s o, 
 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 x v ^ 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *> 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 °* 
 
 v"^ 
 
 
 o V 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 **■ 
 
 
 ,0 % 
 
 
-^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 <*> 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 A* % . 
 
 
 
 
 A > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 The Government of the United States 
 
 WHAT IS IT'? 
 
 COMPRISING 
 
 A CORRESPONDENCE WITH HON. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, ELIC- 
 ITING VIEWS TOUCHING THE NATURE AND CHARACTER 
 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 
 THE IMPOLICY OF SECESSION, THE EVILS 
 OF DISUNION, AND THE MEANS 
 OF RESTORATION. 
 
 By J. A. STEWART 
 
 ' Error ceases to be dangerous when reason is left free to combat it." — Jefferson. 
 
 §Ml8»i», $».: 
 
 
 FRANKLIN IP R, I N" T I IS" G- HOUSE, 
 
 J. J. TOON, PROPRIETOR. 
 
 1869. 
 

 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1869, by 
 
 J. A. STEWART, 
 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. 
 
J 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 In presenting the following pages to the public, my object 
 is to induce a more thorough common sense understanding of 
 the government of the United States, that we may appre- 
 ciate its value, and if possible restore and perpetuate its 
 existence. 
 
 The work contains reasons which influenced Constitutional 
 Union men in opposing secession, and in withholding their 
 assent after their State had seceded ; also, reasons why 
 higher law experiments should be forever abandoned, and 
 the government restored as it was. 
 
 It attempts to lift the dark veil of prejudice and partisan 
 hate, which for years past has shut out from view the light 
 of reason, especially in reference to our political affairs. 
 
 It will present (briefly) an unbiased and unprejudiced 
 view of political evils, as developed during the past eighty 
 years, and point out the remedy. It is one of a series of 
 pamphlets on political topics, which will appear in due time, 
 provided the author perceives any good results from the 
 present issue. J. A. S. 
 
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
 
 It will be discovered by the attentive reader of the pam- 
 phlet, to which this is an introduction, that men can be equally 
 earnest and zealous in their endeavors to establish and main- 
 tain good government, and yet differ widely as to the precise 
 nature and character of the powers to which they acknowl- 
 edge allegiance. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Stewart, when a citizen of Atlanta, in 1859, 
 formed an acquaintance with Hon. A. H. Stephens, which 
 soon grew into very respectful and friendly relations. In 
 1860 they were both ardent supporters of Mr. Douglas, and 
 both equally opposed to the policy of secession as a 
 remedy for any of the evils of which we then complained. 
 Mr. Stephens did all he could to allay the storm of fanati- 
 cism and sectional hate then existing, and to hold in check 
 the incipient steps toward disunion and disintegration. In 
 his patrotic efforts to save the Union, he found in Mr. Stewart 
 a warm supporter. The storm, however, proved too heavy 
 for conservative wisdom. Good men were appalled. They 
 wavered — bent, and then yielded to its power. Even Mr. 
 Stephens consented to get on the disunion craft, in view of 
 saving from the wreck as much as possible of civil liberty. 
 Mr. Stewart refused to go on board, although loth to part 
 with his friend. He begged Mr. Stephens to return — warn- 
 ing him of dangers. A new craft had been formed out of 
 planks which had been violently riven from the " Old Ship 
 of State ;" and it was drifting off into unknown seas. The 
 commanders were ambitious and reckless ; whilst the pilots 
 and crew, maddened by sectional hate and partisan strife, 
 obeyed their orders. 
 
Vi INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
 
 To the mind of Mr. Stewart, ruin was inevitable, if the 
 secessionists remained long at sea ; and he could not refrain 
 from calling on his friend Stephens to return, if possible, ere 
 it was too late, and bring back with him our deluded people, 
 and restore them to the "government as it was." He plead 
 earnestly and long. For three long years he begged Mr. 
 Stephens to come back, and through his influence restore the 
 old government, and thereby end the suicidal strife — end the 
 bloody conflict ere it was too late — end it whilst we had 
 power to dictate terms of restoration — end it at once and 
 avoid the evils of subjugation — evils which persistence in the 
 struggle would inevitably bring upon us. His pleadings were 
 all in vain. The secession craft drifted farther and farther 
 from shore into wild and stormy seas. Even the voice of a 
 Stephens was powerless to change its course ; and after four 
 years' struggle against adverse winds, it went down, and all 
 contended for, was lost. A victorious party that then manned 
 the Old Union Ship, dictated the terms for reconstruction. 
 We found men there who hated the government as it was. 
 We found men there resolved to ignore the Constitution, and 
 to reject our re-admission into the Union under the Constitu- 
 tion. We were a subjugated people. The evils Mr. Stewart 
 predicted were upon us. 
 
 Mr. Stephens was a prisoner in Fort Warren. But whilst 
 there, he found his old friend interceding for him. Mr. 
 Stewart begged for his release. His intercessions were at- 
 tended with good results. Mr. Stephens returned to his 
 home. After which the friendly relations between them gave 
 rise to a correspondence which is embodied in this pamphlet. 
 
 Mr. Stewart was educated in the Jeffersonian school of 
 politics; and he thought he understood the "government as 
 it was ;" but if Mr. Stephens is correct in his views as to its 
 distinguishing features, then he concedes that heretofore he 
 has not understood it. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 The views I entertain as to what the government of the 
 United States really was, or is, are founded mainly on the 
 wording or phraseology — first, of the Original Articles of 
 Confederation ; secondly, of the Constitution of the United 
 States ; and thirdly, of the Messages of the Presidents of 
 the United States — especially of the earlier Presidents. 
 
 1st. In the preamble to the Articles of Confederation we 
 find the States did " agree to certain Articles of Confedera- 
 tion and Perpetual Union," viz: "Articles of Confedera- 
 tion and Perpetual Union between the States of," &c. The 
 Perpetual Union aimed at, was of the nature of an " indis- 
 soluble partnership" between the States respectively, or of the 
 people, to accomplish a common object, essential to the good 
 of the whole ; which no State, singly and alone, had power to 
 accomplish. A nation was needed to secure amicable foreign 
 relations, and at the same time to protect the people of the 
 States against insurrections and invasions. A nation was 
 needed to provide for the common defense and general wel- 
 fare of the United States — to regulate commerce with foreign 
 nations and among the several States — to coin money and 
 regulate the value thereof — to establish post-ofiices and post- 
 roads — to promote science and useful arts — to declare war — 
 to raise and support armies — to provide for calling forth the 
 militia to execute the laws of the Union, &c, and to make 
 all laws which might be necessary and proper for carrying 
 into execution the foregoing powers. 
 
 " One nation" (in the language of Jefferson) was needed 
 to make us one people for national purposes, whilst the States, 
 
8 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 as auxiliaries, were essential to the regulation of oar do- 
 mestic and local polity. An indissoluble partnership or 
 agreement was entered into for the purpose of forming a 
 "Perpetual Union''' — the States reserving all powers not 
 delegated. 
 
 On trial the Articles of Confederation were found too fee- 
 ble for national purposes. 
 
 2nd. We find in the Constitution of the United States a 
 design " to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, in- 
 sure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, 
 promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of 
 liberty to ourselves and our posterity." 
 
 The Articles of Confederation were designed to establish 
 a perpetual Union, whilst the Constitution of the United 
 States made that Union "more perfect.'" The Union made 
 one nation styled the United States — a name recognized 
 by the whole world as a national name, or a name by which 
 we were distinguished as a Nation. This perpetual Union 
 was made strong by all that pertains to a nation to make it 
 perpetual. It had an army and a navy, and power to de- 
 clare war. 
 
 3rd. The Executive Messages, especially those of Washing- 
 ton and Jefferson, recognized the Government as a nation, 
 and the Congress of the United States a National Congress, 
 the Supreme Court a National Judiciary, and the President 
 a National Executive. 
 
 Madison considered himself elected to the Presidency of 
 the United States by the " deliberate and tranquil suffrage 
 of a, free and virtuous nation." 
 
 Washington alluded to advantages we derived from " an 
 indissoluble community of interests as one nation." He al- 
 luded to States as " auxiliary agencies for the subdivisions." 
 
 Jefferson, in his first Inaugural, speaks of a " rising na- 
 tion," "voice of the nation;" of States as "the most compe- 
 tent administration for domestic concerns" and of the Gene- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 9 
 
 ral Government "as the sheet anchor of our peace at home 
 and safety abroad." He mentions in another address, the 
 great "council of the nation," which means national council 
 or national legislature. He speaks of the " danger to the 
 nation,'" the " state of the nation," &c. In his messages, 
 of March 4th, 1805, he called the nation a " commonivealth; , ' > 
 of Dec. 3rd, 1805, he speaks of " the representatives of the 
 nation;" of Nov. 8th, 1808, he spoke of our "beloved 
 country;" never dreaming of anything being entitled to the 
 name country, except the broad land known as the United 
 States. And so we will find in all the messages a clear recog- 
 nition of the nationality of the Government of the United 
 States, and of its supremacy over the Constitution and laws 
 of States, so far as to render them void, when in conflict with 
 any of its Constitutional powers. 
 
 Yet it is nowhere denied, by any of our Presidents, the 
 " reserved rights of the States." They all knew, and well 
 understood that " the powers not delegated to the United 
 States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States 
 were reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." 
 
 Thus we have, clearly, the facts and arguments upon which 
 I found my views of the Government, as it was. 
 
 I consider the National Government legally and Constitu- 
 tionally bound to respect and maintain the reserved rights 
 of the States or the people, according to the Constitution ; 
 and I claim that each State has a right to regulate its do- 
 mestic institutions in its own way, subject only to the Con- 
 stitution of the United States and the laws in pursuance 
 thereof. 
 
 I consider nullification and secession as dangerous abstrac- 
 tions. But in case of intolerable oppression, I hold to the 
 right of revolution as the last resort, and the only remedy. 
 
 And here, in justice to Mr. Stephens, it is proper to say, 
 that he considered the abandonment of the Union, either 
 with or without force, a very impolitic measure, but holding 
 
10 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 that his ultimate allegiance was due to his State; and having 
 repeatedly pledged himself to go with her, right or wrong, 
 he had (in his view) no alternative but to go with his State 
 when she seceded; even though her act was, in his judgment, 
 very impolitic and wrong. The experimental test resulted 
 in war, disastrous to the theoretical views of those who held 
 secession to be a peaceful remedy ; and in a war which proved 
 dangerous to liberty, resulting in the subjugation of eleven 
 States to the higher law party North, now in control of 
 Federal authority; satisfying the people of the South, accord- 
 ing to the following language of Mr. Stephens, " that a re- 
 sort to the exercise of this right (the right of secession) 
 while it is denied by the Federal Government, will lead to 
 war, which many thought, before the late attempted secession, 
 would not be the case ; and civil wars, they are also now 
 very well satisfied, are dangerous to liberty ; and moreover, 
 their experience in the late war satisfied them that it greatly 
 endangered their own. I allude especially to the suspension 
 of the writ of habeas corpus, the military conscriptions, the 
 proclamations of martial law in many places, general im- 
 pressments, and the levying of forced contributions, as well 
 as the very demoralizing effects of war generally." 
 
 Fort Warren, Boston Harbor, Mass. 
 21st July, 1865. 
 Mr. J. A. Stewart, Louisville, Ky. : 
 
 My Dear Sir : — Yours of the 10th inst. was received 
 to-day. Language would fail to express to you the thanks I 
 feel for it. I cannot write to you as fully as I wish. I am 
 suffering from rheumatism in the hand, and cannot use the 
 pen without pain. You will please take the will for the deed. 
 You understand me thoroughly, I think. I went with the 
 State on secession from a sense of duty only. No more ar- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 11 
 
 dent or devoted friend to the Constitution of the United States, 
 and the principles of civil and religious liberty therein em- 
 bodied and guaranteed, than I was and am, ever breathed the 
 vital air of heaven ; and no one can rejoice more than I at the 
 prospect of seeing peace and prosperity restored to our once 
 happy land. This appears from the indications of the Pres- 
 ident's policy. No one would take more pleasure in using his 
 powers to the utmost extent in that direction, if permitted, than 
 I should, if my counsels should be sought. I have no desire, 
 on my own account, however, ever to have anything to do 
 with public affairs again. But if I were at liberty, and the 
 people should desire to know my sentiments, I should take 
 great pleasure in giving them. Perhaps in Georgia they are 
 in better condition to listen to me than they ever were before. 
 I know this was the case when I was taken away ; and I 
 know my counsel was peace and the full and perfect accepta- 
 tion of the new order of things. I mean the abolition of 
 slavery. 
 
 I am sincerely thankful to you for your letter to the Presi- 
 dent. Why I am confined here, and that too under such rigor- 
 ous orders, is a mystery to me. . . . I do not understand 
 why I, who exerted my every effort to prevent the strife, and 
 then my every effort to end it in the speediest manner, rea- 
 sonably, by peaceful adjustment of some sort, should be the 
 
 victim of such sufferings as I am This is 
 
 what is strange, mysterious, and unaccountable to me. I 
 therefore thank you for your letter to the President. You 
 have known my course throughout. I feel assured, if I could 
 
 but confer with him face to face, that I 
 
 could satisfy him that I am, upon all principles of justice, 
 entitled to parole. If, from the office I held under the Con- 
 federate organization, and which was accepted with the sole 
 view of doing all in my power to maintain the principles of the 
 government under the circumstances, it should be thought 
 proper to make an example of me by trial for treason — that, 
 
12 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 it seems to me, is no reason why I should be punished as I 
 am, in advance of the punishment first to be found to be right, 
 by judgment of the law. My parole would be most sacredly 
 adhered to. 
 
 But I can say no moi^e, except again to thank you for 
 your letters — the one to me just received, and the one you 
 wrote to the President. I should be glad to hear from you 
 often. 
 
 This I shall send to Louisville, with directions to be for- 
 warded to Rome, Ga., in case you shall have left the former 
 place before it reaches there. Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 
 Rome, Ga., Aug. 12th, 1865. 
 His Excellency, Andrew Johnson, Washington, D. C. 
 
 Dear Sir : — I am again in possession of what remains 
 of my home in Georgia ; and it is gratifying to be able to 
 state to you, that even here, in this once turbulent and dan- 
 gerous section of Georgia, we have peace, order, and every 
 indication of a return of substantial prosperity. There will 
 no more war go up from the South. An acquiescence in the 
 new order of things, under your administration, is clearly 
 manifested by the masses of our people. The terms of re- 
 admission into the Union, embraced in your proclamation will 
 meet with no opposition entitled to consideration In fact 
 there is no record in history of an erring people manifesting 
 so earnestly, a willingness to retrace their steps, and help 
 repair and restore that which has been laid waste. They 
 have emerged from a mesmeric spell thrown over them by 
 years of inflammatory political harangues, and are now in 
 their sober senses, ready and willing to do right ; and it is 
 earnestly to be hoped that you will have it in your power 
 to protect us against any renewal of the agitation, in refer- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 13 
 
 ence to the negro element. Shield us, if possible, against 
 negro suffrage, negro equality, or whatever tends to the re- 
 kindling of sectional animosities. The people South are 
 willing to give up slavery, but they are not yet willing to 
 place themselves on terms of political and social equality 
 with the African race. 
 
 But it was my purpose in this communication to again ad- 
 dress you in reference to Hon. A. H. Stephens. Having, I 
 think, a thorough knowledge of Mr. Stephens' position prior 
 to, and during the whole progress of the war, I can say, 
 confidently, that secession never met his sanction, except 
 through force of circumstances as a horrible and painful ne- 
 cessity; and that his imprisonment, under the circumstances, 
 in the view of every reasonable man South, is without suffi- 
 cient cause, and not justifiable. 
 
 Mr. Stephens, as you will perceive from the enclosed copy 
 of a recent letter from him, is rejoiced at the prospect of re- 
 turning peace ; and would not hesitate to encourage a speedy 
 and full acquiescence in the terms proposed. 
 
 Release him, if in your power to do so. Release him with- 
 out delay. Let me urge you, as your friend, and a friend to 
 the best interests of our country, to release him on parole, 
 and let him return to the bosom of his friends and the com- 
 forts of home, where his delicate health and frail body may 
 gather new strength, and where his voice of counsel may 
 again be heard. Everybody asks: "Why is Stephens held 
 jn prison whilst the Honorables Cobb, Toombs, Brown, 
 Hill and others are permitted to run at large?" 
 
 I have no prominent position to back up my solicitations 
 in Mr. Stephens' behalf — nor can I calculate much on your 
 very limited personal acquaintance with me. But I am an 
 honest man and a true lover of my country, and am actuated 
 in this appeal by no selfish or mercenary motives ; and feel 
 assured that I am addressing one equally honest and patri- 
 otic — one who will not turn a deaf ear to the pleadings of an 
 
14 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 honest and reasonable appeal, in behalf of a good man, who 
 has committed only an error, but no willful sin. 
 
 Yours most respectfully, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 
 Liberty Hall, 
 Crawfordville, Ga., 21st May, 1868. 
 
 My Dear Sir : — Your letter of the 20th with enclosures 
 came duly to hand to-day. I was glad to hear that my pack- 
 age of the 18th, had gone safely. You need not have minded 
 the matter of stamps. 
 
 I shall look, with a good deal of interest, for your letter, 
 giving me your opinion of the Constitutional View of the late 
 War, &c. 
 
 I wish you would read the book carefully, and study it 
 closely. I know your opinion will be candid, and therefore 
 I shall esteem it the more highly, whether it be favorable 
 or unfavorable — that is whether it be coincident with my 
 own views or not. There are few men whose writings, 
 whether in letters or in addresses to the public, I read with 
 more interest than yours — because they always bear such 
 marks of sincerity and patriotism upon them. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 
 J. A. Stewart, Rome, G-a. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 15 
 
 OPINION OF MR. STEPHENS' BOOK. 
 
 An argument by J. A. Stewart, of Rome, Gra., in opposition 
 to the doctrine of State sovereignty, and the rightfulness of 
 secession, as contained in a late work of Hon. A. H. 
 Stpehens, styled the " Constitutional Vieiu of the late War 
 between the States. " 
 
 A SYNOPSIS OF ESSENTIAL POINTS IN THE ARGUMENT. 
 
