Or were all the people of all the 
 States a sovereign V Naturally the answer to these ques- 
 tions would depend on the answer to the question. 
 
8 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 What had become of the allegiance each inhabitant had 
 owed to the British crown ? Did he owe anything of 
 the sort now ; and, if he did, to whom ? 
 
 This question was easily answered; each one of the 
 Colonies, after active hostihties began between them 
 and the Britiph Government, and more than a year be- 
 fore the Declaration of Independence, demanded the 
 allegiance of each one of its inhabitants, and in default 
 of compliance the property of recusants was confiscated 
 by the legislatures.' 
 
 This was done in every one of the Staies, and the 
 right was denied by nobody except the British and the 
 Tories. 
 
 Hence it followed necessarily that, if the word sov- 
 ereignty was at all admissible in the new nomenclature, 
 it belonged to each State; and, accordingly, in all the 
 early State Constitutions, in the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence, and in the Articles of Confederation, the 
 sovereignty of the several States is recognized as the 
 logical seq uence of Independence. 
 
 This sovereignty was never renounced, or delegated, 
 or surrendered by the States; they delegated powers, 
 jurisdictions, etc., but this was no more a delegation of 
 sovereignty than the conferring of powers on a tenant 
 transforms him into a landlord.^ 
 
 'In November 1777, the Legislature of North Carolina, in session 
 at Newbern, passed an act, "That all the lands, tenements, etc., 
 within this State, and all and every right, etc., of which any person 
 was seized or possessed, or to which any person had title, on the 4th 
 of July, in the year 1776, who on the said day was absent from this 
 State, and every part of the United States, and who still is absent 
 from the same; or who hath at any time during the present war 
 attached himself to, or ai ied or abetted the enemies of the United 
 States, etc., shall and are hereby declared to be confiscated to the 
 use of this State; unless," etc. — Laws of North Carolina, Potter, 
 Taylor and Yancey's Digest, Volume 1, page 366. 
 
 ''By an apparent oversight the Constitution conferred on the Su 
 preme Court the power to decide suits ' 'between a State and citizens 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 9 
 
 CITIZEN. 
 
 This word is derived from city, as burgess or burgher 
 is from borough or burg, but for some reason, unhke 
 burgess, it was in the course of time apphed to mem- 
 bers of anj' community or body pohtic, and became the 
 opposite of foreigner. The rights and the duties of the 
 citizen depended on the degree of civihzation attained 
 to by his community and the nature of the government, 
 and there could be no inference from the word itself as 
 to the privileges and immunities of the person to whom 
 it was applied, whether a man, or a woman, or a child. 
 
 In the course of time it became in England and France 
 the equivalent of inhabitant, as the lexicographers in- 
 form us, and as we may infer from its use in the Bible 
 where it is found in four places, as follows : 
 
 1. Luke XV, 15 : ''And he went and joined himself to 
 a citizen of that country ' ' 
 
 2. Luke xix, 14: "But his citizens hated him, and 
 sent a messenger after him, saying, We will not have 
 this man to reign over us." 
 
 3. Acts xxi, 39: " But Paul said, I am a man which 
 am a Jew of Tarsus, a city of Cilicia, a citizen of no 
 mean city." 
 
 4. Ephesians ii, 19: "Now, therefore, ye are no more 
 
 of another State. ' ' Under this provision a suit was instituted against 
 Massachusetts, while John Hancock was Governor, which is thus 
 referred to in Conrad's Lives of the Signers, etc., page 63. 
 
 " He (Hancock) did not, however, in favoring a Confederate Re- 
 pubhc, vindicate with less scrupulous vigilance the dignity of the in- 
 dividual States. In a suit commenced against Massachusetts, by the 
 Court cf the United States, in which he was summoned upon a writ, 
 as Governor, to answer the prosecution, he resisted the process, and 
 maintained inviolate the sovereignty of the Commonwealth. A re- 
 currence of a similar collision of authority was, in consequence of 
 this opposition, prevented by an amendment (the Eleventh) of the 
 Federal ,Constitution. ' ' 
 
10 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the 
 saints, and of the household of God." 
 
 " In France, " says Aldea's Cyclopoedia, "it denotes 
 any one who is born in the country, or naturalized in it. " 
 
 Such was the meaning of this terra in our Eevolu: 
 tionary period, and in what may be called the formative 
 stages of a nomenclature suited to our new and untried 
 conditions.^ 
 
 Hence the sharp line of distinction between royal and 
 popular goveruments had the king on one side and "the 
 people" on the other; and in all the early documents 
 the woi'd " citizen " is of minor importance. 
 
 Let us examine some of them. 
 
 1. In the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence 
 (May 20, 1775) the word does not occur. ^ 
 
 2. In the Mecklenburg Resolves (May 31, 1775) it is 
 not found. ^ 
 
 3. In the Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776) 
 " fellow citizens '' occurs once, "inhabitants" twice, 
 " free people " once, and " the people " twice. 
 
 •4. In North Carolina's Constitution (1776) "freemen" 
 appears eight times, "the people" eight times, "inhab- 
 itants" five times, and "free^ citizens" once. 
 
 5. In the Articles of Confederation (framed 1777) the 
 
 'There was an attempt to give a new meaning to the word citizen 
 in the Fourteenth Aniendm,ent. It says: "All persons born or nat- 
 uralized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, 
 are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they re 
 side." 
 
 What the intention was is not clear; and there was a serious over- 
 sight, if the word was intended to imply some new relation to the 
 Federal Government, since it excludes people who live in the Terri- 
 tories or in the District of Columbia. 
 
 ^Wheeler's History of North Carolina, Volume I, page 69. 
 
 'Ibid. 255. 
 
 *This word "free" shows what was in the minds of the " fathers.'" 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 11 
 
 people are called "free inhabitants" once, "free citi- 
 zens " once, " inhabitants " twice, " the people" twice, 
 and " members " of a State once; and, as if it was in- 
 tended to leave no ground for misconception, article 4 
 says: "The free inhabitants of each of these States * * 
 shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free 
 citizens in the several States." 
 
 It is clear enough, therefore, that in all the Constitu- 
 *tions the " fathers "applied the word citizen to every 
 man, woman or child in the StateSj whether " free " or 
 not; and that the declaration in the Fourteenth Amend- 
 ment that "all persons born in the United States are 
 citizens thereof " was the work of a set of statesmen 
 who were ignorant of the first principles on which our 
 Federal system was founded. 
 
 NATION. 
 
 The word nation comes to us from the Latin language, 
 and its etymological meaning is family, stock, or race. 
 In this sense it was properly applied to the Indian tribes 
 in the early days, as the Five Nations, the Six Na- 
 tions, etc. 
 
 In the course of time, as races became intermingled, 
 the word lost its proper significance, and separate com- 
 munities were called nations, just as " jus gentium "^ 
 the law or right of families — now means the law of na- 
 tions ; but there was nothing in the word itself indicat- 
 ing the nature of the social or political institutions of 
 the people it was applied to. 
 
 Hence, when these Colonies entered into united resist- 
 ance to British aggressions or threatened aggressions, 
 their people began to be regarded by the world as a na- 
 tion; and with no great impropriety they have been 
 called a nation ever since. The language contained no 
 other word which could distinguish them from ' ' for- 
 
12 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 eign nations," as it contained no other term applicable 
 to the Swiss, who for ages were divided into independ- 
 ent cantons, united together for no purpose but mutual 
 defense.' 
 
 In the treaty of amity and commerce concluded be- 
 tween the United States and France, in 1778, "the two 
 parties" are called "the two Nations"; and during the 
 period of the Confederation all writers and speakers ap- 
 plied the word "nation " to the peoples of these States, 
 although in the Articles " each State retained its free- 
 dom, sovereignty, and independence"; but when it 
 was proposed to put "nation" in the Constitution, "the 
 fathers" scented danger, and the proposition was re- 
 jected. In the progress of events, however, as the neces- 
 sity arose for justifying some intended or actual infringe- 
 ment of the rights of certain classes or sections of the 
 people, it began to be held that since the people of these 
 States are a nation, it was the duty of the minority to 
 submit to the will of the majority ; and after awhile a 
 majority of the " nation " — ^spelled then with a capital 
 N — became thoroughly indoctrinated in this unfounded 
 construction of the provisions of the Federal Constitu- 
 tion. The ignorance of the people was taken advantage 
 of; such a fact as that Nevada has as much control over 
 legislation as New York, and, in the event of a failure 
 of the electors to choose a President, an equal voice in 
 the election of that officer, was carefully hidden from 
 the people ; and at last the administration of the Gov- 
 ernment became, in their eyes, as national as that of 
 Great Britain. But the mischief did not stop here ; the 
 
 'Mr. .Jefferson, February 8, 1786, wrote to Mr. Madison: "The pol- 
 itics of Eui'ope render it indispensably necessary that with respect 
 to everything external we be one nation only, firmly hooped to- 
 gether. Interior government is what each State should keep to 
 itself." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 13 
 
 Northern States became the Nation after the war of 
 Secession commenced. It is a familiar sight to see in a 
 newspaper pubhshed in one of them the statement that 
 when Sumter was fired on " the Nation flew to arms." 
 It appeared in the New York World as late as the last- 
 week in February, 1898. 
 
 , There is nothing in the Constitution requiring or em- 
 powering a majority of the "nation" to elect or control 
 any department or officer of the Government. Mr. Lin- 
 coln was chosen by 39 per cent of the aggregate popular 
 votes of the States; it is easily possible for a majority 
 of the Senators to represent a minority of the whole 
 people ; a majority of the Representatives can be elected 
 by a minority ; and the J udges of the Supreme and other 
 courts may be appointed by a minority President and 
 confirmed by a minority Senate.' 
 
 On the solid foundation of these definitions a body of 
 political doctrines was erected which can never be demol- 
 ished, and they were never attacked by any respectable 
 party until it became necessary to defend encroachments 
 on the rights of certain States. In the course of time 
 there was a union of all the interests which had been 
 quartered on the people, and of others which hoped to 
 be so quartered, and also of ignorant and fanatical re- 
 formers who proposed to use the machinery of the Fed- 
 eral Government to further their schemes; and by the 
 
 'If the reader will turn to the census tables he will find that there 
 are 33 States, including the "mining camps," whose aggregate pop- 
 ulation is 11,597,263, or about 18 per cent of the total population of 
 the States. These States send 46 Senators — a majority of two — to 
 the Congress; and, if political parties were nearly equal in strength 
 in these States, their Senators might represent less than 10 per cent 
 of the population of the "Nation." And he will also see that the 
 aggregate population of Montana, Wyoming, Nevada and Idaho is 
 less than half (about 42 per cent) of the population of West Virginia, 
 although they have as many (four) Representatives in Congress as 
 that State has. 
 
14 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 assistance of demagogues, a venal press, and honest but 
 misinformed friends of the Union, they succeeded in 
 establishing a new and powerful school of politicians 
 who denied the truth of History, instilled vicious doc- 
 trines into the minds of the people, and prepared the 
 way for the war between the sections. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 15 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE UNION OF THE STATES— ITS OBJECTS, CONDITIONS AND 
 LIMITATIONS, 
 
 Having defined the terms which will constantly recur 
 in our discussion, the object in view demands as a next 
 step a clear understanding of the relations of the States 
 to each other after they had entered into a Union, the 
 extent and the limitations of the powers they conferred 
 on any department or officer of the Government which 
 they established, and of the duties or mutual obliga- 
 tions they severally imposed on themselves. 
 
 Obviously the opinions and purposes of individuals, 
 which change as knowledge expands and experience 
 enlarges, deserve no place ill the solution of such a prob- 
 lem as this; our only trustworthy guide is the action of 
 each Colony in its ovs^u legislative assembly, or through 
 its Eepresentatives in the Continental Congress, and, 
 after it became a State, through its delegates in the 
 Congress of the Confederation, iu the Constitutional 
 Convention, and in its own Convention called to con- 
 sider the new Constitution. 
 
 No argument is needed to prove that, if the people of 
 any State were induced to adopt the Constitution by 
 misrepresentations of the functions of the Government 
 to be established and the scope of its powers, a fraud 
 was practiced on them ; nor was there any fraud. The 
 objects of the framers of the Constitution, and the safe- 
 guards against usurpation ware honestly and truthfully 
 presented to the people of the several States by the 
 ablest statesmen in all of them, each article, section and 
 clause of the instrument being explained according to 
 the obvious meaning of the words and, the accepted 
 canons of interpretation. And, for greater security to 
 
16 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the States and their respective peoples, since experience 
 had taught mankind that governing bodies are prone to 
 exercise powers not belonging to them, a widespread 
 demand led to such amendmeats as were thought to 
 remove all danger. ' 
 
 The Convention which met in Philadelphia on May 25, 
 1787, composed of delegates from all the States except 
 New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Maryland 
 (though delegates from all of these except Rhode Island 
 appeared in a month or two), and closed its labors on 
 the 17th of September following, after nearly four 
 months of anxious and sometimes almost hopeless 
 efforts to compromise the conflicting interests of States 
 and groups of States, and agree upon a plan which would 
 probably be ratified by the States, transmitted to the 
 Congress of the Confederation the draft of a Constitu- 
 tion to be submitted to Conventions to be called in the 
 several States by their Legislatures at the request of the 
 Congress. 
 
 There were 13 States in the Confederation, but as 
 there were apprehensions that some of 'them might 
 refuse to abandon the Confederation and adopt the new 
 
 ' Mr. Grreeley, in his efforts to find excuses for the conduct of his 
 political associates, asserts that powers were granted of which the 
 people were kept in ignorance. In his American Conflict, Volume 
 II, page 232, he says : "The Constitution was framed in General 
 Convention, and carried in the several State Conventions, by the 
 aid of adroit and politic evasions and reserves on the part of its 
 framers and champions. * » * Hence the reticence, if not am- 
 biguity, of the text with regard to what has recently been termed 
 coercion, or the right of the Federal Government to subdue by arms 
 the forcible resistance of a State, or of several States, to its legiti- 
 mate authority. So with regard to slavery as well," etc. 
 
 Prom which view of the Constitution, if it were correct, two de- 
 ductions seem unavoidable : 
 
 1. The Revolutionary war was a mistake; and 
 
 2. The ratification of the Constitution, secured by fraud, is not 
 binding on any State. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. IT 
 
 scheme of government, the seventh article provided 
 that if nine States should adopt it, it should he a "Con- 
 stitution between the States so ratifying the same," the 
 other four States to be left to take care of themselves 
 as they could. > 
 
 At the ensuing sessions of the Legislatures, all of them 
 except that of Rhode Island called (conventions to con- 
 sider the ratification of the new Constitution. Dela- 
 ware ratified it on the Yth of the following December, 
 and New Hampshire on the 21st of June, 1788. These 
 were the first and the last of the necessary nine, but 
 five days after the latter date Virginia and New York 
 acceded to the new TJuion.^ Thereupon steps were taken 
 
 'The reader should note that "between" is used here for the obvi- 
 ous reason that the Constitution was to be of the nature of a com- 
 pact between (betwain or by two) two parties, namely, each State as 
 one and its co- States as the other. And the consolidationist may 
 select either horn of the dDemma: If it was intended to establish a 
 new Union, here is recognized ihe right of nine States to withdraw 
 from the old one ; if it was intended simply to amend the old Union, 
 the right of four States to withdraw from it is recognized. 
 
 '■'There was formidable and in some instances violent opposition to 
 the ratification of the Constitution. In the Massachusetts Conven- 
 tion, composed of 355 members, after a three weeks debate, it was 
 carried by 19 majority. But in Pennsylvania the proceedings were 
 even more interesting, as we gather from the protest of the oppo- 
 nents of the Constitution, as given on page 39, Volume I, second 
 series, Hildreth's History : "The resolution introduced in the Assem- 
 bly of Pennsylvania for holding that Convention (to consider the 
 new Constitution) had allowed a period of only 10 days within which 
 to elect the members of it ; and the minority in the Assembly had 
 been able to find no other means of preventing this precipitation, 
 except by absenting themselves, and so depriving the House of a 
 quorum. But the majority were not to be so thwarted ; and some of 
 these absentees * * had been seized by a mob, forcibly dragged 
 to the House, and there held in their seats, while the quorum so 
 formed gave a formal sanction to the resolution. It was further 
 alleged (by the protest) that of 70.000 legal voters, only 13,000 had 
 actually voted for members of the Ratifying Convention ; and that 
 the majority who voted for ratification had been elected by only 
 6,800 votes." 3 
 
18 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 to hold the elections required by the new order of things, 
 and to inaugurate the G-overnment. 
 
 North Carolina's Convention refused to carry the 
 State into the Union, and she and Rhode Island remained 
 out of the Union until sixteen and twenty- two months, 
 respectively, after the ratifications of the necessary nine, 
 their objections having been in the meantime removed 
 by such amendra^^nts to the Constitution as were thought 
 to be effective barriers to usurpation.' 
 
 In the public mind and in the State Conventions there 
 were many objections to the proposed Constitution 
 founded on the total darkness which had enveloped the 
 proceedings of the Convention which framed it. 
 
 Some of the erroneous interpretations which the pub- 
 lication of the " secret proceedings " disposed of, have 
 at different times been palmed off on the people as au- 
 thoritative expositions. For example, Patrick Henry 
 stoutly opposed the ratification by Virginia, and de- 
 manded to know why it said " We, the people" instead 
 of "We, the States." "If," he continued, "the States 
 be not the agents of this Compact, it must be one great, 
 consolidated, National Government of all the States." 
 But the "secret proceedings," afterwards published, 
 showed that the final draft of the Constitution, sub- 
 mitted to the Convention August 6 by the Committee 
 
 'North Carolina's objections to the Constitution may be seen in 
 the following resolution passed on the 1st of August, 1788, after that 
 instrument had been defeated by a vote of 184 to 84 : 
 
 "Resolved, That a declaration of rights, asserting and securing 
 from encroachments the great principles of civil and religious lib- 
 erty, and the unalienable rights of the people, ^together with amend- 
 ments to the most ambiguous and Exceptionable parts of the said 
 Constitution of government, ought to be laid before Congress and 
 the Convention of the States that shall or may be called for the 
 purpose of amending the said Constitution, for their consideration, 
 previous to the ratification of the Constitution aforesaid on the part 
 of the State of North Carolina. "—Elliot's Debates, I, 331. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 19 
 
 of Five, began with " We, the people of the States of 
 New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Ehode Island," etc., 
 naming all the thirteen States; and that the names of 
 the States were stricken out for the reason that it was 
 not known whether all the Stated would ratify it, or 
 how many more States would ultimately be admitted 
 into the Union. But this " We, the people " does duty 
 to-day in bolstering up our " great consolidated. Na- 
 tional Government." 
 
 Mr. Grpeley quotes Usury with much satisfaction; 
 but, like Josh Billings's lazy man hunting for a job of 
 work, he read Elhott's Debates " with a great deal of 
 caution. " If he had turned to page 94 of Volume III — 
 from which volume, pages 22 and 24, he had quoted 
 Henry's words — he would have found this answer from 
 Madison: "I can say, notwithstanding what the honor- 
 able gentleman has alleged * * * Who are parties 
 to it ? The people — but not the people as composing one 
 great body; but the people as composing thirteen sov- 
 ereignties. Were it, as the gentleman asserts, a consoli- 
 dated government, the assent of a majority of the peo- 
 ple would be sufficient for its establishment ; and as a 
 majority have adopted it already, the remaining States 
 would be bound by the act of the majority, even if they 
 unanimously reprobated it," etc. 
 
 But this is anticipating. 
 
 The importance of the subject requires that the reader 
 shall have as a preface to the main discussion a brief 
 history of the relations of the States to each other pre- 
 vious tOithe formation of the " more perfect Union." 
 
 Exposed to dangers from Indians and other enemies, 
 the British Colonies in North America very early recog- 
 nized the duty as well as the necessity of defending each 
 other; and (omitting two unimportant confederacies) 
 apprehending in 1754 that the war between England 
 
20 THE sour a against the noeth. 
 
 and France would involve the British and French Colo- 
 nies in North America, the four New England Colonies, 
 New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland, sent Commis- 
 sioners to a Congress at Albany, N. Y., for the purpose 
 of negotiating a treaty of peace with the Indians who, 
 it was feared, might become allies of the French. This 
 was done ; and then the Congress formulated a scheme 
 of a general government of all the British Coloiiies. 
 But the scheme was rejected by the King of England 
 and by every one of the Colonies. 
 
 After the close of the war (!764) England revived, 
 amended, and instituted measures to enforce her old law 
 of 1733 (levying duties on sugar and molasses) which 
 New England shippers and traders had evaded, and 
 which had never been strictly enforced, her avowed ex- 
 cuse being that these Colonies ought to contribute to 
 the payment of her large war debt contracted in part 
 for the defense of the Colonies against the French and 
 their Indian allies.' 
 
 This created considerable excitement in Boston,^ which 
 was the largest town in all the Colonies, and imported 
 
 'The following extract from Smith's Wealth of Nations (Vol. II. 
 p. 66), the first edition of which was published, in the winter of 
 1775-'76, wiU give us light on this as well as some other matters : 
 "The expense of the civil establishment of Massachusetts Bay used 
 to be about eighteen thousand pounds per year; that of New Hamp- 
 shire and Rhode Island 3,500 pounds each ; that of Ne^ Jersey 1,200 
 pounds ; that of Virginia and South Carolina 8,000 pounds each. The 
 civil establishments of Nova Scotia and Georgia are partly sup- 
 ported by an annual grant of Parliament. But Novia Scotia pays, 
 besides, about seven thousand pounds a year towards the public 
 expenses of the Colony; and Georgia about two thousand five hun- 
 dred pounds. * * * The most important part of the expense of 
 government, indeed, that of defense and protection, has constantly 
 fallen upon the mother country." 
 
 ■Of James Otis, the most active of Massachusetts patriots in de 
 nouncing and agitating against this law, Alden's Cyclopedia says; 
 "His opposition to the Koyal Government developed 1761, and was 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 21 
 
 more molasses than all the other seaport towns on the 
 continent; but outside of Massachusetts there was no 
 manifestation of serious discontent.* 
 
 But when the Stamp Act was passed in 1765, impos- 
 ing taxes which everybody coald see and feel, thei9 was 
 a storm of opposition in all the Colonies, particularly in 
 the towns on the seacoast. 
 
 Thereupon, at the ui'gent request of Massachusetts, 
 delegates from all the Colonies except Canada, New 
 Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina and Goorgia met 
 in a Congress in New York in October, 1765. This 
 Congress of nine Colonies adopted a declaration of 
 rights, and sent an address to the King and a petition 
 to the Parliament, asserting the right of all the Colo- 
 nies to be "exempted from all taxes not imposed by 
 their consent" — a very remarkable doctrine in the light 
 of subsequent events.' 
 
 Societies were formed here and there to arouse the 
 people of the several Colonies against the claims of the 
 British Government, and the merchants of Boston, New 
 York and Philadelphia agreed with each other not to 
 buy any more goods from Great Britain until the Stamp 
 Act should be repealed.^ 
 
 claimed by some to have been greatly intensified, if not wholly 
 caused, by the refusal of Grovernor Bernard to give his father (James 
 Otis, Sr.), the position of Chief-Justice, for which he had applied 
 on the death of Sewall." 
 
 'At least five of the States were taxed from 1834 to 1833 (as will be 
 shown in another chapter), not only without their consent, but in 
 spite of their protests; and eleven of them were taxed for seven 
 years (from and including 1865) far more heavily than Great Britain 
 ever proposed to tax them, not only without their consent, but 
 without their being permitted to send Representatives to either 
 House of the Congress; and among the burdens imposed on them 
 was a Stamp Act." 
 
 'See Note A. 
 
•2'2 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The Stamp Act was repealed the next year; but an 
 act was passed imposing taxes on glass, paper, painters' 
 colors, and tea, on their importation into the Colonies. 
 It was approved by George III in .June, 1767. 
 
 In February, 1768, the Colonial Legislature of Massa- 
 chusetts sent a circular to the legislative bodies in the 
 other Colonies, asking their cooperation in efforts to 
 obtain a redress of grievances.^ This circular was very 
 offensive to the British Government, and a demand for 
 its rescission was sent over; but Massachusetts refused 
 to rescind, and even reaffirmed its doctrines in stronger 
 language. Then ensued a contest between that Colony 
 and the mother country, the latter sending over a body 
 of troops to suppress the "rebels." The excitement in- 
 creased ; the presence of the British troops in Boston 
 added to the causes of irritation, and both sides seemed 
 willing to invite an open rupture. On the 5th of March, 
 1770, a quarrel arose between a military guard and a 
 number of the townsfolk who, under the lead of Crispus 
 Attucks, a negro, surrounded the guard and attacked it 
 ' ' with clubs, sticks and snow-balls covering stones. ' ' 
 Being dared to fire by the mob, six of the soldiers dis- 
 charged their muskets, which killed three of the crowd 
 and wounded five others. The Captain and eight men 
 were brought to trial for murder, John Adams and 
 Josiah Quincy defending them. All were acquitted ex- 
 cept two, who were convicted of manslaughter. These 
 
 'John Hancock, one of the wealthiest merchants and ship-owners 
 in Boston, was one of those who evaded these taxes. His vessel. 
 Liberty, was seized by the Royal Commissioners of Customs in 1768 
 for violations of the law ; and the seizure was followed by a riot. 
 The officers were beaten with clubs, the boat of the Collector was 
 burnt in triumph, and the houses of some of the most conspicuous 
 adherents of the Government were razed to the ground. From these 
 events Hancock gained great popularity, and easily came to the 
 front of Massachusetts patriots. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 2S 
 
 praying the benefit of clergy were branded with hot 
 irons, and dismissed.^ 
 
 But this " Boston massacre" served the purpose of 
 still further inflaming the passions of the people against 
 the mother country.^ 
 
 About the same time a conciliatory measure was 
 passed by the Parliament repealing all the taxes im- 
 posed by the Act of 1767 except that on tea. But this 
 was not conciliatory enough, and an act was passed in 
 1773 permitting the East India Company to carry their 
 tea into the Colonies and undersell the smugglers of 
 Dutch tea.^ All export taxes and other restrictions 
 were removed except a duty of three pence per pound 
 to be paid in the port of entry, which was considerably 
 
 'When Massachusetts invaders fired on and killed some of the peo- 
 ple of Baltimore, April 19, 1861, they were not branded or even 
 tried. 
 
 ^It would be grossly unjust to the Irishmen and the children of 
 Irishmen who dwelt in the Colonies, particularly those of the South, 
 if we failed to recognize the part they played in uniting the Southern 
 Colonies with New England, and in waging the war.' It would be 
 a pleasant task to search the records and gather up a list of the ad- 
 vocates of independence, at the head of which would stand the 
 names of Charles Carroll of Carrollton, Patrick Henry, Hugh 
 Williamson, James Moore, Thomas Lynch, Edward Rutledge, and 
 others ; but we must forego that pleasure, and be satisfied with 
 what may be considered competent evidence of Irish devotion to the 
 • cause of independence. Joseph Galloway, Speaker of the Pennsyl- 
 vania House of Assembly, at the beginning of the troubles, refused 
 to join in measures of resistance, and in October, 1778, he left the 
 States arid went to England. There he was examined by a Com- 
 mittee of the House of Commons, and, when asked who composed 
 the armies of the Continental establishment, he answered: "The 
 names and places of their nativity being taken down, I can answer 
 the question with precision. There were scarcely one-fourth natives 
 of America— about one half Irish; the other fourth were English 
 and Scotch."— Dillon's Historical Evidence on ihe Origin and Na- 
 ture of the Government of the U. S. (New York, 1871), p. 56. (See 
 also North Carolina Colonial Records, IX, 1,246.) 
 
 ^Nine-tenths of all the tea they imported was smuggled from Hoi - 
 land.— See Montgomery's Amer. Hist. (Boston, 1894), p. 154. 
 
24 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 below ihe taxes paid in the mother country. It was 
 hoped that this measure would pacify the Colonies; but 
 it was objected to not only in the Colonies, but by the 
 tea merchants of England, who united with the smug- 
 glers in appealing to the patriotism of the Colonists to 
 refuse to buy the cheap teas. The importation of this 
 tea was resisted in the principal importing cities, nota- 
 bly in Boston, where the smugglers organized a band of 
 " Mohawk Indians " and dumped into the sea about 
 f 100, 000 worth of tea.' 
 
 In consequence of these and other violent proceed- 
 ings the Parliament passed, in succession, during the 
 next seven weeks, beginning with March 23, four acts, 
 which were commented on as follows by Alexander 
 Elmsly, one of North Carolina's agents in London, in a 
 letter dated May 17, 1774: " By the first (Boston Port 
 Bill)^ the harbor of Boston is shut up till a compensa- 
 tion is made to their Indian Company for their tea, and 
 till the inhabitants discover an inclination to submit to 
 the revenue laws, after which the King, by and with 
 the advice of the Privy Council, is empowered to sus- 
 pend the effect of the act. * * * 
 
 " The next act is for taking away the charter of the 
 Massachusetts Bay; hereafter the Council are to be 
 appointed by the King, as in the Southern Provinces, 
 
 'In a letter to the Earl of Dartmouth, dated New York, Novem- 
 ber 4, 1774, Josiah Martin, the Royal Governor of North Carolina, 
 advises the repeal of the tea tax, and gives this among other rea- 
 sons: " It will disappoint the views of the smugglers of Dutch tea 
 who have made monstrous advantages of the opposition they have 
 industriously excited and fomented on this subject, professing to 
 aim by these means at the repeal of the Tax Act, which they cer- 
 tainly intended to produce a contrary effect, deprecating in their 
 hearts that ooui-se above all things that must inevitably destroy 
 their monopoly of that commodity and all its concomitant bene- 
 fits."— North Carolina Colonial Records, IX, 1,085-86. 
 
 ''See Note B. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 26 
 
 and in certain cases the Governor is to act without their 
 consent and concurrence. The town meetings, except 
 for the purpose of elections, are declared unlawful, and 
 some other new regulations established: 
 
 " The third act enables the Grovernors, in case of an 
 indictment preferred against any officer of the Crown, 
 either civil or military, for anything by him done in the 
 execution of his office, to suspend the proceedings 
 against him in America, and to send him home for trial 
 in England. This law, I am told, the officers of the 
 army insisted on for fear of being prosecuted by the 
 civil power, either as principals or accessories to the 
 death of any person killed in the field of battle, in case 
 things should conie to that extremity. 
 
 "The fourth and last law respects quartering the sol- 
 diery. I have not seen it, but suppose it is calcukted 
 to obviate in future the construction put upon the old 
 one, by the people of Boston, in their town meeting, 
 viz, that Castle William, situated three miles out of 
 town, should be taken to be barracks in the town, and 
 of course excluded the pretensions of the army to quar- 
 ters in the town, even though the purpose of sending 
 soldiers should be merely on account of the commotions 
 and disturbances in the tosvn. " ' 
 
 When the people of Boston heard of the passage of 
 the first of these acts they were greatly excited ; and a 
 meeting was called "to consider this new and unexam- 
 pled aggression. It was there voted to make applica- 
 tion to the other Colonies to refuse all importations 
 from Great Britain, and withhold all commercial inter- 
 course, as the most probable and effectual mode to pro- 
 cure the repeal of this oppressive law. One of the citi- 
 zens was despatched to New York and Philadelphia, for 
 
 'North Carolina Colonial Records, IX, 1,000. 
 
26 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the purpose of ascertaining the views of the people of 
 those places and in the Colonies farther South.' A 
 committee, comprising Samuel Adams, Dr. Warren, 
 with John Adarns and others of the same high charac- 
 ter, was appointed to consider what farther ipeasures 
 
 ought to be adopted. 
 
 * * * » * * * 
 
 " The Governor obliged the General Court (Legisla- 
 ture) to meet at Salem, instead of Boston, where they 
 proceeded, after a very civil address to him, to ask for 
 a day of general fast and prayer. This his Excellency 
 refused. But, although he would not let them pray, he 
 could not prevent them from adopting a most important 
 measure, namely, that of choosing five delegates to a 
 General and Continental Congress; and of giving in- 
 formation thereof to all the other Colonies, with the 
 request that they would appoint deputies for the same 
 purpose." (See Life of John Adams in Lives of the 
 Signers, etc.) 
 
 Much sympathy for Massachusetts was manifested in 
 other Colonies. The Assembly of Virginia appointed 
 
 'It seems that Massachusetts had agents travelling through the 
 Southern Colonies before this. Prom the Memoirs of Josiah Quincy, 
 Jr., -w^e learn that in March and April, 1773, he visited William Hill, 
 Esq. (a native of Boston), a merchant of Brunswick, N. C, whom 
 he found " warmly attached to ;the cause of American freedom"; 
 breakfasted with Colonel Dry, the Collector of Customs at Bruns- 
 wick, whom he found to be a " friend to the Regulators" ; dined in 
 Wilmington "with Dr. Cobham with a select party"; dined again 
 with Dr. Cobham "in company with Harnett, Hooper, Burgwin, 
 Dr. Tucker," etc.; "dined with about twenty at Mr. WilUam 
 Hooper's" ; spent the night with Mr. Cornelius Harnett — "the Sam- 
 uel Adams of North Carolina (except in point of fortune)" — "Robert 
 Howe, Esq.," being one of " the social triumvirate"; went to New 
 Bern, -..Bath and Edenton; breakfasted with Colonel Buncombe; 
 and spent two days crossing Albemarle Sound "in company with 
 the most celebrated lawyers of Edenton." — (See North Carolina 
 Colonial Records, Vol. IX, pp. 610 and 611.) 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 27 
 
 the 1st of June (1774)' as a day of " fasting, humilia- 
 tion, and prayer." "The Royal Governor immediately 
 dissolved the House of Burgesses ; whereupon the mem- 
 bers resolved themselves into a Committee, ' ' passed res- 
 olutions declaring in substance that " the cause of Bos- 
 ton was the cause of all, ' ' and took steps to induce the 
 other Colonies to appoint delegates to the Greneral Con- 
 gress, which had been proposed by the Bostonians. 
 
 North Carolina's first Legislative Assembly elected by 
 the people, which met in Newbern August 25, 1774, 
 while declaring the allegiance of the people to the House 
 of Hanover, denounced the Boston Port Bill as uncon- 
 stitutional ; approved the plan for a General Congress 
 of the Colonies in September, and appointed delegates 
 to the same.^ 
 
 On the 5th of September, 1774, delegates from all the 
 Colonies except Canada and Georgia met in Philadel- 
 phia and organized the first Continental Congress, assum- 
 ing the style of the Twelve United Colonies. 
 
 The first act of this body was to recognize the equality 
 of the Colonies by agreeing that in determining any 
 question each Colony should have one vote: and this 
 equality was preserved by subsequent Congresses, by 
 the States under the Articles of Confederation, and, in 
 
 'The day when the Boston Port BUI was to go into effect. 
 
 ^Sympathy for Boston was no t confined to resolutions ; it was 
 manifested in a more practical way. Provisions and other necessa- 
 ries were sent to that city from all the seaboard towns of the South- 
 ern Colonies, contributed in some instances by counties and settle- 
 ments far removed from the coast. — (See North Carolina Colonial 
 Records, Vol. IX, pp. 1,017, 1,018, 1,033, 1,081, 1,116, etc.). 
 
 And this sympathy inspired the Bostonians to consult the Con- 
 tinental Congress about the propriety of burning the town in "order 
 to distress the military, " taking care in the meantime to estimate 
 "the value of the houses, etc., in order to raise a general contribu- 
 tion for the loss at some future time." — (See North Carolina Colonial 
 Records, Vol. IX, p. 1,083). 
 
28 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the Senate, under the Constitution. Without it coope- 
 ration and Union would have been impossible. 
 
 Being little more than an ad visor 5^ body, each delega- 
 tion having no power to do more than it had been in- 
 structed to do by its own Colony, it appointed commit- 
 tees to take into consideration the rights and' grievances 
 of the Colonies, asserting by numerous declaratory reso- 
 lutions what were deemed to be the inalienable rights 
 of English freemen; pointed out to the people of the 
 Colonies the dangers which threatened those rights; 
 besought tbem to renounce commerce with Great Britain 
 as the most effective means of averting those dangers: 
 and advised all the Colonies to send delegates to a Gen- 
 eral Congress, to be held in the same place in May of 
 next year. 
 
 In the meantime the British GoverniT^ent, mistaking 
 the temper of the people of the other Colonies, and not 
 realizing that " the cause of Boston was the cause of 
 all," proceeded to other acts of folly. An act of Parlia- 
 ment, which received the King's assent March 1, 
 restrained " the trade and commerce of the Provinces 
 of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire, and the 
 Colonies of Connecticut and Ehode Island and Provi- 
 dence Plantations in North America, to Great Britain, 
 Ireland and the British Islands in the West Indies,'" 
 and prohibited "such Provinces and Colonies from car- 
 rying on any fishery on the banks of Newfoundland or 
 other places therein mentioned, under certain conditions 
 and limitations." 
 
 This act not only affected the business of the fisher- 
 men, but it diminished the food supplies of the poor of 
 Boston, and would have produced great distress in the 
 town if contributions had not poured into it from other 
 Colonies. 
 
 There was, therefore, a new incentive to comply with 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 29 
 
 the recommendation of the Congress of the preceding 
 year; and accordingly delegates were appointed, and 
 met in Philadelphia in May, 1775, all being represented 
 except Canada and Georgia,' as before, although dele- 
 gates from the latter arrived in July. 
 
 The powers of the delegates were not well defined; 
 but reconciliation with England was to be kept steadily 
 in view. On the day — April 5, 1775 — when Messrs. 
 Hooper, Hewes and Caswell were reappointed as North 
 Carolina's delegates, they said iu an address to the Pro- 
 vincial Convention: "One motive in this important 
 measure, viz, a sacred regard for the rights and privi- 
 leges of British America, and an earnest wish to bring 
 about a reconciliation with our parent State, upon terms 
 Constitutional and honorable to both, have hitherto 
 actuated us." Previous to the meeting of this Con- 
 gress open hostilities had broken out between Massa- 
 chusetts and Great Britain (which probably stimulated 
 Georgia to active cooperation), the battle of Lexington 
 having been fought a few weeks before. The news of 
 this battle spread rapidly and created intense excite- 
 ment. Volunteers from the adjoining Colony of Connec- 
 ticut and from what afterwards became Vermont, un- 
 der the leadership of Col. Ethan Alien, seized upon the 
 military posts of Ticonderoga and Crown Point, both on 
 the west side of Lake Champlain, and White Hall at its 
 southern extremity. The capture of Ticonderoga was 
 effected on the 10th of May, the day on which the Con- 
 gress met. 
 
 New England had now passed the Rubicon; a step 
 had been taken which imposed on the other Colonies 
 the necessity of choosing whether they would stand 
 aloof and permit her to be crushed by Great Britain, or 
 go to her rehef with men and money. They chose the 
 
 'See Note C. 
 
30 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 latter; the "cause of Boston" had become in a new 
 and fearful sense " the cause of all." Their delegates 
 in the Congress proclaimed a declaration of the reasons 
 for the appeal to arms, passed a resolution to raise 20,- 
 000 troops, each Colony to furnish its quota on an agreed 
 equitable basis; appointed, on the nomination of Massa- 
 chusetts, George Washington, of Virginia, to be Com- 
 mander-in-Chief of all the Colonial forces ;' and made 
 other preparations for defending the rights of the Colo- 
 nies against what they considered unwarranted aggres- 
 sions, actual or threatened, on their chartered rights. 
 " We have not raised armies," they declared, " with 
 ambitious designs of separating from Great Britain and 
 establishing independent States. We fight not for glory 
 or conquest. * * * We shall lay them (arms) down 
 when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggres- 
 sors, and all danger of their being renewed shall be 
 removed, and not before."^ 
 
 But revolutions never go backward; and, in the light 
 of history, this declaration of the representatives of the 
 Colonies, if sustained by the several Colonies, meant 
 independence or subjugation. It was not so regarded, 
 however, in the Colonies ; it was generally expected that 
 the British Ministry would recede from their measures 
 
 ^This was an effective piece of diplomacy. "The delegates from 
 New England were particularly pleased with his election, as it would 
 tend to unite the Southern Colonies cordially in the war." — Am. 
 Mil. Biog., 335. But it was very offensive to the New England offl 
 cers who had hitherto commanded in their military operations. Some 
 of them refused to serve under "Continental officers," notably John 
 Stark, Seth Warner, Artemas Ward, and Seth Pomeroy. 
 
 ^On the 36th of April, 1775 — a week after the battle of Lexington — 
 the Legislature of Massachusetts, in session at Watertown, issued an 
 "Address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain," which contained the 
 following passage: "They" (the British Ministry) " have not yet de- 
 tached us from our Royal Sovereign ; we profess to be his loyal and 
 dutiful subjects." — Dillon's Hist. Evidence, page 54. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 31 
 
 of aggression, as they had so often done before. Accord- 
 ingly the people in many of the Colonies were attempt- 
 ing, for months after General Washington took com- 
 mand at Boston, to bring about accommodations with 
 the Eoyal Governors. In New Jersey the expectation 
 of a reconciliation was not abandoned even as late as 
 July 2, 1776, when her new frame of government was 
 adopted. ' 
 
 This Congress remained in session several months, 
 and the delegates, obeying instructions from their sev- 
 eral Colonies, declared, July 4, 1776 (though New York's 
 assent was not obtained till July 9), that these Colonies 
 renounced all allegiance to the British sovereign ; and 
 " that as free and independent States, they have full 
 power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, 
 establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things 
 which independent States may of right do.'"^ 
 
 About the same time a plan of union was being drafted 
 by a committee which had been appointed early in June. 
 The result of their labors was the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion, which were submitted November 15, 1777, to the 
 several State Legislatures, with a request for instruc- 
 
 'Since Massachusetts was the flrnt Colony to resist Great Britain, 
 it would be natural to suppose that she was first to propose inde- 
 pendence; but she was behind the Southern Colonies, North Caro 
 lina taking the lead on April 12. 
 
 Bancroft obscures this disagreeable truth in the following passage 
 in Volume VIII, page 449: "Comprehensive instructions reaching 
 the question of independence without explicitly using the word, 
 had been given by Massachusetts in January." 
 
 ^Samuel Johnston, President of the North Carolina Assembly, in 
 a letter to Messrs. Hooper, Hewes and Penn, dated April 13, 177|,6 
 said: "The North Carolina Congress have likewise taken under 
 consideration that part of your letter requiring their instructions 
 with respect to entering into foreign alliances, and were unanimous 
 in their concurrence with the enclosed resolve, confiding entirely in 
 your discretion with regard to the exercise of the power with which 
 you are invested." — North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 495. 
 
32 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 tions to their several delegations to approve and sign 
 them. 
 
 They proposed in the preamble to establish "a Confed- 
 eration and perpetual union between the States of New 
 Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Prov- 
 idence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jer- 
 sey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, 
 North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia."' They 
 were also translated into the French language and 
 sent with an address to the people of the British Prov- 
 inces north of these States, the eleventh article provid- 
 ing that "Canada acceding to this Confederation and 
 joining in the measures of the United States, shall be 
 admitted into, and entitled to, all the advantages of this 
 Union," and that other Colonies might be admitted by 
 the assent of nine States. 
 
 f3u the 9th of July, 1778, the Articles were signed by 
 the delegates from the New England States, New York, 
 Virginia and South Carolina, New York's approval be- 
 ing on the condition that all the other States would 
 approve. The delegates from New Jersey, Delaware and 
 Maryland refused to sign because their States had not 
 so instructed them, while North Carolina and Georgia 
 were not represented. In the course of ten months, 
 however, all the States except Maryland acceded to the 
 Confederation. She stood aloof until March 1, 1781, 
 the last year of active hostilities. Practically, there- 
 fore, the war was waged under the Continental Con- 
 gress, which was little more than an advisory body, all 
 really effective political power being in the several States. 
 After the war was ended the Articles of Confederation, 
 designed principally as the Constitution of a military 
 government, were found unsuited to the -new situation. 
 The excitement of the war period and the necessity for 
 extra exertion, which could be relied on as inducements 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 33 
 
 for each State to furnish its quota of requisitions to the 
 general treasury, had now passed away ; and the Legis- 
 latures of the several States were loath to burden their 
 impoverished constituents with even the taxes necessary 
 to discharge their own obligations, contracted in each 
 State for the maintenance of its own military organiza- 
 tion and the defense of its own soil. Hence there was 
 inadequate provision for the debts and obligations of 
 the Continental Congress and "the United States in 
 Congress .assembled. " 
 
 This situation induced some of the ablest men in the 
 States to advocate amending the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion so that the " United States in Congress assembled" 
 could lay and collect taxes ; and in a short time com- 
 mercial jealousies of particular States, threatening the 
 peace of the Union, indicated the necessity of other 
 amendments. At last, after four years of uncertainty 
 and discontent — counting from the definitive treaty of 
 peace — a Convention was called, framed a new Consti- 
 tution, and asked the States to ratify it, as we have seen. 
 
 This general s^urvey of the relations of the States pre- 
 pares us for a somewhat critical inquiry into the struc- 
 ture of the Union, which, we will postpone to the next 
 chapter, wherein we shall study the Declaration of In- 
 dependence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 NOTK A. 
 
 BRITISH TAXATIOJV AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE COLONIES OF 
 NORTH AMERICA. 
 
 "Taxation withont representation" has always been held to have 
 been the cause of the Revolutionary war; but familiar as we are 
 with the difficulty of bringing the masses of the people to a realiza- 
 tion of the heavy tax- burden imposed on them by the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, it is not easy to understand how the peoples of all the 
 Cplonies could have been induced to unite in measures of opposi- 
 tion to British taxation. To-day the average man who complains 
 
34 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 if his direct tax to his State, county or town amounts to |25, will in 
 the course of a year pay to his merchant $150 for his purchases, |75 
 of it going to the Federal treasury, if the goods are foreign, or into 
 the pocket of the manufacturer, if they are domestic ; and he will 
 do this without a murmur, because the tax is concealed from him, 
 being levied, as Turgot said, so as to pluck the goose without mak- 
 ing it cry. 
 
 Note B. 
 
 The historians who have persistently asserted that Great Britain 
 never "attempted directly or indirectly to derive a dollar of reve- 
 nue" from these Colonies, have never satisfactorily accounted for 
 the existence of Custom Houses at all the seaports. They tell us 
 that the Custom House was moved from Boston to Salem; but the 
 reader is left in the dark as to the duties of the ofiBcers. The truth 
 senms to be that taxes were collected on certain imports, to which 
 the importer raised no objection, because he reimbursed himself 
 when he sold the articles to his customers, who, as now, did not see 
 the tax "wrapped up" in the price. Hence it was easy to convince 
 the great majority of the people, as it is now, that they were not 
 taxed by tariff acts. 
 
 But import taxes were not all. In all the Royal Colonies there was 
 an annual land tax called "quit rents," collected by the King's offi- 
 cers and turned over to the Royal Treasury. In 1739, when George 
 II bought seven shares of North Carolina from the Lords Proprie- 
 tors, he paid 5,000 pounds for the "quit rents" then in arrears. The 
 custom was to sell land for a nominal sum — 50 shillings per 100 acres 
 and stipulate for this annual rent, which was usually four shillings 
 per 100 acres, or nearly one cent per acre. 
 
 This was quite a heavy tax ; it would amount to-day to about a 
 quarter of a million of dollars in North Carolina. But there was no 
 outcry against it. 
 
 Note C. 
 
 The New England Colonies sent Col. Ethan Allen twice into Can- 
 ada, in the autumn of 1775, to observe the disposition of the people 
 and enlist their cooperation, with apparently favorable results. In 
 a letter from John Penn, one of North Carolina's delegates in the 
 Continental Congress, to Thomas Person, dated February 13, 1776, 
 he said: "The Canadians in general are on our side." — North Caro- 
 lina Colonial Records, X, 448. 
 
 And about the time Penn wrote this letter the Congress sent Dr. 
 Franklin, Samuel Chase and Charles Carroll on a mission to Can- 
 ada ; and in April invited Father John Carroll (Charles's cousin) to 
 go with them. The latter was selected "because of his * * * 
 religious stalnding among his brethren of the Catholic faith, and be- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 35 
 
 cause of his knowledge of the French language, and of his influence 
 ■with the Canadians." 
 
 We may never know the reasons why this mission failed. Possibly 
 religious prejudices stood in the way of their cooperating with the 
 Puritans of New England ; possibly the defeat and expulsion from 
 Canada of the expeditions under Arnold and Montgomery in Decern - 
 ber, 1775, had its influence; and possibly Hildreth gives the true 
 reason (Vol. Ill, p. 33) in the following paragraph : 
 
 "A fifth act of Parliament, passed April 15, 1774, known as the 
 Quebec Act, designed to prevent that newly acquired Province from 
 joining with the other Colonies, restored in civil matters the old 
 French law — the custom of Paris — and guaranteed to the Catholic 
 Church the possession of its ample property, amounting to a fourth 
 part or more of the old French grants, with the full freedom of wor- 
 ship,'' etc. 
 
 The absence of Georgia's delegates may be accounted for by re- 
 membering that she was farthest removed from the storm centre, 
 and, therefore, less easily brought under its influence. Alden's Cy- 
 clopoedia (Art. Massachusetts) says: "From the beginning of her 
 great struggle against oppression, Massachusetts had the active 
 sympathy of her sister Colonies, who had far less cause for com- 
 plaint than she. ' ' But there is danger of confounding sympathy for 
 the sufliering poor with sympathy for the "rebels" ; the latter was 
 a plant of slow growth in many of the Colonies. 
 
 As to Georgia's grounds for complaint against England, this Cy- 
 clopoedia (Art. Georgia) says : "It was acknowledged at the time, 
 and the claim has since been substantiated beyond question, that 
 the people of Georgia had no cause for personal or Colonial dissatis- 
 faction with England during the exciting days that preceded the 
 Revolution. The relations between the Colony and the home gov- 
 ernment had been wholly amicable, and none of the acts of oppres- 
 sion of which the New England Colonies particularly complained 
 had been enforced against Georgia." 
 
36 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE III. 
 
 THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, THE ARTICLES OF 
 CONFEDERATION, AND THE CONSTITUTION. 
 
 The Declaration, Etc. 
 
 The Declaration of Independence opens with a gen- 
 eral proposition as to the right of " one people to dissolve 
 the political bands," etc. 
 
 Applying this' general truth to the case in hand, it 
 proceeds with a general statement of the abuses which 
 constrain " these Colonies" to " alter their former sys- 
 tems of government." Then, after detailing the par- 
 ticular abuses of which the Colonies complained, it de- 
 clares that: " These United Colonies are, and of right 
 ought to be, free and independent States; that they are 
 absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and 
 that all political connection between them and the State 
 of Great Britain, is, and ought to be, totally dissolved, " 
 etc. 
 
 It recognized no government here except that of each 
 Colony, and it warrants no inference that it contem- 
 plated any other government. 
 
 The Articles and the Constitution. 
 
 For the most satisfactory study of the Articles of Con- 
 federation and the Constitution, it is necessary that we 
 compare them as we proceed. 
 
 Under the Articles, all powers granted by the States 
 were to be under the direction of the Congress of the 
 States — " the United States, in Congress assembled " '; 
 
 ' The enacting: clause of every act of Congress — "Be it enacted by 
 the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in 
 Congress assembled" — recognizes the truth that the Congress under 
 the Constitution is a Congress of States. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH, 37 
 
 under the Constitution, the powers granted were vested 
 in three separate and independent departments — the 
 Legislative, Judicial and Executive. 
 
 Under the Articles, the Legislature consisted of only 
 one House, in which each State could cast only -one 
 vote ; under the Constitution, the Legislature consists of 
 two Houses, namely, the Senate, in which the equality 
 of the States is preserved by each State's having tv/o 
 Senators, and the House of Representatives, in which 
 each is represented according to its population, except 
 that a State must be allowed at least one member hov/- 
 ever small its population may be. ' 
 
 Under the Articles, each State supported its own mem- 
 bers ; under the Constitution, they are supported out of 
 the Federal treasury. 
 
 Under the Articles, the States bound themselves to 
 collect and transmit to the Federal treasury the sums 
 of money required of them, on an established appor- 
 tionment, by the Congress; under the Constitution, the 
 Congress is empowered to lay and collect taxes, duties, 
 imposts, and excises ; provided that all direct taxes shall 
 be apportioned among the several States according to 
 their representative population, and that all other taxes 
 shall be uniform throughout the States, 
 
 Under the Articles, the " Committee of the States " 
 executed the laws when the Congress was not in ses- 
 sion; under the Constitution, the President of the United 
 States executes the laws.' 
 
 'The oath of the President "to preserve, protect and defend the 
 Constitution of the United States," was understood by Mr. Lincoln 
 to be an path to preserve the Union, In his first inaugural address 
 he said: "Tou have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the 
 Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to 'preserve, 
 protect and defend it.'" And this is the view of that oath pre- 
 sented to the youth of the Union by even so fair a writer as Mont 
 gomery. — Am. Hist., page 386. 
 
38 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Under the Articles, the Congress appointed all neces- 
 sary officers, civil, military and judicial; under the Con- 
 stitution, the President, by and with the advice and con- 
 sent of the Senate — that is, the States, since in that 
 body the States have "equal suffrage" — appoints all the 
 officers except some inferior ones, whose appointment 
 the Congress may vest in the President alone, in the 
 Judges, or in the heads of departments, except also that 
 the President is Commander-in-Chief of the army and 
 navy,' and except also, as under the Articles, all offi- 
 cers of State troops furnished for the common defense, 
 of and belosv the rank of Colonel, shall be appointed by 
 the States. 
 
 Now let us compare the nmtual covenants of the 
 States to be found in both instruments; and then the 
 delegations of power by the States to be found in both. 
 
 In the first, each State retained its sovereignty, free- 
 dom and independence, and every right, power and 
 jurisdiction which it did not expressly delegate to the 
 United States in Congress assembled ^ ; in the second, all 
 
 ^ The following remarks by Mr. Hamilton in No. LXVII of the 
 Federalist, intended to silence those who had objected to the crea- 
 tion of the office of President, which they had " inveighed against 
 with less candor, " and "criticised with less judgment" than any 
 other provision of the Constitution, may amuse the reader : 
 
 "Calculating upon the aversion of the people to monarchy, they 
 have endeavored to enlist all their jealousies and apprehensions in 
 opposition. * * * To establish the pretended affinity, they have 
 not scrupled to draw resources even from the regions of fiction. The 
 authorities of a magistrate, in few instances greater, in som^e less, 
 than those of a Governor of New York, have been magnified into 
 more than royal prerogatives." 
 
 '' Notwithstanding this clear language, of the meaning of which no 
 school boy could have any doubt, John Piske, a representative of 
 the culture of New England, says on page 94 of his Critical Period, 
 etc., that by the Articles "the sovereignty of the several States was 
 expressly limited and curtailed in many important particulars." 
 And Mr. Fiske seems unconscious of the inconsistency of this im- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 39 
 
 powers not delegated to the United States by the Con- 
 stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, were re- 
 served to the States respectively, or to the pebple. 
 
 In the, first, the States bound themselves under a firm 
 league of friendship to labor for their cojumon defense, 
 the security of their liberties, and their mutual and gen- 
 eral welfare, etc. ; in the second, the object in view was 
 declared to be to establish justice, insure domestic tran- 
 quillity, provide for the common defense, promote the 
 general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty, etc. 
 
 In the first, each State was to have one vote in deter- 
 mining all questions ; in the second, the equal power of 
 the several States was preserved in the Senate, wherein 
 "equal suffrage" is secured to each, of which it can not 
 be deprived- without its consent. 
 
 In both, the citizens of each State were to be entitled 
 to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the sev- 
 eral States.' 
 
 In both, full faith and credit should be given in each 
 State to the public records of the other States. 
 
 plied admission of tlie existence of "the sovereignty of the several 
 States," with the assertion on the same page (94) that "in severing 
 their connection with England these Commonwealths (sic) entered 
 into some sort of union which was incompatible with their absolute 
 sovereignty taken severally." 
 
 But after John A. Andrew, the Governor of] Massachusetts, an- 
 nounced the doctrine, in the Altoona Address, that the people of 
 the States are "the subjects of the National Government," political 
 vagaries in that quarter should not surprise us. 
 
 'On September 35, 1898, one hundred free citizens of the State of 
 Alabama reached Virden in the State of Illinois, having been em- 
 ployed to work in coal mines in that locality ; but threats of shoot- 
 ing them drove them back to Alabama. Again, on October 12, of 
 the same year, two hundred free citizens of Southern States went 
 to the same place for the same purpose ; but they were met by rifle 
 shots instead of threats. In both instances Governor Tanner, of 
 Illinois, declined to insure to these people the enjoyment of the 
 privileges and immunities of free citizens of Illinois. 
 
40 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 In both, persons charged in one State with treason.' 
 felony or other crime, fleeing into another State, were 
 to be dehvered up on demand, etc. 
 
 In the second, slaves and apprentices — persons bound 
 to service for a term of years — in one State, fleeing into 
 another State, were to be delivered up, etc.^ 
 
 In both, neither the United States nor any one of 
 them should grant any title of nobility. 
 
 In the first, no United States ofiicer or State officer 
 should accept any present, office, etc., from any king, 
 prince, or foreign State; in the second, no United States 
 officer should accept such present, etc., without the 
 consent of Congress, nor should any person holding any 
 office under the TJnited States be a member of either 
 House of the Congress during his continuance in office.' 
 
 'North Carolina's "carpet-bag" Constitution defines treason 
 against the State. 
 
 ' A clear understanding of the infractions of the Constitution by 
 certain States requires us to bear in mind that no power was dele- 
 gated to the Congress of the Confederation to enforce the mutual 
 covenants of the States respecting their public records, " the privi- 
 leges and immunities of citizens," the restoration of criminals, or 
 the restoration of slaves or servants provided for in the Ordinance 
 for the government of the Northwest Territory; and that no such 
 power was delegated in the Constitution over these covenants or 
 over that respecting fugitives from labor. In the language of the 
 Supreme Court in Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 Howard, 66 (commenting 
 on the Act of February 13, 1793, prescribing the "duty" of the Gov- 
 ernor of a State when a demand is made for a fugitive from justice), 
 the security for the performance of these covenants is " the moral 
 obligation" of the States. 8ee Note D. 
 
 " Many oflBcers who served in the arm.ies which subjugated the 
 Southern States, and were afterwards placed on the retired list with 
 comfortable salaries, have served in both Houses of Congress and 
 drcawn their salaries as other members ; and many gentlemen have 
 served in both Houses, drawing their salaries regularly, whose pen- 
 sions were affording them a comfortable living. Thus in one case 
 the letter, and in the other the spirit of the Constitution has been 
 disregarded ; it was not intended that a pensioner should sit in the 
 Legislature and assist in framing pension laws. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 41 
 
 In both, no State was to enter into any treaty, alli- 
 ance, etc., without the consent of the Congress. 
 
 In both, no two or more States were to form any alli- 
 ance between themselves without the like consent of 
 the States in Congress. 
 
 In both, no State, without the like consent, should 
 keep troops or war vessels in time of peace. 
 
 In the first, each State was to keep up a well-organized 
 militia; in the second, the Congress was forbidden to 
 infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. 
 
 In the first, no State was to lay any duty upon for- 
 eign imports if it conflicted with any treaty; in the 
 second, no State was to lay any duty on imports or ex- 
 ports, without the consent of the Congress, except what 
 might be necessary for executing its inspection laws. 
 
 In the first, no State was to grant lelters of marque 
 and reprisal without the consent of the Congress, un- 
 less it were invaded; in the second, no State was to 
 grant such letters. 
 
 In both, no State was to engage in war without the 
 like consent, unless invaded or threatened with invasion. 
 
 In the first, each State was to furnish the troops called 
 for by the Congress, arm and equip them at the expense 
 of the United States : in the second, the States confer- 
 red on the Congress the power to raise armies, etc. 
 
 In the first, the States were pledged to pay all the 
 debts contracted by the Continental Congress ; in the 
 second, they were pledged to discharge all the pecuniary 
 obligations entered into by the United States previously 
 to the establishment of the more perfect Union. 
 
 In the first, it was agreed that Canada might come 
 into the Union if she chose to do so, and that other Col- 
 onies or Provinces might do so by the consent of nine 
 States; in the second, it was agreed that Congress 
 might admit new States into the Union, provided that 
 
42 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 it should not interfere with the boundaries of any State 
 without its consent.' 
 
 In the first, each State was to abide by the decisions 
 of Congress on all matters which they had entrusted to 
 it, the Articles of Confederation were to be inviolably 
 observed by every State, and the Union was to be per- 
 petual; in the second, the Constitution, the Constitu- 
 tional acts of Congress, and all treaties made or to be 
 made were to be the supreme law of the land, to sup- 
 port which all judicial, executive and legislative offi- 
 cers of the several States should be bound by oath or 
 affirmation — an oath which the actual administration 
 of the Government has rendered practically meaning- 
 less: but which, when it is understood that the "moral 
 obligation of the States " is the only Constitutional se- 
 curity for the faithful observance of the mutual cove- 
 nants of the States, is as necessary and is as pregnant 
 with meaning as the oath of the President.^ 
 
 And in the first, no alteration should be made in the 
 Articles without the consent of every State; In the 
 second, two methods of amending the Constitution 
 were provided. One was that two-thirds of both Houses 
 might propose amendments, which, being ratified by 
 three-fourths of the States, should be valid parts of the 
 Constitution ^ ; and the other was that on the application 
 
 ' West Virginia was erected into a State within the boundaries of 
 Virginia without the consent of the latter. 
 
 ' There is no intimation here that the Government was to be su 
 preme ; and the oath of the State officer to support the Constitution 
 was no more an oath of allegiance, as is implied in the Fourteenth 
 Amendment, than his oath to support his State Constitution is an 
 oath of allegiance to his State. And even if it were, his oath could 
 not bind his constituents. 
 
 ^ The reader will note that " two-thirds of both Houses " did not 
 mean two-thirds of the bodies which proposed the last three amend- 
 ments ; and that the ratifications of the States were to be without 
 any fear of confiscation or of prolonged military despotism. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 43 
 
 of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the States, the Con- 
 gress should call a Convention of the States for propos- 
 ing amendments, which' should likewise become parts 
 of the Constitution when ratified by three-fourths of 
 the States. 
 
 In the first, no member of Congress could, while a 
 member, hold any office under the United States ; in the 
 second, no Senator or Representative can, during the 
 time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil 
 office under the United States, which shall have been 
 created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been in- 
 creased during such time. 
 
 In the second, each State obligated itself not to pass 
 any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or any law vio- 
 lating the obligation of contracts. 
 
 In the second, each State obligated itself not to lay 
 any tax on tonnage without the consent of Congress. 
 
 And in the second, the United States obligated them- 
 selves to guarantee to each other a republican form of 
 government ; to defend each other in case of invasion ; 
 and, if called on by the Legislature or by the Governor 
 (when the Legislature can not be convened), to protect 
 each other against domestic violence. 
 
 Such are the mutual covenants; and now we will 
 compare the powers delegated by the States in the two 
 instruments, besides the few already mentioned. 
 
 In the first, the United States in Congress assembled, 
 nine States consenting, had the sole and exclusive right 
 and power of determining on peace and war, except in 
 the cases mentioned already — actual invasion, etc. ; in 
 the second, the same power, with the same exception, is 
 granted to the Congress. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had the like power to send 
 Ambassadors ; in the second, the President, by and with 
 the advice and consent of the Senate (or States, since 
 
44 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the States have equal suffrage in that body), appoints 
 Ambassadors. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had the hke power to re- 
 ceive Ambassadors ; in the second, the President alone 
 receives Ambassadors. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had the like power to make 
 treaties, with a proviso ; in the second, the President, 
 by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the 
 Senators, makes treaties. 
 
 In both, the Congress is empowered to make rules 
 concerning captures on land and water. 
 
 In both, exclusive power was delegated to the Con- 
 gress to grant letters of marque and reprisal in time of 
 peace. 
 
 J« both, the Congress was empowered to provide for 
 the punishment of piracies and felonies committed on 
 the high seas. 
 
 In the first, disputes between States were to be set- 
 tled, in the last resort, by the Congress ; in the second, 
 such disputes are to be settled by the United States 
 courts. 
 
 In the first, disputes about titles to land granted by 
 different States were to be decided by the Congress; /» 
 the second, such dispntes are to be settled by the Fed- 
 eral Courts. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had the sole and exclusive 
 right and power of regulating the alloy and value of 
 coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the 
 respective States ; in the second, the Congress has the 
 power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of 
 foreign coin. 
 
 In both, the Congress was granted power to fix the 
 standard of weights and measures. 
 
 In the first, the Congress was empowered to regulate 
 the trade and manage all affairs with the Indians, with 
 
THE SOUTH AGAIJSST THE NOKTH. 45 
 
 a proviso; in the second, the Congress has the power to 
 regulate commerce with foreign nations, between che 
 States, and with the Indian tribes. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had power to establish or 
 regulate post-offices from one State to another ; in the 
 second, the Congress has power to establish post-offices 
 and post roads. 
 
 In the first, the Congress had power to appoint all 
 naval officers and the officers of the land forces, except 
 regimental officers ; in the second, these officers are ap- 
 pointed by the President, by and with the advice and 
 consent of the Senate, with certain exceptions made by 
 the Congress, as before mentioned. 
 
 In both, the Congress was empowered to make rules 
 for the government of the land and naval forces. 
 
 In both, the Congress was empowered to borrow money 
 on the credit of the United States. 
 
 In the first, the Congress was empowered to emit 
 bills on the credit of the United States ; in the second, 
 no such power was granted, the proposition to grant it 
 being deliberately stricken out from the final draft of 
 the Constitution as submitted to the Convention.^ 
 
 In both, the power was granted to provide and main- 
 tain a navy. 
 
 Thus we have gone over the powers delegated to the 
 United States in Congress assembled, and those in the 
 Constitution relating to similar subjects. There are a 
 few others in the Constitution, some of them made nec- 
 essary by the Constitution of the Congress. They are 
 as follows: 
 
 ' On the motion to strike out, the States voting in the affirmative 
 •were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, 
 Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, 
 9 ; and those voting in the negative were New Jersey and Maryland, 
 2.— El. Deb., I, 345. 
 
46 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The Senate is made a court to try impeachments, a 
 two-thirds vote being neaessary to conviction. 
 
 The Congress may alter, amend or substitute others 
 for State laws regulating the times, places and manner 
 of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, 
 except as to the places of choosing Senators.' 
 
 For the different naturalization laws of the States, 
 Congress was authorized to substitute one uniform rule; 
 and to do the like with reference to bankruptcies. 
 
 It can provii3e for punishing counterfeiters of the 
 securities and current coin of the United States. 
 
 It can promote inventions and discoveries, etc. 
 
 It can provide for calling forth the militia to execute 
 the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel 
 invasions. 
 
 It can provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining 
 the militia, and for governing such parts of them as 
 may be employed in the service of the United States. 
 
 It is empowered to dispose of the public lands which 
 were ceded to the United States after the adoption of 
 the Articles of Confederation, and all other property be 
 longing to the United States, and to make all needful 
 rules and regulations respecting the same. 
 
 ' The reader will be interested in the following remarks made by 
 Gen. William R. Davie in defense of this provision of the Constitu- 
 tion. He had been a member of the Convention which framed the 
 Constitution ; was now a member of North Carolina's Convention 
 which rejected it; and was an ardent supporter of it. 
 
 Attempting to meet the objections of his opponents (whom subse- 
 quent events have proved not to have been wholly devoid of the 
 spirit of prophecy), he said: 
 
 "Mr. Chairman, a consolidation of the States is said by some gen 
 tlemen to have been intended. They insinuate that this was the 
 cause of their giving this power of elections" — times, places, and 
 manner. "If there were any seeds in this Constitution which might, 
 one day, produce a consolidation, it would, su', with me, be an in- 
 superable objection." — Elliot's 'Debates, Volume IV, page 58. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 47 
 
 It can exercise exclusive legislation over such district 
 as may, by cession of particular States and the accept- 
 ance of Congress, become the seat of government, and 
 also over all places purchased by the consent of the 
 Legislature of the State in which the same may be, for 
 the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, 
 and other needful .buildings. 
 
 And it may make all laws which may be necessary 
 and proper for carrying into execution all the powers 
 granted by the States in the Constitution. 
 
 To these provisions must now be added those which 
 were designed to shield the States and the people against 
 the exercise of objectionable and usurped powers. Briefly 
 stated they are as follows : 
 
 1. The importation of African slaves could not be 
 prohibited till 1808. 
 
 2. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shslll not 
 be suspended unless the public safety may require it in 
 case of rebellion, invasion, etc. 
 
 3. No bill of attainder or ea? pos^ /acto law shall be 
 passed. 
 
 4. No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, ex- 
 cept in proportion to the representative population of 
 the several States. 
 
 5. No tax shall be laid on any article exported from 
 any State. 
 
 6. No preference shall be given to the ports of any 
 one State. 
 
 7. No money shall be appropriated for raising or sup- 
 porting armies for a longer period than two years. 
 
 8. No punishment for treason, which is defined to be 
 a levying of war against the United States, adhering to 
 their enemies, etc., shall work corruption of blood or 
 forfeiture except during the hfe of the traitor. 
 
 9. No law shall be passed interfering with the religion 
 of the people, or abridging the freedom of speech or of 
 
48 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assem- 
 ble and petition for a redress of grievances. 
 
 10. No soldier shall be quartered in any man's house 
 in time of peace against his will, nor in time of war, 
 but in a manner prescribed by law. 
 
 11. Unreasonable searches and seizures are forbidden, 
 and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, 
 supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly de- 
 scribing the place to be searched, and the person or 
 thing to be seized. 
 
 12. No- person shall be tried for a capital or other in- 
 famous crime, unless on an indictment or presentment 
 of a grand jury, except in the army or navy; nor shall 
 any person be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor 
 shall any person be compelled in a criminal case to be a 
 witness against himself ; nor shall he be deprived of 
 life, liberty or property without due process of law ; nor 
 shall his property be taken from him without just com- 
 pensation. 
 
 13. Every person accused of a crime shall enjoy the 
 right to a speedy trial, by an impartial jury of the State 
 and District in which the offense is alleged to have been 
 committed, and to be informed of the nature and cause 
 of the accusation ; to be confronted with the witnesses 
 against him ; to have compulsory process for obtaining 
 witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of 
 counsel for his defense'. 
 
 ' The treatment of Major Henry Wirtz will impress these two pro- 
 visions of the Constitution on the reader's memory. He was not 
 "in the army or navy"; he was not tried on "an indictment or pre- 
 sentment of a grand jury" ; he was tried in Washington City by a 
 court martial organized to convict, instead of "by an impartial jury 
 of the State and District" in which the alleged offense was commit- 
 ted; he had no "compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his 
 favor," and those who volunteered to go as witnesses were fright- 
 ened away by threats of arrest ; and he was "deprived of life" "with- 
 out due process of law." 
 
TllE SOUTH AGAliSrST THE NORTH. 49 
 
 1-1:, The right of trial by jury shall be preserved in 
 suits where the value in controversy shall exceed |20, 
 etc. 
 
 15. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments in- 
 flicted. 
 
 16. The judicial power shall not extend (as was pro- 
 vided for in the Constitution as it was adopted) to any 
 suit in law or equity against one of the United States, 
 prosecuted by citizens of another State, or by citizens 
 or subjects of a foreign State. 
 
 17. And since a well-regulated militia is necessary to 
 the security of a " free State," the right of the people 
 of a State ' ' to keep and bear arms ' ' shall not be in- 
 fringed by the Federal Government. 
 
 Thus it appears that the States delegated in the Con- 
 stitution only two important powers not found in the 
 Articles of Confederation, namely, that to lay and col- 
 lect taxes, etc., and that to regulate commerce; and 
 that the States agreed to forego no really important 
 power except that to replenish their treasuries by taxes 
 on imports. 
 
 And it also appears that the delegation of what are 
 called "sovereign powers" in the Constitution — foreign 
 intercourse, war, etc. — is no stronger evidence of a dele- 
 gation of sovereignty than the delegation of them in 
 the Articles was ; ' and on the face of both instruments 
 
 ' This truth has been hidden from their readers by almost all mod- 
 ern political writers in the Noi^hem States. One of the most respec- 
 table of them, John Fiske, does this on pages 308 and 309 of his 
 Civil Government in the United States, where he steps from^ the 
 Continental Cbngress to the Congress of the Constitution, utterly 
 ignoritig the Congress of the Confederation. He dties the same on 
 page 343, where he says that " from 1776 to 1789 the United States 
 were a Confederation; after 1789 it was a Eederal Nation" (itaUcs 
 and "it" his). Then, apparently adopting Mr. Greeley's view that 
 
50 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 the ' ' sovereignty, freedom, and independence ' ' of each 
 State were left unimpaired. There is not a syllable to 
 warrant the contrary claim.' 
 
 Now let us, in conclusion, point out the important 
 powers belonging to the several sovereign States which 
 they retained: 
 
 1. The State was the heir of all property belonging to 
 one of its citizens — man, woman, or child — who died 
 without other heirs. 
 
 2. The State could condemn for public use any land 
 or other property in its borders. 
 
 3. The State could punish its citizens for treason^ (See 
 Constitution of the U. S., Art. IV, sec. 11. clause 2), 
 felony or other crimes against the peace and dignity of 
 the State. 
 
 4. The State could provide for the probate of deeds, 
 
 the States were entrapped when they adopted the Constitution, he 
 says: "The passage from plural to singular was accomplished, 
 although it took some people a good while to realize the fact." 
 
 And even " the great expounder," Mr. Webster, confounded the 
 Continental Congress with the Congress of the Confederation. In 
 his speech to the young men of Albany, N. Y., May 28, 1851, he 
 said: "And you, my young friends of Albany, if you wUl take the 
 pains to go back to the debates of the period, from the meeting of 
 the first Congress, in 1774, 1 mean the Congress of the Confedera- 
 tion, to the adoption of the present Constitution, and the enact- 
 ment of the first laws under it," etc. 
 
