rsm — fc 
 
 Duke University Libraries 
 Four essays on 
 Conf Pam *630 
 
 DIIDflOflED- 
 
FOUR ESSAYS 
 
 ON Tllf 
 
 RIGHT AND PROPRIETY 
 
 ^ 
 
 mmm by sodtiiw states. 
 
 A MEMBER OF THE BAR OF RICHMOND. 
 
 RICHMOND, VA. 
 
 EITCHIE & DUNNAVANT, PRINTERS. 
 1861. 
 
i'' 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 THE 
 
 WILLIAM R. PERKINS 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 DUKE UNIVERSITY 
 
 Rare Books 
 
/^' 
 
 Have the Southern States a Right to Secede ? 
 
 The abolitionists and their allies in the northcni and eastern 
 states, have been engaged for more than twenty years in the 
 most cruel, unnatural and unholy warfare upon the peace, 
 safety and property of the southern states — disturbing their 
 repose, and endangering sometimes the lives of their people, 
 and seeking, by all the means at their cdmmand, to destroy 
 the tenure by which they hold the most valuable portion of 
 their property. Their preachers, presses and politicians have 
 habitually denounced the people of the south as a nation of 
 sinners, in the daily practice of iniquity, because of the exis- 
 tence of African slavery among them. Our slaves havBjjcen 
 excited to insurrection, by the denunciation of their owners 
 and the denial of the title of those owners. Men have been 
 instigated to invade our soil and slay our people ; and their 
 leader, who, in conformity to law, expiated his crimes upon 
 the gallows, has been treated as a martyr, and honors paid to 
 his memory. Our slaves have been enticed to abscond, and 
 then forcibly withheld from us, in violation of all sound mo- 
 rality, the comity of friendly states, and the provisions of the 
 constitution, which were designed to protect the rights and 
 property of the south. 
 
 The equality of the south in the Union has been denied, 
 and proclamation has been made that the territories, which 
 are the common property of all the states, shall be appro- 
 priated hereafter exclusively to the use of a part of them, 
 and shall never be enjoyed by the people of the south, unless 
 they renounce slavery, although the largest and most valuable 
 territory, yet to be settled, lies deep in the south, below the 
 
tr^ 
 
 36th parallel of latitude — and its occupation by an anti- 
 slavery population will be utterly incompatible with the 
 safety of the soutli : Until finally, it has been aunonuced, that 
 the country cannot exist half free and half slave ; that the 
 conflict, therefore, between the friends and enemies of the in- 
 stitution of slavery is irrepressible, and must be continued 
 until one or the other shall be exterminated ; and upon this 
 platform of irrepressible and perpetual enmity to us and our 
 institution, which is inseparably connected with our moral, 
 social and political existence, an obscure man has been elected 
 to the presidency, because, and only because he has made 
 himself notorious by the avowal of his enmity to us, our 
 rights and institutions, and is regarded as the author of the 
 maxim, that the conflict between slavery and its opponents, 
 is irrepressible. With the election of this man to the chief 
 executive office of the Union, in which he will be the com- 
 mander in chief of the army and navy, comes another procla- 
 mation from the party which elected him, and their allies, 
 that ^ey have the right and the power to compel us, by 
 force, to siibmit to any laws which they may pass ; and we 
 know that they already have the control of the house of re- 
 presentatives, and will have undisputed control of the senate 
 as soon as the elections, soon to occur, shall be made in Penn- 
 sylvania and California ; and when Kansas and Nebraska or 
 either shall be admitted into tlie Union, their power will be 
 still farther increased. Nay, they already have control of the 
 senate ; for if the senators from South Carolina were in their 
 seats, the vote of Douglas, our enemy, woiild decide every 
 thing, and of course, decide against us. But without the 
 senators from Carolina, the power is complete, without an 
 appeal to the lesser Lincoln, from Illinois. 
 
 For this war upon them, the southern people have given 
 no provocation. The puritanical pretext for it has been, and 
 is, abhon-ence to African slavery as it exists in the southern 
 states. But for this, if it were a sin, instead of a blessing, as 
 
/r->s 
 
 it is, the southern people are, to say the least, not more cul- 
 pable than those of the north, who participated most actively 
 in introducing slaves into this country, and when they found 
 it not profitable to keep them, though no sin to import them, 
 they sold what they had to the southern people; and the con- 
 stitution acknowledges and guarantees our property in them. 
 
 Our institution of slavery is not, therefore, a provocation 
 offered by us to the people of the north, and no other provo- 
 cation is pretended ; for the south lias never, at any time, 
 made an attempt to interfere with the institutions of the 
 north, or, to deprive them of their equal rights in the Union; 
 and therefore we speak the truth only, when we say that the 
 south has offered no provocation for this cruel and umiatural 
 warfare upon her — this determination to degrade the south, 
 then impoverish, if not depopulate her, and finally, govern 
 her as a mere province. 
 
 This condition of things has naturally and necessarily 
 aroused and deeply excited tlie southern people, airt! calls 
 upon them to say, deliberately and explicitly, liow they will 
 meet it. Whetlier tiiey will tamely submit to it, and, in ad- 
 vance, consent to and invite th(> liumiliation, degradation, op- 
 pression and ruin which is fbresiiadowed by it, and must suc- 
 ceed it, under the government which will exist on and after 
 the 4th of March next, or will resist, and by anticipating, 
 prevent them. 
 
 In my opinion, honor, pride, patriotism, the love we bear 
 our wives and children, the duty to protect them, and all the 
 instincts of self-preservation, command us to resist. 
 
 It is said by some that the election of Lincoln is not suffi- 
 cient cause for resisting, and we must wait for an overt act. 
 But this doctrine is, I submit, founded in a total misconcep- 
 tion of the case and want of just perception of the concrete 
 ill which the election of Lincoln presents, and of the mean- 
 ing of the very thing which the objectors call for, to wit, 
 an overt act. Wc do not complain that the people of the 
 
noii-slaveholding states have, by their numerical superiority, 
 elected a president, although it has been their pleasure to 
 select a "rail splitter" for that high station; nor should we 
 complain if they had elected a non-slaveholder who does not 
 approve slavery, if they had selected one who is so far kind 
 that he is capable of being just to us, and will not violate the 
 constitution and his oath in order to do us injury. When we 
 behold, however, a warfare of twenty years' continuance 
 (and more), unprecedented in modern times, among civilized 
 nations, for its violence, malignity and disregard of social, 
 moral and constitutional obligations, culminating in the elec- 
 tion, to the chief executive office of the nation, of a man 
 who has evinced no fitness or qualification for it, and is un- 
 known to fame by any act or speech which should commend 
 him as an example, or entitle him to preferment, because he 
 has made himself notorious by the avowal of the most im- 
 placable hatred to us and our institutions, with a denial to 
 us of gaiy constitutional protection, the man and all thought 
 of him are merged in the representative; and two conclu- 
 sions present themselves in bold relief and with startling 
 effect. The first is, that the spirit of aggression has not sub- 
 sided or abated, but has increased and become more violent; 
 and the second is, that it controls the government, and has 
 the power to execute its will and gratify its malignity, and 
 has selected its leader with a view to the gratification of those 
 passions, and the consummation of its puqjose of degrading 
 and disfranchising the south. As the bravest is always se- 
 lected to lead a stonning party, the wisest to counsel, and 
 the most eloquent to speak, so the party leader is chosen, 
 not because he differs with his party, but because he concm-s 
 and concurs fully with it; and terrible is the wrath which 
 it pours upon him when he fails or refuses to use the power 
 which the party has conferred upon him for its benefit and 
 according to its maxims; and rarely, too rarely, unfortunately, 
 are party leaders found, who can or will distinguish between 
 
their country and their party, unless it be to serve the party, 
 and not the country. The recent divisions in the south un- 
 happily furnish both argument and illustration upon this sub- 
 ject, which cannot be made stronger or more striking. 
 
 Are the anti-slavery men and abolitionists of the north 
 more exempt from frailty than the party men of the south? 
 
 Those who counsel us to wait for the farther action, the 
 "overt act" (as they term it) of Lincoln and his party, in the 
 hope that he will betray them and transfer the quarrel from 
 us to them, deceive themselves, and would, tlierefore, mis- 
 lead, fatally mislead the south. 
 
 Would they counsel us to arm a madman, in the hope that 
 reason would return before lie pulled the trigger? Would 
 they commit themselves, without protection, to the mercy of 
 the highwayman and assassin ? Would they commit the 
 lamb to the wolf, in the hope that his nature and appetite 
 would change before he devoured it? Would they advise 
 the watchman to wait until the torch of the iuceudiaiy has 
 been actually applied and the house in flames, before he raises 
 a cry or attempts to arrest the offender? All will answer no! 
 How then is it that tiie people of the south are asked to 
 commit themselves to the mercy and discretion of fanatics, 
 who for more than twenty years have been seeking the power 
 wliich they have now acquired, for the purpose of accom- 
 plishing southern ruin by it ? 
 
 If there was wisdom in trusting yourself, at any time, 
 without proper guards, to the mercy or forbearance, or re- 
 turning sense of justice, of your enemy, though he was 
 neither a fanatic or a knave, what wisdom or prudence can 
 thei'e be in committing the south to the mercy of a l)lack 
 republican and abolition government, in the hojie that Lin- 
 coln, the elected chief of the party, will cliange his and tiusir 
 policy towards us, when the hope is founded on the imputa- 
 tion that lie is a knave, who, for the purpose of getting into 
 power, professed principles which he did not entertain, or, 
 
entertaining tliem, he will now betray both liis principles and 
 his party ? If the friends of a knave cannot safely trust him, 
 how shall his enemies do it? But in my opinion, there is no 
 ground for the supposition that Mr. Lincoln intends to aban- 
 don the principk's which he and his paiiy have professed, 
 and betray his party ; and if there was, it would only prove 
 the folly of relying on the promises and professions of such 
 a man. I believe, therefore, that the black republican and 
 abolition party will, as soon as it is invested with the power 
 of the government, turn it upon us, first, for the purpose of 
 caiTying out its principles in the form of law, and then, of 
 compelling obedience to them by force, if they can, with the 
 advantage of being able to say, that we have submitted to 
 their government with a knowledge of their principles, and 
 resistance to their laws is, therefore, treason ; and, vrith our 
 people distracted, disheartened and torn, by internal frictions, 
 when they find themselves involved in a dilemma, which 
 makes them traitors to the federal government, if they obey 
 the state, and traitors to the state, if they obey the federal 
 government. It is not difficult to foretell the fate of a people 
 thus distracted and divided, in the face of a united, powerful 
 and vindictive foe. 
 