 Good government should be the paramount object. To effect this end, 
 the only business of government being to prevent men from injuring 
 one another, it must necessarily have power sufficient to enforce obedi- 
 ence. Government means power, consists in power, and without power 
 is no government. Unrestricted power is despotism. A written in- 
 strument defining the powers that may or may not be used, is a Con- 
 stitution. The Government of the United States has authority only 
 through a Constitution, which the people, the great source of power, 
 " ordained and established," as the supreme law of the land. An army 
 and a navy were furnished the Executive head to enable him to en- 
 force obedience to the Constitution and laws ; and the power given 
 him was sufficient, and hence the States were necessarily subordinate, in- 
 dividually, and not sovereigns ; and hence the folly and delusion of 
 "ultimate, absolute sovereignty of all the States" — as illustrated in 
 separate State action in 1860 and '61, by the several seceded States. 
 Concluding with observations on the right of Revolution. 
 
 Rome, Ga., May 26th, 1868. 
 To Hon. A. H. Stephens. 
 
 Dear Sir : — It is with feelings of conscious inability that 
 I attempt to write you an opinion of your " Constitutional 
 View of the Late War." It would certainly afford me much 
 pleasure to be able to agree with you in all your premises, 
 arguments, and conclusions ; but a long habit of thinking 
 and reasoning in an opposite direction, will, I fear, constrain 
 me to forego the pleasure. The paramount object of us both 
 is good government — " a government which shall restrain 
 men from injuring one another, but shall leave them other- 
 
16 CONSEKVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 wise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and im- 
 provement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the 
 bread it has earned." 
 
 Cupidity, avarice and ambition, lead to violence and inva- 
 sions ; and these find no correctives, except through the in- 
 strumentality of some wise governing power. 
 
 A government to be efficient must have, not only the 
 power to enact laws, but all the appliances of coercion neces- 
 sary to enforce them. A good government must necessarily 
 be clothed with power to maintain its authority. It must 
 have an Executive head, and an army at its command to 
 coerce the lawless and disobedient. It must have power to 
 command, not only the respect of foreign nations, but of its 
 own citizens. 
 
 It must demand and enforce implicit obedience to its rights 
 ful authority 
 
 The venal and corrupt laugh to silence the counsels of wise 
 men. They yield only to superior physical power — hen<J$ 
 the necessity for government or power to restrain evil doers." 1 
 Government means poiver. It consists in poiver — and witqf 
 out power it is no government. Governments are founded 
 on the necessity for restraining power. This necessity is 
 perpetual ; for the reason that the evil passions of men are 
 perpetual, and hence government itself must necessarily be 
 perpetual. There is no withdrawing from government. If 
 we release ourselves from one form of restraining power, we 
 pass immediately under another. Then, again, it is only 
 through the agency of men that governing power can be 
 wielded, and hence the necessity for checks and balances in 
 government to control the agents. Unrestricted power is 
 despotism : powers clearly defined in a written instrument 
 which all have agreed to obey, make what is known as a 
 Constitutional government. To found a government of this 
 character requires an agreement or compact to confirm it and 
 make it binding. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 17 
 
 The government of the United States was of this charac- 
 ter. Its powers were clearly defined in an instrument called 
 a Constitution. That Constitution and the laws in pursuance 
 thereof, by an agreement, or compact of the people, became 
 the supreme law of the land; and was a government to all 
 intents and purposes within the limits of the Constitution. 
 It was a government, too, in all respects suited to the wants of 
 the people, and adapted to great extent of country, protect- 
 ing and securing every material interest, embracing those 
 necessarily springing from diversity of soil and climate. It 
 was a government founded on the wants of the people, and 
 established by their sanction. 
 
 The old Confederation which served as a bond of uninn for 
 the people, when common danger and a common cause natu- 
 rally bound them together, proved inefficient as a govern- 
 ment after independence was achieved. The separate States 
 or Colonies, prior to the revolution, were not capable of ex- 
 ercising and maintaining absolute sovereignty. They were 
 failures individually when Great Britain waged a war upon 
 them. They had individually no sovereignty that England 
 respected ; and as separate and independent States or Colo- 
 nies, they had no power to command respect. As indepen- 
 dent States they had no existence. This was conceded by 
 them, and hence a union of the people of those States was 
 necessary to defend them against foreign aggression. The 
 defence made was Continental — not provincial. The vic- 
 tory achieved was Continental — the power that dictated the 
 terms of separation was Continental. A provincial power of 
 separate and distinct, absolute sovereignties had no existence. 
 The people of the Continent achieved independence, "when, 
 in the course of human events, it became necessary." It 
 was one people dissolving the political bands which had con- 
 nected them with Great Britain. It was one people throw- 
 ing off a foreign yoke, and setting up a government for them- 
 selves. The States or Provinces had no power individually 
 
18 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 to throw off the yoke. The boundary lines which had divided 
 the people into separate and distinct political communities, 
 subject to the paramount controlling power of England, were 
 lost sight of in the struggle for independence. The people 
 forgot that there were any dividing lines, except the divi- 
 sions, and subdivisions, essential to the harmonious working 
 of a grand Continental, or National Government, and conse- 
 quently the people, as "one," after independence was achieved, 
 set about maturing and perfecting the fundamental law es- 
 sential, "to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, in- 
 sure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, 
 promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of lib- 
 erty to themselves and their posterity;" and for these pur- 
 poses the people of the new nation, did, in the year 1787, 
 " ordain and establish the Constitution (not compact) of the 
 United States of America." Too feeble, as Provinces, Col- 
 onies or States, to establish justice, insure domestic tranquil- 
 lity, or to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and 
 posterity — they agreed to "ordain, establish," and forever 
 obey, as the supreme and fundamental law of the land, a 
 Constiutional system of government, having for its basis the 
 Constitution of the United States, in which was embodied 
 the fundamental principles of good government, and to which 
 the grand divisions of the people, called States, were com- 
 pelled to look for guidance, not only in forming State Consti- 
 tutions, but in every law enacted by State Legislatures for 
 the government of the people, since nothing in any Constitu- 
 tion or law of any State was binding which came in conflict 
 with the Constitution of the United States. No law to de- 
 feat justice, to disturb domestic tranquillity, or to deprive 
 the people of the blessings of liberty, was allowed to have 
 binding force ; and to make this more explicit, no State was 
 allowed to " enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation, 
 grant letters of marque and reprisal, emit bills of credit, coin 
 money, make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 19 
 
 payment of debts, pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto 
 law or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any 
 title of nobility. 
 
 "No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any 
 duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, 
 or enter into any agreement or compact with another State, 
 or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actu- 
 ally invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of 
 delay." The people, in ordaining and establishing the Con- 
 stitution, had one paramount end in view, viz : freedom and 
 security. The evil impulses of men had necessarily to be 
 held in check, and the powers ordained for this purpose had 
 their limits and boundaries clearly defined in the National 
 Constitution. 
 
 It was provided that the people could select from amongst 
 themselves agents, for limited terms, to make the necessary 
 restraining laws, and the rules and regulations for carrying 
 them into effect; agents to judge of the constitutionality and 
 validity of laws ; and agents to carry the judgments into ex- 
 ecution. Yet, simple as this view of our government appears, 
 it was a task of vast magnitude to wield efficiently and safely 
 its necessary powers. 
 
 A distribution of its labors and duties to be performed, 
 each part appropriately assigned, was essential to the suc- 
 cess of the grand scheme. The people, as "one," entrusted 
 with national affairs, and the people of the grand divisions, 
 called States, entrusted with police and local regulations, (or 
 governments) for these divisions, and the people of each 
 sub-division, such as counties, parishes, towns, cities, &c. y 
 having also an appropriate and essential part assigned them, 
 taken all together, was the government of the United States ; 
 and like a grand complicated machine, every lever, and 
 wheel, and axle, and pulley, and cog, and segment, must 
 necessarily be held in its appropriate place to secure the effi- 
 cient working of the whole ; and as well might we expect a 
 
20 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 wheel to perform its part with a cog out of place, or a seg- 
 ment removed, as to expect such a beautiful, but complicated 
 system of government as ours, to move on efficiently, giving 
 the people freedom and security, after one or more States 
 had been withdrawn from its support. 
 
 The great solar system of worlds, revolving around a com- 
 mon center, could not be held together in harmony, if even 
 only one of the least of the satellites was violently plucked 
 from its orbit. The balance would be lost, and the conse- 
 quent collisions and confusions would destroy the magnifi- 
 cent structure. A cog dropping out of place or refusing to 
 perform its part, produces a shock throughout the entire ma- 
 chine to which it belongs ; and if not replaced, another and 
 another will give way, until nothing is left but fragments of 
 cogs, segments, axles, pulleys, belts, spindles — all in one 
 common ruin. 
 
 South Carolina — a segment of our grand old government 
 machine — refused to perform its part, (or seceded.) A shock 
 was immediately felt, endangering the freedom and security 
 of the people; other States, jarred by the concussion, also 
 flew out of place, producing concussions more violent, over- 
 turning, for a time, every vestige of freedom and security, 
 which had been established for us by the government of the 
 United States. 
 
 A good machinist, when a cog falls or flies from its place, 
 puts it back and pins or wedges it in more securely ; so in 
 reference to government, we would think it strange to see a 
 wise Executive let a good government go to wreck because 
 there was some refractory elements connected with it. But 
 on the contrary we would expect to see him wield whatever 
 power he had at command to coerce obedience to the Consti- 
 tution and the laws in pursuance thereof. We would expect 
 this of him, and more : we would expect to hear him, with 
 all the appliances of reason, and truth, and wisdom, strength- 
 ened by the charms of unsophisticated and native eloquence, 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 21 
 
 saying to the people : This is the government ordained, and 
 ratified, and established for us by our fathers. It is the off- 
 spring of anxious thought and wise counsels. It has secured 
 to us for a long term of years a larger share of freedom and 
 security than was ever enjoyed by any people on earth. It 
 is a government recognizing the great fundamental princi- 
 ples that all power is inherent in the people, and all free 
 governments are founded on their authority and instituted 
 for their peace, safety and happi?iess ; and for the advance- 
 ment of these ends, they, the people, have at all times the 
 power to alter, reform or abolish their government in any 
 manner they may see proper. This fundamental principle, 
 however, to be practicable must itself have limitations. 
 
 All power rightfully belonging to the people must neces- 
 sarily be rightfully exercised to secure the ends in view 
 (freedom and security) ; the people have no just right to ex- 
 ercise any power not conducive to these ends. Consequently, 
 in ordaining and establishing a government for the people, a 
 Constitution was adopted; and in order that the people 
 might safely exercise the power "to alter, reform or abolish 
 their government, in any manner they might see proper," 
 an ample provision was made for its amendment. 
 
 The Constitution provided that two-thirds, either of the 
 people of the several States, or two-thirds of Congress, may 
 propose amendments, which if ratified by the Legislatures 
 or Conventions of three-fourths of the States, becomes valid 
 and binding as part of the Constitution. The Constitution 
 itself is an experiment, and every law enacted under it is an 
 experiment — the object being to secure the largest amount of 
 freedom and security to us and our posterity. Thus privi- 
 leged, there is no Constitution, no act of a Legislature, no 
 law of Congress, but can, if found impracticable or inju- 
 rious, be safely altered, reformed, or abolished. This great 
 privilege was reserved to the people for the purpose of cor- 
 recting errors and removing abuses, and not for the purpose 
 
22 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 of dissolving and breaking up government. A difference of 
 opinion as to the efficacy of laws, or the tendency of meas- 
 ures, must necessarily be decided by the majority of voices 
 for or against ; and there is no appeal from the majority ex- 
 cept to arms ; and an appeal to arms against each other can 
 find no justification under our form of government. 
 
 The government of the United States is a law-making 
 power, which must necessarily be wielded by a majority of 
 the people through representation ; and it is the imperative 
 duty of the minority to acquiesce or obey. The minority can 
 safely do this, for the reason that laws of a general charac- 
 ter, have an equal bearing upon all ; and if injurious to the 
 minority, the majority will also suffer in common with 
 others, and will be equally interested with the minority in 
 effecting their amendment or repeal. And it should be re- 
 membered too, that equal and exact justice to all men can 
 never be fully attained — that no human government can ever 
 entirely prevent men from injuring one another — that an ap- 
 proximation to these ends is all that can reasonably be ex- 
 pected — that bad or evil disposed men will continue in our 
 midst — that no country on the surface of our globe is free 
 from their presence — and that under no circumstances should 
 we abandon or break up a good government. 
 
 The government of the United States, ordained and estab- 
 lished by the people, was and is, "the best government the 
 sun in its circuit around the earth ever shined upon." It 
 constitutes us one people. It is a main pillar of our real 
 independence. It supports our tranquillity at home and our 
 peace abroad. It gives us safety and prosperity, and secures 
 to us the blessings of liberty. It is a National Union of 
 immense value to our collective and individual happiness. It 
 gives > to us one common country — a national capacity, and the 
 proud name of American. It speaks a persuasive language 
 to every reflecting mind. It is a great organization for the 
 whole country, having the auxiliary agencies of governments 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 23 
 
 for the respective subdivisions. It is the offspring of sage 
 experience, and adopted after full investigation and mature 
 deliberation. It is completely free in principle; and in the 
 distribution of its powers, unites security with energy, and 
 yet contains within it ample provisions for its amendment. 
 
 A respect for its authority, a compliance with its laws, 
 an acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by its 
 fundamental maxims. It has a Constitution which exists at 
 all time*, until changed by an explicit and authentic act of 
 the people ; and every individual is under perpetual obliga- 
 tions to obey it. It is an efficient government, and we should 
 remain one people under it. It is a government of our 
 fathers, and, with no doubt many defects and short-comings, 
 more nearly attains the object of all good government than 
 any other on the face of the globe ; and no where can we go, 
 "following the sun in its circuit round the globe, to find a 
 government that better protects the liberties of the people." 
 
 Thus you will perceive I have given in substance the lan- 
 guage of wise and great men. Washington spoke of the 
 government as a great organization for the whole country, 
 with auxiliary agencies as governments for the respective 
 subdivisions; held that we had .a national government de- 
 signed by its framers to establish justice and insure domestic 
 tranquillity; and that State governments and State laws in 
 conformity with the United. States, were necessary as auxil- 
 iaries to establish and secure these ends. Adams enter- 
 tained and expressed similar views. Jefferson spoke of the 
 great commonwealth — the government of the people — the 
 national government — the nation, &c. ; and all claimed that 
 it was a nation, and was essential to our peace at home as 
 well as our protection abroad ; and all, with great solicitude, 
 urged the necessity for viewing the government as embra- 
 cing one great country, and to feel that there was no coun- 
 try for us but the United States of America." 
 
 Thus educated and thus impressed, I never hesitated to 
 
24 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 reject the doctrine of secession. I held that fealty to our 
 whole country was fealty to my State, and at no time was I 
 ever willing to go with my State in the wrong. I felt it was 
 for the best interest of my State not to secede, just as I 
 would feel that my brother or friend should not commit a rash 
 act. And felt too, after my State had seceded, as I would 
 have felt towards a companion — one who had become intoxi- 
 cated : I felt that my State had done a rash thing, and that 
 the sooner she retraced her steps the better — the sooner she 
 became sober again, and hearkened to the voice of Wisdom, 
 Justice and Moderation, the better. 
 
 And now, since time has verified the correctness of these 
 convictions, I hope our sad experience will enable us to exer- 
 cise that wisdom which the dark cloud of revolution again 
 hanging over us, so much demands. 
 
 The complications and exasperations which have grown 
 out of our civil conflicts are yet multiplying, and if not ar- 
 rested, the day is not far distant when we may bid an ever- 
 lasting farewell to Constitutional Liberty. 
 
 STATE SOVEREIGNTY A DELUSION. 
 
 I cannot forget the past ; yet I have no quarrel with seces- 
 sionists, knowing as I do, that many of them were honest in 
 their convictions and impulses ; yet at the same time I must 
 frankly tell them, that absolute State sovereignty is a most 
 egregious delusion, or, to say the least of it, wholly impracti- 
 cable for good. Absolute sovereignty means superior power — 
 a power sufficient to control and govern all opposing powers — 
 a power to which all others are subordinate. A decisive ma- 
 jority of the people is sovereign, for the reason that in con- 
 tests of unequal forces, the inferior must necessarily suc- 
 cumb. Then again, the law of self-preservation belongs as 
 much to majorities as to minorities. No State has ever had 
 superior power over all other States, and hence each State 
 has held a position in the Union of subordination to all 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. Z& 
 
 others. And however much individuals or States may 
 desire to set up for themselves, they will never be permitted 
 to do so, to the injury of the remaining people or States ; 
 and thus it is clear that States are feeble, subordinate pow- 
 ers, subject as individuals are to the will and power of ma- 
 jorities ; and however humiliating this may be to the State 
 pride of secessionists, the fact cannot be disputed, especially 
 since the eleven States recently in rebellion against the u su- 
 pr&me law of the land," have so severely felt the coercive 
 power of superior numbers. 
 
 THE UNION AS I UNDERSTAND IT. 
 
 And here, to enable you more fully to comprehend my 
 views in reference to the Union, and its attempted overthrow 
 by the advocates of secession, I will, in concluding this 
 rather lengthy article, give you a brief outline of my thoughts 
 and actions during the four years' struggle of disunionists 
 per se to disrupt the ties which for seventy years had held 
 the nation together and made us one people. 
 
 In the first place, be it understood that I was educated in 
 "the Jacksonian or Jeffersonian school of politics, and taught 
 to love the Union. And loving the Union as I did, I made 
 it my study to understand the power which was shedding 
 around us in profusion the blessings of liberty. And I found 
 the more I comprehended the workings of the government — 
 State and National — so applicable to all our wants, and so 
 perfect in detail, the more devotedly was I attached to the 
 Union, which alone could render practicable a government 
 so wisely constructed, and so beneficent in its operations. 
 