 ^ Mr. Madison, in the Federalist, No. XL, replying to those who 
 asserted that the Convention in framing the Constitution had not 
 'kept in yiew the fundamental principles ot the Articles, says: "I 
 ask, what are these principles 1 Do they require, that in the estab- 
 lishment of the Constitution, the States should be regarded as dis- 
 tinct and independent sovereignties ? They are so regarded by the 
 constitution proposed." 
 
 ^ The power to punish for treason was destroyed by the Federal 
 Oovemment in 1861-'65 ;. since then many persons guilty of it have 
 been rewarded for it by that Government ; and it is now proposed 
 to place them on the pension rolls at the expense, in part, of the 
 people of the Southern States. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 51 
 
 conveyances, powers of attorney, and wills, and enforce 
 compliance with their terms.' 
 
 5. The State could punish one of its citizens for any 
 trespass, assault, libel, or any other offense committed 
 by him against the person or the property or the repu- 
 tation of another citizen. 
 
 6. The State could establish and enforce relations be- 
 tween husband and wife, parent and children, employer 
 and employee, and corporations and the people. 
 
 7. The State could provide for the education of the 
 children of its citizens, the care of the unfortunate deaf, 
 dumb, blind, insane, and helpless poor. 
 
 8. The State could exclude undesirable foreigners 
 from its borders, and its right to do so was ne'ver dele- 
 gated to the Congress of the United States. 
 
 9. The State could make gold and silver coin a tender 
 in the payment of debts. This it never surrendered, nor 
 did it delegate to the Congress a, concurrent power. 
 
 10. The State could determine the qualifications of 
 electors and of public officers. And, in short, 
 
 11. The State reserved to itself those powers which in 
 the words of Mr. Madison (Federalist XLV) "extend to 
 all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, 
 concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people ; 
 and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of 
 the State." 
 
 With the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of 
 Confederation, and the Constitution thus set before him, 
 the reader is prepared to judge for himself, without 
 respect to great names, whether the reasoning in the 
 following chapters is founded on truth or error.^ 
 
 ' The Stamp Act of June 13, 1898, which is a substantia] reenact- 
 ment of the law of June 30, 1864, nullifies State laws regulating the 
 certification and the validity of contracts, conveyances, etc., unless 
 a Federal revenue stamp be attached to each one ; and it does this 
 without any expressed or implied power delegated in the Constitu- 
 tion, 
 
 ^ See Note E. 
 
52 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Note D. 
 
 Among tlie bills passed by the Congress during its first four years, 
 without any unquestioned Constitutional authority, were the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 1. To take charge of river pilots in the several States, and pre- 
 scribe their duties. 
 
 2. To regulate contracts between merchant seamen and their em 
 ployers. 
 
 3. To establish a United States Bank. 
 
 4. To apportion members of Congress among the States after the 
 census of 1790. This was vetoed by the President. 
 
 5. To declare what coins should be legal tender. 
 
 6. To prescribe the "duty" of the Governor of a State to which a 
 fugitive from justice has fled. 
 
 7. To prescribe the duties of magistrates of counties, cities and 
 towns whenever a fugitive from labor should be brought before 
 them by the person claiming his labor. 
 
 It was claimed that the first and second of these fell under the 
 power to regulate commerce ; that the third fell under the power to 
 make all laws which should be necessary and proper for carrying 
 into execution the power to collect taxes and to appropriate them ; 
 that the fifth fell under the power to regulate the value of coins 
 (although the right of each State to make gold and silver coins a 
 tender for a debt was recognized) ; and that the sixth and seventh 
 fell under — nobody knows what power. 
 
 To the claim regarding the second it may be objected that, if it is 
 valid, Congress can regulate the wages of teamsters engaged in in- 
 terstate commerce ; to that regarding the fifth it may be objected 
 that, if Congress can declare what shall be legal tender, it can de- 
 clare that gold and silver coins shall not lea legal tender, and thus 
 nullify the power of the several States ; to that regarding the sixth 
 and seventh it may be objected that, if Congress can prescribe the 
 duties of the executive and judicial officers of a State, the State 
 Governments are little more than agents to cany out the will of the 
 Congress; and in regard to all these claims it maj' be objected that, 
 if they are valid, it was useless to place any enumeration of powers 
 in the Constitution. 
 
 Note E. 
 
 It is important, in view of the shameful perversion of truth since 
 1861, that it be impressed on the mind that the first ten amendments 
 were added to the Constitution for the purpose of shielding the peo- 
 ple against Federal encroachments on their rights, and that they 
 have nothing to do with State or individual encroachments. This 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 63 
 
 is important because ignorance and fanaticism have not labored in 
 vain. 
 
 Among the first authoritative expositions (from the standpoint of 
 ignorance) was a resolution passed by the House of Representatives 
 on the 17th of March, 1863, instructing a committee to inquire into 
 the arrest of two fugitive slaves in the District of Columbia, " and 
 whether the arrest and imprisonment is not a direct violation of 
 that provision of the Constitution (the Fifth Article of Amend- 
 ments), which says that no person shall be deprived of his life or lib- 
 erty without due process of law." Afterwards this perversion of 
 truth became generally acceped as truth, and all these restraints on 
 the Federal Government were thought to be restraints on the States 
 or the people. 
 
 And even the Washington Post, Administration organ, comment- 
 ing on a provision in the new Constitution of Mississippi, which de- 
 nies a jury trial to a certain class of criminals, copies the Fifth and 
 Sixth Amendments of the Federal Constitution, and then says : "The 
 Post does not profess to be learned in the law and will not presume 
 to determine whether or not this Louisiana innovation is in harmony 
 with the fundamental law of the Republic. But to a mind unversed 
 in the intricacies of judicial interpretation it seems that the words 
 'all criminal cases' in the Federal Constitution must include other 
 crimes than those which are punishable, under the statutes, 'by 
 imprisonment at hard labor.' " — ^Copied in Wilmington, N. C, Mes- 
 senger, October 33, 1898. 
 
 It is equally important that we do not let the fact escape us that 
 in nearly all our political literature the Constitution has been sup 
 planted by "emergencies," " new conditions, " " the march of na- 
 tions, " etc. 
 
54 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE IV. 
 
 Familiar as we now are with the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitu- 
 tion, we are prepared for an intelligent discussion of the 
 unwarranted and vicious doctrines which some seventy 
 years ago began to supplant in some sections of the 
 Union the true principles of the Federal Government. 
 And strangely enough the first effective impulse given 
 to them was in the States which theretofore had been 
 the most consistent and strenuous supporters of the 
 sovereignty, freedom and independence of the several 
 States. 
 
 It was in New England ; and it is one of the curious 
 coincidences of history that her intellectual forces began 
 to organize for the denial of the teachings of their fathers 
 about the time there was a consolidation of sentiment 
 in the Southern States against the injustice of protec- 
 tion to New England's manufacturers, leading in one 
 State to the adoption of measures threatening the' peace 
 of the Union. 
 
 The substance of their new doctrines was that the 
 people of the several States had consolidated themselves 
 into a sovereign Nation, and that the people of one 
 State bear about the same relation to the Nation that 
 those of a county bear to their State. 
 
 The two most brilliant luminaries (of whom the lesser 
 lights became as mere reflections) who championed this 
 doctrine, were Joseph Story and Daniel Webster. 
 
 The celebrated speech of the latter, delivered in the 
 Senate on the 16th of February, 1833, and the former's 
 Commentaries on the Constitution, published the same 
 year, became the accepted exposition of the Constitu- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 55 
 
 tional relations of the States in their section of the 
 Union. Mr. Webster's speech was kept before the 
 youth of the country in school readers, speakers, politi- 
 cal addresses, etc. ; and Judge Story's Commentaries, 
 adopted as a text-book in many semirfaries of learning, 
 even in the Southern States, polluted the fountains of 
 political truth in all sections. 
 
 /The/"one people" doctrine, founded by both of them 
 on substantially the same basis, may be conveniently 
 summarized as follows : 
 
 1. "None of the Colonies before the Eevolution were, 
 in the most large and general sense, independent, or 
 sovereign communities. They were * * * sub- 
 jected to the British Crown. Their powers and authori- 
 ties were derived from, and limited by their respective 
 charters. * * * They could make no treaty, declare 
 no war, send no ambassadors, regulate no intercourse or 
 commerce, nor in any other shape act as sovereigns in 
 the negotiations usual between independent States. In 
 respect to each other, they stood in the common rela- 
 tion of British subjects. * * * if in any sense they 
 might claim the attributes of sovereignty, it was only in 
 that subordinate sense, to which we have alluded, as ex- 
 ercising within a limited extent certain usual powers of 
 sovereignty. They did not even affect local allegiance. 
 
 2. "The Colonies did not severally act for themselves, 
 and proclaim their independence. It is true that some 
 of the States had previously formed incipient govern- 
 ments for themselves; but it was done in compliance 
 with the recommendations of Congress. Virginia, on 
 the 29th of June, 1776, by a Convention of Delegates, 
 declared ' the Government of this Country, ' as formerly 
 exercised under the Crown of Great Britain, totally dis- 
 
 ' Note the use of the word "country." 
 
56 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 solved' ; and proceeded to form a new Constitution of 
 Government. New Hampshire also formed a Govern- 
 ment in December, 1775,, which was manifestly intended 
 to be temporary, ' during, ' as they said, ' the unhappy 
 a.nd unnatural contest with Great Britain. ' New Jersey, 
 too, established a frame of Government, on the 2d of 
 July, 1776; but it was expressly declared that it should 
 be void upon a reconciliation with Great Britain. And 
 South Carolina, in March, 1776, adopted a Constitution 
 of Government; but this was, in like manner, 'estab- 
 lished until an accommodation between Great Britain 
 and America could be obtained. ' 
 
 3. "The Declaration of Independence of all the Colo- 
 nies was the united act of all. It was 'a Declaration by 
 the Representatives of the United States of America, in 
 Congress assembled' ; ' by the delegates appointed by 
 the Good People of the Colonies, ' as in a prior Declara- 
 tion of Rights they were called. It was not an act done 
 by the State Governments, then organized; nor by per- 
 sons chosen by them. It was, emphatically, the act of 
 the whole People of the United Colonies, by the instru- 
 mentality of their Representatives, chosen for that, 
 among other purposes. It was an act, not competent 
 to the State Governments, or any of them, as organized 
 under their Charters, to adopt. Those Charters neither 
 contemplated the case, nor provided for it. It was an 
 act of original, inherent Sovei'eignty, by the, People 
 themselves, resulting from their right to change the 
 form of Government, and to institute a new Govern- 
 ment whenever necessary for their safety and happiness. 
 So the Declaration of Independence treats it. No State 
 had presumed, of itself, to form a new Government, or 
 to provide for the exigencies of the times, without con- 
 sulting Congress on the subject; and when they acted, 
 it was in pursuance of the recommendation of Congress. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH, 57 
 
 It waa, therefore, the achievement of the whole for the 
 benefit of the whole. * * * The Declaration of In- 
 dependence has, accordingly, always been treated as an 
 act of Paramount and Sovereign authority, complete 
 and perfect, per se. 
 
 4. "The separate Independence and individual Sover- 
 eignty of the several States were never thought of by 
 the enhghtened band of patriots who framed this Dec- 
 laration. The several States are not even mentioned by 
 name in any part of it, as if it was intended to impress 
 the maxim on America, that our freedom and indepen- 
 dence arose from our Union, etc. 
 
 6. "We have seen that the power to do th^s act — de- 
 clare Independence — was not derived from the State 
 Governments ; nor was it done generally with their co- 
 operation. The question, then, naturally presents itself, 
 if it is to be considered as a National act, in what man- 
 ner did the Colonies become a Nation, and in what man- 
 ner did Congress become possessed of this National 
 power ? The true answer must be that as soon as Con- 
 gress assumed powers, and passed measures, which were, 
 in their nature, National, to that extent, the People, 
 from whose acquiescense and consent they took effect, 
 must be considered as agreeing to form a Nation." ' 
 
 6. "The Constitution is not a league, confederacy, or 
 compact beween the people of the several States in their 
 sovereign capacities ; but in the ratifying ordinances of 
 Massachusetts and New Hampshire the truth is recog- 
 nized that ' the peoj)le of the United States ' entered 
 ' into an explicit and solemn compact with each other. ' 
 It is the People, and not the States, who have entered 
 into the compact ; and it is the People of all the United 
 
 States * * * a social compact. No man can get over 
 
 i 
 
 ' Elliot's Debates, Vol. I, pages 163-67. 
 
58 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the words, ' We, the People of the United States, do 
 ordain and establish this Constitution. ' These words 
 must cease to be a part of the Constitution * * * 
 before any human ingenuity or human argument can 
 remove the popular basis on which that Constitution 
 rests, and turn the instrument into a mere compact be- 
 tween sovereign States. * * * The Constitution, 
 Sir, regards itself as perpetual and immortal. It seeks 
 to establish a Union among the people of the States, ' ' 
 etc. — Mr. Webster's speech in the Senate, February 16, 
 1833. 
 
 Every claim of these authorities is negatived by the 
 universally accepted definition of the word ' ' State ' ' 
 among English-speakiag people before and during our 
 Eevolutionary period; but if the reader hesitates to ad- 
 mit that a mere definition can weaken a position 
 assumed by such distinguished statesmen, let us exam- 
 ine the propositions they lay down and the historical 
 evidence on which they rely. We will follow the fore- 
 going order. 
 
 1. Nobody ever contended that the Colonies were, in 
 any sense, "independent or Sovereign communities, "' or 
 that they affected "local allegiance" ; and the apparent 
 pretense that such a claim had ever been set up tends, 
 if not so designed, to befog the whole subject. 
 
 But it is true that each one of the Colonies, after July 
 4r, 1776, did "affect local allegiance." For example, the 
 Constitution of Massachusetts, adopted in 1780, required 
 every person chosen to an office, whether civil or mili- 
 tary, to swear "true faith and allegiance" to the 
 Commonwealth; which oath was not changed when 
 the Constitution was amended in 1822. The same oath 
 was required by New Hampshire in 1792, and was not 
 stricken out of her Constitution in 1852, when it was 
 amended. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 59 
 
 2. It would have been suicidal for any one of the Col- 
 onies to declare itself independent of Great Britain, or 
 even for half of them to do so. Cooperatioii was nec- 
 essary to success. But the contention that the Declara- 
 tion was the work of the Eepresentatives of " one peo- 
 ple " who possessed "original, inherent Sovereignty," 
 while in their separate Colonies temporary governments 
 had been adopted, which were to be abandoned on a 
 reconciliation with the rnother dountry, is self-destruc- 
 tive. How all the people could be " Sovereign," while 
 those in each Colony were subject to the Crown of 
 Great Britain, their relations being only temporarily 
 suspended, is beyond human comprehension. 
 
 The truth about the relations and the actions of the 
 separate Colonies is clearly set forth by Mr. .Jefferson in 
 his writings, Volume I, page 10 (copied in Elliot's De- 
 bates, Vol. I, pp. 66 et seq.), as follows: 
 
 " In Congress, Friday, .June 7, 17Y6. The delegates 
 from Virginia moved, in obedience to instructions from 
 their constituents,' that the Congress should declare 
 that these United Colonies are, and of right, ought to 
 be free and independent States, etc. 
 
 " It was argued by Wilson (Pennsylvania), Eobert E. 
 Livingston (New York), E. Eutledge (South Carolina), 
 Dickinson (Delaware), and others, * * * that the 
 people of the middle Colonies (Maryland, Delaware, 
 
 ^ Judge Story and other consolidationists have confused the minds 
 of their readers by irrelevant distinctions between the people of a 
 State and the government of a State. The "constituents" of Jeffer- 
 son, Lee, etc. , were not living in a state of anarchy ; they had a gov- 
 ernment ; and whether it was modeled on that of Great Britain or 
 on the pure democracy of Athens, was of no consequence. 
 
 Another Massachusetts writer makes a distinction between the 
 State (the soil, climate, etc.), and its inhabitants, thus: " The Con- 
 stitution was not adopted by the State, but by the people dwelling 
 in the State." — William Sullivan's Political Class-Book, revised by 
 George B. Emerson (1831). 
 
60 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 PennsylvaDia, the Jerseys, and New York) were not yet 
 rip3 for bidding adieu to British connection, but that 
 they were fast ripening, etc. That some of them had 
 expressly forbidden their delegates to consent to such a 
 declaration, and others had given no instructions, and 
 consequently no power to give such assent; that, if the 
 delegates of any particular Colony had no power to de- 
 clare such Colony independent, certain they Avere, the 
 others could not declare it for them ; the Colonies being 
 as yet perfectly independent of each other; that the 
 Assembly of Pennsylvania was now sitting above stairs ; 
 their Convention would sit in a few days; the Conven- 
 tion of New York was now sitting; and those of the 
 Jerseys and Delaware counties would meet on Monday 
 following ; and it was probable these bodies would take 
 up the question of independence, and would declare to 
 their delegates the voice of their State. 
 
 "That, if such a declaration should now be agreed to, 
 these delegates must retire, and possibly their Colonies 
 might secede from the Union ' * * * It appearing 
 in the course of these debates that the Colonies of New 
 York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland 
 and South Carolina ^ were not yet matured for falling 
 from the parent stem, but that they were fast advancing 
 to that state, it was thought most prudent to wait a 
 while for them, and to postpone the final decision to 
 July 1 ; but that this might occasion as little delay as 
 possible, a committee was appointed (June 11) to pre- 
 pare a Declaration of Independence. The committee 
 
 'Since the Colonies were " as yet perfectly independent of each 
 other," it is not clear how any one of them could "secede from the 
 Union." 
 
 * " Maryland and South Carolina had joined in the Declaration of 
 Independence without any crying grievances of their own. " — Piske's 
 Critical Period, etc. , page 92. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. , 61 
 
 were John Adams, Dr. Franklin, Eoger Sherman, 
 Robert R. Livingston and Thomas Jefferson. Com- 
 mittees were also appointed, at the same time, to prepare 
 a plan of Confederation of the Colonies, and to state the 
 terms proper to be proposed for foreign alliances. "■■ * * 
 "On Monday, the 1st of July, the House resolved itself 
 into a Committee of the Whole, and resumed the con- 
 sideration of the original motion made by the delegates 
 of Virginia, v^hich being again debated through the 
 day, was carried in the affirmative by the vot3s of New 
 Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, 
 New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and 
 Georgia. South Carolina and Pennsylvania' voted 
 against it. Delaware had but two members pres- 
 ent, and they were divided. The delegates from New 
 York declared they were for it themselves, and were 
 assured their constituents were for it; but that their in- 
 structions having been drawn near a twelvemonth be- 
 fore, when reconciliation was still the general object, 
 they v/ere enjoined by them to do nothing which should 
 impede that object. They, therefore, thought them- 
 selves not justifiable in voting on either side. * •' * 
 Mr. Edward Rutledge, of South Carolina, then requested 
 the determination (in the House) might be put off to 
 the next day, as he believed his colleagues, though they 
 
 ' In an address to the people of Pennsylvania, James Wilson, one 
 of the delegates from that State, said: "When the measure" (the 
 Declaration of Independence) " began to be an object of contem- 
 plation in Congress, the delegates of Pennsylvania were expressly 
 restricted from consenting to it. My uniform language in Congress 
 was, that I never would vote for it, contrary to my instructions. I 
 went further, and declared that I never would vote for it, without 
 your authority. * * * When your authority was communicated 
 by the conference of Committees from the several counties of the 
 State, I then stood upon very different grounds : I declared so in 
 Congress. I spoke and voted for the measure." 
 
62 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 disapproved of the resolution, would then join in it for 
 the sake of unanimity ' * * * In the meantime, a 
 third member had come post from the Delaware coun- 
 ties, and turned the vote of that Colony. * * * 
 Members of a different sentiment attending that morn- 
 ing from Pennsylvania also, her vote was changed, etc., 
 so that the whole twelve Colonies, who were authorized 
 to vote at all, gave their voices for it; and within a few 
 days (July 9th) the Convention of New York approved 
 of it, and thus supplied the void occasioned by the with- 
 drawing of her delegates from the vote. 
 
 " Congress proceeded the same day to consider the 
 Declaration of Independence." 
 
 There seems, therefore, no basis for the assertion that 
 "the Colonies did not severally act for themselves. " 
 And as to their having no goveraments, Jefferson's tes- 
 timony is decisive. 
 
 3. The Declaration of Independence was ''an act done 
 by * * * persons chosen by^^ "the State Govern- 
 ments''''; and the doctrine of "qui facit per alium facit 
 per se, ' ' applies here as it does to the responsibility of 
 any other employer. 
 
 They were not chosen, it is true, by the Charter Gov- 
 ernments — ^it has never been pretended that they were ; 
 they were chosen in each Colony by legislative bodies 
 elected by the people for this and other purposes. In 
 North Carolina, for example, John Harvey, Moderator 
 
 ^ It appears that the delegates from Delaware and South Carolina 
 had no positive instructions, but were permitted to exercise their 
 own judgment in emergencies like this. Those from South Caro- 
 lina, it is probable, were hurried into harmony by Sir Henry Clin- 
 ton's invasion of their State. It has been said by respectable au- 
 thorities that the course of these as well as of other delegates was 
 determined by the repulse (June 38) of Sir Henry's army and Sir 
 Peter Parker's fleet ; but it is not probable that news could have 
 gone from Charleston to Philadelphia in six days. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 63 
 
 of the body which had, in 1774, elected Joseph Hewes, 
 WiUiam Hooper and Kichard Caswell to represent the 
 Colony in the Continental Congress, issued a notice to 
 the people of the Colony, in February, 1775, asking 
 them to elect delegates to represent each town (borough) 
 and county in a Convention. The Convention met in 
 Newbern, April 4, 1775, the same day on which the 
 Colonial Assembly met, many gentlemen being mem- 
 bers of both bodies. Governor Josiah Martin soon dis- 
 solved the Colonial Assembly, and the Colony never 
 again saw a legislative body meet under the direction of 
 a Eoyal Governor; the people were thenceforth gov- 
 erned by themselves ; and although they had no written 
 Constitution till December, 1776, it would be as absurd 
 to say that they had no Government during this inter- 
 val as it would to assert the same thing of England, 
 which has never had a written Constitution. On Au- 
 gust 21, 1775, another legislative body, composed of 184 
 members, met in Hillsboro, appointed a Provincial 
 Council for the State, a District Committee for each 
 District, County and Town Committees for each county 
 and town, raised two regiments of 500 men each, emit- 
 ted $125,000 in bills on the credit of the State, passed 
 an act empowering the Provincial Council to enforce an 
 oath of allegiance on suspects,' and did every other 
 thing which any government could have done. The 
 next legislative body met at Halifax on the 4th of April, 
 1776, and among other things it did, it passed unani- 
 mously the following resolution : "That the Delegates 
 from this Colony in the Continental Congress be em- 
 
 'Thus "affecting local allegiance" nearly a twelvemonth before 
 the date of the Declaration"of Independence. "They" (the commit- 
 tees of the counties), says Wheeler "had a test oath to which all 
 persons had to subscribe, which was paramount to the oath of alle 
 giance to the EngUsh Crown. "•' — Wheeler, Series I, Chapter IX. 
 
64 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 powered to concur with the delegates from the other 
 Colonies, in declaring Independence and forming foreign 
 alliances; reserving to this Colony the sole and exclu- 
 sive right of forming a constitution and laws for this 
 Colony."' — Colonial Records, X, 512. 
 
 i. "The several States are not even mentioned by 
 name in any part of" the Declaration for the very rea- 
 son which caused them to be stricken out of the Consti- 
 tution after " We, the people"; it was not known by 
 the committee appointed June the 11th to draft the 
 Declaration whether all the Colonies would approve it ; 
 and the hope that Canada would ultimately "join in the 
 measures" of the thirteen Colonies rendered it improper 
 to name them and leave her out. This omission is not 
 of the least significance as a support to the " one peo- 
 ple" theory, since the right "of these Colonies to alter 
 their former systems (plural) of government" was rec- 
 ognized and demanded in the Declaration — evidently 
 excluding the idea that the Declaration was designed to 
 dethrone George III and enthrone "one people." 
 
 As to the claim that "the separate Independence and 
 individual Sovereignty of the several States were never 
 thought of by the enlightened band of patriots who 
 framed this Declaration," its utter want of support is 
 shown by the second Article of the Articles of Confed- 
 eration framed by a committee appointed by this " en- 
 lightened band of patriots," agreed to by them or their 
 successors, and by all the States. It is : 
 
 " Each State retains its sovereigntj^ freedom and in- 
 dependence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right 
 which is not by this confederation expressly delegated 
 to the tJnited States in Congress assembled." 
 
 This was an indisputable recognition of the " Inde- 
 
 ' This was passed on the 13th of Apr!], 38 days before the Contl- 
 nenlal Congress advised the Colonies to adopt Constitutions! 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 65 
 
 pendence and individual Sovereignty " of each State, 
 since it could not "retain'" what did not belong to it. 
 
 5. There is not a syllable nor a hint anywhere in the 
 Declaration of Independence that it was intended to 
 merge the peoples of thirteen free, sovereign and inde- 
 pendent States into a Nation ; nor was there any assump- 
 tion of sovereign powers by the Continental Congress, 
 since the delegation from each Colony was empowered 
 by its Colony to exercise all the powers necessary and 
 proper for the conduct of the war and, foreign inter- 
 course. And in the Articles of Confederation the second 
 Article, quoted above, is so absolutely inconsistent with 
 the theory of the consolidationists, that they hardly de- 
 serve a respectful refutation.^ 
 
 6. The answer to Mr. Webster by Mr. Calhoun, and 
 the complete overthrow of his political doctrine, by 
 quoting his own former utterances (always scrupulously 
 ignored and excluded by Northern compilers of school 
 readers, speakers. Union text-books, etc.), may profi- 
 tably be imitated here. In June, 1851, Mr. Webster 
 delivered an address at Capon Springs, "V a. , in which he 
 said: 
 
 "I have not hesitated to say, and I repeat, that, if the 
 Northern States refuse, willfully and deliberately, to 
 carry into effect that part of the Constitution which 
 respects the restoration of fugitive slaves, and Congress 
 provide no remedy, the South would no longer be bound 
 
 'One of the most glaring non-sequiturs in all the writings of the 
 consolidationists occurs on page 525 of Bancroft's fourth volume, as 
 follows: "On the 34th (June) Congress ' resolved that all persons 
 abiding within any of the united Colonies, and deriving protection 
 from its laws, owe allegiance to the said laws, and are members of 
 such Colony' ; and it charged the guUt of treason upon ' all mem- 
 bers of any of the united Colonies who should be adherent to the 
 King of Great Britain, giving to him aid and comfort. ' The fellow- 
 
66 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 to observe the compact. A bargain can not be broken 
 OQ one side, and still bind the other side." ' 
 
 Mr. Calhoun's quotations from Mr. Webster's former 
 speeches, and this subsequent utterance at Capon Springs 
 indicate a temporary confusion of thought in 1833, in 
 the midst of the dangers to the Union which protection 
 to New England's manufacturers had caused. 
 
 But even if there were no reason to charge Mr. Web- 
 ster with inconsistency, he is not supported by the evi- 
 dence he adduces ; on the contrary, it is against him. 
 " The people of the United States " in the ratifying or- 
 dinances of New Hampshire and Massachusetts, to which 
 he refers, meant the people of the thirteen free, sover- 
 eign, independent, and separate States, each State hav- 
 ing retained its " sovereignty, freedom and independ- 
 ence" in the Union. Such were "the people of the 
 United States ' ' at that time, and it was a remarkable 
 distortion of the import of the phrase to make it equiv- 
 alent to "one people" or Nation.^ 
 
 His appeal to the "We, the people " in the preamble 
 of the ConstitutioQ is as unavailing as that to the ordi- 
 nances of New Hampshire and Massachusetts; it indi- 
 cates an inexcusably superficial examination of the pro- 
 visions of the Constitution. Whenever nine States rati- 
 fied the Constitution, it was to be a " Constitution be- 
 tween" — not /or, or o/, ov among — "the States" — not 
 people — "so ratifying the same." 
 
 Even this little preposition "between," which is a 
 ^compound of the old preposition he, which signifies at, 
 in, or by, and the numeral adjective tween, which signi- 
 fies twain, twin, or two, not only disposes of the " one 
 
 subjects of one king became fellow-lieges of one republic. They all 
 had one law of citizenship and one law of treason." 
 
 »Curtis's Life of Webster, Volume II, pages 518-519. 
 
 » See Note P. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. Ql 
 
 people ' ' doctrine ; but it clearly demonstrates that the 
 compact was between two parties, each State being one 
 of them and its co- States the other. If this is untrue, 
 the statesmen of 1787 were ignorant of the meaning of 
 between. ' 
 
 Thus it is beyond question that, if we are guided by 
 the accepted definitions of words, the recognized canons 
 of interpretation of language, and the recorded acts of 
 deliberative bodies, there is not even a shadow of a 
 foundation for the contention that the peoples of the 
 several States were ever consolidated into a Nation, or 
 "one people" ; and it is among the marvels of this cen- 
 tury that any intelligent man could derive such a doc- 
 trine from the Declaration of Independence, the Articles 
 of Confederation, or tb3 Oonstitution. And the marvel 
 grows when we find this absurd definition of " State " 
 in all the editions of Webster's Dictionary published 
 since 1864- : "In the United States one of the Common- 
 wealths ^ or bodies politic, the people of which make up 
 the body of the Nation, and which, under the National 
 Constitution, stand in certain specified relations with 
 the National Government, and are invested, as Common- 
 wealths, with full power in their several spheres, over 
 all matters not expressly inhibited.''' 
 
 'The consolidationists at an early date (Mr. Webster, e. g., at the 
 laying of the Comer Stone of the Bunker Hill Monument, on June 
 17, 1825) substituted "over" for "between," and to-day yery few 
 people have the courage to deny that the Government is "over" the 
 States. 
 
 ''This word "commonwealth " was substituted by the Puritans of 
 England for "kingdom," being the English equivalent for the Latin 
 Respuhlica; and the change was made because there was a change 
 in the source of political power, the freedom, sovereignty and inde- 
 pendence of England not being affected. Thence it was imported 
 into these Colonies in 1776, and adopted by some of them. It was a 
 specific title, while "State" was general; but both, in political no 
 menclature, implied nothing less than absolute autonomy. 
 
68 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Note F. 
 
 The flag of the United States preserves the truth as to the "one 
 people" doctrine. On June 14, 1777, the Congress which suhmitted 
 the Articles to the States, passed this resolution; " That the flag of 
 the thirteen United States be thirteen stripes, alternate red and 
 white, with thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new 
 constellation." Afterwards the stars in the "new constellation" 
 were increased as new States were added to the Union, the first act 
 of the Congress pro\ iding for such increase being passed April 4, 
 1818. 
 
 It was a union of separate and sovereign States, bound together 
 by the ties of mutual interest and for mutual defense, the same ties 
 which bound them under the Articles and under the Constitution. 
 Such was the significance of the flag in the beginning, and nothing 
 has happened since to impart any other significance to it. If this is 
 not true, the stars should have been long ago removed from it and 
 the population of the "Naticn" substituted for them, the thirteen 
 stripes remaining to remind us of the time when the United States 
 "were." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 61> 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 NEW ENGLAND'S SHIPPING INTERESTS. 
 
 " It was easy to foresee, what we know also to have 
 happened, that the first great cause of coUision and jeal- 
 ousy would be, under the notion of political economy 
 then and still prevalent in Europe, an attempt on the 
 part of the mother country to monopolize the trade of 
 the Colonies. "■• * * 
 
 "The second century opened upon New England 
 under circumstances which evinced that much had 
 already been accomplished. * * * 
 
 "The commercial character of the country, notwith- 
 standing all discouragements, had begun to display itself, 
 ajiA five hundred vessels, then belonging to Massachu- 
 setts, placed her, in relation to commerce, thus early at 
 the head of the Colonies." — Webster's Plymouth Ad- 
 dress, December 22, 1820. 
 
 Having brought the record of events up to the forma- 
 tion of the new government, we need to be somewhat 
 familiar with the different interests of the different sec- 
 tions of the Union, which could be benefited or injured 
 by Congressional legislation. We begin with New Eng- 
 land's shipping interests, because they were among the 
 first to ask for special favors, and to sow the seeds of 
 that sectional conflict which produced the war between 
 the Northern and the Southern States. 
 
 The people who came over and settled in Massachu- 
 setts in 1620-'23, had spent from eleven to fifteen years 
 in Leyden, the oldest city in Holland, containing at that 
 time about one hundred thousand inhabitants, engaged 
 in manufacturing, ship-building, foreign commerce, and 
 domestic trade. 
 
 The historians telLus that: "At the end of the six- 
 teenth century, the Dutch gained the possession of the 
 
70 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Molucca Islands, and secured a monopoly of the spice 
 trade. At the end of the seventeenth century, they 
 owned nearly half of the shipping of Europe. ' ' They 
 also tell us that: "Living along the estuaries of rivers 
 abounding in fish, " they "soon became a sea-faring peo- 
 ple, " while "manufactures flourished in a remarkable 
 degree. ' ' The intelligence, the skill, the enterprise, the 
 industry, and the thrift of those people commanded the 
 admiration, and in some quarters excited the jealousy 
 of their contemporaries ; and the spirit and temper of 
 the Leydeners had found expression, 33 years before 
 the Puritan " Separatists" landed there, in the establish- 
 ment of their famous University, to which gathered 
 Europe's most renowned teachers of letters, art, and 
 science. 
 
 These Englishmen, spending so long a time in such a 
 city, amazed, no doubt, at the marvelous results of the 
 skill and enterprise 6f the Dutch, could not fail to profit 
 by what they witnessed. Hence, after landing in Massa- 
 chusetts and familiarizing themselves with their envi- 
 ronment, they soon began to put their acquired knowl- 
 edge to practical use, stimulated by the ambition which 
 contact with the Dutch had engendered. They estab- 
 lished schools and set their daughters to teaching, in 
 order that they might give to their children some of 
 that intellectual culture which had evidently been the 
 mainspring of HoUaud's success and of Leyden's phe- 
 nomenal wealth ; and they put their sons to farming, 
 to fishing, to ship-building, to trading, and to manufac- 
 turing, their skill in the latter becoming famous in after 
 times by their reputed success in the production of tin 
 mirrors, basswood hams, and wooden nutmegs ! ' 
 
 ' "William Kief t * * * determined'* * to flood the streets 
 of New Amsterdam with Indian money. This was nothing more 
 nor less than strings of beads wrought out of clams, periwinkles, 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 71 
 
 Of the beginning and progress of ship-building in 
 New England, in the early days, our historians give us 
 few records ; but from these few we may infer that the 
 business was extensive and prosperous. 
 
 In 1634 Oradock had a ship-yard at Medford; Win- 
 throp had the Blessing of the Bay built at his expense ; 
 the Rebecca was built about the same time ; a trade in 
 corn and cattle had commenced with Virginia, includ- 
 ing Carolina ; and West India products — sugar, molasses 
 and ram — were exchanged for furs with the Dutch of 
 New York.^ 
 
 In this same year (1634) Captain Stone and Captain 
 Norton commanded trading vessels on the Connecticut 
 River. In 1636 Captain Oldham commanded a trading 
 vessel on the same river ; and during this year the first 
 New England slave-ship, the Desire, was built at Mar- 
 blehead, and entered upon that inhuman traffic, which 
 was kept up till May, 1862. ' 
 
 and other shellfish, and called * * * wampum. * * * He 
 began by paying all th^ servants of the company, and all the debts 
 of Government, in strings of wampum. * * * 
 
 For a time affairs went on swimmingly. * * * Yankee traders 
 poured into the Province, buying everything they could lay their 
 hands on, and paying the worthy Dutchmen their own price — in 
 Indi^.n money. If the latter, however, attempted to pay the Yan- 
 kees in the same coin for their tinware and wooden bowls, the case 
 was altered; nothing would do but Dutch guilders and such like 
 'metallic currency. ' What was worse, the Yankees introduced an 
 inferior kind of wampum made of oyster-shells, with which they 
 deluged the Province, carying off in exchange all the silver and 
 gold, the Dutch herrings, and Dutch cheeses : thus early did the 
 knowing men of the East manifest their skill in bargaining the 
 New-Ainsterdamers out of the oyster, and leaving them the shell." 
 — Knickerbocker's New York, pages 234-325. 
 
 1 Hildreth, Volume I, page 200. 
 
 2 Naval War Records, Volume I, pages 13, 34, 366, 367. 
 
72 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 In 1642, according to Hildreth,' their ships carried 
 cargoes of staves and fish — the manufacture of rum did 
 not begin till 1733 — to Madeira and the Canaries; and 
 on these trips they were accustomed to touch on the 
 coast of Guinea "to trade for negroes," whom they 
 generally carried to Barbadoes and other English islands 
 in the West Indies, "the demand for them at home be- 
 ing small. ' ' 
 
 In this same year (1642) six large ships were com- 
 pleted at Salem. ^ 
 
 Ship-building, indeed, soon became the leading indus- 
 try in all the seaboard towns, and continued so for about 
 one hundred and seventy years, when " protection " 
 rendered manufacturing equally remunerative. The 
 ships were built for the whale, mackerel, and cod fishe- 
 ries, for inland, coastwise, and foreign commerce, for the 
 African slave trade, and for sale. For the ship market 
 so many were built that in 1727 the "ship carpenters in 
 the Thames complained that their trade was hurt, and 
 their workmen emigrated." ^ 
 
 For about a century and a half those industrious peo 
 pie enjoyed almost a monopoly, in these Colonies, of the 
 carrying trade, except when interfered with by restric- 
 tions imposed by the mother State, since there was 
 never any competition attempted by New York and 
 Philadelphia till near the close of that period, nor by 
 the seaports south of Philadelphia till after the Revolu- 
 tion.^ 
 
 ' Volume I, page 282. 
 
 'Ibid., page 331. 
 
 'Hildreth, Volume II, page 297. 
 
 * In Carroll's Historical Collections of South Carolina there is a pa- 
 per which was published in London in 1761, wherein, after giving 
 an account of the trade of Charleston, the author (believed to have 
 been Governor Glen) said : " But with all this trade we have few or 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 73 
 
 After the Eevolution, of which British restrictions on 
 New England's commercial interests were the prime 
 cause, "free trade and sailors' rights" followed, with 
 corresponding benefits to those interests; and special 
 privileges were secured, in the treaty of peace, to their 
 fishermen on the Banks of Newfoundland and in the 
 Gulf of St. Lawrence. 
 
 After the breaking out of the war and the consequent 
 disturbances of commerce, much of the money made by 
 the slave trade and other commercial operations was 
 invested in manufacturing and mechanical trades to fill 
 army contracts and supply the wants of the people ; 
 another portion was employed in speculating in Conti- 
 nental and State securities, including the bills of credit ; 
 another was devoted to privateering enterpises; and 
 another to traffic with the soldeirs. 
 
 After the war was over commerce resumed its old 
 importance, stimulated to vigorous expansion by the 
 preferences accorded to it because of the bitter memo- 
 ries of Britain's aggressions; and up to the formation 
 of the more perfect Union, it would not be far from the 
 truth to declare that New England's shippihg interests 
 enjoyed almost as many monopolistic privileges as were 
 afterwards conferred on them by acts of Congress. 
 
 The result up to 1786 is thus given by Hildreth, Vol- 
 ume III, pages 465-66 : 
 
 " One large portion of the wealthy men of Colonial 
 times had been expatriated, and another part had been 
 impoverished by the Eevolution.' In their place a new 
 moneyed class had sprung up, especially in the Eastern 
 
 no ships of our own. We depend in a great measure upon those sent 
 from Great Britain, or on such as are built in New England for 
 British merchants, and which generally take this Country in on their 
 way to get a freight to England." 
 
 ' See Note G. 
 
74 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 States, men who had grown rich in the course of the 
 war as suttlers, by privateering, by speculations in the 
 fluctuating paper money, and by other operations not 
 always of the most honorable kind. Large claims 
 against their less fortunate neighbors had accumulated 
 in the hands of these men, many of whom were dis- 
 posed to press their legal rights to the utmost. The 
 sudden fortunes made by the war," ' etc. 
 
 But, while giving the result, Hildreth omits one of 
 the essential causes. This is supplied by a New Eng- 
 lander (probably J. Q. Adams), who, under the nom de 
 plume of Algernon Sidney, addressed "an appeal to the 
 people of New England," December 15, 1808 (printed 
 as a public document in State Papers, 2d sess., 10th 
 Cong.), designed to reconcile them to the non-inter- 
 coarse acts of Jefferson's Administration. Among other 
 things he said: "Eecur to the period between peace and 
 the present Government. Did not the commercial States 
 enrich themselves at the expense of the agricultural? " 
 
 The freeing of the commerce of these people from 
 British restrictions and the securing of privileges to 
 their fishermen ought, one would suppose, to have been 
 enough ; but they wanted more, and, as soon as the 
 Federal Government was empowered in the Constitu- 
 tion to regulate commerce and to lay taxes on imported 
 goods, they applied through their representatives for 
 greater privileges ; and they received them. An abso- 
 lute monopoly of the coastwise trade was conferred on 
 ships built in the United States, with the privilege of 
 adjusting freight and passenger rates to suit the own- 
 ers; a discriminating tonnage tax was imposed on all 
 
 'The Atlantic Monthly for December, 1897, says that one of the 
 signers of the Declaration of Independence took "advantage of in- 
 formaion of the needs of the Continental cause for wheat to corner 
 the supply at once so far as he was able." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 75 
 
 foreign ships engaged in carrying goods to or from these 
 States ; a discriminating tariff tax was imposed on all 
 articles imported into these States in foreign ships; 
 ship-builders in the United States were granted an ab- 
 solute monopoly of the "home market" for ships; and 
 New England's cod-fishermen were quartered on the 
 taxpayers of all the States. 
 
 Such favoritism as this, bestowed mainly on a people 
 unsurpassed in the United States for inteUigence, skill, 
 and energy, bore its legitimate fruits : 
 
 1. The victims of this paternalism began to ask what 
 had become of the "justice" promised in the Constitu- 
 tion, and the resulting sense of wrong passed from father 
 to son long after the occasion of it was forgotten; and 
 
 2. By 1810' the shippers of the United States con- 
 trolled a greater proportion of the world's carrying trade 
 than either Holland or England.^ 
 
 ' Twenty- one years of paternalism ran up the tonnage in the follow- 
 ing States, vessels under 30 tons being omitted, to the figures in the 
 table: 
 
 Massachusetts, 483,509 tons 
 
 New York, 373,473 " 
 
 Pennsylvania, 133,883 " 
 
 Maryland, 136,293 " 
 
 Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, 181,972 " 
 
 This was about eight times, on an average, what the tonnage of 
 these States was in 1789. 
 
 But the principal beneficiaries of the favoritism can only be dis- 
 covered by comparing tonnage with population. This comparison 
 gives per 1,000 persons — 
 In Massachusetts, 1,024.35 tons 
 
 " New York, 284. 
 
 " Pennsylvania, 153.9 " 
 
 " Maryland, 358. 
 
 " Virginia North Carolina, South Carolina.and Georgia, 83.8 " 
 — (See State Papers, Commerce and Navigation, Vol. I, pp. 896-901). 
 
 ^ Smith's Wealth of Nations, American Edition, Volume I, page 
 366, foot note. 
 
76 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 It is Qot necessary, in closing this chapter, to enlarge 
 on the interests of other classes of the people. It is 
 well known that agriculture was the principal business 
 of an overwhelming majority at the time of the adop- 
 tion of the Constitution and for several decades after- 
 wards; and, furthermore, that diversification of employ- 
 ments was confined almost exclusively to the Northern 
 States, with the result, at an early day, that the sur- 
 plus crops of their farmers were consumed by those 
 engaged in other occupations, while the Southern 
 farmers were obliged to seek a market for rriost of their 
 surplus in foreign lands. ' It was impossible, therefore, 
 for them to quarter themselves on the taxpayers of the 
 Union unless they could have prevailed on the Congress 
 to give them bounties out of the Federal treasury. This 
 they never applied for, because they inherited a respect 
 for the Constitution which, they very well knew, con- 
 ferred no such power on the Congress. 
 
 Under these circumstances the South was subjected 
 to two wrongs by operation of Federal laws : 
 
 1. Foreign prices had to be accepted for her crops 
 whether sold abroad or in the United States, and tariff 
 laws compelled her to purchase her supplies of manu- 
 factui'ed articles at prices considerably above those 
 charged in foreign markets ; and 
 
 2. Every act of Congress designed to counteract hos- 
 tile commercial legislation by any foreign government — 
 most of the tariff acts included — led to further restric- 
 tions on exports from the United States, of which the 
 
 ' In the Convention of 1787 Mr. Madison, on June 28, said: " The 
 staple of Massachusetts is fish and the carrying trade; of Pennsyl- 
 vania, wheat and flour; of Virginia, tobacco''; and on the next 
 day he said; " The great danger to our general government is the 
 great Southern and Northern interests of the continent being op- 
 posed to each other." — Yates. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 77 
 
 South furnished from 80 to 90 per cent. In other words, 
 every movement on the part of Congress to check im- 
 ports of foreign manufactures has been met by real or 
 threatened restrictions on our exports of agricultural 
 products. In later years this retaliatory spirit has dis- 
 covered trichinosis in the pork and tuberculosis in the 
 beef exported from the United States. 
 
 The farmers and other producers of provisions and 
 othtT ravs^ material in the South were, therefore, kept 
 betvreen the upper and the nether millstone — the do- 
 mestic manufacturer and the foreign farmer. 
 
 Note G. 
 
 The comparative wealth of the two sections before the Revolution 
 can be approximately arrived at from the exports to Great Britain. 
 Hildreth, "Volume II, page 559, says: "The trade between Great 
 Britain and the Colonies is stated for the year 1770, as follows, and 
 the average for the last ten years, allowing for a ra^oderate increase, 
 had not been materially different : 
 
 EXPORTS TO GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 New England, $657,168 
 
 New York. 310,376 
 
 Pennsylvania, 124,803 
 
 Virginia and Maryland, 1,931,801 
 
 Carolinas, 1,384,750 
 
 Georgia, 3?4,853" 
 Comparing these exports with population in 1790, we find that for 
 every one hundred persons, including slaves, the value of the ex- 
 ports was as follows : 
 
 New England, $65.00 
 
 New York, 91.00 
 
 Pennsylvania, 38.00 
 
 Virginia and Maryland, - 181.00 
 
 Carolinas, 192.00 
 
 Georgia, 383.00 
 
78 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE VI. 
 
 NEW ENGLAND'S SHIPPING INTERESTS (CONTINUED). — NAVI- 
 GATION LAWS. 
 
 "An oak vessel could be built at Gloucester or Salem 
 for 124 per ton; a ship of live-oak or American cedar 
 cost not more than $38 per ton. On the other hand, 
 fir vessels built on the Baltic cost $35 per ton, and no- 
 where in England, France, or Holland could a ship be 
 made of oak for Jess than $50 per ton. Often the cost 
 was as high as $60. ' ' — Fiske's Critical Period, etc. , pages 
 141-42. 
 
 To the general discussion of New England's shipping 
 interests in the preceding chapter, let us now enter upon 
 an examination of the different laws passed for their 
 benefit, except the fishing bounty acts, which will be 
 found in the next chapter. 
 
 It is a matter of curious interest that the clause of 
 the Federal Constitution conferring upon the Congress 
 the power to regulate commerce was the result of a 
 compromise between the agricultural interest of the 
 South and the shipping interest of the Northeastern 
 States. Iq Mr. Charles Pinckney's plan of a Constitu- 
 tion, which presented the general form and much of the 
 substance finally agreed to, he proposed to grant this 
 power with a very salutary proviso, inspired, perhaps, 
 by that distrust of the commercial interests which 
 seems to have been shared by many of the Southern 
 delegates to the Convention. ^ It was that any act reg- 
 
 ' For some reason the New Englanders made unfavorable impres- 
 sions on others besides the Southerners. In the Journal of Wil- 
 liam Maclay, one of Pennsylvania's first Senators, two opinions are 
 recorded, which were kept by him and his family from publication 
 for a century. The first is on page 260, as follows : "I would now 
 remark, if I had not done it before, that there is very little candor 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. Y9 
 
 iilaiing commerce should require a two-thirds vote in 
 its favor in each House. 
 
 The subject was debated for months, and fruitless 
 efforts were made by the Northeastern delegates to have 
 the proviso stricken out. At last an opportunity for a 
 " bargain" arose. This was when the question was to 
 be settled whether the Congress should have the power 
 to prohibit the importation of African slaves. "As the 
 system," says Luther Martin of Maryland, who was a 
 member of the Convention, "was reported by the Com- 
 mittee of Detail" (the Committee of Five who reported 
 the final draft), "the provision was general, that such 
 importation should not be prohibited, without confin- 
 ing it to any particular period. This was rejected by 
 eight States, Georgia, South Carolin?., and, I think. 
 North Carolina, voting for it. We were then told by 
 the delegates from the two first of those States that 
 their States would never agree to a system which put 
 it in the power of the general government to prevent 
 the importation of slaves, and that they as delegates 
 from those States must withhold their assent from such 
 a system. A committee of one member from each State 
 was chosen by ballot to take this part of the system 
 under their consideration and to endeavor to agree upon 
 some report, which should reconcile those States. To 
 this committee also was referred the following proposi- 
 tion, which had been reported by the Committee of De- 
 tail, to-wit: 'No navigation act shall be passed without 
 the assent of two-thirds of the members present in each 
 House' ; a proposition which the staple and commer- 
 cial (agricultural) States were solicitous to retain, lest 
 
 in New England men." The second is on page 341 : "For my knowl- 
 edge of the Eastern character warrants me in dra ling this conclu- 
 sion, that they will cabal against and endeavor to subvert any gov- 
 ernment which they have not the management of." 
 
80 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 their commerce should be placed too much under the 
 power of the Eastern (New England) States ; but which 
 those States were as anxious to reject. This committee, 
 of which I also had' the honor to be a member, met and 
 took' under their consideration the subject committed 
 to them. I found the Eastern States, notwithstanding 
 their aversion to slavery, were willing to indulge the 
 Southern States, at least with a temporary liberty to 
 prosecute the slave trade, provided the Southern States 
 would in their turn gratify them by laying no restric- 
 tion on navigation acts; and after a little time the com- 
 mittee, by a great majority, agreed on a report," which 
 was acceptable to both parties. ' 
 
 Such was the compromise : the Southern States re- 
 tained the power until 1808^ to purchase Africans im- 
 ported by New England's slave traders, with the proviso 
 lodged somewhere (nobody knows where) that the 
 Northern States could liberate and enfranchise them; 
 and the Eastern States secured to themselves the power 
 to have navigation acts passed by a bare majority of a 
 quorum in each House — one more than a fourth of the 
 total membership — instead of two-thirds of the mem- 
 bers. ' 
 
 But in truth this was only a seeming compromise ; it 
 was a surrender of two rights by " the South," and a 
 surrender of no right by the North. The right to im- 
 
 ' Yates's Secret Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1787, 
 pages 63-63. 
 
 ^ The compromise, as agreed to in the committee, and reported to 
 the Convention, provided for non-interference with the slave-trade 
 till 1800 ; but the next day (August 25) ' 'it was moved and seconded" 
 to strike oat 1800 and insert 1808, and this was agreed to, the yeas 
 being New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, 
 North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia; and the nays, New 
 Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Virginia. — El. Deb., I, 364. 
 
 ^See Constitution, Article I, sections 5, 8 and 9; and Note H. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 81 
 
 port slaves forever belonged to each of the Southern 
 ■States, as did the right to go into the open market and 
 employ the cheapest ships for their coastwise and foreign 
 commerce. Both rights they lost in the so-called com- 
 promise, and received absolutely nothing as an equiva- 
 lent. Truly did Greeley say (2, p. 232) that " the Con- 
 stitution was essentially a matter of compromise and 
 mutual concession — a proceeding wherein Thrift is apt 
 to gain at the cost of Principle." ' 
 
 This power being delegated to the Congress, its exer- 
 cise was entered upon with eagerness before measures 
 were adopted to organize the Treasury or State Depart- 
 ment, or the Supreme or any other courts. In the Sen- 
 ate, according to Maclay, when the clause in the bill 
 was reached granting a partial monopoly to ' ' all ships 
 or vessels within the United States, and belonging 
 wholly to citize OS thereof," Izard, of South Carolina, 
 moved to have the latter part struck out, ' ' the effect of 
 which would have been that no discrimination would 
 have been made between our own citizens and fpreign- 
 ers." Lee and Grayson, of Virginia, Butler and Izard, 
 of South Carolina, and Few, of Georgia (North Carolina 
 was not then in the Union), "argued in the most un- 
 ceasing manner " against the discrimination, but to no 
 purpose. 
 
 The act became a law September 1, 1789 ; and even 
 Maclay, a supporter of it, was compelled by his sense of 
 
 ' An example of misrepresentation of truth is seen in the following 
 reference to this so-called compromise on page 355 of Fiske's Civil 
 Government: "There was some sectional opposition between North 
 and South, and in Virginia there was a party in favor of a separate 
 Southern Confederacy. But South Carolina and Georgia were won 
 over by the concessions in the Constitution to slavery, and especially 
 a provision that the importation of slaves from Africa should not be 
 prohibited until 1808." 
 
82 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 justice to make this admission: "In a view solely mer- 
 cantile, this was perhaps wrong, as by these means our 
 foreign articles would be dearer and our home produce 
 cheaper. ' ' ' 
 
 This remark referred to the foreign trade, and was 
 written before the coastwise-trade provisions were 
 reached. These gave to "American" vessels an abso- 
 lute monopoly of the carrying trade between ports of 
 the United States, and enabled their owners to fix 
 freight rates on naval stores, lumber, pork, indigo (when 
 it was a Southern crop), wheat, flour, cotton, tobacco, 
 and rice shipped to Northern markets, and on Northern 
 and foreign goods shipped from Northern to Southern 
 ports. 
 
 The discriminations in favor of " American " ships 
 will be seen in the following acts : 
 
 TONNAGE^ DUTIES. 
 
 1. The Act of July 20, 1790, amending the Act of 
 September 1, 1789, but not changing rates: " Upon all 
 ships or vessels which, after the 1st day of September 
 next, shall be entered in the United States from any for- 
 eign port or places, there shall be paid the several and 
 respective duties following, that is to say : on ships or 
 vessels of the United States at the rate of six cents per 
 ton ; on ships or vessels built within the United States, 
 after the 20th day of July last, but belonging wholly or 
 in part to subjects of foreign powers, at the rate of 
 thirty cents per ton; on other ships or vessels at the 
 rate of fifty cents per ton." 
 
 1 Maclay's Journal, pages 76, 77. 
 
 ^ The burden or tonnage of a ship is its capacity in cubic feet. 
 Webster's Dictionary says a ton is about forty cubic feet; Alden's 
 Cyclopoedia says 100 cubic feet make a ton ; but the act of Congress 
 establishing rules for measuring the capacity of a vessel makes 95 
 cubic feet a ton, which is about 76 bushels. — Act of March 2, 1799. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 83 
 
 2. The Act of January 14, 1817, reenacts the rates of 
 the above act, with a proviso that thfere shall not be 
 any impairment of rights acquired by any foreign na- 
 tion under any treaties or other commercial agreements. 
 
 3. The Act of March 1, 1817, makes certain discrimi- 
 nations in favor of hcensed vessels ; and imposes fifty 
 cents per ton on vessels of the United States if the offi- 
 cers and at least two-thir4s of the crew are not citizens 
 of the United States. 
 
 i. The Act of May 31, 1830, provides that no tonnage 
 duties shall be paid on vessels of the United States ; nor 
 on the vessels of any foreign nation which levies no dis- 
 criminating or countervailing duties, " to the disadvan- 
 tage of the United States." 
 
 LIGHT MONEY. 
 
 The Act of March 27, 1804, lays a duty of fifty cents 
 per ton, "to be denominated ' light money,' " on all 
 ships or vessels, not of the United States, "which * * 
 may enter the ports of the United States" ; provided that 
 this act shall not contravene any provision of the treaty 
 with France. 
 
 RESTRICTIONS ON FOREIGN VESSELS. 
 
 The Act of March 1, 1817, contained this provision: 
 "After the 30th day of September next, no goods, wares 
 or merchandise shall be imported^nto the United States 
 from any foreign port or place, except in vessels of the 
 United States, or in such foreign vessels as truly and 
 wholly belong to the citizens or subjects of that country 
 of which the goods are the growth, production, or manu- 
 facture; or from which such goods, etc., can only be, or 
 most usually are, first shipped for transportation : Pro- 
 vided nevertheless, That this regulation shall not extend 
 to the vessels of any foreign nation which has not 
 adopted and which shall not adopt a similar regulation. " 
 
84 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 COASTING TRADE. 
 
 1. On February 18, 1793, the Act of September 1, 
 1789, was amended to this effect: " Ships or vessels en- 
 rolled by virtue of 'the last-named act,' and those of 
 twenty tons and upwards, which shall be enrolled after 
 the last day of May next, in pursuance of this act, and 
 having a license in force, or, if less than twenty tons, 
 not being enrolled, shall have a license in force, as is 
 hereinafter required, and no others, shall be deemed 
 ships or vessels of the United States, entitled to the 
 privileges of ships or vessels employed in the coasting 
 trade or fisheries." 
 
 2. For some reason — probably evasions of the law — 
 it was enacted, March 1, 1817, that: "No goods, wares, 
 or merchandise shall be imported, under penalty of 
 forfeiture thereof, from one port of the United States 
 to another port of the United States, in a vessel belong- 
 ing wholly or in part to a subject of any foreign power." 
 
 3. On May 27, 1848, an act was passed to permit 
 these privileged vessels (including steamships) to touch 
 at foreign ports for merchandise and passengers. ' 
 
 ' "And what does New York enjoy? What do Massachusetts and 
 Maine enjoy? They enjoy an exclusive right of carrying on the 
 coasting trade from State to State, on the Atlantic, and around 
 C'ape Horn to the Pacific. * * * It is this right to the coasting 
 trade, to the exclusion of foreigners, thus granted to the Northern 
 States, which they have ^ver held, and of which, up to this time, 
 there has been no attempt to deprive them ; it is this which has em- 
 ployed so much tonnage and so many men, and given support to so 
 many thousands of our fellow -citizens. Now, what would you 
 say * * * if the South and the Southwest were to join together 
 to repeal this law, * * * and invite the Dane, the Swede, the 
 Hamburgher, and all the commercial nations of Europe who can 
 carry cheaper, to come in and carry goods, " etc. ? — Webster to the 
 Young Men of Albany, May 38, 1851. 
 
In U S. 
 Vessels. 
 
 In Foreign 
 Vessels. 
 
 6 cents. 
 
 15 cents.-^ 
 
 10 " 
 
 33 •■ 
 
 10 ■' 
 
 33 '• 
 
 10 " 
 
 33 " 
 
 30 " 
 
 45 " 
 
 13 " 
 
 37 " 
 
 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 86 
 
 DISCRIMINATING DUTIES. 
 
 The tariff act of July 4, 1789, imposed discriminating 
 taxes on tea imported from China, as follows: 
 
 Bohea _ __ ..per lb., 
 
 Souchong " 
 
 Other black imperial " 
 
 Gunpowder _ " 
 
 Hyson and Young- Hyson " 
 
 All other green " 
 
 This same act allowed a reduction of 10 per cent of 
 the rates of duty imposed on all foreign goods, if im- 
 ported in United States vessels ; and while imposing a 
 tax of 12i per cent on all articles (other than tea) com- 
 ing from China or India, it permitted them to come in 
 free of duty in ships built or owned in the United States. 
 
 And a? if this were not favoritism enough, the Act of 
 May 13, 1800 — the last year of the domination of the 
 Federalists — provided: "That in case of .the re-exporta- 
 tion from the United States of goods, wares, and mer- 
 chandise, imported thereinto in foreign ships or vessels, 
 no part of the additional duty imposed by law on such 
 goods, etc., on account of their importation in such 
 ships or vessels, shall be allowed to be drawback," etc. 
 
 The- Act of December 31, 1792, provides as follows: 
 " Ships or vessels built within the United States, 
 whether before or after the 4th of July, 1776, and be- 
 longing wholly to a citizen or citizens thereof ; or not 
 built within the said States, but on the 16th day of May, 
 in the year 1789, belonging and thenceforh continuing 
 to belong to a citizen or citizens thereof ; and ships or 
 vessels which may hereafter be captured in war by such 
 citizen or citizens, and lawfully condemned as prize, or 
 
86 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE lirOKTH. 
 
 which have been or may be adjudged to be forfeited for 
 a breach of the laws of the United States, being wholly 
 owned by a citizen or citizens thereof, and no other, 
 may be registered as hereinafter directed," etc. 
 
 This act, which has never been repealed, compels 
 every person, corporation, State, and even the United 
 States, whenever a necessity arises, to purchase, lease 
 or employ in any way any ship or vessel, to make the 
 purchase, etc., in the "home market"; and it is not 
 necessaiy to assure the reader that every advantage has 
 been taken which the act permits. 
 
 More than a century has this monopoly been fleecing 
 the people, either directly, whenever they have had oc- 
 casion to purchase or hire a vessel, or indirectly, through 
 the mihtary branch of the Federal Government when- 
 ever it has needed to purchase or hire transports for 
 troops or war material. The delay in transporting troops, 
 etc., to Cuba, Manila, etc., during the present war with 
 Spain is familiar to readers of newspapers. " Outrage- 
 ous prices, ' ' as the Philadelphia Eecord calls them, have 
 been charged by the ship-owners. On th e 17th of Sep- 
 tember, 1898, a check for $1,475,000 was given in pay- 
 ment of the rental of four ocean steamers of the American 
 line, which were in the Federal service "for an average 
 period of nearly one hundred and twenty days. ' ' This 
 is about $3,070 per day for each ship, or 1820,550 per 
 year ; and the last sum is about five times the total cost 
 (1166,868) of the fifteen iron and steel steamships built 
 in Pennsylvania in 1889. — Census, 1890, Manf. Ind., 
 Part 3, 564. 
 
 How large a stream of wealth this paternalism has 
 caused to flow from the South to the North, and chiefly 
 to New England, we may never know; but we may not 
 err greatly if we draw inferences from the parallel pater- 
 nalism complained of in the address to "the Inhabitants 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 8t 
 
 of Great Britain," July 8, 1775, by "The Twelve United 
 Colonies," as follows: "It is alleged that we contribute 
 nothing to the common defense. To this we answer 
 that the advantages which Great Britain receives from 
 the monopoly of our trade far exceeds our proportion of 
 the expense necessary for that purpose. ' ' ^ And we 
 may reach a more definite conclusion from the testi- 
 mony of a witness who had opportunities of observing 
 the operations of these laws. It was Mathew Carey, 
 who, on page 268 of his Olive Branch, said: 
 
 ' ' The naked fact is that the demagogues in the East- 
 ern States, not satisfied with deriving all the "benefits 
 from the Southern States, that they would from so 
 many wealthy colonies — with making princely fortunes 
 by the carriage and exportation of their bulky and val- 
 uable productions — and supplying them with their own 
 rnanufactures, and the manufactures a,nd productions 
 of Europe and the East and West Indies, to an enor- 
 mous amount, and at an immense profit, uniformly 
 treated them with outrage, insult, and injury." 
 
 To him may be added another witness, who is quoted 
 by Carey on page 291. It was John Lowell, the foun- 
 der of Lowell Institute in Boston. 
 
 In his Road to Ruin, objecting to the transfer of cap- 
 ital from commerce to manufacturing, he declared that 
 commercial gains were 50 per cent, while factories could 
 never yield more than 20 per cent ! 
 
 And the testimony of these witnesses is corroborated 
 " by the extent of the operations of those engaged in com- 
 merce. Their sails whitened every harbor in the com- 
 mercial world ; through their agents foreigners received 
 their impressions of the character, skill, enterprise, and 
 spirit of the people of all these States; and, when the 
 
 i]Sr. C. Col: Recs., X, 81. 
 
88 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOKTH. 
 
 War of 1812 commenced, the whole people, from the 
 Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border, had lost much 
 of that respect abroad which had been inspired by their 
 conduct in the Eevolution. "There existed a general 
 impressiou among civilized nations," says the States- 
 man's Manual, Volume I, page 376, " that the spirit of 
 liberty and independence which had carried America 
 triumphantly through the war of ihe Eevolution, was 
 extinguished by a love of gain and commercial enter- 
 prise, without courage and resolution sufficient to sus- 
 tain the National rights." 
 
 The effect of the first act (September 1, 1789) was 
 magical; the tonnage employed in the foreign trade 
 rose from 123,893 in 1789 to 346,254 in 1790; that en- 
 gaged in the coasting trade rose from 68,607 to 103,775 
 in the same period; and that engaged in the cod and 
 mackerel fisheries (with the additional stimulus of 
 bounties and drawbacks explained elsewhere), rose from 
 9,062 to 28,348 in the same period. ' 
 
 The Act of February 18, 1793, providing for favors to 
 vessels of less than twenty tons, employed in the coast- 
 ing trade, was equally magical; the tables drawn on 
 above give 7,218 tons for that year and 16,977 for 1794. 
 
 As might be expected, the foreign commerce of the 
 United States rapidly fell into the hands of those who 
 enjoyed a monopoly of the coasting trade ; so that before 
 1795 they controlled 75 per cent of it; from that year to 
 1800, 87 per cent; and by 1810 they had reached 91 per 
 cent.^ From the last-named year until 1831 it never 
 fell below 86 per cent ; but about that time the policy 
 of mad protection — the " bill of abominations " — was 
 beginning to allure capital from commerce to manufac- 
 
 ' Commerce and Navigation of the United States, 1891, page 1086. 
 2 Ibid., pageCVIII. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 89 
 
 turing; and the American tonnage fell to 77 per cent, 
 from which it never recovered. Indeed, the still mad- 
 der protection the country was afBicted with by the war 
 tariffs ran the per cent down to 19 in 1881; and, not- 
 withstanding all the extra coddling by exemptions from 
 fees ^ and from taxes on ship materials, ^ and by boun- 
 ties for carrying the mails, ^ etc., the high- water mark 
 of 1895 was only 23 per cent. 
 
 Two observations should be made here. -The first is 
 that many Southern statesmen in the early Congresses 
 supported and voted for the measures designed to foster 
 
 ' By the Act of June 36, 1884, the Secretary of the Treasury was 
 directed to pay to United States Consuls the fees theretofore re- 
 quired to be paid by masters of vessels and seamen ; and the Act of 
 June 19, 1886, directed that oflBcer to pay fees theretofore paid by 
 masters, engineers, pilots and mates of vessels, as for measuring ton 
 nage, issuing license, bill of health, inspecting, granting certificates, 
 granting permits, etc., etc. 
 
 ' The policy of exemptiiig ship material from import taxes was in- 
 augurated by the Act of June 6, 1872; and it has been pursued ever 
 since. But the Dingley Act goes beyond this; it provides in sec- 
 tions 13, 13 and 15 that " all materials of foreign production which 
 may be necessary for the construction of vessels built in the United 
 States for foreign, account and ownership, or for the purpose of be- 
 ing employed in the foreign trade, including the trade between the 
 Atlantic and Pacific ports of the United States, and all such mate- 
 rials necessary for the building of their machinery, and all articles 
 necessary for their outfit and equipment," or "for the repair" or 
 "for supplies (not including equipment) of vessels of the United 
 States engaged in foreign trade, or in trade between the Atlantic 
 and Pacific ports of the United States," shall be exempt from tariff 
 or internal revenue taxes. 
 
 'No longer ago than 1893 Mr. Postmaster General Wanamaker 
 reported that between February 1 of that year and June 30 he paid 
 out to four steamship lines ^77,103.85 more than the service was 
 worth; and his estimates for the next year cover a bonus of 1610,639 
 to nine lines.— (See his Report for 1893, pp. 10 and 11.) 
 
 And Postmaster-General Bissell, in his report for 1894, page 22, 
 says that a bonus or subsidy of $257,779 was paid that year, under 
 one of Mr. Wanamaker's contracts, to three steamship lines. 
 
90 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the shipping interests, for the double purpose of insur- 
 ing a powerful merchant marine which might render 
 valuable service in case of war, and of pacifying the 
 commercial class in New England who threatened to 
 withdraw their States from the Union whenever their 
 interests seemed to be losing the paternal care of the 
 Government. 
 
 The other is that the farmers of the South, enjoying 
 a satisfactory degree of prosperity, having no railroads 
 or other means of rapid communication with the people 
 of the Northern States, enjoying none of the modern 
 facilities for informing themselves, and trusting all pub- 
 lic matters to their political leaders, saw no reason why 
 they should abandon their farms and enter into a com- 
 petition with the experienced ship-builders and traders 
 of the North. They did not realize the stealth)^ trans- 
 fer of their wealth to the Northern States until it was 
 too late to hope for an efficient remedy, and even then 
 only a v^ery small per cent of them could be made to 
 understand the causes of their financial decadence. But 
 even if Southern capital had been directed to this com- 
 petition, the wealth of the farming class would have 
 flowed from them as before, the channel alone being 
 changed. So there was no hope of recovering his lost 
 wealth or of securing the benefits of fair and honorable 
 commercial competition; and the intelligent farmer 
 began to doubt whether he was having his sljare of the 
 blessings of liberty, to secure which his forefathers had 
 carried his State into the Union. 
 
 And this injustice is still irremediable. 
 
 Note H. 
 
 The provision of the Constitution empowering a quorum to do 
 business, thus enabhng one- fourth plus one of the total membership 
 to pass important acts, provided they are voted against by one- 
 fourth, has led to unforeseen evil results (unless we except Mason 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. &1 
 
 and Randolph, of Virginia, who refused to approve and sign the 
 Constitution because this "two-thirds" provision was stricken out). 
 If a two- thirds vote had been required on all bills laying taxes and 
 making appropriations, the tranquillity of the Union might never 
 have been disturbed. 
 
 The protective tariff of 1816 was passed in the House of flepresen- 
 tatives by the affirmative votes of 88 out of a total membership of 
 183, or 48 per cent. 
 
 The " American System " of 1834 was passed by 107 out of 313, or 
 501 per cent. 
 
 The "bill of abominations" of 1828 was passed by 105 out of 313, 
 or 49 per cent. 
 
 The tariff act of 1833 was passed by 133 out of 313, or 61 per cent. 
 
 The tariff of 1843 was passed by 103 out of 343, or 43 per cent. 
 
 Thus it is seen that the tariff acts up to 1861 — those acts which 
 caused, directly or indirectly, nearly all the excitement and antago- 
 nism in the Union — were imposed on the people by minority votes, 
 with two exceptions ; and that the act which laid the foundation for 
 the threatened rupture in 1833 was passed by 49 per cent of the to- 
 tal membership. 
 
 But during all these years the people were flattered by the politi- 
 cians with rhetorical flourishes about "American citizens," "demo- 
 cratic government," "the popular will," etc. 
 
 This minority government is going on yet, and will continue to do' 
 so as long as the people believe they are living under a "govern- 
 ment of the people, and by the people, and for the people." 
 
92 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 GHAPTEE VII. 
 
 FISHING BOUNTIES. 
 
 The first tariff act, which became a law on July 4, 
 1789, imposed a duty of ten cents per bushel on all salt 
 imported into the United States for consumption, and 
 granted a bounty of five cents a barrel on pickled fish 
 exported", and also on beef and pork exported, and five 
 cents a quintal (100 pounds) on dried fish exported, "in 
 lieu of a drawback of the duties" which had been paid 
 on the salt. 
 
 The Act of August 10, 1790, raised the duty on salt 
 to twelve cents — just after Hamilton's scheme of fund- 
 ing and assumption had been fastened on the taxpay- 
 ers — and the bounty on salt fish, beef and pork was 
 raised to ten cents per barrel and quintal. 
 
 But this was not concession enough to the fishing in- 
 terest ; the Legislature of Massachusetts sent a petition 
 to Congress asking for "a remission of duties on all the 
 dutiable articles used in the fisheries," whether re-ex- 
 ported or not — salt, rum, tea, sugar, molasses, iron, 
 coarse woolens, lines and hooks, sail-cloth, cordage and 
 tonnage; " and also premiums and bounties."' This 
 petition was referred to Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, 
 for a report on it ; and his report was that a drawback 
 of duties on articles exported ought to be allowed, but 
 that the fisheries ought not to draw support from the 
 Treasury.^ 
 
 ' Two years before this John Jay had said in the Federalist (No. 
 IV), that these fishermen could supply the markets of France and 
 Britain "cheaper than they can themselves, notwithstanding any 
 efforts to prevent it by bounties on their own, or duties on foreign 
 fish." 
 
 ^ See Benton's Thirty Years' View, Volume II, pages 194-98. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 93 
 
 The underlying motive of this petition was "patriotic" 
 in the highest degree ; it was to encourage the fisher- 
 men to maintain a " nursery for seamen," who would 
 be schooled to manage cruisers and privateers in case of 
 a war. — (See Maclay, p. 384). The Legislature forgot the 
 superior advantages of whaling vessels for this service. 
 
 The Act of December 31, 1792, changed the bounty 
 from barrels and quintals of fish to the tonnage of the 
 vessels employed in the business, granting 30 cents per 
 ton for each season, whether any fish were exported or 
 not. 
 
 The Act of March 3, 1797, advanced the tax on im- 
 ported salt to 20 cents per bushel, and a corresponding 
 increase was made in the bounties both to exported pro- 
 visions and pickled fish, and in the allowance to fishing 
 vessels. 
 
 The Act of March 3, 1799, granted a bounty of 30 cents 
 per barrel on exported pickled fish, and 25 cents per 
 barrel on exported salted beef and pork. 
 
 Thus stood matters until 1807, when, on the recom- 
 mendation of President Jefferson, the salt tax was abol- 
 ished, and with it all bounties and allowances to fishing 
 vessels, to pickled fish, and -to salted beef and pork. 
 
 In 1813, however, the exigencies of war furnished an 
 excuse for restoring the tax of 20 cents per bushel on 
 imported salt ; and the threats of secession in the New 
 England States furnished an excuse for a considerable 
 enlargement of the "bounty of the Nation." 
 
 The act of that year, July 29, left out the farmer' s beef 
 and pork; and granted 20 cents a barrel on all pickled 
 fish exported, and an additional bounty per ton as fol- 
 lows: One dollar and sixty cents per ton if the vessel 
 were under twenty tons; $2.40 per ton if under thirty 
 tons and over twenty; and $4 per ton if over thirty 
 tons.' 
 