 In my opinion, therefoi'e, the southern states should, with- 
 out delay, withdraw from the present confederacy, and form 
 a new one, in which their people will be safe from the ag- 
 gressions of their enemies, and may enjoy their property, in 
 peace, surrounded by plenty. I should content myself on 
 this point, with this expression of opinion, in the conviction 
 that at this day none could be found to deny the right of the 
 people of a state to " alter or abolish the form of their go- 
 vernment," whenever it shall be found to be destructive of 
 their rights and liberty : But, admonished, as we are by Mr. 
 Douglas, in his Norfolk speech, and by the president, in his 
 late extraordinary message, that there are persons who deny 
 the right of one or all of the southern states to withdraw 
 
/ 
 
 9t 
 
 from the present confederacj'' of states, and that the great aii- 
 thorit}'' of Madison is invoked to sustain it, I deem it respect- 
 ful and proper to submit some of the reasons which sustain 
 my opinion : 
 
 And, first, I refer to the historj' of the constitution. In 
 the convention which framed the constitution, Mr. Patterson 
 of New Jersey, expressed the opinion that a compact, formed 
 by unanimous consent, could be dissolved, only by unani- 
 mous consent. Mr. Madison denied the doctrine, saying that 
 it does not result from the nature of compact, and that " a 
 breach of the ftindamcntal principles of the compact, by a 
 part of the society, would certainly absolve the other part 
 from their obligations to it. If the breach of any article by 
 any of the parties does not set the others at libcrt)', it is be- 
 cause the contrary is implied in the compact itself, and par- 
 ticularly by that law of it which gives an implied authority 
 to bind the whole in all cases. This latter circumstance 
 shows that we are not to consider the federal Union as analo- 
 gous to the social compacts of individuals ; for if it were so, 
 a majority would have a riglit to bind the rest, and even form 
 a new constitution, which the gentleman from New Jersey 
 would be among the last to admit. If we consider the fede- 
 ral Union as analogous not to the social compacts among in- 
 dividual men, but to the conventions among states, what is 
 the doctrine resulting from the convention ? Clearly, accord- 
 ing to the expositors of the law of nations, that a breach of 
 any one article by any party, leaves all the other parties at 
 liberty to consider the whole convention as dissolved, unless 
 they choose rather to compel the delinquent to repair the 
 breach. In some treaties, indeed, it is exjiressly stipulated 
 that a violation of particular articles shall not have tliis con- 
 sequence, and even that particular articles shall remain in 
 force during war, which is, in general, understood to dissolve 
 all subsisting treaties. But, are there any exceptions of this 
 sort in the articles of confederation ? So far from it, there is 
 2 
 
10 
 
 not even an express stipulation that force shall be used to 
 compel an offending member of the Union to discharge its 
 duty." 
 
 And in the 21st number of the Federalist, which was an 
 elaborate exposition of the constitution, by Alexander Hamil- 
 ton, John Jay and James Madison, over the signature of 
 •' Publius," written with the view to commend the constitu- 
 tion, Mr. Hamilton says, " There is no express delegation of 
 authority to compel delinquent members ; and if such a right 
 should be ascribed to the federal head, as resulting from the 
 nature of the social compact between the states, it must be 
 by inference and construction, in the face of that part of the 
 second article by which it is declared ' that each state shall 
 retain every power, jurisdiction and right not delegated to 
 the United States, in congress assembled.' " Mr. Hamilton 
 then proceeds to argue that the defect in the articles of con- 
 federation, produced by this restricting and resei-ving clause, 
 was properly omitted in the constitution, and therefore the 
 power to coerce "delinquent members" existed. 
 
 But, by the tenth amendment to the constitution, this re- 
 stricting and reserving clause was restored, and, therefore, by 
 the admission of both Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Madison, the 
 power to control and coerce "delinquent members" does not 
 exist. Is there any one of the present day more able than 
 Hamilton and Madison, or any federalist more devoted than 
 Hamilton? Who will be hardy enough to claim for the 
 federal government powers which Hamilton and Madison 
 denied to it ? 
 
 Again : In the 31st number of the Federalist, Mr. Hamil- 
 ton says, " The state governments, by their original consti- 
 tutions, are invested with complete sovereignty ;" and in the 
 32d number, he says, "that an entire consolidation of the 
 states into one complete national sovereignty, would imply 
 an entire subordination of the parts. But as the plan of the 
 convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the 
 
11 
 
 state governments would clearly retain all the rights of sove- 
 reignty which they before had, and which were not, b)- that 
 act, exclusively delegated to the United States." And Vir- 
 ginia, in her act of ratification of the constitution, declared, 
 " in the name and on behalf of the people of Virginia, that 
 the powers granted under the constitution, being derived 
 from the people of the United States, may be resumed by 
 them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury 
 and oppression, and that all power not granted thereby, re- 
 mains with them, aud at their will." And the 10th amend- 
 ment of the constitution, conforming to the ratification by 
 Virginia, expresslj' declares, as I have before stated, that 
 " the powers not delegated to the United States by the con- 
 stitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, arc reserved to 
 the states respectively, or to the people." And the govern- 
 ment of the United States has been recognized by every de- 
 partment of it, including the supreme court, luider the gui- 
 dajice of Jlarsliall and Taney, and by the jieople, as a govern- 
 ment of limited power, deriving its whole power from the 
 grants in the constitution. 
 
 It may be safely ullirmed, then, 
 
 I. Tiiat the government of the United States is not a con- 
 soiidiitcd, but a confederated goverinncnt of limited autliority- 
 
 II. That the viohition of the constitution by one section, 
 absolves every other from its obligation to that constitution, 
 and the government created by it. 
 
 III. That the states have retained, and now possess all the 
 attributes of sovereignty, which they have not exclusively 
 vested in the general govennnent — and 
 
 IV. That there is no clause in the constitution for])idding 
 any state to secede from it, and no grant of power to the 
 general government to make war upon any state, if slu; does 
 secede, and compel her, by force of arms, to remain in the 
 Union. 
 
 From these positions, the result seems to be inevitable and 
 
12 
 
 irresistible, that the states have a right to dissolve the Union, 
 if they all or a majority of them agree to do so, and that 
 when the compact or constitution has been violated by any 
 state, the other states, and each of them has a right to de- 
 clare that compact at an end, and withdraw from it. 
 
 How can it be otherwise '? That the states were originally 
 sovereign, is conceded by all. That they have parted with a 
 portion of that sovereignty, and retained all not parted with, 
 is also conceded. That they have not, in terms, or by neces- 
 sary implication, renounced the right to withdraw from the 
 compact, and have not conferred upon the fedei-al government 
 power to declare war against or coerce a state, has been fully 
 established. 
 
 Is not the conclusion, then, irresistible, that a state has 
 the right to secede from the Union, whenever that Union be- 
 comes an oppressive and injurious bond to her, or its govern- 
 ment or the other parties to the Union pervert it to her in- 
 jury, disregard its provisions, or otherwise treat her as an 
 enemy ? 
 
 But even this is not a full statement of the argument in 
 our favor, for although the conclusion from the premises 
 already stated is irresistible, still its propriety maj' be made 
 yet more apparent, by reference to other passages in the his- 
 tory of the constitution. 
 
 In the convention which formed the constitution, on the 
 29th day of May 1787, Mr. Eandolph offered a plan of a go- 
 vernment in a series of resolutions, the 6th of which, after 
 enumerating various powers which ought to be conferred on 
 the federal government, concluded with these words : " and 
 to call forth the force of the Union against any member of 
 the Union failing to fulfill its duty under the articles thereof." 
 On the 31st of May the resolutions of Mr. Randolph being 
 under consideration, Mr. Madison said, " that the more he re- 
 flected on the use of force, the more he doubted the practi- 
 cability, the justice, the efficacy of it when applied to peo- 
 
' lol^ 
 
 13 
 
 pie collectively and not individually. A union of the states 
 containing such an ingredient, seemed to provide for its own 
 destruction. The nse of force against a state would look 
 more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punish- 
 ment, and would probably be considered by the party at- 
 tacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it 
 might be bound. He hoped that such a system would be 
 framed as might render tiiis recourse unnecessary, and moved 
 that the clause be postponed. This motion was agreed to 
 nem. con. 2 vol. Mad. Papers, 732-761. At another time, 
 on the Sth of June, he treated the idea of using force against 
 a state as " visionary and fallacious." 
 
 The subject was afterwards revived by Mr. Patterson of 
 New Jersey, but it was repudiated by Jlr. Hamilton as " im- 
 possible," as " a war between the parties, and a dissolution 
 of the Union will ensue" — p. SSI. It was subsequently 
 brought up again incidentally, in a debate, when George Ma- 
 son scouted it, and said, " Will not the citizens of the in- 
 vaded states assist one another, until they rise as one man, 
 and shake otl" the Union altogether?" And he was followed 
 and backed by Luther Martin ; and the idea of coercing a 
 state was not broached again. 
 
 Thus it appears, not only that the power to coerce a state 
 was not granted, but, when asked for, was c.rprcKshj nfuscd. 
 Can any man doubt now, even if he be the lowest and most 
 slavish of the submissionists ? Will not the people treat the 
 man who talks of coercing a state, as they would the suc- 
 cessor of John Brown ? If Mr. Jladison ever did maintain 
 contrary doctrine, m correspondence with Mr. Alex. Rives, 
 at a later period of his life, it is to be ascribed to the timidity 
 and decay of age, and Mr. Rives may well regret that he 
 ever exposed his weakness. 
 
 lilr. Buchanan, however, in that most remarkable of all 
 presidential messages, while he concedes that there is no 
 power of coercion, denies the right of secession. This is 
 
11 
 
 14 
 
 indeed the foundation of a new school of rhetoric as well as 
 of political ethics. The state has no right to secede, and yet 
 no power has the right to prevent her from seceding ! I had 
 alwa)'^s understood that in a state of legal society, there was 
 a remedy for every wrong, and that right and duty wei'e cor- 
 relative, and, therefore, if I have no right to do a thing, it is 
 my duty not to do it, and some party or power has the right 
 to prevent me from doing it or to punish me for doing it. 
 But it is immaterial to press that enquiry, because the ma- 
 terial value of the right to secede is that it imposes the cor- 
 relative obligation upon eveiy one to pennit secession ; and 
 if it be conceded that there is no right to prevent it by force, 
 then it matters not whether, in an ethical point of view, 
 secession is rightful or not; as whether rightful or not, it is 
 peaceful, and if peaceful, it is immaterial whether it is right- 
 ful, so far as the other states are concerned. But if it is not 
 to be peaceful, then it is of the gravest importance to show 
 that it is rightful, as I have shown, and to point, out the ill 
 consequences of surrendering the right, which I will do in 
 another chapter, with your leave. 
 
 VIRGINIUS. 
 
Ought the Southern States to Secede ? 
 
 I HAVE shown, I think conclusively, that the states collec- 
 tively, or a majority of them, have a right to dissolve the 
 Union ; and that, upon a violation of the constitution by one 
 of the states, the other states and each of them are absolved 
 from the obligation of the compact whicli created the Union, 
 and may rightfully withdraw from it — that is, secede. I 
 propose now to enquire whether the southern states or any 
 of them ought now to exercise this right ? Before I proceed 
 to do so, allow me to add to what I have already written on 
 the first point — the question of right — that any other view 
 of the obligations of the Union, makes it the most unintelli- 
 gible anomaly on the one hand, and the most disgusting and 
 insufferable despotism on the other — a government, to wit, 
 which has no power to prevent its members from violating 
 the constitution, and yet has the power and the authority to 
 coinpel the injured parties to remain in the Union, and sub- 
 mit to injuries against which it cannot protect tliem, and 
 against which the constitution will not pcnnit them to pro- 
 tect themselves. In considering this question of the rights 
 and obligations of the Union, it will be observed tiiat there 
 are but two parties to be regarded, viz : the majority states 
 and the minority states ; and the rights of the Union of 
 which we hear so much talk, by which I suppose is meant 
 the rights of the government of the Union, will be most 
 clearly defined by ascertaining what are the rights of tliese 
 ma,jority and minority parties. In truth, and in a proper use 
 of language, the government has no rights, but obligations 
 to i'uUill, in a coutest between its principals, from wiiom it 
 
^4- 
 
 16 
 
 derives its whole authority ; and the whole question of right 
 is resolved when the right of the majority is ascertained. 
 For th.at right alone confers the authority, and imposes the 
 obligation upon the government, and, consequently, the obli- 
 gation cannot be more extensive than the right wliich im- 
 poses it, as the agent can have no right which did not belong 
 to his principals. 
 
 Accordingly, Mr. Hamilton said, in the 7Sth number of the 
 Federalist : 
 
 " There is no position which depends on clearer principles 
 than that eveiy act of a delegated authority, contrary to the 
 tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. 
 No legislative act, tlierefore, contrary to the constitution, can 
 be valid. To deny this, would be to affimi that the deputy 
 is greater than his principal ; that the sei-vant is above his 
 master ; that the representatives of the people are superior 
 to the people themselves ; that men acting by virtue of 
 powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, 
 but what they forbid." 
 
 p cannot forbear to pause here, and remark how identical 
 are the thought and language of this great man, with those 
 of the equally great Taney in the Dred Scott case.] 
 