 I studied the geography of my country, that I might com- 
 prehend its extent, the grandeur of its mountains, the fer- 
 tility qf its valleys, the majesty of its rivers, the extent of 
 its forests, its ocean and lake-bound coasts, its northern 
 climes and sunny plains, its mines of precious metal, rival- 
 
26 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 ing in riches and value the tin of Thule and the gold of 
 Ophir. I studied this magnificent country, and compre- 
 hended its vast extent, stretching from the Atlantic north, 
 crossing the Rocky Mountains four thousand miles to the 
 Pacific — thence south near two thousand miles with the 
 meanders of the coast to the southern extremity of Califor- 
 nia — thence eastward, embracing Texas and the Gulf and 
 Atlantic States, thousands of miles to the beginning ; pre- 
 senting a magnificent interior, enlivened by rivulets and cas- 
 cades, and beautified by broad and majestic rivers with their 
 innumerable tributary streams. These and a thousand 
 other charms made me feel that this was indeed an asylum 
 for the oppressed of all nations — that it was a home fit for 
 freemen, where the iron rule of despotism could never stifle 
 the voice of liberty, or fasten upon our limbs the chains of 
 oppression. And when our impulsive men, north and south, 
 clamored for a dissolution of the Union — the breaking up 
 of the government of our fathers, and asked me to help do 
 it, I said No ! a thousand times No ! 
 
 And when the crazy abolitionists told me they loved the 
 negro better than they loved the Union — that they would 
 see the country flowing in blood to the bundle reins, rather 
 than perpetuate a Union that permitted the white man to 
 control and direct the African race in their necessary pur- 
 suits of industry, and wanted me to help them plunge the 
 country in war, to slay millions of men, and waste billions 
 of treasure, that a few negroes might be put in positions they 
 had no capacity to fill, I told them No ! an everlasting No ! 
 
 I had traveled over this great country of ours, north and 
 south ; I found good people everywhere, and I found bad 
 people everywhere ; and I was proud to think Ave had & grand 
 system of government — National and State — to protect the 
 good by restraining the bad. 
 
 I was proud to think we had a Union to make us one 
 people, under one government — the best the w r orld ever saw — 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 27 
 
 and one flag, whose ample folds protected us on land and sea 
 throughout every foot of this inhabitable globe. I claimed 
 but one country, and that extended from ocean to ocean, and 
 from the beautiful lakes of the North even down to the Gulf 
 of Mexico. This vast country was mine. I loved its moun- 
 tains ; I loved its fertile plains; I loved its forests wild ; its 
 rivers too, I loved, and " every stream that gently flowed in 
 murmurs to the sea." And though of vast extent I loved it 
 all : it was my country — it was my home ; and no power on 
 earth — no abolition threatening North, nor fiery declamation 
 South, could ever have made me sanction its overthrow. 
 
 Thus impressed, it may well be imagined why I reject the 
 disorganizing fallacy of secession, and why I have to dissent 
 from so much of your Constitutional View of the late War 
 between the States, as sanctions and supports the fatal delu- 
 sion of "ultimate absolute sovereignty of all the States," and 
 the right of each State to break up the Union by withdraw- 
 ing from it. 
 
 THE RIGHT OF REVOLUTION. 
 
 " Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long 
 established should not be changed for light and transient 
 causes." But when evils and oppression at the hands of a 
 governing power become greater than those that would result 
 from resistance, then Revolution becomes justifiable — not to 
 change the form of good government, but to coerce an equi- 
 table and just administration of its powers. Separation from 
 Great Britain was demanded by three thousand miles of 
 ocean, which divided that government from the American 
 Colonies ; and the colonists, opprsssed as they were by that 
 nation, had a right to demand and coerce separation — and 
 hence the Revolution of 1776. 
 
 Not so with the States of the Union : we are geographi- 
 cally one people, and separation is impracticable for good. 
 
28 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 A faithful administration of the government is all that is 
 needed — not separation. 
 
 And if war must ensue in cousequence of the usurpations 
 and violence of men in power, it should be waged on the part 
 of the oppressed solely for the purpose of maintaining and 
 enforcing obedience to the Constitution, and the laws in pur- 
 suance thereof. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 Hon. Alexander H. Stephens, 
 
 Libert?/ Rail, Crawfordville, Ga. 
 P. S. — Some further reflections respectfully submitted. 
 
 THE INIQUITY OF SECESSION. 
 
 Secession can never take place in this country under our 
 form of government, with the consent of all the people. A 
 minority will ever be found opposed to separation, and fre- 
 quently (as was the case when we seceded) a majority will 
 stand out opposed to the movement. But the step once taken, 
 by seizing a fort, or committing some overt act, there is no 
 safety for the leaders except in making the movement a suc- 
 cess. Thus situated, it follows as a matter of necessity, to 
 them, to coerce the opposing people of their State into their 
 support, and then follow measures in quick succession for 
 dragooning men into the service. (I mean into war, for 
 secession can never be peaceful.) Conscription soon becomes 
 a necessity — vigilance committees, conscript hunters, en- 
 rolling officers, press gangs, balls and chains, blood hounds, 
 death penalities for desertion, seizures, impressments, confis- 
 cations, thefts, murders, and robberries follow in the train ; 
 and finally subjugation to superior numbers, the people im- 
 poverished, and desolation and mourning wide spread through- 
 out the land. Such has been the experience of eleven States, 
 and nothing; but criminal madness could again involve us in 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 experiments so suicidal. Your words of -warning to our people 
 on the 14th Nov., 1860, were unheeded. The leaders of 
 secession were warned that if they inaugurated secession on 
 the ground of Mr. Lincoln's election, they would place them- 
 selves in the wrong; but, rashly unheeding your advice, they 
 precipitated the people into the horrors and devastations of 
 an unjust war — verifying an eternal truth, that wrong can 
 only be maintained by wrong, that evil begets evil, and strife 
 begets strife, until through the instrumentality of wrong a 
 whole people^re impoverished and ruined. 
 
 J. A. S. 
 
 Liberty Hall, 
 Crawfordville, Ga., 3rd June, 1868. 
 
 My Dear Sir : — Yours of the 1st instant, was received 
 yesterday. I have read it with that interest, which I have 
 told you before, I read all you write upon public matters. 
 There is, in what you say on such questions, a tone of candor, 
 frankness and patriotism which always commend your views 
 and opinions to my most careful and serious consideration. 
 
 To the sentimental portions of the communication now 
 before me — to the deep devotion and love of country, and 
 ardent attachment to the principles of good government and 
 constitutional liberty manifested in them throughout, you 
 have the warmest response from my heart. Yea, more ; I 
 will go farther and say, no more earnest devotee of our 
 glorious Union under the Constitution of the United States, 
 than I am, ever breathed the breath of life. 
 
 It is indeed in my opinion, as it was in Mr. Jefferson's, 
 " the world's last hope." But what is that Union ? Is it a 
 Union or a consolidation of the whole American people in 
 one body politic, or is it a Union of separate and distinct 
 Bodies politic ? Is it not in truth and in fact, a Federal 
 Union of States ? This is the great question discussed in the 
 
30 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 first Volume of the Constitutional View of the late War. It 
 is the object of history to give a truthful narrative of facts. 
 Just or proper conclusions are but logical sequences of undis- 
 puted and indisputable facts, with the legitimate logical and 
 philosophical conclusions which necessarily follow from them 
 upon the same unerring principles of reason which lead to the 
 establishment of all truth. 
 
 If the facts of our history be as they are set forth in the 
 work referred to, (aifd you will pardon me for saying that I 
 think it would be as difficult to disprove anv^ single one of 
 them as it would be to disprove the fact that America was dis- 
 covered by Columbus,) then the only remaining question i9 
 whether the conclusions drawn from them be logical and phi- 
 losophical, and not whether they be in accordance with either 
 our previous theories or present wishes. 
 
 Is it true as a matter of historical fact that the people oc- 
 cupying the geographical Territories known as the United 
 States of America, were never at any period, either before, 
 during or since the war of the Revolution of 1776, "one 
 people," in a strict national sense ? This, I think, is clearly 
 and fully demonstrated in the work referred to. Before their 
 separation from the British Crown, the people of the Colonies, 
 now known as States, were as distinct from each other in 
 their political organizations as the people of Jamaica and 
 Australia, or Canada now are; and they were no more "one 
 people," in any political sense, than the people of these last 
 mentioned portions of the present British dominions now are: 
 they were territorially nearer together, but just as separate 
 and distinct in all their national governmental polity. 
 
 Moreover, it was the leading object with them in resorting 
 to independence not to become "one people," but to maintain 
 the right of each Colony or State for itself, to govern itself 
 absolutely as it pleased ; the Sovereign right of each to thus 
 govern itself as it pleased, was the common bond that united 
 them all in joint action for their Separate Independence. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 31 
 
 Singly, they were not able to cope successfully with England 
 in the assertion and maintenance of this right. But by 
 Confederation, as the small Grecian Republics did against 
 the Medes and Persians, they were and did. The Dec- 
 laration of Independence was not by representatives of 
 the people of the Colonies in mass as " one people." 
 But it was by States in Congress assembled. It was voted 
 upon by States as separate and distinct bodies politic, 
 and proclaimed as the unanimous declaration of Thirteen 
 States, which, by articles of confederation then before 
 them, assumed the name and style of the United States of 
 America. This was the state of things, and such were the 
 political relations existing between the people of the different 
 Colonies or States of this country on the 4th day of <July, 
 1776. They were certainly not one body politic then. Each 
 Colony or State had its own internal government to itself, 
 clothed with absolute sovereignty over the life and property 
 of every person within its jurisdiction. Did they by the 
 Declaration of Independence become ' ; one people," or na- 
 tion ? Most assuredly not, as the Articles of the first con- 
 federation fully demonstrated and the treaty of peace firmly 
 establishes. Did they then afterwards become " one people" 
 — one body politic by the adoption of the new Federal Con- 
 stitution in 1787 ? The bare statement of the Act refutes 
 such an idea. A Federal Constitution means an organic law 
 for distinct and separate peoples or States, just as the pream- 
 ble of this Constitution declares it to be ordained and estab- 
 lished for States — "for the United States of America." 
 
 Now these great leading and controlling facts of our his- 
 tory > are as indisputable as that Washington commanded our 
 armies. The legitimate inference and logical conclusions 
 from these and other great facts of our history as to where, 
 under our system, so emanating, and so constituted that ulti- 
 mate, absolute sovereignty which can rightfully make and 
 unmake Constitutions still resides, are matters which prop- 
 
32 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 erly fall within the domain of reason — the facts can never be 
 upset. They are as firm as the everlasting hills and moun- 
 tains which mark our geographical conformation. 
 
 The conclusion I draw from them is set forth in the collo- 
 quies. To me it seemed and seems irresistible, as much so 
 as any truth in mathematics. It was on this point, the logi- 
 cal sequence from the facts, I expressed a wish to hear from 
 you. The object, of course, was not controversy — far from 
 it ; but only in a private way to interchange views with one 
 toward whom I have ever entertained so much esteem and 
 respect, however widely we differed sometimes as to policy. 
 As to our earnest desire for good government, I believe there 
 is not and never has been any difference between us. It is 
 only as to the surest means of attaining it Ave have differed. 
 And, though this letter is longer than I intended it to be, 
 you must bear with me in saying, further, that in my judg- 
 ment good government never could be attained by the con- 
 solidation of the people of the United States in one grand 
 Republic, as you seem to think they now are. No surer or 
 speedier road to despotism could be taken than such a con- 
 centration of sovereignty. 
 
 The only hope of Constitutional liberty over so large a 
 country as ours is not in one Republic, but in a Union of 
 Several Republics. In other words, in just such a Federal 
 or Confederate Republic as our fathers, in their profound 
 wisdom, devised at Philadelphia, in 1787. I did and do 
 think it the best system of government, or rather of govern- 
 ments that the world ever saw. It is, however, be it ever 
 remembered, founded upon the separate sovereignty of the 
 several States. This, my dear sir, is no delusion. It is an 
 irrefutable truth. It is, moreover, an essential element and 
 power in the harmonious working of the system. It is a 
 power that may be misused or abused, or unwisely exercised, 
 as it was, in my judgment, in the case of secession. Yet the 
 great mischief and ruinous results of that unwise and impol- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 33 
 
 itic act are not to be attributed so much to the act itself as 
 to the denial of the right to perform the act. 
 
 Madness seems to have ruled the hour on both sides. 
 While I did not think the bare election of Mr. Lincoln 
 justified secession, yet I did believe and do believe that the 
 breach of faith on the part of several of the Northern 
 States, in the matter of the rendition of fugitives from service, 
 did. But an act that is perfectly right in morals and law is 
 not therefore either -wise, politic or expedient. This was my 
 view of secession in 1800. But if, at the time, this great 
 fundamental principle of our system had not been denied, 
 we should have had no war, and the Union would have been 
 restored upon its original principles, sooner or later — most 
 probably before this time — and we should have escaped the 
 rule of that fanatical spirit which, under the pretext of 
 saving the Union, aims at nothing but the overthrow of the 
 Constitution. 
 
 That, indeed, was their object at the beginning ; for the 
 Constitution they ever held to be nothing better than a 
 "covenant with hell and an agreement with death." As 
 much as I disagreed with those who advocated secession as a ' 
 policy, yet I doubted not that many of them, even a majority 
 of them, really and earnestly believed it was the only hope- 
 ful way of escaping the terrible evils now upon us. 
 
 But enough. Excuse this long scrawl. I had no idea of 
 writing at any length When I commenced. I only intended 
 to say I had read what you had written, with that interest 
 I always feel in what you say on public questions ; but if 
 the great facts of our history be as I have set them forth, 
 (and about which I think there can be no doubt), then the 
 people of the United States do not constitute one people or 
 nation, in the usual sense of that word; but through, the 
 State organizations, as States, they are united in one 
 great Federal Republic. Hence, while I cordially respond 
 to the truly patriotic tone of your sentiments, yet I find very 
 
34 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 little in what you said which has any bearing upon the 
 deductions of my argument, based upon the premises on 
 which it rests. Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 J. A. Stewart, Rome, Get. 
 
 Rome, Ga., June 6th, 1868. 
 
 Dear Sir : — Your esteemed favor of 3d instant has been 
 received, and I have read its contents with more than usual 
 interest ; and I can join you in saying that a controversy 
 between us, in reference to State sovereignty and topics 
 connected therewith, should not be our object. A contro- 
 versy was no part of my purpose when I consented to write 
 you an opinion of your late work, (the " Constitutional View 
 of the War between the States.") 
 
 I found, however, that in giving an opinion in conflict 
 with your views, which were at variance with my convictions, 
 would lead at once to controversy, and this you will see, 
 from my rather lengthy communication, I endsavored to 
 avoid, by refraining from a close critical view of the views 
 in question. It is no part of my purpose now. I desire, 
 however, to be more explicit in a few brief remarks, which 
 I think is due myself and to you, in reference to the topics 
 under consideration. 
 
 In the first place, I will remark that demonstrable truth 
 never gives rise to controversy. It is only points not sus- 
 ceptible of positive proof that engage the controversial 
 powers of intellect. The very fact of matter being in con- 
 troversy is evidence of a want of power to demonstrate. 
 
 As to the points at issue between us, I find a great deal 
 said on both sides, by men of undoubted ability and patriot- 
 ism ; and I have now before me Webster's great speech in 
 reply to Hayne (which appears to me to be unanswerable) 
 •in support of the views I entertain. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 35 
 
 Prior to the achievement of American independence, the 
 American colonies were under the control of the Government 
 of England. They were held as dependent and subordinate 
 provinces, having no existence as independent political bodies. 
 Their government was a monarchy, and they were held as 
 subjects, until, through the instrumentality of Thomas Payne, 
 they were enlightened as to the fundamental principles of 
 representative governments, and the necessity for a separa- 
 tion from England, and, indeed, to set up for themselves. 
 The experiment was tried, and independence for the whole 
 people was the result ; leaving them free, either to adopt a 
 monarchy after the model of England, or some other form 
 of government more in harmony with the spirit which then 
 prevailed of liberty, justice and equality. Some wanted a 
 monarchy, and urged General Washington to accept a crown, 
 which was evidence that the object was to set up a govern- 
 ment for them as " one people." A government was needed 
 for the people (a national government) and the form was the 
 only thing to be decided. 
 
 A representative government was finally agreed upon. 
 The Government of the United States — embodying the fun- 
 damental principle that majorities must rule ; confining the 
 powers to the establishment of justice, and insuring domestic 
 tranquillity, as well as the protection of our national inter- 
 ests at home and abroad ; reserving to the States all powers 
 not delegated to the National Government, to be used in the 
 maintenance of peace, justice and security for the people 
 within their limits ; requiring of each State, however, to so 
 adapt or remodel their Constitutions and laws as to conform 
 to the Constitution of the United States. This is the Gov- 
 ernment of the people of the United States, as I understand 
 it; and any usurpation on the part either of a State or of 
 the United States, in violation of the agreement establishing 
 the Government, is wrong, and if intolerable should be 
 resisted. 
 
86 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 Peaceable secession is a fallacy, as our sad experience has 
 demonstrated. Then, again, the majority rule established 
 the Government. 
 
 The people of a majority of the States ordained and 
 established the government, and provided means by which it 
 could be peacefully altered, reformed or abolished ; and 
 hence any other means of change, not provided for in the 
 Constitution, would be revolutionary and unjustifiable. 
 
 A Constitutional majority of the people could rightfully, 
 in conformity with provisions for amendments, if found 
 necessary, change the entire Constitution ; leaving the people 
 of each State in full possession of all the delegated powers, 
 breaking up the Union and establishing separate and distinct 
 nationalities. But this could only be done legally by major- 
 ities recognized in the Constitution — not by a single State, 
 or a dozen States, but by two-thirds to propose and three 
 fourths to ratify. Any thing outside of this is "higher law," 
 unknown to the Constitution. 
 
 One word more in conclusion. Please change one term in 
 the title of your book, and consider the effect. Substitute 
 Compact for " Constitutional." Say, " Compact View of 
 the War," &c. If the Constitution is really only a compact, 
 there would be no impropriety in the change of words. 
 
 But I am extending my remarks beyond what I intended, 
 which you will please excuse. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 
 To Hon. A. H. Stephens, Crawfordville, Ga. 
 
conservative views. 37 
 
 Liberty Hall, 
 Craavfordville, Ga., 10th June, 1868. 
 
 My Dear Sir : — Yours of the 6th instant has just 
 reached me. I am very much pleased with its tone and 
 temper. You will excuse me in saying a few words in the 
 same spirit in reply. 
 