9i THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The Act of March 3, 1819, changed this tonnage bounty 
 on vessels of more than five and not exceeding thirty 
 tons to $3.50 per ton. 
 
 These bounties were paid t6 the fishermen, although, 
 according to a judicial decision (The Harriet, 1 Story, 
 251), they were "under no restrictions as to the length 
 of their trips or the nature of their fisheries," nor as to 
 the distance they should sail from the shores of the 
 United States, "if they were without the limits of any 
 port or harbor on the seacoast." ^ 
 
 On May 26, 1824, it was enacted that, if a returning 
 fishing vessel, having complied with the terms of the 
 law, were wrecked, her owner should " be entitled to 
 the same bounty as would have been allowed, had such 
 vessel returned to port. ' ' 
 
 The Act of July 13, 1832, reduced the salt tax to ten 
 cents per bushel; the Act of March 2, 1833, provided 
 for a further reduction; the Act of July 4, 1836, re- 
 stored it to ten cents, where it remained till August 30. 
 1842. Then it was reduced to eight cents, where it re- 
 mained till salt was placed on the free list by the Act of 
 July 30, 1846. But the bounties and allowances were 
 not reduced. 
 
 Here we have extravagant and unauthorized bounties 
 for at least thirty-three years — from 1813 to 1846^ — eat- 
 ing up the substance of the people without any compen- 
 satory benefits to them. In 1840, according to Mr. Ben- 
 ton (2, 197), it took nearly all the salt revenue to pay 
 the bounties; the next year, he said, that revenue 
 would fall short of paying them; and in 1842 it would 
 not pay but half of them. And thus it went on from 
 bad to worse till the Act of 1846 provided that no bounty 
 should be allowed on pickled fish, and no allowance ex- 
 
 ' See Brightley's Digest, Volume I, page 384, foot notes. 
 
THE SOUTH, AGAINST THE NORTH. 95 
 
 cept a drawback equal to the tax ou the imported salt 
 used in caring them ; but even then the tonnage' bounty 
 was not repealed. 
 
 How much the people were compelled by law to con- 
 tribute as a free gift to the fishermen ' may never be 
 known ; but some estimate may be ventured from the 
 figures given by Mr. Benton. " In 1831," he says, " a 
 drawback of duty on the salt used in curing the fish ex- 
 ported would have been about 1160,000; but the bounty 
 and allowance amounted to $313,894." This was when 
 the tax was 20 cents per bushel. The next year it was 
 reduced to 10 cents, and for fourteen years it varied be- 
 tween eight and ten ; so that instead of a drawback of 
 less than $80,000, which was all they were entitled to 
 each year, supposing no variation of the amount of their 
 annual exports, they received nearly four times that sum. 
 In fourteen years this unearned increment would amount 
 to more than three million two hundred and seventy- 
 five thousand dollars. 
 
 Now add to this sum the result of a conservative esti- 
 mate for the preceding nineteen years, and we have over 
 six million two hundred and eighty thousand dollars as 
 the amount the New England fishermen were permitted 
 by unjust and unconstitutional Federal legislation to 
 pull out of the pockets of the toilers of the Union from 
 1813 to 1846, not including sums obtained by fraud. On 
 the question of constitutionality, the reader will be in- 
 terested in the opinions of two distinguished statesmen, 
 one of them having been a member of the Convention 
 which framed the Constitution. 
 
 *They were not contented with, the "free gift"; they perpetrated 
 frauds on the people's treasury, as is evident from the following pas- 
 sage in President Jackson's annual message of December 7, 1830 : 
 
 "Abuses in the allowances for fishing bounties have also been cor- 
 rected, and a material saving in that branch of the service thereby 
 effected. "—(See Statesman's Manual, Vol. II, p. 750.) 
 
96 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Duriag the discussion of the bill (1T92), which changed 
 the bounty from barrels and quintals to the tonnage of 
 fishing vessels, Hon. William B. Giles, of Virginia, ob- 
 jected to " the present section of the bill," which, he 
 said, "appears to contain a direct boanty on occupa- 
 tions"; and he denied its constitutionality. This was 
 on the 3d of February. On the 7th of that month Hon. 
 Hugh Williamson, of North Carolina, addressed the 
 House in opposition to this bounty. Among other things 
 he said : 
 
 " Establish the general doctrine of bounties, and all 
 the provisions (of the Constitution) I have mentioned 
 become useless. They vanish into air. * * * The 
 common defence and general welfare, in the hands of a 
 good politician, may supersede every part of our Con- 
 stitution, and leave us in the hands of time and chance. 
 
 * * -:.- -::• « * * * * 
 
 " Manufactures in general are useful to the Nation; 
 they prescribe the public good and 'general welfare. ' 
 How many of them are springing up in the Northern 
 States ! Let them be properly supported by bounties, 
 and you will find no occasion for unequal taxes. The 
 tax may be equal in the beginning; it will be suffi- 
 ciently unequal in the end. 
 
 " The object of the bounty, and the amount of it, are 
 equally to be disregarded in the present case. We are 
 simply to consider whether bounties may safely be given 
 under the present Constitution. For myself, I would 
 rather begin with a bounty of one million per annum 
 than one thousand. I wish that my constituents may 
 know whether they are to put any confidence in that 
 paper called the Constitution. * * * 
 
 " Unless the Southern States are protected by the 
 Constitution, their valuable staple and their visionary 
 wealth, must occasion their destruction. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 97 
 
 " Three short years has this Government existed; it 
 is not three years ; but we have already given serious 
 alarm to many of our fellow- citizens. Establish the 
 doctrine of bounties ; set aside that part of the Consti- 
 tution which requires equal taxes, and demands similar 
 distributions ; destroy this barrier ; and it is not a few 
 fishermen that will enter, claiming ten or twelve thou- 
 sand doUars, but all manner of persons ; people of every 
 trade and occupation may enter in at the breach until 
 they have eaten up the bread of our children. ' ' ' 
 
 Here were honorable men pleading for honest observ- 
 ance of that Constitution which they and their fellow- 
 members were solemnly sworn to support, but their 
 pleading was vain; the " breach " was made, and " the 
 bread of our children ' ' has been eaten up ! 
 
 Thus far we have considered the bounty system up to 
 1846. Since that year it has lost none of its vicious- 
 ness;. but the purpose of this presentation of the subject 
 would not warrant the search necessary to bring it up 
 to date. 
 
 But the bounties and allowances do not constitute the 
 only burden placed on the people for the benefit of the 
 Northeastern fishermen; international troubles have 
 added a considerable amount. 
 
 By the treaty of peace, 1783, United States citizens 
 were permitted to fish on the Bank of New Foundland, 
 in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and elsewhere, as formerly ; 
 and to take fish "on the coasts, bays, and crieeks" of the 
 British dominion in general, and to dry and cure them 
 in any unsettled bays, harbors, etc., but otherwise only 
 with the consent of inhabitants or owners of the land. 
 
 The treaty of Ghent, 1814, ignored the subject; and 
 the United States claimed, and Great Britain denied, 
 that the old treaty was still in force. 
 
 1 Elliot's Debates, Volume IV, pages 436-27. 7 
 
98 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 In 1818 a convention at London granted to United 
 States citizens the right to fish on certain parts of the 
 west and southwest coast of Newfoundland, on the 
 shores of the Magdalen Islands, and on the coast of 
 Labrador, east and north of Mount Toby; to dry and 
 cure fish on Labrador and the south coast of Newfound- 
 land while unsettled, or, otherwise, with local consent 
 as before; and to enter bays and harbors for wood, 
 water, shelter, and the repair of damages. 
 
 In 1854 the " Eeciprocity Treaty " confirmed the 
 rights granted in 1818, and conferred further the rights 
 of taking all fish, except shellfish, salmon, and shad, on 
 the coasts, and in the bays, harbors, and creeks (but not 
 in the mouths of rivers) of Canada, New Brunswick, 
 Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and the neighbor- 
 ing islands, and of curing and drying fish on all these 
 shores. 
 
 In 1866, previous notice having been given by the 
 United States authorities, according to its terms, the 
 treaty of 1854 was abrogated, which left the treaty of 
 1818 in force. The British-American authorities then 
 for five years made many complaints of aggressions on 
 the part of the New England fishermen; and a state of 
 tension and unpleasantness existed until the treaty of 
 Washington, 1871, was negotiated. By this most of the 
 provisions of the treaty of 1854 were revived. Accord- 
 ing to article 25 of this treaty Commissioners met at 
 Halifax to determine the justice of the complaints of 
 the Canadian authorities ; and this Commission awarded, 
 1877, damages to Great Britain in the sum of $5,500,000. 
 
 The fishing articles of the last treaty expired July 1, 
 1885; but a temporary arrangement was made whereby 
 the New Englanders had the privileges of the treaty ex- 
 tended through that season. Afterwards the business 
 was conducted under the treaty of 1818; but a failure 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 99 
 
 to arrive at an interpretation of Article I, satisfactory 
 to both sides, resulted in numerous vexations, annoy- 
 ances, and seizures of New England fishing vessels. In 
 1886 serious difficulties arose because of such seizures. 
 Retaliatory measures were threatened and in some in- 
 stances attempted, and public excitement over the situ- 
 ation became alarmingly inflamed. • 
 
 In 1887 Mr. Cleveland sought a conference with the 
 British authorities for the purpose of reaching a satis- 
 factory interpretation of the treaty of 1818; each side 
 appointed three Commissioners, who sat in Washing- 
 ton, formulated and signed a treaty on the 15th of Feb- 
 ruary, 1888. But the Senate refused to ratify it, where- 
 upon the President asked for power to institute retalia- 
 tory measures against Canada. 
 
 After that the whole subject remained in the condi- 
 tion established by the disputed treaty of 1818, except 
 some temporary or conditional arrangements. 
 
 All the expenses of these negotiations, together with 
 the award to Great Britain, were paid by people who, 
 a few hundred excepted, received nothing in return, 
 except the pleasure of having conferred further benefits 
 on a class which had been quartered on them for nearly 
 a century. 
 
100 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE VIII. 
 
 REVOLUTIONARY WAR DEBT^HOW NORTHERN TRADERS 
 AND SPECULATORS WERE ENRICHED AT THE EXPENSE 
 OF THESOUTHERN PEOPLE BY THE MANIPULATION OF 
 THE CONTINENTAL AND STATE DEBTS. 
 
 In the month of January, 1790, Mr. Hamilton, the 
 Secretary of the Treasury, laid before the House of Eep- 
 resentatives, at its request, " a plan for the support of 
 the public credit," proposing that the debts of the sep- 
 arate States be assumed by the Congress (without a 
 shadow of Constitutional authority),' and that they, 
 together with the debts contracted by the Continental 
 Congress,. be funded, provision for their payment to be 
 made by impost duties, excises, etc., instead of grants 
 of the ' ' waste lands ' ' which had been ceded by certain 
 States. 
 
 " Several resolutions," says Marshall's Life of Wash- 
 ington, "affirmative of the principles contained in the 
 report of the Secretary, were moved by Mr. Fitzsim- 
 mons, of Pennsylvania. To the first, which respected 
 a provision for the foreign debt"— $11,710,000— "the 
 House agreed without a dissenting voice. The second, 
 in favor of appropriating permanent funds for payment 
 of interest on the domestic debt, etc. , gave rise to a very 
 
 • In the Philadelphia Convention, August 21, Mr. Livingston of the 
 committee, appointed on the 18th, reported that "the Legislature 
 of the United States shall have power to discharge as well the 
 debts of the United States as the debts incurred by the several 
 States during the late war." The report was postponed. 
 
 On the next day Mr. Morris moved to amend Mr. Livingston's re- 
 port so that it would read as follows: "The Legislature shall fulfill 
 the engagements a,nd discharge the debts of the United States," 
 thus striking out the State debts. This was agreed to unanimously. 
 —El. Deb., I, 356-57, 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 101 
 
 animated debate." An amendment to allow the public 
 creditors only the then market value of their paper — 
 one-eighth of its face value — "was opposed by Messrs. 
 Boudinot, of New Jersey : Lawrence, Ames, and Good- 
 hue, of Massachusetts; Hartley, of Pennsylvania; and 
 Sherman, of Connecticut, and was defeated. " 
 
 "Mr. Madison," says Marshall,, "then.proposed to pay 
 the present holder of assignable paper the market price, 
 and give the remainder" — seven-eighths of its face 
 value — "to the original holder. This was opposed by 
 Messrs. Sedgwick, Lawrence, Ames, Gerry, and Good- 
 hue, of Massachusetts ; Boudiaot, of New Jersey; Hart- 
 ley, of Pennsylvania; Livermore, of New Hampshire, 
 and others, and was negatived. * * * 
 
 ' ' In the course of the debate severe allusions were 
 made to the conduct of particular States ; and" the opin- 
 ions advanced in support of the measure were ascribed 
 to local interests. 
 
 ' ' After an animated discussion of several days, the 
 question -was taken, and the resolution was carried by 
 a small majority; but soon afterwards the delegation 
 from North Carolina took their seats and changed the 
 strength of the parties. By a majority of two voices ' ' — 
 31 to 29 — "the resolution was recommitted and nega- 
 tived. 
 
 "A proposition to assume specific sunas from each 
 State was then urged, but with no better success." 
 
 Now, laying aside Marshall for awhile and turning to 
 Maclay's Journal, we get a^better insight into the mo- 
 tives and manoeuvers of tlti6 plotters. His account be- 
 gins some four months before Hamilton's plans were 
 submitted to the Congress. We quote extracts : 
 
 "August 28, 1Y89. There v?as a meeting of the Penn- 
 sylvania delegation. * * * The Chief Justice of 
 Pennsylvania and Mr. Petit '-' — Chairman of the Public 
 
102 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH, 
 
 Creditors — ' ' attended with a memorial from the public 
 creditors. * * * But it seems there was a further 
 design in the meeting. Mr. Morris " (Maclay's col- 
 league) "attended to dehver proposals from Mr. Hamil- 
 ton on the part of the New England men, etc. Now, 
 after the Eastern members have in the basest manner 
 deserted the Pennsylvanians,^ they would come forward 
 with proposals from Mr. Hamilton. * * * i spoke 
 early, and declared that * * * their only view was 
 to get a negotiation on foot between them and the 
 Pennsylvanians that they might break the connection 
 that is begun between the Pennsylvanians and the 
 Southern people. * * * 
 
 " January 14, 1790. This day the 'budget' as it is 
 called" — Hamilton's report — "was opened in the House 
 of Eepresentatives. An extraordinary rise in certificates 
 has been remarked for some time past. This could not 
 be accounted for, neither in Philadelphia nor elsewhere. 
 But the report from the Treasury explained all. * * 
 'Tis said a committee of speculators in certificates could 
 not have formed it more for their advantage. 
 
 "January 15. The business of yesterday will, I think, 
 in all probability damn the character of Hamilton for- 
 ever. It appears that a system of engrossing" (buying 
 up) " certificates has been carrying on for some time. 
 Whispers of this kind come from every quarter. Dr. 
 Elmer" (New Jersey Senator^ "told me that Mr. Morris 
 must be deep in it, for his partner, Mr. Constable, of 
 this place" (New York), "had one contract for forty 
 thousand dollars. The Speaker" (Muhlenberg, of Penn- 
 sylvania, who roomed in the same building with Mac- 
 lay) "hinted to me that General Heister" (a Pennsylva- 
 nia Eepresentative) "had brought over a sum of money 
 
 ^Maclay refers to the bargains between the speculators and the 
 advocates of certain places for the location of the Federal Capital. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 103 
 
 from Mr. Morris for this business ; he said the Boston 
 people were concerned in it. * * * Mr. Langdon " 
 (Senator from New Hampshire), " the old and intimate 
 friend of Mr. Morris, lodges with Mr. Hazard. Mr. 
 Hazard has followed buying certificates for some time 
 past. He told me he had made a business of it ; it is 
 easy to guess for whom. I told him, 'You are, then, 
 among the happy few who have been let into the secret. ' 
 He seemed abashed, etc. 
 
 " The Speaker gives me this day his opinion that Mr. 
 Fitzsimmons, " (of Pennsylvania, Chairman of the Ways 
 and Means Committee in the House of Representatives) 
 " was concerned in this business. * * * 
 
 "January 18. Hawkins, of North Carolina" (who 
 took his seat in the Senate five days before this), " said 
 as he came up from his home he passed two expresses 
 with very large sums of money on their way to North 
 Carolina for purposes of speculation in certificates. 
 Wadsworth " (a Connecticut Eepresentative) " has sent 
 off two small vessels for the Southern States, on the 
 errand of buying up certificates. I really fear the mem- 
 bers of Congress are deeper in this business than any 
 others. ' 
 
 " February 1. Mr. Hamilton is very uneasy, as far as 
 I can learn, about his funding system. He was here" 
 (at the boarding house) " early to wait on the Speaker, 
 and I believe spent most of his time in running from 
 place to place among the members. 
 
 "February 16. * * * Sedgwick, Lawrence, Smith 
 and Ames took the whole day. They seemed to aim all 
 
 ' The people outside, including those in the Southern States, were 
 kept in ignorance of what was going on in Congress. A s late as 
 February 25, 1791, a motion to open the doors of the Senate to the 
 public was defeated. — Maclay, page 401. 
 
104 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 at one point, to make Madison ridiculous. ^ Ames * * 
 had 'public faith,' 'public credit,' 'honor, and above all, 
 justice' as often over as an Indian would the 'Great 
 Spirit, ' and, if possible, with less meaning and to as lit- 
 tle purpose. 
 
 " February 19. * * *' a funding system will be 
 the consequence — that political gout of every govern- 
 ment which has adopted it. 
 
 ' ' With all our Western lands for sale and purchasers 
 every day attending at the Hall begging for contracts ! 
 What villainy to cast the debt on posterity ! But pay 
 the debt ! The speculators who now have them nearly 
 all engrossed, will clear above three hundred per cent. 
 
 " February 22. * * * Fitzsimmons gave me no- 
 tice of a meeting of the Pennsylvania delegation. * * 
 I went. The ostensible reason was to consult on the 
 adoption of the State debts, but the fact to tell us that 
 they were predetermined to do it. Mr. Morris swore 
 'By G — it must be done. ' ^ * * * 
 
 " March 2. * * * The Speaker was at the (Presi- 
 dent's) levee to-day. When he came home, he said the 
 State debts must be adopted. This, I suppose, is the 
 language of the Court. 
 
 " March 9. In the Senate chamber this morning But- 
 ler (South Carolina) said he heard a man say he would 
 give Vining (Delaware's Eepresentative) one thousand 
 guineas for his vote. * * * At length they risked 
 
 ' This was because he proposed to pay the difference between the 
 face and the market price of certificates to the original holders. 
 
 ^ This interesting information is taken from Alden's Cyelopoedia; 
 "He (Morris) was elected, 1788, to the first Senate. * * * The 
 office of Secretary of the Treasury, offered him by President Wash- 
 ington on the formation of his first Cabinet, was declined with the 
 recommendation that Alexander Hamilton be appointed," Mr. Mor- 
 ris having "been familiar with his views en the National finances 
 since 1781." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE KTOETH. 105 
 
 the question, and carried it, thirty -one votes to twenty- 
 six; * * * and this only in Committee (of the 
 Whole), with many doubts that some will fly off (on a 
 roll call), and great fears that the North Carolina mem- 
 bers win be in before a bill can be matured or a report 
 gone through. 
 
 " March 29. * * * This day the House of Eepre- 
 sentatives took up the report of the Committee of the 
 Whole House on the Secretary's report; and after 
 adopting the first three clauses (funding the Federal cer- 
 tificates), recommitted the one on the assumption of the 
 State debts — twenty-nine to twenty-seven; so that I 
 hope this will be rejected at last. 
 
 "Aprils. * * * The New Ehgland men despair 
 of being able to saddle us with their debts, and now 
 they care not whether they do any business or not. 
 
 "April 12. * * * The question was, however, 
 taken and lost, thirty-one against it and twenty-nine 
 for it, * * * Sedgwick, from Boston, pronounced 
 a funeral oration over it. * * * Fitzsimmons red- 
 dened like scarlet * * * Clymer's (Penn.) color, 
 always pale, now verged to a deadly white. * ^' * 
 Benson (New York) bungled like a shoemaker who has 
 lost his end. Ames's aspect * * * was torpid, as if 
 his faculties had been benumbed. Gerry exhibited the 
 advantages of a cadaverous appearance. * * * 
 Through an interruption of hectic lines and consump- 
 tive coughs he delivered himself of a declaration that 
 the delegates of Massachusetts would proceed no further 
 (withdraw from Congress), but send to their State for 
 instructions. Happy impudence sat enthroned on Law- 
 rence's brow. * * * Wadsworth hid his grief un- 
 der the rim of a round hat. * * * 
 
 "April 26. This day Mr. Clymer (Pennsylvania) made 
 his famous speech for throwing away the Western world. 
 
106 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 A noble sacrifice, truly, to gratify the public creditors 
 of Philadelphia. Eeject territory of an extent of an em- 
 pire so that it may be out of the power of Congress to 
 oblige the public creditors to take any part of it." 
 
 Thus Maclay's Journal reaches the point where we 
 dropped Marshall- -the point where the latter proceeds 
 as follows: 
 
 " In this state of things the measure is understood to 
 have derived aid from another, which was of a nature 
 to strongly interest particular parts of the Union. * * 
 
 " From the month of June, 1783, when the Continen- 
 tal Congress " — it was the Congress of the Confedera- 
 tion — "was driven from Philadelphia to New York by 
 a mutiny of a part of the Pennsylvania line," much 
 feeling had been manifested in various sections with ref- 
 erence to the permanent seat of the Federal Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 "At length a compact respecting the temporary and 
 permanent seat of Government was entered into be- 
 tween the friends of Philadelphia and the Potomac, 
 whereby it was stipulated that the Congress should ad- 
 journ to and hold their sessions in Philadelphia for ten 
 years, during which time buildings should be erected at 
 some place to be selected on the Potomac; and a bill 
 which was brought forward in the Senate * * * 
 passed both Houses by small majorities. ' This act was 
 immediately followed by an amendment to the funding 
 hilV — -consideration of which had been postponed till 
 the bargain could be consummated — "assuming twenty- 
 
 ' It passed the Senate by 14 to 13; and of its passage in thie House, 
 Hildreth (Sec. Ser., I, 312) says: " But as the secret of the bargain 
 of which it formed a part had been communicated to a few only of 
 the Northern members, just suflflcient to secure its passage, it then 
 encountered a violent opposition. The yeas and nays were called 
 upon it no less than thirteen times, and it finally passed only by the 
 close vote of 33 to 29." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 107 
 
 one millions five hundred thousand dollars of the debts 
 of the States; and in the House two members represent 
 ing districts on the Potomac, who had all along voted 
 against the assumption, declared themselves in its favor, 
 and the majoritj" was changed." 
 
 Thus closes Marshall's report of the proceedings on 
 page 260 of the fifth volume. The effect of this legisla- 
 tion is not touched upon till we reach page 399. There 
 he says : " As an inevitable effect of the state of society, 
 the public debt had greatly accumulated in the Middle 
 and Northern States, whose inhabitants had derived 
 from its rapid appreciation a proportional augmentation 
 of their wealth. ' ' 
 
 The augmentation of their wealth can be appreciated 
 when ^^fe examine the reperts of the Treasury. The dis- 
 bursements during the first seven administrations, in- 
 cluding those for the Louisiana purchase, the War of 
 1812, and the purchase of Florida, are given on page 
 1,549, Volume 2, of the Statesman's Manual, as follows: 
 
 Administration. Ordinary Expenses, Public Debt, 
 
 Washington's $15,893,708 |36,090,946 
 
 J.Adams's 21,348,351 18,957,963 
 
 Jefferson's 41,100,787 65,186,398 
 
 Madison's 144,684,939 83,438,943 
 
 Monroe's 104,363,446 101,366,111 
 
 J.Q.Adams's -. 50,501,914 45,303,533 
 
 Jackson'sv. 144,546,404 65,533,603 
 
 Of these disbursements the ordinary expenses during 
 the first three administrations were 178,341,84:6, and the 
 public debt payments were 1120,236,306; and since the 
 total debt in 1791 was 175,464,000, of which the por- 
 tion due to foreigners was $11,700,000, 80 per cent of 
 this $120,235,306, or $101,000,000, was the share of 
 Northern speculators, whereas they were entitled to 
 only one-eighth of this sum, or $12,625,000. Their clear 
 gain, therefore, since the average population for the first 
 
108 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 three censuses was 5,492,526, was about $80 out of the 
 pockets of every average family of five persons, includ- 
 ing all the slaves. 
 
 The reader is no doubt surprised that President Wash- 
 ington approved such a measure ; but if he could realize 
 the dangers threatening the Union if the bill had been 
 vetoed, his surprise would vanish. Maclay says, March 
 22, 1790, that " there seems to be a general discontent 
 among the members, and many of them do not hesitate 
 to declare that the Union must fall to pieces at the rate 
 we go on." On July 1, 1790, Senator Eufus King, of 
 New York, disappointed in his efforts to have Congress 
 remain in the city of New York, "sobbed, wiped his eyes, 
 and scolded and railed and accused * * * of bar- 
 gaining, contracting arrangements and engagements 
 that would dissolve the Union." On July 16, after it 
 had been decided that Congress should go to Philadel- 
 phia for ten years, Maclay says : "I whispered to Mr. 
 Morris, now he had got the residence (of Congress), it 
 was our province to guard the Union and promote the 
 strength of the Union by every means in our power, 
 otherwise our prize would be a blank." On July 18 Mr. 
 Morris said to the Pennsylvania delegation that, if Con- 
 gress adjourned without passing the funding and as- 
 sumption measures, " it might go to shake and injure 
 the Government itself. ' ' 
 
 The alarm created by the hungry speculators, of which 
 the present generation can have no adequate concep- 
 tion, included even Mr. Jefferson, the Secretary of State, 
 among its victims, and forced him into silence, if not 
 acquiescence. ' 
 
 ' " Jefferson complains in his Ana that, having but lately arrived 
 in New York" (he entered upon his duties as Secretary of State 
 March 22, 1790, two months and eight days after Hamilton's funding 
 scheme was proposed), "he was 'most ignorantly and innocently 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 109 
 
 So it was almost a case of " stand and deliver!" 
 "Give us the privilege of being quartered on the peo- 
 ple, or we will disrupt the Union, which is so dear to 
 your heart!" 
 
 It is hardly necessary to add here that, as Jeiferson 
 said, "this measure produced the most bitter and angry 
 contest ever known in Congress before or since the un- 
 ion of the States, ' ' or that it engendered in the hearts 
 of the Southern people a resentment against its authors 
 as well as its beneficiaries, which was handed down 
 from father to son long after the cause of it had become 
 a shadowy tradition, or that the quiet submission of the 
 masses of the people to this and other subsequent acts 
 of sectional injustice was due mainly to their want of 
 understanding as to the method of taxing them. If the 
 burden had been understood, as the whiske}" tax was in 
 Western Pennsylvania, the President might have needed 
 more than 16,000 troops to put down the insurrection. 
 
 Nor is it necessary to point out the immense superi- 
 
 made to ' hold the candle' in this intrigue, being duped into it by the 
 Secretary of the Treasury, and made a tool of for forwarding his 
 schemes, not then sufficiently understood. Hamilton, it seems, ap- 
 plied to Jefferson for his aid and cooperation as a member of the 
 Cabinet in calming an excitement, and bringing about the settle- 
 ment of a question which seemed to threaten the very existence of 
 the Federal Government. Jefferson proposed to Hamilton to dine 
 with him next day, on which occasion he would invite another 
 friend oi" two to see whether it 'were not possible, by some mutual 
 sacrifice of opinion, to form a compromise to save the Union. ' At 
 this dinner party the subject was discussed, Jefferson, as he assures 
 us, taking 'no part but an exhortatory one' ; and finally it was 
 agreed that, for the sake of the Union, White and Lee, two of the 
 Virginia members, should change their votes on the question of as- 
 sumption."— Hildreth, Second Series, Volume I, pages 311-13. 
 
 But Mr. Jefferson's name was used by the promoters of the cor- 
 rupt bargain, and he was represented to be one of their supporters. 
 "Mr. 'Morris," says Maolay, page 394, "also repeated Mr. Jefferson's 
 story, but I certainly had misunderstood Mr. Morris at the Hall, for 
 Jefferson vouched for nothing." 
 
110 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ority of the Northern States in banking faciUties, con- 
 ferred on thera by this act, or their superior ability in 
 manufacturing when "protection" began to invite cap- 
 ital iato that business. 
 
 But there was a lesson in this vile business far more 
 damaging than its injustice; it taught corrupt schemers 
 that the forms of law could be used as a means of rob- 
 bing the people, while the Constitution provided no 
 tribunal before which their cause could be pleaded. 
 And this lesson became "the direful spring- of woes un- 
 numbered"; it laid the foundations of the long strug- 
 gle for sectional supremacy. If " justice," " domestic 
 tranquillity," "the common defense," "the general 
 welfare," and " the blessings of liberty " had been the 
 sole object of Federal legislation, there could not possi- 
 bly have been any motive for sectional discontent, and 
 the long and disgraceful struggle for sectional domina- 
 tion, rendered more disgraceful during the last forty 
 years by malignity, mendacity and insolence.' 
 
 ' Washington's anxiety for the preservation of the Union, which 
 such legislation as this was threatening to destroy, was his leading 
 motive for accepting a second term. Jefferson wrote to him : "The 
 confidence of the whole country is centered in yon. * * * North 
 and South will hang together if they have you to hang on." And 
 Hamilton wrote: "It is clear that if you continue in office nothing 
 materially mischievous is to be apprehended; if you quit, mich is 
 to be dreaded." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. Ill 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE UNITED STATES BANK — ANOTHER SCHEME TO 
 ENRICH NORTHERN TRADERS. 
 
 In order to still further "strengthen the public credit" 
 and enhance the value of the public securities, the first 
 Congress, under the advice of Secretary Hamilton, con- 
 verted Robert Morris's Bank of North America into 
 The Bank of the United States. There was no Consti- 
 tutional authority for such an act; indeed, the power 
 to do it was deliberately withheld in the framing of the 
 Constitution; but it accorded with the views of Mr. 
 Hamilton thus expressed in the Philadelphia Conven- 
 tion: "We must establish a general and National Gov- 
 ernment, completely sovereign, and annihilate the State 
 distinctions and State operations; and unless we do 
 this, no good purpose can be answered."' It was in 
 fact, as President Jackson said in his seventh annual 
 message, "but one of the fruits of a system at war with 
 the genius of all our institutions — a system founded 
 upon a political creed * * * whose great ultimate 
 object, and inevitable result, should it prevail, is the 
 consolidation of all powers in our system in one central 
 government." 
 
 As on the question of assumption, the division was 
 mainly between the North and the South. The prin- 
 cipal advocates of the charter in the Senate, according 
 to Maclay, were King, of New York; Ellsworth, of 
 Connecticut; and Strong, of Massachusetts; and the 
 leading opponents were Izard and Butler, of South 
 Carolina, and Monroe, of Virginia. 
 
 The capital of the bank was to be $10,000,000, of 
 which the Federal Treasury was to subscribe $2,000,000 
 
 ' rates, page 141. 
 
112 THE SOUTH AGADSrST THE NORTH. 
 
 in specie, and private stockholders to subscribe the 
 remaining $8,000,000, one-fourth of it in specie and 
 three-fourths of it in public securities or " certificates"; 
 but since the certificates at that time, according to 
 Maclay, were worth only 81^ per cent of their nominal 
 value, here was a "gratuity," as President Jackson 
 called it in his message vetoing the bark bill, " of many 
 millions of dollars to the stockholders. ' ' 
 
 This was in principle as vile a scheme of robbery as 
 the assumption was; and justly did President Jackson 
 denounce its authors in the following language (eighth 
 annual message) : "The facts that the value of the stock 
 was greatly enhanced by the creation of the bank, that 
 it was well understood that such would be the case, and 
 that some of the advocates of the measure were largely 
 benefited by it, belong to the history of the times, and 
 are well calculated to diminish the respect which might 
 otherwise have been due to the action of the Congress 
 which created the Institution." 
 
 The meagre report of the discussion of the measure 
 in the Senate, and of the conduct of some of the mem- 
 bers — especially his colleague — reveals a deep disgust in 
 Maclay, and warrants the following remark : "I am now 
 more fuUy convinced than ever before of the propriety 
 of opening our doors. I am confident some gentlemen 
 would have been ashamed to have seen their speeches of 
 this day reflected in the newspapers of to-morrow. ' ' 
 
 The amount of wealth belonging to other people thus 
 transferred to the traders and speculators of the North- 
 ern States can never be ascertained ; but since they drew 
 6 per cent on their certificates out of the Federal Treas- 
 ury, and at least twice as much on the bank notes issued 
 on the certificates as a basis of circulation, their income 
 from the certificates was about 22 per cent of their value 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 113 
 
 at the time of their subscription ; and, as this was an 
 annual increment for many years, we may believe that 
 this bank was one among the powerful forces which 
 transferred the money of the South to the traders and 
 speculators of the North, and thus weakened the ties 
 which bound the Southern States to the Union. 
 
114: THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 REVOLUTIONARY PENSIONERS — ANOTHER AVENUE OP 
 APPROACH TO THE PEOPLE'S TREASURY. 
 
 Among the avenues of approach to the pockets of the 
 Southern people pension legislation was at an early day 
 found to be safe and easy. And it was soon thronged, 
 as it is to-day, by the undeserving as well as the deserv- 
 ing. 
 
 The evidence on this point is here copied from a 
 speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, 
 June 28, 1854, by Seaator Butler, of South Carolina, in 
 a deba,te with Senator Sumner, of Massachusetts. It 
 was an extract from a pamphlet written by a Virgin- 
 ian, Mr. Garnett. ' It is here condensed as follows : 
 
 " The white male population over sixteen years of 
 age in 1790 (the first census) was in Pennsylvania 
 110, Y88, and in Virginia 110,934; yet according to Gen- 
 eral Knox's (Secretary of War) official estimate, pre- 
 sented to the first Congress, Virginia furnished 56,T21 
 soldiers to the Eevolution, and Pennsylvania only 34,- 
 965. New Hampshire had a military population 513 
 larger than South Carolina, yet she contributed only 
 14,906 soldiers to South Carolina's 31,131. South Car- 
 olina's exceeded New York's 29,836, though New York 
 had much more than double the military population, 
 and 40 per cent more of total population. Connecticut 
 and Massachusetts did more than any of the free States; 
 yet we find that while South Carolina sent to its armies 
 37 out of every 42 citizens capable of bearing arms, 
 Massachusetts sent but 32, Connecticut 30, and New 
 Hampshire 18. 
 
 ' Perhaps Robert S. Garnett, a Representative in Congress from 
 181? to 1827. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. IIS 
 
 " We will pass at once to consider the action of the 
 Federal Government, and its value to the North when 
 the South was no longer her own mistress. The pen- 
 sion system throws a strong light on the tendency of 
 the people of the free States to quarter themselves on 
 the general Government. A calculation, founded on 
 data in Senate Document 307, 1838-'39, shows that 
 from lY91.to 1838, inclusive, $35,598,964 had been paid 
 for Eevolutionary pensions, of which the North received 
 $28,262,597, or 1127.29 for every soldier she had in the 
 war, and the South $7,336,366, or 149.89 for each of her 
 soldiers. The number of soldiers is here estimated ac- 
 cording to Knox's report, which confessedly does not 
 show, by a great deal, the full exertions of the South 
 in raising troops. ' Let us then compare the amounts 
 received with the white population of each section in 
 1790; and we find the free States in 1838 had received 
 $14.35 of Eevolutionary pensions for every soul in their 
 limits in the former year, while the South had received 
 only $5.61 for every white person in 1790. 
 
 The seven free States contributed to the expenses of the 
 
 war, $61,971,1T0 
 
 They had received in pensions up to 1838, ' 38,263,597 
 
 Balance in their favor, 33,708,573 
 
 The six slave States contributed, 53,438,133 
 
 They had received in pensions up to 1888, 7,336,367 
 
 Balance in their favor, 45,101,756 
 
 "To appreciate this injustice fully we must remember 
 
 ' Hundreds of gentlemen here and there in the South volunteered 
 for special occasions— as to meet the British at King's Mountain — 
 and failed to preserve records of their services ; and General Knox 
 says that, ' 'in some years of the greatest exeri ion of the Southern 
 States, theie are no returns whatever of the militia."— American 
 State Papers, Military Affairs, Volume I, page 14. 
 
116 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 that the South hot only paid into the Federal Treasury- 
 all she ever received back in pensions, but also $16,663,- 
 633 of the pensions given to the North. The inequality 
 of the apportionment has grown with the Northern 
 majority in Congress. In the first decennial period, 
 1791-1800, the free States received annually $58,000 
 more than the South. In the next period this yearly 
 excess was diminished to $43,000, but it rose to $339,- 
 000 in the third period. From 1821 to 1830 it averaged 
 $779,000, and from 1831 to 1838, $856,000. In like 
 manner grew the burden upon the South in paying the 
 pensioners at the North, besides those at home. In the 
 last period of eight years it was $9,750,000. 
 
 "According to General Knox's report the North sent to 
 the army 100 men for every 227 of military age in 1790, 
 and the South 100 for every 209. But in 1848 one out 
 of every 62 of military age in 1790 was a Eevolutionary 
 pensioner in the North, and only one out of every 110 
 in the South. New England alone had 3,146 of these 
 pensioners more than there were in all the slave States ; 
 and New York two-thirds as many, though she contrib- 
 uted not one-seventh as much to the war. 
 
 "The results are equally remarkable, if we have re- 
 gard to the whole number of pensioners. Revolutionary 
 and others. The expenses under this head for the four 
 years ending in 1837, were $8,010,061 in the free States, 
 and $2,688,101 in the slave States. New England alone 
 received $3,924,911, rather more than $2 a head for 
 ev6ry man, woman, and child in her limits. During the 
 same four years she paid in taxes to the Federal Treas- 
 ury, according to our tables, ' $1.72 per head. In 1840 
 there were not quite two and one-half times as many 
 pensioners at the North as at the South, but in 1848 
 
 ' Mr. Garnett's Pamphlet has not been found. 
 
[the south against the north. llY 
 
 there were more'than three times as many. New Eng- 
 land had more Revolutionary pensioners than the five 
 old plantation States had pensioners of all kinds" — 
 Revolution, War of 1812, Indian wars, etc. 
 
 So, it seems, the soldiers of the North who fought in 
 the Revolution were quartered on the South just as those 
 who "saved the life of the Nation" have been, though 
 not to the same extent. And there is no ground for 
 surprise at the following remark of Senator Butler in 
 the speech referred to above : 
 
 " The truth is, it is a wonder that South Carolina ever 
 went to the rescue of Boston. Boston made the war 
 with Great Britain. She was the first." 
 
 It also appears that after Massachusetts had 'precipi- 
 tated a confiict with Great Britain, and appealed for co- 
 operation to the other Colonies, South Carolina sent to 
 the war 88 per cent of her military population while 
 Massachusetts sent only 76 per cent, although Massa- 
 chusetts was engaged in active hostilities several months 
 before South Carolina was. 
 
 And, dear reader, this magnanimous recognition of 
 ' ' the cause of Boston as the cause of all ' ' was after- 
 wards held to be, ipso facto, a renunciation of South 
 Carolina's sovereignty; and the pretension was sup- 
 ported not only by argument but by fire and sword, and 
 shot and shell ! 
 
 Note. — Since the foregoing was written the docu- 
 ment referred to (Senate, No. 307, third session, Twenty- 
 fifth Congress) has been examined. It presents some 
 interesting tables, of which the following is reproduced 
 here as a sample, the States being rearranged so as to 
 preserve the distinction between the North and the 
 South which was made by Mr. Garnett. 
 
118 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Tn 1820 pension disbursements were as follows: 
 
 In New Hampshire, 1130,116 
 
 Vermont, 138,093 
 
 Massachusetts, 233,114 
 
 Rhode Island, 33,603 
 
 Connecticut, 130,723 
 
 New York, 378,806 
 
 New Jersey, 43,244 
 
 Pennsylvania, - 135,833 
 
 Ohio, 74,914 
 
 Total for the North, 1,355,444 
 
 In Delaware, |6,263 
 
 Maryland, 44,358 
 
 Virginia, 74,212 
 
 North Carolina, 21,843 
 
 South Carolina, 12,881 
 
 Georgia, 6,206 
 
 Temiessee, 28,07! 
 
 Kentucky. 55,064 
 
 Total for the South, 248,899 
 
 Now, the number of soldiers furnished by the two 
 sections, according to General Knox, was, in round 
 numbers, 222,000 by the North, and 147,000 by the 
 South ; and a simple calculation shows that this pen- 
 sion money was equal to $5.66 for every soldier of the 
 North, and $1.69 for every soldier of the South. And 
 from the contemplation of this marked difference be- 
 tween the men of the two sections in the purpose to 
 ha,ve themselves quartered, even deservedly, on the 
 taxpayers of the Union, the mind instinctively turns to 
 that great Southern man who refused any salary as 
 commander-in-chief of the military forces of the States, 
 and afterwards as President of the United States. ' 
 
 ' People who are not familiar with pension legislation will be in- 
 terested in knowing that the claims of applicants who can not come 
 in under general laws are referred to a Pension Committee, and, if a 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 119 
 
 favorable report is made, a special act is usually passed placing the 
 applicant on the pension roll. Such is the chief business now of 
 Friday night sessions, and has been for over thirty years. 
 
 But how the Revolutionary soldiers of the North got themselves 
 quartered on the South may possibly be explained by the following 
 remarks of President J. Q. Adams in his first annual message: 
 
 "The operation of the laws relating to the Revolution9,ry pen- 
 sioners may deserve the renewed consideration of Congress. The 
 Act of 18th of March, 1818, while it made provision for many meri- 
 torious and indigent citizens who had served in the war of indepen- 
 dence, opened a door to numerous abuses and impositions. To 
 remedy this, the Act of 1st May, 1830, exacted proofs of absolute 
 indigence, which many really in want were unable, and all suscep- 
 tible of that delicacy which is allied to many virtues, must be deeply 
 reluctant to give. The result has been, that some among the least 
 deserving have been retained, and some in whom the requisites both 
 of worth and want were combined, have been stricken from the 
 list."— Stats. Man., Volume I, page 587. 
 
120 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTEE XI. 
 
 UNJUST AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISPOSAL OF THE 
 PUBLIC LANDS. 
 
 From the unfair distribution of pension disbursements 
 we proceed to a phase of sectional legislation far more 
 reprehensible, and far more damaging to the people of 
 the Southern States, particularly those of the original 
 thirteen. It is the disposal of the public lands. 
 
 The honest, truth-loving, and justice-loving people 
 throughout the civilized world have unanimously set 
 the seal of their condemnation on the administration of 
 the public lands — the ager puhlicus — of ancient Eome, 
 their right to condemn being founded on the self-com- 
 placent assumption that no such misgovernment could 
 be possible in this age of enlightenment and Christian 
 civilizatign. But a parallel — and worse than parallel — 
 can be found in the United States. 
 
 Such is the testimony of official records ; and to these 
 the reader's attention is now invited. 
 
 Before entering upon them, however, a thorough un- 
 derstanding of the lesson they teach requires a brief pre- 
 liminary history of the sources from which and the con- 
 ditions on which the United States acquired the right 
 to dispose of the public lands. 
 
 After the Colonies declared themselves to be free and 
 independent States, there was a want of perfect har- 
 mony in their councils because the immense bodies of 
 unsettled lands in certain States (particularly Virginia, 
 North Carolina, and Georgia) would, in the event of a 
 successful termination of the war, become a mine of 
 wealth to the States in which they lay, to the exclusion 
 of the less fortunate States by whose cooperation these 
 lands would be wrenched from the control of George III. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 121 
 
 The first formal effort to remove this cause of dissat- 
 isfaction was made in the Continental Congress while it 
 was engaged (October, 177Y) in considering a commit- 
 tee report on the proposed Articles of Confederation. A 
 motion was made to insert a clause conferring on the 
 ' ' United States in Congress assembled ' ' the power to 
 "ascertain and fix the western boundary of such States 
 as claim to the Mississippi or South Sea, and lay out the 
 land beyond the boundary so ascertained into separate 
 and independent States, from time to time" ; but Mary- 
 laud was the only State which voted for it. 
 
 On the submission of the Articles to the State Legisla- 
 tures with the request for instructions to their respec- 
 tive delegations in Congress to approve and sign them, 
 objection was made to them in several States because 
 of the failure to provide for the transfer of the "waste 
 lands" to the TJnited States as common property. All 
 of them, however, except Maryland, acceded to the 
 Confederation, some of them declaring that their claim 
 to the lands as common property was not thereby aban- 
 doned. 
 
 In 1780 New York, in order to "contribute to the 
 tranquillity and safety of the United States of America, ' ' 
 and to promote a "Federal alliance on such liberal prin- 
 ciples as will give satisfaction to its respective mem- 
 bers, " tendered a cession of her claims to the western 
 territory. 
 
 The persistent jrefusal of Maryland to enter into the 
 Confederation, ana the consequent unsatisfactory prog- 
 
 ' The reader is requested to note New York's language. There 
 was nothing so far but an informal union of the States ; and when 
 she ratified the Articles she declared that her ratification should be 
 binding only after every other State ratified. And yet some of our 
 most distinguished statesmen have insisted that after July 4, 1776, 
 New York was simply a fraction of the "American Nation." 
 
122 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ress of the war, led to the adoption by the Congress, 
 in the same year, of a preamble and a resolution on the 
 subject, of which the following is sufficient for the pres- 
 ent purpose: "That it appears advisable to press upon 
 those States which can remove the embarrassments 
 respecting the western country, a liberal surrender of a 
 portion of their territorial claims, since they can not be 
 preserved entire without endangering the stability of 
 the general Confederacy ; to remind them how indispen- 
 sably necessary it is to establish the Federal Union on a 
 fixed and permanent basis, and on principles acceptable 
 to all its respective members." 
 
 Soon afterwards, in the same year, a resolution was 
 passed containing the pledge to the States that whatever 
 lands should be ceded "shall be disposed of for the com- 
 mon benefit of the United States." 
 
 New York's deed of cession, executed March 1, 1781, 
 and accepted in October, 1782, contained the condition 
 that the lands ceded "shall be and inure for the use 
 and benefit of such of the United States as shall become 
 members of the Federal alliance of the said States, and 
 for no other use or purpose whatsoever." 
 
 January 2, 1781, Virginia was moved by the disheart- 
 ening pace at which the war was dragging its slow 
 length along, and perhaps by the smoke of Arnold's 
 fires down the James, to offer a cession of her claims 
 to the lands north of the Ohio ; but some of her condi- 
 tions were not acceptable, and the Congress thought it 
 best to postpone acceptance till the conditions were 
 modified. 
 
 But Virginia's action and the pledge of the Congress 
 induced Maryland to ratify the Articles and complete, 
 March 1, 1781, the Union of the States.' 
 
 'In No. XXXVIII of the Federalist (Madison) this passage occurs: 
 "One State, we may remember, persisted for several years in refus- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 123 
 
 On October 20, 1783, the Virginia Legislature passed 
 an act, in which the objectionable conditions were with- 
 drawn, and her deed of cession was executed on the 1st 
 of March, 1784. It contained substantially the same 
 proviso as New York's deed, namely, that the lands 
 should be " considered as a common fund for the use 
 and benefit of such of the United States as have become 
 or shall become members of the ' Confederation or Fed- 
 eral alliance of the said States, Virginia inclusive, ac- 
 cording to their usual respective proportions in the gene- 
 ral charge and expenditure, and shall be faithfully and 
 hona fide disposed of for that purpose, and for no other 
 use or purpose whatsoever." — Hinsdale, 242. 
 
 During the three succeeding years Massachusetts and 
 South Carolina ceded their claims to vacant lands, and 
 Connecticut ceded hers, except that she reserved what 
 has since baen known as the Western Reserve — all of 
 them imposing the same condition as that copied from 
 Virginia's deed. 
 
 In 1784 North Carolina offered a cession of her title 
 
 ing her concurrence, although the enemy remained the whole pe- 
 riod at our gates. * * * Nor was her pliancy in the end effected 
 by a less motive than the fear of being chargeable with protracting 
 the public calamities, and endangering the event of the contest." 
 
 And he might have added that Virginia's consent to cede her 
 lands was supposed to be due to Arnold's invasion of the State in 
 the winter of 1780-'81. 
 
 And the question may well be asked, whether Maryland would 
 have yielded ai any time, if she could have foreseen the hostile oc- 
 cupation of Baltimore, May 5, 1861, by Massachusetts Iroops under 
 Gen. Benjamin F. Butler, the disarming of the citizens by that 
 officer, the arrest arid confinement in Fort McHenry of Greorge P. 
 Kane, Marshal of the city police, the government of the city usurped 
 by Gen. N. P. Banks, another Massachusetts officer, who succeeded 
 Butler, and the arrest and confinement of every prominent man in 
 the State — including thirteen members of the Legislature when it 
 assembled — who was unwilling to submit tamely to "the despot's 
 heel." 
 
124 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 to Tennessee, but it was not accepted. In December, 
 1Y89, however, another offer was made, and a deed was 
 executed February 25, 1790. 
 
 And in 1802 Georgia ceded her title to the territory 
 which afterwards became- Alabama and Missisippi, re- 
 ceiving in the adjustment of her "Yazoo claims" 
 $6,200,000 — she and North Carolina imposing the con- 
 ditions imposed by Virginia.' — State Papers, 1st sess., 
 10th Cong. 
 
 On the express condition, therefore, that the "waste 
 lands" should be disposed of for the common benefit of 
 all the States were they placed under the control of the 
 Congress, that body being empowered by the States "to 
 dispose of and make all needful rules acd regulations 
 respecting" them. 
 
 Thus far we have accounted for all the "waste lands" 
 belonging to the States up to 1803, except Kentucky 
 and Vermont. The offer of bounty lands in the "Dis- 
 trict of Kentucky" by the Legislature of Virginia to 
 those of her citizens who had been employed in her mili- 
 tary service, and the purchase of Transylvania by Hen- 
 derson's Company, led to numerous settlements; and 
 the desire of the growing population for admission into 
 the Union as an independant State induced Virginia to 
 give her consent December 18, 1789; and the new State 
 was admitted February 4, 1791. Vermont, a bone of 
 contention between New York and New Hampshire, as- 
 serted its independence and organized a government in 
 January, 1777, maintained its independence all through 
 the war and the period of the Confederation ; and New 
 York, relinquishing her claims to the unappropriated 
 
 ■ Those who are fond of ancient history wUl be interested in the 
 following proviso in North Carolina's deed (and substantially the 
 same in Georgia's) : "No regulations made or to be made shall tend 
 to emancipate slaves" in the ceded territory! 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 125 
 
 lands in consideration of 130,000, she was admitted into 
 the Union March 4, 1791. .- ;;;: 
 
 In 1803 was inaugurated the policy of acquiring for- 
 eign territory (without Constitutional authority).' 
 
 In that year the people of the United States paid or 
 I)ound themselves to pay 127,267,621 for the Louisiana 
 Territory, and in addition thereto certain "French spo- 
 liation claims" ; and subsequent purchases were as in 
 the following table: 
 
 In 1819 Florida for 16,489,768 
 
 1849 New Mexico and Arizona for 15,000,000 
 
 1850 Texas lands for 5,000,000 
 1853 Gadsden treaty lands for 10,000,000 
 1856 more Texas land for 7,500,000 
 1867 Alaslsa f or = 7, 200. 000 
 
 The total cost of these lands up to 1883— the year in 
 which the Public Land Commission made a full report 
 of the purchases, sales, grants, etc. — was $94,353,383, 
 including interest on the $5,000,000 of Texas stock. 
 
 In addition to this there had been paid for "quieting 
 and purchasing the occupancy title of Indians "up to 
 June 30, 1880, $187,328,904. To this, again, must be 
 added the expenses of the survey and disposal of lands 
 from March 4,1784, to June 30, 1880, amounting to 
 $46,563,302. The grand total of the cost of the public 
 lands, therefore, not including rents- of buildings for the 
 use of the G-eneral Land Office in Washington City, was 
 $328,249,489. 
 
 These lands, paid for by all the States in proportion 
 
 'Mr. Jefferson said in a letter to Mr. Breckinridge that "the Con- 
 stitution has made no provision for our holding foreign territory, 
 and still less for incorporating foreign nations into our Union." — 
 Stats. Man., I, 339. 
 
 '^ See Report of Public Land Commission, 1883, pages 17, 18 and 19. 
 
126 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 to their several populations,' belonged to all the States 
 as common property, and the Congress was morally 
 bound to dispose of them, as well as the lands ceded by 
 the States, for the common benefit. 
 
 Such is the history of the donated and purchased ter- 
 ritory, and of the expressed or implied conditions im- 
 posed on the United States — conditions recognized as 
 obligatory by the Committee on Public Lands in 1810, 
 when they reported against allowing donations of land 
 for services in the French-Indian war, declaring in their 
 report: "Nor would the purposes for which the several 
 States have ceded land * * warrant the appropriation of 
 those lands for the satisfaction of the claims in ques- 
 tion." ^ 
 
 But the records of Congressional legislation .warrant 
 the declaration which it is the object of this chapter to 
 justify, that, in the disposal of the public lands, the rights 
 of those who ceded or paid for them have not been faith- 
 fully respected — that a policy was adopted nearly eighty 
 years ago, and has been followed ever since, of grant- 
 ing lands not only for purposes forbidden by the ex- 
 pressed or implied terms on which the control of them 
 was acquired, bat for purposes not included among the 
 powers delegated by the States to any department or 
 officer of the Federal Government. 
 
 Authority on the latter point would be superfluous if 
 selfishness, ambition, and party spirit had not from the 
 beginning sought to obscure the truth, and prepare the 
 people for quiet submission to unauthorized legislation. 
 
 ' It is beyond q uestion that this statement coald be very much 
 modified if we had the necessary data. During all the years of 
 these purchases the people of the Southern States consumed, per 
 capita, a much larger share of imported goods than the people of 
 the Northern States ; and paid a correspondingly larger suui into 
 the Federal Treasury. 
 
 ' State Papers, Volume II, Second Session, Eleventh Congress. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE. NORTH. 127 
 
 In Mr. Jefferson's sixth annual message occurs the 
 following passage, which strikes modern ears as a re- 
 markable deliverance from the Executive mansion: 
 
 "When both these branches of revenue shall in this 
 way be relinquished, there will still ere long be an ac- 
 cumulation of moneys in the treasury beyond the in- 
 stallments of the public debt which we are permitted 
 by contract to pay. * * * The question, therefore, 
 now comes forward: to what objects shall these sur- 
 pluses be appropriated, and the whole surplus of import, 
 after the entire discharge of the public debt ? " ' He then 
 proceeds to advise that they be devoted "to the great 
 purposes of the public^education, roads, rivers, canals, 
 and such other objects of public improvement as it may 
 be thought proper to add to the Constitutional enumera- 
 tion of Federal powers. * * * The subject is now 
 proposed for the consideration of Congress, because, if 
 approved by the time the State Legislatures shall have 
 deliberated on this extension of the Federal trusts, and 
 the laws shall be passed and other arrangements made 
 for their execution, the necessary funds will be on hand 
 and without employment. I suppose an amendment 
 to the Constitution, by consent of the States, necessary, 
 because the objects now recommended are not among 
 those enumerated in the Constitution, and, to which it 
 permits the public moneys to be applied." 
 
 But the Constitution was not amended. And although 
 Mr. Jefferson approved some acts of the Congress un- 
 warranted by the Constitution as expounded by him- 
 self, no unb^'ased student of that compact can entertain 
 a doubt of the soundness of his exposition. 
 
 This ought to be sutificient; but the importance of the 
 subject will justify the summoning of one more witness. 
 
 ' It is surprising that he did not recommend a reduction of tariff 
 rates, and the avoidance of a surplus. 
 
128 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 That witness was James Madison, an active and influ- 
 ential member of the Convention which framed the Con- 
 stitution, the author of twenty-nine of the papers in the 
 Federahst, and a controlhng spirit (opposed by Patrick 
 Henry, George Mason, James Monroe, Benjamin Har- 
 rison, and other able statesmen) in securing the adop- 
 tion of the Constitution by Virginia. His veto message 
 of March 3, 1817, contains the following: 
 
 "Having considered the bill * * * entitled ' An 
 act to set apart and pledge certain funds for internal 
 improvements, ' and which sets apart and pledges funds 
 ' for constructing roads and canals, and improving the 
 navigation of watercourses, in ^rder to facilitate, pro- 
 mote, and give security to internal commerce among the 
 several States, and to render more easy and less expen- 
 sive the means and provisions for the common defence, ' 
 I am constrained by the insuperable difficulty I feel in 
 reconciling the bill with the Constitution of the United 
 States, to return it with that objection. * * * * 
 
 "The legislative powers vested in Congress are speci- 
 fied and enumerated in the eighth section of the first 
 article ; * * * and it does not appear that the power 
 proposed to be exercised by this bill is among the enu- 
 merated powers, or that it falls by any just interpreta- 
 tion within the power to make laws necessary and proper 
 for carrying into execution those or other powers vested 
 by the Constitution in the government of the United 
 States. 
 
 "v'The power to regulate commerce among the several 
 States, ' can not include a power to construct roads and 
 canals, and to improve the navigation of watercourses 
 * * * without a latitude of construction, departing 
 from the ordinary import of the terms, strengthened by 
 the known inconveniences which doubtless led to the 
 grant of this remedial power to Congress. * * * To 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 129 
 
 refer the power in question to the clause 'to provide for 
 the common defence and general welfare, ' would be con- 
 trary to the established and consistent rules of interpre- 
 tation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration 
 of powers which follows the clause nugatory and im- 
 proper. Such a view of the Constitution would have 
 the effect of giving to Congress a general power of leg- 
 islation, instead of the defined and limited one hitherto 
 understood to belong to them; the terms 'common de- 
 fence and general welfare' embracing every object and 
 act within the purview of a legislative trust. * "' * 
 
 "I have no option but to withhold ray signature from 
 it, cherishing the hope that its beneficial object may 
 be attained by a resort for the necessary powers" to the 
 States.' 
 
 But no amendment was proposed to the States ; and 
 from that day to the present the powers of Congress 
 over education, roads, canals, and navigable or unnavi- 
 gable watercourses have never been enlarged. 
 
 It is not among the objects of this presentation of 
 truth to impugn the motives of all those who inaugurated 
 or pursued the Governmental policy whose results, as 
 will be shown, have enriched some States at the ex- 
 pense of others, and have "multiplied, dev'^eloped, and 
 strengthened the North " at the expense of the South. 
 Their motives may, with exceptions, have been unim- 
 peachable; and charity should prefer to attribute their 
 disregard of the moral obligation imposed on them by 
 their official stations to ignorance of their duties, to 
 
 ' The correctness of this definition of the powers of Congress can 
 not be impeached by producing evidence that Mr. Madison was not 
 always governed by it. It is the deliberate interpretation of a writ- 
 ten instrument by one who assisted in writing it, of whom a late 
 sketch in a Cyclopoedia says: "In the knowledge of history and Con. 
 stitutional law he was without a peer among the statesmen of his 
 time." 
 
130 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ambition/ to party spirit/ or to the supposed behests of 
 a code of morals superior to any written law. 
 
 The acts of the Federal Government disposing of the 
 public lands, organizing governments in them, etc. , fall 
 easily and naturally into three gr^oups, the first ending 
 with April 30, 1789, and the second ending with March 
 4, 1861. 
 
 Since there was no ' ' waste land ' ' belonging to the 
 United States at the time of the framing and adoption 
 of the Articles of Confederation, no power was confer- 
 red on the "United States in Congress assembled" to dis- 
 pose of the lands ceded by Virginia and other States ; but 
 as the lands were a "common stock" — property — there 
 was no question of the right of the Congress to adopt 
 measures for disposing of them according to the condi- 
 tions of the cessions. As soon, therefore, as the United 
 States came into possession of the Northwest Territory 
 acts were passed for the sale of the lands. 
 
 But the Congress did not stop at the boundary pre- 
 scribed by the donors. It overstepped them ; and not 
 only this, the celebrated ordinance for the government 
 of the territory was adopted by eight States in the face 
 of the promise that the assent of at least nine States 
 should be necessary to the validity of any act disposing 
 of the lands. On the question of the Constitutionality 
 of the act of the Congress, even if nine States had as- 
 sented, let us hear from Mr. Madison. In No. XXXVIII 
 of the Federalist, he said : 
 
 "Congress has assumed the administration of the 
 stock. They have begun to render it productive. Con- 
 gress have undertaken to do more ; they have proceeded 
 to form new States, to erect temporary governments, 
 
 ' See Note I. 
 2 See Note K. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 131 
 
 to appoint officers for them, and to prescribe the con- 
 ditions on which such States shall be admitted into the 
 Confederacy. All this has been done,, and done with- 
 out the least color of Constitutional authority.'" One 
 of the "conditions " in the Ordinance of 1787 was the 
 anti-slavery article.^ Such was the legislation dur- 
 
 ing the first period ; and it was an appropriate prelude 
 to what came afterwards. 
 
 In establishing the precedents in the early years of 
 the second period, however, there was faithful compli- 
 ance with the Constitution and with the conditions im- 
 posed in the deeds of cession; and, what, with our mod- 
 ern ideas, migh t appear to have been nothing but pater- 
 nalistic gratuities, were grants of land as compensation 
 to organized communities for the relinquishment of cer- 
 tain rights which would belong to them when they be- 
 came sovereign States. In other words, compacts were 
 entered into between the United States and each one of 
 such inchoate States, intended to restrain the latter 
 from interfering with the "primary disposal" of lands 
 within its borders or levying taxes so as to discriminate 
 against non-resident purchasers. 
 
 When in 1802 the Congress was engaged in " laying 
 out" Ohio, and was proposing to add new conditions to 
 those then in force, Mr. Giles, of Virginia, Chairman 
 of the committee having the business in charge, con- 
 sulted Mr. Gallatin, the Secretary of the Treasury, as 
 to the measure the committee ought to adopt. Mr. Gal- 
 latin wrote him a letter (State Papers, Miscellaneous, 
 Vol. i), the substance of which was as follows : 
 
 'It was claimed by the "free soilers" during the discussion of the 
 Missouri question and often afterwards, that this unauthorized Ordi- 
 nance was a precedent justifying the pretension that the Congress 
 possessed the power to restrict slavery to the original slave States. 
 
 2 See Note L. 
 
132 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The Northwest Territory having taxed lands of non- 
 residents higher than those of residents, thereby dis- 
 couraging intended purchasers and diminishing sales, it 
 was advisable to secure a relinquishment of the right to 
 discriminate, since "all legislative powers which of right 
 pertain to an independent State must be exercised at 
 the discretion of the Legislature of the new State, un- 
 less limited either by the Articles (old compact) or by the 
 Constitution of the United States, Indeed," he con- 
 tinued, " the United States have no greater right to 
 annex new limitations than the individual State may 
 have to infringe those of the original compact." 
 
 "By common consent" also, security "should.be ob- 
 tained" against sale of land by the State for taxes be- 
 fore the purchase-money had been paid in and while the 
 United States had a lien on the land. He was of the 
 opinion that "an equivalent" should be offered for the 
 relinquishment of such taxes, which the new State 
 could "accept or reject." He proposed an exemption 
 from State taxes for ten years after full payment for 
 the land, and that on their part the United States should 
 grant as an equivalent: 
 
 1. "Section numbered sixteen" in each township for 
 public schools; 
 
 2. The Scioto salt springs with the six-miles reserva- 
 tion thereto attached — to be leased or sold by the State 
 for only short periods, so as to prevent a salt monopoly: 
 and 
 
 3. One-tenth of the net proceeds of all land sales to 
 be applied to building turnpikes and roads from the Ohio 
 Eiver to the rivers running into the Atlantic. 
 
 These grants, he thought, would facilitate sales, and 
 the turnpikes and roads would strengthen the bonds of 
 the Union.' 
 
 \These turnpikes and roads were not to be in the State of Ohio. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. I'S'i 
 
 The recommeudations of Mr. Gallatin were adopted 
 by the committee ; and the act passed by the Congress, in 
 compliance with conditions in the deeds of cession, au- 
 thorizing the people to frame a State government, was 
 the bill reported by the committee,' with the addition of 
 "the salt springs near the Muskingum River," with the 
 adjoining reservation, etc., and the substitution of one- 
 twentieth (five per cent) for one-tenth of the net pro- 
 ceeds, etc. This compact was accepted by the Ohio Con- 
 vention ; and it was adopted as the precedent in subse- 
 quent enabling acts until the reasons for the grants were 
 forgotten, and personal ambition, party spirit, and 
 sectional advantage began to be controlling factors in 
 land legislation. 
 
 This point was reached in 1816, when Indiana was 
 admitted. To her, besides grants similar to those made 
 to Ohio, presents were made of two entire townships 
 (46,080 acres) for a seminary, and four sections of land 
 (2, 560 acres) for fixing the seat of government. 
 
 This was the precedent and the excuse for the policy 
 pursued ever since of donating to all new States organ- 
 ized in the "waste lands" vast areas for high schools, 
 scientific schools, universities, art schools, etc., etc., 
 while the people in the old States have as a general rule 
 supported educational institutions by taxing themselves. 
 
 This last statement needs two qualifications which 
 may as well be inserted here: 
 
 1 . The first is that certain proceeds of the sales of pub- 
 lic lands were, by certain acts of Congress, deposited 
 with the twenty-six States (1841), the District of Colum- 
 bia, and the Territories of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Florida, 
 according to their representative population ; and that 
 this money was devoted by the Legislatures of some of 
 the States to the support of free public schools. This 
 was done in North Carolina; but the securities in which 
 
134: THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the money was invested were destroyed by the war be- 
 tween the sections. 
 
 2. The second is that an act was passed July 2, 1862, 
 donating land scrip to all the States in aid of Agricul- 
 tural and Mechanical Colleges (a condition based on a 
 still further usurpation), of which North Carolina's allot- 
 ment was 270,000 acres. This scrip could not be located 
 by the State ; it had to be sold ; and as nearly all of the 
 money of the country was in the Northern States, the 
 land speculators up there paid fifty cents per acre for 
 the scrip — the highest offer the State could get. But 
 the North forced on us the infamous "reconstruction 
 measures, " and this fund went down among the wrecks 
 of that period. 
 
 The Indiana act was followed closely in all enabling 
 acts till 1848, when it was enacted that two sections (16th 
 and 36th) in each township should be donated for schools 
 to Oregon and all States subsequently organized or ad- 
 mitted ; but there were many acts granting lands for 
 special purposes not embraced in the legitimate sphere 
 of Congressional action. To these the reader's atten- 
 tion is now directed. 
 
 Among them (beginning with that of May 26, 1824,) 
 was the act of September 4, 1841, which granted to the 
 new States and the organized Territories 500,000 acres 
 each for internal improvements (canals, roads, railroads, 
 etc.), this amount to include any previous grants for 
 the same purposes ; and under the operation of this and 
 the previous acts all these new States and Territories 
 (18 of them) received 500,000 acres each, except five of 
 them, their amounts being as in the following table : 
 
 Ohio, 1,243,001 acres 
 
 Indiana, 1,609,861 " 
 Illinois, 533,000 " 
 
 Iowa, 1,333,079 " 
 
 Wisconsin, 1,183,728 " 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 135 
 
 In 1850, September 27, an act was passed donating 
 320 acres to each unmarried person, and 640 acres to 
 each head of a family, who would settle in Oregon and 
 Washington, on their complying with certain conditions. 
 Under it 8,000 claims were registered. 
 
 In 1854, July 22, an act was passed donating lands on 
 about the same conditions as those of the preceding act 
 to actual settlers in New Mexico, Kansas, Nebraska, and 
 Utah, but the amount to each was to be 160 acres. 
 
 By numerous acts up to August 3, 1864, 3,630,000 
 acres were granted to Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, 
 and Michigan, for -constructing canals. 
 _ By four acts, beginning March 2, 1849, and ending 
 March 12, i860, there were granted 80,000,000 acres of 
 swamp lands to the public-land States. 
 
 By numerous acts, beginning September 20, 1850, and 
 ending February 18, 1859, there were granted to public- 
 land States and Territories 23,495,734 acres for the con- 
 struction of railroads, of which the largest share went 
 to Illinois for the building of the Illinois Central Eail- 
 road. ' 
 
 The value of this " bounty of the Nation" can be ap- 
 preciated from the following statement on page 392 of 
 the Septembei' number, 1890, of the Political Science 
 Quarterly: "The State debt of Illinois has been paid off 
 and the State government for years has been supported 
 by a tax on the gross receipts of the Illinois Central 
 Eailroad." Indeed, as far back as 1868, it was assferted 
 by respectable authority that the State government of 
 Illinois was supported by a tax (7 per cent) on the gross 
 receipts of this railroad. 
 
 In pursuance of this policy of paternalism the organ- 
 
 ' The total amount certified or patented to the State up to June 
 30, 1896, according to the Land Office Report for that year, was 
 2,595,053 acres. 
 
136 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ized Territories have been governed from Washington 
 City, and the salaries of all the Territorial officers — leg- 
 islative, executive, and judicial— have been paid out of 
 the pockets of all the people of all the States. ' The total 
 amount of the people's money thus given away may 
 be approximately estimated from the appropriations for 
 Arizona and New Mexico for the fiscal year ending June 
 30, 1895. For New Mexico the amount was $47,400, 
 and for Arizona it was $41,660. And this, although 
 the population of New Mexico is larger than that of the 
 State of Montana, and Arizona's is larger than that of 
 the State of Utah. ^ If we assume $40,000 as the cost 
 of government in each of the Territories which have be- 
 come States of the Union, the total amount paid out of 
 the people's pocket for this purpose up to 1880 was 
 about $16,000,000, which added to the expenditure al- 
 ready accounted for swells the cost of the public lands 
 and their management to $344,249,489, not including 
 the expenses of government in Indian Territory and 
 Oklahoma. ^ 
 
 ' See Note M. 
 
 " Persons who were born in the Territories, and foreigners who 
 settled in them, enjoying the benefits of largesses of land and money, 
 came to regard the Federal Government as the fountain of many of 
 their blessings. Whatever its usurpations might be, therefore, they 
 stood manfully by it, and supported it in its march toward impe- 
 rialism. 
 
 In later years its powers have become in their estimation almost 
 boundless. For example, in a pastoral letter to Catholics, May 12, 
 1898, Archbishop Gross, of Portland, Oregon, said: 
 
 "It has been objected that if Spain has Its demoralizing bull fights, 
 America has its prize fights. Yes ; but it did not require a decree of 
 the Pope to prohibit them. Our noble Government has prohibited 
 the prize fights, and has done all in its power, and successfully, too, 
 to stop this barbarous sport." The author of that paragraph can, 
 perhaps, see no difference between our "National" Government and 
 the Government of Spain or Russia. 
 
 ' Estimated from data in General Land OfHce Report, 1896, pages 
 197-98.. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THH NORTH. 137 
 
 Thus far we have considered the unauthorized grants 
 of! public lands up to 186] ; and we have found the rec- 
 ord sufficiently discreditable to the statesmanship of the 
 ante-bellum period. But since 1861 there has been 
 something of a revelry in extravagance and an ostenta- 
 tious display of contempt for the rights of the people and 
 for the obligations which are supposed to bind public 
 servants. Take, for example, the act of April 19, 1864, 
 authcriziog the people of Nebraska to form a State (Jon 
 stitution. It grants (1) two sections of land in each 
 township for public schools, and, when such sections 
 have been sold or otherwise disposed of, other land 
 equivalent thereto; (2) twenty entire sections for the 
 erection of public buildings at the Capital; (3) fifty 
 entire sections for a penitentiary; (1) seventy- two en- 
 tire sections for a State University; (5) all salt springs 
 within the State, nat exceeding twelve in number, with 
 six sections of land adjoining, or as contiguous as may 
 be to each ; and (6) five per centum of the net proceeds 
 of the sales of all pubhc lands in the State which had 
 been or should be sold. This was a donation, according 
 to statistics in the General Land Office Eeport for 1896, 
 of 2, 839, 004 acres of land and about $3, 400, 000 in money, 
 or 98 acres and $117 apiece for every human being in 
 the Territory in 1860. 
 
 By several acts, beginning with March 3, 1865, 700,000 
 acres were donated for canal purposes in Ohio, Illinois, 
 Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin.' 
 
 By several acts, beginning with July 5, 1862, there 
 have been granted to public-land States 14,823,457 acres 
 for the construction of railroads. ^ 
 
 By several acts, beginning with March 3, 1863, there 
 
 1 Ibid. 
 
 2 Ibid. 
 
138 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 have been granted 3,910, li4 acres for wagon roads in 
 Wisconsin, Michigan and Oregon. ' 
 
 Between March 4, 1861, and June 30, 1871, according 
 to the General Land Office Eeport for 1871, there were 
 donated for railroads and wagon roads a-total of 197,- 
 711,406 acres. 
 
 By the act of August 18, 1894, provision is made for 
 granting 1,000,000 acres of arid laad to each of the arid- 
 land States on condition tuat each grantee shall "cause 
 to be irrigated, reclaimed, ' ' etc. , so much land within 
 its borders ; and sites for reservoirs, right of "w ay for 
 canals and ditches (aU to be surveyed, selected, and su- 
 pervised by Federal officers at the expense of the people) 
 are to be granted. And possibly, after all the pubh"c 
 lands have been disposed of, irrigation will remain a per- 
 petual object of "National solicitude," as is foreshad- 
 owed in the act of August 30. 1890, which directs that 
 "in all patents for lands hereafter taken up, etc., it shall 
 be expressed that there is reserved from the lands in 
 said patent described, a right of way thereon for ditches 
 or canals constructed hy the authority of the United 
 States." And this possibility becomes a probability 
 when we grasp the full significance of the following 
 recommendation of the Commissioner of the General 
 Land Office in his report for 1896: " I again call your 
 attention to the necessity which must arise in the near 
 future, for the creation of a .National Commission whose 
 functions shall be to regulate the distribution of those 
 waters which have their source in a superjacent State, 
 and which have heretofore been used in common by the 
 people of that and the subjacent States," etc. ^ 
 
 'Ibid. 
 