 And in the 45th number of the Federalist, he says : 
 
 " The state governments may be regarded as essential parts 
 of the federal government, whilst the latter is in no wise es- 
 sential to the operation or organization of the former. With- 
 out the intervention of the state legislatures, the president of 
 the United States cannot be elected at all." 
 
 By the " principals," " the state legislatures" were refen-ed 
 to by Mr. Hamilton. He must have intended a majority of 
 the principals, a majority of tlie state legislatures, or he stul- 
 tified himself by first affirming that tlie principal is greater 
 than his deputy, and then affirming that the deputy who has 
 no principal, and, therefore, is no deputy, is supreme — for 
 when the majority withdraw, or withhold their authority, 
 
17 
 
 there is no deputy except foi- the minority, and as a minority 
 cannot control a raajorit}^ so the deputies of a minority can 
 have and exercise no power over the majority, or for it. If 
 this were not so, then if twenty-nine out of thirty states re- 
 fused to participate in the election of a president, the thirtietli, 
 or one state, might elect a president not only for itself, hut 
 for the other twenty-nine. This is an absurdity, for which no 
 one, I am sure, will contend, and, therefore, I conclude that 
 there can be no doubt that a majority of the states may dis- 
 solve the Union. 
 
 Having ascertained wliat the right of the majority is, let 
 us now enquire what is the right of the minority. 
 
 It will be conceded by every one that a minority in any 
 government has a right to protection and exemption from 
 tyranny, and oppression by the majority ; and, in a govern- 
 ment having a written constitution, it has a right to insist 
 upon a strict observance of the constitution ; and therefore, 
 Mr. Hamilton said, in the 78th number, that " any act of a 
 delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of tlie connnission 
 under which it is exercised, is void." 
 
 The majority being bound, then, to obseiTe the constitu- 
 tion strictly, and all its acts in violation of it being void, and 
 the compact being obligatoiy only when fairly obsei-ved by 
 all the parties, it. results necessarily that when the constitu- 
 tion is not strictly observed, but is violated by the majority, 
 to the injury and oi>pression of the minoritj', the minority 
 have a right to declare that they will no longer submit to ihe 
 unconstitutional and oppressive treatment, and to witlidraw 
 from all furtlier connection with the majority. If they have 
 not, then there is no constitution but the will of the majority, 
 and the government, instead of a republican government, 
 with a written constitution, is a desjiotism of the most detes- 
 table character, in which there is no security for life, liberty 
 or property ; for every one must perceive that if the majority 
 is to be allowed to place its own intei"prctation upon the con- 
 3 
 
(,'<' 
 
 18 
 
 stitutioii, and iincler color of it to violate the constitution at 
 its pleasure, and hold the minority bound, there is no consti- 
 tution for the minority at least, and every thing depends upon 
 the will of the majority, which is the worst form of des- 
 potism. 
 
 To such a doctrine of blind submission and passive obe- 
 dience A^irguiia has never assented, but under the lead of 
 Madison, aided by the lights of Jefferson and Taylor, she de- 
 clared, in her celebrated report of 1799, that each state was 
 the judge of infractions of the constitution, and of the mode 
 and measixre of redress, and so Mr. Hamilton, in effect, de- 
 clared, when he said, in the 33d mnuber of the "Federalist:" 
 
 "If the federal government should ovei^passthe just bounds 
 of its authority, and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the 
 people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they 
 have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury 
 done to the constitution, as the exigency may suggest, and 
 prudence justify." 
 
 But as the wrong must necessarily be committed by the 
 majority, the language of Mr. Hamilton is nonsense, if the 
 minority cannot withdraw, and must submit to "the injury 
 done to the constitution," for there is no other measure which 
 the minority can resort to, unless it be the newly suggested 
 one, of fighting for the Union in the Union, which I will pre- 
 sently show is the most fallacious, and would be the most 
 fatal which the south or any minority can adopt. Of neces- 
 sity, therefore, the minority states must have a right to with- 
 draw from oppression, if they are not the victims of the most 
 unmitigated despotism on earth. 
 
 Again: It was conceded by the writers of the "Fede- 
 ralist," as I have shown, in the emphatic language of Mr. 
 Hamilton, that the states were sovereign before the Union, 
 and that they retained their sovereignty, except so far as they 
 expressly delegated it to the federal government. It was also 
 admitted that if the federal government transcended its au- 
 
V 
 
 19 
 
 thority, there was uo umpire between it and the people, and 
 the remedy must be sucli as tlie people should adopt under 
 the suggestion of the " exigency." Now, I beg to be informed 
 how the people, in such an exigency, could act except through 
 their state authorities; and, secondly, if they did act through 
 their state authorities, and deeming that secession was the 
 proper remedy "suggested by the exigency," should deter- 
 mine to secede, what would be the condition of their people 
 if taken in anns? 
 
 Would they be traitors to tlie federal government, or nott 
 One of the first attributes and duties of a sovereign state is 
 to protect its citizens; and as the states retain all the sove- 
 reignty not expressly delegated, and have not delegated their 
 right to resist unconstitutional laws, or the right to protect 
 their citizens when acting under their orders, then their citi- 
 zens, if taken in battle, would not be traitors to the usurper; 
 for it must be a veiy imperfect and contemptible sovereign 
 which cannot jirotect its citizens when acting in obedience to 
 its orders, rightfully issued. But if the state has no right to 
 secede, its orders to that end will not be rightfully issued, as 
 far as the federal government is concerned, and then the citi- 
 zens will be liable to the penalty of treason to the federal and 
 state govermnents, at the same time; and therefore the con- 
 sequence is tliat the states are bound to submit to any degree 
 of oppression, and have no right to protect their citizens in 
 the exigency supposed by Mr. Hamilton, or the right of se- 
 cession is a right which cannot be parted with, and may be 
 exercised without violating (he constitution, or any law made 
 under it. 
 
 Again — I have shown that there is no authority in the con- 
 stitution to coerce "a delin(|uent state;" and the president, 
 in his late message, very properly admits it, tlioiigh his attor- 
 ney general, by the most renuirkable confusion of ideas, 
 makes him deny the right to secede. 
 
 Now, Pothier informs us, that obligations are perfect and 
 
20 
 
 imperfect — the imperfect being moral only, whicli we cannot 
 be compelled to perform ; and the perfect, legal, which we 
 may be compelled to perfomi — and Paley informs us, that 
 "Right and obligation are reciprocal ; that is, wherever there 
 is a right in one person, there is a corresponding obligation 
 upon others." If, therefore, a state has not the right to go 
 out of the Union, it is because she is bound, by legal obliga- 
 tion, for there is certainly no moral obligation, to stay in it ; 
 and if she is thus bound to stay in, there must be some power 
 to compel her to stay in it ; and if there be no power to 
 compel her to stay in, then she is not bound to stay in, and 
 so may rightfully secede. 
 
 But, say our opponents, while a state cannot commit trea- 
 son, her people may, and we will use hemp freely upon them. 
 These are the modem Borgias of America ; and the fate of 
 the Borgias, I trust, awaits them, and the hemp which they 
 prepare for the friends of equal right and constitutional liberty 
 will adorn their own necks. The idea of thus punishing the 
 people and pardoning the state, is as absurd as it is monstrous, 
 and one which none but a Borgia could conceive and suggest, 
 a compound as it is of force and fraud. 
 
 In the first place, why may not a state commit treason? 
 Wliat is a state ? It is a political corporation ; and if it is 
 by allegiance bound to a larger and more powerful state, and 
 it attempts to overthrow the government of that state, or 
 rebels against its allegiance, it will be guilty of treason ; and 
 if conquered in war, it will l^e degraded into a province sim- 
 ply, and governed by a viceroy, and the persons composing 
 the actual govennnent at the time of the rebellion will be 
 executed as individual traitors, as many cases in history attest, 
 and especially our own. This branch of the doctrine evinces 
 simple ignorance, but when taken in connection with the 
 claim to treat the citizens of a seceding state as traitors, it 
 imputes to the great and good men, at the head of whom 
 stood George Washington, the purpose to practice a delibe- 
 
21 
 
 rate fraud and cheat upon the coiintrj', unless the authors of 
 the idea were as ignorant of the histoiy of their own govern- 
 ment as they are of the law of nations and the rights and 
 duties of states. I have shown that the power to coerce a 
 delinquent state, to use force against her, of wliich, as Mr. 
 Yates informs us in the secret debates, Mr. Hamilton said, 
 when urging the claim for power, "by force, I mean the co- 
 ercion of law, and the coercion of arms," was denied. And 
 yet, the men who whine and slaver most over Washington's 
 uni, and extol, above all others, the constitution and its fra- 
 mers, impute to Washington and his associates the deliberate 
 purpose to commit a fraud, and the actual perpetration of it, 
 by refusing to confer upon congress the power to coerce a 
 state in terms, because, as Mr. ]\[a(lison said, the people would 
 be ofl'ended, and would not consent to it, and it would dis- 
 solve the Union ; and George Mason said the other states 
 would never permit it ; and thou reallj- conferring the same 
 power in a worse form, by authorizing the federal govemment 
 to punish the citizens of the delinquent state for obeying the 
 laws, for passing which they refused to punish the state. 
 
 People of Virginia, do j'oii believe that George Washing- 
 ton, George Mason, James Madison, and their illustrious as- 
 sociates were capable of such fraud — such villainy — or that 
 any but the heart of a Borgia could imjiute it to them ? The 
 authority to enforce the laws of the United States was not 
 intended to apply, and cannot be made to apply, to citizens of 
 a state which has seceded from the Union, because those laws 
 are no longer obligatory upon her, and the refusal to autho- 
 rize coercion against a state shows conclusively that it was 
 not intended in such a case to apply force to her people. It 
 was intended only to enable the government to enforce the 
 judgments and decrees of its courts, and suppress all indi- 
 vidual acts of contumacy or resistance to the laws of the 
 Union, while the Union is in existence. The only laws to 
 which the constitution refers, are the laws of the Union ; 
 
22 
 
 and wlien, therefore, the Union is dissolved, the laws of the 
 Union are abrogated — and it were as well to talk about en- 
 forcing the laws of China in America, or of America in China, 
 under this clause of the constitution of the once United 
 States, as to talk of enforcing the laws of those once United 
 States in a state no longer one of those United States. This 
 argument of the sulimissiouists travels moreover in a circle. 
 It first assumes that a state cannot secede, and therefore the 
 laws may be enforced ; and then it assumes that the laws may 
 be enforced — and tlience concludes that a state cannot secede. 
 It is difficult to determine which is the most oiiensive — the 
 law, the logic or the patriotism of these reasoners. 
 
 If the convention had intended to deny the right of a state 
 to secede, it would have so declared, and provided such re- 
 medy as it thought proper ; ])ut with the knowledge of the 
 views of Madison and Mason, heretofore quoted, it not only 
 failed to deny the right, but refused to confer the power to 
 coerce a state ; and it is shameful to impute to it the disrepu- 
 table trick and cheat which the advocates of a force bill now 
 impute to it. When a state goes out of this Union, no law 
 of it can aifect her — she will be free, sovereign and indepen- 
 dent — rand if assailed by the myrmidons of federal power, not 
 only her sister states vpill rush to her aid, as Mason predicted, 
 but the whole christian world will rally to her rescue, and 
 scatter the carcasses of her assailants to the crows and buz- 
 zards. 
 