 Are you correct in your position that demonstrable truth 
 never gives rise to controversy ? Is any thing more clearly 
 demonstrable than that the earth turns on its axis ? Was 
 there not great controversy about this truth ? Was not 
 Galileo threatened with torture for maintaining it ? Truths 
 are logical deductions from facts. Between intelligent, ra- 
 tional minds there can be no controversy or disagreement 
 as to the " quod erat demonstrandum," etc., (the matter to 
 be demonstrated), where the facts are agreed upon. All the 
 controversy or disagreement that has arisen or existed be- 
 tween men of undoubted ability and patriotism in our coun- 
 try, upon the questions discussed in the work alluded to, has 
 its origin in a disagreement between them as to matters of 
 fact. If the facts of our history be as I have set them 
 forth, then the conclusions, or truths which they establish, 
 are demonstrable. They are as demonstrable as any truth 
 in mathematics. All depends upon the correctness of facts. 
 I agree with you entirely, when you say that " it is only 
 points not susceptible of positive proof that engage the con- 
 troversial powers of intellect;" or, rather, I would say that 
 it is only such points as are not susceptible of positive proof 
 that ought to engage controversial powers of intellect long. 
 For all such as are susceptible of proof ought, in the forum 
 of reason, to be settled by the proof. Some controversy, in 
 such cases, may arise as to the character of the proof; but if this 
 is undisputed, or indisputable, then the truth — the legitimate 
 logical deduction from the facts — becomes the demonstration. 
 Hence it is hardly correct to say, as you do, that " the very 
 fact of a matter being in controversy is evidence of a want 
 
38 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 of power to demonstrate ;" for very often, in settling premises 
 —or arriving at facts capable of proof, on which facts, when 
 established, the argument is to be erected, in demonstration 
 of the great proposed truth — controversy, or discussion pro 
 and con, may arise. Assumed premises are often not granted. 
 These are frequently disputed ; but, when established by 
 evidence or proofs that can not be controverted in the forum 
 of reason, they then become facts — incontrovertible facts — 
 upon which the argument may proceed, to the complete 
 demonstration of the ulterior truth. 
 
 This ulterior truth, which I think is completely demon- 
 strated in the "Constitutional View," is that the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States was formed, agreed to, assented to, 
 and ratified by States, as separate, distinct political sovereign 
 powers — that it was made by States and for States ; that is, 
 it was made by States, and for the government of States, 
 in all their foreign and inter-State affairs, and not for the 
 government of any people whatever, apart from the several 
 States' authority, in any sense whatever. In other words, 
 that it is a purely Federal Government, founded upon com- 
 pact between independent sovereign States. This, I repeat, 
 is the ulterior truth, which I think is demonstrated in the 
 book. Whether the demonstration be conclusive or not, 
 depends upon the proofs on which rest the preliminary facts. 
 If it be established as an incontrovertible fact, as a matter 
 of history, that the Declaration of Independence was but 
 the joint act of several distinct colonies, for the independ- 
 ence of each colony by itself, and not for the independence 
 of all the American colonies, as one people or nation ; if, 
 further, it be a fact that these colonies did afterwards become 
 separate and independent sovereign States, and did so 
 acknowledge themselves to be in their first Articles of Con- 
 federation ; and if, in a word, all the facts connected with 
 the formation of the present Constitution be as set forth in 
 the book — then the conclusion is nothing short of a demon- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 39 
 
 stration that the Constitution itself is a compact between 
 sovereign States, with all the incidents and consequences 
 resulting therefrom. 
 
 You suggest to me to change the word " Constitutional," 
 in the title of the book, to the word " Compact," etc. 
 
 This would be improper, because it would not give the 
 specific as well as the generic character of the work. Every 
 Constitution of government, formed by the consent of a free 
 people — either in mass (as those of one society or body pol- 
 itic, like our State Constitutions were formed), or by the 
 assent of organized political bodies (as the Constitution of 
 the United States was) — is a compact, but every compact is 
 not a constitution. Two or more nations may make a treaty 
 simply : this would be a compact, but not a constitution. 
 Constitution, when used in reference to bodies of men, im- 
 plies or means the organic law which establishes the channels 
 through which political powers are to be exercised, as well as 
 the nature and extent of the powers to be exercised by the 
 agents it provides for the jxecution of them. It is, there- 
 fore, properly applied to siWn organic law, when made for a 
 single society or State, or for an aggregation of distinct 
 societies or States, as integral members of a government. 
 When so made by the people of a single society or State, it 
 is a social compact. When so made by an aggregation of 
 societies or States (each society or State acting as a separate 
 body politic), it is a Federal compact. Our State Constitu- 
 tions are all social compacts. The Constitution of the United 
 States is a Federal compact : it is a compact between States. 
 
 It is a compact, however, by which each State, as a State, 
 agrees that a certain portion of her sovereign powers (but 
 only those which relate to foreign and inter-State mat- 
 ters) may be exercised by a designated class of agents, who 
 are the common agents of all the States. This makes it a 
 government, and gives it a specific character, distinguishing 
 it from other kinds of compacts. It is, moreover, a govern- 
 
40 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 ment proper, too : but no more a government proper, 
 however, than the Articles of Confederation were. It has 
 more powers conferred, and more agents, and different ma- 
 chinery for its operations; but its nature is the same. The 
 Articles of Confederation were the first Constitution for the 
 United States. That was a compact — "a league," said 
 Judge Marshall ; but it was, nevertheless, a Constitution for 
 the States, conferring the exercise of important, though not 
 absolute, but delegated, governmental powers. The present 
 Constitution is also a compact between the same sovereign 
 powers, though it confers, T>y like delegation, several addi- 
 tional governmental powers. Therefore, as it is a compact, 
 conferring governmental powers of some sort, it is a Consti- 
 tution. It is properly styled a Constitutional compact ; and 
 it is also, as its preamble asserts, a Constitution for States, 
 and not for any people whatever in a municipal or social 
 point of view, in any sense of the word whatever. Hence 
 " Constitutional View " is right and most appropriate. 
 
 Now all these things, I insist, dkc demonstrated by me, if 
 the facts upon which the argument i3 built are true. All de- 
 pends upon the truth of these great leading facts of our his- 
 tory. If the proofs upon which they rest cannot be success- 
 fully assailed, then, for the future, all controversy on these 
 questions heretofore at issue may cease ; all bare theories 
 or opinions must be abandoned. The world — the intellectual 
 world — must acknowledge the truth, that the Constitution of 
 the United States is a compact between sovereign States, 
 and that powers delegated by the sovereign States may be 
 resumed by them; or, at least such was the condition and 
 the rights of the parties under their organic law, at the be- 
 ginning of the late unfortunate and ever to be lamented war 
 between the States. And hence, I repeat that " a Constitu- 
 tional View (one that looks into this organic law) of the late 
 War between the States," is, I think, an exceedingly appro- 
 priate title. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 41 
 
 One word in reference to Mr. Webster's speech in reply 
 to Mr. Hayne. His whole argument was based upon the 
 assumption that the Constitution was made by the whole 
 people of the United States as one body politic; he assumed 
 it to be a social compact and not a Federal compact. The 
 overwhelming proofs establishing the great facts of our his- 
 tory, which I have brought to light, show that this assumption 
 was groundless — utterly untenable — and that his reasoning 
 from erroneous premises, however logical and grand these 
 premises, led him to erroneous conclusions. The same applies 
 to his reply to Mr. Calhoun ; but later in life, as I show, he 
 himself admitted that the Union was one — not of the whole 
 people as "one people" or nation — but that it was a "Union 
 of States." 
 
 Do pardon this long letter. My whole soul is in the 
 theme, and when I begin to write I hardly know when to 
 quit. 
 
 With sentiments of the highest esteem and kindest re- 
 gards, I remain as ever, 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Stewart, Rome, G-a. 
 
 p. g. — Do pardon me for submitting to your consideration 
 a few more stubborn facts, which seem to me to be utterly 
 irreconcilable with the theory, or idea that the Government 
 of the United States is the Government of the people of one 
 single Republic; and "that it is founded upon the funda- 
 mental principle that majorities must rule" &c, which you 
 seem to entertain, and which Mr. Webster did so ably en- 
 deavor to establish. 
 
 Now, it is true, that our State governments were in the 
 main — or most of them — founded upon this principle, though 
 not so with all of them at first ; but it is not true of the 
 General or Federal Government at all, so far as the majority 
 
42 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 principle relates to the masses of the*pcople. The majority 
 principle in that is recognized mainly as to States ; it is, 
 therefore, a government of States, as our State Governments 
 are governments of the people. The Federal Government 
 can virtually do nothing without the concurrence of a major- 
 ity — not of the people of the United States — but a majority 
 of the States, without respect to the number either of their 
 people or the number of their enfranchised citizens. The 
 enfranchisement, or disfranchisement of any portion of the 
 citizens or people of a State, depends entirely upon the 
 States themselves. This power attached to their sovereignty 
 before the compact of the Constitution was made by them. 
 They did not delegate it, but expressly reserved it under the 
 compact. 
 
 But the great fact I wish to call your special attention to, 
 is, that no law or measure can be passed by the /States, in 
 Congress assembled, under the Constitution, without a major- 
 ity of the States voting upon it. In tins particular, there is 
 no essential change between the present system and that of 
 the first Confederation. Under the present system no law 
 can be passed, and no man can be appointed to any office of 
 high dignity or trust, without a majority of the States voting 
 upon it. No change in the articles, or terms of this union 
 between the States, can be made without the assent of three- 
 fourths of the States ; and no change in these articles can 
 ever be made which shall render it out of the power of a bare 
 majority of the States, as States, without regard to their 
 population, to defeat any measure whatever of the Federal 
 Government ! Such is the Constitution of the United States 
 of America ! And under it, nothing is clearer than that a 
 majority of the States, with less than a third of the entire 
 population, can defeat any measure which more than two- 
 thirds of the population of the whole country might earnestly 
 desire ! Under the system to-day, the six New England 
 States, with a population, at the last census, of a little over 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 43 
 
 three millions, have as much power as six of the larger 
 States, with a population of over thirteen millions ! Could 
 a greater monstrosity of government for "one people" be 
 imagined than this ?. But how beautiful the system is as a 
 Federal system — as a system for States! — each possessed 
 with sovereign power to govern its own people as it pleases, 
 and the Federal Government having no power to interfere 
 with the citizens of the several States, touching either their 
 properties or liberties, except in such matters as relate to for- 
 eign nations, and matters exterior to the respective States — 
 those that concern the harmony, tranquillity, peace, and gen- 
 eral welfare of all the States, as States. 
 
 Such, my dear sir, is our Government. But I will not 
 ask your opinion on this view ; I submit it simply for your 
 own calm reflection and meditation. As I have often told 
 you, we differ not in our objects or aims ; we both equally 
 want good government. We may differ as to the best means 
 of attaining it ; we cannot differ long as to facts susceptible 
 of proof. In my opinion, the Government of the United 
 States, constituted as I understand it to have been, was the 
 best government the world ever saw, for the objects aimed 
 at in the formation of a Federal Republic. But under the 
 doctrine of its being one consolidated nation, it seems to me 
 to be quite demonstrable, that there is and can be no check 
 against its running immediately into complete Centralism 
 and Despotism ! But enough. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Stewart, Rome, Ga. 
 
44 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 Rome, Ga., July 2d, 1868. 
 
 Dear Sir: — Your esteemed favor of the 10th inst. carne 
 duly to hand; but before I had the pleasure of perusing it I 
 was taken suddenly ill, and was for some time confined to 
 my bed. On recovering, a press of business matters required 
 much of my attention, leaving but little time to devote to 
 the consideration of the more explicit statement of your 
 views on State Sovereignty, submitted for my further reflec- 
 tion and meditation. 
 
 It is not my purpose, in this communication, to elaborate 
 an opinion on the views submitted. I will only offer a few 
 desultory remarks to show why I refused to go with my 
 State when she attempted, to resume the powers which she 
 had solemnly delegated to the United States through the 
 action of her people. 
 
 The government of the United States, as I understand it, 
 is of the nature of an indissoluble partnership. A recog- 
 nized majority of all the people of each State agreed to 
 "ordain and establish" a Constitution as the fundamental 
 " law of the land," " anything in the Constitution or laws of 
 any State to the contrary notwithstanding:" the "several 
 State legislatures, and all the executive and judicial officers, 
 both of the States and of the United States," to be bound 
 by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution which they 
 ordained and established. 
 
 The Constitution of the United States was the result of 
 four months' deliberation and discussion, by men chosen to 
 represent the several States, then thirteen — twelve only 
 represented. The main question they had to decide was 
 how much power to delegate to the United States, and how 
 much to reserve to the States, or to the people. A portion 
 of the people, through their representatives, manifested a 
 preference for a strong national government, in order to hold 
 in check the disorganizing tendency of State sovereignty ; 
 whilst another portion apprehended as seriously the danger 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 45 
 
 of despotic power from a strong government for the nation. 
 The question as to the delegated powers and those re- 
 served to the States respectively, or to the people, was 
 settled by ordaining and establishing a National Congress, 
 a National Judiciary, a National Executive, an army and a 
 navy; also all power necessary and proper to carry into 
 effect the establishment of justice and domestic tranquillity; 
 and, also, to provide for the common defense, promote the 
 general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to our- 
 selves and our posterity. 
 
 The powers for these purposes are numerous and ample. 
 It was not, however, delegated to the United States to enact 
 the civil polity or laws of the several States. These were 
 among the powers "retained by the people," or "reserved 
 to the States respectively." And it is clear, that so long 
 as the States administer justice, and so long as the domestic 
 tranquillity within their borders was not materially disturbed, 
 the government of the United States had no rightful power, 
 in the slightest degree, to interfere. The tranquillity of the 
 people of all the States, as States, and as citizens of the 
 United States, was, however, of vital importance to the gen- 
 eral welfare; and hence the power to make all laws which 
 shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution 
 the delegated powers in the maintenance of domestic tran- 
 quillity and the promotion of the general welfare. All pow- 
 ers not prohibited by the Constitution to the States, are 
 "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." 
 
 The power to secede from, and break up, the Union, and 
 thereby disturb the domestic tranquillity of the people, was 
 not reserved to the States. 
 
 The power of a State to enter into an alliance with another 
 State to break up the Union and involve the people in an- 
 archy and war, was not reserved. 
 
 The power to each State, at its own will and pleasure, to 
 withdraw from the Union and resume the delegated powers, 
 
46 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 was not reserved. And had it been reserved, by express and 
 definite terms, it would have been impracticable. 
 
 One State against twelve, or one against thirty! Think 
 of it! See how preposterous and absurd! Sovereignty ab- 
 solute means paramount or supreme power against all oppos- 
 ing powers. No one State posseses this power. Decisive 
 majorities, whether right or wrong, will necessarily rule. 
 One State can no more defy thirty States, than can one man 
 defy thirty men. 
 
 Thus it is clear, that absolute paramount State sovereignty 
 has no existence in fact ; and the whole history of our 
 country goes to show that it never did exist. It did not 
 exist when the people of the several States or colonies were 
 subject to Great Britain. It did not exist during the revo- 
 lutionary war for independence. It did not exist after 
 independence was achieved ; and the very feebleness of the 
 States, singly, created the necessity for a union of the 
 States, or the people, into one great National Government. 
 United, they were able to stand. Divided, they were too 
 feeble, singly, to protect themselves ; too feeble to insure 
 domestic tranquillity, or oppose invasion from without ; too 
 feeble, after seventy years of unexampled prosperity, when 
 States had become rich, boastful and arrogant, and when 
 not one, but eleven States combined, attempted to overthrow 
 the government of the United States. They failed, for 
 want of sufficient sovereign power ; and this will inva- 
 riably happen, in all similar experiments, until the peo- 
 ple, blinded by the fallacy of State Sovereignty, or some 
 other impracticable theory or dogma, become weaned off 
 from, and lose sight of, the good old government. It will 
 then fall to pieces itself, leaving the States, or the people, 
 to deplore their inestimable loss. In the foregoing remarks, 
 I believe I am speaking the truth from the words of the 
 Constitution itself. * 
 
 I believe I am speaking the truth when I say the achieve- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 47 
 
 ment of independence was Continental, and not Provincial ; 
 that I am speaking the truth -when I say, under our form of 
 government, State and National, the majority rule was recog- 
 nized as a fundamental principle, requiring in some cases 
 two-thirds, and three-fourths, to enact, establish or ratify ; 
 leaving a peaceful or restraining power in the hands of the 
 minority — not to make laws, but to hold in check for further 
 consideration. 
 
 I think I speak the truth, too, and that you will bear me 
 out in it, when I say the real conflict through which we have 
 passed " arose from no inherent defects of our system of 
 government," nor from any oppressive laws ; " that the 
 difficulties that then 'environed us did not arise from any 
 weakness of the craft on which we were borne — the ship 
 was strong enough — the danger was not there. The trouble 
 was with the crew — with the men to whom her safe guidance 
 was confided — with our public men everywhere ; in Congress 
 as well as in our State legislatures and party conventions. 
 We had too many demagogues and too few T statesmen. There 
 was not that loyalty to principle which characterized the 
 men of the past generation. Men sought office, even the 
 highest, for the honor to be derived from it, and not with 
 any view to the honor they ought, by holding it, to confer 
 upon it in the able and faithful discharge of its duties. 
 These were the real troubles. They augured a fearful degen- 
 eracy of the times and of the people. They sprung from 
 those who controlled, and who sought to control the govern- 
 ment." 
 
 This is, in brief, a true history of at least some of the 
 originating causes of our troubles, well understood in 1860. 
 We had too many demagogues and too few statesmen. It 
 was a scramble for office that then involved us in trouble ; 
 and it is a scramble for office now that is intensifying and 
 complicating our troubles. I refused then to go with rash 
 men and demagogues to break up the Union and jeopardize 
 
48 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 the reserved rights of the States; and I refuse now to go 
 with higher-law men and demagogues, who are trying to 
 perpetuate the evils brought on us by secession. 
 
 I hold that it was not our duty, as citizens of the United 
 States, to go willingly with our State, or with our leading 
 men, in their attempt to get out of the Union; and that our 
 refusal to do so was not incivism. 
 
 "We were true to our system of government, State and 
 National ; and were opposed to any revolutionary movement 
 to break it up. We submitted to a government de facto, but 
 never sanctioned its authority as de jure. 
 
 But enough of this extempore epistle. I am in too sad 
 and despondent a mood to write wisely — or to write at all. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens. 
 