 ^ At a meeting of a body of gentlemen in Washington on Decem- 
 ber 15, 1897, calling themselves "The National Board of Trade, " 
 "the question of artificial irrigation was next discussed, the< basj^ 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 139 
 
 Among the grants, already partly included in amounts 
 meationed, was a donation of 140,646,166 acres to the 
 Pacific Railroads, besides a loan of $64,000,000 secured 
 by second mortgages on the roads. 
 
 Several grants of smaller amounts, but large aggre- 
 gates, have beeu made for town sites in new States, the 
 number of such towns as far back as 1869 being 13,000, 
 with populations ranging from 500 to 5,000;' for univer- 
 sities and high schools, normal schools, charitable insti- 
 tutions, county and State public buildings, reform 
 schools, schools of mines, scientific schools, penitentia- 
 ries, rivers, roads, canals, etc., etc. 
 
 But even all these grants, together with others equally 
 violative of the Constitution and the pledge made to 
 the States and to the original grantors or purchasers, 
 were pardonable in comparison with those provided for 
 in the act of May 20, 1862. That donated a homestead 
 free of cost, except a fee amounting to about eleven 
 cents per acre, to any citizen who is the head of a family, 
 or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and 
 to anj foreigner who has filed a declaration to become 
 a citizen, provided that he proves his "loyalty. " ^ That 
 
 being a resolution offered by the Pittsburg Chamber of Commerce, 
 which recommended that Congress enact laws to place the super- 
 vision of all irrigation enterprises in the hands of the United States 
 authorities where such work is undertaken upon waterways affect- 
 ing interstate navigation. * * * The resolution was adopted 
 and a committee appointed to have charge of the matter and report 
 at the next meeting." — Pregs Dispatch. 
 
 ' See General Land OflBce Report, 1869. 
 
 ^ This proviso has never been stricken out of the law. The only 
 amendment bearing on the qualifications of the beneficiary, so far 
 as the Southern people are concerned, is in the Act of 1866, to this 
 effect : 
 
 " No distinction or discrimination shall be made in the construc- 
 tion or execution of this act on account of race or color." 
 
140 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 is to say, the people of the Southern States who, or 
 whos9 ancestors, ceded or partly paid for these lands, 
 were excluded from this " bounty of the Nation,'" even 
 the dregs of foreign countries' being preferred to them.^ 
 
 The total number of homesteaders up to June 30, 
 1896, (according to the General Land Office F.eport for 
 that year, p. 91) was 508,936, and the total number 
 of acres patented to them was 67,618,451, the figures for 
 that year being 36,548 original entries and 4,830,915 
 acres. This was an avei'age annual gratuity of nearly 
 1,800,000 acres for the whole period after the passage 
 of the act, and of nearly three times as much during 
 the last year. 
 
 The drain of wealth from the Southern States — par- 
 ticularly those of the original thirteen— by the unwar- 
 ranted diversion of the public lands from being a source 
 of revenue to the common treasury of the States, to 
 the enrichment of States, corporations, and individuals 
 in other sections, has resulted in a marked comparative 
 deficiency of the appliances and conveniencies of civili- 
 zation in the original Southern States and to a consider- 
 able extent in all of them. 
 
 The untold wealth relinquished by Virginia, North 
 Carolina, and Georgia, for the common expenses of the 
 
 ' At the time of the passage of this act there was no restriction on 
 immigration. Indeed, it was reserved to a more enlightened age to 
 discover that immigration is "commerce," and, therefore, subject to 
 Congressional control! 
 
 '' A bill was passed in the Federal Senate on May 4. 1897, to donate 
 homesteads to settlers upon "the public lands acquired prior to the 
 passage of this act by treaty or agreement from the various Indian 
 tribes or upon military reservations which have been opened to set- 
 tlers," etc. And among the yeas are the names cf ten Senators 
 from Southern States, viz : Two from Alabama, one from Florida, 
 one from Georgia, one from Louisiana, one from Maryland, two 
 from North Carolina, one from South Carolina, and one from Vir- 
 ginia. — Daily Record, Fifty- fifth Congress, First Session, page 1,177. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 141 
 
 States, has been given away to others, ever}^ promise 
 made to the States has been repudiated, including the 
 one which induced Maryland to unite her fortunes with 
 those of the other States in 1781. ' 
 
 But the whole story has not been told. Beginning 
 with the first sale in 1787, and ending with the year 
 1880,^ we find that the net receipts into the treasury 
 from the sales of public lands (including those which 
 cost nothing) were 1200,702,849. Subtract this sum 
 from the $344,24:9,189, and we have 1143,546,640 as the 
 amount the people have paid through incompetent or 
 dishonest servants, for which they have received abso- 
 lutely nothing in return. Here is a triple crime: (1) 
 A century of violations of the Constitution of the Union ; 
 (2) a century of violations of the expressed or implied 
 conditions on which the disposal of the public lands was 
 conferred on the Congress ; and (3) a robbing of the peo- 
 ple of an amount equal to about $2.00 per capita of the 
 present population to pay the expenses incurred in 
 squandering an empire. 
 
 To the pcitriotic Southern man, however, while right- 
 eously indignant at this century of spoliation of. his in- 
 heritance and misappropriation of the fruits of his toil, 
 the purpose of his despoilers has been even more exas- 
 perating. This purpose has been honestly, if- not arro- 
 gantly, avowed in the halls of the Congress. In a speech 
 delivered in the Senate September 25, 1888, ' by Senator 
 Plumb, of Kansas, the following passage occurs: 
 
 ' In Mr. Webster's speech ia the Senate, March 7, 1850, speaking 
 of Virginia's cession, he said : "There have been received into the 
 Treasury of the United States eighty milHons of dollars, the pro- 
 ceeds of the sales of the public lands ceded by her. If the residue 
 should be sold at the same rate, the whole aggregate will exceed 
 two hundred millions of dollars." 
 
 * Public Land Commission Report, 1883, page 17. 
 
 'Congressional Record. Fiftieth Congress, First Session, page 
 q,764. 
 
142 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "It is therefore but natural that when the Democratic 
 Party succeeded to power in 1885, after twenty-four years 
 of enforced retirement, it should at once attack the Re- 
 publican administration of the public lands. It was to 
 be expected that its leaders should seek to break down 
 the system which had in the previous quarter century 
 so signally multiplied, developed and strengthened the 
 North.'" 
 
 And, dear reader, the disgraceful work is not yet 
 ended. According to the report of the General Land 
 Office for 1896, pages 194-8, the total number of acres 
 disposed of up to that time was 845,854,117, and the 
 acres yet remaining to be given away or sold were 600,- 
 040,671. By the old rule of three, therefore, (omitting 
 all the squandering after 1880, of which the statistics 
 have not been examined), we find that the people must 
 pay more than 1102,000,000, and, if we include Alaska, 
 their burden will be more than $166,000,000, as the cost 
 of squandering the remaining acres. 
 
 But this calculation does not present the matter in its 
 most alarming aspect ; something like geometrical pro- 
 gression should have been employed ; the party which 
 has "so signally multiplied, developed, and strengthened 
 the North, ' ' gave away for railroads and wagon roads, 
 alone, during its first fourteen years of control, 6^^ times 
 as much land as had been given for such purposes dur- 
 ing all the preceding seventy-seven years of Congres- 
 sional management; and the average annual receipts 
 into the Federal treasury (about $854,000) from 1861 to 
 1880 were only a little over one-fourth of what they 
 were ($3,115,000) from 1804 to 1861. 
 
 'Nevada, -with a population of only 6,850 in 1860 (Census Reports) 
 was erected into a State on October 31, 1864, the enabling act hav- 
 ing been passed on the 31st of the preceding March. By this 
 shameful proceeding the party in power gained three electors for 
 Lincoln and Johnson, and "the North" gained two Senators. 
 
THE SOITTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 143 
 
 The people may, therefore, expect to shoulder a much 
 heavier burden than $166,000,000. The costs of the liti- 
 gation with the Pacific Eailroads must also be paid, as 
 well as the losses due to the acceptance of inferior secu- 
 rity from those roads for the $64,000,000 loaned to them. 
 To these sums also must be added the cost of the Court 
 of Private Land Claims, for which $51,536 were appro- 
 priated in 1892, the expenses of the Commissioner of 
 (Pacific) Eailroads, for whom $14,420 were appropriated 
 in 1892, and the costs of the Geological Survey (the 
 director of which was created by the act of March 3, 
 1879) for which the annual appropriation is more than 
 $400,000, being $484,640 for the fiscal year ending June 
 30, 1894. 
 
 NOTB I. 
 
 We naturally shrink from uncovering the "nakedness"' of our 
 fathei's ; but the truth sometimes obliges us to do it. 
 
 There being but one political party in 1824, the choice for Presi- 
 dent was a choice of persons ; and the field was full of candidates. 
 "The names of many gentlemen," says the Statesman's Manual, 
 " were mentioned as candidates, but the number gradually dimin- 
 ished until the contest seemed to be confined to William H. Craw- 
 ford, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Gen, 
 Andrew Jackson." 
 
 Each one of these sought to commend himself to the people by an 
 imposing proof of his patriotism. The "American system" of secur- 
 ing the "home market" to manufacturers in the United States was 
 adopted that year; and the first " internal improvement " biU be- 
 came a law, appropriating 130,000 for surveys of roads and canals. 
 This measure, as Mr. Benton is unkind enough to assert in his 
 Thirty Years' View, was supported by all the candidates because 
 each one hoped to be carried into the White House on such a wave 
 of popularity as that which conveyed DeWitt Clinton to a high seat 
 among heroes when the Erie Canal was completed. 
 
 Note K. 
 
 Discreditable as it may seem, party advantage has had much to 
 
 do with the management of the public lands; and the " bounty of 
 
 the Nation" has not unfrequently been lavished on a Territory 
 
 emerging into Statehood to influence the political complexion of its 
 
144 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 first Legislature, and the party affiliations of its first two Senators. 
 Nor does it appear that any political party has been guiltless of ex- 
 travagance for such a purpose. 
 
 Tn 1841 those who for the first time had come into control of Fed- 
 eral legislation, granted to the new States 500,000 acres, each, of the 
 public lands for internal improvements; but worse than this, they 
 directed the Secretary of the Treasury to deposit with the States 
 certain proceeds of the sales of public lands, and in the same session 
 they directed that cfflcial to borrow 113,000,000 to supply deficien- 
 cies alleged to have been created by their political opponents dur- 
 ing the preceding Administration. This same Congress doubled the 
 per centum (making it 10) of the proceeds of the sales of public lands 
 in their borders to Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Alabama, Missouri, Mis- 
 sissippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and Michigan, after Deeemler 31, 1841. 
 
 In August, 1848, the party in power, trembling at the spectre of a 
 Waterloo in the Presidential election of that year, gave evidence of 
 its solicitude for the advancement of the people in the higher walks 
 of intelligent citizenship by doubling the gift of school lands in the 
 new States. 
 
 In 1850 the party which had come into power under the -wing of 
 General Taylor, strengthened its support in certain quarters by do- 
 nating 3,830,093 acres of land for the construction of the Illinois 
 Central and the Mobile and Ohio River Railroads. 
 
 But all this was moderation when compared to what was done 
 in 1864. The possibility of disaster to the rulers in the election of 
 that year led them to make grants to Nebraska am.ounting, in all, 
 to 98 acres of land and $in in money to every human being in the 
 Territory, as shown by the census of 1860; and these same rulers 
 gained two new Senators a short time afterwards by erecting that 
 Territory, with a population of 38,841, into a State! 
 
 Note L. 
 
 One of the "conditions" in the Ordinance for the government of 
 the Northwest Territory was the anti- slavery article; and since 
 there has been much discussion as to who was entitled to credit for 
 that article, it may be acceptable to present here the history of it, 
 as it is given by Hinsdale and other writers. 
 
 After Virginia determined to cede her claims to the territory north 
 of the Ohio, a plan for forming a new State in that territory was in 
 contemplation; and on June 16, 1783. two hundred and eighty five 
 officers of the Continental line of the army (155 from Massachusetts, 
 34 from New Hampshire, 46 from Connecticut, 36 from New Jersey, 
 13 from Maryland, and 1 from New York) petitioned Congress to 
 assign and mark out the boundaries by Lake Erie on the north, 
 etc , etc. One object was to exchange §1,000,000 of " Continental " 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 145 
 
 money for land; and another was to have bounty lands assigned to 
 the petitioners. 
 
 Afterwards. Virginia's cession having been perfected, an "Ohio 
 Company of Associates" was organized at the "Bunch of Grapes," 
 in Boston, March 3, 1786, which next year, while Congress was con- 
 sidering a reported Ordinance for the government of the Northwest 
 Territory, sent Gfen. S. H. Parsons, of Middletown, Conn., to engineer 
 their scheme through the Congress. Prom May 11 to July 4 there 
 was no quorum, many of the members, including nearly all the 
 ablest, being in the Convention in Philadelphia; and hence noth 
 ing was done. General Parsons having gone home, Dr. Manasseh 
 Cutler, of Ipswich, Mass., took his place as agent. 
 
 On July 9 a new committee was apijointed, and reported an Ordi 
 nance on the 11th with no reference to slavery. This committee 
 was composed of Can'ingtou and Lee. of Virginia; Dane, of Massa- 
 chusetts; Kean, of South Carolina; and Smith, of New York, only 
 eight States being pre.sent — Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, 
 Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia — 
 and eleven of the eighteen delegates being Southern men. 
 
 The proposition of the Ohio Company was that they would pur- 
 chase a large body of land, provided a new article excluding slavery 
 were added to the Ordinance already virtually agreed to ; and this 
 was done by the vote of every delegate present except Yates, of New 
 York. And This "immortal" work was done by tight States, 
 although the pledge made to the land States, October 10, 1780, de- 
 clared that the lands should be granted or settled "at such times 
 and under such regulations as shall hereafter be agreed on by the 
 United States in Congress assembled, or nine or more of them." 
 
 The Ordinance, therefore, was passed without authority ; nor was 
 there any "humanity" in it. It was solely a business transaction. 
 The Congress needed money; the trading and speculating classes of 
 the Northeastern States had it. The Ohio Company took 1,.500,000 
 acres, and the Scioto Company, under the leadership of Col. AVil 
 liam Duer, of northern New York, purchased 3,500,000 acres. "The 
 total price agreed upon was 83,.500, 000; but as the payments were 
 made in public securities worth only 12>^ cents on a dollar, the real 
 price was only eight or nine cents per acre." ' 
 
 As to the "humanity" involved in the bargain, the reader can 
 form his own opinion. Dr. Cutler,'Gen. Rufus Putnam, General 
 Parsons, and others led an expedition of New Englanders to the 
 Territory in 1788, laid out and settled Marietta, and they, with the 
 
 > This was equivalent to a gratuity of §53,063,500 to these Northern 
 gentlemen, an amount equal to about one dollar from every human 
 being in the United States at that time. 
 
 10 
 
146 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 other Northern people who went and sei tied the lands of the Scioto 
 Company, shaped that pubhc sentiment which forbade the immi- 
 gration of free negroes, and, in the State Constitution of 1803, de- 
 nied the ballot to free persons of color ! 
 
 And yet the columns of magazines and newspapers up North have 
 groaned for years under the weight of articles written to prove that 
 all the glory emanating from that "immortal" act belongs to Nathan 
 Dane, of Maswichusetts, forgetting that Dane's Article jjrovided, 
 also, for the return of fugitive slaves. 
 
 The "hargain"' in this Ordinance brings to uiind another "human- 
 itarian," who went out to Kansas with " the Bible and Sharpe's 
 rifles." It was Eli Thayer, of Massachusetts, who "organized the 
 Emigrant Aid Company in 1853-'54 to settle the new State of Kan- 
 sas with anti slavery colonists. " In his Kansas Crusade, p&ge 5S, 
 he exhibits the "bargain" instinct as follows: 
 
 "My original plan was, as we have seen, to form a business com- 
 pany, to be conducted on bui-iness principles, able to make good div- 
 idends to its stockholders annually, and, at its close, a full return of 
 all the money originally invested." 
 
 Note M. 
 
 The Territories have been governed so long by the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, and at the expense of the people of all the States, that the 
 supposition is almost unavoidable that such paternalism is war 
 ranted by the Constitution, or, that, at any rate, it could be justified 
 by that necessity which is ever the tyrant's excuse for his usurpa- 
 tions. 
 
 But there is not "the least color of Constitutional authority." un- 
 less we regard the settlers in the Territory as property, since it is 
 "property" which the Congress is empowered "to dispose of and 
 make all needful rules and regulations respecting." Nor does the 
 claim of necessity rest on any better suijport^ The people of Ver- 
 mont took care of themselves, at their own expense, during all their 
 Territorial existence (from 1776 to 1791) ; and the people of California 
 — the most heterogeneous and turbulent mass of human beings to 
 be found anywhere in the world — governed themselves at their own 
 expense dui-ing their Territorial existence (1848 tc 1850). And there 
 is no imaginable reason why the peoijle of Kansas or Colorado could 
 not have done likewise. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 147 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE WAR OP 1813, THE CONDUCT OP NEW ENGLAND, 
 AND THE WAR DEBT. 
 
 The unjust and unconstitutional congestion of the 
 money of the country in the "regions north of the Po- 
 tomac," by Federal legislation, gave to those who had 
 been the chief beneficiaries an undue control over the 
 administration of the government, which they have 
 never relinquished. 
 
 The first opportunity they had to show their power 
 in an effective way was when the war broke out in 1812. 
 
 The discontent produced in New England by the em- 
 bargo and the non -intercourse acts then began to be 
 more demonstrative, and the opposition to Mr. Madison 
 and his advisers strengthened and grew in violence. 
 They threw all the obstructions they could in his way ; 
 they demanded out of the Federal treasury the last cent 
 due on their Federal securities; they gathered into their 
 banks, in specie, every cent due them from the banks 
 of the Central, Southern, and Western States, and then 
 refused to loan their money to the Administration. — 
 Carey. 
 
 The reader, familiar with the progress of I'ederal legis- 
 lation .up to 1812, can realize Mr. Madison's embarrass- 
 ment unless he could secure loans of this money. There 
 was no power in Congress to "emit bills of credit" — the 
 clause in the final draft of the Constitution granting 
 this power was dehberately stricken out by the Conven- 
 tion. Hence loans of some sort were absolutely neces- 
 sary to a successful prosecution of the war. 
 
 This want of power was deplored by Mr. Jefferson, who, 
 in a letter to Mr. Eppes, Chairman of the Ways and 
 Means Committee, written in June, 1813, said: " Th& 
 
148 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 States should.be applied to to transfer the right of issu- 
 ing circulating paper to Congress exclusively, in per- 
 petuum, if possible, but during the war at least." ' 
 
 On March 1+, 1812, before war was declared, Congress 
 authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to borrow 
 $11,000,000. By September 1st he had secured only 
 15,847,212, of which he paid §5,486,4:78 on the public 
 debt, about one-half of it interest, and the other half 
 principal. 
 
 On December 1, 1812, after the war had been going 
 on about six months, the Secretary reported that all he 
 had obtained or secured during the whole year— includ- 
 ing that naentioned in the preceding paragraph — was 
 113,100,200, a part of it in exchange for 6 per cent 
 Treasury notes. ^ 
 
 On February 8, 1813, Congress authorized a loan of 
 $16,000,000; and four days afterwards the Secretary 
 opened the subscription, but with little success. 
 
 On March 25th he again opened the subscription, 
 offering not only 6 per cent per annum, but an annuity 
 of 1 per cent per annum for 13 years. But this proposi- 
 tion brought him only §3,956,400; and in his despera- 
 tion he invited proposals in writing. Thereupon offers 
 amounting to about $17,000,000 were received, some 
 demanding an annuity of 1^ per cent in addition to 6 
 per cent at par, but most of them requiring a, 6 per 
 cent stock at the rate of 88 per cent. On these terms, 
 leaving to subscribers the option, the loan was effected. 
 
 *'In conformity with public notification the same terms 
 -were extended to those persons v/ho had subscribed on 
 the first opening of the subscription (February 12), and 
 they have the same option ; which if the stock, at the 
 
 1 It was transferred in 1863 without applying to the States. 
 ^ These were United States bonds of small denominations. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 149 
 
 rate of 88 per cent be taken, is equivalent precisely to 
 a premium of 113.63 11-100 for each $100 loaned to the 
 Government.'" 
 
 On these terms the 116,000,000 loan was effected, 
 yielding to the Treasury $13,819,024. 
 
 As interesting souvenirs of those times, two of the 
 proposals are appended. The first is as follows : 
 
 "Sir:— I will take $2,056,000 worth of loan author- 
 ized by Congress, receiving 6 per cent stock at the rate 
 of $88, money, for $100 of 6 per cent stock, payable in 
 New York by installments as proposed by you, or as 
 otherwise may be agreed on. I am to receive i per 
 cent for procuring subscriptions, etc. 
 
 " John Jacob Astoe. 
 
 "Philadelphia, Aprils, 1813. 
 
 "Hon. Albert Gallatin, 
 
 "Secretary of the Treasury. " 
 
 The second is as follows : 
 
 "We offer to take as much stock as we can ($8,000,- 
 000), bearing interest at 6 per cent, payable quarter-an- 
 nually, the stock not to be redeemed before December 
 31, 1825, at the rate of $88 for a certificate of $100, pro- 
 vided you will agree to allow us the option of accepting 
 the same terms that may be granted to persons lending 
 money to the United States by virtue of any law for 
 the service of the year 1813, that Congress may pass be- 
 fore the last day of the present year. Also that i of 1 
 per cent be allowed us on the amount to which the pres- 
 ent proposals will be accepted. 
 
 " David Parish, 
 " Stephen Girard. 
 
 "Philadelphia, April 5, 1813." 
 
 ' American State Papers, Finance, Volume II, page 633. 
 
150 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 On page 661 of the volume is a list of subscribers, 
 1813, who took $7,000,000 of stock, which is interesting 
 enough to be appended here. 
 
 Jonathan Smith, Philadelphia, 82,153,000 
 
 Jacob Barker, New York, 1,435,000 
 
 O. Campbell, Philadelphia, 468,000 
 
 Pitz- Greene Halleck, N. Y., 288,000 
 
 Thomas W. Baoot, Charleston, S. C, 221,000 
 
 Wiliam Cochran, Boston, Mass., 151,000 
 
 George T. Dunbar, Baltimore, 147,000 
 
 G. B. Vroom, New York, 144,000 
 
 Henry Kuhl, Philadelphia, 144,000 
 
 Isaac McKim, Baltimore, 144,000 
 
 Whitehead Fish, New York, 118,000 
 
 John Duer, Baltimore, 118,000 
 
 "William Cochran, Baltimore, 110,000 
 
 Jacob G. Koch, Philadelphia, 108,000 
 
 WiUiam Whann, Washington, D. C. 73,000 
 
 James Cox, Baltimore, 72,000 
 
 Thomas Cumming, Augusta, Ga, , 72,000 
 
 On March '2i, 1814, an act was passed authorizing the 
 borrowing of $25,000,000, to be redeemable December 
 30, 1826, the interest at 6 percent payable quarterly ; 
 and appropriating $8,000,000 annually to pay the inter- 
 est and ultimately the principal. 
 
 In pursuance of this act proposals were invited on the 
 4th of April, and the offer of $5,000,000 by Jacob Barker, 
 of New York, April 30, was accepted as follows : 
 
 "Sir: — Eighty-eight dollars in money for each $100 
 in stock, and, if more favorable terms are offered any 
 who lend any of the same sum, you may be favored in 
 the same way. 
 
 "G. W. Campbell, 
 ' ' Secretary Treasury. ' ' 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 151 
 
 On the same terms the following persons loaned the 
 sums annexed to their names: 
 
 Peleg Tahnan, Bath. Me., §25,000 
 
 Levi Cutter, Portland, Me., 05,000 
 
 John Woodman, Portland, Me., ,50,000 
 
 Henry Langdon, Portsmouth, N. H., 40,000 
 
 J. W. Treadwell, Saleui, Mass., 416,000 
 
 Thomas Perkins, Salem, Mass., 25,000 
 
 "William (iray, Boston, Mass., 197,000 
 
 Samuel Dana, Boston, Mass., 35,000 
 
 Jesse Putnam, Boston, Mass., 67,900 
 
 Amos Binney, Boston, Mass., 35,000 
 
 Nathan Waterman, Providence, R. I., 35,000 
 
 James D'Wolf, ' Bristol, R. I., 100,000 
 
 John Shearman, Newport, R. I., 35,000 
 
 Elisha Tracey, Norwich, Conn., 30,000 
 
 Michael Shepard, Hartford, Conn., 25,000 
 
 Abraham Bishop, New Haven, Conn., 25,000 
 
 John Taylor, Albany, N. Y., 150,000 
 
 Alamon Douglass, Troy, N. Y., 50,000 
 
 Smith & Nichol, New York., 80,000 
 
 Harmon Hendricks, New York, 42,000 
 
 G. B. Vroom,. New York, 500,0,00 
 
 Samuel Flewelling, New York, 257,000 
 
 Jacob Barker, New York, 5,000,000 
 
 Whitehead Pish, New York, 350,000 
 
 Gruy Bryan, Philadelphia, • 50,000 
 
 Thomas Newman, Philadelphia, 108,000 
 
 Samuel Caswell, Philadelphia, 28,000 
 
 Paul Beck, Philadelphia, 50,000 
 
 William Patterson, ^ Baltimore, 50,000 
 
 George T. Dunbar, Baltimore, 191,000 
 
 James Cox, Baltimore, 71,000 
 
 Dennis Smith, Baltimore, 200,000 
 
 'James D'Wolf made his fortune toy following 1 he slave trade ; 
 was elected to the United States Senate in 1831 toy the Legislature 
 
 of Rhode Island ; resigned his seat in 1835 ; removed to Havana ; and 
 lived there several years as president of a slave-trading company. 
 
 ^ Wiliam Patterson, whose daughter married Jerome Bonaparte, 
 was an Irishman, who, as the owner of a line of ships, had become 
 the wealthiest man in Maryland, except Charles Carroll, of Carroll- 
 ton. 
 
152 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Samuel Elliot, Washington, D. C, 100,000 
 
 Alexander Carr, Washington, D. C, 33,000 
 
 William Warren, Washington, D. C, 43,500 
 
 Anthony Cazonave, Alexandria, Va., 30,000 
 Charles Cochran, Charleston, S. C, ' 350,000 
 
 David Alexander, Charleston, S. C, 60,000 
 
 John Lukins, Charleston, S. C, 70,000 
 
 Thomas W. Bacot, Charleston, S. C, 115 000 
 
 James Taylor, Newport, Ky., 35,000 
 
 William Whann, Washington, D. C, 190,000 
 
 Robert Jennings, Richmond, Va., 176,000 
 
 On these sums, paid for, says the Statesman's Manual 
 (Vol. I, p. 363), with depreciated State-bank bills (all, 
 except a few banks, it says, in New England, having 
 suspended specie payments),- these parties cleared 13.61 
 per cent at the time of the loan, and a fraction over 
 6.94 per cent, interest per annum, which had to be paid, 
 in part, by the men who were in the armies enduring 
 all the hardships and exposing themselves to all the dan- 
 gers incident to war, in defense of the rights, honor 
 and dignity of the United States! And while all but 
 seven of the subscribers lived north of the Potomac, 
 only six lived in Massachusetts, although as the States- 
 man's Manual says (Vol. I, p. 354), "the war may be 
 said to have been a measure of the South and West, to 
 take care of the interest of the North" — New England 
 — "much against the will of the latter." 
 
 The entire amount borrowed is said by good authori- 
 ties to have been about §64,000,000 ; but the public debt 
 in 1817 was nearly 186,000,000 more than it was in 
 1811, and, if we add the more than §5,000,000 borrowed 
 and paid out again in 1812, the total war debt was 
 nearer §91,000,000; and since the population was about 
 8,000,000, the per capita debt was §11.37, nine-tenths 
 of it due "north of the Potomac." 
 
 All this embarrassment of the Administration, which 
 ultimately drove Mr. Madison to abandon in the treaty 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 153 
 
 of peace the very ground on which war was declared — 
 the impressment of seamen — was the work of the com- 
 mercial class in New England, aided by their sympa- 
 thizers in other States. * "Shortly after the declaration 
 of war," says Carey, "there was a combination formed 
 to prevent the success of the loans authorized by Con- 
 gress. I believe that all those who entered into this 
 scheme resided in the Eastern States, particularly in 
 Boston, which was the grand focus of the conspiracy. " — 
 Page 286. Again he says : "Every possible exertion was 
 made in Boston to deter the citizens from subscribing 
 to the loans. Associations were entered into in the most 
 solemn and public manner to this effect. And those 
 who could not be induced by mild measures were deter- 
 red by denunciations. A volume might be filled with 
 the lucubrations that appeared on this subject. 
 
 "The pulpit, as usual in Boston, came in aid of the 
 press to secure suc3ess. Those who subscribed were in 
 direct terms declared participators in, and accessories to, 
 all the 'murders.' " — Page 289. 
 
 One of the "lucubrations" is quoted by Carey from 
 John Lowell's Road to Ruin, as follows: "Money is 
 such a drug (the surest sign of former prosperity and 
 present insecurity of trade) that men, against their con- 
 sciences, their honor, their duty, their professions and 
 promises, are willing to lend it secretly, to support the 
 very measures which are both intended and calculated 
 for their ruin." 
 
 ' On June 37, 1814, while preparations were going on for the hold- 
 ing- of the "Hartford Convention," Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, 
 giving instructions to the Commissioners appointed to negotiate a 
 treaty of peace, said: "On mature consideration, it has been de- 
 cided, that under all the circumstances above alluded to, incident 
 to a prosecution of the war, you may omit any stipulation on the 
 subject of impressment, if found indispensably necessary to tei;mi- 
 nate it." 
 
154 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 But notwithstanding the ravings of the schemers, a 
 few persons had the courage to defy them. Among 
 these was ex-President John Adams, who, writing to a 
 friend in July, 1812, thus expressed himself: "It is with 
 surprise that I hear it pronounced not only by newspa- 
 pers, but by persons in authority, ecclesiastical and civil, 
 and political and military, that it is an unjust and un- 
 necessary war. * * * I have thought it both just 
 and necessary for five or six years. * * * I have 
 expected it more than five and twenty years." ' 
 
 It would be inexcusable to class all the people of the 
 commercial States with the traders and speculators; 
 there were many eminent gentlemen who strove to calm 
 the storm raised by the agitators. But in vain ; it swept 
 nearly everything before it. 
 
 And it would be uncandid not to admit that during 
 the last two years of the war the people of Massachu- 
 setts and Connecticut were subjected to many hardships 
 and endured tnany grievous wrongs because of the fail- 
 ure of the Federal authorities to afford them adequate 
 protection against invasion, sack, and pillage by British 
 forces ; but it is equally true that the real responsibility 
 lay at the doors of the agitators, who having done all 
 they could to weaken the Federal arm, were vile enough 
 to mislead the people and direct their discontent aginst 
 Mr. Madison and the Southern people in general. 
 
 In the midst of all the provocations, however, the 
 South held out the olive branch in the shape of concilia- 
 tory legislation;^ and by 1820 there was on the surface 
 an "era of good feeling," manifested in the casting of 
 all but one of the electoral votes for Mr. Monroe's re- 
 election to the Presidency. It was only "on the sur- 
 face"; that very year the contest over the admission of 
 
 ' See Life of John Adams in Conrad's Lives of the Signers of the 
 Declaration of Independence. 
 ■' See Note N. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH, 155 
 
 Missouri revealed a determination in the North to de- 
 stroy the' power of the South in the Federal councils. 
 
 This imperfect picture of pohtical movements preced- 
 ing,during, andimmediately succeed hig the Warof 1812. 
 though wanting in much of the coloring which really 
 belongs to it, is sufifioiently vivid to enable us to discern 
 three things : 
 
 1. That the commercial class in New England prefer- 
 red to pursue their ocean traffic with all the insults and 
 vexations Great Britain saw fit to inflict on them, rather 
 than to allow the President and the Congress to defend 
 the rights and the dignity of the United States against 
 the aggressions of that proud mistress of the seas. 
 
 2. That by the operation of Federal laws, supplement- 
 ing natural and other artificial forces, the wealth of the 
 South had, even up to 1812, been flowing in large 
 streams to the "regions north of the Potomac." 
 
 3. And that the channel along which it had flowed was 
 then deepened and widened. 
 
 Note N. 
 
 After excitement sprang up in New England in consequence of 
 non -importation acts, conciliatory measures marked the policy of 
 the Administration and its friends in Congress. Those in that sec- 
 tion who had at all distinguished themselves in military or civil life 
 seem to have been preferred over others for posts of honor. 
 
 1. William Hull, of Massachusetts, appointed Governor of Michi- 
 gan Territory by Mr. Jefferson in 1805, was continued in oflflce by 
 Mr. Madison. 
 
 3. Dr. William Eustis, of Massachusetts, who, the Statesman's 
 Manual says, " knew but little of military affairs," was appointed 
 Secretary of War in 1809 by Mr. Madison, and Minister to the Neth- 
 erlands in 1814. 
 
 3. Joseph B. Varnum, of Massachusetts, was elected Speaker of 
 the House of Representatives in December, 1807, and again in 1809. 
 
 4. Henry Dearborn, of Massachusetts, the predecessor of William 
 Eustis in the office of Secretary of War, served from 1801 to 1809; he 
 was then appointed Collector of the port of Boston, and held the 
 office till 1813, when he was appointed Senior Major-General — Com- 
 miander- in -Chief — United States Army. 
 
 5. Gideon Granger, of Connecticut, was appointed Postmaster- 
 
166 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 General in 1801 by Mr. Jefferson, and was continued in office by Mr. 
 Madison. 
 
 6. Joel Barlow, of Connecticut, was appointed Minister to Prance 
 in 1811. 
 
 7. John Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, was appointed Minister 
 to Russia in 1809 ; declined the office of Associate Justice of the Fed- 
 eral Supreme Court, offered him while he was in Russia ; was ap- 
 pointed in 1813 one of the Peace Commissioners; was then appointed 
 Minister to England, etc., etc. 
 
 8. Levi Lincoln of Massachusetts, was appointed Associate Jus- 
 tice of the Supreme Court of the United States by Mr. Madison in 
 1811. ' He declined the office. 
 
 9. Joseph Story of Massachusetts, was appointed Associate Justice 
 of the Supreme Court of the United States in 1811 by Mr. Madison. 
 
 10. George W. Brving of Massachusetts, was appointed Minister 
 to Spain in 1814 by Mr. Madison. 
 
 11. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, was chosen as Mr. Madison's 
 running mate on the Presidential ticket in 1812, Governor and ex- 
 Senator John Langdon of New Hampshire, having declined the 
 honor. 
 
 13. Benjamin W. Crowninshield of Massachusetts, was appointed 
 Secretary of the Navy in 1814. And 
 
 13. Jonathan Russell of Massachusetts, was appointed Minister to 
 Sweden in 1814; was on the Peace Commission with J. Q. Adams 
 and others ; and was retained as Minister to Sweden by Mr. Moru-oe. 
 
 In addition to thus honoring that section, some special favors were 
 bestowed on certain of its industries: 
 
 1. The act of July 29, 1813, granted a drawback on imported salt 
 used in curing fish, while denying it to persons who cured beef and 
 pork, as is explained in another chapter. 
 
 3. An "important bill" was passed through the efforts of Mr. 
 Chevet of South Carolina, in the winter of 1813-'13, remitting all 
 fines, penalties and forfeitures imposed on the many violators of the 
 Non-importation Acts. 
 
 3. An act was passed in the winter of 1815-'16 allowing a drawback 
 on sugar refined, and on rum made from molasses. 
 
 4. An act was passed in the winter of 1816-'17 prohibiting foreign 
 vessels from transporting goods to the United States unless they 
 were produced in the countries to which the vessels belonged. 
 
 5. And in the winter of 1817-'18 an act was passed to extend for 
 seven years the act of 1816, which was to expire in 1819, levying a 
 tax of 35 per cent on all woolen and cotton goods imported from, a 
 foreign country, in order to enable New England and other manu- 
 facturers of similar goods to control the "home market." ^ 
 
 ^ See Statesman's Manual, Vol. I, pages 348-548. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 157 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 HOW THE POWER TO LAY AND COLLECT TAXES HAS BEEN 
 USED TO ENRICH THE NORTHERN STATES AT THE EX- 
 PENSE OF THE SOUTH. 
 
 The tariff question has been discussed for more than 
 a century, and the masses of the people are apparently 
 as far from an intelligent understanding of it as they 
 were when Hamilton was Secretary of the Treasury; 
 and, worse, still, as Jean-Baptiste Say said in his Politi- 
 cal Economy, hiuety-five years ago, the victims of "pro- 
 tection" "are the first to abuse the enlightened individ- 
 uals who are really advocating their interests.'" 
 
 It requires a degree of courage, therefore, to ask the 
 reader to give patient, if not interested, attention while 
 we thrash over old straw; but the object in view don- 
 strains us to do it. 
 
 When the Federal Government was inaugurated under 
 the Constitution, possessing the power to "lay and col- 
 lect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises," a few years 
 of experience taught the statesmen of those times the 
 lesson which had been learned in other countries ages 
 before, namely, that indirect taxation was least liable 
 to excite popular discontent. 
 
 The different methods of supplying the treasury, with 
 the reasons for and against them, were something like 
 the following: 
 
 1. A poll or property tax would require a set of Fed- 
 eral assessors, list-takers, and collectors in every county 
 in the Union, in addition to the State and county offi- 
 cers. The people would object to this; but, worse still, 
 they would know how much tax they paid. 
 
 2. A part of what every man produced — an excise — 
 could be taken for the use of the treasury; but this 
 
158 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 would have been even more objectionable than a poll or 
 property tax. And 
 
 3. A, tax could be collected at the custom-house on 
 articles imported from foreign countries; and since the 
 importer could reimburse himself when he sold the 
 goods to consumers, he would have no cause for com- 
 plaint, and the consumers would not see the tax, hidden 
 in the price. ^ 
 
 By the last of these methods there was scarcely a limit 
 to the burden which could safely be laid on the people; 
 one-half, or more, of their annual expenses for sugar, 
 coffee, tea, salt, manufactures of iron and steel, cloth- 
 ing, hats, shoes, etc., etc., could be taken from them 
 without their realizing the enormity of the tax, or who 
 was 1 esponsible for high prices. ^ 
 
 Hence this was adopted ; and as the consequent high 
 prices of foreign articles encouraged people in the Uni- 
 ted States to enter upon the manufacture of similar arti- 
 cles, it soon became the favorite method. In the course 
 
 ' "The excise, being a tax which people pould see and feel, was 
 very unpopular, and in 1794 the opposition to it in Western Penn- 
 sylvania grew into the famous 'Whiskey Insurrection,' against 
 which President Washington thought it prudent to send an army of 
 16,000 men — as many as he had commanded at Yorktown. « * * 
 
 'Nowhere was there any such violent opposition to Hamilton's 
 scheme of custom-house duties on imported goods, •s' * * The 
 people do not flock to the custom house and pay the duty, but the 
 importer pays it, and then reimburses himself by adding the amount 
 of the duty to the price of the goods on which he has paid it. In 
 this way vast sums of money can be taken from people's pockets 
 without their realizing it. * * * When a tax is wrapped up in 
 the extra fifty cents paid to a merchant for a yard of foreign cloth, 
 it is so effectually hidden that most people do not know it is there." 
 — Fiske's Civil Government in the United States, page 258. 
 
 It may be added that when a similar article made in the United 
 States is bought at the same price, fifty cents of it is the amount 
 paid as a bonus to the manufacturer by the command of Congress, 
 and that this fifty cents is just as "effectually hidden." 
 
 ■' See Note O. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 159 
 
 of time, iis the advantages of this "encouragemeut" 
 were more and more appreciated, tariff acts came to be 
 looked upon as acts to "protect" domestic manufacturers 
 against those of foreign countries, the raising of revenue 
 being regarded as of secondary consideration. For the 
 first twenty-three years, however, the rates did not go 
 above an average of 17^ per cent; but from about 1807 
 to 1816 the embargo, the non-intercourse acts, and the 
 war afforded a more powerful "protection" than any 
 tariff act could. ' The exigencies of war, too, induced 
 Congress to double the rates formerly imposed. 
 
 "Manufactures, thus powerfully encouraged," says 
 Vethake's Political Economy, "sprang into existence in 
 the Northern and Middle States, where, for various rea- 
 sons" — greater accumulation of capital, and, in the ab- 
 sence of steam power, the proximity of their water-power 
 to the seaboard — "the most advantageous situations for 
 them existed. " "Now on the return of peace, " he says, 
 "and the consequent repeal of the double duties, there 
 was necessarily a reaction." British manufactures, 
 which had accumulated during Britain's v/ars with the 
 United States and with Napoleon, were brought over 
 and sold to the people at prices much below those they 
 had been paying. 
 
 ' The following table of net imports will show the degree of "pro- 
 tection": 
 
 1805, $67,420,981 
 
 1806, 69,126,764 
 
 1807, 78,856,442 
 
 1808, 43,993,586 
 
 1809, 38,603,469 
 
 1810, 61,008,705 
 
 1811, 37,377,210 
 1813, 68,534,873 
 
 1813, -,...- 19,157,155 
 
 1814, ■ 13,819,831 
 —Tariff Compilation, 1884, page 299. 
 
160 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The manufacturers, therefore, clamored for a restora- 
 tion of war prices through a restoration of the war 
 tariff; but the shipping interests, having recovered their 
 old-time lucrative commerce, opposed an increase of 
 rates; and this opposition was voiced by Daniel Web&ter 
 as late as 1824, during the discussion of the so-called 
 "American system." But the real or pretended dis- 
 tress of the manufacturers prevented a "repeal of the 
 double duties;" they were reduced about one-third; and 
 the people who had been compelled to pay 81.36 (the 
 war price) for an article worth $1, were still obliged to 
 pay $1.2-5 for the benefit of the "distressed" manufac- 
 turers. 
 
 So that New England and Middle State manufactur- 
 ers (there were few of the* latter) were empowered to 
 sell their wares at foreign prices increased by at least 
 one-fourth of those prices together with the freight rates 
 on "protected" ships, to the Southern farmers who re- 
 ceived foreign prices for their surplus crops, whether sold 
 at home or abroad; and from that time to the present 
 have competed in the world's markets with the cheapest 
 labor of Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America. 
 
 But this was not encouragement enough ; and their 
 "distress" induced Congress to pass the act of 1816. 
 which so effectually checked imports that they fell from 
 $129,961-,931 in 1816 to 879,891,931 in 1817 and an aver- 
 age of §67,001,957 during the succeeding four years. 
 
 In all these early years tariff rates were professedly 
 adjusted so as to encourage certain "infant industries," 
 and they were intended to be temporary. ' In 1821, 
 however, the "American system" was adopted, designed 
 not only to support the "infants", but to encourage the 
 birth of more "infants"; and when the act of 1828,^ 
 
 'See Note P. » See Note Q. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 161 
 
 still more sweeping in its provisions, ' revealed a purpose 
 to quarter permanently on the agricultural class the 
 manufacturers of the Northern States, the struggle for 
 sectional control of the Government assumed a threaten- 
 ing aspect, which became more alarming when the agri- 
 culturists were defied by the passage of the act of 1832. ^ 
 
 About this time the denunciation of Southern peo- 
 ple by the abolitionists of the North became violent, and 
 tended to weaken the bonds of the Union; and they, 
 together with the "free-soilers" and the manufacturers, 
 began to devise schemes for the extension of Northern 
 influence into the territory belonging to the United 
 States, with the ultimate purpose of strengthening the 
 North in Federal legislation. And in a few years the 
 contest between the manufacturers of the North and /N 
 the agriculturists of the South became a strife between 
 the superior enlightenment and humanity of the North, 
 and what Mr. Thomas B. Reed calls the "lower civiliza- 
 tion of the South"!' 
 
 The effect of this system of taxation on the welfare 
 of the people of the Southern States up to 1832 can be 
 approximately estimated from statistics of exports and 
 imports. 
 
 From statistical tables in the report of the Secretary 
 of the Treasurj'' (pp.322 et seq.) for the year 1858, we 
 learn that the value of the average annual exports of 
 domestic produce for the twelve years ending June 30, 
 1832, was $54,429,000, of which the South furnished 
 cotton worth $26,130,750, tobacco worth $5,660,000, 
 rice worth $2,019,000, turpentine worth by estimation 
 (pp. 362-4) $2,500,000, breadstuSs and provisions worth 
 
 'See Note R. 
 ■^ See Notes. 
 
 ' See Congressional Kecord, Second Session, Fifty-third Congress, 
 page 2,033. 
 11 
 
162 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 (at least half of the exports) $13,026,000, and forest 
 products worth (half of the exports) $3,000,000, besides 
 many other articles, as fish, furs, skins, tallow, butter, 
 horses, mules, cattle, beeswax, soap, etc., etc' But 
 adopting the figures about which- there can be no rea- 
 sonable dOubt, we have 84 per cent as the South's con- 
 tribution. 
 
 Assuming, then, that 84 per cent represented the 
 South's share (which is unfair to the South, since a simi- 
 lar calculation for 1821 gives 91 per cent as her share) 
 from 1789 to 1832, let us ascertain the comparative bur- 
 den of Federal taxes borne by her during that period. 
 We can make the calculation in two ways : 
 
 1. Let us suppose that foreign goods were received in 
 exchange for all these exports, the South consuming for- 
 eign goods and the North consuming largely its own 
 manufactures. The average population of the Southern 
 States, incl uding Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, for 
 the first five censuses was 3,512,473, and that of the 
 Northern States, including Delaware, was 4,267,075. 
 
 Dividing $84,000,000 and $16,000,000 (which are to 
 each other as 84 per cent is to 16 per cent), we have the 
 ratio of per capita tax $23.91 in the South and $3.75 in 
 the North; or, in other words, the Southerner paid 
 nearly six and one-third times as much as the North- 
 erner towards the support of the Federal Government. 
 
 2. Let us take into the calculation the foreign articles 
 imported up to 1832, and paid for with the profits of the 
 coastwise monopoly, the "protected" foreign commerce, 
 and the slave-trade. From a table on page 305 of the 
 
 ' An act passed by the Legislature of North Carolina in 1784, and 
 amended in 1805 and subsequent years, provided for the appoint- 
 ment at all the towns and landings on the waters of the State of in- 
 spectors of the following articles "exposed to sale for export": Beef, 
 pork, rice, tar, pitch, and turpentine, staves and heading, fish, flour, 
 butter, flax-seed, sawed lumber, and shingles. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 163 
 
 report of the Secretary of the Treasury for 185Y-8, we 
 learn that the exports of domestic artiqles up to and in- 
 cluding 1832 amounted to |1,81Y,912,616, that the im- 
 ports of foreign articles amounted to |3,355,4:82,068,and 
 that the exports of foreign articles amounted to $955,- 
 326,630. The net imports, therefore, were 12,400,155,- 
 428, or $682,242,813 more than the domestic exports. 
 
 Now add this to 16 per cent of the domestic exports 
 and we have $873,108,831 as the North's share, and 
 $1,527,046,596 as the South's share. Suppose again 
 .that each section consumed the goods received for its 
 exports, and paid the duties. Dividing as before we 
 find that the South consumed $484.75 to the North's 
 $204.61 per capita, and paid taxes in proportion to these 
 amounts. These calculations, however, as is known to 
 everybody at all acquainted with the conditions prevail- 
 ing in the two sections of the Union, are grossly unfair 
 to the South; the 84 per cent should, perhaps, have 
 been nearer 90, and possibly one-third or more of the 
 extra imports were consumed in the South. The total 
 amount of the taxes collected on these imports was 
 $594,869,613, and for the privilege of consuming them 
 the people had to pay an average of $24.78 on every 
 $100 worth, which would amount to $107.76, per capita, 
 in the South, and $50.70 in the North. But since the 
 highest rates were paid on the goods consumed in the 
 South (from 25 to 60 per cent on woolen goods, from 
 26 per cent to 5 cents per square yard on cotton goods, 
 50 per cent on straw hats and Leghorn bonnets, etc.), 
 it might not be an exaggeration to put the Southerner's 
 tax at $130 and the Northerner's at $38. This would 
 show a per annum tax of $2. 95 in the South and $0.86 
 in the North for each human being. 
 
 Now let us pause and inquire what was done with this 
 money. According to tables on pages 1,647-50, Vol. 2, 
 
164: THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 of the statesman's Manual, of a total of disbursements 
 from the Federal treasury of $842,250,820 up to and in- 
 cluding the year ending June 30, 1832 — a portion of 
 which was revenue received from other sources — 1408,- 
 .088,199, or nearly one-half, was paid as principal and 
 interest of the public debt, held, as is elsewhere shown, 
 principally in the Northern States ; while another un- 
 known amount went to the bounty-fed fishermen of 
 New England and the Revolutionary pensioners of the 
 Northern States. 
 
 But the whole story has not been told yet. After the 
 "fostering" of manufactures had strengthened so many 
 "infants" and caused the birth of many more, the South- 
 ern market began to be supplied «nth "protected" mer- 
 chandise from the North, displacing foreign products to 
 some extent, and this merchandise was sold in the South 
 at about the same price the people had been paying for 
 similar goods from abroad, the extra 24.78 per cent 
 going into the pockets of the manufacturers. Indeed, 
 during the years after 1816, the profit was much larger, 
 being 34.9 per cent in the years 1825-'6.' 
 
 ' It is denied by the protectionists that domestic manufacturers 
 charge the foreign price plus the tax for similar articles they pro- 
 duce; but such a denial is intended to impose on the ignorant. Up 
 to 1833 the protected manufacturers were not able to supply the 
 "home market"; a great many foreign articles were imported; and 
 the reader may judge for himself whether a bolt of Massachusetts 
 homespun sold for less than a bolt of simlar homespun imported 
 from Europe. If the price of the foreign bolt was 85, including $2 
 of tax, the dom^estic bolt sold for |5, S3 of it going as a bonus into 
 the pocket of the manufacturer. 
 
 And he who makes this denial must explain the statistics of the 
 census of 1850 — three years after Mr. Blaine's "free- trade" tariff was 
 adopted. In 1849 there was $537,309,193 invested in manufacturing 
 and other protected industries, not including those "whose products 
 were not worth over five hundred dollars; the raw material (includ- 
 ing fuel) consumed was worth 1554,655,038; the wages, salaries, etc.. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 165 
 
 Truly, therefore, did Senator Benton say in 1828, 
 while discussing the ' ' bill of abomi nations " : " Wealth has 
 fled from the South and settled in the regions north of 
 the Potomac, and this in the midst of the fact that the 
 South in four staples alone, iu cotton, tobacco, rice, and 
 indigo (while indigo was one of its staples), has exported 
 produce since the Revolution to the value of ^800,000, 
 000, and the North has exported comparatively nothing. ' ' 
 And truly did the South Carolina delegation say in 
 their address to their constituents after the passage 
 of the tariff act of 1832: "That in this manner the bur- 
 den of supporting the Grovernment was thrown exclu- 
 sively on the Southern States, and the other States 
 gained more than they lost by the operations of the 
 revenue system. " ' 
 
 After these forty-four years of injustice came the 
 compromise tariff of March 3, 1833, which provided for 
 a gradual reduction of the rates down to 20 per cent in 
 1842. But even under that, when the rates had reached 
 the lowest point, ^ domestic manufacturers were enabled 
 to charge foreign prices increased by ocean freights and 
 tariff rates little less burdensome than before, since the 
 principal reductions were on articles not produced in the 
 United States. For example, the rate was reduced from 
 25 to 21i per cent on blankets, brass wire, buttons, car- 
 amounted to 1339,736,377; and the products were valued at $1,013,- 
 336,463. This was a gain of more than 43 per cent on the capital in- 
 vested. — Lippincott's Gazetteer (1857), Article United States. 
 
 He must also account for the heavy gains of the woolen and cot 
 ton manufacturers in 1859. According to the censvis of 1860, the 
 "free-trade tariff" of 1857 being iu force,, woolen manufacturers 
 realized 48 per cent on the capital invested, and the cotton mana 
 facturers realized more than 34 per cent.— Eleventh Census, Manu- 
 facturing Industries, Part III, page 3. 
 
 ' Statesman's Manual, Volume II, page 996. 
 
 '^ It was tinkered on twice in the interval. 
 
166 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 pets, clocks, copper vessels, cotton goods, cutlery, manu- 
 factures of flax, and woolen or worsted hosiery; from 
 30 to 23 per cent on adzes, axes, bonnets, books (knowl- 
 edge), bridles and bridle bits, firearms, harness, draw- 
 ing-knives, hatchets, wool hats, and straw hats ; and on 
 ready-made clothing from 60 to 29 per cent. On many 
 articles the rate was raised, becauseof the "distress" of 
 the manufacturers or of the treasury. 
 
 Thus we see that the manufacturers were enabled to 
 levy tribute on other classes to the extent of at least 
 one- fifth of the value of their goods and wares, and dur- 
 ing these years and afterwards they were gradually in- 
 creasing the output of their factories and driving foreign 
 goods out of their "home market. " So that the South- 
 ern farmer who sold $1 worth of cotton, or rice, or to- 
 bacco for II, was compelled bylaw to pay at least 11.20 
 for $1 worth of goods made in the Northern States; and 
 perhaps in ninety-nine cases out of every hundred he 
 did not see the 20 cents "wrapped up" in the price. 
 
 After the close of the compromise period, the protec- 
 tionists having promised that the low rates reached 
 should remain permanent, they were encouraged by in- 
 tervening events to violate their promise and restore in 
 1842 all the old high rates (in some instances increasing 
 them), and to add over 260 articles to the dutiable list at 
 very high rates. For example, on cotton bagging they 
 levied 4 cents per square yard, on cotton cloth 30 per 
 cent, on flannels (other than cotton) 14 cents per square 
 yard, on salt 8 cents per bushel, on leather shoes 30 
 cents a pair,- and on woolen goods 40 per cent; and they 
 provided for the birth of more "infants " by remov- 
 ing from the free list axle-trees at 4 cents per pound, 
 bagging for grain at 5 cents per square yard, women's 
 double -soled pumps at 40 cents per pair, leather bootees 
 for women and children at 50 cents per pair, cut-glass 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 167 
 
 candle-sticks at 45 cents per pound, trace chains at 4 cents 
 per pound, and bluestone (for soaking seed wheat) at 4 . 
 cents per pound, etc., etc. 
 
 But even this act, drastic as it was, fell far below the 
 hopes and purposes of the protectionists; it was the 
 third tariff bill passed, at the same session. President 
 Tyler having vetoed the other two. 
 
 Luckily for the country, however, the agitation of 
 the tariff question was bearing fruit ; the schoolmaster 
 was abi'oad in the land, and the people were beginning 
 to analyze prices and find what was " wrapped up " in 
 them. And in 1844 they turned down the protection- 
 ists, and prepared the way for the reductions in the acts 
 of 1846' and 1867. 
 
 Under the operation of these "free-trade" tariffs, as 
 Mr. Blaine called them, there was more general pros- 
 perity and contentment than the people had ever en- 
 joyed before, as is admitted by Mr. Blaine in his Twenty 
 Years of Congress, though he gives much of the credit 
 to other causes. But all this prosperity, so far as it 
 came to the agricultural class, can fairly be compared 
 to the relief experienced by a traveler who, having been 
 compelled to Carry on his shoulders two heavy rails, is 
 permitted to throw down one of them. The manufac- 
 turer could still "wrap up" 24 cents in every $1.24 
 worth of firearms; hand-made clothing for men, women 
 and children; willow baskets; straw, chip, and grass 
 bonnets; brass manufactures; plain chinaware; clocks; 
 combs for the hair ; suspenders ; stockings ; calico and 
 bleached homespun; cutlery of all kinds; earthenware 
 of all kinds; straw hats; hoop iron; castings, vessels, 
 etc.; leather shoes; manufactures of steel; iron bars, 
 bolts, and rods, etc. He could "wrap up" 19 cents in 
 
 'This passed the Senate toy the casting vote of Vice-President 
 Dallas. 
 
168 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 every $1.19 worth of cotton bagging; buttons; thread; 
 , calomel ; flannels ; and woolen or worsted yarns. He 
 could "wrap up" 15 cents in every $1.15 worth of cop- 
 per bolts, nails, spikes, etc. ; linen goods ; window 
 glass; grain bags; gunpowder; wool hats; laces; shot; 
 steel; and blankets. In short, fully one-sixth of the 
 wholesale prices of all his goods and wares was un- 
 earned profit, paid to him by the command of the Gov- 
 ernment of the Union. ' 
 
 The resulting damage inflicted by this system on the 
 agricultural class can be inferred from statistics fur- 
 nished by the Treasury Department. According to tables 
 on pages 316-6 of the report for 1857-'8, on page 73 of 
 the Statistical Abstract for 1894, and on page 88 of the 
 Agricultural Keport for 1873, the exports of domestic 
 produce for the forty-five years, beginning with 1826 
 and ending with 1860, amounted to $4,598,567,742, of 
 which the agriculturists furnished $4,219,204,883, or 
 nearly ninety-two per cent, the share of other producers 
 being 8.24 per cent. These agricultural products were 
 sold at "pauper labor" prices in foreign countries, and 
 all the surplus not exported sold in the United States 
 at ' 'pauper labor' ' prices diminished by the cost of trans- 
 portation to foreign countries. And during all these 
 years the manufacturers were extending their opera- 
 tions so as to supply the demands of the "home mar- 
 ket," at prices ranging from 20 to 50 per cent above 
 "pauper labor" prices. The average was 23.5 per cent, 
 and the agriculturists contributed to the treasury dur- 
 
 'When, after the wars with Napoleon, the British Parliament 
 levied such a tax on foreign corn as to compel the people to pay 
 about six cents for a 3-cent loaf of bread, the London black- 
 smith who complained at that form of robbery; was told that his 
 complaint was unfounded, because he was not obliged to buy bread ; 
 and that it was his own fault if he allowed himself to be robbed for 
 the benefit of the British landlord. 
 
THE aoUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 169 
 
 ing this period 1992,000,000, and perhaps nearly as 
 much to Northern manufacturers, ' while the people in 
 the manufacturing sections, consuming the products of 
 their own factories, were reheved from all taxes except 
 those collected on such articles as were not produced in 
 the United States, which, if not placed on the free list, 
 were usually taxed at a low rate. 
 
 This was the direct damage. Another wrong in- 
 flicted on the agricultural class was perhaps jnore com- 
 pletely hidden from view than the enhancement of 
 prices, but it was none the less shameful. It was the 
 swindUng of the people by imposing on them with what 
 we now call shoddy goods — woolen cloth composed of 
 from 50 to 70 per cent of cotton and old woolen rags, 
 white lead containing from five to twenty per cent of 
 barytes, tin plate covered with a mixture composed 
 largely of lead, etc., etc. In an unrestricted market 
 frauds like these could never escape detection and con- 
 demnation. 
 
 Such was the "fire " the Southern people fell into 
 when they jumped out of the British "frying pan" in 
 1776. 
 
 It would be unfair to the protectionists to deny that 
 there was ever any plausible excuse for their system. 
 
 To a tariff tax per se, there can be no objection. In 
 the early days when everybody consumed imported 
 goods, such a tax honestly and Constitutionally ex- 
 pended, worked no inj astice to any class or section. It 
 was after the tariff began to be adjusted for other and 
 
 1 This was taking from the farmer 133.50 out of every §100 of his 
 produce exported to foreign countries, while the manufacturer in 
 the United States was enabled by the taxing system to take as much 
 out of every 1100 worth of farm products sold in the United States. 
 Add to this the burden laid on his shoulders by the protected ship- 
 pers, and the sum left him out of each |100 he had made was not 
 much over seventy dollars. 
 
170 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 unauthorized purposes that excuses were felt to be nec- 
 essary. 
 
 1. One excuse is that if foreign goods were permitted 
 to come in free of tax, British manufacturers would 
 flood our markets with "pauper-made" products, drive 
 out the "home" manufacturer and then advance prices 
 to suit themselves. This was invented to impose on the 
 ignorant who do not know that a hat or a yard of cloth 
 can be made as cheaply in the United States as in Eng- 
 land, that French, German. Belgian, Dutch, and other 
 European manufacturers would contend with Great 
 Britain for our trade, and that ocean freights impose a 
 considerable restriction on the foreigner. 
 
 S. Another excuse is that by protection, and not with- 
 out it, the manufacturers would furnish the farmers 
 with a "home market" for the products of their farms. 
 
 This might have had some force in it; but the free 
 homesteads and other inducements to build up the West 
 so as to "multiply, develop, and strengthen the North," 
 have had the effect of supplying the Eastern manufac- 
 turers with cheap farm products, of destroying the "home 
 market" for Southern corn, wheat, beef, and pork, and 
 of driving many of the Eastern farmers who had been 
 dupes of this "home market" argument into other occu- 
 pations or into the West. 
 
 3. The competition among manufacturers which pro- 
 tection alone, it was alleged, could bring about, would 
 cause an ultimate reduction of prices to that general 
 level whicli determines the profits of the producers of 
 cotton, breadstuffs, provisions, wool, and other raw ma- 
 terials. This, too, was invented to impose on the igno- 
 rant. More than a century of this competition has 
 failed to reduce prices to the promised level, as is evi- 
 dent from the refusal of our manufacturers to compete 
 in the markets of the world. Instead of this they "shut 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 171 
 
 down" when the "home market" appears to be glut- 
 ted, and begin to devise schemes to have the Constitu'- 
 tion amended so that they can regulate the hours of 
 labor in competing establishments in the Southern 
 States. 
 
 And it is the height of folly to suppose that the States 
 conferred upon Congress the power to fleece about five 
 generations of agriculturists in order that succeeding 
 generations might buy cheap goods. 
 
 4. Another excuse was fairly set forth in a speech in 
 the Senate August 1, 1892, by Senator Hawley of Con- 
 necticut. The substance of it was that without protec- 
 tion it would be impossible to pay "American wages," 
 and that the opponents of protection were manifesting 
 a cruel disregard of "the mourning of labor."' This 
 "labor" means that employed in factories, and excludes 
 the white or black man who works in the cotton fields 
 of the South for 60 cents per day; and Senator Hawley 
 insists that these people shall be compelled by act of 
 Congress to contribute a portion of their 60 cents to 
 swell the wages of the factory employee to $2.50 per 
 day. 2 
 
 5. Another excuse for protection is that "the for- 
 eigner pays the tax, ' ' and that if Congress were to re- 
 move, say, the eleven cents now imposed on every pound 
 of the cheapest wool imported, it would be equivalent 
 to donating this tax to the foreign wool grower. This 
 
 ' The pretense that laboring men are the chief beneficiaries of pro- 
 tection is brought into discredit by the statement made by a Massa- 
 chusetts "woolen workingman" to the Senate Finance Committee 
 in 1894. The factory in which he worked produced daily |1,425 
 worth of woolen goods, while the wages paid per day was $172.50, 
 or 12 per cent of the value of the goods.— Senate Reports, Second 
 Session, Fifty- third Congress, Volume XIII, page 87. 
 
 ^Senate Report, 986, Part III, First Session, Fifty second Con- 
 gress, pages 1,903-2,038. 
 
172 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 excuse for protection was advanced in the Senate of the 
 United States no longer ago than January 18, 1898, by 
 Senator Pettigrew, of South Dakota, who interrupted 
 Senator Morgan's Hawaiian annexation speech with this 
 sage question: "Does the Senator from Alabama mean 
 to say that the Hawaiian G-overnment would voluntarily 
 seek the protection of some other power, and thus forego 
 the great advantage those islands now enjoy in their 
 reciprocity arrangements with the United States which 
 results in our remitting to them annually not less than 
 16,000,000?'" 
 
 6. Another excuse is that there is a lack of patriotism 
 in the Southern man who buys foreign goods in prefer- 
 ence to ''home-made" goods from New England; and 
 that therefore a tax laid on him is a righteous penalty. 
 
 Which being inlerpreted means, as Dr. .Johnson said, 
 that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." 
 
 7. Another excuse for protection — not the protection 
 we have been laboring under for over thirty years, but 
 the Dingley tariff — was given to the country on June 
 16, 1898 (about three months before cotton fell to 4^ 
 cents per pound on North Carolina farms), by Senator 
 Pritchard of North Carolina. It is that the Dingley 
 tariff has produced a prodigious balance of trade in favor 
 of the United States by shortening the wheat crop of 
 foreign countries and causing an extraordinary demand 
 abroad for the wheat of the farmers of the Western 
 States. "As a result," he said, "of the happy concur- 
 rence of conditions" — "the administration of the gov- 
 ernment by the great party of Lincoln, Grant, and Mc- 
 Kinley" — "the volume of cash sent over to us from Eu- 
 rope breaks all previous records. ' ' It has also advanced 
 the prices of farm products "from 15 to 40 per cent.'' 
 
 ' Press Dispatch. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 173 
 
 "Horses are 75 per cent higher than in 1897, and few 
 to be had; poultry 150 per cent above last year * * * 
 tobacco is higher than in four years." ' 
 
 8. Another excuse is that under "protection, ' ' and not 
 without it, everything the people of these States need 
 will be produced "at home." This is addressed to that 
 narrow selfishness which in some quarters is mistaken 
 for "patriotism" ; and it presumes dense ignorance in 
 the persons addressed. It utterly ignores the universal 
 disposition to refuse to buy from a man who refuses to 
 buy from others; and it sends the farmer out into an 
 unwilling world in search of markets for his cotton, 
 wheat, tobacco, etc., and brings him back "home" to 
 spend his reduced income in a "protected" market. 
 
 9. And last, but not least, was the justification of 
 ante-bellum protection which appears in a speech of 
 Hon. J. H. Walker of Massachusetts, commented on in 
 the 16th chapter (Slavery) of this volume. It is that 
 since the slave-holder paid no "wages," he was under 
 some sort of moral obligation to divide his profits with 
 the Northern manufacturers who were obliged to pay 
 wages. 
 
 'Press Dispatch. 
 
 NOTB O. 
 
 That there may be no suspicion of exaggeration in the statement 
 made in the chapter on the tariff, the following table has been con- 
 structed from data in Senate Report No. 407, Second Session, Fifty- 
 third Congress. It shows the value of goods imported during the 
 year ending June 30, 1893, and the tax paid at the custom houses, 
 and from it these selections have been made : 
 
 Articles. 
 
 Alum, 
 
 Morphine, 
 
 Castor oil. 
 
 Linseed oil. 
 
 White lead, 
 
 Bicarbonate of soda, 
 
 Foreign Price. 
 
 Tax. 
 
 178,806.17 
 
 $37,437.52 
 
 25,035.00 
 
 11,790.00 
 
 328.00 
 
 328.80 
 
 2,491.00 
 
 2,369.91 
 
 154.35 
 
 120.18 
 
 19,735.63 
 
 11,933.80 
 
174 ' THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Articles. Foreign Price. Tax. 
 
 Plain white chinaware, 13,110,856.05 $1,160,970.83 
 
 Glass buttons, 51,032.31 30,618.39 
 
 Cheapest window glass, 870,140.49 175,704.99 
 
 Spectacles, . 33,358.00 19,954.80 
 
 Tin plate, 16,691,765.19 13,090,693.75 
 
 Razors, 368,148.33 177,450.95 
 
 Pen and pocket knives, 911,146.03 829,487.54 
 
 Shot guns, 381,657.30 179,473.03 
 
 Cotton thread, yarn, etc , 857,533.60 438,397.81 
 
 Collars and cuffs, 93,705.09 64,323.43 
 
 Shirts, etc., part linen, 38,738.93 31,306.40 
 
 Laces, edgmgs, etc., 15,378,898.64 9,337,339.31 
 
 Cotton bagging, 35,932.00 11,683.60 
 
 Woolen or worsted cloth — 
 
 Lowest grade, 13 097.00 31,360.04 
 
 Second grade, 137,569.00 184,796.00 
 
 Highest grade, 13,666,256.30 13,603,401.74 
 
 Firecrackers, 835,478.60 494,338.07 
 
 Boots and shoes, 95,633.43 33,905.63 
 
 Lead pencils, 81,509.00 43,749.90 
 
 Cotton ties, 56,368.00 35,300.94 
 
 Salt in bulk, 176,820.94 145,158.63 
 
 Blankets of all kinds, 5,767.00 4,870.31 
 
 Woo] hats of all kinds, 31,919.01 19,447.31 
 Women and children's dress goods, part 
 
 wool, 8,180,127.31 8,140,113.30 
 
 Trace and other chains, 64,834.63 31,886.40 
 
 These taxes were levied not for revenue but for "protection," and 
 everybody must be his own j udge whether similar goods produced 
 in the United States sold for less than the foreign price with the 
 tax added. No sane man would buy these goods abroad and pay 
 the tax, if he could buy them cheaper in the United States. And it 
 may be added that, if the women of the country had been required, 
 after paying $8.18 for dress goods, to hand over to a Federal tax 
 gatherer 88.14, the reputations of certain distinguished gentlemen 
 would have suffered. And it is quite probable that they would 
 have diappeared altogether, if the poor people who paid 113.09 for 
 woolen goods to clothe their families had been obliged to pay §31.36 
 as a tax to a Federal tax gatherer for the privilege of clothing their 
 families. But the $31.36 was "wrapped up" in the $34.45 the mer- 
 chant charged for the goods, and the poor people didn't see it. 
 And the authors of this robbery are statesmen and patriots ! 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 175 
 
 NOTB P. 
 
 The protective features of the tariff act of April 27, 1816, are con- 
 stantly resurrected in Congress to confound Southern free-traders 
 and low-tariff advocates, liecause it was supported by Mr. Calhoun. 
 But a careful reading of it will confound the protectionists ; all its 
 protective rates were to be limited to three years, so as to give the 
 "infants" time to exercise their legs and learn to stand alone. For 
 example, it contained these provisions : 
 
 "Un cotton manufactures of all descriptions * * * as follows, 
 viz: For three years next ensuing the 30th day of June next, a duty 
 of 35 per centum ad valorem ; and after expiration of the three years 
 aforesaid a duty of 20 per centum ad valorem," etc. ; and 
 
 "On all woolen manufactures cf all descriptions, except blankets, 
 rags, and worsted stuff or goods" (all of which were left on the free 
 list), "shall be levied, collected, and paid from and after the 30th day 
 of June next, until the 30th day of Jane, 1819, 25 per centum ad valo- 
 rem; and after that day 20 per centum on the said articles." 
 
 Indeed, some of the most grinding rates in the act of 1824 were to 
 be temporary in their operation; but experience soon satisfied the 
 Congress <hat there was no hope of the adolescence of the "infants." 
 There are "infants" now on the protected roll which ai-e more than 
 a century old. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun's avowed object in favoring a three-years' encourage- 
 ment of m^anufactures was to secure the production in the United 
 States of such articles as were sorely needed in the War of 1812; and 
 pro tanto, in his view, it was a war measure. 
 
 But even this temporary protection did not receive the support 
 from the South which protectionists would have us to believe it did. 
 The votes of the following States in the House of Representatives 
 were as in this table : 
 
 Yeas. Nays. 
 Vu'ginia, 7 13 
 
 North Carolina, 11 
 
 South Carolina, 4 3 
 
 Georgia, 3 3 
 
 14 30 
 
 Note Q. 
 The woolen manufacturers, not satisfied with the privilege of ad- 
 ding twenty-five cents to every dollar's worth of their products, in- 
 duced their friends in the House of Representatives to pass a bill in 
 February, 1827, "imposing additional duties on imported woolen 
 goods," but it was rejected in the Senate by the casting vote of 
 Vice-President Calhoun. Thereupon steps were taken by the woolen 
 
176 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 manufacturers to unite in a convention at Harrisburg representa- 
 tives of all the industries which were anxious to have their privileges 
 enlarged. They were successful ; the convention was held ; and by 
 united action they secured the passage of the act of 1838. ' 
 
 Note R. 
 
 Many of the rates in this tariff were dictated by the manufactur- 
 ers, as is evident from the following passage in the report of the 
 committee which framed the bi 1. They examined thirty witnesses, 
 manufacturers and other interested parties, and then made this con- 
 fession: " Indeed, many of the questions put to the witnesses will 
 afford abundant evidence that the committee had not sufficient 
 practical knowledge upon the subjects before them to enable them 
 to make a series of interrogations, the answers to which would place 
 the testimony taken in the clearest light. * * * None but a per- 
 son intimately acquainted with the various operations could have 
 drawn out a series of questions upon the subject, susceptible of clear 
 and intelligible answers." '' 
 
 For example, not satisfied with the privilege of selling §1 worth of 
 woolen goods for $1.30, they had the rate so changed that they 
 could sell at ?1.40 and SI. 45, according to quality. 
 
 Note S. 
 
 One of the strongest reasons given by the committee which framed 
 the tariff bill of 1828 for the protection of the woolen manufacturers 
 was as follows : 
 
 "That these depressions (in prices) are owing, in a very great de- 
 gree, to the excessive and irregular importations of foreign woolen 
 goods into our markets : thus causing a fluctuation in, and an un- 
 certainty of price for those goods, more injurious to the American 
 manufacturer than even the depression of price which these im- 
 portations produce."' 
 
 Here was an act passed to insure certainty of prices to the woolen 
 manufacturers, while the producer of cotton was unable to adjust 
 his business to any certainty of price. His debts, his taxes, and the 
 prices of his clothing, hats, shoes, salt, farming utensils, etc., did 
 not vary ; but the price of his cotton was as uncertain as the weather. 
 In 1821 the Liverpool price of cotton was 19 cents, and in 1831 it was 
 12 cents (counting a penny as equal to two cents). And during this 
 period the price of a bushel of wheat (at Albany and Troy, N. Y.) 
 varied between six and fourteen shillings. * 
 
 ' See Statesman's Manual, Vol. I, pages 663-63. 
 ^ See Taylor's Universal History of the United States, page 437. 
 '' Taylor, page 438. 
 