 I have said enough upon this point, I am sure ; but I beg 
 leave, before I leave it, to quote two paragraphs from the 
 declaration of independence, with the expression of my utter 
 surprise, my amazement that any southern man should be 
 fomid now to question the right of the southern states to pro- 
 tect themselves and their interests, their homes and their peo- 
 ple, by the formation of a new government, and any Bour- 
 bon or Borgia among us to deny it. Those paragraphs are : 
 
 " Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long es- 
 
23 
 
 tablished should not be changed for light and transient causes ; 
 and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are 
 mor^ disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right 
 themselves by abolishing the forms to wliich they are ac- 
 customed. 
 
 " But when a long train of abuses and usuqiations e^'^nce 
 a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their 
 right, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to 
 provide new guards for their future security." 
 
 Having tiien the right to secede, ought the southern states 
 to exercise it ? My answer has already been given in the 
 affirmative. But the submissionists say no. Let us wait for 
 the overt act — the overt act by Lincoln. By some this is 
 said honestly, under some strangely misguiding influence; 
 with otiiers, it is a mere fetch to obtain delay, and thus pre- 
 vent any action. From respect to the honest, let us examine 
 this idea of an " overt act," an " overt act by Lincoln." 
 
 What is an "overt act?" I presume, of course, they 
 mean ovei't act of liostibty to the south; overt then means 
 simply " open, apparent, public." Has not this been com- 
 mitted again and again V In the resolutions of Virginia, in- 
 structing her delegates to dindare the colonies independent, 
 one of the acts cited and relied upon, was the " enticing our 
 slaves, by eveiy artifice, to leave us, and then turning them 
 ^.gainst us." Has not this been done again, and again, and 
 again — nay, have not our citizens been beaten, imprisoned 
 and slain, in the effort to recover their property which has 
 thus been enticed away from their owners'? And have they 
 not done more tlian " turn them against us," b)^ hiring men 
 to invade our soil, slay oiu* people, incite our slaves to insur- 
 rection, burn our houses, and (in Texas) poison our springs. 
 Could the devil and his legions if let loose upon us, connnit 
 more overt acts of deadly liatc and war than these ? Has it 
 not been declared, by every non-slaveholding state, that we 
 have no just title to our slaves ; that the holding of them is 
 
24 
 
 a sin which it is the duty of the holy thieves to purge us of ? 
 Have we not beeu denied our equal rights in the common 
 property of the nation ? And, finally, has not a man Been 
 chosen to wield the power of the government, because he 
 approves of these sentiments and this warfare upon us, and 
 has proclaimed that " the conflict is irrepressible ;" that the 
 nation cannot stand half slave and half free, and the mission 
 of his party is to make the whole free ? If these be not 
 overt acts — open, apparent, public acts of hostility — what 
 are or can be ? Do our opponents mean to say, that we shall 
 wait until our enemy has commenced the actual war upon 
 us, before we take any steps for self-presei-vation and defence V 
 If thej^ were in court, defending a traitor under the definition 
 of treason in the constitution, they would be compelled to 
 admit that the raising of troops, with the avowal that they 
 were to be used against the United States, would be " levy- 
 ing war" against the United States, and an overt act of trea- 
 son, before a gim was fired. 
 
 But between states, a declaration of war is war, and is 
 therefore an overt act. And when, then, our enemies have, 
 in every fonn at their command, declared war against us, and 
 finally selected their commander in chief because he approves 
 the declaration; and the lieutenant general under hun has, as 
 I am told, actually furnished a plan of the campaign in the 
 south, and the secretary of state has resigned because prepa-. 
 ration for the war is not now made, shall we say that there has 
 been no overt act, and quietly wait until the plans of our 
 enemies have been fully consummated, their resolves matured 
 into laws, and their amiy actually in the field to enforce 
 them, before we, the southern states, place ourselves in con- 
 dition to meet, anticipate and i-epel their blows ? Shall we 
 sit down, and take no adequate step to protect our people 
 and defend our homes, until the amiy and the navy, which 
 are paid by the treasury, which is filled by us, are in the 
 hands of our enemies, to be used against us V 
 
. 25 
 
 When information is given that the slaves in anj- neighbor- 
 hood contemplate an insurrection, do the people wait until 
 the insurrection is in full blast, and the assassmations have 
 commenced, before they take any step to prevent it ? TMien 
 France arms at Cherbourg, does England take no notice of 
 it, or does she not at once strengthen all her defences ? 
 
 Do not our enemies counsel tlie jiresidont to increase his 
 defences in anticipation of difllculty"? Does not the lieu- 
 tenant general offer a plan of military operations against us, 
 and why? Not simply because of his hatred of the south — 
 although it is as intense and vindictive as that of John Quincy 
 Adams, and from a similar cause — but because, as a skillful 
 and experienced soldier, he knows the unportance of prepar- 
 ing for and anticipating his foe. Will the people of the south 
 then shut both eyes and ears to all the teachings of history; 
 to the very lessons of tlieir enemy; to all the instincts of 
 self-defence, and remain under a hostile government until it 
 is prepared with tlie double armor of law and force to assail 
 it? Will they continue to rei)lenish the treasury, which is 
 to feed the anny and navy which are to fight against them, 
 and subdiK! them, if possible, to obedience to their foes, and 
 the spoil and pillage of their property? 
 
 I earnestly hope not. They owe it to themselves, their in- 
 stitutions, their homes and their families, to place themselves 
 at once in an attitude of defence and protection, and this they 
 can do 07ily by seceding before the 4th of JIarch next. But 
 it is said that we must wait for an overt act from Lincoln. 
 This is mere nonsense, and those who urge it stultify them- 
 selves. An overt act by Lincoln! What can Lincoln do? 
 Nothing but execute the will of his masters. The overt act, 
 if it has not yet occiured, must come from them. And what 
 can they do more than they hiive done, except by act of con- 
 gress to enforce what by state laws, mob laws, by emigrant 
 aid societies, and by bullet and blood, they have already done ; 
 and if you will not regard these as overt acts, when commit- 
 4 
 
V 
 
 26 
 
 ted by the principals (the non-slaveholding states), how shall 
 you so regard them when done by their agents in congress ? 
 
 But the overt act has been committed by the agents, as 
 well as the principals ; for both have denied your rights in 
 the ten-itories, and refused to protect them ; and while they 
 may bring what they please into your countiy, you are not 
 permitted to travel even, in thems with your servant, though 
 its care may be necessary to a sick wife or child. What 
 overt act can they commit which will justify resistance? 
 Will it be the Wihnot proviso? You know they will pass 
 it, because the lower house has akeady passed it as to New 
 Mexico, and it was defeated in the senate, where it can never 
 be defeated again — and if passed, what shall we do — go into 
 New Mexico and re-enact the scenes of Kansas, and probably 
 bring on a general war, or secede? The first, all patriots, 
 and all lovers of peace should desire to avoid, and the last 
 will be as unconstitutional then as now, and then you will 
 have the government anny in the field to fight you. 
 
 But enough for the present. I will resume the subject on 
 another day, with yoiu- leave. 
 
 VIKGINIUS. 
 
/ 
 
 Ought tlie Soiitlierii States to Secede ? 
 
 Circumstances be)fond my control, have put it out of my 
 power to conclude the discussion until now, and now it is, I 
 believe, wholly umiecessary to pursue it ; at least, for me to 
 do so. Events have determined the question in the affirma- 
 tive, and made farther argument, as it seems to me, unne- 
 cessary. 
 
 South Carolina, thank God ! has proclaimed her indepen- 
 dence, and the grand and massive paper of Judge Allen, the 
 chief justice, in fact of Virginia, has exhausted the argu- 
 ment ; and 1 sliould certainly desist, if it were not from a de- 
 sire to bring out a few additional authorities. Before I pro- 
 ceed farther with the argument, however, let me render, thus 
 publicly, the homage of a gi-ateful heart to Judge Allen, and 
 express ni}^ admiration of the noble and patriotic stand which 
 he has taken in behalf of his country, and of the pure and 
 majestic style in which, and the invincible logic with which 
 he has vindicated her claim to all that she demands, and de- 
 monstrated her right to resume the powers which she has 
 granted, for the noblest puqioses, to a government which 
 has basely perverted them to the worst uses — to her injury 
 and oppression. His paper will, in after time, be fitly re- 
 garded as a second declaration of independence. 
 
 In England, a zealous whig on the hustings is, in office, 
 generally found cousin-german, at least, to a toiy, and in this 
 country, under a similar change, the ardent state rights man 
 and bilious democrat, is too often I'oimd to be that puny non- 
 descript, called " eminently conservative." It is exceedingly 
 gratifying, therefore, to those who have known this pure and 
 
28 
 
 eminent jndgc through long years, to find that the charms of 
 office and the quarterly dip into the treasury, have not 
 changed his nature, or confused his intellect, and that he is 
 still the same calm, determined, clear headed advocate of the 
 rights of the states and the south, which he was when he en- 
 tered life. Now for our mutton. 
 
 The enemies of secession may be divided into four classes : 
 
 1st. The anti-slavery men ; of whom there are a few, and 
 thank God, only a few, and they are generally well known ; in 
 the south. They would prevent secession if they could, in 
 order to bring the south under the power of Lincoln's govern- 
 ment, with a view to abolish slavery, and, as they Ijelieve, 
 get our lands. 
 
 2nd. The political "rep's," who have subsisted long upon 
 the hope of a good supply of federal pap, as the paupers in 
 Paris feed on the odors of the kitchen, and the few followers 
 who constitute their tail. They have nothing to hope from 
 a southern government, and therefore, they would subject the 
 south to any humiliation or injury in order to presei-ve the 
 form of the government for the use of the nortli, from which 
 their pap must come. 
 
 3rd. The modem federalists. They are honest submis- 
 siouists, because they regard the government of the United 
 States as a consolidated government acting tipon individuals, 
 and therefore they repudiate the idea of sovereignty in the 
 states. They love a strong government for its own sake, and 
 hate with equal intensity every thing like popular or demo- 
 cratic government ; and thus they love an ovei-poweriug federal 
 government, and detest the state governments and the power 
 of the people, although in the debate with Hemy in the con- 
 vention of Virginia, Edmund Pendleton said, " I never con- 
 ceived it to be a consolidated government." And Jolui Mar- 
 shall, the great and illustrious leader of the federal party, 
 said in the same debate, "We, sir, idolize democracy. Those 
 who oppose it, have bestowed eulogiums on monarchy. We 
 
29 
 
 prefer this system to any mouavchy, because we are con- 
 vinced that it has a greater tendency to secure our liberty 
 and promote our happiness. We admire it, because we think 
 it a well regulated democracy." But the modern federalist 
 is wiser than Pendleton and more federal than Marshall. 
 
 4th. The stock owners, and old men, who think of nothing 
 but their dividends and a comfortable old age, and who ai'e, 
 therefore, always in favor of the existing government, if it 
 does not interfere with tlieir ease, and exceedingly revolu- 
 tionary if it does. Any change is to them an ague fit. 
 
 There are some whom sheer fear controls ; but they are 
 not sufficiently numerous to be called a class. The advocates 
 of secession constitute on the other hand, really one great 
 class. They are the lovers of well defined constitutional 
 government, and so of constitutional liberty ; who are impa- 
 tient of any violation of their rights, and value the African 
 slave, not only because he is profitable to them, but because 
 he fills the space, which, if it could live in his clime, the 
 mobocratic element would occupy, and thus secures the only 
 nobility of men and women, which the really free white man 
 can tolerate ; and they believe that if the slaves were ex- 
 cluded and the mob introduced, there could be no republic : 
 That the mob would prevail until quelled by military power, 
 and that would be succeeded by a despot. 
 