 Liberty Hall, 
 Crawfordville, Ga., 10th August, 1868. 
 Mr. J. A. Stewart, Rome, Ga. : 
 
 My Dear Sir : — Your letter of the 2nd ult. came to the 
 office here, as you know, while I was in Atlanta defending 
 the Columbus prisoners before the late military commission 
 at that place. I informed you, when we met there during 
 that trial, that your letter had been received ; that it had 
 been forwarded to me there ; and that I would reply to it 
 so soon as I should have sufficient leisure and a suitable op- 
 portunity. This promise I now fulfill ; and in doing it, I 
 can but repeat in writing substantially what I said to you 
 verbally upon the subject. 
 
 Y^our motives, in not going with your State in her act of 
 secession, I always respected. In reference to this measure 
 we stood together on one point — that was the impolicy of it. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 49 
 
 On two other points, however, we differed widely. These 
 were, first, its rightfulness as a sovereign remedy against 
 Federal wrongs ; and, secondly, the results of its success, 
 when resorted to, upon our institutions generally. I believed 
 in the right — you did not ! 
 
 I believed, also, when it was resorted to (however strongly 
 I was opposed to it as a politic or expedient remedy for then 
 existing wrongs), that the only sure hope for the preserva- 
 tion of Constitutional liberty in this country, North as well 
 South, was in the success of the measure ; that is, in the 
 successful maintenance and establishment of the principle 
 of the sovereignty of the separate States. In this view you 
 differed from me "toto eoelo." Your only sure hope for the 
 same end was the failure of the cause, and the re-establish- 
 ment of what you considered the legitimate national author- 
 ity. The reasons and convictions by which you were governed 
 I then fully understood. From your conversations with me 
 before secession, and your letters to me after that event, I 
 knew perfectly well what they were. Your motives, as I 
 have said, I respected. Your patriotism I did not doubt. 
 Your devotion to principles, as you understood them, I con- 
 sidered equal in sincerity to that of any man I ever knew. 
 Not more so, however, than my own. My own convictions 
 were as strong and thorough as human convictions or belief 
 can be, that you were wrong on both the points of our dis- 
 agreement referred to. A mutual tolerance of these differ- 
 ences preserved our friendship during the war ; and it was 
 only after repeated indications, in your letters to me pending 
 the "reconstruction measures" of Congress, of your great 
 disappointment at the results, and the then general tendency 
 of public affairs, that I took occasion to call your attention 
 to the elaborate exposition of all these antecedent questions 
 in the " Constitutional View," etc., and to ask you what you 
 thought of it. 
 
 The object was, that from that exposition you might per- 
 4 
 
50 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 haps, see, that it was a radical error to suppose that consti- 
 tutional liberty with us could be maintained by attempting to 
 perpetuate, by force, a Union of States voluntarily associated 
 by compact ! 
 
 A calm review of the whole question, I thought, might 
 bring you to a reconsideration and change of your previous 
 opinions, and sincere convictions, as I knew them to be, as 
 to the nature of our system of Government, and the surest 
 means of preserving liberty under it. In this work were 
 thoroughly discussed, those points on which we had so widely 
 differed at the beginning of our public troubles. 
 
 My object, as stated before, was not controversy. It was 
 simply to impress upon your mind the great truths set forth 
 in the work alluded to, establishing the sovereignty of the 
 States ; from a denial of which came the war with all its 
 calamities — from which came all our present political ills— 
 and from which, I fear, will come much greater and more dis- 
 astrous ills of a like character hereafter. 
 
 You say you have had but little time to devote to the con- 
 sideration of the more explicit statement of my views on 
 State Sovereignty submitted in my last letter for your further 
 reflection and meditation ; and then ;you go on to offer what 
 you style "desultory remarks," to show why you refused to 
 go with your State when she attempted to resume her dele- 
 gated powers, &c. 
 
 Now, these remarks so offered, are by no means uninterest- 
 ing to me as matters of personal history, but you must allow 
 me most respectfully to say to you, that they do not touch 
 the great facts of the history of our country, to which your 
 attention was at first called, and to which it was again earn- 
 estly directed. 
 
 The reasons assigned for your not going with your State, your 
 conscientious belief as set forth, may be quite sufficient to justify 
 you in the judgment of all unprejudiced minds, as an honest, 
 aincere, conscientious man ; and not intentionally derelict in 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 5l 
 
 the discharge of any duty understood, and considered as 
 such. They certainly so justify you in my estimation, and 
 they so justified you in my estimation during the war. Just 
 as I, for like considerations, perhaps, stood justified in your 
 personal good opinion, notwithstanding the course I took in 
 the conflict when it arose. Of this personal good opinion 
 on your port, and even kind feelings towards me, I received 
 evidences and testimonials of a character, and under circum- 
 stances never to be forgotten ; and never to be thought of 
 without emotions of gratitude. 
 
 But all this has nothing to do with the great questions of 
 the right, or wrong of secession ; the right and the wrong of 
 the war ; which are so fully discussed in the book. It has noth- 
 ing to do with the question of State Sovereignty, on which 
 depends the right of secession ; and with it the solution of 
 the question, on which side, in the war that followed, is to 
 be placed the right of the contest ; and also, on which side 
 the present evils, so seriously felt by all of us, are chargeable 
 — on the side of secession, or on the side of those who made 
 war to prevent it. 
 
 Let me again ask you to re-read the book. Study it 
 closely. Examine its array of facts — not my statement of 
 them, but the records therein produced themselves — these 
 enduring monuments of history. When you have done so, 
 put to yourself these questions. Is it true that the Colonies, 
 before their Declaration of Independence, were separate and 
 distinct political organizations ? See Con. View, page 54. 
 
 Is it true, that in making the Declaration of their Inde- 
 pendence, they voted by Colonies, and thus unanimously 
 declared themselves to be Free and Independent (not nation) 
 but States ? See Con. View, page 68. 
 
 Is it true that before this Declaration was made, a com- 
 mittee was raised by the Congress that made it to prepare 
 Articles of Confederation between them as separate, distinct, 
 
52 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 sovereign States, to go into effect after the Declaration should 
 be made ? See Con. View, page 69. 
 
 Is it true that these Articles of Confederation were after- 
 wards reported and entered into, and in them it was declared : 
 
 " Each State retains its Sovereignty, Freedom and Inde- 
 pendence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and Right which is 
 not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United 
 States in Congress assembled"? See Con. View, page 74. 
 
 Is it true that this Congress expressly declared that the 
 allegiance of the citizens of the several States was due to the 
 State f See Con. View, page 70. 
 
 Is it true that in the Treaty of Peace, in 1783, Great 
 Britain acknowledged the Independence and Sovereignty of 
 each of the States separately, and by name ? See Con. 
 View, page 75. 
 
 Is it true that the Supreme Court of the United States, 
 in 1805, decided that "on the 4th of October, 1776, (after 
 the general Declaration of Independence on the 4th of July 
 before,) the State of New Jersey was completely a Sover- 
 eign and Independent State, and had a right to compel the 
 inhabitants of the State to become citizens thereof" ? See 
 Con. View, page 76. 
 
 Is it true that Judge Chase, from the same bench, in 1796, 
 gave forth these utterances : 
 
 "In June, 1776, the Convention of Virginia was a Free, 
 Sovereign, and Independent State, and on the fourth of July, 
 1776, following, the United States, in Congress assembled, 
 declared the thirteen United Colonies Free and Independent 
 States; and that as such they had full power to levy war, 
 conclude peace, &c. I consider this as a declaration, not 
 that the United Colonies jointly, in a collective capacity, 
 were Independent States, &c, but that each of them had a 
 right to govern itself by its own authority, and its own laivs 
 without any control from any other power on earth " ? See 
 tCon. View, page 80. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 53 
 
 Is it true that Chief Justice Marshall, from the same 
 bench, as late as 1824, declared that under the Confedera- 
 tion the States were completely Sovereign and Independ- 
 ent ? See Con. View, page 81. 
 
 If, after a thorough examination, the answer is Yes, as it 
 must be, to each of these questions — for the proofs of the 
 facts embraced in them, adduced in the volume referred to, 
 are incontestable — then allow me, without submitting any 
 more of a like character, now to ask you — barely for your 
 reflection, and with a view to elicit an answer — if these be 
 really the facts of history, does it avail anything against 
 them, for you to inform me, however honestly and sincerely, 
 that you do not believe that absolute paramount State Sov- 
 ereignty ever did exist in this country, either before or after 
 the adoption of the present Constitution ? This is about the 
 substance of what you say upon that subject. 
 
 It is not my purpose to argue the case at this time. I 
 simply ask if the facts be as set forth, were not your pre- 
 vious opinions, which are now repeated, founded in error ? 
 You say, for instance, "the Government of the United 
 States, as I understand it, is of the nature of an indisso- 
 luble partnership." 
 
 But is this a correct understanding of it, if the facts of its 
 history be as set forth in the Constitutional View ? Must 
 not these facts be assailed and demolished, or must not this 
 understanding be abandoned ? Is not one or the other of 
 these alternatives a logical necessity ? Can opinions, theo- 
 ries, assumptions, or understandings of any sort be main- 
 tained against unquestionable and indisputable facts, when 
 intellect, guided by reason is the arbiter ? 
 
 This is the view I have endeavored, and still endeavor to 
 impress upon you. The real undeniable facts of history, 
 and not our crude understanding of them, must prevail in 
 this matter. Moreover, allow me to say that I do not know 
 that I exactly comprehend what you mean by an indissolu- 
 
54 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 ble partnership. There is, and can be no such thing in law, 
 as an indissoluble partnership between persons in any of the 
 business transactions of life, much less can there be any such 
 thing between Sovereign States or Nations. 
 
 Again, what avail is it for you to tell me that the question 
 of difference between the advocates of a strong Government 
 and the advocates of a Government of delegated and limited 
 powers in the Convention that formed the present Constitu- 
 tion, was settled by that body " ordaining a National Con- 
 gress, a National Judiciary, and a National Executive," &c, 
 if the records taken from the Journal show directly the re- 
 verse of this to be the fact of the case, as those adduced in 
 the volume referred to do most explicitly show ? Is it or not 
 true that the word National was stricken out of the draft of 
 the proposed plan of Government, then before them, wher- 
 ever it occured, and the words "United States," or " Con- 
 gress" substituted in its place? See Con. View, page 119, 
 et seq. 
 
 Was not National Legislature stricken out and Congress 
 put in its stead ? Was not the meaning of the word Con- 
 gress well understood ? Did it not then and now mean an 
 assemblage of States ? 
 
 Congress, under the first Articles of Confederation, was the 
 meeting in council of the several separate sovereign States, 
 through their duty appointed and accredited representatives. 
 This well-known word, with its proper and legitimate meaning, 
 was retained in the present Constitution. There was no 
 change in this particular in the present Articles of Union 
 from those of the first Confederation. Congress means the 
 same now that it did before the Convention of 1787 met. It 
 means the assemblage of sovereign States in grand council. 
 It was known not as the National Legislature, as by some it 
 is called, but as "the Congress of the United States." Under 
 the first Articles of Union, this council of States consisted 
 of but one house. Now it consists of two. The members 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 55 
 
 of both, however, are chosen by the States, as States; and 
 every law that has been passed since the adoption of the 
 present Constitution, as before, is in the name and by the 
 authority, not of a National Legislature, but expressly by 
 the authority of "States in Congress assembled." Moreover, 
 in the new arrangement it was so provided, as I have before 
 said to you, that no law can pass, nor can any person be 
 appointed to any high office of honor or trust, if a majority 
 of the States vote against it. Delaware to-day, with her 
 little over one hundred thousand population, has as much 
 power to prevent the ultimate passage of a law, as New York 
 with her nearly forty times that number. Are these facts or 
 not ? If facts, what becomes of your idea of the fundamental 
 majority principle of the Government? These are the points, 
 in all legitimate inquiry on these subjects, first to be ascer- 
 tained and settled. The book referred to showed them to be 
 incontestable facts. 
 
 Then again, what avail is it for you to tell me that " the 
 power to each State at its own will and pleasure to withdraw 
 from the Union and resume the delegated powers, was not 
 reserved" under the Constitution, if it be true, as matter of 
 fact, that the sovereignty of the States was not surrendered 
 by the adoption of the Constitution? That they were sov- 
 ereign before must be received as an unquestionable fact. 
 And the bare fact that all the powers possessed by the Fed- 
 eral Government are by universal accord admitted to be del- 
 egated only, ought to be of itself sufficient to satisfy any one 
 that the Paramount Authority delegating must of necessity 
 have continued to exist. So general was this opinion in the 
 minds of those who framed the Constitution, that nothing 
 was said on that subject in the instrument, as it at first came 
 from their hands. But, to quiet the apprehensions of many 
 upon that point, it was soon after expressly stated in an 
 amendment unanimously adopted by the States, that '*the 
 powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitu- 
 
56 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 tion, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the 
 States respectively, or to the people." This settled the ques- 
 tion that sovereignty, the source of all political power, was 
 reserved or retained by the States severally, under the second 
 Articles of Union, as it had been under the first. So stated 
 Samuel Adams when this amendment was before the Massa- 
 chusetts Convention. No one in the Convention that framed 
 the Constitution questioned the sovereign right of the States 
 severally to secede from the first Articles of Union, though 
 upon their face they were declared to be perpetual. Eleven 
 States did thus, of their own will and pleasure, withdraw from 
 the first Union, by virtue of this power or right, which was 
 incident to their sovereignty, and entered into the new arti- 
 cles. The two other States left by them soon followed. The 
 same power or right to withdraw in like manner from the se- 
 cond Articles of Union necessarily remained as an incident 
 of the same sovereignty. Hence, if the facts of our history 
 be as set forth in the book referred to, it must be admitted 
 that the power to withdraw at pleasure was reserved to the 
 States. Judge Story and Mr. Webster fully admitted this. 
 See Con. View, pp. 497-8-9. All rational minds must 
 admit it. The whole question therefore turns upon the truth 
 of the facts of our history set forth in the book. These I 
 cannot repeat here, but re-invite your attention to them. 
 
 What you say about the power to disturb the domestic 
 tranquillity, or injure the general welfare, not being reserved, 
 I fully admit. The power wrongfully to disturb the domes- 
 tic tranquillity of neighboring States, is not a natural right 
 of Sovereignty. The powers reserved to the States were 
 all the natural rights of nations, as established by the laws 
 of nations ; except such as were delegated to their co-States, 
 and such as were covenanted not to be exercised by them 
 separately, while the bond of their associated union should 
 continue. In this respect there is not the slightest differ- 
 ence between the provisions of the present Constitution and 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 57 
 
 the first Articles of Confederation. It was because the right 
 to disturb the domestic tranquillity of their neighbors was 
 not reserved to the States, and did not by nature belong to 
 their Sovereignty, that the Southern States so justly com- 
 plained of the settled policy of many of their Northern 
 Confederates to disturb their domestic tranquillity, and even 
 to stir up insurrections in them. 
 
 A great deal more I could say on the same line, but I have 
 not time. What I have said, is sufficient to show you that 
 nothing in your letter, now before me, bears at all upon the 
 great questions to which I first called your attention, and 
 which underlie the whole subject. 
 
 The latter part of your letter I do endorse fully ; I re- 
 cognize in it a paraphrase only of what I said myself upon 
 some occasion. 
 
 I did consider the Constitution, as made by the Fathers, 
 as embodying the best system of Government ever devised 
 by man. While the breaches of faith on the part of some 
 of our Northern Confederated States, were sufficient to 
 justify a withdrawal from the Union, on the part of the 
 Southern States, yet I did not think a withdrawal the wisest 
 or best, or even surest policy, to obtain a redress of the 
 grievances of which they so justly complained. The state 
 of things then existing, sprung from no defect in the Con- 
 stitution ; it was the work of demagogues, both South and 
 North ; chiefly, however, at the North. I, moreover, greatly 
 doubted if we had statesmanship enough at the South to 
 guide our fortunes safely and successfully, in case this course 
 should be adopted. I had the liveliest apprehensions that 
 the end would be just what it is. These views, however, did 
 not weaken in the least, my devotion to the great principles — 
 the eternal truths — upon which our Government was estab- 
 lished, and upon which, alone, you will allow me to say, 
 in my judgment, Constitutional Liberty, on this continent, 
 can be maintained and perpetuated. Had these principles 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 been adhered to — if no war had been waged against the se- 
 ceding States, I feel quite sure we should, sooner or later — 
 perhaps before this time — as I have said before, have had a 
 restoration of the whole Union, upon the same principles of 
 voluntary agreement, that it .was at first formed upon. I 
 call your special attention to the last colloquy, in the book 
 on this subject, page 523, et seq. 
 
 But, with your views of the nature of the Government of 
 the United States, you will allow me, most respectfully, to 
 say, I do not see how you can complain of its late action, 
 even in the enfranchisement of the blacks. If a National 
 Congress was ordained with full power to pass all laws that 
 they might deem proper, for the general welfare, with a Na- 
 tional Judiciary to interpret, a National Executive, with an 
 army and navy to execute, why has not the present Con- 
 gress the perfect right to enfranchise the blacks, and place 
 them upon a perfect equality with the whites in any respect, 
 if they think the general welfare and domestic tranquillity 
 require it ? 
 
 But, my dear Sir, without saying more, let me assure you 
 in conclusion, that our fathers made no such government. 
 Further, I will add that any government in this country, 
 administered on these principles, as ours has been for the 
 last eight years, will and must end, in a short time, in Em- 
 pire and Despotism. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander IT. Stephens. 
 
 Rome, Ga., Sept. 17, 1869. 
 The reader of the preceding pages will perceive that I 
 have either wholly misunderstood the " Government as it 
 was," or else have been very unfortunate in the use of lan- 
 guage in my correspondence with Mr. Stephens in reference 
 thereto. He thinks, according to. my view, I should not 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 59 
 
 complain of the unconstitutional acts and usurpations of the 
 Government as it is now — under radical misrule; whilst I 
 think, according to my conceptions of the " Government as 
 it was," I have just and ample grounds of complaint against 
 such unconstitutional acts and usurpations. 
 