 * See Alden's Cyclopoedia, Article Gotten, and Report of Commis- 
 sioner of Patents (Agriculture) for 1853, pages 142-43. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 171 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE PERSONAL PHASE OF THE TARIFF QUESTION — JACKSON 
 VS. CALHOUN; AND THE POWERS OF CONGRESS — JACKSON 
 AND WEBSTER VS. CALHOUN AND HAYNE. 
 
 There seems to have been no serious opposition in early 
 days to extending "protection" — by what Constitutional 
 authority it is not clear — -to certain manufactures for 
 hmited times. ' The first tariff proclaimed "protection' ' ' 
 as one of its objects, though its 7i per cent would now 
 be regarded as a "free- trade " rate. 
 
 After the War of 1812 the manufacturers of the North- 
 ern States, who had beeo powerfully encouraged by the 
 disturbances of commerce during and preceding the war, 
 clamored for a tariff which would ensure to them a con- 
 tinuance of war prices. They were gratified for three 
 years, and before the three years were ended they se- 
 cured an extension of their privileges for seven years. 
 
 ' Designed solely as a war measure it was, perhaps, Constitutional ; 
 Congress could establish gun shops, powder mills, etc., if they were 
 needed, or it could " encourage " their establishment. To either 
 course there could have been no Constitutional objection, if nothing 
 but the main object could have been kept in view. 
 
 "As a general rule," said President Washington in his annual ad- 
 dress of December 7, 1796, "manufactures on the public account are 
 inexpedient; but where the state of things in a country leaves little 
 hope that certain branches of manufacture will, for a great length 
 of time, obtain, when these are of a nature essential to furnishing 
 and equipping of the public force in tim^e of war, are not establish- 
 ments for procuring them on public account, to the extent of the 
 ordinary demand for the public service, recommended by strong 
 considerations * * * as an exception to the general rule ? " 
 
 But Congress disregarded the implied recommendation; increased 
 tariff rates on clothing, cordage, cotton goods, gunpowder, iron 
 manufactures, pewter plates and dishes, saddles, sail cloth, salt, and 
 some other articles ; and continued the 10 per cent discrimination 
 against foreign ships. 
 
 12 
 
178 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 About this time it began to dawn on the minds of 
 some that the purpose of the manufacturers was to quar- 
 ter themselves permanently on the agricultural and other 
 classes of the people. Hence opposition sprang up, and 
 the Constitutional powers of Congress were called in 
 question. It was denied that the Federal Government 
 was organized for, the purpose of meddling with the 
 occupations of the people, or of taxing one class of the 
 people for the enrichment of another. 
 
 The first serious opposition to protection on this ground 
 appeared in Congress when Mr. Clay's "American sys- 
 tem" was introduced in 1824; but unfortunately that 
 was the year when the field was full of candidates for 
 the Presidency, and personal ambition obscured the path 
 of duty. Among those who voted for the "American 
 system," and who afterwards were more or less identi- 
 fied with the tariff contest, was Andrew Jackson, a 
 Senator from Tennessee, and a prominent candidate for 
 the Presidency. The bill was passed by four majority 
 in the Senate, and five in the House, the division being 
 mainly between the South on one side, and the North 
 on the other. 
 
 Naturally the strife went from the halls of Congress 
 into the States. On the 24th of December, 1827, the 
 Legislature of Georgia denounced the tariff act of 1824 
 as unconstitutional, and threatened resistance to its 
 execution in that State. About the same time the Leg- 
 islature of South Carolina instituted a'committee to in- 
 quire into the powers of the Federal Government, in 
 reference to the tariff and also in reference to internal 
 improvements, schemes for which were then beginning 
 to be devised for the purpose, in part, of necessitating 
 high taxes. The report of the committee, which re- 
 ceived the sanction of both houses December, 1827, re- 
 cited the conditions on which the States had entered 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 179 
 
 into the Union; and declared that whenever the terms 
 of the compact were violated, it was the right of the 
 people and of their State Legislature to remonstrate, 
 etc. ; denied the right of Congress to appropriate the 
 public money for the construction of roads, canals, etc., 
 within the States ; denounced the tariff act of 1824 as 
 unconstitutional; and asserted that whenever "the Con- 
 stitution was violated in spirit, and not literally, there 
 was a peculiar propriety in the State Legislature's un- 
 dertaking to decide for itself, inasmuch as the Constitu- 
 tion had not provided any remedy. ' ' 
 
 These remonstrances against protective tariffs and 
 misappropriations of public moneys, known to be in ac- 
 cordance with public sentiment in the other Southern 
 States, were transmitted to the Congress in the hope 
 that a spirit of justice, if not solicitude for the perpe- 
 tuity of the Union, would lead to a satisfactory modifi- 
 cation of the laws. ' Bat the year 1828 — another year 
 for Presidential candidates to exhibit their patriotism — 
 dashed all these hopes. Congress was deluged with me- 
 morials from the hungry manufacturers; many manu- 
 
 ' Opposition to the " American system " was not confined to the 
 South when it first began to threaten the tranquillity of the Union. 
 "In 1827," says M. M. Trumbull's Free-Trade Struggle in England, 
 page 13, "when our 'infant industries' were much more infantile 
 than they are now, a committee of the citizens of Boston thus pro- 
 tested against the injustice of a protective tariff. They declared it 
 false to say that 'dear goods made at home are better than cheap 
 ones made abroad ; that capital and labor can not be employed in 
 t this country without protective duties ; that it is patriotic to tax the 
 
 ' many for the benefit of the few; that it is just to aid by legislation 
 
 manufactures that do not succeed without it ; that we ought to sell 
 to other nations, but never buy from them. ' They go on to say 
 'these are, we have long since known, fundamental principles among 
 the advocates of the American system. It is, however, extraordinary 
 that these ancient and memorable maxims, sprung from the dark- 
 est ages of ignorance and barbarism, should take their last refuge; 
 here.'" 
 
180 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 facturers — no farmers — were examined by the Commit- 
 tee on Manufactures, "and on the 31st of January (1828), 
 after spending four weeks in these inquiries, they made 
 a report" ; a bill was framed and passed increasing "the 
 rate of duties" on many articles and lowering it on none. 
 
 The evident helplessness of the Southern people, since 
 the Constitution provided no tribunal in which they 
 could successfully attack an act of Congress which, with 
 a title concealing its real purpose, was within the lan- 
 guage of the Constitution, induced Hon. William Dray- 
 ton, of South Carolina, to offer an amendment to the 
 bill, declaring what its real purpose was ; but the pro- 
 tectionists, afraid of the Supreme Court, refused to ac- 
 cept it. 
 
 During this and the next year North Carolina, Ala- 
 bama, and Virginia joined in condemning the policy 
 of protection, and the two latter declared their assent 
 to the doctrine of nullification (in the Virginia House 
 by a vote of 134 to 68). 
 
 In the midst of the discontent the Presidential elec- 
 tion resulted in the choice of Andrew Jackson, a South- 
 ern man and a native of South Carolina ; and a glimmer 
 of hope came to the people. This hope was strength- 
 ended when in his inaugural address March 4, 1829, he 
 expressed this sentiment : 
 
 "With regard to a proper selection of the subjects of 
 impost, with a view to revenue, it would seem to me 
 that the spirit of equity, caution, and compromise, in 
 which the Constitution was formed, requires that the 
 great interests of agriculture, commerce, and manufac- 
 tures should be equally favored. ' ' ' And again in his first 
 
 ' There is nothing in the Constitution authorizing the Government 
 to favor "agriculture, commerce, and manufactures" any more than 
 rail splitting; and it is impossible to favor one industry without 
 burdening all others. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 181 
 
 annual message to Congress December 8, 1829, he said: 
 
 "In deliberating, therefore, on these interesting sub- 
 jects" — the tariff rates — "local feelings and prejudices 
 should be merged in the patriotic determination to pro- 
 mote the great interests of the whole. AH attempts to 
 connect them with party conflicts of the day are neces- 
 sarily injurious, and should be discountenanced. * * * 
 Legislation, subjected to such influences, can never be 
 just, and will not long retain the sanction of the peo- 
 ple, etc. Discarding all calculations of political ascend- 
 ency, the North, the South, the East, and the West 
 should unite in diminishing any burden of which either 
 may justly complain." 
 
 But nothing was done during that session of the Con- 
 gress, and hope was deferred till the next winter session. 
 
 A new question, however, was brought forward in 
 Congress in the latter part of January, 1830, which was 
 destined to overshadow the tariff. Seeing qo prospect 
 of relief, through the courts, from any burdens that 
 might be imposed on their constituents by the repre- 
 sentatives of the protected and bounty-fed classes in the 
 Northern States, some of the Southern members of Con- 
 gress— notably Senator Hayne, of South Carolina — be- 
 gan a discussion of the terms on which the States had 
 agreed to form a Union; of the sources of power in the 
 Federal Government ; and of the right of a State to inter- 
 pose and arrest the execution of any Federal measure 
 oppressive to its citizens and violative of the Constitu- 
 tion, and as a last resort to withdraw from the Union. 
 
 This was an unfortunate move, aside from any merit 
 in it; it united against those who held Mr. Hayne's 
 opinions many of the honest and sincere friends of the 
 Union and all those who were, or hoped to be, bene- 
 ficiaries of Federal legislation. Naturally, a champion 
 of the Union was sought for; andhewasfoundinDauiel 
 
182 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Webster, whose reply to Hayne added very much to his 
 fame, was regarded as a coup de grace to "States' 
 rights," and became as familiar as "Mother Goose's 
 Melodies" in every section of the Union. 
 
 Thus the tariff was obscured to some extent by the 
 dangers to the Union, and Mr. Hayne and his sympa- 
 thizers were placed in the false position of moral crimi- 
 nals. 
 
 Let us now, since we have passed away from the ex- 
 citements of those times, candidly inquire into the 
 soundness of Mr. Webster's argument. He delivered 
 two speeches, one on January 26th and the other two days 
 afterwards, as a rejoinder. We will consider them as 
 one. 
 
 1. He asserts that the power of Congress is unUmited 
 in granting public lands for roads, canals, education, 
 etc., in Ohio and other Western States, without regard 
 to the conditions on which Virginia and other States 
 ceded the lands to the United States ; and he finds his 
 authority in the "common good", it being, he declares, 
 "fairly embraced in its objects and its terms." 
 
 2. Of the Government he says: "It is not the creature 
 of State Legislatures;' nay, more, if the whole truth 
 must be told, the people brought it into existence, 
 established it, and have hitherto supported it, for the 
 
 ' The first independent legislative bodies in the Colonies were em 
 powered by the people to do everything necessary and proper for 
 their welfare, including the forming of alliances. They were at the 
 same time law-making bodies and Conventions. But after Consti- 
 tutions were formed, the governments organized under them were 
 restricted to functions not affecting their external relations. Hence 
 the will of the people on matters not provided for in the Constitu- 
 tions could be ascertained only by what in our political nomencla- 
 ture are known as Conventions. By Conventions, therefore, was the 
 Constitution of the United States adopted ; and it seems to be little 
 better than a quibble to declare that it was not adopted by " State 
 Legislatures." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 188 
 
 very purpose, among others, of imposing certain salu- 
 tary restraints on State sovereignties." 
 
 3. Having not lived to see the "reconstruction meas- 
 ures" thrown out of court, as not coming under its juris- 
 diction, he asserts that all questions involving the rights 
 of the States and the powers of the Congress belong for 
 decision to the United States courts. 
 
 4. Of the Government, again, he says: "So far from 
 saying that it is established by the governments of the 
 several States, it does not even say that it is estabhshed 
 by the people of the several States ; but it pronounces 
 that it is established by the people of the United States 
 in the aggregate. * * * So they declare ; and words 
 can not be plainer than the words used. * * * They 
 ordained such a Government, they gave it the name of a 
 Constitution, and therein they established a distribution 
 of powers between this, their General Government, and 
 their several State governments." ' 
 
 To the first of these propositions Mr. Madison, in 
 No. XLI, of the Federalist, gives answer: "It has been 
 urged and echoed, that the power to 'lay and collect 
 taxes, etc. , to pay the debts, and provide for the com- 
 mon defense and general welfare,' etc., amounts to an 
 unlimited commission to exercise every power which 
 may be alleged to be necessary foi" the common defense 
 or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given 
 of the distress under which these writers labor for ob- 
 jections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. " 
 
 To the third proposition a satisfactory answer was 
 given by the protectionists when they declined to have 
 the purpose of their tariff bill declared in its title. 
 
 To the second and fourth Mr. Webster's speech at 
 Capon Springs June 28, 1851, is a sufficient answer. 
 
 1 See G. G. Evans's Union Text-Book, pages 108-138. 
 
184 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 But all the same, there was scarcely a neighborhood 
 in the Union in which soon afterwards could not be seen 
 a hthograph of Mr. Webster with " EXPOUNDEE OP 
 THE CONSTITUTION,'' in large capitals, placed under 
 his name. 
 
 While the assumed overthrow of Mr. Hayne was en- 
 grossing public attention and solidifying aU the forces 
 which confounded the preservation of the Union with 
 the right of Congress to "foster" one branch of indus- 
 try by taxing others, a personal controversy was thrust 
 on public attention, and shared with the Webster-Hayue 
 debate in drawing the people's thoughts from the real 
 question which their welfare required to be calmly and 
 dispassionately decided. 
 
 President Jackson and Vice-President Calhoun, who 
 was a hopeful aspirant to the Presidency on the retire- 
 ment of Jackson,^ had all along been close friends, and 
 it was understood that the General was favorable to his 
 candidacy. To Mr. Calhoun, says the Statesman's Man- 
 ual, Vol. 2, page 9T1, "as a more early and eflficient sup- 
 porter, the President had given a greater share of con- 
 fidence, and manifested a warmer feeling, than he had 
 originally bestowed on the Secretary of State" (Martin 
 Van Buren). "In this particular the Secretary labored 
 under a disadvantage, " as a candidate for the succes- 
 sion; "but circumstances soon enabled him to obtain a 
 great superiority of influence over the mind of the 
 President." 
 
 By some means Mr. Van Buren — there may have been 
 other aspirants concerned in it — came into possession of 
 a letter which revealed the cabinet secret that in 1818, 
 after General Jackson, in violation of orders, had in- 
 vaded Spanish territory (Florida) and thereby provoked 
 
 ' Jackson had declared his intention to retire after one term. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 185 
 
 a' remonstrance from the Spanish Minister in Washing- 
 ton, Mr. Calhoun, the Secretary of War, proposed that 
 a court of inquiry should be held on General Jackson's 
 conduct. This letter Mr. Van Buren managed to have 
 placed in the hands of General Jackson. It served its 
 purpose ; it interrupted the close relations between the 
 President and the Vice-President; a coolness ensued, 
 and then an open rupture in May, 1830; and thereafter 
 Jackson was an unrelenting foe of Calhoun. 
 
 This controversy played into the hands of the pro- 
 tected manufacturers, who soon had the pleasure of 
 seeing the tariff question drift into a more or less per- 
 sonal warfare between the President of the United 
 States, with all his power, prestige, and influence, and 
 Mr. Calhoun, the intellectual head of the States' rights 
 advocates, the ablest statesman of his generation, per- 
 haps the greatest and purest man in public life, and a 
 man of whom Mr. Webster said in his funeral oration 
 "nothing groveling, or low, or meanly selfish" ever 
 "came near the head or the heart." 
 
 The first official utterance from the Executive Man- 
 sion intended to weaken the force of the arguments of 
 the opponents of protection, and lessen the influence of 
 Mr. Calhoun, was an attempt to find authority for pro- 
 tection in the Constitution. It was in the annual message 
 of December 7, 1830, as follows: "The object of the 
 tariff is objected to by some as unconstitutional; and 
 it is considered by almost all as defective in many of 
 its parts. 
 
 "The power to impose duties on imports originally 
 belonged to the several States. The right to adjust 
 those duties with a view to the encouragement o'f do- 
 mestic branches of industry, is so completely identical 
 with that power, that it is difficult to suppose the ex- 
 
186 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 istence of the one without the other. ' The States have 
 delegated their whole authority over imports to the 
 General Government, without limitation or restriction, 
 saving the very inconsiderable reservation relating to 
 their inspection laws. This authority having thus en- 
 tirely passed from the States, the right to exercise it for 
 the purpose of protection does not exist in them ; and, 
 consequently, if it be not possessed by the General Gov- 
 ernment, it must be extinct. Our political system 
 would thus present the anomaly of a people stripped of 
 the right to foster their own industry, and to counter- 
 act the most selfish and destructive pohcy which might 
 be adopted by foreign nations.^ This surely can not be 
 the case : this indispensable power, thus surrendered by 
 the States, must be within the scope of the authority 
 on the subject expressly delegated to Congress."^ 
 
 This latitudinous construction of the powers of Con- 
 gress by the chosen leader of the only party which offered 
 any obstruction to the substitution of the discretion of 
 Congress for the grants and limitations of the Constitu- 
 tion, was a complete justification of taxing one man for 
 the benefit of another; and, if sustained by the repre- 
 sentatives of the States and of their people, it removed 
 
 ' Why does not the power to lay and collect "excises" include the 
 power to tax all fisheries except the cod-flshery, and thus "foster" 
 that industry ? 
 
 ^ "Treaties of commerce have been found, by experience, to be 
 among the most effective instruments for promoting peace and har- 
 mony between nations whose interests, exclusively considered on 
 either side, are brought into frequent collisions by competition." — 
 See J. Q. Adams's Annual Message, December 8, 1827. 
 
 ' "Hitherto, I believe it may safely be asserted, that these duties" 
 — levied on imports in the several States — " have not upon an aver- 
 age exceeded in any State 3 per cent." — (See Federalist, No. XII., 
 by Hamilton). Such, according to the President, was the protection 
 afforded to manufactures, and such was the protecting power dele- 
 gated to the Congress ! 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 187 
 
 every barrier to the rapacity or tyranny of factions or 
 parties which might gain control of the Federal ma- 
 chinery. 
 
 But it was the only ground possible to be taken against 
 Mr. Calhoun's views, and General Jackson's zeal got 
 the better of his judgment, as is evident from the fol- 
 lowing extract from his farewell address published six 
 years afterwards (March 3, 1837): "Its (the Govern- 
 ment's) legitimate authority is abundantly sufficient for 
 all the purposes for which it was created ; and its pow- 
 ers being expressly enumerated, there can be no justifi- 
 cation for claiming anything beyond them. Every 
 attempt to exercise power beyond these limits should be 
 promptly and firmly opposed. For one evil example 
 will lead to other measures still more mischievous ; and 
 if the principle of constructive powers, or supposed ad- 
 vantages, or temporary circumstances, shall ever be per- 
 mitted to justify a power not given by the Constitution, 
 the General Government will before long absorb all the 
 powers of legislation, and you will have, in effect, but 
 one consolidated government." And, again, "every 
 friend of our free institutions should be always prepared 
 to maintain unimpaired and in full vigor the rights and 
 sovereignty of the States." And, again, "Congress has 
 no right under the Constitution to take money from the 
 people unless it is required to execute some of the spe- 
 cific powers intrusted to the Government." 
 
 At that session of Congress nothing was done with 
 the tariff; and during that year (1831) public attention 
 was kept directed to the personal differences between the 
 President and his cabinet, the schemes of Martin Van 
 Buren to promote his own candidacy, and to the meas- 
 ures of the "kitchen cabinet," though the tariff was 
 sufficiently absorbing in some quarters to induce the as- 
 sembling of a free-trade convention in Philadelphia on 
 
188 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the 1st of October, and a tariff convention in New York 
 on the 26th of the same month. That year also'General 
 Jackson changed the purpose announced in 1828 to de- 
 chne a reelection to the Presidency, and made active 
 efforts to insure his renomination. 
 
 Oa the 5th of December Congress met in regular ses- 
 sion, and the people were anxious to know what view 
 of the tariff' he would now present in his message. The 
 necessity for high taxes, it was known, would cease in 
 a few years, since the public debt was rapidly approach- 
 ing extinction ; he said, in the message, that it would 
 all be paid during his Administration, or by March 4, 
 1833. Hence, since the ordinary expenses of the Gov- 
 ernment did not reach $15,000,000, while the receipts 
 of the treasury were more than $27,000,000, it was 
 clearly the duty of the Congress to provide for a gradual 
 reduction of tariff rates down to about half of the exist- 
 ing rates. 
 
 Accordingly the President, after reciting the above 
 facts as to the public debt and the treasury receipts, ad- 
 vised a reduction as follows : 
 
 "A modification of the tariff, which shall produce a 
 reduction of our revenue to the wants of the Govern- 
 ment, and an adjustment of the duties on imports with 
 a view to equal justice in relation to all our national in- 
 terests, and to the counteraction of foreign policy, so 
 far as it may be injurious to those interests, is deemed 
 to' be one of the principal objects which demand the 
 consideration of the present Congress. Justice to the 
 interests of the merchant, as well as the manufacturer, 
 requires that material reductions in the import duties 
 be prospective; and unless the present Congress shall 
 dispose of the subject, the proposed reductions can Qot 
 properly be made to take effect at the period when the 
 necessity for the revenue arising from present rates 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 189 
 
 shall cease. It is, therefore, desirable that arrange- 
 ments be adopted at your present session to relieve the 
 people from unnecessary taxation, after the extinguish- 
 ment of the public debt. ' ' 
 
 This recommendation, barring its assumption of power 
 to adjust rates for fostering some interest against "for- 
 eign policy," was gratifying to the agricultural class, 
 and tended to check excitement in the country. 
 
 But the Congress disregarded the recommendation ; 
 and unfortunately for the President and his good inten- 
 tions, he had at the previous session of Congress assisted 
 the protectionists in keeping up the necessity for high 
 taxes by repudiating his previous construction of the 
 Constitutional powers of Congress (in his Maysville Eoad 
 veto) and approving a scheme of internal improvements 
 which could ever after be repeated whenever there was 
 a surplus in the treasury. ' Instead, therefore, of re- 
 ducing the tariff rates as the President had recom- 
 mended, the protectionists introduced and urged the 
 passage of various internal improvement measures; and 
 devised a plan for distributing among the States the 
 proceeds of the sales of the public lands. ^ 
 
 The first bill they passed — the result of much "log- 
 rolling" — carried an "amounl^ exceeding $1,200,000," 
 and was approved by the President. The second was 
 for improving certain rivers and harbors, but it was 
 vetoed. ' 
 
 ' In late years pension appropriations have furnished an additional 
 outlet for any surpluses in the treasury ; at the close of the Presi- 
 dential term, March 4, 1889, a surplus of over one hundred million 
 dollars was neatly disposed of by the "dependent pension" bill. 
 
 2 To get this money permanently out of their way, they passed a 
 bill in the winter session of 1833-'33 to distribute it among the 
 States; but a "pocket" veto prevented it from becoming a law.— 
 (See Statesman's Manual, Vol. II, p. 1,013). 
 
 '' Statesman's Manual, Volume II, pages 994-95. 
 
190 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Having thus freed themselves from any necessity for 
 serious reductions, they passed a bill lowering the rates 
 on such articles as did not come in competition with 
 like articles produced in the Northern States. Except 
 a slight reduction on bagging, there was no lowering of 
 the rates on cotton manufactures ; on woolen yarn 4 
 cents per pound was added to the existing rate ; on man- 
 ufactures of wool not otherwise provided for the rate 
 was advanced from 46 to 60 per cent; on wool hats 
 there was no reduction from 30 per cent; on leather 
 shoes there was no reduction from 25 cents per pair; on 
 ready-made clothing there was no reduction from 60 per 
 cent ; on cut nails there was no red uction from 5 cents 
 per pound ; on earthenware there was no redaction from 
 20 per cent; on window glass there was no reduction 
 from |3 for the cheapest and $5 for the dearest per 100 
 square feet, etc., etc. Having been approved by Presi- 
 dent Jackson, this bill became a law on the 14th of July, 
 1832. 
 
 Thereupon the members from South Carolina issued 
 an address to their constituents in which they said with 
 much truth that under such a system "the burden of 
 supporting the Government was thrown exclusively on 
 the Southern States, and the other States gained more 
 than they lost by the operations of the revenue system." 
 The address concluded thus: "They will not pretend to 
 suggest the appropriate remedy, but after expressing 
 their solemn and deliberate conviction that the protect- 
 ing system must now be regarded as the settled policy 
 of the country, and that all hope of relief from Con- 
 gress is irrevocably gone, they leave it with you, the 
 sovereign power of the State, to determine whether the 
 rights and liberties you received as a precious inherit- 
 ance from an illustrious ancestry, shall be tamely sur- 
 rendered without a struggle, or transmitted undimin- 
 
 ed to your posterity." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 191 
 
 Meetings were accordingly hold in South Carolina, 
 the tariff was denounced, and pledges entered into to 
 support any measures the Legislature might adopt -, and 
 in the elections that year the anti-protectionists elected 
 about three-fourths of the members of each House of 
 the Legislature. 
 
 As soon as this was ascertained. Governor Hamilton 
 convened the Legislature on the 22d of October, 1832. 
 Early action was necessary, because it was expected that 
 whatever was done would have an influence on the Con- 
 gress which was to meet on the first Monday in Decem- 
 ber; and it was hoped that a bold stand for the rights 
 of the State would have the same result as Georgia's 
 stand had had in the contest over the lands ceded by 
 the Creek Indians. 
 
 Immediately upon the assembling of the Legislature 
 the tariff question was taken up, and a bill was passed 
 on the 25th authorizing a State Convention to meet on 
 November the 19th. It passed the Senate by 31 to 13, 
 and the House by 96 to 26. 
 
 Delegates to the convention were promptly elected, 
 and that body met on the appointed day, and, as hasty 
 action was necessary in view of the early meeting of 
 Congress, a committee was appointed at once to pro- 
 pose a plan of escape from the burden of the tariff. An 
 appeal to the courts was clearly useless; for, although 
 the purpose of mauy of the provisions of the law were 
 grossly violative of the spirit of the Constitution and of 
 the rights of the States, it was Constitutional in form 
 and avowed purpose. There being no court, therefore, 
 to which the State could appeal, the committee reported 
 an ordinance, which was passed on the 24:th, declaring 
 that the tariff act of May 29, 1828, and that of July 14, 
 1832, were unauthorized by the Constitution; that they 
 violated the true meaning and intent of it ; that they 
 
192 THE SOUTH AQ-AINST THE NORTH. 
 
 were, therefore, null and void, not binding on the citi- 
 zens of that State ; and that the duties imposed by said 
 acts should not be collected in the ports of that State 
 after February 1, 1833. It also declared that any at- 
 tempt on the part of the Federal Government to collect 
 by force the duties imposed by those acts vfould be in- 
 consistent with the longer continuance of that State in 
 the Union. And the Legislature, which was to assemble 
 in three days, was directed to pass all necessary acts to 
 enforce this ordinance. 
 
 This was the seventh act of resistance to the Govern- 
 ment of the Union. 
 
 X. The first was the refusal of Gov. John Hancock, 
 of Massachusetts, to obey an order from a Federal court, 
 issued in pursuance of a power expressly delegated to 
 the Federal judiciary. His reason was that a sovereign 
 State could not be sued, Constitution or no Constitu- 
 tion. His reason was held to be sound, and to prevent 
 any further conflicts of State and Federal authority, 
 the eleventh amendment was added to the Constitution. 
 
 2. The second was New England's resistance to a law 
 of the Union. In the winter of 1808-'9 Congress passed 
 an act to arm the President with additional powers for 
 enforcing the embargo, but certain disclosures made by 
 Mr. J. Q. Adams of the purpose of the ruling party in 
 New England to withdraw their States from the Union 
 frightened Congress, and the embargo was repealed. 
 
 The disclosures were made in February, 1809, and the 
 repealing act was passed on the 1st of March. ' 
 
 3. The third was the refusal of Gov. Caleb Strong, 
 of Massachusetts, to comply with Mr. Madison's call for 
 the militia of Massachusetts in the prosecution of the 
 War of 1812. This refusal was announced as early as 
 August 5, 1812, and it was adhered to during the war, 
 
 ' Statesman's Manual, Volume I, page 363. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 193 
 
 in contempt of the Constitution and of the mihtia act 
 passed February 28, 1795. ' 
 
 4. The fourth was like unto the second. The first 
 act passed at the session of Congress which assembled 
 December 6, 1813, and adjourned April 8, 1814, was 
 a law laying an embargo on all vessels within the limits 
 of the jurisdiction of the United States, to continue in 
 force till January 1, 1816, unless the war ended sooner, 
 for the purpose of preventing "small vessels and boats 
 from supplying the British squadrons on the coast with 
 provisions"; but the threatening attitude of New Eng- 
 land forced Congress to repeal the act four days before 
 it adjourned, and permit the " downeasters " to feed the 
 British. ^ 
 
 . 5. The fifth was the threatening aspect of the pro- 
 ceedings which led to the holding of the Hartford Con- 
 vention. These induced Mr. Madison to make peace 
 with Great Britain without insisting on her renouncing 
 the right of search or the right to impress seamen — the 
 only causes for which the war was declared. 
 
 6. And the sixth was Grovernor Troup's resistance to 
 the execution of a treaty made with the Creek Indians. ^ 
 
 The first, therefore, was a nullification of the power 
 of the Federal judiciary, and the others nullifications, 
 real or threatened, of the powers of Congress or of the 
 President; and since they affected no powerful mon- 
 eyed interests, and there were no personal motives for 
 suppressing the offenders, the Federal authorities 
 yielded. * 
 
 ' See Monroe's Special Message, February 24, 1834. 
 
 ' Statesman's Manual, Volume I, page 366. 
 
 'See Stephens's Pictorial History of the United States, page 443. 
 
 * Just as was done when thirteen Northern States nullified that 
 
 13 
 
194: THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 South Carolina's act, however, threatening to deprive 
 the protected class of their unjust privilege of robbing 
 the people, was represented as an effort to break down 
 the Federal Government by withholding necessary sup- 
 plies — a charge which was false, since her ordinance 
 was not to go into effect till two months after the regu- 
 lar session of Congress began, thus affording sufficient 
 time for that body to amend the tariff. 
 
 The President, determined to crush Mr. Calhoun, who 
 was regarded as the trusted guide of his people, and 
 who, by an arrangement with the South Carolina au- 
 thorities, resigned the office of Vice-President ' and en- 
 tered the Senate as the successor of Mr. Hayne, who 
 was chosen Governor, issued a ringing proclamation on 
 the 10th of December, announcing his purpose to col- 
 lect the revenues at Charleston by force if necessary, 
 ordered ail the available military force to assemble at 
 Charleston, and had a sloop-of-war sent to protect the 
 custom-house officers. His proclamation contained some 
 remarkable opinions as to the nature of the Union and 
 the provisions of the Constitution — remarkable in the 
 light of some of his previous utterances. Let us review 
 some of them. 
 
 1. He calls the Union a "social compact," and the 
 Dnited States "if, in the following sentence: "But 
 reasoning on this subject is superfluous, when our social 
 compact in express terms declares that the laws of the 
 
 section of the Constitution which bound them to deliver up fugi- 
 tives froMi labor. 
 
 But today, if we examine any dictionary or cyclopoadia. we shall 
 
 be told that nullification applies only to an act of Congress, and, in 
 
 the narrow view of the Century Dictionary, that the "doctrine was 
 
 elaborated by John C. Calhoun, and applied by South Carolina in 
 
 :1832." 
 
 ' December 38. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 195 
 
 United States, its Constitution, and treaties made under 
 it," etc. 
 
 2. Of the Declaration of Independence he says: "We 
 declared ourselves a nation by a joint, not by several, 
 acts" ; and of the Articles of Confederation he says: "It 
 was in that (form) of a solemn league of several States, 
 by which they agreed that they would collectively form 
 one nation." And of the Confederation he agam says: 
 " But the defects of the Confederatiop. need not be de- 
 tailed. Under its operation we could scarcely be called 
 a nation." 
 
 3. Of the Constitution he says: "We have looked to 
 it with sacred awe as the palladium of our liberties, and, 
 with all the solemnities of religion, we have pledged to 
 each other our lives and fortunes here, and our hopes 
 of happiness hereafter, in its defense and support." 
 And of the Union he says that it is yet time to show 
 that "the descendants of the Pinckneys, the Sumters, 
 etc., will not abandon that Union, to support which so 
 many of them fought, and bled, and died." 
 
 i. Of the Constitution he again says that "the terms 
 used in its construction show it to be a Government in 
 which the people of all the States collectively are repre- 
 sented. " 
 
 6. Of the Members of Congress he says : "When chosen 
 they are all representatives of the United States, not 
 representatives of the particular State from which they 
 come." 
 
 6. Of secession he says: " But each State having 
 expressly parted with so many powers as to constitute 
 jointly with the other States a single nation, can not 
 from that period possess any right to secede, because 
 such secession does not break a league, but destroys the 
 unity of a nation. * * * To say that any State may 
 
196 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 at pleasure secede from the Union, is to say that the 
 United States are not a nation.'" 
 
 1. Of sovereignty he says: "The States severally have 
 not retained their entire sovereignty. It has been 
 shown that in becoming parts of a nation, not members 
 of a league, they surrendered many of their essential 
 parts of sovereignty." And as a sample of this surren- 
 der he gives this : "They have expressly ceded the right 
 to punish treason — not treason against their separate 
 power — but treason against the United States. Treason 
 is an offense against sovereignty, and sovereignty must 
 reside with the power to punish it." 
 
 8. He says the Federal Government gave to all the in- 
 habitants of the States "the proud title of American 
 citizens"; but that if we secede from the Union, "the 
 very name of Americans we discard" — "that Union," 
 he says, "to support v^hich, so many of theiu fought, 
 bled, and died." 
 
 While thus laying down that exposition of the nature 
 of the Government which will, in his judgment, justify 
 the infliction of the penalties of treason on the people 
 of South Carolina, he does not omit to point out the ob- 
 ject of his special spite, thus: "Let those among your 
 leaders who once approved and advocated the principle 
 of protective duties," etc., referring to Mr. Calhoua's 
 course in 1816. Again he says: "Those who told you 
 that you might peaceably prevent their execution de- 
 ceived you; they could not have been deceived them- 
 selves." 
 
 Now let us inquire into the soundness of his doctrines. 
 We will take them in the order presented above. 
 
 ^ President Jackson seems to have forgotten that the ratifying Con- 
 ventions of New York and Virginia declared the right of those States 
 to revoke the powers they were delegating in the Constitution.— El. 
 Deb., I, 837-339. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 197 
 
 1. He says in this proclamation that under certain cir- 
 cumstances there must be an "acquiescence in the dis- 
 solution of our Union by the secession of one of its mem- 
 bers. " Now a "member" of a "social compact" is one 
 human being; hence if South Carolina is a "member," 
 it is an inexcusable confusion of thought to call the 
 Union a "social compact." 
 
 2. There is not a syllable or hint in the Declaration of 
 Independence, or in the Articles of Confederation, or in 
 the Constitution justifying the assertion that the peoples 
 of the States ever became a "nation, " except what might 
 be inferred from the power to regulate commerce "with 
 foreign nations" — a phrase which was unavoidable, and 
 which implied nothing as to the political institutions of 
 any "foreign nation," or of these States. On the con- 
 trary, when Gov. Randolph's plan of a Constitution was 
 under discussion, containing a provision for a "national 
 government," Mr. Ellsworth of Connecticut, on June 
 20, moved to strike out the word "national"; and it 
 was done, nem. con. ' 
 
 3. There is nothing in our history warranting the pre- 
 tension that anybody ever fought, bled, or died for the 
 purpose of binding one of these States to irremediable 
 submission to the will of others. 
 
 4. "Collectively" is defined by Webster's Dictionary 
 thus: "In a mass, or body"; while the Constitution 
 says that representatives shall be apportioned among 
 the "several States" — several meaning separate. 
 
 5. The Constitution says : "Each State shall have at 
 least one representative"; and that "in choosing the 
 President, the votes shall be taken by States, the repre- 
 sentation from each State having one vote." In the 
 Senate no State can be deprived of its equal voice with- 
 
 *See Yales, page 153. 
 
198 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 out its consent. And each State votes for President 
 through its own electors. In what sense, therefore, 
 members of Congress are "representatives of the United 
 States, not representatives of the particular State from 
 which they come," it is impossible to understand. 
 
 6. Here the President admits that if the United States 
 are not a "nation," any State can secede. ' 
 
 7. The Constitution provides for the surrender to a 
 State of any person who has committed treason against 
 it, and fled to another State. And it defines treason 
 against the United States as "levying war against 
 them" — the States. Hence, if "treason is an offense 
 against sovereignty," the only sovereignty recognized 
 by the Constitution as existing in our Union is that in- 
 herent in each State. 
 
 8. "American citizens" carries its own comment. 
 
 To this review and criticism of the President's doc- 
 trines, it is fortunate that we can add his own, which 
 was called out by the Eichmond Enquirer, the Peters- 
 burg Intelligencer, and some resolutions in the Legis- 
 lature of Virginia. An explanation of the principles of 
 the Proclamation was given to the public in the \Yash- 
 ington Globe, by the authority of the President. 
 
 In the course of the editorial it said: "But we are au- 
 thorized to be more explicit, and to say positively, that 
 no part of the Proclamation was meant to countenance 
 principles which have been ascribed to it. On the con- 
 trary, its doctrines, if construed in the sense they were 
 intended, and carried out, inculcate that the Constitu- 
 
 ' And he yields everything claimed by the secessionists when he 
 states his objection to South Carolina's ordinance thus: "The ordi- 
 nance Is founded * * * on the strange position that * * * 
 the true construction of that instrument (the Constitution) permits 
 a State to retain its place in the Union, and yet be bound by no 
 other of its laws than those it may choose to consider as Constitu- 
 tional." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 199 
 
 tion of the United States is founded on compact — that 
 this compact derives its obligation from the agreement, 
 entered into by the people of each of the States, in their 
 political capacity, with the people of the other States — 
 that the Constitution, which is the offspring of this com- 
 pact, has its sanction in the ratification of the people of 
 the several States, acting in the capacity of separate 
 communities, "■ etc. And again it says: "That in the 
 case of a violation of the Constitution of the United 
 States, and the ursurpation of powers not granted by 
 it on the part of the functionaries of the General Gov- 
 ernment, the State governments have the right to inter- 
 pose and arrest the evil, upon the principles which were 
 set forth in the Virginia resolutions of 1798, against the 
 Alien and Sediton Laws — and, finally, that in extreme 
 cases of oppression (every mode of Constitutional redress 
 having been sought in vain), the right resides with the 
 people of the several States to organize resistance against 
 such oppression, confiding in a good cause, the favor of 
 heaven, and the spirit of freemen, to vindicate the 
 right.'" 
 
 This was an admission of the truth of the doctrines 
 of Mr, Calhoun and his supporters, in every essential 
 particular, including the right of South Carolina to be 
 its own judge of infractions of the Constitution, and of 
 the "mode and measure of redress." 
 
 But the lameness of argument against the right of 
 the State to resist the execution of what it believed to 
 be an unconstitutional act was less remarkable than the 
 assumption that a government created by an association 
 of States can compel, by force of arms, one of its crea- 
 tors to submit to its decrees. Under any circumstances 
 and under any political system such a claim w^ould strike 
 
 ' statesman's Manual, Volume II, pages 808-826, and Stephens's 
 War Between the States, Volume I, pages 463-473. 
 
200 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 the intelligent portion of mankind as unfounded, unless 
 there were some positive and unmistakable power dele- 
 gated for such a purpose in the charter of the govern- 
 ment. In this case nothing of the sort could be found ; 
 on the contrary, it had been deliberately withheld in 
 the framing of the Constitution. In the plan of Gov- 
 ernor Randolph, who next to Mr. Hamilton, was per- 
 haps the foremost advocate of a consolidated govern- 
 ment, it was proposed to confer on the "National Legis- 
 lature" the power "to call forth the foi'ce of the Union 
 against any member of the Union failing to fulfill its 
 duty under the Articles thereof." But the proposition 
 received no favor ; it was well known that the States 
 would never adopt a Constitution containing such a pro- 
 vision. ' 
 
 But President Jackson derived the power to "coerce" 
 a State from what he acknowledged in the above-men- 
 tioned editorial and in his farewell address to be an in- 
 correct interpretation of the grants of power by the 
 States. 
 
 After the issuance of this Proclamation it was "dis- 
 tinctly foreseen, " says the Statesman's Manual, "that 
 the final contest relating to a protecting tariff was about 
 to be decided. Upon distributing the various subjects 
 recommended to the consideration of Congress, this 
 was referred in the House, to the Committee of Ways and 
 Means, of which Mr. Verplanck, of New York, was 
 Chairman. * * * j^ -^ag j^qw determined to remodel 
 the whole, to conciliate its opponents at the South, and 
 on the' 27th of December, a bill was reported by the 
 Committee of Ways and Means, which was understood 
 to embody the views of the Administration. * * * 
 
 "While the discussion on the bill was going on, new 
 
 'Elliot's Debates, Volume V, pages 128-369. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 201 
 
 interest was imparted to the subject by a message from 
 the President to Congress, on the 16th of January, com- 
 municating the South Carohna ordinance and nullifying 
 laws, together with his own views as to what should be 
 done under the existing state of affairs. * * * 
 
 "The whole subject was now before Congress; and 
 the State Legislatures being generally in session, passed 
 resolutions expressing their opinions as to the course that 
 body ought to adopt. 
 
 "In the Legislatures of Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
 New York, Delaware, Tennessee (Jackson's State), Indi- 
 ana, and Missouri (the State of Senator Benton, who was 
 an uncompromising partisan of Jackson), the doctrines 
 of nullification were entirely disclaimed, as destructive 
 to the Constitution. Those of North Carolina and Ala- 
 bama were no less explicit in condemning nullification, 
 but they also expressed an opinion that the tariff was 
 unconstitutional and inexpedient. ' 
 
 "The State of Georgia also reprobated the doctrine of 
 nullification as unconstitutional, by a vote of 102 to 61 
 in her Legislature ; but it denounced the tariff in de- 
 cided terms, and proposed a convention of the States of 
 Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Ala- 
 bama, Tennessee, and Mississippi, to devise measures to 
 obtain relief from that system. 
 
 "The Legislature of Virginia assumed a more extra- 
 ordinary ground. * * * Finally resolutions were 
 
 ' The Legislature of North Carohna, Tvhile holding that nullifica- 
 tion was "revolutionary in its character," declared that "protection" 
 was unconstitutional, imjjolitic, unjust, and oppressive, and urged 
 the repeal of the obnoxious Tariff Act; and it instructed the Sena- 
 tors and requested the Representatives "to use all Constitutional 
 means intheir powerto procure apeaoeable adjustment of i he exist- 
 ing controversy between the State of South Carolina and the Gen- 
 eral Government, and to procure a reconciliation between the con- 
 tending parties." 
 
202 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 passf^d, earnestly requesting South Carolina not to pro- 
 ceed further under the ordinance, etc., and declaring 
 that the people of Virginia expect that the General Grov- 
 ernment and the government of South Carolina will 
 carefully abstain from all acts calculated to disturb the 
 tranquillity of the country. 
 
 "After further resolving that they adhere to the prin- 
 ciples of the Virginia resolutions of 1798, but that they 
 do not consider them as sanctioning the proceedings of 
 South Carolina, or the President's Proclamation, they 
 proceeded to appoint Benjamin W. Leigh, as a commis- 
 sioner on the part of the State, to proceed to South Caro- 
 lina, to communicate the resolutions, etc. 
 
 "The State of New Hampshire expressed no opinion 
 as to the doctrines of South Carolina, but the Legisla- 
 ture passed resolutions in favor of reducing the tariff to 
 the revenue standard. 
 
 "On the other hand, the Legislatures of Massachu- 
 setts, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Pennsyl- 
 vania" — manufacturing States — "declared themselves 
 to be opposed to any modification of the tariff.'" 
 
 After the evident intention of Congress to adjust the 
 tariff so as to avoid a collision between General Jackson 
 and South Carolina had abated the excitement in that 
 Statej its political leaders held a convention in Charles- 
 ton (January 31), and resolved that the nullification ordi- 
 nance and the laws passed in pursuance of it should be 
 suspended during the then session of Congress. ^ 
 
 Congress had much difficulty in agreeing to a satis- 
 
 ' Statesman's Manual, Volame II, pages 1,008-1,010. 
 
 ^ The fairness of New ISngland historians can be inferred, from the 
 following remark made by Montgomery (p. 343): "So saying, the 
 President ordered General Scott to go forthwith to Charleston and 
 enforce the law. It was done, and the duties on imported goods in 
 that city were collected as usual." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 203 
 
 factory bill; but at last a bill was passed, 119 to 96 in 
 the House and 29 to 16 in the Senate, and was approved 
 by the President on the 2d of March. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun, in a speech approving the bill, said: 
 "He who loves the Union must desire to see this agi- 
 tating question brought to a termination. Until it 
 should be terminated, we could not expect a restoration 
 of peace or harmony, or a sound condition of things, 
 throughout tbe country. He believed that to the un- 
 happy divisions which had kept the Northern and South- 
 ern States apart from each other, the present entirely 
 degraded condition of the country, for entirely degraded 
 he believed it to be, was solely attributable. * * * 
 
 "He said that it had been his fate to occupy a posi- 
 tion as hostile as any one could in reference to the pro- 
 tecting policy ; but, if it depended on his will, he would 
 not give his vote for the prostration of the manufac- 
 turing interest. A very large capital had been invested 
 in manufactures, which had been of great service to the 
 country, and he would never give his vote to suddenly 
 withdraw all those duties by which that capital was sus- 
 tained in the channel into which it had been directed." 
 
 Such was the end of the seventh nullification.^ The 
 act provided "that where the duties exceeded 20 per 
 cent, there should be one-tenth part of the excess de- 
 ducted after December 30, 1833, and one-tenth each 
 alternate year, until December 31, 1841, when one-half 
 of the residue was to be deducted, and after June 30, 
 1842, the duties on all goods were to be reduced to 20 
 per cent." 
 
 But although the tariff struggle had been thus ended 
 for the time, it had left wounds on the Constitution 
 
 • South Carolina's Convention reassembed en the 11th of March, 
 and repealed her nullification ordinance. 
 
204 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 which never healed. The doctrines taught by Daniel 
 Webster and Andrew Jackson, which they both shrank 
 from in after years — the former in 1851, and the latter 
 in 1837 — made impressions on the people which were 
 destined to lead to deplorable results. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 205 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 SUGAR AND RUM DRAWBACKS, AND FRAUDS: ANOTHER 
 BURDEN ON THE SOUTH. 
 
 Any attempt to sum up the wrongs attending our 
 tariff legislation would be incomplete if it omitted the 
 favors granted to, and the frauds practiced by, the re- 
 finers of sugar and the distillers of rum. Our sources 
 of information are meagre ; it would be a reflection on 
 the cuteness of "the wise men of the East" to suppose 
 otherwise. But enough has been made public to war- 
 rant the suspicion that these two classes of "patriots" 
 have been handsomely rewarded for their share in build- 
 ing up "home" industries, and rendering us independent 
 of foreigners. 
 
 It was only simple justice to return to the refiner of 
 sugar for export and to the distiller of rum for export 
 the duties which had been paid on the raw sugar and 
 the molasses consumed in their operations ; and accord- 
 ingly provision was made in the early tariff acts for 
 these drawbacks. 
 
 The results were what might have been expected; 
 Louisiana sugar was mixed with imported sugars, and 
 cheap whiskey was mixed with the rum. 
 
 As far back as the session of Congress which met in 
 December, 1827, it was proved before a committee of 
 the House of Representatives that large quantities of 
 cheap whiskey were used in the manufacture of New 
 England rum, having been deprived of its peculiar taste 
 and flavor by filtration through charcoal; and that the 
 exporters of this rum demanded and received the draw- 
 back they would have been entitled to if nothing but 
 imported molasses had been used in the manufacture. 
 
 The sugar refiners, however, escaped public attention 
 
206 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 till after the revelations made by the working of the 
 compromise tariff act of 1833. That act provided for a 
 reduction of import taxes on molasses and raw sugar, 
 but it made no corresponding reduction of the draw- 
 backs. Hence the reports of the Treasury Department 
 made the revelation that in 1837 the drawback on ex- 
 ported refined sugar exceeded the revenue collected on 
 imported raw sugar by iS861.71 ; and that in 1839 about 
 all the molasses imported (392,368 gallons) was exported 
 as rum (356,699 gallons), leaving for the "home mar- 
 ket" no rum and no molasses except that produced in 
 Louisiana. 
 
 The excess of drawback on sugar (according to Doc. 
 No. 275, submitted to the Senate by the Secretary of 
 the Treasury in the winter of 1839 and 1840) rose in 
 1838 to -^12,690, and in 1839 to §20,154; and the report 
 showed that in 1839 the refiners exported 400,000 pounds 
 of sugar more than was imported. 
 
 It went further; it estimated that the excess of the 
 sugar drawback, supposing the amount imported not to 
 increase over what it was in 1839, would be §37,343 in 
 1840, §37,343 in 1841, §114,693 in 1842, and §140,477 
 in 1843. ' 
 
 The beneficiaries of these bounties and frauds were 
 twenty-nine refineries, "the whole of which," said Mr. 
 Benton, "omitting some small ones in the West, and 
 three in New Orleans, were situate on the north side of 
 Mason and Dixon's line. " 
 
 The frauds perpetrated by the distillers seem to have 
 been productive of more "gayneful pilladge" than the 
 sugar frauds. The average yield of a gallon of molas- 
 ses, according to evidence in Mr. Benton's possession, 
 was less than a gallon of rum. But the census of 1850 
 
 ^See chapter 53, Volume IT, Thirty Years' View. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 20Y 
 
 gave 6,500,500 gallons of rum as the product of 1849, 
 while the importations of molasses were only 3,885,526 
 gallons. The distillers, therefore, received as drawback 
 about ^1.70 for every $1 paid into the treasury on im- 
 ported molasses. And this is not remarkable ; the esti- 
 mate for 1842, in the Secretary's report, was that all 
 the molasses revenue would go to the distillers. 
 
 The beneficiaries of the rum drawback and frauds 
 lived, as did most of the sugar refiners, ' ' north of 
 Mason and Dixon's line." Maine, Massachusetts, Con- 
 necticut, and New York produced 6,496,000 gallpns of 
 the 6,500,500 gallons reported in 1849, of which Massa- 
 chusetts contributed 3,786,000 gallons, or nearly 60 per 
 cent of the whole. 
 
 During all the years of these frauds, reaching up to 1861, 
 the refiners and the distillers were "protected" in the 
 home market by import taxes ranging from 24 per cent 
 (1857) to 12 cents per pound on sugar, and from 30 per 
 cent (1857) to 90 cents per gallon on rum; and it is 
 quite likely that the prices of their sugar and rum, when 
 sold in the United States, were the foreign prices plus 
 the drawback.' 
 
 ' Since 1861 it has been the policy of the political party which has 
 enacted every tariflf law, except the short-Hved Wilson Act, to deny 
 that tariff acts foster frauds; and, as the public attention has been 
 kept directed to exciting sectional questions, schemes to rob the 
 people or their treasury have usually managed to escape exposure. 
 
208 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 SLAVERY. 
 
 The care with which the writers of most of the cheap 
 and attractive school histories which the publishing 
 houses in the Northern cities have been introducing into 
 the schools of the South during the last thirty years, 
 record the importation of African slaves into the South- 
 ern Colonies, while omitting their introduction into 
 those of the North, and conceal altogether or misrepre- 
 sent the essential facts on which alone can be founded 
 a just judgment of the long controversy between the 
 Northern and Southern sections of the Union, which 
 terminated in a war between them, deserves the rebuke 
 which it is proper here to summon the cold and una- 
 dorned facts of history to administer. 
 
 One of these books (perhaps a fair sample of what 
 Southern children have been studying for a quarter of a 
 century) is called The Eclectic Primary History of the 
 United States. Its first reference to slavery is in these 
 words (p. 30): ''One day a Dutch vessel visited James- 
 town. She had 20 Africans on board, who were sold to 
 the Colonists. In this manner negro slavery was intro- 
 duced into our country." The second is on page 171 in 
 these words : "You have been told when African slavery 
 was introduced into Virginia. As our country grew 
 and prospered, slavery extended into many of the States. 
 It was legal in all of them that lay south of Mason and 
 Dixon's line, which, you know, marked the boundary 
 between Pennsylvania and Maryland." And the next 
 is in Part IV, which begins thus: "The Southern, or 
 Slave States, believed that the election of a Republican 
 President would 'endanger States' rights a ad the exist- 
 ence of negro slavery." 
 
THE, SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 209 
 
 Another one of them pubhshed by the Educational 
 Pubhshing Company, Boston, is called American His- 
 tory Stories. It is a more attractive volume than the 
 one above-mentioned ; and it can be found in Southern 
 schools. 
 
 After utterly ignoring the existence of Indian and ne- 
 gro slavery in the North, and expressing sorrow that 
 slaves in Virginia "did all the work for their mastei's, 
 and received no pay for it" — the sons and daughters of 
 the slave-holder, of course, growing up in absolute idle- 
 ness — it says the Georgians introduced slavery into their 
 Colony because they "were not a God-fearing people as 
 were the Puritans and Quakers." 
 
 The ignorance of these so-called historians, or their 
 deliberate purpose to prejudice the youth of these States 
 against the Southern people, will appear as we proceed. 
 
 In the days when the first British North American 
 Colonies were settled, and long afterwards, the white 
 man entertained no doubt about his right to enslave any 
 race of people whom he regarded as morally and intel- 
 lectually his inferior; and since in those days every 
 man's station in the world was held to be the one as- 
 signed to him by his Creator, at which it would have 
 been impious to complain, nearly two centuries passed 
 by before the slow-growing spirit of justice, equality, 
 and fraternity began, even in a few isolated cases, to 
 embrace the negro amoag the objects of its sympathies. ' 
 
 At the battle on the Mystic Kiver, in Connecticut. 
 May 20, 1637, between the Pequods and the combined 
 
 ' Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts, as will be seen in an- 
 other chapter, based his denial that slavery ever existed in Massa- 
 chusetts, "in any just sense," on the absence of any law establishing 
 slavery there ; but perhaps he could have proved by similar evidence 
 that slavery never existed in South Carolina, or in any other State. 
 He might have gone further and proved that no man in Massachu- 
 setts ever owned a horse, 
 li 
 
210 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 forces of Massachusetts and Connecticut, aided by some 
 Indians, about two hundred women and children were 
 captured. They were divided between these forces and 
 their Indian aUies, and reduced to slavery ; and after- 
 wards, since Indians did not make docile slaves, they 
 were shipped to the West Indies and exchanged for 
 "blackamoors" (negroes) — an exchange in which, ac- 
 cording to the late Hon. Jeremiah S. Black's under- 
 standing of Moore's Notes on the History of Slavery in 
 Massachusetts, the West Indian got cheated. ' 
 
 Six years afterwards (1643) the Colonies of Massachu- 
 setts Bay, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven 
 formed a Confederation between themselves, in which 
 they mutually agreed to suirender fugitive slaves on 
 the demand of the owiiers. 
 
 In 1676, after King Philip had been slain, beheaded, 
 and quartered, because he had sought revenge for the 
 indignities heaped upon his brother, Wamsutta, Sachem 
 of his tribe, ending in his death by poison (as Philip 
 believed), Philip's son, a lad nine years old, whose grand- 
 father, Massasoit, had been a life-long friend of the 
 Colonists (when they sorely needed a friend), was ship- 
 ped to Bermuda, and sold as a slave. ^ 
 
 In 1638 the Salem ship "the Desire" (built at Marble- 
 head in 1636) brought into Massachusetts a number of 
 negroes, and found ready sale for them. "This first 
 entrance into the slave-trade," says Moore, "was not 
 a private, individual speculation. It was the enterprise 
 of the authorities of the Colony."' 
 
 ' An imperfect but interesting account of "the most sanguinary 
 atrocities of the whites" during their Indian wars can be found in 
 Irving's Sketch Book — "'Philip of Pokanoket.'" 
 
 2 "Two distinguished preachers, Rev. Sam.uel Arnold of Marsh- 
 field, and Rev. John Cotton of Plymouth, were asked to advise 
 what to do with Philip's son. They said 'butcher him.' " — Moore, 
 page 45. 
 
 ' Unless otherwise stated, quotations in this chapter are from Moore. 
 
THE SOUTH 'against THE NORTH. 211 
 
 In 1720 Governor Shute informed the Lords of Trade 
 that there were 2,000 slaves in Massachusetts, includ- 
 ing a few Indians. He added that, during the same 
 year, 37 male and 6 female negroes were imported, with 
 the, remark, "No great difference for 7 years last past." 
 
 "In 1735 there were 2,600 negroes in the Province." 
 
 "In 1742 there were 1,614 in Boston alone." 
 
 In 1754 there were in Massachusetts 4,489 slaves 16 
 years old and upwards. In 1764-'5 the number was 
 5,779. In 1776 there were 5,249; in 1784, 4,377; in 
 1786, 4,371; and in 1790, 6,001. 
 
 And these slaves were treated as cruelly, and sold 
 with as little regard for paternal, maternal, conjugal, 
 or filial love, as they ever were in any other Colony or 
 State. 
 
 The New England Weekly , Journal, 65th number, 
 dated April 8, 172 S, contained two advertisements as 
 follows : 
 
 "ll^^A very likely negro girl, about 13 or 14 years 
 of age, speaks good English, has been in the country 
 some years, to be sold. Inquire of the printer hereof. 
 
 ' ' l^"' A very likely negro woman who can do house- 
 hold work, and is fit either for town or country service, 
 about 22 years of age, to be sold. Inquire of the printer 
 hereof. ' ' ' 
 
 The Boston Newsletter, August 12 to 19, 1731, con- 
 tained this: 
 
 "Just arrived a choice lot of negro boys and girls." 
 
 The New England Weekly Journal, May 1, 1732, con- 
 tained this: 
 
 "A likely negro woman about 19 years and a child of 
 about 6 months of age to be sold together or apart."" 
 
 And the Boston Gazette and Journal, August 18, 
 1766, made this announcement: 
 
 ' Alden's Cyclopcedia, Art. Newspaper. 
 
'212 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "A likely negro man, taken by execution, and to be 
 sold by public auction * * * at 6 o'clock this after- 
 noon. " 
 
 This "chattel" slavery was recognized by Chief Jus- 
 tice Parker, in 1816, la Andover v. Canton, thus: "The 
 practice was * * * to consider such issue (of sla- 
 ves) as slaves, and the property of the' master of the 
 parents, liable to be sold and transferred like other chat- 
 tels, and as assets in the hands of executors and admin- 
 istrators. ' ' 
 
 And even as late as 1793 a slave was sold at public 
 auction in Cambridge, Massachijsetts. ' 
 
 Of other cruelties inflicted on their "chattels" the two 
 following quotations from Moore will furnish sufficient 
 proof : 
 
 "The law of 1703, chapter 2, was in restraint of the 
 'manumission, discharge, or setting free' of mulatto or 
 negro slaves. Security was required against the con- 
 tingency of these persons becoming a charge to the 
 town, and none were to be accounted free for whom 
 security is not given," etc. 
 
 Chapter 4 of the same act forbade "Indian, negro, or 
 mulatto servants or slaves to be abroad after 9 o'clock," 
 etc.^ 
 
 ■See Watson vs. Cambridge, 15 Mass., 286-87. 
 
 '' Moore copies a disgusting story from Josselyn's Account of Two 
 Voyages to New England (published in London, lfi64), whijh begins 
 as follows: "The 3d of October, 1639, about 9 of the clock in the 
 morning Mr. Maverick's negro woman came to my chamber win- 
 dow, and in hei own countiy language and tune sang very loud and 
 shrill, going out to her, she used a great deal of respect toward 
 me, and willingly would have expressed lier grief in English; but I 
 a^iprehended it by her countenance and deportment, whereupon I 
 repaired to my host, to learn of him the cause, and resolved to in- 
 treat him in her behalf, for that I understood before, that she had 
 been a queen in hei own country, and observed a very humble and 
 dutiful garb used toward her by another'negro who was her maid. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 213 
 
 "Dr. Belknap says that ' negro children were consid- 
 ered an incumbrance in a family; and, when weaned, 
 were given away like puppies.' They were frequently 
 publicly advertised to be given away," etc. 
 
 It would not further the object of this chapter to pur- 
 sue mere details ; the spirit of the times and the moral 
 code of the New Englanders will render thi^m unneces- 
 sary. These we can gather from the records presented 
 to us by Moore. "Emanuel Downing,' he says on 
 page 9, "a lav/yer of the Inner Ten:iple, London, who 
 married Lucy VVinthrop, a sister of the elder Winthrop, 
 came over to New England in 1638. * * * In a let- 
 ter to his brother-in-law, 'probably written in the sum- 
 mer of 1645, ' -^ * * he says: 
 
 " ' A warr with the Narragansett is verie considerable 
 to this plantation, ffor I doubt whither yt be not synne 
 in vs, having power in our hands, to suffer them to 
 maynteyne the worship of the devill, which their paw 
 wawes often do; 2li9. if upoii a Just warre the Lord 
 should deliver them into our hands, we might easily 
 have men, women and children enough to exchange for 
 Moores, which will be more gayneful pilladge for us 
 than we conceive. * * * And I suppose you know verie 
 well how we shall maynte5'ne 20 Moores cheaper than 
 one English servant. ' ' ' 
 
 Of the legal status of slavery in Massachusetts, of 
 which Mr. Sumner' seems to have been totally ignorant, 
 all doubt is removed by the records which patient re- 
 search enabled Hildreth and Moore to bring to light. 
 The former, a native of Massachusetts, published in 
 
 "Mr. Maverick was desirous to have a breed of negroes, and there- 
 fore, etc., etc., etc. 
 
 "This she tools in high disdain beyond her slavery, and this was 
 the cause of her grief. " 
 
 1 See Note T. 
 
21-i THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 1849-'66 a six-volume History of the United States, 
 wherein, on page 200 of Vol. I, he tells us that in 1641 
 Massachusetts adopted her Fundamentals or Body of Lib- 
 erties, which recognized and authorized the slavery of 
 "captives taken in just wars and such strangers as wil- 
 lingly sell themselves or are sold unto us." This an- 
 ticipates "by 20 years," he adds, "anything of the sort 
 to be found in the statutes of Virginia or Maryland." 
 
 The latter (Moore, a native of New Hampshire) says 
 on page 18 : "Thus stood the statute through the whole 
 Colonial period, and it was never expressly repealed. 
 Based on the Mosaic code, it is an absolute recognition 
 of slavery as a legal status, and of the right, etc. It 
 sanctions the slave-trade, and the perpetual bondage of 
 Indians and negroes, their children and children's chil- 
 dren, and entitles Massachusetts to precedence over any 
 of the other Colonies in similar legislation. It antici- 
 pates by many years anything of the sort to be found 
 in the statutes of Virginia, or Maryland, or South Caro- 
 lina." 
 
 It seems that slavery was never abolished in Massa- 
 chusetts by any act of the Legislature. The first article 
 of her Bill of Rights, adopted as a preamble to her Con- 
 stitution in 1780, declared that "all men are born free 
 and equal;" but the discovery that negroes were "men" 
 was made in af teryears by her Supreme Judicial Court, 
 aud even then none were "men" except those born after 
 1780. In Bigelow's Digest of the Reported Cases, etc., 
 page 605, this occurs in one of the decisions : "The chil- 
 dren of slaves, born after the adoption of the present 
 Constitution, were born free" — which was legislation 
 by the court, since not a single slave was set free by 
 operation of the Constitution, as was proved by the cen- 
 sus of 1790. 
 
 But the cost of maintaining a negro slave and his un- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 21 S 
 
 fitness for many of the occupations of the people in the 
 rigorous climate of New England proved a barrier to 
 such a general employment of negroes as took place in 
 the South ; and the same causes, particularly the first 
 named, operated in the other Northern Colonies with 
 a force diminishing with their latitude. Experience 
 taught the people at an early day that white servants 
 were more profitable. 
 
 As might have been expected, therefore, the census- 
 takers in 1790 found only 40,860 slaves in the New Eng- 
 land States, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania 
 (the so-called Free States). 
 
 The number of slaves in these States was shown at 
 each succeeding census up to 1840 to be as follows: 
 
 1800, 35,946 
 
 1810, 37,510 
 
 1830, 19,108 
 
 1830, Si 568 
 
 1840, ^^^..^ 1,129 
 
 In 1840 the numbers still remaining in the then so- 
 called Free States were: 1 in New Hampshire, 5 in 
 Ehode Island, 17 in Connecticut, 4 in New York, 64 in 
 Pennsylvania, 674 in New Jersey, 3 in Ohio, 3 in Indi- 
 ana, 331 in Illinois, 11 in Wisconsin, and 16 in Iowa. ' 
 
 Although the doctrine that "all men were created 
 equal" began to threaten time-honored class distinc- 
 tions in the third quarter of the 18th century, and one 
 of the most damning charges against George III in 
 Jefferson's draft of the Declaration of Independence 
 (stricken out by the committee on revision) was that 
 "he had waged cruel war against human nature itself, 
 violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the 
 
 ^ Slaves were held in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa 
 under Virginia's deed of cession and France's deed for the Louisiana 
 purchase. — (See Hinsdale's Old Northwest, p. 349.) 
 
216 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 persons of a distant people (negroes in Africa) who 
 never offended him," it was many years before any 
 State passed any act to liberate its slaves. It is true 
 that Mr. Sumner in the speech already referred to ar- 
 rogantly affirmed that "in 1780 * * * Massachu- 
 setts, animated by the struggles of the Revolution, and 
 filled by the sentiments of freedom, placed in front of 
 her Bill of Rights the emphatic words that 'all men are 
 born free and equal, ' and by this declaration extermi- 
 nated every vestige of slavery within her own borders" ; 
 and it is also true that the Supreme Judicial Court of 
 the State, in Inhabitants of Winchendon v. the Inhabi- 
 tants of Hatfield, (Bigelow's Digest, p. 605) declared that 
 slavery "was tolerated till the ratification of the 
 present Constitution, when it was abolished in this State 
 by virtue of the first article of the Bill of Rights. ' ' ' But 
 it is also true that this first article did no such thing ; 
 although, as Moore says on page 19, this falsehood "has 
 been persistently asserted and repeated by all sorts of 
 authorities, historical and legal, up to that of the Chief 
 Justice of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth."^ 
 "'The Guinea Trade,' as it was called," says Moore, 
 page 65, "continued to flourish under the auspices of 
 Massachusetts merchants down through the entire Co- 
 lonial period, and long after the boasted Declaration of ■ 
 Rights in 1780 had terminated (?) the legal existence of 
 slavery within the limits of the State." 
 
 ' The first article in Virginia's Bill of Rights, adopted June 13, 1776, 
 is: "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and 
 have certain inherent rights," etc. 
 
 ^ Von HoJst, Constitutional History of the United States, Volume 
 I, page 287, says: "In Massachusetts, before the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence, decisions had repeatedly been given by juries which can 
 be .lustified only by the supposition that slavery had no legal exist- 
 ence in the Colony." 
 
 And Professor Von Hoist, all through his seven volumes, delights 
 in criticising what he calls Southern "slavocracy. " 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 217 
 
 He then copies a letter from Felt's Salem, Vol. "i, 
 pages 289 and 290, written by a prominent Massachusetts 
 merchant, whose name he suppresses, a paragraph 
 from which is here produced : 
 
 " , November 12, 1785. 
 
 "Capt. 
 
 " Our brig of which you have the command, being 
 cleared at the office, and being in every other respect 
 complete for sea; our orders are, that you embrace the 
 first fair wind and make the best of your way to the 
 coast of Africa, and then invest your cargo (rum) in 
 slaves." 
 
 This was five years after "all men" were declared to 
 be "born free and equal, ' ' and this merchant, at least, did 
 not include negroes among "men." 
 
 But the prospective or actual judicial interpretation of 
 the famous "first article" as liberating all children of 
 slaves at birth, had a marked effect on the increase of 
 the colored population of Massachusetts. The normal 
 increase of that population in the United States from 
 1880 to 1890 is elsewhere shown to have been 13.6 per 
 cent. Applying this rate to Massachusetts we find that 
 the colored population (6,452) in 1800 fell 616 short of 
 what it should have been (7,323) in 1810; and that the 
 increase from 6,737 in 1810 fell 916 below what it should 
 have been (7,646) in 1820. ' What became of these 1,632 
 unfortunate creatures is indicated in the remark of 
 Senator Butler in his debate with Mr. Sumner (in the 
 33d Congress) that "when slavery was abolished"^ — up 
 North — "many that had been slaves, and might have 
 been freemen, were sold into bondage," 
 
 A prevalent misconception on another point will jus- 
 tify a quotation from Moore. It is "civil rights" or 
 
 ' See Art. Massachusetts — Population — in Alden's Cyolopoedia. 
 
31 S THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "social equality. " He says on page 60 : "Free negroes 
 not being allowed to train in the militia, an act passed 
 in 1Y07, chapter 2, requiring them to do service on the 
 highways and in cleaning the streets, etc., as an equiva- 
 lent." 
 
 And the hypocritical howl that went up in Massachu- 
 setts at the expulsion of Samuel Hoar from South Caro- 
 lina, whither he had been officiously and offensively sent ' 
 to test the Constitutionality of an act authorizing the 
 imprisonment of free negroes landing in that State from 
 other States (an act for which the provocation was far 
 more aggravating than that which induced Ohio, Indiana, 
 and Illinois to exclude free negroes from their borders), 
 appears in all its odiousness when we read what Moore 
 says on page 282. On the 26th of March, 1788, the 
 Legislature of that State passed an act providing "that 
 no person being an African or negro, other than a subject 
 of the Emperor of Morocco, or a citizen of some one of 
 the United States (to be evidenced by a certificate from 
 the Secretary of the State of which he shall be a citizen), 
 shall tarry within this Commonwealth, for a longer time 
 than two months, ' ' under a penalty of being whipped for 
 every failure to leave after being warned by a Justice of 
 the Peace. 
 
 Thus the evidence is ample that the enslavement of 
 human beings in the Northeastern section of the Union 
 was as legal and as cruel as in any other section ; and the 
 evidence that slavery became less prevalent in the former 
 section for economic reasons alone, is equally satisfac- 
 tory. 
 
 The humane spirit which revolted at the barbarities of 
 the African slave-trade did not manifest itself in Massa- 
 chusetts before it did in Maryland or South Carolina, as 
 it should have done if there were any ground for the 
 
 ' By the Legislature of Massachusetts in 1844. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 219 
 
 lofty tone of her Eepresentatives in later years. This 
 may have been due to the circumstance that much of 
 her shipping was engaged in this "gayneful pilladge. " 
 
 The statistics presented by Dubois in his Suppression 
 of the Slave Trade, pages 226 et seq., throw a long 
 needed searchlight on her pretensions. They are as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 "1783. Maryland prohibited importations. 
 
 1783. South Carolina levied 3 and 20 pounds duty on 
 importations. 
 
 1784. South Carolina's act levying 3 and 5 pounds 
 duty. 
 
 1786. North Carolina levied a prohibitory duty. 
 
 1787. South Carolina totally prohibited importations. 
 
 1788. New York prohibited the slave trade. 
 1788. Massachusetts' prohibited the slave trade. 
 1788. Pennsylvania prohibited the slave trade. 
 1788. Connecticut prohibited the slave trade. 
 
 1788. South Carolina prohibited the slave trade till 
 January 1, 1793. 
 
 1789. Delaware prohibited the slave trade. 
 
 1789. Parker, of Virginia, proposed in Congress $10 
 a head on importations. ^ 
 
 1792. South CaroHna prohibited till 1796. 
 
 1793. Georgia prohibited importations. 
 
 1794. North Carolina prohibited importations. ^ 
 
 ' "The kidnapping of three colored persons at Boston, enticed on 
 board a vessel and carried to the West Indies, where they were sold 
 as slaves, produced a great excitement in Massachusetts, and occa- 
 sioned"' the passage of the act prohibiting the slave trade. — Hil- 
 dreth, Second Series, Volume I, page 175. 
 
 ' One of the leading opponents of Parker's motion, according to 
 Lives of the Signers, page 335, was Roger Sherman, of Connecticut; 
 and, according to Greeley, I, page 45, Sherman was one of the first 
 to consent to a continuance of the slave trade. 
 
 3 "By land or water. "—Hay wood's Manual, page 381. 
 
,220 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 1794. South Carolina extended her act of 1792 to 
 1797." 
 
 Virginia had as far back as 1740 levied a tax of ten 
 per cent on the value of every slave imported, to be paid 
 by the purchaser; and this tax vv^as never reduced. — 
 Historical Collections of Virginia, by Henry Howe, p. 1 34. 
 
 And Georgia placed this provision in her Constitution 
 in 1798: 
 
 "There shall be no future importation of slaves into 
 this State, from Africa or any foreign place, after the 
 first day of October next." 
 
 So it seems that, whatever fche motive was, whether 
 moral, economic, or humane, there is no foundation for 
 the claim that any one State or section was the cham- 
 pion, par excellence, of anti-slavery. 
 
 But, if we were to grant all that has been claimed for 
 the famous "first article" in the Constitution of Mas- 
 sachusetts, we could not shut our eyes to the truth that 
 the African slave trade, which we have seen was going 
 on five years after the adoption of her Constitution, was 
 a source of "gayneful pilladge" to her shippers for at 
 least seventy-seven years. 
 
 The inability of the States to enforce their laws against 
 the New England slave traders, after they had transfer- 
 red to the Congress the control of the naval forces of the 
 States, induced South Carolina in 1803 to repeal her law, 
 and wait until 1808 when Congress could suppress the 
 traffic. It was not a creditable spectacle to have the law 
 constantly violated with impunity by "our Eastern 
 brethren," as Mr. Lowndes, of that State, explained in 
 the House of Eepresentatives February 14, 1804. 
 
 It would lend interest to the subject if we could ex- 
 amine the records of the numerous trials of captured 
 slavers ; but we must be content with a brief summary 
 of the efforts made by the Legislative and Executive 
 branches of the Federal Government. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 221 
 
 The act of Congress for suppressing the importation 
 of slaves became effective on January 1, 1808 — or, 
 rather, it was intended to be effective on that day; but 
 a threatened penalty of ten thousand dollars and not less 
 than two years imprisonment, together with a forfeiture 
 of the vessel, etc., could not deter "our Eastern breth- 
 ren " from continuing the traffic. 
 