 These constitute the great sentimental south. However 
 amusing, and in some respects, beneficial, it may be to ex- 
 amine farther the motives of each of these classes of svUmiis- 
 sionists, it will, I think, be fiiund to be entirely unnecessary to 
 examine those of any but the first class, in order to determine 
 the question in hand. I take up then, the abolitionists and 
 their acknowledged allies, who now control the nation. And 
 first, let us enquire, wJiy arc they abolitionists? They say 
 they are so, because " slavery is the sum of all villainies" — 
 that it is a crime, and their president elect has proclaimed 
 from the stump at Leavenworth, that whenever touched, it 
 
30 
 
 is to be dealt witli as a crime ; and upon this ground they 
 profess to justify themselves in the assertion that slavery has 
 no constitutional sanction or protection, and there shall never 
 be another acre of the territory of the Union soiled by the 
 foot of a slave. These are the known and avowed sentiments 
 of the party which elected Mr. Lincoln; and, accordingly, 
 the present house of representatives has rejected a resolution 
 recognizing property in slaves, and the committee of thirty- 
 three, in the house, and tliirteen, in the senate, have virtually 
 disbanded, because of the determination of the black republi- 
 cans to abate nothing from their creed. Does the leader, who 
 is to be the executive officer of the party, concur with the 
 party ? I have shown, by his speech at Leavenworth, that he 
 did concur, and I submit that his silence at this moment shows 
 that he still concurs ; because, if he does not, and has any 
 spark of patriotism or courage in hun, he would say so. But 
 it is not necessary to rely upon negative testunony, however 
 pregnant with the affirmative, because there is the most 
 direct and positive affirmative testimony. Thurlow Weed, 
 of Albany, is well known as a political editor and intriguer, 
 of the Seward and Lincoln school. He has lately paid a visit 
 to Lincoln, of which so much has been said in the news- 
 papers that he made the following publication of the result 
 of his visit, which I have cut out of the New York Herald. 
 Here it is : 
 
 Thurlow Weed's opinion of the President elect. 
 
 Albany, Dec. 24, 1860. — Thurlow Weed, in an article in to-night's 
 Journal, alludes to his recent visit to Springfield, in the following terms : 
 
 Since the newspapers have made our recent visit to Springfield the 
 occasion of remark, it may not be improper to say that an interview with 
 Mr. Lincoln has confirmed and strengthened our confidence in his fitness 
 for the high position he is to occupy ; of his eminent qualifications for 
 the great trust reposed in him; of his enlightened appreciatiim of the 
 difficulties and dangers that surround us ;• of his desire that the free 
 states, if in any thing delimjuent, shall fulfill their constitutional duties; 
 of his determination to require from all the states an eiifoieemciit of the 
 laws and obedience to the constitution ; and, finally, of his earnest and 
 inflexible devotion to the principles and sympathies of republicanism. 
 
31 
 
 None can donbt then that Lincoln is ^^ earnest and inflexible 
 in his devotion to the principles and sympiathics of republicanism." 
 Aye ! Not to the principles merely, but to the spnpatliies 
 of republicanism. Sympathies of republicanism ! What are 
 they ? Sjanpathy for your slaves and hatred of you, their 
 masters ! Why do such people object to your seceding from 
 the union with them ? Why do they desire to continue in 
 daily connection with your crimes ? Is it for the purpose of 
 protecting and perpetuating the crime and the criminals? 
 Every one must answer wo, as Lincoln has answered no, when 
 he said the crime must be dealt with as a crime. Then of 
 necessity it must be for the pnipose of suppressing and exter- 
 minating the crime — n^hich ix slavery! So determined ai'e they 
 to continue this criminal nniou with you, that the whole 
 north rings with the cry to arms, to preserve it and whip the 
 south into submission. Listen to the reports of the N. Y. 
 Herald of to-daj^ : 
 
 Preparations for war in Massachusetts and JVcir Hampshire. 
 
 Boston, December 29. — There is no disguiping the fact that Massa- 
 chuBetts is ready to respond promptly to any demand made upon lier for 
 troops to sutitiiiu the Union and lliv laws. I hani to-day, from the highest 
 authority, that seven thousand troops can be put in marching order on 
 twentj'-i'our hours' notice, and that one hundred and forty-five thousand 
 men are enrolled in the militia of this state. Of this number twenty 
 thousand could be easily mustered. 
 
 The financial resources of Massachusetts were never in better condi- 
 ticui for such an emergency, and the people arc enthusiastic to be enrolled. 
 
 Adjutant (ieneral Alibott, of New Hampshire, arrived here tliis after- 
 noon from Washington, and left innuediately for Concord, with the in- 
 tention of recommending to Governor Goodwin that the granite state be 
 immediately ])ut upon a war footing. 
 
 Considerable excitement exists in consequence of the reports that the 
 muskets removed from the Springfield armory have been distributed over 
 the south. Mr. Whitney, collector of this port, late superintendent of the 
 armory at Springfield, returned from there to-uiglit, liaving been there, it 
 is supposed, witli reference to the rciuirt from Washingtiui to the Herald, 
 that t\\(Milv thousand muskets have recently been taken from the armory 
 and sold to >'irginia. 
 
 The feeling is deep and not to be misinterpreted. There is no mis- 
 taking the fact that Massachusetts is in earnest in this crisis. The mer- 
 chants are plucky, and the name of Anderson is uppermost in every con- 
 versation. 
 
32 
 
 It is well known here among the leading republicans, that several of 
 the governors of the great non-slaveholding states have agreed to recom- 
 mend a firm and determined resistance to the secession movement of the 
 southern states. The first states that will proclaim this policy in their 
 forthcoming messages to their respective legislatures, are New York, 
 Pennsylvania and Ohio, to be followed by the other northwestern states. 
 The south are beginning to understand that they will have no sympathy 
 or strength in the north, except from those who are opposed to the re- 
 publican party. These facts, just developed, are doing much harm in 
 the south, and" accelerating the secession movement. 
 
 The Pennsylvania legislature will meet on Tuesday next. I learn from 
 a well informed gentleman, just arrived from Ilarrisburg, who saw and 
 conversed with the state officers and lei;lsliit(irs cleet, that one of the first 
 acts of that government will be an appropriation of from one to five mil- 
 lions of dollars, and one hundred thousand nien, armed and equipped, to 
 aid the federal government in the iiresorvaticm of the Union. It is be- 
 lieved by Governor Curtin that nearly all the northern states will follow 
 this example. 
 
 The conduct of Major Anderson is universally commended by northern 
 men of all parties, and by all Union men from the border states. 
 
 From the Pittsburg Jounial, Dec. 28. 
 Public meeting in Pittsburg, Pa. — The big gun controversy. 
 
 The most demonstrative public meeting that we have had in our midst 
 
 in a long time, trausj)ired at the courthouse yesterdaj' afternoon. There 
 seemed to have been a liiisiinderstandiiig at tlie time of the meeting, and 
 a large number adjourned to the Diamond market house, but there being 
 no meeting there, thej' returned to the courthouse, and there they or- 
 ganized, and in an assemblage of some five or six thousand, the follow- 
 ing proceedings were had. The following letter was read at the meeting : 
 
 Alleghany Arsenal, Dec. 27, I860. 
 
 To his Honor, G. Wilso7i, Mayor of Pittsburg : 
 
 Sir, 
 
 It is perceived that some of the city papers in their morning 
 issues, persist in publishing statements in regard to the operations of the 
 United States arsenal, that should be corrected. I therefore respectfully 
 request that at the public meeting of the citizens, to take place this after- 
 noon, they will have this paper read. The statement of the Dispatch, 
 that I informed its reporter last evening that there were no more orders 
 to be filled, was in reference to bis enquiry respecting the heavy guns. 
 There are orders yet to till of six months' standing, and more. The 
 stores referred to in the Dispatch as ' boxes of muskets that left the ar- 
 senal that afternoon,' were fifty sets of horse equipments (in part of an 
 order for five hundred sets) destined for Texas arsenal, for the United 
 States troops serving on that frontier. So likewise another issue will be 
 made in a day or two of ninety other sets, made by Messrs. Hartly & 
 Co., contractors, of Pittsburg, and now in their workshops, who can state 
 
33 
 
 how long they have had the order. These are destined for Leavenworth 
 arsenal, for the troops in that vicinity. Furthermore, there is to be issued 
 to the state of Tennessee, under the act of 1808, for arming; the militia, 
 700 rifle muskets, to replace which 1,000 have been ordered from Harpers 
 Ferry armory. And, finally, of unfulfilled orders, 500 mnskcts belonging 
 to and sent here by the state of Kentucky, to be altered to percussion, 
 are now being altered and refitted, the expense of which to be charged to 
 that state, under the same act of congress of 1808. 
 
 JOHN SYMINGTON, 
 
 Major of Ordnance. 
 
 After which the following resolutions were presented and passed : 
 
 Whereas, as citizens of the United States, attached to the Union, the 
 constitution and the laws, we have learned with surprise and iudiguation 
 that large quantities of lieavy ordnance have been ordered from the Alle- 
 ghany arsenal to points where no apparent immediate necessity for them 
 exists, while other points where the necessity does exist are left unde- 
 fended, and where they will bo exposed to seizure at the liands of those 
 who arc now in a state of actual or threatened revolt against the goveru- 
 mcnt; and, whereas, our remonstrances against this act have received no 
 notice from the proper aulhorities at Wasliington city; therefore, be it 
 
 1. Resolved, that notwithstanding the notorious fact that our rulers are 
 disanning the friends, and arming tlie enemies of the Union, we feel that 
 its friends are strong enongh, even without other arms than their own, to 
 sustain the constitution and the laws, and to follow and retake the guna 
 thus ordered to be removed, in case they shall be traitorously employed 
 against them. 
 
 2. Resolved, that we therefore deprecate any interference with the ship- 
 ment of the said arras under government orders, however inopportune or 
 impolitic the same may be, believing it would give color to the imputation 
 that we have more respect for federal law than our fellow citizens of the 
 seceding state of South Carolina, and decrease our moral much more 
 than it could increase our material power. 
 
 3. Resolved, that we profess to be loyal to the Union of these statca ; 
 that we regard the people of the south as much our fellow citizens as 
 those of the northern states; that we regret that demagogues and traitors 
 should have been able to deceive them into a contrarj' belief; and that, 
 knowing no party here, and no north or south, we intend to observe our 
 part of the compact, and shall expect and insist that all others shall do 
 the same. 
 
 4. Resolved, that we greatly deplore the existence of such a state of 
 things in connection with the aduiiiiistration of important departments of 
 the public service at Washington as to have so shaken the confidence of 
 the people of the free states therein, as to minister occasion for the dis- 
 turbance which has prevailed amongst us. 
 
 5. Resolved, that to restore that confidence which every administration 
 ought to enjoy in a crisis like tlie present, it behooves the president of 
 the United States to purge his cabinet of every man who is known to 
 have been giving .aid and comfort, or in any wise countenancing and 
 abetting the actual or apprehended revolt of any of the states against 
 the authority of the constitution and the laws of this Union. 
 
 G. Resolved, that while Pennsylvania is on guard at the federal capita}, 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 it is her especial dnty to look to the fidelity of her sons, and in that view 
 we call ii|)on the president of the United States, as a citizen of the com- 
 monwealth, to see tliat the republic receives no detriment while it con- 
 tinues In his hands. 
 
 Gen. Williaiii Robinson, jr., presided, and Hon. Thomas Williams and 
 Gen. J. K. Mdorliead, M. C., were the principal spokesmen. Gen. Moor- 
 Lead spdlce in iierfect consonance with the tone of the resolutions, and 
 Hon. Tlionias Williams urged the passage of the resolutions — the vote 
 for which was unanimous, with a very tew exceptions. Hon. Charles 
 Shaler made a speech inside of the courthouse to a large audience, which 
 set forth that resistance to the federal authority at the ar.scnal would be 
 treasonable, but opposition to transportation through our streets would 
 only be in violation of state laws, and resistance to their actual shipment 
 would be as justifiable as the acts of .South Carolina. 
 