 If I have been unfortunate in the use of language, I hope 
 the following quotation from Webster's reply to Hayne, Jan. 
 26th, 1830, may be understood as embracing very clearly 
 and concisely my views as to what the Government, as ad- 
 ministered by Washington and his successors, really was : 
 
 "It is, Sir," (Mr. Webster remarks) "the people's Con- 
 stitution, the people's Government; made for the people; 
 made by the people; and answerable to the people. The 
 people of the United States have declared that this Constitu- 
 tion shall be the supreme laio. We must either admit the 
 proposition, or dispute their authority. The States are un- 
 questionably sovereign, so far as their sovereignty is not 
 affected by this supreme law. The State Legislatures, as 
 political bodies, however sovereign, are not sovereign over 
 the people. 
 
 " So far as the people have given power to the General 
 Government, so far the grant is unquestionably good, and 
 the Government holds it by authority of the people, and not 
 of the State Governments. We are all agents of the Su- 
 preme Power — the people. The General Government and 
 the State Governments derive their authority from the same 
 source. Neither can, in relation to the other, be called pri- 
 mary ; though one is definite and restricted; the other general 
 and residuary." 
 
 The powers of the National Government, or of the United 
 States, are "definite and restricted," made so by the Con- 
 stitution, and hence all acts outside of the clearly defined 
 limitations are acts of usurpation, revolutionary in their 
 character, and dangerous to the liberties of the people. So, 
 on the other hand, all attempts by the people of a State to 
 
60 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 disregard their obligations to the United States, or Nation, 
 are only usurpations, unauthorized by their " general and 
 residuary" potvers.t — unauthorized by any rights reserved to 
 them by the Constitution — and hence revolutionary in their 
 tendencies, and dangerous to our liberties. 
 
 If the United States, through unfaithful agents and rep- 
 resentatives, oppress the people beyond endurance, the higher 
 law of self-preservation justifies an appeal to force, as a 
 remedy for the evil. 
 
 On the other hand, if the people's agents, having control 
 of a State Government, arrogate to themselves absolute sov- 
 ereignty, in defiance of our National Government, then 
 the Nation has a right to coerce them to obey its Constitu- 
 tion, and the laws in pursuance thereof, as " the supreme law 
 of the land." 
 
 Thus we have, in language that cannot be misunderstood, 
 an exposition of a system of government which sanctions no 
 infractions of the " articles of perpetual union," rendered 
 " more perfect" by the Constitution. Nor does it sanction 
 any interference with the people of the States in legislating 
 for themselves, in their own way, on all matters pertaining 
 to their State Governments within the limits of their re- 
 served rights. 
 
 The Union was designed to be perpetual, and hence the 
 right of secession was denied. 
 
 The Union ought to be perpetual, and its Constitution and 
 laws obeyed. But if leading men persist in defying the 
 Union on the one hand, and the Constitution on the other, 
 then anarchy and violence will continue to ensue, until the 
 Union and good government will be no more. 
 
 Rome, Ga., Sept. 18th, 1869. 
 I have just had the pleasure of reading a letter of Mr. 
 Stephens, dated August 11th, 1868, addressed to the editors 
 of the Constitutionalist, Augusta, Ga., commenting on a late 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 61 
 
 editorial of the New York Tribune, in which I am pleased to 
 find that his doctrine of the right of secession " is not based 
 on the Constitution, but upon the authority that made that 
 compact." 
 
 He says "it is based upon principles existing before and 
 above any and all constitutions." 
 
 Now, all I have ever contended for is, that our Con- 
 stitutional form of government forbids the disintegration of 
 the Union by the withdrawal of States, but embraces ample 
 provisions for the amendment of Constitutions, State and 
 National, through which to " alter, reform, or abolish our 
 governments in any manner we may see proper," in view of 
 securing " peace, safety and happiness." 
 
 Our Constitutions, however, recognize no mode of altering, 
 reforming, or abolishing the government, except in conform- 
 ity with Constitutional provisions for amendment. 
 
 All outside of this is higher-law, and unjustifiable. Our 
 true policy, under a government so wisely framed as was 
 the United States, is to maintain it at all hazards against 
 all higher-law experiments, either of secessionists or aboli- 
 tionists ; for the reason, that all experiments, unauthorized 
 by the Constitution, are revolutionary in their character, and 
 lead to sanguinary conflicts, and, if long persisted in, to the 
 inauguration of despotism. 
 
 The Union of the States was designed to be perpetual ; 
 and hence the Constitution, which made the Union, provided 
 for enacting, altering, amending and repealing ; so that all 
 changes and revolutions, which experience might suggest as 
 essential to public good, could be accomplished, calmly, 
 slowly, surely, deliberately, and without bloodshed. 
 
 This view of the Government is in conformity with the 
 plainest dictates of reason and common sense, and should 
 not be abandoned for the ever doubtful expediency of higher- 
 law experiments. 
 
 The right to resist oppression exists at all times ; but the 
 
62 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 existence of this right gives us no authority to break up 
 and destroy an existing form of government, which is not at 
 fault, but which has fallen into the hands of bad men. On 
 the contrary, it is our duty to maintain the Government, and 
 if necessary remove from power, by force of arms, those 
 who oppress us. But even this remedy should npver be 
 resorted to, except in conformity with measures for main- 
 taining or restoring the Government and enforcing the laws. 
 
 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL FACTS ADMITTED OR ESTABLISHED. 
 
 The thirteen Colonies of Great Britain were originally 
 separate and distinct political bodies, subject only to the 
 power of the Crown of England. Afterwards, in 1776, they 
 each declared their independence of the Crown, having first 
 entered into a confederacy of perpetual union, styling it the 
 United States. The then States remained separate and 
 distinct bodies politic, subject to the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion. 
 
 In 1787, the Constitution of the United States superseded 
 the Articles of Confederation, giving to the "perpetual 
 Union" an army and a navy, and all the powers and attri- 
 butes of a nation, for national and specified purposes ; the 
 States remaining separate and distinct political organiza- 
 tions, subject to the Constitution of the United States, and 
 the laws in pursuance thereof. 
 
 The Constitutions, State and Federal, comprised a system 
 of government for the people of the United States, never 
 intended to be broken, or changed, or abolished by any act 
 outside of, or above, the Constitution ; and which can never 
 be permanently abandoned, without blotting out forever, on 
 this continent, the blessings of civil liberty. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 63 
 
 Rome, Ga., September 28th, 1869. 
 
 "There is nothing in the book (Mr. Stephens' late work) which treats 
 secession as a right derived from the Constitution. It is, on the contrary, 
 derived from that sovereign power which made the Constitution." — Ex- 
 tract from a letter of Hon. A. II. Stephens to the New York World, August 
 31, 1869. 
 
 The above is the latest and most definite expression of Mr. 
 Stephens on the right of secession. 
 
 He denies that it is a right derived from the Constitution, 
 but rests solely upon the sovereign power which made the 
 Constitution. That is, if a separate and distinct sovereign 
 State at any time agrees to part with any of its powers for 
 any specified object, it may at any time and at its own option 
 (though impolitic to do so) resume the powers parted with. 
 Now, this may work beautifully in theory, but I think our 
 experience for the last few years has fully demonstrated that 
 it will not do in practice. Superior power will control, in 
 spite of all the theories in the universe. It is always easier 
 to get into difficulties than it is to get out of them. 
 
 It is generally very pleasant and easy sailing to enter into 
 a marriage engagement, yet the sovereign power parted with 
 in "taking her for better or for worse" cannot at oar own 
 option be resumed. And why not ? The answer is, that the 
 laws of the State, backed up by power to coerce, rightfully 
 compels the continuance of marriage relations, whether agree- 
 able or not. 
 
 And so, also, in reference to volunteering into an army. 
 It is an easy-going thing for a free and sovereign citizen to 
 volunteer his services and become a soldier in an army, and 
 it would be very pleasant and agreeable to have power to 
 volunteer out of it; but every soldier who has ever tried the 
 experiment finds that he can volunteer into, but never out of, 
 an army. 
 
 Sovereign States are composed of sovereign individuals, 
 and are the creatures of the people. Yet no sovereign citi- 
 
64 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 zen, individually, can resume the powers he delegated in 
 making the State. So of the Federal Government. It is 
 composed of sovereign States, which are composed of sover- 
 eign individuals called "the people." It is the "creature" 
 of the States, and the States are the creatures of the peo- 
 ple, and all power is said to be inherent in the people. 
 
 The all-powerful people gave up some of their individual 
 rights to make State Governments, and then they used the 
 State Governments as organizations to make a National Gov- 
 ernment; and after having made and done all these things 
 they reserved no power sufficient to undo what they had done. 
 They volunteered in, but could not volunteer out. They got 
 married, but could not get unmarried. The marriage cere- 
 mony making a State was guarded by military power. It 
 was possible according to the terms at the ceremony to modify 
 or change the agreement, but not possible to peaceably with- 
 draw from it. 
 
 So of the marriage ceremony, which made the Federal 
 Government or Nation. It could undergo changes in con- 
 formity with itself; but, supported as it was, by an army and 
 a navy, it was impossible for any one State to volunteer it- 
 self out of the agreement. Right or wrong, the people of a 
 State are compelled to submit to superior power, and to the 
 very power which they themselves delegated. The Consti- 
 tution of the United States is a frame of government, with 
 all the appliances of power to make a nation ; and it will 
 necessarily perpetuate itself until overthrown by a majority 
 of the power which created it. One State cannot overthrow 
 it, nor can a dozen States. Superior power of majorities 
 will not allow it ; and the very necessity for salutary restric- 
 tions upon our liberties forbids it. 
 
 There is no need of any fine-spun theory about sover- 
 eignty: it is only an empty name, except in connection with 
 power to enforce its will. Nor is it worth while to elaborate 
 the right of revolution. It is never right to make the at- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 65 
 
 tempt to overthrow a government, without a reasonable cer- 
 tainty of success. It is never right — under any circumstan- 
 ces — to overthrow a good government, and establish a worse 
 one in its stead. 
 
 DON'T DESPAIR OF THE REPUBLIC. 
 
 DISPATCH TO CRITTENDEN AND DOUGLAS, AND THEIR REPLY. 
 
 Atlanta, Ga., Dec. 6th, 1860. 
 Hon. J. J. Crittenden and Hon. S. A. Douglas, 
 
 U. S. Senators, Washington, J). C. : 
 Mr. Toombs' letter, of the 22d inst., unsettles Conserva- 
 tives here. Is there any hope for the rights of the South 
 in the Union ? We are for the Union as our fathers made 
 it, if we can preserve the rights of the South ; if not, for 
 secession. Can the Union be preserved on this principle ? 
 
 You ara looked to in this emergency. Please answer by 
 telegraph. Signed : W. Ezzard, 
 
 R. W. Sims, 
 J. M. Norcross, 
 J. P. Hambleton, 
 T. S. Powell, 
 J. A. Hayden, 
 S. G. Howell, 
 Geo. W. Adair, 
 C. R. Hanleiter. 
 
 REPLY. 
 In reply to your inquiry, we have hopes that the rights 
 of the South, and of every State and section, may be pro- 
 tected in the Union. Don't give up the ship ! Don't des- 
 pair of the Republic. Signed : J. J. Crittenden, 
 
 S. A. Douglas. 
 
66 conservative views. 
 
 Liberty Hall, 
 Crawfordville, Ga., May 18th, 1868. 
 
 My Dear Sir : — You must excuse the delay of my reply 
 to your kind letter of the 2d instant. I was away from 
 home when it came. I write now at my earliest convenience. 
 I send all your letters to me, that I can find, up to the close 
 of the war. I cannot find those written in 1860. Those 
 since the war I suppose you do not want. These letters, 
 after you copy them, as you desire, I wish you would return 
 to me. I prize them very highly. The only difference be- 
 tween you and me, was this : I believed the only way to 
 secure Constitutional Liberty in this country, after seces- 
 sion was resorted to, was in the success of the cause. You 
 thought, or seemed to hope, at least, that if secession should 
 be abandoned, or overcome, that the old Union would be re- 
 stored, and move on as before. I did not think so, and am 
 not disappointed in the result. But you will see my views 
 more at length in my first volume of the Constitutional View 
 of the late War. Have you seen a copy of this book yet ? 
 Please let me know if the package containing this and your 
 letters reach you in safety. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Alexander H. Stephens. 
 
 J. A. Stewart, Rome, Ga. 
 
 Atlanta, Ga., March, 1861. 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens : — I know you will properly ap- 
 preciate the motives which have prompted me to prepare the 
 enclosed lengthy address. My undying attachment to the 
 old Union will never permit a cessation, on my part, of 
 hopes for reconstruction, until a fair opportunity is given to 
 the people to freely express their opinions, and cast their 
 votes untrammeled by fear, unbiased by falsehood, and un- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 67 
 
 controlled by self-constituted committees. I would be 
 pleased to hear from you, in reply, and to have your consent 
 to publish the enclosed address. 
 
 If your Government does not suppress the mob spirit that 
 prevails in our unhappy country, I fear we will, ere long, be 
 deluged in blood. A free people will not long tamely sub- 
 mit to a despotism that deprives them of the freedom of 
 speech, and threatens their hearthstones with violence, and 
 their houses with unreasonable searches and seizures. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 
 "PO&TICAL TOPICS." 
 
 Atlanta, Ga., March 16, 1861. 
 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens: — I address you with the most pro- 
 found respect. I am not insensible to the delicacy of your 
 position as Vice-President of the new Government. We are 
 too often prone to condemn hastily, as innovations or abortions, 
 that which, upon a rigid test and fair experiment, proves to 
 be of great utility. You are experimenting in matters which 
 involves the peace, safety and happiness of society. You 
 have acquiesced in breaking up our old land marks, and 
 have been for some time engaged in a new survey — planting 
 corner stones, and making out plats and charts, in view of 
 affording the people more ample protection, more peace, 
 more safety, more happiness, and more positive guarantees 
 in support of the freedom of speech and of the press. 
 
 If such is not your object, then we can attribute to your 
 movements no other laudable purpose; and here I hope you 
 will bear with me in stating, that so far as I am individually 
 concerned, I have experienced no change for the better; but, 
 on the contrary, have realized a change infinitely for the 
 worse. 
 
 I have realized the existence of a branch or auxiliary 
 of the new order of things, as tending directly to the sup- 
 
68 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 pression of civil liberty, and the insecurity of our lives and 
 property. 
 
 But then this may he only a self-constituted vigilance 
 committee, incident to revolutionary times, which your new 
 government has not had time to suppress. If such is not its 
 character, but in reality it is a branch of the new experi- 
 ment, then I beg the Lord to preserve us from the hands of 
 the chief department. In making these remarks I do not 
 wish to be understood as jesting, or aiming at anything dis- 
 respectful. 
 
 I am in sober earnest, having discovered that my undying 
 attachment to the Union, the Constitution, and laws of our 
 common country, has rendered me an object of vengeance, 
 and subjected me to the risk of violence at the hands of 
 maddened factions. 
 
 "Faction is the madness of the many, for the benefit of 
 the few." " Frenzied be the head — palsied be the hand — that 
 attempts to destroy the Union." — Gen. Eaton. 
 
 "Truths would you teach — or save a sinking land: 
 All fear, none aid you, and few understand." 
 
 "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to des- 
 olation," 
 
 If we pay a proper regard to truth, we shall find it neces- 
 sary, not only to condemn our friends upon some occasions, 
 and commend our enemies, but also to commend and con- 
 demn the same persons, as different circumstances may 
 require; for as it is not to be imagined that those who are 
 engaged in great affairs should always be pursuing false or 
 mistaken measures, so neither is it probable that their con- 
 duct can be at all times exempt from error. 
 
 Your letter of invitation to S. A. Douglas last fall, to come 
 South and ail in maintaining a national organization, in view 
 of preserving the Union through the maintenance of a Con- 
 servative Union party, was commendable. Douglas yielded 
 to your entreaties, and cheerfully took upon himself the 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 69 
 
 arduous task of complying -with your request. The result 
 was, as we anticipated, the maintenance of a strong conserv- 
 ative element, embracing the supporters of Bell and Douglas, 
 outnumbering the disunionists, or Breckinridge men, by a 
 decisive majority. Douglas has been true to the policy dic- 
 tated in said letter of invitation. You, I think, (no doubt 
 with good motives,) have abandoned it. You have given your 
 sanction to the ordinance of secession, and thereby practi- 
 cally abandoned the policy through which you influenced the 
 noble and patriotic Douglas to visit the South. Thus, to my 
 mind, whilst we find much in your former course to commend, 
 we can see nothing in your present position to command our 
 admiration. You will perceive that I am speaking very 
 frankly, and you will concede that I have a right to thus 
 address you, as you are a leading supporter of measures, the 
 nauguration of which has incidentally, if not directly, en- 
 dangered life and deprived men of civil liberty, and the en- 
 joyment of that peace, safety and happiness which, for near 
 three-quarters of a century, have been enjoyed under the old 
 Government. 
 
 Douglas — the noble hearted Douglas — has planted him- 
 self between the leaders of the maddened politic:)! factions, 
 North and South, to prevent hostile collisions and the shed- 
 ding of fraternal blood. Stephens — the eloquent Stephens 
 — has, alas ! taken position with the revolutionists of the 
 South. 
 
 Douglas is seeking to save his country from the fell hand of 
 its maddened destroyers. Stephens is Vice-President of the 
 most stupendous revolution ever recorded in the annals of 
 history. Douglas nobly battles in the cause of his country — 
 his whole country. Stephens abandons the holy cause, joins 
 the seceders of the South, and suffers the popularity of his 
 name and the powers of his eloquence to drown the patriotic 
 appeals of a Douglas and a Crittenden, to "Never give up the 
 ship ! Never despair of the Republic ! " Douglas appeals to 
 
70 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 reason and to patriotism. Stephens sanctions extensive mil- 
 itary organizations, through which to appeal to our fears. 
 
 The old government lived in the confidence of the people. 
 The new government is viewed with distrust, and can not 
 long survive, without the aid of secret vigilance committee?, 
 through which to destroy the liberties of the press and the 
 freedom of speech. 
 
 Ambitious and desporate men are committed to the sup- 
 port of the new government. A desperate cauee requires 
 desperate means ; and hence we have little in prospect but 
 violence and perfidy, usurpation and tyranny. 
 
 Do not be offended at my remarks. I may be wrong ; but 
 facts are stubborn things. Men are threatened with banish- 
 ment for expressing their devotion to the old government, 
 and refusing to acknowledge the justice and legality of the 
 new. 
 