 "Among the commercial abuses," said Mr. Madison in 
 his annual message of December 5, 1810, "still commit- 
 ted under the American flag, it appears that American 
 citizens are instrumental in carrying on a traffic in en- 
 slaved A f ricans. ' ' He recommended ' ' further means of 
 suppressing the evil. ' ' 
 
 In his eighth anuua] message, December 3, 1816, he 
 said: "The interposition of Congress appears to be re- 
 quired by the violations and evasions which it is sug- 
 gested are chargeable on unworthy citizens who mingle 
 in the slave trade under foreign flags and with foreign 
 ports, and by collusive importations of slaves into the 
 United States through adjoining ports and Territories" 
 (Florida and Texas). He thereupon advised that a remedy 
 be found anA-applied ; and the attempt was made in the 
 act of April 20, 1818, which imposed heavy penalties on 
 persons who engaged in the slave trade anywhere, and 
 also on any person who should build, equip, etc., or aid 
 and abet the building or equipping of any vessel intended 
 for the slave trade. But the cupidity of the slave trad- 
 es laughed at the laws; and "some of our public ships," 
 said the message of November 14, 1820,' "have been 
 employed on the coast of Africa, where several captures 
 have been made of vessels engaged in that disgraceful 
 traffic." 
 
 In his annual message of December 6, 1825, President 
 
 ' The act of May 15, 1820, declared the slave ti'ade to be piracy ; 
 but even this did not deter "our Eastern brethren." 
 
222 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Adams informed the Congress that "an occasional cruiser 
 has been sent to range along the African shores most 
 polluted by the traffic of slaves." 
 
 In 1828, since it was known that the traffic was still 
 carried on, Congress appropriated $30,000 for its sup- 
 pression. 
 
 Twelve years afterwards (1840) Mr. Van Buren's mes- 
 sage informed the Congress that "the Brig Dolphin and 
 the Schooner Grampus had been employed during the 
 last season on the coast of Africa, for the purpose of 
 preventing such portions of that trade as were said to 
 be prosecuted under the American flag, ' ' and having re- 
 turned home at the commencement of the rainy season, 
 "bad since been despatched on a similar service." 
 
 In Mr. Tyler's message to the special session of Con- 
 gress June 1, ISil, he advised more stringent laws for 
 the suppression of the slave trade because "there is rea- 
 son to believe that the traffic is on the increase." 
 
 On January 9, 1843, Mr. Tyler's special message in- 
 formed the Congress that he "could not be ignorant 
 * * * of the well-grounded suspicions which pervaded 
 the country, that some American vessels were engaged 
 in that odious and unlawful traffic." 
 
 On June 16, 1860, an act was passed authorizing the 
 President to enter into "contract with any person or 
 persons, society or societies, or body corporate, for a 
 term not exceeding five years, to receive from the Uni- 
 ted States, through their duly constituted agent or 
 agents upon the coast of Africa, all negroes, mulattoes, 
 or persons of color, delivered from on board vessels 
 seized in the prosecution of the slave trade, etc., and to 
 provide the said negroes, etc., with comfortable cloth- 
 ing, shelter, and provisions for a period not exceeding 
 one year at a price in no case to exceed one hundred 
 dollars for each person so clothed, ' ' etc. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 223 
 
 The traffic seemed to defy all legislation ; it could not 
 be suppressed. "Notorious An^erican citizens" kept it 
 up. On March 20, 1861, the Nightingale of Boston, 
 Francis Bowen, master, with 961 negroes on board and 
 "expecting raore," was captured on the coast of Africa. 
 
 On May 21 "the American brig Triton" and the 
 American vessel "Falmouth" were on the coast of 
 Africa engaged in the slave trade : and if the officer who 
 captured the Triton had been there "one month earlier" 
 he might have captur.ed "nine slavers," all of which 
 "escaped except the Nightingale." On March 28, 
 1862, there were two American v^essels at Cadiz, the 
 ship Clarissa and brig Falmouth, "both suspected of be- 
 ing in preparation to engage in the slave, trade. "' 
 
 Thus seventy-four years after Massachusetts made a 
 spasmodic effort to prevent her "subjects," as her Con- 
 stitution called them, from engaging in the slave trade, 
 that execrable traffic was still going on under cir- 
 cumstances which forbid the palliating supposition that 
 she did not wink at it. 
 
 The profits of this "gayneful pilladge, " not including 
 those from sales in foreign countries, could be approx'i- 
 mately estimated by a simple calculation, if we had their 
 price-lists. 
 
 The colored population of all the States and Territo- 
 ries, including blacks, mulattoes, quadroons, and octo- 
 roons, increased from 6,580,793 in 1880 to 7,447,040 in 
 1890, or 13.51 per cent; and it is not likely that the per 
 cent of increase, during any one decade since 1790, 
 could have been larger under normal conditions. The 
 following table, therefore, constructed from official rec- 
 ords (except as to Alabama in the decade closing with 
 1820, in which her colored population has been esti- 
 
 ' See Naval War Records, Volume I, pages 11, 12, 13, 24, 366, 378. 
 
rn States. 
 
 Southern States. 
 
 27.19 
 
 33.5 
 
 15.4 
 
 25. 
 
 15.6 
 
 31.7 
 
 21.8 
 
 19. 
 
 224 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 mated as equal to the whites), can be reUed on as reveal- 
 ing the volume of the business.' 
 
 Table showing the per cent of increase of colored peo- 
 ple in the two sections of the Union by decades from 
 
 1800 to 1840: 
 
 Decades. 
 1800-1810, 
 1810-1820, 
 1820-1830, 
 1830-1840, 
 
 Now remembering that many of these people fled to 
 Canada, and that, after 1816, many of them emigrated 
 to Africa (Liberia) under the auspices of the American 
 Colonization Society, of which Henry Clay, a Southern 
 man, was the first President, and making a reasonable 
 allowance for the increase due to the acquisition of Louis- 
 iana and Florida, we are prepared to form some esti- 
 mate of the streain of wealth which the slave trade 
 caused to flow from the South to the North. Indeed, 
 in spite of all the efforts made to check the traffic by 
 Presidents Tyler, Polk, Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, and 
 Buchanan, "our Eastern brethren" ran the rate of in- 
 crease up to 25.12 in the decade closing with 1850 (in 
 which Texas was annexed), and to 23.25 in the decade 
 preceding the war. 
 
 Now the reader must not suppose that all this evi- 
 dence is presented with any purpose of proving that the 
 people of the Northern States were "sinners above all 
 other men" ; the object is to enlighten those who, hav- 
 ing formed their opinions from reading books written 
 by ignorant or disingenuos authors, cheap newspapers 
 and magazines scattered all over the Union from the 
 cities of the North, and speeches delivered here and 
 there by uninformed or prejudiced orators in and out of 
 the pulpit, have believed that the people of the South- 
 ern States were the chief, if not the only, ofifenders 
 against the laws of humanity. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 225 
 
 NoTB T. 
 
 Extracts from the debate between Senators Sumner and Butler 
 in June, 1854, beginning on page 1,013 of the Appendix to the Con- 
 gressional Globe, First Session, Thirty-third Congress: 
 
 "Mr. Sumner. * * * gut enough for the present. * * * 
 There are, however, yet other things in the assault of the venerable 
 Senator (Butler) which, for the sake of truth, in just defense of 
 Massachusetts, and in honor of freedom, shall not be left unan- 
 swered. 
 
 "Alluding to those days when Massachusetts was illustrated by 
 Otis, Hancock, and the 'brace of Adamses" ; when Faneuil Hall sent 
 forth echoes of liberty which resounded even to South Carolina, 
 and the very stones in the streets of Boston rose in mutiny against 
 tyranny, the Senator with the silver- white locks, in the very ecstacy, 
 broke forth in the ejaculation that Massachusetts was then 'slave- 
 holding,' and he presumed to hail these patriots as representatives 
 of 'hardy, slave-holding Massachusetts.' Sir, I repel the imputa- 
 tion. It is true that Massachusetts was hardy; but she was not, in 
 any just sense, slave holding. And had she been so, she could not 
 have been 'hardy. ' The two characteristics are inconsistent as weak- 
 ness and sti-ength, as sickness and health— I had almost said, as life 
 and death. 
 
 "The Senator opens a page, w hich I would willingly present. Sir, 
 slavery never flourished in Massachusetts; nor did it ever prevail 
 there at any time, even in early Colonial days, to such a degree as 
 to be a distinctive feature of her powerful civilization. Her few 
 slaves were merely for a term of years, or for life. If, in point cf 
 fact, their issue was sometimes held in bondage, it was never by 
 sanction of any statute or law of Colony or Commonwealth. * * * 
 In all her annals no person was ever bom a slave on the soil of Mas- 
 sachusetts. This, of itself, is a response to the imputation of the 
 Senator. * * * 
 
 "At last, in 1780, -» * * Massachusetts, animated by the strug- 
 gles of the Revolution, and filled by the sentiments of freedom, placed 
 in front of her Bill of Rights the emphatic words that 'all men are 
 bom free and equal,' and by this declaration exterminated every 
 vestige of slavery within her borders. 
 
 "And let me add that when this Senator (Butler) presumes to say 
 that American Independence was won by the arms and treasure of 
 slave-holding communities, he speaks either in irony or ignorance." 
 
 "Mr. Butler. * * * When the Declaration of Independence was 
 made, was not Connecticut a slave-holding State?" 
 
 "Mr. Sumner. Not in any just sense." 
 
 "Mr. Butler. Sir, you are not the judge of that. Was not New 
 York a slave-holding State?" 
 15 
 
226 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "Mr. Sumner. Let the Senator (Seward) from New York answer. ' ' 
 "Mr. Butler. Sir, if he answers, he will answer the truth, and 
 perhaps it might not be exactly agreeable to you. Was not New 
 Jersey a slave holding State? Was not Rhode Island a slave-hold- 
 ing State?" 
 
 "Mr. Seward. It is due to the honorable Senator from South Car- 
 olina that I should answer his question in reference to New York, 
 since it has been referred to me. At the time of the Revolution, 
 every sixteenth man in the State of New York was a slave." 
 ******* 
 
 "Mr. Butler. Was not New Hampshire a slave-holding State? 
 Was not Pennsylvania a slave-holding State ? Was not Delaware a 
 slave-holding State? Was not Maryland a slave- holding State? Was 
 not Virginia a slave-holding State? Was not North Carolina a slave- 
 holding State? Was not Georgia a slave-holding Stale ?" * * * 
 
 "Mr. Seward. I am requested to make my answer a little more 
 accurate, according to the truth. I understand, that at the time of 
 the Revolution, every twelfth man in New York was a slave." 
 
 "Mr. Butler. * * * History can recognize no distinction be- 
 tween them. In the progress of events changes have taken place. 
 
 * * * These will afford no excuse for denying the irrevocable 
 certainty of the past. They can afford no refuge for historical false- 
 hood such as the gentleman has committed in the fallacy of his sec- 
 tional vision. I have shown that twelve of the original States were 
 slave -holding communities. Now, sir, I prove that the thirteenth, 
 Massachusetts, was a slave-holding State before, and at the com 
 mencement of, the Revolution. * * * As to the character of 
 slavery in that State, that may be somewhat a different thing, 
 which can not contradict the fact stated in the newspapers of the 
 day, that negroes were held, were advertised for sale, with another 
 truth, that many were sent to other slave holding States in the way 
 of traffic. When slavery was abolished, many that had been slaves 
 and might have been freemen, were sold into bondage." 
 
 Replying to what Mr. Butler had said, Mr. Sumner, in the Globe, 
 page 1,555, made a distinction, as follows: "By slave-holding States. 
 of coiu-se, I mean States which were peculiarly, distinctively, essen- 
 tially slave-holding, and not States in which the holding of slaves 
 seems to have been rather the accident of the hour, and in which 
 all the people, or the greater part of the people, were ready to wel- 
 come emancipation." 
 
 To this Mr. Butler replied: "Mr. President, I think the remarks 
 of the Senator verify exactly what I said, that when he chooses to be 
 rhetorical, it is upon an assumption of facts, upon his own construe 
 tion, and by an accumulation of adjectives" ; and then Mr. Butler 
 brought in Mr. Garnett's pamphlet, showing how pensions had been 
 unfairly divided between the two sections of the Union. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 227 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 SLAVERY AS A MORAL EVIL, AND AS A SECTIONAL ISSUE. 
 
 It has been so long asserted, and dinned into the ears 
 of mankind through so many channels, that the people 
 of the New England States were the first to arrive at 
 that high moral plane whereon human slavery is an 
 offense, that it is now almost ineradically stereotyped in 
 the literature of English-speaking peoples ; and as nearly 
 eighteen centuries passed by before the student com- 
 menced the work of exposing the shams, the frauds, the 
 mendacity, and the tyrannous rule of the ruffians of an- 
 cient Rome, so it may be centuries before the preten- 
 sions of "our Eastern brethren" are laid bare before the 
 eyes of the world. But justice to all parties concerned 
 demands an attempt at such an exposure, and as we 
 probably have no "dark ages" to go through, it is hoped 
 that some impression may be made on .even the present 
 generation. 
 
 The white people of the Southern States who were 
 born after there began to be any doubts about the right 
 of one man to own another, inherited African slavery, 
 were accustomed to it from their infancy, and, if, as they 
 grew up, they had any scruples about it, they could de- 
 vise no practical and satisfactory means of emancipat- 
 ing their slaves. "They had the wolf by the ears'," as 
 Mr. Jefferson put it. They were no more willing to 
 enfranchise them than were the people of Connecticut, 
 New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, 
 Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, California, and Ore- 
 gon, whose State Constitutions denied the ballot to free 
 colored persons (which North Carolina's Constitution 
 did not do until 1835); or the people of Massachusetts, 
 New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island, who ex- 
 
228 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 eluded them by educational or property qualifications, 
 or both. Nor were they willing to turn adrift to shift 
 for themselves such a mass of human beings, untrained 
 to the duties of citizenship, of questionable ability to 
 maintain themselves in the struggle for existence, and 
 likely to become a public charge — one of the reasons, 
 perhaps, why Indiana's Constitution (adopted in 1851) 
 forbade the migration of free negroes into her borders. 
 
 The Southern people were not unacquainted with lib- 
 erated slaves. From moral or other considerations thou- 
 sands of slave-owners in the South, during and after 
 the Eevolution, set their slaves free, some transporting 
 thtim to the Northwest, with means to support them- 
 selves for a year ; but in most cases the owner was un- 
 able to" do this, and the ex-slaves, remaining in their old 
 neighborhood, added nothing to its material advance- 
 ment or its moral growth; on the contrary they were 
 a clog on both. In 1790 there were 32,635 free persons 
 of color in the so-called Slave States: in 1800 61,241; in 
 1810 108,265, in 1820 135,434, etc., etc. In 1840 the 
 numbers in Virginia and North Carolina, respectively, 
 were 49,842 and 22,732. 
 
 The unsatisfactory results of freeing slaves in North 
 Caroling, after the Revolution commenced, induced the 
 Legislature in 1777 to enact that "no negro or mulatto 
 slave shall hereafter be set free, except for meritorious 
 services." 
 
 In North Carolina, to the other objections to the lib- 
 eration of slaves was added the Constitutional provision, 
 adopted in 1776 and never altered until 1835. that "all 
 freemen of the age of twenty-one years * * * shall 
 be entitled to vote," etc. But, perhaps, the strongest 
 objection is indicated in the act passed by the North Caro- 
 lina Legislature in 1801 requiring persons who liberated 
 slaves "to enter into bond in the sum of one hundred 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 229 
 
 pounds for each slave so liberated * * * that such 
 slave or negro shall not become chargeable on the 
 parish or county" ; and authorizing the wardens of the 
 poor to arrest, if necessary, and place under bonds for 
 a similar purpose any slave-holder who was about to 
 move away and leave his slaves behind for the county 
 to support. 
 
 This experience was not confined to the South. In 
 1849 Cooper said in the Spy: '"The old family servant, 
 who, born and reared in the dwelling of his master, 
 identified himself with the welfare of those whom it 
 was his lot to serve, is giving place in every direction 
 to that vagrant class which has sprung up within the 
 last thirty years, and whose members roam through 
 the country unfettered by principles, and uninfluenced 
 by attachments." And in 1860 Thomas Prentice Ket- 
 tell. "late editor of the Democratic Review," said in a 
 volume entitled Southern Wealth and Northern Prog- 
 ress: "Those (fugitive slaves) only who have a good 
 deal of white blood have sufficient energy to migrate ; 
 the true black, never. Enough of the black nature re- 
 mains in the runaway, however, to unfit him for any 
 useful purpose. This fact is within the knowledge of 
 every citizen of the United States. In all the Northern 
 States there are hanging on the outskirts of towns and 
 villages pauper blacks, the miserable remnant of former 
 well-fed slaves. These are always a nuisance, and so 
 well known is it that even Ohio, * * * among its 
 first laws enacted one excluding blacks from the State 
 on any pretence. The white person who brought in a 
 free negro must give security in $500 for the behavior 
 of the black, and that he should not come upon the 
 town. Illinois and other States enacted the same law, 
 and verj^ justly. The free black, without referring to 
 the fact that he is here through no fault of his own. 
 
230 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 will not contribute his share to the exigencies of society, 
 and it is too much to impose his support upon the labor 
 of industrious whites. He claims to be free, but lives 
 only to prey upon society. ' ' 
 
 As to genuine regard for the colored people and 
 their equal rights as human beings, therq seems to have 
 been as much in the South as in the North ; ' and their 
 status as "chattels" was no more offensive to the sensi- 
 bilities of the white man in one section than in the other. 
 The treaty of peace of 1783 containing the stipulation 
 that "His Britannic Majesty shall * * * without 
 carrying away any negroes or other property of the 
 American inhabitants, withdraw all his armies, ' ' etc. , 
 etc., was negotiated by John Adams, John Jay, and Ben- 
 jamin Franklin — all Northern men. Four years after- 
 wards, the ^nal draft of a Constitution, containing the 
 provision that the Congress should neither prohibit the 
 importation of slaves nor levy any tax on them, was 
 reported by a committee consisting of two Southern 
 and three Northern members, namely, Eutledge of 
 South Carolina, Randolph of Virginia, Grorham of Mas- 
 sachusetts, Ellsworth of Connecticut, and Wilson of 
 Pennsylvania. Twenty years afterwards (1807), Uie act 
 
 ' Of the greater kindness and indulgence, in fact, of the Southern 
 man as a slave-holder, the testimony of the negro himself was con- 
 vincing enough. The Northern man who came to the South and 
 became a slave-holder was notoriously a more exacting slave driver 
 than the Southerner was ; and whenever it was suspected by the 
 slaves that "young Missis" intended to marry a "Yankee," there 
 was quite a commotion among them, and opposition to the match 
 was loud and vigorous. Mrs. Stowe emphasized this distinction be- 
 tween the two classes of slave- holders ; her most brutal of all human 
 monsters with white skins — Legree — was a New England Yankee. 
 And in her appeal to the men and women of the North she says : 
 " If the mothers of the free States had all felt as they should, in 
 times past, the sons of the free States would not have been the 
 holders, and, proverbially, the hardest masters of slaves." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 231 
 
 to prohibit the importation of African slaves was passed 
 in the House of Representatives by 113 yeas to 6 nays, 
 one of the nays being from Vermont, one from New 
 Hampshire, two from Virginia, and one from South 
 Carolina. In this same year (1807) another question 
 was disposed of in the Congress which served the double 
 purpose of reraoving any suspicion of sectional differ- 
 ence in those days as to the morality of African slavery, 
 and of correctly defining the "extension of slavery," 
 which in after years became such a powerful weapon in 
 the hands of dishonest agitators and ignorant fanatics, 
 who were banded together for the destruction of that 
 "domestic tranquillity," the insuring of which was one 
 of the indispensable conditions on which the original 
 thirteen States agreed to form a Union. 
 
 On July 13th of that year the Legislative Council and 
 House of Representatives of Indiana Territory (embrac- 
 ing the present States of Indiana and Illinois) adopted 
 bj unanimous votes and sent to Congress a petition, 
 asking it to suspend for ten years the 6th Article of 
 compact in the Ordinance' for the government of the 
 territory northwest of the Ohio ; and permit the intro- 
 duction of African slaves into the Territory. ^ 
 
 This petition, transmitted to the Congress by Gov. 
 William H. Harrison, was inspired by the wish of the 
 people in the western part of the Territory to divert to 
 their own borders the stream of immigration then pour- 
 ing from the South into Missouri ("Upper Louisiana"), 
 as is shown by a petition from 354 citizens of Randolph 
 and St. Clair counties) now in southwest Illinois, bor- 
 dering on the Mississippi River, sent to the Congress in 
 
 ^ This prohibition of slavery in the Northwest Territory was voted 
 for in the Congress of the Confederation (1787) by every delegate 
 from the Southern States. 
 
 ' State Papers, First Session, Tenth Congress, Volume I. 
 
232 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 December, 1805. They prayed that the Congress would 
 divide the Indiana Territory, and erect a separate Terri- 
 torial government, and consent to the introduction of 
 slaves into it, either unconditionally or under such re- 
 strictions, etc. ; and among the reasons given was that 
 "the rage for emigration to Upper Louisiana would not 
 only in a great measure cease, but have a tendency to 
 enhance the value of the public lands on the east side 
 of the Mississippi, render their sale rapid, and by an in- 
 crease of its population place in a flourishing situation 
 the country, which," etc' 
 
 The report of the committee to whom was referred 
 the petition of the Territorial Legislature, submitted to 
 the Senate by Senator Jesse Franklin of North Caro- 
 lina, was, "That it is not expedient at this time to sus- 
 pend the 6th Article, " etc. ^ There is aot a hint in any 
 of the proceedings that there was any moral or sectional 
 question involved in the "extension of slavery." "The 
 abstract question of liberty or slavery, ' ' said the peti- 
 tion of the Legislature, "is not considered as involved 
 in a suspension of the said Article, inasmuch as the 
 number of slaves in the United States would not be aug- 
 mented by the measure," etc.; but, on the contrary, 
 the negro would exchange "a situation which admits not 
 the most distant prospect of emancipation for one which 
 presents no considerable obstacles to his wishes." 
 
 As has been said, the advocates of the doctrine that 
 "all men were created equal," did not, with rare ex- 
 ceptions, include the negro among "men". They 
 
 ■ State Papers, First Session, Ninth Congress, Volume II. 
 
 'This movement began in 1803. A delegate convention called and 
 presided over by Governor Harrison, sent a memorial to the House 
 of Representatives; and John Randolph, chairman of a special com- 
 mittee to which the matter v?as referred, reported against suspend- 
 ing the anti-slavery article (March, 1803). — Hinsdale, 352. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 233 
 
 framed all the early Constitutions with clauses discrimi- 
 nating against him, or they passed laws imposing either 
 direct or indirect disabilities on him ; and the emanci- 
 pated negro's social status was — and is now — about the 
 same in all the States. But the number of persons who 
 believed that some method of emancipation ought to 
 have been adopted, was considerable in all the States: 
 and in this number were included many of the leaders 
 in church and state. In proof of this the figures already 
 given will suffice for the so called Slave States. The nor- 
 mal rate of increase of the negro race, per decade, has been 
 shown to be 13.61 per cent; whereas the rate of increase 
 of free blacks in the Southern States was (from 32,635 in 
 1790 to 61,241 in 1800) more than 87 percent in the 
 first census decade, (from 61,241 in 1800 to 108,265 in 
 1810) more than 76 per cent in the second decade, and 
 (from 108,265 in 1810 to 136,434 in 1820) more than 26 
 per cent in the third decade. 
 
 Whatever other causey may have contributed to this 
 reduction of' the rate, its date points to a new danger 
 whose portentous shadow was then begining to fall on 
 the South — the determination of a powerful party in the 
 Northern States to restrict slavery to the States where 
 it promised to remain permanent, to prevent the admis- 
 sion into the Union of any more States whose interests 
 would be identical with those of the Southern States, 
 and to insure to the JNorthern States the unrestricted 
 control of the common government of the States. ' 
 
 This determination, which had its beginning in the 
 
 ' These agitators, to conceal their real object, put on the garb of 
 patriotism, and pretended that the migration of Southern men with 
 their slaves into the common territory of the States would endanger 
 the Union. And this danger to the Union was many times magni- 
 fied when Mrs. Stowe spread the slaves all over the country, from 
 the Mississippi to the Pacific, thus diluting the slaves from 45 to 15 
 per ten square miles. "If," said she (Uncle Tom's Cabin, p. 74), 
 
234 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 struggles over the assumption of State debts and-the 
 grauting of bounties to certain classes in the Northeast- 
 ern States, manifested itself in 1820 as a danger to the 
 perpetuity of the Union. In that year the famous Mis- 
 souri question arose in Congress, which was settled by 
 the so-called Missouri Compromise. This was an unwise 
 surrender of the South to the demands of the North ; 
 and it fell on the ear of Thomas Jefferson, then seventy- 
 seven years of age, as "a flrebell in the night." "He 
 saw in it the end of the Union of the Constitution. 
 
 The leaders in this opposition to the "extension of 
 slavery" were not abolitionists. They belonged to the 
 most intelligent class of people in the New England and 
 Middle States ; and they would have scouted a proposition 
 
 "all the broad land between the Mississippi and the Pacific becomes 
 one great market for bodies and souls, and human property retains 
 the locomotive tendencies of this nineteenth century, the trader 
 and catcher may yet be among our aristocracy" — a probability 
 which had long before become a reality in Mrs. Stowe's section of 
 the Union through the gains of a buSiness in which the trader and 
 catcher were far more brutal than Haley, Loker, and Marks. 
 
 What their real object was is candidly acknowledged by Mont- 
 gomery. He says on page 324 of his American History : 
 
 "The great majority of the Northern people, believing slavery to 
 be an evil, had therefore, two chief reasons for opposing its estab- 
 lishment in the new territory west of the Mississippi : (1) They 
 thought it would be a serious injury to that part of the country" 
 (though he does not make it plain how such a supposed injury to 
 that part of the country would affect the people of the North) ; "(3) 
 They objected to it because, if the new territory should be admitted 
 as slave States the South would thereby gain such a great number 
 of Representatives in Congress that it would have a large majority. 
 That section could then, by its votes, strengthen and extend slavery" 
 (that is, spread it out and so dilute it that it would cease to be an 
 influential factor either in the South or the West), "and at the same 
 time make laws giving it power to import all kinds of manufactured 
 goods free" — that is to say, free themselves from their vassalage to 
 the "protected" and bounty-fed classes in the North. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 235 
 
 to interfere with slavery in the Southern States. ' In- 
 deed at the time of the Missouri Compromise the abo- 
 Htionists in the North were a small and discredited fac- 
 tion. Four years afterwards (1824) William Lloyd Gar- 
 rison was writing articles for the Salem (Mass.) Gazette, 
 "striving," says Alden's Cyclopaedia, "to reiiGove the 
 almost universal apathy on the subject of slavery." 
 Fourteen years afterwards the house of Lewis Tappau, 
 a prominent abolitionist in New York city, was attacked 
 . by a mob, and its contents destroyed. Fifteen years 
 afterwards (1835) Garrison was dragged through the 
 streets of Boston by a mob of "gentlemen of property 
 
 ' Montgomery says (page 197) that the invention of the cotton gin 
 put a stop to the discussion of slavery; "for now the Southern plan- 
 ters and the Northern manufacturers of cotton both found it to their 
 interest to keep the negro in bondage, since by his Jabor they were 
 rapidly growing rich." And this is the reason given by Northern 
 writers and politicians (even by Mr. Webster who, in his speech in 
 the Senate, March 7, 1850, adopted this "cotton-gin" theory), why a 
 change of sentiment took place in the South in regard to the merits 
 of the slavery question. But there is very much of ignorance un- 
 derlying the theory. The discussion of slavery was hushed in States 
 which produced no cotton, after the Southern people discovered 
 what was the real purpose of the "free soilers" and the abolition- 
 ists. According to the Census of 1850 cotton was not produced in 
 Maryland, Virginia, or Missouri; and it cut no figure in the produc- 
 tions of Kentucky (606 bales). Indeed, it is well known to every- 
 body who does not confine "the South" to a narrow strip of seaooast 
 running from the mouth of the Gape Pear River to the mouth of the 
 Appalachlcola, that the production of cottoii extended into North 
 Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas by very slow paces, and that 
 long before it became an important crop the agitation of the slavery 
 question had ceased. 
 
 In support of this "cotton-gin" theory Mr. Webster, in the speech 
 referred to, made this astounding assertion : 
 
 "In 1803, in pursuit of the idea of opening a new cotton region, the 
 United States obtained a cession from Georgia of the whole of her 
 western territory, now embracing the rich and growing States of 
 Alabama and Mississippi." As if the cession of these lands would 
 change the soil or climate ! 
 
236 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 and respectability," (quotation marks Alden's)' And in 
 1837 Eev. Elijah P. Lovpjoy, Presbyterian minister, 
 was murdered for his abolition doctrines by a mob in 
 Alton, Illinois. The state of public sentiment in New 
 England, and the estimation in which the abolitionists 
 were held " by gentlemen of property and respectabil- 
 ity," may be gathered from a sketch of the life of Wen- 
 dell Phillips in Alden's Cyclopaedia. It says: "Admit- 
 ted to the bar in 1834 — when he was twenty-three years 
 of age — he witnessed * * * the dragging of Wil-_ 
 liam Lloyd Garrison through the streets by a mob of 
 'gentlemen of property and respectability.' From that 
 day he avowed the anti-slavery sentiments.* * * He 
 sacrificed for a despised cause all the advantages of his 
 high social position, fine education * * * ; and in 
 1839 relinquished the profession of the law because he 
 would not act under an attorney's oath to support .the 
 Constitution of the United States with its guaranties of 
 slavery. His first remarkable speech was in Faneuil 
 Hall, December 8, at a meeting promoted by Dr. Wil- 
 liam E. Channing, to denounce the murder of the Rev. 
 Elijah P. Lovejoy * * * Attorney-General James 
 T. Austin opposed the resolutions, comparing the pro- 
 slavery mob to Revolutionary patriots. * * * In 
 184:3'4: he (Phillips) was prominent in denouncing the 
 compromises of the United States Constitution" (declar- 
 ing it to be "a covenant with death and an agreement 
 with hell"), "and then, and far into the 'fifties,' show- 
 ing serene courage in speaking boldly in the face of 
 threatened attacks of mobs, ' ' etc. 
 
 This man and his sympathizers were avowed advo- 
 cates of a dissolution of the Union, in order to free their 
 
 'The Legislature of Georgia offered a reward of |5,000 for the arrest 
 and conviction, according to the laws of that State, of William 
 Lloyd Garrison, just before he was mobbed in Boston. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 237 
 
 consciences from a sort of vicarious -remorse for the 
 sin of slavery in the South. ' 
 
 But a dissolution of the Qnion was far from the aims 
 of the "free soil" agitators. A dissolution would de- 
 prive them of all the advantages of the sectional suprem- 
 acy which they saw in their reach. Nor vi^ere they less 
 strenuous in their opposition to the abolition of slavery 
 for the reason given by Montgomery, and for another 
 reason which can be found in a speech delivered in the 
 House of Eepreseutatives, March 31, 1897, by the Hon. 
 Joseph H. Walker, of Massachusetts. He criticised 
 Southern Statesmen for their free-trade opinions, and, 
 if his language is not misunderstood, he was following 
 the late Mr. Blaine in attempting to brand as three cog- 
 nate evils slavery, free-trade, and secession. A portion 
 of his text was a speech delivered in the House of Rep- 
 resentatives in 1832 by the Hon. George McDuffie, of 
 South Carolina. Under the caption: "Protection de- 
 manded to give us the control of the home market," he 
 says: "But prosperity did come to the North, and Mr. 
 McDuffie, feeling that a portion of the profits of the un- 
 paid (slave) labor of the South was shared by the North 
 through the system of protection, was determined * * 
 to deprive the North of its prosperity, that the South 
 
 ' In Eli Thayer's Kansas Crusade (18S9), page 108, he says: "In the 
 Liberator of July 13, 1855, there is the following record : 
 
 " 'Thomas Wentworth Higginson was the next spealser. His decla- 
 ration of his belief in the certainty of the dissolution of these States, 
 and of his own readiness for that event, met with the general and 
 evidently carefully considered assent of the audience.' " 
 
 And this Mr. Higginson, dear reader, was Colonel of a regiment of 
 colored troops laised in South Carolina ; was wounded at Wiltown 
 Bluff, S. C, in 1863; and is now beyond question receiving a liberal 
 pension for his services in preventing a "dissolution of these States. " 
 
238 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 might reach the whole of what they felt to be their every 
 advantage from its unpaid labor conditions.'" 
 
 No; these "gentlemen of property and respectability" 
 not only felt no sympathy for the abolitionists ; but, on 
 the contrary, they preferred that slavery in the South 
 should be preserved, their only ground of complaint 
 against the Southerners being that they were unwilling 
 to permit a portion of the profits of their slave labor 
 to be sent by Federal law to make the North prosperous. 
 Even as late as 1860 they declared in their platform that 
 "the right of each State to order and control its own 
 domestic institutions according to its own judgment ex- 
 clusively, is essential to that balance of power on which 
 the perfection and endurance of our political fabric de- 
 pends." 
 
 The act of Parliament passed August 28, 1833, pro- 
 viding for the emancipation of slaves throughout the 
 British dominions, and appropriating $100,000,000 to 
 indemnify the slave-owners, gave new life to the little 
 band of fanatics in the Northern States. Garrison, Phil- 
 lips, Arthur Tappan, and Lewis Tappan redoubled their 
 efforts to arouse public sentiment in favor of the aboli- 
 tion of slavery, to organize societies in all the States, 
 and to foment that zeal for reform which, as usual, be- 
 came the more active the farther it was from the evil to 
 be reformed and the more dense was the ignorance of 
 the obstacles to be removed. They agitated, they pub- 
 lished circulars and addresses, they started a "reform 
 press," and they sent lecturers over the country to 
 awaken an interest in their cause. They did more ; they 
 sent insulting circulars to Southern gentlemen, and in- 
 cendiary appeals to colored persons who could read, their 
 
 ' Page 18 of a pamphlet copy, for which this writer is indebted to 
 the courtesy of Mr. Walker. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 239 
 
 names being furnished to the agitators, it was supposed, 
 by Yankee peddlers or other emissaries. ' 
 
 There was much indignation in the South; the gentle- 
 man who paid 25 ceats postage (the insolent fellows 
 never prepaid the postage) on a package, and found on 
 opening it that it was a bundle of insulting circulars, 
 was in no amicable frame of mind toward the agita- 
 tors ; and, since about that time excitement was running 
 high because of acts of Congress designed to confer upon 
 the North a share of the profits of "the unpaid labor of 
 the South," his sense of wrong was doubly inflamed. 
 As a result, too, of the slavery agitation, real or threat- 
 ened servile insurrections threw almost every neighbor- 
 hood in the South into a fever of excitement. In South- 
 
 ' In his seventh annual message, December 2, 1835, President An- 
 drew Jackson referred to these circulars, etc., as follows: "I must 
 also invite your attention to the painful excitement produced in the 
 South, by attempts to circulate, through the mails, inflammatory 
 appeals addressed to the passions of the slaves, in prints, and in va- 
 rious sorts of publications, calculated to stimulate them to insurrec- 
 tion, and to produce all the horrors of a servile wa.r. * * * 
 
 "In leaving the care of other branches of this interesting subject to 
 the State authorities, to whom they properly belong, it is never- 
 theless proper for Congress to tafee such measures as will prevent 
 the Post- office Department, which was designed to foster an amica- 
 ble intercourse and correspondence between all the members of the 
 Confederacy, from being used as an instrument of an opposite char- 
 acter. * * * 
 
 "I would, therefore, * * * respectfully suggest the propriety of 
 passing such a law as will prohibit, under severe penalties, the cir- 
 culation in the Southern States, through the mail, of incendiary 
 publications," etc. 
 
 But nothing was done. The report of the committee to whom the 
 ' matter was referred, submitted to the Senate by Mr. Calhoun, Feb- 
 ruary 4, 1836, said: * * * "The question, then, is. Has Congress 
 such a right ? — a question of vital importance to the slave-holding 
 States. 
 
 "After examining this question with due deliberation, in all its 
 bearings, the comra^ittee are of opinion * ■* * that Congress has 
 not the right," etc. 
 
240 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ampton County, Virginia, a band of slaves under the 
 leadership of Nat Turner murdered in cold blood fifty- 
 five persons, beginning their operations on Sunday, 
 August 21, 1831. Many arrests were made all over the 
 South, many negroes, some of them possibly innocent, 
 were tried and executed. Six were hung in Wilming- 
 ton, N. C. 
 
 The dangers to the Southern people revealed by this 
 and other results of the machinations of the abolition- 
 ists of New England, aggravated by increasing activity 
 on their part, not only silenced the sincere opponents of 
 slavery in the South but led to precautionary measures 
 which were regarded by ixiany as too severe, inasmuch 
 as they diminished the privileges of the well-disposed as 
 v\^ell as the vicious. An amendment, for example, was 
 added to the Constitution of North Carolina in 1835 dis- 
 franchising free persons of color; the Legislatnre passed 
 an act making it a misdemeanor to teach a slave to read 
 and write (except figures) ; and other disabilities were 
 imposed on all colored persons. 
 
 It strikes us of to-day as a remarkable suppression of 
 sentiment and conviction that one of the members of 
 the Convention which amended the Constitution of 
 North Carolina — the late distinguished William Gaston — 
 had given utterance to the following before the literary 
 societies of the University of North Carolina on June 
 20, 1832: "On you, too, will devolve the duty which 
 has been too long neglected, but which can not with 
 impunity be neglected much longer, of providing for 
 the mitigation, and (is it too much to hope for North 
 Carolina ? ) for the ultimate extirpation of the worst evil 
 that afflicts the Southern part of our Confederacy. Pull 
 well do you know to what I refer, for on this subject 
 there is, with all of us, a morbid sensitiveness which 
 gives warning of even an approach to it. Disguise the 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 241 
 
 truth as we may and throw the blame where we will, it 
 is slavery, which, etc. How this evil is to be encoun- 
 tered, how subdued, is indeed a difficult and delicate in- 
 quiry, which this is not the time to examine, nor the 
 occasion to discuss." I felt, however, that I could not 
 discharge my duty without referring to this subject, as 
 one which ought to engage the prudence, moderation, 
 and firmness of those who, sooner or later, must act 
 decisively upon it." 
 
 But even Gaston's voice was hushed in the presence 
 of the dangers which thickened as the intemperate zeal 
 of the New England agitators found more and more in- 
 vigorating nourishment in the alarm they excited in the 
 South. ' 
 
 In the course of time the abolition rabble suspended 
 their efforts for the immediate emancipation of the 
 slaves in the South, and united with thQ "free-soilers" 
 in the work of "multiplying, developing, and strength- 
 ening the North," with the ultimate purpose of driving 
 the Southern States out of the Union, or of trampling 
 on the Constitution and liberating the slaves in the 
 South by fire and sword. This fusion was the death 
 knell of the Union of the Constitution. 
 
 Then "the extension of slavery" became in the minds 
 of the ignorant a multiplying of the number of slaves; 
 and the fanatics were willing to take Beecher's advice 
 and start to Kansas with "the Bible and Sharpe's rifles. " 
 
 Then, too, the "campaign liar" — it was campaign 
 every day in the year — became abundant; and the con- 
 test between those, on the one hand, who insisted on a 
 strict observance of the conditions on which the Union 
 was formed, and those, on the other hand, who held 
 that our Federal was a National Government, with noth- 
 
 ■ See Note U. 
 
 16 
 
242 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ing to guide it except its own discretion, was now repre- 
 sented to Christendom as a contest between slavery and 
 anti-slavery. Every strict constructionist was contemp- 
 tuously thrust into the "pro-slavery" party, including 
 even Thomas Jefferson, whose election to the Presidency 
 in 1801 began to be spoken of as the "advent of the slave 
 power."' And such was the success crowning their 
 labors that by 1860 they had made themselves respecta- 
 ble in some States in the North, and in Massachusetts, 
 as events proved, they constituted a majority of the 
 people; and the uninformed were, in the New England 
 States at least, yielding to the preaching of the fierce 
 fanatics, and accepting their assertions that the strug- 
 gle for sectional control of the Federal Government was 
 nothing less than an "irrepressible conflict" between 
 liberty and slavery — between the ' ' great moral ideas ' ' 
 
 ' Everybody who reads knows that Mr. .Jefferson was opposed to 
 slavery. But this "slave power" fiction can be found in any mod- 
 ern sketch of the life of John Adams as his excuse for refusing to 
 extend to Mr. Jefferson the courtesy supposed to be due from a retir- 
 ing President to his successor. 
 
 Alden's CycIopsBdia (Art. John Adams) says "The slave power 
 was also beginning to be a factor in domestic politics, under the 
 leadership of Jefferson, and so, on the election of his rival to the 
 Presidential chair, Adams vacated the office without even waiting 
 to see his successor take his seat." And yet this same Cyclopoedia 
 (Art. Massachusetts) says that the nineteen electoral votes of Massa- 
 chusetts in 1804 were cast for Mr. Jefferson. 
 
 This "slave power" falsehood figures also in the Encyclopaedia 
 Britannica, Ninth Edition, with American Revisions and Additions, 
 Volume I, page 142. Accounting for the defeat of Mr. Adams, it 
 says: "Owing to this division of his own friends, rather than to a 
 want of public confidence, at the conclusion of the four years, etc. , 
 Mr. Adams was not reelected. Perhaps this was ii:i some measure 
 owing to the preponderance of the slave States, in which Mr. .Jeffer- 
 son, his rival, and a proprietor of slaves, had a fellow-feeUng among 
 the chief of the people." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 243 
 
 of the North and one of the " twin rehcs of barbarism " 
 in the South. ' In the newspapers, in the magazines, in 
 the stump speeches, and in the sermons and lectures, 
 every phase of slavery was discolored; the Southern 
 slave-owner was represented to the ignorant as a mons- 
 ter ; and the humanity which the most sordid self-interest 
 would dictate jvas denied to him. ^ But perhaps the most 
 effective appeal to the laboring class was the picture of 
 the slave-holder as an idle aristocrat who reveled in wealth 
 at the expense of his "unpaid" labor; and whose idleness 
 gave him opportunities of devising schemes to enable the 
 "slave power" to inflict untold imaginary evils on the 
 North. 
 
 The charge against the Southern man which more 
 effectually than any other wrought on the sensibilities 
 of the humane, was that his laborers received no 
 
 wages" ; that they worked from Monday morning till 
 
 a 
 
 ' These "great moral ideas" were gradually embodied in the pub- 
 lic mind into a "higher law" than the Constitution, that instru- 
 ment and its supporters falling into discredit. That most powerful 
 of all the arguments of the abolitionists (Uncle Tom's Cabin), whose 
 dramatic interest caused it to be translated into more languages 
 than any other work written in the English language, sneered at 
 the Constitution in this wise: "So spoke this poor, heathenish Ken- 
 tuckian, who had not been instructed in his constitutional relations, 
 and consequently was betrayed into acting in a sort of Christianized 
 manner, which, if he had been better situated and more enlight- 
 ened, he would not have been left to do." — ^(P. 64). 
 
 ', It was the insolent abuse of Senator Butler (in his absence) by 
 Senator Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts, delivered from the high 
 perch, of his lofty ignorance of the history of his own State, which 
 caused Representative Brooks, of South Carolina (a relative of But 
 ler), to make what Northern writers call a "murderous assault" on 
 Mr. Sumner. 
 
 Mr. Sumner pretended to be laid up for three years, traveled over 
 Europe exhibiting his sores, posing as a martyr, and denouncing the 
 "barbarism, of slavery." 
 
244 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Saturday night with scant food and no wages. And 
 this falsehood became imbedded among the foundations 
 on which so-called "American History" has been built 
 up. The truth, however, is that the slave was cared for 
 from, infancy to old age, sick or well, and enjoyed more 
 of the necessaries and comforts of life than, with ex- 
 ceedingly rare exceptions, he has enjoyed since 1865; 
 and taking into account the care of his mother, of him 
 as an infant, as a child, and as an old and helpless man 
 (including losses by death), it is quite likely that the 
 "wages" paid by his owner were equal to the wages re- 
 ceived by laborers of like skill in the Northern States, 
 while his hours of labor were shorter. On both of these 
 points the testimony of the New York World is worth 
 recording. Eeferring to the strike of the garment-mak- 
 ers in New York in the first half of the year 1897, it 
 said : ' ' The negro slave was at least well fed, well housed, 
 well clothed, and not overworked. There was nowhere 
 in negro slavery such cruelty, such want or squalid and 
 hopeless poverty as that which an inexorable 'economic 
 law' imposes upon the journeymen tailors who are just 
 now striking for the right to keep soul and body to- 
 gether. These people work more hours in the day than 
 any man or animal, can endure."' 
 
 As to houses, the Springfield (Mass.) Republican, 
 quoted in Public Opinion, December 27, 1894, stated that 
 1,333,000 people in New York City hved in 39,138 tene- 
 ment houses, a fraction over 34 persons to the house — 
 a " tenement house being defined by law," says Alden's 
 Cyclopaedia, "as a house occupied by three or more fami- 
 lies living independently * * *= or by more than 
 two families on a floor," etc. "The Health Depart- 
 ment," says this Cyclopaedia, "found five families in a 
 
 ' Prom Wilmington (N. C.) Messenger of June 6, 1897. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 245 
 
 room 12 by 12 feet square; another family paying $8.50 
 per month for a room 7 by 7 feet on a top floor." And, 
 yet, "in 1880," says the same authority, "the average 
 number of persons to a dwelling was about half that in 
 Brooklyn, Boston and London." 
 
 On the general subject of the comparative conditions 
 of the "unpaid" laborer of the ante-bellum South and 
 the wage-earner of the North, let us hear what was said 
 by the Journal of the Knights of Labor, copied in Pub- 
 lic Opinion. February 28, 1895: 
 
 ' ' LAND OF THE SLAVE. 
 
 "The Eepublic is a delusion, freedom is a dream, and 
 the song of liberty is a funeral dirge. * * * The 
 last hope of the poor is being squeezed out. Autocrats 
 rule, rob, and revel. Labor is hampered, hungry, and 
 haggard. All the bullets, bayonets, and bludgeons of the 
 country are centralized around stolen dollars. * * * 
 Sixty million voices demand justice for overworked and 
 underpaid labor," etc. 
 
 Such a wail never went up from the "chattels" of the 
 South ; and yet the people who by misgovernment have 
 tilled the land with tramps (a class of unfortunates 
 never heard of till twelve years after the Government 
 fell exclusively into the hands of "the North"),' and 
 erected a virtual plutocratic tyranny over these once 
 free and co-equal sovereign States, are demanding the 
 admiration of all lovers of freedom because they made a 
 freeman of the negro in a land where he is denied re- 
 spectable employment except from the Southern white 
 man, and in which the "humanitarians" refuse to give 
 him control of even a fourth-class post-oflfice anywhere 
 else than in the South ! 
 
 ' See Note V. 
 
246 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Note D. 
 
 In Virginia the anti-sla-very sentiment, which was perhaps more 
 demonstrative than in North Carolina, was silenced by the same 
 causes. Nat Turner's insurrection produced a profound impression, 
 and possible dangers it foreshadowed excited the emancipationists 
 to renewed efforts. "Men began to think and reason about the evils 
 and insecurity of slavery; the subject of emancipation was discussed 
 both publicly and privately, and was prominently introduced into 
 the popular branch of the Legislature at the ensuing session of 
 1831-'32. * * * The debate which sprang up, upon the abstract 
 proposition declaring it expedient to abolish slavery, was character- 
 ized by all the powers of argument and all the graces of eloquence. 
 
 * * * After an animated contest, the question was settled by 
 a kind of compromise, in which the evils of slavery were distinctly 
 recognized, but that views of expediency required that further ac. 
 tion on the subject should be postponed. That a question so vitally 
 important would have been renewed with more success at an earlier 
 subsequent period, seems more than probable, if the current opin- 
 ions of the day can be relied on ; but there were obvious causes in 
 operation which paralyzed the friends of abolition, and have had 
 the effect of silencing all agitation on the subject. The abolition- 
 ists in the Northern and Eastern States, gradually increasing their 
 strength as a party, became louder in their denunciations of slavery, 
 and more and more reckless in the means adopted for assailing the 
 Constitutional rights of the South. The open and avowed security 
 given to fugitive slaves, not only by the efforts of private societies, 
 but by public oflBcial acts in some of the free States, together with 
 the constant circulation of incendiary tracts, calculated to endanger 
 the safety of slave-holding communities, have awakened a spirit of 
 proud and determined resistance ; and now it is almost impossible to 
 tell when the passions shall have sufQciently cooled for a calm con- 
 sideration of the subject." ' 
 
 NOTB V. 
 In pursuance of the policy to " multiply, develop, and strengthen 
 the North,'" the Homestead Act of May 30, 1863, was passed, oflFer- 
 ing extraordinary inducements to foreigners to flock to the shores 
 of the Northern States ; and, as if this were not enough, an act was 
 passed on July 4, 1864, providing that foreigners might enter into 
 contracts for the payment of their passage money out of their earn- 
 ings, etc., after arrival, thus establishing the "contract labor" sys- 
 tem, which in after years "came home to roost." 
 
 'Historical Collections of Virginia by Henry Howe, published in 
 
 1845. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 24T 
 
 In addition to these public acts, agents were employed to bring 
 over foreigners to fill up the ranks of the armies, to swell the vol- 
 ume of business for the steamship lines and the railroads, and to set- 
 tle on the lands which had been given to the Pacific railroads. ' 
 
 To all these forces must be added the demand for labor to fill 
 army contracts at "American wages." 
 
 The result was that by 1865 the cities, the towns, the thorough- 
 fares, and the armies had drawn from the old world a considerable 
 fraction of its enterprising poor people ; and the stream continued 
 to flow. 
 
 But after a while the war ended ; army contracts were no more ; 
 the troops were gradually disbanded as they ceased to be needed to 
 keep the "rebels" in due subjecion, and to support the military 
 despotisms set up under the "reconstruction measures"; and thou- 
 sands of natives and foreigners found themselves without employ- 
 ment. 
 
 Then, for the first time in these States, the tramp made his ap- 
 pearance. 
 
 ' The building of the Union Pacific Railroad, which was com- 
 pleted May 10, 1869, was accomplished mainly by Chinese laborers, 
 the demand for them running the number of immigrants from 3,867 
 in 1867 to 10,684 in 1868,, and 14,902 in 1869. In well-informed cil-cles 
 it is believed that, without this cheap labor, the road could not 
 have been built. 
 
248 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 It would not be easy to find in the history of contests 
 between nations or factions of men any epithet more 
 inexcusable, or around which more misrepresentations 
 have clustered, than "the slave power." It has disfig- 
 ured the literature of the Northern States ; it has served 
 up there as the most effective weapon to silence any man 
 who pleaded for justice to the South; and during the 
 last thirty-two years it has often dared to show its hid- 
 eous and malignant head in the South. 
 
 Let us review the so-called historical evidence which 
 is supposed to establish the charge involved in this 
 phrase. 
 
 1. The South, by threats of refusing to go into the 
 Union under the Constitution, compelled the North to 
 consent to a continuance of the African slave trade tiU 
 1808. 
 
 It is quite true that the members of the Convention 
 from Georgia and South Carolina made some such threat ; 
 but those two States were not "the South." And it is 
 also true that the New England members, as is else- 
 where fully explained, readily consented to the demands 
 of those two States as an equivalent for the privilege 
 granted to them to monopolize the carrying trade. This 
 "bargain" was due to that spirit of concession manifested 
 by Ruf us King, a new Englander, on a different subject. ' 
 He "had always expected that, as the Southern States 
 are the richest, they would not league themselves with 
 the Northern, unless some respect were paid to their 
 superior wealth. If the latter expect those preferential 
 distinctions in commerce, and other advantages which 
 
 ' Elliot's Debates, Volume V, page 390. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 249 
 
 they will derive from the connection, they must not 
 expect to receive them without allowing some advan- 
 tages in return." 
 
 2. By threats of some sort the South drove the North 
 to yield to the demand that "three-fifths" of the slaves 
 should be counted in ascertaining the representative 
 population of the States, so as to give the South a 
 greater relative power in the administration of the Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 This charge is fully met by the records of the Congress 
 of the Confederation and of the Convention of 1787. 
 They prove that it is a child of ignorance or malice. 
 
 Under the Articles of Confederation the Congress 
 (v^herein each State cast one vote) possessed no power 
 to levy taxes on the people, but each State was bound 
 to supply the treasury by taxes collected in its own 
 borders according to , the number of acres of land 
 granted to or surveyed for any person, etc. But for 
 some reason this basis of taxation was not satisfac- 
 tory; and on April 18, 1783, some amendments to 
 the Articles were proposed to the States, one of which 
 was that the sum to be furnished by each State 
 should be "in proportion to the whole number of white 
 and other free citizens and inhabitants, of every age, 
 sex and condition,, including those bound to servitude 
 for a term of years, and three-fifths of all other persons 
 not comprehended in the foregoing description, except 
 Indians not "paying taxes," * etc. 
 
 In the adjustment of this ratio there was much differ- 
 ence of views. The purpose was to ascertain the wealth- 
 producing power of each State. And it was agreed that 
 a slave was not equal to a white man in this respect. 
 The debate (Elliot's Debates, Vol. 5, p. 79) was interest- 
 
 ' Elliot's Debates, Volume I, page 94. 
 
250 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 ing, as showing that Northern men wished to include 
 nearly all the slaves. A committee which had had the 
 subject under consideration reported "that two blacks 
 be rated as one freeman." 
 
 Mr. Wolcott, of Connecticut, was for rating them as 
 "four to three." 
 
 Mr. Carroll, of Maryland, was for rating them as 
 "four to one." 
 
 Mr. Williamson, of North Carolina, said "he was prin- 
 cipled against slavery ; and that he thought slaves an 
 encumbrance to society, instead of increasing its abihty 
 to pay taxes. ' ' 
 
 Mr. Higginson, of Massachusetts, was in favor of 
 "four to three." 
 
 Mr. Eutledge, of South Carolina, said, "for the sake 
 of the object, he would agree to rate slaves as two to 
 one, but he sincerely thought three to one would be a 
 juster proportion." 
 
 Mr. Holten, of Massachusetts, was in favor of "four 
 to one. ' ' 
 
 Mr. Osgood, of Massachusetts, was for ' 'four to three. ' ' 
 
 Mr. Lee, of Virginia, "thought two slaves were not 
 equal to one white man. ' ' 
 
 Thus it is seen that three-fifths was a larger ratio than 
 the Southern Members desired.' 
 
 The proposed amendment of the Articles of Confed- 
 eration was ratified by eleven States," and the public 
 mind acquiesced in the judgment of the Congress that, in 
 the production of wealth, five slaves were equal to three 
 white men. 
 
 Hence the Convention of 1787, when it came to imbed 
 in the Constitution the doctrine that taxation and rep- 
 
 1 See Note W. 
 
 ' Delaware and South Carolina refused to ratify. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 251 
 
 resentation ought to go together, provided that "repre- 
 sentatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among 
 the several States" according to the basis already virtu- 
 ally agreed to. 
 
 The debate on fixing a basis of representation was as 
 interesting as that on the basis of direct taxes. 
 
 "Mr. Sherman," of Connecticut, "proposed" (Elliot's 
 Debates, Vol. 5, p. 178) "that the proportion of suffrage 
 in the first branch (House of Representatives) should be 
 according to the respective numbers of free inhabi- 
 tants. ' * * * 
 
 "Mr. Eutledge proposed that the proportion of suffrage 
 in the first branch should be according to the quotas of 
 contribution. The justice of this, he said, could not be 
 contested. 
 
 "Mr. Butler, of South Carolina, urged the same idea; 
 adding that money was power; and that the States 
 ought to have weight in the Government in proportion 
 to their wealth. 
 
 "Mr. King, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Wilson, of 
 Pennsylvania, in order to bring the question to a point 
 moved 'that the right of suffrage in the first branch * * * 
 ought not to be according to the rule in the Articles of 
 Confederation — one vote to each State — but according 
 to some equitable ratio of representation.' * * * 
 
 "Mr. Dickinson, of Delaware, contended for the 
 actual contributions of the States, as the rule, etc. By 
 
 1 The opposition of New Englanders to counting three-fifths of the 
 slaves in the representative population brought Mr. Williamson, of 
 North Carolina, to his feet. He "reminded Mr. Qorham (of Massa- 
 chusetts) that, if the Southern States contended for the inferiority 
 of blacks to whites when taxation was in view, the Eastern States, 
 on the same occasion, contended for their equality. " — El. Deb., 5, 396. 
 
252 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 thus connecting the interests of the States with their 
 duty, the latter would be sure to be performed, i * * * 
 
 "On the question for agreeing to King's and Wilson's 
 motion it passed in the affirmative. Massachusetts, 
 Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, 
 South Carolina, Georgia, aye, 7 ; New York, New Jer- 
 sey, Delaware, no, 3; Maryland, divided. 
 
 "It was then moved by Mr. Eutledge, of South Caro- 
 lina, and seconded by Mr. Butler, to add to the words 
 'equitable ratio of representation,' at the end of the 
 motion just agreed to, the words 'according to the quotas 
 of contribution.' 
 
 "On motion of Mr. Wilson, of Pennsylvania, seconded 
 by Mr. Pinckney, of South Carolina, this was postponed 
 in order to add, after the words 'equitable ratio of rep- 
 resentation, ' the words following — 'in proportion to the 
 whole number of white and other free citizens and in- 
 habitants of every age, sex and condition, including 
 
 ' Mr. Dickinson here hints at the failure of some of the States to 
 furnish their quotas of requisitions, and he evidently supposed that 
 under the new Constitution the old system would be pursued. This 
 supposition seems to have prevailed throughout the States. In the 
 North Carolina Convention which met in Hillsboro,' July 1, 1788, 
 and declined to carry the State into the new Union, Mr. Qowdy, of 
 Guilford County, objecting to the plan of the Constitution, said: 
 "Mr. Chairman, this clause of taxation will give an advantage to 
 some States over the others. It will be oppresssive to the Southern 
 States. Taxes are (to be) equal to our representation. To augment 
 our taxes, and increase our burdens, our negroes are to be repre- 
 sented. * * * I wish not to be represented with negroes if it in 
 creases my burdens." To this Mr. Davie replied that it was the 
 "same principle (three- fifths of the slaves) which was proposed some 
 years ago by Congress, and assented to by twelve of the States." — 
 Elliot's Debates, 4, 30. 
 
 Another objection to the plan was that there would be two sets of 
 tax-gatherers in every State. To this Mr. Hamilton, in No. XXX of 
 the Federalist, replied that if Congress collected direct taxes, it 
 would, in his opinion, "make use of the State officers and State regu- 
 lations." 
 
THE flODTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 263 
 
 those bound to servitude for a term of years, and three- 
 fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the fore- 
 going description, except Indians not paying taxes, in 
 each State' — this being the rule in the act of .Congress, 
 agreed to by eleven States, for apportioning quotas of 
 revenue on the States, and requiring a census only 
 every five, seven, or ten years. 
 
 "On the question Massachusetts, Connecticut, New- 
 York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Caro- 
 lina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye, 9 ; New Jersey, Dela- 
 ware, no, 2." 
 
 This was in committee of the whole House ; and when 
 Gorham, of Massachusetts, reported the plan to the 
 Convention, and Patterson, of New^ Jersey, objected to 
 it on the ground that the voting ought to be as in the 
 old Congress, Mr. Eufus King made the remarks already 
 quoted in another connection. 
 
 Thus the basis of taxation agreed to by eleven States 
 under the old system was properly adopted — on a mo- 
 tion made, too, by a Northern Member — as the basis of 
 representation as well as of taxation in the Constitu- 
 tion; and nothing short of stupidity could find any "slave 
 power" in it. 
 
 But Horace Greeley found it (American Confiict, Vol. 
 I, pp. 43-46). He utterly ignores (if he knew anything 
 about it) the reason for counting three-fifths of the 
 slaves, just as he ignores the "bargain" between the 
 New England M embers and those from Georgia and 
 South Carolina by which the former secured "preferen- 
 tial distinctions in commerce." He says: "If slaves are 
 human beings, why should they not be represented 
 like other human beings ? * * * If, on the other 
 hand, you consider them property * * * why should 
 they be represented any more than ships, houses, or cat- 
 tle ? * * * * We can only answer that slavery and 
 
254 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 reason travel different roads. * * * The Conven- 
 tion, without much debate or demur, spht the differ- 
 ence, by deciding that the basis alike of representation 
 in Congress and of direct taxation, should," etc. 
 
 Eeferring to the slave trade provision he represents 
 Georgia and South Carolina as threatening " No slave 
 trade, no Union!" as if there were not a Union then 
 existing, of which they were members! "But," he 
 says, "the ultimatum presented by the still slave-hungry 
 States of the extreme South was imperative, and the 
 necessity of submitting to it was quite too easily con- 
 ceded. Roger Sherman, of Connecticut, was among 
 the first to admit it. " ' 
 
 3. The third crime charged to the "slave power" is 
 defined thus by Greeley: "At length, when the Consti- 
 tution was nearly completed, slavery, through its at- 
 torney, Mr. Butler of South Carolina, presented its little 
 bill for extras. Like Oliver Twist, it wanted 'some 
 more. ' Its new demand was that slaves escaping from 
 one State into another, might be followed and legally 
 claimed. The requirement, be it observed, was entirely 
 outside of any general and obvious necessity. No one 
 could pretend that there was anything mutual in the 
 obligation it sought to impose. * * * The old Con- 
 federation had known nothing like it ; yet no one as- 
 serted that the want of an interstate law was among 
 the necessities or grievances which had impelled the as- 
 sembling of this Convention, ' ' etc. 
 
 The "old Confederation " had known something like 
 it, and the very year when Mr. Butler presented his 
 "little bill" (July 13), the Congress of the Confedera- 
 
 ' Greeley seems to have been laboring under \ he delusion that the 
 North had been appointed by some competent authority to prohibit 
 the importation of slaves into the Southern States, and that Geor- 
 gia and South Carolina, by threats of "Disunion," frightened it into 
 concessions ! 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 255 
 
 tion added this proviso to the anti-slavery Article (the 
 6th) in the Ordinance for the government of the North- 
 west Territory: "That any person escaping into the 
 same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed 
 in any one of the original States, such fugitive may be 
 lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claim- 
 ing his or her labor or service as aforesaid." 
 
 So that Butler's proposition was simply to extend this 
 provision to the States ; and the propriety of doing so 
 seems to have been questioned by nobody. Greeley, 
 himself, quoting from Madison's Papers, Vol. 3, pp. 145 
 and 146, shows in a footnote that Butler's motion was 
 agreed to unanimously — "nem. con"., as Madison wrote 
 it.' 
 
 4. The "slave power" acquired Louisiana for the un^ 
 worthy purpose of expanding itself and insuring its do- 
 minion over the Union. 
 
 Mr. Greeley embodies this charge in the following 
 passage. Vol. I, p. 354: " 'Why can't you let slavery 
 alone ?' was imperiously or querulously demanded at the 
 North" — by those, he means, who believed that the 
 Constitution ought to have been respected — "through- 
 out the long struggle preceding that bombardment (Sum- 
 ter), by men who should have seen, but would not, that 
 
 ' "It was a matter of common practice to return fugitives before 
 the Constitution was formed. Fugitive slaves from Virginia to 
 Massachusetts were restored by the people of Massachusetts. At 
 that day there was a great system of apprenticeship at the North, 
 and many apprentices at the North, taking advantage of circum- 
 stances and of vessels sailing South, thereby escaped ; and they were 
 restored on proper claim and proof. That led to a clear, express, 
 and well-defined provision in the Constitution," etc. — Webster's 
 Reception Address at Buffalo, May 33, 1851. 
 
 So it seems that the provision of the Constitution applied to fugi- 
 tive apprentices (white persons) as well as to fugitive slaves; and all 
 the talk about avoiding the use of the word slave in the Constitu- 
 tion goes for nothing. 
 
256 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 slavery never let the North alone, nor thought of so 
 doing. 'Buy Louisiana for us!' said the slave-holders. 
 'With pleasure.' 'Now Florida.' 'Certainly,' " etc. 
 
 This charge is as baseless as any of the preceding ; and 
 Mr. Greeley's "Slavery never let the North alone" is not 
 only baseless, but silly. The purchase of Louisiana was 
 negotiated by Mr. Jefferson, who was a pronounced op- 
 poaent of slavery, and for reasons which Mr. Greeley 
 had no excuse for not knor/ing. 
 
 The subject is quite fully discussed in the Statesman's 
 Manual, Vol. I, pp. 232-40 — a work which seems never 
 to seek opportunities of commending Southern men or 
 measures. 
 
 During the session of Congress which closed on March 
 3, 1803, an act was passed authorizing the President to 
 call upon the Governors of "such States as he might 
 deero expedient, for a detachment of militia, not exceed- 
 ing 80,000, or to accept the services of any corps of vol- 
 unteers, in lieu of militia, for a term of twelve months" ; 
 and $25,000 were appropriated for the erection of arse- 
 nals on the western waters. 
 
 "There was at this time much apprehension of a war 
 with Spain, which induced Congress to take the meas- 
 ures of precaution above-mentioned. The disputes with 
 the Spanish Government respecting the southwestern 
 boundary line of the United States, and the right of 
 navigating the Mississippi, had often caused difficulties 
 between the people of the west and southwest and the 
 Spanish authorities and inhabitants of the Spanish ter- 
 ritories. ' ' In 1802 it was learned that by a secret treaty 
 Spain had in 1800 ceded Louisiana to France. '^By a 
 treaty with Spain, in 1795, that Government had granted 
 to the United States the right of deposit at New Or- 
 leans for three years, after which the privilege was 
 either to be continued, or an equivalent place assigned 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 257 
 
 on another part of the banks of the Mississippi. In Oc- 
 tober, 1802, the Spanish intendent, by proclamation, 
 declared that the right of deposit at New Orleans no 
 longer existed. 
 
 "This measure caused much excitement among the 
 people of the western States and Territories in the val- 
 ley of the Mississippi. " The excitement increased when 
 those people heard of the secret treaty with Prance, and 
 had reason to believe the suspension had been ordered 
 by the French Government. 
 
 Mr. Jefferson, in view of the supposed well-founded 
 opinion, that a French army was coming over to take 
 possession of Louisiana, wrote to Mr. Livingston, Uni- 
 ted States Minister to France, that if this were done, the 
 United States must become allies of Great Britain and 
 antagonists of France. "He then suggests, however, 
 that if France considers Louisiana as indispensable to 
 her interests, she may still cede to the United States the 
 Island of New Orleans. * * * That this cession 
 would, in a great degree, remove the causes of irrita- 
 tion, " etc. 
 
 Mr. Jefferson did not contemplate the cession of the 
 whole of Louisiana Territory; this was a proposition of 
 Napoleon himself. And not even the X-rays can reveal 
 any "slavery" in the transaction. There is no hint of 
 such a reason for the purchase in the Statesman's Man- 
 ual, nor anywhere else, except in the brain of a mod- 
 ern statesman of the Greeley type. 
 
 As to Florida, if it was purchased to strengthen the . 
 "slave power," it is remarkable that that power did not 
 secure two Senators in Congress by erecting all or a part 
 of the T^erritory into a State until 1845— twenty-six 
 years after the purchase. The population in 1830 was 
 nearly 36,000, or about 7,000 more than that of Ne- 
 
 17 
 
258 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 braska when Mr. Greeley's political sympathizers made 
 a State of it. 
 
 But Mr. Greeley wished to belabor the South, and he 
 was not scrupulous in selecting weapons. 
 
 5, The "slave power" annexed Texas for the purpose 
 of strengthening itself. 
 
 There may be some truth in this charge ; but possibly 
 there were good and sufficient reasons for the annexa- 
 tion, aside from any party or sectional advantage. The 
 population of Texas was composed almost entirely of 
 emigrants from the States of the Union; they were 
 anxious for some sort of an alliailce with the United 
 States as a shield against aggressions from Mexico; and 
 the election of Mr. Polk on an annexation platform re- 
 moves any suspicion of intrigue on the part of the "slave 
 power." The platform declared for "the re-annexation 
 of Texas at the earliest practicable period" ; and Mr. 
 Polk received the electoral votes of Maine, New Hamp- 
 shire, New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois, and 
 Michigan (Benton, 2, 6-2rt) — States which certainly were 
 not favorable to an expansion of the "slave power." 
 
 But if we grant that the motive was solely what the 
 traducers of the South insist it was, the necessity for 
 self-defense against the "eating out" of their substance 
 by the commercial and manufacturing classes in the 
 Northeastern and Middle States and the squandering of 
 the property belonging to all the States, was a sufficient 
 justification. 
 
 6. The "slave power" trampled on a sacred compact 
 which it had made with "freedom" — the so-called Mis- 
 souri Compromise; or, in the words of Eli Thayer, 
 "ventured foolishly to overthrow a time-honored com- 
 pact and subject herself to a charge of bad faith." ' 
 
 ' Kansas Crusade, page 32. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 269 
 
 It would be a long and tedious work to show by re- 
 viewing acts of Congress the utter groundlessness of this 
 accasation ; and the reader shall not be asked to do more 
 than weigh the evidence presented by a few decisive 
 facts. 
 
 a. The Constitution conferred on the Congress no 
 power over slavery in any of the territory ' ' belonging 
 to the United States." 
 
 b. Article HI of the treaty with France stipulated 
 that "the inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be in- 
 corporated in the Union of the United States, and ad- 
 mitted as soon as possible according to the principles of 
 the Federal Constitution to the enjoyment of all the 
 rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the 
 United States; and. in the meantime, they shall be 
 maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their 
 liberty, property, and the religion which they profess. "" 
 
 c. African slavery existed in the Louisiana Territory — ■ 
 slaves were property — at the time of the treaty of cession. 
 Hence, since treaties are declared to be a portion of 
 the "supreme law of the land," any interference of the 
 Congress with the institution of slavery in the said Ter- 
 ritory, was a double violation of "law"; and was, ipso 
 facto, null and void, or, as Brightley's Digest, Vol. I, 
 p. 647, says in a footnote, was "null and void, ah in- 
 cepto. ' ' 
 
 But if it had been a valid law, the charge of "bad 
 faith" on the part of the South was without founda- 
 tion, for the following reasons : 
 
 a. The Missouri Compromise was section 5 of the Act 
 of March 6, 1820, the 1st section of which authorized 
 the people to form a State Constitution ; and declared 
 that "the said State, when formed, shall be admitted 
 
 ' United States Statutes at Large, Volume VIII, page 303. 
 
260 THE SOUTH AGADfST THE NORTH. 
 
 into the Union upon an equal footing with the original 
 States, in all respects whatsoever." 
 
 b. The people, thereupon, proceeded to form a Con- 
 stitution, organize a State government, and elect all nec- 
 essary officials, including Presidential Electors. 
 
 c. But the restrictionista repudiated the "time-hon- 
 ored compact" at the next session of Congress; they re- 
 fused to permit Missouri's electoral vote to be counted, 
 or to accord to her any of the privileges of a member of 
 the Union ; and she was admitted into the Union Aug- 
 ust 21, 1821, by an act which was opposed almost unani- 
 mously by the restrict] onists, the vote in the House of 
 Eepresentatives being 87 to 81. 
 
 There was, therefore, no compromise between the 
 North a;nd the South which any code of morals recog- 
 nized among sane men would hold to be binding on the 
 South, The restrictionists did not agree to permit Mis- 
 souri to com,e into the Union as a Slave State on condi- 
 tion that the South woidd consent to recognize the par- 
 allel of 36 degrees and 30 minutes as the boundary be- 
 tween '■^ slavery''^ and ^'freedom" in the territory west 
 of the Mississippi.'^ 
 
 Many other accusations have been brought against 
 the "slave power" ; but they belong to that class of in- 
 dictments which impose on the accused the necessity of 
 proving a negative. Hence we may pass them by as 
 not worthy of notice. 
 
 Such, dear reader, were the principal weapons in the 
 armory of the South's traducers during all the ante-bel- 
 lum days; and being regarded as the ravings of igno- 
 
 ' The whole subject, with references to authorities, is fully pre- 
 sented in Stephens's Pictorial History of the United States; and the 
 dates of the so-called Missouri Compromise, and of the act to admit 
 Missouri into the Union can be found on page 647 of Brightley's 
 Digest, Volume I. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 261 
 
 rant fanatics, not deserving of respectful refutation, they 
 passed into history. They stand as history to-day, sup- 
 plemented by such choice selections as "traitor," "oli- 
 garchy," "chivalry," "conspiracy," "insurrection," 
 etc., etc., "rebel" being regarded as a mild term. 
 
 But among all the charges against the "slave power" 
 the most ignorant and malignant of the enemies of the 
 South never stultified themselves by including the 
 charge that the South ever attempted to use the machinery 
 of the Federal Government to enrich herself at the ex- 
 pense of the North! She never asked for the privilege 
 of compelling the North to pay from 20 to 200 per cent 
 for the products of her fields and forests more than the 
 price of similar products of foreign countries; she never 
 asked for bounties to any class of her laborers; she 
 never asked for any undue participation in the distribu- 
 tion of the public lands or the proceeds of their sales ; 
 she never asked for any monopolistic privileges; and 
 she never asked for any unfair advantages to her sol- 
 diers in the distribution of pensions. Her hands are. 
 clean — admitted to be so by the silence of her enemies, 
 even if the evidence furnished by public records were 
 destroyed. 
 
 Note W. 
 
 The first movement ever made toward a disruption of tlie Union 
 was made by Massachusetts. 
 
 The plan of changing the basis of the contributions of the States 
 from Jand to population being in contemplation in the early months 
 of 1783, it was the desire of the Northeastern Members to include 
 all or nearly all of the slaves, while the Southern Members urged 
 that not even half of them should be included. The committee 
 appointed to report a plan advised that "two blacks be rated as one 
 freeman." But "for the sake of the object" the South yielded to 
 the rate of three- fifths, the first vote on this rate being as follows: 
 
 New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, divided; Rhode Island^ no; 
 Connecticut, no; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye; Maryland, 
 aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye; South Carolina, aye. 
 