 The resolutions above given, as adopted at the meeting, have the sup- 
 port of a majority of our community, and arc eminently worthy of the 
 endorsement of all. 
 
 Our telegiaphic dispatches give the latest news from head quarters of 
 Beeession. Our people are determined to secure justice, and nothing 
 short of it will satisfy them. 
 
 And the following from the Richmond Whig : 
 
 It is stated that General Scott, several days ago, submitted to the pre- 
 sident a plan for the blockade of Charleston, besides strongly reinforcing 
 all 'he southern garrisons, and other military preparations ; but this was 
 not favorably received. 
 
 Sumner and Hickman denounce compromises. 
 
 Hon. Charles Sumner of Massachusetts was serenaded in Philadelphia 
 on Wednesday evening, after delivering a lecture. He responded by de- 
 claring that the last election decided that the territories should be forever 
 free. He was opposed to making any more compromises, and he thought 
 the people were also. All that is needed now is firmness and prudence ; 
 he thought the party would in future show the same firmness they had at 
 the ballot-box. [Applause.] 
 
 Hon. John Hickman also spoke as follows : 
 
 I never was a compromise man, nor am I one now. [Applause.] It 
 is no use for the north to compromise; it is not safe. There is an eternal 
 antagonism between freedom and slavery, and it must be met now, and 
 the interest of the white man sliould not be forgotten, so far as his vote 
 is concerned. I want to know if the government is worth any thing. I 
 do not iliink my people want me to compromise their interests, and if 
 they do, I will not do it. [Cries of " good."] Every compromise that 
 has been made has l)een violated by the south. There is an eternal an- 
 tagonism that must be settled, and we may as well have it settled now as 
 at any other time. [Applause.] 
 
 Capt. Phelps, of the United States army, followed in some remarks. 
 He announced his willingness to enroll a regiment of volunteers in Ches- 
 ter county. Pa., if the people wished it, to ))c placed at the di^^position of 
 the sovereign of the United States, for the preservation of the Union and 
 the constitution, and he cared not whether it was James Buchanan or 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
35 
 
 This lieutenant general of the army, who is mentioned in 
 the first of the preceding paragraphs is, as every one knows, 
 a Virginian by birth, a native of the county of Dinwiddie, 
 though a New Yorker in taste and residence, who has long 
 since declared that slaveiy ought to be extinguished. Now, 
 Virginians, I ask you, what have you to hope for, fiom the 
 native of the north, the black republican, whose nature has 
 been never softened by the genial climate and social inter- 
 course of the south, when this your brother of Virginia, thus 
 pants for war, and is eager to h^ad the myrmidons and mer- 
 cenaries of the black republican government against you? 
 Why do these people desire to make war upon you and slay 
 you, and subjugate your children and desolate your land? 
 Do you suppose that it is for the purpose of preserving an 
 institution to which they deny legal existence, and which 
 they denounce as a crime ? Or is it not because they can, 
 in no other way, manifest their "sympathy with republi- 
 canism" — their sympathy for your slaves, and their enmity 
 to you? They know that if you go out of the Union, and 
 take your slaves with you, they cannot manifest their sym- 
 pathy for the one, and their hatred of the other ; aud, there- 
 fore, they desire to keep you, where they can do both, 'm the 
 Union with crime! until they can extinguish, exterminate the 
 crime, by abolishing slavery ; and then, oh, Grod ! what will 
 be the scenes whicii you Virginians, who may survive the 
 war, will witness ? The histoiy of the massacres of St. Bar- 
 tholomew and St. Domingo, furnish but an imperfect glimpse 
 of what must be your fate, aud the fate of the south, when 
 four millions of slaves shall be emancipated and turned loose 
 upon you, your wives, your daughters and sisters, with the 
 government army in possession of every fortress within your 
 limits, ready to sustain and protect them against you. Oh ! 
 Virginians, will you not learn wisdom from your enemy, and 
 avail yourselves of the warning and the time for prejiaration 
 which God allows you? Are you deaf and blind, that you 
 
36 
 
 will not see and hear, and require yet more to convince you 
 that you should secede without delay ? Will nothing con- 
 vince you but the war-whoop and the sound of the clarion, 
 as the army of Lincoln, led by your Lieutenant General Scott, 
 marches upon you, to slaughter your people and desolate your 
 land? Will you wait unprepared, like men stupefied with 
 terror, until the shrieks of your women, amid the flames of 
 your homes, shall arouse you, too late, to sense and to shame ? 
 The government is crumbling around you ; to what end shall 
 you remain in connection with it ? Some say, for the sake of 
 the Union — to preserve the Union — the glorious Union, as 
 they term it. To these, I reply that there is no Union ; the 
 Union of which they speak is at an end — the glorious Union, 
 long since, at an end. Its glory, for years, has been acquired 
 by the violation of the constitution, and the pillage and op- 
 pression of the south ; and the states of the south have re- 
 solved to submit no longer. South Carolina, the game-cock 
 of the south — the noblest republic on eaiih — has led the way, 
 and now guards our ThermopylcS. But if she had not broken 
 the accursed bond which bound you to the feet of your op- 
 pressors, would not you Virginians, who have hitherto led the 
 hosts of constitutional liberty, now burst them and free your 
 country from the tyrants who oppress you ? The Union — 
 what is the Union but your form of government designed to 
 protect you, your property and your liberty, which was glori- 
 ous while it did so, because it did so, but is now as odious 
 because it does not, as it was glorious because it did ? The 
 glory of the Union is nonsense. The glory of a government 
 is the glory of the nation — and Vattel informs us, that " the 
 true gloiy of a nation consists in the favorable opinion of 
 men of vdsdom and discernment ; it is acquired by the vir- 
 tues or good qualities of the head and the heart, and by great 
 actions, which are the fruits of those virtues." What claim 
 has the Union now to be entitled glorious, under this defini- 
 tion? But, if it still were glorious to all the rest of the 
 
37 
 
 world, and unjust, oppressive and tyrannical to you, would 
 you submit to it? Have you degenerated since the days of 
 your fathers ? If you have not, then look upon their deeds, 
 and listen to their words, and imitate the one and profit by 
 the others. When Patrick Henry and his prophetic associates 
 foretold the aggressions of " the Union," Mx. Madison replied 
 in the 4-5th number of the Federalist, in the following noble 
 and emphatic language : 
 
 " We have heard of the impious doctrine in tlie old world, 
 that the people were made for kings, not kings for the peo- 
 ple. Is the same doctrine to be revived in another shape, in 
 the new, that the solid happiness of the people is to be sacri- 
 ficed to the views of political institutions of a diflereut Ibrm ? 
 It is too early for politicians to presume on our forgetting 
 that the public good, the real welfare of the great body of 
 the people, is the supreme object to be pursued, and that no 
 form of government whatever has any other value than as it 
 may be fitted for the attainment of this object. Were the 
 plan of the convention adverse to the public happiness, my 
 voice would be, reject the plan. Were the Union itself in- 
 consistent with the public ha^ipiness, it would be, abolish the 
 Union. 
 
 If you have not degenerated, then, Virginians, awake to the 
 dangers which surround j'ou, and arise and meet them with 
 the dignity and det(!rmination which become you, and they 
 call for, and, in the language of James Madison, " abolish the 
 Union." 
 
 VIRGINIUS. 
 
Ought the Southern States to Secede ? 
 
 In addition to the considerations mentioned in my last 
 number, let me add a few others of similar import. I have 
 shown that the people, who arc now most violent in their 
 denunciations of Soutli Carolina and all seceding states ; the 
 most vociferous in favor of the Union; and the most bloody 
 in their programme of coercion, are the freedom shriekers, 
 and the men who denounce slavery as a daily crime. Let me 
 add, that they are the freedom shriekers who expelled the 
 south from Kansas, and now support Montgomeiy and his 
 lawless band, so that the " freedom shiiekers" and " the 
 Union shouters" now shriek and shout in the same key, from 
 the same platform, and that platfonn is "the Union," "the 
 glorious Union." Can you, Virginians, stand upon this same 
 platfonn ? Is the platform of Seward and Lincoln, Hale, 
 Wade, Banks and Giddings, the platform of the south? If 
 it is, then are we guilty hypocrites, and criminals, who deserve 
 that Lincoln and his lieutenant general, vdth their myrmi- 
 dons, should overrun and subdue us, for having by different 
 professions, and opposition to the abolitionists, aroused them 
 to their present fury — and we are unworthy to take position 
 in the line with South Carolina. 
 
 But if their platform is not ours, then is the Union, which 
 is their platform, not a Union for us, and wc may claua fra- 
 ternity with the gallant men who have imjieriled all for honor 
 and libcity, and over whom I pray that the God of peace and 
 of battles will watch, and give them peace, if it may be, and 
 if war must come, bear them safely tluough it, victorious 
 over every foe. 
 
40 
 
 Again, Vattcl, at p. 4, says, " The end or object of civil 
 society is to procure for the citizens whatever they stand in 
 need of, for the necessities, the conveniences, the accommo- 
 dation of life, and in general, whatever constitutes happi- 
 ness — with the peaceful possession of property, a method of 
 obtaining justice with security, and finally, a mutual defence 
 against all external violence." 
 
 Again, at page 3, he says, " Finally, several sovereign 
 states may unite themselves together, by a perpetual confe- 
 deracy, without ceasing to be, each individually, a perfect 
 state. They will together constitute a federal republic ; their 
 joint deliberations vnW not unpair the sovereignty of each 
 member, though they may, in certain respects, put some re- 
 straint on the exercise of it, in virtue of voluntaiy engage- 
 ments. A person does not cease to be free and independent 
 when he is obliged to fulfill engagements, which he has vo- 
 luntarily contracted." 
 
 And again, he says, " We have said that an independent 
 nation, which, without becoming a member of another state 
 in order to obtain protection, is released from its engage- 
 ments as soon as that protection fails, even though the fail- 
 ure happen through the inability of the protector." 
 
 Now, I submit that whether you regard this Union as a 
 federal republic as Vattel defines it, and we the secessionists 
 maintain it is, or whether you regard it as a consolidated go- 
 vernment, as the coercionists do, it has for many years past 
 failed in every one of its duties to the south, the perform- 
 ance of which was necessary to bind the south to it, and 
 threatens still more wrong, viz : 
 
 First — It has permitted the northern states to slander and 
 revile us ; to plunder us of our property ; to slay our peo- 
 ple — and thus has failed to afford us protection : 
 
 Secondly — It has thus failed to promote our happiness, 
 which it was its duty to do : 
 
41 
 
 Thirdly — It has not secured to us the peaceful enjoyment 
 of our property: 
 
 And lastly — It has not afforded us a method of obtaining 
 justice, because it has pennitted the northern and eastern 
 states to pass laws to defeat our justice; and the party now 
 controlling the Union, has avowed its puqiose still farther to 
 deprive us of justice, by corruptly reorganizing the supreme 
 court. 
 
 And now, absolved, as by these .misdeeds j'ou ai'e, from all 
 farther obligations to this Union, the land resounds with the 
 cry "to amis," in order to subdue you, because you will not 
 submit to farther oppression and degradation, if not de- 
 struction. 
 
 What motive have you for remaining under such a govern- 
 ment '? 'Wliat good can you accomplish ; what evil avoid 
 by if? 
 
 The submissionists reply — 
 
 1. You can't protect your property, your slaves especially, 
 out of the Union. To which I reply — there is not the least 
 foundation for tliat idea ; but if there is, our condition will, 
 in that respect, be no worse than it is now, and will be always 
 in the Union ; and certainly must be better — for once out of 
 the Union, we can form foreign alliasces, if need be, which 
 now we cannot. 
 
 2. There will be constant trouble with the north. To 
 which I answer, that cannot well be worse than it now is, 
 and must be better; because when out of the Union we can, 
 by law, cut off the northern trade, and exclude its citizens 
 from our country, if they molest us, which now we caunot do. 
 