 I hoped, when you addressed us the other night, on your 
 arrival from Montgomery, to hear you urge the impropriety 
 and danger of mobs. My hopes were not realized. You 
 gave us no hope of security from lawless violence ; and Mr. 
 Keitt, in his fiery harangue, encouraged violence, rather than 
 counseled moderation. Our old government has not been at 
 fault. Our leaders are (too many of them) corrupt. Hence 
 we have little hope for the future. Liberty is gone, I fear, 
 never to return. The old government was good enough, as 
 there were constitutional provisions for its amendment, when 
 rendered necessary by the ever-changing circumstances which 
 continually evolve. 
 
 " In the minds of some men there seems to be a restless- 
 ness which renders them dissatisfied with any uniform course 
 of things, and makes them eager in the pursuit of novelty. 
 They abound in projects, and are ever meditating some 
 fanciful change in the plan of government, which their im- 
 agination represents as useful. But men of great ambition 
 are still more dangerous : they commonly make the fairest 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 71 
 
 pretenses to principle, though they are actuated only by 
 self-interest. If the Constitution or laws of the country 
 present obstacles to the accomplishment of their wishes, they 
 employ every artifice to alter or abolish them ; and if indi- 
 viduals oppose their attempts, they are equally artful and so- 
 licitous to destroy their influence, and render them odious to 
 their fellow-citizens. Few men, even in a prosperous com- 
 munity, are fully satisfied with their condition. A great 
 part are easily induced to believe that there is something in 
 the Government, or laws, wrong, which might be rectified to 
 their advantage; they, therefore, embrace any specious pro- 
 posal to effect an alteration. 
 
 " The crafty and ambitious know how to avail themselves of 
 this disposition to change, and encourage their followers to 
 expect the amendments they propose will perfectly suit their 
 case, and produce the very blessing they wish. In this way, 
 they not only effect their immediate object, but acquire an 
 influence, which enables them afterwards, to accomplish the 
 most disastrous innovations. Such persons encourage hopes 
 that can never be realized, and excite complaints, which the 
 most wise and benevolent administration is unable to remove. 
 
 " Our forms of government are, doubtless, like all other 
 human institutions — imperfect; but they will insure the bless- 
 ings of freedom to the citizens, and preserve their tranquil- 
 lity as long as they are virtuous ; and no Constitution, that 
 has been or can be framed, will secure those blessings to a 
 depraved and vicious people." 
 
 Adopting a good Constitution palliates, but does not jus- 
 tify, the Confederated States in dissolving the old Union. 
 United in one common brotherhood, as heretofore, we com- 
 manded the respect of the whole civilized world ; divided, 
 as we now are, we richly deserve the contempt of every just 
 power on earth. 
 
 United, we are invincible ; divided, we fall a prey to in- 
 ternal dissensions, which will be fanned into fiercer flames by 
 
72 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 foreign foes. Union of all the States, for mutual preserva- 
 tion, has made us the greatest Nation on earth. 
 
 Disunion and separation of the States will blot out our 
 national existence, increase our burdens, strip us of our lib- 
 erties, and finally fasten upon our brave and noble people 
 the chains of despotism. Already has the ruthless hand of 
 violence commenced its work. A conservative press is si- 
 lenced ; the patriotic appeals of our national men are 
 drowned by the discordant notes of faction ; the old ship of 
 State is going to pieces on the rocks of destruction ; its pi- 
 lots are crazy, and reason driven from the helm. 
 
 We have looked to the wisdom of a Douglas, and the 
 thoughtful eloquence of a Stephens, to save our sinking ship. 
 Douglas yet stands firm amidst the raging storm, braving 
 every danger, and pouring oil on the troubled waters. Ste- 
 phens is afloat, on a fragment of the old vessel, giving vent 
 to his feelings of gratification, at being released from the 
 "shackles of the old government." 
 
 Douglas calls aloud : Come back ! come back ! Don't 
 
 give up the ship ! 
 
 Stephens responds : We will never come back ; other 
 fragments of the ship may come to us, but we will never re- 
 unite under the old Stars and Stripes. 
 
 It is human to err. Stephens, I think, has erred ; he has 
 lost his ballast amidst the tumult of conflicting passions and 
 discordant elements. 
 
 But he is an honest man, and will yet return. The high 
 standard of his moral integrity will follow in the lead of his 
 honest convictions. If in the wrong now, he will, when con- 
 vinced, nobly retrace his steps and enter again into the old 
 Confederacy, purified by the fiery ordeal through which he 
 has passed, bringing"! with him his deluded followers, and, 
 with friendship renewed upon the altar of patriotism, enter 
 again under the protecting shield of a common country. In 
 this the trying hour of adversity and increasing perils, I would 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 73 
 
 exhort Conservative Union men of the seceded States to be 
 calm and prudent, avoiding the use of language, even though 
 truthful and just, if calculated to irritate rather than con- 
 vince 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 J. A. Stewart. 
 
 MR. STEPHENS HAS RETURNED.— HEAR HIM. 
 
 WHAT THE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA WANT. 
 
 " My opinion, and decided opinion, is that an overwhelm- 
 ing majority of the people of Georgia are exceedingly anx- 
 ious for the restoration of the Government, and for the 
 States to take their former position in the Union ; to have 
 her Senators and Representatives admitted into Congress, 
 and to enjoy all her rights, and to discharge all her obliga- 
 tions a3 a State under the Constitution of the United States 
 as it stands amended." — Testimony of A. H. Stephens before 
 the Reconstruction Committee. 
 
 RIGHT OP SECESSION. 
 
 " I think there has been a very decided change of opinion, 
 as to the policy, by those who favored it. I think the people 
 generally are satisfied sufficiently with the experiment never 
 to resort to that measure of redress again by force, what- 
 ever may be their own abstract ideas upon the subject." — A. 
 II. Stephens. 
 
 RESTORATION. 
 
 " I have little hope for liberty — little hope for the success 
 of the great American experiment of self-government — but 
 in the success of the present efforts for the restoration of 
 the States to their former practical relations in a common 
 government, under the Constitution of the United States." 
 A. H. Stephens, Feb. 22, 18G6. 
 
74 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 ISSUES OF THE WAR. 
 
 " We should accept the issues of the war, and abide by 
 them in good faith." — Stephens. 
 
 OUR COUNTRY. 
 
 "Whether Georgia, by the action of her Convention of 
 1861, was ever rightfully out of the Union or not, there can 
 be no question that she is now in, so far as depends on her 
 will and deed. The whole United States, therefore, is now, 
 without question, our country, to be cherished and defended 
 as such, by all our hearts and all our arms." — Stephens, 
 Feb. 22, 1866. 
 
 THE PARAMOUNT LAW. 
 
 " The Constitution of the United States, and the treaties 
 and laws in pursuance thereof, are now acknowledged to be 
 the paramount law in this whole country." — Stephens, Feb. 
 22, 1866. 
 
 IT IS HUMAN TO ERR. 
 
 Mr. Stephens has returned, and is trying to bring his peo- 
 ple with him, to re-unite under the protecting shield of a com- 
 mon COUNTRY. 
 
 Mr. Stephens' address before the General Assembly of 
 the State of Georgia, February 22d, 1866, to be found in 
 Cleveland's "Life and Speeches of Alexander H. Stephens," 
 should be read by the people everywhere. It is one of the 
 best and noblest documents of the age. 
 
A CHAPTER OF BREVITIES. 
 
 AVAR, OR THE FATE OF SOLDIERS. 
 
 " Dost thou not know the fate of soldiers ? They are but 
 Ambition's tools, to cut away to her unlawful ends ; and when 
 they're worn, hacked and hewn, with constant service, thrown 
 aside to rust in peace and rot in hospitals." 
 
 WAR SUSPENDS THE RULE OF MORAL OBLIGATION. 
 
 " War suspends the rule of moral obligation ; and what 
 is long suspended is in danger of being totally abrogated. 
 Civil wars strike deepest of all into the manners of the peo- 
 ple. They vitiate their politics ; they corrupt their morals ; 
 they pervert even the natural taste and relish of equity and 
 justice. By teaching us to consider our fellow-creatures in 
 a false light, the whole body of our nation becomes less 
 dear to us. The very names of affection and kindred, which 
 were the bond of charity whilst we agreed, become new 
 incentives to hatred and rage, when the communion of our 
 country is dissolved." 
 
 PEACE ITS ENEMIES. 
 
 " Five great enemies of peace inhabit with us — viz : 
 Avarice, Ambition, Envy, Anger, and Pride ; and if these 
 enemies were to be banished we should infallibly enjoy 
 perpetual peace." 
 
 IN REFERENCE TO THE AUTHOR OF THIS WORK. 
 
 " We publish below a letter from Georgia, from a genuine 
 Union man. No sham about him. He didn't play rebel, 
 when rebellion was dominant about him, and become Union 
 as soon as Federal power prevailed. He was a known, out- 
 spoken Union man all the while, to all his neighbors as well 
 
 75 
 
76 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 as others. His views ought to be heeded by all Union men, 
 for they have been wise throughout." — Louisville Democrat. 
 
 HIGHER-LAW. 
 
 The higher-law men of both sections, however honest they 
 may be, are responsible for the war ; and both considered 
 war essential to the attainment of their ends : the one to 
 establish the higher law of State Sovereignty — the other, 
 the higher law of social and political equality for the negro. 
 
 PEACE. 
 
 We need peace — absolute, enduring peace. We have had 
 enough of war, and have paid dearly for our experience. 
 Can we not now have less party agitations, and more atten- 
 tion to peaceful pursuits ? Can not partisans and politicians 
 stay their incendiary appeals to the passions and prejudices 
 of the people ? Or, if not, can not the people themselves 
 cease to be influenced by them ? 
 
 CAN DWELL AMONGST US IN SAFETY. 
 
 The negro is now free ; and all are willing to let him re- 
 main so. The rebellion has ceased ; the Southern Confed- 
 eracy has now no existence ; its army has long since been 
 disbanded ; its leaders have all received pardon ; Union men 
 are not mobbed ; whilst Northern men can come and dwell 
 amongst us in safety. 
 
 "truth is mighty and must prevail." 
 
 A people accustomed to free thought, and free speech, a 
 free press, and civil liberty, cannot long be swayed by error. 
 
 revolutions. 
 
 We have passed through a bloody revolution. Revolutions 
 are necessarily despotic. We, of the South, in our efforts to 
 escape higher law — abolitionism — tried to release ourselves 
 from our obligations to the Constitution and laws of the Uni- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 77 
 
 ted States, The Constitution we had lived under was, by 
 the solemn pledges and agreement of its founders, declared 
 the Supreme Law of the land. Failing to disrupt the Union, 
 we are now willing to respect, obey, and abide by the Con- 
 stitution. But the despotism of reaction has not yet subsi- 
 ded ; and we are compelled to submit to acts of Congress, 
 unauthorized by the Constitution. But time and patience 
 will remedy the evil. 
 
 THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLE. 
 
 "We should never lose sight of the great underlying prin- 
 ciple and design of good government — that of preventing 
 men from injuring one another. 
 
 THE RECOIL. 
 
 The measures now proposed, requiring great and radical 
 changes in the form of Government, and the endorsement of 
 the views of the higher law party North, is the recoil 
 upon us of our experiment to dissolve the Union. 
 
 A pendulum, when thrown to one side from its natural 
 perpendicular, will return and vibrate to the extreme on the 
 other side ; so, in all violent upheavals of popular government, 
 extremes have their opposites ; and the vibrations will con- 
 tinue so long as sectional or partisan animosity is permitted 
 to give the impulse. 
 
 If we can profit by our experience, and become wiser and 
 more prudent, the extremes will subside, and the Govern- 
 ment, as it was, will re-appear. THIS IS THE ONLY 
 REMEDY. 
 
 COMMON SENSE. 
 
 Common sense, in managing the necessary political affairs 
 of a people, is as essential to the public good, as common 
 sense in the successful workings of our various industrial 
 and business pursuits. 
 
 The signs of the times indicate a change for the 
 eetter. 
 
REFLECTIONS 
 
 ON THE DOWNFALL OP OUR COUNTRY, AND OTHER MATTERS OP INTEREST. 
 By J. A. STEWART. 
 
 Rome, Ga., Oct. 5, 1869. 
 
 The following reflections were penned at a time when the 
 future of our country was more gloomy than it is now. They 
 were the offspring of serious apprehensions of evil, and may 
 perhaps be read with profit, even though the events antici- 
 pated, or feared, may for awhile be averted. 
 
 The intelligent reader will not fail to observe the rock on 
 which we may ultimately break to pieces, and go down to 
 rise no more. It is this : Men love office and power 
 
 BETTER THAN THEY LOVE THEIR COUNTRY. 
 
 Rome, Ga., November, 1868. 
 
 The hope of the patriot — the work of the philanthropist — • 
 the shield of Constitutional Liberty — the American Union of 
 States and people, under a wisely constructed organic law — 
 I fear, is passing away. 
 
 The mere behest of party and partisan dogmas are thrust 
 upon us. 
 
 A dominant party in Congress has sought to remove the 
 Chief Executive of the Nation for his obedience to the Con- 
 stitution — has sought to paralyze the Supreme Court, and to 
 trample under foot the Constitution of our country. 
 
 The cause for which our forefathers fought seems to be 
 passing away. It was a glorious cause. It was for the 
 etablishment of Constitutional Liberty on this continent. 
 
 The tyrannies and oppressions of the old world presented 
 to view the absorption of all wealth and power into the hands 
 of the few. The millions had for age3 been ground to the 
 dust, and poverty, transmitted from father to son, became 
 their inheritance. Despotisms and monarchies had marked 
 
 78 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 79 
 
 every part of the Eastern hemisphere with palaces and 
 prisons, with pomp and poverty, with arrogance and servility. 
 
 And this was the deplorable condition of mankind, when 
 the discovery of America opened up an asylum for the op- 
 pressed of all nations. 
 
 The down-trodden philanthropist, the virtuous statesman, 
 the devotee of liberty, the enemy of misrule, and foe of des- 
 pots, sought here a resting-place from the throes and convul- 
 sions of principalities and kingdoms. But soon the cupidity 
 of rulers stretched a grasping hand across the Atlantic to 
 coerce the infant Colonies into submission to the demands of 
 rapacity. 
 
 They seized upon the productive labors of the Colonists, 
 and converted them into tributary streams to .fill and replen- 
 ish their coffers. 
 
 A foreign Congress under a foreign King, attempted to 
 legislate for the new world in all things. 
 
 The same ruthless hand which had pillaged and desolated 
 the people of the old world, was eager to grasp and hold 
 power over the new. And every petition for redress of 
 grievances, and every appeal for justice and right, was met 
 by insult and renewed aggression, until forbearance ceased 
 to be a virtue, and resistance became a necessity. 
 
 Then commenced the war for independence : a war which 
 ended with the triumph of American arms ; a war which was 
 conducted on the part of America by great and good men, 
 who, when the conflict ended, sought to establish and render 
 perpetual, on this continent, the blessings of civil liberty. 
 
 After long and serious deliberations, at various times, and 
 after full and mature discussion as to the principles of good 
 government, the Constitution of the United States was 
 adopted, with ample and wise provisions for its amendment. 
 It was a model Constitution, embracing everything essential, 
 as an organic law, to the safety and welfare of the nation, 
 and forbidding to the several States no right or power essen- 
 
80 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 tial to the efficient control of internal and local affairs. 
 
 The establishment of a government so wise and beneficent 
 was the cause for which our forefathers periled their lives 
 and shed their blood; and the maintenance of this legacy and 
 the diffusion of its blessings amongst the people, has been 
 the cause for which every true lover of his country has la- 
 bored since the struggle of '76 to the present hour. 
 
 For a period of seventy years or more, the cause was main- 
 tained, and the people multiplied and prospered. The pro- 
 tection of a wise and beneficent Government, extending from 
 the Atlantic to the Pacific, and from the lakes of Canada to 
 the Gulf of Mexico, gave an impetus to industry and im- 
 provement which has been everywhere visible over this broad 
 land. Opulent cities sprang into existence as if by the hand 
 of magic, and fruitful fields then furnished in profusion all 
 that is essential to the wants of man. 
 
 Protected in the enjoyment of the products of our labor, 
 we had a heart to work, and an incentive to persevere in 
 laudable pursuits of industry; and the consequence was, we 
 prospered as no people on earth ever prospered. The means 
 of subsistence was comfortably within the reach of all, and 
 even the negro slave knew not what it was to want the 
 necessaries of life. 
 
 The founders of this great and good National Government 
 were wise men, and their object was to secure and promote 
 the largest amount of human happiness at the least possible 
 expense consistent with the object in view. They were not 
 unmindful of the natural inequalities of man, and the effects 
 of diversity of soil and climate upon the habits and tempera- 
 ments of the people. 
 
 The separate and distinct races — the black and the white 
 — occupied a large share of their deliberations, and a know- 
 ledge of the natural inequalities of man, physical and mental, 
 had much to do in regulating the abridgment of political 
 privileges. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 81 
 
 The unexampled prosperity and happiness of the American 
 people, for near three-quarters of a century, was evidence of 
 the wisdom and justice which obtained in establishing for us 
 a Constitutional Government. 
 
 But, unfortunately for the cause of good government, we 
 had at the beginning, in our midst, and infused throughout 
 the living masses which peopled this new world, a political 
 malady which has finally succeeded in sapping the founda- 
 dation of our liberties — a malady which no wisdom has been 
 able to control, and no foresight to find a remedy for. 
 
 Washington's Farewell Address gave us warning, but we 
 heeded it not. Washington discovered that men loved office 
 better than they loved their country. 
 
 This was the fatal disease: inordinate ambition — a thirst 
 for place and power, manifesting itself through an intermin- 
 able scramble for office — men out of power seeking to possess, 
 and men in power seeking to hold; and, unfortunately for 
 the human family, this malady is as ancient a3 government 
 itself, and has given rise to all the wars which have desolated 
 the earth. 
 
 The history of our now unhappy country, beginning with 
 the administration of Washington, developes the most vin- 
 dictive and infernal partisan and proscriptive spirit that 
 can be found on record. 
 
 The elevation of Washington to the Presidency of the 
 United States was the signal for ambitious men to commence 
 an organized opposition to his administration ; and he was 
 not permitted to serve out his first term without attempts to 
 impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanors. 
 
 Democratic societies were formed to overawe the regularly 
 constituted authorities, and their madness culminated in re- 
 bellion during the second Presidential term; and to suppress 
 which Washington ordered out fifteen thousand men. 
 