262 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 The next vote was on a motion of Bland, of Virginia, to strike oat 
 the clause as amended, and the States voted as follows: 
 
 New Hampshire, aye; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye; Mary- 
 land, aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye; Massachusetts, no; 
 Rhode Island, no; Connecticut, no; Delaware, no; South Caio 
 Una, no. 
 
 "On April 1 Mr. Gorham (Massachusetts) called for the order of 
 the day, to- wit: the report on revenue, etc., and observed, as a co- 
 gent reason for hastening that business, that the Eastern States, at 
 the invitation of Massachusetts, were, with New York, about to form 
 a convention for regulating matters of common conceni, and that if 
 any plan should be sent out by Congress during their session, they 
 would probably cooperate with Congress in giving effect to it." 
 
 This was a threat of secession from the Confederacy, and it was 
 intended to coerce the South into compliance with the demands of 
 Massachusetts. It was so understood by Mr. Mercer, of Virginia, 
 who "expressed great disquietude at this information; considered it 
 as a dangerous precedent ; and that it behooved the gentleman to 
 explain fully the objects of the convention, as it would be necessary 
 for the Southern States to be, otherwise, very circumspect in agree- 
 ing to any plans on a supposition that the general Confederacy was 
 to continue." 
 
 Mr. White, of New Hampshire, informed the Members that his 
 State had declined to accede to the plan of a convention on foot. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton, who had been absent when the vote was taken, 
 moved a reconsideration, and was seconded by Mr. Osgood. "Those 
 who voted differently from their former -votes were influenced by 
 the conviction of the necessity of the change, and despair on both 
 sides of a more favorable rate of slaves." The rate of three- fifths 
 was agreed to without opposition. ' 
 
 ' Elliot's Debates, Volume V, pages 79-81. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 263 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 MR. BENTON'S VIEWS. 
 
 It is natural for most readers to suspect that a South- 
 erner who has taken a lively interest during the last 
 fifty years in the controversy between the North and 
 the South, is unable to discuss with fairness and-im- 
 partiality the causes of Southern discontent; and that 
 in the preceding chapters the motives of men have been 
 unjustly impugned, if not misunderstood, and the con- 
 sequences of their acts exaggerated. 
 
 To allay this suspicion as far as the corroborative tes- 
 timony of an undoubtedly impartial writer can do it, 
 the views af Mr. Benton are here presented. What he 
 says is valuable in another respect ; it shows that even 
 Thomas H. Benton often voted for measures which "his 
 judgment disapproved and his feelings condemned." 
 
 The following extracts are takisn from Chapter XXXII, 
 
 vol. 2, of his THIRTY YEARS IN THE UNITED STATES SEN- 
 ATE. After stating in general terms the causes of South- 
 ern discontent, he says : 
 
 "The writer of this view sympathized with that com- 
 plaint ; believed it to be, to much extent, well founded ; 
 saw with concern the corroding effect it had on the feel- 
 ings of patriotic men of the South; and often had to 
 lament that a sense of duty to his own constituents re- 
 quired him to give votes which his judgment disap- 
 proved and his feelings condemned. This complaint 
 existed when he came into the Senate (1821); it had, in 
 fact, commenced in the first years of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment (i. e., under the Constitution), at the time of 
 the assumption of the State debts, the incorporation of 
 the first national bank, and the adoption of the funding 
 system ; all of which drew capital from the South to the 
 
264 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 North. It continued to increase; and, at the period 
 (1838) to which this chapter relates, it had reached the 
 stage of an organized sectional expression in a volun- 
 tary convention of the Southern States. It had often 
 been expressed in Congress, and in the State Legisla- 
 tures, and habitually in the discussions of the people ; 
 but now it took the more serious form of joint action, 
 and exhibited the spectacle of a part of the States as- 
 sembling sectionally to complain formally of the un- 
 equal, and to them, injurious operation of the common 
 government, established by common consent for the 
 common good," and now frustrating its object by de- 
 parting from the purposes of its creation. * * * 
 
 "It (the convention) met at Augusta, Georgia, and 
 afterwards at Charleston, South Carolina; and the evil 
 complained of and the remedy proposed were strongly 
 set forth in the proceedings of the body, and in addresses 
 to the people of the Southern and Southwestern States. 
 The changed relative condition of the two sections of 
 the country, before and since the Union, was shown in 
 their general relative depression or prosperity since that 
 event, and especially in the reversed condition of their 
 respective foreign import trade. ' * * * The con- 
 vention referred the effect to a course of Federal legis- 
 lation unwarranted by the grants of the Constitution 
 and the objects of the Union, which subtracted capital 
 from one section and accumulated it in the other: pro- 
 tective tariff, internal improvemehts, pensions, national 
 debt, two national banks, the funding system and the 
 paper system; the multiplication' of offices, profuse 'and 
 extravagant expenditure, the conversion of a limited 
 into an almost unlimited government ; and the substi- 
 tution of power and splendor for what was intended to 
 
 ' The reader is requested to bear in mind that "slavery" and "free- 
 dom" cut no figure in this convention. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 265 
 
 be a simple and economical administration of that part 
 of their affairs which required ^ general head. 
 
 "These were the points of complaint — abuses — which 
 had led to the collection of an enormous revenue, chiefly 
 levied on the products of one section of the Union and 
 mainly disbursed in another * * * Unhappily 
 there was some foundation for this view of the case : 
 and in this lies the root of the discontent of the South 
 and its dissatisfaction with the Union. * * * 
 
 "What has bedn published in the South and adverted 
 to in this view goes to show that an incompatibility of 
 interest between the two sections, though not inherent, 
 has been produced by the working of the government — 
 not its fair and legitimate, but its perverted and un- 
 equal working. * * * 
 
 "The conventions of Augusta and Charleston proposed 
 their remedy for the Southern depression, and the com- 
 parative decay of which they complained. It was a fair 
 and patriotic remedy— that of becoming their own ex- 
 porters, and opening a direct trade in their own staples 
 between Southern and foreign ports. ' It was recom- 
 mended — attempted — failed. Superior advantages for 
 navigation in the North — greater aptitude of its people 
 for commerce — established course of business — accumu- 
 lated capital — continued unequal legislation in Congress ; 
 and increasing expenditures of the government, chiefly 
 disbursed in the North, and defect of seamen in the 
 South (for mariners can not be made of slaves), all com- 
 bined to retain the foreign trade in the channel which 
 had absorbed it ; and to increase it there with the in- 
 creasing wealth and population of the country, and the 
 still faster increasing extravagance and profusion of the 
 government. * * * 
 
 ' This was proposed after the adoption of the compromise tariff, 
 and when it was supposed that "protection" was dead. 
 
266 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "This is what the dry and naked figures show. To 
 the memory and imagination it is worse; for it is a tra- 
 dition of the colonies that the South had been the seat 
 of wealth and happiness, of power and opulence ; that 
 a rich population covered the land, dispensing a baronial 
 hospitality, and diffusing the felicity which themselves 
 enjoyed; that all was life, and joy, and affluence then. 
 And this tradition was not without similitude to the 
 reality, as this writer can testify ; for he was old enough 
 (born 1782) to have seen (after the Revolution) the still 
 surviving state of Southern colonial manners, when no 
 traveler was allowed to go to a tavern, but was handed 
 over from family to family through entire States; when 
 holidays were days of festivity and expectation, long 
 prepared for. and celebrated by master and slave with 
 music and feasting, and great concourse of friends and 
 relatives; when gold w^as kept in desks or chests (after 
 the downfall of continental paper) and weighed in 
 scales, and lent to neighbors for short terms without 
 note, interest, witness, or security; and on bond and 
 land security for long years and lawful usage; and 
 when petty litigation was at so low an ebb that it re- 
 quired a fine of forty pounds of tobacco ' to make a man 
 serve as constable. 
 
 "The reverse of all this was now seen and felt. * ""' * 
 ' ' Separation is no remedy for these evils, but the parent 
 of far greater than either just discontent or restless am- 
 bition would fly from. To the South the Union is a 
 political blessing; to the North it is both a political and 
 a pecuniary blessing. * * * Both sections should 
 cherish it, and the North most," etc. 
 
 ' It was fifty shillings in North Carolina. — Laws, page 132. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 267 
 
 CHAPTEE XX. 
 
 THE CAUSES AND THE CONDUCT OP THE WAR FOE THE 
 SUBJUGATION OF THE SOUTHERN STATES. 
 
 "A greajt man is great, and he is a man; what makes 
 him great is his relation to the spirit of his times, and 
 to his people ; what makes him a man is his individu- 
 aUty ; but separate these two elements, consider the man 
 in the great man, and the greatest of men appears small 
 enough. Every individuality, when it is detached from 
 the general spirit which it expresses, is full of what is 
 pitiful. When we read the secret memoirs which we 
 have of some great men, and when we follow them into 
 the details of their life and conduct, we are always quite 
 confounded to find them not only small, but, I am com- 
 pelled to say, often vicious and almost despicable." — 
 Victor Cousin, Hist. Mod. Phil. 
 
 The causes of the war between the two sections of the 
 Union, the responsibility for its inauguration, and the 
 rightfulness of the invasion of the Southern States have 
 been so consistently and so persistently misrepresented 
 to the world during the last thirty-six years that it 
 seems a daring enterprise to attempt to remove the re- 
 sulting false impressions. But truth and justice de- 
 mand the attempt ; and it is here made. 
 
 In the first Constitution of the United States there 
 were three Articles which embodied all that the South- 
 ern States ever contended for during all the years of 
 sectional strife^ 
 
 ' It is worth while to remind the reader that even the most un- 
 scrupulous traducers of the Southern States never charged them 
 with infidelity to the obligations they assumed on entering into the 
 Union. Mr. Blaine and the statesmen of his school magnified what 
 he called unfaithfulness to the Union ; but he did not dare to ac- 
 cuse them of the crime of which his own party was guilty — unfaith- 
 fulness to the Constitution. 
 
268 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 They were as follows : 
 
 "Article II. Each State retains its sovereignty, free- 
 dom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, 
 and right, which is not by this co nfe deration expressly 
 delegated to the United States in Congress assembled;" 
 
 "Article III. The said States hereby severally enter 
 into a firm league of friendship with each other, for 
 their common defense, the security of their liberties, 
 and their mutual and general welfare, binding them- 
 selves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or 
 attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account 
 of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretence 
 whatever" ; and 
 
 "Article IV. * * * The free inhabitants of each 
 State, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice 
 excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immuni- 
 ties of free citizens in the several States ; * * * no 
 imposition, duties or restrictions shall be laid by any 
 State on the property * * * of either of them. If 
 any person guilty of, or charged with treason, felony, 
 or other high misdemeanor in any State, shall flee from 
 justice, and be found in any of the United States, he 
 shall upon the demand of the Governor or executive 
 power of the State from which he fled, be delivered up 
 and removed to the State having jurisdiction of his 
 offense. Full faith and credit shall be given in each 
 of thes^ States to the records, acts, and judicial proceed- 
 ings of the courts and magistrates of every other State. " 
 
 Afterwards (1Y87), when the new Constitution was sub- 
 mitted for ratification to the several States (containing 
 the additional covenant in express terms, which had 
 been embodied in the Ordinance for the government of 
 the Northwest Territory, that fugitives from labor 
 should be delivered up — a covenant implied in Article 
 III above, and not distinctly formulated because slaves 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 269 
 
 were "property" in each of the thirteen States when 
 the Arjicles were framed), strong opposition to ratifica- 
 tion appeared in at least seven of the conventions, be- 
 cause Article II of the old Constitution was omitted. 
 It was feared, notwithstanding the asseverations of del- 
 egates to the contrary, and notwithstanding the evident 
 exclusion of powers except those ' 'herein granted, ' ' that 
 the Congress would usurp powers not delegated to it; 
 and this fear led to a demand for amendments. Accord- 
 ingly, the demand being supported by majorities in 
 nearly all the States, the first Congress promptly sub- 
 mitted to the States and they ratified ten amendments, 
 the last one being understood to supply the omission. 
 It is: "The powers not delegated to the United States 
 by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, 
 are reserved to the States, respectively, ortothe people." 
 
 The spirit, therefore, and almost the letter of Articles II, 
 III and IV of the old Constitution are contained in the 
 new one, together with the additional covenant respect- 
 ing fugitives from labor; Nothing, it is true, is said 
 about retaining sovereignty ; there was no doubt at that 
 time that each State was sovereign, free, and independ- 
 ent; and the words "delegate" and "reserve" could 
 have implied nothing less. The granticg of a sovereign 
 power does not deprive the grantor of his sovereignty, 
 nor enthrone the grantee as a sovereign. 
 
 Such was the restricted field in which the Federal 
 Government was morally bound to confine its opera- 
 tions; and such were some of the obligations assumed 
 by each State on its entrance into the Union— obliga- 
 tions and restrictions which could not be violated with- 
 out absolving an injured State from the ties which bound 
 it to the Union. ' 
 
 'This is Mr. Madison's " delicate truth " in No. XLIII of the Fed- 
 eralist, but it is a truth which can not be denied by anybody whose 
 standard of morals is worthy of respect. 
 
270 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Let US then inquire whether these restrictions and 
 obUgations have been respected. 
 
 The reader will find elsewhere discussed the violations 
 of the Constitution in 
 
 ]. The unauthorized disposal of the public lands; 
 
 3. The unjust and unauthorized assumption of the 
 State debts; 
 
 3. The bounties to Northeastern fishermen; 
 
 4. The bounties to vessels engaged in the foreign trade ,- 
 
 5. The granting of a monopoly of the coasting trade; 
 
 6. The exclusion of Southern men with their property 
 from the common territory; 
 
 7. The indirect bounties to domestic manufacturers 
 out of the pockets of the agricultural and other classes 
 of the people ; 
 
 S. The burdening of all the people with the ex- 
 penses of government in the organized Territories; and 
 
 9. The pensioning of the North's Eevolutionary sol- 
 diers at the expense of the South. ' 
 
 It remains, then, to record the infractions of the 
 mutual obligations of the States. 
 
 Some of the most flagrant v«'ere: . 
 
 1. Emigrant Aid Societies, organized under the pro- 
 tection of certain States, and for whose acts those States 
 were morally responsible, sent bloodthirsty fanatics into 
 
 'With all these infractions of the expressed or- implied rights of • 
 the States and of the people, well known lo intelligent persons, Mr. 
 Lincoln, in his first inaugural address, said; "Is it true, then, that 
 any right, plainly written in the Constitution, has been denied '! I 
 think not." And then, feeling himself securely supported by this 
 denial, he proceeded to justify the seceding States thus: "If by the 
 mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any 
 clearly written Constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of 
 view, justify revolution — certainly would, if such right were a vital 
 one." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 271 
 
 Kansas and elsewhere to murder Southern men, women, 
 and children ; ' 
 
 2. With rnoneys furnished by these societies John 
 Brown raised an army and invaded the State of Vir- 
 ginia ; ^ 
 
 3. Two of Brown's accomplices, who had been in- 
 dicted in Virginia, escaped, one to Ohio and one to lowq, ; 
 and the Governors of those Stq(,tes refused to surrender 
 them on the demand of Governor Wise, of Virginia; 
 
 4. Emissaries from those societies went (1860) to the 
 borders of Texas to incite the savage Indians to butcher 
 the people of that State : 
 
 5; Under the shadow of Bunker Hill, and by the ac- 
 tive or p9.s3ive assistance of Massachusetts, the fugitive 
 slave clause of the Constitution was trampled under the 
 feet of a mob, which took Shadrach, a fugitive slave, 
 from the officers of the law", and carried him off to a 
 place of safety; and one named Jerry was liberated in 
 S3"racuse, N. Y., under like circumstances; 
 
 6. Thirteen Northern States (Mr. Greeley undertakes 
 to deny this as to three of them) passed what were 
 called "personal liberty" laws forbidding citizens or 
 
 ' John Brown with his band of cut- throats went from house to 
 house during the dark hours of the night, called out the occupants, 
 and murdered them. 
 
 He robbed Martin Bourn of his money, guns, horses, saddles, and 
 store. Bourn's offense being that he had served on the last grand 
 jury in Lecompton. He also robbed J. M. Bernard and thirteen 
 others. 
 
 All this "assassination and midnight robbery'' was "fully justi- 
 fied" by James Redpath in his Life of Capt. John Brown. — Kansas 
 Conflict, pages 365-69. 
 
 But who ■was James Redpath? He was a writer on the New York 
 Tribune from 1852 till 1872; lie was honored by the carpet baggers 
 from the North, who were placed in control of South Carolina by 
 "the Government,' with the office of School Commissioner; and he 
 edited the North American Review from 1886 to 1888. 
 
 2 See Note X. 
 
2Y2 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 officials of those States to assist in doing what they 
 bound themselves to do when they entered into the 
 Union. ' 
 
 7. And to these must be added seventy years of mis- 
 representation of th& motives of the Southern people; 
 malignant abuse of these people ; and what Carey called 
 "insult, outrage, and injury." These offences were, in 
 principle, treason againgt the "firm league of friend- 
 ship." 
 
 This long train of infractions of the conditions on 
 which the States had agreed to unite tended to weaken the 
 bonds of Union in the States which were the chief suffer- 
 ers. But, outside of the student class in the South, who 
 enjoyed the advantages of intellectual pursuits, the un- 
 warranted legislation summarized in the nine items 
 above — producing slow, stealthy, and often misunder- 
 stood results — did not arouse in the masses of the peo- 
 ple the indignation which its injustice merited; in all 
 the later years, however, particularly after the tariff 
 troubles in South Carolina, the impression became more 
 and more pervasive that the people of the Southern 
 States had been made, by Federal legislation, tributary 
 to certain classes in the Northern States. 
 
 But partisanship and the skill of the ignorant dema- 
 gogue in tracing results to wrong causes prevented a 
 general recognition of the almost Colonial subordination 
 of the Southern States to the commercial and manufac- 
 turing States of the North. Hence the love and rever- 
 
 iln Mr. Webster's speech at Buffalo, May 32, 1851, he said: "'The 
 question, fellow- citizens (and 1 put it to you as the real question), 
 the question is whether you and the rest of the people of the great 
 State of New York, and of all the States, will so adhere to the Con- 
 stitution, will so enact and mainlain laws io preserve i hat instru- 
 ment, that you will not only remain in the Union yourselves, but 
 permit your'' (Southern) "brethren to remain in it, and help to per- 
 petuate it?" 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 273 
 
 ence for the union of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, 
 and the other distinguished "fathers" lost httle of its 
 fervor. 
 
 Biit when the successive infractions of the mutual 
 covenants of the States, like the few summarized above, 
 were flashed over the TTnion by the telegraph, the deter- 
 mination of certain NDrthern States not only to disregard 
 their obligations to their sister States in the South, but 
 to endanger social order in these States, revived and 
 emphasized the old sense of wrong ; and the sacredness 
 of the Union became an open question. Still, however, 
 as "mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils 
 are sufferable. than to right themselves by abolishing 
 the forms to which they are accustomed," the avowed 
 advocates of a dissolution of the Union constituted a 
 small faction in most of the Southern States, the great 
 majority trusting that by some means the sense of jus- 
 tice and moral obligation in the people of the Northern 
 States woiild prevail in their councils. But bodies in 
 motion overcome bodies at rest ; the appeals of those 
 whom our Northern friends called "fire-eaters" began 
 to make inroads on the Union sentiment; and when by 
 aTeombination of fanaticism, avarice,' and sectional hate, 
 
 ' It was understood in the winter of 1860-'61 that Pennsylvania, 
 which had given her electoral vote to every Democratic candidate 
 for the Presidency frorii 1796 to 1856, inclusive, except in 1840 and 
 1848, gave her vote to Mr. Lincoln because his platform favored'a 
 tariff for protection — "to encourage, " it' said, "the development of 
 the industrial interests of the whole country. ' ' 
 
 Whether this charge was well founded or not, so soon as the retire 
 ment of Southern Members from the halls of Congress gave the 
 North control of legislation, bituminous coal was taken from the 
 free list and a tax of il per ton imposed on it; pig iron, removed 
 from the 24 per cent schedule, was taxed $6 per ton ; and manufac 
 tures of iron, removed from the 24 per cent schedule or the free list, 
 were taxed from fifteen to forty dollars jper ton. — See Act of March 
 3, 1861. 
 
 18 
 
274 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 a President, representing every interest hostile to the 
 Southern States, was deelared elected (although of a 
 total popular vote of 4,680,881 he had received only 
 l,8fi5,913, or about 39 out of each 100), the quiver of 
 the "fire-eater" was filled with fresh and more effective 
 arrows; the prospect of justice in the Union was 
 dimmed ; and in South Carolina, where there still ran- 
 kled in the bosoms of the people the bitterness engen- 
 dered by their old struggle for relief from tariff burdens, 
 the "fire-eater" met with few obstacles in his path.' 
 
 South Carolina repealed her ordinance ratifying the 
 Federal Constitution, i-esumed all the powers she had 
 delegated in the Constitution, and declared herself to 
 be as free, sovereign, and independent as she was before 
 she acceded to the Confederation. She set forth the 
 reasons for her action.^ She sent Commissioners to 
 
 'In the South CaroUna Secession Convention, Delegate Parker 
 said: "It appears to me, with great deference to the opinions that 
 have been expressed, that the public mind is fully made up to the 
 great occasion that now awaits us. It is no spasmodic effort that 
 has come suddenly upon us; it has been gradually culminating for 
 a long period of thirty years. " 
 
 Mr. Inglis, another delegate, said: "As my friend (Mr. Parker) has 
 said, most of us have had this matter under consideration for the 
 lasi twenty years." 
 
 And Mr. Bhett said: "It is not anything produced by Mr. Lin- 
 coln's election, or by the non-execution of the fugitive slave law. It 
 is a matter which has been gathering head for thirty years." 
 
 To the testimony of these parties we can fortunately add that of 
 Mr. Lincoln, that the tariff controversy in 1828, 1830 and 1833 gave 
 the first impulse to secession in the South. "With rebellion thus 
 sugar-coated," he said in his message to the called session of Con- 
 gress, July 4, 1861, "they have been drugging the public mind of 
 their section for more than thirty years. ' ' 
 
 ' The principal reasons stated were that the New England States, 
 New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, 
 and Iowa had nullified the law of Congress providing for the en- 
 forcement of the Constitutional covenant respecting fugitives from 
 labor ; and that Ohio and Iowa had refused [to comply with the 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 276 
 
 President Buchanan, whose term was not yet closed, to 
 settle amicably all questions of property rights, having 
 little doubt of success, since seventeen days before the 
 passage of her • secession ordinance, he had expressed 
 this opinion iu his annual message: 
 
 "Congress may possess many means of preserving it 
 (the Union) by conciliation, but the sword was not 
 placed in their hand to preserve it by force." 
 
 This confidence of South Carolina in an amicable set- 
 tlement was not founded solely on this announcement 
 in Mr. Buchanan's message. Other acts and utterances 
 were relied on, some of which were the following: 
 
 1 . When in 1790 Mr. Hamilton, the Secretary of the 
 Treasury, became alarmed for the success of his scheme 
 to assume the debts of the several States, he appealed 
 to Mr. Jefferson, the Secretary of State, for his influ- 
 ence with Members of Congress in aid of the measure, 
 presenting the reason that, if the measure should fail, 
 the Members from the creditor States would withdraw 
 from the Congress, and there would be "a separation 
 of the States. " 
 
 2. The famous "Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions 
 of 1798, and * * * the Eeport of Mr. Madison to 
 the Virginia Legislature in 1799," adopted and reaf- 
 firmed in the platforms on which Franklin Pierce and 
 James Buchanan were elected to the Presidency, laid 
 down the doctrine that as there is no common judge 
 between the States of the Union, "each party (State) has 
 an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions 
 as of the mode andmeasure bf redress." 
 
 3. In 1803 Col. Timothy Pickering, a Senator from 
 Massachusetts, elected that year to fill a vacancy and 
 
 covenant respecting fugitives from justice (those demanded by the 
 Governor of Virginia for their participation in John Brown's 
 crimes). — See Stephens's Pictorial History, etc., 560. 
 
276 THE SOUTH AGAINST TEE NORTH. 
 
 reelected next year for a full six years' term (and was 
 elected to the House of Representatives in 18 14-) wrote 
 a letter to a friend in v/hich he asserted the right of a 
 State to withdraw from the Union. Complaining of 
 what he called the "oppressions of the aristocratic Dem- 
 ocrats' of the South," he said: "I will not despair. I 
 will rather anticipate a new Confederacy, exempt from 
 the corrupt and corrupting influence, etc. There will 
 be (and our children, at farthest, will see it) a separa- 
 tion, ''etc. And in another letter written a short time 
 afterwards he said of his proposed "separation" : "That 
 this can be accompMshed, and without spilling one drop 
 of blood, I have httle doubt. * '■ * It (the separa- 
 tion) must begin in Massachusetts. The proposition 
 would be welcomed in Connecticut ; and could we doubt 
 of New Hampshire ? But New York must be associated ; 
 and how is her concurrence to be obtained? She must 
 be made the center of the Confederacy. Vermont and 
 New Jersey would follow of course, and Rhode Island 
 of necessity" (Maine was not a State at that time). 
 
 ■i. In lS(i3 was pubhshed Judge Tucker's Blackstone, 
 in the Appendix to which, page 187. speaking of the 
 nature of the Union, he said: "Each is still a perfect 
 State, still sovereign, still independent, and still capa- 
 ble, should the occasion require, to resume the exercise 
 of its functions, as such, in thi' most unlimited man- 
 ner." 
 
 5. In 1811 the Hon. Josiah Q:iincy, a Member of Con- 
 gress from Massachusetts, opposing a bill for the admis- 
 sion of Louisiana as a State into the Union, because, as 
 the reader can infer from evidence elsewhere presented, 
 the South would be thereby strengthened in Congress, 
 said : "If this bill passes, it is my deliberate opinion that 
 
 ' The word "Democrats" was a term of leproach. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 277 
 
 it is virtually a dissolution of this Union; that it will 
 free the States from their moral obligation; and as it 
 will be the right of all, so it will be the duty of some, 
 definitely to prepare for a separation — amicably if they 
 can, vioientlyif they must."' 
 
 Mr. Quincy does not seem to have been at variance 
 with public sentiment in Massachusetts; he was hon- 
 ored with many official stations afterwards, serving in 
 the State Legislature, as judge of the Municipal Court 
 of Boston, as mayor of Boston, and from 1829 to 1846 
 as President of Harvard College. 
 
 6. In 1814 the Hartford Convention, composed of dele- 
 gates chosen by the Legislatures of Massachusetts, 
 Shode Island, and Connecticut, with some county and 
 town representatives from the other New England 
 States, published an address (after deliberating with 
 closed doors on the propriety or necessity of withdraw- 
 ing their States from the Union) in which they said: 
 
 "If the Union be destined, to dissolution * * * it 
 should, if possible, be the work of peaceable times and 
 deliberate consent. Some new form of confederacy 
 should be substituted among those States which shall 
 intend to maintain a federal relation to each other. 
 Events may prove that the causes of our calamities are 
 deep and permanent. * * * Whenever it shall ap 
 pear that the causes are radical and psrmanent, a sepa- 
 ration by equitable arrangement will be preferable to an 
 alliance by constraint among nominal friends, but real 
 enemies. ' ' 
 
 7. William Kawle, who became United States District 
 
 ' Speaker Varnum, on a point of order raised by Mr. Poindexter 
 of Mississippi, decided that Quiney's declaration of the'right or duty 
 of States to secede was out of order; but "a part of the Democrats 
 voting with the Federahsts, the House reversed" the Spealser's de- 
 cision, 56 to 53,— Hildreth, New Series, 3, 336. 
 
278 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Attorney for Pennsylvania in 1791, declined the office 
 of United States District Judge in 1792, and was Chan- 
 cellor of the Law Association of Philadelphia from 1822 
 till his death in 1836, wrote an elaborate work on the 
 Constitution, which was published in 1826. He had 
 been a firm supporter of President John Adams's Admin- 
 istration ; but when he entered upon the investigations 
 necessary to prepare himself for the composition of his 
 great work — Eawle on the Constitution — he was 
 b'rought to the same conclusion that closer study brought 
 Mr. Webster to. He said: 
 
 ."The Union is an association of the people of. Repub- 
 lics ; its preservation is calculated to depend on the pre- 
 servation of those Republics. * * * It depends on 
 the State itself, to retain or abolish the principle of rep- 
 resentation ; because it depends on itself, whether it will 
 continue a member of the Union. To deny this right, 
 would be inconsistent with the principles on which all 
 our political systems are founded; which is, that the 
 people have, in all cases, a right to determine how they 
 will be governed. 
 
 "This right must be considered as an ingredient in the 
 original composition of the G-eneral Governrpient, which, 
 though not expressed, was mutually understood," etc. 
 
 8. In 1839 ex-President John Q. Adams delivered an 
 address before the New York Historical Society, in 
 which he said : "The indissoluble link of union between 
 the people of the several States of this confederated na- 
 tion is, after all, not in the right, but in the heart. If 
 the day should ever come (may Heaven avert it) when 
 the affections of the people of these States shall be 
 alienated from each other — the bonds of political asso- 
 ciation will not long hold together parties no longer at- 
 tracted by the magnetism of conciliated interests and 
 kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the peo- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 279 
 
 pie of the disunited States to part in friendship with each 
 other than to be held together by constraint. Then will 
 be the time for reverting to the precedents which occur- 
 red at the formation and adoption of the Constitution, 
 to form again a more perfect Union, by dissolving that 
 which could no longer bind, and to leave the separated 
 parts to be reunited by the law of political gravitation 
 to the center." 
 
 9. In this same year (1839) the question whether the 
 laws of nations, or the laws which regulate the inter- 
 course of separate sovereignties, apply to the States of 
 the Union, was decided by the Supreme Court in the 
 case of The Bank of Augusta vs. Earle. The Court in 
 the course of its decision said: "They are sovereign 
 States. * * * We think it well settled, that by the 
 law of comity among nations, a corporation created 
 by one sovereign is permitted to make contracts in an- 
 other, and to sue in its courts ; and that the same law 
 of comity prevails among the several sovereignties of 
 this Union. ' ' 
 
 10. In 1841, while abolition societies were exerting 
 themselves to disrupt the Union, and their emissaries 
 had been violating the privileges of debate in the House 
 of Eepresentatives by vilifying the people of the South- 
 ern States and their Representatives, not only in disre- 
 gard of the rules of the House, but of the Constitution 
 itself, since the subject they discussed was beyond the 
 Constitutional control of the Congress, Gen. William H. 
 Harrison expressed himself as follows in his Inaugural 
 Address: "It was, indeed, the ambition of the leading 
 States of Greece to control the domestic concerns of the 
 others, that the destruction of that celebrated confed- 
 eracy, and subsequently of all its members, is mainly to 
 be attributed. And it is owing to the absence of that 
 spirit that the Helvetec confederacy has for so many 
 years been preserved. * ' * * 
 
280 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "Our confederacy, fellow-citizens, can only be pre- 
 served by the. same forbearance. * * * The attempt 
 of those (citizens) of one State to control the domestic 
 institutions of another, can only result in feelings of 
 distrust and jealousy, and are certain harbingers of dis- 
 union, civil war, and the ultimate destruction of our 
 free institutions. Our confederacy is perfectly illus- 
 trated by the terms and principles governing a common 
 copartnership." 
 
 11. In 1844 the Legislature of Massachusetts threat- 
 ened the President and the Congress in this style: "The 
 project of the annexation of Texas, unless arrested on 
 the threshold, may tend to drive ^these States (New Eng- 
 land) into a dissolution of the Union." 
 
 12. In 1851 Daniel Webster, "the Great Expounder 
 of the Constitution," delivered a speech at Capon 
 Springs, Virginia, wherein he said: 
 
 "If the South were to violate any part of the Consti- 
 tution intentionally and systematically, and persist in 
 so doing year after year, and no remedy could be had, 
 would the North be any longer bound by the rest of it ? 
 And if the North were, deliberately, habitually, and of 
 fixed purpose, to disregard one part of it, would the 
 South be bound any longer to observe its other obliga- 
 tions ? * * * 
 
 "How absurd it is to suppose that, when different par- 
 ties enter into a compact for certain purposes, either can 
 disregard any one provision, and expect, nevertheless, 
 the other to observe the rest i * * * A. bargain can 
 not be broken on one side, and still bind the other side." 
 
 13. In 1855 Senator Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio, 
 whose exti'eme bitterness towards the Southern people, 
 and whose support of all the usurping measures of the 
 radicals from 1861 till his retirement from the Senate 
 in 1867, made him a conspicuous figure and perhaps 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 281 
 
 • 
 
 constituted his chief qualification for the Vice-Presi- 
 dency after Andrew Johnson became President, deli'ir- 
 ered a speech in the Senate, of which the following is an 
 extract : 
 
 "Who is to be judge, in the last resort, of the violation- 
 of the Constitution of the United States by the enact- 
 ment of a law ? Who is the final arbiter ? The Gen- 
 eral Government, or the States in their sovereignty? 
 Why, sir; to yield that point, is to yield up all the rights 
 of the States to protect their own citizens, and to con- 
 solidate this Government into a miserable despotism. 
 * * * "I said there were States in this Dnion whose 
 highest tribunals had adjudged that bill to be unconsti- 
 tutional; * * *■ that my State believed it unconsti- 
 tutional: and that, under the old Resolutions of 1798 
 and 1799, a State must not only be the judge of that, 
 but of the remedy in such a case." 
 
 14. In 1857 Lippincott's Peonouncing Gazetteer of 
 THE World was first published, containing this defini- 
 tion : "The government of the United States is a con- 
 federation of independent sovereignties, delegating a 
 portion of their power to a central government, "etc. 
 
 16. On the 9th of November, 1 860, eleven days before 
 South Carolina seceded, Horace Greeley, the editor of 
 the New York Tribune, and one of the most able of the 
 founders of the party which elected the President in 
 1860, published the following in his paper: 
 
 "The telegraph informs us that most of the cotton 
 States are meditating a withdrawal from the Union, be- 
 cause of Lincoln's election. * * * jf the cotton 
 States consider the value of the Union debatable, we 
 maintain their perfect right to discuss it. Nay: we 
 hold, witli Jefferson, to the inalienable right of commu- 
 nities to alter or abolish forms of government that have 
 become oppressive or injurious; and, if the cotton States 
 
282 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 • 
 
 shall decide that they can do better out of the Union 
 than in it, we insist on letting them go in peace. The 
 right to secede may be a revolutionary one, but it exists 
 nevertheless : and we.do not see how one party can have a 
 Tight to do what another party has a right to prevent." 
 
 On this solid foundation — this recognition of the truth 
 by a long line of the natural guides of an intelligent 
 people — South Carolina based her expectation of success 
 in her negotiations with the Federal authorities. 
 
 But she wag disappointed; Mr. Buchanan lacked the 
 courage of his convictions, and while turning the sub- 
 ject over to Congress, he claimed that it was his duty 
 CO hold and defend the property belonging to the Uni- 
 ted States, on the theory that it was the duty of the 
 President of the United States to defend the city and 
 harbor of Charleston — the purpose for which South Car- 
 olina had given her consent for the purchase of the sites 
 of the forts, arsenals, magazines, etc. — after that State 
 had withdrawn from the Union. 
 
 During this period of uncertainty and excitement two 
 efforts were made to bring about peace and reconcilia- 
 tion. The first was made in the Senate by the vener- 
 able John J. Crittenden, of Kentucky. He proposed 
 certain amendments to the Constitution, which, if 
 adopted, would perhaps have satisfied the South; but 
 the angry radicals voted them down. The second was 
 a proposition by Virginia of a "Peace Congress" of all 
 the Sta,tes then in the Union to "consider, and if practi- 
 cable, agree upon some satisfactory adjustment." This 
 Congress met on the 4th of February, 1861, and ad- 
 journed on the 27th of the same month. It had during 
 its sessions representatives from all the States then in 
 the Union except Arkansas, California, Michigan, Wis- 
 consin, Minnesota, and Oregon; but the necessity of 
 "saving the Eepublican Party from rupture," as Sena- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 283 
 
 tor Zach. Chandler, of Michigan, wrote to Governor 
 Austin Blair, ' was an insuperable obstacle to any satis- 
 factory agreement. ^ 
 
 Thus things drifted along till Mr. Buchanan turned 
 over the business to the sectional President. 
 
 In the meantime Mississippi, Florida. Alabama, Geor- 
 gia, and Louisiana had seceded, and uniting with South 
 Carolina, had entered into a new Union, styliog them- 
 selves the Confederate States of America. The pew 
 government sent commissioners to Washington to nego- 
 tiate friendly relations between the two governments, 
 and " for the settlement of all questions of disagreement 
 between the two governments, upon principles of right, 
 justice, equity, and good faith." It passed an act an- 
 nouncing that "peaceful navigation of the Mississippi 
 Eiver is hereby declared free to the citizens of any of 
 the States upon its borders, or upon the borders of its 
 navigable tributaries." By another act it provided 
 against any monopoly of the coast- wise trade; and by 
 all its acts manifested a disposition to maintain amica- 
 'ble relations with the other States. 
 
 They adopted a Provisional Constitution, February 8, 
 1861, and on March 11, five days after the inauguration 
 of Mr. Lincoln, (Texas being then in the Confederacy) 
 a permanent Constitution was adopted. It was modeled 
 after the Constitution of the United States, containing 
 
 ' In a postscript to his letter Chandler expressed the opinion that 
 '■without a little bloodletting, this Union will not, in my estima-, 
 tion, be worth a rush." 
 
 ^ Hon. George Davis, of IS^orth Carolina, a staunch Unionist, was 
 sent as a delegate to 'this "Peace Congress." He returned an 
 avowed secessionist, declaring in an address to the people of Wil- 
 mington, March 3, 1861,* that he could "never accept the plan 
 adopted by the 'Peace Congress' as consistent with the right, the 
 interests, or the dignity of North Carolina." — Wilmington (N. C.) 
 Daily Journal of March 4, 1861. 
 
284 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 all its guaranties of personal, political, and State rights, 
 together with some additional provisions intended to 
 guard against abuses and to cure defects which had been 
 discovered in the old system. Here is a summary of 
 these : 
 
 1. A Confederate officer, resident and acting solely 
 within the limits of any State, might be impeached by 
 a vote of two-thirds of both branches of the Legislature 
 thereof. 
 
 2. All taxes should bo laid for purposes of revenue 
 only. 
 
 3. No bounties were to be granted from the Treasury. 
 
 4. No duties or taxes were to be laid for the purpose 
 of promoting or fostering any branch of industry. 
 
 5. No appropriation of money should be made for any 
 internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce, 
 except for lights, beacons and buoys, and other aid to 
 navigation on the coast; and also for the improvement 
 of harbors and navigable rivers, provided that such du- 
 ties shall be laid on the navigation thereby facilitated as 
 will pay the cost of the improvements. 
 
 6. No bankrupt law should discharge any debt con- 
 tracted before its passage. 
 
 7. The expenses of the Poat-office Department should 
 be paid out of its own revenues. 
 
 8. The importation of slaves from any foreign coun- 
 try except the United States was prohibited, and the 
 Congress was empowered to prohibit their importation 
 from any State not a member of the Confederacy. ' 
 
 ^ This Constitation was garbled and misrepresented to the world by 
 the traduoers of the Southern States, and their Government was 
 denounced as "the Slave-holders'' Confedei^jacy. " Moore says in his 
 Notes, etc., that "the stains which slavery has left on the proud 
 escutcheon of Massachusetts, are quite as significant of its hideous 
 character as the satanie defiance of God and humanity which ac- 
 companied the laying of the corner-stone of the Slave-holders' Con- 
 federacy.'' 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 285 
 
 9. Congress should appropriate no money from the 
 Treasury, except by a two-thirds vote in both Houses, 
 taken by yeas and nays, unless it were asked for by a 
 head of a Department; or for the payment of its own 
 expenses; or for the payment of an adjudicated claim 
 against the Confederate States. 
 
 10. All appropriation bills should state the exact 
 amount of each appropriation, and its object; and no 
 extra allowance should be made to any contractor, offi- 
 cer, agent, or servant. ' 
 
 11. Every law, <,or jt'esolution having the force of law, 
 should relate to but one subject, and that should be ex- 
 pressed in the title. 
 
 12. The States might lay a tonnagt^ tax on sea-going 
 vessels for the improvement of their rivers and harbors 
 navigated by said vessels, provided such tax did not con- 
 flict with any treaty. ^ 
 
 13. The President was forbidden to appoint any per- 
 son to office after his rejection by the Senate. 
 
 14. No new State should be admitted into the Con- 
 federacy unless by a vote of two- thirds of the whole 
 House of Representatives and two-thirds of the Senate 
 voting by States. 
 
 15. The Confederate States m.ight acquire new terri- 
 tory; and the Congress might legislate for the inhalbi- 
 tants of such territory; might permit them to organize 
 States to be admitted into the Confederacy; provided 
 that neither the Congress nor a Territorial Legislatuie 
 should have the powei' to interfere with or abolish sla- 
 very. 
 
 Such were the provisions for insuring the domestic 
 tranquillity, for guarding against that favoritism to sec- 
 tional or class interests which shook the foundations of 
 the Union in 1832 and 1833, for preventing inexcusable 
 extra:vagance in appropriations, and for excluding all 
 
286 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 those seeds of discord which have found a more or less 
 fertile soil in every one of the world's confederations. 
 
 The 4:th of March, 1861, arrived, and Araham Lincoln 
 went into office, fie reversed the policy of Mr. Buch- 
 anan, who had submitted the whole question of the re- 
 lations of the two governments to the Congress; he did 
 not summon the members to meet in special session, as 
 the gravity of the situation — if in his estimation it was 
 grave — demanded; but he assumed the entire responsi- 
 bility of plunging the peoples of the two sections into a 
 bloody and devastating war, declaring in his inaugural 
 address his purpose "to hold, occupy and possess the 
 property and places belonging to the Government, and 
 collect the duties and imposts." But these was no prop- 
 erty " belonging to the Government" ; the language of 
 the Constitution is, "belonging to the United States," 
 that is, to the States of the Union. But the seceded 
 States were some of the States to which it belonged, a 
 fact which is carefully excluded from any inference to 
 be drawn from the language of the address. And his 
 determination to collect taxes in the Confederate States 
 was unmistakably a declaration of war. 
 
 This claim of property "belonging to the Government" 
 rested on a very weak foundation, as a brief history of 
 the terms on which the United States acquired their 
 title to it will make clear. 
 
 The States conferred upon the Congress the power "to 
 exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever 
 ^' * * over all places purchased by the consent of 
 the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be, 
 for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock- 
 yards, and other needful buildings." 
 
 While Mr. ^[efEerson was Secretary of State, he wrote 
 to the authorities of South Carolina, and advised that 
 her Legislature consent for the Congress to purchase 
 
TH.E SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 287 
 
 certain lands. This was done, but exclusive jurisdiction 
 was denied. The act was passed December 12, 1Y96, 
 (House Ex. Doc, number 67, 2nd session, 33d Congress) 
 "to enable the United States to purchase a quantity of 
 land in this State, not exceeding two bhousand acres, 
 for arsenals and magazines." And it provided, "that 
 the said land, when purchased, and every person and 
 officer residing or employed thereon, whether in the ser- 
 vice of -the United States or not, shall be subject and 
 liable to the government of this State, and the jurisdic: 
 tion, laws and authority thereof in the same manner as 
 if this act had never been passed ; and that the United 
 States shall exercise no more authority or power within 
 the limits of the said land, than they might have done 
 previous to the passing of this act, or than may be nec- 
 essary for the building, repairing, or internal govern- 
 ment of the arsenals and magazines thereon to be erected, 
 and the regulation and management of the same, and 
 of the officers and persons by them to be employed in 
 or about the same." But there was a proviso that the 
 land should not be taxed by the State. 
 
 But this act did not transfer from the State her title 
 to the forts and other defejisive works in Charleston 
 Harbor, which she built during the Eevolution. The 
 transfer was made by an act parsed in 1 805, to which 
 the following proviso was added: "That, if the United 
 States shall not, within three years from the passing of 
 this act, * * * repair the fortifications now exist- 
 ing thereon or build such other forts or fortifications as 
 may be deemed most expedietitj etc., on the same, and 
 keep a garrison or garrisons therein ; in such case this 
 grant or cession shall be void and of no effect." ' ■ 
 
 'Neither South Carolina nor any other State was paid anything 
 out of the f'ederal Treasury to reimburse her for her expenses in- 
 curred in erecting defensive works in her harbors during the Bevo- 
 lution, nor for cessions of State lands. — See Act of March 30, 1794. 
 
288 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 This proviso was disregarded by the United States, the 
 defensive works, including Fort Moultrie, were neglected 
 for years, and Fort Sumter was not commenced till 1829. 
 According to all the laws of justice, therefore, the title 
 to the property reverted to the State, and the repairing 
 and building were carried on solely by the sufferance of 
 the State. ' 
 
 Thus it is clear to anybod,y who respects the laws gov- 
 erning property titles that the United States occupied 
 the defensive works in the harbor of Charleston without 
 any legal rights of ownership; and since the money 
 spent in building came out of the pockets of the people 
 of all the States, it can not be disputed that whatever 
 equitable rights were acquired belonged to the seceded 
 States as well as to the others. And it is equally in- 
 disputable that South Carolina never surrendered her 
 sovereignty over the sites of the forts and other defen- 
 sive works. 
 
 Such, dear reader, was the foundation of the claim 
 that the forts in the harbor of Charleston " be- 
 longed to the Government"; and the determination of 
 "the Government" to hold these forts for purposes not 
 only not contemplated in South Carolina's acts of consent 
 
 ' The Act of the Legislature of North Carolina (1794) Ceding sites 
 for fort?, light houses, etc'., reserved to the officers of the State the 
 power to serve any process or levy executions on the lands ceded, 
 and imposed the conditions that the fortifications, etc., should be 
 erected within three years (which was not complied with), and that 
 they " should be continued and kept up thereafter for the public 
 use." The limit was extended by other acts, and in 1810 it was 
 provided that if the works were not com jileted within five years the 
 lands should revert to the State. 
 
 Evidently there was no intention here to convey a fee-simple title 
 to "the fTOvernment" ; and since the fortifications on the coast of 
 the State were not completed till twenty years afterwards, it was 
 equally evident that the building, occupation, etc., were at the 
 sufferance of the State. — See Report of Engineer Department, No- 
 vember 33, 1833. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. ^ 289 
 
 and cession, but in violation of the implied as well as 
 the expressed conditions imposed by her, was notice to 
 her to prepare to defend her sovereignty, was the casus 
 belli, the first blow struck in the war between the sec- 
 tions ; and she would have deserved the contempt of all 
 honorable men if she had not met it defiantly, as she 
 met Sir Henry Clinton and Sir Peter Parker in June, 
 1776. ' 
 
 Mr. Lincoln, as has been said, declared war against 
 the Confederate States (which he called "a combination 
 too powerful, ' ' etc. ), raised armies, proclaimed a block- 
 ade of Southern ports, suspended the writ of habeas 
 corpus at Baltimore and other places, took money out 
 of the Federal Treasury, and did many other things for 
 which he could find no warrant in that Constitution 
 which he had solemnly sworn to support, before the 
 meeting of the called session of Congress. That body, 
 composed mostly of members from the Northern States, 
 met on the 4th of July, and adjourned on the 6th of 
 August. 
 
 One of the first measures — the first resolution — 
 brought before it was a proposition to declare legal and 
 Constitutional what were not legal and Constitutional 
 acts ; but the motion failed. Here is an abstract of the 
 proceedings in the Senate (Congressional Globe, 1st ses- 
 sion, 37th Congress, pp. 16, 21, 40 and 453): 
 
 On the 6th of July "Mr. Wilson (Mass.), in pursuance 
 of previous notice, asked and obtained leave to intro- 
 duce a joint resolution (Senate No. 1) to approve and 
 confirm certain acts of the President of the United 
 States, for suppressing insurrection and rebellion. " The 
 resolution was: 
 
 "Whereas, since the adjournment of Congress, on the 
 
 1 See Note T. 
 19 
 
290 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 4th day of March last, a formidable insurrection in cer- 
 tain States of this Union has arrayed itself in armed 
 hostility to the Government of the United States, Con- 
 stitutionally administered ; and whereas the President 
 of the United States, did under the extraordinary exi- 
 gencies thus presented, exercise certain powers and adopt 
 certain measures for the preservation of this Govern- 
 ment — that is to say: First. He did, en the 15th day of 
 April last, issue his proclamation calling upon the sev- 
 eral States for T5,000 men to suppress such insurrection- 
 ary combinations, and to cause the laws to be faithfully 
 executed. Secondly. He did, on the 19th day of April 
 last, issue a proclamation setting on foot a blockade of 
 the ports within the States of South Carolina, Georgia, 
 Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. 
 Thirdly. He did, on the 27th day of April last, issue a 
 proclamation establishing a blockade of the ports within 
 the States of Virginia and North Carolina. ' Fourthly, 
 He did, by order of the 27th day of April last, addressed 
 to the Commanding General of the Army of the United 
 States, authorize that officer to suspend the writ of 
 habeas corpus at any point on or in the vicinity of any 
 military line between the city of Philadelphia and the 
 city of Washington. Fifthly. He did, on the. 3d day of 
 May last, issue a proclamation calling into the service of 
 the United States 43,034: volunteers, increasing the regu- 
 lar Army by the addition of 22,714 men, and the Navy 
 by an addition of 18,000 men. Sixthly. He did, on the 
 10th day of May last, issue a proclamation authorizing 
 the commander of 'the forces of the United States on 
 the coast of Florida to suspend the writ of habeas cor- 
 
 ' Mr. Lincoln drove Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Ar- 
 kansas to choose whether they would assist him in subjugating their 
 Southern sisters or assist them in resisting him. They chose the 
 latter. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 291 
 
 pus, if necessary, all of which proclamations and orders 
 have been submitted to this Congress. 
 
 "Now, therefore, be it resolved, etc. That all of the 
 extraordinary acts, proclamations and orders, hereinbe- 
 fore mentioned are, and the same are hereby, approved 
 and declared to be in all respects legal and valid, to" the 
 same extent and with the same effect, as if they had been 
 issued and done under the previous express authority 
 and direction of the Congress of the United States." 
 
 On July 8th Mr. Wilson, for the Committee on Mili- 
 tary Affairs and Militia, to which this resolution had been 
 referred, reported back the resolution, without amend- 
 ment, and recommended its passage. "I wish to say," 
 he added, "that the action of the President in increas- 
 ing the Army and calling out the volunteer force, will 
 be regulated by other bills, to be brought in hereafter. " 
 
 In another place Mr. Wilson said: "A plan has been 
 arranged for the organization of eleven regiments for the 
 Army. Officers have been appointed, * * * sent 
 to certain points of the country, and money has been 
 placed in their hands to fill up the ranks of the Army," 
 etc. 
 
 But, the resolution was never passed; after many 
 efforts to have a vote on it, it was permitted to die with 
 the session. The last debate on it was closed thus on 
 page 453 : 
 
 "Mr. Wilson. Let us have a vote. 
 
 "Mr Trumbull (of Illinois). Now, my friend is cla,m- 
 orous. He can not keep still. He says let us have a 
 vote. I am not disposed to vote on the resolution. I 
 will tell the Senator fi'om Kentucky (Powell ?) I am 
 not prepared to vote for the resolution, and it is not 
 
292 THE SOUTH AGAINST TEE NORTH. 
 
 going to pass without consideration. It is not going to 
 pass in the shape it is in by my approbation." ' 
 
 The Senate then went into executive session, and that 
 evening adjourned sine die. 
 
 The reason why the Senate refused to pass this reso- 
 lution may interest, the reader; it had not at that early 
 date recognized "military necessity" as paramount to 
 the Constitution which it was under a solemn oath to 
 support. 
 
 Not only were all or most of the acts recited in it un- 
 constitutional, but its assertions were repugnant to the 
 meaning of that compact. 
 
 1. The alleged offense named in it may be committed 
 against "the United States," but not against "the Gov- 
 ernment" ; and the language of the resolution was due 
 to ignorance or malice. 
 
 2 The power to raise armies was delegated exclusively 
 to the Congress. 
 
 3. The power to increase the naval forces was dele- 
 gated exclusively to the Congress. 
 
 4. The Constitution conferred on nobody the power 
 to blockade a port in order to collect the revenue thereat, 
 
 ■ the tariff law being the only one mentioned in Mr. Lin- 
 coln's proclamation, the execution of which was "ob- 
 structed by combinations too powerful," etc. 
 
 .5. The President is not authorized by the Constitu- 
 tion to empower a military officer to suspend the writ 
 of habeas corpus at his discretion. 
 
 6. The Constitution expressly forbids the drawing of 
 
 ' Certain leading newspapers in the North, copied with apparent 
 approval by some Southern papers, are preparing the people for ac- 
 quiescence in the strides towards imperialism which the war with 
 Spain is rendering easy, by maintaining the doctrine that ours is an 
 "elastic Constitution," and that the President can do whatever in 
 his judgment is best for the country. If this is true. Wilson's reso- 
 lution should have passed without opposition. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 293 
 
 any money out of the Treasury "but in consequence of 
 appropriations made by law." 
 
 7. The act of February 28, 1795, (the only anti-insur- 
 rection law in force when Mr. Lincoln became Presi- 
 dent) did not justify him in belittling a sovereign State as 
 a "combination." That a.ct was passed in consequence 
 of the whiskey insurrection in western Pennsylvania the 
 preceding July, in these words: "Whenever the laws of 
 the United States shall be opposed, or the execution 
 thereof obstructed in any State by combinations too 
 powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of 
 judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the 
 marshals by this act, it shall be lawful for the President 
 of the United States to call forth the militia of such 
 State, or of any other State or States, as may be neces- 
 sary to suppress such combinations," etc. 
 
 This silent disapproval, by his party friends, of Mr. 
 Lincoln's course up to July ,4, 1861, seems to have been 
 in accord with a sentiment which prevailed in many sec- 
 tions of the North, as may be inferred from the follow- 
 ing indications of opinions : 
 
 1. On December 31, 1860 — eleven days after the seces- 
 sion of South Carolina — Mr. Pryor, of Virginia, offered 
 the folio <ving resolution in the House of Representa- 
 tives: "That any attempt to preserve the Union be- 
 tween the States of this Confederacy by force would be 
 impracticable, and destructive of Eepublican liberty." 
 
 On the motion of Mr. Stanton, the resolution was laid 
 on the table, the yeas being 98 and the nays 56. ' Among 
 the nays were Messrs. Logan, McClernand, and Sickles. ^ 
 
 ' Congressional Globe, Part I, Volume XIII, Second Session, 
 Thirty-sixth Congress, page 220. 
 
 ^ Mr. Sickles proposed on December 17, 1860 — three days before 
 South Carolina seceded — that the Constitution be amended so as to 
 provide for peaceable secession. — Congressional Globe, Second Ses 
 sion. Thirty-sixth Congress, Volume II, page 107. 
 
294 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOKTH. 
 
 2. On February 5, 1861, Mr. Logan delivered a speech 
 in the House of Eepresentatives (after South Carolina, 
 Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana 
 had withdrawn from the Union, and a secession ordi- 
 nance had been submitted to the popular vote in Texas), 
 in which, misunderstanding the real causes of the long 
 contest between the sections, he expressed his views 
 thus: "The abolitionists of the North have constantly- 
 warred upon Southern institutions, by incessant abuse 
 from the pulpit, from the press, on the stump, and in 
 the halls of Congress, denouncing them as a sin against 
 God and man; they have in many places, by mobs, 
 resisted the execution of the fugitive slave law ; they 
 have, in several of the Northern States, by legislative 
 enactment, made it a penitentiary offense for anyone to 
 assist in the arrest or rendition of a fugitive slave. By 
 these denunciations and lawless acts on the part of abo- 
 lition fanatics, such results have been produced as to 
 drive the people of the Southern States to a sleepless 
 vigilance for the protection of their property and preser- 
 vation of their rights." Addressing the fanatics in 
 Congress who had resisted every attenipt to compromise 
 the differences between the sections, he said: "I would 
 ask these gentlemen, who are opposed to concession or 
 compromise, and in favor of war for the subjugation of 
 these revolting States, if it would not be better for us 
 all. North and South, to adjust our difficulties in a 
 proper spirit on some just basis; banish the slavery 
 agitation from the halls of Congress forever ; avoid war, 
 bloodshed, and the horrors of civil strife, and once more 
 give peace to a distracted country? Let them refuse 
 this; let this Congress adjourn without adjusting these 
 difSculties or submitting them to the people for their 
 action, and I envy not the position of any gentleman in 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 295 
 
 this House or the other end of the Capitol who has in- 
 terposed obstructions, or may yet do so," etc. ' 
 
 3. In the "Peace Congress," February 23, 1861, Mr. 
 Vandever, of Iowa, offered and moved the adoption of 
 the following: 
 
 " Resolved, That whatever imay be the ultimate de- 
 termination upoi^ the amendments of the Federal Con- 
 stitution, or other propositions for adjustment approved 
 by this Convention, we, the members, do recommend 
 our respective States and constituencies to faithfully 
 abide in the Union." 
 
 And on a motion to table the ayes were Ehode Island, 
 New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Vir- 
 ginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri 
 and Ohio. ^ 
 
 4. Northern sentiment adverse to coercion is expressed 
 in the following extracts from newspapers (taken from 
 Greeley's American Conflict, Vol. I, beginning on p. 
 395)': 
 
 a. The Albany Argus of November 10, 1860, said: 
 " We sympathize with and justify the South as far as 
 this : their rights have been invaded to the extreme 
 limit, possible within the forms of the Constitution; and, 
 beyond this limit, their feelings have been insulted and 
 their interests and honor assailed by almost every pos- 
 sible form of denunciation and invective; and, if we 
 deemed it certain that the real animus of the Republi- 
 can party could be carried into the administration of 
 the Federal Government, and become the permanent 
 policy of the Nation, we should think that all the in- 
 stincts of self-preservation and of manhood rightfully 
 impelled them to a resort to revolution and a separation 
 
 'Appendix, Globe, Second Session, Thirty-sixth Congress, pages 
 178-180. 
 '' OfBcial Journal of the Conference Convention, page 43. 
 
296 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 from the Union, and we would applaud them and wish 
 them God-speed in the adoption of such a remedy." 
 
 b. The Rochester Union, "two or three days later, " 
 said: " Restricting our remarks to actual violations of 
 the Constitution, the North have led the way, and for 
 a long period have been the sole offenders, or aggressors. 
 * * * Owing to their different circumstances, North- 
 ern States have been enabled to secure their cherished 
 object by violating the Constitution in a way that does 
 not necessitate secession. * * * Owing to their pe- 
 culiar circumstances, the Southern States can not retal- 
 iate upon the North without taking ground for seces- 
 sion. " 
 
 c. The Albany Argus, November 12, said: "If South 
 Carolina, or any other State, through a Convention of 
 her people, shall formally separate herself from the 
 Union, probably both the present (Buchanan) and the 
 next (Lincoln) Executive will simply let her alone, and 
 quietly allow all the functions of the Federal Govern- 
 ment to be suspended. Any other course would be 
 madness." 
 
 d. The New York Herald, November 9, said: "Each 
 State is organized as a complete government, holding 
 the purse and wielding the sword, possessing the right 
 to break the tie of the confederation as a nation might 
 break a treaty, and to repel coercion as a nation might 
 repel invasion. * * * Coercion, if it were possible, 
 is out of the question." 
 
 e. The New York Express, April 15, 1861, said: "The 
 'irrepressible conflict, ' started by Mr. Seward and en- 
 dorsed by the Republican Party, has at length attained 
 to its logical foreseen result. That conflict, undertaken 
 'for the sake of humanity,' culminates now in inhu- 
 manity itself, and exhibits the afflicting spectacle of 
 brother shedding brother's blood. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 297 
 
 " Eef using the ballot before the bullet, these men, 
 flushed with the p6wer and patronage of the Federal 
 Government, have madly rushed into a civil war, which 
 will probably drive the remaining slave States into the 
 arms of the Southern Confederacy, and dash to pieces 
 the last hope for a reconstruction of the Union. * * * 
 To the cold-blooded, heartless demagogues who started 
 this civil war — themselves magnanimously keeping out 
 of the reach of bodily harm. — we can only say. You 
 must find your account, if not at the hands of an indig- 
 nant people, then in the tears of widows and orphans. 
 The people of the United States, it must be borne in 
 mind, petitioned, begged, and implored these men, who 
 are become their accidental masters, to give them an 
 opportunity to be heard before this unnatural strife was 
 pushed to a bloody extreme, but their petitions were all 
 spurned with contempt," etc. 
 
 In another editorial the Express said: "They fight 
 upon their own soil, in behalf of their dearest rights — 
 for their public institutions, their homes, and their 
 property. * * * The South, in self-preservation, 
 has been driven to the wall, and forced to proclaim its 
 independence. A servile insurrection and wholesale 
 slaughter of the whites will alone satisfy the murderous 
 designs of the abolitionists. The Administration, egged 
 on by the halloo of the Black Eepublican journals of 
 this city, has sent its mercenary forces to pick a quarrel 
 and initiate the work of desolation and ruin. A call is 
 made for an army of volunteers, under the pretense that 
 an invasion is apprehended of the Federal Capital ; and 
 the next step will be to summon the slave population to 
 revolt and massacre." 
 
 /. The Utica, N. Y., Observer said: "Brave men, 
 fighting on their own soil, and, as they believe, for their 
 freedom and dearest rights, can never be subjugated. 
 
298 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 * * * '< \Yho are to fight the battles of sectional hatred 
 in this sad strife ? The seceders will fight ; but will the 
 abolitionists, who have combined, with them to over- 
 throw the Union, make themselves food for powder ? 
 
 * * * rjijjg abolitionist will sneak in the background, 
 leaving those to do the fighting ywho have no interest in 
 the bloody strife, no hatred against their brethren." 
 
 g. The Bangor (Maine) Union said: "Democrats of 
 Maine ! the loyal sons of the South have gathered around 
 Charleston, as your fathers of old gathered about Bos- 
 ton, in defense of the same sacred principles of liberty — 
 principles which you have ever upheld and defended 
 with j^our vote, your voice, and your strong right arm. 
 Your sympathies are with the defenders of the truth 
 and the right. Those who have inaugurated this un- 
 holy and unjustifiable war are no friends of yours — no 
 friends of Democratic Liberty. Will you aid them in 
 their work of subjugation and tyranny? * * * Say 
 to them fearlessly and boldly, in the language of Eng- 
 land's great Lord, the Earl of Chatham, * * * 'If 
 I were a Southerner, as I am a Northerner, while a 
 foreign troop was landed in my country, I would never 
 lay down my arms — never, never, NEVEE. ' " 
 
 h. The Journal of Commerce (New York) said: "No 
 doubt it has been precipitated by the sending of a fleet 
 with troops by the United States Government, for the 
 relief (as was understood) of Sumter. And on the other 
 hand, it may be said that this action * * * was 
 occasioned by the cutting off of supplies from Fort Sum- 
 ter by the Confederate authorities, which rendered it 
 necessary to send them from New York or some other 
 point. To this again, it may be replied, that the cutting 
 off of supplies by the Confederate authorities was caused 
 by the long continued delay of the United States au- 
 thorities to take or consent to any measures of adjust- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 299 
 
 ment of the pending differences, thus leaving the Con- 
 federate authorities subject to the necessity of main- 
 taining a large military force at Charleston for an in- 
 definite period, or abandon their claims altogether," 
 etc. 1 
 
 i. The Boston Post said : "An extra session of Con- 
 gress should be called at once " — which Mr. Lincoln re- 
 fused to do — "and if that body prove incompetent to 
 the duty required, then a National Convention should 
 be convened ; and, if all measures for a satisfactory ad- 
 justment fail, after full hearing and answers to state- 
 ments of discontent, * * * let it (the South) depart 
 in peace, if possible," etc. 
 
 j. Mr. Greeley's opinion expressed in the Tribune of 
 November 9, 1860, that the States possessed the right 
 to withdraw from the Union, is recorded in another 
 chapter. 
 
 k. One other expression of views, is worth recording, 
 because it came from a man whose insight into motives 
 was of rare force. Gen. Joseph Lane, of Oregon, reply- 
 ing in the Senate, March 2, 1861, to a speech of Sena-tor 
 Andrew Johnson's advocating the " execution of the 
 laws," "protecting the public property, " etc., said: 
 "Sir, if there is, as I contend, the right of secession, 
 then, whenever a State exercises that right, this Gov- 
 ernment has no laws in that State to execute, nor has 
 it any property in such State that can be protected by 
 the power of this Government. In attempting, how- 
 ever, to substitute the smooth phrases ' executing the 
 laws ' and ' protecting public property' for coercion, for 
 civil war, we have an important concession : that is, 
 
 ' The reader must bear in mind that South Carolina seceded on 
 the 20th of December, and demanded possession pf the forts in 
 Charleston harbor ; and that nearly four months passed by before 
 she knew what "the Government" would do. 
 
300 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 that this Government dare not go before the people with 
 a plain avowal of its real purposes and their consequen- 
 ces. No, sir ; the policy is to inveigle the people of the 
 North into civil war, by masking the design in smooth 
 and ambiguous terms. " ' 
 
 But by the machinations of ignorant reformers, men- 
 dacious demagogues, ^ and zealous fanatics the days of 
 cool reason soon passed away : all this pleading for the 
 principles of the Constitution was hushed ; Messrs. Lo- 
 gan, McCleruand, and Sickles were found at the head 
 of bodies of troops engaged in destroying " republican 
 liberty"; and Mr. Greeley was among the loudest of 
 those who shouted, " On to Eichmond! " 
 
 Vigorous, concerted, and in many instances successful 
 efforts were made to place the people of the Southern 
 States on a level with savages; even Abraham Lincoln 
 in his Gettysburg address, November 19, 1863, told his 
 hearers — and this speech is embalmed among the sacred 
 literature of the North — that the Southern people were 
 attempting to destroy the Federal Government and to 
 cause "government of the people, by the people, and for 
 the people " to " perish from the face of the earth " ' ; 
 and soon patriotism and hatred of the people of the 
 
 South became synonymous terms in the minds of many 
 
 % ■ 
 
 ' Globe, Second Session. Thirty-sixth Congress, page 1,347. 
 
 '' Among the false accusations set in motion to fire the hearts of the 
 people of the North these two may be taken as samples : 
 
 1. It was charged in an Act of the Congress passed July 31, 1861, 
 that the Confederates intended to destroy the Grovernment of the 
 United States ; and 
 
 2. United States army officers who resigned in 1861 and went with 
 their States we^e accused of violating their official oaths, which was 
 represented to be an oath of allegiance to the Government, whereas 
 the language of it was: "I, A. £., do solemnly swear * * * that 
 Iwill bear true»faith and allegiance to the United States of Amer- 
 ica, and that I will serve them honestly," etc. — Act of January 11, 
 1812. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 301 
 
 of the more ignorant of the Northern people. The war 
 raged for four years, thousands were butchered, thou- 
 sands of others were ftiaimed for life, several hundred 
 millions of dollars worth of property in the South were 
 wantonly destroyed, millions more were stolen, millions 
 more of captured and so-called abandoned property were 
 carried out of the South by orders of the militar-y offi- 
 cers, ' thousands of Southern women and children were 
 reduced to beggary — to say nothing of the personal in- 
 sults and outrages they had to submit to from the black 
 and white brutes who wore the Federal uniform — and a 
 colossal war debt was saddled on the people of the South 
 as well as the North, v/hich, including 11,727,000,000 of 
 pensions, amounted on .June 30, 1894, according to the 
 report of the Secretary of the Treasury for that year (p. 
 CXXIX), to $16,386,000,000 already paid. This was 
 nearly three hundred and tv/enty-eight dollars per 
 
 'Gen. W. T. Sherman wrote to General Halleck on January 1, 
 1865, that he had devastated a strip of Georgia "thirty miles on 
 either side of a line from Atlanta to Savannah," an area 2,465 
 square miles larger than the State of Vermont ; and that he had 
 damaged the State as much as $1.00,000,000, including 130,000,000 
 which had "inured" to the "advantage" of the invaders. —War 
 Records. XLIV, 7-14. 
 
 Much of this fiendish work was done by the cavalry of Gen. Jud- 
 son Kilpatrick. He reported (Ibid., 28) that they had burnt 14,070 
 bales of cotton, 13,400 bushels of corn and meal, 80 tons of fodder, 50 
 barrels of molasses, 25 barrels of salt, 36 grist mills, 37 sawmills, 271 
 cotton gins, besides quantities of rice, wagons, carts, tools, etc., etc. 
 
 Congratulating Sherman "upon the splendid result" of this devas- 
 tating march, "the like of which is not read of in past history," 
 General Grant subscribes himself, "more than ever.'if possible," his 
 friend.— Ibid., page 741. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln, closing a letter of thanks for all this vandalism, says: 
 
 "Please make my grateful acknowledgments to your whole army, 
 officers and men." — Ibid., page 809. 
 
 And public sentiment in the Northern States ta-day, if we may 
 judge by McClure's Magazine for June, 1898, page 171, is that this 
 was Sherman's "glorious March to the Sea." 
 
302 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 capita of the average population (50,000,000) between 
 186§ and 1894, an annual per capita burden of nearly 
 eleven dollars, and a penalty laid on the Southern peo- 
 ple about eleven times as grievous as the indemnity ex- 
 acted from the French at the close of the Franco-Ger- 
 man War, with the prospect of its being at least twenty 
 times as grievous before we are rid of it. ' 
 
 But even these enormous amounts do not reveal all 
 the iniquity. All the bonds sold from 1862 to 1868 
 (both years included) represented a face value of |2,- 
 049,975,700, and for them the treasury received treasury 
 notes (greenbacks) worth in coin, on the average for the 
 period, rnly $1,371,424,238; so that here was at the 
 outset a clear gain to the bondholders of $678,551,462. 
 But this is not all ; taking the average price of cotton 
 for the first four years after the war, and also for the 
 whole period up to 1894, we find that one bale would 
 pay as much of this debt during the first period as two 
 and one-half bales would pay during the whole period; 
 and in 1894 it required six and six-tenths times as many 
 bales as would have been necessary in the first period. 
 As cotton fell, therefore, ' the bonds went up, and the 
 vassalage of the South became more burdensome. ^ 
 
 To these inflictions on the people of the South, affect- 
 
 ' This does not include the cost of the "reconstruction measures," 
 the military despotism in the South, the malignant "force bills,'' 
 the "election laws," etc., etc., nor the enormous debts piled up on 
 the Southern people by the "carpet-bag" governments established 
 in the Southern States under the wing of "the Government," nor 
 the millions spent by each Northern State in the prosecution of the 
 war, for which it has been reimbursed out of the general treasury. 
 Nor does it include the cost of the soldiers' homes, or the sums given 
 annually to retired officers and enlisted men who served in the 
 armies of the Northern States during the war between the sections 
 — a class of pensioners never heard of in these States till after that 
 war commenced. 
 
 ^ See Note Z. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 303 
 
 • 
 
 ing the products of their toil, must be added a con- 
 tempt for their sensibilities which " the Government " 
 has never shown towards any other people. Not only 
 did it for a number of years after the war force on these 
 people so-called State officials, as Governors, Judges, 
 legislators, etc., whom the people had no voice in choos- 
 ing; but it sent objectionable strangers or appointed 
 objectionable natives to represent "the Government " 
 as Commissioners, Collectors of Customs, Marshals, 
 Postmasters, Revenue Officers, etc. This last offense 
 has been kept up till now, and, in spite of remonstrances 
 and protests, it will likely continue, while to no other 
 people on the globe is any disagreeable person — persona 
 non grata — sent as a representative of the, Government. 
 Friendly courtesy is shown to foreign States only. 
 
 Nothing of the sort was ever heard of till " the Gov- 
 ernment " fell into the hands of the North. Even Mr. 
 Lincoln, while announcing his purpose to "hold, occupy 
 and possess the property and places belonging to the 
 Government, and to collect the duties and imposts," 
 declared that there would be "no attempt to force ob- 
 noxious strangers among the people for that object." ' 
 
 But perhaps all these wrongs and their immediate re- 
 sults may be less disastrous to our ultimate welfare 
 than the vicious doctrines which, during the war and 
 the "Reconstruction" period, gained an undisputed foot- 
 ing in the Northern States. The Union of the Consti- 
 tution was destroyed, and what Senator Wade called 
 "a miserable despotism" was erected on its ruins; "the 
 maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and 
 especially the light of each State to order and control 
 its own domestic institutions according to its own judg- 
 ment exclusively," was no longer " essential," as Mr. 
 
 ' See Note Aa. 
 
304: THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Lincoln's platform declared it to be, " to that balance 
 of power on which the perfection an 1 endurance of our 
 political fabric depends" ; and the men who had fought 
 in the armies of the North were told, as General Grant 
 told a reunion of the Army of the Tennessee at Des 
 Moines, la., in September, 1875, .that the trials and 
 hardships of the war were "imposed for the preserva- 
 tion and perpetuation of our free institutions " 1 
 
 Note X. 
 The prevalent belief of the Southern people that the abolitionists 
 and the free-soilers of the Northern States were in sympathy with 
 John Brown's invasion ©f Virginia and his attempt to excite an in- 
 surrection of the slaves, was met by a vigorous denial all over the 
 North. But how far this denial was based on the truth may be in- 
 ferred from the following scene in the office of Governor Andrew, of 
 Massachusetts : In the summer of 1862, after Andrew had received 
 some assurances that Mr. Lincoln would likely yield to New Eng- 
 land's demand that he interfere in some way with slavery in the 
 South, "a young merchant of Boston," whc had been selected by 
 Andrew to go on, a mission to Washington, joined the Governor in 
 his office in singing "Coronation," "Praise- G-od, from whom all 
 blessings flow," and "then," he said, "I sang ' Old John Brown,' he 
 (Andrew) marching around the room and joining in the chorus after 
 each verse." — Memoirs of John A. Andrew, page 37. 
 
 Note Y. 
 
 The substitution of the words "the Government" for those of the 
 Constitution — "the United States"— which was done in 1861, for ob 
 vious reasons, has served the purpose of falsifying in the public 
 mind the real motives for the inauguration of the war ; and this 
 substitution has been kept up ever sines for reasons equally dis- 
 creditable. 
 