 3. They say that we cannot bear the expenses of our own 
 government. To which I reply, that this idea is wholly un- 
 founded ; for wc, the south, now defray not only the expense 
 of governing ourselves, but a largo part of that of governing 
 the rest of the Union ; and when out of the Union, we shall 
 
 6 
 
m 
 
 have the expense of our own government only to maintain, 
 and our revenue will increase by the restoration of our trade. 
 And finally, they say, that in order to get out, we must 
 have civil war. To which I answer, that we shall not have 
 civil war, if the southern states go out, and that we shall 
 certainly have it if we remain in, unless we submit to be 
 plundered of our property, and amalgamate with our negroes. 
 But is this an argument to be treated otherwise than with 
 scorn ? It is an appeal to your fears, as an inducement to 
 surrender your honor and your liberty, youj property and 
 your institutions. Are you, Virginians, the descendants of 
 those men who pledged their "lives, then- fortunes and their 
 sacred honor" for the maintenance of a conflict for liberty, 
 with a better, a stronger, and even more glorious government 
 than this, and tamely bear an insult such as this? Ai'e you 
 so degenerate, so mercenary, as calmly to listen to, and coolly 
 to weigh an argument which counsels you to slavery and dis- 
 honor, because it may be dangerous, and not pi'ofitable at 
 
 .first to be otherwise ? God forbid. Spirits of Washington 
 and Jefferson ; of Madison, Marshall and Lee ; of Marion, 
 Sumter and Moultrie, forbid. 
 
 'Twere insult enough to offer such an argument to you at 
 any time, but it is iysulTerable at such a moment as this, 
 when you are threatened with a war the most nefarious which 
 
 ,has ever disgraced the earth since the partition of Poland. 
 When the age is to be insulted, and humanity and Christianity 
 outraged, by the attempt to overrun with armed mercenaries 
 
 :the fairest land on earth, and kill and subjugate its people 
 because they desire peacefully to change their form of govern- 
 ment, in order to preserve their liberty — promote their hap- 
 piness and protect their property — and this by men who wor- 
 shipped Kossuth, who idolize the noble Garibaldi, and stimu- 
 late the discontented all over the world to rise in the name of 
 liberty, and overturn their government — and call themselves 
 your brethren and peacemakers ! ! A generation of vipers, 
 
4^ 
 
 as well as hypocrites, why do ye not bum the declaration of 
 independence, denounce the name and memory of Washing- 
 ton, destroy his statue, and convert Mount Veraon into a 
 swine yard ? For if we deserve death for resisting you, you 
 must believe that Washington was a traitor, who should have 
 changed places with Andi-c. Can the people of the south 
 justly anticipate any thing but injury and oppression from a 
 people who now threaten and urge war upon them, simply 
 because they desire to resume their original form of govern- 
 ment, under which they lived prior to the establishment of 
 the present constitution ? Was ever war so monstrous, in- 
 excusable, inhuman and iniquitous — so utterly at war with 
 the principles upon which the Union was formed, and with 
 the spirit of the age in which we live? Never before, in the 
 history of the world, has such a war been waged upon any 
 state of a federal republic, which chose to separate itself from 
 the other states, leaving them the possession of thoir govern- 
 ment and of all their rights ; and there is no principle upon 
 which it can be justified, which will not equally justify the 
 pirate, the highwayman and the common plunderer. Nor, 
 was ever war so absurd ; for when it is over, if it ever is, and 
 Crod has permitted us to be conquered, as he will not, what 
 will the conquerors do with the conquered country? How 
 will they hold and govern it? Wlio will be the satrap, who 
 will venture to live in a conquered coimtry, surroniided by 
 enemies, who are kept doA\ni by force. Perhaps the gallant 
 lieutenant general will, who was so pacific to the Indians, 
 and so unwilling to march against the Mexicans, but is now 
 so eager to involve iiis native land in war, and regale hia 
 mercenaries with the blood of his countrymen. His pay and 
 rations are dear to him, I know, for no man is less qualified 
 to live without them — but let me tell him, in the language of 
 Edmund Burke, when resisting in parliament the war upon 
 the colonies, that when the war is over he will find "That 
 the south is not subdued. Not one unattacked village which 
 
44 
 
 was originally adverse throughout that vast region, has yet 
 submitted from love or terror. You have the ground you 
 encamji on, and you have no more. The cantonments of your 
 troops and your dominions are exactly of the same extent ; 
 you spread devastation, but you do not enlarge the sphere of 
 your authority." 
 
 Let me tell him, however, that he will never bring us to 
 that condition, for in the language, again, of the distinguished 
 British statesman (Burke), " in these southern states (colonies) 
 the spirit of liberty is more high and haughty than in those 
 to the northward. In Virginia and the Caroliuas they have 
 a vast multitude of slaves. Where this is the case in any 
 part of the world, those who are free are by far the most 
 proud and jealous of their freedom. Freedom is to them not 
 only an enjoyment, but a kind of rank and privilege ; and 
 these people of the southern states (colonies) are much more 
 strongly, and with a higher and more stubborn spirit, at- 
 tached to liberty than those to the northward. Such were 
 all the ancient commonwealths ; such were our Gothic an- 
 cestors ; such in our day were the Poles ; and such will be 
 all masters of slaves, who are not slaves themselves. In 
 such a people, the haughtiness of domination combines with 
 the spirit of freedom, fortifies it, and renders it invincible." 
 And as to this pettifogging and absurd idea of treating the 
 citizens of the seceding states as criminal offenders against 
 federal law, I beg leave to silence and forever extinguish it, 
 by applying to it the language of Edmund Burke, when a 
 similar proposition in respect to the colonies was made in the 
 British parliament. He says, " At this proposition I must 
 pause for a moment. The thing seems a great deal too big 
 for my ideas of jurisprudence. It should seem to my way of 
 conceiving such matters, that there is a wide difference in 
 reason and policy between the mode of proceeding on the 
 irregular conduct of scattered individuals, or even of bands 
 of men, who disturb order within the state, and the civil dis- 
 
45 
 
 sensions, which may from time to time, on great questions, 
 agitate the several communities which compose a gi-eat em- 
 pire. It looks to me to be naiTow and pedantic to apply the 
 ordinary ideas of criminal justice to this great public contest. 
 I do not understand the method of drawing up an indictment 
 against a whole people. I cannot insult and ridicule the 
 feelings of millions of my fcllow-crcaturcs, as Sir Edward 
 Coke insulted one excellent individual (Sir Walter Raleigh) 
 at the bar. I am not ripe to pass sentence on the gravest 
 public bodies entrusted witli magistracies of great authority 
 and dignity, and charged with the safety of their fellow- 
 citizens, upon the very same title that I am. I really think 
 that for wise men this is not judicious; for sober men not 
 decent; for minds tinctured with humanity, not mild and 
 merciful." 
 
 As if however to render their cause more infamous and de- 
 testable, if possible, in the eyes of Christendom, we have been 
 told that we have an internal foe to guard against ; insurrec- 
 tions have been attempted and servile war is threatened as 
 the adjuncts of the semi-civilized but savage warfare of the 
 white men. To the micarthly and infernal demons who make 
 this suggestion, let me give the rebuke of Edmund Burke to 
 the British government, when a similar suggestion was made 
 by the enemies of tlie south of tliat day, when he said, 
 "With regard to the high aristocratic spirit of Virginia and 
 the southern colonies, it has been proposed, I know, to re- 
 duce it by declaring a general enfranchisement of their slaves. 
 This project has had its advocates and panygerists, yet I 
 never could argue myself into any opinion of it. Slaves are 
 often nuich attached to their masters. A general wild ofl'er 
 of liberty would not always be accepted. History furnishes 
 few instances of it. It is sometimes as hard to persuade 
 slaves to be free as it is to compel free men to be slaves ; and 
 in this auspicious scheme we should have both these pleasing 
 tasks on our hands at once. But when we talk of enfran- 
 
"/ 
 
 Ll 
 
 46 
 
 cliisemcut, do we not perceive that the American master may 
 enfranchise too, and arm servile hands in defence of freedom? 
 a measure to which other people have had recourse more 
 than once, and not without success, in a desperate situation 
 of their aftairs." And to this let me add the enquiry. What 
 would be the condition of the grand army of the lieutenant 
 general, if the slaves of the south were told, You shall have 
 a hundred dollars for eveiy soldier you may kill, and your 
 freedom too, if you desire it, with the plunder of the camp ? 
 But I recur to the enquiry. What can you hope for by con- 
 tinued union with men who without provocation have perse- 
 cuted you for thirty years, and now propose to show their 
 love for you, by making war upon you in the most savage 
 and inhuman form ? Will they be less unjust and oppressive 
 in the future, because they find you timid and submissive 
 now ? or will they not, when taught by your craven spirit to 
 despise you, become more insolent, oppressive and tyrannical? 
 
 There are some, however, who still cling to the hope of 
 adjustment, or oppose secession as the remedy, and call for a 
 convention of all the states, or favoring secession, advocate 
 what is called a central confederacy — and one at least — 
 nomcn pnedarimi — entitled always to be heard with respect, 
 suggests that we fight in the Union, for the Union, for the 
 army and navy. 
 
 Let us examine briefly these different suggestions : 
 
 1. The hope of compromise — It is an ignis fatuus, which 
 can only have the effect of preventing you from making any 
 preparation for your defence until Lincoln is installed, and all 
 the materials of war prepared. No sane man, who is candid, 
 can really hope for it. 
 
 2. A convention of all the states — Can any thing more 
 fatal to the south be conceived ? What is the cause of our 
 present troubles? The fiiithless refusal of the non-slave- 
 holding states to comply with the guarantees of the present 
 constitution ; and does any man really believe that the peo- 
 
47 
 
 pie who will not comply with the present guarantees, will 
 give you better ones ? The difficulty is not that the present 
 guarantees are not adequate, but that they are disregarded by 
 the anti-slavery majority ; and the south would be perfectly 
 content if those guarantees were observed. 
 
 If, then, the enemies of the sonth are willing to give 
 stronger guarantees, a fortiori, they would obseiTe the exist- 
 ing guarantees ; and it is certain, therefore, that if they will 
 not observe existing guarantees, they will not give others 
 which are better. 
 
 But what will guarantees effect but to cheat and delude ; 
 for the same majority, which is unjust and unprincipled 
 enough to violate existing guarantees, could just as easily, 
 and would, violate new ones. Is it not absolutely certain, 
 however, that the constitutional guarantees, wiiich a conven- 
 tion formed now would give you, would be inferior to those 
 now existing, for else there would be no necessity for a con- 
 vention. But does any man doubt that any convention which 
 should mc(!t now would deprive you of your slave represen- 
 tation, and thus at the very outset weaken j'ou incurably? 
 The same thing may be said of a central confederacy, in 
 which the anti-slavery party would necessarily prevail. 
 
 In truth, in my opinion, the real design of some of the 
 prominent movers of these schemes is to betray the south, 
 and carve out a little kingdom for very small 7nen. 
 
 3. I come to consider the idea of fighting in the Union, &c. 
 
 To this scheme the first objection is, that with the present 
 parties there ought to be no union by the south, as I have 
 endeavored to show; there cannot be a fraternal and equal 
 union between southeru slaveholders and northern fanatical 
 abolitionists: and if this be true, then there is no Union to 
 fight fur, except the union of the southern states, if it is de- 
 nied us. 
 