 The elder Adams, too, had a factious pack of office-seek- 
 ers yelping at his heels ; and his successor, Thomas Jeffer- 
 
82 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 son, had but little rest from the fury and ire of disappointed 
 factions. But his administration was a bed of roses compared 
 with the eight years in which Madison was at the helm. 
 
 It was during his administration the New England Puri- 
 tans — now so horror-stricken at the South for rebelling — held 
 a Convention at Hartford, Connecticut, for the purpose of 
 dissolving the Union. They were preparing to secede, and 
 were furnishing aid to the British army during the war of 
 1812. And had it not been for the success of our little 
 navy, and the defeat of Packenham at New Orleans, five of 
 the New England States would have committed rebellion, 
 full and complete. It was during this period of political 
 insanity that Madison was threatened with a "halter" and 
 with banishment to the Isle of Elba. 
 
 The intolerable violence and factious insubordination which 
 disturbed the administration of Madison, failing to disrupt 
 the Government, and the people prospering under a faithful 
 obedience to the requirements of the Constitution, the turbu- 
 lent politicians shrank back for a while from public gaze, 
 allowing President Monroe an administration of peace, and 
 which was not disturbed until the contest for the Presidency 
 between the younger Adams and Andrew Jackson awakened 
 anew the scramble for power. 
 
 John Quincy Adams was elected and served four years ; 
 during which time the interminable office-seekers failed, with 
 all their charges of bargain and intrigue against Adams and 
 Clay, to disturb the harmonious working of the Government 
 under the Constitution. And the people — the bone and sinew — 
 protected in their various pursuits, were yet prosperous and 
 happy. 
 
 Jackson succeeded and served eight years. A stormy time 
 he had of it. The interminable s felt sure the country would 
 be ruined by his administration, and dire calamities were 
 predicted. He was spoken of as a tyrant at the helm of 
 aifairs, from whose administration we might expect inevitable 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 83 
 
 and inextricable ruin. He too, was threatened with banish- 
 ment by leaders of the interminable scramble, as the only 
 means of saving the country. 
 
 With the Constitution for his guide, he served eight years ; 
 and the country was not ruined. The people were prosper- 
 ous in spite of the turbulence of politicians. 
 
 Martin VanBuren succeeded Jackson — served four years, 
 carrying out mainly the measures of his predecessor — the 
 country still prosperous, notwithstanding the immense cry of 
 office-scramblers, in 1840, to the contrary. 
 
 Harrison succeeded — served one month and died. Tyler, 
 elected Vice President, filled the chair the remainder of the 
 term, carrying out the policy of Andrew Jackson. The 
 country not ruined yet. The scramble for office, though, was 
 more intense than ever — the number of aspirants by this 
 time, having been greatly augmented through the instrumen- 
 tality of educated and professional classes becoming politi- 
 cians. 
 
 But, to the honor of all our Presidents, from Washington 
 to Andrew Johnson, be it said, no one of them ever inten- 
 tionally attempted a violation of the Constitution. Tyler 
 dropped the partisan ; and each succeeding President, like 
 those preceding him, obeyed the Constitution, and took care 
 that the laws in pursuance thereof were faithfully executed. 
 
 Even Abraham Lincoln was little at fault in his adminis- 
 tration, and was true to the Constitution until the furor and 
 madness of revolution compelled him to resort to expedients 
 and measures which he himself considered of doubtful Con- 
 stitutionality. 
 
 It was reserved for his administration to feel the culmina- 
 tion of the interminable scramble for place and power ; for, 
 by this time, the number of ambitious politicians was legion. 
 The whole surface of our country was covered with them — 
 frothing, foaming, drinking hot brandy, and spitting fire — 
 from Mars Hill to Cape Sable, all along the Atlantic coast, 
 
84 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 and extending far into the interior ; and from the Russian 
 possessions along the Pacific, all the way down to the South- 
 ern boundary of California, and thence East, passing through 
 Texas, mingling with hordes of office-seekers from the Atlan- 
 tic coast. 
 
 Over thirty million of people, had hatched an immense 
 brood of office-scramblers, who, like the plagues of Egypt, 
 covered our goodly land, sapping and undermining the virtue 
 and integrity of the masses, and purposely gulling, deceiving 
 and cheating them into the support of some political or par- 
 tisan dogma. 
 
 Instead of teaching the people to love the Government un- 
 der which they had prospered, and to respect and obey its 
 laws, the political malcontents of the extreme North, pro- 
 claimed a " higher Zat#,"and taught the people there to hate 
 the Union under the Constitution ; whilst along down the 
 coast of the Carolinas, extending round to Southern Louisiana 
 and Texas, another brood of wild, foaming, fiery spirits, were 
 clamorous for separation, and also engaged in teaching the 
 people to hate the Union, and to join them in breaking down 
 the old Government, and in establishing upon its ruins a 
 Southern Confederacy. 
 
 But so long as the people adhered to the Union, and dis- 
 regarded the incendiary teachings of madmen, every thing 
 went well with them. Their commerce was undisturbed, their 
 travel unrestricted, and their persons had the protection of 
 republican institutions, guaranteed by the National Govern- 
 ment. Thus happily situated, they had erected comfortable 
 dwellings their farms were well fenced, their soil in a high 
 state of cultivation, their cattle grazing on rich pastures, 
 their children cared for and as happy as the birds of spring 
 which awaken us with their morning melodies ; whilst our 
 young men and young women, influenced by the surround- 
 ings of peace and plenty, had every encouragement to con- 
 tract the marriage '•elation and set up for themselves, with 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. - 85 
 
 a reasonable assurance of a continuation of the inestimable 
 blessings of good government. 
 
 But 0, what a change — infinitely for the worse ! 0, "what 
 a blight has fallen upon us ! 
 
 A broad belt of desolation but a short time since presented 
 to view our once fruitful fields laid waste, our dwellings 
 crumbling, our cities in ashes, our wealth exhausted ; and 0, 
 worse than all — our hearth-stones were desolate ! 
 
 A war had swept over us. Our young men and middle- 
 aged had been called away, and their bones were bleaching 
 on a thousand battle fields. Men with families, and men 
 without families, sank down bleeding, and perished together. 
 Young women had lost their lovers, wives their husbands, 
 and children their fathers. 
 
 Four years of terrible war had swept over us, and when 
 its violence had ceased, the poor, weary, war-worn survivors 
 of the conflict returned to find their estates wasted, their 
 once beautiful homes in ruins, and their children beggars. 
 
 But such is the fate of mankind. " When the wicked rule, 
 the land mourneth." 
 
 In 1860, the majority rule, in conformity with the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, had elected Abraham Lincoln 
 to the Presidential chair, and as was the case in every pre- 
 ceding election, the party defeated was dissatisfied. 
 
 But, contrary to the theory of our Government demand- 
 ing implicit obedience to the will of the majority, the de- 
 feated party rebelled against the decision, and took up arms. 
 
 Military rule usurped dominion over us — more fatal than 
 pestilence, more terrible than volcanic fires, and more blight- 
 ing than the scorching blasts of a deadly sirocco. 
 
 In all preceding elections, the minority, though dissatis- 
 fied, and sometimes turbulent and threatening, had neverthe- 
 less acquiesced in the majority rule ; and the consequence 
 was, the masses of the people were undisturbed in their bu- 
 siness pursuits and their various vocations. 
 
86 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 Our navigable streams, as avenues of commerce, were free to 
 the people of all the States. No guns were mounted at Fort 
 Pillow, Memphis or Vicksburg, to fire into our beautiful 
 steamers ; whilst an endless panorama of vessels, richly laden 
 and vitalized by the power of steam, were seen ploughing the 
 surfaces of our majestic rivers, under the protection of a Con- 
 stitutional Government, which had guaranteed to us, not only 
 a free and unrestricted commerce within the Union, but the 
 proud title of American citizen, anywhere throughout the in- 
 habitable globe. 
 
 The majority rule — the vital principle of republican govern- 
 ments, and the great corner-stone which supported the* edifice 
 built for us, by the sires of '76 — had, up to the year one thou- 
 sand eight hundred and sixty, been obeyed by the masses. 
 And all attempts to inaugurate insubordination had been 
 promptly met and subdued. The John Brown raid came to 
 grief, and his fate pointed out to us the efficacy of adher- 
 ence to the Union and the enforcement of the laws. 
 
 In the Union, and under the Constitution, we found pro- 
 tection against the higher-law abolition faction. At war with 
 the old Government, to break up the Union, we found no 
 protection. 
 
 We went into an election, in 1860, for a President of the 
 United States. We went into it with the understanding that 
 whoever secured a majority of the electoral votes cast should 
 be the President of the Nation. If Mr. Breckinridge had 
 received the requisite number of votes, his friends would have 
 demanded his inauguration. So, also, would Mr. Douglas' 
 friends, in the event of his election, have demanded his elevation 
 to the Presidential chair. Then, such being the facts in the 
 case, it was not only revolutionary but extremely impolitic 
 to resist the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln as President of the 
 Nation. He was entitled to our support as President, in the 
 performance of his Constitutional duties ; but subject, as was 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 87 
 
 John Brown, to the penalities of just laws, for all willful vio- 
 lations of law. 
 
 It is true, we had bad men to trouble us up North; but it 
 is equally true, we had bad men to trouble us down South; 
 and if we adopt the expedient of breaking up a government 
 because there are bad men in it, then there can be no such 
 thing as government on earth. 
 
 Government, at best, is but a necessary evil, and its only 
 proper design is to restrain evil doers. The existence of bad 
 men creates the necessity for government. 
 
 Bad men must necessarily be restrained to secure the 
 good of society, and the power to restrain must necessarily 
 be intrusted to the hands of men ; who, if they chance to be 
 corrupt or unwise themselves, bring desolation and ruin 
 upon the people. 
 
 The sires of '76 framed a government for us which allowed 
 a portion of our people the privilege of selecting legislators 
 to make our laws, judges to decide the constitutionality and 
 validity of the laws, and executive officers to carry them 
 into effect. 
 
 It was a beautiful system of government, and so long as 
 we adhered to it, rash and imprudent men were restrained, 
 the people were protected, and the whole country was pros- 
 perous. 
 
 The majority rule and the frequency of elections were 
 designed to effect, in a peaceful way, all the changes neces- 
 sary in our Constitutions and laws which experience might 
 suggest. Our Constitutions, State and National, had ample 
 and safe provisions for their amendment, and the evil of bad 
 men in office had its correction in the frequency of elections. 
 
 The wisdom of this form of government was evidenced 
 by seventy years of unexampled prosperity of the American 
 people ; and if we had exercised the wisdom of obedience to 
 the majority rule, instead of rebelling against it, it would, 
 in time, have corrected all the real evils of which we com- 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 plained, and secured to us the continued enjoyment of good 
 government in the Union under the Constitution. If the 
 abolition higher-law party, not satisfied with the fate of 
 John Brown, had continued their raids, the best corrective 
 of the evil would have been the maintenance of law by 
 coercing obedience thereto. 
 
 We could thereby have suppressed and controlled bad 
 men North, and have saved the Government from falling 
 into their hands. But, unfortunately, through the impulse 
 of Southern fire and declamation, intensified by the intermi- 
 nable scramble for office amongst ourselves, we committed the 
 egregious folly of rebelling against the majority rule. We 
 not only thereby placed ourselves in the wrong, but through 
 the instrumentality of war succeeded in wasting our sub- 
 stance, destroying our people, and bringing want and misery 
 to our firesides. And this is not all. The John Brown party 
 is in power, and with fanaticism intensified by the patriotism 
 and firmness of Andrew Johnson in opposing their wicked 
 schemes, they are preparing, with their secret leagues, to 
 seize and control, indefinitely, the reins of Government, to 
 trample the Constitution under foot, blot out the existence 
 of civil liberty, and to re-enact the monarchies of the Old 
 World — enslaving the people, and fastening upon them the 
 chains and burdens of Despotism. 
 
 Such is our condition now. The cause for which the sires 
 of '76 periled their lives and shed their blood, is nearly lost. 
 The civil conflict through which we have recently passed — a 
 four years of bloodshed, violence and rapacity — I fear has 
 inflicted a mortal wound. A once great and good govern- 
 ment is now in the throes and agonies of threatened dissolu- 
 tion ; and it may be well for us to look seriously into the 
 causes, and to elaborate more fully the sins and follies which 
 have brought about this deplorable condition. 
 
 A scramble for office, like gambling, is a game of hazard. 
 The prize at stake is either honor or profit, and generally 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 89 
 
 both. A majority of the votes of the people, under our form 
 of government, must be had to secure the prize. A scram- 
 ble ensues amongst aspirants, and votes must be had. The 
 rule in politics being that the end justifies the means, it fol- 
 lows that every species of fraud, deception and violence is 
 often resorted to, to secure the requisite number of votes ; and 
 hence the bitterness of partisan conflicts, and the oft-recur- 
 ring scenes of violence and bloodshed. 
 
 A too common resort has been had to the use of opprobri- 
 ous epithets, terms of reproach and of odium, for the purpose 
 of degrading an opposing party ; such as Tory, Deserter, Blue- 
 light, Locofoco, Barn-burner, &c. ; together with terms of 
 more recent origin; as Squatter, Submissionist, Lincolnite, 
 Black Republican, Copperhead,Scallawag,Black-and-tan,Car- 
 pet-bagger, &c. ; using a whole vocabulary of hard names, in 
 lieu of argument and reason. The consequence of this folly 
 and wickedness has been fully developed during the last eight 
 years. 
 
 Friendship begets friendship, and evil begets evil. If we 
 treat men kindly, they will be our friends; if we insult them, 
 they will naturally be our enemies; if we persist in insulting 
 them, they will return insult for insult; if we strike them, they 
 will generally strike back ; and hence, if left free to avenge 
 insults and injuries, each one for himself, we could have no 
 such thing as peace or security on earth. Our system of 
 Government, State and National, had forbidden the settle- 
 ment of personal or political grievances, except in conform- 
 ity with law; and this worked well, until ambitious and 
 fanatical aspirants for office succeeded in firing the hearts of 
 our people to a pitch of madness which knew no Constitution, 
 no Union, no law, and no barrier to the revolutionary spirit 
 which pervaded their heated and frenzied brains; and hence 
 we were plunged into all the calamities and horrors of war. 
 In reviewing the scenes through which we have passed, we 
 should never lose sight of the great truth that there is no 
 
90 
 
 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 country for us but the Union of the States; that fealty to 
 our whole country is fealty to our State ; that it was for the 
 best interest of each State not to secede, just as it would be 
 that individual members of society should avoid the commis- 
 sion of rash acts; that after States had seceded, like individ- 
 uals who had become intoxicated, the sooner they became 
 sober again the better. 
 
 The complications and exasperations which have grown 
 out of our civil conflicts, are yet multiplying, and if not soon 
 arrested, the day is not far distant when we may bid an ever- 
 lasting farewell to Constitutional Liberty. To arrest the 
 progress of a calamity so deplorable, let us reflect on the 
 past, and become wiser, that Good Government may re-appear 
 and endure forever. 
 
 Let us think of the glorious Union — 
 
 The Union of States as it was ; 
 Let us think of the hopes of our fathers, 
 
 Who battled so true in its cause. 
 Let us think of the hopes of the million, 
 
 Whose labors for bread never cease — 
 Who toil for the means of subsistence, 
 
 And wish to enjoy them in peace. 
 
 i 
 
 Let us think of the freedom of commerce, 
 
 And friendly relations of States, 
 Secured by the once loved Union, 
 
 Ere war was decreed by the Fates. 
 Let us think of old social relations — 
 
 The times which were pleasant and good, 
 Ere partisan scramble for power 
 
 Had crimsoned the soil with our blood. 
 
 Let us think of the fearful commotion, 
 
 Of hatred, and malice, and spite, 
 Engendered by partisan leaders, 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 91 
 
 Who rashly involved us in fight. 
 Let us think of the loved ones that bound us — 
 
 Of those who will meet us no more — 
 Of those who have fallen in battle, 
 
 No more to return — never more. 
 
 The ii. me was, when 
 
 We loved the good old Union, 
 
 The Union as it was ; 
 We loved its proud old banner, 
 
 Its freedom and its laws : 
 We loved its grand expansion 
 
 Of territory vast ; 
 We loved it for its monuments 
 
 And relics of the past. 
 
 We loved its lofty mountains, 
 
 Its rich and fertile vales ; 
 We loved its ships of commerce 
 
 And weather-beaten sails : 
 We loved its grand old river 
 
 Which flows from North to South — 
 The cities on its margin, 
 
 And the Crescent at its mouth. 
 
 We loved it for its blessings, 
 
 Its freedom and its laws ; 
 We loved the glorious Union, 
 
 The Union as it was. 
 But factions, dark and bloody, 
 
 Essaved the fatal blow, 
 To rend the ties that bound us, 
 
 And fill the land with woe. 
 
92 CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 A factious, devilish madness, 
 
 Involved us all in fight, 
 And shed a gloom of sadness, 
 
 O'er the land -which once was bright. 
 A Union true must triumph, 
 
 Or strife will never cease : 
 A broken, severed Union 
 
 Can never give us peace ! 
 
 ERRATA. — Page fifty-three, second paragraph and sixth line, read : 
 " and not with a view," &c. 
 
 Page fifty-eight, first paragraph 'and tenth line, read : " whites in 
 every respect," &c. 
 
 Page sixty-six, eighth line,'read : " the main difference," &c. 
 
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS. 
 
 The Government of the United States 
 WHAT IS IT? 
 
 COMPRISING 
 
 A CORRESPONDENCE WITH HON. ALEXANDER II. STEPHENS, ELIC 
 
 ITING VIEWS TOUCHING THE NATURE AND CHARACTER 
 
 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES 
 
 THE IMPOLICY OF SECESSION, THE EVILS 
 
 OF DISUNION, AND THE MEANS 
 
 OF RESTORATION. 
 
 By J. A. STEWART. 
 
 'Error ceases- to be dangerous when reason is left free to combat it."— Jeffi rson. 
 
 TRADE SUPPLIED BY 
 
 PHILLIPS & CREW, 
 
 Publishers and Booksellers, Atlanta, Ga. 
 
 1869. 
 
 PRICE FIFTY CENTS. 
 
H 291 73 i 
 
** 
 ^