 A few examples will not be uninteresting: 
 
 1. In the Constitution "treason against the United States shall 
 consist only in levying war against them," etc. ; but now the only 
 treason known in the Union is against "the Government." 
 
 3. In the Constitution the President is empowered to grant par- 
 dons for "offences against the United States" ; but now he pardons 
 for offences "against the Government." 
 
 3. In the Constitution the Congress is empowered " to borrow 
 money on the credit of the United States"; but now it borrows on 
 the credit of "the Government." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 305 
 
 4. In the Constitution we find "the securities and current coin of 
 the United States"; but now we hear only of "Government" securi 
 ties, etc. 
 
 5. In the Constitution reference is made to persons "employed in 
 the service of the United States" ; but now they are all in the em- 
 ployment of "the Government." 
 
 6. In the Constitution reference is made to the debts, obligations, 
 etc., "of the United States" ; but new they are debts and obliga- 
 tions "of the Government." 
 
 7. In the Constitution there are " officers of the United States" ; 
 but now they are "officers of the Government." 
 
 8. In the Constitution reference is made "to controversies to which 
 the United States shall be a party" ; but now "the Government" is 
 a party to suits. 
 
 9. In the Constitiitiop provision is made ^or the disposal of "the 
 territory or other property belonging to the United Stales"; but 
 now we hear of "Government" property, or "property belonging to 
 the Government." 
 
 10. In the Constitution we read of things done or to be done "un- 
 der the authority of the United States"; but now they are done 
 "under the authority of the Government." 
 
 The undoubted purpose of this vicious substitution was to create 
 in the minds of the people in these States and in Europe the impres- 
 sion that the Government of the United States is over the States, 
 they bearing a subordinate relation to it; that " the Government" 
 is'^ sovereign, and the States, for all practical purposes, mere provin- 
 ces'; and that, therefore, " the Government " possessed the right to 
 subjugate the seceded States. 
 
 This perversion of the truth was carried over and presented to the 
 Tribunal of Arbitration which met in Geneva in 1871-'73 to settle 
 the "Alabama Claims" ; bat the fear that it could not be imposed 
 on the arbitrators, led to a supplementary falsehood, the peculiar 
 nature of which, it was thought, would have the desired influence 
 on them. It was a misrepresentation, by garbled extracts, of the 
 reasons proclaimed by the seceding States for their action. 
 
 It is "the case of the United States" prepared, presumably, by 
 the ablest lawyers to be found ; and is Senate Executive Document 
 No. 31, Second Session, Forty-second Congress. 
 
 It begins with an untruth, namely^ " In 1861 Ihe United States 
 had been an independent Nation for a period of eighty-four years^ 
 and acknowledged as such by Great Britain for a period of seventy- 
 seven years." There are in fact two untruths; both assertions are 
 utterly inconsistent with the facts set forth in the. Treaty of Peace 
 and with the known relations of the States in 1783. 
 
 The first article in the treaty is : 
 20 
 
306 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz: 
 New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence 
 Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
 Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carohna, South Carolina, and 
 Georgia, to be free, sovereign and independent States ; that he treats 
 with them as such," etc.— See Laws of the State of North Carolina, 
 page 569. 
 
 The language of the treaty is in perfect accord with the second 
 article of the Articles of Confederation, wherein each State was 
 recognized as sovereign, free, and independent. Nor is there a sylla- 
 ble ill the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion, or in the Constitution indicating that the people of the several 
 States ever intended to consolidate themselves into a "nation," or 
 ever did in fact do so. 
 
 But, supposing that this untruth would be accepted as a funda- 
 mental fact, the "case" proceeds to lay down another. It is: 
 
 "On the 6th day of November, in that year, the jurisdiction of 
 the Government of the United States extended unquestioned over 
 eighteen States from which African slavery was excluded; over 
 fifteen States in which it was established by law ; and over a vast 
 territory in which, under the then prevailing laws, persons with 
 African blood in their veins could be held as slaves. 
 
 "This large unsettled or partially settled territory, as it might be- 
 come peopled, was also liable to be divided into new States, which, 
 as they entered into the Union, might, as the law then stood, be- 
 come slave States, thus giving the advocates of slavery an increased 
 strength in the Congress of the Nation, and more especially in the 
 Senate, and a more absolute control of the National Government." 
 
 Here we have the language of imperialism: the "jurisdiction of 
 the Government" extending "over" the States and the territory in- 
 discriminately; "the Congress of the Nation"; and "the National 
 Government" — all in a grave diplomatic paper presented to a body 
 of arbitrators who were supposed to be unfamiliar with the history 
 and the principles of our Federal Union. 
 
 The supplementary falsehood, its foundations laid in the last 
 clause quoted above, reaches its full proportions in the following 
 condensed extracts : "The general election * * * resulted in the 
 choice of Abraham Lincoln. The party which elected him was 
 pledged in advance to 'maintain that the normal condition of all 
 the territory of the United States is that of freedom, ' and to ' deny 
 the authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any in- 
 dividuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any Territory of the 
 United States.' * * * 
 
 "This decision * * * was resisted by some of the inhabitants 
 of the States where slavery prevailed. The people of South Caro- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 307 
 
 Una * * * commenced the hostile movement. In the following 
 month they proclaimed, through a State Convention, their purpose 
 to secede from the Union, because the party about to come into 
 power had 'announced that the South shall be excluded from the 
 common territory. ' ' The State of ^Alabama * * * followed, 
 
 * * » giving as their reason that the election of 2Mr. Lincoln 'by 
 a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions (i. e., 
 slavery) of Alabama,' was 'apolitical wrong of an insulting and 
 menacing character. ' 
 
 "The State of Georgia followed, etc., etc. 
 
 "On the 4th of February, iy61, representatives from some of the 
 States which had attempted to go through, the form of secession 
 
 * * * met at Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, for the pur- 
 pose of organizing a provisional Government, and having done so, 
 elected Mr. Jefferson Davis as the provisional President, etc. In 
 accepting the office, on the 18th of February, Mr. Jefferson Davis 
 said: 'We have vainly endeavored to secure tranquillity and obtain 
 respect for the rights to which we were entitled' (i- e., the right to 
 extend the domains of slavery). « » * * Having thus^formally 
 declared that the contemplated limitation of the territory within 
 which negro slavery should be tolerated was the sole cause of the 
 projected separation." etc., etc.' 
 
 Such was the "case of the United States," prepared under the su- 
 pervision of the Secretary of State, Hamilton Fish, and presented to 
 the Tribunal of Arbitration, which, basing the justice of its decision 
 on representations in It, awarded damages to the United States in 
 the sum of about fifteen million dollars. 
 
 It totally reversed the Constitutional relations of^thejStates to 
 each other and to the Government which they had created, and, by 
 garbling extracts from the proceedings of Southern Conventions and 
 from Mr. Davis's address, which, in brackets it falsely interpreted, 
 it was a ''case" wbieh had really nothing to support it. 
 
 ' The truth is carefully concealed here. South Carolina's reason 
 for secession was that thirteen Northern States had repudiated one 
 of the covenants of the Constitution, and two Northern States had 
 repudiated another of the covenants. But truth did^ot suit the 
 purpose of the writer. 
 
 ^ Mr. Davis said: "Through many years of controversy with our 
 late associates of the Northern States, we have vainly endeavored to 
 secure tranquillity and obtain respect for the rights to which we 
 were entitled. As a necessity, not a choice, we tiave resorted to the 
 remedy of separation," etc. Would separation secure "the right to 
 extend^theMomains^of slavery '? 1 
 
308 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 Note Z. 
 
 This burden on the South had to be borne by people who had 
 made almost supei human efforts in a four-years war against from 
 four to five times their own numbers in defense of the doctrine that 
 "all just government rests on the consent of the governed" ; a peo- 
 ple of whom every able-bodied man who could be spared from 
 home gave from three to four years of his time, without reward, 
 except bare subsistence, to the cause of the South ; a people whose 
 soldiers returned home after the war without money, without hope, 
 and trembling at the threats of confiscation and other dire calami- 
 ties to be visited upon them by the insolent conquerors; and a peo- 
 ple who have for thirty-one years been subjected to all the il's of 
 political debauchery forced on them by "the Grovernment. " 
 
 A letter written by a Southern veteran relating one of his experi 
 enoes deserves to be copied here that the hardships of the soldiers of 
 the Confederacy may not be forgotten. What he says will not be 
 disputed by any man wbo served in any of the armies. He is criti- 
 cising the complaining warriors who fought in the war with Spain. 
 He says : 
 
 "I remember one incident of my life that I would like to repeat to 
 those complaining warriors. On July 35, 1863, Kemper's Brigade of 
 Pickett's Division left Gordonsville, Va., in light marching order 
 with three days rations in their haversacks — and that was the last 
 one we drew until September 30, almost two months. Incredible, 
 but as true as holy writ, and look what we did. Our Brigade was 
 about two thousand strong, my regiment, the Seventeenth Virginia, 
 had about four hundred and seventy-five in all or about four hun- 
 dred and forty muskets. We crossed the Rappahannock July 37 
 and skirmished all the 28th, and marched to Salem that day and 
 rested. On the^ night of the 39th we made that famous march of 
 thirty-five miles, for Stonewall Jackson was staggering beneath the 
 weight of all Pope's army. We reached Thoroughfare Gap the 
 mornipg of the 30th and got breakfast of 'roasting ears. ' The next 
 two days we fought the battle of Manassas, and that night feasted 
 on the captured supplies. Onward ! still onward, without a halt, 
 men dropping out e^ery minute from weakness and sickness; over 
 the mountains into the valley ; across the Potomac ; into Maryland, 
 living entirely on green apples and corn, we fought the battle of 
 Crampton Gap September 13th, marched all night and fought the 
 battle of Boonstaoro the 14th. then northward and back, until the 
 morning of the 17th of Septem^ber, when my regiment drew up in 
 line of battle at Sharpsburg with 46 muskets and 5 officers, all of us 
 barefooted, not one had tasted meat for a couple of weeks; all were 
 in rags, and without a shred of underclothing, and all were devoured 
 with vermin, and we held all day Burnside's column back, though 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOBTH- 309 
 
 they were five to our one, and I was the only private unwounded 
 and untouched at the end of the fight. With all the suffering there 
 was no complaint — we took everything as a matter of course," etc. — 
 Fayetteville (N. C.) Observer, October 30, 1898. 
 
 Note Aa. 
 
 Lest thosH readers who belong to the post-bellum generation sus- 
 pect undue coloring if not exaggeration in regard to objectionable 
 appointments and other offensive acts of "the Government," some 
 documentary evidence is appended : 
 
 Two years after the war closed Gen. Daniel E, Sickles was Mill 
 tary Governor of North and South Carolina, and among the orders 
 issued by him was one dated at Charleston, S. C, April 11, 1867, 
 wherein he decreed as follows : 
 
 "XV. The Governors of North and South Carolina shall have 
 authority, within their jurisdictions respectively, to reprieve or par 
 don any person convicted and sentenced by a civil court, and to re- 
 mit fines and penalties. 
 
 "XVII. Any law or ordinance, heretofore in force in North or South 
 Carolina, inconsistent with the provisions of this General Order, is 
 hereby suspended and declared inoperative." 
 
 Again, on June 3, 1867, he decreed as follows : 
 
 " I. Sheriffs, Chiefs of Police, City Marshals, Chiefs of Detectives, 
 
 and Town Marshals of the several districts, counties, cities, towns 
 
 and other municipal organizations in North Carolina and South 
 
 Carolina will at once, by letter, report to Bvt. Col. Edward W. 
 
 Hinks, United States Arniy, Provost-Marshal-General of the Second 
 
 Military District, Charleston, South Carolina, etc. 
 
 * * * « **** * * 
 
 "VI. All Sheriffs, Constables, Police and other civil officers and 
 persons, whose duty it is under the laws of the provisional govern- 
 ments of North Carolina and South Carolina to serve writs or make 
 arrests, are hereby required to obey and execute the lawful orders of 
 the Provost- Marshal- General," etc., 
 
 And General Sickles was graciously moved to order as follows on 
 May 15th : 
 
 " Commanding officers of posts are authorized upon good and suffi- 
 cient cause shown, to grant permission to public officers to carry 
 arms when absolutely necessary in the discharge of their duties, " etc. 
 
 Succeeding General Sickles as a preferable tool to carry out the 
 purposes of the authors of the "Reconstruction " measures, General 
 Ed. R. S. Canby ordered an election to be held in North Carolina on 
 the 19th and 30th days of November, 1867, for delegates to a so-called 
 Constitutional Convention; the ballots oast by the colored people 
 
310 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 and the few whites who were permitted to vote — 30,000 of them be. 
 ing disfranchised — were sent to Charleston where General Canby 
 counted them'and declared the result ; the expenses of this outrage 
 were paid out of the people's pockets; and among his many oiher 
 acis which would have disgraced an ancient Persian satrap, General 
 Canby issued the following order: 
 
 " Headquarters Second Military District, ) 
 Charleston, S. C, June 30, 1868. ) 
 
 " General Order ) 
 No. 120. S 
 
 3. To facilitate the organization of the new State governments " — 
 under the Canby Constitutions he means — " the following appoint- 
 ments are made : 
 
 "To be Governor of North Carolina, W. W. Holden, Governor-elect 
 vice Jonathan Worth, removed." 
 
 And this same man (Holden), after having been impeached by the 
 Legislature of North Carolina, found guilty of high crimes and misde- 
 meanors, driven from the office of Governor, and declared incapable 
 of holding any office of trust or profit under the governm^ent of the 
 State of North Carolina, was appointed Postmaster at Raleigh by 
 President Grant, and held that office under " the Government ' ' 
 about twelve years. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 311 
 
 CHAPXER XXI. 
 
 THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY NOT AMONG THE CAUSES 
 OF THE WAR. 
 
 The progress of events and the motives of men as 
 they are presented in the preceding chapter would ren- 
 der it unnecessary to point out that the abolition of 
 slavery in the Southern States was not among the ob- 
 jects of those who waged war against these States ; but 
 as mankind are disposed to infer causes from results, 
 and the literature of the Union is disfigured by misrep- 
 resentations of the origin as well as the progress of the 
 war and its so-called "legitimate" results, it is deemed 
 important to give the reader the evidence on this point 
 preserved in official documents. ' 
 
 1. The platform on which Mr. Lincoln stood for the 
 Presidency declared for "the maintenance inviolate of 
 the rights of the States, and especially the right of each 
 State to order and control its own domestic institutions 
 according to its own judgment exclusively." 
 
 2. In Mr. Lincoln's inaugural address he said: "I 
 have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere 
 
 'Occasionally one of the apologists of the North unwittingly ad- 
 mits the true reason for the subjugation of the Southern States. On 
 page 747 of the Footprints of Time and Analysis of our Government, 
 by Charles Bancroft, this occurs : 
 
 "We could not reasonably have expected either the North or the 
 South to have acted differently from what they did. "While so gigan- 
 tic a war was an immense evil, to allow the right of peaceable secession 
 would have been ruin to the enterprise and thrift of the industrious 
 laborer and keen-eyed business man of the North. It would have 
 been the greatest calamity of the age. War was less to be feared." 
 
 Being interpreted, this means that to the North it would be "the 
 greatest calamity of the age" if they should lose the power to 
 "share" by Federal law, "in the profits of the unpaid labor of the 
 South." 
 
 See Note Ab. 
 
312 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 
 
 with the institution of slavery in the States where it 
 exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I 
 have no incUnation to do so." 
 
 3. Gen. John C. Fremont, who undertook, without 
 any "apphcation of the Legislature or of the executive" 
 to "guarantee" to Missouri "a republican form of gov- 
 ernment," issued a proclamation, August 30, 1861, in 
 which he "declared freemen" all the slaves of the 
 "rebels" in the State; but on September 3 Mr. Lincoln 
 disapproved the proclamation. 
 
 4. On October 3, 1861, Gen. J. H. Lane — known as 
 "the Kansas Jayhawker " — addressed a letter from 
 Kansas City to Gen. S. D. Sturgis, in which he said: 
 " My brigade is not here for the purpose of interfering 
 in anywise with the institution of slavery. ' ' 
 
 6. On the 9th of April, 1862, the Northern troops 
 evacuated Jacksonville, Fla., and on April 15 Colonel 
 Dil worth, the Confederate Commander at Tallahassee, 
 reported that "after the evacuation the enemy returned, 
 under a flag of truce, and were permitted to land fifty- 
 two negroes, which were taken in charge by the com- 
 mander of the post." 
 
 6. General Hunter, who was placed in command of 
 "the Southern department," by Mr. Lincoln, in March, 
 1862, issued a proclamation on April 12 declaring 
 slavery abolished ; but it was disapproved by Mr. Lin- 
 coln. \ 
 
 7. After the disasters to Mr. Lincoln's troops on their 
 march "to Eichmond," at Sharpsburg, at Fredericks- 
 burg, and at Chancellorsville, and Mr. Lincoln's call for 
 more troops was met in Massachusetts and other New 
 England States by the declaration that New England 
 did not desire to "preserve the Union" of the Constitu- 
 tion, but was willing to assist in prosecuting the war if 
 the abolition of slavery in the Southern States were an- 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NOETH. 313 
 
 nounced as a purpose of "the Government," Mr. Lin- 
 coln yielded only so far as to consent to issue a procla- 
 mation declaring free the slaves of "rebels." ' This he 
 did on January 1, 1863. He did not propose to free all 
 the slaves in the South, the only object being to punish 
 the "rebels." The proclamation contained sonie inter- 
 esting passages and some remarkable doctrines. 
 
 After reciting the substance of'a previous proclama- 
 tion, in which he had warned the "rebels" of his pur- 
 pose to issue this proclamation, he proceeds to name the 
 States in which he proposed to free the slaves, but he 
 excepts " the parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, 
 Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James, Ascension, 
 Assumption, Terre Bonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. 
 Martin, and Orleans, including the city of New Orleans 
 (all in Louisiana), forty-eight counties designated as 
 West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkeley, Ac- 
 cojuac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess 
 Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and 
 Portsmouth" (all in Virginia). All this he says he does 
 by virtue of the power vested in him "as Commander- 
 in-Chief of the army and navy, of the United States, in 
 time of actual armed rebellion against the authority 
 
 ' Writing- to the Secretary of War May 19, 1862, in answer to a let- 
 ter inquiring about tlie disposition of the people of Massachusetts, 
 Governor John A. Andrew said: " If our people feel that they are 
 going into the South to help fight rebels, who will Isill and destroy 
 them by all the means known to savages ; * * * -will use their 
 negro slaves against them both as laborers and as fighting men" — 
 Andrew knew, of course, that neither slaves nor free negroes had 
 been enlisted in the Southern armies — "while they themselves must 
 never fire at the enemy's magazine " — i. e. attack the institution of 
 slavery — " I think they will feel that the draft is heavy on their pa- 
 triotism. But if the President will sustain General Hunter, * * * 
 the roads will swarm, if need be, with multitudes whom New Eng- 
 land would pour out to obey your call." — Sketch of Governor An- 
 drew (1868), written by his Military Secretary, page 73. 
 
314 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 and government of the United States, and as a fit and 
 necessary war measure for repressing said rebellion' ' ; 
 though he does not enlighten us as to where and when 
 and how this power was vested in him. 
 
 He proceeds then to declare and make known that he 
 intends to repeat the crime charged against George III 
 in the Declaration of Independence, namely " He has 
 excited domestic insurrections amongst us," by arming 
 the slaves so declared free and sending them to butcher 
 the white people of the South. 
 
 And closing, he expresses the sincere belief that this 
 is "an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution " I 
 
 The fact is beyond cavil, therefore, that slavery was 
 not an issue in the inception of the war, and that when 
 emancipation was announced as one of the objects of 
 the Northern government, the sole purpose was to 
 weaken the South. ' And all their dealings with the 
 race question since the war have had a common object 
 in view — the degradation of the descendants of the men 
 who, in 1766, compelled the stamp master at Wilming- 
 ton to resign, and extorted from Governor Tryon a 
 promise not to attempt to enforce the Stamp Act; of 
 the men who, in February, 1776, defeated and dispersed 
 Governor Martin's tory allies at Moore's Creek Bridge; 
 of the men who, in the winter of 1775 and 1776 drove 
 Lord Dunmore out of Virginia; of the men who de- 
 feated and drove away from Charleston, in the summer 
 
 'Mr. Joseph Holt, of Kentucky, who as Judge- Advocate-General 
 gained some notoriety from his connection with the trial of Mrs. 
 Surrat, wrote a letter to Mr. Lincoln September 13, 1861, asking in 
 behalf of the people of the border States that he disapprove Fre- 
 mont's proclamation, and referred to the " fears of any attempt on 
 the part of the government of the tJnited States to liberate suddenly 
 in their midst a population unprepared for freedom, and whose pres- 
 ence could not fail to'Iprove a painful apprehension, if not a terror, 
 to the homes and families of all."— War Records, 'i2d series, Vol. I, 
 page 768. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 316 
 
 of 1776, Sir Henry Clinton's army and Sir Peter Parker's 
 fleet ; of the men who, in the early years of the Revo- 
 lution, sent cargoes of provisions and other supplies to 
 the suffering people of Boston. 
 
 Such was the object of making voters, over the veto 
 of President Johnson, of the ex-slaves in 1867, before 
 the Fourteenth Amendment was declared to have been 
 adopted, and of disfranchising thousands — estimated at 
 30,000 in North Carolina — of hereditary voters in the 
 Southern States. ' Such was the object of subjecting 
 the Southern States, in spite of the President's veto, to 
 the domination of the ex-slaves of the South and the 
 "carpet-baggers from the North. "^ Such was the 
 object of the "force bills" and of the "civil rights" bills, 
 passed over the President's veto, which the Supreme 
 Court declared unauthorized by even the amendments 
 which the revolutionists had forced into the Constitu- 
 
 ' The revolutionists forgot to enfranchise the colored people in the 
 District of Columbia till 1871. Then the government of the District 
 was placed in the hands of the people thereof; but three years of 
 corruption and incompetence, du^, as nobody doubted, to the heavy 
 negro vote in the District, compelled a repeal of the law (June 20, 
 1874) by the very malignants who were sending bayonets to super- 
 vise elections in the South and insure "manhood suffrage." 
 
 " President Johnson referring in his annual message of December 
 3, 1867, to the enfranchising of the blacks, said: "It is manifestly 
 and avcTwedly the object of these laws to confer upon the negroes 
 the privilege of voting, and to disfranchise such a number of white 
 citizens as will give the former a clean majority of all elections in 
 the Southern States. * * * The subjugation of the States to 
 negro domination would be worse than the military despotism under 
 which they are now suffering. * * * Already the negroes are in- 
 fluenced by promises of confiscation and plunder. They are taught 
 to regard as an enemy every white man who has any respect for the 
 rights of his own race. * * * Of all the dangers which our na 
 tion has yet encountered, none are equal to those which must result 
 from the success of the effort now making to Africanize the half of 
 our country." 
 
316 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 tion. And such was the object of the election laws pro- 
 viding for military control of elections in the Southern 
 States. ' 
 
 Thirty years of efforts have been made to disprove 
 this truth; and humanity and love for the negro have 
 been held up as the sole motive of the radicals. ^ But 
 actions speak louder than words. 
 
 They have never elected a colored man to any State 
 or county office ; they have never elected a colored man to 
 either House of the Congress ; they have never appointed 
 a colored man to any Federal ofifice-r-even a fourth- 
 class post- office — in the Northern States; and they have 
 denied him that equality of opportunity in industrial 
 
 ' This crime against the freedom of elections, of which no English 
 king has been guilty in more than two centuries, appears never to 
 have been suspected as a possibility by the opponents of the Consti- 
 tution. Objection, it is true, was made to the power proposed to be 
 conferred on the Congress "to make or alter" regulations as to "times, 
 places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representa- 
 tives, " but not even a lunatic could be found to suggest that the rep- 
 resentatives of the Northern States would ever send negro troops to 
 supervise elections in the Southern States. In Nos. LIX, LX, and 
 LXI of the Federalist, Mr. Hamilton makes it clear that the objec- 
 tions rested solely on the " times and places." 
 
 And, reader, the authors of all these crimes had taken a solemn 
 oath ^prescribed by themselves without Constitutional authority) to 
 "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution. And the 
 piety of the criminals was manifested in the legend they had placed 
 on the silver dollar: ',' In God We Trust." 
 
 See Note Ac. 
 
 ^ In the speech of Judge Ewart, of North Carolina, in the House 
 of Representatives, against the notorious "force bill" which was 
 passed by that body in 1890, under the whip and spur of such lead- 
 ers as Hon. Thomas B. Reed he said : 
 
 "It is a sectional measure, designed almost entirely for the South." 
 * ******** 
 
 " I will never, by my vote or voice, support a proposition that 
 tends to humiliate or degrade my people." 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 317 
 
 employments which is supposed to be the birth-right of 
 every voter in the United States. ' 
 
 In the August 13, 1896,. number of Public Opinion 
 are extracts from New England newspapers showing 
 how the negro stands among the whites of that section. 
 
 Zion's Herald (Methodist). Boston, said: "Boston, 
 representing the soul and intellect of the North, was 
 the nursery of that second great movement of our 
 country that led to the freedom of 4,000,000 of slaves. 
 
 * * * "Of the 8,590 (negroes) in the city we find 
 about 5,000 of them in four wards, and nearly the total 
 number grouped in two small areas at the West and 
 South Ends. The families are massed — ward II with 
 1,099 negroes, has more than twice as many dwellings 
 occupied by ten families each as any ward in the city. 
 There are many well-to-do colored people in Boston, 
 
 * * * and they do not naturally choose the negro 
 sections. * * * But the truth is, they can't help 
 themselves. 'We can not rent to colored people, ' said 
 Mr. S., a broker on Washington street, 'except in the 
 negro quarters. Property always decreases in value as 
 the negroes increase in numbers about it. ' * * * 
 
 "There is no more striking difference between the 
 negroes of the North and South than in the matter of 
 their labor. Here the negro carries the hod, in the South 
 
 ' In the months of September and October, 1898, about three hun- 
 dred negro laborers — citizens of Southern States — were driven out 
 of Illinois, whither they had gone to work in coal mines, the first 
 time by threats, and the last time by bullets; and the Governor of 
 the State not only refused to protect them in their rights, but 
 publicly announced his pleasure at their expulsion. And this was' 
 done in violation of the first clause of secLiou two, Article IV, of the 
 Federal Constitution, which Governor Tanner is under a 'solemn 
 oath to "support.'' But worse still, it was done in violatipn of the 
 first clause of the XlVth Amendment, which Governor Tanner's po- 
 litical associates forced into the Constitution as a step in the degra- 
 dation of the " old rebel element " in the Southern States. 
 
318 THE SOUTH AGAINST. THE NOETH. 
 
 he lays the brick and mortar; here he is a common 
 laborer, there he is an artisan, * * * 
 
 " ' I have complained to my people, ' said Rev. Dr. D. 
 P. Roberts, pastor of the A.. M. E. Church in Charles 
 street, 'and the white people have complained to me, 
 that we negroes do not take advantage of the educa- 
 tional opportunities offered us by Boston. All the 
 schools and colleges of this State are opened to us as to 
 whites ;■''** but as a class we do not study. Why ? 
 Massachusetts opens her schools to us, but she shuts 
 her shops. * * * Boston does many splendid things 
 for the negro visitor, but other than as a guest she has 
 no room for him except in the places no white man 
 wants. * * * She loves to put a diploma in his 
 hands, but with it a ticket for the South. ' 
 
 "The color line is drawn in Boston — silently and cour- 
 teously, but positively and rigorously drawn. * * * 
 ' I came from Baltimore to Boston, ' said a negro in an- 
 swer to our question as to how he liked the city, 'and I 
 am going back to Baltimore. The difference between 
 the two places is just this: There we know what to ex- 
 pect, and we take our place; but here you are never 
 told and you never know, but for all that you find your- 
 self quietly pushed aside and left out.' " 
 
 And the Providence {R. I.) Journal apologetically 
 says: "As it is in Boston, so it is in other Northern 
 cities. There is no particular moral to be drawn from 
 the fact, no especial complaint to be made on either 
 side. There is no ill feeling entertained by the Whites 
 of the North toward the. negro. Nobody wishes to de- 
 prive him of a single legal right. But when it, comes to 
 the intimate and private phases of society the white 
 man will erect • such barriers as he pleases, whether 
 against the black, the Mongolian, or che uncongenial 
 white person. This"— forgetting the "civil rights bills" 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 319 
 
 supported in Congress by Massachusetts and Ehode 
 Island — "is something outside the pale of law, and no 
 amount of legislation could effept a permanent or wide- 
 spread change." 
 
 Note Ab. 
 Accepting the theory that the Southern people were fighting in 
 defense of slavery in the Southern States, some uninformed persons, 
 even in the South, have expressed surprise that the Confederate 
 authorities did not agree to surrender to Mr. Lincoln " when he 
 offered to pay for the slaves. " But although most of the school hoys 
 and newspaper readers, North and South, have been reading about 
 this offer for over thirty years, and most of our channels of informa- 
 tion have been befouled by 1 he falsehood, Mr. Lincoln ma.de no such 
 offer to the Cotifederate authorities. But it is asserted by the apolo- 
 gists of the North that Mr. Lincoln did, on the 6th of March, 1863, 
 recommend to the Congress the passage of an act offering pecuniary 
 compensation to slave-holders; and that such an act was passed. 
 This is "history " in Alden's Cyclopsedia. But no such an act was 
 ever passed ; and however much Mr. Lincoln may have personally 
 favored compensation to slave-owners, nobody has told us- where the 
 money was to come from. Did Mr. Lincoln propose to collect it out 
 of the pockets of the slave-holders of the South as well as of the 
 non-slaye-holelers of the North ? The only act ever passed offering 
 compensation to slave-holders was that of April 16, 1862, abolishing 
 slavery in the District of Columbia. It provided for compensation 
 to " loyal " owners in the District, if the applicant for compensation 
 could prove by other testimony than his own oath that he had ap- 
 proved all the measures of the usurpers. 
 
 Note Ac. 
 
 Extract from a speech delivered by the author October 7, 1893,' in 
 the House of Representatives : 
 
 " The Speaker jc»'o tempore. The House is in session for the pur- 
 pose of discussing the bill H. R. 2331 "—to repeal Federal election 
 laws. " The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Grady), is recog- 
 nized. 
 
 "Mr., Grady: 
 
 ***** *•»** 
 
 " Now, Mr. Speaker, having given a brief resume of some of the 
 decisive facts in our history, and given what I believe, and what my 
 people believe, to be the true principles on which the Union of these 
 
 'Cong. Rec, 53d Cong., 1st sess., pp. 2303-3306. 
 
320 THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 
 
 States was founded, it seems unnecessary to tell this House what I 
 think of some of the provisions of the Federal election laws. I deny, 
 of course, that there is any such thing in this Union as a national 
 election or a Federal election. 
 
 ' ' The States conferred upon the Congress the power to make 
 laws or alter State laws prescribing the times, places, and manner 
 of holding elections for Representatives, and the times and manner 
 of choosing Senators. I grant all this. But there is another pro- 
 vision of the Constitution, Mr. Speaker, which must be permitted to 
 have its full force wheh these election laws are under considera- 
 tion. It was taken for granted that it would be an insult to the 
 dignity of a sovereign State for the United States to send their soldiers 
 into its borders, even for the purpose of guaranteeing the State 
 ■ against domestic violence,' unless demand for assistance were 
 made by the State Legislature or by the Executive when the Legis- 
 lature could not be convened ; in which case the Federal Govern- 
 ment was to be obedient to a State. 1 remind gentlemen that 
 this is the meaning of that provision, that when the State makes 
 that demand the Federal Government is to obey. 
 
 "The spirit of this provision — indeed the well-known temper of 
 the States at that time, when they declared that the Congress should 
 never raise an army for a longer period than two years — can not be 
 misunderstood ; and if Federal troops can not, unless invited by the 
 State, go into its borders to quell ' domestic violence,' where do we 
 find an excuse for sending them, of our own motion^ to anticipate 
 'domestic violence,' and 'to keep peace at the polls?' Mr. 
 Speaker, words have no meaning if Congress possesses this power. 
 
 "And how can Congress interfere with the registration of voters 
 when their qualifications are absolutely subject to State determi- 
 nation ? I should doubt the sincerity of any sane man who will 
 assert that it can. 
 
 "But, Mr. Speaker, the advocates of these laws fortify their con- 
 tention by citing decisions of the Supreme Court; and I wonder how 
 a political party which has scouted and trampled on decisions of 
 that court can stand her6, unabashed, and ask us to yield our opin 
 ions as law- makers to the opinion of that court. It Is true, Mr. 
 Speaker,- that the Supreme Court is against us as to some of the sec 
 tions of these laws, but what is its argument ? Here it is in a nut 
 shell, as delivered by Justice Miller in ex parte Yarborough (110 U 
 s! R., 651): 
 
 " ' That a government whose essential character is republican, 
 whose executive head and legislative body are both elected, whose 
 most numerous and powerful branch of the Legislature is elected by 
 the people directly, has no power by appropriate laws to secure this 
 election from the influence of violence, of corruption, and of fraud. 
 
THE SOUTH AGAINST THE NORTH. 321 
 
 is a proposition so startling as to arrest attention and demand tlie 
 greatest consideration. ' 
 
 " Tliis reasoning loolis sound, Mr. Speaker, but it is drawn from 
 the necessity of the ca,se — not from the Constitution. And when we 
 remember thai the President of the United States— our ' king in 
 dress- coat' — has more power than any other elected officer in the 
 world, the necessity for supervising his election and guarding it 
 against fraud and corruption overshadows any such supposed neces- 
 sity for supervision of elections for Representatives. But the States 
 delegated no power whatever to the Congress over the Presidential 
 elections, while they did make the House of Representatives the 
 judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own mem- 
 bers. The argument from necessity, therefore, proves too much, 
 and reaches, in my judgment, a lame and impotent conclusion; 
 indeed, it is founded on the 'national idea.' " 
 
 21 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 A DECLARATION BY THE REPBESBNTATIVES OF THE UNITED 
 STATES OF AMERICA, IN GENERAL CONGRESS ASSEMBLED. ' 
 
 When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a 
 people to advance from that subordination in which they have 
 hitherto remained, and to assume amiong the powers of the earth 
 the equal and independent station to which the laws of Nature and 
 of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of 
 mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel 
 them to the strange separation. 
 
 We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable ; that all men 
 are created equal & independent; that from that equal creation 
 they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the 
 preservation of life & liberty & the pursuit of happiness; that 
 to secure these ends, governments aire instituted among men, deriv- 
 ing their just powers from the consent of the governed ; that when- 
 ever any form of government shall become destructive of ihese ends, 
 It is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, & to institute 
 a new government, laying its foundation on such principles & 
 organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely 
 to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate 
 that governments long established should not be changed for light 
 and transient causes: and accordingly all experience hath shown 
 that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are suflferable, 
 than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are 
 accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, be- 
 gun at a distinguished period, and pursuing invariably the same 
 object, evinces a design to subject them to arbitrary power, it is 
 their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government & to 
 provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the 
 patient sufferance of these colonies ; and such is now the necessity 
 which constrains them to expunge their former systems of govern- 
 ment. The history of his present majesty is a history of unremit- 
 ting injuries and usurpations, among which no fact stands single or 
 
 ^ Jefferson's draft, taken from a facsimile in Conrad's Lives of the 
 Signers and copied literally, except that capital letters are substi- 
 tuted at the beginnings of sentences for the small ones almost inva- 
 riably used by Jefferson. 
 
APPENDIX. > 323 
 
 solitary to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest, all of which 
 have in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over 
 these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world, 
 for the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood : 
 
 He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and neces- 
 sary for the public good : 
 
 He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate & 
 pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his 
 assent should be obtained ; and when so suspended, he has neglected 
 utterly to attend to them. 
 
 He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large 
 districts of people unless those people would relinquish the right of 
 representation, a right inestimable to them, & formidable to 
 tyrants only : 
 
 He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, un. 
 comfortable, & distant from the deposilory of iheir public records, 
 for ihe sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his 
 measures ; 
 
 He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly & continually 
 for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the 
 people : 
 
 When dissolved, he has refused for a long space of time to cause 
 others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of 
 annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise, 
 the state remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of 
 invasion from without & convulsions within: 
 
 He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states ; tor 
 that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners ; 
 refusing to p^ss others to encourage their migrations hither ; & rais- 
 ing the conditions of new appropriations of lands : 
 
 He has suffered the administration of .iustice totally to cease in 
 some of these colonies, refusing his assent to laws for establishing 
 judiciary powers: 
 
 He has made our judges dependent on his will alone, for the ten- 
 ure of their offices, and amount of their salaries : 
 
 He has erected a multitude of new offices by a self assumed power, 
 & sent hither swarms of officers to harrass our people & eat out 
 their substance : 
 
 He has kept among us in times of peace standing armies & ships 
 of war: 
 
 He has affected to render the military independent of & superior 
 to the civil power: 
 
 He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction for- 
 eign to our constitutions and-jacknowledged by our laws; giving, his 
 assent to their pretended acts of legislation, for quartering large 
 
SM APPENDIX. 
 
 bodies of armed troops among us ; for protecting them by a mock- 
 trial from punishment for any murders they should commit on the 
 inhabitants of these states ; for cutting off our trade with all parts 
 of the world; for imposing taxes on us without our consent; for de- 
 priving us of the benefit of trial by jury; for transporting us beyond 
 seas to be tried for pretended offences ; for taking away our char- 
 ters, & altering fundamentally the forms of our governments, for 
 suspending our own legislatures & declaring themselves invested 
 with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever: 
 
 He has abdicated government here, withdrawing his governors. & 
 declaring us out of his allegiance and protection : 
 
 He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns 
 & destroyed the lives of our people: 
 
 He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries 
 to compleal the works of death desolation & tyranny already begun 
 with circumstances of cruelty & perfidy unworthy the head of a 
 civilized nation : 
 
 He has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the 
 merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undis- 
 tinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, & conditions of existence; 
 
 He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens, 
 with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property: 
 
 He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its 
 most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people 
 who never offended him. captivating & carrying them into slavery 
 in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their trans 
 portation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel 
 powers, is the warfare of the Christian king of Great Britain deter- 
 mined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and 
 sold. He has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legisla- 
 tive attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce: and 
 that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished 
 die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among 
 us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by 
 murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them: thus pay- 
 ing off former crimes committed against the liberties of cue people," 
 with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of 
 another. 
 
 In every stage of these oppressions " we have petitioned for re- 
 dress in the most humble terms" ; our repeated petitions "have been 
 answered by repeated injuries. " A prince whose character is thus 
 marked "by every act which may define a tyrant," is unfit to be the 
 "ruler of a people who mean to be free." Future ages will scarce 
 believe that the hardiness of one man adventured within the short 
 
APPENDIX. 325 
 
 compass of twelve years only * * » i over a people fostered & 
 fixed in principles of liberty. 
 
 Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. 
 We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legis- 
 lature to extend a jurisdiction over these our states. We have re- 
 minded them of the circumstances of our emigration & settlement 
 here, no one of which could warrant so strange a pretension : that 
 these were effected at the expence of our own blood & treasure, un- 
 assisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain: that in con- 
 stituting indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted 
 one common king, thereby laying a fbundation for perpetual league 
 and amity with them ; but that submission to their parliament was 
 ntypart of our constitution, nor ever in idea if history may be cred- 
 ited: and we appealed to their native justice & magnanimity, as 
 well as to the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpa- 
 tions which were likely to interrupt our correspondence & connec- 
 tion. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice & of consan- 
 guinity, and when occasions have been given them, by the regular 
 course of their laws, of removing from their councils the disturbers 
 of our harmony, they have by their free election re-established them 
 to power. At this very time they too are permitting their chief 
 magistrate to send over soldiers not only of our common blood, but 
 Scoi oh & foreign mercenaries to invade & deluge us ■» * « i 
 
 These facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection, and 
 manly spirit bids us to renounce forever these unfeeling brethren. 
 We must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and to hold 
 them as we hold the rest of mankind enemies in war, in peace 
 friends. Wr; might have been a free & a great people together ; but 
 a communication of grandeur & of freedom it seems is 1:)elow their 
 dignity. Be it so since they will have it: the road to glory and hap 
 piness is open to us too; we will climb it separately, and acquiesce 
 in the necessity which pronounces our everlasting adieu. 
 
 We therefore the representatives of the United States of America 
 in General Congress assembled do in the name & by authority of the 
 good people of these states reject and renounce all allegiance & sub- 
 jection to the king of Great Britain & all others who may hereafter 
 claim by, through, or under them ; we utterly dissolve & break off 
 all political connection which may liave heretofore subsisted be 
 tween us & the people or parliament of Great Britain ; and finally 
 we do assert and declare these colonies to be free and independent 
 states, and that as free and independent states they shall hereafter 
 have power to levy war conclude peace, contract alliances, estab- 
 
 ' These blanks are where erasures have rendered Jefferson's words 
 illegible. 
 
326 APPENDIX. 
 
 lish commerce, & to do all other acts and things which independent 
 states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration we 
 mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred 
 honor. 
 
 ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.' 
 
 Art. 1. The style of this confederacy shall be, 'The United States 
 of America." 
 
 Art. 2. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independ- 
 ence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this 
 confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress 
 assembled. 
 
 Art. 3. The said states hereby severally enter into a firm league 
 of friendship with each other for their common defence, the security 
 of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare ; binding 
 themselves to assist each other against all force offered to, or at- 
 tacks made upon them, or-any of them, on account of religion, sov- 
 ereignty, trade, or any other pretence whatever. 
 
 Art. 4. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship, 
 and intercourse among the people of the different states in this 
 Union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, paupers, vaga- 
 bonds, and fugitives from justice, excepted, shall be entitled to all 
 privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states ; and 
 the people of each state shall have free ingress and regress to and 
 from any other state, and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of 
 trade and commerce subject to the same duties, impositions, and 
 restrictions, as the inhabitants thereof respectively, provided that 
 such restrictions shall not extend so far as to prevent the removal 
 of property imported into any state to any other state, of which the 
 owner is an inhabitant ; provided also, that no imposition, duties, 
 or restriction, shall be laid on the property of the United States or 
 either of them. 
 
 If any person guilty of or charged with treason, felony, or other 
 high misdemeanor, in any state, shall flee from justice, and be found 
 in any of the United States, he shall, upon demand of the governor 
 or executive power of the state from which he fled, be delivered up 
 and removed to the state having jurisdiction of his offence. 
 
 Full faith and credit shall be given in each of these states to the 
 records, acts and judicial proceedings cf the courts and magistrates 
 of every other state. 
 
 Art. 5. For the more convenient management of the general in- 
 terests of the United States, delegates shall be annually appointed 
 
 ' Some unimportant words and phrases are omitted. 
 
APPENDIX. S27 
 
 in such manner as the legislature of each state shall direct to meet 
 in Congress on the first Monday in November, in every year, with a 
 power reserved to each state to recall its delegates or any of them, at 
 any time within the year, and to send others in their stead for the 
 remainder of the year. 
 
 No state shall be represented in Congress by less than two, nor by 
 more than seven members ; and no person shall be capable of being a 
 delegate for more than three years in any term of six years ; nor 
 shall any person, being a delegate, be capable of holding any office 
 under the United States, for which he, or another for his benefit, 
 receives any salary, fees, or emoluments of any kind. 
 
 Each state shall maintain its own delegates in a meeting of the 
 states, and while the> act as members of the committee of the states. 
 
 In determining questions in the llnited States in Congress assem- 
 bled, each state shall have one vote. 
 
 Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached 
 or questioned in any court or place out of Congress ; and the mem- 
 bers of Congress shall be protected in their persons from arrests and 
 imprisonments, during the time of their going to and from and at- 
 tendance on Congress, except for treason, felony, or breach of the 
 peace. 
 
 Art. 6. No state, without the consent of the United States in Con- 
 gress assembled, shall send any embassy to, or receive any embassy 
 from, or enter into any conference, agreement, alliance, or treaty, 
 with any king, prince, or state ; nor shall any person holding any 
 office of profit or trust under the United States, or any of them, ac- 
 cept of any present, emolument, office or title of any kind whatever, 
 from any hing, prince, or foreign state; nor shall the United States 
 in Congress assembled, or any of them, grant any title of nobility. 
 
 No two or more states shall enter into any treaty, confederation, 
 or alliance whate^ er, between them, without the consent of the 
 United States in Congress assembled, specifying accurately the pur- 
 poses for which the same is to be entered into and how long it shall 
 continue. 
 
 No state shall lay any imposts or duties, which may interfere with 
 any stipulations in treajties entered into by the United States in 
 Congress assembled, with any king, prince, or state, in pursuance 
 of any treaties already proposed by Congress to the courts of. France 
 and Spain. 
 
 No vessel-of-war shall be kept up in time of peace by any state, 
 except such number only as shall be deemed necessary by the United 
 States in Congress assembled for the defence of such state or its 
 trade; nor shall any body of forces be kept up by any state in time 
 of peace, except such number only as in the judgment of the United 
 Slates in Congress assembled, shall be deemed requisite to garrison 
 
328 -APPENDIX. 
 
 the forts necessary tor the defence of such state ; but every state 
 shall always keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia, suffl 
 ciently armed and accoutred, and shall provide and have constantly 
 ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field-pieces and 
 tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition, and camp 
 equipage. 
 
 No state shall engage in any war without the consent of the United 
 States in Congress assembled unless such state be actually invaded 
 by enemies or shall have received certain advice of a resolution be- 
 ing formed by some nation of Indians to invade such state, and the 
 danger is so imminent as not to admit of a delay till the United 
 States in Congress assembled can be consulted; nor shall any state 
 grant commissions tc any ships or vessels-of-war, nor letters of 
 marque or reprisal, except it be after a declaration of war by the 
 United States in Congress assembled, and then only against the 
 kingdcm or state, and the subjects thereof, against which war has 
 been so declared, and uiider such regulations as shall be established 
 by the United States in Congress assembled, unless such state be in- 
 fested by pirates, in which case vessels- of war may be fitted out for 
 that occasion, and kept so long as the danger shall continue, or un- 
 til the United States in Congress assembled shall determine other- 
 wise. 
 
 Art. 7. When land forces are raised bj' any state for the common 
 defence, all officers of or under the rank of colonel, sha'l be ap- 
 pointed by the legislature of each state respectively, by whom such 
 forces shall be raised, or in such manner as such state shall direct, 
 and ail vacancies shall be filled up by the state which first made the 
 appointment. 
 
 Art. 8. All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be 
 incurred for the common defence or general welfare, and allowed by 
 the United States in Congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a 
 common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several states in 
 proportion to the value of all land within each state granted to or 
 surveyed for any person, as such land and the buildings and im- 
 provements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as 
 the United States in Congress assembled §hall from time to time 
 direct and appoint. 
 
 The taxes for paying that proportion shall be laid and levied by 
 the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several states, 
 within the time agreed upon by the United States in Congress as- 
 sembled. 
 
 Art. 9. The United States in Congress assembled shall have the 
 sole and exclusive right and power of determining on peace and 
 war, except in the cases mentioned in the sixth article — of sending 
 and receiving ambassadors — entering into treaties and alliances; 
 
APPENDIX. 329 
 
 provided, that no treaty of commerce shall be made whereby the 
 legislative power of the respective states shall be restrained from 
 imposing such imposts and duties on foreigners as their own people 
 are subjected to, or from prohibiting the exportation or importation 
 of any species of goods or commodities whatsoever— of establishing 
 rules for deciding in all cases, what ca^jtures on land or water shall 
 be legal, and in what manner prizes taken by land or naval for- 
 ces in the service of the United States shall be divided or appropri- 
 ated — of granting letters of marque and reprisal in times of peace — 
 appointing courts for the trial of piracies and felonies committed on 
 the high seas, and establishing courts for receiving and determining 
 finally appeals in all eases of captures: provided, that no member 
 of Congress shall be appointed a .judge of any. of the said courts. 
 
 The United States in Congress assembled shall also be the last 
 resort on appeal in all disputes and differences now subsisting or 
 that hereafter may arise between two or more states * * * and 
 the judgment and sentence of the court shall be final and conclu- 
 sive * * * ; provided also that no state shall be deprived of ter- 
 ritory for the benefit of the United States. 
 
 All controversies concerning the private right of soil, claimed un- 
 der different grants of two or more states * * « shall, on the 
 petition of either party to the Congress of the United States, be 
 finally determined, as near as may be, in the same mannei as is be- 
 fore prescribed for deciding disputes respecting territorial jurisdic- 
 tion between different states. 
 
 The United SI ates in Congress assembled shall also have the sole 
 and exclusive right and power of regulating the alloy and value of 
 coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the respective 
 states— fixing the standard of weights and measures * * —reg- 
 ulating the trade and managing all affairs with the Indians not 
 members of any of the states; provided that the legislative right 
 of any state within its own limits be not infringed or violated — 
 establishing and regulating postofflces from one state to another 
 * * * and exacting such postage on the papers passing through 
 the same, as may be requisite to defray the expenses of the said 
 ofBce— appointing all officers of the land forces in the service of the 
 United States excepting regimental officers — appointing all the offi- 
 cers of the naval forces, and commissioning all officers whatever in 
 the service of the United States— making rules for the government 
 and regulation of the said land and naval forces. 
 
 The United.States in Congress assembled shall have authority to 
 appoint a committee to sit in the recess of Congress, to be denomi 
 nated "a committee of the states," and to consist of one delegate 
 from each state; and to appoint such other committees and civil 
 officers as may be necessary for managing the general affairs of the 
 
330 APPENDIX. 
 
 United States, under their direction — to appoint one of their num- 
 ber to preside * * * — to ascertain the necessary sums of money 
 to be raised * * * and to appropriate and apply the same * * * 
 — to borrow money or emit bills on the credit of the United States 
 
 * * * — to build and equip a navy — to agree upon the number of 
 land forces, and to make requisitions from each state for its quota, 
 in proportion to the number of white inhabitants in such state; 
 which requisition shall be binding, and thereupon the legislature of 
 each state shall appoint the regimental oflBcers, raise the men, and 
 clothe, arm, and equip them, in a soldierlike manner, at the ex- 
 pense of the United States. * * * 
 
 The United States in Congress assembled shall never engage in a 
 war, nor grant letters of marque and reprisal in time of peace, nor 
 enter into any treaties or alliances, nor coin money, nor regulate the 
 value thereof, nor ascertain the sums and expenses necessary for the 
 defence and welfare, * * * , nor emit bills, nor borrow money, 
 
 * * * , nor appropriate money, nor agree upon the number of ves- 
 selsofwar to be built or purchased, or the number of land or sea 
 forces to be raised, nor appoint a commander-in-chief of the army 
 or navy, unless nine states assent to the same; nor shall a question 
 on any other point, except for adjourning from day to day, be de- 
 termined, unless by the votes of a luajority of the United States. 
 
 * * * 
 
 (Then follow regulations as to places of meeting, length of recesses, 
 publishing proceedings, recording yea and nay votes, etc.) 
 
 Art. 10. The committee of the states, or any nine of them, shall be 
 authorized to execute, in the recess of Congress,- such of the powers 
 of Congress as the United States in Congress assembled, by the eon- 
 sent of nine states, shall from time to time think expedient to vest 
 them wi1h; provided that no power be delegated to the said com- 
 mittee, for the exercise of which * * * the voice of nine states 
 
 * * * is requisite. 
 
 Art. 11. Canada, acceding to this confederation, and joining in 
 the measures of the United States, shall be admitted into, and enti- 
 tled 1o, all the advantages of this Union; but no other colony shall 
 be admitted into the same unless such admission be agreed to by 
 nine states. 
 
 Art. 13. All bills of credit emitted, moneys borrowed, and debts 
 contracted, by or under the authority of (the Continental) Congress, 
 before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the 
 present confederation, shall be deemed and considered as a charge 
 against the United States. * * * 
 
 Art. 13. Every state shall abide by the decision of the United 
 States in Congress assembled, on all questions which, by this con- 
 federation, are submitted to theni. And the articles of this confed- 
 
APPENDIX. 331 
 
 eration shall be inviolably observed by every state, and the Union 
 shall be perpetual ; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be 
 made in any of them, unless such alteration be agreed to in a Con- 
 gress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the leg- 
 islature of every state. 
 
 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 Preamble. 
 
 We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more per- 
 fect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide 
 for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the 
 blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and 
 establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 
 
 Article I. Legislative Departinent. 
 
 Section I. Congress in General. 
 
 All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress 
 of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of 
 Representatives. 
 
 Section II. House of Representatives. 
 
 1. The House of Representatives shall ' be composed of members 
 chosen every second year by the people of the several States, and 
 the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for 
 electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature. 
 
 2. No person shal} be a Representative who shall not have attained 
 the age of twenty-five years, and been seven years a citizen of the 
 United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of 
 that State in which he shall be chosen. 
 
 3. Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among 
 the several States which|may be included within this Union, accord- 
 ing to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by ad- 
 ding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to 
 service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three- 
 fifths of all other persons. The actual enumeration shall be made 
 within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the 
 United States, and within every subserjuent term of ten years, in 
 such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Represen- 
 tatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each 
 State shall have at least one Representative ; and until such enu- 
 meration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be en- 
 titled to choose three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Provi- 
 dence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey 
 
332 APPENDIX. 
 
 four, Pennsylvania eight, Delainaie one, Maryland six, Virginia 
 ten. North Carolina five, South Carolina G.ve, and Georgia three. 
 
 4. When vacancies happen in the representation from any State, 
 the executive authority thereof shall issue wriis of election to fill 
 such vacancies. 
 
 5. The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and 
 other officers, and shall have the sole power of impeachment. 
 
 Section III. Senate. 
 
 1. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Sena 
 tors from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; 
 and each Senator shall have one vote. 
 
 3. Immediately after they shall be assembled in consequence of 
 the first election, the.v shall be divided as equally as may be into 
 three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first class shall be 
 vacated at the expiration of the second year; of the second class, at 
 the expiration of the fourth year, and of the third class, at the ex- 
 piration of the sixth year, so that one-third may be chosen every 
 second year; and if vacancies happen by resignation or otherwise 
 during the recess of the legislature of any State, the executive 
 thereof may make temporary appointments until the next meeting 
 of the legislature, which shall then fill such vacancies. 
 
 3. No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the 
 age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United 
 States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that 
 State for which he shall be chosen. 
 
 4. The Vice-President of the United States shall be President of 
 the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided. 
 
 5. The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a Presi- 
 dent iJro tempore in the absence of the Vice-President, or when he 
 shall exercise the office of President of the United States. 
 
 6. The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. 
 When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. 
 When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice 
 shall preside: and no person shall be convicted without the concur- 
 rence of two-thirds of the members present. 
 
 T. Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further 
 than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy 
 any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States; but the 
 party convicted shall, nevei'theless, be liable and subject to indict- 
 ment, trial, judgment, and punishment, according to law. 
 
APPENDIX. 333 
 
 Section IV. Both Houses. 
 
 1. The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators 
 and Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the Legis- 
 lature thereof ; but the Congress may at any time by law make or 
 alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators. 
 
 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and 
 such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they 
 shall by law appoint a different day. 
 
 Section V. The Houses Separately. 
 
 1. Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and 
 qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall con- 
 stitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn 
 from day to day, and may be authoized to compel the attendance of 
 absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties, as each 
 house may provide. 
 
 3. Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish 
 its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of 
 two thirds, expel a member. 
 
 3. Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from 
 time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their 
 judgment require secrecy, and the yeas and nays of the members of 
 either house on any question shall, at the desire of one-fifth of those 
 present, be entered on the journal. 
 
 4. Neither house, during the session of Congress, shall, without 
 the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to 
 any other place than that in which the two houses shall be sitting. 
 
 Section VI. Privileges and Disabilities of Members. 
 
 1. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation 
 for their services, to be ascertained by law and paid out of the Treas- 
 ury of the United States. They shall, in all cases except treason, 
 felony, and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during 
 their attendance at the session of their respective houses, and in 
 going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate 
 in either house they shall not be questioned in any other place. 
 
 3. No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which 
 he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority 
 of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emolu- 
 ments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no 
 person holding any ofHce under the United States shall be a mem- 
 ber of either house during his continuance in ofHce. 
 
334 APPENDIX. 
 
 Section VII. Mode of Passing Laws. 
 
 1. All bills for raising reveoue shall originate in the House of Rep- 
 resentatives ; but the Senate may propose or concur with amend- 
 ments as on other bills. 
 
 3. Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representa- 
 tives and the Senate shall, before it become a law, be presented to 
 the President of the United States ; if he approve he shall sign it, 
 but if not he shall return it, with his objections', to that house in 
 which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at 
 large on their journal and proceed to reconsider it. If after such 
 reconsideration two-thirds of that house shall agree to pass the bill, 
 it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other house, by 
 which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two- 
 thirds of that house it shall become a law. But in all such cases the 
 votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the 
 names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered 
 on the journal of each.house respectively. If any bill shall not be 
 returned by the President v;ithin ten days (Sundays excepted) after 
 it shall have been pj-esented to him, the same shall be a law, in like 
 manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjourn- 
 ment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law. 
 
 3. Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the 
 Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on 
 a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of 
 the United States; and before the same shall take effect, shall be 
 approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed 
 by two-thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, accord 
 ing to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill. 
 
 Section VIII. Powers granted to Congress. 
 
 The Congress shall have power: 
 
 1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay 
 the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare 
 of the United States ; but aU duties, imposts, and excises shall be 
 uniform throughout the United States { 
 
 2. To borrow money on the credit of the United States ; 
 
 3. To regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the 
 several States, and with the Indian tribes; 
 
 4. To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform 
 laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States ; 
 
 5. To coin money, regulate the vakie thereof, and of foreign coin^ 
 and fix the standard of weights and measures ; 
 
 6. To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities 
 and current coin of the United States ; 
 
APPENDIX. 335 
 
 7. To establish post-offlces and post-roads ; 
 
 8. To promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing 
 for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to 
 their respective writings and discoveries ; 
 
 9. To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court; 
 
 10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the 
 high seas and offenses against the law of nations ; 
 
 11. To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make 
 rules concerning captures on land and water ; 
 
 13. To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money 
 to that use shall be for a longer term than two years; 
 
 13. To provide and maintain a navy; 
 
 14. To make rules for the government and regulation of the land 
 and naval forces; 
 
 15. To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of 
 the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions ; 
 
 16. To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, 
 and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the ser- 
 vice of the "United States, reserving to the States respectively the 
 appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the niilitia 
 according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; 
 
 17. To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over 
 such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of 
 particular States and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat 
 of the government of the United States, and to exercise like au- 
 thority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature 
 of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, 
 magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings; and 
 
 18. To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for car 
 rying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers 
 vested by this Consbitution in the government of the United States, 
 or in any department or officer thereof. 
 
 Section IX'. Restrictions on the United States. 
 
 1. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the 
 States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohib- 
 ited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred 
 and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, 
 not exceeding ten dollars for each person. ■ 
 
 3. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be sus- 
 pended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public 
 safety may require it. 
 
 3. No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. 
 
 4. No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in propor- 
 tion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken. 
 
336 APPENDIX. 
 
 5. No tax or daty shall be laid on articles exported from any State. 
 
 6. No preference shall be given by any regalation of commerce or 
 revenue to the ports of one State over those of another; nor shall 
 vessels bound to or from one State be obliged to enter, clear, or pay 
 duties in another. 
 
 7. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence 
 of appropriations made by law ; and a regular statement and ac- 
 count of the receipts and' expenditures of all public money shall be 
 published from time to time. 
 
 8. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States ; and 
 no person holding any office of profit or trust under them shall, 
 without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolu- 
 ment, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, 
 or foreign State. 
 
 Section JT. Powers Relinquished by the States. 
 
 1. No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; 
 grant letters of marque and reprisal ; coin money ; emit bills of credit ; 
 make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of 
 debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing 
 the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. 
 
 2. No State shall, without the consent of Congress, laj* any imposts 
 or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely nec- 
 essary for executing its inspection laws ; and the net produce of all 
 duties and imposts, laid by any State on imports or exports, shall 
 be for the use of the treasury of the United States ; and all such 
 laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the Congress. 
 
 3. No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty 
 of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into 
 any agreement or compact with another State or with a foreign 
 power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded or in such immi- 
 nent danger as will not admit of delay. 
 
 Article II. Executive Department. 
 Section I. President and Vice-President. 
 
 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United 
 States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four 
 years, and together with the Vice-President, chosen for the same 
 term, be elected as follows: 
 
 3. Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature 
 thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole num- 
 ber of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be en- 
 titled in the Congress; but no Senator or Representative, or person 
 holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be 
 appointed an elector. 
 
APPENDIX. • 337 
 
 3. [The electors shall meet in their respective States and vote by 
 ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabi- 
 tant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a list 
 of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each ; 
 which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the 
 seat of government of the United States, directed to the President 
 of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence 
 of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, 
 and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the great- 
 est number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a ma- 
 jority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be 
 more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number 
 of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose 
 by ballot one of them for President ; and if no person have a ma- 
 jority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in 
 like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President 
 the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each 
 State having one vote ; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a 
 member or members from two- thirds of the States, and a majority 
 of all the States shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after 
 the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of 
 votes of the electors shall be the Vioe-Pret-ident. But if there should 
 remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from 
 them by ballot the Vice-Pre.sident.] ' 
 
 4. The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors and 
 the day on vvliich they shall give their votes, which day ^hall be the 
 same throughout the United States. 
 
 5. No person except a natural boi n citizen, or a citizen of the United 
 States at the time of the adoption of this Coastitution, sliall be eligible 
 to the ofEce of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that 
 office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and 
 been fourteen years a resident within the United States. 
 
 6. In case uf the i-emoval of the President from office, or of his death, 
 resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said 
 office, the same shall devolve on the Vice-President, and the Congress 
 may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation, or ina- 
 bility, both of the President and Vice-President, declaring what officer 
 shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly until 
 the disability be removed or a President shall be elected. 
 
 7. The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services a com- 
 pensation, which sliall neither lie increased nor diminished during the 
 period for which he may have been elected, and he shall not receive 
 
 'This clause of the Constitution has been amended. See Anend- 
 ments. Art. XII. 
 
 22 
 
338 -APPENDIX. 
 
 within that period any other emolument from the United States or any 
 of them. 
 
 8. Before he enter on the execution of his office he shall take the fol- 
 lowing oath or affirmation: 
 
 '■ I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the 
 office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my 
 ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United 
 States." 
 
 Section II. Powers of the President. 
 
 1 . The President shall be Comriiander-in-chief of the Army and Navy 
 of the United States, and of the militia of the several States when called 
 into the actual servii^e of the United States; he may require the opin- 
 ion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive depart- 
 ments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offi- 
 ces, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses 
 against the United States, except in cases of impeatihment. 
 
 3. He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the 
 Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present 
 concur; and he shall nominate, and, by and with the advice and con- 
 sent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers 
 and consuls. Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the 
 United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided 
 for, and which shall be established by law; but the Congress may by 
 law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, 
 in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of depart- 
 ments. 
 
 8. The President shall have power to All up all vacancies that may 
 happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which 
 shall expire at the end of their next session. ' 
 
 Section III. Duties of the President. 
 
 He shall from time to time gi^e to the Congress information of the 
 state of the Union, and recommend to tlieir consideration such meas- 
 ures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordi- 
 nary occasions, convene both houses, or either of them, and in case of 
 disagreement between them with respect to the time of adjournment, 
 he may adjourn them to such time as he shidl think proper; he shall re- 
 ceive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that 
 the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of 
 the United States. 
 
 1 It is not an uncommon thing for the President to appoint a party 
 during f, recess of the Senate, and then to reappoint him if the Senate 
 neglects or refuses to confirm the appointment, and so on toties quoties. 
 In this way he nullifies the Constitution. 
 
APPENDIX. 339 
 
 Section IV. Impeachment. 
 
 The President, Vice-President and all civil officers of the United 
 States shall be removed from oflfioe on impeachment for and conviction 
 of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. 
 
 Article III. Judicial Department. 
 
 Section I. United States Courts. 
 
 The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Su- 
 preme Court, and in such "inferior courts as the Congress may from 
 time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme 
 and inferior courts, shall hold their ofSces during good^ behavior, and 
 shall, at stated times, receive for their services a compensation which 
 shall not be diminished during their continuance in ofifice. 
 
 Section II. Jurisdiction of the United States Courts. 
 
 1. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, 
 arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and 
 treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority ; to all 
 cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls ; to all 
 cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction ; to controversies to which 
 the United States shall be a party ; to controversies between two or 
 more States ; between a State and citizens of another State ; between 
 citizens of different States ; between citizens of the same State claim- 
 ing lands under grants of different States, and between a State, or the 
 citizens thereof, and foreign States, citizens, or subjects. ' 
 
 3. In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and con- 
 suls, and those in which a State shall be a party, the Supreme Court 
 shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned 
 the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and 
 fact, with such exceptions, and under sach regulations as the Congress 
 shall make. 
 
 3. The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be 
 by jury ; and such trial shall be held in the State where the said crimes 
 shall have been committed ; but when not committed within any State, 
 the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law 
 have directed. 
 
 Section III. Treason. 
 
 1. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war 
 against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and 
 comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testi- 
 mony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open 
 court. 
 
 ' This clause has been amended. See Amendments, Art. XI. 
 
3i0 APPENDIX. 
 
 2. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of 
 treason.' but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood or 
 forfeiture except during the life of the person attained. 
 
 Article IV. Mutual Obligations assumed by the States. 
 
 Section I. State Records. 
 
 Full faitli and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, 
 records, and judicial prooeedin^s of every other State. A'nd the Con- 
 gress may by genei'al laws prescril)e the manner in which such acts, 
 records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the eflfcit thereof. 
 
 Section II. Obligations as to privileges of citizens and of fugitives from 
 justice or labor. 
 
 1. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and 
 immunities of citizens in the several States. 
 
 3. A person cliarged in any State with treason, felony, or other ci inie, 
 who shall flee from justice, and be found in another State, shall, on 
 demand of the executive authority of the State from whicli he fled, be 
 delivered up, to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the 
 crime. 
 
 3. No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws 
 thereof, escaping into another, shall. In consequence of any law or 
 regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but sliall 
 be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such setvice or labor 
 may be due. 
 
 Sectio7i III. New States and the Public Lands. 
 
 1. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union ; but 
 no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any 
 other State ; nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more 
 States or parts of States, without the consent of the legislatures of the 
 States concerned as well as of the Congress. 
 
 2. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful 
 rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belong- 
 ing to the United States ; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so 
 construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States or of any par- 
 ticular State. 
 
 Section IV. Guarantee from all the States to each. 
 
 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a re- 
 publican form of government, and shall protect each of them against 
 invasion, and on application of the legislature, or of the executive 
 (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence. 
 
APPENDIX, 34-1 
 
 Article V. Power of Amendment. 
 
 The Congress, whenever two-thu-ds of both houses shall deem it nec- 
 essary, sliall propose amendments to this Constitution, or. on the appli- 
 cation of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call 
 n convention for proposing amendments, which in either case shall be 
 valid to all intents and purposes a^ part of this Con>-titution, when rati- 
 fied by tlip legislatures of three-fourthq of the several States, or by con- 
 ventions in tliree-fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of rati- 
 fication may be proposed by the Congress, provided tliat no amendments 
 wliich may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and 
 eight" shall in any manner affect the tirsi and fourth clauses in the ninth 
 section pf the first article ; and that no State, without its consent, shall 
 be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. 
 
 Article IT. Public Debt ; Supremacy of the Constitution, Laws, and 
 Treaties ; Oath of Office ; No Religious Test. 
 
 1. All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the 
 adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid ag.iinst the United States 
 under this Constitution as under the confederation. 
 
 3. Till-* Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall 
 be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be 
 made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme 
 law of the land ; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, 
 ■anytliing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary not- 
 withstanding. 
 
 3. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the mem- 
 bers of the several State legislattires, and all executive and judicial 
 officers both of the United States and of the several States, shall be 
 bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution : but no relig- 
 ious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or pub- 
 lic trust under the United States. 
 
 Article VII. Ratification of the Constitution. 
 
 The ratification of the conventions of nine States shall be sufficient 
 for the ratification of this Constitution between the States so ratifying 
 the same. 
 
 Amendments proposed by the Congress September 35, 1789, and de- 
 clared in force December 15, 1791 : 
 
 Article I. 
 
 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, 
 or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom, of 
 speech or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to, assem- 
 ble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. 
 
3i2' APPENDIX. 
 
 Article II. 
 
 A well-regulated militfa being necessary to the security of a free 
 State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not bein- 
 fringed. 
 
 Article III. 
 
 No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without, 
 the consent of the owner, nor in tjme of war, but in a manner to be- 
 prescribed by law. 
 
 Article IV. 
 
 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, 
 and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be 
 violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, sup- 
 ported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to 
 be searched, and the person or things to be seized. 
 
 Article V. 
 
 No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous 
 crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except 
 in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in 
 actual service in time of war or public danger ; nor shall any person be 
 subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; 
 nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against him- 
 self, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of 
 law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just 
 compensation. 
 
 I Article VI. 
 
 In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a 
 speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district 
 wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have 
 been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature 
 and cause of the accusation ; to be confronted with the witnesses against 
 him ; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, 
 and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence. 
 
 Article VH. 
 
 In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed 
 twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact 
 tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the 
 United States, than according to the rules of the common law. 
 
 Article VIIL 
 
 Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor 
 cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 
 
APPENDIX. 3i3 
 
 Article IX. 
 
 The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be 
 construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 
 
 Article X. 
 
 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, 
 mor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respec- 
 tively or to the people. 
 
 Amendment proposed by the Congress March 5, 1794, and declared in 
 force Jan, 8, 1798. 
 
 ArU<Ae XI. 
 
 The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to 
 •extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against 
 one of the United States by citizens of another State, or by citizens or 
 subjects of any foreign State. 
 
 Amendment proposed by the Congress Dec, 13. 1803, and declared in 
 force Sept. 3o, 1804. 
 
 Article XII. 
 
 The electors shall meet in their respective States and vote by ballot 
 for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be 
 an inhabitant of the same State with themselves ^ they shall name in 
 their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots 
 the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct 
 lists of all persons voted for as President and of all persons voted for as 
 Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each ; which lists they 
 shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the govern- 
 ment of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. 
 The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and 
 House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall 
 be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes for Presi- 
 dent sliall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole 
 number of electors appointed ; and if no person have such majority, 
 then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three 
 on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representa- 
 tives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in 
 choosing the President the votes shall be taken by States, the rep- 
 resentation from each State having one vote; a quorum for this 
 purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the 
 States, and a majority of all the States shall be necessary to a choice. 
 And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President 
 whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth 
 day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as 
 President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability 
 of the President. 
 
344 APPENDIX. 
 
 2. The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President 
 shall be the Vice-President, if sucli number be a majority (if the whole 
 number of electors appointed : and if no person have a majority, then 
 from the two highest numbers on the list the Senate shall choose the 
 Vice-President ; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two thirds of 
 the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number 
 shall be necessary to a choice. 
 
 3. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President 
 shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
 
 Amendment proposed by the Congress of the (24) United States, the 
 11 Southern States not being represented, Feb. 1, 1S65. and adopted by 
 the legislatures of 26 States, including 8 States which ■' the government " 
 refused afterwards to recognize as States. 
 
 Artide XIII. 
 
 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a |)unishment 
 for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall 
 exist witliin the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 
 
 2. Congress shall have power to enforce thife article bj' appropriate 
 legislation. 
 
 Amendment proposed by the Congress of the (35) United States, the 
 11 Southern States having no voice in it, and ratified by the legislatures 
 of 29 States (of whicli New Jersey. Oregon, and Ohio afterwards re- 
 pealed their ratifying ordinances), including 8 Southern States which 
 were under the control of Northern adventurers and the ex-slaves. 
 
 Article XIV. 
 
 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject 
 to the jurisdiction tliereof , are citizens of the United States and of the 
 States wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law 
 which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the 
 United States ; nor shall any State deprive any person of Ufe. liberty, 
 or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within 
 its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 
 
 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States ac- 
 cording to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of 
 persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the 
 right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for Pre.'iident and 
 Vice-President of theUnited States, Representatives in Congress, the ex- 
 ecutive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature 
 thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being 
 twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any 
 way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the 
 basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which 
 the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of 
 male citizens twenty -one years of age in such State. 
 
APPENDIX. 345 
 
 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or 
 elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or mil- 
 itary, under the United States or under any State, who, having previ- 
 ously taken an oath as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the 
 United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an execu- 
 tive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the 
 United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against 
 the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress 
 may, by a vote of two-thirds of each hou^e, remove such a disability. 
 
 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by 
 law, inclading debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for 
 services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. 
 But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any 
 debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against 
 the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any 
 slave; but all such debts, obligations, and claims shall be held illegal 
 and void. 
 
 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legisla- 
 tion, the provisions of this article. 
 
 Amendment proposed by the Congress of the (35) United States, the 
 11 Southern States not being represented, and ratilied by the legisla- 
 tures of 18 States and 11 military despotisms in the South. 
 
 Article XV. 
 
 Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall 
 not be denied or abridged by the United States ot by any State on ac- 
 count of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. 
 
 Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by 
 appropriate legislation. ' ^ 
 
 'It would be difficult to frame another amendment containing in it 
 such invincible evidence of the ignorance of the framers. '"The right 
 of citizens of the United States to vote "—the right depending, as this 
 amendment implies, on the fact that they are '-citizens of the United 
 States"— never was heard of before 1867. Women and children are 
 " citizens " as well as the husbands and fathers ; and the " right to vote " 
 was under the exclusive control of each State. And the right of the 
 United States to " deny "' or '-abridge" the elective franchise in a State 
 was never heard of before nor since that date. 
 

 
 i:H»!4i1««ittiV!iffl(!iaiirii!l,!ii«i1!HI«iBlfiiiKi«iiiJ)ffla«Mi«ifiniit«