 Tlie next objection is, that war is the very tiling to be 
 avoided if practicable, not only because it is a terrible cala- 
 
48 
 
 mity, but to make it, is the abandonment of the ground upon 
 which we stand, of a right, peaceably, to secede. And then 
 who would we fight for the army and the navy ? Of course 
 the army and navy themselves : and to enable us to do that 
 in the Union, we must continue to pay duties to furnish mo- 
 ney to maintain and equip the army and navy, which we are 
 fighting, and must at the same time maintain our own forces. 
 It seems to me that this would be most impolitic, and by all 
 means to be avoided. But suppose we did so, and whipped 
 the army and navy, what should we do with it? We should 
 hang the lieutenant general of course, and then be like the 
 boy who caught the bear. We should have an army and 
 navy which we did not want, and could not keep, and must 
 of course place again immediately under the control of a 
 black republican government, in order that we might have 
 the fun of fighting them again. But I cannot perceive how 
 or where such a war would begin. Should we invade the 
 northern states, and make war upon them ? I think every 
 one will answer no. Should we attack Washington, and 
 drive off the government ? If we did, then, instead of hav- 
 ing a Union, we should ourselves have dissolved the Union, 
 and destroyed the government : and then the question would 
 arise, How should we establish another government in the 
 Union? I confess I cannot comprehend the scheme, or see 
 any thing but ruin to the cause of the south in it. But if it 
 were possible to define such a sclicme, so as to make it intel- 
 ligible and practical ; yet it would, it seems to me, be the 
 worst possible for the south, because it would, in the eye of 
 the nation and in the estimation of the world, make the south 
 the aggressor, not seeking peaceably to establish a govern- 
 ment for herself, but to overturn by arms the government of 
 the other states, and would justify the nefarious and inhuman 
 war which is about to be waged upon her ; which I beseech 
 her not to do, and pray to God not to permit her to do. 
 We are in the right now: let us continue so. If all the 
 
49 
 
 principles of the revolution of 1776 are to be overthrown 
 and trampled upon in our blood ; if the declaration of inde- 
 pendence is to be proclaimed a lie by the American Union, 
 and under its flag — the sword is to settle questions of political 
 right, and her army dictate a government to our people, let 
 us presei-ve our attitude of unoflending right and defence, and 
 appealing to the arbiter of all human events for the justice 
 of our cause, bravely meet our foe, confident of victorj'^, and 
 we cannot fail. God will not desert us in such an hour ; and 
 the Christian nations of Europe, who vnll not permit even 
 the Turk to be oppressed, will not stand idly by and see an- 
 other unoflending clnnstiau nation rudely overrun and basely 
 slaughtered, because it claims the right to goveni itself. But 
 if they do, we will still preserve our freedom, or die with 
 honor. If the spirit of Garibaldi could free Italy, the south 
 can never be conquered while her sons are faithful, and have 
 Lee, Garland, Davis, Shubrick, Iiigraham, Huger and the Ma- 
 gruders to lead them. 
 
 VIRGINIUS. 
 
IC\H 
 
7f 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 As will be seen from their tenor, when the foregoing num- 
 bers were written, South Carolina only had seceded. Since 
 that time, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, and most 
 probably Louisiana, have seceded, and the black republican 
 party has assumed the most uncompromising and defiant atti- 
 tude. In the senate, resolutions of conipiomise were oflered 
 by the venerable senator from Kentucky, Mr. Crittenden, 
 wliicli were eminently flivorable to the Tiorth, and not, in my 
 opinion, just to the south, though oflered, I am sure, with 
 the best motives. By a imanimous vote of the black repub- 
 licans in the senate, the resolutions of Mr. Crittenden were 
 rejected, and the violent declaration of war against the south, 
 contained in the resolutions of Clark of New Hampshire, 
 which are appended hereto, was adopted ; and a resolution 
 containing a similar declaration of war, has been passed by 
 the house of representatives ; and it is the well known and 
 avowed purpose of the black republicans to blockade all the 
 southern ports and destroy their commerce, as a means of 
 subjugating them. 
 
 A considerable part of the federal anny has been concen- 
 trated upon the border of Virginia, in and near Washington ; 
 and Mr. Lincoln, the elected chief of the black republicans, 
 has selected as his chief adviser, his prime minister, William 
 H. Seward, the constant and unscrupuloiis enemy of the 
 south, and the author of the. htoodij Rorhrstcr manifcMo. 
 
 What better, what stronger evidence of tln^ determination 
 of Lincoln to carry out all the plans and purposes of your 
 enemies, and pursue you with fire and sword, can you desire, 
 
52 
 
 or can be given, than the selection of such a man as his prin- 
 cipal adviser and first cabinet minister? What ground is 
 there for hope, even, of peace and safety in the Union with 
 Lincoln and Seward, and the party which they represent? 
 Your senators, in whom you have so long confided, in an 
 address to you, also hereto appended, have testified to you 
 that there is none. In the face of all this testimony, will 
 you hesitate, Virginians, to resume the power which you 
 granted to the federal government, not that it might oppi-ess 
 and enslave you, but that it might protect you and presei-ve 
 your libei-ty ? 
 
 Recollect, I beseech you, that if you yield now, you will 
 be enslaved forever ; for the ground assumed by your enemies 
 is, that you have not the right to secede, and they have the 
 right, by arms, to subdue j^ou, and, by the judgment of their 
 courts, to hang you, if you attempt it. Recollect, that the 
 government is, by this theory, made a militarj^ government, 
 and not a government of the popular will of a tree people : 
 Nay, that it is now a military government, administered 
 mainly by the commanding general of the army ; and, sur- 
 rounded by the army, sustained by its cannon and bayonets, 
 this black republican president is to be invested with supreme 
 power ; with the command of that very army as well as of 
 the navy. Is not this the first step always of a military 
 despotism ? 
 
 And now, when you also recollect that fortress Monroe and 
 fort Calhoun, upon your own shores, and commanding your 
 noble harbor and its commerce, now is and will continue to 
 be in the hands of your enemies, and under the control of 
 their president and his army, resistance to whom will be 
 treason, and submission dishonor and ruin — what excuse will 
 you be able to offer to your children, to your posterity, and 
 your countiy, for your failure, if you should fail to avail 
 yourselves of the time and opportunity which are now oflfered 
 you to rescue them from this ruin, and preserve their liberty ? 
 
53 
 
 Recollect, that if you sejiarute yourselves from the south, 
 you must be allied to the north, and governed by the men 
 who have already oppressed you, with your power of protec- 
 tion diminished by the secession of the south : and if you and 
 they together could not protect your rights, how can you do 
 so, when deprived of their aid ? Can you doubt for a mo- 
 ment that in such a condition yoti will be ground to the dust 
 in poverty ? Cut off from the south, your negroes will be 
 immediately emancipated, or rendered equally valueless and 
 more dangerous, by the aid and sympathy of their friends, 
 and your enemies, your northern allies. 
 
 Recollect, that if you go with the south, you will probably, 
 nay, certainly, caiTy all the border slave states with you, and 
 thus prevent, by the power which will be exhibited, a civil 
 war — while, if you separate j^ourselves fi-om the south, you 
 will make civil war certain — and then, iu the Union, you 
 must, as traitors, as they say, fight against the Union, or join 
 the black republicans, and fight against the south — which I 
 am sure you will never do. 
 
 In tlie name of liberty, for the sake of peace, for the love 
 of honor, justice and equality, by your love of Virginia, and 
 her ancient renown, I beseech you, Virginians, to strike while 
 there is yet time, to presei^e the liberty and protect the pro- 
 perty of the people, and savt^ the state from the pollution of 
 black republican rule. 
 
 VIRGINIUS. 
 
54 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 To the People of Virginia, from their Representatives. 
 
 The following address to the people of Virginia has been adopted by 
 ten of fifteen of their representatives in congress. The paper was not 
 presented to Hon. Wm. Smith, he being detained in Virginia by illness : 
 
 TO THE PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA. 
 
 We deem it our duty, as your representatives at Washington, to lay 
 before you such infonnation as we may possess, in regard to the probable 
 action of congress in the present alarming condition of the country. 
 
 At the beginning of this session, now more than half over, committees 
 were appointed in both houses of congress, to consider the state of the 
 Union. Neither committee has been able to agree upon any mode of set- 
 tlement of the pending issues between the north and the south. 
 
 The republican members in both committees rejected propositions ac- 
 knowledging the right of property in slaves, or recommendjng the division 
 of the territories between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding states, by 
 a geograpliical line. 
 
 In the senate, the propositions commonly known as Mr. Crittenden's, 
 were voted against by every repuhlican senator ; and the house, on a vote 
 by yeas and nays, refused to consider certain propositions moved by Mr. 
 Etheridge, which were even less favorable to the south than Mr. Crit- 
 tenden's. 
 
 A resolution, giving a pledge to sustain the president in the use of force 
 against seceding states, was adopted in the house of representatives by a 
 large majority; and in the senate, every republican voted to substitute for 
 Mr. Crittenden's propositions, resolutions oifered by Mr. Clark of New 
 Hampshire, declaring that no new concessions, guarantees, or amend- 
 ments to the constitution, were necessary ; that the demands of the south 
 were unreasonable, and that the remedy for the present danger was 
 simply to enforce the laws — in other words, coercion, and war. 
 
 In this state of facts, our duty is to warn you that it is vain to hope for 
 any measures of conciliation or adjustment from congress, which you 
 could accept. We are also satisfied that the republican party designs, by 
 civil war alone, to coerce the southern states, under the pretext of enforc- 
 ing the laws, unless it shall become speedily apparent that the seceding 
 states arc so numerous, determined and united, as to make such an at- 
 tempt hopeless. 
 
 We are confirmed in these conclusions, by our general intercourse here, 
 by the speeches of the republican leaders here and elsewhere, by the re- 
 
55 
 
 cent refusals of the legislatures of Vermont, Ohio and Pennsylvania, to 
 repeal their obnoxious personal liberty laws, by the action of the Illinois 
 legislature on resolutions approving the Crittenden propositions, and by 
 the adoption of resolutions in tlie New York and Massachusetts legisla- 
 tures (doubtless to be followed by others), offering men and money for 
 the war of coercion. 
 
 We have thus placed before you the facts and conclusions which have 
 become manifest to us from this post of observation, where you have 
 placed us. There is nothing to be hoped from congress ; the remedy is 
 with you alone, when you assemble in sovereign convention. 
 
 We conclude by expressing our solemn conviction that prompt and de- 
 cided action by the people of Virginia in convention, will afford the 
 surest means, under the providence of God, of averting an impending 
 civil war, and preserving the hope of reconstructing a Union already dis- 
 solved. 
 
 (Signed) 
 
 J. M. Mason. E. S. Martin. 
 
 R. Af. T. Hunter. H. A. Edmundson. 
 
 D. C. Dejaknette. Roger A. Pryor. 
 
 M. R. H. Garnett. Thos. S. Bocock. 
 
 Shelton F. Leake. A. G. Jenkins. 
 
 Washington City, 22d January 1861. 
 
56 
 
 RESOLUTIONS 
 
 Offered in the Seriate of the United States, 15th of Jammrij 
 1861, by Mr. Clark of New Hampshire, as a substitute for 
 the Resolutions of Mr. Crittenden. 
 
 Kesolvecl, that the provisions of the constitution are ample for the pre- 
 servation of the Union and the protection of all the national interests of 
 the countiy ; that it needs to be obeyed rather than amended, and that 
 an extrication from our present danger is to be looked for in strenuous 
 efforts to preserve the peace, protect the pubUc property, and enforce the 
 laws, rather than in new guarantees for particular interests, compromises 
 for 'particular difficulties, or concessions to unreasonable demands. 
 
 Resolved, that all attempts to dissolve the present Union, or overthrow 
 or abandon the present constitution, with the hope or expectation of con- 
 Btructiug a new one, are dangerous, illusory and destructive ; that, in the 
 opinion of the senate of the United States, no such reconstruction is practi- 
 cable, and, therefore, to the maintenance of the existing Union and con- 
 stitution should be directed all the energies of all the departments of the 
 government, and the efforts of all good citizens. 
 
penmaliFe* 
 
 pH83